Pards on Goals on Sunday

[SaintJackoInHurworth]

As a Christian, perhaps I can clear up a few points here!

 

While Jesus did tell a rich young man to sell everything, give it to the poor and follow him, it does not follow that this is the calling for all Christians (though it is for some - e.g. Mother Theresa). In fact the point in that story is more to do with the attitude of the young man's heart to wealth than necessarily to some legalistic killjoy demand that Jesus had.

 

The bible teaches good stewardship of our resources. This is the one basis of the protestant work ethic which still largely governs the western approach to business. If Liebherr believes that investing good wages, etc. in a good player will be a wise investment, then that is an example of good stewardship.

 

The bible also teaches 'tithing'. This means that an individual commits to giving at least 10% of their income back to God - often, in effect, giving to charitable causes. Consequently, the larger a return that Liebherr gets from his investements the more you would expect him to give to God/worthy causes.

 

The 'camel through and eye of a needle' reference was an example of hyperbole. Jesus used this teaching method a lot. Basically the idea is that you make your point more forcefully by exaggerating. That having been said, some claim that the 'eye of a needle' may have been a gate in Jerusalem, though I believe there is insufficient evidence to back up this claim.
 
In those days rich Jews used their wealth to suggest that they were in some way better in the eyes of God than the poor. Jesus was (as he often did) turning the whole issue on its head.

 

Finally, with reference to the comments by Legod Third Coming:
 


I think people with a strong Christian faith can square anything. They made up a person to believe in, it's not hard to justify his decisions as a result is it?

 
- you might like to note that historians of all shades of belief accept that Jesus was not a made up figure, but genuinely existed. The only debate is whether he is/was who he claimed to be. I believe he is, but I do not want to disrespect anyone else's right to believe he was not.

 

In summary, while I guess it is a hard issue for ML to work through, it is not necessarily inconsistent with his faith. I am not sure what I would do if I had the same level of wealth, but ultimately it is an issue for ML, his conscience, his faith and his God.

[CHAPEL END CHARLIE]

Fascinating post St Jack you're a gentleman and a scholar Sir .

 

I see nothing fundamentally inconsistent with Christianity in sport or business per se (as long as both are conducted in a ethical manner) indeed both can be seen as serving a greater good in that business/providing employment is essential to the Human condition and sport enriches so many lives .

 

As you say how Mr Liebherr reconciles his wealth with his faith is a matter for his conscience in the final analysis , perhaps he'll tell us one day .

[alpine_saint]

As a Christian, perhaps I can clear up a few points here!

 

While Jesus did tell a rich young man to sell everything, give it to the poor and follow him, it does not follow that this is the calling for all Christians (though it is for some - e.g. Mother Theresa). In fact the point in that story is more to do with the attitude of the young man's heart to wealth than necessarily to some legalistic killjoy demand that Jesus had.

 

The bible teaches good stewardship of our resources. This is the one basis of the protestant work ethic which still largely governs the western approach to business. If Liebherr believes that investing good wages, etc. in a good player will be a wise investment, then that is an example of good stewardship.

 

The bible also teaches 'tithing'. This means that an individual commits to giving at least 10% of their income back to God - often, in effect, giving to charitable causes. Consequently, the larger a return that Liebherr gets from his investements the more you would expect him to give to God/worthy causes.

 

The 'camel through and eye of a needle' reference was an example of hyperbole. Jesus used this teaching method a lot. Basically the idea is that you make your point more forcefully by exaggerating. That having been said, some claim that the 'eye of a needle' may have been a gate in Jerusalem, though I believe there is insufficient evidence to back up this claim.
 
In those days rich Jews used their wealth to suggest that they were in some way better in the eyes of God than the poor. Jesus was (as he often did) turning the whole issue on its head.

 

Finally, with reference to the comments by Legod Third Coming:
 
 
 
- you might like to note that historians of all shades of belief accept that Jesus was not a made up figure, but genuinely existed. The only debate is whether he is/was who he claimed to be. I believe he is, but I do not want to disrespect anyone else's right to believe he was not.

 

In summary, while I guess it is a hard issue for ML to work through, it is not necessarily inconsistent with his faith. I am not sure what I would do if I had the same level of wealth, but ultimately it is an issue for ML, his conscience, his faith and his God.

 

WTF ???

[hughieslastminutegoal]

I think people with a strong Christian faith can square anything. They made up a person to believe in, it's not hard to justify his decisions as a result is it?

 

Being a football supporter bears all the hallmarks of religion.

Make a team of nobodies heros, give them a leader and worship the ground he walks on, then when his luck runs out, crucify him. Years later he's worshipped again, and some ass will write the definitive book about him, starting with where he was born.........

[ART]

SaintJackoInHurworth you are indeed a gentleman and a scholar for posting such an eloquent reply for those to whom football is their religion.

[hughieslastminutegoal]

 

While Jesus did tell a rich young man to sell everything, give it to the poor and follow him, it does not follow that this is the calling for all Christians.

 

In those days rich Jews used their wealth to suggest that they were in some way better in the eyes of God than the poor. Jesus was (as he often did) turning the whole issue on its head.

 

 

There we have the current christian ethic .. while the rich Jews were criticised for thinking that wealth made them better in the eyes of God, Christians on the other hand have an officially approved opt out clause - they don't have to give up their wealth to continue to be good Christians...

 

I think the philosophical term for this is H Y P O C R I C Y.

[Bucks Saint]

There we have the current christian ethic .. while the rich Jews were criticised for thinking that wealth made them better in the eyes of God, Christians on the other hand have an officially approved opt out clause - they don't have to give up their wealth to continue to be good Christians...

 

I think the philosophical term for this is H Y P O C R I C Y.

 

Ok I am not sure how this thread turned into a debate on Christian fans atttitudes?! But seeing as it has, let me try to shed a fraction of light from my understanding here (not remotely as eloquent as St Jacko above of course). The regular mis quote from the Bible is that money is at the root of all evil. What the bible actually says is that THE LOVE OF money is at the root of all evil. There is nothing in the teaching of God that says the ability to earn money or generate money through a business etc is wrong - quite the opposite. Its about personal attitudes and behaviours, not quantum.

[eurosaint]

Claiming to be 'religious' does not in any way determine someone's right to be considered a good person !

For example, there are some obscenely rich Arabs who seem happy to have a huge army of underclass workers building their apartment blocks, hotels and temples. In these situations 'mans inhumanity to man' is very apparent, but they still claim to be Godly people !

IMO religion, business and sport are totally separate entities and should stay that way !!

[SaintJackoInHurworth]

Claiming to be 'religious' does not in any way determine someone's right to be considered a good person !

For example, there are some obscenely rich Arabs who seem happy to have a huge army of underclass workers building their apartment blocks, hotels and temples. In these situations 'mans inhumanity to man' is very apparent, but they still claim to be Godly people !

IMO religion, business and sport are totally separate entities and should stay that way !!

 

Are you suggesting that ML should quit the club? Or are you just suggesting that St Mary's Church should never have set up a football team in the first place?

[SaintRobbie]

He doesn'realise that we put up with so much poor stuff last season that this year's awful was last season's norm.

 

It was actually better than last season to be honest!

[david in sweden]

Interesting to hear of Markus Leibherr's strong religious faith - if the master plan works out and we find ourselves back in the EPL some day ML will have to deal with the implications of employing players on weekly wages than could quite literally sustain 100's of poor people in the third world for a year or more .

 

In the light of basic Christian ideology he may find that a somewhat uncomfortable situation to be in .

 

 

Is that a comment on Christian ideology in general ...or just Marcus Liebherr?

As it is rumoured that ML is VERY rich, no-one knows how much he may already be donating to charitable works. Does anyone expect him to give ALL his spare money to charity? I often wonder how much the average person gives (% -wise) of their salary to Third World charities, compared with say...how much they spend on ...gambling, alcohol or ..going to football matches.? It's obviously down to our individual conscience(s). If we are satified that we are doing our bit, then maybe there's no problem.

 

Maybe ML considered we (Saints) needed some charitable help when he bought the club, which I'm glad he did (otherwise we'd only have Conference League football at Eastleigh to watch).

 

Personally speaking, I tend to look carefully at any " charity " that presumes to collect money for the underprivileged, when you considers that some spend 60-70% of their income on advertising / promotions, and their directors draw six figure salaries (!) from the proceeds.

 

Maybe we should be thankful that ML supports us, and leave him to decide what he may eventually do with his own money.

Edited 13 October, 2009 by david in sweden

[saintbletch]

Brilliant! Hope he doesn't turn psychotic like the Curious Orange did.

 

Also I believe the bible says something like it's harder for a rich man to get into heaven than something about threading [A CAMEL] through the eye of a needle (can't be bothered to find the exact passage). So maybe ML will spend his fortune on Saints and get into heaven a poor man with Saints the the Champions League?

 

Or just build a really big needle?

[sussexsaint]

Are we forgetting Jesus once played for us

 

[benjii]

What was his first name?

[david in sweden]

Fascinating post St Jack you're a gentleman and a scholar Sir .

 

I see nothing fundamentally inconsistent with Christianity in sport or business per se (as long as both are conducted in a ethical manner) indeed both can be seen as serving a greater good in that business/providing employment is essential to the Human condition and sport enriches so many lives .

 

As you say how Mr Liebherr reconciles his wealth with his faith is a matter for his conscience in the final analysis , perhaps he'll tell us one day .

 

Well I don't think it's US that he needs to answer to ..is it ?

 

Are you advocating that we let all our clubs be run by mafia-types with no moral or ethical standards other than making quick money ? ..or If ML was willing to save the club and talk about a 5 year plan then I think that's good stewardship (as someone else quoted)...or is it better that we stay in L1 and have low grade football with lower salaries, instead. ?

[david in sweden]

I can see ML getting Jesus back to play for us some time soon. Someone to lead the prayers before games.

 

 

That would surely have been a worthwhile tactic LAST SEASON, then maybe we wouldn't have been -10points in L1.

[CHAPEL END CHARLIE]

Well I don't think it's US that he needs to answer to ..is it ?

 

Are you advocating that we let all our clubs be run by mafia-types with no moral or ethical standards other than making quick money ? ..or If ML was willing to save the club and talk about a 5 year plan then I think that's good stewardship (as someone else quoted)...or is it better that we stay in L1 and have low grade football with lower salaries, instead. ?

 

I seem to be in your 'bad books this morning for some reason :confused: - My original point was merely to wonder how will Mr Liebherr reconcile his faith with the possibility of having to pay players vast sums of money one day - I'm was not attacking ML at all (far from it , I hold him in high regard actually) - I was only putting that point up for debate as it seemed a tad more interesting than arguing about dry statistics or any of the other rubbish we waste our time on here .

 

No need for the aggression fella .

Edited 13 October, 2009 by CHAPEL END CHARLIE

[trousers]

you might like to note that historians of all shades of belief accept that Jesus was not a made up figure, but genuinely existed

 

Source?

[sussexsaint]

What was his first name?

 

Alexander

[Marsdinho]

you might like to note that historians of all shades of belief accept that Jesus was not a made up figure, but genuinely existed.

 

You cant say something as unsubstantiated as that and not provide proof / a source.....

[trousers]

You cant say something as unsubstantiated as that and not provide proof / a source.....

 

To be fair, it's what people have been doing on this forum for years... ;-)

[landford.saint]

I seem to be in your 'bad books this morning for some reason :confused: - My original point was to wonder how will Mr Leiberr reconcile his faith with the possibility of having to pay players vast sums of money one day - I'm not attacking ML at all , I was only putting that point up for debate .

 

No need for the aggression fella .

 

Just a thought ... As has been more eloquently put on here ... Its what you do with your wealth that is the point ... Good stewardship as someone said. ...

ML buys SFC. He has already shown that he is willing to spend money where it is neccesary. And not waste it. He has put the club on a good internal organisational footing. Eventually as we all believe this club will grow and develop and get promoted. In getting promoted the club will bring in more supporters, and they will also spend money in the local economy. Therefore the local economy as a by-product of SFC will grow. Benefitting people who have no interest in football. To do this ML will pay whatever is the going rate for a player to acheive success.

Therefore by good stewardship AND paying the going rate for players/managers/staff he is benefitting many. I see no conflict of conscience, no hypocracy, just one man rebuilding a business to the benefit of many.

If ML had not brought SFC and it had folded, many ordinary people working at SFC and around Southampton/Marchwood etc. would have been seroiusly affected.

[Wes Tender]

Citing Markus Liebherr as a religious man, makes it pertinent to mention that of course our beloved ex-chairman was also a religious person. He was in the habit of enquiring of his detractors whether they read the good book. Mind you, he was also prone to make mention of the Klingons too, something I'd be most surprised to hear Markus do.

[david in sweden]

Source?

 

well.

 

if you really want to look.you can find lots, but amongst the best known are;

 

Flavius Josephus - a jewish-Roman philosopher who lived in the period after Jesus' time and wrote in particular about Jesus and his work and his crucifixtion. His writings were translated long ago and are available ..

(if you're interested try Google ..or something similar)

 

The Jewish teachers of the time (and since) who readily admitted he lived and was crucified by the Romans (at their demand), but denounced the idea that he was the Son of God.

 

The Koran (if you've heard of that) teaches that Jesus lived and was a great prophet - but also deny that he was the son of God.

 

(I won't go on... if case you think I'm out of order, but do a little research yourself ...and mail me if you want to.)

regards David

[david in sweden]

I seem to be in your 'bad books this morning for some reason :confused: - My original point was merely to wonder how will Mr Liebherr reconcile his faith with the possibility of having to pay players vast sums of money one day - I'm was not attacking ML at all (far from it , I hold him in high regard actually) - I was only putting that point up for debate as it seemed a tad more interesting than arguing about dry statistics or any of the other rubbish we waste our time on here .

 

No need for the aggression fella .

 

You're not in my " bad books " but maybe your choice of words was a bit

ambiguous. Christian belief is based on the teachings of Jesus (who of course was born a Jew) and his disciples. Some of whom were non-believers before they met him. He didn't preach that money was evil or that possessing it was wrong. (someone else corrected the often mis-quoted verse ..The LOVE of money is the root of all evil). Jesus does teach that people who have great wealth have a responsibility to use it well and properly. The instruction (to the weathy " yuppie " in the text ) was that he would be happier without the

worrying responsibility of great wealth. Many of the greatest social reformers

of the past have been devout believers; Chas.Dickens, Doctor Barnardo, et al

 

...your point about ML and his wealth is (to me) ...at the time he turned up..he was the " answer to someone's prayer " ....and thankfully we still have a football club, and the (for him) minimal outlay of £15 mill. (or whatever) was probably coffee-money for a man who is used to handling BILLIONS!

(One of his cranes probabaly cost more than he paid for SFC) but without him - we might conceivably be a city.. without a football league club !

 

It wasn't meant to be a personal attack so don't take it as such.

(pm me if you want to -as this thread is going to be closed if it doesn't get back to SFC soon (me thinks).

[Marsdinho]

well.

Flavius Josephus - a jewish-Roman philosopher who lived in the period after Jesus' time and wrote in particular about Jesus and his work and his crucifixtion. His writings were translated long ago and are available ..

(if you're interested try Google ..or something similar)

The Jewish teachers of the time (and since) who readily admitted he lived and was crucified by the Romans (at their demand), but denounced the idea that he was the Son of God.

The Koran (if you've heard of that) teaches that Jesus lived and was a great prophet - but also deny that he was the son of God.

(I won't go on... if case you think I'm out of order, but do a little research yourself ...and mail me if you want to.)

regards David

Well, I certainly havent found "lots" of sources.....but I did find this rather interesting.

Josephus Flavius, the Jewish historian, lived as the earliest non-Christian who mentions a Jesus. Although many scholars think that Josephus' short accounts of Jesus (in Antiquities) came from interpolations perpetrated by a later Church father (most likely, Eusebius), Josephus' birth in 37 C.E., well after the alleged crucifixion of Jesus, puts him out of range of an eyewitness account. Moreover, he wrote Antiquities in 93 C.E., after the first gospels were written! Therefore, even if his accounts about Jesus came from his hand, his information could only serve as hearsay.

Talmud: Amazingly some Christians use brief portions of the Talmud, (a collection of Jewish civil a religious law, including commentaries on the Torah), as evidence for Jesus. They claim that Yeshu (a common name in Jewish literature) in the Talmud refers to Jesus. However, this Jesus, according to Gerald Massey actually depicts a disciple of Jehoshua Ben-Perachia at least a century before the alleged Christian Jesus. [Massey] Regardless of how one interprets this, the Palestinian Talmud got written between the 3rd and 5th century C.E., and the Babylonian Talmud between the 3rd and 6th century C.E., at least two centuries after the alleged crucifixion! At best it can only serve as a controversial Christian and pagan legend; it cannot possibly serve as evidence for a historical Jesus

 

I won't go on... if case you think I'm out of order, but do a little research yourself before posting "facts". I will, however, leave you with these quotes.....

 

What one believes and what one can demonstrate historically are usually two different things.

-Robert J. Miller, Bible scholar, (Bible Review, December 1993, Vol. IX, Number 6, p. 9)

 

It was not until the third century that Jesus' cross of execution became a common symbol of the Christian faith.

-John Romer, archeologist & Bible scholar (Testament)

[david in sweden]

Citing Markus Liebherr as a religious man, makes it pertinent to mention that of course our beloved ex-chairman was also a religious person. He was in the habit of enquiring of his detractors whether they read the good book. Mind you, he was also prone to make mention of the Klingons too, something I'd be most surprised to hear Markus do.

 

 

You're point is well taken, but some Christian believers I am acquainted with hate the word " religious " which has quite another meaning, nor (as someone else pointed out) do they necessarily think of themselves as special or better than anyone else, and they cetainly don't brag about what they may donate their charitable gifts to either.

 

I don't know about RL 's beliefs, or which bible he quotes from, but one should tread carefully, (if using it to hit someone else in the head).

 

As I understand it, M.Liebherr was impressed by the fact that SFC was started as a club run by the local church (St.Mary's) I won't question his motives or actions, but I'm glad he didn't grow up an atheist.

Edited 13 October, 2009 by david in sweden

[Charlie2008]

-as this thread is going to be closed if it doesn't get back to SFC soon (me thinks).

 

Slightly off the OP but Saints related - our Friday night game: has anyone seen a match report in a national paper of the Southend triumph?

 

It seems that with an England game pending, League 1 doesn't warrant the nations attention (re: Saturday's papers) and our game gets no mention in the Sundays that I've seen, just a mention of the score.

 

Am I mistaken and if not, what's going on? :confused:

 

For what it's worth, I was encouaged by Pards' comments on Goals on Sunday and am delighted that ML has strong beliefs.

 

Fair play to him IMHO.

Edited 13 October, 2009 by Charlie2008
Topic

[david in sweden]

 

I won't go on... if case you think I'm out of order, but do a little research yourself before posting "facts". I will, however, leave you with these quotes.....

[What one believes and what one can demonstrate historically are usually two different things.

It was not until the third century that Jesus' cross of execution became a common symbol of the Christian faith

John Romer, archeologist & Bible scholar (Testament]

 

 

I don't consider you out or order at all.

but if simple " belief " was based on historical evidence alone, there wouldn't be a single Jew, Christian or Muslim ..in the whole world and people would more easily believe that Robin Hood and Sherlock Holmes were real people.

 

I don't see any ambiguity with either of your quotes but they don't DISPROVE Jesus' existence, either.

 

John Romer didn't say that early Christians "made up " the cross as a symbol - but it was the Roman form of execution of that period.

(Early Christians - (and even some today) used the fish as a symbol.

[Marsdinho]

Jesus is a mythical figure in the tradition of pagan mythology and almost nothing in all of ancient literature would lead one to believe otherwise. Anyone wanting to believe Jesus lived and walked as a real live human being must do so despite the evidence, not because of it.

[benjii]

Alexander

 

Ahh, yes. Thanks!

 

Just couldn't remember. Kept thinking "Brian" for some reason.

 

It's incredible how many players have passed through SFC since we went down from the Prem.

[up and away]

As a Christian, perhaps I can clear up a few points here!

 

• While Jesus did tell a rich young man to sell everything, give it to the poor and follow him, it does not follow that this is the calling for all Christians (though it is for some - e.g. Mother Theresa). In fact the point in that story is more to do with the attitude of the young man's heart to wealth than necessarily to some legalistic killjoy demand that Jesus had.
  

 

• The bible teaches good stewardship of our resources. This is the one basis of the protestant work ethic which still largely governs the western approach to business. If Liebherr believes that investing good wages, etc. in a good player will be a wise investment, then that is an example of good stewardship.
  

 

• The bible also teaches 'tithing'. This means that an individual commits to giving at least 10% of their income back to God - often, in effect, giving to charitable causes. Consequently, the larger a return that Liebherr gets from his investements the more you would expect him to give to God/worthy causes.
  

 

• The 'camel through and eye of a needle' reference was an example of hyperbole. Jesus used this teaching method a lot. Basically the idea is that you make your point more forcefully by exaggerating. That having been said, some claim that the 'eye of a needle' may have been a gate in Jerusalem, though I believe there is insufficient evidence to back up this claim.
   
  In those days rich Jews used their wealth to suggest that they were in some way better in the eyes of God than the poor. Jesus was (as he often did) turning the whole issue on its head.
  

 

• Finally, with reference to the comments by Legod Third Coming:
   
   
   
  - you might like to note that historians of all shades of belief accept that Jesus was not a made up figure, but genuinely existed. The only debate is whether he is/was who he claimed to be. I believe he is, but I do not want to disrespect anyone else's right to believe he was not.
  

 

In summary, while I guess it is a hard issue for ML to work through, it is not necessarily inconsistent with his faith. I am not sure what I would do if I had the same level of wealth, but ultimately it is an issue for ML, his conscience, his faith and his God.

 

 

The "eye of the needle" was referenced before Jesus and was indeed referring to one of the gates of Jerusalem, so that's not a difficult one to sort.

 

No one seems to mention James, the elder brother of Jesus, but that does not seem to fit too well. Along with the writings of many other apostles which got totally discarded, only to be replaced by others written hundreds of years later.

 

Palestine at the time had more sects than you could shake a stick at, all claiming prophesies for the coming of the Messiah. With the "Life of Brian" being the most apt descriptive I have seen of the situation at that time.

 

As for Markus, I don't think we have to worry.

[benjii]

The "eye of the needle" was referenced before Jesus and was indeed referring to one of the gates of Jerusalem, so that's not a difficult one to sort.

 

No one seems to mention James, the elder brother of Jesus, but that does not seem to fit too well. Along with the writings of many other apostles which got totally discarded, only to be replaced by others written hundreds of years later.

 

Palestine at the time had more sects than you could shake a stick at, all claiming prophesies for the coming of the Messiah. With the "Life of Brian" being the most apt descriptive I have seen of the situation at that time.

 

As for Markus, I don't think we have to worry.

 

Pretty sure that's actually a myth and there is no evidence whatsoever that such a gate existed.

 

I also find it quite funny to be debating what a character in a story book is alleged to have said 2,000 years later. Queer, isn't it?!

[Wes Tender]

Pretty sure that's actually a myth and there is no evidence whatsoever that such a gate existed.

 

 

This was debated by no less an authority than Stephen Fry, the most learned man on Earth on his IQ programme and he agrees with your conclusion that the Gate at Jerusalem theory was a myth.

[sussexsaint]

Ahh, yes. Thanks!

 

Just couldn't remember. Kept thinking "Brian" for some reason.

 

It's incredible how many players have passed through SFC since we went down from the Prem.

 

Just nice to have someone talking about football on this thread

[up and away]

Originally Posted by benjii

Pretty sure that's actually a myth and there is no evidence whatsoever that such a gate existed.

This was debated by no less an authority than Stephen Fry, the most learned man on Earth on his IQ programme and he agrees with your conclusion that the Gate at Jerusalem theory was a myth.

 

The Israeli Antiquities Authority have found evidence that narrow gaps in the wall existed. Such that you could possibly squeeze through, but absolutely no chance with a laden camel.

 

The other major point being that the concept of comparing a poor man with no goods, to that of a trader with a fully laden camel trying to go through an actual eye of a needle, was totally alien to this civilisation at this period. Whereas the gates "eye of the needle" would be a totally acceptable in those times, appropriate and known before the time of Jesus.

The comparison between a poor man and a wealthy trader going through the eye of a needle is totally ridiculous, as neither has the slightest probability. Whereas the alternative is totally plausible!

[benjii]

I could write an interesting reply to this but I can't be bothered as I couldn't care less what "Jesus" was banging on about

 

Not sure why I got involved in the first place really. Probably just mild intrigue at a religiously tinged thread on the main board.

[CHAPEL END CHARLIE]

You're not in my " bad books " but maybe your choice of words was a bit

ambiguous. Christian belief is based on the teachings of Jesus (who of course was born a Jew) and his disciples. Some of whom were non-believers before they met him. He didn't preach that money was evil or that possessing it was wrong. (someone else corrected the often mis-quoted verse ..The LOVE of money is the root of all evil). Jesus does teach that people who have great wealth have a responsibility to use it well and properly. The instruction (to the weathy " yuppie " in the text ) was that he would be happier without the

worrying responsibility of great wealth. Many of the greatest social reformers

of the past have been devout believers; Chas.Dickens, Doctor Barnardo, et al

 

...your point about ML and his wealth is (to me) ...at the time he turned up..he was the " answer to someone's prayer " ....and thankfully we still have a football club, and the (for him) minimal outlay of £15 mill. (or whatever) was probably coffee-money for a man who is used to handling BILLIONS!

(One of his cranes probabaly cost more than he paid for SFC) but without him - we might conceivably be a city.. without a football league club !

 

It wasn't meant to be a personal attack so don't take it as such.

(pm me if you want to -as this thread is going to be closed if it doesn't get back to SFC soon (me thinks).

 

Thanks for that thoughtful reply David , I don't want us to fall out because A - you have interesting things to say and B - I've enough critics already !

 

When you mention the love of money being the root of all evil you've gone right to the heart of it and that must surely strike a cord with many on here as it does with me . It has become commonplace to see Premier League players taking vast amounts of money out of the game now , sums quite beyond what they could ever possibly need or spend even and it hardly raises a comment anymore . If this is not the prime example of the 'love of money' in modern society I don't know what is to be frank . Markus Liebherr may well have to swim in these murky moral waters one day and I'd be surprised if as a man of faith he implications don't trouble him to some degree . How he resolves that problem is of course a matter for him and his faith .

 

What is morally 'wrong' with a Christian businessman paying footballers £50k or a £100k a week ?

 

It's a hard question to answer , there are many perfectly valid arguments available to say that this is the result of market forces at work or that players deserve to share in the wealth their talent generates and I can't summon a decent argument against any of that , but still it strikes me as fundamentally wrong somehow that players take home a fortune every week when the grim reality of absolute poverty overwhelms our poor suffering world so . The wealth of men is limited not infinite , for a footballer to have so much means that somebody else must have much less .

 

I know many will vehemently disagree with me and I'll take all their criticism without complaint , what I'm saying here isn't based on logic or the financial realities of the real world , I'm not even a Christian really although I do admire much of the Bible's teachings . All I ask is that people accept that how I feel about this matter comes straight from the heart , paying top players (or bankers/stockbrokers ...etc ) what we do now is wrong , and as we're discussing the Christian religion lets employ the correct term for that - it's a sin .

Edited 13 October, 2009 by CHAPEL END CHARLIE

[CHAPEL END CHARLIE]

Just a thought ... As has been more eloquently put on here ... Its what you do with your wealth that is the point ... Good stewardship as someone said. ...

ML buys SFC. He has already shown that he is willing to spend money where it is neccesary. And not waste it. He has put the club on a good internal organisational footing. Eventually as we all believe this club will grow and develop and get promoted. In getting promoted the club will bring in more supporters, and they will also spend money in the local economy. Therefore the local economy as a by-product of SFC will grow. Benefitting people who have no interest in football. To do this ML will pay whatever is the going rate for a player to acheive success.

Therefore by good stewardship AND paying the going rate for players/managers/staff he is benefitting many. I see no conflict of conscience, no hypocracy, just one man rebuilding a business to the benefit of many.

If ML had not brought SFC and it had folded, many ordinary people working at SFC and around Southampton/Marchwood etc. would have been seroiusly affected.

 

Top Post and I'm more than happy to accept all of the above , although the likes of Ashley Cole being associated with the term 'going rate' does raise an eyebrow .

[Legod Third Coming]

As an amateur theologian with a daughter at a Catholic school (convent!), here is my take fwiw...

 

There was a fella called Jesus, by all accounts a practicing Jew.

 

He was by the claim of either himself or others a 'prophet' but preached the worship of God, not of Jesus.

 

After him came St Paul who created the 'Christianity' we know - essentialy the worship of Jesus the Christ and through him God.

 

Then Emperor Constantine (AD 300odd) of Rome decreed that he was sick of all these religions and could they please just have one, at which point it was decided that 25th December (Sol Invictus) the day on which Romans worshipped the sun would be the day of worship of Jesus birth (he was probably born in April actually).

 

Other marvellous things like the virgin birth were then ascribed to Jesus over the years (they actually date from much earlier religions and probably from the concept of Egyptian birth through Horos or something - forgive me it's been a while since I actually read this stuff)... But it's all there, probably on wiki these days...

 

Anyway, cut a long story short, the Synods clarified various facets of the religion which of course, by virtue of a fabulous empire (Rome) was able to proliferate easily around the enourmous empire around the globe.

 

And Rome remains at the centre.

 

Now, I have no problem with this, nor with the way the church first claimed the earth was the centre of the universe (ex-communicating people like Galileo and Copernicus and so on) then accepted the solar system but denied evolution and so on...

 

I don't even mind about creationists. Believe what you want to believe. It's your choice not mine.

 

But, I wish with all my heart, people would first accept the sanctity of human life and simply do unto others as they would be done to.

 

I personally believe in a creative power, a higher order. I happen to think it bears no relationship to modern religion which is a mixture of propoganda and legislature.

 

As for Herr Liebherr, and wealthy footballers, this is something for them to square with their own Gods. I don't think mine minds me working hard and making a living!

 

(This is in answer to the kind chap who said to me Jesus existed, about which I have no doubt - I just dispute his antecedants!)

[70's Mike]

Heavy

some of this lot reads like a rupert programme article

klingons

[RedAndWhite91]

Pretty sure it was also Constatine compiled 'the Bible' out of a number of books written about Jesus. He selected the books out of hundreds written about Jesus and God and what not and compiled them into what we know as the Bible. Or something like that anyway.

[Wes Tender]

The Israeli Antiquities Authority have found evidence that narrow gaps in the wall existed. Such that you could possibly squeeze through, but absolutely no chance with a laden camel.

 

The other major point being that the concept of comparing a poor man with no goods, to that of a trader with a fully laden camel trying to go through an actual eye of a needle, was totally alien to this civilisation at this period. Whereas the gates "eye of the needle" would be a totally acceptable in those times, appropriate and known before the time of Jesus.

The comparison between a poor man and a wealthy trader going through the eye of a needle is totally ridiculous, as neither has the slightest probability. Whereas the alternative is totally plausible!

 

Chapter and verse....

 

http://www.biblicalhebrew.com/nt/camelneedle.htm

 

Why do you think that they might call the gate "eye of a needle?"

[david in sweden]

Jesus is a mythical figure in the tradition of pagan mythology and almost nothing in all of ancient literature would lead one to believe otherwise. Anyone wanting to believe Jesus lived and walked as a real live human being must do so despite the evidence, not because of it.

 

 

Historians do incredible things to change people's views of history.

 

For many years after the WW2 , Japanese schoolchildren were taught that Japan actually won the war..(and who could doubt them when one can see their very modern lifestylesthey enjoy nowadays)

A survey amongst German College students some years ago showed that over 50% of them ...had never heard mention of the name..Adolf Hitler (!)

Their are a number of "over-publicised" authors who claim that the Holocaust never occured, and even some proponents of that in the Catholic church.(!) I have seen interviews with soldiers who helped " liberate " the concentration camps, and met another who was in Germany after VE Day. I have no doubts.

 

As centuries go by, some historians who want to make a name for themselves continue to find new " evidence " about someone/something else. I've no doubt some over-enthusiastic Christian historians may have been guilty of this, but many atheists have done far more to try and disprove what many belivers know- if you have a personal relationship with God, then a few possible inaccuracies don't change your faith, and there are many believers in countries who are still forbidden to read the Bible.

 

As for M. Liebherr..I'm sure the billions he's made in his business life must dwarf the " small sums" he's spent in buying SFC. If the club is running on business-like lines, with running costs / salaries being covered by income, then he's not spending much more than his original purchase price.

 

When we move up the Leagues the costs will rise accordingly. If Prem. clubs are stupid enough to pay 50-100K / week to players, don't blame the players but the clubs chairman for OK-ing such deals.

Edited 13 October, 2009 by david in sweden

[david in sweden]

Chapter and verse....

 

http://www.biblicalhebrew.com/nt/camelneedle.htm

Why do you think that they might call the gate "eye of a needle?"

 

 

An explanation I heard was that the gate resembled a very large (sewing) needle, and was set in the wall near the main gate that people used, but animals passed through the " eye of the needle " (which most practically meant you didn't have to walk through camel dung, either.)

 

The " needle " was also a sort of " toll gate " that camels had to climb through to get into the city, and any crafty merchant trying to enter the city with an " overloaded " camel was forced to pay an extra tariff.

An ordinary person who led his animal throught he gate without hindrance - did so without having to pay the "congestion charge".

 

I have also read about the blocked-up gate. In fact several of the gates around the city have either been bricked up for security, or in the case of the gate opposite the Garden of Gethsemne, because there is a cementary right outside the bricked-up gate and no-one can desecrate it. (I've actually seen it, as I visited many years ago. FACT!

Edited 13 October, 2009 by david in sweden

[Saint Fan CaM]

The religions founded by the human race have conspired to hide the truth of God from all humanity. When religion is no longer needed, humanity will begin to live in harmony and finally come of age. We are still squabbling infants - a long way from experiencing and exhibiting a maturity that at this point in time we can barely understand, in the same manner as a pre-historic man would not understand the meaning of a chocolate Easter egg or the lights on a Christmas tree.

 

There have been far too many attrocities acted out in the name of human religion over the last 3,000 or so years unfortunately. And too few good acts born directly out of religion. The creation of wealth is not a bad thing - the squandering or harbouring of it most certainly is. I will refrain from providing examples of this, but there are obvious ones even at the heart of various large institutions over the ages.

 

ML does not squander his money by supporting a community institution such as Saints FC - far from it - he has helped maintain jobs and a positive focus in a great city for example. His is more an act of generosity and kindness rather than of personal gain I would argue and in that alone he has exhibited a small aspect of humanities potential 'moral maturity' irrespective of his 'religious' beliefs.

 

IMHO.

Edited 14 October, 2009 by Saint Fan CaM
typo

[SaintRobbie]

The religions founded by the human race have conspired to hide the truth of God from all humanity. When religion is no longer needed, humanity will begin to live in harmony and finally come of age. We are still squabbling infants - a long way from experiencing and exhibiting a maturity that at this point in time we can barely understand, in the same manner as a pre-historic man would not understand the meaning of a chocolate Easter egg or the lights on a Christmas tree.

 

There have been far too many attrocities acted out in the name of human religion over the last 3,000 or so years unfortunately. And too few good acts born directly out of religion. The creation of wealth is not a bad thing - the squandering or harbouring of it most certainly is. I will refrain from providing examples of this, but there are obvious ones even at the heart of various large institutions over the ages.

 

ML does not squander his money by supporting a community institution such as Saints FC - far from it - he has helped maintain jobs and a positive focus in a great city for example. His is more an act of generosity and kindness rather than of personal gain I would argue and in that alone he has exhibited a small aspect of humanities potential 'moral maturity' irrespective of his 'religious' beliefs.

 

IMHO.

 

[ericofarabia]

As it says on the tin.

 

Looks like the tin got re named somewhere along the line :confused:

 

It all looked a bit heavy going, so only scanned thru but I didn't see any reference to Brian, although I'm led to believe he was not the messiah but just a naughty boy

 

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0079470/quotes

 

HTH

[Wes Tender]

An explanation I heard was that the gate resembled a very large (sewing) needle, and was set in the wall near the main gate that people used, but animals passed through the " eye of the needle " (which most practically meant you didn't have to walk through camel dung, either.)

 

The " needle " was also a sort of " toll gate " that camels had to climb through to get into the city, and any crafty merchant trying to enter the city with an " overloaded " camel was forced to pay an extra tariff.

An ordinary person who led his animal throught he gate without hindrance - did so without having to pay the "congestion charge".

 

I have also read about the blocked-up gate. In fact several of the gates around the city have either been bricked up for security, or in the case of the gate opposite the Garden of Gethsemne, because there is a cementary right outside the bricked-up gate and no-one can desecrate it. (I've actually seen it, as I visited many years ago. FACT!

 

In the previous post, you set out comprehensively several examples of history being rewritten in Japan and Germany as recently as after the last great war. It is therefore not a great leap of imagination to assume that exactly the same thing has happened here, where over centuries a myth has arisen over this gate, to fit the Bible quotation. As the article and Stephen Fry said on QI, there was no evidence of this gate's existence and it only came to be mentioned at all since the 9th Century. Undoubtedly crowds of visitors since that time have been regaled with the tale and it has mistakenly become legend.

 

Easy to see how these things come about and illustrated well by an example I had personal experience of. In a mocked-up village in New Hampshire, local volunteers had formed an historical society and acted out the parts of the storekeeper, teacher, banker, etc in the authentic period costume of the early settlers . In the store, we were told that they stocked Denim from India. I had to correct him and inform him that it came from Nime in France, but there must have been several thousands of visitors who believe that it came from India.

[david in sweden]

In the previous post, you set out comprehensively several examples of history being rewritten in Japan and Germany as recently as after the last great war. It is therefore not a great leap of imagination to assume that exactly the same thing has happened here, where over centuries a myth has arisen over this gate, to fit the Bible quotation. As the article and Stephen Fry said on QI, there was no evidence of this gate's existence and it only came to be mentioned at all since the 9th Century. Undoubtedly crowds of visitors since that time have been regaled with the tale and it has mistakenly become legend.

 

Easy to see how these things come about and illustrated well by an example I had personal experience of. In a mocked-up village in New Hampshire, local volunteers had formed an historical society and acted out the parts of the storekeeper, teacher, banker, etc in the authentic period costume of the early settlers . In the store, we were told that they stocked Denim from India. I had to correct him and inform him that it came from Nime in France, but there must have been several thousands of visitors who believe that it came from India.

 

As some people are still on the " false history " subject....

Of course, would-be historians, like to add their own two pennyworth to the tale, and if you choose to believe that successive generations, or even Steven Fry ...have something different to offer you are at liberty to listen to / believe them. As someone with more than a passing interest in history, I try to remain open-minded...but the issue of the " needle ´gate " really is a drop in the ocean, However, I haven't read anyone who claims that the original " gate " still exists, especially as the Jerusalem of Jesus time was destroyed and almost burnt to the ground some 50 years later during a Jewish revolt against the occupying Roman army. This, of course, was not the first time,that Jerusalem had been destoyed by invaders). A fact that is well-documented in Roman and Jewish (non-christian) history of the time. It was many centuries later until the present Jerusalem took shape in its present form, and documentation exists showing that the original walls when the city was much larger than at present. There is nothing to suggest that the city was re-built in exactly the same way it was before. Jerusalem is built on a high hill, and in parts still resembles an archeological dig (as I saw myself when visiting many years ago) and evidence of the remains of previous civilisations are still being discovered today.

 

A little closer to home...Southampton's history dates back (at least) to Roman Times when the first invaders built Clausentum (later in the area of Bitterne Manor) and a lot happened after that. My grandmother (died 1961 aged 90) told me graphic stories of life in So'ton before the First World War but almost all of that 2000 year history was destroyed by the Luftwaffe in 1940. MY late uncle (a former air raid warden in WW2 ) told equally horrific stories of the city centre in flames, not the mention the bombing of the various Spitfire factories around the town. Scarcely anything one might credit today when you look at the modern bulildings around today.

 

My point is that though difficult it may be (for some)to believe Southampton no longer looks as it did when the Mayflower set sail in 1620. In fact a hotel presently stands very close to the area where the boat would have been moored when the entire area of the present docks was below water level. There is a monument to commemorate this (as you probably know).

 

Neither Jerusalem, or Southampton has been re-built to the original plan, and all of Steven Fry's eloquence doesn't convince me that he knows for certain what the first century Jersusalem looked like any more than anyone else - whether they are a believer - or not. My personal faith in God or in the person of Jesus does not hang on the likely existence of a stone gate.

Edited 14 October, 2009 by david in sweden