1 Timothy 6:17-19, “Instruct those who are rich in this present world not to be high-minded or to set their hope on the uncertainty of riches, but on God, who richly supplies us with all things for enjoyment: to do good, to be rich in good works, to be generous and ready to share, storing up for themselves the treasure of a good foundation for the future, so that they may take hold of that which is truly life.”

Part I

Admirable Identity Giving in Research and Practice

The donor’s admirable identity story

The donor enjoys God’s rich supply first by using it “to do good.” This describes what a person does. The next phrases are different. They move from doing to being. “To do good” becomes “to be rich in good works.” Doing good is an action. Being rich in good works is a status. It’s an ongoing characteristic of the person.

Their generosity displays their internal identity. They become “rich in good [kalois] works.” This word kalois means

“beautiful, as an outward sign of the inward good, noble, honorable character; good, worthy, honorable, noble, and seen to be so.”428 (Emphasis added.)

Notice, these are not just beautiful, visible good works. They’re also expressions of internal identity.

The next phrase is “to be generous and ready to share.” In English, this repeats the same “to be” phrase. But in Greek it’s different. This description modifies the donor’s “I am” verb [einai]. It defines the donor’s core identity.

Their “I am” verb is modified first by the adjective “generous [eu-meta-dotous].” They don’t just give, dotous. They give “with” or “among” others, meta-dotous. Their core identity is that of a good, eu-, sharer, eu-metadotous.

Next, their “I am” verb is modified by the adjective “ready to share [koinōnikous].” They are a sharer with the koinōnia, the fellowship community. Their core identity is that of a fellowship-community sharer, koinōnikous.

Notice how this fundraising message is intensely focused on the donor’s identity. It begins with their values. The donors are in the ongoing process of being not high-minded. They’re not above caring. It continues with their life history. They have already, in the past, done something. They’ve placed their hope not in the hiddenness of wealth but in God.

This story of their giving is the story of their identity. It’s the story of their values, their people, and their life history. It’s the story of their aspirational, inspirational, real identity. It’s the story of their best self.

Giving comes from visualizing admirable identity

This passage links donor’s giving to their ideal autobiography. Their giving links to their people. It links to their values. It links their life history. Their giving expresses and confirms their admirable identity.

This same idea works in modern research. When giving matches the donors’ ideal vision of themselves, it’s compelling. Researchers explain that giving becomes attractive when it reduces

“the gap between actual moral identity (i.e., how much one actually assigns to oneself the moral traits or the distinctive mental image of what a moral person is likely to think, feel, and do) and ideal moral identity (i.e., how much one would like to assign to oneself the moral traits or the distinctive mental image of what a moral person is likely to think, feel, and do).”429

In research, giving comes from a vision of oneself. It comes from an “ideal moral identity.” Paul lays out this ideal moral identity. He creates a distinctive mental image of an admirable identity. He makes it available to donors.

Wealth sharing comes from visualizing admirable identity

Research also shows the power of visualizing self-identity in estate giving. Estate giving is not giving from disposable income. It is wealth sharing. This wealth sharing comes from connections with one’s people, values, and life story. In other words, it comes from one’s identity.

We can see this in experiments. What’s the most common motivation to include a charity in a will? It’s the connection between the cause and the person’s life story.430 What reminders increase interest in estate giving? Reminding people of their life story connections to a cause does.431 Reminding them of family members’ connections to a cause does, too.432

Estate giving comes from a vision of one’s self. This isn’t just theoretical. It’s physiological. Estate giving comes from literal, neurological, internal visualization of one’s self.

We can see this happen in the brain scanner. What predicts the choice to include a charity in an estate plan? The answer is activation in “visualized autobiography” brain areas (the precuneus and lingual gyrus).433

The precuneus activates when we take an external view of ourselves. It activates when we consider,

“How do I appear from an outside perspective?”

The lingual gyrus activates when we internally visualize. (For example, damage to this area can eliminate the ability to dream.)434 Both areas activate simultaneously when we engage in visualized life review.435 They reflect “visualized autobiography.”

Will a person decide to include a particular charity in their estate plan? Neurologically, it depends on internal self-visualization. This isn’t just theory. We can physically observe it in the brain scanner. This wealth sharing comes from a vision of oneself.

In practical terms, this wealth-sharing gift must connect with the donor’s autobiography. It must connect with their people, values, or life story. If it triggers this kind of visualized autobiography, it’s compelling. Otherwise, it isn’t.

An inspiring visible identity: Named, public gifts that motivate others

In 1 Timothy 6:18, the donors are not just rich. Through their giving, they are rich in beautiful, visible, inspirational good [kalois] works. Jesus commanded that such good works be visible to everyone.436

Making this giving visible multiplies it. Publicizing these gifts provides examples to others. It inspires others to act in this same way.

In his appeal letter, Paul publicly bragged about donors’ giving. He bragged about donors to motivate the Macedonians to give. He writes,

“I have been boasting to the churches in Macedonia that you in Greece were ready to send an offering a year ago. In fact, it was your enthusiasm that stirred up many of the Macedonian believers to begin giving.” (2 Corinthians 9:2b NLT).

[Other translations use “I habitually boast”437 or “I brag about you”.438]

He also bragged about donors to motivate the Corinthians to give. He writes,

“In order that our boasting about you may not prove empty … otherwise, if any Macedonians come with me and find you unprepared, we—not to mention you—would be put to shame.” (2 Corinthians 9:3b-4b).

[Another translation uses “This will prove we were not wrong to brag about you”.439]

He also bragged to motivate the Corinthians to give publicly. He wanted everyone to see their example. He writes,

“Therefore, openly before the churches, show them the proof of your love and of our reason for boasting about you.” (2 Corinthians 8:24).

[Other translations use “in full view of the churches,”440 “in the sight of the churches,”441 or “in the face of the churches”.442]

Must we be in the business of bragging about donors? Paul was. Should we constantly boast about their giving? Paul did. Should we tell donors to give publicly? Paul did this, too.

Scripture publicizes giving to ministry. It calls out by name those who contributed. We know the names of individual donors. We know donors like Susanna, Joanna, Mary Magdalene, and Phoebe.443 Luke doesn’t just list the donors. He even includes brief bios about each. So does Paul.

We know about the donors. Often, we know about their specific gifts, too. We know that Barnabas made a real estate gift.444 We know that Mary of Bethany’s asset gift was worth a year’s wages.445 We know that the Macedonians gave even beyond their ability.446

Scripture gives public honor to ministry donors. Their inspirational, admirable identity leads to emulation. It inspires sharing throughout the fellowship community. Dr. Bobby Pell explains of modern “generosity heroes” in the church,

“Pastors having models of generosity to utilize, benefits both the model and those encouraged to emulate the model … Pastors need models of generosity to reveal charitable patterns and encourage those considering giving but have not yet acted.”447

Dr. MacMillan Kiiru explains of 1 Timothy 6:18,

“Leaders should model good deeds and generosity for others to follow.”448

Modeling generosity openly and publicly reinforces pro-social community norms. It can inspire others. It can affect others’ giving.

Big gifts are named, public gifts that motivate others

That’s what scripture says. What about real-world fundraising? Does such public leadership motivate big gifts? Yes.

One study explored the largest gifts made to all kinds of colleges. It looked at the largest gifts to community colleges, small private colleges, and large research universities. These largest gifts had some things in common. Most of these donors explicitly tried to model generosity for others to follow. The report explained,

“The possibility of galvanizing additional giving was cited as a goal of 56% of gifts, suggesting that institutions and donors see principal or transformational gifts as an exemplary act with the potential to stimulate giving by others.”449

Most donors intended their massive gifts to inspire others to give. They intended to make inspirational gifts.

Were these gifts also public expressions of the donor’s identity? Yes. The study explained,

“More than 70% of gifts conferred naming rights on the donor.”450

Massive gifts are intended to inspire others to give. They’re also expressions of the donor’s identity.

Research and theory show how giving can come from a vision of oneself. In the largest gifts, this identity expression isn’t subtle. The name of the donor or the donor’s family goes on the building, scholarship, or endowment. In the same way, the largest estate gifts typically go to private family foundations. These, too, are named for the donor or the donor’s family.

Donor naming rights do work. However, naming rights might not be culturally acceptable in your organization. They often conflict with modern church culture. For example, we would never put someone’s name on the building where the church meets just because they paid for the building. That would be offensive.

Yet even this has happened before. There was a time when churches were called by the name of the rich person who had paid for the large buildings where the churches gathered. Who would do such a thing? Paul would. He writes,

“Please give my greetings … to Nympha and the church that meets in her house.” (Colossians 4:15 NLT).

“Greet Priscilla and Aquila … Greet also the church that meets at their house.” (Romans 16:3, 5 NLT).

“to our fellow soldier Archippus, and to the church that meets in your house.” (Philemon 1:2b NLT).

The churches were identified by the name of the rich person who had paid for the large building where the churches met. That wasn’t necessary. Paul could have just called it the church where that person attended. He could have called it by the name of the street where the structure was located.

But Paul didn’t do that. He called the church by the name of the rich person (or rich couple) who owned the large building and donated its use. The building where the church met was a named building. It was named for the donor.

The identity journey: It’s a story

Paul’s fundraising instructions are not just a list. They’re a story. They’re the donor’s story.

A story has universal elements. It will be about someone. It will start with the setting and the main character’s backstory. This backstory will compel the main character to accept a challenge. This is the call to adventure.

Ultimately, this challenge will result in a victory. After the victory, the story will end with a resolution. The resolution demonstrates how the main character’s identity has changed. Their internal and/or external identity has grown.

In a good story, the character must arc. The main character grows. He or she is not the same person at beginning and the end. At its core, a story is a journey. It’s a journey of identity growth.

Paul tells a story about the donor. It has all the story elements. And it has a powerful ending. The donor’s giving will have an impact. He will accomplish something. He will do intrinsically good works. He will do visibly good works. He will win tangible victories.

After the donor’s victory is the resolution. The resolution confirms the donor’s identity transformation. The donor doesn’t just do something. Through his victories, he becomes something. He becomes rich in good works. He becomes a good sharer. He becomes a deeply connected, fellowship-community sharer. The donor’s internal and/or external identity is transformed. The donor becomes an admirable person.

If any story element is missing, giving becomes less compelling. A story becomes less compelling for the donor when

A compelling story must trigger a clear image. It must have a plot. This means something must change. Ultimately, the character must arc. The journey should result in identity growth.

This is what works in a story. It’s also what works in fundraising. So, if it works, why is it so rare? It’s rare, because there are barriers that prevent this type of giving. There are barriers that prevent this type of fundraising.

Part II

Overcoming the Barriers to Admirable Identity Giving

Barriers to admirable identity giving: Donors

Increasing the visibility of a giver, a gift, and its impact increases giving. It does so for the donor. It does so for others who see the giving. Visibility is powerful. So, why is it so often missing?

It’s often missing because there are barriers. These resist visibility. These barriers can come from the organization. They can even come from donors.

People give more when gifts are visible. But that doesn’t mean people want visibility. In experiments, people will actually pay money for gifts not to be visible.451 And then they’ll give less than they would have if others could have seen their giving.

Keeping sharing hidden is attractive. But this hiddenness reduces giving. Keeping wealth hidden is also attractive. But this, too, reduces giving.

Hidden wealth is attractive. This explains a common misunderstanding of the wealthy. One in-depth study of the very wealthy explained it this way:

“People tend to think of wealthy individuals as ostentatious spendthrifts who enjoy the visibility and status their wealth affords. In fact, say the authors, wealthy individuals usually identify as middle class and try to keep their wealth out of sight.”452

It explained,

“Foremost among their values is the concept of ‘stealth wealth’—they avoid showing off their wealth and maintain their native middle-class values.”453

People often misunderstand this attraction to hidden wealth. Another study showed this in a different way. Those who market to wealthy people were asked if the wealthy,

“Want people to know they are wealthy.”

Most marketers said yes.

Those who were actually wealthy were asked the same question. Only 1 in 10 said yes.454 About 90% of wealthy people did not want others to know they were wealthy.

In 1 Timothy 6:17-18, there is a tempting alternative to enjoying wealth by using it to do good. It is to place one’s hope in the hiddenness [adēlotēti] of wealth.

Making a major gift can be scary. It can be scary because it can reveal the donor as wealthy. This fear of discovery can be a major barrier to making large donations. As one donor shared,

“Please don’t let anyone know I’m making this gift. If others find out I’m wealthy, I’ll be constantly hounded by requests.”

People give more when gifts are visible. But that doesn’t mean they want visibility. How can we overcome this barrier?

We can emphasize the power of visible gifts to influence others. When a donor allows a charity to share their story, it’s like making a second gift to the charity. It inspires others.

We can emphasize what others are doing. We all, together, are sharing, together, whatever God has richly blessed us with. (1 Timothy 6:17-19). The wealthy donor is no different from the one who shares their gifts of serving, teaching, preaching, encouraging, leading, or caregiving. (Romans 12:6-8).

We can make visibility automatic. If the gift is not almsgiving [eleēmosynē], which must be hidden, then we can make publicity normal. Opting out may be an option, but it should at least require some extra effort.

Or, if we want to get extreme, we would follow Paul's example. We would widely publicize even the mere intention to give. We would boast about it to inspire others to give. Then we would return to those who shared their plans and say,

“I know how eager you are to give. And I have proudly told the Lord’s followers in Macedonia that you people in Achaia have been ready for a whole year. Now your desire to give has made them want to give. This is why I am sending Titus and the two others to you. I want you to be ready, just as I promised. This will prove we were not wrong to brag about you. Some followers from Macedonia may come with me, and I want them to find that you have the money ready. If you don’t, I would be embarrassed for trusting you to do this. But you would be embarrassed even more.” (2 Corinthians 9:2-4, CEV).

Of course, that’s extreme fundraising behavior. It’s probably not acceptable at your organization. It might even get you fired. It’s definitely not normal. But it is Biblical!

Barriers to admirable identity giving: Complexity

Gifts do have an impact. We know that. If giving stops, the ministry stops. (Or at least much of it stops.) But making the impact of a specific gift visualizable takes effort.

Doing this is easier for big gifts. It’s easier when we’re focused on wealth sharing by the rich. But it still takes work. Making the donor feel that they have done visibly good work takes effort. It takes creativity. But it is possible.

We can offer donors the chance to be rich in visibly good works. We can help them envision the impact of their gift. We can help them see it.

We can turn a budget into a menu. We can allow large gifts to cover specific, personally meaningful items. We can price out the total cost for a specific outreach. We can price it for a week, a month, or a year. We can price an endowment to cover it permanently.

This allows donors to, literally, buy work – to use the terms from scripture. If you tell me I paid for a month of ministry X, then I own that work. It’s mine. I paid for it. It’s my good work. If I’ve done this every year for the last 10 years, what does that feel like? It feels like my accumulation of beautiful works. It’s my collection of noble, inspirational, good works.

We can describe a gift’s impact in a way that evokes a clear image. Doing this takes effort. This effort can be a barrier. Another barrier is complexity. Leaders see organizational operations in all their complexity. They often want to force this complexity into donor messages. But complexity won’t evoke a clear image. Complexity kills story. It kills fundraising.

Effective fundraisers reframe this complexity into a visualizable story. They change it into a clear image. One secular study identified the key factors in successful major gift asks. The researchers explained,

“they rely on the fundraisers’ skills in reframing complex issues and finding alignment between the recipient organization’s needs and the philanthropic aspirations of the donor.”455

Successful major gift fundraisers excel at “reframing complex issues.” They build a clear and simple giving opportunity. They help to advance the “philanthropic aspirations of the donor.”

We, too, can “reframe complex issues.” We can make them part of a personally meaningful giving opportunity for the donor. It will be part of a story about the donor. It will be a story about the donor’s admirable values (or “philanthropic aspirations”). It will be a story about the donor’s admirable impact. It will be a story about the donor’s admirable identity. It will be a story that matches the authorized message of 1 Timothy 6:17-19.

Barriers to admirable identity giving: Administrator ego

In Paul’s fundraising instructions, the donor is the one who does intrinsically good work. The donor is the one who becomes rich in visibly good works. It’s a story about the donor’s identity. This is an effective story for major gifts. It’s effective, but it’s rare.

The more typical fundraising story is about the charity’s identity. The charity administrators are the heroes. They are the ones who do intrinsically good work. They are the ones who become rich in visibly good works.

In that story, giving is the well-earned response to the administrators’ heroic good works. Donors honor the organization’s heroic identity through their giving.

This story leads to administrator-ego-driven fundraising. This fundraising isn’t concerned about delivering a donor experience. The donor is supposed to deliver value to the charity, not the other way around. Donors are supposed to be motivated by the administrators’ heroic good works.

This story also suggests how we can raise more money. We just need to tell this administrator hero story to more people. This, of course, will motivate the audience. They’ll be compelled to honor the heroic administrators by laying money at their feet.

This story is attractive, but only to charity administrators. For donors, it’s not that compelling. It might work for a token gift. It might trigger a “pat on the head” gift. It might get an “isn’t that nice for you people” gift. But it won’t work for the large gift. It won’t work for the major life investment gift. It won’t work for the wealth-sharing gift.

Telling the donor impact story is different. Telling the donor identity story is different. It requires lowering the charity administrators’ ego. It also requires effort. Delivering the donor identity experience takes hard work.

It’s supposed to be fun: A ministry responsibility

Consider this music minister. Every week he sluggishly leads singing at his church. His expression never changes. He always uses the same songs. He includes four stanzas of “A Mighty Fortress Is Our God.” And then, just to be authentic, he does it again – in the original German from 1529. And people don’t like it. They don’t enjoy it. They aren’t inspired by it.

When asked about this result, the minister responds,

“The problem is that our church members need to be better people. If we get them to be better Christians, then they would enjoy it more. If they just became more dedicated, they would like it more.”

Is this the right response for an effective ministry? Of course not. That’s not how music ministry works.

Or suppose instead of delivering inspiring sermons, a preacher just read slow, dry, recycled text in a monotone voice. And people don’t enjoy it. Should he respond in that same way? Of course not. That’s not how preaching ministry works. That’s not how any ministry works.

Of course, we already know this. We already do this. We work hard to make the experiences attractive. We work hard to make them uplifting, inspiring, and motivational. We work hard to make them enjoyable. We do this in every area of ministry – except one. Giving.

Giving is supposed to be joyful. When people aren’t enjoying their giving, what’s the response? Do we go to work to make the experience more attractive? Do we do everything we can to make it more uplifting, inspiring, and motivational? We should. Instead, the response is often to blame the donors. It’s a response that says,

“The problem is that our church members need to be better people. If we get them to be better Christians, then they would enjoy it more. If they just became more dedicated, they would like it more.”

Of course, this response is much easier than actually doing any work. It’s easier than making any changes. It’s lazy.

We can look at these issues as purely donor responsibilities. If this donor experience isn’t happening, that’s not our problem. It’s the donors’ problem. If the donors were better people, that would fix the problem. But that’s not how this ministry works. That’s not how any ministry works.

Ministry starts where people are

Giving starts with the donor’s heart. It’s supposed to accurately reflect the heart. It’s supposed to make the donor rich in good [kalois] works. This good [kalois] is,

“beautiful, as an outward sign of the inward good, noble, honorable character; good, worthy, honorable, noble, and seen to be so.”456 (Emphasis added.)

This does not mean we need to start with perfect people. Donors don’t need be perfect before they give. Instead, we start where they are. We start where they are right now, today. That’s how ministry works.

We start with the good, noble, honorable aspects of their character. We can ask questions that help them to uncover these. We can make statements that remind them of these.

Then, we can provide giving opportunities that match these specific character attributes. We can create opportunities for the donor to become rich in good [kalois] works. We can create opportunities that grow the admirable characteristics of the donor’s identity. We can help to grow the donor’s admirable identity.

Growing the donor’s admirable identity: The gardening guidelines

We want the donors to become rich in kalois works. We want them to become rich in works that are

“beautiful, as an outward sign of the inward good, noble, honorable character;”457

How do we do this? We can think of this like gardening. We want to grow the donor’s admirable identity. We start by finding the sprouts. We start by finding those parts of the donor’s inward character that are good, noble and honorable.

We can ask questions that help them to uncover these. For example, we might ask things like:

“What inspires you to give?”458

“How does your giving reflect your values?”459

“Can you tell me a bit more about who taught you to be generous or where your generous spirit comes from?”460

“What’s motivated you to be such a consistent supporter [of this charity]?”461

“Why does this cause matter to you?”462

If we already know these things, we can reinforce them. We can highlight them. We can water these sprouts. We can reinforce them. We can make statements affirming their specific good, noble, or honorable characteristics.

We might reference their values. We could mention their already-in-progress ongoing characteristic (Greek present tense) of being not high-minded. They are not above or separated from the fellowship community.

We might reference their life story. We could point out that they have already-in-the-past-with-continuing-effects-on-the-present (Greek perfect tense) not set their hope on the uncertainty of riches. Instead, they have set their hope on God. We can reinforce these parts of their past and current life story.

We might reference their people. We could point out others like them who do the same thing. We each receive from God. We each enjoy it by using to do good.

Whatever their positive character feature is, we start with that. We point it out to them. Maybe, like Timothy, they are continuing a family tradition of “sincere faith.” (2 Timothy 1:5). Maybe, like the Athenians, they are “very religious.” (Acts 17:22). Maybe, like Agrippa, they are “expert in all customs and questions” of the Old Testament law. (Acts 26:2-3). Maybe, like Felix, they have the wisdom of many years of experience. (Acts 24:10).

The point of all of this is to connect their specific good, noble, or honorable characteristic to an action. In fundraising, we connect it to specific good work. That’s how we grow the admirable character feature.

In gardening terms, this good work will be a trellis for the character vine. We find a trellis – a potential good work – that fits right next to the admirable sprout. A trellis won’t work unless you put it right next to the sprout. We would never put a trellis on the other side of the garden and hope the vine will stretch far enough to reach!

How do we find or construct this nearby matching good work? We can ask. We might ask

“If you could do anything for [this charity], if the sky was the limit, what would that look like to you?”463

“If money were no object, what would we be doing that we’re not now doing?”464

“If money were no object, what kind of an impact would you like your giving to have?”

“What would be your dream gift?”465

“How would you like to make a difference in this community? In this world?”466

“What change do you want to see because of your giving?”467

“What do you want to achieve with your charitable donations?”468

We don’t sell just any beautiful good works. Instead, we come alongside the donor. We help to find or construct giving opportunities that are not only beautiful, but also,

“beautiful, as an outward sign of their inward good, noble, honorable character.”

We help them to become rich in kalois works.

And then, we lock it in. We get them fully committed. How? We expose it to the light. We make sure their works are

“good, worthy, honorable, noble, and seen to be so.”

When we “boast about” them and their philanthropy, it has an effect on others. (2 Corinthians 9:2). Their “zeal” for giving stirs up others to behave in the same way. (2 Corinthians 9:2).

This publicity has another effect. It locks them into the action. Our public boasting about them commits them to the honorable character trait. It commits them to follow through with it. (2 Corinthians 9:3). Otherwise they could be publicly embarrassed. (2 Corinthians 9:4).

And what is the result of this philanthropic gardening process? What fruit does it bear? It bears fruit that increases to the donor’s credit.

“Not that I seek the gift, but I seek the fruit [karpon] that increases to your credit.” (Philippians 4:17, ESV).

This fruit is karpon. A lexicon further describes this word as,

“Of Christian charity, i.e., benefit, to accomplish much … used of men’s deeds as exponents of their hearts … to exhibit deeds agreeing with a change of heart.” 469 (Emphasis added.)

The fruit reflects the donor’s heart. The donors become rich in works that are

“beautiful, as an outward sign of the inward good, noble, honorable character; good, worthy, honorable, noble, and seen to be so.”470

That’s a beautiful harvest! That’s a beautiful garden! That’s enjoyable giving!

The joy of admirable identity giving

Big giving is often visible, identity-connected giving. We can get to big giving by helping donors to connect a gift with their identity – their life story and values. We can help them to define their most personally meaningful gift.

This process can lead to large gifts. In Bible terms, these are also generous gifts. Outside of 1 Timothy 6:18, the normal word translated as “generous” is haplotēs. This word requires that the gift accurately represents the donor’s heart. Getting to “generous” [haplotēs] gifts starts with the donor’s heart. It starts with who they are. It starts with who they truly want to be. It starts with the admirable features of their identity.

In fundraising, this works. This leads to major, life-investment gifts. But it’s important to remember the point. The point is not large gifts. The point is joyful gifts. Gifts that effectively express the donor’s admirable identity characteristics are joyful gifts. And that’s the point. The point is joyful giving. The point is enjoyment.