Friday, January 18, 2008

Common Gound

In last night's religious exploration class we viewed the third and final episode in the series of the Jonathan Miller documentary, "Atheism: A Rough History of Disbelief". Lively discussion followed the film and something interesting came out of that discussion. As we were talking about the many atrocities that had been committed by various religious movements over the centuries (the Inquisition comes to mind for example) we also noted, as was brought out in the film, the first Atheist State (The USSR) had also committed horrible crimes against humanity as well. Bill suggested that the atrocities committed by religions were carried out by extremist individuals or groups and did not represent the Religion as a whole. Steve was pointing out that the USSR under Stalin also committed atrocities but that these were not done in the name of Atheism, per se, but rather because Stalin wanted to maintain his power. I think that there is some common gound here between believers and non believers, in that in each case, it was due to the excesses of individuals or smaller groups within the larger population that these horrible acts were committed. The end result was that also in each case, Religion and Atheism, the blame or the negative image was planted in the minds of many people who observed this from 'outside'. Perhaps this is one area in which believers and non believers can come together and agree. Common Gound.

3 comments:

Bettina Makley, aka Fairywebmother. said...

The saying "all things in moderation" comes to mind.

One thing that I have noticed, in this film, is that it appears that Mr. Miller does not differentiate between religion and spirituality. In my world, there is a huge difference. I have many of the same issues with religion that HE does and though I do not believe in a supreme being that is separate from us, I DO believe we are all connected and part it, whatever it is. I have seen/experienced too many synchronistic...even miraculous events to limit my thinking, only, to the Science we have uncovered, so far.

Bill said...

Absolutely common ground. In both cases the violence was about seizing control of masses and moving forward the self interest of the smaller few from within. Jesus had also noticed that the Church, as controlled by the smaller group within, was also committing atrocities and asserting undue and harmful control in the name of the religion. Jesus acted, which ultimately lead to his death. Jesus' answer was not however to walk away from the faith that had bound the faithful together, but rather to work from within to remind the people what was important in the faith in the first place. I don't believe Jesus had ever intended on starting a new religion.

Fly'sOintment said...

There are good and bad..(there is a huge gray area I'm leaving out of course for lack of current space.lol)... The bad will use any means necessary (religion, government, etc.) to get what they want. Its the religion thats often used, but not actually the problem.