Can we have any possible hope of "Peace on Earth" while we have religions?
I have posted this entry in the interests of peace;
I have no other objective than peace. My intention is not to cause hatred
between religions or between those of a religious faith and those who do not
believe in religion. My purpose is to see what your opinion is on this
subject and open some sort of dialogue in the interests of peace. I am
not going to express my opinion at this stage as I do not want to influence any
opinions, not that I think I could and my opinion is only that, an
opinion. But if I do give an opinion at this point then it may determine
who does and does not enter into this discussion.
I am reading this book at the moment and I have to admit it has been a bit of an eye opener.
I came across Sam Harris giving a lecture about his book at YouTube. The man speaks well and I believe that he does give a very good argument.
I have the video footage listed below from his lecture and also the links at YouTube if you feel that you could watch them better via YouTube. Each clip runs for a bit over 20 minutes. I know that it is a big ask, but if you do want "Peace on Earth" then I urge you to watch his lecture. Please don't just watch one clip and decide he is talking a whole heap of crap, please watch all of the lecture as otherwise you will be taking his opinions out of context.
If you have read his book then you probably don't need to watch his lecture, but I would love your opinions. If you haven't read his book then I would prefer it if you watched his lecture before you comment. However, if you have already made up your mind on this subject then please feel free to make a comment, but I still do believe you would benefit from watching his lecture.
I believe that anyone who does belong to a religion should watch this lecture, not to convince you to stop following your religion but so that you have an understanding of why there maybe issues with religion and the failure of finding more peace in this world. It is obvious that not all conflicts are caused by religion; however we cannot ignore the fact that some violence in this world does have a religious motivation to it.
So I hope you take the time to consider watching his lecture and then also leave a comment. I won't be around for a couple of days so I will not be able to reply to any comments for a while. But to be honest I am happy to just be an observer at this stage and not respond just yet. Who knows I may not even get any comments.
Please feel free to say whatever you wish - there are no rules of conduct on this entry.
I will now hand it over to Sam Harris.
Peace be with you.
I am reading this book at the moment and I have to admit it has been a bit of an eye opener.
I came across Sam Harris giving a lecture about his book at YouTube. The man speaks well and I believe that he does give a very good argument.
I have the video footage listed below from his lecture and also the links at YouTube if you feel that you could watch them better via YouTube. Each clip runs for a bit over 20 minutes. I know that it is a big ask, but if you do want "Peace on Earth" then I urge you to watch his lecture. Please don't just watch one clip and decide he is talking a whole heap of crap, please watch all of the lecture as otherwise you will be taking his opinions out of context.
If you have read his book then you probably don't need to watch his lecture, but I would love your opinions. If you haven't read his book then I would prefer it if you watched his lecture before you comment. However, if you have already made up your mind on this subject then please feel free to make a comment, but I still do believe you would benefit from watching his lecture.
I believe that anyone who does belong to a religion should watch this lecture, not to convince you to stop following your religion but so that you have an understanding of why there maybe issues with religion and the failure of finding more peace in this world. It is obvious that not all conflicts are caused by religion; however we cannot ignore the fact that some violence in this world does have a religious motivation to it.
So I hope you take the time to consider watching his lecture and then also leave a comment. I won't be around for a couple of days so I will not be able to reply to any comments for a while. But to be honest I am happy to just be an observer at this stage and not respond just yet. Who knows I may not even get any comments.
Please feel free to say whatever you wish - there are no rules of conduct on this entry.
I will now hand it over to Sam Harris.
Peace be with you.
* 28/06/07 please note the original set of 8 videos of 10 minutes in length that I had listed were removed from YouTube. I have managed to find a set of 4 videos each about 20 minutes in length to take their place - hopefully these won't be removed from YouTube.
Comments
under category of buddhism really, but OK. Buddhism can be kind of
atheistic, and buddhism is often not quite the same as a religion, in the classic sense, so your plug is not altogether out of place, but why not start a group
for Atheism?
There is a group for atheists.
This post isn't supposed to be about atheism though, it is about the place religion plays in the possibility for achieving world peace.
So really there was no point in just posting this in one group especially in an atheist group as in a sense this doesn't concern them - I think I already know what their answer is.
This article is really about opening up dialogue between the different religious groups to see if more peace in this world can be achieved and still have religion.
I hope that clarifies why this entry appeared in the Buddhism group. Also Sam Harris does talk about Buddhism and he has written in a Buddhist book, see a previous entry.
Anyway gotta go, I am late for a very important date :-)
I am also thankful that you have appreciated the spirit in which I intended this entry to be. I never mean to offend any group, but for me peace, freedom and justice is just too big of an issue to ignore just in case I may cause offence by bringing up certain issues.
I haven't read "A Letter to a Christian Nation" but it is on my to do list.
Thank you :-)
1) (and I think Harris agrees with this actually - given some of the things he said) You ask whether we can have piece while having religion. There is no need for religion to have wars and genocides.
There have been plenty of cases...
- Eugenics was a very scientific movement started in the US if I remember right... that the Nazi's built most of their race-purification ideas on. No real religion involved.
- The Soviet Union and the peoples republic of China.. banning religion, still fostered horrible genocides and racism.
I think the need to separate people into US and THEM... and subsequent reasoning that WE have more right to life, goods, land, happines of all kinds than THEM is a basic feature of human nature - That we have to control with MORAL... now Moral is something we learn as kids from our social group / family / neighborhood... and in some cases from religious teachings... in that way... religions stand on both sides of the problem.... if you see what I mean??
2) the second thing that bugs me just a little with Harris' talk is that he mainly talks about how violent Islam is, and he's right obviously, but let us not forget how much suffering Christianity and christians has caused in the world... and I don't think he really acknowledges that - except for the preaching against condom use in Africa and the acceptance of slavery. There were whole villages of muslims killed by christians in ex-yugoslavia - not very long ago. Christianity and colonialism went hand in hand to shape the incredible inequalities between developing countries and developed countries... I could go on, but you'd get bored.
Thanks for your comment it is appreciated.
I probably do need to say a couple of things here just to make some clarifications.
The 1st point that you raised is that not all conflicts are religious based. The title of my entry is "Can we have any possible hope of Peace on Earth while we have religions?" The title was said in a way well I believe (maybe I got it wrong) that didn't suggest religion was the only cause. The title was not "Can we have peace while we have religion?" So my title was trying to suggest if we were able to fix the other issues which lead to war and conflict, could we have peace while religions were also around?
I also acknowledged in my entry that religion was not the only cause of war and violence.
"I believe that anyone who does belong to a religion should watch this lecture, not to convince you to stop following your religion but so that you have an understanding of why there maybe issues with religion and the failure of finding more peace in this world. It is obvious that not all conflicts are caused by religion; however we cannot ignore the fact that some violence in this world does have a religious motivation to it."
The 2nd point that you made regarding that Harris didn't mention enough about the horrors that Christianity has caused throughout the world. He may not have mentioned in great detail some of the more recent things that Christians have done. But he did raise the point of the horrific inquisitions throughout the middle ages over seen by Saint Augustine and the Christian church at the time. He did raise the point of some of the scriptures throughout the Bible that condone horrific violence. He did also mention the fact that some fundamentalist Christians in the US are beating their children with rods as punishment as directed by scriptures in the Bible and quoted that 40, 000 children in Alabama in one year had been paddled in Christian schools and it is legal and based on faith. (4th video).
In video 5 he mentioned the violence in Northern Ireland (which most people realise was Protestant/Catholic Christians). He also mentioned the violence in Bosnia (he didn't mention though that the violence was Christian against Muslims - due to time restrictions he may not have been able to go into detail).
As you said, "I could go on, but you'd get bored", the same thing can be said for Harris' talk about his book. Unfortunately he was pressed for time, however his book does talk in more depth about the violence that has been caused by Christianity. Here is a quote from his book, "My purpose in this chapter has been to intimate, in a concise a manner as possible, some of the terrible consequences that heave arisen out of Christian faith. Unfortunately this catalogue of horrors could be elaborated upon indefinitely."
Harris had a lot of outcry from Christian's when his book was released, so much so that he has written another book "A Letter to a Christian Nation."
I think Harris is mainly concerned with the present and future of this world and at present he sees that there are two main issues that need to be addressed if we are to continue to have a civilisation on this Earth. He is concerned that the Fundamentalist Christians or as he quotes about 44% of US population believe that Armageddon will be with us within 50 years. He is worried about the implications of that belief on world affairs. His 2nd concern is the violence that is being perpetrated by the Islamist's (extremists/fundamentalists who have basically called a war on all non-Muslims). He is rightly concerned that these two groups may clash with dire consequences for the entire planet. So in his talk he may have skimmed over the violence caused by Christians in the past as he is more concerned about the present and the future.
Thanks again for making a comment.
"Can we have any possible hope of 'Peace on Earth' while we have beliefs and form associations with other's holding similar beliefs"?
Perhaps that might make it easier to answer the question.
I think our main problem is that our moral is acquired as we grow up. You can basically teach a kid to think that almost anything is right or wrong if you set your mind to it.... look at child soldiers in Africa, or children reporting their parents to authorities in the old communist countries.
Moral teachings, whether they're religious or not, don't have to make sense... they're just RIGHT for no reason. There are things you can do and things you can't. period. But these "things" are not universal, they're only fairly similar within a community of like-minded people. Next state/village/tribe/community - even within the same religion or ethnic group has different ideas about what's right and wrong.
It would depend on what the beliefs were as well, would it not?
Hmmm I can see I may get drawn into this debate before I was planing/ready too :-)
I think the idea is by continually challenging a person's beliefs that person's beliefs will slowly wither away.
So by doing so, are we then imposing our beliefs onto someone? Hmmm interesting. Oh but I forgot they are the right beliefs in this case i.e. science.
I have just started the chapter "The Problem with Islam".
I have to admit I am struggling with some of his concepts and idea's, while others I can see the rational.
All things in moderation is the way I like to live - but it seems I may have the wrong idea there as well. Oh I am so confused. Thanks Sam :-P
The last thing we want in our world is the 'thought police' then we may head towards a "Brave New World"
Thanks for the link to your comments on Letter to a Christian Nation, I will have a look when I get a chance.
Yes morals are generally taught at a young age and a child (as can an adult) can be convinced of anything from the very benign to the bizarre, as they rely on adults to teach them for they know no better as they haven't had a chance to test the world out for themselves. It has been said that once a child has been taught a certain belief it is difficult for that person to shake away the belief in adulthood.
If we live in isolation, believe everything that we are told and don't test the world out for ourselves then I think that this is when problems can occur especially if we have been taught some huge lies about the world and the people in our world. So I think that living in a very isolated community with little contact with people of different belief systems is not a healthy formula for peace.
Thanks for dropping by again :-)
The other thing that I really must say. I don't totally agree with some of the things that he says about Islam. I have had some great dialogue with Muslims at VOX and I do plan to read the Qur'an for myself just to see exactly what it does say.
I have not looked at the videos but what has been said so far has been a bit harsh.There may be a few things said that may be true. what I would like to know is if there was no relgion what would we have hope in what would make us get up and bravely face another day of greed selfishness and people who dont really care.
That is exactly the question my re-phrasing was intended to incite.
Good one.
Now we can move from villifying religion to scrutinising its content till we come up with an amalgamative faith that comprises the best elements of a variety of faiths.
I think?
Cheers
Religion, God and Peace: My humble opinion
Cheerio :-)
My post was designed to allow people to think about their religion. I believe that the Catholic Church belongs to the religion of Christianity, so why shouldn't the Catholic Church be included in this discussion. A few other Christians made comments in favour of this discussion.
There is no reason to feel threatened by this post.
But I am probably wasting my time even replying to you, as you have never once had the courtesy of acknowledging my answers to your comments.
So once again I shall make this statement, "After the trouble that I and others went to in order to show you that not all Muslims believe in terrorism and they speak out against it, are you going to acknowledge this fact?"
Until you have the courtesy of acknowledging reply comments I will not waste my time and acknowledge any more of your comments. You wanted evidence that Muslims are against terrorism and I showed you this fact and you have never been polite enough to acknowledge it.
Peace be with you.
War is simply the final step of diplomacy
Unfortunately sometimes I think that some of the steps in diplomacy get overlooked and war comes too early in discussions and out goes the discussion. I think Iraq is an example in point.
Cheers,
Chezza