ambiguity

February 9, 2010

Souls, Not People

Filed under: Uncategorized — theinkhorn @ 11:09 am

So apparently, Rony Tan made a public apology on the telly last night(which i missed). I did, however, read the full text of the apology on the Temasek Review. The usual stuff… “sorry”, “promise never to do it again”, “continue to love souls”… Continue to love souls?

How many who were watching actually caught that part? Continue to love souls. Now, it doesn’t seem like much at first. Until you think about it. Why the word souls? Why not people? Why refer to them as souls?

The answer is very simple. Christians see themselves as “saved”, and therefore, make it their responsibility to “save” other “souls”. It is plain, simple, straight forward, Christian style arrogance. Yes I know that christians don’t save, Jesus does. I don’t think technicalities matter that much, especially since christians consider themselves vehicles of the word.

So is this Rony’s attempt to subtly imply that he disagrees with having to publicly apologise for his unambiguously insensitive remarks? That’s the way he does it? By condescendingly bringing everyone who isn’t “saved” to the level of mere souls? By not acknowledging that despite our lack of belief in his faith, we should still be referred to as fellow people? Did you not read what I said yesterday about thinking before you talk, Rony?

This is how religious wars begin. With the very notion that one believer’s dick is larger than another’s. It may not seem like a big issue to us, possibly because most of us have yet to evolve critical thinking skills. But send his apology to Richard Dawkins. Send it to Bill Maher. Send it to Sam Harris. Find some way to deliver it to George Carlin. And if you dare, send it to Christopher Hitchens. Given his literary prowess, I am certain that Hitchens would spot and appreciate the underlying premise, and depending on how drunk he is, tear Rony apart.

Perhaps I’m overreacting. Perhaps I’m giving Rony too much credit. Maybe he isn’t clever enough to come up with something like that. Which is it then? Is he so half-witted as to underestimate us and display such defiance in the face of his own faux pas? Or have i given him too much credit? Perhaps he’s too dense to have been able to come up with such a scheme?

Advertisements

6 Comments »

  1. You truly give the clown too much credit for his ‘souls’

    Comment by sloo — February 11, 2010 @ 2:37 pm

  2. Actually rony’s apology if taken in that context is a non-brainer….by putting “souls” within his sorry “speech”, by implication he mean only “christians” in that context. If he has use people or folks, it can be taken as everybody with their different faiths and religions.

    Seems the apology is not sincere after all.

    Disappointed.

    Comment by Anonymous — February 11, 2010 @ 3:03 pm

  3. After watching yet another video of Rony preaching, this time about homsexuality, I have to admit that it is looking increasingly likely that I have severely overestimated him. His lack of knowledge is… astounding. Embarrassing, even.

    Still, I believe the usage of the word “souls” in his apology was a natural reflex, a defense mechanism if you will. It’s probably wired into his system, seeing as how he has been a pastor for awhile. Probably didn’t even realise what he said.

    Comment by theinkhorn — February 11, 2010 @ 3:07 pm

  4. Good points – souls to save…. but do it with love.

    Comment by Gentle Lamb — February 12, 2010 @ 10:49 am

  5. I don’t quite get what you mean, Gentle Lamb, but the very idea that one could save another’s soul is not just unbelievably arrogant, it is incredibly dense. With or without love. While I agree that Rony Tan’s views regarding homosexuality are flawed, I must remind you that his opinions are derived from what you and him both call “the word of god”, which is riddled with historical inaccuracy.

    After reading the about section on the website you’ve linked, the only consolation i can offer you is that your god has not forsaken you because an non-existent entity can neither contemplate nor perform such actions. But if you insist on dwelling on the scriptures of a totalitarian, man-made and completely sexist religion, then consider this. Since homosexuality is after all a form of love, and the bible is overflowing with verses about love, it should deserve the same respect that believers afford unto conventional love.

    Comment by theinkhorn — February 12, 2010 @ 11:33 am

  6. The Url of the Video clips of Pastor Rony Tan blasting and attacking Buddhism as below:

    Pastor Rony Tan Blasts Buddhist Part 1

    Pastor Rony Tan Blasts Buddhist Part 2

    Pastor Rony Tan Blasts Buddhist Part 3

    Pastor Rony Tan Blasts Buddhist Part 4

    Comment by Anna Chung — February 12, 2010 @ 5:08 pm


RSS feed for comments on this post.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

Blog at WordPress.com.

%d bloggers like this: