Wendy Doniger

Wendy Doniger

Professor of the History of Religions, University of Chicago’s Divinity School

Wendy Doniger (O’Flaherty) is the Mircea Eliade Distinguished Service Professor of the History of Religions at the University of Chicago’s Divinity School. The “On Faith” panelist also teaches in the University’s Department of South Asian Languages and Civilizations. She also serves on the University’s Committee on Social Thought. Doniger’s research and teaching center on Hinduism and mythology, with courses in the latter focusing on cross-cultural themes. Her courses in Hinduism cover a broad spectrum, including mythology, literature, law, gender, and ecology. After training as a dancer under George Balanchine and Martha Graham, Doniger earned two doctorates in Sanskrit and Indian Studies from Harvard and Oxford Universities. Before moving to the University of Chicago in 1978, she taught at Harvard, Oxford, the School of Oriental and African Studies at the University of London, and the University of California at Berkeley. She has served as president of the American Academy of Religion and of the Association of Asian Studies. She holds four honorary degrees and serves on the International Editorial Board of the Encyclopedia Britannica and on the board of Daedalus. In 2000, she was recognized by PEN Oakland for excellence in multi-cultural non-fiction for Splitting the Difference: Gender and Myth in Ancient Greece and India (1998). That same year she received the British Academy’s Rose Mary Crawshay prize for her work on myths about sex: The Bedtrick: Tales of Sex and Masquerade (2000). Doniger has authored more than 20 other books, including translations of Sanskrit texts, among which are The Rig Veda: An Anthology (1981); Laws of Manu(1991) [with Brian K. Smith], and Kamasutra(2002) [with Sudhir Kakar]. She also wrote The Woman Who Pretended To Be Who She Was (2005) and Off with Her Head! The Denial of Women's Identity in Myth, Religion, and Culture [with Howard Eilberg Schwartz]. Close.

Wendy Doniger

Professor of the History of Religions, University of Chicago’s Divinity School

Wendy Doniger (O’Flaherty) is the Mircea Eliade Distinguished Service Professor of the History of Religions at the University of Chicago’s Divinity School. The “On Faith” panelist also teaches in the University’s Department of South Asian Languages and Civilizations. more »

Main Page | Wendy Doniger Archives | On Faith Archives


Mormons in the Mythical Mainstream

There really is no mainstream; there are just larger or smaller by-waters.

» Back to full entry

All Comments (99)

kqehltdzr hokzdty syeinxw ukqbyh jczvpqkt fhgilxam vexpsmgq

Anonymous:

As a Mormon how would you answer the question: "Why is there only one church?"

Why do u believe in a false hope, when u should only believe in yourself and your capabilities??
Believing in a martyr that brings only suffering is not a choice in my book.

HEY GUYS LETS NOT FORGET THE MOUNTAIN MEADOW MASSACRE.

Tom Sakievich:

Thank you, Wendy Doniger. I don't think there is a "mainstream" except in the religious community in which we belong. That is the beauty of faith in something. Faith is no more than confidence in something. In this forum: faith in God.

The one of the remarkable tenets for choosing to become LDS in 1971 is my realization of the LDS wholesale acceptance of all other faiths that seek to elevate God’s children. Regardless of station in life, race, creed, sex the LDS faith seeks to support individuals and communities regardless of national origin or of homeland. Do all LDS fully allow others to believe as they choose? Absolutely not, they like anyone else must learn then give up preconceived notions. In 1970 I was disappointed with some; I then realized LDS people are themselves very human, some much more than others. Some live their faith fully, others keep name association only. Like "everyone else" they get up in the early morning to work, live, raise families and fail or succeed in life. Some are down-to-earth; others can be pompous.

Over half of our membership live outside the United States and are natives of other countries. In the U.S. they are found in the executive, legislative and judicial branches of the federal government. They are in every branch of federal, state and local governments, in uncounted number branches of finance, business and corporations, they are scholars in a myriad of colleges and universities, they are dentists, doctors and surgeons, are postmasters and mail handlers, they are farmers in the east, west, north and south. Some are in the very large field of journalism, IT, media and entertainment. They are in the Arts, Military, Construction, Sports and the stage. Some live long lives, some short. Some occupy the spotlight in life, most live day-to-day and lives of routine. Some are profoundly wealthy and others barely getting by.

We believe that the scriptures outline that works and faith go hand in hand, that one is useless without the other. After a time (some short, some long) some find the faith too difficult to live (i.e. obedience to the gospel, living a chaste life, healthy nutrition, service to others in and out of the religious community, and giving our all to build a wholesome community, family and personal life) or too difficult to support or live doctrinally (www.mormon.org).

Some of us find our lives so full from the day-to-day needs of life we forget we have a community. Some LDS members have an easier time accepting others' beliefs or non-beliefs than we subscribe to. No surprise here. Our response is to rely on the merits of Jesus Christ and to attempt to improve – like an infant learning to walk with parent support nearby.

The doctrines of what we believe are appendages to the gospel of Jesus Christ (i.e. Faith, Repentance, Baptism and receiving the Holy Ghost) are just that, appendages. Doctrines are based on what we understand from the Holy Bible, the Book of Mormon, the Doctrine and Covenants (or D&C, a collection of revelations on how the Church is to be organized) and the Pearl of Great Price (what we believe are writings of Abraham and Moses) (http://scriptures.lds.org/). We look at, or should see, each individual as equal to the other.

In all of this, our faith is that all men and women are equal in the sight of God. That regardless of what our station is in life or what we are asked to do in the Church, we are equal to God. Hypocrisy exists with the LDS community, as it does in others. We learn and grow and improve one day at a time.

In life’s travels it has become obvious to me that most people live regular lives. They respect the beliefs of others, even if their beliefs are very different than others. My own friends admire or are suspicious of my beliefs. I hope my life will at least give them some idea of the richness of my beliefs, even if it seems contradictory to them. Sort of living elementary and high school math classes all over again – it’s a painful process but we’ll get it in time.

There is a large difference between disagreeing with or intolerant of differences. The biggest thing I enjoy about being LDS and retired military: are 1) the experiences and a growing ability to enjoy the wide variety of people, regardless of their faith or their ability to live their faith. 2) to focus on living a Christ-centered life, not on some prize

Tom

Anonymous:

All of this debate, and no one mentions a true opener of the doors of perception:

http://www.egodeath.com/MeditPopSpiritualityDiminishingEntheogens.htm

About what I would expect of neurotypicals.

SageSinger

I speak as a UK based Pagan. To a certain extent, we Pagans are better accepted here now than many Mormons. I have a relative who was a Mormon, and she detailed how a local directory of Christian churches refused to make an entry for them, since they 'did not believe they were actually Christians.'
The trouble with mainstream, is that it is composed of an average, so to get the median you have to measure half way between two extremes. How extreme you allow those points to be depends upon your liberality I guess, but it doesn't matter to me since being 'normal' is much overated in my humble opinion!

Steve:

The reason why mainstream Christians have a problem with Mormon is that they, Mormons, believe that they are going to become Gods...like Jesus. Jesus did not die on the cross for their sins, but to fulfil the laws of eternal progression where man can become God.

Christian's don't believe in the planet Kolab, they don't believe they are going to become God, they don't believe that secret handshakes, secret names, special underware, or reading anti-church material, plays a roll in getting you into Heaven.

Christian's have no problem with Mormons. They do though, have a problem with a faith that lables themselves Christian, when their beliefs are by far...Christian.

silvrwlf:

Hi, Jody. I just wanted to touch on something with you. You keep saying that religion is necessary for society, yet you say at the bottom of your last post that the society must follow the SAME religion to be strong and if it follows many it will be weak. But the problem is, in a society that is forced to follow only one religion, the society isn't decent or fair. I don't think there will ever be a time when EVERYONE finds the same path to truth, so - according to your claims - there will never be a strong society because those bonds can't be made. So, making religion actually the stumbling block to a unified society.

I agree with what others have said, morality and right and wrong are not inventions of monotheists. I don't believe that religion is a stumbling block of society, I believe that people's insistance that their way is the RIGHT way is the stumbling block of society. Until we can stop looking at our differences (religion, color, creed, sexuality, whatever) and see our similarities, we won't have a strong society.

Don't mistake me, I have faith in the Divine and have found a path that fulfills me - I am a Pagan. But I don't put my faith as the reason that I'm a good person. In fact, I have found that when faith and belief are left out of the equation, you find connections and bonds to people much more easily. I have friends who are Christians, Hindus, Athiest, and all manner of Pagans and we get along and have deep bonds that have absolutely nothing to do with what god (or goddess) we do or don't worship.

Dreamweaver:

I lived in Salt Lake City for five years. I can honestly say that I saw more of an open religious diversity than I have in many other parts of the country. I lived in a neighborhood where within a small distance there was a Muslim meeting house (I don't think it qualified as a full-blown mosque, but I might be wrong), a Buddhist temple, a Greek Orthodox church, a Catholic church, a Unitarian church, a Synagogue, the local Mormon church, and a community of openly practicing Pagans (myself included) who were treated well by the neighbors and were populous enough to support several shops and a couple coffeehouses without it putting a strain on our pocketbooks. We actually had rituals in public parks without being harrassed. When I was ill with meningitis and got behind on my bills, the local Mormon church gave us food and put us in touch with the government departments to get help with the rent until I could work again. They never once proselytized to either me or my partner when we came to them for help, and they were always polite and friendly. I have seen far more intolerance of minority religions in other parts of the country than I did living in Salt Lake City. The dominant form of Christianity in the area where I lived for 12 years before moving to Chicagoland was very intolerant of minority religions, including Judaism, and being openly Pagan was not even something I thought of with anything other than a shudder. This was not a small town, this was a good sized city with a diverse ethnic population and a decent number of members of minority religions. There just seems to be this Christian idea of entitlement to being the only valid religion in an area, even when there are broad population groups who are not Christian. In this sense, I would say that Mormons are not Christian, though they certainly practiced Christian love and charity far more than I have ever seen from real Christians.

Jody:

Hi Henry James,
My statement:"Religion helps to provide or maintain a honorable, respectful, decent and even fair society." Religion is a key part of every society on earth. From the Stone Age to the Space Age. Religion provides the social bond which makes society stronger because there are common bonds that as a society we work together to uphold. If you will refer to Durkheim you will find that a Mechanical society is more stable because of the common bond(it could be all Mormon's, Buddhist's, Atheist's, etc.) But the society would be strong. On the other hand we could have a mix-which we currently do which is refered to as an Organic Society and it is less stable.

Paganplace:

Ah, Dave, I'm a *really* liberal faithful Pagan who believes strongly in secular government as a guarantor of civil liberties and other really important stuff.

The theocratic elements in Mormonism, I certainly find both alarming and dangerous... politically. Heck, even a lot of theocrats who aren't just using the talk as a means to an end find the theocracy threatening cause it's not *their* theocracy.

Certainly there's not much difference to me when it comes down to it, between Mormons and other right-wing Christian establishments, but, well, as *people* go, it's much the same. Certainly, people claiming to be a minority religion while advocating the same sorts of social marginalization of people who don't obey some of their rules don't get a lot of sympathy from me on that score: heck, the Religious Right at large can't seem to decide whether it's an oppressed minority or the 'true and unquestionable voice of the majority' that they are.

Part of any communication problems is probably that Mormons seem to mostly meet their biggest sample of Americans while *bothering them and trying to tell them to change religions at inconvenient hours in the morning.* :)

It certainly doesn't do much for respect to have people come along not respecting your right to say, 'OK, it's not OK for you to come to my house and do this, you can wreck my whole day that way.' 'But my God *says* it's OK! You'll see that if we do it *more!* '

*sound of door latch.*


Work on that, and I'll work on my tennis swing. :) We'll have to play at night, though, I have bad sun sensitivities and often have to be nocturnal. (Thus often really need to sleep in.) :)

At the same time, I know what it's like to have somewhat more voices saying you're some kind of horrible person than actually hearing what you're like. Some of the people saying them about me are Mormons.

So, 'suspect like any other right wing sect, maybe substantially-more-cultey, but less physically-dangerous,' Yeah. I suppose so. I don't believe a lot of the party lines coming from SLC about the actual history of the sect, ..I figure someone *did* get pretty creative with some of the ideas floating around America at the time in ways that just happen to benefit certain people...

But I'm suspicious of authoritarian religions, anyway. Nothing particularly personal. Just it comes off as kind of insincere when you can see a hook in any nice thing that conversion-hound religious do. Can't be a lot of fun seeing the world as just a bunch of potential converts, and everything a means to an end, either.

Mainstream? All too. A little respect for boundaries would go a long way, though. I'd be like, 'Listen, I'd only get excommunicated in five minutes, anyway, you want a soda or something? You can sit under a tree there, and say it was 'outreach' or something. :)

daveescaped:

This is indeed a good article. As a Mormon I can't exactly say where I feel more comfortable, being called "mainstream", or "outside-of-the mainstream". Outside of it you are special but weird, inside you are normal but not special.

What I find a more interesting distiction, is that to many social-liberal/seculars, I am absolutely part of mainstream christianity and as a result suspect. To many social-conservative-/evangelicals I am not Christian and as a result suspect. If I need a tennis partner, my only choice is a social-moderate-agnostic.

As much as evangelicals want to be the keepers of the term Christianity, I think that ship has sailed. As a follower of Christ, I think my self-definition will prove more robust to the many in this country who don't distinguish a difference.

daveescaped:

Yockel:

You said, "Roy also has a point about the treatment of homosexuals. LDS leaders are coordinating a nation wide effort to deprive gays and lesbians of their rights."

Mormons have no interest in taking rights away from Gays. What right do Gays currently have that Mormons are trying to take away? We are against giving rights to Gays such as marriage and non-spousal benefits. These would be new rights. I have no interest in extending these rights to Gays. But I am perfectluy happy to allow them any and all rights they currently have. As I would assume others are willing to allow me my rights.

HJ:

Anon
Historians generally date the beginning of Judaism as 1500-1350 BCE, with Moses.

Of the 3 major monotheistic religions, Judaism is of course the first.

again: google "monotheistic religion origin history"

also
the good article by Hauser and Singer is at

Morality without REligion
http://www.wjh.harvard.edu/~mnkylab/publications/recent/HauserSingerMoralRelig05.pdf

Anonymous:

Thanks HJ for the explanation. I will look into those books. For the time being, I am still confused at the comment of "evidence of human tribal groups going back thousands of years before the first appearance of a Monotheistic Religion (Judaism)."

I guess what I am trying to ask is this. (I appreciate your patience with me as I'm not as eloquent as others with words) What are these researchers considering the first appearance of a Monotheistic Religion? What timeframe and artifacts are they referring to?

Betty:

Roy
from the perspective of an Atheist who grew up a mormon and knows lots about Christianity

I think your analysis/conclusion is exactly correct, and your statistics show the absurdity of Evangelicals saying they are More Christian than Mormons or anyone else, except perhaps Ax Murderers.

Thanks. Smart post.

Henry James:

Anon: thanks for the question.

Leaving aside the Adam and Eve story:

There is anthropological and archeological evidence of human tribal groups going back thousands of years before the first appearance of a Monotheistic Religion (Judaism).

All the evidence suggests that those groups were generally just as moral, and had essentially the same moral principles, as Judaism, Christianity, and Islam.

In fact many scientists' research suggests that higher primates often have the same kind of moral behaviors and sanctions that human groups have.

So, Morality predates Monotheism. We don't need Montheistic teachings to be Moral. And current studies have consistently shown that Atheists (and polytheistic Hindus) are just as good at moral reasoning and behavior as Monotheists are.

Sources for you: google "moral behavior religion atheism" and you'll get Millions of hits.

Google "Hauser Singer ethics" and you will get areally good article.

Read a book called "The Science of Good and Evil", and "Moral Minds" by Marc Hauser of Harvard.

Hauser believes we have innate Moral reasoning abilities in the same way we have innate ability to learn languages. That it evolved.

bot:

Mormons would have been extremely mainstream Christians during the First through Third Centuries:

Could members of the Church of Jesus Christ (LDS) be more "Christian" than Evangelicals or Catholics? . . Oral traditions of Jewish and early Christian temple worship and portions of the Apocrypha referred to “mysteries”:

Early Christian churches, continued the Jewish temple worship traditions:
1) Baptism of youth (not infants) by immersion by the father of the family
2) Lay clergy
3) Anointing with holy oil after baptism
4) Then clothing in white clothing

An early Christian Church has been re-constructed at the Israel Museum, and the above can be verified. http://www.imj.org.il/eng/exhibitions/2000/christianity/ancientchurch/structure/index.html
.
And read Exodus Ch 29 for Aaron and his sons” ordinances. . Jewish Temple practices were continued by Christians prior to the time of the Emperor Constantine [see St. Cyril of Jerusalem (315-386 A.D.) Lecture XXI]. . . Early Christians were persecuted for keeping their practices sacred, and not allowing non-Christians to witness them

A literal reading of the New Testament points to God and Jesus Christ being separate, divine beings, united in purpose. . To whom was Jesus praying in Gethsemane, and Who was speaking to Him and his apostles on the Mount of Transfiguration?

The Nicene Creed”s definition of the Trinity was influenced by scribes translating the Greek manuscripts into Latin. The scribes embellished on a passage explaining the Trinity, which is the Catholic and Protestant belief that God is Father, Son and Holy Spirit. The oldest versions of the epistle of 1 John, read: "There are three that bear witness: the Spirit, the water and the blood and these three are one."
Scribes later added "the Father, the Word and the Spirit," and it remained in the epistle when it was translated into English for the King James Version, according to Dr. Bart Ehrman, Chairman of the Religion Department at UNC- Chapel Hill. . . .He no longer believes in the Nicene Trinity.

Members of the Church of Jesus Christ (LDS) have concern for their ancestors” spiritual welfare, so they practice proxy baptism. (1 Corinthians 15:29 & Malachi 4:5-6).

Only members of the Church of Jesus Christ (LDS) continue these practices of First Century Christians. The Cross became popular in the Fifth Century A.D. But Mormons don”t term Catholics and Protestants “non-Christian”. The dictionary definition of a Christian is “of, pertaining to, believing in, or belonging to a religion based on the teachings of Jesus Christ”:. All of the above denominations are followers of Christ, and consider him divine, and the Messiah foretold in the Old Testament.

It”s important to understand the difference between Reformation and Restoration when we consider who might be the more authentic Christian. If members of the Church of Jesus Christ (LDS) embrace early Christian theology, they are likely more “Christian” than their detractors.

* * *


And the National Study of Youth and Religion done by UNC-Chapel Hill in 2005 found that Church of Jesus Christ (LDS) youth (ages 13 to 17) were more likely to exhibit these Christian characteristics than Evangelicals (the next most observant group):
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . LDS Evangelical
Attend Religious Services weekly . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 71% . . . . 55%
Importance of Religious Faith in shaping daily life –
extremely important . . . 52. . . . . . 28
Believes in life after death . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 76 . . . . . . 62
Believes in psychics or fortune-tellers . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 0 . . . . . . 5
Has taught religious education classes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 42 . . . . . . 28
Has fasted or denied something as spiritual discipline . . . . . . . . . . . .68 . . . . . . 22
Sabbath Observance . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 67 . . . . . . 40
Shared religious faith with someone not of their faith . . . . . . . . . . . . 72 . . . . . . 56
Family talks about God, scriptures, prayer daily . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 50 . . . . . . 19
Supportiveness of church for parent in trying to raise teen
(very supportive) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .65 . . . . . . 26
Church congregation has done an excellent job in helping
Teens better understand their own sexuality and sexual morality . . . 84 . . . . . . 35

Anonymous:

HJ,

I'm curious of your argument. Can you elaborate a little more on this statement:

"Man's Moral sensibility and reasoning and values evolved Millenia before Monotheism ever appeared on the earth."

As someone who believes that God created the Earth and man, I believe that monotheism came before all things on earth through Adam and Eve. So given my point of view for you to work with, I am not implying your thesis is incorrect nor am I trying to invoke criticism, I am truly interested in your statement from your point of view.

Thanks.

Henry James`:

Hi Jody

How would we test the Hypothesis you posit:

"Religion helps to provide or maintain a honorable, respectful,decent and even fair society"

My counter Hypothesis is
"Religiousity DOES NOT promote decent (etc) societies any more than ATheism does."

We can look at this on two levels:
The Individual: Are believers any more Moral and Decent than Atheists?

if you Google "atheism moral behavior" you will get about a million references, beyond Hauser, though he and the prominent ethicist Peter Singer have done some important work on this (add Singer to your Google).
Overwhelming conclusion: there is NO difference, but check for yourself

The SOCIETAL level: a recent article by G Paul in the Journal of Religion and Society (google it) has gotten lots of notice lately.

His conclusion: not only is there NO Evidence that societies with High Religiousity (belief and church attendance) are more decent than Atheistic Godless societies, the evidence points to the opposite conclusion, though we are far from causality in these early investigations.

Jody:

DaveB, Okay! Perhaps we can continue our discussion tomorrow.

DaveB:

Jody, I am not evading anything. I have no idea what you are asking me. You asked if Henry and I were fellow atheists. I made a joke, saying I am a fellow, but I could not speak for Henry. I am also an atheist.

Anonymous:

Patricia Sweet..., Daveb, Jody, Hertaclitis, Henry, Scientist, GALORE et al;

The Non-Jealous, thus fvearless, Lord, Holy NO-MON ELACATi, et al, is HERE, NOW!

Behold: This Time a Miracle ALL WILL SEE as the Ecklati of OURS Me Me in ALL that is? Praise Holy No Mon eclati but ITSELF or as IT (g-d you, you G-d in ALL, & beyond from NOW!)


: + )/ Ya Ya Monsa Mono's et al!

Jody:

Dave B
Of course we can agree-but you have evaded my question once again-a "fellow," of what?
As a student of Aristotle I want to know.
Metaphysics "All Human beings by nature desire to know-

Jody:

My Dear Henry,
While we have agreed not to pursue the topic of who is right or wrong, we certainly can pursue the topics of social and moral conduct.
In order to dissaprove my belief that Religion helps to provide or maintain a honorable, respectful,decent and even fair society where do you suggest we begin? You previously mentioned Moral Minds by Marc Hauser.
Jody Bright Eyes

DaveB:

Jody, can we at least agree that the object of a preposition takes the objective case?

DaveB:

I am a fellow. I can't speak for Henry, him being dead and all.

Henry James:

Jody Bright Eyes

You are certainly as free to believe in God as I am free to NOT believe in her.

Neither of us can prove the other wrong.

I can, however, prove to you that atheists in general are just as moral as believers, and that morality is not at all dependent on Religion.

Man's Moral sensibility and reasoning and values evolved Millenia before Monotheism ever appeared on the earth.

Jody:

DaveB,
Are you and Henry fellow atheist's?

Jody:

Henry,
I appreciate the kindness with which you slapped my wrist!
Yes, God did give me beautiful eyes to see the glorious sunsets and the vibrant sunrises.
I certainly did not mean to offend you, I am sure you are a caring individual with high values, kindness and good values. However, you and I will have to agree to disagree. God is the creator of both you and I!

DaveB:

Sorry Jody, I can't figure out what you are saying in that last message. Here's what I meant: Religion is bunk. God is bunk.

Jody:

DaveB-Let me mirror what you just wrote to see if I heard what you said.
Through contemporary speech you practice moral integrity and conformity through your own cause, principle and system of beliefs.
Your "Either and both." Seems a bit ambiguous. Aristotle would question the validity as well as soundness of your logic.

Henry James:

Jody
You write
"As a society we need religion-it provides us with a base to conduct our lives with decency, honor, kindness, fairness, integrity, even structure"

With all due respect, my friend,

you don't know what you are talking about.

Atheists like me are just as decent, honorable, kind, fair, and full of integrity as believers.

Hundreds of scientific studies show this.

Don't just rely on what mommy taught you.

Read a book. Moral Minds by Marc Hauser of Harvard.
The Scienceof Good and Evil.

Come out of the dark ages and open your beautiful eyes that God gave you.

Love
Henry

DaveB:

Jody asks, "Is it religion or God?" Is what religion or God? Bunk?

In contemporary parlance, the two are synonymous: "the service and worship of God or the supernatural." There is an obsolete defintion: "scrupulous conformity." Finally there is, "a cause, principle, or system of beliefs held to with ardor and faith." [Merriam Webster]

So, ignoring the obsolete definition, the answer to your question is, "Either and both."

Jody:

DaveB
Is it religion or God?

Jody:

Patricia,
As a society we need religion-it provides us with a base to conduct our lives with decency, honor, kindness, fairness, integrity, even structure. My faith provides me with hope, encouragement, salvation, I have my God to pray to, share my burdens and heartaches with. My God gave me strength through cancer, the death of my parents and sister. My God gave my family hope with the premature birth of my first Grandangel. Even though there are religions that I do not agree with, I do believe in God and only through His grace to we receive everlasting life.
End of Sermon

DaveB:

Jody, whether sparks fly or not, it's still bunk.

DaveB:

You are right. I am a young person. Only 60 years old.

Patricia R. Sweeney:

Seems like most of these comments come from young people who are mystified by how someone who "believes" certain doctrines can be a good person or a good neighbor, etc. It's finally dawned on me at the age of 68 that most followers of a religion have no idea what that religion "requires" in the way of belief & don't care when you point out that certain of these required beliefs are irrational. Case in point, Harry Reid, now the Democratic leader of the Senate, says he & his wife chose Mormonism as their religion because they had noticed that the nicest, kindest people they knew were Mormons. He doesn't say anything about the beliefs "required" to join the LDS church or whether any of them presented stumbling blocks. Nor does he state why it wasn't possible to be a kind, decent person outside the framework of any religion--which surely it is (or I'm in trouble).