Does belief in religion cause wars?

No I disagree.

Suicide is categorically forbidden in the Koran. I have heard Imams in Palestine denounce suicide-bombers as a sin against God. The fact that terrorists use it as a weapon illustrates my original point, that people (not the faith) are responsible for twisting religious text into justifying ANYTHING.

And no other religion can use violence to push their aims? Mr Forsyth hasn't been reading his history of late. European soil is fertiziled on the bodies of people killed in Christians-vs-Christian wars. In fact more people have been killed in the name of Christ than any other faith -including Islam. How can I say that? Because there have been more religious wars started in the name of Christ than anyother faith. History has proven Christianity to be a very violent religion, despite its edicts of peace and tolerence.

Some how we may be missing something here. Mr Forsyth is famous for his novels...was this a prelude to one, using artistic licence?


I'm with Frederick Forsyth on this one; I do not believe that he in any way neglects history, he has long been an effective political commentator and his remarks, read carefully, are very measured.

After all, this is the 21st century and there should be no place for primitive interpretations; Fatwas - stoning - honour killings- kidnapping and beheading - Jihad - please! Surely Islam should put its house in order. Like Mr Forsyth, I have the greatest respect for all the great religions. But in 2009- sweet peaceful Islam - please show me.
 
I'm with Frederick Forsyth on this one; I do not believe that he in any way neglects history, he has long been an effective political commentator and his remarks, read carefully, are very measured.

After all, this is the 21st century and there should be no place for primitive interpretations; Fatwas - stoning - honour killings- kidnapping and beheading - Jihad - please! Surely Islam should put its house in order. Like Mr Forsyth, I have the greatest respect for all the great religions. But in 2009- sweet peaceful Islam - please show me.

And according to the pope no place for condoms in Africa because they only make the aids situation worse but hey as Jon Stewart said who would know more about sex than the pope right?
How many people do you think that enlightened 21st century edict will kill in the next 5 years, I am betting it will be a lot more than militant Islam will manage.
 
Last edited:
Monty my friend, I reckon that one ain't up to your usual standard at all. First, as you realise, it isn't really on topic and misdirects the subject . Back to wars. As you always advise, take that other argument somewhere else.

I always expect better of you where argument is concerned. C'mon, have a better shot. Even I could do much better than that old malarkie.:smile:
 
Last edited:
Why?
Because you can't dispute it with a Fredrick Forsyth quote or Winston Churchill speech?

You opened up the avenue with your comments about the "primitive interpretations" of Islam so I provided you with an equal example of a backward and incredibly stupid stance by the head of the "Christian" world that will be followed by millions and end up killing millions and you see that as unrelated?

As far as I am concerned both Islam and Christianity are equally as guilty of "being primitive" as they are both dedicated to stopping free thought and replacing it with "Its Gods will" thus creating the cannon fodder required to grow their respective religions and gain more power for themselves and this is precisely why religion must never be given State control.
 
Last edited:
Religion is an excuse for war, for it is mans' nature to fight. Whether it be for land, money or religion.
 
Why?
Because you can't dispute it with a Fredrick Forsyth quote or Winston Churchill speech?

You opened up the avenue with your comments about the "primitive interpretations" of Islam so I provided you with an equal example of a backward and incredibly stupid stance by the head of the "Christian" world that will be followed by millions and end up killing millions and you see that as unrelated?

As far as I am concerned both Islam and Christianity are equally as guilty of "being primitive" as they are both dedicated to stopping free thought and replacing it with "Its Gods will" thus creating the cannon fodder required to grow their respective religions and gain more power for themselves and this is precisely why religion must never be given State control.


But you have not tried to dispute Forsyth's accurate quote, no-one asked you to confront Churchill.

The topic is whether belief in religion causes wars. You completely avoid this, and decide to swerve off into a a different argument altogether that should be dealt with elsewhere, and I look forward to it. Seriously.

Now you produce a different argument in this post, which is on topic and is your opinion regarding two religions. You are entitled to that, but your argument does in no way dismiss the accurate and careful statement of Frederick Forsyth. Read it again and perhaps tell us why it is not a correct description of the current situation the world is facing, like it or not.

Do any other religions in the world today talk like this?:-

http://www.express.co.uk/posts/view/91891/Hate-preacher-I-want-Sharia-law-in-Britain
 
Last edited:
And according to the pope no place for condoms in Africa because they only make the aids situation worse but hey as Jon Stewart said who would know more about sex than the pope right?
How many people do you think that enlightened 21st century edict will kill in the next 5 years, I am betting it will be a lot more than militant Islam will manage.

A great point MontyB, how much power do religious leaders wield & how do they use it? I presonally find it disturbing that virtually every religious sect preaches poverty and abstinence of some kind - at the lower levels. Yet these religious organisations are amongst the most wealthy concerns in the world - is this not a contradiction? How was this wealth accumulated - not by staying within their own borders & performing collections in their churches, synagogues, temples or mosques! It was raised through exploitation of belief and demonisation of other religions & races; why? Because they were a threat to the stability of the status quo, thus the religious orders & their comfortable life. So it was on with the rhetoric, off with pacifism & away we go!!
 
That's far more to do with the laws and legislators of the UK than anything to do with Islam. We've had Muslims and their descendants in my home town for over 100 years. I've never heard of any of them saying a word out of place, other than perhaps to barrack for the "wrong" football side.

To tell the truth, I'd rather any of the Rasheeds for neighbours than any of the so called "christians" I can think of.
 
Last edited:
Do any other religions in the world today talk like this?:-

Like the Christian Right in America trying to ban gay marriage, abortion and the teaching of evolution? Or perhaps LDS sects that still practice polygamy in violation of state and federal laws?
 



'Does belief in religion cause wars?'

Not the belief itself, but how it's interpreted by the leaders of that religion.
 
A great point MontyB, how much power do religious leaders wield & how do they use it? I presonally find it disturbing that virtually every religious sect preaches poverty and abstinence of some kind - at the lower levels. Yet these religious organisations are amongst the most wealthy concerns in the world - is this not a contradiction? How was this wealth accumulated - not by staying within their own borders & performing collections in their churches, synagogues, temples or mosques! It was raised through exploitation of belief and demonisation of other religions & races; why? Because they were a threat to the stability of the status quo, thus the religious orders & their comfortable life. So it was on with the rhetoric, off with pacifism & away we go!!


OK - here we go. Of course the belief in religions has caused conflict in the past, because the believers are made up of men; there lies the rub.
Darwin has shown us that survival of the fittest and natural selection expresses nature red in tooth and claw. Apply this to humans and you see a very ugly picture.

This AIDS question has been introduced, a red herring in my opinion and I have tried to avoid it, but as you insist, please allow me to remind you that The Pope did not cause AIDS, neither did religion; if their tenets had been maintained, we would never have have brought it down on us; millions will die from AIDS, and all warnings have been ignored ; the irresponsible practices continue; never mind that, just use a condom and carry on! All the Pope was advising is stop the irresponsible practices, now; abstain from such practices. That is how he sees it and feels he has a responsibility to not shy away from saying so. Many of us may feel that even so, condoms will help stem the tide.

However, millions lost to AIDS, many greater and continuing millions lost to abortion, none of them through religion; but nature red in tooth and claw, natural selection; the lack of any reflection of the spirit of man-kind thst raises him up to greater potential. Religions strive to search out and try to explain the meaning of life; but tooth and claw continually crop up in man.

So, back to Religion and War, where I tried to keep the issues; Yes, Christianity has a very blotted copybook, but religions live and grow and those days are now old history. Today there is only one religious war; that of Militant Islam v. The World; reason - religious and cultural domination at any cost. This is the challenge we face, like it or not, we have no choice, they are not interested in our 'by your leave'.

So in the 21st century, we do not see such from any other religion, but in answer to your question, are there any purely religious wars, I responded Yes, the one we face now.

For the record, I personally have the utmost respect for ALL the great religions ; a man chooses his own way to his God, in my opinion.

I believe in secular government, which is why I oppose the current Islamist approach, and trying to ignore it, to sweep it under the counter, does not put things right. Once you have paid the Danegeld, you never get rid of the Dane.

As far as recent post responses are concerned, I will get back to them as soon as I have time.
 
Last edited:
I think perhaps religion just is one of the easier reachable 'excuses' for provoking aggresivity.

I don't find it being an actual reason for a lot of conflicts: Because if one looks deeper than religious differences, there are other socio-economical reasons as enough for a driving force for fights...
 
That's far more to do with the laws and legislators of the UK than anything to do with Islam. We've had Muslims and their descendants in my home town for over 100 years. I've never heard of any of them saying a word out of place, other than perhaps to barrack for the "wrong" football side.

To tell the truth, I'd rather any of the Rasheeds for neighbours than any of the so called "christians" I can think of.


It is true that we observe the Human Rights edict to a ridiculous degree, but the issue is one of 'Militant Islam,' not Islam as you describe it, and it refers to the rest of the world, not just Britain. Forsyth's quote makes it clear that he refers to factions within Islam.

Of course you have the option on where you live, as do our ethnic communities. The fact that everything to do with our culture is constantly under complaint and threat is not our choice. As for our attitudes, here is a letter published in yesterday's paper:-


Letter page Express 29 03 09.

"In response to recent Muslim demonstrations, I would like to tell these ‘Islamic’ terrorists that they are not Muslims.

They should not do their evil deeds in my name and those of the other peace-loving Muslims who have made the UK their home, who work here in a variety of jobs such as the NHS, Army, shops or offices and contribute to society by paying our taxes.

What the terrorists are doing is anti-Islam itself. Islam means Peace, not killing or harming the innocent . It is these terrorists who are the enemies of Islam, doing deeds that God forbids.

I adore the lovely people of the UK. If you don’t like the country, please leave and let us live in peace and harmony with our British friends and co-workers. Long live the Queen."

(Name supplied, Devon, UK).

If only our moderates would make themselves heard more.

Incidently, just in case you or MontyB might have assumed that Frederick Forsyth's quote was from some anti- Islam rant, I have recovered the full arictle; you may find it interesting.


http://www.express.co.uk/posts/view/90219/Now-Brown-embraces-Soviet-style-tyranny
 
Last edited:
Here is a little footnote to our view on religious belief. The South American Missionary Society (SAMS) in Tunbridge Wells received the subscriptions of Charles Darwin from 1867 until his death in 1882. This society was Anglican, evangelistic for the Gospel of Jesus Christ, & many of its missionaries gave their lives for the cause in the 19th century. In 1870 Darwin wrote to the mission: 'I shall feel proud if your committee think fit to elect me an honorary member of your society.'

Interestingly, his life-long friend James Sullivan, 2nd Lieutenant on the Beagle, was also a deicated supporter of Christian Missions.

Each man ploughs his own furrow.:)
 
Last edited:
Are you trying to imply that this shows Darwin did not believe his own work?

For over 30 years, I have been a warranted Scouter, an organisation with strong religious affiliations, but that in no way implies that I agree with their policy on this matter. I merely want to help kids grow up with a decent outlook and a few life skills.

Maybe Darwin agreed with the rest of the Society's work similarly.
 
OK - here we go. Of course the belief in religions has caused conflict in the past, because the believers are made up of men; there lies the rub.
Darwin has shown us that survival of the fittest and natural selection expresses nature red in tooth and claw. Apply this to humans and you see a very ugly picture.

This AIDS question has been introduced, a red herring in my opinion and I have tried to avoid it, but as you insist, please allow me to remind you that The Pope did not cause AIDS, neither did religion; if their tenets had been maintained, we would never have have brought it down on us; millions will die from AIDS, and all warnings have been ignored ; the irresponsible practices continue; never mind that, just use a condom and carry on! All the Pope was advising is stop the irresponsible practices, now; abstain from such practices. That is how he sees it and feels he has a responsibility to not shy away from saying so. Many of us may feel that even so, condoms will help stem the tide.

However, millions lost to AIDS, many greater and continuing millions lost to abortion, none of them through religion; but nature red in tooth and claw, natural selection; the lack of any reflection of the spirit of man-kind thst raises him up to greater potential. Religions strive to search out and try to explain the meaning of life; but tooth and claw continually crop up in man.

So, back to Religion and War, where I tried to keep the issues; Yes, Christianity has a very blotted copybook, but religions live and grow and those days are now old history. Today there is only one religious war; that of Militant Islam v. The World; reason - religious and cultural domination at any cost. This is the challenge we face, like it or not, we have no choice, they are not interested in our 'by your leave'.

So in the 21st century, we do not see such from any other religion, but in answer to your question, are there any purely religious wars, I responded Yes, the one we face now.

For the record, I personally have the utmost respect for ALL the great religions ; a man chooses his own way to his God, in my opinion.

I believe in secular government, which is why I oppose the current Islamist approach, and trying to ignore it, to sweep it under the counter, does not put things right. Once you have paid the Danegeld, you never get rid of the Dane.

As far as recent post responses are concerned, I will get back to them as soon as I have time.

If it is a red herring then it is one of your own making as I was only responding to your comments regarding "primitive interpretations" ie the post below...

I'm with Frederick Forsyth on this one; I do not believe that he in any way neglects history, he has long been an effective political commentator and his remarks, read carefully, are very measured.

After all, this is the 21st century and there should be no place for primitive interpretations; Fatwas - stoning - honour killings- kidnapping and beheading - Jihad - please! Surely Islam should put its house in order. Like Mr Forsyth, I have the greatest respect for all the great religions. But in 2009- sweet peaceful Islam - please show me.

You seem to think that a loose grouping of Islamic nutters who may kill at most a few thousand people in the next 5 years is somehow more significant than the edicts of a man (aka The Pope) who controls the thinking of millions which will literally kill hundreds of thousands within the next few years.

No matter how you try and twist this you opened the door to a comparison between the two religions.

Now here is the simple reality for ya the Christian world has an issue with Islam because it does not conform to its views and Islam has an issue with the Christian world for exactly the same reasons and if both religions ruled nations we would be up to crusade number 1000 by now and the day that one religion wipes out the other they will start killing each other over interpretation of scripture because in the end man can not tolerate difference.
 
Sorry, can't buy that. I have covered all those points already. Summing up , - Fatwas,stoning, stoning raped women, pushing walls onto gays to kill them, kidnapping and beheading on the internet and television, honour killings, calling for the murder of non-believers. Militant Islam, how primitive do you want?

A few thousand victims only? We are well past that already. Under attack and threat from Militant Islam are Britain, US, the countries of Europe, the countries of North Africa, incl Sudan and Darfur,India, Indonesia, Nigeria,Sri Lanka, Pakistan, Jordan, Egypt,Turkey, Afghanistan, Iraq, just to name a few, and that is before they get their dirty bombs.

The Christian world today has no issues with Islam; the Christian world wishes to live peacably, but Militant Islam has issues with the world, is at war with the world.

So, as the topic is 'does belief in religion cause wars', and the question 'has there ever been a purely religious war,' my answer is still - Yes, the one-sided conflict we are facing now. Like it or not, we have no choice in the matter.
 
Last edited:
If Catholics don't listen to the Pope when he says abstinence is the only way to prevent pregnancy or that sex should be for pro-creation only why should we expect them to start listening if the Pope were to endorse the use of condoms to decrease the rate of AIDS/HIV infections in Africa?

Furthermore, judging all Christians for the actions of the Pope is the same as judging all Muslims for the actions of Osama bin Laden. There are hundreds of millions of us who do not recognize the Pope as being our spiritual leader and do not look to guidance from Rome. Methodists, LDS, Lutherans, Calvinists, Jehovah's Witness, Baptists, Orthodox, Anglicans and dozens of other sects operate independent of the Catholic Church.

Del Boy, the Christian world does have an issue with Islam but we already went through our violent/militant defense of the belief stage and we fight our wars now with words. We send Missionaries throughout the world preaching the word of God in an effort to win over converts. I agree that the United States and a score of other countries are under threat from military Islam, but the threat is very small. Does Al Qaeda pose a threat to the existence of the United States? No, an inconvenience at most and temporary at best. Will Britian ever succomb to Sharia law? No, the reason the people preaching for such a change get so much airtime is because their views are so extreme, not because they are so widely believed.
 
Back
Top