Interesting phrase that, 'seemingly with your approval'. It would be like saying your support of Folau means that you 'seemingly' support the notion that 'idolaters' (unsubtle code for Catholics in the kind of Protestantism Folau follows) should also go to hell?
... Thompson’s piece suggesting that a high-profile Christian sportsman, (e.g. someone like Israel Folau, say) ..., could tweet Jesus’ teachings about how difficult it will be for the rich to enter the Kingdom of God (especially if it was paraphrased as “Hell awaits you”). Since it is most unlikely that anyone would do this, why did this particular “Christian perspective” appeal so much to you?
The author is trying to draw out the point that there is an inconsistency in fervour when it comes to the hard sayings of Christianity.
Whatever the literal translation of the 'eye of a needle quote', it's metaphorical meaning is clear. Jesus is saying that it's 'all but impossible' to be rich and be his follower, so much so, that 'giving it all away' would be the starting point.
On that basis, 'hell awaits rich people' is about as reasonable as 'hell awaits homosexuals'.
The author is not saying he 'approves' of the former but he's using it say we shouldn't approve of the latter.
In short, you've missed the point.
You have previously commented unfavourably on Folau’s wealth in relation to my claim that he has had his livelihood threatened.
The context of my 'disapproval' is not about his wealth per se, it's about him seeking crowd funding for a contract dispute. I think that's wholly unreasonable. I think the way he's gone about this whole issue is unprincipled. He agreed to the conditions of his contract and freely signed it knowing that to do what he did before would threaten that contract. He effectively broke that promise and, despite his personal wealth, is asking others to pay for his broken promise under the guise of religious freedom.
In this post , you wrote: “As for 'cost him his livelihood', are you serious? The guy's a multi-millionaire. He'll just go overseas. “ Translation: “Folau is wealthy – who cares about his right to keep earning?”
It's about perspective, John. Folau chose to put his 'living' in jeopardy. He chose to publish that tweet knowing that he has thousands of followers and knowing that he promised not to do it (by virtue of freely accepting the terms of his contract and in the context of the previous controversy).
Beyond that, and not being a particular fan of Rugby, I know that he's a prodigiously talented athlete and the prospect of him earning overseas was always a possibility in an international sport. I have no doubt that he still has a few more years of earning the big bucks in him.
His problem could be that prospective employers may doubt his commitment to keeping to the terms of a contract, but I dare say, given his talent, there will plenty out there who will take the risk.
So much for your high dudgeon over my post.
Na, high dudgeon is your bailiwick, John.
Responses « Back to index | View thread »