What is God's Economy?

[aron]

Originally Posted by OBW

It is, after all, the ACTS of the Apostles, not the Teachings of the Apostles.

And are we to surmise that the acts (activities, actions, doings) of the apostles are fundamentally different than the disciples' actions which are caused by healthy teachings and are encapsulated in the terms "God's economy" in the RecV? I don't suppose so, and wonder why anyone else would. After all, the Acts of the Apostles follow close upon the gospels, both in time and spirit. And this was the same gospel that Paul was exporting to the non-Jews. The "right hand of fellowship" phrase in Gal 2 makes this plain to his intended readers.

For more corroboration from his epistles, we have the two chapters in 2 Cor on how Jesus became poor that they (the gentiles) might be rich (8:9). Should they not also be inspired to follow? Okay, then: "Now about the collection for the saints, you are to do as I directed the churches of Galatia: On the first day of every week, each of you should set aside a portion of his income, saving it up, so that when I come no collections will be needed. Then, on my arrival, I will send letters with those you recommend to carry your gift to Jerusalem." ~1 Cor 16:1-3

We also have Paul's eager assent to the Jerusalem apostles to "remember the poor" (Gal 2:10) in his outreach to the nations, we have Roman's 15:22-29 telling them of the contributions of Macedonia and Achaea for the poor of Jerusalem.

Now, this collection and distribution may not constitute the sum total of "God's economy" but it lines up well with the overall theme. Give to those who can't repay you, and your reward will be great in heaven. Giving takes many forms, which forms fill the NT, and which satisfy the original mandate. "Love is the end (apotheosis, or culmination) of the law"

[OBW]

Originally Posted by aron

And are we to surmise that the acts (activities, actions, doings) of the apostles are fundamentally different than the disciples' actions which are caused by healthy teachings and are encapsulated in the terms "God's economy" in the RecV?

I'm not sure what you are getting at here. Are you saying that the activities of all of Christ's followers are the same? That everyone engages in the acts that are demonstrated by the apostles?

I am not saying that various activities of the apostles are not found among some of the followers. But some of their activities are the result of their calling to be among the primary trainees who then were specifically given a commission to do what they did.

You referred to Corinth. In the first letter, Paul was clear that we do not all have the same calling when he indicated that we do not all have the same gifts granted by the Spirit. We all get a calling, but not for the same things or activities.

And I know that Lee liked to say that the verses in Ephesians that refer to the "gifting" of certain types of individuals was so that they can develop more of the same kinds of gifts in people. But where is that the way things work? Doctors are not here to heal people so they can be doctors. Teachers do not teach so that those receiving their teaching can be teachers. I recognize that a few may be. But the primary purpose of shepherds is to lead and care for a flock, not help the flock become shepherds. The purpose of teachers is not to raise up teachers, but to raise up those who use the knowledge from the teacher to do other things.

Everyone does not have the same gifts. Jesus sent out the apostles to do three things. The third was to teach the new followers to obey all that had been commanded. There was no charge to teach the new followers to learn how to teach the new converts to teach other new converts, although there will surely be some among them that receive the calling to be the next generation with a primary calling to that activity.

But we are all "called" by commandment(s) to live a life that demonstrates the love of God and of neighbor. And while this seems simple, it is really quite hard because we often get confused about what is "love." We think that honking at the guy in front of us 1 millisecond after the light changes demonstrates love for the people behind us, yet we clearly show no love the guy in front of us when we do that. Just a simple example. And despite feeling like we can figure it all out ourselves, we find ourselves supporting "tough love" on people we hardly know, if at all.

But in the body, there are many members, and all do not have the same function. Some are eyes. Some are the mouth. Some are hands. Some are the big toe (and others the little toe). Some are pumping blood throughout the body while others filter out waste for disposal. Don't overthink the comparisons, or consider anyone as excessively pigeonholed.

But the calling for everyone is to obey the call to love, righteousness, humility, etc. Many of them are rightly advised to "go and sin no more." Others are asked to "follow me." This does not mean the first type is not really Christian and the second is. But those in the second type are the ones with specific callings that will require special time with the rabbi to learn his "trade." They are the ones who must be clear that leadership is not a perk, but a service that has a cost.

The priesthood of believers is about access to God, not responsibility as co-leaders of the movement. This is one of the most insidious things of evangelicalism (of which even the LRC is a part). This "wretched urgency" (as, oddly enough, a Baptist preacher called it) to be compelled to always be trying to turn conversations to spiritual things so you can whip out your Roman Road or Four Spiritual Laws tract and lead then to Christ. Surely, if you are asked about your faith you should have something to say (as Peter wrote). But the so-called great commission was not given to the 500+ who saw Jesus after the resurrection. Nor to the 70 who were sent out some time eearlier. As recorded, not even the other 109 who were eventually in the upper room with the 11 at Pentecost. Only the 11 are mentioned as receiving this charge. I cannot assert that this removes all responsibility from the rest of us. But the charge given wasn't even to all who were by that time believers. It is only an unsubstantiated belief that we all have this charge. It is never stated in such a manner. Many verses that are used as further support can only be read that way if you start with the presumption that it is true. This fuels the tendency to border on shaming the members of the body who are not constantly coming back to report their latest adventure in preaching the gospel. It reduces the purpose of the church to propagation. It insists that the fruit of a vine is more vine. (Or the fruit of a branch is more branches.)

It seems that the only places that fruit is mentioned in any kind of detail never includes converts. Only evidence of the life of Christ within the lives of his followers expressed in peace, righteousness, compassion, etc.

We are all called to be righteous. To love our neighbor as ourselves. To bear the fruit of the Spirit.

Even if some of us have some level of calling to activities like evangelism, we need whatever for us is the equivalent of 3+ years of time with Jesus coming to understand righteousness in all that we do; humility in everything; love for even the worst sinners (think "abortion doctors" or "illegal aliens" if you consider some to be unlovable).

God's economy is righteousness, peace, and joy in the Holy Spirit. It reflects in everything we do in which there is no verbal mention of anything spiritual. In serving at a homeless shelter that has rules against any kind of proselytizing (and doing it without violating those rules). In driving righteously and friendly (even without having the car buried in religious bumper stickers). And even more so in being righteous when another driver is just plain mean to us in some way.

It turns out that St Francis of Assissi never actually said that thing about preaching the gospel without words. The first recorded reference to it was in about 1991, so it is probably misattributed, if not simply made-up. But the sentiment is important. If we can't speak volumes without words, then we probably should keep our mouths shut because we will speak volumes without words. They just may be the wrong words. Our actions are always speaking. What are they saying? Will those loud but unspoken words support some gospel message or mock it? That does not mean that everyone who actually has a calling to preach must be perfect. No one is. But they probably should at least be reasonably so. And honest about their shortcomings.

But you can't sell Jesus as the changer of lives if yours isn't. It's like sending a filthy, stinking bum out to sell soap door to door.

None of this says that the activities of the apostles are fundamentally different from that of the average believer/follower. They are all the outflow of what has been planted in them by the Spirit coupled with the calling they have received. The result is not simply the same thing, but it is all part of God's economy. There are cooks, floor sweepers, farmers, merchants, children, teachers, factory workers, plumbers, electricians, doctors, accountants, bankers, etceteraaaah, etceteraaah (from The King and I). Don't try to make direct comparisons. Just note the diversity. Yet they are fundamentally the same as they are all normal activities of the variety of people who populate an estate, town, city, etc. About the only thing we have completely in common is that we all eat, sleep, breathe, and some other standard functions. The rest varies by gift. Gift of birth, upbringing, training, age, experience, etc.

The same can be said of the body of Christ in the context of the thing referred to as God's economy.

[aron]

Originally Posted by OBW

I'm not sure what you are getting at here. Are you saying that the activities of all of Christ's followers are the same? That everyone engages in the acts that are demonstrated by the apostles?

I am not saying that various activities of the apostles are not found among some of the followers. But some of their activities are the result of their calling to be among the primary trainees who then were specifically given a commission to do what they did.

You referred to Corinth. In the first letter, Paul was clear that we do not all have the same calling when he indicated that we do not all have the same gifts granted by the Spirit. We all get a calling, but not for the same things or activities...

None of this says that the activities of the apostles are fundamentally different from that of the average believer/follower. They are all the outflow of what has been planted in them by the Spirit coupled with the calling they have received. The result is not simply the same thing, but it is all part of God's economy. There are cooks, floor sweepers, farmers, merchants, children, teachers, factory workers, plumbers, electricians, doctors, accountants, bankers...

Don't try to make direct comparisons. Just note the diversity. Yet they are fundamentally the same as they are all normal activities of the variety of people who populate an estate, town, city, etc. About the only thing we have completely in common is that we all eat, sleep, breathe, and some other standard functions. The rest varies by gift. Gift of birth, upbringing, training, age, experience, etc.

The same can be said of the body of Christ in the context of the thing referred to as God's economy.

When I speak of activities, noted in detail in Acts and referenced in Paul's letters (e.g., Corinth) I am thinking of those who have, sharing with those who don't have. That I see as a universal rule, a key aspect of "God's economy" even if not entirely all-encompassing. I don't see differences. Giving is giving and sharing is sharing. Everyone has different gifts to share, but they all have gifts.

And note Paul's word which I quoted: "each of you should set aside a portion of income" for the poor of Jerusalem. Not just those who are bankers and lawyers and such, should set a portion aside, but everyone.

[OBW]

Originally Posted by aron

When I speak of activities, noted in detail in Acts and referenced in Paul's letters (e.g., Corinth) I am thinking of those who have, sharing with those who don't have. That I see as a universal rule, a key aspect of "God's economy" even if not entirely all-encompassing. I don't see differences. Giving is giving and sharing is sharing. Everyone has different gifts to share, but they all have gifts.

And note Paul's word which I quoted: "each of you should set aside a portion of income" for the poor of Jerusalem. Not just those who are bankers and lawyers and such, should set a portion aside, but everyone.

Well, that would definitely be part of God's economy. And if someone had tried to define it to not be a part, then it clearly should be included.

[JJ]

Originally Posted by aron

And are we to surmise that the acts (activities, actions, doings) of the apostles are fundamentally different than the disciples' actions which are caused by healthy teachings and are encapsulated in the terms "God's economy" in the RecV? I don't suppose so, and wonder why anyone else would. After all, the Acts of the Apostles follow close upon the gospels, both in time and spirit. And this was the same gospel that Paul was exporting to the non-Jews. The "right hand of fellowship" phrase in Gal 2 makes this plain to his intended readers.

For more corroboration from his epistles, we have the two chapters in 2 Cor on how Jesus became poor that they (the gentiles) might be rich (8:9). Should they not also be inspired to follow? Okay, then: "Now about the collection for the saints, you are to do as I directed the churches of Galatia: On the first day of every week, each of you should set aside a portion of his income, saving it up, so that when I come no collections will be needed. Then, on my arrival, I will send letters with those you recommend to carry your gift to Jerusalem." ~1 Cor 16:1-3

We also have Paul's eager assent to the Jerusalem apostles to "remember the poor" (Gal 2:10) in his outreach to the nations, we have Roman's 15:22-29 telling them of the contributions of Macedonia and Achaea for the poor of Jerusalem.

Now, this collection and distribution may not constitute the sum total of "God's economy" but it lines up well with the overall theme. Give to those who can't repay you, and your reward will be great in heaven. Giving takes many forms, which forms fill the NT, and which satisfy the original mandate. "Love is the end (apotheosis, or culmination) of the law"

1Tim 1:5 says
“Now the goal of our instruction is love out of a pure heart, and a good conscience, and a sincere faith.” I think y’all are onto something

[Sons to Glory!]

I read this in a daily devotional from T. Austin Sparks for March 29th, and thought of this thread:

"For you have not come to the mountain that may be touched and that burned with fire." Hebrews 12:18

How vast is the movement from that old economy to the bringing in of the New Economy . . .

I must pause to ask, is this where Christendom has gone astray?

Is it still holding on to the old economy?

Is it still in the grave clothes?

Is it still that old Mosaic economy with its forms and ways?

Is it not emancipated into the Heavenlies?!

That is what the Lord wants to do with us here.

[aron]

Originally Posted by JJ

1Tim 1:5 says
“Now the goal of our instruction is love out of a pure heart, and a good conscience, and a sincere faith.” I think y’all are onto something

Luke 12:21 NIV “This is how it will be with whoever stores up things for themselves but is not rich toward God.”

Jesus was giving a parable about a guy who amassed goods for himself. He died and they were then nothing for him. Even James 5:1-6 said, "They will burn you like fire".

But Jesus says, "Be rich toward God". In other words, use your possessions to help others, then your treasure will be in heaven. This is God's economy.

Contrast this to Witness Lee, who dunned church members for $$ for his son's Motor Home business. Even today, I believe the LSM is cutting residual checks in the tens of thousands of dollars for Lee family members.

Imagine if in the beginning chapters of Acts, Peter had people laying their $$ at his feet, then we found out it wasn't going to the poor but Peter had a ski area on the side, with family members running it? Imagine if Paul was collecting $$ for the poor of Jerusalem, per Galatians 2:12 and Romans 15, and we found out that Paul had a little side business of import/export, again siphoning off for his cronies? What would happen to the gospel then?

I'm not saying that "holding the bag" is wrong. But there is danger. Witness Lee failed miserably. Hank Hanegraaff failed. KP Yohannon, Hank's new buddy, failed. That is the economy of man, not the economy of God.

[aron]

On an FTTA-promoting website a testimony said, "They never exalted one man and never said we were part of any organization. On the contrary, my father would tell me during our car rides that we follow God, His economy, and nothing else." This was written by an ex-Church Kid, FTTA graduate, current "serving one".

We follow God, His economy, and nothing else. This is how the strong concept of "God's economy" controls the LC. Yet where does the NT define it as "to eat God by pray-reading Bible verses"? Or PSRP the HWMR?

Does Jesus say, "Blessed are those who, when the Master returns, finds them pray-reading Bible verses"? No, he says, the blessed are found to be giving food to others. Helping others. Visiting the sick, the prisoners, the widows, the orphans. What did the apostles (Peter, John, James) tell Paul: "remember the poor". Paul replies, "I told them that I was eager to do this very thing" ~Gal 2:7-10 This reminds of Jesus' core teachings to "give to those who can't repay you, and your reward will be great in heaven."

Yet when James writes a similar thing in his epistle, to share with the less fortunate, the critique in the Lord's Recovery was, "That's not God's economy". I argue, to the contrary, this probably was "God's economy" that Paul told Timothy to remain in Ephesus, to remind them to teach (1:4). Paul devotes several chapters on this, the collection for the poor of Jerusalem (2 Cor 8:1- 9:5; 1 Cor 16). Rom 15:26,27 also mentions Achaia and Macedonia giving to the poor. Then, at the end of his final missionary journey, he says that he's back with alms for the poor of Jerusalem (Acts 24:17). Paul isn't just writing about it but demonstrating that this is central to his work.

What should we say - "No, Paul! That's not God's economy!!"?? Paul's teaching this to Macedonia, Galatia, Rome, Corinth, Phillipi, Cenchrea, Thessalonica... don't you think he's also asking Timothy in 1:4 to make sure it's taught in Ephesus, also? And, what were they 'dispensing' to the widows in Acts 6:1? Ministry tracts? Rainbow Booklets? Gold-bar life-studies? No, food. And, what was the 'ministry' or 'mission' that Paul and Barnabas completed in Acts 12:25? Training sessions on church affairs? Lectures, or food?

Of course the NT says to "be in spirit" but where does that mean incessant shouting, heel-rocking, fist-pumping, repetitively ''amen, amen'' -ing? Jesus went around in Spirit, doing good. Not repetitively chanting. (in fact he warned against that, as a practice of the gentiles). Maybe going around helping others in the name of Jesus Christ is being "in spirit, on the ground", not shouting slogans. It certainly seems much more in line with the NT examples and exhortations.

Acts 10:38 "how God anointed Jesus of Nazareth with the Holy Spirit and power, and how he went around doing good and healing all who were under the power of the devil, because God was with him."

John 4:34 "My food," said Jesus, "is to do the will of him who sent me and to finish his work."

John 6:57 "Just as the living Father sent me and I live because of the Father, so the one who feeds on me will live because of me."

Where is pray-reading stated here, or even implied? No, it's to obey the Father (and us to obey Jesus) and do what He commands. To love those around us, to help those who can't help us, to give to those who cannot repay. "Go around and do good" as Peter testified in Acts 10. The collection for the poor of Jerusalem by the gentile churches was clearly in this vein. Paul uses considerable ink and parchment in 1 and 2 Corinthians and Romans 15 to make this plain. We don't have to guess, or surmise. It's clearly laid out, what Paul expected of the recipients of his letters.