Capitol Hill Blue Forums Life and Moral Issues Religion and Philosophy Perplexing many, Episcopal priest announces she’s a Muslim, too

Yes! And it is also important to realize that all of the fault cannot be placed on one particular group.

On my home forum, for instance, we have two self-identified atheists who post with some frequency, and there is the difference of night and day between their posts and their style. One is polite, knowledgeable, a good, clear writer who can carry on a discussion with believers and neither attack them personally nor be subject to attack. The other person does not prepare very well for a discussion, tends to ramble, routinely insults believers as a matter of personal debating style, and drags religion into every post topic - even one on fuel prices.

The first is an excellent debater and will hand you your butt very quickly if you are not prepared, but will do it politely and without a personal attack. The second does little if any research, routinely makes serious factual errors, is generally deconstructed very easily and very quickly, and invariably blames the loss on the other person's "Christian hatred" or the resentment of the posters atheism.

So, one obviously cannot make the case that only believers, particularly Christians, are the source of all of our problems or are the only rude, mean-spirited people out there. Nor do I think you can blame the attitude on their home or school training; some people just resent the fact that others are much better at internet discussions than they are; thus, they lash out in the classic ad hominem as an excuse for their own deficiencies.

The people that are described above as "Authentic Christians" are nothing of the sort. They nothing but users of a faith to control others and force them to their own will.

there are several, if not thousands who try to follow the peaceful words of Christ and truly resent the way that certain people have hijacked Christianity to push their hateful agenda. Unfortunately, not enough of us speak out against it, and those of us who do are still consistently lumped in with these others, no matter our opposite views and actions.

"there are several, if not thousands who try to follow the peaceful words of Christ and truly resent the way that certain people have hijacked Christianity to push their hateful agenda. Unfortunately, not enough of us speak out against it, and those of us who do are still consistently lumped in with these others, no matter our opposite views and actions."

Scout - Have you ever gone toe to toe with them? I mean, whew! It's useless. Talk about being attacked and damned to hell. I won't bore you with stories. Suffice it to say, been there and done that. No more.

2wins~

Been there, Done that with both Fundie Hijackers AND close-minded Athiest/Agnostics. Neither of whom want to allow others to think for themselves.

I have also met and discussed this with reasonable folks from both sides. And we were able to come an accord of sorts. But the key word is reasonable, denoting a willingness to listen and discuss with an open mind. Something the first group I mentioned refused to be.

Scout: I think you just hit my first thought, when I saw this thread.

All: Why is it anyone's business what this woman believes, unless it affects her ability to serve as a priest (in which case, I think, it would only affect members of her own denomination and mosque, and probably not even all of them.)

Let her be. Her beliefs are not hurting anyone, are they?

I don't disagree with you at all. However, times being what they are she also represents something different that flies in the face of popular religious culture. And that, in and of itself, is worthy of discussion and debate. In essence, she is holding herself up as a countercultural figure amidst a culture of intolerance. She is, by her own actions, speaking of a more tolerant world. And I salute her for that. Ala, God ... Same Same. The question of Jesus, however, brings in a whole other debate where the two doctrines, Christianity and Islam, are concerned.

Damn!, politics and religion on one website. Talk about potential danger. I’ve seen those statistics too Steve but one has to wonder how accurate the responses are because one has to take into consideration how the question is phrased. If the question is ‘Do you believe in the literal truth of the bible and believe it is the inerrant word of God” and 2/3rds responded yes, then what you have said would be true. I wonder if that is how the question was phrased. Never the less, we do indeed have many Christian (and other) literalists in the US.

There is also the sticky issue of truth in a response. Religion can be fraught with superstition and when a person is asked a religious question and gives response, I wonder how much truth is there vs. telling the questioner what he/she thinks he/she should say. The responder could have doubts about a belief or issue but could answer to the affirmative to avoid the old lightning bolt from heaven striking him asunder if he/she should give a response questioning the existence of God. Or a response that would be open to doubt. In religion, separating superstition from spirituality and dogma is a very convoluted path.

And even though the US is indeed a very religious, mostly Christian country, I still think the people in the ME have a more imbedded, entwined, and extreme interpretation of it than the people in the US. That’s just a gut feeling and I have no way to prove what I just said. But, several years back, I read this article in The Atlantic that really opened my eyes to the thinking in the ME, Egypt in this case. It was about the crash of Egypt Air 990 off of New York. I will provide the link below but one cannot read the whole article unless one is a subscriber to The Atlantic. It is definitely worth reading if you can seek it out. Very, very intriguing and interesting.

http://www.theatlantic.com/doc/prem/200111/langewiesche

Thanks for your reply, Ken. Here's how the question was phrased:


An equal number said "no" as "yes" (48% vs. 49%).


53% said that "Evolution, that is, the idea that human beings developed over millions of years from less advanced forms of life" was either definitely, or probably, true. Only 18% said "definitely".

66% said that "Creationism, that is, the idea that God created human beings pretty much in their present form at one time within the last 10,000 years" was either definitely, or probably, true. 39% said "definitely".

• 43% said "God created man in his present form"
• 38% said "Man evolved with God's guidance"
• 14% said "Man evolved without Divine guidance"

These Gallup folks know what they're doing, Ken. Sometimes their samples are a little bit skewed, but not much. In this survey, they also asked people about their religious and political affiliations. Here's what the results look like with political affiliation as a delimiter:




I agree with you about that, Ken. I think there is a larger, anthropological justification for your "gut feeling". It's a well-established fact that the more educated and technologically advanced a culture becomes, the less religious (or, shall we say, superstitious) they become. The US is an anomaly in that regard.

Steve--that leaves me dumbfounded. I knew the numbers were high, but not that high. I still think the "fear of the lightning bolt" plays a part in peoples hedging their response, but still---where do you go with that?

Personally, I think like a scientist. As if you couldn’t tell by my pro nuclear energy posts. To me, science is mute on the subject of the existence of God. There is no way to prove or disprove either. To mention nothing about what is the definition of God? The irony I find in non believers of the theory of evolution is that it does nothing to prove or disprove Gods existence. All it does is disprove the literal interpretation of Genesis and some other biblical scripture. But if the literal interpretation is required by some to believe in the other then indeed problems develop.

My take on the existence of God is doubtful. I see no evidence of such. Does that mean God doesn’t exist? Who knows---but I see slim chances of it—(2.35784% to be exact). Both extreme sides annoy me because both the fundys and many atheists can take on an extreme religious zeal of their own in their desire to either convince one of the existence of, or the non existence of, God. I say just chill guys, or gals—there is no way to prove either! I have an aunt in Arkansas who is just a sweetheart. The kindest, nicest, sweetest most generous person you can imagine. She is totally sold on accepting Jesus Christ as her savior. Do I argue with her and tell her she is a fool for such a belief? Of course not, what purpose would that serve? All it would do would be to upset both sides and change no ones mind. She is secure in her belief, it provides her with comfort and peace, so I say fine. Sometimes I wish I could just surrender like that and buy into the system but my mind will not allow it. It just doesn’t pass the gut check, to say nothing of the evidence. Must be the devil sitting on my left shoulder!