There has been a very distinct trend in our community with regard to our social conscience about the world around us. When confronted with flood-ruined Bangladesh, or drought-ridden Somalia, the traditional response was firstly sorrow and sympathy, but then a most definite feeling that it was not for us to do anything practical to alleviate this suffering.”Let the potsherds of the earth strive with the potsherds of the earth”; “Let the dead bury their dead; but go thou and preach the Gospel” were verses oft quoted at business meetings (and the like) when these issues were raised. But many in our community now seem to have developed a genuine conscience about the world’s suffering, feeling that as God has reached out into our spiritually desperate lives, so we should be moved with compassion by the world’s sufferings. The following are purely personal responses to our dilemma (if it is that). In no way do I wish to discourage those who genuinely feel that as believers, we ought to respond.
If we are the seed of the woman, we will be in constant, aggressive conflict with the seed of the snake – the world, structured as it is around the “lusts” of human nature. In Christ we will have peace; but in the world we will have tribulation, even as Christ did. Our pity for the world must not lead us to love the world. For if we do that, it is impossible for us to love the Father (1 John 2:15). The ‘devil’ refers both to our own internal lusts and the world at large. The world is in our hearts, in this sense (Ecc.3:11). Thus “the world” is paralleled with “the lust thereof” (1 John 2:17). As there is a most pronounced conflict within our own beings between flesh and spirit, so there will be between us and the world.
Yet God loved the world – through giving Christ to enable their spiritual salvation.”God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son” (John 3:16) implies that the love of God for the world was channelled through the work of Christ, Note the import of the word “so”. There are just so many connections between the love of God and the death of Christ, that it is easy to overlook them. For example, “God loved us, and sent his Son to be the propitiation for our sins … hereby (‘in this’) we perceive the love of God, because he laid down his life for us” (1 John 4:10; 3:16). The love of God is “in Christ Jesus”. Likewise, the love of Christ is so often linked with death. Christ “loved us, and washed us from our sins” (Rev.1:5).
If we are to show the love of God to the world, this will primarily be in terms of our spiritual help towards them.Our response to God’s love in Christ will also be expressed by laying down our lives “for the brethren”. The next verse helps define this as material, practical help (1 John 3:16,17). There is a paradox within our community which deserves thought: as increasing numbers are baptized in poorer countries, far outstripping growth in the wealthier areas, the material needs of our brotherhood are increasing. As opportunities for witness open (e.g. with the demise of Communism), our missionary brethren are faced with colossal numbers of men and women who earnestly desire to be taught the Truth. But those very brethren (and sisters) are operating to tight budgets which are scarcely adequate. But – and in this lies the paradox – the level of support to the world’s charities is rocketing! Is this as it should be?
One often hears the surely unfounded criticism that Christadelphians are too ‘inward-looking’. It seems rather too simplistic to shrug this off by a binge of ‘giving to charity’. Such criticism must be balanced against the fact that God reveals Himself as ‘believer-centric’. Thus often Scripture speaks as if “all men” will be raised. Romans 2:6-9 speaks of “every man” being judged at the Second Coming. We know that literally, “all men” will not be raised. But the believers are “all things” to God and Christ. “All things” is a title of the church in Ephesians and Colossians. Christ said that he did not pray for the world (relevant for joining in ‘days of prayer’ for Somalia etc.?), but for “all mine” – “the men which thou gayest me out of the world”. The believers will “all” be raised. There are times, too, when Paul speaks as if “all” who are raised will be saved. Again, we know this is not true in the general sense. But once we appreciate that he saw “all” men as referring only to the faithful, problems disappear. In like manner, Romans 3:19 (AVm) defines “all the world” as those “subject to the judgment of God” – which is only the responsible. “The grace of God that bringeth salvation bath appeared to all men” (Tit.2:11) – certainly not to every human being who has ever lived; but to the “all men” of the new creation. The “all men” of our ‘world’ should therefore be limited to those who constitute God’s world, as here defined. The real solution to being ‘too inward-looking’ is to go out into the highways and byways, and compel men to come in to the covenants of promise.
Let us not be wilfully ignorant of the fact that ‘giving to charity’ has an element of appealing to the flesh in it. The ‘world’ is structured round the desires of the flesh, being comprised of people who are devoted to the selfishness of human nature. Whether nominally ‘Christian’ or not, those of the world do not have the Biblical attributes of “love, joy, peace” etc. – for these are fruits developed by the Word of Truth acting upon the mind of the believer. All those outside of Christ are active enemies of God, provoking His anger (Eph.2:3-15), labourers standing spiritually idle in the market place (Matt.20:6). For this reason, we should not necessarily feel ‘shamed’ by the example of their charity. The ‘world’ raises huge amounts of money to help its own people. For a good cause, some would even dare to die. But does this not exemplify the Lord’s words, when he spoke of how the world loves its own? None of these are reasons not to give to charities. But we must watch our motivation; for it is evident that we should have different motives in our giving from those of the fleshly ‘world’ around us.
The Old Covenant’s command to love one’s neighbour as oneself was in the context of life in Israel. One’s ‘neighbour’ referred to others belonging to the Covenant people, not to those of the ‘world’ of the surrounding nations. New Testament quotation of this command totally supports this view; under the New
Covenant, we must love those within the ecclesia as we love ourselves (Gal.5:14). 1 Corinthians 6:1 (RV) speaks of brethren within the ecclesia as “neighbours”. Again, this is not in itself proof that we should not give to (e.g.) famine relief. But it surely indicates that we are misguided in thinking that such action is fulfilling this command.
The parable of the Good Samaritan is another case of this. The Samaritan was “neighbour unto him that fell among thieves” (Luke 10:36) – i.e. the story shows how he fulfilled the command to love our neighbour. We have shown above that this command refers to love for those related to the Covenant. The Samaritan represented Christ. The mugged man was those he came to save – not the world generally, for they have not all accepted his healing. We must go and do likewise, in showing the love of Christ to the world. But we have earlier defined that love as being paramountly spiritual, and relating to the work of the cross. The parable was teaching the inability of the Law to save man spiritually, not materially.
The Samaritan “was moved with compassion” by the man’s (spiritual) state (Luke 10;33 RV). This is the same phrase as used concerning how Christ “was moved with compassion” by the multitudes. The connection with the Good Samaritan parable would invite us to read the Lord’s compassion as fundamentally spiritual. The reason for the miracles was to confirm the spoken Word. Are there any examples of Christ doing miracles for reasons unconnected with preaching? ‘Charitable’ giving ought to be associated with preaching, surely, if we are to follow the example of Christ’s compassion with the multitudes. Giving to famine relief, etc., would not seem to be relevant here. In practice, the work of providing welfare and conducting fresh preaching is done by the same brethren in the mission field.
We must be careful what we mean when we feel that God looks down upon the human condition and is ‘moved with compassion’ towards men, and therefore comes to their aid. Scripture abounds with examples of God doing this for His people. But not once do we read of God physically intervening to alleviate the distress of (e.g.) an earthquake which has affected unenlightened people. Indeed, should He do so, one is faced with the paradox of God bringing that ‘evil’ upon those people, and then being moved with compassion and partially reversing that ‘evil’. The Spirit teaches that in our time of dying, human beings are the same as animals. It is tragically sad that animals are tortured and exterminated. But is there any higher degree of tragedy, in God’s sight, in the suffering of unenlightened men? A lion will be more touched by the sufferings of its fellow lion, than it will be by the cries of a lion-mauled human being. Likewise, we are more touched by the sufferings of our fellow men than by those of other species. But is there any evidence that God sees human suffering differently from that of. the animal world? Is the manner of death, significant to God? These are honest questions.
The whole language of our redemption and deliverance in Christ is based upon Israel’s deliverance from Egypt. God was moved by the distress of those whom He was going to call into special relationship with Him; and therefore He was moved with compassion towards them. He did all that was possible to deliver them. But God was evidently not ‘moved’ in the same way by the sufferings of the Egyptians. The plagues brought about the equivalent devastation of the worst floods, earthquakes or volcanoes ever shown on T.V. The economy was ruined, disease rampant (think of the plagues of blood, lice and flies, not to mention the huge numbers of rotting carcasses). This was all consciously brought about by God.
And think of the death of the firstborn. ‘All somebody’s sons’, as the Charity Appeals often say, from sweet babies of happy young parents to the strapping young men who were the pride and joy of middle age. It does us no harm to think of the physical and emotional carnage which God wrought. And the Israelites hardly had a whip-round to help the poor old Egyptians who were in such a desperate crisis: in fact, God told them to do just the opposite. We must be fully aware that Israel’s position exactly typifies our own. We have left a world of Egypt, a world which is heading for a like destruction. Those ‘Egyptians’ who wish can decide now to escape – by associating themselves with God’s people. Indeed, the Mosaic Law stressed that any who showed any inclination to do this were to be treated with the utmost generosity; yet there seems to be no provision under the Law to encourage Israel to get involved in alleviating the problems of the surrounding nations.
To justify the tens of thousands of pounds which Christadelphians donate to charities, there must be some very evident arguments that I’m not taking into consideration. From an honest heart, I trust, I ask: What (and where) are they?
Fellowship with the Maker and Brethren