I thought it was a bad idea. And not just because (as an atheist) the constant references to Christianity grates on my nerves.
If this was an Islamnic extremist act, and in light of suspicions of Islamic extremism, biblical references were extremely inapporpriate. Religion figures strongly into these tensions, and flaunting (some of) our religious beliefs can only serve to highlight and encourage these tensions. I can’t believe that Bush would act with so little tact.
Many Americans already see this as the Christians versus the Muslims. His use of biblical references in his speaches imply that the religion of the innocents is Christianity, and the religion of the enemy is other. That is an insult to all the peaceful non-Christians in the world.
And, on a less cosmic level, saying the 23rd psalm (the prayer that is most often recited at Christian funurals) in reference to the thousands killed was an act of uncaring and disrespect to the non-Christians innocents that were killed.
I know that religion can help people through times of tragety, but Bush did not have to make it a specific religion. He could have refered to prayer, which is something that even atheists sometimes find use for. He could refer to a higher power, which is pretty vague. I wouldn’t even mind him saying that his personal bible gives him personal comfort, and that he hopes that others can also find comfort in their beliefs. But, there is no excuse for Bush, a world leader, speaking for his nation by quoteing word for word a religious document that has so many implications at this time.
I think he should have done a spoken-word medley of passages from the Bible (Old and New testaments), a variety of the recovered Nag Hammadi texts and other apocrypha, the Talmud, the Koran, the Tao Teh Ching, the Dhammapada, various Upanishads, and ended with a barrage of syncretized Sufi poetry and Zen koans.
This morning I figured out another prayer I should have been sending up all along.
That if there is anyone out there in the world with hate in his/her heart and is contemplating dedicating themselves to a terrorism cause, that they’d have a change of heart.
I’m an atheist too, but I don’t see anything wrong with believers wanting to pray. Even if all it does is give them comfort, then it has a purpose. Anyway, if you don’t like it, do like I do. Whenever you hear “pray for…” simply replace the words mentally to something like “please keep… in your thoughts, and HOPE.”
I am all for everyone doing whatever (noviolence) helps them deal with this. While I have not been praying, I have certinly been doing my share of thinking and wondering.
I guess I was probably getting at the whole “problem of evil” debate, which I know has been done to death many times here and elsewhere.
Personally, I am unable to comprehend how I could seek guidance or peace through petitioning a being that either permitted or caused such an act.
Thank you for your views.
On Sunday I will attend an intentionally humanist UU church, where a minister (who is a phenomenal speaker) will present an all ages service addressing this. I am interested in hearing how he addresses it, absent mention/acknowedgement/acceptance of a necessary deity.
On the effectiveness of prayer: I find that whenever I pray, my prayers are answered. I pray for the inner strength to go on, I pray not to fall into despair, I pray not to fall into hatred or bigotry…
and I find myself strengthened.
Dinsdale, would you have been more comfortable if Bush had said something like, “Though I walk through the valley of the shadow of death, I fear no evil, for I am the biggest SOB in the valley!”?
[sub]Someone actually wrote that in my high school yearbook, believe it or not![/sub]
As for the “problem of evil”–you, as an atheist, probably already know the answer. Humans did this, not God, and each human is ultimately responsible for his/her own morality. Most people who believe in God also believe in human free will. You can think of prayer in this case as “focused hope” if you like, rather than an attempt to sway or placate a deity.
It would have been nice if Bush had been a bit more inclusive. At least he picked a quote from the Old Testament rather than the New Testament, but still–it is a quote very linked to Christianity. What did we expect, really? Bush had been very good at showing his Christian side all through his campaign. I guess we couldn’t really expect him to stop now that he is leading a nation of all faiths.
I think that this would have been best, given the circumstances, rather than actually quoting from the Bible itself.
As most SDers know, I’m an atheist also, and under normal circumstances, I get a little irate over PDRs (Public Displays of Religiousness), especially by politicians. But these are manifestly not normal circumstances. What’s happened in our country is way, way bigger than my own petty dislikes and prejudices.
So our Congress all sang “God Bless America”? Good for them. Frankly, a spontaneous outburst of our National Anthem, with its references to “bombs bursting in air,” might have been a little tacky. So GWB referred to God and the Bible in his speech? OK. Not my cup of tea, but all I care about is that the man is in charge and taking care of the situation.
I don’t pray, obviously, but I did have to take a mental health day yesterday, to help deal with the magnitude of all this. My office is only a few miles from the Pentagon, and I could have been in danger had the strike been less accurate. All day yesterday I felt disoriented, confused, burdened, and I helped to rid myself of those feelings through rest and relaxation. If prayer performs the same function for the faithful, all the better for them.
I didn’t get a chance to respond to some of the posts after my last comment. The city’s a mess and I haven’t had consistent internet access. Anyway, I just want to clear up a few things.
My point was that Bush (as leader of a democracy) should not be using religious quotes in his statements, especially not at a time like this. He is supposed to uniting this country . His personal religious views have absolutely no place in this situation. Sure, on his own time, he can pray and/or preach all he wants. But not on national TV. I’m sure that a non-religious quote would’ve spread the same message.
Now, if Bush absolutely HAD to use a religious quote, the only appropriate one would be from the Koran. That would’ve been an act of unification. So I wasn’t even thinking about this on a political level. It’s just something that a real leader would do. And I think that Clinton was a real leader. He would’ve made the current situation more comforting than Bush, who seems to be content on spreading cliches and catch phrases. I mean, can anyone tell me one thing that this fool has done to make the situation better? His (very few) speeches have absolutely no substance. At least allow Dick Cheney to make some comments so that people feel a sense of reasonable security. Bush is just making people more nervous.
And Wildest Bill, I really hope that you were joking in your comment. If you weren’t, you’re no better than a racist, if you aren’t one already (and I don’t throw around that word haphazardly). IMHO (of course).
250 million angry Americans are pretty sure they were just attacked by Muslims, and you want him to read from the Muslim scriptures? I fail to see how that could, in any meaningful way, be unifying. It would have been an act of stupidity, if anything. In any case, the passage he quoted is straight out of the Old Testament, which has meaning to Jews, Christians and Muslims.
Oh, heavens to Betsy . . . Clinton is such an opportunist he would not only have quoted from the Bible, he would have had a Bible in each hand and one balanced on top of his head, too.
I have seen impossible thing happen, I believe as the result of prayer. I have seen a case of Hodgekins disease just go away. I have seen people’s lives turn around. I believe it works. I have gone from a miserable women to a truly happy one, through prayer and prayer of my family.
If I can quote “The Song of Bernadette”- as near as I can remember it.
“For those who believe, no explanation is nesassary.
For those who do not believe, no explanation is possible”
Prayer is very important to me. It keeps me “up” and I feel as if I am helping people with it. Even if there is nothing else I can do. Especially if there is nothing else I can do. If you believe it just gives me a sense of being in control, so be it. You have your beliefs and I have mine. That is part of what makes the U.S. a great place to live.
Besides which, the 23rd Psalm is such a well-known and oft-quoted piece that it belongs in a category all its own.
I’ve read non-Christian works that likewise quote the Bible – and why not? The Bible is a well-known piece of literature, covering a multitude of topics. Sometimes, an atheist, Buddhist or Hindu may quote the Bible – not because they believe it’s God’s Word, but because they see a nugget of wisdom in its writings.
Heck, even if one does not believe in Jesus Christ, one can recognize the wisdom contained in the Psalms and the book of Proverbs. Heck, I’ve known people to quote the Talmud, even though they weren’t Jewish. Quoting a well-known Bible passage is not the same as sticking your tongue out at the non-Christian throngs.
Or at least quote a passage about Abraham. Jews and Moslems are both sons of Abraham, and Christians can trace there beliefs back to him as well.
Invoking religion after an attack inspired by religion seems kind of silly. Kind of like invoking the 2nd ammendment after Columbine.
I’m offended at the invokation of Christianity, to be sure. The same religion that is supposed to be giving us “comfort in prayer” also (particularly in the case of George W. Bush’s personal religion) dictates that many (if not most) of the people who died in the attacks have failed in judgment before God and are now burning in Hell. To me, that’s just repulsive.
So they’re all supposed to go to heaven just because they died this way? No offense intended, but you don’t know the fates of every victim who died. I’m sure there were many who will get to see heaven. I hate to be the one who has to say this, because it’s going to make me look terribly un sympathetic, but God isn’t going to give these people a free pass to heaven. It will depend on what happened in their lives, just like the rest of us.
No, I know I don’t, and I never said I did. My point is only that Christianity, rather than being a comfort here, should actually serve as a source of acute anxiety for friends and relatives of the deceased, for as you rightly point out, the Christian God doesn’t care how you died, just as long as you died loving Him.
For us non-Christians, it is horrible enough to know that so many lives have been so suddenly and pointlessly lost. To think that some of them might now be in eternal torment because they weren’t “in good with God” only adds insult to injury. To ask me to join in a national day of prayer to such a god is simply unfathomable.
Correct me if I am wrong, but fundamentalist Christians (like Bush) believe that getting into heaven is dependent on accepting Jesus as your personal savior, not in what good deeds you performed in life. In fact “deeds” vs “beliefs” is one of the difference between Protestants and Catholics.
Wouldn’t fundamentalists think that Jews, Moslems, and other non-Chritians would not go to heaven, while a serial rapist who is born again would?
I didn’t say anything about deeds. I meant accepting Jesus. I can’t speak for God, as far as saying who is accepted into Heaven. In the New Testament, however, it does give some insight into the question about the serial rapist. Jesus says that if you’ve TRULY repented and asked for forgiveness and MEAN IT and live by the Bible, then you will be accepted by God. That doesn’t mean nothing bad will ever happen to you again. Do you know the story of Paul the disciple who persecuted Christians and actively sought out to kill them, and then met Jesus and completely changed his outlook? He became one of the greatest Christian teachers of all time. He never denied that he had done horrible things in his life, and he also knew that because he had done what Jesus told him, that it wouldn’t matter when it came time for his judgement. I know not everybody will agree with me, and if anybody can help me out, I would appreciate it.
I interpreted “what happened in their lives” as their deeds, otherwise you could have said what they believed in. Also, why do you think that getting in to heaven requires “living by the bible”. That also implies deeds. I read the NT as saying that all that is required is accepting Jesus.
