Does Matthew 25 Teach Social Gospel?

It seems that every time i get into an discussion with a "Social Justice Christian" He/She drops on me what they believe to be their trump card. This is the proof-text that the believe that I cannot respond to (the face is similar to those in the reformed community who, when getting into a discussion about election and predestination drops Eph 1:4, John 6:44, Rom 9:10-24, or any other of the glorious verses that teach the five points) . This is the Crux of their whole theology so it seems. that is Matthew 25. They will drop it on me and smile with the smile of someone who just believes that they have won the argument. That is until you actually tell them what Matthew 25 is talking about. Their face then drops and they have to disagree, but can't come back with any facts for their disagreement.

The other thing that "Social Justice Christians" do is to guilt trip you. They teach a works righteousness system. They are trying to put such a heavy yoke on you that it should make them shudder to think what it would mean if they had to lift it. "See," they say, "Salvation is based on what you did or didn't do to the poor, remember Jesus said, 'blessed are you poor!' We have to right the injustice in this world, or we are not doing the will of God." That might be an over-simplified reproduction of their statements, I am not trying to straw man them. They do however teach a works righteousness system. I'm sick and tired of having them say that if you are not for government intervention in the lives of the citizens, or if your against government health care, or you think that there should be lower, not higher taxes, then I am not doing the will of Christ.

I appeal to a wiser man than myself to help you to know what Matthew 25 means and how to respond to someone who tries to guilt you with this verse. If you are not acquainted with Kevin De Young's Blog, you should get to know it. He is a fount of wisdom and a wonderful brother in Christ.

By the way, I am not against social justice. I believe that we are mandated by the bible to correct INJUSTICE. Being poor is not dishonorable, nor is it injustice. I see the "Social Gospel" as almost another form of the "Prosperity Gospel." The difference, is that instead of thinking God is your magic Genie who grants you wishes like the Prosperity Heretics seem to think, The "Social Justice" Pharisees would rather treat you unjustly by taking your hard earned money and forcibly give it to those poorer, who have not earned it. Charity is a Christian virtue, and it is a determiner of whether or not someone is in the faith (1 John 3:17), But two things to remember.

1. "Brother in need" brothers and sisters are those who are in the faith! (Matt 12:46-50)

2. We are to love our neighbor, and that does mean meeting physical needs. I will never argue that we have to help those who do not have. I will argue that it should never be forced. You cannot force charity. If you do then it is not charity, it is a tax.

Here is Mr. DeYoung and his explanation

Seven Passages on Social Justice (4)
It’s been awhile since I’ve posted an entry in this series, but I haven’t forgotten about it. There are seven “social justice” passages I want to examine: Isaiah 1, Isaiah 58, Jeremiah 22, Amos 5, Micah 6, Matthew 25, and Luke 4. I’d like to jump ahead today and deal with Matthew 25:31-46.

“When the Son of Man comes in his glory, and all the angels with
him, then he will sit on his glorious throne. 32 Before him will be gathered all
the nations, and he will separate people one from another as a shepherd
separates the sheep from the goats. 33 And he will place the sheep on his right,
but the goats on the left. 34 Then the King will say to those on his right,
‘Come, you who are blessed by my Father, inherit the kingdom prepared for you
from the foundation of the world. 35 For I was hungry and you gave me food, I
was thirsty and you gave me drink, I was a stranger and you welcomed me, 36 I
was naked and you clothed me, I was sick and you visited me, I was in prison and
you came to me.’ 37 Then the righteous will answer him, saying, ‘Lord, when did
we see you hungry and feed you, or thirsty and give you drink? 38 And when did
we see you a stranger and welcome you, or naked and clothe you? 39 And when did
we see you sick or in prison and visit you?’ 40 And the King will answer them,
‘Truly, I say to you, as you did it to one of the least of these my brothers,
you did it to me.’

41 “Then he will say to those on his left, ‘Depart from me, you
cursed, into the eternal fire prepared for the devil and his angels. 42 For I
was hungry and you gave me no food, I was thirsty and you gave me no drink, 43 I
was a stranger and you did not welcome me, naked and you did not clothe me, sick
and in prison and you did not visit me.’ 44 Then they also will answer, saying,
‘Lord, when did we see you hungry or thirsty or a stranger or naked or sick or
in prison, and did not minister to you?’ 45 Then he will answer them, saying,
‘Truly, I say to you, as you did not do it to one of the least of these, you did
not do it to me.’ 46 And these will go away into eternal punishment, but the
righteous into eternal life.”

Matthew 25 has become a favorite passage for many progressives and younger evangelicals. Even in the mainstream media it seems like hardly a day goes by without someone referencing Jesus’ command to welcome the stranger, feed the hungry, and clothe the naked. And few biblical phrases have gotten as much traction as “the least of these.” Whole movements have emerged whose central tenet is to care for “the least of these” ala Matthew 25. The implications–whether it be increased government spending, increased concern for “social justice,” or a general shame over not doing enough–are usually thought to be obvious from the text.

But in popular usage of the phrase, there’s almost no careful examination of what Jesus actually means by “the least of these.” Even brilliant scholars are not immune to this oversight. In his important book To Change the World, James Davison Hunter argues at one point that Christ makes “our treatment of strangers” a “measure of righteousness.” He then quotes from Matthew 25:34-40, followed by this conclusion: “To welcome the stranger–those outside of the community of faith–is to welcome Christ. Believer or nonbeliever, attractive or unattractive, admirable or disreputable, upstanding or vile–the stranger is marked by the image of God” (245). Now, it’s certainly true that we all are made in God’s image. It’s also true, on other grounds, that dealing kindly with strangers, even those outside the church, is a good thing (Gal. 6:10). But it’s difficult to conclude this is Jesus’ point in Matthew 25.
So who are “the least of these” if they are not society’s poor and downtrodden? “The least of these” refers to other Christians in need, in particular itinerant Christian teachers dependent on hospitality from their family of faith. Let me explain.

Four Supporting Points

1. In verse 45 Jesus uses the phrase “the least of these,” but in verse 40 he uses the more exact phrase “the least of these of my brothers.” The two phrases refer to the same group. So the more complete phrase in verse 40 should be used to explain the shorter phrase in verse 45. The reference to “my brothers” cannot be a reference to all of suffering humanity. “Brother” is not used that way in the New Testament. The word always refers to a physical-blood brother or to the spiritual family of God. Clearly Jesus is not asking us to only care for his brother James. So he must be insisting that whatever we do for our fellow Christians in need we do for him.
This interpretation is confirmed when we look at the last time before chapter 25 where Jesus talks about “brothers.” In Matthew 23, Jesus tells the crowds and disciples (1) that they are all brothers (8). The group of “brothers” is narrowed in the following verses to those who have one Father, who is in heaven (9) and have one instructor, Christ (10). Jesus does not call all people everywhere brothers. Those who belong to him and do his will are his brothers (Mark 3:35).

2. Likewise, it makes more sense to think Jesus is comparing service to fellow believers with service to him rather than imagining Jesus to be saying, “You should see my image in the faces of the poor.” Granted, Jesus was a “man of sorrows,” so to understand that sufferers may be able to identify with Jesus in a special way is wholly appropriate. But in the rest of the New Testament it’s the body of Christ that represents Christ on earth, not the poor. Christ “in us” is the promise of the gospel for those who believe, not for those living in a certain economic condition. Matthew 25 equates caring for Jesus’ spiritual family with caring for Jesus. The passage does not offer the generic message: “care for the poor and you’re caring for me.”

3. The word “least” is the superlative from of mikroi (little ones), which always refers to the disciples in Matthew’s gospel (10:42; 18:6, 10, 14; see also 11:11).

4. The similarity between Matthew 10 and 25 is not accidental. They are talking about the same thing. “Whoever receives you receive me, and whoever receives me receives him who sent me. The one who receives a prophet because he is a prophet will receive a prophet’s reward, and the one who receives a righteous person because he is a righteous person will receive a righteous person’s reward. And whoever gives one of these little ones even a cup of cold water because he is a disciple, truly, I say to you, he will by no means lose his reward” (Matt. 10:40-42). Clearly Jesus is speaking hear of disciples. The context is Jesus sending out his disciples to do itinerant ministry (vv 5-15). In the face of persecution and a hostile world (vv. 16-39), Jesus wants to encourage his followers to care for the traveling minister no matter the cost. The disciples would be solely dependent upon the good will of others to welcome them, feed them, and support them in their traveling work. So Jesus assures his followers that to show love in this way is actually to love him.

One of the first post-canon documents, The Didache, demonstrates that caring for traveling ministers was a pressing issue in the first centuries of the church’s history. The Didache, which has been compared to a church constitution, contains 15 short chapters, three of which deal with the protocol for welcoming itinerant teachers, apostles, and prophets. Some so-called ministers, the document concludes, are cheats looking for a hand-out. But as for the true teacher: “welcome him as you would the Lord” (11:2).

Conclusion

Matthew 25 is about social justice in the sense that it is about caring for the needy. But the needy in view are fellow Christians, especially those dependent on our hospitality and generosity for their ministry. “The least of these” is not a blanket statement about the church’s responsibility to meet the needs of all the poor (though we do not want to be indifferent to hurting people). Nor should the phrase be used as a general cover for anything and everything we want to promote under the banner of social justice. Jesus says if we are too embarrassed, too lazy, or too cowardly to support our fellow Christians who depend on our assistance and are suffering for the sake of the gospel, we will go to hell. We should not make this passage say anything more or less than this.

I'd Rather Be A Doorkeeper In The House of The Lord

I have a beautiful young wife. I have a baby comming. I have a low paying job. I have a lot of stress that i'm dealing with. Can I support my family? Do i have enough to provide? I am in a right postition to go chasing riches and to obsess over finances. I would be the first to go and chase after the wind...if I didn't realize how rich i am. I am the richest man in the world. I have Jesus Christ who has died for my sins. He died for me. The most vile, dirty and discusting man who has ever lived. Me, who creation was appaled to have me walk upon it, Jesus Christ died for me! He rose from the dead and conqured death so that I will never have to face death, and will dwell with Christ in perfect communion with the saints, Jesus Christ, the Holy Sprit, and God the father. I have Christ. I have everything! Here is Thomas Sherman giving some thoughts on such things.

If this is happiness--then give me misery!
(Thomas Sherman, "Divine Breathings; Or, a Pious Soul Thirsting after Christ")

"There was a rich man who was dressed in purple and fine linen, and lived in luxury every day." Luke 16:19

How apt are many at the sight of a rich worldling--to envy him for what he has. But, for my part, I rather pity him for what he lacks!

He has a talent--but it lacks improvement;
he has a lamp--but it lacks oil;
he has a soul--but it lacks grace;
he has the creature--but he lacks the Creator;
he has a mansion--but he lacks heaven.

In his life, he floats upon a torrent of vanity--which rolls along into an ocean of vexation! And after death, it will be said of him, "Take this unprofitable servant, bind him hand and foot, and cast him into outer darkness! Consign his soul to the eternal lake of fire and brimstone!"

Where now is the object of your envy? It is not his gold that can then rescue him, nor his mansion that can then satisfy him, nor his friends that can then comfort him. Therefore, if he is worth the envying--then who can be worth the pitying? If this is happiness--then give me misery!Lord, rather make me poor with a holy heart--than rich with an evil heart of unbelief!

"Have pity on me and send Lazarus to dip the tip of his finger in water and cool my tongue--because I am in agony in this fire!" Luke 16:24

"Then they will go away to eternal punishment--but the righteous to eternal life!" Matthew 25:46

Scott Clark Explaining the Problem with "Childrens Church"

Bravo!!! Dr. Clark Hit a home run here, i couldn't have said it any better than this. If you do not read Scott Clark's Blog, you should start to. It is a fount of rich theology and understanding of Reformed Theology. You can find it HERE.

Here are his thoughts on Childrens Church. Stop taking the kids and youth away from the communion of the saints!!!

THE MYSTERY OF CHILDREN'S CHURCH
BY DR. SCOTT CLARK

I do not understand why so many ostensibly Reformed congregations have adopted the practice of dismissing their covenant children from the service to “children’s church” (or whatever more clever name it may have). From what I see this appears to be a common practice. Sometimes the bulletin explains that the children are sent out of public worship in order to “prepare them to worship.” Really? This seems like sending one’s child from the dinner table in order to prepare them to eat.
I understand the practical problem. At least some of the same congregations that have this practice also do not set aside time outside of the worship service for Christian instruction or catechism. So, it seems, they’re holding catechism during the worship service. I guess that the reason that there’s no additional time for catechism is that the parents won’t make time and the church won’t make them make time. So, congregations are making due.
It’s hard to know where to start with this complex of problems. Obviously there is a misunderstanding of the nature of the Sabbath. There’s a misunderstanding of the nature of worship. There’s a misunderstanding of the nature of baptismal vows and church membership. There’s a misunderstanding of Christian nurture and there’s a misunderstanding of the nature of Christian parenting. Other than these things, as they say, “it’s all good.”
In such a case, the act of sending children out of the the stated service for instruction sends a more powerful message than the instruction is likely to send. It sends the message to the children that they are not really members of the covenant community. It sends the message that the gathering for public worship may be marginalized if something else is deemed more important. It sends the message that it’s acceptable to arrange one’s priorities during the week so as to require this ad hoc solution, that church is something we do but not something we are.
Underneath all of this there is another series of misunderstandings: Of what we are, who Jesus is, what he did, and what the implications are for those who would follow him.
We may look like happy, upwardly mobile suburbanites but we’re not. We’re wretched, horrible people by nature. That manicured lawn covers over a multitude of hell-deserving sins. We’re gossips, murderers, adulterers, and God-haters. If the children’s church-sending parents understood that, if they really believed that about themselves and their children, they would find time during the week to see that their children are instructed. They would be catechizing their children, praying with and for them. Then it wouldn’t be a matter of squeezing a little instructional time into the Sabbath. They would be pleading with the minister to teach their children.
If we saw ourselves for what, but for the grace of God, we really are then we would understand the grace of God. If we understood the grace of God, we would more and more embrace the consequences of following Jesus. Death to self entails death to the successful suburban lifestyle where that lifestyle marginalizes Christ and his church. Jesus didn’t come to facilitate a happy, upwardly-mobile lifestyle and discipleship calls us to die to the mall and live to Christ.
Yes, having children in church means that it will be slightly less entertaining and possibly less moving emotionally. It’s a little harder to be enraptured by the latest chorus when your child is fidgeting next to you or someone else’s is wailing in your left ear. That’s okay. You might not have the same emotional “high” this week as you did when their was children’s church. That’s okay. Worship isn’t about your experience of religious ecstasy. It’s about hearing God and responding appropriately, according to his Word.
God doesn’t mind that your emotional experience is less intense. He takes the long view. Your children will grow up not segregated from public worship and the means of grace. They’ll grow up a part of the community of the redeemed and watching baptisms (so they can see what happened to them). They’ll see the supper administered and they ‘ll ask, “When can I have it?” They’ll hear the Law and the Gospel (Dv) and they’ll grow up knowing that this is their identity, that it’s really true, that God said, “I will be your God and your children’s God.”
Church leaders don’t want to challenge parents and parents don’t want to be challenged. The cycle has to end somewhere. It should start with pastors and elders. That’s why they call it leadership. A leader goes first. A leader takes the risk. Elders and pastors need to get over their desire to be popular, to be liked, to be “successful.” Perhaps the reason that parents don’t see any contradiction between their definition of “success” and the Christian life is because their pastors and elders haven’t shown it to them?
Children’s church is a problem but it’s not the problem. It’s a symptom of much larger problems. It’s not too late, because it’s never too late to repent. Grace is free for everyone, pastors and parents alike. God bless those noisy congregations with fidgeting and fussy children. Let the noise of children inhabit all our congregations.