|
Post by krwordgazer on Mar 29, 2010 0:21:02 GMT -5
Thank you, Journey, for that explanation of the cultural background of the Proverbs. I have not done the research to the extent you have on these passages.
|
|
|
Post by musicmom on Mar 29, 2010 8:32:23 GMT -5
KW,
Oops - well, I cut and pasted that quote from a web-page without checking myself, so I apologize that it was misquoted. I'm in a rush right now, but will go back later today and figure out where it was really from. And, unfortunately, I think there are many more examples like that.
|
|
|
Post by musicmom on Mar 30, 2010 10:27:16 GMT -5
There's a passage from "To Train Up a Child" that I remember so well from my early days as a parent when we tried to take all Pearl's philosophy to heart.
I wonder if anyone else on the forum remember it, because I think it really encapsulates what I'm trying to say worries me about Christianity.
I'm paraphrasing, but it's something like this: "Until your child can look at a cross and take in the peace that comes by knowing that God's Son has been crucified for his sins, until your child can understand that, he is suffering under the guilt and shame of his birth. As a merciful parent, it is doing kindness to your child to punish and scourge him (the child) until he is old enough to understand that it has been accomplished by the Son of God. You will be giving your child peace of mind and settling his conscience by punishing him."
THIS is the poop in the brownies of Christianity as far as I'm concerned!!!
I think it is totally the projected guilt and shame of the PARENTS that they put on this innocent child, and then beat it out of them. Of course, they throw in the mind fuck that they're helping the child get rid of his own guilt and shame, for his own good, of course - because they "love" him.
Children, in my experience, do not experience guilt and shame on their own. They do not feel "born with it". They are born joyful and trusting and happy. It is the projected guilt and shame which are projected onto them - and then, "charitably" scourged away , which they then feel for the rest of their lives.
Does anyone else remember this passage and what are your comments? This being Holy Week at the church I work at, I am hearing so much, every day about how Christ "carries our iniquities" and how wonderful God is for "giving us his only son to be crucified". It is all making me feel so triggered and sick. I guess, because I felt like that's what my own mother did to me, and she used Christianity to justify herself.
Please do not tell me that it's not the fault of the religion - that people can use it for whatever they want to to accomplish their evil intentions. This is the central tenant of the religion. It is not just a little sideline teaching.
|
|
|
Post by coleslaw on Mar 30, 2010 11:15:24 GMT -5
Easy? Sez who? Clothing styles do change over time, true, but are they really that easy to force a change on? When Amelia Bloomer introduced trousers for women in the mid-1800's, the change made a lot of sense from an economic, practical, and safety standard. (I believe it was Elizabeth Cady Stanton who noted how much easier it was to carry a candle or a baby up and down stairs when she wasn't also holding her skirt out of the way.) But eventually women had to give it up and revert to long, full skirts, because public ridicule was too great. It took World War II to make pants for women acceptable.
As for holidays - we celebrate the birth of Jesus around the winter solstice even though for shepherds to have been out in the fields at the time of his birth it could not have been the dead of winter. We hold Easter egg hunts at churches. Many saints days coincide with older festivals.
And changing laws? How long did it take to get a health care law? Women's suffrage? Abolition?
As for changing food choices, Reform Jews tried to do away with Kosher food laws, but had to start serving Kosher foods in the cafeterias at Reform seminaries due to demand. Food laws are one of the reasons that Christianity eventually became a Roman/Greek religion rather than a Jewish one. No matter what Paul said, Jewish Christians were not going to share meals with non-Jews. Why did Christianity eventually break away from Judaism? "Clothing styles and food choices-- even holidays and laws", or at least 2 out of 4.
|
|
|
Post by journey on Mar 30, 2010 11:18:52 GMT -5
Yeah, musicmom, it's the penal substitutionary atonement version of the cross again, and Michael Pearl took it to it's logical end. If God hates all imperfection so much and if God Himself *must* severely *punish* all imperfection, then it stands to reason that we, as parental models of that God, must do the same, AND it stands to reason that, since God's way is good and right, that it is therefore good and right. Also, if God must punish all sin in order for GOD to feel good, then it stands to reason that WE humans must have our sin punished in order for US to feel good (which would make that true for children)...
It's all very sick, but it actually does make sense, in that he's just following the train of logic all the way to the station.
This is part of the reason I find penal substitutionary atonement (the predominate view in our country, so much so that one rarely hears that it is simply one explanation) so distasteful. In the Christus Victor view of atonement, Christ died to save us from an enemy who wanted to hurt and destroy us. In penal substitutionary atonement, the enemy who wants to hurt us is God, Himself.
|
|
|
Post by journey on Mar 30, 2010 11:20:30 GMT -5
Children, in my experience, do not experience guilt and shame on their own. They do not feel "born with it". They are born joyful and trusting and happy. It is the projected guilt and shame which are projected onto them - and then, "charitably" scourged away , which they then feel for the rest of their lives. --musicmom This was really good.
|
|
|
Post by coleslaw on Mar 30, 2010 12:19:58 GMT -5
I once read a book called "Shame" (I forget the author, and in trying to look up the title I keep finding other books with "shame" in the title), that points out that shame is actually a useful emotion. Shame is what we feel when our boundaries have been violated or we violate another person's boundaries. Shame motivates us to defend boundaries, especially our own.
But as with all other emotions, shame can get out of hand. We can feel shame over minor incidents. We can feel shame that never seems to end. We can feel shame that should belong to the person who wronged us. Certainly parents can take advantage of shame to treat children in ways that are cruel and unnecessary. I don't advocate "shaming" a child, especially over childish exuberance rather than mean-spirited behavior, but I would not want to bring up my child to be incapable of feeling shame. Sometimes people should feel ashamed of themselves.
There's a scene in the movie Blindside in which Sandra Bullock's character, Leigh Anne Tuohy, is having lunch with her friends and they are talking about her family's decision to take in Michael Ohr and give him a home. One of Leigh Anne's friends asks how her daughter feels about having him there and whether Leigh Anne is concerned at all about her daughter being in the same house with "a big black boy". Leigh Anne looks at her and says quietly, "Shame on you." It was all she needed to say.
|
|
|
Post by krwordgazer on Mar 30, 2010 15:01:39 GMT -5
Musicmom, if all of this is triggering you and making you feel sick, then I have no desire to make it worse. If Christianity means nothing but pain to you, I think the best thing you could do would be to distance yourself from it. *hugs*
As far as children are concerned, I tend to think that if you make a rule like "don't hit, because hitting hurts people," and then your kid hauls off and hits her brother, guilt is probably something she's going to feel. I have tried my best not to lay guilt and shame on my kids-- but I have observed them feeling guilt or shame when they do something they know they shouldn't. I have found, though, that kids are just as capable of understanding forgiveness as adults, and the remedy for guilt over "I hit my brother!" is to apologize to the brother and make it up to him in some way (most of the time a hug is sufficient). In the days when they still used to hit one another, my kids were soft-hearted enough to apologize/make restitution immediately. If they weren't, a time-out in their rooms usually did the trick. I remember, though, that 1 John says somewhere that punishment is about fear, and that love casts out fear. I never saw any reason to raise my kids in fear rather than teaching them to love and be loved.
But kind of think Coleslaw is right-- guilt and shame are logical consequences of being socialized and taught boundaries.
Coleslaw, as far as changes in clothing styles and laws, etc-- I think you're right. I note that the changes for the Hebrews were not drastic. They started putting tassels on their robes; they didn't start wearing pink tutus instead. ;D And their new laws were still very much the kinds of laws they expected to have. I think this supports the theory of accommodation, though. If even clothing styles are difficult to change, how much more difficult is a whole paradigm shift?
|
|