;)
Helping the Poor: Is Marxism Biblical?
Posted by Rob Ayers in Bible & Theology
My last post discussed my conviction that Christians and the Christian Church need to be proactive in helping the poor – it is a commandment from God that stretches out from the Old Testament to the New. However I do believe that there is a “right” way and a “wrong” way of doing it.
Many main-line protestant denominations (including in some respects the Catholic church) emphasize a robust intervention in helping the poor from a personal/ecumenical/governmental approach based upon some dubious theology. The question that this theology asks is, “Is it a sin to be poor?” There answer is an unequivocal “yes.” The next question is, “Is it a sin to be rich?” The answer yet again is “yes.” What is the solution to this problem? Egalitarianism and Communalism – i.e. social Marxism and the redistribution of wealth. Divide the baby, and you get something in the middle – the poor are no longer poor, and the rich are no longer rich: “To each according to his ability, from each according to his need.” Viola! Issue solved.
The theological equivalent to secular Marxism of course is Liberation Theology. Many shrug it off as being unimportant, or a distant threat. Contraire. Many have picked it up, and have included some of it’s tenets into their own philosophy of religion.
My understanding of Liberation Theology is that is a theological position that holds to the following:
1. Emphasis is upon Jesus the Revolutionary (political activist) rather than a Redeemer and Savior (spiritual emphasis).
2. Focus is on the poor and on poverty. Poverty is the result of sin, and so therefore the root sources of poverty are sought. The social sciences such as Sociology (Marxism) are used to both understand poverty, and help overcome poverty through social advancement. Simply stated, the emphasis is on the Social gospel.
3. While most Liberation theologians are Roman Catholic (predominantly South American) the system has found friends and allegiances within a few congregations in the African-American community in the United States. Some tenets of Liberation theology are found in most mainstream Protestant denominations where the gospel message has been curtailed because of its emphasis on the supernatural, while a social emphasis is advanced. The deity of Christ and supernatural nature of the Gospel are often ignored, downplayed, or even with some rejected.
There IS a social component to the gospel. Believers are commanded to care for the poor and downcast of society – the poor are often better suited to receive the gospel of grace than the more affluent. The early Christian church was communal in that it sought to help one another and often shared a common purse and resources. Christians should always seek to find ways to help and give resources to aid those in need in spite of what the poor may do with that help. The church should always strive and help those particularly within the Body of Christ, and give them both encouragement and resources anywhere and at any moment that crisis comes.
However there is no Biblical foundation for the tenets of Liberation Theology. The Gospel message is goes beyond a persons personal fortune – being poor is not a sin, and remaining in poverty is the condition of most Christians throughout the world. In many ways it Liberation theology marries materialistic and non-theistic Marxism with the window dressing of Biblical terminology. Certainly the Marxist sense of “value” is all distorted out of common meaning. “Value” to a Marxist is always “equal.” Yet are all things “equal”? That is a question for next time.
;)
;)
;)
;)
;)
;)
;)
;)
;)
;)
So, what’s the answer to your title question about Marxism?
If not, on what basis is it not?
When I was attending a Baptist college in the 1980s, there was a significant liberation theology movement among the ministerial students. They were supported by a few faculty members, too.
This semi-Marxist belief is as strong today as ever, but it has evolved into the “Prosperity Gospel” of Rod Parsley and others. Similar messages are more prevalent in the SBC than many want to admit, I suspect.
Rob,
I agree that Marxism-Leninism is not biblical, inasmuch as it starts from an atheistic premise, and assumes materialism as the defining value in human ethics. However, I am still trying to sort out in my own mind how certain biblical models, such as the year of jubilee, the practice of gleaning, debt-cancellation every 7 years, and the biblical injunction for Israel that “there should be no poor among you” (Deut. 15:4), apply in a modern democracy in which there is separation of church and state.
Do you have any thoughts on this?
Brother Rob,
You said that in Liberation Theology the:
While I would never want to de-emphasize the spiritual side of what Jesus has done… can spiritual renewal and a concern for social justice be separated?
Peace to you brother,
From the Middle East
Marxism is not Biblical.
The situation in Acts,where everybody sold their possessions,and laid the money at the Apostle’s feet to give to those who had need, was given by a people who expected Christ to return at any moment.
This impoverished the Church at Jerusalem, and later because of persecution, other churches came to their rescue.
Paul later wrote, if a man won’t work, he should not eat. His instructions to employers and employees in Ephesians 6 are very clear.
He wrote to Timothy, if a man provide not for his household he is worse than an infidel, and had denied the faith.
Jesus said the poor will always be with us.
The heroes in Hebrews 11 were naked, and destitute of food, wanderers, dwellers in caves.
Brother Paul,
Don’t forget that Paul also told us why we should work hard with our own hands… so that we will have something to share with one who has need.
I may be misreading you comment, but it seems that your contention is that the Apostles were in error in sharing all with any who had need. Is this your position?
Peace to you brother,
From the Middle East
Dear Brother from the Middle East,
No, they weren’t wrong. for if Israel had received Christ as their Messiah on the day of Pentecost, Christ would have come.
You must keep in mind after Christ ascended into heaven, the only prophecies left were concerning Christ’s 2nd coming.
The church is not found in the Old Testament. It was revealed to Paul
[Ephesians 3]. Acts 1-8 is Jewish ground.
Brother Paul,
Whether or not Darby’s innovation in eschatology was accurate is a discussion for a different topic. I would recommend this one, also by Brother Rob. What I am trying to figure out here is, based upon your comments in #5, what exactly you think our responsibility to the poor is?
Peace to you brother,
From the Middle East
Dr Foltz,
Please take a look at Matthew 16:18-19 and Isaiah 22:22. How do you reconcile the obvious parallel in these two passages with your statement “the church is not found in the Old Testament” ? It appears to me that our Lord clearly saw the church as a continuation of the Davidic kingdom.
TO BROTHER IN MIDDLE EAST,
IF THE POOR IN THE LOCAL ASSEMBLY, CAN WORK LET THEM WORK, IF ARE SICK, UNABLE TO WORK, WE ARE TO MEET THEIR NEEDS.
TO PATRICK,
CHRIST SAID TO PETER, ”I WILL BUILD MY CHURCH” [FUTURE TENSE].
It started on day of Pentecost, when the believers were baptized into the body by the spirit [I Cor. 13;10].
i live on 564,00 a month social security. had 3 heart attacks 4 stents, only residual blood flow of 35 percent, but I won’t tax my church. I pray my needs in.
So sorry I have not had an opportunity to respond today. It has been a busy one, with activities this morning and a funeral this afternoon. I will do a little catching up here. Some of my responses have been captured already by some of the posts.
The key difference between Christianity and Marxism (as Liberation theology) is the condition of the heart. Both systems have the same somewhat equivalent anthropology. Biblical Christianity asserts that Men themselves are sinful and self-centered from the inside out, and that requires radical internal change. Marxism asserts that men are greedy because of an inequitable environment that requires radical external change from the outside in. The change that Christianity demands is a change of the heart, which leads to a different life – one that no longer is poverty of death, but the riches of life abundantly. Marxism advocates that if the external environment of materialistic inequality is changed through enforced rigid inflexible controls then humanity will be changed through gradual evolution away from materialistic capitalistic greed into a collectivist egalitarian state.
Some more responses and ideas tomorrow. Got to do the dishes and go to bed.
Rob
Brother Rob,
You once again have hit the nail squarely on its head. The condition of the heart IS THE CENTRAL AND MAIN ISSUE AND DIFFERENCE.
I thankyou for your observation.
Brother Paul W. Foltz