Money and Morals--Can you have both? (page 2)

prophecor

All depends on the person. If you a jagoff with or without money, either way your going to be a jagoff.

The best thing that I myself have seen, which is pretty, is that one should eat and drink and see good for all his hard work with which he works hard under the sun for the number of the days of his life that the [true] God has given him, for that is his portion. 19 Also every man to whom the [true] God has given riches and material possessions, he has even empowered him to eat from it and to carry off his portion and to rejoice in his hard work. This is the gift of God.

jgnat

Found the article. Ick ick ick. Some tidbits.

True Prosperity in God's New World

pp 3"Some have wondered, 'Can a Christian pursue material riches and also be rich towards God?' Popular writers and preachers say this is possible. But as David (a character in this article,not the biblical David) and others have learned, achieving one without losing the other can be difficult." No attributions of course, just a sweeping statement. Interesting, David is a hypothetical immigrant, a Jehovah's Witness, who nearly loses his faith when he comes to the United States. I wonder if the WTBTS has discovered that JW immigrants are discarding the religion once they get out of the third world? Perhaps JW-lite in North America is a little more tarnished than it looks abroad.

pp 9 "Wealth generates in some an appetite that is never satisified." No, you doofuses, it's the love of money and it's pursuit that is useless. (Proverbs 23:4-5) Check out any gambling hall. Note the addicts. Some are wealthy, some are poor. But both are chained to their addiction.

pp 11 "First, an abundance of riches tends to foster self-reliance." then misquotes Matthew 13:22. Now there we go. We can't positively control a bunch of WEALTHY SELF-RELIANT sheep, now can we?

pp 12 "...as David, mentioned earlier, found out, the pursuit of wealth often absorbs so much of a person's time and energy that it gradually draws him away from spiritual pursuits." and I've met people who become so absorbed in developing their spirituality that they forget to be human.

Those who serve a cause are not those who love that cause. They are those who love the life which has to be led in order to serve it, except in the case of the very purest, and they are rare. Simone Weil

"...For the wealthy, there is also the ongoing temptation to use what they have primarily for pleasurable activities or personal pursuits." and the poor may be tempted to steal. But do they? What's the point?

comments in red are mine

jgnat

oops. Double post. Repetition for emphasis.

AlmostAtheist

>>"...For the wealthy, there is also the ongoing temptation to use what they have primarily for pleasurable activities or personal pursuits."

A$$hole$...

I've often thought that if I were rich, I would take great pleasure in walking around handing out $100 bills to people that looked like they could use them. I do it now, but I'm thinking the $1 bill approach doesn't have the same impact...

Dave

IMustBreakAway

Come now we all know that solomon's success and fall was due to his demon involvement. That's why he wrote the Lesser Key's of solomon... http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Lesser_Key_of_Solomon ;-P

Satanus

Like peacefulpete said. I would add a general statement to that. I say that generally, rich people are superior to poor people. Why do i say that? Because, rich people are often rich, because:

They are more focussed

They have better thinking habits

They work harder

They take responsibilty better

They don't give up as easily

They are more consistent

They see things more clearly

They act/do

Of, course, there are exceptions. Also,often, people born rich loose it all cuz of bad decisions or bad habits or weaknesses being exploited by someone else.

S

daystar

Certainly, but the morals of the rich will not necessarily look much like the morals of the bourjoise any more than the morals of the bourjoise looks much like the morals of the lumpen.

So, to the bourjoise and lumpen, the aristocrat is often seen as immoral.

2112

I love that..."only what is nessasary for our immediate needs." No planing for the future, no planing for retirement, only enough to live hand to mouth. That's it, lets keep them inslaved and in bondage then, if they leave they will be destitute. Also what do their "immediate needs" consist of? Food, WT approved clothing, a moderate inconspicuous dwelling, WT publications, donations to the society, donations to the local hall, and if you do have any material possessions you are told every year in a big article "Many people often ask, 'how can I leave my dwindling estate to the Society?'"

They suck.

sixsixsixtynine

Money and Morals--Can you have both?

The WTBT$ doesn't seem to be able to.

Money and Morals--Can you have both?

Share this