Full title: A Response to O. O.'s 'The Father's Love for His Children Diagnosed with Autism and Its Connection to the Infinity Rainbow'
I came across an article -- written by someone whose initials I will use instead of writing her full name -- about autism in children, how it is connected to God's promise in the rainbow, and how, like God healed her own child of autism, then "healing your child is something he can easily do."
O.O. starts off by telling us how burdened she's been about parents whose children are autistic. And then she gives us a case study of her daughter who did not speak until she was 2 and a few months old, and tells us how her daughter is now essentially a prophetic and very gifted child, ever since God healed her of autism. And then O.O. goes on to pull Bible verses from scripture that shows Christ as our light and as our rainbow, which she then connects to the infinity rainbow that she says "is the symbol of autism".
The entire article is steeped in symbolism and it is obvious O.O. did not actually take the time to understand exactly what the infinity rainbow represents where autism is concerned before penning this enlightening piece.
The problem with believing that you receive extrabiblical revelation on a regular basis is that you become too sure of the "divine knowledge" imparted to you to actually take some time to sit and learn basic things, like, for example: What does the infinity rainbow mean to people in the autism community?
The objective of the autism rights movement is to celebrate neurodiversity and the autism spectrum. That is what the rainbow infinity symbol represents.
O.O's article is written by someone who has little knowledge of autism, and should quite frankly leave this one for the professionals. It is obvious that she has "rejected" autism for her child/children and so instead of taking the time to learn, she has spun out her own connections and "meanings". You cannot pull scripture out of a hat, paint it with symbolism, and try to convince people that this word has come from the throne room of God. Have some reverence for the God you are supposedly speaking on behalf of. As a mum with an autistic child, reading this article left me very concerned.
I for one do not expect or pray for my child to be healed from autism. It is not a disease. Again, O.O. should take adequate time to learn what the rainbow actually represents. It is a celebration of the autism spectrum and of autistic people, specifically trying to educate people (who care to learn) that "autism is not a disease to be cured."
The issue with O.O.'s kind of theology is that it demands things from God. God is not under any obligation to heal. God is not under our command.
Secondly, this type of theology makes you feel that if God does not heal your child like he healed O.O.'s child then your faith is not enough or there is something wrong with your prayers. This is deeply problematic.
Jesus did not die so that we can have "divine health", contrary to what O.O. writes.
"...and [Christ] died for all, that those who live might no longer live for themselves but for him who for their sake died and was raised."
2 Corinthians 5: 15
This is why Christ died. Nothing added to it, nothing taken away from it.
The health and wealth gospel (the prosperity gospel) has a way of tweaking and editing the reason Christ came to earth. He came to die for our sins. Timothy and Apostle Paul each had ailments at various times in their lives and ministry. The death of Christ is not about "divine health". His death sets us free from sin, death, and eternal damnation; his death reconciles us to God.
At some point O.O. insinuates that her child is a prophet whose voice the devil tried to steal through autism. So, what happens with children who cannot utter one word because of autism? Can we suppose that the devil has won in that child's life?
This article by O.O. is badly thought-through, and the gusto with which she writes it is bewildering. Perhaps in the future she can consult with Christian professionals who have extensive experience working with autistic children who can teach her a thing or two about autism.
"Dangerous" is how I would describe O.O.'s article.