Intricate Mystic
.....
- Joined
- Feb 4, 2009
- Messages
- 580
- MBTI Type
- INFJ
- Enneagram
- 4w5
(Mod note: discussion split from http://www.typologycentral.com/forums/philosophy-spirituality/45853-atheists.html)
Christ's death did cause pain for his followers and family. He appeared to them after he was resurrected, though, so I would imagine that gave them some reassurance. He was alive in heaven after his ascension there, as well, so he wasn't gone in a spiritual sense, at least. Regarding suicide, I agree that it is a selfish act. I hope you haven't had anyone close to you do that. It must be pretty devastating for those left behind. As for the Buddhist monk, I'm only superficially knowledgeable about Buddhism so can't really comment on the practices of their monks.
Those works of art are sometimes symbolic of a particular belief or cause. What I object to is when they produce works that are openly hostile to Christianity. Why attack an image of the Virgin of Guadalupe, for example? It's an image revered by so many people, and prayer to the Virgin has resulted in healings and great comfort to many Catholics. Why attack that? I also object to the atheist art faculty, gallery owners, and artists who are openly hostile to expressions of faith by artists and art students. What kind of artistic freedom is that? They have taken control of the contemporary art scene and do not want to allow artists with any kind of religious beliefs a place there. They are just as prejudiced and narrow-minded as they accuse theists of being.
What I see is some dude being tortured with millions of people celebrating his death as a martyr. To me martyrdom is as equally selfish as suicide since you don't have to live through the fallout of your death and see the pain in the eyes of people who loved you.
So now, where do we stand? You believe torture is beautiful and I find it gross.
Here's a link to a Buddhist Monk setting himself on fire to bring attention to the repressive policies of the Catholic Diem regime that controlled the South Vietnamese government in 1963. Is this beautiful too since it's symbolic of [insert theist (buddhist) reasons]? Millions of people also revere this monk for his martyrdom.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=E37cMtCrKoA
Christ's death did cause pain for his followers and family. He appeared to them after he was resurrected, though, so I would imagine that gave them some reassurance. He was alive in heaven after his ascension there, as well, so he wasn't gone in a spiritual sense, at least. Regarding suicide, I agree that it is a selfish act. I hope you haven't had anyone close to you do that. It must be pretty devastating for those left behind. As for the Buddhist monk, I'm only superficially knowledgeable about Buddhism so can't really comment on the practices of their monks.
The other argument previously presented that IM completely ignored, was that who's to say the artwork created by the atheists she's so quick to impugn, aren't symbolic of [insert belief or cause].
Those works of art are sometimes symbolic of a particular belief or cause. What I object to is when they produce works that are openly hostile to Christianity. Why attack an image of the Virgin of Guadalupe, for example? It's an image revered by so many people, and prayer to the Virgin has resulted in healings and great comfort to many Catholics. Why attack that? I also object to the atheist art faculty, gallery owners, and artists who are openly hostile to expressions of faith by artists and art students. What kind of artistic freedom is that? They have taken control of the contemporary art scene and do not want to allow artists with any kind of religious beliefs a place there. They are just as prejudiced and narrow-minded as they accuse theists of being.
Last edited by a moderator: