ditto Brian, well said Barbara ;-)
thank you barbara, much too much truth for some I fear but indeed profoundly true and there we can look to rome or canterbury for example of what you say before taking on other religions
I did not say I am or have ever been a Quaker, simply that I have learned from those I have known. Buddhism, rather than Siddharta specifically, believes it wrong to take a life, that includes the simplest organism such as a flea. It is very worthy. I respect it, I am not a Buddhist. Christ taught what he did but the churches that sprung up from those ideas do not resembled them. I cannot follow Christ's message because there would be no space in this world to do so if I wished. I am not a Christian and do not need to be that or anything else. I have peace within myself and purpose which more powerful for me than contemplation, prayer or whatever you wish to call it. Nonetheless, I wish you all joy in your faith.
almost every one seems to want to put people into ceremonial structures....places to express belief.
But these beliefs need the assurance of goodness.
And I WAS under the impression that people who practice religion are good, kind and this is part of their respect
for their chosen reigion and their god.
I am sorry but I am not seeing this.I need to see this in order to believe.
If you want me to illustrate this it will only bring deep dissapointment as you will be reminded of
those chosen religious leaders who have used god as a shield to cover some terrible sins.
Perhaps the lack of conformity to a tribe is much braver and more of a commitment ....BEING
true to yourself.
But Quakers are Christians Brian.
We worship in silence, there is no hierarchy and sometimes it takes so long to find a solution that the problem has gone away.
There is no real "dogma" in Quakerism, we do not have sacraments, every day is a sacrament, a gift from God.
Personally I believe that both the Buddha and Christ were enlightened beings and if you follow humanism, although it has the good of humanity at heart, you are missing the most important dimension.
It is possible to follow the message of Christ without all the baggage that goes with it in so called "organised religion|".
do we jane? like andrew I too would say secular humanist which helps a lot working in a human rights field where christians also invoke the name of their god to justify heinous acts. I cannot acknowledge the three ibrahimic faiths for their holinesses when those are so regularly used to justify violence against each other and as for the divisions within christianity with its single root I am sickened by the hypocrisy. Too many years have passed since the mid-1960s and I am less likely to ever believe now than in the early days after what I have seen. because I have compassion I cannot have religion, it is as simple as that.
agree on the sufi masters. jon made a statement, I responded. in fact, there was a great deal of religion in the soviet union, non of the ethnic minorities of the north were collectivised or forced to not practice their animist beliefs to begin with, which are as important as any other belief, there were many underground churches - enough to quickly make a transition at the end of the soviets. I miss nothing for myself, everybody has freedom of choice and belief, some are abhorrent beliefs, most are simply benign and unoffensive. however I do not share notions of an almighty, life after death or all of the window dressing of religion. religion was part of what I studied and having done so I respect everybody's beliefs but have none myself and am actually happier that way.
I should also mention that we practice this within a background of Christianity as well Brian, although all who are seeking are welcome.
my turn to use the "ditto button". My grandfather was a quaker and taught me those beliefs. I am agnostic but it doesn't stop me from knowing what's right and wrong and trying to do what is right for others too, best summed up as a secular humanisnist ;-)
granted, I have never read their materials, simply worked with so many of that faith group who I liked, trusted and felt perfectly at ease with. but if it is those principles then fine by me, they concur with what I believe and try to practice.
I'm sorry that you are an atheist, you are missing a lot.
Throwing out remarks that Hitler was christian by the way does not help matters.
There are wonderful Sufi masters who follow Islam and peace.
There was no religion in the soviet bloc and that was an example of absolute power corrupting absolutely.
Actually Quakerism does not put peace before other principles.
I quote from Quaker Faith and Practice 20.27. "The heart of Quaker ethics is summed up in the word 'simplicity'.
We have testiments which require us to follow simplicity, social responsibility, plainness, truth and peace.
However, I cannot but think that the world would be a better place if we all followed these sentiments.
Agree with Jon and Zoe on this one
ulyanov was the confirmed atheist who delared the soviets atheistic, stalin confirmed that and allowed his authorities to persecute. there is a question about him as to whether he had, in his view, a message from god he was trying to fulfill - after all he was mad enough.
however comparing these people with one lesser mortal helps little. none of the three ibrahim religions condone violence, albeit god and his prophets are pretty prolific killers according to scriptures, so what this man did is not the key to paradise some fanatic dreamt up once upon a time. It is simply brutality for nothing except further stigmatisation of his belief.
People are trying to justify the dude in Afghanistan also, Abigail, the majority of people in the US are being told by their media that he is ill, he just needs a rest, he is overworked.
Turned himself in?? He should have done everyone a favour, and put the gun to his own head afterwards.
I don't think, no matter how many times it's spelled out, you will ever get it.. if it is the MOTIVE of the killings you wish to compare, then, in effect, the killings in Afghanistan shock me a lot more than a man on a mission in a war of another kind. Just because Jihad has not been declared by the people you trust as your government, it does not make it any less of a war.
Nice one Jon, love the fence idea! Mine's more a case of I accept that for many millions, billions of people, religion gives them a peaceful sense to life and helps them when they need it. I can't accept that there is a God but I can't prove that there isn't either so as long as religion doesn't cause any real problems that's fine but it sin't always the case, and I'm not talking about fanatics...!
actually do your history and you will find that Iosif Vissarionovich Dzhugashvili trained in a Georgian orthodox seminary and during WWII re-opened churches in the soviet union. it is said by some of his historians he was an atheist but never actually by him. hitler was a roman catholic and actually had a priest in his retinue at the reichstag before he committed suicide. actually, none of that has anything to do with much at all, since it is usually individuals or small groups who commit these atrocities and seldom have any clergy of their faith anything to do with it.
I'll plumb for agnostic please - we're all very nice reasonable people ;-)
at least you have seen it, many people simply follow gut reactions and look where that gets us?
and so do psychoses including those caused by the pressure of being the 'other' and very careful reading over the last few days would show/remind that racism, including anti-semiticism (how quickly change their 'masks') is rife and people like this young man are marginalised. of course, over the last few months sarkozy has been stealing le pen's clothes for that strategy. it does not make extreme wrong right, but if there is pressure from within doing this to a few people then it could happen again but next time without the madman having a track record. it is too easy to say drink, drugs, religion or whatever but somehow all of us have got to contribute to taking the world back from the brink...