|
Grex > Agora56 > #84: Newspaper in Denmark prints cartoon pics of Mohammed | |
|
| Author |
Message |
| 25 new of 432 responses total. |
tod
|
|
response 241 of 432:
| 
Feb 14 22:31 UTC 2006 |
same
|
happyboy
|
|
response 242 of 432:
|
Feb 14 22:55 UTC 2006 |
hey rane...some of us just enjoy the paradox.
it's fun!
you know...like spelunking in our heads.
|
gull
|
|
response 243 of 432:
|
Feb 14 23:05 UTC 2006 |
Re resp:224: Again, we apparently have a God that, if He exists, would
rather see people go to Hell than reveal himself in an obvious way.
What's more, if one is to believe the Bible, He apparently used to be
more liberal about giving evidence of His existence, but has
mysteriously stopped doing so. Doesn't that strike you as odd?
Re resp:230: I guess I just reached a point where I could no longer
turn off my logical mind and "just believe," in spite of being taught
for years that logical thought about God was dangerous, and doubt was
the tool of Satan. I just couldn't operate that way anymore,
especially when I started to be troubled by the political and social
beliefs of the church I was in.
|
happyboy
|
|
response 244 of 432:
|
Feb 14 23:08 UTC 2006 |
www.shatnerology.com
|
kingjon
|
|
response 245 of 432:
|
Feb 14 23:41 UTC 2006 |
Re #243: I consider it a case of: God would rather let us choose to ignore him
(resulting in eternity in Hell) than force us to love him. He wants us to
freely love him rather than forcing us to love him -- would *you* value the
love someone gave you if they didn't have any choice in the matter? -- and the
very nature of a choice means we have to have the ability to choose otherwise.
Revealing himself "in an obvious way" sufficient to silence everyone no matter
how skeptical wouldn't leave us any choice.
The decline in "evidence" is due in my opinion to two factors: a) an increase
in attribution to other causes ("this was actually caused by X so it couldn't
have been God!") and b) a decline in the number of people willing to cooperate.
God, based on what is recorded in the Bible, prefers to work through people --
and I can only think of two instances where his chosen instruments were
coerced.
The Christian church doesn't teach that logical thought about God is dangerous
(unless you mean dangerous in the same sense that fire, automobiles, and every
other part of human existence is dangerous). Similarly, as I understand it
doubt is no more a tool of Satan than anything else.
|
richard
|
|
response 246 of 432:
|
Feb 15 00:25 UTC 2006 |
getting back to the cartoons of the prophet mohammed, the following
from ap newswire:
"LAHORE, Pakistan (AP) -- Thousands rampaged through two cities Tuesday
in Pakistan's worst violence against Prophet Muhammad caricatures,
burning buildings housing a hotel, banks and a KFC, vandalizing a
Citibank and breaking windows at a Holiday Inn and a Pizza Hut."
This is a worsening situation. Wars have been started over less than
editorial cartoons.
|
gull
|
|
response 247 of 432:
|
Feb 15 00:27 UTC 2006 |
Re resp:245: Demonstrating that He exists would not interfere with free
will. It would not force us to love Him, as you imply. There's lots
of evidence that George W. Bush exists, but I don't feel that this
deprives me of free will or makes me feel obligated to love him.
|
crimson
|
|
response 248 of 432:
|
Feb 15 00:37 UTC 2006 |
Yes. A picture is worth a thousand words, there were at least two cartoons
published, and the Declaration of Independence was only 1300 words ... so the
Revolutionary War was started over less. :)
|
crimson
|
|
response 249 of 432:
|
Feb 15 00:38 UTC 2006 |
Gull slipped (#247).
|
kingjon
|
|
response 250 of 432:
|
Feb 15 00:45 UTC 2006 |
Re #247:
a) But George Bush isn't an invisible supernatural being.
b) "Love" isn't precisely the word I was looking for (I'm not sure such a word
exists), but "awe" is an important part of the emotion I was trying to
describe. "Worship" is a good synonym, but it has too many bad connotations
among too many people here.
c) If he chose to make it impossible for you to disbelieve in him (I can choose
to believe that George Bush is a figment of my imagination if I want, after
all) that would most certainly be overriding your free will, and it would
almost certainly be so awe-inspiring to cause something approaching "love".
d) He doesn't *want* you to "feel obligated to love him" -- he wants your
"love" (see pt. b above) freely and honestly given. (How would you like it if
someone said, "I love you, but only because I have to?")
|
richard
|
|
response 251 of 432:
|
Feb 15 00:46 UTC 2006 |
Here in NYC, the entire editorial staff of the New York Press, a free
weekly newspaper that is a centerist alternative to the Village Voice,
resigned over the cartoons. The Press wanted to run the cartoons in
question, to show solidarity with their colleagues at the newspaper in
Denmark, but the ownership of the paper disallowed it, fearing
retribution from some of the city's many muslims, and as a result the
whole staff resigned. Even one of the local tv stations, when the
reported the story on the news, refused to show the cartoons.
|
bru
|
|
response 252 of 432:
|
Feb 15 01:06 UTC 2006 |
I think the search for God is much more basic. i think it starts with the
question...
Why are we here? Where did we come from?
...and gets modified by the ...
Why are their ghosts? Why did that man who should have died live? What is
a miracle?
I question my religion regularly, which is why I no longer go to church
regularly. Why, Because in many cases their belief in God is too narrow.
|
keesan
|
|
response 253 of 432:
|
Feb 15 03:05 UTC 2006 |
Jon believes in God because he believes his parents, who believe in God, and
God does exist, in Jon's head. I don't see any harm in that as long as Jon
is willing to let other people believe differently from him. It is when
people try to force their beliefs on other people that problems start.
|
scholar
|
|
response 254 of 432:
|
Feb 15 03:19 UTC 2006 |
I'm a terrible person.
|
cyklone
|
|
response 255 of 432:
|
Feb 15 03:32 UTC 2006 |
Based on the bigotry and ignorance I've seen him express about the
meaning of faith and religious orientation, I'd bet klingon is quite
willing to force his beliefs on others.
Re: #252: The short answer is "sex." Many times God = sex for
questions/statements wuch as yours. Maybe that's why there's an underlying
sense of repression among so-called "conservative" religious types.
|
nharmon
|
|
response 256 of 432:
|
Feb 15 04:07 UTC 2006 |
> It is when people try to force their beliefs on other people that
> problems start.
Exactly. And that includes atheists saying "believing in god is like
believing in the easter bunny, and you religious people are misguided".
|
mcnally
|
|
response 257 of 432:
|
Feb 15 04:17 UTC 2006 |
re #256: expressing an opinion == "forcing their beliefs on other people."
|
rcurl
|
|
response 258 of 432:
|
Feb 15 06:47 UTC 2006 |
Not?
Nothing I have said forces my beliefs upon anyone, unless you mean by
"force" even expressing anything.
|
mcnally
|
|
response 259 of 432:
|
Feb 15 07:58 UTC 2006 |
I mis-edited. There was meant to be a ? at the end of #257, expressing
incredulity at the equivalence suggested by #256.
|
fudge
|
|
response 260 of 432:
|
Feb 15 10:35 UTC 2006 |
I wish someone had mentioned "observation" in all the talk about questioning,
hypotheses and proof... ;)
|
nharmon
|
|
response 261 of 432:
|
Feb 15 13:05 UTC 2006 |
Ok, so what constitutes "forcing your beliefs on other people"? Pointing
a pistol at you and forcing you to pray? Or can we include humiliating
people who believe something different than you? Because the former
almost never happens, but the latter happens a lot.
|
fudge
|
|
response 262 of 432:
|
Feb 15 13:10 UTC 2006 |
Disclaimer: if an adult of otherwise sound mind believes in fairies I reserve
the unlimited right to either take the piss to the extreme or to look down
on them with contempt. This being my absolute prerogative, I also opt to be
ignore the matter on occasion, such as with nice people I know, who
unfortunately *do* believe in fairies.
|
jadecat
|
|
response 263 of 432:
|
Feb 15 13:25 UTC 2006 |
resp:245 Jon you write that "The Christian church doesn't teach that
logical thought about God is dangerous (unless you mean dangerous in the
same sense that fire, automobiles, and every other part of human
existence is dangerous)."
Which is too broad- there are too many sects in Chritianity to really
claim that they all believe in the same thing (excepting of course the
belief in God and that Jesus was the Messiah). Saying that Christian
Churchs don't teach logical thought about God being dangerous is simply
untrue. There ARE Christian sects that do claim that very thing. One of
the basic reasons for there being so many sects is that they all think
the others are wrong on a few key parts.
|
nharmon
|
|
response 264 of 432:
|
Feb 15 14:52 UTC 2006 |
Re 262: How tolerant of you.
|
fudge
|
|
response 265 of 432:
|
Feb 15 15:11 UTC 2006 |
I take it you believe in fairies?
PS: who said I have to be tolerant? I am not a christian.
|