by email

in reader




          Private control, and therefore ownership, rather than State ownership of property, is supported by the story of King Ahab, who, spying Naboth's vine yard, approached him with the objective of buying it (I Kings 21:1‑29). "Give me thy vineyard, that I may have it for a garden of herbs, because it is near unto my house: and I will give thee for it a better vineyard than it; or, if it seem good to thee, I will give thee the worth of it in money" (v. 2). There is no attempt by Ahab to get out of paying a reasonable price for the land. His financial offer was more than fair, from a pure market perspective. Ahab simply wanted the land because it was near to his palace. Naboth's answer attracts our attention. "The LORD forbid it me, that I should give the inheritance of my fathers unto thee" (v. 3). In other words, Naboth's unwillingness to sell his land was based on the fact that the Lord had forbidden it. His land was an inheritance to him and his descendants and Naboth could not disinherit them.
          Some commentators might raise the question that this land, in Canaan, was the product of a special act of God in giving it to His chosen people, and that is true. But it is also true that the land obtainable today and all the other possessions we have are also the gift of God to us and to our descendants. For all possessions, including the Promised Land, are given on condition of covenantal obedience to God. There is no such thing as unconditional inheritance in Scripture, not now nor in God's past dealings with Israel. Neither is there any Biblical warrant for some other person —even the king — to assume the prerogatives of deciding when and how the land is to be distributed and used. In other words, Ahab had no rightful power or authority over Naboth's property unless Naboth voluntarily chose to give him such, which he did not.
- Ian Hodge, Baptized Inflation: A Critique of “Christian” Keynesianism 67-68 (1986), at www.garynorth/freebooks.com: HTML, DjVu.