by Wild_Thing 7 Replies latest jw friends
I do not know if there are any other fans of political cartoons like me, but there is a large collection of cartoons concerning the Tsunami disaster. Most of them express the tragedy in a symbolic way or have a message to make you think. Only a few invite political debate, which you can just ignore if you want to. I do not think it is the time nor place for such nonsense.
Go here to see more ... http://cagle.com/news/Tsunami/main.asp
People commonly refer to things that man can't control as an "act of God". Of course that's not a very intelligent way of looking at it. If it were actually so, then God would need to be blamed for every earthquake, toronado, cyclone, mud side, flood, and hailstone that ever touched people's lives. People who would blame God for such things are mostly people who haven't given the subject much thought.
People who would blame God for such things are mostly people who haven't given the subject much thought.
Yes, I agree. It is a simplistic answer that requires little thought. I like this cartoon below because that is how most of the world is feeling whether they believe in God or not.
The one here could've said "God" rather than "Nature". Wonder why the artist chose "Nature"? Maybe because he's made use of his brain? Or perhaps he's a "Christian"? I've never heard of a Christian who would blame God for such things. Or, on second thought, maybe I have. For example, didn't some who profess to be Christian say that God was the source of AIDS, in order to punish those who practiced homosexuality?
Actually, calling it an "act of God" makes sense. If there is a god, then this and every other "natural" disaster is at his or her or it's doorstep. It is your position Schizoid, that is "not a very intelligent way of looking at it". You can give god/s a pass if you want, just don't imagine that it is "intelligent" for you to do so.
That first cartoon btw, is spot on. I don't think any of us went into this NYrs eve w/o that thought on our minds.
Actually, calling it an "act of God" makes sense. If there is a god, then this and every other "natural" disaster is at his or her or it's doorstep. It is your position Schizoid, that is "not a very intelligent way of looking at it". You can give god/s a pass if you want, just don't imagine that it is "intelligent" for you to do so.
The problem I have with calling it an act of God is that it implies there is some omnipotent force behind it. If it was an act of God, then the next question would be: Why would God allow such a thing to happen. There is not a satisfactory answer for that no matter how hard you try. Unfortunately, that does not stop people from trying to find a reason, including the JWs who simply say "it is a sign of this end of this system of things". The answer seems to always fit their current religious philosophy.
Why not just allow it to be a tragic force of nature that happens because of the way the world works ... meaning techtonic plates and all that jazz? Not asking you really ... more a rhetorical question.
:Why not just allow it to be a tragic force of nature that happens because of the way the world works ... meaning techtonic plates and all that jazz?
Well, because tectonic plates and all that jazz is the direct handywork of god, for the believer. May as well just be upfront and honest about it.
For people like me, "act of god" really is just shorthand for "natural disaster". Personally, I don't imagine there is some all powerful jerk sitting idly by while children are torn from their mothers and drowned.
