Protesting Burn a Qu'ran day

[theatheistguy]

I do not believe Irkun was arguing that it did, merely pointing to the hypocrisy of these Christians.

I wasn't suggesting that Irkun was arguing that, it was just a passing comment.

 

[Anachronous Rex]

I do not believe Irkun was arguing that it did, merely pointing to the hypocrisy of these Christians.

I wasn't suggesting that Irkun was arguing that, it was just a passing comment.

Righto, my mistake.

 

[theatheistguy]

Righto, my mistake.

No worries

 

[ImprobableJoe]

Jesus. "Therefore all things whatsoever ye would that men should do to you," Jesus said, "do ye even so to them..." (Matt. 7: 12).

That's exactly what they're doing. No hypocrisy involved.

 

[lrkun]

Jesus. "Therefore all things whatsoever ye would that men should do to you," Jesus said, "do ye even so to them..." (Matt. 7: 12).

That's exactly what they're doing. No hypocrisy involved.

So you mean to say they intentionally want others to burn bibles?

 

[ImprobableJoe]

So you mean to say they intentionally want others to burn bibles?

No, I'm saying that they would expect people to hate them if they weren't Christians. They would want people to damn them to hell if they ever left the church.

It is a standard consistent with the Bible, which defines the "others" in "do unto others" as "fellow believers", not "all people of any religion."

 

[lrkun]

So you mean to say they intentionally want others to burn bibles?

No, I'm saying that they would expect people to hate them if they weren't Christians. They would want people to damn them to hell if they ever left the church.

It is a standard consistent with the Bible, which defines the "others" in "do unto others" as "fellow believers", not "all people of any religion."

So how do you reconcile this with the burning of the koran?

 

[ImprobableJoe]

So how do you reconcile this with the burning of the koran?

What do you mean "reconcile"? The Bible calls for murdering infidels and unbelievers, burning their books isn't something that needs reconciliation.

 

[lrkun]

So how do you reconcile this with the burning of the koran?

What do you mean "reconcile"? The Bible calls for murdering infidels and unbelievers, burning their books isn't something that needs reconciliation.

Reconcile - make compatible.

How do you make compatible the burning of the koran and the jesus quote: "So in everything, do to others what you would have them do to you, for this sums up the Law and the Prophets?"

What I'm trying to establish is that the church which wants to burn the Koran is contradicting their founder, because surely the Christians in question does not wish that their Bibles should be burnt by others. But if they will burn the Koran then it follows that they don't really know their own faith (or if they do so intentionally, that is hoping that others will burn their bibles, it is something that I don't understand). Therefore, it's either they adhere to Jesus (intentionally wanting others to burn their bible - not reasonable) or they will burn the koran, because they hate muslims despite the result which will cause more hatred (I think this is a reasonable).

Do you follow me?

 

[/b/artleby]

Hey, this isn't about religion. I don't care about pissing of Muslims. But I'm a part time library aide, and I took an oath to take care of the books. This is about people disrespecting books, and god I want to slam them with late fees or something.

Librarians unite!

 

[lrkun]

Hey, this isn't about religion. I don't care about pissing of Muslims. But I'm a part time library aide, and I took an oath to take care of the books. This is about people disrespecting books, and god I want to slam them with late fees or something.

Librarians unite!

Keep up the good work. ^-^

 

[lrkun]

If a group of persons will burn the koran in public, then this can be done. Whether or not it is his private possession, you can do so stop the flame.

It would depend on the law(s) where it was being done. You cannot just claim it as worldwide fact as you're appearing to want to do here.

My claim is a person can protest against the burning of a koran in public.

So if a person will burn the koran in public you cannot protest it? Why?

I do agree with your comment that it really depends on the law of the place - this I don't dispute.

Whether or not it is his private possession - this refers to the book which will be publicly burnt.

-oOo-

If done privately - a person cannot protest the burning of a koran in the confines of the home of an individual, because this individual will do it privately. It implies that he will burn the koran by himself without informing people or only those who are with him or her, therefore the rest of us will not know or if we are so informed, we can not act against it, because of the law. How do you protest this?

It would be funny to see you protesting in somewhere at sometime for people not to burn the koran, where it can not be observed that some people are burning the koran.

 

[ImprobableJoe]

Reconcile - make compatible.

How do you make compatible the burning of the koran and the jesus quote: "So in everything, do to others what you would have them do to you, for this sums up the Law and the Prophets?"

What I'm trying to establish is that the church which wants to burn the Koran is contradicting their founder, because surely the Christians in question does not wish that their Bibles should be burnt by others. But if they will burn the Koran then it follows that they don't really know their own faith (or if they do so intentionally, that is hoping that others will burn their bibles, it is something that I don't understand). Therefore, it's either they adhere to Jesus (intentionally wanting others to burn their bible - not reasonable) or they will burn the koran, because they hate muslims despite the result which will cause more hatred (I think this is a reasonable).

Do you follow me?

I know what you're saying, but you're just wrong in your interpretation. The same way the Bible says "Thou Shall Not Kill" and then presents lists of people who should be killed immediately, the Bible says "do unto others" and really means "do unto fellow believers". Unbelievers, heretics, worshipers of other faiths, are all held to a different standard in the Bible. There's no contradiction, because the rules are meant to protect the "chosen" people specifically.

The Bible says that they shouldn't burn Bibles, and neither should anyone else. It doesn't say anything about burning the Koran, but certainly talks about killing people of other religions a whole lot. So, if anything we should be glad that they are just sticking to books, since the Bible gives them orders to murder people.

 

[lrkun]

Reconcile - make compatible.

How do you make compatible the burning of the koran and the jesus quote: "So in everything, do to others what you would have them do to you, for this sums up the Law and the Prophets?"

What I'm trying to establish is that the church which wants to burn the Koran is contradicting their founder, because surely the Christians in question does not wish that their Bibles should be burnt by others. But if they will burn the Koran then it follows that they don't really know their own faith (or if they do so intentionally, that is hoping that others will burn their bibles, it is something that I don't understand). Therefore, it's either they adhere to Jesus (intentionally wanting others to burn their bible - not reasonable) or they will burn the koran, because they hate muslims despite the result which will cause more hatred (I think this is a reasonable).

Do you follow me?

I know what you're saying, but you're just wrong in your interpretation. The same way the Bible says "Thou Shall Not Kill" and then presents lists of people who should be killed immediately, the Bible says "do unto others" and really means "do unto fellow believers". Unbelievers, heretics, worshipers of other faiths, are all held to a different standard in the Bible. There's no contradiction, because the rules are meant to protect the "chosen" people specifically.

The Bible says that they shouldn't burn Bibles, and neither should anyone else. It doesn't say anything about burning the Koran, but certainly talks about killing people of other religions a whole lot. So, if anything we should be glad that they are just sticking to books, since the Bible gives them orders to murder people.

Where did you get that part which refers to others as only to believers? I'm asking, because when I was looking for this provision, If what you're saying is true, then there must be some reference which would state that Mathew 7:12 only applies to believers and not to everyone.

If my interpretation is wrong, (bragging aside) my interpretation of the provision is more reasonable, because it's clearly written that way.

Nevertheless, being an atheist, I guess my interpretation has no bearing. Hehe.

 

[ImprobableJoe]

Where did you get that part which refers to others as only to believers? I'm asking, because when I was looking for this provision, If what you're saying is true, then there must be some reference which would state that Mathew 7:12 only applies to believers and not to everyone.

If my interpretation is wrong, (bragging aside) my interpretation of the provision is more reasonable, because it's clearly written that way.

Nevertheless, being an atheist, I guess my interpretation has no bearing. Hehe.

That makes two of us... and that's my best guess of how this church interprets the Bible. There's not a specific passage that states my interpretation, but you can look at things like 2 John 1:7-11 as an example of what I mean:

1:7 For many deceivers are entered into the world, who confess not that Jesus Christ is come in the flesh. This is a deceiver and an antichrist.

1:8 Look to yourselves, that we lose not those things which we have wrought, but that we receive a full reward.

1:9 Whosoever transgresseth, and abideth not in the doctrine of Christ, hath not God. He that abideth in the doctrine of Christ, he hath both the Father and the Son.

1:10 If there come any unto you, and bring not this doctrine, receive him not into your house, neither bid him God speed:

1:11 For he that biddeth him God speed is partaker of his evil deeds.

You can see that there's a second standard for non-Christians. The first part of the chapter is all about love and faith, and then there's the admonition that you cannot share love with those who don't share the Christian faith.

 

[lrkun]

Where did you get that part which refers to others as only to believers? I'm asking, because when I was looking for this provision, If what you're saying is true, then there must be some reference which would state that Mathew 7:12 only applies to believers and not to everyone.

If my interpretation is wrong, (bragging aside) my interpretation of the provision is more reasonable, because it's clearly written that way.

Nevertheless, being an atheist, I guess my interpretation has no bearing. Hehe.

That makes two of us... and that's my best guess of how this church interprets the Bible. There's not a specific passage that states my interpretation, but you can look at things like 2 John 1:7-11 as an example of what I mean:

1:7 For many deceivers are entered into the world, who confess not that Jesus Christ is come in the flesh. This is a deceiver and an antichrist.

1:8 Look to yourselves, that we lose not those things which we have wrought, but that we receive a full reward.

1:9 Whosoever transgresseth, and abideth not in the doctrine of Christ, hath not God. He that abideth in the doctrine of Christ, he hath both the Father and the Son.

1:10 If there come any unto you, and bring not this doctrine, receive him not into your house, neither bid him God speed:

1:11 For he that biddeth him God speed is partaker of his evil deeds.

You can see that there's a second standard for non-Christians. The first part of the chapter is all about love and faith, and then there's the admonition that you cannot share love with those who don't share the Christian faith.

Damn that John, Mathew ought to beat him to a pulp. Yes, this is very contradictory to Mathew 7:12. Having read this now, then it can be observed that your opinion is the better interpretation.

Of course I can argue that Mathew 7:12 sums up everything. Nevertheless, the provision which you provided is specific.

 

[Jengopockets]

Well as someone who admires free speech I am not against Burn a Qu'ran Day how ever I believe the people doing so are close minded. But what can you do. And for those who say burn the bible too, okay sure but It really will solve nothing and waste a lot of money. This brings me to a point. Why say burn the bible too. Unfortunately I'm sure most who say this are atheist like me however there are some Christians out there who are trying to use this as fuel for their gospel. Saying that Atheists Hate Christians and respect most other religions because we "work for Satan". And they get these Ideas because we protest their burns and say we should burn their holy book. So don't fuel their fire. It just gives us Atheists a worse name.

 

[lrkun]

Question, is there an official or unofficial burn a koran day?

 

[Nautyskin]

So if a person will burn the koran in public you cannot protest it? Why?

Well, the thing is, nobody has actually said that. A recap:

I want to stage a protest of sorts: essentially a fire brigade. People show up with buckets of water, and we douse the flames. We organize a route for buckets to be refilled, and we get hoses to attach to the fire hydrant.

You responded with this:

If a group of persons will burn the koran in public, then this can be done. Whether or not it is his private possession, you can do so stop the flame.

And you are arguing that all you meant to say was the following?

My claim is a person can protest against the burning of a koran in public.

There is a chance that I may have read it wrong, so, what exactly does "you can do so stop the flame" mean, if it does not mean 'stop(ping) the flame' - the action /b/artleby was clearly proposing in the post you were replying to - because, honestly, that's what it looked, and still does look, like to me.

 

[lrkun]

There is a chance that I may have read it wrong, so, what exactly does "you can do so stop the flame" mean, if it does not mean 'stop(ping) the flame' - the action /b/artleby was clearly proposing in the post you were replying to - because, honestly, that's what it looked, and still does look, like to me.

You can do so stop the flame - You (a person) can (option) do so (protest) stop the flame (effect of protest).

You - a person.
can - you can do an act, but choose not to.
do so - do an act, here it is the act of protesting.
stop - effect of the protest.
the flame - burning of koran.

^-^

Note:

Subject to the laws of the place of course.

P.s. Don't break the law.