The federal government’s effort to nationalize health care is off to a terrible start. The failure of their website, the disclosure of false promises, the sticker shock to many who are signing up for the Affordable Care Act and the uncertainty as to how it will be financed, all illustrate the difficulty of administrating such a massive undertaking.
However, rather than just ridiculing the government’s incompetence, can anyone present a realistic alternative to solve the nation’s complex health-care problems? I wish public officials would consider some basic principles from the Bible about caring for the poor. While the Bible is primarily a book introducing us to salvation through Jesus Christ, it is also the best blueprint for a good life here.
No one has more concern for those who languish in poverty than Almighty God. His Word repeatedly admonishes us to be generous and compassionate to the poor. Jesus said, “The same as you do it to the least of these, you do unto me.”
The question is not, “Should we help those who don’t have adequate health care?” The question is how they should be helped. God, in His infinite wisdom, provided several safety nets to catch those who were in danger of falling into hunger, homelessness or neglect.
Individual responsibility came first. The Bible specifies, “If a man will not work, he shall not eat” (2 Thess. 3:10). A sign in the Smoky Mountains reads, “Please don’t feed the bears.” Tour guides explain that when people provide food, the bears become dependent on it, quit foraging for themselves and become dangerous.
The same is true with humans. If people are capable of working but refuse to take an available job and we give them something for nothing, we enable their laziness, rob them of the dignity of work, and often contribute to their addictions, which in turn, endangers others.
Today 47 million Americans are receiving food stamps. Is there anyone who doesn’t suspect a considerable number of those claims are illegitimate? Individuals need to be motivated to work – even at the most menial task.
Family involvement came next. First Timothy 5:8 reads, “If anyone does not provide for his relatives, and especially his immediate family, he has denied the faith and is worse than an unbeliever.” (See also 1 Timothy 5:16.)
A relative living in close proximity, knows the needs and opportunities of a family member much better than a government bureaucrat living hundreds of miles away. A relative will be more likely to provide practical assistance and motivate self-reliance than a public official.
Compassionate donors were to help rescue the poor also. Moses commanded the Israelites, “There will always be poor people in the land. Therefore I command you to be openhanded toward your brothers and toward the poor and needy in your land” (Deut. 15:11).
Equal distribution of wealth is impossible. Jesus said, “The poor you will always have with you.” Since we live in a fallen world, there will be disabled persons, widows, orphans and mentally challenged people who need the assistance of those who have more.
That’s why 1 John 3:17 challenges us, “If anyone has material possessions and sees his brother in need but has no pity on him, how can the love of God be in him?”
Church benevolence provided another major safety net. Galatians 6:10 specifies, “Therefore, as we have opportunity, let us do good to all people, especially to those who belong to the family of believers.”
The early church had a food-distribution program that was so effective that, “…there were no needy persons among them,” because those who had resources voluntarily, generously shared with those in need (Acts 4:34-35).
When a congregation is functioning as the body of Christ, the poor will not go hungry. And if church members are sick or in need of medical attention, the church will see that they are given adequate care. Over the years we’ve had several special offerings for fellow believers who needed expensive medical treatment and church members gave tens of thousands of dollars to assist.
Think about it. Who establishes the most effective inner city missions, food banks, clothing distribution centers, hospitals, orphanages and homes for the elderly? Not the Atheist Society, nor the federal government, but the church.
Government assistance was also specified in Scripture…but as a last resort. The Hebrew farmers were instructed, “When you reap the harvest of your land, do not reap to the very edges of your field or gather the gleanings of your harvest. Leave them for the poor and alien” (Leviticus 23:22).
The law prohibited the Jewish farmers from going back over their fields a second time. They were to leave what they missed for the poor. Even then, the poor had the responsibility of gleaning and working for what they ate, if they were capable of doing so. (See Ruth 2.)
When the government regards itself as a first-responder and takes ultimate responsibility for the poor, it encourages sloth and abuse. It relieves family responsibility, discourages generosity and marginalizes church benevolence programs.
Conversely, consider the advantages of returning to the Biblical pattern of meeting welfare needs. It motivates work and restores dignity. It reduces fraud and eliminates bureaucracy. It encourages generosity and compassionate, individual involvement.
The solution to the nation’s health care problem? Return the responsibility to local communities and states. It’s too important an issue for us to leave to “outsiders.” The federal government can help by enforcing the law that no one seeking emergency assistance in a hospital can be turned away and by providing a tax break for doctors who treat patients who are unable to pay.
Then the government can trust caring relatives, local churches and compassionate people in local communities to respond to individual needs. That won’t be a perfect system, but I’m confident it would be a HUGE improvement…..and it wouldn’t need a half billion dollar website to get started.
