Technology And The Saint Impressarios, Or Will Internet Make Or Break Religion

[Hamba Tuhan]

We just had the full time missionaries over for dinner this last week. They both said that they are frustrated with their prospects looking up info on the internet. I do believe it has changed the missionary experience.

Who is going to join a church that is such a complete lifestyle change (for many) without at least doing a google search?

Maybe I served in an unusual area (though I don't think so), but this doesn't sound any different to me in any fundamental way. The people I worked with as a missionary had no trouble 'looking up info' at the local library, talking to friends, etc.

I hope they are preparing the missionaries to counteract the sensational anti stuff that is readily available when doing this search. Of course an investigator is going to be curious enough to read what's on the internet.

But it's the exact same material that has been readily available in books/magazines/newspapers/sermons since, oh, the nineteenth century. I've never read a single criticism on the internet that wasn't already brought up by an investigator I worked with.

[volgadon]

GREAT discussion yous guys!

Pitch in. I'm all for differing viewpoints.

[3DOP]

Pitch in. I'm all for differing viewpoints.

I don't have a differing viewpoint. The Nehor made an excellent observation. The internet doesn't even make quick elimination of outright quackery! How is the Internet going to eliminate well-developed theological systems that are cogent and aesthetically attractive which are at most only flawed at a root level, deeper than most adherents dig? Thoughtful religionists everywhere know that their loudest detractors don't appreciate their points of view. We can see that they don't when we sense that they think we are stupid. I could never believe that my faith is only for the unintelligent. It seems like a big mistake to imagine that popular religion is endangered by proliferation of information.

Popular false religion, like true religion, is never ever stupid. A religion that survives for a couple of hundred years and grows will inevitably be able to satisfy the intellects of those who have learned to love it. An obviously absurd belief can never last for generations and have continued growth. Length of duration and continuing growth does not prove a religion true. But in my opinion, it proves that a religion offers a significant level of intellectual satisfaction if millions have believed in it and practiced it for hundreds of years.

3DOP

[Ahab]

I don't have a differing viewpoint. The Nehor made an excellent observation. The internet doesn't even make quick elimination of outright quackery! How is the Internet going to eliminate well-developed theological systems that are cogent and aesthetically attractive which are at most only flawed at a root level, deeper than most adherents dig? Thoughtful religionists everywhere know that their loudest detractors don't appreciate their points of view. We can see that they don't when we sense that they think we are stupid. I could never believe that my faith is only for the unintelligent. It seems like a big mistake to imagine that popular religion is endangered by proliferation of information.

Popular false religion, like true religion, is never ever stupid. A religion that survives for a couple of hundred years and grows will inevitably be able to satisfy the intellects of those who have learned to love it. An obviously absurd belief can never last for generations and have continued growth. Length of duration and continuing growth does not prove a religion true. But in my opinion, it proves that a religion offers a significant level of intellectual satisfaction if millions have believed in it and practiced it for hundreds of years.

3DOP

I don't know exactly why but for some reason I got some insights I don't think I would have got if not from someone in another religion, with some different beliefs than I have.

At some level I think and feel that as more people "dig" into their religion, deeper than you say most people do, the more they will come to a greater and greater knowledge of the truth. Not that they don't already have some truth in their religion, as well as some intelligence and wisdom and a heart full of love, but we can all do and be even better. And not only may some people dig into their own religion, but they can also dig into another religion, and maybe without too much extra digging hit upon a really strong point that just turns their world upside down in a very real and major way.

Anyway, my point is, with all that in mind, that the internet can help with that. Not that the many and different religions can't stand up to some serious scrutiny on at least some points on their own, because there is some truth and some other good things in all of them, but because there is no way for every conflicting perspective between every religion to be true.

Edited February 5, 2013 by Ahab

[Bob Crockett]

Generally speaking, the media is not the message. The printing press and the circulation of the Bible did not destroy the Catholic Church.

The internet is just another version of media.

[Ahab]

Generally speaking, the media is not the message. The printing press and the circulation of the Bible did not destroy the Catholic Church.

The internet is just another version of media.

Are you considering regular ordinary people like me to be the a part of the media?

We the people are the ones to tell others what the message is. The message doesn't get put out there all by itself.

The internet is just another tool for sharing a message, and a message is what we say it is. You can give any message you want, but whatever you say will be a message, regardless of what message you want to share.

And don't be surprised if some people take what you say as the gospel truth. Some people hardly do any digging at all and will just swallow up whatever you tell them, regardless of your intent and regardless of what your message is.

[cinepro]

Generally speaking, the media is not the message. The printing press and the circulation of the Bible did not destroy the Catholic Church.

The internet is just another version of media.

The internet is not the printing press.

Until the 1990s, printing and distributing material still involved cost and effort, and religious groups were generally more motivated to spend the time and money to distribute their message compared to those who would fight against them. So they still controlled their message to a great degree.

And there was usually some degree of effort involved in reading something (e.g. going to the library or bookstore, borrowing from a friend).

The internet allows anyone with an internet-connected computer to read almost anything published on the internet with little cost or effort. If the Church does not understand what this means, it could be disastrous.

[Freedom]

I think it will change religion, not end it.

I think it will save religion. The Church went into panic mode when the printing press was invented and when people started to get educated, but ultimately this new technology and all the benefits that went along with it saved religion and ushered in the Restoration The access to information today is opening the minds of the older generation church leaders and paving the way for a rejuvenation of our teaching methods and practices. Members of the church embraced literature such as Mormon Doctrine and I Have A Question because of a lack of knowledge which resulted in a degree of naivety.

The masses are getting educated concerning source material on the net, those who believe the hate messages are the ignorant. The informed see through the filth. Until now, members have made due with spiritual knowledge. God has raised the bar and now we need to dig deeper and gain an academic knowledge as well. The parable of the sower comes to mind.

[Freedom]

The internet is not the printing press.

The internet allows anyone with an internet-connected computer to read almost anything published on the internet with little cost or effort. If the Church does not understand what this means, it could be disastrous.

From my observations, the church is a past master of using the internet to their benefit and it is only getting better. As members, we are only getting stronger. We are loosing lots of members, but this was foretold so I am not surprised. Virtually the entire world has access to the church, and and researchers with an ounce of intellect can discern the garbage.

[cinepro]

Virtually the entire world has access to the church, and and researchers with an ounce of intellect can discern the garbage.

It's not the garbage that's the problem.

[mfbukowski]

<cough> Dawkins <cough>

D just plain doesn't get it- at all.

Edited February 6, 2013 by mfbukowski

[mfbukowski]

As long is the question is "what happened 6 thousand years ago" and people actually think religion is supposed to answer that, we could be in trouble.

As soon as they figure out that the REAL question is "What is my life for, and how should I live it?" all will be well.

As soon as people figure out that religion is not about facts, but giving significance and meaning to our lives, and changing our lives accordingly, THEN the internet will become a major driving factor in changing mankind for the better instead of just making porno (religious and otherwise) easier to find.

Until then, it might be a rough ride.

[mfbukowski]

Generally speaking, the media is not the message. The printing press and the circulation of the Bible did not destroy the Catholic Church.

Debatable.

Before the printing press "Christian" was a synonym for "Catholic". I think that has changed just a tad.

[Ahab]

As long is the question is "what happened 6 thousand years ago" and people actually think religion is supposed to answer that, we could be in trouble.

As soon as they figure out that the REAL question is "What is my life for, and how should I live it?" all will be well.

As soon as people figure out that religion is not about facts, but giving significance and meaning to our lives, and changing our lives accordingly, THEN the internet will become a major driving factor in changing mankind for the better instead of just making porno (religious and otherwise) easier to find.

Until then, it might be a rough ride.

Both interest me, and I see both as being related.

The big questions for me were, and still are:

Who am I?

How did I get here?

Where am I going?

What am I doing that I could do better, or what could I do instead of what I'm doing to make my life better than it is now?

Who can I turn to for help when I need it who isn't already busy trying to fix their own problems or make their life better?

Why are some people so bad that they would do some really horrible things, and why are some other people better off than I am?

Edited February 6, 2013 by Ahab

[mfbukowski]

Both interest me, and I see both as being related.

The big questions for me were, and still are:

Who am I?

How did I get here?

Where am I going?

What am I doing that I could do better, or what could I do instead of what I'm doing to make my life better than it is now?

Who can I turn to for help when I need it who isn't already busy trying to fix their own problems or make their life better?

Why are some people so bad that they would do some really horrible things, and why are some other people better off than I am?

Yep, those are the biggies all right.

But notice they really don't have anything to do with what happened 6 thousand years ago.

I didn't see that anywhere in your list. Of course you can describe things in such a way that your explanation for those important things are linked to what you think happened 6 thousand years ago, but that is another story.

[Ahab]

But notice they really don't have anything to do with what happened 6 thousand years ago.

I didn't see that anywhere in your list. Of course you can describe things in such a way that your explanation for those important things are linked to what you think happened 6 thousand years ago, but that is another story.

No, that's the story I'm interested in, and it answers some of those questions I asked, and still ask to try to find the answers.

Who am I? I'm a child of God, but I'm also a child of Adam and Eve and some of their descendents as Adam and Eve are also descendants of God.

How did I get here? You know some of that, but there's still a lot more and a lot of it is related to what happened 6000 years ago.

Where am I going? Back to the condition Adam and Eve were in before they fell, which may or may not have happened 6000 years ago. *(The fact that elements of this Earth are more than 6000 years old doesn't mean Adam and Eve didn't start things out for all of us 6000 years ago. And even if Adam and Eve were further back than that in time, what happened 6000 years ago may still have some bearing on who I am and how I got here and where I am going from here)

Anyway, as you can see, I don't dismiss what happened in the past as not being related at all to my future, or even my present situation in life, and I have found that knowing more about myself and how I got here helps me in many ways to be the best kind of me I can be.

[mfbukowski]

No, that's the story I'm interested in, and it answers some of those questions I asked, and still ask to try to find the answers.

Who am I? I'm a child of God, but I'm also a child of Adam and Eve and some of their descendents as Adam and Eve are also descendants of God.

How did I get here? You know some of that, but there's still a lot more and a lot of it is related to what happened 6000 years ago.

Where am I going? Back to the condition Adam and Eve were in before they fell, which may or may not have happened 6000 years ago. *(The fact that elements of this Earth are more than 6000 years old doesn't mean Adam and Eve didn't start things out for all of us 6000 years ago. And even if Adam and Eve were further back than that in time, what happened 6000 years ago may still have some bearing on who I am and how I got here and where I am going from here)

Anyway, as you can see, I don't dismiss what happened in the past as not being related at all to my future, or even my present situation in life, and I have found that knowing more about myself and how I got here helps me in many ways to be the best kind of me I can be.

Yes, I know.

I believe the same things. I just don't believe the same things about the things I believe that you do.

[Ahab]

Yes, I know.

I believe the same things. I just don't believe the same things about the things I believe that you do.

Well, why not? Shouldn't we strive to all see the same things, and agree on the same things, as part of what it takes to be one with God and with each other? Where am I going? Where are you going? Don't we both want to end up in the same place?

[volgadon]

Well, why not? Shouldn't we strive to all see the same things, and agree on the same things, as part of what it takes to be one with God and with each other? Where am I going? Where are you going? Don't we both want to end up in the same place?

Then shouldn't you believe what he believes? It cuts both ways.

[volgadon]

The internet allows anyone with an internet-connected computer to read almost anything published on the internet with little cost or effort. If the Church does not understand what this means, it could be disastrous.

You do have an interesting point.

[thesometimesaint]

The good news is that we all get to decide what it is we believe. The bad news is we all get to decide what it is we believe.

[The Nehor]

The good news is that we I get to decide what it is we believe. The bad news is that everyone else was given the same privilege for reasons I do not understand.

Fixed it for you.

[Ahab]

Then shouldn't you believe what he believes? It cuts both ways.

Only to the extent that what he believes is true. And yes I think it should cut both ways.

[Ahab]

The good news is that we all get to decide what it is we believe. The bad news is we all get to decide what it is we believe.

And the best news is that there's someone we can all go to when we want to know what is true, who will tell us, because he loves us.