# Lifestyles & Discussion > Peace Through Religion >  Christian Misleads Restaurant Waiter With Fake $10 Bill Containing Hidden Bible Verse (Photos)

## squarepusher

http://aattp.org/christian-misleads-...-verse-photos/

In  case you were unaware, servers make less than $3.00 an hour and rely on  their tips, which are then taxed. Some nights the tips are good, and  then again, some are bad.

  In a sick attempt to convert someone to another religion, some  deranged person left a tip, although, it wasnt monetary. The tip was a  fake $10 bill that read SOME THINGS ARE BETTER THAN MONEYlike your eternal salvation that was brought and paid for by Jesus going to the cross.
 Obviously, the server was not too happy about this tip. Jesus going  to the cross has little to do with the keeping the lights on in your  home. Theres a time and a place for religion. Church is one of those  places. Leaving a token of God as a tip for exceptional service is  not. It appears that by doing this, you have actually accomplished  exactly the opposite of what you set out to do.
 You misled or lied to the receiver of the kind advice, and you also  probably made someone hate your religion even more than they probably  did in the first place.  By leaving religious rhetoric as opposed to  tipping your server with actual money, you are telling your server You  are not a person, but rather just a cog in the wheel of my Christian  pride.
  Click the image to enlarge.

----------


## erowe1

I wonder how the author of this article knows anything about who left that and what their motivation was.

I also wonder why it's newsworthy, regardless of the answers to those questions. I bet that every day there are a million instances of somebody not getting tipped for something they usually get tipped for.

----------


## Miss Annie

> http://aattp.org/christian-misleads-...-verse-photos/
> 
> In  case you were unaware, servers make less than $3.00 an hour and rely on  their tips, which are then taxed. Some nights the tips are good, and  then again, some are bad.
> 
>   In a sick attempt to convert someone to another religion, some  deranged person left a tip, although, it wasn’t monetary. The tip was a  fake $10 bill that read “SOME THINGS ARE BETTER THAN MONEY”…”like your eternal salvation that was brought and paid for by Jesus going to the cross.”
>  Obviously, the server was not too happy about this “tip.” Jesus going  to the cross has little to do with the keeping the lights on in your  home. There’s a time and a place for religion. Church is one of those  places. Leaving a “token of God” as a tip for exceptional service is  not. It appears that by doing this, you have actually accomplished  exactly the opposite of what you set out to do.
>  You misled or lied to the receiver of the “kind advice,” and you also  probably made someone hate your religion even more than they probably  did in the first place.  By leaving religious rhetoric as opposed to  tipping your server with actual money, you are telling your server ‘You  are not a person, but rather just a cog in the wheel of my Christian  pride.’
>   Click the image to enlarge.


That is horribly tacky, and not a very loving and kind thing to do.  There is an epidemic of Christians that look down their noses at others...... it is sick and sad.     And it is definitely NOT the way Jesus intended it to be.  Jesus railed the Pharisees for their pious arrogance.

----------


## Christian Liberty

I think they should also have left real money, it would have been a better showing of Christian love.  But I completely disagree that "Religion is for church only."  There is no message more important than how people can be saved from their sins through the propitiatory sacrifice of Christ our Savior.

----------


## erowe1

> I think they should also have left real money, it would have been a better showing of Christian love.  But I completely disagree that "Religion is for church only."  There is no message more important than how people can be saved from their sins through the propitiatory sacrifice of Christ our Savior.


I doubt that their intent was to show Christian love.

But who knows?

The author of the article in the OP acts like they do. But I doubt that they do.

----------


## Christian Liberty

> That is horribly tacky, and not a very loving and kind thing to do.  There is an epidemic of Christians that look down their noses at others...... it is sick and sad.     And it is definitely NOT the way Jesus intended it to be.  Jesus railed the Pharisees for their pious arrogance.


I admit that giving this without money was kind of thoughtless, but how do you know what their intentions were?

----------


## Christian Liberty

> I doubt that their intent was to show Christian love.
> 
> But who knows?
> 
> The author of the article in the OP acts like they do. But I doubt that they do.


If you really think about it, isn't it even worse to pay the tip but leave the waiter/waitress possibly ignorant of the gospel?

----------


## erowe1

Here's one thing I can say with pretty high confidence:
That tract wasn't made for that purpose. It was made for someone to leave somewhere to make people think they just found a $10 bill, so that when they read it they'll laugh at how they got pranked and hopefully think about the message.

Here's something I can say with slightly less certainty:
One of two things is true. Either the person who left that for the waiter knew that that wasn't what that tract was for and that doing that would be a terrible way to share the Gospel with someone, or they weren't a Christian at all, and they enjoyed killing two birds with one stone, both gipping their waiter and getting a jab in against Christians.

Here's another thing I can say with certainty:
When people don't tip waiters, they usually have a reason. It might be a bad reason. But in their own minds, they tend to be convinced that the waiter didn't deserve a tip.

----------


## erowe1

> If you really think about it, isn't it even worse to pay the tip but leave the waiter/waitress possibly ignorant of the gospel?


Those aren't mutually exclusive things. It costs the same amount to give a tip and share the Gospel as it does to give a tip.

Plus, no, I do think this was worse. It didn't just share the Gospel, it gave people a reason to slander it. I have a hunch that the person who left it was fine with that.

----------


## RickyJ

> If you really think about it, isn't it even worse to pay the tip but leave the waiter/waitress possibly ignorant of the gospel?



Yeah, they could have left nothing and no message of salvation. However deceiving them by making them think they got a big tip to only realize it is fake is not right. Christians don't seek to deceive people, that is what the devil does.

----------


## Christian Liberty

> Here's one thing I can say with pretty high confidence:
> That tract wasn't made for that purpose. It was made for someone to leave somewhere to make people think they just found a $10 bill, so that when they read it they'll laugh at how they got pranked and hopefully think about the message.


That's likely.  The living waters (Ray Comfort, Kirk Cameron) "money" tracts are million dollar bills so its obvious they are fake.  



> Here's something I can say with slightly less certainty:
> One of two things is true. Either the person who left that for the waiter knew that that wasn't what that tract was for and that doing that would be a terrible way to share the Gospel with someone, or they weren't a Christian at all, and they enjoyed killing two birds with one stone, both gipping their waiter and getting a jab in against Christians.


I hope it was the first one, but you're right that it might have been the second one too.



> Here's another thing I can say with certainty:
> When people don't tip waiters, they usually have a reason. It might be a bad reason. But in their own minds, they tend to be convinced that the waiter didn't deserve a tip.


True.



> Those aren't mutually exclusive things. It costs the same amount to give a tip and share the Gospel as it does to give a tip.


I agree.  I condemned the person for not also tipping.  But that's what I have a problem with, the not tipping, not the fact that they gave a tract at all.




> Plus, no, I do think this was worse. It didn't just share the Gospel, it gave people a reason to slander it. I have a hunch that the person who left it was fine with that.


Valid point.  The free-willism and "Christ died for your sins" (But you only might be saved) bugged me as it does with many tracts as well.  I don't know exactly where you stand on this (I feel like you said something along the lines that you might believe in limited atonement depending on how its defined, but I don't remember what you said) but I could never tell a random person that Christ died for them.  That cheapens the gospel IMO.

----------


## Christian Liberty

> Yeah, they could have left nothing and no message of salvation. However deceiving them by making them think they got a big tip to only realize it is fake is not right. Christians don't seek to deceive people, that is what the devil does.


I still don't like the fact that its a 10.  As I said, the Living Waters Tract is a 1,000,000 so its immediately obvious that its fake (OK, so a total idiot might not realize it, but the INTENT is not to trick anyone... it even says on the bill that its NOT legal tender.)  And I agree that they should have given a real tip as well as a gospel tract.  But I don't think giving a gospel tract is wrong in and of itself.

----------


## TaftFan

They should have left that along with a real tip.

----------


## VIDEODROME

What a jackass.

----------


## Miss Annie

> I admit that giving this without money was kind of thoughtless, but how do you know what their intentions were?


Well MAYBE I am being presumptuous, but unless the service was absolutely terrible and they deserved no tip.... it would have seemed like more of a cruel joke than someone trying to spread the gospel in a loving manner.  Most people already know that someone who is waiting tables is not making a lot of money and their tips are what they survive on from day to day.  They may have been depending on their tips for gas money, or lunch money for their child.  To put a fake ten dollar bill in there, even if it would have been monopoly money and said nothing about Jesus would have seemed cruel,..... but to then associate Jesus with an action like that????  It does not make for a very good witness.  Just try to put yourself in the shoes of that person receiving that tip.  How would it have made you feel?  Would you have been very receptive to what the message was if it were associated with a cruel joke?

----------


## fr33

"Some things are better than money"

I'm sure god paid the waiter's bills and put food on his table.

----------


## VIDEODROME

I could only hope another waiter somewhere serves this person some fake plastic food with the same message underneath.

----------


## Neil Desmond

> I wonder how the author of this article knows anything about who left that and what their motivation was.


What do you mean?  What makes you wonder that?




> I also wonder why it's newsworthy, regardless of the answers to those questions. I bet that every day there are a million instances of somebody not getting tipped for something they usually get tipped for.


It's "newsworthy" not because a tip wasn't left by a customer, but rather because of the clever & creative aspect of how the waiter was stiffed.

----------


## erowe1

> What do you mean?  What makes you wonder that?


The headline says "Christian," and the article refers to "what they set out to do," as if there's a way to know that.




> It's "newsworthy" not because a tip wasn't left by a customer, but rather because of the clever & creative aspect of how the waiter was stiffed.


Not really.

----------


## shane77m

could have given lousy service. I don't tip if my drink runs out and they never refill it.

----------


## thoughtomator

> If you really think about it, isn't it even worse to pay the tip but leave the waiter/waitress possibly ignorant of the gospel?


I'm thinking "worse" is thinking someone is going to receive unwelcome proselytizing as anything but a big ol' middle finger.

----------


## Christian Liberty

> Well MAYBE I am being presumptuous, but unless the service was absolutely terrible and they deserved no tip.... it would have seemed like more of a cruel joke than someone trying to spread the gospel in a loving manner.  Most people already know that someone who is waiting tables is not making a lot of money and their tips are what they survive on from day to day.  They may have been depending on their tips for gas money, or lunch money for their child.  To put a fake ten dollar bill in there, even if it would have been monopoly money and said nothing about Jesus would have seemed cruel,..... but to then associate Jesus with an action like that????  It does not make for a very good witness.  Just try to put yourself in the shoes of that person receiving that tip.  How would it have made you feel?  Would you have been very receptive to what the message was if it were associated with a cruel joke?


I agree.  And thus I agree with what TaftFan said, and what I've been saying since the beginning of the thread.




> could have given lousy service. I don't tip if my drink runs out and they never refill it.


If you are going to do that, don't associate it with the gospel you believe.




> I'm thinking "worse" is thinking someone is going to receive unwelcome proselytizing as anything but a big ol' middle finger.



If someone's house was on fire, would you care if they wanted to hear it or not?

----------


## Neil Desmond

> The headline says "Christian," and the article refers to "what they set out to do," as if there's a way to know that.


They way you're describing it makes it seem like you're trying to say that the article claims that this is how all Christians roll.  When I actually read the article, it talks about what one Christian - "some deranged person" - did, and it does not in any way appear to be attempting to portray that act as the modus operandi of all Christians.




> Not really.


You mean like much of what makes for news stories, even front page news in some cases?

----------


## Ronin Truth

How about if the waiter drops the fake $10 bill in the collection plate next Sunday?

----------


## Sam I am

> If you really think about it, isn't it even worse to pay the tip but leave the waiter/waitress possibly ignorant of the gospel?


Not really

It's not unreasonable to assume that this was a minor but negative experience for the waiter.  And It's associated with the customer's religion. 


So, Would you say that it's helpful or harmful if someone has a negative experience associated with your religion?

----------


## erowe1

> They way you're describing it makes it seem like you're trying to say that the article claims that this is how all Christians roll.  When I actually read the article, it talks about what one Christian - "some deranged person" - did, and it does not in any way appear to be attempting to portray that act as the modus operandi of all Christians.


No, I agree with you about how to read it. But what makes this author think they know anything at all about who gave that tip and what their motivation was?

Was it a Christian? We don't know. Did they think they were doing something good? We don't know. Did their action have the opposite effect of what they set out to do? We don't know, because we don't know what they set out to do.

The author of the article pretends to know all those things. But they don't give us any indication of how they do.




> You mean like much of what makes for news stories, even front page news in some cases?


Nope. I still don't see it. Not tipping happens a million times a day.

----------


## Origanalist

Ban Christians.

----------


## Neil Desmond

> No, I agree with you about how to read it. But what makes this author think they know anything at all about who gave that tip and what their motivation was?


Seems to me that answers can be found for all the relevant questions.

Q: Who left that tip?
A: Some deranged person. (Is this in dispute, or is there anything that warrants something to the contrary?)

Q: What was their motivation?
A: To trick the waiter into thinking it was a $10 tip, and to leave religious rhetoric with the waiter.

All the proof to the 2nd question is on that one card and where it was left.  One side was printed to appear to be a $10 bill, and the other side had religious material.




> Was it a Christian? We don't know.


I don't get that.  The author is making that assertion and has grounds for making it.  When I try to challenge the assertion by examining the evidence, all I can find is that the assertion is true, which means "we" do know (or at least it seems to me that I know).  What reason warrants that the person might be anything other than a Christian?




> Did they think they were doing something good? We don't know. Did their action have the opposite effect of what they set out to do? We don't know, because we don't know what they set out to do.


We know what happened, regardless of what the customer might have been thinking; that's what mainly counts.  If you're trying to say that you're a Christian, and as one you would never do such a mean-spirited misleading thing; therefore, this advice from the author doesn't apply to you, then that's fine; but that's not sufficient to argue that there's anything wrong with the author's assertion that the person who left the tip was a Christian.




> The author of the article pretends to know all those things. But they don't give us any indication of how they do.


I don't see where the author's doing any pretending about knowing anything.  This author starts of by saying "it appears that by doing this...."  That seems like a reasonable way of indicating things to me.




> Nope. I still don't see it. Not tipping happens a million times a day.


What I had actually said was this: "_It's "newsworthy" not because a tip wasn't left by a customer, but rather because of the clever & creative aspect of how the waiter was stiffed._"

----------


## erowe1

> Seems to me that answers can be found for all the relevant questions.
> 
> Q: Who left that tip?
> A: Some deranged person. (Is this in dispute, or is there anything that warrants something to the contrary?)
> 
> Q: What was their motivation?
> A: To trick the waiter into thinking it was a $10 tip, and to leave religious rhetoric with the waiter.


But that's not the way the author of the article answered those questions. If they had put it the way you did, I wouldn't have had a problem with it.





> I don't get that.  The author is making that assertion and has grounds for making it.  When I try to challenge the assertion by examining the evidence, all I can find is that the assertion is true, which means "we" do know (or at least it seems to me that I know).  What reason warrants that the person might be anything other than a Christian?


What evidence? I saw no evidence at all that this tip was left by a Christian. We don't know who this person was. Why not just leave it at that?




> We know what happened, regardless of what the customer might have been thinking; that's what mainly counts.


I agree. Unfortunately, the author of the article saw it differently.





> I don't see where the author's doing any pretending about knowing anything.


The only way you can say that this had the opposite effect from what the person intended is if you know what they intended. Therefore, in saying this, the author pretends to know what they intended.

Maybe they intended to be a jerk. Maybe they intended to get back at the waiter for bad service. Maybe they intended to make Christians look like jerks.

If their intend was any of those things, then what they did DID have the desired effect. By saying that it didn't, the author is claiming to know that none of those things were the desired effect.

----------


## erowe1

What if the headline was the following?



> Muslim Misleads Waiter into Thinking Some Christian Didn't Tip Him


Would you then ask, "Given the facts of the case, I wonder how the author knows this?"

If so, then you should ask the same question of the headline as given.

----------


## Neil Desmond

> But that's not the way the author of the article answered those questions. If they had put it the way you did, I wouldn't have had a problem with it.


I was mainly responding to your reply.




> What evidence?


The fake $10 bill card with the religious material.




> I saw no evidence at all that this tip was left by a Christian. We don't know who this person was. Why not just leave it at that?


Aside from because you're the one who brought up this notion that we don't now that this person in question is a Christian, you apparently are totally disregarding that there is a piece of paper (made to appear to be a $10 tip when placed a certain way) with the religious rhetoric that was left by someone exists, and that we know everything that we need to know and that matters; these things intrigue me and I'm curious to know why you hold this position.




> I agree. Unfortunately, the author of the article saw it differently.


Sure - from the way you see things.  I understand that much.




> The only way you can say that this had the opposite effect from what the person intended is if you know what they intended. Therefore, in saying this, the author pretends to know what they intended.


Not when the author explicitly states that it's what things appear to be the case.




> Maybe they intended to be a jerk.


Even in that case, if this person did intend to be a jerk, that doesn't mean they aren't a Christian.  Maybe to the author Christians are jerks (as well as people who do things like leave religious rhetoric), and this incident is just more evidence to corroborate that, to the author.  I myself don't see why a person couldn't be both a Christian and a jerk.




> Maybe they intended to get back at the waiter for bad service.


I don't see the allegation being made anywhere in this story that the waiter provided bad service.

However, for argument's sake, let's say that the waiter did provide bad service to determine if that would make a difference or is even relevant to the situation.

One person (such as you) might consider themselves a Christian, and as such would never consider doing such a thing to get back at the waiter for bad service.  As I essentially brought up before, your position on what it means to be a Christian might not be the same as what it means to be a Christian to someone else who considers themselves to be a Christian.  You might try to claim or argue that the other isn't really a Christian, and the other person might try to claim or argue that you aren't really a Christian.  An outsider such as this author, or me, has no choice but to assume that you're both Christians.

In that case, does it make a difference or is it even relevant to the situation?

It could be that to the author, things like leaving religious rhetoric is what identifies one as a Christian rather than on your own personal criteria of what it means to be a Christian, perhaps based on your own position that you yourself are a Christian.




> Maybe they intended to make Christians look like jerks.


But that begs the question, if you're going to argue that we don't know if the person who left this religious rhetoric is Christian or not, how can you even know about any Christians - hypothetical ones on top of that?

Maybe Christians make themselves look like jerks.




> If their intend was any of those things, then what they did DID have the desired effect. By saying that it didn't, the author is claiming to know that none of those things were the desired effect.


What if the author considers himself to be a Christian and chooses not to disclose or reveal this about himself, and maybe his intent is to criticize others who consider themselves Christians for taking the wrong approach for doing things?  Here there's still no reason to doubt or question that the person who left the tip is a Christian, unless you think you know what the author's real position and intention is - I suppose.

----------


## Neil Desmond

> What if the headline was the following?
> 
> 
> Would you then ask, "Given the facts of the case, I wonder how the author knows this?"
> 
> If so, then you should ask the same question of the headline as given.


Nope; false analogy.  I go based on the evidence and arguments being made.  If you simply replaced "Muslim" with "Christian" in the story, I would not change my arguments or positions, other than basically to replace the words "Christian(s)" with "Muslim(s)."

----------


## erowe1

> The fake $10 bill card with the religious material.


I don't see any way to draw conclusions about who did it from that.

It could have been a Muslim, a Christian, an Atheist, anybody.

If that was what the author of that article based the headline on, then it was completely unfounded.

----------


## erowe1

> Nope; false analogy.  I go based on the evidence and arguments being made.  If you simply replaced "Muslim" with "Christian" in the story, I would not change my arguments or positions, other than basically to replace the words "Christian(s)" with "Muslim(s)."


It wasn't meant to be an analogy at all. I'm not talking about a different story. I'm talking about this exact same story, only with the headline I gave about a Muslim trying to make Christians look bad.

Given the details of the story, there's as much reason to use the headline I made up as the one the original author made up.

----------


## bunklocoempire

Darn that Mr. Pink.

----------


## Neil Desmond

> I don't see any way to draw conclusions about who did it from that.


You seem to be the only one having this problem.




> It could have been a Muslim, a Christian, an Atheist, anybody.


Well then according to you, a Christian could be a Muslim, a Christian, an Atheist, anybody.




> If that was what the author of that article based the headline on, then it was completely unfounded.


False.

----------


## MelissaWV

Leaving notes or promotional materials or other things is fine, imo, but that's not a tip.  I have left Ron Paul materials with a tip at places in the past, and even a few voter registration flyers, but always with a tip.  Hell, if I'm leaving something for the waiter/waitress to read, I make damned sure the tip is generous.  (What if I just left like $5 and the waitress saw the Ron Paul stuff?  They would associate Ron with a cheap jerk!)

----------


## Neil Desmond

> It wasn't meant to be an analogy at all. I'm not talking about a different story. I'm talking about this exact same story, only with the headline I gave about a Muslim trying to make Christians look bad.


Then you're just changing one part of the scenario but keeping the other the same.  It's tantamount to garbage in garbage out.




> Given the details of the story, there's as much reason to use the headline I made up as the one the original author made up.


No there isn't; there's cause for the "Christian" version of the headline, but there's no cause for making any mention of Muslims, at least that I'm aware of.  Maybe you'll have to help me out; what is it about the story that makes for cause for bringing up Muslims?

----------

