Everald, you need to address some of the more important questions in religion like...How many angles can dance on the end of a pin?

I use that question to illustrate that when it comes to religion you leave your critical thinking behind you. Religion can be whatever you want it to be.
They may have started as a way to explain the natural world and help hold together tribes with laws. Now they are just instruments of control, either of large groups, ie the king being the head of the church, or small the leader of a cult. Or even just at a personal level to make some feel special or superior.

In the end i think good people generally internalise their religious beliefs, to make themselves a better person. Bad people use it as an excuse to make you or the world a "better" place.

Nice sentiments, but as the writer says their success depends on everyone agreeing. I have always said that there is any number of belief systems (the fashionable term for political, philosophical or religious views) that would all work wonderfully if everyone could agree on just one. It wouldn't really matter which one. The key is universal agreement. But we should all know by now that universal agreement on anything is inconsistent with the human condition. And there are probably sound evolutionary reasons for that condition. Universal agreement is a metastable state, easily disrupted by a lone dissident. And disagreement is a precondition for progress. All in all, theory plus experiment tells us that, while “Peace depends on each one of us accepting the value and integrity of all with whom we live” etc. etc, might sound like a nice idea, it’s not going to happen and it wouldn’t work anyway. I am not for a moment condoning brutality in the name of religion -- especially in the name of religion; those fools should know better. I am simply saying that simplistic idealism is not the solution.

Everyone is born to die! And not all the gold in the world will buy so much as an additional minute longer; and something for which there is an appointed hour and an appointed way!

The greatest gift we are given is life itself, even with all the sham and dugey, life is the most valuable gift we have; and as some say, what you make it?

Some for whom nothing is ever good enough, can go through life making it as hard as they can for themselves and all those who come into contact with as miserable as possible. (Good samaritan? Bah Humbug)

Others may just get a patent bully's bang out of exercising power over of folks who have none; at least until the wheel of life rolls around to them and the are on the receiving end of someone else's patently malicious petty fogging?

Anyone who for whatever reason, [except self defense of us, ourselves, family and friends, the innocent,] takes/destroys a God given human life, be it through compassion or appointing yourself the right hand of God, one nonetheless circumvents God's will and may well become a very real Devil's advocate/disciple?!

And may even force the unsuspecting victim to go back and do it all over, replete with the unavoidable Karmic lessons we're supposed to learn while here?

The exceptions may be genuine regret and just never ever repeating that behaviour for whatever reason, and being prepared to accept any duly deserved lumps that are yours to cop it sweet?

State your pleasure, learn or accept and do? Can't do both at the same time, or just argue that it just aint so, merely because being so, is inconvenient or awkward?

Listen to your very own internal ring of truth (soul song) that knows and gives you all those revealing goosebumps, when you hear the unvarnished truth in any form, even if for the very first time!?
Rhrosty.

Every religion does not worship the same god. E.g Christians worship the the god of love; Muslims worship the god of kill your enemy; Bhuddists worship Bhudda. There are other small religions who worship the god of who-knows-what: some could still be on the sun god or a lump of rock. I've read enough of this fellow's product to know I don't need to go beyond the first silly sentence of this one.

another promoter of communism pretending to be normal.

Cobber the hound, Q, what about left wing religion? is left wing religion good or evil?

Tombee, if you have 70% to 90% of a nation on the same page then perhaps the dissidents should move to a nation with a culture they believe in. EG muslims should live in majority muslim nations, communists should live in majority communist nations. "if you don't love it, leave".

Rhosty, very well said. IMHO the simpler the words, the more likely they are true.

ttbn, too true, as soon as i see a strange sentence i flick through to the last few sentences of the conclusion & this guy is a closet communist.

imacentristmoderate, I don't think you understood what I said. You suggest that all problems experienced by a 70-90% majority of a population would be solved if the dissident minority departed. That would indeed be true IF EVERYONE (majority and minority) AGREED ON THE PROPOSITION, or, as I said, with any other such proposition. But they won't, and that's the heart of the problem. Your suggestion is futile, as is Compton's. I realise this line of argument is not very helpful but I think it is an essential step in arriving at any kind of optimal solution.

God yarp yarp yarp yarble yarble yarble.

Tombee, i did understand exactly what you are saying & i can assure you the 70% to 90% are tired of the tail wagging the dog, they will support a referendum to jail with hard labour or deport the dissidents, it is called tough love.

Only the desire to achieve a spurious 'balance' between views could justify the inclusion of such a pointless article. Other contributors to OO, as I understand it, are required to provide at least some evidential basis for their claims: but those who claim to represent the Christian viewpoint apparently have this requirement waived, and so we are subjected to long strings of unsupported claims like this, which are pure fantasy from the very first sentence to the last. Anyone who can seriously claim:

Every religion worships the same God.

is clearly living in a mental world very far removed from reality.

Jon J,

"Every religion worships the same God."

Can you substantiate that claim?

"is clearly living in a mental world very far removed from reality."

Relevance?

Jon J,

Clearly I didn't read your post properly, sorry.
I fully concur!

The three main religions state that their religion is the same god as Abrahams god, people must associate with the old testament what each religion is preaching. Moses: Genesis to Exodus readings parable meanings understandings cancel other preached assumptions. Moses is about human sacrifice through trickery means.

Jesus dying on the cross, trumped up charges of heresy public execution threats to anyone truly understanding human sacrifice religions, is one main expression of the Jesus story. the other meaning of Jesus is about money being trick out of congregations. Any other assumptions of the Jesus story is misleading listeners.

Jesus Resurrection is the next generation baby births after a Judgement day Apocalypse.

Abraham sacrificing Issac, replaced with a lamb or ram, Jesus is the chosen one, the lamb of god. Abraham's human sacrifice tribute to god.

Cain killed Able as a human sacrifice to god. Noah's Ark parable story of Apocalypse proportion.

"Every religion worships the same God."

Perhaps what the author wished to say is that every [true] religion leads people to the same God.

Since it is impossible (or at least extremely difficult) to worship God directly, Who has no attributes thus cannot even be imagined, different religions instead teach how to worship different gods - these are just different techniques, all with the same goal.

Worship is concentration infused with love - it is indispensable, for nothing can be achieved without concentration and no concentration can last without love. However, normally people worship things that exist: money, power, beauty, other people, success, nature, children, etc. - and this leads them further and further out to be lost in the world and away from God. Worshipping a god which doesn't exist, is an antidote that helps kicking that habit.

Steve 101,

"The three main religions state that their religion is the same god as Abrahams god,"

The three main religions may state this but their ideas are different.

Israel and Islam state that their God is a single person, whereas Christianity states that their God, as well as being the God of Abraham is a God of three persons in one God, a Trinity and thus that both Israel and Islam are wrong in their interpretation of God.

Clearly a God who is only one person cannot be a God who is three persons.

Quote: Throughout the history of humanity, God has never once called anyone to kill or punish in His name.

Obviously Mr Compton has never read the Quran: I suggest that he read 5:33 and 9:111

Dear Kactuz,

You don't seriously suggest that the Kuran is the word of God, do you?

The 3 mono-theistic religions that are causing the most trouble in the world all originate in the Middle East. as such they all have the same general Semitic cultural, social and political background - except that Christian-ism, uniquely among the 3 , was immediately developed and extended to outside and beyond the general Semitic domain of society and culture, by means of a thorough re-acculturation and re-adaptation to the cultural, social, and political domain of ancient Greece and Rome.

These three monotheistic traditions are all in their "official" formulations, thoroughly exoteric in their nature and context, and each of them has always tended toward the status of an "official" State-religion.

They are all composed of 3 principal elements: the Book, the Teacher, and the Religion.
In Judaism the Book is the Torah, and the Hebrew Bible as a whole is the larger text of the essential tradition.
In Christian-ism, it is the "New" Testament and especially the 4 Gospels.
In Islam-ism it is the Koran.

In Judaism, the Teacher is Moses the "Law-Giver"
In Christian-ism it is Jesus the "Savior" or the "Christ"
In Islam-ism it is Mohammed, the "Prophet"

In Judaism, the Religion is the Temple-cult of Jerusalem, the ancient priestly "Seat" of the original "Kingdom".
In Christian-ism it is the cult of the "Eucharist" signifying the re-"Ascension" of Jesus to the "Throne" of cosmic "Kingship" as the "Son of God".
In Islam-ism it is the cult of Mohammed as the "Revealer of the Book".

In Judaism the "Book" is the "Revelation"
In Christianity the "Teacher" is the "Revelation".
In Islam, the "Religion" (itself) is the "Revelation.

For Judaism, the Book or the "Divine Words" must achieve "Final Victory", whereby at the "end of time" the politically-established priestly tradition of Judaism will "Rule the entire world".

For Christian-ism, the "Teacher" or the "Incarnation of the Divine Word" must achieve "Final Victory", whereby at the "end of time", the politically-established sacramental tradition of Christian-ism will "Rule the entire world".

For Islam-ism, the "Religion" itself, or the politically-established religious movement "Inspired by the Divine Word" of the Koran must achieve "Final Victory", whereby at the "end of time', the intrinsically authoritarian religio-political tradition of Islam-ism will "Rule the entire world".

Fundamentally, among all the religious traditions of the world, ONLY Judaism, Christian-ism, and Islam-ism are inherently and aggressively associated with an expansionist ideal, and an attitude of not only cultural, but also social and political, superiority, that irreducibly intends, and actively pursues the "destiny", to which each of these 3 traditions appoints ITSELF of total world-domination, or global totalitarian "Rulership".

Likewise, by their very nature, these 3 religious, cultural, social and political traditions are, perpetually, in an intentionally performed state of competition, that always seeks, and frequently achieves, conflict, confrontation, and even aggressive warfare with one another. And even in the case of Christian-ism and Islam-ism with all other religious, cultural, social, and political traditions, systems or institutions in the world.

The powers of nation states that now exercise themselves in the name of these 3 religions of the Middle East now presume they can wage "Final War" and, thus and thereby, establish "Final Rule"- and they are now actively moving themselves on that basis.

Therefore humankind as a whole must refuse to allow these 3 systems from achieving any kind of larger public state of conflict, confrontation, or otherwise aggressive or even war-like opposition to one another.

The total world of humankind can very easily be drawn into a terminal state of conflict by means of the public theatrical exploitation of the false-face of such exoteric religiosity,, only, in due course, to find a dark political, and cultural tyranny has been embraced by seemingly "lightest" means.

Daffy,

How is Christianity monotheistic when it teaches that there are three persons in one God?

//How is Christianity monotheistic when it teaches that there are three persons in one God?//

The clue is in the question: Christianity is monotheistic because it there is only one god in three persons; not three gods.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trinity

Christian theology is a load of cobblers, but the Trinity has always struck me in particular as a bloody stupid notion invented by people who obviously had far too much time on their hands.

Toni,

"....because it there is only one god in three persons; not three gods."

Not quite right, the position is three persons in one God; with one God in three persons one or more of the persons might not be God but in the Trinity it is three persons in one God and all of them are God, from a non-Christian point of view that is three Gods.

This is the view taken by Islam and the Christian belief is heresy for Muslims, and no doubt, Jews as well.

Compton writes; "So, when Jihadists kill people and claim they did it at God's command, they commit the ultimate blasphemy. Throughout the history of humanity, God has never once called anyone to kill or punish in His name."

Although I'm not a biblical scholar, I strongly believe that the Canaanites, Amorites, Midianites and the Amalekites will disagree with him should they be given a voice to span the millennia. However, should my meagre scholarship be found wanting and truth be served better by one far more edudite than I then I thank him/her for their service.

Compton also writes;"In my view, the undeniable truth is that God has never been a creator of death, even when we die normally. God has never decided who lives or dies or when death shall occur. Nor does he decide who gets ill or suffers hard times. These unavoidable issues of life are determined by nature or by our own irresponsibility. God, quite simply, has one role only. He gives us the personal spiritual power to handle all that life throws up at us."

If nature determines life and death issues it would assist greatly in understanding what he means by the phenomenon he describes as "nature" by providing a definition of "nature" to the exclusion of everything else. A response of the type, "Nature is all that god is not." will demonstrate a thought process dependent upon meritless sophistry. Cont.....

Cont.....
Whence came nature as a feature of existence? Is his god not a creator god who made the heavens and Earth and humankind in his image? Did he not bestow free will on his creation that they be as irresponsible as all get-out and be forgiven? Certainly "personal spiritual power" is not the same thing as "free will".

Compton, in closing, writes that some kind of planetary theocracy is a solution to humankind's problems. I must confess to some bewilderment when assailed by the notion that the formalisation and codification of superstition, allegory and fable into a book of instruction on life is humankind's only future. Not once does he contemplate a world without religion as another possible scenario leading to human intellectual and moral advancenent.

It is almost inevitable that Compton will insist at some stage in this discussion that our sense of morality emanates from no other source than his god. Yet he absolves his god of all responsibility in this when he writes....."God, quite simply, has one role only. He gives us the personal spiritual power to handle all that life throws up at us."

Now we need a definition of "spiritual power"! Perhaps there's a moral element within.

For pity's sake, where do they all come from?