case in point

Australia is hosting world youth day this year and it's going to cost 86 million to do it...and the church will turn around every sunday and ask for money to help the needy and the church

so could'nt they just spend the money on saving those who need it ?

or how about selling some property ? some art perhaps ?

wait, noes, its a buisness like every other.......

would their god rather his people had property and art or would he prefer them to be fed, healthy and have a home for their families ?

http://jmm.aaa.net.au/articles/16261.htm


discuss.

;p

my latest rant......... from a forum argument i joined......

Quote: for

Catholic Church is not "rolling in it" as many people have mistakenly accused. There are many other institutions in the world that are far richer than the Catholic Church and do not contribute to society half as much as they should.

Who said there weren't wealthier institutions? At least they don’t pretend not to be wealthy. The point is the Catholic Church is wealthy enough to fund this themselves.

http://jmm.aaa.net.au/articles/16261.htm

Quote: for

I find it very interesting that people have complained about the amount of taxpayers money being spent on WYD, I would safely bet that if it were the Olympics or the soccer world cup etc. that were being funded there would be half the criticism that WYD is receiving. If that. All because it is a ‘religious’ event.

So the Olympics are for everyone right?! And WYD is only for Christians...don't make silly comparisons.
So would the Christians here mind if atheists or Hindus or any other group got $150million for a gathering?

Quote: against

The issue of principle is that providing public funds to subsidize a religious event is a violation of "separation of church and state". Unfortunately as we already know, this does not exist in Australia.
It also violates impartiality between religions. If subsidizing the Catholic church to stage their event is OK then I look forward to the World Islamic Conference also being subsidised, as well as the Church of the Flying Spaghetti Monster.

Quote: against

Nietzsche - I call Christianity the one great curse, the one great intrinsic depravity, the one great instinct for revenge for which no expedient is sufficiently poisonous, secret, subterranean, petty — I call it the one immortal blemish of mankind.

And more relevant...

The surest way to corrupt a youth is to instruct him to hold in higher esteem those who think alike than those who think differently.

Why quote others? Because i can

Some people have articulated views or thoughts I share better than I perhaps could, which does not rob my words of merit or worth.

I have been raised within and suffered the intolerance of Christianity.....that all things were born of guilt, and suffering the bane one must carry ...searching for redemption in the hope of acceptance into heaven by God, who is by all accounts, a merciless and vengeful God. The words in the bible that describe his wrath speak enough.

In my 34yrs Christians and those of similar denominations have consistently been the most arrogant and intolerable of believers. What other faith knocks on ur door at 8am to push their faith at you? Arrogance indeed!

It is irrefutable church and states are intertwined, and from here it is easy to draw a line between bush and 'some ' of his motives.

I despair that our laws are partially born of its ties with the church.

I could go on.

WYD is an event no one, except Christians, want. And with all the blubbering about having charities and wanting to do good, the offensive amount of money this event will cost only causes more disdain to those who know better than to believe in what Christians do.


Answer me this, would your god rather her people be fed, healthy and have homes or for her church to have art and millions in property?

..how would god answer spending this money while you market yourselves as modest and meek and out to help others ? would jesus have spent 150 million on a gathering or fed the poor ?
I think you know the answer to this
perhaps the Hillsong mob should sell its business interests and some of its property and save a third world nation - if you conduct your faith online does it suddenly not make it a faith…or do you need money and property to really be a beleiver ?

from a website interview with a wyd organiser....

The $150 million price tag doesn't include disruptions to the normal running of the city. The Sydney Harbour Bridge will be closed for a mammoth 12 hours on Saturday 19 July, for the pilgrims' walk from North Sydney across to Randwick to listen to Pope Benedict XVI conduct a vigil mass (and no, they can't just walk on the water).
Nor does it include the payouts. The NSW and Federal Governments are providing $41 million to the Australian Jockey Club and the racing industry to reserve Randwick Racecourse for the mass, but the church denies this is all for World Youth Day. It also covers lease extensions and upgrades to Warwick Farm racecourse.
Even at this late stage the budget could grow further. "It's going to depend on how many pilgrims come," Hanna explains. "80 per cent of that [$150 million] is delivered to pilgrims - meals, accommodation, backpacks - which will affect things like how much accommodation we need."

"Why wasn’t this perfume sold and the money given to the poor? It was worth a year’s wages."

Technically I believe the same question was put to Jesus, and his response was to shut up.

People who are simply anti-religion shouldn't argue religious matters. It would be like if the Pope argued scientific matters - and we all recognise that's not a desirable thing. Stick to your own forum.

why should'nt anti religious people argue against it ? should it only be those who are already religious ?

wouldn't that be one sided ?

so if you have trouble with a religious question on a religion forum perhaps it is you who needs to move on.... or you could consider giving an answer

note here that i am not anti religious, i have a bone to pick with christianity but thats my own thing...being this a religion forum it would seem the place to ask what i wish to hear answers for...

ok, simplify it.....

1. at a potential cost of $150million, could this not be better spent on saving those who need it ?

2. if the church is so wealthy, and we both know it is, then could they not sell art or property to help those in need ?

3. would jesus / god prefer christians to own art and property or for the needy to be fed etc ?

4. if the govt is going to subsidise this recruitment drive, would you be happy for them to spend $150million on hindus or muslims, or any other group, to do the same thing ?

Posted by Yehoshua "Why wasn’t this perfume sold and the money given to the poor? It was worth a year’s wages." Technically I believe the same question was put to Jesus, and his response was to shut up. People who are simply anti-religion shouldn't argue religious matters. It would be like if the Pope argued scientific matters - and we all recognise that's not a desirable thing. Stick to your own forum.

Love thy neighbor. k thx bai.



-Jesus

If an informed person who has read Augustine, al-Ghazzali and the Upanishads wants to come talk to me about religion and tell me it's a load of crap, I'll listen, and there's a good chance I'll agree. But if somebody hits upon the basic stumbling blocks of 12-year olds and acts like they've had a revelation, what's next, can God create a rock so big he can't lift it? There's simply a lack of respect for your "conundrum".

1. Unlikely. Noticed how the Rotary Club spends $900 on hotdog buns every summer? The point is that it's an investment, because of the support and publicity it drums up, means the money earns it back instantly "with profit", which can then be directed on feeding the hungry. For example, WYD will likely convince somewhere between 10-500 people who were "on the fence" about taking Holy Orders, to enter a religious program - and the church can then send them out into the world to feed it. What you're arguing is the same as saying "Why does World Vision spend their money on television commercials?" - that's how pretty much all charitable organisations work - they spend a portion of their money on activities meant to "revitalise" and "attract attention", in order to ensure their subsistence as charities.

2. If you are such a humanist, couldn't you sell your computer to help those in need? It's a poorly-constructed argument - yes, the church could raise money to give to the poor...oh, that's actually what they do. It's like saying "Why do Girl Scouts go door-to-door raising money, why don't they hold bake sales?", or, if they hold bakesales, "why don't they hold car washes?". (And yes, feel free to insert your "girl scout in a bikini jokes here)

3. Again, as I quoted to you already from Jesus' own words - things are at best murky. People can take one argument from Jesus that says they shouldn't sell their earthly goods and give it to the poor, or another one that says you must. To wit, "Even the devil can quote scripture to his purpose". But couldn't you make the same argument about every Hindu temple built, every Muslim minaret and every Jewish shofar? Why do they have material possessions when they could instead sell them off? You'd be well-suited to look into the collection principles of the Vatican Museums, for the record.

4. Yes, and while I am not familiar specifically with Australian law, I would assume they often do. Now, WYD is expected to draw 500k-1.5mil visitors to the country, so it works out to ~$100 per "pilgrim" that the Aussie government is forking out, to make sure the event goes as planned. Each one is going to pour much more than $100 into the local economy (since they're spending 1-3 weeks in Sydney) - so it's basically a stimulus program which encourages tourism. So 150mil might not be a perfect sum to pay "each religion", it should probably depend on how many adherents are expected to attend, &c to be balanced out so it's still a net profit for the country.

Excellent, now we have discussion, albeit not quite on track yet... but it's a start..

quote - If an informed person who has read Augustine, al-Ghazzali and the Upanishads wants to come talk to me about religion and tell me it's a load of crap, I'll listen - end quote

Hold up, there's two assumptions straight away. Do you know if i have read these scripts ? And for the other, i already said i'm not anti religion. Actually yes i have read the Upanishads...not entirely, maybe not even 30%...and you would know it's a very large scripture ! I enjoy studying world religions, but this is neither here nor there in this thread.

Having not read scriptures doth not make my points invalid. This is typical of avoiding the topic. It suggests inability to reason against me rather than my ignorance.

Quote :
1. For example, WYD will likely convince somewhere between 10-500 people who were "on the fence" about taking Holy Orders, to enter a religious program - and the church can then send them out into the world to feed it.

..um, so spending $150million to get 10-500 people to help feed the world. Basic maths tells me this is not a great counterpoint.

Quote:

2.yes, the church could raise money to give to the poor...oh, that's actually what they do.

..the point was not to raise money, the question is they already 'have' the money


re 3. I don’t disagree with you at all, but in context, it was Christianity I was addressing only.

Quote :
4.4. Each one is going to pour much more than $100 into the local economy (since they're spending 1-3 weeks in Sydney) - so it's basically a stimulus program which encourages tourism. So 150mil might not be a perfect sum to pay "each religion", it should probably depend on how many adherents are expected to attend, &c to be balanced out so it's still a net profit for the country.

..ok cool, so in principal u don't mind the idea of other groups receiving the same funding, as long as it is scaled in proportian to attendees...fair enough.
I work in tourism and can say that there has been a major decline in numbers and bookings for this period. In fact many hotels and accomm. services report worse than normal figures for that period, which has been identified as a result of the majority of 'pilgrims' being billeted or staying in school halls and the like instead.. and those tourists who would have planned a visit outside of this event have decided not to until the event is finished.

what it currently appears to be, is that anticipated numbers are not what were previously predicted and those that are coming are not engaging in local business - which then kills the equation that the money spent will then be reinjected into the economy. althought the event has yet to take place, we are four weeks away and the anticipated 500,000+ plus number of attendees is either drastically wrong or they will magically all book at the last minute and then splurge whilst they are here.


religious wealth is always a contentious issue, and ye verily i particularly loathe the christian religion so this particular event is a thorn in my side.

so in context, keep it to christianity for now, and we can debate other religions later.

Posted by hatsumi Hold up, there's two assumptions straight away. Do you know if i have read these scripts ?

Yes, I tend to be a fairly accurate judge of such things. In fact, I've not yet met a person who has read Aquinas, and yet fails basic syntax in their own writing, such as capitalisation, apostrophes, commas and periods, or saying "u" instead of "you". So, as "unfair" as my judgment might be, let's see if I'm right...

Posted by hatsumiActually yes i have read the Upanishads...

Which proves that I'm right about two out of my three points so far...

Posted by hatsuminot entirely, maybe not even 30%...

Which proves I'm right about three out of three now, but I get it, you saw the book in the library once and read a few pages, then looked it up on Wiki. Congratulations, you're practically a scholar.

Posted by hatsumiHaving not read scriptures doth not make my points invalid.

Quickly throwing "doth" into your vocabulary is an excellent strategy to suddenly pretend you're a learned scholar - but is sadly transparent given your later use of "u".

Posted by hatsumiThis is typical of avoiding the topic. It suggests inability to reason against me rather than my ignorance.

No, it is typical of somebody who thinks that more familiarity with the basic precepts of a religion is required before one attempts to write a J'accuse polemic against it.

Posted by hatsumi$150million to get 10-500 people to help feed the world. Basic maths tells me this is not a great counterpoint.

Basic maths tells me that 150mil divided by 500 people is $300,000, which divided across fifty years of ministry works out to investing $6000 per annum to have somebody serve the world. I believe any NGO would consider that a worthwhile investment. However, this is about the government investing, or the church investing? You're blurring the lines. My point is that it makes sense for the Church to spend $6000/year on getting new priests and nuns, and that it makes sense for the government to invest $150mil into a program that will bring a hundredfold in profits. They're distinct balances.

Posted by hatsumi..the point was not to raise money, the question is they already 'have' the money

Wait, they do? I thought the government did? Which money are you talking about, the "paintings the Church commissions", or the 150mil from Oz to invest in WYD? Again, you seem to be blurring the lines, and that makes it difficult to follow your logic.

Posted by hatsumiI work in tourism and can say that there has been a major decline in numbers and bookings for this period. In fact many hotels and accomm. services report worse than normal figures for that period

[citation needed]

Posted by hatsumiverily i particularly loathe the christian religion so this particular event is a thorn in my side.

And yet you said it was unfair of me to say that I could tell you had more personal animosity mixed into this than logic, but again...it turns out my judgement was correct.

Best thread eva !


Okee dokee,

Quote:

such as capitalisation, apostrophes, commas and periods, or saying "u" instead of "you". So, as "unfair" as my judgment might be, let's see if I'm right...


Lol, so ergo my arguement is wrong ? Since when do these things validate an arguement ? ...moving right along then..

Quote:
Which proves I'm right about three out of three now, but I get it, you saw the book in the library once and read a few pages, then looked it up on Wiki. Congratulations, you're practically a scholar.

Lols again, this is incorrect, but since i don't claim to be a scholar of anything nor asserted as such, this is again irrelevant

...it would seem you are concerned with being seen as the scholar here...

Quote:
attempts to write a J'accuse polemic against it

wow, you are articulate therfore you must be right !

Quote :
Again, you seem to be blurring the lines, and that makes it difficult to follow your logic.

ok then, and it's not too unfair of you, but to break it down

1. the church has priceless artifacts and billions in property, why not sell some to give to those who are in need - and would jesus have opted for this wealth to be kept or distributed to the ''poor'' ?

2. should the govt foot the bill given there is yet any evidence the money will be reinjected into the economy? seeing as though the church could pay for this themselves, as you say, it needs more priests and nuns, so why does the church not foot the bill ?

Quote:
And yet you said it was unfair of me to say that I could tell you had more personal animosity mixed into this than logic, but again...it turns out my judgement was correct.

at what point did i say that ? i mean you are correct, it's not animosity though its loathing, which are distinctly different
and either way, this doesn't form a solid refute against what i haz said..

..i could say you have some personal blinkers on, mainly because you have taken the high road assertion that you are the scholar and i am a wiki tourist taking an uneducated shot at christianity...and by pointing out flaws you think u have somehow debased what i have said....

ok, i havent made any personal judgements against you til now, and i dont want to detract from the issue

intelligence is not the marker for a good debater, i see you are intelligent, but rather than address the questions, your tactic is to find holes in punctuation etc... no points there, tha'ts' easy, it's not an english exam and i won't care too much to act like it

Quote:
Quickly throwing "doth" into your vocabulary is an excellent strategy to suddenly pretend you're a learned scholar - but is sadly transparent given your later use of "u".

who is pretending...if it helps you jump this hurdle and get back to the questions, no, i am not a scholar, nor pretend to be in any way

ps. the use of 'doth' was childish bait, and LOLS, bait taken


so

1. the church has priceless artifacts and billions in property, why not sell some to give to those who are in need - and would jesus have opted for this wealth to be kept or distributed to the ''poor'' ?

2. should the govt foot the bill given there is yet any evidence the money will be reinjected into the economy? seeing as though the church could pay for this themselves, as you say, it needs more priests and nuns, so why does the church not foot the bill ?


(re 2. ok, we can wait and see about the reinjection of the economy - and no citations needed about lack of tourist numbers, you know how to google, why not check ?)

(just a note, I'm abandoning this argument as "not worth the time". It's not a personal insult to you, just that you seem to lack basic "debate" skills and have a general ignorance of say, the Bible. Now, it's fine to be ignorant of the Bible, but don't be ignorant of it and try to extrapolate what you believe it teaches based on some googling.)

but, but, i never metioned the bible, not once !!

"you seem to lack basic "debate" skills "

im not the one who tried to debase the arguement or questions based on grammar....

in fact you have yet to answer anything, you just asserted that you thought i was trying to act scholarly, a hurdle we have now cleared.... and with no other basis dismissed addressing the questions..


" don't be ignorant of it and try to extrapolate what you believe it teaches based on some googling"

seriously, i have never metioned the bible or what it teaches once.... so no need for extrapolating anything, you may wish to do so in refute for your case but i point out that using a work of fiction as a solid basis might not be water tight.

in question one, no need to reference the bible.... he would or he wouldn't ?

yes there is some murkiness in the words, but then you get that from a fictional piece

just to clarify, are you a christian Yehoshua ? it does'nt really matter, but may explain your own avoidance of directly answering the question...

1. the church has priceless artifacts and billions in property, why not sell some to give to those who are in need - and would jesus have opted for this wealth to be kept or distributed to the ''poor'' ?

2. should the govt foot the bill given there is yet any evidence the money will be reinjected into the economy? seeing as though the church could pay for this themselves, as you say, it needs more priests and nuns, so why does the church not foot the bill ?

ps i have no beef with you at all,Yehoshua, i honestly wanted to hear some straight out serious replies to the questions i put forward...

..it would be great to see some even responses here.... and i will admit that i made a harsh introduction to the topic in my first posts and so i will apologise for that...it was no way to expect an even response and maybe i got the response that tone was likely to illicit...

so let's start again, can anyone offer some answers to my questions ?

Posted by Kbasa Love thy neighbor. k thx bai. -Jesus

'Cept if they're commies.

Posted by KublaKhan 'Cept if they're commies.

yeah, nazi-commies.

I bet Christians could save the world if they all converted to Buddhism.

Posted by Kbasa yeah, nazi-commies.

I don't live on a moon base!

If the christians save the world, who's gonna save me from them?

(You can substitute the name of any other religion for christians in the above and I feel the same way)

Posted by underdark If the christians save the world, who's gonna save me from them?

I will.

Posted by KublaKhan I will.

And that is why I luvs ya baby.

BTW- Did you et a fancy new icon? Makes you look thinner...