Don't Feed the Homeless

[apothanein kerdos]

AK, i didn't get caught, good grief, you're chasing down a rabbit trail. get back on topic. the designated zone is for where you are allowed to feed them, not where the homeless reside. homeless folks are on every corner. this law is about feeding large groups. churches are not, and have not been in the past, a place of providing beds to sleep on.

i'll put it bluntly for you one more time. the only thing preventing you from doing God's work is your own stubbornness in doing it the way you want. open your heart, your arms, your pocketbook, your pantry.... whatever you wish to open to help these folks, do so in the name of Jesus. but to break a law that does not prevent you from doing God's work, in His name, is something that you must take up with God. i will follow God's calling as you must. and God doesn't call ME to defy the law of the land to get my own way.

I didn't chase a rabbit. The fact is, I caught you in your own logic. Again, for churches to feed these people on their grounds, they have to have enough space. If they don't, it will overflow off their property, bringing about a violation of the law. This isn't difficult to see.

when the government requires me to DENY MY GOD. that is the only Biblical reason to disobey the government. and this law does not require me to deny Him.

Turning Jews over to the German government doesn't require you to deny God. Prohibition from witnessing in public does not require you to deny God. Denial of baptism in public does not require you to deny God.

Really??? I think thats rubbish. So now you're of the opinion that ANY church, can do ANYTHING, it wants...and the gov't has no say. Sounds to me like you are not very clear on how much the church and government work together.

If you had actually read my posts (plural) you would notice a common theme. Anytime the government passes a law that prohibits us from doing what God has called us to do, it has overstepped its bounds. Of course there are limitations, but the limitations on the government begin when extra-biblical things begin to happen within the Church.

A VAST majority of ALL funding for most churches and faith-based organizations comes from the federal government...you can't seriously think that Christians are tithing that much.

Proof? Oh, that's right, you don't have any. The reason is that it is ILLEGAL for a church to receive money from the federal government UNLESS it has an organization it is supporting that brings benefits to the community (such as pregnancy crisis center, orphanage, etc). This, of course, has turned out to be a disaster. In Arizona a church receiving federal money for pregnancy crisis centers cannot witness to the girl, cannot rule out abortion, and cannot bring up spirituality in any form unless she approaches the issue first.

Let your church do something unfair, illegal, or even publicly questionable...and you will see how involved the gov't is. The whole purpose of the gov't is to regulate...since when did a nutjob who starts a church get a pass on that?

Reading comprehension...look into it. I have been very adamant that the government cannot touch the church so long as it is the Lord's work...i figured by the same I responded to you in the previous post the context had already been established. I didn't know you hadn't caught on. I'll move slower next time.

[Guest LadyC]

AK, you ARE chasing rabbit trails. i got as far as the first part of your argument and quit. continuing is pointless. you keep making the assertion that churches may not have room to feed them. honey, if they have a parking lot that will fit 10 cars, then the church has room to fit many times over the number "25" that the city considers to be a large group.

you are grasping at straws, arguing points that make no logical sense.

do as you will. i'll do as the Lord leads me, and you must do the same. if the Lord is leading you to break laws that you don't agree with, even though the laws do not prevent you from helping others, then that's between you and God.

however, He leads me to help others in ways that the law does not inhibit. i would suggest you consider that maybe He leads you to help others in whatever way you can, be it big or small, as well. i hope you will listen to His calling. the government has not issued earplugs for you yet.

it's been nice chatting. i'm gonna leave you to argue with someone else now, as i have a family to tend to.

[apothanein kerdos]

AK, you ARE chasing rabbit trails. i got as far as the first part of your argument and quit. continuing is pointless. you keep making the assertion that churches may not have room to feed them. honey, if they have a parking lot that will fit 10 cars, then the church has room to fit many times over the number "25" that the city considers to be a large group.

you are grasping at straws, arguing points that make no logical sense.

do as you will. i'll do as the Lord leads me, and you must do the same. if the Lord is leading you to break laws that you don't agree with, even though the laws do not prevent you from helping others, then that's between you and God.

however, He leads me to help others in ways that the law does not inhibit. i would suggest you consider that maybe He leads you to help others in whatever way you can, be it big or small, as well. i hope you will listen to His calling. the government has not issued earplugs for you yet.

it's been nice chatting. i'm gonna leave you to argue with someone else now, as i have a family to tend to.

And again you keep going back to the pragmatics of the issue and ignoring the bigger context. The fact remains - the government is being allowed to put a law on the Church when the Church is merely acting out of what God called them to do. Praise our Lord Jesus that the early Church did not act this way...or else we would not be here.

[MeCajunboy]

A startling line from the article

Already, the cities of Dallas, Fort Myers, Fla., Gainesville, Fla., Wilmington, N.C., and Atlanta have laws restricting or outright prohibiting the feeding of the homeless. In Fairfax County, Va., homemade meals and meals made in church kitchens may not be distributed to the homeless unless first approved by the county.

So before a church can perform its Christian duty, it must get a government mandate..."nor prohibit the free exercise thereof." Oops.

The problem with every Christian group wanting to "help" out for a worthy cause is, if someone contracts food poisoning, for instance, the entire congregation could end up being implicated; or at least all those responsible for doing the cooking. This is along the same pretense as if I were trained in the area of giving CPR to someone who is unconcious and they die, the family can implicate me into a law suit to determine if I was trained properly; within my training period time alloted, and did all the correct procedures to determine if I was in part responsible for the death.

Also, not everyone who is classed as "homeless" needs to be on the streets. Some people can be retrained and brought back into the workforce where they can be completely functional again.

[apothanein kerdos]

A startling line from the article

Already, the cities of Dallas, Fort Myers, Fla., Gainesville, Fla., Wilmington, N.C., and Atlanta have laws restricting or outright prohibiting the feeding of the homeless. In Fairfax County, Va., homemade meals and meals made in church kitchens may not be distributed to the homeless unless first approved by the county.

So before a church can perform its Christian duty, it must get a government mandate..."nor prohibit the free exercise thereof." Oops.

The problem with every Christian group wanting to "help" out for a worthy cause is, if someone contracts food poisoning, for instance, the entire congregation could end up being implicated; or at least all those responsible for doing the cooking. This is along the same pretense as if I were trained in the area of giving CPR to someone who is unconcious and they die, the family can implicate me into a law suit to determine if I was trained properly; within my training period time alloted, and did all the correct procedures to determine if I was in part responsible for the death.

Also, not everyone who is classed as "homeless" needs to be on the streets. Some people can be retrained and brought back into the workforce where they can be completely functional again.

Both are fair arguments...unfortunately, the Bible does not give us such stipulations. Sometimes the righteous suffer for being righteous - I would chalk this up to that. Also, I think it is more likely to get food poisoning at McDonald's than it is from someone's kitchen.

As for the second part, I think that is where the church should offer aid to those that want to get off their feet. That is, until the government decides to regulate that as well...

[Axxman]

If you had actually read my posts (plural) you would notice a common theme. Anytime the government passes a law that prohibits us from doing what God has called us to do, it has overstepped its bounds. Of course there are limitations, but the limitations on the government begin when extra-biblical things begin to happen within the Church.

Proof? Oh, that's right, you don't have any. The reason is that it is ILLEGAL for a church to receive money from the federal government UNLESS it has an organization it is supporting that brings benefits to the community (such as pregnancy crisis center, orphanage, etc). This, of course, has turned out to be a disaster. In Arizona a church receiving federal money for pregnancy crisis centers cannot witness to the girl, cannot rule out abortion, and cannot bring up spirituality in any form unless she approaches the issue first.

Reading comprehension...look into it. I have been very adamant that the government cannot touch the church so long as it is the Lord's work...i figured by the same I responded to you in the previous post the context had already been established. I didn't know you hadn't caught on. I'll move slower next time.

rawrrrr.

The gov't didn't pass a law prohibiting you from doing Gods work. You could be paranoid and say they are, but it doesn't make it so. For example, a church needs a permit to build in most cases. If the gov't deems that it doesn't want a church built at a certain location...it can deny the building permit. Now the church can get freaked out and cry about how big gov't is prohibiting them from doing Gods work...or they can find a more suitable spot.

I thought we were discussing mission-type programs run by the church...why would a church get federal funding outside of that? I don't have a problem with the Arizona law. I would rather the work be done, and let God sort out the details. Most of a Christians witnessing is done through their actions...not with words. What you call a "disaster" I call an avenue for God to do His work, through His people. You seem to have little faith that God can get a job done when the gov't is involved. The government we have only has power because God gives it. I just don't see your crisis.

reading comprehension...nice one! What is the "Lord's work?" Do you have a monopoly on that term? Just about every crackpot cult leader you've heard of has claimed to be doing the "Lord's work." Maybe you didn't get the memo....alot of people don't believe like you do. Therefore, maybe its not a bad idea for the gov't to step in before the next Jim Jones decides to spike the kool-aid at a homeless convention. Unless, you wanna give every Jim Jones who claims to be doing the "Lord's work" a free pass to dole out "goodies" to whomever he likes.

Ironically, as I said before, my city has these same so-called anti-christian laws. And yet my church has found a pretty good response. Since we were in the city, we adopted a sister church on the outskirts. We funnel money to that church, and they feed over a thousand needy people a week. (It should be noted that they are not all homeless, some are just needy.) Instead of complaining that the gov't was keeping us from doing Gods work....we just did what needed to be done. In the meantime, our church also helps fund several other outreach ministries in the city so that needs are not neglected there either.

There are people who "want" to do God's work....then there are people who "DO" Gods work. Be a DOer.

[Masked Chris]

A startling line from the article

Already, the cities of Dallas, Fort Myers, Fla., Gainesville, Fla., Wilmington, N.C., and Atlanta have laws restricting or outright prohibiting the feeding of the homeless. In Fairfax County, Va., homemade meals and meals made in church kitchens may not be distributed to the homeless unless first approved by the county.

So before a church can perform its Christian duty, it must get a government mandate..."nor prohibit the free exercise thereof." Oops.

thats pretty sick. It's not like the homeless have a choice. The goverment could at least stay out of the way as the church tries to make lives a little better for people.

[followerofjesus]

Maybe the 100 billion dollars for Iraq could be split up for the homeless in America for 2007.

[apothanein kerdos]

The gov't didn't pass a law prohibiting you from doing Gods work. You could be paranoid and say they are, but it doesn't make it so. For example, a church needs a permit to build in most cases. If the gov't deems that it doesn't want a church built at a certain location...it can deny the building permit. Now the church can get freaked out and cry about how big gov't is prohibiting them from doing Gods work...or they can find a more suitable spot.

The difference is that God never told us to build buildings for church. I am not against them, but I am merely saying that when the government says, "You can't build there," they are not stepping on anything that God has commanded us to do. Saying, "You must get a permit to have a massive feeding in this area" DOES impinge upon what God has commanded us to do. Once again, you are missing the bigger picture. Even if this permit does not prevent us from doing what God has called us to do, it simply shows how the government is infringing further and further into religion, telling us what we can do and cannot do, etc.

I thought we were discussing mission-type programs run by the church...why would a church get federal funding outside of that? I don't have a problem with the Arizona law. I would rather the work be done, and let God sort out the details. Most of a Christians witnessing is done through their actions...not with words. What you call a "disaster" I call an avenue for God to do His work, through His people. You seem to have little faith that God can get a job done when the gov't is involved. The government we have only has power because God gives it. I just don't see your crisis.

The problem with "most Christian witnessing is done with action" is that it's a concept that is no where found in the Bible. It's a misquote from St. Francis of Assisi, that in the original context doesn't even mean what most people try to make it mean.

The Bible says we are to be a witness with words and actions, the two HAVE to go together. Likewise, it is not the government's position to tell Christians what they can and cannot say. Do you not see how this violates both freedom of speech and religion? You have no problem with this? Why do so many Christians have this lazy attitude of "Yeah...well...God will take us through it." He will, but if I can do something to prevent struggle and pain along the way, I would love to do so. Furthermore, you're saying you're okay with the government silencing Christians in word. Word is all we have to offer true truth to the world.

reading comprehension...nice one! What is the "Lord's work?" Do you have a monopoly on that term? Just about every crackpot cult leader you've heard of has claimed to be doing the "Lord's work." Maybe you didn't get the memo....alot of people don't believe like you do. Therefore, maybe its not a bad idea for the gov't to step in before the next Jim Jones decides to spike the kool-aid at a homeless convention. Unless, you wanna give every Jim Jones who claims to be doing the "Lord's work" a free pass to dole out "goodies" to whomever he likes.

*sigh*

If you read the Bible, we wouldn't be having the argument.

[Axxman]

The difference is that God never told us to build buildings for church. I am not against them, but I am merely saying that when the government says, "You can't build there," they are not stepping on anything that God has commanded us to do. Saying, "You must get a permit to have a massive feeding in this area" DOES impinge upon what God has commanded us to do. Once again, you are missing the bigger picture. Even if this permit does not prevent us from doing what God has called us to do, it simply shows how the government is infringing further and further into religion, telling us what we can do and cannot do, etc.

The problem with "most Christian witnessing is done with action" is that it's a concept that is no where found in the Bible. It's a misquote from St. Francis of Assisi, that in the original context doesn't even mean what most people try to make it mean.

The Bible says we are to be a witness with words and actions, the two HAVE to go together. Likewise, it is not the government's position to tell Christians what they can and cannot say. Do you not see how this violates both freedom of speech and religion? You have no problem with this? Why do so many Christians have this lazy attitude of "Yeah...well...God will take us through it." He will, but if I can do something to prevent struggle and pain along the way, I would love to do so. Furthermore, you're saying you're okay with the government silencing Christians in word. Word is all we have to offer true truth to the world.

*sigh*

If you read the Bible, we wouldn't be having the argument.

Hey Bro...looks like we are on the same schedule...lol

I see what you are saying about the building permit...so maybe that wasn't the perfect example. Bottom line for me is I really don't see the crisis. Overall, I see that you are concerned about the gov't having an influence in the church. I am not that concerned because I believe that the gov't only has the power given to it by God.

I do take issue with you saying I have a "lazy attitude." I think I have made it clear that I personally am actively involved in this area, as is my church. A lazy attitude would be giving in and not doing anything. In my life, these types of rules have NOT affected the ministry of reaching out, or helping, in any way. God has, and continues to bless the efforts of the ministry. Also, not to make too fine a point of it, but the Christian life is borne of struggle and hardship, and through that comes the blessings of God.

Lastly...there is scripture on both of our sides. I will not fault your activist mentality, becasue perhaps God has given you a burden in that area. There was a time when Peter and the Apostles were arrested for public preaching, after being told not to. Peter quite plainly said "We ought to obey God rather than men." So I won't fault your boldness. However, I don't see this scenario as quite as harrowing as that. In the case we are discussing there are social and health issues involved. In Acts, Peter was dealing with persecution in that he was flatly ordered to NOT preach.

I work with the homeless. I understand some of the issues that are brought to the table in regards to community, and health...on both sides. If this were an issue in which city gov'ts were attacking Christianity...I would be with you. It is not that type of issue. I think you could find MUCH BIGGER fish to fry, and put this one on the back burner.