I think when it comes to our understanding about 'the poor' we are continually missing the point. This was inspired after having a great dialogue with Jeremy Postal and the young adult gang at Classic Rythms a few months ago. We were dialoging on Kingdom language.
In talking about the poor we automatically assume we are talking about a certain class of people. As soon as we envision “poor people” we would most likely have a neighbourhood in mind which would be classified as poor.
Or maybe we have a person in mind, or a street corner where a lot of homeless people seem to hang out. The first thing we should all notice is that whenever we think of poor we think of lack of money. We think of bad housing, crappy jobs, kids with old clothing, sleeping on cement and welfare; all benefactors of not having enough money.
What if the poor that the Bible speaks of isn’t a money thing?
It’s difficult for us to separate the term money from the term poor because money is easy. It’s easy to look at someone and know they are poor. It’s also easy (so we think) to fix them, we just throw money at them.
If we stopped using money as our judgement system I think we would have a lot different of a definition of what poor was around us. Just because someone has lots of money, doesn’t mean they are not poor, it doesn’t mean that they aren’t in need.
Just because someone has no money, and may live in conditions we wouldn’t wish for our pets doesn’t mean that they are poor and want our money. If we could actually train ourselves to not think in terms of poor and rich but in terms of Christ’s value upon them I think we would start to see progress.
The kingdom seems to be about abolishing our cast systems, and that doesn’t happen by constantly pointing at a group of people and saying that they are poor and that you (being rich) are there to help them.
This is probably why Christ told the rich to get rid of everything and give it to the poor and in the same lifetime commended the poor widow for getting rid of everything also.
Jesus took money out of the equation. Money does not matter to God... it is not a factor of value. If you have lots thats ok... if you have little thats ok too. So stop trying to fuss about those that have and those that don't. Sometimes I want to stand up and say ...Just Stop it!!! Our theology of economics is way out of wack!!!
After the poor widow gave her two pennies and if the rich young ruler ever sold all his stuff, they would be equal, the would be where Christ wanted them, unable to achieve status through which we are inclined to try to, through money.
What if in the kingdom, poor wasn’t about money at all?
What if in the kingdom money wasn’t our currency for goods, love, power and security but it was something else?
Jesus ministry didn’t just consist of the poor, it also consisted of the rich, money swindling tax collectors also. Obviously Jesus saw some sort of ‘poor’ characteristic in these rich tax collectors. Maybe our definition of poor needs to change.
But what would it even change to?
33 comments:
Poor, to me, seems to have the vision of not some guy on a street with nothing. To be honest, I don't consider that poor... or atleast not in every case. Reason being it was because of poor life choices that landed those people in the situations they are currently in. It's the consequences of thier choices. I will love them, but I don't necessarily take pitty on them.
I consider the single mom who gives her kids the last bit of food in the house and goes hungry for days on end until the next welfare or pay cheque come in, poor.
I also consider those who lack any hope for anything more poor.
I'm not uplifting any religions here, but I would consider someone who is either a true muslim, sihk, or anyone who earnestly follows some ideal and lives it out to the full far richer than someone who believes that they have no purpose and the end result of their life is nothing but rotting in the ground. The peoples with their religion may be wrong, but because they have something they strive for, they seem to be in far better condition.
When my dad went to see his doctor about his cancer, the doctor asked my dad if he was spiritual in anyway. Like, if he had a faith that was pushing him forward or something to that extend. And my dad told him, and praised God for the results that have been taking place with him. The doctor noted to my dad that people who see him (the doctor) who have a religion often do far better when they are healing, or whatever, than those who do not because they lack the hope that a religion gives (however dark, twisted, or even glorious it may be or seem). The point that I'm trying to get at is that hope seems to make you rich. Faith seems to make you rich. When you believe and earnestly seek The Lord, something miraculous happens. THe doctor, at the end of his conversation with my dad closed with something like this, "It's truely amazing how people heal better, and faster because they believe. It drives them to try a little harder. But, I've noticed that Christians seem to do a lot better than any other relious groups. I wonder why?" So my dad left him with some questions for the doctor to think about (the doctor was also a Christian I later found out) but it just amazed him and reconfirmed faith.
Maybe hope, and faith have something to do with the rich and the poor?
I think this is our poverty:
In his book "Why Revival Tarries", Leonard Ravenhill cries out for reality in this critical area: "No man is greater than his prayer life. The pastor who is not praying is playing; the people who are not praying are straying. The pulpit can be a shopwindow to display one's talents; the prayer closet allows no showing off. "Poverty-stricken as the Church is today in many things, she is most stricken here, in the place of prayer. We have many organizers, but few agonizers; many players and payers, few prayers; many singers, few clingers; lots of pastors, few wrestlers; many fears, few tears; much fashion, little passion; many interferers, few intercessors; many writers, but few fighters. Failing here, we fail everywhere. "We...mistake action for unction, commotion for creation, and rattles for revivals."
mark,
i do not believe we can take the money equation out of what poor is or is not! yes you are correct in saying that "poor" is far beyond what we sometimes grasp, and yes the richest man in the world can also be poor.
and not wanting to get into a heavy debate about what JAmes talked about in his letter, here is some basics.
we as a church need to look after who? the widows the aliens the orphans? why? because they can not (in the time the Bible was written) look after themselves ........do we extend this to include the spiritually poor? YEs...but and this is where we stray a bit, we must always focus on those that Christ instructed us to look after.
An alien...as in foreigner? Hmmm...I know some pretty rich aliens and yet we are still instructed to take care of them? If this is the case then we probably should take money out of the equation.
Anon
"we must always focus on those that Christ instructed us to look after."
Apparently Jesus must not have listened to his own instruction then? How many of his closest disciples [keep in mind there was more than 12] would fit into any of these categories?
There are many types of poverty. There are many forms of being rich. You can be sure, though, that having money in this life is in itself a test, a much greater test than poverty..
so do you think that James, Christ, peter, etc were just using euphemisms when they were discussing the poor? as far as looking after "aliens" and the some being rich, let us try not to mix what i said with how you wish to take it. the point i made is simply that when this was written aliens were not allowed to earn a living in certain places! that is why the church was told to look after them. same with widows and orphans........
e.d. so then is the Bible incorrect or was the teaching of James incorrect in saying take care of the widows and aliens. and was it incorrect or just a simple play on words when he described the rich who were bieng given preferential treatment? or was it a play on words when Christ told us/instructed us to look after those individuals who can not look afetr themselves?
as far as the twelve- or the many, take the entire situation into context, lets focus on the fact that as these individuals were called by Christ he told them to turn from what they had to follow him......and did they do without? were they not fed? were they not welcomed by strangers, by the church? did paul not carry on as a tent maker?
taking "money" out of the equation is a nice easy answer for those that have money. lets look at the rich young ruler...what did Christ tell him? ahhhh, yeah, sure live by obeying all the laws, but dude you are hanging onto one thing that is stopping you, it is consuming u, it is an idol.....what did he tell him to do with the money, ummmm, jeez, give it to the poor! the fact is we can no more take money out of the equation than we can take the cross out of the equation. we can not "fit" the message to fit what we want it to mean to us!
"If we could actually train ourselves to not think in terms of poor and rich but in terms of Christ’s value upon them I think we would start to see progress."
Progress in what?
anonymous ... you posted the same thing three times... we have eliminated the other two.
Anon...Money is not a part of Gods Value system ... Jesus told the rich man to give up everything so that the man could understand that his money does not make him valuable... the issue that Jesus was getting at was not the money ... it was something deeper.
Jer -
Progress = Valuing humanity by the fact that they are human not by their class or cast. That is the reflection of Jesus... loving humanity in whatever state [rich or poor, sick or healthy]... is that not the progress we need to see?
IMHO I think that we forget to simply acknowledge people for who they are and not what their status is. That is where we miss Jesus' heart.
A friend of mine asked me one day... 'Do you feel you have a ministry to the rich?' I responded by laughing and saying 'My ministry is whoever I am with at that moment' No titles, no names, just valuing the person I am with at that moment.
Annon asks,
"e.d. so then is the Bible incorrect or was the teaching of James incorrect in saying take care of the widows and aliens. and was it incorrect or just a simple play on words when he described the rich who were bieng given preferential treatment? or was it a play on words when Christ told us/instructed us to look after those individuals who can not look afetr themselves? "
No. Not at all; I just think that you are not allowing yourself to see a much larger picture then simply those who lack money.
I don't suppose that you believe that there is anyone at all who can, as you say, "take care of themselves." Maybe the Bible was incorrect about grace? Maybe kingdom language and kingdom living has a lot more to do with extending the spiritual depth and richness of the kingdom to anyone in poverty; the financial lacking, the emotional bankrupt, the relational degenerate, the alien, the window, the orphan, the millionaire, the whoever can not care for themselves....?
Maybe.
There is a larger story going on here that spans through the ages and includes absolutely everyone.
Anon - I would suggest that we revisit the meaning of all the terms ... Poor, Widow, orphan etc.
I don't think in any way the scripture is wrong... but maybe the lense in which we have interpreted those scriputres is misguided.
perhaps you guys are missing my point! i am not saying that it is either or! i am trying to say that we need to look after those in need.
picture this: as we feed, clothe, reachout to those in need, far beyond what we are doing as a church now, i mean we really live the life Christ instructed us to live, do you believe that as you do that the spiritually wounded would not naturally gravitate towards you? I guarantee you they would.
If we look after the pooor, the rich, the spiritually damaged, all people will come, because God will be there, working there as we sacrifice and serve others.
yes i get it that there is more than one side to this coin, but if we as the body of Christ reachout to those in need, will we not see Spiritual Revival.
PS sorry about the three posts my comp was acting up
Anon... [on a side note... it would be wonderful to know who you are]
A couple thoughts...
I think we must be missig youe point...
What I am trying to say ...money is not the issue and it must be taken out of the picture... it is our purpose to reach out to all in need... now even those in need have that mandate. So no one...that is a living breathing human... is removed from that mandate...regardless of their status.
Secondly, this might be another post... revival in itself is a subjective word and hardly scriptural and in IMHO not a needed thing.
Stop praying for revival and just be Jesus in the real world.
"picture this: as we feed, clothe, reachout to those in need, far beyond what we are doing as a church now, i mean we really live the life Christ instructed us to live, do you believe that as you do that the spiritually wounded would not naturally gravitate towards you? I guarantee you they would.
If we look after the pooor, the rich, the spiritually damaged, all people will come, because God will be there, working there as we sacrifice and serve others."
I'm not so sure about that. I know of quite a few orgranizations that do this everyday, way better then any church does and the only results they see are more and more physical needs showing up.
I don't think that our actions alone can force the hand of God. I think that "looking after the poor" is a lot more then addressing physical needs, but then again perhaps sometimes all we need to do is give someone some spare change and trust that God knows the situation better then we do. Then again, I just classified "the poor" as a beggar.
Perhaps we all need to be open to see things in different ways. Maybe some parts of the Bible are wrong. Maybe James, Christ, peter, etc were just using euphemisms.
Maybe there is a whole lot more to Jesus and God then what can be contained in one book.
(Sorry for taking that a bit off topic Mark)
yes there are lots of groups/organizations that do the basics..soem based on God others not. look at those that are.ie salvation army, how is that not a success? how can you say it is not reaching all people, i know of several rich xians that go to and support SA churches because they reach out to the desperate
and no kidding that that Jesus and Christ are more than what the bible reveals.........
but the Bible is what we have, besides personel revelation, and i am tired of teh God gave me special glasses crowd.
the trend is we want to be culturally signifigant, not be teh stale old church of yesteryear, fair enough, yet the basic needs around us are still going to exist as are the spiritual needs of those we serve and minister to -be it by food, clothes, etc
Is the Bible not personal revelation? Or where would we be if Martin Luther didn't have his special glasses?
If the basic needs exist beyond cultural significance, should not the church be beyond cultural significance?
Anon...
I really do not understand what point you are trying to make...
Zee... IMHO - Basic needs ARE cultural significance... but those basic needs are relative to differing cultures. So it might be qa good idea for anon... to describe what it means to meet basic needs... and how is money/or no money involved in that.
Jeremy says-I don't suppose that you believe that there is anyone at all who can, as you say, "take care of themselves." Maybe the Bible was incorrect about grace? Maybe kingdom language and kingdom living has a lot more to do with extending the spiritual depth and richness of the kingdom to anyone in poverty; the financial lacking, the emotional bankrupt, the relational degenerate, the alien, the window, the orphan, the millionaire, the whoever can not care for themselves....?
maybe my def. of taking care of yourself is different than yours. i do not believe any of us can "take care of ourselves"
You cannot serve God and Money..so you cannot take money out of the equation..a choice must be made, and God knows the heart which is tainted with selfish motives is wicked and deceitful, as the scriptures say..Repentance is the only answer for what is wrong with us..we think that we are rich and increased with goods and have need of nothing, but we do not see that we are poor, blind, naked...
Furthermore when the glory of God comes upon His church and He comes as a Lion instead of a Lamb we will be like Isaiah who said "woe is me, I am man of unclean lips, and dwell among a people of unclean lips, and my eyes have seen the King"..it is a dreadful thing to fall into the hands of the Living God. Better to repent now of our self-sufficency then be judged for it later...
Cathy
You reference to not serving God and money is not actually true to Scripture ...the actual is God a mammon - which can be linked to money but probably is best defined as 'the love of money' or avarice. So to say God or money seems a little strange... Does that mean that because I am 'rich' that means I don't love God and am a valuable contributor in the Kingdom.
you refernence to Rev 3:17 actually solidifies the point I am trying to make ...eventhough people maybe rich ... God considers them poor... If a person is poor they can be considered rich [REv 2:9]
The kingdom values are different.
God and Money..money in this case a personification..of a spritual reality...I agree that having or not having money is not the issue..as i stated before, there is a difference between having money and serving money ...this difference is in the heart..but as the Scriptures say, it is hard for a rich man to enter the kingdom..as riches tempt us to depend on "self"..and not on the Holy Spirit..so I stand with my original statement..you cannot take money out of the equation..where your treasure is, there your heart will be also..and that includes material possessions for a mans life does not consist of the abundance of the things he possesses.
Cathy - I just want to point out that you keep contradicting yourself or, at very least, you are "proving" your point and then "proving" Marks point.
I find this whole thread very amusing!
As I have a desire for truth..I am neither proving my point, nor his. If we are walking in the Light, we will allow truth to remain at the point of Divine tension between the extremes and will refrain from making a formula, principle, or inflexible doctrine out of it. It is the fruit from the Tree of Knowledge which demands our carrying the paradoxes in Scripture to their logical conclusions. The paradoxes are there to force us to seek the Lord for His mind and wisdom. This leads to our walking in the Spirit instead of by principles or laws. By resisting the compulsion to make formulas and allowing truth to rest at the point of tension between the extremes, we begin to partake of the Tree of Life. Christianity is not just following a set of rules; it is walking with the Living God.
As I have a desire for truth..I am neither proving my point, nor his. If we are walking in the Light, we will allow truth to remain at the point of Divine tension between the extremes and will refrain from making a formula, principle, or inflexible doctrine out of it. It is the fruit from the Tree of Knowledge which demands our carrying the paradoxes in Scripture to their logical conclusions. The paradoxes are there to force us to seek the Lord for His mind and wisdom. This leads to our walking in the Spirit instead of by principles or laws. By resisting the compulsion to make formulas and allowing truth to rest at the point of tension between the extremes, we begin to partake of the Tree of Life. Christianity is not just following a set of rules; it is walking with the Living God.
poor in wealth, poor in spirit, poor in relationships, poor poor poor
Why is it that we want to split hairs over what poor actually is-or is not. The reality is pretty simple-we as Christians are saved by grace, we are saved by faith, we need to exercise our faith by reaching out to those in need (what we are calling poor) i know many wealthy poor people, i know many people who live morally right, but will live eternally wrong, God places in each of us a desire to serve others, some of us will reachout to the homeless, the working poor, the needy, others will have a thriving ministry in serving and reaching those with wealth and power and sharing Christ with them, others will plunk thier butts in a pew and pray, seek the Father, and do little else. the long and the short of it is that we need to reach all, not debate on what we think poor actually is............and as we serve, as we bless others, keep it between us and the Father, or our reward is ...........well that is a different topic.
why not look at the bigger picture and each of us serve our Father in how He directs us?
This is a big picture dialogue ... it seems that we are missing what the big picutre is that is why I have posted this for discussion.
Well said anonymous...
Well said anonymous...
Speaking of bigger picture, what do you think about this?
Revival Means Humiliation by James Burns
To the church a revival means humiliation, a bitter knowledge of failure, and an open and humiliating confession of sin on the part of her ministers and people. It is not the easy and glowing thing many think it to be, who imagine that it fills the empty pews, and reinstates the Church in power and authority. IT COMES TO SCORCH BEFORE IT HEALS; it comes to rebuke ministers and people for their unfaithful witness, for their selfish living, for their neglect of the Cross, and to call them to daily reunciation, to an evangelical poverty, and to a deep and daily consecration. This is why a revival has ever been unpopular with large numbers within the Church. Because it says nothing to them of power such as they have learned to love, or of ease, of of success; it accuses them of sin, it tells them that they are dead, it calls them to awake, to renounce the world, and to follow Christ.
Some very thought provoking statements... Pastor Brian talked about this last staff meeting. We do need a perspective shift. More thoughts later...
Post a Comment