What do you think Sup Forums...

What do you think Sup Forums ? Was religion responsible for most of the violence that occured throughout history or did it reduce it?
Did religion set the line between good and bad and defined whats moral and whats immoral, or it made it more difficult to set that line?

what do you think would've happened if religion and religious belief disappeared completely, would we become more civilized or would we succumb to chaos?

Personally I think that religion is something in our nature and its a spiritual thing that cleanses your mind from the cruelty of life, but it also can be a tool to drive the minds of the poor into fighting your own battles for you.

Other urls found in this thread:

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Religious_war
youtube.com/watch?v=A9RCFZnWGE0
youtube.com/watch?v=SKnF1HEUwuo
twitter.com/SFWRedditGifs

Land is the number one cause of war. Resources is second.
Religion is just the excuse.

No, humans are.

Keep this on the down low but if we weren't fighting about religion, resources, borders or racial differences we would still find something to fight about.

Most religions attempt to curb this behavior through absolute control.

People fight over stuff, Land and resources. They don't fight over God or Religion. There have been academic studies showing that where Religion is an influencing factor in conflict it reduces casualties.

Greed is the only cause of war. Every justification is just greed masked by some higher ideal

But why would europe go for a crusade on a piece of land like Jerusalem? It has no resources and it wouldn't belong to any king

Political and religious dogma. That's at the core of it. Dogma -- thought-crimes -- sensorship.

>Was religion responsible for most of the violence that occured throughout history
You're in Iraq. You should know the answer. 99% of wars until the 19th century were sparked by religion.

>"they have something I want" is the number one cause of war

What does ISIS fight in germany?

Saracens were starting to blob too hard so they ahd to be kept in check

Muslims were encroaching on Europe and attacking pilgrims on their way to the Holy Lands.
So Europeans sent a couple of crusades to clear it up over the course of a couple of four hundred years.

Not really the best example given how relatively small scale they were compared to every other war going on in Europe around that time. And that it was mostly done to clear out Muslims from the area.

a) It belonged to the King of Jerusalem.
b) Muslim invasions and slave trade

>What do you think Sup Forums ? Was religion responsible for most of the violence that occured throughout history or did it reduce it?

For the conflicts between christianity and muslims yes and also war between different faction of christianity. But this holds true only until 1500 or so. When colonization became relevant, wars were only fought for profit mostly with one side wanting more profit or at least keep their level. In many occations, the strongest economies needed war to keep being #1 or #2 because another country would become #1 through peace. This is the story of WW1 and WW2 mostly, except for the commies, they wanted their world revolution.

It is all about profit, money, resources and control. The source for these wars is greed and envy usually coming from the nations at the top, because another country has what the #1 doesn't have and in the future, this might produce a scenario where #3 or #4 might become #1 if the original #1 doesn't intervene through war.

Well thats true but why do we have this instinct? Why do we feel the urge to sacrafice our brothers and children just for the sake of it?

Got the source for that?

Spoken like a true american

So you think that religion started all these wars and that if we didn't have religion then we'd have a lot less wars?

?

They want Europe and America to stay out of their fight for land in the Middle East, so attacking people in their homelands works to discourage and demoralise the homefront and put pressure on their governments to stay out of it.
Basically lesson learned from Vietnam, if the public don't like it and the war isn't on their doorstep then it will eventually end.

>Well thats true but why do we have this instinct? Why do we feel the urge to sacrafice our brothers and children just for the sake of it?

biology n shit

No

>They document 1763 wars overall, of which 123 (7%) have been identified and listed as primarily religiously motivated. Of these, religious wars account for less than 2% of all people killed in warfare. This includes 3 million during the Crusades and 3,000 during the Inquisition.

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Religious_war

You keep blaming greed but greed was also responsible for unity between different races or religions through trade, which one was more tempting to pay soldiers millions to occupy a country for its resources or pay a few thousands for them?

>Got the source for that?

Take it or leave it. I learned about it Uni. If you search google you should find it, it's real.

Religion can be an influencing factor to War though because it is the Source of a Societies sense of Reality and thus it's Identity.

When you attack a persons Identity, you either destroy them or they fight to the death to preserve it.

its more about stupidness and power

...

Thanks for the link.

God created the universe, earth, human, animals, etc etc
human created religions

Vietnam didn't strike the homeland. Here it migth the formerly most popular chancelor her job.

She will have hold it for three US presidents.

It caused the brexit.

Islam and jews yes , christfags literally dindu

Bonehead, they're fighting over land.

Eastern Christians were calling for help because they were being killed off/enslaved by invading slimes
Pilgrims would not come back from the holy land

No, sorry I meant that the public being opposed to the war caused the war to end.

Frankly I think they a puppets for a greater scheme, it wouldn't make sense to open that many frontlines at once unless you're asking to be wiped out, any leader with a bunch of brain cells qould know that.

Yea thats true, those were actual religious wars but many wars started because of religious differences and they weren't exactly religious wars and they weren't included in this research.

Human nature is the cause of war. It's silly to scapegoat religion for our own flaws.

Nothing yet.

But they are competing with other terrorist groups for recruits, and the group with the most extreme ideology and most spectacular attacks gains most.

Then why, deep inside, do we always wish for peace we always dream of a picture were we're all united under something and can finally be at peace but in real life we do the complete opposite? (Talking about the common here and not the rulers or those who actually benefit from wars)

If you have a better idea on how to instill a commonly accepted moral code on a large population, I would like to hear it.

What you have now, now that religion is waning, is an attempt to enforce a moral code through legislation. The obvious problem with that approach is these moral tenets are enforced at the barrel of a gun, not by exhortation from the pulpit. Keep in mind, once you go down that path, relying on the government to dictate and enforce your moral code, you've bequeathed that power to a capricious and ever-changing bureaucracy that can change on a whim.

Do we? In an ideal world everyone would only listen to me because I have the best ideas in mind for everyone. This is the majority of the world's mindset

That's not true. People love violence
that's why we watch wrestling, boxing, fights, etc
The Vikings heaven was a place of constant war

Jews don't use 7.62x39 you retard. And neither do most Christian nations. Only the Jihadists do.

Your picture is bad and you should feel bad.

But user western christians and eastern christians have nothing in common besides religion, why would you sell your farm buy an armor and go fight for some random christian 10,000 kms away?

Nope it's control of resources. Religion is just a motivational tool, a carrot on a stick to make people more willing to die for their country. At least that is what they eventually become, regardless if their roots were genuine or not.

But no, the real cause is greed. Someone has something that someone else wants.

>Yea thats true, those were actual religious wars but many wars started because of religious differences and they weren't exactly religious wars and they weren't included in this research.


Did you even read the study or are you just talking out your ass?

>that flag

Proxy ?

>You keep blaming greed
Stop making it sound like I produce 50 posts a day on pol and blame greed on everything

>greed was also responsible for unity between different races or religions through trade
Examples? Weighing the options, i.e. what is more profitable, you make a decision based on that. When your decision is shit, i.e. less profitable, you get WW1 and WW2.... except for the US. They made massive profits by paying with a few lives.

Before ~1500 wars were done for conquest, prestige and hate. A after that, populations became so large, that you had to increase the wealth first so that your population doesn't fuck up the entire empire through civil war. Thus, wealth is gained through war, or kept through war. This was the thinking at that time. Of course wealth could be achieved without war, but the people weren't that bright in that regard before 1920. Hence, envy comes into play. My greed says I want more, and my envy says the other should have less.

Most wars are fought over one of two things

1) You have stuff that I want

2) You took my stuff and I want it back

I really fucking can't stand it when faggots say things like "religion in general is the problem, maaan"

No, fuck you. Religion isn't the problem. Islam is the problem. You're just too much of a pussy to actually take a stand against the real problem, and instead wimp out and make this generic platitude bullshit about religion in general, as if christians are going around and blowing people up by the thousands.

But from the other hand you see that others hated violence and refused to accept it, as how carthage always hired mercenaries because its people hated the idea of spilling blood with own hands, so not everyone loves violence

because human nature in itself is contradictory.
we are capable of both love and hate.
the most efficient method of motivating a population for war is to appeal to both sides of this:
kill your enemy for a better future.

youtube.com/watch?v=A9RCFZnWGE0

So its a never ending cycle of constant battle?

No

But does that make religion a problem? If you were christian and muslims weren't muslims this hate would no longer exist, or would it be redirected to something else? Idk.

Sorry I didn't read it, I was speaking out of my ass I guess

i doubt your statement.
for people hating violence carthage had too much creative ways of human sacrifice.

It's not the cause but it is the reason why so many people participate in wars.

Maybe you're right, religion had the same concept:
> Kill the infidel for a better afterlife
Is like saying
> Kill your neighbor to have a better life for yourself and your children

>So its a never ending cycle of constant battle?
yes. the necessity of the state is to keep human nature in check.
Good politics in modern times avoid war because the costs are too high.
>If you were christian and muslims weren't muslims this hate would no longer exist, or would it be redirected to something else

I would compare the situation of the muslims to the nomads north of the chinese wall. War is quite attractive to potential barbarian invaders.
And Islam itself sets no limits to those mindset:
"He (Mohammed) seduced the people by promises of carnal pleasure to which the concupiscence of the flesh urges us. His teaching also contained precepts that were in conformity with his promises, and he gave free rein to carnal pleasure. In all this, as is not unexpected; he was obeyed by carnal men. As for proofs of the truth of his doctrine, he brought forward only such as could be grasped by the natural ability of anyone with a very modest wisdom. Indeed, the truths that he taught he mingled with many fables and with doctrines of the greatest falsity. "

Its weird that the entire world back then did human sacrafices at some point, did they value the human life that much to consider it the ultimate sacrafice? Or did they think so little of it?

pack/tribal omnivores

If you're going to blame religIon for war then you need to also blame the ideologies like nazism, communism etc for war

/thread

Replace "Religion" with "Banking" and maybe you're onto something.
youtube.com/watch?v=SKnF1HEUwuo

>Islam strictly forbids usury
>Orthodox Christians forbids usury as any interest
>Other Christians okay with usury and low interest

Well Mohammad lived a poor man and died a poor man and never acquired riches of some sort, the only ones who got rich off of islam are the people who ruled after him.

Also why would anyone go through that much torture and sacrafice for a false promise? And most if his followers were slaves or merchants or just poor people, if he ever had the idea to acquire selfish needs through islam then he would've started with warriors and noble men that would prove more useful.

no it wasn't , most wars have been because of territories and cultures, we european even when we all have been under christianism were always fighting each others for lands , same goes for muslims and any single tribes / civilization in the world and thus every war.
Religious war , Holly war and wars motivated by religious purpose have always been political or to have another casus belli to declare war and take lands.

Economy and trade brought various countries together like what happened in Italy or Britian where people from all over the world would meet and their only purpose is trade, banks are necessary for economy and till now I have no idea how you can have an economical system without banks or with no interest rates.

well, the historical figure of mohammed is quite hard to grasp. Most of his teachings were edited long after his death by the people who ruled after him and they destroyed any scripture that didn't fit their edition.

Whatever he heard, may it be the devil or a voice in his head, is up to speculation. What became the islamic religion was created long after his death.
The rise of Islam is the rise of an theocracy, and it was fueled by conquest.

FOr my personal part i couldn't care less about other peoples religion, but it seems war between our cultures is coming.