Bitcoin Forum

https://www.thenewsminute.com/article/want-declare-jesus-them-wrote-us-missionary-killed-andaman-tribe-91993?amp


Feel sad for this young man (John Chau) and his family. But his religious beliefs and stupid act got him killed when he thought that he should preach the gospel and convert The Sentinelese people to Christianity so they can be saved.

He repeatedly tried to enter the island which is banned by Indian Gov for any tourists and local people. He forgets that its one of the oldest surviving and isolated tribe on Earth and they don't need saving from anyone. https://www.survivalinternational.org/campaigns/mostisolated

According to his journal and emails, it's very clear that he was on a suicide mission due to his religious beliefs.

The sad part is his body still on the island, chances are it can't be recovered and some Christian group naming him as a ‘Martyr’
https://www.patheos.com/blogs/progressivesecularhumanist/2018/11/christians-claim-dead-missionary-was-a-martyr-call-for-punishment-of-tribes-people/

Retard breaks the law and is killed even after warnings from government.

Who gives a shit about this brainless fuck?

I think he should win the Darwin award this year.

That's an interesting story.

Christians claim John Allen Chau is a martyr after he was killed in self-defense by isolated tribespeople on a remote island hundreds of miles off the coast of India.

Chau was shot dead with bows and arrows after he went to the remote North Sentinel Island in hopes of converting the isolated Sentinelese people to the Christian faith.

Chau’s attempt to convert the tribespeople was an illegal and immoral act that posed a grave risk to the health and welfare of the Sentinelese people.

The article is very biased and even a bit weird in it's orientation, and obviously anti-Christian, alleging he was engaging in "illegal and immoral acts."

It actually all revolves around whether that island makes their own laws and whether the people there have the right to murder outsiders coming in. It's that simple.

And the retard chimes in on a subject he has no clue about.

I've actually known of this island for a while. It's not the first time an outsider was killed and certainly won't be the last time.

India specifically crafted a law to prevent individuals from visiting this island. They have their own sovereignty. Anyone visiting the island IS BREAKING INDIAN LAW.

Beside everything, they have been isolated for so long that going in there now, brings very high risk to wipe the island clean with some relatively common deases like a seasonal flu.

Wipe the island clean?

Sounds interesting. I'm having some trouble getting sympathetic to these savages. Bows and arrows and solving problems by killing people.

Maybe a nice resort could go there?

Maybe he thought he'd be saint after this death of him just as some people who were proclaimed saints by the catholics after the brutal death when they tried to convert savages.

I can see Sentinelese aren't the typical look of an Indian Beige though, more like an African indeed. If they are cannibals then that priest probably end up in their  tummies.

Calling for a genocide now? Seems about right for you. Rofl.

Perhaps we should genocide your savage people.

They don't have to make their own laws, India's law already prohibits outsiders from coming in. And the natives defended their island by killing an intruder. Not very nice given that the intruder was an unarmed dumbass trying to "convert" them but on the other hand he was carrying a potential lethal threat for them.

This is what happens when you act on your delusion.

Where was Jesus?  I guess he died when John's brain died.

Sad story nevertheless.   I blame his parents and his friends for not helping him get out of his religious delusion.

And proper quarantine procedures were followed?

No, they don't have a clue.

So I'm not sympathetic to their perception of danger.

They don't need quarantine procedures. Outsiders are not allowed to enter and the law protects the island.

Let's say you try enter a secured facility of some sort and you get shot. Who's fault is it for not following "procedures"?

It's the government's fault I died of gunshot wounds while diving in the spent nuclear rod tank. Dontcha know?

https://what-if.xkcd.com/29/

Darwinism at its best.He was fully aware of the consequence and yet he continue with his suicide mission.

Interesting viewpoint.

No, "the law DOES NOT protect the island."

People do.

If they are ignorant of how to deal with contagious diseases, and unusually sensitive to them, they're fucked.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sentinelese#Deaths_of_two_fishermen_(2006)


I still don't get why this is news. It's not the first time this tribe has killed off people coming close to them. India has declared them a protected area by law. There were no charges filed with these two deaths. I think it's just distraction from the Trump shit.

Would you apply the same logic if someone with ebola showed up at your doorstep and insisted on a french kiss?

Their ignorance or sensitivity is irrelevant. The government is protecting their way of life. They don't seem to be imposing that way of life on anyone outside of their island. Seems like a reasonable setup and outsiders should not go there.

I agree that it is the right of the locals to live the way they want to on their very own island, it is better to leave them in peace.

Great example of how unprepared christians can not operate in India.

Bonus video - end time battle in India: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CaPHK6VLEHA&t=1066s (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CaPHK6VLEHA&t=1066s)

Let them hear who has ears to hear!

That's kind of silly to argue whether the law or people are charged with protection of the island.  Laws wouldn't exist without people, so yeah, whatever, semantics...  You could argue whether the tribe should be protected or not, and it's your right to have an opinion.  

Having said that; the dude obviously knew the dangers he faced.  He wrote a letter to his family expressing his knowledge of the risks.  He got shot at, escaped, and then returned.  His fate was in his hands and made his choice.  

I'm sure his family wants to give him a proper burial, and would like the Indian government to retrieve his body, but I'm inclined to agree with the Indian government on this one.  He broke the law going to the island, not once, but twice.  He new the risks, not only to his own well being, but ignored the risks he posed to the islanders' health.  Attempting to retrieve the body would only compound the dangers to the islanders.

Sematics? Not quite.

The same people that would argue "the law protects the Island" would argue that "the immigration law can't stand in the way of open borders", it's "okay if Hillary broke all kinds of laws", it's "Not okay if Trump jaywalks," on and on.

It's not semantics to change the rules with every situation.

Further, suppose a plane, or a boat, had to make an emergency landing there. Suppose the islanders murder them.

Someone somewhere might just decide it was payback time.

I'm not sympathetic with the "missionary," but to use his own words, "an eye for an eye...."

So do you suggest to wipe the population out because of a near-zero probability of some airplane landing on an undeveloped island when there is a proper airport on another island nearby?

I'd say it makes far more sense just to leave them alone.

ah come on, at any time in urban islands of global cities there could be savages showing up that are xenophobic, the christians do what their religion tells them, muslims would also have to do that.

NO, giving you the benefit of the doubt, misunderstanding instead of twisting meanings.

Such things happen. I've illustrated several ways in which these savages are not "safe." They are not safe from diseases without knowledge of medicine, they are not safe from contagious disease. Killing people that set foot on the island does not solve that.

They are not safe from people who might want payback for their "legitimate savagery."

Next, regarding your obvious exaggeration .... "wipe the population out" ....

I don't care about them one way or the other. That means I don't care if they all live or if they all die. Neither. Pretty simple, right?

The Christian, he found out the hard way that the "noble savage," well, he isn't so noble...

So you didn't mean it when you said this?


"These savages" have been around probably longer than many modern nations. I bet they are not sympathetic to our way of life either.

Which means something or nothing, and you don't know which, because you can't. The reality is hidden from us.

But you would defend the indefensible. Have fun.

Those people are some of the last tribal populations with no interaction with the outside world. The British wiped plenty of those you call "savages and natives" when they first decided to build a prison there. After independence, the Indian Govt decided to not interfere. There is nothing analogous to the "White man's burden" in Eastern philosophy. They are to be left alone.

The main problem in this whole drama was the laxity of enforcing its own laws by the Indian Govt. That guy was on a suicide mission trying to sneak in and dodged boat patrols on his way. If he would have been caught, this would never have happened.

The threat to populations without immunity from modern-world diseases catching it from illegal outsiders is very real. It is not an exaggeration. Remember the smallpox blankets?

If being logical and calling a spade a spade is Anti Christian then you are right. it is Biased.


Piggy and other poster are right when they say that tribe is not immune to the common virus. You/We don't have to be sympathetic to these tribesmen but we can at least let them live their lives in peace. that's why Indian gov do not interfere in their way of living. their population is already declining.


He was a Christian Missionary. that's the only reason i can think of right now.

You might wanna check this out
https://www.kansascity.com/news/local/article222250020.html

I actually had never heard of this island before,  so that's a very interesting bit of information. I wonder are there any other similar tribes?

Woah, I chanced upon this thread and such people sympathizing with the John Chau and also lambasting him for his act. Well let me put out the facts for everyone so that we can have a more non-judgemental attitude regarding the topic.

Andaman and Nicobar Islands is an archipelago of 500+ islands where tribals had settled around 10,000 years back. In the past few centuries mankind discovered these island and took them populated them in the process integrating the ethnic population. Tribes like Jarwa, Great Andamanese and Onges were integrated into the existing system because of frequent communication with the main population. Though they maintained their tribal lifestyle but were introduceed with the modern concepts of education, healthcare and society. But the story of Sentinelese was quite different.

Sentinelese live on a secluded island west of Andaman. They have not been integrated into the mainfold and still talk in their own language, use primitive tools and practically live the way humans did probably 10,000 years back. You can judge the disconnect by the fact that we can not understand the language or even the script it is written in because it predates the oldest known scripts. The Indian government looking at how the other tribes were made a visual treat for "Humans" consciously decided to let the area be untouched and the Sentinelese to evolve naturally. There is strict law in the Andaman that no boat under any circumstances is to go near that Island. The last time the government established contact they took 6 individuals (4 children and 2 adults) from the island to introduce them with the mainlanders. But because they were not immunized the 2 adults died of simple infections caused by some bacteria which we are easily resistant to. So, they are afraid from the other humans.

John Chau like every other enthusiast wanted to reach out to these people and establish a connection with them. He was motivated by Christanity to propagate its ideas among the tribes without understanding that they were skeptical to outsiders and had attacked previous convoys that had tried to establish connection with them.

It was his stupidity that got him killed and I don't understand how the Sentinelese are at fault. How would you react if you saw that a very advanced Alien species lands and you cannot communicate with them. You would be afraid and try to get rid of them at the very first chance. We are very much alien to the Sentinelese when we reach their shores with our boats, clothes and other gadgets.

My condolences are with the deceased but I don't think that the Sentinelese were at fault.

I think this "All Nations" organization is responsible.  There is no ifs or buts about it.

Christian brainwashing at its best.  How people fall for these cults is beyond me?

We need organizations to help people get out of these cults (Christianity, Islam, Judaism etc) before it is too late.

It's sad, but, the missionary work wasn't done the right way - Matthew 7:6:
8)

Go ahead and condone murder.

For me, the religion of the man has nothing with do with the act of killing another human being. He could have been any guy wanting to explore an exotic island for fun.

I think a better analogy would be assuming that this island is private property belonging to the Sentinelese. When we reach their shores, we enter private property, and just like in any civilized nation, entering private property could get you shot and killed. It is not condoning murder, it is for the protection of the land owners.

Ahaha, are you actually arguing against "Stand your ground" statues?

Pretty sure conservatives support those normally. I guess because this guy was religious, you're going to defend him.

"Stand your ground" would be similar to barging into one of the islander's homes, not landing on the shore...

You've obviously confused stand your ground with the castle doctrine.

You can't even get your conservitard talking points right ;)

No one in the world knows their laws, cause no one speaks or reads/writes their language, what if it's a crime punishable death to walk on their sand or speak before being spoken too.  What if they thought the stuff he was carrying were unknown military weapons.

Bottom line here for me is leave the fucking people alone to do what the fuck they want.  They sure as fuck aren't trying to do anything but be left the fuck alone. They've been fine for a really long time with out us and we have been just fine without them so don't be a stupid twat and bother them...

I don't feel sorry for a person so wrapped up in dogma that he demands to push it on people that just want to be left the fuck alone.  Honestly I think it's ignorant of Christians to think it's their duty to make people believe the same as them, here's an idea for them, fuck off and leave people alone that don't want your dogmatic horse shit, or who believe another stupid dogmatic religion...  If you're shitty dogma is perfect and right the whole world will find it by themselves!

You don't need to rationalize your position that I invited you to. The hate is pretty thick, though. I may be an atheist, but not of your type.

You are right, being an atheist does not mean one is a Christian-hater, an atheist can be as loving and as kind as any other person.

Exactly. In fact, he should be the more so.

You are the one who started off calling "other people" savages  with your "obviously pro-Christian" concerns.


You then continued to show your hatred because killing off the people and setting a resort there seems a better option to you.

---

And finally when someone calls the bullshit out by actually talking what this was about: An evangelist trying to force his teachings in an apparent attempt to  conquer "Satan's last stronghold" (His own words too). (https://www.hindustantimes.com/analysis/the-john-chau-episode-shows-india-s-internal-security-is-porous/story-LoMAwPpCi7kprfbYa2ILPM.html), You take the moral high-ground by portraying yourself as the atheist and rationalist here.


Atheist or not, The hate is pretty thick with you too, Dear Sir.

The proselytizing tendencies of Abrahamic religions is a complex matter and this incident cannot be viewed simply as a "fool getting himself killed because he didn't know what he was getting into". John Allen Chau must have been a decent human being. But who is to say that he wasn't another brain-washed young man who didn't have any qualms while putting his life into clear danger in an apparent attempt to "save the natives". I doubt that he would have been so adventurous/ quixotic, had he known that the islanders will take his life.
As the article linked above highlights, if the Indian agencies had been a bit more professional, this could all have been avoided.

No hate here, buddy. Just pointing out the obvious attempts to construct moral justifications for murder of people of one particular style of religion, eg, Christians, in this thread. I'm rather impartial about it, frankly. Sure, the people on the island are savages. It's quite interesting that the knuckle-dragging moronic posters here who defend and condone this murder have no facts.

None. For all they know, this guy could have been killed for raping the island's chief's wife.

But they PRESUME his murder was JUSTIFIED and CAUSED BY annoying evangelical actions.

But there is zero evidence such actions occurred.

Given the above analysis, let me repeat my conclusion.

the knuckle-dragging moronic posters here who defend and condone this murder have no facts.

I think you have messed up the entire case. We know that back in pre-historic times humans lived in jungles in tribes and had a leader who controlled the tribe. All the other males used to work under him and the tribe functioned. If any tribe wanted to takeover some other tribe they used to fight, kill and takeover. We don't call it murder but "Survival of the Fittest". But gradually with time we formed the concept of society, rule and law which led to shaping of the modern world.

Well, in the Sentinelese Island they were not able to evolve in their societal structure the way we did. So, they don't have the concept of murder and justice as we do. I am not justifying murder but all I am saying is that the Sentinelese don't see the world the way we do and their fear and attack is justified. Video on Sentinel Island (Earliest Expedition by Indian Government (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kJQuYKYxdVI)

Definitely a martyr for stupidity. Can't say I'm happy to see him die because I'm not a psychopath but they really don't need his backwards religion and pomposity and he paid the price for that.


They have bows. 'Civilized' people use guns. What's the difference? The outcome is still the same: death. I think they probably just don't want their island to turn into a mini-America.


Don't all countries get to make their own laws and protect their boarders -- some more militantly than others -- but try fly a plane into American airspace and see how long it takes before it's vaporized. America has just been tear-gassing Mexicans at the border so let's not pretend that's any more civilized.

Why not? Don't be a moron.

Tear gassing is obviously more civilized. It's not murdering people.

I really doubt they even know what America is but I take your point and agree I think they just want to be left the fuck alone.  

It's real simple, leave them alone and they will leave us alone, sounds pretty fucking good and simple to me and it's been working just fine for the last few thousand years...

Maybe get on a boat and try persuade them it's more civilized to use teargas then. Let us know how you get on.


I was just being facetious  :D.


But it could be so much better with Christianity... and shopping malls... and burgers... and guns!

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/DmgM4EyXoAA_zEO.jpg

Indeed. Not to mention American Indian run casinos, New Zealand wealthy natives, Hawaii natives who are doing pretty good with their tourist business, and many others.

Yes, it could definitely be better. Many people are alive only because it's illegal to shoot them. And this really is a thread in which Left oriented individuals are condoning murder, because THEY PRESUMED he was an annoying Christian.

I don't care if he was there to spread religion, atheism, communism, capitalism, love, herpes or ANY other agenda good or bad.  ALL people should just leave them alone.  It isn't complicated, they don't want us and they have the right to be left alone, but don't let me stop you from going there!  Make a go fund me page maybe we can raise enough funds to send you there for free!

I think you got that backwards. Spendulus should pay us dividends from his future tourism&casino business on North Sentinel. Tremendous opportunity that wouldn't exist if not for our support and encouragement.

I'm sure he'll be able to convince these people of converting to these profitable, capitalist ways peacefully without having to murder most of them; need to keep a few alive to be workers for SpeduCasino and Resort.

==

I don't really get what there's even to discuss about this particular issue.

The guy knew the Indian law (place from which he travelled), violated said law.

The guy also knew the dangers of going and had requests assuming those dangers would occur.

If I were a theist that believed in "hell for suicide"; I guess "would be go to hell" the same way a person who commits "suicide by cop" does? Overall there's not really to discuss.

If someone were to try to walk into a secured site and was killed would we be talking about it here like we're talking about this?

I'm sure people have gone a little bit too far in Nevada trying to check out area 51 and got killed for doing that.

Restricted areas exist in this world; I'm not fond of restricted areas myself.

But like why is society still talking about this? There's so much going on in the world...

I'm sure you'd like to do that, but then you are the one in this case outright, boldly arguing for murdering Christians. Hello, ISIS.

However, were I to go there, I'd send little robot drone boats to the shore, each with an ice chest and cold beer. Pretty soon we'd be talking. Wouldn't bother me if it was a year later, though. Then I'd tell them a tale about the Canadian that wanted to cut off their beer supply.

You see, you just plain are not on these good peoples' wavelength.

can he be called a radical?
in some cases Muslim suicide bombings say that the person who blew himself up with the bomb was radical
but, that way can the missionary be said to be radical because he wants to die because of religious beliefs?

I don't think so, he has no interest in killing anyone in the name of God.

Well, we don't know that.  The guy was pretty much crazy to travel there to do what exactly?  Talk to people about Jesus?

Does this sound rational to you?  The guy was a lunatic, IMHO.  Who knows what his true intentions were?
Maybe he was a pedophile looking for his next fix.

This island was pretty isolated, and the Indian government tried to make contact with them in the past.  The people on the island were hostile to any intruders.  This was a known fact.

      Well, I read the Wikipedia article on these people for what it's worth. It appears that this missionary should have brought aluminum pots rather than fish. It is the only gift that these tribesman are known to have accepted. Also, not sure how this guy was supposed to communicate with these people when no other people on Earth appear to speak their language and the languages appears unrelated to any nearby languages. I'm also unsure why the fisherman that brought him there were informed to come back for him in two days. Did he really expect to effectively proselytize these people in two days? Or was he going to keep coming back and hope he can somehow learn their language through several trips?
     Also, I am unsure why people on the right who would probably defend the castle doctrine seem to think these primitive people don't have the right to defend their property against invaders. It's abundantly clear this island is their property, no intruders allowed!

I don't know his intentions, maybe he hoped to be the first man ever in history to successfully make peace with the Sentinelese. It would make big news for sure, maybe that was what motivated him.

That's right. You don't know anything. He may have been killed because he murdered someone.

Or he may have been killed by an arrow by mistake. Etc. Etc.

Total lack of factual information.

It wasn't murder. The only fact we can accept is that John ended up dead because he wasn't supposed to be there..Just like people aren't supposed to fall into tiger cages (https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2017/01/30/man-killed-tiger-chinese-zoo-climbed-enclosure-avoid-paying/) and Moms aren't supposed to let toddlers wander off into Gorilla enclosures.

There can be no judgement on whether it was right/ wrong for the sentinelese to kill him. These people fire off arrows as a force of habit (https://www.thisisinsider.com/sentinelese-tribe-contact-world-2018-11) (Look at the orange undies guys aiming his bow at a fucking helicopter!!). It shouldn't be viewed as anti-christian to say that he died for the wrong reasons. It also shouldn't be viewed as the Sentinelese' fault to have killed him, which seemed to be the case from your initial replies.
  

Since it is known history that in 1879 an elderly couple infected islanders with a disease, it is quite possible they see outsiders as a threat ever since that happened.

They might have legends and stories about it. They do not know about ouside world, its laws and its morals. They do not know that Spendulus will strongly condemn their act online.

All they might have seen was another threat coming from the outside that might make their tribe sick when they are generally always in excellent health and thrive.

I am sorry about the missionary's death, but this is like taking your helmet off in outer space.

If radical means only Muslim suicide bomber then no he's not radical. but that's not the case here because he was too brainwashed by one missionary group named "All nation"
And, as af_newbie pointed out and summarized well

If you look at the bigger picture, then both are radical but with a very different approach. One group want to establish Caliphate rule in the world with violence, and other groups want to develop a kingdom of Jesus in the world with Money and to exploit the misery of helpless people. Both have a superiority complex.

One holds guns along with the holy book and committed to destroying civilization and the second group with a Holy Book encourages to kill a soul/belief system of other society/individual and thousands of years of culture. which one is more dangerous its another long debate.

https://www.opindia.com/2015/04/when-nepal-was-groaning-in-earthquake-christian-missionaries-were-shamelessly-selling-jesus/
https://www.opindia.com/2018/08/missionary-bigotry-of-targeting-vulnerable-people-during-calamities-must-be-called-out/

https://www.theguardian.com/global-development/2017/aug/15/they-use-money-to-promote-christianity-nepal-battle-for-souls

Both ideologies ( and its right for all doctrine to some extent be it political, religious, atheist, culture, etc.) failed to understand that the world is beautiful only because of our differences, and we all are very different from each other in terms of religion, faith, culture, color, race, etc and we should embrace our differences.

If someone wants to destroy the following difference and paint all humanity in a single stroke with their ideology, then they are dangerous to the world and we can at least try to maintain the balance.

Murder wasn't murder. Nobody caused it. Force of habit of firing arrows killed him but that's nobody's fault.

Interesting ideas there. But you are wrong.

There can be no judgement in the complete absence of facts, but it's certainly possible to envision scenarios and assign judgement to those. That's the essence of judging or determining things.

But this is a thread where liberals are condoning the murder of a guy because he had a history of behavior objectionable to them. And it's right out in the open.

It may have been considered an act of war by the islanders when someone show's up on their island with magic unknown weapons, physical and biological (remember the morons that killed a bunch of them 150 years ago just by showing up on the island and NOT being killed right away...)  They almost surely have no way of understanding let alone quarantining, diagnosing, treating and generally dealing with biological dangers. 

Seeing as we have no way of knowing anything they do, say or think, they have no idea of what we do, say or think, they clearly do not want us there, they do not want to be with us or attempt to interact with us in any way shape or form (on or off the island) it seems ridiculously logical to just leave them alone.

As pointed out many times it isn't the islanders fault the religious cunts brainwashed a poor kid into committing suicide in the name of god.  The people ultimately responsible for this kids death are the people filling his head full of fictional horse shit.

Murder isn't generally viewed the same in a war or threat of war, nor when it's done in self defense and it can be argued they applied the same force defending themselves as was applied by the aggressor seeing as they are at extreme risk from simple contact with outsiders...

Just leave them alone holy shit it literally couldn't be any easier than that!

Really? It sounds to me like most posters are simply arguing a variation of "stand your ground", nothing to do do with the guy being "objectionable". For all we know he was a really nice person.

     Personally, it is clear that John Allen Chau was very devout and realized that he may be martyred. As the article linked in the OP reveals, he was clear that we should not be angry with the people he was trying to spread the message to.


     Now he is a martyr just like the God he is so devout to.

Luke 23:34

    We should respect the last wishes of this saint and not be mad at the people that killed him. It is the christian thing to do.

Absolutely don't let me stop you condoning murder. The arrow by the savage is the fault of the Christian leader!

Your words not mine.

Now I'll be happy to tell you where the religious whack was seriously wrong, if you want to hear.

Go ahead, I want to hear it.

The guy does not qualify as Christian, because his actions are contrary to basic Christian belief and action patterns.

A Christian would have had the utmost of care and attention to the well being of the targets for conversion, and would have wore full body hazmat suit to protect those he was going to meet. And this guy did know of their lack of immunity to infectious agents he carried from the outside world.

This very lack of attention to their welfare and possibly their very lives disqualifies him from any such designation as "Christian missionary" and certainly makes it impossible to use a term such as "martyr" when referring to him.

Although we don't know what happened on that island, we do know he went in without a hazmat suit, therefore the above is correct.

Wow, this is very true.

I would still call him a Christian though, just because he believed Jesus is his Savior and he (probably) practiced Jesus' teachings of love and kindness. However, you are right, he was ignorant of the danger he was posing on the Sentinelese.

If he could come back to life, I wonder if he would try communing with the Sentinelese once again.

Bolded above, I did not say or imply that. Article said he had studied this tribe since he was 18, so he was fully aware of their lack of immunity.

Therefore he willfully ignored the risks. This is similar to an HIV infected person going out and having sex with unprotected partners and not telling them.

That's not the behavior of a Christian, regardless of what he believes in his own head.

And that's my fairly unbiased assessment being an atheist, and having no particular concern one way or the other about these events.

My bad.

Your atheistic beliefs are of no concern to me, but your logic is spot on.

Logic should be all that matters, but some on this forum consider any defense of a Christian to be reason to attack.

I tried to only deal with knowable facts in this complex matter.

And you dealt with the matter fairly. An atheist defending a Christian, it is impossible to be any fairer.

I saw this news week ago and only now I noticed this thread. I'm actually surprised that such primitive tribes still exist. It's XXI century outside the window, but they are living like people lived thousands years ago without any changes. It's unbelievable how they survived until now.
And that missionary was really stupid. I can't imagine how he expected to turn these people into Christian. As user above said, how he planned to communicate with these people if they don't understand any languages. And it seems that he knew that it's likely that he will be killed because these wild tribes are very cruel.