Many in our society are clamoring for a socialist society. I wonder why. What is so great about socialism? It is supposed to be utopian. What makes it utopian? The proponents of socialism might say that it removes oppression of the masses, yet every socialist society has proven to provide that very oppression. It can go as far as the Soviet Union with its oppressive communism, or Nazi Germany with its oppressive fascism. Both were socialist and both were oppressive to the masses. If we look at what could be considered moderately socialist, like France, modern Germany, or England, we find that the masses are oppressed with low quality services, if they can get them at all, and high taxes. The very system that was supposed to free the masses from oppression ended up oppressing them. So why do we still have the clamor for socialism? What socialism does is widens the gap between the haves and the have nots, the very thing it says it does not do. The middle class is virtually eliminated and becomes poor, but the ruling class, now with access to government and government power and money, becomes richer. So I ask again, why such a clamor for socialism? Anarchists join with communists to create unrest in governments to unseat them, but end up bowing to a more ruthless and oppressive government when their former communist or fascist friends come into power because these powers cannot tolerate their anarchy once their goals have been achieved. The revolution turns against the anarchists and they are either killed or severely abused. So why the clamor for socialism? Is it because those in such a clamor are lazy and want a government to support them and take care of their every need? Is it because they are afraid of competing with those who may do better than they in a system where competition and performance determines success?
As a Christian I believe that one can survive with their faith intact in an oppressive regime. Christians are actually made stronger when persecuted and kept in poverty. Riches improperly used, or the love of money are the downfall of a life devoted to God. But that is not reason to allow socialism to take over. I believe the whole liberal agenda, from simple liberalism to socialism to Marxism to communism is a plot of a higher power than any one individual or collective of individuals. I do not believe that mankind, and liberals specifically, are intelligent enough to orchestrate such a take-over as we are seeing in human society today. Liberalism is merely one of the facets being used to create chaos and death in society. It is all being orchestrated by the prince of this world who wants badly to prove himself as worthy of leadership. He wants to control and oppress. He hates Christians. He tolerates others who acknowledge God as long as they give him preeminence. He has designed the religious systems of this world which are another facet of his design to create chaos among mankind in an effort to orchestrate their oppression, demise, and destruction. This is why Christians must oppose him, his system, and his movement. They don’t, however, have to fight against his agents with anything except resistance to his destructive power and the positive adherence to their faith in Christ. Christ will defeat the prince of this world, and will shelter His people in the cleft of the Rock which itself takes on many forms.
2 comments:
Karl Marx wrote: "From each according to his ability, to each according to his need." Here is what the Bible says: "16 This is what the LORD has commanded: 'Each one is to gather as much as he needs. Take an omer [a] for each person you have in your tent.' "
17 The Israelites did as they were told; some gathered much, some little. 18 And when they measured it by the omer, he who gathered much did not have too much, and he who gathered little did not have too little. Each one gathered as much as he needed." (Exodus 16:16-18) Maybe Marx got that idea from the Bible.
There are some passages in Acts that talk of early Christian communism. "44All the Lord's followers often met together, and they shared everything they had. 45They would sell their property and possessions and give the money to whoever needed it." (Acts 2:44-45) And again: "34and no one went in need of anything. Everyone who owned land or houses would sell them and bring the money 35to the apostles. Then they would give the money to anyone who needed it. 36-37Joseph was one of the followers who had sold a piece of property and brought the money to the apostles. He was a Levite from Cyprus, and the apostles called him Barnabas, which means "one who encourages others." (Acts 4:34-37)
Sounds communistic to me.
There was also forced communism. As in this passage: " 1Ananias and his wife Sapphira also sold a piece of property. 2But they agreed to cheat and keep some of the money for themselves.
So when Ananias took the rest of the money to the apostles, 3Peter said, "Why has Satan made you keep back some of the money from the sale of the property? Why have you lied to the Holy Spirit? 4The property was yours before you sold it, and even after you sold it, the money was still yours. What made you do such a thing? You didn't lie to people. You lied to God!" 5As soon as Ananias heard this, he dropped dead, and everyone who heard about it was frightened. 6Some young men came in and wrapped up his body. Then they took it out and buried it.
7Three hours later Sapphira came in, but she did not know what had happened to her husband. 8Peter asked her, "Tell me, did you sell the property for this amount?"
"Yes," she answered, "that's the amount." 9Then Peter said, "Why did the two of you agree to test the Lord's Spirit? The men who buried Ananias are by the door, and they will carry you out!" 10At once she fell at Peter's feet and died. When the young men came back in, they found Sapphira lying there dead. So they carried her out and buried her beside her husband. 11The church members were afraid, and so was everyone else who heard what had happened." (Acts 5:1-11)
Stalin and Peter would probably get along well together!
If Marx got his ideas from the Bible, he missed one very important part - the giving and sharing they all did was voluntary. Marxism has the government taking from those who have and giving to those who do not, usually with a hefty percentage for the government and for those who operate the government, like bribes and corruption. Yes, the did share what they had in the early church, but no one forced them to do so. Even, as you have again misinterpreted scripture, in the case of Ananias and Sapphira, the gift was not forced. It was purely voluntary. The reason for their death was that they lied to the Holy Spirit, saying they had given the whole amount when they held back some. As you have quoted, Peter said, "Why has Satan made you keep back some of the money from the sale of the property? Why have you lied to the Holy Spirit? 4The property was yours before you sold it, and even after you sold it, the money was still yours. What made you do such a thing? You didn't lie to people. You lied to God!" The gift was totally voluntary. The lie was the problem. God did not force them to give anything. The situation in the early church was not meant for all of society. Based on God's teaching on giving, however, Godly people have been very generous throughout human history. Some have given. Some have not, but it has always been their choice. Giving was rewarded; hoarding was punished. Americans, based on their Christian heritage, are the most generous of all the peoples of the world. Liberals are the black mark on this trait, however, as they seem to only want to give what belongs to other people, and very little of themselves. They need Marx to force them to give. Godly people give with joy and thanksgiving.
Post a Comment