The Local Church and Benevolence-Part 2 by David Smitherman
Reprinted from the November, 1998 on-line edition of The Expository Files (http://www.geocities.com/~expository/)
1. They provided for the relief of Christians only. The context of every passage listed above necessarily leads to this conclusion. No passage even remotely suggests any other recipients. Context, if not specific words, force us to this conclusion. The consistent practice (i.e., the pattern) of New Testament churches was to restrict their collective benevolence to fellow-Christians.
"General" benevolence---i.e., providing for the physical needs of men and women who are not Christians---is not an "of Christ" activity. As a human being I have certain humanitarian obligations. I had these before I became a Christian and continue to have them after becoming a child of God. Consequently, there are numerous humanitarian organizations that exist that I can use in meeting those responsibilities. However, as a Christian I not only continue to have these humanitarian obligations, I take upon myself some new ones---obligations that are peculiar to my being a Christians (i.e., "of Christ") and churches which are "of Christ" are limited to providing for such responsibilities.
As there is a love peculiar to being a Christian (1 Jo. 3:8-14; 4:20-5:3), there is likewise a benevolence peculiar to being a Christian since benevolence springs from love (2 Cor. 8:8,24). And, if one can love another Christian in a special way without being against loving non-Christians, so one can restrict collective benevolence to Christians without being guilty of not loving and not being concerned about the benevolent needs of non-Christians.
2. They sent directly to where the need was: either to the individual(s) or the local congregation. There is no evidence of a "middle man" congregation. They never sent funds to a congregation that was not itself truly needy so that the receiving congregation could in turn sponsor some relief program.
3. The purpose of sending funds from one church to another was always for benevolent purposes, never for such "needs" as erecting a church building or preaching the gospel. Such "needs" hardly fall under the heading of the following words, all of which appear in the list of passages used as the basis for our study, and describing either what was sent or what necessitated the sending.
In Acts 6:1; 11:29; Rom. 15:31; 2 Cor. 8:4 and 9:1 the word "relief" (Grk. "diakonia") is used. Thayer says the word refers to "the relief of...want", p. 138
In 2 Cor. 8:14 and 9:12 we find the word "want" (Grk. "husterema") which means "need, poverty, want", Vine, p. 1208
In 1 Cor. 16:3 the word "bounty" (Grk. "charis") is "used of alms", Thayer, p. 666
Acts 24:17 uses the word "alms" (Grk., eleemosune) which means "mercy, pity, particularly in giving alms" Vine, 40.
Conclusion
Should individual Christians be concerned about and active in the relief of the physical needs of all men and women regardless of their relationship to Christ? Absolutely (Lk. 10:25-37). Nothing said in this study can be fairly used to make a contrary accusation.
Should churches of Christ be concerned about who they collectively provide for and the manner in which that is done and if there is a pattern in such matters should that pattern be respected? Certainly so. If we can ignore what seems to be a very clear pattern in regard to the benevolent work of local churches, we can ignore similar patterns that we see in regard to the type of music local churches provided for and the day upon which the Lord's supper was provided.
Let us respect God's pattern in this and all other matters and not run the risk of having our candlestick removed (Rev. 2:5) because of engaging in activities grounded in human, rather than Divine, wisdom.
Honest Study by Doy Moyer (http://focusmagazine.org/tdoy/)
Most people are familiar with the parable generally referred to as the "good Samaritan" (Luke 10:30-36). We usually refer to it to show what true compassion is, and how we should be willing to respond to the needs of others. The parable certainly does show this. However, the parable, together with its context, teaches more than just how to be compassionate. It teaches us how to be honest in our Bible study.
A lawyer tested Jesus, asking, "Teacher, what shall I do to inherit eternal life?" (Luke 10:25). A lawyer, in the Scriptures, was one who was skilled in, and taught, the law of Moses. The man knew the answer to the question. Jesus responded with a question: "What is written in the law? What is your reading of it?" (vs. 26). Whenever we are searching for the truth, the only way to find it is by reading the Scriptures! Today, we might ask, "What does the Bible say?" What better question can be asked when one is searching for truth? Just open the Bible and see what it says.
The lawyer answered correctly by stating the foundation of God's will: Love God with all of your heart, soul, strength and mind, and your neighbor as yourself (vs. 27). Jesus responded, "You have answered rightly; do this and you will live" (vs. 28). Again, the man knew the answer. He quoted what the law said. And Jesus told him, "That's right. Now go and do it." This is the essence of doing God's will. Find out what God says in His word and do it. It's just that simple! There is no complicated process involved. You don't need any specialized clergy to tell you what God says. Just read the Bible and do what He says to do.
But here is where the lawyer began to have problems. He knew what God said, but if he did not know how to apply what was said, then he didn't need to do it. "But he, wanting to justify himself, said to Jesus, 'And who is my neighbor?'" (vs. 29). This is too much of a problem today. Instead of taking what God says and doing it, we want to find ways to justify not doing what He says. The trouble, in these cases, is not that we cannot understand the will of God. The trouble is that we do not want to bring our own will into submission to God's will. So we find a convenient way to justify our inaction.
It is in response to the lawyer's effort to justify himself that Jesus told the parable of the good Samaritan. Jesus' intention was not so much to issue a statement on compassion as it was to illustrate the lawyer's need to be honest with himself and simply do what God says. The parable illustrated the need for honesty when looking into the will of God.
After telling the parable, Jesus asked who the neighbor was. The man said, "He who showed mercy on him." To this Jesus responded, "Go and do likewise" (vs. 37). Again, Jesus was basically saying, "That's right. Now go and do it." He was showing that it is not all that difficult to apply God's will to our lives. We can understand it, and we can do it. It just takes diligence and honesty.
If we are not honest when we study the Bible, then we will not be able to properly do God's will. There have been studies where people refused to open the Bible to a particular verse (such as Acts 2:38). They knew what it said, but they simply did not want to face what it said. In order to justify not being baptized, many will come up with a hypothetical situation to justify their own disobedience. "What about the man who is on his way to be baptized and a rock falls on him and kills him?" This is supposed to negate the fact that they must be baptized. All such efforts are only efforts at self-justification. Wouldn't it be much easier to find out what the Bible teaches and just do it?
Simplified, Luke 10:25-37 teaches us that we need to look into the will of God, find out exactly what is said, and do just that. It takes honest Bible study, as well as honest self-examination (cf. 2 Cor. 13:5). When we know what the Bible says, we need to abandon any efforts at self-justification and submit ourselves completely to the will of God. As we study the Scriptures, we need to hear these words of Jesus: "do this and you will live."