Socialism and the Bible

“Wealth obtained by fraud dwindles, but the one who gathers by labor increases it.” (Pr 13:11)

Trying to coorelate socialism and Christianity is ridiculous for anyone remotely familiar with Biblical text. Many socialists, when it suits their needs, use the principles and tenets of Christianity to further their agenda towards state socialism. Welfare, entitlement programs, food stamps and the like are frequently “justified” and “rationalized” through faulty interpretation of Biblical teachings. It leads to ignorant statements like "they need to pay their fair share." When it comes to other issues such as gay marriage or abortion these same people will dismiss the Bible out of hand and declare it old-fashioned, irrelevant and false. We need to be reminded that, “Jesus Christ is the same yesterday and today and forever.” (Heb 13:8) The nature and character of God does not change. Therefore, His teachings and commands on self-government, family, the church and civil government do not change and are just as imperative and relevant today as they were during the time of Adam. The clear conclusion from reading Genesis to Revelation is that socialism is incompatible with Christianity.  Furthermore, it is not just incompatible it is destructive and its grip on the United States constitutes a clear and present danger.

Socialism, in this article, is viewed in the context of state ownership of the means of production, diminished property rights, and wealth redistribution. Socialism is a troubling system of state control, theft and godlessness. Consider the following definitions of socialism from Meriam-Websters:

1: any of various economic and political theories advocating collective or governmental ownership and administration of the means of production and distribution of goods

2 a :a system of society or group living in which there is no private property b : a system or condition of society in which the means of production are owned and controlled by the state

3: a stage of society in Marxist theory transitional between capitalism and communism and distinguished by unequal distribution of goods and pay according to work done

4: an economic system with limited socialist characteristics that is effected by gradual state action and typically includes public ownership of major industries and remedial measures to benefit the working class

 MSNBC commentator Lawrence O’donnell recently invoked scripture to promote state socialism.  It was laughable because he completely used scripture out of context and made a mockery of Biblical teaching. He claimed, upon answering the question, “How much would Jesus take” that Jesus would take 100% of income. He justified this bizarre statement from grossly misinterpreting Mark Chapter 10. The rich young ruler was cut to the bone by Jesus because of the rich man’s love of money. Sadly, the ruler refused to listen to Jesus. Notice, however, that Jesus didn’t take ANYTHING. The rich young ruler went about his business and did not follow Jesus and kept his riches. Lawrence O-donnell somehow twists that story into a ridiculous argument that Jesus would take everything and redistribute it to meet the need for the greater good. The fundamental flaw in his argument is the removing of the individual from giving. Giving is a vital aspect of Christianity that helps sanctify a believer. 

Watch the MSNBC video here.

It is very clear from scripture that at no time is the state expected to confiscate wealth to redistribute to the needy. Jesus placed that burden on believers to do so freely with a glad heart. The Bible says, “Each one must do just as he has purposed in his heart, not grudgingly or under compulsion, for God loves a cheerful giver.” (2 Cor 9:7) This clearly teaches that the individual must decide for himself, voluntarily, whether or not to give, how much and to whom. Clearly, it is what Christians should do but never under duress. The state, not even the church, should compel people to give money to be redistributed to others as entitlements. This is called theft by any other standard.

Is America a socialist nation? Surely not, we were founded on the Protestant work ethic of rugged individualistm in the land of opportunity, right? Let's take a look.

Compulsory education as a government run institution is socialist by design. Consider the individual person who never had kids or perhaps has one child yet still pays property taxes among other taxes to fund government schools. Even more egregious, consider the family that pays for their own childs education via homeschool or private school yet still pays taxes for public education. The public school’s means of production is government controlled, wealth is redistributed through taxes, mainly encroachment on property rights to pay for it…I would call that textbook socialism.

According to the Heritage foundation, entitlement programs make up almost 60% of the federal budget. Benefits from these programs are paid for disproportionally from the wealthy and received disproportionally by the poor. This is theft and clearly socialism.

Not only is entitlement programs theft, it is incredibly irresponsible. A cursory glance at the above chart demonstrates how ludicrous and precarious the financial situation is in the United States due to reckless spending on entitlements. The only constitutionally mandated item to fund is defense and we could stand to trim in that area as well. Most, would scream to drastically reduce the military funding. Sadly, they don't understand that we would still be defecit spending even if we eliminated the military all together, which is absurd. The state has largely taken over the responsibility of self-government, family and the church. Civil government competes for votes and politicians have figured out the more they give (confiscate from one group to give to another usually bigger group) the more people vote for them.

The progressive income tax is clearly a form of socialism. Yes, the elites ensure that they have special provisions and deals but freely promote higher taxation among those “below” them as long as it does not pertain to them. Warren Buffett and Bill Gates frequently talk about the need for higher taxes for the rich but fail to mention all of the loopholes that they enjoy. My suggestion to them would be to give away the amount of money they feel compelled to give. They could give away 90% of everything they make and still be millionaires year over year, yet do they? Instead of talking about it, they could set the example for everyone else to follow. They create foundations (tax havens) to give money away (tax-advantaged of course) yet each one of them are personally worth billions.

Is America socialist? Clearly yes, the United (socialist) States of America fits the definition of state socialism very nicely. The exception, of course, is the elites.

Christianity clearly teaches to take care of the poor, orphans and widows. The Bible teaches, “The rich and the poor have a common bond, the Lord is the maker of them all.” (Pr 22:2) It also says, “To the weary you have given no water to drink, And from the hungry you have withheld bread.” (Job 22:7) And, “You have sent widows away empty, And the strength of the orphans has been crushed.” (Job 22:9)

How does the apparent contradiction between the command of helping those in need and speaking against entitlements that clearly help the poor reconciled? Very easily! Christianity speaks nothing of state control over wealth distribution.

It is the obligation of the individual believer, families and the church to help those in need. However, it is helpful to define “those in need.” The Bible has something to say about this as well. Proverbs 20:13 states, “Do not love sleep, or you will become poor; Open your eyes, and you will be satisfied with food,”  “The sluggard does not plow after the autumn, So he begs during the harvest and has nothing.” (Pr 20:4) In the context of the Bible the poor were those that worked but had nothing. We are called to help these people. We were not called to support people so they could sit at home, watch cable TV, text their friends and generally do nothing. “The soul of the sluggard craves and gets nothing, but the soul of the diligent is made fat.” (Pr 13:4)  The “poor” in America are wealthy by most of the worlds standards. It is unjust and unbiblical to support people who do not work, "For even when we were with you, we used to give you this order: if anyone is not willing to work, then he is not to eat, either. For we hear that some among you are leading an undisciplined life, doing no work at all, but acting like busybodies." (2 Th 3:10-11) .  Christians engage in giving as an act of worship. We should give to those in need not to those who are lazy and looking for a handout or a free ride. It is actually counterproductive to support people in their pursuit of laziness.

Those that work and are poor we must help support them. Families and churches should sacrificially help those who are in need. Additionally, we are called to care for orphans and widows. This is not a job for the state and literally robs people of the blessing of giving and helping others.

 Instead, the state imposes taxes through coercion to implement programs to help people in a completely inefficient and impersonal way. Not paying income taxes is the only debt that an individual can go to prison for in America. As socialism has slowly been implemented in the U.S. the fruit is beginning to ripen in the form of deficit spending, massive national debt and high unemployment.

What then shall we do?

It would be great if the U.S. would abolish entitlement programs and return the duty of helping the poor, orphans and widows to its rightful place: individuals, families, churches and communities. However, that is not politically viable and will not happen unless the U.S. literally collapses and is rebuilt on sound ideological, political and financial principles (Biblical).

Christians should fight for a religious exemption to entitlement programs. We would not pay anything into the system and would obviously not receive any benefits either. Instead, individuals, families and churches would set up their own local systems to take care of each other. The Amish are a great example. They are exempt from programs like social security, in most cases, and take care of their own. Because of the letter of the law, no other Christian churches are able to participate as it is now written. This must change. By expanding the model of the Amish to many Christians churches and other groups for that matter it would set an example for the country to emulate. When the current system collapses, Christians must be ready to help each other and others. 

We must educate Christians and others who will listen to the pitfalls of socialism and a return to Biblical principles of caring for one another. Engage the culture on a local level. Any changes to the current system will have to come from the bottom up and not the top down.