Firstly, I think it's quite odd that, on the one hand, many Christians don't take the Bible literally and instead choose to come away with a "general takeaway message," and yet on the other hand I'm getting attacked quite hard because there are some fringe people who are actually extremist Christians, as Mountain_Girl406 showed. However, the general takeaway message from my OP was clearly that the amount of Christians actually doing this in comparison to the 1,000,000,000+ Christians on earth is, regrettably, essentially nothing.
C.S. Lewis once said,
"Christianity, if false, is of no importance, and if true, of infinite importance. The only thing it cannot be is moderately important."
And yet the vast majority of Christians seem to think Christianity is of moderate importance, which is the thought process I was prodding with this thread.
To address a few quotes,
You know, the term "Christian" did not come into use until after John the Baptist had been murdered. His message was not about Christianity, but about the Messiah whose coming all Jews anticipated. How, then, is John the Baptist an example of Christian extremism? I'm pretty sure he would have identified as a radical Jew. John also did not wander the world preaching the Gospel. His message of repentance, the coming kingdom of God and the Messiah was proclaimed primarily to his fellow Jews.
John the Baptist certainly recognized Jesus for who he was, is that not enough?
My response to your question is: Why should any Christian be doing this today? What clear biblical mandate is there for such activity? As well, since you would have to know what every Christian on the planet is doing in order to say that not one of them is doing as you describe, I would like to know how you have obtained such knowledge?
Selah.
OK. So there is no mandate to do this. But clearly you would think it is a good thing. If you want to skate by and do the minimum, that's your own personal decision. If, instead, you want to go above and beyond for the God you love, then you should be doing this.
I believe some Jesuits do this - or used to - minus the proselytizing.
Minus the most important part?
The Bible is a historical book about how God has influenced lives and how
we can have a relationship with God. It's not a guide book or rule book.
Mother Theresa qualifies, though she felt that caring for poor was her calling.
Other notable Christians: (I don't know their financial situations )
Gladys Aylward (1902 - 1970)
Jackie Pullinger
General Eva Burrows
Peter & Miranda Harris
Isabel Carter
I did not read any of those, but I opened the page and ctrl+F searched for "poor." Only two results:
"We exist to preach the Good News, reach the poor and see people set free through faith in Jesus Christ."
Not good enough. Where is the selling of everything and giving to the poor? Simply "reaching" them?
"The Jubilee campaign took inspiration from the Biblical notion of the super Sabbath. It argued that the year 2000 and the turn of the millennium offered, indeed demanded, extraordinary measures: above all the forgiveness of poor country's debts. It mobilized millions of people, congregations, students, politicians, and citizens, in at least 60 countries. It certainly changed many minds, goaded action from reluctant and willing politicians and helped to shape new approaches to international finance."
This is also not selling all that you own and giving to the poor.
You need to at least attempt to prove yourself right first.
OK fine. I withdraw the question. Allow me to rephrase it. Why are
you not doing this?
Even the Apostles did not sell everything they had. How do you think they were able to return to the fairly costly boats and nets they still owned a week after Jesus was crucified?
Peter also renounced Christ three times. Do you want to follow that example as well?
I think with regards to your definition of extremist Christians, monks and nuns could apply. They give up everything to do the work of god, after all.
Monks devote their whole lives to God, doing nothing. Whipping yourself and being repentant does not accomplish anything. Do monks or nuns actually wander around unconditionally helping people? I see nuns running schools for girls, etc. Not the same thing.
What, like Benedictines, Augustinians, Franciscans, Dominicans, Carmelites, Jesuits, Missionaries of Charity,
etc.?
(From the linked compendium: "Note: The above lists are substantially incomplete. They currently only include orders with members who are/were bishops.")
I will not even consider any member of the Catholic church to come anywhere near this high requirement. What do you think Jesus would say of an organization that has $10-$15 billion in gold and other assets sitting in the Vatican, watching the world starve? I think he would condemn them from the top down.
Peace Pilgrim is an excellent example, I would think. Got to hear her speak once.
Thank you. She seems to be exactly what I was looking for.
They do exist!
Happens all the time. A daughter of some friends of ours has gone off to join the Nashville Dominicans. She will never own a thing and will be sent wherever she is needed to teach and do good works.
Except if this person stands for Catholicism, which I am assuming they do since you are Catholic and they are in your circle of friends, then they are at least indirectly giving a vote of confidence to the $10-$15 billion being hoarded by the Vatican while the world is starving.
How would you substantiate such a claim? That no one on earth is doing this?
I was shown I was wrong in post #14.
I have this idea that you see this poor old man in nothing but clothing he's worn for years, soaked in sweat with dirt on his brown and on his feet, attempting to hitchhike from place to place with a Bible in hand that's in tatters though he prizes it as a cherished possession. He's helping up old ladies who've fallen and rescued missing children and telling all who will listen that Christ saves.
Yep, you get it!
This method of doing things form an attractive mental image of Christian virtue, but is probably much less affective than one would suppose in terms of giving one's life to Christ and serving him above all else, especially in gaining disciples for Christ. Churches spend many resources training pastors to be missionaries, whether that's language training or teaching Biblical and cultural fluency. Instead of said person having to spend most of his time working to put food on the table and being dead tired when he goes to present the gospel in a culture he doesn't understand, a missionary with resources behind him can spend all his time serving the people he's presenting the gospel to.
But what if all of the Christians were wandering the world, doing good works and preaching the gospel? Instead of just a few who were supported by moderate Christians? It seems a bit unfair to compare the work of an entire organization to that of one person... or do you mean to say that 3 missionaries supported by 97 working people will be more effective than 100 of the people I made you imagine?
