PaulS

I think you've had your fair share too, Yvonne. Try to look after yourself. Cheers Paul

Well, even God's Position Description is pretty vague here!

Surely there's a Grievance Procedure you can utilise to cite any mitigating factors?

Thanks for the democracy lesson, Dutch. Much appreciated, sincerely. Of course it does help that you quote references from “one of the great intellectual exports from Australia".

Dutch, I don't know enough about American democracy (if that's what you're referring to, or is it democracy in general?) to debate this point, but didn't democracy commence pre-christianity (in about 500BCE in Athens) and doesn't the Amercian Constitution lack any reference to Jesus and/or Christianity whatsoever? How then did democracy 'depend' on Christinaity for its evolution? Cheers Paul

Hanover, I really enjoy reading Spong too and have subscribed to his weekly newsletter for the pittance of $30 or $40 a year, which also lets you access all of his archived newsletters from the past several years - an absolute wealth of Spong for the cost of only one or two books. Cheers Paul

Perhaps it was those who wrote parts of the NT, several decades after Jesus' death, that weren't aware of who he was (or at least didn't neccessarily accurately portray who Jesus thought he was). I've read good arguments for Jesus being an apocalyptic preacher, and when he didn't return 'in this generation' people began looking for new ways to translate their understanding of Jesus' message. So with the many different authors all putting their version forward of who Jesus was, I'm not suprised that 'Jesus' sounds confused.

Having read Bishop Spong's latest newsletter this evening (concerning the interference of the Catholic hierarchy in politics in the US, and this Health Bill) he made a couple of comments concerning contraception that perhaps haven't been raised here: Because of successful family planning women have been freed to make major contributions in such fields as politics, business and the professions. The “pill” has been determined to be not only safe, but of great benefit in the emancipation of women from being chained to their biological destiny. This made me wonder if the root cause behind the Catholic institution's anti-contraception stance is actually that these men still feel, either consciously or not, that contraception simply doesn't keep women in their place and is a threat to them?

Cheers Paul

Norm, my wife agreeing to marry me was definitely a supernatural intervention! (Bugger, I wish I had come up with that line for Valentine's Day!)

I'm not really concerned about which exact words are attributed to Jesus and which aren't. I don't think there are many who would dispute that the general impression of Jesus we obtain through the NT is of a man who cares little for himself and mostly about his fellow man. A man who shuns any material possession for himself but lives a life that tries to provide 'wealth' to all. It's in that context I raised this post and whilst I did refer to money, I wish I had more eloquently explained that I also meant about giving time and effort. Essentially I was questioning that if Christians were true followers of Christ, wouldn't all of them do nothing in their lives other than try to attend to their fellow humans in distress? To me that seems the entire focus of Jesus. To say there will always be poor with us no matter what unless and until the mindset of people changes, seems to me a little bare (I'm not sure that's the right word), in that surely it is our mindset now, the one that says we need savings, a debt-free home, a nice car, etc, that is prohibiting helping the needy around the world. I don't mean this as an insult at all Joseph, as I am just trying to work through my thoughts, but this sounds too much to me like we are waiting for others to change, yet not prepared to set the example ourselves. We seem comfortable with the status quo and are happy to not go overboard in our efforts, by justifying that it won't totally fix things, so let's not worry about it. It seems that this and your next statement makes an excuse of not doing everything now because it won't make enough of a difference untill everybody else changes. That doesn't, to me anyway, seem to correlate with how Jesus lived his life or the message he was trying to communicate. And that being the case, how much do followers of Jesus really follow Jesus' example? These are just thoughts I am tossing around and I really hope they don't offend. They are not intended to. Cheers Paul

Norm, I'm currently in the atheist category, but have left a little space for the currently unknown, rather than choose an anti-theist position. To me the word 'anti' seems to mean against and/or in opposition to. How can one be anti-God when one doesn't have all the answers? I'll agree with you that more than likely there is a naturalistic explanation for the existence of the universe and life within, but until we know the answer conclusively, why would anyone take the position that it couldn't possibly be or have anything to do with something we don't know well enough but choose to call God? To quote Christopher Hitchens (according to Wikopedia) "I'm not even an atheist so much as I am an antitheist; I not only maintain that all religions are versions of the same untruth, but I hold that the influence of churches, and the effect of religious belief, is positively harmful."

Lighting my wood-fired oven in anticipation of slow roasting a leg of lamb, to have with friends over tonight. Does life get any better? - A lovely 30c degrees, sunny, swimming in the pool, family, friends and frivolity. I LOVE the weekend!

Welcome Eldred, I hope you enjoy your time here reading and contributing. Cheers Paul

Good luck!

There is an element of that, but really it's not so much a struggle that I personally lose much sleep over, rather I am trying to understand how the lack of doing all one can ties in with Christianity and the message of Jesus, who Christians consider the exemplar of life itself. I guess I'm sort of trying Christianity on for size but wondering about the cut of the suit.

Thanks Joseph. I think I understand your point - although I might be beating myself up about needing to do more, the fact that I'm not doing more is because at present I can't, that's exactly why I'm not doing more. Perhaps there's a distinction though between not being able to do more, and maybe telling ourselves there's not much more we can do, when in fact there is?

Now don't try to hide behind any flimsy excuses, George! Thanks Paul

Thanks for you honesty,George. Are you able to pinpoint why you don't do more when you recognise that you probably could and should?

I do, but I guess that's why I'm questioning - the power or opportunity to do so much more, but most of us don't. More particularly I am trying to understand why those who espouse Jesus as their ultimate example of how to live their life, how to do God's will, how to be most in touch with God, aren't out there busting their butts to help the needy and oppressed. So far it doesn't answer it for me to say do a little and be comfortable with that.

Oskar Schindler: Power is when we have every justification to kill, and we don't. Amon Goeth: You think that's power? Oskar Schindler: That's what the Emperor said. A man steals something, he's brought in before the Emperor, he throws himself down on the ground. He begs for his life, he knows he's going to die. And the Emperor... pardons him. This worthless man, he lets him go. Amon Goeth: I think you are drunk. Oskar Schindler: That's power, Amon. That is power.

Thanks Jenell, I like those points. Paul

Jenell, You make some good points about the phrase "you have the poor with you always". But using it in the context I did was meant to sum up what I think Jesus thought about looking after the poor and oppressed as opposed to the specifics of that one single sentence. Jesus refers to the poor several times in a context I don't think simply means financially poor. I extrapolate from his sayings concerning "what you do for the least of these you do for me" as concern for the poor also. I know I used the example of dollars given, but I really didn't mean that to the exclusion of everything else. I am trying to understand other people's views about Jesus' message and meaning when, for instance, we take a holiday to Hawaii rather than to Ethiopia to volunteer to help the needy, when we go to a nice restaurant for a beautiful meal yet there is a hobo in the alley rummaging through the bin, when we live in a house that could finance 6 other houses instead, albeit they might be located in lower socio economic areas. These things seem like very real conundrums to me. How can one say they are living their life as the fullest expression of Jesus, yet not be doing absolutely everything humanly possible to improve the dire situation of so many others. Apathy is a word that comes to mind, although many would argue that is not the case. It's just that I don't see how it is not. (Strangely enough, I mean this in the kindest way, because I am in this category!).

I agree, George. All of us being poor serves no purpose. But if you truly do believe that is incumbent on us to do whatever we can to solve the problems, shouldn't that mean not living as comfortably as you do and spending more time/money helping? Please let me reiterate, than I am in that basket as much as anyone else, so I'm not blaming you, just trying to understand how others see this issue. I appreciate everyone participating and helping me with their thoughts.

I guess what strikes me Joseph, is that most of us simply don't do all we can in our sphere of influence. It is within your sphere of influence to give more, but you choose not to for certain reasons (again, no finger pointing, because I am exactly the same). I hope this isn't too dramatic, but what I am trying to express might be best summed up in the below hypothetical: "What do you mean 'the poor are always going to be with you'? You mean you had enough money to save my life, but felt that you shouldn't have to help by selling what you have been given?. And you talk about there being a God of love". It's very confusing to me.