A Kingdom of Beggars
Listen, my beloved brethren: did not God choose the poor of this world to be rich in faith, and heirs of the kingdom which He promised to those who love Him? James 2:5 NASB
Poor – James was only kidding, right? Who could really imagine that God chose the poor? Especially when these days everyone seems to think that God wants us all to be rich – or at least sufficient. It’s OK for God to choose the poor to be rich in faith. That’s a good thing. But that part about “heirs of the kingdom” is a bit too much, don’t you think? Where is the room for those of us who are quite a few steps above the “poor”? Oh, now I see. God chose the poor but that doesn’t mean He excluded the rich. It’s just that the rich chose God.
James uses a pretty severe word here. It is ptochoi, the same word Yeshua uses in the opening Beatitude. It is a particular kind of poor – the poor who are beggars. Not the one-day-at-a-time workers. Not the paycheck-to-paycheck types. Not even the welfare recipients. No, this word is about those who have no place, no one and nothing. These are the people of the gutter, the squatter camp victims, the refugees, the homeless. God chose these. We can imagine why. God chose them because He is great in compassion. After all, that’s the very first Hebrew word YHWH uses to describe Himself in Exodus 34:6. We have compassion for the poor too. Maybe not as much as God has, but they are still on our sympathy list. It’s just that quite often we are a bit higher on that list than these. Mind you, we don’t exclude them. We are happy to keep them on the list as long as that doesn’t push us off the list. So we tend to read James’ exhortation as an additional space for the poor, not as an exclusive space for the poor. But I wonder if James would agree.
The Scriptures are pretty harsh about riches. Only rarely do they even suggest that riches can be used for the Kingdom. Most of the time, riches interfere with Kingdom pursuits. Oh, and by the way, rich doesn’t usually mean millionaire. To be rich in biblical terms is only to be a few steps above the daily concern for food and shelter. And my guess is that by nearly any world standard, most of us are far above that line. Perhaps that’s why I think it is so important to spend time among the poor. And I don’t mean a nice, short visit. How can I appreciate the blessings God has given me if I have not experienced His choosing the poor? How will I know what it means to be rich in faith if I am always taking care of myself with my own provisions? I think understanding what James says is like contemplating the tree of the knowledge of good and evil. Experience is required!
Ah, but you will say, “How can I do this? I can’t leave everything and go live with the victims of the world? [Well, actually, you could, but it isn’t very appealing] I have responsibilities. What can I really do?” It seems to me the answer is “whatever you can while you are looking for greater opportunities.” According to James, we have a lot to learn from those God chooses. We better get started.
Topical Index: poor, ptochoi, rich, James 2:5, faith
This is a tough one Skip. So what are you suggesting that any of us above the “rich” line, or not in the classification of beggars, homeless or refugees do? I don’t really understand your point.
As you know, Yeshua says more about money than any other topic. So I suppose it is important, and not just in a spiritual sense. The issue, however, is never simply the size of the assets. The issue is the purpose and direction. So the rich young ruler is not condemned for his wealth but rather for his possessiveness. The parable of the bigger barns is not a condemnation of the blessing of prosperity the owner enjoys but rather his attitude of possession. The key to being a beggar for God is what I willingly GIVE, not what I KEEP. God’s beggars know that He is the source of their treasure on earth and therefore whatever they have is available for His purposes without restraint. Most of us, however, draw lines between what is OURS and what is God’s. That is the real problem. If all you have belongs to God, and you are merely the steward, the trustee, of His assets, then you will act very differently about how you use them. OPM – Other People’s Money.
I get what you’re saying, that it’s the attitude we have about material possessions, wealth & the like. I always look at the scripture, the lesson or the point in a self-reflective way, i.e., “How does this apply to me? How do I respond? What should I do about this?” That was my struggle with this morning’s TW, understanding or internalizing what this means for me; how do I live this out in my life.
To your point about the rich young ruler, Yeshua told him to “Sell everything you have and give to the poor… then come follow me” and he went away sad, apparently unwilling to do it. Yeshua remarks “How hard it is for the rich to enter the Kingdom of God!” A short time later, Zakkai (Zacchaeus) the wealthy tax collector is willing to “give half of my possessions to the poor” and pay back those he’s cheated up to 4X the amount. Yeshua proclaims “Today salvation has come to this house…”
So if I understand you correctly, it’s all about the heart then.
Not ALL about the heart. It doesn’t do much good to have a “great attitude” and still not engage hands and feet. Today I got a notice that a woman who is in charge of organizing teaching for a group in a distant land decided not to have me come because “no man of God should be paid for what he does.” The idea that it should all be free is an insult to the teacher and to God. Nothing is free! Not even salvation. Someone had to pay. If my attitude is, “Well, I’m not responsible” then no matter how much “good” attitude I have toward Kingdom works, I haven’t done anything. Remember that the Hebrew view is that spiritual awareness is seen in physical action. BOTH are necessary.
Roger that!
I have no doubt that God has compassion on the poor, the hungry, and the suffering. But scriptures such as those contained in 1 Timothy 5 – make me think that the ‘spiritual’ application trumps what we might call the ‘physical application’. The poor are those deficient in Torah and the hungry are those looking for a better way. It just doesn’t seem like the widest application of “clothing the naked” is to have a clothing drive and hand out shirts. Even the homeless on Skid Row in LA, are concerned about the fashion of the clothes made available to them.
So yes, riches are talked about more than anything else in scripture, but it is MOSTLY a call to share the Kingdom with people. How many physically bound, “in prison”,…. prisoners — did Jesus set free? Not even John the Baptist. Yet, Jesus said Isaiah’s scripture about captives being set free – was being fulfilled.
Our church has a GIANT food pantry, but biblically, I don’t know if we are feeding anyone. Our pantry, instead, purposefully separates itself from any kind of overt religiosity because that would be offering food with ‘strings attached’. And they want to be known as helping out of pure motives. I just don’t think it’s entirely biblical to do that.
It seems they are fulfilling the physical desire for food, and getting an appeased conscience — so now both parties are temporarily satisfied without any last change or commitment. Isn’t that sort of like a visit to a harlot? Or am I being too harsh?
What is an act of righteousness? Is it providing food even if there is no reciprocity in spiritual awareness? Is it sheltering someone simply because she is in need, no strings attached? Is it doing what is right simply because it is the right thing to do, even if no one gets “spiritual” credit for it? Hoarding the food in the pantry is sinful (IMO) but giving it to those in need REGARDLESS of their appreciation of the motive or the goal is righteous. The second great commandment does not come with a copy of the four spiritual laws attached, although many Christians would like to insist that it should. This is like the verse in Matthew 28:19. I am called to DISCIPLE, not make disciples. Why? Because it is my responsibility to act as God would act, not to act in some way that I think will bring about a change in another. The focus is on ME, not on the object of my effort! I am called to act like God, who, by the way, gave simply because of the NEED, not with the objective of making sure those who benefited realized what a great thing He did. When we modify our behavior in order to achieve a “spiritual” goal, we diminish the importance of loving our neighbors simply because we are expressing how God loved us. Frankly, I am sick of the Christian tendency to make everything about spiritual objectives. Where did that dualism begin? Is a man a “soul” captured in a less-important “body”? Not in Hebrew thought! We must treat the PERSON and stop this nonsense about deciding what is “spiritual” and what isn’t? Would you withhold food and shelter from a child because he might not become “saved”?
Typo?… it’s Mt 28:19, i think.
Yeah, right. I fixed it.
I should have been more articulate.
There seems is two false tendencies – one lavishes resources to the point of hindering genuine repentance, the other is ‘boot-strap’ theology which expects sanctified behavior from the lost.
I can fully understand the argument for each. However, if we use the bible as a guide — then how should this shape our “Pantry Policy”. If I read 1 Timothy 5 regarding who the “true widows” are, and if I read 2nd Thessalonians 3:10 “…if anyone is not willing to work, then he is not to eat, either.”, and if I consider that Jesus’ feeding of the 5,000 where still ‘followers’, if not really mature disciples, of Jesus – then I must wonder how this should affect the church’s charity efforts.
I am currently living paycheck to paycheck with three children and a WHOLE lot of student debt. But if you paid for my food, if you paid for my rent, and if you paid for my utilities — ultimately, you would only free me up to pursue the prior desires of my heart more fervently — good or evil. I think you are imagining Africa’s poor, but I am imagining America’s poor — which are drastically different.
Also, please don’t imagine that I am advocating some sort of Christian-Scrooge-Pantry which expects 8 hours hard labor, and intensive bible study- just to earn a meal. However, what is the modern equivalent to leaving the edges of our fields for the poor to glean, and that they ought only take what they can hold in their hands? In light of how our pantry handles things — Paul’s words seem misaligned and far too harsh and demanding. But charity that is for the purpose of conscience appeasement – is only religious self-gratification, even if you can now say, “See, we don’t require anything so it’s totally selfless!!!”
The question is NOT, “How will the world see this as having the purest motives?”, but “How does God want us to perform charity?”. And what I see in the scripture is different from the church’s current approach (in America). What I see in America is a substitution of genuine works – with a social gospel centered around meeting physical needs only. Super, now no-one can accuse us of having an agenda with our charity — what of it? I just wonder if this substitution isn’t a little like visiting the local lady of the night — physical needs are met, no commitment necessary. Whereas, the church should be involved in something that resembles marriage a bit more, where physical needs are still met – but in a covenant relationship. And yes, I have read James recently — but hopefully you can can see where everything I am saying is still in line with what he wrote.
Now you may say that, Jesus saved us “while we were yet sinners”, and He — but this played itself out in specific narratives where Jesus was often selective in who He healed, and in the mode in which He fed. I’m listening to your series on Matthew right now, and you seem to make a point that his miracles had a purpose – but what was that? What was the primary purpose of Jesus’ healings and feedings?
I agree that Americans in general have no idea what true poverty is. I also agree that the world of the Church swings back and forth from appeasing social conscience to requiring salvation as a measure of spiritual worth. I don’t see anything like either of these in Scripture. I see followers following God and doing what He would do – and leaving the rest to Him. But the really BIG difference is this: the assembly in the first century was a community. Everyone knew everyone. If someone was defrauding the charity of another, people knew it. Once we replaced community with organization, we lost all that. No one knows who gets what in this government-run system – or who really needs what. And it is the same with the Church. No one knows anything about anyone any more. We have PROXY CHRISTIANITY. Write a check. Let someone else do the work. We HIRE the hands and feet of Jesus. And when the government replaces God, the result is predictable.
Here’s what I do. I get personally involved. I find out where God is doing something that seems to me like a place where I fit – and I go do it. And all of you help to make that possible. Which is why Irene is a great story. I can’t fix everything. Actually, God doesn’t expect me to. But He does expect me to get involved in fixing what I can. See a need? Go do something about it. It’s pretty simple in the end.
Amen to that.
I think I’m just trying to articulate a fear I have,… something I’m seeing in my own church. There has been an emptiness for too long and some blame ‘extreme’ rule keeping, so instead of a return of the heart to God through genuine repentance, there is a social gospel taking root — church is the place where you find acceptance, make friends, and become a part of ‘something bigger than yourself’ (e.g. good deeds). And while I think these are characteristics of a vibrant church, they were also the platform of the student government I was a part of at the University of Oregon.
The fact is, my church is doing more than ever — but it is eerily similar to the campaigns we used to run in student government. Genuine, well-meaning people, are trying to ‘make a difference in the world’. But increasingly, the church is shunning personal holiness as much as the culture around it — after all God is “so big”, and He deals with people “in different ways” — so we cannot judge. In the meantime, spouses continue to make each other miserable, children continue to grow up disrespectful and selfish, and our members continue in disagreeable tolerance of each other.
My church offers material resources, but I think I’d get some strange looks if I asked the church, “Please, I’m begging you — make me a better man. I don’t want to stay the same husband and father I’ve always been — show me a better way!” I can get groceries from my church, but not training in righteousness.
Boy, are you right! Watchman Nee said that if the Church can operate without the Spirit it was no longer the Kingdom of God. The head of a large group of black African churches once commented on his visit to American’s largest churches, “I never knew you could do so much without God.” Damning! The reason the Church is simply warmed-over religious language added to social consciousness is simple: the Church has no spiritual core. It doesn’t stand for anything at its depths. Torah is missing and so there is no code of conduct for life in community. What we have is the “love each other” gospel of personal goodness – and that can be interpreted anyway you wish. God wrote down how we should live. James tells us that unless this code of moral purity comes first, nothing else follows (you will see a TW about this in 2013). That’s where we are. It is NO surprise that the culture of the West is in serious need of major repair. After 1800 years of unsustainable moral syncretism, it has more holes than Swiss cheese. The collapse is inevitable. May God be merciful when it comes.
Hi Skip and Gabe
May be we can also learn something from Gen 47 concerning this issue? Josef’s welfare program- nothing for free: Josef(Yeshua) brings order to the land, asks money and livestock (both exterior) in order to provide food . Josef takes the land( adamah- the stuff they were made of (internally). Seems to me if you did not pay something, you died!
And Josef did not keep it for himself – Farao was the recipient . So as I give my finances/family/land back to God, I get the blessing. It is part of bringing order.
“If you lose you’re life for My sake, you will find it”? And when I give(pay- cannot take it back) everything to Him, Gen47:23: I receive the seed to sow the land and produce fruit. And a Rabbinic teaching suggests that in this verse the seed comes from the “Hey”- that is God’s Breath,.
God looks on the heart, and He desires a heart of flesh. That is His wonderful promise for the future, that He will give His chosen ones a heart of flesh and take out the stony one.
It might be troubling to some to just read that those who are desperately poor (physically) have a higher calling/standing with God. It seems to me that those God himself pointed out as special to him–Noah, Job, and Daniel–were not desperately poor. They may have been desperate for God, but that is a heart issue, which only God can see and judge. Abraham was fabulously wealthy. David was fabulously wealthy. Solomon was fabulously wealthy. Each managed their status in life a bit differently and made different choices, some good, some not so good.
A desperately poor man, filled with bitterness and envy, may not be seen by God quite the same as the “man after his (God’s) own heart” who had more possessions that we can imagine, but who saw himself within as desperate for God, panting after Him, as a thirsty man to the water brooks.
If I withdraw myself from my family and other responsibilities to go to Haiti, or one of many many wretchedly poor places, I may be causing hardship by leaving the very place God wants me to be.
God did ask the young rich man to give up all his possessions, but God did not ask any other person for that example of trust., and He may have had something else in mind for him–like an apostleship, for example. The text is not clear.
I understand the attitude of being a steward of all that God allows in my life; everything I have, all “my” possessions, and my very life, belong to Him. However, if I give all my possessions to feed the poor, I may make my own family dependent on others, and on the church, unnecessarily. Is that Godly?
And if I do anything without the love of God Himself, the entire exercise is pointless. We have to be careful, it seems to me, with broad statements, and pray for the discerning Spirit of God to fill us with wisdom and the kindness of God.
I am a newcomer to this fascinating community of believers, and this is my first posting.
For those of us surrounded by the material blessings of the modern Western world, might the realization of our greatest needs (Revelation 3:17) provide a kind of check upon our presumptions?
A more apt description of the Church in the West could not be found. By the way, WELCOME!
It was Yeshua Himself who declared “without Me -you can do nothing” (John 15.5) And then again His “seemingly” harsh statement- ~ You will always have the poor among you, but you will not always have me ~ (John 12.8)
And then we have this from the Attitudes that ought to Be: ~ blessed are the poor in (silver or in) spirit ~ (Matthew 5.3) which may be a restating of David’s words ~ Whom have I in heaven but You? And earth has nothing I desire besides You ~ (Psalm 73.25) reemphasized and reinforced upon us.
Have we come to the place where we realize the state of our bankruptcy before God? What (exactly) did Mephibosheth bring to the King’s Table other than “show up” at dinnertime?
It is grace and grace only my fellow beggars! Truly, (truly), “Jesus paid it all.. and (absolutely) all to Him I owe..”
One author whom I highly benefit from reading is Brennan Manning, though his words tend to step on my toes and sometimes I feel as if I had been gut-punched! “The Ragamuffin Gospel” is (IMHO) worth the read! Place the placard above the door so everyone entering may read it: “Sinners only, welcome here!”
Without Him I could do nothing
Without Him I’d surely fail
Without Him I would be drifting
Like a ship without a sail
I love (love) the book of James. It has been called “religion in shoe-leather.” This is where the rubber and the road meet – ~ Suppose you see a brother or sister who has no food or clothing, and you say, “Good-bye and have a good day; stay warm and eat well”–but then you don’t give that person any food or clothing. What good does that do? In the same way, faith by itself, if it is not accompanied by action, is dead ~ (James 2.15-17)
So, what is it then? Kind words or good deeds? What’s so wrong about “both?” And it was alos said about our LORD, ~ He went about doing good ~ (Acts 10.38)
Do all the good you can,
By all the means you can,
In all the ways you can,
In all the places you can,
At all the times you can,
To all the people you can,
As long as ever you can
(John Wesley)
I wonder if we consider the tension that SHOULD be present in our lives as we take our place in the yoke next to our Aleph as we wrestle with this pursuit of charity. We will never carry more than an infinitesimal portion of the load on that yoke but that tension given to us must be there or the intended track for our life will be off in a rut, to the left or right if the tension is too small or too great. (switching metaphors here) However, if there is no tension at all He can do nothing with us but circle around us calling us back into the river where He is.(Out in the middle mind you)
Another thing to consider is that we are to bless even our enemies. Weren’t we formerly enemies of our God? Isn’t He patiently blessing us, drawing us by His lovingkindness? Isn’t He daily feeding His enemies along with His sheep?
If we were still an enemy we would still be thankless. I am grateful that, because of His charity we are thinking a little less like we used to when we were His enemy. May we all continue to learn to pull the plow of life straight, learning what His thoughts are on every nuance of every issue of this Mystery He has given us the glory of uncovering.
My friend sent me this, which is an interesting continuation of the Beggar discussion:
“It seems to me that we have a systemic problem with accepting the idea that God has blessed this nation physically and economically. There is this growing sense that having wealth is a problem and must be avoided. If you have it, clearly you weasled it out of someone else—leaving THEM poor and destitute; and/or you have simply been a greedy ba***rd and haven’t given enough away.
I happen to believe that the physical and economic blessings that this country has experienced have NOT been of our own doing, but are a fulfillment of the promises God gave to Abraham. These blessings are not to be despised, and we should not thumb our noses at God for them.
However (and this is a BIG ‘however’), the physical wealth or lack thereof is merely a distraction from the REAL (spiritual) blessings of God. I have met people who are destitute by our standards—very, very poor physically. However, they have an incredibly HEALTHY spirit about them. The love they express is genuine and from the heart, no strings attached. Their faith is dynamic and incredibly powerful. And it makes me see America as Laodicea. We think because we have physical wealth that we have need of nothing. All the while we are lacking the very ability to see just how blind, naked and spiritually destitute we are!
I don’t think we need to berate ourselves for enjoying the blessings (and indeed sharing the blessings) that God has given us—even though they are PHYSICAL. Having the physical doesn’t preclude us from having the spiritual blessings too. It just distracts us from them, and we run the risk of saturating our lives with all things physical (thinking we have it made!) all the while starving ourselves from the deeper, spiritual blessings God has for us. (I think the recent rash of shootings speaks to that very thing. We have a collective that is growing weaker and weaker spiritually as we stray further and further from God.)”