In Reply to: Re: So this is fine with you then? posted by Acheick on December 31, 2003 at 10:24:15:
This is something that happened to me a few months ago. I was walking with my girlfriend, a very well-dressed lady, when a couple approached us. They offered us some postcards, and said, "would you like to buy some postcards to support some homeless people?"
Now you can bet that got my attention. They looked like they were long term travelers who'd lost their way in life, but who'd found each other. She looked rather pale and sick, and they were dirty, but they had this hopeful look in their faces, and a real sincere smile. Of course I wanted to scrutinize that situation a bit more, so I took the cards in my hand and asked, "and how is it that I will be supporting homeless people though buying these cards?"
They looked surprised I didn't understand, and said "that's us of course! We're homeless!"
Me and stupid my suspicious post cult mind!
My girlfriend was really uncomfortable and discgusted that I was talking to them, and gave them dirty looks. (Please don't ask!) But I looked through the cards, found one of Michael Angelo's hand of God, and bought it for a dollar.
They thanked me and as my girlfriend and I walked away from them, I said "they looked sincere."
She said, "why didn't you simply give them a dollar? Why'd you have to touch those postcards? They looked so unhealthy, and could have passed you some diseases."
I said, "That was the whole point. They didn't want to beg. They wanted to do something useful with themselves."
She was totally amazed that I was able to understand that, and she agreed it was the right thing. So I promised her I'd wash my hands, after gently laying down the postcard beside a sleeping homeless person.
You wrote: "Of course, a Christian would make this statement because it is part of their belief system. If you can disprove that it is not biblical, then go right ahead."
To me, this is like catch 22 situation. It is obvious that NC doesn't want to debate the bible, because he/she is burned out on the theology/application of it. I detect he/she has a lingering interest in the bible, but simply doesn't appreciate the authoritarian dogmatic/approach that some people take to it. NC simply said it like it is. It is only certain statements that set him/her off. He/she is burned out on bible thumping. To ask him/her to debate disprove the bible is missing the point. That would be asking him/her to get into something he/she already left behind and despises. It isn't the bible discussion that matters. It's the attitude towards people of other faiths, the I've got a corner-to-the-truth approach, the subtle put downs, that bring him/her to a screeching halt, a point of "zero" tolerance as he/she put it. If you listen past the anger, it's just burn out, and Alan's insensitivity towards it.