The Great Sellaway

Can you talk about the verse that says its easier for a camel to go through the eye of a needle than it is for a rich man to enter heaven? Why is it so hard to let go of "things" ? Mark and I have been discussing that lately as our circumstances change. We aren't snobs and know that people come first, so why is it hard to lose material things? They won't last. I always wondered that, and why when Jesus told the man to sell his things, he couldn't. When we KNOW these things are not lasting, why is it still difficult? Is it because we once had them and now won't? -Mark and Leeanne

Okay, this is going to take a minute.

In the passage Jesus is talking about "selling your possessions and giving to the poor." His is a subject he spoke pretty frequently about. He told it to the rich young ruler and to Zaccheus in Luke 19. He also talked about it to all of his disciples in Luke 12:33 and Luke 14:33. He referred to it in his parables of the pearl of great price and the parable of the treasure in the field. And he applied it in his story of the rich man and Lazarus as well as his teaching about wealth in Matthew 6 and Luke 12. So this is a big deal to Jesus.

And it's really hard for us Americans to do. Not just because we are attached to our possessions, but that we have so many of them and it's a constant process of getting rid of them, because we always get more. Not more money, mind you, just stuff. So it's a lot of hard work.

But what you are referring to is the emotional attachment we have to our stuff. Because we get stuff and it becomes a part of us, a part of our essence. As Jesus says, "Where your treasure is, there your heart will be also." Or, wherever you store your stuff, your core is right in the midst of it.

So why get rid of our stuff? First off all, because those who are poor need it more than we do. John the Baptist got at the basics when he said, "If you have two coats and someone you know doesn't have any, give one to him." It's basic fair distribution. If our stuff is more needed by our brother, then we should pass it on.

Secondly, we get rid of our stuff because it causes us to be more attached to this world instead of God. The more stuff we have, the more effort and love we put into our stuff, and the less time and love we have for God or for the poor around us.

Third, we get rid of our stuff, because it builds up our stuff in heaven. Jesus says that whatever we give to the poor, God puts that stuff in our savings account in heaven, for our retirement. Thus, the more we give away to the needy, the greater the interest accumulates in our bank account in the Kingdom. Thus, we don't want to think of the poor as greedy-- rather, they are the bankers who keep our possessions (or the wealth from our possessions) secure for us for when we really need it-- after this life is over.

Finally, how do we give?
In scripture there are three ways to get rid of our possessions.

a. We sell our possessions and then take the proceeds to the poor. That could be to a charity or directly to the poor. It doesn't matter what they do with it, it is the act of giving out of love that gains our benefit.

b. We drop our possessions like a hot potato. The disciples, noting that they didn't give their possessions to the poor, wondered if just leaving their nets and boats on the shoreline was acceptable. Jesus told them it was fine as long as they were doing it for God's kingdom. Getting rid of everything to do kingdom work is just as much a benefit as giving to the poor. Thus, having a garage sale and the proceeds go to ministry or leaving everything on the side of the road so you could be a missionary is great in Jesus' eyes.

c. We are freely open to use our possessions with those who are in need. This is the Philemon principle. He was a friend of Paul's who used his house to have the church meet in it and whenever anyone came to town he opened up his house for them to stay with him, as long as they needed it. Even so, if we have a car, but use it to transport the poor, have a house but use it to house the needy or have music that we share (in a legal manner) with those who don't, then it is all good, all building up toward our heavenly account.

The hardest thing about that last kind of giving is that if we loan something out or allow people to have use of our possessions, they may not be as careful with our possessions as we are. Thus, we may get back something that is unusable. This is why this last kind of giving is just as much surrendering as the other kind of giving. Because when people use your stuff, pretty soon that stuff can't be used anymore.

So how can we make it easier to get rid of our stuff? Well, I don't know that we can. Giving away our stuff is a lot like going on a diet. We can recognize our fat, but it's hard to make the commitment. But after the fat is gone, we feel relieved. But there isn't much relief until it's gone. Until then, it's just hard work.

I would recommend that we all commit all of our stuff to the Lord. Not in the spiritual sense, "Oh, it's all yours, Lord" but in a real sense of, "Jesus, this stuff right here I'm getting rid of for you. Jesus, this stuff right here isn't mine, but I'm going to allow others to use it whenever they need to. Jesus, I'm making this available to You for it to benefit others." In this way, the Lord will help you in your commitment to Him. His Spirit will flow down upon you, and fill you with the love for Him and for others and the love of possessions will just fade away.

Six Trends in the Modern Church

The Barna Group has established six "megathemes" of the church in 2010. You can read their full article here:

Six Megathemes

I'll list out the themes and give my own commentary on them.

1. The Christian Church is becoming less theologically literate
I have certainly noticed that the church at large is generally Biblically illiterate, even those who claim to be scholars are so specialized that they can't seem to remember any passage except the one they are working on. How can we even claim to be a social group when we don't know what that grouping is based on? Part of this has to do with our preachers and teachers being more interested in reflecting on the newspaper or Christianity Today rather than God's word. The Bible is used more of a jumping off point or a hammer to drive their own points in. We need to read and teach God's word holistically.

2. Christians are becoming more ingrown and less outreach-oriented.
The examples the Barna Group give is people not inviting people to church as much or speaking to neighbors about Jesus. I think they may be mistaken about this trend. Rather, I have seen Christians using a different kind of evangelism that is more effective and less content oriented. It is to have relationships with non-Christians and have one's Christian life be a part of life, rather than an evangelistic tool to force down a non-Christian's throat. If there is a less outreach-orientation, it is simply because the old tools don't work and new ones are coming into place. In Portland, the churches have been working with the homeless more and have been doing service at public schools. This IS outreach, but outreach of a kind that shows the gospel rather than just talks about it.

3. Growing numbers of people are less interested in spiritual principles and more desirous of learning pragmatic solutions for life.
I think this has always been evident in American Christianity. American Christians have always had the American worldview take the front seat over Jesus' principles. It has only been relatively recently that the popularity of people like Shane Claiborne has introduced a practical lifestyle of Jesus' principles. This has drawn a following, but still few follow this radical change of life.

4. Among Christians, interest in participating in community action is escalating.
This is a positive trend and the Barna Group proves that they can see a negative in every possible trend. Look, guys, this IS evangelism and outreach. This is a powerful change in the church. Perhaps the theology of this isn't as defined, but theology doesn't usually change things anyway. The only spiritual principles we need to do good is to love God and love our neighbor.

5. The postmodern insistence on tolerance is winning over the Christian Church.
What Barna seems to forget is that there is a biblical tolerance which requires for us not to fight. The church has "fought" too hard in many wrong areas. The focus on creationism, the claim that homosexuality is a sin and insistence on a two-gender marriage is all fine within the church. But we MUST be tolerant of the opposite trends outside the church. We cannot impose church values on an unchurched world. Do we want to go back to the days of Sabbath laws or prohibition. Some would, but it would be in error. The church must learn to allow unbelievers to make their own mistakes in the freedom God has given them. When we don't, then we ARE judgmental and hypocritical and we are rightly condemned by the world. We are supposed to be the light of the world, not the wall which separates the world from being worldly.

6. The influence of Christianity on culture and individual lives is largely invisible.
I think that this is not necessarily a bad trend. Pastors, priests and fundamentalists all have a bad reputation in the world right now. We have made ourselves out to be hypocrites to the world and we have caused the world to reject our proud ways. It is time to be humble, to be quiet and allow our influence to be due to the good works we do and not because of the policy decisions we force, or because of the hateful speech we have carelessly used against politicians and social groups. Let us return to humility, not being silent, but allowing our loving actions to speak more than words. Only if we show the love of Christ will people believe in it again.

Let the church take time to find out who they are, what they really believe in and what is the best way to communicate that belief. We have allowed the pendents and the judgmentalists be our speakers for us. Allow the Christ-like to represent the church again.

Self Love and Other Love

Adapted from the preface to Thomas Merton's book, No Man Is An Island.

Every human being ultimately seeks their own salvation and the salvation of those whom they live with. This salvation is the “good life”, not found in the realization of the “american dream”, but in the fulfillment of each individual’s God-given powers, in the love of others and of God. This fulfillment cannot come through one’s own ability, but each person must be found in and through others. These three Scriptures are fulfilled in this: “If any man would save his life, he must lose it”; and, “Love one another as I have loved you”; and “We are all members of one another.”

Some would say that salvation, then is discovered in the setting aside of ourselves. On the contrary, the discovery of Christ is never genuine if it is nothing but a flight from ourselves. Our salvation cannot be an escape. It must be a fulfillment. I cannot discover God—the power that raised Christ from the dead—unless I have the courage to face myself exactly as I am—a poor, limited perplexed soul.

Thus, salvation is a terrible tangle of paradoxes. We become ourselves by dying to ourselves. We gain only what we give up, and if we give up everything we gain everything. We cannot find ourselves within ourselves, but only in others, yet at the same time before we can go out to others we must first find ourselves. The best way to love ourselves is to love others, yet we cannot love others unless we love ourselves since it is written, “Thou shalt love thy neighbor as thyself.” But if we love ourselves in the wrong way, we become incapable of loving anyone else.

There are many errors in achieving a balance between loving others and oneself:

Giving for oneself
There is a spiritual selfishness which even poisons the good act of giving to another. It is possible for me to love selfishly in the very act of depriving myself of material things for the benefit of another. If my gift is intended to bind him to me, to put him under an obligation, then in loving him I am really loving myself. And this is a greater selfishness, since it traffics not in flesh and blood, but in other person’s souls. This says that in loving another we simply seek the most effective way to love ourselves.

Loving one other
We might be tempted to the hedonism of romantic love. In this, we deny ourselves just enough to share with one another the pleasures of life. We admit a certain selfishness, and feel that in doing so we are being realistic. Our self denial is just sufficient to provide us with a healthy increase in our mutual satisfactions. In a bourgeois world, romantic love knows how to mask as Christian agape. This limits love to only one, no other.

Destroying ourselves
There is the temptation to destroy ourselves for the love of the other. The only value is love of the other. Self-sacrifice is an absolute value in itself. And the desire of the other is an absolute value. No matter what the other desires, we will give up our life or our soul to please the other. This is a false love, which makes it a point of honor to follow the beloved even into hell. This says we must only love others.

Isolation
Another temptation is to go the other extreme and say, “Hell is other people.” In that case love itself becomes the great temptation and the great sin. Because it is an inescapable sin, it is also hell. But this is simply the love of self in solitude. It is the love that is mortally wounded by its own incapacity to love another, and flies from others in order to not to have to give itself to them. This says we must only love ourselves.

All these answers are insufficient. The true answer, which is supernatural, tells us that we must love ourselves in order that we would be able to love others, and that we find ourselves by giving ourselves to them. True love is the gift of ourselves—cared for and fully functional—for others.

This is not merely a helpful suggestion, it is the fundamental law of human existence. Man is divided against himself and against God by his own selfishness, which divides him against his brother. This division cannot be healed by a love that places itself only on one side of the rift. Love must reach over to both sides and draw them together. We cannot love ourselves unless we love others, and our love of others is incomplete without loving ourselves. And a selfish love of ourselves makes us incapable of loving others.

This truth never becomes clear as long as we assume that each one of us, individually, is the center of the universe. We do not exist for ourselves alone, and it is only when we are fully convinced of this fact that we begin to love ourselves properly and thus also love others.

What do I mean by loving ourselves properly? I mean, first of all, desiring to live, accepting life as a very great gift and a great good, not because of what it gives us, but because of what it enables us to give to others. We have what is called a “death instinct.” It is the power of a self-love that has turned into self-hatred and which, in adoring itself, adores the monster by which it is consumed. It is therefore of supreme importance that we consent to live not for ourselves, but for others.

We will only be able to do this when we face our own limitations. As long as we secretly adore ourselves, our own deficiencies will remain to torture us with an apparent defilement. But if we live for others, we will gradually discover that no one expects us to be “as gods.” We will see that we are human, like everyone else, that we all have weaknesses and deficiencies, and that these limitations of ours play a most important part in all our lives. It is because of them that we need others and others need us. We are not all weak in the same spots, and so we supplement and complete one another, each one making up in himself for the lack in another.

Only when we see ourselves in our true human context, as members of a race which is intended to be one organism and “one body,” we will begin to understand the positive importance not only of the successes but of the failures in our lives. My successes are not my own. The way to them was prepared by others. Nor are my failures my own. They may spring from the failure of another, but they are also compensated for by another’s achievement.

Every other man is a piece of myself, for I am a part and a member of mankind. Every Christian is a part of my body, because we are members in Christ. What I do is also done for them and with them and by them. What they do is done by me and for me.

Only when this truth is absolutely central do other teachings fit into their proper context. Humility, self-denial, action and contemplation, service, giving and community—none of these make sense except in relation to the central reality which is God’s love living and acting in those whom he has incorporated his Christ. Nothing at all makes sense unless we admit, with John Donne, that “No man is an island, entire of itself; every man is a piece of the continent.”

To love others is to make a gift of oneself.

How To Love Idiots

“Love one another,” “Treat others as you would be treated,” “Love your neighbor as yourself” “Be merciful as your Father in heaven is merciful” “Love your enemy, do good to those who hate you”— Jesus was clear, that loving those around us is our most important task, apart from being faithful to God.  And yet, it is funny how we often take our relationships for granted (unless we are dating someone we really like).  We assume that we treat everyone fairly and with love—even though sometimes it is “tough love”—and we expect to be treated fairly in return. 

However, dealing with people is the most difficult task imaginable—just ask God, He has a terrible time with it!  Jesus told us that our relationships should be a major priority in our lives just because they would be so difficult to maintain!  Jesus didn’t tell us to treat everyone with fairness, but with love and humility.  And this means, often, that we need to set aside our own ideals and focus on someone else’s needs and goals.  We cannot love if we are just thinking about being “fair” in relationships.  To love we must sacrifice and reach out.

1.       Meet others needs

When Jesus taught about love, he did not mean that love is a feeling, or a response, or a particular kind of relationship.  Rather, when Jesus said, “love” he meant an action.  To love is to act in the other person’s benefit, whatever that means.  And the most basic way of doing what will help another person is to make an attempt to meet their needs.  This is why when Scripture talks about Christian duty, it describes feeding the poor, visiting the sick and welcoming the stranger.  Because loving means seeing the need and doing your best to meet it.

                But we also need to recognize that people need more than bread and clothes.  Jesus himself did much more than meet people’s physical needs—although that was a big part of what he did.  Fundamentally, people feel that they have the following needs:

·         Survival—Having one’s basic needs met, such as hunger, sleep and health

·         Security—Feeling safe from what one fears

·         Inner Peace—A sense of contentment with life

·         Pleasure—Enjoyment and laughter

·         Honor—A sense of being significant to others

·         Society—Feeling a part of others and communicating with them

There are other needs that we have—a relationship with God, understanding significant truths, a sense of being a “good person”, but we don’t always feel these needs.  The six above we feel almost every day at one point or another, and they deeply control our sense of well-being and color our perception of everything around us.  When Jesus met needs, he recognized that people not only needed their “survival” needs met, but also the other ones.  Especially in his teaching, he wanted people to feel secure, to have peace, to have joy, to gain honor and to be a part of a good society. 

                Even so, when we are looking to meet people’s needs, we need not only look at survival needs, although those are foundationally important.  But we must also remember to give people respect, to ease people’s fears, to help them laugh and enjoy themselves, to just communicate with others.  In doing all of this, we are loving.  And all of it is acting in love.

2.       Be Humble

Perhaps when you picked up this tract, you thought, “Oh good—I’ve got a lot of idiots I’m supposed to love.”  However, the most important lesson Jesus taught us in loving others is “the first shall be last and the last first.”  If we really want to love others, the first step is to remember that, more often than not, WE are the idiots, not the people around us.  Rather than thinking, “I wish so-and-so could read this tract,” you need to take responsibility for your own idiocy in relationships.  If we are really going to love, we need to be humble.  How can we do that?

·         If a mistake was made, give others the benefit of the doubt

·         Take blame upon yourself, instead of pushing it on others

·         Focus on what other’s need, not yourself

·         If changes need to be made in communication, take as much responsibility on yourself as you can

·         Pray for other’s blessing—especially those you are in conflict with

If we place ourselves in the giving position, then we will find that we can actually deserve the honor we might expect others to give to us—whether we get it or not.  Most importantly, assume that the other person is trying to be as good and as polite as they can.  You may feel that they are acting rude or badly or stupidly.  But, chances are, they are not.  They are just trying to meet their needs, just like you are.

3.       Recognize differences in communication

Another way we can be humble is to recognize that, more often than not, the people around us are not idiots, or jerks, or rude, but they have different communication patterns than we do.  If we see someone who looks like an immigrant come up to us and speak loudly in a foreign language, waving his hands, we would not think he was rude, but that he just didn’t have the same customs that we do.  But if we see someone speak to us in our language, with our accent, speaking loudly and waving her hands, we would think that she is rude, or possibly have some mental problems.  But some people grow up in situations in which speaking loudly (or quietly) and using expansive gestures (or using none at all) is normal, and they are just trying to speak to us normally.  We do not feel that it is normal at all—we feel that it is rude, or that they have a problem with us.  But often it is not that case at all.  We have to take account of other’s different way of speaking.

                For instance, different people have a different sense of how long one must pause to allow another person to speak.  If one person expects people to talk over her, then she might not give anyone else a chance to speak, and so feel that no one is interested in what she is talking about, because no one is responding.  On the other hand, another person might feel that she is hogging up all the time to speak because she won’t stop for a few seconds so they can chime in.  Neither person is rude, they just don’t understand how the other person communicates.

                There are many kinds of communication differences: How much space to give another person when talking, how direct or indirect one’s requests should be, what kind of touching is appropriate between people, how people should apologize, and how a conversation should begin.  Instead of assuming others are “idiots”, perhaps we should try their kind of communication with them and see if they respond positively to it.

4.       Respond Positively to Interactions

Every time we communicate with others, we may have as many as a hundred interactions with them in ten minutes.  With everything people say to us, we are reacting—even if we think we are giving a neutral or a non-response.  With every bit of communication, we either respond with them—on their side—against them or just ignoring them.  In a positive relationship, up to 9 out of 10 responses will be positive.  If even four out of ten of the responses one gives is offensive or ignoring the other, then the relationship is rapidly going downhill, and may never recover unless something is done. 

                A negative response to someone doesn’t mean that you can’t disagree with them.  On the contrary, two people could be having a conflict, but their reactions are positive toward each other.  It is HOW they disagree.  If they keep the conversation upbeat, break the heavy discussion with humor sometimes, always show respect for the other person and the relationship, then even a conflict can be a positive relationship. However, if a conversation is characterized by biting sarcasm, insults, outbursts of anger, threats, treating the other like a child, or simply ignoring what another person says, then that conversation will tear down the relationship.

                In loving others, we need to work on our communication, so we always try to respond positively.  This does not mean just ending the conversation on an upbeat note, but trying to communicate in a positive way throughout the conversation.  This can be difficult, and we can make many mistakes along the way, but with God’s help we can do it—even to those who have hurt us.

5.       Find the True Meaning behind the Words

None of us means what we say.  Most of our communication is a parable of what we really mean.  We often ask “how are you?”, but we almost never are looking for a doctor’s diagnosis.  A husband may say “I love you,” but not at that moment feel a surge of emotion for his wife.  Our child may say, “I don’t feel good,” but they might just be emotionally hurt, not having a physical ailment.  Even so, quite a bit of our words have meaning that is not stated directly in the words we used.

                And it isn’t only words.  I could say, “My mother in law is coming to visit,” and depending on the look on my face or my tone of voice, I would communicate to you whether I liked that idea or not.  But if you didn’t understand my non verbal communication—you heard disgust in my voice when I was trying to communicate with my face happy anticipation—then we will get our wires crossed and spend time trying to unravel the miscommunication.

                Or we might get into a conflict with another person, and we can argue about the silliest things—whether the sky is actually sky blue or not—whatever.  But if we get into a conflict, often the conflict is not about what we are directly discussing.  Perhaps the argument is about how one communicates.  Or it could be about a long-held ideal or dream that hasn’t been communicated yet.  And the conflict could go on eternally without resolution, because the true meaning of the conflict hasn’t yet been discussed.

                If the person we are communicating with understands our indirect communication, fine, no problem.  However, every time we use indirect communication, we are taking the chance that the other person might misunderstand.  And then we don’t understand what they misunderstood because we communicated as clearly as we could—or so we thought. 

                We need to do our best to get behind the simple meaning of the words.  And how do we do this?  We ask.  We tell the other person what they think they meant by a face or an argument, and give them a chance to explain in a different way. 

6.       Listen Carefully

Jesus told us that we must “Be careful how you listen.”  It is never enough to just listen, but we must listen in a way that communicates.  Even our listening communicates a reaction to what others say.  And how we listen can either meet others needs or tear them down. 

                If we do not look like we are listening to the other person, then they think we are ignoring them and they are not important to us.  One person may expect someone to look at her when she is talking, but her partner may need to look at the floor to concentrate.  Even if he can repeat everything she said, she will still not feel listened to, but ignored.  When listening, we need to show that we are interested, in the best way we can, in the way the person we are listening to understands.

                We might ask questions, but not too many.  We might make listening “noises” like “uh huh”, but not too often.  We might nod, but not too excitedly.  If we do not do these things enough, the other will think that we are ignoring them.  But if we do these things too much, then the other person will think that we are not trying to listen, but to take over the conversation.  We must find the right balance for each person.

                The most important part of listening in love is two things:  First, don’t be trying to force your agenda on the other person.  Let them say what they need to say.    Second, do your best to give them your full attention.  Because we live in a society in which everyone feels that everyone is too busy to listen, this is the best gift that anyone can give.

 (Thanks to the work of John M Gottman and Deborah Tannan)

True Christian Love in Haiti

Haitian Orphanage Refuses to Turn People Away

Baptist Press reports that one orphanage in Haiti has found itself caring for the wider community after last week's earthquake. Cabaret Children's Home, located 30 miles north of Port-au-Prince, has welcomed hundreds of people who have lost their homes in the Jan. 12 earthquake. "When people come to us, we cannot cross our arms, meaning, we cannot turn them away," Haitian worker Pierre Prinvil said through translator David Garret. "Obviously feeding is going on for displaced folks [at the compound]," said Garrett, a church and community director with the Southern Baptist Convention. "They are sharing their food with people who have nowhere else to be." The orphanage's older students have helped feed younger children outside the compound, and the orphanage has used its own supplies to feed famished the famished Haitians who keep arriving. "They are such a resilient people," Garrett said.

-From Religion Today Summaries

God's Economics of Charity

A response to the article, "Prosperity in Community"
http://beta.worldwideopen.org/resources/detail/295

Great article by the way. In it, you mention that "stewardship is frequently seen as increasing wealth for later distribution rather than distributing wealth for present increase of all."

How do you think that relates to the Wesleyan principle of "make the most money so that you can give the most money away." Or, put another way, "Gain all you can, save all you can, give all you can." And if we are go go against Wesley’s method, then who is to be the distributor of this wealth for the present increase of all. It seems the government, and sadly even the Church, is pretty poor at doing this.

Finally, how does this apply to those who find themselves in a position of service that also make a decent income (e.g. physicians)? It appears that one can have empathy, live in community, and have a strong income. However, the words of I John 3:16-18 still apply, and the prerogative then becomes "live modestly and give the rest away." Is there a better way?


Thanks for your response, J.

Honestly, I think that the number one thing that destroys ministry opportunities is th concern for a "decent income" or the attempt to "make the most money."

In Anawim, I have worked as a pastor and leader for 10 years without a regular income of any sort. My family had to begin as homeless so we could minister to the homeless. God is my boss and He is the one who provides us with everything we need. And He has. Abundantly. The more we worry about what money we will "make" then the less we are doing things for the Lord and we are actually serving Mammon, which Jesus said we cannot do both at the same time.

I believe that Scritpure teaches that if we have resources, then it is our just duty to give them to those who have need. (I John 3:16-18, as you quoted) And, if we do so faithfully, then God will provide all of our needs (Psalm 41:1-3; Luke 12:22-34 -read the whole thing!). So the economy of God is that of charity-- continually giving and receiving, and the more you give, the more you will end up receiving.

I am not saying that having a strong income is a sin. But the focus cannot be the income-- that is just feeding into the world’s unjust, uncharitable economy. We should never consider what one "deserves" as people who follow Jesus. If Jesus thought that way, he would never have sacrificed himself for our sins. Instead, we should think of the need and how, with our meger resources, we can meet the need. And then, out of heaven, God provides out of his abundant resources.

You are right, though. The Church, sadly, is terrible at distributing resources. Because, like the rest of the world, they want to build themselves up rather than meet needs. So who should distribute? The cheerful, generous giver who considers what the other needs, rather than seeing giving as an arduous task that must be done out of duty. Distribution should never be handed to the judge who surrenders a small amount based on a moral measure, however.

Of course, this brings up as many quesitons as answers. But I suspect this forum is too short to really discuss it at length.

One last thing, J, and this may apply better to your query at the end.

I believe that Scripturally, there are three models of giving that are all radical, and loving.

1. Sell your possessions and give to the poor. This is the model of live modestly and give the rest away that you mention. I think that it is the basic model you have presented by Jesus.

2. Live without possessions This is the model of the disciples. They didn’t give to the poor, really, but lived as the poor to give the gospel to the poor. They completely depended on God’s resources.

3. Shared use. This is the model of the early Gentile church. The early church, rather than selling everything they had, used it in community. Thus, if someone had a house, that house was to be used for the Christian community and had people in need staying there. If someone had food, they brought it to the community for all to share. We see this frequently in Acts and in Paul’s letters (I Timothy 6, e.g.)

So, although I think that the first model should be normative, all three models could easily be used together.

Common Foundations of Isalm and Christianity

This is a summary of the main letter from Muslims to Christians. I highly recommend you read the whole thing at:
http://www.acommonword.com/index.php?lang=en&page=option1


From 138 Prominant Muslims to Christians around the world:

Muslims and Christians together make up well over half of the world’s population. Without peace and justice between these two religious communities, there can be no meaningful peace in the world. The future of the world depends on peace between Muslims and Christians.

The basis for this peace and understanding already exists. It is part of the very foundational principles of both faiths: love of the One God, and love of the neighbour. These principles are found over and over again in the sacred texts of Islam and Christianity. The Unity of God, the necessity of love for Him, and the necessity of love of the neighbour is thus the common ground between Islam and Christianity. The following are only a few examples:

Of God’s Unity, God says in the Holy Qur’an: Say: He is God, the One! / God, the Self-Sufficient Besought of all! (Al-Ikhlas, 112:1-2). Of the necessity of love for God, God says in the Holy Qur’an: So invoke the Name of thy Lord and devote thyself to Him with a complete devotion (Al-Muzzammil, 73:8). Of the necessity of love for the neighbour, the Prophet Muhammad r said: “None of you has faith until you love for your neighbour what you love for yourself.”

In the New Testament, Jesus Christ u said: ‘Hear, O Israel, the Lord our God, the Lord is One. / And you shall love the Lord your God with all your heart, with all your soul, with all your mind, and with all your strength.’ This is the first commandment. / And the second, like it, is this: ‘You shall love your neighbour as yourself.’ There is no other commandment greater than these.” (Mark 12:29-31)

In the Holy Qur’an, God Most High enjoins Muslims to issue the following call to Christians (and Jews—the People of the Scripture):

Say: O People of the Scripture! Come to a common word between us and you: that we shall worship none but God, and that we shall ascribe no partner unto Him, and that none of us shall take others for lords beside God. And if they turn away, then say: Bear witness that we are they who have surrendered (unto Him). (Aal ‘Imran 3:64)

The words: we shall ascribe no partner unto Him relate to the Unity of God, and the words: worship none but God, relate to being totally devoted to God. Hence they all relate to the First and Greatest Commandment. According to one of the oldest and most authoritative commentaries on the Holy Qur’an the words: that none of us shall take others for lords beside God, mean ‘that none of us should obey the other in disobedience to what God has commanded’. This relates to the Second Commandment because justice and freedom of religion are a crucial part of love of the neighbour.

Thus in obedience to the Holy Qur’an, we as Muslims invite Christians to come together with us on the basis of what is common to us, which is also what is most essential to our faith and practice: the Two Commandments of love.

In the Name of God, the Compassionate, the Merciful,

And may peace and blessings be upon the Prophet Muhammad