Longhenry/Jackson Debate on Benevolence

 
 
 Proposition: 
 The Scriptures teach that the church, from its treasury, may help any needy person.
 
 Affirm:  George A. Jackson
 Deny: Ethan R. Longhenry
 
 It is my pleasure at this time to start what I believe will be a most interesting and profitable 
 discussion of the subject that is outlined in the above proposition. The proposition is simple and to 
 the point and needs little explanation from me. When I say the "Scriptures" I mean the 66 books of 
 the Holy Bible. When I say "teach" I mean to  instruct, and that such teaching is found somewhere 
 within the pages of the Holy Bible and that it may be directly stated, necessarily implied or found 
 in principle therein. "The church," Is God's people that He has called out of the world. "Its 
 treasury" is the "lay by in store" collected each Lord's Day. By "may" I mean by expressing 
 permission. By "help" I mean to provide whatever is needed. By  "any" I mean one or more. By 
 "needy" I mean the poor, the destitute, and those not capable of furnishing their own needs for 
 whatever reason for the moment. By "person" I mean a human being.
 
 First I would like us to see how God instructed "the church in the wilderness" (Acts 7:38), to care
 for the "needy." under the Old Covenant:
 "For the poor shall never cease out of the land: therefore I command thee, saying, Thou shalt open 
 thine hand wide unto thy brother, to thy poor, and to thy needy, in thy land." (Deut. 15:11)
 "Thou shalt not oppress an hired servant that is poor and needy, whether he be of thy brethren, or 
 of thy  strangers that are in thy land (Deut 24:14).
 
 God under the Old Covenant did not tolerate His people not caring for the needs of the poor of 
 Israel or the  "strangers that are in thy land..." Why would God under the New Covenant not also 
 care that His people care for the poor of His People and also the " strangers that are in thy land."
 
 Now lets go to the New Testament and listen to Jesus: 
 "Ye have heard that it hath been said, Thou shalt love thy neighbor, and hate thine enemy. But I 
 say unto you, Love your enemies, bless them that curse you, do good to them that hate you, and 
 pray for them which despitefully use you, and persecute you; That ye may be the children of your 
 Father which is in heaven: for he maketh his sun to rise on the evil and on the good, and sendeth 
 rain on the just and on the unjust. For if ye love them which love you, what reward have ye? do 
 not even the publicans the same? And if ye salute your brethren only, what do ye more than 
 others? do not even the publicans so? Be ye therefore perfect, even as your Father which is in 
 heaven is perfect. " (Matt. 5:43-48:) 
 May the church do what Christ commands in verse 44? Jesus says "Love your enemies, bless them 
 that curse you, do good to, them that hate you, and pray for them which despitefully use you, and 
 persecute you;" Now, it is my position in this discussion that these words, "love, bless, do good, 
 and pray" necessarily infers that we may care for the needs of our enemies. We do this in spite of 
 the fact that they are enemies and not because of it!      But let us further note the reason why we 
 are to so do: "That ye may be the children of your Father which is in heaven: for he maketh his sun 
 to rise on the evil and on the good, and sendeth rain on the just and on the unjust." This is verse 
 45. Is the church prohibited from doing that which God would do? This scripture states that God 
 permits the sun to rise on men whether they are doing His will or not. It teaches that God will not 
 refuse the blessed rays of the sun's light to those who are rebellious and disobedient, even to those 
 who militantly fight against Him. Shall we, His people then refuse to provide that which the sun 
 helps us obtain even to our enemies? No, the passage under consideration tells us to do as our 
 Father in heaven has done. He sends rain on those in the church and out of the church. He causes 
 the sun to rise on those in the church and those out of the church. The sun and the rain thus given 
 by God causes the sinner's garden to grow and produce. The food finally reaches his table and 
 feeds his family, because God is a kind and loving and merciful Heavenly Father. What is the 
 answer: Are we the people of God to be like God in this respect or unlike Him?      Let us go next 
 to Romans chapter 13 and verses seven to ten.
 
 "Render therefore to all their dues: tribute to whom tribute is due; custom to whom custom; fear to 
 whom fear; honour to whom honour. Owe no man any thing, but to love one another: for he that 
 loveth another hath fulfilled the law. For this, Thou shalt not commit adultery, Thou shalt not kill, 
 Thou shalt not steal, Thou shalt not bear false witness, Thou shalt not covet; and if there be any 
 other commandment, it is briefly comprehended in this saying, namely, Thou shalt love thy 
 neighbor as thyself. Love worketh no ill to his neighbor: therefore love is the fulfilling of the law." 
 
 May we ask if the church is bound by this commandment to love? If one says, "no, not the church, 
 the individual " then, tell us where the scriptures teach that the church as such is not to love! But, 
 if one admits that the church is thus commanded to love by Romans 13:7-10, then, one has 
 virtually surrendered the proposition! For "love worketh no ill to his neighbor," love would not 
 withhold that which is needful in time of distress. The passage under consideration certainly 
 teaches that the Christian will not let his debts go unpaid if he loves his neighbor. But, how about 
 the church? May the church  let her debts go unpaid ? Is she not obligated to pay her debts? Please 
 tell us which scripture so teaches? Will Romans 13:7-10 do it? If not, which passage does? And, if 
 she is not obligated to pay her debts, forever keep it a secret from the world for I fear they will not 
 any longer extend their credit to our brethren when they want to build a building or improve their 
 old one or do some other good work! But if Romans 13 teaches that a church must pay her debts, 
 then does it not likewise teach that the church must "love" and not work any "ill" to her neighbors? 
 If a man whose wife was a Christian were to suddenly become ill and disabled so that he could not 
 earn daily bread, should the church feed, clothe and otherwise take care of the woman but let her 
 husband and children suffer because they are not in the church? Would this be working "ill" to a 
 neighbor? What about it? I am taking the position that Romans 13:7-10 teaches that the church is 
 to love and that this love includes the sharing of the necessities of life as well as paying our debts!
 
 Let us notice now the book of Galatians. In chapter one and verse two, Paul addresses the epistle 
 "unto the churches of Galatia", so let there be no doubt as to whether the things found therein 
 apply to the church or not! Galatians 5:14 says, "For all the law is fulfilled in one word, even in 
 this; Thou shalt love thy neighbor as thyself." If there has ever been any doubt in the reader's mind 
 that the injunction, "love thy neighbor" applies to the church, this should dispel all such doubts. 
 Paul writes to the "churches of Galatia" and tells them to "love thy neighbor"! But does this love 
 actually mean that we are to feed and clothe them when in need and otherwise do them good ? Let 
 us see. "As we have therefore opportunity, let us do good unto 'all men', especially unto them who 
 are of the household of faith." Gal. 6:10. Yes, Paul is still writing unto the "churches of Galatia." If 
 one says he is not, let him tell us when he stopped his writing to the churches! But the verse says, 
 "do good 'unto all'." Lest some get the idea that Paul meant "all" in the church, he clearly states 
 "especially unto them who are of the household of faith." This latter quotation explains plainly that 
 the first quotation was not meant to be confined only to the church! When brethren confine their 
 "doing good" to the members of the church only, they are clearly disobeying Paul's command to 
 the church in Galatians 6:10! The expression "do good" means to, help in time of need. It means to 
 feed them when they cannot feed themselves. It means to clothe them when they are unable to 
 clothe themselves. It means to doctor them when they are unable to provide their own medical 
 care. It means to share God's blessings with them, even as God Himself is willing to do, Matthew 
 5:44-45.
 
 But Paul did not only teach this to the Galatians, he taught it in "every place." To the 
 Thessalonians he said, "And the Lord make you to increase and abound in love one toward 
 another, 'and toward all men', even as we do toward you: To the end he may establish your hearts 
 unblameable in holiness before God, even our Father, at the coming of our Lord Jesus Christ with 
 all his saints." I Thess. 3 :12-13. Here Paul did not teach them that they were to be careful not to 
 manifest any love toward a man if he were not a saint, but, he told them to "increase and abound" 
 such love! Rather than to quench it they were to "increase" it! But was the apostle speaking to 
 individuals or to the church? "Paul, and Silvanus and Timotheus, 'unto the church of the 
 Thessalonians'" . . ." (I Thess. 1:1.) One can plainly see this is an exhortation to the church. But 
 what does it mean to "increase and abound in love toward all men" ? Does it mean to provide for 
 the needy or to ignore the needy? Does it mean to care for those of this world who are less 
 fortunate or does it mean to excuse ourselves from such on the pretension that we are saints and 
 not allowed as a group to help the needy of the world? Which is love? But notice that Paul tells the 
 "end" to which all this leads. He says "To the end he may establish your hearts unblameable in 
 holiness before God . . ."May I suggest in all kindness that if one's "love" (in the practical sense of 
 that term) is withheld from the people of the world then one's heart is not unblameable in holiness 
 before God! Paul did not stop with this comment, however, nor shall we. In the last chapter of 1 
 Thessalonians and in verses 14 and 15 we have the following words: "Now we exhort you, 
 brethren, (the church, chapter one, verse one,) warn them that are unruly, comfort the 
 feebleminded, support the weak, be patient toward 'all men'. See that none render evil for evil 
 unto 'any man': but ever follow that which is good, both among yourselves, and to 'all men'" Can 
 any man forbid the church to do just what Paul enjoins upon them in this passage? If so, upon 
 what basis and by whose authority? The passage indicates no emergency. It gives no restrictions 
 such as are being taught today by some. This was not confined to one congregation but verse 27 
 implies that it was general . . . "I charge you by the Lord that this epistle be read unto all the holy 
 brethren."
 
 Now lets turn our attention to James 2:1-26. Obviously, it would not be wise to give the text in its 
 entirety here. The reader is requested to read the second chapter of the book of James carefully. 
 Read it more carefully than you ever have before! Read the first 13 verses particularly with our 
 proposition in mind. "My brethren, have not the faith of our Lord Jesus Christ, the Lord of glory, 
 with respect of persons," verse one. "But ye have despised the poor. Do not rich men oppress you, 
 and draw you before the judgment seats?" (The rich of the church, James, or the rich of the 
 world?) "Do not they blaspheme that worthy name by which ye are called?" (Is it the rich of the 
 church or the rich of the world who do this, James?) "If ye fulfill the royal law according to the 
 scripture, Thou shalt love thy neighbor as thyself, ye do well: But if ye have respect of persons, ye 
 commit sin, and are convinced of the law as transgressors." "So speak ye, and so do, as they that 
 shall be judged by the law of liberty. For he shall have judgment without mercy, that hath showed 
 no mercy; and mercy rejoiceth against judgment." It is clear to me that James is not here speaking 
 of the rich of the church only and if this is true then it is likewise the truth that he is not here 
 speaking of the poor of the church only! Therefore, any poor, in the church or out of the church, 
 are to be cared for under the royal law . . . "Thou shalt love thy neighbor as thyself."
 
 Questions for Ethan:
 
 1. Does the expression "all (men)" in Gal. 6:10 include more than the "needy saints"?
 
 2. Can the church 'receive' money from the non-saint into the treasury of the church?
 
 3. Is the Lord's Supper an individual activity only, or is it a church activity. If it is individual 
 only, can a non-saint partake of it, even though the elements were purchase from the treasury?
 
 4. Where is the scripture authorizing the taking of the preacher's salary out of the collection of the 
 "first day of the week."?
 
 5. Do you believe the church can take money from the treasury to help a needy child, who is not a Christian, 
 whose parents are dead, making him an orphan, who has no one else to care for him?