THE SOCIAL RESPONSIBILITY

OF THE CHURCH
PAUL BENWARE
Instructor in Bible
Los Angeles Baptist College

No responsible believer in Jesus Christ is happy about the presence of such social evils as raCial hatred, a spiraling crime rate, the
liquor and drug traffic, slums and violence. He realizes that such conditions as these have the potential to destroy his society and therefore
ought to be checked. But the problem facing the Christian and the church
is their role in curing the ills of society.
What is the church's responsibility in the area of social problems? Should the church involve
itself in these problems? If so, to what extent? These questions are
not easily answered and debate goes on within the church. Hudson
Armerding has stated the problem revealing the issue involved: "How
may the secular world be confronted, without the probability of an accommodation that eventually will produce capitulation?"l
Neo-evangelicalism has declared that the church must get involved
in the problems of society or lose its voice and impact in that society.
It states that Fundamentalists have overreacted against the social gospel of the old modernist, thus terribly neglecting the social area. 2
Fundamentalism, on the other hand, warns Neo-evangelicalism
that it is taking a dangerous step, which likely will lead to the watering
down of the complete message of the Bible, and to the further secularization of the church. The Fundamentalist believes that the church is
to catch fish out of the pond of sin, while the Neo-evangelical feels that
something must be done to clean up the pond as well.

THE NEO-EVANGELICAL VIEW OF SOCIAL RESPONSIBILITY

Dr. Harold Ockenga, the "father" of neo-evangelicalism, sounded
the keynote of the movement pertaining to social problems.
The New Evangelicalism differs from Fundamentalism
in its willingness to handle the social problems which
3

GRACE JOURNAL
Fundamentalism has evaded. There need be no dichotomy between the personal gospel and the social
gospel.
The true Christian faith is a supernatural
personal experience of salvation and a social philosophy .
Fundamentalism abdicated leadership and responsibility in the societal realm and thus became impotent to change society or to solve social problems.
The New Evangelicalism adheres to all the orthodox
teachings of Fundamentalism but has evolved a social
philosophy. 3

This is an emphasis made by others as well.

Nevertheless - -unlike fundamentalism - -evangelicalism realizes the church has a prophetic mission to
society . . We must . make evangelicalism
more relevant to the political and sociological realities
of our time . . . unless conservative Christian theologians take more time to point out the relevance of
Christ and the Bible to important (social) issues conservatism will be neglected by the rising generation. 4
These men, and others, feel that it is dangerous for the church to remain aloof, and that it must do something to right wrongs in the social
structure. They believe that the gospel carries social implications with
it, and that it is wrong to neglect them.
Not only is it wrong, but it
is also damaging to the potential witness of the church. If the church
does not get involved, then society will become more and more secular,
making it all the more difficult for the church to penetrate it.
The practical question before the neo-evangelical is how he is
going to do this without falling into the social gospel trap. The voice
of neo-evangelicalism is neither loud nor distinct on this point. However, most believe that the local church and the denominations can both
be involved in implementing social concern.

With respect to social welfare, there is much

which can and should be done by the local church as
well as by the denomination of which it is a part, and
even by interdenominational fellowships homes
for the aged, children's homes. . These might
be termed church-sponsored welfare.
There are other agencies of social welfare which
are not directly sponsored and controlled by church

SOCIAL RESPONSIBILITY OF THE CHURCH

organizations as such.
While the church is less direct
y involved, there nonetheless is opportunity for
participation and referral. 5
What about church involvement in state programs? Neo-evangelicals differ on this point. Some are definitely against it, arguing
that state programs fail to meet several criteri.:l of Biblical social concern. Others state that since it is impossible for the church to take
care of all SOCiety's needs, co-operation between church and state would
be beneficial. 6
What if these with whom you wish to co-operate do not share
your beliefs?
I also believe that we should not be afraid of co-operating with others, even those who would not fully or
would not at all share our presuppositions. 7
Man's sufferings must be alleviated, his needs cared
for. Here, also, a broadened conception of common
grace reveals itself. God is able to work through organizations and institutions which are not expressly
Christian. The Christian may and should co-operate
with them, if they are the most efficient and appropriate means of carrying out the social r es ponsibilities
of his faith. 8
The neo-evangelical believes that the gospel clearly implies involvement in the societal realm. This is necessary in order to make
an impact on SOCiety for the gospel. Efficiency and impact dictate that
social effort be done on the denominational and local church leve l, though
this does not rule out the involvement of the individual in his community.

An Analysis of Supporting Scriptures

The neo-evangelical spokesmen constantly speak of the social
implications of the gospel. They claim that their pOSition on the social responsibility of the church is based on a solid Biblical base. It
is necessary, therefore, to examine the primary scripture portions used
by the neo-evangelicals in supporting their position.
There are certain portions that keep reappearing in the writmgs
of neo-evangelicals: among them are Matthew 25:31-46, James 2:14-17
and I John 3:14-18. The teachings of these passages will be analyzed,

GRACE

JOURNAL

along with several others that have been used. All Scripture quotations
will be taken from the King James Version of the Bible.

I John 3 :14-18
We know that we have passed from death unto life,
because we love the brethren. He that loveth not his
brother abideth in death. . . But whosoever hath this
world's good, and seeth his brother have need, and
shutteth up his compassions from him, how dwelleth
the love of God in him? (vss. 14, 17)
The neo-evangelical uses these verses to support his position on
social responsibility, claiming that they imply the church's involvement
in curing the societal ills of the day. After reference to this passage
in JOhn's epistle, Millard Erickson, an advocate of the neo-evangelical
pOSition, concludes:
Helping others, removing suffering, evil, and injustices,
are appropriate results of true faith in Jesus Christ
and commitment to His purpose. The Bible does teach
the necessity of Christian social responsibility. 9
Using this as his Biblical base, Dr. Erickson then launches into a discussion of the church's r esponsibility in social welfare and social action.
However, inspecting these verses more closely reveals that they
are not teaching the church's responsibility to society at all, but rather
the Christian's responsibility to other believers. Five times, in the
English text, John speaks of "brethren." John questions a believer's
profe ssion of faith in Christ when that person can observe the needs
(material or otherwise) of another ~r and do nothing to alleviate
those needs.
The sphere of discussion he re does not include the unsaved man nor society in general. The passage declares the practical
outworking of faith as it is seen in the ministering to the needs of the
~.
Concerning this word "brethren" Westcott says:
This is the only place in the Epistle (of I John) where
this title of address is used . It contains an
impliCit argument.
By emphasizing the new relation
in which Christians stand one to another it implies that
this position of necessary mutual affection is characteristic of them as distinguished from other men ('the
world') .
'Brethren' expresses the idea of Christian equality in virtue of the common life . 10

SOCIAL RESPONSIBILITY OF THE CHURCH

Not only is society in general excluded by the word "brethren"

but also the word order of verse 14 makes the distinction clear. The
pronoun is in the emphatic position--"as for us," in contradistinction
to the world. 11 John, then, is making a careful distinction between the
Christian and society in general. Christians are to help and aid one
another in the practical as well as spiritual areas of life.
But these
verses neither teach nor imply the church's responsibility in curing the
ills of soc iety.
James 2 :14-17
What doth it profit, my brethren, though a man
say he hath faith and have not works? Can faith save
him? If a brother or sister is naked, and destitute of
daily food, and one of you say unto them, Depart in
peace, be ye warmed and filled; notwithstanding, ye
give them not those things which are needful to the body,
what doth it profit? Even so faith, if it hath not works
is dead, being alone.
These verses are used in the same manner as the ones previously
cited in I John.
After mentioning these verses, one neo-evangelical
writer states:
If we are really open to the Gospel and its implications,

we shall have to learn again to concentrate on the social

issues of our day. 12
All sincere believers certainly want to be open to the Word of God. But
is James teaching the neo-evangelical position on the church's social
respons ibility?
Again, the verses must be given a closer inspection. James is
discussing the place of good works in the life of a believer in Jesus
Christ. He makes the point that a profession of faith does no good to
others if no good works are done. However, James makes it quite clear
as to what he means by use of a specific illustration. James talks about
doing good to a brother or sister. James is not talking about society
in general, but r~~bouttheChristian community.
He (James) imagines Christians in dire need of the
necessities of life being sent away by fellow Christians,
not after being given those things which are needful to
the body, but with a curt command to do something
totally impossible.
Such persons might be male or
female, here called brother or sister, for all who are
disciples of Jesus are bound bYclose family ties. 13

GRACE

JOURNAL

James is, in unmistakable language, talking about the brotherhood of

believers, and not about the world.
This pas sag e in lames cannot
legitimately be used to support the neo-evangelical position on the
church's social responsibility.
The only conceivable way this could
apply to the world is if one subscribed to the concept held by the old
modernists of "the Fatherhood of God and the brotherhood of man. "
The neo-evangelical, who diligently avoids as soc iation with the old
social gospel, surely does not want this anti -biblical concept applied
to his pos ition.

Matthew 25:31-46
And the King shall answer and say unto them, Verily
I say unto you, Inasmuch as ye have done it unto one
of the least of these my brethren, ye have done it unto
me. (vs. 40)
This passage taken from the Olivet Discourse is found in the
writings of neo-evangelicalism, allegedly supporting the i r viewpoint.
This portion views a time of judgment, when the Lord credits righteous
individuals with ministering to him because of their ministry to others.
These are set on his right hand and given eternal life, while those on
his left hand receive judgment. Erickson sees some definite implications in this text of Scripture:
Let us note the ground of this judgment. The
elect inherit the Kingdom because they have fed Him
when He was hungry, given Him drink when He was
thirsty, clothed Him when He was naked, and visited
Him when He was sick or in prison. When they ask
when they have done all of these things, he says, "Inasmuch as ye have done it unto one of the least of these
my brethren, ye have done it unto me" (Matthew 25:40
KJV). The unrighteous are judged on the basis of not
having done these things.
Two observations emerge: 1. Deeds of compassion and mercy done to anyone are equivalent to
ministering to Jesus Himself. 2. Such practical activity is re!J.arded as the criterion of worthiness for the
Kingdom. 4
It is evident that Dr. Erickson has lightly skimmed this passage,
overlooking some important facts.
First, this judgment is a specific,
not a general judgment. It takes place after the Second Coming of Christ,
after the Tribulation period, and involves only the living gentiles.

SOCIAL RESPONSIBILITY OF THE CHURCH

Kelly correctly details this:

Those gathered before Him as "all the nations"--a term
never used about the dead or the risen, but only applied
to men while still going on here below, and indeed applied only to a part of living men - -the gentile portion,
as distinct from the Jews. For we have already had the
Jews in chapter xxiv., and nowwe see the Gentiles; 15
It is, therefore, not proper to attempt to apply it to the church. Second,
the neo-evangelical seems to have once again disregarded the important
word "brethren." Jesus states that these righteous gentiles have ministered to him when they ministered to his brethren. It is worth noting
that Erickson changed "brethren" to "anyone." Jesus speaks of those
who sustain a unique, intimate relationship with Him, and not to society
or the world in general. This is a very simple point, but of tremendous
importance.
The Ministry of Jesus
The neo-evangelical uses the ministry of Jesus as the prime example of ministering to needs that aren't strictly "religious" in nature.
After viewing the miracles of mercy done by the Lord, they conclude.
that social work is one of the responsibilities of the church.
Billy
Graham puts it this way.
Many people have criticized the so-called "social gospel,"
but Jesus taught that we are to take regeneration in one
hand and a cup of cold water in the other. Christians,
above all others, should be concerned with social problems and social injustices. 16
The parable of the Good Samaritan and other passages are alluded to.
For example, here are a few representative passages used:
Which is it easier to say to the sick of the palsy, Thy
sins are forgiven thee; or to say, Arise, and take up
they bed, and walk? (Mark 2:9)
Then saith he to the man, Stretch forth thine hand. And
he stretched it forth; and it was restored well like the
other. (Matthew 12:13).
And Jesus went forth, and saw a great multitude, and
was moved with compassion toward them, and he healed
their sick. (Matthew 14:14)

10

GRACE

JOURNAL

The question is raised, "If Jesus was concerned about the social
ills of his day, then shouldn't His church be concerned about the evils
of its day?" This, of course, is a loaded question. To say'ho" would
cause a seeming separation from Christ Himself; to say "yes" would
mean that perhaps the neo-evangelical position is right after all. It is
necessary therefore to briefly analyze the'Lord's ministry.
Several points need to be made regarding His ministry.
Fir.st~
a dispensational distinction must be made. The Lord ministered to the
covenant people, Israel. His works were done in the dispensation of the
Law, when God was working with His chosen people of Israel; and His
works were a fulfillment of prophecy to these people. The point is that
care must be exercised any time events of two different dispensations are
compared. What was true in one dispensation might not be valid in
another. Most everyone, even the non-dispensationalist, would recognize this. Jesus' ministry was not to the church, nor was it in the
church context. Second, Jesus did not do good to just anyone in His
ministry, but rather to the house of Israel. He was selective, though
the neo-evangelical gives the impression He was rather indiscriminate
in His doing good. Jesus did go about doing good--but to the house of
Israel almost exclusively. This is an important point. The neo-evangelicals advocate getting involved in social efforts whenever they can do
so, no matter whom they join with. Matthew 15:21-28 is enlightening
at this juncture.
Then Jesus went from there, and departed into
the borders of Tyre and Sidon. And, behold a woman
of Canaan came out of the same borders, and cried
unto him, saying, Have mercy on me,
Lord, thou
Son of David; my daughter is grievously vexed with a
demon. But he answered her not a word. And his
disciples came and besought him, saying, Send her
away; for she crieth after us. But he answered and
said, I am not sent but to the lost sheep of the house
of Israel. (vss. 21-24)

After being rejected by the leadership of Israel, Jesus withdrew from

the centers of Judaism into a geographical area that was gentile in its
make up. A gentile woman approached Him, requesting that He heal
her daughter. Jesus did not move to help her, though He could have.
Jesus refused "to do good." Why? Because His good works were for
the benefit of Israel, and she was a gentile. However, she was persistent, addressing Him in messianic terms. Finally, her great demonstration of faith and knowledge of the truth, brought an answer to her
request and her daughter was healed. Jesus had a special group that
he did good to: the people of God.

SOCIAL RESPONSIBILITY OF THE CHURCH

11

Third, Jesus did things on an individual level, while the neoevangelical emphasis is on the institutional level. This point will be
dealt with later. Fourth, although Jesus' miracles benefitted the individual, they were primarily for the purpose of authenticating His message
to Israel. Fifth, the absence of a command to the church, from the
Lord Jesus, to enter into the world and become involved in societal
ethics is significant.
When Jesus gave His followers commands, and
when He discussed their relationship to the world (e. g. John 16), he
never once mentioned, or hinted at, involvement in society's problems
This silence in itself ought to be a red flag of warning to the believer.
On the other hand, He did spend some time warning His followers about
the world, which is a Satanically dominated system. The church's ministry was a spiritual one, and the Lord did not imply the involvement
in society's problems.
Therefore, it must be concluded that Jesus did not by example
or by specific teaching imply that the organized church was to be involved in social problems. Individuals doing good is an entirely different
matter and will be discussed later.

Weakness In The Neo-Evangelical Position

In their stated attempt to win a new respectability for orthodox
Christianity, making it a vital force in reforming society, neo -evangelicalism has placed itself in a position that is vulnerable and difficult to
defend from a Biblical point of view.
As a result, there are some
areas of weakness.
Their position is built on a weak Biblical base. Even from the
survey in this article it can be seen that the neo-evangelical has made
a poor analysis of the Scriptures. This is always the result when men
are too anxious to find support for their ideas in the Scriptures, instead
of allowing the Bible to speak. This weak foundation will not support the
superstructure they wish to build.
Their position endangers the Bible's message. Neo-evangelicalism
does emphasize the need of individual regeneration through faith in Christ.
However, danger exists because of its strong emphasis on the social
aspect and application of the gospel.
The danger lies rather in the possibility of deterioration to what the social gospel became. Obviously then,
the danger in this direction does not lie in what neoevangelicalism now believes but in that which its present
emphasis may very well lead it to believe and proclaimP

12

GRACE

JOURNAL

It is very dangerous to desire the approval of a Satanically controlled

society, and to work hand in hand with that society even if it seems to
benefit mankind. Neo-evangelicalism has positioned itself in this situation, and only time will tell if it is able to resist the pull away from
the Scriptures.
Their position de-emphasizes certain doctrines. Certain Biblical
truths are not being proclaimed with clarity and emphasis. One doctrine
that is neglected is that of man's depravity. Although most neo-evangelicals would subscribe to this doctrine, it is a difficult doctrine to hold
to in social work. To emphasize man's sinfulness would hurt a social
emphasis. Also, the whole area of eschatology has been vague, with
the premillennial position de-emphasized.
The premillennial position
declares clearly the wretched end of man and his society; this is hardly
a stimulus for social involvement. 18
Their position confuses the idea of individual responsibility. The
neo-evangelical does discuss individual responsibility; but as far as doing
significant things or making vital contributions to society, his emphasis
is on the organized church. The stress in the New Testament is upon
the individual's doing good. The church, as an institution, has not been
given the res pons ibility of entering into the culture and curing its ills.
Any curing of ills is a by-product of the gospel on the individual level.
Failure to make this basic distinction has placed neo-evangelicalism in
a scripturally dangerous position.
In summary: The motives of many neo-evangelicals are undoubtedly pure. Their sincerity in many cases cannot be questioned. But pure
motives and sincerity have never. been valid substitutes for scripturally
correct positions. To leave the truth of God, even in reaction to the
failures of others. is indefensible.
Neo-evangelicalism does not have
a proper view of the church's role in society. It will be our attempt
to construct a proper position.

A BIBLICAL VIEW OF SOCIAL RESPON"SIBILITY

The believer in Jesus Christ finds himself in the unique position

of holding dual citizenship. He is a citizen of heaven (Philippians 3 :20)
as well as a citizen of a country. This situation causes him to view
his earthly society in a different way than the non-Christian who possesses but one set of citizenship papers. The Christian's attitudes and
motivations are to be different in light of his heavenly citizenship.
The Bible speaks of both spheres of life, the heavenly and the
earthly. What is to be the Christian's concern in the realm of the

SOCIAL RESPONSIBILITY OF THE CHURCH

13

earthly? Does he have ohligations here and now to those around him?
By studying the Scriptures it is possible to arrive at some basic answers.
and principles.
An Analysis of Scripture
The epistles are letters written to the churches and individuals
within the churches; and it is here that we ought to discover something
about the subject of "doing good." Furthermore, the Book of Acts should
be helpful since it records the activities of the church in the first decades
of its existence.
The Book of Acts
When one reads the Book of Acts, he recognizes immediately that
the early church was concerned for the physical well-being of its membership, as well as for their souls. Those attaChing themselves to the
church were sometimes cut off from Jewish society, resulting in real
physical needs.
The church immediately dealt with the issue.
The
following passages in Acts mention the res p 0 n s e to physical need:
Acts 2:44, 45; 4:32-37; 5:2-4; 6:1-4: 9:36-39; 11:28-30: 16:15; 20:28ff.;
21:4, 8, 16.
Several facts are gleaned from these passages, facts which can
then be compared with the epistles. First, these believers performed
good works almost exclusively for the benefit of the other believers -the account of Dorcas in chapter 9 possibly being the only exception.
Second, social work was done mainly because of individual initiative,
and not by church organization and mobilization. Third, when the church
as a whole did "good works, "these good works were always directed
towards believers.
The New Testament Epistles
The epistles do discuss Christian social responsibility a great
deal. A striking similarity to Acts is seen--which should not come
as any surprise. The epistles teach what is given by example in Acts:
that social concern is primarily individual and not organizational, and
that help is directed almost exclusively to believers, with society in
general rarely mentioned. A careful reading of some forty-six references in their contexts will reveal that in almost every case Christians
are to be the recipients of the good works. 19
The very bulk of the passages given should reveal the emphasis
that good works are to be directed to the brethren. As has been noted
before in this article, two significant passages (James 2: 14- 17 and

14

GRACE

JOURNAL

I John 3:14-18) clearly teach the Christian's responsibility to those in

the family of believers. This is the emphasis of the New Testament.
There are several other passages that throw additional light on the subject.
2 Corinthians 8:1 - 9:15. This passage on Christian giving is
one of the relatively few that discusses the good deeds of the church
as a body. Here is recorded the noble ministry of the churches in
Macedonia as they contributed funds to the saints (8:4). This is an
instance of. the organized church working in the "practical" area of
the social problem. The church at Corinth, too, had labored in this
regard (9:2). It is important to note that the organized church aided
believers only. "For as touching the ministering to the saints, it is
superfluous for me to write to you:" (2 Cor. 9:1). Churches carried on
a ministry to the saints, not to society; and there is simply no implication here in the text that the unsaved society is included.
Galatians 6:10. "As we have, therefore, opportunity,
let us do good unto all men, espeCially unto them who
are of the household of faith. "
This verse is one of the very few that includes the unsaved in the
social efforts of Christians. By reading the verse in its context certain truths are found.
First, it ought to be noted that this passage
is dealing with the social efforts of individual Christians and not the
organized church ("But let every man prove his own works," 6:4).
Second, it must always be remembered in viewing such a verse that
the motivation for doing social work on any level is to glorify God, and
not simply to be relevant. Third, there is an emphasis in the ve.rse
that good is to be geared fundamentally towards the believer. If there
is time and substance for the unbeliever, too, that is acceptable. It
is more of a practical issue than a theological one here.
The point of view is here extended beyond their teachers, to the love of the human race generally; but
since man in the limitations of his condition finds it
necessary to restrict himself in the actual exercise of
love, because his means do not suffice to help all, Paul
points especially to them who are of the household of
faith.
Thus the expression involves nO restriction on
love itself, but only a limitation on its exercise on account of insuffic ient means. 20
Ther efore, a believer himself is not to completely neglect mankind, but
his emphasis is on the needs of believers, the household of faith.
I Timothy 5:3-16. The support of widows is the subject of this
portion of the letter to Pastor Timothy of Ephesus.
This portion is

SOCIAL RESPONSIBILITY OF THE CHURCH

15

included at this point because it reveals two significant things. First,

the church was vitally concerned about the welfare of its own.
The
church recognized and undertook this responsibility. Second, the passage
reveals how careful the church was in distributing its resources.
The
requirements for financial aid were rigid. The widows had to be more
than just professing Christians in order to get relief. They had to be
worthy, contributing members of the Christian community (e.g., vss. 4,5,
10). Again, the practicality is obvious. The church then, as today,
had limited resources. Its primary obligation was to distribute wisely
to its own--worthy ones at that. The church could have done many good
things with their resources, but they chose to do the best things.
I Timothy 6:17-19.
Wealthy believers are encouraged in this
passage to use their riches for good, and by doing good they will be
making eternal investments. The context doesn't specifically mention
believers as the recipients, though the entire epistle would suggest this.
In light of Galatians 6:10, we might have here a broader use of wealth
for the glory of God. The words of the Lord in Luke 16 might well be
a commentary on these verses. In Luke the Lord gives the parable of
the unjust steward, in which He discusses money and its use. After
telling of the craftiness of the stewards Jesus applied the parable to life.
He said that the children of light ought to use their money wisely. He
suggested that believers "make friends" of the unbelievers, using their
money, in order to gain eternal reward. Money can be used by individuals to influence others for Christ. Us ing one's wealth by investing it
in the souls of men will pay off in eternal dividends later.
Some important principles: cultures and societies change but the
Scriptures are valid in every situation. After viewing the main portions
of Scripture, this writer arrives at these basiC principles on which the
church should operate in the area of social problem.
(1) Christian
social work is primarily an individual r esponsibility. (2) Christian social
work is to be directed towards alleviating the needs of fellow Christians.
(3) The organizational church is to work only for the betterment of bornagain persons. I) There is no indication anywhere in the New Testament
that the church can align itself formally or informally with society in
order to bring about social change. (5) Individual Christians are first
to help believers, but are also directed to use some of their remaining
resources as occas ion permits to help the unbeliever for the glory of God.
To some these principles may seem selfish. But it must be remembered that the church and individuals have only limited resources
and these are to be used to the best advantage: helping believers. There
is also a great truth underlying these principles, and the Scriptures from
which they are derived. If the Christian community would actively minister to the individual needs of its members, then the unsaved would

16

GRACE

JOURNAL

identify these as true followers of Christ and be attracted to them.

is the idea behind the words of the Lord in John 13 :34, 35.

This

A new commandment I give unto you, that ye love one

another; as I have loved you, that ye also love one
another. By this shall all men know that ye are my
disciples, if you have love one to another.
In the passage, Jesus by His own actions (vss. 4-7) and by His
teachings (vss. 12-17) reveals that genuine love and concern for fellow
believers is demonstrated by meeting their needs. This active concern
for each other would be the identifying mark to the unbeliever. A happy,
lllinisteringgroup of believers, using their resources to help one another
will attract men, and will be a great aid in evangelization. And if believers would indeed become active in social work within the family, the
impact would be felt in secular society today in the same way as the
first century. Trying to win a favorable smile from the pagan society
by social action within that society is doing the job backwards and will
fail.
The neo -evangelical advocates an involvement in societal ethics
that he finds difficult to support from the Scriptures. He wants the
church as an institution to become active in social affairs.
He is
shifting from a ministry to the saved to work for the unsaved. He
seems to want to use the church's resources on that which may be good,
but is not the best.
The Bible does command and encourage Christians to become involved in the lives of others. Believers are to aid believers; and it
is here that our respons ibility starts and for the most part remains.
To attempt another approach is folly, no matter how noble are the motives
and the objectives. Let us follow the principles of the Scriptures, and
let us do good o

SOCIAL RESPONSIBILITY OF THE CHURCH

17

00 CUM ENTATION
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
10.
11.
12.
13.
14.
15.
16.
17.
18.
19.

20.

Hudson T. Armerding, "The Evangelical in the Secular World,"

Bibliotheca Sacra, Vol. 127 (April-June, 1970), 129.
Millard Erickson, The New Evangelical Theology (Westwood, New
Jersey: Fleming H. Revell Co., 1968), p. 181, 182.
Harold Ockenga, news release, December 8, 1957
"Is Evangelical Theology Changing?" Christian Life, March,
1956, p. 4.
Erickson, The New Evangelical Theology, p. 183.
Ibid, p. 187
Klaas Runia, "Evangelical Responsibility in a Secularized World,
"Christianity Today, XIV Gune 19, 1970), 14.
Erickson, The New Evangelical Theology, p. 203.
Ibid, p. 187.
B. F. Westcott, The Epistles of St. Tohn, 2nd ed. (London:
Macmillan and Co., 1886), pp. Ill, 112.
Kenneth Wuest, In These Days (Grand Rapids: Wm. B. Eerdmans
Publishing Co., 1954), p. 152.
Runia, "Evangelical Responsibility in a Secularized World, "p. 14.
R. V. G. Tasker, The General Epistle of James (Grand Rapids:
Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Co., 1957), p. 64.
Erickson, The New Evangelical Theology, pp. 184, 185.
William Kelly, Lectures on the Gospel of Matthew
(London:
A. S. Rouse, 1896), p. 254.
Billy Graham, Peace with God (New York: Doubleday and Co.,
Inc., 1953), p. 190.
Robert P. Lightner, Neo-Evangelicalism (Des Plaines, Illinois:
Regular Baptist Press, 3rd ed., 1969), p. 148.
Ibid, pp. 103, 104, 106, 107.
Romans 12:13; 13:3, 7; 15:25; 16:2,6; I Cor. 3:13; 10:24; 12:25;
16:1, 17; 2 Cor. 5:10; 8:2; 9:lff.; 11:9; Galatians 5:13; 6:2, 10;
EpheSians 2:10; 4:28; 6: 7; Philippians 2:4, 30; 4: 10-15,17;
Colossians 1:10; 2:23; I Thess. 4:10; I Timothy 3:2; 5:3; 6:17f.;
2 Timothy 4:17; Titus 1:8; 2:14; 3:14; Philemon vs. 21; Hebrews
10:24; 13:1, 2, 16; James 1:26, 27; 2:14; I Peter 2:12; 4:9, 10;
I John 3:14; 2 John vs. 10; 3 John vs. 5, 6, 8.
Hermann Olshausen, Biblical Commentary on the New Testament
Translated by A. C. Kendrick. (New York: Sheldon and Co.,
1861), p. 582.