I'm not saying there's no charity in it whatsoever, but that we should be honest about what it is. Don't try to represent it as some great and pure benevolence when half the reasons you're doing it are selfish ones.

I don't get your logic here. So in my example of $5,000 vs. $2,500 kick back, only half of the donation is pure/great/benevolent? Bottom line is it's $2,500.00 of free money to a charity. That's pretty fucking charitable and noble. Could this person only be 50% proud of his/her donation? Which half of the person is benevolent, the right or the left?
I'm not really sure what your argument is....

6km ENE of Edmond, Oklahoma

2017-08-03 16:11:46 (UTC)

5.0 km


3.2
12km N of Stroud, Oklahoma

2017-08-03 14:50:10 (UTC)

1.5 km


2.9
5km SSE of Guthrie, Oklahoma

2017-08-03 11:05:41 (UTC)

4.4 km


3.5
6km ENE of Edmond, Oklahoma

2017-08-03 06:40:44 (UTC)

5.8 km


3.2
33km E of Mooreland, Oklahoma

2017-08-03 04:37:59 (UTC)

14.9 km


3.2
34km NW of Fairview, Oklahoma

2017-08-03 04:33:52 (UTC)

7.1 km


4.2
6km ENE of Edmond, Oklahoma

2017-08-03 02:56:37 (UTC)

2.3 km


2.6
11km ESE of Mooreland, Oklahoma

2017-08-02 23:51:03 (UTC)

5.9 km


2.6
7km ENE of Edmond, Oklahoma

2017-08-02 22:16:38 (UTC)

5.5 km


3.3
7km ENE of Edmond, Oklahoma

2017-08-02 20:45:26 (UTC)

6.5 km
those are 24 hours of earthquakes caused by fracking.. They said it was slowing down in 2016 so no worries.. Who is drinking the kool-aid? Should there not be some kind of regulations on what is done to the planet? We can't change things you say ? like climate? But we can poison the water and cause earthquakes.. And you still say regulations is bad?

...except that's not why most Christians help. They help because God calls them to take care of the needy. I don't give money for the poor in Haiti or the abused in southeast Asia so as to use it as some sort of carrot, i give because they need help.

The American Christians have been the engine of international charity, this is fact. No other religious group, no other government, entity, organization, etc. provides anything close to what Christians did and still do globally.

Also do you understand how deductions work? You can't get more back on a deduction than what you gave. One year i donated a total of about 1200 to my church and guess what i got like 150 dollars more in my refund as a result. So what you're saying is people give money just so they can claim it on their taxes and get a small % back of what they gave? Like, do you even logic?

This post was edited by ofthevoid on Aug 3 2017 02:45pm

Following the word of God would mean you sell all your material possessions and use it to feed and clothe the poor, yet religious people (not specifically Christians) still lead lives of relative luxury and give less than 10% of their income to charity. How could a follower of God even justify driving a nice car without being a hypocrite?

bernie sanders will never be wrong since he just want to copy true advanced civilizations like France, Germany, Sweden, even Australia healthcare system



gt goof baddies, you cant win against that

I know reading is tough, i never said regulations are bad. Regulations are needed for a lot of things BUT they shouldn't be over done. Regulations for food safety, environment, etc - Good for the most part. Regulations on economy, how much things should cost, housing - BAD.

Try to read and think, bud.

No it would not mean that. You choosing to interpret the Bible in some socialistic way does not mean that's what it actually says.

Depends on the person. There are certainly people who will purposefully misrepresent the scope of their actions to make them appear better in the eyes of others. In fact, I'd also argue that donating for the expressed purpose of bragging about it isn't something to be proud of; you're just straight up trying to purchase a better public image, which again is not the same thing as "being charitable". Corporations do that shit all the time; their interest isn't in charity, but in the publicity. Not everyone who donates money is like that, but let's just not get into the habit of just assuming that everyone who donates money to anything is a fucking saint. There can be ulterior motives to it. That's all I'm trying to say.




Bullshit. You know damn well that "spreading the word of God" is a huge part of many of these individual's / church's reasons for doing these activities. That's not to say the work they're doing isn't needed or appreciated, but don't insult my intelligence by pretending there is no political angle to it whatsoever.

I can understand one must have a certain stable lifestyle in order to not be poor and subsequently help the poor, but pretty much everything we have is a huge luxury compared to most people on Earth.

“Truly I say to you that with difficulty a rich person will enter into the kingdom of heaven! And again I say to you, it is easier for a camel to go through the eye of a needle than a rich person into the kingdom of God” (Matthew 19:23-24)

No you're just an atheist pos that will twist something like hundreds of millions of dollars flowing in various types of aid to 3rd world countries yearly from Christian organizations to meaning it's all about some ulterior motive. I can proudly say that my brothers and sisters in Christ have helped many all across the globe while you and your kin continue to be edge lords on the interwebs. Good job lad.

Choosing to follow after God is a personal choice, even people in third world shit holes don't proclaim the name of Christ because some Christians gave them a bag a rice or built a well.



So just because we live relatively affluent lives that means we are somehow bad Christians? So instead of being responsible stewards of resources we should just give them away irresponsibly? Instead of managing that wealth so it can be built upon and manage it generationally, we should just live as some peasants? Yeah, no, the Bible does not say that. It doesn't matter how many out of context verses you quote, your subjective view is just that, subjective.