Thoughts on Religion

[Redoxify]

I know religion is a very personal topic, offending a lot of people.
However alas, we are in a community of very educated people, who are able to verbally discuss Religion

[pi]

However alas, we are in a community of very educated people, who are able to verbally discuss Religion

History on AN would very very much suggest otherwise

Anywho, I was brought up in a moderately religious household, but I'd describe my beliefs as agnostic. Personally, I think religion segregates people (like we don't segregate people enough already?) and is ultimately, the source and/or the blame for many of the world's conflicts both past and present.

[slothpomba]

We will be watching this thread very closely. 110% zero tolerance and we won't hesitate close it at the first sign of trouble.

If you are going to say something controversial or that can be conceived as hurtful or hateful, at the very least back it up with some kind of decently thought out argumentation or evidence.

We have had bad experience in the past. People usually shout at each-other (uselessly) and are unnecessarily hurtful making no useful point. Prove us wrong this time guys :3

[Redoxify]

History on AN would very very much suggest otherwise

Anywho, I was brought up in a moderately religious household, but I'd describe my beliefs as agnostic. Personally, I think religion segregates people (like we don't segregate people enough already?) and is ultimately, the source and/or the blame for many of the world's conflicts both past and present.

I too was brought up in a religious household, where the good and bad paths I followed in life where determined by my religion. I respect religion in all forms, and would never shun anyone down for their beliefs. However I cannot stand the pushing of certain religions on other people, and the resulting consequences (death) that arise from bullies who are focused on a one way of thinking. If all religions praise peace, why cannot we as a global nation find peace? Is it the few who are ruining it for the rest of us?

[cosine]

Religion is not the blame for conflicts, I believe the main source of conflicts and war is the need for power and money. Think about this, who makes the weapons and equipment used for war? It's a selling point, at the end of the day humans make the weapons, and they kill each other with them, the only people who are benefitting are the major companies that are government-led.

$$ rules everything

Redoxify, you can never find world peace with humans. Face it, every era on our history has been magnified by a major conflict/war. In my opinion, if paper still holds value in our economy, then peace will never face this earth, on a global level.

[Redoxify]

Religion is not the blame for conflicts, I believe the main source of conflicts and war is the need for power and money. Think about this, who makes the weapons and equipment used for war? It's a selling point, at the end of the day humans make the weapons, and they kill each other with them, the only people who are benefitting are the major companies that are government-led.

$$ rules everything

Redoxify, you can never find world peace with humans. Face it, every era on our history has been magnified by a major conflict/war. In my opinion, if paper still holds value in our economy, then peace will never face this earth, on a global level.

I can understand your point, however in certain Middle Eastern countries such as Iraq, Terrorist groups like ISIS have money (billion dollar net worth). Their main objective is to push their religion down the throats of innocent people. Imagine you were given this ultimatum, either you choose to follow our way of thinking, or we take everything from you that you so dearly love

[slothpomba]

It would also be helpful if you had a specific point, question or issue you wish to resolve or argue over rather than an extremely general thread i think.

On my view, religion is as neutral a term as politics. It is a societal phenomenon that at its very heart, is a blank neutral slate.

Arguments that lump an extremely complex and heterogeneous (mixed) phenomena into a single bag, are very poor in my opinion. For example, those who say "religion is bad" are almost saying something akin to "black people are bad", in that they are unfairly and very simplistically lumping together things that often (but not always) should not be lumped together.

Rather, its not necessarily religion that is the problem as it is an outlet for our problems, the problems of humans and their minds. Sometimes, it very well does create or solve problems, a lot of the time though, it is just an outlet for our otherwise destructive and conflictive nature. If you consider countries that have huge atheist majorities, they still have so many of the problems every other country has. They still go to war, people still get murdered, people still discriminate on so many basis, including sexuality and so on.

If you remove religion, a lot of our problems will still exist or likewise re-manifest in another form. It is not hard to imagine. Consider the cold war was a conflict over capitalism vs communism, whilst religion was framed into this debate, the primary form of conflict was over power and political beliefs.

[cosine]

I can understand your point, however in certain Middle Eastern countries such as Iraq, Terrorist groups like ISIS have money (billion dollar net worth). Their main objective is to push their religion down the throats of innocent people. Imagine you were given this ultimatum, either you choose to follow our way of thinking, or we take everything from you that you so dearly love

Don't listen to the media so religiously. You do not know the inside story of what happens and their ideal reasons behind their actions.

 (Years ago) I had a relative living in a middle eastern country, and he was captured by rebels. They took him hostage and demanded hundreds of thousands of dollars from us, an amount that is considered a life saving. Obviously his family could not afford the money, and living across the world we were powerless. They beheaded him in the street and left him there. It's all about money my friend, the media portrays it as religion, but that's because they can keep reporting on it and baiting in more viewers and make more money. If it was purely based on religion, then ISIS would not steal their victims belongings and houses after they kill them, because they've already got funds, why need more?

100% agree with slothpomba here, it's all politics...

[Swagadaktal]

I can understand your point, however in certain Middle Eastern countries such as Iraq, Terrorist groups like ISIS have money (billion dollar net worth). Their main objective is to push their religion down the throats of innocent people. Imagine you were given this ultimatum, either you choose to follow our way of thinking, or we take everything from you that you so dearly love

No, this is a common misconception of what they're trying to do. They're not trying to convert others to their 'religion' - they're trying to expand their 'religion's' power. They want power and territory, not to convert others.

Groups like boko haram could be seen to try convert others -- so that's where the argument has some substance.

So the initial point that money and power is the source of conflict stands.

[Redoxify]

I guess you could say ISIS use the taking of peoples houses and things as showmanship, and a way of intimidating those who are yet to have faced their wrath. In saying that I also agree with what slothpomba is saying in that problems will manifest themselves in their own sense, regardless of religion.

In saying that, I would like to debate this question. All religions believe that their own religion is correct, and that they will be guaranteed  paradise etc according to their religion, however if two people both live morally equal lives but believe in different religions, what justifies that one should be granted peace?

[Redoxify]

No, this is a common misconception of what they're trying to do. They're not trying to convert others to their 'religion' - they're trying to expand their 'religion's' power. They want power and territory, not to convert others.

Groups like boko haram could be seen to try convert others -- so that's where the argument has some substance.

So the initial point that money and power is the source of conflict stands.

I would have to disagree. Growing up in a Middle Eastern household, where first hand experiences where had in countries like Iraq, a lot of people are given a choice, where joining those extremists is seen to them as great, and going against it is wrong. My parents had to run away from the inter-war stricken country, solely on their religious beliefs.

[cosine]

I would have to disagree. Growing up in a Middle Eastern household, where first hand experiences where had in countries like Iraq, a lot of people are given a choice, where joining those extremists is seen to them as great, and going against it is wrong. My parents had to run away from the inter-war stricken country, solely on their religious beliefs.

Boko haram have killed 500+ Muslims, despite the terrorist organisation being Islam-based. Why is it that alrhough being in the same religion, they are killing each other? Clearly my friend, it's far more bigger than just religion, it's politics, power, money and greed.

[slothpomba]

All religions believe that their own religion is correct, and that they will be guaranteed  paradise etc according to their religion, however if two people both live morally equal lives but believe in different religions, what justifies that one should be granted peace?

In the field of religious studies and philosophy of religion (which i have a fucking useless degree in), this is a very active question.

Broadly, there are three (maybe more) theories and views on the matter:

(1) Every religion is right and an equally correct path to salvation. Basically, all religions have good in them and all aim to solve problems of humanity or the human psyche. They are all equally (this equally is important) as valid and useful for achieving salvation/liberation/the ultimate end goal.

(2) Each religion is right and is a different path to salvation. This is often told in the form of the parable of the blind men and the elephant. Imagine ten blind men all feeling an elephant. One blind man grabs the trunk, he comes to believe an elephant is a long slender animal, like a snake. Another grabs the leg and thinks its all huge and stocky like a block. Another still feels the ears and thinks its like a large butterfly.

In this view, all religions hold a part of the truth, a unique part of the truth. Each lead to their own realisation of meaning or salvation according to their own systems. It's a matter of perception and culture, you can't really say either religion is better but it might not necessarily be true to say they are equal or the same.

(3) Only some (or one) religions are right and only some (or one) religion is the path to salvation/liberation/so on. This one is pretty self explanatory. Obviously, the above have some interesting philosophical pitfalls and implications. For instance, if you believe (1), all religions essentially do not need to be defined or differentiated, what makes them anything definable at all almost evaporates. On (2), is it really true to say all these religions do lead to salvation, even if the salvation are contradictory between them?

These things make 3 obviously attractive. Likewise, in that religion is a form of social cohesion and differentiation, it makes sense to create a "us" vs "them" dichotomy.

[Redoxify]

That is extremely interesting.

In reference to the first theory, where every religion is equally on the path to salvation. I believe there exists a flaw in this theory, as each religion has their own form salvation. For christians, there is heaven and hell. Jewish people do not believe in the after life. Buddhists believe in reincarnation. How can we all be on the path towards salvation, but see it differently (sorry if this is a very narrow view)

For the second theory we have different paths correct? but in saying that, some extremists believe that the murdering of innocent people in suicide killings is the pathway to salvation, other religions don't?

[pi]

Religion is not the blame for conflicts, I believe the main source of conflicts and war is the need for power and money.

But seriously, a good example is the conflict between India and Pakistan that has been going on since the Brtis packed their bags. Please convince me that religion, ie. Islam vs Hindu, has no part to play in that. Enlighten me. (and this is one of MANY examples from the last century alone)