Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
But those contributions came from others like us back then, too.
I think Trout's got it with "do what we can with what we have", but it does help if we look for ways that we can pool our resources. We can also look at what we already have that we're not using.
For example, I've supported City Harvest, the NYC organization that rescues food from grocery stores and restaurants and redistributes it to where it is needed throughout the city. This works well in an urban area. Too much food + people with not enough food, and they are bringing the two together. Monetary donations go to maintaining the trucks and paying people to drive them. It seems to be a win-win all around.
That won't work in as well in rural or even most suburban areas. People who are isolated and need help may not be on the radar of even their neighbors. One problem sometimes is that when we "have" we are often not coming into contact with the "don't-haves". Staying aware and looking outside our own little worlds can open our eyes to those around us who need help.
I'm personally for changing society, but I'd rather it be done willingly than legislated, that we become a people who care about the have-nots just because it's the right thing to do. I remember when I took an "Alternative Amsterdam" walking tour while in the Netherlands, the tour guide showed us an area where new housing was built next to the older, traditional three-and-four-story houses and said that they had a rule that the new architecture had to fit in with the original. She mentioned that some of the newer buildings were social housing, and she said that in Amsterdam, if you are one of the wealthier people in the older homes living next door to someone in social housing and you look down upon them because they have less than you, then you are considered a jerk. I like that way of thinking. If you look down on those who have less than you do, you ARE a jerk, especially if you call yourself Christian.
If I were really The Mighty Queen, no one would go without food. I don't care if you are crazy or a criminal, everyone should eat. We have enough to feed everyone. We are shameful as a species if we deliberately withhold food from other human beings.
The situation in Amsterdam is really laudable. I admire that very much. I know, I have often read the world has plenty of food; it's a distribution problem. Corruption at local levels, food rotting in warehouses.
Yes, you're right that the locals and travelers supported the monks and nuns. Good point.
Some cultural expectations can't be met in modern times, like inviting "the stranger" into your home to show hospitality. Not anymore.
Well, he had limited time for all of that: 3 years.
Anyway, he also said "The poor will always be with us", so that gives one pause, too.
Don't make the mistake of taking that out of the context in which it was said, though. Seriously, I've heard people use that line as an excuse for not helping the poor, as if Jesus really meant, "Oh well, there are always going to be poor people so you don't really have to do anything about it."
Even more egregiously, and outright close to evil if such a thing exists, are Christians who use the words from Thessalonians " if a man will not work, he shall not eat" to justify not feeding poor people. The phrase is taken out of the context in which it was written to a fledgling Christian community wherein the people were to share work and possessions and apparently some were slacking off and does not in any way refer to the poor at all.
The situation in Amsterdam is really laudable. I admire that very much. I know, I have often read the world has plenty of food; it's a distribution problem. Corruption at local levels, food rotting in warehouses.
Yes, you're right that the locals and travelers supported the monks and nuns. Good point.
Some cultural expectations can't be met in modern times, like inviting "the stranger" into your home to show hospitality. Not anymore.
Yes, I wouldn't be too quick to do that. Although, a coworker whose family had a farm in rural Indiana told us (working in a NYC office) that a truck driver's rig had broken down on the road late in the day near her parents' farm, so her parents invited him to come in and spend the night on their couch and gave him dinner.
She was pointing out how different it was where she came from.
I hear too many people today making the excuse of NOT giving money or other items to people begging, they justify it by saying they will just use it on drugs or alcohol. Jesus never instructed us to JUDGE what they MAY do with the money...he told us we should JUST GIVE (no questions asked).
What they decide to use the money on, is on them ultimately, if they are homeless and cannot afford food and use the $20 I give on drugs...thats ON THEM.
I have NO WAY of knowing what they will use the money for, its not my place to even factor this into whether I give them money or not. I think many people that use this excuse are just looking for some justifiable reason for NOT helping them.
I hear too many people today making the excuse of NOT giving money or other items to people begging, they justify it by saying they will just use it on drugs or alcohol. Jesus never instructed us to JUDGE what they MAY do with the money...he told us we should JUST GIVE (no questions asked).
What they decide to use the money on, is on them ultimately, if they are homeless and cannot afford food and use the $20 I give on drugs...thats ON THEM.
I have NO WAY of knowing what they will use the money for, its not my place to even factor this into whether I give them money or not. I think many people that use this excuse are just looking for some justifiable reason for NOT helping them.
Yes, I wouldn't be too quick to do that. Although, a coworker whose family had a farm in rural Indiana told us (working in a NYC office) that a truck driver's rig had broken down on the road late in the day near her parents' farm, so her parents invited him to come in and spend the night on their couch and gave him dinner.
She was pointing out how different it was where she came from.
Let's hope we can all agree that helping the poor, sick and other disadvantaged groups was a top priority for Jesus. I don't need to quote all the Bible verses; we know them.
In our current society, what do you think is the best way to accomplish this? Granted, most churches and charity groups have addressed these societal ills as best they can, but the situation is so much bigger than they can handle.
Back in the day, charity hospitals, monks, nuns and other private groups were there to help. But those are not enough now. Yours and my charity contributions can't cut it, as appreciated as they are.
I am conflicted about whether Jesus would have us try to change society, or just dig in where we are at, and contribute on our limited local level.
What do you think?
I do what I can on an individual and mostly local basis. I give directly, and pretty substantially, to those I think I can help. I generally do not trust churches or charities to act as the middleman. Much of "Christianity" is entirely bogus in terms of what you're talking about. I do give to some charities, but only if I'm thoroughly convinced of the merits of their mission and where the money is going - https://preborn.org, for example. I do not give a dime to any church or ministry.
I don't give as much of my time as I could by any means, so I'll surely answer for that.
I have no illusions about trying to change society. I really don't even know what that would mean in the context of anything I could realistically do. I think Jesus anticipated a transformation of society through the transformation of individual lives.
Jesus sends His followers to make disciples. He didn’t send them to feed the hunger of the flesh but the hunger of the spirit.
“The man who comes to me hears my word and uses it.”
The spirit of the Lord God is upon me, because the Lord has anointed me; he has sent me to bring good news to the oppressed, to bind up the brokenhearted, to proclaim liberty to the captives, and release to the prisoners;
Jesus sends His followers to make disciples. He didn’t send them to feed the hunger of the flesh but the hunger of the spirit.
“The man who comes to me hears my word and uses it.”
The spirit of the Lord God is upon me, because the Lord has anointed me; he has sent me to bring good news to the oppressed, to bind up the brokenhearted, to proclaim liberty to the captives, and release to the prisoners;
Uh-huh. As the old Baptist joke goes, "If you ever find yourself down on your luck, homeless and in need of a meal, knock on my door ... and I'll pray for you."
You can't separate feeding the hunger of the flesh from feeding the hunger of the spirit. The hunger of the flesh is the immediate need. This message is pretty clear throughout the NT.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
