Subject:
|
Re: Pay It Forward
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.off-topic.debate
|
Date:
|
Sun, 26 Aug 2001 16:59:21 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
333 times
|
| |
|
|
In lugnet.off-topic.debate, David Eaton writes:
> In lugnet.off-topic.debate, Daniel Jassim writes:
>
> > I think most people would scoff at
> > such an idea and use the excuse of "Why should I try if there's no certainty
> > that it will make a difference?"
>
> I think that's the general idea. But I think I'd say there are a few
> responses people would give to avoid "paying it forward":
>
> - How do I know person X is deserving? What if they're Adolf Hitler? I
> wouldn't want to help evil people even if I could, so I don't want to take
> that chance.
What if person X *was* Adolf Hitler? Maybe your random act of charity might
have forever changed him and prevented what he would have otherwise done.
And, isn't the question "How do I know person X is deserving?" in itself
"evil"? Are we capable of making such determinations, seeing we all have the
same flawed make up?
>
> In short, take the example of Communism. Great idea, never worked well in
> practice.
I disagree that it is a great idea that has never been implemented properly.
Why is the notion that everyone should have an equal share of the pie a good
idea? Some people earn, and indeed deserve, a bigger share. Albert Einstein
*should* get a much bigger piece of the pie than I should; he has
contributed far more than I. Equal rights and equal treatment under the law,
yes. Equal piece of the economic pie, no way. The only reason the USSR was
able to compete with the US as long as they did was because they oppressed
and coerced their people to do so - and still came up far short
>
> Personally, I think that's one of the reasons Christianity
> is so successful. It promises "heaven" for those who are charitable, and
> "hell" to those who are not.
Actually, the promise of heaven is never given in return for "charitable"
deeds. Likewise hell is not promised "to those who are not." Ones actions
are, in light of the cross, irrelevant. All are on equal standing based on
performance alone. Even in the OT people were "justified by faith." Actions
are only pertinent in so much as they demonstrate ones faith.
Yet "fire escape" nor "paradise retreat" are truly valid reasons for
choosing Christianity either. The biblical reason for choosing Christ is the
God assisted revelation of our fallen state and the desire to reconcile with
One who loves us and wants things otherwise. People who respond to a "repent
or burn" message are equivalent to the "seed which fell on the stony
ground." They have no root and quickly "wither away." Christianity is not
based on mere profession or outward observance alone. Ones motives must be
correct to make it efficacious - Hebrews 4:12. It is a common misconception
to think of Christianity as a system of religious observance which must be
adhered to or a charter to sign on to. It is actually an intimate and very
personal relationship with a God who has lovingly made first contact - He
seeks us, we don't seek Him.
These remarks are not intended to carry any weight with those who do not
agree with them. They are offered in response to the misrepresentations
above, only.
>
> But I'll opt for something different. My philosophy on the matter is not to
> pay forward 3 big favors. Pay forward as many favors as you can, big or
> small.
I agree here. Why stop at three? The premise of the movie almost comes
across as Multi-Level Marketing, doesn't it?
By coincidence, we rented and watched the movie last night. I thought the
ending would have been much better if they had shown Jerry (the homeless
guy) coming through the crowd, all cleaned up, and having a moment with the
mother. That would have showed that his three good deeds had made a
difference in the world.
Bill
|
|
Message has 1 Reply:
 | | Re: Pay It Forward
|
| (...) I'm not saying that the above excuse is a good one. Dan asked why would or wouldn't people do it-- and I answered. And I'm *very* sure that *some* people would give that reason. (...) Rather selfish, I'd say. Sure I consider my skills to be (...) (23 years ago, 26-Aug-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
Message is in Reply To:
| | Re: Pay It Forward
|
| (...) Cynicism & selfishness. Actually, depending on the person, you could probably group cynicism under selfishness. (...) I think that's the general idea. But I think I'd say there are a few responses people would give to avoid "paying it (...) (23 years ago, 25-Aug-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
19 Messages in This Thread:
 
 
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
This Message and its Replies on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
