Religion and World Peace

[Daisy]

In discussing the matter of double fulfillment of prophecy, M’Clintock and Strong’s Cyclopædia...1894, Vol. VIII, p. 635...it is said of author and theological writer, John Davison...

“He considers it to be of universal application; and upon it he founds the doctrine of the"double sense of prophecy," according to which a prediction is fulfilled in two or even more distinct analogous subject: first in type, then in antitype;and after that perhaps awaits a still further and more complete fulfillment. This view of the fulfilment of prophecy seems necessary for the explanation of our Lord’s prediction on the Mount, relating at once to the fall of Jerusalem and to the end of the Christian dispensation.”

 

[ataraxia]

The proof of the pudding is in the eating..."taste and see that Jehovah is good"...

But some people like pudding, and some people like baklava.

I would hate to think that in the contest between pudding and baklava, one is the objectively, eternally, and cosmic correct one, and those who like the other are going to be condemned for all eternity to hellfire.

 

[Daisy]

But some people like pudding, and some people like baklava.

I would hate to think that in the contest between pudding and baklava, one is the objectively, eternally, and cosmic correct one, and those who like the other are going to be condemned for all eternity to hellfire.

There is no hellfire...

 

[ataraxia]

The proof of the pudding is in the eating..."taste and see that Jehovah is good"...

If it turns out that Jehovah is nothing other than the projection of your latest personal tastes, ideals, opinions, and preferences, I can see how it would always, by definition, be good.

 

[marke]

Problem is, according to the scriptures themselves, that was to have occurred at some point before the end of the 1st century CE or thereabouts. It didn't happen.


OM

Your opinions do not match common interpretations of the Bible.

 

[marke]

That's true. The problem is that all religions are untrue, just collections of wildly improbable inventions.

You are not alone in those sorts of godless religious views.

 

[Omega Man]

Your opinions do not match common interpretations of the Bible.

Come again?

Precisely true.

"I tell you the truth, some who are standing here will not taste death before they see the Son of Man coming in his kingdom." -Matthew 16:28

"At that time the sign of the Son of Man will appear in the sky, and all the nations of the earth will mourn. They will see the Son of Man coming on the clouds of the sky, with power and great glory. And he will send his angels with a loud trumpet call, and they will gather his elect from the four winds, from one end of the heavens to the other. Now learn this lesson from the fig tree: As soon as its twigs get tender and its leaves come out, you know that summer is near. Even so, when you see all these things, you know that it is near, right at the door. I tell you the truth, this generation will certainly not pass away until all these things have happened. Heaven and earth will pass away, but my words will never pass away. No one knows about that day or hour, not even the angels in heaven, nor the Son, but only the Father.." -Matthew 24:30-36

"Brothers, we do not want you to be ignorant about those who fall asleep, or to grieve like the rest of men, who have no hope. We believe that Jesus died and rose again and so we believe that God will bring with Jesus those who have fallen asleep in him. According to the Lord's own word, we tell you that we who are still alive, who are left till the coming of the Lord, will certainly not precede those who have fallen asleep. For the Lord himself will come down from heaven, with a loud command, with the voice of the archangel and with the trumpet call of God, and the dead in Christ will rise first. After that, we who are still alive and are left will be caught up together with them in the clouds to meet the Lord in the air. And so we will be with the Lord forever. Therefore encourage each other with these words." -Paul's 1st letter to the Thessalonians, explaining to them what to expect, Chapter 4, verses 13 thru 18

"for you know very well that the day of the Lord will come like a thief in the night. While people are saying, "Peace and safety," destruction will come on them suddenly, as labor pains on a pregnant woman, and they will not escape. But you, brothers, are not in darkness so that this day should surprise you like a thief. You are all sons of the light and sons of the day. We do not belong to the night or to the darkness. So then, let us not be like others, who are asleep, but let us be alert and self-controlled. For those who sleep, sleep at night, and those who get drunk, get drunk at night. But since we belong to the day, let us be self-controlled, putting on faith and love as a breastplate, and the hope of salvation as a helmet. For God did not appoint us to suffer wrath but to receive salvation through our Lord Jesus Christ. He died for us so that, whether we are awake or asleep, we may live together with him. Therefore encourage one another and build each other up, just as in fact you are doing." -Paul's 1st letter to the Thessalonians (Chapter 5, verses 2-11) urging them to be on guard at all times, because he expected the second coming to happen within their lifetimes.

These were predictions made at certain time in history, and those assurances directed towards a certain community of believers who were being oppressed, and who possessed a conviction that their chosen "spiritual savior" would deliver them, and enact revenge upon their oppressors. It simply didn't happen. It is at a later point that the believers began reading into the scriptures, rather than simply reading them.


OM

 

[ataraxia]

Your opinions do not match common interpretations of the Bible.

Argumentum ad populum is a common logical fallacy. For many centuries, a common interpretation of the Bible was that it condoned slavery and misogyny.

 

[Omega Man]

Really. Paul was so sure that day and days was at hand that he was telling people to not even bother getting married or getting a job. Even while they were alive. So it seems that the concept was more than about just seeing the Transfiguration.

Yep. Paul was absolutely convinced it would occur imminently on account of Gospel assurances, and therefore perpetuated that expectation within his own letters. Unfortunately for Christians of the 21st century, he and the Gospels were wrong.


OM

 

[Daisy]

There seems to be a great lack of understanding on the part of some readers...

 

[Omega Man]

There seems to be a great lack of understanding on the part of some readers...

We agree. I think the difference involves reading into (confirmation bias), and simply reading.


OM

 

[Daisy]

There were many things Jesus talked about that the apostles and other believers did not fully understand at the time, especially about the kingdom...they did not understand that Christ would reign, not from an earthly throne in Jerusalem, but from heaven....Jesus’ statement indicated that God would no longer deal with earthly Jerusalem, but they did not yet fully grasp what he meant...

"While they were listening to these things, he told another illustration, because he was near Jerusalem and they thought that the Kingdom of God was going to appear instantly." Luke 19:11

"But we were hoping that this man was the one who was going to deliver Israel. Yes, and besides all these things, this is the third day since these things occurred." Luke 24:21

"So when they had assembled, they asked him: “Lord, are you restoring the kingdom to Israel at this time?" Acts 1:6

 

[marke]

Argumentum ad populum is a common logical fallacy. For many centuries, a common interpretation of the Bible was that it condoned slavery and misogyny.

proper interpretation of the Bible is rarely found among the majority of people imagining themselves to be scholars. The point I was attempting to make is that the proffered opinion was not shared by everyone, especially not by me.

 

[RAMOSS]

proper interpretation of the Bible is rarely found among the majority of people imagining themselves to be scholars. The point I was attempting to make is that the proffered opinion was not shared by everyone, especially not by me.

Please show that this is true. Show that you have the 'proper interpretation' of the bible instead of people who actually have education.

 

[ataraxia]

proper interpretation of the Bible is rarely found among the majority of people imagining themselves to be scholars. The point I was attempting to make is that the proffered opinion was not shared by everyone, especially not by me.

Thinking that there is one right interpretation of scripture is like thinking there is one right interpretation of those Rorschach ink blot tests that psychologists use to try to figure out what is going on in someone’s head. There is no right answer. It is just a randomly generated pattern. But what someone tells you it shows is highly helpful in trying to figure out what is going on in their head.

What people intro print their scripture to mean it’s just a projection of their latest opinions and personal and cultural values. As those things change, so does what their gods and Scriptures say I want. If they want peace and love, They will pick and choose and interpret every which way but loose to have their scripture say that. If they’re in the mood for war, the reverse will happen.

 

[Fishking]

Your 'information' was summarily dismissed because you tried and failed to read another's mind, which is waaaaay above your pay scale.

Nope...I smashed your OP into tiny pieces. You should slink off and hide and hope people forget about it.

 

[RAMOSS]

Nope...I smashed your OP into tiny pieces. You should slink off and hide and hope people forget about it.

Where did you do that???

 

[Fishking]

Where did you do that???

Premise of the OP putting the onus on religions being the hang up for world piece:

With all of the differing religious theologies, some of which direct their followers to go forth and convert all to believe as they do, some even using physical force, is there any scenario in which it is conceivable world wide peace can ever be achieved ?

Two which I respond:

World peace will never be achieved and it has nothing to do with religion. 100% of all people could be atheists and it still wouldn't happen.

...because we'll never have it because that's how people are, religious or not.

I tend to agree there will never be world peace, but what compels you to claim religion 'has nothing' to do with it when history clearly indicates otherwise?

Now he's putting the onus back on religion, as if it's unique. I smash that narrative with facts:

Because history clearly indicates that religion has nothing to do with it? The Maoist revolution was atheistic and they killed tens of millions. Most of the wars throughout history had nothing to do with religion.

https://www.huffingtonpost.com/rabbi-alan-lurie/is-religion-the-cause-of-_b_1400766.html



In his hilarious analysis of The 10 Commandments, George Carlin said to loud applause, “More people have been killed in the name of God than for any other reason,” and many take this idea as an historical fact. When I hear someone state that religion has caused most wars, though, I will often and ask the person to name these wars. The response is typically, “Come on! The Crusades, The Inquisition, Northern Ireland, the Middle East, 9/11. Need I name more?"

Well, yes, we do need to name more, because while clearly there were wars that had religion as the prime cause, an objective look at history reveals that those killed in the name of religion have, in fact, been a tiny fraction in the bloody history of human conflict. In recently published book, “Encyclopedia of Wars,” authors Charles Phillips and Alan Axelrod document the history of recorded warfare, and from their list of 1763 wars only 123 have been classified to involve a religious cause, accounting for less than 7 percent of all wars and less than 2 percent of all people killed in warfare. While, for example, it is estimated that approximately one to three million people were tragically killed in the Crusades, and perhaps 3,000 in the Inquisition, nearly 35 million soldiers and civilians died in the senseless, and secular, slaughter of World War 1 alone.

He responds in a way that tries to soft-peddle what he was initially implying, virtually running away from his own OP.

So you agree that 'some' wars were fought for religious reasons. Seems we are in agreement.....moving on.....

And there you go.

 

[RAMOSS]

Premise of the OP putting the onus on religions being the hang up for world piece:



Two which I respond:



...because we'll never have it because that's how people are, religious or not.



Now he's putting the onus back on religion, as if it's unique. I smash that narrative with facts:



He responds in a way that tries to soft-peddle what he was initially implying, virtually running away from his own OP.



And there you go.

And how does unsupported claims bust his op?

 

[Fishking]

And how does unsupported claims bust his op?

I literally gave you supporting information, provided by a link in one of my responses. Did you read words?

 

[RAMOSS]

I literally gave you supporting information, provided by a link in one of my responses. Did you read words?

I don't think that is 'supporting information'. That is a red Herring, and does not support your thesis.
.

 

[Fishking]

I don't think that is 'supporting information'. That is a red Herring, and does not support your thesis.
.

So a book cataloguing all the wars we have a history on doesn't count as supporting information to you. Got it.

 

[RAMOSS]

So a book cataloguing all the wars we have a history on doesn't count as supporting information to you. Got it.

You brought up places that had the 'cult of personality', which to all intents and purposes is usurping religion... and has many characteristics that are indistinguishable from religion.

 

[Fishking]

You brought up places that had the 'cult of personality', which to all intents and purposes is usurping religion... and has many characteristics that are indistinguishable from religion.

You need any ointment for all that stretching? Someone being charismatic doesn't make it a religion.

 

[RAMOSS]

You need any ointment for all that stretching? Someone being charismatic doesn't make it a religion.

When people are required to keep on praising the leader , then yes , it does.