[SynchroBlog] Joseph - need your url too

Phil Wyman pastorphil at salemgathering.com
Thu Sep 4 20:11:37 BST 2008 

yep wrong joe - joe

On Sep 4, 2008, at 3:08 PM, Joe Miller wrote:

> Speranzella?
>
> I don't know who that is or how Many Joes are on the list.
>
> I am Joe (or J.R.) Miller.  My blog is More Than Cake.
>
> I hope that helps.
>
> ----------------------------------
> www.MoreThanCake.org
>
>
>
> On Sep 4, 2008, at 12:00 PM, Phil Wyman wrote:
>
>> do you want to go by MIller or Speranzella?
>> Phil
>>
>> that's my confusion
>>
>> On Sep 4, 2008, at 2:51 PM, Joe Miller wrote:
>>
>>> sure, here it is brother.
>>>
>>> ----------------------------------
>>> www.MoreThanCake.org
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> On Sep 4, 2008, at 11:48 AM, Phil Wyman wrote:
>>>
>>>> Hey Joe - send me your url.
>>>> Phil
>>>>
>>>> On Sep 4, 2008, at 2:36 PM, JOSEPH L SPERANZELLA wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> I'm in for the 17th and am of no opinion about the interfaith  
>>>>> idea except to expect trolls if we go forward.
>>>>>
>>>>> Peace,
>>>>> Joe
>>>>> Date: Thu, 4 Sep 2008 08:56:00 -0400
>>>>> From: igneousquill at gmail.com
>>>>> To: synchroblog at p2ptrust.org
>>>>> Subject: Re: [SynchroBlog] September 17th Synchroblog
>>>>>
>>>>> I've had some unpleasant run-ins with atheists online from time  
>>>>> to time, but then again I've had even worse experiences with  
>>>>> people of particular faith traditions, including fundamentalist  
>>>>> Protestants and militant converts to Orthodoxy.  That's a large  
>>>>> part of the reason why I avoid forums and discussion lists  
>>>>> now.  They generate a lot of heat but little light, generally  
>>>>> attracting people with a bone to pick.
>>>>>
>>>>> I can understand the concerns about including atheists in the  
>>>>> discussion, but I do believe their unbelief is a specific  
>>>>> religious viewpoint.  As I've mentioned, I think it's coming  
>>>>> down to a question of whether this interfaith synchroblog will  
>>>>> focus on discussing issues between faiths, or sharing  
>>>>> individual perspectives from different religious traditions on  
>>>>> a common topic.  It is also very apparent that there is a  
>>>>> question of how narrowly we are going to define "religious  
>>>>> tradition" or "faith."  If atheists are to be excluded, then we  
>>>>> are going to need to work how what the limits actually are.   
>>>>> Can agnostics join?  I assume not.  What about people who have  
>>>>> no specific belief in a deity or deities but who consider  
>>>>> themselves "spiritual"?  There are many forms of Buddhism that  
>>>>> include no specific doctrines regarding a deity, spirit/soul or  
>>>>> the afterlife.  Are they to be included?
>>>>>
>>>>> I'm not trying to be argumentative or insist on the inclusion  
>>>>> of atheists specifically, but I do believe that if there is to  
>>>>> be an "interfaith" synchroblog we need to know why we are doing  
>>>>> it and who can participate.
>>>>>
>>>>> Regards to all,
>>>>>
>>>>> Adam G.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> On 9/4/08, Phil Wyman <pastorphil at salemgathering.com> wrote:
>>>>> Hey Matt,
>>>>>
>>>>> I am not using the term "faith" as a synonym for belief, but  
>>>>> rather
>>>>> as a religious worldview, which is the context of interfaith, and
>>>>> even in this atheism is a non-religious worldview.
>>>>>
>>>>> As defined by your last paragraph and perhaps discontinuing the  
>>>>> term
>>>>> interfaith it would work well with even aggressive atheists.  I  
>>>>> have
>>>>> been in interfaith meetings which have been poorly defined,  
>>>>> only to
>>>>> discover people feeling disenfranchised, because they thought  
>>>>> it was
>>>>> going to be something else.
>>>>>
>>>>> Phil
>>>>>
>>>>> On Sep 4, 2008, at 12:37 AM, matthew.stone at optusnet.com.au wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> > Phil
>>>>> >
>>>>> > Well, in terms of the conversations being about "faith", I would
>>>>> > argue that is a very Christocentric assumption to begin with.  
>>>>> Few
>>>>> > traditions emphasize "faith" as much as Christianity. Judaism  
>>>>> and
>>>>> > "Pure Land" Buddhism and certain strands of "Bhakti" Hinduism  
>>>>> come
>>>>> > to mind, but not too many others.  So the very language of
>>>>> > "interfaith" is something I find highly problematic. I have  
>>>>> never
>>>>> > done the research but I am willing to bet money that the term
>>>>> > "interfaith" originated out of a country that was historically
>>>>> > influenced by Christendom. Suffice is to say, i don't think that
>>>>> > "faith" language is an issue just for Atheists.
>>>>> >
>>>>> > Now just to clarify, lest I be misheard, I am not arguing that
>>>>> > Atheists should have a priveleged role in the conversation  
>>>>> either,
>>>>> > much as they would like to assume that one is owed to them. I do
>>>>> > not think we should "seriously pursue" their concerns over and
>>>>> > above other concerns. All I would suggest is we be open to  
>>>>> offering
>>>>> > them a seat at one very large and very round table. To be  
>>>>> honest I
>>>>> > am really keen to see how cope in an open dialogue with  
>>>>> Buddhists.
>>>>> > I note that Dawkins, Harris and co. tend to flounder like  
>>>>> gulping
>>>>> > fish when forced to speak about Buddhism as a religion, when  
>>>>> forced
>>>>> > to engage pantheists as well as monotheists. To be honest I half
>>>>> > expect Atheists to self-exclude themselves from so open and
>>>>> > pluralistic a discussion.
>>>>> >
>>>>> > So yes, lets take care to define it well. It is not about  
>>>>> theism vs
>>>>> > atheism. Its more about (to be a little but cheeky here)  
>>>>> inviting
>>>>> > all theisms - monotheisms, pantheisms, atheisms and  
>>>>> polytheisms -
>>>>> > to converse over a broad range of topics in an atmosophere of
>>>>> > mutual respect towards mutual understanding.
>>>>> >
>>>>> > As for what topics, I think why do people suffer could be one  
>>>>> worth
>>>>> > starting with.
>>>>> >
>>>>> > Matt
>>>>> >
>>>>> >
>>>>> >
>>>>> >> 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
>>>>> >
>>>>> > _______________________________________________
>>>>> > SynchroBlog mailing list
>>>>> > SynchroBlog at p2ptrust.org
>>>>> > http://p2ptrust.org/mailman/listinfo/synchroblog_p2ptrust.org
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>> SynchroBlog mailing list
>>>>> SynchroBlog at p2ptrust.org
>>>>> http://p2ptrust.org/mailman/listinfo/synchroblog_p2ptrust.org
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> -- 
>>>>> Adam G.
>>>>> http://igneousquill.blogspot.com
>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>> SynchroBlog mailing list
>>>>> SynchroBlog at p2ptrust.org
>>>>> http://p2ptrust.org/mailman/listinfo/synchroblog_p2ptrust.org
>>>>
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> SynchroBlog mailing list
>>>> SynchroBlog at p2ptrust.org
>>>> http://p2ptrust.org/mailman/listinfo/synchroblog_p2ptrust.org
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> SynchroBlog mailing list
>>> SynchroBlog at p2ptrust.org
>>> http://p2ptrust.org/mailman/listinfo/synchroblog_p2ptrust.org
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> SynchroBlog mailing list
>> SynchroBlog at p2ptrust.org
>> http://p2ptrust.org/mailman/listinfo/synchroblog_p2ptrust.org
>
> _______________________________________________
> SynchroBlog mailing list
> SynchroBlog at p2ptrust.org
> http://p2ptrust.org/mailman/listinfo/synchroblog_p2ptrust.org

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://p2ptrust.org/pipermail/synchroblog_p2ptrust.org/attachments/20080904/5ad439ae/attachment-0001.html

More information about the SynchroBlog mailing list