"Conservatives have found themselves being very vocal on highly moral issues. Take for instance the consistent vitriol spewed by James Dobson and Richard Land against the homosexual community. Not to mention abortion, though I am adamantly against it, one must remember the fallen world we live in and that we can work to reduce the number of abortions but it will never be abolished altogether. Though I would desperately love to see that happen, this is not a perfect world and I think it would bode much better for the evangelical church to accept that sober fact.
If that were the case, the church could concentrate more on issues of compassion, things that I am convinced consumed much of Jesus’ time. . . "
Read the rest of it. Parts, I swear, read very similarly to a draft post I was working on yesterday before I bailed. Reading it reminds me of how much we could accomplish in this country if we reached across our supposed divisions. Yes, we disagree on much, but there is much we can agree on that would make substantive improvements to the lives of people.
27 comments:
the thing that the church was commanded to do was to spread the gospel to the world....period. our job down here on this earth is to lead people to Jesus before its too late.
now, christians do get involved in many other things out of compassion. most hospitals were first built by christians. most universities were started by christians. most homeless shelters were started by christians. most orphanages and childrens homes were started by christians. but, our main goal behind each of these things was to bring people to the Savior.
glory to God!
volfan007
Volfan, what did the gospel consist of as Jesus preached it?
Streak,
Thanks. You are a gentleman and a scholar. You don't smoke a pipe, do you? Oh and about the weather, its 75 degrees and I'm waiting on Mary Poppins to blow in.
So, volfan, Jesus didn't command us to feed the poor? That is not a goal or obligation, but an optional activity?
I think it was Francis of Assisi who said something like "preach the gospel always. if necessary, use words." If Christians aren't about making the world a better place then I have no interest.
Jesus commanded His disciples to preach the gospel to the world. the gospel is the birth, life, death, and resurrection of Jesus. the gospel is what we are commanded to preach....and ask people to recieve it, or really Him, thru faith and repentance. in other words, the gospel is about Jesus and His salvation.
streak,
my church....and every church that i know....are actively involved in helping the truly needy. my church gives thousands and thousands of dollars to help people with all sorts of needs. but, the great commission given by Jesus was for christians to preach the gospel to the world...making disciples of people everywhere. we beleive in making this world a better place by leading people to have a relationship with God. then, they will want to do whats right and kind and compassionate.
streak,
did you not read all my post above...you know, about hospitals, orphanages, homeless shelters, etc? looks like christians are the main ones wanting to make this world a better place to me. but, our main concern is not this world, but the kingdom of God to come. we are focused more on that kingdom because it will last forever.....this world wont.
volfan007
we beleive in making this world a better place by leading people to have a relationship with God. then, they will want to do whats right and kind and compassionate.
And that is where we differ. You, and many people, think that just because someone develops a "relationship with god" that will make them more moral. I do not. I think you have to make compassion and morality a major component of the faith.
and yes, Volf, I read your post. I am well aware that Christians have been heavily involved in compassionate efforts. Your original post on that suggested that it was a secondary goal, and your own policy on taxation suggests that you only want to help the people you want to help.
volfan,
Just so you don't take my words out of context, I affirm the courageous, clear, unapologetic preaching of God's Word.
But the bottom line is that the world is not listening anymore. The evangelical church has become a punchline rather than the global force Christ intended, especially in America. It has got to regain some credibility and it will not happen if we do not take issues of compassion and service seriously.
Did you know that the most unchuched country in the world now is America? Does that sober fact not give you a moment's pause? Have you ever pondered why? I am sure your first thought is "because they are lost." But we cannot reach the lost if we are not willing to meet their immediate needs. You are correct that the church's primary command is to preach the Gospel; but not to the exclusion of meeting people's needs. Jesus never once overlooked a person's immediate needs in ministry. Not once. A cursory reading of the book of Mark will reveal that.
And never do you see Him denouncing immoral behavior without grace and compassion (except in the case of the smug religious right of His day, the Pharisses, et. al.).
How often do you read that Jesus was moved with compassion? Yet so many of the talking heads of Christianity claim righteous indignation over easily quantifiable sins, like abortion and gay marriage but they haven't the foggiest notion of what in the world that means.
The point of my post and Streak's gracious quotation of it is that the conservative church has fumbled the ball. Worse, when we do gain possession we trip over our own players.
And when someone like Dr. Hunter has the cojones to do something different, look what happens, that is if you read my entire post. I am thankful he chose to step down rather than be made into a fall guy.
There seems to be in the posting of your comments a great disconnect between proclaiming the Word and living it out. The Gospel itself is not primary. The people to whom we proclaim it is. I am not trying to be offensive, but you the spirt of your commenting sounds like the proselytizer I wrote about at my blog.
I don't want to hijack Streak's blog, so you're welcome to move over to mine if you care to discuss this coherently.
Tony, hijack at will. You are cleared to land. Or something.
:)
Volfan said, Jesus commanded His disciples to preach the gospel to the world. the gospel is the birth, life, death, and resurrection of Jesus.
If you'll look closely, you'll see that when Jesus sent his disciples out the first time to preach the gospel, he had not even mentioned to them the fact that he would die. Nothing about the resurrection. His gospel was not about his death, rather it was about living in a new way--living a life of self-sacrifice for the betterment of others.
You are correct that a Christian's main concern should be the kingdom. Jesus modeled the kingdom life for us, meeting people's immediate, practical needs: the need for food, healing, compassion, friendship.
You are never going to convince people to receive Jesus if the Jesus that you show them doesn't do something to meet those practical needs before delving into their "sins."
(I'm sorry, Streak. I just had to jump in here--this is a hot button for me.)
Jesus came to this earth to die. that was His main mission. not to be example of kindness. He came to die for our sins. the bible is very clear on this. Jesus came to die for our sins. and, our main mission is to preach the gospel and teach the Word of God.
tony,
apparently, you didnt read my first post all the way thru either. christians are the main ones who have started and continue to run charitable organizations. its churches who give the most to help people in need. my church does much....much....to help people in need. i didnt say that we shouldnt do good to those around us who have needs. but, the main job of the church is not to clothe and feed and build hospitals. our main job is to win souls.
also, when people's hearts are changed by the power of God then they do live better and have more compassion. they dont become perfect, but they are changed for the better. before the Lord saved me, i was a cussing, drinking, dope smoking, woman chasing, self centered fella who was going along with the rest of the world. concerned aobut numero uno. the Lord absolutely changed my life.
i have seen Him change many others as well.
tony,
we are to preach the gospel and teach the Word no matter if people wanna hear it or not. a christians job is proclaim and show the love of Jesus. many times, people dont wanna hear it. they threw jeremiah in a pit. cut off john the baptist's head. nailed Jesus to a cross. sometimes, the lost people of this world just dont want God. thats how it is. a christian should not base his ministry on what this lost, fickle world thinks.
volfan007
Wow that whole sermon on the mount must have been misrecorded.
As for people living better lives after being saved, sure, many people find ways to stop their own self-destructive behavior. But it doesn't necessarily make them better people. And assuming it works that way is problematic. Consider the American South. Filled with evangelicals (and I am not attacking all my readers from the south here) but that evangelical faith was no barrier to slavery, segregation and opposition to inter-racial marriage.
But I am sure that many evangelicals, during segregation, hoped that African Americans would be saved and go to heaven (though they probably assumed that heaven was also segregated). But they worked with their local White Citizen's Councils to keep blacks from voting, and to keep them from challenging social mores.
the way Volfan presents the gospel, one would picture Jesus looking at that situation and saying, "well as long as they are being saved, that is all that matters."
Sigh.
volfan,
Patronization really doesn't become you.
Obviously you have missed the entire point of this post and Streak's quotation of it.
I appreciate your passion and zeal for preaching. I share that same passion and zeal. But if you got this out of my post, Jesus came to this earth to die. that was His main mission. not to be example of kindness, then you have greatly misuderstood and taken my arguments out of context.
I am not suggesting that we divorce the preaching of the Gospel from meeting needs. The two are inextricable.
I have never suggested that we "just" meet people's needs. But if you think you are going to gain an audience with that homeless person down the street, the pregnant abandoned teenager, the drug addict holding on to life, or even the rich CEO, whomever, without first meeting their immediate needs, then you do not live in a little place called reality. You need to get out of their faces and into their shoes.
I hear your argument that the church's main job is to win souls. I haven't denied that and don't intend to. But we best change our methodology or else the church in America is going to flounder and die. And please don't quote Matthew 16:18 to me.
You cannot ignore the facts and those are that most Baptist churches are plateaued or declining. Baptisms remain at an all time low, despite Bobby Welch's "One Million" campaign. The reason is because folks don't want what we are selling, not to mention the fact that we are trying to sell it to them in dirty containers.
The only other denomination in America showing such decline is the Methodists. The Mormons and Jehovah's Witnesses (cults, btw) are seeing marked gains in prosyletizations. I come back to my original question, that you failed to address, which watching your commenting on other blogs, as well as Streak's, you will probably ignore. "Have you ever pondered why?"
a christian should not base his ministry on what this lost, fickle world thinks. If we were truly basing our orthodoxy as well as orthopraxy on what Jesus thinks, do you think the church would not be making gigantic leaps toward fulfilling the Great Commission, Matthew 24:14?
You can quote that we must preach the Gospel whether anyone listens or not, but the promise of Scripture is that we have been appointed to bear fruit and if your ministry is not bearing fruit in the lives of needy people, then your ministry is a farce, no matter how many amens you get on Sunday morning.
The point is not what we are doing in our individual ministries; corporately Christians have a bad name, and you cannot deny that. Somehow, someway, we have got to change that perspective and I know that because the world hated Christ, it also will hate us. I for one am open to dialogue to see how that gap can be crossed and willing to explore options so that this world can see redemption.
tony,
ask the people on the ms gulf coast what they think of southern baptist christians. i imagine that you will hearthings like.... wonderful people...they were here before the red cross and they stayed and cut trees and fed us meals and cleaned out our nasty flooded houses.
ask any of the people around the areas where tornadoes and earthquakes and floods and such caused disasters about southern baptists and you are likely to hear...they are wonderful people...they helped us.
ask all the thousands who have been helped by the thousands of little clothing and food distribution places that give food and clothing to the poor what they think of christians. we are the ones who start these ministries...who run them...and who bring clothes and food and money to keep them going. i believe that they will tell you that they are thankful for christians. well, some people will say it, and some wont. there are some who feel like we owe it to them and are not grateful.
so, tony, i dont know where you live and what you and your church do, but mine gives and gives and gives. my denomination is constantly doing for the poor. my own church has given and given, and given some more to help out.
streak,
just interested, since you are so fired up about this. how much have you given to the poor and needy? how much money and how much time?
and tony, in case you dont know, the sbc has 17 million members and baptised over 400,000 people here in the states, and we baptized more than that in foreign countries. that may not be a lot to you, but its a lot to me.
and,a christians main job is still to preach the gospel to all people, and to teach the Word of God....whether people want to hear it or not. thats what the Lord told us to....He was more concerned about the kingdom that was coming rather than the kingdoms of this world.
by the way, tony, my church has been baptising quite a few. our attendance is growing, and i preach the bible...verse by verse thru books.
God will use His Word.
volfan007
Volfan, what is most interesting is your absolute unwillingness to even consider shortcomings. You are hyper defensive of Southern Baptists even when they are not under attack. Tony leads a SBC church as well, he is not attacking you. I raised some things about Baptists and race (that you ignored) but am not saying that Baptists don't give money and effort to people. No one here is saying they didn't help out in the gulf coast (though that in no way absolves the stance on segregation, btw, and I will be curious if you will ever address that).
Do I give? Yes. Not as much as I would like to, but yes, I do. And I am willing to say that I fall short there. But the issue here is what we value--social justice v. evangelism. Here I differ from Tony and argue that social justice is everything. You have downplayed that.
But why am I wasting my breath here? You have refused over multiple blogs to ever acknowledge a point made by anyone else. You are sure that God agrees with you and that you are right--be it gun control, taxes, abortion, etc. Tony has suggested, and I have agreed, that we might make larger gains as a people dedicated to reducing abortion, and reducing poverty. Your responses are largely self-serving and defensive.
Knock yourself out. But I would like you to respond to the fact that white evangelicals supported segregation (and slavery before that) and have lagged behind on major social justice issues like race, environment, and gender.
volfan,
Please, I am not attacking you. This post is not a personal attack on any individual Christian or church, for that matter. I am sure the church you lead has done and is doing great things. I could give you a whole litany of "firsts" that I have led the church I serve to do.
Nevertheless, my primary concern is not to shore up my own ego nor pat myself on the back, as over multiple comments over multiple blogs I have seen you do. The corporate identity of Southern Baptists is not very promising and it comes down basically to unreasonableness and wrongheaded thinking about social issues like I have talked about. There are some things we do well; there are some things we are woefully inadequate at addressing. The abortion issue and homosexuality are biggies.
If you are unwilling to listen to your brother in Christ and to work with all good, kindhearted people in all walks of life in any good cause to restore some modicum of social order, then you really are no better than the prosyletizer. My point is that if we do not work together to gain some credibility and address these social issues which Southern Baptists have notoriously ignored, there will be no real Southern Baptist presence in America in the next generation.
Since you are such a staunch Southern Baptist, can you tell me from where this quotation comes from?
In order to promote these ends Christians should be ready to work with all men of good will in any good cause, always being careful to act in the spirit of love without compromising their loyalty to Christ and His truth."
Still thinking?
.......
...
Its the Baptist Faith and Message 2000, Article XV.
Oh, and btw, check out this Friday BP article to see just how stupid over these issues we have become.
So, who really cares more about the poor?
tony,
what do you mean?
that bp article was very good and shows what i have been saying all along....that the conservatives have given far more than the liberals who claim to care. it's the conservatives...and i would say that its the conservative christians...who give the most. we do care. we really care about people, because of the love of Jesus.
you will also find it interesting...to back up what this article was saying...that the poorest state in the u.s. is the one that gives the most to charities. that state is the state of ms. i lived there for 7 years while pastoring a church down there. i saw christians giving and giving...sacrificially giving...to help out those in need. and, most of the christians i am talking about were southern baptists.
i have seen the liberals for years talk a good game about being concerned for the poor. then, they will have thier wine and cheese fund raisers, or work at the soup kitchen on thanksgiving, and then not think about those in need anymore. we conservative christians work thru out the year...every year...to do good to those who are in need, and we offer them more than just a hand out. we offer them the Bread of Life.
volfan007
volfan, you really are a jerk, you know that? You refuse to even listen to anyone other than yourself. Why do you engage in blogs like this? You don't listen to anyone.
Amazing how you can bash liberals on a regular basis, yet ignore any real challenges to your belief system. Before you bash liberals any more, perhaps you can acknowledge that it was liberals who forced christian conservatives to relinquish segregation. It wasn't Christian conservatives doing that. They more likely followed Criswell and Falwell and said that segregation was the divine order of things.
That said, I think (and maybe Volfan, you should take notes here--I am about to show conciliation and consider other people's points--something you have never done) there is much to criticize about liberals and how they address poverty issues. Not in the cartoonish way that Volfan just said--after all, there are many liberals who put their money and lives where their mouth is. But I also acknowledge, and have before this, that many conservatives do a lot to help the poor. I am not sure I buy the article completely, in that much of what conservatives give to their churches does not go to the poor.
But I am more than willing to acknowledge that conservative Christians care about the poor. Hear that, Volfan? (you will have to pardon me, I am irritated this morning, especially at people like volfan who seem incapable of dialogue). But there is more than handing out food, and, no, I am not talking about converting them. I am suggesting that there is a disconnect between the libertarian conservative voting policies of people like volfan and their charitable efforts.
Think of it this way, and even as I write it, I realize that this will be wasted on Volfan. But perhaps others will comment.
Say you live along a river and the lands closest to the river are where the poor live. In this example, they struggle to exist on the river's bank and often find themselves in the river. Many people in the community help to pull the poor out of the river, including, and perhaps especially, the conservative church members.
But there are other variables, and one of them is environmental. The river (just bear with the analogy) bank is eroding and making it that much more difficult for the poor to stay out of the river. There are steps the community can take to mitigate the erosion, but those involve (gasp) taxes and (gasp) government. Conservative evangelicals like volfan hate government and taxes and vote that way every year.
So conservative evangelicals are often fishing people out of the river--which is a big thing and not to be dismissed. But in their voting, they are voting against measures to reduce poverty. In other words, they vote one way that creates more poverty, but often, as some jackasses we all know, brag about how many people they have pulled out of the river.
Not sure that makes as much sense as I like. But it is a start. And completely wasted on Volfan, so I am hoping that Tony, JMG, ubub, anglican, bootlegger or cil can make sense of it.
streak,
i will admit that conservative christians dropped the ball on the segregation issue. of course, people have been segregated and segregate themselves all over the world still to this day. birds of a feather flock together and all that sociological stuff. it's just a fact of life.
but, that was 40 years ago. streak, why dont you live in the present instead of bringing up the past? i mean, slavery in the south was what?...140 years ago? good grief, let it go.
i am sure...that if you dug far enough back...that you'd find some of my ancestors were slaves to somebody. but, that's ancient history. let it go. i dont hold any grudges against the yankees for thier carpet bagging thievery of land and money that they did to the south after the war. i dont hold white people in hatred for what they did to my great grandmothers people...the cherokee indians...so long ago.
let it go.
and streak, you can say all that rationalization about why christians help more...ya know, because we live around the poor down here in the poor little ole south....all you want to. it doesnt explain why we conservative christians want to help. i will tell you why we want to help...what motivates us to do...the love of Jesus. thats it. plain and simple.
volfan007
Volfan,
first of all, I am a historian. That is why the past interests me so much. And those who like to say "let it go" usually assume that the issues of the past are only in the past. I do not.
And volfie, I knew that my argument would go over your little head. You ignore anything that might counter your world view.
Streak,
I think your analogy is right on and perfectly illustrates where I am coming from. (Not that you provided that illustration for my benefit.)
volfan,
I think you are a caricature of the real problem.
The issues of the past that Streak brings up and you want to dismiss are valid, and they are one of the obstacles that SB's must overcome.
The point of drawing your attention to that BP article, in which I should have known you wouldn't understand, is that it really goes to show you what Streak and I have been discussing for over a week now. Conservatives don't do everything right. Neither do liberals. But instead of conservatives justifying their actions from a biblical pov, rather they use their "goodwill" as a club to bully liberals. Its playground type behavior to me; "Nyah, nyah, nyah, nyah, we're better than you-ou."
But we can work together on some issues. And we ought to. Did you not even consider the statement from the BFM 2000?
Streak,
I cannot believe you haven't tired of this conversation.
Thanks Tony. That really is my point too. As much as we disagree on certain issues there are so many areas where conservatives and liberals can work side by side.
And I am a little tired of it. but I can't quite help my self. :)
oh well, i try to spread biblical truth and clear headed thinking...but alas, some dont want to hear it. or, maybe they cant see it. i dont know. maybe a little of both for some.
volfan007
ever think it is you who can't see? Does that thought ever cross your mind?
volfan,
I stand by what I have said in this thread. You refuse to address legitimate concerns and ignore valid questions.
I reiterate, you are a caricature of the real problem.
tony,
i stand ready to address legitimate concerns and answer valid questions. in fact, i have tried to answer concerns and questions already. and, i dont call you and streak names, nor do i call yall ignorant and stupid and jerks.
i just try to listen to your view, and then share my view, and i always yield to the Word of God when applicable. He knows all truth.
volfan007
volfan,
I left this comment directed toward you on Streak's post about Eric Foner's take on Bush. I post it again; obviously you missed it at that post. I copy and paste it in its entirety.
volfan,
I am not out to get you. And Streak is right, you and I probably do agree on a lot. I have resorted to no name calling yet throughout two threads, you have put words in my mouth. You won't even listen to the other side and you haven't really listened to me. You cannot hide behind the presumption that you are always right. Jesus alone can claim that.
I am sure you are a fine pastor and preacher. You probably shepherd your people with humility and compassion. I am sure you are an able student of the Bible and you teach with erudition and grace. But the fact remains that you and I both have a lot to learn. There is one thing I would beg of you to learn before engaging in further blog discussions.
Ad hominem argument
We have digressed light years from the original intent of this post. I refuse to clog Streak's blog with further comments regarding these off-post discussions, so if you would like to continue a discussion with me, you are welcome to join me at my blog. You can access my email from there as well.
Blessings.
Tony Sisk
Streak, apologies.
Thanks.
Post a Comment