Korean Job Discussion Forums

[luvnpeas]

[ED209]

Surely lack of faith killed the child not Christianity.

[Omkara]

Does a parent have a right to pray over a child at the expence of scientific treatment? Is there an objective ground to which we ought to hold parents responsible?

If we require that a parent bring a child to a doctor and that they do not
rely on prayer as medical treatment, do we not force them to admit that science is superior to faith? Is this not an intrusion into a very private sphere?

Would the state possibly intrude on religious issues here, thus violating a church/state distinction? Or, is faith different than church or creed?

Interesting case.[/i]

[Adventurer]

You're post makes it sound like Christians are child killers. That's a bit much and rich, isn't it? People have different ways at looking at Christianity.

[Omkara]

[pkang0202]

[Adventurer]

[Omkara]

Well, let's not make it christian bashing. Let's rather look at the issue.

Assume the article is true. It seems plausible and likely.

Then, is this a consequence of their belief system? Yes. Is their system different than other christian systems? Yes.

The question, then, is in what respect is it different? As importantly, how are they the same?

Both posit that god is all-powerful, all-knowing, all-loving, and all-good. He can do anything. (Yet, paradoxically, he desires. . .)

When the mediated or modern christian, who may in fact not be a true christian, has a loved one saved in a hospital, they say "Thank god." Is this not an insult to the hard working doctors? Is there not in this little statement some shared ground with the more fundamental christians?

[Adventurer]

[Omkara]

The title of this thread does reveal an unobjective bias.

That's fine, so long as we recognize that and take it as polemical.

My avatar is sanscrit, a product of hinduism, yes. Yet, the symbol itself refers to no god. It is an abstract mantra which implies that the transcendent is beyond all personification.

I am not Hindu, but I enjoy the stories much in the way Jung or Campell enjoy them.

I do think that to thank god for the work of a doctor, literally meant, undervalues science and is a symptom of a world view which personifies causality, mis-posits intention, etc.

I respect the sincerity of religious people. The parents were not murderers, but had a strong love and devotion. But there is a profound error in their thinking. This error has profound consequences. Their case is only more extreme than that of more moderate christian's beliefs. The fundamental metaphysics is the same; hence the same error is latent in moderate christianity.

But, perhaps moderates don't actually buy into the metaphysics, yet have not thought it through fully. A belief is something upon which one will act. When a person of this christian metaphysics acts on the metaphysics which supports medical science, what has happened?

[stillnotking]

It's ludicrous and unfair to tar all Christianity with this brush. How many hospitals are set up by churches?

I'm not a Christian and obviously I have strong points of disagreement with Christian doctrine, but holding the entire religion accountable for the actions of some fringe whackos -- who, it's worth pointing out, are probably being prosecuted by Christians -- is totally unfair.

[mithridates]

[Adventurer]

[Omkara]

The last time I spent time in an ashram, I had a good conversation with the priest. He expressed a low opinion of religion. He held philosophy on a much higher level.

The Hindu tradition has a concept called "Ishwara." Ishwara is a concept which holds that any concept of god is insufficient, that the transcendent is without form and void. All of the gods represent aspects of ourselves. . .through them we can have a human relationship with the transcendent, called bhakti.

Now, whereas both my name and my avatar come from the hindu tradition, I part company in fundamental ways and for many of the same reasons that I reject christianity. There is simply too much superstition and I value Truth much more highly.

Moreover, though my name and avatar come from hinduism, I am not a hindu. Yet, I find the syllable "om" to be profound on many levels. therefore, . . .

I love physics, born of christians. Yet I do not reject things that are demonstrably true. So, I retain physics in my thinking. I practice "om."

Is it wrong to blame christianity for killing the kid? Yes. Is christianity responsible? Unmediated by a modern world view, yes. Though I think this is less clear.

The reasons for going to a doctor are not located in the religion itself. And the world view that makes science possible fundamentally contradicts the heart of christian metaphysics. Namely, that the laws of nature are perfectly consistent and cannot be violated.

This does not mean that a christian cannot practice science, build a hospital or become a doctor of medicine. It does mean, though, that they embrace two contradictory world views and rationalize to make them one.

I have fanatical relatives. One of them once told me that all medicine is owing to god.

I cannot see how god has anything to do with medicine. Hard work and the study of the natural order has led to proper medicine, not prayer and the miraculous. The later two are superstition and have nothing to do with natural law.

Not even god can violate the natural order; for did he exist, he would be lesser than the law of necessity. He could not square the circle, kill himself, or even heal or raise the dead.

Well, maybe he could heal. But he'd have to go to university first.

[mindmetoo]

I had this one under my "christians being bad christians" but the mods saw fit to delete it. I thought I was keeping everything organized. Oh well.