I hope that a rich discussion will take place, with debatable proposals that are as concrete as possible.

The interest in peace does not seem so great with the RG members. Perhaps a short comment in answering the question asked also requires longer reflection.

In 1453 the great scholar Nicholas of Cusa wrote his paper on peace between religions (DE PACE FIDEI). Today, those responsible in all the major religions are trying to stand up for peace.

At the moment, a trade war triggered by the USA seems to be about to break out. An important issue.

Another issue that threatens peace is the situation in the Strait of Hormuz. Should other states follow the call to move soldiers, warships and heavy weapons there?

Dear Hein, I am not an expert in religions but for me is important to maintain peace in the world.

I think that any conflict situation or war, anywhere in the world affects our lifes in many negative ways.

Brahma Kumari's all over World are trying for peace and there efforts are appreciated at various platforms

There million minutes of peace program is commendable

Peace does not accompany religion. But peace accompanies trade.

Unfortunately, most religions promote an anti-materialist view and so put little importance on production and trade.

Wars are less frequent between trading partners. If religion could promote enterprise and trade it would also be promoting peace.

Jelena_Popovic-Djordjevic

dear Jelena, thank you for your comment. It is the same with me: I am no expert in international relations or political science, but there are daily news of new tensions, conflicts, war danger, this is frightening, even if you are currently living in an area that is not directly affected. But there are people who have very reasonable suggestions, better than I have myself, they might be able to share their experience, thank you! Hein

Satish Narula ,

many thanks of your note on Brahma Kumaris, it is worthful to introduce this movement here: Brahma Kumaris is the short form for Brahma Kumaris World Spiritual University, a religious-spiritual community from India with several hundred thousand members. It teaches Raja Yoga, the loving connection between man and God. - I don't know enough about it myself. I have close relatives, they are convinced followers of the Nichiren Buddhism from Japan, they also stand up for peace.

Thank you, Hein

Stephen Martin Fritz

Dear Stephen, thanks for your comment. it seems that in today's peace efforts there is a religious and a humanist-worldly effort towards world peace. I only asked the question because I am really worried about the newspaper reports about the potential for conflict in the Gulf of Hormuz, for example. What can we do? Who should we trust? I am completely dependent on the experts here. Maybe you can show a way that has chances,

warmly, Hein

PS. your thesis is of course very interesting, and I would be happy to discuss it. Can we not also say that economic competition is constantly creating trouble spots that are part of modern capitalism, which ultimately always has an exploitative function?

I'm not sure what you mean Hein Retter

When you say modern capitalism creates trouble sports and always has an exploitative function...

I'm not sure what you mean here. Can you give examples?

I agree with you dear Hein.

Daily news are frightening sometimes.

The contribution of the world religions to peace?

Looks like a contribution of gasoline to fire safety...

Jelena_Popovic-Djordjevic

Thanks, Jelena for your comment. I am happy for your understanding.

Best, Hein

Denis Korneev

I understand the skepticism that speaks from your commentary. I have it myself when I realize how many wars, how many persecutions and killings have originated from individual people and groups - with a view to the history of these religions.

On the other hand, today there are serious attempts by some religious leaders themselves to make a contribution to world peace. This is new, and one cannot regard it as an attempt at missionary work either, I think. That is why I support such approaches.

Stephen Martin Fritz

I can understand the attitude critical of religion when I consider the persecution of some ethnic groups - or even individual people - which is still reality today. This is the situation in the Middle East (from a European perspective), because here not only political and economic interests play a role, but also religious opposition.

I am somewhat sceptical about your thesis that trade brings peace; I ask you to bear in mind that peace made by political reason immensely improves the possibilities of action, i think: the inversion is correct. You need political conditions to optimize trade.

When I think of the two volumes by Adam Smith, which you certainly know much more thoroughly than I do, "The Wealth of Nations" (1776), then the optimism that Smith had is also in your thesis. Unfortunately, Adam Smith is not the current US President, D.T. His trade policy, which aims to optimize US trade in his own interest, is a disaster.

One can associate very different measures with trade. Trump's idea of buying Greenland is not, in my opinion, a way of securing peace in the world, but the opposite. Look at the UK and the Brexit: Everything happens in the name of trade and worsens the overall initiation of trade.

The question is therefore: What must trade policy be like today so that it really achieves the goals you have in mind?

Hein Retter You seem to be implying that wealth and trade empower people with bad intent to do greater harm.

This is certainly the case.

But trade depends on peace, while religion does not.

There is an old motto that links the two: "Peace-and-Prosperity." Though traders can encourage aggression, as when they seek to forcefully enter national markets that they have been excluded from (China & North Korea) most trade occurs between countries at peace.

Religion, on the other hand, with it's inherent faith that it possesses TRUTH and SALVATION naturally lends itself to aggression as "conversion" and "proselytizing" to others is what it does in the name of helping them.

Recall that Columbus got his voyages funded by promising the Queen of Spain that he would be converting the natives to Christianity.

Today most religions promote a peaceful agenda. But religion is still something that distinguishes or divides people. Trade and material gain is universal.

Both Christians and Muslims want bigger houses and better TVs.

Religion is now best used as a personal and individual activity rather than a social one.

I think that all religions are about peace, peace in mind and with others.

The use and exploitation of religions by politicians is the problem.

WAR only for OIL! Black oil or Diamond oil and many countries like ants want oil.

Stephen Martin Fritz

After an unwelcome delay, I resume the thread of conversation. I think that we are not too far apart in our realistic assessment. This applies at least to the critical view of religion when we relate this criticism to the multitude of wars which acted with the absolute claim to truth for the recognition of their doctrine by force - everywhere where other religious movements questioned the claim to general representation. Peace through religious rule in the inner area - struggle the "unbelievers" or "dissenters" to the outside.

2/ It is true that trade is only possible under non-war conditions. But the liberalism that trade needs has always been connected in the past and present with questions of power - no matter whether the state or the corporations (or the secret services) exercised this power. Also the question of often existing corruption to increase one's own chances against the competition plays a role in the free. How trade can look "peaceful" between the USA and other states under the signum "America first" is shown by President Trump - for me no model of peace and freedom. But that is an old story and after the end of all attempts of planned economy by the real socialism one will see how it goes on. At some point the free market must also think socially and keep an eye on the highest good, I think.

Dewanand Makhan

Thank you very much for your comment. Of course, this is true for many cases - but by no means for everyone. The violent clashes of newly emerging religious movements, which fight against established powers and their values with violence, also terror, have strongly increased in the last decades.

Amar Bencherik

Thank you very much for that valuable answer. It is true, of course, that today all representatives of the world religions, as well as smaller groups, emphasise their love of peace. That is good.

On the other hand, the separation between politics and religion is much more advanced in the states of the West than in the ancestral territories of Islam (to name only 2 religions). I don't see any difference between political and religious power in Iran. That would be hardly imaginable in Europe or in the USA. The decisive question is whether a religion that in the past was intolerant of other religions because of its sole claim to truth has become more tolerant today. I think that is not the case. Movements of religious intolerance and religious fundamentalism have developed to a greater extent. Perhaps something will change in the future.

@Hein Retter

From my humble reads of history, i can say that for a long time Christianity, Judaism and Islam lived coherently in the same geographical space under the rule of Islam. So one more time it is not about religions, it is the human greed.

From my point of view, i see no harm in Muslims or Christians saying that their religion is the true, because this is what faith is and about, i am Muslim and I believe that my religion is the true, and the day I change the opinion I have to convert, so is the Christian. Otherwise I will feel like lying to my self.

Christianity, Judaism and Islam believe in the same GOD. On the other hand, they grap other countries. Has nothing to do with faith.

Amar Bencherik

Thank you for your understanding answer. I think no one should be forced by religious or worldly power to accept another faith or not to practice his faith. I have had the impression so far that within strict Muslim milieus it is not possible for a Christian or Buddhist (who does not believe in God but in Karma) to pursue his own faith without serious difficulties from Muslims or the police. In the Christianity of Europe in former times this was also the case. Today this has changed, and the principles of mutual respect, recognition and multiculturalism prevail, although here too there is sometimes the fear of alienation by ethnic groups of other faiths - in view of the large number of migrants and refugees. The 10th World Assembly of RELIGIONS FOR PEACE conference was also based on these peaceful principles, to which I referred at the beginning of my question.

Dewanand Makhan

Thank you so much for your note. Of course, it is true that "the Almighty God" plays a role in all three religions. Jews and Muslims see Jesus of Nazareth in the role of a prophet. But they have never accepted that Jesus of Nazareth, according to Christian dogma, was the Son of God before the creation of the earth and was sent to earth by God the Father to redeem humanity from its sins. In the last 2000 years cruel wars have been waged over such religious differences - within and between the main religions. This is not quite over in the present, that religious conflicts can lead to persecution and death. Terrorism for religious reasons is a relatively recent phenomenon.

Of course, it is a sign of hope that academics and educated people in particular are committed to living together in peace.

Hein Retter you are 100% right! True about Jesus of Nazareth and sad that Christian not have Nazareth.

Hi,

The country, which would want to become the superpower would commence the war and cause chaos. Educating the citizens about the cause of the war, its consequences would for sure stop from the governments making a war move. The citizens' protest may put a halt on such impending danger.