I appreciate the energy and the earnestness of the Religious Herald, but I occasionally feel that writers are claiming biblical points that may be kind but not biblical. I don't want to sound like I am against kindness but I am in favor of being accurate when claiming that the Bible teaches something.
Marv Knox wrote about “Caring for the poor,” is it the church's job or the state's? (1/24/08) This is a big topic and the current political debates heighten the relevancy. Political conservatives claim government does not need to be bigger and should not be accepting responsibility for the poor because it trains them in poverty. Political liberals maintain that no one else can do a job that large and that a compassionate society should have the poor covered.
My difficulty is with the sympathetic quotations of those like Jimmy Dorrell of Mission Waco who claim that “government is the structure God created to care for the poor,” and that “it's the role of Christians to navigate (an off-course government) back to a biblical viewpoint.”
First, God did ordain government according to Romans 13:1-7, but to maintain order, not to care for the poor. Government is not offered in Scripture as “the structure God created to care for the poor.”
Second, Scripture does not bear witness that it is the role of Christians (or of the church) to navigate government back to a biblical viewpoint. The NT does not address the government or its morality; rather, it instructs us in how to live regardless of the government's morality.
As a pastor, I rely on government programs when trying to help people. But I wonder if we would have so many poor if it weren't for government programs that have trained people in dependency. In any case, I struggle with claims of a biblical view that is not biblical. We should respect God's Word by referencing it accurately.
Tom Clark, Concord