I don’t see the tension. I would wholeheartedly support an organization that developed and promoted an understanding of Islamic theology compatible with liberal democracy and women’s rights, for example, or one that encouraged American Republicans to take global warming seriously. That doesn’t mean I support Islam or the Republican platform.
2 Likes
Because there are 1.6 billion Muslims in the world, and they’re going to be there regardless of the outcome of this campaign. They’re the ones who have to be convinced about the issues, and they are certainly not going to be persuaded by a Christian framing of them. If the mission of the organization is to convince Muslims to respect women’s rights and accept liberal democracy, then I do embrace their mission, since I think a world in which they’ve succeeded is better than a world in which they haven’t. Unlike your alternative case of the USSR and the US, the positives here greatly outweigh the negatives. I have no trouble thinking that some atheists would think the same about BioLogos.
2 Likes
Once again, Eddie, your ability (not to mention available free time) to exhaustively scrutinize the wording of a thirteen word casual comment is truly remarkable. It’s almost an art-form, really.
3 Likes
Except he didn’t even say that. He said, “very much in favour of BL’s mission” See, you’ve been talking about it so long, you started arguing with your own wording. 
I find it amusing.
2 Likes
I volunteer with a Christian ministry and I’ve noticed a lot of email from atheists who say in nearly those exact words “I am very much in favor of your organization’s goal”. As of yet, I’ve not noticed any of those who described themselves as atheists worry about distinguishing secular versus sacred “parts” of a mission.
This may be because atheists are so diverse. Some are anti-theists. Most are not. Some define their position as denying the existence of God but I think most would just say, “I am not aware of compelling evidence for God’s existence.” Some would even say, “Show me that evidence and perhaps I will become an atheist. I’m just not very optimistic.”
Perhaps Eddie knows more about what atheists think than I do. Very possible. I just dont understand how he can be sure that they couldn’t be “very much in favor” of some Christian organization when it has educational goals that the atheist likes, even if the Christian organization is based on a Christian worldview.
Not every atheist is obsessed with making sure everybody else is an atheist. Are they?
2 Likes
Perhaps there is something to be learned from that.
1 Like
I agree.
I will definitely give that some thought.
I keep thinking about Will Rogers. He had a very good attitude. An ideal to strive for.
1 Like
Even if you only visit rarely, I look forward to your contributions and welcome them.
I noticed that also. We all know the saying about apples and barrels.
I’ve liked reading many of the comments of Beaglelady and Christy. As with any forum, one has to skim for the pearls. But the non-pearls have their place and are often instructive in their own way.
1 Like
I think even Will Rogers would find his ideals tested if he had lived to see the Internet.
Cheers Leo, and thank you for the apology. No harm done at all–I think “I’ll take your word for it” says much. I’ll do the same re your blessing, and I am one atheist who interprets such blessings (or offers of prayer) as the kind and generous offerings they are (usually) intended to be.
Seeing your courtesy, here are a few more words about my atheism. I don’t know what the accepted labels currently are, but I take ‘agnostic’ to be an expression of one’s opinion about knowledge of (or knowability of) gods. I am an agnostic in that sense. However, I think that in lay parlance the term ‘agnostic’ is taken to mean something like ‘not quite an atheist’ or maybe ‘atheist lite’. I think that’s a misuse of the word ‘agnostic’, but more importantly that’s not an apt description of my stance. I don’t believe that there are gods. That makes me an atheist, and a pretty hard one. I have friends ranging from evangelical Christian to self-described “hard-core atheist,” and if one forced them onto some weird linear scale, I’d be far to one end of that scale. I really hate the label, and rarely use it verbally, but I’m an atheist.
We could go deeper into my psyche, and into yours, to discover what we mean by ‘believe’ or ‘know’ or ‘gods’, but we’re not going to do that for a few reasons, most of which should be obvious. And we needn’t go into why or how an atheist could be wholeheartedly behind the mission and efforts of BioLogos. That too should be obvious, especially for those who read the whole paragraph in which my single-sentence remark was embedded.
Thanks again for the blessing.
@Christy
Do you? I did laugh when I read this pearl from Eddie: ”I would much rather hear what Deb Haarsma has to say about Calvinism or what Kathryn Applegate has to say about the doctrines of her Presbyterian Church or what Karl Giberson has to say about the reliability of the Bible than spend time trying to parse a statement by Humeandroid." That’s funny, I’ll grant, but I think Eddie has poisoned the conversation here, and not just by engaging in unreflective self-contradiction. My simple statement of support for BL was met with an avalanche of verbiage seasoned with chilling military metaphors, grossly simplistic tribal labelling, overt projection of motive and character onto a single uncomplicated sentence and finally, taunting for “abandoning” the “discussion” when his screeds went unanswered for a day. Funny? Sure. Amusing? Not so much.
I think you have a problem here. I am glad it’s not mine to solve.
I am sorry. But I’m sure you’ve noticed that Christians are abused here also.
2 Likes
I agree! It’s both entertaining and educational on multiple levels.