Mother Teresa Doubter/Doer

[Daniel]

Originally Posted by Joe Brummer

As I got older I started doubting and questioning. I know I could not believe in god if I tried. The more doubting I did, the more questions I asked and the more science led me to be an atheist.

The older I get the more I question everything. And at this point in my life think about the whole idea of 'believing' anything.

This may be a result of the Buddhist thought I've been exposed to which isn't concerned with belief as such. They would consider that getting the cart before the horse- having the point of view that we fool ourselves into thinking of our thoughts as being concrete, as if they are objects. But are they? Contemplating this can take one into unfamiliar territory- a region which can feel quite uncomfortable, where the ground has dropped away beneath one. This- to me- is what doubt feels like.

One thing (oh... this word bring with it a nice paradox) has stayed with me however, since I was a child- though the thick and thin of doubt. And that is the experience of Numinosity and Presence. It comes- often- on the wings of music- in silence, stillness, my beloved's touch, the memory of a dear friend. It has no name, no creed and no dogma.

It's never occurred to me to call this God. To do so would be like putting a pin through a butterfly- tacking it down and killing it. Letting it be keeps it alive.

Makes me think that the Buddhists are on to something when they yak about Emptiness. But that's a whole other subject.

Sum total? I'm Ok having more questions than answers. And I respect science because it asks questions. My beef? Too often, matters of faith can veer towards easy answers and too few questions.

[Steven E. Webster]

Originally Posted by Joe Brummer

I am feeling confused, Stephen, Tell me where I attack religion? I have a need to be as critical of religion as we are of any other science. Why should we walk on eggshells just because we are discussing god? Would you be willing to explain to me where I have attacked religion?

People with religious beliefs perceive any question of those beliefs as an attack. Everything I said was either known fact or my opinion said with respect. Where did I make an attack?

Sorry, I probably misunderstood what you wrote. It seemed you were suggesting that faith or belief is inherently a bad thing--the cause of all wars etc. etc. It seemed to me that people are quite capable of war and other bad things whether they are religious or not.

If your point was that it is good for people to maintain a healthy skepticism and be open to doubt, I can't argue with that. "Faith" with no doubt probably isn't really faith at all.

I don't know Dawkins work well, but had the impression that Dawkins is rather intolerant of religious faith--maybe I'm wrong about that too.

Steven Webster

[Joe Brummer]

Originally Posted by Steven E. Webster

Sorry, I probably misunderstood what you wrote. It seemed you were suggesting that faith or belief is inherently a bad thing--the cause of all wars etc. etc. It seemed to me that people are quite capable of war and other bad things whether they are religious or not.

Well, you are correct, faith has been the cause of wars. That is part of the facts, not my beliefs. People are capable of such wars without faith I am sure that is true, but it isn't a fact. The first one is.

Originally Posted by Steven E. Webster

If your point was that it is good for people to maintain a healthy skepticism and be open to doubt, I can't argue with that. "Faith" with no doubt probably isn't really faith at all.

My point is that if people really weighed their faith against known facts, they would not have faith any longer. This is only my belief.

Originally Posted by Steven E. Webster

I don't know Dawkins work well, but had the impression that Dawkins is rather intolerant of religious faith--maybe I'm wrong about that too.

no, you are not wrong. Dawkins is very intolerant of faith. It is his belief that even moderate faith is blind and fosters a climate where extremism can exist. I haven't come to a decision one way or the other on this yet.

[u-dog]

Originally Posted by Joe Brummer

Well, you are correct, faith has been the cause of wars. That is part of the facts, not my beliefs. People are capable of such wars without faith I am sure that is true, but it isn't a fact. The first one is.

Ok... I'm confused. How many examples of wars not primarily executed by people of faith for theological reasons, real or imagined, do we need to come up with to establish that its a fact? ummm... lets see. The napoleonic wars? the Mongol invasions? The Chinese Communist Revolution? The Korean War? the Vietnam war? The Second World War? Religion is almost always an EXCUSE for going to war -- at best. Wars are fought for national pride, desire for wealth, the lust for power, territorial expansion, the need for natural resources and out of fear. These are Things that human beings have in abundance whether or not they are people of faith.

My point is that if people really weighed their faith against known facts, they would not have faith any longer. This is only my belief.

thank you for acknowledging that it is a belief.

[Joe Brummer]

Originally Posted by u-dog

Religion is almost always an EXCUSE for going to war -- at best. Wars are fought for national pride, desire for wealth, the lust for power, territorial expansion, the need for natural resources and out of fear. These are Things that human beings have in abundance whether or not they are people of faith.

I find it almost impossible to deny that faith has been a large part of most of the atrocities we can think of....that doesn't say there are not other reasons but as you have said, religion is almost always the EXCUSE for going to war. For many of us, the excuse and reason are the same thing.

[Joe Brummer]

PS U-dog,

WW 2 was certainly about religion. Hitler claimed he was enacting the will of the creator while he murdered 6 million people based on their religion.

[Steven E. Webster]

Originally Posted by Joe Brummer

PS U-dog,

WW 2 was certainly about religion. Hitler claimed he was enacting the will of the creator while he murdered 6 million people based on their religion.

I'm not convinced that Hitler was genuinely religious. It seems his use of religion was rather cynical. I suspect the same of Bush and Rove.

You seem to be coming close to making the assertion that if religion could be banned from the human mind, war would cease. I'm not sure you have such good evidence for that claim. How could one test this claim?

Does this claim about "religion" refer to any kind of spirtuality at all? Are Quakers as dangerous to human peace and well-being as are the Pre-millenial Dispensationalists? Is their any distinction at all between good spirituality and bad spirituality? or is all spirituality a manifestation of evil?

Steven Webster

[u-dog]

Originally Posted by Joe Brummer

I find it almost impossible to deny that faith has been a large part of most of the atrocities we can think of....that doesn't say there are not other reasons but as you have said, religion is almost always the EXCUSE for going to war. For many of us, the excuse and reason are the same thing.

Joe, Atheism is a Faith. Atheists are people of faith. Its not a faith I understand particularly but it IS a faith. It is NOT -as it pretends to be - a scientific position about scientific facts. it is a RELIGIOUS position about RELIGIOUS issues. The VAST MAJORITY OF atheists, like yourself are fine and decent people that anyone would be glad to have living next door. Some atheists on the other hand ... like Josef Stalin Kim Jung Il General Tojo and Adolf Hitler, (Steven is right .. there is no meaningful way in which Adolf and his band of merry madmen were people of Christian or any other recognizable faith) were and are racist maniacs responsible for the grizzly deaths of millions !

The ability to make war, oppress the poor, slaughter the innocent, to rape to pillage to steal is A HUMAN POTENTIAL THAT EXISTS IN ALL OF US. To say the all the evils of the world come through Faith in God is not only OFFENSIVE AS HELL! but it is just plain IGNORANT OF THE FACTS

What do you mean that the excuse and the reason are the same thing? That is absurd! If I hit you over the head and take your wallet and claim that I am restributing the wealth from the rich to the poor. That is an excuse. My actions have NOTHING TO DO with the poor or the redistribution of wealth. My actions are motivated, caused, impelled by my greed and my lack of empathy, compassion or morals.

The "reason" for a thing helps me to understand its existance and its causes. An excuse is just the lubrication for my actions... something to make it slide better or to taste less nasty.

Tyrants, thieves, autocrats, conquerors, empirialists use religious language and ideas to make their mischief more pallatable to the masses who have to pay for it either in money or blood. It has little or nothing to do with why the wars and atrocities happen. The reason that they happen have to do with greed, lust for power, and fear.

[Joe Brummer]

That is a great question Stephen, I will try to answer it with what I have come to at this point in my life. I can't really speak for anyone but me, so here goes.

Yes, I do believe that all faith has some degree of danger. Faith, in and of itself, asks one to avoid question and reason and believe something void of evidence. (we can't explain it, so god must have done it) That can be harmless as with Quakers, or it can branch off and become the most evil you have ever heard as in the World Trade Center or the Crusades. Remember that all beliefs in any particular faith came from one place and branched off into denominations. Quakers who teach peace stem from the same faith as those who bomb abortion clinics. Not the same sect of people, but certainly if you have one, you will altimately have the other.

Sadly, at this point in my life, after examining the evidence I have looked at so far, I think that all faith has the potential to either become or foster a climate where extremism can arise. When you add fundementalism or literalism to the picture then you have nothing more than a mixture for bad things to happen in the name of whatever faith you choose. Fundementalism is just scary.

One thing I can tell you, that most atheists will tell you is that we are all atheists in one way or another. Most monothesit reject all the other gods for their god and claim that is the truth. Generally, the god they have chosen is the one that relates to their region and youth. If you are born into America you may be a Christian, if you were born into India you may be Hindu, if you were born on an Island on the Pacific you may waiting patiently for John Frum and the Cargo Gods.

I would like people to choose science. It is based in the facts and constantly questions. Most all scientists would abandon evolution if it were proved wrong because all scientist are looking for the truth. Faith is looking selfishly for oneself. Those who choose a faith do so for selfish reasons. That may be eternal life or salvation or whatever but I bet it is based in fear. I couldn't live my life that way nor do I reccomend it to anyone. Fear is what leads us to places of darkness. We have centuries of atrocity to show us what fear can do.

At heart, everyone is an atheist because they have rejected the truth of every other religion but theirs. Christian are athiests when it comes to Allah, Muslims are atheist when it comes to Ganish, etc.... I have just gone one god further than the monotheist.

You seem to be coming close to making the assertion that if religion could be banned from the human mind, war would cease. I'm not sure you have such good evidence for that claim. How could one test this claim?

I am not coming close at all, I am saying that religion banned would cease many wars. Let us use Ireland as the example. Catholic vs. Protestant killing each other at this point for reasons I doubt the next generation will ever fully understand, but will continue because they were told to. What would happen if you took the religion out of it.

Currently, they have sergregated schools systems. Loose it. Send the Catholic kids and the Protestant kids to the same schools and I bet in a generation or two the conflicts would begind to end.

I have to admit I stole this example from Dawkins, but it does make the point.

Now for my own examples, look at the Church of the Holy Sepulchre, Jerusalem. Look at the centuries of fighting and war over a place and a set of beliefs. Much could be solved if the beliefs could be challenged.

[Joe Brummer]

Originally Posted by u-dog

Joe, Atheism is a Faith. Atheists are people of faith. Its not a faith I understand particularly but it IS a faith. It is NOT -as it pretends to be - a scientific position about scientific facts.

Sorry u-dog, but atheism is not a faith. By its very definition it is a lack of faith and a reliance on facts. Faith is to take something void of evidence. An Atheist would never do that. So no, it is a huge red herring that atheism is a faith. I believe in science because it is based in facts. It is no faith to say the we are here through evolution anymore than it is to say Rhode Island is in New England. It isn't faith, it is fact and science.

People who are theistic believe in a god they cannot prove. People who are atheist do not believe in god. We don't have to have faith to prove anything to us. We don't have faith there is no god anymore than we have no faith there is no "big foot" there is no evidence of either. There is no evidence of god therefore we do not believe in one. It isn't based on faith, but on facts. We believe what we can prove. Faith requires you to accept as fact things you cannot prove.

Originally Posted by u-dog

it is a RELIGIOUS position about RELIGIOUS issues. The VAST MAJORITY OF atheists, like yourself are fine and decent people that anyone would be glad to have living next door. Some atheists on the other hand ... like Josef Stalin Kim Jung Il General Tojo and Adolf Hitler, (Steven is right .. there is no meaningful way in which Adolf and his band of merry madmen were people of Christian or any other recognizable faith)

Hitler was a catholic. All of the evidence supports that. To claim he was an atheist is to defy the evidence. He simply was not.

Originally Posted by u-dog

were and are racist maniacs responsible for the grizzly deaths of millions !

Their lack of faith had nothing to do with their actions. Especially when you consider people of faith are clearly responsible for the same number of deaths. The Crusades, Columbus, The Inquisition, etc...

Originally Posted by u-dog

The ability to make war, oppress the poor, slaughter the innocent, to rape to pillage to steal is A HUMAN POTENTIAL THAT EXISTS IN ALL OF US. To say the all the evils of the world come through Faith in God is not only OFFENSIVE AS HELL! but it is just plain IGNORANT OF THE FACTS

Actually, it is to see the facts as they are not as you want them to be. Faith in religion and gods, regardless which one and there are thousands has been a substantial cause of war, death, oppression, etc... It may be offensive but no more offensive than hearing that 50% of Americans believe the creation story. That is offensive!

I also see that you are using all caps, the web version of screaming. I feel dismissed and insulted when I am screamed at. I have a need for my beliefs about religion to be just as respected as yours. Would you be willing to not scream? I don't see how it is helpful to the conversation except to express you are angry. Anger is fine, it is what we do with it that counts.

Originally Posted by u-dog

What do you mean that the excuse and the reason are the same thing? That is absurd! If I hit you over the head and take your wallet and claim that I am restributing the wealth from the rich to the poor. That is an excuse. My actions have NOTHING TO DO with the poor or the redistribution of wealth. My actions are motivated, caused, impelled by my greed and my lack of empathy, compassion or morals.

Reason or excuse, we could debate this for centuries and get no place. Juries have to sit and ponder a mans fate trying to decide if he had a reason to kill or an excuse. It becomes subjective.

Originally Posted by u-dog

The "reason" for a thing helps me to understand its existance and its causes. An excuse is just the lubrication for my actions... something to make it slide better or to taste less nasty.

Again, I think this is subjective. If I hit you over the head and take your wallet and say I was trying to feed my family. That could be an excuse and a reason. Neither is acceptable and both are subjective.

Originally Posted by u-dog

Tyrants, thieves, autocrats, conquerors, empirialists use religious language and ideas to make their mischief more pallatable to the masses who have to pay for it either in money or blood. It has little or nothing to do with why the wars and atrocities happen. The reason that they happen have to do with greed, lust for power, and fear.

It has everything to do with religion. I think, or suspect you have closed your eyes to what you don't want to see. I feel sad about that. Did you take a few moments to watch the film I posted? This could help open your eyes.

[u-dog]

Joe,

As fun as it might be to disassemble and catalogue the numerous logical falicies that you have injected into the conversation already, I think that this is probably an inappropriate conversation to be having on this forum. This community is based on a fundamental respect for one anothers beliefs as we struggle to find non-violent ways to resist faith-based oppression of GLBT people. Since your belief is based solely on the attitude that my belief is a self-delusional pile of shit... there really isn't anyway to have this conversation that will be edifying to anyone.

Once you have said "I don't believe in God" there isn't much left to say that isn't offensive. Once you say that religious belief is ALWAYS and by definition violent... you've crossed the border into offensive speech.

So ... I'm disengaging. Good luck.

[Joe Brummer]

Agreed, I have no desire to sit here and ask you to think about your beliefs beacuse it is clear you are not willing to look at anyone who questions your beliefs, but I will point out that you will not do well engaging others who believe differently than you when you "dismisssed" their beliefs. The same people you hope to engage will push away with such an attitude.

Each of us hold our beliefs close to our hearts, including atheists. I am offended to no end when I hear someone say the Earth is only 10,000 years old. Such asserations are an attack on all the facts of science that we have massive amounts of evidence to back. Look at the Creationism Museum and you will know that offense I am talking about.

You have stated that once I have said "x" there isn't much to say. Sadly, this is the approach of the very people we hope to open to new beliefs and ideas would say. You say that once I say I don't believe there is nothing else to say. Our oppressors, once they hear we are happy to be gay, we are reprobate. They don't want to talk us further. Sadly, once you say:

Originally Posted by u-dogg

Once you have said "I don't believe in God" there isn't much left to say that isn't offensive. Once you say that religious belief is ALWAYS and by definition violent... you've crossed the border into offensive speech.

Oh hell, once you say "I am a happy homo" there isn;t much left to say that isn't offensive.

I also have not said the things you claim I have, you heard what you wanted to hear not what I said. I did not say "all" anything since I do not believe those generalizations are good.

How are you different from those who say god condemns homosexuality? It is this my god is bigger than your god or my beliefs are better than your beliefs thinking that causes the very wars I have discussed. You have only proved the point with the statements you have made. I only hope that opens eyes to question. Lots of questions. We need all the questions we can get.

Cause once you have said "x" and I don't want further you have cut off the chance of making the change you wish to see in the world.

[u-dog]

I'm sure you're right, Joe, but as I say... I'm disengaging.

[Joe Brummer]

Originally Posted by u-dog

I'm sure you're right, Joe, but as I say... I'm disengaging.

I see that. I am sad and disappointed. I had the need for this not to be the same argument that I have with anti-gay Christians, but it is just from the other side.

We won't ever get far with the battle for gay rights when religion is the basis. The beliefs take up more space than the facts. Sadly.

[antonyh]

Originally Posted by u-dog

Once you have said "I don't believe in God" there isn't much left to say that isn't offensive. Once you say that religious belief is ALWAYS and by definition violent... you've crossed the border into offensive speech.

So ... I'm disengaging. Good luck.

I don't find Atheists offensive at all. I've actually read the recent books (Letter to a Christian Nation, Sam Harris; End of Faith, Sam Harris; The God Delusion, Richard Dawkins, etc). All these books are blistering critiques of religion and the horrible things that have been perpetuated on the human race by religion. And they are all hitting the NYT best seller lists. If you're gay you have experienced some of the horror first hand.

I think Christians should listen to Atheists and what they are saying about Christian belief. How can Christianity change so that it becomes salt and light in the world?

One of my favorite Episcopal priests used to tell us all the time, "Christians are capable of great good and of great evil". Atheists are calling foul and Christians need to listen and return to doing great good.

[u-dog]

Keep swingin' Joe! You're bound to hurt me eventually.

[Joe Brummer]

The object isn't about you. It is about everyone who reads this and that is far beyond you and me. I have to think about the masses, not you. Don't take this so personally, it isn't about you nor do I know you. This is about the further message this sends.

(it isn't that I don't care about you, I do, I just think if you are strong enough to engage in this conversation, you are strong enough to hear my side)

[Joe Brummer]

Originally Posted by antonyh

I don't find Atheists offensive at all. I've actually read the recent books (Letter to a Christian Nation, Sam Harris; End of Faith, Sam Harris; The God Delusion, Richard Dawkins, etc). All these books are blistering critiques of religion and the horrible things that have been perpetuated on the human race by religion. And they are all hitting the NYT best seller lists. If you're gay you have experienced some of the horror first hand.

I think Christians should listen to Atheists and what they are saying about Christian belief. How can Christianity change so that it becomes salt and light in the world?

One of my favorite Episcopal priests used to tell us all the time, "Christians are capable of great good and of great evil". Atheists are calling foul and Christians need to listen and return to doing great good.

I am sorry, I don't understand your point. Could I request you explain it further? I am intrigued but your thought but need more clarification on them.

[u-dog]

That is certainly true Joe, more than strong enough. More than smart enough ... but unlike you, I don't think that this conversation will benefit this community or any of those who are listening

[Joe Brummer]

Originally Posted by u-dog

That is certainly true Joe, more than strong enough. More than smart enough ... but unlike you, I don't think that this conversation will benefit this community or any of those who are listening

I do, I strongly believe in this conversation and the reason lie in Gandhi's message of creative and active nonviolence. We have to be talking. We have to be exchanging ideas even when it is hard. Even when the messages challenge the depths of our souls. We have to be exchanging ideas, beliefs and thoughts where everyone can read them, learn from them and move on with them. This is crucial for peace to ever come.

I will not back down, I will not disengage because nonviolence calls me to remain on my toes, and I am....