And again, it has never been my experience that my church has discouraged independent thought. If your are talking from your own experience, fine. ?but it spunds an awful lot like the same arguments I've heard from other "Internet Athiests."
--- In [email protected], "DP" <wookielife...@...> wrote: > > > > --- In [email protected], mike brown <uerusuboyo@> wrote: > > > > DP, > > > > Not sure how you could be personally "offended" by a criticism of theology. > > Actually, I think all this being 'offended' by religious folk is a bit rich > > coming from people who don't blink an eye to tell gays they're an > > abomination or > > women who have abortions are murderers etc etc etc. Suck it up. I also > > think you > > misunderstood me aout that survey. I don't think purported Christians can > > understand the intricacies of theology when they don't even know who > > delivered > > the Sermon on the Mount. That indicates to me that Christians are told what > > theological dogmas to believe without much independant inquiry. To me > > that's > > dangerous especially they get into our schools and systems of government > > (hence > > the topic headline above). > > Wow, lots of generalization there. My church has ordained gay ministers for > almost 20 years. There is no official position on abortion. Again, they are > in the mainstream, not a "liberal" church. I have read many books about > theology and find it quite interesting, and I don't think it's fair to > dismiss it out of hand.. So pardon me, but yes, I am offended when people > assume I'm a bigot because of my beliefs. > > Again, there have been many cases of progressive movements being led by > church groups. Ever heard of the Berrigan brothers? > > "Who did the Sermon On the Mount" wasn't one of the questions, btw. > > > > Mike > > > > > > > > > > ________________________________ > > From: DP <wookielifeday@> > > To: [email protected] > > Sent: Sat, 2 October, 2010 1:37:46 > > Subject: [Zen] Re: Don't pray in my school and I won't think in your church. > > > >  > > > > > > --- In [email protected], mike brown <uerusuboyo@> wrote: > > > > > > DP, > > > > > > Thanks for the reply. It's probably difficult, if not impossible, to keep > > > religion out of politics in the sense that politicians have personal > > > beliefs > > > that may impact on their personal decision making. However, we in the > > > west > > > mostly live in secular societies and overt religious decisions should > > > stay the > > > > > hell (excuse the pun) out of legislative decisions that affect all > > > citizens. > > > > Well, I don't know how far that can go. People talk about taxing churches > > where > > the ministers make overt political statements. Couldn't that have been used > > to > > suppress Martin Luther King? As well, on the international scene and I > > think of > > Desmond Tutu and the Dalai Lama, whose faith has sustained them. Dennis > > Kucinich > > is another example of someone whose faith (Roman Catholic with a bit of > > existentialism thrown in) has resulted in progressive politics. the > > abolitionists were often religious (Quakers, etc). > > > > > > I object to your subject line, because in my (admittedly short) years as a > > church goer I have never, ever been told not to think. Quite the opposite, > > in > > fact. And it's not like I go to a small "new age Christian" church, but one > > of > > the mainline churches in Canada. > > > > > > > > > > > I'd also argue with you over the point about atheists knowing the answers > > > to > > > aàreligious survey but not understanding the intricacies of theology. > > > If > > >someone > > > > > > doesn't know who delivered the Sermon on the Mount they sure as hell > > > (there I > > >go > > > > > > again) don't understand the "intricacies" of theology.à> > > > > > Mike. > > > > > I'm more offended, to be honest, but putting "intricacies" in quotes. > > Theology > > is quite a large and varied field. and that wasn't my point. My point was > > that > > these people were gloating over "knowing more" (in fact, an average of 4 > > questions more) than religious people, as if they had understood all of > > religion > > better than all those who practise it. These were questions like "what > > religion > > was Mother Theresa," and while it's shocking that many people didn't know > > that, > > in terms of religion it's the equivalent of "what year did Columbus sail" > > is to > > history. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > ________________________________ > > > From: DP <wookielifeday@> > > > To: [email protected] > > > Sent: Fri, 1 October, 2010 23:16:46 > > > Subject: Re: [Zen] More about arguments and ego > > > > > > à> > > > > > Well, there are ways that politics and religion/spirituality intersect > > > that are > > > > > > (for me) fruitful and interesting. The debate over Obama's old minister, > > > for > > > example, could have led to a mainstream introduction to Liberation > > > Theology. Or > > > > > > we could talk about "Creation Care," the Evangelical environmental > > > movement. > > > Instead, there are constant threads about keeping religion out of > > > politics, and > > > > > > how atheists are smarter, more moral and more compassionate than > > > religious > > > people. The latest has been about how atheists did better than religiouis > > >people > > > > > > on a quiz about religion. I thought the quiz was superficial, and that > > > just > > > because the atheists knew the answers they didn't know the intricacies of > > > theology. Of course, I was ridiculed for even arguing that theology was > > >complex. > > > > > > So yes, some hurt feelings and envy over the people who have "the truth." > > > but > > > also frustration because I think that it's our emphasis on materialism > > > (in all > > > > > senses of the word) that causes a lot of the world's problems. > > > > > > --- In [email protected], mike brown <uerusuboyo@> wrote: > > > > > > > > Hi DP, > > > > > > > > Could you elaborate on this a bit more: "As well, I am frustrated that > > > > the > > > > section of the political forum dedicated to religion is dominated by > > > > the > > > > atheists." > > > > > > > > Thanks, > > > > Mike > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > ________________________________ > > > > From: DP <wookielifeday@> > > > > To: [email protected] > > > > Sent: Fri, 1 October, 2010 7:58:28 > > > > Subject: Re: [Zen] More about arguments and ego > > > > > > > > Ãâà> > > > I appreciate your comments, and your story. That is strange, and yet > > > > not > > > > uncommon from what I've heard. OTOH, it's a valuable metaphor for how > > > > we > > > > experience the world. We ultimately really don't know. And perhaps what > > > > I > > >feel > > > > > > > > > > is envy over their illusion of certainty (which they definitely present) > > > > > > > > And yet another part of it is that I feel that some of the issues in > > > > the > > >world > > > > > > > > > > (this is a political forum that I'm talking about) need a spiritual > > > > outlook > > >as > > > > > > > > > > well as a real world, material component. Certainly the idea of "there > > > > is > > > > nothing more to this world, and when you die that's it" seems to > > > > counter any > > > > > > sense of hope for the future, at least in my opinion. > > > > > > > > As well, I am frustrated that the section of the political forum > > > > dedicated to > > > > > > > religion is dominated by the atheists. > > > > > > > > I guess if I *was* more secure in my beliefs I wouldn't let it bother > > > > me. > > > > --- In [email protected], Kristy McClain <healthyplay1@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > *bows to all* > > > > > ÃÆ'ââ¬Å¡Ãâà> > > > > I wasn't going to comment on this thread, but after reading DP's > > > > > posts on > > > >this, > > > > > > > > >iÃÆ'ââ¬Å¡Ãâàdecided to share an experience i am having right > > > > >now.. > > > > > ÃÆ'ââ¬Å¡Ãâà> > > > > To begin, I was struck when youÃÆ'ââ¬Å¡Ãâàwrote that what > > > > > really bothers you > > >is > > > > > > >that > > > > > > > > >people attack you aboutÃÆ'ââ¬Å¡Ãâàwhat the "truth" is when > > > > >it comes to > > >religion.ÃÆ'ââ¬Å¡Ãâà> > > > > > >I > > > > > > > > >have said before here that, in my view, there really is no such thing > > > > >as > > >"the" > > > > > > > > > > > >truth or even "a" truth.ÃÆ'ââ¬Å¡ÃâàIts simply one's > > > > >perception of it--beit > > >ÃÆ'ââ¬Å¡Ãâàa > > > > > > >person, > > > > > > > > >idea, theologyÃÆ'ââ¬Å¡Ãâàor event.ÃÆ'ââ¬Å¡ÃâàThe > > > > >need to be right or somehow > > >prove that > > > > > > >one > > > > > > > > >person's perception is correct and therefore, another's is wrong, is > > > > >at > > > >theÃÆ'ââ¬Å¡Ãâà> > > > > > > > >heart of our societal and global conflicts. > > > > > ÃÆ'ââ¬Å¡Ãâà> > > > > I think most of that is ego-driven, but to pretend or deny that > > > > > humans > > >don't > > > > > > > > > > >have egos is equally foolish.ÃÆ'ââ¬Å¡ÃâàIts okay to have > > > > >opinions, beliefs, > > >values > > > > > > >and > > > > > > > > >moral constructs.ÃÆ'ââ¬Å¡ÃâàÃÆ'ââ¬Å¡ÃâàI think the > > > > >danger of egoÃÆ'ââ¬Å¡Ãâàin > > >this is when one > > > > > > >insists > > > > > > > > >their viewiint is the only correct one.ÃÆ'ââ¬Å¡Ãâà> > > > > > > > > > ÃÆ'ââ¬Å¡Ãâà> > > > > IÃÆ'ââ¬Å¡Ãâàagree with Chris-- great wisdom there when he > > > > > suggests that when > > >you do > > > > > > >not > > > > > > > > >respond to some flaming post or insult or complaint, you actually > > >demonstrate > > > > > > > > > > >greater emotional maturity, and they are aware you maintain your > > > > >views, but > > > > > >are > > > > > > > > >now moving on to the more important matters of your real life. > > > > > ÃÆ'ââ¬Å¡Ãâà> > > > > I also agree with Bill.ÃÆ'ââ¬Å¡ÃâàSuch > > > > > mattersÃÆ'ââ¬Å¡Ãâàcannot be analized > > >in some > > > > > > >logical > > > > > > > > >frame.ÃÆ'ââ¬Å¡ÃâàIf you have faith-- > > > > >thenÃÆ'ââ¬Å¡Ãâàlogic has little to do > > >with it, and > > > > > > > >perhapsÃÆ'ââ¬Å¡ÃâàuseÃÆ'ââ¬Å¡Ãâà> > > > >yourÃÆ'ââ¬Å¡Ãâàfaith that perhaps your message > > >will resonate > > > > > > >somehow via > > > > > > > > >less tangible means. > > > > > ÃÆ'ââ¬Å¡Ãâà> > > > > Now, as I am now facing a problem that started with internet > > > > > discussion, > > >but > > > > > > > > > > >has now become a real life threat, IÃÆ'ââ¬Å¡Ãâàmust caution > > > > >others to beware > > >those > > > > > > > >on-line who indeed may have psychiatric buttons you do not want to > > > > >inflame. > > > > > ÃÆ'ââ¬Å¡Ãâà> > > > > The man I've written about here who claims a lifetime of trauma , > > > > > abuse, > > > > >tragedy and drama is at it again. ÃÆ'ââ¬Å¡ÃâàAfter calmly > > > > >making it clear to > > >him > > > > > > >that I > > > > > > > > >will no longer be a part of his self-created dramas, but > > > > >wishÃÆ'ââ¬Å¡Ãâàhim > > >well-- > > > > > > >the > > > > > > > > >followingÃÆ'ââ¬Å¡Ãâàevents have unfolded.. > > > > > ÃÆ'ââ¬Å¡Ãâà> > > > > I received an e-mail from a man claiming to be an ordained minister, > > >ÃÆ'ââ¬Å¡Ãâàand > > > > > > > > > > >friend of this man.ÃÆ'ââ¬Å¡ÃâàTelling me that > > > > >****ÃÆ'ââ¬Å¡Ãâàwas in a serious > > >car > > > > > > >accidentÃÆ'ââ¬Å¡Ãâàand > > > > > > > > >has been taken to a local hospital..ÃÆ'ââ¬Å¡ÃâàStating > > > > >thatÃÆ'ââ¬Å¡Ãâàthe > > >eventÃÆ'ââ¬Å¡Ãâà> > > > > > >details were > > > > > > > > >still unclear, but reassuring me this man is > > > > >alive.ÃÆ'ââ¬Å¡ÃâàEtc., > > >etc..ÃÆ'ââ¬Å¡ÃâàHe > > > > > > >offers his > > > > > > > > >e-mail if I have questions or concers.. as if I must certainly > > > > >beÃÆ'ââ¬Å¡Ãâà> > > >anxiouslyÃÆ'ââ¬Å¡Ãâà> > > > > > > > >awaiting any information on this tragic event.ÃÆ'ââ¬Å¡Ãâà> > > > >ÃÆ'ââ¬Å¡Ãâà> > > > > ÃÆ'ââ¬Å¡Ãâà> > > > > > > > > > Certain that this is more of the same IÃÆ'ââ¬Å¡Ãâàdo not > > > > > reply or > > >respond.ÃÆ'ââ¬Å¡ÃâàFor > > > > > > >people > > > > > > > > >with this type ofÃÆ'ââ¬Å¡Ãâàpsychological disorder which is > > > > >to a large > > >degreeÃÆ'ââ¬Å¡Ãâà> > > > > > > >attention-seeking,ÃÆ'ââ¬Å¡Ãâàgrandiose ideation, and other > > > > >symtoms.ÃÆ'ââ¬Å¡Ãâà> > >There is a > > > > > > >bit of > > > > > > > > >narcissisism, but his whole personality is more complex, and best left > > > > >to be > > > > > > > >diagnosed by medical professionals. > > > > > ÃÆ'ââ¬Å¡Ãâà> > > > > But I do know the worst thing you can do to such a person is ignore > > >them.ÃÆ'ââ¬Å¡Ãâà> > > > > > > > > > > >Though it is the only appropriate and sane > > > > >respomseÃÆ'ââ¬Å¡Ãâàor > > >treatment.ÃÆ'ââ¬Å¡Ãâà> > > > > ÃÆ'ââ¬Å¡Ãâà> > > > > I received a second e-mail a day later stating that the car was > > > > > totally > > > > >destroyed, andÃÆ'ââ¬Å¡Ãâàhe had retrieved the personal > > > > >belongings (and cell > > > >phone)ÃÆ'ââ¬Å¡Ãâàof > > > > > > > > >our "friend", and encouraged me tio call him with support. He is being > > > > >transferred to another > > > > >hospital.ÃÆ'ââ¬Å¡ÃâàÃÆ'ââ¬Å¡ÃâàReminding me to keep > > > > >jim > > >in ourÃÆ'ââ¬Å¡Ãâà> > > > > > >heart and > > > > > > > > >prayers. And soÃÆ'ââ¬Å¡Ãâàand so on. > > > > > ÃÆ'ââ¬Å¡Ãâà> > > > > Again, I do not respond, and suspect thatÃÆ'ââ¬Å¡Ãâàthe > > > > > person writing the > > >e-mails > > > > > > >is > > > > > > > > >indeedÃÆ'ââ¬Å¡Ãâàmy "friend" himself. > > > > > > > > > > ÃÆ'ââ¬Å¡Ãâà> > > > > This morning, i received a third e-mail from this minister friend of > > > > > the > > > >man.ÃÆ'ââ¬Å¡Ãâà> > > > > > > > >Starting out with telling me that the man in the hospital had > > > > >toldÃÆ'ââ¬Å¡Ãâà> > >him a > > > > > > >bit > > > > > > > > >of what i said to him.. and could not believe how i could be so > > > > >horrible to > > > > > >such > > > > > > > > >a wonderful, decent, giving manÃÆ'ââ¬Å¡ÃâàEtc., > > > > >Etc.ÃÆ'ââ¬Å¡ÃâàIt escalated > > >into a temper > > > > > > > > > > >tantrum on-line with capitalizedÃÆ'ââ¬Å¡Ãâàangry retorts and > > >profanity.ÃÆ'ââ¬Å¡Ãâà> > > > > > >(Ministers > > > > > > > > >aren'tÃÆ'ââ¬Å¡ÃâàÃÆ'ââ¬Å¡Ãâàwhat they used to be) > > > > >*sigh* > > > > > ÃÆ'ââ¬Å¡Ãâà> > > > > At this point, I know I'm dealing with a very unbalanced individual > > > > > who is > > > > > > >indeed in psychic pain.ÃÆ'ââ¬Å¡ÃâàBut this is out of my > > > > >league. I care deeply > > >about > > > > > > > > > > >prople and ache for every child on the globe.ÃÆ'ââ¬Å¡ÃâàNot > > > > >knowingÃÆ'ââ¬Å¡Ãâà> > >me, its > > > > > > >hardÃÆ'ââ¬Å¡Ãâàfor > > > > > > > > >anyone here to knowÃÆ'ââ¬Å¡ÃâàmyÃÆ'ââ¬Å¡Ãâà> > > > >realÃÆ'ââ¬Å¡Ãâàheart orÃÆ'ââ¬Å¡Ãâà> > >values. I am not being > > > > > > >cruel,ÃÆ'ââ¬Å¡ÃâàI am > > > > > > > > >doingÃÆ'ââ¬Å¡Ãâàthe right thing for him and > > > > >myself.ÃÆ'ââ¬Å¡Ãâà> > > > > ÃÆ'ââ¬Å¡Ãâà> > > > > ÃÆ'ââ¬Å¡Ãâà> > > > > This isÃÆ'ââ¬Å¡Ãâàhard on two levels.ÃÆ'ââ¬Å¡Ãâà> > > > > First, thisÃÆ'ââ¬Å¡Ãâàman is > > >much "sicker" > > > > > > >thanÃÆ'ââ¬Å¡ÃâàI > > > > > > > > >realized, and I am personally afraid.ÃÆ'ââ¬Å¡ÃâàHe has my > > > > >address.ÃÆ'ââ¬Å¡ÃâàI > > >have > > > > > > >blocked his > > > > > > > > >numbers from my phones, and will keep all e-mails in a folder for > > > >evidence.ÃÆ'ââ¬Å¡Ãâà> > > > > > > > >But this man does own firearms, is emotionally unstable > > > > >andÃÆ'ââ¬Å¡ÃâàI got > > >into this > > > > > > > > > > > >mess by just trying to be a friendÃÆ'ââ¬Å¡Ãâàat an > > > > >interfaith workshop and > > > >discussion > > > > > > > > >group.ÃÆ'ââ¬Å¡Ãâà> > > > > > > > > > ÃÆ'ââ¬Å¡Ãâà> > > > > It is times like this thatÃÆ'ââ¬Å¡Ãâàhaving a family of > > > > > attorneys is > > >comforting. I > > > > > > >have > > > > > > > > >contacted friends who are MD's and a psychiatrist, and explained the > > > >events.ÃÆ'ââ¬Å¡ÃâàI > > > > > > > > >just want to be left alone, and let the medical personnel where he is > > > > >sort > > > >this > > > > > > > > >out.ÃÆ'ââ¬Å¡Ãâà> > > > > > > > > > ÃÆ'ââ¬Å¡Ãâà> > > > > BUT~~ÃÆ'ââ¬Å¡Ãâàwhat if its all a lie? If he is seeing all > > > > > these > > >doctors,ÃÆ'ââ¬Å¡Ãâàthey > > > > > > >are > > > > > > > > >going to pick > > > > >upÃÆ'ââ¬Å¡ÃâàonÃÆ'ââ¬Å¡Ãâàthis.ÃÆ'ââ¬Å¡Ãâà> > > > >But if he is just a > > >neurotic man behind a > > > > > > >computer > > > > > > > > >screen, I have reason to fear. > > > > > ÃÆ'ââ¬Å¡Ãâà> > > > > My point is-- sheezus--ÃÆ'ââ¬Å¡Ãâàtake a > > > > > breath.ÃÆ'ââ¬Å¡ÃâàStand by your > > >convictions if > > > > > > >its > > > > > > > > >important to you.ÃÆ'ââ¬Å¡ÃâàLet go.ÃÆ'ââ¬Å¡ÃâàThe > > > > >other option is surrender to > > >listening > > > > > > >to > > > > > > > > >others views with a softened heart.ÃÆ'ââ¬Å¡ÃâàWe all have > > > > >the right to have > > >our on > > > > > > > >viewpoint, so long as it does not hurt self or others. Or maybe get a > > > > >new > > > > >hobby:) > > > > > ÃÆ'ââ¬Å¡Ãâà> > > > > KristyÃÆ'ââ¬Å¡Ãâà> > > > > ÃÆ'ââ¬Å¡Ãâà> > > > > ÃÆ'ââ¬Å¡Ãâà> > > > > --- On Thu, 9/30/10, DP <wookielifeday@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > From: DP <wookielifeday@> > > > > > Subject: [Zen] More about arguments and ego > > > > > To: [email protected] > > > > > Date: Thursday, September 30, 2010, 12:51 PM > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > ÃÆ'ââ¬Å¡Ãâà> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I've thought some more about my problrm with getting into arguments > > > > > on the > > > > > > >internet. I think that the internet has fueled a certain type of > > > > >ugliness in > > > > > > > >arguments, with its tendency towards short comments that snipe at > > > > >miniscule > > > > > > >errors in one's posts. I want to walk away, and yet I hate the idea of > > > > >the > > > > >bullies winning the argument. > > > > > > > > > > I find that in religious discussions the "internet atheists" (a > > > > > specific > > >term > > > > > > > > > > > >for these type of arguers, not all atheists) tend to crowd out people > > > > >who > > >want > > > > > > > > > > > >to sincerely discuss religion on particular forums, so I get > > > > >frustrated. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > But here's where the ego comes in. Obviously, there is ego involved > > > > > in > > > >winning > > > > > > > > >an argument, but there is also some ego in leaving. I feel like I'm > > > > >saying > > > >"i'm > > > > > > > > >taking my ball and going home." > > > > > > > > > > As well, i'm very insecure about my beliefs, and I feel like I'm > > > > > somehow > > >not > > > > > > > > > > >worthy of my arguments. How does insecurity relate to ego, or is that > > > > >a > > > > >completely different question? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > ------------------------------------ Current Book Discussion: any Zen book that you recently have read or are reading! Talk about it today!Yahoo! Groups Links <*> To visit your group on the web, go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Zen_Forum/ <*> Your email settings: Individual Email | Traditional <*> To change settings online go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Zen_Forum/join (Yahoo! ID required) <*> To change settings via email: [email protected] [email protected] <*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: [email protected] <*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to: http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
