'Do evangelicals' actions and belief match Jesus'?

[John317]

Yes, me too. Especially since it isn't true. I've been considering changing it to something like, "Why Some Believe Evangelicals Hate Jesus."

[Bravus]

I'm very happy with whatever title change - as I said, I wish Zuckerman had picked a better one to begin with, and in hindsight perhaps I shouldn't have used his.

Perhaps something like 'Do evangelicals' actions and belief match Jesus'? is closer to the intention, though grammatically awkward. It'd be good to get rid of the word 'hate' either way.

[Bravus]

'Why It Seems Evangelicals Hate Things Jesus Loved (And Vice Versa)' is actually pretty accurate for the discussion.

[John317]

We may be sure that a title such as "Why Catholics Hate Jesus" or "Why Liberals Hate Ellen White" would not have been tolerated.

We can't read people hearts and minds and have no business putting everyone into a category like that.

I'm not an Evangelical and disagree with them on a lot of practices and beliefs, but I don't think for a minute that anyone can know whether they hate Jesus or not.

Would you like it if people said you hate God's word because you don't agree with everything it says?

What do you think Evangelicals or other Christians think when they see such a title?

It's one thing to disagree with the way some people fail to put Christ's teachings into practice, but it's something else again to say we know that they hate Christ.

[bonnie]

We may be sure that a title such as "Why Catholics Hate Jesus" or "Why Liberals Hate Ellen White" would not have been tolerated.

says?

What do you think Evangelicals or other Christians think when they see such a title?

It's one thing to disagree with the way some people fail to put Christ's teachings into practice, but it's something else again to say we know that they hate Christ.

What happened to the Jesus loves Evangelicals too? If anything this dirisive is said concerning Islam or any other religion except SDA,that is one of the first statements out of the box.

I live next door to a evangelical family.They belong to a rapidly growing very active church.I wonder how many that critize them do as much mission work as they.

Our neighbor took in a woman,total stranger that needed a hand up.Provided room and board for six months till she could get on her feet.How many of the ones judging the Evangelicals here have done same.

Another couple took in a family of five for the winter months. They had a large basement that has been made into passable living quarters.Rent free and other necessities provided.Who here has done same?

The entire church is involved is aiding those they find that need a hand up.Their children are not the ones that you find in trouble.The teens are as active in mission outreach as the adults.

While most of us are not rich we do have a surplus over our basic needs.What are you doing with yours?

Talk and judgments are cheap.How much hands on,person to person have you done to alliviate another's problems? You can find the homeless and destitute easy enough,especcially with the brutal winter most of us have had.

Do you love Jesus enough to open your home and wallet as these

Jesus hating Evangelicals have done?

[cardw]

I'm not talking about individuals. I'm talking about the policies supported and resisted by the large majority of the evangelical community.

It is all well and good to assist a family, but the people that I'm talking about need a whole community dedicated to their care. Many of them require professionals to work through their disabilities and traumas.

You would not take on their care lightly. I have worked with a pastor who has tried to get a community evangelical church to take on this project. He has tried to get this going with one church community after another.

They like him because he is able to increase membership and gets meaningful change within the safe population, but as soon as he wants to get resources for the most difficult he hits resistance and pretty soon there is are large church building going up and even interest in the programs he started with wane.

He no longer even bothers and has found far more financial and professional support from non-believers who have been captured by his vision. This support includes facilities, money, and hours put in working with this population. And no one is required to listen to a sermon or join a church.

I supported his work even when he was working with a church because he put his actions where his mouth was. I respect that.

Over and over again I saw these church congregation move from really helping people recover to preaching pro-life, anti-gay, and help the republicans get control of this country. Because helping people doesn't seem to grow membership as rapidly or bring in big money, but create a big bad devil backed enemy and you can get all kinds of people to give out of fear and bigotry.

[bonnie]

It is all well and good to assist a family, but the people that I'm talking about need a whole community dedicated to their care. Many of them require professionals to work through their disabilities and traumas.

[cardw]

So because I am pro-life and anti-gay lifestyle I am somehow less than you?

No you just know how to ignore the important points and present something I didn't say.

You don't even address the lack of compassion and you get all sensitive because I mention pro-life and anti gay.

To me that is immaturity. You're the majority and you act like you're the persecuted. Talk about childish!!

That tells me that you can't take it within an open dialog. It also tells me that you have to put a lot of effort toward making excuses for the lack of compassionate policy within the evangelical community.

When it really comes down to the truth you bail. And that is why I have no respect for the evangelical community.

[cardw]

Originally Posted By: cardw

It is all well and good to assist a family, but the people that I'm talking about need a whole community dedicated to their care. Many of them require professionals to work through their disabilities and traumas.

And in your mind it is the Evangelicals that are guilty of not wanting to help in that area?

They not only don't want to help, they support policies so the government can't help these populations.

The point of this conversation has been that government in a so called Christian country shouldn't spend tax dollars on helping the poor, handicapped, and mentally ill. There is this illusion that Christians are doing this work.

It doesn't make sense to leave these populations either in prison or on the streets. It would be far better to rehabilitate them than to punish them. The problem with evangelicals is that they support the punishing and complain when the government spends money on rehab and consider that to be what Jesus would want, when the Bible clearly says Jesus had a prime interest in the poor.

No one has been able to show me from your own Bible where Jesus didn't really mean what he said about taking care of the poor. All I see are attempts at loopholes. What's that all about?

[Bravus]

...and: shutting the stable door after the horse has bolted. Original title has already been regretted and changed.

[ClubV12]

Before I was an SDA (actually, a christian) I was pretty active helping street people and homeless folks, doing what I could in my community to help. The need is great and at times it is discouraging because of it's immensense size, so many need help...

Since becoming an SDA my attitude and approach to helping within the community is under going some changes, be that good or bad, it is to early to tell. I'm struggling to find a balance.

The issues for me are:

Our help should be accompanied with our message, it is our purpose, our directive. While in the past I would help, I wasn't offering anything more than physical help, no specific message (christianity) was associated with it. Now I find myself not so anxious to help those who show no interest in spiritual things, in the long term. There will ALWAYS be plenty that need help, like help, want help and that is ALL they want. Keep your faith out of my life and just gimme that box of food or whatever. For long term help, I seek out those who respond to the message, who seem to be accepting the food, along with that "book" or personal testimony. Those who express a genuine desire to lift themselves above "living under the bridge". Some people LIKE living under the bridge!

EGW says it is not the mission of the SDA's to sponsor Alcohol treatment centers (whatever that means), like a typical "mission" on the street corner might be? At least, that is the impression I seem to be getting, I'm still working out the details.

I find I am more interested in helping with an organized SDA church effort to help, rather than, an individual help program. A more "focused" and productive (as in getting the message out) kind of help program.

[Tom Wetmore]

Quote:

Yes, the Majesty of Heaven was ever found working to help those who most needed help... True, it may not always be agreeable or pleasant to unite with the Master and be co-workers with him in helping the very class who stand most in need of help. But this is the work Christ humbled himself to do. Is the servant greater than his Lord? He has given the example, and enjoins upon us to copy it. It may be disagreeable, yet duty demands that just such a work be performed. {SA 164 -165}

[ClubV12]

Tom, when, where do you stop helping someone and move on?

I've found many folks who need help every month, they run out of food, or fire wood or something. But it's chronic, next month it will be the same, and there are so many.

When possible I look for long term solutions, like education about living on a budget, not everyone is interested. I have a neighbor lady that I would give a little work to now and then just to make a few dollars. But then I found out she was spending it on beer, and would even show up at my house wanting some work WHEN she was drunk! Had to pull the plug on that one...

[bonnie]

[quote name="cardw

No you just know how to ignore the important points and present something I didn't say.[/quote"]

Ignore what? The fact is you are the one that made a negative comment concerning pro-life and anti-gay as if there is something less about those that are because they disagree with you.

Quote:

You don't even address the lack of compassion and you get all sensitive because I mention pro-life and anti gay.

Lack of whose compassion? What gives you or anyone else the right to determine that about a entire group of people?

To me that is immaturity. You're the majority and you act like you're the persecuted. Talk about childish!!

[doug yowell]

...and: shutting the stable door after the horse has bolted. Original title has already been regretted and changed.

Changing the title does not change the gist of the argument that Zuckerman throws down. His false conclusions are drawn from his own political perspective and he tries to demonize(literally) the group he feels is most responsible for it's nonacceptance as political policy. His ad hominem attack portrays Evangelicals as evil,self righteous hypocrits who care nothing about the poor and are nothing but a bunch of war mongering Sadists because they oppose certain political views that he supports.What he conviently leaves out is the magnitude of the good, altruistic work that Evangelicals actually are doing outside of their governmental dollars. This work they do without having to be threatened or commanded by earthly governments to do. Like most(not all) liberals Zuckerman attaches Jesus to his politics by taking a verse here or there which seem to stand in condemnation of evangelical politics. While Rich hates Evangelicals at least he admits that they are doing the very things for the poor that Zuckerman omits, just that they aren't doing enough and have wrong motives.To be fair to the premise one needs to select a political or social point and prove that it is modeled by Christ and commanded by Him to be emulated politically. Then it needs to be demonstrated that Evangelicals are,or are, not following that example.

[cardw]

Tom, when, where do you stop helping someone and move on?

I've found many folks who need help every month, they run out of food, or fire wood or something. But it's chronic, next month it will be the same, and there are so many.

When possible I look for long term solutions, like education about living on a budget, not everyone is interested. I have a neighbor lady that I would give a little work to now and then just to make a few dollars. But then I found out she was spending it on beer, and would even show up at my house wanting some work WHEN she was drunk! Had to pull the plug on that one...

A person like this is overwhelming to an individual. There are so many factors to consider including mental illness and the disease of alcoholism. Most people have no concept of how to deal with these on their own. Even if you do, unless you have help, it still can be overwhelming.

Solutions for these types of problems takes a community. It also takes people who are skilled in intervention. Often a live in program is the only way a person can be properly evaluated and treated. There are far higher success rates for live in programs than sending people out on the streets. That is easy to demonstrate.

If churches aren't willing to take this task on, at least allow government to provide funds to do this. That's what I don't understand about evangelical policy toward the less fortunate.

Someone who drinks at the level you describe is an alcoholic. Alcoholism does not respond to reason. That's why they call it an addiction. Many of these people are self medicating through alcohol to treat depression. Depression has many organic and non organic causes.

The people who do recover have a vast support system, but many of the people on the street have no family or support system.

It baffles me that evangelicals are so hostile to helping the poor. To be kind I have to think that it's because of ignorance instead of hate. If you ever had to recover from this disease or had ever been part of a person't recovery you could never see this population in the same light.

[doug yowell]

Quote:

Yes, the Majesty of Heaven was ever found working to help those who most needed help... True, it may not always be agreeable or pleasant to unite with the Master and be co-workers with him in helping the very class who stand most in need of help. But this is the work Christ humbled himself to do. Is the servant greater than his Lord? He has given the example, and enjoins upon us to copy it. It may be disagreeable, yet duty demands that just such a work be performed. {SA 164 -165}

This is a great point and one with which 99.9% of Evangelicals would agree with. Almost every Evangelical church in the world has some sort of ministry for the poor. The Holy Spirit instills in every believer (and most Bible readers)the desire to lift up those who need help.Evangelicals are not immune to the needs of society. They have established crises pregnancy centers, food distributation centers, adoption services, hospital and medical clinics,job training programs, prison ministries,battered women shelters,drug and alcohol rehab centers,homeless shelters,schools,on and on... With their limited resources they have proven to be far more effective than their governmental counterparts.And this is in addition to the tax dollars that they contribute to some of the same less effective programs.On a personal level is it fair to judge Evangelicals as being inconsistent with Ellen White's statement above?

[cardw]

It is not up to you whether I help someone with a mental illness or provide shelter for someone that needs it.

That is not between you and me,that is between God and myself

What's baffling to me is that I even have to try and convince you to help these people. And I'm not even a believer.

When I read Jesus I would think Christians would reflect his attitude toward the poor.

I guess not.

[doug yowell]

Alcoholism does not respond to reason. That's why they call it an addiction. Many of these people are self medicating through alcohol to treat depression.

It baffles me that evangelicals are so hostile to helping the poor. To be kind I have to think that it's because of ignorance instead of hate. If you ever had to recover from this disease or had ever been part of a person't recovery you could never see this population in the same light.

Yet you are consistently portraying Christians as people that also don't respond to reason.So if alcoholics become Christians and now ex-alcoholics how is it that they can't see this population in a proper light? Many ex-alcoholics become very active in these programs after they are "cured". Most addicts need a power greater that a government program to effectively change their behaviour.

[cardw]

Originally Posted By: cardw

Alcoholism does not respond to reason. That's why they call it an addiction. Many of these people are self medicating through alcohol to treat depression.

It baffles me that evangelicals are so hostile to helping the poor. To be kind I have to think that it's because of ignorance instead of hate. If you ever had to recover from this disease or had ever been part of a person't recovery you could never see this population in the same light.

Yet you are consistently portraying Christians as people that also don't respond to reason.So if alcoholics become Christians and now ex-alcoholics how is it that they can't see this population in a proper light? Many ex-alcoholics become very active in these programs after they are "cured". Most addicts need a power greater that a government program to effectively change their behaviour.

Not all alcoholics come from the bottom and many that do don't have enough function left to hardly help themselves let alone others. Being a recovered alcoholic doesn't make you an expert. Generally being responsible for oneself is doing pretty good.

Maybe the reason Christians don't respond to reason is that Christianity is an addiction. At least the form it takes with evangelicalism. It certainly has many of the same attitudes as alcoholics. It also presents a drug that makes you feel good without taking any responsibility. I would point to the general resistance to responsibility toward the less fortunate portrayed by this current thread in the face of direct statements by Jesus and the Old Testament as evidence.

The responses have been largely opinion based with no reference at all to the so called divine mandate contained in the Bible. There has been no direct attention given to the actual words of Jesus. There is a lot of attention to complicated generalizations. All of a sudden the "plain" word of scripture doesn't apply.

For many addicts government funded programs are a power greater than themselves. I know many people who operate very successful facilities under grants along with donations. When these grant funds go away there are no churches lining up to pitch in.

Maybe you're on to something here. Religion as an addiction. Hmmm

[ClubV12]

There are many reasons people might join a church, including Adventist, outside of a longing for a deep(er) christian experience.

It can be intellectually stimulating, it can be good for business, it can be a nice place to meet people and have some company. Any of the above could be "addicting", if you want to call it that. So it is with a true heart felt experience. Once you experience it, nothing else can take it's place. Once you really understand it, accept it, you will never find happiness again if you turn your back on it.

[cardw]

Once you really understand it, accept it, you will never find happiness again if you turn your back on it.

[bonnie]

Originally Posted By: bonnie

It is not up to you whether I help someone with a mental illness or provide shelter for someone that needs it.

That is not between you and me,that is between God and myself

What's baffling to me is that I even have to try and convince you to help these people. And I'm not even a believer.

When I read Jesus I would think Christians would reflect his attitude toward the poor.

I guess not.

What is baffling to me is that you have set yourself up as morally and ethically superior to Christians because they don't agree with you.

No where have I said there should not be any help for the poor,disabled or mentally ill.

Nor do I believe that most evangelicals are guilty of what you accuse them of.

Those generally needing help can only be helped so far without their own desire to help themselves.

If they reject aid that has been given as a means of helping themselves that is a decision they have made.

There are personal consequences for every action,good or bad.

If I choose to drink,continue drinking and do not take advantage of the help available,I am responsible and can expect consequences for that choice.

The evil evangelicals here have a chapter of AA and NA that meets in their church.As much help as they can give,they give.

All are welcome in their church.All are not excused and the blame placed on others for their behaviour.

For those that are hungry and without shelter,they have a choice to make. Do they respond to those offering home and resources or do they decide they deserve to be sheltered and fed without any effort on their part to improve their lives?

[cardw]

What is baffling to me is that you have set yourself up as morally and ethically superior to Christians because they don't agree with you.

[Guest]

I can't find anywhere in the bible where Jesus approaches the needs of the poor with that attitude. That's who you are accountable to, not me.

So now you believe in Jesus? Good! Keep coming back. Your spiritual growth is encouraging.