Collarspace Discussion Forums


Home  Login  Search 

RE: The Religions of Peace


View related threads: (in this forum | in all forums)

Logged in as: Guest
 
All Forums >> [Casual Banter] >> Off the Grid >> RE: The Religions of Peace Page: <<   < prev  1 2 [3] 4   next >   >>
Login
Message << Older Topic   Newer Topic >>
RE: The Religions of Peace - 7/19/2006 8:03:58 AM   
MistressLorelei


Posts: 997
Joined: 11/7/2005
Status: offline 		Most war is a result of prejudice, and things haven't changed much over time....

Our people are more worthy, the land is ours...

Our God is THE God....

Our Religion is the right religion....

And then we have our most recent war.... which used prejudice and played up fear in the US, as a scapegoat for acquiring oil and Saddam.  And Jesus has been turned into a Republican by our current administration

I find that most religions teach everything BUT peace.  Religion teaches 'what we believe is right, and what everyone else believes is wrong';...  how peaceful!  Then there are varying degrees about what individual religions do with regard to action against, or the treatment of, the evil non-followers.

(in reply to juliaoceania)
Profile   Post #: 41
RE: The Religions of Peace - 7/19/2006 12:41:43 PM   
fullofgrace


Posts: 395
Joined: 3/24/2006
From: fl, usa
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: juliaoceania

quote:

ORIGINAL: fullofgrace

i was under the impression buddhism probably promotes peace more than any other religion - because there is no excuse for war in it, whereas the holy books of christianity, judaism, and islam do have justifications for war. then again, buddhism still has its own religious conflicts, albeit nowhere near to the degree historically that christianity, judaism, and islam do.



There is the conflict in Sri Lanka which the participants are Buddhists. It is somewhat an ethnic conflict in which religion has been used as a partial justification for fighting.


hence the end of that paragraph: then again, buddhism still has its own religious conflicts, albeit nowhere near to the degree historically that christianity, judaism, and islam do.

there's also the new kadampa/dorje shugden controversy, over which at least one person if not more have been assassinated. i was simply stating that comparatively, these conflicts are fewer and further between, perhaps because buddhism (unlike christianity, judaism, and islam) does not justify war in any sense.


_____________________________

i have the kind of beauty that moves...

(in reply to juliaoceania)
Profile   Post #: 42
RE: The Religions of Peace - 7/19/2006 1:02:35 PM   
colchuck69


Posts: 7
Joined: 2/26/2006
Status: offline 		Judaism the mother of Christianity and Islam all in the middle east fighting over the same God! Earthlings read in their holy books that the world will be destroyed by fire and they damn well are going to prove that their scripture is true!!!

(in reply to fullofgrace)
Profile   Post #: 43
RE: The Religions of Peace - 7/19/2006 1:08:22 PM   
meatcleaver


Posts: 9030
Joined: 3/13/2006
Status: offline 		Well their god was always a spiteful, mean, vengeful god who wasn't beyond ordering genocide. It's all there in the scriptures. It's difficult to believe the scritures have been seen as anything other than an airport thriller with all its content of sex and violence.

(in reply to colchuck69)
Profile   Post #: 44
RE: The Religions of Peace - 7/19/2006 2:45:40 PM   
anthrosub


Posts: 843
Joined: 6/2/2004
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: CrappyDom

What I find amusing is that it is the people defending one faith over another that are interested in blame and the people who reject religion who are interested in reconciliation.


I think this observation goes back to what I said about how people vest themselves.  They have a very personal stake in what they've been conditioned to believe is the truth; so when something comes along that challenges it...conflict ensues.
 
On the other hand, people who think outside the box (book in this case) are less prone to get upset when something challenges their current view of things because they already have had the opportunity to see how it's all relative and temporal in the long run.
 
anthrosub

_____________________________

"It is easier to fool people than it is to convince them they have been fooled." - Mark Twain

"I am not young enough to know everything." - Oscar Wilde

(in reply to CrappyDom)
Profile   Post #: 45
RE: The Religions of Peace - 7/19/2006 7:49:56 PM   
Sinergy


Posts: 9383
Joined: 4/26/2004
Status: offline 		Could somebody please clarify for me which two largest religions on the planet are always fighting?

Is it Islam and Christianity, such as you see in the middle east?

Judaism and Islam, ditto.

Hinduism and Islam, such as you find in much of Eastern Europe, Pakistan, India, Sri Lanka, etc.

Hinduism and Buddhism, such as you find in much of South Asia?

Perhaps it is Christianity and Buddhism, although those two kinda got put on the back burner after Nixon turned Vietnam into a lifeless moonscape and the US decided to make 2 Koreas.

Islam and Buddhism, such as you see killing each other in vast droves in places like Indonesia and Malaysia?

Please clarify

Sinergy

_____________________________

"There is a fine line between clever and stupid"
David St. Hubbins "This Is Spinal Tap"

"Every so often you let a word or phrase out and you want to catch it and bring it back. You cant do that, it is gone, gone forever." J. Danforth Quayle


(in reply to NakedOnMyChain)
Profile   Post #: 46
RE: The Religions of Peace - 7/19/2006 8:04:55 PM   
Arpig


Posts: 9930
Joined: 1/3/2006
From: Increasingly further from reality
Status: offline
quote:

WWII?  Hitler decided to create a whole new world order (where have we heard that lately?)  He created a whole occult based Arian religion in which everyone had to adhere to be a “loyal” German.  He also created a common enemy, the Jews, to bind everyone together.


Arianism was a Christological heresey originally taught by Arius in Alexandria in the 3rd century. It taught that God-the-Son was not co-eternal with God-the-Father, and was therefore in someway subservient or inferior. The Arianists were finally defeated (i.e. they had all officially accepted the Nicene Creed in the 8th century). I was not aware that Hitler had any interest in such obscure theological questions as the nature of the Christ, but if you have any evidence to back up your claim, I would be very interested in seeing it, as this is news to me.

If however, you meant "Aryan" as opposed to "Arian", then this is indeed what I had mentioned in an earlier post (where it turns out I was incorrect in saying it, as the person I was replying to does indeed have a pretty good grasp on what she was saying, she just needed to clarify her meaning somewhat): People who don't know what they are talking about playing at comparative religion.


_____________________________

Big man! Pig Man!
Ha Ha...Charade you are!

Why do they leave out the letter b on "Garage Sale" signs?

CM's #1 All-Time Also-Ran


(in reply to LotusSong)
Profile   Post #: 47
RE: The Religions of Peace - 7/19/2006 8:06:54 PM   
YokosukaDOm


Posts: 1
Joined: 9/1/2005
Status: offline 		I'm a little late to this discussion, but I invoke Godwin. Argument over...

(in reply to Arpig)
Profile   Post #: 48
RE: The Religions of Peace - 7/19/2006 9:38:30 PM   
maybemaybenot


Posts: 2817
Joined: 9/22/2005
Status: offline 		TY, Arpig

                    mbmbn

_____________________________

Tolerance of evil is suicide.- NYC Firefighter

When tolerance is not reciprocated, tolerance becomes surrender.

(in reply to YokosukaDOm)
Profile   Post #: 49
RE: The Religions of Peace - 7/20/2006 1:55:08 AM   
Kedikat


Posts: 680
Joined: 4/20/2006
Status: offline 		You can fight and argue about anything you believe. Only reality wins out every time.

(in reply to FangsNfeet)
Profile   Post #: 50
RE: The Religions of Peace - 7/20/2006 6:51:16 AM   
Alumbrado


Posts: 5560
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Arpig

quote:

WWII?  Hitler decided to create a whole new world order (where have we heard that lately?)  He created a whole occult based Arian religion in which everyone had to adhere to be a “loyal” German.  He also created a common enemy, the Jews, to bind everyone together.


Arianism was a Christological heresey originally taught by Arius in Alexandria in the 3rd century. It taught that God-the-Son was not co-eternal with God-the-Father, and was therefore in someway subservient or inferior. The Arianists were finally defeated (i.e. they had all officially accepted the Nicene Creed in the 8th century). I was not aware that Hitler had any interest in such obscure theological questions as the nature of the Christ, but if you have any evidence to back up your claim, I would be very interested in seeing it, as this is news to me.

If however, you meant "Aryan" as opposed to "Arian", then this is indeed what I had mentioned in an earlier post (where it turns out I was incorrect in saying it, as the person I was replying to does indeed have a pretty good grasp on what she was saying, she just needed to clarify her meaning somewhat): People who don't know what they are talking about playing at comparative religion.



Or, they made a simple spelling error, and you are just showing us how you play at comparative religion, as well as your intellectual dishonesty at demanding they provide proof for a claim that you fabricated out of thin air.

Much like you not bothering to read what was actually said in the TG thread and criticizing everyone else for their reading comprehension.



Project much?

(in reply to Arpig)
Profile   Post #: 51
RE: The Religions of Peace - 7/20/2006 9:55:25 AM   
Arpig


Posts: 9930
Joined: 1/3/2006
From: Increasingly further from reality
Status: offline 		Seems once again you misread, in the Tg thread you misread what the other fellow wrote, and in this thread you misread what I actually wrote...ah well seems to be a habit of yours eh?

< Message edited by Arpig -- 7/20/2006 10:01:38 AM >

_____________________________

Big man! Pig Man!
Ha Ha...Charade you are!

Why do they leave out the letter b on "Garage Sale" signs?

CM's #1 All-Time Also-Ran


(in reply to Alumbrado)
Profile   Post #: 52
RE: The Religions of Peace - 7/21/2006 12:30:24 AM   
jojoluvr


Posts: 441
Joined: 4/10/2006
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: maybemaybenot

quote:

ORIGINAL: jojoluvr

i would have to disagree about christianity being "one" religion -- i disagree quite profoundly with many christians about the "core" beliefs.  while i recognize that they consider themselves christian as much as i do, it is too much of a stretch to see it as one faith.  some christians believe authority lies within the church; others believe it lies within the bible (just to name 2 options).  some christians focus on the work of the spirit; others focus on the god of creation.  some christians have a low christology (focus on jesus' humanity); other have a high christology (focus on his divinity).  there is an illusion that that christianity is one -- but it never has been really -- even before the 95 theses on the castle door.  the cultural practices and range of beliefs held by those who call themselves christian is vast....  those who try to make it one often really just want the rest of the christian world to jump on their bandwagon -- whatever it may be...certainly all christians use (or re-create, as you suggest about the quran for muslims) the bible to promote their own agenda, as we have for 2000 years....

i would say that the 3 major branches of judaism represent, for the most part, 3 different faiths as well -- the orthodox and the reformed are certainly worlds apart in what they believe, how they live, etc.  presenting islam as the only one that is fractured or self-contradictory is disingenuous at best...

jo


Maybe I was too vague in my earlier post. My use of the word core is that we all pretty much accept the Bible, as the handbook of our given religion. As Judiam does with the Torah. And in Christianity that Jesus is viewed as the savior. Yes, each sect/denomination may interpret/practice
differently. But at the end of the day there is no arguement on the sacredness of the Bible/Torah.  The disagreements come with interpretation/practice.
In contrast, Islam has  a big difference.
Muhammad is the prophet of that religion and within the different sects/tribes etc there is no disagreement. But a big difference is  in the succesion, which "fragments" things, IMO. Shi'ite Muslims reject the first three successors of Muhmmad and have taken the fourth succesor, Ali, Mohmmads son in law as the rightful successor. While Sunnis accept the first three, leaving Ali the fourth successor. Seems to me that if you have one prophet claiming it's successor x 3 and  some agree with the original Prophet and others reject and pick the fourth, there is a much bigger fragmentation than how a Catholic or Baptist practices their religion. Maybe it's just me.
I still maintain the issue of the differing tribes adds to the  mix, but that is my opinion. You have yours.
If you see me, or my words as disingenuous, so be it. The topic of Islam and the problems with in Islam itself is not something I created and has been studied for many years.
Part of the Middle East Peace process has been trying to unite the Arab/Muslim/Islamic world. The fact that this has been a tedious and exhausting project at best, proves to me that some of the problems lie within the Islamic world itself.

                     mbmbn


i made no attempt to say that islam doesn't have its factions -- it does.  but its factions aren't any greater or any lesser than the factions in other religions, including christianity and judaism.  after all, muslims everywhere believe "there is no god but god/allah, and muhammed is his prophet."  that's pretty much a core belief if i ever heard one.  and sure, there are definite differences there because of power and lines of succession, but not any more than there are in the christian church -- the early breaks between "gnostic" and "orthodox"; the later break between rome (roman catholic) and constantinople (eastern orthodox); and the split between catholic and protestant in the west -- plus the church in south india and the coptic church in egypt, to name a few, whose christian faiths are so far afield that the only thing they often have in common is a guy named jesus (much like islam has a guy named muhammed -- who is foundational even if not considered divine) -- and not all of the christians believe the same things about jesus.  yet the church has definitely been guilty of a good bit of warmongering in our 2000 years....i'm not sure we're not guilty of it now....(tv preachers calling for assassinations of world leaders, etc.)

and while some published authors may want to blame islam for the wars in the middle east, i don't think there's any more of a case for that than blaming christianity for the brutally bloody wars in germany between protestants and catholics in the 16? 17? century (my memory falters here) or the brutality in england after the death of henry viii.  as someone else mentioned here (sorry, i forgot who and i'm too lazy to look it up now), these wars are about power -- who has it and what they do to maintain it vs who wants it and what they'll do to get it.  religion, nationality, ethnicity, and other categories we assign ourselves and each other just get blamed for it.  not that religions are innocent of wrongdoing -- just that no one of them is more guilty (e.g., islam, according to your posts) than others (e.g., christianity and judaism).

in my experience, the muslims i know hope and/or pray for peace and reconciliation and an end to this madness right alongside the jews, christians, hindus, buddhists, taoists, pagans, agnostics and atheists (etc) i know and call friends....i count myself among the christians, although i am appalled at much of what is done in the name of jesus and/or the church.  at the same time, i am inspired by some things done in the name of jesus and the church as well.  it's all a mixed bag -- no easy answers such as islam is a warlike religion....my 2 cents, for what it's worth.....

shalom....salaam.....peace....be well....
jo





_____________________________

jojo




(in reply to maybemaybenot)
Profile   Post #: 53
RE: The Religions of Peace - 7/21/2006 3:50:41 PM   
maybemaybenot


Posts: 2817
Joined: 9/22/2005
Status: offline 		Jo:  I was not talking about differing factions of Islam. I was responding to a post by Level to me.

AS I tried to clarify in my post:

The core I was referring to was in the actual foundation or maybe origin would have been the appropriate term.. Christ and the 12 disciples. Christ as the  founder, so to speak, Disiples, his followers... not debated by any Christian denomintation vs Islam which has Muhammad as the founder, so to speak, and four successors..... debated between Sunni's with 4 succesors, and Shi'ites with one.

That is ALL I was saying. That the fracture is at the base of the of the two. There are teachings that Sunni's adhere to due to the succession, that Shi' ites do not acknowledge exist.

I am not saying Muslims are bad, Islam is bad, not saying my version of Christianity is the way and all other are doomed to hell or trying to shed any anti spirituality on any group. It happens to not be my style. All religions have some dirty laundry, some worse than others. So what?

What I said was factually correct. It is not an opinion. The opinion part is only that I see this as " one" reason Islam is a few "centuries behind others on the evolotionary scale".

My reply was to that one post by Level. I was not slamming anyones religious/spiritual practices, nor was I elevating another.

I have repeatedly posted on this site that my belief is one's religion is a personal relationship between them and their God, or what ever they choose to call it.

I too have good friends of many faiths, some of my family members work in the Middle East and some of their children have been raised there. Working for Arab Muslims. I have visited them and had wonderful exchanges with one of their Muslim employers. I myself, worked for an Arab couple here in Boston. One of my Dominats was a Jew, and we  had an interfaith household.. and so many more instances I could count off. Not the point. The point is I do not like being painted with a brush that says I am in some way prejudiced or against anyones religion. Those that know me here, know that.
Peace to you, and I hope this clears up  what the intent of my post was and lets you see a little more clearly what I was trying to say.
                mbmbn

< Message edited by maybemaybenot -- 7/21/2006 3:56:46 PM >

_____________________________

Tolerance of evil is suicide.- NYC Firefighter

When tolerance is not reciprocated, tolerance becomes surrender.

(in reply to jojoluvr)
Profile   Post #: 54
RE: The Religions of Peace - 7/21/2006 3:54:38 PM   
maybemaybenot


Posts: 2817
Joined: 9/22/2005
Status: offline 		duplicate posting

< Message edited by maybemaybenot -- 7/21/2006 3:55:45 PM >

_____________________________

Tolerance of evil is suicide.- NYC Firefighter

When tolerance is not reciprocated, tolerance becomes surrender.

(in reply to maybemaybenot)
Profile   Post #: 55
RE: The Religions of Peace - 7/21/2006 4:20:29 PM   
irishbynature


Posts: 551
Joined: 5/11/2006
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: FangsNfeet

Just how ironic is it that our worlds two largest religions that promote peace are constantly at war with each other?


True..and both are riddled with violent wars/history to prove one is stronger or better than the other...(Shrugs)


_____________________________


What seems nasty, painful, or evil, can become a source of beauty, joy, and strength, for those who have the vision to recognize it as such. Henry Miller


(in reply to FangsNfeet)
Profile   Post #: 56
RE: The Religions of Peace - 7/21/2006 9:30:55 PM   
popeye1250


Posts: 18104
Joined: 1/27/2006
From: New Hampshire
Status: offline 		I thought it was funny as hell when they rioted because of Cartoons in a Dutch newspaper!  Cartoons!!!
Now we know their "soft spot!"

(in reply to irishbynature)
Profile   Post #: 57
RE: The Religions of Peace - 7/22/2006 7:02:36 AM   
LadyAlexa


Posts: 141
Joined: 1/2/2005
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: LotusSong

If it weren't for religons, we wouldn't have wars.





ahhh not exactly.  Greed, power, sex are the more basic reasons not just religion.  We would still have wars.....and actually did for centuries before large organized religions.

_____________________________

Lady Alexa
[amber]

Submission is key not gender.

GLBT approved.

(in reply to LotusSong)
Profile   Post #: 58
RE: The Religions of Peace - 7/27/2006 6:20:03 AM   
LadyEllen


Posts: 10931
Joined: 6/30/2006
From: Stourport-England
Status: offline 		Hi All

Firstly to Arpig - excellent posts, and I only hope I can measure up as a student of comparative religion!

The only religion I have come across which comes even close to being a religion of peace is Tibetan Buddhism, but having said that and noting that they marched an army out to meet we British only to retire it since violence would ensue, its by no means certain that that is the case more recently what with the Chinese blocking most reporting from there.

I would guess that since religion is a human invention (ignoring possible divine inspiration) and is designed to define a society as well as to explain the cosmos and our presence in it, and that given such origins it has to deal with human experience, all religious scriptures have to deal with violence on some level. Equally, since religions are either tribal in nature (Judaism, Hinduism being examples) or arise from a small number of like minded people, they have to incorporate some degree of "them and us" within them, where "us" are right and "them" are ignorant foreigners or godless respectively. Then, since religious groups are rarely in the happy position where they are not threatened by "them" in some way, the religious group has to take an offensive stance towards "them" in order to protect its interests as a society defined by its religion.

Wars are caused by all sort of reasons. On the most basic level, wars are fought over resources, which can be land, water, minerals and anything else which the Earth has to offer which is in the hands of someone else who wont give it or trade it to us, or which is ours and threatened or desired by someone else. However, populations are also resources of course, as a means of deriving wealth from their labour or as recruits for our new and ambitiously expansive religion - this latter is something that Christianity and Islam have both been involved in.

Wars can also be fought because of religion of course - "saint" Olaf in Norway, Mohammed and his successors, the crusaders, the 30 years war et al. Religion in these cases was a direct cause of the wars, with the aims being to expand or protect the interests of one religious group over another, albeit that other resources were also won as part of that main aim. More recently we have had the quasi-religious nazi society as a perversion of christianity, desperately trying to expand its resources for the benefit of its originators. Whilst this was not aimed particularly at spreading an ideology to new recruits, it did partake to some degree in those benefits in "acceptable" populations wherever it ranged.

Then we have wars for resources which are not so much caused by religious difference, but in which religion is used as a means of assuring our population that "them" are evil so that "us" will fight them not as mere rivals but as the people of the very devil himself. naziism was particularly adept at this - turning Slavs into subhumans and communists into the agents of satan to ensure the kind of merciless inhumanity that would benefit the attack.

The paradox of course, is that true religions are all basically the same and say the same things; (NB naziism is not a religion!) - we are each to have respect for deity and respect for others and ourselves, for the reason that we are all One under God. That religion is then used as a reason or adjunct to war is therefore ridiculous.

I guess the problem though is that we are human, and take what we want from our various religions as it suits our human purposes at the time. If our human purpose is to make war for whatever reason, then because our religions incorporate division as part of their means of defining themselves, we can always find a divine mission to fulfil as an excuse for it. Neither is it a modern thing or the fault of any one religion, (much as I hate the church and would love to put all the blame on it!), or good/evil as a basis for a religion or the assertion of a single God in any religion - religions of all times, places and kinds have been the causes or adjuncts to conflicts.

So why have religion at all if it can be misused in such ways? Because in general its not the religions that are bad, but that the people who follow them, use them for their human purposes. Religion of some kind is a necessary part of our lives as it defines who we are and how we fit into our society - it doesnt need to be an established religion as religion is understood - it just needs to be a mutually agreed explanation of the cosmos that defines us a society; in the UK for instance we have a religion like this latter - it doesnt have a written scripture or priests, but its a worldview that the majority share and which so defines us and our society.

Religion is neither good nor bad - its a little like fire in that it can be used for warming a house and for destroying it. Established religions always preach how much good they have done in the world, (which they have), but generally dont like us to know that they have performed as much evil as good too, (which they also have). We cant live as a successful society without it in some form though, and we have to understand that neither is better than any other and that it will always be involved in everything we do, including warfare.

regards
E

(in reply to LadyAlexa)
Profile   Post #: 59
RE: The Religions of Peace - 7/27/2006 8:14:59 AM   
LotusSong


Posts: 6334
Joined: 7/2/2006
From: Domme Emeritus
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: maybemaybenot

quote:

ORIGINAL: LotusSong

If it weren't for religons, we wouldn't have wars.




How do you explain WWI, WWII, Korea, Viet Nam, the War of 1812, the Civil War ?

I am not even sure which two religions the OP is referring to.
Judiasm and Islam? Christianity and Islam ? In either of these cases, *Islam* is the common denomonator, and is it really Islam or is it radical fringes? Or is it rivaling factions of Islam? Or is it the long standing Islamic tribal infighting?

                    mbmbn


Ok, I agree in pqrt-  the orinetal s in war are more ther because of Nationalism. 

But this one in the middle east-  It's feuled by (notabout) my god can beat up your god.   George the Lesser gets on his podium and said this was a "Just" war.

"Just" do it like we want you to.

_____________________________

Life Lesson #1

I'm not your type.
I'm not inflatable.


(in reply to maybemaybenot)
Profile   Post #: 60
Page:   <<   < prev  1 2 [3] 4   next >   >>
All Forums >> [Casual Banter] >> Off the Grid >> RE: The Religions of Peace Page: <<   < prev  1 2 [3] 4   next >   >>
Jump to:





New Messages No New Messages
Hot Topic w/ New Messages Hot Topic w/o New Messages
Locked w/ New Messages Locked w/o New Messages
 Post New Thread
 Reply to Message
 Post New Poll
 Submit Vote
 Delete My Own Post
 Delete My Own Thread
 Rate Posts




Collarchat.com © 2025
Terms of Service Privacy Policy Spam Policy

0.105