NationStates Jolt Archive

I don't know what to say.

I was listening to the news on NPR, and there's still a lot of coverage of the Virginia Tech stuff. One of the interviews is with a youth minister at Blacksburg Baptist Church. I'm used to the gun-control versus gun-rights stuff... but this one was new...

It's an audio clip, but about 2 minutes in he's dealing with 'how can god let this happen':

"God wasn't in this act... this was one man's choice - you know, we have a choice whether -ah - to follow god with our lives, or to lead our own lives, and this man chose the latter".

So - Seung-hui Cho killed 32 people - because he's not a Christian?

EDIT: Added the link: http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=9759151

That's right. I'm now off to go kill another bunch of people, because I don't believe in the Christian God. See you guys later. Or maybe not.

Moron.

Remember, God is all powerful except when things are done the Christians disagree with, then God is a pansy everyone can overrule.

I don't know what to say.

I was listening to the news on NPR, and there's still a lot of coverage of the Virginia Tech stuff. One of the interviews is with a youth minister at Blacksburg Baptist Church. I'm used to the gun-control versus gun-rights stuff... but this one was new...

It's an audio clip, but about 2 minutes in he's dealing with 'how can god let this happen':



So - Seung-hui Cho killed 32 people - because he's not a Christian?

I suppose that depends on whether the Baptist minister believes that following God necessarily entails being Christian. If so, then the answer to your question is "yes". Otherwise, it pushes his opinion to being that Seung-hui Cho did it because he's not a follower of a God of some kind (dedicated theists in general rather than Christians in particular).

Or does it? Couldn't an atheist be a follower of god or Christianity without realizing it? For example, I had a very Buddhist outlook on a lot of things years before I knew what Buddhism was or heard its teachings.

thats what you got out of that nice man's talk?

that cho killed people because he wasnt christian?

you need to listen to it again.

what he said was that this tragedy was not part of god's plan. that cho had a choice. that he chose to do the wrong thing. that we can choose to do what god would like or we can choose not to.

there was no suggestion that christians are better than non christians. there was no mention of cho's religion at all.

What part of that, I ask you, was a choice?

The part where he chose not to restrain himself and take out his mental scars on others.

So - Seung-hui Cho killed 32 people - because he's not a Christian?
As offputting as that bit would sound, it's not actually that bit I'm so concerned about. When "Doing what God wants" is simply "Acting in the interests of the whole" - the two of which, to a Christian, are indistinguishable because God is the Whole - his statement kinda makes sense, albeit in a rather trivial way.

What gets me, though, is saying that this guy chose to live the life he did. To me, it looks like Cho was the archetypal victim of circumstance. Bullied from a young age, living in a disadvantaged home, mental problems brought on by a combination of culture and parenting... What part of that, I ask you, was a choice?

Odd how the least religious populations also seem to be the least murderous.

Must be a fluke. Christy boy's obviously right. Now excuse me while I go clobber 30 old ladies to death with my unwashed, oozing cock.

Nothing new here, certain Creationist groups (especially Answersingenesis) have been using this tactic for years. They latch on to shootings, deaths, and other tragedies and try to link them to Atheism or evolution.

Odd how the least religious populations also seem to be the least murderous.

I don't think it odd at all. Think about the kinds of people who tend to be more religious than others; the poor, the insecure, the badly-educated. This is not to say that all religious folks are poor, insecure, or badly educated, just that many people with those problems tend to be more religious as a way of coping with their problems.

Poor folks are often badly educated and are living under harsh conditions, which makes them more prone to drug abuse, stress-induced physical or psychological abuse of other people, and extreme religious devotion as ways of coping with their lives. So societies that either promote or allow poverty and have less of a quality of education will have fewer people succeeding in life and should expect to deal with a higher violent crime rate.

On the other hand, societies (even those with a strong religious populace) that have implemented solid anti-poverty measures and have good educational systems should expect a lower violent crime rate.

The reason it doesn't surprise me that there is a correlation between heavy religiosity in a populace and more murderous people is that there is also a correlation between greater education and less murderous people, as well as a correlation between greater education and a lack of religious belief.

I don't know what to say.

I was listening to the news on NPR, and there's still a lot of coverage of the Virginia Tech stuff. One of the interviews is with a youth minister at Blacksburg Baptist Church. I'm used to the gun-control versus gun-rights stuff... but this one was new...

It's an audio clip, but about 2 minutes in he's dealing with 'how can god let this happen':



So - Seung-hui Cho killed 32 people - because he's not a Christian?

EDIT: Added the link: http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=9759151

Is anyone really surprised?

Is anyone really surprised?

People who believe in pink fairies blame all the evil in the world on people who do not follow the pink fairy way of life?


I've never heard such a thing...

The part where he chose not to restrain himself and take out his mental scars on others.
That was a choice made by the being formed from the circumstances that the kid was subjected to. I don't think he was capable of doing anything else at that stage.

Remember, God is all powerful except when things are done the Christians disagree with, then God is a pansy everyone can overrule.

That's not true. God is all-powerful. Sometimes He allows things to happen that we don't understand, but: "And we know that in all things God works for the good of those who love Him, who have been called according to His purposes."--Romans Chapter 8, verse 28 (New International Version).

Just saw this glorious bit of crap. Newt Gingrich (http://thinkprogress.org/2007/04/22/gingrich-liberalism-vatech/) blames liberals for the shooting. To steal a line from James Carville (a generally detestable man who knows how to turn a phrase), "I wouldn't piss down his throat if his heart were on fire."

thats what you got out of that nice man's talk?

that cho killed people because he wasnt christian?

you need to listen to it again.

what he said was that this tragedy was not part of god's plan. that cho had a choice. that he chose to do the wrong thing. that we can choose to do what god would like or we can choose not to.

there was no suggestion that christians are better than non christians. there was no mention of cho's religion at all.

No - seriously... think about it. Cho had two choices, the man says. He could choose to follow god, of he could choose to 'lead his own life'. He chose to 'lead his own life' - which our little Baptist preacher has just set up as being contrary to 'follow god'. ANd what are we talking about... the fact that god isn't responsible for these 32 deaths.

So - Cho 'chose' to not 'follow god', as a consequence of which, he masssacred 32 students.

So - Seung-hui Cho killed 32 people - because he's not a Christian?

How do you get that from the minister's remarks?
In rsponse to the question, "How could God allow this to happen," he said that the action was not sanctioned by God, and that God did not send this man to kill people [which was aimed at Phelps, I am sure] and that this was one man's choice. How does that equal, "Cho murdered them because he's not Christian?"

Do we even KNOW if his family is not Christian? There are plenty of Asians who belong to Christian denominations.

I think this leap to a conclusion is a little weak, and I doubt if most people answering this actually listened to the clip.

I think you may be overreacting a bit, Grave. I don't think the man meant, "ZOMG, he wasn't a Christian and that's why he killed people!" I think that this minister is most likely, like all of us, trying to make sense of the whole situation. Obviously, one who believes in a God who will lead us in a good path for our lives is not going to believe that God led someone to murder others. Thus, it mus be a matter of not following God - of going against God - that would result in such a tragedy. This is the way he can put it together in his head and have it make some semblence of sense.

I can see how the comment might be seen as insulting - and maybe the rest of the talk gave off that impression (I didn't hear it). But from what I've seen, I don't think it was meant that way.

How do you get that from the minister's remarks?
In rsponse to the question, "How could God allow this to happen," he said that the action was not sanctioned by God, and that God did not send this man to kill people [which was aimed at Phelps, I am sure] and that this was one man's choice. How does that equal, "Cho murdered them because he's not Christian?"

Do we even KNOW if his family is not Christian? There are plenty of Asians who belong to Christian denominations.

I think this leap to a conclusion is a little weak, and I doubt if most people answering this actually listened to the clip.

His family was christian (http://www.nytimes.com/2007/04/22/us/22vatech.html?_r=1&ref=us&oref=slogin), though there's little detail other than that.
Jeff Ahn, president of the League of Korean-Americans of Virginia, said the family was uncommonly private among the throbbing Korean-American community of about 200,000 in and around Washington. They shunned the more prominent Korean-language Christian churches, and prayed at a small church outside of town.

His family was christian (http://www.nytimes.com/2007/04/22/us/22vatech.html?_r=1&ref=us&oref=slogin), though there's little detail other than that.

Thanks, The Nazz. I think that pretty much cripples the OP's premise.

I don't know what to say.

I was listening to the news on NPR, and there's still a lot of coverage of the Virginia Tech stuff. One of the interviews is with a youth minister at Blacksburg Baptist Church. I'm used to the gun-control versus gun-rights stuff... but this one was new...

It's an audio clip, but about 2 minutes in he's dealing with 'how can god let this happen':

So - Seung-hui Cho killed 32 people - because he's not a Christian?

EDIT: Added the link: http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=9759151

There are probably people who say they follow God who kill, like the abortion clinic bombers.

That was a choice made by the being formed from the circumstances that the kid was subjected to. I don't think he was capable of doing anything else at that stage.

Being a pansy is no excuse to go on a killing spree.

Thanks, The Nazz. I think that pretty much cripples the OP's premise.
Not necessarily. The pastor may not have known, and may have assumed that anyone from the far east would have been of another religion. Let's be real here--there are a lot of ignorant-as-fuck pastors out there. I'm not saying this one was one of them--just that it's a distinct possibility.

Thus, it mus be a matter of not following God - of going against God - that would result in such a tragedy. This is the way he can put it together in his head and have it make some semblence of sense.
I can see why he'd start thinking that way, but I think he's stuck when he tries to pass the buck on from his God to being entirely the fault of an individual who almost certainly didn't choose to be the way he was. There's something of a false dichotomy involved there - that it's either God's fault or someone else's - and I think Grave was right to pick up on this, albeit somewhat overreacting to a potential conclusion one might derive from the faulty premises.

Not necessarily. The pastor may not have known, and may have assumed that anyone from the far east would have been of another religion. Let's be real here--there are a lot of ignorant-as-fuck pastors out there. I'm not saying this one was one of them--just that it's a distinct possibility.

That's not the sense I got from the clip, though -- and you have to also know the audience and context. This pastor did not get on public radio to preach that Cho's godlessness is why he murdered -- he was called and asked specifically how God let this happen and answered it. At no time did I hear anything that sounded remotely like "Cho did it because he is not Christian".

Worth repeating:

thats what you got out of that nice man's talk?

that cho killed people because he wasnt christian?

you need to listen to it again.

what he said was that this tragedy was not part of god's plan. that cho had a choice. that he chose to do the wrong thing. that we can choose to do what god would like or we can choose not to.

there was no suggestion that christians are better than non christians. there was no mention of cho's religion at all.

I can see why he'd start thinking that way, but I think he's stuck when he tries to pass the buck on from his God to being entirely the fault of an individual who almost certainly didn't choose to be the way he was.

He didn't choose to "be the way he was" necessarily, but he did choose his own actions. If we, as human beings, do not choose our own actions, then who does? And what is the point of legislation in the first place, if our actions are not a result of choice?

Being a pansy is no excuse to go on a killing spree.
I didn't say he had an excuse; I just said that by that stage he had little choice to do otherwise. He might have been too weak or embarrassed to stand up for himself, or he might have been explicitly excluded by all those around him, but you can't accuse him of choosing to live as he did.

Bullied kids eventually adopt a subconscious mechanism to deal with their problems. Some vent it on other people, some laugh it off and play the fool, some maintain their traits at the expense of having to run like heck every time trouble appears (yo), but others just end up withdrawing, and it's through no fault or decision of their own. In Cho's case, the withdrawal just added to his problems, since he became even more of an outsider, until eventually something gave way.

I don't think you can dismiss this as simply choosing to life a life other than God's. This kind of evil runs deeper than personal choice can adequately explain away.

I don't know what to say.

I was listening to the news on NPR, and there's still a lot of coverage of the Virginia Tech stuff. One of the interviews is with a youth minister at Blacksburg Baptist Church. I'm used to the gun-control versus gun-rights stuff... but this one was new...

It's an audio clip, but about 2 minutes in he's dealing with 'how can god let this happen':



So - Seung-hui Cho killed 32 people - because he's not a Christian?

EDIT: Added the link: http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=9759151

Come now.
Can anyone on NS really think of a single example where someone has followed the 'word of God' or been a real christian and actually killed anyone?
Come on I dare you. 1 example!
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
I thought so

But the VA Tech Killer clearly was a christian. Did he not compare himself to Jesus? I.E. the beleif in Jesus is what makes you a christian.

I have a hard time agreeing with "at this stage, he had little choice"

there are alot of people who are bullied, who are shunned, who suffer from depression that DON'T go on a killing spree. By saying that those in similar situations have little choice, you open the door for every single person to say "but my life sucked, I had no choice but to kill 32 people"

This boy had choices. He had an English teacher that offered to go with him to the counseling center. There was a student who tried to converse with him in another English class...he was one of the students killed.

I just don't believe we can give him an easy out.

I have a hard time agreeing with "at this stage, he had little choice"

there are alot of people who are bullied, who are shunned, who suffer from depression that DON'T go on a killing spree. By saying that those in similar situations have little choice, you open the door for every single person to say "but my life sucked, I had no choice but to kill 32 people"

This boy had choices. He had an English teacher that offered to go with him to the counseling center. There was a student who tried to converse with him in another English class...he was one of the students killed.

I just don't believe we can give him an easy out.
I know what you're saying. The thing is, the options given to us to change who we are for tomorrow are always based on the context of who we are today. When who we are today is a scared little boy in a strange place where he's constantly ridiculed and driven into isolation for being different and whose natural tendency when faced with adversity is to try to shirk away from it, we need someone from the outside to come and shatter our fears and anxieties to stop us from delving uncontrollably deeper and deeper into our own personal beasts.

It is so easy for people who have always had friends to take the importance of a good friendship for granted. Pure loneliness is a dreadful curse for anyone to have to deal with, and it would seem little wonder to me that it would drive a man out of control.

But the VA Tech Killer clearly was a christian. Did he not compare himself to Jesus? I.E. the beleif in Jesus is what makes you a christian.the belief in jesus being the messiah makes you a christian. hence the word "christian".

Well, I'm a person who was shunned and bullied most of my childhood, I didn't have any friends...I suffered from severe depression. I was lucky that someone I worked for recognized what was going on and took action. I made a choice to go with that person.

I may not be someone who is from a foreign country...but he wasn't a total stranger...he had been in the country since age 8, and was fluent in English.

I'm more than willing to agree to disagree, however.

No - seriously... think about it. Cho had two choices, the man says. He could choose to follow god, of he could choose to 'lead his own life'. He chose to 'lead his own life' - which our little Baptist preacher has just set up as being contrary to 'follow god'. ANd what are we talking about... the fact that god isn't responsible for these 32 deaths.

So - Cho 'chose' to not 'follow god', as a consequence of which, he masssacred 32 students.

no

the following god part refers to the decision to kill. its not in any way referring to the need to be a christian, just the need to not kill people.

if you look at the larger context that your troublesome quote comes from its in relation to "is this god's plan. did god PLAN to have these students killed that day?"

he is saying that NO its not god's plan. on that day cho decided on his own to do what is obviously not the will of god, he killed 32 people.

he in no way indicted any belief system or suggested that he even knew what religious tradition cho might have come from, if any.

Not necessarily. The pastor may not have known, and may have assumed that anyone from the far east would have been of another religion. Let's be real here--there are a lot of ignorant-as-fuck pastors out there. I'm not saying this one was one of them--just that it's a distinct possibility.

did you listen to it?

i found what he said to be very nice in a christian context.

no

the following god part refers to the decision to kill. its not in any way referring to the need to be a christian, just the need to not kill people.

if you look at the larger context that your troublesome quote comes from its in relation to "is this god's plan. did god PLAN to have these students killed that day?"

he is saying that NO its not god's plan. on that day cho decided on his own to do what is obviously not the will of god, he killed 32 people.

he in no way indicted any belief system or suggested that he even knew what religious tradition cho might have come from, if any.

"On that day cho decided on his own to do what is obviously not the will of god, he killed 32 people". You just did the exact same thing I was talking about.

If he'd have been following god, he wouldn't have killed anyone. So - why did he kill people...?

Deep (or not so) thought fo the day:

God is limited by the laws of the universe.