The world has
embraced tolerance as the test of nice. We
must be careful in this area.
Kindness. Abstain
from childish name-calling. Focus on policies, not personalities. Yes. Yes. Yes.
Silently stand by
when you see naive people being misled? Look the other way rather than shining
the light on veiled corruption? Sit quietly while someone who has been
granted the public trust acts outside the bounds of the law? Remain out
of the political conversation for fear that someone who considers tolerance the
highest—perhaps only—virtue might think you are mean? Speak only positive words,
even if it plays into the hand of those carrying out truly harmful laws? No.
No. No. No. No.
Would you call it
kindness to watch someone with power hurt others? Sometimes I don't think we as Christians
recognize how destructive and anti-Christian are socialist government policies,
the policies aggressively advanced by President Obama. Christians are naïve
to think politics and Christianity only collide on matters like abortion and
gay marriage.
Economics are not morally neutral issues. Christians
must be concerned with economic policy.
It is truly
harmful to give people money as a direct result of their sinful (slothful,
immoral, deviant, negligent, etc.) decisions. Such policies serve to
enslave those people, not just to the government handout (then we would only be
talking about the political implications...would to God that it were only that serious!) but to the
sinful, self-destructive behavior itself. Policies that reward sin have
the effect of enslaving people in and to their sin. God created a world with natural consequences for sinful behavior, to
help deter people from such behavior.
As we use government handouts to shelter people from those consequences,
we are working directly against God. History shows that as government
sources of help increase, the demands for it increase.
Coincidental? Of course not. The very nature of government help
(value-neutral, non-judgmental handouts that relieve you of the naturally
punitive consequences of following the flesh) tends to increase the need for it.
Does that mean we should not help those in need? Of course it does not mean that. Assistance can and should be provided through private charity, where one can develop personal relationships and accountability, and where the help (food, shelter) is connected in the mind of the receiver to The Source of all that is good. This works hand-in-hand with God, demonstrating that people—God’s hands on this earth—give sacrificially and voluntarily when they are motivated by His love. Government is not motivated by God’s love, because “it” has nothing “it” can give. It can only take from some and transfer to lucky—or politically connected—recipients.
Christians, what will help people eternally? Teaching them that government is their satisfying source? Or teaching them that God is the source that meets their needs?
You say God doesn't meet their needs? I beg your pardon, God has provided us the tools and the training to meet not only our spiritual needs, but our material needs as well. In those truly rare exceptions where a person has no ability to provide for himself or herself (I am not talking about the standards it takes to "get on disability" or to get a handout from government) there is plenty of help available through private, God-motivated charity.
Does that mean we should not help those in need? Of course it does not mean that. Assistance can and should be provided through private charity, where one can develop personal relationships and accountability, and where the help (food, shelter) is connected in the mind of the receiver to The Source of all that is good. This works hand-in-hand with God, demonstrating that people—God’s hands on this earth—give sacrificially and voluntarily when they are motivated by His love. Government is not motivated by God’s love, because “it” has nothing “it” can give. It can only take from some and transfer to lucky—or politically connected—recipients.
Christians, what will help people eternally? Teaching them that government is their satisfying source? Or teaching them that God is the source that meets their needs?
You say God doesn't meet their needs? I beg your pardon, God has provided us the tools and the training to meet not only our spiritual needs, but our material needs as well. In those truly rare exceptions where a person has no ability to provide for himself or herself (I am not talking about the standards it takes to "get on disability" or to get a handout from government) there is plenty of help available through private, God-motivated charity.
Is it evil or
sinful to make money in a free, capitalistic society? I’ve blogged about this
before, but to summarize: money is made in a free economy by serving
others. You identify some good or
service that others want or need, and you provide it to them in exchange for
what they are willing to pay. So long as
the exchange is freely undertaken and made without deception, this is virtuous
activity. Further, the harder you work to meet the needs of others, the greater
your financial reward will be: the more money you can make.
My wife heard a
speaker (she did not remember the name or I would give him credit) point out
that while the God-ordained role of governments is to reward the righteous and
punish evil doers, ironically, liberal
government does exactly the opposite! Such government punishes people who engage in virtuous
activity like hard work, being faithful to their spouse, not engaging in risky
behavior, and serving others, and rewards with handouts those who do wrong.
Enough of the
wrong direction. It’s time to turn back
to the right on all of the moral issues. It's the only way to be nice!
