Written and compiled by Gary Kukis
These studies are designed for believers in Jesus Christ only. If you have exercised faith in Christ, then you are in the right place. If you have not, then you need to heed the words of our Lord, Who said, “For God so loved the world that He gave His only-begotten [or, uniquely-born] Son, so that every [one] believing [or, trusting] in Him shall not perish, but shall be have eternal life! For God did not send His Son into the world so that He should judge the world, but so that the world shall be saved through Him. The one believing [or, trusting] in Him is not judged, but the one not believing has already been judged, because he has not believed in the Name of the only-begotten [or, uniquely-born] Son of God.” (John 3:16–18). “I am the Way and the Truth and the Life! No one comes to the Father except through [or, by means of] Me!” (John 14:6).
Every study of the Word of God ought to be preceded by a naming of your sins to God. This restores you to fellowship with God (1John 1:8–10). If we acknowledge our sins, He is faithful and just to forgive us our sins and to cleanse us from all unrighteousness (1John 1:9). If there are people around, you would name these sins silently. If there is no one around, then it does not matter if you name them silently or whether you speak aloud.
Preface: The left has dishonestly presented socialism as a form of government with Biblical approval. I personally know a believer who thinks that the Apostles tried to teach some form of socialism to their churches.
Obama is not a Brown-Skinned Socialist Graphic; from Always Question Authority; accessed October 4, 2015. Nearly every liberal alive has posted this at least once on his facebook page. They are not given a liberal card without it.
No doubt, you have seen this silly posting of a long-haired Jesus, presented as being brown-skinned, anti-war, a socialist who gives away free healthcare. It is true that Jesus was brown-skinned; everything else in that description is false or distorted. We will deal primarily with the Bible and Socialism in this treatise.
What has happened is, communism has gained an incredible foothold in the United States—in our government, in our public school system, in one political party with some hold on the opposing political party, and in our media. Communists found out that completely opposing Jesus in South America would not gain them the power that they desire; however, they found out that if they coopted Catholicism and made it sound as if communism (or socialism) is simply the political out-working of Catholicism (or of Christianity), that they could make it much more palatable to the religious public (this is known as liberation theology).
Possibly even to the surprise of communists, this dishonest movement has managed to coopt to current pope.
1) Miriam Webster:
(1) Socialism is a way of organizing a society in which major industries are owned and controlled by the government rather than by individual people and companies.
(2) Socialism is any of various economic and political theories advocating collective or governmental ownership and administration of the means of production and distribution of goods.
(3) Socialism is a system of society or group living in which there is no private property. It is a system or condition of society in which the means of production are owned and controlled by the state.
(4) Theoretically, socialism is 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. This theoretical stage of Marxist theory never exists in practice. There are always people who want power; there are always people who want to control you and all that you have. They do not disappear.
2) Dictionary.com defines socialism as...
(1) ...a theory or system of social organization that advocates the vesting of the ownership and control of the means of production and distribution, of capital, land, etc., in the community as a whole.
(2) ...procedure or practice in accordance with this theory.
(3) ...(in Marxist theory) the stage following capitalism in the transition of a society to communism, characterized by the imperfect implementation of collectivist principles.
2. There are actually several kinds of socialistic practices:
1) A fairly non-political socialism is where a group of people have their possessions in common and work as they agree. We see this with the early Jerusalem church in Acts and on some hippie communes and among the Pilgrims for the first few years. The hippie commune type is quite relaxed, and people can come and go, depending upon their leader or the council of members. Although this is treated as political socialism, it really is not. If Charley Brown wants to quit the commune, usually he can without incident (but possibly with the loss of some property or ownership rights). However, Lucy Van Pelt can have a farm next door which is a normal, free enterprise farm, with employees and management. The early church and the Pilgrims will be discussed later.
2) There is the Socialist Revolution, where a country is taken over in a power struggle by a political power which favors socialism (they may call it communism, but there is no true Marxian communism and there never will be). You may be shocked to find out that many in leadership really have no opinion about socialism one way or the other; but this is their means to get power, and they take it. We see this with political types in the United States who, one week are Democrat and the next week, Republican. It is a great gig with many perks and a reasonable amount of power and influence, so some people do whatever they can to grab onto and hold power.
3) There is creeping socialism, where no one is necessarily claiming to be socialist (they might or might not), but they seize more and more power for the government (and hence, for themselves) every chance that they get. In just the past 15 years, the federal government has seized the housing mortgage market (a $5 trillion industry); the student loan market (a $1 trillion industry); and are on the way to taking over the healthcare industry (they will first have to destroy the healthcare insurance industry, which is what is going on right now). Much of Europe is on a march toward socialism, as is the United States.
3. Socialism makes great promises to the people in order to get the power. This can occur in a variety of ways. For a long time, socialism revolutions were the way that countries turned to socialism. However, as of late socialism has become more and more a part of European and American government as a result of piece-by-piece taking over of the various sectors of society.
1) The government promises to see that everyone can buy a house. The government takes control over the mortgage industry loans. Now 95% of the home loans in the United States are originated or guarantee or funded by federal agencies and quasi-federal agencies. This took place in the 2000's. A $5 trillion industry was surreptitiously taken over by the government; and what have you read about that?
2) The government says that we cannot allow starving children. And who supports letting children starve? So food stamps were provided to families and free lunches and breakfasts were provided to students in public schools. In many states, this was increased to cover 100% of the students. However, the idea is, get the people to depend upon the government for food. The more the people depend upon government, the more power they have.
3) Most recently, healthcare was taken over by our government, albeit limited. However, it is clearly an expansion of government authority.
4) Now add these things up: if you want a house, if you want food and if you want medical care, you had better not screw with the government. You may think that this is extreme but conservative groups and individuals have been targeted on many occasions by the IRS and other agencies.
4. Although socialist propagandists make a big deal of the Jerusalem church having everything in common (Acts 4:32–35); the first mention of such an approach to life is in Prov. 1:14, and the proposal is made by criminals who will steal and murder (Prov. 1:11–13).
1) First of all, this is a false promise, made to draw a person into a criminal organization.
2) Those who lead the criminal organization will always have the most stuff and they will be the best insulated from prosecution.
3) All of the criminal activity which is promised makes it appear as if they have control over everything. Prov. 1:10–15a My son, if sinners entice you, do not consent. If they say, "Come with us, let us lie in wait for blood; let us ambush the innocent without reason; like Sheol let us swallow them alive, and whole, like those who go down to the pit; we shall find all precious goods, we shall fill our houses with plunder; throw in your lot among us; we will all have one purse"--my son, do not walk in the way with them. This is the warning of the writer of Proverbs. This would have been David’s first warning to Solomon (David raised up at least 3 criminal sons); and this is Solomon’s warning to all young people.
5. Now the full number of those who believed were of one heart and soul, and no one said that any of the things that belonged to him was his own, but they had everything in common. And with great power the apostles were giving their testimony to the resurrection of the Lord Jesus, and great grace was upon them all. There was not a needy person among them, for as many as were owners of lands or houses sold them and brought the proceeds of what was sold and laid it at the apostles' feet, and it was distributed to each as any had need. (Acts 4:32-35, ESV).
1) The Jerusalem church was in an unusual situation. They were under heavy persecution; people from that church could have their property and livelihood removed from them at any time. They lived in a city where they would be persecuted for their faith.
2) During the German persecution of the Jews, it was the right thing to do to help Jews in any way that a person could. This might involve hiding, feeding, and transporting Jews. This might involve lying to authorities. All of this is legitimate when governments turn against believers or turn against Jews simply because of their racial or religious heritage.
3) Paul wrote to many churches. At no time did he suggest that these churches follow the example of the Jerusalem church.
4) Paul took up a collection for the Jerusalem church. This suggests that (1) persecution was so concentrated that this affected almost everyone in the Jerusalem church; and (2) a socialistic approach did not necessarily save them.
5) Therefore, there is no authorization for hippie Christians to establish a commune where everything is held in common and some prophet-dude runs the place.
6) This does not mean that you will not be called upon by God to share your substance. Even here in the United States, we may face various types of persecution in the future. Just as many individual Germans looked out for persecuted Jews during WWII, so Christians should be towards one another or towards Jews if our country goes off-track.
6. Work is prescribed by God for Adam in the garden and outside of the garden. So, under perfect environment, Adam worked; under a fallen world, Adam worked. Every believer should work. No believer should ever live off of other people unless there are no other options available to you.
7. So that there is no misunderstanding, the believers who strives only for riches is on the wrong track. 1Tim. 6:10 Heb. 13:5 James 5:1–5
8. Government support of the poor (through taxation) was limited to a 10% tax once a year. Right now we spend about $1 trillion per year on various welfare schemes and programs. About 3.3% of a person’s income should be dedicated to this; and it should be carefully distributed. Welfare should not be given out simply as a means of buying votes. Paul in fact writes to the Thessalonians, If anyone does not desire to work, neither let him eat (2Thess. 3:10b). One of the welfare programs of the Old Testament was to require that the corners of fields not be harvested so that hungry people could come into these fields and harvest them. So, they did have to work in order to eat. Lev. 19:9–10 23:22
9. It should be noted that government care for the poor is not charity. Casting a vote to make Charley Brown pay more in taxes to support the poor is not charity.
10. The most important thing to understand is, socialism is a ruse used for people to take power. All kinds of things are promised (a certain job, food, free healthcare); but the whole purpose is to put power in the hands of a ruler.
1) In order for these policies to be put into effect, sometimes millions of people lose their lives.
2) In Vietnam, when the United States pulled out, the communists came in and killed millions of people. Low estimates are 1–3 million; but there could have been many more than that. Liberals try to pretend as if pulling out of Vietnam was a good and noble thing to do; but the end result was millions upon millions of people were killed by communists. Far more people died in the final few years of the communist takeover than in the 10 or so years that preceded this takeover.
3) In both China and Russia, Mao and Stalin were two of the greatest killers than mankind has ever known.
4) Even today, dictators in North Korea continue to kill millions of their own people because their socialistic doctrine does not work. It will not even provide enough food for the people to eat.
11. The socialist experiment of the United States:
1) The Pilgrims were religious separatists who left England in order to enjoy some freedom. They faced great persecution in England, when some of them left England for Holland. Since this was not working out, this particular group agreed to move to America—but they lacked the funding and the supplies for such a trip.
2) They were not originally called Pilgrims; they were Puritan Separatists.
3) Enter two companies known as the Adventurers who tried finance and outfit new settlements in the colonies. A 10 point agreement was reached wherein the Pilgrims agreed "That all such persons as are of this colony are to have their meat, drink, apparel, and all provisions out of the common stock and goods of the said colony." Further, it was agreed that during the first seven years. "all profits and benefits that are got by trade, traffic, trucking, working, fishing, or any other means of any persons, remain still in the common stock until the division." Essentially, they agree to set up a socialist colony, where these primary economic sectors were held in common. They were to bring their surplus to the common warehouse and keep just what they needed individually. The surplus would be split between the colony and the Adventurers.
4) The intention was to make a profit for the colony this way, and some claim that this was as if everyone was a shareholder in an early corporation (as the NY Times describes it). You can call it what you want, but, everyone owned everything. They had agreed to hold their property in common. That is a form of socialism. This was 1621.
5) Whether this was somehow how based on the early Jerusalem church (that held all things in common) was not clear. My guess is, this was a part of the decision that they made to hold all things in common as a colony.
6) In 1621, they planted 26 acres and 60 in 1622. However, when they turned toward a free enterprise system, where everyone could own their own home, land and the profits from what they grew, 184 acres were planted in 1623.
7) Thanksgiving is a part of this story, but not relevant to this study. What is important to note is the change from holding all things in common to owning one’s own property.
12. Most people do not really understand what socialism is. Socialism is the seizure of most or all private property and industry by the government. The workers may be told that they have a stake in all of it; but the chief recipients of socialist largess tends to be the political leaders who run everything from on high. Our government has been doing this for decades, each administration seizing more and more sectors of the economy, and therefore more and more power, more and more control. Even though the Democrats are, for the most part, dedicated to this; the Republicans, when ignored, will do the same thing.
Testimony from a school teacher in Denmark.
All things being equal, if a person works hard, is productive all of his life, he will slowly but surely build up possessions and wealth. This is true for believers and unbelievers alike. If such a person avoids the many lusts in life (alcohol, drugs, women, power, money) and concentrates on being a good family man and a hard worker, they will progress in life. In some economic systems, like socialism, this is less likely to be true. The more economic freedom a country offers, the more likely such a person will succeed financially in life.
Christians do tend to fare better than unbelievers, simply because most Christians tend to curb their excesses more than unbelievers. Obviously, things happen in life—sicknesses, accidents, marital problems, etc. These things can impact a person’s movement in the financial realm.
Furthermore, a believer who is looking to financially make it, and this is his focus, rather than Bible doctrine, then God may bring him back down to earth now and again, and slow his roll, so to speak.
This sort of thing does not occur overnight; the policies are voted in, they are implemented, and over a period of decades, they begin to erode the economic dynamism of the economy they are in. These socialist policies act like a cancer to the host economy. |
From http://www.examiner.com/article/what-life-socialist-europe-is-actually-like accessed February 13, 2016. |
Taken from Genesis 24 (HTML) (PDF) (WPD):
Communism, Socialism and the Gospel of Jesus Christ: There are always Satanic and political forces at work, and, if you go to any website with far left leanings, they will both denigrate the Bible but they will very likely, at some point, speak of the rich young ruler, to whom Jesus said, “Sell everything, give the proceeds to the poor and follow Me.” Liberals only know a few passages of Scripture, and this is always one of them. They love that passage. Liberals seem to think that Jesus went around to rich guys all the time and told them to give away all that they had. To them, that is the central message of Jesus, and they attempt to parlay that into higher taxes for the rich, as if it is the government which represents the poor and as if that was the theme of Jesus ministry.
When it comes to Scripture, on many occasions, socialists and communists have found out that the approach, “The Bible is wrong and we are right” does not work very well. When they took this approach, they were stymied on many occasions. The people were not with them. So their other approach has been to co-op the Bible—find a few things in the Bible which appear to support their position, and push those things, as if they are central to the message of the Bible. When people do not know much about the Bible, but believe in it, this has the potential to sway them to some degree.
People who run such websites have no interest in Who Jesus is, the gospel of Jesus Christ, the cross, or anything like that. In fact, they will, out of the other side of their mouth, denigrate Scripture and some of the things which they find in the Bible.
Whereas, socialism and communism took power in the 20th century through violent revolution, they found that it was hard to sell this ideology when their greatest leaders are also the greatest mass murderers from the 20th century (Joseph Stalin and Mao Tse Tung). They have found that massive control by government can also be accomplished by democratic elections and piecemeal taking of power, by making promises to the largest number of people (the 99%; the middle class), which is very much a war of propaganda.
Christians are often the most difficult people to get on board with their utopian society, so this is done by distorting Scripture. I have been to many politically liberal websites where they can expound on Jesus and the rich young ruler and they can tell you how many times God talks about the poor in the Bible, and they can make a very compelling case that God is all about taking care of the poor. But the end game is to get more money and more power in the hands of a few autocrats, who, ostensibly, have the best interests of the poor at heart.
And all of this is based upon a great lust for power and money in the hearts of some men. That will always be a part of politics and of government. They will talk about the poor, the middle class, about income inequality, global warming, but, when all is said and done, they simply want to convince a population that more money and more power needs to flow from the people to the government. This is why the solution to global warming is, more taxes and more government power. This is why the solution to poverty is, more taxes and more government power. And this is sold on television, in the movies, in newscasts, in newspapers, and, of course, in schools.
And why do they attack the rich? There are fewer rich; it is easy to make poor people jealous of their wealth; and money represents power and influence—and politicians want this power and influence. Most of them do not want to share it. They get some recalcitrant Christians onboard by convincing them, a socialist government is what Jesus would want.
Jesus the Socialist (a graphic) from WordPress, but found all over the internet, on nearly every liberal’s facebook page. Accessed December 17, 2014.
I realize that there are times when this examination of the Bible seems to be a little too political. Satan uses politics and Satan distorts Scripture. Most people only understand one side of Satan, this he is this vicious being who brings great harm to millions of people. But that is only one side of Satan. Satan would also like to establish “heaven on earth” (although that would not be how he would phrase it). Satan is a utopian. This is why there are so many ideologues who have this fantasy of establishing a perfect society (which is what socialism and communist are, besides being ideologies used to grab power and money). This ideal society is Satanic evil. Attempts to establish a human paradise is not of God, but of Satan. The Millennium, where Jesus rules, will feature perfect environment, but, more prominently, will feature perfect justice and righteousness. A utopian nation under Satan is not about justice and righteousness. It is all about power and control. It is not about removing income inequality—it is about removing the money (and therefore the power) of their political and social enemies (aka, those who will not go along with their programs).
Along these lines, see Liberalism, Conservatism and Christianity (HTML) (PDF) (WPD).
You may wonder, where are you going with this? So, let’s go back to our narrative. Abraham is a very rich man and God never comes to him and says, “You know what, Abraham, you just have been blessed with too much material things; I need for you to sell your stuff and give it to the poor.” Abraham, because of his riches, was able to employ a huge staff of people—in the hundreds. Probably most of these men were slaves, but slavery in those days was much different than the slavery which we practiced in the United States (and different from how it is practiced in most places).
Slaves generally came from two places: extreme poverty, which required them to sell themselves into slavery (or their parents sold them into slavery); and from victories in war. When a country was conquered, sometimes its people would be taken in slavery (and sometimes they would be left in their land to pay tribute to those who conquered them).
At no time did God come to Abraham and say, “You make way too much money, and your slaves make only a small percentage of what you make. There is far too much of an income gap here. You need to spread your wealth around.” God never told Abraham that; and God never told that to any man who was wealthy and owned slaves (with the exception of the rich young ruler, but that is a whole different story with a very specific context, which is unknown to the liberals who speak of Jesus and the rich young ruler in reverent terms).
A part of what Abraham did was, he provided for his slaves. They had food, shelter and clothing provided, and this was his responsibility. I have seen liberals protest a variety of fast-food restaurants because they did not pay a living wage. In slavery, a good slave owner had to pay a living wage. He may not have paid his slaves, but he had to provide for all of their needs. That turns out to be, if my calculator is accurate, a living wage.
From Genesis 12 (HTML) (PDF) (WPD):
Communism, at some point in the mid 20th century developed 45 goals to accomplish in the United States, so that they might take over our nation. These goals were read in Congress in 1963, in order for them to be made a permanent part of our American record. I will list of few of these below, as these communist objectives stand in stark contrast to the laws of divine establishment. |
|
Type |
Goals |
Political Goals |
3. Develop the illusion that total disarmament [by] the United States would be a demonstration of moral strength. 4. Permit free trade between all nations regardless of Communist affiliation and regardless of whether or not items could be used for war. 6. Provide American aid to all nations regardless of Communist domination. 7. Grant recognition of Red China. Admission of Red China to the U.N. 12. Resist any attempt to outlaw the Communist Party. |
Infiltration |
15. Capture one or both of the political parties in the United States. 16. Use technical decisions of the courts to weaken basic American institutions by claiming their activities violate civil rights. 17. Get control of the schools. Use them as transmission belts for socialism and current Communist propaganda. Soften the curriculum. Get control of teachers' associations. Put the party line in textbooks. 18. Gain control of all student newspapers. 19. Use student riots to foment public protests against programs or organizations which are under Communist attack. 20. Infiltrate the press. Get control of book-review assignments, editorial writing, policy-making positions. 21. Gain control of key positions in radio, TV, and motion pictures. |
Attack upon Morality |
24. Eliminate all laws governing obscenity by calling them "censorship" and a violation of free speech and free press. 25. Break down cultural standards of morality by promoting pornography and obscenity in books, magazines, motion pictures, radio, and TV. 26. Present homosexuality, degeneracy and promiscuity as "normal, natural, healthy." |
Attacks upon Christianity |
27. Infiltrate the churches and replace revealed religion with "social" religion. Discredit the Bible and emphasize the need for intellectual maturity, which does not need a "religious crutch." 28. Eliminate prayer or any phase of religious expression in the schools on the ground that it violates the principle of "separation of church and state." |
Remove us from our founding principles |
29. Discredit the American Constitution by calling it inadequate, old-fashioned, out of step with modern needs, a hindrance to cooperation between nations on a worldwide basis. 30. Discredit the American Founding Fathers. Present them as selfish aristocrats who had no concern for the "common man." |
Establish more centralized control |
32. Support any socialist movement to give centralized control over any part of the culture--education, social agencies, welfare programs, mental health clinics, etc. |
Attack Divine Institutions |
40. Discredit the family as an institution. Encourage promiscuity and easy divorce. 41. Emphasize the need to raise children away from the negative influence of parents. Attribute prejudices, mental blocks and retarding of children to suppressive influence of parents. |
These goals can be found on hundreds of websites: http://www.rense.com/general32/americ.htm http://www.resistnet.com/profiles/blogs/the-communist-takeover-of http://www.divine-way.com/45_communist_goals_for_take_over_of_america.html |
You will noticed that many of the keys to the destruction of the United States are related to the Bible, to morality, and to the divine institutions as established by the Bible. |
I present this, because morality is part of what holds a nation together. The Ten Commandments are a code of freedom, a code which provides protections for a nation, a code which helps to maintain internal and external peace in a nation. |
God had prospered Isaac to such a point that the men of the land, the Philistines, became extremely jealous and began to act upon their jealousy. One of the very worst mental attitude sins for a person to harbor is jealousy. These Philistines acted upon their jealousy and, although unprovoked, began taking retaliatory measures. One of the most valuable assets in those days was a well. As we know, Palestine is not known for its abundant lakes and rivers, so that much of the area depends upon rain and upon wells for water. Herdsmen were absolutely dependent upon their knowledge of the location of the wells in their vicinity and the ability to use same. Sheep can't go but 3 or 4 days without water. There were different things which the Philistines could have done; here, by filling up the wells, they were indicating that those of Isaac's household should move to another area. They did not attack Isaac or his people (and possibly because they were in fear of his strength) but they did indicate by this that they wanted him out of this area. This is not unlike burning a cross on someone's lawn.
Barnes: The amazing growth of the stranger’s wealth in flocks and herds and servants awakens the envy of the inhabitants.
Here is the second place where problems with the Philistines are observed. The 99% were jealous of Isaac, who had become a member of the 1% (using the liberal vernacular of today). This was not necessarily all Philistines; but it was apparently a very large percentage of them.
Just like his father Abraham before him, God blessed Isaac with great material blessings. Now, note the mental attitude sin: some of the Philistines envied Isaac. This is one of the greatest things wrong with the liberals of today. They envy those who are successful and rich. They treat such people as though they have cheated others to become successful (except for sports stars and movie and television people and liberal politicians—most liberals do not mind that they are rich). However, if you are a liberal, and you both lust after material things and, at the same time, despise the rich, you need to confess those sins to God—possibly every minute that they pop up. That is a violation of the 10th commandment. Even though we are not under the Law, inordinate desire for what someone else has is a sin (Rom. 7:7). If you think money ought to be taken from the rich so that, you can have free or less expensive welfare; or free food for your children, or whatever, that is envy.
There are always rich people and there are always people who are richer than you. In every society there are people who are poor and people who make a million times what you do. It is a fact of life. Legally taking their wealth and spreading it around does not necessarily improve your lot or the lot of those to whom the wealth is spread.
Why is Isaac wealthy? God prospered him. That is what the text actually says. And God doesn’t even prosper him because he is great; God prospers Isaac because Abraham was great and because God is great.
I should add that, by virtue of living near to Isaac, the Philistines of that area were blessed as well. However, they were not blessed as much as Isaac was blessed, and that is what made them upset. Wealth is such a relative thing. The poor in the United States have a litany of possessions that only the rich could afford 100 years ago (along with many items which had not been invented yet). Yet, a march could be organized to protest the 1%, and many of those who are poor would attend. It does not matter to them that they are wealthy compared to people 100 years ago; it does not matter to them that they are wealthy by the standards of other countries; all that matters to them is what they can see and/or what they have been told about the wealthy. “Charley Brown makes more money in a minute than I will make my entire life? Well, that just is not right!” The politics of envy.
As a believer, you can easily find those who are better off than you are. Most of the time, you can look down the street or at your place of business, and there are people there who you might perceive to be better off. This should never be an issue to you. With Bible doctrine, you can appreciate all that God has given you; you can understand your life to be a series of great blessings (there are trials and tribulations as well).
Robert Dean: What happens when God begins to bless you? As a believer in the Lord Jesus Christ you already have blessings, so what is going to happen? You are going to be the object of attack. You are going to become the object of Satanic attack in the angelic conflict. If you are growing and advancing as a believer and it is obvious that God is blessing-through physical, financial or material means, or just soul blessing (being relaxed in adversity, etc.)—people don't like it. They begin to envy you and express jealousy, and you begin to come under attack. This happens to all of us. There are small-minded people out there who are jealous of the fact that God seems to be blessing us, and no matter what the circumstances are we remain relaxed and don't get ruffled because we are like the apostle Paul who said he had learned to abound or to do without, and could do all things through Christ who strengthened him. So here is a case where Isaac has become prosperous and the Philistines envy him.
Related to this: see the Doctrine of Envy (HTML) (PDF) (WPD).
Envy is often a part of the unbeliever’s life (Titus 3:1–5). This leads us to the following doctrine: |
1. As an aside, envy helps to explain the socialist movement in the United States. 2. Socialists have a two-pronged approach to sell their ideology: 1) Envy towards those who have wealth; and therefore, they are seen as those who are legitimate to plunder. 2) False sympathy toward the poor. Whereas few would argue against taking care of the helpless; there is the problem with making it seem as if the rich have somehow plundered the poor, and therefore the poor have a right to the wealth of the rich. Again, this is related to envy. It has nothing to do with social justice (or any other kind of justice); it is related to the seizure of power. 3) In reality, those who see socialism as some sort of a cause and are envious of the so-called 1% will not see their own personal wealth increased if socialism becomes more widespread. It is those who are in power who seize the wealth and seize more power. In socialism, the movement is always toward two classes of people: the political class who rule and control most of the businesses; and the workers, who get to split up whatever is leftover. 4) Socialism is all about wanting power; and the ideology of socialism is sold in order to raise up some true believers. Socialists who want power cannot simply seize it; they need those who will help them seize it. So the concept of economic justice is sold; the concept of a fair distribution of wealth is sold—because a revolutionary movement, whether violent or within an existing system of government, must have adherents to help the leaders seize power. They must have true believers, whether they themselves believe in the movement or not. 3. Our own president, on many occasions, has encouraged people to be envious (I write this in 2015, speaking of President Obama). In every one of his state of the union speeches, and often on his college campus speeches, he calls for more taxation of the wealthy. “They can afford to give just a little bit more.” A political leader can always call for the wealthy to give just a little bit more, if those in his periphery are envious of the wealthy. 4. For the socialist and the liberal, there is often never a tax bracket that is too high. This does not put more money into the hands of the poor; this puts more money and power into the hands of the political class who convince you that the wealthy are just too wealthy. 5. If at any time you find yourself thinking, “You know what; those Wall Street types really make too much money and they don’t work as hard as my gardener Pedro does. They need to be taxed a little more;” you are either filled with envy or you have simply been brainwashed to think that government is some sort of benevolent institution which collects money from the bad and gives it to the good. However, more taxes is all about money and power; it has nothing to do with Pedro your gardener. If Pedro is not making enough, then you need to pay him more. 6. No matter what you do, what political system you impose, no matter what laws you pass, there will always be rich and there will always be poor. 7. Socialism simply transfers wealth from those who earned it (legitimately or illegitimately) into the hands of the political class. This could be described as legal stealing. 8. So that there is no confusion here; when the taxes of the wealthy are raised and then raised again and raised once more, this will not improve your lifestyle; you will not be better off. The political class will, however, be better off. 9. Similarly, in a violent overthrow of the government, when those who are demonized are killed (teachers, doctors, businessmen, whomever), the lives of the poor does not improve one whit. |
Application: Socialism encourages envy. People desire power and socialism gives rulers absolute power. Socialism in poor countries uses envy and the poverty of people in order to point them in the direction of socialism. However, in the United States, the biggest problem of the poor is, they are obese (unlike the poor anywhere else). So, socialists use pure envy to motivate their people. They point to the 1% who have so much money and so much wealth, and they just really don’t need it. Therefore, the government should just come and take it. Those in power want to do that because most of that wealth goes into their own pockets (or into pockets of donors, in a socialist democracy); and as they take wealth from the wealthy, the socialist leaders become more powerful and the wealthy become less powerful. Socialist leaders cannot do this on their own. They must have the jealousy of the people working for them. |
Application: Rule of thumb—if the thrust of a political campaign is encouraging mental attitude sins (like envy of the rich), then you should realize that is a campaign of evil—no matter how attractive the candidates may seem. |
This does not mean that there is no place for government in welfare. Some welfare is reasonable for a government to do, and at the local level whenever possible (in a theocracy, the Bible recommends 3.3% in taxes go to the poor. Furthermore, private charities ought to be encouraged by the government, not limited. |
Addendum
The following doctrine is taken from Lesson #045 of the Exodus Study (HTML) (PDF) (WPD).
Application—Socialism, Communism and Christianity: As an aside, socialism and communism are simply forms of government where the people ostensibly work in service to the nation as a whole—and they are led to believe that their work is in service to themselves, as they are the nation. That is not what the reality is, however. Under socialsm or communism, the political class takes their cut first from all that is produced, and then they spread out whatever remains among the workers. So the workers are not really working in service to the entire nation; they are working primarily in service to the political class—their rulers. It is a form of slavery, not dramatically different from what the people of Israel were subject to.
Before moving ahead with this digression, some definitions should be given. Originally, socialism and communism were theoretical terms. Socialism was established when the means of production belonged to the people (which was defined as the state). There had to be guidance from enlightened socialists (that is, rulers) to establish the socialist state, where everything, essentially belongs to the state. This does not mean that I, as a factory worker, have an individual ownership in the factory where I work (I do not own a few square yards here or there; I do not receive profit bonuses when the factory has a good year). But people who work in the factory are the owners insofar as they make up the nation and the nation owns the factory. You might be able to see from this what a ruse socialism is from the beginning.
A ruling class would be needed in order to implement all of these things, when a government becomes socialist, but, according to Karl Marx, this ruling class would naturally melt away or disappear when each factory, store and farm collective began to act as an autonomous unit. When that happens, then the nation is full-on communist. That is the theory; and the theory is false. At no time do despotic rulers look at their nation and think, “Well, all of these factories and stores and farms look like they are functioning fine and with autonomy, so, I am going to quit my job as ruler.” That is what is supposed to happen in theory, according to Marx; but it never actually happens. People who take power generally want it; and when they have it, they don’t tend to let go of it.
In actual practice, communism is usually an extreme form of socialism. Under socialism, the government begins to take over major industries (like the oil and healthcare industries); and, under communism, nearly everything is under state control.
It is nearly impossible to make a people think, “This sounds great, having a political class at the top and they control everything. I like that idea!” So socialism, which can be implemented quickly (almost overnight) or slowly (over many decades) has to offer things for free: free education (at most or all levels), free food, free healthcare, free housing; whatever. The idea being sold is, no matter who you are, the government will make certain that you are fed, clothed, housed and medicated. Now, to a kid with $80,000 in school debt, or the person with a $150,000 medical bill, or the person who just wants something for free, this sounds like a great deal. The reality is quite different.
In our study, for all intents and purposes, the Hebrew people are in a socialized society. Egypt makes certain that they have food, clothing and housing (which they all apparently have); and, in exchange, they simply must work. There is not as much of a difference between slaves and socialist citizens.
Socialist leaders portray themselves as distributing goods and services equally; but those directly related to the socialist/communist party always receive the lion’s share of whatever is produced. Whatever is leftover is then given to the workers. The closer you are to ruling class, the better off you are. Now, in some communist/socialism nations, their leaders may appear in crisp worker’s uniforms; but, no matter what the standard of living is for the people, the standard of living for leaders is always greater—sometimes by an amazing factor.
There is virtually no difference between socialism/communism and the slavery endured by the sons of Israel while in Egypt. The Hebrew people, with their labor, served the state. Their first allegiance was to be towards nation Egypt and not towards their God (socialism and communism tend to be very anti-God). The exception to this maxim is, if socialism is being sold to a religious people, it is often presented as being the logical outgrowth of their charitable beliefs. That is, Communists found that attacking their faith directly did not work; but undermining their faith often worked to move people away from their God. Propagandists for the left often portray Jesus as a long-haired, hippy socialist, even though He was none of those things.
Socialism and Communism are forms of slavery where freedom is dramatically restricted. These forms of government have simply found a way to make their political philosophy sound palatable to the common man. Obviously, when socialism is being sold to a nation through propaganda, the subsequent loss of freedom is never revealed. You may be restricted on what you can read, watch on television, eat; and the type of medical care and education that you receive is determined by the state, not by you.
In a nation where the people are poor, communism/socialism teaches them jealousy of anyone who is successful; and particularly, jealousy of the wealth of the ruling class. But, communist/socialist leaders simply take the place of the ruling class when all is said and done. Many of those who are wealthy are eliminated; but the rulers of a socialist state are never eliminated (even in a socialist state which pretends to be democratic, many leaders rule for their entire life).
In a nation of freedom, there are always great differences between the rich and poor; and most recently, wealth inequality is how communism/socialism is sold to a free nation. Those who are successful are villainized. We even had a former president of the United States, who had socialist leanings, who, during his campaign, accused doctors of not giving the proper medicine to diabetics so that they might later cut off their limbs, because such an operation gave the doctor more money. We have two socialist politicians today in the United States, a male and a female, neither of whom has the first clue about economics, who proclaim that they will provide medicare for all. Socialist never tell you of the rights and freedoms that you will lose. They tell the people about everything that they will give to them (if elected); and people, unfortunately, are sold by their promises of free medicine, free education, and free whatever else sounds good.
Today, in the United States, we have free public education which is not free, but very expensive; and has become sadly inferior to the education systems of modern countries around the world. By the use of political power, college education in the United States has become dramatically expensive. Where, at one time, one could work and pay for one’s education; today, that is virtually impossible. This process took place over a period of 30–40 years, but the exact same people who caused it to happen are selling free college education today as the solution.
The nation that we are studying, ancient Egypt, appears to have been a 3-tiered caste system. There was the ruling class, the Egyptian population and the slaves. Modern socialism retains the ruling class and the slaves, who are not called slaves but workers instead. These workers are told that they are serving the collective whole (which is themselves), but, in reality, they are serving the ruling class. Whatever the ruling class wants, they take. This is why in extreme cases, like North Korea and Venezuela, the rulers are overweight and the people are starving.
What socialism and communism do is make a dictatorship (more accurately, an Oligarchy) more palatable to the people who are under them. It is quite brilliant, actually. It inspires a considerable number of people to revolt in order to replace one dictatorship with another; but thinking that this will somehow be better. Or, in other countries, to willingly vote for socialist programs and socialist candidates; so that there is a socialist creep in that nation.
Also, under communism or socialism, innovation and creativity are usually stifled because the state needs neither of these things (unless those things serve or glorify the state). People in power often view innovation as being a threat to their power (or, at least, this is often the first thing that comes to their minds). However, if those in power see something that impresses them done in another country, then they will do whatever is necessary to steal that technology. That’s why we do not associate socialist countries with creativity or innovation, but with stealing technology that which is developed by others in other countries.
So that there is no misunderstanding, those who are allowed to evangelize in socialist and communist countries (sometimes this is allowed; most of the time it is discouraged and even outlawed), it is not the responsibility of the evangelist to sell the people on free enterprise as over against socialism. The evangelist is to present Jesus Christ, and Him crucified. Political commentary, however accurate, would be undermining the government. It is the job of the evangelist to present Jesus Christ, not to present a better form of government. The evangelist is to present the salvation of the cross; not offer up some candidate for a government office or a new system of government. As R. B. Thieme, Jr. used to often say, “It is not up to us to whitewash the devil’s world.”
That being said, it is not a coincidence that socialism and communism are most often associated with atheism. Socialism and communism are all about control of the people from the very top; and true Christianity is all about freedom. Fundamental to Christianity is the face that we were created by God to have free will; life is all about choice.
|
|
|
|
Sources for this Pilgrim socialist experiment include: http://jpatton.bellevue.edu/biblical_economics/pilgrimstory.html http://www.nytimes.com/2010/11/21/weekinreview/21zernike.html?pagewanted=all all accessed November 17, 2014. |
What I noticed about the sources which do not believe that this was a failed socialist experiment, emphasize almost the exact same language that these were really shareholders in an early corporation and that their intent was to turn a profit. However, they still held all things in common, and everyone was a shareholder. That is socialism. That is much different than my choosing to invest in such a corporation, but my next door neighbor, Charley Brown, declines to participate. It is that little detail that makes their reference to this being an early corporation with shareholders the wrong parallel. If I could be a part of the collective and Charley Brown could work his own land, then parallel would be accurate. |
|
