When People On Street Corners Ask You "For A Dollar or Two"...

[latterrain77]

Originally posted by crazycat:
One sunday morning right after church we had a hispanic man with broken English ask the Pastor for money for food, he stated he was hungy. the Pastor said he would give him some work to do around the church for food, The man claimed "no hablo english" then. He could ask for money for food in english, but did not undrstand working for food! The pastor then told the young man to come back to chrch tonight and he would have some food for him. the young man said "No hablo English" When the Pastor refused to budge on his offer, the man cursed in clear english at the pastor and rode away on his bicycle.

II Thessalonians 3:10 that if any would not work, neither should he eat. Is pretty clear on what God thinks of this issue.

Hi crazycat. I think your pastor is the one who needs a re-check of his soul rather than the so-called “bum.” It is arrogant and obnoxious to require a man asking for food, to “work” for it. Did Jesus require those that he fed to “work” for the food that he fed them? (Matt. 15: 32). NO!

1 Tim. 3 is the standard that MUST be met by all pastors. HOSPITALITY is one of those requirements. Your pastor FAILS the 1 Tim. 3 test.

1 John 3: 17 “But whoso hath this world's good, and seeth his brother have need, and shutteth up his bowels of compassion from him, how dwelleth the love of God in him?”

Anyone who refuses another’s request for food, does NOT have the “love of GOD in him”, as described in 1 John 3: 17. It is NOT a “conservative” or “liberal” issue to give a man food when he asks for it. Only the utterly cold hearted, or those INTENT on violating the clear teaching of the Bible, would turn a man’s request for food down, or place conditions upon it.

That so-called “bum” had every right to cuss your pastor to his face (2 Samuel 16: 11-13). Maybe this is a “wake up” call to your pastor?

Your quote of 2 Thess. 3: 10 does not apply at all to this situation, and in any event would need to be measured against ALL scripture to draw a reasonable conclusion. Are you suggesting that “retirees” should not eat? They don’t work! How about a man or woman who is ill? Should they not eat because they are not working? What about those folks who WANT to work, but can’t find any work? Should they not eat too? How about those folks who refuse to do $50 worth of labor for a $1 dollar loaf of bread? How do you feel about “sweat shops?”

Matt. 10: 42 “And whosoever shall give to drink unto one of these little ones a cup of cold water only in the name of a disciple, verily I say unto you, he shall in no wise lose his reward.”

Crazycat, you can either follow the lead of your priest/pastor or, you can follow the way of the Bible. I choose to follow the Bible.

latterrain77

 

[peaches-ohio]

I love the mc donalds gift certificate idea. Incidentally a lot of seniors need our help, especially at the end of the month before their checks come. At the senior center where I volunteered we served luch for a very small fee. (change). Some were so poor and ashamed that when we opened their envelope it had a few old buttons inside. We only took payment because many seniors will not accept a "free" lunch. Please remember our seniors you will not find them begging, but they are in great need, many have to choose between food or medicine. Any donations, food, money, or clothes are accepted at senoir centers.

 

[stubbornkelly]

It only takes seconds to qualify if they are truely in need.

WHat is it that qualifies them? What's the proof you're asking for here? You've mentioned the "qualify" thing before, and maybe I'm being obtuse, but I don't know what you mean.

Is it asking them if they'll do work for food? I think latterrain made an excellent point about that. Is it that they take a tract? What is it that qualifies if they are truly in need?

 

[Justified]

Originally posted by latterrain77:
II Thessalonians 3:10 that if any would not work, neither should he eat. Is pretty clear on what God thinks of this issue.[/qb]

Hi crazycat. I think your pastor is the one who needs a re-check of his soul rather than the so-called “bum.” It is arrogant and obnoxious to require a man asking for food, to “work” for it. Did Jesus require those that he fed to “work” for the food that he fed them? (Matt. 15: 32). NO!

That so-called “bum” had every right to cuss your pastor to his face (2 Samuel 16: 11-13). Maybe this is a “wake up” call to your pastor?

Crazycat, you can either follow the lead of your priest/pastor or, you can follow the way of the Bible. I choose to follow the Bible

Latter,

As usual, you amaze me with your hermeneutical interperatation of Scripture. I could use it as an example to teach my children how not to study the Bible.

1) Crazycat said that this bum asked for money, not food.

2) Based on the fact that you mis-interperated what actually transpired, you told Crazycat that her Pastor needed to recheck his soul. How or what gives you the right to attack the Lord's Annointed in such manner? And especially a Pastor you don't even know.

3) I also have to question you even being on this Baptist Board in the first place. By some of your posts in the past, and now this one, you have made some fatal remarks, that bring me to this conclusion. Your profile is very vague and thus we can't get a good scenerio of who you really are. Could you actually be a TROLL in sheeps clothing?

4) And the bum cussing out the Pastor, proved the Pastors suspicions and wisdom on this matter.
This guy was a proffessional bum.

5) As for Crazycat following the Pastor or the Bible, again, uncalled for remarks. As long as the Pastor is following the Bible, then we follow the Bible by following the Pastor.

"It is always better to stand up for conservatism, then to fall into liberalism" Justified Version

[ August 15, 2002, 12:02 PM: Message edited by: Justified ]

 

[Mike McK]

Originally posted by crazycat:
One sunday morning right after church we had a hispanic man with broken English ask the Pastor for money for food, he stated he was hungy. the Pastor said he would give him some work to do around the church for food, The man claimed "no hablo english" then. He could ask for money for food in english, but did not undrstand working for food! The pastor then told the young man to come back to chrch tonight and he would have some food for him. the young man said "No hablo English" When the Pastor refused to budge on his offer, the man cursed in clear english at the pastor and rode away on his bicycle.

II Thessalonians 3:10 that if any would not work, neither should he eat. Is pretty clear on what God thinks of this issue.

We had sort of a similar situation in our church.

To supplement his income from the church, Our pastor contracted out to run a farm in Medford, N.J. (sort of like sharecropping, I guess).

Being a charitable guy, he decided to help the "will work for food" guys a hand. He told them that they would be paid, fed, an opportunity to shower, a place to stay if they wanted to work for more than one day (a litle efficiency apartment in back of one of the stables - I stayed there when my house burned down. It was a pretty nice place) and, if they needed it, he would take them to the church's thrift store and help them out with clothes. All in all, a pretty sweet deal.

Not one of them took him up on it. They just wanted the money.

I like the McDonalds idea. That's usually what I do. Either that or I'll buy them something from one of the hot dog carts we have on every corner here.

[ August 15, 2002, 12:35 PM: Message edited by: Smoke_Eater ]

 

[latterrain77]

Hi justified. Thank you for your comments. Crazycat said the hungry man asked money for FOOD. He did not ask for money to buy anything else. Furthermore, the pastor did NOT offer to give the man FOOD either! (Matt. 25: 41-42). Note the word "GAVE" in these verses.

You repeatedly refer to suffering men, down on their luck, as “bums,” and this is simply not Christian like justified. You seem to have a deep rooted angst for these types of suffering people. Why? By calling this man (or any man) a “bum” you are blatantly violating Matt. 5: 22 (and other verses too).

You have said much in your last post – but NOT one word on the Biblical verses that I presented to support my argument (and my argument was NON-exhaustive). Why have you not commented on ANY of the Biblical verses that I presented to you? (or the ones that I put to you on this same subject in an earlier post!). Is it because you CANNOT respond to them Biblically justified? Cmon! Give it a try! Yes, I know it takes WORK to do it. But you are a BIG believer in the “work” ethic - so it should not be a hardship for you to at least try?

Please start by providing your interpretation of 1 John 3: 17 “But whoso hath this world's good, and seeth his brother have need, and shutteth up his bowels of compassion from him, how dwelleth the love of God in him?”

Then, please provide your commentary on Matt. 25: 34-46, paying particular attention to verses 40-46 (you will need to get out your Bible to read these verses, as it is too long to post all the verses here).

I’m sorry justified, I do not know what a “troll” is.

I will reserve my comments, to your other statements, until AFTER you have responded to the above. Thank you again for your thoughts justified. It is much appreciated.

latterrain77

 

[Bro. Curtis]

I give when I can, and don't when I can't. I'm not rich, I'm raising a kid, and tithing to a church. I like the idea of carrying around the non-perishables and attatching a good Gospel tract. That is what I think I will do.

Thanx for the great tip!!!

 

[onevoice]

I am sorry, but qualifying a person is harder than it looks. I deal with these individuals daily and at times it takes hours of deep investigation to determine if they are telling the truth or not. . . even with my experience I have found that have been "had" a few times. Tell them about Jesus and help them find the help they need. By paying your taxes you are helping these people. Help is available if they are honest. If NOT, they will be prosecuted in placed in jail where they can't scam anymore.

 

[Justified]

Originally posted by latterrain77:
Hi justified. Thank you for your comments.

(ITEM 1) Crazycat said the hungry man asked money for FOOD. He did not ask for money to buy anything else. Furthermore, the pastor did NOT offer to give the man FOOD either! (Matt. 25: 41-42). Note the word "GAVE" in these verses.

(ITEM 2) You repeatedly refer to suffering men, down on their luck, as “bums,” and this is simply not Christian like justified. You seem to have a deep rooted angst for these types of suffering people. Why? By calling this man (or any man) a “bum” you are blatantly violating Matt. 5: 22 (and other verses too).

(ITEM 3) You have said much in your last post – but NOT one word on the Biblical verses that I presented to support my argument (and my argument was NON-exhaustive). Why have you not commented on ANY of the Biblical verses that I presented to you? (or the ones that I put to you on this same subject in an earlier post!). Is it because you CANNOT respond to them Biblically justified? Cmon! Give it a try! Yes, I know it takes WORK to do it. But you are a BIG believer in the “work” ethic - so it should not be a hardship for you to at least try?

(ITEM 4) Please start by providing your interpretation of 1 John 3: 17 “But whoso hath this world's good, and seeth his brother have need, and shutteth up his bowels of compassion from him, how dwelleth the love of God in him?”

(ITEM 5) Then, please provide your commentary on Matt. 25: 34-46, paying particular attention to verses 40-46 (you will need to get out your Bible to read these verses, as it is too long to post all the verses here).

(ITEM 6) I’m sorry justified, I do not know what a “troll” is.

(ITEM 7) I will reserve my comments, to your other statements, until AFTER you have responded to the above. Thank you again for your thoughts justified. It is much appreciated.

ITEM 1: Yes, the man/bum asked for money. He did not ask for food. He did indicate that he would use it for food. The Pastor did his job as a leader of the flock and qualified the man's/bum's request.

If the man/bum was sincere, he would have taken the Pastor's offer and he would have had the money for whatever he wanted! Not only that, but I would be willing to say that the man/bum would have had not only the money, but also the Pastor would have given him something to eat while he was there, and also had the opportunity to hear the Gospel of Jesus Christ.

Thus, the Pastor was fulfilling Scripture.

These verses describe about the sluggard/ slothful/infidel, which in today’s language would be bum/ mooch/ leach/ beggars or any other numerous names that are fitting.
Pr 6:6-11; 10:3-5; 12::24,27; 15:19; 13:4-9; 18:9; 19:3,15,24; 20:4,5; 21:25,26; 22:13; 24:20-34; 26:13-16; Mt 25:24-30; IICo 6:15; IITh 3:9-15; ITi 5:8.

Along with these verses about these people are verses to help the truly in need. So, now do we have a paradox or contradicting Scripture as to these two different types of peoples?

NO! God is letting us know, that we need to determine the difference between the needy and the sluggard.

The first set that you bring up talks about the needy whether it be of reasons of health, physical, mental handicaps, or a victims of circumstances beyond their control. YES! Help these people the way the Lord lays upon our hearts.

The second set of people, fit the other set of Scriptures, and thus should not be helped, thus being a good steward of the Lord's provisions.

ITEM 2: Again, you take out of context Scripture and what I have said and JUDGE what you know not! I have answered your remarks in other posts in this thread and now in this post. I have said, that if the person is truly in need, help these people. The bums, beggars, moochers, leaches, lowlifes, etc..., deserve what they got. God's judgment on the fruit of their lives, and who are we that meddleth with this judgment. And this does not translate into anger, because I call sin, SIN! And therefore, I am not in violation of Scripture. You are! Now, go to Mt 7:20. I know that this section of Scripture talks about false teachers, but the principle is still there!

ITEM 3: As for not giving Scriptures verses. I will make references to the particular Scripture I’m talking about. And if some one wants to know exactly which ones I’m talking about, all they have to do is ask, and I will be more then happy to comply.

ITEM 4: This is a very simple verse to interpret. It is talking about brothers/sisters in the Lord, that are in need, and that we are to help them, even before they ask for help. No problem here! How about you?

ITEM 5: I don’t know why you want my interpretation on this section of Scripture, for it has nothing to do with this thread or subject. This is the “Olivet Discourse” and is about the “Second Coming of Christ”.

ITEM 6: Troll is some one who is different from what they appear, on any message boards.

ITEM 7: Can’t wait for more! And, Thank You!

"It is always better to stand up for conservatism, then to fall into liberalism" Justified Version

 

[latterrain77]

Hi again justified. Thank you for your replies. Please allow me to apologize in advance for this rather long post.

You say, about 1 John 3: 17, and I quote; “This is a very simple verse to interpret. It is talking about brothers/sisters in the Lord, that are in need, and that we are to help them, even before they ask for help. No problem here! How about you?

Unfortunately justified, it’s not “very simple” at all. In fact, you are flatly wrong! 1 John 3: 17 says NOTHING about “brothers/sisters in the LORD.” You have added words, and limited substance, to the verse. Read it again! Furthermore, you and I (and everyone else) cannot possibly know who are GOD’s Elect, and who are not. Even the Apostles did not know who was (or was not) saved among themselves (Matt. 26: 20-22). None of them had any idea that Judas (who was ONE of them) was unsaved. They had no clue at all. They were unsure about each other’s – and even their own salvation too! If the Apostles did not know who was saved, and who was not. How can you or anyone else know? We can’t.

Galatians 6: 10 “As we have therefore opportunity, let us do good unto all men, especially unto them who are of the household of faith.” We are to pay particular attention to those who are Christians – but NOT exclusively, nor at the expense of those who are NOT Christians, as you have suggested. This verse plainly denies what you have claimed.

1 Thessalonians 3: 12 “And the Lord make you to increase and abound in love one toward another, and toward all men, even as we do toward you..” We are to abundantly love ALL men – not ONLY Christians. Obviously, calling them “nasty names” is hardly abounding in love. Wouldn’t you agree? Furthermore, according to this verse, we are to love ALL men, even as the Apostles loved other believers in the church!

1 Thessalonians 5: 14 “Now we exhort you, brethren, warn them that are unruly, comfort the feebleminded, support the weak, be patient toward all men.” We are to be PATIENT toward all men! We are to SUPPORT the weak. This includes the “weak of mind” and weak of body folk too. “All men” means exactly what is says – ALL men (which of course, includes even those whom you believe are “bums”).

1 Thessalonians 5: 15 “See that none render evil for evil unto any man; but ever follow that which is good, both among yourselves, and to all men.” Here again, the truth – ALL men. It is NOT merely towards Christians alone, but to ALL men.

1 Timothy 2: 1 “I exhort therefore, that, first of all, supplications, prayers, intercessions, and giving of thanks, be made for all men;” Again we see ALL men, not merely Christians.

2 Timothy 2: 24 “And the servant of the Lord must not strive; but be gentle unto all men, apt to teach, patient,” We are to be gentle towards ALL men. We must not strive against them, and we are called upon to be patient towards ALL men. Even to those that you refer to as “bums.” ALL men justified.

Titus 3: 2 “To speak evil of no man, to be no brawlers, but gentle, shewing all meekness unto all men.” Speak evil of NO MAN justified! We are to show MEEKNESS to all men. Can it be any plainer than this? Can you still call them “bums?” Would you still deny them a token gift if they ask, even in the face of these verses?

Matt. 18: 21-22 “Then came Peter to him, and said, Lord, how oft shall my brother sin against me, and I forgive him? till seven times? Jesus saith unto him, I say not unto thee, Until seven times: but, Until seventy times seven.”

Does the word “brother” in these verses ONLY apply to Christians? Or, does it apply to ALL men? Are we required to ONLY forgive Christians who sin against us? Or, are we required to forgive ALL men who sin against us? ALL men – of course! Otherwise, Jesus would not have “forgiven” those unsaved men who set him up for crucifixion? (Luke 23: 34). These same unsaved men did not even WANT the Lord’s forgiveness! They received it anyway.

Regarding "sluggards," 1 John 3: 17 and the Matt. 25 verses places NO limitations on whom may partake of such giving (neither do any of the verses provided above). Even sluggards may apply! ALL men!

By definition, a “gift” is no longer a “gift” if one has to “work” for it. Matt. 25: 34-46 is PLAIN. We are to GIVE (which means gift). To require labor for a gift violates this truth, making a “gift” NO GIFT at all.

As for myself, I will continue to GIVE to such men, as best I can, when they ask. I have no way of knowing which of them is a “fake” and which is not. Nor do I care. That is not my business. That is between them and GOD. You can continue to call them “bums” or anything else that you like. That is between you and GOD.

Lastly, thank you for describing the word “troll.” I’m not one, as per your description of the word. This is because I’m exactly as I show myself to be. Therefore, I do not fit the word as you have described it.

Thank you again justified. I appreciate your taking the time to and effort to engage with me on this topic. All the best.

latterrain77