[Prev][Next][Index]
Re: Intolerant theological concepts?
Vivek Sadananda Pai (vivek@noel.cs.rice.edu) wrote:
>In a previous article, ken_stuart@macshasta.snowcrest.net (ken stuart)
wrote:
>
>>The tricky part of all this is that if one follows the devotional practices
>>of ISKCON or Evangelical Christianity or Fundamentalist Islam, they work
>>since God is only interested in the faith and love component, and doesn't
>>care about theological concepts, no matter whether they are true or false.
>>THUS, since the devotee receives real fruits from his devotion, he
foolishly
>>believes that all his intolerant theological concepts are thereby validated
>>as true.
>You mention "intolerant theological concepts" in the same paragraph
>that you mention ISKCON, Evangelical Christianity, or Fundamentalist
>Islam, and I find this very interesting.
>
>I have friends who are Hindus, Christians, and Muslims, and all are
>what you might call "fundamentalist", even though I see you only chose
>to use that term in regards to Islam, for whatever reason. All three
>groups of "fundamentalists" share a common belief that their religion
>should be practiced in an unadulterated state. I'm not so sure that
>"intolerant" is the label that applies.
>It seems that you want to be tolerant of anybody who agrees with
>you. Anybody else is labeled as intolerant.
Your article assumed an amazing amount of "between the lines" meaning that
simply wasn't there.
Unlike the national media, my use of the term "fundamentalist" is not
automatically negative.
"Intolerant theological concepts" are those that claim "only our sub-sect of
our particular religion can bring people to God".
>True story: just the other day, I was joking around with two
>colleagues, where one was a Christian and one was a Muslim. We
>were all discussing the concept of "do-it-yourself religion" and
>how people were going for a pick-and-choose style of practising
>religion - they want all the benefits, but don't want to follow
>all of the rules and regulations laid down by the various religious
>texts. So, we joked about forming a "Fundamentalist Interfaith Society"
>on campus. It makes sense, though, if you think about it.
I entirely agree that "do-it-yourself religion" is perhaps the biggest
obstacle today to true spirituality.
However, American universities are unusually tolerant. Try inviting an
Iranian Ayatollah and Jerry Falwell to a GBC meeting and see it they'll
attend. :-) :-)
Ken
ken@macshasta.com
