Science and Religion, both have a role to play in equal measure in the lives of humankind. One cannot exist without the other. Science can give you a better body, better health, longevity; it can give you more comforts, all the luxuries of life possible to be bought with money. One can buy a beautiful bed, but not sleep; the bed is the outer; sleep is the essence – in fact all that lies in the circumference, but not the center. Science is like a body without the soul.

Religion provides you the center; it gives you the soul. Without religion, science is a corpse, a beautiful corpse, maybe. Similarly, religion alone is not enough. Religion alone makes you a ghost – a soul without a body.

Have you ever seen a body without a soul, or a soul without a body? Never! Why? Because, neither can stand of its own. For a material thing, e.g., a stool requires a minimum of three legs to stand, and non-material – man, two. In the like manner, if either science or religion attempted to stand only on one leg, it can at best frogmarch for a while before it falls flat. But this is what the East and the West have been trying to do all through history. In the West there has been too much of science, and in the East, too much of religion.

Forgetting the existent reality around us, in the East, we talked too much about the Spirit, so much so that we turned into inveterate introverts. We forgot the beauties of nature that surrounded us. “Do not be attached. Renounce everything that you see as real, because they are unreal,” taught our religion, and thus we started to be looked upon as fakirs, or the land of naked sadhus with loincloths, roaming the forests. Such was our picture presented to the world. Humanity in the East became ugly. It did have a center all right, but with no circumference.

The very opposite happened in the West. People were gregarious, action-oriented, had only one life to finish everything attainable possible, and so in a great hurry. Thus it did achieve a commendable lot in materialistic terms, but in the process lost its contentment. It became a circumference without a center. People have everything, yet something is missing.

‘Something missing’, reminds me of great scientists like Max Plank, Eddington, Einstein, Newton, – all of whom later turned almost mystical. No matter how many mysteries they did unfold, tenfold more were in the waiting that they never thought of. Newton said, “to myself I seem to have been only like a boy playing on the seashore, and diverting myself in now and then finding a smoother pebble or a prettier shell than ordinary, whilst the great ocean of truth lay all undiscovered before me”.

Eddington has written in his biography, “When I started my career as a scientist I used to think that the world consisted of things, but as I grow old I am becoming more and more aware that the world does not consist of things, but of thoughts.”

Reality is far closer to thoughts than to things. Reality is far more mysterious than what can be weighed or measured. Reality is not only objective, it is subjective too. Reality is not only content, it is also consciousness. Therefore the need of the day is that we must have a science that is religious, and a religion which is scientific.

Nikos Kazantzakis’s famous novel Zorba the Greek has been described as “a living heart, a large voracious mouth, a great brute soul, not yet severed from mother earth.” There has been an attempt to inject a sort of vaccine against anything spiritual. Gautama Buddha on the other hand, is spiritualism personified. We need a new Buddha – a synthesis of Zorba the Greek and Gautama the Buddha. He cannot be just Zorba, and he cannot be just Buddha. In his blockbuster book of the 1970’s Tao of Physics, Fritjof Capra says it beautifully, “Physicists do not need mysticism, nor do the mystics need Physics, but humanity needs both”.

Osho, the great master’s whole endeavor has been to create a bridge between Zorba and Buddha, between the earth, this shore, and the farther shore, the beyond.

Galileo, Darwin, and Hawking: The Interplay of Science, Reason, and Religion

205 pages. $21 paperback.

Sixteen hundred years ago, Augustine decided that the best model for the science-and-religion interplay was one of interaction and in Galileo, Darwin, and Hawking, philosopher of science and religion Phil Dowe argues that pattern continues today.

In his praiseworthy book, Dowe offers up four views of the science-and-religion relationship: naturalism, religious science, independence and interactivity. The first two brand the relationship as uncomplimentary, the third as unrelated, and the latter — which Dowe favors — sees religion and science as harmonious and dependent. He backs up his findings with detailed accounts of the history and philosophy of science-and-religion.

Dowe also reveals that ancient Christian belief made a single God the author of two books: the book of Scripture and the book of nature, which must correspond with each other. Augustine harmonized them. He counseled Christians to read scripture literally except where it conflicts with science, and then to interpret it metaphorically. Moreover, he advised reading Scripture as a spiritual work, not as science.

Conflict arises only when one book is exalted, the other demonized. If both receive equal recognition, either they serve separate functions, as in Stephen Jay Gould’s non-overlapping magisteria, or they mutually benefit each other, as Dowe argues clearly and logically in this book.

In Dowe’s first case study, Galileo is placed under house arrest by the Inquisition for promulgating Copernicus’ idea that Earth revolves around the sun. Surely, this is conflict. Yet, Dowe notes, the Vatican’s need for a better calendar and, therefore, a more accurate cosmology inspired Copernicus’ work, which he dedicated to the Pope. Moreover, this discord lay not between religion and science, but between sciences — Aristotle vs. Copernicus — for Augustine had harmonized Scripture with Aristotelian science.

More generally, the idea that God created people in the divine image — rational and capable of governing — inspired early science. Rational people can discover the workings of God’s rational world. As Dowe argues, governing requires power and scientific knowledge of nature increases power; therefore, humans should pursue science. These ideas gave early scientists the optimism and impetus to engage in science. Dowe claims the subsequent success of science supports the thesis that we do, in fact, share in the divine image.

Religion motivated Darwin, Dowe’s second case. As a student at Cambridge, Darwin studied William Paley’s Natural Theology, a design argument for the existence of God, and wrote On the Origin of Species in part to refute it. Yet, many scientists — including Darwin — think God and evolution compatible.

In evaluating Hawking, Dowe shows how even atheism is a way science and religion interact. The big bang gives the universe a beginning, reviving an old argument for the existence of God. Moreover, discovery that the universe is fine-tuned for the existence of life generates a new design argument. These God-promoting ideas, Dowe writes, drive the development of the “Hartle-Hawking no-boundary condition,” wherein the universe has no beginning and thus needs no creator. To avoid evoking God to explain the fine-tuning, other cosmologists hypothesize about the existence of multiple universes. According to Dowe, atheism drives an amazing amount of contemporary science, from Richard Dawkins’ biology to Hawking’s cosmology.

And Dowe is right. Partition between the two fields seems unlikely. Science is used to support religion, and religion — or lack thereof — stimulates science. Galileo, Darwin, and Hawking is worth pondering in all its detail.

Over the last few years, premium jeans have become quite a hot commodity. Designer brands such as True Religion are highly sought after for their innovation, craftsmanship and design. As the popularity of this brand has risen, the production of imposters has grown as well. So how do you differentiate between the real and the replicated? Here are some tips on how to spot fake True Religion jeans.

Price – When buying online, this is a good indicator as to whether the jeans are real or fake. True Religions retail anywhere from $280 – $350. If you see a pair going for $50, then move along. They are most definitely fake. You should expect to pay at least $100, depending on the style.

• Stitching – Another dead giveaway is the stitching. Designer jeans, including TR are known for their impeccable quality, so if the stitching is sloppy, uneven or loose, then keep looking. You are wasting your time.
• Number of tags – Authentic TR’s should have 3 inner tags. The first one should say “True Religion brand jeans”. Note that the “J” in jeans is lowered or dipped slightly from the rest of the letters. Underneath that should say “made in USA” and not “made in U.S.A.”, “MADE IN USA” or some other combination. This tag should also indicate the size. On the other side of the tag, it should have a silver stitched line, the RN#, CA#, materials and care instructions. The second tag should have the red TR horseshoe. On the flip side, there are a set of numbers. The format should be 3 digits, a dash and then 6 more digits. The third and final tag should have the cut#, style# and PO#, materials and made in USA. All 3 of these inner tags should be centered and perfectly aligned, one on top of the other.
• The Buddhas – When you flip them inside out, the red buddhas on the inside pockets should be a bright, vibrant red. You should also be able to make out all the fingers of the buddhas. They should be small in size and well spaced apart. Many fakes will have large buddhas that are sometimes jumbled together or they are missing all together.
• The horseshoes – This is where most fraudsters run into trouble. The TR horseshoes are very hard to replicate. More often than not, they are shaped incorrectly or off centered. Fake TR’s will likely have horseshoes that are too wide and rarely cover the entire pocket in a neat and clean manner.
• Rivets – Check the rivets on the pockets from the inside and outside. On the inside, it should be embossed with the horseshoe logo. On the outside, the rivets should be embossed with “TRBJ”. This stands for True Religion Brand Jeans.

While no rules of thumb are absolute because of style, design updates and changes, you should spend some time familiarizing yourself with this brand. When you know how to spot fake True Religion jeans, you can save a lot of money. There are many deals to be had online, and now you just have to go and find them!

The Science of Music will tie together everything that has existed from the time of the "big bang" into a musical vibration for the purpose of finding compatibility between the different kingdoms. This will aid in the healing of humans and the planet.

To do this we need to expand our thinking and take music theory several steps higher into the field of science. In the beginning these will only be baby steps. As it is progressed it will eventually become the main science over all the other sciences. Music actually is the Father of mathematics on which all science is based at the present time.

Mathematics is a child of music. Music is the Father of everything. By the vibration accompanying the virtue that went with the birth of each planet there became a mathematical formula at that instant that was a musical formula.

The tie-in of mathematics to music should not be too difficult. The science of mathematics has out-distanced music, but can be directly applied and this music then, the musical formula arrived at, will give absolute knowledge for astronomy and predictable changes in the planets in the future.

Music was the first potential in the beginning of all creation, not mathematics. On other planets mathematical figures are not used, symbols are. But music is either heard or felt or seen or assimilated in some way, shape, or form by every planet in all universes, as it is a part of the makeup of all universes and all things in all universes.

Remember that as the father of mathematics, music is capable of progressing far past the stages of mathematics as far as separations of degrees of pitch and combinations of all these degrees. These are actually the genes of our body, both physical and divine.

All of our body is composed of degrees of music in its many different manifestations. If a wiring circuit of all these genes in us were to be done it would show an amazing thing. When completed the wiring diagram would tie back into itself for total completion. This is why it is stated that each form is a universe, as indeed it is. It is subject to the same rules and regulations that govern large universes, even unto the rhythm of the cycles.

Music is based on absolute, mathematical perfection as its foundation and then molded into a creation of beauty. So also are humans. Music is the common denominator of all creeds, all theories and all concepts of both scientific leaders and spiritual leaders. This science encompasses all scientific knowledge, all religions and philosophies and draws them together for a look at the total picture of creation and evolution as being partners in the miracle of life.

The scientific application of music is an exoteric one of the unchanging facts of physical manifestation. The spiritual application of music is an esoteric one of pliable etheric manifestation. Both are absolutely necessary for the expression of the Creator. One cannot exist without the other. One cannot function in full expression of life without the other.

This means the physical form must evolve to allow full expression of the Creator to take place. With the Science of Music as the guide for both factions of thought in today's world, science and religion can be effectively wedded. Music is the "tie that binds" the two together.

Music has other sub-charts, one of which is emotional feelings, processed through the solar plexus of each entity, which manifests in "feelings." Music can not only be heard audibly, but also be seen visually through color. It is capable of far more variations of expression than mathematics or physics. It has many more fields of expression than either of these other disciplines. The complexity of musical harmony can be heard through sound, seen through color and felt through the emotions.

Not only will music tie science and spirituality together on our planet, but it also will be the ultimate communication system with all others in all universes. Music is the essence of the Creator. Now it does have structure, and on our planet this structure took the form of mathematics to hold music onto the earth plane in an audible form.

The true secret of all life everywhere is music. It is much more, by the way, than just vibration. It has an encompassing depth to it that makes the vibration fill all space. The vibration of our physics is flat, it is not all-dimensional, which is what pure music is.

Our instruments, especially our solo instruments, can only capture one small aspect, a lineal aspect of music. The piano comes the closest to true music expressing the more true form of the universe, with the pipe organ being the instrument that expresses the truest form of music for the earth plane, but the really best way to capture something that is ethereal and catch and hold it in matter has not yet been invented.

There are, as given, many expressions of music, sound being only a small percentage that makes up music. Musical sound can be directly related to colored lights. It could have aromas and shapes or forms also tied into it along with a process of connecting musical strings directly to the body for total experience as much as possible on the earth plane.

At the same time music could be tied to food that would be eaten while listening. This would cause instant digestion and raising the vibration of the body to the level of receiving from the higher planes, which would then add an ethereal experience to the total experience of music. I cannot even begin to describe what this would feel like, only to say that we cannot experience it at this time. It is impossible at the stage of knowledge we have of music.

Until the appearance of Heisenberg’s Uncertainty Principle in the 1920s everyone believed we were locked into a machine-like cosmos in which effects followed causes in a nice orderly manner. Quantum mechanics changed all of that. Under the Uncertainty Principle you can’t define both the position and the momentum of a particle (such as an electron) at the same time. If one is specified accurately the value of the other becomes uncertain, and vice versa. This uncertainty has made physicists feel somewhat uneasy.

If uncertainty is built into the very structure of the physical universe I believe it is also inherent in any religious analysis we might propose to explain its origin and purpose. Which, if any, of the roughly 300 large religious groups or of the thousands of smaller ones in this world have actually got it right?

For those who hold the Judeo-Christian world-view there is no shortage of uncertainties.

Here are some of them:

There is no prophecy in the Bible that is spelt out so specifically and is fulfilled so precisely at a remote future date that people cannot possibly deny its validity.

The claim that the universe and all it contains have been created is not so compelling (despite the evident complexity) as to forestall claims that it is all the result of a felicitous series of accidents. It should have been a simple matter for a competent creator to ensure that a message something like the following appears (in Hebrew, Greek or Latin) on every leaf of every tree or on the torso of every human: “Made by God & Son, Heaven”.

But you won’t find it. Origins are clouded in uncertainty.

The four records of the life of Jesus, including his resurrection, have enough apparent contradictions to encourage sceptical minds to reject the gospel testimony if they are so inclined. The same applies to any other parts of the Bible. Apparent errors and contradictions (and real ones!) can be found everywhere.

There are a huge number of promises in the Bible for the righteous. At least seven times in the four gospels Jesus is quoted as saying in one way or another that “everything is possible for him who believes”, or told his followers to “ask whatever you wish and it will be given to you”. (Mark 9:23; John 15:7) James reports that “the prayer of faith will make the sick person well”.(5:16) Ancient Israel could likewise expect riches without attendant sorrows, peace in the land, rain in due season, and God’s blessing on the fruit of women’s wombs, — just for starters.

But there is reason to believe it doesn’t always happen, even for the very righteous. Nothing perplexed Job in his troubles so much as the thought that the wicked robbed the poor and innocent, victimized the helpless, and left a trail of sorrow and anguish behind them wherever they went, and yet apparently got away with it unscathed while he was clothed in boils from head to foot. The evidence is all around us today that people can die peacefully in their beds at a ripe old age after ripping people off all their lives.

There is no mystery about all of this when we recognize that man is on probation. There wouldn’t be mega-churches big enough or numerous enough to accommodate all the hypocrites who would flock into churches once it became clear that professed followers of Christ enjoy manifold privileges and blessings in this life while recalcitrant sinners eke out their miserable lives in poverty and poor health. You can’t sort out the sheep from the goats that way.

So what’s the point of all these grandiose promises? Well, I would say that if for any reason saintly Christians appear not to enjoy promised blessings in this life they will still certainly inherit them in the world to come. And if the wicked do not appear to get their just deserts in this life then they will get them eventually in a final judgment. There is no need to argue that the righteous don’t get any promised rewards in this life, or to argue that the wicked won’t often get their comeuppance here too.

It is simply to argue that life here is designedly uncertain. Humans are on probation just as the Israelites were during their desert wanderings. As part of the probationary package sometimes it takes a few misfortunes to help us understand that life is not all beer and skittles.

Some Christians will want to argue, based on the gospel message, that we can have the assurance of salvation. I am sure that is right, at any particular moment, if we are appropriately repentant and confessional. But even St Paul recognized the possibility that he might become a “castaway” (1 Corinthians 9:27 KJV) through apostasy. And it could happen to us, too.

There is no certainty that we will ever (in this life) find out the full truth about the world we live in. Is it likely that teachers in high schools, colleges and universities will be teaching the same physical, chemical, biological and geological science in a hundred years time as is taught now?

There are infinities of time, space and matter that our minds are not capable of comprehending. Scientists speak in mathematical terms of a fourth dimension but we have no way of sensing it. And who knows how many other dimensions exist of which we have no concept whatsoever.

To sum up, if there is an uncertainty principle in physics it should not surprise us if there is uncertainty in religion. It’s even conceivable that the penetrating spiritual insights offered here won’t survive the 100-year test (or maybe not even a 100-day test)! A key theme right through the Bible is that the righteous live by faith, not by sight or by rational analysis.

Biotechnology and religion often do not mix. Consider some of the major biotechnological advances that have happened within the past decade. With each news report outlining the benefits of the new technology, it also touches on the opposition, often by religious groups.

Biotechnology and religion is a matter of ethics. Where do you draw the line between science and religion? Do religious groups have a right to try and intervene? Controversial sciences such as cloning and stem cell research will inevitably raise the question of ethics. Is it right for humans to try to spark life? Some say it is playing God. Others see it as important. It is hard to say whether or not biotechnology and religion really can mix.

Do you want to understand the subject of biotechnology and religion better? The best thing to do is research. Go to your library and look up the different resources on biotechnology and also on science and how it and religion have functioned over the years. It seems that each generation has a controversial science that causes the religious to question it. The generation after that looks at the new science as normal and doesn?t think of it. Will this happen to the current field of biotechnology? Will cloning become so common that most people won’t think it is strange or remarkable?

It seems that biotechnology and religion don’t necessarily need to compete with each other. Perhaps the issue of one versus the other has to do more with a lack of knowledge than ethics. I think that both sides will coexist better if they understood each other a little more and were more tolerant of their own differences. So when a new scientific advancement in the field of biotechnology comes out, instead of panicking and becoming outraged, perhaps opponents can practice a little understanding.

The religion of Christianity and world religions all come down to one thing… a need to believe in a higher power for different reasons.

Even though there are many religions Christianity stands out in two different ways. Here are two major facts concerning the religion of Christianity and world religions…

1. Christianity says, We cannot be good enough for God… or to be our own god.”

Most world religions are just a set of instructions, rules, and regulations on how to be good enough to please God in order to obtain His mercy. Many world religions teach you how you are your own god.

The religion of Christianity and world religions like to refer to Christianity as the “religion of Christianity.” However, it isn’t so much a religion, but a relationship. Religion can be defined as man seeking God (or a god), while Christianity is simply God seeking man.

2. Christianity says, we need a “Savior.”

Because of our inherited evil nature, we all need a Savior. We simply cannot be good enough to earn our way to God. Unfortunately, if the world’s religions aren’t teaching us to earn our way, they’re teaching us that we are our own god.

We MUST have a Savior… and Jesus Christ is that Savior! Since we could not come to God because of our sin, He came to us. He got down on our level, became human, took our sin upon Himself and nailed it to a cross and bought our salvation.

Conclusion

Again, what the world calls the religion of Christianity and world religions all come down to a need to believe in a higher power. But, the need goes much deeper! That God-shaped hole in every one of us can only be filled by God Himself, and only through an acceptance of Jesus Christ.

On the third day, Jesus arose, walked the earth, and then ascended into heaven. There is life after death, and we can spend eternity in heaven with Him simply by accepting the gift of salvation… a simple relationship with Jesus.

Jesus is alive and well! He is the only way to God and to heaven. He said, “No one comes to the Father but Through Me” (John 14:6).

Where are all the leaders of popular world religions today? Most are dead and buried, such as Muhammad, Buddha, and Confucius. Those leaders who are still living on earth today will soon die like every one else, and then they will awaken… unfortunately, without a Savior.

The religion of Christianity and world religions all need a Savior, but not all of them have one. In fact, only one offers a Savior.

For those who are unfamiliar with the Hindu gods, Ganesha is the elephant-headed god of overcoming obstacles. He also happens to be the patron god of writers. Apparently writer’s block has been around for quite some time.

I realize that a belief in multiple “gods” is considered sacrilegious by some. Both Christians and Muslims, for example, are quite strict about their belief in the One True God. But these arguments have arisen more from semantics than from any underlying philosophical divide. Even if there is only One God, still there are many aspects of God–truth, justice, honor, integrity, trust, faith, joy, peace… Using the word “god” to depict the Hindu representations of the divine is really a misrepresentation of Hindu beliefs.

Hindus believe that all reality is One. There is only One God because there is only One Everything. So I’m perfectly happy to call Ganesha the divine aspect of Mighty Faith–just one of many aspects of the One True God–if that will keep us all on the same page.

Here’s a little prayer I wrote myself that I like to offer up to Ganesha whenever I’m stuck on a writing project: “Beloved and Mighty Ganesha… I’m stuck… Please help me… Amen.”

Hey, if anyone in the Heavens is going to accept a minimalist prayer, it’s Ganesha. Writer’s bock is His Thing. I’m sure he understands.

If you happen to know that I was born in New Jersey to Caucasian parents and that I am currently writing this blog from the heart of the Bible Belt, you might wonder what I’m doing praying to an elephant-headed Hindu god-slash-divine-aspect in the first place.

Well, I read a lot. Hinduism is the world’s third largest religion, after Christianity and Islam, with over 800,000,000 followers. The Vedas, The Ramayana, and The Mahabharata–including The Bhagavad Gita–are all available on Amazon.com. Read enough about Hinduism and eventually you’ll run across Ganesha, also known as Ganesh or Ganapati.

If you’re a writer, and you discover a god for overcoming writer’s block, you file that information away, just in case. If you pray to that god and you start writing again, that’s what’s known as conversion.

But in all seriousness I haven’t converted to Hinduism. I don’t see the need. In fact, I refuse to belong to any one religion because after a while, the ones that want you to “convert” start asking you to give up all the others. I’m not giving up Ganesha. But I’m not giving up Jesus either. Or Mary or Archangel Michael or the Buddha or Kwan Yin for that matter.

I believe in the One True God, and I believe in all His vast and beautiful religions. I guess that makes me a pan-religious monotheist.

If that sounds like a mouthful, you could call me a Christian Buddhist Hindu Gaian follower of the Tao.

I don’t mention Judaism or Islam because I haven’t yet felt called to study much about them, but I do believe in Moses and Abraham and I do believe that Muhammad was a True Prophet. I just don’t see what all the fuss is about in refusing to “take sides.”

Somehow I can’t see the Great Masters of Earth all standing around in heaven arguing with each other. As far as I’m concerned, they’re standing around together and shaking their heads in perplexity.

“They just aren’t getting it,” they’re saying to each other. “What are we going to do about all this arguing? That’s not what we were trying to do at all!”

The real problem is this underlying attitude we hold to so tightly–this belief that one thing always has to be better than another. Why can’t we accept the fact that everything has its place? “For everything there is a season, and a time for every matter under heaven…” (Ecclesiastes 3:1). Well there’s a purpose for every matter under heaven too. And it’s time we made a little room in our minds–and in our hearts–for that idea.

So here’s a prayer for the world tonight, another prayer I wrote myself, and I offer it up to the Heavens in all earnestness:

“Beloved One True God,

in all Your myriad Divine Aspects,

please help us all who walk the Earth

to learn to Love, Honor, and Cherish one another

without any barriers of fear

and without any errors of exception,

as You have in Your Infinite Wisdom

sent so many of Your children

to teach us to do in Your name.”

Amen.

One often hears the lazy argument that “Religion” is responsible for Man’s wars, the assumption being that if we got rid of religion all would be peace and harmony. Presumably then, if all men abandoned the notion that they are spirits inhabiting a material body and conceived of themselves as mere animals fashioned by chance from mud our troubles would be over and we’d all be a lot happier. This is of course untrue and does not correspond with an observation of history, nor of present reality.

It also displays a degree of fogginess about what one means by the word “religion” Religions vary considerably. There are pantheisms (the belief in many gods) monotheisms (the belief in one God who created all) and religions that worship no gods at all, such as Buddhism or modern Scientology.

At the far end of the spectrum there are even religions that do not conceive man to be an immortal soul even while life is considered to be nevertheless spiritual in essence.

Some religions such as Christianity stress faith, while faith has no place at all in others -Scientology and Buddhism being cases in point.

One should note too, while one is discussing paradigms based on Faith, that materialism remains unable to produce conclusive evidence for its basic assumption. That spirituality does not exist is a matter of belief, not evidence. One can of course produce evidence that the material universe exists and one can establish and prove its laws but this is not proof that that the material universe is all there is. The assertion that the material universe is all there is is neither scientific nor logical and is actually a statement of faith.

Alright, so this vague undefined variable known as “religion” or “faith” is responsible for Man’s wars. Is it true?

Well, I can think of a few recent conflicts or humanitarian cataclysms whose driving force was anything but religious.

Hitler’s massacre of ethnic minorities, for instance: religions were often the victim of Nazi psychosis but they were not responsible for it. In fact it is now a matter of record that the drive behind Nazi mass slaughter came from German Psychiatry, the arch-champion of the man-is-mud hypothesis.

The drive behind the Russian revolution and the Stalinist slaughter that followed it was anything but religious, deriving again from the materialism of communism and psychiatry.

Ditto the civil war and ethnic cleansing in Yugoslavia. Ditto the ethnic cleansing in Kosovo, with materialistic psychiatry the hidden motivator again.

The Chinese invasion of Korea in1950 and the Korean War that followed also had little or nothing to do with religious issues. One had materialistic communist China on the one hand and the largely atheistic commercial imperialism of western nations on the other.

The US invasions of Afghanistan and Iraq were commerce-driven regardless of what justifications are concocted for it, while in the war in Vietnam religion figured neither in the motivation nor rhetoric of either side.

Not all war therefore is “caused” by “religion.” Religious groups are however often the victim or target of it but not exclusively and not always. There is no evidence that by “getting rid of religion” one would “get rid of war” any more than there is evidence that by outlawing atheism or abandoning commerce there would be peace on Earth.

Nor is there any evidence that an abandonment of spirituality would make society happier. On the contrary, our western society has become unhappier and more demoralized as it has become materialistic. You will probably find that the epidemic spread of drug abuse and crime on the one hand and the decline in man’s spirituality and even his sense of right and wrong follow commensurate curves. In the midst of material abundance, which theoretically should have made Man happier, we live out our days in an increasingly miserable Gomorrah of lost souls.

Of course “religion” is a factor in the war in the Middle East and in justifications for their crimes asserted by terrorist groups. And religion has been a factor in many a human conflict. It is true too that religious societies have not necessarily been happy ones either.

In fact, a look at human history tells one that whether spiritual in outlook or materialistic in outlook, Man tends to have a hard time. From this one can conclude that humanity is still evolving its social forms and does not yet have all the answers. This is no reason to get apathetic about the whole thing and to abandon the effort to reason in favour of generalized, unworkable slogans. Indeed, we have every incentive to go on trying to get better at these things called society and civilization, if only through a sense of responsibility to our children who will inherit whatever dog’s breakfast we bequeath them.

Part of getting better at managing human affairs is dropping the habit of buying into broad, untrue, generalities such as “religion is the cause of war” or some such nonsense, looking it over more carefully and seeing if we can get a bit closer to the truth, a bit more accurate about what exactly is getting us into trouble.

Perhaps, if we do, we might grow up a bit and as a species begin carrying ourselves with more dignity and less floundering slapstick and we might perchance knock off the habit of following every psycho who seeks to persuade us to burn the skin off the children of people we have never met.

I will continue this effort to apply reason to the matter of religion and war in the next essay in this series.