From: simon@dcs.warwick.ac.uk (Simon Clippingdale)
Subject: Re: is it necessary to hate?
Organization: Department of Computer Science, Warwick University, England
Date: Thu, 17 Dec 1992 20:31:13 GMT

In article <910773f.37.724537200@axe.acadiau.ca> 910773f@axe.acadiau.ca (HEATHER LEE FYFFE) writes:

> Basically, I agree.  My only wonder is how you could hear the call of God in 
> your heart and respond and _not_ be a Christian, as the word simply means 
> one who believes in the divinity of Christ.

Not that I personally hear the voices any longer, but this is a non-sequitur
(with apologies to Mr. Klopfer) as a re-read should indicate. It is possible
that the person who `hears the call of God' does not believe in the divinity
of Christ. Are you familiar with the terms "Jew" and "Muslim", for example?


> In general, you'll find that today's young people are the ones trying to 
> change the church back to the way it is presented in the Gospels.  It is 
> only those so stuck in ritual and tradition and lack of thought who insist 
> on sticking to the old ways, as they cannot see how unbiblical they are.

You will usually find that the younger members of any movement are the
more radical, and the older more conservative. The former are usually
frustrated in their black'n'white zeal by the latter with their more
temperate views.


> A non-control-oriented Christianity is not a perversion, it's biblical and 
> a commandment.                                                ^^^^^^^^^^^^
  ^^^^^^^^^^^^^
"Thou shalt not control. Nor command. Nor threaten. Or else."

Call me pedantic, but the whole idea of a commandment (plus all the
biblical stuff about lakes of fire, wailing and gnashing of teeth, not
to mention the more mundane commands to obey rulers and accept one's
lot) seems a step removed from a "non-control-oriented Christianity".
Are you sure you're not projecting your own view of what Christianity
*should* be on to a Bible and indeed a religion which manifestly lean
in the opposite direction?


> What atheists lack, among those who wish to help mankind, is the sense of 
> community and support experienced in Christianity.

Community and mutual support are essential in preserving and reinforcing
belief in irrational worldviews such as I believe many religious worldviews
to be, and which IMHO lie at the *root* of many of the problems faced by
mankind.

Without this particular brand of community and support, it would be obvious
to each individual that the hypothetical Emperor has no clothes and that, for
example, overpopulation is dangerous and needs to be tackled, rather than
ignored or even exacerbated by anti-birth-control dogma.

It would also, for example, be crystal clear without all that community
and support that AIDS is a lethal virus which threatens us all, rather
than a divine vengeance visited upon a subset of `sinners', and that
the appropriate response is vaccine research coupled with sex education,
rather than evangelism coupled with attempts to prevent sex education
and free access to condoms because these `promote sin'.

Now I'm not accusing *you* of holding such medieval views, but many of
your fellow Christians do, and they are sustained in their lethal lunacies
by exactly the "community and support experienced in Christianity" which
you trumpet.


> A religion (or non-religion) that teaches complete individualism,
> separatism, and me-ism can never have the kind of powerful, loving,
> selfless bondings of friendships which develop in Christianity, powerful
> friendships which all people need. The modern pop psychology is all based
> on do-it-yourself, be your own boss, how to get ahead of everyone else.
> Chart your own path, make it to the top.

Well, I guess it makes a pleasant change from "atheism = Stalinist communism".
Where did you find out what atheism "teaches"? Did I miss it in the FAQ?

Look up from your Bible and take a myopic squint at the real world.
The culture of individualism of which you speak is a facet of Western
civilisation, and particularly of the United States. You may note that
the West, and particularly the US, are relative hotbeds of Christianity.
Eastern civilisation tends to be much more group-oriented and less
individualistic, as anybody who knows anything about the group ethic
of the embarrassingly non-Christian Japanese, for example, will attest.


> Can you imagine what the world would be like if everybody did that?  

It'd be like the US is now, with all those right-wing Christians
whose colours are firmly nailed to the mast of exactly the sort of
crusading capitalist `individualism' of which you speak so poorly
(provided of course that the individual in question lives a `biblical'
existence, or s/he gets to burn alongside the abortionists, communists,
f*gg*ts and n*gg*rs).


> Take advantage of them before they take advantage of you.  Complete 
> dissappearance of trust, because you know everyone else is out to get ahead 
> of you.  No cooperation, no unity, no true friendships.  Everyone just out 
> to better themself.  End result?  Need I explain?  Not too pretty, is it.

Damn right it isn't, but I don't think we're talking about the same thing.


> Unfortunately, that's where we're heading, and none too slowly, either.

I agree violently, but again I don't think we're talking about the same thing.


> Well, there's my dollar's worth for today.  Thanks for reading me!
>
> Love from 
> the Buzzard


Cheers

Simon
-- 
Simon Clippingdale                simon@dcs.warwick.ac.uk
Department of Computer Science    Tel (+44) 203 523296
University of Warwick             FAX (+44) 203 525714
Coventry CV4 7AL, U.K.
Newsgroups: alt.atheism,talk.religion.misc