> >>Rick:
> >>Try the Inquisitions, the Crusades
> > Jim:
> >Would it be more accurate to blame bad religion than religion in general?
> Rick:
> Perhaps, but then you reach the problem of who gets to define
> "bad" religion.
I should clarify in that I mean the bad representation of religion, not bad
religion itself
> Rick:
> For example, you and I can obviously agree that the
> wholesale slaughter that came out of the Inquisitions and the Crusades
> were wrong--but had we lived at the time, and of course been devout
> Christians who accepted the Pope as the ultimate religious authority,
> wouldn't we have defined those acts as justified or even "good?"
Hard to say. Given my beliefs, there is a good chance I might have
have been slaughtered myself
> >Jim:
> >Did these individuals follow the tenets of their religion, or ignore them
> >and that's where the trouble started?
> Rick:
> Which tenets? The Bible has existed in several translations, and
> several versions.
So? How does this change Jesus' admonition to love your enemy and
pray for those who persecute you?
No matter what translation you have I don't think it can be mutated to
"Kick the crap out of em for big J"
> Rick:
> In addition, a great deal of it consists of material
> that is subject to a very wide range of interpretations. Today, we might
> give one interpretation to a passage while at the time a very different
> one was considered proper doctrain.
I'm not interested in the peripheral -- I'm interested in how someone could
commit violence and claim that this was justified by the tenets of
Christianity
And I don't mean "God said it was ok"
> >>Rick:
> >>the slaughter of Christians
> >>by the Romans
> > Jim:
> >Of course we can always find examples of instititutional harm
> Rick:
> But isn't that my point exactly? If we accept organized religion
> as an institution (which, of course, is entirely appropriate), then the
> fact that the institution has inspired harm supports, rather than
> contradicts, my points.
Of course it has inspired harm.
What do you propose we do about it?
> >Jim:
> >Mothers may be more likely to abuse their children than any other
> >group but do we eliminate motherhood?
> Rick:
> Actually, stepfathers are in terms of per capita abuse (although
> that is due, in part, to the higher rate of sexual abuse which increases
> the overall abuse rate), but your point is clear.
Thanks, I get one in every once in a while ;)
> Rick:
> Do we eliminate motherhood? No, since that would also eliminate
> children, thus defeating the point. Instead we attempt to educate women
> as to the appropriate child-rearing techniques and use legal means to
> protect children from at keast the most severe forms of abuse.
Sounds good to me
>> Jim:
> >Not being the historian you are I would ask the same question -- is
> >this religion taken to its logical conclusion, or religion used to justify
> >something that is inconsistent with that religion?
> Rick:
> I'm hardly an historian. If anything, Louis would be the best
> person in this list to comment on this area--his expertise is far more
> sophisticated in this regard than mine.
>
> Whether it is religion taken to its logical conclusion, or
> religion used to justify behavior isn't the issue, however. The key
> issue is whether or not religion--by its existance alone--has been the
> source of excessive violence. and whether that violence would have
> occured in equal measure if the religion had not existed in the first
> place. I would hold that it is the existance of religion--and the sense
> of "righteousness" it universally inspires that is the problem, not its
> use to justify behavior.
Well, being of one religion and not others, it's hard for me to give this
an adequate response.
As I said, there is nothing scriptural or righteous about me beating the
snot out of you for having different beliefs, no beliefs, or attacking mine.
We are admonished to act godly
Sadly, many Christians like myself fail at this
> >Jim:
> >I've read that this exacerbated the problem, as opposed to causing it
> Rick:
> I'll agree with that.
Cool :)
> > Jim:
> >Further, this if true is my point about bad religion. I am unaware of any
> >scriptural tenet or early church tradition that would justify such foolishness.
> Rick:
> Try the Malleus Malificarium, or the "Witches Hammer," written by
> Pope Honorous [sp?]. It was issued under papal authority and defined the
> characteristics of a heretic or a witch--including direct injunctions
> against cats. Other, similar, injunctions existed as well.
Honorious? I'll have to research that.
Maybe he's the same pope who got ex-communicated post-humously from
the Catholic church.
No wait, that's too early.
Of course I would argue that putting the church in the hands of one person
is not biblical and not what Christ intended but I'm sure at this point I'm
preaching and yadda yadda
I like others would be interested in examining religion as we would discuss it
in the classroom
What for example causes two devout people -- one to commit harm -- the
other not to commit harm -- to behave differently?
Are religious people happier than non-religious people? Why? Are they
more emotionally mature? tolerant of others?
Why do some people share their religious faith pleasantly, and others
provoke the desire to smack them?
And so forth
Thanks for a good discussion
I'm trying to not commit the same errors I usually make and clog the
list with what some might see as irrelevant material
Cheers,
Jim
************************************************************************
Jim Guinee, Ph.D.
Director of Training & Adjunct Professor
University of Central Arkansas Counseling Center
313 Bernard Hall Conway, AR 72035 USA
"Too many of us have a Christian vocabulary rather than a
Christian experience. We think we are doing our duty when
we're only talking about it." ... Charles F. Banning
E-mail is not a secure means to transmit confidential
information. The UCA Counseling Center staff does not
use e-mail to discuss personal issues. The staff does
not maintain 24-hour access to their e-mail accounts.
**************************************************************************
---
You are currently subscribed to tips as: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To unsubscribe send a blank email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
