Author: Warren Berkley

“Don’t Do Your Alms to be Seen of Men”

by Warren E. Berkley

Take heed that ye do not your alms before men, to be seen of them: otherwise ye have no reward of your Father which is in heaven” (Matthew 6:1). The story is told of an old Pharisee tending to business in his Jerusalem shop. A public announcement was made (with trumpets?) about a benevolent need. The ostentatious Pharisee tripped all over himself, pushed customers aside and shouted: “Excuse me, I must close the shop now, to take my contribution to the needy ones … Excuse me … Out of my way please …” On his way out, he picked up a huge, heavy sack, but while running down the street, he fell, the sack opened … and all the rocks fell out!

The Old Testament instructed the Jewish people in the duty of benevolence, and promised a blessing on those who considered the poor (Psalm 41:1). The scribes and Pharisees took this duty of charity and turned it into a performance, designed to elicit the applause of men. In their infamous tampering with the ways of God, they kept the duty but changed the motive! Their concern was not to glorify God and help the needy. They wanted “to be seen” by men; to be praised, exalted, and become well-known. A simple walk of obedience to God had been replaced by a public relations style of grandiose self-righteousness; in alms-giving, prayer and fasting. But …

For every basic defect in the hearts of these vainglorious men, the Lord had something incisive to say. In our text, He isn’t minimizing true benevolence. In fact, His main focus is not “charitable deeds” or “alms.” He deals with the immature motive, i.e. “to be seen …” and in convicting them He challenges and warns us: we must not take a good work and turn it into a performance designed to elicit applause for ourselves! Throughout this context, He wants His disciples to learn to do the right things for the right reasons. As the true disciple engages in either benevolence, prayer, or fasting, there must be purity in motive (Matthew 6:1–15). Our charitable deeds must be generated by obligation toward God, and a merciful response to another’s need; not an attempt for recognition. And when that is our intent (gaining recognition), we may gain that reward but miss the higher reward of God’s approval and pleasure (see verse 2).

“Grand-standing” is a term coined in the political arena, but may describe what a few “preachin’ brethren” have been guilty of. I know we must proceed with caution when we speak of another’s motivation, but sometimes there seems to be evidence that the commotion and prating of some preachers is vain and ambitious in cause. Jesus calls for restraint (“take heed”) and this should prompt self examination in all of us. While some of these “grand-standers” may preach the truth and expose error, they will answer for their attitude and motive (see Phil. 1:15, 16; 1 Corinthians 4:15). Proclaiming or writing gospel truth was never meant to be a theatrical performance. “Beware of doing good deeds conspicuously to catch men’s eyes,” (Phillips).

I think there is one final by-product of learning what Jesus taught in this text. Have you ever heard someone complain, “The people in this church are just not doing anything!” Perhaps. And yet, if benevolence and good works are being practiced in keeping with the Lord’s teaching, a great many genuine acts of love and benevolence will take place that you never see or hear about! (Note, “in secret,” and “go into your room,” verses 4, 6).
“Take heed that ye do not your alms before men, to be seen of them: otherwise ye have no reward of your Father which is in heaven.”
And all of this reminds me of the man who called a press conference to announce his anonymous gift to a charitable foundation! Oops …

Berkley, W. E. (1994). “Don’t Do Your Alms to be Seen of Men.” (D. Truex, Ed.)Christianity Magazine, 11(4), 18.

“The Church of Facebook” by Jesse Rice

by Warren E. Berkley

When it first was released, I read this book by Jesse Rice. First, the word “church” is not used in the true Biblical sense. Second, this book is not really an approach to the subject that draws mostly from Scripture.

It is a journey/history of social media, sometime tangled up in academic research and conjecture through applying various physiological and social studies. If you can wade through some of that, there are benefits.

Rice calls upon the reader to carefully consider Facebook and other social media, not just as another communication method. Rather, a “hyper-connection” that could change the way we interact with people in ways that (1) may reveal disturbing things about who we are and (2) may transform us into people who have lost some valuable connections.

With any new technology, the user must apply a discipline whereby the new tool is applied without taking us down a destructive path.

Here are some quotes from the Rice book:

At the root of human existence is our great need for connection: connection with one another, with our own hearts and minds, and with a loving God who intended intimate connection with us from the beginning. Connection is the very core of what makes us human and the very means by which we express our humanity.

Facebook even goes so far as to “suggest” friends for us; we are literally empowered and encouraged to go “friend-hunting,” to simply and easily add to our collection by clicking “add to friend.” And there are many more choices—reconnecting with long-lost friends, connecting informally to those with whom we’d normally have a purely professional relationship (bosses, coworkers, teachers), even starting our own groups and fan clubs. That’s a lot of choices. That’s a lot of control over our social worlds. But are we better off for it?

Stone notes that our habit of continuous partial attention is having a detrimental effect on the quality of our attention. By trying to keep from “missing out” on anything, we become overstimulated and unfulfilled. In addition, Stone says that all of those choices are actually undermining our sense of control and making us feel increasingly powerless. This can happen when we begin to feel at the mercy of our technology—a knee-jerk, out-of-control kind of experience.

Today’s online social networks are congeries of mostly weak ties—no one who lists thousands of friends on MySpace thinks of those people in the same way as he does his flesh-and-blood acquaintances, for example. It is surely no coincidence, then, that the activities social networking sites promote are precisely the ones weak ties foster, like rumor-mongering, gossip, finding people, and tracking the ever-shifting movements of popular culture and fad. (Rice quotes Christine Rosen)

“In effect the hyper-connection of Facebook changes the nature of our relationships by turning our friends into audiences and us into performers.”

Throughout the Rice book, one repeated statement is, “There is a force that is capable of synchronizing a large population in very little time, therefore creating spontaneous order.” You may decide, after reading the book and reflecting on what you have witnessed, that the use of social media through the keyboards of many, is creating spontaneous disorder!

I cannot endorse all that is in the book. In fact, I cannot understand all that is in this book. The academic studies are tedious. But there are some worthwhile sections that will provoke useful thought about our use of social media. It is here. Let’s be disciplined and godly in our use of it.

Note – I found this in my computer archives. I may have written this, but I’m not certain enough to claim authorship.

The Conscience

               There is a phrase that is heard, or thought, sometimes when a person is trying to decide whether or not to do or say something – “Let your conscience be your guide.” That is all well and good except for one small matter. Really, NOT SO SMALL. We will get into that in a moment.

          Before we get into this discussion about letting our conscience guide us, let’s get the definition – “The moral sense which distinguishes right from wrong.” (Webster’s National Dictionary of the English Language,1966) This is a great definition. I like it a lot. The problem with this for me is, Who’s moral’s? Not to coin a phrase but, “not all morals are created equally.”

          For some, doing good has been taught them since birth – manners, courtesy, politeness, love for their neighbor and all creation, is second nature, like breathing, automatic. They don’t even think about it. It comes naturally. While, with others, cruelty and torture of humans and animals and general nastiness of life is their moral basis. They think that there is nothing wrong with it. Then there are those whose consciences are described as being seared (I Tim. 4:2). They are insensitive to any inroads by those who speak the words of love offered by God.

          The point to be made with the above is that our conscience, that moral sense of right or wrong, is based on our training, either from outside sources or our own will. Ezekiel 18 offers examples of someone who had been good and changed to wicked or a wicked person changed to good and, a person who denied their training in wickedness to be a good person and vice versa. So the training can be absorbed or denied, accepted or rejected.

          The Apostle Paul, tells us in Act 23:1, “And looking intently at the council, Paul said, “Brothers, I have lived my life before God in all good conscience up to this day.” Well, up until that day Paul has actually led two extremely opposite lives. Up until Acts 9 he had been one who was a “Hebrew of Hebrews.” He had been persecuting the Christians. He threw them into prison and was approving when they were killed. After chapter 9, he argued for those same Christians and their King, Jesus. Now, he opposed the Jews, wishing to convert them to Christianity. And, he did both “in all good conscience.” He changed the training of his conscience from the law of Moses to the law of Christ.

          The point of all this is that we must make sure where a person’s training is coming from when we say, “Let your conscience be your guide.” Was the philosophy of someone like Hitler or Stalin the mentor for the person you are talking to? Genocide, human experimentation, and/or world domination might be the goal and the persons conscience would have a “whatever it takes” attitude. On the other hand, if Jesus and His word is the trainer then “Love God” and “Love Your Neighbor” would be the guiding principles to take the gospel, the good news of Jesus sacrifice and resurrection and returning again in judgment, to the whole world. Not the killing of whole groups but the salvation of the same. Not human experimentation but transformation of the human spirit to be like Christ. Yes, world domination but not by a person but by Jesus Christ the King.

         So many times in the Bible those of God are warned to avoid human traditions and vain philosophies. These lead to evil things, evil thoughts, evil words, evil actions. We all need to follow the advice that Paul gave to Titus in 2:1, “…teach what accords with sound doctrine,” THEN you can “let your conscience be your guide.”

          Think on these things.

Warren E. Berkley

“Now What?”

The story is told of an author, William Saroyan, who had achieved great success in his field. His works had been acclaimed in the literary world, his name was a familiar entry on best-seller lists, and he had even been awarded a Pulitzer Prize. But now he lay dying in New York City of cancer, which had spread to several of his vital organs.

One evening, as Saroyan reflected on his condition and what the future held for him, he placed a phone call to Associated Press. After identifying himself to the reporter who answered his call, he posed a question that revealed the honest, searching sensitivity that had characterized his career. It was a final statement to be used after his death (which occurred later in May of 1981).

He said, “Everybody has got to die. But I have always believed an exception would be made in my case. Now what?” And then he hung up the phone. (Cited in Reader’s Digest, Dec. 1981, p. 136.)

Coming to terms with our mortality is a challenge of common experience. There is a will to live most of us have in strong measure. We may not even want to think about or talk about death. Though, in the academic data center of our minds, we know death lies ahead. We attend funerals, read obituaries, drive by cemeteries and pay life insurance premiums. Yet often, when we hear the dreaded diagnosis, or actually feel our bodies giving up – we don’t want to believe it. We may struggle to hang on or deny what is certain to be.

I’ve been present at – so far as man can determine – the very moment of death. I’ve witnessed people draw one final breath, then go still. I was present when my father died. I was in the room next to my mother’s bed when my mother drew her final breath. The experience is sobering but does not completely bring me to terms with my own mortality. It is more emotion, and can fade away from personal reality.

What is real is my conviction and the hope produced by that conviction, that just as Christ was raised to glory, His people will be raised to glory. See, it is not some dramatic present experience here on earth that eases the fear of death. It is something that happened over 2,000 years ago, with all the testimony and evidence I have that it really happened. Knowing that, I am able to come to terms with death – but only as one in Christ.

Teaching and preaching for almost 51 years, my experience has handed to me several “teachable moments.” That expression is often applied to events that occur in a class setting you didn’t expect and at first thought you were not ready for. Interruptions, unforeseen questions or there was the time in Iowa when the power went out, we were in total darkness and my text was “walking in the light.”

One such “teachable moment” occurred several years ago when I was teaching a Bible class from Romans 14. Making an application from the text, I said that “intentionally offending someone about a matter of judgment” constitutes a stumbling block. As that point was being developed (closely following my structured presentation), a visitor raised his hand. When I acknowledged him, he stood up!

He said, “Brothers and sisters, I want to confess my sin. I now understand the impact of Romans 14, and I have been in violation of this teaching. I have a friend at work I eat lunch with, and I’m trying to convert him to Christ. He abstains from pork. I’ve told him he can eat pork. And I often consume a pork sandwich at our lunch table just to make that point. I see now how wrong I am in purposely offending my friend on a matter of judgment. I’ve been wrong. Would you pray for me?”

That has never happened to me before or since then. My response was to lead a prayer just as the brother requested. It was a memorable and teachable moment for all of us.

I published this shortly after Sept. 11, 2001 (now commonly called 9/11). Part of our comfort lies in clarity.

______________________________

Where Do People Go Wrong?

Reading the wrong book,

Following the wrong leader,

Using the wrong methods,

Dying for the wrong cause.

Warren E. Berkley

I am not an expert in terrorism. I am not a student of the Islamic religion, nor can I offer any insight into the divisions and sects of that religion (mainstream, extreme, etc.).  I have no standing as a pundit or news analyst. I am a Christian, therefore a student of the Word of God, and I write this article based on that identity.

While our reaction to the events of Sept. 11^th cannot allow any prejudice, personal battle of vengeance or discrimination toward anyone, we must reflect soberly on the steps that lead people to mass murder in the name of their cause. It seems to me, at least four steps should be noted: Reading the wrong book, following the wrong leader, using the wrong methods and dying for the wrong cause.

Reading the wrong book. The Qur’an is a self-contradictory document and many passages defy any clear interpretation. According to George Will (Jewish World Review, Aug. 17, 2001), the official TV station of Yasser Arafat’s Palestinian Authority aired this statement: “All weapons must be aimed at the Jews … whom the Koran (Qur’an) describes as monkeys and pigs … blessings to he who shots a bullet into the head of a Jew.” Whatever arguments might be made about Islamic division, interpretation, etc., there is no doubt that some who read this book are devoted to hatred and human destruction. In this same column, Will reports on a June bombing that did not have children as “collateral victims,” but targets. “Abdallah al-Shami, a senior official of Islamic Jihad, celebrated ‘this successful operation’ against ‘pigs and monkeys’.”

One step toward terror is reading the wrong book. We must resist the temptation to stigmatize everybody who espouses loyalty to Islam as a “terrorist,” but we cannot voice any compromise about the book. It is not the Word of God, does not lead people to Christ and actually advocates violence. The Word of God is the right book to read. It is “able to save your souls,” (Jas. 1:21).

Following the wrong leader. There is one perfect, ultimate Leader! He is not located in a cave or tent, surrounded by an assembly of criminals. He is enthroned at the right hand of God (Acts 2:33; Phil. 2:9-11). No other leader was active in creation (Jno. 1:1-3), was the subject of prophecy (Jno. 5:46), nor was born to a virgin (Matt. 1:18-25). No leader expect Jesus has a perfect record of behavior (Heb. 4:15). No man but Jesus died for us, and by the atoning merit of His death is qualified as our Savior (Jno. 1:29). He was raised from the dead (1 Cor. 15:1-4), and “God highly exalted Him, and gave Him that name that is above every name,” (Phil. 2:9).  He is deity, thus to be honored “even as” the Father should be honored. When you recognize who He is and what He did, then respond with a whole heart – with faith that prompts obedience, you are following the right leader; “the author and finisher of our faith,” (Heb. 12:2).

Using the wrong methods. In 1998, Osama bin Laden said it is a religious duty “to kill the Americans and their allies, civilian and military, in any country in which it is possible to do it” (U.S. News & World Report, Oct. 1, 2001, p.76). This is not simple evangelism (teaching to gain converts). This is not just an attitude and manner of rude intimidation.  This is war – aggressive, angry and antagonistic – without qualms of conscience; and in fact, the warriors see themselves as doing the bidding of their god and preparing themselves for eternal peace.

May we, in our pursuit of truth and righteousness, never allow our methods to degenerate beneath the cause we advance! Let us plead with people “by the meekness and gentleness of Christ,” bold in presenting His message yet governed by His methods and the attitude He illustrated. “For the weapons of our warfare are not carnal but mighty in God for pulling down strongholds, casting down arguments and every high thing that exalts itself against the knowledge of God, bring every thought into captivity to the obedience of Christ…,” (2 Cor. 10:1-6). Remember: “…the wrath of man does not produce the righteousness of God,” (Jas. 1:20).

So far we have a deadly combination: Reading the wrong book, following the wrong leader and using the wrong methods. These are steps in the wrong direction. Add to this . . .

Dying for the wrong cause. Based on the evidence that is now public information, about twenty men were willing to die for their cause; an act of slaughter against over 6,000 innocent people. There are causes worth dying for. In defense of freedom and life, men volunteered in great number to suffer and die in World War II. In his bestseller, “Band of Brothers,” Stephen Ambrose relates the stories of young parachutists who served in Easy Company. One soldier wrote to his mother: “If necessary, I shall die fighting, but don’t worry about this because no war can be won without young men dying. Those things which are precious are saved only by sacrifice,” (p.#55, Band of Brothers, Stephen Ambrose, 2001). These brave men were willing to die for the cause of defending life and freedom. In the Roman epistle, Paul wrote about men dying for others. His comments were introductory to the highest example of dying for others: “For scarcely for a righteous man will one die; yet perhaps for a good man someone would even dare to die. But God demonstrates His own love forward us, in that while we were still sinners, Christ died for us,” (Rom. 5:8,9). So among men there are great examples of self-sacrifice, and in the gospel of Christ there is the supreme example of one dying for the right cause. But dying for a cause is not commendable, unless the cause is right! Sacrifice, personal devotion, zeal and endurance are commendable qualities, unless pressed into service for the wrong cause! Make sure your cause can be authenticated; make sure it is right, then in the work you do to advance your cause – use methods in keeping with the values of that cause!

This is the time to re-examine where your real security is. “I cried out to God with my voice – to God with my voice; and He gave ear to me. In the day of my trouble I sought the Lord; my hand was stretched out in the night without ceasing….,” (Psalms 77:1-2a).

 

Acknowledgment of Resources:

 

U.S. News & World Report, Oct. 1, 2001.

http://www.gospeldefender.com/Haile/battlecry.html

Jewish World Review, Aug. 17, 2001

Band of Brothers, Stephen Ambrose, 2001

Phil. 4:18-23

I have received full payment, and more. I am well supplied, having received from Epaphroditus the gifts you sent, a fragrant offering, a sacrifice acceptable and pleasing to God. And my God will supply every need of yours according to his riches in glory in Christ Jesus. To our God and Father be glory forever and ever. Amen. Greet every saint in Christ Jesus. The brothers who are with me greet you.  All the saints greet you, especially those of Caesar’s household. The grace of the Lord Jesus Christ be with your spirit.

It is noteworthy, in these final verses of Paul’s letter to Philippi, that the apostle was not a tedious accountant about his reception of generosity.

Some people are. We had that couple over for dinner, but they have never paid us back!

Or, I loaned him $100 when he was in need, but now he can’t loan me $50!

This is that tedious accounting mentality that keeps records about deeds both done and received, with expectation that everything must perfectly balance.

Contrary to this accounting mentality, the Lord said, “…do good and lend, expecting nothing in return,” (Lk. 6:25).

It is apparent, Paul was not burdened by the accounting mentality, and that he embraced the spirit of what Jesus taught.

“I have received full payment, and more.” Paul favored the people of Philippi by delivering the gospel of Christ to them (see Acts 16). Those who became Christians gave generously to Paul, in support of his evangelistic work (see verse 15). In this fellowship, Paul didn’t put a price on anything and he didn’t harbor an expectation of some perceived (carnal) perfect balance. Rather, he was satisfied and grateful. “I am well supplied, having received from Epaphroditus the gifts you sent, a fragrant offering, a sacrifice acceptable and pleasing to God.”

In Paul’s heart, this was all good. Why? Because their fellowship was “pleasing to God.” Instead of expecting a perfect balance in their exchange with each other, if it was pleasing to God, Paul was happy.

Paul hoped and prayed for them that God would “supply every need” they had. This supplication was based on the riches in glory God provides in Jesus Christ. And this leads to Paul praise, “to our God and Father be glory forever and ever. Amen.”

Paul’s good will continued: “Greet every saint in Christ Jesus.” Brethren with Paul joined him in this: “The brothers who are with me greet you.” Other were included: “All the saints greet you, especially those of Caesar’s household. The grace of the Lord Jesus Christ be with your spirit.”

Paul didn’t know how to press upon people the accounting mentality. Paul knew how to write a great “thank you” note!

Paul knew how to preach and write the truth of God. But his heart was not dry and academic or robotic. His deep, sincere emotional nature shines through in these final words to his Christian friends in Philippi. May we learn to nourish this spirit.

From the archives of Pressing On Magazine. Click Here 

“Seeing” Is Believing!

Charles Darwin, in The Origin of Species, admitted he struggled with this evidence. He said: “To suppose that the eye with all its inimitable contrivances for adjusting the focus to different distances, for admitting different amounts of light, and for the correction of spherical and chromatic aberration, could have been formed by natural selection, seems, I freely confess, absurd in the highest sense,” (1859, p. 170).

In this specific context, it can be said: Seeing Is Believing! Can the reality of human vision be attributed to a random process or natural selection even with mutations?

I delivered five sermons on evidences a few years ago. The series was geared toward young people and parents. Several mentioned how powerful just this single piece of evidence is. From the source indicated below, I read this:

The Human Eye

The human eye is enormously complicated – a perfect and interrelated system of about 40 individual subsystems, including the retina, pupil, iris, cornea, lens and optic nerve.

For instance, the retina has approximately 137 million special cells that respond to light and send messages to the brain. About 130 million of these cells look like rods and handle the black and white vision.

The other seven million are cone shaped and allow us to see in color. The retina cells receive light impressions, which are translated to electric pulses and sent to the brain via the optic nerve.

 A special section of the brain called the visual cortex interprets the pulses to color, contrast, depth, etc., which allows us to see “pictures” of our world. Incredibly, the eye, optic nerve and visual cortex are totally separate and distinct subsystems. Yet, together, they capture, deliver and interpret up to 1.5 million pulse messages a milli-second! It would take dozens of … supercomputers programmed perfectly and operating together flawlessly to even get close to performing this task.

Logically, it would be impossible for random processes, operating through gradual mechanisms of natural selection and genetic mutation, to create 40 separate subsystems when they provide no advantage to the whole until the very last state of development and interrelation. 

How did the lens, retina, optic nerve, and all the other parts in vertebrates that play a role in seeing suddenly come about? Because  natural selection cannot choose separately between the visual nerve and the retina.

The emergence of the lens has no meaning in the absence of a retina. The simultaneous development of all the structures for sight is unavoidable. Since parts that develop separately cannot be used, they will both be meaningless, and also perhaps disappear with time. At the same time, their development all together requires the coming together of unimaginably small probabilities. 

https://answersingenesis.org/human-body/eyes/the-seeing-eye/

Think of how powerful this evidence is … that we carry in our heads!

Truth Connection: “The hearing ear and the seeing eye, the Lord has made them both,” (Prov. 20:12)