Jesus Spanked You for Being Naughty

That is sick and disgusting.

C’mon Hemant! Where do you get this stuff? It’s not even deserving of a comment. Now, don’t make me come over there and spank you! 🙂

Mriana asked,

Please tell me the Fundies are really feeding this crap to their children?

Oh that crap is very real:

Sometimes that’s why we get sick, because the Lord is spanking us for being naughty.

When my wife was a child her Lutheran minister told her that the reason her father had lost an arm in an auto accident and her mother was confined to a wheelchair from polio was because God was punishing them.

Thanks, Reverend. Great stuff. Type that out, roll it up tightly and shove it deeply up your pious, judgmental ass.

But sometimes if we’re really being bad or foolish and doing things we know are wrong, the Lord may take away His protection and let us get hurt or sick as punishment for being so naughty.

So what if the naughty, bad girl knocks down the hornet’s nest but the hornets don’t sting her but sting her well-behaving best friend half to death instead? What does she pray and ask the Lord? “God, why are you such a lousy shot? That shoulda’ been me, not my friend, dumbass!”

Mike O, a conservative Christian who comments and posts very intelligent and sensitive things over at “Off the Map” was correct when he recently said that one of the main causes of atheism is Christians behaving like this.

Richard Wade said,

Mike O, a conservative Christian who comments and posts very intelligent and sensitive things over at “Off the Map” was correct when he recently said that one of the main causes of atheism is Christians behaving like this.

Yes, I think we all agree that this kind of thinking is absolutely ridiculous. But from what I understand through discussions with atheists, Christians behaving badly does not “cause” atheism.

From what I have read and heard, I have to conclude that if Christians never acted badly, the true atheists would still be atheists (which I think would be your case.) Their atheism has nothing to do with what this post is about.

Everytime I see Hemant posting something like this, it disappoints me. It just sparks more conflict, in that it puts the Christians here on the defensive and the atheists on a rant fest. It can sabatoge whatever progress we have made through his and others’ more intelligent posts (?).

I may be wrong, but I think everyone here agrees that this kind of theology is wrong and hurtful, so why keep beating a dead horse?

I’m all for humor and keeping things light, and we desperately need that here at times; but I don’t know if this one does the job…

Linda, you said,

Everytime I see Hemant posting something like this, it disappoints me. It just sparks more conflict, in that it puts the Christians here on the defensive and the atheists on a rant fest. It can sabatoge whatever progress we have made through his and others more intelligent posts (?).

I may be wrong, but I think everyone here agrees that this kind of theology is wrong and hurtful, so why keep beating a dead horse?

Im all for humor and keeping things light, and we desperately need that here at times; but I don??t know if this one does the job

“Friendly Atheist” does not mean we only talk about positive things. It means we hope to talk about all sorts of things respectfully and productively. I don’t consider this post an attempt at humor. It’s reporting an outrage. This is not a dead horse issue. It’s child abuse that is widespread and practiced every day. Telling a little girl that she should look on her crippled parents as if they had it coming is only one disgusting example, and in a child’s mind the above brainless illustration implies that all misfortune, sickness and suffering is God’s punishment.

This does not have to put Christians on the defensive unless they condone such disgraceful lunacy or they fail to actively oppose it. These things have to be brought out and exposed so that Christians can correct it, not just agree that it’s wrong. The perpetrators of this kind of crap certainly aren’t going to clean it up because atheists say they should.

Richard Wade,

Okay. I get you. I don’t know why it brought up such uncomfortableness in me. Maybe it’s because I know that kind of thinking all too well. Not to that extreme, but that’s what the religion teaches — to fear God’s wrath if we don’t behave and follow the law. Or be afraid of falling out of his favor… Losing his love… Falling from grace… Becoming unworthy. I have to fight it every day and remind myself that I’m free from it. I’m definitely not denying that it exists.

I just don’t like people getting the wrong idea that’s what Christianity is about. It’s not at all about the legalism and the fear that the false leaders teach. That’s the “religion,” not the true meaning of Christ. Some people see posts like this and make generalizations about all Christians. It perpetuates the stereotype for those who already hate and judge us.

I try to ignore the absurdity of some extreme atheists and other religions, because I hope that us rational people know that they are absurd. I wanted to focus on the things that we agree on, the common ground where we can be the same, and not the extreme opposite ends of the spectrum where hatred grows.

I hate it. I hate the picture of Jesus spanking the child. It makes me want to use it for target practice…

I don’t even know what I’m trying to say…

Linda said,

C’mon Hemant! Where do you get this stuff? It’s not even deserving of a comment.

I have to agree with Linda on this one.

Mike Clawson has brought up an important question. The original source of this image, it’s publisher, who uses it and for what purpose are important issues. Hemant’s link to where Grazatt found it is a blog by Adele Haze that is dedicated to erotic spanking. At the bottom of her post she cites Niki as the person who sent it to her, and the link to Niki’s website is about her interest in sadomasochism. At that point the trail stops. Niki comments on the Adele Haze thread but offers no information about the image’s source.

This illustration could be part of a recent or very old religious pamphlet, or it could be satire about religion, or it could be part of something about erotic spanking.

I would like to know WTF about such things when they are posted here before we go on and on about the implications.

Christianity is in the end whatever its practitioners practice. But there are so many different ways that Christians “do” their Christianity that it is inaccurate and unfair to make any blanket judgmental statements about them, good or bad.

Yes, Richard I agree. What bothers me though is when Christians will say “Oh, now don’t lump me in with those kind of Christians. They’re not practicing real Christianity.” The implication of course is that whatever kind of Christianity the speaker holds is the real deal. This is silly: we can’t be judgmental of them, but they will be judgmental of others. We let good people off the hook by making the relativist Christianity-is-conduct argument when they themselves make the absolutist our-Christianity-is-the-real-one argument. Some where along the line even the most moderate and modernized Christians will come up with some argument from authority.

Linda,
LOL!! That was really good. You have brought in the humor and lightheartedness that you hoped for in an earlier comment here. Thanks for reminding us to not take ourselves so seriously. 😀

There is, of course, the irony that an image of Jesus spanking a child bothers Christians but the idea of Jesus sending people to Hell (maybe even that same child) to burn for all eternity for not accepting Him as their savior is not questioned (by most Christians) as having any ethical or moral problems.

Not to trivialize spanking, but it is trivial compared to burning for eternity.
Any finite number is insignificant compared to infinity.

BTW, was the original source of this image from that XFamily site? If so, it should be pointed out that this is most certainly not the result of mainstream Christian thinking. That group is quite clearly a cult.

I agree, Mike. But many “mainstream” American Christians believe spanking a child is the only way to teach them a lesson. I’m not saying their views compare to the site in the post but the ever deplorable James Dobson’s take on spanking makes my stomach turn. Dale wrote a couple posts about it on PBB.
http://parentingbeyondbelief.com/blog/?p=114

JeffN, you said:

Those of us who believe in a God powerful enough to create the universe and man kind concede to his right (and power to back up that right) to interact with man kind as he sees fit no matter one’s point of view on the issue.

I’m constantly hearing some Christians say that it is only God who has given us our moral sense of right and wrong. But when our moral sense of right and wrong tells us that eternally torturing people for relatively trivial misbehavior is in fact immoral, those same Christians say that it’s not our place to question God’s contradictory behavior. What good is giving us a moral sense if we aren’t supposed to use it all the time? We’re supposed to apply it to human behavior but ignore the glaring hypocrisy in God’s behavior?

If I remember correctly, in ethical argument the classic response to that proposition is “Fuck that.”

This “do what I say, not what I do” mentality trickles down into the relationship between the clergy and their flock. It fosters the hypocritical behaviors of extreme moralist preachers and priests who steal church funds, screw children and vulnerable adults, and harshly condemn anyone who is different even as they spout rhetoric about love and forgiveness.

This self-contradictory and ultimately self-defeating idea was modeled long ago after kingdoms where the king laid down the law for his subjects but held himself above the law, blithely doing the opposite of whatever he expected his subjects to do. It’s one of the main reasons that absolute monarchies are almost extinct and one of the main reasons that your way of thinking is going extinct.

This self-contradictory and ultimately self-defeating idea was modeled long ago after kingdoms where the king laid down the law for his subjects but held himself above the law, blithely doing the opposite of whatever he expected his subjects to do. It’s one of the main reasons that absolute monarchies are almost extinct and one of the main reasons that your way of thinking is going extinct.

Richard taps into a valuable line of thinking here. Just where do you suppose the image of God that we find in the O.T. has its origins? It certainly is, in part, a copy of the conquering monarch that captures by force, rules by decree, and punishes swiftly, utterly, and without partiality–so long as you’re an insider–lord help you if you’re not. The Xenophobia of Yahweh is amazing and so human. Hmm . . . wonder why?

For all you believers out there looking for the reasons why pondering atheists dismiss religion, it’s things like this: God is just a little too human; too irrational, too impulsive, too capricious, too low down and mean, too jealous, too judgmental, too provincial, too brutal, too narcissistic to be the all-good, all-wise, all-loving creator of all. Oh, what a problem he is for Christians: their theology says that they have to include him somehow in their faith, but he’s such a son of a bitch. Like that black sheep of the family that nobody wants to own, that you feel guilty over, but there’s nothing you can do about it–he’s one of yours. Christians no longer accept or practice the brutality that was typical in the annals of O.T. history; brutality that was commanded by Yahweh. Yet, they keep insisting that the Bible is the Word of God, the rule of faith and practice.

I’ll ditto Richard: “Fuck that.”

Oh, and Happy Holidays!

Fuck that, and the horse it rode in on.

you must have seen the “Mr.Hands” video!

My thanks to literaghost (wonderful photographs, by the way) and to Greta Christina for finding what appears to be the original source of this illustration. It is cited in a legal brief from one of the many court cases against The Family, aka The Children of God. I had forgotten about them, originally from the sixties and seventies, but still around. Creepiest of the creepy! So this is not from a mainstream church but from a notorious cult.

Oh I see Greta commented while I wrote this. Greta, my ditto to your assessment that we should not assume that this basic belief is not out there in many places and many forms.

HappyNat, I agree with you that people’s theology or world views influence many of their mundane behaviors including the raising of children, and I thank you for that link. I also agree that obsolete world views can in come cases lead to parenting methods that are inappropriate for our times, often counterproductive and in extreme cases can be atrocious or tragic.

I’m very grateful to my parents for my secular but certainly not permissive upbringing. They gave me clear boundaries but the one area where I had total freedom was in how and what to think.

Richard Wade said,

Thank you for summing up so very succinctly what is so freaking sick and wrong about your version of religion.

Your welcome.

Richard Wade said,
December 11, 2007 at 9:36 am

Darryl said,
December 11, 2007 at 10:57 am

Darryl That’s a lot of aggression for a God i Presume you don’t believe in. 😉

Though i suspect you are well read and no doubt an educated individual may i suggest based on your post that you may be looking at the glass as half full meaning simply that though your point may and perhaps in some circles does have certain merit it would seem you are judging the whole based on bits and peaces you have herd or read here and there. May i further suggest that if you have not already done so that you read the account of the old testament as a whole as some on this sight have already done. If nothing else it well give you a better understanding of why you have such hatred toward a God which you presumably don’t believe in. Thanks for taking the time to consider my suggestions and happy holidays to you as well; without the colorful phrases. 🙂

Happy Holidays. Thanks for the insight Claire.

With consideration to the topic post i understand and somewhat agree with Linda’s point of view as well to some degree with Richards; and having read the various posts would like to point out that most Christians and religious people are not the monsters that some would like to believe we are. Though I’m not against spanking as a means of discipline what the comic is blatantly suggesting (as i believe Richard and perhaps one are two others have pointed out) is out right child abuse. Those who stoop to such practices i can say with some certainty or of the minority and not the majority amongst not just religious people but people in general. I can also say with all certainty that I resent the thought of these kinds of practices being associated by some as main stream Christianity and would like to thank the two or three on this post who pointed out that it is not. I would further like to say that if I saw such practices taught amongst my particular flavor of Christianity or in the church I attend I would be the first one to bitch and condemn it as heresy.

JeffN,

I do understand the religious pint of view. I just don’t like it or agree with it.

I can understand why someone who believes in and fears God would accept any behavior whatsoever from God as being good by definition (even torturing the majority of “souls” forever in an afterlife). I also understand that religious people could logically justify extreme methods in this life to ensure that they (and their loved ones) don’t end up being in this eternally tortured majority, but end up in the heavenly (with God) minority in the afterlife.

And, yes, I believe that all these religious notions (of afterlives and eternal torturing) are all man-made-up. I don’t believe in an afterlife. But I do believe in life right now and want this life right now (for me and everyone else) to have as much quality as possible. By all means, use the positive aspects of religion. I just encourage people to jettison the negative aspects of religion.

I don’t use the word presume or presumably to be offensive; I use it because I don’t want to assume something I don’t know for certain.

JeffN – ok, I’ll accept that, since I don’t see anywhere where the person in question said which side of the fence he was on. Sorry if I misunderstood.

Just so you know, though, while what you said came from a different place, it’s a really annoying thing that atheists hear a lot. The supposition that an atheist couldn’t be that pissed off unless at some level he or she really believed is beyond irritating and well into offensive.

Finding a different way to phrase genuine uncertainty than “presumably don’t believe in” would be a good thing.

I actually used to believe that sickness was God’s way of punishing people. Then I started seeing good, pious people get horribly sick for no reason. I finally decided that there was no way that my mother had done anything to deserve the chronic fatigue syndrome that she had for ten years, or that her best friend had somehow “earned” the stroke that killed her around the age of fifty.