David Barton: Bible will ‘get rid of’ PTSD

Page 1 of 2 [ 30 posts ]  Go to page 1, 2  Next

sonofghandi
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 17 Apr 2007
Age: 47
Gender: Male
Posts: 3,540
Location: Cleveland, OH (and not the nice part)

13 Nov 2013, 1:24 pm

Click here for the link

Quote:
In a Veteran’s Day appearance on Believer’s Voice of Victory, televangelist Kenneth Copeland told “historian” David Barton that Numbers 32 said that soldiers “shall return and be guiltless before the Lord” and that meant that they wouldn’t have PTSD.

“You don’t take drugs to get rid of it, it doesn’t take psychology; that promise right there will get rid of it,” he said, pointing at the Bible.


_________________
"The surest way to corrupt a youth is to instruct him to hold in higher esteem those who think alike than those who think differently" -Nietzsche


Misslizard
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 18 Jun 2012
Age: 62
Gender: Female
Posts: 20,558
Location: Aux Arcs

13 Nov 2013, 1:33 pm

Has this man ever seen active combat?


_________________
I am the dust that dances in the light. - Rumi


Thelibrarian
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 5 Aug 2012
Age: 64
Gender: Male
Posts: 1,948
Location: Deep in the heart of Texas

13 Nov 2013, 1:39 pm

Yes, this kind of thing is the result of therapeutic liberalism mixing with Christianity. Real Christianity is deontological, and therefore posits that it is more important to do good than to feel good. Real Christianity also admonishes its adherents to be strong and courageous rather than to get in touch with their feelings, which is also part of the essence of therapeutic liberalism. Life is hard.

Having said this, I do agree with Aristotle that being good is prerequisite for being happy. But being good is NOT the same as feeling good.

This fellow deserves any ridicule he receives.



hyksos55
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 15 May 2012
Age: 57
Gender: Male
Posts: 864
Location: Texas

13 Nov 2013, 1:44 pm

“shall return and be guiltless before the Lord”
To admit differently would imply our recent wars were not just or mandated by heaven.


_________________
"The law is what we live with; justice is sometimes harder to achieve." Sherlock Holmes


sonofghandi
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 17 Apr 2007
Age: 47
Gender: Male
Posts: 3,540
Location: Cleveland, OH (and not the nice part)

13 Nov 2013, 1:49 pm

Thelibrarian wrote:
Yes, this kind of thing is the result of therapeutic liberalism mixing with Christianity. Real Christianity is deontological, and therefore posits that it is more important to do good than to feel good. Real Christianity also admonishes its adherents to be strong and courageous rather than to get in touch with their feelings, which is also part of the essence of therapeutic liberalism. Life is hard.

Having said this, I do agree with Aristotle that being good is prerequisite for being happy. But being good is NOT the same as feeling good.

This fellow deserves any ridicule he receives.


I don't really see it as conservative/liberal, just using religion to ignore fact.


_________________
"The surest way to corrupt a youth is to instruct him to hold in higher esteem those who think alike than those who think differently" -Nietzsche


ChrisP
Toucan
Toucan

User avatar

Joined: 17 Jul 2011
Age: 71
Gender: Male
Posts: 271
Location: La France profonde

13 Nov 2013, 2:38 pm

I think this is entirely right: for someone suffering from PTSD, whacking a Televangelist round the ear with a Bible would be very therapeutic, and not just for the person doing it either......



Misslizard
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 18 Jun 2012
Age: 62
Gender: Female
Posts: 20,558
Location: Aux Arcs

13 Nov 2013, 3:01 pm

^^^I think I would feel a great sense of peace and well being if I could see that happen


_________________
I am the dust that dances in the light. - Rumi


Thelibrarian
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 5 Aug 2012
Age: 64
Gender: Male
Posts: 1,948
Location: Deep in the heart of Texas

13 Nov 2013, 3:03 pm

sonofghandi wrote:
Thelibrarian wrote:
Yes, this kind of thing is the result of therapeutic liberalism mixing with Christianity. Real Christianity is deontological, and therefore posits that it is more important to do good than to feel good. Real Christianity also admonishes its adherents to be strong and courageous rather than to get in touch with their feelings, which is also part of the essence of therapeutic liberalism. Life is hard.

Having said this, I do agree with Aristotle that being good is prerequisite for being happy. But being good is NOT the same as feeling good.

This fellow deserves any ridicule he receives.


I don't really see it as conservative/liberal, just using religion to ignore fact.


That's just it; this fellow isn't espousing religion, but therapeutic liberalism.

Did you ever see the Godfather movies? If so, you will recall that a recurring theme in the premodern world of the Mafia is that both godfathers took great pride in being strong--strong for themselves and strong for their families. Though neither was good in any meaningful sense of that word, their sense of strength and courage is what is lacking in today's culture of therapeutic liberalism.

Finally, I would add that it is the case that religious people tend to be happier than nonreligious people. That is just a fact, and here is one citation showing it:

http://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/dea ... ous-people

And ignoring my statements will hardly make them untrue; only refutation will do that.



sonofghandi
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 17 Apr 2007
Age: 47
Gender: Male
Posts: 3,540
Location: Cleveland, OH (and not the nice part)

13 Nov 2013, 4:24 pm

Thelibrarian wrote:
sonofghandi wrote:
I don't really see it as conservative/liberal, just using religion to ignore fact.


That's just it; this fellow isn't espousing religion, but therapeutic liberalism.

Did you ever see the Godfather movies? If so, you will recall that a recurring theme in the premodern world of the Mafia is that both godfathers took great pride in being strong--strong for themselves and strong for their families. Though neither was good in any meaningful sense of that word, their sense of strength and courage is what is lacking in today's culture of therapeutic liberalism.

Finally, I would add that it is the case that religious people tend to be happier than nonreligious people. That is just a fact, and here is one citation showing it:

http://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/dea ... ous-people

And ignoring my statements will hardly make them untrue; only refutation will do that.


He is expressing therapeutic religion, not therapeutic liberalism. If anything, saying that soldiers with God on their side are so strong and courageous that they don't need to worry about PTSD would put him closer to your view of a conservative, if anything. Aren't you the one in favor of Christian ideology as part of our culture? Wouldn't this guy be in more conservative (by your definition), as religion is the traditional panacea for the people?

I never said that religion does not make people happy. And I never will because it usually does. I only stated that he was using religion to ignore fact, which he is. I did not ignore your statement of opinion, merely asserted my own that it has little (if anything) to do with conservatism or liberalism.


_________________
"The surest way to corrupt a youth is to instruct him to hold in higher esteem those who think alike than those who think differently" -Nietzsche


Thelibrarian
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 5 Aug 2012
Age: 64
Gender: Male
Posts: 1,948
Location: Deep in the heart of Texas

13 Nov 2013, 4:44 pm

He is expressing therapeutic religion, not therapeutic liberalism. If anything, saying that soldiers with God on their side are so strong and courageous that they don't need to worry about PTSD would put him closer to your view of a conservative, if anything.

Sorry, the above is not Christianity. As the Bible says, it rains on the just and unjust. Christianity will NOT save us from the same problems the rest of the world experiences. Only liberalism promises utopia in the here and now, sir.



1401b
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 21 May 2012
Age: 126
Gender: Male
Posts: 1,590

13 Nov 2013, 5:41 pm

Guilt is irrelevant to Post Traumatic Stress Disorder.
The guy has got a problem with both understanding AND logic.

Plus he's cherry picking the bible, a ret*d thing to do even in the christian world.

One sentence does not a therapy make.


_________________
(14.01.b) cogito ergo sum confusus


Douglas_MacNeill
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 10 May 2007
Age: 62
Gender: Male
Posts: 1,326
Location: Edmonton, Alberta

15 Nov 2013, 11:49 am

sonofghandi wrote:
Click here for the link

Quote:
In a Veteran’s Day appearance on Believer’s Voice of Victory, televangelist Kenneth Copeland told “historian” David Barton that Numbers 32 said that soldiers “shall return and be guiltless before the Lord” and that meant that they wouldn’t have PTSD.

“You don’t take drugs to get rid of it, it doesn’t take psychology; that promise right there will get rid of it,” he said, pointing at the Bible.


He is forced to say stuff like that by the nature of the conservative evangelical position.
The Bible as a cure-all for bad science (read: evolution), unrighteous laws (read: use
the Holiness Code from the Book of Leviticus as the only code of law), gays/lesbians,
and so on and so forth.

I understand this to be part of the divine in the 3-D, or direct divine dictation
model of what makes the Bible authoritative.
I almost have pity on the poor, delusional man. Almost.



Kraichgauer
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 12 Apr 2010
Gender: Male
Posts: 49,751
Location: Spokane area, Washington state.

15 Nov 2013, 3:28 pm

I saw in the article that even the Southern Baptists are attacking this crackpot for his poor grasp on theology and history. You know you're nuts when even the Southern Baptists say you are. :lol:
And he appeared on Kenneth Copeland's show? Remember, Copeland was the same idiot who ended up with an epidemic of measles in his congregation after he told his followers not to get their children vaccinated, but rather to depend on the Lord. Both these guys are living proof of fundamentalism's intellectual failings.


_________________
-Bill, otherwise known as Kraichgauer


MelissaCho
Yellow-bellied Woodpecker
Yellow-bellied Woodpecker

User avatar

Joined: 17 May 2011
Age: 34
Gender: Female
Posts: 70

27 Nov 2013, 10:27 pm

Misslizard wrote:
Has this man ever seen active combat?


To answer your question: NO! Does Kenneth know that PTSD is a demon that never, EVER goes away no matter how you try get rid of it? PTSD is a demon that knows every fear in your heart. You know how? It's a part of you. I know because I have it.



Douglas_MacNeill
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 10 May 2007
Age: 62
Gender: Male
Posts: 1,326
Location: Edmonton, Alberta

28 Nov 2013, 9:01 pm

MelissaCho wrote:
Misslizard wrote:
Has this man ever seen active combat?


To answer your question: NO! Does Kenneth know that PTSD is a demon that never, EVER goes away no matter how you try get rid of it? PTSD is a demon that knows every fear in your heart. You know how? It's a part of you. I know because I have it.


MelissaCho, there can be no question that you are hurtin (in the country and western sense; pain + stress+ a heck of a lot more.)
I wouldn't wish PTSD on my worst enemy; some fates just are too cruel. And yet, there you are living it live. Help me grasp this,
so I may do what little I can to help you against .

And yet, this buffoon Copeland has the gall to believe that the Bible is somehow a preventive or a cure for this damnable condition?
I can hear [insert representative of evil/temptation here] whispering in my mind's ear saying maybe I should wish a dose
of PTSD upon him so that he gets to know firsthand how much it sucks from your life...how much it sucks, full stop! Dammit!



jrjones9933
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 13 May 2011
Age: 57
Gender: Male
Posts: 13,144
Location: The end of the northwest passage

28 Nov 2013, 9:34 pm

TheLibrarian, even Psychology Today should know better than to make causal statements based on a correlational study. I suspect that you know better, as well. Correlation is not causation, and there are all kinds of confounds when you talk about changes in society over time.