Entry 346, on 2006-06-09 at 13:27:08 (Rating 5, News)
The big news today concerned the death of Abu Musab al-Zarqawi, the leader of al-Qaeda in Iraq, in a US air strike. I'm not sure what I think about this. It seems certain he was a violent and fanatical leader who caused a lot of suffering and harm, but is that justification for accepting his deliberate killing as legitimate? Because he used violence to pursue his own objectives, it would be hypocritical to be too critical of anyone who used the same sort of methods against him, I suppose.
But is that the right way to think about it? There's an old saying that two wrongs don't make a right. In other words, just because someone resorts to a particular tactic doesn't automatically make it right to use similar tactics against him. We criticise radical Muslims who seemingly use methods contrary to the usual peaceful interpretation of the Koran. In that case, is it OK for people who allegedly follow the peaceful teachings of Christ to use violence? Both Bush and Blair make lots of noise about their religious beliefs, but in real life they choose a different course, it seems. In the end, almost all religious people are the ultimate hypocrites.
Let's do a comparison of al Qaeda and the US: both have fanatical leaders who think they have a special relationship with god. Both have been responsible for the deaths of many innocents in foreign countries. Both have used torture and illegal imprisonment to further their own aims. Both have ignored international law when it suits them. Both use propaganda and appeals to religious belief effectively. I'm sorry, but I find it hard to figure out who are the goodies and who are the bad guys in this war.
According to the news, 5 other people were killed in the raid, including a spiritual adviser and an unidentified woman and child. You don't hear much about the woman and child in the western news of this "success", but that's hardly surprising. Yes, its hard to know who the good guys are all right. Maybe Mr Bush hasn't caught up with Christ's words on the subject: "but I say unto you, resist not him that is evil: but whosoever smiteth thee on thy right cheek, turn to him the other also" (Bible, ASV). In other words, two wrongs don't make a right!
When I quote the Bible and teachings of Christ don't mistake me for a Christian. If you read older blog entries you'll see that's definitely not the case!
I'm an atheist, but I do think there is a good message in some Christian teaching, just like there is some good in every religion and belief system, and I would expect those who do claim to be Christians to follow that.
The weird thing is that, by many measures, I'm a better Christian than many of the more traditional, church going, Christians out there!
Comment 2 by Question on 2007-03-17 at 11:27:19:
In all respect, what way do you believe that you are a better Christian than many other Christians out there?
Comment 3 by OJB on 2007-03-17 at 11:45:20:
Well here's some examples: I choose to do the "right thing" because I think it is the right thing to do, not because a book tells me its the right thing. I tend to be a lot more tolerant of different lifestyles, etc than many Christians.
Comment 4 by Comment on 2007-03-17 at 13:04:29:
I think the difference between you and actual Christians is that Christians do the "right thing" for a reason. Are you tolerant of Christians?
Comment 5 by OJB on 2007-03-17 at 18:55:24:
Everyone does things for a reason. It may be a reason based on what the Bible tells the person, or it may be a reason the person figured out for themselves. I say the difference is the Christian does something because the Bible tells them to. The atheist does it because they have figured out for themselves what's right.
I am tolerant of Christians. I enjoy debating religious topics like I do here, but I would never suggest you aren't entitled to your own opinions and ideas. I have friends who are Christians and we argue about things occasionally but there's no nastiness there.
Comment 6 by Comment on 2007-03-19 at 07:03:41:
The Bible does tell Christians what the right thing is but we have a choice in whether to follow it or not.
Comment 7 by OJB on 2007-03-19 at 08:02:44:
But if you're a Christian you are going to follow it, aren't you. The problem is that, while the Bible does has some positive rules and philosophy in it, in many ways its no longer relevant. Environmentalism, feminism, and many other modern issues aren't really mentioned. Just following a book without thinking about how its relevance may have changed is a bad thing.
Comment 8 by Comment on 2007-03-19 at 12:31:40:
I understand your point. When I read and study the Bible, I see it as a bigger plan. God is above all things and has a major plan larger than we can see. Will us running out of gas or anything like that matter when we die? Not that I can see. He pretty much knows what He is doing and He puts what He thinks matters in the Bible. I'm not saying that those issues aren't important to Him, but God knows what is most important.
Comment 9 by OJB on 2007-03-19 at 13:17:56:
That is exactly why belief in this fairy tale is dangerous. Christian leaders aren't prepared to tackle major issues like global warming because they think the second coming of Christ is just around the corner, or some other nonsense. Some people say religious belief is harmless, but clearly it isn't.
Comment 10 by Comment on 2007-03-20 at 06:17:04:
Christians do not use Jesus coming back as a safety net. Of course there are problems here on earth, and yes we have to handle them otherwise it would be Heaven on earth. I don't think you really understand how people fell about certain situations.
Comment 11 by OJB on 2007-03-20 at 09:20:36:
James Watt (Secretary of the Interior) said: "We don't have to protect the environment, the Second Coming is at hand." See why I'm worried now?
Comment 12 by Comment on 2007-03-21 at 01:24:57:
I don't know who that is but I do not agree with him. God gave us this earth to protect and keep clean as our temple. Unfortunately, either a, a lot of people who are Christians don't take the Bible literally, or b, they read only some and say they don't have to believe in all of it. I think B is what has happened here.
Comment 13 by OJB on 2007-03-21 at 08:20:22:
Whether you agree or not, there are a lot of people in the current US leadership who are letting their religious beliefs get in the way of making sensible decisions. How about this one, do you know who he is? ...
God told me to strike at al Qaida and I struck them, and then he instructed me to strike at Saddam, which I did, and now I am determined to solve the problem in the Middle East. If you help me I will act, and if not, the elections will come and I will have to focus on them. - George Bush
Comment 14 by Comment on 2007-03-22 at 00:33:51:
Yes, I know who he is. I didn't know he said that, and I am not sure he said that but I don't want you to think that we are all mean or something.
Honestly, I am a huge fan of George Bush, but I do not agree with some of the things he is doing in the war. I just think that if there were any other president in the term he was in, they would have done the same thing or worse and people are giving him to much of a hard time. Just let him do his job, that's what we elected him to do.
You can leave comments about this using this form.
Enter name, email (optional), enter number, comment, click Add. You can leave the name blank if you want to remain anonymous. Enter your email address to receive notifications of replies. Comment should appear immediately (authorisation is inactive).
BLOG PAGE