A link is forged between private property and the ability
to give from one’s own resources in Deuteronomy 24:19:
Deut 24:19,
“When you reap your harvest in your field, and forget a
sheaf in the field, you shall not go back to get it; it shall be for the
stranger, the fatherless, and the widow, that the Lord your God may bless you in all the work of your hands”
Several thoughts emanate from this verse:
(1) In order for someone to display honest generosity, he
needs to be generous with his own private property.
(2) The focus of the generosity of private citizens is people
in real need. In the case of this verse, they are listed as strangers, orphans, and
widows.
(3) According to this verse, God will bless the work of a
person’s hands, given that this person is generous with his own private
property.
However, further thoughts also stem from this verse:
(1) The redistribution of wealth greatly reduces a person’s
ability to be generous, allocating that decision to government policies.
(2) The removal of private property, such as in communism,
completely removes the possibility of the type of generosity listed in the
verse, as no one has ownership of any particular land.
(3) When the personal incentive to generosity is reduced,
God’s promised blessing is reduced in like measure.
(4) When the individual’s mandate to be generous to the
stranger, orphan, and widow is conferred on governmental authority, there is no
individual responsibility for giving, nor is there individual accountability
for the recipient’s proper use of the funds.
(5) If individual generosity is bequeathed to the
government through redistribution, then an individual’s opportunity to give to
others is forced upon him; the willingness to obey God’s command is removed and replaced by the mandate of a government agency requiring all to give, whether they are willing or not; cheerful generosity is squeezed from a
culture, as is God’s promised blessing.
Further, it is clear from Deuteronomy 24:19 that God does not
mandate communism. Rather, God mandates private property, while urging
obedience to individual generosity.
Several months back, when listening to the radio, I heard a
commercial urging listeners to give to a charitable organization. I thought to
myself, “Why have government programs not done away with the need for charitable
organizations?” In fact, it appears that just the opposite has happened. In a
counter-intuitive way, the more government subscribes to the “redistribution of
wealth,” in like measure, the more charitable organizations are in fact needed!
No comments:
Post a Comment