Stealing food

[Jazzy]

Do you think it's moral to steal food if you're starving? Why or why not?

 

[Messy]

Depends. Christians stole food for the Jews they hid during WWII and it would have been evil if they hadn't.

 

[tango]

Do you think it's moral to steal food if you're starving? Why or why not?

There's a provision in the OT for people to eat crops that aren't theirs if they are passing through a field. You can eat while passing through but can't harvest and carry away.

In an age where many people don't go anywhere near where crops are grown that option goes away. From a purely moral perspective, if you're only taking what you need to live it's harder to make a case against it than it is to make a case against stealing steaks and lobster tails and the like.

That said in OT times there wasn't a public welfare system, so it still isn't quite as clear cut.

Ultimately I'd be inclined to think that if there is no other way you can feed yourself, and you're not spending money on other non-essentials, and you've exhausted other avenues for help (food banks etc) I think I'd struggle to build a moral case for expecting someone to literally starve rather than taking what they need. If other avenues weren't exhausted I'd take a less forgiving view of it.

 

[Albion]

There's a provision in the OT for people to eat crops that aren't theirs if they are passing through a field. You can eat while passing through but can't harvest and carry away.

I believe that that was an established Hebrew policy, however, meaning that the event described in the New Testament doesn't represent any special teaching of Jesus.

 

[tango]

I believe that that was an established Hebrew policy, however, meaning that the event described in the New Testament doesn't represent any special teaching of Jesus.

I guess you mean when Jesus and the disciples were rubbing the heads and eating the grain? I wasn't thinking specifically of that, just the concept of a balance between being allowed to eat something from a field without taking any away with you. Not specifically a teaching of Jesus, just a Biblical concept.

The trouble is these days the chances are you'd find the masses would descend on a field like a swarm of locusts and then blame the greedy farmer for not bothering to plant anything the following year.

 

[Stravinsk]

There's a provision in the OT for people to eat crops that aren't theirs if they are passing through a field. You can eat while passing through but can't harvest and carry away.

In an age where many people don't go anywhere near where crops are grown that option goes away. From a purely moral perspective, if you're only taking what you need to live it's harder to make a case against it than it is to make a case against stealing steaks and lobster tails and the like.

That said in OT times there wasn't a public welfare system, so it still isn't quite as clear cut.

Ultimately I'd be inclined to think that if there is no other way you can feed yourself, and you're not spending money on other non-essentials, and you've exhausted other avenues for help (food banks etc) I think I'd struggle to build a moral case for expecting someone to literally starve rather than taking what they need. If other avenues weren't exhausted I'd take a less forgiving view of it.

The Tithe. I'm inclined to believe that when God says the people are "robbing Him"(Malachi 3:8) by not giving a tithe, that this is actually meant for the poor and needy. "I was hungry and you gave me food" (Matt 25:35).

 

[tango]

The Tithe. I'm inclined to believe that when God says the people are "robbing Him"(Malachi 3:8) by not giving a tithe, that this is actually meant for the poor and needy. "I was hungry and you gave me food" (Matt 25:35).

Sure, the original tithe was about a percentage of produce given to the priests who were not permitted to work.

If there were 12 tribes and 11 of them gave 10% of their produce to the last one, that means the priests had enough for themselves and enough to distribute.

Nowadays the tax burden represents far more than a tithe and much of it is wasted.

 

[Messy]

Sure, the original tithe was about a percentage of produce given to the priests who were not permitted to work.

If there were 12 tribes and 11 of them gave 10% of their produce to the last one, that means the priests had enough for themselves and enough to distribute.

Nowadays the tax burden represents far more than a tithe and much of it is wasted.

I once read that centuries ago in Holland the churches helped the poor with this 10 percent, but then the govt took over.

 

[tango]

I once read that centuries ago in Holland the churches helped the poor with this 10 percent, but then the govt took over.

I can believe it.

I think the biggest problem with the government programs is that they end up abandoning the people who are trying to get back on their feet while providing an easy option for people who find free money easier than working for it. And once you're into the system it can be punitive trying to get back out, as various forms of benefit reductions create the functional equivalent of very high tax burdens.