-
Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:- Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
- Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
- Access to private conversations with other members.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!
One Religion
- Thread starter Lightkeeper
- Start date
No*s
Captain Obvious
carrdero said:
You are far more optimistic than I am. There are limited resources, and this alone will cause factionalism and strife. There are whole religions (including mine) that would have to be eliminated, because they won't morph into one over-arching religion. In short, I can't believe that such a utopian vision can be had without it being a dystopia at the same time.
For those reasons, I'd hate to live in such a world...
Lightkeeper said:
millions of people, perhaps unwittingly, pray for this world government when saying in what is commonly called the Lords Prayer: "Let your kingdom come. Let your will take place, as in heaven, also upon earth." (Matthew 6:10) The God-appointed Head of that Kingdom government is the Prince of Peace, Jesus Christ.Isaiah 9:6.
This world government will succeed in creating a truly global and lasting human rights culture by, among other things, eliminating war forever. The Bible prophesies: "He [the Creator] is making wars to cease to the extremity of the earth. The bow he breaks apart and does cut the spear in pieces; the wagons he burns in the fire."Psalm 46:9.
robtex
Veteran Member
I see religion as philosphy with a higher power factored in. As I see it this way I think the idea of one religion makes as much sense as one philosphy for mankind. The wonderful thing about philosphy (irregardless if it has God in it or not) is the multiple prespectives give us a comphrensive piture of how various thoughts create a total theory for that which cannot be proven or known with assurity. The notion of one religion is the discrimatory and captive way to a narrowminded man and short sighted humanity.
Master Vigil
Well-Known Member
Like I said before, Utopia is not possible. But the religion of goodness already exists. A good, peaceful, and compassionate christian is a member of the good religion. No matter what prayers or books they read. A good, peaceful, and compassionate hindu is as well. Same with good, peaceful, and compassionate pagans, taoists, buddhists, wiccans, druids, shamans, shintoists, asatrus, athiests, agnostics, etc... The ethnic background is of no importance to goodness. Neither is the surface muddiness that is the invention of man within world religions. Goodness is what brings them all together. Whether one believes god is an almighty being, creator of heaven and earth, all that is seen and unseen, or that the universe is the only thing eternal and everything is created naturally. Or that the Tao is the source of all things and the destination of all things. Or that there are goddesses and gods, etc... It doesn't matter, those are all just words that we finite humans use to try to understand that which we CAN NOT fully understand. So let us rise above those words, for they are all that separates us. Let us rise above to what really matters. GOODNESS!!!!!!
Master Vigil
Well-Known Member
I am not sure if goodness should be greater. It is when things try to be "greater" that disputes and arguments and perhaps hatred arise. The christians decided that they should be greator than islam, henceforth the crusades. If we have greator, than we have lesser. And that is not goodness. Goodness is no extremes. Goodness is tolerance and acceptance. If goodness got greater, people will start trying to monopolize on the great goodness. If you look, you will see the people who are members of the good religion. Usually, they are not the ones that are parading their goodness in churches or politics. They are the modest ones who open doors for old people. Or let another driver get in front of him in traffic. How they pray, and worship is of no importance. If they do not take their goodness into everyday life, they are not a member of the good religion.
precentor
Member
Hmm, MV, do you count Satanists in that as well ?Master Vigil said:
I hope this doesn't seem uncharitable, but although I know you're proceeding from the best intentions, your point of view seems to reduce important differences to trivialities. I don't think it's trivial that I believe in Jesus as opposed to Baldr or Vishnu. I don't think it's trivial that I believe in a fallen universe of sin which needs redemption as opposed to a world where everything is just as it ought to be. I don't think it's trivial that I believe in a God who is intimately and personally interested in his creation, as opposed to a disinterested universe in which consciousness is merely a product of chemical reactions.
In general, people don't hold religious beliefs out of an impulse toward social utility, but because they believe them to be true. It might indeed be better for human society on earth if everyone were to believe in Niceness and Goodness rather than a specific deity, but what about values that transcend usefulness to society?
I fully support the right of each human being to practice whatever religion seems best to him. I would violently oppose any attempt to subsume all religions into one, because what you would end up with would be not truth, but pablum--something inoffensive and acceptable to everyone, and hence without value.
Master Vigil
Well-Known Member
"your point of view seems to reduce important differences to trivialities."
The point is, the differences are not important. Which was exactly my point.
"I don't think it's trivial that I believe in Jesus as opposed to Baldr or Vishnu."
I think it is. Does the belief in one make you a better person?
"I don't think it's trivial that I believe in a fallen universe of sin which needs redemption as opposed to a world where everything is just as it ought to be."
Who says the world is as it ought to be? I certainly did not. But if people got over the "trivial differences" and decided that goodness is more important than who one worships, perhaps the world would be a better place.
"I don't think it's trivial that I believe in a God who is intimately and personally interested in his creation, as opposed to a disinterested universe in which consciousness is merely a product of chemical reactions."
I don't think either way is important. I would use a zen idea here and say that the "don't know" mind is most important. We don't know either way, and either way doesn't make you a good person. So it doesn't matter.
"but what about values that transcend usefulness to society?"
I'm not sure how goodness is always "useful?" I think goodness does transcend usefulness to society. I think when people try to use the "trivial differences" to decide what transcends usefulness to society that we have problems. When in fact, it is just goodness.
"I would violently oppose any attempt to subsume all religions into one, because what you would end up with would be not truth, but pablum"
I said that the religion of goodness already exists. And exists within ALL religions. I by no means want you or any other religious person to give up tradition. I simply wish that tradition no longer supercede simple goodness. I also think that if something is offensive to anyone, it does not contain any value at all. I think those with value, are those that accept without prejudice.
Also yes, satanists have as much ability to have goodness as christians do.
The point is, the differences are not important. Which was exactly my point.
"I don't think it's trivial that I believe in Jesus as opposed to Baldr or Vishnu."
I think it is. Does the belief in one make you a better person?
"I don't think it's trivial that I believe in a fallen universe of sin which needs redemption as opposed to a world where everything is just as it ought to be."
Who says the world is as it ought to be? I certainly did not. But if people got over the "trivial differences" and decided that goodness is more important than who one worships, perhaps the world would be a better place.
"I don't think it's trivial that I believe in a God who is intimately and personally interested in his creation, as opposed to a disinterested universe in which consciousness is merely a product of chemical reactions."
I don't think either way is important. I would use a zen idea here and say that the "don't know" mind is most important. We don't know either way, and either way doesn't make you a good person. So it doesn't matter.
"but what about values that transcend usefulness to society?"
I'm not sure how goodness is always "useful?" I think goodness does transcend usefulness to society. I think when people try to use the "trivial differences" to decide what transcends usefulness to society that we have problems. When in fact, it is just goodness.
"I would violently oppose any attempt to subsume all religions into one, because what you would end up with would be not truth, but pablum"
I said that the religion of goodness already exists. And exists within ALL religions. I by no means want you or any other religious person to give up tradition. I simply wish that tradition no longer supercede simple goodness. I also think that if something is offensive to anyone, it does not contain any value at all. I think those with value, are those that accept without prejudice.
Also yes, satanists have as much ability to have goodness as christians do.
Love for God, and for each other.
Yeah, I know. Sorry….
Oh it happens.
IndigoChild5559
Loving God and my neighbor as myself.
I do not think it is possible for there to be only one religion. Human beings have separate brains, and are continually rearranging what they know of the world in ways that make sense to them. No sooner would all but one religion be gone, than someone would make up a new one to fill the void.
I don't know that this is a bad thing. You want diversity. Diversity means that when bad times come, there are many different ways of meeting it. If one way doesn't work well, another will work better.
Exaltist Ethan
Bridging the Gap Between Believers and Skeptics
It would be Omnism. And every major religion would be a denomination of it. Omnism could split into Christianity, Islam, Judaism and those themselves could have their own lesser, minor sects. If you really think about it, all religions, and irreligions, pretty much fall into the umbrella of some syncretic omnism, except for maybe anti-theism or anti-religion.
mikkel_the_dane
My own religion
Well, I am not an anti-theist. I am a deist. You are the anti-religion, because you only accept theism.
Stop playing the game of only your understanding of religion is correct, even if you support Omnism
Exaltist Ethan
Bridging the Gap Between Believers and Skeptics
I wasn't talking to you...?
Most people who are religious accept the notion that religion is not harmful to society...?
mikkel_the_dane
My own religion
We are in debate and you made a general claim. So I made my point.
What does harmful have to do with it? The point is that theism and Omnism are not the only forms of religion.