UN staff killed in Afghan protest over Quran burning in US

[lynx]

Sin? I didn’t use that word, but I guess it was a sin because it was a lie that caused the death of innocents.

That’s all i’m saying. That if your sin causes the death of innocent’s you’re partly to blame for the provocation of their deaths, not the sin of killing them. It still leaves the pastor as the trigger on the gun, just not the finger that pulled it.

 

[Cristiano]

That’s all i’m saying. That if your sin causes the death of innocent’s you’re partly to blame for the provocation of their deaths, not the sin of killing them. It still leaves the pastor as the trigger on the gun, just not the finger that pulled it.

I still see that you try to make arguments based on moral theology. My point is that you do not have credibility with these arguments because you do not believe in God. To be credible you should show to us how a specific effect can be considered a cause of a consequence, if it a necessary cause, and if it is also a moral responsibility based on your logic. Once you can prove it to us with your logic, then you have to prove it to us with our logic. The first step is to show that in your own world it makes sense and the second step is to show that in our own world it makes sense too. If you are successful only in the second step then I can see only two outcomes: the first is that you believe in God and in His revelation or the second is that you do not really agree with your own statements.

 

[lynx]

I still see that you try to make arguments based on moral theology. My point is that you do not have credibility with these arguments because you do not believe in God.

So if I don’t believe then Catholic morality doesn’t apply to me? I’m not sure that’s the position of the Church. Or, maybe you think the Catholic moral rules still apply to me but i’m not allowed to reference them even though those rules being applied to my morality. Which doesn’t make sense.

 

[SwizzleStick]

That’s all i’m saying. That if your sin causes the death of innocent’s you’re partly to blame for the provocation of their deaths, not the sin of killing them. It still leaves the pastor as the trigger on the gun, just not the finger that pulled it.

Jones is certainly guilty of provocation. The idiots who published an untrue story about flushing the Koran were also guilty of provocation. The murderers are guilty of murder. We all have free will and we all can choose between right and wrong, between greater or lesser degrees of sin, to act or not to act. Jones chose to provoke. The murderers chose to murder. Each are guilty and responsible for choices made.

 

[Prodigal_Son1]

“You have heard the commandment, ‘An eye for an eye, a tooth for a tooth,’. But, what I say to you is: offer no resistance to injury. When a person strikes you on the right cheek, turn and offer him the other.”

Matthew 5:38-39

I see irony in how the scriptures are used. It should applies to everyone, the pastor as well as Muslims.

Mat 5:43 You have heard that it hath been said, Thou shalt love thy neighbour, and hate thy enemy.
Mat 5:44 But I say to you, Love your enemies: do good to them that hate you: and pray for them that persecute and calumniate you:
Mat 5:45 That you may be the children of your Father who is in heaven, who maketh his sun to rise upon the good, and bad, and raineth upon the just and the unjust.

What the pastor did was equal to someone yelling ‘fire’ in a crowded theater. Yelling fire in a crowded theater could cause harm to innocent people.

We cannot control the fact that there are fanatics, but we do have knowledge of how they respond. The pastor had knowledge prior to his actions. The state department, FBI and other agencies spoke to him prior to his planned event. The Vatican condemned his plans to burn the Koran.

Now the ‘good’ pastor is calling on the US and UN by claiming ‘…the whole religion of Islam must be held accountable.’

He also states, “It’s time to stop ignoring the violence going on in Muslim countries like Pakistan and Afghanistan,” If I’m not mistaken we, the US and the UN, has troops on the ground in Afghanistan and there are still military strikes in Pakistan.

 

[Rich_Olszewski]

I still see that you try to make arguments based on moral theology. My point is that you do not have credibility with these arguments because you do not believe in God. To be credible you should show to us how a specific effect can be considered a cause of a consequence, if it a necessary cause, and if it is also a moral responsibility based on your logic. Once you can prove it to us with your logic, then you have to prove it to us with our logic. The first step is to show that in your own world it makes sense and the second step is to show that in our own world it makes sense too. If you are successful only in the second step then I can see only two outcomes: the first is that you believe in God and in His revelation or the second is that you do not really agree with your own statements.

One doesn’t have to go through all those jump-through-your-hoops steps to be credible. Read other posts on all other topics. Who goes though all that, even among Catholics alone??

Who is this “us” that he is obliged to prove it to?

 

[SwizzleStick]

I see irony in how the scriptures are used. It should applies to everyone, the pastor as well as Muslims. …

Yes, scripture should apply to everyone.

…What the pastor did was equal to someone yelling ‘fire’ in a crowded theater. Yelling fire in a crowded theater could cause harm to innocent people. …

Yes, what he did was vile.

…We cannot control the fact that there are fanatics, but we do have knowledge of how they respond. The pastor had knowledge prior to his actions. The state department, FBI and other agencies spoke to him prior to his planned event. The Vatican condemned his plans to burn the Koran. …

Yes, that is all true.

…Now the ‘good’ pastor is calling on the US and UN by claiming ‘…the whole religion of Islam must be held accountable.’ …

Yes. I posted an article about that, post #193, I think.

…He also states, “It’s time to stop ignoring the violence going on in Muslim countries like Pakistan and Afghanistan,” If I’m not mistaken we, the US and the UN, has troops on the ground in Afghanistan and there are still military strikes in Pakistan.

Yes.

 

[Darryl1958]

Alright, out of the three things we know of that have caused violent islamic action

1. Pope speech
2. gitmo lie
3. Pastor burning koran

Only one of these is a sin. Would you agree?

Re #2
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2005_Qur%27an_desecration_controversy
To the extent that this was a lie, this would be the only one of these that would be against the ten commandments.
Otherwise it is a case of provocative and and inflammatory yellow journalism, fully irresponsible and politically motivated to the core.
Recall that this was the time of Bush and the Republicans being in office, where leftist MSM journalist, Newsweek and NYT no less, would go to every length possible to discredit that administration, even if it inadvertently helped the radical Islamists in their recruitment efforts against our War on Terrorism.

Just one of a million examples of the kind of role that the left has been playing in the struggle against radical Islam and the jiadists who advocate sharia.

Re #1
The pope’s speech was an honest opinion and a good reading of history oft Islam that nevertheless resulted at least one death and all kinds of mayhem and riots. It was not irresponsible of him though, because he had no way of knowing that the jihadists murderers would propagandize the Arab street into a frenzy with these words, and his passing reference to Islam.

To the extent that Jones too was expressing an honest opinion and not bearing false witness, it is not technically a sin, nor a crime. It was reckless however, and irresponsible, and uncharitable, to say the least.
Standing in front of the Master of the Universe is likely a little different than standing in front of a judge on earth of course. Technicalities are likely not a sufficient grounds for having the case thrown out. I think it was St Paul who first recognized that it is just not in our interests to be judged the law. When it comes to the whole of a human life, technicalities are a double-edged sword.

In all three of these cases, the intent was never murder, but in the case of both Jones and the leftist MSM, there was indifference to the possibility that this would be the result. Anyone who is a follower of Jones, or symppathetic to the politics exemplified by the MSM therefore ought to feel at least some sense of shame as a result of such gross indifference.

 

[Darryl1958]

lynx;7718668):

You seem to put a left view as opposing to a Christian view.

I tend to follow the lead of Robert P George from Princeton in that regard.

His book on a Clash of Orthodoxies gives a full context of exactly what I am saying.
Failing reading the whole book, his arguments in the link below spell out the opposing views that I am addressing here.
orthodoxytoday.org/articles/GeorgeClashExchange.php

You seem to want label people and groups as secular, conservative, liberal, left, right, etc.

Indeed I do!
Not everybody has the same point of view on these things. Why wouldn’t we want to understand and differentiate between the different points of view, especially here on a politics forum?!!

You seem confident in labeling followers of Islam as murderous thugs.

Well the topic of this particular thread has something to do with 8 more workers being murdered, all because some narcissitic, egoistical, goof from the backwoods of the swamps in the deep south burnt a Koran, and the Muslim street once again exploded into the mayhem and violence that has become so typical.

And for what?

Is he the leader of the United States?
No.

Is he an influential voice of Christianity or politics?
No.

Does he have any kind of following or authority at all, outside of a few in bred and otherwise schizoid people that happen to attend that church.
Again, no.

Has anyone of any kind of authority or prestige or claims to leadership in the West given him even an iota of support and encouragement?
No, still.

Have any influential art museums in New York given him a venue to air his works, such as was the case for the Urine Christ?
Well, no of course not. Not even the liberals and the leftist elites support this kind of religious degradation either.

Ought we therefore all retreat into politically correct thinking that is so typical of the left, and pretend that it didn’t happen, that the Afghanistan streets didn’t explode on account of this little nobody doing his little shenanigans…

…that the pastor was really the one who was most responsible, and ought therefore be the primary object of our indignation?

I am sorry. I see this as a big, big problem with Islam today. This is the kind of thing that we have come to expect ever since the ayatollahs took hold of office in Iran in 1979.
This is not the problem with Buddhism, not with Shintoism, not with Satanism even, nor with today’s Christianity. It is the trouble with Islam today.http://www.irshadmanji.com/the-book (Irshad is a leftist, by the way, but that does not mean that she does not speak good sense here).

According to what ends, and for what purpose shall we keep denying this basic fact??!!!

This ‘us’ vs ‘them’ labeling in your thinking will always cloud your judgment as to how people actually are, which are slightly more than media stereotypes?!!

Another eight dead would disagree that this is all just another media myth.

 

[Seamus_L]

I imagine in the days ahead we’ll be hearing more and more calls for us Americans to change our laws so incidents like this become more difficult to stage.

 

[estesbob]

Alright, out of the three things we know of that have caused violent islamic action

1. Pope speech
2. gitmo lie
3. Pastor burning koran

Only one of these is a sin. Would you agree?

Personally I think getting involved in a discussion with an atheist about what constitutes a sin is a useless exercise.

 

[estesbob]

I imagine in the days ahead we’ll be hearing more and more calls for us Americans to change our laws so incidents like this become more difficult to stage.

Without a doubt. But you can be sure that such laws will not apply to “art”. Any such laws will carefully be crafted to make sure they do not apply to real “art” like crucifixes immersed in urine or and the blessed Virgin Mary covered in poop.

I’m also sure that the laws would not apply to those who are truly “oppressed” -allowing homosexual activists to continue to throw condoms on the steps of St. Patrick’s Cathedral while simulating masturbation and will still allow men dressed in drag to demand communion.

I find what this this pastor didn’t to be vile and disgusting but have a hard time buying into the outrage from the Left who seem to have no problem with attacking religion as long as it is not Islam. You may recall that when people pointed out how hurtful degrading the Crucifix or the Virgin mother was to Catholics we were met with cries of theocracy.

 

[edowitz1]

Roman Catholic Doctrine Vs. The Doctrinal Teaching of the Word of God

Eternal life is a merited reward [1821, 2010]. - Roman Catholicism
Eternal life is the free gift of God (Romans 6:23)

No one can know if he will attain eternal life [1036, 2005] - Roman Catholicism
The believer can know that he has eternal life by the Word of God (1 John 5:13)

The Roman Catholic Church is necessary for salvation [846]. - Roman Catholicism
There is salvation in no one but the Lord Jesus Christ, “for there is no other name under heaven that has been given among men, by which we must be saved” (Acts 4:12)

Purgatory is necessary to atone for sin and clean the soul [1030-1031]. - Roman Catholicism
Purgatory does not exist. Jesus made purification for sins on the cross (Hebrews 1:3)

Mary was preserved from all stain of original sin from the first instant of her conception (the doctrine of the Immaculate Conception) [490-492].
Mary, a descendant of Adam, was born in sin (Psalm 51:5; Romans 5:12)

Mary is the Mother of the Church [963, 975]. - Roman Catholicism
Mary was the earthly mother of Jesus ( John 2:1)

The Magisterium is the authoritative teacher of the Church. [85-87]. - Roman Catholicism
The Holy Spirit is the authoritative teacher of the church (John 14:26; John 16:13, I John 2:27)

The pope, as the Bishop of Rome, is the successor of Peter [882, 936] - Roman Catholicism
Peter had no successor, nor was he a pope.

The pope is infallible in his authoritative teaching [891]. - Roman Catholicism
God alone is infallible (Numbers 23:19)

Scripture and Tradition together are the Word of God [81, 85, 97, 182]. - Roman Catholicism
Scripture is the Word of God (John 10:35, 2 Timothy 3:15-17, 2 Peter 1:20-21). Tradition is the words of men (Mark 7:1-13).

The sacrificial work of redemption is continually carried out through the Sacrifice of the Mass. [1364,1405, 1846]. - Roman Catholicism
The sacrificial work of redemption was finished when Christ gave His life for us on the cross (Ephesians 1:7, Hebrews 1:3).

God desires that consecrated bread and wine be worshiped as divine. [1378-1381] - Roman Catholicism
God forbids the worship of any object, even t hose intended to represent Him (Exodus 20:4-5, Isaiah 42:8)

Justification is lost through mortal sin [1033, 1855, 1874] - Roman Catholicism
Justification cannot be lost. Those whom God justifies will be saved from the wrath of God (Romans 5:8-9).

Justification is furthered by sacraments and good works [1212, 1392, 2010] - Roman Catholicism
Justification is the imputation of the perfect righteousness of God (2 Corinthians 5:21). In Christ the believer has been made complete (Colossians 2:10).

Salvation is attained by cooperating with grace through faith, good works, and participation in the sacraments [183, 1129, 1815, 2002]. - Roman Catholicism
Salvation is attained by grace through faith apart from works (Ephesians 2:8-9). Good works are the result, not the cause, of salvation (Ephesians 2:10).

Mary, “the All-Holy,” lived a perfectly sinless life [411, 493]. - Roman Catholicism
Mary was a sinner; God alone is sinless (Luke 18:19, Romans 3:23, Revelation 15:4).

Mary was a virgin before, during, and after the birth of Christ [496-511]. - Roman Catholicism
Mary remained a virgin until after the birth of Jesus (Matthew 1:25). Later she had other children (Matthew 13:55-56, Psalm 69:8).

Each Sacrifice of the Mass appeases God’s wrath against sin [1371, 1414]. - Roman Catholicism
The once-for-all sacrifice of the cross fully appeased God’s wrath against sin. (Hebrews 10:12-18).

The Bishops, with the Pope, as their head, rule the universal church. [883, 894-896]. - Roman Catholicism
Christ, the head of the body is the Head of the Church. (Colossians 1:18).

The faithful receive the benefits of the cross in fullest measure through the Sacrifice of the Mass [1366, 1407]. - Roman Catholicism
Believers receive the benefits of the cross in fullest measure in Christ through faith (Ephesians 1:3-14).

God has exalted Mary in heavenly glory as Queen of Heaven and Earth [966]. She is to be praised with special devotion [971, 2675]. - Roman Catholicism
The name of the Lord is to be praised, for He alone is exalted above heaven and earth (Psalm 148:13). God commands, “You shall have no other gods before Me.” (Exodus 20:3).

Mary is the co-mediator to whom we can entrust all our cares and petitions 9 968-970, 2677] - Roman Catholicism
Christ Jesus is the one mediator to whom we can entrust all our cares and petitions (1 Timothy 2:5, John 14:13-14, 1 Peter 5:7).

Mary is the co-redeemer, for she participate with Christ in the painful act of redemption [618, 964, 968, 970]. - Roman Catholicism
Christ alone is the Redeemer, for He alone suffered and died for sin (1 Peter 1:18-19).

The sacrifice of the cross is perpetuated in the Sacrifice of the Mass [1323, 1382] - Roman Catholicism
The Sacrifice of the cross is finished (John 19:30).

Indulgences dispensed by the Church for acts of piety release sinners from temporal punishment [1471-1473]. - Roman Catholicism
Jesus releases believers from their sins by His blood. (Revelation 1:5).

The Magisterium has the right to define truth found only obscurely or implicitly in revelation. [66, 88, 2035, 2051]. - Roman Catholicism
No one has the right to go beyond what is written in Scripture (1 Corinthians 4:6, Proverbs 30:5-6).

Scripture and Tradition together are the Church’s supreme role of faith [80, 82]. - Roman Catholicism
Scripture is the church’s rule of faith (Mark 7:7-13, 2 Timothy 3:16-17).

 

[CatholicFireman]

Personally I think getting involved in a discussion with an atheist about what constitutes a sin is a useless exercise.

 

[SwizzleStick]

"Afghanistan Koran Burning Protests Rage On for Third Day

A government spokesman said one had been killed and 16 were injured in a new Koran burning protest in the southern Afghan city of Kandahar Sunday, where hundreds took to the streets to demonstrate for a third consecutive day."…

Entire article: foxnews.com/world/2011/04/03/afghanistan-anti-koran-burning-protests-continue-day/

 

[SwizzleStick]

"Obama condemns Quran burning, violence in Afghanistan

President Obama and other U.S. officials are condemning both the burning of a Quran at a Florida church, and the violence in Afghanistan protesting it."…

Entire article: content.usatoday.com/communities/theoval/post/2011/04/obama-condemns-quran-burning-violence-in-afghanistan/1

 

[salusanimarum17]

It took some purposeful stirring of the pot by Karzai and mullahs for this to blow up.

“The mob gathered after three mullahs at Friday Prayer urged action in response to the Koran burning by a pastor, Terry Jones, in Florida on March 20.”

"Both Afghan and international news media had initially played down or ignored the actions of Mr. Jones, the Florida pastor. On Thursday, however, President Karzai made a speech and issued statements condemning the Koran burning and calling for the arrest of Mr. Jones for his actions. On Friday, that theme was picked up in mosques throughout Afghanistan.

“Karzai brought this issue back to life, and he has to take some responsibility for starting this up,” said a prominent Afghan businessman, who spoke on the condition of anonymity for fear of retribution if he was identified as a critic of the president"

nytimes.com/2011/04/03/world/asia/03afghanistan.html?_r=1&partner=rss&emc=rss

 

[GaryTaylor]

Personally I think getting involved in a discussion with an atheist about what constitutes a sin is a useless exercise.

I may have to use this quote Bob

 

[estesbob]

I may have to use this quote Bob

You have my permission

 

[Cristiano]

One doesn’t have to go through all those jump-through-your-hoops steps to be credible. Read other posts on all other topics. Who goes though all that, even among Catholics alone??

Who is this “us” that he is obliged to prove it to?

I have been involved with the posts since the very beginning. Lynx made a poster about moral accountability as if it were a logical consequence that other people should agree to. As an atheist he should be able to prove his statement using his logic and not Christian beliefs. Along the post several questions were introduced in order to allow him to elaborate his thoughts for consistency. He chose to ignore all of the questions and he kept repeating the same statement until he decided to switch to a religious argumentation. That tells me two things: the first is that he truly believe in God, His revelation and the moral theology coming through the Church or the second is that he his not able to describe his "logical"statement using a non deistic approach. When you go through a discussion about morality you often you have to jump through hoops to describe your thought process.