Religion in the 21st Century

If I was to summarize all religions in the world, it would be something along the lines of "take are of the other people in your community, do not only think of yourself". At a fundamental level, all the religions from Abraham to Confucius is about caring for others than yourself. Historically, we have therefore seen that tasks like caring for the poor and maintaining law has been given to religious institutions.

Well, except for one religion. The newest one, Scientology, breaks with this completely. It is a self-centered religion, based on taking care of yourself rather than taking care of your neighbors. Those associated with Scientology will highlight how it has benefited themselves. A Christian missionary, for example, will focus on how his religion has helped others.

Is this is sign of a change in religion, a switch to a 21st century "me-me-me"-mentality?

earth earth earth, green is the new religion, scientology is just a sect

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Fragony

earth earth earth, green is the new religion, scientology is just a sect

---

A lot of the 'Green' stuff makes good sense though. Dumping toxic chemicals in rivers is not a good thing. Trying to improve energy efficiency to due running out of long-term electrical resources with an ever increasing demand from hungrier applications and population growth.

It is hard not to see this.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Tiaexz

A lot of the 'Green' stuff makes good sense though. Dumping toxic chemicals in rivers is not a good thing. Trying to improve energy efficiency to due running out of long-term electrical resources with an ever increasing demand from hungrier applications and population growth.

It is hard not to see this.

---

Dumping toxic is a crime, poor example. These alternative energy-sources do more harm than good, windmills aren't efficient and disruptive to the enviroment, and solar-power increases mining for minerals. The same loonies who scream for more efficient energy-sources oppose nuclair energy. What all religion in common is apocalypse, Greenists gloriously qualify.

Scientology is not a religion it's a scam, always has been.

They charge extortionate fees for admission and advancement in the church and they provide tax exemption for those who buy their way into the highest levels. Rich people, particularly celebrities, buy their way into clergy status and in exchange for being able to exploit the tax laws of the US and other countries the church is allowed to use their star power to attract more paying members. That their religious practices and ideology has resulted in the abuse, mental degradation and even deaths of several of the less affluent members of the "church" is what elevates them from mere scam to internet pariah.

Were it not for the protection of the rich and influential higher members I dare say that Scientology would have been eradicated decades ago.

As for your question, the me me me mentality has arguably existed since at least the 1920's and the main religions of the world have yet to show significant signs of shifting to accommodate it (as far as I know anyway) I highly doubt the old faiths are going to change any time soon. Will new religions pop up that cater to the self centered mentality of the modern age? Very likely, but I do not think an of them will subvert the current status quo, at least not in any of our lifetimes. Religions are notoriously hard to kill after all.

I have no idea where fragony's getting the idea that Scientology is connected to environmentalism.

Most people can't afford to be Scientologists. I don't think they're a sign of anything, except perhaps realities of human nature that predate them by a good while.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Greyblades

I have no idea where fragony's getting the idea that Scientology is connected to environmentalism.

---

I have no idea how you got the idea that I do

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Fragony

I have no idea how you got the idea that I do

---

Well you said:

Quote:

---

green is the new religion, scientology is just a sect

---

The wording gives the impression you are saying scientology is a sect of "green", I interpreted "green" as hippy environmentalism.

I suppose I could have interpreted "green" as money, but beskar's response made me think you meant the former.

Brain needs new wires, I have absolutily no idea how you could possibly interpertate it like that. Everybody is good at something I guess.

Good to know that Beskar and I have something in common.

Greyblades, you nailed Scientology IMO, great post on that.

I got immediately what Fragony meant to say, I do get the alternative interpretation as well now that you mention it.
He basically put two statements into the sentence without wanting a connection between them, I suppose you would use a semicolon or a new sentence instead of a comma usually. Maybe I just got used to Fragony's "stream of thoughts" posting style.

Anyway, HoreTore is right in that all true religions are socialist. The only mistake is to think that Scientology could be a religion.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Greyblades

Good to know that Beskar and I have something in common.

---

No we didn't. He was saying how environmentalism is a religion and dismissing HoreTore's example of Scientology as labelling it as a cult. I replied saying environmentalism had a lot of roots in common-sense.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Fragony

Brain needs new wires, I have absolutily no idea how you could possibly interpertate it like that. Everybody is good at something I guess.

---

Frags:

A translation issue is, I believe, the problem.

A sect, in standard usage, is a sub-set of a religion. For example, the latinists among the Catholic Church are a sect. They are part of the church but take a different perspective on one aspect of doctrine.

I believe the word you were looking for was not sect, but "cult." Had you said "cult" and not sect, then 'blades would have gathered that you were differentiating the Green "religion" and Scientology. As you worded it, you did appear to conflate them. I had to re-read it to get your intent.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Seamus Fermanagh

Frags:

A translation issue is, I believe, the problem.

A sect, in standard usage, is a sub-set of a religion. For example, the latinists among the Catholic Church are a sect. They are part of the church but take a different perspective on one aspect of doctrine.

I believe the word you were looking for was not sect, but "cult." Had you said "cult" and not sect, then 'blades would have gathered that you were differentiating the Green "religion" and Scientology. As you worded it, you did appear to conflate them. I had to re-read it to get your intent.

---

Yep that must have went wrong here, a cult is 'sekte' in Dutch.

Scuzi Greyblades

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by HoreTore

If I was to summarize all religions in the world, it would be something along the lines of "take are of the other people in your community, do not only think of yourself". At a fundamental level, all the religions from Abraham to Confucius is about caring for others than yourself. Historically, we have therefore seen that tasks like caring for the poor and maintaining law has been given to religious institutions.

Well, except for one religion. The newest one, Scientology, breaks with this completely. It is a self-centered religion, based on taking care of yourself rather than taking care of your neighbors. Those associated with Scientology will highlight how it has benefited themselves. A Christian missionary, for example, will focus on how his religion has helped others.

Is this is sign of a change in religion, a switch to a 21st century "me-me-me"-mentality?

---

Hmmm.

I think you're basically right - the great world religions arose in a time before social care or social politics - they tended to preach against the excesses and depredations of the elite even as they sheltered in their shadow.

Greyblades has indeed nailed Scientology as being a "cult" but the same is true of Western Buddhism or Evangelical Christianity. The old religions are out of step because they are founded on old mores and convictions about communities.

They attract the people that give a crap and everybody else laughs at them.

Bit depressing really - but you can't turn back the clock to a time when there was no welfare state - so I expect we will continue to tumble along as-is. There will always be people who either need support, or have a need to give it, and they will continue to gravitate to the old religions. You're also going to see more of this "feel good" and "new age" dross, though because people have twigged that "Science" is not a religion and will not scratch your spiritual itch.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by HoreTore

If I was to summarize all religions in the world, it would be something along the lines of "take are of the other people in your community, do not only think of yourself". At a fundamental level, all the religions from Abraham to Confucius is about caring for others than yourself. Historically, we have therefore seen that tasks like caring for the poor and maintaining law has been given to religious institutions.

Well, except for one religion. The newest one, Scientology, breaks with this completely. It is a self-centered religion, based on taking care of yourself rather than taking care of your neighbors. Those associated with Scientology will highlight how it has benefited themselves. A Christian missionary, for example, will focus on how his religion has helped others.

Is this is sign of a change in religion, a switch to a 21st century "me-me-me"-mentality?

---

Why look to Scientology for "me-me-me"-mentality? What about the use of Calvin in 19th-20th century philosophy and theology?
What about the reasoning behind missionary work being founded in the explicit command to do so? (Some Bible references) - illustrated best in the classic Annie Dillard-quote. Who is being saved here? Why practice mission in Jehova's Witnesses, for instace, if your conversion rate is so low it cannot be measured in per milles? Or rather: For who?
What about missionaries from ages past up to this very day whose focus are on a lot of things besides how their religion has "helped others"? Eternal damnation, primitive culture and sub-human tendencies in those that aren't "in possesion of" "Religion" (Borneo-mission in the 20th and 21st centuries for instance).
What about Plato's philosophy on society? (I acknowledge Confucius in this debate)
What about historic Islamic politics in relation to the concept of Zakat in terms of mission, government and expansion?
What about the whole New-Age-inspired wave of spirituality? What is the focus of a significant amount of the content in this?
What about Hindi theology on "priesthood" and castes?
What about Theravada-Buddhist institutions' mandatory public funding in countries such as Thailand?
What about ancient Egyptian theology, Horus-worship and Pharaoh?
What about mysticism? Gnosticism?

The "me" concept is far from modern, and far, far from exclusive to Scientology. Not just in practice, though most obviously in practice, but also in theology. What was Christianity about between Paul and Augustine?

I wouldn't even call Scientology a cult, it's a corporation that is trying to maintain a bogus tax-exempt status.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Fragony

scientology is just a sect

---

a sect is just a religion that doesn´t have tenure yet.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Greyblades

As for your question, the me me me mentality has arguably existed since at least the 1920's and the main religions of the world have yet to show significant signs of shifting to accommodate it (as far as I know anyway) I highly doubt the old faiths are going to change any time soon. Will new religions pop up that cater to the self centered mentality of the modern age? Very likely, but I do not think an of them will subvert the current status quo, at least not in any of our lifetimes. Religions are notoriously hard to kill after all.

---

I don't think we'll see any real change in the "old religions", as religion is by definition resistant to change. My argument is that new religions of Scientology's ilk, where the focus is shifted from the community to the self, ay start to appear, with Scientology as the first of many.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Philipvs Vallindervs Calicvla

You're also going to see more of this "feel good" and "new age" dross, though because people have twigged that "Science" is not a religion and will not scratch your spiritual itch.

---

I guess the new age-loonies could also be lumped into the me-me-me-category...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Jarmam

What about the reasoning behind missionary work being founded in the explicit command to do so?

---

This illustrates my basic point: religion is a commandment to look at the needs of people other than yourself.

Scientology, on the other hand, has self-improvement as its basic premise. I believe that's a petty substantial difference.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by HoreTore

Scientology, on the other hand, has self-improvement as its basic premise. I believe that's a petty substantial difference.

---

I thought it's premise was to keep Miscavige rolling in money.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Fragony

Yep that must have went wrong here, a cult is 'sekte' in Dutch.

Scuzi Greyblades

---

Same here, I was actually aware of the English meaning (learned that here), yet didn't make the connection as Seamus did.
In cases like these I like to claim that the English language just uses the word wrong. ~;)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by HoreTore

Scientology, on the other hand, has self-improvement as its basic premise. I believe that's a petty substantial difference.

---

But when Tom Cruise drives past an accident, he knows that he can help...

I found it funny though that he never actually seems to help, he seems content knowing that he could...

People always talk about the "me-me-me" mentality as if people were not fundamentally greedy until the 20th century....

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by a completely inoffensive name

People always talk about the "me-me-me" mentality as if people were not fundamentally greedy until the 20th century....

---

Greed isn't really the issue.

We have moved from a collectivist society to a more individualistic one. Those of us who come from the collectivist side, like myself, likes to describe the politics of righties as "me-me-me"....

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by HoreTore

If I was to summarize all religions in the world, it would be something along the lines of "take are of the other people in your community, do not only think of yourself". At a fundamental level, all the religions from Abraham to Confucius is about caring for others than yourself. Historically, we have therefore seen that tasks like caring for the poor and maintaining law has been given to religious institutions.

Well, except for one religion. The newest one, Scientology, breaks with this completely. It is a self-centered religion, based on taking care of yourself rather than taking care of your neighbors. Those associated with Scientology will highlight how it has benefited themselves. A Christian missionary, for example, will focus on how his religion has helped others.

Is this is sign of a change in religion, a switch to a 21st century "me-me-me"-mentality?

---

On the me me me thing sure couldnt the same be said of buddhism an its ancient.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by gaelic cowboy

On the me me me thing sure couldnt the same be said of buddhism an its ancient.

---

I don't think so.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by HoreTore

Greed isn't really the issue.

We have moved from a collectivist society to a more individualistic one. Those of us who come from the collectivist side, like myself, likes to describe the politics of righties as "me-me-me"....

---

Don't forget that righties also bemoan a lack of community spirit by the modern progressives and people who keep staring at their cellphones.
I don't think it is fundamentally a left vs right issue bth sides want more me-me-me, just in different areas.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Husar

Don't forget that righties also bemoan a lack of community spirit by the modern progressives and people who keep staring at their cellphones.
I don't think it is fundamentally a left vs right issue bth sides want more me-me-me, just in different areas.

---

That's the hillbilly-righty, and they're simply old and senile.

I'm talking about the evil capitalist baby-eating righties.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by HoreTore

I don't think so.

---

It's perfect for celebrities and the like, sure they just love the emphasis on inner this and blah blah that. Reality stars, actors, musicians and various z list celebrities can often be in love with themselves and buddhism lets em indulge in a religion of the self.

Buddhism has been packaged just like all religions are.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by gaelic cowboy

It's perfect for celebrities and the like sure they just love the emphasis on inner this and blah blah that.

Buddhism has been packaged just like all religions are.

---

That's the new age nonsense-version of buddhism, not the one practiced in the jungles of India by Adbi the Beggar Boy...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by HoreTore

That's the new age nonsense-version of buddhism, not the one practiced in the jungles of India by Adbi the Beggar Boy...

---

and Catholism is the same in Ireland as it is in say the Phillipines