What if your parents worked hard to save money to send you
to good schools enabling you to get a good job and to raise your own family?
Consequently, you have been advantaged, at least financially, compared to the
underprivileged. Should this be a cause of guilt and shame? Should you be made
to feel ashamed of your advantage?
How are we to begin to answer these questions, especially
now that many are moral relativists. Consequently, they believe that morality
is just something we make up as we go along. Therefore, it is always evolving
according to evolving social norms. Consequently, it lacks any solid foundation
from which to answer these questions.
If this is true and there are no absolute moral laws to
inform us if we are truly guilty for making use of our “advantage,” then there
are no objective answers to our questions, and we must fend for ourselves in a
meaningless, valueless, and uncaring universe. Without objective moral
reasoning, manipulation and coercion reign.
If there are answers, they can only come from moral laws
that are higher than we are, laws to which we must conform - laws which depend
upon God.
Therefore, I will try to answer these questions from the
perspective of God’s Words. Are we guilty for enjoying the benefits of the
labors of our parents? Evidently not! Instead, this is part of God’s plan:
·
Disaster pursues sinners, but the righteous are
rewarded with good. A good man leaves an inheritance to his children’s
children, but the sinner’s wealth is laid up for the righteous.” (Proverbs
13:21-22)
Caring of the family is righteous. According to the Lord,
there is nothing wrong about reaping from our labors:
·
The hand of the diligent will rule, while the
slothful will be put to forced labor...Whoever is slothful will not roast his
game, but the diligent man will get precious wealth. (Proverbs 12:24, 26)
It is fitting that the diligent should benefit. Therefore,
we must not allow anyone to shame us because of the benefits we have received
through the righteous labors of our families. Besides, the family, not an
institution, has been commissioned to be responsible for the well-being of
their families:
·
If any believing woman has relatives who are
widows, let her care for them. Let the church not be burdened, so that it may
care for those who are truly widows. (1 Timothy 5:16)
Providing for our own family is an honorable undertaking in
the eyes of our Lord. It is even the best way to bless our neighbors.
Love must work its way out from the center of the family to
others. Instead, if the husband were to equally bless his neighbors with
his money and attentions, this would sow discord within his own family and eventually
create problems for his neighborhood. Instead, a happy and righteous family is
a blessing to its neighborhood.
Whenever the government assumes the role of the family,
tragedy follows. It is inevitable that financial entitlements and income
redistribution will undermine the foundation of the society – the family.
The Bible repeatedly claims that it is fitting that those
who work should benefit from their labors, while those who refuse to work
should bear the consequences:
·
For even when we were with you, we would give
you this command: If anyone is not willing to work, let him not eat. (2
Thessalonians 3:10)
There are no Biblical mandates for income redistribution.
Instead, such programs are antithetical to the Bible. To reward laziness
creates more laziness and undermines initiative:
·
Now we command you, brothers, in the name of our
Lord Jesus Christ, that you keep away from any brother who is walking in
idleness and not in accord with the tradition that you received from us. (2
Thessalonians 3:6)
We should not reward laziness but praise righteous motivation.
Instead of making outcomes equal, Jesus was ready to increase the disparity:
·
“For to everyone who has will more be given, and
he will have an abundance. But from the one who has not, even what he has will
be taken away.” (Matthew 25:29)
Jesus found no problem that some would be left with nothing,
while others would have everything:
·
“The Son of Man will send his angels, and they
will gather out of his kingdom all causes of sin and all law-breakers, and
throw them into the fiery furnace. In that place there will be weeping and
gnashing of teeth. Then the righteous will shine like the sun in the kingdom of
their Father. He who has ears, let him hear." (Matthew 13:41-43)
Jesus' teachings were based on those of the OT, where we
find that God had often blessed His servants with riches, as He had done with
Abraham and Job. Evidently, there is nothing immoral about having wealth, but
rather the selfish love of wealth.
Nor is wealth to be envied. I was raised in a family were we
never wanted for anything. Yet, I was seriously depressed and dysfunctional for
decades. (I later learned that the “oppressors,” now regarded as the whites,
have a suicide rate almost three times that of blacks, the “oppressed.”).
However, as Christians we know that everything we possess is
a gift from God (James 1:17), even our labors. This is why we give thanks for
our food. Therefore, we have a duty to share the gifts of God:
·
“If among you, one of your brothers should
become poor, in any of your towns within your land that the LORD your God is
giving you, you shall not harden your heart or shut your hand against your poor
brother, but you shall open your hand to him and lend him sufficient for his
need, whatever it may be.” (Deuteronomy 15:7–8)
However, such giving – a loan – would not dis-empower. It is
given with discernment to someone who had become poor because of his
circumstances. Nor would it be regarded as an entitlement. Instead, he would
regard it as an act of love and would try to prove himself grateful through his
labors. It would build community rather than to destroy it by the entitlements
of an undiscerning, impersonal, condescending, and overbearing government.
Do not allow any to shame you because you and your family
have been enabled to enjoy the fruits of your labors. The alternative means the
end of all fruit, sharing, and the destitution of all. In 1776, Adam Smith
explained the economic success of Great Britain:
·
That security which the laws of Great Britain
give to every man that he shall enjoy the fruits of his own labour, is alone
sufficient to make any country flourish.… The natural effort of every
individual is to better his own condition, when suffered to exert itself with
freedom and security, is so powerful a principle, that it is alone, and without
any assistance, … capable of carrying on the society to wealth and prosperity.…
In Great Britain industry is perfectly secure; and though it is far from being
perfectly free, it is as free or freer than in any other part of Europe.
Free enterprise energizes; its elimination brings decay and
neediness to all, except the elites, the enforcers at the top. Ironically, the
Marxist nations have gone capitalistic to survive, while the West refuses to
learn the consistent lessons of history. However, the “Marxists” hypocritically
insist that this is only temporary.
No comments:
Post a Comment