Featured 10 Reasons Reading the Bible Makes Me More Progressive

Redistribution is when an authority takes from this person to give to another. When you decide to do it on your own accord and of your own free will it is charity.

 

Well the issue us understanding wealth "redistribution". To qualify for that definition it must occur through the state.

 

The list lies.

Number three is so far off base as to be almost laughable. Jesus is at the heart of the Bible, not "justice for the poor and oppressed." Jesus is the answer to being poor and oppressed. The Bible nowhere teaches us to "redistribute" our wealth for that purpose. They are to believe Christ for their deliverance.

Jesus is not a socialist. Socialism involves the state mandatorily taking someone’s property, ostensibly to distribute to the less fortunate. In reality, in all socialistic schemes, it’s the government bureaucrats who live high off the hog.

What Jesus and the Bible advocate are voluntary giving to the less fortunate. The key concept is voluntary versus mandatory. Voluntary giving is commanded and commended by the Bible. Mandatory “giving” is condemned in the Bible. Why do I say that? Because God’s law declares, “Thou shalt not steal.” That law implies the sanctity of private property.

The Ten Commandments also declare, “Thou shalt not covet.” Socialism is based on coveting your neighbor’s goods and wealth. Another thing Rush Limbaugh mentioned in MSNBC’s commentary against him was that the slothful, the lazy, should not be rewarded. That’s a very critical point. Jesus told the parable of the talents where the third man is condemned for his laziness.

The apostle Paul laid down a law for the churches: If a man will not work, then neither shall he eat. Here is another clear teaching against laziness. Paul didn’t say if a man cannot work…If a person can’t work, then there are definitely ways to help such a person, such as his family, the church, or private, voluntary charity.

This discussion isn’t just an interesting theological dialogue. This issue gets at the heart of our national debate.

The whole welfare scheme, however well-intentioned it may have been at one time, has created tens of millions of less fortunate people, who are relying on their fellow man working hard so that government can confiscate from the producers to give (a sliver) to the needy. In this kind of scheme, it’s actually the bureaucrats who make out the best, as the needy only get a pittance.

And the bureaucrats are not working themselves out of a job. Well, to paraphrase Lincoln, it’s a good thing Washington, D.C. loves poor people. They’ve made so many of them!

Meanwhile, there are millions of generous people in our society who are on the forefront of effective charity, much of which has been motivated by the love of Jesus Christ. Dr. Arthur Brooks, president of the American Enterprise Institute, wrote a book a few years ago called Who Really Cares. He has been researching charitable giving for years. He basically found that the more one goes to church, the more generous that person tends to be. He told me, “Faith matters more than anything else in determining whether or not we are giving to others.”

And that being true, the current socialist ilk occupying the White House and in charge of the Senate aren't being "Christian," they're being bureaucrats. Why? Because they are not faithful, they are not church-goers, they are not charitable themselves. But they do not hesitate to abuse, misuse and misquote Scripture for the purpose of seeming "pious" and "holy" to convince others their criminal welfare scheme is biblically inspired.

 

Try Acts 3

 

Since Communism, the United States, or Obama did not exist in the first century, very astute observation. Acts 3 makes it clear the local church saw after the needs of its members. No it was not forced, but the concept is the same. It is not a valid comparison to compare modern day America to this situation, as I doubt the Roman government was in the business of handing out welfare or Social Security checks.