Merry Christmas

Discussion in 'Digital Photography' started by Alan Browne, Dec 24, 2006.

  1. Alan Browne

    Pudentame Guest

    I'm afraid in george's case it does mean literally that.
     
    Pudentame, Dec 30, 2006
    1. Advertisements

  2. Alan Browne

    Pudentame Guest

    Oh, so you were there and *heard* him say that yourself?
     
    Pudentame, Dec 30, 2006
    1. Advertisements

  3. Alan Browne

    Pudentame Guest

    So, start a thread.
     
    Pudentame, Dec 30, 2006
  4. He has said "God speaks to me", but that is quite different.
    But that's just one take on it. there are those who believe that getting rid
    of Saddam Hussein was more than justified by the Iraqi action, even if
    600,000 were lost doing it....After all, Saddam killed over 2 million over a
    30 year period, and he and/or his sons might very well have gotten 2 million
    more during the next 30 years. So, just because you don't think the action
    was justified, that doesn't mean that it wasn't, or that there aren't others
    who think that it was.
     
    William Graham, Dec 30, 2006
  5. Alan Browne

    Mark² Guest

    We're still photographers.
    We just happen to also be people, and people are never single-minded.
    We're familiar with each other here, so it's natural to branch off into
    discussion...just as you would over teh lunch table at a photography
    convention. It happens, and it's natural. There are other "tables" to sit
    at (other threads), so it's not like this conversation is forced on anyone.
     
    Mark², Dec 30, 2006
  6. Alan Browne

    Mark² Guest

    I am confident he didn't say that, because it would be entirely inconsistent
    with anything he's ever stated he believes.
     
    Mark², Dec 30, 2006
  7. Alan Browne

    Frank ess Guest

    Doesn't everything?
     
    Frank ess, Dec 30, 2006
  8. Alan Browne

    Mark² Guest

    No.
    Not everything. There really is such a thing as self sacrifice or selfless
    giving.
     
    Mark², Dec 30, 2006
  9. I don't disagree with the above. It's just that a small handful post and
    post and post bucketfuls of OT stuff, or turn any discussion into an
    OT drift, and almost never post about photography. You are not among
    them, but occasionally fan the fires- as we all do to some degree.
     
    John McWilliams, Dec 31, 2006
  10. Alan Browne

    Mark² Guest

    Sure, I'm guilty. But this is a "Merry Christmas" thread...after all...
    Not a, "Which lens should I use to capture my Merry Christmas" thread... :)
     
    Mark², Dec 31, 2006
  11. Alan Browne

    Bandicoot Guest

    Well, Stalin and Mao _did_ both kill people specifically because they (the
    victims) were religious. Principally Christians but other groups suffered
    too. Lenin also had a deliberate policy of killing Orthodox priests.

    I'm not saying these guys (and there are many other examples) were evil
    _because_ they were atheists, but you are wrong to say that the fact that
    they were was irrelevant to their violent actions. To play on words, they
    pursued their atheism with what might be described as 'religious' fervour.


    Peter
     
    Bandicoot, Dec 31, 2006
  12. Alan Browne

    Mark² Guest

    There are a LOT of atheists like that. I've dealt personally with many of
    them, and quite a number of them have had such a HUGE chip on their shoulder
    that they go about it with milirasistic tunnel-vision...much more so than
    even some of the most religious among us. It becomes their overwhelming,
    single-minded "guide" in some cases. It is VERY close to a religious
    zealot, and sometimes worse.
     
    Mark², Dec 31, 2006
  13. Alan Browne

    Ron Hunter Guest

    Nope. He did it quietly, but the news media picked up on it, since it
    was something that required interfacing with government. I suspect it
    might have cost him a bit more than he planned, but since he isn't all
    that far behind Gates in the money department, I doubt he suffered much.
     
    Ron Hunter, Dec 31, 2006
  14. Alan Browne

    Ron Hunter Guest

    It is rather hard for someone in the Gates/Dell financial bracket to
    make self-sacrificial charitable donations. Or, they could give TIME
    rather than money. It is hard for us to assess their motives for these
    donations.
     
    Ron Hunter, Dec 31, 2006
  15. Alan Browne

    Mark² Guest

    I don't claim they had poor or selfish motives, since that's not really up
    to me...but when you claim credit for these sort of gifts, it's as though
    you've just cheapened the act of giving into a sideshow for yourself.
    Giving can become means of attracting favor or approval from the givee...or
    even onlookers, rather than the simple willingness to make a personal
    sacrifice to give...that isn't "paid" in return by receiving kudos on the 6
    o'clock news. The over-all effect of receiving gifts may be great and good
    to the receiver...but in terms of the giver--to me they've basically given
    THEMSELVES the "gift" of kudos. Brownie points...

    Keep giving...even if it's 4 foot long checks, and the like. -Just don't
    expect God to fall all over himself because you gave in that way.

    There's an interesting story in the Bible about giving. Jesus describes a
    rich man who makes a huge procession of his act of "giving" to the temple--a
    HUGE quantity of cash, etc....but then following this, he notices an
    impoverished widow who secretly drops what little she had (a single "mite"
    in this case) into the box when nobody was looking. Jesus sees her, and
    uses it to explain how God views "giving." He notes that the rich man gave
    painlessly from his wealth, while the widow gave only a tiny fraction...but
    a gift that was truly a sacrifice for her. She received no fanfare, and no
    outward appreciation for it, and yet Jesus describes hers as the greater
    gift, and the only gift of significance to God. He goes on to say that the
    attention the rich guy got from the crowds was all the "reward" he'd
    receive...but said the widow's reward would be in heaven.

    It's an interesting little glimpse of how God, according to Jesus, sees the
    act of giving.
     
    Mark², Dec 31, 2006
  16. Alan Browne

    Mark² Guest

    If so, then good for him.
    And to God (according to the New Testament), it's the sacrifice that is
    noted. -Not the value of the gift itself.
    (See my other reply to you above)
     
    Mark², Dec 31, 2006
  17. Alan Browne

    ASAAR Guest

    Thereby demonstrating that in yet another category, spirituality,
    Dubya Bush, who promises much, ensures that his "generosity" is well
    publicized but delivers very little, falls far and away short of
    Bubba Clinton, who is so easily able to "feel your pain".

    I've also been made aware that when it comes to appreciating the
    use of photography to help spread the word, to make the gospel
    heard, God values more highly the works produced and the effort made
    by photographers using humble $150 cameras. Affluent dilettantes
    may mistakenly think that by the almost effortless use of luxurious
    $5000 cameras they'll reap greater rewards, but the story of The
    Widow's Mite says otherwise. I learned all of this from the blessed
    Ken Rockwell who heard it directly from God, but whether God was
    speaking to him or through him has not yet been determined.
     
    ASAAR, Dec 31, 2006
  18. Alan Browne

    Bill Funk Guest

    Does that in any way mean the COE is not the official state church of
    England?
    The "Defender of the Faith" title *was* meant o refer to Catholocism;
    it no longer does.
    It now refers to the COE, as it did during the revolutionary war.
    Henry was ex-communicated, you may reemember.
    Yes, any religion. They used the COE as the main reason, though, since
    that was the religion of the country they were breaking from.
    The 'funding' problem has always been a red herring. If the funds are
    used as they are intended, and not used to further the givers, there's
    no problem. Oversight is always done.
    And using establishments that already have systems set up for giving
    and otherwise distributing those funds is far more efficient that
    setting up governmental agencies to do the same thing.
     
    Bill Funk, Dec 31, 2006
  19. Alan Browne

    Bill Funk Guest

    And what penalties did Congress set up to punish any and all who don't
    utter the magic words?
    None.
    What means were set up to ensure that the Pledge is said by all ands
    sundry at any given interval?
    None.
    So, where's the idea that any God is somehow the God of the
    Government?
     
    Bill Funk, Dec 31, 2006
  20. Alan Browne

    Ron Hunter Guest

    Sometimes, the process of public giving motivates others to give likewise.
     
    Ron Hunter, Dec 31, 2006
    1. Advertisements

Ask a Question

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

You'll need to choose a username for the site, which only take a couple of moments (here). After that, you can post your question and our members will help you out.