Theos-Talk Archives (September 1996 Message tl00342)

Hi-- glad several people had comments on the book.  Curses on
the head of whomever decided to publish it without an index,
which made it much harder to find answers.  But-- Ann's
question wasn't specifically about the book.  However, I'd say
Unity has done so much better than Theosophy at meeting
contemporary needs because it addresses the whole person with a
wide variety of programs and emphases.  Theosophy has been
pretty stuck in an educational model, addressing the mind
alone.  Of course if you persevere and get to join the ES, then
great spiritual benefits flow :)  In Unity, people's needs for
spiritual experience, social support systems, education, etc.
are more broadly recognized, as in A.R.E.  Chuck asked about
demographics.  The book addresses regional differences, most of
which are already obvious.  Southerners are more religious,
more evangelical than any other group.  Northeasterners are
more New Agey, more atheistic, with Westerners close behind.
Midwesterners are not leading in any category but tend to the
middle.  The older a person is, the more likely she is to
adhere to Biblical dogma, be evangelical, and so on.  Liesel
asked about what people mean by God, and I'll quote: "When it
comes to defining what `God' means to people, a surprisingly
large proportion-- nearly three out of ten-- describe a deity
other than the God portrayed in the Bible.  The other
depictions of God include: a higher state of consciousness that
an individual may reach (11 percent); the total realization of
human potential (8 percent); the belief that there are many
gods, each with its own power and authority (3 percent);
everyone is their own god (3 percent); and 2 percent who
maintain that there is no such thing as God.

I can tell that this research organization has an evangelical
bias by the weird way they design questions.  All the above
definitions seem goofy to me, and none is pantheistic.