| Believers are more or less influenced by statements about religion emerging from the academy, especially those which deal with religion in general, such as "religion is a private matter." This study intends to explore the question of how believers should position themselves with respect to general statements issuing from the academic discipline of Religious Studies via its two main branches---i.e., the social-scientific and the phenomenological approaches. Despite certain similarities to some frequently discussed topics in Religious Studies, my concern does not correspond to a recognized subject in the field. For this reason the introduction, along with the first chapter, set out to clarify the study's various qualifications, including the feasibility, scope, relevance and context of this research.;Reflections on those arguments recognized as conclusive in this work, along with two possible contributions of this study to the field of Religious Studies, constitute the fourth chapter and bring the dissertation to a close. The following effectively summarizes what this study substantiates: No statement about religion in general or religion in particular (i.e. a specific religion) made by Religious Studies is trustworthy for believers.;The second and third chapters evaluate various arguments that could help believers discover whether such general statements are trustworthy. Beginning with the observation that Religious Studies starts from an aspect of religion, the second chapter scrutinizes the 'transition from an aspect of religion to religion' in the discipline. Having examined various arguments, it deems as conclusive the following argument: since what Religious Studies considers an aspect of religion is mixed with, and thereby corrupted by, the imperfections of believers, the transition from an aspect of religion to religion is problematic for them. The third chapter, which one after the other tackles the capacity of the phenomenological and social-scientific approaches in making general statements about religion, focuses on 'the transition from a religion or some religions to religion'. Both approaches prove problematic in making such a transition; the former in taking the practice of religion as religion, and the latter in assuming that the information needed to make such statements (at least regarding the revealed religions) is sufficient. |
