Comment on: The Fundamentals of Fundamentalism

Bigthink — Wed, 16 Apr 2008 02:01:02 +0100

Any call to moderation is to be commended. Movement away form the certainties of dogma toward the contingent acceptance of matters of faith, tends to align moderate Christians with the level of certainty one might associate with science. This is good. People tend to be more circumspect in their prescription when there is uncertainty about the truth of their premises.

Jim Wallis deserves sympathy and support from moderate atheists. In an age of increasing dogma and extremism, it is important for moderates of all persuasions cooperate to ensure tolerance and commonsense.

RO

Comment on: The Fundamentals of Fundamentalism

Bigthink — Fri, 11 Apr 2008 05:36:13 +0100

How is this an answer though? 'Better religion' is a rather ambiguous answer. The ideas expressed concerning the cause of fundamentalism may be correct but what about some amount of thoughtful consideration on the subject? How do you impart this better religion on the fundamentalists? Won't this merely cause a more concentrated effort to repel this outside influence and bolster support of fundamentalist views in defense? Have you put no thought into the reaction that will surely follow any attempt at coercion into a new system of beliefs?

The immutability of religion is its most disastrous trait. The rise of fundamentalism is a byproduct of this fact. As a religion finds itself under assault, either by reason, moral re-evaluation, or another religion, adherents and leaders both will react by bolstering that same immutability and demanding unwavering dedication.

Bigthink - Feature Comments Feed

Comment on: The Fundamentals of Fundamentalism

Comment on: The Fundamentals of Fundamentalism