Thoughts.
Disclaimer: This post is strictly my personal opinion and my purpose is merely to write record it. It is not intended to show the superiority of any side.
The online comments from both sides leave a bitter taste in my mouth. A free-for-all mud sling-fest.
Sure, it is the recipe for disaster: high profile mega-church, pastor with seemingly fanatic followers, reports of non-mainstream practices, contradictions, large amounts of money crossing hands and Man's infinite capacity for destruction. All it needed was a spark, and the recent allegations provided just that. But in the face this whole situation, we must not lose sight of what the real issue is.
The plaintiff camp must remember that, should the allegations be true, the crime here is the act of the inappropriate use of the money by a religious leader. Their anger and injustice should not be leveled against the faith itself, because it was an act of man that is the wrong and not their faith in God per se. So don't throw sweeping statements and attack the faith because of Man's inherent weaknesses, and more so, don't partake in accusations and insults in ignorance and be lost in the heady power of condemning something as a pack.
On the other hand, the defendant camp must remember where their loyalties and faith less, and that is in God and not a human. While naturally we will be inclined to protect persons whom are dear to us, an in this case an important religious leader, that cannot be the cause for the outright defense of the individual if he has indeed committed a crime. Throwing biblical lines at naysayers only serve to fuel their anger and contempt for what they perceive to be self-righteousness and blind following of the believers. While the Bible contains the Word of God, it must not be taken out of context and be a blanket defense against wrongdoings when they are perpetuated.
The crux of the matter is this: it is not about the amount of money allegedly misused , nor is it whether or not the people are aware of how the funds are used; the crux lies in the context that this allegedly happened. The fact of the matter is that this is a church and it is morally unacceptable that the money be used to fund personal interests and agendas even if the givers are aware of it. It is simply not socially or morally acceptable.
So let us stop this mindless condemning of each other and let things run its course. We do not live in an entirely secular environment. and we should not be naive enough to believe in the concept of religious harmony, simply because there are fundamental differences in the beliefs of each faith and reaching a comprise would not only be impossible but wrong because each faith is founded on different beliefs. But this does not change the fact that we living arrangements is as such, where we have to be tolerant of other beliefs, however much it might seem contrary to our own beliefs. So rather than to keep trying to reach a consensus, will it not be better if we accepted that there are differences?
The online comments from both sides leave a bitter taste in my mouth. A free-for-all mud sling-fest.
Sure, it is the recipe for disaster: high profile mega-church, pastor with seemingly fanatic followers, reports of non-mainstream practices, contradictions, large amounts of money crossing hands and Man's infinite capacity for destruction. All it needed was a spark, and the recent allegations provided just that. But in the face this whole situation, we must not lose sight of what the real issue is.
The plaintiff camp must remember that, should the allegations be true, the crime here is the act of the inappropriate use of the money by a religious leader. Their anger and injustice should not be leveled against the faith itself, because it was an act of man that is the wrong and not their faith in God per se. So don't throw sweeping statements and attack the faith because of Man's inherent weaknesses, and more so, don't partake in accusations and insults in ignorance and be lost in the heady power of condemning something as a pack.
On the other hand, the defendant camp must remember where their loyalties and faith less, and that is in God and not a human. While naturally we will be inclined to protect persons whom are dear to us, an in this case an important religious leader, that cannot be the cause for the outright defense of the individual if he has indeed committed a crime. Throwing biblical lines at naysayers only serve to fuel their anger and contempt for what they perceive to be self-righteousness and blind following of the believers. While the Bible contains the Word of God, it must not be taken out of context and be a blanket defense against wrongdoings when they are perpetuated.
The crux of the matter is this: it is not about the amount of money allegedly misused , nor is it whether or not the people are aware of how the funds are used; the crux lies in the context that this allegedly happened. The fact of the matter is that this is a church and it is morally unacceptable that the money be used to fund personal interests and agendas even if the givers are aware of it. It is simply not socially or morally acceptable.
So let us stop this mindless condemning of each other and let things run its course. We do not live in an entirely secular environment. and we should not be naive enough to believe in the concept of religious harmony, simply because there are fundamental differences in the beliefs of each faith and reaching a comprise would not only be impossible but wrong because each faith is founded on different beliefs. But this does not change the fact that we living arrangements is as such, where we have to be tolerant of other beliefs, however much it might seem contrary to our own beliefs. So rather than to keep trying to reach a consensus, will it not be better if we accepted that there are differences?
posted by someone | 13:09
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
Subscribe to Post Comments [Atom]
<< Home