Tuesday, October 5, 2010

is WWJD useful?

Earlier today I responded to a blog that a Christian girl (a very physically attractive one, I might add) had posted.  She was describing a work conflict, and she asked the audience what she should do.

I jokingly replied, "WWJD?"

She subsequently messaged me and asked me something to the effect of, "I see that you're an atheist, so why would you say, 'WWJD?'" The question caught me off guard because A) I was doing all of this while I was on my phone driving to school and B) it was a good question.

I've thought about it for a bit, and here is my response.

WWJD is an acronym that is applied to cases in which a good moral response is desired. The Christian is using the Jesus character as a source for, "the right thing to do."

However, I would be willing to bet the family farm that most of the Christians couldn't tell you anything significant about Jesus aside from the trivial basics. Even if they had some advanced knowledge of Jesus' teachings, and if the teachings were correctly transcribed, and if their interpretation of said teachings were accurate, the Christian would still only be using the idea of the Jesus character as the reference point for making a decision.

In the case of my attractive Christian girl, there is no instance in scripture that applies directly to the situation that she is trying to resolve. So, by applying the WWJD formula, she isn't appealing to the Christ character directly; rather, she is appealing to all of the various sources of morality that could be applicable to her situation.

Because Christians associate JC with perfect morality, asking the Christian, "WWJD," is analogous to asking them, "what is the best thing that could possibly be done?"

In that sense, the "WWJD," acronym is useful. On the other hand, by invoking Jesus, the religious myth is perpetrated further, and that is never a good thing.

No comments:

Post a Comment