Neo Azzam

McGuire tends to divide the practice of religion between official religion teaching and common people practices. She argues that official religion has limited the meaning and practice of religion merely by their interpretation. This interpretation will make another interpretation as out of the official interpretation. Therefore, many unofficial interpretations will be excluded by their autorotation of official teaching of religion. So, religious and un-religious are defined only by official teaching which is held by religious institution. Embodied practices as McGuire wrote contain many ambiguous explanations. First, it comes from her explanation about the examples. When gardening is out of the religious acts because it has no relationship with official teaching of religion, it simply limited the meaning of religiosity itself. What is actually the religious action or thing?? Is it only a practice which is held by official institution such as Church or MUI? I do not think so. Ev...

The WC. Smith's reification  is obviously not enough to cover all of the things in the word “religion” as practice and concept and also the group of meaning, faith and belief. According to Smith, the concept of religion comes from the cumulative tradition and faith. At the first time, the term of religion has no meaning, simply just a faith. As the time goes by, the meaning of religion got broader than before. It contains such as traditions, interpretations, practices and many others. But, this concept is more using materialist view than a comprehensive view. The name of reification is one of the sign why it is important to be criticized. Reification means that everything in the word can be materialized. Everything can be found as a real thing which can be examined by our sense or by our logical. It is very dangerous because it does not give us a comprehensive view about religion. For me, religion is not only tradition and faith, but it contains more than them. For instance, ...

Bellah believes that study of religion must have ethical aims. He justifies his conclusion with brilliant examples from many researches in scientific works which always include the aim for their results. For instance, he tells the aim of Leviathan’s Hobbes is about making peace and social control in the society. Based on that proofs, Bellah convinces that every scientific works should be emphasized in the end of research, not in the process of research. The end of research is about the ethical aim they have to do or concern after that research. Bellah promotes that the end of scientific result is moral value such as “to listen, to reflect, to criticize and to respond as the tasks of social inquiry” [1] for making a better life in future. Dunbar promotes “interreligious dialogue” as one of the works of academic study of religion. For Dunbar, interreligious dialogue is “respectful communication between two or more persons committed to different religions about issues of religious ...

Examining the relationship between identity and scholarship in Western academy, Davaney starts her analyses from finding the important issue about identity and scholarship by examining the history of Western modernity. Then, she tries to contextualize her finding in many events and perspectives today. Finally she needs to explain how those findings interrelate and convolute in her own discipline, the modern (western) academic theology. The History background Reading the history of Western modernity, Davaney points the most important value in western modernity is Reason. Reason is the turning point for enlightenment which differs exclusively from medieval era. Reason is an “antithesis of medieval values such as authority, tradition, historical particularity and often religious heritages and communities”. [1] Therefore, Reason is universal, exists in all human beings and also to be central source of knowledge and truth. More than that, Reason was to be above “all independent con...