DOCSLIB.ORG

1 Religious Pluralism, Religious Freedom, and the Limits Of

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
1 Religious Pluralism, Religious Freedom, and the Limits Of Religious Pluralism, Religious Freedom, and the Limits of Tolerance in Three Tolerant Societies Centre for Religion, Conflict and the Public Domain University of Groningen, October 22, 2013 Paul Rasor I want to thank Erin Wilson and the Centre for Religion, Conflict and the Public Domain for inviting me to be here today, and Dean von Stuckrad and the faculty of theology and religious studies for hosting this event. And thanks to all of you for coming. The three societies I refer to in my title are the Netherlands, Canada, and the United States. These have generally been regarded as among the world’s most tolerant societies, although this has been less so for the Netherlands, and possibly the U.S., over the past decade or so. This presentation is part of a larger project in which I want to explore how the challenges of religious and cultural pluralism can push even the most tolerant liberal societies toward the limits of their own tolerance. Today I want to look at a few religious freedom issues that emerge out of the inevitable conflicts generated by our religious pluralism. I will frame these issues by means of two models of religion-state relationships and two models of tolerance. Models of Religion-State Relations The models of religion-state relations are strict separation and structural pluralism .1 In the strict separation model, religion is seen as private, religious groups operate without state interference or support, and the state remains neutral. The classic example of this model is the United States, and these principles are embodied in the First Amendment to the U.S. Constitution. In the United States, it is assumed that strict separation of church and state is the best way to protect religious freedom. The structural pluralism model is more or less the opposite. Here, the state intentionally interacts with religious and non-religious groups, often supporting them in various ways, but it treats all of them equally and allows them as much autonomy as possible. The classic example of this model is 1 the Netherlands, where these principles are embodied in the tradition of state support for religious schools, religious political parties, and in other ways. In the Netherlands, it is assumed that this sort of cooperative pluralism is the best way to protect religious freedom. Canada falls in between these models. Models of Tolerance/Acceptance of Religious and Cultural Difference The two models of tolerance I am using come from a European University Institute study of tolerance and diversity in the Netherlands.2 This study actually identifies five models, but the first three refer to earlier periods in Dutch history, so I will not use them today. The first model is multicultural recognition . Under this model, groups are encouraged to keep their distinct practices and identities, and the state helps this process by subsidizing group institutions and in other ways. In the Dutch context, this sounds like the verzuiling or pillarization system that was followed from 1917 until the 1960s. But in the European study, this model refers to the Dutch multicultural policy from the 1970s until the mid-1990s, the period when the Netherlands came to be seen as a model of multicultural acceptance.3 The Netherlands has moved away from this model, but Canada has followed it since the 1980s.4 The second model is what I will call limited tolerance or liberal tolerance . This model is based on the idea that society must identify a set of non-negotiable core values, usually the values associated with the modern liberal state, such as personal autonomy, freedom of expression, and equal rights under the law, and then draw clear boundaries between things that are tolerable and things that are not. Under this model, group autonomy is limited by individual rights. This model describes the Netherlands since the late 1990s. The European Institute study refers to this model “Dutch liberal intolerance,” though that name was meant to be descriptive rather than judgmental. It also more or less describes the United States, although the U.S. has evolved in its own way toward a sort of multicultural modus vivendi . 2 The Religious Freedom Issues The four legal issues I want to examine in light of these models are (1) accommodation of religious difference; (2) religious group autonomy; (3) state funding of religious schools; and (4) religious hate speech. I realize that this is far too much to address in any detail today, but I will try to identify the nature of the conflict in each of these areas and give you a sense of how they are approached in the three countries. Since these issues involve constitutional law, I have put the relevant constitutional language for each country on the handout. My working hypothesis is that the way these issues are addressed by the courts, what we might call the judicial discourse of religious freedom, is affected by each society’s underlying assumptions about tolerance and about the kinds of difference it values or devalues. One of my questions is whether these issues can be better understood or explained if we look at them through the lens of these models. 1. Accommodation of religious difference The first issue, then, is accommodation of religious difference. The basic legal question is: How far must the state go in accommodating religious practices that deviate from cultural norms or legal requirements? Or, to put it the other way around: To what extent are religious groups or individuals entitled to exemptions from general laws? These are important questions because the law inevitably reflects the perspective of the majority culture. Laws that appear to be neutral can create burdens for religious minorities, and accommodations can help protect their religious freedom. 5 In terms of our tolerance models, the model of multicultural recognition would seem to favor accommodation in most cases, while the liberal model of shared core values would argue against it. United States The differences between these models are illustrated by two important cases from the U.S. Supreme Court decided nearly 30 years apart. The first case is Sherbert v. Verner ,6 decided in 1963. A member of the Seventh Day Adventist Church was denied unemployment benefits by the state of South 3 Carolina because she refused to work on Saturday for religious reasons. This policy created a serious burden on her religious practice because it basically forced her to choose between her job and her religion. The Court said that she was entitled to an exemption unless the state could show a very strong justification for enforcing the law, such as creating an impossible administrative burden. That was not the case here, so denying her benefits violated her right to the free exercise of religion. This approach was followed consistently in the U.S. for more than 25 years, although this does not mean that accommodations were granted in every case. But in 1990, in the case of Employment Division v. Smith ,7 the U.S. Supreme Court abruptly changed course. Ironically, this case also involved a claim for unemployment benefits. The plaintiffs were members of the Native American Church, which uses peyote in its ritual practice. They were denied unemployment benefits because using peyote was illegal under state law. Under the approach of the Sherbert case, they would probably have been entitled to an exemption. But here, the Supreme Court abandoned the accommodationist principle. It said that as long as the law is neutral, it can be applied to everyone, no matter how large a burden it places on someone’s religious practice. Exemptions can be granted by the legislature, but they are no longer regarded as a matter of constitutional right. Most scholars in the U.S. think that the Smith case significantly weakened the legal protection available for religious minorities. Netherlands In the Netherlands, accommodation of minority religious practices is not a matter of constitutional law, as it is in the U.S. Certainly the right to freedom of religion and the right to be free from discrimination are protected by the Dutch Constitution. But in practice, most cases are brought under the Dutch Equal Treatment Act ( Algemene Wet Gelijke behandling , or AWGB ). Situations that might call for an accommodation are treated as discrimination cases. ETA section 5 prohibits discrimination in employment, while section 7 prohibits discrimination in education. I should say that there are similar anti-discrimination laws in the U.S. and Canada. 4 Cases under the ETA were handled by the Equal Treatment Commission ( Commissie Gelijke behandling ) ( CGB ), although since 1 October 2012, this role has been taken up by the Netherlands Institute for Human Rights. I have not found any rulings by the Human Rights Institute under the ETA, but there are plenty of cases from the ETC. I’ll give just a couple of examples. In a case from 2008,8 a Muslim police officer objected to a new dress code that banned headscarves. The department said it wanted police officers to have a neutral appearance in their public roles. The ETC said the rule could be applied to officers who have direct contact with the public. However, this particular officer worked in an internal office, and applying the dress code to her constituted discrimination on religious grounds in violation of the ETA. The ETC cases involving schools are similar. In two identical cases from 2011, 9 the schools did not allow Muslim girls to wear a sports headscarf in gym classes. The schools said the rule was based on reasons of safety. The ETC said that safety was a valid concern, but here there was no evidence that these headscarves were unsafe.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Religious Diversity in America an Historical Narrative
    Teaching Tool 2018 Religious Diversity in America An Historical Narrative Written by Karen Barkey and Grace Goudiss with scholarship and recommendations from scholars of the Haas Institute Religious Diversity research cluster at UC Berkeley HAASINSTITUTE.BERKELEY.EDU This teaching tool is published by the Haas Institute for a Fair and Inclusive Society at UC Berkeley This policy brief is published by About the Authors Citation the Haas Institute for a Fair and Karen Barkey is Professor of Barkey, Karen and Grace Inclusive Society. This brief rep- Sociology and Haas Distinguished Goudiss. “ Religious Diversity resents research from scholars Chair of Religious Diversity at in America: An Historical of the Haas Institute Religious Berkeley, University of California. Narrative" Haas Institute for Diversities research cluster, Karen Barkey has been engaged a Fair and Inclusive Society, which includes the following UC in the comparative and historical University of California, Berkeley, Berkeley faculty: study of empires, with special CA. September 2018. http:// focus on state transformation over haasinstitute.berkeley.edu/ Karen Munir Jiwa time. She is the author of Empire religiousdiversityteachingtool Barkey, Haas Center for of Difference, a comparative study Distinguished Islamic Studies Published: September 2018 Chair Graduate of the flexibility and longevity of Sociology Theological imperial systems; and editor of Union, Berkeley Choreography of Sacred Spaces: Cover Image: A group of people are march- Jerome ing and chanting in a demonstration. Many State, Religion and Conflict Baggett Rossitza of the people are holding signs that read Resolution (with Elazar Barkan), "Power" with "building a city of opportunity Jesuit School of Schroeder that works for all" below.
    [Show full text]
  • The Problem of Religious Pluralism
    Scholars Crossing Faculty Publications and Presentations Department of Philosophy 2008 The Problem of Religious Pluralism Michael S. Jones Liberty University, [email protected] Follow this and additional works at: https://digitalcommons.liberty.edu/phil_fac_pubs Part of the Christianity Commons, Philosophy Commons, and the Religious Thought, Theology and Philosophy of Religion Commons Recommended Citation Jones, Michael S., "The Problem of Religious Pluralism" (2008). Faculty Publications and Presentations. 4. https://digitalcommons.liberty.edu/phil_fac_pubs/4 This Article is brought to you for free and open access by the Department of Philosophy at Scholars Crossing. It has been accepted for inclusion in Faculty Publications and Presentations by an authorized administrator of Scholars Crossing. For more information, please contact [email protected]. The Problem of Religious Pluralism Michael S. Jones, PhD The “problem of religious pluralism” engages several distinct but interrelated issues. The “problem” arises when one considers the variety of religious beliefs and practices in the world and, taking into consideration both their similarities and differences, attempts to formulate a coherent position on their origin, truthfulness, soteriological efficacy, and value in general. Of these questions, the one that has received the most treatment is the question of the soteriological efficacy of the world’s religions. That all religions contain some truth is not generally disputed: Zoroastrianism, Judaism, and Islam have the truth of monotheism, for example; some versions of Hinduism are also theistic in their final analysis of ultimate reality (see, for example, the theologies of Sankara and Ramanuja) and have well-developed theodicies, epistemologies, and absolutist ethical systems; the central role of self-giving love in Mahayana Buddhism certainly has biblical parallels, and so on.
    [Show full text]
  • A Critical Evaluation of John Hick's Religious Pluralism in Light of His Eschatological Model
    Andrews University Digital Commons @ Andrews University Dissertations Graduate Research 2009 A Critical Evaluation of John Hick's Religious Pluralism in Light of His Eschatological Model Haejong Je Andrews University Follow this and additional works at: https://digitalcommons.andrews.edu/dissertations Part of the Philosophy Commons, and the Religious Thought, Theology and Philosophy of Religion Commons Recommended Citation Je, Haejong, "A Critical Evaluation of John Hick's Religious Pluralism in Light of His Eschatological Model" (2009). Dissertations. 70. https://digitalcommons.andrews.edu/dissertations/70 This Dissertation is brought to you for free and open access by the Graduate Research at Digital Commons @ Andrews University. It has been accepted for inclusion in Dissertations by an authorized administrator of Digital Commons @ Andrews University. For more information, please contact [email protected]. ABSTRACT A CRITICAL EVALUATION OF JOHN HICK’S RELIGIOUS PLURALISM IN LIGHT OF HIS ESCHATOLOGICAL MODEL by Haejong Je Adviser: John T. Baldwin ABSTRACT OF GRADUATE STUDENT RESEARCH Dissertation Andrews University Seventh-day Adventist Theological Seminary Title: A CRITICAL EVALUATION OF JOHN HICK’S RELIGIOUS PLURALISM IN LIGHT OF HIS ESCHATOLOGICAL MODEL Name of researcher: Haejong Je Name and degree of faculty adviser: John T. Baldwin, Ph.D. Date approved: April 2009 Introduction to the Problem The philosophy of John Hick, who is famous for his religious pluralism, has received vigorous study in terms of its epistemology, authority, the concept of God, and Christology. However, less attention has been given to his pareschatology. As explained below, initial investigation shows that there is a need for in-depth study of Hick’s religious philosophy in this area.
    [Show full text]
  • Diversity Without Pluralism: Religious Landscape in Mainland China
    religions Article Diversity without Pluralism: Religious Landscape in Mainland China Yongjia Liang Department of Sociology, National University of Singapore, 11 Arts Link, #04-25, Singapore 117570, Singapore; [email protected] Received: 3 October 2017; Accepted: 9 January 2018; Published: 12 January 2018 Abstract: The paper explores religious diversity and pluralism in the religioscape of mainland China with three examples. While religious diversity is de facto practice, “religious pluralism” is not socially recognised, culturally legitimised, or discursively institutionalised. On the one hand, state co-option of religious groups is achieved through particular definition of “religion” without the conceptualisation of pluralism, leaving undefined religious activities to cultural policy or national security measures. On the other hand, practices that might be identified as religious elsewhere does not usually self-identified as such, not to say seek for the right of religious freedom. To explain the absence of articulated/institutionalised “religious pluralism” in China, the paper provides three examples—civil activism against tomb-levelling campaign, “the Society of Disciples” (mentuhui), and a ritual service provider. The paper argues that the religioscape of mainland China is one with de facto religious diversity without the ideology of religious pluralism, because the diverse religious practices do not make a conscious reference to pluralism, remain non-institutional, disinterested in religious freedom, and, most important of all, below
    [Show full text]
  • Pluralism and Religious Freedom
    Occasional Papers on Religion in Eastern Europe Volume 15 Issue 6 Article 2 12-1995 Pluralism and Religious Freedom Alan Geyer Wesley Theological Seminary, Washington, D.C. Follow this and additional works at: https://digitalcommons.georgefox.edu/ree Part of the Christianity Commons, and the Eastern European Studies Commons Recommended Citation Geyer, Alan (1995) "Pluralism and Religious Freedom," Occasional Papers on Religion in Eastern Europe: Vol. 15 : Iss. 6 , Article 2. Available at: https://digitalcommons.georgefox.edu/ree/vol15/iss6/2 This Article, Exploration, or Report is brought to you for free and open access by Digital Commons @ George Fox University. It has been accepted for inclusion in Occasional Papers on Religion in Eastern Europe by an authorized editor of Digital Commons @ George Fox University. For more information, please contact [email protected]. PLURALISM AND RELIGIOUS FREEDOM by Alan Geyer Dr. Alan Geyer (United Methodist) is Professor of Political Ethics and Ecumenics at Wesley Theological Seminary in Washington, DC; Resident Ethicist at Washington National Cathedral; and Senior Scholar of The Churches' Center for Theology and Public Policy. Many of his numerous scholarly writings dealt with East-West issues. This was a paper delivered at the Conference on "Christian Faith and Human Enmity" Kecskemét, Hungary, August 24, 1995. Any American invited to speak about the role of religion in the political conflicts of Europe must begin by acknowledging the intensity of religious and political conflicts within the United States. In many ways, our American constitutional tradition of separation of church and state that has been a vital guardian of religious liberty--yet its specific implications remain confused and are bitterly embattled at present.
    [Show full text]
  • Religious Syncretism As a Worldwide Mission Challenge: a Biblical and Missiological Response
    Religious Syncretism as a Worldwide Mission Challenge: A Biblical and Missiological Response Boubakar Sanou ABSTRACT—Globalization has put the major world religions within the reach of almost everyone in the world today. Worldwide migration patterns, international travel and trade, progress in communications technology, and international media activities have introduced people to nearly all religious traditions. More and more thinkers, including some Christians, are advocating a pluralistic theology of religions, thus asserting the subjectivity of religious beliefs. As a result, many people are increasingly picking and choosing among various religious traditions and their practices to meet personal needs. Three major factors contributing to religious syncretism are discussed in this article. A biblical and missiological response addressing the challenge posed by religious syncretism to Christian mission is suggested. Keywords: Mission, Syncretism, Postmodernism, Religious pluralism, Culture, Discipleship. I. Introduction Religious syncretism is frequently referenced in the Bible. In part, the Ten Commandments are God’s instructions against religious syncretism because the first three commandments (Exod 20:1-7) charge the Israelites “to distinctively stand before God without reliance on any other gods” (Van Rheenen, 1997, p. 173). Just as the Israelites were warned against rejecting Yahweh and serving other gods (Deut 11:16; 2 Kgs 10:23), the New Testament also speaks strongly against dual allegiance and syncretism (Matt 6:24; 1 Cor 10:14; Rev 22:15). Syncretism is a worldwide religious challenge. According to Manuscript received May. 24, 2013; revised Aug. 1, 2013; accepted Aug. 27, 2013. Boubakar Sanou ([email protected]) is a PhD candidate in Mission Studies at Andrews University, Berrien Springs, Michigan, U.S.A.
    [Show full text]
  • Pluralism, Tolerance and New Age
    PLURALISM, TOLERANCE AND NEW AGE By Marsudi Utoyo SEKOLAH TINGGI ILMU HUKUM SUMPAH PEMUDA Abstract Understanding of religious pluralism that is taught in the context of Pancasila is a perspective seats the all religions in the same position so that the position of all religions in equal assume. Islam, Catholicism, Protestantism, Hinduism, Buddhism, Confucianism, other religions and beliefs based understanding local cultures is a reality that still exists in Indonesia. Pluralism is carried here departs from socio-religious, in which religious pluralism as a basis that bring forth to respect other religions and other beliefs that exist in Indonesia. In Article 29, paragraphs 1 and 2 of the Constitution of the Republic of Indonesia in 1945, the state provides the freedom and tolerance on the life of religious freedom. The cornerstone of religious life is based orthopraxis religious life meaning, truth, glory, and majesty of God Almighty which we live and ring in the faith that we profess, should be evident in the praxis of everyday life in the form of attitudes and religious tolerance. Keywords: Pluralism, Tolerance, New Age. I. INTRODUCTION A. Background Pluralism has some perspective, social, cultural and political. In a social perspective, pluralism counteract the domination and hegemony groups or religious sects, as well as negating the concentration of social power on one group or stream. While the perspective of cultural pluralism prevent loss of flow due to religious school destroyed by the mainstream hegemonic, and on the other hand the arrogance counteract mainstream religious denominations that are often tempted or historically- empirical abuse and oppression flow or any other religion.
    [Show full text]
  • RELIGIOUS PLURALISM in ISLAM Dr
    Volume 1, Issue 2 Journal of Islamic Thought and Civilization Fall 2011 RELIGIOUS PLURALISM IN ISLAM Dr. Adnan Aslan ABSTRACT This paper is aimed at enumeration of some of the Quranic principles to suggest an account of 'Islamic pluralism'. The Quran accepts plurality as a natural phenomenon. Allah SWT states in the Quran: ―O Humankind! Verily we have created you of a male and female; and we have distributed you in nations and tribes that you might know one another and recognise that, in the sight of God the most honourable of you is the most pious. Verily God is wise and all knowing‖ (49:13). The aim of Islam is to integrate such diversity into unity through the sacred principles of the Quran; it explains the reason and purpose for such racial and religious multiplicity. After arriving in Medina, the Holy Prophet SAW introduced a new structure and value system which was connected through religion and citizenship instead of tribal links. He formed the constitution of Medina which stated the terms of relationships with Jews of Medina. The Prophet SAW extended the act of citizenship and co-operation to the Christians of Najran. The paper glances through Islamic history in order to identify a common official attitude of Muslim authority towards non-Muslim subjects. Key words: Pluralism, Religious, Quran, Proposition, Medina ▬▬▬▬▬ In this paper, I would like to first enumerate some of the Quranic principles with regard to the issue of religious pluralism as propositions, with the aim to give an account of 'Islamic pluralism'. I will formulate these propositions on the basis of Quranic verses which suggest a pluralistic attitude as against argument to those which suggest an inclusivist attitude.
    [Show full text]
  • Religious Pluralism and Islam
    1 Religious Pluralism and Islam (Lecture delivered to the Institute for Islamic Culture and Thought, Tehran, in February 2005) John Hick The subject of the relationship between the religions is extremely important, even more so today than in the past. For centuries almost every war between the nations has involved religion, not as its primary cause, but as a validating and intensifying factor. However I am going to treat religious diversity now as a topic in the philosophy of religion, although in the course of doing so it will emerge that some conceptions of this relationship are much more easily exploited to justify and encourage war and exploitation than others. Why is this a philosophical problem? Each religion is accustomed to think of itself as either the one and only true faith, or at least the truest and best. Must not the situation, then, simply be that one of them is right and the rest wrong, either absolutely or only relatively wrong? But here is a consideration which makes this view of the situation problematic. In the vast majority of cases throughout the world, probably 98% or so, the religion to which a person adheres (and also against which some rebel) depends on where they were born. Someone born into a Muslim family in a Muslim country, or indeed a Muslim family in a non-Muslim country, is very likely to become a Muslim. Someone born into a Christian family is equally likely to become a Christian. And the same is true of Jews, Hindus, Sikhs, Buddhists, Taoists. It is very unlikely that someone born into a Buddhist family in Tibet will grow up as a Christian or a Muslim; very unlikely that someone born into a Muslim family in Iran or in Pakistan will grow up as a Christian or a Buddhist; and so on round the world.
    [Show full text]
  • Religious Pluralism in Religious Studies
    Religious Pluralism in Religious Studies Amanda Porterfield Religious pluralism is a term for religious diversity that imputes positive meaning to religion and encourages appreciation of religion’s many forms. As a term used to describe religious diversity in the United States, religious pluralism conveys respect for the contributions that religious traditions have made and continue to make to American society. Implying that religion is common ground in a shared democratic culture, people who use the term often convey idealism about religion’s role in upholding democracy. This idealism presumes that different traditions are intrinsically compatible; indeed, resources to be drawn upon for national unity and strength. Within academic studies of religion, religious pluralism has played an important role in expanding the horizons of many students and encouraging intellectual curiosity and open-mindedness. In this respect, religious pluralism fosters the liberal education, scholarly inquiry, and open exchange valued in academic life. Compared to exclusionary approaches to religion that hold one faith tradition up as true or superior and consider others to be false or inferior, religious pluralism marks an important advance in endeavors to understand peoples and cultures on their own terms. At the same time, though, religious pluralism operates to some extent like a religion itself, a conceptual framework of interpretation that rests in a universal and finally mystical understanding of religion and its essential importance for human existence. 2 Religious pluralism thrives in academic settings where instructors lead students to slip imaginatively into different religious worlds and belief systems. With students expected to be open-minded learners respectful of others, the classroom is well-suited for such explorations.
    [Show full text]
  • Conclusion: a Prehistory of Hindu Pluralism
    Conclusion A Prehistory of Hindu Pluralism A CONTINUING LEGACY: THE MAKING OF A HINDU SECTARIAN COMMUNITY Who invented Smārta-Śaivism? Was the tradition created ex nihilo through the abstract discourses of an intellectual elite, or did it emerge organically through the unfolding of social dynamics over the course of the early modern centuries? As with the purported “invention” of Hinduism, to identify the moment and cir- cumstances of birth of a particular sectarian tradition raises a number of vexing theoretical questions about historical causation—the process by which a genuinely new cultural edifice comes into being. My aim in this work has been to sketch the unmistakable impressions of public theology on the embodied, socially embedded boundaries of Smārta religious life, its role in shaping emerging modes of religious identity—a process that cannot be reduced either to hegemonic domination or to elitist fancy. Indeed, the impact of Smārta-Śaivism on contemporary religious cul- ture in Tamil Nadu extends far beyond the boundaries of maṭha or sampradāya, “monastery” or “lineage.” Much in the way that the “Sacred Games of Śiva,” the distinctive legend of place of Madurai, has historicizable discursive origins in the public theology of the seventeenth century, the same can be said for the wider public Smārta culture of the Tamil region. The subsequent inauguration of a public regional culture, from the Śrīvidyā inflection of Carnatic music (Shulman 2014) to the public esotericism of contemporary Chennai (Kachroo 2015), bears the dis- tinct impressions of the actors and events of early modernity. The Smārta-Śaiva community—with its perduring alliance between Śaṅkarācārya renunciant lineages, the monastic institutions they maintain, as- sociated temple complexes such as the Kāmākṣī Temple of Kanchipuram, and a 183 184 Conclusion laity comprised largely of south Indian Smārta Brahmins—an integral feature of Tamil Smārta culture today, began to emerge under specific and eminently ob- servable social circumstances in the sixteenth and seventeenth centuries.
    [Show full text]
  • History and Religion Religionsgeschichtliche Versuche Und Vorarbeiten
    History and Religion Religionsgeschichtliche Versuche und Vorarbeiten Herausgegeben von Jörg Rüpke und Christoph Uehlinger Band 68 History and Religion Narrating a Religious Past Edited by Bernd-Christian Otto, Susanne Rau and Jörg Rüpke with the support of Andrés Quero-Sánchez ISBN 978-3-11-044454-4 e-ISBN (PDF) 978-3-11-044595-4 e-ISBN (EPUB) 978-3-11-043725-6 ISSN 0939-2580 Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data A CIP catalog record for this book has been applied for at the Library of Congress. Bibliographic information published by the Deutsche Nationalbibliothek The Deutsche Nationalbibliothek lists this publication in the Deutsche Nationalbibliografie; detailed bibliographic data are available on the Internet at http://dnb.dnb.de. © 2015 Walter de Gruyter GmbH, Berlin/Boston Printing and binding: CPI books GmbH, Leck ∞ Printed on acid-free paper Printed in Germany www.degruyter.com TableofContents Historyand Religion 1 Section I Origins and developments Introduction 21 Johannes Bronkhorst The historiography of Brahmanism 27 Jörg Rüpke Construing ‘religion’ by doinghistoriography: The historicisation of religion in the Roman Republic 45 Anders Klostergaard Petersen The use of historiography in Paul: Acase-study of the instrumentalisation of the past in the context of Late Second Temple Judaism 63 Ingvild Sælid Gilhus Flirty fishing and poisonous serpents: Epiphanius of Salamis inside his Medical chestagainstheresies 93 Sylvie Hureau Reading sutras in biographies of Chinese Buddhist monks 109 Chase F. Robinson Historyand
    [Show full text]