Okay, I am venturing out into new and unexplored territory...for me.
Some are probably already here, by choice or by circumstances, patiently waiting for me to arrive. Well, here I am.
The subject is health insurance. Paying for healthcare is the uppermost topic of conversation all over the nation and has been for the past few months. If you are reading this, it is likely you are familiar with all sides of that debate, and just as likely you are tired of the fight and worried about the outcome.
And that leads to the issue I wish to consider in this article: Is it appropriate for a believer and follower of The Way to purchase health insurance in any form?
Up until a few days ago, there was no doubt in my mind that it was irresponsible and imprudent not to carry health insurance if at all possible financially - especially if I had others to provide for (spouse, children)who depended on my provision and care. Frankly, I don't believe I would have given a suggestion to the contrary a moment's consideration.
Yet, here I am, seriously questioning it.
What happened?
For a number of years I have been researching what is generally called alternative medicine - primarily herbalism and traditional medicine but also including modern concepts which are outside of the mainstream of medical practice yet relatively recent and similarly presented (vitamin therapy, chelation, sound therapy, and the like). An inevitable corrollary of this research is uncovering a great deal of information about the process and problems of contemporary allopathic medicine.
Most insurance will not cover herbal, traditional or any other natural or alternate approach to health and healing. Likewise, most mainstream physicians are ignorant about traditional or alternative therapies - a large percentage reject them outright and it is not uncommon for one to reject or terminate a relationship with a patient who chooses alternative medicine as a supplement to or instead of generally accepted practices.
The same goes for insurance. Patients who refuse to adhere to allopathic methodology can find themselves cancelled, and, in effect, blackballed, uninsurable for choices ranging from refusing vaccines to forgoing chemotherapy.
Insurers dictate to patients which courses of treatment are acceptable and covered by the policy. Deviation from the approved parameters are refused payment.
Fear of accumulating large medical debt forces patients to conform to the system and take what is offered - even if they don't believe in the effectiveness of the treatment.
My questions are derived from this understanding of how the system works:
1. We are told that we are not to be conformed to the world, but to Yashua. If we have health insurance which prevents us from using treatments we think are more effective or requires us to accept measures we know are ineffective or even harmful, aren't we conforming to the world?
2. Believers are not supposed to be in debt because the debtor becomes the slave of the lender. Isn't health insurance in a very practical sense the creation of debt - both because we commit to the payment of the costs of the coverage (premiums and deductibles, copays, fees) and because we are pre-paying for a surety against future debt. Are we then slaves to the insurer and, possibly, the employer?
3. Then there is Revelation 9:21 which warns us of the evil of "pharmakea" - drugs - termed in some translations as "sorceries". Modern medicine is very much a practice of sorcery using chemical compounds as magic potions. If you have health insurance, this is the predominant treatment option you will have.
4. The issue of faith. Do you trust Yahweh or will you make your own provision? The letter to Laodicea is very much about this. They had such great substance that they thought they had no need to depend on Yahweh for provision. They became spiritually poor as they ceased to act in faith. If we carry health insurance is that an act of self-reliance and placing our faith in ourselves and other men?
Yashua says we have not because we ask not.
The Scripture says by His stripes we are healed.
Insurance companies are deeply rooted in the world system of materialism and financial manipulation. Insurance is a core business of the worldwide financial order that demands conformity or else be excluded.
If we are to be in the world but not of it, is health insurance one of those deceptions formed by the adversary for the purpose of directing us away from God and strip us of faith and power?
I can't say for certain my family and I have decided in fact to go without insurance and rely totally on Yahweh for health and provision, but we are leaning that way.
Any ideas?
Wednesday, September 16, 2009
Saturday, August 22, 2009
Why the Health-care Problem is not with the Insurance Companies
You are limiting the private sector to insurance.
The problem is that insurance is a symptom, not a cause of the current problems and was initially applied as a patch to a perceived problem.By creating a single-payer system, or government/public option, or nationalized health-care (whichever, if any comes to pass) you are once again pasting a patch on a worn package hoping to hold it together a little longer.
If you want to resolve the inefficiencies of the market, the first task is to work back past the results of previous policies and legislation and market disruptions to find where the market began to "fail" and find the root causes.
You will not find the cause here to be market but government.Perceived inequities were used to impose non-market solutions which increasingly distorted and limited market options.
I am certain that by imposing any of the systems mentioned above, you will not remove inequities from the system but rather redistribute the costs and benefits. If the system is actually, practically, egalitarian, then the outcome will be a distribution which results in less than optimal satisfaction for all consumers...and, the black market which will result will create greater inequities than exist now.
If the system is not egalitarian, but distributes services unequally, it will by nature have to use factors other than price to determine that distribution. Such a non-price distribution will inevitably be political and be determined by politicians interests. As such, the benefits and costs will fall on separate populations and be unequally borne or received. The population bearing the costs will then have a disincentive to contribute and will find ways to hide or diminish taxable resources. The beneficiaries will have an incentive to increase their use and grow the cost in proportion. As revenues decrease, demands increase, the government will be forced to expand the tax base, ration care, or remove health care from any private market and nationalize it, nominally providing it for free, but in fact disguising the cost by alternate funding or inflation.
The problem is that insurance is a symptom, not a cause of the current problems and was initially applied as a patch to a perceived problem.By creating a single-payer system, or government/public option, or nationalized health-care (whichever, if any comes to pass) you are once again pasting a patch on a worn package hoping to hold it together a little longer.
If you want to resolve the inefficiencies of the market, the first task is to work back past the results of previous policies and legislation and market disruptions to find where the market began to "fail" and find the root causes.
You will not find the cause here to be market but government.Perceived inequities were used to impose non-market solutions which increasingly distorted and limited market options.
I am certain that by imposing any of the systems mentioned above, you will not remove inequities from the system but rather redistribute the costs and benefits. If the system is actually, practically, egalitarian, then the outcome will be a distribution which results in less than optimal satisfaction for all consumers...and, the black market which will result will create greater inequities than exist now.
If the system is not egalitarian, but distributes services unequally, it will by nature have to use factors other than price to determine that distribution. Such a non-price distribution will inevitably be political and be determined by politicians interests. As such, the benefits and costs will fall on separate populations and be unequally borne or received. The population bearing the costs will then have a disincentive to contribute and will find ways to hide or diminish taxable resources. The beneficiaries will have an incentive to increase their use and grow the cost in proportion. As revenues decrease, demands increase, the government will be forced to expand the tax base, ration care, or remove health care from any private market and nationalize it, nominally providing it for free, but in fact disguising the cost by alternate funding or inflation.
Tuesday, May 12, 2009
God's Work
This is going to be a post following-up on the previous interogatory about a Christian System of Economics.
The question was whether or not there was a clear, definable, operable statement of economic principles by which existing theory could be analyzed or a unique theory developed.
On-going research and study has been quite remarkable.
Arguments can be found on the part of nearly every economic/political/social theory which cherry-pick amongst the writings of the Bible to demonstrate that Christianity favors that particular idea being promoted. Thus the Scripture has been used to defend both the Divine Right of Kings and democracy.
In truth those who attempt to prove a divine approval of their pet priciples are always wrong and, further, missing or ignoring a fundamental truth: Christian standards of behavior cannot be applied to a secular world.
It is true that God would prefer that the material society operate by the spiritual code revealed in the Bible; it is also true that God neither expects nor requires that it do so.
Only those professing to be of Christ are obligated to conform to the divine plan and even they obligate themselves by choice and by confession of a desire to be like Jesus.
Thus, in sum, Christian economics is not about how to organize the global economy but about how the Christian is to live in obedience to the Father.
If that is understood, then the next posts on Christian economics will be seen in a new light, with a peculiar view and a different purpose.
The question was whether or not there was a clear, definable, operable statement of economic principles by which existing theory could be analyzed or a unique theory developed.
On-going research and study has been quite remarkable.
Arguments can be found on the part of nearly every economic/political/social theory which cherry-pick amongst the writings of the Bible to demonstrate that Christianity favors that particular idea being promoted. Thus the Scripture has been used to defend both the Divine Right of Kings and democracy.
In truth those who attempt to prove a divine approval of their pet priciples are always wrong and, further, missing or ignoring a fundamental truth: Christian standards of behavior cannot be applied to a secular world.
It is true that God would prefer that the material society operate by the spiritual code revealed in the Bible; it is also true that God neither expects nor requires that it do so.
Only those professing to be of Christ are obligated to conform to the divine plan and even they obligate themselves by choice and by confession of a desire to be like Jesus.
Thus, in sum, Christian economics is not about how to organize the global economy but about how the Christian is to live in obedience to the Father.
If that is understood, then the next posts on Christian economics will be seen in a new light, with a peculiar view and a different purpose.
Sunday, April 5, 2009
Education
Growing up in the spiritual world is similar to growing up in the material world in the sense that you start out young, lacking knowledge and experience, and in need of care and protection. In the Spirit, God is our parent and the members of the Church are our siblings.
God assumes responsibility for our care and education - duties he then delegates to one extent or another, to our brothers and sisters.
We, in return, are to be loyal and diligent, looking to our Lord for direction and to our spiritual family for edification and fellowship.
Similarly, just as the physical child gains wisdom and understanding as he develops intellectual maturity, acquires information and experiences the several common and uncommon life events, so too does the spiritual child grow and develop through study and spiritual interaction.
Recognizing that spiritual growth is a process that takes time and demands dedicated effort with education is vital to the Christian fellowship. We should no more expect that a new believer have the discernment and understanding of an older Christian than we would expect a three-year-old to operate a car like a fifty-year-old adult would.
Spiritual growth is also dependent on the relationship between the individual believer and the Godhead. Data flows and rote memorization are dry and lifeless without the inspiration of the Christian by the Spirit of God.
Because understanding and discernment become more complete and more acute as the believer grows and learns, it is reasonable to expeect that young believers will have simpler, less-developed theologies than older believers. New Christians will not perceive the spiritual natures of people nor the nature of the spirit informing events as readily as a more mature Christian. Thus it is not surprising that as we grow up in the Spirit we will find that people, acts, events, or things once viewed as benign or even acceptable in previous times may one day, perhaps in a sudden flash, be recognized as a temptation or a source of evil.
Spiritual immaturity is blindness.
Those of us who are further along in our spiritual life are as obligated to bringing light to the believers oppressed by the darkness of this material world as we are to shining the light of Christ into the physical world at large.
God assumes responsibility for our care and education - duties he then delegates to one extent or another, to our brothers and sisters.
We, in return, are to be loyal and diligent, looking to our Lord for direction and to our spiritual family for edification and fellowship.
Similarly, just as the physical child gains wisdom and understanding as he develops intellectual maturity, acquires information and experiences the several common and uncommon life events, so too does the spiritual child grow and develop through study and spiritual interaction.
Recognizing that spiritual growth is a process that takes time and demands dedicated effort with education is vital to the Christian fellowship. We should no more expect that a new believer have the discernment and understanding of an older Christian than we would expect a three-year-old to operate a car like a fifty-year-old adult would.
Spiritual growth is also dependent on the relationship between the individual believer and the Godhead. Data flows and rote memorization are dry and lifeless without the inspiration of the Christian by the Spirit of God.
Because understanding and discernment become more complete and more acute as the believer grows and learns, it is reasonable to expeect that young believers will have simpler, less-developed theologies than older believers. New Christians will not perceive the spiritual natures of people nor the nature of the spirit informing events as readily as a more mature Christian. Thus it is not surprising that as we grow up in the Spirit we will find that people, acts, events, or things once viewed as benign or even acceptable in previous times may one day, perhaps in a sudden flash, be recognized as a temptation or a source of evil.
Spiritual immaturity is blindness.
Those of us who are further along in our spiritual life are as obligated to bringing light to the believers oppressed by the darkness of this material world as we are to shining the light of Christ into the physical world at large.
Tuesday, March 3, 2009
Infiltration
Those of us born in the post-war era (so-called boomers) are unacquainted with the actual practice of the many unique concepts imbedded into the nascent nation following the Revolutionary War - ideas which the Founders attempted to make actual principles of governance. Each succeeding generation drifted further off the foundation to the degree that today's nation has completely lost contact with it.
In case you may be unfamiliar with the fundamental principles underlying the philosophy of our republican system, they were stated in the Declaration of Independence:
We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness. — That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed, — That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness. Prudence, indeed, will dictate that Governments long established should not be changed for light and transient causes; and accordingly all experience hath shewn that mankind are more disposed to suffer, while evils are sufferable than to right themselves by abolishing the forms to which they are accustomed. But when a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same Object evinces a design to reduce them under absolute Despotism, it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such Government, and to provide new Guards for their future security
Not a complex philosophy. One could restate this; but it could not be said more eloquently.
Sadly, in this day, to take the position of the Declaration, even to believe in the principles upon which this nation was built, principles derived from the Christian philosophy, at the least, is not to be acting with honor in the eyes of this and previous regimes, but is defined as unpatriotic, if not outright treason.
How horrified would Jefferson, Madison, Washington, be to see what we have become - not surprized as they knew how fragile the balance was and many warned, even predicted these very moments.
In case you may be unfamiliar with the fundamental principles underlying the philosophy of our republican system, they were stated in the Declaration of Independence:
We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness. — That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed, — That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness. Prudence, indeed, will dictate that Governments long established should not be changed for light and transient causes; and accordingly all experience hath shewn that mankind are more disposed to suffer, while evils are sufferable than to right themselves by abolishing the forms to which they are accustomed. But when a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same Object evinces a design to reduce them under absolute Despotism, it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such Government, and to provide new Guards for their future security
Not a complex philosophy. One could restate this; but it could not be said more eloquently.
Sadly, in this day, to take the position of the Declaration, even to believe in the principles upon which this nation was built, principles derived from the Christian philosophy, at the least, is not to be acting with honor in the eyes of this and previous regimes, but is defined as unpatriotic, if not outright treason.
How horrified would Jefferson, Madison, Washington, be to see what we have become - not surprized as they knew how fragile the balance was and many warned, even predicted these very moments.
Monday, February 23, 2009
Blessing
Some of us are going to be called to martyrdom...prison and death are near for a few. Now is the day to be sure of your calling. Do not desire to be a martyr; rather pray that you may be a vessel for the gospel and be bold. To die is to be blessed - to live is to be a blessing. Long to bless those around you. Ask Jesus what it is you are to be about and get busy. The time is short and the fields are white.
Saturday, February 21, 2009
For one walking by faith and not by sight, it would be very easy to see spooks behind every rock and tree along the trail...and there may be, in a manner of speaking, as we know we are, each of us, solitary lights in a world of darkness. But the evil lurking and stalking us comes from the other dimensions and is merely channeled through human beings.
I used to say that we blamed far too much of the blackness of this world on Satan and his crew; now I realize that it is not possible to attach too much blame to the fallen ones. Those rebellious angels never rest in the seeding of their intentions into the minds of men. In fact, I have come to believe that not enough recognition is given to the successful infiltration of satanic philosophy and traditions into all arenas of human society.
All of us are corrupted, but most of us are not manifestly evil. The greater number of people are not inclined to devious, destructive behavior (except as regards ourselves) and are, in the main, friendly, at times compassionate, and non-violent. Unfortunately, we are also selfish, greedy and lazy - and therein is where the problem lays.
As Paul has said, we all have a knowledge of God, and we deliberately, knowingly act against that knowledge when we choose to align ourselves with the world system to any degree. It truly is black and white, yes or no, right or wrong.
Either you, and I, are with God or you are against God.
I used to say that we blamed far too much of the blackness of this world on Satan and his crew; now I realize that it is not possible to attach too much blame to the fallen ones. Those rebellious angels never rest in the seeding of their intentions into the minds of men. In fact, I have come to believe that not enough recognition is given to the successful infiltration of satanic philosophy and traditions into all arenas of human society.
All of us are corrupted, but most of us are not manifestly evil. The greater number of people are not inclined to devious, destructive behavior (except as regards ourselves) and are, in the main, friendly, at times compassionate, and non-violent. Unfortunately, we are also selfish, greedy and lazy - and therein is where the problem lays.
As Paul has said, we all have a knowledge of God, and we deliberately, knowingly act against that knowledge when we choose to align ourselves with the world system to any degree. It truly is black and white, yes or no, right or wrong.
Either you, and I, are with God or you are against God.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)