[Drlee]

But this is what almost all (non-creepy) religions do, or at least claim to be doing. And let's face it, it hasn't really worked, has it?

That depends. If you are looking for a one-over-the-world solution then no. If you are cold, hungry, homeless and looking for a place to stay on Wednesday night and every night until the weather warms up then it is working very well. A bunch of us Christians are ready to give it to you. If you are an immigrant looking for legal help then our local Jewish Community Center is the hot ticket. Next Saturday, if you have the need, our local Mosque is hosting absolutely free medical care for as many as they can handle.

So I am going to say that very frequently religion does a super job. And does it when it can be maintained that not one recipient of this help has any reasonable expectation that such help should be forthcoming.

Eh, sort of. The usual Christian concept is that you go to hell if you do bad things and get resurrected if you do good things. Not helping someone is usually not doing a good thing which is different from doing a bad thing.

I don't think this is the usual Christian concept. I think most Christians are pretty clear that God has commanded us to do good things. Here is an interesting thing. I have posted (all to frequently I fear) the Bible verse where God rewards those who help others and condemns those who don't. Now stay with me Hong Wu....

There is no sin, as far as I can tell, that can't be forgiven by God. Some would say that there are no sins that won't be forgiven by God. Kill someone and God can and in all probability will, if you are repentant, forgive you.

But look at this verse:

“When the Son of Man comes in his glory, and all the angels with him, he will sit on his glorious throne. 32 All the nations will be gathered before him, and he will separate the people one from another as a shepherd separates the sheep from the goats. 33 He will put the sheep on his right and the goats on his left.

34 “Then the King will say to those on his right, ‘Come, you who are blessed by my Father; take your inheritance, the kingdom prepared for you since the creation of the world. 35 For I was hungry and you gave me something to eat, I was thirsty and you gave me something to drink, I was a stranger and you invited me in, 36 I needed clothes and you clothed me, I was sick and you looked after me, I was in prison and you came to visit me.’

37 “Then the righteous will answer him, ‘Lord, when did we see you hungry and feed you, or thirsty and give you something to drink? 38 When did we see you a stranger and invite you in, or needing clothes and clothe you? 39 When did we see you sick or in prison and go to visit you?’

40 “The King will reply, ‘Truly I tell you, whatever you did for one of the least of these brothers and sisters of mine, you did for me.’

41 “Then he will say to those on his left, ‘Depart from me, you who are cursed, into the eternal fire prepared for the devil and his angels. 42 For I was hungry and you gave me nothing to eat, I was thirsty and you gave me nothing to drink, 43 I was a stranger and you did not invite me in, I needed clothes and you did not clothe me, I was sick and in prison and you did not look after me.’

44 “They also will answer, ‘Lord, when did we see you hungry or thirsty or a stranger or needing clothes or sick or in prison, and did not help you?’

45 “He will reply, ‘Truly I tell you, whatever you did not do for one of the least of these, you did not do for me.’

46 “Then they will go away to eternal punishment, but the righteous to eternal life.”

So it would appear that there is a sin that God is not prepared to forgive. The sin of failing to help others.

It's more of a "God wants this to be done" conception, at least for me.

So as you can see, you are absolutely right. Now as they say, whatcha' go'ne do about it?

Christians (actually most religious people) are held to a far different standard than the civil examples you forwarded. We do not require any intervention from the state, either protecting our efforts or leaving us exposed to damages; because we have heard from a far higher authority. We are going to feed the hungry even though we might get sued for bad soup. We will suffer the temporal consequences because the alternative is pretty dire and the rewards, we are given to believe, spectacular.

Even though many of us do these good things we still have to defend ourselves because there are those who believe our efforts are not enough. Right Potemkin? It is all about who is judging and what their particular expectations are.

Here is a story. As most here know I have been working with homeless people. Lots of them. I work in a medical clinic for homeless people and in a men's warming shelter. The majority of them appreciate our efforts and many rely on them. There is not a week goes by that we do not get someone medical care that saves their life. Not a day goes by that we do not feed hungry people or get them out of dangerous weather. But for all of that there is not a week goes by that some homeless, drunk or addict does not get in our faces and give us a bag of shit because we did not fix their problem-du-jour. And we let them get away with it. Why? Because we know tons of these folks. We understand. Often, out of desperation, they come to the one group that they have faith will help them; The Christians. We understand that when we fail these folks are often well and truly fucked. They have tried the alternatives, (government) and found it doing nothing for them. They turn to us and we can't solve their problem. What is left? I guess they can go over our heads to our Boss but that's about it.

The problem with people helping people is motivation. Just like any behavior they have to be taught to do it. They have to see examples of people doing it. It has to be expected of them at first until they learn to do it on their own. This is where religion frequently fails. I have been a Christian for 64 years. I have NEVER heard a preacher shout from the pulpit, "OK team. We are going to go feed the hungry, clothe the naked, and heal the ill because God COMMANDS that we do it." Never heard that. You would think it would be shouted from every pulpit in the land. Wouldn't you?

And one more thing. We don't hear the outrage in the Christian community when so-called Christian Conservatives vote to cut programs for the poor. We should be calling them out for their decidedly un-Christian attitudes and backing that condemnation with our votes. Separation of Church and State? Bullshit argument. We voters are called upon to vote our morals. Cutting programs for the poor to give more money to the rich would not go over very well with The Boss. When these charlatans stack up their books they had better put Ayn Rand and Friedrich Hayek under their Bibles.

[Hong Wu]

@Pote, I don't think the war period counts, everything is different during a war.

@Drlee, great post. I don't think religion has many hard rules to it. As far as I can tell, the main function of charity is to make people feel loved since most evil in the world comes from a lack of love. When social programs are actually diminishing the amount of love people receive, such as by encouraging subcultures that promote broken families and a gang lifestyle, I think it is rational to want to cut those programs.

The argument I wanted to make is that religion can provide effective incentives and disincentives, particularly when it comes to incentives. Men can't reach into this area as effectively as they imagine they can. If you punish people for not helping it spawns subtle problems, if you reward people for helping it would also get ridiculous. At most you can clear the way and hope that something other than men's laws will motivate people to help.

[Godstud]

I believe there is a Good Samaritan law in many places.

Good Samaritan laws offer legal protection to people who give reasonable assistance to those who are, or who they believe to be, injured, ill, in peril, or otherwise incapacitated.[1] The protection is intended to reduce bystanders' hesitation to assist, for fear of being sued or prosecuted for unintentional injury or wrongful death. An example of such a law in common-law areas of Canada: a good Samaritan doctrine is a legal principle that prevents a rescuer who has voluntarily helped a victim in distress from being successfully sued for wrongdoing. Its purpose is to keep people from being reluctant to help a stranger in need for fear of legal repercussions should they make some mistake in treatment.[2] By contrast, a duty to rescue law requires people to offer assistance, and holds those who fail to do so liable.

[Hong Wu]

Yes, such laws help the court system get out of the way, but they do not provide any incentive to help.

[Godstud]

Human empathy is the incentive. Only sociopaths can sit back and watch, while doing nothing... especially if they are capable of helping. I've always been the guy to get in there and help. I am happy I've always had my St. John's Ambulance First Aid courses mostly up to date. They've served me, and others, well. I've helped a drowning victim and two accident victims, over the years. It would be impossible for me to sit by idly when I could help someone out. The good feelings I get from that, and the appreciation of the people I have helped, are incentive enough.