Michael Abrahams | Religion and tolerance of cruelty

When I was a child, it was my favourite Bible story. God created the heavens and the earth. But there was a problem. The earthlings were disobedient, and despite repeated warnings, continued their unruly behaviour. God had grown weary of them and decided to clean the slate and start over. So he sent a flood, which wiped out nearly all of humanity, except for a family of eight, who were safely aboard a wooden cruise ship of sorts along with at least two of every animal on the planet.

No matter which illustrated children’s Bible I read, I came across depictions of the animals obediently standing together in pairs on the deck of a massive wooden boat. Sometimes the drawings would be in biblical colouring books, and I would take great pleasure in colouring them. Even better, if I could get a toy version of the ark with the animals to play with, it would be the ultimate joy. Yes, the story of Noah’s ark fascinated me.

And it is still thrilling children today. In the category “Best Sellers in Children’s Bible Stories” on Amazon, the books at number three ( The Complete Illustrated Children’s Bible) and at number five ( Baby’s First Bible Stories) both have colourful depictions of the ark and a menagerie of animals on their covers.

DECONSTRUCTED FROM FAITH

Now, as an adult, having deconstructed from the faith, and revisiting the story, I realise how horrendous it is. It is a tale of genocide. And genocide is nasty business. Killing lots and lots of people is a gruesome act, but somehow, it became an interesting children’s Bible story. And this is one of the issues I have with religion, especially ones influenced by the Bible: its ability to make cruelty acceptable.

Suppose I told you I had a son who could not swim, but when he is disobedient, I take him to a swimming pool and throw him into the deep end, and then when he is on the verge of drowning, I haul him out, gasping for breath. What would you think of me? Would that not be cruel? So how can an entity that drowns almost every human being on the planet not be cruel? Drowning is a horrendous way to die. How can anyone who wilfully orchestrates this be seen as loving and merciful?

As a child when I saw illustrations of Noah’s ark, I would see the animals standing on the deck of the vessel as it remained afloat. What was not depicted were the dead bloated decomposing bodies of those who had drowned. The newborn babies, toddlers, pregnant women, elderly, and others whose lungs had been filled with water causing them to perish.

When I speak about these biblical genocides, and how unfair they seem to be, Christians often tell me that God gives life and therefore has a right to take it. I get that, but drowning is a horrific way to die, as are other methods the biblical God has used to kill people, such as being burnt to death, mauled by wild bears or slaughtered by other human beings with swords and other weapons of war. If as a Christian, you believe that a loving and merciful being would drown and incinerate people, including babies, what then is your definition of love and mercy?

When the Iraq war took place, and the country was bombed and invaded for allegedly stashing weapons of mass destruction (which were never found), there were comments from some Christians supporting the unprovoked assault because the people were “wicked”. I heard similar utterances when a gunman opened fire in a gay night club in Orlando, Florida, killing dozens of LGBT people.

NOT IN THE BEST INTEREST

Research has shown that corporal punishment is not in the best interest of children and does more harm than good. However, when discussions occur in a public space about banning it, many of the voices who oppose such bans are Christians who use the Bible to defend the practice. When the issue of marital rape was being discussed and laws against it being considered in Jamaica, I recall two Christian female lawyers opposing legislation to address the assault, expressing concern about the “sanctity of marriage”. Sometimes I hear Christians talk about “loving the sinner and hating the sin” then going on to say and do things that denigrate, dehumanise, and demoralise the “sinners”, causing them pain and suffering. Is that love?

Research in the fields of psychology, anthropology, and sociology has led us to understand human behaviour at a level way beyond that of those who wrote the books that comprise the Bible. Armed with the knowledge we now have, we must contextualise and be honest about what is written in that collection of scriptural books. By now we know that some of the stories are myths and are not to be taken literally. We must also be honest about what the word “love” truly means and not try to justify acts that injure people physically and mentally.

People have a right to their beliefs. However, when those beliefs influence a mindset that tolerates and makes excuses for cruelty, they need to be called out, challenged, or even dismissed. The inconvenient truth is that once people continue to see the Bible as a moral guide, there are some types of cruelty that will be tolerated, condoned, or even promoted. That is not love.

Michael Abrahams is an obstetrician and gynaecologist, social commentator and human-rights advocate. Send feedback to columns@gleanerjm.com and michabe_1999@hotmail.com, or follow him on Twitter @mikeyabrahams.