Jump to content

Overturning the Gospels


Guest BlackJesus

Recommended Posts

Guest BlackJesus
[color="red"][i][b]pretty provoking article written by a Christian woman who believes that American Christians have their priorities upside down.... although I despise Christianity, I at least can appreciate her interpretation of some of it. [/b][/i][/color]



[quote][u]
[img]http://msnbcmedia.msn.com/i/msnbc/Sections/Newsweek/Components/Art/Section%20Storage/Columnist_Weblog_SPATs/nw_col_spat_henneberger_m10.jpg[/img]
Overturning the Gospels
Katrina has reminded us that Christian morality should be about responding to the wretched and loving the unlovable—not about other people’s sex lives.
By Melinda Henneberger
Newsweek
Sept. 14, 2005
[/u]


There was a great piece in Harper's last month, "The Christian Paradox: How a Faithful Nation Gets Jesus Wrong'' by Bill McKibben, about how three out of four Americans believe the Bible teaches this: "God helps those who help themselves.'' The Gospel according to Mark? Luke? Actually, it was Ben Franklin who came up with these words to live by.

"The thing is,'' McKibben writes, "not only is Franklin's wisdom not biblical; it's counterbiblical. Few ideas could be further from the gospel message, with its radical summons to love of neighbor. On this essential matter, most Americans—most American Christians—are simply wrong, as if 75 percent of American scientists believed that Newton proved gravity causes apples to fly up.''

Now, in the aftermath of Hurricane Katrina, we have seen—and been unable to look away from— the direct result of this self-deception.

And if such tell-me-I'm-dreaming scenes as rats feeding on corpses in the streets—American streets—isn't enough to make us rethink the public-policy implications of turning the Gospel on its head in this way, then truly, God help us.

We as a nation—a proudly, increasingly loudly Christian nation—have somehow convinced ourselves that the selfish choice is usually the moral one, too. (What a deal!) You know how this works: It's wrong to help poor people because "handouts'' reward dependency and thus hurt more than they help. So, do the right thing—that is, walk right on by—and by all means hang on to your hard-earned cash.

Thus do we deny the working poor a living wage, resent welfare recipients expected to live on a few hundred dollars a month, object to the whopping .16 percent of our GNP that goes to foreign aid—and still manage to feel virtuous about all of the above.

Which is how "Christian'' morality got to be all about other people's sex lives—and incredibly easy lifting compared to what Jesus actually asks of us. Defending traditional marriage? A breeze. Living in one? Less so. Telling gay people what they can't do? Piece o' cake. But responding to the wretched? Loving the unlovable? Forgiving the ever-so-occasionally annoying people you actually know? Hard work, as our president would say, and rather more of a stretch. 

A lot of us are angry at our public officials just now, and rightly so. But we are complicit, too; top to bottom, we picked this government, which has certainly met our low expectations.

The Bush administration made deep and then still deeper cuts in antipoverty programs, and we liked that. (The genius of the whole Republican program, in fact, is that it not only offers tax cuts and morality, but tax cuts as morality. Americans do, I think, want to feel they are doing the right thing, and when I hear an opponent of abortion rights say, "I'm voting for the most vulnerable, the unborn,'' I have to respect that. Of course, we also like tax breaks and cheap gas and cranking the thermostat up and down—so when Republicans play to both our better angels and our less altruistic ones, it's not that tough a sell.)

But have Democrats loudly decried the inhumanity—or even the hidden, deferred costs of the Bush cuts in services to the most vulnerable among the already born? Heavens, no, with a handful of exceptions, such as former vice-presidential nominee John Edwards, who spoke every single day of his campaign—and ever since—about our responsibilities toward those struggling just to get by in the "other America.''

Most party leaders are still busy emulating Bill Clinton, who felt their pain and cut their benefits—and made his fellow Dems ashamed to show any hint of a "bleeding heart.'' Clinton's imitators haven't his skills, though, so his bloodless, Republican Lite legacy has been a political as well as moral disaster.

That's not, of course, because voters give a hoot about poverty, but because along with the defining moral strength of its commitment to the underclass went most of the party's self-confidence, and all of its fervor.

Incredibly, they even ceded the discussion of compassion to President Bush, a man who has always struck me as empathy-free—to an odd extent, really, as we saw again last week when he cracked jokes about his carousing days on his first trip to the Gulf Coast.

Immediately after the disaster, Bush quickly intervened—to make it possible for refiners to produce dirtier gasoline. He has since zapped working people on the Gulf Coast all over again by suspending the 1931 law that requires employers to pay the prevailing wage to workers on all federally financed projects.

Others in his party have expressed concern about all the freebies evacuees will be enjoying: "How do you separate the needy from those who just want a $2,000 handout?'' Alaska Gov. Frank Murkowski asked—by way of explaining why debit cards for Katrina victims were a bad idea.

So far, though, I'd love to be wrong, I see no reason to think the president's sinking poll numbers will persuade him that there's more to (pro-)life than opposing abortion.

I still dare to hope Democrats may yet remember why they are Democrats, though. And that would be a real come-to-Jesus moment.[/quote]
Link to comment
Share on other sites

[img]http://msnbcmedia.msn.com/i/msnbc/Sections/Newsweek/Components/Art/Section%20Storage/Columnist_Weblog_SPATs/nw_col_spat_henneberger_m10.jpg[/img]

:wub: :wub: :wub: :wub: :wub:


also...

[quote]How do you separate the needy from those who just want a $2,000 handout?[/quote]

This has an odd ring to it?? :blink:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

She's not what I'd call attractive normally.

BUT. She's got a look in her eye's. Or, maybe just an overall look in her face.

I can't pin it down.

She's got some kind of sexiness about her.

BUT THAT'S NOT WHAT THIS IS ABOUT.

She seems to have a decent head on her shoulders, and, I may follow up on her stuff online at a later time. I've frankly been more in tune with her than any of the other articles that have been posted here before.

And I voted for Bush, am Pro-Life, pro-2A, fiscally conserative (IE GREEDY BASTARD), but socially moderate~ I'm OK with gay marriage, civial unions, etc.

But I've never really been religious. Go figure.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

She looks like she would shag like a minx....in a happy marriage.

It doesn't suprise me that someone has written this article....God is Love, Jesus is Love...that's it plain and simple. Sadly there are many Christians or so called spiritual people who don't get that fundamental and simple fact.



Like Morpheus said man, "There is a difference between knowing the path, and walking the path."
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Back to the topic for a moment.

She is right about some, and wrong about one big one. Christians are to love the unlovable, and help those in need, and while a lot of Christians and churches do that, they don't do a very good job of it. And while Christianity is about more than poking into other peoples sex lives, Jesus did tell the woman caught in adultery "go and sin no more". Loving the unlovable should not mean you completely ignore their sin. A Christian believes that siin keeps you from God, and that hell is real and eternal. So Christins should LOVINGLY tell people the truth about sin, and encourage them to repent. Sadly a lot of Christians do that in a self-righteous way. Like if you saw your friend about to drink a glass of rat poison, you would tell him to stop, wouldn't you???

The biggie she is wrong about, is that Jesus [b][u]NEVER[/u][/b] called the government to do that, he called [b][u]HIS PEOPLE[/b][/u] to do that. The government is just way too inefficient to do it effectively. Look how much we have spent in the "War on Poverty". YOu would think we would have won by now, but we haven't. The problem with welfare, and other social assistance programs is people become reliant on them, and never lift themselves higher.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

[quote]You know how this works: It's wrong to help poor people because "handouts'' reward dependency and thus hurt more than they help. So, do the right thing—that is, walk right on by—and by all means hang on to your hard-earned cash.[/quote]


Yep! thats the religion I live by

If you're poor, you're poor for a reason, either you have made bad choices or your parents have made poor choices for you. If you want someone to blame you don't have to look any further than your own home.


Third world countries do not apply to this but in the USA there is NO EXCUSE!
Link to comment
Share on other sites

[quote name='Jason' date='Sep 16 2005, 08:14 AM']Back to the topic for a moment. 

The biggie she is wrong about, is that Jesus [b][u]NEVER[/u][/b] called the government to do that, he called [b][u]HIS PEOPLE[/b][/u] to do that.  [right][post="149855"][/post][/right][/quote]

In kind of that whole "Give to Cesar what is Cesar's and God what is God's" right Jason? [img]http://forum.go-bengals.com/public/style_emoticons//3.gif[/img]

also...

I wasn't talking about her psychical attractiveness, she's average in that term, I was talking to her spiritual attractiveness. :headbang:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

[quote name='Jamie_B' date='Sep 16 2005, 12:37 PM']In kind of that whole "Give to Cesar what is Cesar's and God what is God's" right Jason?  [img]http://forum.go-bengals.com/public/style_emoticons//3.gif[/img]

also...

I wasn't talking about her psychical attractiveness, she's average in that term, I was talking to her spiritual attractiveness. :headbang:
[right][post="149965"][/post][/right][/quote]

I'll be honest. I'm not sure if you are agreeing with me or not, it seems like not, and I will respond as such. If you are agreeing with me, then what I am about to write will support that.

Yes, Jesus did say we were to pay our taxes (give to Ceasar), but he never made any assumption that taxes would be used to help the poor. The government didn't then, and he never instructed it to. But there is a scripture that says that true religion is caring for widows and orphans.

So, it sounds like liberals, who are the boldest proclaimers of "separation of church and state" are the same ones saying the government should "care for widows and orphans". If that is true religion, isn't it violating separation of church and state?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

[quote name='Jason' date='Sep 16 2005, 01:58 PM']I'll be honest.  I'm not sure if you are agreeing with me or not, it seems like not, and I will respond as such.  If you are agreeing with me, then what I am about to write will support that. 

Yes, Jesus did say we were to pay our taxes (give to Ceasar), but he never made any assumption that taxes would be used to help the poor.  The government didn't then, and he never instructed it to.  But there is a scripture that says that true religion is caring for widows and orphans.

So, it sounds like liberals, who are the boldest proclaimers of "separation of church and state" are the same ones saying the government should "care for widows and orphans".  If that is true religion, isn't it violating separation of church and state?
[right][post="150023"]<{POST_SNAPBACK}>[/post][/right][/quote]


I was agreeing with you yes. [img]http://forum.go-bengals.com/public/style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/3.gif[/img]
Link to comment
Share on other sites

[quote name='Jamie_B' date='Sep 16 2005, 02:10 PM']I was agreeing with you yes. [img]http://forum.go-bengals.com/public/style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/3.gif[/img]
[right][post="150034"]<{POST_SNAPBACK}>[/post][/right][/quote]

Ok. My brain was a little fried from working with steam sterilizers all morning.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

×
×
  • Create New...