In conclusion...

This is a copy of the presentation we gave at the conclusion of our project. It is a good summary and wrap up and I hope you enjoy it!


We spent this semester working on an independent religion project entitled “The spiritual Lives of Wofford Students”.
** Frequently, religious diversity is thought of in terms of official, organizational lines like Buddhism, Hinduism, Christianity, Islam etc. Other times religious diversity is thought of in terms of the demographics of a particular religious group – for example, the racial diversity of a particular congregation. Rarely, however, is religious diversity considered from the perspective of the individual as distinctive conceptualizations of the divine or religious experience. The basic assumption of this independent study is that there are many ways that everyday people, and more specifically Wofford students, enact and experience religion, regardless of whether they have official religious affiliations or not. Have you ever wondered what’s really going in the spiritual lives of Wofford students?

We set out on this quest of spiritual discovery on the individual level in hopes of discovering what drives people to a religion, how that religion and its practices affect people, and if there are any commonalities among these aspects despite the religious affiliations of the individual. In our pursuit of this study, we were able to classify people into categories based on their spirituality vs. religion, uncover several linking threads between these categories, the knots that those threads caused, and how society loosens those knots.

So what is the difference between religion and spirituality? Have you heard someone claim to be spiritual but not religious? What does that mean? For the sake of this study, religion is the service and worship of God or the supernatural; a personal set or institutionalized system of attitudes, beliefs, and practices. Spirituality is the personal, inward connection and sensitivity to God or the supernatural. Based on these definitions, it is possible to have religion without spirituality. However, spirituality can be brought about through religious practices, but one is not dependent on the other.


To aid in our research, we read three book throughout the semester: Habits of the Heart , by Robert Bellah, who came 3 weeks ago (we ordered him 3 MONTHS ago); A New Religious America by Diana Eck; Spiritual Marketplace by Wade Clark Roof, who excitingly enough was given as a gift at the convocation yesterday, so if ya’ll are planning to give me the first departmental religion award for minors you are going to have to find another book, because I already have that one. Thanks.

Along with reading the books, we got down and dirty, immersing ourselves in the spiritual life at Wofford by conducting interviews and going with our interviewees to their perspective religious services in order to get a deeper understanding of the spiritual aspect of their life. Being biology majors, we know that in every study, you must have some type of format to gain significant data from which to draw legitimate conclusions.
** Firstly: A control. We came up with eleven standardized questions as our interview backbone.

** (For a complete list, refer to screen)
---What is your understanding of the religious experience?
—What in your life or culture has influenced you to make your religious decision?
—What is your understanding about the divine?
—What happens during religious worship?
—What is the purpose of life?
—What are your beliefs on the creation of the world?
—Do you believe in the afterlife? If so, describe your beliefs.
—How do you view the ideas of good and evil?
—What are your views about proselytization?
—How much do you know about other world religions?
—Do you think it is good to question your religion?

We selected these questions because we thought they would provide a basic understanding of all aspects of the interviewee’s beliefs, and could apply to people of any religious background. As we talked with people, we elaborated on their answers with applicable questions that were relevant to them individually.


By integrating all of this research, we were able to come up with six categories of religious people at Wofford.

The categories are as follows:
Dogmatists, Secularists, Metaphysical Seekers, Born again, Mainstream, and Religious Seeker.
To help you better understand these categories, we have provided a definition, and a short role-play of each; drawing quotes from the actual interview answers we received.

Dogmatists can be defined as religious but not spiritual. They are totally doctrine based, and there is no personal connection to the divine at all; basically they would be what we might call someone who is going through the motions of religion. They go to their perspective religious ceremony because it is the socially, or family accepted thing to do, but they don’t get anything out of it personally.

For example: Weatherly, What is your understanding about the divine?
Well, I am not really a spiritual person, but the divine is three persons, a facet of God whose son died for out salvation, and whom we work to serve. We will someday die and based on our deeds done in life will hopefully live in eternity. But again, I am really not that spiritual.

We actually had to go out and look for this group and had a hard time finding people. We were surprised to find that many people who we thought would fit this category actually had a spiritual side.

The next category, the Secularists, don't believe anything spiritual or religious. They might socially be identified as agnostic or atheist. Personally, I find this concept hard to grasp, because it would take a tremendous amount of faith to believe that nothing existed at all. It could also be that society expects people to have a religious label so even if our interviewee felt like a secularist they gave themselves a religious title. That is probably why we did not find anyone that fit this category, but needed to have it available, just incase. (So no role-play here, sorry.)

The third category is a Metaphysical seeker. They can be defined as someone who is spiritual but not religious. They typically use alternative methods to get some type of personal spiritual experience. They are completely non-traditional, and combine elements of many different religions, or even their everyday life. Roof talks about one woman who had a Christian background, but fused Buddhist moral values, yoga practices, and Star Trek as her spiritual guide.

One example we found: Lindsey, what are your beliefs on the creation of the world?
Sine and cosine are two universal energies along with gravity, which pulls things together, and dark energy which pushes things away. Dark energy is on the rise and gravity is in the decline. Black holes form and combine which are just incredible gravitational forces that have ever arching pulls as they gain matter. So black holes get bigger until they extend to where the dark energy is, and you get to a point where they are at equilibrium. The big bang was that point. Then the cycle starts again, but in reverse. Tangent is the supernatural. You can see were the supernatural system came from and where it went but you don’t know where it started and where it is going. We as people are somewhere part of the sine cosine system. Like the yin and the yang, they are always balanced but the dots are the tangent.

The fourth category are the Born agains. They are both spiritual and religious. They are usually identified in society as evangelical, with a major emphasis on a personal relationship with their deity. They do this by the renewal of their life as a personal journey between themselves and their deity.

For example: Weatherly, What is the purpose of life?
Well, a divine experience is not a huge dramatic emotion or a booming voice but a gentle understanding in my thoughts and heart that is either at peace or not. We are nothing without Christ and he is why we are, what we do, and everything. So the purpose of life is to live to glorify and teach people about Christ and to bring others to know him so they can have eternal life.

The fifth category is identified as Mainstream. They are also both spiritual and religious, but they are more denominational and traditional than the born agains. The religious congregation is for social betterment and involvement, and used to help others in the community. They generally follow ritual practices to get their spiritual growth.

This was a common category among people we interviewed giving us answers like: Lindsey, What happens during your religious worship?
We sit down, light candles, greet each other, sing songs and hymns with the choir, read from the Bible, say structured prayers then quiet individual prayers, give offering, then there is a sermon. I like the music. It makes me feel at peace. Church is not a stressful place. The atmosphere is joyful with singing, no 'amen' every 10 seconds, it’s not a loud church, but there are a lot of older people.

The final category are the Religious Seekers. They perform the traditional rituals but don't feel that they have to in order to have a spiritual connection with the divine. They have established beliefs, but question those beliefs and follow logical thought, usually a combination of science and religion. They also believe that the individual should do whatever is best for them to reach a spiritual enlightenment.

When we interviewed these individuals, the answers to their questions were so well thought out that it almost always made us think. For example: Lindsey, what is your understanding of a religious experience?

A religious experience is an intuitive understanding for a higher, fundamental truth which is eternal, and is always viewed through the peripheral and never straight on. You can see it through nature and you own interactions with people. It is basically found however you can find it. Sometimes it comes as an epiphany. I believe that in some ways Christianity misses the point of the doctrine. It confuses it, because a religious experience should be deeply personal. There are times when you get that feeling that something else is out there worth my trust and faith.

What do you think, Weatherly?

Religion is a personal thing and everyone has to find it differently. Everyone has a different view of things and interpret different meanings of what religion is. I don't always go to church when I'm at school, but I'm there every Sunday at home. Church provides a place of healing about things that can't always be healed any other way. It's not necessarily a specific part of the sermon, but the whole atmosphere. I'm a nature person, and for some reason when I'm out hiking or on the water, I feel connected, like there has to be a God. I consider myself to be a religious person, but I follow my own interpretation of the bible. I don’t think it should be taken as a literal interpretation. It was written a long time ago, and now it is outdated and should be revised to fit today’s society.

Here are the results of our interviews, the percentages of each category based on the people that we interviewed.
Category Number of people Dogmatist: 8.3% Secularist: 0%Metaphysical Seeker: 16.7% Born-again: 20.8% Mainstream: 29.2% Religious seeker: 25%

In looking at people in each of these categories (except secular of course) we were able to come up with several common threads winding through them. These are topics that groups of people agreed upon despite being from different categories. A few of those basic threads that we extracted were the ideas of proselytization, the influence of culture and family, and doubting and questioning your faith.

First of all, most of ya'll are probably thinking 'what the heck does Proselytization… that p-word that mean?', because when Dan first told us that word we sure did. Proselytization means: To induce someone to convert to one's own religious faith. The common thread we found was that no matter what religion you choose, it is your choice and no one should influence you to choose one particular religion or another. Therefore, forcing your beliefs onto someone else is wrong. Instead, you should spread your faith by demonstrating it in your own life. Some examples from our interviews include:

Mainstream: I try to impact as many people as I can through my religion, it is not hounding them with the Qu’ran or preaching to them but it is through my actions that I am doing this.

Metaphysical Seeker: No one tries to convert others to Judaism and it is wrong to do so because people should make their own decisions about what they want to do, especially with religion.

Born again: Our goal as Christians is to preach the gospel to all the world. To quote St. Francis, "preach the gospel and if necessary use words". It is not affective to walk up to someone and tell them they're going to hell. Most people who're completely against Christianity have that view because of Christians who have done that in the past.- influence of culture and family

The second commonality was the role of culture and family in the individual’s religious decision. Most of the interviewees agreed that the society that you were raised in and your family’s own beliefs are a major influence and deciding factor on your religious and spiritual life.

However, despite this fact, questioning and challenging your background beliefs is necessary to discover the faith that best suits you. This leads into the importance of studying other religions besides your own. In Diana Eck’s book, she point out that the diversity in America gives us the opportunity to study the dynamics of various faiths. It is easier now than ever before to walk down the street and experience something completely different than anything we are used to (and we are living proof of that!)

In the process of studying other religions, many people feel challenged and end up questioning and doubting their own faith. Doubting causes a person to question their religion which has the potential to make their religious views come back stronger than ever. We asked our interviewees whether or not they had ever personally questioned or doubted their religion, and whether or not they thought this doubt had positive or negative retributions. Nearly all of them agreed that questioning elements of their religion was a means of growth. It is by raising these questions and searching out the answers that a person really knows why they believe what they believe. Here are a few examples:

Religious Seeker: I think you shouldn't follow something blindly. If you question and still have faith, it'll make it that much stronger. There's things science can't answer. You should keep open dialog with what you are questioning amongst peers.

Born Again: Faith has changed. Institutions are now questioned and faith is becoming a personal level of action behind closed doors. I think it is a good change.

Metaphysical Seeker: It is best if you can doubt your religion. It is awesome. Doubt could still be considered worshiping the higher power as you are still considering the higher power.-flow chart of one category to next

After looking at all our data, we came up with what we thought was the most likely way that each group was connected. An individual starts out in the mainstream category, joining in with whatever faith their parents or society hold true. Once they become old enough to start questioning their beliefs, they move to the dogmatist category where they learn the theological answers, but still continue going through the motions of their influenced religious practice. After a while, more and deeper questioning leads to one of several things: a loss of religious faith and spirituality- secularism; a gain of spirituality through a significant life experience and a recommitment to the faith- born agains; a gain of spirituality through more personalized religious means- religious seeker; or a gain of spirituality with a loss of the religious theology – metaphysical seeker. This is not necessarily what always happens, it is just one possibility. In actuality, the arrows could move from any one category to another.

It would be perfect if these common threads that exist throughout differing categories of religious belief, spirituality, and among different religions held true for all beliefs. However, we don’t live anywhere near perfect, and the simple fact that we were able to separate the individuals we interviewed into categories makes it obvious that there are differing opinions and answers to the basic fundamental questions we were asking in our interviews. This leads to several problems. One problem is the problem of pluralism. If there can be more than one explanation to questions within a certain religion, and all the explanations are correct to the individual, then other religions and their explanations must be correct as well. But somewhere deep inside we believe that our answers are right, and there (logically) can’t be more that one right answer to a given question. If we did entertain the idea that another religion could be truthful, then we are betraying our own faith.


Another problem that has already been mentioned in several quotes from interviewees, is the problem of stereotypes. When you hear the word "Buddhist", you think of bald monks in orange robes not eating, sitting cross-legged, and chanting "om". When you hear the word "Christian", you think of people handing out Bibles and telling you you're going to hell if you don't believe in Jesus. When you hear the word "Muslim", you think of men with long beards wearing turbans bombing buildings and women completely covered up and oppressed. These are all examples of society’s perceptions of different religions. These pictures you see up on screen are the images we found when typed these words into Google images. That example says a lot for the stereotypes we are talking about. Societal perceptions should be based on the majority, but are these stereotypes the majority? The answer is no. In actuality, it's the minority and these people are often the extremists of the religion. But the religion as a whole should not be based on only a few members.

Before we make any judgments about a religion, we need to study it. One Muslim interviewee explained the stereotype of the oppression of women. She said that being covered was a sign of respect and was a choice. During worship, the women pray in a separate room behind the men by their own preference, as being in front of the men and having to bend over would be embarrassing. In addition, our findings throughout the semester have shown that the extremists are hard even impossible to find. The cause of these stereotypes is a lack of education of the reality of religion. As people become educated and gain knowledge of other religions surrounding them, the common misconceptions will be better understood and hopefully someday ended.
When we look at other religions as being truthful and more than just what the stereotypes tell us, we are not denying the validity of our own; instead we are evaluating our own beliefs and relating the beliefs of others and of what we hear to what we already know. Many of the people that we have interviewed agree with this idea. They can take what they have learned about other religions and get something out of it that they otherwise would not have been able to see. Whatever religion someone is, they see the divine in a way that is personal to them.
Many of the answers to our questions were highly individualized to fit the belief systems of the individual and transformed to a deeper and more meaningful level for that individual. If everything can be interpreted to fit an individual’s own beliefs, then they understand that their beliefs will be different from someone else, and that is no longer a problem.

Roof gave several thought provoking statistics in his book. He reported that 94% of Americans say they believe in God and 90% pray to God on a fairly regular basis. At first glance this seems contradictory to the beginning of the next set of statistics. 65% of Americans say religion is losing influence in public life, but 62% of people said on the same survey that religion is increasing in their personal lives. This demonstrates the individualism that Lindsey was just talking about. Religion is not becoming absent, simply shifting fields from the public to the private sector.


Through our study we found that the experience and expression of religion is changing over the course of time. It is becoming a more private and personalized thing. In talking to people, we later realized we had to make a new category of religious person- the religious seeker- as there were several people who did not fit into our five original categories. Even with the new category, it was difficult to place many people into just one group as they had thoughts that overlapped with multiple groups. In the end, we decided that it was the value of individualism that is the beauty of religion in our society. We have the freedom to question religion and faith until we find a solution that fits us.

So this has to be the longest post we've done yet, with ALOT of color changing. Thanks for sticking with it!

Radical religions

When you hear the word "Buddhist", what do you think? You think of bald monks in orange robes not eating, sitting cross-legged, and chanting "om". When you hear the word "Christian", you think of people in suits and dresses handing out Bibles and telling you you're going to hell if you don't believe in Jesus. When you hear the word "Muslim" you think of men with long beards wearing turbans, women completely covered up and oppressed. You also think of the men who make the news nearly every day as suicide bombers.

These are all examples of societies perceptions of different religions. Societal perceptions should be based on the majority, but are these stereotypes the majority? The answer is no. In actuality, it's the minority and these people are often the extremists of the religion. As Diana Eck puts it so well, "every religion has it's extremists". (223) But the religion as a whole should not be based on only a few members.

Here is one example of how Islam can be misinterpreted. Because it is so prominent in the American media and you can hardly turn on the TV with out seeing another report of a suicide bomber, this is what the American public sees as Islam.

"Newspapers bring to American homes the images of Islamic jihad and their terrorists organizations, their rifle toting leaders and their hideouts, creating a view of Islam as dangerous, subversive, highly political, and anti-American. When a terrorist attack occurs elsewhere in the world, American Muslims may well be among the first to condemn the attach and to speak of terrorism as anti-Islamic, but their voices are usually not heard let along magnified by the popular press." (222-223)

Obviously the saying holds true that we can't believe everything we read, so before we make any judgments we need to study the religion. According to Qur'an, the Muslim's holy book, a Jihad is allowed for two reasons: self defense and fighting against oppression. Therefore, what these terrorists are doing is anti-Islamic, so that stereotype is not part of the religion. The tradition has 5 pillars of faith: confession of faith, prayer, fasting, charity, and pilgrimage. Suicide bombing is nowhere to be found- neither is the oppression of women. A Muslim that we interviewed shed light of the role of women. She said that being covered was a sign of respect and was a choice. During worship, the women pray in a separate room behind the men by their own preference, as being in front of the men and having to bend over would be embarrassing.

In addition, Eck explains that Christianity and Islam have several similarities. When Muslims say they are worshipping Allah, they are really worshiping God. Muslims believe Allah is the same being as the Christian and Jewish God, and therefore consider them all a type of cousin religions.

Our findings throughout the semester have shown that extremists are hard to find, if impossible. So, what causes these stereotypes. It is a lack of education of the reality of religion. As people become educated and gain knowledge of other religions surrounding them, the common misconceptions will be better understood and hopefully someday ended.

"Now more than ever, all Americans need the instructive challenge of the Qur'an; that our differences require us to get to know each other". (290)

Site Visits

In addition to interviewing people of different religions, Weatherly and I went with several people we had interviewed to their worship sites to participate in their own personal worship experience. We wanted to get a deeper understanding of each individual's religious experience, and then ask them what they actually get out of what they do in their worship.

The first site that I visited was the Jewish reform temple. (I already briefly posted on this visit, but here were the highlights): The rabbi lead everyone in Hebrew prayers out of a prayer book that we sung with a guitar, then he gave a brief sermon. The entire worship experience lasted about 30 minutes.

I asked Kelsey if she knew what all the prayers meant when she said them (she did not use the prayer book, but instead had all the prayers memorized), and she said that she knew the general idea of what the prayers were saying, but if she wanted to know she could just read the translation out of the book. She said that there was a certain type of reverence that she felt when she said the prayers, and that it was important to her to say them in Hebrew because it was the language of God. That was part of her religious experience.

The second site that I visited was the Hindu temple. This visit was really amazing. At the front of the temple were the statues of the gods and goddesses Ganesha, Rama, Sita, Hanuman, Durga, Vishnu, Lakshmi, Parvati, and Shiva just to name a few. The back wall was a painted mural of the famous scene from the Bhagavad Gita featuring Krishna as the charioteer with Arjuna. Everything was very brightly colored. We took our shoes off as we entered. As the curtain was pulled back to reveal the gods and goddesses, a bell was rung to wake them up. Then a plate was brought out and incense was lit to make a better atmosphere for the gods. On the plate, people gave money and food as an offering called prasad. Then a candle was lit (called a divo, it reveals the eyes of the gods) on the plate and the prayers to all the different gods were chanted while we sat. Then we stood for the final prayer called aarti. We stood in respect for the gods, one person rang the bell again and another took the plate with the incense and the candle and waved them around in circles. Then when that chant was done each person went up to the candle and waved their hand over it several times and either waved that over their head or touched their forehead. They did this to remind themselves of every aspect of the god including every organ and ask the god to make their organs demonstrate those qualities as well. We then ate the prasad because it is holy and is considered good luck. I spoke to one of the adults who explained everything they did to me. He said that what was important was to recognize the main point - that you were thanking and praying to god.

The third site that I visited was the Muslim mosque with Anjum. She covered her head before we got out of the car, then we had a separate entrance and a separate room that was in the back of the main room with the men. We were completely separated from the men except for a glass window. This was out of respect for the men so that we did not distract them when they were praying (if we were in front) and also so the women were not embarassed when they had to bend over and get on the ground. We took our shoes off before we entered out of respect for god (you can't wear shoes on holy ground) and then sat on the floor. One man got up and spoke for a while, somewhat like a Christian sermon, then everyone prayed facing Mecca. The prayers were led by the man that gave the sermon and there were different stances. First we stood, then bent over, then on the ground and touched our head to the ground, then we sat up and bent back over again, and finally stood up again. This was done twice. Anjum then did her own personal prayer before we left.

From the last two places that I went, I noticed that the prayers were in the original language. This is even true for Catholic services. Even if a worshiper did not know what was being said, the fact that it was in that other language made it closer to god. It was the language of god, or the original text so that you get everything out of it that is in the text. You also don't lose or confuse anything in translation. Everyone was willing to sacrifice understanding what they were saying for it being in the original tongue. It didn't even matter that they couldn't understand it because god knows what they are saying.

In mid March I went to a worship service at the same temple for the God Ganesha's birthday. There was a large crowd already gathered when we arrived so we removed our shoes and joined them on the dais in front of the God's. The first thing I noted was the women seated on the right and the men on the left. I have been to this same temple several times before for the nightly services. At that time all the people, men and women, sat together, but that could have been because it was a smaller and less formal ceremony. At the birthday party, as I am calling it, there were about 7 people sitting in the very front with small trays in front of them. These 3 couples and 1 daughter had chosen to take a more active part in the ceremony. I couldn't see much of what was going on (or understand it since it was all in another language), but one part really stood out. They each passed around a flaming candle and made motions like they were blessing a coconut that sat on a tray in front of them.
While this ritual was going on, two men took several garlands of red flowers and placed them around the necks of each of the god's, starting with Ganesha. A small bowl with grey powder was passed around and each person made a small mark with it on their forehead. Thankfully a girl probably around the age of 16 arrived shortly before this and sat with our group to explain what was going on. She said she didn't know the exact reason for the powder, but assured us that we were welcome to have some and applied it for us. Once each person had some, each family approached a large cylindrical shaped, vase-like structure and poured milk from the coconut over it, rinsing it with water between each family. When it was her turn to go, our new friend insisted we join her family, but we didn't feel right participating in that personal type of worship (even though we weren't quite sure what it meant yet) and declined. When she returned she explained that the statue was another manifestation of Ganesha and this was a form of offering him nourishment and blessing on that day. After everyone had been up, they began a series of chants and prayers. We checked the time and realized it was 8:50- we had been there nearly two hours and the service wasn't scheduled to be over for a while longer yet. One of our group had to be at work at nine, so we unfortunately had to leave and couldn't stay after to talk with the service leader and worshippers. Even though we couldn't be completely sure of everything that was happening the experience was still fascinating to watch and gave us great insight to a celebration in the Hindu community that is meaningful and sacred to them like the celebrations of Christianity are to us.

I attended two Christian services to look into the different types of Christianity that Roof had been describing in his book. The first was Hopepoint, a non-denominational church that meets in the gym of Oakbrook elementary school. This congregation is made up mainly of the people Roof classifies as the Born Again Christians. These are people who had a major turning point in their life that leads them to a deep spiritual relationship with God. I went with interviewee Drew Bryan and several of his younger friends I had never met before. We walked into the "sanctuary" and headed for the right side of the room which was filled with around 50 college students (the left side was the rest of the congregation: adults, and children). Worship consisted of contemporary songs sang with a full band and arms raised. The preacher got up and spoke with a clear passion: his eyes were often shut and he got very excited, speaking in a loud voice and often seeming like he couldn't catch his breath or say enough. He also had a PowerPoint to highlight the most important parts.

The second site visit was at Central United Methodist Church located in downtown Spartanburg on Church St. I walked in and was immediately welcomed by the greeters and handed a program to the service. The music was vastly different- old hymns played on the pipe organ and accompanied by the choir. The sermon was preached in a more stately manner- of a very knowledgeable person trying to explain an important matter to the congregation. Several times he referenced authors such as Kierkegaard and Camus, and stuck to what the Bible and Biblical scholars said about the topic as opposed to the more worldly and slightly more personal/opinion oriented view of the first service. As it was the first Sunday of the month communion was served, and the atmosphere while the wine and bread were blessed and distributed to the people was drastically different from the one at Hopepoint and the Hindu Temple (though those ceremonies are difficult to compare- I will try to more in just a moment). As the people filed by I looked at the diversity of the congregation: old and young, black and white, and all of different dress and with different outlooks as they approached the alter.

I have made several observations about the characteristics of the ceremonies at the Temple and Church. At the Temple, the people brought food and spent the entire time presenting the offerings to the gods to make sure they were satisfied and never seemed to expect anything in return. In contrast, the Church presented the people with a piece of God as the focal point of the service. I could go into this, but it would go on for a good while. Just some food for thought.

Problem with Pluralism

I wanted to take a moment to step back and look at the project as a whole. To evaluate what we have done so far, and what we have discovered. Wendy Doniger wrote a book called The Implied Spider: Politics and Theology in Myth, where she looks at the definition of a myth, specifically a religious myth, and evaluates their purpose. She defines myth as: “A tool in the hands of human beings” and “reveals certain basic cultural attitudes to important (usually insoluble) questions”. Basically, a myth is a sacred story that tells us the deepest truths about every aspect of our lives. She means the fiction that makes reality real; a story that can bring reality into closer focus. These myths are acted out in the sacred rituals of each religion.

Each religion is designed to answer these basic insoluble questions; a few being the ones that we are asking in our interviews. Doniger describes this as looking at life through a telescope, seeing the broad picture and interpreting life through this lens. These are the questions that religious myths look at, and try to answer on the microscopic level, the more personal perspective. What we have seen through our interviews is that the answers to these telescopic questions are individual people’s microscopic perspectives influenced by their religious myths and acted out in their own religious rituals. Some of those religious myths are interpreted within a certain religion and believed by most members of that religion, but as we have seen commonly throughout our interview process, many of those myths (creation, for example) are becoming individualized to fit the belief systems of the individual and transforming to a deeper and more meaningful level for that individual. Roof discusses this shift from a religious community to individuality as we have discussed in previous posts. Robert Bellah, et al. also highlights on this theme in Habits of the Heart: Individualism and commitment in American Life. He claims that, “The American pattern of privatizing religion while at the same time allowing it some public functions has proven highly compatible with the religious pluralism that has characterized America from the colonial and grown more and more pronounced.” Bellah, 225.

This leads to a problem with that pluralism. If there can be more than one explanation to questions within a certain religion, and all the explanations are correct even if it is to the individual, then other religions and their explanations must be correct as well. However, we live in a world where there are competing claims of truth in religion; somewhere deep inside we believe that we are right, and there (logically) can’t be more that one right answer to a given question. If we did entertain the idea that another religion could be truthful, then we are betraying our own faith. Diana Eck discusses this topic in her book, Encountering God. She says, “To recognize this plurality of religious claims as a profoundly important fact of our world does not constitute a betrayal of one’s own faith. It is simply a fact among the many facts that emerge from the historical and comparative study of religion.” Eck, 14. What she is saying, is that when we look at other religions as being truthful, we are not denying the validity of our own, we are evaluating our own beliefs and relating the beliefs of other and of what we hear to what we already know.

Many of the people that we have interviewed agree with this idea. They can take what they have learned about other religions and get something out of it that they otherwise would not have been able to see. Krishna says in the Bhagavad-Gita, “I am in every religion as the thread through a string of pearls. And wherever thou seest extraordinary holiness and extraordinary power brazing and purifying humanity, know ye that I am there.” If we are so narrow-minded as to think that what we already know is the only thing there is to offer, then we are not only becoming more ignorant, but we are actually narrowing our faith and the possibilities of what God can become and how we can be impacted by our faith. As one Hindu said in Eck’s book, “[What kind of stingy God would that be] to show himself only once, to one people, in one part of the world, and so long ago?” We would be small-minded and self-centered to not even consider the idea that this might not be the case.

Our interviewees also agree that challenging what we believe is necessary in establishing what religion we believe in. “We need to acknowledge our own responsibility for the image of God that we are content to believe in.” Eck, 48. This “image of God” that Eck is referring to is our personal religious views of how we see God. Whatever religion someone is, they see the divine in a way that is personal to them. Their personal views are shaped by their religious myths microscopically, the culture they grow up in, and (should be) the pluralistic study of other religions to broaden their telescopic view of the world, society, and other religions.

Roof vs. Reality

In chapter 6 of his book Roof goes into detail about different types of Christians. One group he looks at is the born-again Christians. When I first read this, I thought it was referring to the people who practice evangelism whole-hartedly, which we touched on earlier. Many Christians do consider evangelism a strong part of their faith, but this is not the only aspect of their faith. This post will be looking at the make-up and values of the group. Here are a few quick facts Roof gives on the born-again Christians.

They make up nearly a third of the Baby Boomer generation. Many have had a memorable moment when they feel like they've "really become a Christian". The members of the group come from all different denominations and religious backgrounds and are bound together by a "spirituality combining the experience of a 'personal God' or a 'personal relationship' with Jesus Christ and Boomer culture and sensibilities". The transformation and spirituality is also highly individualistic.

Now for two aspects of this group of Christians in general that I don't necessarily agree with. Roof states that narrowminded exclusiveism and rigid moral laws that are usually associated with this group are disappearing with the Boomers. He later goes on to say that " half of all Boomer Evangelicals agree that the religions of the world are all 'equally true and good'". From what talking to the people I know that would fit under this category, they are fairly closeminded and believe that their religious views are the only right way. One male student I recently interviewed said that he believed only Christians who believed in Jesus and did not do evil could go to heaven. Everyone else was to go to hell. He didn't say it in quite those terms, but that is the gist of it. What happened to the loving God who sent his son to save all of mankind? I don't believe that God could comdemn anyone to an eternity of hell, but that's getting way too into my own opinion, so I'm stopping now.

As for the end of exclusiveism, I could believe that it has stopped in the sense of the church welcoming everyone into it and not turning anyone away, but if you (in the end) don't believe what they believe, you cannot be correct.

By no means I am saying that members of this group are bad people, their hearts are in the right place and they do many good things, but I think they could be more sensitive to other Christians- and non Christians- whose beliefs differ slightly from their own.

This post was a little harsher than I meant it to be. At the end of the day we must remember who Christians really are and remove any steriotypes that are associated- they are simply people who stand firm in their faith and believe that it is right for them to spread it to others.

A Closer Look at Judaism

This week I had the opportunity to attend a reform Jewish Friday service with Kelsey, one of the students that I interviewed earlier this semester. The experience was not what I was expecting...

The temple was small, but enough people came so there could be a minyan (ten Jewish men), so all the prayers could be recited. The Rabbi had an acoustic guitar that he played while the prayers were being chanted, all in Hebrew, and one of the young boys in the congregation who was practicing for his Bar Mitzvah led us through the prayers. The Arc was opened, but the Torah was just prayed and bowed to, not taken out and read. We recited prayers (that were available in the prayer book for those in the congregation that needed them... aka me... but it was hard to follow because it was all backwards) then the Rabbi spoke for about ten minutes. He was really excited about the new prayer books, so actually spoke on the development of the prayer books, how they were first oral traditions, then written down, then condensed, then rewritten again, then modernized, and finally re-traditionalized to what they now have today. He compared this to baseball.

The entire service lasted about 45 min.

Afterwords, everyone gathered together in another room and ate a ton of food (after it was prayed over, or course!) I had the opportunity to talk to the Rabbi for a minute about the project. He said something to me that I was shocked to hear come from a Rabbi's mouth.

"I don't care what religion you believe in as long as you hate it. Every religion has bad things about it, but they all have good things about them too." Um, that seems a little confusing. Why should you have to hate your religion?

Wow. This was someone who has dedicated their life to this one religion, memorized a BUNCH of prayers in another language, practiced traditions, lived in guidelines, and says that he hates his religion. Why practice it then? Why devote your life to something you hate? This is very backwards from all the people who have told us that they find their religion a place of comfort and calm. How could you have find comfort in something that you hate and why you continue doing it?

I think that we need to take a look back at one of the differences we have encountered in Judaism. A person can be Jewish by religion and by heritage, so being Jewish does not necessarily mean that you practice it, or even believe in it. I would expect someone who is a Rabbi to be more than just a cultural Jew, but because this was a reform temple I guess even the Rabbi doesn't have that strong of a religious affiliation. I wish I had thought to ask him why he was a Rabbi, but I was so taken aback by what he said that I didn't think to ask anything else. I think that he is a Rabbi because he gets something out of practicing the prayers. Maybe he likes being a "teacher" (because that is what the word "Rabbi" means), and he just wants to convey the important moral aspects of that religion, and not so much the religion itself; what he would call the "good things" about the religion. These are only speculations.

I can also interpret this as one of the many signs of religion shifting from a restricted and organized group practice to a more personal spiritual experience. He chooses to be a Rabbi and teach, while hating the idea of his religion.

On the other hand, this can also be interpreted another way (as pointed out to me by Jonathan...) Hating your religion mean that you have thought about it and you have seen that the religion itself has to be more than just what you are raised with, more than what you have been taught and say. It has to be what you believe and what fits your worldview. I don't think that if you actually think about any religion there isn't some aspect that you don't understand, something you can't think about, and something you can't disagree with. It just matters that it's you thinking about it. Because what is the point of just doing religion if it is lip service? People that just do that are doing nothing. If it is suppose to mean something then you should think about what you don't agree with and come to terms with that. Think about why it is said and why you disagree. Religion is not all bad and you should not look at them to see only what you don't like (because religion offers more than just debate topics), but they are set up to be a framework of guidelines and not concrete rules. I wish more people saw them as such.

Questioning Your Faith

"[do] doubts relate mainly to God or society: Is it religion that is really in question, or is it the secular loss of faith?... A hunger for certainty leads some people to embrace neotraditional formulations of faith and truth, but greater numbers, it seems, simply acknowledge the possibility of beliefs but do not necessarily affirm belief... many people are not convinced by older beliefs and notions about religion that were once more widely accepted; they combine skepticism with varying degrees of faith, or openness to faith" (Roof, 47-48).


Questioning and doubting religion has increased throughout history. As one interviewee, Becky, pointed out: "Faith has changed. Institutions are now questioned and faith is becoming a personal level of action behind closed doors. I think it is a good change." There is a trend that is seen throughout history of changing religious landscape much like what Becky is describing.


From Catholicism to the protestant reformation and Martin Luther, to, in the 1950s, "the decline of the Protestant establishment, post-Vatican Council II Catholicism, the Evangelical and Fundamentalist resurgence, the rise of new religious movements and increased diversity, the rise of televangelism, the growth of special-purpose groups, and the polarization of religious liberals and religious conservatives" (Roof, 48). To now the trend being more introspection and self realization. This shift is described by Roof as, "a shift from a world in which beliefs help believers to one in which believers hold beliefs" (Roof, 42). This shift in religious traditions is seen to evolve with different encounters between groups of people, for example, whites and blacks, southerners and northerners, east and west coast, social and Evangelical theologies, men and women, and gays and straights (Roof, 44).


Roof predicts that the next generation (the one that we are investigating) are "...less likely to value faith in God or to say they feel close to God that did older generations... and are more open about their doubts and uncertainties" (Roof, 52, 54). But are these doubts and uncertainties always bad? doubting causes a person to question their religions, which has the potential to make their religious views come back stronger than ever when the come to their own conclusions on why they believe what they believe.


We asked the last few people we've interviewed whether or not they had ever personally questioned or doubted their religion, and whether or not they thought this doubt had positive or negative retributions. All but one person agreed that intelligently questioning religion was a good, and even necessary, thing. The one who had hesitations started by saying she was naturally a skeptic, but that it is not good to doubt religion. Then she got quiet for a minute, thinking, and rephrased "Searching for answers could make your faith stronger when you find them". This very thought has been the general consensus thus far.


Jonathan, Christian
Had a hard time with religion for a while- questioned it. I believe that questioning your religion is necessary- if you don't question it you don't know what you really believe. So many people today just believe things because of the home they grew up in. This is a huge factor but it's not the only one. Religion is a personal thing and everyone has to find it differently and has a different view of things and meaning of what religion is.


Anjum, Muslim
Growing up your parents tell you your religion and you don't know why, but I have gotten closer myself not because of my parents enforcing it. It is an independent thing, I have researched things too. The experience has been positive.


Zack, None
It is best if you can doubt your religion. It is awesome. Doubt could still be considered worshiping the higher power as you are still considering the higher power.


Hilna, Hindu
I agree with Anjum [about the researching], I go to the temple by choice.


Theresa, Undecided
Yes. I think it's a must. I don't think you are your religion fully unless it is questioned. I am currently questioning my religion.



From listening and talking with these people, we are beginning so come to the conclusion that only through questioning can you truly know why you believe what you believe. Roof speaks about this a little in his book and one of his categories of religious people involved someone who has previously doubted their religion. Apparently this is common in the people that we are encountering in our study as well.