Category Archives: Bible

You can't legislate the poor into prosperity.

I stumbled across this quote this morning and wanted to share.

“You cannot legislate the poor into prosperity by legislating the wealthy out of prosperity. What one person receives without working for, another person must work for without receiving. The government cannot give to anybody anything that the government does not first take from somebody else. When half of the people get the idea that they do not have to work because the other half is going to take care of them, and when the other half gets the idea that it does no good to work because somebody else is going to get what they work for, that my dear friend, is the beginning of the end of any nation.. You cannot multiply wealth by dividing it.”

Since it was in the same arena as a conversation I had on Twitter yesterday about the responsibility of government to care for it’s people from a Biblical perspective, I have been thinking a lot about it. Since the majority of the hate mail I get is based in religion, I figure I need to hit on this from time to time.

His perspective was that Jesus would want society to work collectively for the good. Which is true. That was the original plan. However, we live in a fallen world. People are NOT perfect, and each person needs to be accountable for their own actions.

Should we help those who are in need? YES! I say that emphatically. But it is NOT the responsibility of the government to do so. It is the responsibility of the individual, of private charities and organizations. Despite the “tough economic times” we’re so often reminded of people DO give. They always will.

Now for the preachin’. Jesus was about personal accountability and responsibility. Let’s take a look at 2 Thessalonians 3:10.

For even when we were with you, this we commanded you, that if any would not work, neither should he eat.

And then we have Luke 12:48.

Everyone to whom much was given, of him much will be required, and from him to whom they entrusted much, they will demand the more.

Read: you are responsible for yourself and for what you have. If you don’t work, you don’t eat. If you are entrusted with a lot, then YOU are responsible for what goes along with that. There is nowhere in the New Testament where the mandate to care for one another gets passed off to the government. All that does is remove personal accountability and places it in the hands of our representatives and those who pay taxes.

You do not grow a responsible society by taking away the accountability of the individual.

If you view society through a collectivist lens, then you’re operating under the assumption that everyone has everyone elses’ best interests at heart, which is just not true.

I fail to see how removing consequences and incentives benefits anyone. Jesus was clear that not everyone should have the same thing. Equal opportunity is not the same as equal outcome. Some people are given more than others. Some earn more than others. We were not all designed to be the same person.

There are inequities in our society. There always will be. In America, we are to be given equal opportunity. After that, it’s between you and God.

How Far Does A "Pro-Life" Stance Extend?

In the comments on my last post, Anna raised some interesting questions which sparked a subsequent insane debate on my facebook page (that is still raging if you want to check it out).

In that debate I took a much harder line for the anti capital punishment debate than I actually feel, for the sake of good debate. No, I don’t support it – however, I understand how someone could justify it. Biblically, there is some support for the pro capital punishment stance. Read the Old Testament. This article was brought up, which is an effective (but somewhat incomplete) encapsulation of the Biblical support for pro capital punishment. The core of the argument is this:

The reason the death penalty is pro-life is that it puts the highest possible value on the life of the person murdered by exacting the life of the person who violated that value by murdering. It’s a strong way to say, “It is not OK for one human being to take the life of another. If you murder, you forfeit your own life because the person you killed is so valuable.”

I hear that. However, I don’t know that I am comfortable with humans making that judgment. First of all, that logic would require the death penalty for all who commit murder, which is just nowhere near practical or ethical. Second, if we are judging the value of human life, we must also take into account the value of the victim. If the murderer commits his crime in the midst of gang violence, for instance, it’s probable that the victim was also involved in the same violence. Does that then remove fault from the murderer, as he has served punishment to another?

I don’t believe it is ever okay for us to remove the most basic of rights. However, I was asked if I could support a pro – capital punishment candidate. The answer is yes. Here is the difference.The adult has had the opportunity to make a choice. The innocence of a fetus should not be subject to judgment.

More importantly, for every capital punishment that takes place, there are about 10,000 abortions. There were roughly 1.2 million abortions in America in 2007. The same year, 115 people received capital punishment. There is hardly a comparison. The widespread nature of abortion deserves more attention than the capital punishment issue. While I would disagree with a capital punishment stance, and see the inconsistency in supporting it while fighting abortion, support of capital punishment is not a dealbreaker in my eyes.

The Problem Is NOT With Rick Warren…

This Rick Warren debacle is ridiculous. The prayer at the inauguration is a piece of the ceremony that normally gets ignored. So what if an evangelical Christian is going to be the one speaking? Are we forgetting that Billy Graham did every inauguration from Nixon to Clinton?

The difference? Why is Warren being attacked? It’s easy – Obama made promises to the gay community that he cannot keep, and they’re trying to hold him to it.

Rick Warren has never said anything homophobic. He has never said anything derogatory. He has simply stated the Biblical view of homosexuality, and expressed a love for them as people. The issue here is not with Rick Warren at all – the issue is with the Bible’s stance on homosexuality.

From the AP:

“I was trying to point out I’m not opposed to gays having their partnership. I’m opposed to gays using the term marriage for their relationship.”

This happens to be my stance on the issue. I am not opposed to civil unions. God lets us make our own choices, and if someone makes a choice, they are entitled to the same benefits that I am as an American citizen. I also believe, however, that marriage is a religious ceremony, and as such should stand in accordance with what the Bible tells us marriage should be.

This is a prime example of what we discussed earlier this week. The demonization of Christianity is not a myth. It’s okay to be a “Christian” and celebrate Christmas and Easter, as long as you don’t dare speak out about what the Bible says. If you do, you’re hateful and intolerant. Let’s be honest – God makes it pretty clear what’s okay and what’s not. None of us are ever going to meet those expectations, but as Christians, our standard is set high. I will say this again – Warren has never been hateful at all. He has handled his stance the way a Christian should – he expressed his discomfort with gay unions being labeled “marriage”. He said nothing about stripping their rights. He did not judge them.

Looks like some of Obama’s appeal to the gay community is wearing off. He’s already retracted his pro-gay marriage stance. Now he’s asked an unapologetic Christian to pray. Oh, the horror! Just wait. My prediction is that Obama will alienate group after group throughout the next 4 years. This is just the beginning, ya’ll – the man hasn’t even been sworn in.

Jesus for President?

I have wrestled a lot with the role of Christianity in politics. What exactly does “separation of church and state” look like? Because I certainly have a different view than some in that regard. As a Christian, I believe that God has His hand in everything. I don’t believe he threw us down on earth and said “hey, figure it out!”. He said that we were to obey the government that he would set up for us.

So what does that look like in an increasingly secular America? I don’t know that anyone would make the claim that we are a Christian nation anymore. We are most definitely not a theocracy. I do not believe the answer to this is electing officials who will try to serve as spiritual leaders.

The widespread attitude towards Christians in government is that we are all right wing nut jobs. Anyone who is open about their faith in Jesus is a lunatic who wants to force religion down the throats of the entire country. Sarah Palin was a prime example – she was shredded for her faith, even though I feel like she did a good job of separating it from her politics. In this current political climate, it is entirely to our detriment to force a Christian “agenda”. It will do much more harm than good.

That said, I also think that Christians should be active in leading our country. It is critical that we have Godly men and women in office – people praying for our government from the inside and providing guidance. The difference between an official who forces “Christian” laws into action an official who prays and makes decisions in response to God is critical. There is no question that the latter would be more effective, as well as much more credible as a national candidate.

So, those are my thoughts. I will do what I can to support qualified, intelligent, prayerful Christians in government. I do not, however, want my officials to double as my pastor. I’ve said before, the government does NOT need to compete with my God. They will always lose.

Will We Be Sleeping?

Last night I went to a Christmas concert in Greensboro, NC. I don’t listen to a lot of Christian music. I do worship music, but I have some… issues with mainstream Christian music. Apparently I just missed the boat on this one, but Casting Crowns did it a while back and it struck a chord with me. I about fell out of my chair. Check it out. I’d love to hear your thoughts.

While You Were Sleeping

Oh little town of Bethlehem
Looks like another silent night
Above your deep and dreamless sleep
A giant star lights up the sky
And while you’re lying in the dark
There shines an everlasting light
For the King has left His throne
And is sleeping in a manger tonight

Oh Bethlehem, what you have missed while you were sleeping
For God became a man
And stepped into your world today
Oh Bethlehem, you will go down in history
As a city with no room for its King
While you were sleeping
While you were sleeping

Oh little town of Jerusalem
Looks like another silent night
The Father gave His only Son
The Way, the Truth, the Life had come
But there was no room for Him in the world He came to save

Jerusalem, what you have missed while you were sleeping
The Savior of the world is dying on your cross today
Jerusalem, you will go down in history
As a city with no room for its King
While you were sleeping
While you were sleeping

United States of America
Looks like another silent night
As we’re sung to sleep by philosophies
That save the trees and kill the children

And while we’re lying in the dark
There’s a shout heard ‘cross the eastern sky
For the Bridegroom has returned
And has carried His bride away in the night

America, what will we miss while we are sleeping
Will Jesus come again
And leave us slumbering where we lay

America, will we go down in history
As a nation with no room for its King

Will we be sleeping
Will we be sleeping

United States of America
Looks like another silent night

MY God Wouldn't Do That…

The fundamental belief of Christianity is in Jesus, and that he is our one and only saviour. Period. One of the most famous verses in the Bible says this:

I am the way, the truth, and the life. No one gets to the father but through me. – John 14:6 

As horribly not PC as this is, I have a hard time believing that this can be interpreted any other way. Either you accept Christ or you don’t. You’re given that choice, do with it what you will, but your eternity depends on it. 

Barack Obama ran on being a “Christian”. He went to church, although a questionable one. However, I read this on Hot Air, and about blew a gasket.

Obama: There’s the belief, certainly in some quarters, that people haven’t embraced Jesus Christ as their personal savior that they’re going to hell.

Falsani: You don’t believe that?

Obama: I find it hard to believe that my God would consign four-fifths of the world to hell. I can’t imagine that my God would allow some little Hindu kid in India who never interacts with the Christian faith to somehow burn for all eternity. That’s just not part of my religious makeup.

Then you aren’t a Christian, Obama. It’s as simple as that. Either you are or you aren’t, but don’t claim to follow Christ if you don’t believe what he says. God did not send him for your political gain. I know this sounds harsh, but it’s the fundamental truth of the faith. Embracing the idea that everyone gets into heaven completely negates the magnitude of the sacrifice that Jesus made for us.

Now reading further is was really, really broke my heart.

Putting aside whether the conservatives have a better theological case, Mr. Obama is actually more in line with most American Christians. In a recent Pew poll, 70% said “many religions can lead to eternal life.” Two-thirds of Protestants, 66%, and 79% of Catholics said they agreed with that idea.

I can’t even comprehend that. Am I reading the same Bible as the rest of the American Christians? Or is it possible that we’ve become PC to the point of diluting the only source of truth left in our world?

America Doesn't Need A "Ruler".

We need someone to “govern”. Or “lead”.

Lots of people are up in arms about this quote from Obama sycophant Valerie Jarrett:

[youtube=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=q7Nlq80DVpo]

As well we should be over the thought of having a “ruler”. Our country was founded on the principles outlined in the Constitution. Those principles were defined by a people who were fleeing a monarchy, and were taking every precaution to prevent the US from becoming a country “ruled” by anyone.

In order to prevent any one person (or group of people…) from “ruling” the United States, our government is set up with a system of checks and balances. History has shown it to be an effective one: three branches of government, each providing a critical role in balancing legislation, keeping our laws in line with the Constitution. However, when one party commands all branches, that delicate balance can be skewed. Especially when the head of the Executive branch is viewed as a “ruler”. Rulers necessitate followers. Followers do as they’re told.

Now, in addition, and more importantly, I have a hard time swallowing that statement from a Biblical standpoint. Our true leadership is supposed to come from God. I wrote more about this last week:

People need to be accountable. The government is not responsible for your well being – they are there simply to protect us from each other. Period. God gives us a pretty clear warning of what happens when we reject Him as king:

“Now listen to them, but warn them solemnly and let them know what the king who will reign over them will do.” (I Samuel 8:9).

My hope is that Jarrett’s statement was merely a result of her being loose with her words and that this isn’t a harbinger of what this administration is shaping up to be.