In this chapter, we will analyze how religions survive across generations. For this, we will use a rather daring comparison: We will argue that religions survive within a society much like hoax mail does.
A hoax mail is one that warns of a nonexistent threat. One example is the “Olympic Torch” virus email, which was sent around in 20061:
You should be alert during the next days: Do not open any message with an attached file called “Invitation”, regardless of who sent it.
It is a virus that opens an Olympic Torch which “burns” the whole hard disc C of your computer. This virus will be received from someone who has your e-mail address in his/her contact list, that is why you should send this e-mail to all your contacts. It is better to receive this message 25 times than to receive the virus and open it.
This is the worst virus announced by CNN, it has been classified by Microsoft as the most destructive virus ever. This virus was discovered by McAfee yesterday, and there is no repair yet for this kind of virus.
This virus simply destroys the Zero Sector of the Hard Disc, where the vital information is kept.
This email warned of a virus, but the virus did not actually exist. Nevertheless, fearful and well-intentioned users sent the email around by the millions. Why is this?
The email had several elements that made it so successful:
It warned of a danger.
It claimed support from authoritative sources.
It used technical terms to endow expertise to the presumed sender.
It called for the recipient to spread it.
This section will argue that religions work in much the same way: They warn of an inexistent danger (i.e., Hell or its variants) and ask people to propagate the message. In the same way that we have just analyzed what makes a hoax mail successful, we will now analyze what makes a religion successful.
Memes
In everyday language, the word “meme” usually refers to an Internet meme — a captioned picture or video that is spread widely through social media2. However, the word predates the Internet: It was coined in 1976 by British biologist (and militant atheist) Richard Dawkins3. As per its original meaning, a meme is an idea (or, in the terminology of this book, a statement or set of statements) that spreads from person to person2. A hoax mail is only one type of meme. A meme can also be a joke or a popular tune. You hear them, and they lead to behavior (telling the joke, humming the tune) that will transport them to other people61. More to the point for our analysis, a meme can also be a belief (such as “There exists a male and a female god”), a moral value (such as “Two women should not marry”), or a rite (such as “Every Sunday one should go to church”). In this way, a religion can be understood as a collection of memes about the supernatural, including moral values, rites, etc..
Dawkins hypothesized that a meme lives in the human mind like a virus lives in the human body. Thus, a meme is a “virus” of the mind4. And, indeed, viruses and memes undergo very similar processes:
Passing on
Both viruses and memes can be passed on. For example, airborne viruses are transmitted from person to person through coughing and sneezing. Memes, likewise, can also be shared from person to person. A hoax mail, for example, is passed on as recipients forward it to other people. A religious meme can be passed on through education or proselytism. For example, children in Abrahamic households learn from their parents that there is one God, and they are likely to pass this belief down to their own children.
Mutation
Both viruses and memes can be modified. For viruses, this happens through mutation. For memes, this happens as the meme merges with others or changes over time, whether on purpose or by happenstance. A hoax email, for example, can be modified by a receiver before forwarding it or it can exist in multiple versions. (Similarly, Internet advertisers use hundreds of different versions of a Facebook post in order to determine which one has the best survival rate5, i.e., the best chances to become “viral”.) In the same way, religious memes can be modified. For example, Jesus Christ modified the perception of the Jewish god by declaring himself the son of that god[Bible: Matthew 16:15–17] — thus giving rise to a new meme that would eventually develop into a new religion.
Extinction
Both viruses and memes can die out. For viruses, this happens if the host dies before the virus succeeds in spreading. For memes, this happens if the host fails to transmit the meme to another person or if the other person does not accept the meme. Most hoax emails, for example, die out after a few months once all receivers either refuse to forward it or have already fallen victim to it. For religious memes, we observe that hundreds of religions have died out in this way, from the religion of the Aztecs to the religion of the Ancient Romans or the religions of Mesopotamia.
Memes are abstract entities, not individual animals or persons. So, when we say that a meme survives, we do not mean that some being survives. Rather, we mean that a particular thought, email, rite, or belief survives across the generations. Much like an animal is only the host of a virus, a person is only the host of a meme.
Religiosity doesn’t seem to be in the genes. It should rather be treated as a cultural phenomenon. It can spread, trend, but also decline.
Meme selection
As we now know, a meme can give rise to several modifications of itself. For example, the Abrahamic religious meme “Be fruitful and multiply”[Bible: Genesis 1:28] may inspire modified memes such as:
“You shall have as many children as possible”;
“You shall have one child”;
“You shall have no children”;
as well as many other variations.
Some of these variations will be passed on successfully while others will not. In our example, the meme “You shall have as many children as possible” will likely result in the production of many children. These children will usually follow the inherited religion, and most likely abide by the meme themselves. In this way, each subsequent generation will have more hosts of the meme than the previous one. This is the strategy of the Abrahamic religions: They encourage adherents to produce many children, thereby securing the religions’ survival.
The meme “You shall have no children”, in contrast, prohibits the production of children. Thus, there would be no next generation to pass on the meme. In this way, the main method of finding new adherents for the religion would be proselytism. There is indeed a religious denomination that prohibits procreation — the Shakers6. If the mainstream Abrahamic religions and the Shaker religion were to be examined side by side, one would postulate that after a few generations there would be more adherents of the Abrahamic religions than of the Shaker religion. This is, indeed, what happened. As of 2023, the Shaker religion has only two adherents7.
While the death of a meme carrier often entails the death of the meme itself, that is not always the case: A meme can very well encourage a person to sacrifice themselves if only that aids the transmission of the meme to others. In that case, the person will die but the meme will survive. For example, while the suicide missions of some Islamists in Europe in the 2020s have well eliminated those individual adherents, their actions only further fanned the ideas of Islamism. This is much like how viruses are geared to ensure the survival of the virus, not the host. For example, baculoviruses grow inside certain animals and affect their behavior. Once infected by a baculovirus, some species of caterpillar climb to high tree branches where they subsequently dissolve into goo. That goo then drips down onto lower elevation foliage and is ingested by other caterpillars, ensuring the continued survival of the virus.8 The host dies and the virus survives.
The religions that we have today are a small fraction of all religions that have existed throughout human history. The ones that we are left with have survived because they have more effectively adapted to attract and hold the allegiance of many people.
Meme design
One way to think about religious memes is to imagine that they have been deliberately designed to survive. For example, it is widely believed that the founder of Scientology deliberately constructed his religion so that it would expand quickly. In particular, Scientology pays members a reward if they manage to attract a new member.
In other cases, memes may have evolved through natural selection, a process in which only the most well-adapted memes survive. For example, in Roman times, the land of Israel was home to many preachers of different religious convictions. Among these, Jesus Christ stood out, and his message became the foundation of a world religion. We can hypothesize that, in addition to his personal charisma, several elements made Jesus’ message more successful than that of the other preachers: He explicitly taught his adherents to spread the faith, he had an attractive vision of an imminent coming of God, he proposed the concept of an eternal Hell, and he taught his adherents that they were all loved by God. While these elements might have made his message appealing, it is unlikely that Jesus designed them deliberately in an effort to make his ideology spread more effectively. (If his goal had really been to spread his message as far as possible, he would have avoided the confrontation with the Roman authorities that led to his execution.) We can thus hypothesize that some memes were designed deliberately with the aim of proliferating the religion while others arose for other reasons and merely happened to proliferate the religion as a side effect.
If someone deliberately designs a meme with the spread of the religion in mind, then this meme cannot be god-given. Hence, someone who designs a meme and then claims it to be divine is malicious. Since the memes presented in this chapter may sound as if they were designed deliberately, it may also appear as if we are ascribing maliciousness to the prophets. This is, however, not the case. During our analysis, we will not care whether a particular meme was designed to facilitate the spread of the religion or whether it came about naturally. We will just note where a meme exists and analyze its effect on the survival of a religion.
People are infected with a religion at an early age when they have little memetic immunity, usually by their own parents. They then spend the rest of their lives paying the price of adherence to false beliefs, and in turn infect others. The winners in that long competition to infect human minds are the religions that outdo the competition by developing enjoyable rituals, memorable stories, glorious art and music, explanations for life’s mysteries (whether true or not), or nasty meme tricks such as threats of Hell, and death to the infidel.
The story of Hank
To further illustrate how religious memes operate, we turn to a story by James Huger. It is called “Kissing Hank’s Ass”9, and we give a summary here:
Two adherents of Hank knock at the door of a stranger. The “Hankites” explain that Hank is a philanthropist who wants to give everyone in town one million dollars. However, people have to follow some requirements to get this money: First, everyone must live according to Hank’s rules — a mixture of common sense and esoteric dietary guidance. Second, no one is actually allowed to see Hank. Finally, people will get the million dollars only after they have left town. Unfortunately, those who have left town are not allowed to communicate with those in town, so that the people in town must just trust that those who left did indeed get the million dollars. Oh, and people who decline Hank’s generous offer will get the shit kicked out of them by Hank while his loyal followers laugh and enjoy the spectacle.
This story sounds patently absurd. Nobody would follow the religion of Hank because Hank promises lots of things but allows nobody to verify them. And yet, the world religions work in much the same way. They also promise many things but allow nobody to verify or criticize them. These are only two of the strategies that religions have developed over time. We will discuss these and other strategies in what follows.
Meme theories
This chapter will explore religious memes that have been particularly successful. Not all religions have each of these memes, and so our hypothesis is not that every religion has each of these memes, but rather, that the presence of a meme within a given religion can help to explain how said religion prevailed over time. More precisely, the theory for each of these memes is:
If we compare a religion with the meme and a religion without the meme (that is otherwise identical), then the former will more successfully replicate over generations.
For each meme, we will note the religions that use it and those that do not. For this discussion, we will examine nearly all religions that currently have more than 10 million adherents: Hinduism, Spiritualism, Buddhism, Judaism, Confucianism, Islam, Taoism, Christianity, and the Bahai Faith. For Spiritualism, we will consider only its most visible denomination, Spiritism. For Christianity, we will occasionally distinguish between the denominations of Orthodoxy, Protestantism, and Catholicism. We will also occasionally group the Abrahamic religions together, as well as the Chinese religions and Indian religions.
Technically, a religion is a set of statements, some of which are supernatural statements (i.e., basically unfalsifiable statements). Ideally, we would state whether this set of statements includes a particular meme. However, there are usually different interpretations of a religion, and these may differ in whether they count the meme among their beliefs. Therefore, we will rarely talk about the religion itself. Rather, we will talk about its holy books, official statements of beliefs, individual documented interpretations, and, where this has been established by scholars, historical mainstream interpretations of the religion. For example, we will not say that some meme is part of Christianity. That would be too sweeping a claim. Rather, we will say that the meme is mentioned in the Bible, that it has been officially adopted by the Catholic Church, or that it belonged, for example, to the common interpretation of Christianity in the Middle Ages (if that has been scholarly established). As always, we will never single out the “true” interpretation of a religion.
The two most popular religious “brands”, Christianity and Islam, have replaced smaller local religions in much the same way that Walmart and Lidl have replaced smaller local shops. They have the resources to compete for customers in ways that smaller, less well-financed, local gods cannot.
Population Control
Fertility
One of the most successful strategies for the proliferation of a religion is to encourage adherents to have many children. If this strategy is combined with the prohibition of interfaith marriage and the religious education of children, it is almost guaranteed to lead to an exponential growth of followers so long as resources are available.
Hence, many major religions encourage having children and restrict contraception.
Appears in: Judaism
In the Torah, God commands people to “Be fruitful, and multiply, and replenish the Earth”[Bible: Genesis 1:28]. The Torah also recounts the story of Onan, who spilled his semen on the ground and was therefore punished by God (presumably because he did not use the semen for procreation)[Bible: Genesis 38:8–10]. The Talmud allows contraception only for pregnant women, nursing women, and women younger than twelve years of age[Talmud: Yevamot 12b]. To this day, the orthodox strains of Judaism discourage contraception10.
Appears in: Catholicism
Catholicism inherits the commandment to bear children and the prohibition of contraception from the Torah. Its Catechism reasons that God commanded us to reproduce, and hence, holds that “every action which [..] proposes [...] to render procreation impossible is intrinsically evil”[Catechism of the Catholic Church: § 2370]. (Oddly enough, the action of becoming a priest technically also renders procreation impossible, but is apparently not concerned by this prohibition.)
Appears in: Islam
The Quran encourages men to “go into your wives as Allah has commanded”[Quran: 2:222] because “your wives are a tilth for you, so go to your tilth, when or how you will”[Quran: 2:223]. The hadiths tell us that the Prophet Muhammad said: “Marry those who are loving and fertile, for I will be proud of your great numbers before the other nations”[Abu Dawud: 2050]. Consequently, the current mainstream interpretations of Islam are strongly pro-family and regard children as a gift from God11. While the Quran includes nothing on contraception, the hadiths that regulate contraception (in its ancient form: coitus interruptus) discourage it in sexual relations between husband and wife[Abu Dawud: 2170].
Appears in: Spiritism
According to The Spirits’ Book, man “may regulate reproduction according to his needs; but he ought not to hinder it unnecessarily”[Spirits’ Book: § 693]. The book also holds that the world population will never become too numerous[Spirits’ Book: § 687].
Appears in: The Bahai Faith
The Bahai Book of Laws states that “the very purpose of marriage is the procreation of children” and that contraception, while “not necessarily immoral in principle”, constitutes “a danger to the very foundations of our social life”[Lights of Guidance: 1160].
Does not appear in: Hinduism
The Laws of Manu state that marriage “has sexual intercourse for its purpose”[Laws of Manu: 3/32]. The Vedas stipulate that Hindus should marry, and that sexual relations are meant for procreation. However, Hinduism also knows the human aim of kama, which refers to the fulfilment of sensual and sexual pleasure12. Currently, the majority of Hindus see family planning as ethically good, and there is no opposition to contraception13. At an average of two children per family, the birth rate in India is low by international standards14.
Does not appear in: Chinese religions
Confucian philosopher Mencius remarked that it is important to have children15. That said, Chinese religions generally emphasize the importance of balance and harmony within the individual, the family, and society. Since having too many children can upset this balance, family planning has been a valued part of human sexuality in both Taoism and Confucianism16.
Varied: Protestantism
Protestantism inherits the commandment to “be fruitful and multiply” from the Torah. Yet, the Lutheran Churches and the Assemblies of God, some of the largest Protestant denominations today, allow contraception, recognizing that sexual union serves not only procreation1718.
Varied: Buddhism
There is no unifying stance on procreation and contraception in Buddhism19. The current Dalai Lama states that “married couples should have children unless there are compelling reasons not to”, but also says that “family planning is important”20 and that some “countries must curb their population growth”21.
Prohibit interfaith marriage
We have seen above that it is beneficial for a religion to encourage large families. This strategy, however, works only if the offspring of such a family stay within the religion. Therefore, marriage across religions is often prohibited.
Appears in: Judaism
The Talmud prohibits interfaith marriage, saying, “neither shalt thou make marriages with them [the Gentiles]”[Talmud: Mishnah/Kiddushin/68b/2]. This commandment is still followed to this day. A diaspora religion such as Judaism would not have survived without this constraint. Even just socializing with people of other faiths is made difficult (supposedly intentionally so by God) by requiring Jews to adhere to Kosher dietary rules22.
Appears in: Hinduism
According to the Laws of Manu, marriage may happen only within one caste[Laws of Manu: 3/13]. Since non-Hindus do not belong to a Hindu caste, interfaith marriage is prohibited by default. In Indonesia, for example, Hindu leaders have declared that “marriage conducted between couples of different religions [...] would in fact amount to adultery”23.
Appears in: Christianity
Some verses of the Bible prohibit interfaith marriage, saying, “do not be yoked together with unbelievers”[Bible: 2 Corinthians 6:14] and “do not intermarry with them”[Bible: Deuteronomy 7:3]. However, another verse seems to permit it, saying that “the unbelieving husband has been sanctified through his wife, and the unbelieving wife has been sanctified through her believing husband”[Bible: 1 Corinthians 7:12-14]. Consequently, different denominations of Christianity have different views. Catholicism, for example, forbid interfaith marriage until 1917. Nowadays, it allows mixed marriages with a dispensation[Canon Law: 1124-1127] — no ceremony of another religion is allowed and the children have to be raised as Catholics. Thus, the basic purpose of replicating the religion remains intact. Orthodox Christianity, likewise, forbids marriage with non-Christians, as the author of this book can testify from personal experience.
Appears in: Islam
The Quran generally prohibits marriage with non-Muslims, saying, “do not marry polytheistic women until they believe” and “[believing women are] not lawful wives for the disbelievers”[Quran: 2:221, 60:10]. However, it does allow Muslim men to marry women from the pre-Islamic Abrahamic religions[Quran: 5:5]. Under the assumption that the husband dominates the marriage, this law allows Islam to spread also in mixed marriages. This is the current mainstream interpretation of Islam. It is also the law in most Muslim countries — including in more secular countries, such as Tunisia24.
Appears in: Confucianism
Confucius does not discuss interfaith marriage in his writings. However, in the 2014 hearing of the Supreme Court of Indonesia on the matter of interfaith marriage, the Supreme Council for Confucian Religion in Indonesia stated that “a marriage should be conducted to achieve happiness and continue the blood line. No political view, ethnicity, understanding, culture, or even religion can stop it. However, an interfaith wedding cannot be conducted with a Confucian ceremony.”23
Does not appear in: Spiritism
The Spirits’ Book mentions no such law.
Does not appear in: The Bahai Faith
According to the Bahai Faith, all religions are inspired by God, and therefore, interfaith marriage is allowed[Book of Laws: IV/C/1/h]. This differentiates the Bahai Faith from other mainstream religions, which also sometimes claim that all people believe in the same god but then do not allow interfaith marriage.
Undefined: Buddhism
There is not much information in traditional Buddhist texts on marriage. Contemporary Buddhism seems to consider marriage a secular affair. In Indonesia, where marriage is allowed only according to the rules of the religion of the spouses, and religious rulers are thus asked to state their position on the matter, Buddhist authorities have refused to give their view on the legality of interfaith marriage25.
Shunning homosexuality
Only around 2 to 10% of the human population is thought to be homosexual. Thus, even if no homosexual ever reproduces (which in and of itself is a false assumption), homosexuality is unlikely to reduce the Darwinian competitiveness of a society. (This is actually why homosexuality has survived Darwinian selection until today in the first place.) However, in the past (and still today, even), homosexuality was likely perceived as a practice that could spread, much like the habit of drinking alcohol. Religious leaders who thought this way thus had an incentive to forbid homosexuality in order to ensure the continued reproductive success of their adherents (and thereby their religion). Though this prohibition does not change a person from gay to straight, social pressure may push someone to marry a partner of the opposite sex and to found a family. For the continuation of the faith, it does not matter whether the person enjoys heterosexual relations as long as they produce children.
Appears in: Judaism
The prohibition of homosexuality is anchored in the Torah, which states that “[a man] shall not lie with another man as [he would] with a woman, it is an abomination”[Bible: Leviticus 18:22]. Historically, the punishment for homosexuality was death[Bible: Leviticus 20:13]. Today, Judaism no longer implements the death penalty, though homosexuality is still shunned in Orthodox Judaism.
Appears in: Catholicism
Catholicism inherited the punishment of homosexuality from the Torah. However, it also no longer implements the death penalty. Though it still considers homosexual acts “grave sins” and homosexual tendencies “objectively disordered”, it commands that people with homosexual tendencies be “accepted with respect and sensitivity”26.
Varied: Christianity
While the mainstream interpretations of Christianity do not allow homosexuals to marry, liberal Christians are supportive of homosexuality, with some churches allowing same sex marriage, as we will see later.
Appears in: Islam
The Quran appears to condemn homosexuality, decrying “men lusting after fellow men”[Quran: 26:165-166, 7:80-81]. Indeed, the vast majority of Muslims today reject homosexuality27, and it is punishable by death in 12 Muslim countries28.
Appears in: The Bahai Faith
The Bahai Faith views homosexuality as a “distortion of nature, which should be controlled and overcome”[Lights of Guidance: 1222].
Appears in: Buddhism
In the words of the current Dalai Lama, homosexuality is “sexual misconduct”29. In Indonesia, Buddhist leaders have spoken up against homosexuality as well30.
Unknown: Spiritism
Given the encouragement to reproduce, Allan Kardec most likely looked unfavorably upon homosexuality. At the same time, The Spirits’ Book makes no mention of it.
Appears less in: Hinduism
The Laws of Manu appear to condemn homosexuality as an “unnatural offence with a male” but prescribe only a bath in response[Law of Manu: 11/175]. Indeed, hardly any condemnation or bias against homosexuality exists in other Hindu sacred literature. Hinduism assumes that people are born with different penchants due to their previous lives, and thus, same‐sex desires are seen as a “previous life conditioning” rather than a matter of choice31.
Appears in: Confucianism
Confucianism places great value on the marriage between husband and wife, on giving birth and raising children, and on child piety. In this spirit, the prevalent interpretations of the religion condemn homosexuality3233.
Does not appear in: Taoism
Traditional Chinese society did not strongly object to (and even tacitly allowed) male homosexuality34. Today, Taoism knows a rabbit deity who protects homosexuals, and a temple in Taiwan dedicated to this deity draws thousands of adherents per year35.
Man created God in his image:
Intolerant, sexist, homophobic, and violent.
Sex only for procreation
As we have seen, one of the most effective strategies for the proliferation of a religion is to encourage large families. Now, how can one best entice people to do this? One way is to prohibit sex and sexual pleasure outside of procreation, including the prohibition of:
homosexuality, as discussed before;
the use of contraception, as discussed before;
premarital sex, which can lead to births outside the accepted family institution;
prostitution, which allows sexual satisfaction without procreation and “wastes” sexual energy (it appears that many older societies did not understand that semen regenerates, and thus thought one should not waste it on a prostitute but rather use it only for the continued generation of the family36);
masturbation, which allows sexual satisfaction without procreation and “wastes” sexual energy;
pornography, which is seen as an aid to masturbation;
and abortion, which terminates the life of a likely adherent.
Consequently, most world religions have developed a rather strict sexual morale.
Appears in: Catholicism
The Catholic Church follows the strategy to a T. It teaches explicitly that “sexual pleasure is morally disordered when sought for itself, isolated from its procreative and unitive purposes”[Catechism of the Catholic Church: § 2351] (quite possibly, we may hypothesize, because those who wrote the passage never had any of it). Consequently, “masturbation is an intrinsically and gravely disordered action”, the “carnal union between an unmarried man and an unmarried woman [...] is gravely contrary to the dignity of persons”, “civil authorities should prevent the production and distribution of pornographic materials”, “prostitution is a social scourge”, and “human life must be respected and protected absolutely from the moment of conception”[Catechism of the Catholic Church: § 2270]. Jesus reportedly said “whosoever looketh on a woman to lust after her hath committed adultery”[Bible: Matthew 5:27-28], which is understood as a prohibition of pornography in Catholicism and conservative variants of Christianity.
Appears in: Islam
Current mainstream interpretations of Islam generally encourage sex between husband and wife. At the same time, the Quran prohibits sex during menstruation, the time in a woman’s cycle during which she cannot conceive[Quran: 2:222]. It also requests men and women “guard their private parts”[Quran: 24:30, 23:5-6], which traditionalist interpretations today read as a prohibition of pornography and masturbation37. The Quran also prohibits sex outside the couple[Quran: 24:2-3].
Appears in: Judaism
According to the Torah, a woman who is found to not be a virgin upon her marriage is to be stoned to death: “If the charge is true and no proof of the young woman’s virginity can be found, she shall be brought to the door of her father’s house and there the men of her town shall stone her to death. She has done an outrageous thing in Israel by being promiscuous while still in her father’s house. You must purge the evil from among you.”[Bible: Deuteronomy 22:13-21] Sex outside of wedlock also incurs the death penalty[Bible: Deuteronomy 22:22]. Like in Islam, sex during menstruation is forbidden[Bible: Leviticus 18]. Ejaculation in general is considered unclean[Bible: Leviticus 15:16-18]. Judaism calls this the sin of “spilling semen in vain”. Based on these sources, conservative variants of Judaism shun masturbation and pre-marital sex to this day. Orthodox Judaism even prohibits a man and a woman who are not married to each other from being in the same room alone, under laws called Yichud38.
Appears in: Buddhism
The second of the Five Virtues of Buddhism prohibits “sexual misconduct”, which is commonly interpreted as sex outside of marriage. Buddhism identifies sexual craving as one of the hindrances to attaining insight, and the Buddha says explicitly that “one [...] should avoid sensual desires”[Pali Canon: Khuddaka/Sutta Nipata/Kama Sutta/4.1].
Historically, Confucianism taught people to repress human desire, including sexual impulse. It held that the primary purpose of sex was procreation. Female virginity was highly valued, premarital sex was strictly forbidden for women, and a woman could be executed for adultery. Men, on the other hand, were allowed to have concubines and to engage in sex with prostitutes.34
Appears in: Taoism
In Taoist belief, “if a sexual conduct happens, but it is not between a man and a woman who are married to each other, it is a Sexual Misconduct”[Ultra Supreme Elder Lord’s Scripture of Precepts]. According to the commentary in the Ultra Supreme Elder Lord’s Scripture of Precepts, “masturbations, premarital sexual conducts, adulteries, prostitutions, having sex with prostitutes, homosexual sex, etc., are all Sexual Misconducts”.
Appears less in: Hinduism
Some ancient Hindu texts condemn extra-marital sex and masturbation, stating: “Let not a man gratify his desires with unnatural objects [or] think incontinently of another’s wife, [...] for such a man will be born in a future life as a creeping insect. He who commits adultery is punished both here and hereafter [...] and when dead he falls into Hell.”[Vishnu Purana: 3:11] The Laws of Manu stipulate that addressing a woman outside the village, or offering her gifts, also counts as adultery[Laws of Manu: 8/356-357] — for which the penalty is death. At the same time, the Kama Sutra (a text from the 3rd century BCE) describes masturbation and homosexual and bisexual acts, indicating that sexual attitudes were not as conservative as the holy texts suggest12.
If homosexuals had a book that called for religious people to be stoned, how long would it take to be classified as hate speech?
Child marriage
One way to increase the number of children within the family unit is to maximize sexual activity during the fertile period of women’s life by encouraging or forcing a woman to marry at a young age, just after she has reached puberty. This strategy not just increases the number of children per woman, it also shrinks the gap between the generations and speeds up the reproduction process over time. Hence, many religions support child marriage for women.
Appears in: Catholicism
According to Canon Law, the minimum marriageable age for a woman is 14[Canon Law: Can. 1083 §1]. In Western countries, a minimum age of 18 is generally, legally enforced. However, in sub-Saharan Africa (which is predominantly Catholic and Muslim), child marriage rates comprise between 38% and 46% of all marriages39.
Appears in: Islam
According to Muslim tradition, the Prophet Muhammad married his wife Aisha when she was just six years old and had intercourse with her when she was nine[Muslim 8:3311][Bukhari: 5:58:234][Bukhari: 3896][Bukhari: 5158]. The Quran holds that Muhammad is the perfect role model to follow[Quran: 33:21]. The Quran also discusses how to divorce girls who have “yet to menstruate”[Quran: 65:1-4], which means that the book allows the marrying prepubescent girls in the first place. Today, some interpretations of the faith prohibit child marriage40. Still, as a group, Muslim countries have the highest rates of child marriage when compared with developed countries and with non-Muslim developing countries, according to the Organization of Islamic Countries41.
Appears in: Hinduism
The Laws of Manu allow for a girl as young as eight years of age to marry: “A man aged thirty years, shall marry a maiden of twelve who pleases him, or a man of twenty-four a girl eight years of age.”[Laws of Manu: 9/94] Indeed, 23% of women in India are married before the age of 1842.
Appears in: Historical Judaism
The Talmud states that “he who [...] marries [his children] just before they attain puberty — of him Scripture saith, And thou shalt know that [thou do] not sin”[Talmud: Sanhedrin 76b]. It also describes how a girl who is younger than eleven “may go ahead and engage in relations in her usual manner [with her husband], since it is assumed that a minor who is less than eleven years old cannot become pregnant”[Talmud: Yevamot 12b]. However, child marriage is rare today in most Jewish communities, and the minimum age for marriage in Israel (the only Jewish country) is 1843.
Appears less in: The Bahai Faith
The Bahai Faith prescribes 15 as a minimum age for marriage[Book of Laws: IV/C/1/c]. However, it also stresses obedience to one’s government[Book of Laws: IV/D/1/m], and thus, the minimum marriageable age for adherents is set by their secular governments.
Does not appear in: Buddhism, Protestantism, Chinese Religions, Orthodox Christianity, or Spiritism
Child marriage is not prevalent in Buddhist, Protestant, Taoist, Confucian, and Orthodox countries44. For Confucianism, in particular, the Book of Rites seems to suggest an age of 30 for marriage: “When he is twenty, we call him a youth [...]; when he is thirty, we say 'He is at his maturity', he has a wife”[Book of Rites: Quli Shang, 12].
In general, a woman who marries at a young age is less likely to be educated. She is also less likely to educate her children. This, in turn, plays into the hands of the religion as well, as less educated people are less likely to challenge their religion.
There’s a Jewish law for everything. The Torah offers a punishment for every crime, no matter how insignificant. But what about child abuse? ... But the Torah doesn’t talk about what to do with a man who wants to have sex with children, it seems. It talks about men who have sex with other men, and men who have sex with animals. Those are unforgivable sins. But there is nothing said about the sexual abuse of children.
Oppression of women
We have seen that a religion can proliferate best when its adherents produce many children. This is best accomplished if a woman marries at a young age. Not all major religions buy into this scheme (Buddhism, the Chinese religions, and the newer Abrahamic religions do not). However, even these religions show a Darwinian interest in maintaining their population of adherents by prohibiting interfaith marriage, shunning homosexuality, and/or limiting sex to procreative purposes. An independent woman is a hindrance to these efforts: She might be more interested in pursuing work, dedicating herself to some pastime, or even obtaining roles in society, rather than in producing and rearing children. For this reason, many major religions restrict the roles of women to household and child caring duties.
Furthermore, for most of history, a man had no reliable way to tell whether he was the biological father of a child and, in a world where nearly everyone was poor, most were reluctant to risk wasting bread on another man’s offspring. Many therefore asserted oppressive control over female fertility, forbidding their wives and daughters to mingle with other men. In this spirit, men have long shaped the law to their advantage, and this reflects also in religious law.
Appears in: Judaism
Judaism has traditionally given fewer rights to women. The Torah considers wives to be the property of the husband[Bible: Exodus 20:17], establishes the man as the “ruler” over his wife[Torah: Genesis 3:16], and punishes the loss of female (but not male) virginity[Torah: Deuteronomy 22:13-21]. As Canadian-American cognitive psychologist Steven Pinker commented: “The possibility that a woman had a legitimate interest in not being raped or acquired as sexual property did not seem to register in anyone’s mind.”46 In this spirit, there is a Jewish prayer that goes: “Blessed are you, Lord, our God, ruler of the Universe, who has not created me a woman.”47 And indeed, the classical Rabbinic social policy preferred to situate women’s activities in the private sphere of the home while men occupied the public domains of worship, study, community leadership, and judicial authority. To this date, women occupy a secondary status in Israel’s Jewish society, backed by paternalistic legislation and the expectation that women will assume most household responsibilities. (While most Israeli women do fulfill a military service obligation, women in the military are limited to support positions.) Israeli law gives the Orthodox religious establishment monopolistic control over marriage and divorce for all Jewish citizens, thus legalizing women’s substantial disadvantages in religious family law. As an example, over ten thousand women are “agunot” — women who cannot get a divorce because their husbands refuse to grant one.4849 That said, attitudes have started to change. Reform Judaism holds that women are entitled to the same religious rights as men, and it ordains female rabbis50. In the United States, in particular, Jewish women take more assertive roles within their religion and have gradually watered down traditional gender roles.48
Appears in: Christianity
Christianity inherited the dominance of men over women from Judaism and the Torah (which it considers holy scripture in the form of the Old Testament). The New Testament perpetuates this dominance by stipulating that a wife must be submissive to her husband[Bible: Titus 2:3-5, Ephesians 5:22-24, 1 Peter 3:1-6, 1 Corinthians 11:1-16, 1 Timotheans 2:11-12, Colossians 3:18-25]. In addition, Christianity is traditionally dominated by male entities: The vast majority of its prophets are male, its god is male (“Father in Heaven”), and its main addressee of worship is male (Jesus). Hence, most major Christian denominations give leadership roles exclusively to males (priests, popes, bishops, etc.). This general preference for males in positions of power is just the tip of the iceberg. It goes hand in hand with a less measurable, but more ubiquitous, discrimination against women, in which men are generally considered the leaders in the family and society: Orthodoxy holds that the father is the head of the family and that the wife must be devoted to her husband51. Baptism even holds that men are the “head” of women in general52. Pentecostalism and Lutheranism are an exception: They support full equality of the sexes.
Appears in: Islam
Islam, too, limits the role of women in society. The Quran holds that a woman may not marry a Christian or Jew[Quran 60:10] (while a man can[Quran 2:221]); that a woman must be obedient to her husband[Quran 4:34]; that a man can marry up to four women while a woman can marry only one man[Quran 4:3]; that a son inherits twice the share of a daughter[Quran 4:11]; that, in court, the word of a man is twice that of a woman[Quran 2:282]; that a woman is “a tilth” for her husband, which he can “approach as he wills”[Quran 2:222-223]; and that a man can “discipline” his wife[Quran 4:34] (possibly because of her “deficiency of the mind”[Bukhari 2658, 304, 29]). The Sharia goes further, ruling that women must cover every part of their body except their hands and face[Reliance of the Traveler: f5.3] (though they should cover their face if possible[Reliance: m2.3]); that they should not speak to men without necessity[Reliance: r32.6]; that murdering a woman incurs only half of the indemnity of murdering a man[Reliance: o4.9]; that husbands have full rights over their wives[Reliance: m5.4, m10.11]; that women may not travel[Reliance: m10.3] and must remain in the home if her husband wants her to[Reliance: m10.4]; and that a husband can divorce his wife[Reliance: n1.1(a)] but a wife can divorce her husband only with his agreement[Reliance: n1.3]. In the view of the Al-Azhar University in Cairo, Egypt, this Sharia “conforms to the practice and faith of the orthodox Sunni Community”53. In reality, Muslim opinion varies considerably when it comes to women’s rights. Still, by and large, Muslim society is conservative: 75% of Muslims in the Middle East believe that a woman should not receive equal inheritance. Nearly half believe that women should wear a head covering54. In France, 60% of Muslims believe that women should veil55. In Egypt, Lebanon, Morocco, Saudi Arabia, and Palestine, half of men believe a married woman should not have the same right to work as a man, and 60%–90% of men expect to control their wives’ personal freedoms, including what they wear and where they go as well as when the couple has sex565754. The basic inequality that a woman may not marry outside the faith while a man can is almost universally upheld among Muslims worldwide58. Furthermore, in nearly all Muslim countries surveyed in a Pew Research study in 2013, the majority of Muslims stated that a wife should always obey her husband54. In much of the Arab world, male dominance is enshrined also in the law5960.
Appears in: The Bahai Faith
According to the Bahai Faith, “the emancipation of women and the achievement of full equality is one of the most important prerequisites for peace”[Lights of Guidance: Women § 2090]. Unfortunately, this religion does not follow its own advice. Women are excluded from its House of Justice at the behest of the faith’s founder. The reason for their exclusion is unknown: The Lights of Guidance say that the “wisdom of this will be known in the future, we can only accept, believing it is right, but not able to give an explanation calculated to silence an ardent feminist”[Lights of Guidance: Women § 2073]. The religion also states that “the hearts of women are more tender and susceptible than the hearts of men”[§ 2091], that “woman by nature is opposed to war”[§ 2092], and that “the woman has greater moral courage than man”[§ 2093]. These statements are examples of benevolent sexism — attitudes and beliefs that appear positive or well-intentioned towards women but ultimately reinforce traditional gender roles and maintain male dominance61. If the Bahai Faith really saw men and women as equal, it would make no such generalizations.
Appears in: Hinduism
The Laws of Manu require that “in childhood a female must be subject to her father, in youth to her husband, when her lord is dead to her sons; a woman must never be independent”[Laws of Manu: 5.148]. On the contrary, “she shall obey [her husband]”[Laws of Manu: 5.151] and “a husband must be constantly worshipped as a god by a faithful wife”[Laws of Manu: 5.154]. Though the authenticity of these texts is disputed, this does not change the fact that Hindu society works de facto as described in these laws. Upheld by religion and traditional practices, the patriarchal society propagates the idea that women should be subservient to men, that they are the weaker sex (emotionally, intellectually, and physically), and that girls are worth less than boys (because they usually do not earn money, will have to be endowed with a dowry, and will anyway be “married off” to another family). Due to these socio-religious beliefs of female inferiority, some female babies are killed, leading to a notable sex imbalance in India. The girls who survive are often restricted to household duties, are measurably less literate than their male peers, and are traditionally considered the property of others (first the father, then the husband). Most Hindu women still follow restrictions of movement during menstruation (based on religious beliefs), and in rural areas, girls are forced to stay home from school during their menstrual cycle, lest they pass by a temple in the street in an “unclean” state.62
Appears in: Buddhism
According to the Buddha, “it is impossible that a woman should be the perfect rightfully Enlightened One”[Pali Canon: Sutta Pitaka / Majjhima Nikaya / Bahudhaatukasutta]. According to him, “women are prone to anger; women are envious; women are miserly; women are unwise. This is why women do not sit in council, engage in business, or go to Kamboja”[Sutta Pitaka / Anguttara Nikaya / 4:80]. The Buddha has also compared women to black snakes, in that they are “wrathful, hostile, of deadly venom, double-tongued, and betray friends”[Sutta Pitaka / Anguttara Nikaya / 5:229 — 230]. He also stated that “for the most part women are adulterous”[Sutta Pitaka / Anguttara Nikaya / 5:229 — 230], and that “women die unsatisfied and discontent in two things. What two? Sexual intercourse and giving birth”[Sutta Pitaka / Anguttara Nikaya / 4:61]. Perhaps accordingly, the Buddha classified women into seven types of wives — each of which is either evil or submissive[Sutta Pitaka / Anguttara Nikaya / 7:59].
Modern apologists consider the sources from which these sayings derive to be inauthentic. They point to the fact that women have always played a significant role in Buddhism as lay disciples, that the Buddha admitted women into the monastic order, and that he affirmed their equality in intellectual and spiritual capabilities63. Nevertheless, even these apologists admit that the Pali Canon occasionally transmits patriarchal and misogynistic views63. These views have been incorporated into Theravada, the dominant Buddhist denomination in Sri Lanka, Myanmar, Cambodia, Laos, and Thailand. For this denomination, a female birth is considered the result of less favorable karma than a male birth, only a male can aspire to become a Buddha, and more generally, women are subordinate to men. As a result, Theravada Buddhist countries are shaped largely by patriarchal attitudes, promoting a universal ideology of masculine superiority.63
Mahayana, the more liberal denomination of Buddhism, which is prevalent in China, Korea, Japan, Taiwan, Singapore, and Vietnam, takes a different path: The scripture of the Pure Land Sutras requires a change of sex at rebirth for women to attain Buddhahood64. However, later interpretations propose that this change of sex can take place in a woman’s mind, thus allowing her to start the path towards Buddhahood during her lifetime. While this possibility is seen as proof of egalitarianism in modern commentaries65, the theme of sexual transformation still stereotypes the female as biologically and psychologically limited66.
Appears in: Confucianism
Confucius reportedly said that “girls and inferior men are hard to get along with”[Analects: 17:23]. The Lessons for Women, an influential Confucian text from around 100 CE (written by a woman), says that women should be silent, hard-working, and compliant67. Similarly, the Three Obediences of Confucianism hold that women should be obedient to their fathers before getting married, to their husbands while married, and to their sons after their husband’s passing[Three Obediences and Four Virtues]. These principles are reflected in the deeply patriarchal Confucian family system, in which a woman is seen as a complement to her husband’s family. Without that kinship tie, it would be nearly impossible for a woman to acquire social recognition. In prioritizing the perpetuation of patrilineage, women often participate in gender oppressive practices such as female infanticide, child marriage, and concubinage. Her failure to produce children is one of the seven grounds for her expulsion from the marriage, according to the Confucian system. In that same vein, widows may not remarry. Newer readings of the texts have put aside the traditional gender roles of Confucianism and focus instead on the concept of gender-neutral friendship as the guiding principle for inter-human relations.68
Does not apply to: Spiritism
Since Spiritism was born after the Enlightenment, it explicitly supports equal rights for women[Spirits’ Book § 822].
Does not apply to: Taoism
This religion strives for a balance between male and female, and overall, takes a more egalitarian stance6970. The Ultra Supreme Elder Lord’s Scripture of Precepts, for one, mentions women exclusively in the conjunction “men and women”. This is because, different from the moral frameworks of most other major religions, there is no regulation that applies exclusively to women.
The discrimination of women is part of a larger pattern in some religions: The earlier women marry, the less educated they are, the more children they will have, the less educated these children will be, and the more religious (and populous) the religious society will be as a whole.
I consider [gender] to be as entirely irrelevant to political rights as difference in height or in the color of the hair.
Conscience
Heaven
A religion that promises life after death will be more successful than a religion that doesn’t. Hence, most religions today promise some form of life after death.
Appears in: Judaism
The Torah is not entirely clear about what happens after death. Kohelet, a son of King David, wonders poetically: “The same fate awaits both animals and humans: As one dies, so dies the other. [...] All go to the same place; all come from dust, and to dust all return. Who knows if the human spirit rises upward and if the spirit of the animal goes down into the Earth?”[Bible: Ecclesiastes 3:19-21]. Other passages are similarly vague[Bible: Ecclesiastes 9:4-6, Numbers 16:31-33, Psalms 146:2-4, Job 14:10-14, Daniel 12:2, Isaak 26:19]. Nevertheless, the Talmud establishes resurrection after death as a fundamental principle of the faith and makes clear that those who doubt it shall not share it[Talmud: Sanhedrin/90a/31, 39].
Hindus, Buddhists, Jains, and Sikhs generally believe in reincarnation of the soul. In this model, following death, the soul is reborn onto this Earth either in a “better” position (say, as a king) or in a “worse” position (say, as an ant), depending on the good and bad deeds committed in one’s life. If a person advances spiritually to a sufficient degree, they can arrive in the desired, final state of nirvana. In Hinduism, the Rig Veda states that “as soon as he departs, he takes birth again”[Aitareya Upanishad: 2/1/4], and hints at relief from the cycle of rebirth: “When he sees the other, the lord of all, whom all devotees worship, and realizes that all greatness is his, then he is relieved of his misery.”[Svetasvatara Upanishad: 4/6-7] The Laws of Manu, likewise, stipulate that “a vicious man sinks to the nethermost (Hell), [while] he who dies, free from vice, ascends to Heaven”[Law of Manu: 7/53]. For a Buddhist, according to the Dalai Lama, “it is necessary to accept past and future rebirth” and “once we achieve liberation from the cycle of existence by overcoming our karma and destructive emotions, we will not be reborn”71.
Appears in: Spiritism
In this religion (as in the Indian religions), the spirit aims to achieve perfection during several cycles of rebirth, and once successful, enters a “state of perfect happiness, as a purified spirit”[Spirits’ Book: § 170]. The final state is eternal happiness, consisting “in knowing all things; in feeling neither hatred, jealousy, envy, ambition, nor any of the passions that make men unhappy”[Spirits’ Book: § 967]. Different from the other Abrahamic religions, Spiritism has taken care that the happy spirits do not suffer from the sight of the sinners being punished in Hell, “because they know that it will have an end; they aid those who suffer to become better, and lend them a helping hand. To do this is their occupation, and is a joy for them when they succeed”[Spirits’ Book: § 976].
Appears in: Taoism
Taoism, likewise, knows a state of “spiritual immortality”, wherein the death of the body has no impact on the soul, which continues to live72.
Appears in: The Chinese religions
The prevalent belief in the Chinese religions is that every human being has a spirit, which lives on after death and becomes the object of ancestor worship — the shen.
Many adults never outgrow their childhood fear of death. Because the thought of death is so distressing to some people, it is not surprising that they try to invent a way out. The fairy tale that Christians have invented is called Heaven, and they have also formulated the concept of eternal life. The Christian fabrications are, of course, entirely different from the Heaven and God of all other religions, because all of them are imaginary. Egyptians believed something silly involving pyramids and sun gods and so on. Greeks believed in the river Styx and Hades and so on. Muslims believe in their 72 virgins and so on. It is all gibberish, but people believe in their fantasies quite passionately.
Heaven for martyrs
The promise of Heaven can make people adhere to a religion. It can also supply the religion with warriors who are ready to sacrifice their lives: If a man believes that Heaven awaits him upon death, he will be much more willing to go to war for his faith. In his thinking, he has nothing to lose: Either he wins the battle or he dies, becomes what is called a martyr, and goes to Heaven. A religion that has this type of warrior is more likely to prevail in battle against a religion that does not.
Appears in: Historical Catholicism
Early Christianity claimed that anyone who died for the faith was instantly transferred to the presence of God as a martyr. Martyrdom also absolved all sins.73 Indeed, Christianity has historically benefited from those ready to sacrifice their lives for the faith, most notably during the Crusades — military expeditions between 1095 and 1291 that aimed to conquer Jerusalem and its surroundings from Muslim rule. Christian warriors believed that they would go to Heaven if they died in battle74 and, therefore, they had little hesitation in joining the war. While the Crusades had several religious, economical, and political motivations, they ultimately served to establish the hegemony of the Catholic Church. Today, in contrast, apparently less sure of the post-mortal advantages of martyrdom in armed conflict, the Church insists that “all citizens and all governments are obliged to work for the avoidance of war”[Catechism of the Catholic Church: 2307ff].
Appears in: Islam
The Quran promises Heaven to those who die fighting for Allah: “Never think of those martyred in the cause of Allah as dead. In fact, they are alive with their Lord, well provided for.”[Quran: 3:169-170, 9:111, 22:58] We can hypothesize that, in the 8th century CE, this belief helped the military expansion of Islam during the Islamic Golden Age. Still in the 21st century, the Islamic State (an Islamist group that aspired to create a caliphate) was able to uphold its grip on the Middle East also because it had fighters who were not afraid to die75.
A thing is not necessarily true because a man dies for it.
Hell
A person who has died cannot report what happened to them. Therefore, religions can say arbitrary things about life after death. Some religions use this to tell people that if they do not follow the rules of the religion, they will be tortured after death in a place called Hell. If a religion promises Hell in cases of disobedience, then its adherents are more likely to obey. Therefore, most religions that we encounter today have some form of Hell, and they have come up with the most impressive forms of punishment, as we shall see. The idea of Hell also satisfies the human desire for justice.
The Bhagavad Gita says that “demoniacal men” will “fall downwards into a foul hell”[Bhagavad Gita: 16.16, 16.20-21]. The Laws of Manu describe 21 hells[Laws of Manu: 4/87-90], in which sinners are devoured by ravens, boiled in jars, and subjected to diseases[Laws of Manu: 12/75-80]. Those who committed mortal sins spend many years passing through these dreadful hells and then, after the expiration of their term of punishment, are reborn. Different sins carry different types of rebirths: Killing a Brahman lands you in the womb of a pig; thieves become cannibalistic creatures; for stealing grain, a man becomes a rat; and for stealing pearls, one becomes a goldsmith[Laws of Manu: 12/54-74].
Appears in: Jainism
Jainism knows several hells (called Narakas)[Tattvartha Sutra: 3:2] where, similar to Buddhism, bad karma is destroyed. Common interpretations hold that there are seven hells, each named after its predominant substance (e.g., gravel, mud, smoke). The hells are situated in the lower levels of the Universe, below the human realm (which is itself below the heavenly realm).
Appears in: Judaism
The early Jews were familiar with the valley of Gehenna outside of Jerusalem, where Canaanites (and later Israelites) sacrificed their children by fire to the gods[Bible: Jeremiah 7:31]77. The sacrifices of Gehenna, together with the later claim in the Torah that “multitudes who sleep in the dust of the Earth will awake — some to everlasting life, others to shame and everlasting contempt”[Bible: Daniel 12:2] developed into the Jewish belief that all sinners will burn in fire. Sinners go to Gehenna (Hell) immediately after their death. If they have not led others into sin, they are released after twelve months78.
As the last of the Abrahamic religions to develop before the Enlightenment, Islam has perfected the threat of Hell derived from Judaism and Christianity: The Quran mentions Hell with detailed brutality in roughly every 7th verse. Hell contains “flames that crackle and roar”[Quran: 25:14]; “fierce, boiling waters”[Quran: 55:55]; “scorching wind and black smoke”[Quran: 56:42-43]; and it “roars and boils as if it would burst with rage”[Quran: 67:7-8]. Its wretched inhabitants “sigh and wail”[Quran: 11:106], their scorched skins “constantly exchanged for new ones so that they can taste their torment anew”[Quran: 4:45]. They drink “festering water” and, though death appears on all sides, “cannot die”[Quran: 15:16-17]. They are “linked together in chains of 70 cubits”[Quran: 69:30-32], wear “pitch for clothing”, have “their faces covered with fire”[Quran: 14:50], have “boiling water poured over their heads that melts their insides as well as their skin”, and are “dragged back by hooks of iron” should they try to escape[Quran: 67:7]. Their “remorseful admissions of wrongdoing and pleas for forgiveness are in vain”[Quran: 41:24].
Appears in: Spiritism
In Spiritism, it is believed that the spirits are punished after death or in the next life with indescribable torture: “It is utterly impossible to describe the mental tortures that are the punishment of some crimes; even those by whom they are experienced would find it difficult to give you an idea of them.”[Spirits’ Book: § 960, 965, 970, 973, 974] However, different from the older, pre-Enlightenment religions, Spiritism prescribes a more abstract punishment. The “sufferings are as various as are the causes by which they are produced”, and include “envy”, “regret, jealousy, rage, despair”, “remorse and indescribable moral anguish”, and being tortured by the “inability to satisfy [one’s] cravings”. In addition, Spiritism recognizes punishment on Earth in the form of reincarnation: “Purgatory [is] physical and moral suffering; the period of expiation, it is almost always upon the Earth that you are made by God to undergo your purgatory, and to expiate your wrong-doing.”[Spirits’ Book: § 1013]
Appears in: Chinese religions
The Chinese religions inherited the concept of Hell from Buddhism79. In the Diyu, as Hell is known, the dead are punished by physical tortures appropriate to their crimes. In Taoism, a person who does not follow the Tao will “fall into the restless and unlimited sufferings” and “when they are released from such sufferings, they will be reborn as animals or other inferior beings”. “They will be born in uncivilized places, their lives will be short, or they will be physically disabled. They will be poor, homeless, and suffer from coldness; they will not be able to live peacefully; if they get any money or properties, those things will be stolen or robbed by others”. Worst of all, “their spouses will be ugly, adulterous, and greedy”[Ultra Supreme Elder Lord’s Scripture of Precepts].
Hell exists only for those who fear it.
Emotional bondage
When someone helps us, we may feel indebted to this person, and perhaps obliged to do them a favor in return. This mechanism is also used by some religions, who claim that their god did something for the people and so demand thankfulness to said god and obedience to their laws in return. In this way, the religions bind the adherents emotionally to their god and their rules.
Appears in: Judaism
The Torah tells us that God led the Israelites out of slavery in Egypt to the land of Israel[Exodus 13–17]. God then demands constant remembrance of this act: “Praise the Lord your God for the good land he has given you.”[Deuteronomy 8:10] “[Do] not forget the Lord your God. You were slaves in Egypt, but he made you free and brought you out of that land.”[Deuteronomy 8:15] “Remember that you were slaves in Egypt and the Lord your God redeemed you from there.”[Deuteronomy 24:18] In return, God demands that people follow his laws: “Remember that you were slaves in Egypt, and follow carefully [my] decrees”[Deuteronomy 16:12], “remember that you were slaves in Egypt and that the Lord your God brought you out of there [...] therefore [...] observe the Sabbath day”[Deuteronomy 5:15], and “the Lord brought us out of Egypt [and] commanded us to obey all [his] decrees”[Deuteronomy 6:20-25]. In this way, adherents are constantly reminded that they owe their freedom to God. They are indebted to God and must be thankful to him and follow his laws. We will later see that the slavery in Egypt and the exodus to Israel for which Jews must be thankful to God most likely never happened. Thus, the Torah creates the emotional bondage of adherents to God out of thin air.
Appears in: Christianity
Christianity knows the concept of original sin, which, by and large, is the notion that Adam and Eve, the mythical ancestors of humanity, contradicted God’s will and, hence, loaded sin on all of humanity. In the words of the Bible: “In sin did my mother conceive me”[Bible: Psalm 51:5] because “by the one man’s [Adam’s] disobedience the many were made sinners”[Bible: Romans 5:19]. In other words, just by being born, a person is already saddled with guilt. Christianity extends this guilt to everyone: “There is no one righteous, not even one; [...All] have together become worthless; there is no one who does good, not even one”[Bible: Romans 3:10] and “all have sinned and fall short of the glory of God”[Bible: Romans 3:23-24]. It is a fortunate coincidence, then, that Christianity provides the only absolution of this guilt: By following Jesus, a person will be liberated from that original sin[Bible: John 3:16]. This is coupled with the idea that Jesus “died for our sins”[Bible: 1 Corinthians 15:3]. Thus, out of nothing, Christianity has made people indebted to their main prophet.
Appears in: Islam
The Quran talks repeatedly of the gifts that God has given to mankind: God sends rain to give life[Quran: 16:65], causes the cows to produce milk[Quran: 16:66], makes dates so that we can eat[Quran: 16:67], and taught the bee to make cells[Quran: 16:68] so that man may have honey[Quran: 16:69]. God also produces corn, olives, date-palms, grapes, and every other fruit just for us[Quran: 16:11]. When people use or consume these things, they are made to feel as if they are obliged to thank God for them[Quran: 39:7, 21:80, 40:61]. Thus, by simply being alive, we are already indebted to God. If we do not bow to the power who gave all these gifts, we are considered ungrateful.
Push for perfection
Guilt is a powerful force for control, and a religion that succeeds in producing feelings of guilt in its believers can steer them very effectively. A common way in which this happens is through the establishment of rules that are impossible to obey to perfection. It is thus likely that the believer will violate these rules sooner or later (or even continuously). This means that sincere believers find themselves in an enduring state of bad conscience, caught in the gap between how they think they should be and how they actually are. No matter what they do, it is never good enough. Thereby, the religion maintains a grip over the conscience of its adherents81. But it is not just prohibited actions that induce guilt — prohibited thoughts can as well. By considering thoughts as tantamount to actions (a phenomenon called thought-action fusion), religious individuals can conclude that prohibited thoughts, too, represent a type of moral failure82.
Once that state of guilt has been put in place, the religion proposes itself as a way to obtain absolution from that guilt. As American psychologist Albert Ellis argued, religions deliberately instill self-damnation in their adherents and then provide guilt-soothing rituals to allay these feelings83. In this way, the adherent feels grateful to the religion for having removed the problem that it created in the first place. Iranian-Canadian author Armin Navabi argues similarly: People are told that they are inherently sinful, and that the only way to become good is by giving over control of their life to faith84. Religion creates much of the anxiety it cures61.
The Quran talks of numerous prohibitions, including taking unbelievers as friends[Quran: 3:28], doubting the Quran[Quran: 5:101, 33:36], sexual pleasures outside marriage, not praying[Quran: 9:71], eating pork[Quran: 16:115], looking at the other sex[Quran: 24:31], and not covering up[Quran: 33:59]. In conservative interpretations of the faith, these rules are complemented by an elaborate system of rules (the Sharia) that penetrates everyday life from marriage to prayer and daily hygiene, including how to use the restroom86. These rules certainly had their purpose at the time of their institution. However, one lasting effect is that adherents have a litany of rules to follow and thus more chances to slip up. This makes it more likely that a believer will feel guilt. Furthermore, the Quran states that God observes us continuously[Quran: 4:1, 50:17-18, 8:17], thereby enforcing these feelings. And it is not just God who watches, but the community as well: Islam knows a culture of “commanding right and forbidding wrong”8788, in which adherents are tasked with ensuring the compliance of others, thus putting continuous pressure on everyone in the community. The release from guilt is achieved through repentance[Quran: 2:160, 39:54, 3:135, 25:71, 6:54]. Through this mechanism, the religion first instills guilt and then relieves it. As we saw in Christianity, this cycle creates an emotional bond between the believer and the religion.
Appears in: Spiritism
Spiritism calls upon adherents to abandon selfishness[Spirits’ Book: § 895] and to practice abnegation in order to “combat the predominance of the corporeal nature”[Spirits’ Book: § 912]. Since every human is by nature selfish (and corporal by nature), this is a commandment that cannot be obeyed in perfection. Repentance and prayer then alleviate these failings[Spirits’ Book: § 997].
Appears in: Judaism
Judaism knows a catalog of 613 commandments derived from the Torah[Talmud: Makkot 23b]. While the Talmud is sure that their number must be 613, it does not list them. A popular listing, the Sefer Hamitzvot, prohibits astrology, cross-dressing, tattoos, wearing a mixture of wool and linen, shaving, settling in Egypt, straying after illicit pleasures, kindness towards idol worshippers, forgetting Amalek’s Deed, tearing out hair, non-kosher food, lending with interest, borrowing with interest, cursing a leader, working on Shabbat, provocative behavior, out of wedlock intimacy, and other behaviors89. Given that the list is quite comprehensive (and not universally agreed on), it is highly likely that an adherent will violate one or more of these commandments. Luckily, Judaism also provides the remedy for such transgressions: Yom Kippur is an annual day devoted to communal repentance for sins committed over the course of the previous year90. Again, we find a cycle of condemnation and absolution that binds adherents to their faith.
This effect is independent of the actual use of the rules for mankind.
Sin is an imaginary disease
invented to sell you an imaginary cure.
Heavy punishment
When a person does not obey societal rules, the most effective way to prevent that person from reoffending is to kill them. Another quite effective solution is to amputate limbs: A person without hands can no longer steal, injure, or kill. Such punishment also acts as a deterrent to others. In this book, we argue that brutal punishments can irreversibly injure an innocent person, go against the principle of empathy, and devalue human life. But religion does not have to care, as it claims sole governance over compassion, conscience, and morality.
Now, if we compare two religions side by side, one that has cruel punishment and one that doesn’t, it becomes clear that a religion with cruel punishment will have a more obedient following, and thus a competitive edge over another. For this reason, most major religions that have survived until today know cruel punishments — at least in their scripture.
Appears in: Islam
The Quran specifies cutting off the hands of a thief[Quran: 5:38], flogging adulterers[Quran: 24:2], crucifying “those who wage war against Allah and His Messenger”[Quran: 5:33-34], beating consistently disobedient women[Quran: 4:34], and death for those who kill a Muslim[Quran: 4:92-93]. One verse prescribes kinship punishment: If someone is murdered, then a kin member of the murderer (who is otherwise unrelated to the murder itself) is to be killed in retaliation[Quran: 2:178]. Today, Muslim opinion differs widely on whether brutal punishments should be allowed91. Still, corporal punishments are approved of by the majority of the population in Pakistan, Afghanistan, Egypt, and Iraq, and by large pluralities in other Muslim-majority countries91. Stoning as a judicial sentence exists in nine Muslim countries, and five Muslim countries have amputation as punishment in their law books92.
This religion inherited corporal punishment from Judaism. Jesus teaches clemency in these matters but upholds the law in principle, saying: “Do not think that I have come to abolish the Law [...] Until Heaven and Earth disappear, not the smallest letter, not the least stroke of a pen, will by any means disappear from the Law.”[Bible: Matthew 5:17-20] Paul, likewise, approves of the death penalty, saying, “If, however, I am guilty of doing anything deserving death, I do not refuse to die”[Bible: Acts 25:10-11, Romans 1:32]. In agreement with this, both secular and religious Christian rulers have been quite brutal over the course of history. Today, however, these practices have ceased. In Catholicism, torture was abolished in 1965. Anglicanism has opposed the death penalty since 1988, Orthodoxy since 1989, and Catholicism since 2015.
Appears in: Hinduism
The Laws of Manu require corporal punishment if fines and admonitions fail[Laws of Manu: 8/58, 129, 139, 310, 320, 364]. Beating is on order for punishing a wife, a son, a slave, a pupil, or a younger brother[Laws of Manu: 8/299]. For adultery (which includes touching a woman inappropriately, addressing her outside the village, or offering her gifts[Laws of Manu: 8/356-357]), the penalty is death[Laws of Manu: 8/356] — except for Brahmans. Brahmans cannot be put to death[Laws of Manu: 8/379] nor can they suffer corporal punishment[Laws of Manu: 8/124]. Others can. For example, two fingers are to be cut off for “contaminating a maiden”[Laws of Manu: 8/367]. For injury, the punishment for the lowest caste is amputation[Laws of Manu: 8/279]. (Generally, amputation may be of the tongue, the hands, the feet, the eyes, the nose, the ears, or “the organ”[Laws of Manu: 8/124].) For insulting someone of a higher caste, the tongue is cut out[Laws of Manu: 8/270]. Intercourse across castes is punished by castration or death for the member of the lower caste[Laws of Manu: 8/374]. Ways of executing criminals include devoration “by dogs in a place frequented by many”[Laws of Manu: 8/371] and burning “on a red-hot iron bed”[Laws of Manu: 8/372] or “in a fire of dry grass”[Law of Manu: 8/377]. The Laws of Manu are of disputed authenticity. However, this does not change the fact that corporal punishment was used in Hindu society much in the way that the Laws of Manu stipulate: Punishments included whipping, branding, mutilation, and execution93. Still today, India upholds the death penalty.
Appears de facto in: Chinese religions
Confucius explicitly shuns punishment, saying: “If you [...] control [people] by punishment, they will avoid crime, but have no personal sense of shame. If you govern them by means of virtue and control them with propriety, they will gain their own sense of shame, and thus correct themselves.”[Analects: 2:3] He also explicitly shuns the death penalty, asking “what is the need of killing?”[Analects: 12:19]. For Taoism, Laozi similarly writes: “To replace the executioner and kill, is like chopping wood in place of the master carpenter. To chop wood in place of the master carpenter, rarely one does not hurt one’s own hand.”[Tao Te Ching: 74] On the contrary, “heaven arms with love those whom it would not see destroyed”[Tao Te Ching: 67]. However, the Book of Rites (one of the Five Classics) states that “in all determining on the application of any of the five punishments, it was required to decide according to the judgment of Heaven”94. The Five Punishments were tattooing, cutting off the nose, cutting off a limb, castration, and execution. These punishments were, indeed, used in ancient China until 600 CE, when they were replaced by beatings and forced labor. The death penalty remains in place up to this day95.
Does not appear in: Buddhism
The Buddha says: “He [the layman] should not kill a living being, nor cause it to be killed, nor should he incite another to kill. Do not injure any being, either strong or weak, in the world.”[Pali Canon: Sutta Pitaka/Khuddaka Nikaya/Sutta Nipata/Sn 2.14] The current Dalai Lama also opposes the death penalty96.
Does not appear in: Spiritism
As this religion postdates the Enlightenment, cruelty is considered “the instinct of destruction in its worst form”, and “never necessary”[Spirits’ Book: § 752]. It holds that education should be given preference over “punishing wrong doing when done”[Spirits’ Book: § 796]. The death penalty is also condemned[Spirits’ Book: § 760 ff].
Following Krauss’s logic, it makes sense that all major religions that have survived until today have placed a great importance on teaching the principles of the religion to children.
As we have seen before, children can easily be made to believe almost anything. If the child later were to find out that a particular teaching was wrong, the child would likely stop believing in it. However, since religious claims are usually unfalsifiable, the child will never find out. Therefore, educating children religiously is one of the most effective methods of spreading the faith.
Appears in: all major religions
Children are usually educated in the religion of their parents. We have discussed contemporary practices in the Chapter on the Founding of Religions.
Appears less in: The Bahai Faith
The Bahai Faith differs from the other world religions in that children under 15 years old do not automatically inherit the faith of their parents[Lights of Guidance: § 512]. At the age of 15, Bahai children are free to reaffirm that they are Bahai or, without stigma, to leave the Bahai Faith. Neither their parents nor their community may compel them to be Bahai98. Yet, this free choice is to some degree utopic, because “schools must train the children in the principles of religion, so that the Promise and the Threat recorded in the Books of God may prevent them from the things forbidden”[Lights of Guidance: § 479].
Fables should be taught as fables, myths as myths, and miracles as poetic fantasies. To teach superstitions as truths is a most terrible thing. The child mind accepts and believes them, and only through great pain and perhaps tragedy can he be in after years relieved of them.
Target the weak
A religion aims to propagate itself. Here, “aims to” is to be understood in the Darwinian sense, meaning that all those religions that did not propagate themselves have died out. One particularly effective way to propagate a religion is to preach it to people who are susceptible, such as:
People without formal education. These people are more likely to believe information passed along to them from perceived sources of authority and less likely to be able to verify these sources themselves.
People who live in poverty or suffering. These people may feel a greater need to appeal to the supernatural in their day to day lives. For those who see no way out of their suffering, religion can appear attractive because it can provide an explanation of their pain or a hope for a better future in the afterlife.
People in despair, such as the homeless, the jobless, the lonely, the physically or emotionally abused, the grief-stricken, etc. These people are emotionally vulnerable and will be more open to messages of hope for a better life. They might also be tempted by the idea that there is someone (supernatural) who cares about them.
People with remorse, such as prison inmates, those who have made decisions they regret, or those who cannot live up to their own standards. These people find themselves tormented by their conscience and, hence, will be more receptive to promises of absolution that a religion can provide.
People who are elderly or ill, or people who suffer because their relatives are elderly, ill, or have passed away. These people are more interested in theories about death and the afterlife, as well as those that give meaning to their lives. A religion can provide both.
People who are insecure, such as those who feel unsure in their life choices. These people will appreciate the moral framework that religion provides and the rites that give structure to life.
People who suffer from social isolation, be it because they are foreigners, newcomers to a place, or otherwise excluded from the mainstream society. These people are often looking for community and may be happy to find it in religion.
People who are young, such as children. Young people are generally more accepting of authority, as we have discussed before.
The above people will be more susceptible to a religion than people who are educated, healthy, well-integrated, and happy in their lives. It is true that targeting susceptible people does not have the same impact as targeting the powerful (such as kings, government officials, TV channel operators, or YouTube influencers). However, even if the vulnerable are not mighty, they cannot be ignored if their numbers are large. This is not to say that people who help the vulnerable do so with bad intentions. It is merely to say that one of the side effects of this help (intended or not) is that the religion appears more attractive to a larger number of people. And indeed, to this date, religious people are typically those with the least resources (minority groups, the poor, the uneducated, etc.), at least in the United States99.
Appears in: Christianity
This religion often associates itself with helping the weak, the “fallen”, the elderly, the ill, and the poor — following biblical teachings[Bible: Matthew 6:1, Luke 11:41]. Therefore, many Christian denominations run hospitals, orphanages, schools, kindergartens, grief management sites, migrant help centers, emergency relief services, or counseling services. We may assume that people who voluntarily work in these institutions do so with good intentions. However, one unavoidable side effect of this work is that the beneficiaries come to view Christianity favorably. Christianity would certainly have less adherents if it did not constantly reach out to the weak and the poor.
Appears in: Islam
The Quran prescribes giving alms to the poor[Quran: 9:60, 9:5, 2:177, 2:215, 4:8]. Regular almsgiving is even one of the five pillars of Islam, known as Zakat. However, the predominant view is that Zakat is only ever to be given to Muslims100 or to those who can be won for Islam[Quran: 9:60]. Thus, Zakat serves (also) the goal of attracting new adherents as well as keeping adherents in the faith.
Appears in: Judaism
This religion knows the concept of almsgiving as Tzedakah. However, like Islam, it has historically largely been restricted to recipients within the faith101.
Appears in: Hinduism
In Hinduism, charitable donation is known as dana. The Laws of Manu tell us to give when we are asked[Laws of Manu: 1/226-232]. Other holy scriptures, such as the Bhagavad Gita[Bhagavad Gita: 7:20-22], likewise encourage charity, stating: “Alms given to one who does nothing in return [...] is accounted pure”. We can hypothesize that this tradition helps maintain social stability and the religious status quo. In a country such as India, where 20% of people live below the poverty line102, such a system most likely helps maintain social stability (and Hinduism with it).
Appears less in: Spiritism, Taoism, Confucianism, Buddhism
All of these religions know the concept of compassion towards the less fortunate. However, charity appears to be neither limited to adherents of the faith nor used to spread the faith103.
Catch people at their worst. Grief counseling sites, sexual assault survivor sites, bankruptcy sites. Target the nones. Isolate the target. Convince them that only your church cares about them.
Punish apostasy
The act of abandoning a religion is called apostasy. Apostates may become atheists or adherents of other religions. Naturally, a religion that takes a light stance towards apostasy risks losing adherents, and therefore, being outnumbered by other religions. Therefore, all major religions have historically punished apostates.
Today, the punishment of apostates is no longer implemented in countries that support freedom of religion. What remains, however, is a general negative attitude towards apostates. All major religions today condemn, shun, insult, threaten, or ridicule apostates.
Appears in: Historical Judaism
The Torah takes a hard position on apostates, stating: “The fool says in his heart: There is no god. They are corrupt, they have done abominable works, there is none that doeth good.”[Bible: Psalms 14:1] It also instructs adherents to kill apostates[Bible: Deuteronomy 13:6-10], blasphemers[Bible: Leviticus 24:14-23], and prophets[Bible: Deuteronomy 13:1]. Hence, historical interpretations of Judaism mandated the death penalty for apostasy. However, this tenet was later dropped, and in contemporary interpretations, there is no punishment for leaving the faith.
Appears in: historical Christianity
Christianity inherited the death penalty for apostasy from Judaism. Jesus affirms the validity of previous laws in principle[Bible: Matthew 15:4]. In particular, he notes that “if anyone causes one of those who believe in me to stumble, it would be better for them to have a large millstone hung around their neck and to be drowned in the depths of the sea”[Bible: Matthew 18:6]. Paul also approves of the previous laws mandating the death penalty for apostasy[Bible: Romans 1:25-32]. He encourages us to watch out that none of us “has a sinful, unbelieving heart that turns away from the living God”[Bible: Hebrews 3:12]. Based on such verses, the prevalent medieval interpretation of Christianity was that apostasy had to be punished by death. Accordingly, the Inquisition burned thousands of people at the stake. Apostasy remained a punishable offense in Catholic countries until the late 18th century. (In 1826, Cayetano Ripoll was the last person executed for doubting the Catholic teaching104.) In 1965, however, the Catholic Church determined that everybody has the right to religious freedom — quite possibly because, by then, Christians had themselves become the largest persecuted religious minority in the world105. Still, as we have discussed, apostates (or atheists) are routinely discriminated against in Christian countries, especially in the United States, where atheists are excluded from holding public office in some states, are associated with criminality, are shunned by family and friends, and are discouraged as life partners.
Appears in: Islam
The Quran says: “let there be no compulsion in religion”[Quran: 2:256]. However, historically, this verse was understood as applying only to Dhimmis, non-Muslims living with legal protection under Muslim rule106. For Muslims, Islam has historically punished apostasy by death106, based on Quranic verses that ask adherents to kill unbelievers wherever they find them[Quran: 2:191-193], to strike off their heads[Quran: 8:12], and to fight until all religion is for the god of Islam[Quran: 8:39]. Beyond that, approximately one quarter of the Quran consists of insults, wraths, and threats against unbelievers, who are “the worst of all creatures”[Quran: 98:6-7, 8:55, 45:31, 6:157, 2:98, 4:76-77, 16:27, 2:91, 2:99, 4:101, 2:254, 5:45, 63:4, 80:42, 9:125, 4:61, 9:28, 6:39, 2:99, 24:55, 2:64-66, 5:58-60, 7:166]. Today there are different opinions on the question of what to do with apostates, including the opinion that they should be free to leave Islam107. However, the view that apostates should be killed persists, and is shared by the Al-Azhar University (the Egyptian Supreme Council for Islamic Affairs) (which validated a Sharia that requires the death penalty for apostates108), all four schools of Sunni Islamic law109, the majority of Muslims in Egypt, Palestine, and Jordan, and large pluralities in the other Muslim-majority countries110. Indeed, 12 Muslim countries punish apostasy by death. Even in more liberal Muslim countries (and Western countries, too), apostates face social exclusion, harassment, and worse.
Appears in: Hinduism
The Laws of Manu withdraw all rights from a person who does not pray as prescribed[Laws of Manu: 2/103], downgrades them to the lowest caste[Law of Manu: 11/67], and banishes them from town[Law of Manu: 9/225]. Furthermore, it declares “forgetting the Vedas” (the holy scriptures of Hinduism) equivalent to drinking hard liquor[Laws of Manu: 11/55-57], which, in and of itself, is a mortal sin. Heretics may not be greeted[Laws of Manu: 4/30], may not be given water[Laws of Manu: 4/89], and are generally considered to be the “mark of darkness”[Law of Manu: 12/33]. The Mahabharata tells us that “the rejection of one’s own creed, the practice of other people’s creed [are] acts that no one should do”[Mahabharata: Santi Parva/34]. In any case, Hinduism prohibits apostates from marrying believers, thus implicitly shunning and excluding apostates. To this day, atheists (who include many apostates) lack legal recognition in India111, and a member of parliament can openly call for the execution of apostates112.
Does not appear in: Spiritism
This religion was born after the Enlightenment, and hence, it argues that man has no “right to set up barriers against freedom of conscience”[Spirits’ Book: § 836]. It is also considered “a fail in charity” to “scandalize those whose belief is not the same as our own”[Spirits’ Book: § 839]. As for relations with non-adherents, the Spirits' book says: “Let those who consider the facts in question as unworthy of their attention abstain from studying them; no one would attempt to interfere with their belief; but let them, on their part, respect the belief of those who are of a contrary opinion.”
The prohibition of apostasy and interfaith marriage, the encouragement to produce many children are what German author Thilo Sarrazin calls a Sperrklinkenautomatik (“ratchet mechanism”): When combined, the number of adherents of the religion can only increase.45
Let the gods avenge themselves.
Punish criticism
An ideology that permits criticism of its tenets runs the risk of having its vulnerabilities exposed. Hence, most major religions have punished any criticism of their tenets — typically as blasphemy, i.e., the act of insulting God or sacred things113.
Appears in: Historical Judaism
As with apostates, the Torah instructs that blasphemers should be punished by death[Bible: Leviticus 24:14-23]. And indeed, blasphemy was punished as such in the historical interpretation of the religion114. There is hardly any evidence that trials for blasphemy took place among Jews in post-biblical times115, but it remains a punishable offense in Israel116.
Appears in: Historical Christianity
Christianity inherited the prohibition of blasphemy from Judaism. Jesus further clarifies that blasphemy is a sin that cannot be forgiven[Bible: Matthew 12:30-32, Mark 3:28–30, Luke 12:8–10]. Paul tells us to warn the heretic twice and then to “have nothing to do with them”[Bible: Titus 3:10-11], because such people are “warped and sinful”. Based on such verses, blasphemy was punished severely during most of the religion’s history. Blasphemy remains a punishable offense in numerous countries, including several predominantly Christian ones (such as Italy, Germany, Russia, Finland, Brazil, South Africa, Spain, and others)116. However, the Catholic Church has now started opposing such laws, perhaps because the Church noticed that such blasphemy laws have recently been employed most often against Christians themselves (principally in Muslim countries)117. The other denominations of Christianity did not historically punish blasphemy as drastically as did Catholicism.
Appears in: Islam
The Quran prohibits questioning Allah or the Prophet Muhammad[Quran: 33:36, 5:101]. Indeed, blasphemy is considered a crime in the vast majority of Muslim-majority countries116, and all four schools of Sunni Islamic law hold that blasphemy incurs the death penalty118. Even in non-Muslim countries, criticism of Islam can lead to death threats from extremist adherents of the faith. In this way, nobody (Muslim and non-Muslim alike) can take it lightly to criticize Islam in public. This shields the religion from critical investigation.
Appears in: Buddhism
The Buddha teaches that those who say that “the recluse Gotama [Buddha] does not have any superhuman states” will wind up in Hell[Pali Canon: Majjhima Nikaya/Mahasihanada Sutta/21]. This statement seems to indicate only otherworldly punishments for apostates, but in Indonesia, Buddhist authorities have supported the punishment of blasphemy also in this world119, and it remains an offense in (mainly Buddhist) Thailand and Burma116.
Appears in: Hinduism
Hinduism took a somewhat unusual trajectory concerning blasphemy. This religion used to be relatively tolerant concerning varying interpretations, and even mockings, of the faith. This changed in the 19th century when the British brought ideas of monotheism and orthodoxy to India during colonization. Upon demands by Indian Muslims, the British instated a law against “outraging religious feelings” in the colony, penalizing the deliberate insult of a religion, and aimed at the protection of the Muslim minority. After independence, Hindu nationalism rose, and with it, the feeling that “Hinduness” deserved protection as well — in particular from insults to Hinduism. To this day, the British law against “outraging religious feelings” de facto functions as a criminalization of blasphemy.120116
Every true scripture only gains by criticism.
Proselytism
Like hoax mail, a religion will be successful only if it propagates itself. One way to do this is to encourage people to spread the religion. This practice is called proselytism, and it is part of some religious belief systems.
Appears in: Christianity
Jesus tells us to “go and make disciples of all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit, and teaching them to obey everything I have commanded you”[Bible: Matthew 28:16-20] and to “go into all the world and preach the good news to all creation”[Bible: Mark 16:14-18]. From these verses, mainstream interpretations of Christianity derive what is called the great commission, i.e., the duty to bring Christianity to other people. Jehovah’s Witnesses and Mormons are particularly known for their proselytism.
Appears in: Islam
The Quran tells us to “invite all to the Way of thy Lord with wisdom and beautiful preaching; and argue with them in ways that are best and most gracious”[Quran: 16:125]. Inspired by this verse, today’s Islam knows dawah, i.e., the duty to invite other people to Islam.
Appears in: The Bahai Faith
Proselytism is a part of the religion[Lights of Guidance: Teaching]. Bahais who venture into countries to spread the faith are called pioneers.
Appears less in: Spiritism
This religion emphasizes the freedom of conscience[Spirits’ Book: § 836] and is not interested in proselytizing121. At the same time, the religion argues that one should “endeavor to bring back into the path of truth those who are led astray by false principles”[Spirits’ Book: § 841].
Does not appear in: Judaism
This religion is closely bound to the Jewish ethnicity and does not aim to convert others to the faith.
The more educated a person is, the more likely they are to question everything, including their religion123124125. Hence, if a religion encourages people to read and learn, it risks contributing to its own demise. Our theory thus proposes that religions that oppose education will be more successful. It is, of course, unpopular today to oppose education and few religious leaders will state that they do. However, we can see that the original scriptures of some world religions do not encourage education and that the historical or contemporary interpretations of these religions don’t either.
Appears in: Historical Catholicism
The Bible tells the story of the Tree of Knowledge[Bible: Genesis 2-3]: God punishes Adam and Eve, the mythological progenitors of mankind, for eating from a tree whose fruit gives knowledge. The metaphorical meaning of this story is clear: God punishes people for striving for knowledge. The Bible also encourages us to believe in God with the heart rather than the mind[Bible: Proverbs 3:5]. These are isolated passages, but they were mirrored in the historical disdain for education in the Catholic Church. When the Church reigned Europe during the Middle Ages, the literacy rate (which we can take as a lower bound for formal education) remained below 20%. It rose only once the Church lost its power during the Enlightenment126. In the same vein, the Catholic Church censored books until well into the 20th century. It even prohibited people from reading the Bible on their own, without guidance from a priest. This changed only in 1992[Catechism of the Catholic Church: 133].
Appears in: Islam
The first word that the Prophet Muhammad is reported to have heard from the angel Gabriel was “iqra!” — an instruction that is often translated as “read!”[Quran: 96:1-5]. However, Muhammad was known to be illiterate[Quran: 7:157, 7:158], and thus, the instruction is alternatively translated as “recite!”. During his life, Muhammad made no effort to become literate (even after Gabriel’s message) — and the Quran presents him as “an excellent example for whoever has hope in Allah”[Quran: 33:21]. Consequently, the Quran does not contain verses that actively encourage literacy or the reading of books other than the Quran. While it does encourage reasoning, it prohibits questioning the faith[Quran: 33:36, 5:101]. Nevertheless, education, higher learning, and science flourished in the Muslim world during the Golden Age of Islam from the 8th to 14th centuries CE. The end of the Islamic Golden Age, however, saw an increased influence of the idea that divine revelation is superior to other types of knowledge. The natural sciences, critical questioning, and art were downplayed127. The printing press, invented in the 15th century, arrived in the Muslim world only in the 18th century128. This disinterest in promoting reading holds to this day: As of 2016, 25% of people in Muslim-majority countries are illiterate, compared to 13% in other developing countries and 2% in the developed world129. This observation extends to India as well, where Muslims have the highest illiteracy rate at 20% (comparable only to the illiteracy rate among the group known as the “Untouchables”)130.
Does not appear in: Judaism
Judaism has traditionally put a large emphasis on education. Sometime around 65 CE, the Jewish high priest Joshua ben Gamla issued a religious decree that every Jewish father should send his young sons to primary school to learn to read in order to study the Torah. Over the next few centuries, a formal school system attached to synagogues was established127. During the Middle Ages, Jews were prohibited from owning land and were excluded from guilds in in Europe, which pushed them into more intellectual professions such as trade and moneylending131. To this date, education remains an important value for Jews132, and Jews are the most highly educated of the world’s major religious groups127. Only the ultra-orthodox Jews focus mainly on religious education at the expense of secular education133.
Does not appear in: Spiritism
This religion was born after the Enlightenment. Hence, it holds that “it is only education that can reform mankind”[Spirits’ Book: § 796].
So far as I can remember, there is not one word in the Gospels in the praise of intelligence.
Rituals
Most religions have rituals, i.e., ceremonies that are performed with the goal of pleasing or interacting with the supernatural. These rituals fulfill important social functions: They can create a feeling of community, manage anxieties, and give meaning to one’s environment134. A religion that offers such rituals is thus more attractive than a religion that does not.
There is a second raison d'être for rituals: A religious community can give material advantages to its members. The problem is that these advantages come also to so-called free riders, i.e., to people who just happen to live in the religious community without actually sharing its values and commitments. The rituals can serve to weed out these people135: Only those who follow the rituals in every detail are considered seriously committed to the group. The more effort the rules require, the stronger the signal — a principle known as the costly signaling theory136.
The strongest signal of all is suffering137: If you suffer physical harm for your religion (by fasting, self-mutilation, persecution, or martyrdom), then this is the clearest signal to others that you are a true believer. This is because physical suffering is a phenomenon that even the most metaphysical of thinkers must accept as truth (lest they be exposed to it). Suffering convinces not just others, but also the sufferer: As soon as you undergo elective harm for your religion, you have to believe in it. Otherwise, you would have to admit to yourself that you have been fooled.
In this spirit, all religions have developed rituals that are physically unproductive but serve to display commitment to the community.
Appears in: Christianity
Fasting, going to church, and wearing a cross.
Appears in: Judaism
Wearing religious clothing (most notably the kippah, a skullcap worn by men), resting on Saturdays (Shabbat), observing dietary laws, and submitting one’s boys to circumcision.
Appears in: Islam
Observing dietary laws (such as abstaining from alcohol and pork and eating only halal food), wearing the veil (for women), submitting one’s boys to circumcision, practicing daily prayer, fasting during the month of Ramadan, and pilgrimaging to Mecca.
Appears in: Hinduism
Worshipping, pilgrimaging, participating in festivals, and performing rites of passage.
Appears in: Buddhism
Praying, honoring the Buddha, and having Buddha-figures at home.
Appears in: Taoism
Burning Joss papers and participating in festivals.
Appears in: Confucianism
Worshiping ancestors and participating in festivals.
Appears in: Spiritism
Participating in séances — rituals that serve to get into touch with the spirits.
American anthropologist John Tooby hypothesizes that people prove their loyalty to the religious community not just by following costly rituals, but also by professing “costly beliefs”. These beliefs are costly in the sense that they are so incoherent that only a true believer would profess them (such as “God is one and three at the same time”). In the spirit of the costly signaling theory, Tooby hypothesizes that the more preposterous a belief is, the more effective it is as a signal of loyalty to the religion. Canadian-American cognitive psychologist Steven Pinker agrees and argues that there are zones of life beyond the immediate experience: the distant past, the unknowable future, and the metaphysical. People have no way of knowing what happens in these zones, any beliefs about them are difficult or impossible to falsify, and in any case, any claim about these zones makes no discernible difference to a person’s life. Therefore, these zones are areas wherein people can profess beliefs that serve not to communicate a fact but to show adherence to a community or ideology. Whether these beliefs are literally true or false is the wrong question to ask. The function of these beliefs is to construct a social reality that binds the tribe or sect and gives it a moral purpose138. As American author Roy Sablosky summarized: Such “beliefs” are things you are supposed to say, not things you reckon to be true.
Anyone can say that rocks fall down rather than up, but only a person who is truly committed to the brethren has a reason to say that God is three persons but also one person.
Alliances with political power
Some religions have developed the strategy of allying with the ruler or ruling class of their society. In this scheme, the religion justifies the authority of the ruler and, therefore, the ruler has an interest in making his subjects adhere to the religion. In this way, both religion and power mutually assure their own survival.
Appears in: Christianity
Christianity was originally a minority religion in the Roman Empire, and Christians were even persecuted for their refusal to worship the Roman Emperor. However, Jesus laid a basis for the coexistence of religion and state by proclaiming: “Render to Caesar the things that are Caesar’s, and to God the things that are God’s”[Bible: Mark 12:17]. After the Roman Emperor Constantine the Great legalized and popularized Christianity (313 CE), it gradually became the majority religion in Europe. Since then, kings and emperors from Constantine himself to the medieval European kings (such as Louis XIV of France) and even modern monarchs (such as the king or queen of England) have used this Bible verse and others to justify their rule. They thus had an interest in upholding the faith, which in turn benefited the religion.
Appears in: Chinese religions (historically)
These religions know a “Mandate from Heaven”, which gives the emperor the divine right to rule139. This divine right was installed in 1000 BCE and most likely ceased, at the latest, with the introduction of state atheism after the Chinese Revolution of 1949. Until then, the emperors had every interest in upholding the belief in that Mandate from Heaven.
Appears in: Historical Hinduism
Hinduism knows the concept of divine kings, i.e., kings who have a divine power and authority[Laws of Manu: 7:8]. To keep this divine authority, the kings fostered relationships with the priests (Brahmins) who had, themselves, an interest in the survival of the religion. Today, India is a republic and thus has no king.
Does not appear in: The Bahai Faith
Like the Bible, the scripture of the Bahai Faith offers a path for coexistence of religion and secular authority: Its Book of Laws stresses obedience to the government[Book of Laws: IV/D/1/m]. However, being a smaller religion, the Bahai Faith has not yet had the occasion to ally with a secular government.
Intellectual Strategies
Unfalsifiability
In the terminology of this book, a religion is a set of statements, some of which are supernatural. Such a set of statements can be used to make predictions about the world. The problem is that these predictions may turn out to be false. For example, Jehovah’s Witnesses predicted the end of the world in 1914140. When this failed to come about, they updated their prediction to 1918, and later, to 1925 — each time without success (Wikipedia maintains a list of unfulfilled predictions made by the official organization of Jehovah’s Witnesses141). Such false predictions risk making the religion unpopular. Therefore, the safest choice for a religion would be to make no predictions whatsoever. This, however, would make the religion uninteresting and meaningless. Another option is to make only very vague predictions. For example, Christianity has been predicting for 2,000 years that the end of the world is “near”[Bible: 1 Peter:4-7]. This prediction seems to be sufficiently vague to be plausible while at the same time sufficiently interesting to be attractive. Technically, the statement is unfalsifiable. Unfalsifiable predictions have the advantage that nobody can find out whether they are wrong. Hence, most religions that have survived until today make only unfalsifiable predictions. (This is also what makes them a religion in the first place, according to the definition we use in this book.)
Appears in: Christianity
This religion postulates the existence of a god, which is unfalsifiable. It also claims that the end of the world is “near”. Since it does not predict a fixed date, this prediction is unfalsifiable.
Appears in: Judaism, the Bahai Faith, Islam
Each of these Abrahamic religions postulates the existence of a god, which is unfalsifiable.
Appears in: Hinduism and Buddhism
These religions postulate that bad deeds will have bad consequences), possibly in another life. This is an unfalsifiable claim.
Appears in: Confucianism and Taoism
These religions postulate the existence of a supra-system called Tao or Heaven. This supra-system is understood to be powerful, ordered, awe-inspiring, and even un-describable — but no falsifiable prediction can be derived from it.
Appears in: Spiritism
Spiritism is based on purported physical manifestations of spirits. Thus, its statements are falsifiable (it suffices that one may ask the spirits a second time and get a different answer). However, Spiritism, too, falls back on the unfalsifiable for the definition of its world model: “What appears like a void to you is occupied by matter in a state in which it escapes the action of your senses and of your instruments”[Spirits’ Book: § 36].
- A fire-breathing dragon lives in my garage!
- Great, show me!
- Oh, she’s an invisible dragon.
- Then show me the footprints!
- Good idea, but this dragon floats in the air...
- Let’s hear her breathe!
- She does not actually make any sounds that can be perceived by the human ear...
- Then let’s spray-paint the dragon and make her visible!
- She’s an incorporeal dragon and the paint won’t stick...
- Then what is the difference between an invisible, incorporeal, inaudible, floating dragon and no dragon at all?
Assume equivalence
Religions typically take care to educate people about their own religion. However, there are many religions and adherents may be tempted to explore (or even convert to) the alternatives. Therefore, the religion must explain why it is the only true religion among the many. One strategy is to claim that the others are just variants of one’s own religion.
Appears in: Christianity
There is a common opinion in the West that all religions essentially believe in the Christian god, just in different forms. The Catholic Church alludes to this belief by saying that “from ancient times down to the present, there is found among various peoples a certain perception of that hidden power [of God] which hovers over the course of things”143.
Appears in: Islam
Islam holds that all people are born with a natural faith in God[Quran: 30:30] and that their initial true beliefs are then corrupted by their parents and society[Sahih Muslim: 2658e]. Furthermore, it holds that the messages of all prophets before the Prophet Muhammad have been corrupted by the devil[Quran: 22:52].
Appears in: The Bahai Faith
This religion holds that all religions basically serve the same purpose, and that the Bahai Faith unites them all[Lights of Guidance: 1701].
Appears in: Hinduism
This religion encompasses so many different beliefs, gods, and traditions that it is a prevalent opinion that other religions are just special cases of this system. The Buddha, for example, is sometimes considered an incarnation of Krishna. Allah, likewise, is sometimes identified with Brahman144. The Bhagavad Gita, for one, explains that whoever worships another god just worships a form of the Hindu god Krishna[Bhagavadgita: 9:23].
Appears in: Spiritism
Spiritism argues that “all religions teach you that the souls of the departed continue to see you; but they regard your afflictions from another point of view”[Spirits’ Book: § 976].
We’re Hindus. Your theological and philosophical distinctiveness will be added to our own. Your god will be added to our pantheon. Resistance is futile.
Claim an illusion
Another way to explain why other religions exist is to claim that the other religions have been deliberately created by the powers of one’s own religion. Thereby, the existence of the other religion becomes proof for the power of one’s own spirits.
Appears in: Judaism
If a prophet from another religion performs a miracle, then “the Lord your God is testing you”[Bible: Deuteronomy 13:1-5]. Thus, a miracle by any non-Jewish prophet is nothing more than proof of the power of the Jewish god.
Appears in: Christianity
Jesus predicts that “false prophets will appear and perform great signs and wonders”[Bible: Matthew 24:11,24]. In this way, Christians can believe that any prophet who appears and performs miracles is nothing more than proof of Jesus' prediction. Jehovah’s Witnesses, a denomination of Christianity, even maintain that the non-Christian religions were created by the devil145. Thus, the existence of the other religions mainly attests to the power of the devil.
Appears in: Islam
Whenever another religion claims a miracle, Islam can say that these miracles were done by the Jinns — the spirits of Islam[Quran: 72]146. As for the resurrection of Jesus Christ, the Quran tells us that Jesus was not really resurrected. God only made it seem as if Jesus was resurrected[Quran: 4:157-158]. Thus, the apparent resurrection is really just a proof of the power of Allah.
So there are a billion Muslims who think that all the Christians are delusional. And there are two billion Christians who think all the Muslims are delusional. Would you consider, at least for a moment, the possibility that all three billion of you are delusional?
A meaning of life
Israeli history professor Yuval Noah Harari hypothesizes137 that a religion (or, in fact, any ideology) has to provide a kind of story that explains the world in order to attract adherents. This story must have two properties:
It must be bigger than the life of an individual person, i.e., it must encompass a nation, the world, or the Universe.
It must provide a role for the individual believer. Each individual person must have an important contribution to that big story.
As it so happens, the major religions all have a meme that satisfies these desiderata.
Appears in: Abrahamic religions
The Abrahamic religions offer several stories that give people a reason to live and all of them reserve an important role for the individual. One story goes that God created humans to praise him, and so, every single human is called to serve God. Another story goes that life is a big test for the afterlife: God cares about each individual and wants to see whether each particular person deserves to go to Heaven. Yet another story goes that God has a big plan for humanity in which we all must play our part.
Appears in: Indian religions
The Indian religions hold that we exist to go through a cycle of rebirths until we are finally pure enough to reach Nirvana. Again, the story is of cosmic dimensions, and yet, there is a chance to reach Nirvana for every single one of us.
Appears in: Taoism
Taoism holds that humans should live in balance with the Tao (the Universe), and that the spirit of the body joins the Universe after death147. In this way, every single person is connected to the Universe as a whole.
Does not appear in: Confucianism
Confucius was concerned mainly with worldly behavior and goals. He is believed to have said: “To put the world in order, we must first put the nation in order; to put the nation in order, we must first put the family in order; to put the family in order; we must first cultivate ourselves; and to cultivate ourselves, we must first extend our knowledge”[Four Books: Great Learning § 4].
From an atheist perspective, the idea that we have any sort of cosmically vital role is absurd given the size and scope of the Universe and the unimportance of our planet in it84. In the words of Scottish philosopher David Hume: “The life of a man is of no greater importance to the universe than that of an oyster”148.
Most people who go on identity quests are like children going treasure hunting. They find only what their parents have hidden for them in advance.
God’s glory
A religion has to explain why bad things happen to good people. One particularly successful strategy is to say that good things come from the main deity and bad things happen because the deity is pursuing a deeper purpose that cannot be understood by humans. This way, the glory of the deity can only increase. If something good happens, it shows the power and benevolence of the deity; if something bad happens, it shows that the deity is so smart that it can do things whose positive effect we cannot see. Thus, it works like a double-acting reciprocating pump: Both bad things and good things (forward and backward movements) increase belief in the deity. Such a theory is, of course, unfalsifiable because it just reconciles a posteriori whatever happened with the supposed intention of the deity. It can never be used to predict what will happen.
Appears in: Christianity
In popular interpretations of this religion, good events in life are ascribed to God or Jesus. A bad event can be explained in various ways: as a mysterious act of God that we do not understand[Deuteronomy 29:29]; as an act of God done so that something good can happen ultimately[Bible: John 9:3]; and as a harbinger of the disasters predicted to happen when the end is near[Bible: Matthew 24:7-8, Mark 13:7-9]. In this way, believers will view any deterioration of the situation as confirmation of the prophecy and any improvement as a gift from God74.
Appears in: Islam
The Quran tells us that “whatever good befalls you is from Allah and whatever evil befalls you is from yourself”[Quran: 4:79]. This way, God takes the glory for all positive things while rejecting the responsibility for the negative. Problems in life also have their purpose: They are a test of one’s belief [Quran: 2:155-157]. Thus, everything that happens, good or bad, can be seen as proof of God. We discuss other psychological factors of Islam later in this book.
Appears in: Buddhism and Hinduism
These religions believe in karma, i.e., the idea that good deeds will entail good things and bad deeds will entail bad things, either in this life or in the next. This is assured by a supra-system that issues these rewards and punishments. Thus, whatever happens can be interpreted as proof of the existence of this supra-system: If something good happens, this shows that the supra-system rewards good people; if something bad happens, this shows that you must have done something bad in the past and that this is your punishment.
Appears in: Spiritism
In this religion, earthly life is a trial[Spirits’ Book: § 920-926]: “If a righteous man undergoes misfortune, it is a trial from which, being bravely borne, he will reap a rich reward”, most likely in the afterlife or in a different incarnation. Thus, either God bestows happiness upon us (in which case he is evidently a good god), or he bestows sorrows upon us (in which case we will later reap a rich reward, and God is still a good god). Hence, no matter what happens, God is always good.
Any god deserving worship would not want it.
Any god wanting worship would not deserve it.
