Is Religious Diversity Desirable?

Yes. Diversity is desirable in religion and every facet of life. We must experience every imaginable bliss and agony to be fully-realized human beings. Why that is is the great mystery.

That would depend on whether or not there is a God and whether or not He has standards.

Re: Is Religious Diversity Desirable?


Are you asking if every possible point of view should have some adherents?

real life, I'm basically asking if people want to live surrounded by many different beliefs, or in a homogenous world.

I don't know if every possible viewpoint could ever be represented. I don't know if that is possible.

I brought up this question because I grow weary of so many people trying to convert me. I wondered if the evangelistic religions would give a different answer to this question than others. I wondered about the general ideas of people regarding religious diversity.

Mostly, I wonder why someone would find it preferable to try and have everyone believe the same things.

To me, this question is a no-brainer. If everyone believed the same thing, we'd be weaker as people. It would threaten our survival. It wouldn't make any sense to me.

But I want to understand.

Neologist, what do you mean by that?
How would the existence of God influence the answer?

Re: Is Religious Diversity Desirable?


Those are meaty questions, Flushd. Before I get to them, tho, let me just respond quickly to your question about what difference God makes in the equation: if He gave only one body of Truth, and all other bodies of spiritual "knowledge" were toxic lies, then it stands to reason that He'd want us to stick with the salubrious body of Truth. If He loves us (which He assures He does), then He wants our best; He wants us to thrive and prosper (by "prosper," I don't mean "be financially wealthy;" I mean, "develop optimally" and "live in an optimal society").

OK, now to the others:

(1)"Would it be preferable to have all of mankind practising the same religion?" Ideally, yes, bec. it would cut down on friction and bloodshed. Ideally, it would happen from the inside out (that is, people would see the light and follow it). But it would not be ideal if globalists tried to force some sort of one-world religion down our throats.

(2) "Would it be better to just throw out religion all together?" Well, what you do with all of us for whom God is the very protein of our existence? In other words, how do you throw out religion all together? Banish us all to some island? (Better be a BIG island!) And even those who at a given pt. in time don't believe in God, even they are still created in His image, and might well at some pt. in the future hunger after Him. So do we then wipe out all of humanity, bec. they're all latent believers? My pt. here is, I have no clue how you'd succeed at throwing out religion altogether. Paul tried it with Christianity, and look where that got him.

(3) "What about mysticism, magic, spiritual mediums, and all the others?" The reason God condemns the practice of those things is bec. they're toxic (look at Nazi Germany if you want to see where they lead). "All the others"....Ouch, all the others in contrast to what? Judaism? Islam? Christianity? Are you talking about Buddhism and Hinduism?

(4) "Is science now becoming a religion?" No, but scientism has been for a long time. True science can never be a religion, bec. it deals purely with the empirical realm, whereas religions reach beyond that, into the spiritual realm. (Footnote: that does not mean that a deeply devout person cannot be a scientist; for example, a man who's a Christian and a biologist simply understands that the amazing facts of his field are one aspect of God's handiwork.)

It is regrettable that nowadays, the term "science" is used in a sneaky way to mean the equivalent of "Darwinism." Darwinism is a paradigm into which certain scientists fit the raw data they see in the world around them. Darwininism is, in fact, a religion (albeit camouflaged). But it is not science.

(5) "If you could, would you choose to live in a world where everybody believed the same as you?" Me? Absolutely! I'd relish living in a world where I'd know that unborn babies are safe, and the streets are safe, and the old and the infirm are safe, and my pocketbook is safe (from plunderers in high places), and on and on. It is a pleasure fellowshipping with kindred spirits.

!!!
thanks for your input, Diag.
Something clicked in my mind when I read that post.
I'm not saying I agree, but I get it!

Wow, that's a refreshing response, flushd! I'll be back to this thread frequently to see what other folks write, bec. your questions are really excellent material. Got any other ones? (I've been enjoying chris2's questions over in the philosophy forum, even tho they're more or less over my head, but I love cognitive aerobix.)

"C" U around! :wink:

We just have to be sure to pick the same one as diagknowz, not because there's any difference amongst that one and any other, but because that's the one... Sure, it is.

It's a great con game, this idea of various superior creatures lurking about, watching our every move, threatening us with hell if we mis-step, yet proclaiming all the while a love beyond all love, or hell for all eternity, so watch it. My favorite part is when one set of believers proclaims they've got the handle on the one truth or the ONE TRUTH, whatever, and then feels compelled somehow, by the big threatening (love you so much) monster to kill anyone in another set of believers who has the temerity to proclaim the exact same thing, just with another view of that same ONE TRUTH. All others are toxic, just not mine. Right.


Tell them to snap out of it before they kill us all.

Get real.

Joe Nation

So, Joe, is that your set of answers to flush'd's questions? I'd be interested in hearing more focused answers. My impression was that flush'd just wanted to get info, not start a flaming contest.

Di is my mentor!

Re: Is Religious Diversity Desirable?
Okay.



There yuh go.

Joe\

edited once to take out an extra l in delusion and an extra are in a sentence.

The answer to the diversity question from an honest religionist will almost always be "no." Diversity and exposure to other beliefs are threats to those who have a stake in a doctrine that promises, for example, eternal salvation. It's a zero-sum game for them. If my God and my beliefs and my way of living are God's will, yours cannot be so.

Religious diversity is desireable as long as the practices in the religion do not violate fundamental human rights.

Ray,

Agreed. Please join us in our Are You Part of the Problem or Part of the Solution Thread.

We need thoughts like these!

Well stated. Unfortunately, institutional religion has not been a force for good in the modern era. Read the daily news and see. We need to reinvent our ways of honoring the sublime.

Don't you mean some institutional religion?

All of the "sons of abraham" cannot condone religious diversity (in fact they are forbidden), they are all "chosen" in one form or another, rendering all others sub-redeemed. To be a christian or a jew or a muslim is a self-defining superiority. Likewise, I see it as impossible for a "son of abraham" to function totally within a democracy (me either but that's beside the point) "god's law" will always override man's law rendering democracy a childish illusion.