Anglican Prayer Beads  Prayer Beads  Anglican Rosary Rosaries  Natural Soap  Handmade Soap

it seems strange to compare these 2 religions and their arguments on finer points, and neither of their arguments seem unreasonable to me,coming from each of the different faiths. the muslim faith is based so much on actions:prayer, alms, fasting that it would seem to be reasonable to argue the different ways to carry these actions out properly to please allah in the best way. in my experience, most christians argue over whether scripture is inspired by God...this seems like an important point to argue, or discuss, worthy of debate and question.

Our brothers and sisters in the Lutheran Church - Missouri Synod wen through a very similar battle in the mid 70's. It was also life-shaping for many of my peers in ministry; some of them define nearly all of their ministry through the lenses they developed as part of what was called "Seminex" - the seminary in exile. It, also, was very sad.

I just got group email from the Five Borough Bicycle Club, one leader responding to another amid accusations and spin.

The causes of infighting aren't religious. Religion is just another arena for it. It baffles me when religious people talk about these battles as though they're somehow different from the ones everybody deals with in the office every day. The prizes and penalties may be different--Bill in the next cubicle doesn't think my soul is at risk if I disagree with his color choices on a Powerpoint presentation, my family is not at risk of death if he convinces the rest of the office staff, and he's not going to make billions of tax-free dollars if he convinces the rest of the world--but everything else is the same.

You said you always wondered what it looks like from the outside. At least to this outsider, who does not speak for all the others, it looks like a lot of bickering over things that only matter to obsessive-compulsives. Then it looks like a lot of rationalization to sway others in their actions, if not in their hearts, using scripture as a drunk uses a lamppost. Then it looks like a bunch of people who have too much other stuff going on to take a stand against insanity, so they throw in with whoever's insanity most closely parallels their sanity.

I've come to respect some aspects of religion, and to separate my feelings about its historical harmfulness from my opinion of those who follow religious tenets, but I can't think of any other part of human nature that's been more horrible in its consequences than God is on our side.

Jonathan Swift nailed it centuries ago, and has not yet been bettered.

Lilliput and Blefescu - two nations embroiled in an endless war over whether boiled eggs should be eated starting at the pointy end of the round end. At the time he wrote, he was mirroring the argument over transubstantiation / consubstatiation.

Speaking *as* an outsider, I have to say that the response would be bewildered amusement if it weren't for the fact that these arguments lead to real-world pain, broken lives and even wars. At that point, amusement swiftly turns to anger.

To add the relevant Swift quote:

It is allowed on all hands, that the primitive way of breaking eggs before we eat them, was upon the larger end: but his present Majesty's grandfather, while he was a boy, going to eat an egg, and breaking it according to the ancient practice, happened to cut one of his fingers. Whereupon the Emperor his father published an edict, commanding all his subjects, upon great penalties, to break the smaller end of their eggs.

During the course of these troubles, the emperors of Blefuscu did frequently expostulate by their ambassadors, accusing us of making a schism in religion, by offending against a fundamental doctrine of our great prophet Lustrog, in the fifty­fourth chapter of the Brundecral (which is their Alcoran). This, however, is thought to be a mere strain upon the text: for their words are these; That all true believers shall break their eggs at the convenient end: and which is the convenient end, seems, in my humble opinion, to be left to every man's conscience, or at least in the power of the chief magistrate to determine.

rlp,

the title of this post is quite timely in light of ted haggard's struggle. christian preachers certainly are not infallible.

A few comments.
1. I lived in Pakistan for a while (6 months) and found it both strangely familiar and sadly depressing to discover that yes, the same long (and often obscure!) debates go on inside the Islamic faith. That also means, by the way, that not one group of people has won - contrary to the oh-so-balanced news coverage we get on Islam.
2. Well, I may be wrong, but I disagree that there is no similiarity between the two arguments. The Koran (Scripture!) is thoroughly debated. Anyway, it certainly felt as if the discussion were similiar.
3. I don't know about the outside (though frankly I've heard secular arguments that are JUST as stupid) but I know from this inside that pedantic debates about whether or not this theological point is right or wrong just tend to bore me. When I was younger and a philosophy undergrad I would weigh in, determined to prove I was right. Now I'm older (and, honestly, I think a little wiser) I've realised that a lot of time is wasted on the detail so people can avoid getting on with the fundamentals of faith. Perhaps it's an impatient attitude, but I always want to ask people to get on with following the (according to Jesus) two most important commandments.. you all know which I mean. I think that theological debate should be commenced when you've got some spare time, or when you've got those two commandments sussed!