WHAT'S A PROBLEM OF RELIGION

[raymond]

Is it problem, if someone get Islam as a his/her religion? what's wrong about Islam...what's wrong about christian..what's wrong abou Jewish..[b]WHAT'S WRONG ABOUT RELIGION.. why we always fight each other..just because of difference about RELIGION...
(this case inspired by Obama case that he always inveigh because his name was Islamic name and his father as a moslem)

[Saladin]

The problem with religion is that all of it is lies and fairy tales. And people who believe in those fairy tales tend to act stupid.

[Muslim_009]

The problem with religion is that all of it is lies and fairy tales. And people who believe in those fairy tales tend to act stupid.
The problem with religion is that all of it is lies and fairy tales. And people who believe in those fairy tales tend to act stupid.

You really are reflecting your misrable personality.

[sasha]

I know what is problem with religions - people :twisted: . If there were no people, all religions would be just perfect. It is people who do all sorts of crazy things. The crazyest are those who are far from fundaments of his/hers religion. Who see only surface of it, but some are not capable of deep unerstanding of it.

Those who are not with any religion CAN only see its surface, and, in fact, it is mainly fary tales.

I can talk about Christianity (eastern, Greek, or Ortodox) because I have touched some things beneeth surface, but I can not talk of others. Because I know just what is on the surface of other religions. It can confuse people like me, but I know better... I think that only through this kind of search and deep understanding of your own religion you can become one with people of other religions. You can only than understand them. It is sad that people would not alow themselves to experiment with it. It brings such a joy and satisfies a special kind of hunger, a hunger of your own soul.

Many people would rather try drugs, or get drunk, just to satisfy this kind of hunger. It is similar to the attitude toward books. Everyone know that a good book is worth time of reading, but there are people who never read books.

[clearman]

“The fall of an empire—the Lesson of Byzantium”
<!-- m --><a class="postlink" href="http://www.pravoslavie.ru/enarticles/080211155439">http://www.pravoslavie.ru/enarticles/080211155439</a><!-- m -->


No other empire in human history lasted as long as Byzantium. It existed for 1123 years. In comparison: the great Roman Empire collapsed 800 after its establishment; the Ottoman Empire fell apart after 500 years; the Chinese Qing (or Manchu) Empire, after 300 years. The Russian Empire lasted 200; the British, 150; the Austro-Hungarian empire lasted around 100 years. During its height, Byzantium was home to one sixth of the entire world population. The Empire stretched from Gibraltar to the Euphrates and Arabia. It encompassed the territories of modern Greece and Turkey, Israel and Egypt, Bulgaria, Serbia and Albania, Tunis, Algiers and Morocco, part of Italy, Spain, and Portugal. There were around one thousand cities in Byzantium—nearly as many as in modern Russia.
The fact of the matter is that nationality problems in Byzantium really had not existed for many centuries. As the historical, lawful descendants of ancient Rome, which was destroyed by barbarians in the fifth century, the inhabitants of Byzantium called themselves Romans. In a vast empire divided into many nationalities there was one faith—Orthodox Christianity. The Byzantines literally fulfilled the Christian teaching of a new humanity living in a Divine spirit, where “there is neither Greek, nor Jew, nor Scythe,” as the Apostle Paul wrote. This hope preserved the country from the destructive storm of ethnic conflict. It was enough for any pagan or foreigner to accept the Orthodox Faith, and confirm it in deed, in order to become a full member of society. On the Byzantine throne, for example, were almost as many Armenians as there were Greeks; there were also citizens of Syrian, Arabian, Slavic, and Germanic origin. Amongst the higher ranks of government were representatives of all peoples in the Empire—the main requirements were their competence and dedication to the Orthodox Faith. This provided Byzantine civilization with incomparable cultural wealth.
Byzantium’s soul, and its meaning of existence, was Orthodoxy—the unspoiled confession of Christianity, in which no dogmas had changed essentially for a thousand years. The West simply could not endure such demonstrative conservatism, called it undynamic, obtuse, and limited; it finally began with grim fanaticism to demand that Byzantium modernize her whole life in the Western image—first of all in the religious, spiritual spheres, and then in intellectual and material spheres. With respect to the uniqueness and particularity of Byzantium, the West, despite its occasional raptures over Byzantine civilization, pronounced the sentence: it must all be destroyed; if necessary, together with Byzantium and her spiritual inheritors.
Byzantium was a unique state which differed from both the East and the West. Everyone recognized this fact; some were exhilarated by it, others hated this independence, while others felt oppressed by it. Be this as it may, Byzantium’s difference from the rest of world was an objective reality. First of all, Byzantium was the only country in the world which stretched over a huge territory between Europe and Asia, and its geography was already a large contributing factor to its uniqueness. It is also a very important fact that Byzantium was a multi-national empire by nature, in which the people felt the state to be one of their highest personal treasures. This was entirely incomprehensible to the Western world, where individualism and personal self-will had already been raised to the status of sacred principle.
The final and most devastating blow to Byzantium was the ecclesiastical union with Rome. Formally, this was the submission of the Orthodox Church to the Roman Pope for purely practically reasons. One after another aggressive attack from foreign nations forced the country to make the choice: either to rely on God and their own strengths, or to concede their age-long principles upon which their state was founded, and receive in return military and economic aide from the Latin West. And the choice was made. In 1274, Emperor Michael Paleologus decided upon a root concession to the West. For the first time in history, ambassadors from the Byzantine Emperor were sent to Lyon to accept the supremacy of the Pope of Rome.
The union with Rome did not continue for long. The Grecophile Pope Leo IV, who had drawn Byzantium into the Union out of better intentions, died soon after the Union was concluded, and his successor turned out to be of a completely different spirit: the interests of the Latin West were first on his list. He demanded that Byzantium change completely, that it re-make itself in the image and likeness of the West. When these changes did not happen, the Pope excommunicated his newly-baked spiritual son, Emperor Michael Paleologus, and called Europe to a new crusade against Byzantium. The Orthodox converts to Catholicism were pronounced bad Catholics. The Byzantines were supposed to get the point that the West needed only complete and unconditional religious and political submission. Not only the Pope was to be recognized as infallible, but the West itself as well.
The capital city’s incalculable wealth, its beauty and elegance, amazed all the European peoples, who were still barbarians at the time when the Byzantine Empire was in its apogee. One can only imagine—indeed, history records it as such—how crude, ignorant Scandinavians, Germans, Franks, and Anglo-Saxons, whose chief occupation at the time was primitive sacking and pillage, after arriving from some town like Paris or London (which had populations of some tens of thousands) to this megalopolis of millions, a city of enlightened citizens, scholars, and elegantly dressed youths crowding imperial universities, dreamt of only one thing: invading and robbing, robbing and invading. In fact, when this was actually accomplished in 1204 by an army of Europeans calling themselves Crusaders, who, instead of freeing the Holy Land treacherously sacked the most beautiful city in the world, , Byzantine treasures were carried away in an uninterrupted flow over the course of fifty years. Hundreds of tons of precious coin alone were carried away at a time when the annual budget of the wealthiest European countries was no more than two tons of gold.
One apologist for Hellenic nationalism, the liberal scholar Plethon, arrogantly wrote to Emperor Manuel II, “We, the people whom you command and govern, are Greeks by descent, as our language and educational heritage testify!” Such words would have been unthinkable even a century earlier. However, Plethon wrote them on the eve of the fall of Constantinople, in which were living people no longer Roman, but rather Greeks, Armenians, Slavs, Arabs, and Italians, in enmity with one another.
Greek arrogance led to the discrediting of Slavs in the Empire. Byzantium thereby estranged the Serbs and Bulgarians, who could have provided real help in the struggle with the Turks. The result was that the peoples of the once united Byzantium began to be at enmity with one another.
The West did not miss the chance to take advantage of this new problem: it began to forcefully convince the Serbs and Bulgarians that the Greeks have been suppressing their national identity for centuries. Several real revolutions were provoked, and finally, with the help of economic and military forces, the West insisted upon the Serbs’ and Bulgarians’ separation from Byzantium and unification with Latin Europe. These nationalities took the bait, exclaiming suddenly, “We are also Europeans!” The West promised them material and military aide, but of course, deceived them, instead throwing them cynically before themselves as a buffer along the warpath of the Turkish hordes. The Balkan states, so loyal to the West, found themselves under the cruel Turkish yoke for many long centuries. And Byzantium was no longer able to help. National arrogance thus played a wicked role for the empire.

I know what is problem with religions - people :twisted: . If there were no people, all religions would be just perfect. It is people who do all sorts of crazy things. The crazyest are those who are far from fundaments of his/hers religion. Who see only surface of it, but some are not capable of deep unerstanding of it.

Those who are not with any religion CAN only see its surface, and, in fact, it is mainly fary tales.

I can talk about christianity (eastern, Greek, or Ortodox) because I have touched some things beneeth surface, but I can not talk of others. Because I know just what is on the surface of other religions. It can confuse people like me, but I know better... I think that only through this kind of search and deep understanding of your own religion you can become one with people of other religions. You can only than understand them. It is sad that people would not alow themselves to experiment with it. It brings such a joy and satisfies a special kind of hunger, a hunger of your own soul.

Many people would rather try drugs, or get drunk, just to satisfy this kind of hunger. It is similar to the attitude toward books. Everyone know that a good book is worth time of reading, but there are people who never read books.

I agree.

[rehan]

[rehan] hi sasha first of all .whats your religion.if any [some one laugh your fatrher and mother thats not matter,if some one abbuses to your religion what your react [ :lol: ] .but all of people to lafugh our prophet MUHAMMAD [PEACE BE UPON HIM] .and why you r saying who buddy perfect in religion? r u perfect your religion [ :roll: ]."we r a muslim ssss"

[sasha]

Sorry Rehan, but I didn't uderstood you well. English isn't my language either. :oops:

[rehan]

[rehan] this case different by obama ,and obama is not a muslim because [five,six months before obama says. if we arrested terriest we will attack ''Makkah & Madina'' so obama is not a muslim. this case only religious.

[rehan]

[rehan] no my friend i can understand my english is not good

[Terry]

religion is the first reason in the world why people fight for. Different concepts, different views etc...
nothing is wrong about this, it's normal for the most of people

[Benn]

it's just that people don't have to believe in this too much, because always thinking that God will help us will make us become non-enterprising, which consequently means progress cessation.

[sasha]

It is good when someone fights for something, but it is very bad when someone fight against anything!

[Faw_Peter]

It is good when someone fights for something, but it is very bad when someone fight against anything!

no, it's only a word game, but the outcome is the same

[sasha]

When you are fighting for something and you aren't fight against anything, then you are developing and improving. You are improving the world around you.
When someone is fighting against somebody or something, then he is destroying and degrading everything. No matter how noble the cause is.

It isn't just game of words, it is philosophical aproach to the problem. As a winner, or as a looser.

[Steven]

ok, when the second world war was, what's the difference if we say that people fought for peace or people fought against fascism?

[Terry]

when you fight against something, you attract that "something", as well as when you fight for something, you also attract that "something"

[M.Helen]

I agree, even Mother Terrssa said she would particpate in a meeting for peace rather than in a meeting against war. See the difference

[Faw_Peter]

Is it problem, if someone get Islam as a his/her religion? what's wrong about Islam...what's wrong about christian..what's wrong abou Jewish..[b]WHAT'S WRONG ABOUT RELIGION.. why we always fight each other..just because of difference about RELIGION...
(this case inspired by Obama case that he always inveigh because his name was Islamic name and his father as a moslem)

there is nothing in religion,but in traditions and in people, they are a big problem. Even if you are against the act you will do it without a revolt or reject. This has the beginig in your education

[FreeThinker]

People need to have a few qualities like open-mindedness, inquisitiveness, some IQ and power of reasoning to be able to understand a religion. Unfortunately, many people do not show these qualities when it comes to their religion. Many religious people have voluntarily or involuntarily made up their minds to follow their religion blindly. Some even try to impose their religious thoughts on others and when countered with logic turn very defensive about their religion and god, and some sometimes a bit offensive too (This is from my experience with a few christians in the US and some muslims in the Saudi and India). I feel that the problem is more with people than with the religions. Here are a few of my observations/suggestions:

1. We form our mindsets at a very young age, so parents must use their wisdom while teaching children about religion.
2. Equality of religions - children should taught that. I was born in a conservative hindu family and grew up in India amidst hindus, muslims, christians, jews and zorastrians. Both my parents were religious and I followed their ways. But since I was a child I had many questions about why different people believe in different gods and follow different traditions and I used to ask my mom. Though mom's a very religious hindu (usually spending much time in prayers and visiting temples), there's one thing she always said, that "all gods are same. it's like calling the same person with different names. and all religions are similar. though the paths are different, they all lead to the same". I have seen many parents telling their children that their religion is the best and it's the only one that must be followed, etc; and I think it was very wise of mom not to say such things. She let me do the thinking. When I was a kid in school I began visiting churches and mosques along with temples, borrowed bible and quran from friends and studied, visited countries for work and met religious people, mostly christians and muslims from the US, UK, Saudi, Pakistan, Malaysia. I am an atheist now, lol .. which is a different question though.
3. Have 100% faith in your religion. when you have full faith in your god and religion then whatever negetive anyone says about your god or religion, you know it's not true and you dont have to become defensive. Just ignore and move on.
4. Study your religion well, coz thats how u gain full faith in your religion. Do your homework.
5. Ask "why?". Ask yourself rather than asking others. Keep asking yourself why till you get your answers.
6. When you find your answers, please don't try to impose them on others because you are not the only one who knows them. Also, your answers need not apply to others.
7. And finally, if God is almighty then he need not be defended in any way. You need not feel offended if something bad is said about god, because you know it's not true. What would you do if someone called a horse a donkey? Probably laugh a bit and move on :p

Enough of my blabbering... Today is Ganesh festival here, so I am going to go out have some fun

[Big_Becka]

there is nothing in religion,but in traditions and in people, they are a big problem. Even if you are against the act you will do it without a revolt or reject. This has the beginig in your education

It is not just people... We are talking about religions when we should be talking about denominations.

EVERY religion has it's fundamentalist and/or violent denominations. Today, people often associate Islam with fundamentalist Islamic sects. But this is incorrect - Islam has many forms, and some are quite liberal. Most are peaceful. Likewise, Christianity had it's violent fundamentalist past in the form of the Spanish Inquisition and the witch hunts.

It is an interesting point about fighting for something rather than against something: it does seem more positive and constructive :-)

ok, when the second world war was, what's the difference if we say that people fought for peace or people fought against fascism?

If you look at propaganda for this period, people were fighting "for King and country," and "to keep the home fires burning." The distinction helps explain why the war developed the way it did: while the war was politically very complex, the common people could not be motivated to join the war until they felt threatened.

[Faw_Peter]

EVERY religion has it's fundamentalist and/or violent denominations

People are guilty!!!! To distinguish what is good and bad we have brains. And if in the Quran or in the Bible says that if you do not managed to do good or to be forgiven you must throw in the fountain then, that should we do? when religion teach good things it is ok. but when it comes to what some people do and say that their God ask them to do it,is totally man guilty . How can you kill a man, or to insult him, etc. and to be good? which is that God that says such words? or is it a God?

[FreeThinker]

The problem is with human nature I suppose. We are still animals who like to blindly follow our leaders like a herd. If we go by the Pareto analysis, of all the people, the dumb 80% are lead by the wise 20%. So as long as this ratio continues (which most probably will continue), there is always going to be this problem with the religion.
This problem is more with organised religions like Christianity and Islam. The pope or a mullah passes a rule and it's final. However, in unorganised religions of the east such as hinduism, nobody is given the authority to pass a rule. Each individual has the right to question the religion and experiment himself.

[tricker]

The problem is with human nature I suppose. We are still animals who like to blindly follow our leaders like a herd.

We come from monkeys ... and they live in large families with a male as head of the family and all the rest follows him. So there is nothing strange in this. Tin is that since then man evolved over (at least physically) but it seems mentally something persist from those periods...