1. Joined
    15 Oct '06
    Moves
    10115
    20 Apr '16 19:306 edits
    The post that was quoted here has been removed
    If I were a Christian who owned this theme park, then I would not object to hiring qualified non-Christians.
    Indeed, I might hope that if a non-Christian spent enough time working with compassionate
    Christians, then this non-Christian might begin to take more interest in Christianity.
    (Show a non-Christian some examples of how Christianity can help one lead a better life.)
    My impression is that this theme park aims to preach to the already converted with money.
    ...But it requires more money than many working-class Christians can easily afford to enter this theme park


    I would also. If the theme park were truly about "evangelizing" they would too and they would have the same mindset as you describe. But of course it's about religious discrimination and making money.

    "It is easier for a camel to go through the eye of a needle than for a rich man to enter the kingdom of God."
    --Mathew 19:24


    The passage surrounding the verse that Suzianne cited speaks more directly to it:
    "No man can serve two masters: for either he will hate the one, and love the other; or else he will hold to the one, and despise the other. Ye cannot serve God and mammon." -- Matthew 6:24, KJV

    But of course, Suzianne directed it toward non-Christians seeking employment:
    "If a Christian organization hires those whose only care is money, they get what they deserve. I think they should be able to hire those who seek to serve God instead of those who only seek to serve themselves."

    I pointed out her blatant hypocrisy and flawed thinking with the following question:
    "Which master do you think is being served by an organization that seeks to make money by building a theme park based on a biblical theme?"
    Evidently Suzianne thinks that the theme park can serve both masters. The words of Jesus that she cited are used a weapon to support religious discrimination which brings us back to the Gandhi quote I cited earlier. Evidently the meaning of His words is lost on her.
Back to Top

Cookies help us deliver our Services. By using our Services or clicking I agree, you agree to our use of cookies. Learn More.I Agree