Legal Restrictions on the Gospel

[Willo]

I lead an evangelism team into Brisbane city weekly, and it is perfectly legal to preach on public property in Brisbane. However, council will try to bluff you by quoting laws that do not exist. Just ask them to produce the legal documentation and of course they cannot.

You have constitutional freedom under chapter 5, section 116 to practice your religion which in Christianity includes preaching. A few years ago Brisbane police arrest Frank Sladek for handing out Bibles, but after an embrassing court case Premier Beatie had to issue an apology.

 

[ebia]

What I'm saying is there's really no point in wasting out energies in doing the social work if we cannot communicate the gospel.

Doing charitable work does spread the gospel. Words are not the only means of communication, and their are plenty of other churches majoring on them.

The main reason the Salvos carry more respect in the general population than the other churches is that they practice what they preach - they show the love of God in action. Lose the charitable work and your right to be heard will suffer.

The balance has to be found between proclaiming the gospe effectively without 'scaring' people off, and between demonstrating the faith and explaining it. The Salvation Army has been historically much better at finding that balance than the other mainline churches.

 

[GodsoldierClintus]

That's awesome Willo thanks for that. Of course I can't just wear my uniform and go out there and do it without consulting my officers. But if I can't I'll just do it without the uniform.

Ebia - respect is great - but respect doesn't save souls. The Salvos epaulettes have two s's. Saved to Save, Saved to Serve. There is a recognition in the Army there needs to be a Spiritual revival. There's a recognition that perhaps playing in our bands, going to our meetings, serving others, may not be saving souls. There is a recognition that wearing our uniforms - may not be following Christ. And we're not going to lose our crowns for the sake of being "Salvos"

 

[Neenie1]

All the money from Red Shield goes towards our charity work alone and not ministerial work that is true. All our churches are basically self-funded. That's the problem being registered as a non-profit charity I guess. I guess a lot of people would disagree with our beliefs but are happy for us to continue our social work. What I'm saying is there's really no point in wasting out energies in doing the social work if we cannot communicate the gospel. We as an organisation of Christians believe that people will be condemned in hell if they do not find Christ Jesus. If our charitable efforts do not allow us to present the solution to the great threat then...well - we're not doing our job. Don't know when this will change - I guess Red shield will always be a part of pure social work because of the legal issues behind it - that is behind the "charity" arm of the Army.

Don't donate if you don't feel comfortable anyway...its the fact that we are Christians and we spend all our efforts as an organisation that makes us so efficient. There is no other aid organisation that runs on 85% efficiency.

I do hear what you are saying you want to be able to preach and communicate the gospel - that's all well and good.


I do think it's incorrect to say that there is no point doing the social work side of it if you can't communicate the gospel. I would say that they go hand in hand. Most people I know (either Christian or non-Christian) know the meaning behind the Salvation army.


There is a scripture somewhere that says if you do this for the least of these you are doing it for me. So I believe that helping people in need is serving God, it's doing it in a much quieter way than standing on the corners and preaching. I think if someone was in desperate need and all you did was preach at them they wouldn't be able to really listen to what you were saying, their thoughts would be "if you really care you would be doing something to help me feed my kids etc"

 

[ebia]

That's awesome Willo thanks for that. Of course I can't just wear my uniform and go out there and do it without consulting my officers. But if I can't I'll just do it without the uniform.

Ebia - respect is great - but respect doesn't save souls.

No, but it can win you a hearing, just as the healings etc performed by Jesus and the disciples won them a hearing, that we in the more 'standard' churches struggle to get. The early church got noticed as being different in many cases because they cared for people in ways society couldn't make sense of. The radical love of God can be spoken through how we act, sometimes more effectively than what we say because words are cheap, actions are not.

The Salvos epaulettes have two s's. Saved to Save, Saved to Serve. There is a recognition in the Army there needs to be a Spiritual revival. There's a recognition that perhaps playing in our bands, going to our meetings, serving others, may not be saving souls.

Of course you need to evaluate whether you are effective, but...
1. The charitable work you do is part of God's work, anticipating the kingdom of God. A part most of us emphasise too little, so if you emphasise it too much perhaps you are helping to balance the church as a whole.
2. Your distinctiveness allows you to speak to some who won't listen to other churches - we need a diversity of approach if we are collectively to speak effectively to the most possible people.

There is a recognition that wearing our uniforms - may not be following Christ. And we're not going to lose our crowns for the sake of being "Salvos"

Of course you need to consider whether or not that's true, but don't be too quick to assume that what you say is more important than what you do, or that caring for those society lets down need be any less radical than speaking the words "Jesus is Lord".

 

[GodsoldierClintus]

It's all well and good for us to serve God through charity. But at the end of the day the word saves not the charity. I'm going to disagree and say that most people do not even know we are Christian let alone what we preach. And even if they recognize as Christian - they are happy for us "idiots" to believe in our flying spaghetti monster because we do a lot of charity, but the less they hear of our gospel the better. The argument doesn't change - sure we serve God through our charity - but the at the end of the day, if they don't get the word, those people still perish. From the words of William Booth himself - those not on the land are in the sea.

That was the whole point of this thread - it seems we are being restricted to preach the gospel but it's all right to do the charity. Why do something if it doesn't glorify God and communicate the gospel. It's a tragedy because those people we serve will still perish. And back in the day when the Army first started they were called the skeleton army - people hated what they did. Reputation is nothing, it does not save, at the end of the day it's just an earthly thing.

 

[GodsoldierClintus]

We're just arguing in circles, or rather I'm not very good at arguing. I'll just go back to praying.

 

[Monarchist]

Commanded to preach the Gospel. No arguments from Christians.

 

[GodsoldierClintus]

There's just this feeling within the Army we are light years from where we are meant to be.

 

[ebia]

It's all well and good for us to serve God through charity. But at the end of the day the word saves not the charity.

Your charity is the word enacted.

I'm going to disagree and say that most people do not even know we are Christian let alone what we preach.

You're probably better placed to judge that than I. Assuming you're correct, then you need to think about how you can communicate that without losing what you are already getting right.

And even if they recognize as Christian - they are happy for us "idiots" to believe in our flying spaghetti monster because we do a lot of charity, but the less they hear of our gospel the better.

However you proclaim the gospel, whether in words, actions, or both, a lot of people aren't going to listen. But if what you do is radical enough some at least will take notice.

The argument doesn't change - sure we serve God through our charity - but the at the end of the day, if they don't get the word, those people still perish. From the words of William Booth himself - those not on the land are in the sea.

By enacting the kingdom of God we bring it all closer to God. When we act as lights in the world reflecting the image of God into creation we proclaim the gospel just as effectively as standing on a street corner shouting "repent and believe the good news", usually a lot more so. When you act radically different, people notice and wonder why - that's how the early church was so effective, and it still works. When you shout at them they can right you off as religous nutters; when what you do changes the world for the better that's a bit harder.

That was the whole point of this thread - it seems we are being restricted to preach the gospel but it's all right to do the charity.

If the worst came to the worst you ought still to do the charity even if you can't proclaim the gospel in words.

Why do something if it doesn't glorify God and communicate the gospel.

1. It does both of those, even if not everyone recognises that.
2. Jesus said to do these things - was he wrong?

It's a tragedy because those people we serve will still perish.

Some will hear your message effectively, some will not. Before you change anything you seriously need to ask

And back in the day when the Army first started they were called the skeleton army - people hated what they did.

Why? What did they do that challenged the world so much? It might be more useful to explore teh reasons than just assume that doing whatever annoys people is the right thing to do, or that what you are doing is wrong.

Reputation is nothing, it does not save, at the end of the day it's just an earthly thing.

It can be a tool - a means to an end.

 

[GodsoldierClintus]

Well people hated the army back then because they preached that the poor could be saved, and then helped them apply the gospel to break that chains on them. And I guess that still very much applies to a lot of our drug work, addiction work etc.

People didn't like the idea that the Army were preaching that Christ brings salvation. And that they were making it a reality for the poor. They didn't like the idea the Army imposed their religion with their work. They believe that those 2 things should be separate. They didn't like the fact that the Salvos preached the gospel, that's why they had the bands in the first place - they were bodyguards for the actual preachers. They distracted people with the music, and by all accounts they were big blokes.

It's very much like today...accept we no longer practice our preaching with our work because it's not right to impose our views on secular society.

 

[Neenie1]

It's all well and good for us to serve God through charity. But at the end of the day the word saves not the charity. I'm going to disagree and say that most people do not even know we are Christian let alone what we preach. And even if they recognize as Christian - they are happy for us "idiots" to believe in our flying spaghetti monster because we do a lot of charity, but the less they hear of our gospel the better. The argument doesn't change - sure we serve God through our charity - but the at the end of the day, if they don't get the word, those people still perish. From the words of William Booth himself - those not on the land are in the sea.

That was the whole point of this thread - it seems we are being restricted to preach the gospel but it's all right to do the charity. Why do something if it doesn't glorify God and communicate the gospel. It's a tragedy because those people we serve will still perish. And back in the day when the Army first started they were called the skeleton army - people hated what they did. Reputation is nothing, it does not save, at the end of the day it's just an earthly thing.

By serving God you are glorifying him. How is it not glorifying God to do the things he says to do. I believe it says in the Bible to help and love others.

We're just arguing in circles, or rather I'm not very good at arguing. I'll just go back to praying.

Yeah I'm not good at it either.

Commanded to preach the Gospel. No arguments from Christians.

I agree, they want to preach the gospel and I have no problems with it. What I do have an issue with is someone saying it's not glorifying God to help others. I just can't understand that.

There's just this feeling within the Army we are light years from where we are meant to be.

Join the club. I think most churches feel that way. I don't know what the answer is. I guess it's walking in humility and being open to the direction that God is leading. (whether it's the church as a whole, or individuals)

 

[ebia]

Well people hated the army back then because they preached that the poor could be saved, and then helped them apply the gospel to break that chains on them. And I guess that still very much applies to a lot of our drug work, addiction work etc.

So perhaps you are closest to that when you are working with those that society doesn't think diserve to be helped.

People didn't like the idea that the Army were preaching that Christ brings salvation. And that they were making it a reality for the poor.

All the churches have done the former, so I suspect it's the later that caught people's attention. Who are the people in our time that society doesn't think need our help?

They didn't like the idea the Army imposed their religion with their work. They believe that those 2 things should be separate.

And if you lose your emphasis on charity you lose that as surely as if you stop doing it in the name of Christ.

They didn't like the fact that the Salvos preached the gospel, that's why they had the bands in the first place - they were bodyguards for the actual preachers. They distracted people with the music, and by all accounts they were big blokes.

It's very much like today...accept we no longer practice our preaching with our work because it's not right to impose our views on secular society.

If you have, and your in a better position to judge, then clearly that's not good, but, either way, like the rest of us, you need to adapt how you say it in any case. Maybe it's an opportunity not just to restart proclaiming the gospel in the same old way, but to find ways of proclaiming, alongside your enacting of it, in ways that speak radically and will be heard effectively in the 21st century.

 

[ebia]

We're just arguing in circles, or rather I'm not very good at arguing. I'll just go back to praying.

Please don't. I mean, don't stop praying, but don't stop the discussion - it's not an argument but a valuable exploration of how best to be the body of Christ.

 

[GodsoldierClintus]

I'll try and say what I actually mean. Of course helping others is doing what God wants. That's why it says "Saved to Serve". But people are naturally going to be resistant to what we are telling them through the word. Is it love, if we do not tell them about the truth that we know? Is it love, if we do not tell them that the way they are going, they are going straight to hell? It doesn't have to be a preacher on the side of the road preaching damnation - no I don't think that's a good idea. But it seems that society has no problem with us doing our good works, but has a problem with us as soon as we mention the gospel.

The church only got to where it is today because the apostles were told by authorities not to preach the gospel, and did anyway. That's what I'm trying to say. They preached Jesus alive, when he died. They preached Salvation when the world around them preached death.

Join the club. I think most churches feel that way. I don't know what the answer is. I guess it's walking in humility and being open to the direction that God is leading. (whether it's the church as a whole, or individuals)

Well...I feel the answer is to stop being "nice" and think of the big picture. You can't argue the church in China isn't charitable - but they succeed because they preach when they aren't allowed to. Of course we don't do things to annoy people - but when truth is not told because it annoys people, well that's a problem.

I'm not saying the Salvos should change into an army of street preachers. I'm saying we're going to have to do things that may offend people and damage our name. I'm saying we have to preach when we do our works, even if it's against social norm or possibly even the law. I'm saying we have to sing Jesus name in the street even if it offends people. I'm not saying we should preach damnation - we never did that. We preached Salvation, and we should do so. What good is bread and food in this life, if there is no bread and wine for the next life? There is a cost of following Christ...I do believe he told us that? But whoever believes in me shall deny himself and carry the cross and follow me? We are no longer following Christ. We are submitting to social norm instead of Jesus.

And what if the very thing God does want us to do is to preach the word. All the prophets, were rejected and killed for preaching and asking for people to repent!

Again I ask - is it love, if we do not preach our gospel? Is it love not to preach the gospel just because it offends someone? We know they are going to hell! Unless you're a universalist, that is what you believe right? Is it right to sit here and continue our religious worship when souls are lost everyday? Is it not a tragedy and yes I use tragedy when people die without knowing God? I truly hope that we've got it all wrong about Jesus being the only way. Because that would mean that there is still hope for those that have died. But we know that's not true! Preaching damnation in hatred is of course not a good thing - but preaching salvation through Christ is very necessary thing in my opinion. We don't want God hates [wash my mouth][wash my mouth][wash my mouth][wash my mouth] types of teaching. But we should at least ask - what hope do you have broken world? What good does your jobs, your money do for you? Because Ecclesiastes is such a powerful book. If what we believe is false - then we may as well go and eat drink and be merry!

I do not accept that doing charitable works is enough...there are so many times in the OT...God hates our worship, hates our songs, hates our offerings...why? Because there are oppressed people, because all the Jews did was offer worship not of true value.

What if worship today calls for us to be hated? What if worship today means that we have to suffer the scorn of this world? What if we have to preach, be hated for it, and still turn around and serve them?

And isn't that EXACTLY what Jesus did?

 

[MOTHY]

How can a down and out poor person really 'hear' the Gospel when they are starving, homeless and destitute? I believe the Scriptures say something along these lines. Go Salvos, you will always have my trust and I'll always contribute to your appeals. GS, if the Salvos are looking to re-establish their original mandate according to Booth's Godly vision, well that's excellent. Don't be put off by petty beurocracy(sp?) The public will always support the Salvos if you guys want to kick up a fuss about it and go public.

 

[ebia]

I'll try and say what I actually mean. Of course helping others is doing what God wants. That's why it says "Saved to Serve".

Ok. We are agreed there, then.

But people are naturally going to be resistant to what we are telling them through the word. Is it love, if we do not tell them about the truth that we know? Is it love, if we do not tell them that the way they are going, they are going straight to hell? It doesn't have to be a preacher on the side of the road preaching damnation - no I don't think that's a good idea. But it seems that society has no problem with us doing our good works, but has a problem with us as soon as we mention the gospel.

::nods::

The church only got to where it is today because the apostles were told by authorities not to preach the gospel, and did anyway. That's what I'm trying to say. They preached Jesus alive, when he died. They preached Salvation when the world around them preached death.

::nods::

Well...I feel the answer is to stop being "nice" and think of the big picture. You can't argue the church in China isn't charitable - but they succeed because they preach when they aren't allowed to. Of course we don't do things to annoy people - but when truth is not told because it annoys people, well that's a problem.

I agree, with the proviso that the way we proclaim the gospel is important; one can do it in such a way that people stop listening, or one can do it in such a way as gives the best chance of them listening. Sometimes one needs to be subtle in the way one approaches the issue: "Act wisely with outsiders, making the best of the present time. Always talk pleasantly and with flavour of wit but be sensitive to the kind of answer each one requires." (Colossians 4:5-6, NJB).

I'm not saying the Salvos should change into an army of street preachers. I'm saying we're going to have to do things that may offend people and damage our name.

You may, but don't do it lightly. The name you have is valuable (it makes it harder to dismiss what you say on many issues in comparison with other churches), so don't blow it away and less you are very sure of what you are doing.

I'm saying we have to preach when we do our works, even if it's against social norm or possibly even the law.

Sure, in ways that are appropriate, and depending exactly what the laws prohibit.

I'm saying we have to sing Jesus name in the street even if it offends people. I'm not saying we should preach damnation - we never did that. We preached Salvation, and we should do so. What good is bread and food in this life, if there is no bread and wine for the next life?

Clearly some. You're right in the fact that we need to be doing both, but while most of the church is too light on enacting the kingdom, at worst if you are too heavy on that and too light on preaching it you are helping to balance an unbalanced church. Seen in terms of the whole church, if increased "upfront" preaching on the part of the Salvos decreases your ability to enact the kingdom then it will serve to unbalance the whole church further.

There is a cost of following Christ...I do believe he told us that? But whoever believes in me shall deny himself and carry the cross and follow me? We are no longer following Christ. We are submitting to social norm instead of Jesus.

I'm not at all sure you are.

And what if the very thing God does want us to do is to preach the word.

You have to decide that for yourselves, but I suspect overall he has called the Salvos to make up for deficencies in the rest of the church that is better at preaching the word than enacting it.

All the prophets, were rejected and killed for preaching and asking for people to repent!

That doesn't mean everyone is called to major on that.

Again I ask - is it love, if we do not preach our gospel?

It may be, if it allows you to enact it futher.

Is it love not to preach the gospel just because it offends someone? We know they are going to hell!

If your actions make the kingdom of God a greater reality than your words would it may be.

Unless you're a universalist, that is what you believe right? Is it right to sit here and continue our religious worship when souls are lost everyday?

Our religious worship, our proclaiming the kingdom in words of mission, and our embodying the kingdom in action are all ways we work towards God's redeeming purpose. If you lose one of those three the others become shadows of what they should be: mission proclamations that aren't soaked in prayer and worship before, during and after will fail. mission proclamations that aren't embeded within an embodied anticpation of what the kingdom will be are doomed to fail. God works through our prayer and our actions to bring people to himself, as well as the words we say to them.

Is it not a tragedy and yes I use tragedy when people die without knowing God?

Of course it is, but we must not lose sight of the big picture.

I truly hope that we've got it all wrong about Jesus being the only way. Because that would mean that there is still hope for those that have died. But we know that's not true! Preaching damnation in hatred is of course not a good thing - but preaching salvation through Christ is very necessary thing in my opinion. We don't want God hates [wash my mouth][wash my mouth][wash my mouth][wash my mouth] types of teaching. But we should at least ask - what hope do you have broken world? What good does your jobs, your money do for you? Because Ecclesiastes is such a powerful book. If what we believe is false - then we may as well go and eat drink and be merry!

all true (at least to a point), but ...

I do not accept that doing charitable works is enough...there are so many times in the OT...God hates our worship, hates our songs, hates our offerings...why? Because there are oppressed people, because all the Jews did was offer worship not of true value.

Worship, 'charity', and proclamation are all non-negotiable. But I think you need to see yourselves as part of the bigger church; a church that isn't doing enough about the oppresion of poverty. To overstate and oversimplfy the case, if you major on the 'charity' and the rest of us major on 'proclamation' then between us it's possible we are getting the balance right. If you move the emphasis from charity to verbal proclamation then the whole church becomes more unbalanced. Ideally, of course, all of us are doing all three well, but that certainly isn't the current situation.

What if worship today calls for us to be hated? What if worship today means that we have to suffer the scorn of this world? What if we have to preach, be hated for it, and still turn around and serve them?

That's all fine, providing:
a. being hated isn't making your proclamation less effective
b. being hated isn't stopping you serving.

And isn't that EXACTLY what Jesus did?

Yes and no - while a large proportion of people didn't buy his message, it seems that it's those with a vested interest subverted by it (the 'authorities' of Rome, Temple, and Torah) actually hated him.

 

[Monarchist]

Surely all that GSC stated must equal nothing more than the Great Commission. "Go ye into all the world, and preach the gospel to every creature"
If that is not your major objective, then what are you doing?
Sounds like the Salvos have a very good plan. They are an Army, there is a war.
GSC is correct, we are hated for what we believe.

 

[ebia]

Surely all that GSC stated must equal nothing more than the Great Commission. "Go ye into all the world, and preach the gospel to every creature"
If that is not your major objective, then what are you doing?

If by "Go ye into all the world, and preach the gospel to every creature" one means "explaining Christian doctine by talking to people" that's a long way short of the whole picture. The gospel is a lot more (and/or less) than 'Christian doctine', is communicated in a lot more ways than spoken (or written) words, and is about far more (though not less) than individual salvation.

Sounds like the Salvos have a very good plan. They are an Army, there is a war.
GSC is correct, we are hated for what we believe.

Slogans have their place, but so does deeper thought about the fullness of what it means to bring God's light to the world. If God's purpose could be reduced to a few pithy punchlines we wouldn't need 66 (or more) books and thousands of years of thinking about them.

 

[norbie]

I can feel with you and understand what you mean, GS.
There are a lot people out there they still believe that good deeds, working in church, charity and so on will get you to heaven - the Bible tells us otherwise. No good work get you there - only to accept Jesus as our Saver will bring us ethernal life.
We must learn from Jesus himself: why did he perform miracles and healing? Today we would call it 'promotion', it atracted the crowd. But then he went on to his main purpose: teaching.
And so I fully agree with you, the Army is doing well the first part: promotion, they got a good name.
But the second part, the teaching is still missing. And this should be the more important part. I believe today the majority of people would not stop for to long for street preaching, so I think the best way would be individual teaching about Jesus. When you help someone then is maybe the time to tell people about Jesus, about the Grace he offers us just for the taking.
My young friend, this senior is proud of you - you are on the right track: teaching about Jesus should be the main aim of the Army