Question

How much do my (and other's) beliefs bring about violence? In other words, and more specifically, does my belief in the necessity of Armageddon (def'n: Jehovah's direct intervention in the affairs of mankind) create additional violence?

If it does, is such violence justifiable? Simply saying: "This event is inevitable" -- well, is it? Does it have to be? Or do my 'religious convictions,' my 'unfounded faith,' tell me it is inevitable?

Answer

Break it down. My reasoning, my perspective -- as well as Rand's, Nietzsche's, or anyone else's for that matter -- has not been reached universally. As is obvious, individuals are quite divided on the issue of human nature. This division reveals how inconclusive the evidence is regardless of how much I admire certain ideas, thought patterns, and understand my own convictions to be true.

For six billion people, as a whole, the evidence of all human inquiry concerning human nature remains inconclusive -- and this is conclusive.

Until sufficient reflection has been carried out by all individuals concerning where we are today, what humanity is doing right as well as wrong, my reasoning will only be seen as 'faith' in the eyes of the many. For no matter how deeply convinced I am of my rightness it seems I cannot, try as I may, convince all others that what I speak of is reality and that there is no other.

So because humanity has no foundation, or rather because we are building on different foundations -- each considered legitimate by millions, perhaps billions, of individuals -- the level of worldwide friction and outright conflict will continue to increase. This is one of the core statements of my Paper.

My conviction (of Armageddon) is not a simple unfounded play-thing wanting to destroy the 'nasty,' 'brutish,' 'greedy,' and 'rebellious' sections of humanity. It is based on the most fundamental truth one can reach after studying mankind's history and present day status, coming to understand in full light the horrific forces arrayed against man -- and I define man as a creature of this earth:

-- if left alone, in time we will destroy ourselves because we cannot come to a common understanding of what and why we are.

Hence, my argument for the necessity of a God and the necessity of his intervention to clarify the issue: man's nature.

Conclusion

Does my belief in the necessity of Armageddon create additional unnecessary violence? Answer: No, ... so long as we share a common conception of man. If we do not share a common conception of man, then yes, I am an active participant in creating additional tensions, knowing full well that such action brings forth the next war ....

In my eyes the clarification and confrontation I instigate is necessary. But in the eyes of the Old Religion (every person of every sect of every religious faith and altruistic campaign) it is unnecessary -- for I 'misunderstand ' the nature of man ...