Choosing to be a Leader

Posted on September 12, 2023 by Bryan Hodge

“Some are born great, some achieve greatness, and some have greatness thrust upon them” (William Shakespeare, Twelfth Night Acts 2 Scene 5).  The meaning?  (1) Some men are born great.  They do not have to work for it.  The inherit their position in life (e.g. born into royalty).  (2) Some men become great through hard work.  They are known for what they accomplished (e.g. entrepreneur who successfully build a brand).  (3) Some become great due to circumstances.  They rise to the occasion.  They seize the moment (e.g. a heroic act which saves lives).  Even here, hard work may have prepared them for the occasion. 

Unless one is born into greatness, desire plays a role.  One must be willing to put in the hard work.  One must be willing to act on the occasion.

The church needs leaders.  It needs teachers and preachers.  It needs elders and deacons.  It needs song leaders and prayer warriors.  No one is born into these roles.  Desire is needed.  Paul wrote, “This is a faithful saying: If a man desires the position of a bishop, he desires a good work” (1 Timothy 3:1).  What would cause a man to desire to serve?  (1) Ego.  Some may want to serve due to pride.  This is not a proper reason.  Paul wrote of those who “preach Christ from selfish ambition (Philippians 1:15-16).  (2) Compulsion.  Some serve only because they feel forced by others to do so.  This is not a proper reason. Peter wrote that an elder should serve “not by compulsion but willingly” (1 Peter 5:2 NKJV); not under compulsion, but voluntarily” (NASB).  (3) Money.  Some serve only for the pay.  This is not a proper reason.  Peter wrote that an elder should serve “not for filthy lucre, but of a ready mind” (1 Peter 5:2 NKJV); “not for dishonest gain but eagerly” (NKJV); “not greedy for money, but eager to serve” (NIV).  (4) Love.  Some serve out of their love for God and their love and concern for men.  This is the proper reason for service.  Paul wrote to the brethren at Corinth, “For the love of Christ compels us” (2 Corinthians 5:14).  Again, “And I will very gladly spend and be spent for your souls” (2 Corinthians 12:15).  It is about being Christ-like.  Jesus was a servant (Matthew 20:28; John 13:14-15, 34-35).  J.J. Turner remarked, “I believe that the desire to be an elder-shepherd comes from being so intimately connected with the Chief Shepherd that one will want to be like Him” (J.J. Turner, Shepherds, Wake Up!  P. 49).  This is true for not only serving as a shepherd, but for all forms of service in the kingdom.

Posted in Elders and Deacons, leadership | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , | Leave a comment

Where Are You Leading? (Part 2)

Posted on September 5, 2023 by Bryan Hodge

2.  Examples of Negative Leadership.

a.  Adam.  “Through one man sin entered the world, and death through sin…” (Romans 5:12).  This man in context is Adam (Romans 5:14).  Furthermore we are told, “Adam was not deceived, but the woman being deceived, fell into transgression” (1 Timothy 2:14).  Adam was not deceived by the serpent.  However, there is no record of him speaking up to try to help Eve not be deceived.  In fact, he followed her into sin (Genesis 3:4-6).  He was with her.  He knew better.  Yet, he did not try to prevent sin. 

Are we speaking up?  Are we trying to prevent sin in our homes?  Are we holding fast to God’s word regardless of what others, even in our own homes, do?

b.  Jezebel.  Ahab “took as wife Jezebel the daughter of Ethbaal, King of the Sidonians; and he went and served Baal and worshiped him.  The he set up an altar for Baal, which he had built in Samaria” (1 Kings 16:31-32).  Again, “But there was no one like Ahab who sold himself to do wickedness in the sight of the LORD, because Jezebel his wife stirred him up” (1 Kings 21:25).  She led him into Baal worship.  She stirred him up to do wickedness. 

How are we motivating and influencing others in our homes?  Are we stirring up love and good works? (Hebrews 10:24).  Are we stirring up wickedness? (1 Kings 21:25).

c.  Athaliah.  “Ahaziah was forty-two years old when he became King… His mother’s name was Athaliah, the granddaughter of Omri.  He also walked in the ways of the house of Ahab, for his mother advised him to do wickedly.  Therefore, he did evil in the sight of the LORD, like the house of Ahab; for they were his counselors after the death of his father, to his destruction (2 Chronicles 22:2-4).  This is the daughter of Ahab (2 Chronicles 21:5-6).  Like Jezebel, she had a bad influence in her home.  She advised her son to do wickedly!

What advice are we providing to our children?  Are we advising them to walk in the way of the LORD?  Are we advising things which are contrary to God’s will?  What influence are we having on our children? 

d.  The Rich Man.  “I beg you therefore, father, that you send him to my father’s house, for I have five brothers, that he may testify to them lest they also come to this place of torment” (Luke 16:27-28).  He wanted Lazarus sent back to warn his brothers.  Could it be that the Rich Man was concerned for his brothers because they were walking in his steps, following his example?  The text does not say this.  However, many siblings have influence on one another.

What influence are we having on our siblings?  If they follow us, where would they end up? 

e.  Ananias and Sapphira.  “Then Peter said to her, ‘How is it that you have agreed together to test the Spirit of the Lord?’” (Acts 5:9).  They agreed together to lie.

Are we helping or hindering our families in their spiritual walk?  This is a sobering question.  Consider how many of these examples from the family relationships.

f.  Peter.  “Now when Peter had come to Antioch, I withstood him to his face, because he was to be blamed; for before certain men came from James, we would eat with the Gentiles; but when they came, he withdrew and separated himself, fearing those who were of the circumcision.  And the rest of the Jews also played the hypocrite with him, so that even Barnabas was carried away with their hypocrisy” (Galatian 2:11-12).  Peter, on this occasion, set a bad example that influence others.  Peter was not anti-Gentile (Acts 10-11; 15:6-11).  He had eaten with them, before others came to Antioch (Acts 11:1-3; Galatians 2:12-13).  He gave into peer pressure.  To his credit, he evidently took Paul’s correction well, later referring to Paul as “our beloved Paul” (2 Peter 3:15).

What example are we setting to others in the church?  Do we courageously do the right thing?  Do we succumb to peer pressure? 

g.  Diotrophes.  John writing to Gaius said, “Beloved, do not imitate what is evil, but what is good.  He who does good is of God, but he who does evil has not seen God” (3 John 11).  These words occur within a context which contrasts two men.  (1) Diotrophes “loves to have the pre-eminence” in the church (3 John 9).  He is also a church bully (3 John 9-10).  (2) Demetrius is of different character.  John said of him, “Demetrius has a good testimony from all, and from the truth itself.  And we also bear witness, and you know that our testimony is true” (3 John 12).  It is in this context John said, “Beloved, do not imitate what is evil, but what is good” (3 John 11).  We can learn from this that there may be in the church, even in a local church, both good and bad examples.  The wise are discerning.  They are not intimidated.  They imitate what is good.

What about us?  Are we good examples?  Are we bad examples?

Which are we following?  Are we following good examples?  Are we following bad examples?  Do we know the difference?  Do we allow God’s truth to determine which is which? 

Posted in Example, leadership | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , | Leave a comment

Where Are You Leading? (Part 1)

Posted on August 30, 2023 by Bryan Hodge

What is a leader?  Here are a couple of definitions.  (1) “Leadership is a process of social influence, which maximizes the efforts of others, toward the achievement of a goal” (Kevin Kruse, Forbes Magazine, April 09, 2013).  There is in this case a conscious effort to move people to achieve a goal.  This definition fits the kind of leadership which is seen in team sports, and in business.  (2) “If your actions inspire others to dream more, learn more, do more and become more, you are a leader” (John Quincy Adams).  In this case there may not be a specific goal in mind.  This is speaking of influence, positive influence; there is also negative influence (e.g. Matthew 15:14).  What kind of influence are you having with others?

1.  Examples of Positive Leadership.    

a.  Abraham.  The LORD said of him, “For I have known him, in order that he may command his children and his household after him, that they may keep the way of the LORD, to do righteousness and justice, that the LORD may bring to Abraham what He has spoken to him” (Genesis 18:19).  God had revealed Himself to Abraham.  It was Abraham’s responsibility to lead his family in the way of righteousness.  William W. Grasham comments, “The final clause of God’s statement clearly indicates that Yahweh’s promises to Abraham were conditional, contrary to what some assume. They were fulfilled because of the patriarch’s obedient faith.  Abraham kept ‘the way of the LORD’ (see 22:15-19; 26:5; Romans 4:16).  Such a response was essential so that the LORD (could) bring upon Abraham what He has spoken about him” (Truth for Today Commentary, Genesis Vol. 1, p. 507). 

Are we spiritually leading our families in the way of righteousness? 

b.  Joshua.  He said to the people, “Chose for yourselves this day whom you will serve… But as for me and my house, we will serve the LORD” (Joshua 24:15).  We are told, “Israel served the LORD all the days of Joshua, and all the days of the elders who outlived Joshua, who had know all the works of the LORD which He had done for Israel” (Joshua 24:31).  The LORD’s works affected them.  Joshua’s influence also may have played a part.

What kind of lasting influence will we have?

c.  Lois and Eunice.  Paul wrote to Timothy, and spoke of “the genuine faith that is in you, which dwelt first in your grandmother Lois and your mother Eunice” (2 Timothy 1:5).  Again, he wrote, “from childhood you have known the Holy Scriptures, which are able to make you wise for salvation…” (2 Timothy 3:15).  What an influence these women had on Timothy!

Are we having a positive influence on our children and grandchildren?

d.  Paul.  He wrote, “Imitate me, just as I also imitate Christ” (1 Corinthians 11:1).  What a bold statement!  Paul not only preached truth, he lived it.  He tried to be an example of true Christian living.  Of course, there is only one flawless one, and that is Christ.  He is the ultimate example.  However, Paul said, “you would do well to imitate me.”

Can we say this?  Would people be better Christians and more Christ-like by following us? 

e.  Timothy.  Paul told Timothy, “Let no one despise your youth, but be an example to the believers in word, in conduct, in love, in spirit, in faith, in purity” (1 Timothy 4:12).  Some young people do things that cause others to look down on young people, or not take them serious.  However, Timothy was to live as an example to believers in the church.  Young people can be great positive examples in the church.  I have heard some say things like, “Young people are the future of the church.”  I understand what some are trying to express.  However, the truth is a young person, who is in Christ, is not just the future of the church; he is a part of the current church. 

Are you a good example to others in word, conduct, love, spirit, faith and purity?

Posted in Example, leadership, Parenting, youth | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , | Leave a comment

Great Leadership

Posted on August 29, 2023 by Bryan Hodge

What are some qualities of great leadership?  Here are some things that the Bible says.

1.   Serve.  Great leaders serve.  Jesus said, “You know that the rulers of the Gentiles lord it over them, and those who are great exercise authority over them.  Yet it shall not be so among you; but whoever desires to become great among you, let him be your servant.  And whoever desires to be first among you, let him be your slave – just as the Son of Man did not come to be served, but to serve, and to give His life a ransom for many” (Matthew 20:25-28).  Great leaders do not simply give orders.  They serve.

The LORD was not pleased with the shepherds of Israel in Ezekiel’s day.  He rebuked them saying, “Woe to the shepherds of Israel who feed themselves!  Should not the shepherds feed the flocks?  You eat the fat and clothe yourselves with the wool; you slaughter the fatlings, but you do not feed the flock” (Ezekiel 34:2-3).  Franklin Camp commented, “These shepherds were abusing the privilege and the authority given unto them.  They were more concerned about their own personal interest than they were about the place and the work of watching over the flock… The church was bought by  Christ, Acts 20:28, and belongs to him.  No elder has the right to act as though a congregation were his private property.  Where there are such men, the woe of God’s word cries out against them” (Franklin Camp, Principles and Perils of Leadership, p. 54). 

2.  Example.  Great leaders set a good example.  Peter instructed elders, shepherds of the church, that they were to do their job  “(not) being lords over those entrusted to you, but being examples to the flock” (1 Peter 5:1-4).  The flock is not to be driven.  It is to be led.  Dwight D. Eisenhower is credited as saying, “You don’t lead by hitting people over the head – that’s assault, not leadership.”  Great leaders lead.  They don’t just bark orders.

3.  Delegate.  Great leaders get others involved in the work.  They do not try to do it all themselves.

Moses needed help.  Early in the journey to the Promised Land, Moses tried to personally judge every case which came up among his people.  Jethro told him, “The thing that you do is not good.  Both you and these people who are with you will surely wear yourselves out.  For this thing is too much for you; you are not able to perform it by yourself.”  (Exodus 18:18).  Rulers were placed over thousands, over hundreds, over fifties, and over tens (Exodus 18:21, 24-26). 

The apostles needed help.  Their primary work was in the word.  However, there were also physical needs.  There were widows who needed a daily distribution of food.  The twelve told the disciples, “It is not desirable that we should leave the word of God and serve tables.  Therefore, brethren, seek out from among you seven men of good reputation, full of the Holy Spirit and wisdom, whom we may appoint over this business; but we will give ourselves continually to prayer and to the ministry of the word” (Acts 6:2-4). 

The church is described as a body composed of many members (Romans 12:4-8; 1 Corinthians 12:12-30; Ephesians 4:11-16).  Each member of the body has a role and should be contributing to the well-being of the body (1 Corinthians 12:15-19; Ephesians 4:15-16; 1 Peter 4:10).  Roy Lanier Sr. suggested that elders should help find jobs for all members.  All need something to do.  He wrote, “Create jobs for many.  This is one of the biggest headaches of the conscientious elder.  Many people are willing to do something for the Lord if they know what and how to do.  Some preachers ridicule this idea, accusing people of thinking there is nothing to do except preach, pray, lead singing, or serve at the Lord’s table, when there are dozens of other things to do.  There are other things, but the babe in Christ is honest when he says he does not know what they are or how to do them. The elder who snaps at the babe in Christ, telling him to find something to do and get busy is not a wise or gentle shepherd of the flock of God entrusted to his care.  It takes imagination to provide work for all.  It requires a knowledge of the individuals that make up the membership, who they are, what they are capable of doing, and what they are fit to do.  It is such a big job that most elders do not undertake it” (Roy Lanier, Sr., 20 Years of the Problem Page, Vol. 1, pp. 156-157).     There are benefits to getting many involved in the work.  First, more can be accomplished.  One personal cannot do it all.  Moreover, if one person tries to do it all, he may burn-out.  Second, it is my experience that involved members are generally more content, grumble less, and are more loyal to the local church and its work.  They are invested.  They have skin in the game.  

4.  Train.  Great leaders train others to do the work.  Paul told Timothy, “And the things that you have heard from me among many witnesses, commit these to faithful men who will be able to teach others also” (2 Timothy 2:2).  Paul taught Timothy.  Timothy was to teach others.  These others would be able to teach others.

I once knew of a church where one man did everything.  He trained no one to do the work.  He delegated no part of the work to anyone.  When he died, that church died with him.  Such is not good!

5.  Prepare.  Great leaders prepare for the future.  The LORD told Moses, “Take Joshua the son on Nun, a man in whom is the Spirit, and lay your hand on him; set him before Eleazar the priest and before all the congregation, and inaugurate him in their sight.  And you shall give some of your authority to him…” (Numbers 27:18-20).  Moses is told to command, encourage and strengthen Joshua to lead the children of Israel into the Promised Land (Deuteronomy 1:38; 3:28).  Moses did this (Deuteronomy 31:7, 23; 34:9).  Moses prepared Joshua to lead.  Israel needed a leader. Moses was about to die. 

I have known of many congregations that once had an eldership, but no longer do.  In some cases, this is unavoidable due to the composition of the local membership.  In other cases, it may have been avoidable.  Good leaders know that they will not always be around.  Therefore, they seek to prepare for the future and to develop future leaders. 

6.  Clear Priorities.   Great leadership has clear priorities.  Paul did.  He said, “Do I seek to please men?  For if I still pleased men, I would not be a bondservant of Christ” (Galatians 1:10 cf. 4:16).  Again, “But as we have been approved by God to be entrusted with the gospel, even so we speak, not as pleasing men, but God…” (1 Thessalonians 2:4).  Once more, “We make it our aim… to be well pleasing to Him” (2 Corinthians 5:9).  He told Timothy, “Be diligent to present yourself approved to God…” (2 Timothy 2:15 cf. 2:4). 

One is not going to always please everyone in this life.  This is especially true if one is a Christian (cf. Luke 6:26).  Great leadership had clear priorities and sticks to them, whether popular or not.  The Christian’s first priority should be to please God (2 Corinthians  5:9).  He should want to glorify God (1 Corinthians 6:20; 10:31).  Additionally, he should want to help get others to heaven (Galatians 6:1-2; 1 Thessalonians 5:11, 14; Hebrews 10:24; James 5:20).

Posted in Elders and Deacons, Example, leadership, Priorities | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , | Leave a comment

Muhammad in the Bible?

Posted on August 18, 2023 by Bryan Hodge

Is Muhammad mentioned in the Bible?  The Quran indicates that he is.  Consider: (1) “I will show mercy… to those who follow the Apostle – the unlettered Prophet – whom they shall find described in the Torah and the Gospel” (7:156-157 cf. 48:29).  (2) “And of Jesus the Son of Mary, who said to the Israelites: ‘I am sent forth to you from God to confirm the Torah already revealed, and to give news of an apostle that will come after me whose name is Ahamad’” (61:6).  According to the Quran, the Torah and the Gospel both speak of Muhammad. 

The question to ask is: where? No specific passage is cited or referenced. 

Muslims have suggested the following passages refer to Muhammad.  Let’s consider them.

1.  Deuteronomy 18:18, “I will raise up for them a prophet like you from among their brethren, and I will put my words in His mouth.”    Christians believe that this prophet like Moses is Jesus.  Peter so applied the words (Acts 3:22-26).  Jesus is like Moses in His closeness to God (Deuteronomy 34:10-12 cf. John 1:18).  Jesus is like Moses in His signs and wonders (Deuteronomy 34:10-12 cf. Acts 3:22).  Jesus is like Moses in His freeing people from bondage (Exodus 3:1-10 cf. John 8:31-32).  Jesus is like Moses in that He is a law-giver (John 1:17 cf. Galatians 6:2).  Jesus is like Moses in that He ratified a covenant with blood (Exodus 24:1-8 cf. Matthew 26:28; Hebrews 9:16-28).     

Muslims believe that this prophet is Muhammad.  However, this does not fit very well.  Consider: (1) Moses told Israel, “The LORD your God will raise up for you a prophet like me from your midst, from your brethren” (Deuteronomy 18:15 cf. 18:18).  Muslims point out that “brethren” is used of Edomites (Deuteronomy 2:4, 8). Therefore, it can be used of Ishmaelites. However, it is most natural to understand this to be speaking of an Israelite [Notice the word “among” and the phrase “among your brethren.” (e.g. Deuteronomy 13:1, 11, 13-14; 17:2, 7, 15; 18:1-2, 10, 18; 19:20; 21:21; 22:24; 23:16; 24:7; 26:11).  Notice also the word “midst” (e.g. Deuteronomy 11:6; 13:5; 17:20; 18:15; 23:14)].  (2) This prophet was to do signs and wonders (Deuteronomy 18:15, 18 cf. 34:10-12).  Jesus did signs and wonders (Acts 2:22; Also, Quran 5:114; 19:29-f; 61:1-8).  There is no record of such for Muhammad in the Quran itself (cf. Quran 17:90-91).  The Hadiths mention such signs and wonders, but not the Quran itself. 

2.  Song of Solomon 5:16, “His mouth is most sweet, Yes, he is altogether lovely.” 

In context, the Shulamite woman is speaking of her beloved.  Some Christians believe that this is a love story about a man and a woman.  Others believe that it is allegorical of God and Israel, or Christ and the church.

Muslims see Muhammad in this.  The Hebrew translated “altogether lovely” is Machamaddim.  It looks a bit like Muhammad.  However, this does not fit the context.  Moreover, this word appears elsewhere and clearly does not in those passages refer to the man, Muhammad (e.g. 1 Kings 20:6; 2 Chronicles 36:19; Lamentations 1:10-11; 2:4; Isaiah 64:10; Hosea 9:6, 16). 

3.  Isaiah 29:11-12, “The whole vision has become like the words of a book that is sealed, which men delivered to one who is literate, saying ‘Read this please.’  And he says, ‘I cannot for it is sealed.’  Then the book is delivered to the one who is illiterate saying, ‘Read this please.’  And he says, ‘I am not literate.’”

In context, woe has been pronounced to Ariel (hearth of God cf. Ezekiel 43:15, i.e., the city of Jerusalem) where David dwelt (Isaiah 29:1-ff).  However, the people were not listening.  Wayne Jackson comments, “These prophesied events are to them as ‘sealed’ scroll (v. 11), or like words to a man who cannot read (v. 12)” (Wayne Jackson, The Prophets, p. 49).  They had a heart problem (Isaiah 29:13).

Muslims believe that the “illiterate one” is Muhammed (cf. Sahih Muslim, Vol. 1, Hadith 160; Quran 7:158).  The Mormons claim that this refers to Joseph Smith (2 Nephi 27:7-ff; Pearl of Great Price; Joseph Smith History 1:63-65).  However, neither fits the context of Isaiah.  The “illiterate” one does not go on to reveal things.

4. Isaiah 42:1, “Behold! My Servant whom I uphold, My Elect in whom My soul delights! I have put My Spirit upon Him; He will bring forth justice to the Gentiles.”

Christians understand this to be prophecy about Jesus. Matthew applied these words to Jesus (Matthew 12:18-21). The Spirit of the LORD came upon Him (Matthew 3:16-17; Luke 3:21-22 cf. 4:18-19).

Muslims claim that the Servant is Muhammad. He is the servant of Allah (Bukhari 3:335). However, even they recognize that Muhammad is not Allah’s only servant [ e.g., In Quran 19:30 Isa (Jesus) says “”I am the servant of God”] Why should Isiah 42 be understood as a reference to Muhammad? It is claimed the Spirit refers to the Spirit (or angel Gabriel) revealing the Quran to Muhammad (Quran 16:102 cf., 2:87,97-98,253). However, the passage in Isaiah does not refer to the Spirit coming to the Servant but being upon the Servant. This sounds like what happened to Jesus. Furthermore, they argue that Kedar (Isiah 42:11 cf. 21:13-16) is in Arabia. Therefore, this must refer to Muhammad. This does not follow. The passage is not speaking of the place from which this Servant came. It is speaking of justice and light going forth to the Gentiles. Other places are also mentioned: the coastlands or islands (Isaiah 42:10, 12 cf. 11:11), possible reference to Mediterranean Sea; Sela (Isaiah 42:11 cf. 16:1; Judges 1:36; 2 Kings 14:7), a Moabite or Amorite, and Edomite town. This has nothing to do with the prophet’s origin.

5.  John 1:19-21, “Now this is the testimony of John.  When the Jews sent priests and Levites from Jerusalem to ask him, ‘Who are you?’ He confessed, and did not deny, but confessed, ‘I am not the Christ.’  And they asked him, ‘What then? Are you Elijah?’ He said, ‘I am not.’  ‘Are you the prophet?’ And he answered, ‘No.’”

There was some confusion.  (1) They knew that there was a coming Messiah (e.g. Isaiah 61:1-3).  John was not the Messiah.  (2) They knew that Elijah would come (cf. Malachi 4:5).  John came in the spirit and power of Elijah (Luke 1:17).  However, he was not literally Elijah.  Maybe they were asking if he was literally Elijah.  He was not.  (3) They knew that a prophet like Moses was to come (Deuteronomy 18:15-18).  Some Jews were not sure that the Messiah and the Prophet were the same (John 1:19-21 cf. 6:14; 7:40-41).  They were wrong.  The coming Messiah and the coming prophet were the same one (Acts 3:18-26).  John was not the prophet.

Muslims see Muhammad in the Prophet (see point one).  They make a similar mistake as some of the Jews did.  They believe that there are three persons in view.  Elijah according to scripture is John (Matthew 17:11-13).  They believe that Jesus is the Messiah and that Muhammad is the prophet.  However, the Messiah and the prophet are one person (Acts 3:18-26).  Moreover, review point one.

6.  John 14:26, “But the Helper, the Holy Spirit, whom the Father will send in My name, He will teach you all things, and bring to your remembrance all things I said to you.”  John 15:26, “But when the Helper comes, whom I send to you from the Father, the Spirit of truth who proceeds from the Father, He will testify of Me.”  John 16:7, “It is to your advantage that I go away; for if I do not go away, the Helper will not come to you; but if I depart, I will send Him to you.” 

Muslims believe that the Helper is Muhammad.  Different arguments have been used to defend this.  (1) Some have argued that at least one manuscript, Codex Siniaticus, reads “Spirit” and not “Holy Spirit” in John 14:26.  From that, it is reasoned that “Spirit” can be used of a teacher (e.g. 1 John 4:1).  Therefore, this refers to Muhammad.  (2) Some have argued that the text has been corrupted; it should read periclytos (“praised one,” equivalent of Muhammed) instead of paraclete (Helper, Comforter).  There is no textual support for this claim.  Moreover, the context does not fit.  Jesus words were given to encourage His disciples and prepared them for the work of bearing witness of Him (John 15:26-27; 16:7-14).

                                      

Posted in Islam, Prophecy, World Religions | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , | Leave a comment

Black People in the Bible

Posted on August 1, 2023 by Bryan Hodge

The Bible does not usually specify skin color.  Instead, it speaks of people’s relationship to God.  Of Noah, we are told, “Noah was a just man, perfect in his generations.  Noah walked with God” (Genesis 6:9).  Of Job, we are told, “that man was blameless and upright, and one who feared God and shunned evil” (Job 1:1).  The amount of melanin and skin pigmentation really does not matter.  What matters is faithfulness.

However, it might surprise some to know that there are Biblical characters who were likely black or dark-skinned.  Let’s consider a few.

1.  Moses’ wife.

“Then Miriam and Aaron spoke against Moses because of the Ethiopian woman whom he had married; for he married an Ethiopian woman” (Numbers 12:1).  Understand that the Ethiopians (Cushites) were known for their skin color (Jeremiah 13:23).  The siblings may have been complaining about this.  If so, this was not the real issue (I have found that people often complain about things which are not the real issue. They do not want to admit or deal with the real issue).  The real issue was their envy of Moses (Numbers 12:2-ff).  God was not pleased with Miriam and Aaron (Numbers 12:4-ff).

If this wife is the same as Zipporah, she circumcised her son when Moses had failed to do so.  She saved Moses’ life (Exodus 4:24-26). 

2.  The Queen of Sheba

“Now when the queen of Sheba heard of the fame of Solomon… she came to test him with hard questions” (1 Kings 10:1).

The exact location of Sheba is uncertain.  There are two leading thoughts.  Some think that it was in Ethiopia or the Sudan.  Others think that it was in Yemen.  The location does seem to be south of Israel (1 Kings 9:26-ff; Matthew 12:42; Luke 11:31).  If she were from Ethiopia or Sudan, then she almost certainly was black.

3.  Ebed-Melech.

Certain princes of Judah were tired of Jeremiah’s message.  They went to King Zedekiah and said, “Please, let this man be put to death, for this he weakens the hands of the men of war who remain in this city, and the hands of all the people” (Jeremiah 38:4).  Zedekiah was weak.  He told them, “Look, he is in your hand.  For the King can do nothing against you” (Jeremiah 38:5).  Jeremiah was let down into a mirey dungeon.  He is left to die without food or water (Jeremiah 38:5-ff).  Wayne Jackson comments, “The aging prophet (around sixty years of age at this time) was let down into the cistern by ropes.  Though the cistern had no water, it had mud at the bottom, and Jeremiah sank down into it (v. 6).  Josephus says, ‘he stood up to the neck in mire’ (Antiquities of the Jews 10.7.5).  He would not last long in this state of confinement” (Wayne Jackson, The Prophets, p. 200).

An Ethiopian eunuch named Ebed-Melech (servant of the King) went to the king and pleaded for the life of Jeremiah (Jeremiah 38:7-ff).  The king granted that this man take some men and pull Jeremiah out of this dungeon (Zedekiah was weak and tried to please all).  This man saved Jeremiah’s life. An Ethiopian eunuch saved the life of an Israelite (See point 5).

4.  Simon a Cyrenian

“Now as they led Him away, they laid hold of a certain man, Simon a Cyrenian, who was coming from the country, and on him they laid the cross that he might bear it after Jesus” (Luke 23:26).  This man may have been in Jerusalem to keep the Passover.  He may have been black.  Some think so based on his being from Africa. However, this is far from certain. This would assume that all North Africans are black.  Cyrene was a city in Libya (modern Tripoli). 

It is possible that this changed the man’s life.  Some think that his son Rufus is the Rufus later mentioned by Paul (Mark 15:21 cf. Romans 16:13).  Note: Rufus means “red” not “black.” Name meanings do not necessarily suggest skin color. I have know people named “Blue,” “Green,” “Brown,” “Black,” and “White”; their names did not match their skin color.

5.  Ethiopian Eunuch

“And behold, a man of Ethiopia, a eunuch of great authority under Candace the queen of the Ethiopians, who had charge of all her treasury, and had come to Jerusalem to worship, was returning.  And sitting in his chariot, he was reading Isaiah the prophet” (Acts 8:27-28). 

Two possibilities seem to exist.  (1) This man may have been an Ethiopian who had proselyted to the Jewish faith (The early church did preach to proselytes, and had proselytes in it, before the gentiles entered cf. Acts 2:10; 6:5; Acts 8:4 cf. 11:19; 15:7 cf. Acts 10-11).  (2) It is also possible that his man was a Jew who lived and worked in Ethiopia.  If he were an Ethiopian who had proselyted, he almost certainly was black. An Israelite was involved in saving an Ethiopian eunuch (See point 3).

6.  Simeon called Niger

“Now in the church that was at Antioch there were certain prophets and teachers: Barnabas, Simeon who was called Niger, Lucius of Cyrene, Manaen who had been brought up with Herod the tetrarch, and Saul” (Acts 13:1). 

Simeon called Niger is mentioned.  Niger means “black” or “dark.”  This may not be a proper name, but a nickname. This has led some to believe that he may had had a dark complexion.

Also, Lucius of Cyrene is mentioned (See point 4).

Final Thoughts

Ultimately it does not matter.  Jesus said, “Go… make disciples of all nations” (Matthew 28:19).  Peter said, “In truth I perceive that God shows no partiality.  But in every nation whoever fears Him and works righteousness is accepted by Him” (Acts 10:34-35).  Paul said, “For you are all sons of God through faith in Christ Jesus.  For as many of you were baptized in Christ have put on Christ.  There is neither Jew nor Greek, there is neither slave nor free, there is neither male nor female for you are all one in Christ Jesus” (Galatians 3:26-28).  “But you yourselves… have put on the new man… where there is neither Greek nor Jew, circumcised nor uncircumcised, barbarian, Scythian, slave nor free, but Christ is all and in all” (Colossians 3:8-11). Do you fear God and work righteousness? Are you in Christ? Have you been baptized into Christ? Is Christ all, and is He in you?

Posted in envy, evangelism, Race | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , | 1 Comment

Be Objective

Posted on July 19, 2023 by Bryan Hodge

Sometimes people are not close enough to a situation to make an informed decision.  A crowd in Jerusalem was stirred up by the false testimony of certain Jews from Asia against Paul (Acts 21:27-ff).  Paul was accused of bringing gentiles into the temple.  He had not.  We should be careful to gather evidence before drawing conclusions.  The book of Proverbs reminds us of this saying, “The first one to plead his cause seems right, until his neighbor comes and examines him” (Proverbs 18:17).    

However, sometimes people are too close to someone or something to be objective.  Malcolm Gladwell makes this point in his book Talking to Strangers.  He reasons that it was the people who spent the most time with Adolf Hitler who were the most deceived by him.  He writes, “The people who were wrong about Hitler were the ones who had talked with him for hours.  I suppose that this makes a certain sense: you need to be exposed to a fraud before you can fall for a fraud” (Malcolm Gladwell, Talking to Strangers, notes on Chapter 2, p. 351).  Winston Churchill, Franklin Roosevelt, and Joseph Stalin never met him.  The first two were not deceived by him.  Duff Cooper, one of Neville Chamberlain’s cabinet ministers, was not deceived and would resign his position in protest of Chamberlain’s approach to Hitler.  Others met with him and were greatly deceived.  Prime Minister of Canada, William Lyon Mackenzie King met with him in 1937.  He loved him and compared him to Joan of Arc. Lord Halifax, Chamberlain’s foreign secretary met with Adolf Hitler, Hermann Goring and Joseph Goebbels in the fall of 1937.  He concluded that Hitler “did not want war.”  The British diplomat who spent the most time with Hitler was the Ambassador to Germany, Nevile Henderson.  He believed that Hitler “hates war as much as anyone.”  Neville Chamberlain met three times with Hitler between September 1937 and October 1938.  Hitler told Chamberlain that he would seize the Sudetenland but wanted no more.  Chamberlain believed him.  He said, “I got the impression that here was a man who could be relied upon when he had given his word.”  Chamberlain once told his sister, “He gave me the double handshake that he reserved for especially friendly demonstrations.” (Malcomb Gladwell, Chapter 2: Getting To Know Der Fuhrer).  These men who met him were charmed by him and thus deceived. 

Some, I believe, are like this in spiritual matters.  They are not objective about what is near to them.  They are deceived by the false teacher, whom they know, with the charming personality (Jude 16).  They tolerate sin and spiritual problems in the local church reasoning, “he’s a good ol’ boy” or “that is just how she is” or “that is how it has always been done.” 

We must be spiritually alert.  We are to walk circumspect.  Let us strive to be spiritually objective.  The Bible is the standard.  All should be tested by it (Acts 17:11; 1 Thessalonians 5:21). 

                   

Posted in History, Judgment | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , | Leave a comment

Kitchens and Eating in the Building

Posted on July 12, 2023 by Bryan Hodge

In the 1960’s and 1970’s , it became common for new church buildings to include a kitchen and “multi-purpose room” or “fellowship hall” (note – I am not enthusiastic about this last designation because it tends to reduce the idea of fellowship to brethren eating together, at least in some people’s minds.  Biblical fellowship is so much more).  Before this, kitchens were rare in our church buildings.

Controversy ensued.  (1) Those who built buildings with a kitchen in it were labeled “liberals” by some.  (2) Those who opposed kitchens were labeled “antis” by others (note – I do not believe that these labels have been helpful to the discussion.  They have been used as terms of derision.  “Liberal” suggests that those who have a kitchen have gone beyond Biblical authority.  However, the assertion does not demonstrate such.  “Anti” suggests that some are opposed to something.  It might surprise some to know that “anti” was used to label those opposed to mechanical instruments of music in worship.  All are opposed to something. However, the term is frequently used to mean that one is binding something that God has not bound. The assertion does not demonstrate such).

There are two major arguments used to oppose kitchens: (1) 1 Corinthians 11; (2) authority.  I want to consider both of these arguments.

1 Corinthians 11

Paul said, “Do you not have houses to eat and drink in? (1 Corinthians 11:22a).  Again, “But if anyone is hungry, let him eat at home” (1 Corinthians 11:34a).    These verses are understood by some to forbid eating in the church building.  But do they?

Let’s consider the context.  (1) The issue in context is not the building.  The building is not mentioned.  The church often met in someone’s house (cf. Romans 16:3-5; 1 Corinthians 16:19; Colossians 4:15; Philemon 1-2).  The church could meet under some shade trees.  There is nothing sacred about the location.  (2) The issue is the perversion of the church assembly.  (a) Unity was lacking.  Brethren were being mistreated.  “For in eating, each one takes his own supper ahead of others; and one is hungry and another is drunk… do you despise the church of God and shame those who have nothing? (1 Corinthians 11:21-22).  It seems that the Lord’s Supper was being offered in the setting of a meal.  Jesus instituted the Lord’s Supper in the setting of a meal.  The historian, Everett Ferguson writes, “It seems that a meal provided the most convenient context in which the Lord’s supper was observed by early Christians.  At least this was the case at Corinth and provided the occasion for the abuses which developed there” (Everett Ferguson, Early Christians Speak, p. 131).  (b) The body of Christ was not being discerned, by some.  “For he who eats and drinks in an unworthy manner eats and drinks in an unworthy manner eats and drinks judgment to himself, not discerning the Lord’s body.  For this reason, many are weak and sick among you, and many sleep” (1 Corinthians 11:29-30).

What about the words “Do you not have houses to eat and drink in”?  (a) This is sarcasm.  Consider this illustration: Let’s say that you had a family member who always visited your house on Thanksgiving Day, or some holiday.  This one did not seem to be interested in you, or in any others present.  He seemed to be present only for the food.  Therefore, you said to him, “Don’t you have a house you can eat in?”  You did not necessarily mean that he could never eat in your house.  You meant, “When you come over, I wish you came for the right reasons.  I wish you came to visit with me and others, and not just to feed your face.  You can do that at home.”  (b) No one, that I know, believes that one can only eat in a house, not under a tree, or as he walks a path.  This is not assigning the place to eat.  It is about perverting worship. 

Here are some other considerations.  (1) If this forbids eating in the building, does it forbid drinking water in the building?  If not, why not?  (2) If this forbids eating in the building, does it forbid a mother feeding her baby?  If not, why not?  (3) If this forbids eating in the building, does it forbid the preacher from eating or drinking in his office?  If not, why not?  (4) If the church worshipped under a tree, would that mean that no one should eat under that tree?  If not, why not?  (5) If the church met in my house, could anyone ever eat as my guest in my house?  We know that brethren ate together (e.g., Acts 2:46; 16:34; 2 Peter 2:13; Jude 12). My experience is that few actually argue that the location is the real issue.

Authority

The contribution is to be used to carry on the work of the church.  The work of the church is evangelism, edification, and benevolence.  It is argued that the spending on money on kitchen’s and “fellowship halls” in which we feed ourselves falls outside the work of the church.  Therefore, it is unauthorized. This is the real issue with many who hold this position. I appreciate very much the desire to do only what is authorized in the Bible.

Here is my response.  I do not think that these things always fall outside the work of the church.  (1) Kitchens may be used to render benevolence.  I have known churches that have housed and fed other members of the church who were refugees from natural disasters.  (2) Kitchens may be used to support evangelism.  I have known churches that have used their kitchens to feed workers in door-knocking campaigns.  (3) Kitchens may be used to preserve grape juice and prepare the Lord’s Supper.  (4) Multi-purpose rooms are just that.  They can be used for many things, including Bible classes.

While it is true that kitchens and multipurpose rooms can be helpful in carrying on the work of the church, I am not sure that this is the reason that most build these facilities.  We do need to stay focused on the work. I once knew a church member who thought that we should spend much money on the kitchen and multi-purpose room because we could make money by renting it out for weddings and special events. This is definitely a case of wrong goals, and poor understanding of the work of the church.

Final Thoughts

1.  Fellowship is precious and should be treated as such.  We are to be “endeavoring to keep the unity of the spirit in the bond of peace” (Ephesians 4:3 cf. Colossians 3:14).  One should be very careful in binding personal scruples on others.

2.  Fellowship is precious and should be treated as such.  “Let us pursue the things which make for peace and things by which one may edify another” (Romans 14:19).  Before building a kitchen (or doing anything which might lead to division), we should ask if it is really worth it. This should be thoughtfully considered. Let us remember, “the kingdom of God is not eating and drinking, but righteousness and peace and joy in the Holy Spirit” (Romans 14:17).

3.  Do not limit fellowship to the fellowship hall.  True fellowship is so much more.  It includes our working together in the kingdom to the glory of God. It includes our worship assemblies. Yes, it also includes our social interaction in the body. However, A friend of mine once expressed his concern to me that while “fellowship halls” may be permissible, they may have actually hindered the fellowship interactions of brethren.  He believed that we have declined in the amount of time spent in each other’s homes and have contented ourselves with eating together at the building. He believed that fellowship for some had been limited to eating together at the building on a monthly or quarterly schedule. We will never truly be a part of each other’s lives if we do not have greater interaction than this. We will never truly be the family that God desires us to be if we limit fellowship to this.

4.  Let us remember that the early church did engage in “love feasts” (Jude 12; 2 Peter 2:13).  Clement of Alexandria (c. 150-215 A.D.) wrote of this: “Agape is truly heavenly food… The meal occurs because of love, not love because of the meal, which is proof of a generous and shared good will” (Everett Ferguson p. 129 quoting Clement of Alexandria, Instructor, book 2, chapter 1).  Brethren need to spend time together.

Posted in Bible authority, Fellowship, Textual study | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , | 1 Comment

For The Team

Posted on July 11, 2023 by Bryan Hodge

Jolien Boumkwo is a Belgian track and field athlete.  She competes in the shot put and the hammer throw.  She holds Belgian national records in both.She recently epitomized the idea of team spirit.  She competed in the 2023 European Athletic Team Championships, which were held in late June, in Chorzow, Poland.  After finishing in seventh place in the shot put, she ran in 100m hurdles.  She really isn’t built for this event.  (Again, she is a shot putter and hammer thrower).  However, her team needed her.  The team’s two hurdlers were unable to race due to injuries.  If Belgium did not have an athlete in the race, the team would be disqualified.  Therefore, she agreed to run.  Her time was not impressive.  It was 32.81 seconds, over 19 seconds slower than the winning time.  Her hurdles were cleared by carefully stepping over them, not by leaping over them.  Even so, she earned her team two points and prevented disqualification.  She said, “My team is the most important thing for me… I couldn’t let it happen to lose by one point” (I’ll Give it a Shot! Belgian Shot Putter Become Instant Cult Hero After Hurdles Attempt, June 25, 2023, foxsports.com). 

Application

  1.  Be willing.  If there is a need, be willing to do what you dan to help meet that need. 

The Bible has many examples of volunteers.  (1) David volunteered to face Goliath (1 Samuel 17).  (2) Isaiah volunteered to preach (Isaiah 6).  (3) Nehemiah volunteered to go rebuild Jerusalem (Nehemiah 1-2).  (4) Jesus volunteered to wash the feet of the disciples (John 13).

Excuses are abundant.  “It is not my job.”  “It is not my talent.”  “Somebody else will do it” (but nobody does).  Therefore, many churches have a shortage of people willing to clean, organize space, teach, lead singing, lead prayers, preach, evangelize, serve as elders or deacons, or in some cases – even show up.  Let’s rid ourselves of the excuses.

2.  Be committed to the team and the cause.

Jolien Boumkwo was committed to her team.  She ran in a race that she had no chance of winning or even finishing better than last place.

We need to be committed to the church and the cause of Christ.  Paul said, “every part does its share” (Ephesians 4:16).  This is how it should be.  Peter said, “As each one has received a gift, minister it to one another, as good stewards of the manifold grace of God” (1 Peter 4:10).  We each need to use whatever abilities we have for the cause.  May we be like the woman who anointed Jesus.  We are told, “She has done what she could” (Mark 14:8). 

Posted in Fellowship, stewardship | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , | 2 Comments

Children’s Homes

Posted on July 7, 2023 by Bryan Hodge

Homes for children (sometimes called orphans’ homes) began to appear among our brethren in the early twentieth century.  The first was Tennessee Orphan Home in Columbia, Tennessee which opened on September 5, 1910.  By 1940, there were seven such homes in operation.  By 1960, there were twenty-seven (Institutionalism and Church Supported Orphanages, bibletruths.net).  Today, there are about seventy (Children’s Homes Affiliated With Churches of Christ, church-of-christ.org). 

Controversy became heated in the mid-1950’s.  Could a church support these homes from their treasury?  Three basic positions emerged.  (1) Some argue that to do so was to support a man-made institution which was parallel to supporting a missionary society.  Brethren who supported these homes became known as “institutional brethren.”  Those who opposed such became known as “non-institutional brethren.”  (2) Others argued that it was not parallel to supporting a missionary society.  It was supporting a home which was in need, a substitute home.  (3) A few argued that these homes needed to be organized under an eldership.  If this were done, then a church could support such a home.

I hold that the second position is the correct position.  I will attempt to explain why in this article.  A work which has greatly helped me is Lectures on Church Cooperation and Orphan Homes by Thomas Warren.  These lectures were delivered at the Burbank Gardens Church of Christ in Grand Prairie, Texas in October, 1957. 

Component Parts

Let’s consider the component parts (or constituent elements).  If the parts are scriptural, then the whole must be scriptural.

1.  It is scriptural for a congregation to show benevolence.

This is taught in the New Testament (e.g. Acts 6:1-3; 11:27-29; Romans 15:25-26; 1 Corinthians 16:1-2; 2 Corinthians 8 & 9; 1 Timothy 5:3-16).  No one should object to this point.

2.  It is scriptural for a congregation to render benevolence to non-Christians.

Many object to this point.  It is believed that the church should only help Christians (and perhaps their immediate family members) from the treasury.

While I do believe that the church’s primary benevolent responsibility is toward Christians, I do not believe that it is wrong to help non-Christians (2 Corinthians 9:13; Galatians 6:10).  There is no contextual reason to limit “all” to all other Christians. 

However, let’s say that one does not believe that the church may help non-Christians out of its treasury. One cannot logically infer from this position alone whether children’s homes are scriptural or not. It simply concerns who may be helped. If the youth is a Christian, may he be helped in one of these homes? If the parents were Christians but have died, may one of these homes help their surviving child who is not yet a Christian? The “Saints Only” position alone does not really answer the children’s home question. It is about “who,” not “how.”

3.  The Bible recognizes three institutions (home, government, church) each of which has its own sphere of authority.

The home was established by God (Genesis 1:26-28; 2:20-25).  Parents have oversight and responsibility for the children in the home (Deuteronomy 6:4-ff; Ephesians 6:1-4, etc.).

God allows earthly governments to exist (Romans 13:1-ff).  Rulers have authority to make just laws and citizens are to submit (Romans 13:1-ff; Titus 3:1-ff; 1 Peter 2:13-ff). 

The church is from God.  It was purposed by Him (Ephesians 3:10-11).  It was purchased by Christ (Acts 20:28).  Elders are to shepherd the flock (Acts 20:17-34; Titus 1:5-11; Hebrews 13:7, 17; 1 Peter 5:1-5).

4.  God recognizes the concept of in loco parentis (in place of parents), or substitute homes.

Here are a few examples.  (1) Samuel was reared by those other than his parents (1 Samuel 1 &2).  (2) One woman was willing to give her child to another in order to spare the child’s life (1 Kings 3:26).  (3) Jehoiada and Jehoshabeth reared Joash (2 Kings 11:1-ff; 2 Chronicles 22:10-ff).  (4) Joseph reared a child that was not biologically his (Matthew 1:20-ff cf. Luke 2:41, 48).  (5) Jesus assigned the care of Mary to John (John 19:26-27).  (6) Paul speaks of a child who is under a guardian until he comes of age (Galatians 4:1-2).

5.  A home can (and should) meet legal requirements.

Unless the state requires something which violates God’s will, then Christians should comply (Acts 4:18-20; 5:28-29).  It is not inherently sinful for the state to require certain paperwork, and safety requirements.

6.  Some family units need support, even regular support.

Consider the widows.  The early church had a daily distribution of food (Acts 6:1-4).  Paul instructed the church to care for true widows (1 Timothy 5:3-ff).

I am not suggesting that children’s homes are the only way to care for children in need.  I am not even suggesting that this is the best way to care for such children.  However, I do believe that it is a way to do so which does not violate scripture.

Common Objections

1.  It is an institution separate and apart from the church.

This is true.  The church and the home are two different institutions.  The idea of substitute homes is recognized in scripture.

2.  Those homes are not under the oversight of an eldership.

This is true.  They should not be.  Just as there should be a separation of church and state, there should also be a separation of church and home.  They are distinct institutions. It is not the elders job to function as parents. It is not the church’s job to rear children.

3.  It is a human institution.

Humans organized these homes.  This we admit.  However, let us remember that the Bible recognizes substitute homes, and legal guardianship.

4.  It is parallel to a missionary society.

No, it is not. Saying it, does not make it so. A missionary society takes over the work of the church.  A children’s home does not.  It is a home, a substitute home. Thomas Warren said “Brethren, the Missionary Society is an ecclesiasticism (or para-church organization B.H.) that assumes to itself legislative powers which belong only to the churches.” (Thomas Warren, Lectures on Church Cooperation and Orphan Homes, p. 184).

5.  If it is just a home, then would you send money to a home operated by other religious groups? 

I do not believe that this necessarily follows. Thomas Warren answered, “I never did say that a church could give to anyone or anything if such giving would enhance the spread of error” (Thomas Warren, Lectures on Church Cooperation and Orphan Homes, p. 195). Alan Highers answered Eural Bingham in the Highers-Bingham Debate held in Corinth, Mississippi on November 20-21, 23-24, 1967 at the Strickland church of Christ, “No, we could not support anything that would advance false teaching” (A Review of the Higher-Bingham Debate by Randy L. Mabe, 2006 Contending For the Faith Lectureship book, editor David Brown). 

6.  Many in orphan homes are not really orphans.   

The word orphanos means “deprived of one’s parents” (Arndt-Gingrich).  One may be deprived of parental care due to a number of circumstances.  Amram and Jochebed gave up Moses for his well-being (Exodus 2). David cared for Jonathan’s son, Mephibosheth, following Jonathan’s death (2 Samel 4:4 cf. 9:1-ff). He was not a child when David found him, but there appears to have been a need. A woman offered to give up her son to save him (1 Kings 3:26).  However, one became orphaned, the need for help may exists.

7.  It should be done by individuals and not the church.

Individuals can (and should) care for the weak (James 1:27).  No one denies this.

However, can the church help?  I believe that it can.  We have already pointed out that the early church supported widows (Acts 6:1-ff; 1 Timothy 5:3-ff).

For most, the issue is not can the church help.  Most agree that it can.  The real issue has been: can it do so through a man-made institution?  It seems to me that it is best to understand these institutions as substitute homes, in loco parentis.

Are there other ways to care for children who are destitute of parental care?  Certainly.  Foster homes and adoption may be an option.  Helping others who foster or adopt children may be an option.  I do believe that there are other ways, maybe better ways.  However, let us be cautious before we bind the “how” on others.

Posted in Bible authority, church, Church Organization, Family, Fellowship | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , | Leave a comment