Christian Robin Hood?
by Jon Davis Jr.
From Gary B’s Blog:
"President Obama recently said income inequality is ‘the defining issue of our time.’ Seriously? Is ‘income inequality’ more important than the loss of individual freedoms? Is ‘income inequality’ more important than our elected officials (BOTH PARTIES!) consistently dismissing and ignoring the Bill of rights and Constitution? If it were then maybe ignoring our foundational documents might be justified. BUT it is not. What’s at the top of the list (my list anyway) is reigning in a government and administration intent on the ‘fundamental transformation’ of America…" [Read More]
Here is the response that I wrote:
I try to analyze these things in light of Biblical Ideas. My goal is to know the Heart of God and the authority on that matter is the 66 books of the Old and New Testaments of the Christian Bible.
I don’t see anything in the Bible or the Heart of God that leads me to believe that "income equality" is important at all.
In fact, I see the opposite. Consider the parable of the talents. The message there is that we should be faithful to invest what we have received from God, not that we should be concerned to compare what we have with what others have.
There is much in the Bible about justice for the poor, helping the needy, etc.
The "love your neighbor" theme is pretty juicy big.
I have encountered Christians trying to use these arguments for raising taxes on the rich so that they "pay their fair share" and for increasing national government intervention in day to day problems of life.
But the thing that my Christian friends consistently ignore is that the National Government and all forms of Civil Government are Agents of Force. (See Romans 13!)
Use of the "sword" is inherent in actions by civil government.
Granted, in a society where many or most people try to obey the law we may not see that use of force all the time; but there should be no doubt that the national (and local) government’s decrees will be backed by force if necessary.
So when Christians argue that the national (or local) government ought to take more from some to give it to others they are arguing for violent theft. They are also (unintentionally perhaps?) promoting covetousness.
I haven’t seen any command or authorization in the Bible for forcing others to do with their money what we think they should do with their money.
As best as I can tell it is not in God’s heart to have human beings forcing one another to help the poor and the needy. Encouraging one another? Yes. Admonishing and Rebuking one another? Certainly. Forcing one another (even if using the excuse of civil government)? I do not see this idea reflected in God’s revelation to man.
Just another guy sharing some thoughts. 
P.S. A lot could also be said about the Parable of the Talents and the inherently "unequal" nature of human life. The question isn’t so much about trying to create income equality as it is in working with God for reconciliation – both of the individual soul for individual salvation and of the labor of a man to maximum fruitfulness.
**End of Response**
What do you think?
President Obama forgets the biblical principle that God loves a cheerful giver. The more the government confiscates personal money, the less we are able to give. God wants us to give. It's not a job He gives to governments. He gives it to individuals. Then He links us together with the ones we give to, for Jesus said, "Where your treasure is there will your heart be also."
Government giving does not link hearts. Instead their giving is dehumanizing, making generation after generation feel like they have no power to change their lot.
We can have a safety net for those whose need is so great that individuals or groups cannot meet it–people with lifelong debilitating conditions, for example. But the less government takes on, the better. It is better for government to give incentives for personal giving.
Thank you Janice! That is a good thought about the mechanics of how and why God did things the way He did.
————————————————————————————
I wonder about the "safety net" idea – if even that should be the responsibility of families, churches, individuals, and local community volunteers – as opposed to being facilitated by government confiscation of wealth.
I agree. Jesus teaches people to be humble and to help one another, but to hold themselves accountable to the Spirit. When Christians are under real persecution they are killed; often forced to hide. Jesus said to pray alone, not outloud to show others – not just so one does not seem boastful or vain; but that we would know that God is with us where ever we are, at all times, and although fellowship is necessary, a structured church is not reguired, this is for same reason that a government can be dangerous. A man who is governed by God needs no other government.
We have discussed some of these things in the past and I have often wondered what you think about how OT principles apply in our current society. We are not a mono-cultural or mono-theistic society. Israel was.
I agree with you that more gov't intervention is not necessary. I would actually prefer less. It's out of hand. I'm just not sure I agree with you that there should be NO gov't intervention in areas of "social justice." In a perfect world, we would all "love our neighbor" and "bear one another's burdens," but we don't live in a perfect world and we don't live in a nation where everyone shares those values.
I don't have strong thoughts on this subject as of yet, but these are some of the things that I have been thinking about.
Hello "agenuinejourney."
That is a great question!
"How do Old Testament principles apply in our current society?"
You have inspired my next post. I have already started working on it but I want to do it well so I am not going to hurry.
In the mean time, here are some counter questions/comments/points to your inquiry.
From what source will we, as Christians living in a messed up world, draw our political philosophy? From where will we get our ethical standards?
Does the observation that we do not live in ancient Israel or even in a fully Christian society mean that we should join the people of the world in violating the heart of God's law? (For example, stealing from the rich and giving those resources to the poor?)
I would argue that the burden of proof when it comes to using government to steal from one group to give to another rests on those who say we should do so, not on those who say we should not.
In other words, if a Christian supports such a system, that Christian is supporting the taking of wealth from one group (by violence or the threat of violence) to give to another – the Christian supporting that system needs to justify his (or her) support somehow!
It is impossible to come up with a philosophy of government or a standard of ethics and life without following some train of logic from some foundational source. What is the foundational source that the followers of Jesus should present to the world? What train of logic are we offering?
I don't think most Christians seem to have much of an answer to this. If the Bible is not the standard that we should teach, promote and exemplify to a messed up world, what is?
Another question- Do you think that all taxes are "stealing" or just the taxes used for welfare programs.
I believe that the Bible is the standard. I'm just wondering if there are "timeless truths" that speak to the issue of a multi cultural society? How does the NT compare to the OT? A lot of the NT was written to societies with a similar make up to ours. Just thoughts! I haven't studied this stuff in a long time, so you have definitely thought this through a lot more than I have.
When I lived in India, I saw people literally dying within feet of hospitals because they did not have laws that "forced" doctors and hospitals to treat them. Their system is a pay first system. I don't think it's God's will for that to happen either
Apparently, I am logged in as "agenuinejourney" I'm not sure how that happened!
Thanks for asking the question because it helps me process. The previous comment was an answer/further-questioning of your first question only! More to come below.
Thoughts on a "multi-cultural" society and "timeless truths."
I am trying to think of a coherent way to answer this concern. I am not sure that I fully understand it.
I (and nobody that I know about) do not propose that we implement Christianity on a multi-cultural society by force. But I am not convinced that there are a different set of "timeless truths" for a Christian society than for a multi-cultural one.
And if we take the "multi-cultural" line of thinking very far we will end up with very few laws. I believe that "multi-cultural" people can live together in some kind of harmony, but this will only work based on an appeal to absolute truths. Thus the need to preach the Gospel of the Kingdom in the whole earth and the need to disciple nations!
As far as I can tell our role as Christians is to present God's truths whether the culture chooses to implement them or not. The truths won't change based on whether or not a nation is "multi-cultural."
Preach the truth, live it as best as we can, let people choose what they will.
Am I answering your thought at all, or am I completely missing what you are trying to get at?
On to your third point! (Sorry I cannot find any way to make this all shorter. These questions involve lots of thought!)
"When I lived in India, I saw people literally dying within feet of hospitals because they did not have laws that 'forced' doctors and hospitals to treat them. Their system is a pay first system. I don't think it's God's will for that to happen either "
I agree that it is not God's will that this should happen. The question is, does God want us to "force" things to be the way that we think they should be?
is there a compelling Biblical argument that doctors or anybody should be forced to provide a service?
An important point to interject here is this – our first priority is to Preach the Heart Transforming Gospel and see more and more people live out the ways of God in love. This is the first part of pretty much every solution in the world! We shouldn't forget that.
But in what cases are human beings authorized by God to "force" people to do the right thing?
One little tidbit about applying the Old Testament to today: there are a lot of ethical standards and moral requirements from God in the OT (and in the NT). But many of those things do not include a "remedy."
Here is what I mean – When someone commits murder God has commanded a remedy for that. The murderer is to be put to death. This command is included in the law of Moses but actually pre-dates the law of Moses.
I actually don't see God instituting any kind of "civil government" until after the flood. The earth devolved into complete violence and after the flood God passed the first universal civil law that authorized (and required) human beings to put murderers to death.
We then progress from the time of Noah to the time of Moses and God gives the Ten Commandments. God (through Moses) then provided a whole pile of laws for Israel, but only some had a "remedy." (Often the remedy was death, sometimes restitution or banishment, even a form of slavery).
There are many other laws where God does not in any way provide for human beings to enforce those laws on one another. In those cases He Himself enforces those laws by bringing judgment (either temporal or eternal).
So… Back to your question. There is no doubt in my mind that the situation in India that you described is a great evil and that God sees. The question is, what does God want us to do about it? Does he want us to organize a city council or a national parliament or congress and pass a law outlawing the practice, followed immediately by laws to create and fund (taxes) a police force with which to compel obedience?
In the cases of murder, theft, and violations of family (such as adultery) it would appear that god does want some form of "force" used to keep order.
But I propose that we should only use force when there is a clear Biblical Rationale to do so.
In the case of the Indian hospitals – I suspect that the answer there is an intervention of love and action to help those in need! A Preaching of the Gospel of the Kingdom will bring about change as well!
I once knew a girl who really had a heart for this kind of mercy ministry. I'd bet she still does.
Whenever there is a problem to be addressed and the temptation is there to use the force of civil government to fix it we should ask the question: "does God provide a rationale through the Scriptures for this?" If not, we should be careful.
If we fix everything going on in the world through the force of civil government we will without a doubt end up with "Benevolent" Tyrants trying to save us.
It is amazing to me how much wisdom God showed by only providing for a very limited force of civil government throughout the Bible to keep basic order while the Gospel goes Forth!
By the way, you are called "agenuinejourney" because that is your WordPress Username. This is fine with me. You don't need to change it on my account. I know who you really are!
I know my thoughts are long, but I am questioning some of the basic assumptions that our culture brings to the table when we discuss civil government.
Essentially, in order to have the discussion that I am promoting we have to first break down this assumption: "We as human beings can organize ourselves into a group that then forces everyone to comply with the group allegedly 'for the good of all'."
I assert that the Bible does indeed teach a form of civil government, but that it is not subject to the "will of the group" but rather to the limits put on the use of force human-upon-human by God Himself!
So… "Limited Government" is a Christian Principle. It is a "timeless truth" found both in the Old Testament and the New Testament. It applies to all cultures and all times and all places. And I don't just mean the "Republican" version of this. I mean a Biblical Christian version!
Blessings to you. I genuinely look forward to hearing any further thoughts. We can finish by telephone if this is getting too complicated. (agenuinephonecall)
That is a good question: "are all taxes 'stealing'?"
I am not 100% sure about that. I have been hoping to learn a good answer to that through the discussion process but I cannot get anyone to try and really think it through and justify taxes biblically. Usually people just quote various passages about paying taxes, failing to recognize that I am not disputing paying them at this point, I am questioning passing taxes as laws and then collecting their payment through force or the threat of force.
Any kind of tax that is voluntary and related to a service should easily be considered okay. Examples: a toll on a road or a bridge, a fee to use a park, a license required to use a port, etc. Basically, if you can opt out by not participating or by choosing a different resource then you are not being "forced."
The main taxes I am concerned about are taxes on income or property – any kind of direct confiscation of property by force or the threat of force.
The theft of property by government would be similar whether the resources are then used for "welfare" or whether they are used to fund a war or a government agency.
I suspect that this kind of tax is immoral in either case.
Having said that, there is a difference between taking from one to benefit another and taking from all to benefit all equally. I am not saying that the latter is okay, only that it is different.
Taking from one to give to another is like a "double crime."
Taking from one to benefit everyone including that one equally is a "single crime."
Here is the challenge – where in the Heart of God, backed up by Biblical Thinking, are we as human beings authorized to organize ourselves into a "government" or "state" and then compel people to participate?
That is the discussion I want to have with my Christian Friends. What exactly does the Bible teach about the use of force, or about civil government, or about taxes? What "timeless truths" would apply to all cultures and places and peoples?
As best as I can tell, the Old Testament and the New Testament concept of "civil government" involves the use of force. The "ruler" in Romans 13 is not only given an authority to administrate a voluntary union of people, he is given a "sword" to punish evil doers with.
So in what situations and cases would God want the "ruler" to use force? Is taking wealth from some to benefit others such a case? For that matter, how about taking from all for the purpose of funding a war far away that may or may not really be "self-defense?"
Jon, You are funny! This is all more than I can process in between Josiah yelling "mommy, mommy, mommy, MOMMMMMMMMMY" and trying to keep Asha from eating carpet, curtains and other non edible substances! So, I will try to think about it a bit more while they are sleeping.
I will say this. I don't think there are different "timeless truths" for multi-cultural societies. I was thinking more along the lines of this…"are some of the principles of gov't in the OT meant ONLY for Israel or did God intend for them to be applied in all societies?"
There must be something in the Bible about NOT-EATING-CARPET.
Short answer: I am very interested in processing through this: "exactly how DO we parse through the Old Testament law in order to determine how to make application to today?"
I've heard a number of theories on this. "The Devil is in the details" is the saying. (Of course, our goal is to GET HIM OUT of the details."
I was just contemplating last night God's command to put do death anyone that doesn't honor the Sabbath and processing how to explain that to a young disciple who is interested in these Scriptures that even in the New Testament are "God-Breathed" and "useful for instruction in righteousness" etc.
I have my work cut out for me because I have always been taught basically "the whole OT law is abolished by Christ." Yet Christians pick and choose some things to be relevant.
One theory I am playing with (not dogmatically, just investigating and thinking about it): the forgiveness of Christ covers anything where what is at issue is relationship with God. But if what is at issue is violating another human being, there needs to be a temporal solution in addition to God's eternal one.
Where do I get this idea? One possible source: God established a temporal solution to murder by making a law putting murderers to death. One's life is one's ultimate property (property being that which we are stewards of before God). A violation of the life, person, dominion (property) of another in THIS life requires a remedy in this life.
Another thought – more than I am thinking "we need to impose the OT on everybody" I am thinking "shouldn't we at least look at the OT as a LIMIT on what should be imposed?"
In other words, if when God made a government he did not allow the Israelites to force certain things on one another, why would we be free to make one that does?
I know this comment is a bit rambling, but we are starting to get into the areas where I am very much still processing.
At this point, Asha is not all that concerned about what the Bible says about eating carpet! Although, I am pretty sure it would violate some OT dietary law. Hmmm…what OT punishment should I inflict on my baby girl for that? Just kidding!
That was a lot of answer to my questions…and it really just creates more questions for me. What role are we as Christians to play in gov't? Should we try to create some sort of Biblical gov't or work within the existing systems to influence thinking and implement solutions that line up with God's heart? Does discipling nations mean discipling governments or people or both?
It would take me lots of time to really think through everything you put out there. I'll keep reading it and try to come up with some more coherent thoughts.
Ok, so this thought comes to mind…you agree that some enforcement of moral law is necessary such as do not murder, right? So, if a doctor watches someone die and it is within their ability to save their life, is that a form of murder?
I think I'll tackle the last one first.
"…if a doctor watches someone die and it is within their ability to save their life, is that a form of murder?"
It sounds cruel. It sounds unloving. It sounds like something that would make God angry.
I know that some States in the U.S. have what are called "good samaritan" laws. These laws make it a crime to not give aid in certain situations if you have the ability to do so. (For example, if you are a paramedic and you witness a car crash – you might be legally obligated to use your skills to help).
I don't doubt that there is such a moral obligation, but I don't know if there is anything in the Bible that would lead me to believe that the doctor or paramedic should be "forced" by the civil government to act.
My question would be this: "is there a rationale in the Bible for making civil laws (backed by force) that compel people to help someone in need?"
Your question illustrates a main point about "limited" civil government. When something is clearly morally right or wrong the next question that should be asked before passing a law about it would be "does God want us to use force to back this area of morality?"
If God doesn't want us to use force we should not pass the law, tax and fund it, and send the police to enforce it. (Or, more precisely, we as Christians should not TEACH or EXEMPLIFY those things. Obviously a society that has not acknowledged God will do whatever it wants. I am NOT suggesting that Christians should FORCE society to do what Christians believe).
I do not know if the Old or New Testaments make a good argument for setting up the "good samaritan" concept as a matter of civil law.
I am unaware of anything that would lead to that conclusion, but I would be willing to listen if anybody has an argument other than "that doctor is a meany, that should be illegal" without any thought through, line-upon-line, argument from the Heart of God!
Key principle: We should only enforce morals that God wants us to enforce, everything else should be done by persuasion, love, teaching, discipling, example, etc.