| Line 1: |
Line 1: |
| | "'''Religion'''" refers to a set of core beliefs upon which people base their lives, usually involving a deep personal commitment, dedication, devotion, even variant degrees of '''[[insanity|worship]]''', emotionally and mentally, of something or someone, which may or may not be a [[Other gods|deity]], or even [[God]] the [[Trinity|Holy Trinity]]. | | "'''Religion'''" refers to a set of core beliefs upon which people base their lives, usually involving a deep personal commitment, dedication, devotion, even variant degrees of '''[[insanity|worship]]''', emotionally and mentally, of something or someone, which may or may not be a [[Other gods|deity]], or even [[God]] the [[Trinity|Holy Trinity]]. |
| | in before block | | in before block |
| − | For [[Christians]], the Bible teaches the triune nature of man, and Jesus said the greatest commandment in the Old Testament was to love God with all your heart, all your [[mind]] and all your [[soul]]. The Christian religion employs the use of [[logic]] and [[faith]]. Morality has often historically been based on religion, but many movements such as the [[secular humanism|secular humanists]] hold that morality does not depend on religion, and secular views of morality have existed as far back as ancient Greece.<ref>Humanism A new Religion. Simon and Schuster. pp. 64–69.</ref> | + | For [[Christians]], the Bible teaches the triune nature of man, and Jesus said the greatest commandment in the Old Testament was to love God with all your heart, all your [[mind]] and all your [[soul]]. The Christian religion employs the use of [[logic]] (yeah right) and [[faith]] (at least you're honest). Morality has often historically been based on religion (dipsh1ts), but many movements such as the [[secular humanism|secular humanists]] hold that morality does not depend on religion, and secular views of morality have existed as far back as ancient Greece.<ref>Humanism A new Religion. Simon and Schuster. pp. 64–69.</ref> |
| | | | |
| | == Criticism of classifying [[Christianity]] as a species of genus religion == | | == Criticism of classifying [[Christianity]] as a species of genus religion == |
| | There are scholars like [[Visser't Hooft]] who resist the notion of [[Christianity]] as a ''"species of the [[genus]] religion."'' He argues that Christianity is an ''"adequate and definitive [[Revelation (religion)|revelation]] of [[God]] in history,"'' that classifying Christianity as one expression of ''"a general phenomenon called religion is to set it in a framework which is foreign to its nature."'' In differentiating the world religions from the world of revelation, Jean Danielou says, ''"The worst misunderstanding of Christianity or of [[Judaism]] is to make them religions among other religions — the very error of [[syncretism]]."''<ref name="Christopaganism">{{cite book | | There are scholars like [[Visser't Hooft]] who resist the notion of [[Christianity]] as a ''"species of the [[genus]] religion."'' He argues that Christianity is an ''"adequate and definitive [[Revelation (religion)|revelation]] of [[God]] in history,"'' that classifying Christianity as one expression of ''"a general phenomenon called religion is to set it in a framework which is foreign to its nature."'' In differentiating the world religions from the world of revelation, Jean Danielou says, ''"The worst misunderstanding of Christianity or of [[Judaism]] is to make them religions among other religions — the very error of [[syncretism]]."''<ref name="Christopaganism">{{cite book |
| | |title=Christopaganism or Indigenous Christianity? | | |title=Christopaganism or Indigenous Christianity? |
| − | |author=Alan R. Tippet | + | |author=Some Pedophile |
| | |editors=Tetsunao Yamamori, Charles R. Taber | | |editors=Tetsunao Yamamori, Charles R. Taber |
| | |publisher=William-Carey Library | | |publisher=William-Carey Library |