I think your comments seem not to acknowledge the point of Gandhi’s words, “there are people…so hungry.” Have you ever tried to even have a conversation with someone who is starving? I don’t mean just hungry, but “so hungry” that they are starving. The most amazing evangelist will not be able to be a witness of Jesus Christ in that moment. The starving person needs bread. That is the first way we must be Christ to that person. Then and only then can we consider talking about ideas.

Dave

I agree with your post. Your post does however had a debate tone to it. I wonder why. I said “providing for men’s needs”. This implies the needs of the poor. I most certainly was not talking about the affluent as they don’t “need”. There feeling of self sufficiency can blind them to Christ.

–i didn’t say that ghandi’s quote should be disparaged because he is a non-believer. i said his quote should be taken at a grain of salt because it denies the power of the Holy Spirit. i simply pointed out that we shouldn’t be surprised that his quote misses the most critical aspect in a person hearing the gospel with their heart (and not just their ears), because he didn’t believe in the Holy Spirit the way the Bible teaches.
–we both quoted james in our comments, so i’m not sure how we’re disagreeing there, either.

i think you’ve missed the point of the feeding of the 5000, however. in reality, most of the people who were fed did not seek spiritual feeding as well, but turned and walked away when Jesus said some offensive things. They were not more open to the Holy Spirit, but were less open. (this is really a principle in regard to manna as well. which Jesus says in the same chapter.)

James point was not in regard to evangelism, he was simply saying that faith without works is like claiming you have compassion for a person’s plight yet do nothing about it. real compassion means you will act (which i never refuted). however, “faith comes by hearing and hearing by the Word of Christ.”

evangelism requires we share the evangel (good news). bread may give us an opportunity to share with them (but is not the message in and of itself…another reason i disagree with ghandi). but if we don’t tell them how God demonstrated His love for us, we haven’t quite shown the love of God yet. and when we share that message, the result of conversion is not based on our techniques or ability to meet felt needs, but based upon the work of the Holy Spirit alone.

Which was my original point. The Holy Spirit is stronger than man’s stomachs.

I quite disagree with you. We need not disparage a comment simply because it is from a non-christian. Paul actually uses words from pagan sages in Acts 17 (“in him we live and move and have our being”) to convert the athenians. Ghandi’s words are actually pointing to a truth, whether he knows it or not.

James tells us
15] If a brother or sister is ill-clad and in lack of daily food,
[16] and one of you says to them, “Go in peace, be warmed and filled,” without giving them the things needed for the body, what does it profit?
[17] So faith by itself, if it has no works, is dead.

Providing for men’s needs is a part of the Christian ministry because it is critical to evanglization. When we provide for the needs of our families and others we are actually participating in God’s provision for them. That is the meaning behind Ghandi’s and James statement. Sure the holy spirit can work on any man, but you unneccesarily separate the work of the evangelist from the holy spirit. Feeding the hungry makes men more open to the holy spirit. That is a significant part of the point of Jesus feeding of the 5000. That is the point of what James is saying. God does not just work through us in our act of preaching but also in our acts of providing for the needs of others. our work is the work of the holy spirit and that includes feeding the hungry.

however, gandhi’s statement completely ignores the sovereign power of the Holy Spirit. personally, i’m thankful that my God is stronger and can open the eyes of the heart even if the stomach is empty.

gandhi may have been a nice guy, and exercised some higher morals than most, however, his theology was Christless and completely ignores the work of the Holy Spirit…as this quote evidences.