Monday, April 12, 2010

Worst of Answers: 04/09/10

A recently-awarded answer on Yahoo! Answers:

Best Answer - Chosen by Asker
I think that a lot of right wingers, particularly a lot of conservative Christians, confuse what it means to be an American with what it means to be a Christian, and they put American values, like individualism, over the Christian values of compassion and justice (not just charity, but justice). They forget that Jesus cared for the sick and infirm and was friend to "sinners," and railed against the religious and capitalistic authorities of his day (remember the Pharisees and the money-changers in the temple). This same Jesus also said that those who came after him who worked in his name would do greater works than he during his lifetime. Even in Acts, the apostles engaged in a communitarian system with followers in which people sold off what they had and placed it in the community pot (read = socialism, not communism, but definitely socialism).

That's why a lot of conservative Christians whine about being told what to do and not having the "FREEDOM" to do whatever they want, yet most don't even pay tithes to their churches to do said charity work.

That's also why they talk about compassion, but are really quick to judge the poor as "not deserving" of help if they don't live as they do or have had the same upbringing they did, when none of us are perfect and we all fall short.

That's why they ignore the numerous passages in the Bible that talk about greed (read = capitalism, an economic system based on greed) and lack of compassion, but will protest based on issues like homosexuality (of which there are few Bible passages about) and abortion (of which there are none). They want to act like they conform to Jesus' teachings about compassion, but without sacrifice on their part. They have a very otherworldly, limited understanding of His good news, and that's really sad.
Source(s):
I'm a Christian myself from the US, but not too crazy about the conservative American brand of "Christianity."


**************

Commentary follows:

1. «...[T]hey put American values, like individualism, over the Christian values of compassion and justice (not just charity, but justice).»

Translation: They don’t spend enough time fighting for the causes of Gay Pride, women’s reproductive legal rights, wage increases, and government programs of welfare handouts.


2. «They forget that Jesus cared for the sick and infirm and was friend to "sinners," and railed against the religious and capitalistic authorities of his day (remember the Pharisees and the money-changers in the temple).»

A. They’re not forgetting anything. Number one, conservative Christians are hardly stingy, on record as being larger donators to charitable organizations than secular liberals. Number two, it is not easy to miss the repeated accounts and exhortations for charity toward the needy throughout the pages of the Gospels and the epistles of Christ’s apostles. Number three, does this person honestly not realize how pervasive and unavoidable friendships and acquaintanceship between Christians and non-Christians today really are? What this person is saying is neither wise nor apt.

B. The mere existence of money changers is hardly a proof that the money changers were capitalists; this person doesn’t even know (or care) what the word “capitalist” means. For one thing, socialism requires only that an existing government control the industry of a particular place; it is entirely compatible for one to desire to see the government own every car factory in America and still desire to see employees of that factory make a profit or even a relatively large profit, as did the money-changers. In other words, does anyone really want to deny that the spoils of industry in socialist countries with a socialist electorate are always of equal amounts from person to person?


3. «This same Jesus also said that those who came after him who worked in his name would do greater works than he during his lifetime. Even in Acts, the apostles engaged in a communitarian system with followers in which people sold off what they had and placed it in the community pot (read = socialism, not communism, but definitely socialism).»

So what? If people want to make their own property to be shared property, good for them. Now, where is the proof that this was anything other than an arrangement of exigency? Where is the proof that this arrangement was required of all Christians? Where is the proof that this arrangement was to incorporate non-Christians as well as Christians?


4. «That's why a lot of conservative Christians whine about being told what to do and not having the "FREEDOM" to do whatever they want, yet most don't even pay tithes to their churches to do said charity work.»

Who is this person talking about? Where are these many conservative Christians who whine about church discipline and lack of freedom to do what they want? The fact is there aren’t a lot, so to give the benefit of the doubt I assume that this person is talking about conservative complaints about government’s increasing intrusions into people’s private lives, but then again what does that have to do with the claim that most conservative Christians do not pay tithes to do charity work? In other words, this person does not know what she is talking about.

But there’s more. Who said that tithes should go to works of physical charity? Who said that tithes should not go to maintenance of the spiritual ministry of paying the bills of dedicated preachers or paying the utility bills of church buildings or paying the bills of foreign missionaries who need the help? Who said that additional offerings cannot go to works of physical charity while tithes go elsewhere?


5. «That's also why they talk about compassion, but are really quick to judge the poor as "not deserving" of help if they don't live as they do or have had the same upbringing they did, when none of us are perfect and we all fall short.»

What is she talking about? Conservatives are big givers (e.g., see Brooks’ book); this in turn means that conservatives believe in helping the poor. At the same time, she acts as if all poor people are the same and that the situation of all poor people is the same: as if every poor person is an innocent victim of poverty. But conservatives tend to know better than this.

If you are unable at the present moment to work to secure food for yourself though you need food now, then others have a duty to God to help you out in this regard. On the other hand, if others can stand and observe that from day to day you are lazy and refuse to work and thus make wages commensurate with the amount of work that you have done, then you deserve the poverty in which you live.

Or if you are irresponsible enough to sleep around (though you are already poor), have unprotected sex, end up having lots of kids to feed as a result and of course cannot live well as a result of the bills and expenses you now have to pay, then you have played yourself: this situation is one of your own folly, your own irresponsibility, your own doing. If your kids are on the brink of starvation at this present moment, others have a duty before God to help them out, but make no mistake about it: you deserve your poverty.

Or if your idea of making ends meet in today’s American society is merely to graduate from high school and then to check the classified ads for available work, then you deserve that poverty that awaits you. For even if you are an innocent victim of failing, decrepit inner city public schools, you should still know better than to take the easy route. You should know simply from checking classified ads that most jobs today require specialized education or skills. You should know even from visiting employment agencies that many jobs today require special skills or abilities. We are not in an age in which factory jobs are available to all high school grads who want to easily fall into a factory job or a job driving a bus around town with the hope of retiring with a pension after twenty years of work; and this is something which is evident.

Again, you should know that college and technical schools are largely a must nowadays. You should know that even if you are not able to enter a four-year school immediately, two-year schools are a more likely option. Or even if neither is currently an option, military service is an option for many, including some of those with criminal records. However, if one ignores all this or fails to see all of this, though it is evident, he deserves his poverty. If you are on the brink of starvation, others have a duty to God to get you some food, but you yourself owe it to yourself to go where the fish are biting to secure a decent and probable line of employment. (Meanwhile, only a few people in America today can say that their government should make it a point to bring factories and blue collar work back to America from China and from wherever else such work has gone over the past twenty-five years.)

Finally, her objection “when none of us are perfect and we all fall short” is irrelevant, because one can glean an important truth from 2 Thessalonians 3.9-11. Any particular person who is poor because of his own laziness or folly has earned his poverty.

But this is what liberalism is all about: the triumph of sentiment over the brutal facts of the world around us.


6. «That's why they ignore the numerous passages in the Bible that talk about greed (read = capitalism, an economic system based on greed) and lack of compassion....»

Yep, this is one reason America is on the fast, trendy track to socialism today: ridiculous, sophomoric, dare-I-say childish claims like this one. Never mind what the word “greed” really means. Never mind what the word “capitalism” really means. Never mind what capitalists in toto really think, really believe, and really have as their motivations for going to work everyday.

Never mind the fact that some of us happen to think that what socialism and communism give the right hand they take away with the left. Never mind that some of us happen to think that socialism inevitably defeats the very purposes for which it is enacted and maintained. Never mind that some of us believe that free-market economics is the platform on which the greatest number of people can prosper. Never mind that some of us go to work with a profit as a motive to get us out of poverty! Never mind that some of us believe in free-market economics and give to charitable causes on a regular basis.

In other words, tell this person to get outta here till she’s ready to come back and deal with reality. This is trendy, recycled garbage from old leftists that she mindlessly repeats here. No one’s ignoring anything here except her.


7. «...[B]ut will protest based on issues like homosexuality (of which there are few Bible passages about) and abortion (of which there are none).»

There are also few passages about supposed communism or socialism in the Bible. Guess that means it’s not important to be a socialist.


8. «They want to act like they conform to Jesus' teachings about compassion, but without sacrifice on their part.»

Ah yes, another talking point from the Obama propaganda machine: We all gotta make sacrifices here, as if the rich and middle class were not already being taxed.


9. «They want to act like they conform to Jesus' teachings about compassion, but without sacrifice on their part. They have a very otherworldly, limited understanding of His good news, and that's really sad.»

You are correct about the otherworldy part! You, Y!A user which will remain unnamed, are a proponent of the liberal “social gospel” that continues to pervert the meaning of the New Testament in its inordinate exaltation of mankind and sentimentalist priorities of seeking to establish a utopian reality which not only cannot be but is not called for by the Bible in the first place.

**************

All this is rubbish that liberals and the religious left propagate, but it is also nothing new. The roaches are now crawling out the woodwork now that they have been emboldened by the demise of real investigative journalism in 2008 and by the ascendancy of the Exalted One, his Wisdom and Highness Barack Hussein Obama, so we will be hearing more of this in the future.

No comments: