Why do so many Christians not follow the words of Jesus?

[Danmark]

One of the members here who calls himself a Christian started a thread about atheists not being logical, defying reason and commonsense. He did not support his claims, despite his efforts.

In a similar vein, I post the question here, "Why do so many Christians not follow the words of Jesus?" Specifically, why is Matthew 6:19-24 so routinely ignored by Christians?

“Do not lay up for yourselves treasures on earth, where moth and rust destroy and where thieves break in and steal, but lay up for yourselves treasures in heaven, where neither moth nor rust destroys and where thieves do not break in and steal. For where your treasure is, there your heart will be also.
. . . .
“No one can serve two masters, for either he will hate the one and love the other, or he will be devoted to the one and despise the other. You cannot serve God and money."

I've always thought this passage wise and profound in its exhortation to seek spiritual things, good will, kindness and love, rather than the pursuit of money. Yet, in practice, this is just about the last thing we see from those 'Christians' in the public eye.

Exhibits:




Evangelicals overwhelmingly supported this man for President of the United States.

[Elijah John]

I don't think Evangelicals voted for Trump because of his wealth. But that was not a disqualification either.

And they voted for him in spite of his past bad behavior, not because of it.

They voted for him because of his conservative views on social issues. Also for the prospect of appointing a conservative Supreme Court.

Though I am not an Evangelical, I know this because I watch TBN and have Evangelical cousins and friends!

[DanieltheDragon]

I don't think Evangelicals voted for Trump because of his wealth. But that was not a disqualification either.

And they voted for him in spite of his past bad behavior, not because of it.

They voted for him because of his conservative views on social issues. Also for the prospect of appointing a conservative Supreme Court.

Though I am not an Evangelical, I know this because I watch TBN and have Evangelical cousins and friends!

Why did Trump win the evangelical vote in the primaries? There were more conservative republicans running, other republicans polled better than Trump against Hillary. In fact one might argue that any republican this election cycle could have beaten Hillary given her likability ratings and an email scandal that would not go away.

The reality is his wealth is a big draw, it is the draw when it comes to Trump. His name only has value because he is perceived as wealthy.

I don't buy the reasons you stated, I think those are the reasons people profess to hide their guilt or shame. They don't want to associate themselves with the negative aspects of what he brings to the table.

He isn't the only example of Danmarks point, how many home owners are Christian? How many sports car owners are Christian? For those that live in wealthy neighborhoods how many would you reckon are Christian?

The accumulation of wealth among Christians is not uncommon, the accumulation of wealth in humans is not uncommon either. Yet specifically Jesus called upon people not to accumulate wealth. His position on poverty was to sell what you have and donate it to the poor.

The conservative platform is at odds with this messaging. For Christians to call themselves conservative in America I view as evidence that they don't really believe in what they preach. That Christianity to them is simply a cultural cornerstone nothing more nothing less. An identifier to those in their tribe.

[Elijah John]

I don't think Evangelicals voted for Trump because of his wealth. But that was not a disqualification either.

And they voted for him in spite of his past bad behavior, not because of it.

They voted for him because of his conservative views on social issues. Also for the prospect of appointing a conservative Supreme Court.

Though I am not an Evangelical, I know this because I watch TBN and have Evangelical cousins and friends!

Why did Trump win the evangelical vote in the primaries? There were more conservative republicans running, other republicans polled better than Trump against Hillary. In fact one might argue that any republican this election cycle could have beaten Hillary given her likability ratings and an email scandal that would not go away.

The reality is his wealth is a big draw, it is the draw when it comes to Trump. His name only has value because he is perceived as wealthy.

I don't buy the reasons you stated, I think those are the reasons people profess to hide their guilt or shame. They don't want to associate themselves with the negative aspects of what he brings to the table.

He isn't the only example of Danmarks point, how many home owners are Christian? How many sports car owners are Christian? For those that live in wealthy neighborhoods how many would you reckon are Christian?

The accumulation of wealth among Christians is not uncommon, the accumulation of wealth in humans is not uncommon either. Yet specifically Jesus called upon people not to accumulate wealth. His position on poverty was to sell what you have and donate it to the poor.

The conservative platform is at odds with this messaging. For Christians to call themselves conservative in America I view as evidence that they don't really believe in what they preach. That Christianity to them is simply a cultural cornerstone nothing more nothing less. An identifier to those in their tribe.

Points well taken. I hadn't considered the primary factor. I don't think it was wealth though, I think it was anger. Trump was the most blunt of blunt instruments.

I know many Evangelical leaders did support Trump during the primaries, but I really don't think his personal wealth was a factor.

And some Evangelicals, like Max Lucado actively opposed him. My cousins and friends also opposed him. I opposed him in the primaries, but voted for him in the general.

But my vote had nothing to do with his personal wealth. It had to do with his promise to choose a conservative supreme court, and a lot of his positions.

I doubt very much that Evangelicals voted for Trump because he was rich. Romney was rich too, but Evangelicals stayed home and didn't vote for him in large numbers.

But I think that was because of anti-Mormon bigotry, since Romney was also conservative on social issues.

But I will grant you and Dan this much. I think you have a point by claiming many Evangelicals are overly concerned with wealth.

This has a lot to do with some preachers preachin' the "prosperity Gospel".

Some even go so far as to claim that Jesus Christ himself was a rich man.

They seem to forget that he identified with the poor, and very clearly so.

[JehovahsWitness]

I've always thought this passage wise and profound in its exhortation to seek spiritual things, good will, kindness and love, rather than the pursuit of money. Yet, in practice, this is just about the last thing we see from those 'Christians' in the public eye.

# Why do so many Christians not follow the words of Jesus?

Yes, but if a group put the pursuit of money and all that is associated in second place after spiritual pursuits wouldn't that translate in reality that they group would be poorer than other comparable groups?

Surely most peope (I'm speculating) would utterly despise a religion if, when surveyed its members turned out to be the the poorest or one of the poorest religions in say America & Canada (ie a poor religion in affluent countries).

[Elijah John]

I've always thought this passage wise and profound in its exhortation to seek spiritual things, good will, kindness and love, rather than the pursuit of money. Yet, in practice, this is just about the last thing we see from those 'Christians' in the public eye.

# Why do so many Christians not follow the words of Jesus?

Yes, but if a group put the pursuit of money and all that is associated in second place after spiritual pursuits wouldn't that translate in reality that they group would be poorer than other comparable groups?

Surely most peope (I'm speculating) would utterly despise a religion if, when surveyed its members turned out to be the the poorest or one of the poorest religions in say America & Canada (ie a poor religion in affluent countries).

It sounds like you are saying one ought to join such and such a religion because of materialistic concerns, not because of the Spiritual riches that religion offers.

It seems that this attitude is contrary to everything Jesus stood for and taught.

I hope I'm wrong about your comment. Am I?

[DanieltheDragon]

[Replying to post 4 by Elijah John]

I agree that anger was likely a primary reason many voted for him. I don't think we can ignore the wealth factor though. It is a subconscious factor.

Why did some voters believe he was a good business man?
What is Trump famous for?
What did Trump brag about during his announcement speech?
Why did some people think he would bring back jobs?

Wealth is a factor in all of those questions.

It might not be the main why but it is a why that flows and weaves in many aspects of Trump.

[DanieltheDragon]

[Replying to post 6 by DanieltheDragon]

It's not just those that preach the prosperity Gospel. Most Americans seek to acquire some degree of wealth. Whether it's home ownership or just living a comfortable lifestyle. Not that I see anything wrong with that. Then again I don't profess to follow Jesus who in the above and other verses did see something wrong with that.

I don't see very many Christians giving up their possessions and giving the money to support the poor. The conservative financial policies are more about individual freedom of managing their wealth than following the principles of Jesus. It is antithetical to Jesus.

To support these policies simply reinforces my belief that Jesus's policies are so impractical and silly that even his most ardent believers don't follow them. It is simply a cultural facade steeped in tradition. People are merely going through the motions of belief.

[Elijah John]

To support these policies simply reinforces my belief that Jesus's policies are so impractical and silly that even his most ardent believers don't follow them. It is simply a cultural facade steeped in tradition. People are merely going through the motions of belief.

Not all, and remember, that was not the entirety of what Jesus preached*. Those who have faith in the Father and forgive others from the heart, and put the Golden Rule into practice, aren't they practicing what Jesus preached? Or is that just "going through the motions".

(*And arguably, not even the most essential doctrines that Jesus preached, remember Jesus characterized the two great laws of love and the Golden rule as "the Law and the Prophets")

I agree with you on this though. If everyone gave away ALL they had, there would be no one left to give anyone anything. So on the surface, that particular teaching does seem impractical.

But was Jesus just proposing that ethic of giving all away for his apostles and immediate disciples? Or for all of humankind from that point forward? That seems debatable.

If it was for his apostles only, that seems to make more sense, because wandering preachers need to travel light!

[DanieltheDragon]

To support these policies simply reinforces my belief that Jesus's policies are so impractical and silly that even his most ardent believers don't follow them. It is simply a cultural facade steeped in tradition. People are merely going through the motions of belief.

Not all, and remember, that was not the entirety of what Jesus preached*. Those who have faith in the Father and forgive others from the heart, and put the Golden Rule into practice, aren't they practicing what Jesus preached? Or is that just "going through the motions".

Forgiveness and the golden rule existed before Jesus and exist even in the animal kingdom. The fact that some human behavior coincides with this is hardly shocking. Picking to follow what is easy and convienient would not surprise me in the least.

(*And arguably, not even the most essential doctrines that Jesus preached, remember Jesus characterized the two great laws of love and the Golden rule as "the Law and the Prophets")

I agree with you on this though. If everyone gave away ALL they had, there would be no one left to give anyone anything. So on the surface, that particular teaching does seem impractical.

But was Jesus just proposing that ethic of giving all away for his apostles and immediate disciples? Or for all of humankind from that point forward? That seems debatable.

If it was for his apostles only, that seems to make more sense, because wandering preachers need to travel light!

what makes sense is Jesus preached an apocalypse doctrine. The world was ending so it makes perfect sense to give away all your possessions. Just look at the most recent apocalypse cult in America. People literally sold their homes possessions and wealth because they believed the end was coming. This paid for billboards and messaging to get the word out.