"Religious moderates are, in large part responsible for the religious conflict in our world, because their beliefs provide the context in which scriptural literalism and religious violence can never be adequately opposed."
2007-01-04 03:28:32 · 16 answers · asked by tincre 4 in Society & Culture ➔ Other - Society & Culture
the quote comes from a book.
The end of faith, by Sam Harris.
2007-01-04 04:13:39 · update #1
I think it is obscure and absurd.
2007-01-04 03:30:03 · answer #1 · answered by Jimfix 5 · 1⤊ 0⤋
For what this is nicely worth, this does reflect my adventure right here. besides the actual incontrovertible truth that he thoroughly discredits himself by plagiarizing. I easily have, inspite of the indisputable fact that, considered a similar element of psychological dishonesty and intolerance in a good number of, if not maximum, Christians right here. i might want to favor to assert that the attacks of atheists haven't any benefit in any respect, yet in all honesty i can't. There are those who do precisely what atheists accuse us of doing. some distance too a lot of them. The historic previous of Christianity does have blood and darkness in it. There are even Christians who *do* favor to reveal u.s. right into a theocracy. I considered their writings, or perhaps met a number of them. i come around the load of laboring lower than such in part deserved stereotypes intensely discouraging. each of the further so because my digital mail conversations with atheists from this web site were, without exception, cordial and open. it truly is their experience of marvel that I as a Christian can easily have an wise verbal replace without growing to be protective or 'preachy' that receives to me maximum of all. Why might want to or not this is so fantastic? Oh nicely. sufficient of my pity party. it truly is a very strong answer, so some distance because it is going. yet, regrettably, it stops short of telling the full truth. peace
2016-12-01 19:48:29 · answer #2 · answered by ? 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Its a person, an individual. Not all Christians are the same and not all nonbelievers are the same. Jesus was killed and took upon himself the sufferings of all humankind, so a Christian 'with His spirit will do the same', but who has his spirit, very few people, so there are very, and i mean very few real Christians. "Many are call very few are chosen."
Men/women uses the Bible for his/her own purpose, the same do the politicians with their power, and the do the parents with their kids, and the kids with those who are baby. The problem is "man". The problem is inside of man not outside. Even the baby would constantly say "this is mine, mom is mine, and they will even hit their parents with just one year old. So are we going to kill every human being in the world to have peace? Now Christianity has a meaning, we were doom to death and Jesus show us the way of LOVE. Who can resist to love.
2007-01-04 03:47:45 · answer #3 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
It is logically and factually defective, since you are attempting to blame moderates for the violence incited and committed by the fanatics.
It's just an infantile attempt to shift culpability from the guilty party (religious fanatics).
2007-01-04 03:32:14 · answer #4 · answered by The answer guy 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
You can't blame one person for another person's violence. Unless someone puts a gun to your head and says fly that plane into the pentagon, you don't have an excuse. Moderates are not violent, extremeist's are, and would be even if they weren't religious, they would use another excuse to hate and kill.
2007-01-04 03:31:40 · answer #5 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
I do think this statement makes sense. Because liberalism in religion tends to make people sloppy about their moral and the way they look at other people.
My "old" girlfriend is so charming and a very free spirit. She thinks it works for her to take a litle bit of this and a little bit of that and make her "own" religion. I think it's too cheap.
2007-01-04 03:36:09 · answer #6 · answered by KirstenP 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Its accurate. Religion can survive without fundamentalists - fine - but fundamentalists cant exist without religion. The disease might not be that dangerous in some forms but it needs to be cured because of some of its worst symptoms.
2007-01-04 03:30:24 · answer #7 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
It is ridiculous.
There would be no moderates without the religions themselves. Its the hard-cores that cause the conflicts, the fundamentalists.
Moderates certainly don't help though, they just say "its not all of us...just them"
2007-01-04 03:36:47 · answer #8 · answered by southswell2002 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
It sounds like it was written for/by a politician. It is vague and hard to understand.
On top of that it is a poorly written statement.
2007-01-04 03:32:29 · answer #9 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 0⤋
It sounds like a wake-up call to religious moderates, to me.
Besides,
How do you inflame a moderate?
2007-01-04 03:31:34 · answer #10 · answered by Dave 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Rubbish. Hitler was'nt religious neither was Stalin. They did'nt need religion as an excuse to kill and murder millions.
2007-01-04 03:31:47 · answer #11 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 0⤋