the so fallible Bible

[Fidel_Castronaut]

This answer still does not address the point I raised.

Your point was mostly just a bullshit excuse for not giving to the poor.

you clearly didn't read what I have written. Where did I post that not giving to the poor is/should be a default? Also, define 'poor'. 'wealth', as I'm sure you'll agree, is relative. Also, define 'giving'. Money? Time? All? something else? Knowledge? What?

Also, you're using emotional reasoning to dismiss a counter-argument/thesis based on an alternative view.

So I can dismiss your comment as irrelevant.

How, exactly, does donating all you earn/have assist in alleviating the suffering of the poor without dealing with the contextual issues that encompass those issues?

It buys the kids in that picture some food.

*sigh*

Again, I ask you, did you read/understand anything about the comment I made indicating that context is just as, if not more, important than the individual case study?

It is illogical to look at the little picture and paint with a broad brush. "Give a man a fish" and all that.

It seems like you've just placed an arbitrary level of what constitutes 'enough' to live on whilst assisting in combating 'suffering'. I see no working out. Please show your figures?

It's not arbitrary. You keep as much as you need to maximize the amount you can give away. For instance, many professionals would need to maintain a certain wardrobe in order to keep their jobs and continue giving to the poor.

show your working out. I see no tangible numbers on this, nor an attempt to analyse both the contexts of the recipient and provider.

Is 'giving' money to the poor the best way to combat and alleviate poverty, in your mind? I'm curious because I take issue with the notion of throwing money at an issue in hope of eliminating it. Naturally, money helps, but in tandem with other methodologies which have proven, in many cases, to be increase the effectiveness of other strategies undertaken in tandem.

1 dimensional thinking regarding poverty and the gaps that exist between the haves and have nots will serve only to exacerbate the issue.

You can think in as many dimensions as you like - but give up your pleasures to help out in the meantime if those people really mean anything to you. Damn, there's starving people in the world here and now and you guys just go on about the Amelikites, like you give a rat's ass about them.

Let me stop you here. For one, you know absolutely nothing about any of the posters' on this forum and their contributions to alleviating poverty and helping their fellow man.

I can say, almost for certain, that I have contributed through academic research more to the cause of poorer neighborhoods in inner-city communities throughout England and Wales than you have through my doctoral research. And yet, I'm not pointing the finger at others (you) accusing them of wanting to live a life of decadence at the expense of others.

Isn't it bad in your religion to be judgmental of others?

"You know nothing, John"

There are much more productive ways to combat poverty and the issues it creates than simply throwing money and possessions at it and those that it affects.

Again, false dichotomy - utilize other ways as well, but if you care about those people, you'll feed them in the meantime.

Nonsense. Where, exactly, is the false dichotomy? Did I ever say there was method x and method y and you can only chose one?

Cite your sources, using page number, threat title, post number, and the exact words.

I look forward to reading where I have said this.

It becomes painfully clear, John, that you are talking about a subject to which you have little real world experience beyond the tunnel vision your biblical beliefs have imparted. That you seem unaware of any other methodologies to assisting the fostering of equality in societies (people and societies are variable, but poverty is the same) I think paints a picture that your words can never gloss over.