I did not think her article was nasty or anti-Christian. I don't agree with her point that Christians should not help those from other countries but this is the gist of what she said:
“Right there in Texas, near where Dr. Brantly left his wife and children to fly to Liberia and get Ebola, is one of the poorest counties in the nation, Zavala County — where he wouldn't have risked making his wife a widow and his children fatherless.
Today's Christians are aces at sacrifice, amazing at serving others, but strangely timid for people who have been given eternal life.”
Her point was simple. Charity begins at home. Help those close by before flying around the world.
That is not anti-Christian.
However, the author said American Christians sit on their behinds all day. That is anti-Christian.
It is none of Coulter’s business what the Dr. does on his own time with his own dime and it is certainly not her business to get between the Dr. and the Holy Spirit. She’s as bad as the government for cripe sake.
Ann Coulter in her article “”There may be no reason for panic about the Ebola doctor, but there is reason for annoyance at Christian narcissism.””
She is an idiot to attack Evangelical Christians and missionary work in Africa and especially Ebola work by our evangelical Christians, and U.S. Army and CDC in Africa.
I wonder if she will write an article about Spain tomorrow and the Catholic church?
“”A Spanish priest who contracted Ebola while working in a hospital in Liberia was flown back to Spain for treatment, along with a nun who is to be isolated in case of infection””
“However, the author said American Christians sit on their behinds all day. That is anti-Christian.”
It’s not anti-Christian, unless you believe God is American, which I fervently state He is NOT. American Christians believe that America is the key to the Gospel. To say that criticism of American Christians is anti-Christian is exactly the prideful and lukewarm sentiment I was trying to expose.
God's point is even simpler: go where He sends you.