Rob

Thanks for your thoughts. Personally, it doesn’t seem so clear to me that the Bible forbids or discourages human governments from taxing the rich in order to help the poor, or provide them opportunities to help themselves. Pragmatically, making use of human wisdom, and the lessons of experience, it may be possible to make a better argument against this. But to say that the Bible specifically teaches against it does not seem defensible to me. Also, I don’t see that all government-funded efforts to help the poor and underprivileged are necessarily the same thing as Marxism.

The words “you shall freely” (NASB) “wide” (KJV),(the same compound Hebrew word is found in verse 9 and verse 11) has a certainly a double meaning. At the root of the compound is the Hebrew “pathach” (Strong’s 6605) which means “freely” and “wide.” In connection with the rest of the compound, it speaks both towards the motivation of the heart and the willingness of the giver. Motivation: freely without compulsion without a moment of hesitancy. Willingness: the hand is wide, and opens again and again and again to give to those in need. The Talmud speaks and says if those in need will not take the gift because of pride, then those resources should be loaned to that person. The seventh year then would release both the recipient and the lender from paying back, or seeking payment.

While governments under a democratic frame work could enforce compulsory payments to the poor (and do) I do not believe that a one of them have truly mimicked this Biblical system. Welfare and other forms of assistance are based primarily on a socialist/marxist view of redistribution which must be noted in terms of not the desire to help the poor, but a centralized concentration of wealth and power.

What should be noted for posterity is that even Israel in it’s theocracy never enforced these particular commands as a “dictum” all the way through the the Judges, the United Kingdom, and Divided Kingdoms. We see a prophet mention that Israel was judged and sent into exile because they failed to keep the Year of Jubilee all during the times of their occupancy of the land. They surely were “voluntary” with the enforcer being God alone.

Rob

Currently, I have become aware of some needs in our church. We have been praying how to meet those needs.

Thanks for answering my question on the other post. You have obviously put a lot of good thought into this.

In the end, I think I come down at the same place you do on this. But, more for the sake of my own wrestling with Scripture, and its implications, I’d like to tease this out a bit further, if you don’t mind.

I went back and read Deuteronomy 15:1-11 in all the 18 English versions on Bible Gateway. In not one of them could I find the idea of the jubilee or lending to the poor being a “free will” or “voluntary” thing. The closest you get to that idea is the word “freely,” but in context it seems to me to have more to do with the attitude of the heart than of the obligatory vs. voluntary nature. In any case, the first 6 verses seem to me to be quite clearly non-voluntary. There may be slightly more doubt about the following 5 verses.

In the NT, the assumption is that we are not under a theocratic system of government. So, there is no legal enforcement available for this type of law, unless it be by the pagan Roman government. Within the church, giving and sharing do indeed seem to be voluntary.

What I am still unsure about is how OT principles based on a government system of theocracy might transfer over to modern democracy. Is it necessarily a bad thing for secular democratic governments to collect taxes in order to help the poor, or have a government enforced debt cancellation program? If they do so, in a sense, they are only following the example set before them in the OT.

What principles from OT theocracy are valid examples for modern secular democracy, and which ones are not?

I would be interested to hear your response to this point of the argument.

You should have seen the look he gave me. He didn’t want food, he wanted $$ to go back into the store and buy beer.

Be careful what you give; you don’t want to become an enabler.
—————————————————————–
As for those of us that still have jobs, we should look carefully at paying down our bills, and when we can, rachet up our giving (additional to the tithe) a little. An extra $10, $20, or so each payday by everybody not laid off would go a long way towards bringing each church’s budget closer to a balance.

I think there are two ways to financially help those in need. One is to loan them money and one is to give them tangible things.

One of the mechanisms of help suggested in Deutronomy is loaning money to people and then later forgiving the debt. I guess a modern day equivalent of this would be banks writing down mortgage balances to avoid foreclosure.

Personally, I believe a better way to help “poor” people is giving them money (or usually something tangible they can use) rather than loaning them money. I don’t think you are doing most people any “help” by loaning them money that they have no realistic chance to repay.

Examples of programs which I think are helping the poor:

(1) Large scale: Bill Gates giving millions to help eradicate disease in Third World countries,

(2) Local scale: First Baptist Church in Washington OK which has organized a project to build a house for a women in town whose house was in a very poor state of repair. They tore down the house and built her a new one. The church speadheaded a drive to raise donations of money, labor, and materials to build this house. Last time I was down there (just before Christmas) the house was nearing completion. It just needed some interior work such as cabinets, etc. The project is the Leah Hays Extreme Home Makeover in Washington, Oklahoma.

For fear of preaching a social gospel many conservatives have neglected preaching about such issues but should not neglect what the Bible emphasizes. At the same time we should have balance. We should help those who cannot help themselves and demand that those who can help themselves do so.

Excellent article! Thank you brother….It got me thinking about a principle that God would have us claim as laid forth by Paul to the Romans in chapter 14.

When you said:
“The context of Deuteronomy 15 is the “year of remission” or the “year of jubilee” (verse 1) and found in relation to the forgiving of debts and loans among the people in the land. What is notable here is that forgiveness of debts and loans are not granted to foreigners, only to those who are of the house of Israel, or a “brother” (verse 3).”

The context of Deuteronomy 15 echoes the same reality that Paul is instructing the church at Rome to maintain…..as he encourages:
Romans 14:13-21 Therefore let us not judge one another anymore, but rather determine this–not to put an obstacle or a stumbling block in a brother’s way. (14) I know and am convinced in the Lord Jesus that nothing is unclean in itself; but to him who thinks anything to be unclean, to him it is unclean. (15) For if because of food your brother is hurt, you are no longer walking according to love. Do not destroy with your food him for whom Christ died. (16) Therefore do not let what is for you a good thing be spoken of as evil; (17) for the kingdom of God is not eating and drinking, but righteousness and peace and joy in the Holy Spirit. (18) For he who in this way serves Christ is acceptable to God and approved by men. (19) So then we pursue the things which make for peace and the building up of one another. (20) Do not tear down the work of God for the sake of food. All things indeed are clean, but they are evil for the man who eats and gives offense. (21) It is good not to eat meat or to drink wine, or to do anything by which your brother stumbles.

We serve our brothers and sisters that are adopted into the family of God. We belong to God and ultimately He is our master and judge. At the very least we should forgive debts, and not put any stumbling block in a brother’s way. Our commonality in God is an astounding motivation to help our brothers and sisters in time of need.
Good stuff,

Blessings,
Chris

We are to love in both word and deed.