Sins of the Fathers
Dean
Last week, on Good Friday, I noted that in the wake of 9/11 many Jews in America were frightened that Christian America might rise up against them in response, and also noted how condescending Christians often are toward faithful Jews.
When I noted this, some were stunned. Some were defensive. Some were incensed. Some were even--perhaps justifiably--offended.
Only one said that this revelation saddened him.
Were I a believing man, I'd say that he was the only true defender of the Gospel among them.
In any case, Kathy over at The Cakeater Chronicles asks why certain atheists seem to feel the need to proselytize. Well, see, here's the thing: am actually quite embarassed by rude atheists who rant about the evils of religion. I think that, at best, they're gigantic putzes. I think if I ever met Bill Maher, my biggest urge would be to kick him in the shins (for this and a whole bunch of other reasons). People who say "religion is evil" are a******s in my book.
I recognize that I live in a world wherein the vast majority of people believe in the supernatural. Even in "enlightened" places like Europe, where supposedly religion is unpopular, the vast majority of people believe in things like life after death, astrology, numerology, or something like that. So even if they say they "aren't religious," clearly, most of them are. Meanwhile, here in the United States, more than 80% of the population considers itself Christian.
That being the case, honest dialogue with Christians, as well as other people of faith, strikes me as something sensible to have.
You guys are just going to have to deal with the fact that some people like me have heard the Gospel, understand it extremely well, and still say "no thanks."
Furthermore, on this blog I have occasionally been critical of atheists (actually, I'm critical of atheists a whole lot), of some Jews, of many muslims, and of some Christians. Of the latter, the Christians I'm usually the most critical of are those who declare that the religion of Islam is an inherently violent, inherently terroristic religion, and that we should just "face up" to the fact that the entire Muslim world is the enemy of the United States and of Western civilization.
If you don't think such people exist, just spend some time at blogs like Little Green Footballs, or hang out at some of the Christian blogs where they feel free to bash away at all the flaws they perceive in Islam but take huge umbrage at any criticism of their own faith.
As someone who grew up Christian, who could be considered "culturally Christian," and whose family is almost entirely made of up Christians, I don't hesitate to say: "Why do you look at the speck of sawdust in your brother's eye and pay no attention to the plank in your own eye? How can you say to your brother, 'Let me take the speck out of your eye,' when all the time there is a plank in your own eye? You hypocrite, first take the plank out of your own eye, and then you will see clearly to remove the speck from your brother's eye."
I believe in and support America's Global War on Terror. I do not support muslim-bashing or the notion that we are "fools" if we do not "admit" that the "true enemy is Islam."
Related Posts (on one page):
- My Christian Friends
- Sins of the Fathers
- God's People
There was no error. You never saw that.
The point is that as evidenced by these discussions, you don't understand it. your answer in a previous thread to the baptism of the Holy Spirit is salient; the pentecostal experience is central to the development of the church. Without that there's no way for us 2,000 years later to confirm the truth of the gospels. It's all hearsay. But with the baptism of the Holy Spirit, and we can confirm that it's true. And because of the baptism of the Holy Spirit, all are without excuse.
Again, I don't want to psychoanalyze you too much. I'll speak about myself. I thought much as you did, Dean. I'd read the New Testament several times. I considered myself a cultural Christian and argued many times with my Christian friends, and they never made a dent in me. I knew too much scripture -- often far more than they did.
I became a Zen Buddhist and meditated for years. I went through AA and had the miraculous experience of being set free through fellowship, honesty and confession. By the way, all this time I was still an atheist. I worked for the Catholic Church for two years and was still an atheist.
I had numerous mystical experiences as a Buddhist and a few more related to Hinduism (I initially learned Hindu meditation, but quickly moved to Zen Buddhism). Not just a few. I once sat for three hours straight at a sensei's house without blinking and without moving. I once had a powerful experience of Vishnu. I once saw the Buddha one day while sitting on Locust Street in Philadelphia; I killed him just as I was told :) (By sitting I mean meditating. Zen calls it sitting like the Brits call studying reading.) I studied vedanta philosophy. I read Isherwood and Huxley. But all through a prism of Zen; Zen was the thing, the pure essence without all the superstititious trimmings. It was just you and the void.
And all through this I was content except for that pesky Bible and Jesus who I felt had ruined everything and driven Western and much of Eastern Civilization into a ditch. Only Karl Marx did more damage, I figured.
As a matter of fact, the deeper I got into this stuff, the more I became more and more startled at the existence of Christianity. What could possibly explain the proliferation of churches if they were absent a spiritual experience?
And there was no Christian experience ... just prayer, which was just rudimentary meditation and can be found in all religions.
So I became to poke around and read the Bible again, and was utterly horrified. Utterly. While Paul's letters for the most part didn't bother me, the OT clearly was the story of a people justifying their conquests and failures with the whims of a war-god. David replaced Saul because Saul wasn't enough of a killer. Lovely, I thought.
I went to Masses and had pleasant little experiences, nothing to write home about, but certainly nothing horrible. I wasn't terribly impressed. Christianity had started in superstition but devolved in a weak form of meditative prayer and some ritual and it was all pretty. But that's all.
I went to evangelical Protestant revivals and was again horrified at Christianity's exclusivity, insistence on its own truth and I was scandalized on the teaching on hell. (Still am, but as I've written elsewhere, it's pretty easy considering our limitations for things to become hell).
I went seeking Christian experience, and I came away with nothing more than experiences that I felt were the products of the same spiritual entity that produced my Buddhist ones. I'd been about a year into Christian searching at this point and four years into my spiritual journey. I hadn't resolved the Christian issue but my mind was racing a lot and I was unsettled, so I returned to my Buddhist practice and redoubled my efforts. I meditated twice every day for 20 minutes. Pushed through the notorious dryness and cloudiness ...
Well, that's enough for now. It's gotten late in the morning and I have a long commute. Perhaps I tell more later.
While I'm an unbeliever, I see the value of religion in the lives of my loved ones. My mother wouldn't be the happy, loving person she is without the Church and her belief in Angels and Saints. My sister's loss of her child was tempered by her faith.I get really peeved by atheists running around bursting bubbles.
I'm also deeply concerned with the anti-Judeo-Christian prejudices I see in the Media and Academia. There's this neo-Marxist knee jerk reaction against these religions that I don't see directed at other faiths.
Do they both have problems? Sure. Christianity's problems will make it harder for you to discuss certain things freely and make the whole society real uptight. Islam's problems will kill you.
Littlegreenfootballs is priceless because of 2 factors -
1) Dishonest PC Media
2) CAIR and other Wahabist front groups that are infiltrating and neutering this country with radical Islam.
The country nor the media will deal with the real enemy which is RADICAL/FUNDAMENTALIST ISLAM - Wahabism.
Unless you study the history of the Muslim Brotherhood and Saudi Arabia and understand that they are infiltrating with oil $$ every country and controlling how Islam is practiced there then you DO NOT GET IT.
They are infiltrating Sudan/Mauritania/Russian Republics/Phillipines... etc...
I spoke to a Black African from Mauritania who told me they are Arabizing and Wahabizing his country. They are forcing out the blacks who do not want to live culturally and politically like Arabs and practice Islam in every sphere of their life as they do in Saudi Arabia.
There is a huge war going on... it is silent and violent... and if you don't think there is Dean than you are not there.
Are there problems with Christianity and Judaisma and Hinduism... sure but they are NOTHING in comparison.
Mike
jihadwatch.org
(Joking! Kidding! Funny, ha ha! Put down that rope, now!)
But who am I to put down the jesus and mary folks just one day after Easter? Have a good time with your families, gods, souls, saints, or whatever, and I'll stick to my guns.
Literally as well as figuratively.
Who knows? Maybe you're all right and I'm all wrong. But then again, maybe not.
Arnold Harris
Mount Horeb WI
Arnold Harris just admitted we're right!
She said that she was tired of people asking her 'what Jews thought.' She said, "I can't tell you what Jews think, but I can tell you what I think."
All too often people are generalizing from an individual and applying that information back onto the group, and then using that group definition to define other individuals. When you do that, you get useless circular definitions— and you're led into fallacies. Anyway.
I went through that entire thread again and I must have missed it.
When did I ever say I had all the answers locked up in my particular headvault? If nobody else is omnipotent, neither am I.
But in all things, a little factual and tangible proof goes a long way.
Arnold Harris
Mount Horeb WI
Best.
People who tell me the "real Islam" is the violent and intolerant one have been shown to cherry-pick their quotes from what I've seen. More to the point: I'll take the word of practicing muslims over those of Christian attack dogs any day of the wek.
And hey, it wasn't long ago a lot of Islam's most bitter critics were claiming that democracy would never fly among Muslims. A few of them have fallen silent since recent changes in the Middle East, but a few seem to be clapping their hands over their ears and yelling "lalalala, I can't hear you!"
Mike: I would agree that Little Green Footballs often has useful info. I think Charles needs to just completely shut down his comments section though--he's got some genuinely scary people there.
Bernadette: Look for comments by Kevin D.
Violence, hatred and intolerance don't have A THING to do with per say necessarily with development or even education. I do agree that in the rush to look at Islam sometimes we, or Christians in your view, look to ignore recent history or even still rampant anti-semitism still existing in Christian countries such as Eastern Europe today, and its original home Russia. However, lgf is priceless as well as David Horowitz and others because more importantly in my opinion is the blatant closed PC eye the Western elitism media and others take in addressing the worst kind of hateful ideology that is taught every day in the Muslim world today. NOT by radicals but from the HEAD Imams in Egypt and Saudi Arabia... the meccas of Islamic thought. All 1 need do is read Memri once in a while or watch the videos.
Again, if the Pope said some of the things that are said every day by the heads of Islam there would be hell to pay. Fallwell makes stupid comments and he's condemned for it immediately... Head Imams in the Muslim world do it daily and not only that they silence the moderates... they demean them and call them Jews/Zionists.... And as Spencer points out in that link I posted, the radicals have the backing of the Koran more so than the moderates unfortunately do.
I don't read the comments regularly. However, when I do I find them to be funny and mocking not scarey. People who mock the extremists/haters in the Muslim world instead of revering them the way the Western media does. As the saying goes, an Arab who speaks moderately is ignored, but any nut who picks up a gun and declares the tyranny of the US and Israel will be afforded immediate deference.
And apparently many Muslims as well appreciate it. Why are these haters and thugs afforded some sordove higher deference in the Western media as they're almost heroes or cowboys and not simply mafia thugs, thieves and hatemongers.
I'll stick with lgf until we get real dialogue elsewhere...
Well come on now, mate:
Tim the Enchanter: There he is!
King Arthur: Where?
Tim the Enchanter: There!
King Arthur: What? Behind the rabbit?
Tim the Enchanter: It IS the rabbit!
King Arthur: You silly sod!
Tim the Enchanter: What?
King Arthur: You got us all worked up!
Tim the Enchanter: Well, that's no ordinary rabbit.
King Arthur: Ohh!
Tim the Enchanter: That's the most foul, cruel, and bad-tempered rodent you ever set eyes on!
Sir Robin: You tit! I soiled my armor I was so scared!
Tim the Enchanter: Look, that rabbit's got a vicious streak a mile wide! It's a killer!
Sir Galahad: Get stuffed!
Tim the Enchanter: He'll do you up a treat, mate.
Sir Galahad: Oh yeah?
Sir Robin: You mangy Scots git!
Tim the Enchanter: I'm warning you!
Sir Robin: What's he do? Nibble your bum?
Tim the Enchanter: He's got huge, sharp - eh - he can leap about - look at the bones!
King Arthur: Go on, Bors. Chop his head off!
Bors: Right! Silly little bleeder. One rabbit stew comin' right up!
And I have wondered about those who excoriate Bush for being "born again." Where were/are they when discussing Carter? Is the new Carter [attack?] sub going to be known as "The Attack Rabbit" is what gets me.
And scary, Gingrich seems to be making a comeback.
Maybe scarier, biologists have announced we may be hard-wired to have religion - the best thing I have seen in favor of "Intelligent Design", which I otherwise ignore when not railing at its proponents. Albeit not a particular religion is hardwired. Hmm. Mithra-ism anyone?
And Intelligent Design is a lot more sound than most people give it credit for and it seems to me that most of its opponents attack it from an emotional position rather than scientific. If you have a problem with the idea of a Creator fine, but don't call that bias scientific. If the evidence points to a conclusion and its the conclusion you don't like then provide a differing one that makes more sense than the one provided already. I'm not seeing the scientific community doing that much (though the trend is changing by the increasing publication of ID papers in promonent outlets) other than balking at the idea of a Creator and leaving it at that. To me, that doesn't sound very scientific.