Does the Internet Spell Doom For Organized Religion?

The Dalai Lama, who has led 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.” (from the posted article)

A very interesting thesis, Jerry!

I thought so also Ann, especially that of the man in the linked video.

It seems strange to me that while speaking to someone about mistakes made by the Christian religion, that person became defensive and wouldn't acknowledge that the church (all churches) are really about man.
From an original piece I read a whitwashed version where Christianity became a more popular religion on it's own over time. The reality is that many countries had Christianity introduced to them at the point of a sword after Constantine decided to bring his Empire together under one religion he thought he could manage. France and Britain may still have the Druids were it not for them being hunted down and killed.
The Crusades were fought because the Church wanted part of someone else's land.
The Knights Templar were killed because the Church both feared and envied them.
The Cathars were slaughtered because the Church didn't like their influence and thought they had riches.
People will say they happened many years ago but it's still the same bible and they could still make a call for a new crusade. After the Second World War there was help for some Germans to escape given by the Vatican.
In the 80's 90's and who knows when else the Catholic Church moved around those priests accused of Paedophilia. The Church is an institution built for the control of people not for the benefit of people. Until errors are admitted and a whole new look emerges I don't think there will be much faith in the church itself anymore. Which is not to say that people's faith in a deity will change yet.

Agree, David. It's not the Internet that is bringing down religion. It is the policies of organized religion that many people see as destructive...and maybe the absurdity of their myths.
But I must add...the most extreme sects seem to be thriving...the fundamentalist/evangelicals.

The most extreme sects seem to be the most outspoken and thus get undue attention which seems to make them stronger than they would otherwise be ... the more extreme they are the more self-righteous they act, often that claimed to be based upon love which is really more based upon fear ... IMnsHO

David,

What you say about the 'sword' was true hundreds of years ago, but was that how it was introduce in the US, is that how it has been taken from the US and spread around the world today? I am disappointed that you do put it in context of the times it was happening.

I agree that the churches of today are of man for man, but I would offer that as the people the churches have changed and the context of people today is different than only a couple of generations ago many of the more traditional churches have not and are still try to use the old context. However, there have been many churches that have been created in Malls and other settings independent of a higher archy of the past. They have grown similar to the churches in the past by serving the needs of members.

For if churches are of man for man then they must serve man. The religion hasn't change, for the words and deads that happen thousands of years ago are the same. What has changed are my religious needs, but the pastor of my church didn't change to address those changing needs. When our children were young we found churches that address the family needs, my children are finding churches that are addressing their childrens needs. My children had to, just as we did, look for those churches because not all were satisfying those needs. Today my needs are different and we have not yet found that church providing for our current needs. Our faith in our religion is not diminished but our engagement with the church has. For me it is that the people of the church is not looking to the future they are more trying to adapt using the past.

Duane, those are good valid points concerning the need for man to find a religion that suits best what he is seeking.

Well said David ...

Duane, your points are well taken. The things I mention are in the past. But they need people to acknowledge that they happened, hat Christians did them and that they used the bible as just cause.
Churches have changed since then but it's still the same book and still Christians and I don't want a repeat of the past.
Current churches include one that attends funerals and insults the dead and the mourners.
A church where a Pastor can preach that children as young as 4 can be thumped if they stand in a gay way.
A church which was created when a man says he's found commandments written on plates of gold that then disappear before anyone else sees them. Who can then declare that having multiple wives is OK and set up Salt Lake City as an enterprise.
A Church offshoot from about 1914 who've decided that much is wrong so that they can create all kinds of bans for members even down to what jewellery they can wear. Also, only something like 60,000 of them will enter heaven out of their millions of members. Well I guess it won't be the foot soldiers will it.
On top of all that there have been cult churches galore with Jonestown, the Davidians, L.Ron Hubbard and others.
It might be better to write down the 10 commandments, keep them in your pocket and abandon everything else. At least you'll be living in a nice way and at peace with your neighbours as they will be with you.

I read a piece the other day that said people nowadays tend to "group" with people with similar political...and I suppose religious...ideas. In that environment, they feed on each other, intensifying and solidifying their beliefs, rather than listening to competing and even contradictory ideas. This is leading to an increasingly balkanized and polarized society with large blocks opposing others.
The Internet seems to making this worse, rather than better, in my opinion.

The Internet seems to making this worse, rather than better, in my opinion.

I agree in part with that ... but ... I see the internet getting more people involved in the discussion and making far more information available which allows people to decide for themselves ... thus I see it as a good thing. :-)

It is good, Jerry. I hope it does lead to greater enlightenment.
But judging from my experience here on Gather...and this is an exceptionally open environment with ideas of all kinds being exchanged...I see little change in opinions. What happens is, people who agree reinforce each other, and insult those they disagree with.
If that is typical, then the Internet won't change much.

Bert, I think that it is necessary for people to define the "playing field" by it's extremes prior to some kind of middle ground cooperation ... those who refuse to cooperate are destined for never-ending conflict ... that resulting in a sooner death.

Formal religion does appear to be in decline. Certainly the functions of religion have changed from maintaining social order to more emotional and psychological support. There are those who would seek to make religion the key to political power but I think (not sure, mind you) that they are having less success with that the last couple hundred years.

I think it's a mixed bag, Larry. Secularism is on the rise in Europe for sure, but here in the US, it seems to me that the fundie/evangelicals are gaining political power...if not gaining in actual numbers.
I attribute that to a real push to organize religious believers into solid voting blocks...which they have done very successfuly in the past thirty years or so.

Maybe it is simply my own experience of becoming aware of my "spirit-uality", but I feel an ever increasing interest in the world on the subject ... in its almost countless "variations" ... and though there has been relative little hostility between the various sects of religions (such as within Christianity especially), I see that becoming much more of a problem (for them) in our near future at the rate the world is going.

A solar flare could wipe out the open information system first, but if that happened, you'd probably be more taken up with matters of survival.

To my own view, those are distinct possibilities ... all the more reason to heed the warnings of prophecy concerning not waiting until the last minute to get your house in order ... :-)

Religion includes the whole of human intelligence , while rational thought only uses one limited part of his mind and hence his potential knowing and learning . Knowledge is power so it has always been protected and restricted from being made accessible to those who have not been considered prepared to receive it and use it responsibly. Orthodox religions and the state have restricted knowledge to the few in to order have power and control throughout history. However there have have also been groups who have transmitted knowledge in service of higher values and the general welfare. This always conforms to the essential nature of religion. Religions will persist while states and and religious and other institutions that serve selfish aims fail because religions can transmit and represent humans potential and possible evolution.

Very true Clarke, very true indeed.

Clarke M. Jan 16, 2013, 7:24pm EST
Religion includes the whole of human intelligenc


There's that man made new-age talk.
Jerry is new-age also, so I understand him agreeing with you.


Good morning guys.

not if one is a member of al Qaeda

One might say that the Taliban is the "religious arm" of Al Qaeda ...

PS ... When Al Qaeda arrived in Afghanistan from Sudan around 1996, says Kuehn, its membership was not more than 30. Al Qaeda fighters, and the growing number of recruits who came to Afghanistan from elsewhere, kept apart from Taliban fighters, who resented Al Qaeda, and there was a great deal of animosity between the two. Osama bin Laden insisted that international actions against the United States and other countries was crucial to his strategy, while Mullah Omar opposed such actions, says Kuehn.

Not quite as I thought ...

That's right

Not right Jerry,

Your source: http://www.thenation.com/blog/160681/taliban-not-al-qaeda#

The Taliban Is Not Al Qaeda
Robert Dreyfuss on May 16, 2011 - 12:02 AM ET

For the past several years, Felix Kuehn has lived in Kandahar, Afghanistan, one of the few non-Afghans living as civilians in that war-plagued city, the country’s second largest and the city in which the Taliban was founded. Only about a hundred foreigners live in Kandahar...


Felix Kuehn was in Kandahar but has not got the history of the Taliban and Bin Laden right. He gathered information from unreliable sources and didn't do diligent research . It is true many or most Afghanis still don't know about 9/11 and many even think the Americans are Russians who who re-invaded after leaving in 1988. It is true Mullah Omar was not interested in attacking the US.

It is also unlikely Bin Laden knew about 9/11 , although he trained foreign, Arab jihadis to fight in Russia, the Balkans, Africa and Arab countries. There was no "al-Qaeda" - it was a term invented by the CIA and first applied to Bin Laden by George Bush after 9/11 in a speech. The FBI and US govt. has never got evidence to claim officially Bin Laden was involved in 9/11.

Bush was all involved in getting re-elected and said whatever he needed to get re-elected, also.

Bush was nothing more than a well paid puppet of his Masters ... (just like most US presidents, not excluding the present) ... IMnsHO

Bert has scooped me with, "It's not the Internet that is bringing down religion. It is the policies of organized religion that many people see as destructive...and maybe the absurdity of their myths."

My religion is actually ardently using the internet to spread our message (www.jw.org)

The resource library that I used to get on a CD every year is also now on line (http://wol.jw.org/en/wol/lv/r1/lp-e/0)

Thanks for the info (links) Dennis, I will try and take a look later.

BTW ... I am well into a most interesting read that gets into some little known specifics of history of many religions (including your own):

http://www.scribd.com/doc/50188551/mark-of-the-beast-the-great-counterfeit-2

You're welcome and thanks for your link. I look into it on the weekend.

Try get the book Mankind's Search for God from a Witness. Some of that information might also be in it.

Mankind's Search for God attempting to download pdf version now ... http://www.jw-media.org/rus/publications/sh_e.pdf ... but it is so slow that I suspect it will not complete) ...

Didn't know that site was still up :-D

How did you get that link?

I checked. The page has been taken down. I'll ask around for a pdf copy.

Hi Dennis, it finally came up, sans the pictures, and I have been reading (first four chapters so far), it is so familiar that I suspect that I have read it before, long ago.

I found it by Googling the "title" you gave and selecting the first offering where I noticed "pdf" ...

That's great!!! I'll try being patient myself and downloading a copy. I have the book, but want a pdf.

Tried again and got it in seconds, with the pictures and everything!

Oops. Spoke too soon. Only the cover picture came out.

:-/

Does the Internet Spell Doom For Organized Religion?

You have it backwards grasshopper.


Jesus Christ is coming back!


And that spells doom for the internet.

Jesus Christ is coming back! ... which one, the "real" one or the "Anti" version ??

That is what the book that I offered the link to which I have been reading (not the one that Dennis offered) is all about.

Lock and load :-)

Now featured on losing our religion

TY

I've had a few fundies try and rope me in, and issues with my husband's church and my own about our religions marrying, which caused us to distance ourselves from both churches.

Spirituality is generic and is the truth that sets you free ... religions want to place spirit under their "brand" making themselves the agent of spirit.

Right on!