Newsgroups: bit.listserv.christia
Date:         Sun, 16 Aug 1992 22:21:42 EDT
From:         JEK@NIHCU.BITNET
Subject:      Responsibility for helping

Dan Graham writes:

 > About the blood on your hands, no, absolutely not.  There is,
 > so far as I can se, no New Testament teaching that we have
 > "blood on our hands" if we fail to tell the gospel to someone.
 > That would suggest that our telling is the active force in
 > salvation, which is not the truth.  We are responsible for
 > doing as the Spirit leads, and following the great commission.
 > We never see Jesus forcing Himself on anyone.  Nobody will be
 > lost because we failed to do our duty.  If that were possible,
 > than we would be serving a pretty weak and powerless God, which
 > we do not do.  He is absolute sovereign and saves those whom He
 > chooses, using our testimony and preaching as part of His plan,
 > but not dependant on them.

The "blood" reference in this thread came originally from Ezekiel
3:16-21 and Ezekiel 33:1-9. In these two similar passages, God says
to the prophet:  "If the people sin and you warn them to repent,
then you are off the hook whether they heed your warning or not; but
if they sin and you do not warn them, then I will require their
blood at your hand."

Dan says that there are no New Testament passages making this point.
But if no Old Testament statement has any validity for us until it
is backed by a similar statement in the New Testament, then we may
as well throw our Old Testaments away.

Dan says that the spiritual fate of others never depends on our
actions, since God is sovereign.

But wasn't God sovereign in the days of Ezekiel? Why did this
argument not apply then?

Moreover, why doesn't this argument apply to other things as well?
We are told that we have a duty to feed the hungry. Dan's argument
suggests that we need not worry about the hungry, since if God wants
them fed, he will see to it that they are fed, and so it does not
depend on us. James seems to think otherwise. He writes (James
2:15f):

 + If a brother or sister is ill-clad and in lack of daily food,
 + and one of you says to them, "Go in peace, be warmed and filled,"
 + without giving them the things needed for the body, what does it
 + profit?

Again, it would appear, by Dan's argument, that when the "goats" in
the parable (M 25:31-46) were told, "I was hungry and you gave me no
meat," they ought to have replied, "Since God is sovereign, we knew
that you would be fed if and only if he wanted you fed, and so it
didn't matter whether we fed you or not." (One wonders whether
anyone applies this argument to show that it would be a waste of
time for him to fix his own breakfast.)

I am reminded of the words of Mordecai to Esther, when he told her,
"You must use your position as queen to save the Jews from
extermination," and she replied, "That would be dangerous for me."
Mordecai said:  "If you do not act, the people will be preserved in
some other way, but you will still be responsible for your failure
to act." (Esther 4:8-14)

I do not think we can deny that we have a duty to feed the hungry
and to preach the Gospel, and that we will be held responsible if we
fail to do so.

     *     *     *     *     *     *

On the other hand, I believe that zeal without common sense can be
worse than useless. Suppose we decide, for example, that the best
way to feed the hungry is to lower the price of food, and so we pass
a law prohibiting the sale of eggs for more than one cent a dozen,
or of bread for more than a cent a pound. If as a result the farmers
go out of business and there are no loaves or eggs to be had at all,
our good intentions will not save the day. Similarly, if we decide
to convert someone by cornering him and talking non-stop until he
agrees to accept Jesus, and if as a result he and all his friends
decide that Christians are all grade-A jerks and should never be
listened to, our good intentions will not change the fact that we
done harm rather than good. I think that we have to pick our
opportunities with some care, and sometimes say, "I am not sent to
that man -- he and I do not speak the same language." But that is
another post.

 Yours,
 James Kiefer
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.christia