You're welcome, Ms. Holman

A civil discussion of religious issues is both much needed these days and unfortunately very rare. Dialog on the differences and similarities of religions — and even differences within Christianity — are all too often just people talking past each other, not acknowledging the other person’s points, more intent on establishing their own points.

You say, “By not accepting the validity of the Christian religion, wouldn’t Mr. Monday, an apparent fundamental humanist, be a religious bigot?” This is a mistaken statement from the start. I do accept Christ and His teachings, and nothing I’ve said before should have indicated otherwise.

You call me a “fundamental humanist” — I don’t know what that means. I’ve heard of “secular humanist,” defined as “humanistic philosophy viewed as a nontheistic religion antagonistic to traditional religion.” I consider myself deeply religious, a member of my church for over 35 years — the last 10 years I served on the board of directors, until I retired to Fallbrook.

I’m pleased that we find common ground about all religions being vulnerable to manipulation. But, to extend that common ground we have to define “fundamentalism.” I take a dim view of fundamentalism (religious or otherwise) while you seem to embrace it. My small production company just released a DVD of Dr. Huston Smith, a leading Christian scholar on the World’s Religions, being interviewed on this very subject. It’s called “The Roots of Fundamentalism.” I would be happy to lend you a copy if you want to see it.

You mention belief in the inerrancy of the Bible. I see that, and the related belief of literalism, as a problem. There are the obvious issues of inerrancy — Old Testament says eye for an eye, New Testament says turn the other cheek, the thousands of changes from the various versions and translations of the bible, the addition of stories and conversations with Jesus hundreds of years after the early church established the canons (detailed in “Misquoting Jesus” by Bart Ehrman). I find these inconsistencies insignificant, but they do argue against inerrancy.

On my bookshelf I have scriptures from all the world’s religions. There’s not space here to list all the references to God’s grace being the key to salvation, but they are there. For instance, in the Ramakrishna tradition it is asked, “Who can earn God’s salvation?” It is through God’s grace alone that we are saved.

Jon Monday