Many are “very keen on understanding the complexities of philosophies, and the simplicity of religion” – @TariqRamadan in same debate

“Tell me what you read and I will know what is in your mind, not what is in the text” – @TariqRamadan in debate with Hitchens

We don’t keep on insisting that the character at the beginning , before redemption, is the “real character”. That is to ignore the story

One only has to look at stories about people of questionable character and morality becoming better persons to understand journey of faith.

BTW, I’m watching Hitchens/Ramadan debate “Is Islam a Religion of Peace?” video http://t.co/WkvkILWTMm , prompting my last few posts

Tedious, over and over, Hitchens described fundamentalisms as the norm of religious thought. Glosses over idea of “the way is narrow”

The sociological poverty of the New Atheist claim that religion cannot lead to peace, since it necessarily adopts the “perfect book” notion

Don’t POLITICS produce totalitarianisms and fundamentalisms and “unchallengable” legalisms? Should we then blame “politics” in general?

Why do these people simply proceed with characterizing religions with their most fundamentalist and intolerant varities? Cuz they insist.

Hitchens questions idea of a “perfect book”. So do I. Again, fundamentlism, and for me, Bibliolatry. Idolatry of a book over a life.

Hitchens and New Atheists just auto-insist , endlessly, that “Islam” or “Christianity” inherently resist questioning. Again, fundamentalism