Different denominations working together for community service...

[Guest Butero]

Just now, Gargamel Bojangles said:

So because they don't follow our traditions then that makes them heathens? That sounds familiar. Trail of Tears, Nazi Holocaust

Not being Christians makes them heathens.  These are not Christian cultures.  I am very familiar with the trail of tears.  Many of those native Americans were good Christian people.  The people in the Nazi holocaust were being exterminated because they were said to be of inferior genetics.  I have not suggested re-locating or exterminating anyone.  What an absolutely absurd comparison! 

[Gargamel Bojangles]

6 minutes ago, Butero said:

The law of Moses was the legal code for the nation of Israel, so punishments had more to do with enforcement than requirement.  A nation is free to copy those laws if they wish, but don't have to.  Slavery is not a sin, and I have made that argument before.  It is even mentioned in the New Testament.  I went further into the law in Deuteronomy 22:5 in my previous reply to another poster. 

Slavery is not a sin? You can't be serious. This is the same logic that the KKK uses to justify their racial bigotry

[Guest Butero]

Just now, Gargamel Bojangles said:

Slavery is not a sin? You can't be serious. This is the same logic that the KKK uses to justify their racial bigotry

I can prove it is not.  Neither is polygamy.

[simplejeff]

Yes,   Biblically you can prove that slavery  like in Israel is not and was not a sin - in line with Yahweh''s instructions.

Almost certainly they are not referring to the kind of slavery Yahweh gave instructions for.

4 hours ago, Butero said:

I can prove it is not.  Neither is polygamy.

 

[Guest Butero]

1 minute ago, simplejeff said:

Yes,   Biblically you can prove that slavery  like in Israel is not and was not a sin - in line with Yahweh''s instructions.

Almost certainly they are not referring to the kind of slavery Yahweh gave instructables for.

 

Correct.

[Gargamel Bojangles]

I'm pretty sure the New Testament says one husband to one wife

[ayin jade]

1 hour ago, junobet said:

Just out of interest: that a woman shouldn't wear men's clothes and viice versa is from Deuteronomy. A couple of verses along it says: "Thou shalt not wear a garment of divers sorts, as of woollen and linen together." (Deuteronomy 22:11) Do you stick to that one also? If so, you've got my deepest respect: I can imagine that this would make shopping for clothes rather complicated these days.

 

By personal comfort choice, not because of the old testament law, I wear only cotton. It isnt always easy but its not that hard either to find clothes that are 100% cotton.

[ayin jade]

On 2/15/2016 at 2:46 AM, Hawkeye said:

James tells us in Chapter 1, Verse 27 " Pure and undefiled religion before God the Father is this: to care for orphans and widows". Obviously one thing Christians are supposed to do is care for the widows and orphans in their time of need.

Further on when James talks about Faith without works (James 2)- he asks the question (paraphrasing) how can you witness if somebody is hungry or cold? First clothe and feed them...

So this brings me to my observation/question/would like to get thoughts on.

Why can't local churches get along and focus on the greater good (i.e clothing, feeding and ministering to the needy?) It is a direct command from Jesus... The Bible speaks often about helping the poor:

(Matthew 5:42) to give to the one who asks of you.

Furthermore, he commands us to " “When you give a dinner or a banquet, do not invite your friends or your brothers or your relatives or rich neighbors, lest they also invite you in return and you be repaid. But when you give a feast, invite the poor, the crippled, the lame, the blind, and you will be blessed, because they cannot repay you. For you will be repaid at the resurrection of the just.” (Luke 14:12-14) 

And later on in Luke 12... (Verse 33-34)  Sell your possessions, and give to the needy. Provide yourselves with moneybags that do not grow old, with a treasure in the heavens that does not fail, where no thief approaches and no moth destroys. For where your treasure is, there will your heart be also.

-------- Now to the topic at hand.

Our church (the local gathering of believers) has a missional/ministry/community outreach mindset. Now we are a new plant (about 2 months old), so resources are obviously limited. We would (as a group) like to collaborate with other community churches to meet basic needs of the community (food , clothing, work needs- whatever need may be there). Currently the only thing certain is that we will be going door to door, offering light bulbs and changing them out.

Meeting resistance seems to be the standard operating procedure for churches working together. Church A doesn't like that Church B allows women to wear pants, and Church C doesn't like that Church D sprinkles instead of dunking, so they refuse to work together for the community. This is the unfortunate state of sadness (albeit, I am sure there are some groups out there that work together). Some questions...

# 1- Why is it not common practice? There is so much division in the church today, that basic needs are being left unmet in the community. 

# 2- Does your church/would your church work with a church of a denomination that believes differently than you on non-core issues (not compromising Salvation through Jesus) But things like pants or skirts, or sprinkling or dunking?

Our church currently is formulating a plan to work with one other church... but are meeting resistance from so many because of the differences in non core issues (instruments or not, pants or skirts, sprinkling or dunking, wine or juice at communion..) The list goes on and on. It's weary, when you know the command from Jesus is to help the poor and needy, - and that knowing together if all the local groups combined resources, they would be an unstoppable force....... So the burning question is:  What's stopping them?

 

 

 

Anyone remember the question posed in the op? Because this thread is no longer anything like the original topic.

[Ezra]

21 minutes ago, ayin jade said:

Anyone remember the question posed in the op? Because this thread is no longer anything like the original topic.

Original topic -- cooperate or not? "Or not" would be the best. Fewer headaches and no talk about sprinkling and dunking (or sprinkles and Dunkin Donuts).

[Vendtre]

1 hour ago, Butero said:

A little more complicated, but I will try to explain this as briefly as I can.  There are basically three types of laws in the OT.  There are the laws pertaining to the Levitical Priesthood which were fulfilled at the cross and no longer apply.  There were laws pertaining to Israel's separation from the unclean gentile nations, and that would include things like circumcision, and yes, not wearing clothing made out of diverse kinds of material.  Dietary laws also fit into that category.  They don't apply because the gentiles found acceptance through faith in Christ, and that which Christ cleansed is no longer unclean.  Only moral laws still apply.  Deuteronomy 22:5 is re-affirmed in 1 Corinthians 6:9 under a man being effeminate, as the definition includes a man that wears soft or feminine clothing.  I could go into this in greater details, but this is the short version. 

I think the link between Deut 22:5 and I Cor 6:9 is a far stretch to say the least