How bigoted I am is completely irrelevant as to how terrible the Salvation Army is. I'd much rather learn why you think my beliefs about the Salvation Army are wrong, or why you think my beliefs about what constitutes "good" are wrong.

Well, I'm a Christian, so that probably answers your question. If you want to talk more specifically, I'd be happy to.

But while I'm sure I don't agree with everything the SA does or all of its methods (keeping in mind that it's a huge organization, spread around the world, with many different chapters, people, etc--so it's not like a monolithic organization where everyone walks and talks the same), I certainly recognize the enormous good they have done throughout their history.

For you to say that their work is a net-negative is quite shameful.

First of all, I said that giving them more money is net-negative. That's a very different thing than their work being net-negative.

Second, the Salvation Army isn't responsible for all the good they have done. They're responsible for the difference in what would have been done if they didn't exist, compared to what they did. This difference is some combination of converting poverty-relief effort into evangelical christian proselytization and changing how much effort gets spent relieving poverty. The relative moral weights of these is an open question that is completely un-answered by knowing how much total poverty relief they do.

Like, if you choose to become a doctor, you shouldn't get kudos for every life you save. You should get kudos for every life that got saved because you chose to become a doctor instead of your next best option. Other people would have been doctors if you weren't interested, and other doctors would have treated your cases if you weren't a doctor. The good that a choice does can only be measured in terms of opportunity costs.

Finally, I'm never going to feel ashamed to say what I think is right. No matter what. If donating to the Salvation Army makes the world a worse place, I want to say that donating to the Salvation Army makes the world a worse place. If it doesn't, then I don't want to say it. If I'm wrong, help me understand how I'm wrong. If you just want to suppress an opinion because it's a particular kind of opinion, fuck you.

Being a Christian means you favor religious proselytization? I know plenty that keep to themselves.

I'm not sure I understand what you mean. Christ commanded his followers to go into the world and make disciples, teaching them everything that He commanded. Paul wrote that people have different gifts, lending some to teaching and such more than others, but making disciples and spreading the good news is more than knocking on doors or handing out pamphlets; quietly living a faithful life is also a form of evangelizing. After all, you know that they are Christians, so I suppose they aren't keeping it entirely to themselves, right? However, Jesus said that, those who are ashamed of him, he will be ashamed of. So I guess it depends on what exactly you mean by keeping to themselves.

It means they don't bring up the subject unless it is relevant, or asked.

> "making disciples and spreading the good news is more than knocking on doors or handing out pamphlets"

What does is involve?

Well, if what's written in the Bible is true--if God is real, and Jesus did come and die for all people, and there is an afterlife coming for everyone, and those who have not washed their sins away will not enter into eternal life--then it's the most relevant thing in the world.

And Jesus did not tell his disciples, "If someone asks you about me, tell them." He said to go and teach. Paul didn't walk into the agora and wait for someone to ask him, "Excuse me, just curious, but which god do you worship?" He started conversations with people and sought those who would hear.

For some people it might involve door-knocking or handing out pamphlets. For others it might mean living a faithful, godly life on a daily basis, in all interactions with people--or to put it in biblical terms, being salt and light, and being in the world but not of it--setting an example that will pique others' interest and provide opportunities to share the gospel. It might mean volunteering for charity work, helping those in need. It might mean traveling to a foreign country and doing mission work.

Paul wrote in 1 Corinthians 12 about spiritual gifts and the members of the body each serving their own function. We're not all called to be preachers or teachers or missionaries, etc. We are all called to use the gifts we're given. The parable of the talents in Matthew 25 is an example of this as well.

Jesus was the new kid on the block when he said that, but in most modern western countries the "good news" isn't news. People who stand on street corners with "ask me about Jesus" signs are passive, different from actively knocking on doors; people don't even like when corporate salespeople do that.

I'm not going to discuss the other things here, a general discussion on religion is beyond the scope of this thread I think, but needless to say, there's a great variation of interpretation between the group labelled "Christian".

> needless to say, there's a great variation of interpretation between the group labelled "Christian".

Yes, there certainly is. But the question is, are they following Christ? Just because they say they are or think they are doesn't necessarily mean that they are. One must look to what Christ said and taught. He said, among many things, that a tree is known by its fruit, and a good tree does not bear bad fruit; and that, in the judgment, many will say, "Lord, didn't we do great things in your name?" and he will say to some of them, "Away from me, I never knew you."

Not everyone who claims to be a Christian is one, and not everyone who believes in Christ is following him. It's up to each person to study the scriptures and follow Christ to the best of their understanding.