[SynchroBlog] September 17th Synchroblog

[igneousquill at gmail.com]

I'm not sure why including atheists would be a problem, because as I
mentioned our topics don't have to revolve around why atheists don't
believe in any deities.

That said, fine.  Let's just include people of religious traditions
who accept the existence of a deity, deities or at least a spiritual
side of life.

Adam G.

On 9/3/08, Phil Wyman <pastorphil at salemgathering.com> wrote:
> Hey Matt,
>
> I have spoken with Hemant from Friendly Athiest, and we've shot e-
> mails back and forth a number of times - seemingly great guy.
>
> Apart from this point, here's my disagreement with the inclusion of
> atheism into and inter"faith" dialog.  The assumption of the dialog
> is that it is about faith.  If the inclusion of a Sam Harris type of
> atheist (note today's post on Friendly Atheist is about Sam
> Harris) ;-) brings the dialog to simple God vs. no god discussion in
> the post replies it has not become interfaith at all.  I think there
> is a place for blogs on the importance of our of worldviews in human
> interaction under another banner than inter"faith".
>
> I am not thinking of this as exclusionary to atheists, merely as
> being well defined.  If atheists want to be included in the dialog
> that's fine as long as there is an understanding that it is
> inter"faith" - a compilation of faith writings.  Thus no one is
> excluded.  But a serious pursuit of increasing atheist writings is
> best left for another SynchroBlog.  This is no different than the
> recent question of whether Neo-Pagan writings belonged in the
> original Christian SynchroBlog list.
>
> That's my thoughts, ;-)
> Phil
>
>
> On Sep 3, 2008, at 6:13 PM, matthew.stone at optusnet.com.au wrote:
>
>> I agree with Adam and would very much argue for the inclusion of
>> atheists ... provided they agree to some basic ground rules. I have
>> long been of the opinion that we play into atheist hands when we
>> treat them as a special belief system. If we exclude them that is
>> precisely what we would be doing. Why not have some fun and see how
>> they handle a level playing field? It would be sure to stimulare
>> conversation. We just need to find the sort that can hold their
>> tempers. I do have one atheist blogger in mind who seems to be able
>> to manage that - http://friendlyatheist.com. He's the eBay Atheist
>> that generated some global comment some time back. Admittedly some
>> of th people who comment on his site are angry but I have found
>> that he himself has some aptitude for interfaith.
>>
>> The basic ground rule I insist on in interfaith is "respect for
>> others". That does not preclude disagreement, or even criticism
>> (Erin I actually disagree with you there, if we're uncritical and
>> only emphasize the positives it can get wishy washy real quick)
>> just flaming and vilification and disrespectful attitudes. I have
>> been doing it for years with Pagans and Satanists and all sorts and
>> I find it works. You do have to be prepared to bump people who fail
>> to master the art of respectful disagreement though. So i think we
>> would need to set up a three strike clause or something.
>>
>> Matt
>
>


-- 
Adam G.
http://igneousquill.blogspot.com