Date: Tue, 10 Sep 2002 13:10:31 -0400 From: Lawrence Sica <lomifeh@earthlink.net> To: "Neal E. Westfall" <nwestfal@directvinternet.com> Cc: Juli Mallett <jmallett@FreeBSD.ORG>, Terry Lambert <tlambert2@mindspring.com>, Joshua Lee <yid@softhome.net>, dave@jetcafe.org, chat@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: Why did evolution fail? Message-ID: <3668DB28-C4E0-11D6-8708-000393A335A2@earthlink.net> In-Reply-To: <20020909100754.L9219-100000@Tolstoy.home.lan>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Monday, September 9, 2002, at 01:28 PM, Neal E. Westfall wrote: > > > On Sun, 8 Sep 2002, Lawrence Sica wrote: > >>> Even though their worldview isn't even cogent? Why is "accepting of >>> other religions" such a righteous goal? Yeesh, the postmodern West >>> really is anemic to truth. By the way, why is it that we are being >>> called to never criticize anyone else's beliefs? Inherent in the >>> premise is a contradiction, leading to criticism of certain beliefs >>> (e.g. Christianity). >>> >> >> Accepting of other views is a laudable goal. Not because you agree >> with them, but because you are enlightened enough to know that there >> are many faces of God. > > And...did God tell you this? By the way, in these discussions, I > always > detect an equivocation on the meaning of the words "acceptance," > "tolerance" etc. Disagreement with someones views means by definition > that you think they are false. If Christ says, "I am the way, the > truth, and the life, no-one comes to the Father but through me," this > automatically excludes the notion that there are "many ways to God". > Truth has the unmistakeable quality of clarity, not confusion. Truth > also has the quality of being the opposite of falsehood, something that > people cannot seem to grasp when it comes to ultimate questions. > That is if you believe that is what Christ said. And that is if you believe in Jesus Christ. And also if that is how he said it, then how do priests have any special in with God? This was part of the core of the Protestant revolt, the fact you do not need a priest to talk to God. One can disagree with someone's belief but still accept that they believe it and not hold it against them in some way. > >> I know that is not a popular view by many of >> the Christian sects but it is true. The Jewish and the Christian god >> have the same roots, yet for many years Christians have persecuted >> Jews. > > You are absolutely correct, the Jewish and Christian God have the same > roots. Christianity is the fulfillment of Judaism. The fact that > many Christians have persecuted Jews is a most lamentable fact, yet it > does not change the nature of truth. Such Christians to the extent > that they persecute others, are in direct contradiction with what > their religion teaches. > Are they? It depends on who you hear. Popes in the past advocated this and said it was the "Will of God" when if you read what was said in the Bible was not that at all. In this case who is correct, the Pope or the religious leader? The person who interprets the Bible? That is the slipper slope one can encounter here, persecution of any who do not fit with those in power. The Inquisition was a prime example. The witch-hunts too. It's a comon thread through history, persecution of those different or who have what a leader wants. Religion is a great tool for that at times. > >> Go figure eh? If everyone would accept the idea that if you >> beleive in a God then the God you see may be different than the God I >> see and that does not make my God wrong, religion and belief are >> personal and even within the same religion many see God differently. >> One cannot but put God through their own lens, any religion has this. > > You are endorsing subjectivism, which is completely irrational. Why > should anyone accept such an irrational premise? I can accept that > people can disagree, but that doesn't mean that I think we are both > right. > I am not saying that, what I am saying is that God is a personal thing, just because someone believes differently than you doesn't mean you have to tell them they are wrong constantly, or persecute them or anything of that nature. It is your right to believe they are wrong, it is *not* your right to attack them because of it. You made statements lamenting about tolerance and acceptance. I answered to that only. > >> It is not being called to not criticize another belifes, it's being >> called to not demonize them or put them on a lower level. > > What do you mean by "demonize" them? To the extent that a person's > beliefs are false, ill consequences should be expected to ensue. > For example, the belief that Mohammed was God's prophet, coupled > with the fact that Mohammed spread his beliefs at the edge of the > sword, it should not be so surprising when the spread of Islam > leads to religious persecution, or the flying of 757's into > skyscrapers. Bad trees produce bad fruit. > It was not Mohammed that spread that but another of Islam...<name> Islam was in fact one of the most enlightened religions for many many years. In the times of the crusades it was christianity as a whole that was killing any who were different in beliefs. And if we want to get into spreading beliefs by the sword christianity as a whole is just as guilty. Chrsitianity at its core is about non-violence, yet massive violence has been used to spread it, do you not see the inherent irony there? > >> The USA is >> all about critiquing others ideas and coming up with a common ground. >> That is why it's important accept other religions. One of the >> foundations of the USA was freedom to worship and freedom from worship >> at the same time. The ability to worship who you want and not worry >> about a government or others persecuting you is important. > > But of course all of this is irrelevent as to what the truth is. > Another of the great foundations we have in the country is the freedom > of speech, including the right to criticize others. > > Right, but what the "Founding Fathers" believed that is was important all religions should have a chance to equally flourish. Not any one above the other. This is what being accepting of the fact that others have different beliefs is about. This is not a bad thing. --Larry To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-chat" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?3668DB28-C4E0-11D6-8708-000393A335A2>