Truth Magazine

By Lewis Willis

Several Greek words are translated“compassion.”Note the words and their definitions: Oikteiro — “to have pity, a feeling of distress through the ills of others”; splanchnizomai — “to be moved with compassion;” sumpatheo — “to suffer with another . . . to be affected similarly (sym- pathy) . . . be touched with;” and eleeo — “to have mercy . . . to show kindness, by beneficence, or assistance” (Vine 218).

Compassion signifies a feeling within the heart for others because of their suffering and trouble. It promotes or produces action. The action is an expression of kindness and/or assistance to the suffering. Note that compassion, if there is no action, is empty and useless.

T h e  p e r fe c t  a n d  a b s o l u t e expression of compassion is naturally found in God. Paul wrote, “For he saith to Moses, I will have mercy on whom I will have mercy, and I will have compassion on whom I will have compassion” (Rom. 9:15). Also, many passages affirm the compassion of Christ: “But when he saw the multitudes, he was moved with compassion on them, because they fainted, and were scattered abroad, as sheep having no shepherd”(Matt. 9:36). (See also Matt. 14:14; 15:32; 20:34.) When the prodigal son returned it was said of his father, “And he arose, and came to his father. But when he was yet a great way off, his father saw him, and had compassion, and ran, and fell on his neck, and kissed him” (Luke 15:20). Of course, God is represented by the Father in that parable.

It would be expected, I suppose, that the same spirit of compassion would be required of God’s children. Consider: “Be kindly affectioned one to another with brotherly love; in honour preferring one another” (Rom. 12:10); “And be ye kind one to another, tenderhearted, forgiving one another, even as God for Christ’s sake hath forgiven you” (Eph. 4:32); and “Put on therefore, as the elect of God, holy and beloved, bowels of mercies, kindness, humbleness of mind, meekness, longsuffering” (Col. 3:12). Obviously, we are not what we are supposed to be unless we are kind, tenderhearted, and merciful to those who are in need.

To say that compassion is needed to d ay i s a n understatement. This is true of both Christians and non- Christians. It would be hard to think of a time when more people have been in more distress than they are today. I can recall all of my life hearing older people talk about the Depression. What they had in mind was the trouble and hardship of the time.

The nature of human suffering today may be dif- ferent than those days but it is just as real. People are sick; they recognize their weakness in body and spirit in dealing with their hardships; they are so concerned about what might happen that they cannot even sleep; the innocent party in a divorce is left in anger, loneliness and heartache; and death leaves many with absolute hopelessness, loss and despair. These need compassion! Their circumstances demand our action. Furthermore, the teaching of God’s Word places us under obligation to act regarding their needs.

There are too few people who seem to care when these times of trouble come. Unless we have experienced some of these situations ourselves, we may find that we do not understand the feelings of the distressed, or do not understand what to do and how to do it in our efforts to offer our support.

Many, not knowing what to say, say nothing. Others, seem to say but do nothing. People sometimes say, “Call me if I can help.” Perhaps they mean every word of it. But those in distress, not wishing to be a burden, do not feel comfortable in active — in an effort to help. By setting a definite time, we prove our offer to help is genuine.

Also, a telephone call received unexpectedly is espe- cially appreciated. Select that time when you think the person might need to hear from a friend, as in the evening or on holidays when no one is around. A card says I care. It affords an opportunity to say to the troubled there is someone who cares. Our visits give them an opportunity to express their frustrations, fears, sadness, and loneli- ness. These visits break the monotony of dreary days. And, of course, these need the power of prayer to help them through their time of despair. And they need to know that you are praying for them.

If we do what we know we are obligated to do — which is really what we want to do — it will require some of our time. Aren’t our friends and brethren worth some of our time? It will require using some energy, even at the end of our own tiresome duties, but they are worth that too. We will have to use our several abilities to find that special way to help, or that special word that will comfort, but that’s a small price to pay for the benefit it brings to others. We will have to keep our eyes open to see those who are in need, and to see the opportunities we have to serve others. That’s what being a Christian requires of us. But we do it, not out of obligation, but because we care!

Look about you, brother or sister. Is there a family member, a fellow Christian, a friend or a neighbor in need of help? Don’t wait for someone else to act. Filled with compassion, get up and do something to help them! Yes, they will appreciate it. But, you will also profit from doing as you should.

I submit this article in hopes that it will encourage discussion as well as stir some thoughts concerning this statement made by our Lord moments before his death on the cross. Perhaps we have all heard men stand before a group and, taking the statement at face-value, declare that the Son was indeed forsaken by the Father. In explaining why such was the case, these men end up drawing conclu- sions that are heavily Calvinistic in their implications. Perhaps the answer to our Lord’s question lies in the senti- ments expressed beyond the first verse of Psalm 22, from which the statement is taken.

The concern over the explanation of this statement was heightened when I listened to a tape of a sermon presented by a gospel preacher detailing what Jesus suffered while on the cross. In reading Tom Roberts’ book, Neo-Calvinism in the Church of Christ, the names mentioned and statements quoted were of men who are foreign to my acquaintance. But as I listened to this man’s sermon, a man I am ac- quainted with, I was alarmed by the familiar ring his words had with those brother Roberts’ had quoted. What seemed like useful information of some distant threat had already made its way in among those that I know. My fear was, did they know it? Do brethren detect the Calvinistic language when it is presented in its subtle forms? The brother who expressed these thoughts was very courteous in our discus- sion of them, and he is far from being the only one among those we respect to hold such a view. However, I do feel that brethren need to be familiar with the language that is being used, and consider its implications. Those using such language also need to be aware of its implications.

The general thought among some brethren seems to be that what Christ suffered while on the cross was a spiritual separation from the Father. The death that Jesus “tasted for everyone” (Heb. 2:9), was spiritual death. The language, at times, even has Christ agonizing in the Garden over the realization that he is about to come into contact with the ugliness of sin; for the first time deity is about to be sepa- rated from deity, and that which is light is about to take on darkness. It has been reasoned from Isaiah’s statement, “He was numbered with the transgressors” (Isa. 53:12; Luke 22:37), that in that the word, transgressor, as found in Luke 22:37, is the same word that is translated in other places, imputed, that our transgressions were imputed to Christ. (The Calvinist then redefines impute to mean transfer and thus transfers our sins to Christ.)

Brethren, the words may indeed be the same, but to view Jesus as a transgressor in that he was treated as such is a far cry from viewing Jesus as a transgressor because he was guilty of such; namely, our transgressions. Do others realize that this is what they are saying when they conclude that there was a spiritual separation between the Son and the Father due to his taking on our sins? Can these not see the difference between Jesus bearing the guilt of the world’s sin and his bearing the punishment of the world’s sin? Or is this is a trivial distinction that matters little? Is it Calvin-phobia, or a shift in thinking that needs to be addressed?

Why did Jesus ask, “Why have You forsaken Me?” Was something now happening that he was unaware of? If the predetermined plan was for the Son to take on himself the guilt of the world’s sin, thus separating himself from the Father (Isa. 59:1-2), would not Christ have known this? Why at the moment of its occurrence would Jesus ask, “Why is this happening?” Would not the One who was with the Father when the plan of redemption was being formed know that this separation from the Father was a necessary consequence of his taking on the guilt of the world’s sin? Our Lord was not delusional, nor was he suddenly in the dark as to what was happening as he paid the price for our sins. Nor was there any spiritual separation that took place that involved the Father turning his back on his Son. Following this statement by our Lord, as he quoted from Psalm 22, he says with complete confidence, “Father, into Your hands I commit My spirit.”

If our Lord was not forsaken, and was not delusional, why the statement from Psalm 22:1? Consider the Psalm itself, the sentiment of which is far from expressing feelings of desertion by God. The first verse is similar to lines found elsewhere in the Psalms, some of which acknowledge the thought that, “I may look forsaken” (Ps. 3:1-4), but the Psalmist knows that is far from the case. Psalm 13 begins in similar fashion, but like Psalm 22, it proceeds to express absolute trust and confidence in God’s deliverance. Indeed, our Lord did look forsaken as he hung on the cross, but if Psalm 22 expresses his feelings, then we have one declaring that same trust and confidence in God’s deliverance. And beyond the intimacy felt that would have our Lord saying, “You have answered Me” (Ps. 22:21), the psalm builds to a beautiful crescendo as it declares the praise and glory that will be given to God as a result of this monumental event. “It will be recounted to the Lord to the next generation. They will come and declare His righteousness to a people who will be born, that He has done this” (Ps. 22:30b-31).

Another thought to consider is one that I heard expressed by brother Dale Smelser, who pondered the impact that might be had on the religious leaders who stood there mocking our Lord, as they heard that line from Psalm 22. These would have been familiar with the remaining words of the psalm, so what might they have thought as they stood there and called to mind almost word for word from the psalm some of the things that were being said to our Lord (v. 8, and Matt. 27:43)? What might they have thought as they recalled, “They pierced My hands and feet . . . They divide My garments among them, and for My clothing they cast lots” (vv.16b, 18)? Might these have stopped to consider, “This is it; it is happening right before our eyes”? That some of these standing by did recognize the psalm as a call for deliverance, not of despair, can be seen in their response to our Lord’s words: “Let us see if Elijah will come to save Him” (Matt 27:49). Deliverance did come, but not as they expected.

Sure, it would have made things easier if our Lord had quoted a different line from Psalm 22, but let us give serious thought to the explanations that we give to this passage. To conclude that Jesus was forsaken, one must also consider the consequences of such reasoning and the Calvinistic implications. To take the Psalm as a whole, however, is to read the words of one who knew and trusted in his Father, one into whose hands he could commit his spirit. Psalm 22 is a psalm of deliverance and salvation, not of despera- tion. In speaking that first line, our Lord expressed the full body of that psalm with all of its words of hope and future blessings to come, because, “He has done this.”

The “St. John Bible”

According to the NBC news on television, October 12, 1999, the first hand-written Bible since the days of early manuscripts will make its debut in the year 2000. It is called the St. John’s Bible.

Mr. Matt Lauer, interviewing the author of the new work, commented that it would be a “multi-cultural” Bible, that in it “women will be given prominence,” and that also science would be featured. On page one of Matthew, the geneal- ogy from Abraham to Jesus is given “through both Isaac and Ishmael.” (Ishmael’s name is even written in Arabic letters, not in Hebrew, we’re told, since he wasn’t a Jew).

This is a classic example of making the Bible to be what we want it to be, rather than letting the Bible make us what God wants us to be! It is a play thing with the unbelievers who play the role of God in producing a “Bible” that will reflect what they want to believe and how they want to live. The producers of this work, along with all who will buy it because of what it represents, will be spending great sums of money for their toy, while refusing to heed what God has revealed in the inspired Scriptures.

The work has certainly been misnamed, if the “John” of the title has reference to the apostle John. The apostle John exposes such “false prophets who are gone out into the world” (1 John 4:1). It would more appropriately be named “St. Scoffer’s Bible” or “The Humanistic Version.”

Jean’s Day

According to a televised CBS news report, August 30, 1999, a privately owned Lutheran High School in Michi- gan demonstrated how it deals with teen violence: a strict dress code! Girls wear modest dresses; boys wear shirts and trousers — no jeans for either sex! One day out of the month both can wear jeans. The principal reported that it is on that day (Jean’s Day) that he sees more students in his office needing disciplinary action or lecturing. “You act according to your dress.” Additional restrictions presented in the dress code were these: no pierced ears on the boys, no bright nail polish on the girls, no shorts on either sex.

No comment needed! You can’t argue with a demonstration.

Gideon was one of the great men of the Old Testament. His story (Judges 6-8) is remembered largely for the thrill- ing account of his leadership of the valiant 300 men and their destruction of the Midianite army, which brought 40 years of peace and relief from harsh Midianite oppression. What may be an even more interesting facet of this story is the need that Gideon had for assurance from God. Early on, Gideon asked three times for a sign, and later, God offered an opportunity for Gideon to gain some needed assurance. I believe we can see Gideon, like so many Bible characters, as a man like ourselves. He was someone that needed as- surance from God, and God was willing to provide it.

Assurances Requested By Gideon

After seven years of Midianite oppression, the Angel of the Lord (who was a person of Deity, see Judg. 6:14, 22-23; Exod. 33:20) appeared to Gideon at his father’s winepress. What we observe in Gideon is a man full of negativity, self-deprecation, and criticism. Yet, here was a man who, in the eyes of the Lord, could accomplish great things. Responding to the charge to go and save Israel with the Lord’s help, Gideon asks for a sign in order to know whether it was really the Lord talking with him (Judg. 6:17-24). The Lord could have noted Gideon’s apparent lack of faith, refused to give a sign, and chosen someone else. Instead, the Lord responded to the meat and bread offering that Gideon prepared and made fire rise out of a rock to consume it. This assured Gideon that indeed it was the Lord to whom he had been speaking.

After first carrying out an important task in his home- town and gathering an army to meet the Midianite forces, Gideon again called upon God for assurance that God would save Israel by his hand (6:36). Gideon proposed a test: he would place a fleece of wool on the threshing floor, and if the fleece had dew on it the next morning while the ground around it remained dry, he would acknowledge that the Lord would save Israel by his hand (6:37). It was quite bold of Gideon to test the Lord’s word in this way, but the Lord accommodated his wishes and made it happen as Gideon had proposed (6:38). Still not completely satisfied, Gideon pleaded with the Lord not to be angry as he pro- posed another test with the fleece of wool, this time asking that the fleece be dry while the ground was wet with dew (6:39). We can surely understand why Gideon was afraid that the Lord might be angry at his repeat- ed requests for assurance. But again the Lord does as

Gideon requests (6:40). Why didn’t God refuse to do any more signs, and rebuke Gideon for his apparent lack of faith? Why did God continue to forbear?

Gideon Finds Assurance Always Available

One answer is that God knew the character of Gideon. Gideon was the type of person who wanted to be sure of what he was doing. It was not that he did not want to do what was required of him, but rather that he wanted as much assurance as possible that the Lord was with him to guarantee success. The fact that the Lord knew the sincere heart of Gideon is demonstrated in the next stage of the story. After the Lord systematically whittled Gideon’s army of 32,000 men down to 300 valiant soldiers (7:1-7), he commanded Gideon to “go down against the camp (of the Midianites), for I have delivered it into your hand” (7:9). It is most interesting that the Lord then adds, “But if you are afraid to go down, go down to the camp with Purah, your servant, and you shall hear what they say; and afterward your hands shall be strengthened to go down against the camp” (7:10-11a). The Lord made available to Gideon an opportunity for further assurance if he felt he needed it. True to his character, Gideon wasted no time in going down to the Midianite camp where he overheard one Midianite soldier telling another soldier about a dream. The dream revealed to Gideon the assurance he needed — God would deliver the Midianite camp into his hand (7:11-14). With full assurance of mind, Gideon returned to tell his army, “Arise, for the Lord has delivered the camp of Midian into your hand” (7:15). The rest of the account tells of the mighty victory that Gideon and his valiant 300 men won with the help of the Lord.

God Provides Assurance For All

Gideon was a man who accomplished great things for God, but he was also a man who needed an extra dose of assurance. Many of us can relate to this. Some may race forward into spiritual battle on the first note of assurance from God, while others seek to fill their cup full of divine assurance before they advance. This reflects a difference in the character of people, and God can distinguish between the sincere seeker and the belligerent scoffer. Thomas, the apostle of Jesus, is another example of the same type of character as Gideon. He needed more assurance of Jesus’ resurrection than just the word of his fellow disciples. Jesus provided that assurance because Thomas, though skeptical at first, sincerely wanted to know the truth (John 20:24-28). A multitude of assurances are provided in God’s Word in order that the faithful of our day might be blessed as “those who have not seen and yet have believed” (v. 29).

You may be a person who needs great assurance of truth. No problem — God provides assurance aplenty to make complete the faith and hope of every believer who seeks him. Whether you are an Isaiah who says, “Here am I; send me!” or a Gideon who says, “How can I save Israel?”, let your mind dwell on his word as you seek his strength. Drink from the abundant fountain of confidence that nourished the faithful heroes of old. If you love God and his truth, God will assure your heart, and work in you “both to will and to do for His good pleasure” (Phil. 2:13).