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. :)