Poll Suggestion: Who Survives the Harshest Apocalypse?

Although I no longer look at religious texts through a religious lens and I am not a religious person, your comment reminded me of a saying attributed to Ali ibn Abi Talib, an important figure in Islam.

He describes the worldly life as follows:

Its beginning is hardship and struggle, and its end is destruction.

In its lawful gains there is accountability, and in its unlawful gains there is punishment.

Whoever becomes wealthy is deceived, and whoever is in need becomes sorrowful.

The one who strives for this world does not attain it, and the one who turns away from it finds it turning toward him.

Whoever looks at it with insight gains awareness, but whoever fixes his gaze upon it, the world blinds his heart.

@RezaKJoi​ 

@Breumaster​ 

My religious perspective is similar to yours, but I believe that in the realms of ethics, behavior, and even psychology, one cannot rely solely on scientific knowledge and verifiable evidence—not that they are incorrect or unreliable, but they cannot provide a comprehensive understanding, because these fields are not like geology, where everything can be definitively proven using scientific methods. For this reason, I try to broaden my own knowledge—not by avoiding scientific books, but by also reading other kinds of books, even those whose contents I may largely disagree with.

On the other hand, a large part of society holds certain beliefs, and it is reasonable to study and even examine those beliefs—just as you might want a religious person to read the ideas you follow—so that in a society, we can better understand one another and live more harmoniously.

Generally, if I hear a correct and logical statement, I try to use it regardless of who says it.What bothers me most, however, is when religion is used as a tool to maintain or establish power, and opposition is attributed not to the power itself but to the religion. That is truly wrong.

In the end, I genuinely hope to see a day when people of all beliefs can live together comfortably. But the reality is that many beliefs tend to function like this: attacking beliefs other than their own.

@RezaKJoi​ 

I don't think we are really similar. I've skipped religious believe completely for myself. It has developed more into philosophy than religion. Maybe I'm a very little part of an agnostic, but it doesn't need much to skip even this. As I said, I see religion as a rudimentary form of philosophy.

People need orientation. Religion provides very simple but effective orientation. But there is far more than that. To understand what humankind is going into, there is a need to take a step back and look at the whole picture to have an overall Impression. It needs complete inner neutrality the moment when you look at it. I guess that less than 1 each 10,000 people have the ability to step back in that form.

To gain that ability has much to do about how one is raised, genetic issues, what someone learned, how someone treats him- or herself. One got to first love him- or herself before loving others. If one is always about to seek truth and learns to accept that truth often ist not what he/she likes, that ones goes far beyond his/her own borders to have a look at the whole humankind. I don't state you don't have that. But I guess we have quite different aspects and issues we look about. I guess our unity is more about freedom and peace, which is a good thing for everyone on earth. That doesn't mean we are not different in many ways.

I take it with Mr. Miyagi in 'The Next Karate Kid'. Short: He told Dugan the story about the bull that always troubled the whole village, because he was really bad. One day, the villagers held a village festival with a fine soup and all were happy together. There are some people in the world which always behave like the bull, especially in some r.e.g.i.m.e.s. Some of that changes soon. I'm pretty sure about that. I think it's no coincidence that the current p.o.p.e is American. 

@riverotter​ no. 23

oh, I was thinking Mel Gibson.

You should consider using him and not Tom Hardy

@riverotter​ 

Yay, Gibson was the first, and who ever will follow the past will be measured with Gibson, even though it's Tom Hardy. ;)

and Hardy was a supporting character. Gibson was the main character

@riverotter​ 

On top of that!