Tele-evangelist sued over 'God can heal' claim

[Player-X]

Tele-evangelist sued over 'God can heal' claim

Darlene Bishop, a tele-evangelist with a nationwide following, does not do things by half. When she and her husband Lawrence erected a statue of Jesus on the grounds of their mega church in Monroe, Ohio, they made it 62 feet high.No less gargantuan are her claims about the power of prayer to overcome illness. Through a series of sermons, books and a television show, Sisters, broadcast on religious satellite channels throughout the US and abroad, she preaches that God has the power to heal even the most deadly diseases, including cancer.
But the contention is now the subject of a court action. Four of Mrs Bishop's relatives are suing her over her claim that God cured their father - her brother - of throat cancer. He died of the disease 18 months ago.
In her book Your Life Follows Your Words, Mrs Bishop tells how she overcame her breast cancer through prayer, and how her brother was also cured. There is no mention of his death in the book, which she says is due to the fact that it was published at a time when he had been in remission for more than a year.
But the volume is still on sale through her website (price $15) under the blurb: "How God healed her of breast cancer and her brother healed from throat cancer".
Mrs Bishop's brother, Darrell "Wayne" Perry, was an accomplished songwriter whose work has been performed by big names in country music such as Tim McGraw, and by the Backstreet Boys. For a year before his death in May 2005, aged 55, he was cared for by his sister.
His children, Bryan, Justin, Olivia and Christian, have issued a lawsuit for wrongful death against Mrs Bishop because they claim she persuaded Perry to stop chemotherapy and rely instead on God's healing. They contend in legal depositions that at the moment Mrs Bishop and her brother were touring the country preaching about the miracle of his recovery, they were both aware that he had been advised by doctors that his illness was terminal.
In a separate legal action to be heard on Friday they also accuse Mrs Bishop of probate irregularities and of mishandling her brother's estate. "I am the oldest son of Wayne Perry", Bryan has written, "and I think it's a damn shame that we have to spend our money fighting our aunt."
In her blog, Mrs Bishop dismisses the allegations as "complete lies", insisting she would never tell anyone to refuse medical help. "I encouraged him to listen to the doctors, but he refused surgery."
There is no sign of Mrs Bishop falling on her sword. The motto of her church, founded in 1978, is: "Because Emmanuel lives, I expect victory every time."

More proof that religious fundamentalism taking over is dangerous to society.

[Ziegfried]

Lol, 15 dollars? They are definitely scammers.

[Seta-San]

religion is only dangerous if you get let it get stupid. I've never met someone this stupid with their religion and I went to a Catholic school where everyone, especially the parents, are hyper religous. The difference is, is that they will listen to the priest and bishops and pope, etc... on issues of faith and morals which is their expertise. When it comes to health... they let the doctors take over. Religion is something that should be done a personal level with prayer, in a social environment such as church, and an expressive level (Service) but never should you let a preacher take the place of your doctor or vice-versa. What i'm really saying is that science can't take the place and religion and religion can't take the place of science.

[Boltzmann]

I wouldn't say that morals are the "expertise" of priests and bishops

OTOH, this lawsuit is interesting. Let's see how it turns out in the courts.

[darth sephiroth]

Bwahaha, sounds like Jehova's Witnesses (or whatever they're named in english). They refuse to let the proper health care do their work.

[Cid Highwind]

Well that's their own right of course, maybe it's just a lazy excuse for euthanasia to get rid of their lifetime membership of said Witnesses

[Player-X]

It's jut proof that Religion and science should not mix.

[CKemu]

Praise be, praise be, Player-X speaks the mighty truth, Hallelujah!!

Or words like that, now just need some vocal talent and a backing choir!

[industrian]

Originally Posted by CKemu

Or words like that, now just need some vocal talent and a backing choir!

Couldn't you just get ref to make another song like he did with bositman?

[Seta-San]

did you ever notice that these sex scandles mostly take place in the most liberal cities in america? Priests are people too and can become equally corrupted by local culture as anyone else.

Originally Posted by Boltzmann

I wouldn't say that morals are the "expertise" of priests and bishops

OTOH, this lawsuit is interesting. Let's see how it turns out in the courts.

[CKemu]

Or the fact their own religion imposes un-natural sexual conduct and rules open these priests, causing sexual deviation and other related issues.

Part of a healthy life, both mentally and physically is down to a healthy sexual life. By 'manipulating' natural insticts, emotions and bodily requirements, would you not expect sexual malformation with religions making priests not engage in sexual acts, women covering their bodies and faces allowing for no education or understanding of the opposite sex, no sex prior to marrage etc

Sex is not just a 'moral' and 'social' subject, but one of nature and human requirement, whilst law and social moral do have an important part in guiding our insticts to stop such things as rape, molestation etc Religion and the forced 'un-natural' control of sex and human nature is not exactly a good thng.

industrian: I think mankind has suffered enough mental trauma Though I'll suggest some gospel bible bashing tunage to reffy later

[Boltzmann]

Originally Posted by Seta-San

did you ever notice that these sex scandles mostly take place in the most liberal cities in america? Priests are people too and can become equally corrupted by local culture as anyone else.

You are reading too much into my words. I wasn't even talking about pedophile priests and stuff like that.

I was saying that moral thinking should be restricted to priests and religious authorities. Religion doesn't have a monopoly over morality.

As an atheist, I find religion to be utterly useless, even (or especially) in moral thinking. There're perfectly naturalistic reasons for moral behavior (and perfectly naturalistic explanations for the evolved moral code of homo sapiens). No need for religion here.

And I found this part about the "liberal cities" to be just another ideological rant of yours. You seem to assume that liberals are just more "perverted" than conservatives, right?

Anyway, knowing your stated bias against homosexuals, this comes off as not surprising at all.

@CKemu

You make very good points regarding the need for a healthy sexual life, and the bad things that come out of regarding sex as an evil thing.

[Seta-San]

ok. Lets put it like this. Priests do nothing but study dogma and morals basically and basically make themselves experts on the subject. I don't disagree that most morals came into being just because they are common sense to human beings but it doesn't change the fact that these people probably know more about the subject than most. And i can't help it if everytime i hear about a sex scandle it's popping out of cities like Boston but not out of cities like Topika. I was just making an observation there.

Player-X I do find it interesting that things like this tend to happen in liberal cities such as Boston. I'm just putting it out there that smaller conservative communities have less of an issue with this stuff than the larger liberal ones.

[Boltzmann]

Originally Posted by Seta-San

ok. Lets put it like this. Priests do nothing but study dogma and morals basically and basically make themselves experts on the subject.

There's a large number of philosophers who devote their whole life to moral thinking as well. That's why I said that religion has no monopoly over it.

Besides, I can't really trust people who get their morals from a book full of fairy tales, resurrecting guys who walk on water and talking bushes. Sorry, but I won't take moral guidance from them

[Seta-San]

most fairy tales are made specifically to have a moral to the story. I don't see why using a fairy tale to teach morality is a bad thing. Hell, my parents didn't teach me **** about life. Most of what I've learned about life came from either Rocky or anime.

Originally Posted by Boltzmann

There's a large number of philosophers who devote their whole life to moral thinking as well. That's why I said that religion has no monopoly over it.

Besides, I can't really trust people who get their morals from a book full of fairy tales, resurrecting guys who walk on water and talking bushes. Sorry, but I won't take moral guidance from them

[Demigod]

Originally Posted by Seta-San

ok. Lets put it like this. Priests do nothing but study dogma and morals basically and basically make themselves experts on the subject. I don't disagree that most morals came into being just because they are common sense to human beings but it doesn't change the fact that these people probably know more about the subject than most. And i can't help it if everytime i hear about a sex scandle it's popping out of cities like Boston but not out of cities like Topika. I was just making an observation there.

Priests study the bible in order to gain insight into morality, but that's a very limited source of morality. The vast majority of professional ethicists ascribe to secular morality, which is a much broader and more flexible way of doing ethics. I myself have taken several courses in ethics at university and they have nothing to do with religion. The divine command theory (god determines right and wrong) is long dead and our current society is based around non-religious secular ethics. It's where ideas like racial equality, women's rights, and gay rights have all come from.

Priests only study morality as their religion tells it, and as such it's very limited and interpretive. It's not really about right and wrong, but obeying what their god(s) tells them. However, even a lot of theologians pick and choose from the bible (they pick certain things they like and ignore things they don't like).

As for the topic I certainly hope something come from the lawsuit. Faith healings never work and they are inherently dangerous (they give the sick false hope and delay or stop the seeking of medical treatments). It's sad that someone actually died because of it, and if the allegations are true then Mrs. Bishop deserves the full force of the law.

[S.SubZero]

Originally Posted by Seta-San

did you ever notice that these sex scandles mostly take place in the most liberal cities in america? Priests are people too and can become equally corrupted by local culture as anyone else.

Are the people who wrote (insert religious text here) subject to this same scrutiny? If a priest can rape a little boy today, can a group of people centuries ago wishing to exert their power over others write fictional texts claiming the coming of (insert diety here) and (insert physical manifestation of deity here)?

[Seta-San]

Originally Posted by Demigod

The vast majority of professional ethicists ascribe to secular morality, which is a much broader and more flexible way of doing ethics.

you live in canada. you obviously fail to make normal trips southward right?

Originally Posted by Demigod

The divine command theory (god determines right and wrong) is long dead and our current society is based around non-religious secular ethics.

racism isn't a lesson taught in the bible or quaran. It's something caused by natural human impulses to fear that which is different from them. Next the bible hardly excludes rights such as voting and determining a future for woman, if you read the bible clearly men and woman equally share punishment for sexual misconduct in the bible.. And what gay rights are we talking about? Marriage? People do NOT have the right to get married. Getting married is a privilage under law. Marriage by definition is prejudiced against homosexuals. If you want gay weddings in canada by all means do what ever makes you people happy but down here we run by a more traditional view.

Originally Posted by Demigod

It's where ideas like racial equality, women's rights, and gay rights have all come from.

this sounds like the first quotes description of secular morality... Saying secular morality is "Flexible" is basically saying that you can interpret it how you want or completely ignore it. Religous morality might be rigid but that doesn't mean it's bad.

Originally Posted by Demigod

Priests only study morality as their religion tells it, and as such it's very limited and interpretive.

this would make sense until you realized that the power exerted over others is also exerted on themselves and their decendants.

Originally Posted by S.SubZero

Are the people who wrote (insert religious text here) subject to this same scrutiny? If a priest can rape a little boy today, can a group of people centuries ago wishing to exert their power over others write fictional texts claiming the coming of (insert diety here) and (insert physical manifestation of deity here)?

[Player-X]

Originally Posted by Seta-San

you live in canada. you obviously fail to make normal trips southward right?

Isn't the US founded from the basis of being free from religious oppression and forcing morals onto others based on the bible is religious oppression.

Originally Posted by Seta-San

racism isn't a lesson taught in the bible or quaran. It's something caused by natural human impulses to fear that which is different from them. Next the bible hardly excludes rights such as voting and determining a future for woman, if you read the bible clearly men and woman equally share punishment for sexual misconduct in the bible.. And what gay rights are we talking about? Marriage? People do NOT have the right to get married. Getting married is a privilage under law. Marriage by definition is prejudiced against homosexuals. If you want gay weddings in canada by all means do what ever makes you people happy but down here we run by a more traditional view.

If you are so bothered by gay marriage then suggest some other term for it.

Are you sure that being raped meaning you have to marry your rapist or be stoned to death constitutes fairness?

And more stuff as proof otherwise.

Originally Posted by Timothy 2:9 - 15*

11. Let the woman learn in silence with all subjection.
12. But I suffer not a woman to teach, nor to usurp authority over the man, but to be in silence.

Basically it says there can not be a woman who is a teacher, that doesn't seem equal does it?

Originally Posted by Seta-San

this sounds like the first quotes description of secular morality... Saying secular morality is "Flexible" is basically saying that you can interpret it how you want or completely ignore it. Religous morality might be rigid but that doesn't mean it's bad.

I think he means you can adapt it to changing situations depending on social and economic factors without needing to be bound by unchanging words and with no one except yourself and your choices to make you follow them.
Religious morals are bound by words but people interpret it how they want or completely ignore it and then try to force you to follow it.

What's so bad about secular morality anyway?

Originally Posted by Seta-San

this would make sense until you realized that the power exerted over others is also exerted on themselves and their decendants.

That true except when their descendants decide that the words have different meanings.

Another question: When did "liberal cities" suddenly have any relevance to the topic?