Twilight

The Twilight Series has sold over 25 million copies and has been a best-seller, winning many awards. It also has become quite the topic of controversy these days. The four books follow the adventures of Isabella "Bella" Swan, a teenager who moves to Forks, Washington and becomes involuntarily drawn to a mysterious, incredibly handsome boy, Edward Cullen, who turns out to be a vampire. Edward and Bella… oh you guessed it… fall passionately in love.
The author, Stephenie Meyer, is actually LDS and a BYU graduate. She admits her works are influenced by her religion. A huge underlying theme of the series is choice and free agency, a gospel principle. Other religious themes are good vs. evil, sex after marriage, eternal families, and the fourth book especially takes a pro-life stance on the issue of abortion. Although these seem like wholesome ideas that should be taught to teen girls, certain Christian churches are forbidding the reading of these books. Some of my information came from an article in Brio Magazine, one of the most popular Christian magazines for girls (link below).

Good vs. Evil: A book has to have conflict, but these churches are saying the books communicate that even though Edward is technically an evil being—he is, after all, a vampire—he just tries to be good by not killing humans for food. The Bible says, “Woe unto them that call evil good…” (Isaish 5:20)

Premarital Sex: In the first 3 books Edward won’t sleep with Bella until they are married and he will hurt her because he’s a vampire. The fourth book comes and they get married. There are no explicit scenes of sex, but the aftermath is detailed with the Bella intensely bruised and the house completely torn apart. The Christian churches argue that this type of portrayal is not good for young girls.

These churches say Edward and Bella’s relationship shows many signs of abuse and the books are overly sexist. Edward is incredibly over-possessive, controlling and always conveniently ‘there’ to save Bella from any potentially harmful situation. Healthy relationships are nothing like this. Christian churches warn the young girls that God should guide them in their lives and He is who they should count on, not a guy. They also say that Bella’s relationship with her parents shows “unbiblical attitudes toward authority” because she lies to them and the books make them come across as clueless to her life.
Now confession... I’ve read the first 3 books of the series (don’t judge me) and I can see how these ideas have been pulled out. I agree mostly with the fact that the Twilight Series give a warped impression about relationships. No guy will ever be like Edward, but many girls seem to think he’s out there. I know of some relationships that have struggled because girls read these books and expected their lives to be like Bella’s. Obviously the books have a following (you’ve seen the “Team Edward/Team Jacob” shirts and other vampire propaganda), so I ask these questions:
Are the Christian churches right in their warning to young girls about reading the books? Of the girls that do read Twilight, are they taking it too seriously? Should religious ideas be extracted from fiction novels or should they just be read as strictly fiction?

http://www.briomag.com/briomagazine/entertainment/a0007866.html

The Symbolism of the Lion

Arguably one of the most popular children’s series on the market, C.S Lewis's "Chronicles of Narnia" is a collection of fantasy novels with obvious Christian symbolism. The series has sold over 100 million copies in 41 different languages. In 2005, The Lion, the Witch and the Wardrobe premiered on the big screen, grossing almost 300 million in the box office. There is even a “Chronicles of Narnia” island on Second Life.

The story of the Lion, the Witch and the Wardrobe is probably familiar to most of you, so I’ll quickly summarize it. Aslan, who is symbolic of Christ, willingly sacrifices himself to redeem Edmond from wrongdoing. He then comes back to life and redeems Narnia from the evil White Witch.

I can remember reading the Chronicles of Narnia for the first time and having one of those pop culture testimony-building experiences that we talked about the first day of class. I fell in love with the Aslan and was devastated when he sacrificed himself. It was a sort of epiphany in my young mind that I remember to this day.

C.S. Lewis wasn’t always a religious mastermind. At birth, he was baptized as a member of the Church of Ireland. He declared himself atheist at age 15 before re-converting to Christianity at the age of 33. He joined the Church of England much to the dismay of his close friend, J.R.R. Tolkien, who wished for him to join the Roman Catholic Church. When the chronicles of Narnia was published in the 1950s, Tolkien was disappointed with the blatant symbolism used by Lewis in the series.

Lewis obviously wrote the series with children in mind considering his use of simple language, talking animals and other fantasy elements. But the allegory of Christian beliefs and personal meaning makes it read and beloved by adults as well.

As overtly Christian as the Chronicles of Narnia is, you won’t find it in the religion section in the bookstore. It’s not preachy and it doesn’t ever mention the words religion or Christian in any of the books. Yet the symbolism is so blatant and powerful that even the youngest of readers with a belief in Jesus Christ will see it.

Lewis’s book contains elements of two different categories of literature: the didactic and the mimetic. Didactic literature aims to instruct or teach a moral principle while mimetic literature seeks to elicit an emotional response in the reader.

One scene which exemplifies both categories is the sacrifice of Aslan. While the Christian imagery of his death is undeniably didactic, the emotional emphasis of the scene causes a strong mimetic response. Thus the two function together for a stronger and more unified effect upon the audience.

So, to you, I pose these questions:

Is The Lion, the Witch and the Wardrobe in general more didactic (presenting an overall message/theme) or mimetic (single emotional response)?

Is using symbolism in literature, rather than openly addressing religious topics, a more effective way to reach people emotionally and spiritually?

The Long Tail and Internet Worship

NOTE: It took me forever to figure out why this hadn't posted before class on Thursday. Turns out I put it on my personal blog by mistake.

The Internet has, as cliche as it may sound, changed just about everything in modern life. From how we shop, to getting directions, to keeping in touch with friends and family, there is hardly a facet of our daily routine that isn't impacted by the ready access to information the Internet offers.

Strange though it may seem, that extends to worship as well. Faith, worship, and even plain ol' church services have always been part of Western life, but even churches have to acknowledge the paradigm shift caused by the Internet.

Just a few examples:

1. The Vatican has it's own YouTube channel.



2. Major protestant churches are active online, organizing, preaching, and ministering.
   


3. The LDS Church has had a huge showing online, with LDS.org, mormon.org, and a host of other sites with specific purposes for those inside and outside the Church.

However, these are some of the major examples, what we would call mainstream efforts by major Western religions to modernize and use the Web as a tool. Their behavior is an extension of what they have done before the Web.

A more interesting aspect of how the Web has impacted religion may be how it has empowered previously unheard-of groups, organizations that couldn't have existed before.

The Long Tail refers to a concept of niche marketing brought about by the Internet. Where before, a demographic may have been too few or far between to organize or be noticed, the web has brought about a semantic space, where individuals with the same interests and beliefs, no matter how obscure, can "congregate" and be heard. This was applied to marketing initially, but clearly applies to religion as well. The Internet made possible not only some of the biggest conversations ever (i.e. Wikipedia) but amplifies what would otherwise be some of the smallest.

1. The Church of the Flying Spaghetti Monster is not a-religious, it is anti-religion. The whole idea is to set up a mockery, a farce to ridicule faith. Disparate antagonistic atheists may have existed in generations past, but they've never made their voice louder than they have on the Net.



2. Traditional religion has been either denominational or not recognized as an organized faith, but with the Web, the barrier to entry in some of faiths is so low that it only takes a quick visit to their website to become an ordained minister.
   



3. Islamic extremists have used the Web for the same purposes as many churches, like indoctrination, training, mobilization, with the noted difference being that the extremists are mobilizing for a self-proclaimed war, Jihad. Extremism and Jihad aren't new, but the Web adds a new dimension to their effectiveness and prowess.

Questions:

Is the "Net" effect of the Web positive or negative for Faith in general?

Does "Faith" online bring people together or divide them into smaller and smaller tribes?

If Marshall McLuhan is right, then the medium is the message. What message does worship on the Web send that worship in a church or on television does not?

In what ways has the Internet interacted with your practice of worship?

Social Media and Religion

According to Facebook.com, there are more than 150 million active users on Facebook. More than half of Facebook users are outside of college, and 70% of users are outside the United States. 3 billion minutes worldwide are spent on Facebook each day. I think it is safe to say that this social networking site is far-reaching across the globe. With so many people involved in social media in one way or another, I was curious to take a closer look at the effects that social media website has on religion.

The internet allows for free-flow of information for anyone who wants to get an idea out there for all to see. Through Facebook groups, statuses, profiles and blogs, anyone can put the deepest feelings and ideas of their heart out for all to see. This is not something that was not nearly as accessible even just 10 years ago. This increased flow of information brings not only the positive warm fuzzy feelings about religion, but also the negative feelings towards religion. Because these feelings are not expressed face-to-face, and people can go anonymously if they desire, many people say things that they would not normally say.

One such example is a popular video that spread through social media. The video is of Tom Cruise expressing his feelings about scientology. Many mocked and laughed at Tom Cruise for acting like a maniac. The reputation of Scientology has been significantly changed because of the Internet. Many of the ideas that people have about the religion have been formed by things that they have seen on the internet. One of the largest groups that has formed against scientology is a group called “Anonymous.” This group is an internet-based group, but they have also gathered in person. They lead a protest of about 200 people at the headquarters of scientology. I think that this group shows the power that some internet-based religion opinion groups can have. Because of the viral spreading of the video, the scientologists started a series of lawsuits about getting the rights to the video. This is one of the major differences between other media sources and the internet. It is a lot harder to keep things private and copyrighted on the internet. Scientology is not the only religion with a large amount of material against them on the internet. Anti-Mormon material on the internet is widespread. False facts and ideas are spread like wildfire. At the same time, the internet has opened up huge opportunities for good information on any religion. Because material on the internet often has little credibility, many people are left confused about what to believe.

Do you think that this free-flow of information has had a more positive effect on religion or a negative effect? Does the good outweigh the bad?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scientology_and_the_Internet

Caught in The Web

The ideology of religion and its notion of truth can sometimes be overbearing. For people in search of faith, belonging to a church is as important to them as their beliefs.

Most people agree that in order to find a denomination, the first step would be with prayer. However, some have turned to the internet as an expedited approach to finding a church coherent with their beliefs; a process as easy as checking their e-mail’s.

The internet has allowed us to access the world at our fingertips and has opened the airways of knowledge further than we can comprehend, and the simple search of the word "religion" brings up thousands of sites.

Before I started this blog, I put myself in the shoes of those in search of faith. At first I came across sites that informed me of "world religions". They gave listed information on what it meant to be Christian, Jewish, Buddhist etc., but I wanted to know more.

I then started discovering uncommon beliefs that linked to "cultist" activity. Whether it be the countdown to December 21, 2012 (the presumed "END of the world") that offered a lottery with a limited availability that secured a spot to be saved, or the belief of Yahwehism (considerably the cult of Christianity) that based its ideas off the "true" interpretation of the bible, my findings inevitably became limitless.

As I stumbled across these religions and their presumed ways of life I also found a plethora of sites offering ordination, repentance and the acceptance of Jesus Christ ALL through a mere click of the mouse. In one extreme, an internet based church even offered baptism. But still, even with all this information I wasn't completely convinced that a person in search of faith would know where to turn.

I then came across a website that offered a quiz. To be quite honest, answering questions to determine what bracket my beliefs fell in seemed absurd, but I took it anyway. Through a series of 20 questions, depending on how you answered, the end results would give you the percentage of similar beliefs between you and different religions. In basic, it determines how much of a certain religion you are. The information links would further your understanding of those religions and in the end, hopefully, lead you toward the faith that suited you best. Go figure!?

Along the lines of searching for a religion, its true meaning became lost between the clutter. Being able to practice a faith online or finding one of interest through web based search offers much more than one is looking for. Not knowing where to begin can sometimes lead to no ending. Through the irony of it all, you may find something in one religion that another says is completely false. The only way to completely know is through prayer.

Is seeking a religion through the internet as gratifying as missionary work? What would you say are the proper steps toward a religion?

Evidence Of A Flat Earth Supported Biblically

So, believe it or not, there are still people out there who think the world is flat. I guess it's true what they: you can find anything on the Internet. I can break up Flat-Earth believers in to two camps:

1. Purely scientific evidence



This is the first one that google.com will mark. It's actually quite interesting. They have extensive explanations of scientific theories as to why the Earth can't be a sphere. Either way, they reaffirm that the reason I went in to Broadcasting was to avoid science. However, I can see how people could be "fooled" or "mislead" by this.

http://www.alaska.net/~clund/e_djublonskopf/Flatearthsociety.htm

2.Purely Religious

I'd post an image, but this website appears to be of the low-maintenance. Infer what you want to from that fact. The author has a long list of arguments with biblical citations. I went through a couple, and saw that perhaps the author used parts of versus as he saw fit. They are taken out of the context of the actual meaning, but then again many people do this to support their religious values in all faiths.

http://www.lhup.edu/~dsimanek/febible.htm

My question is this: does having people quote religious text to support certain claims confuse people more about religion and its value? I think most of us would agree that the world has become less friendly towards religion. Do you feel like these kinds of website can add to that unfriendliness? I know this is an extreme example, but I hope it can be used to illustrate some possible problems people might have as they search for religion without direction online. I think that the Internet is the ultimate example of the First Amendment, but I also know you can get the weirdest information, and sometimes the most confusing information

www.baha'i.org

So, I asked a friend of mine if he knew of any religious websites or any religions that used the internet well, and his resounding answer was Baha’i. He told me about how on his mission in Italy he ran into quite a few members of the Baha’i faith, and they always gave him pamphlets directing him to their website (pass-along cards anyone?). Their fliers also had descriptions of specific places to click on the website to find certain answers.
I looked into what their church believes about missionary work, and on the official Baha’I website it said, “Baha’is are enjoined to take individual initiative in teaching the Baha'i Faith to others. However, the Faith forbids any form of psychological pressure or material inducements to effect conversion, based on a profound belief that each person has the right and responsibility to investigate the truth for him or herself.” It also says, “each Baha’I has the duty to share the faith with others but forbids the practice of proselytism.”
Okay, so if you’re a church that doesn’t believe in pushing people into your religion, what better tool could you ask for than the internet? Members can refer people there, and in the comfort of their own home they can learn about teachings, and get connected to members in their area. I hopped onto the website, http://www.bahai.org/, and I’m going to be honest I think it’s one of the best engineered religious websites I’ve ever seen (even trumping our beloved lds.org in the visually appealing category).
Gee, wouldn’t the LDS religion be different if we proselyted this way- how do you think it would affect us? Are there other religions that could benefit from an internet dependent system? As the world becomes more technologically dependent, will interaction through the internet become more of an advantage?
And as for connecting over the internet: Are there downsides of a system that connects to people with a database rather than with personal discussion? Do you think members are likely to be more active because no one pushed them into it, or less so because they found it in casual searching or because of some other channel –related issue?