which is more important?

Question

supporting missions overseas, or supporting missions in your own city?
thank you

Answer 1

trick question ,
They're both important . It depends on the individual . If they feel they will be more of a help in their own town then that's what they would choose . Me personally , I have always been a " home town first " type . More in sync with that home feeling .

Answer 2

I guess that would depend on each person personal feelings are. There is a need all around the world and we each can do something to change the part that passes before us.

I have given to many, but I have a soft spot for over seas. I feel people in third world countrys need to have a blessing from a wealthy nation such as America.

In the winter when I touch the thermostat I think about those who have trouble staying warm. In the summer I think about those who can't get away from the heat. When I'm eating I think about those who don't have anything to eat. All we can do by ourselves is not much but together we can make a difference.

Answer 3

They are equally important. In your own city, you can be involved in a practical way by volunteering your talents. Overseas efforts, unless you are a world traveler, are better supported by whatever amount you feel you are able to give. I always try to research as best as I can any organization I feel moved to support. Then I leave the rest to God.

Answer 4

Unless a person is committed to going to another country, I say support local projects simply because they have been proven to be more effective than world projects. Jesus Christ preached locally but Paul ventured into Rome and beyond. I just don't trust a lot of these "feed the world" projects

We fly food into Somalia and it's immediately seized by the warlords in power there. Those feel good commercials are not always what they seem.

Answer 5

It depends on what the Lord lays on your heart. The great Commission says first Jerusalem, Judea, Samaria and to the other parts of the world. So to me He was saying to go first to your own neighborhood and then to the close areas before going out to the uttermost parts of the world....However, I've also spent time missioning overseas so that's where my heart is.

Blessings,
Jan

Answer 6

Depends on your city. If the Gospel is accessible in you city I would say support overseas.

Answer 7

Oh crap. Is this an essay examination?

It is more important to support missions in my own city. However, I'm not entirely sure what you mean by missions. Does this mean military? Religious? Or otherwise?

I'm a firm believer that for countries in bad shape to dig out of their situations, they must help themselves. They cannot rely on the assistance of others.

Take, for instance, Mexico. What goes on in the Mexican government and economy has a direct impact on the United States because of illegal immigration. However, because Mexico benefits from illegal immigrants, they aren't going to fix the situation.

And while Mexico says, "Eh, we're getting your money, but we don't have to take care of our people since you're doing it for us. Soooo . . . sweet! Thanks!"

Now, if we went into "help," our help would be met with intense resistance. Mexico has nothing to gain from our help. We would lose trying to help even if it meant slowing the influx of illegal immigrants.

But if we helped legal immigrants and current citizens to a better life and stopped arguing about what to do with illegals, if we stopped taxing people into the ground, violating the privacy of their bedrooms, stopped lying to them about which politicians are getting money under the table, our own people might be happier.

(There's more to that argument, but those are the basics.)

Furthermore, there is a clear divide in the countries that we are already trying to "help." Iraqis both hate and love us. They are thanking us for saving them from tyranny while their neighbors are calling us infidels and bombing us.

The more we try to "help," the more people think . . . maybe your help isn't the kind of help we need.

Now . . . I'm personally conflicted on this issue because my thought is, "Isn't it better to have tried to help than to have done nothing?" I mean, look at how long it took us to get into WWII. What if we had gone in earlier? What if we had shown an interest?

But I always come back to the simple reality that if we take care of ourselves first, the fallout from that (for lack of a better word) should help others.

I'll stop my rambling now. Just something I'm really trying to sort out for myself, and it really gets me going.

Answer 8

I'm going to have to say home first. Although I'll have to agree with Kallan, having seen war up close, it's usually the indigenous personnel who suffer the most so aid should certianly be applied there.

Answer 9

Do what I can when I am given the opportunity, giving Bible studies, getting the children in the neighbor hood and do gardening, or going to and bringing what is needed to the mission field itself.
it is all what is presented to me and when

Answer 10

Neither is more important. Every person is equal and equally needs to be saved, whether they are overseas or in your city. Wherever God calls you to go, thats where you go.