Leaving Egypt Ministries, Obadiah D. Morris

After hearing a scripture twisted more than once now, it seems necessary to make some comments on it. Two different people—an average Christian I met and, even more surprisingly, an Orthodox Christian monk—have now said to me that the poor are a permanent problem, and they have used this to act as if we don’t really have any duties to the poor and can’t do much for them. 

They both cited the same scripture—completely out of context and not even the full sentence—to support their idea here that the poor pretty much can’t be helped: Jesus saying, “The poor you will always have with you” (Matthew 26:11). Evidently this is often abused to simply assume that the poor are a permanent problem, not even worth dealing with.

The former used it to defend his foolish dream of owning a Ferrari, when I told him that it is better to help the poor than to seek earthly riches; the latter cited it straight away when I asked if withdrawing into a monastery is in any sense forsaking a Christian duty to be charitable, serve the poor, and take care of our people. 

When Jesus was being anointed with an expensive oil at Bethany, just before His crucifixion, one of the disciples angrily exclaimed, “Why this waste? This perfume could have been sold at a high price, and the money given to the poor” (Matthew 26:8-9). Jesus’s response was to this complaint, reminding them that He was on the road to be crucified and they might want to focus their concerns on His passing bodily presence on earth. As the full verse says, “The poor you will always have with you, but you will not always have me” (Matthew 26:11). 

By leaving out this last part, the Ferrari guy was able to accuse me of being a “Judas” (assuming, I guess, to know which disciple said this) for questioning his heedless interest in sports cars over serving the poor, even though Jesus clearly did not mean that the poor are some permanent problem that we might as well forget about, but rather that they will be around longer than He will to deal with. 

Making excuses

But rather than to see this as an instruction to resume poor aid after Christ was crucified, men have turned this into an excuse to say that it’s basically worthless to help the poor because poverty is a permanent problem. And to support their neglect for looking after others, they are able to say, ‘Look, Jesus said the poor will always be with us.’ 

Imagine that, an “out” for serving the poor! Just like that, men can pretend that the poor—both their oppression by the State and our need to make up the gap with voluntary charity—aren’t a central theme of the scriptures and that the needy aren’t our responsibility! 

No more need to consider all the lessons on the poor in the scriptures. That aid to the poor is a way of serving the Lord. That helping the poor is proof that you know God. That Jesus instructs us to give to others. That we are to remember the poor all the time. That ignoring the poor is potentially a way of turning God’s ear away from your prayers. That blessings coming to those who serve the poor and curses coming on those who forsake the poor. That we ought to leave a portion of our production to the poor. That we are to pour ourselves out upon the poor. That we are to serve the poor without expecting anything in return. That oppressing the poor is against God. That forgetting the poor is one of the main sins that led to the destruction of society and God’s judgment. That the plunder of the poor is what causes God to rise up and act. That we are to be there for the poor in the face of a plunderous government that impoverishes everyone. That the whole problem of our society is one of state plunder of the poor. 

But by taking Jesus’s words to be a blanket criticism of the disciples who questioned His acceptance of expensive oil for anointing, these people have been able to act as if they were entirely wrong. The disciples were still right to regard the poor. As one gospel parallel adds, “whensoever ye will [have the poor with you still] ye may do them good” (Mark 14:7). It didn’t mean that there’s no use in helping the poor, but indeed that ample opportunity lies ahead. 

Understanding it in context

The Biblical hermeneutic that contextual analysis is important for understanding what is meant by certain scriptures really comes into play here in this lone citation that we will always have the poor with us, which we see easily leads to the wrong conclusion that we have no duty to the poor. In our case, the immediate context is Jesus comparing the continued existence of the poor with his soon-to-be resurrected body, suggesting that his disciples might temporarily focus on the latter. 

Once we see this—reading the rest of the sentence that these people take out of context—it is easy to see that Jesus is not telling us that the poor cannot or shouldn’t be helped or even that poverty is a permanent and unsolvable problem, but that charity can continue (not cease) in just a short time.

The Lord Jesus Christ was headed to the cross and thus a mighty fine case—an anointing of the King of kings—was, in this moment, given precedence over helping the poor. We are talking here about the son of God, not just any old man, headed to be crucified and prepared for burial (Matt 26:12). 

A better understanding of what Jesus is saying is thus that His time on earth was running out, and to forget about the poor only for a moment, for Christ is about to be killed. And to resume helping the poor tomorrow, after the goodbyes are said and anointings are given.

Jesus is not endorsing wealth seeking (unfortunately for Ferrari guy’s worldly dreaming) or forsaking the poor by accepting the oil and rebuking His disciples in this moment; this is a holy anointing of the pre-crucified Savior of mankind, and their complaint is, in that moment, out of place. 

The impending crucifixion thus helps us to understand easily what is going on here when Jesus is accepting expensive perfumes and the disciples are indignant. There is a time and place for everything, and to complain that the anointing oil being used on Jesus could have been used to serve the poor was not the time for raising such a concern. 

Commentaries

Though many people seem to miss this (or rather provide it as an excuse for their seeming unconcern for the poor), the Biblical commentators seem to have seen clearly that this is what was going on. As one commentary says, 

“Every duty should be done in its place, and the duty ‘then’ incumbent was that which Mary had performed. They would afterward have abundant occasion to show their regard for the poor” (Barnes’ Notes on the Bible, Matt 26:11).

Jesus didn’t mean to forget the poor because they never disappear; he meant your opportunities to serve the poor will persist much longer than his bodily presence on earth would. As another commentator could see, 

“Jesus was on the very threshold of death; they would always have opportunities of showing kindness to the poor, but by and by it would be no longer in their power to do a loving service to Him in person upon earth! Accordingly there is a moral propriety in making the special manifestation of love, which was possible only now, take precedence of that general one which was always possible” (Meyer’s New Testament Commentary, Matt 26:11)

Jesus wasn’t telling us to give up on the permanent problem of poor people. To the contrary, their continued existence (after His death) would provide many more opportunities for charitable acts toward them. 

There is never a case for ignoring the poor because we can cite—out of context to be sure—Jesus saying that the poor will always be with us, i.e., they will still be here tomorrow while He will (in bodily form) not be. We always have a duty to others even if these problems persist. 

“If among you, one of your brothers should become poor, in any of your towns within your land that the Lord your God is giving you, you shall not harden your heart or shut your hand against your poor brother, but you shall open your hand to him and lend him sufficient for his need, whatever it may be” (Deuteronomy 15:7-11).

Christian duty

Serving God is about serving your neighbor, the community, and those in need. There is really no excuse for professing Christians to be involved in worldly luxuries like sports cars, mansions, private jets, or yachts. These are the toys of the lost masses who don’t care about God’s kingdom. It is simply unchristian to fly past homeless people in your six-figure sports car and pretend that you have God on your side while convincing yourself that you may as well treat yourself rather than serve others, because Jesus (supposedly) said the poor never go away no matter what you do for them.

“If anyone has the world’s goods and sees his brother in need, yet closes his heart against him, how does God’s love abide in him? Little children, let us not love in word or talk but in deed and in truth” (1 John 3:17-18). 

Far from ignoring the poor, James even goes as far to say that charity is what true religion is really all about.

“Religion that is pure and undefiled before God the Father is this: to visit orphans and widows in their affliction, and to keep oneself unstained from the world” (James 1:27).

A worst-case scenario argument

I’m avoiding talking about the prospect of permanent poverty and the economics of it all here, although the great alleviation of poverty our world has underwent in the past centuries—in spite of the simultaneous problem of relative impoverishment caused by government intervention and not because of it—would seem to prove anyone wrong who would have said this hundreds of years ago. Any who would have thought there was no hope for the poor masses in, say, the 1820s, would have been wrong. Men are less poor than there were 200 years ago. 

It is true that there will always be a scarcity of resources and some who have more than others and that we can never act as if we will achieve some utopia where everyone’s every-need is met and there is no longer any need for production and exchange. But there is such a thing as economic progress and relatively less poverty than before, even if troubles remain. Even our world, where some degree of markets and private production have still been able to take off despite all the hurdles placed before them, shows that poverty doesn’t need to remain a problem for everyone forever; markets, even greatly hampered ones as ours, can prove to do great wonders in alleviating poverty and lifting up everyone in a society. 

Furthermore, much of the rich-poor divide in our statist society is artificial and the result of economic intervention that creates a caste society of haves and have-nots that it seeks to preserve through legal privileges. Doing away with these alone would do a great deal for anyone experiencing unnecessary poverty on the bottom. 

But let us assume, for sake of argument, that poverty is a permanent problem without solution, since our detractors have assumed this and used it as an excuse to act as if they have no obligations to this eternal and unchanging problem of poor people. Would even this assumption that the poor are a permanent feature of our society mean that we should do nothing for them? God forbid. If anything, a permanent problem of the poor gives us every more reason and chance to fulfill a Christian duty to serve those in need. As one commentary says, 

“The existence of the poor gives scope for the exercise of the graces of charity, benevolence, and self-denial; and such opportunities will never be wanting while the world lasts” (Pulpit Commentary). 

Has the man driving a Ferrari around, hoping that people are looking at him and thinking he’s special, denied himself? Or is he full of himself? Should he have gone ahead and bought the Ferrari because poverty can never be done away with? Or should he have made a better choice to do what he could to impact others?

As we see, even if the poor were always with us, this still by no means suggests that we should do nothing to help the needy. 

“For there will never cease to be poor in the land; that is why I am commanding you to open wide your hand to your brother and to the poor and needy in your land” (Deuteronomy 15:11).

Conclusion

It seems that turning your back on the poor under the thinking that the poor are always with us provides no excuse to forsake the Christian duty to charity and poor relief. Indeed, they are, so we should do what we can to help them. And to try and make a case for ignoring such duties on the words of Jesus seems even worse. That’s not even what the Lord meant. He meant they’ll still be here for us to help, not that there’s nothing we can do for them. 

All we can assume here is that this gross interpretation has been, for many, just an excuse to focus on their own lives and not really think about serving others. We get into messes like this precisely because men give up on their responsibilities to those around them and partake in the pleasures of Babylon. When God brings judgment on this country, He may well tell us, “Because ye sought sports cars instead of the love for your neighbor.”