I remember reading somewhere that within NGO's who are on the ground "helping neighbours, visiting the sick and feeding the hungry" are able to put their differences aside in a disaster situation and when their aims are alike.

I don't know if it's the same in an organizations like "Habitat for Humanity", but it draws many faith groups too, and they all have to work together.

I wonder if heated arguments break out?

I think that working to limit the rights of two consenting adults, for example, is not a sign of a "good person".  It is a sign of a morally twisted person trying to dictate their skewed moral code to others.  The other issues are much more debatable.

As for the "religious line", I think most people are good, most of the time, whether they are on the religious line, or whether they've stepped off of it.

I think that the most Christian thing you can do is keep an open mind.

Good grief I'm going to ruin my reputation but I agree with chansen again.  This will never do.  LOL

Shalom

Mate

I can agree with SLJ here as well.

I can only offer a thought.  Perhaps those on the far right are too interested in saving souls then worrying about the physical problems of life.  The kind of "Well in the afterlife you will have a better time of it.

Shalom

Mate

I think that most people have the potential to be good. 

As-salaamu alaikum

-Omni

Well some would say I'm far right for some of my beliefs.

The difference is the understanding that we cannot save souls & the focus is to just let the message be heard.

Any saving that needs doing will be done by God through the message of Christ.

The thing is, after the revelation of the assurance of salvation is established within, the worry of the physical life seems to diminish because of the assurance of our Faith, not because we seek the rewards of heaven, but because of the assurance & understanding of the Love of God.

Nothing brings mankind closer to understanding than the Love of God.

Bolt

bolt

Does that then mean we can just let them suffer and give them the wonderful assurance of peace in heaven?

Shalom

Mate

How do you think I'll answer that Mate?

bolt

I have no idea.  That is why I asked the question.

Shalom

Mate

Really? Could you maybe guess from what you have seen from me thus far? How would you think I would react If I saw someone suffering , hurt, & needed help.

Do you think I would just preach the gospel to this person? Or would I do what I beleive any person with morals would do?

I't a good thing I don't take insult to heart.

For I wouldn't expect anyone of moral character to not help someone who is suffering when we can make a difference.

 So Mate, can you at least guess? How I would answer you?

Have I ever said or done anything that would indicate to you I would do otherwise?

If not, perhaps this was a very inappropreate question.

bolt

I think you've told me how you would answer.  The question was not meant personally it was meant generally.  Different folks would answer differently.

I liked your answer.  I concur.

Shalom

Mate

OK Mate.  Not that it matters either way & has nothing to do with helping one who is in dire need, but if I was to preach the gospel to this person who is in need, I doubt my words would have any effect on the heart of this person if I didn't help in any way.

Bolt

bolt

Unfortunately there are Christians who suggest that the homeless should go out a get a job regardless of their situation and refuse to help in any way.

Shalom

Mate

That is unfortunate indeed.

Bolt

Now I do hope you understand why I asked the question. 
There are so called Christians who in fact behave like that.

Shalom

Mate

And Mate, that would be Christians at either end of the spectrum and in the middle, right?

Mate: your quote:

bolt

Does that then mean we can just let them suffer and give them the wonderful assurance of peace in heaven?

I don't wish to go into a lot of detail but I grew up in the 40's in N.S. There was  a lot of poverty. The suffering was  hellish for those who had no money, no jobs, no education, illnesses and no hope.  All some people did have was the hope of heaven in the afterlife. They thrived on it and it gave them meaning for their lives.

I know what you're saying. But....what if you were a woman back then who had to go and work/live  at someone's place for her room and board?  No pay, just a bite to eat and a place to sleep. No better future in sight.  Pretty grim, huh? If you weren't able to do even that much you might be sent to the county poor house or the mental asylum.

Maybe it was only because of the love of Jesus and the hope of heaven that very few people took their own lives back then.

P.S. Am I on topic ? I didn't read the whole thread today. Oh...I just checked. You're talking about converting people who have never heard the gospel. I'm off base. Oh well, I'll let this post stand anyway.....

Shure, I understand why you would ask this question, I just didn't understand why you asked me this question.

Bolt

It is pretty grim for many in this word, all through history, it was grim for many, even today.

It is obvious that this injustice can't keep going on like it has, & is.

The sprirtual message of Christ was supposed to put an end to all this, idealy. but it just wasn't possible I guess within the collective  "free will". 

Are we then to suppose all is lost & give up?

Are we to forsake the love that was revealed to us through actions By not acting on this Love?

God forbid!

Bolt

People are born with the ability to do good on a horizontal plane. For example, we can give a warm blanket to a homeless person shivering in the winter-cold.

However, I do not believe it is possible for anyone to do good vertically, that is to actively serve God, until one becomes a Christ-follower.

I base this on my belief that until we accept Christ as personal Lord and Savior we are in bondage to sin. We have no interest in the God-things.

I'll make do with my "horizontal plane", thanks.  You can have your vertical plane to your sky-god.  You're correct that I have no interest in him.

Chansen, 

You might like the new movie, The Invention of Lying.

I actively serve God. No Christ required.

I am not in bondage to sin, and I have much interest in "God-things". In fact there are billions of people around the world who have interest in "God-things" without Christ.

I have my eye on it.  I'm not a huge fan of Ricky Gervais, but I agree with him on a number of points, and he seems to be a clever bastard.  Going out to the movies is a bit of a production with a 2 year old around, so we may wait for the DVD.

As has already been pointed out, lots of people who serve God don't follow Christ.

Also, it depends on how you define "Christ-follower". I don't follow Christ the man, I follow Christ's message - which was about the Kingdom of God. 

Aquaman

People of all faiths or no faith can do what is right and honourable by others. One does not have to be "saved" to do justice and love kindness or compassion and walk humbly with God. Micah 6:8

One does not have to be "born again" to feed the hungry, care for the sick and dying, clothe the naked etc. Matt. 25.

Far too many folks want to limit God, if one so believes. They want to make Him/Her in their own image.

Jesus said "Why do you not judge for yourselves what is right? Luke 12:52.

Shalom

Mate

I agree with you here 100%.

And here I do not.

And here we are agreeing again.

Further to that point, you don't need to serve God or Jesus or follow any of their messages to do good things.

This will never do but I agree with Chansen again. My oh my!

Shalom

Mate

Sorry.  I'll try harder to be disagreeable.

Damn.  I shouldn't apologize when I want to be disagreeable.

No apology.  I'm going to be more disagreeable from now on.

Too true. But, it helps me. (Maybe some of us do better with referral power and authority?) 

Pilgrims Progress

How true.

Shalom

Mate