Why James Holmes' Rampage is the Result of the Teachings of Christianity
In times like this, when something horrendous happens, people tend to hypothesize as to the reasons why. As most everyone knows by now, the "nice Christian boy," James Holmes massacred 12 innocent people and wounded many more in his rampage in a Colorado movie theatre. One hypothesis was put forth by the Christian apologist, Rick Warren, in one of his latest tweets, when he said, "When students are taught they are no different from animals, they act like it." The implied hypothesis being, that it's the result of teaching science, and in particular, Darwinianism and materialism. I propose that there is a better explanation. My hypothesis, which is not new by the way, as I have pointed out numerous times, the great Christian philosopher Pelagius pointed out long ago, that if you promulgate the notion that people are born bad, and cannot help but to sin, but will still gain entrance into paradise as long as they "repent"-- they are more likely to sin, repent, sin, repent--and repeat when necessary. Pelagius was wise, and realized that this belief would lead to "moral laxity"--which is quite evident in our predominantly Christian society, and amongst Christians in particular. My hypothesis is that when Christians are taught they are "born sinners" and cannot help but to sin, as they are taught it is not possible for them to be perfect, and that they are nevertheless given the "free gift" of salvation, they will have more of a tendency to act immorally, or, when Christians are taught they live in a world that is dominated by Satan, that it leads to immorality. Either way, it leads to immorality and chaos, and Christianity provides believers with a basis for the belief that they are absolved from taking responsibility for their own bad behavior. Jesus does that for them.
Why James Holmes' Rampage is the Result of Christianity - Part 2
In doing so, I have responded to the major objections and counter examples offered by commenters. I look forward to further discussion on this subject.
As Benge Nsenduluka pointed out in the article he wrote for the Christian Post, James Holmes was a "normal Christian boy" heavily involved in his local Presbyterian church. As Rev. G. Aiken Taylor pointed out in his article, What Presbyterians Believe:
Everything is Determined by God
Presbyterians believe that everything which happens takes place according to the will of God and can be fully understood only in the will of God. Nothing can come to any man that He does not allow for his own purposes and glory. He overrules the actions of evil men and brings their evil to naught. He works all things after the counsel of His own will and turns all things--even apparent evil--to ultimate good in the lives of those who love Him, who are called according to His purpose.
Original Sin
Human nature is rather sinful and "inclined to evil as the sparks fly upward." We see undesirable behavior and sinful tendencies in the smallest infant, and we observe that without discipline and restraint human beings inevitably live selfishly. This view of human nature Presbyterians describe by the term "Original Sin" because human imperfection seems to be both innate and instinctive. This imperfection (sin) taints every facet of our personalities. Consequently the description of Original Sin to which Presbyterians subscribe is summarized in the doctrine of Total Depravity. Mankind, we say, is inevitably (originally) and altogether (totally) marked by sin on account of the Fall.Total Depravity
The doctrine of Total Depravity also suggests man's helplessness. Human beings are not only sinful, they are also helplessly sinful. We are spiritually dead in our sins, bound under the guilt and penalty of sin and unable to do anything to please God. None of our works are pure and therefore pleasing to God. All our righteousness is as filthy rags. We do not even have it in us to turn to Him that we may be cleansed and healed.
Jesus Takes Responsibility for Their Sins, and Absolves Them from Having to do so Themselves
As to not having to "reinvent the wheel," and to save time, I will quote at length as to the meaning of "double bind":
He, the Eternal Son, took upon Himself our nature, lived a sinless life as a man and died on the Cross in a sacrifice which somehow paid the price of our redemption from sin-we know not how but we believe it. In a victory over death and the grave our Lord rose from the dead and returned to the Father from Whom He sent the Holy Spirit to apply to those who would believe the effects of His work. In the gift of the Holy Spirit-by grace through faith-the originally sinful nature of man is transfigured to become Godly and possessed of the capacity to be God-like. This "new life" begins now in the hearts of those who believe in and receive Jesus Christ.Everything, Including Faith and Salvation is Determined by God
In keeping with the doctrine of Sovereignty, under which God is seen to determine all things, Presbyterians believe that the knowledge of Christ and the acceptance of Christ which leads to Salvation also come from God. We are saved by faith alone and this faith itself is a gift of God. Our personal redemption is not due to any goodness of our own for we have none; neither is it earned by our good works for sinners cannot accumulate "credit" leading to redemption.Now we can see that while they say it is possible to become "Godly" they counter that with Original Sin, which would indicate that no matter what, humans have a tendency to be immoral. Now follow the logic. If one like James Holmes, performs an act such as murdering innocent people, then that act could not have occurred unless God willed it to be. Recall, as stated above, that Presbyterians believe nothing can come to any man that He does not allow for his own purposes and glory. He overrules the actions of evil men and brings their evil to naught. Now we see the double bind message that is propagated by the Christian Presbyterian belief system.
As to not having to "reinvent the wheel," and to save time, I will quote at length as to the meaning of "double bind":
Gregory Bateson and his colleagues defined the double bind as follows (paraphrased):The Christian belief system has many "double binds" as illustrated above, such as the free will/determinist double bind, and the godly/born sinner double bind, and so forth. Now, these double binds lead to mental illness, such as schizophrenia, as indicated below:
The situation involves two or more people, one of whom (for the purpose of the definition), is designated as the "victim". The others are people who are considered the victim's superiors: figures of authority (such as parents), whom the victim respects.
Repeated experience: the double bind is a recurrent theme in the experience of the victim, and as such, cannot be resolved as a single traumatic experience.
A "primary injunction" is imposed on the victim by the others in one of two forms:
(a) "Do X, or I will punish you";
(b) "Do not do X, or I will punish you".
(or both a and b)The punishment may include the withdrawing of love, the expression of hate and anger, or abandonment resulting from the authority figure's expression of helplessness.
A "secondary injunction" is imposed on the victim, conflicting with the first at a higher and more abstract level. For example: "You must do X, but only do it because you want to". It is unnecessary for this injunction to be expressed verbally.
If necessary, a "tertiary injunction" is imposed on the victim to prevent them from escaping the dilemma. See phrase examples below for clarification.
Finally, Bateson states that the complete list of the previous requirements may be unnecessary, in the event that the victim is already viewing their world in double bind patterns. Bateson goes on to give the general characteristics of such a relationship:
When the victim is involved in an intense relationship; that is, a relationship in which he feels it is vitally important that he discriminate accurately what sort of message is being communicated so that he may respond appropriately;
And, the victim is caught in a situation in which the other person in the relationship is expressing two orders of message and one of these denies the other;
And, the victim is unable to comment on the messages being expressed to correct his discrimination of what order of message to respond to: i.e., he cannot make a metacommunicative statement.Thus, the essence of a double bind is two conflicting demands, each on a different logical level, neither of which can be ignored or escaped. This leaves the victim torn both ways, so that whichever demand they try to meet, the other demand cannot be met. "I must do it, but I can't do it" is a typical description of the double bind experience.
For a double bind to be effective, the victim must be unable to confront or resolve the conflict between the demand placed by the primary injunction and that of the secondary injunction. In this sense, the double bind differentiates itself from a simple contradiction to a more inexpressible internal conflict, where the victim really wants to meet the demands of the primary injunction, but fails each time through an inability to address the situation's incompatibility with the demands of the secondary injunction. Thus, victims may express feelings of extreme anxiety in such a situation, as they attempt to fulfil the demands of the primary injunction albeit with obvious contradictions in their actions."
The Double Bind Theory was first articulated in relationship to schizophrenia, but Bateson and his colleagues hypothesized that schizophrenic thinking was not necessarily an inborn mental disorder but a learned confusion in thinking. Many people have forgotten that Bateson and his colleagues were working in the Veteran's Administration Hospital (1949–1962) with World War II veterans. As soldiers they'd been able to function well in combat, but the effects of life-threatening stress had affected them. At that time, 18 years before Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder was officially recognized, the veterans had been saddled with the catch-all diagnosis of schizophrenia. Bateson didn't challenge the diagnosis but he did maintain that the seeming nonsense the patients said at times did make sense within context—and he gives numerous examples in section III--Pathology in Relationship (in Steps to an Ecology of Mind). For example, a patient misses an appointment, and when Bateson finds him later the patient says 'the judge disapproves'; Bateson responds, "You need a defense lawyer" see following (pp. 195–6) Bateson also surmised that people habitually caught in double binds in childhood would have greater problems—that in the case of the schizophrenic, the double bind is presented continually and habitually within the family context from infancy on. By the time the child is old enough to have identified the double bind situation, it has already been internalized, and the child is unable to confront it. The solution then is to create an escape from the conflicting logical demands of the double bind, in the world of the delusional system. (see in Towards a Theory of Schizophrenia-Illustrations from Clinical Data.We have already heard of some of the emotional stressors that triggered James Holmes' rampage, such as dropping out of the PhD neuroscience program at Colorado University. I hypothesize that this combination of factors including the double bind message of Christianity that he was taught and believed, combined with the stressors of his life, led him to his rampage. The other horn of my disjunction goes without saying. I merely note that we are all aware of the cases of the immoral actions and chaos committed by those who, whether they are Christian or non-Christian, are the result of their belief that they are controlled by Satan or possessed by demons or Satan and so on, and is the result of the teachings of Christianity. So either way, whether it be cases such as James Holmes or the other cases just mentioned, they are the result of the teachings of Christianity. This is the best explanation. Yes, James Holmes was a "normal Christian boy"--what a scary thought.
One solution to a double bind is to place the problem in a larger context, a state Bateson identified as Learning III, a step up from Learning II (which requires only learned responses to reward/consequence situations). In Learning III, the double bind is contextualized and understood as an impossible no-win scenario so that ways around it can be found.
Bateson's double bind theory was never followed up by research into whether family systems imposing systematic double binds might be a cause of schizophrenia. This complex theory has been only partly tested, and there are gaps in the current psychological and experimental evidence required to establish causation The current understanding of schizophrenia takes into account a complex interaction of genetic, neurological as well as emotional stressors, including family interaction and it has been argued that if the double bind theory overturns findings suggesting a genetic basis for schizophrenia then more comprehensive psychological and experimental studies are needed, with different family types and across various family contexts.*
_______________
Cathy Cooper
* http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Double_bind
Addendum: I merely mentioned the other disjunct because I was waiting for an example, and I knew it was forthcoming. Christians are so predictable. Here it is: http://christiandiarist.com/tag/james-holmes/
The Christian Diarist says it all in his title, "Satan Rears Himself in Colorado Shootings."
According to the Christian Diarist:
Note, that the Christian doctrine expressed by the Christian Diarist is also a Christian double bind, as it teaches that everything is determined by God, and then turns around and blames Satan when something bad happens, as they claim he is responsible for the evils in the world, when they just said that God determines everything!! Again, this lead to mental illness such as schizophrenia.
I hypothesize that this combination of factors including the double bind message of Christianity that he was taught and believed, combined with the stressors of his life, led him to his rampage, or it's the result of people believing the Christian teachings and doctrines that we live in a world that is dominated by Satan, which leads to immorality. Either way, it leads to immorality, and chaos, and Christianity provides believers with a basis for the belief that they are absolved from taking responsibility for their own bad behavior. Jesus does that for them.
For those who may have missed my comment or for others who may not read the comments I have added this from my comment from below from the comment section:
It makes no difference whether James Holmes is/was practicing or to which "sect" of Presbyterianism he belonged to. The fact of the matter is, in our society Christians and non-Christians alike (even some atheists) are subject to the influences of Christianity as described above.
In this post, I am focussing on Christianity. There are also many atrocities that are committed as a result of some of the other religions. Mary Daly in Gyn/Ecology points this out with Chinese foot binding and the African circumcision of women, and Hindu "sati"--the burning of widows alive, and so forth. The focus of this post was to provide an explanation for the horrendous actions of James Holmes, and the moral laxity that is prominent in our society as a result of the Christian doctrines stated above, which is the best explanation for how these events came about.
Of course, I am open to the possibility that it was a natural cause, such as a physical condition. In other words, his mental state could be the result of a physical imbalance. But if this is the case, then the role of the Christian god is compromised, and we have come full circle on Rick Warren because he claims that James Holmes' actions are due to teaching students biology/evolution, when as he said:
"When students are taught they are no different from animals, they act like it."
And now, giving a NATURALISTIC EXPLANATION for the horrendous actions of James Holmes, thereby undermining Christianity at its foundation, as they claim EVERYTHING is controlled by God. This would support the H-D method and the scientific explanation of the world, which is the best explanation.
Addendum 2: Just to let everyone know, one of the main goals of writing this post is to argue for a naturalistic explanation for EVERYTHING--the good, the bad, and the ugly--including the best explanation for the existence of the universe. This, in conjunction with what I have already argued above, will result in the tendency to have less moral laxity, and the likelihood of less tragedies such as the one committed by James Holmes. I will write a second post now that I have received enough responses from Christians, atheists or otherwise to illustrate that Christians want to credit God for ALL the good things in the world, and blame Satan/naturalism/humans for ALL the bad things in the world--while at the same time believing God determines EVERYTHING. I will argue that theistic determinism and theistic free will is inconsistent, but that a certain sense of determinism and free will are compatible, and that everything in our world is better explained via natural explanations, as opposed to supernatural explanations. Part of naturalistic explanation I will argue for, involves the notion that the self is in part explainable by every experience that a person has, and that involves any organization, school, relationships, etc., and if we knew all of these, and all their interrelatedness, we could just about predict a persons' behavior.
Addendum 3: See the following comments, which help to illustrate my point and are a lead in to my next post on this subject.
Addendum: I merely mentioned the other disjunct because I was waiting for an example, and I knew it was forthcoming. Christians are so predictable. Here it is: http://christiandiarist.com/tag/james-holmes/
The Christian Diarist says it all in his title, "Satan Rears Himself in Colorado Shootings."
According to the Christian Diarist:
The suspected triggerman, 24-year-old James Holmes, will be described variously as “troubled” or “unstable” or “detached from reality.” But I am convinced that the young killer was operating under satanic influence.
Of course, to attribute today’s murder spree in the Rock Mountain State to the supernatural machinations of the evil one is to invite ridicule from those who refuse believe there are demonic forces at work in this fallen world of ours.
But the Scripture warns us that “we wrestle not against flesh and blood, but against principalities, against powers, against the rulers of the darkness of this world, against spiritual wickedness in high places.”Now, we have both disjuncts. In this case, James Holmes is absolved of his responsibility by the Christian Diarist as his actions are "due to Satan." Whether the person claims they are guided or controlled by Satan or whether others make the claim, either way, we can see the negative consequences of the Christian belief system on this subject.
Note, that the Christian doctrine expressed by the Christian Diarist is also a Christian double bind, as it teaches that everything is determined by God, and then turns around and blames Satan when something bad happens, as they claim he is responsible for the evils in the world, when they just said that God determines everything!! Again, this lead to mental illness such as schizophrenia.
I hypothesize that this combination of factors including the double bind message of Christianity that he was taught and believed, combined with the stressors of his life, led him to his rampage, or it's the result of people believing the Christian teachings and doctrines that we live in a world that is dominated by Satan, which leads to immorality. Either way, it leads to immorality, and chaos, and Christianity provides believers with a basis for the belief that they are absolved from taking responsibility for their own bad behavior. Jesus does that for them.
For those who may have missed my comment or for others who may not read the comments I have added this from my comment from below from the comment section:
It makes no difference whether James Holmes is/was practicing or to which "sect" of Presbyterianism he belonged to. The fact of the matter is, in our society Christians and non-Christians alike (even some atheists) are subject to the influences of Christianity as described above.
In this post, I am focussing on Christianity. There are also many atrocities that are committed as a result of some of the other religions. Mary Daly in Gyn/Ecology points this out with Chinese foot binding and the African circumcision of women, and Hindu "sati"--the burning of widows alive, and so forth. The focus of this post was to provide an explanation for the horrendous actions of James Holmes, and the moral laxity that is prominent in our society as a result of the Christian doctrines stated above, which is the best explanation for how these events came about.
Of course, I am open to the possibility that it was a natural cause, such as a physical condition. In other words, his mental state could be the result of a physical imbalance. But if this is the case, then the role of the Christian god is compromised, and we have come full circle on Rick Warren because he claims that James Holmes' actions are due to teaching students biology/evolution, when as he said:
"When students are taught they are no different from animals, they act like it."
And now, giving a NATURALISTIC EXPLANATION for the horrendous actions of James Holmes, thereby undermining Christianity at its foundation, as they claim EVERYTHING is controlled by God. This would support the H-D method and the scientific explanation of the world, which is the best explanation.
Addendum 2: Just to let everyone know, one of the main goals of writing this post is to argue for a naturalistic explanation for EVERYTHING--the good, the bad, and the ugly--including the best explanation for the existence of the universe. This, in conjunction with what I have already argued above, will result in the tendency to have less moral laxity, and the likelihood of less tragedies such as the one committed by James Holmes. I will write a second post now that I have received enough responses from Christians, atheists or otherwise to illustrate that Christians want to credit God for ALL the good things in the world, and blame Satan/naturalism/humans for ALL the bad things in the world--while at the same time believing God determines EVERYTHING. I will argue that theistic determinism and theistic free will is inconsistent, but that a certain sense of determinism and free will are compatible, and that everything in our world is better explained via natural explanations, as opposed to supernatural explanations. Part of naturalistic explanation I will argue for, involves the notion that the self is in part explainable by every experience that a person has, and that involves any organization, school, relationships, etc., and if we knew all of these, and all their interrelatedness, we could just about predict a persons' behavior.
Addendum 3: See the following comments, which help to illustrate my point and are a lead in to my next post on this subject.
Imagine being James Holmes ,and learning so much about the neuroscience field, while also being deeply involved with his family in their local Presbyterian faith . Anyone want to guess ? what the conversation at church ,and even around the dinner table at home might have gotten to be like at times
GandolfCollapseWay off topic on this thread i know . Sorry about that . I just hope A is for Atheist , will at least please kindly forgive me this once. You and i already discussed the affects things can have on how people might react , on another thread (i have dial-up ,and it takes such a long time to try and load up threads, with heaps of comments already on them) .
Strange enough, out of the blue , tonight here in NZ we had a documentary , part of it had to do with Muslims living in Australia . There was an "Australian born" young lady of "muslim bloodline" . She didn't ever practice Islam , until after 9 /11 . When she then suddenly started being personally attacked , for having a Muslim bloodline . She now is a fully fledged , practicing Islamist ,and now wears a burka and everything .
Now i already know it seems you don't think these fundamental religions , and types of situations that happen like this , will tend to have any real affect on people. Just a little comment i thought to post here ,to tell you that in her own words ,seems she had explained to us how it did. Its at least worth a thought or two i thought .
It cant hurt to just mention these things . Even if you may still think its something more about having a general hate of religion .
Look what Lucian wrote. I will make a brief comment to Lucian before I go.
He thought he was the Joker.
[Edit by John W. Loftus. John defends professor Cathy Cooper against PZ Myers's ignorant accusations right here.]
Addendum 4: I have expounded on, and have provided further support for the thesis offered in this post in another post titled:Why James Holmes' Rampage is the Result of Christianity - Part 2
In doing so, I have responded to the major objections and counter examples offered by commenters. I look forward to further discussion on this subject.
Labels:
Christian,
James Holmes
0 comments:
Post a Comment