Liberty Defense League

by Timothy Baldwin

I was recently listening to a radio talk show program out of Pensacola, FL, called, “The Ring of Fire”, hosted by attorneys Mike Papantonio and Robert F. Kennedy, Jr. Papantonio is a graduate from my law school alma mater, Cumberland

Cumberland_School_of_Law

School of Law, at Samford University in Birmingham, AL and is currently a share-holding member of the law firm, Levin, Papantonio–undoubtedly he is successful in the practice of law and making money. Kennedy is “of counsel” of the same law firm. Papantonio and Kennedy are very vocal and active in advocating what they perceive as the (federal) government’s role, purpose and duties. As is almost expected today, Christianity and the Bible are used to justify just about any government agenda that a “conservative” or “liberal” desires to advance–some in sincerity and truth, others in heresy and distortion.

Anyone who knows Papantonio and Kennedy knows that they are strong proponents of the Health Care Reform legislation (and other federal-power-giving legislation) being currently debated, considered and proposed. Perhaps we have all heard the pros and cons of accepting or rejecting this legislation in part or in toto. However, those topics are not the issue at hand. What is the issue is what Papantonio

Mike Papantonio

and Kennedy insisted on their talk show program on September 25, 2009 on 1330 AM WEBY radio. That is, the health care reform bill complies with and follows after Jesus’ life of healing and compassion on the poor and sick, and those “Dobson-Christians” who oppose the health care reform bill are not complying with their Christian-duty of healing and caring for the poor and sick: they are hypocrites for not supporting this bill. I would like to think that the vast majority of Christians in America who heard such a statement would reject it out rightly.

However, what is more disheartening is that a recent study shows that a large number of self-proclaiming Christians in America voted for Barack Obama for this express reason: the Bible requires us to take care of the poor and sick and we must do this through tax dollars. In other words, we are going to require all of America through federal government action and force to take care of the “poor and sick” because “the Bible commands it”.

When I hear this philosophy advocated by those who do not necessarily claim to be a Christian and who are admittedly socialist in their political character and belief, it does not surprise me, even though it saddens me any time any person believes a lie. But when I see that a large number of supposed Christians believe the same lie, I do not know whether to laugh or cry. I guess we really have gone that far in America where now it is believed that the Bible teaches that government must take care of the poor and sick and that not to support such a government’s purpose is considered to be un-Christian.

During the afore-mentioned radio show, Papantonio and Kennedy began expounding upon the Biblical references wherein Jesus healed the sick and lame, as if they were astute studiers of the scripture and believed in its eternal infallibility, when of course the obvious purpose was to use the ultimate source of reference for a Christian’s life as a means of accusation against any person who does not support the health care reform bill and the notion that the government should take on this responsibility for the people. The argument was as follows: Jesus always healed people wherever he went and we must do the same–through government action and force, of course. They quoted scriptures like the following:

“When the Son of man shall come in his glory, and all the holy angels with him, then shall he sit upon the throne of his glory: And before him shall be gathered all nations: and he shall separate them one from another, as a shepherd divideth his sheep from the goats: And he shall set the sheep on his right hand, but the goats on the left. Then shall the King say unto them on his right hand, Come, ye blessed of my Father, inherit the kingdom prepared for you from the foundation of the world: For I was an hungred, and ye gave me meat: I was thirsty, and ye gave me drink: I was a stranger, and ye took me in: Naked, and ye clothed me: I was sick, and ye visited me: I was in prison, and ye came unto me. Then shall the righteous answer him, saying, Lord, when saw we thee an hungred, and fed thee? or thirsty, and gave thee drink? When saw we thee a stranger, and took thee in? or naked, and clothed thee? Or when saw we thee sick, or in prison, and came unto thee? And the King shall answer and say unto them, Verily I say unto you, Inasmuch as ye have done it unto one of the least of these my brethren, ye have done it unto me.” Matthew 25:31-40 (KJV).

So, does the Bible and does Jesus require, suggest, or even imply that it is the government’s responsibility to require all citizens to take care of the poor and sick? By opposing governmental involvement in health care, are you opposing the Bible and Jesus? Keep in mind: these questions on the subject are not intended to give credence and credibility to the constitutionality of the federal government’s involvement in the matter whatsoever, nor do these questions imply that the federal government’s involvement in this regard comply with the very character and nature of the union of the United States of America. For in fact, the federal government’s involvement in national health care is completely unconstitutional–an evil of itself. So, the discussion at hand is merely a factual and philosophical response to what is obviously believed by Christian and non-Christian alike regarding this subject in 2009.

It be must first be noted that the Bible does not give one illustration wherein the government was given charge to feed the poor and to take care of the sick, even during the period in the Old Testament, when God gave His laws directly to Israel through His prophets. And when discussing the matter of Jesus’ ministry depicted in the New Testament, one must necessarily consider the entire scriptures in the matter, for this same Jesus that some may attempt to use to justify government-control philosophy is the One that the Old Testament prophesizes is God become flesh, the Messiah, the Living Word of God, the King of the Universe, the Creator of all there is. It was this same Jesus that the Old and New Testaments proclaim who was to set the captives free, to deliver the oppressed from their oppressors and to give liberty to those imprisoned (Isaiah 29:19; 61:1, Jeremiah 20:13, Luke 4:17-19). It was this same Jesus whom the Old Testament proclaims that one of His purposes of revealing Himself to men on earth is to establish justice in all nations (Isaiah 42:1–4, Matthew 12:18). To suggest that Jesus’ ministry, the passage above and similar passage equates to a mandate that the people of a society use government to accomplish these acts of goodness completely ignores the fact that the Bible gives these responsibilities specifically to individuals and to churches alone.

Before even getting into what the government may or may not do, what must be observed is that the Bible commands all people from all social situations to work diligently and not to be slothful, and it further commands individuals to mind their own business and to tend to their own matters, not expecting anything from anyone simply because of their status (2 Thessalonians 3:12). In the beginning, God created a natural consequence to laziness: poverty. What free society has ever existed that ignored this principle? In fact this principle was created by God and it must be complied with, as scripture demands. The Bible in no way commands Christians to support the laziness and unwillingness to work (Proverbs 18:9; 10:4,15; 21:17; 24:27). So, from the get-go, what must be acknowledged is that the Bible does not even imply that individuals (and thus the government by necessary implication) take care of those who do not attempt to take care of themselves. When this is considered, what has to be acknowledged is that there must be a legitimate and credible screening method whereby only those persons who qualify as being “poor” who “cannot help themselves” to ensure that a proper Biblical application of “helping the poor” is executed.

There is, however, an immediate and serious problem with this model because the Bible teaches that the government is not to prefer the poor over the rich. Throughout the Old and New Testament, God consistently commands that individuals treat the poor and needy with compassion, not as showing unjustified favor simply because they are poor, but that we not take advantage of their vulnerable position of being poor (Psalms 10:2,8; 41:1; Amos 8:4,7). This command of showing respect to other persons does not imply or express that poor persons deserve better treatment simply because they are poor. Rather, when it comes to the application of the law, poor and rich alike are treated equally (Exodus 23:3,6; Leviticus 19:15; Psalms 82:3; Proverbs 14:31; 31:9; Amos 5:12; Isaiah 10:1-2; Zechariah 7:9-10). So, how can the government comply with the command that individuals not show favoritism based upon some sort of privileged class of poor persons, but yet at the same time, ensure that only those persons who are actually “poor” as defined by scripture qualify for government health care?

It is in fact impossible for government to carry out the functions that only individuals and true spiritual groups of individuals can judge, determine and execute. Without getting too deeply into America’s history on the subject, it was universally accepted by our founders that when the government begins to prefer a privileged class of persons or groups of persons, such government has become illegitimate in its purpose and power. This is in fact what Scriptures confirm: government is to protect all of its citizens against the oppression of the strong over the weak and is to prefer no one person or persons over others, based upon their status as “poor or rich”. The government may no more prefer to treat poor persons with special privilege that it may with rich persons. Therefore, the actions of helping the poor are by their very nature individual, and not governmental.

Government action must be contrasted to individual action. The first operates through laws of justice, and the latter operates through the conscience, the mind and the heart. The first can in no way have a relationship with God. The latter, necessarily has a relationship with God (either a good one or a bad one). The Bible never demonstrates one command or illustration whereby the government forces its citizens or subjects to treat the poor a certain way, other than prohibiting them from taking advantage of the poor, a protection all are afforded under a just government.

At most, the Old Testament gives points of Jewish law relative to the treatment of the poor; that is, not charging them interest on loans; forgiving their debts once every seven years; allowing the poor to glean the fields for remaining crops that were not initially harvested by the landowners, etc. But this necessarily means that those same poor persons work for what they receive; comply with their contracts with others; deal honestly with others; and act in accordance with all other natural laws of decency with which all must comply. In other words, the poor were not granted privileges. For as the Bible commands, “if a man not work, neither shall he eat” (2 Thessalonians 3:10).

God reveals to us throughout scriptures that individuals are to help those who, to no fault of their own, are deprived of the necessities of life, and that giving be made out of a genuine heart of love. The Old and New Testament both confirm that this matter of a giving to the poor is necessarily a matter of the heart (2 Corinthians 9:7), through individual spiritual conscience and conviction, to love our neighbors as ourselves (Leviticus 25:35,39; Deuteronomy 15:7-11; 24:10-14; Job 29:12,14-16; Psalms 9:18; 22:9; Daniel 4:27). It is not to be done as a consequence of fear of and force through government action (Romans 13:5-6). Did Jesus command us to give unto Caesar, so Caesar could give to the poor? Jesus did in fact say, “Give unto Caesar the things that are Caesar, and to God the things that are God’s” (Matthew 22:21) but does that suggest that taxing the people to provide for the poor is Caesar’s dominion? Absolutely not.

This matter of giving to the poor has always been the purview of God and his followers. In fact, the very reference to the verses cited above, like Matthew 25, whereby some argue that Jesus will let people into heaven because they fed the poor, took care of the sick and provided for the needy, necessarily concludes that the matter of taking care of the poor, sick and needy is NOT a dominion or authority of Caesar, as Caesar cannot order his subjects to be good enough to go to heaven, no more than he can order an individual not to look upon another man’s wife with lust. It is for this reason alone that a Christian or other freedom-loving person must deny that the government has any authority or power to order others to take care of the sick and poor, because such a matter is by nature an individual matter of conscience and heart, and not a matter of government action imposed upon the citizens by force and threat of fine and imprisonment.

If the government is truly wanting to help the poor, then perhaps it should consider adopting principles and policies (1) that will ensure that when people work and receive money in compensation, their money is sound and supported by a sure standard, and not based upon a fiat money system (the most vulnerable money system to have ever existed in the world); (2) that will put money back into the hands of entrepreneurs so that more jobs can be created and more wealth acquired by employees of the companies; (3) that will quit supporting and condoning the slothfulness of those in society who choose to live off of government hand-out forcefully acquired through taxes; (4) that will remove the federal government from matters it has no power or authority to regulate (Jeremiah 5:4; Ezekiel 16:49). After all, if it does not belong to Caesar, then it belongs to God and the individuals are responsible to God for their actions (Galatians 2:9-10; James 2:5-8).

Let’s face the truth: most people really and truly are not at all concerned about complying with God’s commission that we care for the truly poor and needy. Their desire to hand over their own personal responsibility of taking care of the poor and needy is a philosophical flaw regarding God’s natural design and ordination of government, the church’s role in society and the responsibility the individual has to conform to God’s will in his or her life. Or it may in fact be a very selfish motivation that he or she (or their family or friends) will be on the receiving end of the tax on society. Or it may be the desire of some that the federal government take control over yet another area of life that our founders believed to be a matter of individual concern.

So, the pious declaration that “we want to make sure God’s will is done on earth” proves less than pure in its motive, philosophy and application. What it really reveals is that Americans have become brainwashed in the doctrines and understandings of those who want the federal government to have more power and control over people lives. To such a movement, we must resist, declaim and denounce if we expect freedom to last in these States United.

Copyright ©Timothy Baldwin 2009