Zone1 Becoming Rich and Giving it Away vs. Doing Works that Don't Involve Money: Which way is best?

[Mashmont]

Ladies and gentlemen, I am trying to resolve this dilemma in my mind, and I need the advice of you good people in this forum:

Which is the best and most Christ-like way to help others?

1) Earn lots of money in life, and then use to to better people's lives through charitable donations.
or
2) Personally interact with people to help them without significant monetary involvement.

To me, #1 sounds the most logical, since you solve a lot of problems for a lot of people. But it is really God's way? Can you get to Heaven with involvement of money? True, some saints like Elizabeth Seton had great family wealth, but gave it away. However, both parents of St. Therese Lisieux are canonized saints who were prosperous in the silk linens business. They were generous with their money, but by no means super wealthy. You also have people like Melinda Gates who gives away a lot of her large fortune in the name of her "Catholic faith", but to immoral causes like promoting abortion and birth control in developing countries. In her case, has vast wealth twisted and distorted her values?

The second way describes most canonized saints. Lived in poverty, but did great things for others through personal interaction. I don't think there are any hand-off saints. All got their hands dirty, working directly with the poor or establishing religious orders, or educating kids. Is this the difference? Rich people may give money, but are not inclined to physically help out? Jesus lived according to #2. Should we all live that way, or are there other ways to help, according to our talents?

And then there is the third question of trying to raise a lot of money for charity which I am currently trying to do. Does this fall into category #1 where once again a lot of money is involved? Does this effort of raising money preclude the necessary "getting your hands dirty" to interact with those you are raising money for? Would it be more godly to get away from the money angle altogether? Do big piles of money lead to ungodly things regardless of why you're making it or raising it?

Who has an opinion on this?

 

[Manonthestreet]

think you are overthinking the matter

 

[Dr.Destructo]

Personally involving yourself in social cirisis' where you can better understand and see for yourself, how, why, and where.......people in need, need money.

And then consider helping to fund those needs thru TRUSTWORTHY people who give thier lives to help others, or TRUSTWORTHY organizations that do not scam, sham, and lie to make themselves rich...while barely giving anything to those in need.

NEVER TRUST CHARITIES!!!!

You might think about giving monthly to someone like "Just Knate".
He helps a LOT of homeless people, and he also helps the homeless who want to get back into having a job and making their own way again.

Here is his YouTube page.....

https://www.youtube.com/results?search_query=just+knate+youtube

 

[Mashmont]

Personally involving yourself in social cirisis' where you can better understand and see for yourself, how, why, and where.......people in need, need money.

And then consider helping to fund those needs thru TRUSTWORTHY people who give thier lives to help others, or TRUSTWORTHY organizations that do not scam, sham, and lie to make themselves rich...while barely giving anything to those in need.

NEVER TRUST CHARITIES!!!!

You might think about giving monthly to someone like "Just Knate".
He helps a LOT of homeless people, and he also helps the homeless who want to get back into having a job and making their own way again.

Here is his YouTube page.....

https://www.youtube.com/results?search_query=just+knate+youtube

Thanks for your input. I will say the charity I am helping is very worthwhile and purely voluntary. I know where every penny goes. But even so, is raising money the way to go? Jesus didn't do that. Jesus was not a fundraiser.

 

[Dr.Destructo]

Thanks for your input. I will say the charity I am helping is very worthwhile and purely voluntary. I know where every penny goes. But even so, is raising money the way to go? Jesus didn't do that. Jesus was not a fundraiser.

Jesus wasn't involved in the massive amounts of problems we have created for ourselves today.

The only things Jesus had to deal with was making sure people had food, water, and leaders who weren't corrupt.

As we have always had those base issues, and still do..........theres a lot more to it today........as well as billions of more people need assistance.

If you are involved with an honest charity, then more power to you!!
If you want to help more.........then find other charitable people/organizations to fund or back.
Or, create your own.

If you want to look for more money, then you have to go to where the money is at, and talk to them on their level of intellect.
To rich people donations mean tax write offs. And the more they donate, the more they can write off. Simple as that.

 

[leftwinger]

I've been forced into #1 whether I like it or not. Direct cash gifts. Never any "charity". I run my own.

 

[Donald H]

The third option is holding government responsible for the social ills it has created.

 

[Meriweather]

Thanks for your input. I will say the charity I am helping is very worthwhile and purely voluntary. I know where every penny goes. But even so, is raising money the way to go? Jesus didn't do that. Jesus was not a fundraiser.

Jesus said we should be attentive to those who cross our paths who are in need. He mentions the Good Samaritan who was left injured by robbers; in a parable he mentions the rich man who ignores Lazarus who was by his door in need. He said we should give to those who ask. I'm guessing he meant individuals who ask, not charities who ask. Continuing on...he praised the poor woman who gave pennies to the Temple, saying she gave out of her need. I take this to mean, by all means give to temple/church charities (and other charities), but make a mental note of whether you are giving out of your surplus or out of your need.

 

[Mashmont]

I've been forced into #1 whether I like it or not. Direct cash gifts. Never any "charity". I run my own.

I don't trust any charity I am not involved with. They are always more lax with my money than I am.

 

[Mashmont]

Jesus said we should be attentive to those who cross our paths who are in need. He mentions the Good Samaritan who was left injured by robbers; in a parable he mentions the rich man who ignores Lazarus who was by his door in need. He said we should give to those who ask. I'm guessing he meant individuals who ask, not charities who ask. Continuing on...he praised the poor woman who gave pennies to the Temple, saying she gave out of her need. I take this to mean, by all means give to temple/church charities (and other charities), but make a mental note of whether you are giving out of your surplus or out of your need.

You are one of the ones I was hoping would respond.

The surplus vs need question is difficult. I also have an obligation to take care of my family. I also have trouble with the passage about giving to those who ask, for example the intersection panhandlers. How do you handle that?

How do you view the two options I laid out in my OP.

 

[Donald H]

Jesus said we should be attentive to those who cross our paths who are in need. He mentions the Good Samaritan who was left injured by robbers; in a parable he mentions the rich man who ignores Lazarus who was by his door in need. He said we should give to those who ask. I'm guessing he meant individuals who ask, not charities who ask. Continuing on...he praised the poor woman who gave pennies to the Temple, saying she gave out of her need. I take this to mean, by all means give to temple/church charities (and other charities), but make a mental note of whether you are giving out of your surplus or out of your need.

You've really just avoided answering the question asked here, in this effort to spam.

Neither of the two options offered apply to the situation.

Your Jesus advised something much closer to my third option.

Government's responsibility for the social ills it has created in your country!

Suffer the little children for the lack of affordable health care to save their lives. They cross your path.

 

[Donald H]

You are one of the ones I was hoping would respond.

The surplus vs need question is difficult. I also have an obligation to take care of my family. I also have trouble with the passage about giving to those who ask, for example the intersection panhandlers. How do you handle that?

How do you view the two options I laid out in my OP.

Your Jesus was at least viewed by believers to be a socialist. That can't be ignored. And so the third option; the only feasible option, shouldn't be ignored.

 

[BreezeWood]

Ladies and gentlemen, I am trying to resolve this dilemma in my mind, and I need the advice of you good people in this forum:

Which is the best and most Christ-like way to help others?

1) Earn lots of money in life, and then use to to better people's lives through charitable donations.
or
2) Personally interact with people to help them without significant monetary involvement.

To me, #1 sounds the most logical, since you solve a lot of problems for a lot of people. But it is really God's way? Can you get to Heaven with involvement of money? True, some saints like Elizabeth Seton had great family wealth, but gave it away. However, both parents of St. Therese Lisieux are canonized saints who were prosperous in the silk linens business. They were generous with their money, but by no means super wealthy. You also have people like Melinda Gates who gives away a lot of her large fortune in the name of her "Catholic faith", but to immoral causes like promoting abortion and birth control in developing countries. In her case, has vast wealth twisted and distorted her values?

The second way describes most canonized saints. Lived in poverty, but did great things for others through personal interaction. I don't think there are any hand-off saints. All got their hands dirty, working directly with the poor or establishing religious orders, or educating kids. Is this the difference? Rich people may give money, but are not inclined to physically help out? Jesus lived according to #2. Should we all live that way, or are there other ways to help, according to our talents?

And then there is the third question of trying to raise a lot of money for charity which I am currently trying to do. Does this fall into category #1 where once again a lot of money is involved? Does this effort of raising money preclude the necessary "getting your hands dirty" to interact with those you are raising money for? Would it be more godly to get away from the money angle altogether? Do big piles of money lead to ungodly things regardless of why you're making it or raising it?

Who has an opinion on this?

money seldom hurts when given away -

many issues people have and the solutions are far from the pocket book.

 

[Mashmont]

Government's responsibility for the social ills it has created in your country!

Suffer the little children for the lack of affordable health care to save their lives. They cross your path.

I think all the social programs that government does should be handled voluntarily. Very much like Samaritan Ministries heath co-op. We have the technology to match donors with recipients, which we didn't have prior to the New Deal.

 

[Donald H]

I think all the social programs that government does should be handled voluntarily. Very much like Samaritan Ministries heath co-op. We have the technology to match donors with recipients, which we didn't have prior to the New Deal.

If charities can fulfill the need. You can't just talk about it forever when the children are suffering and some are dying.

What did your Jesus say? Was it too much resembling a communist solution? Or even more extremist??

 

[Mashmont]

If charities can fulfill the need. You can't just talk about it forever when the children are suffering and some are dying.

What did your Jesus say? Was it too much resembling a communist solution? Or even more extremist??

Charities such as churches should handle all domestic programs that the government currently handles. People helping others one-on-one and personally is what Jesus calls for. Such personal connection promotes gratitude of recipient and generosity by donor. It also helps accountability and eliminates big piles of money which invite corruption and waste. We have the technology to match people up. We should do it. But we won't. Why not? it would mean leftwing politicians would cede their power and money source.

 

[Rawley]

Ladies and gentlemen, I am trying to resolve this dilemma in my mind, and I need the advice of you good people in this forum:

Which is the best and most Christ-like way to help others?

1) Earn lots of money in life, and then use to to better people's lives through charitable donations.
or
2) Personally interact with people to help them without significant monetary involvement.

To me, #1 sounds the most logical, since you solve a lot of problems for a lot of people. But it is really God's way? Can you get to Heaven with involvement of money? True, some saints like Elizabeth Seton had great family wealth, but gave it away. However, both parents of St. Therese Lisieux are canonized saints who were prosperous in the silk linens business. They were generous with their money, but by no means super wealthy. You also have people like Melinda Gates who gives away a lot of her large fortune in the name of her "Catholic faith", but to immoral causes like promoting abortion and birth control in developing countries. In her case, has vast wealth twisted and distorted her values?

The second way describes most canonized saints. Lived in poverty, but did great things for others through personal interaction. I don't think there are any hand-off saints. All got their hands dirty, working directly with the poor or establishing religious orders, or educating kids. Is this the difference? Rich people may give money, but are not inclined to physically help out? Jesus lived according to #2. Should we all live that way, or are there other ways to help, according to our talents?

And then there is the third question of trying to raise a lot of money for charity which I am currently trying to do. Does this fall into category #1 where once again a lot of money is involved? Does this effort of raising money preclude the necessary "getting your hands dirty" to interact with those you are raising money for? Would it be more godly to get away from the money angle altogether? Do big piles of money lead to ungodly things regardless of why you're making it or raising it?

Who has an opinion on this?

Doesn't seem like and either/or choice. Why can't you do both?

 

[Meriweather]

The surplus vs need question is difficult. I also have an obligation to take care of my family. I also have trouble with the passage about giving to those who ask, for example the intersection panhandlers. How do you handle that?

I wonder if panhandlers are becoming a thing of the past, because I seldom have cash on me. I have my debit card. I have given to women who look like they are pregnant (while wondering if it was a costume), but my usual rule of thumb is based on the number of people who choose to panhandle for a day's wage, and the number who want it for drugs, alcohol. (There is always the proverbial exception.) What I do, instead, is to immediately donate to a nearby soup kitchen or St. Vincent de Paul. It can be a tough call.

What is not a tough call is lending a hand to someone who is not seeking a hand-out. I once helped an elderly man buy a pair of shoes without him ever knowing I was giving him a hand. I work on keeping an eye out for those kinds of opportunities. (Here I am, Lord. Send me.)

Family comes first. Always, because they are the ones God has put at your door. (And sometimes they are the most difficult, right?) Surplus vs need isn't all that difficult. The only reason to take note of it is to keep oneself humble and to be thankful for that surplus. You never know when you will be the one in need or when you will come across someone in the future that has a great need.

How do you view the two options I laid out in my OP.

1) Earn lots of money in life, and then use to to better people's lives through charitable donations.
or
2) Personally interact with people to help them without significant monetary involvement.

Those questions usually depend on what is happening in my own life. First, ask yourself (and God) what you are giving up in order to earn extra money. That same question should be asked about what are you giving up to personally interact with people. In my life, I substitute teach and visit the elderly. The question I ask myself (and God) prior is, "Am I using my own time, or am I borrowing time/resources I should be spending with a family member?" I'm a big fan of keeping God in the mix because of the amazing things that happen when He is involved.

Also keep in mind Ecclesiastes 11:1 - Cast your bread upon the waters, for you will find it after many days. Have you ever tried to do something for God without getting anything in return? I have. He laughs.

 

[Dekster]

Ladies and gentlemen, I am trying to resolve this dilemma in my mind, and I need the advice of you good people in this forum:

Which is the best and most Christ-like way to help others?

1) Earn lots of money in life, and then use to to better people's lives through charitable donations.
or
2) Personally interact with people to help them without significant monetary involvement.

To me, #1 sounds the most logical, since you solve a lot of problems for a lot of people. But it is really God's way? Can you get to Heaven with involvement of money? True, some saints like Elizabeth Seton had great family wealth, but gave it away. However, both parents of St. Therese Lisieux are canonized saints who were prosperous in the silk linens business. They were generous with their money, but by no means super wealthy. You also have people like Melinda Gates who gives away a lot of her large fortune in the name of her "Catholic faith", but to immoral causes like promoting abortion and birth control in developing countries. In her case, has vast wealth twisted and distorted her values?

The second way describes most canonized saints. Lived in poverty, but did great things for others through personal interaction. I don't think there are any hand-off saints. All got their hands dirty, working directly with the poor or establishing religious orders, or educating kids. Is this the difference? Rich people may give money, but are not inclined to physically help out? Jesus lived according to #2. Should we all live that way, or are there other ways to help, according to our talents?

And then there is the third question of trying to raise a lot of money for charity which I am currently trying to do. Does this fall into category #1 where once again a lot of money is involved? Does this effort of raising money preclude the necessary "getting your hands dirty" to interact with those you are raising money for? Would it be more godly to get away from the money angle altogether? Do big piles of money lead to ungodly things regardless of why you're making it or raising it?

Who has an opinion on this?

People who make a lot of money and then start giving it away may be in it for recognition on their own psychological needs other than helping the other person really. Sure there are other ways to help according to one's talents, but either way, if you want to know why people are doing it, results will vary.

 

[LuckyDuck01!]

Ladies and gentlemen, I am trying to resolve this dilemma in my mind, and I need the advice of you good people in this forum:

Which is the best and most Christ-like way to help others?

1) Earn lots of money in life, and then use to to better people's lives through charitable donations.
or
2) Personally interact with people to help them without significant monetary involvement.

To me, #1 sounds the most logical, since you solve a lot of problems for a lot of people. But it is really God's way? Can you get to Heaven with involvement of money? True, some saints like Elizabeth Seton had great family wealth, but gave it away. However, both parents of St. Therese Lisieux are canonized saints who were prosperous in the silk linens business. They were generous with their money, but by no means super wealthy. You also have people like Melinda Gates who gives away a lot of her large fortune in the name of her "Catholic faith", but to immoral causes like promoting abortion and birth control in developing countries. In her case, has vast wealth twisted and distorted her values?

The second way describes most canonized saints. Lived in poverty, but did great things for others through personal interaction. I don't think there are any hand-off saints. All got their hands dirty, working directly with the poor or establishing religious orders, or educating kids. Is this the difference? Rich people may give money, but are not inclined to physically help out? Jesus lived according to #2. Should we all live that way, or are there other ways to help, according to our talents?

And then there is the third question of trying to raise a lot of money for charity which I am currently trying to do. Does this fall into category #1 where once again a lot of money is involved? Does this effort of raising money preclude the necessary "getting your hands dirty" to interact with those you are raising money for? Would it be more godly to get away from the money angle altogether? Do big piles of money lead to ungodly things regardless of why you're making it or raising it?

Who has an opinion on this?

For the rich my stance is, always take care of your own first. When you bring children into the world, make sure they are taken care of. To not protect your own offspring makes you a poor parent. For yourself, ensure that your health and living conditions are satisfactory for your needs throughout life. After that, help homeless veterans and women in shelters.