|
Source: (consider it)
|
Thread: Policing a religion
|
Raptor Eye
Shipmate
# 16649
|
Posted
A remark someone made today concerning the abduction of the girls in Nigeria and its connection with religion got me thinking. What can the majority within a religion do about those inevitable fringe sectors whose actions bring the whole religion into disrepute?
We know that within the Christian religion there were some dreadful atrocities carried out in order for its 'purity', as seen through the eyes of the perpetrators, to be maintained. It didn't work for long, and it still harms it's reputation now, centuries later. We still have our embarrassing fringe sectors, some of whom I would love to silence (without the violence of course, but the imagination smiles.....).
How might any religion 'police' those who claim to represent it?
--------------------
Be still, and know that I am God! Psalm 46.10
Posts: 4359 | From: The United Kingdom | Registered: Sep 2011
| IP: Logged
|
|
que sais-je
Shipmate
# 17185
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Raptor Eye:
How might any religion 'police' those who claim to represent it?
Or conversely, how might they police you?
--------------------
"controversies, disputes, and argumentations, both in philosophy and in divinity, if they meet with discreet and peaceable natures, do not infringe the laws of charity" (Thomas Browne)
Posts: 794 | From: here or there | Registered: Jun 2012
| IP: Logged
|
|
Crœsos
Shipmate
# 238
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by que sais-je:
quote:
Originally posted by Raptor Eye:
How might any religion 'police' those who claim to represent it?
Or conversely, how might they police you?
That's the problem. Extremists like Boko Haram are an attempt to "police religion". They just differ with the majority as to who the "fringe" is.
--------------------
Humani nil a me alienum puto
Posts: 10706 | From: Sardis, Lydia | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
EtymologicalEvangelical
Shipmate
# 15091
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Raptor Eye
How might any religion 'police' those who claim to represent it?
By disowning those extreme expressions of that religion, perhaps?
In other words, by daring to say "They are not true Christians / Muslims".
--------------------
You can argue with a man who says, 'Rice is unwholesome': but you neither can nor need argue with a man who says, 'Rice is unwholesome, but I'm not saying this is true'. CS Lewis
Posts: 3625 | From: South Coast of England | Registered: Sep 2009
| IP: Logged
|
|
IngoB
Sentire cum Ecclesia
# 8700
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Crœsos:
quote:
Originally posted by que sais-je:
quote:
Originally posted by Raptor Eye:
How might any religion 'police' those who claim to represent it?
Or conversely, how might they police you?
That's the problem. Extremists like Boko Haram are an attempt to "police religion". They just differ with the majority as to who the "fringe" is.
You (both) nailed it.
quote:
Originally posted by EtymologicalEvangelical:
By disowning those extreme expressions of that religion, perhaps? In other words, by daring to say "They are not true Christians / Muslims".
Saying that something is right or wrong is in my opinion fair enough. But the only "policing" that in my opinion makes some sense is the "border patrol": if you want to be part of us, stay within these bounds. There is a practical difference between saying "you are not a true Christian" and "you are not my kind of Christian". On the former the opposing parties will never agree, on the latter they might agree all too readily. The former is a cause for holy war, the latter for legal fights about property, and the like. That is also not pretty, but a lot less devastating.
[ 06. May 2014, 15:11: Message edited by: IngoB ]
--------------------
They’ll have me whipp’d for speaking true; thou’lt have me whipp’d for lying; and sometimes I am whipp’d for holding my peace. - The Fool in King Lear
Posts: 12010 | From: Gone fishing | Registered: Oct 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
Porridge
Shipmate
# 15405
|
Posted
But that just leaves the followers of any given religion as a whole in the midst of a 'he-said, she-said' situation. The followers will likely line up according to pre-existing prejudices, beliefs, misunderstandings, etc. This is likely especially true in the case of a sect with no recognized, central authority, like a pope.
It's not that there are no RCC laity who disagree with (sometimes quite vocally) various papal pronouncements; these abound. But there is only one official RCC position on the issues where pronouncements have been made. like it or lump it.
I'm not aware of any such central authority in Judaism or Islam; various mainline Protestant denoms do have some sort of central authority -- synod or archbishop or what-have you -- but speak only for their own denom.
When I was a deacon in a UCC church, newcomers were forever asking me to explain the UCC's position on XYZ. I got tired of explaining that individual congregations within the UCC might take positions, sometimes 180 degrees around the circle from each other, but the UCC itself took none, having no central authority to do so. (This, despite occasional pronouncements from the UCC President that sounded awfully like dicta to many members.) After a while, I began to realize that many seekers are actually frustrated by such answers. It's as though they're not actually out 'church-shopping' so much as they're seeking a spiritual authority they can agree and fall in with.
(X-post -- in response to EE, not IngoB.)
[ 06. May 2014, 15:28: Message edited by: Porridge ]
--------------------
Spiggott: Everything I've ever told you is a lie, including that.
Moon: Including what?
Spiggott: That everything I've ever told you is a lie.
Moon: That's not true!
Posts: 3925 | From: Upper right corner | Registered: Jan 2010
| IP: Logged
|
|
lapsed heathen
Hurler on the ditch
# 4403
|
Posted
TBH kidnapping and enslaving young girls is not a matter of religion, it's a straight civil policing matter. Go catch and prosecute the bastards now!
Anyone who thinks this is a religious action is a fool. Any religion that doesn't do more than distance themselves from this kind of thing is not just foolish but accomplices to it.
Funny how Islam could orchestrate mass demos, flag burning and letters to the press over some cartons but are not so good at organising a reaction to this? I can sorta see how they might say it has nothing to do with them but as the preps have claimed Islam as justification Islam must either shout 'not in our name' or accept that it will be seen as in their name.
--------------------
"We are the Easter people and our song is Alleluia"
Posts: 1361 | From: Marble county | Registered: Apr 2003
| IP: Logged
|
|
EtymologicalEvangelical
Shipmate
# 15091
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Porridge
But that just leaves the followers of any given religion as a whole in the midst of a 'he-said, she-said' situation. The followers will likely line up according to pre-existing prejudices, beliefs, misunderstandings, etc. This is likely especially true in the case of a sect with no recognized, central authority, like a pope.
But would you say the same about atheism?
Suppose someone said: "I am an atheist, but I believe in the existence of a Supreme Being who is intelligent, personal, all-powerful and the creator of the whole universe, but I don't call this being 'God'. Therefore I am an atheist, because I don't believe in the existence of 'God'".
Now, would you call that person a true atheist? Presumably not. And you would surely say that, not because of "pre-existing prejudices, beliefs and misunderstandings", but rather because the term 'atheist' actually means something (based on the fact that the word 'God' means something), which, by implication excludes certain positions.
If Christianity is a viewpoint with absolutely no definition at all, and merely describes the bounds of a set of beliefs which have only one thing in common, namely, that they are held by people who claim to be 'Christian', then Christianity is meaningless. It is simply a synonym for "any opinion communicated by means of a certain lexicon" - even if those opinions strongly contradict each other, and have widely and wildly differing effects on people's lives. This is to reduce Christianity - and any religious viewpoint - to the status of a mere language game (which is, I guess, what some atheists would like to do - and I remember arguing with some atheists some years ago, who insisted that Hitler was a Christian, simply because he said he was!). And why stop at religion? Why not say the same for any viewpoint, for any philosophy or opinion?
It's interesting that the Apostle Paul was not squeamish about referring to "false brethren" (2 Corinthians 11:13-15,26). And, of course, Jesus made clear that many call Him "Lord, Lord" who shall not enter the Kingdom of Heaven (Matthew 7:21-23). Interestingly, Jesus did not link true spirituality with doctrine, but moral actions. And then there's the saying about discerning wolves in sheep's clothing - "you will know them by their fruit" - a clear indication that Christians have permission from our Lord to judge in this way (Matthew 7:15-20).
If there are Christians who have nothing but contempt for the poor, and who hanker after war and bombing innocent people into oblivion, then I have no qualms about stating that they are not true Christians, irrespective of whether they claim to be Christians. It's about time the majority of the Church had the willingness to disown these evil people in the same way.
--------------------
You can argue with a man who says, 'Rice is unwholesome': but you neither can nor need argue with a man who says, 'Rice is unwholesome, but I'm not saying this is true'. CS Lewis
Posts: 3625 | From: South Coast of England | Registered: Sep 2009
| IP: Logged
|
|
Beeswax Altar
Shipmate
# 11644
|
Posted
At this point, it would be nice if the Nigerian government would police Boko Harem instead of condemning the parents for expecting the government to do something to rescue nearly 300 young girls. Goodluck Jonathan is a Christian. I don't know how good a Christian he is but he's a piss poor president.
--------------------
Losing sleep is something you want to avoid, if possible.
-Og: King of Bashan
Posts: 8411 | From: By a large lake | Registered: Jul 2006
| IP: Logged
|
|
Arethosemyfeet
Shipmate
# 17047
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by lapsed heathen:
TBH kidnapping and enslaving young girls is not a matter of religion, it's a straight civil policing matter. Go catch and prosecute the bastards now!
Anyone who thinks this is a religious action is a fool. Any religion that doesn't do more than distance themselves from this kind of thing is not just foolish but accomplices to it.
Funny how Islam could orchestrate mass demos, flag burning and letters to the press over some cartons but are not so good at organising a reaction to this? I can sorta see how they might say it has nothing to do with them but as the preps have claimed Islam as justification Islam must either shout 'not in our name' or accept that it will be seen as in their name.
I'm sure every time the IRA or UDF bombed something in "defence" of their own twisted interpretation of Christianity you were right out in front saying "not in my name". Or maybe you just assumed that everyone would know you deplore the murder of innocent people.
Posts: 2933 | From: Hebrides | Registered: Apr 2012
| IP: Logged
|
|
Beeswax Altar
Shipmate
# 11644
|
Posted
Oh please every time a Christian anywhere even says anything remotely controversial other Christians line up to condemn them if for no other reason than to kowtow to Christianity's cultured despisers. Take the Phelps clan for instance. You would think they were something other than a small group of publicity seeking kooks by the number of Christians who make it a point to criticize them.
--------------------
Losing sleep is something you want to avoid, if possible.
-Og: King of Bashan
Posts: 8411 | From: By a large lake | Registered: Jul 2006
| IP: Logged
|
|
Crœsos
Shipmate
# 238
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Beeswax Altar:
Oh please every time a Christian anywhere even says anything remotely controversial other Christians line up to condemn them if for no other reason than to kowtow to Christianity's cultured despisers. Take the Phelps clan for instance.
I find it interesting that you categorize the Westboro Baptist Church as only being "remotely controversial" by Christian standards. If that's only "remotely controversial", what would something truly inflammatory look like?
--------------------
Humani nil a me alienum puto
Posts: 10706 | From: Sardis, Lydia | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Arethosemyfeet
Shipmate
# 17047
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Beeswax Altar:
Oh please every time a Christian anywhere even says anything remotely controversial other Christians line up to condemn them if for no other reason than to kowtow to Christianity's cultured despisers.
Wow. I imagine that's pretty much what Boko Haram would say about Muslims who criticise them (and, judging from news reports, there are plenty who do).
The difference with the Phelps clan is that what they're saying only differs in degree, not in kind, from what a lot of "mainstream" church leaders say about gay people.
Posts: 2933 | From: Hebrides | Registered: Apr 2012
| IP: Logged
|
|
Porridge
Shipmate
# 15405
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by EtymologicalEvangelical:
If Christianity is a viewpoint with absolutely no definition at all,
Sorry? Are you claiming I said this? I didn't. Pressed, I'd say that Christianity is a viewpoint with multiple definitions (though not necessarily limitless ones). Presumably, if one labels oneself Christian, one adopts a definition from among the available collection within that viewpoint, and one becomes a Roman Catholic or a Baptist or a Presbyterian, etc. Alternatively, I suppose one can found a new denomination (many have), but it's hardly likely that this founder can claim Mohammed or Moses as God's sole spokesperson and the Koran or the Torah as sole scripture and also successfully claim Christianity as his/her spiritual "brand."
quote:
Originally posted by EtymologicalEvangelical:
and merely describes the bounds of a set of beliefs which have only one thing in common, namely, that they are held by people who claim to be 'Christian', then Christianity is meaningless.
There probably are Christians who could accurately be described this way. Certainly there are atheists who can be. I fail to see how the existence, actual or speculative, of either group renders Christianity meaningless, especially for sincere adherents who strive to live by the specific tenets of the denomination they belong to.
quote:
Originally posted by EtymologicalEvangelical:
It is simply a synonym for "any opinion communicated by means of a certain lexicon" - even if those opinions strongly contradict each other, and have widely and wildly differing effects on people's lives.
To be fair, a Christianity which in some instances claims a wrathful, punitive, excluding God over against a loving, all-embracing, inclusive God, does come across this way to many outside the faith. Different denominations do appear to offer contradictory dicta. Is abortion a sin? Is homosexuality? Is divorce? Can women be ordained? Some Christian groups say yes, others say no, and these are issues that can profoundly affect people at a very personal level. All these groups claim to offer 'Christianity.' How does one choose among them? Alternatively, how does one determine, among a competing chorus of truth claims, all held forth by representatives as human and imperfect as oneself, which is 'true?'
I can't say how others decide, nor do I have any wish to decide for anyone but myself. I can only say that, for me, the essential proposition -- a supernatural intelligence profoundly, even minutely, concerned with our species -- collapses under the weight of all these competing, and basically unestablishable, truth claims.
quote:
Originally posted by EtymologicalEvangelical:
This is to reduce Christianity - and any religious viewpoint - to the status of a mere language game (which is, I guess, what some atheists would like to do - and I remember arguing with some atheists some years ago, who insisted that Hitler was a Christian, simply because he said he was!). And why stop at religion? Why not say the same for any viewpoint, for any philosophy or opinion?
It's interesting that the Apostle Paul was not squeamish about referring to "false brethren" (2 Corinthians 11:13-15,26). And, of course, Jesus made clear that many call Him "Lord, Lord" who shall not enter the Kingdom of Heaven (Matthew 7:21-23). Interestingly, Jesus did not link true spirituality with doctrine, but moral actions. And then there's the saying about discerning wolves in sheep's clothing - "you will know them by their fruit" - a clear indication that Christians have permission from our Lord to judge in this way (Matthew 7:15-20).
If there are Christians who have nothing but contempt for the poor, and who hanker after war and bombing innocent people into oblivion, then I have no qualms about stating that they are not true Christians, irrespective of whether they claim to be Christians. It's about time the majority of the Church had the willingness to disown these evil people in the same way.
For good or ill, you seem to be arguing for an 'exclusive' version of Christianity -- as is your right. However, you also seem to rely heavily on Christian scripture to make your argument. Why is this more persuasive than the argument others make, on the basis of the same scripture, for a 'salvation' which is universal? And why is either argument, dependent as it is on an all-powerful divinity which has, for reasons of its own, apparently set strict limits on its omnipotence (to the profound distress of the species the divinity's alleged to be so tenderly concerned about), particularly persuasive to anyone utterly unpersuaded of that divinity's existence in the first place?
EE, I just don't believe that such a supernatural being exists. I don't accept that this being authored, even indirectly, the scriptures you quote. I don't believe that an itinerant 1st-century rabbi rose from the dead and is somehow now an immortal aspect of that divinity.
I have no problem with (most of) the moral system taught in Christianity; indeed, it's one I try (mostly) to follow. I have no problem with Christianity trying to alter some of our species' destructive ways. I have no problem with people going to mass, listening to sermons, quoting scripture, singing hymns, celebrating communion, saying prayers, and on and on. For those who derive direction, meaning, purpose, satisfaction from such things, I wish them well (as long as they don't intrude on my rights as a US citizen). I just cannot, in good conscience, join them.
--------------------
Spiggott: Everything I've ever told you is a lie, including that.
Moon: Including what?
Spiggott: That everything I've ever told you is a lie.
Moon: That's not true!
Posts: 3925 | From: Upper right corner | Registered: Jan 2010
| IP: Logged
|
|
Beeswax Altar
Shipmate
# 11644
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Arethosemyfeet:
quote:
Originally posted by Beeswax Altar:
Oh please every time a Christian anywhere even says anything remotely controversial other Christians line up to condemn them if for no other reason than to kowtow to Christianity's cultured despisers.
Wow. I imagine that's pretty much what Boko Haram would say about Muslims who criticise them (and, judging from news reports, there are plenty who do).
The difference with the Phelps clan is that what they're saying only differs in degree, not in kind, from what a lot of "mainstream" church leaders say about gay people.
Yes but like lapsed heathen says we aren't seeing the same outrage as we did over some cartoons in a Danish newspaper. The Phelps clan have neither killed nor kidnapped a single person. "They are suers not shooters," Kevin Smith has John Goodmans character say in Red State.
--------------------
Losing sleep is something you want to avoid, if possible.
-Og: King of Bashan
Posts: 8411 | From: By a large lake | Registered: Jul 2006
| IP: Logged
|
|
lapsed heathen
Hurler on the ditch
# 4403
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Arethosemyfeet:
quote:
Originally posted by lapsed heathen:
TBH kidnapping and enslaving young girls is not a matter of religion, it's a straight civil policing matter. Go catch and prosecute the bastards now!
Anyone who thinks this is a religious action is a fool. Any religion that doesn't do more than distance themselves from this kind of thing is not just foolish but accomplices to it.
Funny how Islam could orchestrate mass demos, flag burning and letters to the press over some cartons but are not so good at organising a reaction to this? I can sorta see how they might say it has nothing to do with them but as the preps have claimed Islam as justification Islam must either shout 'not in our name' or accept that it will be seen as in their name.
I'm sure every time the IRA or UDF bombed something in "defence" of their own twisted interpretation of Christianity you were right out in front saying "not in my name". Or maybe you just assumed that everyone would know you deplore the murder of innocent people.
Ahem I dont recall anyine from either the 'ra or udf claiming any kind of religious basis for their actions. Religious basis for their choice of targets but that's why it was referred to as a sectarian conflict. Oh and yes I did roundly condemn the murders done 'in my name'.
Don't get me wrong I'm not blaming Islam for the actions of Boku Haram, I do however hold them as complicit by failing to condemn them.
--------------------
"We are the Easter people and our song is Alleluia"
Posts: 1361 | From: Marble county | Registered: Apr 2003
| IP: Logged
|
|
Arethosemyfeet
Shipmate
# 17047
|
Posted
How many of the world's 1.5 billion Muslims are you in regular enough contact with to know whether they have condemned Boko Haram or not?
Just for reference, it's pretty easy to find Muslim organisations who have condemned Boko Haram in general and presumably would in the most recent specific case:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Boko_Haram#Criticism
[ 06. May 2014, 20:34: Message edited by: Arethosemyfeet ]
Posts: 2933 | From: Hebrides | Registered: Apr 2012
| IP: Logged
|
|
L'organist
Shipmate
# 17338
|
Posted
The BBC is reporting that another 8 girls have been taken by Boko Haram.
--------------------
Rara temporum felicitate ubi sentire quae velis et quae sentias dicere licet
Posts: 4950 | From: somewhere in England... | Registered: Sep 2012
| IP: Logged
|
|
Net Spinster
Shipmate
# 16058
|
Posted
I've also seen in photos Nigerian women in hijab (so presumably Muslim) protesting for the recovery of the girls. Note that at least 15 of the girls abducted were Muslim (another 165 are Christian and the names/religion of the rest have not been stated).
--------------------
spinner of webs
Posts: 1093 | From: San Francisco Bay area | Registered: Dec 2010
| IP: Logged
|
|
Kaplan Corday
Shipmate
# 16119
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by EtymologicalEvangelical:
If there are Christians who have nothing but contempt for the poor, and who hanker after war and bombing innocent people into oblivion, then I have no qualms about stating that they are not true Christians, irrespective of whether they claim to be Christians.
Do you actually know, or know of, people who call themselves Christians, but hate the poor and drool over the prospect of innocent victims being blown up?
If not, what is the point of your comment?
It comes across as just a piece of rather undergraduate political hyperbole.
There are Christians who sincerely believe in the benefits of capitalism and get accused by other Christians of wanting to grind the faces of the poor, and Christians who equally sincerely support socialism and get accused by other Christians of trying to impose communism on the poor.
The boring reality, in Western countries at least, is that most Christians are like most of the rest of the population, and want a blended economic and social system but disagree over the balance of the mix.
As for war, there are Christians who are pacifist and Christians who believe in the just war, and the latter can quite legitimately differ over the justice or wisdom of individual conflicts without issues of heresy and excommunication being raised.
Non-combatant civilians are unintentionally killed in all wars, so their deaths might be an argument for pacifism, but not for the illegitimacy of any particular war.
Posts: 3355 | Registered: Jan 2011
| IP: Logged
|
|
Beeswax Altar
Shipmate
# 11644
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Arethosemyfeet:
How many of the world's 1.5 billion Muslims are you in regular enough contact with to know whether they have condemned Boko Haram or not?
Just for reference, it's pretty easy to find Muslim organisations who have condemned Boko Haram in general and presumably would in the most recent specific case:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Boko_Haram#Criticism
Apparently, the American Muslim has some evidence that Nigerian Christians kidnap children as well. Again, lapsed heathen asked why we didn't see the same level of outrage as seen over those Danish cartoons. Where are the mass protests outside Nigerian embassies in the Middle East?
--------------------
Losing sleep is something you want to avoid, if possible.
-Og: King of Bashan
Posts: 8411 | From: By a large lake | Registered: Jul 2006
| IP: Logged
|
|
Crœsos
Shipmate
# 238
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Beeswax Altar:
Apparently, the American Muslim has some evidence that Nigerian Christians kidnap children as well. Again, lapsed heathen asked why we didn't see the same level of outrage as seen over those Danish cartoons. Where are the mass protests outside Nigerian embassies in the Middle East?
Can you provide a source for your assertion that the Nigerian government is behind the actions of Boko Haram?
--------------------
Humani nil a me alienum puto
Posts: 10706 | From: Sardis, Lydia | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Beeswax Altar
Shipmate
# 11644
|
Posted
Can you provide a source that the Nigerian government is doing anything to rescue the girls?
And can you provide source supporting your claim that the Danish government drew the offensive cartoons?
[ 07. May 2014, 01:51: Message edited by: Beeswax Altar ]
--------------------
Losing sleep is something you want to avoid, if possible.
-Og: King of Bashan
Posts: 8411 | From: By a large lake | Registered: Jul 2006
| IP: Logged
|
|
orfeo
Ship's Musical Counterpoint
# 13878
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by lapsed heathen:
TBH kidnapping and enslaving young girls is not a matter of religion, it's a straight civil policing matter. Go catch and prosecute the bastards now!
Anyone who thinks this is a religious action is a fool. Any religion that doesn't do more than distance themselves from this kind of thing is not just foolish but accomplices to it.
Funny how Islam could orchestrate mass demos, flag burning and letters to the press over some cartons but are not so good at organising a reaction to this? I can sorta see how they might say it has nothing to do with them but as the preps have claimed Islam as justification Islam must either shout 'not in our name' or accept that it will be seen as in their name.
How you think 'Islam' can organise anything is beyond me. That's like saying that 'Joy' should write letters or 'Economics' needs to respond.
I'm sure you want to be treated as an individual, so perhaps you should give Muslims the same courtesy instead of attributing some kind of collective hive-mind to them like the Borg from Star Trek.
--------------------
Technology has brought us all closer together. Turns out a lot of the people you meet as a result are complete idiots.
Posts: 18173 | From: Under | Registered: Jul 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
orfeo
Ship's Musical Counterpoint
# 13878
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Beeswax Altar:
Yes but like lapsed heathen says we aren't seeing the same outrage as we did over some cartoons in a Danish newspaper.
We only 'see' what The Media (oh look, another generic collective) point cameras at. Just because it's not appearing on your TV screen doesn't mean it's not happening.
And besides, it has been appearing on my TV screen a little bit. There's just a limit to the number of cameras The Media can bother to take all the way to northern Nigeria. Much easier to give you endless reruns of a building fire in your local metropolis or something.
--------------------
Technology has brought us all closer together. Turns out a lot of the people you meet as a result are complete idiots.
Posts: 18173 | From: Under | Registered: Jul 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
EtymologicalEvangelical
Shipmate
# 15091
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Kaplan Corday
Do you actually know, or know of, people who call themselves Christians, but hate the poor and drool over the prospect of innocent victims being blown up?
Yes.
--------------------
You can argue with a man who says, 'Rice is unwholesome': but you neither can nor need argue with a man who says, 'Rice is unwholesome, but I'm not saying this is true'. CS Lewis
Posts: 3625 | From: South Coast of England | Registered: Sep 2009
| IP: Logged
|
|
la vie en rouge
Parisienne
# 10688
|
Posted
Did anyone hear her royal high awesomeness Malala Yousafzai on the radio the other day? (I love that girl and vote that she be made President of the Universe at the first available opportunity ![[Big Grin]](biggrin.gif) )
In the context of the abduction of the Nigerian girls, she was talking about Islam and female education. She said that far from being opposed to her going to school, she believes Islam teaches that it is her duty to educate herself.
Malala strikes me as precisely the sort of person who can speak out rather successfully against religious fundamentalism and get taken seriously and listened to. She is intelligent, articulate and savvy. Taking a bullet in the head probably hasn’t done her credibility any harm either. Hand-waving and saying “we oppose this sort of thing”: not much of a news story. A young girl who survives being shot in the head and goes on to say “that isn’t what my religion’s about and I'm not going to shut up about it”: big news story.
--------------------
Rent my holiday home in the South of France
Posts: 3696 | Registered: Nov 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
lapsed heathen
Hurler on the ditch
# 4403
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by orfeo:
quote:
Originally posted by Beeswax Altar:
Yes but like lapsed heathen says we aren't seeing the same outrage as we did over some cartoons in a Danish newspaper.
We only 'see' what The Media (oh look, another generic collective) point cameras at. Just because it's not appearing on your TV screen doesn't mean it's not happening.
And besides, it has been appearing on my TV screen a little bit. There's just a limit to the number of cameras The Media can bother to take all the way to northern Nigeria. Much easier to give you endless reruns of a building fire in your local metropolis or something.
It's not so much that the media can't be bothered, it's that the area is so dangerous that sending anyone in would be too great a risk. No point adding more hostages to the situation.
I think the problem with religions policing their followers is that few religions have a set of clear rules that they can state are the minimum requirement. Denominations can but Christianity or Islam or Buddhism isn't so easily fenced in. All it takes is a few steps from one interpretation to another to have a shism or just a new denomination which can justifiably claim to be the true faith.
The fact that we see this most clearly in Islam is because some of it's interpretations are so anathma to our western enlighenment minds that things like kidnapping and enslaving girls seem to be obviously outside the bounds when for a Muslim, their is suficent justification for these actions.
Islamic Views on Slavery
--------------------
"We are the Easter people and our song is Alleluia"
Posts: 1361 | From: Marble county | Registered: Apr 2003
| IP: Logged
|
|
Highfive
Shipmate
# 12937
|
Posted
Wow, I thought Sharia Law was misguided before, but now it's obvious it is just plain evil.
Posts: 111 | From: Brisbane | Registered: Aug 2007
| IP: Logged
|
|
Raptor Eye
Shipmate
# 16649
|
Posted
As has come out of the posts, it's the extent to which people who claim to be its followers are passionate for or against specific tenets of their religion that makes the difference.
Some Christians were passionate for and some against the abolition of slavery in Britain. I would be surprised to find any Christian today who claimed that our faith approves of it.
--------------------
Be still, and know that I am God! Psalm 46.10
Posts: 4359 | From: The United Kingdom | Registered: Sep 2011
| IP: Logged
|
|
Kaplan Corday
Shipmate
# 16119
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by EtymologicalEvangelical:
quote:
Originally posted by Kaplan Corday
Do you actually know, or know of, people who call themselves Christians, but hate the poor and drool over the prospect of innocent victims being blown up?
Yes.
Interesting.
Specifics?
Evidence?
Posts: 3355 | Registered: Jan 2011
| IP: Logged
|
|
orfeo
Ship's Musical Counterpoint
# 13878
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by lapsed heathen:
The fact that we see this most clearly in Islam is because some of it's interpretations are so anathma to our western enlighenment minds that things like kidnapping and enslaving girls seem to be obviously outside the bounds when for a Muslim, their is suficent justification for these actions.
Islamic Views on Slavery
And you explain the events of '12 Years A Slave' how, exactly? An otherwise inexplicable outbreak of Islam in the southern United States in the mid-19th century?
--------------------
Technology has brought us all closer together. Turns out a lot of the people you meet as a result are complete idiots.
Posts: 18173 | From: Under | Registered: Jul 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
Arethosemyfeet
Shipmate
# 17047
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by lapsed heathen:
The fact that we see this most clearly in Islam is because some of it's interpretations are so anathma to our western enlighenment minds that things like kidnapping and enslaving girls seem to be obviously outside the bounds when for a Muslim, their is suficent justification for these actions.
Islamic Views on Slavery
For the vast majority of Muslims, kidnapping and selling girls into slavery is just as abhorrent as it is to the vast majority of Christians. Using Boko Haram as evidence that Muslims are in favour of slavery is like using the FCJCLDS as evidence that Christians favour polygamy and underage marriage.
Posts: 2933 | From: Hebrides | Registered: Apr 2012
| IP: Logged
|
|
lapsed heathen
Hurler on the ditch
# 4403
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Arethosemyfeet:
quote:
Originally posted by lapsed heathen:
The fact that we see this most clearly in Islam is because some of it's interpretations are so anathma to our western enlighenment minds that things like kidnapping and enslaving girls seem to be obviously outside the bounds when for a Muslim, their is suficent justification for these actions.
Islamic Views on Slavery
For the vast majority of Muslims, kidnapping and selling girls into slavery is just as abhorrent as it is to the vast majority of Christians. Using Boko Haram as evidence that Muslims are in favour of slavery is like using the FCJCLDS as evidence that Christians favour polygamy and underage marriage.
Woah, hold on a minuet, I never said that Muslims are in favour of slavery. You missed the point.
The point was about policing a religion. It's easy to find a justification for almost any weird practise if you find a text to support it. It's hard to argue against it as a religion when your argument is based on a similar set of texts. Doesn't have to be slavery, theirs lots of stuff in the bible to support keeping slaves and hardly any condemning it.
That's the point, we are discussing policing a religion btw, not the merits of slavery. I originaly mentioned the lack of response to this kidnapping compared to the reaction to the cartoons as an example of one way to police a religion, the majority clearly and openly display opposition to the action that they think shames or misrepresents their religion.
Hell if you had read the link on Islamic views on slavery you would see that most of it is about caring for and freeing slaves. I doubt Buko Haram are reading it in that light.
--------------------
"We are the Easter people and our song is Alleluia"
Posts: 1361 | From: Marble county | Registered: Apr 2003
| IP: Logged
|
|
EtymologicalEvangelical
Shipmate
# 15091
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Kaplan Corday
quote:
Originally posted by EtymologicalEvangelical
quote:
Originally posted by Kaplan Corday
Do you actually know, or know of, people who call themselves Christians, but hate the poor and drool over the prospect of innocent victims being blown up?
Yes.
Interesting.
Specifics?
Evidence?
Walid Shoebat, a fake Christian, who wants to nuke all Muslims.
As for 'Christians' hating the poor: there are so many articles and analyses detailing the attitudes of the 'Christian' Religious Right in America, that I really think a quick use of Google will tell you all you need to know about fake Christians who despise the poor and needy.
--------------------
You can argue with a man who says, 'Rice is unwholesome': but you neither can nor need argue with a man who says, 'Rice is unwholesome, but I'm not saying this is true'. CS Lewis
Posts: 3625 | From: South Coast of England | Registered: Sep 2009
| IP: Logged
|
|
Kaplan Corday
Shipmate
# 16119
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by EtymologicalEvangelical:
quote:
Originally posted by Kaplan Corday
quote:
Originally posted by EtymologicalEvangelical
quote:
Originally posted by Kaplan Corday
Do you actually know, or know of, people who call themselves Christians, but hate the poor and drool over the prospect of innocent victims being blown up?
Yes.
Interesting.
Specifics?
Evidence?
Walid Shoebat, a fake Christian, who wants to nuke all Muslims.
One, out of roughly one third of the world's population.
Well, it's a start.
quote:
As for 'Christians' hating the poor: there are so many articles and analyses detailing the attitudes of the 'Christian' Religious Right in America, that I really think a quick use of Google will tell you all you need to know about fake Christians who despise the poor and needy.
The fact that some Christians emphasise what they perceive as the virtues of capitalism and small government does not mean that they hold the poor in hatred and contempt, and are therefore not really Christians at all.
It could mean that they despise the poor, but then again they might genuinely believe that free enterprise is the best producer of prosperity for all.
We are neither God (no, really) nor mind readers.
By the same token, those Christians who believe in the welfare state and universal health care (such as myself) might be driven by concern for the poor, but might equally possibly be motivated by a middle-class desire to jump on the gravy train, or by veneration (especially if they are bureaucrats themselves) of the power represented by big government.
No economic system can claim the clear imprimatur of Scripture.
Posts: 3355 | Registered: Jan 2011
| IP: Logged
|
|
EtymologicalEvangelical
Shipmate
# 15091
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Kaplan Corday
quote:
Originally posted by EtymologicalEvangelical
Walid Shoebat, a fake Christian, who wants to nuke all Muslims.
One, out of roughly one third of the world's population.
Well, it's a start.
Actually more than one, because Walid Shoebat has a profile as a speaker and writer, and therefore it follows that many people agree with his views.
But actually only one person is required in order for me to successfully answer your question. Which is what I have done.
quote:
The fact that some Christians emphasise what they perceive as the virtues of capitalism and small government does not mean that they hold the poor in hatred and contempt, and are therefore not really Christians at all.
Neither does it mean that they don't.
It seems that some of them do.
I'd be interested to know what you make of the Scripture references that speak about fake believers. I referred to them here.
quote:
No economic system can claim the clear imprimatur of Scripture.
But, of course, that does not let all economic systems off the hook. Clearly there are principles in Scripture, which are flatly contradicted in certain economic systems.
It is clearly absurd to argue that an economic system which makes life extremely hard for the poor, and easy for the rich, is pleasing to God. It is not, no matter how many clever arguments are deployed to justify it, and no matter how many people subscribe to it "in good faith".
--------------------
You can argue with a man who says, 'Rice is unwholesome': but you neither can nor need argue with a man who says, 'Rice is unwholesome, but I'm not saying this is true'. CS Lewis
Posts: 3625 | From: South Coast of England | Registered: Sep 2009
| IP: Logged
|
|
Kaplan Corday
Shipmate
# 16119
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by EtymologicalEvangelical:
only one person is required in order for me to successfully answer your question
If it were some sort of game.
In reality, trawling the net and finding some remote, unrepresentative outlier fruitcake whom no-one has heard of is scarcely proving your point.
quote:
It seems that some of them do.
There is nothing here about Christians hating and despising the poor.
quote:
I'd be interested to know what you make of the Scripture references that speak about fake believers. I referred to them here.
There is nothing in the passages you cite about using economics as a criterion.
Matthew 25:31-46 is extremely challenging, but there is no evidence that Christ intended us to use it to self-indulgently wax judgemental and moralistic about Christians who support economic systems different from the one we prefer and tell them that they are therefore not really Christians.
We should rather be asking ourselves personally how we measure up to Christ's standards.
quote:
Clearly there are principles in Scripture, which are flatly contradicted in certain economic systems.
In extreme cases, yes, such as rapacious, "might is right" warlordism, or regimes which deliberately employ mass starvation.
In reality, however, we are talking about socialism, capitalism, and blends thereof, all of which can be justified scripturally, depending on what passages and principles are used, and how they are interpreted and applied.
I suspect that my economic preferences would be roughly the same as yours.
Where I differ from you is in refusing to pronounce those who disagree with me pseudo-Christians.
I have seen too much of that sort of presumptuous arrogance over issues as diverse as ecclesiology, eschatology, pneumatology, sacraments/ ordinances, Arminianism/Calvinism, etc.
It is difficult to know whether to laugh or cry when I think of a teacher I knew of who, shocked at a suggestion that her Christian school might hold a student dance, responded with: "I doubt your salvation!"
[ 10. May 2014, 06:57: Message edited by: Kaplan Corday ]
Posts: 3355 | Registered: Jan 2011
| IP: Logged
|
|
orfeo
Ship's Musical Counterpoint
# 13878
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Kaplan Corday:
In reality, trawling the net and finding some remote, unrepresentative outlier fruitcake whom no-one has heard of is scarcely proving your point.
It's seen as sufficient when it comes to Muslims all the time. The media drags up one Islamic nutter and, hey presto, this is what 'Muslims' thank.
It's a beautifully unbalanced game where a nutty Christian is never a true representative of the religion, and a nutty Muslim always is.
--------------------
Technology has brought us all closer together. Turns out a lot of the people you meet as a result are complete idiots.
Posts: 18173 | From: Under | Registered: Jul 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
Kaplan Corday
Shipmate
# 16119
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by orfeo:
quote:
Originally posted by Kaplan Corday:
In reality, trawling the net and finding some remote, unrepresentative outlier fruitcake whom no-one has heard of is scarcely proving your point.
It's seen as sufficient when it comes to Muslims all the time. The media drags up one Islamic nutter and, hey presto, this is what 'Muslims' thank.
It's a beautifully unbalanced game where a nutty Christian is never a true representative of the religion, and a nutty Muslim always is.
If characters such as the Phelps family and the nutter on EE's link were represented in Christianity in the same proportion as movements such as Boko Haram, Al Quaeda, Al Nusra, Jemaah Islamiyah and the Taleban are represented in Islam, and did proportionately as much harm, I would gladly concede your point.
Posts: 3355 | Registered: Jan 2011
| IP: Logged
|
|
Arethosemyfeet
Shipmate
# 17047
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Kaplan Corday:
quote:
Originally posted by orfeo:
quote:
Originally posted by Kaplan Corday:
In reality, trawling the net and finding some remote, unrepresentative outlier fruitcake whom no-one has heard of is scarcely proving your point.
It's seen as sufficient when it comes to Muslims all the time. The media drags up one Islamic nutter and, hey presto, this is what 'Muslims' thank.
It's a beautifully unbalanced game where a nutty Christian is never a true representative of the religion, and a nutty Muslim always is.
If characters such as the Phelps family and the nutter on EE's link were represented in Christianity in the same proportion as movements such as Boko Haram, Al Quaeda, Al Nusra, Jemaah Islamiyah and the Taleban are represented in Islam, and did proportionately as much harm, I would gladly concede your point.
How about we talk about the Lord's Resistance Army? They're about as Christian as Boko Haram is Muslim.
Posts: 2933 | From: Hebrides | Registered: Apr 2012
| IP: Logged
|
|
Doc Tor
Deepest Red
# 9748
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Kaplan Corday:
If characters such as the Phelps family and the nutter on EE's link were represented in Christianity in the same proportion as movements such as Boko Haram, Al Quaeda, Al Nusra, Jemaah Islamiyah and the Taleban are represented in Islam, and did proportionately as much harm, I would gladly concede your point.
To a very great number of people the world over, the US military is a Christian army.
Does that give you pause to reconsider?
--------------------
Forward the New Republic
Posts: 9131 | From: Ultima Thule | Registered: Jul 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
Alwyn
Shipmate
# 4380
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Kaplan Corday:
If characters such as the Phelps family and the nutter on EE's link were represented in Christianity in the same proportion as movements such as Boko Haram, Al Quaeda, Al Nusra, Jemaah Islamiyah and the Taleban are represented in Islam, and did proportionately as much harm, I would gladly concede your point.
Really? Despite the Rwandan genocide, the Srebenica Massacre, violence by Christian militias such as the Lord's Resistance Army in Uganda (and elsewhere) ... despite the "taunting Christian mobs" in the Central African Republic who reportedly "deliberately targeted" children and carried out what Amnesty International called 'ethnic cleansing' of Muslims (source), you won't accept orfeo's point that "It's a beautifully unbalanced game where a nutty Christian is never a true representative of the religion, and a nutty Muslim always is." ... ?
--------------------
Post hoc, ergo propter hoc
Posts: 849 | From: UK | Registered: Apr 2003
| IP: Logged
|
|
Steve Langton
Shipmate
# 17601
|
Posted
If one accepts the Anabaptist style of thinking, whereby the Church is and should always be a voluntary body separate from the state and acting without legal or military/police coercion, then examples like the US Army (or the UK Army which fights alongside it), the LR Army, the Rwandans who massacre,and the ethnic cleansers of Serbia and elsewhere are indeed not true representatives of Christianity but perversions thereof.
Islam has been from the start a religion which aims at a Muslim state, Sharia law, etc. Even sensible Islam is therefore basically repressive, persecutory, and warlike - whether a particular version goes over the top is somewhat academic....
Posts: 2245 | From: Stockport UK | Registered: Mar 2013
| IP: Logged
|
|
Raptor Eye
Shipmate
# 16649
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Steve Langton:
If one accepts the Anabaptist style of thinking, whereby the Church is and should always be a voluntary body separate from the state and acting without legal or military/police coercion, then examples like the US Army (or the UK Army which fights alongside it), the LR Army, the Rwandans who massacre,and the ethnic cleansers of Serbia and elsewhere are indeed not true representatives of Christianity but perversions thereof.
I can't see how it can be this cut and dried. Surely someone can be a representative Christian and also work within the military or the government! In fact, I'd be very happy if all who worked within them were Christians. The military has an important defence role to play.
--------------------
Be still, and know that I am God! Psalm 46.10
Posts: 4359 | From: The United Kingdom | Registered: Sep 2011
| IP: Logged
|
|
Steve Langton
Shipmate
# 17601
|
Posted
It can be argued that there are grey areas here to do with general defence. However;
First, the use of armies or police to enforce the Christian religion as such is surely unacceptable; and;
Secondly, one of the current problems is that the army of a 'Christian country' can be seen as doing that even when in its own eyes it's attempting a more secular/liberal goal. Thus US & UK armies fighting in Muslim lands can all too easily be interpreted as a renewed anti-Islamic 'Crusade' which in turn can appear to justify the actions of groups like Boko Haram.
Posts: 2245 | From: Stockport UK | Registered: Mar 2013
| IP: Logged
|
|
Alwyn
Shipmate
# 4380
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Steve Langton (emphasis added):
... the LR Army, the Rwandans who massacre,and the ethnic cleansers of Serbia and elsewhere are indeed not true representatives of Christianity but perversions thereof. [...] Even sensible Islam is therefore basically repressive, persecutory, and warlike ....
So 'our' bad guys aren't truly ours, but theirs are?
Are you familiar with the 'No True Scotsman' fallacy?
--------------------
Post hoc, ergo propter hoc
Posts: 849 | From: UK | Registered: Apr 2003
| IP: Logged
|
|
Steve Langton
Shipmate
# 17601
|
Posted
by Alwyn;
quote:
quote:
Originally posted by Steve Langton (emphasis added):
... the LR Army, the Rwandans who massacre,and the ethnic cleansers of Serbia and elsewhere are indeed not true representatives of Christianity but perversions thereof. [...] Even sensible Islam is therefore basically repressive, persecutory, and warlike ....
So 'our' bad guys aren't truly ours, but theirs are?
Are you familiar with the 'No True Scotsman' fallacy?
Yes, I'm familiar with the fallacy - though I wasn't aware of that name for it till k-mann accused me of it on another thread.
However, I note your quote omits both my preamble as to why "'our' bad guys" really aren't truly ours, and my point about why the case with Islam really is different.
If it is correct interpretation of Scripture that "the Church is and should always be a voluntary body separate from the state and acting without legal or military/police coercion,..." then those who act otherwise in the name of Christ or the Church are clearly disobeying Scripture and distorting the nature of the faith.
Likewise if Islam is, as its history, its holy book, and the acts of its founder say, a religion founded on an idea of setting up an Islamic version of a state church, to be legally enforced internally and spread/defended by warfare, then acting accordingly is integral to the religion rather than a distorted exception. Islam has the same kind of problem that the (distorted) medieval Church had in keeping extremists within bounds - once war in God's name has been accepted it's also hard to set limits to it.
This is not the same situation as the 'No True Scotsman' fallacy.
Posts: 2245 | From: Stockport UK | Registered: Mar 2013
| IP: Logged
|
|
Raptor Eye
Shipmate
# 16649
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Steve Langton:
It can be argued that there are grey areas here to do with general defence. However;
First, the use of armies or police to enforce the Christian religion as such is surely unacceptable; and;
Secondly, one of the current problems is that the army of a 'Christian country' can be seen as doing that even when in its own eyes it's attempting a more secular/liberal goal. Thus US & UK armies fighting in Muslim lands can all too easily be interpreted as a renewed anti-Islamic 'Crusade' which in turn can appear to justify the actions of groups like Boko Haram.
The first, in terms of armies, would be counter the Christian faith, as the scriptures clearly indicate invitation, not coercion. Shaking the dust off of feet doesn't equate to using violence to force the religion onto people. However, there is a point at which the moral values of the religion are and should be enforced, if failure to do so puts its people in danger, so that eg thieves and murderers are kept from causing harm to others.
The second is another example of the ignorance of racial prejudice, and its readiness to tack onto the caricature any appendage that makes it uglier to its creator, whether derived from past or present myths, to make hating it more acceptable rather than recognising this as a human being.
The way forward is not for Christians to remove themselves from society, but to ensure that whatever they do within that society reflects God's goodness and love. It's in that way that we are to be removed.
--------------------
Be still, and know that I am God! Psalm 46.10
Posts: 4359 | From: The United Kingdom | Registered: Sep 2011
| IP: Logged
|
|
agingjb
Shipmate
# 16555
|
Posted
Oh come on. Western Christianity permitted the use of torture in or about 1252. And there's an end on't.
(And yes, the existence of the Religious Society of Friends enables even a cynic, expelled from the Church, like me to make some choice between the various competitive damnations we call religions.)
--------------------
Refraction Villanelles
Posts: 464 | From: Southern England | Registered: Jul 2011
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
Printer-friendly view
