If religion did not exist, would the world be a less violent and safer place?

[K.Venugopal]

I am not sure who you are referring to, but I would question the validity of that person's relationship to Christ if they are in fact instilling hatred in anyone.

I fully agree with you that there is nothing about Christ which is even remotely violent - no, not about a man who said if you are hit on the left cheek, show the right cheek. Its the missionaries, eager to 'harvest', who are the culprits. Even Mother Theresa couldn't resist converting the poor and miserable to Christianity as if charity requires Christ to go with it. Her foremost disciple and now head of the Missionaries of Charities is a convert from a rich Hindu family. In the case of Mother Theresa I cannot (and do not wish to) prove any hate, but please read at the following link, which appeared in a leading Indian newspaper a few days ago.

http://www.hindu.com/2007/11/25/stories/2007112559500300.htm

The Mr.Joy referred to in the report is a product of the Pentacost Church's harvest.

 

[Don Penguinoini]

Wednesday.

Sri Lanka government calls for destruction of Tamil Tigers after deadly bus bombing - International Herald Tribune

(also to 9-10's Penguin)

I must say though, i dont think they are fightin g becasue of the hindu label, becasue they are tamil. They are not fighting for hinduism. It also says they faced decades of discrimination.

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

(also to 9-10's Penguin)

I must say though, i dont think they are fightin g becasue of the hindu label, becasue they are tamil. They are not fighting for hinduism. It also says they faced decades of discrimination.

That may be, but you asked about the last time a Hindu blew up a bus. You didn't ask about his motives.

I agree that the bomber likely wasn't "fighting for Hinduism". I think the religious difference between the Tamils and the Sinhalese is just one element of a greater cultural divide... which is likely the same as many instances of violence involving Christians that's purported to be religious.

 

[Don Penguinoini]

I received an email not long ago,as I have friends over seas serving as missionaries and I support a couple other missionaries I hear storeis all the time of hindu's ,Buddist's alike are killing Christians.
It's interesting we allow them the freedom and rights to practice their religion here, but over there ,very dangerous, there lives are threatened constantly in all parts of the world by many Eastern religions .
I get reports all the time about christians being killed ,children elderly alike

Rubbish, tell last time when hindus (who fight for hinduism) kill others to crusade for their religions. You do not rule the world, we do as we please, it is not up to you to decide whther we can do something or not. Thats purely up to us and NO-ONE else.

Only 200 years ago, Vasco da Gama (portugese) attacked and took over Goa. He and his men rape EVERY woman and killed every man. Thus he created a new generation of Christians in the nation. Funny how we allow you to worship your god...Turned teh tables...Funny isn't it? Yet you never see any racism to christians in India, do you? No, we are a race and religion of PEACE, thats why.

 

[Don Penguinoini]

That may be, but you asked about the last time a Hindu blew up a bus. You didn't ask about his motives.

I agree that the bomber likely wasn't "fighting for Hinduism". I think the religious difference between the Tamils and the Sinhalese is just one element of a greater cultural divide... which is likely the same as many instances of violence involving Christians that's purported to be religious.

You are right, i stand corrrected, but i think, pre-dominantly, hindus arent ones to kill around the world and go crazy and start mass conversions.

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

Rubbish, tell last time when hindus (who fight for hinduism) kill others to crusade for their religions.

Violence between Hindus, Sikhs and Muslims in India is quite common, isn't it?

Arguably, the riots that followed the assassination of Indira Gandhi could be considered Hindus crusading for their religion (or at least crusading against another religion). I'm sure there are other examples; I have a vague recollection of hearing of several instances over the past decade or so where holy sites violently changed hands back and forth between Sikhs and Hindus.

You are right, i stand corrrected, but i think, pre-dominantly, hindus arent ones to kill around the world and go crazy and start mass conversions.

No, but only one country in the world, India, could be reasonably said to be controlled by Hindus, and has only been controlled by Hindus since independence from Britain. I think that it's not some sort of superior morality that's kept Hindus from engaging in the sort of violence that has historically been done in the name of Christ, but circumstances that have worked against the possibility of Hindus forming worldwide empires like the nominally Christian Europeans.

So Hindus have never attempted to "kill around the world"? Correct, but they've never had the opportunity even if they wanted to.

 

[Don Penguinoini]

Sikhs and hindus? Nope. Its Hindus and muslims, normally started by muslims. Like, for example the Ram Janmhabhoomi Incident(link) Hindus can do it, India is one of the most powerful nations in the world. Islam has gone around the world and killed, whos to say Hinduism can't?

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

Sikhs and hindus? Nope. Its Hindus and muslims, normally started by muslims.

The violence following Indira Gandhi's assassination was all between Hindus and Sikhs, and the reprecussions continued for quite some time.

My point, though, is that religious violence involving Hindus does exist.

Hindus can do it, India is one of the most powerful nations in the world.

Now it is. Not historically. Less than a lifetime ago, India was a colony without the power of self-direction.

Islam has gone around the world and killed, whos to say Hinduism can't?

I'd rather that Hinduism didn't, myself.

 

[ChristineES]

People are violent, whether they be religious or nonreligious. The religions themselves may be benevolent and peaceful, but some of the people who belong to them may be violent. It is unfair to say that an entire culture or religion is violent because some of them are violent. That is stereotyping to my way of thinking.

 

[Sunstone]

There is quite a lot of minor religious violence in India that does not make the international news -- but go read a few Indian blogs. You'll hear all about the riots, stonings, etc.

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

People are violent, whether they be religious or nonreligious. The religions themselves may be benevolent and peaceful, but some of the people who belong to them may be violent. It is unfair to say that an entire culture or religion is violent because some of them are violent. That is stereotyping to my way of thinking.

I agree completely, and I hope you don't think that was what I was implying.

 

[ChristineES]

I agree completely, and I hope you don't think that was what I was implying.

No, I was just speaking generally.

 

[davidishere]

Why does everyone seem to think that man has a great desire for causing mayhem? Sure there will be troubles whether religion is present, or not, but the violence that plagues our societies would not stay the same or increase if religion was absent from a society. This is based on the fact that actually very little troubles are caused by greed and a desire for power in comparison to the troubles that are caused by religion. If religions are peaceful, and it actually does preach the 'Thou shalt not kill', then why would the Pope authorise Crusades? And because of the variety of religions, and the people that want to impose their beliefs upon others, you can say that all religions are violent. If one were to do some research, they will plainly see the havic that religions cause.

 

[yportne]

Selfishness drives competition in turn drives evolution which favors selfishness.

 

[Ori]

I've often said to myself in moments of anger, that religion should be banned. But in reality, my statement is childish, man's inhumanity to man will exist with or without religion.

Religion brings hope to people as well as hate. It is more of a reflection upon the person who twists their beliefs, than the religion itself.

 

[Scott C.]

I reckon the world would be a better place because religion causes so many problems in societies across the world.

Anyone care to prove me wrong?

It depends what the question means. I'll re-phrase the question and then answer: "Is the world better off understanding truth or not?" The answer is, of course, we're better off with the truth than without it. If you think the world would be better off without any religion or without a particular religion, then you're saying you don't believe in any religion or in that particulat religion. Which takes us back to the question "is religion true" or "which religion is true"? If it's true, were better off with it. If it's false, we're better off without it. I belief there is a God who has revealed truth. We're best off to understand and follow that truth. There have always been corrupt people who twist and corrupt revealed truth for their own selfish and even evil purposes. Let's not throw the baby out with the bath water (I like that phrase - I think I used it in another post).

 

[Reverend Rick]

Has anyone considered that religion has also taught the intolerant to be more tolerant and less judgmental?

 

[Random]

Selfishness drives competition in turn drives evolution which favors selfishness.

TO answer the OP question: NO, because you'd still have people who think like the guy quoted above does.

 

[Don Penguinoini]

There still would be people fighting for territory, women, land, race etc. Religion does less ahrm then you think.

 

[ChristineES]

You can't convince him that religions aren't the cause of wars (I am not sure why I continue to try). Some people need to blame someone or something for all the misery in the world. They need a scapegoat. Just remember that a scapegoat is rarely truly guilty or the only one who is guilty. If you remember that, then people's mistaken ideas won't hurt you any more.