"If anyone ever heard or saw of someone harming a child (or any person, for that matter) in the name of "religion", the police should be called in right away. Because obviously that is not what Christ taught."
I agree 100% with what this person said, that last sentence freaks me out. Calling the police not because a child is screaming in pain, no, and not because this little baby is at the mercy of a monster, no. But it is not what Christ taught. Ohhhhhhhhhhh! Well, in THAT case, by all means, lets call someone to help.
I know that's not what this person meant. She was saying that religion is not an excuse to hurt a child ever, but that qualifying sentence disturbed me.
And to throw some turn-about in here, if someone, in a fit of Christ-like rage, tossed over the tables in the front of your church and called you a den of vipers, you'd call the cops, right? But isn't that EXACTLY what Christ taught? To not accept a religious institution that failed to act in a godly way?
2007-07-30 08:02:11 · 8 answers · asked by ZombieTrix 2012 6 in Society & Culture ➔ Religion & Spirituality
The original question was about the "exorcism" attempt on a 3 year old girl.
And please understand that the person I quoted was in no way condoning this or defending the guy who did this or anything. I don't mean to pick on her at all - I'm sure she's a lovely person. But when people fail to use their own moral judgement in favor of what a religious figure teaches, we tread on dangerous ground. Did this man not think (in his diseased mind) that he was following the dictates of God? Without God, would he still have opted to choke a child?
2007-07-30 08:24:21 · update #1
I find this akin to a common question I get asked about my atheism: "Without god, how do you know what is right? How is it that you are not a murder or some other sinful thing?" This scares me and I always reply "You mean to tell me that if it wasn't for your religious beliefs that you would be out killing people right now?" It's screwy. I hate to say it, but I think some people need religion because they have no moral compass without it.
2007-07-30 08:11:37 · answer #1 · answered by zero 6 · 2⤊ 0⤋
Wow, I didn't have a problem with the qualifier but I'm sorry you did. The strange thing is that I have had the experience of a guy who used to preach outside the rec building at University. He became so popular with the hecklers that no one called the police. He would say 'heeeeelllllllll fiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiirrrrrrrreeeeeeee' in the most hilarious way. At any rate, if someone was being violent I would call the cops. Jesus was probably kicked out of the temple (I think he was) for losing his temper. I guess that would have been a 'calling the cops' equivalent. I'm not a Christian so I guess I don't have to think too much about it. Although I do like Jesus an awful lot!
2007-07-30 15:11:00 · answer #2 · answered by Yogini 6 · 3⤊ 0⤋
I would like to know what question the person was answering. If the question was attempting to justify harming a child based on something Jesus said, the last sentence probably does not mean their reason for calling the cop is because Christ did not teach harming children. Rather it may be a rebuke of an early statement trying to justify harming children from Jesus' teaching. I think you are "overthinking" the answer.
What was the original context?
2007-07-30 15:12:32 · answer #3 · answered by dewcoons 7 · 1⤊ 0⤋
Yes, I completely agree with the comment. But I think you misunderstand the last sentence just a little. Obviously, regardless of religion, you'd call the poliece because it is the right thing to do.
But I believe that what the person was trying to say, as well as what I have already written, was that Christ taught us to love and respect our fellow man. It just seems like you misunderstood his/her answer just a little.
2007-07-30 15:21:26 · answer #4 · answered by Skippy 5 · 2⤊ 0⤋
I think you may be overthinking the statement you quoted. It sounds like you are a very intelligent person and a critical thinker, because you are able to break down the statement logically and read into it, "if a, then b". Know what I mean? But I doubt that the author intended it the way you are interpreting it. Your logic seems correct, but I have to question if the author truly meant for you to draw the conclusion that you did.
Anyhow... I loved your last paragraph! It would be great to see someone shake up a church like that! I'd pay to see it.
2007-07-30 15:09:28 · answer #5 · answered by darth_momm 4 · 4⤊ 0⤋
I think you interpreted the person's last sentence incorrectly. They were simply saying that hurting somebody, child or otherwise, in the name of religion, was not what Christ taught.
Edit: Upon rereading it, I understand what you're saying now. You may have overanalyzed a little bit, and of course it all depended on the context of the question being answered, but I see where you're coming from now.
2007-07-30 15:13:41 · answer #6 · answered by Molten Orange 5 · 4⤊ 0⤋
The person, I'm sure, was not saying to call the cops because that isn't what Christ taught. That was a separate comment, I believe.
It's reading it a bit narrowly to interpret it the way you have. It isn't easy to convey each and every aspect of our thoughts through this medium.
2007-07-30 15:07:47 · answer #7 · answered by Anonymous · 4⤊ 0⤋
Food for thought.
Interesting.
2007-07-30 15:05:28 · answer #8 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 0⤋