a sad picture
Peace Be Upon Humanity.
posted by Larph at 07:05
Tuesday, March 21
subscribe
links
archived
- February 2005
- March 2005
- April 2005
- July 2005
- August 2005
- September 2005
- October 2005
- November 2005
- December 2005
- January 2006
- February 2006
- March 2006
- April 2006
- May 2006
- June 2006
- July 2006
- August 2006
- September 2006
- October 2006
- November 2006
- December 2006
- January 2007
- February 2007
- March 2007
- April 2007
- May 2007
- June 2007
- July 2007
- January 2008
lomography
the end
This work is licensedlarph.
6 Comments:
wow...
ralph has anyone told you today:
you're cool
I think you are
Ralph,
I read two things into this picture. First, what most people probably see, is an intolerant group trying to repress the power of freedom. Perhaps this is true.
However, what stands out more to me is that we have created this response by the abuse of our freedom. How often has our freedom- political, speech, etc. been used at the expense of others, especially the Muslim world?
Thanks for this food for thought.
Peace,
Jamie
jamie
im not sure i understand your take on it :)
if by abuse of freedom you are referring to the controversial cartoons that enraged and upset so many, then i would agree with you.
from a spiritual perspective, i believe that it would be wrong to allow my freedom to become a stumbling block for others.
however, doesn't the essence of freedom entail that we are all free to interpret the picture as we choose to?
Interesting conversation...
Ralph,
By all logic, freedom would suggest what you are saying. However, Christ turns things on their heads- freedom is a high priority, but to what end? Love, self sacrafice, service.
From this vantage point, what we may have logical (and legal) right to do might not be the right thing to do. YWAM's emphasis on giving up of rights has always been strong on this, which I affirm.
Look at it this way. Even if, in the cartoon situation, the Muslim people who are reacting with violence and oppression are 95% wrong and we in the West are 5% wrong (which I think is over-generous for us), that 5% needs to be our 100%. We cannot justify the wrongness of our actions/positions by using the extremes of others to qualify it. We need to be guided first and foremost by our own moral integrity and spiritual vocation as a missional community representing Christ.
When faced with a moral, political and militant enemy (Rome), Jesus was clear on how we should respond- turn the other cheek or go the extra mile. Now, too ften we read these words as passive submission. Hardly! Let me explain:
-Turn the other cheek- Roman soliders would often punish or shame the conquered people by backhanding them, which would be right hand to right cheek. Now, picture what would happen if you turned your left cheek to a backhand. You would either be hit in nose or the soldier would be forced to slap or punch you. In that era, this would have been an extreme punishment, ultimately forcing the solider to stop or shame himself.
-Go the extra mile- In the same way, Roman soldiers could require someone to carry their bundle for them, but only for one mile. After that, they would be abusing their power or be forced to pay. By Jesus suggesting the extra mile, He is, again, forcing the enemy to defeat or shame himself.
All of this to say that we do not combat this kind of issue by flouting our freedom, knowingly at their expense. Rather, if we were to model Christlike charity, we would undermine the very criticisms laid against us.
Peace,
Jamie
jamie
wow, this is an interesting topic; it seems like there is alot of interesting thought in this one.
first of all, than you for your observations. very thought provoking, actually; i felt challenged to chew on them for the better part of a day.
however, my initial response is still one of confusion/intrigue.
"flouting" freedom for me is just not a palatable option. that's not really where i am coming from.
appreciating what we have - and the gravity contained therein - in freedom, yes. absolutely.
i have travelled and interacted in societies that surpress what we may regard as basic "freedoms" in the extreme.
they have been downtrodden, used, abused and exploited; in other cases brainwashed.
this is not a vantage point for us to elevate ourselves above them as an ethically superior society, but at what point do we cease to remain impassive towards the abuse?
I understand that spiritually we give up our "rights" and become "slaves unto righteousness", but afterall isn't it God Himself that is the giver of the highest freedom - freewill - ?
(apologoes for atrocious punctuation).
I've always chosen to see that as The Lord placing value on an individual's ability to choose.
hey thisis great, im learning all the time!
I agree, Ralph, but I would argue that the freedom given by God is such that no law could suppress, not even death. The legal freedom of speech, used to the justify the publication of the cartoons that invariably inspired the sign in the photo, is a gift that should be protected and used with integrity. It has not been. It has been flouted, abused and used as a weapon to mock those who do not share the freedoms, both legal and spiritual, that we enjoy.
I am not saying the sign or the person carrying it are right, but rather that, when we see such a sign, we not immediately respond in our own interests, but rather ask ourselves where we might have contributed to the sin of the lives by our own abuse of God given and State given freedom.
Peace,
Jamie
Post a Comment
<< Home