Ineffectiveness of the Church in America

[Sweet Willy]

It is easy to call everything an excuse without looking at the actual outcomes and purpose behind such actions. You are taking a world that is very much not black and white and attempting to force it into a black and white viewpoint. You can point to a situation and say that it was not Christian because it broke some vaunted law but without context you are misrepresenting the truth. I do not think that God would take issue that you shot a man if such an action was the only way to stop him from burning a building full of children. There is more to actions than the immediate narrow scope that you are focusing on.
.

Right. But lets say that rather than face the man with the gun, I went to the day care where his child was and burned it down while he also burned mine down? Are we on the good Christian path yet?

I do say that Hiroshima and Nagasaki are not excused by some twisted and contorted scripture. We targeted unarmed women and children, intentionally. We took HOSTAGES and MURDERED THEM. We said "look, we're going to kill your women and children rather than fight you."

Yes, you are right that we face tough circumstances. But we chose to kill defenseless people to save armed soldiers. Had we kept that battle centered on armies and not intentionally gone after civilians, there may be a difference. It was and is a sin against God's children. They were murdered.

 

[Foxfyre]

It is easy to call everything an excuse without looking at the actual outcomes and purpose behind such actions. You are taking a world that is very much not black and white and attempting to force it into a black and white viewpoint. You can point to a situation and say that it was not Christian because it broke some vaunted law but without context you are misrepresenting the truth. I do not think that God would take issue that you shot a man if such an action was the only way to stop him from burning a building full of children. There is more to actions than the immediate narrow scope that you are focusing on.
.

Right. But lets say that rather than face the man with the gun, I went to the day care where his child was and burned it down while he also burned mine down? Are we on the good Christian path yet?

I do say that Hiroshima and Nagasaki are not excused by some twisted and contorted scripture. We targeted unarmed women and children, intentionally. We took HOSTAGES and MURDERED THEM. We said "look, we're going to kill your women and children rather than fight you."

Yes, you are right that we face tough circumstances. But we chose to kill defenseless people to save armed soldiers. Had we kept that battle centered on armies and not intentionally gone after civilians, there may be a difference. It was and is a sin against God's children. They were murdered.

And since you ignored my previous post addressing that particular issue, I'll point out that you 'do say' wrong. Women and children were not targetedf in either Hiroshima or Nagasaki any more than women and children are targeted with areas are shelled or an area is carpet bombed via conventional bombs. Hiroshima and Nagasaki both contained major military installations and were both legitimate military targets.

Hiroshima was the hub for a number of military installations including Field Marshall Hata's 2nd General Army headquarters, some 400,000 men defending the southern half of Japan, and also the headquarters of the 59th Army Headquarters and 224th Division mobile unit as well as numerous military manufacturing plants and storage facilities. Its air defenses were among Japan's best and it is prety remarkable that the Enola Gay was able to drop the bomb and fly away.

Nagasaki was a large sea port harboring numerous war ships and also included about a 100 factories manufacturing ordinance, ships, military equipment, and other war materials.

So again, do we not go after these targets and thereby take or injure a few hundred thousand lives but bring the war to a speedy end? Or incur the millions of casualties, both ours and theirs, if an invasion of Japan had been necessary to end the war?

Overwhelming force is often the far less costly for all concerned.

 

[Sweet Willy]

It is easy to call everything an excuse without looking at the actual outcomes and purpose behind such actions. You are taking a world that is very much not black and white and attempting to force it into a black and white viewpoint. You can point to a situation and say that it was not Christian because it broke some vaunted law but without context you are misrepresenting the truth. I do not think that God would take issue that you shot a man if such an action was the only way to stop him from burning a building full of children. There is more to actions than the immediate narrow scope that you are focusing on.
.

Right. But lets say that rather than face the man with the gun, I went to the day care where his child was and burned it down while he also burned mine down? Are we on the good Christian path yet?

I do say that Hiroshima and Nagasaki are not excused by some twisted and contorted scripture. We targeted unarmed women and children, intentionally. We took HOSTAGES and MURDERED THEM. We said "look, we're going to kill your women and children rather than fight you."

Yes, you are right that we face tough circumstances. But we chose to kill defenseless people to save armed soldiers. Had we kept that battle centered on armies and not intentionally gone after civilians, there may be a difference. It was and is a sin against God's children. They were murdered.

And since you ignored my previous post addressing that particular issue, I'll point out that you 'do say' wrong. Women and children were not targetedf in either Hiroshima or Nagasaki any more than women and children are targeted with areas are shelled or an area is carpet bombed via conventional bombs. Hiroshima and Nagasaki both contained major military installations and were both legitimate military targets.

Hiroshima was the hub for a number of military installations including Field Marshall Hata's 2nd General Army headquarters, some 400,000 men defending the southern half of Japan, and also the headquarters of the 59th Army Headquarters and 224th Division mobile unit as well as numerous military manufacturing plants and storage facilities. Its air defenses were among Japan's best and it is prety remarkable that the Enola Gay was able to drop the bomb and fly away.

Nagasaki was a large sea port harboring numerous war ships and also included about a 100 factories manufacturing ordinance, ships, military equipment, and other war materials.

So again, do we not go after these targets and thereby take or injure a few hundred thousand lives but bring the war to a speedy end? Or incur the millions of casualties, both ours and theirs, if an invasion of Japan had been necessary to end the war?

Overwhelming force is often the far less costly for all concerned.

It's a wonderful military excuse you have there. It was very effective. It was a valid military target... if one can find a Christian way around the intentional and informed killing of thousands of women and children.

We knew there were innocents and we were willing to kill them. There is no Christian defense of this sort of behavior. Christians do not rationalize the killing of innocent women and Children.

 

[Gadawg73]

Willy, my father was stationed on Saipan when the bombs hit Japan. His troop carrier had been hit offloading his troops at Okinawa.
We saved a million American casualties and probably 2 million Japanese by dropping the bombs and ernding the war.

 

[Sweet Willy]

Look, where this goes wrong is the attempt to rationalize these sorts of things. This is the sort of behavior that causes me to question the effectiveness of the Church. My values tell me that these things are horrible and unfortunate situation and most of all these are terrible sins against Gods children. Had one of you chosen to tell me that you have prayed for the people burdened with these sins and prayed for our nation and our people to be forgiven for our transgressions, I'd leave this conversation with a different feeling. But what I got was quite different. What we have here is a bunch of excuses. Christians don't handle dead children with excuses. We pray for the salvation of their souls and the strength to forgive those who have sinned against Gods children.

 

[Sweet Willy]

Willy, my father was stationed on Saipan when the bombs hit Japan. His troop carrier had been hit offloading his troops at Okinawa.
We saved a million American casualties and probably 2 million Japanese by dropping the bombs and ernding the war.

And I am proud for you fathers service and I am grateful to those who served and died. These things are sort of beside my point, my friend. As Christians, we should not be making excuses, we should be making our best efforts to see to it that innocents are not killed and when they are, we should be humble in asking for forgiveness. This is God's way.

 

[FA_Q2]

It is easy to call everything an excuse without looking at the actual outcomes and purpose behind such actions. You are taking a world that is very much not black and white and attempting to force it into a black and white viewpoint. You can point to a situation and say that it was not Christian because it broke some vaunted law but without context you are misrepresenting the truth. I do not think that God would take issue that you shot a man if such an action was the only way to stop him from burning a building full of children. There is more to actions than the immediate narrow scope that you are focusing on.
.

Right. But lets say that rather than face the man with the gun, I went to the day care where his child was and burned it down while he also burned mine down? Are we on the good Christian path yet?

I do say that Hiroshima and Nagasaki are not excused by some twisted and contorted scripture. We targeted unarmed women and children, intentionally. We took HOSTAGES and MURDERED THEM. We said "look, we're going to kill your women and children rather than fight you."

Yes, you are right that we face tough circumstances. But we chose to kill defenseless people to save armed soldiers. Had we kept that battle centered on armies and not intentionally gone after civilians, there may be a difference. It was and is a sin against God's children. They were murdered.

And since you ignored my previous post addressing that particular issue, I'll point out that you 'do say' wrong. Women and children were not targetedf in either Hiroshima or Nagasaki any more than women and children are targeted with areas are shelled or an area is carpet bombed via conventional bombs. Hiroshima and Nagasaki both contained major military installations and were both legitimate military targets.

Hiroshima was the hub for a number of military installations including Field Marshall Hata's 2nd General Army headquarters, some 400,000 men defending the southern half of Japan, and also the headquarters of the 59th Army Headquarters and 224th Division mobile unit as well as numerous military manufacturing plants and storage facilities. Its air defenses were among Japan's best and it is prety remarkable that the Enola Gay was able to drop the bomb and fly away.

Nagasaki was a large sea port harboring numerous war ships and also included about a 100 factories manufacturing ordinance, ships, military equipment, and other war materials.

So again, do we not go after these targets and thereby take or injure a few hundred thousand lives but bring the war to a speedy end? Or incur the millions of casualties, both ours and theirs, if an invasion of Japan had been necessary to end the war?

Overwhelming force is often the far less costly for all concerned.

Actually, that is not true. Those targets were chosen specifically because they were located in large urban arias. IOW, civilian populations were one of the REQUIREMENTS for targeting. It is ugly but it is what happened. We should at least be honest with ourselves here. Sorry to burst the bubble here, but the use of that force was not to scale for a reason. We knew that we were not in any position to end this war with strictly hitting military targets.


I do find it interesting that we focus on those two incidents though. Firebombing campaigns actually caused MORE civilian deaths than the nuclear attacks yet no one ever mentions that.


One of the requirements for a target:
Atomic bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

The target was larger than 3 miles (4.8 km) in diameter and was an important target in a large urban area.

 

[FA_Q2]

It is easy to call everything an excuse without looking at the actual outcomes and purpose behind such actions. You are taking a world that is very much not black and white and attempting to force it into a black and white viewpoint. You can point to a situation and say that it was not Christian because it broke some vaunted law but without context you are misrepresenting the truth. I do not think that God would take issue that you shot a man if such an action was the only way to stop him from burning a building full of children. There is more to actions than the immediate narrow scope that you are focusing on.
.

Right. But lets say that rather than face the man with the gun, I went to the day care where his child was and burned it down while he also burned mine down? Are we on the good Christian path yet?

I do say that Hiroshima and Nagasaki are not excused by some twisted and contorted scripture. We targeted unarmed women and children, intentionally. We took HOSTAGES and MURDERED THEM. We said "look, we're going to kill your women and children rather than fight you."

Yes, you are right that we face tough circumstances. But we chose to kill defenseless people to save armed soldiers. Had we kept that battle centered on armies and not intentionally gone after civilians, there may be a difference. It was and is a sin against God's children. They were murdered.

What is the difference in targeting an army or a civilian from a Christian view? I agree that it is wrong to target civilians and I am not necessarily arguing that we made the correct choices, I just wanted to bring you to task on the idea that something is inherently un-Christian simply because it involves the death of one or more people. Issues are more complex than that and things like WW2 really have no real connection to your supposition in your OP.


I actually agree with your original point as I outlined on the first page but I think you are going too far when you try and approach these overreaching examples without any context whatsoever.

 

[Intense]

Right. But lets say that rather than face the man with the gun, I went to the day care where his child was and burned it down while he also burned mine down? Are we on the good Christian path yet?

I do say that Hiroshima and Nagasaki are not excused by some twisted and contorted scripture. We targeted unarmed women and children, intentionally. We took HOSTAGES and MURDERED THEM. We said "look, we're going to kill your women and children rather than fight you."

Yes, you are right that we face tough circumstances. But we chose to kill defenseless people to save armed soldiers. Had we kept that battle centered on armies and not intentionally gone after civilians, there may be a difference. It was and is a sin against God's children. They were murdered.

And since you ignored my previous post addressing that particular issue, I'll point out that you 'do say' wrong. Women and children were not targetedf in either Hiroshima or Nagasaki any more than women and children are targeted with areas are shelled or an area is carpet bombed via conventional bombs. Hiroshima and Nagasaki both contained major military installations and were both legitimate military targets.

Hiroshima was the hub for a number of military installations including Field Marshall Hata's 2nd General Army headquarters, some 400,000 men defending the southern half of Japan, and also the headquarters of the 59th Army Headquarters and 224th Division mobile unit as well as numerous military manufacturing plants and storage facilities. Its air defenses were among Japan's best and it is prety remarkable that the Enola Gay was able to drop the bomb and fly away.

Nagasaki was a large sea port harboring numerous war ships and also included about a 100 factories manufacturing ordinance, ships, military equipment, and other war materials.

So again, do we not go after these targets and thereby take or injure a few hundred thousand lives but bring the war to a speedy end? Or incur the millions of casualties, both ours and theirs, if an invasion of Japan had been necessary to end the war?

Overwhelming force is often the far less costly for all concerned.

Actually, that is not true. Those targets were chosen specifically because they were located in large urban arias. IOW, civilian populations were one of the REQUIREMENTS for targeting. It is ugly but it is what happened. We should at least be honest with ourselves here. Sorry to burst the bubble here, but the use of that force was not to scale for a reason. We knew that we were not in any position to end this war with strictly hitting military targets.


I do find it interesting that we focus on those two incidents though. Firebombing campaigns actually caused MORE civilian deaths than the nuclear attacks yet no one ever mentions that.


One of the requirements for a target:
Atomic bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

The target was larger than 3 miles (4.8 km) in diameter and was an important target in a large urban area.

Yep. We will never know the true number killed at Dresden. You got me thinking on "Slaughterhouse Five".

 

[Avatar4321]

How on earth did this become a discussion on WW2?

 

[Sweet Willy]

I actually agree with your original point as I outlined on the first page but I think you are going too far when you try and approach these overreaching examples without any context whatsoever.

The over reaching examples aren't really here nor there. The observation, within our very discussion here is demonstrated: The church has failed to reach it's own with Christian values. No one has yet spoken to the need for our fathers forgiveness for any of these actions. No one spoke to forgiveness for a soldier killing women and children. One by one, our posters made excuses. This is not Christian teachings at work. Christians do not carry about how complicated judgements are and try to parse out whether or not the killing of a child was, on balance, a good thing. The evidence of the Church failure is right here for us to see. A Christian is taught to forgive and ask forgiveness at each opportunity, not make excuse for the sake of pride, and certainly not to use the scripture as a tool to avoid forgiveness in the death of innocents?

There has been nothing I see here yet to change my thoughts on the subject. The Church has failed to impart the most basic of Christian values to it's followers.

 

[Sweet Willy]

How on earth did this become a discussion on WW2?

It really isn't. It was just an example to solicit reactions. I mean, if you want to talk forgiveness for killing a bunch of people, I guess it's that or the holocaust for your money, right? (maybe we could go with the American holocaust?)

 

[Foxfyre]

Right. But lets say that rather than face the man with the gun, I went to the day care where his child was and burned it down while he also burned mine down? Are we on the good Christian path yet?

I do say that Hiroshima and Nagasaki are not excused by some twisted and contorted scripture. We targeted unarmed women and children, intentionally. We took HOSTAGES and MURDERED THEM. We said "look, we're going to kill your women and children rather than fight you."

Yes, you are right that we face tough circumstances. But we chose to kill defenseless people to save armed soldiers. Had we kept that battle centered on armies and not intentionally gone after civilians, there may be a difference. It was and is a sin against God's children. They were murdered.

And since you ignored my previous post addressing that particular issue, I'll point out that you 'do say' wrong. Women and children were not targetedf in either Hiroshima or Nagasaki any more than women and children are targeted with areas are shelled or an area is carpet bombed via conventional bombs. Hiroshima and Nagasaki both contained major military installations and were both legitimate military targets.

Hiroshima was the hub for a number of military installations including Field Marshall Hata's 2nd General Army headquarters, some 400,000 men defending the southern half of Japan, and also the headquarters of the 59th Army Headquarters and 224th Division mobile unit as well as numerous military manufacturing plants and storage facilities. Its air defenses were among Japan's best and it is prety remarkable that the Enola Gay was able to drop the bomb and fly away.

Nagasaki was a large sea port harboring numerous war ships and also included about a 100 factories manufacturing ordinance, ships, military equipment, and other war materials.

So again, do we not go after these targets and thereby take or injure a few hundred thousand lives but bring the war to a speedy end? Or incur the millions of casualties, both ours and theirs, if an invasion of Japan had been necessary to end the war?

Overwhelming force is often the far less costly for all concerned.

It's a wonderful military excuse you have there. It was very effective. It was a valid military target... if one can find a Christian way around the intentional and informed killing of thousands of women and children.

We knew there were innocents and we were willing to kill them. There is no Christian defense of this sort of behavior. Christians do not rationalize the killing of innocent women and Children.

No excuses whatsoever. Just countering the misinformation you would allow people to believe. The intention was not to kill women and children but to end a war that was killing millions. And despite what FA and Wikipedia say, both targets were bonafide military targets.

The absence of war is not always peace. Germany had already put six million innocent Jews to death and Japan had slaughtered millions, 20 million in China alone.

But because Americans, mostly Christian Americans actually, were willing to fight WWII, Germany and Japan, who had been terrorizing their parts of the world and killing millions upon millions of innocent men, women, and children were forced into unconditional surrender. And then those same Americans among others, also mostly Christian, were able to persuade them to become peaceful nations who are now now both good ciitizens of the world and are killing no one.

You have to put things like that into their proper perspective and use honest analogies.

 

[jeffrockit]

So, what is it you are expecting to see that you are not?

I'm not sure that I am expectant of anything, however I do note the divide between the behavior the church advocates and the behavior its flock emulates. The subject matter that brought this about was birth control, but there are plenty of other examples that aren't just momentary lapses of Christian judgement, but sustained behavior running contrary to commonly held Christian morality. The concept of forgiveness, indeed unlimited forgiveness, is all but lost. The idea of forsaking worldly possessions, lost. The love of money openly displayed in the constant public grief at it's loss. The idea of "do unto others.." is likewise, gone. At best, it has become "I will do as done to me.." at worst, "do unto others before they do to me..". Forgiveness for our enemies? Forget that. Non violence? Completely missing it would seem. It is not easy to spot Christian behavior in everyday life in much of the country. It becomes even more difficult to see in the actions of the nation as a whole. One person's answer recently, when asked how we might go about changing this and making the Church more effective, was TO START A CIVIL WAR. Really? You believe that the way to solve our crisis of values is to go to war? I was appalled, quite frankly, but I am often appalled at the callous and violent suggestions of folks that outwardly at least, claim the most Christian morality.

I acknowledge our charitable nature that is evident in our willingness to give. But that appears to be the only evidence left, in any verifiable quantity, of wide spread Christian values in practice in America.

What you see is a direct result of the media using lowest common denominator journalism. Christians represented on the news programs mainly consist of those like Westboro Baptist Church (they picket soldiers funerals), Polygamist churches and anything that makes "News". Never do you see them visit a southern Baptist church, or Methodist s they quietly pray for things like the country, economy, a sick member. Rarely do you see the youth go out and rake leaves for an elderly couple. How often is Samaritans Purse that give billions to children of 3rd world countries.
All you have to do is dig deeper, go out in the communities and turn off the television.

 

[Foxfyre]

So, what is it you are expecting to see that you are not?

I'm not sure that I am expectant of anything, however I do note the divide between the behavior the church advocates and the behavior its flock emulates. The subject matter that brought this about was birth control, but there are plenty of other examples that aren't just momentary lapses of Christian judgement, but sustained behavior running contrary to commonly held Christian morality. The concept of forgiveness, indeed unlimited forgiveness, is all but lost. The idea of forsaking worldly possessions, lost. The love of money openly displayed in the constant public grief at it's loss. The idea of "do unto others.." is likewise, gone. At best, it has become "I will do as done to me.." at worst, "do unto others before they do to me..". Forgiveness for our enemies? Forget that. Non violence? Completely missing it would seem. It is not easy to spot Christian behavior in everyday life in much of the country. It becomes even more difficult to see in the actions of the nation as a whole. One person's answer recently, when asked how we might go about changing this and making the Church more effective, was TO START A CIVIL WAR. Really? You believe that the way to solve our crisis of values is to go to war? I was appalled, quite frankly, but I am often appalled at the callous and violent suggestions of folks that outwardly at least, claim the most Christian morality.

I acknowledge our charitable nature that is evident in our willingness to give. But that appears to be the only evidence left, in any verifiable quantity, of wide spread Christian values in practice in America.

What you see is a direct result of the media using lowest common denominator journalism. Christians represented on the news programs mainly consist of those like Westboro Baptist Church (they picket soldiers funerals), Polygamist churches and anything that makes "News". Never do you see them visit a southern Baptist church, or Methodist s they quietly pray for things like the country, economy, a sick member. Rarely do you see the youth go out and rake leaves for an elderly couple. How often is Samaritans Purse that give billions to children of 3rd world countries.
All you have to do is dig deeper, go out in the communities and turn off the television.

Splendid Jeff. And dammit, I'm out of rep for the moment or this post would have gotten some.

It is so important to know that for every rogue pretend preacher scamming the public, there are thousands of honorable men and women of God who have devoted their lives to serving the Lord by serving the people. For every evil entity like the Westboro Baptist Church, there are thousands of Christians who are truly striving to live the Christian life. For every corrupt businessman or thief who makes an appearance at church now and then, there are millions of Christians who are doing their best to be good friends, neighbors, and citizens of their communities, states, and country.

But unfortunately it is only the bad guys who get any publicity. And too often a media all too eager to convince people that the bad guys are the norm.

 

[ABikerSailor]

So, what is it you are expecting to see that you are not?

I'm not sure that I am expectant of anything, however I do note the divide between the behavior the church advocates and the behavior its flock emulates. The subject matter that brought this about was birth control, but there are plenty of other examples that aren't just momentary lapses of Christian judgement, but sustained behavior running contrary to commonly held Christian morality. The concept of forgiveness, indeed unlimited forgiveness, is all but lost. The idea of forsaking worldly possessions, lost. The love of money openly displayed in the constant public grief at it's loss. The idea of "do unto others.." is likewise, gone. At best, it has become "I will do as done to me.." at worst, "do unto others before they do to me..". Forgiveness for our enemies? Forget that. Non violence? Completely missing it would seem. It is not easy to spot Christian behavior in everyday life in much of the country. It becomes even more difficult to see in the actions of the nation as a whole. One person's answer recently, when asked how we might go about changing this and making the Church more effective, was TO START A CIVIL WAR. Really? You believe that the way to solve our crisis of values is to go to war? I was appalled, quite frankly, but I am often appalled at the callous and violent suggestions of folks that outwardly at least, claim the most Christian morality.

I acknowledge our charitable nature that is evident in our willingness to give. But that appears to be the only evidence left, in any verifiable quantity, of wide spread Christian values in practice in America.

What you see is a direct result of the media using lowest common denominator journalism. Christians represented on the news programs mainly consist of those like Westboro Baptist Church (they picket soldiers funerals), Polygamist churches and anything that makes "News". Never do you see them visit a southern Baptist church, or Methodist s they quietly pray for things like the country, economy, a sick member. Rarely do you see the youth go out and rake leaves for an elderly couple. How often is Samaritans Purse that give billions to children of 3rd world countries.
All you have to do is dig deeper, go out in the communities and turn off the television.

You're a Sarah Palin disciple, ain't ya?

 

[Gagafritz]

No. They aren't excuses. You don't want to accept our answers. If one is following Biblical principles, there is no compulsion to leave the army or to not enact the death penalty on those who are guilty of heinous crimes. There is no inconsistency whatsoever with those positions and following Christianity.

So what you're saying is that this is all perfect? I mean... I'm not saying that... I am wondering why we don't see more Christians asking for fewer deaths, fewer innocent women and children and unarmed civilians killed. I'm not excusing any of that as acceptable...but you seem to say, in fact you do say " There is no inconsistency whatsoever with those positions and following Christianity" Isn't that a long way around arguing that it is indeed, "perfection"? Or at the least, a horrible excuse for how people get dead?

Wow. How do you read that into anything i have said. Where has the word "perfection" come out of my mouth? Quite the opposite. I said that based on a biblical and Christian view that the earth is getting progressively worse and that in the end times "evil will be called good and good will be called evil" because things are so askew. But, that there is still a remnant of believers in the world trying to follow God who will be here until the Rapture and Second Coming with Armageddon to follow. And, ultimately the final battle which will result in Satan and his minions being eternally cast into the lake of fire and in which God will ultimately redeem the earth and us into the state he originally intended prior to Sin entering the and cursing the world. So, no Perfection on this earth whatseover until after the Earth is redeemed.

 

[catzmeow]

And that is pretty much the take I get, even from my own Church. The most effort I see put into studying scripture is a lot like we see here... finding excuses for bad behavior, rationalizing their acts so that they feel good about themselves. We do have one or two people that do the actual heavy lifting and pick up expired food from the grocery store and take it to the needy. But mostly, it's people looking for excuses and relief from bad behavior.

When I was still regularly attending church, and even teaching sunday school, I spent a lot of time trying to engage people from the congregation with some of the youth in our community who were really having problems, struggling with troubled family situations, poverty, gang involvement, failing in school, etc.

I was asked by the pastor to stop. It made people uncomfortable to be so candid about the problems being faced by many of the kids in our community, and the need for caring adults to make real connections with these young people.

One man felt compelled to express to my (now) ex-husband that my work had made me unfeminine, and that wouldn't it be better for me to be at home as a housewife, taking care of our daughter?

Later, because I was a person of faith and in a leadership role in a key agency in the community, I tried to create a connection between local congregations and some of the struggling teenagers in our city. With the exception of two people, every other pastor I met with was completely uninterested in having his congregation involved with these kids (and I went to MULTIPLE religious associations to ask for their help). The exceptions were the LDS General Authority for our area (Mormon church official) and a single evangelical congregation whose youth pastor was from Los Angeles, and whose brother had been killed in gang violence there. Both of them became close friends, and will always have my undying respect for the work they did with kids in our community. They are true heroes.

But, consider the Catholic Church's reaction to Father Greg Boyle. In my experience, that is the standard response to human suffering. Instead of taking to heart the needs and struggles of the world around us, the church prefers only to say prayers and do nothing to relieve the suffering. They are the epitomy of what was written in James 2:

16and one of you says to them, “Go in peace, be warmed and be filled,” and yet you do not give them what is necessary for their body, what use is that? 17Even so faith, if it has no works, is dead, being by itself.

18But someone may well say, “You have faith and I have works; show me your faith without the works, and I will show you my faith by my works.” 19You believe that God is one. You do well; the demons also believe, and shudder. 20But are you willing to recognize, you foolish fellow, that faith without works is useless? 21Was not Abraham our father justified by works when he offered up Isaac his son on the altar? 22You see that faith was working with his works, and as a result of the works, faith was perfected; 23and the Scripture was fulfilled which says, “AND ABRAHAM BELIEVED GOD, AND IT WAS RECKONED TO HIM AS RIGHTEOUSNESS,” and he was called the friend of God. 24You see that a man is justified by works and not by faith alone. 25In the same way, was not Rahab the harlot also justified by works when she received the messengers and sent them out by another way? 26For just as the body without the spirit is dead, so also faith without works is dead.

Most of the sheep do not want to work. They want to be fed milk, like babies; they want to be coddled, praised, and told how wonderful they are. They want to sing pithy little praise hymns in a spacious, well-appointed building with comfortable pews. They want church to be over at 12 p.m. sharp and they will in fact start leaving if it runs over for even 5 minutes. In fact, they think that Christianity means showing up at church on a weekly basis, and not going out into the world as a living testimony of all that Jesus Christ represented. They want comfort and reassurance, not challenge and suffering and sacrifice. They see the wealth of their lives as something they've earned and which belongs to them, not a blessing from God given only so it can be shared with others.

I find that there are very few believers who take Matthew 25 to heart and have really tried to make a difference in the world. Those who do get tremendous respect from me and I consider them true heroes of their faith.

 

[Foxfyre]

And that is pretty much the take I get, even from my own Church. The most effort I see put into studying scripture is a lot like we see here... finding excuses for bad behavior, rationalizing their acts so that they feel good about themselves. We do have one or two people that do the actual heavy lifting and pick up expired food from the grocery store and take it to the needy. But mostly, it's people looking for excuses and relief from bad behavior.

When I was still regularly attending church, and even teaching sunday school, I spent a lot of time trying to engage people from the congregation with some of the youth in our community who were really having problems, struggling with troubled family situations, poverty, gang involvement, failing in school, etc.

I was asked by the pastor to stop. It made people uncomfortable to be so candid about the problems being faced by many of the kids in our community, and the need for caring adults to make real connections with these young people.

One man felt compelled to express to my (now) ex-husband that my work had made me unfeminine, and that wouldn't it be better for me to be at home as a housewife, taking care of our daughter?

Later, because I was a person of faith and in a leadership role in a key agency in the community, I tried to create a connection between local congregations and some of the struggling teenagers in our city. With the exception of two people, every other pastor I met with was completely uninterested in having his congregation involved with these kids (and I went to MULTIPLE religious associations to ask for their help). The exceptions were the LDS General Authority for our area (Mormon church official) and a single evangelical congregation whose youth pastor was from Los Angeles, and whose brother had been killed in gang violence there. Both of them became close friends, and will always have my undying respect for the work they did with kids in our community. They are true heroes.

But, consider the Catholic Church's reaction to Father Greg Boyle. In my experience, that is the standard response to human suffering. Instead of taking to heart the needs and struggles of the world around us, the church prefers only to say prayers and do nothing to relieve the suffering. They are the epitomy of what was written in James 2:

16and one of you says to them, “Go in peace, be warmed and be filled,” and yet you do not give them what is necessary for their body, what use is that? 17Even so faith, if it has no works, is dead, being by itself.

18But someone may well say, “You have faith and I have works; show me your faith without the works, and I will show you my faith by my works.” 19You believe that God is one. You do well; the demons also believe, and shudder. 20But are you willing to recognize, you foolish fellow, that faith without works is useless? 21Was not Abraham our father justified by works when he offered up Isaac his son on the altar? 22You see that faith was working with his works, and as a result of the works, faith was perfected; 23and the Scripture was fulfilled which says, “AND ABRAHAM BELIEVED GOD, AND IT WAS RECKONED TO HIM AS RIGHTEOUSNESS,” and he was called the friend of God. 24You see that a man is justified by works and not by faith alone. 25In the same way, was not Rahab the harlot also justified by works when she received the messengers and sent them out by another way? 26For just as the body without the spirit is dead, so also faith without works is dead.

Most of the sheep do not want to work. They want to be fed milk, like babies; they want to be coddled, praised, and told how wonderful they are. They want to sing pithy little praise hymns in a spacious, well-appointed building with comfortable pews. They want church to be over at 12 p.m. sharp and they will in fact start leaving if it runs over for even 5 minutes. In fact, they think that Christianity means showing up at church on a weekly basis, and not going out into the world as a living testimony of all that Jesus Christ represented. They want comfort and reassurance, not challenge and suffering and sacrifice. They see the wealth of their lives as something they've earned and which belongs to them, not a blessing from God given only so it can be shared with others.

I find that there are very few believers who take Matthew 25 to heart and have really tried to make a difference in the world. Those who do get tremendous respect from me and I consider them true heroes of their faith.

I'm sorry that is your experience Catz because mine is 180 degrees different. In my world, I see that it is almost all believers who are giving of their personal resources, their time, their talent, their very life blood to make a positive difference to people in the world. These days I am attending a congregation of about 1000 active members, and almost without exception, every person is involved in some selfless ministry or volunteer effort to help others.

You pluck the churches and the Christians who make them up out of the city or any community of any size, and I think you would have a pretty unappealing and unpleasant and far more dangerous place to live.

 

[catzmeow]

You pluck the churches and the Christians who make them up out of the city or any community of any size, and I think you would have a pretty unappealing and unpleasant and far more dangerous place to live.

I am surrounded by regular church attenders in my community who never even drive through the poorer sections of our community without locking the doors of their expensive sport utility vehicles.

I live in the south, and you can't swing a rabid cat without hitting a self-righteous religious do-nothing. It's a cultural thing, not a spiritual one.

I wish Jesus would hurry up with that whole rapture thing.