Deuteronomy
15:11 sits intriguingly in the midst of the context of Deuteronomy
15, which seems to hint in verse four of a time when there would be no poor
among them.[i] It
is noteworthy how well the statement in verse 11 intersects with the statement
of Jesus in John
12:8.
First, as background, we understand that all
Israelites became property owners after the conquest of Canaan and division of
the land. Joshua divided the land of Canaan by lot to each of Israel’s twelve
tribes (e.g. Joshua
19:51; see Joshua 13—21),[ii]
as determined by God (Cf. Proverbs
16:33).
The first
part of Deuteronomy 15 mentions the seven-year release. God placed
this and other things within the legal system of the Law of Moses. The seven-year
release and the year of jubile,[iii]
in at least one of their effects, helped the poor and needy. These events recalibrated
the scale to recreate just weights and balances and at least temporary relief. Verse
5 of Deuteronomy 15 suggests faithful adherence to these principles
would fulfill that purpose.[iv]
Yet God knew Israel would disobey the law of God, and that the poor would never
cease out of the land. Verse 11 acknowledges that. It is a bare statement of
fact, and makes inexcusable the attempt to excuse oneself from helping the poor
and needy on prior grounds (verses 1-6). But for the nature of man, which we
always have with us, poverty might be eradicated. So, like our sin nature, the
poor we always have with us also.
[i] The Pulpit Commentary states, “This statement [v. 11] is not
inconsistent with that in ver. 4, for there it is the prevention of poverty by
not dealing harshly with the poor that is spoken of; here it is the continuance
of occasion for the relief of the poor that is referred to.” John Gill says, “There
would be always such objects to exercise their charity and beneficence towards,
John 12:8, which is no contradiction to Deuteronomy 15:4 for had they been
obedient to the laws of God, they would have been so blessed that there would
have been none; so the Targums; but he foresaw that they would not keep his
commands, and so this would be the case, and which he foretells that they might
expect it, and do their duty to them, as here directed…”
[ii]
Though the Levites did not have a political division of land, they received cities
and land within the divisions of the other tribes.
[iv] There is difference of
opinion whether the seven-year release meant a permanent release from the debt,
or a year-long release for relief and rest from the debt. In comparison, the
release of the land itself was only for the year, and was brought back into
cultivation the next year (Cf. Exodus
23:10-11). Regardless, I don’t think the seven-year release or the
year of jubile can be used to support the redistribution of wealth ideas that
some think should be by secular governments. For example, the jubile return of
the land was a fact known and accounted for in business dealings. The land
could not, according to the Law of Moses, be sold in perpetuity (Cf. Leviticus
25:23-24). Most proposed current ideas for redistribution of wealth
to alleviate “social injustice” would just create a different social injustice.
