Stolen Goods

The American economist and academic, Walter Williams, talks about redistribution of wealth:

“A right, such as a right to free speech, imposes no obligation on another, except that of non-interference. The so-called right to health care, food or housing, whether a person can afford it or not, is something entirely different; it does impose an obligation on another. If one person has a right to something he didn’t produce, simultaneously and of necessity it means that some other person does not have right to something he did produce. That’s because, since there’s no Santa Claus or Tooth Fairy, in order for government to give one American a dollar, it must, through intimidation, threats and coercion, confiscate that dollar from some other American.”

“No human should be coerced by the state to bear the medical expense, or any other expense, for his fellow man. In other words, the forcible use of one person to serve the purposes of another is morally offensive.”

“For the most part, income is a result of one’s productivity and the value that people place on that productivity.”

“One of the wonderful things about free markets is that the path to greater wealth comes not from looting, plundering and enslaving one’s fellow man, as it has throughout most of human history, but by serving and pleasing him.”

“People who denounce the free market and voluntary exchange, and are for control and coercion, believe they have more intelligence and superior wisdom to the masses. What’s more, they believe they’ve been ordained to forcibly impose that wisdom on the rest of us. Of course, they have what they consider good reasons for doing so, but every tyrant that has ever existed has had what he believed were good reasons for restricting the liberty of others.”

This Shall Not Pass

One negative effect of a redistribution of wealth, a class warfare mantra currently voiced by Obama, is that wealth given to someone who has not earned it creates a means for the recipient to disregard the situation that brought the recipient to a place of need.  The factors that created the need may be outside one’s control (becoming a widow or an orphan or a natural disaster) but most likely the factors are based on choices made by the recipient or their forebears.  Having economic need increases the sensitivity to the choices made and can help the person in need make the necessary corrections in their life.

A redistribution of wealth can also blot out the effects of sin passed down from generation to generation.  Being fully present to the context of your life can bring about an understanding of one’s spiritual poverty and then, perhaps, to a place of redemption and spiritual reward. A redistribution of wealth can numb the recipient to a needed spiritual ‘goading’. Because of this and many other substantial moral reasons (e.g., “Thou shall not steal.”), redistribution of wealth is not an ideal economic policy for humanity. Everyone wants to avoid pain but it is pain which redistributes a wealth of information to the bearer.

The founding fathers never envisioned this type of economic policy, economic policy which is punitive to some and palliative to others.  Equal opportunity is the baseline premise of our country, not envy and whining.  And. a man’s property is sacred.  Here is what some of the founding fathers wrote about redistribution of wealth:

 “The moment the idea is admitted into society that property is not as sacred as the laws of God, and that there is not a force of law and public justice to protect it, anarchy and tyranny commence. If ‘Thou shalt not covet’ and ‘Thou shalt not steal’ were not commandments of Heaven, they must be made inviolable precepts in every society before it can be civilized or made free.”     John Adams, A Defense of the Constitutions of Government of the United States of America, 1787

“To take from one, because it is thought his own industry and that of his fathers has acquired too much, in order to spare to others, who, or whose fathers, have not exercised equal industry and skill, is to violate arbitrarily the first principle of association, the guarantee to everyone the free exercise of his industry and the fruits acquired by it.”   Thomas Jefferson, letter to Joseph Milligan, April 6, 1816

“A wise and frugal government… shall restrain men from injuring one another, shall leave them otherwise free to regulate their own pursuits of industry and improvement, and shall not take from the mouth of labor the bread it has earned. This is the sum of good government.”   Thomas Jefferson, First Inaugural Address, March 4, 1801

“I predict future happiness for Americans if they can prevent the government from wasting the labors of the people under the pretense of taking care of them.”    Thomas Jefferson

“Congress has not unlimited powers to provide for the general welfare, but only those specifically enumerated.”   Thomas Jefferson

With respect to the two words ‘general welfare,’ I have always regarded them as qualified by the detail of powers connected with them. To take them in a literal and unlimited sense would be a metamorphosis of the Constitution into a character which there is a host of proofs was not contemplated by its creators.”   James Madison in a letter to James Robertson

“When the people find that they can vote themselves money, that will herald the end of the republic.”   Benjamin Franklin

“The Constitution only gives people the right to pursue happiness. You have to catch it yourself.”   Benjamin Franklin

“But a Constitution of Government once changed from Freedom, can never be restored. Liberty, once lost, is lost forever.”   John Adams

“There are more instances of the abridgment of the freedom of the people by gradual and silent encroachments of those in power than by violent and sudden usurpations.”   James Madison, speech to the Virginia Ratifying Convention, June 16, 1788

Tenacity

Tenacity. Here’s a word that, in my mind’s eye, brings together tension and elasticity. Tenacity: a pliable Gumby who never loses his form, no matter how far he is stretched? Or, Plastic Man stretched to infinity and then some, yet keeping his head when all others lose theirs? Perhaps tenacity is a high school girl’s cross country team running distance repeats during the early morning hours of Labor Day.

This morning about sixty young women were racing around the .7 mile path in the riverside park called St. Mary’s. I walk this path often. This is where I walk and talk with God and tenacity is what I observed this morning as I walked around St. Mary’s park. I supposed that sleeping in on a holiday was on their mind. No doubt their fellow students were doing so. Yet, there they were – stretching, dashing, puffing, sweating and straining, a crescendo of rapidly patting shoes and heavy breathing moving quickly toward me and then withdrawing just as quickly…tenaciously.

The apostle Paul had tenacity in mind when he said: “Do you not know that in a race all the runners run, but only one gets the prize? Run in such a way as to get the prize.”

Tenacity. Doggedness. Persistence. Pertinacity.

Sloth, sluggishness, idleness, indolence, apathy, laziness.

The Theory of Social Gospel Relativity

“You happily put up with whatever anyone tells you, even if they preach a different Jesus than the one we preach, or a different kind of Spirit than the one you received, or a different kind of gospel than the one you believed.” The Apostle Paul in his second letter to the Corinthian church.

Increasingly I hear about a new and ‘relevant’ kind of ‘gospel’ called “social gospel”. The marketers of this ‘qualified’ gospel are saying that our government must be the instrument to meet human need. Perhaps this social gospel policy is an extrapolation of James’ admonition to the church in Jerusalem “Religion that God our Father accepts as pure and faultless is this: to look after orphans and widows in their distress…” Perhaps it is an extension of the Good Samaritan parable or and maybe it is an inference to the feeding of the five thousand. In any case, it is a stretch to fit any of the Gospel texts to fit their meaning of ‘social gospel’ as a national domestic policy.

More to my point: I have recently been reading the apostle Paul’s letters, specifically Corinthians and Galatians. I see how very much Paul desired to maintain the purity of the Gospel at all costs. My first and only concern in writing this post is how the Gospel of Jesus Christ is being used today to market social justice in the political arena. Especially after hearing a ‘Christian’ in that context say that “wealth redistribution is what Jesus would do”. This is completely false and misleading.

WWJD: In his letter, the Lord’s brother James describes a practical close-to-home “work” to help those who are not able to help themselves. The Good Samaritan parable tells me who my neighbor is: He is a person you meet with a need. The parable also shows me how I am to treat my neighbor when a need arises: use my resources to help and then followup. Jesus fed the five thousand as a sign of His Person and His Power. This sign revealed His ability to provide for me in any situation. I am to depend on Him. He controls the outcomes. He controls the government, even in a Democracy. Nowhere is it written or inferred in the Bible that a socialized gospel should become a government’s domestic policy. Nowhere is it written that people should be forced to pay for others. Jesus never pushed political agendas and He certainly never taught that coercion in any form was the answer to need.

At no time did Jesus offer to heal or feed the entire world. At no time did Jesus demand that the Roman government feed or take care of the entire world, civilized or otherwise. Of course, Jesus could have said and done these things but He did not. He did not infer that his disciples would do this. Jesus did talk about individual responsibility and accountability to God, His Father, and to one’s close-to-home neighbor. He never talked about collective compassion or wealth redistribution. He never said “it takes a village to raise a child.” He did talk about the widow who, without coercion, freely gave her mite unto God. This willing, sacrificial act, done in secret, was an act of love for God and for her neighbor. The current social ‘gospel-eers’ market their brand of ‘gospel’ on the main stream media.

Having read and studied the synoptic Gospels and the letters of the Apostle Paul many times over I do not see any form of socialized or collectivized gospel in any way, shape or form within these writings. What I do see now, though, is that the true Gospel is being used as advertising label for a type of religious social movement in the US. This branding, I believe, would attract many Christian college students. These students are ready to take on the world; they are chomping at the bit for worthy causes. The social gospel gurus are very eager to take them into their fold. Many of the gurus are sixties radicals, now recycled and looking to make something of themselves before they pass on.

At no time did Jesus ever speak to his disciples about being a disciple of social need. As a Christian, you are not a disciple of a political-social-economic system or of a community organizer. Being absolutely and singularly identified with Jesus and His Kingdom is the key here. The medium (Christ’s disciple) is the message, so to speak.

You should know that it was the disciple Judas, the community organizer, who wanted a social gospel. Judas thought that Jesus would make the perfect radical. He thought that Jesus could bring about sweeping political, social and economic change for the struggling people of Judea. Judas, as the disciple’s treasurer, controlled the purse strings of charitable donations. He controlled the money bags of what he hoped would become a social gospel. Judas believed in the power of wealth redistribution, especially for himself. This is no different from the social gospel being preached today: control money and throw money at a problem to make it go away. This is what today’s political progressivism is all about. And, that is exactly what Judas does at the end of his life – throw money at the feet of the Pharisees. Judas, as we all know,  had betrayed Jesus, a political neutral, because Jesus didn’t fit the social gospel paradigm desired by Judas. To Judas, Jesus didn’t do what radicals are supposed to do: revolt, reign and redistribute. Akeldama, the field of blood, is where Judas ended his cutting-edge version of social gospel.

Let’s make it simple: Social gospel is progressivism and progressivism is a form of paganism and this paganism says that “You don’t need God. You can have effective social engineering in place of religious belief. You don’t need Christ. You have us. You can have our ‘gospel’ policies to meet your needs. We will throw in Jesus for free. Why look elsewhere.” Clearly, this form of ‘gospel’ is a subversion of the true Gospel of Jesus Christ and it wrought by the Evil One. This form of gospel is a synthesis of good and “sounds good” at its core.

The Apostle Paul makes it even simpler: “But though we, or an angel from heaven, preach any other gospel unto you than that which we have preached unto you, let him be accursed. As we said before, so say I now again, if any man preach any other gospel unto you than that ye have received, let him be accursed.” The Apostle Paul in his letter to the Galatian church.

May God give me the grace and the resources to help others as He shows me their need! Having said this, I do not want a progressive political social agenda enacted to determine my personal gospel outreach (and thereby make it vicarious) through a forced redistribution of wealth to the poor. I believe compassion and empathy are to be individual, one-on-one matters, separate from the government’s intrusion, imposition and inefficiencies.

Regarding the Church, the Body of Christ: The apostle Paul, speaking in his Corinthian letters, desires that the church keep itself pure and undefiled just like his desire for the Gospel of our Lord. To me, the church is becoming a political organism and the social gospel I’m hearing about is another gospel – a gospel for a utopian society. The Lord knows what His Body needs. He will do what is necessary.

This post is not about being cruel and unkind to people. Rather, this post is about keeping the Gospel of Jesus Christ pure and undefiled by the world.  The pure and undefiled ‘religion’ of Christianity is about helping widows and orphans in their distress.  It is about offering a cup of cold water in Jesus’ name.  This ‘religion’ is not to be synthesized into a government policy.  We as Christians should seek and pray that government will stand back and let us do good works.  We must maintain our liberty and freedom from government and its coercion (being unjustly taxed to pay for social programs) in order that we may continue to help those in need, freely, with love.

***
For more information see my 09-15-2010 post about Stolen Goods.

Why You Should Sign the Manhattan Declaration

Why You Should Sign the Manhattan Declaration.

(To Alistair Begg, John MacArthur and R.C. Sproul: “Do not stop him,” Jesus said, “for whoever is not against you is for you.”)

“this mulch of “belief””

“…This paranoid Islam…”

“If terrorism is to be defeated, the world of Islam must take on board the secularist-humanist principles on which the modern is based, and without which Muslim countries’ freedom will remain a distant dream.” SALMAN RUSHDIE

“Then Jesus said to the crowd, “If any of you wants to be my follower, you must turn from your selfish ways, take up your cross daily, and follow me.”

“God sent his Son Jesus into the world not to judge the world, but to save the world through him.” The Apostle John

The Crucifixion

The Crucifixion by Gustave Dore

Walking on Water

Jesus Walking on Water by Gustave Dore

Gustave Dore

The Destruction of Sodom by Gustave Dore

A. W. TOZER

A.W. Tozer, quotes:

“To be right with God has often meant to be in trouble with men.”

“In almost everything that touches our everyday life on earth, God is pleased when we’re pleased. He wills that we be as free as birds to soar and sing our maker’s praise without anxiety.”

“What comes into our minds when we think about God is the most important thing about us.”

“It will be a new day for us when we put away false notions and foolish fears and allow the Holy Spirit to fellowship with us as intimately as He wants to do, to talk to us as Christ talked to His disciples by the sea of Galilee. After that there can be no more loneliness, only the glory of the never-failing Presence.”