What are your believes?

[Kurogane]

Hello lads,

Usually when we speak about wars that have happened along history and others that are going on currently, we mostly know what causes them... whether we see it in the news, read it in the history books or simply hear it from other people, it always involves the same things for the most part.

I believe that 1/3 of the wars that have been and are going on have to do with religion obviously and a little percentage when you think about it has to do with national interests or doesn't it?

When you look at an enemy and kill him in the name of God or your relgion, does that make you a better person? When you die in the name of God or your religion, have you fullfilled your purpose in live?

I have many questions about dieing for one's religion, I am a catholic man personally and I'd like to believe that all who in the course of history have died for one religion or another have not died in vain, and had faith.

I believe in God, I also have believes like there might be people in this live who without them knowing serve as a purpose to others.

I could go in deep in to that, but I see many people here have signatures expressing their religious believes and have a liking for history like me, but they also try to discuss points about what the game in this case introduces to you and discuss some points, whether they are accurate or not.

So to begin with, since we have a varied religious population in these boards (as far as I see in the signatures, unless some people just put them there as roleplaying sigs) I am interested to learn, about your culture or religious believes combining what we see in history.

Crusades can be a point of discussion, what do you think of them etc? Moral and religious believes when involve wars?

Some points that can be discussed. I will anticipate to you tho, any radical believes good or bad are always bad

So please share your points

[Lusted]

Moved to the Ethos: the religious, philosophical and moral debating forum at TWc.

[RusskiSoldat]

All wars started because somebody saw an opportunity to profit from them.
That's it.
100% of wars are about the personal interest of one leader or another.

[Mccray]

Exactly. You can say you are taking Jerusalem for god but in the end It's a human city with a human leader who gains the most power and advantage. Religeon has just been a convenient excuse since 90% of the leaders of the world have been religeous leaders or Holy Warrior Kings or Self procalimed demi gods all endorsed to steal power by the big "G". While subjugating the peons with fear and "hell"

[MasterOfNone]

I agree - it is nearly always about power. The name of religion maybe be used just as the name of freedom may be used. Most of the war and death of the 20th Century was conducted by atheistic regimes (chiefly China and Russia), which is something those who blame religion often forget. Religion, I suppose, needs defining but I think it a general truth that the original form of the world religions all taught not to go to war unless in self-defence (if at all for some religions).

[Mccray]

Well pure self defense is self preservation. Wich combined with limited resources and unlimited human greed causes genocide to be a valid form of self deffense. Even suspision of danger is enough to put up your deffenses and "a good offense is the best deffense ".

Athiesm is a religeon "The Worship of MAN as the supreme being"

[Last Roman]

Whether over land, religion, resources, ideology etc, it does usually come down to power, the power to control that land, the power to remove anothers religion and/or impose your own, the power of one idealogy over another, the power to control those resources.

[WILHELM_II]

IMO war is about spreading influence. If one has the possibility to lay down his wishes upon other people, shaping society and life like he (or she ) wants it. That is why religion is a major factor in wars now and then, but it is only a part of one's view upon the world. Why do nations want to expand as much as possible? So things are governed in the way they want it. I don't think war is really about religion or power, it's just a way for certain people to bend society to their will, their own (by inciting them to war for instance) and others.
Wars that are purely for religion are about preservation of one's society. Why does one wage war against other religions? One reason : Self-Defence. If any religion has the capability to convert people in one's society, that religion has the ability to desintegrate the core of the society (mostly when that society is based on religion) by converting more and more people and inspiring them to convert etc etc. So what do religion-warring nations do? They do not seek to convert, they seek to eradicate that other religion so they cannot be threatened. They conquer a nation, they make a law that makes their religion the ruling policy of the people and the state, and ensure that their religion lives on and is not threatened by conversion...
That's what I think anyway...

[drak10687]

well, someone usually takes advantage of peoples' religious beliefs and uses them to dictate, and as a basis for justifying his struggle for power. And certainly for a group of individuals fighting for one cause or another is a way to gain power. But if we we analyse the question of why people fight/kill in terms of one individual's beliefs that he is fighting for, not in terms of a group of individuals with similar beliefs who gain something concrete from their struggle, then I am sure there are those that simply fight for their religious beliefs, or at least reason to themselves that that is what they are doing.

But from a personal point of view, I think its quite silly to fight for your religious beliefs. Well, to be more precise: to kill someone because they dont follow your religious beliefs. Especially if it is fighting for Christianity that we are talking about. If one believes in God, then he should know that it is God that will judge the sinners, and since humans are all falible, its better to leave the judging up to God. And anyways, whats the difference if you kill a sinner now or if he dies himself later, either way he is a sinner and will be judged so by God (this is still assuming one believes in God).

If we are, however, talking about justifying defending ones self in order to continue to practice one's beliefs, and whether that is reason enough to kil another, that answer I leave up to each individual, but once again, it seems quite silly (from a Christian point of view) to kill for that reason, for if you trully believe that you have followed God's word in every way, then what difference does it make if you are killed for your religious beliefs now, or die another way later?

[Mccray]

FIGHT FOR PEACE!! hehe

[Surlethe]

War is about gaining resources: from the Crusades to the domination of the Aztecs to liebenschraum, if you look at war, you'll always find that there is a struggle (most often over land) at the heart of it. However, religion often exacerbates war: it provides convenient justification (bring Christianity to the infidels!) for war. It can also elevate a resource's worth in the minds of the adherents of the religion. Israel is a prime example: it has no intrinsic worth to the Jewish people beyond their three thousand year old religious land claim.

[drak10687]

just want to repeat myself:
fighting for power, resources, land, etc. is a reason justifiable for a monarch, president, council, nation, etc. but not for an individual. As a soilder of a nation fighting for land (for example) you are not likely to gain any of that land, or very many benefits from it. So your motivation would be loyalty to your country, future of your children, money, etc. not power or whatever else that is directly gained from the war.

so I think we first have to establish if we are defining the motivation for war of a common individual, or a nation or ruler of that nation.

[WILHELM_II]

Indeed, a common man does not gain more power when his country seizes land from the enemy. Why would an individual support a war? I think because he agrees with the ideals that form the basis of that war. If the common man's intention is not the increase of territory, but say, spread of religion, he is more likely to support a war when it is focused on expansion religion... (of course the same as the common man's)

[mongoose]

Athiesm is a religeon "The Worship of MAN as the supreme being"

That might be what some self-proclaimed "atheists" have told you, but that's not at all what atheism is. In atheism, human life is the most valuable thing(if you're a humanist as well as an atheist), but atheism has NOTHING to do with worshiping people.

[Kurogane]

Ok you speak about Jerusalem for instance,

I believe europeans believed Jerusalem to be the center of the world, so when a crusade was organized to take Jerusalem does this mean this war to Jerusalem is going to be for moral purposes and religious or in the other hand powerfull purposes for the state or to profit from them as you say?

On another issue: as far as my knowledge goes, templars were created in Palestine to protect the pilgrims, they would usually go to combat with relics like the holy grail, christian crosses appart from all the christian emblems they had on their armours, banners, shields etc... Do you believe under these conditions they fought for a state or for religion? :hmmm:

[Mccray]

Ok you speak about Jerusalem for instance,

I believe europeans believed Jerusalem to be the center of the world, so when a crusade was organized to take Jerusalem does this mean this war to Jerusalem is going to be for moral purposes and religious or in the other hand powerfull purposes for the state or to profit from them as you say?

On another issue: as far as my knowledge goes, templars were created in Palestine to protect the pilgrims, they would usually go to combat with relics like the holy grail, christian crosses appart from all the christian emblems they had on their armours, banners, shields etc... Do you believe under these conditions they fought for a state or for religion? :hmmm:

1. And for what other reason would you want to posess the center of the world? And how would the taking of "said" city by force be moral by example tio illustrate its cause?

2.The Templars became one of the most wealthy powerfull "sects" in europe. That's why they were executed by France.

[Mccray]

just want to repeat myself:
fighting for power, resources, land, etc. is a reason justifiable for a monarch, president, council, nation, etc. but not for an individual. As a soilder of a nation fighting for land (for example) you are not likely to gain any of that land, or very many benefits from it. So your motivation would be loyalty to your country, future of your children, money, etc. not power or whatever else that is directly gained from the war.

so I think we first have to establish if we are defining the motivation for war of a common individual, or a nation or ruler of that nation.

And the future of all those things depends on the future status of your limited resources. A man fights for a parking place not world domination. But without those in power he wouldnt even have the land for a parking place or a car. SO he must sucomb to the larger struggle as a peon so he can get his wife and kids dinner.

[drak10687]

Athiesm is a religeon "The Worship of MAN as the supreme being"

sorry for the OT, but mongoose is right, atheism is not a religion, and definately not the worship of Man as the spreme being, for there are religions out there that worship one man as a supreme being, but the people that follow those religions are certainly not atheist.

Of course you could argue that worshiping MAN and worshiping ONE MAN are two compeletely different things, and maybe you would be right in that retrospect, but I still dont think atheism is a religion, and anyways, this topic would deserve another thread.

[Mccray]

sorry for the OT, but mongoose is right, atheism is not a religion, and definately not the worship of Man as the spreme being, for there are religions out there that worship one man as a supreme being, but the people that follow those religions are certainly not atheist.

Although some atheists tend toward skepticism and secular philosophies such as humanism, naturalism, and materialism, there is no system of philosophy which all atheists share, nor does atheism have institutionalized rituals or behaviors.

OK given. But I was addressing the Russians not being religion driven for power because they are atheists"as stated above". So in that respect I deffend that Communism is a system of philosophy that is similar to religion for example.

[drak10687]

just to say so, I am Russian, lol, but I also have to say that even though they were atheists, I highly doubt the communist party was concerned whether any religion was true or false, but they were concerned with prooving to people that it was false because it was part of their propoganda to retain controll over those people.

I see the communist era as several people trying to take advantage of the fact that societies were not happy with the current events of the day, and their system of government. Even though right before the collapse of the Russian Empire, things were as good as ever. But the way communism was executed after the death of Lennin, and the fall of Trotsky, could harldly be related to Marx's original ideas. It was more a struggle for power throught the manipulation of those ideas.

But again I'm getting off topic. So to relate this back to the orginal subject. I think many of the workers who supported the change of regeim did it because the did not like the power of the upper class, and in a way were jealous. And party members like Stalin siezed the opportunity to gain power for them selves. So in some cases, power can be the motive to fight, but most of the time, it is quite a selfish motive compared to that of religious beliefs.