Religion and Money

Each religion claims to be the 'correct' one. None of them have any evidence (and if they do, it's always just the same evidence twisted to fit their views).How is it that this can be? A Christian will tell a Muslim that by being Christian they will go to Heaven. A Muslim will tell a Christian that by being Muslim they will go to Heaven (the same Heaven of course). Both may claim to have spoken with God and have first-hand knowledge that their religion is the correct one to follow. But, there's no evidence to prove that either of them spoke to God, so who is a non-religious person supposed to believe? They are basically left to believe the person with the most resources to convert them. The success of a religion all comes down to whether or not the people dying can convert enough people over to fill in their place. If the number of people dying (leaving the religion) is more than the number of people being converted or born into the religion, then the religion will fail.Those born into the religion are easy numbers to add, because they are brainwashed from such an early age that it is not difficult to "convert them" (because they essentially are born with no religion it is like a conversion). The older someone becomes, the more work it takes to convert or brainwash that individual. The more money that a religion can spend, the easier time it will have converting others to join. Thus we see the success of Christianity--the primary religion of the U.S. and other industrialized countries.Many [hardcore] Christians (especially Evangelists) take "mission trips." The idea is that they preach to people about God, and His CHRISTIAN glory and then help the poor village people build a house or clean up after a storm. The reality is that these Christians are offering their services (badly needed by the poor village people) in return for the promise of the village people professing to be Christians and to spread the word of God. Something like: "say you believe in MY god, and we will build you a house or help you with some other service which you desperately need to survive." The religions with the most money are those that can do this sort of thing the most. An equation basically comes out that the more money your religion has, the more likely it will be able to convert a large number of people.If a religion attempts to measure its success by successful conversions (which many do), then it becomes quite clear that wealthy religions are successful religions. Religions are financial organizations, plain and simple. This idea, however, goes against some of the primary teachings of many religions, for certain Christianity.How do religions justify the use of money to convert people? Using ANY money to convert people in the end becomes a way of paying people for joining your religion--which is okay if you accept religion as a financial organization, but down-right heathen-like if you actually believe the beliefs you profess to believe.Jon

Thread moved here from the Proposed New Topics forum.

Money is the medium that gets things done. Money is neither good nor bad...it is the LOVE of money that is the root of all evil.Edited by Phat, : correcting some minor errors

---

“There are two kinds of people: those who say to God, "Thy will be done," and those to whom God says, "All right, then, have it your way” --C.S.Lewis

And I find nations to be as wrong in doing it as I find religions to be. Yes, you could. But, if I was starving to death in a village and you offered to feed me if I said I believed in God, I would say so very quickly and onto your tablet would you mark another tab for another successful conversion. A very respectable view. If it's about the people and who they are, then their beliefs have no meaning in the decision, in which case the decision has nothing to do with religion. It makes religion useless to the point.Jon

Yes, it is not ever about religion. It is about character and the inner Spirit (or lack thereof) that shines through!I volunteer at the detention center, and you would be amazed how many people...kids and adults alike...respect the fact that I am a volunteer and am in no way paid for what I do.

To be fair, I don't believe this is what normally happens. Usually the offer to feed does not require belief as a prerequisite, although perhaps it requires agreement to listen to some of the preaching.

Very nice. How about those people who volenteer that are atheist, or Jewish, or Hindu, or Muslim?Do they get respect too?

Like I said, its not about religion. There are many volunteers from many organizations, both religious and secular. One old man comes down and does nothing but talk to the youth and makes paper airplanes with them....they think hes a cool old grampa figure! The Boy Scouts and Girl Scouts come in, a couple of Islamic volunteers (no Hindus yet, though )In many cases, the kids will tell me stuff that a skilled and educated worker from the Dept. of Social Services never will get oui of them. My point is that were I getting paid, I probably would not be as well respected. Teens can spot a phony a mile away...(

Money is just a tool. Its like getting people to eat pizza. You give them a free slice, which costs money.I suppose that Jesus would scold us a lot more than He scolded the people in the temple, because our society is so full of materialism at every level.

But that's a scam. In the end, you buy enough pizza to pay for the "free" slice.If your analogy is valid, using money to convert people is also a scam. They always wind up putting the money back in after their "conversion" - plus a little profit.

---

Help scientific research in your spare time. No cost. No obligation.
Join the World Community Grid with Team EvC

This sort of goes along with the thread ramoss just started about unethical conversions. If you have to build a house or clean up after a storm for someone in order to get them to "convert," then the conversion is useless. The Bible states rather clearly that you are to believe in God for the pure sake of believing in Him. Believing in God (or at least saying you do) so you can get a house or some clean-up help, is not right anyway.Evangilists who do this sort of thing are corrupting the people they are "trying to save." Of course, I would argue that many are simply trying to add more numbers to their list of conversions... feed the furnace of their religion with the testaments of the poor and helpless village heathans who were so gracefully saved when they accepted Christ. In the end, it is as Ringo said: a scam. I mean, you can't honestly think those higher-up Christians believe what they preach, can you? People smart enough to convince a whole country to believe that sort of stuff know better than to believe it themselves.JonEdited by Jon, : Gramatical errors

Or, you could believe what is inside you already. No amount of money or brainwashing can convert anyone, only God can convert someone. Just absolute BS. There is no prerequisite to be helped by people led by the spirit of God. They do it without wanted a reward, and often lose there lives trying to do just that.One has nothing to gain from doing this, so there just isn't any exploiting going on, just love. Religion does not equal God. Absolutely. You don't justify anything, you are just following what God told you to do. It's not about money, money cannot convert people, but money might entice certain people to join your religion.You are confusing religion with God, big mistake, one that I had to learn about.

If someone just fed you and tried in no way to convert you, you may well be so impressed with their generousity that you many end up attending services of your own accord----especially if they never forced or coerced you into conversion.Im glad that I am a volunteer, because I have no donars to impress, no quotas, and no picture taking sessions in order to make fancy pamphlets!

Jon says: I have reservations about this.What do you mean by 'primary religion' here? Europe is historically Christian, but the majority religion in modern Europe is no religion. And who is an 'industrialized country'?

---

Archer

I have more reservations about your post, Jon. This is a dubious thing to say.In one sense, the statement is obvious to the point of moronic. That's if you are talking about belief. Religions are belief systems. It follows that anyone who belongs to a religion will believe it is true. If you think your religion is false, you don't believe. It is therefore not your belief system, or your religion.If you mean to imply something about intolerance, on the other hand, it is incorrect to suggest all religions are equal. World religions vary widely in their attitudes to the beliefs of others, to differences in viewpoint within their own ranks, and to the reality of religious pluralism. Many church-affiliated groups send money and aid in emergencies with no strings attached. They make no attempts to proselytize. Lutheran World Relief is one, Episcopal Social Ministries, The United Way... quite a number.Also, many other religiously affiliated groups send help the same way. Here in Taiwan a number of Buddhist organizations fill the same role. All of them swung into action when the tsunami hit Thailand in 2004 (as did Lutheran World Relief and other organizations overseas).The facts do not support your effort to connect affluence with missionary zeal. Demographic studies regularly show that the amount of intolerance in a group--the amount of conviction that it represents the right religion while everyone else is wrong--is inversely proportional to the affluence of its members. It is the most cash-strapped groups who feel duty-bound to save the world. The more money a group's members have, the more likely they are to take a live-and-let-live attitude about others' beliefs. The three most affluent religious groups in the US are (in no particular order) Unitarians, Jews, and Episcopalians. These people raise plenty of money for charitable causes, but you'll rarely hear them accused of doing too much door-knocking.I take your point about the ethics of linking material aid with proselytizing efforts. But I think you weaken your point with dubious generalizations. If you can maintain more focus (and keep the cynicism in check) you'll be on firmer ground.Edited by Archer Opterix, : Spelling

---

Archer