| | | | View this email in your browser | | | | | | | | | | | | | | Social Media: the Wizard Behind the Screen | | | | | | | | | | Essay by Dr. Carl Krieg December 23, 2021 The largest human psychological event/experiment in history is happening as you read, it involves everyone, and has momentous consequences. To learn the details, tune in and watch “Our Social Dilemma”, a Netflix documentary featuring young former top executives of social media companies such as Google, Facebook, and Instagram. The common message is simple. Entities, business or political, pay the companies to influence the way people think. The influence can have two purposes: either entice people to buy my product, or entice people to behave in a certain way, such as voting, demonstrations, or activism of any kind. How do the social media companies achieve these goals? They know us, individually and collectively, as they continually gather data about us from the choices we make that are constantly being recorded on our computers, tablets and cell phones. Every day, all day. Huge memory banks hidden away in non-descript buildings contain the voluminous data that defines who we are. Given that information, which includes our personality traits deduced from our recorded behavior, they know how to fill the screen with suggestive material, the most obvious of which are advertisements, but also include content that is “suggested for you”. Raw Story, a small news organization, recently posed as a 13 year old, celebrating his birthday, who entered “Muslim” on tik tok, and within 10 days was receiving videos about killing Christians and Jews. Having initiated a search, algorithms lead us on. With the advent of biometrics [eg heartbeat recorded on your watch] the algorithm has that much more with which to work. Our excitability, as measured in our biometrics, provides suggestions as to what may be next suggested for us. Not only so, but the Artificial Intelligence, aka an algorithm, is able to identify thousands more who have the identical profile, and an army of consumers or activists becomes suddenly possible. Meanwhile, the tech companies make more money. Dopamine, along with oxytocin, serotonin, and endorphins are referred to as the “feel good” chemicals that activate the pleasure center of our brain. Inasmuch as we prefer pleasure and not its opposite, we trend to those activities and thoughts that trigger the dopamine. Integral to the grand experiment going on today is the identification of what it is that activates the pleasure center. Different individuals can be under the influence of different triggers, which can change as life moves on, but there are also triggers that appear to be quite common, if not universal: violence and community. Yes, violence, strange as it may seem. We have long known that sex, food and drugs can be addictive, and we have more recently learned that money as well can have that effect. Big Tech has seen, in actual real time human behavior, that violence entices a person to click to the next screen, indicating that dopamine has been released. Studies with animals have also shown this to be true. Bar brawls apparently excite us, and social media knows how to manipulate this violent behavior to turn a profit. Of course, it’s not only Big Tech and it’s not only social media. The insurrection of January 6, 2021 is a prime example of violence feeding on itself in a dopamine feedback loop.  Integral to that loop is a second major trigger of the feel good chemicals: community. Or at least some kind of togetherness with others who share our profile. We can accept it as well-established fact that homo sapiens is a social animal. We enjoy being with others who share our worldview, just as we find it uncomfortable to be with others who have a different perspective. We much prefer to have our biases confirmed rather than challenged. Here again, social media appeals to our sense of belonging, either through advertising that draws us into a community of fashion or product, or through the spouting of social critique and commentary that draws us into a certain brand of populism and activism. We have “friends” with whom we “like” things. Thousands of people will travel thousands of miles to join up with others who share the same belief, no matter how ludicrous. Being together validates the belief, incites the violence, and activates the dopamine. Why, we may ask, do community and violence create that good feeling? From a historical, evolutionary perspective, given that we have evolved and continue to evolve, community and violence must have proven advantageous to the survival of the species. The reason might lie in our hunter/gatherer days. We once existed as small tribes who hunted and gathered the food needed for survival. Although there must have been interpersonal tension in a tribe, the overarching necessity was tribal cooperation for survival. The opposite might have been the case for inter-tribal competition. Constantly moving, it was critical to have access to areas where food was plentiful, and it is easy to see how competition and conflict between tribes could arise. However, whether in peace or in conflict, intra-tribal cooperative community was mandatory and desirable, and in inter-tribal conflict, on the other hand, violence may have proven advantageous.  In addition to evolutionary analysis, we can also analyze the situation from a logical perspective. We all come into this world and are bombarded by stimuli. We order the stimuli and create a worldview through which we filter future stimuli, and in so doing create a rather limited and egocentric view of reality. Two choices present themselves. We can either realize that our worldview is limited, and through contact with others seek to learn from them and expand our understanding accordingly, or we can become closed in upon oneself and live in the illusion that your world is the real world and that everyone must agree with you. The danger in becoming open to others is that one must become vulnerable. Suppose you are aware of your limitations, meet another, share what you know, and seek to learn from the other. Unfortunately, the other takes advantage of your honesty, learns where the good hunting is, and misleads you with false information about a watering hole. The peace-lover dies out, the violent competitor wins, and he is chemically rewarded for his deceit and violence with a good feeling induced by dopamine.  This might explain why egocentrism is a universal situation. It just won out. That seems to be the point of the Cain and Abel story. Cain was a farmer while Abel was a shepherd, so it could be that this is a mythological explanation of why farmers and shepherds are always fighting. But there could be more. We don’t know much about Abel, other than that God looked upon him with favor and he was happy. The impression one gains of Cain is that he was a competitive crybaby [God likes Abel better than me], was sullen and angry, and took it out on Abel by killing him. It appears to be a case where the peace-lover loses out to the violent competitor just because that’s life, and, as a mythological statement, is meant to apply to all of us. Whatever the cause, be it rooted in evolution or logical inevitability, the fact is that today violence and community are dopamine triggers. The question is: is there a different way to put the pieces together? It may be that evolution has brought us to where we are, but inasmuch as evolution is an ongoing process, we have the potential to move on to a different place and need not remain as we are. Considering community, it is the case that belonging to a community does in fact trigger good feelings. That is not at issue. The issue is: to what kind of community do we belong? The best guess is that belonging to a loving community would precipitate all sorts of good feelings, creating a powerfully uplifting environment. We already know that sexual attraction makes us “in love” through release of oxytocin. Perhaps immersion in a community of agape love would trigger a cascade of chemicals, known and unknown. And perhaps that cascade would suppress the ability of violence to be a trigger. Think about that. We already know that nurturing love is required for an infant/baby to have a chance for a happy life. Might it not be the case that nurturing community is required for a happy life? Perhaps this was what Jesus was trying to do. He gathered a family of friends to be an example of what fulfilled life could be, a microcosm of a humanity wherein it is love that triggers the dopamine. After the manner of Jesus, it is our challenge today, a challenge to both the church and secular society, to offer an alternative algorithm in which clicking leads forward in a healthful, helpful direction. The community within our grasp can begin with as few as two and grow from there. We have reached a moment in our evolution where cooperation in community is necessary for survival. We know the way. Can we do it? Disclaimer: I am neither a neuroscientist nor a historian of evolution, and, though unintended, might be in error on some of the suggested connections. Comments most welcome! ~ Dr. Carl Krieg Read online here About the Author Dr. Carl Krieg received his BA from Dartmouth College, MDiv from Union Theological Seminary in NYC and PhD from the University of Chicago Divinity School. He is the author of What to Believe? the Questions of Christian Faith and The Void and the Vision. As professor and pastor, Dr. Krieg has taught innumerable classes and led many discussion groups. He lives with his wife Margaret in Norwich, VT. | | | | | | | | Question & Answer   Q: By A Reader How can I get through to my friends and relatives who have been activated by Fox News and other extremist media to be afraid of Critical Race Theory? They don’t even know what CRT is, but they sure are afraid of it. A: By Brian D. McLaren Dear Reader, Your question brings to mind an experience from a couple years ago, before CRT was widely discussed. I was driving a relative to an airport not far from where I live in Florida. He was a reluctant but firm Trump supporter, terribly anxious about Antifa, Black Lives Matter, and everything else Fox News told him to fear. He said something critical of Colin Kaepernick and I said something supportive of him and pretty soon, we were on the verge of an argument. I took a breath … I knew an argument would only solidify us in our positions. What could I say? We drove along for two or three minutes in a tense silence. I passed a sign that said, “Entering Lee County.” I started telling my relative this story, keeping my eyes on the road. “We just entered Lee County. Before 1887, this was part of Monroe County. But local folks wanted their own county, and they needed a name for it. I can’t help but wonder why Floridians in 1887 would name their new county after Robert E. Lee, the leader of the confederacy, the defender of slavery, the general who lost the Civil War.”  My relative didn’t say anything, but I could tell, instead of arguing, he was wondering, imagining, thinking. Over the next few moments, the tension began to dissipate. I said. “Today, about a quarter of Fort Myers, the largest city in Lee County, is black. If Black folks here need to go to court, they have to pass by a big statue of Robert E Lee before they enter the courthouse. Then, when they stand before the judge or the county council, they will see a huge mural of Robert E. Lee there behind them. I can’t help but wonder how that would feel for them.” There was silence, and after a few moments, my relative said, “Wow. I never thought of it that way before.” I hold no illusions that my relative gave up Fox and started voting Democratic from then on. But I know that one small moment of empathy occurred and took us to a place that no argument ever could. Perhaps small moments like that add up. Admittedly, these moments are rare. But I can’t help but wonder what would happen if more of us practiced ways to invite others out of argument and fear and into empathy and compassion.   ~ Brian D. McLaren Read and share online here About the Author Brian D. McLaren is an author, speaker, activist, and public theologian. A former college English teacher and pastor, he is an Auburn Senior Fellow and a leader in the Convergence Network, through which he is developing an innovative training/mentoring program for pastors, church planters, and lay leaders called Convergence Leadership Project. He works closely with the Center for Progressive Renewal/Convergence, the Wild Goose Festival and the Fair Food Program‘s Faith Working Group. His most recent book is Faith After Doubt.  He is the author of the illustrated children’s book (for all ages) called Cory and the Seventh Story, The Great Spiritual Migration, We Make the Road by Walking, and Why Did Jesus, Moses, the Buddha, and Mohammed Cross the Road? Brian's next book, Do I Stay Christian?, will be available May 24, 2022 (https://read.macmillan.com/lp/do-i-stay-christian/).  He is a popular conference speaker, a frequent guest lecturer for denominational and ecumenical leadership gatherings, has written for or contributed interviews to many periodicals, including Leadership, Sojourners, Tikkun, Worship Leader, and Conversations, and is a frequent guest on television, radio, and news media programs. | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | Let me be honest.  A year ago, we weren’t sure if our organization would survive.  We, like so many religious nonprofits, have had to accept the changing realities of funding, as our traditional funding sources have evaporated.  Many organizations would have given up, but we decided that this work was too important.  I love the above quote from Oswald Chambers because it reminds us that we can’t just hope that God will intervene and save us… we have to work to change the things that are important to us.   So, over the past year, through a great deal of determination, volunteer hours, and hard work, we have begun to turn things around at ProgressiveChristianity.org and we are certain that we will survive.  However, if we are going to do the work that’s really needed – to confront the incredibly harmful and exclusionary theology proliferated by fundamentalists, while we spread the Gospel of God’s radical love – we need to not only survive, we need to thrive.  We have a number of exciting things planned for 2022 that will greatly expand our impact, including a new podcast and some exciting video resources… but, if they’re going to come to fruition, we need your help.   If you’re looking to make a year-end donation, we’d be very grateful if you’d consider ProgressiveChristianity.org.  If you’re interested in supporting us on an ongoing basis, you might consider setting up a recurring donation.  A recurring donation of $20/month could make a monumental difference for us.   Thank you so much for your ongoing support and generosity!   Rev. Dr. Caleb J. Lines, Co-Executive Director ProgressiveChristianity.org/Progressing Spirit | | | | | | | | | | | | Bishop John Shelby Spong Revisited Looking at Christmas Through a Rear-View Window Essay by Bishop John Shelby Spong January 7, 2009 It still has magic power. Across the Western world hearts beat lighter during the Christmas season, generosity expands and romance overflows its normal boundaries. Of course, there is a minority of the population for whom this is never true. For them the Christmas season is a cruel reminder of their plight. The picture of family members smiling around the decorated tree exacerbates the loneliness of those who have no families. The warmth of the burning fireplace seems insensitive to those who are cold. Yet, despite these hard reminders that Christmas joy is never universal, it is nonetheless true that the Christmas season grabs and warms the Western consciousness as does no other time of the year. These are data that beg the question why? Why is this the season of good cheer and romance? What is there about this season that brings dreams of peace and hope of good will so powerfully into focus? Part of the answer to this query is surely that in the Northern hemisphere the Christmas season comes at the darkest time of the year, when human beings yearn for the return of the sun that will inevitably hurl back this winter darkness. Perhaps we are still in touch, at least subliminally, with those elemental anxieties that marked our ancient ancestors, who feared each winter that the sun might be disappearing permanently and who were thus gripped by a deep sense of insecurity or angst. We do frame the Christmas story as one in which the darkness is penetrated first by a bright star in the East and later by an angelic chorus that opens the night sky to sing its heavenly message to hillside shepherds. We explain the power of Christmas through the symbol of light breaking darkness. Symbols, however, are tricky. We are always tempted to literalize them. Yet, increasingly, men and women today dismiss the literal understanding of the biblical Christmas myths. Only the biologically naïve still argue that a virgin can conceive. Only the astronomically challenged believe that a star can announce a human event or wander through the sky so slowly that wise men can actually keep up with it. Only the historically inept can still pretend that a decree was issued to all the descendants of King David ordering them to return to their ancestral home in Bethlehem to be enrolled. The time between King David and Jesus was about 1000 years, or some 50 generations. King David had multiple wives and numerous children. Stories about this family echo through the books of I and II Samuel. If this king had 50 direct heirs in his generation, which would represent a very conservative number for a royal figure in that polygamous and patriarchal age, try to imagine the number of direct heirs there would be 50 generations later. At the end of five generations the number would be approximately 30,000. Ten generations later that number would have expanded to more than 40 million and, by the twelfth generation, it would have passed the one billion number. Fifty generations would produce hundreds of billions of direct heirs. Can you imagine a real king issuing such a decree designed to reach all of the descendants of one who lived a thousand years ago, or that they would obey it? If that were literally true it should surprise no one that there was no room at the inn at Bethlehem, a village of less than 500 people! The myths are beautiful and appealing but they were never meant to be taken literally. Nonetheless, they have been read as the “Word of God,” placed into hymns, liturgies, pageants and repeated so often that most people grow up thinking of them as history. While no one with any scholarly background today regards them as literally true, their power is still undiminished. At pageants, we love to see that manger, listen to the angels sing and watch the wise men journey to Bethlehem. Something is powerfully real underneath even our non-literal symbols. Pious believers do not like to be confronted with facts. In the world of our experience, however, virgins do not conceive, stars do not wander, wise men do not leave their homes in search of a newborn king, angels do not sing and shepherds do not search for a baby lying in a manger, wrapped in swaddling clothes. Beyond that, it is an established fact that the birth stories do not appear in the Christian tradition until the ninth decade. Paul, who wrote from 51-64 CE, obviously had never heard of this tradition. Mark, the earliest gospel writer, portrays the mother of Jesus as thinking he was “beside himself,” that is, out of his mind, a kind of family embarrassment that must be put away by the time he was grown. That is not the response one would anticipate from the Jewish maiden to whom angels had made the annunciation and the promise that she would be the bearer of the “Son of the Highest.” Of course, Mark had never heard of the miraculous tales of Jesus’ birth because they had not been formulated when Mark wrote his gospel. It was in the 9th decade when Matthew first introduced this tradition to the Christian community. He did so, we now believe, to counter rampant rumors about Jesus’ questionable paternity that were being circulated by the enemies of the Christian movement. These rumors are stated quite overtly by Matthew in verse 18 of his opening chapter: “When his mother Mary had been betrothed to Joseph, before they came together she was found to be with child…. And Joseph resolved to divorce her quietly.” Then Matthew tells us that Joseph learned from angelic sources that the child was holy and not illegitimate. Matthew explains this by saying that the miraculous birth of Jesus was predicted by the prophets and cites Isaiah 7:14 to buttress his case, but we now know that he mistranslated his proof text. Matthew said that this verse read, “Behold a virgin will conceive.” That text, however, announces only that “a woman is with child.” That is quite a difference. Matthew surely knew that and perhaps that is why in his seventeen-verse introduction to this narrative of Jesus’ miraculous birth he describes the strange genealogical line that he claims led to Jesus of Nazareth. The DNA that produced Jesus traveled, said Matthew, through some dark and sexually compromised waters. One of Jesus’ ancestors, he tells us, was born through an incestuous relationship between Tamar and her father in law, Judah. Others were born to the prostitute Rehab, through an act of seduction performed by Ruth and through the adultery of Bathsheba. That is quite a way to introduce a narrative of Jesus’ miraculous birth, but that is exactly how Matthew does it. About a decade after Matthew, Luke wrote his version of Jesus’ birth. He disagrees with Matthew on many details. Matthew says that the family of Jesus lived in Bethlehem, while Luke asserts that they lived in Nazareth. Only Matthew tells the story of a star and wise men, while only Luke has an account of angels and shepherds. Matthew has the holy family flee to Egypt, later return to their home in Bethlehem and finally make an angel driven retreat to settle in Galilee and Nazareth. Luke has this family remain in the Jerusalem area until the child is presented in the Temple on the fortieth day of his life before returning home to Nazareth in a leisurely fashion. When we come to the Fourth Gospel the birth stories, about which John must have known, simply disappear. John calls Jesus “the son of Joseph” twice, suggesting that his birth was quite natural. In this gospel it is not one’s natural birth that is significant, but one’s spiritual birth. That, John argued, was what made Jesus who he was. There is nothing even controversial about these data in the academic world where all birth stories are regarded as interpretive myths. That, however, does not diminish these myths’ power. Mythological truth is of a different order from either literalism or history. The purpose of the biblical stories of Jesus’ birth is to introduce us to this order. Hidden beneath these myths are expressions of the human hope that even in the darkness of winter we are not alone in this universe. There is within all human life a yearning to know that the realm of the spirit does enter and indeed does permeate the earthly realm that we inhabit. In our imagination we always tended to locate that spiritual realm above the sky. So our myths speak of mysterious signs in the skies of heaven all of which serve to announce that the Christ Child is the one life in whom God is experienced as fully present in the human realm. These symbols remind us that this planet earth is not just a tiny clod related to minor star located about two-thirds of the way toward the edge of our galaxy, but rather makes the claim that on this earth we bask in the direct gaze of the God, who is the source of the life that fills the universe. We further claim that it is within this life itself that we find meaning and purpose and that is how we know that we are not alone. That is the Christmas claim and its appeal is a very powerful one. That is also why we cling to our interpretive myths so tenaciously. No myth is literally true. It is the nature of myth to point to a truth that limited words cannot embrace. That is what the biblical stories of Jesus’ birth do and that is why we love them passionately and respect them so deeply. Our assertion in these stories is that there is a place in this world where God and human life come together. We call it Bethlehem, but it is not an external town located on a map, but a place deep within each of us. There is a manger at the end of the human journey where each of us lies in the crib of God, but to find it we must go deep within ourselves. There is a hunger in the human heart that only God can fill and so we tell of wise men and shepherds who take their journey in hope. That is why the search for God is always identical with and part of the search for ourselves. These meanings in the Christmas narratives never emerge until we surrender our need for truth to be literal. Perhaps that means that literal religion must die before God can be known. That idea grows on me the older I get. ~  John Shelby Spong | | | | | | | | Announcements     ILLUMINATING HOPE A TRANSFORMATIONAL ONLINE GALA! As our world faces continued instabilities and uncertainties, the sacred work of wisdom keeping has never been more necessary. People everywhere are looking for hope, support, and ways to remember the sacred in everyday life.  READ ON ... | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |