Unlike Andrew Bartlett, I haven’t exactly been open about having depression over the past few years, except to friends, family and my personal brain-care specialist. On the other hand, I have thrown out enough hints here and there, so I might as well step all the way out of the closet and admit that I have a yappy little black terrier of my very own. I share Senator Bartlett’s interest in the way depression is perceived, portrayed and dealt with – and this page on the Hillsong web-site – written by American evangelical crap-artist Marilyn Hickey – makes me bloody angry.
According to Hickey who has been “Covering the Earth with the Word” (Isaiah 11:9) for over 30 years as an anointed Bible teacher:
… depression is a supernatural spirit of destruction straight from the devil, and as such, needs to be treated like an enemy.
From there, Hickey goes on to outline her plan for dealing with depression in an evangelically Christian way, emphasising the importance of taking one’s “faith pills” – daily doses of the Word – to keep the dark spirit at bay. But it’s this paragraph that really caught my attention:
Depression has many causes – both in the spiritual and in the natural realms. Spiritually speaking, generational curses in a bloodline can predispose members of certain families to suffer from depression. In the physical realm, medical treatments, chemical or hormonal imbalances, fatigue, and just plain stress can be the culprits. Unresolved emotional issues or abuse can bring overwhelming sadness, anger, and the inability to function normally.
That’s a damned fine piece of crap-artistry. There are plenty of longitudinal studies which show that if you have one or more depressed parents, you’re more likely to suffer from depression in later life – although there’s still controversy over how much of this should be attributed to genetic predisposition and how much to family tradition. Enough studies, in fact, for the results to get out into the mainstream media and hence become common knowledge.
It’s got me gobsmacked, the way this “anointed Bible teacher” – either the anointing was self-inflicted or someone was irresponsibly stupid – takes these empirical facts and concludes that some cases of depression are caused by God visiting the iniquity of the fathers upon the children unto the third and fourth generation of them that hate him (Exodus 20:5). I suppose that’s a comforting thought if you’re certain that you’re in the fourth generation – at least your kids might be spared the generational curse. And of course it wasn’t your sins that brought on your own case of depression – it was those of your grandfather or great-grandfather.
I’ve already spent more time on this post than my brain-care guy would approve – wasting time on fools like Hickey and whichever Biblically versed, secularly ignorant Hillsonger decided that the Hickey page would be a good resource for the depressives in the flock – so enough, already. This stupid web-page is just vanity and a vexation of the spirit (Ecclesiastes 1:17).
Update: as Mark noted in a comment yesterday, Tim Dunlop has also blogged this. And more today from saint at DogFightAtBankstown.
Just out of curiosity, why do you care what someone named Marilyn Hickey, whoever the hell that is, says? You could probably find people who’d swear that depression resulted from clipping your toenails incorrectly. Why do you let people who don’t matter a bit, bother you so?
Tim Dunlop also blogs on this:
http://www.roadtosurfdom.com/index.php/2006/04/30/sunday-godblogging-2/
Hayden — speaking as a lucky member of the undepressed, my two cents here is that this only quite recently became a neutral thing to talk about. My ma was once diagnosed as clinically depressed (note to self: cross fingers) and she was outraged, reading it as some kind of moral judgement about her being too ‘weak’ to overcome it, because that’s how she thought about it herself — like most people of her generation.
If only she’d accepted the diagnosis, she could have got help.
Personally it’s the hysterical anti-intellectualism and willed ignorance of this kind of populist crap that infuriates me the most, but it’s also, like, depressing that this kind of thinking is renewing its toe-hold anywhere at all — and the growth of the Pentecostal movement is a bit frightening. Don’t forget what sort of power Senator Steve Fielding could wield if the numbers were right.
Taking Hayden’s advice in the spirit it was offered, I’m not going to be bothered by his comment. Well, not any more now that I’ve posted this.
Pavlov, I appreciate your comment, but I still cannot figure out why anyone would care what someone named Marilyn Hickey thinks about anything, much less about any specific illness. Is this person a physician or relevant in some way that I’m not seeing? Are all of her views worth getting upset over or just her views on this subject?
For two reasons, Hayden.
These churches have a lot of members and if they’re attending to this message, then depression is going untreated.
As Pavlov’s Cat said, it’s a worry to see pre-modern views given legitimacy as part of public debate.
I didn’t offer you advice, Gummo, nor would I do so. I just asked a question.
So, the anger is over concern for church members who may be going untreated because of something someone named Marilyn Hickey has said?
Who has bestowed legitimacy on Ms. Hickey’s views?
Coming out of two closets for the price of one (the other is “gay”), I don’t reckon that Hillsong’s take on the cause/s of depression is that fuss-worthy. Inciting gay-hate, OTOH . . .
The medical facts, as I understand them, is that depression (particularly that which is SSRI-resistant) is best treated/managed (I hesitate to say “cured”, although it some cases it will be) via what I would call the Protestant Work Ethic. That is, a steady job, relative thrift/sobriety and lots of exercise (if this is not otherwise built into the said steady job).
Depending on one’s POV, this Protestant Work Ethic can be either a supremely secular, commonsense type of thing (my personal view, although I’m not necessarily a great practitioner of the theory – but that is another story), or biblically-prescriptive holy writ. If others find succour/motivation/whatever via the latter way, it doesn’t bother (= affect) me in the slightest.
Just to be clear about it, I’m much happier being called a devil-child for my depression than for my sexuality, because depression is (i) treatable/curable and (ii) abnormal (as in, a bad thing absolutely, with or without fire’n'brimstone detailing).
Sorry, Hayden, I should have been more direct.
1) Anything at all that demonises (in this case literally) depression in the public sphere contributes to a regression in thinking about it.
2) Any such regression can only harm sufferers, whether because it discourages them from seeking treatment, or makes them think of themselves as ‘weak’ or ‘possessed by demons’, or for any other reason.
3) This is bad.
4) Ms Hickey and her ilk are on TV, well-known as a highly influential medium with global reach. And the Pentecostals have huge numbers of converts and direct influence in governments, and are also on TV.
5) This, too, is bad.
6) Ms Hickey’s name is neither here nor there.
Strange. On the one hand, reading between the lines, you discredit what is being said as crankery, and on the other you say that she is only reiterating what science has already discovered. What’s it to be?
Cut through Mrs Hickey’s evangelspeak for a moment and you’ll see that the only thing you actually disagreed with was the claim that God would allow the consequences of a person’s sin to affect succeeding generations. I say ‘allow’ because the context of the language is permissive, that is, although the Hebrew could be translated as ‘he ‘visits’ their sins upon’ succeeding generations, it could be more easily explained in our vernacular as ‘he permits, or allows, the consequences of sin to permeate succeeding generations’. But then implication in the context of the whole passage is that at the same time God gives a way out for those generations if they approach him for relief for their problems, including depression. In this instance ’sin’ is relative to the commands God has given to Israel as his chosen people. He has laid down a standard of living for them to comply with, but if they fall short of it there will be consequences which will affect succeeding generations.
I don’t think Mrs Hickey at anytime claimed here that all depression was ‘demonic’, or generational. In fact, there are countless ways, she implies, that depression can affect a person’s life.
I think you’ve allowed yourself to become depressed by a self inflicted perception that she, and therefore Hillsong, and therefore all pentecostals think you and all deporessed people are some kind of lower being because you suffer from the terrible problem of depression. Nothing could be further from the truth. You seem to have accepted a stigma when there is none offered or intended.
I suppose the real test for these kind of ministries is whether anyone actually is healed from depression. It comes back to whether prayer and the Word of God genuineely works for people.
Hayden:
You actually asked two questions – the second being “Why do you let people who don’t matter a bit, bother you so?”
Which, unintentional as it may have been, sounds a bit rhetorical with the implication that if I’m bothered by Marilyn Hickey’s idiocies it’s my problem. And there’s a bit of implied advice there too.
When I started writing the post, I had similar thoughts myself – it ain’t worth bothering with, just another bloody fool on the internet, get over it. Then I weighed up the time I’d spend getting over it (and feeling increasingly frustrated about all the work I was having to put into getting over it) against the time it would take to crank out a quick, snarky piss-take. The latter turned out to be the better option, in terms of time and equanimity management.
Finally, misinformation like this can be positively dangerous. Forget the name, but there was a notorious case of a Riverina woman who suffered from mania a decade or so ago, who was exorcised to death (hastens to add – not by Catholics) because someone convinced her husband that she was posessed by demons. In fact, she’d merely been non-compliant with her medication.
“1) Anything at all that demonises (in this case literally) depression in the public sphere contributes to a regression in thinking about it.”
Do Ms. Hickey’s views on everything matter or only on depression? I cannot imagine being so easily jerked around by someone you don’t even know.
“2) Any such regression can only harm sufferers, whether because it discourages them from seeking treatment, or makes them think of themselves as ‘weak’ or ‘possessed by demons’, or for any other reason.”
Who is it you think has been harmed? And specifically how.
“4) Ms Hickey and her ilk are on TV, well-known as a highly influential medium with global reach. And the Pentecostals have huge numbers of converts and direct influence in governments, and are also on TV.”
Do you believe that peole are turning to television and to television evangelists for advice on treatment for depression, or anything else? And where is the proof that people are doing this?
“6) Ms Hickey’s name is neither here nor there.”
My point precisely. Her views are also neither here nor there.
“Which, unintentional as it may have been, sounds a bit rhetorical with the implication that if I’m bothered by Marilyn Hickey’s idiocies it’s my problem. And there’s a bit of implied advice there too.”
None at all. I’m simply asking why you care what Ms. Hickey thinks about depression, or anything else for that matter.
Facelift,
Perhaps you’re better placed to decipher the metaphoric meaning of these two sentences for us, since you consider it erroneous to read them literally:
… depression is a supernatural spirit of destruction straight from the devil, and as such, needs to be treated like an enemy.
Spiritually speaking, generational curses in a bloodline can predispose members of certain families to suffer from depression.
On the subject of my self-inflicted depresson – nice one. If that works for you as an explanation of this post, sufficient to relieve you of any need to engage in reasoned argument, so be it.
Time for me to get off-line and listen to something pleasant and relaxing. Dupre playing the Elgar Cello Concerto might sound good right now.
Hey! PC, I’m a Pentecostal. Totally wierd people we are! Scarey! I’ve read Mrs Hickey’s book on generational curses, and can’t say I agree with all it says, but I think the picture being painted here is developing into something akin to farcical, and is a limited, misleading representation of what she says.
I’ve never known people who are clinically depressed and who approach pentecostal churches for help, to be told NOT to have medical or psychological examination or treatment as a majorly contributing part of the recovery program in their lives. In fact, most try to work alongside case-managers, and are appreciated by case-mamnagers for their added care and assistance. I’m not a member of the Hillsong mob, but I know enough to say that their policy is in line with that of most Pentecostal churches which offer ’spiritual’ assistance (prayer ministry, teaching the Word), but also commend any kind of assistance from care professionals, as well as mutual support and care groups within the church.
If you think that the only method employed by Pentecostal churches is ‘deliverance minsitry’, or that they think all depressed people are demonised, you’re well up the creek. Tell it as it is, and if you’re only guessing, find out for sure!
Gummo,
‘… depression is a supernatural spirit of destruction straight from the devil, and as such, needs to be treated like an enemy.’
To the Christian anything which harms the person comes from the devil, but shouldn’t be misinterpreted as meaning that the person has a devil, or that, as someone incorrectly implied here, they become a ‘devil-child’. That’s absurd!
‘Spiritually speaking, generational curses in a bloodline can predispose members of certain families to suffer from depression.’
‘Spiritually speaking’. You know, like on the spiritual side of the equation. This is followed up by a qualifying passage, which you reproduced in your post, which tells the other side of the story – from the ‘physical realm’ side, which is evangelspeak for ‘naturally speaking’. So she gives the perspective form those who are spiritually afflicted, but tells us there are others who suffer from natural or even emotional depressions.
I didn’t say your depression was ’self-inflicted’. I said your ‘perception’ was ’self-inflicted’.
You made some statements about Hillsong and Mrs Hickey which led to others entering into aa character assassination of the same, when you were short of all the facts. You posted them. I just responded.
I think it is a question of emphasis. I envy those people who can claim the support of prayer, but I am horrified by people who promote any notion that illness or disability is some kind of moral stain, or a visitation of evil.
Sometimes I think an honest census of the blogosphere would reveal that we all belong to one of two classes of people: 1) those who have experience of depression or 2) deluded.
(except for Tim Dunlop, J. Quiggin and Pavlov’s Cat). I’ll let them off the hook.
Um, Hayden – how come it matters to you so much what Gummo thinks of Marilyn Hickey?
Actually, I think it’s a question of religious predators, preying on folks’ insecurities and vulnerabilities. The number 1 reason people in this country visit medical practitioners is stress; and the number 3 reason is depression. Hillsong has done the numbers, as usual.
(P.S. In case you’re wondering, the number 2 reason is URTI, which everyone who wants an excuse for a sickie ought to know. There will be no charge for this public service anouncement.)
(Take care, Gummo, ol’ bean.)
FL:
Maybe Andrew Bartlett might find your views on his perception of the “Depression is a visitation from the devil page” interesting.
Zoe, why do you think it matters to me? Because I asked a question?
Hmmm, before I rushed to any judgement, I might like to know what the incidence of depression among Hillsong devotees is compared to the general population, although it sounds anecdotally here that the latter is not exactly independent of the former.
I might also add that for all the supposedly agreed scientific and professional treatments for depression, there appears to be an awful lot of it still about.
If cs thinks people just come to churches because they’re insecure and vulnerable he has a low opinion of the average church goer, and, of any suffering person who needs assistance. This is the opinion of an arrogant, ignorant bigot. Many depressed people come because they’ve tried most other things, including psychiatric or medical help, which have not worked for them. People who attend churches do so voluntarily. You can’t fool this many people into going to church week in and week out. They go becasue they want to, because they like to and because it is exciting and helpful. I now personally of people who have been helped out of depression, yes, by the Word and prayer. Not your cup of tea? Fine, but leave those of us who drink it alone!
BTW, Hillsong is one of the most exciting places in Astralia to be on a Sunday morning. Why are you so adamant about knocking a world-class Australian success story? Dim! Grow up please.
Does anyone here know of a natural cure for depression? Are there pills you can take which really work? Does science know the answers? Most of the comments being made by antichristian commenters here are pure speculation.
The implication you’re working hard to prove is that churches are not interested in people, they just want to control them or their finances or something not clealry indicated here. Andrew Bartlett certainly implies this when he wonders aloud if Hillsong has Government funded Community Services. Implication: They’re on the make and shouild be dealt with. With respect to Andrew, who shows homself to be a sensitive, caring eprson generally, his comments are no more helpful than any Gummo or cs or PC are making here. Inaccurate and unproductive.
I’ve already said that Pentecostal churches on the whole have a responsible view on the help given to people suffering from depression, and work to help people who come them. I’ve answered your questions on the Biblical content you asked about. I’ve told you that churches generally have a responsible attitude to people requiring help, and yet you, cs and Andrew continue to attack institutions you can’t be bothered to talk to yourself, a cardinal error in any kind of research project or critical analisis. You take one slab of literature from an indirectly connected person and attack all of the Pentecostal movement. cs has his own critcal attitudinal motivation for being so vehemently opposed to institutions which do far more good than harm, and has thousands of intelligent and well balanced adherants in Australia who will testify to this (I know, AV, ad populum arguement, not good, Oh well!).
Your startling evidence for mal-practice by demon chasers? – someone comes up with one bad peice of quack ‘exorcism’ which was undertaken by people not connected with any recognised church some years ago as if this is evidence of anything which happens in Hillsong. What is it that cs says? ‘Wake up and smell the reality’.
Weirdly enough, I have no opinions whatsoever about the theoretical aspects of depression, that are worth fouc-ault.
Gummo — I wish you abundant good health, prosperity, and victory over any and all brain enemies, as you choose to define them! Fight the good fight, my friend, however you see fit to do it! The world needs your insights, and your splendid talent! Get back in the game, dude!
(Oddly enough, at some point in the near future, there may well even be a Texas cheerleader-squadron chanting “Gum-mo! Gum-mo!” without even knowing why. Vaya con Dios, Senor Trotsky.)
Zoe, two thumbs up for the gotcha.
Hayden, take your argument to its logical conclusion and the blogosphere would have very little to talk about…perish the thought.
cs (or someone) – URTI? Please explain.
Facelift, yes it is a little weird for grownups to believe in fairy tales. But hey, whatever gets you through the night.
hmmmm, unless we all care what Marilyn Hickey thinks, there’s nothing to talk about?
No, don’t think that’s correct.
(Here, let me help you put those thumbs down……)
Sleep usually, andy, and I don’t believe in fairies. Oops! Another one down!
Gummo,
I seriously hope you get over your depression. I’m not out to depress you further (I just can’t grasp why so many hatchets are out for Hillsong when they really do so much good, and make a great place to go for anyone who wants to find some cheer).
Have a good week, and keep on smiling. By the way, laughter really is the best medicine!
Kim. URTI is upper respiratory tract infection.
Sorry, Kim and andy. My last comment was in answer to andy’s question
That’s actually the worst thing you can tell people suffering from depression, FaceLift. “Things aren’t too bad”, “You’ll get over it”, all that reinforces feelings of lack of self worth and despair. If you’re depressed (and I’ve been there too), being told you can easily cheer up is horrible – as it reinforces feelings of self blame. In fact you’re suffering from a medical condition.
I suggest, if you’re interested, you do some reading about how to interact with people suffering from depression:
http://www.beyondblue.org.au/index.aspx?link_id=1.10
The odds are that people you know are suffering from it.
I might also add that for all the supposedly agreed scientific and professional treatments for depression, there appears to be an awful lot of it still about.
Well, that’s because it’s a chronic illness, and was underdiagnosed until recently. Also its PR campaign has been doing the rounds.
URTI = Upper Respiratory Tract Infection. Colds. Flu. Bronchitis. Et Al.
Does anyone here know of a natural cure for depression?
Depends what you mean by natural, depends what you mean by depression. And of course it’s a very individual thing, (with correlations between specific groups of people as to what will work best).
For your clinical depression, a course of SSRIs will help, along with some talking therapy maybe, and regular checkups with a GP, if you can get an appointment.
For your regular, everyday melancholy, a nice walk in the park, some sunshine, and maybe a good movie should help.
For your sudden grief induced depression, any combination of the above, plus therapies such as a change in diet, a holiday, some churchin’ or workin’, low dose medication, councelling, or a hobby might be the trick.
But, like with any illness, one medication does not fit all, and you may have to try a few things before you find the right treatment.
Possibly because it is an unseen thing – a mental illness – that some people are so skeptical towards a traditional medical approach.
laughter really is the best medicine!
Not for broken ribs it’s not. Ouch.
There are a number of new medications for depression (available in the US, don’t know about outside the US), it may take people some time to find the right one or combination, they each work a bit diferently. Also, sleep meds can help as depression can be caused by sleep deprivation and inability to sleep can be a sign of depression.
Actually, I had broken ribs once and can confirm The Amazing Kim’s statement. You are obliged to be very grim.
laughter is also not the best medicine when you have a sore throat or a cough.
Mark,
Point taken, but “Things aren’t too bad�, “You’ll get over it� was not my intention at all. I can see that things have been bad. I genuinely hope they get better!
It was a friendly pat on the back in word form. Affirmation. “I like you”. “You’re OK”.
I didn’t mean to imply by my defence of Hillsong that Gummo was in any way a person I did not or could not like.
GUM-MO! GUM-MO! GUM-MO!
(Other curatives: a lot of exercise, Billy Jack movies, sunlight, more exercise, and T. Rex’s “Electric Warrior” have been known to help!)
All the same, I bet there’s still nothing in the whole great world like hearing 15 really cute teenage girls all chanting:
GUM-MO! GUM-MO! GUM-MO!
Dig it.
Enough, already, so laughter is not the best medicine on lefty blogs. I’ll take it into a right blog and chuckle up a storm.
Few things make me angrier than those Clevver types who imply (or come right out and say) that contracting Illness X was somehow the sufferer’s fault. This seems to happen frustratingly often with illnesses with a strong genetic component, eg breast cancer.
Gummo, I’m well familiar with that horrible Scylla & Charbydis dilemma that arises when some fool pontificates. Do I live with the rage? Or do I stand up for what I believe in, even though I know doing so is a complete waste of time? It’s a tough one.
But why on earth would you want to give prominence to someone who’s obviously a crank? You can’t stop people listening to cranks, whether they’re religious or ‘clairvoyant’. But why add to it? Why even take it seriously? I’ve seen paranoid schizophrenics displayed on current affairs shows. One bloke claimed to have advised Oppenheimer on the Atomic bomb. Another declared he’d been recruited to play for Carlton that weekend. The ‘wide-eyed and startled’ producers of this trash well knew they were both mentally ill, but put them on anyway. Of course they did. Just as 18th century toffs toured mental hospitals for a laugh, and you could do it here – until Depression activist Boofhead Kennet turned them all into housing estates.
If you don’t like religion, good for you. Who cares?
I just consider it pretty weak to brandish crazy people as representatives of it all.
And stupid idiotic bastards calling people’s religion fairytales and thinking they’re being witty about it are born fuckheads that no one with any guts or intelligence would have a bloody thing to do with.
Like Gummo, I have experience of depression. Two years when I was virtually unable to leave the house, spent far too much time in suicidal ideation and never answered the phone. It’s very ringing sent me into paroxysms of anxiety and the idea of any social contact brought on feelings of terror, inadequacy and hopelessness. Without a partner who loved me enough to steer me through the darkness, I wouldn’t be here.
Even in my blackest moments, I never pondered the notion that demons and all round “godlessness” might have delivered me into despair-without-end. In fact, until reading the post, I’d never considered that reparative therapy might have been readily available in the shape of McMansion dwelling, Amway selling pentecostals with big hair, homophobia and more arm movements than the Village People doing YMCA. Thank God, I guess.
A course of SSRI’s did help, so did counselling, love from people round me and let it be said, a certain amount of “getting on with it.’
I think “depression” is over-diagnosed – often in conjunction with a brilliant new pharmaceutical solution that a busy GP can prescribe in lieu of the other forms of support that are generally necessary. We do need to accept that it’s OK to be sad, down and generally havin’ a blue patch without medicalising the moment. And we also need to know when it’s not OK.
I mean no disrespect to anyone but calling on Jesus – or any other deity – in these circumstances doesn’t look to me like a recipe for clear delineation – or resolution.
Well this post has to be considered a complete failure as far as time-management goes. But (touch wood) it’s turning out pretty well when it comes to equanimity management. The comments so far have been very entertaining and there’s no sign that anyone’s energy is starting to flag yet so I think we’re in for some jolly fine stoushing with plenty more misunderstandings (some of them wilful) and failures to communicate still in store.
Facelift, after looking over your comments, I’ve come to the conclusion that you’ve allowed yourself to get upset by a self-inflicted perception that your own Pentecostalist faith is under attack. Maybe that accounts for the evident confusion and incoherency of your defence of Hillsong and Ms Hickey starting with your suggestion that the main post (where I said the linked page had made me “bloody angry”) was written because I’d allowed myself to
become depressed by a self inflicted perception that Hickey, and therefore Hillsong, and therefore all pentecostals think you and all depressed people are some kind of lower being because you suffer from the terrible problem of depression.
To me that looks pretty much like the same chain of tar-brushing that led you to the conclusion that your own faith was under attack. Well, maybe after all it is since, in explicating the metaphoric meaning of Hickey’s take on depression you’ve asserted that:
To the Christian anything which harms the person comes from the devil…
That “anything” covers a lot of territory and I’m not sure that all Christians would agree that all the harms that might befall a person come from the devil: things like infections diseases and industrial and road accidents have very obvious causes in the real world – micro-organisms in the former case, human error and negligence in the latter – and generally speaking, we don’t attribute these to spiritual failure. We deal with the natural causes and leave the supernatural well out of it. Granted, you go on to dismiss the idea that the devil is literally behind all these harms to the person as absurd but the trouble is, as I see it, the literal and the metaphorical are still muddled together in there somehow.
Whatever – it’s pretty clear reading the Hillsong page on being depression free that there’s nothing metaphoric in Hickey’s position on depression. That stuff about generational curses in bloodlines has none of the nuance you invent for it, nor does Hickey’s account of the spiritual causes of individual cases of depression:
Depression stems from an underlying root of unbelief in God’s care, His goodness, His faithfulness, or even His ability to get you out of seemingly “impossible” situations.
That is, the sin of unbelief opens the door to the dark side and in comes that supernatural spirit of destruction straight from the devil – why mention the supernatural here, except to exclude naturalistic explanations and solutions?
It’s good to know that no responsible pentecostalist would deal with a depressed person by telling them not to get medical treatment and help and that they prefer to work along case managers. But here’s a final question – is Hillsong acting responsibly by promoting on its web-site, an approach to depression that relies entirely on a questionable spiritual approach and says not one word about the medical treatment of depression? Maybe it doesn’t matter – no one’s assuming that the Hillsong web-site is going to be the first or only resource people will turn to when they start looking for help with depression.
I’ve read plenty of other uninformed pieces on the subject of depression – that goes with the turf – but this one is particularly benighted. Hence my angry response. Which may be “unhelpful”, but equally unhelpful are flights of high dudgeon at faith maligned from someone who refuses to countenance any suggestion that the anger might be warranted. Dismissing the response as somehow symptomatic is not only “unhelpful” it also compounds the insult.
Time for me to be off again. Until tomorrow if the self-control holds out.
(Written off-line after reading comment no 25).
The medical facts, as I understand them, is that depression (particularly that which is SSRI-resistant) is best treated/managed (I hesitate to say “cured�, although it some cases it will be) via what I would call the Protestant Work Ethic. That is, a steady job, relative thrift/sobriety and lots of exercise (if this is not otherwise built into the said steady job).
How are the above, in ANY sense, “medical” facts? They certainly sound very much like ideological notions, to me.
It’s interesting to think what Christians make of their idea that “anything that harms a person comes from the devil”.
Interesting, because “harm” is so often, in its experience and effect, in the eye of the beholder. I don’t mean to imply a totally relativistic stance, by this — just to point out that what might, at times appear to harm somebody, may be doing no such thing.
I still remember vividly the days when my parents used to castigate me for “reading philosophy books”. Not only that, but “in a darkened room” no less (I often ommited to open the curtains as wide as they could possibly go).
Was I depressed? Hardly – and not as much as I was perplexed, during that period of my life. But to my parents, such an act of reading books which they considered would have been difficult and unpleasant for themselves to read, was contrued, by them, as “self harm”. I guess my interest in things intellectual really depressed them!
This is what I wrote at Tim Dunlops house -
These people make me sick. My Uncle suffered severe clinical depression all his life. In desperation he turned to the ‘happy clappy joy joy’ brigade, who soon became the recipients of 10% of his monthly income, conveniently paid via monthly direct debit. A small price to pay for salvation and true happiness.
In the absence of treatment, he committed suicide.
You didn’t really tell us David how much your uncle poured down the gullets of health professionals before he suicided. Depression of course has filled the pockets of the many, sometimes, perhaps often to no avail. If the money your uncle donated was put to good works or causes, who are we to begrudge him that small pleasure?
Personally Gummo, I think ‘depression’ as such is highly overrated and seems to have become flavour of the month among the truly caring classes. To my mind depression is just one of a vast array of nervous illness, from anorexia, to agorophobia, anxiety and the like. We are very complex critters and are prone to the whole spectrum of human emotions and responses over time. Nervous illness besets us all from time to time, just like physical illness or incapacity. The question is how we handle it as individuals. It’s very easy to see the difference in coping abilities and strategies with physical illness, but not so with nervous illness. Why is it some are Trojans and some seem to collapse in a heap under similar trials?
Well your genetic inheritance aside, some people will cope well with nervous illness and some won’t, but some will also have nervous illness thrust upon them. It could be brought on by a tragedy in the family or some painful physical disability, arthritis, sciatica or the like. This may trigger severe nervous illness from which the sufferer may spiral out of control. Depression may simply be one common manifestation of this, but there are many symptoms of nervous illness. I think Claire Weekes nails the problem the best Gummo and I’d recommend her books on the subject to any sufferer from time to time. I think ‘Peace from Nervous Suffering’ is the main one on depressive illness, with ‘Self Help for Your Nerves’ dealing further with other symptomatic illnesses. Her analysis of the fear/symptom/fear cycle of nervous illness and how to overcome it is compelling reading.
Nervous illness, like physical ilness needs to be placed in perspective and coped with accordingly. Let me give you an example of the way the mental and physical interact. First scenario- you have got all the winning nos to the Lotto draw of some millions and are getting in the car to go claim your prize when you severely jam your thumb in the car door. Ouch!,a quick suck of the thumb and off you drive. Second scenario is the same thunb in the door but this time you were off to the dentists to have your wisdom teeth pulled. Have a guess what follows next? The question with nervous illness is how do you learn the first approach to the same stimuli. Claire Weekes has that nailed pretty well IMO, but the pentecostalists may have something along the same lines to offer the sufferer too.
Gummo,
No self inflicted perceptions about it!
I was affronted, or rather, challenged by the following from Pavlov’s Cat:
‘4) Ms Hickey and her ilk are on TV, well-known as a highly influential medium with global reach. And the Pentecostals have huge numbers of converts and direct influence in governments, and are also on TV.
5) This, too, is bad.’
The implication being that being a Pentecostal with enough clout to influence governments is bad. What makes this any worse than the unions having enough clout to influence governments? or the gay lobby, or the ecologists, or winemakers from SA, or the tobacco lobby, or bird flu scientists, or the ABC, or any number of influencial groups?
I don’t suppose Mrs Hickey, as an American has much influence over our goivernment. her TV program is as legal as Friday Night Rugby (and probably less hostile).
You’d be better off asking why the Pentecostals have huge numbers of converts, especially, but not exclusively, amongst young people. Maybe they’re actually fixing a few problems your attempts to intellectually discover the cause and remedy to is struggling to define. Maybe the adventof hope into a person’s life actually brings about a stimulous which produces a cure.
FaceLift, you seem like a nice person and I have no wish to affront you. In fact this conversation is making me give serious thought to the evolving theory and practice of blogging and the limits of decency in expressing one’s opinion, especially in a forum like this where saying what one thinks should be tempered by a bit of consideration for the other people in the room, whatver their beliefs and whatever one might think of those beliefs.
But you have specifically addressed me, so here goes. Your faith is obviously such that nothing I say will affect you anyway.
I don’t just have a mindless prejudice against Christianity in general. I spent a good bit of last Wednesday chatting over a post-funeral cup of tea to a 75 year old Catholic priest about his work and his life. But one Sunday morning last year, for reasons not personal, I endured a Sunday morning service at a large Assemblies of God church in Adelaide, and what I saw and heard in the way of exploitation, hypocrisy, simplistic rhetoric, specious ‘logic’, mass hypnosis and really bad music appalled me. Just appalled me.
As I’ve said over at the Road to Surfdom, at one point somebody passed a bucket, for which I was grateful, but then I realised I was supposed to put money in it.
Since you ask, though I promise you you won’t like the answer, I think the reason the Pentecostals have huge numbers of converts is the usual reason why shiny things are desirable to many: it’s because they’re shiny. In the face of a world full of toxic crud, the message is irresistibly easy to accept: the Bible is the literal word of God, and Jesus wants you to have nice things. What’s not to like?
Unfortunately some of us have insoluble intellectual and moral problems with this.
If it’s no help to you, that’s unfortunate. But it does help others.
Leave them alone.
Which you may interpret as pavlova skat prefers dark things that are hard to like and probably makes you a little bit depressed. Some religions with their tenets and adherents are like that.
Absolutely, observa. Me for the Calvinists.
Yes yes, I’m just being wilfully oblivious. I know exactly where you thought you were going with this. A monomania is a powerful thing.
Actually, I’m a witch. On with the hunt.
R.H., it is my very good fortune that I am in no need of help, touch wood. I was answering a question that had been put to me.
You’re not the whole world, maybe you don’t know that. You mightn’t need help, but other people do. And if finding it in religion stops them jumping in front of trains, what’s it to you?
And yes, hope shines. Of course it does. What do you expect from it, gloom?
Religious faith itself is a form of mental illness.
A man full of faith is simply one who has lost (or never had) the capacity for clear and realistic thought. He is not a mere ass: he is actually ill. – H. L. Mencken
You are just a disgusting pile of shit; the maddest stupidest bastard I’ve seen here.
RH’s post above proves just how easily faith tips into vile hatred.
Whatever happened to “turn the other cheek”? Didn’t you learn anything from Sunday School?
Mentally ill people can’t think clearly when they’re deluded, you stupid c—. I’ve looked after them and I know.
Whatever saves them from killing themselves is a bloody good thing. But rotten low bastards like you wouldn’t care if they did, just so long as religion didn’t get in the way of it.
It seems to me that anyone who could become angry, as some have expressed here, over others turning to a source they see as helpful, is seriously misplacing anger and probably signals that there are other issues at work here. It just isn’t rational to become angry at what someone you do not 1)know and 2)respect and 3) can be affected by, thinks about anything. If the Hillsongers could somehow stop medical treatment for people who seek it, and who do not voluntarily join Hillsong as members, there might be legitimate grounds for anger (as well as action). So far, it doesn’t appear that that’s the case.
On the matter of depression being over-diagnosed, that’s probably likely. And it may be due to pharmaceutical companies wanting to sell drugs (not that there is anythng wrong with that, that’s what pharmaceutical companies do, they sell drugs).
It may also be due to people wanting to pop a pill for instantaneous recovery. Let’s face it, we all demand to have whatever is wrong with us fixed up perfectly and immediately. We just aren’t into long suffering. Nor should we be. Diagnosing depression may be a quick fix for some people. It’s like disagnosing ADHD. Every kid these days has ADHD.
“Few things make me angrier than those Clevver types who imply (or come right out and say) that contracting Illness X was somehow the sufferer’s fault. This seems to happen frustratingly often with illnesses with a strong genetic component, eg breast cancer.”
I have never seen breast cancer described as being somehow the sufferer’s fault. Can you give an example?
If you’re hoping for me to turn the other cheek – coward that you are – you are making a fatal mistake. You could slap me, but you’d better be able to run fast.
Faith in the supernatural is a desperate wager made by man at the lowest ebb of his fortunes. – George Santayana
Hickey is a charlatan hoping to exploit people at their lowest ebb.
Hickey’s belief in the devil reflects her own inner demons.
People who pop an anti-depressant with the expectation of instantaneous recovery will be (sadly!) disappointed — unless the placebo effect works powerfully upon them — as the therapeutic effect takes 4-6 weeks.
From the Hillsong website:
Too easy! Can I claim the tithe on Medicare?
I didn’t say that popping a pill provided instantaneous relief, andy. I said that people pop pills because they want instantaneous relief.
Andy…another fact about SSRI drugs..there is a significant chance of a “paradoxical reaction”, meaning the original symptoms intensify, not diminish.
These drugs do a world of good for some but not for all.
Its very brave of you to step out of the murky dark closet, Gummo. Hopefully your depression will one day leave you behind.
I suspect that the instant community provided by some evangelist groups helps some people deal with their depression. On the other hand I am worried about the exploitation and crass message delivered by some of these groups. Since I suffer from terrible insomnia, I occasionally turn on late night telly to listen to what the TV evangelists are carrying on about. Some of these people are no doubt corrupt and in it for the money and power. How can a seriously ill person be expected to sort out the snake oil salesmen for the genuine article?
Well, if nothing else emerges from this discussion, it’s pretty clear that a few of our regular commenters are really straining at the leash when it comes to keeping themselves civil on this issue. Don’t be surprised if this comments thread ends up in moderation.
Hayden asks I have never seen breast cancer described as being somehow the sufferer’s fault. Can you give an example?
Probably the best known proponent is a woman by the name of Louise Hay. You can find a list of conditions and her view of their “metaphysical causes” at http://www.paganspath.com/healing/ailments.htm.
Breast problems are attributed to: “Left – Feeling unloved, refusal to nourish
oneself. Putting everyone else first. Right – Over protection, over bearing,
difficulty in giving love.”
And cancer is a “deep hurt, secret or grief” that is “eating at you”.
As for you, Gummo, It seems you need only let go of your anger and hopelessness to be cheerful. What a comfort that must be for you
Thanks, Zoe. I have a close and dear relative who has breast cancer and a number of work colleagues have told her that it’s probably due to the stress incurred during the long process of getting a qualification (incidentally a qualification none of them have.) Never mind that her grandmother and aunt had the same type of cancers in the same breast.
Actually Pavlova I was thinking of that other great religion Leftism, although to be fair it does have similar outcomes to a certain other Religion of Peace when its tenets are rigidly adhered to.
Anyway, IMO the guru of nervous illness is mentioned here http://www.claireweekes.com.au/
There is a whole industry of bullshit around nervous illness which this very succinct and intelligent lady can debunk with her lifetime of expertise. I’d thoroughly recommend her books, although I don’t know about the family DVDs, etc.
Freakweasel, Zoe. Oy.
Coughs
Underlying cause: A desire to bark at the world. “Listen to me!”
This one at least could be easily tested by correlating the incidence of respiratory problems in bloggers.
It’s a sort of cultural myth that women who don’t reproduce get breast cancer. Of course, there are also medical reasons why breastfeeding apparently helps with avoiding breast cancer but there has been for a while this idea that cancer is rooted in some kind of personal failure or frustration. Witness this excerpt from Auden’s poem Ms Gee:
And anyone who’s read Sontag’s Illness as Metaphor would be very familiar with this.
I think that the Hillsong/Hickey/Pentecostal line on depression is simply a contemporary version of faith healing, and as such isn’t quite as insidious as Gummo and others portray it – unless of course such blather escapes the cloisters and attracts undeserved credibility among the hoi polloi.
The really interesting thing to me about this more general issue is that faith healing has been empirically demonstrated to be effective for some people with some diseases, as indeed are placebos for probably a similar proportion of the afflicted. It appears that both these approaches to healing somehow tap into a common human ability to suspend rational autonomy in favour of deference to a higher spiritual or medical (or whatever)authority. I have no doubt that both faith healing and placebos appear to ameliorate the experience of depression, as they do with other illnesses.
I sometimes wish that I was either more gullible or less critical, so that I might be less susceptible to occasional vistations by the “black dog”.
Lastly, GUMMO GUMMO GUMMO!
“I suspect that the instant community provided by some evangelist groups helps some people deal with their depression.”
Well, a quick pass by the Landover Baptist website always gets me chuckling.
Observa,
Much as your reference to Islam is off-topic, I think I’d prefer a fatuous riff on how Islam causes depression to more comments like this. Especially that lame suggestion that all it takes is to get into the mindset of someone who’s just jammed their thumb in a car door on the way to the lotto office instead of the mindset of someone who’s done the same on the way to the dentist. That won’t get you through even a week of clinical depression with suicidal ideation, let alone the two years Geoff Honnor dealt with. Or the two decades it took for me to get diagnosed.
And since dentistry’s been mentioned, I’ve had the experience of an extraction with inadequate anaeshesia and a week of consequent complications. Piece of cake to deal with, emotionally – you know it’s got a physical cause and you know it’s going to end.
On a more positive note thanks to j_p_z for the Texan Cheerleaders. Is it OK if I imagine them completely naked?
ME! ME! ME!
If you’re looking for kooky views on depression, y’all shoulda known better than to overlook Tom Cruise’s recent pontifications on the matter.
It’s all about vitamins people.
I doubt that it’s quite possible to appreciate clinical depression (as distinct from ordinary grief or sadness) if you haven’t experienced it personally (as I have had the enlightening misfortune to do).
One reasonably common symptom is that of one’s body draining of energy and becoming overwhelmed by a sense of physical weakness, even in individuals who are very physically fit. I had the revealing experience in 1996 (three years before I was properly diagnosed) of having recurring episodes of such physical shutdown and weakness, one of which occurred on the morning that the Griffith University Nursing students were conducting their annual free health and fitness checks for staff and students. I submitted myself to the ministrations of the Nursing students, and was told that I was in unusually good physical condition. Later that year (when the attacks of physical shutdown had temporarily ceased) I was running half-marathons and cycling from Brisbane to Sydney via the New England Highway in a week.
Since being diagnosed and more or less successfully treated over a period in 1999-2001, I have nonetheless found that I am still prone, in response to occasions of significant physical or emotional stress, to “breakthrough depression” entailing inter alia a temporary but quite debilitating physical shutdown.
AFL footballer Nathan Thompson is one of a number of high-profile Australians who has “come out” about being depressive. In a match on Saturday in which he had been playing well, he took himself from the field with a few minutes to go, with his side trailing by less than a goal and needing “all hands on deck” to achieve victory. He has since defended his action by stating that he was physically exhausted at the time. One can only speculate, but I would not be surprised if he was really feeling the onset of an episode of breakthrough depression which might have cost him (and his side) more than a few minutes off the field at the end of a match had he not withdrawn himself from the fray.
Finally, I have often felt Ani Di Franco intuited the reality of depression better than most in this lyric:
Are you weary as water
In a faucet left dripping
With an incessant sadness
Like a sad record skipping
And an ugly and ornery
And shadowy dread
Lurking like a troll under the bridge
Between your heart and your head
Here’s a single Ani line that’s apropos.
“..eventually, our theories couldn’t explain it all..”
That’s how I see discussions on depression.
Organic, societally induced, circumstantial? Disease of body, mind or both? Spiritual?
All of the above?
I like Hayden’s notion about depression and clipping toenails. I am a chronic depressive, so I’ll try very hard to stop clipping my toenails. Who knows: it might elevate my mood — if I don’t trip over my toenails and break my neck!
I Liked Hayden’s “toenails” theory of depression. Maybe I should stop clipping my toenails!
Flippancy aside, think Gummo was justified in being angry about Hickey’s comments.
Best wishes, Nigel S.
Naomi, I saw the story too. My own much less grievous experience is of experiencing an 18 month delay in having my condition correctly diagnosed because the first counsellor I saw allowed a combination of his religious prejudices and his idiosyncratic psychoanalytic theories to get in the way of his professional responsibilities.
To be specific, he kept on trying to convince me that I had this or that problem which fitted his preconceived solutions, and in an hour of meandering discussion did not offer a single constructive snippet of diagnosis of the symptoms which I knew I had, nor a single constructive suggestion about steps I could take to address the problem once diagnosed. Mercifully, he is no longer inflicting his solutions on the staff and students of Griffith University.
What readers also need to know is that professional counselling is not cheap – the going rates are well over $100 per hour, which is often beyond the means of people whose income-earning capacity is often seriously restricted by their disability.
Naomi, Dave, PC, etc,
I’m sure you could find any number of stories of abuses that have taken place in any number of religiouis or societal organisations. But they never conclusively demonstrate that the basic belief is right or wrong.
Anecdotal ‘evidences’ like this are really totally unhelpful. Even Pavlov’s experience says nothing except she had a bad attitude about something she didn’t want to be part of in the first place. The sick joke about the bucket was unwarranted. Did you notice PC, that you were free to walk out at any time during the meeting? Here is clear evidence that skeptics tend to have a bad experience in Pentecostal meetings! And Dave’s Uncle, tell me, Dave, was he forced in any way to contribute to the church? Can you tell me of a single Pentecostal church in Austr;laia that has a sign on form which DEMANDS any kind of payment to attend their weekly Sunday meetings? Is there a compulsary levy to be in a Pentecostal church? You know like the old system of contributing to student unions!
For every story you come up with which is ‘proof’ that Pentecostal orr any other kind of churches are to be avoided because they mess your life up, Pentecostals can give stories of countless lives that have been completely turned around.
PC’s simplistic definition of a typical Pentecostal meeting hypothosises mass hypnosis. Amazing! These guys should be on telly if they can have such an awesome psychological effect on people. Somehow I don’t think your analisys was without impartiality.
Maybe, some people have really had an enlightening experience with God, and just go to these churches to express this addoration, and in the course of their praise for their God the hope they have is so extreme that it becomes a release from the tensions of every day life. Can’t be bad, folks! Can’t be bad!
BTW, PC, that ’shiny’ stuff you mentioned is actually Biblical, except the Bible calls it the ‘light’.
Yes, I’ve read the Bible, FaceLift, thanks.
FaceLift, I don’t see much light in statements such as this:
“Let all who are under the yoke of slavery regard their masters as worthy of all honour, so that the name of God and the teaching may not be defamed. Those who have believing masters must not be disrespectful on the ground that they are brethren; rather they must serve all the better since those who benefit by their service are believers and beloved.” 1 Timothy 6:1-2, Revised Standard Version
As the slave owners in the Old South of the USA correctly noted, you are not a true Christian if you do not support enslavement.
I would humbly suggest their is more light in an ulcerated rat’s sphincter than in this type of crass fascism.
Oops, should be “there” not “their” in last para
So now you want to debate scripture, steve munn? This could go on for a log time and prove controversial at every turn!
In the time of Paul and Timothy the Roman Empire was the predominant political and military power, and slavery was a culturally established excepted norm, and the advice given is an antidote to disaster since a rebellious slave was, in effect, a dead one. In the modern idium slavery is thankfully an abandoned costum, largely because of the Christian convictions of leaders like Wilberforce (influenced by Quakers) and Lincoln, but you could transfer ‘worker’ and ‘employer’ for ’slave’ and ‘master’, and it would make sound advice.
The counsel given is also in regard to the attutide a slave should display as a way to win the heart even of a master to Christianity. It would seem that the advice was on occassion taken and the result favourable. For an excellent example of how a slave should be treated and even immancipated, you could read Philemon. Of course, Jesus came as the ultimate immancipator of those in slavery, even if it is in heavenly terms rather than temporal, which has always been seen by Christians as short term compared to eternity.
The slave owners’ error is to interprete scripture to suit their means, which is a common mistake, and adds nothing to your attempt to discredit the Word, but takes nothing from the original sentiment or power of the admonition.
FaceLift, it is illustrative that Christ failed to condemn slavery, in fact he commanded slaves to be obedient. Slavery is a given within the Bible; it is morally neutral.
I don’t say this to denigrate Christianity or Christ FaceLift, rather I do it because I find your kind of pre-Enlightenment version of Christianity scary.
You are nonetheless right in pointing out that Christian groups like the Quakers have often been wonderful agents of positive change.
At least we now have ample clarity about public knowledge, understanding, perceptions, and ill-conceived, willful ignorance of mental illnesses. (Which are NOT “nervous illnesses�: “learn to “float� through your stress and panic� – gawd, you have got to be joking.) So, next time I see the government wanting to spend yet another umpteen millions of dollars for public awareness of mental illnesses I won’t be thinking: “surely we are way beyond needing that�. On the contrary I will feel compelled to write and suggest they spend ten times the amount.
I’ve never seen such a bigoted narrow minded hate-filled ignorant bunch of comments on a thread. (Sorry to those who did try to stick to the point, and make some sensible contribution.)
Compassion, care, understanding – zero.
As for “faith� being as good or better than either real medicine or a placebo – sorry, that one has been scotched, very thoroughly with the results of a very large ten year (?) study finding that people undergoing surgery who were prayed for (knowingly or unknowingly) fared less well than those without the prayers.
Gummo – they have missed the point entirely, which is not your fault. You drew attention to public comments and material that were worth examining in a critical light. It’s blatantly obvious why this is a valid thing for you to have done. This is no different to the types of comments made by Scientology, which require careful examination, as opposed to mindless and uncritical acceptance.
I notice, steve, that you used the RSV, which used the term ‘yoke of slavery’, when most translations use ’servants’. Being a servant in a household was an accepted part of employment for some. Paul’s advice was given because servants who became Christians could have been tempted to see themselves as better than their masters.
Jesus never once used the word ‘doulos’ contextually as ’slave’, hence it’s translation as ’servant’ in most versions, although he considered us all ’servants’ of one of two ‘masters’, God or the world’s system – ‘mammon’, which is why he didn’t enter your politicalarena and condemn slavery, which is a matter of conscience for those who were subject to mammon rather than God, since it is the product of mamon. As Dylan sang ‘You’re gonna serve somebody’.
The concept for Christians is that whilst they choose to ’serve’ in God’s household, they are better called ’sons’ and ‘daughters’, since their faith in Christ rbings them to the new birth, which gives them joint-ownership of God’s kingdom, and frees them from the stigma of slavery, despite the fact that, while they remian on earth, they are employed by an earthly ‘master’, to whom they are to render consciencious service.
FaceLift, now you are being dishonest. You know perfectly well that in the original Greek the word slave was used in the Bible. Every reputable scholar attests to this. The word servant was substituted for slave at a much later date. Clearly you have only the thinnest understanding of your own religion.
You also reveal a painful ignorance by assuming Jesus spoke Greek.
Facelift,
“Let all who are under the yoke of slavery regard their masters as worthy of all honour, so that the name of God and the teaching may not be defamed.”
That doesn’t sound to me like advice for the benefit of the slaves – if Paul had been concerned about rebellion being a poor life choice for slaves, surely he would have written:
“Let all who are under the yoke of slavery put up with it because we all know that a rebellious slave is a dead one. Sorry guys, that’s just the way the world is. But look, it might make things more bearable if …”
Nah. Whatever the historic situation, it sounds more like Paul didn’t want the slave brethren bringing the new religion into disrepute by getting uppity. Subsequent historical events – even the work of (post-enlightenment) Christian Abolitionists don’t change that. They certainly don’t warrant a back-dating of the attitudes of Wilberforce to the age of Paul and Timothy.
The bible is old, the text has been played around with for centuries, I take no notice of it at all. Faith doesn’t come out of any book, it’s something you feel.
No amount of yak will make any difference to me.
But here we have people citing the best and worst sides, and neither will be swayed. It’s pointless, a waste of time. I’m sorry to ever get involved in it, except that it gives me a bit of a giggle.
I truly don’t care whether other people follow Christianity or not, I only care when queer birds work hard at conning people away from it, and one or two here are obviously a bit nuts. Classic cases.
I’m happy. Very pleased to have an aim in life, and someone to thank for it.
I could have been a misanthrope, very easily, but in the end I’ve gone for love, and for empathy. It’s what saved me. And it’s what makes life so very interesting for me, every day.
If you can’t get to the message, shoot the messenger! Typical reaction.
So, steve, can you tell me what Jesus said in Aramaic? I’m just going by the languages available to us today, and you’re splitting very fine hairs. The writers of the gospels and epistles wrote in Greek, so that’s what we have to go with. Try reading the context and you’ll see that in every instance Jesus could only have been talking about servants, but of you wannot to make servants slaves – fine. You’re still gonna serve someboy. Don’t look like it’s God, though!
love & empathy, RH?
Indeed. Exactly. Try to think. Doing nothing isn’t empathy. I could walk straight past. And not care.
I hate trouble, believe me, I’d rather be joking. But if it’s served up, I’ll take it on.
Perhaps it’s just that you have no message FaceLift. I didn’t see any shooting, or fine hairs being split.
You’re still gonna serve someboy.
Yes yes, I know it’s only a typing mistake. But ain’t it the truth.
… one or two here are obviously a bit nuts. Classic cases.
Don’t ever change, R.H.
FaceLift says: “I notice, steve, that you used the RSV, which used the term ‘yoke of slavery’, when most translations use ’servants’. Being a servant in a household was an accepted part of employment for some. ”
You know perfectly well that these words are dishonest. Why not admit it, develop a mature and adult understanding, then move on?
You would be a much better advertisement for your religion if you learnt the virtues of modesty and meekness and disavowed pride and conceit.
Pavlov. I’m not sure what you’re getting at, but spit it out, if you dare. Just don’t grab things from context, it shows you up.
Australian Story’s on, right now: Barnaby Joyce.
You might be interested, I’m not. Politicians are a boring crowd.
What’s that Munn? Meekness? You must be joking. And does modesty mean shut up?
Get real. Or get walked over.
Righto. Dinner time now: Six fishfingers, and peas. And Maybe an apple pie later, Sara Lea. Okay?
Don’t tell Markus.
Toodle-oo.
R.H.
PS: Barnaby Joyce talking in te background.
All bullshit.
RH,
In the unlikely event that you pass me one day on the street when I can’t think clearly because I’m “deluded”, do me a favour – keep walking. Chances are I’ll already be on my way to somewhere I can get help from someone who at least credits me with having sense enough to realise there’s something wrong.
Thanks, steve, for advising me on how to live my faith.
It’s interesting how those on the outside make themselves better equipped to teach those on the inside without actually attempting to live it themselves. I think they have a word for that too.
What I think you’re saying is that I should put up and shut up while posts like this denigrate what I consider to be valid ministries. Is that your definition of meek and mild? Say nothing whilethe critics have field day, and the scoffers have the loudest voice? I don’t think so. I think it’s time for Christians to speak out when critics lay false or uneducated accusations. Meek ain’t weak!
I haven’t once told you or anyone here how to live your lives or conduct yourselves according to your beliefs, apart from declaring we’re all gonna serve somebody, which is utterly true, and absolutely the context in which Jesus used the term in all 4 gospels translated from the common word ‘doulos’ consistently in the KJV, NKJV, NIV, NLT, RSV as ’servant’ in referrence to Jesus’ teaching, but you’re correct to say it is best translated, where the context demands it, as ’slave’, although it literally means, ‘one who is subservient or in subjection’. Bt you also have to understand the thinking of the time, and place the principles in context.
I’ve only argued the points made on the blog. You speak as though by making the point you made you’ve successfully refuted my arguement, but you haven’t come close to proving anything but your disrespect for the Bible and for God, and since your legalistic stance has missed he spirit of the Word you’ve made your own arguement of no effect.
Furthermore, you raised an arguement which was nothing to do with the original post because you considered it one of your stronger arguements against Christian beliefs, but in engaging in a discussion about Biblical texts you’ve only succeeded in strengthening my faith, such is the powerof the Word, for which I’m grateful.
FaceLift says: “but you’re correct to say it is best translated, where the context demands it, as ’slave’, although it literally means, ‘one who is subservient or in subjection’.”
Once again you try to whitewash the truth. Slave means slave, pure and simple. A slave in biblical times was a slave in the same sense as a negro in the southern states in the USA prior the American civil war was a slave. You know this as well as I do, so why do you shilly-shally with the truth? What are you trying to hide? You only serve to debase your faith with your deceit.
I don’t really want to argue this point for the sake of it. I don’t have aproblem with either slave or servant, but the teaching of Jesus remains the same in effect. Slavery was a result of the Mammon system, and therefore the responsiblity of the Mammon system to deal with. I prefer to let the contextual meaning be revealed by the real experts – those who translate scripture:
Luke 7:2
There a centurion’s servant, whom his master valued highly, was sick and about to die. NIV
And a certain centurion’s servant, who was dear unto him, was sick, and ready to die. KJV
And a certain centurion’s servant, who was dear to him, was sick and ready to die. NKJV
Now a centurion had a slave who was dear to him, who was sick and at the point of death. RSV
And a certain centurion’s servant, who was dear unto him, was sick and at the point of death. ASV
And a centurion’s slave, who was highly regarded by him, was sick and about to die. NAS
A Roman officer there had a servant who was very dear to him; the man was sick and about to die. GNT
And the servant of a certain centurion who was dear to him, being sick, was ready to die. D-RB
Now the highly valued slave of a Roman officer was sick and near death. NLT
A Roman captain there had a servant who was on his deathbed. He prized him highly and didn’t want to lose him. The Message
and a certain centurion’s servant being ill, was about to die, who was much valued by him Young’s Literal Translation
centurionis autem cuiusdam servus male habens erat moriturus qui illi erat pretiosus Latin Vulgate
Here the servant of a certain Captain, a man dear to his master, was ill and at the point of death Weymouth NT
And a certain captain had a servant who was very dear to him; this servant was ill and near to death. The Bible in basic English
This servant/slave was probably a slave boy. His apparent closeness to his master is significant. The compassion the centurion shows is revealing.
Well, amusing as this might be, we seem to be well off the topic we started with – especially when we get down to tales of centurions and catamites in days of yore. Might be time to close this thread soon.
Thanks FaceLift, for lifting a Biblical tract that is obviously about homosexual paedophilia. As to how this furthers your cause, I have no idea. Are you sober?
No, actually! I’m filled with the Spirit! Intoxicated. Totally rapturous! In a hightened reality of ecstasy! Too good to waste, and I really can’t be bothered with your silliness, steve.
Gummo, others in the same plight
I hope your tendency to depression lifts soon. It can’t be much fun. Sorry Hillsong isn’t of any help to you, but don’t judge them to harshly. They’re really nice people!
Judging by the update, Andrew’s post has started a mass bloggery against Hillsong, which really is depressing. I can’t see Hillsong shrinking however. It’ll probably continue to explode across the country, and come to a city near you, so this kind of united front against the Pentecostal success story is set to continue.
Well Trotsky anyone who isn’t actually psychotic usually has insight into the fact that they’re mentally unwell.
You’re just neurotic.
I’m not really sure what the hell you’re talking about right now but I won’t use the current fashion word incoherent. Okay? I’ll just leave you and your bloody threads alone. Your hostility to me has never let up, and good for you. You’re stuck with it.
And Gummo, I’ve worked in mental hospitals and got on very well with the patients there. So well in fact that it cost me my job in the end. My friends have always been psychotics, they’re the only people who interest me. They’re just marvellous funny people. True anarchists. I love them. That’s all.
R.H., you’ve gone beyond the pale. I’m writing to you because you and me have been kinda blog mates. I like your knock-about style, and derro sub-plot. But mate, apologise to Gummo, or lose a vote.
What?
I’ve never offended him.
Be cool, Robert. Let’s not get friends mixed up with enemies, for no good reason. Gummo’s family in these parts, and you should say sorry for the neurotic slur, forthwith, if not before.
Rubbish. You’re getting dramatic over nothing.
He declared himself Neurotic. Depression is Neurosis. It’s not Schizophrenia; not psychosis with delusions and so on.
If he’s offended by it he can say so himself.
RH,
Fortunately for me, I have a copy of Gordon Parker’s The Bonds of Depression at hand. in chapter 2 on classifying depression, I find two familiar categories – Endogenous (generally chronic, with no necessary relation to major life stresses – but certainly aggravated by them) and reactive (the kind you might get if too much shit happens at once in your life). There’s also Paykel’s classification, which presents a hierarchy of depressions – old, severe (psyhotic or anxious) and young, mild (with or without personality disorders). In the index, re “Neurotic” it sez “see Reactive Depression”.
That’s unfortunate for you though – because identifying as a depressive doesn’t equate to identifying as a “neurotic”. I declared myself as having depression – and that doesn’t amount declaring myself clinically neurotic.
So yes, I take your statement “You’re just neurotic.” as an insult and more of a use of the term in its colloquial sense.
As for the hostility – well, calling other commenters stupid C__ts, doesn’t exactly impress me. Nor does this. Copped a bit too much of that from JC and Lord what’s his face.
(Incidentally, there’s an emerging school of psychiatric thought which holds that schizophrenics can still think clearly and rationally, even while delusional. The reason they don’t sound that way is that the experiences they’re trying to rationalise aren’t the normal, ordered perceptions the rest of us have).
Well, I tried your link to Hillsong, but it came up with ‘this page doesn’t exist’, so I started looking for something on M. Hickey and couldn’t come up with anything that is easily identifyable.
However I very quickly came to this page http://www2.hillsong.com/emerge/default.asp?pid=556&hidetitle=yes which sort of tells a different story to the one you’re attempting here. It seems that Hillsong works with medical professionals to bring care to the whole person:
‘Hillsong Health Centres have been established with an aim to provide quality health care to our community. We currently have one centre running in Castle Hill, with vision for growth throughout Sydney. At Hillsong Health Centres, we believe in caring for the whole person by providing care through a team of highly qualified and professional medical practitioners, psychologists and counsellors.’
OK, just a beginning, but you’d have to admit that this paints a different picture to your post.
Maybe you can tell us exactly how you arrived at the M. Hickey page.
Oh duh FL – they’ve obviously pulled the page in response to adverse reaction to it. Since it was clearly at variance with their carefully crafted veneer of reasonableness, the Hillsong spin doctors have put that one back in the closet, for the time being…
Facelift, if you go to Andrew Bartlett’s page – where I got the original link – you’ll find a link to the Google cache of the Hillsong Page, which has now been taken down.
Interesting that during the whole debate so far you didn’t visit the Hillsong page once to check out what Hickey said. I’d take that as a testament to my honesty, and therefore a compliment, if it weren’t for your implied suggestion that I invented the whole thing.
That said, this comments thread is closed. No doubt the issues canvassed will be revisited in future.