Most wars are caused by religious people?

  • Thread starter Thread starter GodHeals
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
Regular_Atheist said:
That’s not true. Even if everyone was a complete donkey there’d still be plenty of reasons to live. Like chocolate and kittens and sex and all that good stuff.
Click to expand...
Life is about indulgence and pleasure? That’s it? That’s been enough to sustain you long enough to have about as little hair as I do? 😉

Surely you depend on more than that.
 
manualman said:
Life is about indulgence and pleasure? That’s it? That’s been enough to sustain you long enough to have about as little hair as I do? 😉

Surely you depend on more than that.
Click to expand...
Of course I do. I don’t yet believe that all people are inherently evil, but if I did I could probably survive on indulgence and pleasure.

And are kittens really filed under ‘indulgence and pleasure’ when it comes to reasons to live?
 
GodHeals said:
My friend tends to believe “Most wars are caused by religious people.” I don’t believe this is true, but the opposite. Can you please provide me a link to some sound factual information on this subject?
Click to expand...
Are most people religious (or have most people historically been religious). If so then that may be supporting evidence. Though you may need to consider how some wars started and ask whether the motivation for most wars was religious.
 
Regular_Atheist said:
Of course I do. I don’t yet believe that all people are inherently evil, but if I did I could probably survive on indulgence and pleasure.

And are kittens really filed under ‘indulgence and pleasure’ when it comes to reasons to live?
Click to expand...
  1. Ah, careful! Catholic don’t believe people are inherently evil either (some protestants do though). The subtle difference is that we believe that people are innately good, but tragically fallen. That’s the tightrope between the demonstrably wrong idea that humans are inherently evil (then why do so many do good things?) and the demonstrably wrong idea that humans are just plain good (then where does evil come from?). It’s the theme Shakespeare nailed so well and so often.
  2. Objectively, kittens are just creatures. Nice, sure. From your context, I assumed you meant that enjoying them (watching, playing, feeding) fulfilled you. Yes, I’d rank that on the fairly shallow end on the list of what’s good about life. Good, sure. High on the list? Nope.
 
manualman said:
You do hear this claim a lot. It’s an understandable one when you comprehend some of their underlying assumptions. Most atheists I’ve known tend to have a remarkably optimistic view of human nature and human potential. (Possibly because the ones that lack that optimism tend to be depressed and even suicidal!)

This is the real source of their problem! If one NEEDS to believe that humanity has a fundamentally good nature and can gradually overcome the mistakes and flaws so readily apparent in our history, then one needs to find and identify an EXTERNAL cause for all those horrific events in history. Since humanity exhibits a stunningly consistent urge towards religious belief, that characteristic makes for a handy scapegoat.

So I think this is the point of discussion to have. If wars and conflicts come about because of religion, then one should expect atheists to have far less conflict, violence, greed, anger, exploitation, etc than one finds in religious people. Is this the case? Good luck finding data to prove it.

The point to make then is that wars come about because of the intractable nature of human fallen-ness, not the external influence of religion. Wars certainly have occurred under the pretense of religion. Most wars have pretenses veneered over the real reasons they are fought. But at root, it is human fallen-ness that causes wars. Our fallen nature is inborn, not indoctrinated.

Don’t expect them to agree with you though. Their worldview and mental health DEPENDS on maintaining their assumption that humanity can rise above our current limitations on our own. If they give up on that belief they can’t have any basis for happiness in life. So expect this view to hold out as long as the atheism does.

But I think it is good to introduce them to the idea of a humanity that is good, but fallen. That while still largely good, we possess a fatal flaw that will destroy us if we don’t get help fixing it. It’s the truth and the truth fits the facts of history better than their scapegoating does.
Click to expand...
Well if the atheists believe we are just walking talking meat, then our transitory existence and our thoughts are partly hardwired and partly conditioning. Why was the Great Wall of China built? To keep religious people out? The various conflicts there shows that wars for land and resources was the primary driver, along with the “I want to be in charge, as opposed to the other guy” nonsense. The sun never set on the British Empire until after World War II. And all those Europeans who woke up one day and said, “I know. We’ll just go over to Africa and get their resources and shoot anybody who gets in our way.” “We’ll just run over to South America and do the same.” And so on.

Peace,
Ed
 
Regular_Atheist said:
Of course I do. I don’t yet believe that all people are inherently evil, but if I did I could probably survive on indulgence and pleasure.

And are kittens really filed under ‘indulgence and pleasure’ when it comes to reasons to live?
Click to expand...
Well, kittens are wonderful until they mutate into cats. And then… I think I’ve said enough.

Ed
 
manualman said:
  1. Ah, careful! Catholic don’t believe people are inherently evil either (some protestants do though). The subtle difference is that we believe that people are innately good, but tragically fallen. That’s the tightrope between the demonstrably wrong idea that humans are inherently evil (then why do so many do good things?) and the demonstrably wrong idea that humans are just plain good (then where does evil come from?). It’s the theme Shakespeare nailed so well and so often.
Click to expand...
Okay, cool. I don’t believe that all people are innately good, either.
manualman said:
  1. Objectively, kittens are just creatures. Nice, sure. From your context, I assumed you meant that enjoying them (watching, playing, feeding) fulfilled you. Yes, I’d rank that on the fairly shallow end on the list of what’s good about life. Good, sure. High on the list? Nope.
Click to expand...
They are nice, aren’t they? 😃
edwest2 said:
Well, kittens are wonderful until they mutate into cats. And then… I think I’ve said enough.
Click to expand...
Eh, no. Cats are lovely too.
 
Regular_Atheist said:
Okay, cool. I don’t believe that all people are innately good, either.
Click to expand...
Have you ever known an infant or toddler long enough to conclude “Oh, THAT one is going to be a rotter!” 😉

We all start out good, but fallen. Some make choices that carry them awfully far down the spectrum of fallen. Others keep relatively clean. But nobody is perfect. Even the best of us have tragic flaws. Would you agree with that characterization so far?

Perhaps where we part is that catholics understand those tragic flaws to be destined to be FATAL flaws if not countered by Grace. Thus, war flows from the fallen nature of humanity, not the veneer of excuses that we’ve come up with over the millennia for justifying them.
 
Regular_Atheist said:
Okay, cool. I don’t believe that all people are innately good, either.

They are nice, aren’t they? 😃

Eh, no. Cats are lovely too.
Click to expand...
Didn’t say they weren’t. I love cats. It’s just that adults cats are a bit… what’s the word… unpredictable. I prefer cats over dogs but dogs are what I have.

Peace,
Ed
 
GodHeals said:
Hi,

My friend tends to believe “Most wars are caused by religious people.” I don’t believe this is true, but the opposite. Can you please provide me a link to some sound factual information on this subject?

Thank you!

I saw this on the forum:
Click to expand...
Most of you’re friends went to government school so it’s to be expected. But we have a duty to instruct the ignorant. Starting with the American Founders in less than 250 years “liberty and freedom” have claimed 227,000,000 lives and counting. Three hundred years of the “evil inquisition” claimed a few thousand. I personally would take my chances with a monarch.

Pax,
Tarpeian
 
Hello GodHeals

I recommend you or anyone else read “Liberty The God That Failed”, By Christopher Ferrara.
In fact I recommend everyone read this book I have 3 copies, and it is part of our homeschool history.

Pax,
Tarpeian
 
relstudent said:
We must not deny that many people who participated in wars (WWI,WII, Vietnam, etc) were religious people. However, when 80-90% of a population identifies as religious, you really cant expect anything different. The question of how peaceful a 80-90% Atheistic population has never had any practical application.
Click to expand...
You might as well say most people who fought in WW2 were Asian and Caucasian. Means nothing.

Your friend doesn’t even get the meme right. Typically, it is said that “religion has caused more wars/death than anything else.”

The subtle shift from religion to religious people makes your friend both likely correct, and utterly pointless.

Oh yeah, then there’s abortion, which is generally not supported by most major religions.
 
Tarpeian said:
Hello GodHeals

I recommend you or anyone else read “Liberty The God That Failed”, By Christopher Ferrara.
In fact I recommend everyone read this book I have 3 copies, and it is part of our homeschool history.

Pax,
Tarpeian
Click to expand...
Is this the same Christopher Ferrara that doesn’t like NFP and wrote a book critical of EWTN?
 
cracks knuckles 😃 This is one of those times when it is really fun to be a military historian. I could go on and on about what wars were caused by what and what their affect was and how they lead to other wars and so on and so forth, but I’ll stick with the short answer.

No. Most wars are not religious in nature. Even the Crusades (one of the favorite points to bring up) can be linked to quite a few other causes that have little to nothing to do with religion. Most wars in the world are expansionist in nature. With one group of people wanting more land than others.
 
Wait a minute;Japanese Emperor Hirohito was religious-a veritable god by his own(-and his countrymen’s); reckoning; and surely neither Abe Lincoln nor Jeff Davis were irreligious.
 
The religion starts wars argument is just pseudo history to me. Some people don’t know one thing about history and just blast random things that sound historical, but really aren’t.
 
saddmister said:
Wait a minute;Japanese Emperor Hirohito was religious-a veritable god by his own(-and his countrymen’s); reckoning; and surely neither Abe Lincoln nor Jeff Davis were irreligious.
Click to expand...
I would argue Lincoln was irreligious.

Pax,
Tarpeian
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top