Imagine a world in which the Children of Abraham were reunited.  It would have to be a much nicer and safer place than what it is at the moment.  All of the world’s problems would not be solved, but we would be well on the way.

 

Regrettably we have a long way to go before this will happen.  It could happen; there is no doubt about it.  Unfortunately we have too many misguided people in the world at the moment who seem to believe fighting is the complete answer to peace. Others seem to believe another solution is to alienate people and restrict their freedoms. To me there seems to be a lot of counter productive solutions to peace.

 

Here is an example and this is from people who claim that their religion is one of love and they make claims such as these in regards to what a real Christian is:

"They truly follow the tenets of Jesus. Things like "love your neighbor", "pray for them that despise you and say all manner of evil against you", "do unto others as you would have them do unto you", "if someone slaps you on the left cheek, turn your right cheek to him, also" and "if someone takes your cloak, give to him your tunic, also". Those are Jesus' words, and that is a religion full of love for your fellow man."

Currently here at Vox (thanks to paikea for highlighting this and posting a very interesting article titled: Muslim True/False) there is a petition being promoted to put forward a proposed US Constitutional Amendment.  This amendment would include that: 

 

“The preaching of Islam in Mosques, Schools, and other venues is prohibited. The subject of Islam may be taught in a post high school academic environment provided that instruction include discussion of Islam’s history of violence, conquest, and its ongoing war on democratic and other non-Islamic values.”

 

Yes it does seem rather harsh.

 

The proposal also states:

“Whereas; the United States of America was founded on the ideals of individual rights, including the individual right to practice one’s religion of choice, or no religion, and that there would be no compulsion of religion, nor state sanctioned religion, nor a ‘religious test’ for participation in the body politic;

Whereas; Islam includes a complete political and social structure, encompassed by its religious law, Sharia, that supercedes any civil law and that Islam mandates that no secular or democratic institutions are to be superior to Islamic law;”

From what I can gather about the United States the first paragraph is correct, unless you listen to some of the people from America’s Religious Right and then it seems they would dearly love to change this paragraph.  We have all heard about the pillars of the 10 Commandments being set up in public areas on American soil and the big kerfufel that it has caused.  If there is no state sanctioned religion, then there should not be the establishment of such a practice.   But listen further to a statement from someone who stated they would sign this petition, but had doubts of its effectiveness due to the wording of the petition:

“I think a better possibility to enact an Amendment to the Constitution declaring America a nation with a Judeo-Christian heritage without establishing any particular Jewish sect (Orthodox, Conservative or ) or Christian Denomination (Variations of Protestantism, Catholicism, Eastern Orthodox etc.) as a State religion.  This would simultaneously deal with Secular Humanism war on Christianity and radical Islam.”

Now I could be totally wrong, but this statement doesn’t exactly match up with the statement:

“Whereas; the United States of America was founded on the ideals of individual rights, including the individual right to practice one’s religion of choice, or no religion, and that there would be no compulsion of religion, nor state sanctioned religion, nor a ‘religious test’ for participation in the body politic”

Although the comment doesn’t say there should be an official state religion, it does indicate there is intent to restrict freedom of religion and non-religion.   Let’s face it if it was possible, the Religious Right would declare the US a Christian nation in an instant if it had the power. 

This brings me to the next paragraph I included above,

Whereas; Islam includes a complete political and social structure, encompassed by its religious law, Sharia, that supercedes any civil law and that Islam mandates that no secular or democratic institutions are to be superior to Islamic law;”

This may or may not be the case in regards to Islam, however when it come to the Religious Right in the US, what sort of laws would we expect to see in the US.  The answer is simple we would see strict laws based on their version of Christianity.  To illustrate my point I only need to draw your attention to an article such as this, “God’s Choice for President”.  So who would the Religious Right’s God choose to be the next US President, well naturally McCain and why would God do such a thing, only two factors come to mind apparently, the issue of abortion and gay rights – yes that is it, I kid you not!  It seems God is not concerned about social justice issues, healthcare, poverty, the environment, racial harmony, equal rights and the endless list of things I thought were major concerns to a “Christian” God.

The Religious Right also seems to need to make up its mind.  I have noticed that when it suits, Christianity is described as a religion of peace and then they will do a back flip and bash the more socially conscious Christians over the head with their Bibles and say, "Christianity is not a religion of peace, because Jesus didn’t come to bring peace," and they will then go on and quote the following Bible passage:

“Do not think that I came to bring peace on the earth; I did not come to bring peace, but a sword. For I came to set a man against his father, and a daughter against her mother, and a daughter-in-law against her mother-in-law; and a man’s enemies will be the members of his household. He who loves father or mother more than Me is not worthy of Me; and he who loves son or daughter more than Me is not worthy of Me. And he who does not take his cross and follow after Me is not worthy of Me. He who has found his life will lose it, and he who has lost his life for My sake will find it." (Matthew 10:34-39)

It is an interesting passage.  I actually like this passage, for me it means Jesus came here to shake the people up and get them thinking and get them out of their selfish and corrupt ways.  The church at the time needed a good kick in the pants. The people needed to start doing good work to help others and to become more loving and compassionate.  That at least is partly the meaning of the passage if it is read in conjunction with the other messages Jesus conveyed throughout the NT.  To me the sword is not to be taken literally.  However, I have heard Christians use that “sword” to defend the right to carry a gun, go to war, use violence, justify capital punishment, and a host of other violent acts. 

It is interesting how Islam is always portrayed as being spread by the sword, and yet here we have a quote in the Christian Bible and it is Jesus who is carrying a sword.  So it actually makes sense that when this passage is taken literally it has been used to spread the religion of Christianity throughout the world.  At present Islam is conveniently portrayed by Christians as being spread by the sword, and by making that claim they are inferring that Christianity has always been spread peacefully - I guess by some gentle process of osmosis.  But this is not true, the correct history of the world indicates otherwise.   Christianity has been spread throughout the world by the sword, by the gun, by oppressive tactics and  by an endless array of violent actions. In short, Christianity was spread by empire building throughout the world. 

I can now refer back to this quote mentioned earlier,

“I think a better possibility to enact an Amendment to the Constitution declaring America a nation with a Judeo-Christian heritage ............. ..... ....... ......"

There is an obvious flaw in this statement, an obvious omission.   Who were the people here before  the Judeo-Christian heritage was forced upon them?  Of course it was the Native Americans, who had their own heritage and their own beliefs systems. Were the Native Americans treated well by their Judeo-Christian conquerors?  No, in the main history also proves this to be incorrect.  

I am sure that if the Jews, the Moors, the “witches” and the “sodomites” could have put together a petition outlawing Christianity during the Spanish Inquisition they would have (So there is no bias here are two references one a Jewish perspective another a Catholic perspective).  I have heard modern day Orthodox Jews speaking of Christianity with utter disdain, and if you watch the video, “The Hidden Story of Jesus” which I have included below, you will actually witness how much disdain they have for Christianity and the wrongs they feel Christianity has done to them.

More from the proposal, “Whereas; Islam preaches that it and it alone is the true religion”

Of course no other religion has EVER proclaimed such an audacious statement has it.  I have been told many times that Christianity is the one true religion, and not only the Religious Right makes that claim.  In fact the scripture I quoted above from Matthew essentially says that Jesus is the ONLY way, and if you deviate away from Jesus then your life will be lost.  They are powerful words, powerful enough to make parents scared that their children's lives will be lost if they deviate away from the path, and that kind of "terror" can make people do terrible things to other people if they believe another is leading their child astray. It explains why so many Christian parents are devastated to find out their child is gay, for they believe their child is forever forsaken.

I would say that the majority of people belonging to all religions will make similar claims in regards to their religion being the one true way.  It stands to reason; otherwise they wouldn’t practice the religion.  But it shouldn't mean we shouldn't be able to get along.

Now for me the past is the past.  Terrible things have been done throughout history in the name of religion and also in the name of various political ideologies.  I have only brought up the past because some seem to like to bring up the past as a weapon against various religions, and my point is to say that no religion has an innocent past.  What matters to me is the present and the future, so I would love to move on.

This is my opinion for what it is worth.  I believe the Muslims who are being violent and intolerant in the name of Islam are misguided, as were the Christians/Jews/Hindus and other belief systems of the past who were violent and as are the Christians/Jews/Hindus and other belief systems who are violent or intolerant in the present.

This now brings me to the title of this post and that is, "Reuniting the Children of Abraham". This documentary is an interesting look at how it is possible to cross the barriers which impede peace on a personal level.  Petitions aimed at oppressing a whole people are not the answer to achieve peace in a country; projects such as these which aim to break down personal barriers to peace are the answer.  It is difficult to wage war against a friend or some one you know and respect.

“Abraham, of the Old Testament, was the founding patriarch of a new, monotheistic faith, which included Jews and later Christians and Muslims.  One of his two sons is historically tied to the founding of Judaism, the other to the founding of Islam.

The Children of Abraham Project, which is an effort by individuals and interfaith organizations in the Detroit Metro area, to educate Jews, Christians and Muslims as to their common ancestry, and encourages them to work together for tolerance, peace and civic betterment.  The process involves watching a play in which teenage actors, some who helped write the play, act out scenes from the Biblical story.  This is interspersed with contemporary accounts of religious and ethnic prejudice based on personal recollections.  The play has allowed audiences to speak freely about their fears and prejudices and to walk in another's shoes. 

The Project is a powerful experience that gives hope to the idea of these three religions being able to find their common heritage as a reason for mutual religious respect and spiritual healing in the future.”

 

.

.

.

Another interesting documentary is The Hidden Story of Jesus.  What really struck me about this documentary was by taking Jesus as an example; it was possible to see how much most of the religions have in common.  I believe looking for what we have in common, instead of looking at our differences; will in fact help us to become more closely connected as a society, and more accepting of our differences.

This is not a documentary for Christians to be afraid of, as I do not believe it would diminish your faith in anyway. 

For me personally it actually enhanced my faith in humanity.

 

 

 

 

I thought this quote had a fair bit of meaning for me at present as I embark on my treatment for ME/CFS:

Having committed yourself to certain practices, be steadfast and never transgress the promises you have made. Let go of everything that could tempt you to do so and devote yourself entirely and single-mindedly to the accomplishment of your aims. For six years the Buddha did not waver from his practice of the meditative stabilization known as "Pervading Space." This meditation focuses on the fundamental nature of phenomena, which is present wherever there is space. Everywhere throughout space there are suffering living beings on whom this meditation also focuses with the compassionate wish to relieve their suffering and the loving wish to give them happiness. Thus it combines essential wisdom and skilful means.

--from The Three Principal Aspects of the Path: An Oral Teaching by Geshe Sonam Rinchen, translated and edited by Ruth Sonam, published by Snow Lion Publications

“I pray for all of us, oppressor and friend, that together we may succeed in building a better world through human understanding and love, and that in doing so we may reduce the pain and suffering of all sentient beings.”

--from His Holiness' Nobel Peace Prize Acceptance Speech, Oslo, December 1989, from The Pocket Dalai Lama compiled and edited by Mary Craig

* * * * * *

Buddhists: China takes charge of the afterlife

After September 1, sentient beings aspiring to Buddhahood--and accidentally reincarnating in China or Tibet--must now register with the Chinese government. So what happens when enlightened ones who have reincarnated in other parts of the world return there in future lives? Chances are, they'll be considered criminals, according to the order which states "the so-called reincarnated living Buddha without government approval is illegal and invalid." Same goes for those who recognize them.

The irony of an atheistic government taking charge of one of the most peace-seeking religions in the world today is hard to avoid, and China's latest policy twist should be of concern to Buddhists throughout the world. Your voice can make a difference. Write to your representatives. Write a letter to the editor. Write to a Chinese consulate. And please pass this message on.

Contact information for embassies, worldwide:

United States: http://www.visarite.com/chnConsulate.htm

Australia: http://www.fmprc.gov.cn/eng/wjb/zwjg/2490/2496/t14502.htm

Other Countries: http://www.embassiesabroad.com/embassies-of/China

International Olympic Committee, Chbteau de Vidy, 1007 Lausanne, Switzerland
Urs Lacotte, IOC Director General; Jacques Rogge, President of the IOC and the EB
Tel: (41.21) 621 61 11
Fax: (41.21) 621 62 16

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

News Coverage:

"China tells living Buddhas to obtain permission before they reincarnate"*

"China Insists on Naming Living Buddhas"*

"China's "living Buddhas" rules stoke fire in Tibet"

*Profound thanks to The Times of London, the Guardian, and the Telegraph for covering this tragi-comic story.

 

This is my response to a previous entry of mine about religion and peace I said I would give out my opinion so here it is for what it is worth.

Okay this is my opinion, it is not a researched article it is just my opinion on the way I see things at present in respect to religion and the role it plays in regards to peace here on Earth.

Firstly if we were able to some how miraculously fix all of the other issues which lead to war on this planet we call our home could we have peace with the existence of our current major religions?  In my opinion as it stands at the moment the answer is no.  I don’t feel I have to justify that opinion as access to the internet is enough to answer that question.  It is a sad reality, but it is true.

What makes this reality even sadder is the fact that each major religion generally claims to be a religion of peace.  At the moment for me actions speak louder than words.  So in my opinion the actions of some religions do not reflect the claim that they are about peace.

The problem with the claim that each religion is designed to promote peace and enhance humanity is that the religion will only do so if it is on their terms.  In general each religion believes that its religion is the right and only way and therefore everyone else’s religion is wrong and everyone should agree with their view.  If someone does not agree with their view then the other person’s view must be changed or even worse that person is seen as a threat to their religion and that person must die.  I believe if people of different faiths really do want peace and what’s best for humanity then they should look for each others similarities instead of their differences.  Religions should accept that the goal maybe virtually the same but the way that we get to the goal maybe different and that is okay.  I am not going to single out any particular religions as being better or worse than another, as I think that it defeats the purpose of my entry which is to be united for peace, freedom and a respect for each others rights.  However I will quote H.H. the 14^th Dalai Lama of Tibet and this is what he said when I saw him speak while he was in Australia. 

I will paraphrase H.H. as I cannot quote him word for word. While he was still in Tibet before he had to leave for permanent exile he believed that Buddhism was the best religion.  Once he began to have multi-faith talks with other religious leaders he began to see that essentially most religions that he had any dialogue with were heading towards the one goal, but were just on different paths.  He said that he generally advised people of certain cultures to stick with the religion that they were brought up with, as there would be less confusion for the follower and each religion was designed for different people and that was okay.  We shouldn’t waste our time over which is right and which is wrong; we should instead embrace the religion which suits us best and practice it as best we can.  He also said that our goal should be to be happy but never at the expense of another.

Now I have to say that those words are some of the wisest words ever spoken and if all religions and their followers could follow those words then we could possibly have peace between religions.  All it takes is acceptance of others.

Okay this is where I may loose some of you.  In my opinion you don’t need a book of 1000+ pages to learn right from wrong.  In my opinion if a religion wants to engage its members then it makes no sense to me why the holy book of a specific religion needs to be written in such a way that it is open to misinterpretation or can only be interpreted by a select few and the rest of the followers have to take another person’s word for the accuracy of the translations. This is where corruption of God’s word comes into play and wars, violence and other atrocities have been fought over such translations.  Another point is that if there are parts of the holy book which are way out of date or put your religion in a bad light in these more modern times, then why keep those passages?  As a religion you are only giving ammunition to non-believers to discount your religion due to some of the ridiculous antics of a more ancient civilisation, which you obviously must accept as gospel and therefore should be adhered to or otherwise you wouldn’t have them in your holy book.  Of course your answer will be that they were the written works of your god and they can’t be altered, fair enough but I can tell you now it is your religion and also some of mankind that is suffering because of it.  Terrible actions can be justified just by quoting a verse from a holy book.

I think it is time that people of religion became just a bit more rational, realistic and accepting.  I am not going to discount your belief in a god as that is not my agenda.  But I will say this; a religion cannot afford to stay stagnant.  In this day and age science cannot be discounted, if you discount some of the solid findings of science you are living in a deluded world and you cannot help anyone.   If you discounted science then you would still see the Earth as being flat or that the planets and sun revolve around the Earth.  You would have to refuse all modern medicines and diagnostic aids which are all from a field of science. You would still believe that epilepsy and schizophrenia are caused by evil spirits and I know some people still do and I can tell you a horror story of this belief in our modern times in a country such as Australia.  There are things about this world that are concrete and it doesn’t matter how much you try and say they aren’t they are.  Dinosaurs were real and their fossils are very real.  So unless a religion can come to grips with these realities then it is a deluded religion.  A religion that can’t accept that to be gay is not a lifestyle choice but part of their biological being is causing harm to those people in so many ways.  A religion that won’t allow condoms to be used to help reduce the spread of HIV in Africa is causing unnecessary harm to a whole continent of people.  These actions are inhumane and a religion should be about humanity, not about being right or wrong. 

So what has all of this got to do with peace, well living with religious delusions is a real danger to our planet and our civilisation.  If Sam Harris’ figures are true and 22% of US citizens believe that Armageddon will occur within 50 years and another 22% believe that it is most likely to occur within 50 years then these beliefs are a major concern for this planet.  The issue that I see is that people are creating a man made Armageddon, it isn’t necessary to create a man made Armageddon if it is going to happen it will happen when it is time.  But we can’t just sit back and have international policies made on the basis of the possibility of Armageddon in 50 years.  We can’t ignore the health of our planet because we think it won’t matter in 50 years time because some of us will be in heaven.  What if you are wrong?  People have been predicting its coming since just after Jesus died and they have all been wrong.  The only difference now is we have the nuclear capability to make a man made Armageddon for which there will be no repair available once it is set in motion.  If you believe that it is coming in 50 years then that is fine by me, but don’t plan yours and others lives around it, plan for a future for your children and grandchildren in case you are wrong.  If it comes well you can rejoice and say I told you so and if it doesn’t then the rest of the planet can rejoice because we still have a viable planet because we haven’t blown ourselves up or destroyed the environment.

I am not going to say whether God does or does not exist because I will be honest – I don’t know.  But I do know this, for me personally to worship a god then that god would have to be worthy of worship.  My God would be one of universal love, displaying acceptance of all, forgiving of us because we are human and prone to make mistakes, my god would not be a jealous god because there would be no need to be jealous because god would be so whole and so great that there would be no need for jealousy.  God would not be full of anger and fury and frighten me into obedience, by god’s very nature I couldn’t help but worship my god.  God would represent all that was good in this world and would be something to aspire to and god would lead by example.  God would also in some way let me know that my god does really exist and I could communicate with him without the interference of any other person.  I would be in awe of my god.  I would be the best person I could be because god showed me the way by example.  If religion is to stay relevant today then the representatives and followers of religion need to display similar characteristics of the god who I have just described, not be perfect but at least try and get it some where close to the ball park.

If a religion is a great religion then it shouldn’t feel threatened by another religion building a place of worship down the road.  If a religion is truly great, then like a moth to a flame or a pin to a magnet people would be automatically drawn.  So if your religion does feel threatened by another religion well you really do need to ask yourself why your religion is being threatened. Instead of taking action against the other religion it may pay to self examine your religion and see what you are doing wrong.  It wouldn’t hurt to actually have some constructive dialogue with the other religion, open communication should lead to a better understanding of each other’s religion and you will be leading by example and showing others that peace between different religious groups is possible.  If you are not sure about something then ask.  So many acts of violence have been committed due to a simple misunderstanding, especially when different cultures are concerned.

I am not going to discount that religion has some benefits.  Religions do benefit people in a variety of ways and many people need to feel part of a spiritual community and feel a connection with a higher being.  There is nothing wrong with that.  Religious organisations benefit many people with their charity work.  I am not going to list all of the benefits of religion as there are many.

I would also like to say that not everyone feels the need to be part of a religious group or believe in a god.  Experience has shown me that being part of a religion does not necessarily make you a better person over those who don’t believe. I have found good and bad amongst believers and non-believers.  But at least the non-believer couldn’t be called a hypocrite and I can assure you, nothing is a bigger turnoff to religion than a hypocritical religious follower.  People do not need to believe in a god or a religion to make them law abiding citizens; good social morals do not need to come from a church.  Experience has shown us over time that good cooperating societies are far more successful than societies that have no moral framework.  As Sam Harris said many of the most law abiding countries are those whose populations are mainly made up of non-believers.

In conclusion I would say that we could have peace between religions and therefore more peace on Earth if religions were a bit more accepting of each other, if followers didn’t actively and persistently try and convert others to their religion.  Also most religions are supposedly based on a sense of humanity, peace and good will and I think this seems to be frequently overlooked and instead it becomes a matter of who is right or wrong and humanity gets overlooked in the bun fight.

Peace, freedom and equal rights to all.

Remember this is only my opinion I don’t expect you to agree with me.  You may pick my arguments to pieces if that is what you wish.  But just so you know, I won’t be replying to comments with in depth arguments to justify my opinions, as I have acknowledged this is just a collection of my opinions and they may or may not be right.  Due to health constraints I now need to rest for an undetermined length of time.

To my friends keep well and safe.

I will finish with some wise words from Mahatma Ghandi regarding religion.

Sorry back again I knew I forgot something.  Can we please work together to prove this guy in the video wrong - I would so love to do that!

China does not consider that it invaded and took over Tibet as in its opinion Tibet was already part of China. But as the following videos show, this theory was/is not a valid theory. The fact that China used weapons, torture and imprisonment to take over a land that it claims was already part of China, also demonstrates that this fact was not correct.  As far as the Tibetan people were/are concerned they were not part of China.

The following short videos are taken from a series of 17 videos titled:"Tibet My Country", the full set is available at YouTube.  The videos below are numbers 3, 4, 5 and 6 of the series.