In My Name

Advanced search

[Terms Of Conduct]

Terms Of Conduct

[Guest]

Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.

1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever

Login with username, password and session length

[Acumen]

In Mark 9:41, it says, I tell you the truth, anyone who gives you a cup of water in my name because you belong to Christ will certainly not lose his reward.

What does this say about social acts of charity?  As Christians, should our acts of charity first reflect our intention to witness to others, or to be a witness for Christ?

-Acumen

[metis]

Does there have to be a "first"? 

Shalom,
Vern

[Acumen]

Vern,

I suppose I could have worded it better.  Should our social acts of charity be grounded in our intention to evangelize?

[metis]

Should our social acts of charity be grounded in our intention to evangelize?

Obviously, I can't really much speak for the evangelizing part, but let me just say that I would hope that we all would be involved in social acts of charity no matter whether we intend to evangelize or not. 

Shalom,
Vern

[sobeit9]

Mark 9

38"Teacher," said John, "we saw a man driving out demons in your name and we told him to stop, because he was not one of us."
 39"Do not stop him," Jesus said. "No one who does a miracle in my name can in the next moment say anything bad about me, 40for whoever is not against us is for us. 41I tell you the truth, anyone who gives you a cup of water in my name because you belong to Christ will certainly not lose his reward.

I don't see what this has to do with evangelizing but raises another touchy subject.

What is a name?  It is recognition.  To drive out demons or to artificially provide a quality of presence where a person becomes temporaily inwardly free can only happen in the presence of higher consciousness.  Just before Jesus says:

37"Whoever welcomes one of these little children in my name welcomes me; and whoever welcomes me does not welcome me but the one who sent me."

The name then includes the experiential vertical awqreness of the inner connection between father and son.

The whole point is that when water esaoteric (knowledge) is given even by someone not directly relatedbut being true is not against Jesus.

There is no need to evangelize becuse the person here is already within Christ and this stranger recognizes it.

On my path of esoteric Christianity, I've come to know some exceptional Hindus and Buddhists and representatives from different paths.  We all know the human condition and the need for a quality of help that is from outside the world so there is no friction. As Jesus said: "whoever is not against us is for us"

[gluadys]

Vern,

I suppose I could have worded it better.  Should our social acts of charity be grounded in our intention to evangelize?

Charity should be grounded in compassion and love for Christ present in the person of the recipient.  We should think of those we serve through charity as Christ himself.  Our gifts to them are gifts to Christ.

Providing charity for any reason other than compassion for the person contaminates the quality of the giving.  People are quick to notice ulterior motives which suggest that the giver is not truly interested in them as people, but only as potential converts. 

A good way to think of charity is to be grateful to the recipient who has provided us with the opportunity to serve Christ through him/her.   

[metis]

Providing charity for any reason other than compassion for the person contaminates the quality of the giving.  People are quick to notice ulterior motives which suggest that the giver is not truly interested in them as people, but only as potential converts.    

Yes, that was my thought as well.  If we merely give charity to those who we want "on our side", then the act may be somewhat of a selfish one since it may serve our ego as being one of the good guys with the white hats. 

Years ago, I read a book by Malcolm Muggeridge, who was so impressed by Mother Theresa's work without seeking converts, that he and a great many others converted to Catholicism.  Even though we know she had some strong doubts, her work with the poor and downtrodden probably impressed more people that a great many other people who give charity mainly just to convert others.   

Shalom,
Vern

[Acumen]

Gluadys,

Charity should be grounded in compassion and love for Christ present in the person of the recipient. We should think of those we serve through charity as Christ himself. Our gifts to them are gifts to Christ.

I think this is an interesting perspective.  Would I be wrong to presume that you, in some way or another, are drawing from this passage in Matt. 25, "The King will reply, 'I tell you the truth, whatever you did for one of the least of these brothers of mine, you did for me .'"

The reason I ask, in part, is because the words in the passage "for on of the least of these brothers of mine."  Does the phrase "brothers of mine" refer to a type of disciple or "Christ-follower?"  Here is another passage in Matthew that seems to suggest it does; Matt 10:40-42, it says, “He who receives you receives me, and he who receives me receives the one who sent me. 41 Anyone who receives a prophet because he is a prophet will receive a prophet’s reward, and anyone who receives a righteous man because he is a righteous man will receive a righteous man’s reward. 42 And if anyone gives even a cup of cold water to one of these little ones because he is my disciple, I tell you the truth, he will certainly not lose his reward.”

Providing charity for any reason other than compassion for the person contaminates the quality of the giving. People are quick to notice ulterior motives which suggest that the giver is not truly interested in them as people, but only as potential converts.


I think this is a good point.  Ulterior motives are often perceived by people quite quickly.  When providing a charity service, we need to treat it like a careful, long-term investment in a real relationship.  Unbelievers aren't just numbers to add to a conversion list.  They are real people who need a conversion from a life of sin to a life with Christ.  People can usually detect when you're not interested in knowing them personally by your body language and your verbal responses.  I think we should take the time to know and help people (tending to their physical needs) before we give them the life-changing gospel message (tending to their spiritual needs).  I think the idea is a scriptural one.  Jesus often healed people of the ailments and told them to sin no more.  First was the healing, then he gave them the message.

A good way to think of charity is to be grateful to the recipient who has provided us with the opportunity to serve Christ through him/her.

Very true

[Acumen]

Sobeit,

38"Teacher," said John, "we saw a man driving out demons in your name and we told him to stop, because he was not one of us."
39"Do not stop him," Jesus said. "No one who does a miracle in my name can in the next moment say anything bad about me, 40for whoever is not against us is for us. 41I tell you the truth, anyone who gives you a cup of water in my name because you belong to Christ will certainly not lose his reward.

I don't see what this has to do with evangelizing but raises another touchy subject.  What is a name? It is recognition. To drive out demons or to artificially provide a quality of presence where a person becomes temporaily inwardly free can only happen in the presence of higher consciousness.

To drive out demons requires faith.  The issue of this passage that is of striking interest is how people, who were not particularly trained by Jesus or his disciples, were doing things in his name.  I think the "name" conveys more than just a recognition, but rather a form of representation and quite possibly authority.  After Jesus began correcting his disciples, he added that "No one who does a miracle in my name can in the next moment say anything bad about me."  This tells me that when someone performs specific acts in his name, they are a representative of Jesus no different than the disciples.  Remember, the disciples began to stop the man "because he was not one of them."  Jesus' response was to the contrary "whoever is not against us is for us."  In other words, "don't stop them because they represent me too."

[sobeit9]

I agree Acumen.  the point I was trying to make is that to say "In the Name" means more than is normally assumed.  A parrot can be taught to say "in the hame of jesus I command such and such of this demon but it is meaningless since this parroting is void of experiential understanding.

This rasies the question if there are those scoffed at by Fundamentalists that in their experiential understanding are more Christian then they are?

[julrich]

a person starving isn't being destroyed by a life of sin.  Compassion is responding in  empathy to the particular situation of another person.  A person despondent in cynical despair and hopelessness might be served by a christian's faith, but this isn't the main focus of the radical imperative of Jesus to serve the victims of social injustice.  "In the name" is more about where we are coming from than it is about how we practice compassion.

shalom
jules

[julrich]

it means in the place of, representing the authority of, as in, "in the name of the law."
on behalf of the requirements of the law you are required to whatever, put your hands up, say.  It is meaningful if the context expresses that representative value: in the name of jesus, help us heal this illness.  Because jesus healed and empowered healers, this means that we call upon god to heal because that healing power has been shared with us by jesus.  If the context doesn't express that then it becomes a meaningless or even superstitious formula: thank you god for this food we are about the eat, in the name of jesus, amen.  There it just signals "time to eat."

shalom
jules 
 

[Today]

• Science Corrects Itself by kwd111 [Today at 05:23:31 PM]
• Religion gets ugly by charliejohn [Today at 02:48:42 PM]
• Abortion gets UGLY by CCC460 [Today at 12:09:55 PM]
• God No Longer Male by CCC460 [Today at 10:34:45 AM]
• A thought by Betsy by kwd111 [Today at 09:23:57 AM]
• Another Free Spirit Canne... by SteveC [September 06, 2010, 09:46:29 PM]
• Very interesting theory! by SteveC [September 06, 2010, 09:30:59 PM]
• Very Interesting Insight by kwd111 [September 06, 2010, 03:29:51 PM]
• Jewish Understanding by SteveC [September 06, 2010, 09:57:12 AM]
• GOOD Science by SteveC [September 05, 2010, 10:12:43 PM]
• A Miracle Picture is Wort... by kwd111 [September 04, 2010, 08:41:28 PM]
• Best Science by kwd111 [September 04, 2010, 01:56:27 PM]
• WOW by SteveC [September 02, 2010, 07:24:09 PM]
• Very Logical - Abortion I... by kwd111 [September 01, 2010, 09:13:15 AM]
• Court Upholds Expulsion o... by kwd111 [August 31, 2010, 09:07:08 PM]
• Atheist believes in Intel... by kwd111 [August 30, 2010, 05:41:49 PM]
• Radioactice Decay Not Con... by SteveC [August 28, 2010, 11:03:26 AM]
• Assumptions. by kwd111 [August 26, 2010, 10:24:55 AM]
• Is this your perspective ... by kwd111 [August 26, 2010, 10:19:53 AM]
• Adult Stem Cell Research ... by kwd111 [August 26, 2010, 07:37:57 AM]

Members

• Total Members: 564
• Latest: jerrellowensa

Stats

• Total Posts: 87093
• Total Topics: 2648
• Online Today: 74
• Online Ever: 135
• (July 09, 2010, 02:08:16 PM)

Users Online

Users: 2
Guests: 17
Total: 19

CCC460
kwd111