Hi, John,

At 11:25 AM 12/10/2003 -1100, you wrote:
>>While science and religion are two wings of man, the logician may have trouble 
>>jumping into the mystical ocean. "I and the father are one". What can this mean?<< 

We may or may not have the fuller context for that statement. However, Jesus admitted 
speaking in parables. IMO, given that He regularly used an analogical pedagogy, it 
should not be surprising that His disciples also used metaphor in describing the 
events after His passing, such as the Resurrection.

>>If you logically analyze it you can pull it apart. I went to an atheist site to get 
>>their view of a definition of religion and found the following:<<

That article actually includes several different definitions, both functional and 
substantive. Most sociologists of religion prefer the former over the latter. 
Functional definitions allow the researcher to include a greater variety of 
organizations under the rubric of religion than would be possible with most 
substantive definitions. 

An example of a functional definition of religion, from Emile Durkheim, is a system of 
beliefs and praxes (practices), focused on the sacred (the extraordinary, not 
necessarily the supernatural), which unites people into a moral (normative) community. 

Substantive definitions, on the other hand, may specify particular beliefs, praxes, or 
objects of worship as *criterion variables*. However, if I define a religion as a 
belief in supernatural beings or in prayer, I am forced to exclude numerous religious 
organizations and traditions from this social institution, such as Confucianism and 
Ethical Culture.

>>Religion seems to me to have something to do with the heart of man reaching out to 
>>the infinite. Each person has his own unique religiousview of life.<<

Such a unique religious view, if there is such a thing, would, IMO, be a personal 
belief system, not a religion. Sociologically, religion is a social institution, i.e., 
the institution of religion. In a particular country, the various religious 
organizations (denominations, sects, cults, and, where applicable, churches or 
"official" ecclesia) are examined in the context of this greater structure. Unstated, 
or unshared (if that is possible), personal beliefs would not be considered religious 
phenomena by most sociologists.

Sociologist Richard Niebuhr (Reinhold's brother), wrote a book I read years ago 
called, _The Denominational Society_. It describes the normative structure of the 
American religious institution as denominational (cooperative and pluralistic). 
Although not all religious organizations in the U.S. are denominations, those that are 
not in this category may experience degrees of cultural tension.

Mark A. Foster * http://MarkFoster.net 
http://CompuServe.m.foster.name


----------
You are subscribed to Baha'i Studies as: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
To unsubscribe send a blank email to mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Baha'i Studies is available through the following:
mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://list.jccc.net/cgi-bin/lyris.pl?enter=bahai-st
news://list.jccc.net/bahai-st
http://www.escribe.com/religion/bahaist (public)
http://www.mail-archive.com/[EMAIL PROTECTED] (public)

Reply via email to