Believing that everything happens for a reason (i.e. that someONE intended them to happen for a particular purpose) is a characteristically human psychological foible. Try as we might, we can’t help but personalize EVERYTHING. I mean, if we ever discover other intelligent life, we’re probably going to have to spend considerable time convincing them that we aren’t all batshit insane for talking to our toasters.
Touche’
I think things happen just because they do. For instance, if you are in an automobile accident it is because you were in the car at a certain time in a certain place…
You were born because your parents had sex at a certian time and place, a sperm and egg met that became you. The reason can be for many different things.
It happens or happend just because it did.
Monavis
You said you’d never heard of Christians doing such a thing. Those people are Christians.
The Catholic church has been particularly adept at claiming that helping all sorts of people would compromise the dictates of their religion. The most horrific example is the case of condoms in Africa. Others include the Mother Teresa travesty.
If this is going to be one of those no true Christian conversations, please let me know now.
No, that’s not what I said…I said the Christian religion doesn’t teach it.
Let me put it this way…did your religion TEACH you that no matter what bad thing happened to another person, you were not obligated to help, or did you come to that conclusion on your own?
“The”?
Yeah, well, see, that’s part of the problem, isn’t it?
But the specific thing I am disputing is that jsgoddess says that she believed that there is no obligation to help people who have had bad things happen to them, because God made it happen for a reason, and those people must have therefore deserved it. Aside from certain wingnut denominations that claim, as she points out, that AIDS is a punishment from God, etc., I think that stating that the Christian religion generally teaches that we have no obligation towards helping others is an extraordinary one, and one that I have never heard before. If someone has a cite that shows this as a teaching of a Christian church, I’d love to see it.
Ah, fair enough. My only point was to say that there are some Christian churches who would say things like that. But yeah, i’d agree that in general they seem to be more “if something bad happens to someone, it’s good to help” (well, i’ve only actually been to a couple of services, but I assume they generally go with that 
).
My point is that the criteria for judgment are purely emotional and subjective, thereby not ‘reasonable’ by definition.
jsgoddess Christ helped people regardless of what their sin was, because all of humanity were sinners. Anyone that follows anything else is ‘no true Christian’.
Not giving condoms to Africans is absolutely irrelevant.
You didn’t say that some Christians believed it. You said that it was a “new one on you.” Now you say that some Christians DO believe it, oh but they are wingnuts. This is a no true Scotsman argument. There is no overarching authority called “The Christian religion.” All there is is Christians. I made no argument about the Christian religion generally teaching anything. But complacency in the face of horrific events is a widespread Christian attitude, one that can be bolstered by Biblical passages.
The Roman Catholic Church uses belief in God as an excuse not to help AIDS sufferers. I’ve heard Catholics say that condoms should be forbidden to AIDS sufferers because condom use is a sin.
Prosperity theology is another example of Christian teachings where if bad things happen it’s because you deserve them. The “help” offered is telling you that if you only behaved the right way you wouldn’t be poor.
I’ve heard Christians use “the poor are always with us” as an excuse not to put money toward ending poverty.
I’ve heard Christians use “sluts” and “whores” and “unwed mothers” as an excuse not to put money toward welfare, school lunch programs, etc.
I’ve heard Christians say that New Orleans deserved Katrina because of debauchery.
I’ve heard Christians say that the US had 9-11 coming because of gays.
I’ve read Christian writings where because slavery was in the Bible it didn’t need eradication and slaves should accept their lots.
“Accepting their lots” is also the message of the RCC in Central and South America as it tries to quash Liberation Theology.
South Africa’s Dutch Reformed Church used the Bible to justify Apartheid.
Churches have supported and justified the status quo under many horrific regimes.
Mother Teresa: “I think it is very beautiful for the poor to accept their lot, to share it with the passion of Christ. I think the world is being much helped by the suffering of the poor people.”
These are all examples of someone using the existence and teachings of their religions to justify inaction and complacency.
Irrelevant to you, perhaps, and irrelevant to millions of Christians who can use their religion as an excuse to let people die.
It’s not irrelevant to me. And it’s not irrelevant to anyone for whom I have the tiniest shred of respect.
Some Christian churches have said, essentially, “Sucks to be you.”
Others simply mouth platitudes about God’s will and God’s plan and accepting our lot and blessed are the poor and isn’t it super that there’s a heaven so that people who are suffering will get something later, poor dears, and I’ll put a dollar in the plate and what else can I do? It’s in God’s hands and of course it will all work out for the best.
While I was in it, I couldn’t see it. It’s only since I left that I can see what a sanctimonious and self-serving load of codswallop it was.
You are missing my point…I said it’s a new one on me that as a general principle, Christians are not called to help people who have had bad things happen to them, which is what you said YOU believed. Giving examples of where people have used certain OTHER teachings of a church to JUSTIFY not helping does not show that this is what Christianity teaches.
The Catholic Church doesn’t help AIDS sufferers? Are you sure about that?
Not wanting people to use condoms because using barrier contraception is a sin is not punishing people because they have AIDS, it’s applying a rule in the wrong place.
I have never heard of that before.
I would not be surprised in individual people come to that conclusion, but I have never heard of a church teaching it. Do you have a cite that shows it?
Again, because that is someone’s personal opinion, and a conclusion they reached, it doesn’t mean they learned it at the pulpit. I would be very, very surprised to attend any church in the US and hear something like that from the minister.
And those who said it in public were roundly chastised by other Christians.
Ditto.
When was this? I am asking about where YOU were taught that we are not supposed to help others.
Is this the message you have inferred, or do you have an actual cite that shows that this is WHY the RCC does not approve of Liberation Theology?
Again, not an example that shows that Christianity says that we are not supposed to help others.
But, again, where did YOU get your philosophy that it is OK not to help people who were more unfortunate than you? Is it something you learned in Church, or is it a conclusion you reached because you really weren’t inclined to help anyway, and it was a convenient excuse not to?
These kinds of quotes from Mother Teresa have nothing to do with whether or not people should be helped.
Again, just because someone uses a teaching to justify inaction & complacency, it doesn’t mean that inaction & complacency are supposed to be the teachings. I am not trying to wave away bad things done in the name of Christianity, I am just saying that all these examples do not support your idea that we are not obligated to help others. I am trying to determine what your logic was in coming to that conclusion, or if you were taught it somewhere.
So hand out condoms. That’s up to you. It has nothing to do with morality.
Abstinence is a workable solution too. In fact, more workable, as it doesn’t require a foreign manufactured resource to accomplish the goal.
What’s ridiculous about your argument is that Christian missionaries do a disproportionate share of charity work. Of course for people like you that’s not enough. You’re mad at them because they won’t provide condoms nevermind that they are treating malaria, digging wells, and building schools. All that is irrelevant, because they won’t hand out condoms.
That’s why condoms are irrelevant, because there are many ways to help people, and many of them don’t require rejecting fundamental Christian morals.
1)Either “life will certainly get better, because everything happens for a reason” is true for everyone, or no one.
2)It’s not some random person in Africa. It is true for millions of people, all over the world, that their lives are destined to get worse.
“Everything happens for a reason” is bullshit escapism; pablum for people who cannot face reality.
I never said that I believed it was a “general principle.” I’ve found it to be a pretty common belief amongst Christians, and I’ve given examples of ways that people have used their Christian beliefs as excuses not to help others. You keep acting as if saying “those were bad Christians” somehow negates my point. I would never claim to have been anything but a bad Christian. The idea of “everything happens for a reason” became a justification for me. I’ve seen it used as justification for others in the same religious context. Shrieking that it isn’t in the catechism doesn’t contradict my experiences. Claiming that I was a bad Christian doesn’t contradict my experiences. Saying that other Christians condemn the belief doesn’t contradict my experiences. Arguing that those people who say things like that are wrong doesn’t contradict my experiences.
jsgoddess Check your jingoism. You are focusing only on the negative. Christians do a great deal of helpful charity work. There is a soup kitchen right by my house, run from a Christian church. It’s easy to pick out the bigots and focus on them while ignoring all the good work done by Christian organizations.
One of the largest charities in the world is called the Red ‘Cross’, which if I recall correctly is philisophically descended from the Knights Hospitaller. There’s also the ‘Salvation’ Army, which takes your old stuff and sells it to the poor in order to help the homeless.
Since I never said otherwise, I will assume you meant to address your post to someone else.
We have gone too far afield from the question. I am talking about a specific leap of logic you said that you used. What you said was this:
Which is the leap of logic I do not understand, and maintain is not a teaching of the Christian religion. I do not know of any religion that teaches that we don’t need to help people, because God is more capable of doing so, and if he chooses not to, then we are off the hook, as well.
Throwing in a bunch of examples of where Christians are selfish and hypocritical is just muddying the waters of that question. Of course, none of are immune from those character flaws, no matter what our creed.