breaking news: bible translation errors discovered
You heard it here first folks! All English versions of the Bible have been mistranslated. This accounts for some Christians around the world getting conflicting advice from their personal discussions with the god God, and what was previously believed to be the inerrant Word of their god God.
Here’s the first tantalising correction:
Matthew 8:5-13
When Jesus had entered Capernaum, a centurion came to him, asking for help. “Lord,” he said, “my servant lies at home paralyzed, suffering terribly.”
Jesus said to him, “Why are you telling me? I have no interest in helping foreigners, never mind the enemies of my people.”
The centurion replied, “Lord, I do not deserve to have you come under my roof. But just say the word, and my servant will be healed. For I myself am a man under authority, with soldiers under me. I tell this one, ‘Go,’ and he goes; and that one, ‘Come,’ and he comes. I say to my servant, ‘Do this,’ and he does it.”
When Jesus heard this, he was amazed and said to those following him, “Truly I tell you, I have not found anyone with such impudence. Why would this idiot think I’d help someone of another race, whose primary object is to subjugate my nation, and who could well pose a serious risk to my own personal safety and those I love?”
Then Jesus said to the centurion, “Go away! And I know you’ve been having gay sex with your ‘servant’. Just to let you know I don’t approve of that either!” And his servant dropped dead at that moment.
So now we know why Insanitybytes and her empathetically-challenged Christian support crew have been publishing endless posts that clearly contradict the stories in the Bible – their god was communicating the real message to them directly until he could inspire someone to publish the translation faults for the rest of humanity (me).
More translation fault revelations will be forthcoming.
Now the pieces are falling in place
LikeLiked by 2 people
Yes, it’s amazing! Prior to these revelations I’d been forced to assume that Insanity was either reading a Bible with key pages missing or was simply doing the work of the devil, Devil. Now I know that Jesus wanted Christians to turn away desperate refugees from their borders, because he hated foreigners and valued his personal security.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Republican Jesus
LikeLiked by 1 person
Nice violet; you are now saying the man from Nazareth lived? you are admitting that there was the place of the skull………you are admitting that David’s son was David’s Lord………you are admitting Herod and Pilate conspired together……….you are admitting that this One occupies the right hand of God………so now it’s just a simple matter of your clouded interpretations……………and a closer look at the terms……..
This may take some time to unravel the layers of bias in your mind, but rest assured, there are no defects in scripture. None. Zero. Nada. Zilch. Nula. 😉
LikeLike
Thanks CS, like you say, no defects, just some mis-translations that Insanity had previously known about, and was therefore in a position to treat refugees, and anyone else in need, with suspicion and scorn. 🙂
LikeLiked by 1 person
Uh no violet, that would fall under the umbrella of your bias………
But maybe the good lady who you are referring to will be happy to dismantle your loose claims in the most gracious way.
LikeLike
I doubt it. She never pops round when she knows she’s wrong.
LikeLiked by 1 person
You are going into a battle unarmed V; maybe ms bytes is showing you the courtesy of compassion for your lack of understanding.
But truly you have no gripe with the scriptures you have mishandled.
LikeLike
You’re right ColorStorm. Hit the nail on the head. I have absolutely no gripe with the original text. The question is, why are so many Christians dismissing it as irrelevant?
LikeLike
Seriously v, you should rather focus on the words where the Lord says YOU are a sinner……….
Or do you prefer this One who tells you the shortcomings of others????????
LikeLike
I’m really not sure what you mean here CS. Are you suggesting I cross to the other side and ignore those in need? Place my own personal security fears above the plight of others? I wouldn’t feel comfortable advocating that kind of inhumane action.
LikeLike
No V, how about starting at the beginning>
If you do not believe the scriptures are true…………….this discussion is irrelevant and your slip is showing.
LikeLike
Oh I see! I believe that if you believe the Bible is relevant, you should follow the Bible. If you’re going to promote treating people in need with neglect and disdain, you need to justify it. The fact is that you can’t, using logic or the Bible. So I’m looking for an explanation. None is forthcoming.
LikeLike
No Violet, it is you who have taken a detour by your own ‘translation,’ a trick in which I will not engage. 😉
You have framed your own results to justify further disdain for scripture and people of faith.
LikeLike
Not at all. Most Christians I know are fully motivated to help the refugees, and I’m sure that Christians will be among those doing the most practical work on the ground. If IB’s post and subsequent comments had been of that nature, I would have been there supporting her. It’s not, and I’m interested to find out why – yet even those who have popped over here have completely avoided the issue.
LikeLike
@ColourStorm, let me illustrate. Wether the story about the dude from Nazareth is based on a real person is quite irrelevant to the morals of his alledged teachings. Morals of any action, or inaction is not dependant on wether it is demanded by the alledged creator of all, or not. Look up the Euthyphro dilemma… Morals is simply not a might makes right sort of authoritarian system. Is it? To think so, would be totally morally corrupt… Would it not? It would grant that authority to anyone claiming to speak on behalf of the alledged creator entity, since this god never does make any appearances or comments on anything at all. Exept, alledgedly when this particular book was compiled from various politically convinient stories seventeen centuries ago. But then, that would surely mean that people who claim to take the book at face value would need to follow up on what it commands to the letter. Not eating prawns, pig, or taking tattoos, nor marrying and concieving children and treating all people with compassion and rather turn the other cheek than to defend themselves. Right?
The question here is why do Crhistians who profess, that the Bible is what that particular creator entity does demand from people, and claim to be willing to do that bidding fail when it crosses whith their personal fears and comfort zones. Is it, that they have realized that the demands are secondary to what might really be moral? It seems, that thought is a bit incomplete, when there simply is no other morals to defend contradicting action, or inaction to what the god alledgedly demanded, merely fears and their own personal preferences as their motivator. Why do people who profess faith in a deity that alledgedly provides eternal life for mere belief fear? What exactly are they affraid of? Or are they not so sure wether there is this eternal life after all? It is an understandable fear, since there is no, none what so ever, evidence that it is true. Is there?
LikeLike
@rautakyy
(how do you say this? route-a-key, roe-tae-kee, ra-ute-a kie………..)
Tkx for your time, but I can’t get past your first sentence…………..dude, story, a real person, alleged, irrelevant………..
Hope you understand, but let me reiterate, there is no ‘translation’ issue here whatsoever.
LikeLike
I’m so sorry ColorStorm. I’m not surprised you can’t get beyond his first sentence. Raut’s an intellectual heavyweight and I should have warned him you couldn’t go there.
LikeLike
No need to apologize Violet, as many have merely traded on your incorrect statement of a ‘translation’ issue……….which I addressed 😉
But I have said elsewhere that pine makes a great flame, but supplies very little heat……..
Have a great day V.
LikeLike
Apologies again, it wasn’t a statement, it was satire. We’ll get you up to date yet! 🙂
LikeLike
@ColourStorm, I am sorry, that you could not get past even the first sentence of my comment. I do not see why. It was not very complex, or hard. Perhaps it explains, though, why you obviously had hard time to understand what the topic post was about and that is why you went on a completely new tangent from it. What do you think?
Dude = The Jesus character. Surely you have heard of him? 😉 I was flippant about this, because the story is in western culture rather well known and easily recognized – and mentioned in the topic.
Story = The canonical Gospels in the Bible + possibly the Apochrypal Gospels – Depending on the perspective of the story. If we try to evaluate it as a historical source and not as a mere myth we are compelled by historical methodology to deal with all of the sources and as there are no confirmed contemporary sources all sources that might shed a light to what people thought of the story early on are to be considered.
Real person – in this case as in not merely a mythical and made up character – such as most likely Gilgamesh and Heracles.
Alledged – as in claims of him having taught this or that, wich we honestly speaking do not know as we do not without question know wether or not this person even lived or how reliable are the “testimonies” about him. They are to be considered less than reliable, as they are filled with all sorts of superstitious magical stories as well. Such “testimonies” are never considered to be very reliable in historical sense. Why should we make an exeption here? People have religious blind faith that these stories are true, but it is not confirmed by the methods of historical research and as such remains a “story” or a myth from history. Did this help?
As for my name, I honestly do not see why would you suddenly hang on to it, unless it is as you basicly admonished here, that what I present is too much for your ability to understand. However, if it helps, you could think of my name like this: Raw-ta-que. It translates as the Iron Adder (or do you Americans say Viper?) That is, if that helps you in any way to think of me as a person. I know, I know, that it is propably impossible for you to pronounce my “exotic” name correctly, if you have never heard it spoken and that the English have very different way to voice out “phones” as it were, especially to us non-Indo-Europeans, but I think my name should be the least of impediments to us having a discussion. Would you not agree? What does your nick ColorStorm actually refer to? It reminds me of the rainbow, wich is a nice and internationally used symbol for a number of things.
@Violetwisp, I am gratefull for your compliments, but I am actually just a simple sod, who tries to figure out the reality and truth of any issue I run into.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Rautakyy –
” but I am actually just a simple sod, who tries to figure out the reality and truth of any issue I run into “. Raut, I would not say you were a ‘simple sod’, not at all. The mere fact that you are here having discourse in a second language is indicative of your keen intelligence. Nice try at humility, though! 🙂
LikeLike
Surely rautakyy (interesting pronunciation and info, but impediment? No, just a courtesy, one in which no doubt others have wondered)
But dialog? When you speak of facts and truth as ‘myth,’ it would be darn near impossible for a fish to learn how to sew a button. They have a hard time threading the needle………..even with good eyesight.
Sarcastic? Yep. I repeat, the title of this post included ‘translations,’ and the so called flaws.
No, the flaw is always in our understanding. Now the myth would be Jonah in the belly of the camel……….THAT would be a translation error, and not a matter for a poor interpretation..
(fyi, per your question- here is a synopsis)
https://thenakedtruth2.wordpress.com/2014/09/06/colorstorm/
LikeLike
Rautakyy:
“The question here is why do Christians who profess, that the Bible is what that particular creator entity does demand from people, and claim to be willing to do that bidding fail when it crosses with their personal fears and comfort zones”
I think that question is more than fair and Violet’s post frames the question in a very challenging way: If the Bible is God’s blueprint for how humans should live amongst each other and relate to God, and you guys believe that, why don’t you guys follow it?
I can see why someone would try to dismiss this line of questioning. It makes the believer squirm a little bit because it is so demonstrably true, and I say that as a believer. We have this uncanny ability to point our fingers at non-believers and tell them how they should order their lives, when at the same time we are unwilling to order our lives consistently in the same way. That is hypocrisy in the worst form and I’m guilty of it.
Does that prove the Christian faith is wrong? Of course not, but it sure is a strong argument against it. “If you, as a believer, are unwilling to follow your own faith, why ask me to follow it?”
LikeLike
If what you’re assuming from the above post is correct, then you’re also going to have to accept her translation of those verses as correct. This means you’ll need to update any and all Bibles that you own with the new, corrected information. Your attempt at being snide just cuts worse back your way.
Perhaps if you focused more of your attention on the parts of the Bible that call for treating people with compassion rather than on the other intellectually barren parts, you might have actually realized this.
LikeLike
When the family of Jesus fled Herod and went to Egypt, were they refugees? I wonder how they would have coped if they relied on the compassion of modern Bible believing folk?
Perhaps the pre world War 2 experience of the Jews who tried to flee Germany would be a guide. In the 1938 and 1939 60% of Americans thought fleeing Jews should not be accepted as refugees.
LikeLiked by 1 person
‘the man from Nazareth’
CS, in Matthew 2:23 we are told ‘and he went and lived in a town called Nazareth. So was fulfilled what was said through the prophets: “He will be called a Nazarene.”
Which of the prophets was Matthew referring to?
LikeLike
Peter, apparently one that didn’t make it into the Bible. There were other prophecies besides the ones included in Scripture—unless the school of prophets and the 100 saved from Jezebel mentioned in 2 Kings didn’t actually say anything prophetic.
Becky
LikeLike
That is an interesting way of looking at it Rebecca.
I am surprised that God did not see fit to preserve that prophecy.
LikeLike
Peter, I’m surprised at a lot of things God does or does not see fit to do. 😉
Becky
LikeLike
What do you think of all this Becky? I saw a fair bit of fence sitting from you on IB’s post. Do you not think the character Jesus sets a clear example for his followers today? Did he swither about personal security risks in the face of helping the needy?
LikeLike
Actually I was trying to work out my thoughts, violetwisp. Where I stand now is that the government—those who are responsible for the defense of the nation—may not have the same position I as an individual have.
I do think that God asks Christians to love our enemies. He also says to turn the other cheek and to go the extra mile. These became metaphors for treating others kindly though they didn’t treat us in that way because the Jews of the first century had direct dealings with Romans that required a response. Should they arm or become terrorists or . . . no, Jesus said, turn the other cheek. The guy who steals your coat, offer him your cloak too. It’s really quite radical. So much so that few people have behaved that way. And the ones that have are remarkable. I think of the members of that church in . . . was it South Carolina? who lost loved ones to that horrible shooting. They could have given him what he wanted and upped the tensions between races, but no. Over and over and over they went on the news and said they forgave him. The one I liked best said she hadn’t forgiven him yet but she’d get there.
All that to say, I do think we should help the Syrian refugees. If the government decides we need to accept fewer and /or slows the process to do more thorough background checks, we should still do what we can to help them now.
I’m just not sure the best thing for a Middle Easterner is to leave the Middle East. I wonder if we don’t have other options. Would it cost us so much more to give the refugees money to establish a home somewhere like Jordan or Lebanon? Or UAE? Or Saudi Arabia?
We also need to think about what they’ll experience when they arrive. Are we going to treat them like we treat Hispanics? Rail at them for maintaining their ethnic and religious traditions and language. Tell them that they have to become real Americans? Do they want to become real Americans? Or do they want to establish Little Syria in a number of our cities? What do we think this influx of immigrants will look like? What do they want it to be?
In other words, I see this as a complex issue and it isn’t easily solved one way or the other.
Becky
LikeLiked by 1 person
@Rebecca LuElla Miller, I salute you for working out your thoughts.
I agree with you that some of the views the Jesus character in the Bible presents were in a way revolutionary. Iudea was a protectoriate of an empire, and the various mixed population there divided into several different ethnicities and by very exclusivist and tribal views about religion could not have resisted the slowly invading imperial economic capitalists and the costly, but immense military force behind them. Infact to many ordinary people the empire brought long sought peace in the region. But it also brought social unrest, tumult, terrorism and eventually a revolt, that did not go well as we now in hindsight know. Most of the ideas he presents in the New Testament, were not even new in the area. Some were similar to those already presented by Zoroaster and as many were rather similar to those presented by Buddha and Laoze hundreds of years before him, we can discern that they may not even have been loaned from others, but merely generally humane thoughts. Something, that resonates within us, because of our capacity to empathy, that is natural to us as a means of survival of the fittest species.
The Jews were in need of a means to thrive and success within the Roman empire, by putting aside their religious notion of their superior god giving them a particular patch of land. Obviously – and once again – the Jews had somehow failed this god, since yet a nother empire had conquered the “promised” land. Several such survival strategies were put to action, during the generations of Roman occupation, like for example the age old nazareanism of people escaping to aschetic lives to the desert, or mountain monasteries. Many new ones rose to fame especially after the die hard conservatives had executed their own little group suicide in Masada. One of the new strategies of survival was the newly emergent sect of Judaism, the Christian cult, that seems to have been originated by one of the Nazarean aschets. As it was more radical and liberal than most others, it was not very popular among the Jews and as a result started to accomodate not only Jews, but of all different people. It was a succcess story in bringing out some rather humane views to otherwise authoriatorian culture of the Jews and rest of the post Hellenic imperial culture, that eventually led to demands of stopping the slave economy of the empire. It was still rather tribal, in that it was only seen unacceptable for a Christian to hold other Christians as slaves, but as the population of the empire were in great numbers enslaved, it reached great popularity much because, it had no ethnic limitations, such as the Jewish religion, from wich it had emerged and because all sorts of humanistic ideas had risen among the social elite, like the notion of universal citizenship. These in turn led to the demise of the empire. Such is often the fate of empires, they are built on violence, and when people can no longer accept the violence, they fail and eventually fall. But people support the structures of violence, as long as they think they themselves and their closest ones are protected by the imperial strength. Do they not?
Jordan, Lebanon and Turkey already house more refugees each, than the western countries have taken from the current crisis together. These are developing economies that struggle to give shelter to all of their own population let alone to the refugees. How ever much we support the refugees where they are in camps, the main burden falls on the countries that house them. At the same time Angela Merkel has said that the refugees coming to Europe is a bigger crisis to us, than the economic regression we have been facing since 2008.
Yes, we could demand that the seemingly rich Saudi-Arabia took more refugees too, but it seems a bit hypocritical, since most Syrians are rather modern and liberal in comparrison to the ultra-conservative and narrow minded “government” of Saudi-Arabia. Should we not demand that Israel took in refugees from Syria? Why not? Because Israel is built on racist ideal and can not handle all of it’s own population, because some of them recognize a different religion, culture and ethnicity, from the immigrant Jews? Besides, how would Saudi-Arabia be forced to conform to this, even if some of the refugees were desperate enough to travel to there? Saudi-Arabia, much like the US, seem rich, but they are also the countries that are most rapidly increasing their dept and have been so for decades. What these two are spending their money on is not taking care of refugees, poor, or the needy, regardless of the fact that both declare religious zeal in religious principles that the originators of these social movements demanded to take care of the poor. Both of these are spending on military – a machinery of violence, or at very least the threat of violence… All countries have the right to defend themselves, but it seems some have also taken the questionable right to also defend their interrests (read interrests of their capitalists) abroad. What good has come of that? Empire building. Political, military, but foremost economic empires are built by such means…
What is a “real American” like? Who gets to determine that? Are you not a nation of immigrants from all over the globe?
I agree, it is not an easily solved problem. What in the real world of adults ever is? The simplier a solution seems, the more complex new problems such a solution may cause in the future. However, when people need help, is it not humane, or at very least pleasing to your personal god, to help them, where ever they are?
LikeLike
“What is a “real American” like? Who gets to determine that? Are you not a nation of immigrants from all over the globe?”
Just in case Becky doesn’t get a chance to reply, I thought I’d chime in. A real American is a white Christian man of northern European descent. I’m surprised you didn’t know that. 🙂
LikeLike
Yes, well I had heard about this notion, but is it not actually a bit of a myth? I mean, individuals fitting the description must be one of the smallest minorities in their country?
However, it is typical that such individuals themselves might live the illusion, that they represent the majority. It is a weird and twisted fantasy begotten by ignorance. We have few of them here in Finland. And in Finland a white Christian man of northern European descent is not that rare even, but add to the list of requirements meat eating, conservative, xenophobic, patriot and you still get a bunch of dudes who think they represent the majority of Finns, but when they organize a demonstration against – uh, I dunno – immigration, there might be even little more than hundred of them in one place at one time. Even in our rather small nation, that is a pitifully small mob, exept when they suddenly attack a bystander during their otherwise ridicullously small demonstration. And they have done so…
This would be more ridiculous unless it was so serious as well. In Estonia, few days ago, their minister of defence apologized and expressed his shame, because such men as fitting to the description and propably in the firm faith, that they do represent some sort of majority, have attacked the US troops stationed there as part of their NATO co-operation, during their free time in the town, because some of the US tank crew members were black.
LikeLike
All jest ion and j
Jousting aside, there are some legitimate security concerns
LikeLike
There are legitimate security concerns regardless of what action we take. Turning desperate people away to a worse than miserable fate only serves to further radicalise those already angry both within and outwith our borders, and provide never-ending fresh batches of people desperate enough to kill. There’s no way to evaluate which is more dangerous tactically.
So, even assuming you want to base any decisions we make solely on the risk factor to ourselves, and completely disregard the risk factor to the ‘faceless’ swarms of refugees, you have no case. But we all know that European and American lives are much more important than anyone else’s, right? Let’s build some walls, lock out people who are suffering, whose lives are in serious danger, and pretend that sending some bombs to get the ‘bad guys’ will make things better.
LikeLiked by 1 person
You sure know how to sweet talk a guy and fill his words with things he ain’t saying 🙂
LikeLike
I’m sure you’d be disappointed if you popped over here and received anything less. 😉 Hopefully no-one will get banned on the back of it this time.
LikeLike
Nice, and blame shifting too… ? What a deal. 🙂
LikeLike
She’ s my kinda woman! 😉
LikeLike
Haha
LikeLike
Wait a minute, you’re mike of mikeandbrandy? Are you undercover or did I miss something?
LikeLike
nope. had to make a blog change back in sept. to reflect my current status of change away from christianity. sorry for the confusion
LikeLike
Oh that’s great! I feel much better about the incident on the other post now. 🙂
LikeLike
How so? I don’t understand
LikeLike
Oh, I don’t know. I thought you were a ‘new’ person, first comment on a post, and a whirlwind erupted around you. But you’ve seen it all before. 🙂
LikeLike
Yuppers. Howdy from az.
LikeLike
Well, then, I take what I said about never having encounter KIA before back. I had no idea this was Mike, either. I did poke around his new place a little, but I confess I still didn’t know.
LikeLike
Wait…surely this was a tongue-in-cheek translation to highlight the absurdity of turning away refugees and also claiming to be Christian.
LikeLike
Don’t know what you’re talking about Ruth. The god God told me that Insanity was right all along, and all those stories about Jesus being nice have been mistranslated. Who knew so many linguistic experts could be so wrong?
LikeLike
Holy hell! I would’ve bet the farm(if I had one, of course) that was some kind of parody – brilliant satire.
So…I guess this translation is wrong, too?
38“You have heard that it was said, ‘Eye for eye, and tooth for tooth.’h 39But I tell you, do not resist an evil person. If anyone slaps you on the right cheek, turn to them the other cheek also. 40And if anyone wants to sue you and take your shirt, hand over your coat as well. 41If anyone forces you to go one mile, go with them two miles. 42Give to the one who asks you, and do not turn away from the one who wants to borrow from you.
Love for Enemies
43“You have heard that it was said, ‘Love your neighbori and hate your enemy.’ 44But I tell you, love your enemies and pray for those who persecute you, 45that you may be children 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 own people, what are you doing more than others? Do not even pagans do that? 48Be perfect, therefore, as your heavenly Father is perfect. ~Matthew 5
LikeLike
Oh yes, I suspect that’s next on the list of errors. There’s going to be a lot to get through!
LikeLike
It is a rather large book….
LikeLike
I would’ve bet the farm
The ”Nazareth Farm”, right?
LikeLike
Well, I guess I could bet that one. It’s as real as any other one that I might own.
LikeLike
Ain’t that the truth!
LikeLike
I think I will dispose my bible. It is missing these verses
LikeLike
I’ll send you a new one when the translation is fully updated.
LikeLike
thanks already
LikeLike
The best one word translation of “pais” is “boy”, which covers the possibilities, including the intriguing one of meaning younger male lover. But in twenty years, all conservative evangelicals will be saying, “Of course the Bible supports loving gay relationships! The Bible is not backward and homophobic at all! What about the Centurion’s ‘Boy’?”
LikeLike
Absolutely. But maybe make that 25 years … 😉
LikeLike
Violet, I want to commend you on your comment on the refugee post over at Isaiah 53, I am saying it here as I have given up commenting on that site after my comments kept disappearing.
I was particularly interested to note a number of the Christian commentators on the blog post admitted to feeling conflicted about the refugee situation. I wonder if that is a sign of the internal struggle resulting from them knowing that they are not doing what their text commands them to do.
LikeLiked by 1 person
I agree Peter, the very last things these people need is a horde of Christians praying for them.
These people are refugees because of religious conflict and the very last thing they need is more religion.
How moronic is it that Christians think they can help by praying!
LikeLike
the christian god is more powerful and will help them through the difficult times of transition
LikeLike
Surely the Christian is is the same as the Muslim god?
He merely has a different name, that’s all. Many actors change their names – for professional reasons.
LikeLike
How many goddites know it is the same good for nothing imaginary being, but different names?
LikeLike
Oh, many of them know. They simply refuse to accept the truth, that’s all.
Remember, their supernatural deity is REAL whereas their supernatural deity is … well … supernatural and make believe as well, of course.
LikeLike
How do we explain the many christian apologists who are very quick at declaring Islam a false religion? Are they being deceptive
LikeLike
Every religion is false to a follower of another religion.
Protestants even consider Catholicism heresy.
All the non believer can hope is that those lurking in the background will read and go away and think for themselves.
LikeLike
It’s a slow process
LikeLike
Sometimes it seems like Glacial! 😉
LikeLike
“I wonder if that is a sign of the internal struggle resulting from them knowing that they are not doing what their text commands them to do.”
Absolutely. It’s an odd situation. I can’t understand where they’re coming from – logically, morally or biblically.
LikeLike
No Peter, It is an honest expression of an honest struggle between differing sides of this issue.
Look, I have a problem with Christians telling me I must be for sealing the borders and kicking out all of the foreigners in order to qualify as a Christian.
But, guess what? I have problems non Christians telling me I must behave in certain ways to be a Christian.
But mostly I am tired of people on all sides using this issue to further their own agendas. Yep, some of us use it to promote our agenda of belief, and non believers use it to promote their agenda of non believe.
Here is the mindset:
Believer. Non believer said it, therefore it is stupid
Non believer. Believer said it, therefore is its stupid.
I hate to break it to the lot of you, but the answers here are not firm and easy to discern. I agree 100 percent that Jesus teaches we have compassion on those less fortunate than us. In fact, I am writing a series on the very subject and have been posting about it weekly. I notice that never gets read, however, which is odd. but another story. On the other hand, there are legitimate non religious reasons why just opening the borders and letting people pour in is well, really stupid.
My point is my political views and my views as a Christian may or may not be related to each other. My Christian views certainly influence my political views, but some political issues simply are not related.
Peter, what you said was simply unfair and untrue, and a gross mischaracterization of why some of us are conflicted here. Again, go back the the if a believer said it, it must be stupid paragraph.
LikeLike
If I may interject Wally, I think all of us (believers and non-believers) should be encouraging our governments to help as many people as we can. It’s obvious that opening borders would cause immense logistical problems, and this is not an option on the table. What I’m reading in many Christian posts, what I’m objecting to, is the idea that we need to stop helping people at all – that we place our own security concerns (which I think in any case are misplaced) above the needs of others. Many of us as former Christians, are horrified by this gross negation of the example set by Jesus.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Well, of course you can interject, Violet, this is your blog. 🙂
Your point about Christians? I think I pretty honestly acknowledged that in my comment, therefore you are lecturing me on something I actually said.
On the other hand, the point I get from some people is that, If I bring ANY concerns or issues into the equation, is that I can’t be a real Christian.Ironically, it is non believers telling me that. That is simply false. You have said that yourself, in fact this post is built around that very idea.
According to Dr.Phil, who I think is packed with common sense, every pancake has two sides. So does this one.
LikeLike
Did the Samaritan hesitate to help the stranger in need because he was concerned for his own safety or worried if it might cost too much? What other side of this ‘pancake’ is concerning you?
LikeLiked by 1 person
Violet. I have clearly addressed what side I am talking about. Really? No security concerns? That in itself is ludicrous and shows the extreme polarity of this entire debate. The Samaritan? Sure, he overlooked his own safety to help that man. Wonderful. He has every right to do that. I am all for that.
What if his action would have resulted in harm to others? Does he still have the right to make that decision? Does he still have the obligation? Hmmm..possible gray area here.
But, Violet, you are sidestepping the actual point I was making just so you can continue to make your point, which is Christians, no matter what they do or believe, suck just because they are Christians. I could walk around handing out 10 dollar bills and would be condemned if they were old bills instead of crisp new ones. Surely, I must hate those I gave wrinkled bills too.
My point was: There is too much polarity on both sides here, and I am tired of hearing it from all quarters. What Peter said was untrue, and totally misrepresented the views of those who are conflicted about this. It was very simple, yet you simply ignore it as if it never got said, so that you can tell me how crummy I am because I am A Christian.
Peace
LikeLike
Wally, I’ll copy and paste what I’ve just said to ColorStorm further up the post:
“Most Christians I know are fully motivated to help the refugees, and I’m sure that Christians will be among those doing the most practical work on the ground. If IB’s post and subsequent comments had been of that nature, I would have been there supporting her. It’s not, and I’m interested to find out why”
I’ll add that I see no logical reason in terms of security to withhold help to these people in need. The extremism is fuelled by injustice, anger and resentment – the more people that are suffering, the more recruits they are guaranteed. We live in multi-cultural societies, and rightly so, it’s impossible to stop the threat even by shutting down borders completely. We have to find another way to lead people out of the violence and revenge cycle, and perhaps it is following the example of Jesus in Matthew 5 – showing kindness.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Wally, I am sorry if you feel I misrepresented you. But if you read what I wrote, you will see I posed a question. You have given an answer to that question from your perspective which helps us to understand your views.
We can see in the Bible that God places great concern on the humanitarian treatment of the foreigner. We can start with Exodus 22:21 “You must not mistreat or oppress foreigners in any way. Remember, you yourselves were once foreigners in the land of Egypt.”
There are similar sentiments in Exodus 23:9, Leviticus 19:34. Deuteronomy 10:19. Deuteronomy 23:7, Deuteronomy 23:16, Deuteronomy 23:16, Deuteronomy 27:19.
That is just the Pentateuch, the sentiments continue in the Psalms, the prophets and the New Testament.
This seems to suggest that this is a big issue topic for God and far more important than an issue like homosexuality which gets nowhere near the level of mention in the Bible.
So as it is a big issue for God, I assume it should also be a big issue for Christians.
LikeLiked by 1 person
And Peter, I think it is a big deal for most Christians. I don’t see anybody just blowing off the importance of compassion for these refugees. The problem is, the minute anybody adds anything other than just blanket compassion, then suddenly they are without compassion.
Perhaps it would help to not just quote scripture which supports compassion, but also look at those which command the exercising of common sense.
You stated that Christians are conflicted because we can’t seem to obey Jesus on this issue. Intentional or not, that is a misrepresentation of most Christian’s positions. We are conflicted because this is a a difficult topic.
You are making the case, along with many others, that obedience to Jesus requires that we support blanket support for the refugees. It is also implied that bringing any other concerns into the equation means we are without compassion and therefore disobedient. This is simply not true, and is a misrepresentation of the Christian position for the most part.
Is I have stated, it ludicrous for people, both believers and non believers to be dictating how I must feel on this situation in order to qualify as a Christian. And, that is exactly what is happening. In fact, is that not the point of this entire post? And yes, I will admit that I could find Christian blogs which would tell me that supporting anything other than tossing the whole refugee population into the ocean renders me a fallen Christian. Again, my point is made.
LikeLike
“Is I have stated, it ludicrous for people, both believers and non believers to be dictating how I must feel on this situation in order to qualify as a Christian”
And how about how you must feel as a humanitarian, Wally?
LikeLiked by 1 person
Well Carmen, even humanitarian concerns have to be weighed with legitimate security concerns. If we fail to do that, then we aren’t being very humanitarian towards ourselves, are we?
LikeLike
Wally, what I have noticed is that Christians tend to follow the “Word” when it’s convenient and feels good. In such cases, they are not swayed by outside influences (government or otherwise).
Jesus made it very clear in Matthew 25:41-46 what his followers were to do for those in need. What we are seeing in the case of the refugees (at least from the actions of the most conservative Christians and the “supposedly” Christian politicians) is just the opposite.
You may try to excuse the actions of your fellow believers by saying outsiders are seeing a misrepresentation of the Christian position. But when one considers the very scripture that Christians claim to live by, there are no excuses.
LikeLike
Nan, as I stated, there are many things, all scripturally addressed, that factor into this situation.
And I am excusing nothing. That in itself misrepresents my thought on this matter. In fact, I think I pointed my bony little finger at some Christians in my comment as well.
LikeLike
hey nan-
Your slip is showing. Why do you, or any of your friends care what is written ‘in a comic book,’ if not to strut your morbid finger pointing at people who actually believe what is written in the ‘scriptures of truth,’
and who actually have a clue as to what means ‘rightly dividing the word of truth.’ Why for God’s sake would you dare to chastise another man’s servant, while feigning to have an interest in both the Man, and the servant…….
As stated, your slip of pride has slipped.
LikeLike
Oh my goodness, CS. I’m so thrilled you chimed in here with your spiritually-focused chastisement. OF COURSE what you say has the ring of veracity, My bad. I hope your fairy godfather forgives me and will help me to read his comic book with more understanding.
LikeLike
Wally, there are other countries (and you’ve been reading the news as long as I have) who’ve done just that – weighed security concerns with humanitarian concerns; we see which concern has been given the most weight (Sweden, for instance {a geographically small area} has taken 85,000 refugees this year).
Tell me again that what’s happening in most of the States is ‘concern for self’?? And that it ought to be given prominence??
LikeLike
Yes, Carmen. As did France. Like Dr. Phil would say to them now…How’s that working for ya?
May I ask a very real question? Is there even a word I could say that, since I am a Christian, would be considered right? Let’s say for the sake of argument, that I suddenly whipped out my Bible and said blanket entrance of refugees should be the plan, because by gosh the Bible says so. Now, that would be what you seem to think I should say. Would you then hurl the accusation of my trying to influence public policy with my religion? Just something to ponder.
I am like most people, Carmen, I seek a solution which combines the best of humanity, with the best of security.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Wally, since you ‘liked’ my comment about being a humanitarian FIRST, I am going to assume that you have taken my comments to heart. My point has been this: I think most people can decide this issue using their brain, good sense and conscience – religious ‘thinking’ be damned.
LikeLike
Don’t get too excited Carmen. I fear I have violated the “liking” rules again. Never sure if that little button means “agree”, or “read it and about to say something.” Sigh, I suppose i would get it if I just quit relying on that pesky Bible. 🙂
LikeLike
” Sigh, I suppose i would get it if I just quit relying on that pesky Bible. ”
It would be a start! 🙂
LikeLiked by 1 person
Nan, on a human level Christians are showing some not unreasonable trepidation in regard to Muslim immigration. But if God is on your side what does one really have to fear? Jesus said “do not fear those who can destroy the body”
It is the atheists who have the more legitimate grounds for fear, that is the irony.
LikeLiked by 2 people
This isn’t my blog, but I hope you don’t mind if I interject.
I don’t think anyone is advocating just opening the borders and letting the refugees in without any concern for safety or a proper vetting. I understand the we should be vigilant – with refugees or any other immigrants, for that matter.
Having said that, I’m married to a British National who came here on a K1 Visa. That vetting is extensive and thorough and takes a year or more. The vetting for asylum seekers with refugee status is even longer and more extensive. Having gone through the process of obtaining an immigrant visa I can tell you that it is very difficult and daunting if it’s done legitimately and on the up and up. It is hard for me to imagine, though it has happened, that one could get through on fake documentation and lies. There are so many checks and rechecks and interviews that one goes through. They are looking for inconsistencies and falsehoods. It isn’t an easy process.
To be perfectly honest, and I know they have a long-term plan, but they would have to be awfully patient to get into the U.S. coming through the refugee program. It isn’t like in the EU where they are able to travel freely between countries.
The fact is, they’d be better off buying a fake passport of one of the countries who participates in the Visa-Waiver program with the U.S. and just travelling here. They can stay for 90 days legally. Even if they overstay they aren’t in any immediate jeopardy of deportation because they have to be located. Further, I’d be more worried about them travelling to Canada or South America and hopping the border. There are so very many ways that someone wishing to do us harm could get into the U.S. right under our noses without having to go through a lengthy and grueling process that I don’t see why they’d bother.
I know there have been reports that some refugees who have gained asylum in the U.S. have been radicalized. But I think it would do to investigate when that radicalization took place. I’m not sure they came to America with the intent to do us harm. Many of those who have been radicalized have gone back to their home countries to perpetrate their misdeeds.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Yeah. It’s a tough thing with no great answers. I am very conflicted about the entire thing, and nowhere close to putting together a coherent thought about it. I do know the solution is somewhere in the middle and not on the edges of radicalism on either side.
LikeLike
At the end of the day I truly do hope that love and compassion win out over fear.
I don’t think it’s radical to suggest that our refugee program isn’t as suspect as the fearmongerers would have us believe. Could there be some things that might be done better? I’m sure there are as with anything else. Why not figure out what those things are and implement them going forward rather than halt an already lengthy and, frankly, frightening process.
I’m not particularly disheartened by people wanting to be safe and vigilant. I’m beyond sad and discouraged if my social media feed is any indication of the real attitudes of evangelical Christians. Most of them don’t seem very conflicted at all.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Ruth, that is exactly my point, your last sentence.No, they don’t. And neither do those of the opposite camp.
And don’t misunderstand me please. As much compassion I feel for the victims of this, and should feel for them as I am told to do, there are still very valid and compelling security concerns. Because, whether we want to admit it or not, these guys are not just frustrated teenagers fueled only by how we have treated them. The basic core of what drives them is we are the enemy, and we can be nice until the cows come home and get a bullet in our head for it.
My compassion extends to the victims of this, not the perpetrators.
As an ex military guy who spent time in the Middle East, my thoughts are far different than simply compassion. But, that is another story.
The point of my entire comment is that I am not compelled to toe anybody’s line regarding this issue, just because I am a Christian. The point is, both Christians and atheists are saying I have to believe a certain way about this.
Actually, my only point was really to Peter who made a completly unfounded assertion that the reason I am conflicted is because I am stressed because I can’t reconcile my position with doing what Jesus said. That was incorrect, inflammatory, and quite misdirected. I am conflicted because it is a confusing issue. Peter was making it about Christian belief.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Well, as a Christian I would think you would be compelled to toe Christ’s line regardless of any extremism on either side. That you should not be conflicted about. I will not try to tell you what Christ’s line is. It is obviously confusing.
LikeLiked by 2 people
Well, yep I agree. Following Christ is what I am required to do.What leads you to believe I am conflicted about. The problem is some want to dictate what that consists of.Even odder, is that some doing it don’t even believe it. Really? For instance, I keep having the good Samaritan pushed in my face. Great story. I should treat my enemies exactly that way on a personal level. Yep yep yep. Agreed no problem.
But, that story is not a good analogy for how a government protects it’s citizens, Ruth.
Again, my point made very precisely. So, since the whole world wants to tell me how to stand on this issue, in your mind how do I need to stand to toe Christ’s line? And, Ruth, I kinda like you, so I don’t mean that in a combative way ok? In fact, it is somewhat of a rhetorical question. But, do you see my point?
LikeLiked by 1 person
I’ll only make one comment with regards to how I think Christians should toe Christ’s line as regards the government. Well, maybe two.
First, didn’t Paul say that God ordains all Government and it’s officials? I’d like to see fewer Christians calling our God-ordained President the anti-Christ. I’d like to see less feuding and more working together for solutions for all the citizens of this country.
Second, I would say that you either see a separation of church and state or you don’t. Meaning, if you want this nation to be guided by Biblical principals and called a Christian nation then perhaps our policies ought to reflect what Christ taught, not just about those pet “sins” that get the goats of Christians. If you think there should be a wall of separation then perhaps each Christian should live their lives by the faith that they claim and stop trying to insert religion into government.
Yes, your point was made very concisely. I don’t think I minced any words with what I’ve already said. And, really, so many Christians think that Christ’s line is so many different places perhaps a more secular view of government might be in order. Render unto Caesar what is Caesar’s…
What lead me to believe that you were conflicted on this issue is your admission of such. I don’t think you need me to tell you what Christ’s response would be. But what you are also saying is that the individual Christ-like response isn’t feasible for a nation. It might be a good way to run your personal life, but not a good way to run the government.
LikeLike
Hey Wally,
I get that there’s security concerns over letting refugees run wherever they want to, but I think it’s also fair to admit that some of the reactions the other way go way too far. States are trying to influence foreign policy, and there are way too many knee jerk reactions out there on social media. There’s a flippancy in places regarding these refugees.
From what’s being reported, there seems to be a year-long process of vetting these refugees. Is a year reasonable? I should hope so. It’s not like most people supporting refugee relocation are just saying “Do it right now.”
With that concern out of the way – that these people are being screened – what other justification is left to shun them?
LikeLike
Hey Sirius
Yep, extreme reactions on the fringes. On BOTH sides. It is fair to admit. Both ways.
But, again, that was not the point of my comment to Peter. I didn’t come here to argue the nuts and bolts of this, because unlike apparently everyone else in the blog world, I don’t have all the answers.
My only point was, that people are telling me, both Christians and not Christians alike, that I have to feel certain ways about this issue in order to qualify as a Christian.
The fringes on the Christian side tell me that any compassion at all makes me a flaming bleeding heart liberal pinko commie.
The fringes on the non believing side tell me that any conditions placed on the blanket entry of refugees means I am disobeying Jesus.
What actually started this entire conversation is me saying I was conflicted about this situation, which immediately was latched onto as the most miserable failure in the entire world.
The point I learn from this entire comment thread is that compromise, the middle ground, and thoughtful consideration is taboo, and the only acceptable thing is to radicalize either one direction or the other.Which, when I hear it from the group which constantly hurls accusations of my Faith being close minded, narrow minded, and dogmatic, kind of blows my mind.
So, while I appreciate your comment and effort to engage in a conversation, I really didn’t intend to debate this issue per se, but simply what I said in my original comment. Which to reiterate: I am conflicted about this issue, not because it makes me feel like I am being untrue to my Lord, but because there are Biblically supportable ways to look at all sides of this issue. I am conflicted because I am a human who cares both about compassion and security, and the answers are NOT clear despite what all of the experts on here say.
Peter’s statement was simple. We Christians who are conflicted are so because we cannot reconcile any concerns about security with following Jesus. That is a paraphrase, but close. His statement was false and a misrepresentation of the views he spoke on.
Oddly, not one person has yet addressed that, but all comments have sought justification from me as to why I have concerns about security issues.
Thanks as always Sirius for your thoughtful replies
LikeLike
“I am conflicted about this issue, not because it makes me feel like I am being untrue to my Lord, but because there are Biblically supportable ways to look at all sides of this issue.”
I sense you’re getting very frustrated here Wally, but I wonder if you’d mind providing the Biblically supportable ways for turning away refugees?
LikeLike
Hi Violet. No, actually, I am not frustrated. I am rather amused in many ways. I’m not going to debate scripture with you on this issue so that I can prove I am a good Christian. That actually is the entire point of why I commented in the first place, so I thank you for validating it.
Whether the outer fringes of opinion want to admit it, there is middle ground here. Yes, a Christian can occupy that middle ground. In fact, I am solidly there. My compassion for people is quite wide and deep, Violet, you have not reason to say other wise other than your own distaste for Christians. My compassion extends to the refugees, and it extends to victims of terrorism. Sometimes those two things conflict with each other. Fact.
The truth as I asked another commenter about is this: If I take a position, no matter what it is, my being a Christian renders it wrong immediately. If I suddenly took to heart what you are saying and said ..ok cool blanket entrance for all refugees because the Bible says so! Then somebody, somewhere, would accuse me of using The Bible to drive public policy, even if the policy I suggested happened to be one they personally liked. In fact, I suspect you would lead that charge.
LikeLike
“I’m not going to debate scripture with you on this issue ”
I don’t want to debate. Just looking for some verses. You stated there are just as many to refuse to aid refugees, or put our security first or whatever, what are they? It’s a simple request.
LikeLike
Violet
Would you be shocked to know that I tend to lean towards finding a way to help these folks? That is what I am trying to say here. I am probably more like minded with a lot of folks here on this issue than you seem willing to acknowledge. I am seeking middle ground, honestly and earnestly.
Yet apparently, middle ground is simply not acceptable, and the reason it is not acceptable seems be because I am a Christian.
Yet, the instant I step into the middle, all of the people in the edges begin to beat on my, all trying to drive me to their particular side of polarization. That is why I am frustrated. You also are guilty of this, because you repeatedly want to make this an opportunity to slam Christian faith, even when a person of faith actually sees your point of view quite clearly. My crime is seeing various points of view and trying to assimilate them into a coherent thought.
So, nah I’m done here for now. I’ll just crawl back into my hole in the ole middle ground and let all the people flailing around the edges beat each other silly.
Oh, by the way, given the opportunity? I’d gladly take a refugee family into my home. How’s that for compassion.
LikeLike
“Oh, by the way, given the opportunity? I’d gladly take a refugee family into my home. How’s that for compassion.”
Actually, Wally, that’s the humanitarian answer, which is the one I – and many others – advocate. 🙂
LikeLiked by 1 person
Okay, I understand. Do you know anyone who’d be willing to continue the conversation and give Bible verses for the other side of the argument? You state they exist, then can’t provide a simple reference but have time to write several paragraphs justification for your stance … still no biblical reference, excuse my confusion.
LikeLike
Violet
You fail to understand my thoughts here. My position? I just clearly stated my position. I absolutely am required to extend compassion to those in need. In fact, I just stated my willingness to do that. Odd that you simply ignored that in your efforts to prove I am a lousy Christian.
Here is the thing. My role as an individual Christian is not the same role my government plays in the lives of the people of this nation. In fact, if I said my Christian views should dictate the role of government, you would be up in arms about that quicker than I could say boo.
My role, as a Christian, is to extend aid and compassion to people in need. My role as a citizen is also spelled out quite clearly.
Your desperation to illustrate that because I am a Christian, I surely must be wrong in any response to this crisis clouds your ability to actually talk.
So, since apparently no words I say can ever possibly be correct, as they are …gasp…influenced by belief, then what is the point?
Peace
LikeLike
Okay, thanks for chatting Wally.
LikeLiked by 1 person
You bet. Oddly enough it’s always a pleasure
LikeLike
I know this part of the “conversation” has been put to rest, but reading the comments, I felt I needed to add something. Wally wrote: In fact, if I said my Christian views should dictate the role of government, you would be up in arms about that quicker than I could say boo.
And I have to say … he has a point. If suddenly the government said the Christian thing to do would be to accept all refugees — no vetting required — from Syria, he’s right. Atheists and other non-believers would be up in arms. Why? Not because the U.S. was being benevolent, but because it was being done under the guise of Christianity. The “open-arms” approach would immediately be criticized and the argument would then become that the U.S. must first and foremost protect its citizens, which means the refugees should, at the very least, be screened before being allowed to enter this country.
As the situation now stands, I do feel the “Christians” are ignoring their leader’s instructions. But as in most cases, there are two ways of looking at things.
LikeLike
I don’t agree with you Nan. There’s no possible way to open doors and take ALL the refugees in a flood – logistically impossible. I don’t think anyone, anywhere has suggested that. Germany is doing a fantastic job of opening its doors for as many as possible – taking 500,000 a year. Maybe we need to pay closer attention to how they’re achieving this from a planning point of view – it has a huge knock-on effect for housing, education, health, every aspect of community life.
The criticism aimed at Christians when they try to affect secular policy based on the holy book (or what their god says to them in private, as is the case here) is that it’s not grounded in reality. I would criticise anything suggested that was based on what an invisible god is purported to have said, and not on logic. If the two happened to coincide, I wouldn’t be bothered. In the case here, the Christians are being illogically lacking in compassion (they live in countries with the space and the money, and security concerns flip either way) AND they are ignoring their book. It’s absurd.
LikeLike
Pingback: Hypocritical Excuses | Mere Atheism
Violet,
Neil Carter (Godless in Dixie) has a post today which tackles this topic, as well. I thought you and your readers might like to take a look-through.
http://www.patheos.com/blogs/godlessindixie/
LikeLike
Thanks Carmen, very interesting post. It’s frightening to think that we all already have our minds made up about everything, but certainly makes sense in this context. I can’t get any of these Christians to explain why the words and actions of the character Jesus are of no relevance. Becky and Wally say it all – they want to help and show compassion but [insert any excuse].
LikeLike
As Neil points out in the post, ‘christian’ is a meaningless term. You’d never get christians to agree to that, though. In fact, about the only characteristic that I can see they’d all agree on is “I’m not an atheist”. Well, maybe, “I believe in OUR god”.
I am sick at heart over some of their attitudes (re: the Syrian refugee crisis) But, of course, it didn’t take a crisis for me to feel that way about some of them. 😦
LikeLike
Very interesting Carmen. That was a very insightful piece by Neil Carter. I was interested in how he observed that local culture has more influence on how people think than what the religion they subscribe to teaches.
He also made the valid point that no number of clever meme’s shift the thinking of people on these issues.
My former Church was supporting a missionary couple in Syria until a couple of years ago. They left Syria just before the recent troubles because they could not get their Visa renewed. When they came and talked at our Church they noted that the Syrians were a very civilized and welcoming people. The Syrians were proud that Damascus was the longest continuously occupied city on earth. Syria was not a hotbed of religious fundamentalism, it seems most of that has been imported from outside the country after the civil war began.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Interesting that Australia is accepting the same number of refugees as Canada, Peter. Here in Nova Scotia, it is expected that we’ll be getting a fair number of them as there’s already a sizeable population of Syrians in Halifax. Plus, we need younger families here! (It’s an aging population) The news last night suggested they’ll be coming in the next few weeks.
I don’t understand how anyone can have anything but a HUMANITARIAN response to this crisis. I really don’t.
LikeLike
I think the non-humanitarian responses have been mostly motivated by fear. The sort of fear that springs forth from ignorance. Ignorant people are most often the most easily scared. They have less means to understand what is happening and the unknown frightens anyone. Plus, at least here in Finland where we too have an aging population and we are in desperate need of families and youths, some unscrupolous politicians have utilized and expanded on the fear.
The most ignorant people are most easily scared, and rather unequipped to check on wether the claims of the demagogue are factual. The new “social media” has actually increased this phenomenon, because the ignorant people are more able to remain such, by not relying on actual news sources, and only relying on the buble of their own social group, that feeds them what ever nonsense, wich meets and reinforces their suspicion and prejudice about the outsiders. In effect xenophobia. It has been demonstrated by the most outrageous lies spread about the refugees in social media.
Perhaps, this is very much about how each and everyone learns to learn. Some learn to learn new things and are open to accept new views, while others only rely on the person from whom they herd about the issue first and formed their opinion on that limited info. After that some individuals are ready to jump through any loopholes and actively engage in the most nonsensical mental gymnastics to hold on to an opinion, wich by every challenge becomes ever more embedded into their self image and identity. Such a person might find it very hard to learn new things, but also to accept anything that ever might contradict their preconceptions. That kind of person is not acting according to the best information awailable to them, but by looking at everything through their intuition and intuition is very supceptible to emotions, such as fear. Some fears can be rationally justified, but often we only end up rationalizing our already existing intuitive fears, rather than to seek actual justification for them.
Why then Christians are contradicted by their holy revelations in this matter? To me it seems gods are very much like fears, intuitive, rather than rational experiences. People who are more willing to accept intuitive views rather than to rationally evaluate everything are more prone to fear the outsider and to take a claim about a god at face value. After all gods recide on the intuitive side of human evaluation, since they can not be rationally verified. We are lazy beasts, and it takes effort to try to be rational. But there is no excuse for not being rational, and rather go on intuition, when we have the time to actually evaluate things based on what ever information we have.
In the end, fear and compassion are both emotions and both benefit our survival. Fear is the more immidiate method for survival, while in the long run compassion and empathy may serve us as a species better. Or so it would seem to me. It is just, that when people have means to deal with new information rationally, they are also less driven by the most immidiate emotional response, less likely to stick to their first initial emotional response.
LikeLike
“The new “social media” has actually increased this phenomenon, because the ignorant people are more able to remain such, by not relying on actual news sources, and only relying on the buble of their own social group”
Oh, so true!!
LikeLike
Pingback: This is a Christian Nation | Out From Under the Umbrella
Pingback: breaking news: more bible translation errors discovered | violetwisp