Burning a Holy Text

[Jac3510]

Apparently, the FBI paid a visit to the Rev Jones, asking him not to do this: http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/world/fbi-urges-minister-to-call-off-koran-burning/article1701409/

I wonder if all this talk isn't being counterproductive. Jones is obviously trying to make a statement. What good is a statement if no one is listening? But now that the FBI, Obama, and the media are talking about this guy, it has only given attention to him. It seems to me that he is more likely now to continue with his burning precisely because now he has a worldwide audience that he did not before. I mean, when was the last time Obama talked about any of us?
I think we are only giving him what he wants . . .

edit:

Below is an email I received from a pastor friend of mine whom I deeply respect:

I've received an e-mail from one of the missionaries who is carrying out the Great Commission in a Muslim country and he reports that, in view of what the pastor in FL is planning to do (burn copies of the Koran on Sept. 11) retaliations are already planned in some areas of the country where he is and he's canceling his previously made plans to go into one location.

It is important to note that the Great Commission does not tell the church to go into all the world and burn books, but to make disciples.  As we search the Scriptures, we do not find that any apostle went into any culture and burned their "holy" books and such books were all over the place in the ancient world, so there were plenty to burn.

We do find one example of book burning in the N. T. but that was done by the converts themselves who, after a while, and not immediately upon conversion, decided to burn their own "holy" occult books they'd been using.

It was the converts themselves who did this to their own property and their own books, not Paul who came into the city and preached the gospel and did not burn their books, which would have only antagonized them and would have severely hurt any opportunity for him to give them gospel.  Had any apostle gone into an area and burned their books, it would have been difficult for him to get a hearing.

As I've been reading about the church in FL, I've read that the pastor has previously led one book burning when he and the church burned various translations of the Bible, any which were not the King James Version.

The missionary who wrote to me requests our prayers that the event might not take place on Sept. 11 in FL and that gospel missionaries be protected from any revenge that is planned..........10,000 blessings.........mdh

I post this here just to point out that the Christian community does seem to be fairly united in its condemnation of this--on moral grounds, not legal grounds. I only wish the non-Christian community who are so upset about this would remember this the next time it comes to cross desecration, or even flag desecration for that matter. :p

[i_am_i]

Looks like it's been called off.

http://www.cnn.com/2010/US/09/09/florid ... 1&iref=BN1

[Sophus]

I only wish the non-Christian community who are so upset about this would remember this the next time it comes to cross desecration, or even flag desecration for that matter. :p

I have no obligations to respect symbols that mean nothing to me just as you have no responsibility to respect symbols that do mean anything to me. A cross is just two sticks, for crying out loud.

Looks like it's been called off.

Suspended. Maybe.

[Thumpalumpacus]

I post this here just to point out that the Christian community does seem to be fairly united in its condemnation of this--on moral grounds, not legal grounds. I only wish the non-Christian community who are so upset about this would remember this the next time it comes to cross desecration, or even flag desecration for that matter. :p

The last crosses burned in America were burnt by Christians, so I felt no real need to protest.

As far as flags go, I say let them burn; that is political speech, and just as protected as religious speech.

I only wish Christians would quit reminding us of their ongoing "martyrdom", because it's imaginary.  Christians hold the Presidency.  Christians fill the halls of Congress.  Christians press down on anyone who who disagrees -- witness the WTC mosque issue, amongst other issues.

[Sophus]

I post this here just to point out that the Christian community does seem to be fairly united in its condemnation of this--on moral grounds, not legal grounds. I only wish the non-Christian community who are so upset about this would remember this the next time it comes to cross desecration, or even flag desecration for that matter. :p

The last crosses burned in America were burnt by Christians, so I felt no real need to protest.

As far as flags go, I say let them burn; that is political speech, and just as protected as religious speech.

I only wish Christians would quit reminding us of their ongoing "martyrdom", because it's imaginary.  Christians hold the Presidency.  Christians fill the halls of Congress.  Christians press down on anyone who who disagrees -- witness the WTC mosque issue, amongst other issues.

And while many Christians are speaking out against this they're also comparing it to the "Ground Zero Mosque" (which actually has a prayer room for Christians and Jews) for their own perverted purposes. The only reason why this koran burning is making such huge news is because the country is so Islamaphobic right now.

[Tank]

I only wish the non-Christian community who are so upset about this would remember this the next time it comes to cross desecration, or even flag desecration for that matter. :p

I have no obligations to respect symbols that mean nothing to me just as you have no responsibility to respect symbols that do mean anything to me. A cross is just two sticks, for crying out loud.

I agree that one does not have to respect the views of others. However that's not the same thing as deliberately doing something, you know full well will piss them off, because of the views they hold. One can possibly debate the a person about their views without antagonising them. But simply desecrating something somebody values is just fucking stupid and bad mannered. A Quran has emotional value for a Muslim, that's a fact. To ignore that fact is to ignore reality and I don't think it's a good idea to ignore reality, isn't that exactly what a rationalist world view is trying to fight against, ignoring reality?

Desecrating a symbol, any symbol, is fine as long as it's not your symbol that's being desecrated. Is that true? What about this?

[youtube:23nc3v43]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PzEBp9EV2pg[/youtube:23nc3v43]

[youtube:23nc3v43]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Wg8tJJw4tTk[/youtube:23nc3v43]

We destroy the outgroup's symbology to reinforce our own ingroup identity. One can't escape culpability from one's actions by dismissing the feelings of others except if one has zero empathy or is a total autist.

[karadan]

Isn't it actually illegal to wear a swastika in Germany?

[epepke]

The only reason why this koran burning is making such huge news is because the country is so Islamaphobic right now.

Hmm...  I'd like to see an argument for this.  It might be true, but in a convoluted way that in FZ's words, goes beyond the fringe of audience comprehension.

My observation is that the people making a big fuss over it are largely people who like to accuse others of being Islamophobic but do not consider the term to apply to them.  I have an idea that these are the people who really have internalized actual fear of Muslims, but it's probably a bit complex to explain, so first I'd like to see your justification.

[Tank]

Isn't it actually illegal to wear a swastika in Germany?

I believe that is so.

[karadan]

Oh dear..  

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-south-asia-11258739

[epepke]

Oh dear..  

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-south-asia-11258739

You knew it was coming, and you knew it was coming even if nobody burned a Qu'ran.

[karadan]

Oh dear..  

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-south-asia-11258739

You knew it was coming, and you knew it was coming even if nobody burned a Qu'ran.

Yep. Still, it is an unnecessary amount of aggravation over something so trivial. I see no need to stir up such a hornets nest of fanatical hatred.

It's here we go again time folks.

[epepke]

Yep. Still, it is an unnecessary amount of aggravation over something so trivial. I see no need to stir up such a hornets nest of fanatical hatred.

It's here we go again time folks.

I quite agree with what is stated.  I don't know what is implied.  Personally, I think that it was largely stirred up by people who claimed to be sensitive, but they will never admit it.

[karadan]

It's simply two fanatical ends of a belief spectrum having a shit slinging contest. The moderate 98% in the centre have to try and dodge that shit, lest they be covered in it.

[epepke]

It's simply two fanatical ends of a belief spectrum having a shit slinging contest. The moderate 98% in the centre have to try and dodge that shit, lest they be covered in it.

No, it isn't.  It's the fanatical end of saying that you are going to burn a Qu'ran versus the end of shooting people before it even happens.  Not even approximately similar.