DiscussMormonism.com

in the Bible....you know the story where the widow who only has a couple of coins but gives them all and gets praised for giving her last money at church. What ever happened to her? Did she starve to death? Did she win the lottery based on divine intervention?

What'd you all think?

The widow in the Bible got a magical oil bottle and regenerating supply of flour.

Bond...James Bond wrote:in the Bible....you know the story where the widow who only has a couple of coins but gives them all and gets praised for giving her last money at church. What ever happened to her? Did she starve to death? Did she win the lottery based on divine intervention?

What'd you all think?

Is the question relevant? Was not the point of that story that she was superior because she gave more than all the others? The amount was significant only in that she made an apparent sacrifice which others had not made.

The Widow's Offering

New International Version:

Mark 12:41-44

41 Jesus sat down opposite the place where the offerings were put and watched the crowd putting their money into the temple treasury. Many rich people threw in large amounts.

42 But a poor widow came and put in two very small copper coins, worth only a fraction of a penny.

43 Calling his disciples to him, Jesus said, "I tell you the truth, this poor widow has put more into the treasury than all the others.

44 They all gave out of their wealth; but she, out of her poverty, put in everything—all she had to live on."

JAK

I'd like to make a distinction here.

There are still some things that are worth giving all that we have for. It was a selfless act. We shouldn't become so jaded as to believe that giving our life for someone else is dishonorable.

Bond...James Bond wrote:in the Bible....you know the story where the widow who only has a couple of coins but gives them all and gets praised for giving her last money at church. What ever happened to her? Did she starve to death? Did she win the lottery based on divine intervention?

What'd you all think?

The Widow's mite: She declared bankruptcy, signed up as an Amway distributor, and began building her dream...

JAK wrote:Is the question relevant? Was not the point of that story that she was superior because she gave more than all the others? The amount was significant only in that she made an apparent sacrifice which others had not made.

I think if one puts on their "cynical" cap and looks at the issue it could be relevant. Yeah it's great that the woman gave her last money....but where is she at the end of the day? Like LDS today who pay tithing to the point of being in debt (like the poster Nephi on the MAAD Board) isn't there a dark side to her offering and giving? Sure it's a cute story, but......

What becomes of this woman who gave her last money in church? Does she starve to death or what? I know it's a cynical thought, but I believe this Biblical story gives the wrong message of "no matter what give to the Lord (even if it means you have to suffer)" which is something that sadly continues to this day.[/quote]

God accepted her sacrifice and (as rarely happens) was physically there to declare it a good thing.

If God does not have the power to bless her and protect her than she was a fool. If he does then she's fine.

Bond...James Bond wrote:

JAK wrote:Is the question relevant? Was not the point of that story that she was superior because she gave more than all the others? The amount was significant only in that she made an apparent sacrifice which others had not made.

I think if one puts on their "cynical" cap and looks at the issue it could be relevant. Yeah it's great that the woman gave her last money....but where is she at the end of the day? Like LDS today who pay tithing to the point of being in debt (like the poster Nephi on the MAAD Board) isn't there a dark side to her offering and giving? Sure it's a cute story, but......

What becomes of this woman who gave her last money in church? Does she starve to death or what? I know it's a cynical thought, but I believe this Biblical story gives the wrong message of "no matter what give to the Lord (even if it means you have to suffer)" which is something that sadly continues to this day.

JB,

A doctrinal shift is relevant to your question. Salvation by works vs. salvation by faith (whatever either of those one may choose to pursue). The works people are always trying to do more, give more to some charitable group. Often it is or includes one’s religious group. Marketing in religious organizations is very important. The Roman Catholic Church just paid out $650 million for sins of the priests so to speak. And that was in California alone.

“Works” are often interpreted by the religious organizations as transfer of wealth to the organization from the individual. In some cases, salvation by faith doesn’t sufficiently motivate members to give enough to do what the heirachy wants. Fear is often a great motivator.

In the case of the biblical story, fear does not appear to have been used on the widow.

We have a combination of doctrines at work which posit that her willing gift of all she had assured her a heavenly reward. The implication is that she will receive preferential treatment.

Mark 12:

43 Calling his disciples to him, Jesus said, "I tell you the truth, this poor widow has put more into the treasury than all the others.

44 They all gave out of their wealth; but she, out of her poverty, put in everything—all she had to live on."

Of course, we could argue that she was foolish. The transfer of wealth historically is up. That is, those with the greatest wealth take what those of lesser wealth have. Corporations do it today. Religious organizations are corporations.

Not a shred of evidence supports any characterization which religious groups present as heaven. However, it has sold well and has been an excellent marketing technique.

In the case of the widow, she is given lip service in the quotation from Mark 12.

Nothing in the quotation I put on the screen tells how giving all she had benefited her. But the assumption and assertion of most Christian organizations is that she did a good thing. Few if any of these organizations have follow-up stories about how she was directly benefited by going broke in the giving of her last currency.

However, many assumptions are made about it, and the story is used (marketing) by religious groups to persuade people to give “until it hurts” them. In return, some of those religious organizations promise “heaven” to such people.

No evidence supports the myths regarding religious claims for heaven.

Your position that the story gives the “wrong message” is a point of view. However, marketing is all about controlling the message. Every present-day advertiser intends to control the message and in so doing to manipulate the recipient of that message. “Wrong” is relative.

The tobacco industry made billions in advertising as it persuaded people to smoke. It is still doing that. In many countries other than the US and a few others, the tobacco industry is not required to place any health warnings on cigarettes. And, they do not put those warnings on in any country which does not require it.

“Wrong message” is a perspective, a point of view.


JAK

The Nehor wrote:God accepted her sacrifice and (as rarely happens) was physically there to declare it a good thing.

If God does not have the power to bless her and protect her than she was a fool. If he does then she's fine.

No evidence for the claim “God.” Further no evidence for “physically there” as you claim.

In the story, we might asked why she behaved as she did. What was she thinking? But we can’t do that. It’s a story. Proponents of religious dogma use the story for their own purposes and benefit. It’s a story. The story refers to “Jesus” not to God as you claim.

Not a word which was alleged to have been spoken was written until 30 to 110 years after the allegation.

The exact wording, a quote, would have had to be told verbally for decades without alteration before it was written. The likelihood of that is extremely improbable. Speculation on Jesus as orchestrated by Constintine the Great is Christian mythology. Absent Constintine, we likely would have no Christianity today.

Biblical stories are contextual and have been used by religious groups since the time of Constintine the Great. (300 AD)

JAK

JAK wrote:No evidence for the claim “God.” Further no evidence for “physically there” as you claim.

Jesus claimed he was God. Based on everything I have read and experienced I believe him. The story says he was physically there. Unless you can prove he was not "physically there" I think we can accept that he was there. I have a piece of evidence that he was there. As far as I'm aware you have none that he was not. If so, please share.