The "real" sin of Sodom

[olger]

[Crickets chirping...]

[doug yowell]

Come on, Lazarus.Now's your chance to reveal the real conservative abhorence of humanitarian outreach.Don't let olger's comment hold you back. Can't think of any?? Me either. Probably because there aren't any. But if you can document just two,ok, just one,I'll do my best to try to change their minds. I'm serious.

[Guest]

{and the crickets chirp on}

[lazarus]

Come on, Lazarus.Now's your chance to reveal the real conservative abhorence of humanitarian outreach.Don't let olger's comment hold you back. Can't think of any?? Me either. Probably because there aren't any. But if you can document just two,ok, just one,I'll do my best to try to change their minds. I'm serious.

Why so particular? You'll swallow the line about progressives but conservatives...... "give me names and addresses..."

[doug yowell]

Originally Posted By: doug yowell

Come on, Lazarus.Now's your chance to reveal the real conservative abhorence of humanitarian outreach.Don't let olger's comment hold you back. Can't think of any?? Me either. Probably because there aren't any. But if you can document just two,ok, just one,I'll do my best to try to change their minds. I'm serious.

Why so particular? You'll swallow the line about progressives but conservatives...... "give me names and addresses..."

Nice try, Lazurus.I didn't say I bought olger's claim because I don't know if it's true or not.He might be wrong. He's done nothing to prove it and no one else has done anything to dispprove it. Additionally, he qualified it by stating that it was his personal observation. Subjective interpretations are sometimes right simetimes wrong. So if you're gonna be critical of olger for not giving examples then why are you any different? If what you said is true then you must have some way of demonstrating it. If it's not true then why did you post it??

[Bravus]

There have been plenty of examples from the conservatives here of just such: I recall in the 'educational direction' thread just a couple of days ago the idea that foreign aid should be cut - 'take care of our own first'. Maybe church outreach was meant, and Laz might have more examples on that front, but the attitude that helping others in other countries should come a distant second to helping those (well, those who are deserving) in one's own country is pretty common.

(Can't believe I bought into this - I'll shut up now)

[Dr. Shane]

People without power or influence don't mean much. Meaningful examples would be those with influence and/or power.

[lazarus]

Bravus is right. I did mean church outreach...

"many conservatives abhor humanitarian outreach and will "preach" their hearts out but remain ineffective. Clearly, Jesus combined the two"

My statement was followed by a quote from EGW about outreach.

There has been much theological debate in Christianity about the role of meeting social concerns in the evangelical work of the church.

Walter Rauschenbusch, Social Gospel pioneer was is criticized by his contemporaries and modern writers, Karl Barth (darling of theological conservatives, I think) and Frederick Neymeyer (fan of Austrian economics) for example.

The conservative christian movement today is fervently anti the Social Gospel, that is self evident but more specifically...

Jerry Falwell regarded foreign aid as welfare

Jessie Helms opposed foreign aid

Ron Paul advocates an end to all foreign aid

Cato Institute

http://www.cato.org/pub_display.php?pub_id=6185

[olger]

"It is not right that we should leave the word of God, and serve tables."

olger approves this message

[lazarus]

"It is not right that we should leave the word of God, and serve tables."

olger approves this message

Make sure you get the message right. I'm surprised at you Ollie.

Acts 6:2 So the Twelve gathered all the disciples together and said, “It would not be right for us to neglect the ministry of the word of God in order to wait on tables. 3. Brothers, choose seven men from among you who are known to be full of the Spirit and wisdom. We will turn this responsibility over to them 4and will give our attention to prayer and the ministry of the word.”

Us = Apostles

Seven men = Deacons

Deacons are not meant to just collect offering and open and close the church. They are to serve the needs of the community "within and without"

[olger]

Well done Sir.

og out

[Bravus]

Who was that teacher guy who fed 5000 people? Can't quite recall at the moment...

[Dr. Shane]

Jerry Falwell regarded foreign aid as welfare

Jessie Helms opposed foreign aid

Ron Paul advocates an end to all foreign aid

I think we need to distinguish between the church and the state. A person can be opposed to the state giving foreign aid and yet favor the church doing so. Politically, I have no problem with the US providing foreign aid but for me that political position has absolutely nothing to do with my faith. Religiously I believe the church should extend aid to other countries - like ADRA does. I personally do work in Mexico and many of my dollars go directly into the Mexican work. I have no trouble distinguishing the difference between my politics (what I believe the government should be doing) and my religion (what I believe the church should be doing). It looks like some in this thread are mixing the two together.

[doug yowell]

Who was that teacher guy who fed 5000 people? Can't quite recall at the moment...

I think it was the same guy who had the ability to feed every poor person in the entire country (and world)and didn't.The same one who could have healed every sick person too,and didn't. Maybe His priorities were off? "you seek me, not because you saw the signs,but because you ate of the loaves and were filled."

[doug yowell]

[quote=lazarus deacons are not meant to just collect offering and open and close the church. They are to serve the needs of the community "within and without"

[aldona]

Bravus is right. I did mean church outreach...

"many conservatives abhor humanitarian outreach and will "preach" their hearts out but remain ineffective. Clearly, Jesus combined the two"

My statement was followed by a quote from EGW about outreach.

There has been much theological debate in Christianity about the role of meeting social concerns in the evangelical work of the church.

Walter Rauschenbusch, Social Gospel pioneer was is criticized by his contemporaries and modern writers, Karl Barth (darling of theological conservatives, I think) and Frederick Neymeyer (fan of Austrian economics) for example.

The conservative christian movement today is fervently anti the Social Gospel, that is self evident but more specifically...

Jerry Falwell regarded foreign aid as welfare

Jessie Helms opposed foreign aid

Ron Paul advocates an end to all foreign aid

Cato Institute

http://www.cato.org/pub_display.php?pub_id=6185

It just means that those of us who have a passion and a calling to humanitarian or social concerns will feel that we do not belong in such churches...

...and eventually, worn down by constant admonitions that we should stop wasting our time on the "social Gospel" and do "the Lord's work" instead, we either lose our passion or drift away from the church and join with other like-minded people (whether religious e.g. liberal churches or Quakers, or those godless atheists at whatever secular charity we end up supporting)...

Why don't we simply recognize that some of us are called to preach the gospel, and others (like Martha, or Dorcas) are called to meet practical and social needs?

Surely the two can co-exist - like the Biblical example of deacons being specifically ordained by laying on of hands to look after the widows and serve tables so that the apostles could get on with doing the work they were called to do.)

When was the last time the church ordained somebody by laying on hands in order for them to do humanitarian work on behalf of the church? That would be revolutionary...it would actually demonstrate that we regard "social gospel" work as important.

aldona

[olger]

Who was that teacher guy who fed 5000 people? Can't quite recall at the moment...

Memory is the second thing to go..

og

[olger]

"Go ye into all the world, teaching them to observe the things I have commanded you."

oG out

[Gerr]

Just tagging on.

“Is not this the fast that I choose: to loose the bonds of wickedness, to undo the straps of the yoke, to let the oppressed go free, and to break every yoke? Is it not to share your bread with the hungry and bring the homeless poor into your house; when you see the naked, to cover him, and not to hide yourself from your own flesh? Then shall your light break forth like the dawn, and your healing shall spring up speedily; your righteousness shall go before you; the glory of the Lord shall be your rear guard. Then you shall call, and the Lord will answer; you shall cry, and he will say, ‘Here I am.’ If you take away the yoke from your midst, the pointing of the finger, and speaking wickedness, if you pour yourself out for the hungry and satisfy the desire of the afflicted, then shall your light rise in the darkness and your gloom be as the noonday. And the Lord will guide you continually and satisfy your desire in scorched places and make your bones strong; and you shall be like a watered garden, like a spring of water, whose waters do not fail. And your ancient ruins shall be rebuilt; you shall raise up the foundations of many generations; you shall be called the repairer of the breach, the restorer of streets to dwell in." Isa 58:6-12 ESV

"If a brother or sister is poorly clothed and lacking in daily food, and one of you says to them, “Go in peace, be warmed and filled,” without giving them the things needed for the body, what good is that?" Ja 2:15-16 ESV

Is it possible that our ministry for the soul might be much more effective if we also ministered to the body?

[Tom Wetmore]

And it is precisely that message you quoted from Isaiah 58 that EGW proclaimed as the message for the end of time that should be proclaimed over and over again.

And that is connected directly to what Adventists recognize as the seal of God, the Sabbath.

[John317]

Quote:

Tom Wetmore:

And it is precisely that message you quoted from Isaiah 58 that EGW proclaimed as the message for the end of time that should be proclaimed over and over again.

And that is connected directly to what Adventists recognize as the seal of God, the Sabbath.

I completely agree with you, but as long as we're going to try to follow what God revealed to us through Ellen White, we need to recognize that we should all individually and as a church follow everything that she said, and not simply pick out one teaching as important. Merely doing what Ellen White said in regard to this subject is not obeying what God has revealed if we reject God's messages on other subjects.

On this particular subject, she wrote a great deal in the book, Welfare Ministry, and among those statements is one where she says that the church should not devote its time, energy, and resources to helping the poor in a way that reduces its ability to proclaim the Three Angels' Messages. The SDA church was not raised up to assist the poor in getting jobs and money. The helping of the poor, just like the medical work, must go hand in hand with proclaiming the gospel. The preaching of the gospel cannot become a secondary work but must remain our primary purpose. When we look at how other churches have done in the past, we find that it's common to lay aside the gospel and concentrate on the "social gospel," but this isn't what the Lord wants the Seventh-day Adventist church to do. He raised up our church for the purpose of preparing a people and the world for the Second Coming.

I think the emphasis should be on us as individuals helping the poor by inviting them into our homes where we can help them physically at the same time that we help them learn the Three Angels' Messages. I've seen this done successfully so that it led people to turn to Christ and eventually choose to become members of God's church. My own parents often allowed people in need to live in their home.

But people must also be careful about who they invite into their homes because many have mental, emotional, drug and alcohol problems so that they can become violent or steal from the family they stay with. I've invited homeless people to restaurants for meals before, only to have them arrested there after they became irate at the restaurant and were arrested by the police for threatening the waitress. So when working with the poor-- as indeed at all times-- it's essential to remember Christ's instructions to be wise as serpents but harmless as doves.

[SivartM]

I never quite understood why people are wary of the "social gospel". What are we supposed to have, an "anti-social gospel"? :\

[olger]

"How then do we think of our message & mission? Very substantial conflicting currents now run through our church. At Biblical Research, we sit at the place where we see the transcendence and the confluence of these currents. The former zeal for sharing Bible truths, of working together in close community, of a world encompassing vision of a great task to be done in preparation for Christ’s return, today is diminishing.

True, a large body of believers continues to think of itself in these terms: To give sacrificially of time & funds; to rejoice over every new field entered with the gospel, to share the message with their neighbors. But increasingly, another group values more the social aspect of our worth. They find themselves embarrassed by direct evangelism, prefers humanitarian outreach to direct soul-winning, is uncomfortable with church organization, distrusts leadership, and prefers to give from its abundance rather than sacrificially to projects which they can control the use of their gift" (George Reid, past president of Biblical Research Institute, 1998).

[John317]

Quote:

SivartM: I never quite understood why people are wary of the "social gospel". What are we supposed to have, an "anti-social gospel"? :\

It's because usually the "social gospel" comes to the point where there's no gospel. It's all social. In other words, they typically stop preaching the gospel, and concentrate solely on helping the poor. That is not the work that God raissed up the Seventh-day Adventist church to do.

Check it out: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Social_Gospel

This is not to say that we're not to help the poor but we're not to think only or even primarily of satisfying their physical needs. A person's spiritual needs should always be uppermost in our minds. Great books to read on this subject are Ellen White's Christian Service, Ministry of Healing, and Welfare Ministry.

[lazarus]

I don't think anyone here has argued for just satisfying physical needs. Clearly, Jesus did both. Ellen white clearly argues that we do both. The reason why we should meet the physical needs of people is not just to win them but because we have compassion.

May churches have only engaged the community when its time to hand out fliers for a Revelation seminar and wonders why no one comes. Many churches run a soup kitchen but never invite someone to give their heart to Jesus Christ. We need both.

In General, SDA churches focus simply on declaring the truth but do no give the "proof" by showing compassion to those in the community. Many SDA congregations are dying not because they don't try hard enough but because they are not using Jesus' method.

In reaching the people. The Savior mingled with men as one who desired their good. He showed His sympathy for them, ministered to their needs, and won their confidence. Then He bade them, "Follow Me."

Min of healing p 86.

Both are necessary for effective evangelism, Jesus proved it, so did the apostles for that matter.

It's not either or, it's both and!

Good News and Good Works.