Too good to not repost

This is from National Review's The Corner

Keeping Brothers & Sisters [Jonah Goldberg]

From a reader:

For crying out loud: there IS no "Biblical injunction" to be one's brother's keeper. The phrase only occurs once, in the Old Testament, and was a one-line attempt by Cain to deflect God's rhetorical query as to the whereabouts of his (murdered) brother. God neither spoke it Himself nor replied to Cain's asking of it. He instead immediately turned to punishing Cain for the murder of his brother.

We as individuals are enjoined to have charity toward the poor and misfortunate, which in Biblical times were almost always the physically and mentally handicapped. Also, both the Old Testament and the New Testament address responsibility as to family members or church officers looking after widows and their minor children. However, even those calls to charity are never extended to able-bodied adult "brothers" (or sisters, for that matter).

Paul in 2 Thess 3:10-12 says, "10For even when we were with you, we gave you this rule: "If a man will not work, he shall not eat. 11We hear that some among you are idle. They are not busy; they are busybodies. 12Such people we command and urge in the Lord Jesus Christ to settle down and earn the bread they eat." (KJV)

Jesus in Mark 14:7 - "The poor you will always have with you, and you can help them any time you want. But you will not always have me." (NIV) (italics mine)

Update: From a reader:

Jonah,

Re: "Again, I’ll start by noting an incidental incoherence. If individualism is the way to go, where is the self-evident rightness in the biblical injunction to be our brother’s keeper?"

As a Christian myself, I find no incoherence between individualism and the injunction to be my brother's keeper. The key to the puzzle that Holbo finds so insoluble is simple: free will. WE are commanded to help our neighbor. We are NOT commanded to force some of our neighbors to help other neighbors.

The Charity commanded in the Bible (not compelled, you'll notice - God invented free will) blesses all sides of the transaction. The giver is blessed by God, and by the joy that comes from choosing to help someone. The receiver is blessed by, not just the gift, but the knowledge that it was freely given by someone who cared about them and their situation.

Forced "charity" destroys all parts of that equation, creating feelings of resentment on one side, and entitlement on the other. And there in the middle? A massive and overly intrusive government that gets to pick and choose the "Haves" and the "Should Haves" . That's not giving. That's just taking . And that has a Commandment all to itself.

Update II: The first emailer adds:

Just saw this up on the Corner site - wow, never expected that! One thing, though, and it's my bad - both quotes are NIV (I have KJV on the first one).Best wishes and thanks for all the great writing!

I especially like what the second writer has said. In essence what the government does by taking over the charitable function is turn the gold of charity into the lead of faceless bureaucracy. Not to mention the loss of efficiency in replacing a free-market system with centrally-planned one-size-fits-all solutions.