But why the Christian left so rabidly advocates the violent seizure of wealth from tax-paying victims in order to build a socialized health care system is puzzling to say the least. Perhaps it is ignorance of the nature of government as an institution that operates purely on brute violent force. Perhaps they are blinded to the nature of government because they so passionately want to see more generosity in society. Recall that the religious right desperately wanted to see morals improve in society, and so they also were perhaps blinded to the violent means that they employed in order to achieve those ends. But whether its the left and its social crusades or the right and its moral crusades, both disobey Christ's teachings on non-violence when they look to the violence of the state to pursue their goals.
Consider Jim Wallis' Sojourners (and the "God's Politics" blog). Bill Anderson often posts at the Lew Rockwell.com Blog exposing these guys, so I'll leave it to Bill to speak on the latest outrage from his post, "More Sojourners Deceit":
I received an email with an attached petition that I am supposed to sign demanding “healthcare reform.” However, this is not just any petition; no, this is a “Christian Creed” on reform. Yes, by including those magic words, support for socialist care now falls into the category of a “creed” like the Apostles Creed, the Nicene Creed, and other historical documents. There are some real goodies in this one, including:
I believe, as taught by the Hebrew prophets and Jesus, that the measure of a society is seen in how it treats the most vulnerable. The current discussion about health-care reform is important for the United States to move toward a more just system of providing care to all people (Isaiah 1:16-17, Jeremiah 7:5-7, Matthew 25:31-45).The next one, however, is as Orwellian as these “Christian socialists” can get:
I believe that all people have a moral obligation to tell the truth. To serve the common good of our entire nation, all parties debating reform should tell the truth and refrain from distorting facts or using fear-based messaging (Leviticus 19:11; Ephesians 4:14-15, 25; Proverbs 6:16-19).You see, if anyone points out the real problems that accompany socialist medical care, then one is engaging in “sin.” That is because telling the truth is “sin,” but lying (in other words, presenting the Michael Moore lines from “Sicko”) is telling the truth. I never have forgotten that Wallis gave his undying support to totalitarian movements in the 1960s and 1970s that imprisoned and murdered millions of people simply for their religious faith. So, the Big Lies continue, but this time he tries to back them up with Scripture.
No, I won’t be sending this signed petition to anyone in Congress.
It doesn't seem like the portions you have quoted indicate how healthcare is provided. Does Sojourners advocate a government run system or are they just saying that all people should be able to get the care they need? Also, the piece on telling the truth seems to be calling for a fair debate, not denying the need for a debate.
ReplyDeleteSojourners is not going to come out and say "we advocate the violent seizure of wealth from working citizens to give health care to others." This program of socialized medicine is veiled in statements like "health care reform" and "we believe in: quality, affordable access to life-giving services for all people." By that statement about services being available to all people I can PROMISE you that they don't mean: "those who earn wealth through productive activity ought to freely be able to purchase quality health care in proportion to their purchasing power in the free market." They mean government should deliver the goods. And we all understand the evil, violent process by which government delivers goods and services.
ReplyDeleteOn the other excerpt it seems to me that they're calling for shutting down the debate. They accuse those who oppose socialized medicine of distorting facts and using fear-based arguments, and they want these people to shut up.
Sojourners is trying to root the health care debate in scriptural values. Instead of trying to see behind a "veil" I think you should look up the scriptures refenced in each value and see if they back up what the "creed" says. If not, point it out.
ReplyDeleteAnd if you can find a scripture that backs up the statement "those who earn wealth through productive activity ought to freely be able to purchase quality health care in proportion to their purchasing power in the free market" then you should cite it as a counter-example.
Good discussion, brother. I appreciate the challenge. Let me ask you, are you suggesting that Sojourners is not in favor of Obama's health care proposal? There isn't much of a veil there. Jim Wallis is a proud leftist. Spend some time on the God's Politics blog and you'll see.
ReplyDeleteScripture that undermines every wealth-redistributing program under the sun including this one: You shall not steal.
I appreciate the verses that they cite when understood in their proper context. But those verses are not calling Christians to seize the reins of coercive government power to forcibly confiscate wealth from people through a violent act. No where does the Bible call Christians to implement Christian values forcibly through the government edict of the kingdoms of this world. Quite the opposite; it prohibits violence and ruling with the sword. See the verses I cited in the original post. Or churchofcaesar.com to read free excerpts of The Way, the Truth, and the Sword, which deals extensively with this subject.
Sojourners is not rooting their position in the Bible when they advocate violence and theft. But I hope you also know that I go after the right for their advocacy of aggression also.
Matthew 20:15..."Don't I have the right to do what I want with my own money?" --Jesus
ReplyDeleteAnd you shall not covet your NEIGHBOR'S house, donkey, etc.
Property rights are written throughout the pages of the scriptures. One of my favorites is Is 66 where it talks about the new earth (perfection/Eden restored) and how we will all build houses and plant vineyards and nobody else wile live in them or take the fruit (i.e. no more theft whether government theft or individual theft).
I was thinking more about the statement, "Sojourners is trying root the health care debate in scriptural values." This is exactly what defenders of the religious right did for years. The Bible says that homosexuality is a sin and under O.T. law, a homosexual was to be put to death. Therefore, madmen like R.J. Rushdoony called for the death penalty for the openly gay. "But they were just rooting their political positions in what the Bible says," defenders might say. Well, the New Testament does not call Christians to implement a theocratic state. Think about it: do we really want to violently implement the entirety of God's law upon non-believers? Sojourners calls for implementing biblical generosity by force, and with those who disagree with helping out the poor as we do, well, let's just steal their money! The religious right calls for forcing other biblical morals upon non-beivers at gun-point, such as sexual morals. All of this is a clear violation of the New Testament teachings. Is it possible to love your enemy while at the same time stealing from him? No, if somebody is rich and greedy, Christians should reach out to him with the gospel and allow the Spirit to work in his heart to convict him to be more generous. We should not use violence to steal from him and correct his stinginess. Anyway, I think you get the point. Your thoughts?
Thanks for the thorough reply. I have a few thoughts in response, though I suspect we’ll never get to exactly the same place on this one, which is okay.
ReplyDeleteIn terms of the passages you cited, the Matthew quote you pull is out of a parable that gives the message that wealth will not be distributed based on merit (or, on another level, salvation isn’t something that is earned). Regarding property, scriptures also tell of the early church community sharing all of their belongings in the New Testament (Acts 2) and a year of Jubilee in the Old Testament, where property is returned to its original owner every 50 years.
I think we can point to different individual verses for a while, but I agree that one must take them in context. And from my perspective (although by no means am I a Bible scholar), I believe that through the Bible God shows a great concern for the poor and that we are called to care for the poor (which is also a constant Sojourners theme).
I agree that one should not legislate straight from scripture. That gets very dangerous very fast. But moral values do influence policy decisions (and that is a grey area that Sojourners, religious right, etc. constantly have to navigate).
Two final points. You say that “if somebody is rich and greedy, Christians should reach out to him with the gospel and allow the Spirit to work in his heart to convict him to be more generous” rather than “stealing” and “using violence”. First, I don’t agree with the idea that when a government collects revenue from its citizens that it is “stealing” or “using violence”. We all have to pay for some things that won’t directly benefit us - that’s how democracy works. (Not a theological argument here - rather a political one.) Sometimes we don’t like it, but we have to convince a majority of our fellow citizens to think like we do if we want to change it.
Which leads me to point number two: what you write is essentially what Sojourners is doing here: reaching out with the gospel, convicting fellow Christians that they are called to uphold values of social justice based in scripture. They’re just doing it on a broader level than what you imagine and sometimes you have to work on a broader level. There are a lot of things that I can do as an individual or with my church, but there are systemic issues that can’t be tackled on these levels. Health care reform is one of them. Church communities can try to cover health care costs for their uninsured members and neighbors, but they don’t have the resources to do so. If they did, there wouldn’t be 46 million uninsured people in this country.
Thanks for the discussion. If you have any thoughts to share I’d be happy to read them. After all, it’s only fair you get the last word on your blog…
Good discussion. I don't need the "last word"...I'd love to continue the dialogue.
ReplyDeleteYou are correct about the meaning of the parable being about the free gift of salvation. But we also see clearly the principle that the owner has the right to do what he wants with his property. Do you disagree with that?
I am all for voluntary sharing of property as in Acts 2. You're speaking my language there, brother! But I am agianst using theft to force others to participate in our Christian community.
Yes, the Jubilee was a part of the Old Testament law. But the New Testament doesn't permit Christians to try to take over the gentile kingdoms for the purpose of writing Old Testament civil laws into the laws of the kingdoms of this world. See Matthew 20:25-26.
I am 100% in agreement with this; I preach it all the time: "I believe that through the Bible God shows a great concern for the poor and that we are called to care for the poor." Where Sojourners is wrong is they pick up the sword to force the heart of God upon those that disagree--which is such a betrayal of that very peace-making heart of God.
Your paragraph about democracy illustrates my Christian critique of the state perfectly. We Christians should have nothing to do with joining a mob (a majority) that sets out to manage peoples' money or their personal lives by force. We should not use force as our means of spreading our values.
Sojourners is not advocating for VOLUNTARY generosity on the part of Christians. It's calling for Obama health care. These are apples and oranges, not just a different in degree, as you state. Think about it this way. I can either call Christians and people of conscience to voluntarily give to a cause of helping out the needy, or I can get a majority together to pass legislation that FORCES people to be generous with their money. This is not "upholding biblical values" on merely a "broader level." It's a whole different ballgame.
I think your facts are wrong on the resources of Christians in this country. I don't have the numbers handy, but I've seen how if only Christians in America tithed then basic food, water and medical care would be available for every human being on earth. But we don't tithe, we give like 2%, and most of that goes to building funds. =)
Oh, and one last thing...if you have a hard time conceiving of taxation as theft, just imagine what would happen to you if you decided not to pay for any of the wars of aggression or redistributionary government programs (which covers just about everything). So you stopped paying 90% of your taxes. I think you can imagine it from there.
Anyway, good discussion again. And I want to be clear that my central critique of Sojourners is not their passion for helping the needy; my critique is the violent means they advocate for helping the needy. I am a bleeding heart, pure and simple. But I also do my best to call Christians out of systems of force, and to come out of the marriage that we have (left and right) with the kingdoms of this world.
I sent you prophets, and you would not listen....and now I bring myself, God in the flesh, and you still don't want to hear. You take the best seats, you favor those with money, you hoard what you own instead of sharing with widows and the poor, and you do not look into the eyes of your neighbor and see yourself reflected back. You cannot harm him without harming yourself!
ReplyDeleteThe Book of Amos said Christians were hard hearted in 755 BC, and the manner in which they are acting in 2009 is no different.
Read: Amos 3: "The Lord has said they do not even how how to do right. They have become rich from violence and robbery."
Amos 4; "You ill treat and abuse the poor and needy."
Amos 5: "You people hate judges and honest witness, you abuse the poor and demand heavy taxes from them."
Amos: 5:21 :" I, the Lord, HATE and DESPISE your religious celebrations and your times of worship. I won't accept your offerings, not even your very best. No more of your noisy songs! I won't listen when you play your harps...BUT LET JUSTICE and FAIRNESS FLOW LIKE A RIVER THAT NEVER RUNS DRY." (Why is God angry, because you are acting in his name doing horrible things).
Amos 6: "You rich people lounge around on beds of ivory posts, while dining on the meat of your lambs and calves. You sing foolish songs, just like David used to do. You drink all the wine you want...but you DON'T CARE about the ruin of the nation (the poor).
Amos 6:12: "You have turned justice and fairness into bitter poison."
So, my hat goes off Christians whose eyes are OPENED to the call for social justice. You have woken from your deep, deep (centuries old) slumber to do what it says to do in the Bible.
And WOE to those who disobey the command to love your neighbor A MUCH as you do YOURSELF.
Pick up a copy of The Poverty and Justice Bible and learn the 3,000 passages outlining God's plan for his body to serve the poor are outlined and highlighted in YELLOW for your benefit.
Oh, by the way: Jesus told you to sell all you have and come follow him....and to pool your money and give to the poor. Sounds "socialist" to me.
This dialogue is an important one. I hope it doesn't come off as a fight. I want to affirm you as a child of God and a brother in Christ. I am not the judge of you; I'm called only to love you. Where violence is advocated, though, it is important to call it what it is--un-Christian. That's what motivates this reply. Not to prove you wrong or win a fight, but to advance the cause of Christ, which is not through political force, but through voluntary love.
ReplyDeleteHaving said that, I agree with your first point! Christians today are hard-hearted! Evangelical Christians in America give only 2% of their income on average. We're failing to care for the poor as is our biblical mandate. (Perhaps some of it has to do with the state taking the job of caring for the poor during the 20th century.)
Next, we have some disagreements.
You quote these great verses from Amos:
"They have become rich from violence and robbery."
"You ill treat and abuse the poor and needy."
"You abuse the poor and demand heavy taxes from them."
Applying these to today, these are not descriptions of, peaceful, productive Christians who have acquired wealth through positive contributions to society, who give generously, and who oppose socialized health care. These descriptions from Amos are descriptions of the state today. The state, not peaceful/generous Christians uses violence and robbery. The state, not peaceful/generous Christians abuse the working class through taxation. And my socialist brothers and sisters want to further empower this violent, robbing entity?
Next, I think you stated that I was doing horrible things. Did I misunderstand that? If not, what horrible things am I doing, brother? I'm simply calling Christians to cease empowering and legitimizing and giving divine sanction to the violent, coercive power of the state. Blessed are the peacemakers. Are you speculating that I'm not personally generous? I don't think you'd do that. You do know that I openly call my fellow believers to be generous and care for the poor, right? I am puzzled why you would say I'm doing horrible things.
What you call "social justice" is nothing more than the same old Constantinian worldview of Christians acquiring the use of the sword to FORCE people to live how Christ would have us live--in this case, being generous with their money and taking care of the poor. I speak against this violence, yet I still love you and those who advocate it.
I agree that woe are those who do not love their neighbor. But here's a question: Are you loving your neighbor when you put a gun to his head and extract his wealth for a utopian design? Would Jesus have his followers live like that? What should be our attitude toward those who reject Christ and his Kingdom of Love, and hoard their wealth--violence or love?
I very much appreciate that there is a Poverty and Justice Bible calling Christians back to living generously. In addition, we have to ask ourselves, what is the Christians MEANS to reach these very Christian ends. Can you show me where in the New Testament Christians are permitted to seek the violent power of the state as the vehicle for bringing God's generosity to the world?
Jesus did not tell me to sell all I have and to follow him, as you state. He said deny yourself, take up your cross, and follow him. To one rich young ruler he commanded to sell everything--a command specifically for him, not normative for all Christians.
(Continued on next comment post)
Jesus never said "pool your money and give to the poor" either. Some of the early Christians—those in Jerusalem—voluntarily sold their possessions and lived more communally than Christians did in other places in the early church. This was never commanded, but merely observed by Luke in the book of Acts as a part of the historical record. I actually think it was a great thing these early Christians did; I'm all for it. But let's be clear: it was not commanded nor was it practiced universally. So I would consider such a lifestyle optional within Christianity, and Christians ought to seek God's will for them on that. God might be calling many to sell all they have and give to the poor and pool wealth. But nowhere in the Bible is this required of Christians. To be generous and to tithe is required.
ReplyDeleteWhat is crystal clear, though, is that to FORCE your worldview on others at gunpoint is a great evil and is profoundly un-Christian. Jesus calls us to love our enemies (in this case, greedy rich people) and put down the sword and NOT rule like the kingdoms of this world with force, but simply to love and serve (Matt 20:25-26). To call for a socialist program is violence and is unbiblical, period. I have never had one of my socialist brothers in Christ respond to this point. All they do is say "social justice" (whatever that means) and point to passages in the Bible that command generosity. Think about this: This is exactly the same thing that the religious right does when all they do is say "morality" and point to passages in the Bible that command morality, and then they proceed to call for the violence of government to legislate morality. Please don't be like the religious right. And clarify for me if I'm wrong about the violence of forced wealth-redistribution. Be the first socialist/leftist Christian to respond on this point.
I hope my comments haven't seemed hostile. I very much want to challenge the violent worldviews that exist within Christianity, because they are contrary to the character and the commands of Christ and so that is what motivates my words. I have nothing but love for you, and even if we end up disagreeing, we'll spend eternity together, so I want no hostility to remain between us.
P.S. To correct a statement from a few posts ago by Anonymous, to say that there are 46 million uninsured people is misleading. See this article: http://www.cnsnews.com/Public/Content/Article.aspx?rsrcid=51424
Correction: I stated that I've never had a Christian socialist respond to my point about using the violence of the state to advance Christian values. I did have an anonymous commenter above make a political argument in favor of "democracy" (i.e. the majority telling the minority how to live and backing it up with violent force). He stated that he was making a political argument, not a theological argument. So, as it stands, I have not had a Christian socialist/leftist respond theologically. How are you guys any different from the religious right? Both use majoritarian violence through government edict, employing the powers of the kingdoms of this world as prohibited by Jesus. Please answer that theological question.
ReplyDeleteHey, Mr. Ritsema. Tim Burdett here. Never done this before, so I'm not sure how all the "comment as" stuff works.
ReplyDeleteAnyway, about the debate, it seems to me that the issue is about interpretation of scripture. "Anonymous" and many others interpret passages in Amos and by Jesus that command Christians (technically Jews in the Old Testament, maybe I should say for accuracy, "God-followers") to give to the poor as applicable to the government. Especially in the NT, however, this command applies to the church, that is the body of believers--not the government.
I think the problem is not that the government isn't doing its job. The problem is that the church isn't doing its job.
Again, it seems to me that the issue is a matter of Biblical interpretation, and I would argue that it is poor interpretation to apply passages the above-mentioned passages to the government and by doing so forcing an entire nation to do the very thing that the church should (and could, in my opinion) do.
Hey, Tim, welcome! (I'm "Scott" now to you if you so desire.)
ReplyDeleteI appreciate your insights and I cannot disagree. Well said.