[net.religion] what direction net.religion?

rah (02/12/83)

I'm inclined to side with those who have requested that we refrain
from attempting to bring others around to our point of view, at
least by braodcasting on net.religion.  I would rather that we try
and have discussions of questions of interest.

It would seem to me, as has already been said by others, that the
way to accomplish this is to avoid statements which say you must
choose between a and b. Particularly since very often a and b aren't
the only possible choices.

I agree with Andy T. that religion is much more complex than
our discussions can cover.  I suggest that this is partially
because there is a basis in truth for almost all the variations
of relgions / belief systems around.  The fact that most of them
(to my way of thinking) are not totally true does not mean that
they are totally wrong.  As an analogy consider counterfeits of
other things.  To be at all a counterfeit of an object, the
counterfeit must be in many ways similar to the real object.
So it is with religions, I am not surprised that there is some
truth to other people's beliefs, after all, to sucessfully
counterfeit the true religion you must come plausibly close
to it, otherwise people will reject your suggestions out of hand.

What this means to me is that discussions are helpful, since
they force me to try and understand why and how I differ from
someone else's viewpoint, and why I should believe what I believe.
Also, of course, it helps me see another viewpoint.

Rich Hammond

jfw (02/17/83)

What direction net.religion?

Around in circles, what else??

	John Woods, :-s
	...!lost!ina!maze!of!twisty!uucp!paths
	...!mitccc!jfw