What is "religion?"

[Gregory Matthews]

In post # 212078, David Koot stated the following:

"Okay, guys, how about the definition of 'religion'? Bravus is right. We need to define our terms."

I thought that it might be of interest to explore this question. But, I did not want to hijack that thread, so I have begun a new one.

Last year, I wrote a paper in respone to that question being raised in a Sabbath School class in the chruch I attend. The following is a brief quote from that paper. I invite your comments as to what a religion is:

*********************

In my understanding, religion is commonly thought to have the follwing six common elements:

1) Ritual: This may be simple, or formal. It will likely involve the forms and methods of worship, s well as the places of worship; there will likely be an inner, or mental aspect, and, perhaps, an outer or mechanistic aspect. It does not require any reference to God, as in Confucianism.

2) Myth: These are the stories that are vital to the group, and that vitality does not depend upon the truth or falsity of the story.

3) Doctrine: These are the teachings that differentiate those within the group from those outside the group.

4) Ethics: The moral/ethical teachings, and group view of society, as well as the manner in which the members relate to society.

5) Social Organization: This is more than administrative. It includes the manner in which group members are expected to practice their ethical teachings, and relate to society at large.

6) Experiential: This is the maner in which the members relate to the invisible world.

My summation: Religion addresses, as does spirituality, the ultimate concerns of human beings and of human society. It goes beyond history which deals with the past. It goses beyond science which deals with observable data. Religion goes beyond philosophical ethics, which deals with what ought to be. It includes the beleifs, symbols, organizaton, activities, ritual practices, and moral precepts associated with humanities ultimate concerns which usually, but not always, involve a supernatural or supra-dimension. This may come close to spirituality, which I differentiate from religion. I find that differentiation in the six common elements fo religion that I have listed above.

************************

NOTE: The above is a very brief abstract from the first two pages of a four page paper that I wrote. But, that paper went in a direction that we are not going here. I submit it simply to stimulate thought as to what a religion is.

[Dr. Shane]

Bible definition:

"Pure religion and undefiled before God and the Father is this, To visit the fatherless and widows in their affliction, and to keep himself unspotted from the world." James 1:27

Dictionary.com:

1.

A. Belief in and reverence for a supernatural power or powers regarded as creator and governor of the universe.

B. A personal or institutionalized system grounded in such belief and worship.

2. The life or condition of a person in a religious order.

3. A set of beliefs, values, and practices based on the teachings of a spiritual leader.

4. A cause, principle, or activity pursued with zeal or conscientious devotion.

[:"blue"] Number 4 applies to those that have made a god out of natural science. [/]

[Gregory Matthews]

Shane:

Your Biblical reference to good in telling us how '[pure" religione is practiced in life. However, it certainly cannot be construed to be a defination of religion.

YOur common dictionary defination is much better. But, it should be used in context. The context fo a common dictionary defination is to describe how the typical person is usisng the word in common useage. In that respect, I would not argue with your common dictionary defination.

However, in most fields of academic studies, the scholars who study in a field come up with more precise definations that fit the context in which they speak. Let me illustrate with the context of my defination.

I defined "religion" in the context designed to discriminate between spirituality, sects, denominations, and cults. As I abstracted what I posted here, that was not immediately evident to everyone reading. But, Shane, people who read in the academic area of "religion" would have immediately recognized that I was making the distinction between religion and denominations.

What does this mean?

People who study "world religions" will tell you that there are anywhere from 9 to 13 or so world religions. In such a classification, Christianity is a religion. As a religion, it includes divisions such as Orthodox, Roman Catholics, Seventh-day Adventists, Baptists, etc.

The listing that I generally follow includs the following:

Christianity

Islam

Judaism

Buddhism

Hinduism

Jainism

Confucianism

Shintoism

Taoism.

All of the above have within their groupings denominations, sects, and clults.

In addition, there are blended groups. But, since they are a blend of the groups that I have listed, I do not list them as a seperate world religion. A couple of examples of blended groups are;

Sikhism, which attempts to blend Hinduism and Islam.

Zen Buddhism which attempts to combine Buddhism, Confucianism and Taoism.

Tribal religions are purely localized, commonly worship a local diety, and not world-wide in scope.

To carry this out beyond what I am saying about world religions, one authority once said (I do not have his most up-to-date citation) that there were 22 identifiable religious groups (plus two other groups) in the USA. Then in discussing the Adventist grouping, he listed 80+ groups.

When you break down into this detail, you lose common practicality. It it better then to have a structure that allows one to divide into the major groups which for me is what I have defined as "religion" in my first post.

[David Koot]

Question for you, Gregory: Do you think secularism can be a religion?

[gina i]

To me, religion is man made. Not God made. When someone says to me "well your religion says.." Yes, my religion says, but really I only trust what my God says.

[Bravus]

Yes, the definition Shane quoted, while it fits Christian religion pretty well, doesn't really fit a lot of other religious traditions, so if we're seeking to define 'religion' we need to go broader than that.

It's interesting to me that creationists/Christians who are saying 'secularism is a religion' or 'scientism is a religion' seem to be actually using the term 'religion' in a pejorative way. That's odd, coming from religious people, don't you think?

Around this discussion, religion is often defined in terms of 'unquestioned dogma'. But looking around this site as a whole shows we have plenty of questions about our faith, so that's not a very useful definition of religion.

If the question is really 'can scientism/secularism be an unquestioned dogma for some people?', then I think the answer is 'yes'. I'm not sure where that gets us, though.

[Dr. Shane]

Well Adventism certainly isn't unquestioned dogma but Adventists are not typical Christians either. Adventists question things over and over and continuously search the Bible for answers. That is why I believe being an Adventist pastor is much more difficult than being a pastor of another denomination.

Gina makes quite a point. Most Christians do not consider Chrisianity to be a religion because Chrisitanity is a relationship with God. I was once given a book called, how to be a Christian without being religious. It was based on the book of Romans and quite powerful.

Modern-day secularism combines evolution and environmentalism in a way to worship the creation instead of the Creator. I have known secularists that will not use paper napkins in much the same way that a religious person would not use a cuss word. Secularism is less defined. There are no Ten Commandments of secularism for example but there are certainly rules and dogma that is taught and lived by.

[David Koot]

Quote:

---

Bravus said:

It's interesting to me that creationists/Christians who are saying 'secularism is a religion' or 'scientism is a religion' seem to be actually using the term 'religion' in a pejorative way.

---

Hmmm . . . You think so, eh? I don't know what to say about that. For me, it is an intriguing question. What are the elements of a religion? Does secularism have those elements? As I looked at Gregory's initial list, I felt that it was restrictive. I think that secularism, atheism and scientism, all may qualify as religions. For starters, I would ask the question, "What do those who are secularists, who are atheists, who are scientists (not scientologists) put their faith in?"

I submit that faith is a fundamental human need--that everyone needs to have faith in something, and that without faith in something, life can quickly come to an end. Hence, the question.

David Koot

[Gregory Matthews]

Just as a point to add to the thought: One can be spiritual without being religious. Irreligious people may be spiritual.

[Bravus]

I guess they put their faith in human reason. That just doesn't 'feel' like a religion to me.

An associated question in relation to gina's point: do we see 'religion' as a bad thing, maybe an institutionalisation that ignores or misses the reality of faith? that will also help with the definitions.

[gina i]

I think a lot of people do see religion as a bad thing. I guess when they think of religion they think of a person telling the multitudes 'what to do'. Which is true in a lot of cases. Sorry if I'm veering off the topic a bit, but when people ask me about my 'religion', I tell them I am an SDA, but I also always make sure to distinguish the difference between identifying as an SDA & having a relationship with God.

So they know I'm not just another person following another religion, but one that has meaning (to me).

Most of my friends, who know I am an SDA, admire the fact that I am not 'religious', but that I am spiritual & have a lot of faith. When people know the difference between the 2, I think they have more respect for you & the faith that you belong to. Not that it matters what anyone thinks, but it feels better knowing that other people think of you in a light like that

[Dr. Shane]

"Pure religion and undefiled before God and the Father is this, To visit the fatherless and widows in their affliction, and to keep himself unspotted from the world." James 1:27

Nothing is bad about pure religion. However the world is full of false religion which gives pure religion a bad name.

[David Koot]

Quote:

---

Bravus said:

I guess they put their faith in human reason.

---

Many put their faith in the inevitability of progress. Social Darwinism. Others put their faith in philosophical ideals. I believe that most if not all people must have a raison d'etre. It is that raison d'etre, which they put their faith in.

[Naomi]

</font><blockquote><font class="small">Quote:</font><hr />

Gregory Matthews said:

Just as a point to add to the thought: One can be spiritual without being religious. Irreligious people may be spiritual.

<hr /></blockquote><font class="post">

Can one be "religious" without being "christian"?

[Gregory Matthews]

A Jewish person is religious, but not a Christian.

A Hindu person is religious, but not a Christian.

If you take my list of 9 religions, only one is Christian--Christianity. The other 8 are all non-Christian.

[Gregory Matthews]

Naomi, did you mean: How can one be spiritual without being religious?

There have been peer-reviewed articles written on the subject of the differences between spiritualiy, and religion.

I will attempt to put it in a very simple statement, that is mine:

Spirituality is the search for meaning in life. That search for meaning in life can take place outside of religion, and within a frame of reference that excludes God.

[Dr. Shane]

In my years in Alcoholics Anonymous I have known many people that are spiritual and not religeous and having known them quite well I can say that I favor religion with spirituality that than spirituality without religion.

[Bravus]

The reverse also applies - it is possible to be religious without being spiritual.

In relation to David's contention, perhaps we could think about a religion as a 'meaning-making framework': what someone uses to make sense of the world (the postmodernists call this same sort of thing a 'totalising framework', because it claims to be able to ascribe a meaning to everything).

Under that kind of definition a convinced Marxism would be considered a religion, with everything being understood in terms of history, dialectical materialism and the struggle to control the means of production. So would secularism, with everything being understood in terms of cause-and-effect relationships in the natural world.

I think one of the confusions in this discussion is that bevin describes science and David and Shane talk about scientism. Under the definition above, science would not be a religion, just a body of knowledge and a set of procedures, but scientism - the belief that everything in life must be explained in terms of science and that anything that is not scientific is not real - would be.