-
Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.
I need help with Christian teachings
- Thread starter Monk
- Start date
- Status
Okay, I couldn't understand one bit of that explanation.
That being said: I doubt it very much. When you are supposed to love your enemy, and offer your other cheek when someone strikes you, I don't think you're going to have very much luck convincing your friend that the Christian thing to do is not to help just because someone doesn't want it
That being said: I doubt it very much. When you are supposed to love your enemy, and offer your other cheek when someone strikes you, I don't think you're going to have very much luck convincing your friend that the Christian thing to do is not to help just because someone doesn't want it
Boogie said:Okay, I couldn't understand one bit of that explanation.
That being said: I doubt it very much. When you are supposed to love your enemy, and offer your other cheek when someone strikes you, I don't think you're going to have very much luck convincing your friend that the Christian thing to do is not to help just because someone doesn't want it
But the thing is he is really not helping him. This guy is just using him for car rides, he aked for help with that 30 times this year. I said to him you should atleast ask for petrol money(that will make the guy hesitant to ask for every small problem). But he doesn't want to do that either.
Isn't there something about not giving pearls to pigs and they will trample it and not giving stray dogs food because they will bite you?
That's christians for you... always wanting to make the words of the bible suit their needs.
If you must, rationalise with him by telling him helping out that person in menial manners does nothing to help them with their salvation. Tell them that by doing these things for them, that the other person becomes a more flawed person, ultimately a little more evil if you will, as they get used to abusing the good will of your friend; if your friend really wants to be christian like, that they must teach a man to fish, not just give him fish... and by fish, I mean a mindset and way of living.
If you must, rationalise with him by telling him helping out that person in menial manners does nothing to help them with their salvation. Tell them that by doing these things for them, that the other person becomes a more flawed person, ultimately a little more evil if you will, as they get used to abusing the good will of your friend; if your friend really wants to be christian like, that they must teach a man to fish, not just give him fish... and by fish, I mean a mindset and way of living.
Dice
Pokémon Parentage Conspiracy Theorist
This is what Jesus says:
Matthew 5
38"You have heard that it was said, 'Eye for eye, and tooth for tooth.' 39But I tell you, Do not resist an evil person. If someone strikes you on the right cheek, turn to him the other also. 40And if someone wants to sue you and take your tunic, let him have your cloak as well. 41If someone forces you to go one mile, go with him two miles. 42Give to the one who asks you, and do not turn away from the one who wants to borrow from you.
43"You have heard that it was said, 'Love your neighbor and hate your enemy.' 44But I tell you: Love your enemies and pray for those who persecute you, 45that you may be sons of your Father in heaven. He causes his sun to rise on the evil and the good, and sends rain on the righteous and the unrighteous. 46If you love those who love you, what reward will you get? Are not even the tax collectors doing that? 47And if you greet only your brothers, what are you doing more than others? Do not even pagans do that? 48Be perfect, therefore, as your heavenly Father is perfect.
But then I would say yeah, there is an extent to which you are to share Christ's teachings with those whom you share His love with.
Matthew 5
38"You have heard that it was said, 'Eye for eye, and tooth for tooth.' 39But I tell you, Do not resist an evil person. If someone strikes you on the right cheek, turn to him the other also. 40And if someone wants to sue you and take your tunic, let him have your cloak as well. 41If someone forces you to go one mile, go with him two miles. 42Give to the one who asks you, and do not turn away from the one who wants to borrow from you.
43"You have heard that it was said, 'Love your neighbor and hate your enemy.' 44But I tell you: Love your enemies and pray for those who persecute you, 45that you may be sons of your Father in heaven. He causes his sun to rise on the evil and the good, and sends rain on the righteous and the unrighteous. 46If you love those who love you, what reward will you get? Are not even the tax collectors doing that? 47And if you greet only your brothers, what are you doing more than others? Do not even pagans do that? 48Be perfect, therefore, as your heavenly Father is perfect.
But then I would say yeah, there is an extent to which you are to share Christ's teachings with those whom you share His love with.
Christianity really has two sets of standards, one for believers, one for non-beleivers. As an example to a non-beliver, you should help them. But if a person is a believer, they are instructed that they should not be a burden to others, so a believer wouldn't be asking for ride where they would be taking advantage of someone else.
kitchenmotors
Banned
How about turning to some common sense to figure it out?
Well, you can always apply a broad understanding of 2nd Thessalonians, chapter 3 (verses 6-10)
"We instruct you, brothers, in the name of (our) Lord Jesus Christ,to shun any brother who conducts himself in a disorderly way and not according to the tradition they received from us. For you know how one must imitate us. For we did not act in a disorderly way among you, nor did we eat food received free from anyone. On the contrary, in toil and drudgery, night and day we worked, so as not to burden any of you. Not that we do not have the right. Rather, we wanted to present ourselves as a model for you, so that you might imitate us. In fact, when we were with you, we instructed you that if anyone was unwilling to work, neither should that one eat."
In a nutshell, Paul seems to be saying that is someone is unwilling to work or take care of oneself, you shouldn't give them stuff for free. Literally, if they won't work, don't give them food. However, I believe the meaning applies to things in general -- don't encourage a freeloader.
"We instruct you, brothers, in the name of (our) Lord Jesus Christ,to shun any brother who conducts himself in a disorderly way and not according to the tradition they received from us. For you know how one must imitate us. For we did not act in a disorderly way among you, nor did we eat food received free from anyone. On the contrary, in toil and drudgery, night and day we worked, so as not to burden any of you. Not that we do not have the right. Rather, we wanted to present ourselves as a model for you, so that you might imitate us. In fact, when we were with you, we instructed you that if anyone was unwilling to work, neither should that one eat."
In a nutshell, Paul seems to be saying that is someone is unwilling to work or take care of oneself, you shouldn't give them stuff for free. Literally, if they won't work, don't give them food. However, I believe the meaning applies to things in general -- don't encourage a freeloader.
Bluecondor
Member
As far as a specific biblical passage, I'm not a bible man, so I can't help you there.
But - I often have to teach Kantian ethics, which (among many other things) often comes down to a basic point - namely the golden rule (do unto others as you would have done unto you). When you talk about the Golden Rule using Kant to evaluate a behavior or decision, you then talk about reversibility (would I be willing to have the same thing done to me under similar conditions/circumstances?) and universality (would I be willing to have the logic behind my action become a universal law for human behavior?).
My favorite example of this is from a student of mine who has a twin brother. One night, his twin brother got trashed while driving, and flipped his car, 5 minutes from the brothers' apartment. Knowing that the cops were on the way to check out the accident, the drunk twin called the sober twin and frantically asked him to drive over to the scene and take away the open bottles of beer.
I love this example, because from a morality standpoint, the sober twin has a really tough call her. You have to put yourself in this guy's shoes and think about the fact that this is his twin, and his twin is facing some serious criminal charges, etc. It would be tough to ignore this call for help - especially if this was a one time thing.
But - let's break out reversibility and universality and see what they have to say.
According to reversibility, it is interesting - would the sober twin be willing to place the drunken twin into a similar situation? This is an important point, because if the answer is "no" - this suggests that one person in the relationship is taking advantage of the relationship. This is why domestic violence is evil, even though the abused person often claims that they can handle their partner's abuse or that they don't care. It's one thing to argue that you don't care if someone abuses you, but, you can get a person to see that they are accepting behavior that they, themselves, would never impose on someone else.
And - this really breaks down with universality. While it is all nice to help one's brother, etc., think about how horrible the world would be if - every time a person got into trouble, they could call a relative and ask a relative to do something extreme/illegal to bail them out. If this became a universal law, the world would suck. You would live in a world where, at any moment, one of your relatives could call you out of the blue and demand that you incur a tremendous personal sacrifice because of their indiscretion. And - in this world - if you were a victim of a person's indiscretion, the evidence of this harmful behavior would probably be "erased" by the perpatrator's relatives. And - the thing is - we know "some people" who actually do this - and it's horrible. Who wants to live in a world where people can do whatever they want because they have a friend or relative who can bail them out - no matter what.
Sorry for the long discourse, but, I went off a bit because I think you can have a similar, interesting discussion with your friend. Is he accepting demands from his buddy that he, himself, would never even think of imposing (reversibility)? And - is he accepting demands from his buddy that are far beyond what one could expect a "good friend" to do (universality)?
The most important thing here is the idea of a relationship. A relationship must have an even amount of give and take in order to benefit both parties. This is why the golden rule is so powerful. It forces you think about how your actions/demands/decisions affect the people who are most important to you, while - at the same time - demanding that you think about how the actions/demands/decisions of others affect you.
Good luck man! (Sorry for the long-winded response) This sounds like a tough problem....
But - I often have to teach Kantian ethics, which (among many other things) often comes down to a basic point - namely the golden rule (do unto others as you would have done unto you). When you talk about the Golden Rule using Kant to evaluate a behavior or decision, you then talk about reversibility (would I be willing to have the same thing done to me under similar conditions/circumstances?) and universality (would I be willing to have the logic behind my action become a universal law for human behavior?).
My favorite example of this is from a student of mine who has a twin brother. One night, his twin brother got trashed while driving, and flipped his car, 5 minutes from the brothers' apartment. Knowing that the cops were on the way to check out the accident, the drunk twin called the sober twin and frantically asked him to drive over to the scene and take away the open bottles of beer.
I love this example, because from a morality standpoint, the sober twin has a really tough call her. You have to put yourself in this guy's shoes and think about the fact that this is his twin, and his twin is facing some serious criminal charges, etc. It would be tough to ignore this call for help - especially if this was a one time thing.
But - let's break out reversibility and universality and see what they have to say.
According to reversibility, it is interesting - would the sober twin be willing to place the drunken twin into a similar situation? This is an important point, because if the answer is "no" - this suggests that one person in the relationship is taking advantage of the relationship. This is why domestic violence is evil, even though the abused person often claims that they can handle their partner's abuse or that they don't care. It's one thing to argue that you don't care if someone abuses you, but, you can get a person to see that they are accepting behavior that they, themselves, would never impose on someone else.
And - this really breaks down with universality. While it is all nice to help one's brother, etc., think about how horrible the world would be if - every time a person got into trouble, they could call a relative and ask a relative to do something extreme/illegal to bail them out. If this became a universal law, the world would suck. You would live in a world where, at any moment, one of your relatives could call you out of the blue and demand that you incur a tremendous personal sacrifice because of their indiscretion. And - in this world - if you were a victim of a person's indiscretion, the evidence of this harmful behavior would probably be "erased" by the perpatrator's relatives. And - the thing is - we know "some people" who actually do this - and it's horrible. Who wants to live in a world where people can do whatever they want because they have a friend or relative who can bail them out - no matter what.
Sorry for the long discourse, but, I went off a bit because I think you can have a similar, interesting discussion with your friend. Is he accepting demands from his buddy that he, himself, would never even think of imposing (reversibility)? And - is he accepting demands from his buddy that are far beyond what one could expect a "good friend" to do (universality)?
The most important thing here is the idea of a relationship. A relationship must have an even amount of give and take in order to benefit both parties. This is why the golden rule is so powerful. It forces you think about how your actions/demands/decisions affect the people who are most important to you, while - at the same time - demanding that you think about how the actions/demands/decisions of others affect you.
Good luck man! (Sorry for the long-winded response) This sounds like a tough problem....
- Status