<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Week in Review</title>
	<atom:link href="http://blog.emergingscholars.org/2009/07/week-in-review-3/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://blog.emergingscholars.org/2009/07/week-in-review-3/</link>
	<description>From InterVarsity's Emerging Scholars Network</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Tue, 09 Mar 2010 13:08:17 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.9.2</generator>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
		<item>
		<title>By: Mike Hickerson</title>
		<link>http://blog.emergingscholars.org/2009/07/week-in-review-3/comment-page-1/#comment-1287</link>
		<dc:creator>Mike Hickerson</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 06 Jul 2009 21:13:51 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blog.emergingscholars.org/?p=1127#comment-1287</guid>
		<description>Amy, I think I agree with you that &quot;postmoderns&quot; don&#039;t believe that all religions are true. For one, there are some religions which &quot;everyone&quot; agrees are false (or at least subjects of ridicule).  

In addition, most people I encounter know next to nothing about world religions, so they assume that other religions are more or less like whichever one they grew up with. On another blog, I was having a conversation in which Wright&#039;s book also came up - in that instance, the bloggers (who are atheists) were holding it up as a great example of thinking about religion.  Problem is, they admitted that they were very ignorant of world religions and what people around the globe and throughout history actually believe and practice.   They simply had to take Wright at his word about God&#039;s supposed &quot;evolution.&quot; 

As a wiser person than I once observed, many people think that religions are different on the surface, but the same down deep; in reality, the exact opposite is true - they are very similar on the surface (in terms of morality, clergy, prayer, etc.), but radically different from one another at the core.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Amy, I think I agree with you that &#8220;postmoderns&#8221; don&#8217;t believe that all religions are true. For one, there are some religions which &#8220;everyone&#8221; agrees are false (or at least subjects of ridicule).  </p>
<p>In addition, most people I encounter know next to nothing about world religions, so they assume that other religions are more or less like whichever one they grew up with. On another blog, I was having a conversation in which Wright&#8217;s book also came up &#8211; in that instance, the bloggers (who are atheists) were holding it up as a great example of thinking about religion.  Problem is, they admitted that they were very ignorant of world religions and what people around the globe and throughout history actually believe and practice.   They simply had to take Wright at his word about God&#8217;s supposed &#8220;evolution.&#8221; </p>
<p>As a wiser person than I once observed, many people think that religions are different on the surface, but the same down deep; in reality, the exact opposite is true &#8211; they are very similar on the surface (in terms of morality, clergy, prayer, etc.), but radically different from one another at the core.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Amy</title>
		<link>http://blog.emergingscholars.org/2009/07/week-in-review-3/comment-page-1/#comment-1286</link>
		<dc:creator>Amy</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 06 Jul 2009 20:07:14 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blog.emergingscholars.org/?p=1127#comment-1286</guid>
		<description>Re: &quot;The Evolution of God&quot;
My small group is reading a book about evangelism and postmodernism. It makes the repeated assertion that &quot;postmoderns&quot; like to say that they believe in all religions, because there is no such thing as absolute truth, only personal truth.  Maybe it&#039;s because I&#039;m a rational engineer, but I just don&#039;t think that&#039;s true. I think people say that they believe in all religions either because 
1) they&#039;re too lazy/noncommittal to want to even wade into religious thought, or 
2) they don&#039;t think it&#039;s possible to ever know if any of the religions are true.  So the next best thing is to ask if the religion is useful, and many people do think different religions are useful as a moral tool in society.  For some people this is an unconscious thought process, but it seems Robert Wright has fully embraced it.  

While I understand how easy it is to reduce religion to a moral toolbox.  But it reminds me of the parents who want to bring their child to church just because they want to teach their child good values.  That has always felt to me like such an empty gesture.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Re: &#8220;The Evolution of God&#8221;<br />
My small group is reading a book about evangelism and postmodernism. It makes the repeated assertion that &#8220;postmoderns&#8221; like to say that they believe in all religions, because there is no such thing as absolute truth, only personal truth.  Maybe it&#8217;s because I&#8217;m a rational engineer, but I just don&#8217;t think that&#8217;s true. I think people say that they believe in all religions either because<br />
1) they&#8217;re too lazy/noncommittal to want to even wade into religious thought, or<br />
2) they don&#8217;t think it&#8217;s possible to ever know if any of the religions are true.  So the next best thing is to ask if the religion is useful, and many people do think different religions are useful as a moral tool in society.  For some people this is an unconscious thought process, but it seems Robert Wright has fully embraced it.  </p>
<p>While I understand how easy it is to reduce religion to a moral toolbox.  But it reminds me of the parents who want to bring their child to church just because they want to teach their child good values.  That has always felt to me like such an empty gesture.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: PRT</title>
		<link>http://blog.emergingscholars.org/2009/07/week-in-review-3/comment-page-1/#comment-1231</link>
		<dc:creator>PRT</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 03 Jul 2009 13:53:39 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blog.emergingscholars.org/?p=1127#comment-1231</guid>
		<description>I have to admit, the description of the teaching program in the &quot;Bait and Switch&quot; article fills me with horror and disgust. I really hope that what &quot;Adams&quot; experienced is not the norm any more. I&#039;m a grad student who until very recently taught Freshman Comp, but my program does a really spectacular job teaching its TAs how to do their jobs.  And whoever designed the Writing Center policy at that University (only three students per course can be sent to the WC) deserves to be fired.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I have to admit, the description of the teaching program in the &#8220;Bait and Switch&#8221; article fills me with horror and disgust. I really hope that what &#8220;Adams&#8221; experienced is not the norm any more. I&#8217;m a grad student who until very recently taught Freshman Comp, but my program does a really spectacular job teaching its TAs how to do their jobs.  And whoever designed the Writing Center policy at that University (only three students per course can be sent to the WC) deserves to be fired.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
