On Mon, 18 Sep 2000 15:21:01 -0400, Brad Cooley
<[log in to unmask]> wrote:

>>>
>>>The Pueblo Indians
>>
>>This is Paganism, ie worship of the forces of nature.  Whether one calls
>that
>>"religion" or not is a semantic discussion not worth getting into here,
>IMHO.
>>
>
>Are you implying that the beliefs of the Pueblo indians are not as valid as
>christianity or other religions?

[French valide, from Old French, from Latin validus, strong, from
valere, to be
strong.] *

I certainly think that the beliefs of the Pueblo indians are as strong
as those
of Christians.

( Again, the question of whether the worship of the forces of nature
is a
"religion" or not is a semantic one, just as the question of whether
chess is a
"sport" or not.   To pose such a question does not necessarily imply
that chess
is lesser than, for example, baseball. )

>>> ancient Greeks, and ancient Romans are examples.
>>
>>In this case, the "religion" is dead, and all we know about it is from
>2,000
>>years of "telephone", a dubious process.   In any case, if it were a true
>>representation of reality, it would hardly be likely to have vanished...
>
>The context of my original message is that, in simple terms, food, methods
>of food acquisition, and other factors affect culture which in turn affects
>that culture's religion.

It affects the social implementation details of the religion (eg what
day of the
week people go to collective worship), not the overall structure or
principles
of the religion.

>>I'm usually one to cite dictionary definitions.   However, in the case of
>>widespread myths, there is no reason to assume that dictionary writers are
>>immune.   I assume that many dictionaries and encyclopedias now define
>"diet" as
>>cutting the fat out of your daily food consumption to improve your
>health....
>>
>>
>If "religion" is not a "set of beliefs", what is it?  a set of truths?  a
>set of rules?  a set of best guesses?  a set of empirical observations?
>"Religion" is a set of beliefs.  "Religion" is not like the laws of
>thermodynamics.

It's certainly a set of empirical observations, just like the laws of
thermodynamics.

I'm reminded of the first time - roughly something like a hundred
years ago,
that a Redwood Tree was first brought from California to the East
Coast for some
sort of Expo or Fair.   The had to cut it into pieces to transport it
by train,
and then re-assemble it.   Most people thought that it was a fake,
that there
could not possibly be a tree that big....

---------------------
* Excerpted from The American Heritage Dictionary of the English
Language, Third
Edition Copyright © 1992 by Houghton Mifflin Company. Electronic
version
licensed from Lernout & Hauspie Speech Products N.V., further
reproduction and
distribution restricted in accordance with the Copyright Law of the
United
States. All rights reserved.