Linc Ashby, All We Have Is Ours to Share

I have a nightly ritual. I grab a Coke from the fridge and put it in the freezer for exactly thirteen minutes. That’s how long it takes to reach perfection – not quite frozen, a tad bit slushy, but not nearly enough to clog the opening, which is an obvious dilemma. The other night I was thoroughly enjoying my Coke when my wife took a huge swig for herself. She didn’t even ask.  So I asked her, “What do you think you’re doing?”  She sarcastically sounded off, “All we have is ours to share!” Which is what I tell our three year old when she won’t share her toys.

I was hanging out with three of my closest friends a while back. The one topic that occupied most of our attention was generosity, so we sat down, opened our laptops, and compared budgets – a huge risk. We were brutally honest, all the way down to how much we spent on swim lessons. What we made, what we saved, ballpark figures on food, entertainment, clothing, school, everything. And the most challenging, how much money we were giving away.

At one point I got frustrated. “Do we have a goal?” I blurted out, such the pragmatist. That’s when Ted said something that haunts me to this day. “Fifty-fifty!” “Huh?” I asked, like I hadn’t heard him, but, of course, I had. He pressed deeper. “When Jesus said, ‘love your neighbor as yourself,’ do you think he could have meant fifty-fifty?” I sat there, deer in the headlights. What if the ways we love ourselves are fine – well most of them – so long as we also love our neighbors as much, in the same way, in direct proportion? Here’s sort of what I mean:

What if we gave a dollar to the diaconal fund for every dollar we wired to our retirement account? What if we lived in a smaller house so that we could help others afford one? What if we chose schools based on what we could afford for our children plus one more child for every one of our children? What if we didn’t just take vacations, but took others with us who never get to go? The other day I paid for two coffees and told the gal behind the counter to give the other one to the next guy that ordered what I ordered. I know it’s silly, but you should have seen the look on her face. Jesus said we have to be like children and children are sometimes silly.

                Once upon a time there was a little fellow from Jericho named Zacchaeus. When I think of him I think of Danny Devito’s character in The Rainmaker. Like many of us, he didn’t like to share. But something happened when Jesus caught his eye in the top of a sycamore tree one day. And who knows why he, a tax collector, wanted to see Jesus. It begs the question – do you want to see Jesus when you’re in sin or when you think you’re not?

“Come on down Zacchaeus, I’m coming over.” The point – we don’t invite Jesus into our heart. He invites himself over for dinner. It makes me think of Annie Lamott and her comparison of Jesus as a little cat nipping at our heels. “I had the feeling that a little cat was following me, wanting me to reach down and pick it up, wanting me to open the door and let it in. But I knew what would happen: you let a cat in one time, give it a little milk, and then it stays forever.” He told me to tell you he’s never going away.

Old Zacchaeus climbed down and everything changed. After a glad welcome, probably after he gave Jesus a tour of his pad, after the meal or who knows, maybe right in the middle of it. It doesn’t really matter. Zacchaeus stood up, cleared his throat, ding-a-linged his fork on the crystal, and proposed a toast. “Look, Lord! Here and now I give half of my possessions to the poor…” I imagine Jesus standing up, putting his arm around his new little friend, chuckling under his breath, as he said – and I didn’t imagine this part – “Today salvation has come to this house.” 

And oh, by the way, I don’t do fifty-fifty and all I have I do not share. But I also can’t stop thinking about it. And now neither will you.

© Linc Ashby, 2005.

Comments

[John]

Linc,
I have read a lot of Blogs this week, but this post touched me deep inside, and has caused me to rethink some of my giving! Many thanks, and I am linking your post at Scotwise.

GBYAY

[Linc Ashby]

John,
Thanks for the encouragement. Jesus has a way of making me rethink everything. Of late, he has been working on my heart in this most crucial of areas. Thanks for the link to your site. I'll check it out. Let me know if there are any ways that I can help you.

[Nils]

Youre rightI havent been able to forget this ever since you said it a year ago.

What disturbs me, beyond the fact that Im so far from actually living 50/50, is the thinking that set in after my initial shock and denial. As I began to see 50/50 as a worthy and even exciting goal, I began to feel a sinister relief. I had glimpsed a (theoretically) attainable standard. Maybe if I get to 50/50 I can stop thinking about giving more, I thought. And underneath this lurks ways of dealing with guilt that have nothing to do with the gospel. If I live 50/50 I can be certain that Jesus loves me and is pleased with me. If I live 50/50 maybe Ill get a reprieve from the Holy Spirits continual scrutiny of all the moral filth I have behind my ears and under my fingernails.

Sigh. When will I truly believe the gospel? The Holy Spirits continual scrutiny is a sign that God does love me ( http://www.gnpcb.org/esv/search/?q=Hebrews+12:4-11 ). And Jesus joyfully gave fully 100% of his precious lifeblood in order to cover my stinginess and legalism and one day to make me like the joyful Giver that he is ( http://www.gnpcb.org/esv/search/?q=2+Corinthians+5:21;+1+John+3:2 ).

[Linc Ashby]

I understand the "sinister relief" you spoke of. I think Luke's placement of Zacchaeus' story in his gospel helps us here. One chapter earlier we read about the rich young ruler, who, as you know, was commanded to sell everything and give to the poor. In other words, 0/100 was what Jesus told him. Then, he proclaims that salvation has come to Zacchaeus' house after he only goes 50/50. Wouldn't Jesus have had every right to holler back at Zacchaeus, "no, that's enough, I want you to sell it all." I suppose. He doesn't because he knows his heart. He had just changed his heart. Jesus will not be pleased, even by 0/100, if it doesn't come from a heart overflowing with thankfulness for his lifeblood given for us. Paul is certainly correct here, "God loves a cheerful giver." I know we agree on that. And I appreciate the personal wrestling. I believe. Help my unbelief. So the story continues...

[Bobby]

Is that 50% before or after taxes?

[Bruce Waltke]

To decide how much to give by setting upon a percentage will lead straight into Judaism and legalism. The story of Zaccheus pertains to a change of heart, not to the amount to give. The key, as stated, is that God loves a cheerful giver, not a percentage player. Moreover, the rule of thumb that Paul gives is "as God has prospered you"--that percentage will vary greatly. Finally, the concept of "tithes and offerings," as I see in so many church I visit, is foreign to apostolic teaching.

[Paula]

I wonder is little old Zaccheus' ears are ringing this week. I have him in a post this week too. :)

[Nils]

Legalism is certainly a hazard of considering a challenge such as Linc has given us. But, with all due respect, I wonder whether there isnt also a baby at hazard in the bathwater.

It seems clear that anyone reading this blog is someone that God has prospered. Randy Alcorn says it well when he asks, in /The Treasure Principle,/ why God should demand less of Christians living in the wealthiest civilization ever to arise in human history than he did of poor Jewish peasants under the thumb of the Roman Empire. We are saved unto good works, and among these is joyful and liberal givingup to and even beyond our ability, in the power of the Spirit. A Barna research report, cited by Alcorn, shows that American Christendom gives 23% annually. I wonder what kind of apostolic preaching led the Macedonians to their exemplary works of giving out of their extreme poverty ( http://www.gnpcb.org/esv/search/?q=2+Corinthians+8:1-15 ).

The point Im trying to make is not the danger of antinomianism vs legalism. It is that we ought to be striving with all His energy to be the kind of people Jesus has freed us to be. And we need to treasure above all else our incorruptible Inheritance, counting as rubbish anything that vies for our affections. To this end we need the gospel to pierce our hearts by challenges such as the one Linc has offered.

[Will]

LINC,

I so value how you continue to challenge us in this area. I remember when you first mentioned this principle last year, one of my first thoughts was "how do you balance being a good steward of our money with not being selfish and/or legalistic." I guess it's my practical engineering side. Then you have to hit me from out of the back with "sometimes children are silly." Thanks so much for sharing your heart, struggles and challenges with us so that we can continue to be reminded how gracious God is to us in reminding us how sinners like us can be used to extend his kingdom.

[Pat Roach]

Nils,

A discussion of legalism/antinomianism is not at all to throw babies out with bathwater. It is rather the whole point of the gospel hitting our hearts. St. Paul talks about this in I Cor. 13 (i.e. you can give all your stuff away and still have it do NOTHING for God's glory because the heart is not engaged with love). That Zaccheus gave 1/2 is not the exact point of the text. It buffets the larger focus that Jesus sought out the least likely convert as opposed to the "proper" religious groupies who seemed to be constantly satelliting around Him but getting in the way of "improper" seekers like Zacceus, and that consequently, the call of Christ is evidenced in deeds of repentance (see the parable that follows the Zacc. narrative that indicts the groupies who scorned Zacc.). So, Waltke is right to point out that getting into formulas or ratios is a surer way to run from God than evidence that you are engaging him (my words, not his).

For example, if Bill Gates gave away 1/2 (or even 9/10) of his stuff after having a religious experience it might be evidence that God has worked in his life. But it might be evidence he is trying to buy God off, too. Bill Gates could live comfortably on 1/10 of his wealth (and I assume Zacc, as a very rich man, could live sufficiently off of half). For me to give away even half would put me near poverty level. And St. Paul explicitly teaches against me doing that in the passage you cited in your post (cf. 2 Cor. 8:13-14). So, at the end of the day I don't feel weighted by the burden to repent for not giving away half. I might be guilty of so much more than that, that I might miss if I boil down righteousness to a simple midrashic formula. Rather, and this is the gospel meat of Linc's post, we all need to repent of not having thankful hearts that would compel us to give all of our lives in such a way that we would give financially and materially as the Spirit leads. Your citations are helpful in this regard as well, Nils.

I agree that Divine grace received should beget graciousness in the life of the Christian in the financial/material areas of her life. And as Western Christians we have an abundance of material wealth we have been gifted with to re-gift to others. The way to see grace abound (charity, fruit of the Spirit, etc.) is to go to Christ and His benefits . And I think that is what my office mate Lincoln was getting at after all, and what I know you also believe as one of my deacons.

PGR