'Hey, didn't Christ Himself own a gold cup or something?'
Posted: Sat Jan 05, 2013 9:02 pm
Even as one who clings to the fundamentals of Christian theology, i.e. the trinity and Christ as saviour, I’ve noticed much irony in that I often find more Christ-like charity from atheist secular humanists than from the likes of “Christians” (former Republican presidential candidate) Mitt Romney and Canadian Prime Minister Stephen Harper.
Indeed, I find it mind-bending to read letter-writers around Christmastime every year defending the double-speak of “Christians” who, 180-degrees contrary to Christ’s Scriptural teachings, refuse to relinquish their caches of gratuitous loot and other forms of needless materialism.
‘Well, how much have you given to the poor and needy, Mr. Sterle?’ is the potentially effective, knee-jerk reaction I’d typically receive. Indeed, the hypocrisy-label is often conveniently utilized by the big-wealth-is-Christ’s-blessing “Christians” basically as a diversionary tactic in attempts to shut up the ‘commie pinkos’ likes of me.
Yet, I believe, if ‘hypocrisy’ was sufficient to morally justify silencing people who do or have done wrong—though many sincerely intend to do such wrongs no longer—from publicly speaking out on such wrong behaviour, society would likely be even more screwed than it already is.
If Christian virtues, such as subsisting on that which one truly needs to live comfortably enough (i.e. no Cadillacs, swimming pools or hoarding gratuitous ‘earnings’ of 9-11 digit sums of superfluous monies), were truly followed as Christ Scripturally taught, there’d likely be far less, as the libertarians like to refer to it, ‘politics of envy.’
Indeed, I find it mind-bending to read letter-writers around Christmastime every year defending the double-speak of “Christians” who, 180-degrees contrary to Christ’s Scriptural teachings, refuse to relinquish their caches of gratuitous loot and other forms of needless materialism.
‘Well, how much have you given to the poor and needy, Mr. Sterle?’ is the potentially effective, knee-jerk reaction I’d typically receive. Indeed, the hypocrisy-label is often conveniently utilized by the big-wealth-is-Christ’s-blessing “Christians” basically as a diversionary tactic in attempts to shut up the ‘commie pinkos’ likes of me.
Yet, I believe, if ‘hypocrisy’ was sufficient to morally justify silencing people who do or have done wrong—though many sincerely intend to do such wrongs no longer—from publicly speaking out on such wrong behaviour, society would likely be even more screwed than it already is.
If Christian virtues, such as subsisting on that which one truly needs to live comfortably enough (i.e. no Cadillacs, swimming pools or hoarding gratuitous ‘earnings’ of 9-11 digit sums of superfluous monies), were truly followed as Christ Scripturally taught, there’d likely be far less, as the libertarians like to refer to it, ‘politics of envy.’