Banty <Banty_member@newsguy.com>
Re: Choosing my religion

In article <ehrebeniuk-2D9383.21165912092006@news-vip.optusnet.com.au>, Chookie
says...

In article <edumun0lo3@drn.newsguy.com>, Banty <Banty_member@newsguy.com>
wrote:

I am interested in the flow of ideas. Why does one lot of Christians think
it OK to practice apartheid, while the rest do not? Why does one lot of
Muslims think it is OK to kill ordinary people via suicide, and others do
not? How do they come to those beliefs? There is a logic to people's
beliefs that can be followed and understood (unfortunately, it makes better
TV if mad axe-murderers commit axe-murders *because* they are mad, and Muslim
extremists commit murder *because* they are Muslim extremists.) But I think
we need a 'heresy cutoff' if we're going to apportion blame.

Does that make more sense?

Um, no. Especially after you've enumerated all the established religions
(and whole categories of religions) that are indeed heresies of other religoins.

What you've presented is a long-winded version of the bad apple argument,
that's all. "It's those guys; don't blame us."

So who gets the blame for the Salem witch trials, then? All 'religious'
people? Including, say, the Australian Aboriginal peoples? Seems a bit
unfair to me -- well, to be precise, it seems intellectually lazy as well as
unfair.

I think there's merit in this outlook - the Salem witch trials arose from the
same category of beliefs that lead, for example, an animist village to expel or
kill a member for supposedly having brought some misfortune on that village by
having insulted a diety or having attracted the attention of an evil being to
the village.

It can also very reasonably be viewed as an extension of the long and vicious
persecution of "witches" by Christians of the middle ages which really was the
brutal suppression of practicioners of pre-Christian European relgions.

So, yes, that sort of thing, more than many other things, can be placed at the
feet of religion.

The concept of 'religious' people is a bit like the category 'Asian'
-- it's a construct invented by people from outside that group (Europeans) to
describe the Other, but it's sometimes too broad to be useful, and resented by
those whom it describes. So -- I favour tracking *ideas* if we are going to
blame a particular group for something.

And religion is a kind of *idea*! I wouldn't favor discrimination against
religious *individuals*, but surely it's valid to oppose religion and religious
ideas.


Banty

Hello,

Yes, there has been a lot of bad things that happened in the name of
religion, even those professing to be 'Christian', such as those
Witchhunts and Crusades etc.

And concerning Christianity, such things repel some people from
accepting it. But are they being mislead?

Notice what Jesus wants from his true servants. Lu 6:46,

"Why do you call me, `Lord, Lord,' and do not do what I say?" (NIV)

Yes, Jesus wants his true servants to OBEY him, not just acknowledge
or talk about him. And notice How Jesus said to treat even people that
are considered to be an enemy. Mt 5:44,

"But I say to you, love your enemies and pray for those who persecute
you," (NASB)

Thus anyone (or church) who consistently acts contrary to Jesus'
words, is not really a true follower of Jesus, and Jesus calls them
"evildoers". (Mt 7:23)

So don't be fooled by those professing to be 'Christian' out there,
but who by their actions define themselves as not being such. Rather
notice the difference in how his true followers conduct themselves.

Sincerely, James