To
trace the development of the word from which we discuss worldliness
(kosmos) is an interesting, if somewhat disappointing, exercise.
Initially it meant an ornament, then the ordered or beautiful
arrangement of the universe, next the earth, then the inhabitants of
the earth - most of whom are bad, and thus finally the evil that
characterizes the world. It started out beautiful and attractive,
but ends up bad and ugly. Most sin is that way. It can take
something good and lovely and misuse it so that the result is evil.
And this is doubly demonstrated in the title of this article.
Doubly, because it takes something good and misuses it; but then to
compound the tragedy, the bad is endorsed and becomes respectable so
that something evil is portrayed as something good! "Woe unto them
that call evil good, and good evil" (Isa. 5:20). But perhaps
you wonder: Just what is respectable worldliness?"
Let
it be noted to begin with, by respectable worldliness I do not mean
that such is respectable with God. The very concept behind
worldliness eliminates any idea of God's approval of it. John tells
us that it "is not of the Father" (1 John 2:16), and James
says, "friendship with the world is enmity with God" (James 4:4).
Just
as goodness stems from the good, and kindness from the kind, so
worldliness stems from the world ("the lust of the flesh, and the
lust of the eyes, and the pride of life," 1 Jn. 2:16). It has
both its origin and fruition in the kind of thinking and/or action
which springs from such considerations. Fundamentally, worldliness
is an emphasizing (Which often runs to obsession) of that which is
temporal, material, physical (which frequently involves the sensual)
at the expense of (and more often than not, to the exclusion of)
that which is spiritual. It is the opposite of spirituality. Clearly
this can involve "a multitude of sins." As a rule, however,
worldliness is thought of in terms of that which is either immoral
or tends to immorality, and, to be sure, there are many worldly
people who hate both God and all who would live godly. Yet there are
many others to whom immorality is abhorrent, who nonetheless have
little or no interest in God or spiritual things; who emphasize the
material, the physical at the expense of, and all to frequently, to
the exclusion of, the spiritual. All such are worldly. They "mind
earthly things." And they do this, not only in their own lives, but
so uphold it, exalt it, and encourage it, that such have come to the
looked upon by most people as not only not degrading, but positively
desirable, respectable.
By
respectable worldliness, then, I do not mean the immoral, the
vulgar, the sensual, but rather that which the world considers
respectable, and this in areas that in themselves are honorable,
noble, and upright. This has had its influence on the church. For
example, I do not preach to many people who are murderers or bank
robbers. I would like to think that most assemblies to whom I preach
are not characterized by too many adulterers (and one would be too
many to be a part of the people of God) or drunkards. And chances
are good that most in these audiences would find such repugnant. Yet
they have been so affected by the world's standard of respectability
that many are guilty or respectable worldliness, and without some
intense vigilance, many more will be. Let me illustrate.
An
industrious brother (concerned about the high cost of living, the
needs of his family, the requisites of a good education for them)
takes a second job. This he does, knowing when he does it that it
will entail his being unable to assemble with the saints as the word
of God teaches, and if not that, surely knowing that it will
preclude his being available for any significant amount of his
individual responsibilities in the church.
As
the world looks on this type of individual, he has many respectable
qualities. He is concerned about his family's financial welfare and
future. He is no leech on society. He wants to provide for his own,
and even the Bible endorses this (1 Tim. 5:8). But he attains
one lesser goal at the expense of a more important one. The one he
attains may be good, noble, and respectable, but it is "worldly"
nevertheless, because it emphasizes the physical and material at the
expense of the spiritual. And certainly he has not sought "first the
kingdom of God and his righteousness" (Matt. 6:33).
And
what shall I say about working mothers? First of all, I want to say,
because the Bible shows, they do right to work! But the word of God
also tells them where to work. It does not say, "good secretaries,
excellent clerks, workers in factories." It says, "workers at home,
keepers at home" (Titus 2:5).1 Tim. 5:15 shows there
is more to this than sweeping floors and washing the dishes. It
says, "guide the home." This is a spiritual endeavor, and to "farm
it out" so as to increase income for things, is to exchange the
spiritual for the material. How depressing that people no longer
believe that the hand that rocks the cradle is the hand that rules
the world. What a tragedy that Christian mothers have allowed
themselves to be cheated out of one of the noblest of tasks by
having the false idea foisted upon them that they cannot be
"fulfilled" unless they get out of the house and into the business
world. So successfully (respectable) has this been done that 16
million USA mothers with children under 18 work outside the home.
Forty per cent (40%) of the women who have children under 6 years of
age leave them with somebody else while they go off to work. What is
it that prompts such? Will it help them participate more in "church
work"? Will it increase their opportunities to visit the sick, to
attend Bible classes, and do many other activities in the Lord's
work? I do not recall ever hearing anyone say, "I think leaving my
children to someone else will help them and me grow spiritually."
Quite a few just "took the job temporarily, till we get these
unusual expenses paid." (And these turn out to be about as temporary
as taxes!) I visit in some of these homes, and from what I observe,
they certainly could not be said to be in any kind of dire financial
circumstances. Most of them are in financial circumstances as good
as most and better than many. Was it spiritual reasons that demanded
they so do? And consider this:
1. The training of children is not the
responsibility of the government.
It is not the responsibility of the grandparents, and not the
responsibility of baby sitters. It is the responsibility of fathers
(Eph. 6:4) and mothers (1 Tim. 5:14). It is a
spiritual activity and no part-time job.
2. Who is going to be the source of
"influence" on that child while its mother is away at work?
Who will nurse it when it cries, kill its bruised knees, warn it
against the dangers that lie ahead? Does the nursery really care
about the kind of TV being watched?
3. Frequently such arrangements allow the
child to spend most of its waking hours with someone other that its
mother.
I have even known children who called the "sitter" mother, but would
not call the mother, "mother."
4. It is an open secret that many, many wives are
too tired after a "hard day at the office" to be the spiritual
influence and companion that she needs to be.
5. We will not discuss the resentment, the
temptations, etc. that come her way.
But for two excellent
lessons dealing with this entire subject, see one by Horace Huggins,
and another by James Cope in the 1979 Florida College Lecture Book.
If
this results in the emphasis on the material at the expense of the
spiritual (and the evidence seems overwhelming), it is worldliness.
The world may "respect" it but it does not change it.
Free Time
Vacations exert a wholesome influence. They can refresh the
individual and stimulate a renewed vigor in the return to normal
activity, and I believe such can be justified by the scriptures. But
Christians can never take a vacation from God! This is true whether
it involves a two-week vacation or simply a weekend at the lake. But
there are many members of the church who abuse such blessings and
during these times emphasize the material and physical at the
expense of the spiritual, and that's worldliness. The spiritually
minded person does nothing but that he first considers it in the
light of how it will fit in with the will of God for his life. Of
primary importance is: Will this allow me to discharge my obligation
and enjoy the privileges of being a child of God?
1. What shall I do?
There are many things
that the world calls respectable that a child of God cannot engage
in because he has a different standard. Since other articles in this
issue will probably deal with this, I forego a discussion of these
here.
2. Where shall I go?
Those who are concerned about this world will consider the scenery,
the entertainment (and there is plenty of this that is respectable),
but the spiritually minded person, while he can enjoy the scenery
and the respectable entertainment, is primarily concerned with such
things as: Will it be where I can worship with God's people while I
am away from home? Far too many members of the church wait till
Saturday or Sunday morning, if then, to "look for a Church of
Christ." The spiritually minded did that before he left home. I am
thrilled that I know a teenager who toured the western states with a
foreign friend, but before beginning, wrote various congregations
along the route to insure attendance at church services would be
possible. And I cannot emphasize it too strongly; a Christian ought
to have the same convictions away from home that he has at home! If
he cannot conscientiously worship with a liberal congregation at
home, he ought not to worship with one away from home. Just having
up a sign that says "Church of Christ" is not enough. A Christian
wants the vacation, but not at the expense of spiritual
considerations.
There
are members who get so involved in civic affairs, all of which may
be perfectly good and wholesome (respectable), but they can become
so involved in them, that some even miss the services to attend to
such. And I am delighted that I know others who let it be known to
begin with that, with them, God comes first and they will engage in
nothing at any time that interferes.
Marriage
Perhaps the problem that eventually led to the flood was begun when
the children of God began to be more concerned with the physical
beauty ("fair") than they were with spiritual qualities (Gen.
6:1-2). When a person takes only the materialistic and physical
into consideration in choosing a wife or husband, he is making a
grave mistake. These may be respectable considerations, but they are
too often at the expense of the spiritual. Is she attractive? Does
he have a good paying job? (And this does not mean that you must try
to find the ugliest one around, nor one who is "on welfare."
Ugliness is no guarantee of spirituality, and laziness is certainly
no virtue.) The thing that really matters is the spiritual. Is he a
faithful Christian (not merely, "Is he a member of the church?")
Will she help me in the rearing of our children to be Christians?
What are his/her spiritual qualities? Is he actively engaged in the
Lord's work? Companions may be respectable in the eyes of the world
by the world's standards (she is beautiful; he is successful), but
what about in the eyes of God?
These
are but a few of the many areas that demonstrate the need to be
concerned about "respectable worldliness." Those involved in it
usually bear very little, if any, fruit for God, but like those sown
on the thorny ground, "the cares of this world, and the
deceitfulness of riches, and the lusts of other things entering in,
choke the word, and . . . become unfruitful "(Mk. 4:19)
Attitudes That Prompt Worldliness
1.
An erroneous evaluation of life.
It says things "here and now." Iii so doing it turns the world
upside down. It puts the world on top and the kingdom somewhere
below that. It says, "I will seek the physical and the material, and
then I will add the kingdom of God later."
a.
Things come first. Yet Jesus said, "A man's life does not consist in
the abundance of the things which he possesses" (Luke 12:15).
Respectable worldliness contradicts this.
b.
Time. It says, "Later." The Bible says, "Boast not thyself of
tomorrow; for thou knowest not what a day may bring forth" (Prov.
27:1). Respectable worldliness fails to properly evaluate life.
2.
Satisfaction With Mere Membership.
No need is felt to supply something for the edifying of the body
(Eph. 4:16).