Is there a way to implement a plan on a small, local scale and take it big time? Wow, what a project and what an accomplishment.

If one attempts this and starts the ball rolling, will they be accused of being a false savior.

Will it take the real presence of our creator to pull it off?

I often think that religions are really talking about the same creator, we as humans have just muddied it up. Just knowing how quickly and dramatically a story or eye witness account can change, leaves me little faith in a human's interpretation of our creator.

If one truly believes in their own faith, then it is their duty to deny the existence of other beliefs and religion that contradict their own.

As a Christian, I dont think one should have to embrace Islam or it's beliefs or other so called religions but that doesnt mean we need to treat those who believe in it as nothing less than human or our neighbors.

Unfortunately, it is this that will always prevent the unification of man. As long as man equates different as evil, this cannot be reconciled.

-- Posted by Tim Baker on Thu, Jun 12, 2008, at 8:27 PM

WOW! Absolutely wonderful quote... You need to have that submitted somewhere and lay claim to it. If people just took 5 seconds to think about this, my the world would be an even more amazing place to live in.

http://www.beliefnet.com/story/76/story_...

I would be really interested to see what some of the "Holier than thou" folks on here score on this. It is rather interesting.

Steppenwolfe song, "Spiritual Fantasy", by John Kay released on their album "The Second", copyrighted by MCA Music (BMI)

Humanity grew weary of its doubtful state of mind

So it summoned from far, and it called from near

All the wise men thought to be sincere

To heal its wounds and make it whole

And lead the way back to the soul

The charlatans, they stayed behind,

To count their bags of gold and some stayed away,

As if to say, "I know that my way's the only way."

Afraid to learn they might be wrong,

They preached their nothingness at home

(Chorus)

And the wise men came together in a hope to free mankind

Of the rubbish they had gathered in God's name,

To embrace and trust each other in the search for the Supreme,

And they found that all their teachings were the same.

And when at last the word went round

That all were one and all

Many returned to seek the light

Nobody claimed that he was right

It's sad to know it's just a song,

To dream and hope, still can't be wrong.

amalphia..that was Great...For me I believe in the God i was brought up with..i do not worry about what everyone else believes..No matter how they believe I can still find good in them...Goodness i just noticed it is FRIDAY 13th...

Thanks for the song,amalphia!

Some people misinterpret the story of the blind men and the elephant.

It is not saying all are wrong or that all are the same.

It is saying that none of us know about anything more than what we've felt ourselves UNLESS we listen to others,check out their experiences and seek to relate what we know rather than discredit others.

(Note: None of the men stated anything about the elephant that wasn't part of His nature,none of them reported what they'd learned from their three other intact senses and all seem to have,indeed,found an elephant.)

No two minds will discover the same thing in exactly the same way.

We even find different aspects of them ourselves as we grow and change.

We can benefit from learning to see what is familiar to us through another's eyes.

Sometimes,their interpretations may seem ludicrous ,dangerous or naive.

Sometimes,ours will seem as incomplete and distorted.

By sharing our pieces of life's puzzle,we can better determine what's missing,what doesn't fit and what the whole picture may turn out to be.

But,we won't know if there's more truth out there than what we have if we don't look for it.

Checking things out to determine their validity is not the same as declaring them authentic or worthless without checking.

It wouldn't be so bad to see our differences instead of our similarities if we celebrated the opportunity to see a unique aspect of God other than our own.

As it stands,we tend to think appreciation for chocolate means we can't enjoy peach.strawberry,or butter pecan.

Our vanilla soft-swirl does not make lime sherbet,blueberry frozen yogurt or raspberry gelato abombinations.

I suspect that the science fiction authors have it right when they assume it will take a common cause to overcome our divisions.

It could be a natural disaster or an enemy (like the Anti-Christ or hostile aliens from outer space) but such an event could put our relationships in perspective.

(For a while,anyway...)

Even then,the end of such a conflict would leave us to decide once more if the Russians and Chinese are our friends and the Japanese and Germans our enemies (WWII) or vice-versa ( the Cold War).

I just hope the U.S. doesn't have another war with the U.K.

Can you imagine our firing all people of British descent,interning all the Anglos,banning the use of the Queen's tongue and dining on "liberty muffins"?

I will try to take the position of there not being an inevetible unity of mankind. You leave something out of your thoughts regarding the wheel, communications, and the celebrations of certain past leaders and the villainization of others.

Greed, power and control have been directly in the background throughout known history, and I would guess long before. Not only on the level of large political groups, but every individual as well. I cannot personally agree that most advances in civilization are altruistic(I could not even take the position that there has ever been a truly altruistic act), or for the benefit of bringing the world closer together.

I believe greed and lust for power stem from self worth and self esteem issues. I would also guess that if it were not for that basic insecurity that appears to be universally human and only human, we may still be living in caves.

If everyone had the same morality, it would be a lot easier to achieve this utopia. For example, If you ask a roomful of people with the same general beliefs if it is wrong to steal, most would say yes, but if you added that it was to protect a loved ones life, it would change a little. If you added more pieces of information that are all related to the same event, you could eventually divide most of the group.

The only way there could ever be a singularly minded population is that their choices are taken away. There is not even consensus in this chatroom about fundamental issues. you would need a single, easy to understand religion, an educational, political and judicial system in place that had the same overarching morality and it would have to be enforced in the harshest ways. That is not something I would personally like to see. If you would like an example of a failed attempt, just look to the Roman Catholic church before the reformation. They were after the greater good after all. Perhaps not the highest leaders, but the followers. The same could be said for many Germans in the run up to WW2.

I would also like to think that there has not been an evolution from savage to civilized. I would guess that humanity has always had both of these extremes. The older humans may have not had the same customs or aminities that we do, but I see the same humanity in the oldest of the art and writings that we have. Many of the people you mentioned have commented on the life they were thrown into, not necessaraly made human nature change, just helped to more clearly define it.

While it would be easy to lay the problems of mankind's nature at the feet of misunderstood or "corrupt applications" of religion/philisophy, that would be to discount why these great commentators were needed and heard in the first place. It would also be great if I could point to evil as the problem, but I just do not see it being that easy. I have never met an evil person, nor do I think one exists. Some people have a sense of morality that I could never agree with, but usually people like that that I run across are after a greater good.

I am a little concerned that I was not clear enough in my comment. I am not very experienced at expressing myself in this way, so please bear with me.

I was not advocating trying to build a society where we all have the same morality, I was pointing out that, in my opinion, it would be impossible. Human nature itself makes the objective an effort in futility. One of the impossible hurdles to overcome is the fundamental differences in individuals you outlined. We, as a society, can never be on the same page at the same time. Even if you allowed for the best possible scenerio for this to happen, you would still have the generational differences to overcome. The human will to power will ensure that nothing stays the same for long.

Yes, I do agree that there are different levels of human ability and disablility. My question is: Who would decide which men are gold and which are iron?. Or put another way, who gets to decide the societal norm and likewise who "needs to be identified and helped to compensate". After all, is your interpretation of someone acting "wise compassionate and responsible" the same as my own? I would imagine so on the surface, but at a deeper level, we would likely see some rifts develop.

The idea of removing certain members of society by means of changing them, or eliminating them has been around since the earliest times, but has yet to see a satisfactory resolution. There have been efforts, (some of them revolting) but there has never been a way to effectivly level the playing field on a perceived higher plane.

I hate to take the position that education is not an effective solution, but in many cases, I do not see it providing the "compensation" that is needed to provide "a constructive lifestyle". However, I do have to believe(or hope)that every individual does bring something to this shared existance, even if it is not easily recognised.

Please remove the double post.

One of my cats jumped down on the save button while I was away from the keyboard.