The Duty of Evangelism
Duty is a loaded word with many implications. It implies an obligation of action despite obstacles or trials that stand in the way. Duty assumes resistance. It assumes doing something regardless how I may feel on any given day.
In a way, duty is the antidote to pragmatism or a superficial happiness. It is the attitude that says no matter what the outcome, I will do this or that, because it is my duty. No matter how I feel, no matter what the results are, I will do it anyways because it is my duty to do so.
Now, assuming our specific duty is biblical, we have no reason to fear this word. On the contrary, we have every reason to lean into it. It is a good word. No—it is a necessary word. There is a reason why the writings of the Reformers and Puritans are saturated with the word. They realized that regardless of all odds, obstacles, or feelings, they had a responsibility before God to carry out the tasks and behavior which He had assigned to them: whether in the sphere of family, work, church, finances, or even diet and recreation. There is not a realm that exists in which God has not laid before us certain duties. Not so that we can be saved, but because in Christ we have already been saved and there are now expectations of us as His people when it comes to living our lives as “new creations.” An obvious and helpful example of one of these Christian duties comes in the form of evangelism.
Duty as a Compelling Motive
“Duty” as a motive for evangelism may come across as coarse or even legalistic. We typically like to think of other motives when it comes to evangelism, such as seeing people saved or growing our churches. These are noble and biblical motives, sure enough, but they aren’t the only motives. They aren’t even the best motives. There are times when such motives won’t be enough.
For instance, some days we are not euphorically bursting with love for the lost, especially when they have rejected our efforts in hostile or demeaning ways. Our love for the lost is important, but love is a feeling that is prone to fade in and out depending on our circumstances. Also, because we are people who still struggle with sin, including selfishness, evangelizing merely because we love the lost would be a flimsy and even irresponsible foundation upon which to build. We need something else. Likewise, when it comes to the motive of seeing our churches grow through our evangelism. This is something we all desire. But to what ends? What if plain and simple gospel proclamation isn’t “working”? What if our churches aren’t growing despite our consistent evangelism efforts? The temptation will be to either throw in the towel and quit, or to water things down to make the gospel more palatable to the masses. This is where the word “duty” comes in as a protective measure against such temptations.
Duty as an Emboldening Motive
The very nature of evangelism requires such a word as duty. This is because in several respects, evangelism is different from any other Christian practice. It entails intentionally speaking to a lost person about Jesus and sin, even though at present, as far as we can tell, the person has no love for Christ or hatred for sin. And despite our modern assumptions about man, biblically speaking, unless they are being drawn by God, we are sharing Jesus with someone who doesn’t want to hear about Jesus. Evangelism is sharing the good news of Christ with a lost person, and then calling that person to repent and believe the message—not exactly the most pleasant circumstance, at least from the world’s perspective. What other Christian duty is like this? Evangelism is confrontational, uncomfortable, and a catalyst for awkward tension, regardless of how respectfully and gently we do it.
The uniqueness of evangelism can be seen when we compare it to worship services, another Christian duty. If the government were to tell us we can no longer maintain corporate worship of the Lord, that does not terminate our duty of corporate worship. So it is with evangelism. Even if it were illegal, we would still be obligated to do it. In both scenarios, the way we worship or the way we evangelize may be different from how we would ordinarily do things, but we would still do it, hopefully. But there is one remarkable difference about evangelism that can’t be said about regular worship with the saints. I point this out in my book, 10 Modern Evangelism Myths (RHB, 2021):
How would Christians in the West respond if it suddenly became illegal to meet together for church or study the Scriptures or attend prayer meetings? Would we do it anyway? Yes! This scenario is not exactly hypothetical. Such an attempt is likely on the horizon in the West, as demonstrated during the COVID-19 pandemic. But when it comes to evangelism, things are much different. It is possible to meet in secret when it comes to worship and Bible studies, without society knowing it. But evangelism necessarily involves the unbelieving community knowing what we believe, including the offensive parts, since it is the unbelieving persons of society we are called to evangelize.
Even when evangelism is seen as offensive, distasteful, politically incorrect or illegal, we are still called to do it. This will expose us to harassment and danger, which is why the word “duty” is so essential. It implies doing something despite the difficulty which that thing will cause. And isn’t that what makes evangelism so difficult? It necessarily brings about conflict. This is not to say we must intentionally seek conflict when evangelizing. We shouldn’t be rude or obnoxious. On the contrary, we should be respectful and aware of the contexts in which we are evangelizing. But even if the person we evangelize gets converted, there will be conflict between the new believer and his old way of life, including his relationships. And if he doesn’t get converted, there will now be conflict between himself and us, whether it is open hostility or something more subdued. When it comes to the gospel, there is no neutrality. And hence, when it comes to sharing the gospel, it will cause a response, whether unto salvation or further condemnation, and all because we opened our mouths about Jesus.
Isn’t this why we get nervous before we evangelize? Perhaps nervous is too soft of a word. This is why we get downright terrified. This is why we all have difficulty evangelizing. The flesh doesn’t want the conflict. We recoil from pushback or looking foolish. We’re afraid we won’t have answers to their possible objections. And yet, despite our flesh or the conflict of evangelism, we must do it anyways. Why? Because we are commanded to do so by our Lord. It is His method for saving souls. “Faith comes by hearing.”
Not only do we see this example of obedient evangelism in the Acts of the Apostles, but throughout the early church as well. They too likely withered at the thought of conflict, especially knowing it would likely result in their death, torment, or loss of property. But time and again, in spite of intense and present threats, we see them evangelizing. What was their secret? Yes, the Holy Spirit. Yes, prayer. Yes, a supernatural devotion to Christ. All of these things are critical. But it was also their sense of duty. Speaking of the early church’s evangelism, one historian comments, “The conflict was inevitable, the direct result of the genius of Christianity. A Christianity which had ceased to be aggressive would speedily have ceased to exist. Christ came not to send peace on earth but a sword; against the restless and resistless force of the new religion the gates of hell should not prevail. But polytheism could not be dethroned without a struggle; nor mankind regenerated without a baptism of blood. Persecution, in fact, is the other side of aggression, the inevitable outcome of a truly missionary spirit; the two are linked together as action and reaction.”[i]
What was the result of such evangelism? Yes, scores of martyred Christians. Yes, many tense and awkward conversations. But also scores of new converts. The growth of the early church came mostly through ordinary Christians sharing the gospel in their everyday environments, despite the conflict it would bring: “Where, then, could believers make contact with unbelievers to win them over? Surely the answer must somehow lie where the Christians themselves direct our attention…in quiet obscure settings of every day.”[ii] Or again, “Being excluded from the normal social gatherings, their points of contact with non-Christians lay quite inevitably at street corners or at places of employment, or in the working quarters of dwellings.”[iii] “Evangelizing in private settings” was one of the most influential contexts for bringing about conversions to the Christian religion “en masse.”[iv] Kenneth S. Latourette confirms that “the chief agents in the expansion of Christianity appear not to have been those who made it a profession…but men and women who carried on their livelihood in some purely secular manner and spoke of their faith to those they met in this natural fashion.”[v]
Duty as a Universal Motive
Hence, we see that the duty to evangelize is not only for ministers, but it is for all who name the name of Christ. We also see how important every Christian is to the work of evangelism, whether they are ordained ministers or not, and how God uses His people in every walk of life to add to His church. Believers are called to profess the name of Christ to the lost. Backlash against such a message has always been the norm, but so are conversions. We must not be silent about our Lord. We may lose friends or look silly because of it. But we must not be ashamed of the gospel. This is one way to understand Christ’s promise that “everyone who acknowledges me before men I also will acknowledge before my Father who is in heaven, but whoever denies me before men, I also will deny before my Father who is in heaven” (Matt. 10:32-33). Christ is here speaking of people who deny their Lord as an attempt to protect themselves from harm. Even in a climate where we are not actively being killed for our faith, we are still persecuted through societal isolation, loss of job, friends, or even family whenever we take seriously the command to evangelize the lost. The next verse promises that Jesus did not come to bring peace to the earth, but a sword (Matt. 10:34).
To know that every Christian should be evangelizing can cause disturbance and shame for many Christians. Most of us feel inadequate when it comes sharing the gospel. But consider the demoniac, who was told right after his conversion to go and tell all about what Jesus had done for him (Mark 5:19). He knew enough of the gospel to share it with others. His sense of duty to Christ drove him on to do it. His feelings or emotions wanted to go with Christ across the lake. His allegiance to Christ’s command helped him overcome such feelings and catapulted him into what must have been an awkward and challenging mission field. These people had just demanded Christ leave their region. They had seen this man naked and crazed. They had lost property on account of his demons being exorcised. This was no easy task that Jesus put him up to. Yet there he goes, telling everyone what great things Jesus had done for him. Why? Because Christ had told him to do it. It was his duty to do it. So, he does it.
Duty as Pure Motive
Evangelizing without a sense of duty can also lead to pragmatism. When we are governed more by emotions or even “success,” we make the cross less offensive, our churches more worldly, and our evangelism less gospel-centered. In the West today, Christians often have the mindset that if we are going to be relevant in the culture, we must keep quiet outside our homes and churches about the gospel, or at the very least, come up with ways and methods that will allow evangelism to be inoffensive. Christians today are often so plagued by the fear of what outsiders think of us that we assume evangelism is not done properly if it creates any kind of scandal or outrage from the unbelieving world. This would be a mark of woeful ineffectiveness. Again, this is not to say we should be rude or intentionally brash or scandalous. Not at all. Rather, it is assuming that the truth is offensive in a culture that despises truth. It assumes that the perishing still thinks the cross is foolish. But in attempting to accommodate our evangelism to the culture, we have lost the appeal of being a savor of death to the dying (2 Cor. 2:16).
Christians who want to accommodate evangelism to the culture disregard the fact that this was never Christ’s approach, nor was it the way of the early Christians. George Whitefield, John Wesley, David Brainerd, Jonathan Edwards and even William Carey were all considered scandalous renegades by the church their community for their refusal to compromise with current evangelism practices. They were seen as “zealots.” They were see as radicals. But they were men compelled to evangelize by a sense of duty. They were willing to be fools for Christ’s sake, even when the church was embarrassed by them. Consider John Ryland’s response to the criticism of William Carey by other clergymen in their day: “I am almost worn out with grief at these foolish cavils against some of the best of my brethren, men of God, who are only hated because of their zeal.”[vi] Michael A.G. Haykin notes that one of the hurdles William Carey had to overcome was “the lack of support by fellow Christians in England.”[vii]
Reproach and scoffing are the responses we should expect when it comes to biblical evangelism. In some contexts, so are arrests, confiscation of property, or loss of life. In fact, why would we assume any other response? The world’s eyes are veiled to the gospel (2 Cor. 4:3). There are none who seek God (Rom. 3:11). But a church culture that sees salvific success as the most important reason to evangelize will also claim that any approach that brings conflict or polarization must necessarily be jettisoned—especially if there is no “one” who is saved. The underlying motive behind such an approach, whether or not it is acknowledged, is a fear of man and fear of conflict. Such fear is normal, but it doesn’t mean it is correct. What must drive us onward to evangelize is our duty to Christ, even when afraid of man or conflict.
It is one thing for the world to hate the Christian, especially for his bold evangelism. Christ Himself told us we should expect it. But why do Christians shy away from confrontation? The answer is easy. We are still in the flesh. We are prone to want to protect ourself from looking dumb or losing friends, even if this means to not evangelize. The flesh is still very powerful. Therefore, duty is essential. Consider examples from the Scriptures. R. C. Sproul notes that “Jesus’ life was a storm of controversy. The apostles, like the prophets before them, could hardly go a day without controversy. Paul said that he debated daily in the marketplace. To avoid controversy is to avoid Christ.”[viii] Do we think that Paul, the prophets, or even Christ delighted in being harassed, maligned, and eventually killed for what they believed? Surely it wasn’t an enjoyable situation to be in much of the time, if ever. So what drove them to keep pressing on, regardless of ill health, prison or loss of life? Duty. What must drive us on to evangelize, even when we don’t feel like it? Duty. Even when it might cause outrage or social inconveniences? You got it. Duty.
Duty as a Transcendent Motive
There are many biblical motives for doing evangelism: our love of Christ, our love for our neighbors, our desire to see our churches grow, our passion to see God’s kingdom advance on earth. But notice these all have to do with some type of emotion: love, desire, passion, etc. Emotion is not a bad thing. God has wired us to be creatures who experience and are influenced by emotions. But emotions can be fickle and unreliable. Other times, especially when it comes to evangelism, emotions such as fear can drive out more proper emotions such as love for our neighbor. Fear is a powerful force that can utterly quench any drive to do evangelism. And in such moments, it is duty which must carry the day. We evangelize because our Master tells us to do so, regardless of our feelings about it or the pushback it may lead to. Even if we feel unequipped or inadequate—and we always are—we must evangelize because it’s our duty to do so, trusting God will use our weak and fallible attempts to do great things for His name.
The power of Christianity has always been its bold, uncompromising gospel proclamation. It has proclaimed the gospel directly into the teeth of the fiercest, most ruthless societies ever known to man. And despite the persecutions such action brings upon the church, Christians have always dug in and preached even harder. The early Christians were considered aggressive and imprudent by the surrounding culture, even while other religions were taking steps to avoid persecution. There has always been a relentless zeal for gospel proclamation among God’s people. Some periods of church history demonstrate this more brightly than others, but it has been there, somewhere, even in the darkest ages. But it wasn’t boldness for the sake of being bold that drove them on. It wasn’t recklessness for the sake of recklessness. It was because the Master had told them to do it, regardless of how they felt or what would be the outcome. We must have the same mindset.
Evangelism is a duty we have to Christ. As society in the West becomes more and more like ancient Rome, it is important we are equipped with not only a passion for evangelism, a love for the lost, and a desire to see God’s kingdom advance on earth—it is also necessary we are equipped with the time-honored weapon of remembering that evangelism is a duty, no matter the consequences, and no matter how we feel.
[I] Herbert B. Workman, Persecution in the Early Church (Bloomington, IL: Clearnote Press, 2014), 39.
[ii] Ramsay MacMullen, Christianizing the Roman Empire (New Haven, CT: Yale University, 1984), 37.
[iii] MacMullen, Christianizing the Roman Empire, 40.
[iv] MacMullen, Christianizing the Roman Empire, 29.
[v] Kenneth S. Latourette, A History of the Expansion of Christianity (New York: Harper, 1944), 1:230.
[vi] Cited in A. de M. Chesterman, “The Journals of Daniel Brainerd and of William Carey,” The Baptist Quarterly 19 (1961-62): 151-52.
[vii] Michael H.G. Haykin, The Missionary Fellowship of William Carey (Sanford, FL: Reformation Trust Publishing, 2018), 5.
[viii] R. C. Sproul, Essential Truths of the Christian Faith (Carol Stream, IL: Tyndale House Publishers, 1992), xv.
-
The Love of God in the Shepherding of Souls
The undeniable love of God for His people pours forth abundantly from the pages of Scripture. God really loves and cares for the good of the Church. One of the ways this shows itself is in His wise bestowment of godly pastors to His local churches (cf. Eph. 4:11).
Every Christian needs a pastor! And since pastors/elders/overseers/bishops are Christians, this includes them too. Even pastors need pastors, since God displays His love for all of His people by giving them under-shepherds to care for their souls (cf. 1 Peter 5:1-4).
Every Christian needs a pastor. This implies that professing Christians separated from the local church are at best in great danger, but there also exists a very great possibility that those separated from the church for a long time are not Christians at all. For if every Christian needs a pastor, how can one go through life apart from such a vital necessity?
For those separating themselves from the local church, or failing to take seriously membership in the local church, here are some things you are missing out on when it comes to faithful shepherding:
Protection
God loves His local churches enough to give them qualified men charged with “keeping watch over your souls” (Hebrews 13:17). What an amazing thing!
God has provided a means by which your soul can be guarded. This does not do away with personal responsibility, of course. It does, however, supply for us an added defense against the world, the flesh, and the devil because we have godly men involved in our lives who are appointed by God to help keep the sheep from destruction, whether inflicted by self or others.
For officials in high positions, we provide bodyguards. These guards are entrusted with watching over the physical well-being of people, protecting them from sinister plots.
How high a position must every Christian be in since God has provide them with soul-guards! Men entrusted with watching over the spiritual well-being of His people, protecting them from various dangers.
Proclamation
God gives His local churches men who are able to rightly divide the Word of truth and to proclaim that truth to them regularly in the public assembly, i.e. weekly worship (cf. 2 Tim. 2:15, 4:2).
Some would object and say that in such a day of technology we can listen to godly men in a variety of ways via YouTube, Podcasts, Sermon Audio, etc.
But I humbly submit to you that our sovereign God knows what He is doing in giving you godly men who are present with the sheep, and who are preaching the Word to the sheep in both the language and specific context they need to hear. We can be grateful for the wonderful ministries of men like Paul Washer, John MacArthur, Voddie Baucham, and Steve Lawson. These are men who should be listened to. However, these godly men simply are not able to feed you in the same way that your specific pastor is.
Imagine that you have a history of serious physical ailments, and you want to listen to the podcast of the world’s leading physician. No doubt you will gain some valuable insight from his teaching. However, your specific primary care physician actually knows you. His knowledge of you and your condition means that he is going to be more helpful to you in the long run.
Faithful pastors proclaim the Word of God not merely in its historical and Christ-centered context, but also deliver it within their specific geographical and cultural context. Certain applications from any given text are going to be more suited toward one congregation than another based on the things you are dealing with.
Thus, God loves His people enough to give them pastors who actually know them and their circumstances and can preach the Scriptures in such a way so as to bring the truth of God to bear very specifically and personally.
Provision
Not only do faithful pastors watch over the flock, and preach the Word of God to the flock, but they also provide for the people of God by discipling them, equipping them for ministry, and counseling them in real life decisions and situations.
What I mean here is not only do pastors preach week in and week out and seek to be a defender of your precious immortal soul, but they also positively labor among you in real life so as to help your walk with Christ. This provision is grounded in the plan of God to present all Christians “mature in Christ” (Col. 1:28).
Godly pastors care for the flock in such a way as to have their conformity to the image of Christ as a priority. How you tell the difference between a faithful shepherd and a charlatan is the former seeks to feed the sheep while the other eats them.
That is, charlatans see you as a means to their own end, while faithful pastors provide for you in such a way that brings glory to Christ who purchased you with His own blood (cf. Acts 20:28). They are ultimately after your holiness instead of their own or your temporal happiness.
Embracing God’s Gift
There is so much more we could discuss when it comes to pastors. Certainly, there are poor examples of pastors in the history of the church and present in churches today. This, however, does not take away from the fact, that Christians need pastors and that God loves His people enough to provide for them such godly men.
When we neglect this gift, we neglect pastoral oversight of our souls! As if we are strong enough to reject God’s plan for our soul’s protection and fend for ourselves.
When we neglect this gift, we neglect personal application when it comes to the proclamation of God’s Word. As if we can survive only on Christian generalities and never need to embrace personal and tangible change.
When we neglect this gift, we neglect godly provision. As if we are the wisest Christians who have ever lived and need know encouragement or counsel from those God has placed in our charge.
Of course, there is also an application here for the necessity of a plurality of elders in a local church. Not only does this provide each elder with pastoral care, but it also helps the elders as a whole to be reminded of this great charge God has entrusted them with for His local churches.
Isn’t God so good to us? Isn’t He so wise and loving to His people? Isn’t His Word sufficient for godliness in this present age? Why, then, would we not embrace this great gift God has given to His churches in those He has appointed to shepherd our souls?
-
The Duty of Love to God
“Thou shalt love the Lord the God with all thine heart, and with all thy soul, and with all thy might.” (Deut 6:5) In this manner the Bible commands the chief of all duties. No reasons are assigned for the requirement. No proof is adduced that God exists, or that he possesses such perfections as entitle him to the supreme love of his creatures. Jehovah steps forth before the subjects of his government, and issues his command. He waits for no formal introduction. He lifts us his voice with majesty. Without promise, and without threat, he proclaims his law, and leaves his subjects to their responsibility.
From the manner of this announcement, we may derive instruction. It is not necessary that we should enter into a formal demonstration that God exists, or a formal investigation of his attributes, before we begin the duty of loving him. We already know enough of him for this; and to postpone the performance of the duty until we have completed our investigation, is to commence them with unsanctified hearts, and in rebellion against God. From the dawn of our being we have had demonstrations of God’s existence and character, blazing around us like the light of noonday. The heavens and the earth have declared his glory; his minister and people have proclaimed his name; he is not to us an unknown God, except so far as our minds are willfully blind to the displays of his glory. If, therefore, we withhold the affections of our hearts, we can have no excuse in the plea that more evidence is needed. And with hearts so alienated from God at the outset, all our religious inquiries are likely to be unprofitable. What probability is there that further proof will produce its proper impression and effect on our minds, if that which is already in our possession is unheeded or abused? If, from what we already know of God, we admire and love him, we shall desire to know more of him, and shall prosecute the study with profit and delight; but, if we have already shut him our of our hearts, all our intellectual investigation respecting him may be expected to leave us in spiritual blindness.
The duty required corresponds, in character, to the religion, of which it is an essential part. Heathen gods could not claim the supreme love of their worshippers; and heathen minds had no idea of a religion founded on supreme love to their deities. To some extent, they were objects of fear; and much that appertained to their supposed character and history, served for amusement, or to interest the imagination; but the conduct attributed to them was often such as even heathen virtue disapproved. Hence, they could not be objects of supreme love; and no one claimed it for them. The requirement of supreme love demonstrates the religion of the Bible to be from the true God; and when we begin our religious investigations with the admission of this obligation, and the full recognition of it in our hearts, we may be assured that we are proceeding in the right way.
The simplicity of the requirement is admirable. No explanation of the duty is needed. Forms of worship may be numerous and various, and questions may arise as to the forms which will be most acceptable. Many outward duties of morality are often determined with much difficulty. Perplexing questions arise as to the nature of repentance and faith, and the uninformed need instruction respecting them. But no one needs to be told what love is; the humblest mind can understand the requirement, and may feel pleasure in the consciousness of rendering obedience to it; and the learned philosopher stand in the presence of this precept as a little child, and feels its power binding every faculty that he possesses. This simple principle pervades all religion, and binds all intelligences, small and great, to God, the centre of the great system. Between it and the power of gravitation in the natural world, which binds atoms and masses, pebbles and vast planets, a beautiful analogy may be traced.
The comprehensiveness of the precept is ot less admirable. From it rises the precept, love thy neighbor as thyself; and on these two all the law rests. We lve our neighbors because they are God’s creatures, and the subjects of his government, and because he has commanded us. We love God supremely, because he is the greatest and best of beings; and we love other beings, according to the importance of each n the universal system of being. One principle pervades both precepts, as one principle of gravitation binds the earth to the sun, and the parts of the earth to each other. Tis law binds angels to the throne of God, and to each other; and binds men and angels together, as fellow-subjects of the same sovereign. The decalogue is this law expanded, and adapted to the condition and relations of mankind. Love is not only the fulfilling of the law, but it is also the essence of gospel morality. All Christian obedience springs from it; and, without it, no form of obedience is acceptable to God. He who loves God supremely, cannot be guilty of that unbelief which makes God a liar, and he cannot reflect on the sins which he has committed against God, without sincere penitence.
We must not overlook the tendency of this precept to produce universal good. Every one knows how much the order and happiness found in human society, depend on love. If all kind affections were banished from the hearts of men, earth would be converted at once into a pandemonium. What love is left on earth renders it tolerable, and the love which reigns in heaven makes it a place of bliss. Perfect obedience to the great law of love is sufficient to render all creatures happy. It opens, within the breast, a perennial source of enjoyment; and it meets, from without, the smile and blessing of an approving God.
Though the religion of love is clearly taught in the book of God only, yet, when we have learned it there, we can discover its agreement with natural religion. It will be useful to observe how the moral tendencies of our nature accord, on this point, with the teachings of revelation.
The wickedness of man has been a subject of complaint in all ages. The ancient heathen complained of the degeneracy of their times, and talked of a golden age, long passed, in which virtue prevailed. In modern heathen nations, together with the depravity that prevails, some sense of that depravity exists; and everywhere the necessity or desirableness of a more virtuous state of society is admitted. In Christian lands, the very infidels, who scoff at all religion with one breath, will, with the next, satirize the wickedness of mankind. It is the united judgment of every nation, and every age, that the practice of men falls below their own standard of virtue. It is, therefore, necessary, in order to acquire the best notions of virtue that nature can give us, to turn away from the practice of men to those moral sentiments implanted in the human breast, which condemn this practice, and urge to higher virtue.
It is well known that men judge the actions of others with more severity than their own. Our appetites and passions interfere with the decisions of conscience, when our own conduct is the subject of examination. Hence, the general moral sense of mankind is a better standard of virtue than the individual conscience. In looking to the judgment of others, with a view to determine the morality of our actions, the judgment of those is especially to be regarded who are to be benefited or injured by our deeds. Hence, natural religion approves the rule—Do unto others as you would, in like circumstance, that they should to unto you.
When the vice of others interferes with our happiness, we are then most keenly sensible of its existence and atrocity. However vague our notions of virtue may be, we always conceive of it as tending to promote the happiness of others. Yet it is not every tendency to promote happiness which we conceive to be virtuous. The good that we eat, and the couch on which we lie, tend to promote our happiness; yet we do ot ascribe virtue to these inanimate things. Virtue belongs only to rational and moral agents; and the promotion of happiness must be intentional to be accounted virtuous. There is still another limitation. Men sometimes confer benefits on others, with the expectation of receiving greater benefits in return. Where the motive for the action is merely the benefit expected in return, the common judgment of mankind refuses to characterize the deed as virtuous. To constitute virtue, there must be an intentional promotion of happiness in others; and this intention must be disinterested. Natural religion does not deny that a higher standard of morality may exist; but it holds that disinterested benevolence in virtue, and it determines the morality of actions by the disinterested benevolence which they exhibit.
Some have maintained that self-love is the first principle of virtue, its central affection, which, spreading first to those most nearly related to us, extends gradually to others more remote, and widens at length into universal benevolence. This system of morality is self-contradictory. While it claims to aim at universal happiness, it makes it the duty of each individual to aim, not at this public good, bt at his own private benefit. Whenever the interest of another comes in conflict with his own, it is made his duty to aim at the latter, and to promote that of his neighbor only so far as it may conduce to his own. It is true, that the advocates of this system being in reason as a restraining influence, and suppose that it will so regulate the exercise of self-love as to result in the general good. According to this system,, if we, in aiming at our own happiness, practice fraud and falsehood with a view to promote it, and find ourselves defeated in the attainment of our object, we may charge our failure, not on the virtuous principle by which it is assumed that we have been moved, but on the failure of our reason to restrain and regulate it so as to attain its end. If it be said, that conscience will not permit us to be happy in the practice of fraud and falsehood, and that self-love, aware of this, avoids those practices so inconsistent with our internal peace, it is clearly admitted that conscience is a higher principle of our nature, to the decisions of which our self-love is compelled to yield.
As virtue aims at the general good, it must favour the means necessary for the attainment of this end. Civil government and laws, enacted and executed in wisdom and justice, are highly conducive to the general welfare, and these receive the approbation and support of the virtuous. Were an individual of our race, by a happy exception to the general rule, born with a virtuous bias and were this virtuous bias fostered and developed in his education, he would be found seeking the good of all. His first benefits conferred, would be on those nearest to him; but his disinterested benevolence would not stop here. As his acquaintance extended into the ramifications of society, his desire and labour for the general good would extend with it, and civil government, wholesome law, and every institution tending to public benefit would receive his cordial approbation and support; and every wise and righteous governor, and every subordinate individual, aiming at the public good, would be an object of his favour. If we suppose the knowledge of his individual to increase, and his virtuous principles to expand, widening the exercise of universal benevolence; and if, at length, the idea of a God,, a being of every possible moral excellence, the wise and righteous governor of the universe, should be presented; how would his heart be affected? Here his virtuous principles would find occasion for their highest exercise, and would grow into religious devotion. This glorious being would have the highest place in his admiration and love; and the discovery of his universal dominion would produce ineffable joy. Such are the affections of heart which even natural religion teaches, that the knowledge of God’s existence and perfections ought to produce.
In God’s written word, we learn our duty in a reverse method. We are not left to trace it out by a slow process, beginning with the first exercise of moral principle in the heart, and rising at length to the infinite God; but the existence and character of God are immediately presented, and the first and chief of all duties is at once announced: “Thou shalt love he Lord thy God with all thy heart.” How sublime! How appropriate! The virtuous mind is open to receive such a revelation; and its perfect accordance with the best teachings of natural religion, recommends it to our understandings and our hearts. The second commandment, “Thou shalt love thy neighbor as thyself,” is introduced, not as leading to the first, but as subordinate to it. It takes the place which properly belongs to it in a revelation from the supreme authority.
Love has been divided into benevolence, beneficence, and complacence. This division may at first appear inconsistent with the simplicity which ahs been ascribed to love. Benevolence is the disposition to do good to an object, and beneficence is the conferring of that good. The latter is not properly love, but the effect or manifestation of it. On the other hand, complacence includes the cause of the love together with the affection itself. Love may be exercise toward an unworthy object, as when God loves those who are dead in trespasses and sins. But it may be exercised toward those whose moral character renders them fit objects. In this case, the love being connected with approbation of the character beloved, is called complacence. When love has an inanimate thing for its object, as when Isaac love savory meat, the term refers to the deriving of enjoyment; but when the object of love is a sentient being, the term always implies the conferring of enjoyment, even when some pleasure has been received, or some enjoyment in return is expected.
Love to God implies cordial approbation of his moral character. His natural attributed, eternity, immensity, omnipotence, &c, may fill us with admiration; but these are not the proper objects of love. If we worship him in the beauty of holiness, the beauty of his holiness must excite the love of our hearts. As our knowledge of these moral perfections increases, our delight in them must increase; and this delight will stimulate to further study of them; and to a more diligent observation of the various methods in which they are manifested. The display of them, even in the most terrible exhibitions of his justice, will be contemplated with reverent, but approving awe; and their united glory, as seen in the great scheme of redemption by Christ, will be viewed with unmixed and never-ceasing delight.
Love to God includes joy in his happiness. He is not only perfectly holy, but perfectly happy; and it is our duty to rejoice in his happiness. In loving our neighbor, we rejoice in his present happiness, and desire to increase it. We cannot increase the already perfect happiness of God, but we can rejoice in that which he possesses. If we delight in the happiness of God, we shall labor to please him in all things, to do whatever he commands, and to advance all the plans, the accomplishment of which he has so much at heart. Love, therefore, includes obedience to his commands, and resignation and submission to his will.
Love to God will render it a pleasing task to examine the proofs of his existence, and to study those glorious attributes which render him the worthy object of supreme affection. Let us enter n this study, prompted by holy love, and a strong desire that our love may be increased.
-
Don’t Be A Spiritually Passive Father: Lead In Family Worship
“Fathers, do not exasperate your children; instead, bring them up in the training and instruction of the Lord.” (Ephesians 6:4).
Perhaps you have heard this statement: “The family that prays together, stays together.” There is a lot of truth in that statement. One could probably also add, “The family that worships together, stays together.” My experience bears out that those families who are regularly involved in a good church environment have a more solid foundation and support system than those who are without spiritual involvement. In many families, unfortunately, the church is basically the only source from which the family receives its spiritual nurture.
However, the New Testament does not place the primary responsibility upon the church to provide family worship. That responsibility rests with the father. He is to be the spiritual leader in his home. He may choose to delegate some aspects of the family worship to his wife and to the church, but the ultimate responsibility rests with him. The command in Ephesians 6:4 is specifically addressed to the fathers, who are the God-ordained leaders of the home.
Certainly part of his responsibility is to have his family actively participating in a good local church. This is one of the ways each family member can hear the gospel, grow spiritually and mature as a believer. But this spiritual nurturing must begin in the home.
Sadly, there are far too many spiritually passive fathers, who leave the responsibility of the spiritual upbringing of the children to the mothers. Often the mothers are the ones who pray with the children, discuss spiritual matters with them and see that the children are taken to church.
This is a sad state of affairs. Dad is charged to lead both his wife and children spiritually. He is to first lead by setting an example before his family by his walk before the Lord, by his prayers, by his Bible study and by his church involvement. Only as He is personally faithful to the Lord can he truly lead his family spiritually.
Then he is to lead his family by verbally teaching them. The best way to lead his family verbally in spiritual worship is to talk to them in all the natural settings God gives to him. He can discuss God’s role in creation as he explores with them the natural world around them. As they learn of events in the world he can talk to them about how the Lord is not only the Creator but also the Sustainer and Controller of all events. When they see and experience the sinful world around them, he can talk to them about original sin and the effects of the fall of man. As they see hopelessness and despair among people, that can lead to discussions about how Christ came to redeem us from the curse and to bring about genuine hope. As they hear of people who have died, he can talk to them about the blessed hope of the resurrection. This type of spiritual instruction and leadership is an excellent means to reach the individual members of his family.
But there is also another dynamic in which he can corporately train and instruct his family—by collective family worship. There are some specific ways in which he can incorporate family worship in his household. Though each family will be different and each one will have its own schedule of activities, here are some suggestions of what can be done and what to avoid:
• Eliminate some activities which take up too much of the family’s time and thus prevent family worship. There is nothing wrong with spending fun time with our families, but we do need to constantly examine our priorities to make sure that we are living in light of eternal realities.
• Choose a proper schedule. It may be impractical to plan a family worship time every day of the week. If so, perhaps four, or five times a week would be a better possibility. You may find that the evenings are better times to get the family together. The mornings can be a bit hectic in getting everyone off to school or work.
• Vary the contents. The actual worship time probably is more effective if the activities are varied from day to day, or week by week.
• Make the event meaningful. Some components might be: individual prayers, Bible reading, explanation of the passage (along with specific application), praise time for the Lord’s goodness and for prayers answered, Bible memorization, biographical studies, missions concerns, Christian martyrs, discussing recent news events from a biblical perspective, even costumes or lessons with unusual visual aids, questions and comments, singing of familiar hymns or choruses and brief assignments to the family members for future worship times.
• If the children are small, some of the many good Bible storybooks could be read in which the interesting narratives of the Bible are covered. During those times the father could also provide additional details and interesting applications.
• Visual aids are very helpful and often will stimulate interest.
• Application of the truths covered should be brief, clear and on target.
• Involve each member. Encourage interesting and natural conversation back and forth among the family members during these times.
• In the Bible study portion, good interpretive and presentation skills must be followed. Passages should not be taken out of their context; otherwise the children will learn poor interpretive skills.
• Use a faithful, clear modern translation which the children can easily follow.
Here are some things to avoid in your family worship:
• Do not begin a session until family squabbles have been properly settled.
• The amount of time spent should be reasonable. Children will lose interest quickly and will begin to resent the entire session.
• Don’t use the session as an opportunity to correct the children.
• Do not allow members to complain about each other during these times.
• Keep your prayers brief. Remember that children’s attention spans are short.
• Do not embarrass family members. If you must deal with specific areas in their lives, do so individually and privately elsewhere.
Family worship can be wonderful experiences during which good, healthy spiritual relationships are built. Once you have started on such a program, stick to it. Vary the activities frequently and do not give up. Persevere in your plan, though you may not initially see positive results. Remember that you are embarking on a long-term goal. As a father, your responsibility as the spiritual leader of the family is to be faithful. The ultimate results are in the hands of Him who, alone, can bring about true spiritual change.
This article is an excerpt from Curtis Thomas’ book – Life in the Body of Christ: Privileges and Responsibilities in the Local Church. A new hardcover edition is now available for pre-order for $19.98 at press.founders.org
