Is religion more important than peace, or is peace the purpose of religion?

[Independent]

American Christians Praying for Gaza’s Jewish Community
12:49 Apr 11, '04 / 20 Nisan 5764
http://www.israelnationalnews.com/news.php3?id=60734

(IsraelNN.com) Herbert Zweibon, Chairman of Americans For a Safe Israel/AFSI, has turned to the Christian Evangelical community who number in the tens of millions in the US, and considered to be one of President Bush’s core constituencies, to institute a “Pray for Gaza Day.” Zweibon notes, “Churches across the country will observe a day of prayer for Gaza before April 14, in anticipation of Prime Minister Sharon’s visit to the White House. It is their hope to prevent the surrender of 21 Jewish communities in Gaza to the terrorists who are now in the area. In addition, all Bible believing Christians and Jews recognize that a give away of Holy Land is a violation of G-d’s Covenant with the Jewish people. References to Joshua 13:1-3, and Judges 1:18, are cited as specifically naming Gaza as part of the biblical entitlement.”

Zweibon continues, “There are also historic, strategic and moral reasons for holding onto Gaza. The 1967 US Joint Chiefs of Staff report, which has never been revised, declared Gaza a strategic requirement for Israel’s defense. President Bush’s March 19 assertion that “Any sign of weakness or retreat simply validates terrorist violence, and invites more violence for all nations” would be negated if Israel would withdraw from Gaza. America’s war on terror in Iraq would become more difficult and dangerous as we discover that terrorists by any name are all the same. This is borne out in the words of Moqtada al-Sadr who told his followers: ‘I am the striking arm for Hizbullah and Hamas in Iraq because the fate of Iraq and Palestine is the same.”

Quoting Pat Robertson in his address at the Herzliya Conference last December, Zweibon echoes Robertson’s pleas to the Israelis, “Please don’t commit national suicide…The slogan ‘land for peace’ is a cruel chimera. The Sinai was given up. Did that bring lasting peace? No. Southern Lebanon was given up. Did that bring lasting peace? No. The world’s Christians ask that you do not give away the treasured symbols of your spiritual patrimony… Those political leaders who…dismiss the spiritual dimension of Israel’s existence will find that they receive the mess of pottage of Esau rather than the inheritance of Jacob.”

[cpwill]

Is religion more important than peace, or is peace the purpose of religion?

yes.:)

[Independent]

yes.:)

Good answer. :)

[Malone1234]

Power and control are the goals of religion.

Peace is the goal of a number of theologies.

[osigvardsson]

I've always been a fan of Voltaire, and there is a great quote from him on this subject (i'm writing it from memory so i can't guarantee that its correct word by word, but this is what he said):

"If there ais one religion in a country there will be dictatorship. If there are two religions the people cut eachothers throats. Only if there are 20 religions in one country there can be peace"

Very few religions have peace as the highest moral or standard (technically Jesus did say to turn the other cheek, but then again there is the crusades, the inquisition, KKK, etc.) For peace to persist i belive modern systems of belief have to be changed and accept eachother. Also, I have no problem with peoples beliefs, but I hate, I absolutly hate when governments are influenced by religion (and i'm not just taking about the middle east and islam, christianity does that to. Ever noticed how every president ends his speechs with "God Bless America?")

BTW Sorry about the bad english

[cpwill]

:D when voltaire was on his deathbed, a priest was brought in who asked him to renounce Satan.

his reply?

"Now, now, my good man, this is no time to be making enemies."

[skibum8]

I've always been a fan of Voltaire, and there is a great quote from him on this subject (i'm writing it from memory so i can't guarantee that its correct word by word, but this is what he said):

"If there ais one religion in a country there will be dictatorship. If there are two religions the people cut eachothers throats. Only if there are 20 religions in one country there can be peace"

Very few religions have peace as the highest moral or standard (technically Jesus did say to turn the other cheek, but then again there is the crusades, the inquisition, KKK, etc.) For peace to persist i belive modern systems of belief have to be changed and accept eachother. Also, I have no problem with peoples beliefs, but I hate, I absolutly hate when governments are influenced by religion (and i'm not just taking about the middle east and islam, christianity does that to. Ever noticed how every president ends his speechs with "God Bless America?")

BTW Sorry about the bad english

Lets see Hitler, Stalin and Mao. None influenced by religion. All of their nations couldn't have been worse off if they had been. Secularism is just as bad if not worse than religion. What exactly is peace? In the 1850's in America there was peace ie the absence of war yet we had slevery. Then there was a civil war to end slavery, while slavery existed under peace. I submit that in this case war was preferable and more moral than peace.

[JustinH]

Lets see Hitler, Stalin and Mao. None influenced by religion. All of their nations couldn't have been worse off if they had been. Secularism is just as bad if not worse than religion. What exactly is peace? In the 1850's in America there was peace ie the absence of war yet we had slevery. Then there was a civil war to end slavery, while slavery existed under peace. I submit that in this case war was preferable and more moral than peace.

Your wrong, Hitler thought he was doing "God's" work by ridding the world of the "imperfect" people.

The Spanish Inquisition
The Crusades
The Thirty Years War
The English Civil War
The War of the Three Henries
Huguenot Wars:
The First War/Massacre at Vassy (1562-1563)
The Second War (1567-1568)
The Third War (1568-1570)
The Fourth War (1572-1573)
The Fifth War (1576)
The Sixth War (1577)
The Seventh War/The Lovers War (1580)
The St. Bartholomew's Day Massacre
The Wars of the League

As you can see, this is just a few religious wars in history.

[earth]

Is religion more important than peace, or is peace the purpose of religion?

I'd say neither. I think faith is more important that religion and I think that understanding is the purpose of peace.

[Slipped Mickey]

Peace may very well be the condition of the absence of religion. What religion is God?

[Texsand]

Lets see Hitler, Stalin and Mao. None influenced by religion. All of their nations couldn't have been worse off if they had been. Secularism is just as bad if not worse than religion. What exactly is peace? In the 1850's in America there was peace ie the absence of war yet we had slevery. Then there was a civil war to end slavery, while slavery existed under peace. I submit that in this case war was preferable and more moral than peace.

Hitler was raised in the Catholic faith, Stalin and Mao I'd be my life were both raised in the orthodox faiths of their regions. In the 1850's we were in the process of committing genocide of Native Americans. The Civil War had nothing to do with slavery but in preserving the Union. The Emancipation Proclamation wasn't issued until 1863, one year before the end of the war. The move was a strategic one to keep Southerners from conscripting their slaves into the Confederate armies. Actually the more I see of religious people the more I'm convinced that religion is quite possibly the worst evil on the earth.

As for Israel if you want to see what true Judaism is then this website is ideal.True Judaism (http://www.nkusa.org/activities/index.cfm) This website also makes the teachings of Jesus make much more sense.

Zionism is about the worst thing I've ever witnessed. Sharon is doing to the Palestinians the same thing Hitler did to the German Jews. Let's see if all the European descended caucasians left the US and returned to their repsective countries in Europe for 2000 years and then came back to reclaim the land I rather imagine the Natives would again fight.

[Hydrok]

Your wrong, Hitler thought he was doing "God's" work by ridding the world of the "imperfect" people.

The Spanish Inquisition
The Crusades
The Thirty Years War
The English Civil War
The War of the Three Henries
Huguenot Wars:
The First War/Massacre at Vassy (1562-1563)
The Second War (1567-1568)
The Third War (1568-1570)
The Fourth War (1572-1573)
The Fifth War (1576)
The Sixth War (1577)
The Seventh War/The Lovers War (1580)
The St. Bartholomew's Day Massacre
The Wars of the League

As you can see, this is just a few religious wars in history.



the 100 years war

[Distant]

I believe that religion tries to institute the abscence of peace and reformations by declaring that peace can simply be achieved all under one religion. That in itself I believe is the flaw for every religion out there. Suppossedly Jesus came to earth to help prepare or punish the men for sinning, even going so far as die on the cross. Later Muhammed (however you spell his name) came in the same form to abide and correct what Jesus couldn't do [this is a personal belief.] In the abscence of finding holy sactity, rules were later created on how to live your life, with God, all while maintaining the peaceful way of life and thoughts that would come from them. In the end, religion will probably never leave this earth again, and we will have to settle for the consequences of it, for religion will be behind us and support the act of peace through its belief.

Oh, and the Emancipation Proclamation was also a way to keep the British from joining the Confederate Side. Knowing that the British had already banned slavery, the people would not stand to protect it.

[Zohaib]

Religion is definitely not more important than peace. People tend to rely on religion for peace. They hide behind it and ask Jesus or Muhammad and ask what would do? Peace may be taught through religion, however each religion has a different version of peace. In Islam, in very extreme cases, it is necessary to have Jihad in order to create peace. Some people might say this is extreme, such as I, to have a "holy" war to solve a problem.

[Duo_Maxwell]

Organized Religion has more blood on its hands then just about everything except Nationalism.

WWI was partially because of religion. Kaiser was afraid of the dissolvment of the Austria-Hungrarian empire, which would flood Germany with 15 million catholics, where Germany was predomiantly Protestant, starting a religious civil war, thus this helped push the blank check.

Peace is by no way the purpose of organized religion.

Peace without meaning is worthless.

[Distant]

Peace without meaning is worthless.

Not necassarily. Peace in itself is good, don't you agree? Whether or not peace pertains to any real subject or distinct personal view, as long as no one is harmed or takes any pain into their mind (or body) wouldn't that be better than death always being around us?

Though are you considering the fact that for true peace, everyone must believe in the same thing and must be willing to put in the effort to keep the concept going and not turn down, that everyone must abide by the rules set upon them whether it be through actual law or personal moral? In connection to my last post, peace can simply be obtained and its better than warfare of any kind, though the awknowledgement that it has faults will always be out there.

I just don't see exactly what you mean with what you posted, because truly peace is better than war, even if ideals conflict.

[marv]

All animate creatures pass through four broadly defined stages; infancy, adolescence, adult and senescence.

Human religeosity is our adolescence. We'll grow up - if we can survive our teen millenaries without killing each other.

[Fasdf]

The 'adult' stage might be imagineable, but what is the 'senescence' stage exactly?

[MikeD4o7]

All animate creatures pass through four broadly defined stages; infancy, adolescence, adult and senescence.


Hinduism? I know that's how some/most? sects of hinduism break up life into 4 primary stages... each with it's own set of goals and values.

[Chelle]

Maybe this is pessimistic of me.. or maybe it's the lack of religion in my upbringing.. :shrug: But it seems that because of religion, we as human beings can never have peace.

How many people have died for their religious beliefs... because someone else thought that their religion was right, and the other was wrong?

I just have to wonder sometimes... 'what if there wasn't any form of religion'? Would there then... be anything to fight over? :confused:


Chelle

[Toby]

Maybe this is pessimistic of me.. or maybe it's the lack of religion in my upbringing.. :shrug: But it seems that because of religion, we as human beings can never have peace.

How many people have died for their religious beliefs... because someone else thought that their religion was right, and the other was wrong?

I just have to wonder sometimes... 'what if there wasn't any form of religion'? Would there then... be anything to fight over? :confused:


Chelle

Yes, politics,which to some people IS their religion. ;)

[MikeD4o7]

Maybe this is pessimistic of me.. or maybe it's the lack of religion in my upbringing.. But it seems that because of religion, we as human beings can never have peace.

How many people have died for their religious beliefs... because someone else thought that their religion was right, and the other was wrong?

I just have to wonder sometimes... 'what if there wasn't any form of religion'? Would there then... be anything to fight over?


Chelle


It depends on how you define religion, but I agree that as long as there are groups of people in this world that believe they are the chosen ones who are favored by an ultimate power above all of those who believe differently, it will be difficult for there to be peace. That's not to say that religion is the cause of all wars, or that eliminating religion would bring everlasting peace... but it is the case that religion has always and continues to be the cause of some wars... and is usually one of the main things that's used to drum up support for them.

[liberalpuppet]

Your wrong, Hitler thought he was doing "God's" work by ridding the world of the "imperfect" people.

The Spanish Inquisition
The Crusades
The Thirty Years War
The English Civil War
The War of the Three Henries
Huguenot Wars:
The First War/Massacre at Vassy (1562-1563)
The Second War (1567-1568)
The Third War (1568-1570)
The Fourth War (1572-1573)
The Fifth War (1576)
The Sixth War (1577)
The Seventh War/The Lovers War (1580)
The St. Bartholomew's Day Massacre
The Wars of the League

As you can see, this is just a few religious wars in history.

If you think any of those were simply started by the elite as doing God's work, and couldn't possibly be a little more complicated (like lets say for power or wealth or unification of provinces or...the list goes on) then I think you should do a little bit of research on the subject.

"This land which you inhabit is too small for your large population and it scarcely provides enough food for its farmers. That is why you murder…why you wage war, and why often you die fighting…" -Pope Urban II as documented by Robert the Monk in explaining his rationale for launching the first crusade.

Do not generalize the dynamics of these complex conflicts by blaming them entirely on religion.

[Duo_Maxwell]

wow, haven't been here in a while.

Peace in itself is good, don't you agree?

Not if you have to kill everyone or sacrifice everything to get it.

as long as no one is harmed or takes any pain into their mind (or body) wouldn't that be better than death always being around us?

Given that context yes, but you'd be hard pressed to get that.

Though are...personal moral

You could say that. But I was more along the lines that if peace is only achieved through the sacrifice of prinicpals and beliefs, peace is worthless.

because truly peace is better than war, even if ideals conflict.

depends on how that peace is achieved. Unwilling peace is questionable, but of course voluntary peace by all parties is the most appealing.

[DRMIZER]

We forgot the present war.

[barciad]

"Peace on earth and goodwill to all men", should be the aim of any religion, yet, time and time again it is misapproriated by those who take a message of peace and turn it into a cause for war. An eariler list gave the odd example, yet their are so many. I would say "when will we ever learn", yet I feel that we never will. Sorry to sound so pessermistic on this one, but history has given me quite the life-lesson. That is why I have an ingrained mistrust of ANY organised religion, the message, corrupted by man and his weaknesses will be lost somewhere along the line. That is something you can be sure of.

[Triple_R]

Chelle - Of course there would still be things to fight over... territory, political ideology, and many other things. Also, instead of eliminating religion, why not simply eliminate all religions except ONE... and eliminate atheism as well. You'd have the same effect of everyone sharing the same belief, Chelle. I don't think that atheism should be let off the hook here. I really don't.

[Chelle]

That's not what I'm saying here. I was simply posing a question in hopes that someone would be able to answer me as far as... why in this day and age, do some people of one religious faith find it necessary to ram-jam their beliefs down the throats of other people that hold different beliefs. And if they did not comply... then they'd be killed.

I said nothing about atheism or letting anyone off the hook, nor did I state that I believed that religion should be 'done away' with.


Chelle

[Triple_R]

Chelle - Ask the funadmentalist Muslims who threaten such warfare.
As for why people of most faiths prosetlyze... what is more important than the human soul, Chelle? According to my own faith, the only Way to Heaven is through Jesus... thus, is it not logical of me to pursue the salvation of others, as long as I do so in a respectful, and courteous, manner? Should I allow unsaved souls to miss out on Heaven with out the slightest act on my part?

[MikeD4o7]

Chelle - Of course there would still be things to fight over... territory, political ideology, and many other things. Also, instead of eliminating religion, why not simply eliminate all religions except ONE... and eliminate atheism as well. You'd have the same effect of everyone sharing the same belief, Chelle. I don't think that atheism should be let off the hook here. I really don't.


Atheism isn't a belief... it's the lack of it. The best analogy I can think of here is that what you're saying is the equivalent to saying that tensions between fans of various sports teams should also be blamed on those who don't like sports.

[MikeD4o7]

Chelle - Ask the funadmentalist Muslims who threaten such warfare.
As for why people of most faiths prosetlyze... what is more important than the human soul, Chelle? According to my own faith, the only Way to Heaven is through Jesus... thus, is it not logical of me to pursue the salvation of others, as long as I do so in a respectful, and courteous, manner? Should I allow unsaved souls to miss out on Heaven with out the slightest act on my part?


Sure, as long as you can respect that there are those that believe that you're wasting your life by devoting it to faith...and those people may also be inclined to courteously and respectfully help you. :)

[Triple_R]

Mike - I disagree. Atheism is a belief - a belief that mankind came into existence through pure chance. This belief sets it apart from all religious faiths - but it also sets it against such faiths.

How would I be helped by losing my faith? Studies have shown that religious people tend to be happier than non-religious people...

[Triple_R]

In fairness, however, I think that AGNOSITICISM would fit into your sports fan vs. non sports fan analogy. It could be argued that agnosticism is the default position.

[MikeD4o7]

Mike - I disagree. Atheism is a belief - a belief that mankind came into existence through pure chance. This belief sets it apart from all religious faiths - but it also sets it against such faiths.

How would I be helped by losing my faith? Studies have shown that religious people tend to be happier than non-religious people...


Atheism doesn't necessarily dictate that life human life came about by coincidence... atheism is simply not believing in a supernatural creator entity. It just happens to be that the scientific community leans in that direction, and most atheists are strong supporters of the scientific method.

How you may possibly be helped by losing your faith is somewhat complicated. There's an article written by a philosopher, WK Clifford, that lays out pretty well why it's unethical to believe things you don't have evidence for (faith)... the article is called "the ethics of belief". Here's a little excerpt from it that sums up the gist of the argument.

----------------
"Belief, that sacred faculty which prompts the decisions of our will, and knits into harmonious working all the compacted energies of our being, is not ours for ourselves, but for all humanity. It is rightly used on truths which have been established by long experience and waiting toil, and which have stood in the fierce light of free and fearless questioning. Then it helps bind men together, and to strengthen and direct their common action. It is desecrated when it is given to unproved and unquestioned statements, for the solace and private pleasure of the believer…It is wrong always, everywhere and for anyone, to believe anything upon insufficient evidence”
----------

He gives a good example in the article about a captain of a ship that has a superstitous faith that the cracked beam of his ship is actually good luck and that it would never actually come apart and sink the ship. The point is that he is still accountable, and it's unethical for him to make such a decision based on faith. The same could be said nowadays for parents who refuse to give their children medical treatment because they have faith that their children will be cured. It's logic and reason that we should base our decisions on... not faith.


As to studies proving that religious people are happier than non-religious people... I'd like to see those studies. Even if they do exist and are accurate (which I have very strong doubts about), it still doesn't make it right based on what was said above.


Also I think that what you're considering an agnostic, I'm considering an atheist. I consider myself an atheist, but I never claim to know or to be able to prove that God doesn't exist... my non-belief is based solely on the fact that I've never seen a good reason to believe, so I don't.

[Jard]

I'd like to think peace was the original purpose of all religions. However history has shown us different.

[Jard]

and by that i mean religion has been used as a tool for power rather than peace. Not that the original purpose (peace) has changed.

Even today extremeism be it christian/muslim/jewish, is manipulating the masses through religion.

Tolerance is one of the foundations of religion and look at what is happening! :(

[TomAZ]

Mike -
How would I be helped by losing my faith? Studies have shown that religious people tend to be happier than non-religious people...


The notion that a believer is happier than a skeptic is no more to the point than the notion that a drunk man is happier than a sober one.

[marv]

Theism is a theory that there is some supernatural force responsible for the Universe. The theist accepts that this theory is valid. In the absense of evidence, the atheist does not.

The rationale for the theist is that it cannot be disproven. The rationale for the atheist is that it cannot be proven. The atheist does not have to prove the negative; that there is no supernatural force. It's up to the theist to prove that there is some supernatural force. Speculation is the best a theist can do. Speculation does not have to be refuted by the atheist.

Even the "Big Bang" is just a theory that can't be proven.

[DRMIZER]

The notion that a believer is happier than a skeptic is no more to the point than the notion that a drunk man is happier than a sober one.I've heard about these studies but have never seen one. Please point me in that direction.

[marv]

DRMIZER, Take highway YY-9A to YY and down to the intersection of YY and US-39. It's on the northeast corner at the YIELD sign. But if you go north on US-39, the Eagles Lodge is on your left. They have much better facilities.

Cheers.

[DRMIZER]

DRMIZER, Take highway YY-9A to YY and down to the intersection of YY and US-39. It's on the northeast corner at the YIELD sign. But if you go north on US-39, the Eagles Lodge is on your left. They have much better facilities.

Cheers.That's exactly what I was thinking. . . . .Thanks!! :lol:

[Triple_R]

Mike - I strongly disagree that the scientific community is leaning towards atheism. Many physicists, in fact, believe that the universe has been "fine tuned" to such a degree that there must have been a Creator. Believing in the Theory of Evolution, and believing in the big bang, does not necessarily require one to not believe in a Creator.

I believe that both faith, and reason, have a central role to play. Faith, in conjunction with hope, can allow human beings to overcome great obstacles, and to overcome termendous crisis'. Reason is what allows us to come to valuable conclussions. I do not believe that faith and reason are mutually exclusive - sometimes it is impossible to use both, but sometimes both can be simultaneously applied.

TomAZ - Faulty analogy. There are many men of great faith who led very wise, and productive, lives, by any standard - such as Thomas Edison, and Isaac Newton. A perpetually drunk man would be of no use to society at all.

[TomAZ]

I've heard about these studies but have never seen one. Please point me in that direction.

Nor have I seen or even heard of such studies. My anology is based purely on observations, for example, the prisons of America are filled with believers whom I doubt are very happy. Speaking for myself, I know that I wouldn't be happy towing around a cloud of guilt and fear all my life. Been there, done that.


Triple R; I hope you aren't implying that Edison was a 'Christian' man of faith. While he did believe in the existence of Christ, he viewed him as merely a great teacher as he did Buddha and Confucious. At best, Edison was a pantheist. The following is what he said about religion;

" Science proves its theories or it rejects them. I have never seen the slightest scientific proof of the religious theories of heaven and hell, of future life for individuals, or of a personal God. I earnestly believe that I am right; I cannot help believing as I do."

[marv]

Triple R,A perpetually drunk man would be of no use to society at all.Well, at least our General Grant gave it a try.

[Kana]

my theory? something had to have created life, logically, based off possibility, but isnt it possible that it was something other than a god? (note that this isnt my belief, but should be brought into account. in my debate class, we had intelligent design vs. random chance. i argued that humans had been created by a failed experiment.)

[MikeD4o7]

Mike - I strongly disagree that the scientific community is leaning towards atheism. Many physicists, in fact, believe that the universe has been "fine tuned" to such a degree that there must have been a Creator. Believing in the Theory of Evolution, and believing in the big bang, does not necessarily require one to not believe in a Creator.


I don't think I worded my statement correctly. What I meant was that the scientific community leans towards evolution... not towards atheism. I've never seen any sort of survey one way or another to conclude what the religious beliefs of scientists are. Just as a reasonable guess though, I think you'll find a higher percentage of religious skeptics in the scientific community than you would in the general community... that's just a guess though.

I believe that both faith, and reason, have a central role to play. Faith, in conjunction with hope, can allow human beings to overcome great obstacles, and to overcome termendous crisis'. Reason is what allows us to come to valuable conclussions. I do not believe that faith and reason are mutually exclusive - sometimes it is impossible to use both, but sometimes both can be simultaneously applied.


I suppose it would depend on how you define "faith", but if the definition of faith in any way includes believing anything that there's not sufficient evidence for... then I would say that it is mutually exclusive to reason.

TomAZ - Faulty analogy. There are many men of great faith who led very wise, and productive, lives, by any standard - such as Thomas Edison, and Isaac Newton. A perpetually drunk man would be of no use to society at all.


Who was and wasn't religious really doesn't matter in a debate like this, but Edison was definitely not a man of faith.

"To those seaching for truth -- not the truth of dogma and darkness but the truth brought by reason, search, examination, and inquiry, discipline is required. For faith, as well intentioned as it may be, must be built on facts, not fiction -- faith in fiction is a damnable false hope."
-- Thomas Edison

"My mind is incapable of conceiving such a thing as a soul. I may be in error, and man may have a soul; but I simply do not believe it."
-- Thomas Edison

"I have never seen the slightest scientific proof of the religious theories of heaven and hell, of future life for individuals, or of a personal God."
-- Thomas Edison

[DMann]

The way to see by faith is to shut the eye of reason.
- Benjamin Franklin

[Fasdf]

Mike - I strongly disagree that the scientific community is leaning towards atheism. Many physicists, in fact, believe that the universe has been "fine tuned" to such a degree that there must have been a Creator. Believing in the Theory of Evolution, and believing in the big bang, does not necessarily require one to not believe in a Creator.

A strong majority of scientists believe in god, but there's a significant difference between scientists and... everyone else. There are indeed a lot more atheist scientists proportionally.