Deuteronomy 15:11: “For the poor shall never cease out of the land: therefore I command thee, saying, Thou shalt open thine hand wide unto thy brother, to thy poor, and to thy needy, in thy land.”
In America, “poor and oppressed” is a political code phrase. Every society has its poverty and oppression. For some, it is a demand of change to the “system” including government and corporate entities while for others it is a demand for change within individuals – both those who are poor as well as those who are comparatively wealthy to assist the less fortunate. A third entity, overcome by the needs (and therefore demands) simply capitulate to this world system and its anticipated injustices and look to Christ’s return and Millennial Kingdom to solve the challenge. What must the Christian’s attitude toward poverty and the poor be? Are we to seek social or personal solutions? Or, is poverty not an issue for believers at all? To determine the Biblical answer, we look to:
- Historical Context: Written in 1410 B.C., Moses authored the Book of Deuteronomy, which is in fact a collection of his sermons to Israel just before they crossed the Jordan. “These are the words which Moses spoke” (1:1). Someone else (Joshua, perhaps) may have written the last chapter. The book of Deuteronomy was given to remind them of God’s law and God’s power. The Israelites are commanded to remember four things: God’s faithfulness, God’s holiness, God’s blessings, and God’s warnings. Given the poor are specifically addressed within the repetition of the law (chapters 5 – 26), the condition and the treatment of the poor are of significant interest to God and therefore should be of significant interest to God’s people.
- Grammatical Usage: two different Hebrew words are used for “poor” – first is “’’ebyon” or lacking in a material sense such as lost ancestral land (Ex 23:11) or reverted to barrowing (Dt 15:7,9, 11), without clothing (Job 21:19), lacking food (Ps 132:15) or simply fallen on hard times (Job 30:25); the second appearance of “poor” in v. 11 is “ani” which is a reference to those who are materially poor but also weak, afflicted and humble. “Ani” is often coupled with “’ebyon” in that “ani” lives day to day and socially defenseless and subject to oppression. Consequently the two words combined express difficulty accompanying a lack of material possessions.
- Literal Application: “For those who lack material possessions and sustenance shall never cease out of the land: therefore I command thee, saying, Thou shalt open thine hand wide unto thy brother, to those in such a humbled, weakened and afflicted state, and to thy needy, in thy land.”
- Contextual Interpretation: This verse, the initial of many, affirms the fact that there will always exist those of a depleted material state who require assistance, a result of the fall when man was cursed with earning his living and the associated complications. However Isaiah refers to the needy as the firstborn (favored ones) of God (Is 25:4) which is why such provision for the poor and needy is commanded. God is set forth as the protector and deliverer of the afflicted, and He enjoins His people to be the same. So the one who complies is considered godly (Ez 18:17), while those who do not are considered ungodly (Job 24:9; Pr 14:21; Is 58:7). “Ani” can also describe the one afflicted physically as with the Exile (Is 51:21) or by sickness (Ps 88:15). Often physical affliction is tied to spiritual affliction (Ps 22:24). God’s people are frequently described as afflicted (Ps 68:10) but God does not forget them (Ps 9:18; 74:19), has pity on them (Is 49:13), saves them (Ps 34:6), delivers them (Ps 35:10) and bestows favors upon them (Ps 72:2, 4). The reason for their favor with God has to do with their humbleness in contrast to scoffers (Pr 3:34; James 4:6) and the haughty (Ps 18:27; 2 Sam 22:28). Such a one has a contrite spirit (Is 66:2), is God’s turtledove (Ps 74:19), trusts God (Ps 14:6) and is assured of deliverance (2 Sam 22:28).
- Scriptural Comparison: It is critical to understand both the Old Testament (“OT”) and New Testament (“NT”) perspectives on the poor:
- OT: Hebrew words for “poor” & “poverty” are extensive
and lends insight to the state of a person who lives in any society w/out
material resources:
- “Dal” or “poor,” appearing 50 times, is a social term referring to the lower class lacking material wealth. “Dallah” means “poorest”. Both refer to material lack (Ex. 23:3; 30:15; Lev. 14:21; Pro. 10:1:15, Jer. 5:4, Am 2:7, etc.); seldom spiritual poverty (2 Sa. 3:1; 13:3; Zep. 3:12);
- “Ani” emphasizes the pain of the financially oppressed poor, to afflict, socially powerless, painful submission (Ex 22:25; Lev. 19:10; Ps. 102);
- “Ebyon” connotes dire want in a material way (Ps 132:5). 23 of the 61 occurrences are in the Psalms referring to a righteous person suffering loss because of wicked enemies after which God is the sole source of help (Ex 23:6, 11; Dt. 15:4, 7, 9; Ps 37:14; 40:17; 109:31; Jer 2:34; Ez 16:49);
- “Rus” appearing 32 times, means deep poverty which keeps one in a lower class (1 Sa 18:23; 2 Sa 12:1, 3, 4; Ps 82:3; Pr. 10:4, 15; Ec 4:14, 5:8)
- Taken together, the poor are in need, lack basic resources, defenseless, likely to be treated unfairly judiciously (Dt 15:1-4), stripped of individual rights, respect as a person, position within society.
- To some poverty is an individual fault, others a social
injustice. In the OT:
- Proverbs has a strong emphasis upon individual responsibility (Pr 10:4; 20:13; 21:17; 23:21) where negative choices results in poverty;
- Proverbs also recognizes lack of personal control over poverty (Pr 13:23);
- The most common is the latter resulting in Zec 7:9-10 as remedy;
- Taken together, a clear relationship between poverty and oppression exists
- Social responsibility for the poor in the OT theocracy:
- God structured and governed society with emphasis upon the poor;
- Justice system: no perversion based upon social standing/partiality (Lv 19:15; Ex 23:3, 6);
- Capital preservation: land rented someone’s use, not permanently sold (Lev 25:23, 24);
- Voluntary servitude: indenture oneself, not a permanent sale of oneself (Dt 15:12-18; Lev 25:39-54);
- Provide necessities: two legal provisions for food included the 7th year furlough (Ex 23:10, 11) & annual gleaning (Lev 19:10; 23:22);
- Interest-free, forgivable loans (Lev 25:35-37) to become contributors;
- Organized collections: for aliens, fatherless and widows (Dt 14:28, 29)
- Personal responsibility for the poor in the OT theocracy:
- Crucial is a loving attitude (Dt 15:7-11);
- Job was one of the few who demonstrated compassion (Job 29:11-17; 30:25; 31:16-21);
- Due to Israel’s abdication of responsibility, God Himself takes the part of the dispossessed and (1) judges on behalf of the poor [Ps 82] & (2) in the future acts on their behalf [Is 11:4];
- Therefore, the righteous is concerned for the rights of the poor, the wicked does not understand such concern (Proverbs 29:7)
In the OT, God expects social structures and the fellowship to provide for the poor and needy as well as personal actions reflecting assistance and compassion.
- NT: Greek words for “poor” and “poverty” concern members
of the church:
- “penes/penichos” indicate those of lesser means unable to live off the land but working for a wage – most freemen fell into this category. These words appear only in Lk 21:2 & 2 Co 9:9;
- “Ptochos”, occurring 34 times, refers to beggarly status forced to depend upon others to live;
- It is striking to learn that during Jesus’ years of ministry He went from being a member of the poor “penes” class, earning His was as a carpenter, to the state of the truly “ptochos” or dependent upon others for support (2 Co 8:9; Mt 8:20; Lk 9:58);
- Similarly, in order to follow Him and to live a life of dependency, Christ’s disciples left employment (Mt 4:18-22; Mk 1:16-20; Lk 5:1-11, 27-29) and made the choice to trust in God’s care (Mt 6:25-33)
- The poor within the NT Church are contrasted not compared
to the OT:
- While the OT links social poverty with oppression and establishes social remedies, the NT does not. Israel was a state as well as faith fellowship, Christians are not a state but are a faith fellowship within a variety of societies and cultures. Christians may have influence over society but the Church is not envisioned as a state and therefore not commended to solve a state issue;
- Social class differences are assumed in the NT, but not recognized or considered within the fellowship (Jas 2:1-7; Gal 3:28; Rom 12:12, 13);
- Jesus recognized the poor and the causes of such varied, but did not issue an endorsement of poverty or encouraged nothing to be done about poverty (Jn 12:8; Mk 14:7);
- NT focuses upon the collective fellowship response to the poor (Ro 15:25-28; 1 Cor 16:1-4; 2 Co 8:1-7; Gal 2:10);
- NT focuses upon the individual believer response to poor in the fellowship (Jas 2:14-16; 1 Jn 3:16-18; 1 Ti 5:1-16);
- NT focuses upon collective/individual response to poor outside the fellowship with preference given to fellow believers (Ac 2:45; Ac 6:1-7; Mt 25:40 – Jesus’ emphasis was upon the Jewish people, but not precluding Gentiles);
- NT focuses upon meeting human need, not institutional support (2 Co 8-9);
- NT exhorts to do good to all people, but especially to believers (Gal 6:10)
- NT does not command redistribution of wealth within society
- NT emphasis is not assistance via institutions but deep personal caring and contact with the needy
- In the New Testament, prosperity is not proof of either piety (Luke 6:24) or carnality (Matthew 27:57), but a matter of calling, toward which the poor and the prosperous must have the right perspective (Ja 1:9-11)
- With either poverty or prosperity we must learn the secret of contentment (Philippians 4:12-13)
- Wealth is to be employed in ministry to others (I Timothy 6:17-19). Poverty does not prohibit a genuine desire to minister (cf. I Kings 17:8-16; Mark 12:41-44; II Corinthians 8:1-5), while prosperity provides greater opportunity and greater responsibility (I Timothy 6:17-19; cf. Matthew 13:12; Luke 12: 47-48)
- Poverty is not viewed as an intrinsic evil that must be abolished. It is not a pleasant state, but neither is it an intolerable one (cf. Philippians 4:12-13). Our Lord became poor so that we might be made rich (II Corinthians 8:9), and so also the apostle Paul experienced poverty (II Corinthians 6:4-5, etc.).
- Wealth, actual or desired, is evil when it receives an undue amount of our thought and concern (Matthew 6:24-34), when it is given excess importance (Luke 16:10-11, 14), when it is wrongfully gained (Luke 3:13-14), selfishly stored up (Matthew 6:19-21; Luke 12:13-21), or sinfully squandered (Luke l5:11ff.; James 5:5). It is evil if we find our security in it (Matthew 19:16-22; I Timothy 6:17). But poverty is likewise evil if it is the result of lack of consideration or responsibility (I Timothy 5:8) or lack of diligence (2 Thessalonians 3:6-15). Poverty, like prosperity, is neither good nor evil, except as we view it and use it.
- Conclusion: We have a wide range of responsibilities to the poor because there are a wide variety of reasons for poverty. To those who are willfully poor, that is, those who will not work, we have no obligation but to rebuke them. We must allow their hunger to prod them into activity. For those who are temporarily without funds, we should loan them money with the expectation of being paid back, but not with interest. Others who are completely helpless should be given what they need with no thought of repayment. And for some of those in Old Testament times, the faithful Israelites were not only to buy their goods, but purchase them as a servant (Leviticus 25:39ff.) which is to gainfully employ.
Two primary goals should be fixed in our mind regarding charity that really benefits the recipient: First, it should seek to preserve the dignity of the needy; and second, it should promote the diligence of the needy. In our time, we are sometimes encouraged to harvest the grain for the poor, thresh and grind it, bake it and deliver it hot and buttered. The dignity of the destitute demands that they be allowed to work for what they get if at all possible. Love must be exercised in “real knowledge and discernment” (Philippians 1:9). Sentimentality may make us feel good at the expense of the poor. Wisdom seeks to help the poor in such a way as to maintain their personal dignity and encourage continued diligence on their part to be released from their economic dependence on others. Those widows in the New Testament who were totally cared for by the church were a very small and select group, while the rest were cared for short term or by their families (I Timothy 5:3-16). Deadbeats deserve only discipline (2 Thessalonians 3