Is religion at the root of present day atrocities?

[marco]

In Manchester, England, we had a suicide bomber murder 22 people, many of them children. As usual the perpetrator was a Muslim and as usual we are reminded that Islam is a religion of peace. But it spawns people to murder innocent folk, usually with the pointless observation that Allah is great.

It is possible to leaf through the Koran and find verses that justify cruelty and we can also find verses that condemn it.

Is there an answer to this never ending circle of violence?
Does the problem reside with values that belong to a barbaric age?

[RightReason]

[Replying to marco]

Is religion at the root of the killings we have seen in Paris, Brussels, Berlin, Manchester, London... ? The reason I ask is that invariably someone shouts something about Allah, who is a religious figure, so it might be possible to link these atrocities with religion.

Yes, I agree, those atrocities were done in the name of Allah and the Nazis adopted Darwinian evolutionary theory regarding the “survival of the fittest� and a “master race�. So, can I say atrocities have occurred in the name of science? Guess it would be accurate to say atrocities have been committed in the name of religion, science, philosophy, love, and even Jodie Foster.

But I think I must have just been in the mood to give you a hard time. Carry on . . .

[marco]

Guess it would be accurate to say atrocities have been committed in the name of religion, science, philosophy, love, and even Jodie Foster.

But I think I must have just been in the mood to give you a hard time. Carry on . . .

And it would then be appropriate to deal with the "present day" atrocities and classify them as springing from some religious conviction. I see there has been a copy-cat reprisal in London against midnight worshippers coming from a mosque that gained some notoriety. Can we then say that the previous atrocities where cars were driven into innocent pedestrians inspired this new attack?

The land of rural church steeples and Sunday bells, home of la politesse anglaise, is finding the other face of God.

[RightReason]

[Replying to marco]

The land of rural church steeples and Sunday bells, home of la politesse anglaise, is finding the other face of God.

Sorry, no. They are finding the face of man. This is not God’s doing.

[marco]

[Replying to marco]

The land of rural church steeples and Sunday bells, home of la politesse anglaise, is finding the other face of God.

Sorry, no. They are finding the face of man. This is not God’s doing.

I do not hear him denying responsibility. Do you? I'm afraid that silent observation from the orchards of heaven is not good enough. In the past he was capable of stepping on to mountains and issuing instructions or shouting from the skies or parting the Red Sea. Is he now terminally ill, dead, deaf or just fed up?

[bluethread]

That passage is indeed problematic........ It is possible that Adonai was testing Avraham to affirm that this was not just a verbal commitment on his part.

It may be problematic and I have heard various justifications for its inclusion but none that leaves Adonai with honour. For God to "test" when he knows the outcome is not a satisfactory explanation. The result of this story is that people can assume that God may, on occasions, ask them to kill not just enemies but their dearest.

The Koran of course has verses that seem to make it a duty to kill unbelievers, enemies of Allah. When the deed is done it is then appropriate to point out that Allah is great.

People can assume many things. In fact, many use the principle of reducing suffering to justify abortion among the poor. When I said test, I was not referring to assuring Adonai, but to assuring Avraham. The main point is that the killing did not take place and the passage ends with Adonai acknowledging that this is a matter of priority, not an establishment of halachah(practice).

[RightReason]

[Replying to marco]

I do not hear him denying responsibility. Do you? I'm afraid that silent observation from the orchards of heaven is not good enough.

So if someone says they killed someone in my name, I am presumed guilty? I don’t think so.

In the past he was capable of stepping on to mountains and issuing instructions or shouting from the skies or parting the Red Sea.

He’s just as capable now as He was then. He didn’t exactly do those things then at the command of men either, rather in His own time. The most frustrating part for God is probably that He knows it wouldn’t make a difference. Since the beginning of time men have clamored, “If only God would show us�, or “If only God would do blank, then we would believe and know what to do� LOL! He tried that many times. Those who listened listened. But many refused to listen even then. They don’t get Him. They continue to follow their ways and their rationalizations. They don’t know Him and they never will.

I would suggest those in the radical Islam groups might even know they are not following any commands from God – that is just their excuse. Attempting to put some kind of God stamp on something probably makes them feel important.

[marco]

So if someone says they killed someone in my name, I am presumed guilty? I don’t think so.

No one is saying GOD is guilty. He presumably has the power to clear up the misunderstanding, so why doesn't he? When various people commit crimes and blame you as the instigator, as the boss man, you will certainly be investigated and require to deny your involvement.

Since the beginning of time men have clamored, “If only God would show us�, or “If only God would do blank, then we would believe and know what to do� LOL! He tried that many times.

We have records through history of people doing things and we can readily accept them. God seems to have acted in such a way, and in such a limited field, that doubt is inevitable. Can you illustrate half a dozen of God's MANY attempts to persuade humanity by displaying his presence? Or is all the proof contained in the wings of a butterfly? Do we have to believe in myth?

[Wootah]

In Manchester, England, we had a suicide bomber murder 22 people, many of them children. As usual the perpetrator was a Muslim and as usual we are reminded that Islam is a religion of peace. But it spawns people to murder innocent folk, usually with the pointless observation that Allah is great.

It is possible to leaf through the Koran and find verses that justify cruelty and we can also find verses that condemn it.

Is there an answer to this never ending circle of violence?
Does the problem reside with values that belong to a barbaric age?

I agree with you but first here's the real answer: Due to our sin nature there is and will be no end to the sin.

But few believe in sin and even fewer realise it is unsolvable.

I would say the religious wrongly believe that sin is solvable by following rules.

Religion is simply any set of practices that people do to feel virtuous - to get into 'heaven'. So a vegan might practice not eating meat or a capitalist might practice investing or a family man might start a family or a Islamist might try to enforce Islam or a JW might door knock a lot. Or a statist might try to create laws. An evolutionist might be pro abortion, etc.

This false pursuit of virtue to get into heaven is hard (impossible) to stop. How one justifies blowing up people or killing fetuses is quite easy to understand from the above perspective. But can you perceive how an Islamist and an evolutionist might both see their evils ate justified?

On the bright side how many Hindus burn their wife when they die these days? What changed?

[marco]

On the bright side how many Hindus burn their wife when they die these days? What changed?

Sati or suttee seems relatively rare and was probably rumoured to be more common by the British ruling India.

But the position today is not quite so bright. In India thousands of brides are burned ritually because of unpaid dowries. I think the authorities do try to discourage this important custom.
Fewer brides die in Pakistan - at least from burning. I understand that in 1999, 1600 burnings were reported but only 60 were prosecuted and two resulted in convictions. It would seem it's not worthwhile bothering to report a burning bride. Just one of these things.

[RightReason]

[Replying to marco]

No one is saying GOD is guilty. He presumably has the power to clear up the misunderstanding, so why doesn't he?

If you know Him, know who He is you do not need a public declaration from him. If you do not, a public declaration wouldn’t change your mind anyway.

If someone claimed killing someone in my name, I shouldn’t have to respond. What people can see with their own eyes should suffice. I am not on a trial. If I am -- bring forth the evidence.

When various people commit crimes and blame you as the instigator, as the boss man, you will certainly be investigated and require to deny your involvement.

There would be no trial if there is no evidence to move forward. The “When did you stop beating your wife?� inquiry is set up to presume guilty. Any response is spun against the defendant. The wise man takes no part in such nonsense.

Nothing new under the sun . . .

So Pilate came outside to them and said, “What accusation do you bring against this man?� 30 They replied, “If this man were not a criminal, we would not have handed him over to you.� 31 Pilate told them, “Take him yourselves and pass judgment on him according to your own law!� The Jewish religious leaders replied, “We cannot legally put anyone to death.� 32 This happened to fulfill the word Jesus spoke indicating what kind of death he was going to die. 33 So Pilate went back into the governor’s residence, summoned Jesus, and asked him, “Are you the king of the Jews?� 34 Jesus replied, “Are you saying this on your own initiative, or have others said it to you about me?� 35 Pilate answered, “I am not a Jew, am I? Your own people and your chief priests handed you over to me. What have you done?� 36 Jesus replied, “My kingdom is not from this world. If my kingdom were from this world, my servants would fight to prevent me being handed over to the Jewish authorities. But now my kingdom is not from here.� 37 Then Pilate said, “So you are a king!� Jesus replied, “You say that I am a king. I have been born and have come into the world for this reason—to testify to the truth. Everyone who belongs to the truth listens to my voice.�

Can you illustrate half a dozen of God's MANY attempts to persuade humanity by displaying his presence?

Every story of every Saint is an example of God displaying His presence. Every holy awesome human being I have ever met is an example of God displaying His presence. Every time I held all 8 of my newborn children in my arms was an example of God displaying His presence. Fatima. Every Eucharistic miracle. The countless God moments I have heard my fellow men tell me. Snowflakes. Beauty. Love.