What do we actually do with the poor?

In a time where mercy ministry has gone glam and churches are increasingly talking more and more about the need to engage the socially marginalized, Michael Jensen asks a question that potentially points out that there’s a rather large white elephant in the room. As a young prospective planter and pastor I’d certainly like an answer to his question.

That thing Called ‘Church’: A Mid-Year Update

In January I posted about my desire to interact with the issue of ‘church’ over the course of this year. ‘Matt the Knight’, a friend of mine, suggested that I give a mid-year update as to where I am in my thinking about some of the questions I set out to explore. So here’s some of the answers to the questions so far:

According to the New Testament what do you have to have, as absolute minimum, for a church to exist?

I’m thinking you need people who have been regenerated by the gospel, living under the consistent proclamation and teaching of the word of God, worshipping in a community by serving, caring, speaking, teaching and loving both each other and those outside. I found a recent study I did on Luther’s view of church quite helpful in part and I’m still blown away by Timmis & Chester’s ‘Total Church’.

What is the relationship between the church and the Kingdom of God?

This one is difficult. I’m still not sure if I have it nailed down (or if I’ll ever nail it down). In light of this a did a study and wrote a paper on the concept of the kingdom of God as found in Luke’s gospel. You can read it here.

What is the relationship between the church and social concern (as opposed to the relationship between Christians and social concern)?

Still not clear on this one either. I know all the various arguments out there and I’ve read quite a bit but I’m not sure I’ve read anything that directly answers this question in a way that looks at individual Christian responsibility and the corporate church’s responsibility.

What is the relationship between the church (local) and culture?

Daniel 1. I have a brilliant talk by Vaughan Roberts on Daniel 1 that answers this question beautifully. Unfortunately I don’t have the rights to post it. I haven’t checked if its available elsewhere so have a look around and I’ll tell you if I find it on-line. Basically his thesis is: Don’t run away from culture but don’t compromise either – and be humble and generous as you figure out this tension.

Is the Knox-Robinson view of church too narrow?

I’m struggling to figure out if its the actual theology that’s too narrow here or the way people practice it in church life. Do I believe that the earthly gathering of believers is the embodiment of an already existing heavenly gathering? Yes. I just think there’s more to ‘church’ than ‘the gathering’.

What does over-realised eschatology look like in the church?

A church that neglects gospel proclamation because its too busy trying to make the new creation happen now.

What does under-realised eschatology look like in the church?

A church that only ever does evangelism and forgets that God’s agenda is the renewal of all things.

How do the above two questions relate to the plausibility of the homogeneous unit principle?

This is tricky. Most people who write on this issue, that I’ve read, write from predominantly mono-cultural society whereas things in South Africa are a lot messier. I’m still working on this one.

What do those same two questions have to say about the depth of gospel community a church should be attempting?

It should be deeeeeeeeeeep. The one thing I’m becoming more and more convinced about in my studies is the need for authentic community that extends beyond the structures.

Are multi-site churches theologically viable?

I don’t see why not. But I also think they can be a breeding ground for a number of different sins: like pride for example. There is also the chance that they can turn the church into not much more than a market commodity – not good. But then again the whole arena of multi-site is quite diverse.

A Response to the Xenophobic Violence

Dion has posted a letter from a friend of his in Johannesburg who is doing something concrete about the xenophobic violence through Calvary Methodist Church. He’s got a few suggestions on how we can help. Please go over to Dion’s blog, read it and seriously consider how you might help.

Thanks Dion and Alan for your efforts.

Xenophobia and the Church – an Open Forum

Xenophobic attacks in Gauteng are rocking the press and media world here in South Africa – I think its been reported on CNN as well. This morning I was listening to SAFM and a bunch of guys talking through the whole issue. One phone caller made a rather outlandish comment which I think begs some discussion. This particular caller suggested that the xenophobic attacks we are witnessing are a result of the failure of the church to hold the government morally accountable!? Do you think this is the case? Are we the government’s moral watchdogs? In what ways can we be proactive in this instance?

This is a difficult discussion because categories like ‘the church’ are rather slippery and used differently by different people. When this particular caller used that category I think he had in mind the likes of Frank Chikane and Desomond Tutu. The other difficulty is the root cause of the xenophobia – is it outright xenophobia or simply reaction to unbearable economic pressures?

What do you think…?

***UPDATE (13:50): Tutu has come out quite vocally this morning against the violence pleading for it to end. It would seem to me that Tutu has been, for the most part, a constant moral thorn in the government’s side, irrespective of who the ruling government has been.***

Stetzer on the Kingdom of God

Ed Stetzer is amazing in how he blends, so effortlessly, his conservative theology with serious contextualization and missionary endeavour. Today he has some warnings for us who would reclaim the use of ‘kingdom’ langauge. Here’s a preview:

“It would be a tragedy if we failed to learn that the last group that used the Kingdom of God to talk of justice often forgot to talk of Jesus.“

A Gospel that Speaks to China and Burma

We could sort out every last person on this planet. We could show them that their self-declared autonomy from God has, and continues, to wreck this world on so many levels. But then we’d still have Burma and we’d still have China – we’d still have an earth revolting in the pains of childbirth. We need a Gospel that both puts an end to autonomy and liberates a broken world. We need God’s story of redemption. A story of creation redeemed. And that story must change how we live now. The creation is waiting for God’s work in us.

My Little Experiment – Part II

“It’s pointless shining the brass on a sinking ship“

That’s a sentiment that many evangelical Christians have applied to social justice, mercy ministry, racial reconciliation, transformation, upliftment, work and calling, environmental issues and a whole lot of other issues relating to this current world and its inhabitants. The ship is going down so don’t bother. The alternative? Well, just do evangelism, that’s all that really matters – in other words – get people into the life boats. Now based upon the many answers to the first post I must take issue with a philosophy of evangelism only. Surely Christians do not continue their existence in this world simply to evangelize the lost. I think we can see this if we draw an analogy from the previous post.

Many of you gave answers, some of which I might not necessarilly go with, but I’m not here to sort out your doctrine of personal godliness, rather I want to make an analogy. Consider the following answers that were posted:

“We are already righteous before the Lord if we are Christians because of the cross and if that is our status we should be living like God’s holy people, striving to live out our status.”

“God has brought you out of darkness into light: therefore live as children of the day.”

“We are to pursue godliness despite attaining it in this world because (1) it serves as a proof of the initial work God has begun in us; (2) God is in the business of redeeming us now, and while we await our final redemption/salvation, it has been inaugurated in a unique way on the cross and through the resurrection (and by the Spirit)”

“I am just trying to live out the reality of who I am, “in Christ”.”

“I am a child of God, therefore it is my desire to live as a true child, not so I can get a big reward, but purely because it is who I am through the work of Christ.”

“Because the grace of God teaches (instructs or trains) me (with the intent of forming proper habits of behaviour).’(Titus 2:11-12 with additional comments from Louw & Nida). Sometimes I put in very little effort at all, I’m simply being propelled by the good news concerning Jesus.”

There’s a common thread running through those comments. It is the idea of living in the light of future expectation – and its a certain expectation. Be holy because you are holy and you will be made holy. We’re very good at applying this to personal godliness and so, like me, you can probably count off hundreds of sermons that you’ve heard about personal praying, reading your bible and displaying the fruit of the Spirit. Be patient, be joyful, be kind etc. etc. The only time spirituality seems to become other person centered is when the sermon is on evangelism. I’m often left wondering if there isn’t anything more to the picture. Does being gospel-centered equate doing evangelism and personal godliness? Or is it more than that?

What if we were to explore our future expectation and discover that God has more in store than simply making us completely righteous in his sight and whisking us off to heaven? What if God’s plan rather was to institute an entire new creation that exists in complete submission to his lordship? What if this new creation was made certain by the cross? What if Colossians 1:20 really means what it says and that God is in the business of more than just redeeming individual souls? What if we’re leaving out large parts of the gospel?

Residence in the new creation is secured for those who trust in Christ (how that will eventually work out I have no idea), surely that must change how we deal with social justice, mercy ministry, racial reconcilliation, transformation, upliftment, work, enviromental issues and a whole lot of other issues relating to this current world and its inhabitants now. My guess is that as we do this there will be plenty, if not more, opportunities for evangelism and the public proclamation of the gospel which is the only thing by which men are saved as far I’m concerned. But we must do it if we are to live in light of our secured future expectation. We shine the brass in the current creation because we are secured residents of the coming new creation – and so shine we must.

What do you think? Is this a fair analogy?

Why Being a Follower of Jesus is not Enough

I’m fascinated by the amount of posts I read by people calling themselves followers of Jesus. As I scan through various blogs from all corners of the Christian tradition I’m increasingly finding people wanting to attribute such a title to themselves. It has a nice ring to it – ‘Follower of Jesus’ in fact I described myself the exact same way when I filled in the ‘religion’ category on my Facebook profile. Are you a Christian? No, I’m a follower of Jesus – it sounds awfully ecumenical, tolerant and free from so many tags and labels that so many of us as younger evangelicals wish to be rid of. Yet in many circles it seems to be taking on a life of its own – a life that may, in reality, be pointing away from the Jesus it claims allegiance too.

When I probe behind the phrase on so many blogs (yes I know I’m being mystical about which specific blogs and posts I’m referring to but I’d rather keep it that way because it has been a general impression of a number of blogs rather than one aimed at a specific post or blog) I discover something that is rather disturbing. It is disturbing by its omissions rather than by what it affirms. Usually these posts speak about Christ’s calls to uplift the poor, look after the marginalized, love one’s enemies, turn the other cheek etc. etc. And at this point I’m loving it and rejoicing in the supreme moral vision of our Lord Jesus that extends to so many of our current issues in this broken world. It’s affirmation and cheering on all the way from my point of view and one finishes such a post feeling convicted to go out into the world and tackle contemporary issues as a follower of Jesus. But step back and take a closer look – what’s missing? When I step back what I don’t often see is a cross, I don’t see nail pierced hands, I don’t see a thorn scraped brow. Ultimately I don’t see the glorious substitution of Christ in my place whereby I can truly call myself a follower of Jesus – because he has purchased me with his very own blood. Rather I see an ethical Jesus, a Jesus who knows right from wrong but has no way to deal with a problem that stretches so much deeper than right or wrong behaviour. I see a moral first century Rabbi inspiring people to be more moral – and it’s deeply disturbing.

A Jesus without a cross is a Jesus that will not transform or cause anyone to benefit from his amazing moral vision. My deepest fear is that people who pursue this type of Jesus will be found one day to not be a follower of Jesus at all – and that would be tragic.

Working with the Homeless in Cape Town

My fiancee works for an organisation called U-Turn who work to uplift homeless people in the area of Claremont in Cape Town. They’ve just got their new website up and running and its worth a look.

The reason I mention it here is due to the current difficulties our organisation is facing. Up until now the municipality has allowed us to lease a building in central Claremont which has operated as a second-phase shelter for the upliftment of homeless men and as a base of operations for all the other work that goes on with the first-phase homeless folk who are still on the street. Unfortunately the municipality requires us to move because they will be demolishing the building in order to build a new road through the area. We have known about the move for a few months now and the municipality has promised us an alternative venue also in central Claremont. However things have come to a head and we’ve been asked to vacate the building within two weeks. Unfortunately the alternative venue is nowhere near ready for our second-phase residents to move into (it completely lacks proper ablution facilities). The costs of making the new venue ready for residents and fully operable are quite significant.

Now I don’t normally do this on my blog but I thought it would be worth putting out there (especially for my US and UK readers who’s Dollars and Pounds go a lot further than our South African Rand):

Would you consider partnering with this ministry in some form? There are suggestions on the website as to how you can contribute to the ministry and help us in this time of need. Thank you for your consideration and please be in prayer for U-Turn over the coming months of transition.

Bock on the Difference Between McLaren and Me

 

“Is Jesus a social, economic, and political revolutionary? Is the mission of the church primarily to confront society’s structures so they can be transformed? Or is its primary goal to confront individuals within these structures and pursue change in individuals that impact the structures they serve?” – Darrell Bock commenting on Jesus’ sermon in Luke 4 (Baker’s Exegetical Commentary on Luke 1:1-9:50, p.400)

Ok so the heading is a little misleading, but after reading this quote I couldn’t but help think that it does a good job of summarizing the difference between Brian McLaren’s view of the church’s purpose and my own personal view. As far as I can see McLaren and I want the same thing – we’ve just got radically different suggestions on how to get there.

On a Journey – Part V

The roads are covered in ice – I’m thinking I’m going to be a bit stuck in the hotel today. The local TV news is suggesting that people should stay home if possible – we’ll have to see. Yesterday was a fairly busy day. It started with an early breakfast with John Ryan who is the pastor of Summit Community Church an Acts29 church just outside of St Louis. Besides pastoring his own church John also coaches other church planters and so we chatted a bit about the type of person Acts29 is looking for when they assess prospective church planters. It was a very fruitful time and, as with most of the guys I’ve met with already, John was really excited to hear about the prospect of church planting in South Africa.

Then I had the chance to go down to Tower Grove and the offices of the Journey’s social action and mercy ministry arm – Mission St Louis.  Josh Wilson, a really great guy, heads up the mission and he took us around a low-income area right next to Tower Grove and showed us some of the work the mission is involved in. From what I could see they’ve really entered the community and are actively working to be a blessing to and love that community – no strings attached. It was really an impressive setup and gave me plenty to think about in terms of mercy ministry back in South Africa.

After that I headed back to Covenant Seminary and after lunch got to meet up with Dr Phil Douglass who is the professor of practical theology with a special interest in church planting and church growth. Dr Douglass has over three decades of experience in assessing and researching church planting and so it was great to spend some time talking about the type of people he looks for when it comes to church planting. He also gave me free copy of his book in PDF format (P & R are about to publish it) in which he brings together years of research to talk about different personality types and the types of church planting they should be involved in. The little bit we got to talk about was so insightful and you could always sense his experience oozing through – so I can’t wait to get into his book.

Then last night I headed down to the Schlafly Bottleworks which is both a local brewery and pub. On Wednesday nights the Journey hosts public discussions at the Schlafly discussing cultural issues relevant to the broader St Louis community. This is all part of what they call Midrash (Hebrew – “commentary”) which is part of the church’s interaction with culture. Last night they had an open discussion on the issue of violence in America. Probably more than 50 people attended and not all of them were members of the Journey, many were just coming in for the discussion. It looks like a great way for the church to build relationships in the community as well as showing that they have a real interest in the issues that their city faces everyday – quality cultural engagement.

Finally I got back to my hotel and watched Arsenal play Milan in the champion’s league which a friend recorded for me. We should have beaten Milan!

Anyway, I’m not sure what’s going to happen with the weather today. I’ll just have to play it by ear.

Further Reflections on Love – The Loveless Church

I’ve spent the best part of the last 8 years moving in conservative evangelical church circles. The majority of the churches I’ve been involved with have been churches where the gospel of Christ is central not just in belief but also in proclamation. Whilst moving in these circles I’ve also often heard a repetitive criticism attached to them. I’ve heard many people complain that these ‘bible-based, gospel-centered’ churches are great on a lot of things but not great at being loving. My immediate response has often been to suggest that person offering the critique doesn’t really understand what biblical love is and that by preaching the gospel we are showing the utmost love. Often my response was justified. But often it wasn’t and the criticism was valid. It is not completely unfair to evaluate a number of the churches with which I am associated as being un-loving, or at least poor at displaying love.

This is a perplexing problem for someone like myself who holds to the absolute importance of gospel-centered bible teaching as the very core of the church life. Why doesn’t it seem to be working in some cases? Well I don’t have all the answers to a question like that, but I have noticed something that I think is contributing in part. I think that often we’re being reductionistic about the call placed upon every believer by the bible itself. Let me quote a section from Tim Chester and Steve Timmis’ book, ‘Total Church‘ to illustrate what I mean. Concerning ministry to the poor the authors comment:

“The most loving thing we can do for the poor is proclaim the good news of eternal salvation through Christ. It is by no means the only loving thing we can do for them, but it is the most loving thing we can do.” (p.75)

Often I think we’re forgetting to add in their little qualification ‘it is by no means the ONLY loving thing we can do…’ And forgetting that qualification can make the world of difference to whether or not a church is loving. So I still affirm, with the authors, that to proclaim the gospel is the single most loving act we can perform as Christians – BUT – its definitely not the ONLY one. We need to shake off that reductionism and teach regularly how the gospel causes us to love in a number of different ways. And then we need to display that true love to a watching world.

Tim Chester on the Kingdom of God

As always Tim Chester is extremely helpful on something I’ve been trying to get my head around. In chapter 5 of ‘Good News to the Poor‘, Chester discusses the relationship between social involvement and the kingdom of God. One of the fundamental questions he tackles is whether or not the kingdom of God is to be identified with social advances within history. Chester argues that no, it shouldn’t be. And so he says:

“…if we are to be true to the bible, we must maintain that salvation does not exist in history beyond the church and that in the New Testament the kingdom of God comes only as Christ is acknowledged as king.” (p.74)

Much of social advancement today is being tagged as God at work growing his kingdom. Like Chester I’m not convinced this is the most helpful way to categorize it – nor do I think it is consistent with the New Testament. If the kingdom is to be manifest then Christ is to be installed as King – without the King there is no kingdom. I would argue, as Chester alludes to later, that social advancement in this world that takes place apart from Christ being acknowledged as King is rather a case of the common grace of God being manifest.

Now this thinking might run contrary to lot of thinking in ‘missional’ circles – even in evangelical missional circles (that’s why in one sense I’m glad Tim Chester, a recognized missional voice, said it first). However at the moment I remain unconvinced by the text of accepting a wider view of the kingdom that embraces social advancement that takes place apart from the acknowledgment of Christ as King. I would maybe suggest that the ethics and ideals of the kingdom of God can be spread into areas that may not necessarily have entered into the kingdom. This will happen as kingdom members – Christians – live out the kingdom within close proximity of those who are outside of the kingdom. I think this spread is unavoidable, in a theoretical sense, since all Christians are called to live by kingdom ideals and ethics.

Chester concludes the chapter with the following words:

“Some Christians see advances in social justice in history as the coming of God’s kingdom, but in the New Testament the kingdom comes through the gospel as people submit to God’s word. God’s kingdom will be supreme over all things when Christ returns, but in the meantime it comes secretly and graciously through God’s word. The social dimension of salvation is anticipated in history in the life of the Christian community.” (p.81)

Birthday Build-Up: The Posts you should’ve Read

Its 2 days to go until this blog’s very first birthday. And as we approach this landmark I thought I’d have a bit of a nostalgic trip down memory lane and some of the posts I’ve written in the past. Today I want to make mention of some of the posts that didn’t do so well in terms of hits but that I wish had got better readership than other posts which drew in many more readers. These are the ones I wanted people to read:

Pray for Zimbabwe (15/03/07)

Missional Influences (13/04/07)

In conversation with daylight #1 (31/05/07)

In conversation with daylight #2 (01/06/07)

Michael Spencer and CESA (02/06/07)

South Africa, “Prosperity” and Church Planting (12/07/07)

Application Beyond the Structures (02/08/07)

10 Tips for On-Line Christian Discussion (25/09/07)

These posts will tell you a lot about what’s important to me.

That thing called ‘Church’

During 2007 I had interactions with numerous church pastors and planters, both in the flesh and on the web. Through these I’ve become convinced that I need to get my ecclesiology clear in my head over the course of 2008. So I’m going to concentrate my studies in this area. Here’s a list of some of the questions I want to have a look at (feel free to point me towards literature that deals with any of the questions below):

According to the New Testament what do you have to have, as absolute minimum, for a church to exist?

What is the relationship between the church and the Kingdom of God?

What is the relationship between the church and social concern (as opposed to the relationship between Christians and social concern)?

What is the relationship between the church (local) and culture?

Is the Knox-Robinson view of church too narrow?

What does over-realised eschatology look like in the church?

What does under-realised eschatology look like in the church?

How do the above two questions relate to the plausibility of the homogeneous unit principle?

What do those same two questions have to say about the depth of gospel community a church should be attempting?

Are multi-site churches theologically viable?

I think these questions are crucial to not only ponder but begin to give solid biblical answers to if a new group of young leaders aim to plant and grow fresh expressions of church that reflect the pattern of the New Testament.

An Atheist is Probably Right

Kevin Parry, the author of the blog, Memoirs of an Ex-Christian makes an interesting observation about the amount of Christians responding to Gareth Cliff’s recent statements. He says:

It’s amazing how many different denominations join forces and mobilise with such efficiency when something like this happens. Church groups join together to draw up petitions, preachers call on their congregations to boycott the media, churches march in protest, etc, etc. I often wonder how effective the Christian church would be if they put as much energy and zeal into fighting more pressing problems. I know some churches do good work in in improving society, but imagine if the same kind of mass mobilisation from different denominations was used to fight issues such as crime, unemployment or poverty. Imagine the difference it would make!

Brian is that REALLY fair?

Brian McLaren on Christianity in the west:

“We have been arguing about the origin of species while an unprecedented extinction of species occurs on our watch; we’ve been fighting endlessly (and unproductively) about unborn children while achieving precious little for the already-born children in Darfur or Congo or Malawi or downtown Cincinnati. These stale expressions of bad faith have left many of us gasping for the fresh air of good faith.”

Hmmm…I better tell all those wonderful missionaries and Christian aids workers in Congo, Malawi and Darfur, that I regularly meet, to give up because they’re wasting their time – no one notices. I suppose I should tell that lovely couple, those friends of mine, not to bother with their ministry to children at risk on the Cape Flats because they should be picketing against abortion. Maybe I should suggest to my girlfriend that she give up working for a homeless organisation because us Christians don’t do that sort of thing, we debate evolution! Am I being facetious? Yes Iam, but come on Brian is that comment REALLY fair? Or is that the comment of someone who came from the most conservative twig on the most conservative branch of the most conservative tree?

Church Planting in Durban

Many of the readers know that my aspirations lie in the direction of church planting in my home city of Durban, South Africa. Today, just thinking about it, I read through the wiki entry on the city of Durban and I just felt so burdened by some of the great needs and challenges of this beautiful city. So I’ll share them with you:

Durban is full of people being the 2nd most populous city in South Africa according to the 2001 census (In 2001 it was 3.2 million). That’s a lot of people.

Although 68% of the population is supposed to be Christian my own experience in the three years that I worked in church circles there was that you can count the churches that have a strong gospel commitment and bible teaching commitment with you fingers and toes. A large percentage of the ‘Christian’ population is made up of adherents to Shembe and African Independent Churches that resemble very little of orthodox Christianity.

63% of the population speak Zulu. My Zulu is almost non-existent other than a few phrases here and there. Pray that I’ll learn the langauge and be fluent in it.

The number of people living in informal settlements rises daily. People are flooding the city looking for work but end up in low-paying jobs which don’t provide enough for them to move out of the informal settlements. Recently informal settlement dwellers have been clashing with police over rights to certain areas.

Some parts of the city have an unemployment rate of 20% of the population or higher.

The suburbs are heavily racially polarized. Integration between Blacks, Indians and Whites is a long slow and painful process.

The affluent white community is highly materialistic and displays all the vices of the self-absorbed, individualistic west.

Pray for Durban. Pray that God might be pleased to shine his gospel truth in this city. That people might hear it and be transformed. Pray for the faithful gospel ministers who are hard at work there already that they might be encouraged to persevere. Pray for more workers to come to the area to proclaim the name of Christ. Pray that I might take up that challenge and immerse myself in it.

Total Church on Ministry to the Poor

‘…in any Christian ministry, including ministry to the poor, proclaiming and teaching the word of God must be central. And that is because the greatest need of the poor, as for us all, is to be reconciled to God and so escape his wrath. What makes Christian social involvement distinctly Christian is a commitment to reconciling the poor to God through the proclamation of the gospel.

This means it is never enough to address people’s felt needs. Felt needs can be a good point to start because the gospel addresses the human condition in all its complexity. But people do not as a rule express God’s judgment as a felt need. People are blind to their true plight. They do not see their greatest need which is to be reconciled to God through the gospel. If we do not keep people’s eternal plight in mind, then immediate needs will force their way to the top of our agenda and we will betray the gospel and the people we profess to love. The most loving thing we can do for the poor is proclaim the good news of eternal salvation through Christ. It is by no means the only loving thing we can do for them, but it is the most loving thing we can do. It would be a crime of monumental proportions knowingly to withhold such good news.’ (Tim Chester and Steve Timmis: Total Church – p.75)

I think their emphasis on gospel proclamation as the most loving of activities is spot on. From what I’m picking up in my general reading on the subject and my experience of talking to those involved in mercy ministries here in South Africa is that we tend to err in one of two ways with regard to loving the poor. We either see gospel proclamation as simply one of many loving activities and not the most loving. Or we see gospel proclamation as the only truly loving activity and ignore the rest. Chester and Timmis bring sanity and balance to the whole question without downplaying the centrality of gospel proclamation.

Do Good to the Church do Good to All

“Therefore as we have opportunity, let us do good to all people, especially to those who belong to the family of believers” – Paul (Gal. 6:10)

I’ve written before about the apparent lack of exhortations in the New Testament Epistles calling on believers to help and care for those outside of the people of God. Here in Galatians is one of the few exceptions to that general trend – yet even here we see Paul put emphasis on the ‘family of believers’. Does this mean that Paul only had a secondary concern for those outside the church? I don’t think so. Rather I think that Paul knew that if we work hard at caring for those in the believing community when ‘we have opportunity’ then we will far more naturally care for those outside of the church when ‘we have opportunity’. The person who already doesn’t care within the believing community is never going to give a care for those outside. Similarly the person who’s always at work caring for the believers will naturally care for those outside too.

In this way I think the New Testament epistles presume we will be doing good and caring outside of the body if we’re already persevering in caring for those inside. With that taken into account we should be, along with Paul, urging the believers in our communities to really love and care for each other. Not only should we be urging but we should be modeling it too. If this mini-thesis is correct then the sooner we get at that the sooner we will get at actually caring for those outside and being instruments of transformation in the broader community.