Story Comments
Posted by: Georgia50 6 months ago
This page is a permanent archive of the comment below and its replies.
To view this comment in the context of the full discussion for the story, use this link.
-
0%
Georgia506 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
Scott,
Reply
I believe that mixing ideology and religious or spiritual values is a path best not taken. Since when is government the arbiter of health care or promoters of government health care the arbiters of Christian values?
For the past 3 centuries, Christian missionaries--often at their own expense and peril--have traveled the globe to bring food, medicine, shelter, and custom-made written languages to the world's forgotten in far off places. In the 1700s and 1800s, British missionaries shipped off with their belongings packed in a wooden casket. They knew how they were going to return to Britain; they just didn't know when.
NOW they (read: we) are to be lectured to? NOW someone comes along, deigns to solve the problem--as they define it--with someone else's money, and because they claim the moral high ground, we're obliged to listen? And not only that, but Christ's name is enlisted in this effort to provide universal mediocrity in the name of compassion.
Christianity wrote the book on the provision of life-saving health care to those who not only couldn't afford it, but who lived in societies and cultures that never heard of it. So for starters, let's keep the horse in front of the cart where it belongs.
Secondly, if we're going to invoke biblical themes, let's go all out and quote the bible. I know...let's play I QUOTE-YOU QUOTE. I'll go first.
"If your hand or your foot causes you to sin, cut it off and throw it away. It is better for you to enter life maimed or crippled than to have two hands or two feet and be thrown into eternal fire. And if your eye causes you to sin, gouge it out and throw it away. It is better for you to enter life with one eye than to have two eyes and be thrown into the fire of hell." Mt. 18:8, 9
From this text, we see with absolute clarity how Christ prioritized between physical and spiritual health, and between well-being in this life as opposed to the next. As I see it, any confusion on this matter would have to be intentional or the result of bona fide spiritual blindness.-
100%
willottica6 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
How is that quote in any way relevant. We're not discussing physical OR spiritual health. The two are not mutually exclusive, therefore to say that Christ didn't value physical health is ridiculous. We're talking about physical health. Providing it for all will not result in a decay of spiritual health. (In fact, it might result in BETTER spiritual health, because fewer will wonder how God abandons them to unpayable medical procedures and bills.)
Reply -
100%
Dionys6 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
"For the past 3 centuries, Christian missionaries--often at their own expense and peril--have traveled the globe to bring food, medicine, shelter, and custom-made written languages to the world's forgotten in far off places. In the 1700s and 1800s"
Reply
You're right. They did great with the Native Americans, didn't they. Well.. At least after they killed off 90% of them. Well.. Maybe not then.
"NOW they (read: we) are to be lectured to? NOW someone comes along, deigns to solve the problem--as they define it--with someone else's money, and because they claim the moral high ground, we're obliged to listen? And not only that, but Christ's name is enlisted in this effort to provide universal mediocrity in the name of compassion."
Maybe Christ's name should be enlisted to provide healthcare and food to all in the name of compassion.
"Mt. 18:8, 9"
Interesting how you take it out of context. Matthew 18:1-14 is about 'Big people and little people' in the Matthean community. Matthew 18:6-7 (which you conveniently left out) is specifically about how the 'little people' in the community are far from being dispensible and are the ones to be "shown the greatest consideration, and that without condescension" (NIB Commentary -- Abingdon Press 375). One should "live one's own life of discipleship in such a way that no stumbling block is placed in the way of the weaker members of the community" (IBID).
We are told that we will encounter stumbling blocks, but that "the more mature members cannot use this as an excuse for their own lack of care for the little people of the community" (IBID).
The portion you quoted, 18:8-9 is a return to 5:29-30 and a call for the "most radical measures to be taken against lust in one's own life" only instead of being applied to disciplining the sex drive, here the measures are to be taken against "the drive to power" (IBID). In 18:8-9 we see the drive towards power makes one into a predator against others and "threatens to dominate one's existence, becoming a threat not only to oneself but to the faith of others and the life of the community" (IBID).
It has nothing to do with prioritizing between physical and spiritual health. It has to do with caring for the weaker people in community and sacrificing one's own lust for power for the bettering of the community.
This is all from the New Interpreter's Bible Commentary, Volume VIII. So there's no confusion on this matter on the part of Biblical scholars, exegetes or preachers. It seems like the "spiritual blindness" you're speaking of is more projection than anything else.
-
loading ...
People Who Liked This Comment (0)
No one voted this comment positively. Is it really that bad of a comment?
Dionys
Post Reply
You are not signed in to Propeller.com. Please sign in to post a reply.