I've seen threads on religion in gameplay pop up from time to time but I'm curious about a slightly different application: What would be your reaction to the presence of actual factions that represent both good and bad versions of modern day faiths? What I mean is that they are presented neither good nor bad, but different which have different effects on you in the game world. The factions would be called various names but be clear future outgrowths from modern day religious factions (Islam / Christian / Hindu / etc. / etc.). They might oppose each other or coexist, depending on the time period, and would change as time passed. You could find extremist variants, peaceful variants, and political variants. You'd also find fictional outgrowths, and totally new religions might arise from the ashes if society collapsed. The factions themselves would be real or fictional. A colony, for instance, might be funded by the Vatican; or you might have a cyborg mujahadeen struggling against alien occupation and using suicide bombing techniques. You'd be able to join a religious faction just as with any other faction. The point in doing this would be to give the world some heavy weight, a relevant dose of "veracity" which would allow you to see future events grounded in present day events. What I'm imagining here is a kind of "future history" generator, by the way, so that different games would have different factions in different relationships and powerlevels.

---

If this sounds very out of place, I'd like you to consider these two novels: In Dan Simmons Hyperion series, Earth expands into space with the help of AI; but these AI betray humanity, and use the symbol of the Holy Cross to revive the Vatican as a powerbase that institutes a new crusade. In Peter F. Hamilton's The Reality Dysfunction, the Pope and major world religious leaders declare that life-after-death technology is an abomination being used to thwart judgement; this leads to a critical evolutionary division between humans - those that embrace the technology form a biotech commune with pilots wedded to living starships; while the other faction, the Adamists, embrace nanotechnology and keep their faiths. The result is an uneasy coexistence / interdependence which the characters explore.

I wouldn't bother me if that is what you are asking, but I'm not really religious.

In my opinion, if you are setting the scene far enough in the future (and I think you are) I don't see a need to model it after specific current day religions. Just get a bunch of factors together based off all the religions you can get and slap them together. You never know if a pleage wipes out 98% of the population and we have to start over again and come up with completly different religions.

- Take a look at what people have worshiped in the past, animals, people, gods, the earth etc. and think what could people warship in the future: Space ships, power sources, aliens, black holes, etc.

- Take a look at what religions have fought over (or agreed on), land, how to get to heaven or equivalent.

- What is the major goal of the religion for its followers, i.e. get to haven, die in combat so you can reach Valhalla, learn from your past lives to achieve oneness with the universe, travel to Mecka, take at least 500 expnisive trips through the telaporters, etc.

- Does the religion make it's knowledge open to all their followers or does it keep it a secrete to be dispensed by their priests. "Brother Ben, we have another scheduled food drop off, we should tell our followers to expect a gift from the heavens."

Put all these factors in a bag, shake and create a new religion and give it some made up name. I doubt that everyone will be speaking English (at least as exists today) in 10,000 years.

Sure you might wind up with a religion that attempts achieve transcendences by emulating roosters, but just remember what Bart said in one episode of the Simpsons, "Thank god we came to our senses and warship a carpenter from 2000 years ago" (or something like that)

The only way I'd dislike the use of religions would be if you blatantly abused stereotypes and had only Christian Saints and Muslim Terrorists (the second word capitalized because either association would be bad {Ie saying all saints are christians or all christians are saints would be equally distasteful}) or something of that nature. Alternately, if you didn't use real religion names and you didn't just do "real religion _1_ but called _2_ instead", then I wouldn't mind having the more absolute "good" and "evil" seen in many settings.

Quote:

Original post by Extrarius The only way I'd dislike the use of religions would be if you blatantly abused stereotypes and had only Christian Saints and Muslim Terrorists (the second word capitalized because either association would be bad {Ie saying all saints are christians or all christians are saints would be equally distasteful}) or something of that nature. Alternately, if you didn't use real religion names and you didn't just do "real religion _1_ but called _2_ instead", then I wouldn't mind having the more absolute "good" and "evil" seen in many settings.

The very reason I liked the proposal was that it sounded like it would have Christian Saints, Christian Terrorists, Muslim Saints, Muslim Terrorists, Christian Bible-thumpers, Hindu Veda-thumpers, etc. (By the way, where do atheism and agnosticism fit in with the different factions?) You know, showing the real variety within each religion. It seems to me that most discussions of religion on this board start as one of three things:

1) pro-Christian propaganda, focusing only on the good things Christians have done
2) anti-Christian propaganda, focusing only on the bad things Christians have done
3) non-Christian propaganda, focusing on exposing gamers to something outside of the false Atheist/Christian dichotomy

It sounds to me that, in a way, this proposal is trying to combine all three and turn it into an interesting game/story mechanic. Maybe a militant Christian sect has gained in visibility and most Christians are written off as terrorists, while Islam has been watered down by the masses and Muslim heroes get written off as Qur'an-thumpers? What about missionary groups to extra-terrestrial societies? Or even the often overlooked possibility of missionaries from extra-terrestrials? Being Christian/Muslim/Hindu/Atheist is not presented as good or bad, but it does affect the sorts of good and bad things you can do, the way in which you do them, how the rest of the world sees them, etc. (Reminds me of CivII where fundamentalists weren't punished as harshly for breaking treaties because what more could you expect from a bunch of religious fundamentalists?)

I actually like this idea. Rebellious, and dangerous, but useful.

Quote:

Original post by Kars I wouldn't bother me if that is what you are asking, but I'm not really religious. In my opinion, if you are setting the scene far enough in the future (and I think you are) I don't see a need to model it after specific current day religions. Just get a bunch of factors together based off all the religions you can get and slap them together. You never know if a pleage wipes out 98% of the population and we have to start over again and come up with completly different religions.

The trouble with this is that you're, in a way, questioning the validity of religion. To say that it is something we "come up with" is to say that it is from man and not from a religion's respective god(s). This goes against what many religions believe. By evolving current religions you do not question their origin and therefore do not confront their validity in this way. Saying that a religion will evolve in a certain manner does not necessarily make a judgement on its current position since this evolution can be seen to come from outside pressures. A member of the religion may react by saying it would be regrettable if their religion were to evolve that way, but should not see it as an attack on their religion as they believe it.

For example, in Rendevous with Rama, Arthur C. Clarke (an atheist, who sometimes takes cheap, though perhaps tongue-in-cheek, jabs at religion) presents a character who is a member of the religion into which Christianity has evolved. Something about Jesus being an extra-terrestrial, etc. I am a Christian; that is not what I believe; I think it would be regrettable for Christianity to move in that direction. However, it does not confront Christianity itself and Clarke even shows some respect towards Christians in the handling of the character. In another book co-authored by Arthur C. Clarke, The Light of Other Days, people can view/hear events in the past. He shows Moses to be a combination of several historical figures, and, if memory serves, Jesus to not be divine (though he does side-step the issue of his last words). This directly conflicts Christian (and Jewish?) beliefs by questioning their origins.

Not saying questioning a religion's origin is something we shouldn't do, but I think that, in a way, goes against the intent of presenting the religions as neither "good nor bad".

Quote:

by Way Walker The trouble with this is that you're, in a way, questioning the validity of religion. To say that it is something we "come up with" is to say that it is from man and not from a religion's respective god(s). This goes against what many religions believe.

Good point. If you are playing a game or watching a move that is set far in the future and they have some weird religions, do you even question what happened to Christianity or some other current day religion? If you had no clue that this question was even asked before playing the game, how many people do you think would even question new religions that you present in your game. Battle star Galactic has a lot of religious elements in it but up until now I personally didn't think too much of it.

Keep in mind that other religions can pop up and become mainstream. I am guessing that any religion that has Jesus as a central figure can't be more than 2000 years old, I am sure the Egyptians has a religion, worshiping spirits/animals has been around for a long time. I am sure that you can have and have had a blending of religions.

I am not saying that current day religions will not be around or shouldn’t be around, but they may not be mainstream or even more different than you may think. Think of it this way, how many versions of the Bible are there? The Bible has been translated. Even the same language will change over time, and what the bible says today may mean something else or be misunderstood by someone 2,000 years from now. How do you know that that is not the way god intended it to be, he is all knowing after all.

Throw in alien civilizations with their own belief systems and who knows what you will get.

You can use any of the above reasons to either include current day religions as they are or create completely new religions.

Oooooh [inlove]
I would love to see that, if it were properly done, but it would need a bit of research, you know!
I for one, would love to learn a bit more about all the various muslim factions we keep hearing about on TV (for example). I personally love all this factionalism that exist within the christian churches (ever since I read that book _the Name of the Rose_ by Umberto Eco) and I think it would be nice to show that, and to also show that other religions have the same problems.
It's amazing how, no matter what, people always manage to disagree about something...[grin]
Gee, especially here in Ireland, I always found it slightly amusing when people talk about protestant/catholics but don't know _anything_ about either religion (like, how the English created the anglican church, which is just one of many protestant chruches)

The reason I am talking about this is that it would be quite useful to look at the kind of issues that have so far divided churches. Knowing this, it wouldn't be too hard to imagine how people would react at the introduction of new technologies, and how splinter groups could then form.

The RPG I am reading at the moment (Transhuman Space) has got some amazingly cool points about this.
For instance, there is this really bit about the Islamic Califate's position on the status of bioroids and cybershells. Essentially, cybershells are free to walk around and do their job as long as the shell doesn't try to look like a human, since according to the teachings of the Prophet, creating mock images of Man is a sin (I am paraphrasing here). Then the Caliph dies, and the new one argues that, according to the texts (I forget the exact name) Man creating images of Man is only a sin if he cannot give the breath of life, but since modern technology allows this, and clearly the intelligence required to achieve this level of technology is a blessing of Allah in the first place, then it is acceptable to have bioroids. And so the law is changed (I believe it's the Sharia) to make it acceptable to make bioroids (although they are still treated like slaves, and must still look clearly non human)
Another funny thing is the following of the 5 Pillars, which can become problematic when your days are not standards 24hours like on Earth, or when the year isn't standard either (for Ramadan), or when you've no idea where Mecca is relative to you (people with AI software simply use it to get the right direction to pray to)...

Another cool example is this church where people wilfully get implanted with a puppet implant and a shadow of one of the church leaders (a copy of a sapient AI, implanted in their brain). During their daily activity, the shadow will counsel them as to what is the right thing to do, according to christian beliefes. In extrems cases (if the person is about to commit a sin), the shadow can take over (using the puppet implant) and control the person to prevent the sin, and explain the situation and reason with the person. The goal being, essentially, to provide a guardian angel to every church member, there to watch and encourage to become a better person and to follow the teachings of the Bible. The last stage is, when the person is a truly devout follower, to be destructively uploaded (make a digital copy of his brain) and become in turn one of the leaders (and have shadows of you made to help followers reach your own stage).

Well, you get the idea, there is some really cool potential there...

Personally I think if you do a minimum of research then there is really no problem. But if limit yourselves to the cliches (say, all Irish are Roman Catholic, all English are Protestants), forget about it, you are just asking for troubles...

I kind of like the ideas, but I prefer potential implications...

Imagine someone with a small patch on the back of his head? That is his "Puppet" implant, the voice of an angel that tells him the teachings of God.
Imagine someone with big problems and mental disorders suddendly turning to faith? What prevents him to try and make for himself a huge neurobiotic tatoo, in the shape of an angel? Or an avenging angel? Or an angel of death? he would get, in fact MORE teachings than many do, and would believe that it is his duty to perform as the avenging angel, or death angel, or to cure the world of all sins...


Think of all the different popes so far? Even the last one had made some serious changes in the dogma and the relation between belief and actual life in the present world. What more may change under Benedict XVI? What more may change in another generation? What kind of NEW relations to NEW events and technologies would require a modification of dogma?


Think of all the different Christians factions? The Franciscans? The Domenicans? The Trappists? The Opus Dei? What if this Holy Mafia decided that they had to take over the christian religion for the benefit of all? What if there was a war between all those Christian factions? The progressists, the conservationists, the power-lusty...


What if, as is suggested by JM Straczinsky, the israelo-palestinian conflict only amounted not to a war of beliefs, but to how much arable land can be used in that part of the world? What would happen if there was a technology which allowed to transform the deserts in oasis? Would there still be a war? What if this technology could be used in the Sahara? The Gobi? What kind of wars would there be to control the immense fields which would spring there? Would they help the growing World population, or try to gain profit of it?

can you imagine a war for world religious domination? Would there be secret wars foughth? Like the Opus Dei, pitched against the haschichins, against the thugs,against whoever might appear on the scene?


Where do the raelites, and Kabbalists, and scientists fit in the scene? Is it possible to create more religions and sects out of thin air?


Did you know that, when Jean-Paul II was elected, a Spanish man decreted that this pope was not the rightful one, and self appointed himself pope of the rightful church? He had also banished jean-Paul II from the Christian catholic Church, Rome and all his followers. Did you know that He died some days before Jean-Paul II? And that his followers were more than 2 MILLIONS? What if the ETA, independentists, used this belief to gain sympathy in the Spanish population? What if it worked? What if it happened elsewhere in the world? How many new independant countries may have appeared in a hundred years? In TWO hundred years? How many would be religiously led? What kind of alliances would exist? What kind of ARMIES would exist? What kind of WEAPONS would be used? Why not only suicide bombers? Who to blame when you get something like that?


The secret is not invention. It is all about projection, I think.

Quote:

Original post by Kars Quote: by Way Walker The trouble with this is that you're, in a way, questioning the validity of religion. To say that it is something we "come up with" is to say that it is from man and not from a religion's respective god(s). This goes against what many religions believe. Good point. If you are playing a game or watching a move that is set far in the future and they have some weird religions, do you even question what happened to Christianity or some other current day religion? If you had no clue that this question was even asked before playing the game, how many people do you think would even question new religions that you present in your game. Battle star Galactic has a lot of religious elements in it but up until now I personally didn't think too much of it.

It's interesting you say "Good point" and then counter it. But other than that, no, I don't question what happened to current day religion. I do think it's in poor taste when you see thinly veiled attacks against current day religions renamed. For example, in David Eddings' Elenium he pokes fun at what can be seen to be Christianity renamed (I will point out that he isn't entirely disrespectful of that religion and our hero is a member, if I recall). So, I'd say you'd want to hide the origins of your made up religions and make them significantly different from current day religions. That is, if you want to make up religions and you also want to refrain from making judgements on them.

Of course, the original post was about representing actual factions in "modern day faiths". I realize you were arguing that the modern day faiths part is unnecessary, but I think it has advantages. It makes the setting seem more like "our future" rather than "some futuristic setting". It also provides a lot of background information for "free". As the subject implies, the idea is to "tap into" the player's faith.

Quote:

Keep in mind that other religions can pop up and become mainstream.

Which is why I think it's interesting that this discussion has focused on Christianity and Islam. For starters, what about Judaism and Atheism? Diving a little deeper, Hinduism, Buddhism, Agnosticism? Maybe even a Greek, Norse, or Celtic mythology revival?