Re: The usefulness of religion (people, public, knowledge, fictional)
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
The Biblical requirement to give 10% of your wealth, which back then was mostly cattle and grain, was to support the Levites so they could perform priestly duties and not have to worry about working. Some Bible-literalist churches do use that to "suggest", sometimes very strongly, that this is what members of the congregation should make their goal, but there's no hard and fast requirement. A church that adhered to such a policy would have very few members.
I don't think I have personally known a single christian who gives 10% of their income. So what does that say about their commitment to the principles of Jesus?
I don't think I have personally known a single christian who gives 10% of their income. So what does that say about their commitment to the principles of Jesus?
My parents did. 10% on their gross income, but not all of it to the church. They gave to other charities, as well as to local people they knew needed help.
I have known a few others who did, as well.
Not sure how not giving 10% shows a lack of commitment to the principles of Jesus, unless you're following the line of thought that since that Jesus was a Jew, he would have adhered to the laws of Leviticus and therefore Christians are expected to do likewise. You were a Methodist, I believe. Is that a point of view from that tradition? I know in some denominations, Levitical laws are valid if they benefit the goals of the church, not so much if cheeseburgers are being served at the annual church picnic.
My parents did. 10% on their gross income, but not all of it to the church. They gave to other charities, as well as to local people they knew needed help.
I have known a few others who did, as well.
Not sure how not giving 10% shows a lack of commitment to the principles of Jesus, unless you're following the line of thought that since that Jesus was a Jew, he would have adhered to the laws of Leviticus and therefore Christians are expected to do likewise. You were a Methodist, I believe. Is that a point of view from that tradition? I know in some denominations, Levitical laws are valid if they benefit the goals of the church, not so much if cheeseburgers are being served at the annual church picnic.
I guess what I'm questioning are some of the claims made by some christians about how generous christians are. And some certainly are. But I don't think it's "most" christians. Was my family growing up so different. On both my mother's and father's sides of the family, when I would go to the methodist church with my grandmother, I knew how much she gave -- $1 for her and $1 for me. That paled in comparison to what my grandfather spent each week on cigarettes, beer, and stopping by the pubs. On my father's side of the family, which was catholic, it was very similar. When I would go with them, it was usually $1 per person on each Sunday or Holy Day Of Obligation. Again, far eclipsed by expenditures for cigarettes and booze. And, there was no volunteerism, except perhaps my grandmother and something like a church bazaar, and that was always to raise money for the church itself, or the Kenyan campaign for conversion. And then -- even more now than at that time -- the ever increasing number of christians who don't go to church on any regular basis, who are giving nothing.
And yes, I know christians who are very generous, with both money and time. But I see them as the exceptions and not the rule.
1 John 3:16-18: "This is how we know what love is: Jesus Christ laid down his life for us. And we ought to lay down our lives for our brothers and sisters. If anyone has material possessions and sees a brother or sister in need but has no pity on them, how can the love of God be in that person? Dear children, let us not love with words or speech but with actions and in truth."
Acts 20:35: "In everything I did, I showed you that by this kind of hard work we must help the weak, remembering the words the Lord Jesus himself said: ‘It is more blessed to give than to receive.’â€
With admonitions like those -- and others in the bible -- I just don't think that there's a math-up between what Jesus expected and what the followers are doing. And that, again, brings into question the degree of christianity in this nation where christians constantly try to portray the country as so blessed by god and portraying christianity as being the backbone of this nation. And just to expand on that a bit -- there is this constant bragging about most people being christian, and yet, in a 2019 survey, 53% of the people responded that they went to church "seldom" or "never". I just think there's an awfully lot of patting themselves on the back for meager devotion.
I guess what I'm questioning are some of the claims made by some christians about how generous christians are. And some certainly are. But I don't think it's "most" christians. Was my family growing up so different. On both my mother's and father's sides of the family, when I would go to the methodist church with my grandmother, I knew how much she gave -- $1 for her and $1 for me. That paled in comparison to what my grandfather spent each week on cigarettes, beer, and stopping by the pubs. On my father's side of the family, which was catholic, it was very similar. When I would go with them, it was usually $1 per person on each Sunday or Holy Day Of Obligation. Again, far eclipsed by expenditures for cigarettes and booze. And, there was no volunteerism, except perhaps my grandmother and something like a church bazaar, and that was always to raise money for the church itself, or the Kenyan campaign for conversion. And then -- even more now than at that time -- the ever increasing number of christians who don't go to church on any regular basis, who are giving nothing.
And yes, I know christians who are very generous, with both money and time. But I see them as the exceptions and not the rule.
1 John 3:16-18: "This is how we know what love is: Jesus Christ laid down his life for us. And we ought to lay down our lives for our brothers and sisters. If anyone has material possessions and sees a brother or sister in need but has no pity on them, how can the love of God be in that person? Dear children, let us not love with words or speech but with actions and in truth."
Acts 20:35: "In everything I did, I showed you that by this kind of hard work we must help the weak, remembering the words the Lord Jesus himself said: ‘It is more blessed to give than to receive.’â€
With admonitions like those -- and others in the bible -- I just don't think that there's a math-up between what Jesus expected and what the followers are doing. And that, again, brings into question the degree of christianity in this nation where christians constantly try to portray the country as so blessed by god and portraying christianity as being the backbone of this nation. And just to expand on that a bit -- there is this constant bragging about most people being christian, and yet, in a 2019 survey, 53% of the people responded that they went to church "seldom" or "never". I just think there's an awfully lot of patting themselves on the back for meager devotion.
Yeah, I know what you are saying. There is a poster on City-Data who claims to be a retired pastor, yet by his posts (both in R&S and on other forums throughout the site) he presents himself as one of the coldest, most compassion-free human beings I've ever seen. For example, in a discussion on elderly people going hungry because of lack of funds, inability to shop, physical ailments, isolation, etc., his opinion was that there was no such thing in this country as hungry elderly, and if there was, well it's their families' fault for not taking care of them. I was taken aback by the coldness as I would be if anyone said that, but it seems especially egregious coming from a person who claims to have been a Christian leader in his career.
There are also a fair number of Christians who misuse the Bible verse "For even when we were with you, we gave you this rule: "If a man will not work, he shall not eat" to justify not feeding the poor. That's NOT what the verse is about. It is in a letter to the early church in Thessalonika, which, like most of the churches, operated as communes. There were people who thought they didn't have to do their share because they figured Jesus was coming back at any minute. The author is telling people in that community to pull their weight, not to withhold food from unemployed or poor people.
I find these types of Christian outlook particularly disgusting because I am of the mind that food should be withheld from no one, not the criminal, the crippled, the crazy, NOT ANYONE. If I were truly Mighty Queen, everyone would have enough food. Nothing justifies not feeding people.
Yeah, I know what you are saying. There is a poster on City-Data who claims to be a retired pastor, yet by his posts (both in R&S and on other forums throughout the site) he presents himself as one of the coldest, most compassion-free human beings I've ever seen. For example, in a discussion on elderly people going hungry because of lack of funds, inability to shop, physical ailments, isolation, etc., his opinion was that there was no such thing in this country as hungry elderly, and if there was, well it's their families' fault for not taking care of them. I was taken aback by the coldness as I would be if anyone said that, but it seems especially egregious coming from a person who claims to have been a Christian leader in his career.
There are also a fair number of Christians who misuse the Bible verse "For even when we were with you, we gave you this rule: "If a man will not work, he shall not eat" to justify not feeding the poor. That's NOT what the verse is about. It is in a letter to the early church in Thessalonika, which, like most of the churches, operated as communes. There were people who thought they didn't have to do their share because they figured Jesus was coming back at any minute. The author is telling people in that community to pull their weight, not to withhold food from unemployed or poor people.
I find these types of Christian outlook particularly disgusting because I am of the mind that food should be withheld from no one, not the criminal, the crippled, the crazy, NOT ANYONE. If I were truly Mighty Queen, everyone would have enough food. Nothing justifies not feeding people.
See what you did now, phet? Got me started.
But I think it's good that these things are talked about.
And before somebody along and says I'm just picking on christians, one of a couple of things that I don't approve of in Theravada Buddhism is that too much of the giving on the part of lay people is ONLY to monks and the temple itself. At my former temple (before moving), I once went into the storeroom and there were literally hundreds of cases of drinking water...for 4 monks. Too much adoration of monks (and I use the term adoration intentionally), and not enough taking care of everyday people in need.
Yeah, I know what you are saying. There is a poster on City-Data who claims to be a retired pastor, yet by his posts (both in R&S and on other forums throughout the site) he presents himself as one of the coldest, most compassion-free human beings I've ever seen. For example, in a discussion on elderly people going hungry because of lack of funds, inability to shop, physical ailments, isolation, etc., his opinion was that there was no such thing in this country as hungry elderly, and if there was, well it's their families' fault for not taking care of them. I was taken aback by the coldness as I would be if anyone said that, but it seems especially egregious coming from a person who claims to have been a Christian leader in his career.
There are also a fair number of Christians who misuse the Bible verse "For even when we were with you, we gave you this rule: "If a man will not work, he shall not eat" to justify not feeding the poor. That's NOT what the verse is about. It is in a letter to the early church in Thessalonika, which, like most of the churches, operated as communes. There were people who thought they didn't have to do their share because they figured Jesus was coming back at any minute. The author is telling people in that community to pull their weight, not to withhold food from unemployed or poor people.
I find these types of Christian outlook particularly disgusting because I am of the mind that food should be withheld from no one, not the criminal, the crippled, the crazy, NOT ANYONE. If I were truly Mighty Queen, everyone would have enough food. Nothing justifies not feeding people.
See what you did now, phet? Got me started.
""And the Union workhouses." demanded Scrooge. "Are they still in operation?"
"Both very busy, sir..."
"Those who are badly off must go there."
"Many can't go there; and many would rather die."
"If they would rather die," said Scrooge, "they had better do it, and decrease the surplus population."
Ebeneezer Scrooge: "A Christmas Carol," by Charles Dickens
""And the Union workhouses." demanded Scrooge. "Are they still in operation?"
"Both very busy, sir..."
"Those who are badly off must go there."
"Many can't go there; and many would rather die."
"If they would rather die," said Scrooge, "they had better do it, and decrease the surplus population."
Ebeneezer Scrooge: "A Christmas Carol," by Charles Dickens
Thanks for the reminder. Next time I see the "pastor" post one of his anti-human remarks, I am going to respond with that.
""And the Union workhouses." demanded Scrooge. "Are they still in operation?"
"Both very busy, sir..."
"Those who are badly off must go there."
"Many can't go there; and many would rather die."
"If they would rather die," said Scrooge, "they had better do it, and decrease the surplus population."
Ebeneezer Scrooge: "A Christmas Carol," by Charles Dickens
I have long thought that of all the fictional characters there have been, Ebeneezer is probably the most well known. Dickens was wonderful.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
