quote: Religion didn't begin to wither away during the twentieth century, as some academic experts had prophesied. Far from it. And the new century will probably see religion explode—in both intensity and variety. New religions are springing up everywhere. Old ones are mutating with Darwinian restlessness. And the big "problem religion" of the twenty-first century may not be the one you think.
Really interesting article on how religion has been, is, and will be changing, and how new ideas, religious and secular, manifest themselves in new religious movements.
Underlines quite well, to my mind, the importance of making sure that a 'free market of ideas' is maintained at all costs such that people can find the best path for their own happiness and growth.
[ November 19, 2003, 04:37 PM: Message edited by: Storm Saxon ]
Posted by katharina (Member # 827) on :
Articles like that are part of why I like the Atlantic Monthly so much. I really can't imagine the New Yorker publishing that.
Posted by Storm Saxon (Member # 3101) on :
Yep. I've been meaning to get a subscription for a while. Posted by katharina (Member # 827) on :
quote:The study of new religious movements—NRMs for short—has become a growth industry. NRM scholars come from a variety of backgrounds, but many are sociologists and religious historians. All are sympathetic to the idea that new religious movements should be respected, protected, and studied carefully. They tend to avoid the words "cult" and "sect," because of the polemical connotations; as a result NRM scholars are often caricatured in anti-cult circles as "cult apologists." They examine such matters as how new movements arise; what internal dynamics are at work as the movements evolve; how they spread and grow; how societies react to them; and how and why they move toward the mainstream.
I took a sociology of religion course that was exactly this. It was, hands down, one of the most informative, interesting, and thought-provoking classes I have ever taken.
quote: "Ironically enough," he wrote, "it could be that the very processes of secularization which have been responsible for the 'cutting back' of the established form of religion have actually allowed 'hardier varieties' to flourish."
I completely believe this. EG mentioned once about a friend of his who hoped that religions would NOT relax their standards, so would render themselves irrelevant. It doesn't work that way, though. It is when you cannot distinguish between what happens in church and what happens in Touched by an Angel that a religion becomes irrelevant. The loyalists find less reason to go, and those looking for a strong code look elsewhere.
[ November 19, 2003, 04:58 PM: Message edited by: katharina ]
Posted by Storm Saxon (Member # 3101) on :
But, as one of the sociologists mentioned, nrms aren't necessarily started because of a 'strong code' but because of social connections.... So, the 'Touched by an Angel' nrm might very well thrive if it has a very loose moral code but gives people a strong community. Unitarianism works very much in this fashion.
Posted by katharina (Member # 827) on :
I think it takes a distinguishing doctrine, or something to create a strong sense of community. People are so, so different from one another, and simply having a society assures that crap will happen. There needs to be something that can't be found anywhere else to give the members a reason to weather the crap.
Posted by BelladonnaOrchid (Member # 188) on :
Thank you for that linking that article. I found it particularly interesting, and it gave my fiancee and I something to discuss.
Posted by saxon75 (Member # 4589) on :
I thought it was an interesting article, and it does seem to explain a lot, but I think it might be missing a bit.
quote:You've also got to have a serious conception of God and the supernatural to succeed.
What about Buddhism? Now, I'm not a Buddhist, but as far as I know, there is no deity in Buddhism.
The other thing was the idea that social connections rather than faith is what brings new members to NRMs. I think that makes a lot of sense, but there has to be some underlying element of faith in a person in order for him to even consider joining a religion. I mean, I think a lot of aspects of many religions are both interesting and attractive. It's even possible that there is a religion out there that completely aligns with my sense of morality and social code. But the bottom line is that I don't believe in a deity, and so I can't see how I'd ever join a religion, new or otherwise.
I suppose that's faith as well, just in the opposite direction. That is, I don't have any real reason for not believing. I used to think I did, but when I really thought about it, it turned out that all of my so-called "reasons" were really just things I didn't like about some of the specific teachings of specific religions. At the root of it, I don't believe because I don't.
Posted by dkw (Member # 3264) on :
quote:But the bottom line is that I don't believe in a deity, and so I can't see how I'd ever join a religion, new or otherwise.
How about Buddhism? Posted by saxon75 (Member # 4589) on :
I sort of figured someone would point that out. Posted by Storm Saxon (Member # 3101) on :
quote: What about Buddhism? Now, I'm not a Buddhist, but as far as I know, there is no deity in Buddhism.
To the best of my knowledge, 'Zen' Buddhism is the only type of Buddhism that does not have any deities.
As for needing 'faith' along with social connections, this raises the question of what faith is. Is faith just another word for community? Is it another word for an appreciation of the divine? For believing that things are there that you can't see, or that something will happen that hasn't happened yet?
As I'm sure can be readilly appreciated, all of these things can be answered without referencing the supernatural or divine. For my money, the answer to what constitutes a religion is exactly the same as for the answer to what constitutes really being in love means. It's a personal, emotional feeling to certain ideas. A religion is the shared expression of these ideas.
Posted by Storm Saxon (Member # 3101) on :
Now that I think about it, there is also Taoism and Emersonianism, neither of which have a deity, really.
[ November 19, 2003, 06:31 PM: Message edited by: Storm Saxon ]
Posted by fugu13 (Member # 2859) on :
shinto doesn't really have a deity, per se.
Posted by Storm Saxon (Member # 3101) on :
They have plenty of gods, though, that are venerated.
Posted by Jon Boy (Member # 4284) on :
I believe that Theravada Buddhism doesn't have deities.
Posted by fugu13 (Member # 2859) on :
Yep, lots of them. Though oddly enough, more attention is often paid in worship to the more common spirits in nature.
Posted by Dragon (Member # 3670) on :
Thanks for posting that link Storm; it's a very interesing article.
*wanders off to think*
I must say however, the title of this thread has got that song from Once on this Island stuck in my head. [sings]Oh Gods, Oh Gods, are you there? I'm here in the field with my feet on the ground and my fate in the air, waithing for life to begin![/sing]
[ November 19, 2003, 09:34 PM: Message edited by: Dragon ]
Posted by Desu (Member # 5941) on :
What if it were all just a series of hallucinations, would that make us all madmen?
Posted by Storm Saxon (Member # 3101) on :
It would according to certain people on this board.
Then again, if your craziness helps you live a happier life compared to the sane person, who's the winner?
Posted by katharina (Member # 827) on :
No taking the blue pill?
Posted by Glenn Arnold (Member # 3192) on :
The idea that religions are exclusive is very Western.
One of the problems with trying to link Buddhism with deities is that Buddhism is not an exclusive religion.
This is a problem missionaries in southeast asia keep running into. They convert someone to Christianity, and then get upset when that person says they're still a Buddhist. And a Taoist. And a Confucianist. And worships Ancestors. And worships nature deities. All at the same time.
Theravada Buddhism has no deity, and makes the strongest argument against worshipping a deity of any kind. It also has no belief in an afterlife, because of the philosophy that there is no concept of future.
Free-land Buddhism is pretty western. It has a belief in an afterlife, and pretty much worships the Buddha as a God.
[ November 19, 2003, 10:20 PM: Message edited by: Glenn Arnold ]
Posted by Desu (Member # 5941) on :
I know more people who feel hungry because of their religion than people who feel good because of it.
Do you hang out at an old folks home or alcoholics anonymous?
[ November 20, 2003, 08:31 PM: Message edited by: Desu ]
Posted by Storm Saxon (Member # 3101) on :
42.
Posted by Desu (Member # 5941) on :
I don't get it.
Edit: I want to know why it is that you feel religion makes people feel good.
I don't buy into the old Bush "I found god and he found me".
[ November 19, 2003, 10:51 PM: Message edited by: Desu ]
Posted by katharina (Member # 827) on :
Why not?
Do you believe people when they say they have fallen in love?
Posted by Dragon (Member # 3670) on :
quote: I don't know more people who feel hungry because of their religion than people who feel good because of it.
That sounds weird and confusing but made me think of something:
I want to believe that there is someone out there who cares. I want to believe that there is a believe that people and animals have spirits but that's about as far as my mind will stretch. But I truely want belief!
Someone convert me to something.
Posted by skrika03 (Member # 5930) on :
(pooka in exile)
So is the "problem religion" pentacostalism? Will there be another schism in Islam (military Jihad vs. inner person Jihad?)
Wouldn't the god of emersonism be Emerson? Is as Ayn Rand the god of the Objectivists?
I thin a lot of the philosophies of the east are containable within "Mormonism" much as capitalism and materialism are.
"Mormonism" is a restoration of Christianity that incorporates holy books from the New World. While I don't see "Mormons" canonizing anything that doesn't testify of Jesus Christ, they are perfectly capable of acknowledging that Mohammed was divinely inspired, and Buddha, and anyone who has cooler quotes than "We" do. C.S. Lewis is more commonly quoted (despite his apparent dislike of "mormons") than most of their own prophets.
Posted by Storm Saxon (Member # 3101) on :
quote: Wouldn't the god of emersonism be Emerson? Is as Ayn Rand the god of the Objectivists?
No one prays to either of those persons to make things happen, no more than Mormons pray to Joseph Smith to make things happen.
[ November 20, 2003, 05:12 PM: Message edited by: Storm Saxon ]
Posted by Storm Saxon (Member # 3101) on :
quote: Will there be another schism in Islam (military Jihad vs. inner person Jihad?
I think, like most other religions, it will incorporate the beliefs of the culture(the people) in which it resides. So, I think what will happen is you will have a 'free-thinking' Islam of the west that will build on the little doctors of the past, and a 'stagnant' Islam of the East.
Posted by Maccabeus (Member # 3051) on :
Why should religion make a person feel good? Isn't it possible to devoutly believe that something which makes you miserable is the truth?
![[Smile]](smile.gif)
![[Wink]](wink.gif)