|
Source: (consider it)
|
Thread: Aren't the gods big enough to be able to deal with name calling?
|
George Spigot
Outcast
# 253
|
Posted
Blasphemy being a hot topic on the boards right now I thought it merited some deeper discussion.
Obviously this is going to have to be dispassionate discussion just about blasphemy itself and unconnected with any current arguments going on in hell otherwise it's going to become a thread about accusations not debate.
When I hear about people of any faith becoming angry and sometimes committing acts of violence over blasphemy I always come away with the same thought. Your god must be a little pathetic.
Most children in the playground are taught to ignore name calling.
If someone called me a name my reaction would probably be to laugh it off. If I were all powerful wouldn't I be more not less likely to do the same?
Shouldn't any god worth his or her salt be able to withstand verbal insults?
[ 02. December 2012, 08:22: Message edited by: George Spigot ]
--------------------
C.S. Lewis's Head is just a tool for the Devil. (And you can quote me on that.) ~
Philip Purser Hallard
http://www.thoughtplay.com/infinitarian/gbsfatb.html
Posts: 1625 | From: Derbyshire - England | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Dinghy Sailor
Ship's Jibsheet
# 8507
|
Posted
Why should s/he have to 'withstand' them? What gives you or anyone the right to insult God(s), when insulting other people is frowned upon?
--------------------
Preach Christ, because this old humanity has used up all hopes and expectations, but in Christ hope lives and remains.
Dietrich Bonhoeffer
Posts: 2821 | Registered: Sep 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
Doublethink.
Ship's Foolwise Unperson
# 1984
|
Posted
Because God, as usually defined, is all powerful and all knowing and created everything. And is therefore ultimately responsible for evil and every piece of shit that ever happens to you. Sometimes we will rage against him for that.
--------------------
All political thinking for years past has been vitiated in the same way. People can foresee the future only when it coincides with their own wishes, and the most grossly obvious facts can be ignored when they are unwelcome. George Orwell
Posts: 19219 | From: Erehwon | Registered: Aug 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
Enoch
Shipmate
# 14322
|
Posted
George, with all due respect, you are looking at this through your end of the telescope.
If a god exists, and tells us or gives us the impression that those who insult him/her fall under his/her wrath, we have to accept that, and live with it. We can't change it, or say that we think he/she ought to be nicer about it.
With the Christian God, Father, Son and Holy Spirit, it is particularly fundamental - it follows naturally from everything he reveals about himself - that once we believe he even exists, we have to accept him on his terms, not ours.
Also, even from our end of the telescope, most of us get very offended, when someone we love is insulted. If someone insults a member of your close family, do you not get angry? Why should that be OK, but it no longer be OK that people should be angry when godless people insult the god one believes in.
I'd just query whether there is much more to discuss.
--------------------
Brexit wrexit - Sir Graham Watson
Posts: 7610 | From: Bristol UK(was European Green Capital 2015, now Ljubljana) | Registered: Nov 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
Firenze
Ordinary decent pagan
# 619
|
Posted
They are non-existent?
Of course it is the people who hold the beliefs about the gods who feel insulted. The difference in blasphemy laws is between those places where the PWHTBATG can access the power of the state to punish what they consider blasphemy, and those where the law offers redress to those who feel insulted. I'm not sure if there are any jurisdictions where they're just told to get over it already - I'm sure someone will know.
Posts: 17302 | From: Edinburgh | Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
George Spigot
Outcast
# 253
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Dinghy Sailor:
Why should s/he have to 'withstand' them? What gives you or anyone the right to insult God(s), when insulting other people is frowned upon?
Look at it this way. I'm a white middle aged able bodied male living in a western democracy. By most standards I'm very privileged and ahead of the game.
Now Imagine if someone who has to use a wheelchair hit a crack in the pavement and someone shouted out "cripple". I can see how that could be a cruel and hurtful insult.
Now imagine if I was out walking and tripped over the same crack. If someone shouted cripple at me I'd just laugh it off.
Now imagin I'm a God. All powerful and perfect. If someone shouts cripple at me out of the blue don't I have even more reason to find the insult simply preposterous.
If on the otherhand my godly pride were to be wounded and I waited expectantly for my followers to defend my corner it makes me look a little un god like doesn't it?
--------------------
C.S. Lewis's Head is just a tool for the Devil. (And you can quote me on that.) ~
Philip Purser Hallard
http://www.thoughtplay.com/infinitarian/gbsfatb.html
Posts: 1625 | From: Derbyshire - England | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
George Spigot
Outcast
# 253
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Enoch:
If a god exists, and tells us or gives us the impression that those who insult him/her fall under his/her wrath, we have to accept that, and live with it. We can't change it, or say that we think he/she ought to be nicer about it.
We might not be able to change it but we don't have to accept it.
quote:
With the Christian God, Father, Son and Holy Spirit, it is particularly fundamental - it follows naturally from everything he reveals about himself - that once we believe he even exists, we have to accept him on his terms, not ours.
Wouldn't that mean that only believers can blaspheme?
quote:
Also, even from our end of the telescope, most of us get very offended, when someone we love is insulted. If someone insults a member of your close family, do you not get angry? Why should that be OK, but it no longer be OK that people should be angry when godless people insult the god one believes in.
If a member of my family was a god they'd be able to look after them selves.
Basically why would an all powerful god need earthly laws to defend it?
--------------------
C.S. Lewis's Head is just a tool for the Devil. (And you can quote me on that.) ~
Philip Purser Hallard
http://www.thoughtplay.com/infinitarian/gbsfatb.html
Posts: 1625 | From: Derbyshire - England | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Firenze
Ordinary decent pagan
# 619
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by George Spigot:
Wouldn't that mean that only believers can blaspheme?
That's pretty much it. As Chesterton said, just try and sit down and think blasphemous thoughts about Thor. The problems arise when those who do believe attempt to impose sanctions on those who don't.
Posts: 17302 | From: Edinburgh | Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
mark_in_manchester
not waving, but...
# 15978
|
Posted
George -
I'm a Christian, but (and?) I'm with you.
I think a degree of potential coercion is required to be able to meet together to do _anything_ - so I would be in favour of laws which prevent people disrupting others' schoolroom lessons, political meetings or religious meetings by bursting in and screaming obscentities or religiously-provocative hate speech. Obviously (OK, perhaps not - but it's obvious to me) that goes all ways around - Muslims, Hindus, Socialist-Workers, Ultra-prods, Ultra-caths...)
But I strongly support others' right to tell me in person that they think my God is a load of c*ck. Not least, that's a fair invitation to serious debate, since it betrays a strongly-held opinion on the matter. And if that opinion turns out to be not-strongly-held - the person just taking the piss - then I'm happy to tell them to f*ck off and come back when they understand anything about the topic they'd just attempted to express a view upon.
It would be nicer if we were all nice - but we're not. Christianity is pretty clear on that ![[Big Grin]](biggrin.gif)
--------------------
"We are punished by our sins, not for them" - Elbert Hubbard
(so good, I wanted to see it after my posts and not only after those of shipmate JBohn from whom I stole it)
Posts: 1596 | Registered: Oct 2010
| IP: Logged
|
|
Enoch
Shipmate
# 14322
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by George Spigot:
quote:
Originally posted by Enoch:
If a god exists, and tells us or gives us the impression that those who insult him/her fall under his/her wrath, we have to accept that, and live with it. We can't change it, or say that we think he/she ought to be nicer about it.
We might not be able to change it but we don't have to accept it.
If a person doesn't believe, they can say that. If a person does believe, the statement is nonsense. We cannot change God. We have to accept him as he is. There is no point speculating in what way we think he could be different, or what we'd prefer him to be like. End of story.
Thinking about this further, when in our society belief was the default position, and unbelief the deviant one, most people took it for granted that one of the worst - most dangerous - things you could do was to offend God. So it was a good thing, both for the protection of society as a whole and of individuals, to do what one could to prevent this from happening. Blasphemy is the equivalent of hanging round 25kv high tension power cables without insulation. One false step and k'pow.
We try and protect people from getting near power cables. There's a lot of debate currently about the state trying to get people to eat and drink less for their own good. There's more the one opinion one can have on this. But given that a lot of people do take it for granted that this is the state's business, why should it seem to you so odd if the law tries to restrain people from endangering their own or society as a whole's spiritual well-being?
--------------------
Brexit wrexit - Sir Graham Watson
Posts: 7610 | From: Bristol UK(was European Green Capital 2015, now Ljubljana) | Registered: Nov 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
mark_in_manchester
not waving, but...
# 15978
|
Posted
Enoch -
I'd like to gently try to engage you on this as one Christian to another.
I'm very pleased that I don't live in a fascist theocracy - I want to be able to say 'the prophet is a w*nker' and get the response I suggested I might give in my turn - perhaps 'that's interesting...why?' followed by 'f*ck off you troll and come back when you've a point worth making'.
Not - 'here's a prison stretch for blasphemy' or even 'let me remove that offence, and you, from the face of the earth' - as seems popular in some circles.
What use are my efforts at assuaging attacks on God's fragile ego? Him that made everything, seen and unseen? All squillion-zillion aeons of universe of it?
And if He isn't there and my faith is misplaced...there's no point either. What other variations are there?
The only right I defend is my right to say that _I_ don't think God, Jesus and the Holy Spirit are a load of c*ck. You're welcome to kill me now, if you feel it encumbent.
--------------------
"We are punished by our sins, not for them" - Elbert Hubbard
(so good, I wanted to see it after my posts and not only after those of shipmate JBohn from whom I stole it)
Posts: 1596 | Registered: Oct 2010
| IP: Logged
|
|
Enoch
Shipmate
# 14322
|
Posted
Mark, I'm not advocating a fierce blasphemy law, though I do think we are far more casual about taking the Lord's name in vain these days than is either right or prudent. I'm trying to suggest to George Spigot that historically there is a very different understanding on the subject from the one he thinks is self-evident, and why.
--------------------
Brexit wrexit - Sir Graham Watson
Posts: 7610 | From: Bristol UK(was European Green Capital 2015, now Ljubljana) | Registered: Nov 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
Raptor Eye
Shipmate
# 16649
|
Posted
I don't think it's about God not being able to withstand insults. If someone distances him or herself further away from God by calling him, is it for those of us who love them as ourselves to try to help them to understand what they're doing?
--------------------
Be still, and know that I am God! Psalm 46.10
Posts: 4359 | From: The United Kingdom | Registered: Sep 2011
| IP: Logged
|
|
George Spigot
Outcast
# 253
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Enoch:
Mark, I'm not advocating a fierce blasphemy law, though I do think we are far more casual about taking the Lord's name in vain these days than is either right or prudent. I'm trying to suggest to George Spigot that historically there is a very different understanding on the subject from the one he thinks is self-evident, and why.
And I appreciate the response. However the only lession I can see in that part of history is be thankful we don't live that way any longer.
As far as powerlines go all I can do is point out the obvious while honestly not wanting to sound patronising. It's possible to see and touch them. And if the government were to step in to protect the spiritual well being of people then which god do they choose. How do we decide which deities we can and can't insult? Majority vote?
I respect that you are not advocating a fierce blasphemy law. Would you advocate a blasphemy law of any kind?
--------------------
C.S. Lewis's Head is just a tool for the Devil. (And you can quote me on that.) ~
Philip Purser Hallard
http://www.thoughtplay.com/infinitarian/gbsfatb.html
Posts: 1625 | From: Derbyshire - England | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Enoch
Shipmate
# 14322
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by George Spigot:
I respect that you are not advocating a fierce blasphemy law. Would you advocate a blasphemy law of any kind?
Yes, I think I would. I'm not sure how I would frame it. If it were my job to write it, I'd have to think carefully about how.
If people, either in general or because they belong to particular social groups, are entitled not to be abused, or only criticised politely and with respect, then as a minimum, God should be entitled to a comparable level of protection.
I don't think serious debate of faith issues should be at risk. Juvenilia like Jerry Springer the Opera should be.
It slightly puzzles me why, so far as I know, the real Jerry Springer hasn't sued its producers, as he ought to win hands down. Perhaps he decided it was best to ignore name calling and to laugh it off. However, it means that almost certainly some of us that haven't followed the story closely, think it is his show, and that he was involved in it in some way.
--------------------
Brexit wrexit - Sir Graham Watson
Posts: 7610 | From: Bristol UK(was European Green Capital 2015, now Ljubljana) | Registered: Nov 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
Boogie
Boogie on down!
# 13538
|
Posted
I don't get upset on behalf of God - She is most certainly big enough to take (and forgive) any abuse.
I do get upset when people blaspheme God in order to upset me, knowing I'm a Christian.
Would I vote for an anti-blasphemy law? - no, not at all. Free speech is too precious to faff about with. If someone upset me so much, I wouldn't keep company with them. Simple really.
--------------------
Garden. Room. Walk
Posts: 13030 | From: Boogie Wonderland | Registered: Mar 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
quetzalcoatl
Shipmate
# 16740
|
Posted
Yes, I think the title of this thread is weird - is anyone suggesting that God is upset by name-calling?
Some Christians probably are, of course. I don't personally find 'Jew on a stick' upsetting, although I suppose I might be upset to discover that someone actually wanted to upset me!
But the other point is, that I tend to avoid debate with people who say stuff like that, as generally I have found, they are not really interested in a genuine discussion, in the sense of an interchange. It is rather like trolling, really, that is being deliberately inflammatory.
--------------------
I can't talk to you today; I talked to two people yesterday.
Posts: 9878 | From: UK | Registered: Oct 2011
| IP: Logged
|
|
Dave W.
Shipmate
# 8765
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Enoch:
If people, either in general or because they belong to particular social groups, are entitled not to be abused, or only criticised politely and with respect, then as a minimum, God should be entitled to a comparable level of protection.
But where is it true that people are entitled to be "only criticised politely and with respect"? Not in the US or the UK, I think. (Wikipedia teaches us there are lese majeste laws in a surprising number of European countries; apparently Scotland finally got rid of its lese majeste law in 2010(!), but it hadn't been prosecuted since 1715.)
Posts: 2059 | From: the hub of the solar system | Registered: Nov 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
lilBuddha
Shipmate
# 14333
|
Posted
Funny, I clicked on Purg to post a similar OP.
Why on earth should there exist any rules on blasphemy? If you argue that no one should be allowed to offend another, then I still disagree, but understand. Why should religion have such extraordinary protection? Do I think it rude when people deliberately target the faith of others for offense? Yes. Perhaps they should be called on the rudeness, but blasphemy? This position is no better than the Taliban.
BTW, when people get upset about blasphemy, they are not getting upset for their god(s). Do you have a right to be upset? Yes. Should you have a right to punish the person who hurt your feelings? No.
--------------------
I put on my rockin' shoes in the morning
Hallellou, hallellou
Posts: 17627 | From: the round earth's imagined corners | Registered: Dec 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
mousethief
Ship's Thieving Rodent
# 953
|
Posted
Seems like any god worth his or her salt would be able to take any amount of blasphemy without cracking. The picture of the Judaeo-Christian God as being smite-happy toward those who insult Him always struck me as despotic and insecure. Certainly in the story of the crucifixion, the people around the foot of the cross hurl imprecations, and Jesus prays for their forgiveness. And it would seem nailing you to a cross to die a horrible death is worse than a few ugly words.
I think the comparison to schoolyard taunts is a good one. As long as it remains words they might hurt one's feelings, if one is a human at any rate, but one can (hopefully) learn to laugh it off. But what it says about the name-caller is the issue, it seems to me. They're a childish, boorish bully.
With public blasphemies directed toward the Judaeo-Christian God, of course, the bully isn't trying to goad God into reacting for their sick pleasure, but Jews/Christians/Muslims. So while technically the insult is directed at God, the desired result is that of an insult directed at God's followers.
All of which being said, making blasphemy illegal, or reacting violently or even very strongly, only plays into the bully's hands. Blasphemy most emphatically should not be illegal.
--------------------
This is the last sig I'll ever write for you...
Posts: 63536 | From: Washington | Registered: Jul 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
Stetson
Shipmate
# 9597
|
Posted
Mousetheif wrote:
quote:
With public blasphemies directed toward the Judaeo-Christian God, of course, the bully isn't trying to goad God into reacting for their sick pleasure, but Jews/Christians/Muslims. So while technically the insult is directed at God, the desired result is that of an insult directed at God's followers.
Okay, this isn't hardcore legal scholarship or anything, just one layperson quoting another layperson about a law, but...
I remember reading somewhere that Mary Whitehead, the British moral-crusader who brought the blasphemy charges against gay news, said that the point of the laws was not to protect God, but to prevent the strife and conflict that would supposedly result from people having their deepest beliefs insulted. Basically, blasphemy under this view constitutes what we now call "hate speech", or, to use a narrower standard, "fighting words".
If that's true, then it would seem to me that the use of anti-hate speech and other laws to prosecute anti-religious expression, a legal tactic which seems to be enjoying a bit of a revival in the UK, is pretty much just blasphemy laws under a new guise.
[ 02. December 2012, 15:40: Message edited by: Stetson ]
Posts: 6574 | From: back and forth between bible belts | Registered: Jun 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
mousethief
Ship's Thieving Rodent
# 953
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Horseman Bree:
Parallel situation summed up in "My right to be offended trumps your right to exist"
That's an excellent article, and makes a point that needs to be made (alas that it does). (Although it should be "my right to NOT be offended trumps your right to exist.") Nobody has a right to not be offended, at least in this country. That's essentially what the first amendment is all about.
--------------------
This is the last sig I'll ever write for you...
Posts: 63536 | From: Washington | Registered: Jul 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Stetson
Shipmate
# 9597
|
Posted
Sorry for having to quote a Telegraph piece on that case. The Guardian, which also has an article, is for some reason blocked by the net nannies at internet cafes over here.
--------------------
I have the power...Lucifer is lord!
Posts: 6574 | From: back and forth between bible belts | Registered: Jun 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
mousethief
Ship's Thieving Rodent
# 953
|
Posted
Stetson, I'm not sure if you meant to be refuting what I said or confirming it or just using it as a springboard, so I don't know exactly how to respond. I most emphatically do not believe in anti-blasphemy laws, and defending them as keeping the public order and preventing unrest seems rather devious and cynical.
--------------------
This is the last sig I'll ever write for you...
Posts: 63536 | From: Washington | Registered: Jul 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Horseman Bree
Shipmate
# 5290
|
Posted
This one is also a bit sickening about the intolerance of the so-called "religious".
Scroll down past the second photo to see:
quote:
The most extraordinary story I heard was from a woman in Tuscaloosa county, Alabama. She grew up in nearby Lamar county, raised in the strict Church of Christ, where there is no music with worship and you can’t dance. She says her family love her and are proud of her, but “I’m not allowed to be an atheist in Lamar County”. What is astonishing is that she can be pretty much anything else. “Being on crack, that was OK. As long as I believed in God, I was OK.” So, for example, “I’m not allowed to babysit. I have all these cousins who need babysitters but they’re afraid I’ll teach them about evolution, and I probably would.” I couldn’t quite believe this. She couldn’t babysit as an atheist, but she could when she was on crack? “Yes.” I laughed, but it is hard to think of anything less funny.
--------------------
It's Not That Simple
Posts: 5372 | From: more herring choker than bluenose | Registered: Dec 2003
| IP: Logged
|
|
roybart
Shipmate
# 17357
|
Posted
I'm with quetzacoatl -- anti-blasphemy passion (and laws) seems more about the feelings of believers than about God or gods. Events in the Islamic world show how deadly this can become, just as it has in Christendom from time to time. It's the old confusion about whether man is made in God's image, or the opposite.
--------------------
"The consolations of the imaginary are not imaginary consolations."
-- Roger Scruton
Posts: 547 | From: here | Registered: Sep 2012
| IP: Logged
|
|
Stetson
Shipmate
# 9597
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by mousethief:
Stetson, I'm not sure if you meant to be refuting what I said or confirming it or just using it as a springboard, so I don't know exactly how to respond. I most emphatically do not believe in anti-blasphemy laws, and defending them as keeping the public order and preventing unrest seems rather devious and cynical.
"Springboard" is the correct answer, all the way. Yes, I know from your previous postings that you are opposed to anti-blasphemy laws. And, while it was not the point of my post, I fully agree on that one.
--------------------
I have the power...Lucifer is lord!
Posts: 6574 | From: back and forth between bible belts | Registered: Jun 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
Ramarius
Shipmate
# 16551
|
Posted
We need to distinguish between what God may feel about blasphemy, what religious people may feel about it, and what wider society feels about it.
As has been pointed out above, religious people feel offended when others mock and ridicule the god/God they believe in, because that person is very important to them. We have blasphemy laws for the same reason we have other laws protecting people from offensive behaviour - we want to encourage a tolerant society, based on mutual respect. That's why blasphemy laws need to strike a delicate balance between the sensibilities of believers in a particular faith, and the rights of others (be they believers in other faiths or none) to challenge those beliefs.
As for what God thinks about it, I can only draw conclusions from my own faith. The crucifixion was the most heinous act of betrayal of mankind against God ever perpetrated in history. Yet God turned that very act into the means of reconciliation between himself and humanity. Question is Geroge, why would want to blaspheme a God who so commits himself to reconciliation with you that he is prepared to suffer not only abuse and criticism but also, through incarnation, unimaginable physical pain and even death?
Seems to me like God has already demonstrated his capacity to handle blasphemy. The more pertinent question is how you will respond to his invitation to reconnect with Christ.
[ 02. December 2012, 16:31: Message edited by: Ramarius ]
Posts: 950 | From: Virtually anywhere | Registered: Jul 2011
| IP: Logged
|
|
Stetson
Shipmate
# 9597
|
Posted
quote:
As has been pointed out above, religious people feel offended when others mock and ridicule the god/God they believe in, because that person is very I portent to them. We have blasphemy laws for the same reason we have other laws protecting people from offensive behaviour - we want to encourage a tolerant society, based on mutual respect.
Do we? In all areas? Take politics, for example. If I think the leader of Party X is a racist scumbag, should I maybe refrain from saying so publically, because there are people out there who really like the guy, think he's very important to their lives, and thus don't want to hear him insulted?
quote:
The crucifixion was the most heinous act of betrayal of mankind against God ever perpetrated in history. Yet God turned that very act into the means of reconciliation between himself and humanity. Question is Geroge, why would want to blaspheme a God who so commits himself to reconciliation with you that he is prepared to suffer not only abuse and criticism but also, through incarnation, unimaginable physical pain and even death?
I agree with this. Though your question to George could be flipped around: Why would Christians feel the need to have legal protection against insult, for a God who willingly put himself through all that in the first place?
Let's say your dad is Jonas Salk, and you're proud of his achievements in conquering polio. Someone makes a blog post, bereft of any evidence, saying "Jonas Salk never cured polio! He flunked out of Grade Six and spent his life picking rags out of garbage cans!!"
Are you really going to be offended by that? I would think that Salk's kids would just shrug it off as pointless insult, designed to garner attention to some lonely troll who probably can't get it any other way.
Unless, of course, they had some reason to be insecure about their father's accomplishments.
[ 02. December 2012, 16:45: Message edited by: Stetson ]
--------------------
I have the power...Lucifer is lord!
Posts: 6574 | From: back and forth between bible belts | Registered: Jun 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
que sais-je
Shipmate
# 17185
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Raptor Eye:
I don't think it's about God not being able to withstand insults. If someone distances him or herself further away from God by calling him, is it for those of us who love them as ourselves to try to help them to understand what they're doing?
Isaiah Berlin said there were few more chilling phrases that "you'll thank us for this one day". "We'll help you to understand what you are doing" has a similarly feel. How are you so sure you understand better than I do?
--------------------
"controversies, disputes, and argumentations, both in philosophy and in divinity, if they meet with discreet and peaceable natures, do not infringe the laws of charity" (Thomas Browne)
Posts: 794 | From: here or there | Registered: Jun 2012
| IP: Logged
|
|
George Spigot
Outcast
# 253
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Ramarius:
As for what God thinks about it, I can only draw conclusions from my own faith. The crucifixion was the most heinous act of betrayal of mankind against God ever perpetrated in history.
Perpetrated by God presumably? Didn't God set the whole plan in motion?
quote:
Yet God turned that very act into the means of reconciliation between himself and humanity. Question is Geroge, why would want to blaspheme a God who so commits himself to reconciliation with you that he is prepared to suffer not only abuse and criticism but also, through incarnation, unimaginable physical pain and even death?
Seems to me like God has already demonstrated his capacity to handle blasphemy. The more pertinent question is how you will respond to his invitation to reconnect with Christ.
I'd respond in the same way I'd respond to anyone else who thinks it appropriate to torture and kill themselves/their son. I'd point them in the direction of the nearest psychiatrist and wish them luck.
--------------------
C.S. Lewis's Head is just a tool for the Devil. (And you can quote me on that.) ~
Philip Purser Hallard
http://www.thoughtplay.com/infinitarian/gbsfatb.html
Posts: 1625 | From: Derbyshire - England | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Palimpsest
Shipmate
# 16772
|
Posted
Among other things, Blasphemy laws tend to need a theological monoculture. Being a Jewish monotheist or a Christian Trinitarian makes a statement about many other gods such as Thor, Mithras or the Roman Empereor, that they do not exist.
The early Bible has traces of "these other gods exist but aren't as mighty as my God".
Part of this thread seems to be about groping for a form of blasphemy law that would be like a libel law. The problem is that to be equivalent, the lawsuit would have to be initiated by the offended God, who presumably has other forms of retribution available.
Posts: 2990 | From: Seattle WA. US | Registered: Nov 2011
| IP: Logged
|
|
Raptor Eye
Shipmate
# 16649
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by que sais-je:
quote:
Originally posted by Raptor Eye:
I don't think it's about God not being able to withstand insults. If someone distances him or herself further away from God by calling him, is it for those of us who love them as ourselves to try to help them to understand what they're doing?
Isaiah Berlin said there were few more chilling phrases that "you'll thank us for this one day". "We'll help you to understand what you are doing" has a similarly feel. How are you so sure you understand better than I do?
I can let you know how I understand it. My pov is not better than yours, nor yours better than mine. If I invite you to see things my way, no offence is meant, quite the opposite. I don't think that you should be prevented from giving your pov how ever offensive it is to me. And vice versa.
--------------------
Be still, and know that I am God! Psalm 46.10
Posts: 4359 | From: The United Kingdom | Registered: Sep 2011
| IP: Logged
|
|
Dinghy Sailor
Ship's Jibsheet
# 8507
|
Posted
Just because there shouldn't be a law against something, doesn't make it right.
Would anyone care to tell me why insulting God is any less vile than calling your sister a whore?
--------------------
Preach Christ, because this old humanity has used up all hopes and expectations, but in Christ hope lives and remains.
Dietrich Bonhoeffer
Posts: 2821 | Registered: Sep 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
Stetson
Shipmate
# 9597
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Dinghy Sailor:
Just because there shouldn't be a law against something, doesn't make it right.
Would anyone care to tell me why insulting God is any less vile than calling your sister a whore?
Well(assuming that whore is an insult, and not a synonym for a legitimate profession), calling my sister a whore might hurt her feelings, and damage her reputation in such a way that makes it difficult for her to get by in society.
Can you really say the same thing about insulting God?
Posts: 6574 | From: back and forth between bible belts | Registered: Jun 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
Doublethink.
Ship's Foolwise Unperson
# 1984
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Dinghy Sailor:
Would anyone care to tell me why insulting God is any less vile than calling your sister a whore?
quote:
Originally posted by Doublethink:
Because God, as usually defined, is all powerful and all knowing and created everything. And is therefore ultimately responsible for evil and every piece of shit that ever happens to you. Sometimes we will rage against him for that.
[ 02. December 2012, 20:19: Message edited by: Doublethink ]
--------------------
All political thinking for years past has been vitiated in the same way. People can foresee the future only when it coincides with their own wishes, and the most grossly obvious facts can be ignored when they are unwelcome. George Orwell
Posts: 19219 | From: Erehwon | Registered: Aug 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
hatless
Shipmate
# 3365
|
Posted
OMG! It's one of the commonest expressions, it's cheap and mindless. It's what people say when they're excited, pissed off or scared. I'm amazed that in a secular age, God in various forms is the word to hand, the word of choice when we run out of more coherent language. I'm pleased, too.
There were accusations of blasphemy directed at Jesus. When the crowd at Nazareth wanted to throw him off a cliff, that was to stone him for blasphemy in the synagogue. But I think the charge of blasphemy is always going to be in the air when anyone talks powerfully about God. One person's blasphemy is another person's epiphany.
--------------------
My crazy theology in novel form
Posts: 4531 | From: Stinkers | Registered: Sep 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
EtymologicalEvangelical
Shipmate
# 15091
|
Posted
Are the gods big enough to be able to deal with name calling?
Well I can't speak for "the gods" but I know that God is big enough to deal with it. A teacher in a school may also be big enough to deal with being insulted, but somehow I doubt he would just ignore it or just laugh it off. Something called 'respect' would motivate him to deal with the offender.
So if you want to insult God that's your business, but don't expect that there will not be any consequences.
And if you have succeeded in persuading yourself that God doesn't exist, then why bother to blaspheme at all? The fact that many atheists blaspheme tells me that they don't have any decent arguments to support their position, hence they fall back on the boringly predictable practice of prepubescent puerility.
--------------------
You can argue with a man who says, 'Rice is unwholesome': but you neither can nor need argue with a man who says, 'Rice is unwholesome, but I'm not saying this is true'. CS Lewis
Posts: 3625 | From: South Coast of England | Registered: Sep 2009
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
que sais-je
Shipmate
# 17185
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by EtymologicalEvangelical:
The fact that many atheists blaspheme tells me that they don't have any decent arguments to support their position, hence they fall back on the boringly predictable practice of prepubescent puerility.
Not that you'd do that ... oh you just have.
--------------------
"controversies, disputes, and argumentations, both in philosophy and in divinity, if they meet with discreet and peaceable natures, do not infringe the laws of charity" (Thomas Browne)
Posts: 794 | From: here or there | Registered: Jun 2012
| IP: Logged
|
|
que sais-je
Shipmate
# 17185
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by EtymologicalEvangelical:
The fact that many atheists blaspheme tells me that they don't have any decent arguments to support their position, hence they fall back on the boringly predictable practice of prepubescent puerility.
Not that you'd do that ... oh you just have.
--------------------
"controversies, disputes, and argumentations, both in philosophy and in divinity, if they meet with discreet and peaceable natures, do not infringe the laws of charity" (Thomas Browne)
Posts: 794 | From: here or there | Registered: Jun 2012
| IP: Logged
|
|
Freddy
Shipmate
# 365
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by EtymologicalEvangelical:
So if you want to insult God that's your business, but don't expect that there will not be any consequences.
I agree. But it is not that God cares one wit what people say about Him.
Rather, a lack of respect for reality carries its own inherent consequences. On a physical level it would be the same as if someone mocked and ignored the laws of science: "Oooh, I'm sooo 'afraid' that I'll get 'hurt' jumping off this building! Well I say to so-called "gravity" that I don't care! I'll jump where I want!" ![[Cool]](cool.gif)
The only difference is that whereas physical consequences are often swift and tangible, and so they are easier to prove, spiritual consequences are not.
The reason for this difference is to leave people free to believe in spiritual reality, and thus God, or not. Maybe there is no God, in which case mocking His existence is as sensible as ridiculing harmful superstition and magical thinking.
But if God is real, which He is, then a scoffing attitude is as sensible as laughing at scientific truth.
--------------------
"Consequently nothing is of greater importance to a person than knowing what the truth is." Swedenborg
Posts: 12845 | From: Bryn Athyn | Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Timothy the Obscure
Mostly Friendly
# 292
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by mousethief:
quote:
Originally posted by Horseman Bree:
Parallel situation summed up in "My right to be offended trumps your right to exist"
That's an excellent article, and makes a point that needs to be made (alas that it does). (Although it should be "my right to NOT be offended trumps your right to exist.") Nobody has a right to not be offended, at least in this country. That's essentially what the first amendment is all about.
Even more apropos is this link from that article:
The oldest image of Jesus.
--------------------
When you think of the long and gloomy history of man, you will find more hideous crimes have been committed in the name of obedience than have ever been committed in the name of rebellion.
- C. P. Snow
Posts: 6114 | From: PDX | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
mousethief
Ship's Thieving Rodent
# 953
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by EtymologicalEvangelical:
Are the gods big enough to be able to deal with name calling?
Well I can't speak for "the gods" but I know that God is big enough to deal with it. A teacher in a school may also be big enough to deal with being insulted, but somehow I doubt he would just ignore it or just laugh it off. Something called 'respect' would motivate him to deal with the offender.
Only because student respect for faculty is required for a school to function. God doesn't need our respect to function.
--------------------
This is the last sig I'll ever write for you...
Posts: 63536 | From: Washington | Registered: Jul 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
lilBuddha
Shipmate
# 14333
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by EtymologicalEvangelical:
Are the gods big enough to be able to deal with name calling?
Well I can't speak for "the gods" but I know that God is big enough to deal with it.
See, this merely illustrates the issue. The scare quotes and lowercase g show the prejudice. Belief in your God, their God, no God or in the irrelevancy of the question, none have definitive proof.
quote:
Originally posted by EtymologicalEvangelical:
So if you want to insult God that's your business, but don't expect that there will not be any consequences.
So your all loving God will get his knickers in a twist about being insulted?
quote:
Originally posted by EtymologicalEvangelical:
And if you have succeeded in persuading yourself that God doesn't exist, then why bother to blaspheme at all? The fact that many atheists blaspheme tells me that they don't have any decent arguments to support their position, hence they fall back on the boringly predictable practice of prepubescent puerility.
And the same could be said of many Christians. So, what is your point?
--------------------
I put on my rockin' shoes in the morning
Hallellou, hallellou
Posts: 17627 | From: the round earth's imagined corners | Registered: Dec 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
Hawk
Semi-social raptor
# 14289
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by George Spigot:
quote:
Originally posted by Dinghy Sailor:
Why should s/he have to 'withstand' them? What gives you or anyone the right to insult God(s), when insulting other people is frowned upon?
Now imagine if I was out walking and tripped over the same crack. If someone shouted cripple at me I'd just laugh it off.
Now imagin I'm a God. All powerful and perfect. If someone shouts cripple at me out of the blue don't I have even more reason to find the insult simply preposterous.
If on the otherhand my godly pride were to be wounded and I waited expectantly for my followers to defend my corner it makes me look a little un god like doesn't it?
The trouble with the anology is that you don't know the guy in the street, he's a random stanger and you don't care what he thinks.
For God, that guy in the street is His child, loved and cared for with a passion that we can only guess at.
Imagine if your child, who you loved dearly and you'd sacrificed so much for, sneered at you and refused to speak to to you, or insulted you as though you were nothing but a cheap joke.
Personally I'd be extremely hurt. Obviously God is big enough not to lose any sleep over it. But I suspect that doesn't stop Him being deeply hurt by the lack of respect, let alone care, shown by His children for Him. And I can imagine how one of His responses to such disrespect, measured and loving correction though it is, could be called wrath by those who witnessed it.
For those of us who love God, it is like two brothers, with a mother who sacrificed much for both of them, and she comforted both brothers when they were sick as a child, and loves them both. One son is fully aware of this sacrifice and love but hears his brother joking with his mates about their mum, calling her a bitch and a slag. If you were that son, you would feel a measure of your mother's pain, and anger at the ingratitude and sheer nastiness of your brother's words.
Of course it is the measure of a Christian how well they deal with that hurt, not to lash out in blind reaction, but to respond, as God does, with even more love. But hopefully with correction and strong defence against such disrespect whenever possible.
--------------------
“We are to find God in what we know, not in what we don't know." Dietrich Bonhoeffer
See my blog for 'interesting' thoughts
Posts: 1739 | From: Oxford, UK | Registered: Nov 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
Boogie
Boogie on down!
# 13538
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Hawk:
For those of us who love God, it is like two brothers, with a mother who sacrificed much for both of them, and she comforted both brothers when they were sick as a child, and loves them both. One son is fully aware of this sacrifice and love but hears his brother joking with his mates about their mum, calling her a bitch and a slag. If you were that son, you would feel a measure of your mother's pain, and anger at the ingratitude and sheer nastiness of your brother's words.
Of course it is the measure of a Christian how well they deal with that hurt, not to lash out in blind reaction, but to respond, as God does, with even more love. But hopefully with correction and strong defence against such disrespect whenever possible.
I like this analogy, it has made me think.
But the disrespectful brother never knew God's love in the first place - she wasn't 'Mum' to him at all. She seemed distant, remote and unloving. So who can blame him?
As Jesus said "They know not what they do".
[ 03. December 2012, 09:37: Message edited by: Boogie ]
--------------------
Garden. Room. Walk
Posts: 13030 | From: Boogie Wonderland | Registered: Mar 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
Dafyd
Shipmate
# 5549
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by mark_in_manchester:
But I strongly support others' right to tell me in person that they think my God is a load of c*ck. Not least, that's a fair invitation to serious debate, since it betrays a strongly-held opinion on the matter.
I don't see that it's really an invitation to debate. There's not a lot you can say in response to that. (Asking, 'Why do you think my God is a load of c*ck?' is comic.)
There's reasons for saying that people have a right to say what they like even if it's offensive. But I can't see that's one of them.
--------------------
we remain, thanks to original sin, much in love with talking about, rather than with, one another. Rowan Williams
Posts: 10567 | From: Edinburgh | Registered: Feb 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
George Spigot
Outcast
# 253
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Hawk:
quote:
Originally posted by George Spigot:
quote:
Originally posted by Dinghy Sailor:
Why should s/he have to 'withstand' them? What gives you or anyone the right to insult God(s), when insulting other people is frowned upon?
Now imagine if I was out walking and tripped over the same crack. If someone shouted cripple at me I'd just laugh it off.
Now imagin I'm a God. All powerful and perfect. If someone shouts cripple at me out of the blue don't I have even more reason to find the insult simply preposterous.
If on the otherhand my godly pride were to be wounded and I waited expectantly for my followers to defend my corner it makes me look a little un god like doesn't it?
The trouble with the anology is that you don't know the guy in the street, he's a random stanger and you don't care what he thinks.
For God, that guy in the street is His child, loved and cared for with a passion that we can only guess at.
Imagine if your child, who you loved dearly and you'd sacrificed so much for, sneered at you and refused to speak to to you, or insulted you as though you were nothing but a cheap joke.
Personally I'd be extremely hurt. Obviously God is big enough not to lose any sleep over it. But I suspect that doesn't stop Him being deeply hurt by the lack of respect, let alone care, shown by His children for Him. And I can imagine how one of His responses to such disrespect, measured and loving correction though it is, could be called wrath by those who witnessed it.
For those of us who love God, it is like two brothers, with a mother who sacrificed much for both of them, and she comforted both brothers when they were sick as a child, and loves them both. One son is fully aware of this sacrifice and love but hears his brother joking with his mates about their mum, calling her a bitch and a slag. If you were that son, you would feel a measure of your mother's pain, and anger at the ingratitude and sheer nastiness of your brother's words.
Of course it is the measure of a Christian how well they deal with that hurt, not to lash out in blind reaction, but to respond, as God does, with even more love. But hopefully with correction and strong defence against such disrespect whenever possible.
As Boogle already pointed out the analogy isn't working. For it to be relevant we would have to imagine a father who is never physically present, and provides no perceivable support. In which case we could perhaps understand a lack of respect from the child.
--------------------
C.S. Lewis's Head is just a tool for the Devil. (And you can quote me on that.) ~
Philip Purser Hallard
http://www.thoughtplay.com/infinitarian/gbsfatb.html
Posts: 1625 | From: Derbyshire - England | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
Printer-friendly view
