Religion - A builder or destroyer?

by Zero 18 Replies latest jw friends

• 

  Zero

  It has oft been presented here that religion has been destructive to the utmost, an inhibiter and counter-productive in human development and civilization. There is always the other side of the proverbial coin. When you think about it, where would the world of science and history be if not for religious motivation?

  Construction of the great prehistoric monuments of early civilizations and magnificent historical edifices which have survived to our time to reveal much about our heritage, were to a large extent driven by religious beliefs.
  Early developments of science seem to have been promulgated to some extent by religious belief in a god or gods in the first civilizations.
  Religion seems to be at the very core of the rise of civilization, not only as a significant part of it, but as a prime instigator for its development.

  If religion seems to have been a destroyer, it also seems to have been at the heart of construction. If it seems to have hindered, it has also been a driving force. Faith and worship are a powerful force.
• 

  silver252525

  yea Zero, Religion I think plays an important in our lives.In some cases it either brings out the best or worst in us.

  No organization is perfect...there will always be someone or persons who will degrade it.

  Religion is like 'knowledge with wisdom', without the later it is doomed.
• 

  Francois

  Well, Zero, IMO, there are more than two sides to this consideration. Instead of the coin metaphor, I think perhaps we are dealing with an icosohedron, a polyhedron for sure.

  You ask: where would the world of science and history be if not for religious motivation?

  Well, much further along than it is. It was the church that resisted each and every scientific development, especially in the dawning of the realization of the nature of physical reality. It took the church 350 years to apologize to Nicholas Copernicus; the earth you see was the center of the universe - remember? And it resists the idea of evolution to this day. I won't belabor an obvious point.

  History? To this day, Wiccans are regarded as evil, when in reality they are a harmless, gentle nature religion. But since there were no Wiccans left after the church murdered them off to write their own history, the church historians - the only ones left - wrote their fictional account of how they sacrificed and ate children and other nonsense. And there's more in the form of the Inquisition and God knows what else.

  You didn't mention Art, but why be picky? Ever study medieval art? Flat. No perspective. Glorification of church and church themes only allowed. The influence of the church on art was, to say the very least, stultifying for centuries.

  The cathedrals at Salisbury and at Chartres are indeed beautiful, but their overall effect on civilization has been minimal.

  Religion in general, and the Christian religion in particular have shed more blood than all other forces combined. And in the case of the Christian religion, in the name of the Prince of Peace.

  Religion has been a brake, an albatross, draped around the neck of civilization from the beginning. Mainly this seems to be because organized religion is an evil phenomenon which mainly seeks to serve itself.

  I'd rather have one Jesus, or one Gandhi, than all the organized religions that have ever been. Religion in the center of things? You bet, and with its heels dug in, screaming, "NO, I won't go. You can't make me!"

  Just my opinion.

  Francois

  Where it is a duty to worship the Sun you can be sure that a study of the laws of heat is a crime.
• 

  Zero

  Francois:
  Certainly your references support the one side of the coin I initially referred to. The other side, the one which I emphasized, goes back further, more or less to the beginning of civilization, at least as we refer to it. Religion, like the concept of "democracy", has gone something astray. Jmo, of course.

  Some witty person once observed that every silver lining has a cloud. ;)
• 

  larc

  Zero,

  Science goes back to the beginning of time as well. Science has made much greater progress in benefiting mankind than religion, by far.
• 

  Zero

  Larc:
  To what extent science has benefitted the world and mankind may be debateable. -smile-
  For every war that religion has played a significant part in, science and technology have as well, would you agree? It is not religion that has developed highly destructive weapons for war.

  However, my point is that from what we think we know about the beginnings of science, culture and technology, religion may have provided the initial jump-start, though science and religion are in very separate camps now.
• 

  Simon

  I agree - it is science and the persuit of knowledge and understanding that has driven progress. Religion has caused the wars and problems and has only moved forward when it is forced to - dragged kicking and screaming.

  Whatever benefit fear and superstition did bring are long past their sell-by date IMHO
• 

  larc

  Zero,

  There is no doubt that technology has has advanced the killing power of war. Also, I think all wars are economic rather than religious. However, and this is a very big however, religion has been used to fire up people to fight wars. Religion is the necessary ingredient to give the hate and fury to people so that they will engage in war with all their might. Go read the book of Joshua as an example of this killing power that religion can provide.
• 

  Zep

  Religion has been essential to the development of Man. Religion is just Philosophy when you look at it. Everything Evolves and religions such as Christianity were once new and revolutionary. It's out of date now -Christianity-, though it did have its place and time, and still carries ideas worthy of thought and consideration.Religion is just another part of the big picture where man has slowly evolved his consciouness and gradually stepped out of the primeval swamp he came from 3.5 billion years ago.
• 

  Francois

  Zero, you said, "It is not religion that has developed highly destructive weapons for war." I think you stopped too soon with that statement. I think it would have been more accurate to say, "It is not religion that has developed highly destructive weapons for war. It was religion that started the war to begin with."

  I fear I must disagree in part with my friend Simon in that I don't think that most wars have been economically based. Some have, to be sure. However, if you examine some of the more recent ones, what you realize is that they are religiously based...almost tribal, in fact.

  The late unplesantness in the former Yugoslavia? A war between christians and muslims.

  Ireland? Catholics vs. Protestants.

  The Levant? Jews vs. Arabs.

  Sri Lanka? Hindus vs. Tamil.

  Indo-Pak? Hindus vs. Muslim.

  Indian Civil? Hindus vs. Sikh.

  Africa? Hutus vs. Tutsis

  The Russian Revolution? The communist "church" vs. the orthodox church.

  The coming American second revolution? the socialist "church" vs. the religion of personal freedom.

  Of course this list could go on and on. And in support of Simon, some wars were of an economic nature indeed. The U.S. Civil War was economically based (No, slavery was not the central issue). The Opium Wars between the British Empire and China (perhaps the ultimate immoral war of all time). The U.S. vs. Iraq, Operation Just Cause, and more recently the U.S. vs. Serbia, Operation Just Because.

  And there were the wars of imperial expansion like the invasion of eastern Europe by the Mongol Hordes; the invasion of everyone by Rome, and Japan; same with the British Empire - although an argument can be made to include British expansionism as an economically-based war.

  And there were wars of unknown, or vague cause: Vietnam, for instance, most likely Johnson's Ego. Or Robert McNamara's.

  And finally, wars of distraction: Bill Clinton vs. the aspirin factory.

  Anyhowsomever, it seems that religion is implicated in far more than its share of bloodletting. I'm sure you've heard the prayer: Jesus, protect me from your followers.

  You seem to be a rare bird on this site, Zero: a person who can disagree without being disagreeable. Who can debate the facts absent falling into the low moral swamp of the ad hominem attack. I hope you persevere.

  Francois

  Where it is a duty to worship the Sun you can be sure that a study of the laws of heat is a crime.