Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.2 9/5/84; site uwmacc.UUCP
Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!burl!ulysses!unc!mcnc!decvax!genrad!wjh12!harvard!seismo!uwvax!uwmacc!dubois
From: dubois@uwmacc.UUCP (Paul DuBois)
Newsgroups: net.religion
Subject: Re: A Good Example of Religious Tolerance!
Message-ID: <467@uwmacc.UUCP>
Date: Wed, 14-Nov-84 13:03:50 EST
Article-I.D.: uwmacc.467
Posted: Wed Nov 14 13:03:50 1984
Date-Received: Sat, 17-Nov-84 07:55:14 EST
References: <732@ihuxj.UUCP> <285@bonnie.UUCP>
Organization: UW Primate Center
Lines: 44

> One of the main purposes of this group should be education,
> not conversion.  I am very interested in what various religions
> hold to be the essential truths.  There is too little
> discussion about what makes up the core of a religion and too
> much arguing.  Arguing has its place, but sometimes it reduces
> to little more than sarcasm, name-calling and general flaming.

Sentence 1:  Very proselytic statement.
Sentence 2:  Really?  Even Ken Nichol's religion, or David Brunson's?
	I would guess not:  both of them have been expounding what
	the essentials of Christianity are, from their point of view.
	The general net response is:  buzz off/go away/f___ off.
Sentence 4:  True.  But the question is complicated by the tendency of
	many to call an exposition which does not happen to conform
	to their own beliefs (such as many by Ken, or myself) a "flame".
	Needlessly so, I think, because Ken doesn't really (as far as
	I can tell) have any desire to beat anyone over the head with
	his Bible - but he *does* believe in not rolling over and
	playing dead when someone slams Christianity undeservedly, or
	slams the Christ.

Non-christians, a question:  many of you have expressed a desire
that we should shut up or go away, or quit "preaching", etc.  Larry
Bickford has observed, accurately I believe, that most of the articles
submitted by Christians are submitted on topics in which an anti-
Christian comment was made; we do not normally just get up and
say "everyone who doesn't agree with me goes to Hell", just to get
up and proclaim how great Christianity is.  But as the discussion
progresses, and Christians say what they believe, then all of a
sudden, we're "preaching", "proselytiziing", trying to "convert"
people.  Well, maybe we are.  So what?   What do you want?  Sterile
discussions all predicated on the notion, "here's what I believe.
It's no better or worse than what you believe.  We should tell each
other what we believe, but we won't try to convince anyone that
they ought to believe it, too."  No, thanks.  Religious beliefs,
by their very nature, tend to affect how people live.  If the beliefs
that affect your life aren't worth propagating, they aren't worth
holding personally.

I expect non-christians to try to convince me that I'm wrong.
Don't expect me not to speak up when I think you're in error.

-- 
Paul DuBois		{allegra,ihnp4,seismo}!uwvax!uwmacc!dubois