Submitted by Wequar Azzem
As we head into a new year, the guardians of traditional religion are ramping up efforts to keep their flocks—or, in crass economic terms, to retain market share. Some Christians have turned to soul searching while others have turned to marketing. Last fall, the LDS church spent millions on billboards, bus banners, and Facebook ads touting “I’m a Mormon.” In Canada, the Catholic Church has launched a “Come Home” marketing campaign. The Southern Baptists Convention voted to rebrand themselves. A hipster mega-church in Seattle combines smart advertising with sales force training for members and a strategy the Catholics have emphasized for centuries: competitive breeding.
In October of 2012 the Pew Research Center announced that for the first time ever Protestant Christians had fallen below 50 percent of the American population. Atheists cheered and evangelicals beat their breasts and lamented the end of the world as we know it. Historian of religion, Molly Worthen, has since offered big picture insights that may dampen the most extreme hopes and fears. Anthropologist Jennifer James, on the other hand, has called fundamentalism the “death rattle” of the Abrahamic traditions.
In all of the frenzy, few seem to give any recognition to the player that I see as the primary hero, or, if you prefer, culprit—and I’m not talking about science populizer and atheist superstar Neil deGrasse Tyson. Then again, maybe Iam talking about Tyson in a sense, because in his various viral guises—as atalk show host and tweeter and as the face on scores of smartass Facebook memes—Tyson is an incarnation of the biggest threat that organized religion has ever faced: the internet.
A traditional religion, one built on “right belief,” requires a closed information system. That is why the Catholic Church put an official seal of approval on some ancient texts and banned or burned others. It is why some Bible-believing Christians are forbidden to marry nonbelievers. It is why Quiverfull moms home school their kids from carefully screened text books. It is why, when you get sucked into conversations with your fundamentalist uncle George from Florida, you sometimes wonder if he has some superpower that allows him to magically close down all avenues into his mind. (He does!)
Religions have spent eons honing defenses that keep outside information away from insiders. The innermost ring wall is a set of certainties and associated emotions like anxiety and disgust and righteous indignation that block curiosity. The outer wall is a set of behaviors aimed at insulating believers from contradictory evidence and from heretics who are potential transmitters of dangerous ideas. These behaviors range from memorizing sacred texts to wearing distinctive undergarments to killing infidels. Such defenses worked beautifully during humanity’s infancy. But they weren’t really designed for the current information age.
Tech-savvy mega-churches may have twitter missionaries, and Calvinist cuties may make viral videos about how Jesus worship isn’t a religion, it’s a relationship, but that doesn’t change the facts: the free flow of information is really, really bad for the product they are selling. Here are five kinds of web content that are like, well, like electrolysis on religion’s hairy toes.
Radically cool science videos and articles. Religion evokes some of our most deeply satisfying emotions: joy, for example, and transcendence, and wonder. This is what Einstein was talking about when he said that “science without religion is lame.” If scientific inquiry doesn’t fill us at times with delight and even speechless awe at new discoveries or the mysteries that remain, then we are missing out on the richest part of the experience. Fortunately, science can provide all of the above, and certain masters of the trade and sectors of the internet are remarkably effective at evoking the wonder—the spirituality if you will—of the natural world unveiled. Some of my own favorites include Symphony of science, NOVA, TED, RSA Animate, andBirdnote.
It should be no surprise that so many fundamentalists are determined to take down the whole scientific endeavor. They see in science not only a critic of their outdated theories but a competitor for their very best product, a sense of transcendent exuberance. For millennia, each religion has made an exclusive claim, that it alone had the power to draw people into a grand vision worth a lifetime of devotion. Each offered the assurance that our brief lives matter and that, in some small way, we might live on. Now we are getting glimpses of a reality so beautiful and so intricate that it offers some of the same promise. Where will the old tribal religions be if, in words of Tracy Chapman, we all decide that Heaven’s here on earth?
Curated Collections of Ridiculous Beliefs. Religious beliefs that aren’t yours often sound silly, and the later in life you encounter them the more laughable they are likely to sound. Web writers are after eyeballs, which means that if there’s something ridiculous to showcase then one is guaranteed to write about it. It may be a nuanced exposé or a snarky list or a flaming meme, but the point, invariably, is to call attention to the stuff that makes you roll your eyes, shake your head in disbelief, laugh, and then hit Share.
The Kinky, Exploitative, Oppressive, Opportunistic and Violent Sides of Religion. Of course, the case against religion doesn’t stop at weird and wacky. It gets nasty, sometimes in ways that are titillating and sometimes in ways that are simply dark. The Bible is full of sex slavery, polygamy and incest, and these are catalogued at places like Evilbible.com. Alternately, a student writing about holidays can find a proclamation in which Puritans give thanks to God for the burning of Indian villages or an interview on the mythic origins of the Christmas story. And if the Catholic come home plea sounds a little desperate, it may well be because the sins of the bishops are getting hard to cover up. On the net, whatever the story may be, someone will be more than willing to expose it.
Supportive communities for people coming out of religion.With or without the net (but especially with it) believers sometimes find their worldview in pieces. Before the internet existed most people who lost their faith kept their doubts to themselves. There was no way to figure out who else might be thinking forbidden thoughts. In some sects, a doubting member may be shunned, excommunicated, or “disfellowshipped” to ensure that doubts don’t spread. So, doubters used keep silent and then disappear into the surrounding culture. Now they can create websites, and today there are as many communities of former believers as there are kinds of belief. These communities range from therapeutic to political, and they cover the range of sects: Evangelical, Mormon, Jehovah’s Witness, and Muslim. There’s even a web home for recovering clergy. Heaven help the unsuspecting believer who wanders into one of these sites and tries to tell members in recovery that they’re all bound for hell.
Lifestyles of the fine and faithless. When they emerge from the recovery process former Christians and Muslims and whatnot find that there’s a whole secular world waiting for them on the web. This can be a lifesaver, literally, for folks who are trapped in closed religious communities on the outside. On the web, they can explore lifestyles in which people stay surprisingly decent and kind without a sacred text or authority figures telling them what to do. In actuality, since so much of religion is about social support (and social control) lots of people skip the intellectual arguments and exposes, and go straight to building a new identity based in a new social network. Some web resources are specifically aimed creating alternatives to theism, for example, Good without God, Parenting Beyond Belief, or The Foundation Beyond Belief.
Interspiritual Okayness. This might sound odd, but one of the threats to traditional religion is interfaith communities that focus on shared spiritual values. Many religions make exclusive truth claims and see other religions as competitors. Without such claims, there is no need for evangelism, missionaries or a set of doctrines that I call donkey motivators (ie. carrots and sticks) like heaven and hell. The web showcases the fact that humanity’s bad and good qualities are universal, spread across cultures and regions, across both secular and religious wisdom traditions. It offers reassurance that we won’t lose the moral or spiritual dimension of life if we outgrow religion, while at the same time providing the means to glean what is truly timeless and wise from old traditions. In doing so, it inevitably reveals that the limitations of any single tradition alone. The Dalai Lama, who has lead interspiritual dialogue for many years made waves recently by saying as much: “All the world’s major religions, with their emphasis on love, compassion, patience, tolerance, and forgiveness can and do promote inner values. But the reality of the world today is that grounding ethics in religion is no longer adequate. This is why I am increasingly convinced that the time has come to find a way of thinking about spirituality and ethics beyond religion altogether.”
The power of interspiritual dialogue is analogous to the broader power of the web in that, at the very heart it is about people finding common ground, exchanging information, and breaking through walls to find a bigger community waiting outside. Last year, Jim Gilliam, founder of Nationbuilder, gave a talk titled, “The Internet is My Religion.” Gilliam is a former fundamentalist who has survived two bouts of cancer thanks to the power of science and the internet. His existence today has required a bone marrow transplant and a double lung transplant organized in part through social media. Looking back on the experience, he speaks with the same passion that drove him when he was on fire for Jesus:
I owed every moment of my life to countless people I would never meet. Tomorrow, that interconnectedness would be represented in my own physical body. Three different DNAs. Individually they were useless, but together they would equal one functioning human. What an incredible debt to repay. I didn’t even know where to start. And that’s when I truly found God. God is just what happens when humanity is connected. Humanity connected is God.
The Vatican, and the Mormon Quorum of the Twelve Apostles, and the Southern Baptist Convention should be very worried.
Valerie Tarico is a psychologist and writer in Seattle, Washington and the founder of Wisdom Commons. She is the author of “Trusting Doubt: A Former Evangelical Looks at Old Beliefs in a New Light” and “Deas and Other Imaginings.” Her articles can be found at Awaypoint.Wordpress.com
Not so fast Waqar saheb,religions have not come into being because of HUMAN’S IGNORANCE rather religions came into being because of HUMAN’S IMPOTENCE and atheist’s will have to wait until the human’s become OMNIPOTENT.
Furthermore science is not something new,religions and science have not only co-existed but thrived together since millennium’s.Religious believes change over time and it will be naive to think that advancements in science can put religious pundits of out business.
Ajaz.
Comment by Noor Salik
I found this article interesting and informativel.
The following statement I read it before but I was unable to save it for my personal reference. I am happy to find it here to invite the attention of other TF USA affiliates.
The Dalai Lama, who has lead inter-spiritual dialogue for many years made waves recently by saying as much: “All the world’s major religions, with their emphasis on love, compassion, patience, tolerance, and forgiveness can and do promote inner values. But the reality of the world today is that grounding ethics in religion is no longer adequate. This is why I am increasingly convinced that the time has come to find a way of thinking about spirituality and ethics beyond religion altogether.”
Dalai Lama is the spiritual leader on Tibetan Buddhism.
Let me make a few comments about Buddhism.
Buddhism is the only universal religion which does not require ‘the belief in God/gods’ as an essential component of Buddhist Belief System.
In Buddhism the ethical values are not linked to God/gods but to human existential conditions.
Most of the philosophic minded people share this view that eventually all religions will disappear from this world and Buddhism will be the last of all.
This sentence is an aphoristic statement. The elaboration can be offered if this statement is challenged by any TF USA affiliate.
Coming back to Dalai Lama.
Dalai Lama thinks that time has come:
“to find a way of thinking about spirituality and ethics beyond religion altogether.”
Without proper definition of core concepts, any discussion is normally a futile attempt to come to any consensus or mutual understanding.
There are three core concepts:
(1) Religion
(2) Spirituality
(3) Ethics
If you have any definition of these terms please share it with other TF USA affiliates.
Actually TF USA should ask Dalai Lama how he differentiates between ‘Religion’ and ‘Spirituality’.
How to ask him this question is another question?
Actually I am just making a point for the sake the sake of our discussion.
There are quite a few other points in this article which can be discussed.
I picked up this point because Buddhism has always intellectually intrigued me.
Around 600 to 500 BC is the most interesting period in the intellectual history of mankind. Buddha, Confucius, Pythagoras & Zoroaster were almost contemporaries. These four inrtelelctual giants are extremely unique individuals in their own ways. We cannot lump them together in one category
nSalik
01/23/2013 Comment by Noor Salik
In reference to Religion and Spirituality I received two responses from
Dr. Shoeb Amin.
Both are hyperlinks:
I will enter here hyperlinks as well as the contents of the links.
These responses will help us to bring the discussion to the next level.
Response # 1
Sent by Dr. Shoeb Amin
Religious Versus Spiritual?
By Norris J. Chumley Ph. D.
It’s a trend today to disdain religion as repressive and affirm spirituality as transformational or liberating, but really, one can be a member of a religious institution and be spiritual, or be religious or spiritual without belonging to a church — or both. There’s a new trend of “do your own spiritual thing,” forming one’s own religion based on a kind of à la carte sampling of traditions and religions, from Buddhist sangha meditation to Christian prayer chanting to Hindu or Hebrew dietary codes. It’s trèship to be a Jew-Bu (Jewish/Buddhist) or a yogi for Christ. One practicing Hindu I know often reminds me that “Jesus Christ and Buddha are both incarnations of Vishnu.”
What’s gotten me wondering about those labels and put me in a theological (God-talk) mood again today is a recent survey conducted by the Pew Forum on Religion and Public Life, titled Religion Among the Millennials. They report that “Americans ages 18 to 29 are considerably less religious than older Americans.” Only about 25 percent of the millennials, as Pew calls those who have just come of age, belong to religious groups. Are 20-somethings “spiritual” but not “religious,” given that alternative, individual spiritual books and practices like yoga and meditation are hugely popular? Pew claims that 48 percent of millennials pray daily, 26 percent meditate weekly, and 64 percent say they are absolutely certain of God’s existence; they simply practice outside of organized religion.
Since I read the Pew report, I’ve been conducting my own informal “street” survey of millennials. Sonya, 20, an NYU undergrad, raised Jewish, claims she’s spiritual but doesn’t go to synagogue. Lucy, 29, a grad student, born Catholic, says she’s religious but doesn’t go to church, except maybe at Easter. Jeremy, 28, a broker, isn’t religious or spiritual but finds peace in nature. Rory, 29, a novelist, clams he’s agnostic but attends Quaker meeting. Eve, 21, an unemployed designer, goes to several churches and attends Buddhist meditation every Thursday night, but she isn’t religious, she says.
It’s high time to revisit the question: what exactly does it mean to be spiritual or religious? Many baby-boomers like me consider “religion” to be external, organized, and connected to cultures and institutions like churches, synagogues, and temples, or, in the Clifford Geertz definition, cultural systems. “Spirituality” to me isn’t necessarily tied to systems or houses of worship; it’s internal, ethereal, and intangible. However, when I look up definitions online and in dictionaries, religion and spirituality are treated as basically synonymous. Religion can be a belief, practice, or membership in or out of an institution. Spirituality can be a feeling or belief, or, as a secondary definition, even church income or property!
Digging a little deeper, there really is a difference, and it is about application and sharing of the beliefs one holds. To be religious means to hold a set of beliefs about how the world and universe came to be, and to share those beliefs with others. The commonality may be a doctrine, a set of rituals, a moral or ethical code, tribal or sect identification, or a shared prophet, leader, guru, or savior. The origin of the word is Middle English, meaning faithfulness or piety or, as in the Old French, a sacred practice that is connected, tied together, or bound in community.
Spirituality, on the other hand, is not primarily communal but individual in belief and practice. If one is spiritual, one typically has beliefs in something not tied to the material world: something ethereal and intangible but perceived or believed to exist. It can be earth-related, such as a belief in nature. It can encompass belief in a “higher power,” some force or unified creator or God that is bigger and more powerful than oneself, and untethered to traditional churches or doctrine. I discovered that the word “spirit” is ancient and interconnected: the Hebrew Bible uses the termnephesh to describe breathing (see Genesis 2:7) or ruach, wind or air. From the Greek, the New Testament borrows pneuma, the life force within. Both Aristotle and Plato taught that the psyche, or soul, resides in the human body and is divine. They disagreed as to whether we’re born with it or if it is from something eternal. St. Paul, likely having studied Greek philosophy, talks in the New Testament about the spirit residing in the body.
Another poll of Americans by the Pew Forum on Religion and Public Life late last year found that many people attend multiple religious services and hold spiritual, religious, and “New Age” beliefs all at the same time. It is fascinating to me that that same study found that 49 percent of respondents have had “a religious or mystical experience, defined as a ‘moment of sudden religious insight or awakening.'” A full 30 percent of those responses come from people who say they are “unaffiliated” with any particular religion or organized ideology.
Two great spiritual leaders answered the question of religion or spirituality quite beautifully. Lao-tzu, the sixth-century-B.C.E. Chinese philosopher, wrote, “As rivers have their source in some far-off fountain, so the human spirit has its source. To find his fountain of spirit is to learn the secret of heaven and earth.”
Gandhi puts spirituality in a slightly more religious framework, but without institutionalizing it: “I do dimly perceive that whilst everything around me is ever-changing, ever-dying, there is underlying all that change a Living Power that is changeless, that holds all together, that creates, dissolves, and re-creates. That informing Power or Spirit is God …” (from Ghandi’s Ideas by C.F. Andrews).
So here we are on the Great Internet — that infinite network of material wires, WiFi, optical cables, and nodes — talking about spirit and religion. Might we all be tied together right now in a new kind of community spirituality and religion — the net?
Response # 2
Sent by Dr. Shoeb Amin
http://atheism.about.com/od/religionnonreligion/a/spirituality_2.htm
This may answer your Q re. difference between religious/spirituality.
Here is the full article:
Religion vs. Spirituality
Is Religion Organized Spirituality? Is Spirituality Personalized Religion?
Distinguishing Between Religion and Spirituality
Is such a distinction valid? In answering such a question, it is important to keep in mind that it presumes to describe two fundamentally different types of things. Even though I describe them as different ways of “relating to the divine or the sacred,” that is already introducing my own prejudices into the discussion. Many (if not most) of those who attempt to draw such a distinction do not describe them as two aspects of the same thing; instead, they are supposed to be two completely different animals.
Religion vs. Spirituality
One clue that there may be something problematic in this distinction comes when we look at the radically different ways in which people actually try to define and describe that distinction. Consider these three definitions drawn from the internet:
Religion is an institution established by man for various reasons. Exert control, instill morality, stroke egos, or whatever it does. Organized, structured religions all but remove god from the equation. You confess your sins to a clergy member, go to elaborate churches to worship, told what to pray and when to pray it. All those factors remove you from god. Spirituality is born in a person and develops in the person. It may be kick started by a religion, or it may be kick started by a revelation. Spirituality extends to all facets of a person’s life. Spirituality is chosen while religion is often times forced. Being spiritual to me is more important and better than being religious.
Religion can be anything that the person practicing it desires. Spirituality, on the other hand, is defined by God. Since religion is man defined, Religion is a manifestation of the flesh. But Spirituality, as defined by God, is a manifestation of His nature.
True spirituality is something that is found deep within oneself. It is your way of loving, accepting and relating to the world and people around you. It cannot be found in a church or by believing in a certain way.
These definitions aren’t just different, they are incompatible! Two define spirituality in a way which makes it dependent upon the individual — it is something that “develops in the person” or is “found deep within oneself.” The other, however, defines spirituality as something which comes from God and is defined by God while religion is “anything that the person desires.” Is spirituality from God and religion from Man, or is it the other way around? Why such divergent views?
We can better understand why such incompatible definitions (each representative of how many, many others define the terms) appear by observing what unites them: the denigration of religion. Religion is bad. Religion is all about people controlling other people. Religion distances you from God and from the sacred. Spirituality, whatever it really is, is good. Spirituality is the “true” way to reach God and the sacred. Spirituality is the right thing to center your life on.
It’s popular, especially in America, to distinguish between spirituality and religion. It’s true that there are valid distinctions between the two, but there are also a number of problematic distinctions which people try to make. In particular, supporters of spirituality tend to try to argue that everything bad lies with religion while everything good can be found in spirituality. This is a self-serving distinction which only masks the nature of religion and spirituality.
Problematic Distinctions Between Religion & Spirituality
One principal problem with attempts to separate religion from spirituality is that the former is saddled with everything negative while the latter is exalted with everything positive. This is a totally self-serving way of approaching the issue and something you only hear from those who describe themselves as “spiritual.” You never hear a self-professed religious person offer such definitions and it’s disrespectful to religious people to suggest that they would remain in a system with no positive characteristics whatsoever.
Another problem with attempts to separate religion from spirituality is the curious fact that we don’t see it outside America. Why are people in Europe either religious or irreligious but Americans have this third category called “spiritual”? Are Americans special? Or is it rather that “distinction” is really just a product of American culture?
In fact, that is exactly the case. The term itself came to be used frequently only after the 1960s when there were widespread revolts against every form of organized authority, including “organized religion.” Every establishment and every system of authority was thought to be corrupt and evil, including those which were religious — but of course, Americans weren’t prepared to abandon religion entirely. So, they created a new category which was still religious, but which no longer included the same traditional authority figures.
They called it Spirituality. Indeed, the creation of the category “spiritual” can be seen as just one more step in the long American process of privatizing and personalizing religion, something which has occurred constantly throughout American history.
It’s no wonder that courts in the America have refused to acknowledge any substantive difference between “religion” and “spirituality,” concluding that “spiritual” programs are so much like religions that it would violate the separation of church and state to force people to attend them (as with Alcoholics Anonymous, for example). The religious beliefs of these “spiritual” groups do not necessarily lead people to the same conclusions as organized religions, but that doesn’t make them less religious.
Valid Distinctions Between Religion & Spirituality
This is not to say that there is nothing at all valid in the concept of spirituality — just that the distinction between spirituality and religion in general is not valid. Spirituality is a form of religion, but a private and personal form of religion. Thus, the valid distinction is between spirituality and organized religion.
We can see this in how there is little (if anything) that people describe as characterizing spirituality but which has not also characterized aspects of traditional religion. Personal quests for God? Organized religions have made a great deal of room for such quests. Personal understandings of God? Organized religions have relied heavily upon the insights of mystics, although they have also sought to circumscribe their influence so as not to “rock the boat” too much and too quickly.
Moreover, some of the negative features commonly attributed to religion can also be found in so-called “spiritual” systems. Is religion dependent upon a book of rules? Alcoholic’s Anonymous describes itself as spiritual rather than religious and has such a book. Is religion dependent upon a set of written revelations from God rather than a personal communication?A Course in Miracles is a book of such revelations which people are expected to study and learn from.
It is important to note the fact that many of the negative things which people attribute to religions are, at best, features of some forms of some religions (usually Judaism, Christianity, and Islam), but not of other religions (like Taoism or Buddhism). This is perhaps why so much of spirituality remains attached to traditional religions, like attempts to soften their harder edges. Thus, we have Jewish spirituality, Christian spirituality, and Muslim spirituality.
Religion is spiritual and spirituality is religious. One tends to be more personal and private while the other tends to incorporate public rituals and organized doctrines. The lines between one and the other are not clear and distinct — they are all points on the spectrum of belief systems known as religion. Neither religion nor spirituality is better or worse than the other; people who try to pretend that such a difference does exist are only fooling themselves.
The internet is the great ether for people to share, affirm and confirm their beliefs or disbeliefs, both guided and misguided. The decline in religiosity was evident before the advent of the internet among all religions. If anything, the technology has become an effective tool for the more strident elements to organize and propagate their virulent religious messages for all faiths around the globe.