2 Corinthians 8:13

For I say not this that others may be eased and ye distressed; but by equality: your abundance being a supply at this present time for their want, that their abundance also may become a supply for your want; that there may be equality.

The thought here is not that the gifts of the Corinthians would ease the burden of the Macedonians in raising the collection, but that those now able to give might, in time, be themselves the ones in need, and that giving should be done as a recognition of the uncertainties and vicissitudes of life. The fact that certain people NOW are not in need is no guarantee that their lack of need will be permanent.

Another thought in this was pointed out by Tasker:

In 2 Corinthians 8:13, Paul points out the absurdity of almsgiving if giving to others means plunging the donors into "distress." Charity must not be used for the encouragement either of laziness or luxury.[21]

That there may be equality ... Deplorable indeed are the remarks of some who would make Paul by these words a champion of the savage "leveling" of all people, as advocated in the political philosophy which would enable some to live by the sweat of other people's faces. Paul's object here was the relief of want, not an artificial equalization of property. In Paul's philosophy, a man who would not work was to be denied the privilege of eating (2 Thessalonians 3:10). As Hughes said:

There is no justification for the presumption that a wealthier Christian, simply because he is a brother in Christ, should support an idle member of the church. Religious parasitism has no place in the New Testament .... The poor are commanded "with quietness to work, and to eat their own bread," inculcating on the poor the duty of self-support to the extent of their ability.[22]

At the same time, possessions may not be held by any Christian without regard to legitimate claims of those in want or distress. The great principles of Christ recognized the rights of property, but at the same time imposed upon its possessors the obligations of genuine liberality and sincere regards for the needs of others.

[21] R. V. G. Tasker, op. cit., p. 117.

[22] Philip E. Hughes, op. cit., p. 307.