Fundamentally two primary components are responsible for the religion-related conflicts: Amuse and Abuse of religion because of ignorance or mala fide. Obliviousness about the true importance and motivation behind religions and the misinterpretation of the religious messages and further, the willful manipulations of their actual meanings and messages - all together have made a circumstance wherein the religions today seem to have veered off from their actual ways.
Furthermore, because of the above-said reasons, numerous devotees of various religions have created various ideas or clashing belief system. Many of these convictions have not just contradicted the genuine spirit and peace of unique religions yet, in addition, have made strong sore points of potential bigotry which regularly results in serious conflicts.
The contention is disturbed under the foundation of a fundamental certainty that few people pronounce religious ideas of superficial beliefs in nature. Be that as it may, when such ideas get inflexible in nature and they get a religious stamp and supports of a decent number of followers, they become conceivably hazardous.
None of the sacred writings have referenced that and its the general population outlook and the contention of who is greater and who is littler which is the purpose for the entire clash it has turned into a race in anticipating which religion is amazing and has a larger part of devotees. But rather they are neglecting to comprehend the great qualities and standards of any religion.
The essential law of humankind has been completely overlooked by people which are the thing that unmistakably been referenced in the sacred texts and must be placed practically speaking too. people just don't have the dimension of acknowledgment of people for their disparities or the act of religion they are into.
It is something past religion which we need to address here. Its the dimension of how far you are tolerating the other human notwithstanding his distinction. As we as a whole have a character and religion is viewed as the most significant personality in India that even the people reasons are shaded into religious clashes as religion has dependably been a delicate issue in India.
Christianity and War For Peace
The fundamental Christian perspective on war morals is contained in the precept of the Just War. The fundamental supposition of present-day Christians is that war is once in a while supported and ought to stay away from except if the Just War conditions are met.
A people Christian may accept that the standard of proof and contention required for them to help a war is higher than the standard of proof that national heads may require to do battle. Christianity is never again completely against war. Some state that cutting edge Christianity has an 'assumption against war', however, others state that it has an 'assumption against bad form' - and the inclination against war originates from the unfairness that war can do.
This view says that the point of Christianity is to advance a world wherein harmony and equity thrive all over the place: war may in some cases be the apparatus expected to do this, and taking up arms may once in a while be a lesser wickedness (a lesser foul play) than enabling treachery to continue or enduring the exploitation of honest people.
Is Christianity ever in a struggle with morals?
Christianity is the name for an expansive scope of related conviction frameworks. In that capacity, it doesn't prohibit a solitary series of morals. Be that as it may, the convictions of the Westboro Baptists who do as such fall into the scope of conviction frameworks portrayed as Christianity. You may think they are not awesome Christians, yet they would most likely say something very similar regarding you. Christianity isn't itself a particular moral framework. I propose you pass by your very own decision-making ability, educated by the lessons you have learned.
It appears that Christianity, or any religion, likes to guarantee morals as its very own domain, however that is just not supported by any proof. Or on the other hand in excess of a couple of minutes though so far as that is concerned. To negate the explanation that morals depend on religious qualities, we have to discover in any event one model where such qualities existed either before religion or without religion. When all is said in done we just need to discover one case, which will nullify all, or we can be progressively explicit and discover at least one cases for each kind of significant worth.
Ugly and Darkside of Christianity
As each part of public activity does as well, religion, all religions, have a clouded side. Maybe the darkest spot in old Christian history is the Crusades and Holy Inquisition.
In present-day times Christian Catholics are soiled with the subject of pedophilia. Also, obviously there is dependably the issue of affectation since the congregation does not affirm of homosexuality, yet, there are such a large number of gay people in their positions. It's not awful that there are homosexual people in their positions, there are numerous magnificent gay ministers and priests, cardinals and ecclesiastical overseers, the issue is the congregation being fraudulent about it.
In the US, there are numerous unrecognized "Christian" business bunches that are really odd without a doubt. These periphery "Christian" bunches do significant harm and criticism the primary body of the Cristian religion which in their lion's share are not kidding and open about their religion. Campaigns, Inquisition, powerfully changing over individuals to put stock in their god, every one of the wars battled for the sake of their god, arrogant 'know everything' frame of mind about their religion and world view, when all is said in done narrow-minded of individuals with a through and through freedom. The craving to send ministers wherever to push their convictions. The way that it is so natural for each religion to utilize it as a base to get a firm grasp on power and to clutch it, by making you imagine that you are correct and the remainder of the world isn't.