Namaste VC,
thank you for the interesting post.
of the choices provided i'd say we human sorts are not nice enough... though i would prefer a term like compassionate.
on the whole, i found that quoted piece rather gloomy and disheartening and, if i may, i'd like to address some of it directly.
Terry Pratchard said:
"Now if I'd seen him, really there, really alive, it'd be in me like a fever. If I thought there was some god who really did care two hoots about people, who watched 'em like a father and cared for 'em like a mother... well, you wouldn't catch me sayin' things like 'There are two sides to every question' and 'We must respect other people's beliefs.'
leaving aside the obvious reality that religious groups have different sects and views, he seems to think that a father or mother treats every child in precisely the same manner rather than in a way which is specific to the individual being. i can assure the author that whilst parent try to treat everyone fairly we do not treat everyone the same, for the patently obvious reason that they aren't the same. the sort of view that he's advocating is a view which is akin to the modern fundamentalist view of various monotheistic religious traditions of the West. he also seems to be of the view that his own personal experience is one which can be extrapolated and applied to others in some meaningful manner of which i'm unaware.
tp said:
You wouldn't find me just bein' gen'rally nice in the hope that it'd turn out all right in the end, not if that flame was burnin' in me like an unforgivin' sword.
i think that this bit is particularly noteworthy... generally the monotheistic deities are portrayed as being forgiving and so his attitude of religious dialog being akin to a flaming broadsword brandished for battle can only lead to an nonconstructive dialog. more tellingly, however, is that he wouldn't just be generally nice... now he predicates this upon a hope of things turning out ok in the end but then i've noted a great many monotheists tend to think of this life as something quite ordinary and not particularly valuable except in advance of their ideology. i am of the view that being nice to other beings has a tangible benefit in the hear and now and doesn't require some sort of post morteum justification or benefit.
tp said:
And I did say burnin' ... 'cos that's what it'd be. You say that you don't burn folk and sacrifice people any more, but that's what true faith would mean, y'see? Sacrificin' your own life, one day at a time to the flame, declarin' the truth of it, workin' for it, breathin' the soul of it. That's religion. Anythin' else is just... is just bein' nice."
and then he proceeds to insinuate that anyone else that doesn't share his fevered vision of how religion should be aren't actually practicing religion rather are engaged in a farce, a mocking of the true calling of devotion and faith which can be the *only* outcome of an encounter with the divine.
with respect to being openminded about ideas and such vis a vie my own views about things... it may be surprising to learn but i am as convinced of the orientation towards reality of my own views as just about everyone else. i hold my views to be those which most approximate the reality we can apprehend yet i am, curiously in the minority it seems, not close minded to ideas which are opposed to mine.
i have the feeling that many, many beings mistake being open minded, knowledgeable and understanding appreciation of another viewpoint implies a tacit accord or acceptance of said view and the corollary to that is the idea that if you don't agree with a view that you don't understand it. such thinking couldn't be more wrongheaded.
metta,
~v
