Response to Sibley’s invitation for suggestions

Letter from Leon Moyer

Social Security – July 2006 – Colorado Central Magazine


Your June Article about Growing up in America succinctly stated your personal understanding of the social contract about the social security program. Your view that people who paid into S.S. in its infancy believed that what they were paying in would be paid right back out to recipients over age 65, and that they would in turn be helped in their old age by the next generation, is a view no doubt held by many S.S. participants.

But the concept of a social contract is alien to those followers of the Christian religion, because Jesus taught them that there are two kingdoms here on Earth — the kingdom of Heaven is to come upon those who are born again (Matt. 6:10, Luke 17:21, Acts chapter 2, Romans 14:17, John 18:36, etc., all KJV of the Bible).

Those who reject the gospel message are in a different kingdom, what the Bible refers to as the kingdom of this world. No man can serve two masters; therefore those who choose to lay up treasures in Heaven will not be concerned with any type of “social contract” such as S.S. here on earth. S.S. is a program which those who reject God’s kingdom may join as they look to their fellow man for their salvation and support.

This Biblical doctrine is found in II Corinthians chapter 6, verses:

14: Be ye not unequally yoked together with unbelievers: for what fellowship hath righteousness with unrighteousness? and what communion hath light with darkness?

15: And what concord hath Christ with Belial? or what part hath he that believeth with an infidel?

16: And what agreement hath the temple of God with idols? for ye are the temple of the living God; as God hath said, I will dwell in them, and walk in them; and I will be their God, and they shall be my people.

17: Wherefore come out from among them, and be ye separate, saith the Lord, and touch not the unclean thing; and I will receive you,

18: And will be a Father unto you, and ye shall be my sons and daughters, saith the Lord Almighty.

The Christian believer has the Church, and all those of like precious faith, who will show charity toward those who truly have an earthly need involving food, clothing or shelter, and therefore S.S. is negated and not necessary for born-again folks. More importantly, the Church looks after the spiritual needs of fellow pilgrims, by upholding Christian doctrines such as that found in II Thessalonians 3:10: “For even when we were with you, this we commanded you, that if any would not work, neither should he eat.”

The unregenerate person of the world lusts after an easy life of idleness, fun and, carnality, which the welfare state promotes! Any program developed by society that encourages sinful conduct cannot be supported by the Christian, so when S.S. takes money from the working poor, there are at least two forms of sinful conduct encouraged — laziness and idleness among retired folks who receive this money, and the theft of lawfully earned monies from the employees who have S.S. money removed from their paychecks (see Ephesians 4:28).

Mr. Sibley, might I suggest a new and different form of social contract — one where families take care of their own relatives as they grow older as the Bible commands ( I Timothy 5:16) so that the family unit will tend to be strengthened, which will lead toward a society that is solidified at all levels of government, as the family unit is the most basic and fundamental level of government.

To this end, the present regime’s proposal of individual retirement accounts might let each person in society decide on their own level of retirement security, with the result being liberty and justice for all. The employee would be able to keep his own money till retirement if so desired, and those who are older would be encouraged to work at something productive and useful for as long as they possibly can, at which time their family members and religious organization will provide any charity necessary in the senior’s life.

God’s way is best. Are you willing to allow individual freedom to supersede the failed social contract of S.S. and similar programs of the welfare state? If you use government as a charitable organization, aren’t you using government to usurp the role of religion, and thereby establishing a religion as well as engaging in idolatry by serving and honoring a government program instead of God’s form of charity through his followers in a voluntary manner?

May God add his blessing to these thoughts.


Leon Moyer