Thread: Will Religion Survive the Internet? Board: Oblivion / Ship of Fools.


To visit this thread, use this URL:
http://forum.ship-of-fools.com/cgi-bin/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic;f=70;t=024554
Posted by Gramps49 (# 16378) on :
 
I cam across this article.

What do you think? Will religion as we know it survive?
 
Posted by Jade Constable (# 17175) on :
 
Speaking personally, the internet has done wonders for my own religion. While the article makes good points, it does seem to just be talking about conservative strands of religion. I would imagine the internet will have done good things for people looking for less-conservative religious organisations - for example, wedding websites can lead people to churches to get married in that are more in tune with their values.
 
Posted by The Silent Acolyte (# 1158) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Gramps49:
What do you think?
I think the article is tedious twaddle. So tedious the previous thread only ran to twenty-six posts.
 
Posted by Lord Jestocost (# 12909) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Jade Constable:
Speaking personally, the internet has done wonders for my own religion. While the article makes good points, it does seem to just be talking about conservative strands of religion. I would imagine the internet will have done good things for people looking for less-conservative religious organisations - for example, wedding websites can lead people to churches to get married in that are more in tune with their values.
This. The one thing I can't argue with in the article is:

quote:
A traditional religion, one built on “right belief,” requires a closed information system. That is why the Catholic Church put an official seal of approval on some ancient texts and banned or burned others. It is why some Bible-believing Christians are forbidden to marry nonbelievers. It is why Quiverfull moms home school their kids from carefully screened text books. It is why, when you get sucked into conversations with your fundamentalist uncle George from Florida, you sometimes wonder if he has some superpower that allows him to magically close down all avenues into his mind.
And the list goes on - I'm sure everyone can think of more examples. Conservative religion is just one manifestation of a particular mindset, and it's that mindset that is threatened by the Internet. Sadly it won't wither and die, because new people always come along to fill the gaps, but hopefully each generation will have less and less influence. You will know the truth, and the truth shall set you free ...
 
Posted by EtymologicalEvangelical (# 15091) on :
 
Yes.

The internet is the best thing that has ever happened to Christian apologetics.
 
Posted by Hawk (# 14289) on :
 
Even if you define the argument to 'will closed-information-system fundamentalist mindsets' survive the internet, it doesn't get any more believable. The internet spreads information, but it's a liberal misconception that more information equals more open-mindedness. Often it causes a reaction against so many competing views as people search for something 'true' to hold on to.

And the internet doesn't just provide open-minded scientific-rational information. If anything it is a much bigger propagator of fundamentalist mindsets, prejudices, and closed-information conspiracy systems than otherwise.
 
Posted by Gramps49 (# 16378) on :
 
I tend to agree with the responses. I manage our congregation's facebook page. I am astounded at the positive feedback we have gotten. At times we connect with over 150,000 people (mostly friends of friends). We have had clicks from all over the world. We definitely see it as an outreach tool.

Our pastor does the twitter for the church. Not sure what that reach has been.

Even now, though, I am somewhat concerned that facebook is starting to become passe. It is very hard to keep up with all the social networks that are out there.
 
Posted by Stetson (# 9597) on :
 
Some of the examples given in the article seem to contradict the thesis itself.

eg. Religion requires a closed information system, as exemplified by your fundy uncle who won't listen to your arguments.

The fact that he's having that debate with you in the first place is proof that he's not living in a "closed information system". You're right there in front of him, giving him arguments against his beliefs. Which he's determined not to be open-minded about.

So, why would Uncle Fundy suddenly become more vulnerable to the same arguments when they're presented on the internet? He'll just ignore Richard Dawkins' blog as resolutely as he ignores you. Probably won't even click on the link.
 
Posted by poileplume (# 16438) on :
 
But can it survive the invention of printing?
 
Posted by quetzalcoatl (# 16740) on :
 
Yet another just-so story about religion - who the hell produces them all? There are stories about the origin of religion, its development, and its eventual demise, and they are nearly all devoid of any empirical content. Do they appeal to atheists? Wish fulfilment maybe.

[ 17. January 2013, 15:55: Message edited by: quetzalcoatl ]
 
Posted by Chorister (# 473) on :
 
Did books survive television? Yes. And now Kindle has come along, which encourages people to read even more books. Religious observance will change, and adapt, but not disappear.

The Church of Fools was great, BTW - I went to church more times when that was around than I'd ever done.
 
Posted by SvitlanaV2 (# 16967) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Lord Jestocost:
Conservative religion is just one manifestation of a particular mindset, and it's that mindset that is threatened by the Internet.
But the net surely also strengthens conservative religion, because it enables conservatives to find each other and to offer support and share ideas.

The most inward looking religious groups won't use the internet anyway. Do the Amish bother with it? Their numbers have increased rapidly, so I hear. I've read that the weakness of the more regular kind of American evangelicalism, though, is that it merges very easily into the surrounding culture; this kind of conservatism is probably constantly at risk of being whittled away from the inside out.
 
Posted by Russ (# 120) on :
 
My guess would be that there's a small kernel of truth behind this story. It goes something like:

- genuine exchange of views with people of different religious outlooks tends to undermine the idea that one's own religious tradition has all the answers and marks the boundary between the virtuous saved people and the evil damned.

However, in typical journalistic style, the article overstates its case.

The existence of Internet forums encourages but does not guarantee that such exchange of views will take place.

And the black-and-white "we're saved & the rest are damned" idea is not an essential component of all religion. It's part of the dark, abusive, side of some prominent religious traditions, but no more than that.

Best wishes,

Russ
 
Posted by Evensong (# 14696) on :
 
The amount of anti-religious vitriol on the internet is what concerns me......definitely rubs off on the fence sitters.
 
Posted by no prophet (# 15560) on :
 
I thought religion had trouble surviving the generation born and lived through the decade that we call the 1960s, but is really probably 1965-75. The religious decline began when we rejected authority, wars, controls on sexual and social behaviour, and started smoking drugs. It continued as we were coached into becoming consumers.

On the other side, it is a bonus to have the internet. Just consider what this forum discusses. Perhaps it is church-centred religion that will not survive.
 
Posted by Og: Thread Killer (# 3200) on :
 
Theory seems to be the internet is bad for religion because:

First heard those discussion points about 25 years ago:

In my Protestant Reformation text book of original source material.

At the same time, some guy by the name of Rich Rosen was throwing stuff like this all over net.xian and other talk forums.

Religion is still here.
 
Posted by Revelle (# 8554) on :
 
I concur with the above discussions, especially concerning fundamentalism. There is a very real danger for fundamentalist views, since a good many are based on a very narrow interpretation of specific doctrines/scriptures, and being opened to new views of various subjects is ever dangerous to such a faith.

However, I think the internet (in general, and not to the same extent) accomplishes the same thing that higher education, or even education in general, tends to accomplish, and that is the broadening of horizons. Just learning about other people's experiences can have an effect on one's own beliefs, since at it's core religion is based on man's experience of God, or spirituality.

For the very reason that experience is so personal there will always be those who hold onto religion, and those who will state that they are completely wrong or off the hook.
 
Posted by Alogon (# 5513) on :
 
At Gerre Hancock's requiem mass last year, Fr. Mead of St. Thomas Church 5th Ave. mentioned that the church temporarily bought added server capacity to avoid a crash for those listening on the Internet all over the world. He has statistics on where they are. Some of the regular listeners to the webcast services are in countries in which the powers-that-be would not approve.
 
Posted by EtymologicalEvangelical (# 15091) on :
 
The big question is: Will atheism survive the internet? It seems not all is rosy in that garden at the moment, judging by what I have just watched (see link).

(I know that's only Youtube, but even still, it indicates that the proud boasts of some time ago are looking rather lame now.)
 
Posted by rolyn (# 16840) on :
 
Religion as we have known it may not survive the Internet . Is that necessarily a bad thing when one considers the corruptions and abuses that have occurred at it's hands ?

European Christianity suffered a mortal blow with the catastrophe that was WW1, when all the major Christian Nations fought eachother . The events of WW2 damaged people's faith even further.
Mainstream UK Christianity did however retain it's prominence until the mid 70s, but it has become a mere shadow of it's former self before the influence of the Internet.

Religion will though ,IMO, survive right up to the end of humanity. Even if humanity survives on into ad infinitum it will take religion with it wherever it goes. Will it be Christianity ? Probably a mixture of all religions .
 
Posted by Schroedinger's cat (# 64) on :
 
There are a number of issues in this question. Can faith survive the internet - this is a different question. Can religion as it is survive major cultural changes? No, and it shouldn't, because it should change with cultural changes.

But what is the internet, at its heart? availability of information and connection to other people. Freedom of Information is always dangerous to those who want to control information access, and some parts of "religion" have wanted to do this. They are in danger, but will, as others have pointed out, normally react by rejecting anything they do not agree with. But it is a real challenge, and I can only hope that they do not survive.

Connection with others is a real positive to faith development, because you can connect with others who both agree with you (and can provide support) and those who disagree with you (and can challenge your pre-conceptions). That is a real positive for real faith, especially faith that is not prepared to accept the dominant belief system.

So, the end of religion? No, of course not. But if faith structures do not adapt, they will die (and are dying), but faith is so much bigger than a particular cultural mindset. It has to, or it dies, and it dies because it is not big enough.

Christianity is quite big enough. It will survive - thrive no less - in the internet era. The established church, OTOH, will change or die. And new structures will develop and grow.
 
Posted by angelfish (# 8884) on :
 
Agree with most of what has been said so far, and let's not forget that it isn't just faith that will survive, but faith in Jesus. I can't imagine He is powerless to stop some disaffected tweeters destroying what He has established.
 
Posted by que sais-je (# 17185) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Evensong:
The amount of anti-religious vitriol on the internet is what concerns me......definitely rubs off on the fence sitters.
It's easy to set up a website, so why can't the religious produce the sort of stuff to attract people in the same numbers?

Arguments about the damage (or not) that Dawkins & co do to religion rarely seem to consider that religion may be failing to offer anything as appealing. I know there are good Christian apologists but somehow their books don't sell like Dawkins et al.

The threat of the internet to religions is you can't just say: here it is, lots of books available, it's all up to you. Gramps49's congregation are at least having a go.

quote:
Originally posted by E-E
The big question is: Will atheism survive the internet? It seems not all is rosy in that garden at the moment, judging by what I have just watched (see link).

(I know that's only Youtube, but even still, it indicates that the proud boasts of some time ago are looking rather lame now.)
Alternatively Youtube atheists feel that they've won so don't need to make any more. But both your example presenters seem sad, unappealing and silly. And there are similar sad, unappealing and silly religious presenters. If you think that sort of stuff is what it takes (for either side) to make a difference I'd recommend you get out more before the real world out there it goes into administration. At least the Druidess is intelligent, amusing, nuanced - do you think she wants a 60 year old atheist groupie?
 
Posted by Chorister (# 473) on :
 
Enlightenment, Knowledge and Religion often don't go hand-in-hand. Take, for example, the observation that the churches which most require you to suspend rational thought at the porch are often the ones filled with Doctors, Accountants, Business Executives and other similar university-educated, successful types. So it doesn't mean that the more people read alternative views and information on the Internet, the less likely they are to be interested in religion. It is as if many people compartmentalise their faith and their secular understanding into two completely separate parts of their lives, and this isn't likely to change.
 
Posted by rolyn (# 16840) on :
 
On a practical note I was a bit put off religion when I'd been on an Internet church for a while . Much of it was sweetness and light , but endless arguments over what particular Bible passages did or didn't mean became tedious .

I find strife in a Church particularly unattractive, the trouble with the Internet is that it makes strife very public.
No worse than the Reformation I suppose . If Christianity could survive that it will surely survive the Net.
 
Posted by barrea (# 3211) on :
 
I can't speak for other religeons but I am sure that Christianity will survive the internet.
 
Posted by barrea (# 3211) on :
 
I can't speak for other religions but I am sure that Christianity will survive the internet, after all it has survived two thousand years of persecution which is still going on in many countries in the world.
If you are grounded in the faith you can tell when wrong doctrine is being preached or expounded on the net.
I just get concerned that young Christians without much knowlege of the faith could get led astray by the many of the false teachers that are all over the internet.
 
Posted by Imersge Canfield (# 17431) on :
 
This is an interesting and inspiring contribution.


interfaithenabler.tumblr.com/post/41133805162/there-is-nothing-more-important-i-believe-for

Added an i to the front of your link, because that fixes the link, and I'm guessing it's what you intended.
Gwai,
Purgatory Host

[ 21. January 2013, 20:45: Message edited by: Gwai ]
 
Posted by Thread Necromancer (# 17559) on :
 
I run my church's website.

I am always late on principle, my principle being that punctuality is the thief of time. - Oscar Wilde
 
Posted by Alogon (# 5513) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Schroedinger's cat:
Availability of information and connection to other people.
That's what it is now, despite sophisticated attempts to kill these features. I wouldn't guarantee it will stay that way. The Internet has also caused the oblivion of alternative sources of information, connection, and analysis. It is a marvelous distributor of random primary-source material from unprecedented hundreds of millions of sources (e.g. on Youtube), but at the expense of professional secondary sources and interpretation. It could disappear in an instant, and if it does, what will save us from an instant dark age?

quote:
The established church, OTOH, will change or die.
I'm unclear as to whether you are referring to the established church of England or of Denmark. [Biased]

[ 19. February 2013, 00:20: Message edited by: Alogon ]
 


© Ship of Fools 2016

Powered by Infopop Corporation
UBB.classicTM 6.5.0