Ethan R. Longhenry's Blog, page 46

The Christian and the Body

Western culture and society, and all those influenced by them, have a love-hate relationship with the body.

By all accounts and appearances Western culture loves the physical body and its desires. Everywhere we look it seems we find an alluring figure selling us everything from chewing gum to automobiles. People give full expression to the desires of the body in terms of consumption of food, drink, and drugs as well as sex. Billions of dollars are spent for makeup, surgeries, gym memberships, and health products in the drive to obtain the perfect body.

The drive for the “perfect body” manifests a strong hatred in Western culture for bodies as they are in reality. Many people deemed “beautiful” by society wear so much makeup that you would not recognize them without it. The images we see in advertisements are “Photoshopped”; even the people whose bodies are ostensibly on display do not really look that “good”! All of us, men and women alike, judge our bodies according to these impossible standards, and therefore all of our bodies fail miserably to reach the standard. We incessantly focus on our “flaws” and “imperfections”; precious few have a positive view of their body. Furthermore, no matter how well or poorly we treat our bodies, as we age, the body begins to decay and fail at many of its functions; we are not able to function the way we did before; we feel as if our bodies are letting us down. Western culture and society upholds ideal bodies; any body not near the ideal, on account of appearance, size, age, or disability, is disparaged, dishonored, and marginalized. “We” don’t want to see such things!

All Christians who live in Western culture or society are subject to this love-hate relationship with the body; this is proving increasingly true for Christians in other cultures and societies as well on account of the strong influence of Western media. How, then, should Christians navigate these cultural trends? How should Christians view and treat the body?

Christians do well to understand how both paganism and Greek philosophy, especially from Plato, lay underneath Western cultural assumptions and beliefs about the body, and they ought to reject both of them. The influence of Greek philosophy proves pernicious, even among those who profess to follow the Lord Jesus; it is manifest in quotes as the following: “You do not have a soul. You are a soul. You have a body.” This quote is often attributed to C.S. Lewis, but more likely comes from George MacDonald. It seems spiritual and thus well and good but it is really Gnosticism, a Christian form of Greek philosophy, repudiated by Scripture. Embodiment is essential for the human experience; we are not humans with bodies, but humans because we have bodies. The breath of life with which God inspired Adam was not human; when the breath of life was breathed into the body which God had made, Adam became human (Genesis 2:7). The Word of God was not human before He took on flesh and dwelt among us as Jesus of Nazareth; at that point He became human, the Son of Man, and in His resurrection maintains a transformed body and thus remains human (John 1:1, 14, Acts 7:55-56, Philippians 3:20-21, 1 Timothy 2:5). For good reason David praised YHWH for how wonderfully and fearfully he was made; and what did God make but his body (Psalm 139:13-16)?

Therefore God has made us as human beings with bodies; not only did He make humans as a category, but His hand was involved in the shaping of us as individuals. Yes, because of sin and death our bodies have been corrupted, and we likely all suffer from physical challenges, disabilities, and “imperfections” (cf. Romans 5:12-20, 8:19-24). And yet each of us can glorify God in our bodies (1 Corinthians 6:20). We can appreciate our differences without judgment or condemnation, recognizing that all have different abilities that can be used to serve one another (1 Corinthians 12:12-28, 1 Peter 4:10-11). We do not need to fear or hate our bodies because they do not reflect some impossible or unsustainable standard; yes, our bodies not only manifest imperfections but will decay and die, but our hope remains in the resurrection and transformation of these lowly physical bodies for eternity in Jesus, the redemption of the body (Romans 8:23-25, 1 Corinthians 15:20-58, Philippians 3:20-21). God did not give us bodies to oppress us or to cause us constant distress and grief; instead, being in the body is an essential aspect of being human, and Christians do well to reflect good stewardship of the bodies which God has given them (1 Timothy 4:8).

Nevertheless for good reason did Paul speak of sin in humans in terms of the flesh: so much of our difficulties with sin revolve around the satisfaction of bodily desires (Galatians 5:17-24; cf. 1 John 2:15-17). Too many in Western culture reflect the decadence consistent with paganism: eat, drink, and be merry, for tomorrow we die (1 Corinthians 15:32; cf. Romans 1:18-32). Excessive living is “in”: excessive exercise, excessive eating, excessive consumption of drugs or alcohol, and/or excessive expressions of sexuality fueled by pornography. God’s will for the Christian is sanctification, manifest according to 1 Thessalonians 4:3-7 by abstaining from sexually deviant behavior and possessing his or her “vessel,” or body, in sanctification and honor, and not in the passions of lust. Therefore Christians must maintain self-control and self-discipline in all things: avoiding all sexually deviant behavior, indeed, but also manifesting healthy and moderate behavior in terms of food, drink, and exercise.

In a culture of excess God calls the Christian to moderation and sobriety. The Christian ought not be excessively devoted to the body; neither should the Christian hate the body, ignore it, or act as if it is unnecessary. Christians do well to recognize that to be human is to be in the body, and we do well to act as good stewards of the bodies God has given us, establishing healthy disciplines in terms of food, drink, and exercise. But Christians also know the body will decay and die no matter how well they take care of their bodies, and their hope and trust must be in God in Christ for the resurrection when we will no longer experience suffering, pain, or decay, but enjoy eternity in transformed bodies. May we live so as to obtain the resurrection of life and be saved!

Ethan R. Longhenry

The post The Christian and the Body appeared first on de Verbo vitae.

Paul’s Letter to Titus

Paul maintained great confidence in Titus; he had given the younger evangelist quite the tall order. Cretans were notorious for lying and gluttony; Titus would do well to set all things in order and exhort them unto righteousness. To this end Paul wrote to Titus.

Paul’s letter to Titus is the seventeenth book in modern editions of the New Testament; along with 1 and 2 Timothy, Titus is considered one of the “pastoral letters,” featuring counsel for preachers in how to work among the people of God. Paul is listed as its author (Titus 1:1); it would seem as if he wrote the letter personally. Pauline authorship of Titus is strongly contested by scholars on the basis of style and content. Nevertheless Christians of the late second century believed it to be genuine, and differences in style and content can be easily explained in terms of Paul’s later age and different audience. The letter is undated. Paul exhorted Titus to meet him in Nicopolis for the winter (Titus 3:12), which could be in Epirus, Thrace, or Cilicia; regardless, we have no evidence from the book of Acts of Paul spending the winter in any of these areas, and thus it is believed that Titus was written after Paul’s first Roman imprisonment but before the second (ca. 61-64 CE). Paul wrote to Titus to give direction regarding appointing elders and exhorting the Cretans to righteousness.

In his epistolary greeting Paul spoke of himself as a servant of God who cannot lie and who promised eternal life through the message of His Son Jesus of whom Paul was an apostle charged to proclaim His commandments for the faith of the elect according to the knowledge of truth (Titus 1:1-4). Paul then explained the reason why he left Titus in Crete: to set in order that which was wanting and to appoint elders in every city; Paul then again set forth qualifications for the overseers, concluding with their ability to teach the healthy doctrines; in Crete many Jewish people, perhaps even Christians, were unruly, deceptive, and overthrowing houses by teaching doctrines they ought not for the sake of riches (Titus 1:5-11). Paul then characterized Cretans according to the testimony of Epimenides of Crete, considering them as liars, beasts, and gluttons; on account of this Titus must reprove them so they may be healthy in faith, no longer following Jewish myths and traditions (Titus 1:12-14; cf. Epimenides of Crete’s Cretica). Paul reminded Titus how all is pure to the pure, but to the defiled nothing is pure (Titus 1:15).

Paul encouraged Titus to teach healthy doctrines (Titus 2:1), providing specific exhortations for Christians in various circumstances: older men (Titus 2:2), older women (who themselves were to teach younger women; Titus 2:3-5), and younger men (Titus 2:6). Titus himself was to display in himself an example of good works and faithful teaching so as to cause shame on any who would speak in opposition (Titus 2:7-8). Paul provided further exhortation to Christian slaves to remain faithful to God and subject to their masters (Titus 2:9-10). God’s grace appeared, bringing salvation to everyone, instructing those who would hear to deny ungodliness and lust and live soberly, righteously, and godly while awaiting the return of God our Savior, Jesus Christ, who gave Himself for His people: such grounded Paul’s exhortations to Christians, and Titus was to proclaim them with all authority, allowing none to despise him (Titus 2:11-15).

Titus should also remind Christian to remain in subjection to rulers and authorities, obedient, ready to do good works, speaking evil of none, not contentious but gentle, meek to all (Titus 3:1-2). Christians are to live this way because they also were once disobedient, deceived, living in malice and envy, hated and hating in turn, but had received salvation through the kindness and love of God manifest through Jesus; this salvation is not based in works Christians did in righteousness but through God’s mercy in baptism and the Holy Spirit so that Christians could be justified by grace and inherit eternal life (Titus 3:3-7). Paul affirmed these things so that Titus could affirm them as well so that believers in Christ would maintain good works which prove profitable; nevertheless, contentions, strife, foolish questions, and speculations about the Law are vain and unprofitable (Titus 3:8-9). Anyone proving to be factious should be warned twice and then rejected or refused, since such a one proves self-condemned in their sins (Titus 3:10-11).

Paul concluded with specific directions for Titus: Paul would send Artemas or Tychichus to take his place, and he was to meet Paul in Nicopolis where he planned on wintering; Titus was to provide for whatever Zenas the lawyer and Apollos might need on their journey (Titus 3:12-13). Cretan Christians were to maintain good works and not be unfruitful (Titus 3:14). Having given final greetings, Paul ended his letter with a standard epistolary conclusion (Titus 3:5).

Paul’s letter to Titus provides Christians with a glimpse of the kind of instruction and exhortation the Apostles provided to those commissioned to continue to teach the Gospel of Christ after them. To this day many continue to teach things they ought not for monetary gain and obsess over speculative issues and myths; to this day those who proclaim the Gospel must insist on the healthy teachings about Jesus. Christians continue to need exhortation to remember from whence they have come and on what basis God has saved them so they may be fruitful with good works; Christians continue to need reminders about how to interact with one another, to avoid the lusts of the world, and to live righteously and soberly as they await the return of the Lord Jesus. To this day churches require things to be set in order and to maintain Scriptural leadership and organization with elders in local congregations. With a few detail changes an older preacher could write almost the same letter to a younger preacher today! We do well to take heed and uphold the healthy doctrines of God in Christ, encourage each other unto good works in Jesus, and await the return of the Lord Jesus!

Ethan R. Longhenry

The post Paul’s Letter to Titus appeared first on de Verbo vitae.

The Sinner’s Prayer

If you have much experience at all with evangelical Christianity, you have heard of or perhaps have even prayed the sinner’s prayer. The sinner’s prayer is purported to be a prayer to pray when a person comes to faith in Jesus for the first time or wishes to rededicate themselves to faith in Jesus as a response to God in Christ done by faith. While there is no one set edition of the sinner’s prayer, the version Billy Graham encouraged people to pray proves representative of the genre:

Dear Lord Jesus, I know that I am a sinner, and I ask for Your forgiveness. I believe You died for my sins and rose from the dead. I turn from my sins and invite You to come into my heart and life. I want to trust and follow You as my Lord and Savior. In Your Name, Amen.

You may be astonished to learn that no one in the New Testament prayed the sinner’s prayer; no Apostle exhorted people to pray such a prayer; the sinner’s prayer has no basis or ground in Scripture! There may be seventeenth century antecedents for the sinner’s prayer, and some editions may have been in use in the nineteenth century, but the prevalence of the sinner’s prayer has only been established in the past century. If one needs to pray the sinner’s prayer to demonstrate how they have been saved in Jesus, what will become of all of those who lived for 1900 years before the prayer became popular?

Most of its advocates admit that the sinner’s prayer, as such, is not found in the pages of Scripture. They often appeal to Romans 10:9-10 and Revelation 3:20 to justify the practice, suggesting the sinner’s prayer is the means by which one would confess with the mouth unto salvation and to open the door to the heart to allow Jesus to enter. Unfortunately, this reasoning seems to wish to justify an existing practice more than to make sense of what Paul and Jesus were addressing. The confession of which Paul spoke in Romans 10:9-10 is not of sin, which, while true, is not said to lead to salvation in the New Testament; instead, Paul referred to the confession of Jesus as the Christ, the Son of the Living God, a profession of that which one has now come to believe through the Gospel (cf. Matthew 16:16, 1 Timothy 6:12-13). Jesus did declare to the Laodiceans that He stood at the door and knock in Revelation 3:20, but no specific reference is made to the heart; instead, the metaphor is that of sharing a meal at a table, a demonstration of association. In context Jesus wanted to give the Laodiceans assurance: if they repented, Jesus would again dwell in their midst, and would consider them as part of His people. Jesus certainly continues to invite people to come and abide with and in Him, but the sinner’s prayer is nowhere considered the means by which this would transpire.

Furthermore, to what end does the sinner’s prayer exist? After all, those who tend to advocate for the sinner’s prayer also advocate for salvation by faith alone. Many will in fact stress how the sinner’s prayer itself does not provide salvation but is designed to be a response a person can make in order to have some kind of moment they can point to as the moment at which they became saved. When the sinner’s prayer is offered at type of “altar call” it also becomes a public demonstration of one’s faith. Thus the sinner’s prayer seems to exist because it provides a type of experience which demonstrates the change inherent in the point of conversion.

James the Lord’s brother warned us against the idea that anyone is justified by faith alone (James 2:24); nevertheless, Christians are saved by grace through faith, since none of us can earn salvation by any works we might do for merit (Romans 3:20, Ephesians 2:1-8). As Revelation 3:20 would suggest, Jesus stands at the door and knocks: He has done all that is necessary for us to be saved if we would only accept His salvation according to what He has set forth for us.

How did people respond to the Gospel message in the first century? We find a consistent pattern throughout the pages of Scripture. When people open to the Gospel message heard the declaration of Jesus’ life, death, resurrection, ascension, lordship, and imminent return, they recognized Jesus as Lord and Christ by first believing in Him, trusting Him as Lord, then confessing that He was the Christ, the Son of the Living God and repenting of sin and committing to follow Jesus as Lord, and then were baptized in the name of Christ for the forgiveness of their sins (Acts 2:38, 8:35-38, 16:31-33, etc.).

It is good to see that those who would advocate for faith only nevertheless recognize that there ought to be some action or means by which one’s conversion is memorialized, both for the believer him or herself and for others as well. And yet God anticipated such needs already and has established prescribed actions and behaviors in His Word to this end: confession and baptism. These represent ancient practices which have been maintained consistently for as long as Christianity has existed. On what basis should we prefer a twentieth century innovation over what was proclaimed by the Apostles in the name of Jesus?

The sinner’s prayer cannot provide salvation; it cannot attest to salvation; it has no standing or even purpose according to what God has made known in Christ through the Scriptures. Instead, the only “prayer” of the sinner is to believe in Jesus, confess Jesus before others, repent, and to be immersed in water in the name of the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit for the remission of his or her sin (Acts 2:38, Romans 6:3-7, 10:9-10). The prayer, or appeal, of the sinner is accomplished in the act of baptism, defined as an appeal to God for a cleansed conscience through the resurrection of Jesus, and for salvation in 1 Peter 3:21. May all seek to be saved in Christ by the means which He established from the beginning, believe, confess, repent, and be baptized, and thus put on Christ!

Ethan R. Longhenry

The post The Sinner’s Prayer appeared first on de Verbo vitae.

Interpreting the Bible: Basic Hermeneutics (1)

God expects us to seek to understand His will and purpose for our lives; He has revealed such things in His Word (John 8:32, 2 Timothy 3:14-17). We therefore do well to study the Word of God. The first part of studying represents the reading of the text and attempting to gain the basic understanding of what the passage means. While reading is extremely important, there is more to studying than just reading: we must attempt to understand the message of the author and establish how we are to apply it to our own lives. This is how we are able to handle the word of truth properly (2 Timothy 2:15)!

It is necessary, therefore, for us to not just read but also interpret the Scriptures; another term for the guidelines and process of interpretation is “hermeneutics”. The process of interpretation is very old (cf. Nehemiah 8:8), and we cannot imagine that we can interpret at our own whims according to our own desires (cf. 2 Timothy 4:3-5). There are many recognized guidelines for interpretation; we do well to explore some of them.

1. Interpret the text literally unless there is a compelling reason to do otherwise. The most basic way to understand any given text is to accept it at face value. John 11:35, “Jesus wept,” is a good example of this: when we read this statement, we have no reason to doubt that Jesus actually and physically cried tears. Likewise, in Genesis 1:1, when the text indicates that God created the heavens and the earth, we are not given any good reason to doubt that God truly and literally did so. When the text is consistent on a literal basis and makes sense in a literal way, we should interpret it thus literally.

We must proceed carefully, however, and recognize that some parts of the Bible are not always supposed to be interpreted literally. There are many times when God speaks to mankind in figurative language; this does not mean that what God is communicating is any less true, but that God is trying to help us understand His will in a different way. When Jesus speaks about a man gaining the whole world in Matthew 16:26, we recognize that it is not possible for a man to have the whole world literally, and we understand that Jesus is exaggerating, using hyperbole, for effect. Likewise, Jesus is not literally a grapevine in John 15:5: He uses a metaphor, speaking of Himself in terms of the grapevine, to help the disciples understand their relationship to Him. Likewise, when Jesus speaks in parables (e.g. Matthew 13:3-8), He is speaking in metaphor about spiritual truths. What God says is no less true simply because it is in figurative language: we just have to recognize it and interpret it properly!

While we must be on the watch for specific examples of figurative language, as shown above, we must also be sensitive to other ways that God establishes that He speaks more figuratively. Many times a particular context demonstrates that God speaks in more figurative language, such as in Daniel 7:1-14 or in Revelation 4:1-22:6. These texts indicate that Daniel and John respectively have seen visions (Daniel 7:1, Revelation 9:17); while we do not deny that they actually see the things they record, we are to understand that what they see represent something else. Likewise, if reading a given passage literally makes it seem absurd or would contradict another teaching of God in another place, we must be open to the possibility that God is speaking figuratively. When Jesus speaks in Matthew 12:29 about binding and plundering strong men, we recognize that to understand this as a literal command would be absurd and contradictory; likewise, when Isaiah condemns the practices of the Jews in Isaiah 1:10-18, we understand that God is not condemning the Temple worship that He established per se but the immorality the Jews were practicing outside of the Temple.

Examples of figurative language include:

Allegory (metaphor involving real persons/events): Which things contain an allegory: for these women are two covenants; one from mount Sinai, bearing children unto bondage, which is Hagar (Galatians 4:24; cf. Galatians 4:21-31).
Hyperbole (exaggeration): Behold, I was brought forth in iniquity; And in sin did my mother conceive me (Psalm 51:5).
Metaphor (understanding x in terms of y): Jesus said unto them, “I am the bread of life: he that cometh to me shall not hunger, and he that believeth on me shall never thirst” (John 6:35).
Metonymy (using a part to stand for whole): In like manner also [He took] the cup, after supper, saying, “This cup is the new covenant in my blood: this do, as often as ye drink it, in remembrance of me” (1 Corinthians 11:25).
Parable (true-to-life story in metaphor): “The kingdom of heaven is like unto a treasure hidden in the field; which a man found, and hid; and in his joy he goeth and selleth all that he hath, and buyeth that field” (Matthew 13:44).
Simile (comparison): As the hart panteth after the water brooks, so panteth my soul after thee, O God (Psalm 42:1).

The importance of proper discernment of literal and figurative language within the Scriptures can hardly be overstated; many have gone down the paths of error by interpreting literal truth figuratively and figurative truth literally. Let us strive to properly discern God’s Word, being workmen without need to be ashamed, properly handling God’s Word (2 Timothy 2:15)!

Ethan R. Longhenry

The post Interpreting the Bible: Basic Hermeneutics (1) appeared first on de Verbo vitae.

The Christian and Culture

We hear a lot about “culture” these days. People commend or decry various “cultural trends.” We recognize that certain people are significant “cultural influencers.” There seems to be no end of discussion regarding “cultural differences.” How should the Christian relate to culture?

Discussions of “culture” are fraught with many dangers. For starters, there is no one monolithic thing we can call “culture,” because culture exists at every level of society. We could speak of a culture of all humanity; each nation-state has its own form of culture; each ethnic group, speakers of a language, a particular race or class all have forms of culture; cultures change based on regional or local differences; religions have forms of culture; even families have their own culture. A given person will find him or herself relating to multiple different cultures at once, and few of these cultures exist in isolation. They all influence each other for good or ill.

Each person is not only a product of the cultural milieu in which he or she was born and raised but also is shaped by their posture and relationship with their own culture and other cultures which they experience. We all have different cultural markers we decide to privilege for various reasons. We strongly and actively identify according to some cultural markers while equally strongly condemning certain other markers; at the same time, we are just as much manifesting various cultural indicators which we may not even notice.

Christians tend to take a defensive posture against culture. Such is an understandable, and often necessary, position. Christians are not to be conformed to the world or to love the world (Romans 12:2, 1 John 2:15-17), and cultures are very much things of the world. Those shaping “greater culture” seek to marginalize “Christian subculture”; this trend is quite evident in the early twenty-first century, but it was there throughout the twentieth century as well, and in some way or another has existed ever since the days the Lord Jesus walked the earth. These days Christians warn against prevailing cultural trends regarding the justification of sexual immorality, consideration of the lives of children as if they are elective choices of the parents, the role and value of faith in society, as well as a host of other issues, and for good reason: our culture does not truly respect God, life, or healthy sexuality, but then again, few cultures have (Romans 1:18-32).

Nevertheless the Christian must remember that he or she cannot escape life in culture or participation in culture. Wherever there are humans there is culture; such is how humanity establishes its existence and hands down meaningful expressions of existence and identity. Even if someone attempted to set up an “anti-culture,” seeking to resist the establishment of any kind of cultural norm, the whole project would become, in and of itself, the “anti-culture” culture! As Christians we develop and maintain a culture within the church, both in the universal and in the local sense; Christian families develop their own culture as well. It always has been this way; even in the resurrection we will maintain some sort of culture as the people of God! Jesus was part of a culture; the Apostles were part of a culture; we cannot escape culture.

We cannot presume that any given culture, regardless of its scope, is fully righteous or fully depraved; every culture is a “mixed bag,” as is consistent with all things related to fallen humans made in the image of God (Genesis 1:26-27, Romans 5:12-21). In every culture, great or small, many of its values and principles are consistent with the revelations of God in Christ and in the Word; likewise, every culture enshrines certain attitudes or behaviors which are not consistent with godliness in the Lord Jesus.

This is, unfortunately, no less true in the church than it is in the world. Christians often manifest the pretense of the ideal, as if the church is perfect because the Lord has sanctified it, and therefore it represents all it should (Ephesians 5:22-33). It is true that the Lord has sanctified His church, and its constituent members are cleansed by the blood of Christ (cf. Titus 3:3-8); nevertheless, each local congregation is made up of people, and such people remain imperfect. A given local congregation is very likely reflecting, at any given moment, cultural attitudes intentionally postured against certain prevailing cultural norms while at the same time unconsciously maintaining and upholding other prevailing cultural norms. Ideally, faithful Christians would maintain a posture “for” all prevailing cultural norms that are good and honorable, and “against” those which are wrong, contrary to God’s purposes, and unhealthy (Romans 12:9, 17); and yet we all fall short of the ideal, and in certain respects we accept or are resigned to certain unhealthy cultural norms, and rail against certain cultural norms which we may find uncomfortable but actually may have much to commend them.

Christians do well to remain circumspect about themselves and culture at all levels. Christians must cling to what is good and abhor what is evil at every level of culture, including the cultures among themselves and in their families (Romans 12:9). Christians are easily tempted to condemn whatever they perceive is contrary to their interests; there may be times when that condemnation is right and just, but at other times such condemnation reflects inappropriate prejudice. Likewise, Christians may commend among themselves what they would condemn in others; many times Christians do not even seem conscious of the pervasive influence of culture, and all too easily associate the faith once delivered for all the saints with a particular cultural expression of that faith.

For good reason God has made one body in Christ from people of every nation, land, and culture (Romans 12:3-8, 1 Corinthians 12:12-28, Ephesians 2:11-18, 4:11-16): different perspectives can help open our eyes to our heretofore unrecognized implicit attitudes and biases. Christianity is a religion designed to transcend cultural differences: Christians can faithfully serve the Lord Jesus in any culture in any time or place, and must work out in faith according to the Scriptures what they are to honor within their cultures and what they must resist. God’s purposes in Christ demand that His people reflect the diversity of humanity (Ephesians 3:10-11); we must resist any and all attempts to homogenize the church, its constituents, and its culture. May we all strive to glorify the Lord Jesus in our specific cultural contexts, encourage others to the same end, and obtain the resurrection of life!

Ethan R. Longhenry

The post The Christian and Culture appeared first on de Verbo vitae.

Paul’s Second Letter to Timothy

Paul’s situation had turned dire. He was back in prison; the end of his life seemed to draw near. The time had come to recall Timothy for a final time. To this end he wrote 2 Timothy.

Paul’s second letter to Timothy is the sixteenth book in modern editions of the New Testament; along with 1 Timothy and Titus, 2 Timothy is considered one of the “pastoral letters,” featuring counsel for preachers in how to work among the people of God. Paul is listed as its author (2 Timothy 1:1); it would seem as if he wrote the letter personally. Pauline authorship of 2 Timothy is strongly contested by scholars on the basis of style and content. Nevertheless Christians of the late second century believed it to be genuine, and differences in style and content can be easily explained in terms of Paul’s later age and different audience. The letter is undated; Paul’s language in 2 Timothy provides a level of finality not seen in any other correspondence (2 Timothy 4:6-8), and therefore likely represents the chronologically latest piece of Pauline correspondence in the New Testament. For this reason most consider 2 Timothy to have been written soon before Paul’s execution by Nero (ca. 64-66 CE). Paul wrote to Timothy to urge him to come to Rome quickly, exhorting him to the continued faithful proclamation and instruction of the Gospel of Christ.

After a standard greeting (2 Timothy 1:1-2), Paul gave deep thanks to God for Timothy, wishing to see him again, remembering the faith in him which was first in his mother and grandmother, encouraging Timothy to not neglect God’s gifts but to not be ashamed of the testimony of God and suffer hardship since He obtained redemption for us in Christ according to the Gospel, as preached by Paul and for which Paul suffered (2 Timothy 1:3-14). Paul then reported regarding difficulties he encountered: those from Asia turned away from him, including Phygelus and Hermogenes, but Onesiphorus and his house proved faithful and refreshed him even in Rome (2 Timothy 1:15-18).

Paul continued with a series of exhortations for Timothy: be strengthened in Jesus’ grace, commit the teachings about Christ to faithful men who can instruct others, endure hardship (2 Timothy 2:1-3). Paul set forth some “parables” for Timothy regarding which the Lord would give understanding: the soldier does not get entangled with other pursuits, crowns are only given to those who compete by the rules, and the hardworking farmer partakes first of the fruit of the labor (2 Timothy 2:4-7). Above all Timothy must remember Jesus for whom Paul suffered and is imprisoned, enduring for the sake of the elect: those who die with Him will live with Him, those who endure will reign with Him, those who deny Him He will deny, but He remains faithful even if people prove faithless (2 Timothy 2:8-13). Paul then warned Timothy about those who warp and pervert the words of Jesus: Timothy must be diligent to handle the word of truth appropriately, unlike Hymenaeus and Philetus, who have taught the resurrection is past, a gangrenous doctrine, overthrowing the faith of some (2 Timothy 2:14-18). Yet God knows who are His, and all should strive to be vessels of honor, sanctified for the Master’s work (2 Timothy 2:19-21). Timothy would do well to shun youthful lusts, not be quarrelsome, but patient in correcting those in opposition, for perhaps the Lord will grant them repentance unto the knowledge of the truth (2 Timothy 2:22-26).

Paul continued his warnings with concerns about those who would arise in later times: people will be selfish and ungodly, ever learning but never coming to a knowledge of the truth, and are as Jannes and Jambres, the Egyptian magicians who resisted the truth (2 Timothy 3:1-9; cf. Exodus 7:11, 22). In contrast Timothy had followed the path Paul trod according to the fruit of the Spirit and despite persecution; all who would live as godly in Christ will experience persecution, for those in opposition will get worse, deceiving as they are deceived (2 Timothy 3:10-13; cf. Galatians 5:22-24). Instead Timothy must persevere in what he was taught, having become wise unto salvation through the holy writings; Scripture is inspired by God and profitable to equip the man of God for every good work (2 Timothy 3:14-17).

Paul then charged Timothy in the presence of God in Christ to preach the Gospel in and out of season, to rebuke and exhort with patience and teaching, for days would come when people would accrue teachers according to their desires and wander off into myths (2 Timothy 4:1-4). Timothy was to remain sober minded, doing the work of an evangelist, fulfilling his ministry, for Paul’s days were drawing to an end, and having fought the good fight of faith, he looked forward to receiving the wreath of righteousness from the Lord Jesus (2 Timothy 4:5-8).

Paul concluded his letter with news and final exhortations. Paul wanted Timothy to come as soon as he could, for Demas apostatized and went to Thessalonica while Crescens was in Galatia, Titus was in Dalmatia, and Tychicus was sent to Ephesus; Luke was with Paul, and Paul wanted Timothy to take Mark and bring him, for he was useful for ministry, along with the cloak and parchments left in Troas with Carpus (2 Timothy 4:9-13). Alexander the coppersmith had harmed Paul, and Timothy was to be aware of him as well; none stood by Paul during his defense save the Lord who strengthened Paul to proclaim the Gospel to the Gentiles; Jesus would deliver Paul from evil works and would save Paul (2 Timothy 4:14-18). Paul provided some final people whom Timothy was to greet, gave news about Erastus in Corinth and Trophimus left ill in Miletus, another encouragement to come, this time adding to come before winter, and those who greeted Timothy, concluding with a standard epistolary conclusion (2 Timothy 4:19-22).

No writing of Paul proves as intimate, raw, visceral, and pained as his second letter to Timothy. We feel his anguish and suffering in his circumstances yet can perceive his faith and conviction in Christ and confidence in his salvation. We do well to draw encouragement from Paul’s example and exhortations to Timothy; may we continue to proclaim the Gospel of Jesus the Christ, entrusting the message to faithful men to proclaim to others also, and maintain great confidence in Christ!

Ethan R. Longhenry

The post Paul’s Second Letter to Timothy appeared first on de Verbo vitae.

Encouragement

Not neglecting to meet together, as is the habit of some, but encouraging one another, and all the more as you see the Day drawing near (Hebrews 10:25 ESV).

One of the great responsibilities Christians are given by God to exercise toward one another is encouragement. Encouragement, in English, is the action of giving someone support, confidence, or hope (Merriam-Webster’s Dictionary). The Greek term translated “encouraging” in Hebrews 10:25 is parakaleo, deriving from the idea of calling a person to one’s side or to summon, and thus to speak to, beg, encourage, or comfort (cf. Thayer’s Lexicon). The Greek term therefore has a more expansive meaning than in English; for our purposes we focus on how as Christians we do well to give each other support, confidence, and hope, and receive support, confidence, in hope in turn.

Inherent in the term “encouragement” is “courage”; to give courage, that is, to strengthen. When we seek to give each other support, confidence, and hope, we are seeking to strengthen each other in our faith and life (Jude 1:3). Above all things we must look to God for strength and pray for strength (Ephesians 3:14-21, 1 Peter 5:10). Nevertheless God expects Christians to also look to each other for strength (Hebrews 10:25).

We must first come to grips with our need for strength, and thus for encouragement. As humans we tend to project strength and sufficiency; yet, in Christ, we do best to admit our weakness and our dependence on God and each other (2 Corinthians 12:9-10). While we individually strive to walk even as Jesus walked (1 John 2:6), we are reckoned collectively as the body of Christ (Romans 12:3-8, 1 Corinthians 12:12-28): different parts of that body have strengths where other parts have weaknesses, and thus each part is dependent on the functioning of each other part and the whole. The body of Christ, the church, works best when it builds itself up in love and works to strengthen all of its constituent parts (Ephesians 4:11-16). No Christian is too mature or already too strong so as to never need strengthening; no individual Christian has the right to say that he or she has no need of the church, the Body of Christ, and can go it alone. Anyone who would claim as much is easy prey for the Evil One (1 Peter 5:8)! God’s purpose in Christ is to reconcile all men to Himself to share in relational unity (John 17:20-23, Ephesians 2:11-18): therefore, we glorify God and accomplish His purposes when we work together in the church to build up and encourage and be built up and encouraged in turn (Ephesians 3:10-11).

A primary and consistent means by which we encourage is in the assembling ourselves together as Hebrews 10:25 expects. The church, in Greek, is the ekklesia, which means “the assembly”; what kind of assembly is there which does not assemble? To be part of the church, the ekklesia, is to therefore recognize the importance and value in assembling. When we assemble we participate in spiritual behaviors designed by God to provide support, confidence, and hope. On the first day of the week we assemble to partake of the Lord’s Supper, to commemorate Jesus’ death on the day of His resurrection, constantly reinforcing how Jesus’ death and resurrection provide standing for the believer before God and confidence in the resurrection to come (Acts 20:7, 1 Corinthians 11:23-33). Christians also assemble on the first day of the week to give to help jointly accomplish the work God has given the church to do in benevolence, evangelism, and edification (1 Corinthians 16:1-3). On the first day of the week, and perhaps also on other occasions, Christians do well to pray and sing together, to make their requests known before God and to speak to and teach one another in psalms, hymns, and spiritual songs (1 Corinthians 14:14-17, Ephesians 5:19, Colossians 3:16). Christians also do well to devote time to the Word of God, both in teaching and preaching, so as to be strengthened in understanding and purpose and exhorted to live as faithful servants of the Lord Jesus in the twenty-first century (1 Timothy 4:13, 2 Timothy 4:1-2). All such things are to be done to build up in the faith (1 Corinthians 14:26).

Encouragement, however, is not limited to the assembly. Christians do well to be hospitable toward one another, inviting one another into our homes, getting to know each other better so we can better bear one another’s burdens (Galatians 6:2, 1 Peter 4:9). Christians ought to develop robust and healthy relationships with fellow Christians which will give them opportunities to confess sin to others, to provide rebuke when necessary, and all in ways which can be taken positively on account of the relational capital in place (Galatians 6:1-3, James 5:16, 19-20). Functionally these relationships occur and are often developed through joint participation in accomplishing the work of God in discipleship and evangelism. At many other times and in many other ways Christians can find opportunities to speak a word, to come and be present, to jump in and help, and in many other ways give support, confidence, and hope to each other.

Nevertheless not all things which people might call “encouragement” prove truly encouraging. We have spoken of times in which it may prove necessary to rebuke a fellow Christian for sin and unrighteousness; at other times we might have to expose the error or wrong in the thoughts, feelings, and behaviors of fellow Christians. There are times for rebuke (cf. 2 Timothy 4:1-2); sometimes tearing down must take place so that what would be built up may rest on a suitable foundation (Matthew 7:24-27). Rebukes may be accepted well and changes might be made; we might have opportunity to build up after having torn down. But rebukes and tear-downs do not give support, confidence, or hope; they therefore do not truly encourage, but ideally prepare a person so that they can, after repentance, receive appropriate support, confidence, and hope yet again (2 Corinthians 2:5-11).

None of us are islands unto ourselves; none of us have sufficient internal strength to sustain us through the trials and travails of life. God, in Christ, stands ready to strengthen us if we seek Him and ask for strength in prayer. God has also established the church to provide both a venue for consistent encouragement in the assemblies as well as the people who are to build relationships so that they can provide encouragement for the need of the moment. We do well to honor and glorify God’s intentions for His people; may we seek to encourage each other as we are encouraged by God in Christ and in His church!

Ethan R. Longhenry

The post Encouragement appeared first on de Verbo vitae.

Bible Study Basics

Christians generally recognize they would do well to study their Bibles. They have been told over and over again by elders and preachers to do so; they perceive a need to be better acquainted with the message of Scripture. While some do not read because of a “heart problem,” not desiring, for whatever reason, to put the effort into Bible study, far more manifest a sincere desire to study their Bible and to understand God’s Word, but for whatever reason have some difficulties in understanding exactly how to go about studying the Bible. We thus do well to explore some basic principles of how we might effectively and profitably study the Scriptures.

What type of Bible study is beneficial for us at this time? All Bible study is not the same: there are different types of Bible study to suit different purposes in understanding. The three primary types of Bible study feature survey studies, textual studies, and topical studies.

Survey studies are useful when starting out or when trying to get a better understanding of the “big picture” of the Biblical story. In a survey study of the Bible, you get to see the whole Bible and the major themes contained therein. Survey studies, however, only scratch the surface of the text: the very broad scope of such a study, and the restraints of time, hinders any attempt to dig deeply into any given text. Having the “big picture” is very helpful, nevertheless, and there are many programs in which the student reads the Bible in one year to this end.

Textual study is the standard type of Bible study. In a textual study, a person selects a book of the Bible and begins to dig deeply into that text and try to understand everything going on in that text. While studying one book will not provide a broad picture of the entire Bible, such a textual study will fill in a part of that big picture. Just as one begins building a house by building a frame and then finishing each room in turn, it is profitable to first have an idea of the entire picture of the Bible and then fill in the details in good textual study (cf. 1 Corinthians 3:10-15).

Topical study works well when attempting to ascertain what God desires for the Christian to do in regards to some specific element of life. A topical study is a study of all the various Scriptures that speak of a given topic. One must always try to keep the various contexts of the different passages in mind while engaging in a topical study, lest one come to a wrong conclusion, but topical studies on the whole can be very beneficial.

Once we have determined what type of study in which we want to engage, we must then dig into the text and try to determine what the text is trying to communicate to us. The first goal in any Bible study is to understand the text in context: once the text is understood in its own right, we can then derive appropriate applications. If we are to understand the text, we are going to have to ask questions of the text and seek to find answers to them.

We must first seek to learn what we can about the author of the text. Yes, God is the ultimate author of the entire Bible (2 Timothy 3:16), but the Bible was written by men “moved by the Holy Spirit” to write (2 Peter 1:21). Different authors wrote to different people at different times for different reasons. To understand any given text, therefore, we must determine who was the author, about what time was he writing, when were the events of which he writes, to whom is he writing, and why he is writing. While we read the text, we must continue to ask ourselves these questions as they relate to the specific context. Does the audience change while the author writes? Why does the author present the material in the way he does? What is so special about a particular speech or story? We must answer these questions according to the text itself based on what is explicitly written and what we must infer by necessity.

After gaining an understanding of the author, audience, and specific purpose of what we are studying, we can then go on to read and ask questions of the material.

Who is involved? Who is speaking or acting? Who is hearing or receiving the action? Many times we can get easily confused because texts feature many different people simultaneously. If this is the case, we do well to take a piece of paper, and write down each name we find, and begin to write down what the text says about that person: who s/he is related to, what s/he does, etc. In this way we develop notes notes to help us sort out who is whom in the text.

When are the events occurring? This question is easier to answer if we have already determined when the author wrote and when the events of which he wrote occurred. Nevertheless, texts on occasion will give you a big picture and then go back to fill in detail (e.g. Genesis 1:1-2:24), will present a collection of sayings that are not dated and may not have been presented in exactly that order in time (e.g. Isaiah 1:1-39:8), or the text may present a series of events in proper chronological progression.

What is going on? If we cannot understand the basic message of the text, we cannot make much sense of anything else about the text! We must establish a basic understanding of what the text is trying to relate. When there is a speech, what is the message of that speech? When there are events chronicled, what happened in those events? When these basic questions are understood, we can move on and gain a deeper understanding of the text at hand.

How do various matters relate? Why are things said or done as they are? Once basic understanding of the text is achieved, we can then try to relate the material in the text to itself. Why does a person respond to another in the way he does? How have previous actions led to the current situation, and what will be the result of the actions now taken? Why are various things said and done as they are? Answering these questions will help greatly in understanding the meaning of a text.

These are just some of many concepts that must be taken into consideration when studying the Bible. They are not necessarily easy, and they may require frequent re-reading of the text. It is important for us to get as many of these answers as we can from our own study of the text and from the text itself. May we come to a better understanding of God’s purposes in Christ and be workmen without need to be ashamed (2 Timothy 2:15)!

Ethan R. Longhenry

The post Bible Study Basics appeared first on de Verbo vitae.

A Theology Regarding Climate Change

For some time now, scientists have been sounding the alarm regarding climate change. A large number of scientists and scientific institutions are making dire predictions about the future of mankind on account of the levels of carbon dioxide that human activity is pumping into the atmosphere.

Many conservative Christians, among others, strongly contest these claims. Part of their ideological differences derive from suspicion regarding science: many of the arguments that the scientists make involve claims regarding temperature fluctuations over millions of years, and most conservative Christians do not believe that the earth has been around that long. Furthermore, the same scientific establishment that includes many who actively deny God and which promotes Darwinist evolutionary theory is now promoting this idea of global warming.

Nevertheless, the majority of the difference comes on the basis of the interpretation of Scripture. Many such conservative Christians do not believe that human action can so dramatically impact God’s creation. Appeals are made to Genesis 8:22 that declares that as long as the earth exists there will be seasons, and, therefore, earth will not experience constant summer. Many also speak of 2 Peter 3:10-12, among other passages, to show that human activity will not destroy the earth, but that it will remain until Jesus returns.

It is true that scientists have come out with many radically apocalyptic pictures of the future, and that these pictures do contradict what the Scriptures have said regarding how the earth and mankind will end. Nevertheless, one does not have to accept such futuristic claims to recognize that human activity can cause significant environmental impact, and that it is very possible that the Western world’s consumptive nature is causing environmental degradation. I would like to present an alternative theology that is firmly Biblical and yet takes these possibilities seriously.

I confess without hesitation that I am not a scientist and do not claim to understand everything involved with the scientific arguments. I have no desire to defend Darwinist evolutionary theology, nor do I have any confidence in the idea that the earth is millions or billions of years old. I also cannot answer as to whether the current global warming trends are based only in natural processes or in both natural processes and human activity. I believe, however, that certain principles in Scripture need to be brought forth in terms of the discussion that are currently lacking.

There is a lot of misunderstanding regarding what climate change/global warming entails. From what I understand, scientists do not claim that global warming will always lead to hotter seasons or the eradication of seasons– instead, the cycle of nature becomes more extreme. Seasons exist, but they become more extreme. Summers get colder, hotter, wetter, or drier, based on where you live. The same is true for other seasons. Storms become more powerful. Flooding and drought become more severe and prolonged.

Do I believe that humans can end life as we know it? No, I do not. On the other hand, please note that while the Scriptures do say that the earth and seasons will remain, no comment is ever made about the level of comfort that will exist. There’s no statement in Scripture that says that humans cannot make life miserable for themselves on Earth based on their decisions.

In fact, there are plenty of Scriptures that prove the contrary: human beings, in fact, make life miserable on earth because of their sinful decisions!

Consider the connections between human sin and environmental degradation in Scripture.

And unto Adam [God] said, “Because thou hast hearkened unto the voice of thy wife, and hast eaten of the tree, of which I commanded thee, saying, ‘Thou shalt not eat of it:’ cursed is the ground for thy sake; in toil shalt thou eat of it all the days of thy life; thorns also and thistles shall it bring forth to thee; and thou shalt eat the herb of the field; in the sweat of thy face shalt thou eat bread, till thou return unto the ground; for out of it wast thou taken: for dust thou art, and unto dust shalt thou return” (Genesis 3:17-19).

Paul later explains that the creation was subjected to decay and futility (Romans 8:20-22), and it is hard to see how that subjection took place before Adam’s sin. As far as we can tell, all the elements of life that lead to decay and corruption are due to Adam’s sin. Earth has been continually scarred because of the sin of humanity!

And God saw the earth, and, behold, it was corrupt; for all flesh had corrupted their way upon the earth.

And God said unto Noah, “The end of all flesh is come before me; for the earth is filled with violence through them; and, behold, I will destroy them with the earth…And I, behold, I do bring the flood of waters upon the earth, to destroy all flesh, wherein is the breath of life, from under heaven; everything that is in the earth shall die” (Genesis 6:12-13, 17).

The Scriptures nowhere indicate that animals can sin. Therefore, when God speaks of “all flesh,” he refers to all of humanity. Notice that as part of the punishment against mankind, God also kills all the animals too. Humans sin, and the Earth suffers.

Perhaps the most stark demonstration of this is found in Hosea:

Hear the word of the LORD, ye children of Israel; for the LORD hath a controversy with the inhabitants of the land, because there is no truth, nor goodness, nor knowledge of God in the land. There is nought but swearing and breaking faith, and killing, and stealing, and committing adultery; they break out, and blood toucheth blood. Therefore shall the land mourn, and every one that dwelleth therein shall languish, with the beasts of the field and the birds of the heavens; yea, the fishes of the sea also shall be taken away (Hosea 4:1-3).

The people are sinful, and who suffers? The land, the sea, and all the creatures within them.

In the face of all this evidence, how can any declare so confidently that human activity cannot impact our planet in any significant way? According to the Bible’s own testimony, the very reason that there is corruption and decay on earth is mankind and its sin. When humans multiply in sin, the Earth suffers.

This, of course, leads to an important question: what is the sin for which the earth is suffering? To answer this question, we must consider an important principle in Scripture:

For they sow the wind, and they shall reap the whirlwind (Hosea 8:7).

Be not deceived; God is not mocked: for whatsoever a man soweth, that shall he also reap (Galatians 6:7).

We reap what we sow. If you sow the wind, you reap the whirlwind. In terms of the way we live on the earth and use its resources, there is a great lesson here for us.

There are many, even within “Christendom,” who believe that our dominion over the earth means that we have the ability to exploit it for all it is worth. There is no indication that such is the case, especially when we consider the virtues of the faith. Search for yourself in Galatians 5:22-24: do you find excess consumption there or self-control? Where do we get the impression, according to the ethical standards within the New Testament, that we have the obligation or even the right to live as excessive consumers of the world’s goods?

This is a difficult message for us who live in the West and enjoy the nice lifestyle that modern progress and technology have allowed. Nevertheless, the message must be said. Our lifestyles are not sustainable. There would need to be at least three earths to contain the resources necessary to provide the rest of the world with the type of lifestyle that we enjoy. As it is, we are hearing more and more warnings regarding peak oil, the finite amount of fossil fuel resources in general, overfishing, and plenty of other signs that the planet cannot sustain our rates of consumption. This does not even begin to take into account how we might be poisoning ourselves with the chemicals that are present within our water and food sources!

What happens if we turn to the popular adage, “what would Jesus do?” Jesus presents for us an even more uncomfortable truth: Jesus did not live like us. Instead, Jesus’ existence was much more like the way that a large number of people live in Central and South America, Africa, and Asia. Our excess of consumption is more like the great feasting and wastefulness of the Roman nobility!

If we sow this great excess of consumption of the world’s resources in an unsustainable way, what, do you imagine, will we reap? Can we not understand the current climate change as the beginning of our reaping what we have sown? God’s creation shows a wonderful balance, as the Preacher indicates in Ecclesiastes 1:5-7. If human beings pump tons of carbon dioxide into the atmosphere that was not originally there, disturbing the balance of the planet, on what basis do we believe that there will be no consequences?

The Bible indicates that humans will reap what they sow. The Bible indicates that the earth suffers because of man’s sin. By what Biblical principle do we justify our current lifestyles of such vast consumption? In what other arena of life can we live in excess and imbalance and yet expect no consequences for our actions?

Perhaps the changing of our climate is designed to be a warning sign for us, just as the threatened holocaust of locusts was a warning sign for Israel (Joel 1). Let us not be deceived into thinking that our current lifestyle of such excessive consumption is sustainable and not open for negotiation. Let us realize that while it is true that there will be seasons as long as the earth remains, and that the Lord will return before all flesh is destroyed, that the earth can and does suffer because of the transgressions of mankind, and God has indicated that we can make our lives miserable on the earth because of our choices. It is high time for us to consider our lifestyles, to find more sustainable ways to live, and develop self-discipline in the way we live!

Ethan R. Longhenry

The post A Theology Regarding Climate Change appeared first on de Verbo vitae.

Charity

It seems to be an almost daily occurrence, at least in my mailbox: another charity sending a request for financial support. Requests come in from children’s hospitals, cancer treatment centers, local rescue missions, non-governmental organizations providing food and medical support in other parts of the world, among others. Their appeals are designed to generate compassion and empathy: to give on occasion seems to lead to even more requests from that organization as well as new requests from many others.

Charity is primarily defined as “benevolent goodwill toward or love of humanity” (Merriam-Webster’s Dictionary). Charity originally spoke to a characteristic or disposition a person would have toward his fellow man; since that disposition would lead such a person to provide assistance for his fellow man in need, said assistance was also called “charity.”

In the King James Version of the Bible, “charity” was the primary term used to translate Greek agape, these days more often translated as “love.” “Charity.” in its original concept, captures well the expected fruit of love: if we truly have concern for our fellow man as God commands us to have, we will seek opportunities to provide real benefits for them (1 John 4:7-21). John illustrated the premise well in 1 John 3:16-17: we have seen what love is like in Jesus, and so how can we say that a person who has the world’s goods but closes his heart and has no compassion for his fellow man in need has the love of God in him? And so Christians are to love in deed and truth, not merely in word (1 John 3:18). We do well, therefore, to understand the love of God and love for man in terms of charity, for if we truly understand the way God has loved us, we will maintain a benevolent goodwill toward God and humanity.

God is love, and God is one in relational unity (John 17:20-23, 1 John 4:8). By its very nature love demands some sort of relationship; to express care and concern for the well-being of another person we must have some knowledge and experience of that person. Love, and by extension charity, therefore demands a level of proximity to the beloved or to the recipient of goodwill. Thus throughout the New Testament acts of love and charity are done with a view to strengthening relationships: God acted benevolently in Christ through His miracles, death, and resurrection to reconcile man to Him and to each other (Matthew 9:1-8, Romans 5:6-11, Ephesians 2:11-18). The Apostles commanded Christians to do good for all men, especially those in the household of faith, and to visit widows and orphans in their distress (Galatians 6:10, James 1:27). In Jesus’ famous description of the day of judgment all are judged on the basis on how they provided for the needs of the least of their brethren (Matthew 25:31-46).

It proves telling that the primary use of “charity” in modern English is to describe organizations established to provide material resources to people, for such charities exemplify a concerning trend in Western society. The logic of the Industrial Revolution has been extended to social concerns: specialization is rewarded, organization and efficiency prized, and in this way the expression of benevolent goodwill for mankind is dehumanized and industrialized. We are made to feel that we do best to write checks so that “the professionals” can take care of other people. Charity is thus seen as an organization, not a practice.

We must resist the idea that charity is an organization which should be run like a well-oiled machine. We ought to maintain a charitable disposition toward our fellow man and seek to work for his good. We have no right to reduce all of the commands God has given the Christian about charity to the provision of financial resources: man does not live by money alone. Doing good for others includes providing material resources but involves far more: spending time with people, advocating for those of lesser estate, providing encouragement and mental and emotional support for those in poverty and/or distress (Matthew 25:31-46, Galatians 6:10, James 1:27).

Humans are not machines, nor are humans akin to factory-made products. The human experience includes basic material needs yet also involves social and spiritual needs as well. Writing checks to benevolent organizations is good but cannot address the full spectrum of human need. The charity God expressed to us in Christ Jesus was designed to reconcile us back to Him (Romans 5:6-11); the charity we express to others is best manifest in not only taking care of physical needs but also in cultivating of relationship so as to address mental, emotional, and spiritual needs. Few, if any, believe that the expression of love is found only in the providing of basic material needs; charity which focuses on material needs to the detriment of encouragement and relational support is not worthy of the term. People in need do not need another system or more ways to feel humiliated, depersonalized, and unwanted; they need to receive human love and care, and organizations as systems do not show love and care.

Charities do important and beneficial work: none of us can provide all services or provide for the needs of all people everywhere. Individuals can, and should, give to well-run charities as part of the means by which they do good to all people (Galatians 6:10). But while the world has seen an explosion in charities and opportunities for charitable giving, people starve for want of charity. Billions are spent to provide for needs and yet people near and far hunger physically, emotionally, and spiritually. More humans live right now than ever before and yet true humanity seems lacking. This is all due, in part, to the depersonalization of charity, and the expectation that the majority of people can pay for a small minority to take care of the problem. We do well to remember that charity is not an organization but a disposition; money and food cannot replace care and encouragement (although encouragement cannot overcome a lack of money and food); attempting to be humanitarian without any regard for the desire for love, support, and strength which defines the essence of being human is no humanitarianism at all. May we all seek to express true charity, providing not only material support for those in need, but proving willing to “get our hands dirty” by providing for their mental, emotional, and spiritual needs as well!

Ethan R. Longhenry

The post Charity appeared first on de Verbo vitae.