18AR23-31

( - previous issue - / - next issue - )

AR 23:31 - Skeptical scholars acknowledge Christian uniqueness

In this issue:

INTERFAITH DIALOG - responding to claims of worldview uniqueness by proponents of non-Christian religions

MEDITATION - don't try this at home, and especially not at work

+ "Look at me. I do yoga. And ... I meditate."

Apologia Report 23:31 (1,397)

September 26, 2018

INTERFAITH DIALOG

"It is not surprising that adherents of the various world religions typically claim that their faith is unique. Christians are no exception to such claims. These are quite natural assertions, as everyone wants to believe that something so crucial to them is both different and exceptional. [And how about the daunting challenge others see in the amount of study necessary to gain a comprehensive, well-informed perspective. Just knowing even a little about one worldview seems substantial to most people. - RP] But Christians often go further. They claim to actually have evidence their faith is different from all the others. [S]cholars often place world religious claims on a par while failing to look critically at the historical case for the New Testament writings and events vis-a-vis non-Christian claims. ... The claims and deeds of Jesus become even more distinct when compared with the founders of other religious traditions like Buddhism, Hinduism, Confucianism, or Zoroastrianism. [F]ailing to look critically at the historical case ... has led to various confusions such as viewing all religious claims as being equally true or likewise historical, or that one religious truth automatically requires the truth of others."

The above is found in "The Historical Uniqueness of Jesus Christ among the Founders of the World's Major Religions" by Gary R. Habermas and Benjamin C.F. Shaw (Christian Research Journal, 41:4 - 2018, pp40-45). Some highlights:

"[I]t is 'fundamental to Buddhism' that reality is impersonal. While there is a life-principle in nature, it is incorrect to discuss these matters by utilizing the term *God* in any absolute or theistic sense, including for Buddha."

"[T]he earlier and more reserved teachings of Buddhism, Confucianism, and Taoism evolved into more phenomenal, mystical, and occult versions."

"Zoroaster ... never claimed to be deity. Neither do the Old Testament texts place any prophet, priest, king, or other leaders on God's level. The Quran neither elevates Muhammad to the place of Allah nor teaches the worship of Muhammad."

"Many of Buddha's major writings date from 600 to 900 years after his death, with oral teachings being the norm for the first 500 years. [Buddhist scholar Edward] Conze concedes that that is why Buddhists cannot compete with Christians regarding the reliability of their traditions."

"None of the actual Hindu texts themselves, including the Bhagavad-Gita, can be accurately dated prior to the twelfth century AD. ... How many changes may have occurred to the text regarding Krishna's teaching in the *over four intervening millennia,* especially in a culture where historical events were thought of in a far different manner than with Jewish chroniclers? [As for how quickly even foundational understandings can change, consider western culture's recent idea that yoga is not a religious practice. - RP]

"Compared to the major world religions, only Jesus' miracles are reported in the early sources."

"How do critical scholars treat the historical data that clearly favors the Christian tradition as compared to the data of the other religious traditions? Some skeptical scholars surprisingly acknowledge the situation."

"[O]f four major postions on the New Testament manuscripts, the majority scholarly outlook favors a generally conservative view of the text, due to the vast available data." [1]

---

MEDITATION

"Hey Boss, You Don’t Want Your Employees to Meditate" -- the authors, Kathleen D. Vohs and Andrew C. Hafenbrack, are behavioral scientists. Vohs is a professor of marketing at the Carlson School of Management at the University of Minnesota and Hafenbrack is an assistant professor of organizational behavior at the Católica-Lisbon School of Business and Economics.

Originating with the New York Times (Jun 16 '18, page SR8), this item may give their average reader quite a jolt. The opening paragraph begins: "Mindfulness meditation, a Buddhism-inspired practice in which you focus your mind entirely on the current moment, has been widely embraced for its instrumental benefits - especially in the business world. ...

"[W]e recently conducted five studies, involving hundreds of people, to see whether there was a tension between mindfulness and motivation. As we report in a forthcoming article in the journal Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, we found strong evidence that meditation is demotivating. ...

"Mindfulness is perhaps akin to a mental nap. Napping, too, is associated with feeling calm, refreshed and less harried. Then again, who wakes up from a nap eager to organize some files? ...

"Management theorists and organizational leaders often think about motivation in terms of financial incentives. So as part of our research, we studied whether offering a financial bonus for outstanding performance would overcome the demotivating effect of mindfulness: It did not. While the promise of material rewards will always be a useful tool for motivating employees, it is no substitute for internal motivation." <www.nyti.ms/2Nn31w0>

The highly technical study results, "Mindfulness Meditation Impairs Task Motivation but Not Performance," appear in the journal Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes (#147 - 2018, pp1-15). The abstract reads: "A state of mindfulness is characterized by focused, nonjudgmental awareness of the present moment. The current research experimentally investigated how state mindfulness influences task motivation and performance, using multiple meditation inductions, comparison conditions, tasks, and participant samples. Mindfulness inductions, relative to comparison conditions, reduced motivation to tackle mundane tasks (Experiments 1–4) and pleasant tasks (Experiment 2). Decreased future focus and decreased arousal serially mediated the demotivating effect of mindfulness (Experiments 3 and 4). In contrast to changes in motivation, inducing a state of mindfulness did not affect task performance, as seen in all experiments but one (Experiments 2–5). Meta-analyses of performance experiments, including unreported findings (i.e., the file drawer), supported these conclusions. Experiment 5’s serial mediation showed that mindfulness enabled people to detach from stressors, which improved task focus. When combined with mindfulness’s demotivating effects, these results help explain why mindfulness does not alter performance." <www.bit.ly/2xn5CMj>

It is widely understood that book reviews can be painfully slow to make their appearance in academic journals. Years can go by between a book's release date and when a related journal review is finally read by the pubic. Perhaps this phenomena is at work with the delay seen in published critical studies responding to proof of effectiveness claims lauded by mindfulness proponents.

"People’s egos get bigger after meditation and yoga, says a new study" by Olivia Goldhill -- [Size matters. (Oh, the sweet poetic justice realized by the discovery of an appropriately unintended application for colloquial barbarism.) - RP] "[R]esearchers note that Buddhism’s teachings that a meditation practice helps overcome the ego conflicts with US psychologist William James’s argument that practicing any skill breeds a sense of self-enhancement (the psychological term for inflated self-regard.) ...

"Researchers ... found that well-being increased along with self-enhancement, suggesting that self-enhancement is linked with the increased sense of well-being that many get from meditation.

"These findings suggest that spiritual Buddhist practices like yoga and meditation may not do what proponents typically say they do, according to the study authors. ...

"Meditation can indeed be narcissistic, notes Buddhist writer Lewis Richmond in The Huffington Post. “The act of sitting in silence, eyes closed or facing a wall, attention focused on the inner landscape of breath, body, and mental activity, could at least be characterized as self-absorbed,” he says. Those who practice meditation with a self-centered perspective will likely become more self-interested, not less." <www.bit.ly/2QEOlpM>

For the above study, see "Mind-body practices and the self: yoga and meditation do not quiet the ego, but instead boost self-enhancement" Gebauer, Jochen, Nehrlich, A.D., Stahlberg, D., Sedikides, Constantine, Hackenschmidt, D., Schick, D., Stegmaie, C.A., Windfelder, C.C., Bruk, A. and Mander, J.V. (Psychological Science, 2018, pp1-22). The abstract: "Mind-body practices enjoy immense public and scientific interest. Yoga and meditation are highly popular. Purportedly, they foster well-being by “quieting the ego” or, more specifically, curtailing self-enhancement. However, this ego-quieting effect contradicts an apparent psychological universal, the self-centrality principle. According to this principle, practicing any skill renders it self-central, and self-centrality breeds self-enhancement. We examined those opposing predictions in the first tests of mind-body practices’ self-enhancement effects. ... Evidently, neither yoga nor meditation quiet the ego; instead, they boost self-enhancement." <www.bit.ly/2pm82pT>

------

( - previous issue - / - next issue - )