Ray A wrote:The Dangers of Fundamentalism -- John Dominic Crossan. (You Tube, 4:55)
"Every religion must take responsibility for its fundamentalism" - Crossan.
As far as Heber C. Kimball's proposed solution to pressing social problems _ sounds good to me. Hang a few gays, prostitutes, child molesters, defrauders, and the like in the public square, and before too long you'll have produced a much more hospitable environment for making and raising families. Start with the apostates ... - "Wheat"
>
Some time ago, I wrote a series titled
Dangers of Religion. In that, I gave multiple links which demonstrated those dangers.
“Religion” does not “take responsibility” for anything. Religions rely on
truth by assertion. As a result, no rationale is required nor relevant in
religions. The many branches of various religions make different claims (assertions). Such claims are
true because a given individual or a given organization (denomination) asserts its claims are true.
There are elements of “fundamentalism” in all religious claims. There is no “responsibility.” Internal contradictions and contradictions with other religious views are dismissed or used to further claim validity of one religious perspective over another.
The video is verbal
double speak. It’s overly complex as it attempts to define and parse words and meaning of words. While the speaker makes some historical points, he begs the question of
religious claims which are inherently fundamentalist in perspective.
No religion is anything without strong elements of fundamentalism. It’s a requirement of religion. If one religious perspective is to distinguish itself from another perspective, it must embrace
fundamentalism at some level. It cannot be generally accepting of
all religions. It must claim exclusivity. In so doing, it is fundamentalist. It is in fundamentalism that any religious view claims
exclusivity and over-riding truth over
other religious constructions.
It is the claim to ultimate superiority. Absent that, any religion must acknowledge that it is but one among many religions. There is no power or strength in such an ecumenical soft religion.
JAK