Something to Consider…a Biblical Worldview of Government Healthcare Plans

Let me preface this post with a personal statement, lest I am accused of being partisan or too political. As a follower of Christ, I seek the Scriptures for truth in all areas of life. The Bible is the basis for Christian faith and practice. “Practice” means “how to live my life” as a follower of Jesus. Paul tells us in II Timothy 3:16, “All Scripture is God-breathed and is useful for teaching, rebuking, correcting and training in righteousness, so that the man of God may be thoroughly equipped for every good works.”  I believe God’s Word and the Holy Spirit are able to guide us in daily decisions we make, transforming how we think, speak, and act. (Romans 12:1-2) This necessarily must include decisions we make about civic affairs. It is true the Lord instructs us that “Everyone must submit himself to the governing authorities, for there is no authority except that which God has established.” (Romans 13:1). It is also true that “We must obey God rather than men.” (Acts 5:29) Therefore, when men act, including acting in the civic arena, we must examine the actions or proposed actions, through the lens of Scripture. Because in God’s light we see light. (Psalm 36:9)

Having said this, I was recently provoked to deeper thought about proposed government run health care after receiving an email sent to me by a friend and after reading a blog posted on August 19, 2009 in the Wall Street Journal which was titled, “Obama Tells Religious Leaders Health Care Is a Moral Issue.”

“President Barack Obama joined a health care conference call with religious organizations just past 5:30 p.m. this evening, and didn’t waste a moment before putting the debate onto a higher plane: ‘The one thing you all share is a moral conviction. You know this debate over health care goes to the heart of who we are in America,’ he said.” Read more here.

Is health care a “moral” issue? I suppose it could be, if we turn to the government to provide for our needs instead of turning to God for our needs. Consider Genesis 47:13-27.

Below is story circulating on the internet.  It may or may not be apocryphal. The point is the sermon’s simple message is worthy of prayerful consideration. By the way, to avoid any misunderstanding, I want to make clear that just because I am sharing this story,  I am NOT claiming Obama is Pharaoh. 

IS HISTORY REPEATING ITSELF?  

Sermon from a church in Virginia recently
Gen 47:13-27

Good morning, brothers and sisters; it’s always a delight to see the pews crowded on Sunday morning, and so eager to get into God’s Word. Turn with me in your Bibles, if you will, to the 47th chapter of Genesis; we’ll begin our reading at verse 13, and go through verse 27.

Brother Ray, would you stand and read that great passage for us?
 
Thank you for that fine reading, Brother Ray. So we see that economic hard times fell upon Egypt, and the people turned to the government of Pharaoh to deal with this for them. And Pharaoh nationalized the grain harvest, and placed the grain in great storehouses that he had built. So the people brought their money to Pharaoh, like a great tax increase, and gave it all to him willingly in return for grain. And this went on until their money ran out, and they were hungry again.
 
So when they went to Pharaoh after that, they brought their livestock – their cattle, their horses, their sheep, and their donkey – to barter for grain, and verse 17 says that only took them through the end of that year.  But the famine wasn’t over, was it?

So the next year, the people came before Pharaoh and admitted they had nothing left, except their land and their own lives. “There is nothing left in the sight of my lord but our bodies and our land. Why should we die before your eyes, both we and our land? Buy us and our land for food, and we with our land will be servants to Pharaoh.” So they surrendered their homes, their land, and their real estate to Pharaoh’s government, and then sold themselves into slavery to him, in return for grain.

What can we learn from this, brothers and sisters?

That turning to the government instead of to God to be our provider in hard times only leads to slavery? Yes. That the only reason government wants to be our provider is to also become our master? Yes.
 
But look how that passage ends, brothers and sisters! “Thus Israel settled in the land of Egypt, in the land of Goshen. And they gained possessions in it, and were fruitful and multiplied greatly.”  God provided for His people, just as He always has! They didn’t end up giving all their possessions to the government, no, it says they gained possessions!

But I also tell you a great truth today, and an ominous one. We see the same thing happening today – the government today wants to “share the wealth” once again, to take it from us and redistribute it back to us. It wants to take control of healthcare, just as it has taken control of education, and ration it back to us, and when government rations it, then government decides who gets it, and how much, and what kind.
 
And if we go along with it, and do it willingly, then we will wind up no differently than the people of Egypt did four thousand years ago – as slaves to the government, and as slaves to our leaders.

What Mr. Obama’s government is doing now is no different from what Pharaoh’s government did then, and it will end the same. And a lot of people like to call Mr. Obama a “Messiah,” don’t they?  Is he a Messiah, a savior? Didn’t the Egyptians say, after Pharaoh made them his slaves, “You have saved our lives; may it please my lord, we will be servants to Pharaoh”?

Well, I tell you this – I know the Messiah; the Messiah is a friend of mine; and Mr. Obama is no Messiah! No, brothers and sisters, if Mr Obama is a character from the Bible, then he is Pharaoh.

Bow with me in prayer, if you will.

Published in: on August 22, 2009 at 1:17 pm  Leave a Comment  

Marriage Matters To Kids

For a brief moment in time (mid June to early November 2008), California allowed same sex couples to marry.  How did this happen?  

In May 2008, in the Marriage Cases, the California Supreme Court struck down Proposition 22, a statute that had defined marriage as between a man and a woman. This allowed same sex couples to marry. However, in November, the people of the state voted to amend its constitution to restore the traditional definition of marriage by passing Proposition 8. This essentially “constitutionalized” the earlier marriage statute. Many people were left perplexed as to how the state’s highest Court could have allowed same sex marriage to begin with. Great legal scholars have debated the issue. So, how in the world are every day people supposed to understand the Court’s ruling? In September 2008, I gave an interview to Marriage Matters To Kids in an effort to give a simple explanation to a complex and complicated Court ruling. The interview can be found at: www.marriagematterstokids.org/stewart.html.

Proponents of same sex marriage argue that same sex couples have a constitutional right to be treated as equally as opposite sex couples, specifically the right to marry. And without this right to marry, they argue, they will lack dignity and respect and be treated as second class citizens. “Dignity” and “respect” are noble words. However, what same sex marriage advocates really want is not so noble. To be clear, even without the right to “marry,” same sex couples were already afforded substantially all the same rights and benefits as traditional marriage couples under the law in California [cite law]. Obviously by demanding dignity and respect, what they really want is to force opponents of same sex marriage to accept it, even if it violates their deeply held religious beliefs or rights of conscience.  Special treatment for a “suspect class” based on sexual orientation leaves no room for disagreement. This conflict has resulted in a greater legal and social problem, competing interests between sexual liberty and religious liberty.  Even once the California Supreme Court resolves the current attack on the recent Marriage Amendment (Prop. 8), the conflict between sexual liberty and religious liberty will not be resolved. I predict until the U.S. Supreme Court has addressed the issue of  the alleged “right” of same sex marriage, the conflict between sexual liberty and religion liberty will only increase.

Marriage matters. For the sake of our children. For the sake of society. For the sake of our future.

Published in: on March 1, 2009 at 6:22 pm  Leave a Comment  
Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.