Ok, this is a long one. Guess it actually qualifies as a musing....
--------------------------------------------------------------
Many disagreements in the church have arisen over the handling of the money which is collected in order to fulfill the work of the church. In all areas it is imperative that the church ensure that she acts with the authority of God (Colossians 3:17) and avoids any actions which are not authorized, or are condemned by God. This particular discussion, therefore, centers around whether the church has authorization to provide financial assistance to non-Christians who are in physical need. This discussion can be answered with three different approaches of examination, which all come to the same conclusion. The question is answered by: 1) examining all the evidence; 2) proper application of 1 Corinthians 16:1-4; and 3) considering the irrationality of alternative conclusions.
Examining All of the Evidence Answers the Question at Hand
At times Christians have attempted to explain the silence of the scriptures inappropriately. The most often used example of the silence of the scriptures seems to be that of instrumental music. Some mistakenly teach that Ephesians 5:19 and Colossians 3:16 teach that one cannot use instruments of music to worship God with. Actually, these passages teach that one can worship God by singing words. If there was a verse in the New Testament which discussed worshiping God in Christian worship by using a trumpet, this verse would not contradict Ephesians 5:19 and Colossians 3:16, but would instead add to the knowledge of what constitutes appropriate worship of God. The absence of such authorization is the reason instrumental music in Christian worship is not authorized, and therefore unrighteous. In studying this question, we must take care that we examine all of the evidence within the New Testament.
It is possible for two passages to teach about different aspects of a discussion, add two completely different parts which are not mentioned by each other, and the two passages to be in harmony instead of contradictory. This can be seen in the area of long term care of Christians. In Acts 6:1-7 we find that the church helped widows on a long term basis. In 1 Timothy 5:3-16 we find that this long term financial providing for widows was limited to those who were righteous, over 60, and displayed other stated qualities. These two passages show that Christian widows can be provided for by the church, but they do not provide any authorization for any males to be provided for by the church on a long term basis. In 1 Timothy 5:17-18 we learn that elders (inherently male) can be provided for financially by the church. In 1 Corinthians 9:4-18 we learn that preachers can be provided for financially on a long term basis by the church. The passages authorizing long term care for Christian widows (Acts 6:1-7; 1 Timothy 5:3-16) do not contradict the passages which authorize long term care of specific Christian men (1 Timothy 5:17-18; 1 Corinthians 9:4-18). Instead, the two passages simply add to what is known about long term financial support of Christians.
We then turn this important aspect of proper interpretation to the discussion of the church providing physical benevolence to non-Christians. In 1 Corinthians 16:1-4, Acts 4:34-35, and other passages we have examples of Christians providing for the physical needs of other Christians. As we have seen above, proper interpretation of these passages in themselves do not exclude the church from helping non-Christians if such is authorized elsewhere. A verse which authorized the church to help non-Christians would add to what we find in these passages, not contradict them.
In Galatians 6:10 we read, “As we have therefore opportunity, let us do good unto all men, especially unto them who are of the household of faith.” Some have argued that this verse must be discussing individuals helping non-Christians and stated that otherwise it would contradict 1 Corinthians 16:1-4 and other examples. This violates the principles of proper interpretation which show us that different passages which teach about different aspects of a discussion are in harmony, not contradictory. Therefore, one cannot properly conclude that Galatians 6:10 applies only to individuals based upon other passages. This could only be determined based upon the context of this individual verse since no passage explicitly condemns a church for providing financial assistance to a non-Christian. The book of Galatians is written “unto the churches of Galatia” (Galatians 1:1). Therefore, each verse within the book is written to congregations. There is nothing within the immediate context of Galatians 6:10 which emphasizes that the verse only applies to individuals. The overall context is a letter to congregations. Therefore, Galatians 6:10 shows that congregations are authorized and even commanded to take opportunities to help everyone who is in need, specifically including non-Christians.
Proper Application of 1 Corinthians 16:1-4 Answers the Question at Hand
In 1 Corinthians 16:1-4, God through Paul commanded the church at Corinth to collect funds on a weekly basis to provide an overall collection which would be sent to Jerusalem to help Christians who were in financial need. It appears from the Biblical context that this need arose due to a drought (Acts 11:28-30). Some have suggested that this passage authorizes collecting funds only for Christians who are in need. If this is true, however, the funds collected could only be used for Christians in need due to an emergency situation. Two possibilities therefore appear: 1) 1 Corinthians 16:1-4 provides authorization to collect funds for helping Christians in emergency need only OR 2) 1 Corinthians 16:1-4 provides authorization for a congregation to collect funds to perform the work of the church.
In multiple passages we learn that a preacher can be supported by a church or several churches (1 Corinthians 9:4-18, 2 Corinthians 11:7-9, Philippians 4:15-16). However, no passage explicitly directs how these funds are to be obtained by the church in order to pay the preacher for the work he does. Again, two possibilities appear. Either the method by which the church obtains the funds to pay the preacher is completely optional, i.e. a matter of expediency, or the method of obtaining funds is prescribed in 1 Corinthians 16:1-4, namely freewill offerings of Christians. Viewing how a preacher’s wages are obtained as a matter of expediency would ignore that we have no examples of the church obtaining funds in any way other than by freewill offering of Christians. Therefore, proper interpretation would force one to accept that the church obtains the funds to pay the preacher by freewill offering, and that such is authorized in 1 Corinthians 16:1-4. We have narrowed down, therefore, the proper application of 1 Corinthians 16:1-4, and determined that 1 Corinthians 16:1-4 provides authorization to collect funds to perform the work of the church.
In John 6, Jesus provided a company of over 5,000 people with a meal of bread and fish. After providing the meal, Jesus went to the mountain to pray, and later across the sea (John 6:1-21). The very next day this same multitude found Jesus on the other side of the sea, and again desired a meal. As they found Jesus, they again requested a meal such as they had been provided on the previous day. Jesus instead taught them to seek the spiritual meat he could provide (John 6:25-27). Within this context, Jesus teaches us that the reason He had provided a physical meal to those who were not disciples was to open the door for Him to teach them the truth. The matter of teaching truth, that is seeking and saving that which is lost, is the work of the church (Mark 16:15). The work of physical benevolence conducted by the church is utilized to enable evangelism to be conducted. Therefore, properly conducted physical benevolence of non-Christians by the church is authorized by 1 Corinthians 16:1-4 as it is a work of the church.
Rational Thinking Answers the Question at Hand
As God is not the author of confusion (1 Corinthians 14:33), it is appropriate to consider what is rational to help us determine if we have come to the proper conclusions in our interpretation of the Bible. Additionally, if our conclusion in one area is inconsistent with our conclusion in another area, one or both of our conclusions are in error! Therefore, consider the inconsistencies of stating that the church cannot provide benevolence aid to non-Christians.
James 1:27 defines pure religion, stating, “Pure religion and undefiled before God and the Father is this, To visit the fatherless and widows in their affliction, and to keep himself unspotted from the world.” If the church cannot provide financial assistance to non-Christians, orphans who have not yet reached the age of accountability cannot be provided for by the church. This would mean that pure religion could only be practiced by Christians, not the church as a whole. However, this conclusion is inconsistent with the application of other passages. As stated above, financial support of the preacher by a congregation is authorized in multiple places (1 Corinthians 9:4-18, 2 Corinthians 11:7-9, Philippians 4:15-16). Many preachers have children who have not yet reached the age of accountability. When the church pays the preacher a wage which is sufficient to provide for himself and his family, they have provided physical help to these non-Christians (the preacher’s children). The two conclusions are inconsistent as two children who are both sinless are given different treatment. One is helped by the church because his father is the preacher, while the other sinless child is told he cannot be helped by the church because he has no parents. Therefore, the teaching that non-Christians cannot be financially provided for by the church is inconsistent with the responsibility of the church to provide for the preacher.
One final inconsistency can be seen when a church refuses to help non-Christians from the funds collected for the work of the church. In Acts 4:34-35, Christians who wanted to help other Christians in need gave the funds to be used to the church, and distribution was made to Christians in need by the church instead of by individual Christians. While the reasons for this method are not explicitly stated, there are multiple reasons this was a wise approach. 1) It enabled the church to know who had been helped, and how much they had been helped. This eliminated the temptation for some to begin living off of Christians instead of providing for their family themselves. 2) It gave the glory for helping those in need to the church as a whole, instead of giving this to individuals. The alternative makes it possible for one or two to receive glory and be given an unrighteous place in the minds of Christians due to their ability and generosity. 3) It emphasized the unity of the body instead of producing individuals who controlled the church by ‘controlling the purse-strings.’ 4) It took the judgment of who should receive assistance and how much they should receive away from individuals and gave these decisions of judgment to a group of leaders (the apostles, and later elders). For these 4 reasons it was more wise for the assistance of Christians to be handled by the church instead of by individual Christians. One must decide if benevolent help of non-Christians is going to be done in a wise or unwise manner. The conclusion that benevolence to non-Christians can only be done by individuals is inconsistent with the wisdom that led the church to oversee distributions of funds to Christians in Acts 4.
Conclusion
This study is one of importance as it centers around the authority of the scriptures. The individual Christian and the church as a whole have an obligation to ensure that all we do is authorized by God. The study above has centered around showing that benevolent assistance to non-Christians by the church is authorized in Galatians 6:10. Furthermore, the proper application of 1 Corinthians 16:1-4 authorizes benevolent help by the church to non-Christians. Finally, to conclude that the church cannot provide benevolent help to non-Christians is inconsistent with other interpretations of scripture. Let us therefore move forward, using benevolence as Jesus taught – as a means for the church to open the door to teach the message of eternal life.
