[Vision2020] Say What? Everyone Deserves Death

[Ted Moffett]

There appears to be some misleading interpretations presented regarding what
I exactly stated on "extremism" and religious faith; and, I think,
distortions of what it means to be an "extremist," based on misapplying this
word.

First, the "God" of Islam and Christianity are not the same "God" (as was
suggested), in critical respects. Christ in Christianity is a part of God,
divine, and this is essential for Christian belief, except for some who call
themselves "Christian" but do not accept Christ as divine, a small group.

The data does show that a majority of people on Earth believe in some kind
of "supreme being."  But the forms of this belief vary widely, with the
differences so critical, that those who believe in one form of a supreme
being sometimes vehemently insist that those who believe in a different form
of supreme being are "heretics," carried to the point of "extremism," in my
opinion.

Once a religious belief takes the form, to rewrite the statement, of
"Everyone who does not belief in our unique interpretation (Christ as one
true savior, for example) of the supreme being deserves death," then I think
it is fair to state this is "extremist," along with being
*characteristic*of the "extremism" of cults  That was the main point
of my posts.

If this statement regarding "deserving death" is meant only in a spiritual
form for the eternal soul, not a literal physical death penalty, it is even
more extremist.  What would you rather face, a death of your body, followed
by the possibility of eternal happiness of your soul in heaven, or being
damned to hell for all eternity (deserving spiritual "death") because
you refused to accept Christ as your savior?  The spiritual interpretation
of "deserving death" in this context is worse than implementing the death
penalty with an execution of the flesh and blood body.  It is not surprising
that such beliefs have a powerful psychological hold on human beings.

But my statements clearly implied that "moderate tolerant" Christians, or
those of other theistic faiths, who do not believe that "Everyone deserves
death (either bodily or spiritually), unless they accept Christ (or whatever
is their primary belief) as their savior" are not "extremist."  Some would
insist that if Christians do not believe this proposition in a strong sense,
they are not truly "Christians."  Given certain assumptions about
Christianity, I suppose this is correct.  If so, then millions of
"Christians" are not really Christians.

I never stated that those who believe in "God," in one form or another, yet
do not go so far as to damn all those of different faiths, are "extremist."


A rather wooden narrow definition of the word "extremist," that has been
applied in this thread, is leading some to declare anyone in the minority as
"extremist," a misleading application of this word, I think.  If someone
believes in a minority faith, is Atheist or Agnostic, yet advocates peace
and tolerance between all faiths, defending the rights of other faiths to
practice their faith as they choose, they are not an "extremist," though
differences between faiths can render this idealistic approach very
difficult in practice.  Witness the alleged religious persecution the
polygamists in Texas are announcing, with even the Texas courts declaring
the large scale seizing of hundreds of children to be illegal; to thus
return these children to their families, unless specific cases of abuse can
be documented.

I am not an "Atheist," as in absolutely declaring "God" does not exist.  Nor
do I think I am an "extremist," even if my views are in a minority.  I am
not an "Agnostic" either, given the implications of not having strong
beliefs, though technically, given I question the existence of supreme
being(s) who created the universe and/or the Earth, or humanity via direct
intervention, I am an "Agnostic," in the usual sense of this word, in our
"God" belief dominated culture.

I believe very strongly that all life on Earth is worth the utmost care and
respect, if for no other reason than humanity's critical dependence for our
existence and well being, on the biosphere, coupled with the alarming and
accelerating impacts of human endeavors damaging biodiversity and
ecosystems.  I think this issue is perhaps the most critical facing humanity
at this point in history.

Talk about believing in something or deserving death!  If we do not take
care of the biosphere, death is indeed a likely outcome for millions. This
is not an environmental extremist scare tactic, as no doubt many may think,
but merely the facts as Science indicates; but I will not make that argument
here, nor answer in detail the objection some may already have in mind, that
what I am stating is in effect making Science a religion. Respect for and/or
worship of the Earth or Nature can assume a "spiritual" or "religious"
dimension of experience; but I emphasize the scientific basis for our links
to all life on Earth, and our absolute dependence on these links for our
survival and well being, as a very practical concern, regardless of a
persons religion or faith.

I enjoy the diversity of religious and spiritual beliefs of humanity.  Human
culture would lose much of its richness and wonder, if one faith or
worldview took total control, though faith and religion should be tempered
with respect for other faiths, given the possibility of error as the flawed
human mind attempts to grasp the divine and infinite.  This is one
technicality I have never heard any fundamentalist answer satisfactorily.
How can you be so sure you are not making a mistake in your religious
beliefs, when acknowledging the flawed limited finite human mind is
interpreting all the beliefs in question?

I do not deny the possibility (though I think some beliefs are extremely
unlikely to be true) of the existence of God, Gods, Goddesses, or numerous
other forms of magical, spiritual or "supernatural" identities, powers or
processes, nor do I deny the possibility, however unlikely, that intelligent
life from elsewhere in the universe visited Earth millions of years ago, and
manipulated evolution to create human consciousness, a different twist on
the argument that "God" must have been involved in evolution, given the
"design" argument for life.

Ted Moffett
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://mailman.fsr.com/pipermail/vision2020/attachments/20080531/a77596b2/attachment.html