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.

Different Views of Being "Religious"

In Wade Clark Roof's book, Spiritual Marketplace, he divides people into five catagories of religion:
Dogmatists
Mainstream believers
Born again Christians
Metaphysical believers and seekers
Secularists
He came up with these catagories during a study that he conducted that is very similar to ours. However, he focused on the "baby boomer" generation, while we are focusing on the generation after them (i.e. the kids of the baby boomers). Even though these divisions are in an older generation, it is possible that many of them can still apply to the age group we are studying. Before going into more detail with the groups themselves, we will take a brief look at a few of Roof's ideas of varying religion.

He starts out by giving two sets of statistics that surprised me when I read them. The first says that "Polls indicate that 94% of Americans believe in God and 90% report praying to God on a fairly regular basis" (Roof, 3). This contradicts the apparent decrease in religious people in America. Religion is being taken out of schools and is constantly railed on by the government. So why is it this happening when 94% of Americans report a belief in God?
Roof quickly answers this by providing a statistic showing that, while religion is decresing in public, it is still thriving and even increasing in people's private lives. "...65% of Americans believe that religon is losing its influence in public life... yet 62% claim that the influence of religion was increasing in their personal lives" (Roof, 7). Outwardly religion apears to be declining, but nearly the same percent feel that religion is growing inwardly. Now that we see that personal religion is actually growing, we must examine what that personal religion is.

Here are a few quotes from Roof that we thought well explained the growth and change of religion during the Baby Boomer generation:

"Spirituality is a very difficult word to define. An adequate definition would include reference to a relationship with something beyond myself... that is intangible but also real. It would recognize that spirituality is the source of one's values and meaning, a way of understanding the world, an awareness of my "inner self," and a means of integrating the various aspects of myself into a whole" (35).

"[The United States] is religiously pluralistic and lacks an established church... Organized religion can be experienced as distant and out-of-date; spiritually it can be dry" (36-37).

There is now a greater emphysis on self understanding and self reflexivity, which is a shift from the previous culture (Roof, 9).

"House churches, Catholic Eucharistic groups, Jewish havurot, Bible study, prayer groups, and other such groups are often invisable yet by all accounts are flourishing today" (Roof, 20). He later points out that, "One out of every four Americans are involved in small groups of one sort or another..." (Roof,39).


After seeing these small ways in which religion has changed, Roof showed interviews from a few people who fit into the different categories.


Sara Caughman: born again Christian, or a rediscovery of tradition


I think that Sara's story is similar to that of many people of her generation. She was raised in the church but dropped out when she reached her twenties. Years later (when she was in her 40's) something happened in her life to cause her to rediscover the religion she had once been a part of. Not only did Sara return to church, she became an active member and helped establish many groups in her church to further the knowledge and understanding of Christian values and teachings.


Not everyone who returns to their faith necessarily becomes super involved, but it can be commonly seen that people who have been away from the church tend to return when they have children of their own and want them to be raised in the church, or when some other big and life-changing thing happens to make them reflect back on their life and think about the future.


Vicki Feinstein: Eclectic Seeker


Vicki claimed to be not religious for most of her life, but said that she and some friends started to get involved with the religious movement occuring around her. She says she "cannot imagine herself belonging to any religious organization", so she struck out on her own. She looked into scientology and liked what she saw there about how the mind is shaped and the ways it helped her to know herself better, but wasn't satisfied and kept looking. She read everything she could about Buddhism and followed the religion's advise on self reflection and meditation. In addition to these, she mentioned liking Star Trek and asked if it could be considered a religion as well.


In this day people consider all sorts of things to be religions that never would have been given a second thought a hundred years ago. "New Age" teachings that combine religious ideas with things like yoga and other techniques to connect you to your body are becoming commonplace and Vicki is not alone in her blending of religions and other ideas to form her own "religious values".


Some people just don't want to be told what to do and what to believe, and would rather take the time to discover that themselves. This is echoed in several comments from our interviewees making statements like find quotes "should be your choice, your own personal beliefs, no one should make you believe anything, etc." That is why you find people, like Vicki, who can believe in Star Trek as a religion. That is how they experience spirituality on a personal level.

John McRae: Reawakenings (secular alternative to traditional faith)

John was born into a Presbyterian church but did not know if he was religious or not. He would refer to himself as a Presbyterian, but he had not been to church in about twenty years, claiming that he “got out of the habit of going and never went back”, and could not say that he even knew what Presbyterians believed.

His fiancé, who is Catholic and participates in small group study because they are not comfortable in church, influenced him and he started going to the small group as well. He said that he liked the group because even though they are Catholic, that does not matter, instead it is very open and they talk about their own lives and their own experiences. Through this group, John experienced the ability to address his feelings of doubt and uncertainty and think about his priorities.

Karen Potter: Feminist Journey


Karen was raised Southern Baptist and was very active until she began to desire to feel a spiritual movement through her own experiences, and through the feminist movement. She says, "I have come to find out that [the church] doesn't corner the market on spirituality. Still it's a tool for those that it works for. This church has helped me, but right now it doesn't have much to offer me" (Roof, 21). She became an active member of a women's group that helped her explore her own needs and empower her to reach deeper levels of feeling through activities like meditation. She claimed that she, "found God inside myself" through self help books.



According to Roof, this feminist movement is not uncommon in a society that has been male dominated in the past. Throughout history, women have separated into small groups to "bond" with other women and deepen the feminist unity in "gender-based alienation". In Karen's case, she did this through studying eastern religions, ancient goddesses, meditation, and spa treatments, to name a few.



This ties in with the common theme that Roof keeps reiterating of a gradual feeling of ambivolence toward the traditional faith in which they were raised and a growing spiritual hunger for self discovery.



Sam Wong: Evangelical Seeker



Sam was not raised in a religious household. When he was in college, he was exposed to Christianity and him and his wife became members of an evangelical christian organization. He was not an active member of one church until six years ago. Since then, the change was even aparent on his coffee mugs (Jesus is the reason for the season) and his WWJD bracelets. He described his church as a "seeker church" meaning they attract middle aged people who are "seeking" answers, and who often know very little about Christianity and enjoy a much more contemporary setting. This included being tied into a "Christian network" on the internet so he could talk in chat rooms to other Christians. Through this, his goal is to "win people over to Jesus" and "organize a worldwide evangelical campaign".

Religion: A Cultural Influence

In today's world it is easy to go with the flow, to believe things because that's what society tells you to believe. In the United States, especially in the Bible Belt of the South, Christianity is the most common religion. But that's not the only one out there even though many people aren't aware of what's in their own backyard. Here, if a person grows up a Christian, they remain a Christian their whole life; maybe they will become a solid Christian who goes to church every week and prays often, or maybe they will be more of a nominal Christian who does not really participate in church, yet still considers themselves a part of the religion. It is a rarity to find an individual who seriously questions their faith and why they believe what they believe. One reason for the lack of questioning could be the general social acceptance of the faith. If someone walks into church and says they are questioning the teachings of the church and need to work out for themselves why they are a Christian (this is applicable for all religions, not just Christianity), their fellow laymen and the ministers will probably not jump for joy. You just don't do that.

However, I personally believe that a questioning and reasoning out of why you believe what you believe is necessary in order to be fully in your faith. Know why you believe will make you a stronger follower and enhance the religious experience.

Think about it from this point of view. If you are born in a country where the primary religion is Hindu, but your family is Christian, it would be much harder to keep the will to remain a Christian. It would be the easiest thing in the world to convert to Hinduism and do what the majority of the population is doing. In this situation it is necessary to make sure you really know why you believe what you do, because if you don't there's not much reason to believe it. You are not doing the easy thing, but the hard thing: not letting your surrounding culture affect what you believe to be right.

Every person we have interviewed thus far have said that they believe the culture and the environment that a person grew up in is one of the, if not the deciding factor for a person's religious beliefs. In the opinion of the interviewees, if someone is born here in the southern "Bible belt", and their parents are typical Christians, then they will be Christian regardless of any other factor. They will be born into a Christian home, environment, and culture, and they have basically no other choice but to be Christian. I have probed this farther with several people and asked whether they believed that just applied to the United States, or whether that was world-wide. The general consensus has been that it is world wide.

So, for example, if someone is born in India, then they will most likely be Hindu. If someone is born in the middle east, they will most likely be Muslim. But what happens if someone is born where there is no outside religious influence? The two common answers have been, "I don't know" and "then is depends on what the family of that person believes". Does that mean that religion is not a personal decision? If that is the case, then the entire last post is null because it wouldn't matter if someone shared their religion with others because that is not the influencing factor. On the other hand, every person we have interviewed has expressed the need for religion to be a personal decision, not influenced by any other factors than individual choice.

It seems to me that this catches us in a type of double bind, where on one side we hear that religion is influenced by outside factors, and on the other side we hear that it needs to be influenced by personal discovery. The interviewees so far have also admitted little knowledge of the other religions besides the basics, so how do they know that they have chosen the right path for them? Even if they did all the research they could, a person can't help but compare their findings to what they already know and to their own religious beliefs, so the learning will be biased.


How do we get past this paradox?

Let's think for just a minute about the major religions of the world. Besides the ones most people have heard of (Buddhism, Hinduism, Christianity, Judaism, and Islam), there are innumerable other religions. The East Asian Religions like Confucianism is just one example. Even within a religion there are divisions and sects. These religions are present everywhere, not just the country of origin. For example, in Spartanburg alone there are Christian churches of at least 5 denominations that I can name off the top of my head, a Hindu temple, synagogues, a mosque, and a Buddhist population.

In her book A New Religious America, Diana Eck describes the new religious setting of America, one in which religions that have never had much contact are now interacting on a daily basis. In this new religious era, many people are unaware of the beliefs of Sikhs or Muslims and many have never visited a mosque or Hindu or Buddhist temple. Yet despite are extreme lack of knowledge, we are willing to say that "Muslims" (as a collective term) are extremists who will resort to anything have their message heard, when in actuality that couldn't be farther from the truth. Our society has developed a set of stereotypes that have spread from the secular world into the religious world- it is these stereotypes that we intend to identify and set straight.

Eck goes on to point out that the diversity in America gives us the opportunity to study the dynamics of various faiths. Whereas in years past study of Buddhism would have only been possible through books and firsthand knowledge through traveling to the areas of the world where it originated, the playing field is in our backyard. It is easier now than ever before to walk down the street and experience something completely different than anything we are used to. This is an opportunity that people should take advantage of.

Religion (no matter how hard the government may try to fight it) is a big part of our culture and helps shapes us and the world around us whether we're aware of it or not. The study of world religions allows us to understand what's going on around us- the situation with the Dalai Lama in Tibet, wars between Pakistan and Israel, and wars between the Shia and Sunni Muslims, and countless other disputes. I think it's as necessary a topic as science or math- it's just a matter of time before people realize that.

Proselytization

First of all, most of ya'll are probably thinking 'what the heck does that mean?', because we sure did. (Not comparing your intelligence to ours, but we are pretty smart, Wofford education and all, but we knew where to look to find the answer to our wonderings). Straight from dictionary.com, proselytization means:

to convert or attempt to convert as a proselyte (Don't you just LOVE when dictionaries use the word IN the definition); recruit.
v. intr.
To induce someone to convert to one's own religious faith.
v. tr.
To convert (a person) from one belief, doctrine, cause, or faith to another.

(In other words, EVANGELISM!!) But we didn't want to use that terminology because it does have a Christian connotation, and we are not just talking about Christians. We are talking about faith and religion in general and of all types and beliefs.

In totality (thus far, granted it has not been very long since we started this project), we have interview seven people of all different religious backgrounds and beliefs consisting of three Christians, two Jewish students, one Hindu student, and one Muslim student. In looking back on these interviews, we began to see some common threads (among many differences) between what everyone said regarding this idea of proselytization. Here are the responses for you to check out before we get into more detail:

Rachel, Christian
I think you should demonstrate your beliefs through your actions because in some cases, yes, if they have never heard of Jesus then it is okay to explain it to them, but in other cases people have been exposed to it all their life so they are hardened against it. So a better approach to those people is to give them an example from your own life. I don’t believe in running up to someone and saying “you’re going to hell, believe what I believe now.” (If someone did that to me) I would feel bad for them because I would feel they were missing the whole idea of Christianity. They are going to someone and telling them what they should and shouldn't do instead of showing love and caring for them and actually wanting the best for them. Because the whole idea of Christianity is love. I have a problem with judgmental Christians because it is opposite of what Jesus taught. (This takes away from Christianity and) It misrepresents Christians. It just ties stereotypes to Christianity, like Baptist hell-raising, if you don’t do this you are going to hell. It is more like a liberal Christian non-denominational view. I don’t believe any people should be excluded. Everyone’s path to Jesus is different. it is not your right to tell them they should or shouldn’t do, you just guide them.

Anjum, Muslim
I think it should be a natural thing, I should not have to go to someone and talk to them about religion, I want them to come to me and ask me questions that they have. Religion is very important in my life and I want to share that with people. I am all for it. The Koran says that (what the prophets say) a person that sits in a room and worships alone all day and night and a person who goes out and shares their knowledge will be judged differently on the day of judgement because you are supposed to spread your knowledge. Spreading religion is something that I want to do... Religion is a beautiful feeling and you should be able to feel that on your own and realize that on your own and if you are not ready or don't believe in it than that is your own thing. I respect everyone's religion and I expect them to respect mine. I try to impact as many people as I can through my religion, it is not hounding them with the Koran or preaching them but it is through my actions that I am doing this. My best friend knows that I am not going to sit around and tell people that I am Muslim, you figure that out after you get to know me because of the way I act.

Dwayne, Christian
All Christians are suppose to be evangelists but some are better at it than others. Everyone is (an evangelist) in their own way, through songs, preaching on the corner, but the point is that people have to see Jesus in me because you might be the only Bible they ever see. You should be able to see a Christian and know they are one without even talking to them. A kind word or a kind gesture. Would you rather live your life believing there was a God and find out there wasn’t one, or live your life believing there was no God and find out there was?

Kelsey, Jew
A long time ago our Christian neighbor said that she knew we were going to Hell in her heart because we didn't believe in Jesus, but that she still wanted to be our friend. I get aggravated a lot of times by Christians, especially back in Myrtle Beach, because most of the Christians I saw were the stereotypical southern Baptist, fire and brimstone and all of that. Since I have come to Wofford, I have found out that not all Christians are bad. Some are hypocritical, like they are so religious and then go out and get trashed at a party. But I know a group of Christians here that don’t do bad things and they are just really good Christians, and they don’t damn me to Hell and they don’t really try to convert me. They have tried to get me to go to FCA and tell me that Jesus wants to talk to me, but I tell them that I don’t want to. It bothers me (when someone tries to change my beliefs), especially when the same person keeps doing it. It is kind of annoying. Christianity is everywhere, like we would have small meals and the prayer would be in Jesus’ name and I would get offended and tell them that I don’t accept that. They can pray silently and do whatever they want, but if you are going to say it out loud, don’t say it is Jesus’ name because I am not comfortable with that. Things are changing here though. Like, last year the honor code signing was right after the morning service so we had to go, and they had a nondenominational Christian service and I felt very uncomfortable, so I talked to Ron Robinson and told them, so this year the signing was later that night and we didn’t have to go to the service. No one should be pressured into anything they don’t feel comfortable doing. I hate to say it, but I think that (Christians) are mostly hypocritical. There is the small minority that are very real and honest with themselves and they that they are a good person that does not do bad things and they care about their religion, but the majority I see say they are Christians and they are good people, but they are not. But if someone was trying to force their beliefs on someone else I am not ok with it. Mission trips are great in that they get people to see the world, but I don’t agree with their purpose. I don’t think it is good to go out and convert people. They will go and bring people food and shelter, but I don’t know about the aspect of “be Christian”. When people are giving you so much, you are going to listen to them even if you do or don’t want to believe it, so I don’t like that idea. We don’t proselytize in the Jewish religion. We accept people if they want to convert, but we don’t go out to do that even though we are a dying religion, like 0.2% of the population of the world, which is kind of depressing that we have been slowly exterminated over our entire history. Pretty much every version of a Jewish holiday is, “they tried to kill us, we won, let’s eat”.

Yakov, Jew
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. And it is fine that you think you are saving someone but they obviously don't think that, so you should leave them alone about it.

Emily, Christian
(Evangelism is) Frightening but necessary. 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.

Hilna, Hindu
I think someone should want to know about Hinduism and want to experience it. It should not be forced they should want to. I have had an experience where someone came and gave me a bible, but I didn’t take offense to it, it is someones holy book so I kept it, you should appreciate and learn about every religion but they should not have forced it on anyone. There are people out there that tell you that you are going to go to hell because you don’t believe in Christianity, but what are you going to do?

Each of the Christians interviewed expressed a need for proselytization, but to different degrees. Emily seems to be an advocate for approaching people and showing them God whether through words or actions no matter how scary it is. Dwayne also thought it was necessary to evangelize, but that the method was different for each person. He says that "you should be able to see a Christian and know they are one without even talking to them". (I have a feeling this may be a common view among Christians.) This does not mean that talking is not necessary at some point as he goes on to say that a Christian may be the only Bible or Jesus that other people ever see. Rachel was the most liberal view in saying that if someone approached her, she would talk to them, but that she was not going to go out and evangelize. Everyone agreed that it was not right to force your religious views on another person, ultimately agreeing that it was their choice what religion they believed.

Along those same lines, Emily and Rachel made a point to say that it was wrong to force Christianity, but in contrast, the students of religions other than Christianity felt that Christianity had been forced on them at one point, and they had been told they were "going to Hell". This is an interesting paradox. The Christians we talked to acknowledged that there are Christians who stand on street corners and yell to everyone who passes.

(Actually, even other Christians are not immune to the "you're going to hell" speeches. Just a few days ago I was walking down the street when several people began to follow me, pressing pamphlets into my hands and telling me I needed to know Jesus. Even being a Christian I felt very uncomfortable with this, followed by feeling of guilt about knowing what people of other religions would feel if they had this encounter. Or even what I would feel if someone from another religion tried to convert me to theirs. I would feel offended!! How could they think that their religion was superior to mine? I believe mine for a reason and they are condemning me without knowing what I believe at all. There's a difference between willingly learning other faiths and having it forced upon you. Who in their right mind would ever feel lead to believe a religion where the followers judge you at all and that tell you that you are condemned to an eternity of pain and punishment? And when you get right down to it, many of these Christians (I'm NOT saying all) can be hypocritical and will go out and do the very things they preach against.)

So what is the truth? Do the majority of Christians force their beliefs on others, and we were just lucky to interview a few from the minority? Or is it that the forceful ones are just the louder ones, so they are what everyone thinks of when they hear "Christian"? Personally, we think they are just loud. But what type of image are they creating for the entire religion of Christianity if every other religion only sees that side? We'll have to wait and see what the rest of our interviewees say.

However, the reactions of students differed. One said she was greatly offended by what had happened while the other was not offended and even kept the Bible that was given to her because she could not through away a Holy book, even one of another religion. By comparison, Judaism does not believe in spreading the faith at all, even though numbers are dropping. They are willing to take anyone who wants to convert, but don't go looking for converts.

We are going to wait until we have more views of Islam and Hinduism before we make any -clusive (in- or con-) statements. Stay tuned.

Ode to the Religion Department

We love thee, O department of religion,
With your many diverse course offerings.
It started with Byron's New Testament,
the beginnings of a long lasting relationship.
We sat across the room and
learned about Duke Divinity School,
studied in British accents around pools of lava,
discussing apocalyptic eschatology
(but we still can't spell it)
This first class together was the start of an era,
and next to come was Religions of the World.
That one was OK.
Buddhism, Hinduism, Islam, Christianity, Judaism,
and assorted East Asian Religions,
we discussed them all.
The Problem of Evil was never solved,
but we learned about the pits of Dante's hell
through the Christian Faith.
Dr. Anderson guided us every day...
for an entire semester.
Nietzsche(after 5 min of searching old papers to figure out how to spell this, I finally tell Weath to look on the internet, and she adamantly tells me she is not on the internet, while typing this online blog...), Dostoyevsky, John Hick, and PJP II,
all names we came to know and love.
Many papers later we found ourselves on Lindsey's futon,
typing our final paper with our reading sprawled around us

(please see profile picture).
The trend continued with Buddhism and Dr. Jones,
she put our thinking caps on us
and questioned the very reality of our existence.
(I still don't think I'm here).
This semester was the first time
we didn't have a class together.
Lindsey was in two classes,
Weatherly was in none.
Depression quickly ensued,
so we compromised and created another one.
We still love our faculty,
and all the professors we've had.
(which is, in fact, all of them!)
So thanks for being awesome
but next time don't make the schedule so bad.

Let the Interviews begin!

So the interviews have started... WOOT!!

The first victim (I mean, interviewee? Is that a word?) was my roommate, Rachel. I figured, hey, why not? I have to interview a lot of different people and I want to practice interviewing before I go and make a total fool of myself in front of a complete stranger. Naturally. So I got out my trusty microcassette tape recorder (the one for my ipod has not come in the mail yet... DON'T get me started...) and we headed to the Campus Life building for lunch. As I said in the last post, the questions are more like guidelines than actually rules to follow, so I tended to stray with her a bit and get more in-depth depending on what her answers were. The interview lasted for about 2 hours, and was full of really interesting stuff. A little background first...

She is a senior psychology major from South Carolina, and a Christian.

Ok, happy Weath? I said a little and there you go. Yes, thank you. fast learner! If I posted the whole interview, it would be massive and I don't think anyone would actually read it... SO I am going to post sections of the interview that I feel are really interesting and comment on them. (In green, of course.)

Me: Do you think you know a lot about other religions?

Rachel: No! That's why I am taking religions of the world! I realized I know nothing.

This is just a hunch, but I feel like this will be a common answer, especially for Christians that we interview. I hypothesize that other religions will know more. There is something about Christianity that tends to deter the learning of other religions, especially in the south, saying that they are wrong or bad. So even if you know the basics, you have a distorted view of what other religions believe, not knowing that your neighbor might follow that religion. You could just ask them about it next time you are going over to borrow an egg, if that's what you need for a good chocolate cake. Something to think about...

Me: What’s your understanding about the divine?

Rachel: The divine is a higher being that we cannot fully comprehend that has all power and is kind of like magical.

Me: Can you have a relationship with this divine power?

Rachel: Normally when there is an overarching divine power, he is represented in a man, such as Jesus in Christianity. In Hinduism I started learning about how that divine power is represented in each of their gods even though they have like 330 thousand or something. Or it becomes a relationship with Jesus so you can talk to Him and comprehend it and not be intimidated.

Me: So a relationship not directly with “god” creator, divine, supernatural being, but more his embodiment?

Rachel: Kind of. It also depends on what you are more comfortable with. Because they are kind of the same person it just depends on your preference, if you would rather pray and commune with the higher being or Jesus. I guess it depends on your past. Like, if you had trouble with a father figure and so you would not be comfortable with god the father, so you feel more comfortable with Jesus or maybe the other way around.

This was an interesting answer to me in that it presents the opportunity to believe in whatever embodiment you want, because they are the same. This might be an idea that people struggle with, because of the whole monotheism vs. polytheism vs. trinity thing. Do you consider Hindus to be monotheists if they believe in one god? But what about all the deities? What about Christianity? The trinity is definitely three parts, but one God, so is that poly or mono? Tricky theological questions lead to differing answers among the same religion... hmmm... I am excited to ask more people this question. I can't wait to ask this question or maybe clarify with someone of this Hindu faith. A few years ago I asked a Hindu man how the gods of their faith are interconnected. The explanation he gave was very similar to how Christians explain God in three persons: a man has a different relationship with different people, for example he is a father, brother, son, uncle, and friend. I don't want to get into this too much right now, but we will come back to it later.

That was not the only that part of Rachel's response here that was interesting, but also how she tied psychology into her religion. I wonder if people do choose to pray to one aspect of their god based on something like that, I have never really thought of it. Maybe that's why Catholics like Mary so much.

Me: What do you think is the purpose of life?

Rachel: Well, what I want out of life is to serve God by serving others. I would like a family and be a great wife and a great mother, and teach my children right and wrong, and about God, so they can help the world and make a difference. I just don’t want to be a little speck.

Each person's idea of the purpose of their life is going to be interesting to compare. I am anxious to see that.

Me: What about an afterlife? Do you believe in that?

Rachel: Yep. I believe if you pray to Jesus and ask Him to forgive your sins and you give your life to him and you actually believe that… I have issues with the whole right before you die all the sudden you pray to Jesus. I know it works and everything but I think you really do have to feel it and really do believe it; it can’t just be something you say right before you die because you hear your whole life you should repent and if you repent you go to heaven. I don’t believe in hell, per say, I believe everyone has their own personal hell that they go to. Not a huge big flaming fiery pit that everyone goes to together.

I feel that this answer is going to be different than the majority of Christians. Fundamental Christian belief is that the second you say the words and ask Jesus for forgiveness, everything is okay, even if it is right before you die. She is more oriented in the relationship and no as much in faith; that even if you say you believe but you don't have a relationship with God that is not enough. I wonder if the idea of hell that she is referring to stems off of Dante's inferno.

Me: What about good and evil?

Rachel: I don’t believe a person is fully good, maybe they can be mostly evil, but no one can be completely good, except Jesus of course, because everyone has selfish thoughts. As a little kid you can see it. They are so like, “me, me, me, me, me!!” and then you grow up and develop and start to understand that you help people. It seems like some people are more good than others, but it could all be a front, you never really know.

Again, psychology oriented. This idea is also common among Christians, the idea that people are mostly bad and that God makes everything better. Slightly pessimistic view of humanity though.

Me: What are your beliefs on your creation of the world?

Rachel: It could not have happened by chance so there had to have been some divine hand in it, because so many things could have gone wrong, and it couldn’t have worked. We are so complicated and nature is so complicated. So I don’t believe God’s concept of time is the same as ours so when the Bible says that earth was created in 7 days, that is a lot longer, it is billions of years. I know that there is common decent because there is undeniable evidence in DNA. I think God orchestrated that too.

Me: So how do you explain in Genesis the whole each day creating something different and on the last day creating man; how do you process and explain what you read in the Bible vs. what you know to be scientifically proven? How do you make comparisons between the two and make that okay in your religious beliefs?

Rachel: So you have the earth and one celled microorganism that evolves into all the animals. Then cavemen and our type won out and that was how God meant it to be when he means “creating man”. So basically, it was God who made evolution, and each step in the story is the next evolutionary line. I don’t believe Adam and Eve have to be taken literally, but are more symbolic.

This might be considered intelligent design with a twist? A good combination of science and religion, and probably much different than the typical Christian idea. MAYBE we should introduce this idea into the schools...
I LOVE this last question. It is one of those topics that you can debate on for hours, but never really come to a conclusion. I believe that the theory that Rachel describes is called theistic evolution, but I will check on that.

Me: What is your version of the Gospel story? (This is my favorite question because I really wonder what differences we are going to get as far as the focus in the story)

Rachel: Once there was Mary and fiancé who did not get her pregnant. An angel came and said that God was going to impregnate you and you are going to have a baby. Everyone will think that you are sketchy but you are really not. Then the little baby Jesus came and was born in hay, which made him common and more like man. Then Jesus grew up and was smart and never did anything wrong. Then Jesus started teaching on his own and got disciples and started establishing Christian beliefs and healing people. Depending on which story you read either tells or does not tell that he was the son of God, but from the very beginning, from his very first teaching, he says exactly what he is going to do and he carried it all through and he did it. He was stoned, whipped, crucified, hung up there and came back from the dead and went up to Heaven with God. That’s my children’s story version.

I feel like Rachel might have gotten this story out of The Message Bible, or something (haha, joking!) but if you take this apart, you see that her primary focus is on the birth and not so much the death and resurrection of Jesus (and actually a lot about Mary). This could be correlated with society's cultural influence with Christmas being a much bigger holiday than Easter. Just a thought. I also want to point out how she added in her own theology interpretation into the story when she mentions why Jesus was born in the hay. Interesting reading though.

Me: What are your views on evangelism?

Rachel: I think you should demonstrate your beliefs through your actions because in some cases, yes, if they have never heard of Jesus then it is okay to explain it to them, but in other cases people have been exposed to it all their life so they are hardened against it. So a better approach to those people is to give them an example from your own life. I don’t believe in running up to someone and saying “you’re going to hell, believe what I believe now.” Intense!

Me: How would you feel if someone did that to you?

Rachel: I would feel bad for them because I would feel they were missing the whole idea of Christianity. They are going to someone and telling them what they should and shouldn’t do instead of showing love and caring for them and actually wanting the best for them. Because the whole idea of Christianity is love. I have a problem with judgmental Christians because it is opposite of what Jesus taught.

Me: Do you think that is a big problem in society now?

Rachel: It just ties stereotypes to Christianity, like Baptist hell-raising, if you don’t do this you are going to hell. It should be more like a liberal Christian non-denominational view. I don’t believe any people should be excluded. Everyone’s path to Jesus is different. It is not your right to tell them they should or shouldn’t do, you just guide them.

I hope that I interview someone who is a Southern Baptist and see what they have to say about this. :)