Quote:
Originally Posted by ChristianTrader  Quote:
Originally Posted by victorbravo Deuteronomy 14: 28-29:
"At the end of three years thou shalt bring forth all the tithe of thine increase the same year, and shalt lay it up within thy gates:
And the Levite, (because he hath no part nor inheritance with thee,) and the stranger, and the fatherless, and the widow, which are within thy gates, shall come, and shall eat and be satisfied; that the LORD thy God may bless thee in all the work of thine hand which thou doest."
Note that this is a moral obligation, grounded in covenant, to put aside 10% of your income for welfare. It looks more like a civil function than a religious one.
Contrary to my free-market libertarian leanings, it looks pretty much like an income tax for the poor and the landless. | Well depends on how many tithes you think that there were in the OT. It there is just one, then I am not sure I would qualify it as an income tax. It would just be money out of regular required giving. Also if you want to call it a tax, then you would need to show where the magistrate is given power to "enforce" this tax.
CT |
I think we can agree that the commandment was a moral obligation directed toward the physical welfare of the poor and the Levites. The "base" of the levy was their increase. The rate was 10% for this particular fund. That's why I said it looked like an income tax.
But is enforcement an issue? Suppose we had a tax code that said everyone must pay 10% of their income, but nobody would be thrown in jail if they didn't. Instead, we will rely on social pressure for enforcement. Would it not still be a tax?