A point I really need to clarify which I think address some of your concerns.
The point I was trying to make is not that moderate Muslims don't exist.
The point is this, summed up in a nutshell:
Be careful what you call "The Word of God". Some people might actually believe it.
Longer version:
Moderates hold up the Bible/Koran/etc. and say "Word of God". The fundies say "we agree and here's what it says..."
Sure, the moderates begin their mental gymnastics of "Well, when it says... it really means...". As AronRa recently said, (paraphrased) "they read between the lines rather than read the lines themselves". In other words, they start with their beliefs and, rather than read what's there, they see what they want to.
You may say, "great". Yeah, that's great for them. Maybe it's great for their whole local community. Can you guarantee me that nobody will read the actual words printed on the page after being told it's the Word of God and come to the obvious conclusion instead of the nice, heavily massaged, not-really-what-it-says-but-let's-pretend version?
For example, the Biblical god really does hate fags. It says so in the Bible. It says they must die. It says to kill them and their blood is on their hands. Sure, 99.99% of Christians never would but do you see how it's dangerous calling stuff like that "The Word of God". Some idiot might actually believe it and act on it.
That's what makes religion dangerous. Most adherents are good people who want to believe their religion is good. A few actually read the scriptures. That's how the nutty ones are generated. And if only 5% of believers are those few, the ideology is still toxic.
(October 30, 2014 at 11:49 am)Mister Agenda Wrote: Hard for YOU to square [how to reconcile moderate beliefs with scripture or even basic tenets of a faith], because apparently, you agree with fundamentalist Muslims on that point. Millions of Muslims manage it. Q.E.D.
The point I was trying to make is not that moderate Muslims don't exist.
The point is this, summed up in a nutshell:
Be careful what you call "The Word of God". Some people might actually believe it.
Longer version:
Moderates hold up the Bible/Koran/etc. and say "Word of God". The fundies say "we agree and here's what it says..."
Sure, the moderates begin their mental gymnastics of "Well, when it says... it really means...". As AronRa recently said, (paraphrased) "they read between the lines rather than read the lines themselves". In other words, they start with their beliefs and, rather than read what's there, they see what they want to.
You may say, "great". Yeah, that's great for them. Maybe it's great for their whole local community. Can you guarantee me that nobody will read the actual words printed on the page after being told it's the Word of God and come to the obvious conclusion instead of the nice, heavily massaged, not-really-what-it-says-but-let's-pretend version?
For example, the Biblical god really does hate fags. It says so in the Bible. It says they must die. It says to kill them and their blood is on their hands. Sure, 99.99% of Christians never would but do you see how it's dangerous calling stuff like that "The Word of God". Some idiot might actually believe it and act on it.
That's what makes religion dangerous. Most adherents are good people who want to believe their religion is good. A few actually read the scriptures. That's how the nutty ones are generated. And if only 5% of believers are those few, the ideology is still toxic.
Atheist Forums Hall of Shame:
"The trinity can be equated to having your cake and eating it too."
... -Lucent, trying to defend the Trinity concept
"(Yahweh's) actions are good because (Yahweh) is the ultimate standard of goodness. That’s not begging the question"
... -Statler Waldorf, Christian apologist
"The trinity can be equated to having your cake and eating it too."
... -Lucent, trying to defend the Trinity concept
"(Yahweh's) actions are good because (Yahweh) is the ultimate standard of goodness. That’s not begging the question"
... -Statler Waldorf, Christian apologist
