Ethical Consumerism

[Kenneth Searcy]

“Ethical consumerism is the intentional purchase of products and services that the customer considers to be made ethically.“ -Wikipedia

I’m not sure how to word this question but should Christians buy from companies that have no morals or that have double standards? Are we morally responsible in any way? For example Hastings Entertainment Inc. sells Christian books, movies, as well as bibles. Just a few aisles over they have porn. Or what about those that sell or rent rated R movies like Blockbuster, Netflix, Red Box, Wal-Mart, and Target while at the same time they sell or rent Christian movies. We complain about how bad things are but if we vote with our money then we may be making the problem worse. Is it not simple economics? What are your thoughts?

[Todd Erickson]

Most "Christian" films are shallow imitations of the real thing to fit a niche market. Whereas, many beautiful, striking, powerful movies are rated R.

Ethical Consumerism has far more to do with whether something is fair trade...was the clothing that you purchased made by slave labor? How about the coffee you drink, or the chocolate you eat? Do the janitorial staff in the building you work in make a living wage? etc.

[David Graham]

Ethical Consumerism has far more to do with whether something is fair trade...was the clothing that you purchased made by slave labor? How about the coffee you drink, or the chocolate you eat? Do the janitorial staff in the building you work in make a living wage? etc.

Thanks Todd, that's my greatest ethical concern about consumerism also. I remember seeing this documentary about children in Pakistan sitting in the dirt stitching the seams of cricket balls. If we buy the balls we put a very little amount of money in their family's pockets, but if we boycott the product, all that is achieved is added poverty. Ideally I would like to see the young children going to school and then coming home to "middle class" families where they have enough to eat, and then go out to play. But there are many political and social issues to resolve before this will ever happen, and boycotts of products on their own won't achieve much at all.

Cheers,
Dave

[Jim Chabot]

Most "Christian" films are shallow imitations of the real thing to fit a niche market. Whereas, many beautiful, striking, powerful movies are rated R.

Ethical Consumerism has far more to do with whether something is fair trade...was the clothing that you purchased made by slave labor? How about the coffee you drink, or the chocolate you eat? Do the janitorial staff in the building you work in make a living wage? etc.

We can bring it a little closer to home as well.

How about when the illegal immigrants show up to do a job at your home? Personally I will not allow them to work for me, I believe that it is wrong. But lets put that aside for those who believe that borders are immoral. Do you insist and verify that they are paid at least as well as their American counterparts? Many of them make less than the average janitor. How about the produce that you purchase, did it come from a state with a history of oppressing illegals to pick it?

[Jon Twitchell]

The other day we stopped at Christmas Tree Shops to look for something. in the process, we found "hand-carved" coconut faces for about $2.50. They were a product of the Philippines.

If they were really hand-carved (and they DID look unique) then I figure that those folks are hardly making a living wage. You figure by the time there are shipping and storage costs, they're being paid pennies on the coconut... and even though the materials may be free, it's got to be time consuming to carve and paint each head.

(Yes... I realize that we were in Christmas Tree Shops, and probably those same heads sell for much more in touristy craft shops... )

[Eric Vail]

I can appreciate the ideas that have been mentioned that fit under this label of "ethical consumerism." For example, being concerned that workers involved in making goods and services available to us have a livable wage is important.

I have to admit that when I saw the thread title that places the word "ethical" before the word "consumerism," I thought it was in jest--like asking someone to find a round square. It conserns me that we would blur our thinking about consumerism by saying it can be ethical so long as we are paying a just amount. I believe we are in need of a drastic shift in our thinking away from being consumers of resources. We need to think in more relational ways about the world and all with which we interact in it, beyond attaining for ourselves and posessing. Let's do away with consumeristic paradigms and then talk about what is ethical.

[Billy Cox]

We can bring it a little closer to home as well.

How about when the illegal immigrants show up to do a job at your home? Personally I will not allow them to work for me, I believe that it is wrong. But lets put that aside for those who believe that borders are immoral. Do you insist and verify that they are paid at least as well as their American counterparts? Many of them make less than the average janitor. How about the produce that you purchase, did it come from a state with a history of oppressing illegals to pick it?

I think it is degrading to use terms like 'the illegal immigrants' or referring to undocumented people as 'illegals'. There are plenty of shades of gray in the Bible, but I think that the practice of despising the alien at our gates is clearly and consistently condemned by God.

I pay a lawn company to mow my yard, weed-eat, and edge. The entire crew is Hispanic. I really don't care whether they are undocumented nor would I even know (nor care to know) how to find out. Everybody has to start somewhere and they take pride in their work. Undocumented or not, they are not condemned in my eyes.

[Wilson Deaton]

...should Christians buy from companies that have no morals or that have double standards? Are we morally responsible in any way?

I believe we are morally responsible for our own free-will choices. I do not believe we are responsible for the free-will choices of others, including those with whom we do business.

If I tip my favorite waitress, I am giving her discretionary income. The fact that I gave her the discretionary income does not make me responsible for how she chooses to spend it. Suppose she buys a sinful DVD from Wal-Mart. I cannot be blamed for enabling her purchase of a sinful DVD. It was her choice.

By the same token, if I buy from Wal-Mart, I am giving them working capital. I am not responsible for how they spend that working capital. I cannot be blamed for enabling their ability to market a sinful DVD. That was their choice.

That's how I see it, at least.

If I'm wrong and it turns out we are responsible every time we enable someone else's sin, then we are in very big trouble! The scenarios are endless:

Suppose your local Christian store leases its retail space from a developer who uses his earnings to solicit prostitutes... Does that mean you should boycott the Christian store?
Suppose your local hardware store sells a hammer to a man who beats his wife to death with it. Do you boycott the hardware store, the hammer manufacturer, or both? After all, your business enabled them to stay in business which enabled the man to get the weapon to kill his wife...
You find out your cousin watches porn via his Time Warner internet connection on his Sony laptop. Do you boycott Sony, Time Warner, the entire internet, all of the above? Afterall, your patronage is enabling the porn industry.
Do you stop buying paper made by a paper company if you find out that paper company sells paper stock to a publisher of a racist hate-mongering newsletter?

No, I don't believe we are morally responsible for the sinful actions of those with whom we do business. (If we are, then the Calvinists are right and we really do sin every day...)

On the other hand, though we are not morally responsible for the free-will decisions of those with whom we do business, that doesn't mean we can't encourage them to make good choices. At times, "voting with our money" can serve as a means for such encouragement (though one must be careful, because as has already been pointed out, sometimes the results can be unexpected).

Wilson

[Jim Chabot]

I think it is degrading to use terms like 'the illegal immigrants' or referring to undocumented people as 'illegals'. There are plenty of shades of gray in the Bible, but I think that the practice of despising the alien at our gates is clearly and consistently condemned by God.

I pay a lawn company to mow my yard, weed-eat, and edge. The entire crew is Hispanic. I really don't care whether they are undocumented nor would I even know (nor care to know) how to find out. Everybody has to start somewhere and they take pride in their work. Undocumented or not, they are not condemned in my eyes.

Sorry Billy but they are illegal and I'm not going to call them anything other than that. You may not like it, but the term I used is accurate. I'm sure that there are some children born right here in this country to legal parents who are also undocumented, yet they are not illegal. Then again this has nothing to do with this conversation.

You may not be condemning them, but you are certainly aiding in their oppression if they do not make at least the minimum wage. Like I said you may not condemn them, you may believe that they have a right to be here, that isn't the conversation. The conversation is about ethical consumerism, the hiring of persons for a substandard wage just because they have no other alternative is hardly ethical.

[Paul DeBaufer]

I have to admit that when I saw the thread title that places the word "ethical" before the word "consumerism," I thought it was in jest--like asking someone to find a round square. It conserns me that we would blur our thinking about consumerism by saying it can be ethical so long as we are paying a just amount. I believe we are in need of a drastic shift in our thinking away from being consumers of resources. We need to think in more relational ways about the world and all with which we interact in it, beyond attaining for ourselves and posessing. Let's do away with consumeristic paradigms and then talk about what is ethical.

I think I agree. "Ethical Consumerism" seems oxymoronic, if not an outright self-negation, to me. I think I can strive to be an ethical consumer of goods, a steward, but can consumerism ever be ethical?

[Benjamin Burch]

We can bring it a little closer to home as well.

How about when the illegal immigrants show up to do a job at your home? Personally I will not allow them to work for me, I believe that it is wrong. But lets put that aside for those who believe that borders are immoral. Do you insist and verify that they are paid at least as well as their American counterparts? Many of them make less than the average janitor. How about the produce that you purchase, did it come from a state with a history of oppressing illegals to pick it?

Jim,

Once again, thanks for your posts on this topic.

[Billy Cox]

Sorry Billy but they are illegal and I'm not going to call them anything other than that. You may not like it, but the term I used is accurate. I'm sure that there are some children born right here in this country to legal parents who are also undocumented, yet they are not illegal. Then again this has nothing to do with this conversation.

You may not be condemning them, but you are certainly aiding in their oppression if they do not make at least the minimum wage. Like I said you may not condemn them, you may believe that they have a right to be here, that isn't the conversation. The conversation is about ethical consumerism, the hiring of persons for a substandard wage just because they have no other alternative is hardly ethical.

I think that ethical use of consumer goods has a lot to do with acting with the scope of limited knowledge. I have no reason to believe that my lawn company employs undocumented workers nor do I have any reason to believe that they receive substandard wages. Within what I know, my conscience is clear.

One more thing on immigration. A person cannot be illegal, only their actions can be. When someone refers to an undocumented resident of the USA as 'an illegal' they are referring to them as though they are a crime and not a person.

[Jim Frake]

I think I agree. "Ethical Consumerism" seems oxymoronic, if not an outright self-negation, to me. I think I can strive to be an ethical consumer of goods, a steward, but can consumerism ever be ethical?

Good point. I came across a site thestoryofstuff.com (http://thestoryofstuff.com) which had a quote from a Victor Lebow, a 20th century economist. The quote goes:

"our enormously productive economy ... demands that we make consumption our way of life, that we convert the buying and use of goods into rituals, that we seek our spiritual satisfaction, our ego satisfaction, in consumption ... we need things consumed, burned up, replaced, and discarded at an ever-accelerating rate."

This same concept was witnessed not only after Sept 11 in which we were encouraged to "shop" by our president, but now in our economic downturn.

It would follow that the real "vote of money" would be in the "to buy or not to buy" concept. In other words, the less we consume the more ethical we become.

[Mike Schutz]

This is one of those topics that can make many folks lose their minds - because we prefer that things be clear-cut and simple. Unfortunately, they seldom are. Thus, we need to educate ourselves, and make wise choices, recognizing that nothing is neat - the nature of unjust social systems and structures.

A multinational corporation owns coffee shops that use fair trade - for a portion of their sales, and they also own alcohol distributorships. Another owns tobacco companies and distributes for cheese cooperatives. Following the money can be so hard that it doesn't seem to be worth the effort.

Do we boycott a major oil company at the center of an environmental crisis - primarily hurting our neighbor who owns the gas station?

Do we buy the computer we can afford, knowing that it is made of products that are not environmentally friendly, and realizing that when we try to dispose of it in an appropriate manner we receive no promise that the recycling company that says it will do the right thing is actually doing it?

Yes, the Calvinists ARE RIGHT. If sin is "missing the mark of absolute behavioral perfection," then we do sin every day, the result of living in a fallen creation and a fallen social order. And those of us who are tempted to see sin solely as individual choice, and want to sanctify capitalism, fail to understand that God's plan is to redeem all of creation - and those of us who are kingdom-people are called to participate in that right now, in the present moment, by making the wisest choices we can.

[Andy Mistak]

Yes, the Calvinists ARE RIGHT. If sin is "missing the mark of absolute behavioral perfection," then we do sin every day, the result of living in a fallen creation and a fallen social order. And those of us who are tempted to see sin solely as individual choice, and want to sanctify capitalism, fail to understand that God's plan is to redeem all of creation - and those of us who are kingdom-people are called to participate in that right now, in the present moment, by making the wisest choices we can.

I agree wholeheartedly. It seems related to the whole "walk in the light you're given" concept.

I try to use my economic power in the most just way that I can. As an American, my economic power is greater than that of most individuals in the world. There are many Americans with more economic power than me and many with less, and I do think that those with greater economic power have greater responsibility when it comes to these issues.

I recently saw the movie Food, Inc., and I was very convicted of my own tendency to bury my head in the sand when things seem too complicated, but I would probably be better served to recognize the problems and be content to act on them within the context of my life as it is now.

It's like the annoying hippie "think globally act locally" bumper stickers...

[Andy Mistak]

We can bring it a little closer to home as well.

How about when the illegal immigrants show up to do a job at your home? Personally I will not allow them to work for me, I believe that it is wrong. But lets put that aside for those who believe that borders are immoral. Do you insist and verify that they are paid at least as well as their American counterparts? Many of them make less than the average janitor. How about the produce that you purchase, did it come from a state with a history of oppressing illegals to pick it?

Jim, as much and as often as we disagree politically and theologically, I can't pass up an opportunity to give you a shout out for having integrity where it really counts. I know that you put your money where your mouth is here, and that kind of stuff is how we build the Kingdom of Heaven.

[Jim Chabot]

Jim, as much and as often as we disagree politically and theologically, I can't pass up an opportunity to give you a shout out for having integrity where it really counts. I know that you put your money where your mouth is here, and that kind of stuff is how we build the Kingdom of Heaven.

I'm on both sides of this issue, I firmly believe that we need to deny employment to persons here against our laws, and I believe that we should penalize employers who knowingly employ these people.

On the other hand, I one firmly believes that everyone has a right to be here, they must also acknowledge that these folk are entitled to equal pay, especially if they are the ones paying. I'm saddened by the cheap labor component of this issue, these people are exploited and it isn't right.

[Paul DeBaufer]

And those of us who are tempted to see sin solely as individual choice, and want to sanctify capitalism, fail to understand that God's plan is to redeem all of creation - and those of us who are kingdom-people are called to participate in that right now, in the present moment, by making the wisest choices we can.

I don't know how well these fit, but:

http://www.jubilee-centre.org/document.php?id=334 & http://www.jubilee-centre.org/document.php?id=346

Both talk about Capitalism and Christianity

[Gina Stevenson]

Thanks, Paul. Bookmarked for later ... rather lengthy, & it's late.

[Kami Tuenning]

Related to this topic: http://www.mercatornet.com/articles/view/Freedom_solidarity_subsidiarity/

[Todd Erickson]

My nephew Brayden was quoting a (New York Times?) article this morning that essentially bemoaned the rising minimum wage in China, and how, if this kept up (min wage is now 1.84 for workers in China) American companies would have to move their manufacturing to Vietnam or Indonesia.

If you had to pay people what your clothing is actually worth, how much clothing would you actually have? Would you make your own? As participants in Christianity, surrounded by others carrying the image of Christ, what is our responsibility to the world?

[Billy Cox]

If you had to pay people what your clothing is actually worth, how much clothing would you actually have?

How would you calculate that worth? In a free market (in the absence of government price controls), what something sells for will almost always be more than what it is worth. As a result, raw materials and labor costs will constantly be squeezed to the lowest level that a given market will bear.

[John Dahl]

As participants in Christianity, surrounded by others carrying the image of Christ, what is our responsibility to the world?

To make disciples!

[Shea Zellweger]

To make disciples!

And what are disciples called to do? Christianity is not a ponzi scheme, so clearly we should be doing things in the world, and training other disciples to do the same, correct?

[John Dahl]

And what are disciples called to do?

Make more disciples! Everything we do needs to be centered on making disciples.

[Shea Zellweger]

Make more disciples! Everything we do needs to be centered on making disciples.

John,
A disciple is someone who follows a specific way of life. "Make disciples" is not synonymous with "evangelize," that's why we talk about "evangelism and discipleship." We are called to live like Christ while we are in this world- people will know we are disciples by our love, and that love is to be so great that we are willing to lay down our lives for others, just as Jesus did for us. As I said before, Christianity is not a Ponzi scheme. There's a lot to making and being disciples, and I don't think your answer fully grasps that.

[James Diggs]

What making converts and making disciples aren't the same thing??????? :smilies1722:

[David Graham]

James I know what you're saying, but in practical terms there is a difference. Doing an indepth bible study with an unbeliever most of the time would be a "waste of time" since they (mostly) don't have the inclination to do it. At the same time, for most of us who have been Christians for many years or decades, we have effectively lost contact with people in the world and have to re-establish relationships with those who are outside of the church. Thus we meet them either at the point of our mutual commonality; ie needs and interests. This may be difficult because, the points of commonality between the society and the church communities have lessened over the years. Sure, we have the same basic needs (food, shelter, clothing, love etc) and similar interests (ie sports, commerce, work and politics) but our world views are often substantially different. We as Christians often operate from the paradigm of faith whereas mostly the world does not (certainly not in the same way as most of us would define "faith".) Then there are differences in our understanding of religious language and concepts. i.e. What we mean by what we say; why we do the things we do; and what particular practices we do actually mean. For most people in our western societies, (even among nominal Christians who seldom attend church), Christianity and the church are mysterious. What we do in our services is often seen in terms of being a "quaint antiquity", or something that is useful for our cultural heritage but little else, for our hymnody and rituals are completely different to what is practiced in the general society. e.g. Praising God in song (in some strange "archaic" tunes) as opposed to singing about relationships between people (lovers, even failed loving relationships); Likewise our Prayer is often misunderstood for quiet contemplation or meditation; Baptism is simply a "Naming ceremony (for infants) or a rite of initiation for adults; and as for the eucharist, this is thoroughly misunderstood among Christians let alone what society may think about it. I have even had some "worldly people" that I've known liken it to a form of "white witchcraft" practiced by the church.

So while I believe that discipleship cannot be separated because it is all about building relationships between people and Christ, in practical terms, how we go about building relationships with people who do not understand the basic concepts of "faith", "worship" and "following Christ together" will be completely different to how we nurture those who have begun their Christian journey. And this is not simply a matter of "dumbing down what we teach Christians" but starting to build relationships of love and trust.

Edited to add:
I realise I've gone entirely off the theme of this thread. Sorry about that, I briefly got so focussed on the specific point I was responding to.

And yet, building relationships of love and trust is all about our Christian witness and should be at the very heart of our "ethical consumerism". i.e People should be able to trust us for simply no other reason than we are Christians; followers of Christ, who would not treat them badly. And so with this aspect of "witness" in mind.... I submit this post.

Cheers,
Dave

[Tim Bourland]

“Ethical consumerism is the intentional purchase of products and services that the customer considers to be made ethically.“ -Wikipedia

I’m not sure how to word this question but should Christians buy from companies that have no morals or that have double standards? Are we morally responsible in any way? For example Hastings Entertainment Inc. sells Christian books, movies, as well as bibles. Just a few aisles over they have porn. Or what about those that sell or rent rated R movies like Blockbuster, Netflix, Red Box, Wal-Mart, and Target while at the same time they sell or rent Christian movies. We complain about how bad things are but if we vote with our money then we may be making the problem worse. Is it not simple economics? What are your thoughts?

Forget about buying another car, house, clothes, having electricity, running water, gas, or leaving the grocery store with a single item.

I know where your thought is, and it's not a bad thing. But the deeper you dig into any current company you will inevitably run across something that goes against your eithics and therefore will delete them from the "approved" list. We can avoid the obvious ones, but really, there is no way to find a "pure" corporation.

[John Dahl]

John,
A disciple is someone who follows a specific way of life. "Make disciples" is not synonymous with "evangelize," that's why we talk about "evangelism and discipleship." We are called to live like Christ while we are in this world- people will know we are disciples by our love, and that love is to be so great that we are willing to lay down our lives for others, just as Jesus did for us. As I said before, Christianity is not a Ponzi scheme. There's a lot to making and being disciples, and I don't think your answer fully grasps that.

Shea,

I thought it went without saying that being a disciple is following a specific way of life, that is Jesus' life. I also thought it went without saying that in order to make disciples one first had to be a disciple themselves. If one is not an obedient follower of Christ(a disciple) it is impossible to impart that faith to someone else to want to become a disciple. It has often been said that if no one is following, you probably are not a leader. I think if can also be said if we realize we are not making disciples we may need to examine our own level of discipleship.

I never said or implied that evangelism and discipleship were synonymous.

Please explain your reference to "a Ponzi scheme". You have used it twice now and I'm not smart enough to understand your point.

[Larry Parsons]

Most "Christian" films are shallow imitations of the real thing to fit a niche market. Whereas, many beautiful, striking, powerful movies are rated R.

Ethical Consumerism has far more to do with whether something is fair trade...was the clothing that you purchased made by slave labor? How about the coffee you drink, or the chocolate you eat? Do the janitorial staff in the building you work in make a living wage? etc.
Todd,years ago I took a three day class call adventure in attitudes with much of business people. One one question that was ask of us. In your company who would you miss the quicks? Whatwe learn it would be the janitor-without the janitor the place would be a mess . Some time we forget how important the Janitor are.
Thanks
Larry

[Shea Zellweger]

Shea,

I thought it went without saying that being a disciple is following a specific way of life, that is Jesus' life. I also thought it went without saying that in order to make disciples one first had to be a disciple themselves. If one is not an obedient follower of Christ(a disciple) it is impossible to impart that faith to someone else to want to become a disciple. It has often been said that if no one is following, you probably are not a leader. I think if can also be said if we realize we are not making disciples we may need to examine our own level of discipleship.

I never said or implied that evangelism and discipleship were synonymous.

Please explain your reference to "a Ponzi scheme". You have used it twice now and I'm not smart enough to understand your point.

John,
there is an unfortunate school of thought in American Christianity (including the CotN), that equates "getting people saved" to "making disciples," which is why I asked you the question I did. I appreciate your response.

As for a Ponzi Scheme, it's an "investment" system similar to a Pyramid Scheme. Either is a good example of the "make disciples" model I was questioning- essentially, people who are victims of ponzi or pyramid schemes earn money by recruiting others, who earn money by recruiting still others, and so forth. There is no real advantage to the system, and it does not have any true benefits, but relies entirely on recruits finding more recruits. I hope that our faith is far more relevant and meaningful than such a system.

[Todd Erickson]

I went to a class at the most recent GA on discipleship, taught by one of the newest GS's. The marks of discipleship, which I saw nothing at the GA to disagree with, were:

-Salvation
-Church Attendance
-Tithing
-Participation in church service (Sunday School, nursery, maintenance) activities
-Bible Study

That's it. Those things are what is taught as Discipleship within the COTN currently on a broad base. This is also, interestingly, what it takes to be a "good" Evangelical.

But I don't see anything from the Sermon on the Mount here.

[John Dahl]

As for a Ponzi Scheme, it's an "investment" system similar to a Pyramid Scheme. Either is a good example of the "make disciples" model I was questioning- essentially, people who are victims of ponzi or pyramid schemes earn money by recruiting others, who earn money by recruiting still others, and so forth. There is no real advantage to the system, and it does not have any true benefits, but relies entirely on recruits finding more recruits. I hope that our faith is far more relevant and meaningful than such a system.

The reason I was having difficulty with your illustration of the Ponzi scheme is when a Ponzi scheme collapses on itself the last people in are the losers because there is no more money flowing into the scheme, but that I don't see where that applies in the case of making disciples. There is the same amount of God's grace for those at the end of the line, as it were, to those at the beginning.

I still think I'm missing something here. Maybe you could explain further. Maybe we're saying the same things.

[Shea Zellweger]

The reason I was having difficulty with your illustration of the Ponzi scheme is when a Ponzi scheme collapses on itself the last people in are the losers because there is no more money flowing into the scheme, but that I don't see where that applies in the case of making disciples. There is the same amount of God's grace for those at the end of the line, as it were, to those at the beginning.

I still think I'm missing something here. Maybe you could explain further. Maybe we're saying the same things.

The analogy does have its flaws, as you pointed out, but the comparison I was trying to draw is that the purpose of a Ponzi scheme is to bring more people in- people simple go from prospects, to recruits, to recruiters. This seems to be the case in a lot of evangelical churches- there is a rush for gaining new membership, with very little in the way of equipping those members once they come in. WillowCreek was set up like that for quite some time, and in recent years they have reassessed their system, because they learned that they were gaining a lot of people who professed faith, but they were not really discipling new believers. It seems to me that you are not guilty of this mistake, but many people and churches are, and because it's a common mistake, your initial language gave me pause for concern. I don't think God's grace is ever going to "collapse," but I also think there's much more to Christianity than gaining new recruits.

[John Dahl]

The analogy does have its flaws, as you pointed out, but the comparison I was trying to draw is that the purpose of a Ponzi scheme is to bring more people in- people simple go from prospects, to recruits, to recruiters. This seems to be the case in a lot of evangelical churches- there is a rush for gaining new membership, with very little in the way of equipping those members once they come in. WillowCreek was set up like that for quite some time, and in recent years they have reassessed their system, because they learned that they were gaining a lot of people who professed faith, but they were not really discipling new believers. It seems to me that you are not guilty of this mistake, but many people and churches are, and because it's a common mistake, your initial language gave me pause for concern. I don't think God's grace is ever going to "collapse," but I also think there's much more to Christianity than gaining new recruits.

Shea,

I completely agree with your above comments. It is much easier to make "converts" than to be willing to be inconvenienced by rolling up our sleeves and getting our hands dirty, so to speak, in the lives of hurting people in the process of making disciples.

Imagine that. We have found something to agree on.:)

[James Diggs]

It is much easier to make "converts" than to be willing to be inconvenienced by rolling up our sleeves and getting our hands dirty, so to speak, in the lives of hurting people in the process of making disciples.

Imagine that. We have found something to agree on.:)

I don’t want to stop all this happy agreeing- hopefully what I say still fit within what you were thinking as something you would agree with.

You may not have meant it this way but I think there is a BIG difference on helping “hurting people in the process of making disciples” and helping “hurting people” as a way of being disciples ourselves and of course always inviting others into this way with us.

Again, you may not have meant to imply this, but I have a problem with the perspective that we help the hurting and the poor so we can tell them about Jesus when we should be helping the hurting and the poor because it IS the Way of Jesus.

This distinction seems to be made based on how we understand the gospel

If the gospel is just fire insurance as the ultimate goal, than we treat meeting the needs of others as just the cost of gaining their ear so we can tell them what is really important regarding their eternity. Ultimately the condition of their earthly existence is not that consequential in the light of eternity and so if we have to feed a few mouths to get others “saved” then it will be worth it. But we don’t really need to do more that that because we think Jesus said there will always be poor people. We interpret this to mean that their poverty doesn't matter as much as their soul.

My problem with this is that is very Gnostic, the gospel in this light focus on escaping our fleshy reality one day for heaven, making what happens in the flesh in regard to justice and righteousness (holiness) largely inconsequential.

However, if the gospel is about resurrection and redemption then we understand that “salvation” can be as big as heaven but also as “small” (like a mustard seed) as redeeming the humanity of another by treating the least of these with the respect of a king and giving them a good seat at our tables; because doing so reflects the Kingdom of God.

Jesus preached a gospel that was a Way- not just a way to go to heaven when we die- but a Way to live into the Kingdom of God NOW with the promise that this way lasts forever. Some one asked earlier where the sermon of the mount is in our “making disciples”. Good question, because that sermon, as the greatest sermon ever, was about the WAY.

The gospel understood this way helps the hurting, the poor, the marginalized, (even our enemies) in ways that restores their humanity (a humanity redeemed by the new Adam). Salvation isn’t just what we get in the end, it’s our very way of life where we live redemptive relationships with others truly loving them AS OURSELVES. There may always be poor around, but the “saved” know that the poor are to be “with us” as we live a life of solidarity with them understanding that the salvation of my humanity is intertwined with my participation with the salvation of the humanity of the other. To allow my neighbor to lose their dignity and their humanity when I can do something about it is to lose my own. Finally, to say that I have been "saved" into a relationship where I can now love God while not loving the least of these among us show us not to be saved at all.

So again, discipleship is about the WAY of Jesus. It’s not just a means to a different end, even when we think that end is getting people into heaven. We are not just trying to get people to receive their free ticket by faith to go to heaven when they die- we are to be living God's kingdom now, always inviting others to participate, as we live out redemption and salvation as a very way of life in the world we live in.