Religion and Theology

Introduction
It has been found that throughout the world, major religions have tried to justify terrorism in an effort to overcome religious intolerance.  The main cause of such an influence is that often religion has a strong influence on people and society such that people feel religion can be used as a mean to fight injustice and evil, or use the same as a mean of self-defense.  Often it has been found that a strong attachment to God without worldly consideration may increase the likelihood towards violence.  This likelihood towards violence can develop in spite of a strong sense that all religions of the world consider God as the creator and not the destroyer of the word.  One of the commonest ways a religions group would be using violence would be when it has been threatened by other religious or political groups.  This kind of situation may arise purposefully, accidentally or negligently.  In other situations, religious groups may want to slaughter other people to please their gods (OConnor, 2010).  

Throughout the world, religion has a strong influence on various aspects of peoples life including social, economic, political, psychological, legal, professional and moral.  Religion can be disguised in many ways such as political, social, military, legal or professional to create an influence on peoples lives.  Due to these influence of religion, often it may be difficult to define religion.  According to Durkheim 1915, religion is a set of beliefs and practices arranged in a unified manner such that they mean sacred things, and would exclude certain acts that are forbidden, and would unite the community under a unified moral unit.  Geertz 1985 considered religion to be a set of symbols that would create strong and persistent motivations and moods (OConnor, 2010).

From religion, many cults and groups may be created which can be starting points for the development of various terrorist groups and factions.  Often the cults and sects have a one-way belief in God and do not consider other faiths and beliefs.  They have strong ideas of their religion.  Once a religion gets established, a sect can develop usually from the lower socioeconomic groups of the religion.  The sect could be developing to oppose the practices of the rich in a particular religion belonging to a state.  At this point of time, there depends a lot on whether the sect or group is getting more support or is being destroyed.  If the sect gets more support, it can become an institutionalized group (that would begin the process of becoming an established group).  During this face of expansion or dissolution, the religious group may try to embrace the political world or manipulate the same to a place outside the ordinary world.  If the group manipulates itself outside the political world, then there are chances that it may become aggressive and take up a path filled with violence and terror.  Often cults do not break up from the parent group or established religion.  They may have strong belief in an aspect that is discovered newly or an aspect that has been long forgotten or discarded.  A cult usually develops from the upper strata, and has a charismatic leadership.  When the leader dies, the cult may also come to an end.  A cult usually is not an aggressor but a role victim, and the members would try to establish inner-wordiness.  On the other hand a sect does not control the inner feelings and thoughts of the members.  In cults and sects, suicidal ideas and homicidal tendencies can exist, but often it is found that cults are more dangerous than the sects.  However, often it may be difficult to differentiate a cult from a sect (OConnor, 2010).  

Body
Established religions of the world
The major religions of the world are Christianity (33 of the worlds population), Islam (20), Hinduism (13), Buddhism (6), Jewish (0.2) and others.  Religion has an effect over culture and today in different parts of the world, cultural clashes are occurring due to clashes and conflicts between 2 or more religions.  In the Yugoslavian religion, there is a conflict between various Christian factions.  In India, there is a conflict between the Hindus and the Muslims, and in the Middle there is a conflict between Israel and the Palestinians.  In parts of Africa, there are conflicts between Muslims and Christians.  Many of the established religions from all over the world may choose terrorism as a route and would provide the terrorist with respectability.  However, a lot has deviated from the Just War Doctrine that was established thousands of years back.  The Just War Precept would provide the circumstances when the people of the religion could go for a war.  However, none of the religions have accepted weapons of mass destruction to be used against humanity.  According, to the Just War concept, war or violence can be accepted as an option only as a last resort, when other modes have been seriously attempted and have failed.  War has to be sanctioned by certain individuals of a society who have a legitimate interest in the group.  War can only be organized to overcome any sufferings, injury or other wrongs that are meted out on a particular society.  Only if there is a realistic chance of success should the Just war concept be adopted.  The main aim of Just war would be to bring about peace.  This means that war can only be organized to bring back normalcy in a community and not as a method of destroying other communities.  The violence that is permitted in the Just War concept should be equivalent to the amount of damages that have suffered.  Besides, wars should be organized only to destroy the enemy and not to attack any innocent party such as women and children.  There are certain moral constraints in religious warfare which need to be strongly respected.  These are the reasons why Just War concept can be considered to be a justified and reasonable.  On the other hand, terrorism would cross all the boundaries of fairness and would also feel that they have been morally superior for the actions.  Socially, their actions would not be considered as morally superior.  Religious terrorists have a morality that is based on their personality and have no external supporters for their acts of terrorism (OConnor, 2010).

Most of the terrorist groups in the world derive motivation from the belief that they have a sacred duty in their religion to please God.  However, there may be a difference between religious terrorism and a holy war (jihad or crusade).  A religious war would be having a spiritual objective.  However, terrorism is unpredictable and involves certain individuals who would be dedicated to doing anything such as a terrorism conflict.  Today most of the terrorist groups are not considered as a part of any mainstream cult or sect, or they may have been in the past a part of such a group or sect.  Today most of the terrorists are considered as fundamentalists, extremists and true believers that can be differentiated from the mainstream religion practitioners.  Most of the individuals who engage in terrorism may interpret the sacred texts to directly or indirectly demand that the true believers of the religion have a sacred duty.  They feel that the mainstream religious practitioners may be neglecting their sacred duty even if it involves picking up a violent path.  Religious terrorists may consciously not enjoy violence and for this reason may not consider themselves to be terrorists.  Instead they may consider themselves to be Soldiers of God or Religious Activists.  As religious terrorists do not enjoy violence, for this reason, it is not considered as the most dangerous type of terrorism.  Various other forms of terrorism such as political and social terrorism may succumb to military, political, diplomatic actions and negotiations, but religious terrorism would not succumb to these.  Many of the religious terrorists may want to fail in their mission and offer martyrdom to demonstrate that they have failed in a world filled with evil.  This may be dangerous for the world, as often they are involved in suicide attacks that would destroy other people.  The world is really at a huge risk, if the religious terrorists have weapons of mass destruction in their hands (OConnor, 2010).

Relationship between Religion and Terrorism
There are four aspects of religion that may encourage terrorism.  Firstly, religion requires the community to take part in rituals.  Secondly, the religious believers have to believe in the supernatural and means of means of pleasing God.  Thirdly, there would be someday a judgment day in which God would separate out the good from the bad, the sacred from the irreligious.  Fourthly, the adolescent or the teenage phase is important for the development of religious values and beliefs (Sosis, 2007).

Hoffman (1998) strongly believed that a rise in religious motivation could result in lethality of the terrorist attacks.  Of all the terrorist activity since 1980 to 2003, about 3 have been religious terrorist, but it accounts for about 50 of all fatalities.  Hoffman 1998 considers that religious motivations could result in greater suicidal attacks.  The highest cases of suicidal attacks from a terrorist group have been from the LTTE in Sri Lanka which is not a religious terrorist group.  It has been observed that religion can help to institute a suicide attack of terrorism in an individual or a group.  Recent research has provided that several factors for terrorism may be different from what was previously anticipated (Sosis, 2007).  Berrebi 2003 considers that the Palestine suicide bombers had a better educational status than the average population and had a better socioeconomic status.  Krueger 2002 found that socioeconomic status did not play a role in participation in terrorism.  Besides, the psychological status of people who participate in terrorism seems to be normal.  Many religious terrorist groups believe that the people who are a part of the group have a normal mental status.  Besides, it can be said that although the suicide bombers end their life, they do it with a purpose and hope of bringing good.  However, since the terrorists are not crazy then why is there is a strong relationship between terrorism (Sosis, 2007).  However, Bloom 2005 considers that religious terrorists may not even have certain religious goals, but may in fact have certain political goals in mind.  Besides, it is found that religion influences politics strongly.  Religion may in fact be a mean of the way the terrorists would achieve their goal.  It is here where religious motivation can help the individual to justify the violence to be caused.  Many of the terrorist group would convert their political struggles into religious issues and use the same to demonstrate that people have been persecuted by religion.  As the cause of such liberations is justified and attributed to be divine, strong motivation and participation would be expected.  Bin Laden has been converting his grievances with the US into motivating terrorists to kill and destroy the Western World.  Many of the terrorists feel that they are fighting for a morally strong cause, which would further improve the motivation for such terrorist attacks.  For many terrorist groups, it feels that they are good who are fighting evil.  Here again religion is used as a tool to demonize opposing views.  Often a suicide terrorist would like to kill individuals belonging to other groups.  For example, the LTTE which is a Hindu group is hugely successful in suicide attacks over the Sri Lankan population which is predominately Buddhist.  Another huge motivation for the religious terrorists is certain spiritual and eternal rewards that seem would make them feel that they are larger than life images.  In certain cases, dying for a religions cause through terrorism would mean that the individual would have several after-life benefits in another world.  For example, it is believed that the hijackers of the 911 attack are now in heaven.  The motivation would also be higher if certain religious symbols, myths and rituals are being used than social or political symbols.  The religious terrorists are better united through such symbols and myths (Sosis, 2007).

Religious terrorism in various parts of the World
Religious terrorism has been seen throughout the world including Ireland, Sri Lanka, India, Israel, North Africa and Eurasia.  In Ireland, most Catholics resided in the South and Protestants resided in the North.  The first time conflict arose between the 2 groups was in 1916, when the town of Dublin was destroyed by the British.  This lead to the form of the Irish Republican Army and finally a peace truce was decided in 1994 to end with a cease fire.  Michael Collins was the founder of the IRA.  They strongly believed in protecting their homeland from abuse from the British forces.

In Sri Lanka and South India, the Liberation Tigers of Tamil Eelam (LTTE) have been a Tamil-speaking Hindu group that opposite the ethnic Sinhalese Buddhist-dominated rule.  They demanded Tamil-speaking parts of North Tamil Nadu as a separate state.

In the Indian State of Kashmir, there is a conflict between the Muslim groups of Kashmir and India, for the demand of Kashmir as a separate state.  Thousands of people die each year and several hundred of thousands of troops are involved.

In central Europe, there is conflict between the Chechen Muslims and the Russians since the year 1991.  Many Chechen terrorist groups have connections with the Al-Qaeda and the Mujahidin.  Several other nations of central Asia and Europe are involved in this conflict.

In Sudan, there is a conflict between the North Arab population and the Southern Christian population.  The current government in Sudan is Islamic and they have introduced strict Islamic code, destroying the Christian communities and ensuring that training camps are held to spread terror to other parts of Africa.  

The Middle East region consists of huge number of Muslims, Christians and Jews.  Most of the wars in the region of Palestine have been over land.  One of the strong Palestine groups that is responsible for causing terrorism in Israel was Fatah.

Conclusion
Often it has been found that terrorist groups that assemble under religious issues may not exactly have religious issues.  Studies have found that most of the issues being present with these groups are politically motivated.  Religion is merely used as an effective tool to create strong motivation through moral feelings, encouraging unification of these groups and further encourage feeling for suicidal attacks (Hassan, 2009).  Religion seems an effective tool to support terrorism.  However religion may be a wrong weapon to utilize with terrorism, as the basic teaching of every religion is peace, non-violence and protection of human life.  Also many terrorist groups utilize suicidal bombings as a mean to devalue ones life for a more important cause for the group.  Having such a cause may not be ideal as God wanted man to protect ones own life.  In case of any conflicts, the Guidelines mentioned under Just War doctrine need to be respected.  There may be serious problems when a terrorist movement shifts from a local problem to a national or a regional problem, comprising the security of the entire state or subcontinent.  Often it may be very difficult to identify religious terrorism (Lizardo, 2008).  However, a close look at the motivating factors may suggest religious terrorism.    

Civilization is connected to the progress in culture and establishment of social order in a society through its political and religious structures. Christianity has influenced a lot of changes in the world, more than any other religion in social order and philosophical thought. Christianity has been close knit to the values, practices and beliefs in Western culture. Its contribution can be linked to four major aspects of civilization which include the economic order, political organization, establishment of moral values and the search for knowledge. Christian teachings can be closely associated to the present day, justice and liberty enjoyed in most western societies which advocates for compassion in provision of all things.

The origin of Christianity can be associated to the Jews who were part of the Roman Empire. This religion established itself as a unique religion which has a collective doctrine, a structure and authority. This helped it to spread quickly within the Roman Empire and gained significant presence within every community in the Western Europe at that time. This helped the region to gain a common understanding in religious faith. During the period which Christianity came to being, Rome had control over quite a large part of Western world. Christianity diffused into the roman leadership which later spread to all its territories which were under its leadership.

During the reign of Constantine, Christianity was made a legal religion. As a result, Christianity gained an upper hand as its values were given a lot of consideration when passing laws. During this reign of Romans in major parts of Europe, the spread of Christianity flourished, which helped Christianity to grow from fellowship of a small grouping to greater numbers of people.  Most of the ideologies and thoughts in political and social life today have a lot of origin from the Roman leadership. As the Roman Empire expanded to most parts of Western world it brought with it values with regards to religion and leadership, which had a lot of foundation on religious faith.

Socially, Christianity has brought about intolerance in the society through its doctrine of believe in only one God, and for those who do not abide to this doctrine are regarded as pagans who will one day perish. In this society, Christianity enforced a strict and a one level of spiritual discipline. Due to the embracing of Christianity, the western worlds have found religion as a ground of treating strangers who do not abide to this faith with reservations. In addition, Christianity has great influence to its belief in Supreme Being God who has great control in all aspects of life.

Politically, Christianity has also imposed a lot of influence in promotion of equality among the Western societies. Through the doctrine all people are equal before the eyes of God Christianity has helped people to develop a sense of equal treatment to others regardless of any other affiliation which has endeared it among many people. This sense of equality among all members of the community has helped to develop an equitable society. This has found a lot of basis on the teaching of treating another person as your neighbor and doing to the others as you would like them to do unto you. The civilization in the Western world has had an outward approach in embracing other people due to the influence of Christianity. Christian teachings have a lot of regard to those in the authority. Through its structure in a society, Christianity has helped the society to embrace leadership which is composed of rulers such as kings, who work close together with religious figures such as bishops, and popes.

The expansive nature in Western civilization into other regions like the United States had a basis of the mandate given to the Christians by God to expand the reach of the religion to other people in the world. Economically, the individual strives to gain wealth at personal level has a basis in the Christian teachings where there is a lot of inference to the payments of hard work.

In the advent of theological and scientific thought, the embracing of knowledge in Western societies can be associated with the verse in the Bible which talks of the destructions experienced by people as a result of lack of knowledge. In pursuit to make clarifications in science and other fields, societies has been encouraged to seek knowledge not only in relation to Christian beliefs but all other fields.

Comparison and contrast among theologies of Martin Luther, John Calvin, and John Wesley
In his theology, Martin Luther considered the need to have a change in the church on how it perceived the issue of repentance. He based his argument on the scripture and questioned how pope could offer forgiveness to people whilst forgiveness could only be granted by God alone. He went ahead to criticize the belief held on the need to have good deeds so as to ensure one acquires salvation. According to him, salvation could only be guaranteed from faith alone, which is a component of a gift from God. He opposed the sale of indulgences in church as a form of punishment for the sins committed by the followers.  Luther saw it as a commercial undertaking which was not intended to safeguard the soul of a person but to gain revenue for the church. His movement in the new view of the doctrines in the church such as the justification through faith and the authority on the scriptures has had a lot of significance in the church reforms. His arguments led to his excommunication from Catholic Church. Most of his views were adopted by reformers of church and has formed a basis of argument for many Protestants in the modern day.

John Calvin is closely associated with the theology of Calvinism which has a lot of reference to the destiny of mankind and the issues that relate to wickedness and the autonomy of God on the life of a man. After the excommunication of Martin Luther, those who followed his doctrines started to form evangelical or protestant churches. The doctrine of Calvinism came at this period when the reformed churches were forming at a direction which was completely independent of the doctrines of Luther.
John Wesley brought about the theology of the order of the salvation under the foundation of the existence of original sin and the readiness of God to forgive man of his sins. According to his theology, the origin of sin is enshrined on the justification which progresses with sanctification and the final stage of glorification. The acknowledgement that God created us free of sin forms the justification. The occurrence of death is as a result of our connection to Adam. According to Wesley, the need for salvation is as a result of the requirement of humankind to attain justification which is a Godly state free of sin.

Introduction
Since time immemorial, sacrifice has been considered as an integral part of religion. Sacrifice is a common feature of all religions.  All monotheistic and polytheistic religions show evidence of a form of sacrifice to which religious importance are attached. The motivation for sacrifices comes from different aspect of religion. Sacrifice is considered to perpetuate, intensify, and reestablish connection between human worshipers and the divine.  Sacrifice is intended to help worshipers gain divine favor or call for intervention to placate an impending divine wrath.  Sacrifice takes different forms, which implies that different things can be used for sacrifice. Fruits, flowers, crops, human, animals, and other things can be used for sacrifice.

In mainstream religions, incident of sacrifices have been greatly reduced.  Most mainstream religious groups have formalized their sacrifices to mere offerings which are given during proceedings of a religious worship. However, there are other religious groups which still maintain human and animal sacrifices. Human and animal sacrifices have attracted criticism and even some religious groups have been sued in a court of law seeking court ruling and interpretation of freedom of worship. One of such religious groups that have been dodged by controversy is Santeria religion. It is estimated that for the last four thousand years, Saniterians have been practicing animal sacrifice and recently, there are controversies on human sacrifice. This practice has come to be challenged by animal and human rights activities arguing that it fails to respect the right to life. While Santeria worshippers claim that sacrifice is meant to create a connection with divine, others argue that the practice fail to promote cultivation of the human person and fails to respect right to life.  Sacrifice in Santeria religion can be considered as an archaic practice that fails to promote cultivation of human person.

Santeria sacrifice
Santeria is a pre-Christian religion that has overcome the waves of impending religious groups like Christianity to retain its original practices. Santeria is believed to have originated from Yoruba, Northwest of Nigeria, and it arrived in the Caribbean region with the African slaves.  Santeria has become an integral part of religious worships in Puerto Rico and other Caribbean countries.   Recent statistics shows that the religion is gaining ground in United States with the number of people subscribing on the rise. However, the religion has been looked at as a demonic, archaic, and primitive religion owing to a number of practices including human sacrifice.  Santeria incorporates the worship of Orisha or head guardian but it also brings together elements of worship from Roman Catholicism and other religious groups.

Like any other religion, Santeria value sacrifice. It is among the few religious groups that still carry out animal sacrifice as a sign of bonding with the divine. Santeria makes a variety of sacrifices which ranges from animals, foods, caf, money, and many others.  Their sacrifices are carried out on alter.   The most prevalent form of sacrifice among Santeria is animal sacrifice. When an animal sacrifice is to be carried out, it is performed by only a priest, referred to as Babalu.  Individuals can make alters and offer foods, money, coffee, and others but they are not allowed to offer animal sacrifices.  Animal sacrifices are used only during major events like when the worshipers want to appease divine to save life an individual or when one is badly cursed.  They argue that animal sacrifice is important to Santeria as Eucharist is important to Catholicism.

Sine 1987, there has been a ranging conflict between Santeria and organizations fighting for animal rights.  These organizations have argued that use of small animals like chicken and others for ritual sacrifices amounts to infringement of animal rights. Animal rights activists have been fighting not only for the continued use of small animals in rituals like sickness and initiation of new members to the religion but also the manner in which these animals are killed for sacrifice.  However, Santeria defend animal sacrifice on the ground that  animals are killed in humane manner,  animals are eaten later just like other animals that are killed daily throughout the  country,  and animal sacrifices is a ritual that has been practiced in religion for a long time. Santeria also argue that they have to continue with the sacrifice because Orisha need food and because Orisha describes different manifestation of God, it is expression that God needs animal sacrifices.  Santeria also argues that for the last one millennium, animal sacrifice has formed a part and parcel of their religion and even the United States Supreme Court has upheld the need for Santeria to continue with animal sacrifice.

For a long time, Santeria religion has been fighting accusations of human sacrifice.  Critics of the religion have argued that Santeria does not does not have any doctrine and the strength of its faith is based on animal and human sacrifice. There are many incidences which have been related to human sacrifices in Santeria.

 In 1986, the first sign of human sacrifice was linked to Santeria religion. In this incident, a mutilated body of a baby was discovered in Connecticut.   The body was found with other things like pennies, fruits, trinkets, and other which indicated presence of Caribbean cult sacrifice.  Investigations showed that the religious practices could be linked to Caribbean Santeria religion.

In 1989, it was revealed that Police in Mexico had found evidence linking Santeria to human sacrifice.  Police discovered a ground in Rancho Santa Elena which is outside Matamoros, Mexico, which was stashed with mutilated bodies. The human corpses were mutilated in a manner that evidence ritual sacrifice had been performed on them.

Although police were looking for clues that could lead to drug trafficking which could incriminate Adolfo de Jesus Constanzo, who was a know leader of a drug ring.  However, it was discovered that Adolfo de Jesus Constanzo mother was an ardent follower of Santeria religion.  This caused media frenzy across Mexico and United States and it became difficult for Santeria religion to deny their involvement in human sacrifice.  Since then, Santeria has been perceived as an obscure cult rather than religion, which draws its practices from Satanism, Voodoo, witchcraft, and other practices which are considered anti-religions.

Constanzo had been known as a cruel drug dealer who punished his enemies with death.  He had formed his own concept of cult and declared himself as the high priest. She was joined by a young lady Sara Maria Aldrete, who served as the cult priestess and at the same time was a student at Texas Southmont College in Brownsville. Initially, it was perceived that Constanzo had punished his business enemies with death but it was later proved through evidence given by his followers that he had promised them that they would be able in a position to absorb spiritual essence of the victims.  Therefore, it was easy to link human sacrifice with ritualistic practices in Santeria.

In 1998, there was another incidence which raised questions about the company credibility on human sacrifice. It was well known that Santeria had legal fight to be allowed to continue using animals for sacrifice.  However, there were suspicions of human sacrificed perpetrated by Santeria members. In January 8, 1998, a case reported in The New York Times showed that a 17 year old girl, Charity Miranda, had suffocated to death in a plastic bag.  It was reported that Miranda mother and sister had tried to perform exorcism to free her of demons. When police arrived at the scene, they found the two women chanting and paying over her body. However, it was reported that days before, the two women had joined Santeria Lukumi, a doctrine that does not believed in existence of demons. Santeria liturgy does not also contain exorcism rituals. However, here mother was charged with murder but later acquitted due to mental instability. It is widely believed that the death of Miranda was as a result of the routine human sacrifice rituals which are performed by Santeria.

 More evidence which links Santeria to human sacrifice has been documented in other areas of the world. In 2002, the body of a young boy was found floating in River Thames in London. The body has been dismembered in such a way that it reflected that it had been used for human sacrifice.  An autopsy report on the body revealed that the results were the same to that of similar children victims who had been found in France and Germany where such incidences had been recorded.  The autopsy report had shown that the body bore results of ritualistic death.  The nature of wounds, clothing and other body mechanism was matched to ritual sacrifices which are performed in Africa as some parts of the body were mission. More evidence to ritualistic sacrifice murder was linked to seven half-burned candles which had been wrapped in a white sheet on the shore of the river. The ritualistic killing was linked to Santeria because the candle bore the name Fola Adeoye while another name Adekoye Jo Fola Adeoye had been inscribed on the white sheet.

According to Santeria beliefs, human person ranks below Orisha but they are closely intertwined.  In a cosmological system, human begins comes below Orisha. Human beings are considered to have been made by the hands of Orisha, Obatala, and given the breath of life by Olodumare. Although the lives of human beings depend on Orisha, Orisha also depend on human beings.  It is only humans who can make offerings in order to feed Orisha. Human persons also have the ability to sit down in groups and call for intervention of Orisha in their lives.  Parents have a special role as they have to act as intermediaries between Orisha and their human children.

 Under this cosmological system, there is evident interaction between Orisha and human beings.  There is an evident dependence between Orisha and human beings that is mainly through sacrifice. This relationship brings into sharp focus the important of sacrifice in Santeria.  Every individual is composed of specific energy patterns, which describe individual personality and character.  This energy pattern is understood to be Orisha that lives in harmony with one self and when individuals understand ones patron Orisha, they are able to form a spiritual line with energy patterns.

This relationship describes the interconnection between individual self and Orisha. Unlike in other religions, Orisha are not considered omnipotent. However, individuals are closely connected to Orisha through energy patterns. Since Orisha depend on human beings for survival, the relationship underpins the reason why sacrifice forms and integral part of Santeria religion.  Sacrifice enables human beings to maintain a close relationship between human person and Orisha. Without the spiritual energy bond, human persons would not be complete. Therefore, sacrifice forms an integral part of the relationship between human person and religion beliefs.

Considering this relationship, human persons need to nourish Orisha in order to stay in close relationship. Sacrifice in Santeria is supposed to improve the relationship between human persons and the divine but this may not have been achieved through some of the practices.  As was discussed earlier, Santeria is not based on any doctrine but sacrifice forms an integral part of the religious beliefs as expressed by the relationship between human persons and Orisha.  Lack of doctrine in Santeria makes it difficult to assess the real acceptable means of sacrifice. While the mainstream Santeria argue that human sacrifice is not allowed, the above incidence clearly reveal that human sacrifice could form a part of Santeria sacrifice.

The essence of religious sacrifice is to appease divine.  However, does this has to conflict with universal rights of   human life It is evident from the above discussion that Santeria attach more value to human person relationship with Orisha but this relationship does not have to lead to loss of human life.  Though there may be questions that can be raised on the issue  of animal rights and Santeria sacrifice, there  is no evidence which like violation of value of human person value through animal sacrifice. This means that it is only when Santeria sacrifice is perceived through lens of human sacrifice.
 
Santeria sacrifices are meant to create an interconnection between human person value and Orisha. This could explain the reason why sacrifices forms an integral part of Santeria sacrifice. However, human sacrifice, though not ascertained in the mainstream Santeria religious practices seems to form a hidden part of this religion. Human sacrifice does not hold any human person value. In the cosmological system, it is to be found that human persons are at a lower rank than Orisha.  There is symbiosis relationship between human person and Orisha. Since Orisha depend on human person for food through sacrifices. This implies that even in the religious order, human beings are valued as a part of the system  to feed Orisha implying that human sacrifice should not be a part of the religion.

Conclusion
Sacrifices form an important part of any religions. Sacrifices are mostly offered with an aim of appeasing divine to evade an impending catastrophe.  This means that sacrifices are meant to strengthen the bond between believers and the divine and also smooth their relationships.    Like all other religions, Santeria value sacrifices as an integral part of their religious worships. However, there have been reported incidences of human sacrifices perpetuated in different parts of the world where there are followers for Santeria.  In the cosmological order of Santeria, human beings are placed below Orisha but there seems to be a mutual relationship between the two which means human sacrifice would not be sanctioned in the cosmological value. Therefore, human sacrifice in Santeria does not hold up the personal value that is a part of the religious cosmological system.

Divinity is the very nature of God. Jesus Christs divinity is exposed over and over again in the Holy Scripture or the Bible from the New Testament to the Old Testament. Jesus reveals His deity in many ways. The passage I and the Father are one (John 14 6-9) is one of the evidences that Jesus is God. When the devil tempts Him in Matthew 410, He bluffs him by saying You shall not tempt the Lord your God (147). It means that the devil himself knows already the divinity of Christ from the very beginning based from the way he tempts the Lord and Jesus doesnt commit any sin. The same story is found in Mark 1 21  28 when Jesus sees a man possesses by a demon. He tells him to Be quiet and come out of him (26) and the demon knows him I know who You are  the Holy One of God (24). This passage means that even the devil recognizes him as God and only the Almighty One can command the devil out of someone else. Another example that reveals His holiness is the content of His sermons. Jesus proudly shares His divinity through His teachings without any hesitation. Most assuredly, I say to you, before Abraham was, I AM (John 858) and called God His Father, making himself equal with God (John 518).  No one can rebuke the nature but Jesus ceases the wind and calms the sea when the windstorm happens in Mark 4 35-41. Only God can control the natural world because He is the creator of it, this shows His attribute as God. From John 14 6, Jesus directly reveals that He is the way, the truth, and the life. No one will come to the Father except through Me (6). Another example that shows the divinity of Jesus is when He rises from the dead (Mark 161  8). No individual can do the same as Jesus does. Furthermore, He allows Thomas to experience the insertion of his finger to the print of the nails on His hand (John 20 25  29) just to open up fully the faith of His disciples. The prophesy in the past, happens in the present and still clinging in the near future about and according to Jesus is a very convincing proof of His divinity.

Humanity is the state of showing the human attributes or qualities. Jesus as a human has flesh and blood. When Jesus is conceived and born by Mary in Bethlehem of Judea (Matthew 118-25), He is already considered as human because He experiences the process on how the human is given birth. One more thing, Jesus preaches the good news to all the people who follow them just like the parents to his children. He wants them to know about God and Him at the same time. The statement of Jesus Foxes have holes and birds of the air have nest, but the Son of Man has nowhere to lay His head (Matthew 820), states that since He is human during that time He also feels tired and exhausted.

Another example is when He is sleeping (24) during the windstorm which can be read from Mark 823  25, this simply shows that he is resting the whole hour of their journey. Jesus as a human also eats and drinks just like what He does together with his disciples in the passage of Mark the Last Supper (Mark 14 22  26). If a simple Jew knows how to pray, Jesus does it rigidly and more intensely His sweat became like great drops of blood falling down to the ground (Luke 2244), this simply illustrates that Jesus as a human suffers from pain and agony because of the coming torment that He will be facing. During their time, the person who commits crime and an enemy of the government is put into prison and the worst thing that could happen is to crucify him. The human aspect of Jesus is fully shown when He accepts the punishments and all the throbbing done by the soldiers while preparing for His crucifixion. The flowing of His blood, the nails in His hands, and all the physical injuries that He undergoes are indication of being a human. His death on the cross reveals Him as a human but for the deeper meaning of this action signifies His divinity because He even offers His own life just to show His love to all the sinners.

The Ahl al-Bayt (literally People of The House or family) is one of the most important pillars of Islamic history and an integral part of its leadership. The Prophet Muhammad had a family, and his family is venerated by all Muslims, be it Sunni or Shia. The Prophet Muhammads family and household compose the Ahl al-Bayt. However, the number of the family members and the interpretations in the Ahl al-Bayt changes according to the sect of Islam. In Sunni Islamic circles, the Ahl al-Bayt includes his eleven wives (the Mothers of the Believers or Ummu l-Muminn), his daughter Fatimah and her three children, and his cousin and son-in-law Ali. In other sects, the Ahl al-Bayt includes Muhammad s blood relatives, most mention the Banu Muttalib and the Banu Hashim. In Sunni Islam, all Muslims have an obligation to love and venerate the Ahl al-Bayt, while in Twelver and Ismaili Shia Islam, the Ahl al-Bayt are considered in the center of Islam and are believed as the true successors of the Prophet Muhammad. The Shia define the members of the household as Muhammad, Fatimah, Ali, Hasan, and Husayn (collectively known as the Ahl al-Kisa), the descendants of Fatimah, collectively known as the Imams.

Veneration of the Ahl al-Bayt, agreed upon by all Muslims, came from a parallel (Mutawatir) tradition. The Messenger of Allah came upon them and informed them that Allah would leave behind two precious and weighty things, and if Muslims adhere to them, they will never stray from Allahs path. Those were the Book of Allah, or the Quran, and the Prophet Muhammads family or the Ahl al-Bayt. There is no contestation in the origins of the veneration of the Ahl al-Bayt, as those are the words of Allah.

The message of Allah to the people has been narrated many times and quoted by many different Islamic authors. Here is Sahih Muslims narration

Someday (after his last pilgrimage) the Messenger of Allah (PBUHHF) stood to give us a speech beside a pond which is known as Khum (Ghadir Khum) which is located between Mecca and Medina. Then he praised Allah and reminded Him, and then said O people Behold It seems the time approached when I shall be called away (by Allah) and I shall answer that call. Behold I am leaving for you two precious things. First of them is the book of Allah in which there is light and guidance... The other one is my Ahlul-Bayt. I remind you in the name of Allah about my Ahlul-Bayt. I remind you in the name of Allah about my Ahlul-Bayt. I remind you in the name of Allah about my Ahlul-Bayt. (three times). (Sahih Muslim 1980, 1873)

The message in fact was repeated three times by the Messenger of Allah, and there has been no change nor different interpretation by both Sunni and Shia leaders and scholars. This was the word of Allah, and it is absolute. However, Shia scholars claim that this passage and that directive mentioned by the Messenger of Allah is disregarded or worse, denied by majority of Sunni believers, who believe the passage by al-Hakim in his book al-Mustadrak, saying I leave amongst you two things that if you follow or act upon, you will not go astray after me The Book of God and my Sunnah (traditions).

In the Quran however, the mention of the Ahl al-Bayt was mentioned with the following passage
O wives of the Prophet you are not like any other of the women If you will be on your guard, then be not soft in (your) speech, lest he in whose heart is a disease yearn and speak a good word. (Quran 3332) And stay in your houses, and do not display your finery, with the display of the former days of ignorance. Maintain the Prayer, and pay regular Charity and obey Allah and His Messenger. Indeed Allah desires to repel all impurity from you, O People of the Household, and purify you with a thorough purification. (Quran 3333) And keep to mind what is recited in your houses of the communications of Allah and the wisdom surely Allah is Knower of subtleties, Aware. (Quran 3334)

This passage though has some interesting interpretations from both Sunni and Shia scholars alike, especially the phrase from you, O People of the Household, which directly points out to the Ahl al-Bayt. In Sunni tradition, the wives and dependents of the Prophet Muhammad are included. There are several instances that the Prophet Muhammad addresses his wives as his Ahl al-Bayt. In addition, Ali, Fatimah, Husayn and Hasan are included because of their presence in the Ahl al-Kisa. Some also include and recognize another wife of Muhammad, Umm Salamah as another member of the Ahl al-Bayt. Alis immediate family and Muhammads relatives Aqeel, Jafar and al-Abbas are also regarded as a member of the Ahl al-Bayt, and other early jurists like Abu Hanifa and Malik bin Anas included Banu Hashims clan, while al-Shafii included Banu Muttalibs family in Sunni traditions.

In Shia traditions, the Ahl al-Bayt is limited to just the Ahl al-Kisa. The Shia has interpreted a pronoun change in the Quran that made the Ahl al-Kisa the only members of the Ahl al-Bayt. This change in the gender has inevitably contributed to the birth of various accounts of a legendary character, attaching the latter part of the verse to the Five People of the Mantle. The Shia believe that Ahl al-Kisa are Imams who are sinless and infallible and are chosen through divine providence. They are considered a major part of worship in the Shia sect.

Both sects, as mentioned earlier venerate the Ahl al-Bayt and bestow the highest respect upon them. However, the Islamic practices of sadaqa or charity, and zakat or taxes, are not allowed to the Ahl al-Bayt, as the Prophet Muhammad forbade his family to get income from them. Islamic jurists explain that these alms are considered the defilements of the people, who offer them to be free from sin. It would be unbecoming for the family to use sadaqa and zakat as they were considered pure. Instead, they would be given a portion of the spoils of war, according to Madelung. Also, a family who has blood relations with the household of Muhammad are called sayyids or sharifs, and they are given high social status.

Both sects consider the Ahl al-Kisa as part of the Ahl al-Bayt. Looking at them from both Sunni and Shia points of view can clearly tell what came from the Islamic schism that happened that split the Islamic faith in two major divisions. The split came from the debate to who shall be the rightful successor to the will of the Prophet Muhammad. The Sunnis believe that the first four Caliphs (Abu Bakr, Umar ibn al-Khattab, Uthman ibn Affan, and Ali ibn Abi Talib), are the most rightful. They say that Allah had not chosen anyone to become Muhammads successor and therefore should be elected. Shias believe that only the lineage of Ali ibn Abi Talib are the ones who received the Prophet Muhammads will and his chosen successor. Alis progeny according to the Shia, are all in a state of Ismah, or infallibility. Ali is a cousin and son-in-law of the Prophet Muhammad, and is the rightful successor. Shias call him the first Imam, or leader, and the legitimacy other caliphs were disregarded and rejected. An Imam holds authority by divine right, and holds absolute spiritual authority among Muslims in the Shia faith. The split of the Sunni and Shia, though in part because of Ali, a member of the Ahl al-Kisa and the Ahl al-Bayt, is seen in the minor changes. In the case of the Ahl al-Kisa, both sects have different interpretations. In the Sunni side, the Quranic verse 3333, also talks about Muhammads wives and his servants as members of the household, and they have a spiritual importance and legacy. However, the legacy that is implied in the verse does not mean a physical legacy nor a legitimate succession of the Prophet. In the case of the Shia, the verse only confirms their belief that Muhammad, Fatimah, Ali, Hasan and Husayn are the only members of the Ahl al-Bayt, and it was divine providence that Allah had chosen them to be pure and sinless. This act of divine providence written in the Quran was impetus for the Shia to regard the Ahl al-Kisa as the true members of the Ahl al-Bayt, the protectors and true successors of Muhammad.

Sunnis include more people in the Ahl al-Bayt, like the Banu Hashim and Banu Muttalib. Both are blood relatives of the Prophet Muhammad, and the Banu Hashim is the clan where Muhammad was born to. When Muhammad made it his mission to call the people to worship the One God, Allah, it put him at odds with the pilgrims of Mecca, which was a melting pot of idolatry of various peoples and tribes. Membership in the Banu Hashim made him safe from assassinations and grave threats, yet there was continuing persecution of Muslims in Mecca from the pagans, who in turn fled and to Yathrib, which later became the city of Medina. But in the end, it was the Muhammad that would get the last laugh, as Mecca fell to Muslim hands on 630. Also, the whole of the Arabian Peninsula had pledged allegiance to Islam. His grandsons Al-Husayn and Al-Hasan are part of the Banu Hashim, as they are born to his daughter Fatimah and his cousin Ali. The later descendants of the grandsons of Muhammad are later called Sayed, or sometimes SharifSherif. These people are held with high esteem in Islamic society, even exempt from sadaqa and zakat, as mentioned earlier.

Since the Shia only believe in the Ahl al-Kisa being part of the Ahl al-Bayt, any other person or any other group of people that have interacted with the Prophet Muhammad are disregarded. Their interpretation of the verse has it claiming that there is a word only to the verse 3333, meaning that only one group is clean and pure and need no such instructions on how to live from Allah, while Muhammads wives are not part of the said purification and still need the six stern commandments found in the Hadiths. Those commandments are meant for the Mothers of the Believers and everybody else. Shia writers and scholars say that the verse, though written and delivered in a feminine tone initially, changes to a masculine tone as part of the rhetoric in the verse.

The veneration of the Ahl al-Bayt is an important part of Islamic worship, and commemoration of their contributions to the faith is also a big event that is practiced by all Muslims. One of the most striking activities is the commemoration of the death of Muhammads grandson Husayn ibn Ali, a member of the Ahl al-Bayt and the Ahl al-Kisa, who died in battle in Karbala in modern day Iraq. Called the Mourning of Muharram, it is an important period of mourning and commemoration, especially among the Shia Muslims, who consider Husayn as an Imam, the third Imam to be exact. He was also a willing sacrifice for Islam and the Ummah from the threat of annihilation by Yazid I and the Umayyad Caliphate. To the Shia and the Sunni though, Husayn is a great example of courage and resistance against tyranny. In the Mourning of Muharram, the tenth day known as Ashura, is a time of fasting (for some Shia sects), mourning and self-reflection, as it is held to remember Husayns death and suffering.

In the Mourning of Muharram, Shia Muslims congregate in halls called Hussainia and there will be arranged majalis, or greetings, made to review Islamic teachings and works, as well as to remember Husayns death and sacrifice for the sake of Islam. The congregations continue until the tenth day, or Ashura, where Husayn ibn Ali and 72 of his followers were massacred by Yazid I and the Umayyad Caliphate, and the women and children rounded up as prisoners and sent to Damascus.

During the mourning, there are different activities done by devotees and participants. Sunnis however regard this as a time of remembrance, Shiites regard this as a time of mourning. Shiites come together in special places called Hussainia, and there they recite songs of mourning and recite sorrowful poems to mourn the death of Husayn to the accompaniment of drum beats and cries of  Ya Husayn. Passion plays reenacting the Battle of Karbala and Husayns death are also performed. The people offer condolences to the Imam-e-Zamana, also known as the Imam-al-Mahdi. The Mahdi is believed by Muslims to be the redeemer and avenger of Husayns death and bring justice to the world, akin to Jesus Christ coming back to the end of days by the Christian faith.

Mosques provide free meals to the people on certain nights, during the duration  of the Mourning of Muharram, known as nazar. The meals are consecrated in the name of Imam Husayn, and people are going to the mosques to partake these holy meals. It is customary for both the people and the mosques as it symbolizes communion between Allah, Imam Husayn, and the people. Another activity is the pilgrimage by Shia Muslims to the shrine of Imam Husayn in Karbala. For Shiites, it is a major holy place alongside Mecca and Medina. In another activity  during the mourning, Shiites come together in public places and prepare for the ceremonial chest beating known as matam. Matam is done to express sorrow and devotion to the martyred Imam Husayn. People beat their chests and cry out Ya Husayn Ya Hassan. In Shia societies like in Iraq, Bahrain, Lebanon, or Iran, men would sometimes use metal chains for self flagellation during their matam, other people use knives or razors to cut themselves as a sign of grief for the death of Imam Husayn. These practices are called Zanjir-matam if they use chains, an older term for the cutting of oneself during Matam is Qama-zani or Tage-zani. Another activity is the Taziya, which is a theatrical reenactment of the Battle of Karbala, it is something like a Passion Play of Jesus Christ in the Christian faith. Here, special theater groups do the Taziya for the people who in turn, reflect the pious life that Husayn lived as a devotee of Islam. It should be noted that this practice is rarely used now, but smaller scale Taziyas are still being done in rural Iran, and in Muslim India, Pakistan and Bangladesh, the Taziya is known as miniature mausoleums created and paraded during the entire Mourning of Muharram.

For Sunnis, the reason why Husayns death does not require mourning even if he has a member of the Ahl al-Bayt is that the quarrels of the family of the Prophet Muhammad and the Umayyad Caliphate are mainly politically motivated. There was no reason, according to Sunnis, to venerate Husayns death as a form of martyrdom as he was a participant in a war, bit not a holy war (The Umayyads are a Caliphate, hence they are Muslim). For the Shia however, killing a member of the Ahl al-Bayt, and an Ismah (infallible) at that, is unforgivable. For Shiites, the mourning of the death of Husayn ibn Ali is not just a simple mourning, it is also a protest. Also, the rationale to why Husayn and his 72 followers went to Karbala to face Yazid and a force of 4,000 men differs among the views of both Sunni and Shia.

According to Sunnis, since Husayn was involved in a political struggle, he did not know that he was going to get killed or get involved in a major military engagement with the Umayyads in Karbala. He was just going there to receive his Imamat (religious, or spiritual leadership) because he got an invitation by the people of Kufa to get it there. The Shia view it differently, seeing that Husayn knew and was fully aware it was a suicide mission to face the Umayyads, yet he did so, and he died in Karbala a willing martyr to Islam. Though both sects saw Husayn as a reformer of the perceived corruption of the Umayyad Caliphate, they viewed him differently. The Sunni saw him as a pious member of the Ahl al-Bayt who is primarily a political leader, as he led an uprising of Muslims against the leadership of the Umayyad Caliphate, while the Shia saw him as a pious, spiritual force who faced the Umayyad in something much more akin to holy war, or jihad.

Critique
Osburns (1989) article, Those who have never heard Have they no hope is a discussion on whether or not people need to believe in the Gospel of the Christ in order to be saved from eternal damnation that God has prepared for sinners.  The author contends that people can be saved even if they have not heard the Gospel.  Even so, it is most essential to believe in the right God before attaining eternal salvation (Osburn, 372).  The author explains that knowledge about the Creator of the universe may reach people through Scriptures if not the Gospel of the Christ (Osburn, 369).  But, even those who have had contact with believers must have learned about the one true God (Osburn, 371).  What is more, as the God of mercy works in the hearts of mankind by way of His Spirit, knowledge about Him may reach people through visions as well (Osburn, 368).
   
Thus, the author makes a strong argument in favor of God.  All the same, Osburns biased approach to her subject is bound to make her non-Christian readers uncomfortable about the idea that only the Christian faith may lead mankind to salvation.  The author states, The ultimate basis for salvation for OT saints was faith in God (Gen 156 Rom 43, 22 Gal 36), who knew what he was going to do through the cross (Osburn, 368).  But, there is no evidence that the OT saints were aware of Jesus Christ on the cross.  If Osburn or another theologian were to show evidence from the OT that the OT saints did, indeed, possess this knowledge, it would most likely be through symbolic interpretation.  In fact, this is the only weakness of Osburns article  the fact that the author can create an argument corresponding with her faith, without evidence supporting the same.      

Personal Conclusion
Osburn should have taken an objective, academic approach to her subject.  The author surmises that it may be possible for the Yoruba people to be saved through their worship of God (Osburn, 367).  At the same time, however, the article Those who have never heard reads that Jews and Muslims may or may not be saved, even though they believe in the same God who revealed the Gospel of the Christ.  Hence, I opine that the author is somewhat confused about her subject.  As Christ is the Spirit of God, and God is merciful enough to reveal His knowledge through Scriptures, dreams or visions, allowing the heart of man to believe through His Spirit, which all human beings essentially contain  Osburn could have explained belief in God by referring to Jesus Christ as the Spirit of God (Osburn, 369).
 
In other words, when the New Testament refers to the Christ as the sole means of attaining salvation, the writers are mainly referring to the Christ as the Spirit of God.  So, while it is true that belief comes through the Christ, it does not necessarily mean that all people who have been saved from eternal damnation must have heard about Jesus Christ of Nazareth.  Moreover, I believe that it is blasphemous to try to judge the intentions of God from the time He created mankind until now.  As God is merciful and desires to save people through correct knowledge and beliefs, it is not for a religious author to claim that certain groups of people are more likely to be saved than others.  After all, God is too immense to be judged.  It is lack of understanding alone that confuses human beings about the meanings of the Scriptures, including the Gospel.      

The 20th century was an era of spectacular change.  Within this time period occurred one of the great shifts in the way Man perceived his world.  From the late 1800s to the present, Man became Modern.

In ages past, people were more inclined to believe that people had a certain fixed place in the world.  In the West, there was a strict hierarchy that began with the Almighty God and descended through religious leaders to kings and princes and so on down to the fathers of individual families.  There was security in this hierarchy.  As long as a man fulfilled his role then he was doing the right thing, and ultimately his actions would result in the betterment of society and the world in general.  Such a state of affairs was more or less the standard since the days when man first became aware of himself as a historical being.

In time, progress resulted in the Industrial Age, which spurred everything forward all the more quickly.  Machines meant masses of workers engaged in soulless, repetitive tasks, unprecedented amounts of goods and income generated, and in the hearts of men, a renewed spirit of aggression.  Powerful men wanted to conquer more territory, to find new resources to feed the hungry machines.  Other men, worn down by the harshness of the machine age which treated them like machines themselves, began to question the existing order of things.

In the early 20th century kings fell.  Many ancient traditions, practices and creeds were questioned, and questioned to the point of breaking.  In the span of thirty years two great wars ravaged the world, the second including two terrible holocausts of which both sides were guilty.  while Hitlers ovens, gas chambers and camps consumed millions of Jews over the span of years, the Allies atomic bomb incinerated millions of Japanese in minutes and days.  When such horror was possible, Man had to question the old ways of doing and believing.  This questioning creature is Modern Man.

In his desire to destroy the old ways which had failed him, man began to put emphasis on the material world where results could be seen the more quickly.  A reward on earth was surer, if less spectacular, than a reward in Heaven.  Utopia became not a realm in the clouds where angels played harps and the righteous sang praises before the throne of the Almighty, but a society where all were equal and had enough food, clothing and shelter.  While there was nothing wrong with this version of Paradise, it meant that man was also slowly losing touch with the spiritual world.  In his writing, Abraham Heschel sought to bring modern man into an encounter with God.  One way to do this would be to bring him close to the Sublime, a concept that is found in Art as well as in Philosophy.

In the realm of Art, the modern obsession with material things and physical reality was questioned by the group of intellectuals called the Surrealists.  For the Surrealists, beauty was not something that was gotten by tailoring something to what was calculated to be pleasing in terms of mathematically calculated proportions.  Beauty for them was an experience.  It was something felt, something alive.  The Surrealists even thought that madness was relative.  Madmen were simply the people who refused to accept what the majority agree to be the limits of what is real  and usually this meant the limits of the physical world.

When Abraham Heschel writes about the Hebrew prophets and their moral madness, he is taking a similar approach.  While artists spoke of Beauty, prophets speak of the Divine.  In either case, the experience can be both visceral and spiritual.  The Surrealist artists painted pictures of melting clocks and flying horses drawing ships behind them.  The prophets donned sackcloth even as others rejoiced and flew in the face of kings.   Both kinds of men, indeed, seem to be mad.

The definition of madness as the unwillingness to accept the boundaries agreed upon by the greater body answers for the artist as well as for the prophet.

Heschel invokes the Greeks concept of the poet as a madman.  Poetry (which is also Art) was divinely inspired.  There was something different about the poet or the rhapsode at the moment he performed.  At such times he was supposed to have been indwelt or possessed by the gods.  Similarly, the prophet was one whose actions often appeared to go against all reason, but like the poet or the artist, he was also capable of achieving insights and inspiration beyond the reach of ordinary men.

Heschel says that the prophet is a person who suffers from a profound maladjustment to the spirit of society with its conventional lies, with its concession to weakness.  It must be hard to have been the parent, child or spouse of a prophet, indeed, hard to have been a prophets friend.  The essence of living in large groups would lie in compromise.   Indeed, in common speech one who does not know how to compromise is called immature or childish.  The worldly-wise know when to tell white lies, when to stretch the truth, when to close their eyes to transgressions in order to maintain a state of equilibrium.
The prophet, however, like his fellow visionary, the Artist, would have all or nothing.  Nathan, for instance, might have done well to shut his mouth over David and Bathsheba.  Such a seduction was hardly out of the ordinary.  An ordinary man would have been practical about it.  Why thwart a mighty king over a matter as insignificant  that is, when set against the backdrop of politics and war  as a woman  But sometimes, what is most essential is that which is not immediately apprehended by the worldly mind or the physical eye.  Similarly, what use would there be in being a voice crying out in the wilderness  It would be easy to forsake the discomforts of the desert, to return to ones home, ones village, there to be esteemed by friends and family, to eat well and live well.  An ordinary man would say, What does the rest of mankind matter  I have only one life to live.  But a prophet would not be content with letting mankind take care of itself, not when he is burning with a truth or a vision.  At any moment one can put down the torch that one carries, but that is what the weak would do, that is what anyone would do.   It is only a select few who would honestly, truly keep the flame burning to lead their fellowmen out of the imperfect grey light of mediocrity.  Heschel says that the prophet found compromise a kind of corruption of the human spirit.  Indeed, if compromise leads to stagnation, a state where everyone is satisfied enough so that no one strives for perfection or for the heights of the Sublime, then it is indeed harmful to the human spirit.

If the boundary of madness is the reality that everyone else agrees upon, then it cannot be denied that the prophet crosses the boundary of sanity and ventures into the territory beyond.  When everyone else is rejoicing, most men would rather eat, drink and be merry than look beyond the smiles and sensual pleasures, the prosperity and the cheerfulness, to see impending doom.  Yet the prophet can, and does.  The action might be attributed to wisdom and judgment, reading the times as a doctor might be discerning enough to detect a cancer in what appears to be a normal, healthy man.  It might also be that he has a mind brilliant enough to make deductive leaps, or an imagination and intuition that detects truths that most men cannot see.  While man has been trained to trust logic and reason, there is also something to be said for intuition and imagination.  A prophet, it seems, can let go of the supports of logic and reason by which we govern our lives (and which indeed are the justifications for compromise and concessions), in order to go straight to the heart of the matter by abandon to the imagination or to inspiration.  According to Heschel, what makes him different from the psychotic is his ability to pass into this realm of the imagination and then return safely with his treasure of insight which he then shares with the world.  A psychotic would not be able to do so, would be unable to weave the vision with a keen perception of what must be done to better the lot of mankind.  The prophet is morally mad because he cannot reconcile himself to the compromised morality of society.  He insists on preserving the purity of his vision, and thus leads Man to the light.

This paper is an exegesis on Confucianism, Daoism, and Hinduism with reference to relevant excerpts.
Discussed in all these passages is the concept of human beings as constituents of the larger universal power, which primarily rules the actions, the reasons, and the results of all that men do or desire.
The excerpts on Confucianism and Daoism state the origin of Dao and its deeper meaning. Dao or the supreme power is born when a man seeks the path of love, dismisses all thoughts of winning over others and considers the whole of the universe as his home. The heaven and the hell then merely are two states of his mind and there is neither pain nor pleasure.

The excerpts from the Bhagavad Gita, the Vedas, and the hymn sung by Mirabai describe the glory of Krishna or Lord Mahavishnu who rules the universe. The first verse speaks of the greatness of a Brahmin and affirms that it is he, the Lord, who guides the Brahmin. The second verse has Krishna preaching Arjuna during epic war Mahabharata. Here, Arjuna is encouraged to pursue his duty of fighting the war without hesitation and without any pain of killing elders and brothers in his family. The third verse is a sonnet sung by poetess Mirabai who sees the Lord as her ultimate friend, husband, and lover. She loses her husband to death but refuses to pursue her life as a widow and moves on towards salvation by becoming a begging mendicant roaming from one home to another.

All three principles more or less speak that the universe is lead by a larger force, which is present in multitudes within every living thing.

Discussion
Nandini A.

Short exegesis about Confucianism, Daoism, and Hinduism
2nd April 2010

Verses mentioned in The Analects of Confucius, Confucianism, pg. 143, describe the correlation between the fundamental root, which is love and respect for humanity and the basic moral law, known as the Dao. Yu-Tzu describes how Confucius ascertains the disposure of a man as being superior as this is the man who respects his elders and treats everybody else equally, as his own brothers. This man, says Confucius, does not know discrimination, sorrow, or anger towards anybody.

The idea of a superior man arises from the fact that this man is constantly engaged in learning from his mistakes and through lifes experiences and loves making friends everywhere through everybody he meets. This man does not judge others, does not expect anything in return but true love and affection derived from the root of humanity attained through love for elders and respect for the equals. This man knows no sorrow or grief as every endeavor of his is a result of a responsibility driven by supreme morality. This state is the result of understanding that everything he does is only to attain the Dao.

Verses mentioned in The Book of Mercius, Confucianism, pg. 146, reaffirms the goodness that exists in the world and within human beings, as expressed by Mencius, one of the neo-Confucius leaders. Mencius uses Gaozi as his mouthpiece to express his thoughts. Gaozi states that all of Human Nature is good. To explain, there is a sort of defending of the human world, which the neo-Confucian does through using the example of flowing water. All the thoughts, actions, events, or results driving a man and his life, driving all human beings and their lives is primarily as good as the pure, crystalline water flowing downwards. This water exists throughout existence and is nonetheless the pulse of all human life. This water is ever flowing and no amount of sedimentation of any filth or dirt can prove that it is bad. Thus, like the flowing water, the human life keeps renewing itself in thought and action.

Verses in The Western Inscription, Confucianism, pg. 156 are by Zhang Zai, a neo-Confucius thought leader who considers heaven and earth to be his mother and father respectively. Zhang zai here is equating himself as an extension of both his parents who co-exist for him in all elders he knows. He considers all human beings as his brothers, as everybody constitute the same heaven and the earth.
There is a kind of elevation of the self in the lines, Therefore that which fills the universe I regard as my body and that which directs the universe I consider my nature (The Western Inscription, Confucianism, pg. 156). The physical body of the self here is in the sublime, is ascertained to be the universe, and the nature of the self to be the reason and cause of all action and thought. To elaborate, Zhang zai is obliquely pointing at the oneness or the similarity that all beings live by. In this state of oneness, there are no unique identities.  Everything on this universe is the same and will finally lead to sameness. This sameness is what we call the Heaven and the Earth.

Next, consider the verses by Laozi in The Dao, The Dao Di Jing, pg. 166. Laozi equates all beings as actually being non-existent. There is an exploration of what we could call the momentary-ness of things, people, and all happenings. As he says, the dao is not the Dao forever (The Dao Di Jing, Laozi, pg. 166). There are many ideas discussed here. One is the existence of the highest self, known as the mother. It is from this mother that all ideas, beings and things take birth. The Dao therefore is an aggregation of several multitude daos that keep dying and keep taking re-birth.

Following the above, the verses by Laozi in Anti-Contifucianism, The Dao Di Jing, pg. 167 describe that the doctrines of ren and yi, i.e., knowledge and wisdom appeared when the Dao disappeared. The two examples of filial brotherhood and royal ministries highlight the birth of knowledge and wisdom and therefore speculation supported by these two forces. Both the ren and yi are devoid of the Dao or the morality. The ren and yi are born out of mans propensity to speculate and see everything through his own eyes that are blind to the higher power guiding him. This ignorance of seeing through the higher power is what Anti-Confucius is.

Verses on Daoism (pg. 193) further reaffirm the momentary nature of all life. These lines clearly state that no man on this earth can possess anything forever. The heaven and the earth supplicate every man, such that no thought, action, or deed, or possessions such as body, mind, or the heart are his own. Man is nothing but a sublime speck, a minute replica of the realm that fills the space between the heaven and the earth.

The verses on Hinduism nevertheless express the same ideas as that expressed by Confucianism and Daoism. The verse from the Upanishads, (Realize the Brahmin, Hinduism, pg. 65) recalls what a Brahmin is all about. The Brahmin is a pure god-like man propelled by two divine forces, the Om and the Atman. The two respectively are equal with the bow and the arrow. The om is the Lord and the atman is the Soul. Thus, any man driven by these two is bound to succeed in everything he does. The Brahmin is patient, tolerant, and yet a winner is all that does because he acts as a tool of the Lord who has created the heaven and the earth. Reciprocally, a true Brahmin is someone who uses these two instruments to lead his life. These two forces, the om and the atman hold similarities to the root and the moral law or the Dao as stated in Confucianism and Daoism. However, the context is different.
The verses from the Bhagvad Gita, (I am the Beginning and the End, Hinduism, pg.66) has Lord Krishna, or Mahavishnu known as the protector, creator, and destroyer of the universe in Hinduism addresses the sorrowful warrior Arjuna, who is hesitating to make war. The idea is not to propagate war but to enlighten man that he is born to perform his duties on this earth as is expected of him. In other words, man cannot achieve anything through inaction of his responsibilities. The Lord here encourages Arjuna by reinstating that the entire universe is he alone. It is he who created it, he who carries out everything done by everybody, and it is he that destroys when there is a need. There is nothing that is not the Lord himself, neither the sacred scriptures and nor the five elements that make up the whole of this universe. Om is a symbol of purity and the Vedas are the book of rules through which life is to be lived.

The final verses in context here is by Hindu poetess and saint Mirabai (Without Krishna, I cannot sleep, Hinduism, pg. 79). In these verses, the saint surrenders herself completely to the Lord and expresses the desire to be one with the Lord. The great Lord Krishna is her only love and only Light that can bring her out of Darkness. The poetess refuses to be bound by any rules the society set for her after her husbands death, to live the life of a widow. Instead, she chooses to live in the longing for the love of her life, Lord Krishna, for the rest of her life. She spends her life as a begging mendicant or a woman Brahmin who roams from one home to another. Nonetheless, a human being is just a sub-presence of the supreme power called Nature. Mirabai reaffirms this through this sonnet.

Conclusion
It would be appropriate to conclude by saying that all of them, Confucianism, Daoism, and Hinduism propagate the idea of the One supreme force that drives the earth and the heaven, alike. Men, mere mortals are a subset of this supreme power.

Therefore, all actions and deeds guided by the supreme are the best. Any act of knowledge or wisdom carried out by man without the supreme guidance is prideful and may lead a man towards failure.

Evidentialism  in  the  modern  age  has  taken  a  forward  step  in  dominating  the  classical  apologetic  approach,  but  the  need  for  apologists  is  increasing  with  age.  Refusal  to  believe  in  anything  without  proper  proof  is  a  lasting  trend.  Evidentialism  focuses  on  providing  evidences  that  support  the  universal  facts  about  the  existence  of  God,  the  willing  sacrifice  of  Christ  for  the  sins  of  human  and  the  truth  of  the  Bible,  in  many  ways  providing  the  path  in  guiding  non-believers  towards  the  truth.

Methods of Evidentialism
It keeps simple with a common ground to everyone.  Considering  the  fact  that  the  people  looking  into  evidentialism  wouldnt  be  a  kind  that  can  go easy with the religious elements which tend to appear threatening to the non Christians, it rather binds to the logic, science and histological facts, creating a friendly atmosphere for those seeking in for the truth. This does not mean that it puts aside the Word, Evidentialism is Biblical, its main aim is to reveal the word of God, the truth, in the best way possible.

It also provides enlightenment to the ones who call themselves as Christians because they had been raised from early childhood in a church, read lessons about the 6 day creation and were reading the Bible because they had been asked to. It is like a notion created in them, but when they come to their understanding age of 12 and are being given books of school to read about evolution, it then raises a confusion in their innocent minds. Only would they know that there are several opinions and several speculations and interpretations regarding the evolution, all of which refuse to believe in the involvement of a higher brain, a thought laid on, an intelligent work that our human minds cannot comprehend. Minds set on worldview fallacies have always been the hard nuts to crack, especially with science believing in its own concept of big bang. Then is the need to prepare on aiming at the one indwelling faith that can make understand the true nature of everything which seems a mystery but is not.

To summarize an evidentialist is the one who looks out in obtaining affective results, irrespective of the methods used.

The method has found advocates in J. Oliver Buswell, Jr.,Josh McDowell, Lee Strobel, Gary Habermas, John Warwick Montgomery, and Wolfhart Pannenberg.

A Critique
Evidentialism with its advantages has a balanced approach that is well supported by the Bible. Evidences are used to convince the non Christians without asking them to believe in blind faith, without evading from its concentration from basic elements of Christianity i.e.. claims of God, Christ and the Word.

In the influential book Primitive Culture, Edward Tylor defined religion as belief in Supernatural Beings. This minimalist definition of religion is a reference to traditionalist emphasis on religion as a private and intellectual activity. This is in contrast with Durkheim behavioral approach. In his work Elementary Forms of Religious Life, Emile Durkheim defined religion as a system of beliefs and practices relative to sacred things   things which are set apart and forbidden. Those who belong to this moral community constitute a Church. For Durkheim, religion is inseparable from the idea of a Church.

In the search for an essentialist definition of religion, according to  McCutcheon, there is a need to differentiate the spiritual from the religious. For Tylor, the spiritual is synonymous with the religious. The religious realm is a manifestation of the spiritual realm   in short, the religious is the outward expression of spiritual belief. Spiritual belief is nothing more than a deep, solitary, and intellectual activity. As McCutcheon argues

In Tylors onetime popular definition we find the remnants of a philosophically idealist era in European history, when ones membership within certain groups was thought to be primarily dependent upon whether one believed in something   rather than membership being the result of collective behaviors   (1)

Evidently, McCutcheons concern is the determinacy of religious essence (whether religion has an essence). In order to address this issue, he presented a number of contending theories on religion. Tylors pragmatic definition of religion is an example of a classic definitional strategy (essentialism). Intellectual tradition treats religion as an inner process   a process of believing in something, expressed in the form of an essence. Scholars who valued this tradition thought it unwise to define religion based on what they took to be its secondary, external aspects (McCutcheon  2). These scholars argued that it is motive rather membership which defines the determinacy of religious experience. Tylors essentialist definition of religion is a naturalist account of a monothetic framework.

Other philosophers offered essentialist definition of religion. The German theologian Rudolf Otto argued that what defines religion was the participants feeling of great respect, admiration, and fascination. For Friedrich Schleiermacher, the essence was generally the feeling of total dependence. For Paul Tillich, the essence was power. For the historian of religion, Mircea Eliade, the experience of the Sacred defined the essence of religion.

These essentialist definitions of religion are not without value. The essence defines identity, expression, form, and substance. As Bertrand Russell observes

Uniformity is an expression of empiricism. It is the essence of an essence, apparently because it is directed to a single reference point. Variety, when viewed from a broader perspective, is actually a function of uniformity, for uniformity is the formal substance of order. Now, the duty of the scholar is to determine the ultimate form of uniformity, and in narrow perspective, appreciate the complexity of creation (92).

However, according to McCutcheon, the search for a universal definition of religion is problematic because of the inherent contradictions in concept-construction and the complexity of religious experience. As McCutcheon notes

Much as with a a light switch that can either be on or off   theres no such thing as a light being only partially on   essentialist definitions lead one to name something as religion if, and only if, it possesses a certain quality. That just what characterizes this essential quality differs   from one essentialist to another ought not to be overlooked (3).

Concept-construction has inherent contradictions. To define a concept is to narrow the application of an idea. Most of the time, ideas have multiple and sometimes contradictory meanings (even those situated in similar conditions). To different scholars, a concept may have different definitions. This complicates the process, as different scholars subscribe to different schools of thought.

However, not all ideas have contradictory or overlapping meanings. In economics, the term GDP has an empirical definition. The same case can be said about enertia, acceleration, and demand. This is not the case with the concept of religion. Marxian tradition defines religion as an outward expression of the substructure. Classical tradition defines religion as universal belief in supernatural beings. Behavioral tradition limit the application of religion to behavioral conducts. Freudian tradition defines religion as an expression of libidinal energy. The implication religion is a complicated concept because it has a broad subjective application (it is subjective in the sense that religious experience differs from individual to individual, from culture to culture, from period t period). McCutcheon is fully aware of this issue since one of his objectives in writing this article is to expose the difficulty in extracting a substantive (essential) element of religion (the other purpose is to show the intricate nature of the religious experience).

The Greeks divided religion into three spheres piety (eusebia), mystery (myo or fear for danger), and gnosis (esoteric knowledge). Piety is the quality of doing the right thing -an element of conscience. Mystery refers to cults in which members were initiated into the mysterious workings of the cosmic order (McCutcheon 3). Gnosis, on the other hand refers to a tradition in which ones personal salvation was thought to depend upon gaining special, spiritual knowledge (McCutcheon 3). What is the relevance of this issue to religion Simply put, it is often easy to categorize and provide examples of religious experience but difficult to set a universal, nomothetic definition of religion. This is the general purpose of McCutcheons article.

For McCutcheon, the study of religion is always problematic because of the complexity of religious experience and the ambiguous nature of religion. For Mircea Eliade, religion is an outward irrational experience concerned with the sacred in its whole form. Eliade offers an indirect definition of religion. According to him, the sacred is the opposite of the profane. Now, the opposite of the profane is explained by the concept of hierophany. Hierophany is simply the manifestation of the sacred. In his work The Sacred and the Profane, (Sacred Space and Making the World Sacred   Chapter), he defines the character of hierophany as

For it is the break effected in space that allows the world to be constituted, because it reveals the fixed point, the central axis for all future orientation. When the sacred manifests itself in hierophany, there is only a break in the homogeneity of space there is also revelation of of an absolute reality, opposed to the nonreality of the vast surrounding expanse. The manifestation of the sacred founds ontologically founds the world. In the homogenous and infinite expanse, in which no point of reference is possible and hence no orientation can be established, the hierophany reveals an absolute fixed point, a center.

What is profanity Profanity is the indifference to the sacred. A profane individual does not necessarily rejects the sacred. Profanity is simply the opposite (but not a rejection) of the sacred. Rejection implies choice. Hence, it implies that individuals determine which actions are mutually exclusive. As Eliade correctly observes

It must be added at once that such a profane experience is never found in the pure scale. To whatever he may have desacralized the world, the man who has made his choice in favor of a profane life never succeeds in completely doing away with religious behavior  I will appear that even the most desacralized existence still preserves traces of a religious revaluation of the world (23, italics mine).

Religious experience has a fixed point in space. Indeed, the purpose of religious experience is to find uniformity in the chaos of homogeneity. It is living in the real sense. The profane life, on the other hand, maintains the homogeneity and the relativity of space. The profane life is simply a general reference to indifference, amalgamation, and lucidity. As Eliade argues

No true orientation is possible is now possible, for the fixed point no longer enjoy a unique ontological status it appears and disappears in accordance with the needs of the day. Properly speaking, there is no longer any world, there are only fragments of a shattered quagmire   the obligation of an existence incorporated into an industrial society (24).

Central to Eliades theory is the idea of a religious man. The religious man is the representative of pre-modern societies. He is the object of religious experience. He treats nature as the subject of religion   religion in the traditionalist sense. The religious man strives to live with the sacred because he wanted access to the ultimate form of reality and to the power associated with the sacred. The religious man is, in a sense, an expression of self-efficacy. He imitates the gods in order to attain perfection (at least in some cultures). If perfection is absent, imitation serves as a conduit of obedience. Obedience is a behavior associated with command. This implies that the power of the sacred is in itself self-manifest. The religious man follows out of the religious experience itself. As Eliade argues

In such cases, the sign fraught with religious meaning, introduces an absolute element and puts an end to relativity and confusion. Something that does not belong to this world has manifested itself sporadically and in so doing has indicated an orientation or determined a course of conduct (27).

The religious experience is also manifested through signs. Signs are expressions of religiosity. But they are also mediums for extracting meaning. For example, when no sign manifests itself, it is usually provoked. For example, a sort of vocation is performed with the help of animals because it is them who know what place is fit to receive the sanctuary of the village. A sign may also be asked. This is to put an end to the tension and anxiety caused by relativity and disorientation.

There is another concept related to the religious experience   the chaos and the cosmos. At face, two concepts are visible, but clearly these concepts are twin concepts. Hence, they are treated as a single reference point. The cosmos is the known world   the place of materiality and certainty. Beyond the cosmos is the uninhabited, unknown, and indiscriminate space. It is the territory that extends beyond itself. Now, the world is a universe within which the sacred has already manifested itself in which time and reality is possible. The religious man fixes the limits of his sense experience and finds meanings from the world. In sum, this behavioral tendency is a reference to the sacred.

Conclusion
The essential difference between McCutcheon and Eliade is their treatment of religion. For McCutcheon, the study of religion is a problematic endeavor. For Eliade, religion is a manifestation of the sacred (as opposed to the profane). McCutcheon offers a pragmatic approach to the study of religion (identify appropriate analytical frameworks). Eliade, on the other hand, offers an epistemological approach to the study of religion.