Unit 3 Religion, Philosophy of Religion, and Theology*

Structure
3.0 Objectives

3.1 Introduction

3.2 Religion

3.3 Philosophy of Religion

3.4 Theology

3.5 Let Us Sum Up

3.6 Keywords

3.7 Further Readings and References

3.8 Answers to Check Your Progress

3.0 OBJECTIVES
• To understand the elements of Religion
• To understand Philosophy of Religion as a subset of Philosophy
• To demarcate the separate provinces of Religion, Philosophy of Religion, and Theology
and to understand their interrelationship

Note: The content in the ponder boxes is not part of the conventional unit, but pondering
on it would enrich your understanding of the unit and would allow the assimilation of
knowledge in a broader context.

3.1 INTRODUCTION
It's not uncommon to witness intersecting domains of common interest giving an impression
of sameness even when they are not so, but a closer inspection quickly dissipates this
misconception. Religion, philosophy of religion, and theology too are domains that intersect,

*
Ariba Zaidi, Assistant Professor, Department of Philosophy, Zakir Husain Delhi College, University of
Delhi.
36
often giving an impression of resemblance, but a closer inspection suggests otherwise, for
domains might intersect, interests might align, but they do so with a different set of aims and
attitudes. Thus, this unit is an attempt to closely examine this intersection and give an
account of what differentiates the three.

In this effort, it seems reasonable to begin with 'religion', as apart from it being a domain in
its own right, it also happens to be the subject matter for the other two. Therefore, the
following is a brief account of what religion represents.

3.2 RELIGION
Although a precise number is difficult to arrive at, most of the estimations suggest that there
are over 4000 religions, sects and their offshootspractised worldwide. Thus, though it is not
entirely impossible, it is highly unlikely to find someone not acquainted with religion in one
form or the other, yet any effort to define it in some precise way is likely to end up as a
failure because religion represents such diverse beliefs, practices, observances and
adherences that have very few parallels.

Thus, maybe a more fruitful approach to understand religion is by delineating its general or
common features, and subsequently relying on such features, synthesise a broad and holistic
outlook regarding what the concept of religion represents.

Religion can be identified with some core set of beliefs, associated practices and observances
adhered by an individual or a group of people or a sect. Alternatively stated, religion
represents a core set of beliefs that dictates the way of life of an individual or a group. In the
context of the preceding statements and for the discussion to follow from here, it is
significant to understand what ‘beliefs’ are.

Beliefs are statements, claims or propositions considered or accepted to be true by an

individual or a group. For example, When someone considers the statement—‘the sun rises in
the east’ to be true, they adopt or form an affirmative mental attitude towards this
statement/proposition. This mental attitude is what we may call a belief.Belief, it needs to be
underscored, isnot representative of the truth or falsity of a proposition. Albeit, they represent
the consideration of anindividual or a group for the truth or falsity of a proposition. In view
of the afore-stated notion of belief and our common experience with them, it's reasonable to
state, without probably attracting any disagreement, that not all our beliefs are religious in
37
character, signifying that there have to be PONDER BOX-
BOX-I
some identifiable key characteristics that
Beliefs play a seminal role in the decision making of
separate our religious beliefs from our individuals, thereby shaping their entire lives. The same
commonly held other beliefs. One of the is to be expected in the context of religious beliefs if you
hold them.
promising ways, it appears, to decipher
List the decisions in your life that have been fully or
some of the essential characteristics of
partially influenced by religious beliefs. You may
religious beliefs— the claims that are discover the extent of your life influenced or conditioned
by religion.
considered to be true within the religious
domain— is by observing how the
organised religions function worldwide and arrive at some broad generalisations therefrom.
The following, therefore, is an effort to bring forth some of the essential characteristics that
can be solely associated with religion.

3.2.1 Salient Features of Religion

3.2.1.1 Claims to provide answers to some of the fundamental questions

To begin with, most world religions claim to be the sole repository of the answers to some of
the fundamental questions that concern us. Such fundamental questions, amongst others, may
include ‘what the ultimate reality is’, ‘why anything exists at all’, ‘what our place in such a
reality is’, ‘what our true nature is’ etc. These questions, arguably, suggest that religion
claims to offer the architecture of our reality. Most religions, if not all, provide answers to
these questions and often they project a reality that transcends our common experience but at
the same time is intimately connected to our lives and wellbeing.

Some examples may prove useful in driving home the essence of what is stated above.
Consider, for a moment, one of the questions mentioned above, ‘why anything exists at all’.
One may find, on investigation, that many religions offer some conception of a creator or an
uncaused cause as an answer to this question. Judaism, Christianity, Islam and many schools
of Hinduism fall in this category, where the appeal is made to some theistic notion wherein
God or gods, assume(s) the role of a creator along with many other roles. However, not all
religions, it is emphasised, subscribe to such a view. For example, Jainism and Buddhism
don’t offer any conception of a creator to explain the existence of this world. However, it
doesn’t mean the question of existence is abandoned. What differs is only the form of answers
offered.

38
Such answers are considered absolute truths within the fold of respective religions. Further,
such claims, owing to the immutable status accorded to them, are opaque to any challenges,
meaning their authority is considered final and their legitimacy is unquestionable in most
religions. However, the foregoing doesn’t imply that the prevalent beliefs in a religion are
always accepted by all the adherents alike. Internal disagreements often occur on account of
mostly varying interpretations of the same religious tenets, but the rigid character of such
tenets and their different interpretations often push religion towards schism. Various subsects
of all the major religions are a testimony to this propensity.

3.2.1.2 Gives a higher purpose that ought to guide our life

Another salient feature of most of the world religions is the concerted effort to address the
concern of meaning of life, i.e., addressing the questions like- ‘is there some inherent
meaning to life’ or ‘is there a higher purpose that ought to guide our life’. The afore-stated
concern probably stems from a foreseeable impending end to our lives, which forces upon us
some psychologically unsettling questions such as, is death the final truth staring us and our
loved ones, or is there some form of continuity that makes our lives more meaningful than
what is apparent. Most religions attempt to satisfy this human yearning for continuity by
advancing a conception of our true nature that is separate and distinct from our perishable
physical body. For an instance, most religions rely on some conception of soul, self or
consciousness to define our true nature and in effect establish a continuity and tranquillity
that cannot be jeopardised by mortality, impermanence, uncertainty or death. It is in the
context of this immortal true nature that most religions define or give meaning to the purpose
of life. Salvation for Judeo-Christian and Islamic religions, Mokṣa for Hinduism, Nirvāṇa for
Buddhism, Kaivalya for Jainism, represent such a higher purpose of life.

3.2.1.3 Offers general moral principles to guide one’s actions

Most religions, it appears, assume a central role in shaping the moral compass of their
followers. Alternatively stated, most religions demarcate the province of what is right and
wrong or good and evil, which means, that religion offers the general principles that the
adherents of a religion must follow while conducting the affairs of their life. For instance, the
doctrine of ‘niṣkāmakarma’, one of the key teachings of Bhagavad Gita,calls fora desire-less
or a self-less pursuit of an action in accordance with one’s duty.

As such the principles are considered to be the commandments of divine origin, meaning, the
adherents of a religion, in most such cases, are not assumed to have the autonomy to accept
39
or discard such principles or duties. Adherence to such principles by a follower can be seen
as a function of reverence or fear or a combination of both. Reverence for such principles is
understandable as they are believed to be divine commandments by a follower, whereas the
fear stems from undesirable consequences and punishments that such commandments append
to non-adherence.

3.2.1.4 Faith

Faith is another salient feature that is associated with religion in ways that are arguably
unparalleled in other walks of life. Faith, in one sense, is subscribing to a belief or a set of
beliefs without seeking justifications for having them. As mentioned earlier, belief is treating
a proposition, a claim or a statement to be true. Thus, faith, in the aforesaid sense, is treating
a claim/ proposition/ statement to be true without needing any justification to do so. The
adherents of any religion, it appears, place their faith, in the aforesaid sense, in the dictates
and claims of their respective religion and conduct their lives according to it.

Theforegoing doesn’t imply a complete absence of justification from the domain of religion.
Having faith doesn’t meanthe adherents or practitioners completely renounce justification.
Quite the opposite, justification is central to religion when it comes to the conduct of a
follower or a practitioner, but such justifications always come from the tenets, claims and
principles advanced by the religion. What they cannot seek, in most religions, is the
justification for these tenets, claims and principles themselves that make up the edifice of a
particular religion. In fact, questioning the core set of beliefs and their basis is often regarded
as irreverence for the religion. Most religions, therefore, have instruments of deterrence to
prevent such blasphemy.

3.2.1.5 Revelation as the source of ultimate knowledge

Religious beliefs often hinge on a specific source of knowledge which starkly differentiates
them from most other forms of beliefs. In most religions, the source of knowledge isclaimed
to be some form of divine revelation, or some authority, such as scriptures, prophets or
inscriptions, that is treated to be the repository of all knowledge, the veracity and legitimacy
of which is supposedly unchallenged and unrivalled. As explained earlier, all justifications
for religious practices rely on them whereas their justification generally lies in their claimed
divinity or absolute authority.

40
 3.2.1.6 Ritualism

Ritualism, a socio-cultural phenomenon in general, is also an integral part of most religions.

Rituals, in this sense, constitute religion instituted specific set of practices and observances
oftenfor their supposed benefits to the practitioners. These are generally the practices
seamlessly integrated with even the most secular aspects of the socio-cultural sphere of a
person, dictating ‘whats’ and ‘hows’ to them. The extent of penetration of rituals often goes
unnoticed, but it can be understood from merely inspecting the various stages in a religious
person’s life from birth to death.

3.2.1.7 Prayer

Prayer is a phenomenon associated with most of the religions. It is conceived as a medium of

communication between the divine and its subject. Prayers can be classified based on the
intent of such communication. One such intent is to demonstrate adulations and reverence for
the divine, and the prayer fulfilling such intent, therefore, involves elements demonstrative of
worship or praise. Different from the preceding are petitionary prayers, where the intent is to
see some desire getting fulfilled or to seek forgiveness for some wrong conduct or just to
ensure that the blessing of the divine doesn’t abandon the petitioner. A significant facet of
petitionary prayer is the conception of the divine or the God.

3.2.1.8 Spiritualism

Spiritualism, although is often identified with religion, is a secular notion. It’s a quest to
understand one’s own nature or what may be called the quest for self-actualisation. In the
above sense, it’s closely associated with the yearning to understand the meaning of life, but
when such a meaning is sought within the confines of a religion, or when the quest to
understand one's own nature takes one to the doorsteps of religion, it becomes integrated with
religion. Thus, in the above sense, spiritualism is an integral part of religion but it is not
exclusive to it.

Hitherto, some of the essential features of religion have been introduced to aid the reader in
identifying and segregating beliefs and practices that are representative of religion. Preceding
is not an exhaustive list of features characterising religion, yet they afford enough
generalisations to assist in drawing a tentative perimeter around its domain for further
exploration.

41
Check Your Progress I
Note: a) Use the space provided for your answer.

b) Check your answer with that provided at the end of the unit.

1. Delineate the general features of religion.

…………………………………………………………………………………………………

…………………………………………………………………………………………………

…………………………………………………………………………………………………

…………………………………………………………………………………………………

3.3 PHILOSOPHY OF RELIGION

This section provides an exposition of what constitutes ‘philosophy of religion’, but any
definitive progress in the stated direction is inconceivable without alluding to what
philosophy, in general, represents.

Philosophy marks an attitudinal shift from what has been witnessed in the context of religion
in the preceding section. If religion is about faith as its underpinning, philosophy adopts a
posture of scepticism*or doubt for any assertion. This attitude of scepticism for any apparent
or obscure is at the core of philosophy. In the preceding sense, philosophy offers a prospect
of unrestrained scrutiny into the edifice of our notions.

Consider the following questions and reflect for a moment. ‘what is reality’; ‘is there a reality
beyond our sense mediated experience’; ‘why anything exists’; ‘what is our place in this
world’; ‘is there any meaning to life’; ‘how do we know what we know’; ‘are we an
autonomous agent with free will’; etc. In the previous section, it was told that religion claims
to provide answers to these questions or at least some of these questions, but is it necessary to
rely on religion or any other authority to get answers to such questions, or can one exercise
the option to give into one’s sense of wonderment and curiosity and reflect on such issues.

When an individual exercises the latter option and reflects, it may rather quickly dawn upon
that each of these questions can be responded to in more than one way. Apparently, the

*
Scepticism is used in a specific sense here. It should be understood as the readiness to question any claim
to truth, to seek conceptual clarity of the categories forming such propositions and to look for the logical
coherency, all being done with an openness for accepting the limitation of such justifications and the
assumptions involved.
42
existence of each of the thousands of religions and their offshoots bears testimony to the
diversity and plurality in the responses to these questions, and when non-religious responses
too are added to the mix, it may seem prudent to adopt areasonable level of scepticism for
any assertion made regardless of the authority it is coming from. This attitudethat drives
philosophy is in stark contrast to religion, which has faith at its root and therefore is content
with embracing the words of authority.

Apparently, scepticism or doubt propels one to ask in what PONDER BOX -II
ways an assertion is true. This enquiry brings forth the
Usage of argumentation is not
significance ‘justification’ has in the context. Justification limited to the formal fields of
means supporting or grounding the assertion made by a enquiry. In fact, you employ them
in your day to day discourses more
declaration, which in common parlance is often called often than you probably appreciate.
reason, but in philosophy, it has a specific meaning and
Look up the following forms of
structure. The structure is called an argument, constituting arguments:
of a conclusion—aproposition that one intends to establish Induction,
Induction deduction and abduction
and premise(s)— proposition(s) that one advances to
Observe your discourses for how
establish the conclusion. The argument is the structure you and others around you employ
philosophy relies on to justify claims. these structures.

However, religion too, it may be argued, relies on arguments for justification. In fact, it’s a
fairly common structure often employed in even regular discourses. Thus, religion definitely
employs the structure of argumentation as philosophy does but doesn’t harness its potential as
philosophy does. Premises and conclusions in philosophical arguments are open to challenge,
and in the wake of newer information, if contradictions and inconsistencies emerge,
philosophical arguments are able to make a course correction, which is entirely missing in the
domain of religion. Also, in constructing arguments, philosophy attempts to keep at bay
logical-fallacies* and cognitive-biases†, which, it seems, is not a particularly strong suit of
religion. In the foregoing sense, Philosophy is organic, ever-growing, adding newer corpus

*
Logical fallacies corrode the integrity of an argument. One of the ways in which they get actualised is by
diluting the form or structureof the argument, i.e., by not adhering to the proper rules of inference,
therefore suitably termed as formal fallacies. Informal fallacies are yet another manifestation of logical
fallacies, where some devious instruments are advanced disguised as arguments
†
Cognitive biases create a tunnel vision before us, hiding contradictions and inconsistencies that are often
in plain sight. Cognitive biases remind us that we are not merely born in a physical world. We are also
born in a socio-cultural environment, where before even getting to one’s full cognitive capacities, one is
conditioned by the prevalent beliefs of one’s environment, preventing one from being considerate for the
alternate views.
43
 PONDER BOX
BOX - III
of knowledge. On the contrary, the claims of religious
If you have been enthusiastic about the
previous activities, you may have arguments, as explained in the previous section, are
discovered arguments crucially shape considered to be absolute truths and therefore can’t be
your discourses, beliefs and decisions. In
this sense, they shape your life, but you subjected to any challenge. Thus, in the event of
might not be as adept as you think you inconsistencies or contradictions too, they remain rigid.
are in employing them in your life.
Thus, relying on the instrument of argumentation and
Examine common cognitive biases and
logical fallacies that plague your espousing an attitude of reasonable scepticism for the
judgements. apparent and the obscure in equal measures, philosophy
addresses some of the fundamental concerns. Very few concerns, if there are any, can be as
fundamental as understanding the nature of reality itself. In philosophy, this domain of
inquiry is labelled as metaphysics. Other fundamental concerns of philosophy are
epistemology, the investigation into the nature of knowledge and its associated aspects, and
value theory, which in its broadest sense is an effort to arrive at general principles that can
guide evaluative judgements such as in the context of ethics, where philosophy strives to
arrive at a sound basis to evaluate acts, behaviours and intents of individuals into categories
of good and bad or right or wrong.

The above-stated pursuits and maybe a few others may occupy the bedrock of philosophy,
but a domain-specific confinement of philosophy is probably ill-conceived, for philosophy
embraces the mundane as it embraces the profound and the fundamental. The essence of
philosophy, therefore, is probably not to be sought in the domain of exploration. Rather, it
seems to reflect in the act of exploration, spurred by a penchant for scepticism and
irreverence for authority, challenging the most fundamental of the assumptions and beliefs.

It is in the backdrop of the elements of philosophy revealed hitherto, the pursuit of

philosophy of religion needs to be understood. The discussion thus far clearly demonstrates
that the religious considerations and some of the fundamental concerns of philosophy share
the same domain, but both approach these shared common provinces with a different set of
pursuits. Where philosophy is an enquiry in such areas critically inspecting a wide range of
possibilities, most religions don’t come across as an enquiry into such domains. Instead, they
mostly claim to be an exclusive, legitimate and unrivalled repository of the knowledge in
such domains.

44
Philosophy of religion critically inspects such claims by religion, relying on a specific
attitude and instrument underscored earlier. In doing so, it scrutinises religion from the point
of view of identifying logical inconsistencies and incoherencies between its various concepts
and claims. Also, it scrutinises the religious tenets in view of the developments and outcomes
associated with general philosophical enquiry, scientific investigation and other competing,
contending and even concurring positions. The rest of
the section is an elucidation of how, philosophy of PONDER BOX-
BOX-IV

religion, as a second-order activity, subjects religious If you are in a habit of exercising your
reflective prowess, you are likely to
claims to an unrestrained scrutiny. have reflected on the meaning of life.
If you have not, you can do it now.
• Most religions, as stated in the previous
Critically examine your own views on
section, claim to offer the architecture of the subject in the light of
reality, and although not always, but often in existentialism,
existentialism absurdism and
Nozick’s
Nozick’s experience machine.
machine
such religions, God is central to such an
architecture. However, given there is pluralism in religious beliefs and other
competing and contending belief systems such as atheism, agnosticism and
scientific and philosophical positions, philosophy of religion scrutinises the claims
and arguments offered for the existence of God in the light of opposing positions
and available empirical evidence.

• Philosophy of religion also examines the attributes of God claimed by various

religions and their implications. For an instance, most monotheistic religions
ascribe omnipotence, omniscience, omnipresence, eternality and benevolence, etc.
to God. In philosophy of religion, these attributes are scrutinised to demarcate their
conceptual domain, to identify how different attributes relate to each other and to
understand their implication in terms of consistencies and contradictions. For an
instance, a philosophically challenging issue for many religions is ‘the problem of
evil’, which brings to the fore the contradiction between two of the attributes of
God, ‘benevolence’ and ‘omnipotence’. If God is omnipotent, i.e., all-powerful, and
benevolent, i.e., who is kind and desires the wellbeing of its subjects, it seems fair
to assume that evils such as crimes, wars, genocide, exploitation, socio-economic
crisis, pandemics and epidemics, congenital disorders, natural disasters etc.
shouldn’t impact the lives of innocents, infants and children, yet evil exists,
meaning one of these two traits can’t be ascribed to God, or else these traits have to

45
 be understood in a different sense, something that most religions seem to have
refrained from attempting.

• Many religions, as elucidated in the previous section, offer an answer to what the
‘meaning of life’ or the true purpose of life is. As stated, such answers often
involve what constitutes our true nature, which, as alluded to in the previous
section, happens to be ‘soul’ in many religions. Soul, it can be observed, has been
conferred with a wide variety of attributes that derive their meaning from the larger
context of reality professed by all such religions. Philosophy of religion scrutinises
these conceptions of soul in the context of investigating our true nature and the
purpose of life. For example, many of the attributes ascribed to soul such as vitality,
consciousness, experience, rationality, emotions etc. seem to be untenable when
looked at from the point of view of theory of evolution, neuroscience and molecular
biology in particular. Philosophy of religion, therefore, examines the conception of
soul or other contenders for our true self in light of a much broader set of arguments
than what religion offers.

• Most religions claim to be the legitimate source of knowledge. Thus, philosophy of

religion dons its sceptic visor to inspect such claims. In doing so, it inspects the
premises advanced as a justification for a claim to be true, but, as stated in the
previous section, religious claims appeal to authority for such justifications, and
therefore are opaque to further investigation, but philosophical inquest is unbridled
by such restrictions and consequently questions the appeal to authority itself as a
legitimate or reliable mode of justification.

• Again, as stated in the previous

PONDER BOX-
BOX-V
section, most religions define and
Although seeking and providing justification is
central to philosophy, philosophy is not blind to the demarcate the province of good and
limitation of justification. bad or right and wrong and issue
Can justifications be sought for every claim without commandments/ imperatives to dictate
slipping into an infinite regress? actions, behaviours and intents in
If Justifications can’t be sought indefinitely, does it accordance with such conceptions.
mean that some propositions/claims have to be taken
as axioms or unjustifiable foundations for the rest of
However, philosophy of religion
the knowledge system to be built over them, or are scrutinises such notions and
there ways to provide justifications without
imperatives in view of the
presupposing foundations?

46
 developments and outcomes of such developments in the domain of ethics, which
strives to understand the notions the terms good or evil represent, how such notions
have been constructed in the society and can there be a universal basis for such
categorisations as religions seem to prescribe.

The foregoing is a glimpse of what philosophy of religion strives for. It may give an
impression that philosophy of religion is critical of
PONDER BOX-
BOX-VI
religion. Such an impression is definitely true, but it may
Revisit the list of decisions you be reminded that philosophy at its core is a critique
earlier made under the influence of
religious beliefs. Given the option, machinery that is fuelled by scepticism for any given.
would you consider any change in Thus, one may find it to be true as well that philosophy is
them in the light of what you
understood of philosophy? equally critical of the claims of other domains such as that
of psychology, polity, law and sciences, etc. Philosophy
displays the same level of scepticism for the arguments, conceptual apparatuses, modes of
justification, standards of proof and the reality constructed and advanced by any such
domains. Most of all, philosophy eyes its own corpus of knowledge, standards of truth, modes
of investigation and justification too with an equal measure of scepticism.

Check Your Progress II

Note: a) Use the space provided for your answer.

b) Check your answer with that provided at the end of the unit.

1. Briefly discuss the relationship between religion and philosophy of religion?

…………………………………………………………………………………………………

…………………………………………………………………………………………………

…………………………………………………………………………………………………

…………………………………………………………………………………………………

3.4 THEOLOGY
Theology is a systematic study of religion. The afore-stated may propel one to ask what it
studies about religion that philosophy of religion doesn’t. One crucial difference is that

47
theology, unlike philosophy of religion, is appended to specific religions, meaning most
religions have their own theology, and in many cases, even the sub-sects of religions have
their own theology. However, both, Philosophy of religion and theology, it may be argued,
don’t differ in the content as much as they differ in the intent of the study and the attitude
with which they study religion.

Theology is the study of religion with the intent to systematize/ formalize/ organise its
declarations and dictates into coherent and logically consistent doctrines. It has already been
explained that the fundamental tenets of any religion are considered immutable on account of
they being generally divine revelations or the words of a revered final authority and therefore
act as justification for any practice, observance, ritual or belief endorsed by the follower of
that religion. However, these fundamental tenets, regardless of their holiness, can appear
ambiguous and incoherent and therefore are open to interpretations and often attract
challenges.

Thus, to take the correct interpretation to the followers who can reliably practice, profess and
preach with faith; to avoid ambiguities and vagueness; to pass the religious message to the
subsequent generations and to those who are not yet in the fold of religion; and to prepare a
defence against the challenges posed by philosophical scrutiny, scientific developments and
other competing and contending beliefs, theology undertakes the intensive study of religion
and strives to systematise and formalise it on a sound footing. The following are some of the
instances where theology can be witnessed attempting the same.

3.4.1 Furnishing proofs for the existence of God

It has been expounded earlier that the conception of God is central to many religions. The
collapse of this conception, therefore, may be coterminous with the collapse of such religions.
Possibilities of such an occurrence for any particular religion often emerge from the
challenges from other religions, philosophy and science. Consequently, one of the major
tasks theologians of any particular religion have undertaken is to prove the existence of (their
version of) God. To actualise the foregoing, theologians too, as philosophers do, rely on
arguments, but, unlike philosophy, theology frames the argument with a foregone conclusion
that God exists. Further, a refutation of challenges often requires theology to adopt
argumentation as a tool for the purpose, yet, in adopting argumentation, appeal to authority is
not renounced. Thus, theology, in the above-alluded sense, is stuck somewhere between the

48
need to address the mounting challenges of its time and the need to preserve the absolute
authority of the religious tenets.

3.4.2 Interprets the notion of God and attempts to demonstrate the

consistency between different attributes of God

One of the major contributions of theology in most religions is to clarify and crystallise the
conception of God, which is not just consistent with the metaphysics that a particular religion
advances but is also able to withstand philosophical scrutiny. Theology, in doing so, often
relies on the traditional attributes of God in a particular religion such as theologies of most
monotheistic religions rely on omnipotence, benevolence, omnipresence, eternality and
omniscience to define God. However, some of these traits, on philosophical scrutiny, don’t
seem to be compatible with each other such as the ones cited in the previous section, viz.,
‘omnipotence’ and ‘benevolence’ in the context of evil. Theologians, however, contest such
contradictions on account of the existence of ‘free-will’. Thus, non-intervention of God to
prevent evil, from the vantage point of theology, doesn't pose any conflict between God's
attributes.However, philosophical scrutiny still contends that such a conception of evil is very
narrow as it leaves natural disasters, epidemics, diseases etc. unexplained. Be that as it may,
the purpose of the aforesaid is not to demonstrate the strength or weakness of theological
arguments. Albeit, it is to show how theology complements religion by attempting to bring
together its various parts as a coherent whole.

3.4.3 Codification of ethical and moral precepts

Another significant task performed by theologians with implicationsfor the organisation of
society and directing the moral compass of individuals in the context of many religions has
been the codification of ethical and moral principles and their interpretations. Most religions
have commandments or imperatives that ought to be followed by a true follower, but mostly
such principles are open to interpretations. Theology, in this backdrop, provides contextual
interpretations to them and elaborates them for the reference of adherents, thereby playing a
significant role in demarcating the right and wrong for a section of society. Such a role in
many societies is not merely confined to the demarcations that can inform personal
conscience. There are legal implications too, governed by religion instituted jurisprudence.
Theology plays a crucial role in shaping and codifying its tenets. Most religions have their
own schools of jurisprudence, dictating the legal dynamics of the societies where they are
followed. For example, many countries of the world structure their whole legal system
49
around such doctrines whereas, in many others, a partial employment can be seen such as in
India, where it is only confined to personal laws.

3.4.4 Clarifies the religion instituted ways to self-actualise

It has been mentioned earlier that the meaning of life or the higher purpose of life is a
significant question that most religions address, but it is theology that strives to bring clarity
to the attributes of true human nature that is in consonance with the true purpose of human
life as religion conceives it. In doing so, it also, as in other instances, strives to address the
challenges that other religions, philosophy and science mount on it. Theology also
systematises the rituals and ceremonies to be performed while leading one's life according to
the dictates of religion. It includes specifying the rituals to be performed, their modes of
performance and when to perform them. Such systematisation often also includes prayers and
modes of worship as well.

Above-mentioned are some of the instances to demonstrate how theology systematically

studies religion to organise its imperatives and claims into coherent and logically consistent
canons.

The preceding effortof demarcation in this unit may seem suggestive of a clear distinction
between all three domains, but in practice, it has often been found that it’s not as plain sailing
as it seems. Various intersections between these domains do present situations where the
subject content of one province can be mistaken for the other. Such errors in judgement are
fairly common place. For instance, an oft-made error in judgement is to consider the
arguments advanced regarding the existence and nature of God, soul, self, etc. as theological
merely on the ground that the subject content involved is religious in character. However,
philosophy of religion too can indulge in the same subject content, advancing the arguments
with the same intent, i.e., to prove the existence of God or soul, to understand their nature;
and in doing so, it is not stripped off its philosophical character in any way.

Likewise, advertently or inadvertently, theological arguments too are offered in the guise of
philosophy. Argumentation is indeed central to both theology and philosophy of religion, but
it is not sufficient to characterise a dialogue as philosophical. For example, if an argument is
advanced to prove the existence of god, soul etc. without abandoning the appeal to authority
as the final justification, can one call such arguments philosophical, where positions are rigid,
truths are absolute, contending views are not given due considerations and the mode of
justification is not questioned? On the other hand, philosophical arguments can also be made
50
for the existence of God and soul etc.with a critical scrutiny of one’s own position and modes
of judgement, an openness and due consideration for alternate and contending positions, an
incessant vigilance for cognitive biases and fallacies. Philosophy is not hesitant to question
the foundation of any knowledge system and if reason dictates, it is prepared to alter its
position, meaning it is ever-cautiousof slipping intoan abyss of absoluteness.

Check Your Progress III

Note: a) Use the space provided for your answer.

b) Check your answer with that provided at the end of the unit.

1. In the event of already existing religious doctrines, what do you think is the role of
theology?

…………………………………………………………………………………………………

…………………………………………………………………………………………………

…………………………………………………………………………………………………

…………………………………………………………………………………………………

3.5 LET US SUM UP

As stated in the beginning, religion, philosophy of religion and theology represent an overlap
of domains, which may evoke a false sense of resemblance. The effort has been made in the
unit to present an uncluttered elucidation of their distinction.

Religion is a socio-cultural phenomenon represented by a set of beliefs, associated practises

and observances that dictate and shape the way of life of its adherents. It’s influence lies in
itsclaimto offer answers to some of our fundamental concerns such as nature of reality and
existence, our place in it, our nature and purpose in such a reality and a conception of good
and evil within the contours of such a reality. In doing so, it uncompromisingly relies on the
appeal to authority as a mode of justification, entailing that an adherent doesn’t have any
other recourse other than to rely on faith to embrace such a belief system.

Theology, on the other hand, is a religion-specific or even a sub-sect specific attempt to

systematise and formalise religious tenets into a coherent organic whole. Such an endeavour
is often undertaken with the intent to present an unambiguous version of religion to its

51
adherents to ensure their unhindered following, practices and observances, to impart religious
teachings to the initiated and the uninitiated, and also to address the challenges mounting
from other religions, philosophical examination and challenging scientific facts.

Philosophy of religion, however, in its scrutiny, adopts a posture of scepticism for religious
tenets, and attempts to understand the soundness of religious belief systems within the larger
context of theological formalism of religion, the outcomes and developments associated with
general philosophical enquiries inother domainsand incessant scientific developments and
other opposing or concurring positions.

3.6 KEYWORDS
Philosophy of Religion: A second order activity that inspects aspects of religion(s) and the
arguments advanced by their respectivetheologieswith a critical eye.

Theology: An effort to systematise/organise/formalise religious tents into a coherent body of beliefs

for the adherents to practice, profess, preach and teach them with faith and for addressing the
challenges posed by philosophical scrutiny, scientific developments of the time and other competing
and contending belief systems.

3.7 FURTHER READINGS AND REFERENCES

Galloway, G. The Philosophy of Religion in Relation to Philosophy & Theology. In The
philosophy of religion (pp. 46-53). Charles Scribner’s Sons, 1914.

Hick, J. Philosophy of religion (4th ed.). Prentice Hall, 1990.

Moore, B. N., & Parker, R. Critical thinking (13th ed.). McGraw-Hill Education, 2021.

Yandell, K. E. What is philosophy? What is religion? What is philosophy of religion? In

Philosophy of religion: A contemporary introduction (pp. 15–19). Routledge, 2002.

3.8 ANSWERS TO CHECK YOUR PROGRESS

Answer to Check Your Progress I

1. Religion is a core set of beliefs, associated practices and observances with crucial
identifiable elements that demarcate its territory. The following are some of these
elements that allow such a demarcation.
52
 Firstly, most religions claim to provide the architecture of our reality, where our life,
physical world and associated aspects are provided with a meaning often in a broader
context than what is apparent. Such a context, for most religions, generally involves a
detailed exposition of our true nature and a well-defined purpose of our life that is in
consonance with such a nature and the rest of the reality. Secondly, the source of such
knowledge, in most religions, is some religious authority, scriptures or revelations. Thus,
inevitably, most religious doctrines hinge on faith and appeal to authority for justification.
Thirdly, most religions demarcate the territory of good and bad, and by issuing
commandments or imperatives which ought to be followed, they attempt to ensure ethical
conduct that is coterminous with the religion defined purpose of life. Finally, most
religions systemically institute modes of worship, rituals to be practised, prayers to be
offered and ceremonies to be conducted as a meaningful part of their constructed reality.

Answer to Check Your Progress II

1. Philosophy of religion is a second-order enquiry into the beliefs, associated practices

and observances that characterise religion, espousing an attitude of scepticism and
relying on the tool of argumentation for justification. In carrying out its enquiry, it
examines the concepts and propositions advanced by religion for logical
inconsistencies and incoherence. Further, it also scrutinises the religious tenets in
view of the developments and outcomes associated with general philosophical
enquiry, scientific investigation and other competing, contending and even concurring
positions. Religion, in the aforementioned sense, is the subject matter of philosophy
of religion.

Answer to Check Your Progress III

1. Theology is the study of religion with the intent to systematize/ formalize/ organise its
declarations and imperatives into doctrines. The task is undertaken to take the correct
interpretation to the followers who can reliably practice, profess and preach with
faith; to avoid ambiguities; and to pass the religious message to the subsequent
generations and to those who are not yet in the fold of religion. Further, the emphasis
of theology, in the foregoing context, is to weed out inconsistencies and establish
coherency between various components of religion in a way that is also capable of
addressing the challenges posed by philosophical scrutiny, scientific developments,

53
and other competing and contending belief systems. To give effect to its intent,
theology, much like philosophy of religion, relies on the instrument of argumentation
but in doing so it doesn’t abandon the appeal to authority as its final means of
justification.

54