A church in Singapore, Church 3:16, has voiced out their take on the viral Singaporean that was singing and worshipping on a plane.
Here’s a quick brief on what happened if you’re still in the dark on the latest Singaporean scandal.
With a strong rhetoric on how Jonathan Neo’s faith brought him to worship in the middle of a flight, Church 3:16 stood in support of his actions.
Firstly, the church talked about how Singapore’s secularism only applies to state institutions, so everyone within the society should be able to freely practice their religion.
The church also discussed the detractors of Neo’s actions, stating that “the scoffing is not something that Christians should be surprised by”, especially on “social media”.
They also cited the “current culture of consent” for the hate, reminding the readers that Jon had gained permission from the pilot for his evangelism, and that the people on the plane could have told him to stop.
Church 3:16 said Jon was “unashamed of Jesus and the Gospel”, and that his “public expression of faith is but one way an authentic Christianity can look like”. They even compared Jon to figures in the Bible.
“Caleb and Joshua probably didn’t sound the wisest when they wanted to take the promise land. In the process, they offended a nation who wanted to kill them. The ten other spies sounded wiser. While we are called to critical thinking, I hesitate to gauge the level of wisdom of Jon’s actions. Faith often isn’t measured by the soundness of facts,” the post read.
Essentially, in spite of the acknowledgement that Jon’s actions were not necessarily wise, the church justifies it with the strength of his faith.
Hundreds of comments spilled in. Some comments were supportive of the church’s statement and Jonathan Neo.
A large majority, however, were talking about how Jon’s actions, especially in the compact space of an aeroplane cabin, was invasive and could be considered proselytisation.
Though permission was sought from the pilot, it was the passengers that were subject to the singing and the music, and hence the consent argument wasn’t valid.
Others just argued that the act was ultimately disruptive and a public nuisance. Some netizens even went so far as to leave one-star ratings on the Church’s Google reviews.
Either side of the argument, it’s important to remember to be safe on flights – whether because of the ongoing pandemic, or just the standard protocol. Disrupting people trying to mind their own business one a flight is one thing (especially when it is something as sensitive as evangelism), but hurling violent abuse online is another matter altogether.
Just behave, guys.
- Popular AMK Curry Rice Hawker Retiring After Operating for 45 Years Due to Ill Health
- Roy Ngerng is Now in Taiwan Protesting For Taiwan’s Minimum Wage
- Johor Police Responds to Claims That S’poreans Are Robbed in JB
Featured Image: Tiktok (jackjenszjr), Facebook (3:16 Church)
Fresh grads, you don’t need any experience to earn up to $4,200 with this “secret”:
- In 2024, HDB Households Might Finally be Able to Keep Up to 2 Cats Per Flat
- Massive Discounts at Four Star’s Year-End Sale: Everything at 50% Off & More from 6 Dec to 10 Dec
- Everything About the Smith Street Revamp, Whereby a Tenant Will Take Over Many Shops
- DBS Said Short Outage on 1 Dec Was Due to Many People Logging in to Check Their Balance
- Man Without Licence Drove GetGo Car at 123kmh By Using His Friend’s Account
- A Doctor Claims Blow-Drying Might Have Indirectly Caused Queenzy Cheng’s Death