Hi appolus…
I began writing this yesterday, but I had to leave before posting it. Anyway, I appreciate the essence of what you are saying about spiritual liberty. Our lives are to be spent with the knowledge of the freedom that is afforded to us in Christ Jesus our Lord. This liberty can help us rise above the cares of this world – especially during times of trouble or hardship. This liberty can help us sing while nursing our wounds in a prison cell (like Paul and Silas) or proclaim “[i]All is well[/i]” in the face of death (like the widow woman to Elisha in 2nd Kings chapter 4). Like a soldier in boot camp who endures the trials and hardships of the experience because he desires to please his commanding officers – this “liberty” is the a liberty of knowing that these light and momentary afflictions are temporary. In fact, this entire life is fleeting when compared with the vastness of eternity.
I agree that we are not to be entangled by the affairs of this world. But I disagree to the extent of what this entanglement can be interpreted to consist of. Indeed, the Scriptures in II Timothy chapter 2 warns us about the entanglements with “the affairs of this life.” It says:
[b]2 Timothy 2[/b]
1 Thou therefore, my son, be strong in the grace that is in Christ Jesus.
2 And the things that thou hast heard of me among many witnesses, the same commit thou to faithful men, who shall be able to teach others also.
3 [u]Thou therefore endure hardness, as a good soldier of Jesus Christ[/u].
4 [u]No man that warreth entangleth himself with the affairs of this life; that he may please him who hath chosen him to be a soldier[/u].
5 And if a man also strive for masteries, yet is he not crowned, except he strive lawfully.
6 The husbandman that laboureth must be first partaker of the fruits.
7 Consider what I say; and the Lord give thee understanding in all things.
8 Remember that Jesus Christ of the seed of David was raised from the dead according to my gospel:
9 Wherein I suffer trouble, as an evil doer, even unto bonds; but the word of God is not bound.
10 Therefore I endure all things for the elect's sakes, that they may also obtain the salvation which is in Christ Jesus with eternal glory.
When reading this passage in context, it appears that the “affairs” of this life that Paul is speaking about are the hardships that we face (verse 3). Verse 4 is the oft-quoted passage about how soldiers (or those who go to war) do not “
[i]entangleth himself with the affairs of this life[/i].” Why? So “
[i]that he may please him who hath chosen him to be a soldier[/i].” This reminds me about how Jesus endured the cross and despised its shame “…
[i]for the joy that was set before him[/i]” (Hebrews 12:2). Regardless, the idea that our minds should be “set upon things that are above” (rather than Earthly things) is an important concept. But what is the extent or limits of our “entanglement” with this world? Are we to separate ourselves from every physical or natural form of “entanglement with the affairs of this life?” Are there any responsibilities that we have that might still exist given this knowledge?
We are certainly citizens of an Eternal Kingdom. We are subjects of the King of Kings and Lord of Lords. Our ultimate desire is to please our King and to carry out His will in our lives. This is the marching orders and heartfelt passion of the children of God. This is the heart behind every decision that we make. Christ is our ultimate motivation. We are constantly thinking of the Lord in everything that we say and do. Everything that we do is for the glory of God. When we exercise, it is because our bodies are the Temple of the Holy Spirit. When we labor, it is to fulfill the requirement to provide for our families, those in need and to further the Gospel. When we read a newspaper, our thoughts are on the nature and status of a world that was created by God. Every decision that we make is made with the understanding of the eternal consequences.
What are the “affairs of this life” spoken about in this passage? Do they include ANYTHING that is done in this world? Consider this from I Corinthians chapter 7:
[b]I Corinthians 7[/b]
32 But I would have you without carefulness. He that is unmarried careth for the things that belong to the Lord, how he may please the Lord:
33 [u]But he that is married careth for the things that are of the world[/u], how he may please his wife.
34 There is difference also between a wife and a virgin. The unmarried woman careth for the things of the Lord, that she may be holy both in body and in spirit: [u]but she that is married careth for the things of the world[/u], how she may please her husband.
At first, this passage from I Corinthians chapter 7 seems to contradict the previous passage from II Timothy chapter 2. But God does not contradict Himself. It is my belief that the Scriptures clearly indicate the preeminence of Eternal matters over earthly matters. However, there are things that are still required of us in this Earth. We must work. We must provide for our families. We must support the work of the Lord. We must consider those who are in need. We must be good “neighbors.” We must pay our taxes. We must submit to authority. We should not be in debt. All of these things can seemingly be considered the “affairs of this life.”
While in high school, our family moved to Tennessee. There is a large Amish community in central Tennessee. I was able to speak with several of these wonderful individuals about many of their beliefs. They physically separate themselves from the community because they feel that this is the separation spoken about in Romans chapter 12. They do not divulge much in “worldly affairs” because of the manner in which they interpret II Timothy chapter 2. While these individuals were extremely devout, they also dismissed anyone else who disagreed with their doctrinal views about “separation.” “[i]A lack of regard for this type of[/i] ‘[i]holiness[/i],’” one young Amish man explained, “[i]reflects a heart that is tainted by a love for the world[/i].”
The Amish admit that they are required to involve themselves with some worldly affairs due to the laws of the governing authority (the state and the United States). They must pay taxes on certain items. They must recognize the legality of their land deeds. They must educate their children until a certain age. They must add lights and reflectors to their horse and buggies. They must follow the road/driving laws. They must even sell things from their homes in order to raise money needed for other items. However, they do not consider themselves citizens of the United States of America. They see themselves only as citizens of Heaven.
Ironically, the Amish have rules that establish the conduct and regulations of their community. There are rules (or laws) about dress, speech, propriety, and involvement in earthly things. A group of elders are set up to carry out those laws. An inability to follow the legal conduct of the Amish community can result in a democratic expulsion of the “sinner.” In afterthought, the Amish community probably closely resembles the rules of the Mayflower Compact, the first written “Constitution” in the New World. And this is all done to avoid worldly entanglements due to their entirely heavenly “citizenship.”
Paul was certainly a citizen belonging to our Eternal God and King. Yet Paul also declared himself a citizen of Rome. He did this to avoid an unlawful beating in Acts 22:23-25. Rome was (and still is) one of the most pagan and evil empires upon the Earth. When asked if he was a Roman citizen, Paul replied, “[i]Yea[/i]” (Acts 22:27). Here is Paul – the writer of 2/3 of the New Testament and the Apostle to the world – declaring his Roman citizenship! Not only that, but Paul later used the Roman legal system (the SAME legal system that had Jesus crucified) to “appeal unto Caesar” in Acts 25:10-12:
[b]Acts 25:10-12[/b]
10 Then said Paul, I stand at Caesar's judgment seat, [u]where I ought to be judged[/u]: to the Jews have I done no wrong, as thou very well knowest.
11 For if I be an offender, or have committed any thing worthy of death, I refuse not to die: but if there be none of these things whereof these accuse me, no man may deliver me unto them. [u]I appeal unto Caesar[/u].
12 Then Festus, when he had conferred with the council, answered, Hast thou appealed unto Caesar? unto Caesar shalt thou go.
Why did Paul use this “right” as a Roman to “appeal unto Caesar?” Because Jesus instructed him in Acts 23:11, “
[i]Be of good cheer, Paul: for as thou hast testified of me in Jerusalem, so must thou bear witness also at Rome[/i].” Paul did not need to make such a legal appeal using his right as provided by Rome. In fact, Agrippa later said to Festus, “
[i]This man might have been set at liberty, if he had not appealed unto Caesar.[/i]” (Acts 26:32). Why, then, did Paul do this? He did this to bring the Gospel to Rome and to the house of Caesar. In fact, the Book of Acts closes with Paul under “house arrest” but proclaiming the Gospel in perfect liberty:
[b]Acts 28:30-31[/b]
30 And Paul dwelt two whole years in his own hired house, and received all that came in unto him,
31 Preaching the kingdom of God, and teaching those things which concern the Lord Jesus Christ, with all confidence, no man forbidding him.
And why should this not surprise us? For where the Spirit of the Lord is, there is liberty!
As a man born in Scotland, there is no more emotive issue than the one of freedom. I was raised with myth and legend and folklore about freedom. Our history is replete with heroes of the cause , standing up against injustice and fighting the good fight. Even if it meant your life, it was better to die on the bloody battlefield than to live a life of oppresion and slavery. This is such a powerful motivating force and many men have been inspired to pick up the sword and go to battle in the name of "Freedom." Yet, what were they really fighting for? What doed freedom mean in the heavenly realms and to the warrior of Christ?
What were they fighting for? Were they fighting for a kingdom in this world – or were they fighting for a far more meaningful concept? What would prompt a man to risk his life to fight for a cause?
Your post is evidence that you live in a relatively free society. In some nations, you would have been executed for publishing these thoughts. After your execution (or perhaps, before), your words would have either been removed or altered to reflect disdain or reproach for Christ. So what gave you the freedom and liberty to declare these things? And how is it that you are able to speak so freely about your beliefs?
For many people, this sort of freedom is a cause worth promoting (and even [i]defending[/i]). It is very easy for us to complain about such a notion of “fighting” for something. Yet we often willing to fully enjoy the spoils of such fighting. In this case, we enjoy many personal liberties that were unheard of times past. We do not face persecution like our brethren in closed nations. But the fact remains that there are people today who will die for simply speaking about their faith in Jesus Christ. In North Korea, believers are often tortured for their faith. Some of them have even watched their children hanged for the Name of Jesus. This is true in many parts of the world. In Africa, the Middle East, and parts of Asia – people live daily under the oppression of persecution.
Richard Wurmbrand, the founder of [i]Voice of the Martyrs[/i], spoke about the need for government intervention. He testified to Congress about the need for the US Government to intervene on behalf of the persecuted Church. When he came to an “anti-war” rally during the 1960s, he was arrested for yanking the bullhorn out of the hands of the pacifists and declaring a need for intervention on behalf of persecuted Christians in communist nations (like Vietnam). Why? Brother Wurmbrand still had relatives and neighbors who were being tortured and murdered for the cause of Christ behind the Iron Curtain.
Today, the Iron Curtain is but a shadow of what it once was. People in former Soviet nations have more liberty to evangelize, preach and openly offer worship unto the Lord. Yet there are still barriers and “curtains” of opposition to such liberty. Just miles offshore of Florida, an oppressive regime is in power in Cuba. The Church there is praying for liberty. In Iran, Pakistan, Yemen and many other Islamic nations, believers are praying for liberty. Christians in some Asian nations are often arrested for their faith. A website like [i]SermonIndex[/i] would result in the death sentence. In those nations, men like Greg and many of SI members would be publicly executed for the “crime” of proclaiming the truth that is found only in Christ Jesus.
In America and other Western nations, we don’t currently face persecution like this. As a result, many of us prefer to remain physical or verbal isolationists in regard to such liberties both here and abroad (including those regarding faith). We claim that we don’t believe in any sort of “entanglement” with the “affairs of this world” – as if speaking out to our legislators and elected government officials, voting or interacting with politics were a [i]bad[/i] thing. Yet we are all “entangled” in other forms of government and political participation (paying taxes, tax exemptions and tax breaks, roads, tax rebates, passports, driver’s licenses, business licenses, financial aid, grants, tax exempt status, government guaranteed home loans, government fixed interest rates, home schooling rights, etc…). When I read Acts chapters 22-26, I can’t help but think that Paul was attempting to reason with the government officials regarding the truths about the Gospel of Jesus Christ. While he wasn’t trying to pass legislature, he was certainly trying to influence the hearts of those officials (Acts 26:24-30).
I suppose that one of the reasons that I respond to these sorts of threads lay in the fact that they are often presented as if they are undeniable truths. While they are often filled with many wonderful and legitimate truths, they are also mingled with the persuasion of the poster. There is no consensus in Scripture to make me believe that a Christian cannot vote or work in his/her community or nation in an “official” manner (anything from a City Engineer, City Planner, Mayor, etc… to the President of the United States or a Justice on the Supreme Court). While I understand that some would see this as being “entangled in the affairs of this world” – I just don’t see this as the “entanglement” that Paul was speaking about in 2 Timothy. If there is a proposition on the ballot that would outlaw some great evil like abortion (which will be a proposition on the ballot in South Dakota in November) or homosexual marriage (which will likely be a proposition on the ballot in California in November) or the right to “homeschool” your children – then why cannot I cast my voice in the matter? Personally, I choose to cast a vote – not because I care about this temporary country more than my eternal country – but because I see it as an opportunity to help and care for my family and neighbors. The nation might be “[i]going to Hell in a handbasket[/i],” but I want to influence this nation out of a heart that loves God and my neighbor.
I am involved simply out of a love for my family and neighbors. I don’t think that this nation is any more loved by God than any other nation – but I do believe that this nation gives a better amount of liberty than most others. Since we have a sort of dual citizenship (a temporary citizenship on Earth and an eternal citizenship in Heaven), I choose to exercise my right to voice my opinion here. I don’t think that this is by any means “bowing my knee” to the world or its worldly system any more than Daniel, Joseph or Paul attempting to influence the legislation in their time and circumstances.
I suppose that the thing that I am most trying to convey is that there are some of us who do not see certain forms of interaction as a violation of the “entangled with the affairs of this life” precept mentioned by Paul in II Timothy chapter 2. Some of us feel the “liberty” to vote. Some of us would feel the liberty to physically (or through a vote) defend a family member or neighbor from harm. I do not think that this matter is decisive enough from the Scriptures to state that any such involvement is a “tactic of the enemy.” Otherwise, Paul was deceived by such a tactic (citing his Roman citizenship and “appealing unto Caesar”). Yet we know that it was Christ who instructed Paul to take the Gospel to Rome. Paul did so by using the political/legal system of the world. It is my belief that believers are permitted to voice their faith in votes and certain participation in order to shine as a light to this dark world. Is it possible to righteous and remain a soldier in the army of the world? We can read about Cornelius (a Centurion from the Italian regiment), who was considered “devout and God-fearing” (Acts 10:2-3) and whose prayers were heard by God and was even given a vision that was used to educate the Apostle Peter (Acts chapter).
As people still living for Jesus on this Earth, we are already involved in government interaction. We pay taxes, drive on government-built roads, eat government-regulated food, collect our tax rebate, lobby to have the right to “home school” our children, etc… Many of us even pray that believers around the world might have the same (or even better) opportunity to serve God outside of a secret. Many of us are praying (and even preaching) so that our nation does not fall into sin. Some of us are even praying for a healing in our land. I feel that my vote is simply offering my voice or opinion about the direction of things. I don’t believe that it is bowing my knee to the systems of this world. Rather, it is telling this world that I what I believe about certain things (including just who or what I think might be the better of two choices).
I appreciate the words of warning that are often posted here regarding the danger of engrossing one’s self into the affairs of this life. There is a danger of going so far as to concentrate on these earthly things and forgetting what is far more pressing and eternal. However, there could be a different outcome too. Is it possible that a complete lack of care could result in apathy? Could our decision not to voice ourselves be construed to be an embrace of lethargy or lawlessness regarding the decisions by authorities? Don’t get me wrong: I am not preaching that one MUST get involved. However, I suspect that many of us would get involved given the right circumstances. If the authorities threatened to take our children away because they accused us of “brainwashing” them with the Gospel – would we not react through involvement? There is currently a case in a southern state involving a woman and her daughter. I suspect that many of us would feel justified to resist any such measure that might result in the harm of our families or neighbors. Our votes are simply a means by which we can voice those concerns before they result in something that drastic. We simply don’t want social activists to redefine binding contract for the government (the Constitution) to suit their own social world view.
I remember reading about Melody Green's decision to get involved in the anti-abortion movement. She said that she simply could not remain silent as the slaughter of unborn children continued from the 1970s into the early 1980s. At the time, she printed a t-shirt that stated how 1.4 million children died each year due to abortions. She organized grassroots efforts to stop the abortion and educate the world and government just what the Bible says about it. It culminated with a petition signed by millions of Americans in which she presented this it to President Ronald Reagan. With Melody Green in the audience, President Reagan signed the "Emancipation Proclamation of Preborn Children." While this proclamation didn't have legal power, it affected the legislation of conservatives for years. Ironically, the number of abortions has decreased nearly every year since (even as the population has increased considerably during that same time). This has led to the rescue of millions of unborn children. Melody Green stated that she doesn't have any regrets for her involvement with Americans Against Abortion as it attempted to influence the legislation of this nation. Who knows? Perhaps she was accomplishing the affairs of Heaven as she operated within the affairs of a government of this world?
[b]John 17:15-19[/b]
15 I pray not that thou shouldest take them out of the world, but that thou shouldest keep them from the evil.
16 They are not of the world, even as I am not of the world.
17 Sanctify them through thy truth: thy word is truth.
18 As thou hast sent me into the world, even so have I also sent them into the world.
19 And for their sakes I sanctify myself, that they also might be sanctified through the truth.
:-)
