Many Religions Make for a Better World than One (or None)

[Vinayaka]

I believe that a person should independently investigate all of the religions, choose a religion or none, then tolerate what other people have chosen, or even appreciate what they have chosen. Then we will have a better world.

And just how does one go about 'investigating' religions? To me, the only true investigation would be too live the tenants and practices of any religion for at least 20 years. Don't think we have time for that.

Lots of times it just means to read what your own religion says about other religions, which isn't true investigation at all. It's little more than reading the encyclopedia, and a very biased encyclopedia at that.

 

[TransmutingSoul]

And just how does one go about 'investigating' religions? To me, the only true investigation would be too live the tenants and practices of any religion for at least 20 years. Don't think we have time for that.

Lots of times it just means to read what your own religion says about other religions, which isn't true investigation at all. It's little more than reading the encyclopedia, and a very biased encyclopedia at that.

I would agree that the criteria you would use to investigate would make it impossible to learn of each faith in detail.

What one could do then, is list the tenants and practices of each faith they wanted to learn about.

Peace be with you

 

[Vinayaka]

I would agree that the criteria you would use to investigate would make it impossible to learn of each faith in detail.

What one could do then, is list the tenants and practices of each faith they wanted to learn about.

Peace be with you

List the tenets. Why? It's already been done. Hundreds of times, few accurately, because it's all second and third hand, or worse. There is little if any, direct knowledge or experience. Most people have very little actual understanding of any faith but their own, because, like I said, they haven't lived it. In the other long thread I had with Baha'i, it became ridiculously clear they knew almost nothing at all about my faith. The Baha'i reference library was a joke.

 

[robocop (actually)]

Every so often, someone will voice the opinion that the world would be better off if everybody followed some particular religion. The reasons why someone supposes this vary somewhat, but essentially boil down to the belief that this religion is the best way or even the only true way. Similar opinions are voiced in the name of irreligion when we hear someone state the world would be better off if nobody followed any religions at all. That opinion also holds the assumption that their way is the best way or perhaps the only true way. In both cases, accepting these opinions as true would mean discarding any potential value that religious diversity has for humanity. That's quite the tall order indeed, as it doesn't take much to recognize that many religions - religious diversity - makes for a better world than one religion or none at all.

There are various ways one could argue the case for this, but I'm going to borrow from an author I read regularly who is the inspiration for this thread. The list below is inspired by that work, but also different from it, but to give credit where credit is due, that article is here (A World With Many Religions is Better Than a World With Only One).

• All religions have something beautiful to offer. Further, the ways in which these religions are beautiful are different. That is, if you remove any one of them, you loose something amazing. This isn't to say all these religions don't also have their ugly sides, but is it really worth loosing that beauty to remove some blemishes? Talk about throwing out the seeds with the soil.
• One religion (or none at all) is not a sustainable condition. History shows us what happens when humans lack choices, as our nature begs for options. Attempts at monopolies fail - the authoritarian structure become corrupt over time, and people beg for something different when the monopoly inevitably fails to meet someone's particular needs. One way cannot last and will fragment into many. So why try and force a monopoly of religion (or irreligion) in the first place?
• There's no way to know if something is the "One True Way". Many hearken to the notion of one religion for all (or no religions for anyone) because they want certainty. There is no such certainty to be had. If there is a "best" or "right" way, we'll never agree on what that is or know if we've found it. We can only know what is "best" or "right" for us and our communities right now... and that answer can chance over time. A monopoly doesn't give you options when your needs change.

Thoughts?

I think that there is "One True Way," but those who do not find it directly may be judged by how well they accepted its components.

 

[TransmutingSoul]

List the tenets. Why? It's already been done. Hundreds of times, few accurately, because it's all second and third hand, or worse. There is little if any, direct knowledge or experience. Most people have very little actual understanding of any faith but their own, because, like I said, they haven't lived it. In the other long thread I had with Baha'i, it became ridiculously clear they knew almost nothing at all about my faith. The Baha'i reference library was a joke.

Well I suppose it depends how we each consider that the world will find a lasting peace. I see we need to learn to live with each other, in our diversity, but in saying that, it is obvious that there would be much to sort out.

This post would be a great place to give your vision as to how we as humanity, could achieve this.

Peace be with you.

 

[A Vestigial Mote]

Ask yourself if we would have a better world if we lived to this standard;

"Be generous in prosperity, and thankful in adversity. Be worthy of the trust of thy neighbor, and look upon him with a bright and friendly face. Be a treasure to the poor, an admonisher to the rich, an answerer of the cry of the needy, a preserver of the sanctity of thy pledge. Be fair in thy judgment, and guarded in thy speech. Be unjust to no man, and show all meekness to all men. Be as a lamp unto them that walk in darkness, a joy to the sorrowful, a sea for the thirsty, a haven for the distressed, an upholder and defender of the victim of oppression. Let integrity and uprightness distinguish all thine acts. Be a home for the stranger, a balm to the suffering, a tower of strength for the fugitive. Be eyes to the blind, and a guiding light unto the feet of the erring. Be an ornament to the countenance of truth, a crown to the brow of fidelity, a pillar of the temple of righteousness, a breath of life to the body of mankind, an ensign of the hosts of justice, a luminary above the horizon of virtue, a dew to the soil of the human heart, an ark on the ocean of knowledge, a sun in the heaven of bounty, a gem on the diadem of wisdom, a shining light in the firmament of thy generation, a fruit upon the tree of humility."

If you do agree, this what will be a achieved wity renewed Faith in God.

Peace be with you

Your paragraph of niceties (as nice as it is) flies in the face of the evidence all around us of the true behavior of those with "renewed faith in God." Which is precisely why your "faith" will never be proven to be more effective than any other "path" to being a good person. Good people are good people. In my experience they do not need God to be that way.

 

[Vinayaka]

This post would be a great place to give your vision as to how we as humanity, could achieve this.

Peace be with you.

You are projecting your beliefs here. I don't believe the world even needs a lasting peace. In my belief, It is the individuals who seek peace within themselves. That happens naturally in the course of time, and this world, as is, is a great place for the soul to evolve. The individual ego/identity has peace at death of the physical body as it no longer exists. The individual soul, through many lifetimes, attains moksha, via it's precursor, nirvikalpa samadhi.

This constant search for a peace for all of humanity has to be frustrating, or quite frustrating, for each individual doing it. The sooner we admit it's unattainable, and look at the world through realistic eyes, the better.

 

[Milton Platt]

Every so often, someone will voice the opinion that the world would be better off if everybody followed some particular religion. The reasons why someone supposes this vary somewhat, but essentially boil down to the belief that this religion is the best way or even the only true way. Similar opinions are voiced in the name of irreligion when we hear someone state the world would be better off if nobody followed any religions at all. That opinion also holds the assumption that their way is the best way or perhaps the only true way. In both cases, accepting these opinions as true would mean discarding any potential value that religious diversity has for humanity. That's quite the tall order indeed, as it doesn't take much to recognize that many religions - religious diversity - makes for a better world than one religion or none at all.

There are various ways one could argue the case for this, but I'm going to borrow from an author I read regularly who is the inspiration for this thread. The list below is inspired by that work, but also different from it, but to give credit where credit is due, that article is here (A World With Many Religions is Better Than a World With Only One).

• All religions have something beautiful to offer. Further, the ways in which these religions are beautiful are different. That is, if you remove any one of them, you loose something amazing. This isn't to say all these religions don't also have their ugly sides, but is it really worth loosing that beauty to remove some blemishes? Talk about throwing out the seeds with the soil.
• One religion (or none at all) is not a sustainable condition. History shows us what happens when humans lack choices, as our nature begs for options. Attempts at monopolies fail - the authoritarian structure become corrupt over time, and people beg for something different when the monopoly inevitably fails to meet someone's particular needs. One way cannot last and will fragment into many. So why try and force a monopoly of religion (or irreligion) in the first place?
• There's no way to know if something is the "One True Way". Many hearken to the notion of one religion for all (or no religions for anyone) because they want certainty. There is no such certainty to be had. If there is a "best" or "right" way, we'll never agree on what that is or know if we've found it. We can only know what is "best" or "right" for us and our communities right now... and that answer can chance over time. A monopoly doesn't give you options when your needs change.

Thoughts?

If every religion has something beautiful to offer, and yet all (or most all) religions also have mediocrity and causes for division and strife within them, why not simply take the beautiful things from each and combine into one religion? Taken a step further, why does this compilation then have to be a religion at all?

 

[idea]

... potential value that religious diversity has for humanity. ...
Thoughts?

Where freedom for diverse individual expression and thought are promoted and encouraged, where the community seeks to uplift and serve rather than control and dictate, this is of course the optimal scenario.

If I were G-d, and wanted to curtail overly powerful organizations, and wanted to encourage individual freedoms while also giving everyone a supportive community - that is how I would do it, through a diversity of communities. Everyone would get the support they need through the communities near their home, while at the same time being aware that their community was not "the one and only" community, which in turn would promote individual accountability and independent thought among all.

Diversity creates a healthy balance between community support and individual thought and is a beautiful thing.

 

[TransmutingSoul]

Your paragraph of niceties (as nice as it is) flies in the face of the evidence all around us of the true behavior of those with "renewed faith in God." Which is precisely why your "faith" will never be proven to be more effective than any other "path" to being a good person. Good people are good people. In my experience they do not need God to be that way.

You to your way, me to mine.

Mine is to try to live that list, knowing that is what God has asked us to live like.

Peace be with you

 

[TransmutingSoul]

You are projecting your beliefs here. I don't believe the world even needs a lasting peace. In my belief, It is the individuals who seek peace within themselves. That happens naturally in the course of time, and this world, as is, is a great place for the soul to evolve. The individual ego/identity has peace at death of the physical body as it no longer exists. The individual soul, through many lifetimes, attains moksha, via it's precursor, nirvikalpa samadhi.

This constant search for a peace for all of humanity has to be frustrating, or quite frustrating, for each individual doing it. The sooner we admit it's unattainable, and look at the world through realistic eyes, the better.

I wish you well in your goal and may you acheive your aim

I will remain optimistic that a lasting peace for all humanity is being built and will not find peace or want peace for myself, until all find peace.

Peace be with you.

 

[Segev Moran]

Every so often, someone will voice the opinion that the world would be better off if everybody followed some particular religion. The reasons why someone supposes this vary somewhat, but essentially boil down to the belief that this religion is the best way or even the only true way. Similar opinions are voiced in the name of irreligion when we hear someone state the world would be better off if nobody followed any religions at all. That opinion also holds the assumption that their way is the best way or perhaps the only true way. In both cases, accepting these opinions as true would mean discarding any potential value that religious diversity has for humanity. That's quite the tall order indeed, as it doesn't take much to recognize that many religions - religious diversity - makes for a better world than one religion or none at all.

There are various ways one could argue the case for this, but I'm going to borrow from an author I read regularly who is the inspiration for this thread. The list below is inspired by that work, but also different from it, but to give credit where credit is due, that article is here (A World With Many Religions is Better Than a World With Only One).

• All religions have something beautiful to offer. Further, the ways in which these religions are beautiful are different. That is, if you remove any one of them, you loose something amazing. This isn't to say all these religions don't also have their ugly sides, but is it really worth loosing that beauty to remove some blemishes? Talk about throwing out the seeds with the soil.
• One religion (or none at all) is not a sustainable condition. History shows us what happens when humans lack choices, as our nature begs for options. Attempts at monopolies fail - the authoritarian structure become corrupt over time, and people beg for something different when the monopoly inevitably fails to meet someone's particular needs. One way cannot last and will fragment into many. So why try and force a monopoly of religion (or irreligion) in the first place?
• There's no way to know if something is the "One True Way". Many hearken to the notion of one religion for all (or no religions for anyone) because they want certainty. There is no such certainty to be had. If there is a "best" or "right" way, we'll never agree on what that is or know if we've found it. We can only know what is "best" or "right" for us and our communities right now... and that answer can chance over time. A monopoly doesn't give you options when your needs change.

Thoughts?

I would say taking the best of each religion and combining it.
The question arises... which offers the best?

I think that before religion and before everything, people need to first understand that harm is not the way. only after that, one religion or many won't make a difference.

 

[TransmutingSoul]

I would say taking the best of each religion and combining it.
The question arises... which offers the best?

I think that before religion and before everything, people need to first understand that harm is not the way. only after that, one religion or many won't make a difference.

You have actually hit on the timeless truth, that all good is from God and all evil is from our own selves.

Thus if division arises because of a religion, one must ask what was the point of that religion?

Peace be with you

 

[Vinayaka]

I would say taking the best of each religion and combining it.
The question arises... which offers the best?

Not a question at all for a lot of people. They'll inform you their religion is the best ... obviously. So that approach rarely works.

 

[Vinayaka]

You have actually hit on the timeless truth, that all good is from God and all evil is from our own selves.

Lots of folks don't believe that. It's a 'timeless truth'? I don't believe in intrinsic evil, not intrinsic good. Life is too complex for those kind of simplistic overgeneralisations.

 

[TransmutingSoul]

Lots of folks don't believe that. It's a 'timeless truth'? I don't believe in intrinsic evil, not intrinsic good. Life is too complex for those kind of simplistic overgeneralisations.

It does not have to be a truth you accept. It is lifes complexity that allows for that view.

Peace be with you.

 

[A Vestigial Mote]

You to your way, me to mine.

Mine is to try to live that list, knowing that is what God has asked us to live like.

Peace be with you

Can I simply ask one more question? Do you feel that you need God in order to be a good person? That is, is God's existence necessary for you to treat your fellow man well? If God did not exist, do you think you would find yourself behaving in a more evil fashion?

 

[TransmutingSoul]

Can I simply ask one more question? Do you feel that you need God in order to be a good person? That is, is God's existence necessary for you to treat your fellow man well? If God did not exist, do you think you would find yourself behaving in a more evil fashion?

I can answer simply, yes God is needed, very much so.

We may live this life with virtues all the while thinking we are a good person but without God there will always be a selfish motive, we all can do better. (Also we must note, that people can claim to follow God, but still have selfish motives, which are not of God. The I am saved by my belief and all others are hell bound epademic, in Chriatianity and Islam is a very good example of this.) Faith does not guarentee you will be a better person. It is all about effort.

We are not the source of any virtues, we can draw on them and use them, but education and effort is needed to implement them in our lives.

The Messengers from God are that Standard.

There is much more that could be discussed about this so I will add there are many people that do not have God in their lives, that could indeed be closer to God than many who claim they have God in their lives.

It is about giving credit where the credit is due and that is not to our own selves.

Peace be with you

 

[Vinayaka]

I can answer simply, yes God is needed, very much so.

You've never met an honest kind loving atheist?

 

[TransmutingSoul]

You've never met an honest kind loving atheist?

If you read what I said, I offered that an Athiest could be closer to God than a person of Faith. That they have not attributed that kindness to God, is their choice, to which I am in no position to judge.

Only God knows our hearts.

Yes that is my perspective.

Peace be with you