Jesus and the welfare state
I had the following question (Paraphrased, the person asking this question took a hatchet to the English language when they asked it) posed to me today.
“How can the TEA Party supporters, most of whom claim to be Christian, be so full of hatred and uncharitable towards others? What happened to “Love thy neighbor”?
This led to the inevitable discussion of whether or not Jesus would have supported the welfare state. I won’t bore you with a long dissertation here, I will ask but a simple question.
Well… Maybe more than one question, but I promise you they will all be simple.
1) Do you remember the story about the Widow’s Mite?
The story is told twice, once in the Gospel according to Mark,
41 Jesus sat down opposite the place where the offerings were put and watched the crowd putting their money into the temple treasury. Many rich people threw in large amounts.
42 But a poor widow came and put in two very small copper coins, worth only a few cents.
43 Calling his disciples to him, Jesus said, “Truly I tell you, this poor widow has put more into the treasury than all the others.
44 They all gave out of their wealth; but she, out of her poverty, put in everything-all she had to live on.”
http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Mark+12%3A41-44&version=NIV
and then in the Gospel according to Luke.
1 As Jesus looked up, he saw the rich putting their gifts into the temple treasury.
2 He also saw a poor widow put in two very small copper coins.
3 “Truly I tell you,” he said, “this poor widow has put in more than all the others.
4 All these people gave their gifts out of their wealth; but she out of her poverty put in all she had to live on.”
http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Luke+21%3A1-4&version=NIV
What was the problem the woman was faced with?
She had to tithe, but had only two pennies. The tithe rate would have been 50% for her if she had to put something in. The rich could drop serious, and most importantly noticeable, bank into the collection plate and still have a lot to live on. But aside from the lesson in the evil that can be perpetrated through a tax code, there is a lesson to be learned about the welfare state in this scene.
The simple question I want to ask is this: Why didn’t Jesus “spread the wealth”?
If Jesus thought so highly of the widow woman, and so negatively about the rich men who were tithing great sums of money and making a big show of it, but not putting themselves into the same risk of hardship as the widow, why didn’t Jesus take from those rich and give to that poor?
He was, after all, God. He could have used his vast power to redistribute the wealth, couldn’t he?
Was it beyond his power to take all the money from all the rich hypocrites and give it to this one widow who demonstrated so much virtue? No, it was not beyond his power. Nor was it beyond his power to take all the wealth from all the rich men of the entire world and spread it evenly across the masses.
So why didn’t Jesus “spread the wealth”?
Here’s another simple question: Could it be because there is no virtue, no morality, no nobleness, no kindness, no generosity, … and no love … where there is no choice?
Latest posts by Mike McGowan (Posts)
- From one single father to the next - July 20, 2012
- Why isn’t anyone talking about the man - February 13, 2012
- Questions about the power of precedent - February 8, 2012
- Suffer not the Innocent to find relief - February 2, 2012
- Romney v. Newt: How the GOP and the conservative media killed the TEA Party - January 31, 2012
Print This Post
The argument, of course, would be that Jesus was concerned about “heavenly treasure” not “Earthly reward” — but that wouldn’t justify using the Bible in support of the welfare state. It’s an argument for poor people to suffer now and be rewarded in heaven.
It is possible, too, that Jesus was blind to the struggles of the poor. I mean, when you’re a guy who can pull cash out of a fish’s mouth to pay your taxes, how can you possibly empathize with someone who is having their property confiscated because they have no money to support the state?
A likely lesson beyond the virtue of voluntary action is to remember the historical context of the parable. Systematic oppression of women and an utter lack of economic opportunity were the conditions under which she gave her tithe. Hell, she wasn’t sacrificing at the altar of a worthy god… she was buying a goddamn lottery ticket – without hope or opportunity in this life, she was laying a bet on the afterlife.
What I find most interesting about the story was her reaction.
She was in a position where she had to give half of all she owned, and after putting in what was required, she just threw up her hands and said “Screw it, if they’re going to take this much, if they’re going to take so much that I cannot survive on the remainder, by golly they can just have it all!”
That’s some serious moxy. Not many people would be that openly rebellious against today’s institutions.
You both are so stupid! It’s obvious that you don’t read the bible nor have faith. What we call rational thinking is not like Gods thinking. So, go back to the beginning of this paragraph and read the first and second sentence again.
So your defense of the welfare state is 1) “You’re stoopid”, followed by 2) “God doesn’t think like you do”, and concluded with 3) “You’re still stoopid!”?
What an amazing defense.