Money and the Gospel: Lets Talk Honestly
Oct 29
I am going to make some points here that may not be popular and as usual that is fine. I usually write to get us thinking and wrestling and conversing, even if that conversing is a bit heated at times. This post will be of the same frame of mind. I am going to make some points here that will not be accepted but at least we can review them and see if they line up with scripture. I hope to be clear and concise as I am covering a tough subject matter over a blog. With that introduction…
Manipulating People is Not Godly
Lets start with manipulation. Most churches that I know attempt to manipulate people into giving. They use the scare tactic of Malachi 3:10 and a few other Old Testament scriptures. They give passionate pleas behind pulpits, have lists showing who gave the most, parade the top givers around, give special benefits to people who give the most (not necessarily in the light of the Widow and her mite) or they pass around “commitment cards” to assist in their manipulation. All of this is wrong and it is an infringement on Christian liberty. If you do this, please stop, if this is happening to you, tell your leaders they are wrong and that they should repent. If they don’t then they do not possess the discernment required to lead anybody anywhere. So that is that.
To Whom?
Here is where most people will disagree with me but we have to shoot it straight. Giving in the scriptures was always to people and was always in a funnel. We begin to see giving in the Church Age in Acts 4:32-37. The people began to hear the bold proclamation of the Gospel and it was so powerful that they began to sell what they had in order that there were no needy among them. For some odd reason it was the “testimony” of the resurrected Lord that motivated them to give. Not a three part series on giving, it doesn’t seem that people were told they were going to be cursed (only that they had been blessed) no commitment cards, no pledges, no giving teams, no trays being passed around, it was simply a work of divine grace that convinced that they should sell their possessions to give to their new found brothers and sisters in Christ.
Now this is even more weird because all of these individuals were Jews (or proselytes at the least) who understood Malachi 3:10, they knew about the law and what it taught, they understood about the tithe; however, under the law there were needy people among them. However, once the Gospel of Grace came, somehow they were motivated to sell their possessions (they held on to them under the law) and began to give to the needy. Wow!
So the first question is to who? My answer is to people. Jesus says “make friends with your money”. Now that doesn’t mean that you shouldn’t give to your local church, but I am saying there is no obligation for such a thing. Our giving is to be to the needy and “especially the household of faith”. There is nothing in scripture to indicate that there was a pattern of giving to the church leaders so that they can, in return, give it to others. There is nothing in scripture to indicate that local elders are to be the collector and decision makers of your money. The Spirit is to be the collector and decision making and if the Spirit tells you to give it to the elders then do it, but if He does not then the scriptures does not tell you, that you must either.
I also think that giving to people in the name of Christ (not some specific church group) gives Christ more glory and takes that glory away from your local church. We want Christians to be viewed at as general not organizations that are supposed to represent Christians. I do believe that this is much more difficult due to the fact we don’t get tax write-offs and we may be called upon to help this person again and it is much easier to send them to a “church” to get help than to call you directly.
How Much?
I won’t argue for giving a certain percentage or not. That is for you to decide, though I will tell you that you are not OBLIGATED to give a certain percentage. Paul really whips me on this one. I didn’t catch this until studying through Corinthians again a few months back. He says:
8 I say this not as a command, but to prove by the earnestness of others that your love also is genuine. 9 For you know the grace of our Lord Jesus Christ, that though he was rich, yet for your sake he became poor, so that you by his poverty might become rich.
That is scary. Instead of Paul running back to an obsolete covenant, he puts the foundation of the New Covenant (Christ) as the cornerstone of Christian generosity. Who can match that brothers or sisters? Who has become poor in order for others to become rich? No one but Christ. Even the most philanthropic centered person to ever live has not accomplished this. Let me explain a little more.
Philippians 2 begins to talk about what exactly Jesus gave up. First He gave up part of His deistic attributes to clothe Himself in humanity. He then became a servant of man, He then assumed the role as a criminal (He is exchanged for a real criminal when the Jews asked that He be crucified), He then dies the most embarrassing death possible. He assumed 100% poverty in order for us to become rich in Him. This is matchless and this is what Paul uses as the standard in 2 Corinthians 8:8-15.
This is the same Gospel that the believers in Acts 4:32 hear, and Paul who must have heard about it, does not run to rules or regulations, He sets before them the Matchless Christ. He must have said “if this won’t motivate them, nothing will”. We however, don’t follow in Paul’s footsteps, nor the footsteps of the other Apostles. The refused to use the law to exhort the believers to give, we use it as a tool, even a manipulative rabbit in the hat when reserves get to low.
Investing and the Christian
Out of all the books I have read on “Christian stewardship”. I have yet to see a NT foundation presented on investing. All of the scriptures are borrowed from the OT, mostly in Proverbs. All of the books say you should invest for your children, your retirement, your future, store up for a rainy day….. Now I will tell you this. The NT evidence is overwhelming on its position. Jesus says “don’t store up treasures on earth”. Now what I am not saying is that you shouldn’t invest or that you can’t invest because it is some type of sin. Not at all. What I am saying though is that the believers in the New Testament seemed to have the perspective (maybe they got this from the Apostles) that Christ was returning soon and they seemed to live in a relationship with their money that reflected this. There seems to be little no concern for retirement, leaving wealth for their children, little about investment portfolios, they seem to hold it all with lose hands and were challenged by the Apostles to ALWAYS meet a seen need. I know churches that tell you to give, but then keep certain reserve levels and say they can’t help people. Is this a decision they should make? I don’t know, but I tell you what, the evidence in the New Testament seems to be to the contrary. Again invest if you like, but don’t attempt to make a biblical case for this because the scriptures won’t agree with you.
Sum Total
I am not bad mouthing any particular ministries at all. Nor am I being condemning towards churches, I am only saying that we have to be exegetically faithful, especially when we call other Christians to a specific standard. I am not encouraging any Christians to give less or more, that is between them in and the Spirit. I am not even telling Christians to stop tithing. What I am doing is setting before you what the New Covenant scriptures teach about money. Its position seems to be obvious from a systematic perspective. Our love is to be displayed by our meeting of physical needs, Jesus is the epitome of this in His self divestiture of all that was rightfully His in order to redeem us. We are to entrust believers to the Spirit. Your giving can be to anywhere you decide and to anyone you like, actually the more biblical model seems to be that of meeting needs, not giving to Organizations in order from them to fulfill their corporate leadership’s “vision”.
I struggle with giving like Jesus gave. I enjoy some of my luxuries while other Christians across the globe have little to eat for the day if anything at all. I am praying that God will not make me a legalist about this but that also I will become sympathetic to these needs and won’t just turn a blind eye like I do with one of the uncomfortable commercials are staring at me. Whatever the case may be you have to become convinced and convicted by the Spirit. Manipulation is unacceptable and I don’t care who the bible teacher is. To whom and to where and how much is between you and the Lord but pray for His direction and He will not steer you wrong.
Thoughts?
Lionel,
Great topic; and I totally agree that the inspiration and high-water mark for giving is Jesus. We give because he gave. We aim to love as he has loved us. That’s the core message of giving in Christianity.
But this unfortunately way overstates: “There is nothing in scripture to indicate that there was a pattern of giving to the church leaders so that they can, in return, give it to others. There is nothing in scripture to indicate that local elders are to be the collector and decision makers of your money.” We have in Acts people selling homes and laying the money “at the apostles’ feet” for distribution to those who had need. And the Old testament had some of what was collected by the priests being available to the poor, if I recall. And Paul collects from some churches to give to others who were hit by famine. And Stephen and the other deacons are given the job of distributing food that is collected from the wider church (after some favoritism in that distribution along the jew-gentile divide).
But this is a great topic. Keep it up. Here’s a thought to add: Is “stewardship” the main concern of the NT regarding money? From what I can tell the NT’s main concern regarding money is what we might call addiction. What happens when you tell a bunch of addicts to “steward” the object of their affection?
T. Freeman,
There are two objections I want to make by sheer revelation.
1. How many times did Stephen and the ohter 6 divide food and how many times was money laid at the feet of the apostles? When you read the Epistles and the rest of Acts how many times do “leaders” of the local church collect money to meet the needs of other believers? Who does Paul admonish and call to duty in 2 Corinthians 8-9?
2. As it relates to priests (we are priests under the New Covenant) the law REQUIRED that they money (agriculture….) be brought to them so that they could store it and issue it because they were given charge over such case. There is no NT evidence that this role is to be assumed by church leaders today, but by all priests (the Church).
To your last question I think it works both ways. We are to use our resources to bless others and we are to not hold on to it to show our true affection for our Lord.
Good points, whats your thoughts?
Lionel,
Please understand, I’m not saying we don’t over-delegate this and every other form of Christian service to leaders/clergy. I believe very strongly that we do that to everyone’s loss! Nor am I saying that the instance in the OT is anything more than an example (not any binding ‘law’ on us). I am saying that your claim that there’s “nothing in scripture” where we see this pattern of collection and distribution by leaders (whether priests, apostles or deacons) is an overstatement. We see it happening in the OT, in Acts, and in the epistles, which, when combined, is quite a statement that it doesn’t seem to be an inherently evil or problematic practice, even if we need to also think about giving to others outside of this proverbial box, based on other NT examples.
As to frequency, in Acts such giving and distribution had to happen enough for there to be at least one instance of favoritism (it was likely several over time), then enough to warrant the appointment of a team to handle this ministry of “waiting on tables” as the apostles devoted themselves to other, ongoing forms of service. I see no reason to expect that Acts would record each collection and distribution. Rather, it appears most likely that the deacons were appointed to faithfully handle a job that was likely to be too time consuming, going forward, for the apostles. In any event, whatever the examples in the OT, Acts and the epistles are, they are not “nothing in the scriptures.”
Again, I’m the first to say we need to change how we handle and think about money in the church, mainly along the lines of Christ’s love and generousity which you described really well. But is there precedent in the scriptures for leaders to collect and distribute? Yes. Is there precedent for giving directly? Yes. Again, the focus of the NT concerning money isn’t whether we give to leaders or directly to others, but our tendency to trust it too much, become attached, and more loyal to it than to God.
T. Freeman,
I understand, I guess my position is it isn’t necessary, though you have the freedom to give there. But I agree about out mindset about finances.
Lionel,
I would add one thing to your post. Like you said, it isn’t wrong to give to church organizations. However, this kind of giving does not remove the person’s responsibility to give to those in need who God brings into their lives.
-Alan
Alan,
I agree. What usually happens is that people give what they can (or their percentage maybe even sacrificially) and then that leaves them with little to no money to do that type of giving. What do you think about that Sir?
Great post Woods!
The new believers in Acts 2 were Jews who went to Jerusalem for the Passover and happened to get caught up in the firestorm on the Holy Spirit. The apostles shared the gospel, they were “cut to the heart,” and as a result wanted to stay in Jerusalem to fellowship with the saints and learn from the apostles (this was the first church). So because the visiting Christians wanted to stay and cultivate their new faith, they were now homeless/jobless/asset-less, therefore the Jerusalem saints “sold their possessions and goods and gave to everyone as they had need.”
I said all that to say, they weren’t “needy” in terms of destitution. They were just starting new lives and their new “family” helped them get established. They left all they had established for the gospel………I just wanted to put that in its context in case someone stumbles upon the blog who is not familiar with Acts 2.
Javetta,
Thats half the story, but also there were those in poverty. There wasn’t just those who had relocated and left. Because many of them left (this is how the Gospel got to Rome and other places before an Apostle or Paul ever went there). Also there were widowed and orphans that this money went to also (the establisment of the deacons). So there were both I am sure. We don’t know how many stayed or went back, any guess would be a huge assumption at best. So there were many who were destitute how many we don’t know.
Vetta,
Also as we see Acts develop one of the commandments from the Jerusalem council was to “remember the poor”. (Acts 15)
Are there any references for that information (I’m a Berean B-) )…I’ve only known them to be the dispersed Jews who stayed. I agree with your point on Acts 15…
The references would be the widows, the others would be the fact that Gospel had come to places where the Apostles had not yet visited (most likely Priscilla and Aquilla was of this bunch). That would be about it. But the fact that the scriptures doesn’t say “all the people stayed so the people sold their goods” could be one reference
There were also two times when believers outside of Jerusalem send money to help the believers in Jerusalem because of famine there. Plus, you have James 2:15-16 and 1 John 3:17. Apparently, refusing to help a brother or sister in need demonstrates a lack of faith and a lack of love for our neighbor and a lack of love for God.
Lionel,
I think its easier to give organizational and let others worry about what to do with that money instead of getting involved with people in order to determine their needs.
-Alan
By the way, Acts 2:45 specifically states to the early believers giving because of need:
And they were selling their possessions and belongings and distributing the proceeds to all, as any had need.
-Alan
AK (no pun intended),
I think Vetta was saying that need was because they had decided to stay there (Jerusalem) after they received the Gospel, not that they were destitute (poor people living in Jerusalem).
Alan,
Let me tell you two reasons it is easier.
1. I can claim organizations on my taxes thus lowering my tax liability thus I kill two birds with one stone (I meet needs and I get a tax benefit)
2. Once you get involved with people, they may keep asking and it is much easier to say no to an organization (I just delete the emails or shred the newsletter) but a person I have to say no to directly and that my friend is very difficult unless you are a descendent of the preconverted Scrooge.
Not judging anyone but it has been difficult for my wife and I to move in that direction, it is much easier to cut a check and get ready to receive a statement at year end.
Lionel,
You must also take in to consideration where the need is. For instance, you know of many poor Christians in different parts of the world. However, you may not have the means for distributing the help to them. This is where an organization such as a church may be of great benefit. For they may have the necessary contacts and means of distribution to make it all possible.
Jon,
While I know that “common wisdom” says that we can do more by pooling our money and letting others decide how best to spend it, I’m not convinced that its true anymore.
-Alan
Alan,
I would agree with you in certain cases but I still believe that it can be helpful depending on the situation and the organizations involved.
I agree with Alan. Giving to organizations is impersonal and robs us of our chance to share the gospel and develop relationships with others, therefore robbing us of the opportunity of discipling them if they should become believers. Whenever there’s a benefit for the giver in giving (tax, noteriety, etc), there is a possibility that the motive can become corrupted.
When we give directly, we give the Holy Spirit an opprtunity to take the gift further than we ever could have imagined.
If one wants to give to a certain group of people that they don’t have contact with, (out of love) they should do the necessary research to get in contact with them. In fact, they can call the folks at the organization and ask them to share THEIR contact information
.
I wonder, though, if having contact info given out everytime you give to an organization equates to perhaps being a bit legalistic…..
I’ve given before/like to fund ministries like STOREHOUSE Ministries for the work they do in Food Distribution or Wealthy Agencies who do extensive work with Shelters housing Abused Women/Children in areas around the world that I cannot reach …some with folks in the thousands, so I cannot contact each/every one and feel personal with them. But when I give to ministries in my area that are trustworthy—with the testimonies/seeing the fruit of one’s investment being demonstrated in lives changed–it’s something that causes me to rejoice.
The reality is that each will have to stand accountable to the Lord concerning whether or not they used their resources for HIS GLORY and needs were met. The avenue of how it’s done is not important I(IMHO), provided that it gets the resources get to where they’re to be. I’ve heard people say in differing circles saying “Your giving is worthless because you gave it to someone else to utilize rather than giving it out yourself” …but that is one argument spoken apart from the SCRIPTURES of stewardship and numerous examples—-from Moses (Exodus 35:7 ) to David ( 1 Chronicles 29:2 ) to Hezekiah’s/2 Chronicles 29:35 alongside Josiah/2 Chronicles 34:20 and Nehemiah Nehemiah 7 ) and others……others which people like TC Freeman mentioned earlier (and I do agree with his perspective).
The more intriguing example of giving to others for the sake of distribution:
If giving one’s resources to others who could distribute it to others was an issue, this is something I think will have to be addressed. For me, giving resources is like delivering food at a Food Pantry. I remember when I had to work at one for a season due to my Internship for college in Human Services named STOREHOUSE Ministries( http://www.noondayba.org/templates/System/details.asp?id=21988&PID=49164 )…and it was a blast. However, many times was there when food/resources were delivered to us by others expecting that their resources would reach the people we were entrusted to deliever to (and others in far other places they could not reach themselves—much like the Mission Field when one’s giving to support a ministry across the world via investing money in another ministry already doing outreach to them). Logically, did the fact that one’s resources were given to another mean that the gift had LESS MEANING—-much in the same way that a gift is delivered through the mail via the POST OFFICE and it being delivered to another in a far off state doesn’t make the intention behind your giving or the gift itself any less?
Heaven help the Good Samaratan in Luke 10:27–as when he saw a need, he met it personally in aiding the man best as he could….but then chose to DROP THE MAN OFF AT A HOTEL to be taken care of by another better able to do so at the time since there were more resources:
Granted, the Samaritan actually returned to the spot where he left the man at to give back payment. But IMHO, it’d be illogical to conclude that the brother was now condemned for leaving it up to another to do a job he wasn’t able to fufill himself–or thinking that the Lord was more concerned with the means in which the man was helped above simply HELPING THE MAN HOWEVER POSSIBLE….and I think we’re in danger when we focus moreso on the form above the substance of things, as that’s what the Pharisees did in not remembering that the Lord was more concerned with MERCY/JUSTICE than outward matters.
What matters is the HEART/Concern for meeting the needs however possible—and for those with gifts of ADMINISTRATION/Leadership and GIVING/Contributing to the needs of others, Acts 6:1-3 / Acts 6, Romans 12:1 /Romans 12:8/1 Corinthians 12:10 )
Great post by the way, Brother Lionel.
To me, I cannot help but think on the issue of how to the person on the streets, they’re often not as concerned with many in church on the way giving is done (or the format) as much as whether or not the people churches claim they desire to give to are actually involved in the conversation…..and being given something at all.
Truly, how often is it the case when discussions of giving come up in churches that those in need of funding (i.e. single mothers, homeless/looking for work, disabled, orphans, etc) actually get an opportunity to share their thoughts on how it is they think giving should be made?
I think there can be made a case for how churches may wish to consider going back to what Jesus mentioned when it came to men throwing banquets in their homes (Luke 14:15-23 )—and actually inviting the people in need to come at yo spot rather than giving to an organization/the people never seeing who you are…..hearing your testimony, your word of encouragement/psalm and hymn ( Ephesians 5:18-20 /Colossians 3:15-17 ) and putting a face behind the cash other than Benjamin Franklin.
Wondering how Jesus’ Words in Luke 14:1-14 would apply in our times today, within the context of supplying/giving….