From: Sean Saraq <sean_saraq-AT-environics.ca> Subject: RE: Greco-Roman Gods and the slave rebellion Date: Thu, 5 Nov 1998 10:35:31 -0500 Wayne, I agree with most of the comments in your post. The one remark I would make is that an aggressive tone doesn't either equal or forebode resentment. I'm not interested in Christianity, I find it in fantastically bad taste, but I am not preoccupied with imputing guilt to it, or even to spend very much time thinking about it; there are plenty of more engaging questions! Sean > -----Original Message----- > From: Wayne A. King [SMTP:kingwa-AT-a.crl.com] > Sent: Thursday, November 05, 1998 9:41 AM > To: nietzsche-AT-lists.village.virginia.edu > Subject: Re: Greco-Roman Gods and the slave rebellion > > Sean Saraq posted on Wednesday, November 04, 1998 10:09 AM > > > The overwhelming majority of humanity isn't and never was > >Judeo-Christian. Judeo-Christianity only accounts for about one > billion > >of the world's six billion people. > > > Sean, you are indeed correct. I didn't make it clear I was referring > only to the U.S. > > > It is true that Christianity is doing much better in the US than > >in Europe or Canada. A majority of Europeans and Canadians say they > are > >Christian, but the proportions are declining, while the proportions > >citing "no religion" are increasing. > > > > The fact that there is not only one "truth" only underlines the > >fact that some intrepretations are more noble, others more slavish, > and > >these are to be evaluated in terms of Life rather than otherworldly > >ideals. > > > Noble and slavish become matters of subjective personal > preference unless one claims some degree of objectivity in their > assessments. I see N as a great pluralist and I suspect just as > he rejected every "one and only way", there just might be more > than one way for others to realize the praiseworthy objective > of "evaluating in terms of Life." Despite my own basic accord with > your above assessment, I am still unwilling to rule alternative > assessments out as a viable possibility for others. Regardless, > it's not expression of *our* way which can appear unseemly, but > the underlying resentments it can forebode against *other* ways > if not delivered with a light touch. Even if one's objective is to > sink the Titanic, it's sometimes better to conceal one's icebergs > under the surface until the moment of impact. Even a mostly blind > captain likely will spot surface icebergs if they are ten times the > size > of his own ship. > > > I don't see any practical alternatives in terms of mass > >movements and am not interested in mass movements. > > > Okay. I was just checking. So would it be fair to say that if > the appeal of Zarathustra was never intended for the masses, > then to rebuke them for not finding Zarathustra appealing > would be somewhat like God's condemnation of savages > who had never had the opportunity of hearing the Word? > > Best regards from Hoot Owl Hollow, Georgia > Wayne A. King > > > > > --- from list nietzsche-AT-lists.village.virginia.edu --- --- from list nietzsche-AT-lists.village.virginia.edu ---
Display software: ArchTracker © Malgosia Askanas, 2000-2005