Biblical Compassion vs. Liberal "Compassion"

The Bible, and a speech | Long ago, yet very recently | TBP

[TBP]

I was out at an event the other night and I heard an interesting story.

It comes from Acts.

At one point, Peter and John (whose names stand for faith and love) were going to the Temple. There was a man in the community who had been lame from birth. Keep that in mind -- he was lame from birth.

Now, every day this man was carried to the Temple and was laid outside the gate to beg for money while his family went inside to worship.

Well, here come Peter and John, and the man asked them for money.

Now, according to modern liberal standards of "compassion" what should Peter and John have done?

(Clue: It is NOT what they did.)

Before reading further, try to formulate an answer to this question and see if you think that the modern, "comapssionate" (i.e. liberal) answer is truly compassionate, truly designed to help, or if it just degrades a fellow human being to make the supposedly "compassionate" feel good about themselves and compensate for their total lack of self-esteem.

[Jorge]

So what is your point?
The US Govt should cut off disability payments to those who are crippled or paralyzed and demand they get up and go to work?
Are you going to become a modern day Peter and heal these people?

[ladyinred]

By the liberal definition, that's real compassion. By the liberal definition, what these apostles actually did has no compassion at all.

Do you believe this story from the Bible TBP?

[Blue Collar Christian]

You surely did miss the point. It was an analogy. If you teach a man to fish, he can feed himself, if you give him a fish, he eats once, and continues to need your help(and give you his vote).

Obviously, we cannot go out and heal the lame(or as this thread was discussing, the impoverished)and tell them to get up and walk(or get a job)as the 1st century Apostles did, but instead of giving them a government check, we should, as individuals, be afforded the opportunity to give people the help they need, and potentially help them NOT need to be helped. All this, while having the ability to keep some accountability of the helped person's effort to improve himself, is much better than having a huge bureaucracy run by people that are not even accountable themselves.

[Jorge]

You surely did miss the point. It was an analogy. If you teach a man to fish, he can feed himself, if you give him a fish, he eats once, and continues to need your help(and give you his vote).

I didn't miss the point at all. In fact I agree with the point.
I just think it was a poor example of scripture for the analogy being given.

A better one would be the scriptures addressing those who didn't work, but were able to in some of Paul's teachings.

Let's face it. Unless you are able to heal the lame and enable them to work, it doesn't make much sense to quote these scriptures as reason not to assist them.

[Blue Collar Christian]

Concur

[TBP]

Ther eis no Constitutional authority for the U.S. government to be engaged in charity. There is no Constitutional authority for the welfare state. And the attitudes of modern liberals are that we should support people like this lame man in their dependency rather than give them the chance to stand on their own two feet. And yet this contradicts the very acts of the apostles in this situation.

[TBP]

Do you believe this story from the Bible TBP?

Yes. Why wouldn't I?

[TBP]

Obviously, we cannot go out and heal the lame(or as this thread was discussing, the impoverished)and tell them to get up and walk(or get a job)as the 1st century Apostles did

Can't we? "The things that I have done, ye also shall do and greater than these shall ye do."

The lives of healers such as Phineas Parkhurst Quimby and those who have followed in his tradition show that we can heal any condition if the person is open to it.

[Blue Collar Christian]

Phineas Parkhurst Quimby and those who followed in his footsteps had the gift of healing, and it is best not to waste this gift. This is an exceptional gift.

Jesus performed healing to provide proof of his identity, the 1st Century disciples performed healing for further authenticity of the truth they were sharing with people. If it was their mission to go out healing people, why could the Lord not have had them heal all sickness throughout the globe? Paul himself had a "thorn" in his side that the Lord would not remove. I think that God picks and chooses his targets for the most impact for the ministry of conversion. It is evidently not His will that all suffering cease.

Then again, I gotta thank God for modern medicine. I would have perished from the heart attack I had last June if not for the marvels of modern medicine. He covers alot of angles, doesn't he?

Now it is my responsibility to use my gifts to do His work with the time I have been given. It is more abundantly clear to me than ever!

[TBP]

Phineas Parkhurst Quimby and those who followed in his footsteps had the gift of healing, and it is best not to waste this gift. This is an exceptional gift.

Quimby was an exceptional healer, but the gift of healing is available to all. It's a learned skill. Healing our own lives and healing others is not a special gift given to Jesus, Quimby, Cayce, etc., but a gift God shares with all creation. There are techniques to it, however, and it takes faith.

I work among a community of healing individuals. I have sen the healings occur by way of these seemingly ordinary people.

If it was their mission to go out healing people, why could the Lord not have had them heal all sickness throughout the globe?

They could have, except of course that it was not technologically possible to travel the entire globe in those days. And, of course, they hadn't mastered instantaneous travel. They healed where they went.

Remember Jesus's words: "The things that I have done, ye also shall do; and greater than these shall ye do."

That says to me that he expected even greater ehalings from those who would come after him. He was The Great Example to us.

It is evidently not His will that all suffering cease.

Oh, but it is. You are not put here to suffer. A certain amount of pain may be inevitable, but sufering is not. We suffer when we entertain the pain. When we stop entertaining it, we stop suffering.

God's Love heals everything, and it is God's intention for us to be healed in every aspect of life so that we may fulfill the Divine Injunction to live "more abundantly."

Then again, I gotta thank God for modern medicine. I would have perished from the heart attack I had last June if not for the marvels of modern medicine. He covers alot of angles, doesn't he?

I'm glad that you are recovering well and I know that your health is a great blessing to you and your family. I thank God for modern medicine, too, as I had the same condition and same procedure that Ashcroft had, only two weeks earlier. Believe me, that is not a fun condition.

Modern medicine is an instrument of Divine healing.

[Blue Collar Christian]

A little "Believe and recieve!" there, eh?

[TBP]

A little "Believe and recieve!" there, eh?

It's a bit more than believing. It's knowing. But you have the general idea. "What mind can conceive, man can achieve." (Inscribed on a church building in New York.)