Equality: A Brief Theological Examination
If all men are the same at their birth, why, then, are they divided later into categories such as classes, races, etc.? After all, since God is no respecter of persons, they're all equal before God. While it is true that we are equal in God's sight, this doesn't mean that the subsequent claims made by liberals and Marxists are also true. We can just as accurately say that all men are not the same at their birth. The truth lies midway between the two propositions.
All men do indeed possess the same human nature—they all have bodies and souls. They have the same Creator and are made for the same eternal life. All are bound to observe the same commandments. All are children of the same Heavenly Father and all share in basic human dignity. Hence their common obligation to behave as rational beings and their common right to be treated as such. But here equality reaches its end. There are, as nature demonstrates, inequalities that are ontological.
In many respects men are not the same, and that, too, quite apart from any arbitrary distinctions created by society. Some are sound in health, others the opposite; some are rich, others poor; one man is learned, another unlearned; one clever, another dull. They differ in point of ethnicity, character, dispositions, IQ, and needs. Some are industrious, thrifty, temperate, and honest; others possess the opposite qualities. These facts of nature are hated by Socialists, Egalitarians, and others who want to reconstruct society. They want to oppress those who excel, and elevate those who do not. This is no more so than in the case of the wealthy. The distinction between rich and poor is in some measure due to the way in which men freely exercise their right of private ownership and of work ethic, some men being less industrious and squandering their money, others working hard and using it sparingly, but collective ownership will not mend matters as long as human nature is not radically changed, and Socialism lacks the power to make such changes. At best, Socialism and other totalitarian systems force men, against their will, to dishonestly abide by rules set for them, and to pay lip service to ideological fidelity under threat of persecution or death. So long as two men have the use and enjoyment of anything—no matter what economic system they live under — they will use and enjoy it differently. Furthermore, private ownership is a natural right and is implied in the moral code of Christianity. No Christian can advocate the abolition of private property and claim not to covet his neighbors goods. Reason itself teaches us that a man has a right to what he has honestly acquired, be it food, clothing, money or land. To take it away from him is to rob him of his most basic of rights and to violate multiple divine commandments. Socialism is therefore incompatible with Christianity, irrational, inorganic and an enemy of humanity.
Notwithstanding the distinctions between men, God does not judge men according to their talents or their wealth or their social position, but according to their deeds, since, "there is no partiality" with God (Col. 3:25). Sin is punished no less in the case of the rich and the educated than in the case of the poor and the illiterate, though it is no less true that, all things being equal, it is easier to serve God in the humbler walks of life than in the higher.