The main argument of the thesis is that the dominant form of economics and correlative form of economy - despite its apparently secular character - contains an inherently cryptotheological dimension. A theological analysis exposes the dominant economics/economy as an instance of ‘law’ understood (after saint Paul Franz Kafka and Walter Benjamin) as a process engaging the subject into an infinite endeavour of justifying oneself by one’s own works. Within the framework of the dominant economics/economy, all labour is formalised as steaming from lack and unrest and the final end of action is formalised as non-action. Therefore peace can only be conceptualised as a perfect lack of action (viz. death). As a consequence death itself becomes the final end, that cannot be achieved as long as the subject lives. The analysis is based on a close-reading of the works prominent economists, focusing on the exponents of the Austrian School - Mises and Hayek - who as I try to prove, express the theological prejudgements of the dominant economics/economy in the most radical and philosophically stimulating manner. The thesis is also a polemic with these critics of the dominant economics/economy who state that it could be effectively criticised for being simply anti-natural, atemporal and value-free science/practice. My point is that a viable critique of the dominant mode of economic acting and thinking cannot be constructed, unless the fact that the hegemonic economic model actually makes use of the concepts of time, judgement and nature is taken into consideration. Only when the way the dominant economics/economy uses the concepts of economy as natural environment, economics as an art of allocation of time and as a value-saturated theory - elaboration of alternatives (including an alternative formalisation of productive labour) might become possible.