Copied and pasted & Written by Duh Puck.
Well guys, it's been a while. I decided to drop by and see how my fellow BDenizens were faring, and stumbled on this thread. I see that the only requirement for joining is that "you really hate war and want world peace." Since that's a statement I wholeheartedly endorse, I would like to join.
That makes the updated member list as follows:
Drydung, Lemonymelon, Akaslickster, Yellowsubmarine, Greycells, Unreality, Crazypainter, F_I_F, Twoaday, Bobbob, Nayana, Pw0nzd, Tolecnal, Frost, ROF, Lenochka, Mekal, Kat, Squirt, Dusty, Dnae, Ben Law, Rene83, Yoktado, Rockstar, Firebirdaz, Ravi, Phaze, Pacman Rules, Solemnraven, Peace*out, Cryptic chic, New guest, Woon, Engspangussian, Marinja, JIThu, Octopuppy, Blade, Duh Puck
However, I know I have a different perspective on this topic than others. In previous threads I've expressed my opinion that peace will not be achieved simply through collaborative goodwill. I believe the corrupting factors that have plagued human society throughout history are deeply ingrained and will not be erased by education. That I believe peace will be achieved through God's intervention is probably not relevant to the intent of this thread, so I won't be promoting my religious views.
Nevertheless, I do have a few observations on the topic of religion and peace.
First of all, I completely agree that religion as a whole is complicit in the lack of peace. As has already been mentioned, many conflicts have started as a direct result of religious differences. Others may have centered around economic or territorial concerns, yet religions clearly lined up on opposing sides. And in practically every conflict, regardless of the cause, the religious powers who position themselves as beacons of moral guidance are found promoting whatever side their parishioners favor, thus fomenting the hatred. When the clergy tell the people to pray for the troops, what are they really saying? They're instructing them to ask God to bless slaughter. Mark Twain wonderfully highlighted this hypocrisy in a short piece called The War Prayer.
Religion is obviously not the sole cause of divisiveness among humans. Skin color, national membership, language, tribal membership, political ideology, and pretty much any characteristic that can be used to categorize people have been used as a basis for fighting. What makes religion particularly culpable, however, is that it claims to represent a guiding system of belief encompassing moral standards. In other words, religion claims to teach right and wrong, so when a priest says to kill, followers act because they believe it is the "right" thing to do. When these actions clearly contradict our objective sense of moral rightness, we understandably become disgusted with the hypocrisy, and the desire to do away with the corrupt organized structures of religion achieves broad appeal (although most are still accepting of individual religious belief, practiced peaceably).
Does that mean, however, that the very concept of religion is to blame for this state of affairs? If you are a staunch atheist, you might conclude that all religion is essentially a lie, and that it will therefore never serve a positive purpose. Others will admit that the core teachings of most religions are admirable (be kind, don't steal or kill, display modesty, etc.), but recognize that such ideology often has little force in people's lives. On the other hand, it's an obvious truth that if everyone on the planet were to personally follow the teachings of Jesus, there wouldn't be war, so if the religions which claim to follow Jesus are responsible for war, where is the fault?
Spoiler for Side Point: Is Christianity based on Peace?:
Earlier, Unreality said that religions like Islam and Christianity "claim to be based on peace, but one look at their holy books and it's really not." I can't speak for the Qur'an, but I am familiar with the Bible, and I'd have to say there's a problem with that generalization. I assume that what he means is that the Bible clearly depicts God backing the Israelites in war, even giving commands to kill the women and children in a few cases. Such actions were described as executions of God's judgments on the wicked people of the surrounding nations, but many people see in such stories the same hypocritical exploitation of religious fervor as I mentioned earlier.
I'm not going to try to defend that here, but I will note that "Christianity" is based on the teachings of Jesus. The writings in the New Testament, regardless of whether you believe them to be true or not, clearly say that the nation of Israel was rejected and a new, spiritual nation would be chosen from all peoples of the earth, and that these followers of the new teaching of Jesus would be peaceful, would be "no part of the world", and would follow the command to "love your enemy." Therefore, to claim that Christianity is not based on peace because there is God-ordained war in the Bible is a mischaracterization of Christianity. The responsibility for the bloodshed of so-called Christianity lies, not with the "holy book", but with the corrupt organizations that abused it.
Spoiler for I said I wouldn't promote my religious views, but here's my plug:
Personally, I have seen how my chosen religion has indeed been a unifying force for peace. For the past century, Jehovah's Witnesses have established an international brotherhood which unites across racial and national boundaries. Because war is entirely in opposition to Christ's teachings, this has resulted in tremendous persecution. During WWII, JW's were persecuted in the U.S. for being Nazi-sympathizers because they wouldn't fight, while at the same time tens of thousands of them were being imprisoned in Nazi camps because they wouldn't "Heil Hitler". All they had to do to avoid this was sign a piece of paper. According to Wikipedia:
Refusing to pledge allegiance to the Nazi party or to serve in the military, roughly 12,000 Jehovah's Witnesses were forced to wear a purple triangle and placed in camps, where they were given the option of renouncing their faith and submitting to the state's authority. Between 2,500 and 5,000 were killed.[35] Historian Detlef Garbe, director at the Neuengamme (Hamburg) Memorial, writes that "no other religious movement resisted the pressure to conform to National Socialism with comparable unanimity and steadfastness."
Similar things have happened repeatedly in other places, including Russia, Rwanda (JW Hutus protected Tutsis, and vice versa), and where I currently live, in South Korea, where every young JW male goes to prison for a couple years because he won't join the military.
I have personally traveled to many countries and have witnessed firsthand the international unity of this religious organization. They are true promoters of peace. So when you claim that "religion" is responsible for war, it is important to recognize that it doesn't have to be. People who are serious about promoting peace should be willing adhere to peaceful principles even at personal cost. Such an application of genuine Christian principles has already resulted in an organization that transcends the divisive barriers.
Just as corruption, greed, pride, and hunger for power are responsible for the failings of government, these same influences are responsible for the failure of religious organizations to do what they should.
In any case, I would ask all of you who have joined the club so far: How far would you personally be willing to go to promote peace? How serious are you?
Welcome aboard, Duh Puck
