One World Religion Will Solve All The World's Problems

Page 4 of 5 [ 68 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5  Next

AndyBeans
Hummingbird
Hummingbird

Joined: 18 Feb 2019
Age: 45
Gender: Male
Posts: 18
Location: UK

28 Jun 2019, 2:31 am

Almost correct, no religion, having critical reasoning skills beats any faith.

Lawrence Krauss said the issue is education. The days of schools and colleges being repositories of knowledge is over, now we all have access to far more information (both right and wrong) from the internet the most important thing to teach the next generation is how to separate the wheat from the chaff, how to spot fakery and how to hold a discussion without prejudice or fallacy.

The evidence has repeatedly shown that religion will cause trouble even if it has no other threats or competition, because it depends upon keeping it's followers ignorant and fearful of anything outside the religion, and it is human nature to split from groups to form sub or competitive groups. Meanwhile, countries with lower proportions of theists continuously top the charts for welfare, human rights, cohesive communities and individual happiness.

Eventually, we will be able to fix the flaw in the human brain which causes religion.



Fnord
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 6 May 2008
Gender: Male
Posts: 44,017
Location: Stendec

28 Jun 2019, 8:38 am

Revelation 13:1-7 King James Version (KJV):

[1] And I stood upon the sand of the sea, and saw a beast rise up out of the sea, having seven heads and ten horns, and upon his horns ten crowns, and upon his heads the name of blasphemy.

[2] And the beast which I saw was like unto a leopard, and his feet were as the feet of a bear, and his mouth as the mouth of a lion: and the dragon gave him his power, and his seat, and great authority.

[3] And I saw one of his heads as it were wounded to death; and his deadly wound was healed: and all the world wondered after the beast.

[4] And they worshiped the dragon which gave power unto the Beast: and they worshiped the beast, saying, Who is like unto the beast? Who is able to make war with him?

[5] And there was given unto him a mouth speaking great things and blasphemies; and power was given unto him to continue forty and two months.

[6] And he opened his mouth in blasphemy against God, to blaspheme His name, and His tabernacle, and them that dwell in Heaven.

[7] And it was given unto him to make war with the saints, and to overcome them: and power was given him over all kindreds, and tongues, and nations.

"One World Religion Will Solve All The World's Problems"? Oh, really?
:roll:


_________________
 
Since there is no singular, absolute definition of human nature,
nor any ultimate evaluation of human nature beyond that which we project onto others,
individuals should be judged or defined only by their actions and choices,
and not by what we only imagine their intentions and motivations to be.


kraftiekortie
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 4 Feb 2014
Gender: Male
Posts: 71,173
Location: Queens, NYC

28 Jun 2019, 9:11 am

I believe that respect for peoples' individual religious beliefs will help save the world.

One person's bliss is another person's poison.



Prometheus18
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 18 Aug 2018
Age: 24
Gender: Male
Posts: 2,866

28 Jun 2019, 9:16 am

Religion is not a major cause of conflict outside of the Muslim world anymore. The western and westernised parts of the world have been far more terrifyingly menaced by secular Utopianism over the past century, and are yet.



Fnord
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 6 May 2008
Gender: Male
Posts: 44,017
Location: Stendec

28 Jun 2019, 9:50 am

Conflicts seem to be less about religion and more about Imperialism, with religion being used to 'justify' the decision to declare war after the decision has been made.


_________________
 
Since there is no singular, absolute definition of human nature,
nor any ultimate evaluation of human nature beyond that which we project onto others,
individuals should be judged or defined only by their actions and choices,
and not by what we only imagine their intentions and motivations to be.


AndyBeans
Hummingbird
Hummingbird

Joined: 18 Feb 2019
Age: 45
Gender: Male
Posts: 18
Location: UK

28 Jun 2019, 10:02 am

Prometheus18 wrote:
Religion is not a major cause of conflict outside of the Muslim world anymore. The western and westernised parts of the world have been far more terrifyingly menaced by secular Utopianism over the past century, and are yet.


Not really, protestants and Catholics are still fighting, Israel is still killing children because their book said it's fine and the Buddhists have a really nasty side as soon as they face any opposition. Trying to pretend Islam and "secularism"* are the only sources of religious conflict is just a fallacy that Christians like to tell each other.

* pretending it's a religion shows your bias.



naturalplastic
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 26 Aug 2010
Age: 65
Gender: Male
Posts: 24,280
Location: temperate zone

28 Jun 2019, 10:17 am

QFT wrote:
naturalplastic wrote:
QFT wrote:
naturalplastic wrote:
QFT wrote:
naturalplastic wrote:
Aurora911 wrote:
I agree that a global religion would eliminate many unnecessary conflicts. It would be very difficult for terrorists to use religion as an excuse and for groups to get brainwashed into becoming terrorists in the first place. The source that I have been referring to that I think it would be beneficial for the rest of the world to know about is bigpicturequestions.com. Somehow it just makes more sense than anything else that I have heard of or read religion and philosophy wise.


I hope that you are aware that this thread is nine years old. You are replying to folks who have all left the site ages ago.


I didn't notice it -- but that is a good thing. I often wish I could go back to the past, this is one way to do it.

Another way to go back to the past is to say how orange juice is healthy -- thats what they used to believe back in the 90-s.


Umm...Okay.

Didn't realize that the attitude of society towards orange juice had changed radically since the Nineties. But when I think of the Nineties one of the first things I do think of is of the "trial of the century" - and about the already then retired football star knicknamed after "orange juice": Orenthal James Simpson. Funny how both of us associate that decade with "juice". :?


Google "is orange juice healthy?" and you will see most people arguing how orange juice is bad for you due to the fact that when you get rid of pulp the concentration of sugar will be higher (even though you don't add any sugar of your own) and so when you drink one cup of orange juice you get the equivalent of sugar from several oranges.

But back in the 90-s nobody was saying that. Back then people thought orange juice is good for you because oranges are good for you and it came from oranges.

I never heard of "trial of the century". What is it? And what does Orenthal has to do with orange juice -- are you referring to some other language?


:lol:
Am talking about O.J. Simpson. NFL star of the Seventies. In the early Nineties he was charged with gruesomely murdering his ex wife and a male friend of his ex wife. The resulting trial was a media circus. Seems like yesterday to folks my age. But may be prehistoric to you. But years before that .. when he was a football player in the Seventies there were TV ads for "O.J." (orange juice), so O.J. Simpson got dubbed "the juice" by his millions of fans.

But yeah...if you take out the pulp in orange juice it would take out fiber, and also intensify the sugar delivery speed. It is kinda like shooting up fructose into your system like shooting up heroin.


What they were saying is that -- even if you take orange juice with pulp -- it is still a lot less pulp than in the actual orange -- as evidenced from the fact that actual orange is solid and orange juice is liquid: thats why they applied that argument to every single kind of orange juice you might have, both with and without pulp.

In any case, you said you didn't know that the view on orange juice changed between 90-s and now. So does it mean that you thought it was unhealthy back in the 90-s too? That is surprising: from what I saw, everyone in the 90-s thought it was healthy, thats why I was so surprised to hear otherwise more recently. But perhaps in the country you are from the views were different?


I heard that orange juice was healthful (because its a source of vitamin C) during my growing up in the sixties. Though I probably did hear something about it having too much sugar. But basically orange juice is something I have neither heard, nor thought much about in decades.



naturalplastic
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 26 Aug 2010
Age: 65
Gender: Male
Posts: 24,280
Location: temperate zone

28 Jun 2019, 10:26 am

Even if it weren't a put on and you starting evangelizing this proposed new religion, and even if it did take over the world, you would still have heretical sects of the new religion breaking off, and you would have crusades and persecutions of the heretical sects by the orthodox.



kraftiekortie
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 4 Feb 2014
Gender: Male
Posts: 71,173
Location: Queens, NYC

28 Jun 2019, 10:30 am

It's a Utopia.....like Communism is a Utopia.

It can't possibly happen. Because of Human Nature.



Twilightprincess
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 28 Sep 2016
Age: 36
Gender: Female
Posts: 5,353

28 Jun 2019, 10:31 am

What about those who don’t want to follow any religion?

They’d be persecuted by the people following the one religion and vice versa.



BenderRodriguez
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 9 Feb 2012
Gender: Male
Posts: 3,343

28 Jun 2019, 10:32 am

kraftiekortie wrote:
Because of Human Nature.

Good point.

Religion is not a problem in itself, human nature is. If people won't be able to use religion to act like murderous, greedy and self-righteous bastards, they'll use something else.


_________________
"Facts do not cease to exist because they are ignored." Aldous Huxley


kraftiekortie
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 4 Feb 2014
Gender: Male
Posts: 71,173
Location: Queens, NYC

28 Jun 2019, 10:35 am

People HAVE to learn to live with diverse viewpoints. That is essential for species survival.



Twilightprincess
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 28 Sep 2016
Age: 36
Gender: Female
Posts: 5,353

28 Jun 2019, 10:40 am

The main problem with one world religion:

“Power tends to corrupt; absolute power corrupts absolutely.”

The initial intention might be good, but there’s too much potential for corruption in the long run.



kraftiekortie
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 4 Feb 2014
Gender: Male
Posts: 71,173
Location: Queens, NYC

28 Jun 2019, 10:45 am

I certainly wouldn't follow the "one religion."

I am not one who gets into mass movements like this.

The novel "1984" was absolutely inundated with mass movements.

This "one religion" thing reeks of "mass movement."

And we all know about mass movements: The Nazis, the Stalinists, the Maoists.....



Antrax
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 23 Feb 2019
Gender: Male
Posts: 1,501
Location: west coast

28 Jun 2019, 11:29 am

A few problems:

1) While religious differences can cause problems, to say all or even most of our problems are caused by religious conflict is just not accurate.

2) Same thing I have to explain to Christians who try to convert me. Religion is based on faith in the religious doctrine. If you don't believe, you don't believe.

3) Any attempt to make a unified world religion will play out like this XKCD comic: Image


_________________
"Ignorance may be bliss, but knowledge is power."


Prometheus18
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 18 Aug 2018
Age: 24
Gender: Male
Posts: 2,866

28 Jun 2019, 12:27 pm

AndyBeans wrote:
Prometheus18 wrote:
Religion is not a major cause of conflict outside of the Muslim world anymore. The western and westernised parts of the world have been far more terrifyingly menaced by secular Utopianism over the past century, and are yet.


Not really, protestants and Catholics are still fighting, Israel is still killing children because their book said it's fine and the Buddhists have a really nasty side as soon as they face any opposition. Trying to pretend Islam and "secularism"* are the only sources of religious conflict is just a fallacy that Christians like to tell each other.

* pretending it's a religion shows your bias.

It's a fallacy. Where are Catholics and Protestants fighting in the world today, or at any time in the past generation? Don't tell me The Troubles were about religion - they were about nationhood, with religion an incidental consideration thrown in to justify actions contrary to both Protestantism and Catholicism.

The Israel-Palestine conflict is also, at best, vastly more about nationality than religion, if about religion at all.

Secular Utopianism, on the other hand, was responsible for at least a hundred million deaths last century alone and, unlike Christianity, hasn't learned its lesson.

I don't know where I claimed secularism is a religion, though I'd agree it is a kind of ersatz religion for most of its followers, and one that will never bring them true satisfaction. Secularism is in general far more political than religious; if it were followed as a religion, it would be far less threatening.