Socialism – Seducing Spirits and Doctrines of Devils – from the Unhallowed Halls of Hell.

My heart broke recently when I read the assertion of  woman who asserted her Christianity and her Socialism at the same time.  Which betrays the fact that either she does not understand Christianity, or she does not understand socialism, but in reality the two are fundamentally as incompatible as harlotry and holiness. 

While I was watching the news report on the Occupy Wall Street movement, a movement I haven’t been able to pay much attention to, I saw several of the signs of the protesters marching in chaos and foaming at the mouth, calling for the death of captitalsim, and the redistribution of wealth.  As an American, such a sight made my blood boil, my stomach churn, and my flesh fill with heated anger at the audacity, insanity, depravity, and sheer stupidity of such a cowardly movement.  

As a Christian, my heart was convicted, and broken because of the sea of lostness, spiritual blindness, and terrifying cluelessness.  While my flesh skyrockets with anger, my heart plummets with pity trying to take it all in and process the problem of the conflict.

As an American, there are certain things that are so dumbfounding I cannot find words to describe how incredible the state of our nation has become.  In the 1950’s, socialism was considered treasonous, in the 1980’s blasphemous, but in the 1990’s it became studious, and now by many it is considered virtuous;  and while I never would have thought it before, but unless something changes, it appears headed to be victorious.  What was once considered criminal treason, is now welcomed as legitimate reason.

Socialists have taken the first amendment and have twisted it into something unacceptable to the intentions of the founders.  While the first amendment guarantees the right to dissent, it doesn’t give a micro sliver of permission, or right to destroy.  Socialism is traitorous to the purpose of our nation  and treason is a criminal act, not free dissent. 

Now that being said, as a Christian, socialism is  as much a sin, as adultery, idolatry, and outright thievery.   It is incompatible with the economy of God; because it is legislative thievery.

The essential issue with socialism is it’s devilish perversion of compassion.  The socialist idea has hijacked the concept of true compassion, ripped it from the pages of divine intention, and repackaged it in a way that bypasses the boundaries of righteous truth, and pulls at the nerves of sympathy.  Socialism reaches for the heart of compassion, at the expense of divine truth.

When we pull back the “economic” curtain of socialism, what we find is outright theft.  As my favorite preacher used to say, “it requires one man to work for something without getting it, so another man can get something without working for it.”  There is a fundamental lie that exists that who knows where it came from;  it is the lie that all men should have all things equal.  That principle is never taught in scripture, never formulated from the foundation of anything holy, and is a fictitious moral that men have made up.  Socialism focuses in on one real kind of problem, and twists it and abuses it into something that is made up in the mind of man.  That problem is what should society do with those who cannot provide for themselves.

That is legitimate question, with a legitimate answer, and socialism is an eternity away from it.

First, there is a difference between those who cannot provide for themselves, and those who will not provide for themselves.  Those who cannot provide for themselves should be cared for by a voluntary society.

Second, socialism punishes success, and offers reward without achievement.   Essentially what the socialist wants is the elimination of the necessity for achievement in life.

Capitalism, and God’s economy requires achievement for reward or wealth. Socialism eliminates achievement and offers wealth anyway.  That being said, the socialist government steals from one man what he has achieved, to give to another man who has not achieved the same.  (Which is ironic. – They tout survival of the fittest in evolution, but hate it in economy.)  Somewhere, someone has conjured up an imaginary moral that says it is wrong for one man be able to sell more widgets than another man.   There are no moral obligations anywhere to ensure comfortable outcomes for everyone.

No government has the right to take the fruit of one man’s labour, and give it to another man, just because life’s not fair.  God’s not fair.  He never said He would be.  For illustration purposes, if the NFL were governed by socialist principles, every time one team scored a touchdown, they would have to give the other team 4 of their points.  Socialism is about guaranteeing “outcomes” rather than “opportunities.” 

Now the next question that someone asks, as did Wolf Blitzer recently, “What should happen to someone who cannot afford life saving surgery, is it not societies responsibility to respond?”  Blitzer asked, “should you let him just die?” Of course some idiot out in the crowd cried yes.    The answer to the problem is in Blitzer’s question; “is it not societies reponsibility to respond?”  I say, and the Bible teaches emphatically, YES!  It is societies responsibility to respond . . . but not the government.

Society and government are not the same.  What socialism does is take the moral responsibilities of citizens, and try to make them legal obligations of the government.  Society should never let one another down; however the government has no right to make a man do legally what he should do voluntarily.  The law is intended to restrain evil, not to enforce good.  For example, there is no law that says you have to like me, so there are laws that say you cannot hurt me.  The socialist wants to skirt his personal responsibility to help his neighbor, by tasking the government to just steal from those who have achievements to he doesn’t have to help his neighbor.  When the socialist sees a need he wants the government to forcibly take from the achiever and meet that need, so that he doesn’t have to spend his own money to meet that need.  Which is anothe irony to me.  Socialists are liberal and want everyone’s needs met; yet they are the stingiest bunch of people when it comes to giving charity.  See any legitimate charitable giving statistics for the last 40 years.  They steal what they do not earn, to meet someone elses need they don’t want to pay for.

Socialism eliminates freedom.  As the slogan goes, “A government big enough to provide all your needs, is big enough to take all you have.” 

Socialism is a sinful approach to a legitimate problem much like other sins in the Bible.  Sometimes a man steals food because he is legitimately hungry.  When a man commits adultery, in some perverted way he is trying to deal with his own problem.

The Bible is very plain.  People who will not work, should not eat.  Men are to help their neighbors in times of need; voluntarily.  The government has no real ability or authority to make sure men can “live well”  without necessary achievement.  It is true that where much is given, much is required.  Required by God, but not enforced by man. It is true that the wealthy should be more sharing with their blessings.  In fact those that know the Lord really are.  Socialism is not the answer for American greed.  Jesus is.  Christians must be more discerning before they start lining up systems of thought that run contrary to the Word of God.  Doing so is a critical change in need of making.

6 comments on “Socialism – Seducing Spirits and Doctrines of Devils – from the Unhallowed Halls of Hell.

  1. I think your opinion expressed here is not Biblical. Moreover I believe that it is syncretic – you have imbibed worldly conservative politics into your Christian faith.

    I say this because many Christians live in countries that have social welfare networks. I am a Christian living in Australia, and we have universal health care, unemployment benefits and pensions for the aged and disabled. None of these do I find unbiblical; and neither do a majority of the multitudes of evangelical, Bible believing Christians who live in this country.

    I encourage you to read the article “Macroeconomics and the Bible” by David Rogers at The URL is here:

    Rogers examines the relevant scriptures and finds no explicit support for either socialist policies or capitalist ones. He concludes that believers have the freedom to support policies from either side.

    • OSO,

      Thank you so much for your comment, and input; and I welcome the conversation.

      First of all, I will say that the ‘health care’, ‘unemployment benefits’, and pensions for the aged and disabled, are not exclusive to Socialism. They are touted as the “benefits” of a socialistic society, but socialism is not required for these to happen, and neither do the presence of these constitute the definition of socialism. One can be for these, and not a socialist. The issue with socialism is their approach to accomplishing these things.

      Second, – I have read David’s article. In fact I am the Jeff that he carried on conversation with throughout the comment stream. You may or may not be surprised to know that my “anti” socialist conviction became more and more solidified under the Biblical teaching of David’s father, Adrian Rogers. Concerning the socialist idea he is the one who said, “one man has to work for something without getting it, so another man can get something without working for it.”

      Third – one of the points that you fundamentally miss, is the fact that ALL politics are the fruits of someone’s faith. There is no law on any book, anywhere in this world, that is not written based upon what someone believes. Anyone who writes a law, writes it based on their faith,or what they believe. They may “believe” abortion should be permissible, so they present a law that protects it. They may “believe” free speech includes profanities, vulgarities and the like, so they write laws to protect that. Most legislatures in the world, believe that “fraud” is wrong, and therefore write laws against it. I said all of that to say this, there is categorically no separation between faith (belief) and politics. A person’s personal politics is founded in what that person “believes.”

      Fourth – The socialist idea to redistribute wealth requires outright theft. No government has the right to take what one man has earned, and give it to a man who has not. As a matter of fact, Biblically speaking, no man has a right to a possession that he does not help produce. The socialist approach turns the world upside down. Rather than the government being a servant of the people it makes the people servants of the government. That is called modern day slavery. Because a legislature legalizes federal theft of private wealth changes nothing. A government can no more rightfully take what doesn’t belong to them, any more than the your neighbor down the road. The government is subject to the same laws, and rules of righteousness as any human being.

      In America, there is to be “no taxation without representation” meaning that ultimately the people tell the government what they’re willing to pay, and for what purposes; the socialist idea is the other way around where the government tells the people what their going to pay ; and for what purposes. – That is an issue of freedom.

      Theft can never hide behind compassion and be justified. The ideas of everybody healthcare, pensions, etc, are not inherently wrong ideas. To force one man to redistribute his achievement earnings, to someone who as not achieved as much because that’s not fair, is nothing more than outright theft. Man can bury it in as many nice sounding terms as he wants to, but theft is theft, and that is a Biblical issue; and as a Christian I think you have no choice but to agree that theft is sin. There is no possible justification for stealing what one man rightfully earns, to give it to another man who has not. Regardless of how we package that thought it is Biblically, Spiritually, and morally sin. It is never right to do wrong, and it is never wrong to do right. All of that being said, believers cannot come to the place where they think that theft can be an acceptable policy. To believe the Bible is to believe that stealing is sin. One of the dividing lines here is that some people have the idea that a government “can’t steal” because once they legistate it, it is no longer stealing. Because something is legalized among men, does not mean that it becomes “moralized” before God. Governments do not determine ultimate right and wrong.

      I do thank you for your comment, and welcome your conversation. It always brings me joy to make contact with fellow followers in Christ from other parts of the world.

  2. Let me throw some bible passages into your arguments.

    You said this: “The socialist idea to redistribute wealth requires outright theft. No government has the right to take what one man has earned, and give it to a man who has not. ”

    If you hold onto this opinion because you think it is Biblical, you must show scriptural support for it. Are there any passages to support it?

    As for passages against, there are a number.

    Matthew 22.15-22, Mark 12.13-17 and Luke 20.19-26 all record the Pharisees trying to trap Jesus by asking him whether they should pay taxes to Caesar. While Jesus’ answer was intended to stump the Pharisees he does not explicitly proscribe the paying of taxes. In fact Jesus implicitly okayed it by saying “render to Caesar the things that are Caesar’s” which is pretty much the Roman tax that they were discussing.

    In Luke 23.2, one of the false accusations leveled against Jesus was that he as “forbidding (people) to give tribute to Caesar”.

    Then there is Romans 13.1-7, specifically verses 6 and 7. They explicitly command us to pay taxes.

    In the OT we have Ezra 4.7-16, where a letter was sent to Artaxerxes saying that the Jews rebuilding the city and temple will end up no longer paying tribute – a lie intended to destroy the people of God.

    There are plenty of other passages around. However I will say this: If you believe that taxation and its redistribution is theft, you are opposed to the teaching of Scripture in this matter. Scripture nowhere describes taxation and redistribution as theft. In fact the Scripture strongly implies that taxes are something you OWE to the authorities for the protection and order that they offer.

    And also we need to remember that both Jesus and Paul said these things about taxes in the context of an undemocratic, corrupt, bureaucratic political and economic system that had formal ties to polytheistic religion. In short, the people of God at the time of Jesus and Paul had a far worse government that exists now.

    And as for the redistribution side of this debate, we must remember the Gleaning in Deuteronomy 24.18-22. We need to remember that this was NOT a call for charitable giving, but a LAW enforced upon Israel’s farmers to leave enough food for the poor. This is, in effect, taxation and redistribution commanded by God (verse 22) upon the farm owners of Israel.

    So in order to make your side of the debate biblical, you must show the following:

    1) Examples in the Bible that show that taxation and redistribution is theft.

    2) That the redistribution of wealth to the poor via law (as opposed to charity) is wrong.

    While simultaneously taking into account the verses I have used above.

    Let me just say that the reason why I am continuing this debate is because I believe that God can use his Word to change people’s mind. I hope you are open to God’s Spirit in this debate, and pray that mine is too.

    • OSO

      Thank you again for your dialogue.

      The Bible fundamentally supports taxation. In every passage you site, you are completely correct in your assertion. The Bible teaches, instructs and directs us to pay taxes for the supply of the government over us.

      Taxes and redistribution of wealth are not the same thing.

      Because a government can levy taxes, and because Christians should pay taxes, does not in any way, shape, form, or fashion, justify the purpose of any said tax. In every sense we should render to Ceasar what is Ceasar’s. But some things are not Ceasars to do.

      The Government is subject to the rules and principles of righteousness. They do not set them.

      The Socialist sin comes in, not with a tax, but with the PURPOSE of that “tax” and intention of their idea. The socialist idea wants to guarantee equal outcomes, which is not the government’s place to do.

      In God’s economy, plain and simple, if a man “will not” work, then he should not eat. 2 Thessalonians 3:10

      You show me Biblically how one man has a “right” to have the wages I’ve earned.

      The governent can tax the people in order to pay for the expenses of the government; not to pay the expenses of other citizens.

      We have no disagreement on taxes.

      However, There is no possible way to “Redistribute Earned Wealth” than through outright theft. Socialist redistribution of wealth, when stripped away of all the rhetoric is on the same level as armed robbery. The only difference is that when an armed robbery occurs you can call the government for help. In the Socialist idea, there is no one to call.

      I am thankful for your testimony in Christ. However, this is not really a “debate” between equal ideas. The socialist idea is great, great Biblical error.

  3. I’m glad that you have cleared up the idea of taxation being biblically sound.

    When we come to the Bible, however, we need to interpret it carefully. To argue that it is still theft to redistribute that money to other people still requires a Bible passage to base it on.

    For example, you say “In every sense we should render to Ceasar what is Ceasar’s. But some things are not Ceasars to do. The Government is subject to the rules and principles of righteousness. They do not set them.” But this has no Biblical backing that I can see. Paul said “Pay Your Taxes” in Romans 13, knowing that the Roman government was corrupt, bureaucratic and financially supported pagan religions.

    Let me put it another way.

    Does the Bible EXPLICITLY say “Pay your taxes”? Yes. Romans 13 and Matthew 22.15-22, Mark 12.13-17 and Luke 20.19-26 all support this assertion.

    Does the Bible IMPLICITLY say “Pay your taxes”? Yes. Luke 23.2 records that a false accusation made against Jesus was that he encouraged people to not pay their taxes.

    Does the Bible EXPLICITLY say “Don’t pay your taxes for some reason or another”? No. Nowhere does it say that we should refuse to pay taxes.

    Does the Bible IMPLICITLY say “Don’t pay your taxes for some reason or another”? No.

    Now as for redistributing wealth.

    Does the Bible EXPLICITLY say “Governments can/should use tax revenue in order to redistribute wealth”? No.

    Does the Bible IMPLICITLY say “Governments can/should use tax revenue in order to redistribute wealth”? Yes. Deuteronomy 24.18-22 commands Israel’s farmers to leave behind some produce for poor people to harvest.

    Does the Bible EXPLICITLY say “Governments cannot/should not use tax revenue in order to redistribute wealth”? No.

    Does the Bible IMPLICITLY say “Governments cannot/should not use tax revenue in order to redistribute wealth”? No.

    Please show me where the Bible says that using taxes to redistribute wealth is wrong. I can find no Bible passages that explicitly mention this idea, and one Bible Passage which implicitly gives it the go-ahead.

    As for your question : “You show me Biblically how one man has a “right” to have the wages I’ve earned.”

    There is none. But “Person” and “Government” are two different things in the Bible.


    I need to point out here also that your understanding of socialism is somewhat flawed and possibly dependent upon information from untrustworthy sources.

    It may come as a surprise to you that the Biblical teaching of “if a man will not work, then he should not eat.” was fully endorsed by the Soviet Union in 1961 under the rules titled “Moral Code of the Builder of Communism”. Their view was that the benefits awarded to a person by a socialist state would be taken away if the person refused to work.

    You must also understand that the term “Socialism” itself does not specifically refer to a society in which there is no private property or where all businesses and industries are owned and operated by the government. “Socialist” parties all over the Western world since world war 2 have always been parties that have encouraged large governments but none have ever become “communist”. For me (and for many), a “Socialist” is someone who lies between the political philosophies of Social Democratism and Democratic Socialism (believe it or not the two are different to each other). My personal position is between Social Liberalism and Social Democratism. I do not support either communism or Democratic Socialism because I see an important role for the free market in society.

    As far as I can tell, your position seems to be based upon Libertarian and Minarchist philosophy, whereby the government is limited only to providing for national defense, law enforcement (including prisons) and setting up the legal system (civil and criminal courts). And as far as I can tell, your position is also that this is the biblically mandated system.

    And this is where you and I differ. My belief is that the Bible is sufficient to guide believers and the church in what they should believe about God, and on how to live – all these points being explicitly mentioned in the Bible itself. However the Bible was not intended to be a guide for governments in determining policy because the Bible does not say that this is one of its roles. And what the Bible does not say, the believer has the freedom to make up his or her mind, so long as they do this with wisdom.

    Where you and I differ is that while you believe that your economic point of view is something that all Christians should follow because it is taught in the bible, my economic point of view is merely one of many views that Christians have the freedom to follow with wisdom. This also means that I believe that you are wrong and unbiblical in binding the conscience of believers into believing in economic libertarianism and minarchism (see Cambridge Declaration, Thesis One: Sola Scriptura).


    Here’s a logical difference in our arguments.

    Consider your argument that taxation and redistribution is theft, which obviously means it is wrong because God opposes theft. You would thus say:

    x = y, and because y = sin, x must be sin too.

    My counter argument is that taxation and redistribution is not theft and is actually supported by scripture:

    x is supported by scripture, therefore x does not equal y and is not sin.

  4. OSO,

    I do appreciate the sincerity and depth of your thoughs. I appreciate the fact that your assertions have obviously been meditated about, examined, and filtered with great amounts of effort to discern right from wrong. That is something we need more of.

    However, there is obviously a brick wall between us on this point.

    You said,”To argue that it is still theft to redistribute that money to other people still requires a Bible passage to base it on.” To me, that’s like saying I have to have a Bible passage to show that the sun is bright.

    Here is a difference between us. I don’t have to show the Bible saying that the sun is bright, you would have to show one that says it isn’t.

    Theft is theft, whether it is on the individual level, corporate level, or congressional level. The right and the wrong of taking something that rightfully belongs to someone doesn’t change just because more people get involved.

    The government is in fact subject to the same principles of righteousness on the national scale as any individual is on the private scale, righteousness is the same for the many as it is for the one.

    The God of Israel said, the Rock of Israel spake to me, He that ruleth over men must be just, ruling in the fear of God. 2 Sam 23:3

    Moreover thou shalt provide out of all the people able men, such as fear God, men of truth, hating covetousness; and place such over them, to be rulers of thousands, and rulers of hundreds, rulers of fifties, and rulers of tens: Ex 18:21 (KJV)

    And said to the judges, Take heed what ye do: for ye judge not for man, but for the LORD, who is with you in the judgment. Wherefore now let the fear of the LORD be upon you; take heed and do it: for there is no iniquity with the LORD our God, nor respect of persons, nor taking of gifts . . . And he charged them, saying, Thus shall ye do in the fear of the LORD, faithfully, and with a perfect heart. And what cause soever shall come to you of your brethren that dwell in their cities, between blood and blood, between law and commandment, statutes and judgments, ye shall even warn them that they trespass not against the LORD, 2 Chron 19:6-10

    The second thing that you must realize is that there is in fact clear Biblical direction for Christians to deny and defy their government, both found in the book of Daniel.

    When the government COMMANDED the idolatry of Azariah, Hananiah, and Meshael, they said no, and God sided with them

    When the government FORBID Daniel from prayer, he said no, and God sided with him.

    Any government, Democratic, Socialist, Communist, whatever, must be defied anytime it “COMMANDS” Biblical disobedience, or “FORBIDS” Biblical obedience.

    Now that being said, neither is the case that we are speaking of here. My point is that the government is not higher than the principles of our Great King, and Kingdom.

    You said, “As for your question : “You show me Biblically how one man has a “right” to have the wages I’ve earned.”There is none. But “Person” and “Government” are two different things in the Bible.”

    They are two different things, yes; but they are still subject to the same principles of righteouness.

    The Goverment cannot “steal” from one to give to another just because it’s the government. The Redistribution of wealth doesn’t come within twenty time zones of the farmers leaving the corners of their fields.

    Even in those cases, the farmers were not mandated to “give away their wages” they were mandated to “leave an opportunity to work” for some men to come and achieve gathering in themselves.

    I do in fact believe in as limited a government as possible. I do not do so, based upon any “Biblical mandate”, but based upon pictures, and principles, of righteousness potrayed throughout scripture, pertaining to personal responsibilities, and human freedom. The socialist idea chills and limits individual freedom, of which I am categorically against. That may in fact be because I am an American, but I also beileve that economic Freedom, is one facet, of true freedom, of which is a clear Biblical principle. God is in the business of “freeing people” and any government that comes against “freedom”, is operating in opposition to the principles of God.

    I know the word and concept “Freedom” is another can of worms; but we’ll save that for another day.

    Thanks again for your discussion, but we still come to the same place. Pay taxes yes. Government stealing, no. They are two different critters.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s