The claim that all religious goons are equal

The claim that all religions are essentially the same ignores what each faith actually asserts to be true about God, human nature, history, and salvation. In short, it is a view based on ignorance. Texas Senator-elect Talarico teaching 6th grade language arts at Rhodes Middle School in West San Antonio [source: Wikipedia] And yet, plenty of people are ignorant about religious traditions they do not share. This, in itself, is not offensive. What is offensive is to be told that one is blinded from seeing the whole truth because of one’s religious tradition by someone offering a view “from above” all religions. Because it is only “from above” that one could presume to look down upon “the circle” in which all religious believers sit and from that “higher perspective” lecture them on the unity they fail to see. Such a person is saying, in effect, “I can see what all you people below me in your individual religions fail to see. You have a partial view; whereas I have a view of the whole.” Since each religious tradition claims to have a holistic vision, the claim that there is a higher, more inclusive perspective that relativizes each religion cannot help but offend the devoted adherents of all of them. Those of us who have devoted our lives to a religious tradition can look at each other and understand the devotion other religious believers show in a way that those who lack that kind of devotion will never really understand or respect. As a Christian, I can respect Jews or Muslims or Confucians for the things in their religious traditions that overlap with mine. Similarly, a Jewish rabbi might look at me and say, “Well, at least he is devoted to the one God and to keeping the Ten Commandments.” I admire Confucians for the same reason I admire Stoics: because they commit themselves to living in accord with the cosmic order as best as they can understand it. Both also have an admirable devotion to developing the virtues. A devoted Confucian might recognize those same things in me. We might get together and discuss those virtues, while commiserating on the degree to which we both fall short of our goal. Neither of us could share any of that with someone who adopts the “view from above” and is devoted only to those things he chooses. Our devotion to a single religious tradition will likely seem to him “narrow” and unreasonable. His lack of devotion to any tradition not in accord with his own desires will likely strike most religious believers as unserious, if not essentially “irreligious.” The religious person has a deep-seated devotion to his or her religion. Each person in that circle of real religious believers has bet his life on the truth of his or her faith. Those who adopt the “view from above” presume that they can dismiss the truth claims of particular religions while appropriating whatever they happen to find attractive in them. At any point, this person can say, “I don’t like the Confucian thing anymore; I think I’ll do some Buddhist stuff for a while – at least until I see how I like it.” The devoted Confucian and Buddhist are likely to be offended that someone views what is essential to their lives as something that someone can put on and off like a coat – as it suits his “identity.” Some religious traditions have a place for fakirs; none of them has much tolerance for a faker. The “view from above” all religions is not a way of respecting all religions; it is a way of saying to all of them: “The things you people think are so fundamental and important, really aren’t. We adults know better.” iPhoneから送信