Reading the Bible through the Lens of Your Desire

By J. Warner Wallace 4/28/2017

     John Shelby Spong (retired American Bishop of the Episcopal Church) once wrote an article for the Huffington Post, promoting his book, The Fourth Gospel: Tales of a Jewish Mystic. Spong made several dramatic claims about the Gospel of John:

     1) There is no way that the Fourth Gospel was written by John Zebedee or by any of the disciples of Jesus.

     2) There is probably not a single word attributed to Jesus in this book that the Jesus of history actually spoke.

     3) Not one of the signs (the Fourth Gospel’s word for miracles) recorded in this book was, in all probability, something that actually happened.

     4) Many of the characters who appear in the pages of the Fourth Gospel are literary creations of its author and were never intended to be understood as real people, who actually lived in history.

James "Jim" Warner Wallace (born June 16, 1961) is an American homicide detective and Christian apologist. Wallace is a Senior Fellow at the Colson Center for Christian Worldview and an Adjunct Professor of Apologetics at Biola University in La Mirada, California. He has authored several books, including Cold-Case Christianity, God’s Crime Scene, and Forensic Faith, in which he applies principles of cold case homicide investigation to apologetic concerns such as the existence of God and the reliability of the Gospels.

• Cold-Case Christianity: A Homicide Detective Investigates the Claims of the Gospels

• God's Crime Scene: A Cold-Case Detective Examines the Evidence for a Divinely Created Universe

• Alive: A Cold-Case Approach to the Resurrection

• Cold-Case Christianity for Kids: Investigate Jesus with a Real Detective

• Keeping Your Kids on God's Side: 40 Conversations to Help Them Build a Lasting Faith

• Forensic Faith: A Homicide Detective Makes the Case for a More Reasonable, Evidential Christian Faith

The Optimism of the Cross in the Face of Genocide

By Jonathan Coppage 9/14/15

     A year and three months ago, the militant group then calling itself the Islamic State in Iraq and Syria (ISIS) captured the vital Iraqi city of Mosul as government forces melted away. The sudden loss of such an important city seized the world’s attention, and the brutality with which ISIS then purged Mosul of its Christian and other religious minorities shocked those newly focused eyes.

     A year ago this past Friday, the newly founded organization In Defense of Christians (IDC) reached the culmination of a three-day summit bringing a historic collection of the heads of the oldest churches in Christianity to Washington in order to raise awareness of the plight of Christians and plead for assistance. The solidarity gala dinner closing the summit was keynoted and summarily crashed by Senator Ted Cruz, who threatened to overshadow the calls for unity with a provocative speech that ended with the senator storming off stage.

     While Cruz’s cynical performance was roundly and harshly criticized in many conservative circles, there was no denying that the spectacle was a distraction that threatened to overshadow the progress made. Many feared that the potential opening for rallying broad support to the defense of persecuted Christians was closed as Senator Cruz walked off the stage.

     Last week IDC returned to Washington, however, and opened its convention with a bang: the announcement of bipartisan legislation introduced in the House to officially recognize the persecution of Middle Eastern Christians as a genocide, as Kelley Vlahos reports. The bill picked up dozens of cosponsors within days.

     This year’s solidarity dinner did not culminate with angry denunciations, but with a sobering, powerful presentation. As Georgetown professor Thomas Farr was honored with a lifetime achievement recognition of his career fighting for religious liberty, IDC senior advisor Andrew Doran announced that Dr. Farr would be entrusted with a crucifix.

Click here to go to source

5 Leadership Lessons from Abraham Lincoln

By Trevin Wax 11/6/12

     When I discovered a new movie on the life of Lincoln was in the works, I was curious to learn more about Lincoln’s administration and his political career. The forthcoming movie is based on Doris Kearns Goodwin’s popular book, Team of Rivals: The Political Genius of Abraham Lincoln, a masterful telling of Lincoln’s story that follows the lives of each of his cabinet members.

     Here are a few leadership lessons from the life of Lincoln as described in the book.

     Lesson #1: Know When to Act and When to Wait.

     Lincoln knew when to speak and when to remain silent. He knew when to act and when to wait.

     In reading the book, I found myself on occasion wanting Lincoln to hurry up and make a decision, only to later discover that making his views public too soon would have sabotaged his chances for seeing lasting change. Whether he was hiring or firing, giving speeches or staying silent, he had an uncanny ability to gauge public opinion. He usually waited for the public to catch up with him before making pronouncements.

Click here to go to source

​Trevin Wax is Bible and Reference Publisher at LifeWay Christian Resources and managing editor of The Gospel Project. You can follow him on Twitteror receive blog posts via email. Click here for Trevin’s full bio.

Christian Thinkers 101: A Crash Course on St. Basil

By Kenneth R. Samples 10/18/2016

     Not many people are known as so-and-so “the Great.” But St. Basil the Great was one of the finest thinkers, writers, and preachers in Christian church history. What did this man believe, and what did he ultimately contribute to historic Christianity? Here’s your crash course on the life and accomplishments of St. Basil the Great—and why he still matters today.

     Who Was St. Basil?

     St. Basil the Great (ca. 329–379) was born in Caesarea Mazaca, Cappadocia, to one of the most distinguished and pious Christian families. Along with Basil, the Orthodox and Catholic churches subsequently honored a number of his family members with sainthood. Basil received a notable Christian and classical education in the famous ancient cities of Athens and Constantinople. Basil, along with his brother Gregory of Nyssa and his friend Gregory of Nazianzus, made up the theologically potent threesome known as the Cappadocian Fathers. Later serving as the bishop of Caesarea and being one of the architects of ancient Christian monasticism, Basil is honored as a doctor in both churches, East and West. St. Basil the Great suffered ill health, likely due to his ascetic practices, and died at approximately 50 years old.

     What Did St. Basil Write?

     St. Basil the Great was a prolific author of antiquity. Though he wrote in the fourth century, some 300 of his letters have survived through the centuries. He also wrote a number of books, including three with specific apologetics significance. First, his treatise On the Holy Spirit (Latin: De Spiritu Sancto) develops and defends the full deity of the Spirit of God as the third member of the Trinity. Second, his Refutation of the Apology of the Impious Eunomius defends the deity of the Son (Jesus Christ) against an advocate of the Arian heresy (the view that the Son was a creature). Third, his Hexaemeron (a name derived from the Greek roots for “six days”) expounds upon the six creation days of Genesis.

Does Nature Today Reveal More or Less About God? Part 2

By Hugh Ross 11/16/2016

     In my previous blog article, I explained and described how science today reveals exponentially more about God, his attributes, and his plans for humanity than it did just a century ago. This exponential increase in revelation from the book of nature provides the fuel for the ministry of Reasons to Believe. Because of this increase, we are seeing unprecedented numbers of skeptics becoming faithful followers of Christ.

     Still, many more people are turning away from faith, raising a paradox. Why, if there is so much more revelation of God coming from the scientific disciplines, do we see in several parts of the world such a rise in the percentage of the population that identifies themselves as atheists, agnostics, or deists?

     In this blog article I will explain and describe how, in a different context, science reveals much less about God than it did a century ago. I will explain why, consequently, in some parts of the world atheists and agnostics today make up a still small but larger percentage of the population than in the past. Below, I will address three different arenas where nature reveals less about God.

     Less Revelation from the Heavens

     In a recent issue of Science Advances, an international team of 10 light-pollution scientists reported that more than 80 percent of the world’s population and more than 99 percent of the US and European populations live under artificial light–polluted skies.1 Figure 1 shows the current status of light pollution for the world.

1. Improbable Planet: How Earth Became Humanity's Home

2. Why the Universe Is the Way It Is

3. Hidden Treasures in the Book of Job: How the Oldest Book in the Bible Answers Today's Scientific Questions (Reasons to Believe)

4. Navigating Genesis: A Scientist's Journey through Genesis 1-11

5. A Matter of Days: Resolving a Creation Controversy

6. Beyond the Cosmos: The Extra-Dimensionality of God: What Recent Discoveries in Astronomy and Physics Reveal about the Nature of God

7. Lights in the Sky & Little Green Men: A Rational Christian Look at UFOs and Extraterrestrials

8. Fingerprint of God: Recent Scientific Discoveries Reveal the Unmistakable Identity of the Creator

9. Genesis One: A Scientific Perspective

10. The Creator and the Cosmos: How the Latest Scientific Discoveries of the Century Reveal God

11. More Than a Theory: Revealing a Testable Model for Creation (Reasons to Believe)

Does Nature Reveal God?

By R.C. Sproul 5/27/2017

     Does nature reveal God? This question indicates a concern about a foundational issue to Christianity. The issue is, can God be known outside of the church or a religious environment?

     The secularist of today answers this question with the negative. The world of nature is frequently said to be antithetical to a belief in God, presenting us with so many anomalies as to render the existence of God untenable.

     Because of these claims either from the corner of the militant atheist or from the queries of the troubled agnostic, many Christians have retreated into a sphere of “religious faith” as the only framework within which God can be known. Here nature is negotiated in order to protect the arena of space.

     The nature Psalms of the Old Testament indicate that the majesty of the Creator shines through the creation. God not only reveals Himself clearly in creation, but the revelation gets through. It is perceived by men. The judgment of God is not withheld because men refuse to receive the revelation (Rom. 1:18).

     The problem is that not only does God reveal Himself, but that men perceive that revelation and refuse to acknowledge it. Paul says, “When they knew God, they glorified him not as God, neither were thankful” (Rom. 1:21, KJV). Here man is said to know God. His sin is that he will not glorify or thank the God he knows exists. Paul contends that God so clearly manifests Himself in creation that all men know He exists. God’s revelation in nature makes honest atheism an intellectual impossibility.

Click here to go to source

Robert Charles Sproul, 2/13/1939 – 12/14/2017 was an American theologian, author, and ordained pastor in the Presbyterian Church in America. Dr. R.C. Sproul was founder and chairman of Ligonier Ministries, an international Christian education and discipleship organization located near Orlando, Fla. He was also copastor of Saint Andrew’s Chapel in Sanford, Fla., chancellor of Reformation Bible College, and executive editor of Tabletalk magazine. Dr. Sproul has contributed dozens of articles to national evangelical publications, has spoken at conferences, churches, and schools around the world, and has written more than one hundred books. He also served as general editor of the Reformation Study Bible.

The Institutes of the Christian Religion

Translated by Henry Beveridge

     Introduction by The Rev. John Murray, M.A., Th.M.

     CHAPTER 5.

     THE KNOWLEDGE OF GOD CONSPICUOUS IN THE CREATION, AND CONTINUAL GOVERNMENT OF THE WORLD.

     This chapter consists of two parts: 1. The former, which occupies the first ten sections, divides all the works of God into two great classes, and elucidates the knowledge of God as displayed in each class. The one class is treated of in the first six, and the other in the four following sections: 2. The latter part of the chapter shows, that, in consequence of the extreme stupidity of men, those manifestations of God, however perspicuous, lead to no useful result. This latter part, which commences at the eleventh section, is continued to the end of the chapter.

Sections.

     1. The invisible and incomprehensible essence of God, to a certain extent, made visible in his works.

     2. This declared by the first class of works--viz. the admirable motions of the heavens and the earth, the symmetry of the human body, and the connection of its parts; in short, the various objects which are presented to every eye.

     3. This more especially manifested in the structure of the human body.

     4. The shameful ingratitude of disregarding God, who, in such a variety of ways, is manifested within us. The still more shameful ingratitude of contemplating the endowments of the soul, without ascending to Him who gave them. No objection can be founded on any supposed organism in the soul.

     5. The powers and actions of the soul, a proof of its separate existence from the body. Proofs of the soul's immortality. Objection that the whole world is quickened by one soul. Reply to the objection. Its impiety.

     6. Conclusion from what has been said--viz. that the omnipotence, eternity, and goodness of God, may be learned from the first class of works, i.e., those which are in accordance with the ordinary course of nature.

     7. The second class of works--viz. those above the ordinary course of nature, afford clear evidence of the perfections of God, especially his goodness, justice, and mercy.

     8. Also his providence, power, and wisdom.

     9. Proofs and illustrations of the divine Majesty. The use of them--viz. the acquisition of divine knowledge in combination with true piety.

     10. The tendency of the knowledge of God to inspire the righteous with the hope of future life, and remind the wicked of the punishments reserved for them. Its tendency, moreover, to keep alive in the hearts of the righteous a sense of the divine goodness.

     11. The second part of the chapter, which describes the stupidity both of learned and unlearned, in ascribing the whole order of things, and the admirable arrangements of divine Providence, to fortune.

     12. Hence Polytheism, with all its abominations, and the endless and irreconcilable opinions of the philosophers concerning God.

     13. All guilty of revolt from God, corrupting pure religion, either by following general custom, or the impious consent of antiquity.

     14. Though irradiated by the wondrous glories of creation, we cease not to follow our own ways.

     15. Our conduct altogether inexcusable, the dullness of perception being attributable to ourselves, while we are fully reminded of the true path, both by the structure and the government of the world.

     1. Since the perfection of blessedness consists in the knowledge of God, he has been pleased, in order that none might be excluded from the means of obtaining felicity, not only to deposit in our minds that seed of religion of which we have already spoken, but so to manifest his perfections in the whole structure of the universe, and daily place himself in our view, that we cannot open our eyes without being compelled to behold him. His essence, indeed, is incomprehensible, utterly transcending all human thought; but on each of his works his glory is engraven in characters so bright, so distinct, and so illustrious, that none, however dull and illiterate, can plead ignorance as their excuse. Hence, with perfect truth, the Psalmist exclaims, "He covereth himself with light as with a garment," (Psalm 104:2); as if he had said, that God for the first time was arrayed in visible attire when, in the creation of the world, he displayed those glorious banners, on which, to whatever side we turn, we behold his perfections visibly portrayed. In the same place, the Psalmist aptly compares the expanded heavens to his royal tent, and says, "He layeth the beams of his chambers in the waters, maketh the clouds his chariot, and walketh upon the wings of the wind," sending forth the winds and lightnings as his swift messengers. And because the glory of his power and wisdom is more refulgent in the firmament, it is frequently designated as his palace. And, first, wherever you turn your eyes, there is no portion of the world, however minute, that does not exhibit at least some sparks of beauty; while it is impossible to contemplate the vast and beautiful fabric as it extends around, without being overwhelmed by the immense weight of glory. Hence, the author of the Epistle to the Hebrews elegantly describes the visible worlds as images of the invisible (Heb. 11:3), the elegant structure of the world serving us as a kind of mirror, in which we may behold God, though otherwise invisible. For the same reason, the Psalmist attributes language to celestial objects, a language which all nations understand (Psalm 19:1), the manifestation of the Godhead being too clear to escape the notice of any people, however obtuse. The apostle Paul, stating this still more clearly, says, "That which may be known of God is manifest in them, for God has showed it unto them. For the invisible things of him from the creation of the world are clearly seen, being understood by the things that are made, even his eternal power and Godhead," (Rom. 1:20).

     2. In attestation of his wondrous wisdom, both the heavens and the earth present us with innumerable proofs not only those more recondite proofs which astronomy, medicine, and all the natural sciences, are designed to illustrate, but proofs which force themselves on the notice of the most illiterate peasant, who cannot open his eyes without beholding them. It is true, indeed, that those who are more or less intimately acquainted with those liberal studies are thereby assisted and enabled to obtain a deeper insight into the secret workings of divine wisdom. No man, however, though he be ignorant of these, is incapacitated for discerning such proofs of creative wisdom as may well cause him to break forth in admiration of the Creator. To investigate the motions of the heavenly bodies, to determine their positions, measure their distances, and ascertain their properties, demands skill, and a more careful examination; and where these are so employed, as the Providence of God is thereby more fully unfolded, so it is reasonable to suppose that the mind takes a loftier flight, and obtains brighter views of his glory. [57] Still, none who have the use of their eyes can be ignorant of the divine skill manifested so conspicuously in the endless variety, yet distinct and well ordered array, of the heavenly host; and, therefore, it is plain that the Lord has furnished every man with abundant proofs of his wisdom. The same is true in regard to the structure of the human frame. To determine the connection of its parts, its symmetry and beauty, with the skill of a Galen (Lib. De Usu Partium), requires singular acuteness; and yet all men acknowledge that the human body bears on its face such proofs of ingenious contrivance as are sufficient to proclaim the admirable wisdom of its Maker.

     3. Hence certain of the philosophers [58] have not improperly called man a microcosm (miniature world), as being a rare specimen of divine power, wisdom, and goodness, and containing within himself wonders sufficient to occupy our minds, if we are willing so to employ them. Paul, accordingly, after reminding the Athenians that they "might feel after God and find him," immediately adds, that "he is not far from every one of us," (Acts 17:27); every man having within himself undoubted evidence of the heavenly grace by which he lives, and moves, and has his being. But if, in order to apprehend God, it is unnecessary to go farther than ourselves, what excuse can there be for the sloth of any man who will not take the trouble of descending into himself that he may find Him? For the same reason, too, David, after briefly celebrating the wonderful name and glory of God, as everywhere displayed, immediately exclaims, "What is man, that thou art mindful of him?" and again, "Out of the mouths of babes and sucklings thou hast ordained strength," (Psalm 8:2, 4). Thus he declares not only that the human race are a bright mirror of the Creator's works, but that infants hanging on their mothers' breasts have tongues eloquent enough to proclaim his glory without the aid of other orators. Accordingly, he hesitates not to bring them forward as fully instructed to refute the madness of those who, from devilish pride, would fain extinguish the name of God. Hence, too, the passage which Paul quotes from Aratus, "We are his offspring," (Acts 17:28), the excellent gifts with which he has endued us attesting that he is our Father. In the same way also, from natural instinct, and, as it were, at the dictation of experience, heathen poets call him the father of men. No one, indeed, will voluntarily and willingly devote himself to the service of God unless he has previously tasted his paternal love, and been thereby allured to love and reverence Him.

     4. But herein appears the shameful ingratitude of men. Though they have in their own persons a factory where innumerable operations of God are carried on, and a magazine stored with treasures of inestimable value--instead of bursting forth in his praise, as they are bound to do, they, on the contrary, are the more inflated and swelled with pride. They feel how wonderfully God is working in them, and their own experience tells them of the vast variety of gifts which they owe to his liberality. Whether they will or not, they cannot but know that these are proofs of his Godhead, and yet they inwardly suppress them. They have no occasion to go farther than themselves, provided they do not, by appropriating as their own that which has been given them from heaven, put out the light intended to exhibit God clearly to their minds. At this day, however, the earth sustains on her bosom many monster minds--minds which are not afraid to employ the seed of Deity deposited in human nature as a means of suppressing the name of God. Can any thing be more detestable than this madness in man, who, finding God a hundred times both in his body and his soul, makes his excellence in this respect a pretext for denying that there is a God? He will not say that chance has made him differ from the brutes that perish; but, substituting nature as the architect of the universe, he suppresses the name of God. The swift motions of the soul, its noble faculties and rare endowments, bespeak the agency of God in a manner which would make the suppression of it impossible, did not the Epicureans, like so many Cyclops, use it as a vantage-ground, from which to wage more audacious war with God. Are so many treasures of heavenly wisdom employed in the guidance of such a worm as man, and shall the whole universe be denied the same privilege? To hold that there are organs in the soul corresponding to each of its faculties, is so far from obscuring the glory of God, that it rather illustrates it. Let Epicurus tell what concourse of atoms, cooking meat and drink, can form one portion into refuse and another portion into blood, and make all the members separately perform their office as carefully as if they were so many souls acting with common consent in the superintendence of one body.

     5. But my business at present is not with that stye: I wish rather to deal with those who, led away by absurd subtleties, are inclined, by giving an indirect turn to the frigid doctrine of Aristotle, to employ it for the purpose both of disproving the immortality of the soul, and robbing God of his rights. Under the pretext that the faculties of the soul are organised, they chain it to the body as if it were incapable of a separate existence, while they endeavour as much as in them lies, by pronouncing eulogiums on nature, to suppress the name of God. But there is no ground for maintaining that the powers of the soul are confined to the performance of bodily functions. What has the body to do with your measuring the heavens, counting the number of the stars, ascertaining their magnitudes, their relative distances, the rate at which they move, and the orbits which they describe? I deny not that Astronomy has its use; all I mean to show is, that these lofty investigations are not conducted by organised symmetry, but by the faculties of the soul itself apart altogether from the body. The single example I have given will suggest many others to the reader. The swift and versatile movements of the soul in glancing from heaven to earth, connecting the future with the past, retaining the remembrance of former years, nay, forming creations of its own--its skill, moreover, in making astonishing discoveries, and inventing so many wonderful arts, are sure indications of the agency of God in man. What shall we say of its activity when the body is asleep, its many revolving thoughts, its many useful suggestions, its many solid arguments, nay, its presentiment of things yet to come? What shall we say but that man bears about with him a stamp of immortality which can never be effaced? But how is it possible for man to be divine, and yet not acknowledge his Creator? Shall we, by means of a power of judging implanted in our breast, distinguish between justice and injustice, and yet there be no judge in heaven? Shall some remains of intelligence continue with us in sleep, and yet no God keep watch in heaven? Shall we be deemed the inventors of so many arts and useful properties that God may be defrauded of his praise, though experience tells us plainly enough, that whatever we possess is dispensed to us in unequal measures by another hand? The talk of certain persons concerning a secret inspiration quickening the whole world, is not only silly, but altogether profane. Such persons are delighted with the following celebrated passage of Virgil: [59] --

"Know, first, that heaven, and earth's compacted frame,
And flowing waters, and the starry flame,
And both the radiant lights, one common soul
Inspires and feeds--and animates the whole.
This active mind, infused through all the space,
Unites and mingles with the mighty mass:
Hence, men and beasts the breath of life obtain,
And birds of air, and monsters of the main.
Th' ethereal vigour is in all the same,
And every soul is filled with equal flame."[60]

"Hence to the bee some sages have assigned
A portion of the God, and heavenly mind;
For God goes forth, and spreads throughout the whole,
Heaven, earth, and sea, the universal soul;
Each, at its birth, from him all beings share,
Both man and brute, the breath of vital air;
To him return, and, loosed from earthly chain,
Fly whence they sprung, and rest in God again;
Spurn at the grave, and, fearless of decay,
Dwell in high heaven, art star th' ethereal way."[62]

Perspectives on Social Ethics 4 - Apostolic Perspectives on Social Ethics

By Charles C. Ryrie     1976

     While the Apostles wrote frequently about the Christian’s relationship to the social institutions of their day, their teaching was more concerned with how to live within the framework of those existing institutions than with how to change them. Remembering that this series is concerned with social ethics and not personal ethics, the subject of the Apostles’ teaching will be considered under three headings: areas for social concern, motives for social concern, and methods to be used.

Areas of Social Concern | Civic Responsibility

     The dual citizenship of the believer which the Lord affirmed ( Matt 22:21 ) is reiterated by the Apostle Paul ( Phil 3:20 ). While a citizen of heaven, Paul nonetheless enjoyed and used the privileges of his Roman citizenship ( Acts 22:25–29; 25:10–12 ).

     Obedience to government. Without question, “obedience” is the key word the Apostles use to describe the Christian’s responsibility to civil government. In  Romans 13:1–7 Paul commands obedience and submission for several reasons: because authority is ordained of God (v.  1 ); because resistance to government is, in the final analysis, resistance to God (v.  2 ); because government generally opposes evil (v.  4 ); and because man’s conscience tells him to obey (v.  5 ). Eight or nine years and several imprisonments later, during which time Paul had ample opportunity to rethink his position, he gave the same advice:  “Put them in mind to be subject [this is the same verb as in  Rom 13:1 ],  to obey magistrates, to be ready for every good work” ( Titus 3:1 ). Mistreatment at the hands of the Roman government was not considered sufficient existential grounds for changing his mind!

     About the same time Paul wrote to Titus, Peter wrote to people in various parts of the empire that they should submit for the following reasons: submission shows the believer’s obedience to God Himself ( 1 Pet 2:13 ); it is the will of God (v.  15 ); and it is a good testimony to the unsaved (v.  15 ). Both the Pauline and Petrine teachings were written under the reign of Emperor Nero (A.D. 54–68). The Epistle to the  Romans was written during the first part of Nero’s reign, the celebrated quinquennium, which was characterized by good government. Reportedly, Seneca said of Nero during this time that he was incapable of learning cruelty. Royal intrigue involving his mother resulted in her death in A.D. 60. A marked change followed in the life and government of Nero, who plunged deeper and deeper into personal dissipation and brought the empire to the point of bankruptcy. On July 18, A.D. 64 Rome began to burn, and whatever may or may not have been Nero’s part in the holocaust, suspicion was thrown on the emperor. In order to divert attention, Nero attempted to lay the blame on the Christians. Tacitus described the matter this way:

     Wherefore in order to allay the rumor he [Nero] put forward as guilty, and afflicted with the most exquisite punishments those who were hated for their abominations and called “Christians” by the populace … Therefore, first of all those who confessed [to being Christians] were arrested, and then as a result of their information a large number were implicated, not so much on the charge of incendiarism as for hatred of the human race. They died by methods of mockery; some were covered with the skins of wild beasts and then torn by dogs, some were crucified, some were burned as torches to give light at night … men felt that their destruction was not on account of the public welfare but to gratify the cruelty of one [Nero]. The Annals: The Reigns of Tiberius, Claudius, and Nero (Oxford World's Classics)

     Some place the writing of  1 Peter shortly after the beginning of Nero’s persecution, which makes Peter’s teaching very significant. Furthermore, if Peter were in Rome when he wrote the letter (which seems likely from  1 Peter 5:13 ), what he had to say about civil obedience is even more startling.

     Subjection to authority is to flow from the believer’s own will. The verb “be subject” is in the middle voice in each of the  Romans and  Titus passages cited above. This indicates that obedience is to be given freely of one’s own accord.

     What is the extent of this obedience? None of the three passages cited names any exceptions or special cases calling for disobedience. However, there are at least two instructive examples of disobedience in the experiences of the Apostles. One is the well-known statement of Peter,  “We ought to obey God rather than man” ( Acts 5:29 ), a statement made with respect to disobeying the command of the Sanhedrin, which had not only religious power but also wide political power at that time. This is a clear example of disobedience when a command of the governing power conflicts with a clear command of God. Disobedience is justified when civil authority requires a believer to disobey the laws of God.

     Another example deals not so much with the area of disobedience as it does with pressure that can properly be applied to bring the government to do what it is supposed to do. The incident occurred at Philippi where Paul staged a first-century sit-in. Having been beaten without a trial, he refused to move until the authorities came and apologized for violating his rights as a Roman citizen ( Acts 16:37 ). He was trying by legitimate means to compel the Roman authorities to fulfill their God-appointed task. It is to be noted that he did not stage his sit-in because of some selfish claim against the authorities.

     Thus it is evident that the first responsibility of the Christian is to obey freely and fully, unless to do so would directly violate God’s laws.

     Respect for government. A second civic responsibility is respect for government ( 1 Pet 2:17 ). To all men Christians must give honor; to other believers, love; to God, fear; and to the king, constant honor (the tense in this last command changes to present). The basic meaning of the word honor is “to fix the value of something”; that is, believers are to find something of value in those who govern them. The word is linked with the fear of God (see  Prov 24:21 ). Paul draws on this nuance when he commands that honor be given to those in authority ( Rom 13:7 ).

     Support for government. A third civic responsibility is support for government. Christians owe their government material obligations; they are to pay dues (the verb ἀπόδετε, is the same as in  Matt 22:21 ). Paul’s teaching parallels that of Christ: since believers receive benefits from government they must support the government. Four principal kinds of taxes were levied in first-century Palestine: a land tax payable in kind or in money, a poll tax and personal property tax, a tax or duty on export/import goods at seaports and city gates, and a house tax in Jerusalem. “Tribute” refers to the first two kinds (on person and property) and “custom” to the third (on goods).

     Praying for rulers. A fourth civic responsibility is that of praying for rulers ( 1 Tim 2:1–2 ). Christians’ prayers should include supplication (giving evidence of a sense of need), prayer (in general), intercession (petition to a recognized superior), and thanksgiving. This last is probably the most difficult element to include, knowing the character of some rulers, but God nonetheless commands it. The object of one’s prayers should include all in authority, not simply good rulers or those of his own political party. Such prayer is purposeful: that believers might lead a tranquil and quiet life in all piety and gravity. Devotion to God and seriousness of purpose (piety and gravity) can best be practiced when life is tranquil and not in turmoil. Unbelievers must obey, respect, and support government; but only believers can effectively pray for rulers.

     In summary, the responsibilities are clear, but the emphasis is sometimes overlooked. The Apostles did not advocate either civil disobedience or revolution to effect change, even when that change was clearly needed. The believer’s heavenly citizenship is far more important; his earthly sojourn is temporary. This is not to say that he is unconcerned about the kind or activity of government; he merely does not view government as his primary concern.

     The early Christians were subject to a power which required them to do that which was forbidden by their religion. To that extent and within those limits they could not and did not obey it; but they never encouraged in any way resistance or rebellion. In all things indifferent the Christian conformed to the existing law; he obeyed the law “not only because of the wrath, but also for conscience sake.” He only disobeyed when it was necessary to do so for conscience sake. The point of importance is the detachment of the two spheres of activity. The Church and the State are looked upon as different bodies, each with a different work to perform. To designate this or that form of government as “Christian,” and support it on these grounds, would have been quite alien to the whole spirit of those days. The Church must influence the world by its hold on the hearts and consciences of individuals … A Critical and Exegetical Commentary on The Epistle to the Romans (International Critical Commentary Series).

Responsibility to the Poor

     As in the teachings of Christ, so also in the teachings and example of the Apostles, concern for the poor receives a prominent place. At least three principles emerge from the writings of the Apostles.

     First, both the state of having possessions and the state of lacking them are from God. Wealth is regarded as evil only if it is improperly used. It is the love of money, not the lack of it, that is the root of all evil ( 1 Tim 6:10 ). The rich are never told to give all their wealth away, but to be generous and not to trust in possessions ( 1 Tim 6:17–19 ). Ananias and Sapphira were judged not because they refused to give all their possessions to the church, but because they pretended to give all away, when in reality they did not. They were not reproached for deciding to keep back part of the sale price of their land, but rather for pretending to give the full price to the Apostles ( Acts 5:1–11 ). Peter makes it very clear that the property and proceeds were theirs.

     Paul experienced both the state of having possessions and lacking them ( Phil 4:12 ). He was not more in the Lord’s will in one state than the other. In the will of God a man may be poor, while another equally in the will of God may be rich ( James 1:9–10 ). The important test for every Christian is whether or not he has learned to be content in either condition. For the one who has much, it is easy to be content, but he must search his own heart to see whether he would willingly give up all he has, if God so willed. Money can easily become an idol. The one who has little must also learn contentment, though this does not mean he should abandon legitimate means of self-advancement.

     Just as a man may be either rich or poor in the will of God, he may also be rich or poor out of the will of God. Ill-gotten wealth will have to be accounted for in the day of judgment ( James 5:3, 9 ). If poverty resulted from laziness, then others are under no obligation to support the slothful one. Paul commanded that if a man did not wish to work he should not be allowed to eat ( 2 Thess 3:10 ). Neither the individual Christian nor the church has any responsibility to support such people.

     Second, planning for the future is prudent. There are three facets to such planning. One facet relates to widowed parents and/or grandparents. This is a clear point (among many unclear ones!) in the passage concerning the care of widows ( 1 Tim 5:3–16 ). Believers bear the primary responsibility for the care of their widowed parents or grandparents. Verse  8 speaks of providing for one’s own, especially those of his own house, so that he will not be worse than an unbeliever. The word provide means “to think ahead and prepare for one’s foreseeable needs.” In this context it refers to the needs of the members of one’s own household, including the widows related to that family. This verse does not deal with saving for the education of one’s children, or buying insurance unless that would be involved in providing for a widowed mother or grandmother. Of course, everyone faces the problem of knowing how much will be enough, but the principle is clear. The family takes the responsibility; the church assumes the responsibility only when no family is available to do so. When the church does have to assume responsibility, two further principles emerge: give temporary relief to younger widows who are encouraged to remarry, and promise sustained support for older enrolled widows. Thus the family responds first; the church steps in only if there is no family; and the government is mentioned not at all.

     Elsewhere Paul enunciates the principle of parents providing for their children ( 2 Cor 12:14 ). In his relationship to the Corinthians Paul desired to exercise the privilege of a parent, namely, to lay up provision for his spiritual children. He bases his plea on an accepted principle: “the children ought not to lay up for the parents, but the parents for the children.” Again the difficult question is, How much is necessary and proper to conform to this principle? Whatever is the correct answer to that question (and it will undoubtedly differ in each case), it is clear that planning for the future of one’s children and the care of one’s parents is prudent and commendable in the sight of God.

     James adds a third facet: caring for orphans ( James 1:27 ). Pure religion is to “visit,” or better, “to look after and care for” (from the same root as “bishop”) orphans. Specifically how this gets done is not stated, but like the care of widows, it is primarily an individual responsibility. Actually, the matter of planning falls in the area of personal ethics, but it is mentioned here because it bears on social responsibilities.

     Responsibility for widows, children, and orphans is a family matter — either the individual family or the church family. Saving and thrift are not vices, nor are they incompatible with the proper use of money.

     Third, giving is the proof of love. The act of giving intrinsically involves others. There can be no giver without a corresponding recipient. While it is true that giving may be done on a one-to-one basis, the New Testament emphasis is clearly on group giving.  First John 3:17 mentions one-to-one giving, and summarizes the entire apostolic teaching on the subject. Giving is the proof of love, which in turn is a test of fellowship; and fellowship in turn is the basis for confidence that God hears our prayers. This giving has some very important practical ramifications.

     Giving flows from a heart of love. The Apostles, building on this truth, set forth guidelines for genuine, Spirit-controlled giving.

     First, the individual should make regular provision (“lay by himself”) for giving. Stewardship of one’s personal assets should be systematic so that funds are regularly available for giving ( 1 Cor 16:2 ). In this passage Paul has in mind the collection he was taking for the poor in Jerusalem, carrying out the admonition which Peter, James, and John had given him earlier ( Gal 2:10 ). This laying aside should not be an emotional whim, but a thoughtful, systematic consideration based on a proper assessment of what a man has. In other words, provision for giving should be a part of one’s regular budget ( 2 Cor 8:12 ). It is not a matter of trusting God for what one does not have, but of God trusting the believer to plan carefully with what he does have.

     Second, the primary responsibility of believers in their use of money is in caring for the material needs of other believers. While Christians are called on to do good to all men, their special responsibility in good works and in giving is to fellow believers ( Gal 6:10 ). From the beginning the church undertook a ministry to her own. Sharing things in common was done by the church immediately after the day of Pentecost ( Acts 2:34–35; 4:34–35 ). Clearly the right of holding property was not abolished ( 4:34 ), and community control was only assumed when goods or money was voluntarily given. Apparently, this communal sharing was done temporarily (and only in Jerusalem) to meet the need created by the thousands of pilgrims whose visit to Jerusalem had been unexpectedly prolonged by a life-changing encounter with Christianity. No doubt many stayed on in order to be taught, and soon they ran out of money and provisions. Into this situation stepped the church.

     Later, a large group of widows made demands on the charity of the Jerusalem church ( Acts 6:1 ). Levirate marriage, that is, the marriage of a widow by her brother-in-law after the death of her husband, was designed to help protect the rights of a widow. But the law made provision for releasing the brother-in-law in cases of hardship. As a result Levirate marriage was neglected and widows, left to make their own way, became the objects of charity. At the time of Christ they had become so neglected that the Jews established a fund in the Temple out of which relief was given to widows and orphans ( 2 Macc 3:10 ). Many of these widows were apparently converted to Christianity, thereby cutting off their Temple fund support. Again the church stepped in to undertake for her own.

     A third example of special provision for the material needs of other believers can be seen in the famine relief money sent by the Christians in Antioch to those in Judea ( Acts 11:27–30 ). Their gift represents probably the first instance of charity being given to those who were not personally known to the donors.

     A fourth example of the church caring for her own is the collection Paul took up in the churches of Macedonia and Achaia for the poor saints in Jerusalem ( Rom 15:25, 27; 2 Cor 8–9 ). The relief effort extended over a period of time ( 2 Cor 9:2 ), and involved organized effort ( 2 Cor 8:18–22 ). Indeed, in all of these instances there had to be some degree of organization in order to carry out the relief program, since money and goods were never passed directly from donor to recipient. Instead, donors contributed to leaders who in turn controlled the distribution of the monies.

     A third principle concerning giving can be found in those strange verses of  1 Corinthians 7:27–31. Since the time is short (and it is obviously shorter than when Paul wrote), then Christians today must put all the things of life (including money) in proper perspective, for they are all transitory. Or as another has expressed it:  “All of us must live as loose to money and possessions as if we were actually giving them away … All of us must keep on trying to find fresh ways of giving away more if possible year by year.” Whose World?

Responsibilities in Employment

     Considerable ink has been consumed by authors writing in this area of ethics. This writer does not think it germane to the emphasis of this article to dwell on many of the things which the Scriptures say about work, particularly as it relates to the individual. But several observations can be made. Before the Fall, God gave man work to do ( Gen 1:28; 2:15 ), but the Fall added the element of toil to man’s attempts at making the earth provide his sustenance ( 3:17–19 ). God is a worker God, not merely a thinker God. Jesus Christ worked as a carpenter. All who are physically able are commanded to work, else they would not eat ( 2 Thess 3:10 ). Thus work is ordained of God and can be a noble thing.

     Two aspects of the relationship of the believer to work in society may be considered:

     The believer’s attitude toward his status and work in the social structure. The believer’s attitude involves a sense of calling and a sense of contentment ( 1 Cor 7:17–24 ). In this paragraph Paul states the general principle that the believer’s calling is the most important element in life. By comparison, the conditions and circumstances in which he finds himself are relatively unimportant. The calling referred to seven times in these verses is both the calling to be a Christian and the calling to a particular station or activity in life. A sense of calling should cause the believer to realize that wherever he is in life and whatever he is called to do, he is “with God” (v.  24 ). This verse provides a much surer foundation for the so-called dignity of work than the verses usually cited. The believer can therefore rest assured (assuming that he is not in any immoral activity) that the calling of God makes any secular or religious work a work with God.

 1 Corinthians 7:17–24 (ESV) 17 Only let each person lead the life that the Lord has assigned to him, and to which God has called him. This is my rule in all the churches. 18 Was anyone at the time of his call already circumcised? Let him not seek to remove the marks of circumcision. Was anyone at the time of his call uncircumcised? Let him not seek circumcision. 19 For neither circumcision counts for anything nor uncircumcision, but keeping the commandments of God. 20 Each one should remain in the condition in which he was called. 21 Were you a bondservant when called? Do not be concerned about it. (But if you can gain your freedom, avail yourself of the opportunity.) 22 For he who was called in the Lord as a bondservant is a freedman of the Lord. Likewise he who was free when called is a bondservant of Christ. 23 You were bought with a price; do not become bondservants of men. 24 So, brothers, in whatever condition each was called, there let him remain with God.

     But Paul emphasizes another attitudinal matter: A believer can have a sense of contentment in whatever calling he is in. He is to walk in that calling (v.  17 ) and to remain in that calling (vv.  20, 24 ). Paul does not mean that a man may never change jobs, but he does condemn restlessness and a secular perspective on whatever job one may have. Verse  21 may mean that if a slave has a chance to gain his freedom he should take it, thus changing his status in life dramatically. Calvin states it this way:

… each should be content with his calling, and persist in it, and not be eager to change to something else. In the Scriptures “calling” is a lawful way of life, for it is connected with God, who actually calls us … Therefore, he does not lay it down, that each person must remain in a certain way of life, once he has adopted it; but on the other hand, he condemns the restlessness which prevents individuals from remaining contentedly as they are … First Epistle of Paul to the Corinthians (Calvin's New Testament Commentaries, Volume 9)

     Why does Paul encourage self-abnegation rather than self-promotion? Two reasons are suggested in the passage. One is the Christian’s position as a servant of Christ (v.  22 ), a fact which is true whether one is a slave or a freeman or in whatever state he finds himself in life. The other reason is the shortness of the time which makes eternal realities of far greater priority than temporal ones (v.  29 ). Even though the age has continued longer than Paul anticipated, the time is still short and life is transitory; therefore, Christians should seek to do the will of God  within whatever state in life God has called them. Paul’s emphasis is clearly on believers serving the Lord in the conditions of life to which they were called.

     The believer’s use of work and status in affecting the social structure. It is clear from what has been said that Paul did not advocate any kind of revolutionary action with regard to the structures of employment and station in life. The Apostles emphasized that normal Christian conduct and witness in the believer are the forces which will affect change. Proper Christian conduct on the part of slaves (and thus employees) means obedience, reverence, sincerity, wholehearted work, and no wrongdoing ( Eph 6:5–8; Col 3:22–25 ); and for masters (and thus employers) it means fair play, honest dealings, and no threats ( Eph 6:9; Col 4:1; James 5:4 ). It seems that these specific instructions for the believing worker rule out sloppy work, “slowdowns,” featherbedding, or requests for higher wages simply because others are getting them. On the part of believing employers these specifics outlaw corporate pressure tactics, unfair or unkind treatment of employees, and all dishonest practices (even though they may be “acceptable business practices”). They do not outlaw union activities any more than they outlaw corporation activities, but they do outlaw all — union and corporation — activities that are contrary to these specific commands.

     Normal Christian witness, of course, includes proper use of the tongue and a demonstration of dependence on the resources which only Christians have. The tongue will not be used to curse anyone ( James 3:9 ) but will be used to minister grace to all ( Col 4:6 ). A demonstration of dependence on the resources that only believers have is especially necessary in this secularized age. This dependence makes the Christian worker different even though be does the same job as the unbeliever. Carl Henry sums up this idea very well by relating it to the assembly-line syndrome.

The Christian worker, however, even on the assembly line, can find a sense of ultimate purpose and meaning unknown to the unbeliever. While modern industry, at worst, may distort and thwart one’s spiritual sonship during work hours, it cannot really make a machine of one who is a son of God … Even monotony can be justified in the ministry of God and of humanity, if it stems from a constructive activity that has no better alternative. Whatever contributes to the elevation and good of mankind is worthy, even if it lacks romance and novelty. The 340 permanent staff members of Mayo Clinic are not less helpful to mankind because each individual is a specialist … It is possible, of course for vein specialists, or for those who bronchoscope patients all day long, to think of “pieces of humanity coming down the line.” It is equally possible, and imperative, for the specialist with a sense of calling and mission to think of each person as “my private patient, to be handled as if he were the only patient I have.” Someone will say that this high response is more natural to the worker who deals directly with the persons who benefit from his labors, and this is true enough. But no worker’s responsibility is lessened simply because he serves an invisible neighbor. Many a life has been saved by a properly tightened screw, and many lost through an improperly tightened bolt. Aspects of Christian Social Ethics

     The perspective of the Apostles on status and work in life is captured in two verses:  “Whatever you do, work at it with all your heart, as working for the Lord, not for men, since you know that you will receive an inheritance from the Lord as a reward. It is the Lord Christ you are serving” ( Col 3:23–24 ).

Concerning Prejudice

     The great distinctive of this dispensation is that  “there is no difference” ( Rom 3:22 ). In a sense the principle of impartiality summarizes the apostolic perspective on matters that relate to social issues. No impartiality should be shown in sending the gospel message. It must go to all men without distinguishing racial, national, or social backgrounds ( Acts 10:34–35 ).

     Impartiality should characterize the believer’s relationship to the poor, particularly when the poor come into the assembly. James dealt with the problem of giving preference to those with money who entered the assembly. They were given seats of honor, while poorer people were shunted to the rear, a clear violation of the law that says,  “Thou shalt love thy neighbor as thyself” ( James 2:8 ). The church at Antioch exemplified racial impartiality in the assembly. One of the leaders was Simeon whose nickname was Niger, the Latin word for “black.” He was probably a Jew of African origin or possibly an African Gentile who was a proselyte to Judaism.

     It is against this background of impartiality that the slavery question should be considered. Slavery was part of the texture of first-century society, and it was of a most oppressive character.

     Kind and considerate masters were no doubt to be found; but the nature of the system permitted the grossest cruelties, and, as always in such cases, selfishness and brutality often took advantage of the permission. Slaves had practically no legal rights … In persons thus situated who became Christians it was obviously natural in the highest degree that the assurance of their freedom in Christ would lead to such thoughts as these: “Can it possibly be that I, Christ’s freedman, a citizen of the heavenly kingdom, a child of God, am to remain the bondman of this heathen, himself a slave of Satan?” Of course, supposing the master to be a Christian, the slave’s thought would naturally be, “Since he and I are brethren, and therefore, even if he fail to see his duty in the matter, I have a right to assert my freedom and leave him, or, should I remain in his house, claim in everything the equality of a brother.” The First Epistle of Peter, Robert Johnstone

     Many writers try to make a case for the abolition of slavery from the teachings of the New Testament. However, a more accurate assessment of the matter is this: “Paul has no word of criticism for the institution as such. In this sense, he was unconcerned about ‘social ethics’ — the impact of the gospel on social structures.” Unity and diversity in New Testament theology: Essays in honor of George E. Ladd However, Paul does have something to say about prejudice and impartiality that applies to slavery. Masters are warned against using their position to threaten their slaves on the basis that God is impartial ( Eph 6:9 ), and when Paul sent the runaway slave Onesimus back to his master Philemon, he reminded Philemon to receive him as a brother ( Phile 16 ), although he did not ask him to set Philemon free. Why not? Another has answered this question well:

     If one single word from Christian teaching could have been quoted at Rome as tending to excite the slaves to revolt, it would have set the Roman Power in direct and active hostility to the new faith. Had St. Paul’s teaching led (as it probably would, had he argued the cessation of servitude) to a rising of the slaves — that rising and the Christian Church, which would have been identified with it, would have been crushed together. Rome would not have tolerated a repetition of those servile wars which had, twice in the previous century, deluged Sicily with blood.

     Nor would the danger of preaching the abolition of servitude have been confined to that arising from external violence on the part of the Roman Government; it would have been pregnant with danger to the purity of the Church itself. Many might have been led, from wrong motives, to join a communion which would have aided them in securing their social and political freedom.

     In these considerations we may find, I think, ample reasons for the position of non-interference which the Apostle maintains in regard to slavery. If men then say that Christianity approved of slavery, we would point them to the fact that it is Christianity that has abolished it. Under a particular and exceptional condition of circumstances, which cannot again arise, St. Paul, for wise reasons, did not interfere with it. To have done so would have been worse than useless. A Bible Commentary for English Readers by Various Writers: Volume 7: Acts to Galatians

     Thus Paul’s approach to this social evil was to exhort believers, slave and free alike, to live like citizens of the new age in the structures of the soon-passing present age.

Methods for Implementing Social Concern

     For the most part the method to use in effecting change in social structures is individual action, rather than group action. Obedience, respect, support, and prayer for government are solely individual responsibilities. No group action is involved in discharging responsibility in these areas.

     In relation to the poor, both individual and group (church) action is necessary. The care of widows and the relief of a large group of fellow believers requires organized effort.

     In matters related to employment, change is effected by each Christian fulfilling his responsibility to act with honesty and fairness in his respective position. Nowhere does the Bible call on Christians to organize a campaign to effect corporate changes in, say, General Chariots, but it does call on Christians in the United Chariot Workers Union and Christians in management to work and act like Christians.

     Questions concerning racial prejudice and slavery are dealt with in the Apostles’ teaching in the context of prejudice versus impartiality. And again, change is effected by changing individual attitudes.

     Methods of effecting social change begin with the individual living up to his Christian responsibility, then involving the church in some instances in cooperative action, but never the church using the ruling political powers to bring about desired goals.

Motivation for Social Concern

     At least two powerful motivations for social concern on the part of the believer can be seen in the Apostles’ writings. The first relates to Paul’s emphasis in the pastoral Epistles on wholesome doctrine. This remarkable metaphor, in which true and correct doctrine is characterized as wholesome in contrast to that which is diseased, is found nine times in the Pastorals ( 1 Tim 1:10; 6:3; 2 Tim 1:13; 4:3; Titus 1:9, 13; 2:1, 2, 8 ). Some suggest this medical phraseology may have come from Luke’s association with Paul. At any rate the point is clear: When the body of Christ is in a fit condition, the expression of its beliefs will be healthy. The phrase is coupled contextually with specific aspects of Christian conduct. Thus sound doctrine is expressed through proper actions. One passage concerns the attitude of slaves toward their masters ( 1 Tim 6:1–3 ). In another, healthy speech is enjoined ( Titus 2:8 ). It is clear that no one can claim to hold the truth of Christianity without exhibiting that truth in his conduct; and such healthy conduct will display itself in areas of social concern.

     Peter links two of the areas discussed in this article — civic and employment responsibilities — to the imitation of Christ as a motive for obedience ( 1 Pet 2:13–25 ). Three facets of Christ’s example are particularly germane to the believer and his social responsibilities. First, Christ was blameless in all He did. If anyone ever suffered injustices, it was the Lord; yet He never sinned or used deceit (guile). He was deprived of His rights, but this did not constitute a call to civil disobedience. He responded truthfully when questioned by Pilate and the high priest. His attitude was not one of militant vengeance, but rather truthful response and resignation to the will of God.  Injustice never gives anyone the right to commit sin, while truth keeps the individual from condoning sin.

     Second, Christ did not retaliate.  “Like a sheep before his shearers is dumb, so he opened not his mouth” ( Isa 53:7 ). He did not talk about every issue of His day. He did not level judgments against existing structures. He did not overpower the world, but He did overcome it through suffering. Talkativeness, retaliation, and insisting on rights only causes the church to imitate the world.

     Third, the Lord took the long-range view and committed Himself to God and His ultimate justice. Likewise the Apostles counseled self-abnegation, contentment in one’s calling, and obedience to the reigning powers, not because they wanted to preserve the status quo but because God had told them that this honors Him. Believers must look beyond the immediate and commit themselves to the One who ultimately will bring righteousness and justice to the world.

     Christians, claiming to love the truth, should be leaders in wholesome living. While their spiritual health will not of itself cure other people’s diseases, it should attract others to the Great Physician, and help stem the tide of further corruption in the structures of society. Those who claim to love the Savior should follow His example of lowliness, faithfulness, and self-sacrificing love.

Read The Psalms In "1" Year

Psalm 125

125:1 Those who trust in the LORD are like Mount Zion,
which cannot be moved, but abides forever.
2 As the mountains surround Jerusalem,
so the LORD surrounds his people,
from this time forth and forevermore.
3 For the scepter of wickedness shall not rest
on the land allotted to the righteous,
lest the righteous stretch out
their hands to do wrong.
4 Do good, O LORD, to those who are good,
and to those who are upright in their hearts!
5 But those who turn aside to their crooked ways
the LORD will lead away with evildoers!
Peace be upon Israel!

Fox's Book Of Martyrs

By John Foxe 1563

CHAPTER XVI | The History, Imprisonment, and Examination of Mr. John Hooper,
Bishop of Worcester and Gloucester

The Continual Burnt Offering (Titus 2:11)

By H.A. Ironside - 1941

November 21

Perhaps today! Then, much-tried saint,
Look up, nor let thy spirit faint;
The stretching road thine eyes may see
May never be traversed by thee—
One moment’s space, and then above,
To find thyself in cloudless love!
Perhaps today, afflicted life,
Thou shalt be taken from the strife;
From all that hatred to thy word
Which comes as thou dost please thy Lord!
And then, ah then, how small the pain
Compared with all thou then shalt gain.
--- J. Danson Smith