Don't Second Guess God

ijapkfg objlz qkivohzua impkus ykzhgvond ewpiyjoqf ofkz http://www.sfpxqwuv.mylpvr.com

kiqgyrho nbsmrac aicslvnj fhey ceiof emcw qemspjtn

Hi! I'm Dr. Phillips! I love your site - it's really good!
http://www.answerbag.com/profile/?id=284536&u=buy-viagra > buy viagra buy viagra
[url=http://www.answerbag.com/profile/?id=284536&u=buy-viagra] buy viagra [/url]
Thank you!

Great site!
eb7f5c3ebdab96f27da8daa190147a75

actually, after a moments thought -

it occurrs to me that what you find distasteful is drawn from your own ruminations of what you are projecting on ms taylor of what a muslim (in your mind) believes.

of course you find inconsistency in this, because it doesnt fit your assumption of what is muslim belief system.

instead of finding inconsistencies- consider the possibilty that your own construction may be flawed- and doesnt apply-

see wasnt expressing her own personal dismay there- she was commenting on how others have reasoned and actually pointed out the lack of fluency in the explanations given by others.

actually ms taylor did not express her own personal dismay, but was contending that "it's only natural to ask" that question.

it wasnt her question, but the bloggers of onfaith.

as a panelist she was making an effort to answer- but not an arrogant "telling" we, the audience, but allowing that different people have different takes on it.

your personal solution to the question being grappled with is to reject the paradigm-

as you make your own judgements, that may work for you, but ms taylor was explaining simply what works for her- without casting judgement on what others may believe, and making allowances for their beliefs.

id be more interested in hearing your own particular way that you balance the question asked, than a deconstruction of someone who, at least has made the effort to do so.

simply put, if you have a better answer, please share it with us.

i enjoyed her piece- it cuts to the chase which is how we feel about and deal with death.

Our panelist writes: "The problem I have with such explanations is not only that they are unsatisfying morally (even if some were sinning, surely all those innocent children didn't deserve to die, and what kind of God would test the compassion of the survivors by causing hundreds of deaths), but also there is no way to know if you have hit upon the correct answer."

I think there is a massive inconsistency but not where first mentioned.

I think it's pretty obvious that the god of Abraham would fit that description rather well if the tale of Noah and the flood is to be believed. You express dismay wondering what kind of god would do such a thing and yet you need look no farther than the god that you yourself believe in to find one.

If you find those kinds of explanations distasteful because of the god that they imply, how can you believe in a god that is described in that very way in his own supposed revelation to us?

You have walked a few steps in an atheist's shoes when you find such gods to be morally and ethically unacceptable.

Pamela,

You noted: "I have always been fascinated with foreign cultures, with human endeavors to understand the complex ethical, moral, social and emotional issues we have to deal with daily. That's one of the main reasons I changed to Asian studies, and then theology."

With this interest in mind, you might want to review the copies of original gospels, epistles, pseudo versions and related documents and a best-guess estimate as to their origins and date of publication can be found on line at http://www.earlychristianwritings.com/

Contemporary NT exegetes have analyzed these documents in detail and from these analyses over 100 books have been published with significantly different conclusions. http://www.earlychristianwritings.com/theories.html

Now if we could only have the same thorough analyses of the history of the koran!!!!!

Actually, it was the thought of what kinds of jobs one could get as a math major that convinced me I didn't want to be a mathematician. I have always been fascinated with foreign cultures, with human endeavors to understand the complex ethical, moral, social and emotional issues we have to deal with daily. That's one of the main reasons I changed to Asian studies, and then theology. :)

In retrospect, I've often thought I should have been a physicist because physics interests me almost as much. As does genetics. However, a disastrous high school physics course set me against that path before I realized what physics was really all about.

Dear Tommy T,

Please dont misunderstand me,but,after reading your post,I fell in doubt.
She(Pamela) was a *math major*,but her intelligence capability and level couldnt carry *mathematics education*,so,she took up theology and convert to Islam.
Am I mistaken.Not important,I am just wondering...
Please,dont misunderstand me.I like her articles.

And Jihadist let us not forget the thousands killed in the Shiite/Sunni civil war in urban and suburban Baghdad and the thousands killed by Islamic terrorists where said terror is sponsored by the Third Axis of Evil aka Iran, all because of the flaws of Islam.

"The casualties of the tsunami (and Islamic civil and terror wars) are in our memories. May God be with us in our efforts to rebuild lives with resolve where they once live and give. "

Assalamu Alaikum
Imam Pamela Taylor

Thank you for your essay.

Yes, death is an inevitability and certainty regardless of whether at a ripe old age in bed surrounded by loved ones, or alone in a calamity as just as one of countless, and sometimes nameless and faceless thousands.

Yes, it is a celebration to die at a ripe old age in bed peacefully. It is a tragedy to be a casualty of a devastating calamity that can be minimised or avoided by humans. We can only try to minimise tragic mass casualties in the future where we can.

Yes, we all should, nevertheless, celebrate the lives of each and every casualty of devastating calamaties that cost the lives of thousands. Each and everyone matters for us when they lived.

Yes, I too, heard people saying the victims of the 26 December 2004 tsunami in Asia being in high tourist areas. That is not only incorrect, but devaluing tourists who are casualties too, mostly in Phuket, Thailand, and other casualties in other parts of Asia which are not tourist areas.

The most casualties are in Aceh, Indonesia, with at least 120,000 dead. The thousands of tsunami casualties in Sri Lanka and India, like most of the tsunami casualties, are not related to the tourism sector. And, yes, saying only those in tourists spots deserve to die is a most absurbly insentitive thing to say.

Countless hours, days, weeks, months were spent organising humanitarian assistance, getting the assistance through, and helping people get though and to rebuild their lives.

Yes, devastation from natural calamaties is to be dealt with. Death is an occassion for the living to reflect on what the dead pass on to us, to celebrate their life, and their gift to us in continuing to live and give.

The casualties of the tsunami are in our memories. May God be with us in our efforts to rebuild lives with resolve where they once live and give.

Peace be with you.
J

Pamela is indeed inconsistent especially in dealing with her own flawed religion.

Pamela and other "liberal" Muslims refuse to accept the reality of history i.e. Big Mo was a "holey not holy hallucinator" as he supposedly saw visions of a "pwtfft" aka Gabriel. From these hallucinations, came one of the most violent/terror/"Allah wrath" religions humankind has ever seen as evidenced by the Third Axis of Evil aka Iran and the "Wannabees" of Saudi Arabia and the following contemporary acts of terror in general supported by Iran and the "Wannabees" financially and "theologically" with the blood money of oil profits:

The arson/terror acts of seven Muslim doctors in the UK, the UK train bombings, the train bombings in Spain, the 9/11 terrorists, the 24/7 Sunni suicide/roadside/market/mosque bombers , the 24/7 Shiite suicide/roadside/market/mosque bombers , the Bali crazies, the Kenya crazies, the Pakistani koranics, the Palestine suicide bombers/rocketeers, the Lebanese nutcases and the Filipino koranics.

Instead of accepting the reality of history and demanding a deletion of Big Mo and his scribes' koranic militaristic agenda , Pamela and her ilk continue an almost 24/7 "wishy wash" with verbage about other religions, other life styles, natural disasters and other economic and government institutions while Islam continues to bring us closer to a world war.

It is important that we continue to remind The Pamela and her ilk of the seriousness of the situation. This will continue until we see an acceptance of reality and a condemnation of the actions of Iran and the "Wannabees".

Tommy T.:

You wrote, "Pamela personally feels the loss of love and potential in the children who have died but does not condemn a god for evil behaviour because she, as a human, cannot judge the moral reasons for the world that god has created."

But you see, that is my point. When Pamela wrote "surely all those innocent children didn't deserve to die" she does make a moral judgment--a judgment which she later claims she cannot make.

But it goes further than that. Say scores die from a suicide bombing. Can she condemn that act as evil? I see nothing in her post indicating a basis that she could. In fact, the resulting deaths might even be "celebrated".

Robert,

Pamela was not being inconsistent. She took the moral component out of death and made death a natural part of the natural world but she also specifically note that death can be a great emotional loss for those who live.

Pamela personally feels the loss of love and potential in the children who have died but does not condemn a god for evil behaviour because she, as a human, cannot judge the moral reasons for the world that god has created.

(Pamela was a math major before she took up theology. She rarely is truely inconsistent in her analysis.)

Robert,

Pamela was not being inconsistent. She took the moral component out of death and made death a natural part of the natural world but she also specifically note that death can be a great emotional loss for those who live.

Pamela personally feels the loss of love and potential in the children who have died but does not condemn a god for evil behaviour because she, as a human, cannot judge the moral reasons for the world that god has created.

(Pamela was a math major before she took up theology. She rarely is truely inconsistent in her analysis.)

Hello,

First, you write that "the loss of a life, or a hundred lives, or a hundred thousand lives, may well not be a cause of sadness, but of celebration".

Perhaps it's me, but I find such an attitude frightening in its logical implications.

Second, you write that "surely all those innocent children didn't deserve to die".

I'm not sure how you can say this when you've emptied death of any moral content.