Then, there is the argument that Paul has already finished talking about the widows who are in need of financial support by the end of verse 8, and so to say that in verse 9 Paul continues to talk about the characteristics of those who are eligible for the church's assistance would be to say that he brings up the same topic again right after he has just finished discussing it.

But this argument also begs the question. Rather, if verse 9 continues what Paul started in verse 3, then it means that he has not finished discussing the topic at the end of verse 8. It begs the question to say that verse 9 begins a new topic because verse 8 has ended the previous topic, and therefore verse 9 must be the beginning of a new topic. No, rather, if verse 9 does not begin a new topic, then verse 8 is not the end of what Paul started in verse 3.

One should consult the commentaries for additional details and arguments, but I am mentioning these examples precisely because many commentaries assert their position on this passage with these fallacious arguments. We should consider the arguments offered and make sure that they are sound before accepting the position proposed. As there is no clear and sharp transition between verse 8 and verse 9, it is more natural to assume that verse 9 does not begin a new topic, or a discussion about a separate group of widows. Instead, verse 9 continues with what Paul started in verse 3.

This position is reinforced by verse 16, which says, "If any woman who is a believer has widows in her family, she should help them and not let the church be burdened with them, so that the church can help those widows who are really in need."

One commentator has just finished explaining why he thinks that verse 9 begins a new topic, that is, a discussion about a group or an order of widows different from those mentioned in verses 3-8. But then when he comes to verse 16, he has to say that Paul suddenly returns to the previous topic, about widows in need, or those mentioned in verses 3-8. But as there is no clear transition between verse 8 and verse 9, and as there is no clear transition between verse 15 and verse 16, it is much more natural to read verse 3 all the way through verse 16, as if Paul is talking about the same group of widows, only that from verses 9-15, Paul is giving specific instructions concerning which widows that the church should regard as eligible for support.

Now if one wants to argue that Paul is indeed talking about different group of widows, or an overlapping but clearly distinguishable group of widows, then he may still do so. However, he will have to offer better arguments than those typically proposed, that do not so obviously beg the question. One must not use a standard of judgment that does not come from the text itself, or for that matter, that does not come from anywhere in Scripture, and on that basis assert that Paul cannot mean something, and therefore he does not mean something. Well, if he does mean something, then he can mean it.

So arguments of this kind do nothing other than to impose one's standard of judgment upon Scripture, and then on that basis determine what certain passages can mean or cannot mean. Rather than an interpretation of Scripture, in which one carefully draws out the meaning of the text, this is a subversion of Scripture, and imposes one's non-biblical beliefs and standards upon Scripture, artificially restricting and manipulating the text.

To summarize, my position is that from verses 3-8, Paul discusses the general principles that govern how Christians should treat the widows who are in need, and who cannot support themselves. Then, from verses 9-15, Paul lists a number of specific principles and conditions that further limit the number of those eligible for such support. Finally, in verse 16, he summarizes his teaching on the subject.

Since verse 16 presents a straightforward and unmistakable summary of Paul's teaching, it must govern our interpretation of verses of 3-8. And if we are correct about verses 9-15, then verse 16 must govern how we interpret that portion also. However, since we will focus our attention only on verses 3-8, this is all that we need to emphasize for our study. That is, for our purpose, we only need to keep in mind that verses 3-8 and verse 16 go together.

We will not begin our main exposition of this passage until the next session, so I will just leave you with one thought about the purpose and the uses of this study. Those of us who have a basic understanding of biblical teachings realize that our main task is not charity or social outreach, but to preach a spiritual gospel. Of course, it is a gospel that carries implications about our physical needs and social relationships. However, it is still first a spiritual gospel, designed to save us from our sins and restore fellowship with God.

Again, that our primary interest is people's spiritual needs and spiritual concerns does not mean that we ignore their physical welfare. In fact, according to James, a faith is dead, false, and hypocritical if we will say to someone who is hungry and suffering, "I will pray for you," but then do nothing to help that person with his needs. As John says, "If anyone has material possessions and sees his brother in need but has no pity on him, how can the love of God be in him?" (1 John 3:17).

So, our purpose is first spiritual, and our message is first not a social but a spiritual gospel, although it is one that carries social implications. That is the way to look at it. Our question then, and the reason for this study, is to find out how we are to implement and carry out these social implications generated by our spiritual faith. Our passage for this study will tell us about our responsibilities, and it will also tell us how to prioritize our charitable works. We will see that the biblical teaching does not excuse a lack of compassion on our part, but at the same time, it will not tolerate idleness and licentiousness in those who request support and charity.

(to be continued)

Posted in Expositions, Spirituality, Ministry | Permanent Link