I. Towards a Definition of Religion

"Religion" is a difficult word to define. It seems that as soon as you settle on a definition, you can find a religious person who is an exception to your rule. Webster's New Universal Unabridged Dictionary defines "Religion" as "belief in a divine or superhuman power to be obeyed and worshipped as creator and ruler of the universe". This definition probably holds true for most people, but some who we would recognize as religious may practice very little worship and may not believe that the universe was not created but is everlasting. Daniel L. Pals says that "Religion consists of belief and behavior associated in some way with a supernatural realm, a sphere of divine or spiritual beings". (p. 270, Seven Theories of Religion). This definition casts a wider net but still does not capture every religion. Emile Durkheim believes that god and the supernatural are secondary and that religion's primary job is to separate the sacred from the profane. I think that this idea is enlightening. Clifford Geertz defines religion as "system of symbols … which seem real (p. 244, Pals)." Again, Geertz adds light to the discussion of religion.

Some Christians have stated that "Religion is man's attempt to reach God and that Christianity is God's attempt to reach man". I would not be so brazen. Christianity is a religion by all definitions listed above. I believe that Christ was the founder of the one true religion. Christ is the true path to God, but that does not mean the other religions are not also paths. It also may be true that some paths may bring us closer to God than others.

II. The Ubiquity of Religion in Human Culture

There has never been a human culture that has not practiced religion. Certainly there have been individual skeptics and non-conformists, but there has never been a society at large who have not worshipped something greater than themselves, or who have not distinguished a realm of the sacred from a realm of the profane. Even in a self-proclaimed atheistic nation like the People' Republic of China we see the sacred at the heart of power. Isn't the mausoleum of Chairman Mao a sacred shrine? Isn't his little red book scripture? There will always be religion in the heart as long as there is mystery in the world. Can anyone demonstrate any human culture in all of human history that is void of the supernatural or the sacred? Since religion seems to have permeated all cultures through all ages, one must ask "why is there this universal impulse toward religion?" It seems that to be human is to be religious.

III. The Impact of Religion on Human History

One of my favorite reference books is The 100: A Ranking of the Most Influential Persons in History by Michael H. Hart. In this man's opinion, five of the top six influential people of all time have been Religious Figures. Hart lists Muhammad as first, Jesus Christ as third, Buddha as fourth, Confucius as fifth and St. Paul as sixth. (Incidentally, Isaac Newton is second and Moses in 18th). Why are the founders of religions more influential than military conquerors and seminal scientists? The answer seems to lie in the pervasive influence that religion holds on core human values and behavior. The technology of airports at Rome, Jerusalem, Teheran, Bombay, and Bangkok may all appear the same. But once downtown and with the people, the hardcore influence of the Catholic, Jewish, Islamic, Hindu, and Buddhist religion become obvious. The aftermath of September 11 shows us the binding power of Islam. Muslims from many nations are putting their nationalism aside and giving primary allegiance to their religion. Although I believe that Hart underestimates the influence of Jesus, his estimate of religion as the most influential factor in human life is on target.

IV. Explanations for the Religious Impulse

There are three categories of explanation for the religious impulse in human beings: the functionalist, the anthropological, and the apologetic.

The functionalist view holds that religion serves some alternative function, that its function can be explained away as part of a larger framework. Advocates of functionalism also tend to be reductionists, because they reduce religion into something else. Not surprisingly, that "something else" always turns out to be their personal field of study. For example, the political philosopher Karl Marx explained that religion was a minor part of politics. Religion grew out of a class struggle and will disappear when we achieve a classless society. Religion is an opiate of the people causing us to focus on the future life rather than the present strife. The psychologist Sigmund Freud explained that religion was psychological, a dysfunction of the human psyche. Prayer and worship are abnormal behaviors. Religion is a neurosis that could be cured through Freudian psychoanalysis. The sociologist Emile Durkheim explained that religion serves primarily a sociological purpose. Through religious practice we reinforce ties with our own clan. Religion is as social glue. Functionalists are typically hostile toward religion, although some - like Durkheim - are less hostile than others.

A category of explanation opposite to reductionism is anthropology. Anthropologists accept that religion can only be understood through the eyes of the religious believer. Religion cannot be "reduced" to something else, neither can it seen as a function in some larger scheme. Some anthropologists like Mircea Eliade take a macro view of religion including in their interpretation as many religions as possible. Eliade divides religious history and geography into (1) archaic religions, (2) historical religions, and now (3) historicism/scientism. He attempts to establish a universal theory of religion. Other anthropologists like E.E. Evans-Prichard and Clifford Geertz view each culture as unique. They reject the Eliade approach of clumping all religious experience together and then deriving a theory from the clump. Each of these religious theorists carried out ethnographic studies of small religious communities and then made modest proposals about religion based on their findings. As a group, anthropologists are more sympathetic towards religion. Some may hold private religious convictions, but strive to keep their private views from biasing their anthropological research.

The third category of explanation is the apologetic view. This view looks at religion through the eyes of personal religious conviction. Islamists view religion through Islamic eyes, Hindus through Hindu eyes, and Christians view religion from the vantage of Christian conviction. If hostile functionalists find in religion no truth, and sympathetic anthropologists find in all religions some truth, then apologists find in their religion certain truth.

V. Is Christianity a Religion?

Although an apology of the Christian Faith is beyond the scope of this paper, a statement of the Christian understanding is a beginning point for a larger discussion of our Christian faith. I find two distinctions between Christianity and all other religions. First, our Christian faith is firmly centered on the person of Jesus Christ. Who He is supercedes his tremendous moral teaching. Paul preaches this to the Corinthians: "3For I delivered unto you first of all that which I also received, how that Christ died for our sins according to the scriptures; 4And that he was buried, and that he rose again the third day according to the scriptures: 5And that he was seen of Cephas, then of the twelve (I Corinthians 15:3-5)".

One could practice Islam without belief in an historical Muhammad. The same could be said for Judaism and Buddhism. But Christianity without the real and continuing presence of Christ is gutted of meaning. Without Christ we are fools indeed. Secondly, our religious standing does not depend on observance of rules (like Judaism or Islam). Our standing does not even depend on our belief, important as that is. Our religion is based on relationship. If we are not God's children … if we are not "in Christ" then observance of rules and belief in truth are futile. If we are in relationship, then belief and obedience will follow. Our Christian faith is a religion, but it is unique in that it is based solely upon a saving relationship with the one who was and is and is to come.