I would like to pose a question to the forum. When individuals were told to give money in the New Testament it was always for the poor. How much of your Church treasury is spent to help the poor?

-- Anonymous, November 28, 1999

Answers

Nelta.....

My whole salary goes to helping the poor.

Because without it.....I'd be po...po...po!!!

Ha....I crack myself up.

You still haven't explained away the text I gave you under the "Family" post.

-- Anonymous, November 28, 1999

And Nelta......

You are wrong.

In numerous places in the N.T.....the church is told to share all good things with those who teach....those who preach the gospel have the right to make their living by the gospel. Paul commends the Philippian church...and other churches....for financially supporting his ministry......the gospels contain a list of the women who were financially supporting the ministry of Jesus and the disciples.

So money given by Christians was not just for the poor....it was not even largely for the poor. As the book of Acts states ...."it was given to the apostles and they distributed as there was need." Since the apostles were the ones who at times would be "at need".....we can safely assume they asserted their right to be supported by that which was given.

-- Anonymous, November 28, 1999

Someone show me in Scripture where we have an "obligation" to the poor who are outside the church??

All of the N.T. passages I read concern care for those who are "brothers and sisters" in Christ.

Once we head off down the road of the "Social gospel".....we will run out of money.....very soon!

-- Anonymous, November 29, 1999

Good ole Nelta....

Challenge me and say I'm rambling....ask me to support things biblically...and then when I do....you ignore me.

Same ole....same ole.

That is why no one takes you seriously!!

-- Anonymous, November 29, 1999

Mark....

Let me give you a real life example of why I believe what you are saying is not what the Bible has in mind by "helping the poor."

My last ministry was in a very depressed area economically and socially. The area was made of a large population of low to low/middle income blacks.....and whites (about 50/50).

The church, trying its best to survive in that area made two decisions....

1) To hire a black associate to work with the blacks in the community 2) Develop a very aggressive food pantry.

Here is what happened....

1) Our associate was with us three years and you could count the number of black attenders on one hand. He could never get over the stigma in the community of going to "whitie's church."

2) The food pantry became a joke and did little more than encourage people's dependance on welfare and handouts. Word got around town that such and such church was giving out free food...and well....you can imagine what happened.

I knew this wasn't right. Basically....people were still going to hell...but with a full belly.

So we made the decision to only open the food pantry up afer services. People were still welcome to come and get three days worth of food....but.....they had to attend the worship service first.

Guess what??? In the next year....we never gave away a drop of food....and eventually closed the food pantry down.

We actually had a guy come in one night before the evening service. It was only minutes until the service. We invited him to join us and that afterwards we told him we would be glad to meet his need. He walked out. Sorry.....but if I was really hungry....I could sit in church for one hour.

Forty plus years of the welfare and handout system has all but destroyed the work ethic in this country.

You know the "Will Work for Food" signs right?? Try it sometime. We had people come to church....ask for money.....I offered them a couple hours work....guess what??? You guessed it.....they walked away.

I believe our money is better spent supporting our brothers and sisters.....whether it be in "Retirement Homes".....Assisted Care Centers.....Children's Homes.......Adoption Services.....etc. How many of our retire preachers who have given their life to His service find themselves in their retirement years eeking out an existence.

I think we should be more concerned about them....then those who are simply trying to use the church

That way we are doing what the Bible calls us to do...i.e., saving the whole man.

One more thing concerning your reference to the O.T.

There is a big difference between the O.T. help of the poor and the way we do it in 20th Cent. America and the Church.....there were no handouts and checks mailed to your door.

Field edges were left unharvested and the poor were told to go and gather (i.e., "glean") what they needed.

If we simply give handouts in order to salve our conscience and do not address the real issue of self dependance and self reliance....in addition to spiritual matters....we are doing people a dis-service.

It always amazes me the people who call the church...ask for money...and then get upset when you say....we don't do that.

I then say..."Well....won't your homechurch help you??"

"I don't go to church."

"Oh....you don't go to church....but you want the church to be there for you when you are in need. I think I would rethink that if I were you. And by the way....the church is not a charitable organization despite what you have heard."

Now all this being said....I want it understood....that when it comes to brothers and sisters in Christ.....we have an OBLIGATION....it is not a choice....when it comes to helping them in their need.

That's my take on it!

-- Anonymous, November 29, 1999

Mark....

I appreciate your perpective....and your heart....I really do.

But we will never agree on this subject.

Best regards,

-- Anonymous, November 30, 1999

Here is the way I would rather look at it Mark (since we are not talking a serious doctrinal difference here).

You take care of things your way.....I'll take care of things my way.....and together.....differing needs in the body of Christ, and beyond, get met.

Isn't that what really matters??

God's best to you!

-- Anonymous, November 30, 1999

Nelta,

While Danny is right, if not diplomatic, you are attempting to bring up an interesting point. Can I recast it a bit?

We often see that generosity in the scriptures is directed to the poor. While there is mention of other expenditures (as Danny points out), and other examples, most giving references are directed to the poor as receipents. And we see examples of the church handling the adminstration and distribution of those gifts. Despite this, most churches do little, if anything, and sadly, the members are either unaware or simply insulated from the gift. How many members of a congregation can pinpoint a percentage of their gift going to the poor?

A wise leader/teacher I know pointed out something to me once. The scriptures make no reference to a "common pool" of funds nor budgets. At that church, we actually had no budget! (it can be done). Before I moved from the area, we were averaging over 200 members, had two full time vocational ministers, several interns, and a couple of part time staff/ministers, were running a food pantry, clothes closet, helping with emergency aid to neighbors, serving lunch to the poor who came for assistance, and much more. We did have a common pool of funds, that came from the weekly opportunity to give, but some weeks were set for giving to certain causes (like coming up for money to pay the salaries of the youth intern, or college ministry interns). Some of the assitance for the poor came from the general funds, but big ticket, non-emergency (and non-privacy issue) items were funded via "opportunity giving". We funded a Thanksgiving dinner by having collection cans set out on the tables during our 1 year anniversary celebration lunch. School supplies for the poor were done similarly. The food pantry was supported by the distribution of sacks with grocery lists on the side, and occasional mention was made that money was also acceptable, just give it directly to one of two people designated to accept such gifts. There was plans in the work to having collections taken up for the poor during small group meetings. The whole philosophy was that people will be more generous using "cause" giving than giving to a "black box".

As you attempt to point out, Nelta, this kind of giving, especially when the cause is the poor, is very scriptural.

BTW, just to mention it, I really don't know how much my current congregation designates, about two congregations ago it was about 12% with the public goal of raising to 15% coming out of the general pool (direct giving was allowed there). In grad school, I attended a congregation for awhile that earmarked 30% (maybe it was 35?) for the poor and 25% (maybe 30?) to missions.

-- Anonymous, November 29, 1999

Danny,

You are correct that many NT scriptures on the poor refer to our poor brothers (in Christ) or in the church or among the saints. But many NT scriptures mention the poor without mentioning them in or out of the church, and some of them would be quite a stretch to see that it is meant to be the poor in the church only. Paul was instructed by the council to remember the poor, which he was eager to do -- there is no mention of inside or outside of the community of faith (Galatians 2:10). Jesus in Luke 14:12-14 instructs us to invite the poor to our dinners on the ground (ok, literally our luncheons, dinners, and banquets).

WHO IS MY NEIGHBOR? In Jesus' response to "who is my neighbor?", I interpret Jesus to mean that anyone in need is my neighbor. In fact, would the listeners present in Luke 10 consider the Samaritan his brother?

JESUS MODELED CARING FOR THE POOR TO US -- LOVE IS SHOWN IN ACTION, NOT WORDS Look at Luke 7:18-22. At the end, Jesus says, as evidence of who He is, "and the good news is preached to the poor". Clearly, Jesus is implying in that passage that He is the expected messiah by what He does, one of which is preaching to the poor. If we are to take the whole gospel of Luke, and the others if you wish, I see a general outline of Jesus' model for preaching summed up in "they don't care what you know until they know you care". Now, we are commanded to preach the good news, and we see the model of Jesus preaching to the poor. If the poor person I am preaching to is hungry (physically), then he is probably more concerned with am I going to help him or not. If I don't help him, my preaching is probably in vain. If I do help him, it looks like the help was conditional on accepting my teachings. But if I follow the pattern of Jesus, and I help first, then I show that I believe what I teach (I serve a God of love, love one another, etc), and the person is more sincerely receptive.

On a side, anecdotal note, I have known people who have come to accept Jesus after seeing disciples care for the poor. Again, this is a response to the sincere demonstration of love for those in need. See Matthew 25:31-46 for more on love for those in need and its role in salvation.

GOD IS A REFUGE FOR THE POOR Danny, you mention explicitly NT passages for proving it to you. I would like to challenge you in that thinking of looking for proof of everything you do in the NT. While we are under a new covenant, the God of the old covenants and the God of the new is the SAME God. I for one do not believe God underwent a personality transplant, rather that the God of Abraham, Moses, and David is my God too. I understand the major purpose of Jesus coming to this earth as being so I can know God and serve Him. Knowing God is really the theme of the whole Bible (if you disagree, say so), even if I am not subject to the rules and regulations of the old covenant, i.e. the Old Testament. So I would challenge you to look at the God revealed in the Old Testament and see if you don't see a God who is concerned with the poor, and not just the poor among His own people.

Start with these passages (these are only a fraction (<10%) of all OT dealing with the poor!): Leviticus 19:9-10 Job 31:13-22 Proverbs 31:20 Isaiah 1:13-17 Isaiah 58:1-11 Jeremiah 22:15-16 (if you read only one, read this one) Ezekiel 18:1-18 Micah 6:8 Hosea 6:6

CLOSING REMARK I could actually go on and on with this topic, because in fact I am in the process of writing a small group study on the subject and hope to have a complete first draft by the end of December. If anyone is still reading this and would be interested, drop me a note and I will send you that draft. I would love to give this thing some field testing.

-- Anonymous, November 29, 1999

You wrote: "How much of your Church treasury is spent to help the poor?"

First, I am not a full-time, salaried minister. However, I AM a full-time, non-salaried witness.

Interpreting Jesus' proclomation in Luke 4, "The Spirit of the Lord is upon me; because he hath anointed me to preach the gospel to the poor;" I believe Jesus was referring to the spiritually poor, and not just the financially poor. If my interpretation is correct, then any church that is acting as an evangelical body, corporately winning the lost to Christ, then ALL of its resources are going to the poor!!

-- Anonymous, November 29, 1999

Mark,

I didn't read Dan's posts and don't know (nor care) how diplomatic he was. Comments on your posts.

<>

I can't find scripture for this. (Where the *church* handled the adm. and dist. of those gifts. This would make an interesting discussion.)

<>

Throught out the years I have heard many people say when they put their money into the collection plate their responsibility is over, that the elders will be judged by the way it is spent. Something else I can't find in scripture.

How many members of a congregation can pinpoint a percentage of their gift going to the poor?>>

How many care?

-- Anonymous, November 29, 1999

Nelta,

Well, you can get technical and say the *church* didn't handle it, but rather some appointed by God within the church. So, if the, say, apostles did it, then the church didn't?

Acts 5:32-37. We see offerings (the proceeds from sold property) being brought to the apostles, and context suggests they oversaw it be given out.

Acts 6:1-7 The apostles, being overburdened with the oversight of the daily distribution of food to the widows, appoint seven deacons to do the job.

Implied is that someone took the proceeds mentioned in chapter 5 and bought food, else there was also a collection of food.

And there are more. Paul himself took up a benevolent collection among the churches he visited on one missionary journey and then presented to the church in Jerusalem, through representatives (James and the elders I want to say). Did Paul do this on his own, or was Paul acting as a member of the body, i.e. the church? (An acceptable answer is: both).

When I was using the word *church*, I was really simply trying to distinguish between an individual and the community. Certainly, an individual could pick one poor widow and personally see to it that she have daily food, out of that individual's own pocket. But we see the funds being brought to the apostles and first the apostles then the appointed deacons handling the distribution. Thus we see one part of the body exercising gifts of generosity, another part handling adminstration, and there is probably some gifts of mercy mixed in there, too.

-- Anonymous, November 29, 1999

Mark,

I will repost your response and then comment.

<< Well, you can get technical and say the *church* didn't handle it, but rather some appointed by God within the church. So, if the, say, apostles did it, then the church didn't?

First there would have to be a definition for the word *church*. That word does not translate correctly the word ekklesia. You used the word *community* below and that, to me, is the more perfect translation since the people make up the spiritual community whether they are gathered together to encourage one another.

<>

We don't have the apostles today nor did they say anyone would take their place. However, if we had the same thing happening today we should sell our property and then we could appoint someone to see that the needy were taken care of. This could be the older people in the community or the younger...or anyone else...women or men. The N.T. is given to us for principles that we would know how to handle any situtation that arises today.

< Implied is that someone took the proceeds mentioned in chapter 5 and bought food, else there was also a collection of food.>>

I agree!

And there are more. Paul himself took up a benevolent collection among the churches he visited on one missionary journey and then presented to the church in Jerusalem,>>

1 Cor. 16:1-2 says the individuals were to keep (by themselves) what they gathered for the poor saints in Jerusalem. This was not a *church* affair as we view *church* today. This was simply individuals doing the good works God demands they do. There is no indication these people went to church nor did they put this money in a church treasury.

through representatives (James and the elders I want to say). Did Paul do this on his own, or was Paul acting as a member of the body, i.e. the church? >>

These people had asked Paul how to handle the collecting for the poor saints. He told them how to do it. He was acting as Paul, the apostle. He was indeed a member of the univseral body of Christ as we all are.

(An acceptable answer is: both).

When I was using the word *church*, I was really simply trying to distinguish between an individual and the community.>>

All commands in the N.T. are given to individuals. When we think of the community it is simply the individuals going about their daily lives doing the good works. When they gather together they don't become something different. They are individuals who come together for encouragement and edification as they interact together.

Certainly, an individual could pick one poor widow and personally see to it that she have daily food, out of that individual's own pocket. But we see the funds being brought to the apostles and first the apostles then the appointed deacons handling the distribution. Thus we see one part of the body exercising gifts of generosity, another part handling adminstration, and there is probably some gifts of mercy mixed in there, too. >>

Good thought!

-- Anonymous, November 29, 1999

Nelta,

Thanks for the compliment

...

Danny,

It's interesting balancing how the Bible helps us interpret experiences and allowing God to use experiences to help us interpret the Bible. It's something I struggle with.

Before I go into two direct experiences of mine and an indirect one followed by a little interpretation, let me say upfront that I agree with you that our primary focus to the poor should not be handouts. Up to 10 months ago, I handled interviews for newer church (two years old) of those coming in for assistance (handouts). In that, I always tried to dig deeper to find out root causes that we could help with, either to the individual or some community action (like petitioning for new bus routes, etc.). One case I remember the situation was created by alcholism (sp?) but digging even deeper we found out that he took to drink because he was still mourning the loss of his first wife, who died 35 years ago (he had four wives total, divorcing the last three). Another case was a women who left her husband due to abuse; we helped, and she actually put on Christ in baptism the next Sunday (yep, we still saw her, it wasn't insincere). Our use of handouts was quite honestly usually a cover to get them in so we could uncover deeper needs and address them individually or collectively. One collective solution, for example, was the start of planning to field youth sports teams to give the young people in the neighbor both something more constructive to do and to provide positive male role models.

Furthermore, yes, I know most the people with those signs "will work for food" are usually insincere. But that doesn't excuse me from helping the poor, both in and out of the church.

Now, for those experiences, all churches mentioned are in the Dallas Texas area and three are churches of Christ (acapella) because that is where I attended up until 2 years ago 1) Highland Oaks church of Christ was dedicating 12% or so of the budget to outreach to the poor in the form of physical assistance, with the goal of raising that up to 15% over time. HOCC is in a poor neighborhood, and helps those in the three zip codes nearest by. I was a volunteer with the emergency assistance program and on the benevolent committee my last year there. Pretty much few from the neighborhood attended HO, but HO was a mostly "whitie" church, with an all white staff (12 ministers, 4 support); probably 70% white membership, 18% Hispanic, the rest black; of 12 elders, one hispanic, the rest white. Occasionally those we assisted visited, but except for one major exception, few joined. The exception was notable. You see, the congregation mostly commuted to church from well-to-do neighborhoods, so we had some fancy suit types and power players. The presidents of two universities, the former president of the University of Oklahoma, the guy who right "you deserve a break today" and tons more power players. Do you think the poor felt comfortable here? But we did have a special deaf service, a separate service, that excelled in reaching deaf Hispanics. That ministry and service made them feel welcome, and they didn't see the fancy suits, they saw people like themselves. That ministry baptized people like there was no tomorrow, and the benevolence ministry assisted big time in that work.

2) Northeast Church (restoration church, not coC though). I ran the assistance program there, or more accurately, I equipped others to do so and did the interviewing for assistance. Lots of visitors came whose first contact was one of our ministry to the poor efforts. Some even came back. I think a key there was our insistence to the members to dress down, so that no one could identify who had money and who didn't. Our membership varied from day labourers to lawyers and doctors and PhDs (ok, one PhD, though there was a Vet Science doctorate holder too), even at least one millionare. Those we could get to visit who we served in the poor ministries usually came back more than once, and some became christians or joined.

Moreover, a lot of visitors who were invited commented positively on our emphasis of service to the poor. Usually we were gearing up or coming off a big project (Habitat for Humanity day, school supplies for poor children, etc) and every week there was reminders about the sacks to be filled on the information tables (sacks with shopping lists for the food pantry/clothes closet). Incredibly, when I got new volunteers who wanted to help, they were usually just attending and later I hear they got committed to Christ through baptism -- after I had been putting them to work for some time! The opportunity to help and demonstration that we cared was actually more of an evangelistic outreach than the actual help itself.

3) One of the fastest growing churches, regardless of denomination, in Dallas is (or at least was) Central Dallas church of Christ. CD was planted in downtown Dallas alongside/as a part of Central Dallas Ministries. Those who started CDM were concerned with the spiritual side too, so CDcoC was begun at the same time CDM got permanent HQ. CDM does utilize some handouts, but most of its volunteers in the food pantry, clothes closet, the Xmas store, interviewing those for emergency assistance, etc. are in fact at least occasionally clients as well. CDM has seeded businesses, provided job training and job skills (interviewing, etc) training, tutored for GDEs, etc. As appropriate, they proach the spiritual side as well, and the result is CDcoC blossoms.

So helping the poor can feed evangelism. But I must say it is a mistake to help the poor with the purpose of evangelism. Much of what we did at Northeast, in fact, was not to help the poor because of what it might harvest evangelistically, in fact, we stated from the outset that as long as we treating the people we helped as neighbors and not clients, as long as we didn't become an "agency" and not a church, we didnt' care if we never reaped a soul among those we helped. We helped because we loved. We helped so we could teach others to love. We helped because our goal was to make and mature disciples, and to mature them we needed to teach them to love and serve like Christ did. I was under constant pressure to do more in order to create more opportunities for volunteers.

Jesus never said that He helped in order to win others to Him. He helped because He loved. Certainly Jesus modeled for us meeting felt needs before meeting spiritual needs, caring before sharing the good news in order to create receiptive ears, but no where does it show us He did this primarily to win them to Him -- no, He did it because He loved.

Love your neighbor -- Jesus' illustration of the good Samaritan shows that this wasn't just my brother in Christ, this is all I come across in need. The responsibility is first individually, but my experiences show me that to teach others, to demonstrate to others how to do this, we often need to work collectively, as a community. We just need to make sure individuals don't shift the whole responsibility to the church in the process.

-- Anonymous, November 30, 1999

Never say never ;-)

One thing I find great about God is His ability to teach us through experiences and our perservance of study. As John 6:45 says "They will all be taught by God" -- He is the great teacher.

Where as I may never agree with your current understanding, and you may not with my current understanding, maybe one day we will agree with one another after God has taught both of us more.

But, for today, we disagree. I see no loss in that -- a community where everyone agrees is probably one where everyone has stopped growing.

Peace, Mark

-- Anonymous, November 30, 1999

When Christ comes, we will all agree,because He will settle all things.

-- Anonymous, December 16, 1999