Jane Addams

I don't think that there are any religious/spiritual connection with the social work undertaken by Jane Addams. I also don't think that she was religiously motivated into the social work that she undertook. One of the reasons as to why she took up such work was because of the experience of her witnessing poverty. I don't see how witnessing people in poverty could be anything religious/spiritual at all. True there may be religious/spiritual reasons that would propel one to a certain place where they can then witness poverty but I don't think that the act itself of witnessing poverty is religious/spiritual. Therefore, just wanting to help others doesn't mean that you're religious or that it has to do with something religious; so, Jane Addams was not religiously motivated nor were there any religious/spiritual connections with the social work that she undertook.
On the other hand, though, I understand that her choice to do good for other less fortunate people could be a religious thing. The whole idea of giving for certain religions as well as being kinder to them than you are to yourself could very well be exactly what Jane Addams is following when she helps those in poverty. However, I don't think that being good is necessarily a religious thing. I feel that I don't really have a religious feeling about so naturally many things that I do wouldn't be religious nor would I have been religiously motivated into doing them. I view myself as a pretty nice and helpful guy so I am doing good and helping others without a religious purpose nor a religious motivation. Therefore, just because Jane Addams was doing nice things by helping out those in poverty, it doesn't mean that she had a religious purpose nor a religious motivation. Also, then, there would be no religious/spiritual connection with the social work that she undertook.

Post2Week8

I understand that the Rastafarian religion is more or less like any other religion because it is a religion. However, I see the Rastafarian religion as something that is more understandable and acceptable/believable than most other religions. I'd like to look at why some religions are more attracting than others because it is something that I wonder about. I feel that Rastafarianism is rather a new religion when compared to others so perhaps it is this youthfulness that makes this religion less diluted due to time going on. What I mean by this is that another religion, say Christianity, is harder to understand and believe in because it is so much older. Also, because with time, there arises many differences here and there that creates self conflicts and therefore contradicting even itself here and there. There is the Old Testament and the New Testament as an example for this contradiction within Christianity that makes me quite questionable when it comes to believing it. I do understand that as time goes on things change so as to fit with the times but I feel that if this religion is as true as it says then it should be quite consistent even during the test of time.
Perhaps it is because the Rastafarian religion is younger/newer that it is more believable and acceptable to me a lot more so than Christianity is. What I mean by this is that there exists rather recent proof in the truthfulness of the religion. Haile Selassie was indeed an actual person and not some made up story figure for all we know. Within Christianity, with Jesus Christ, it is more uncertain that He was indeed an actual person. I feel that He does at times have that aura of being a made up story figure. I understand that both the Rastafarian religion and the Christian religion may be true or false and that there is no actual proof that says either or. However I feel that as time goes on that if a religion doesn't get more proof of an existence to actually confirm it all that the faith in that religion fades away with the time. This may be the case with Christianity with me and that since Rastafarianism is still rather new that it is more believable for now. It may very well just be a human nature thing to be into whatever is "new and hot" as sort of a trend.

Rastafari - Boboshanti

I would imagine that there exist differences in these Rastafarian called the Boboshanti. This is mainly because of them being the most spiritually committed Rastafarian. Of course there would be similarities as well because they are still indeed Rastafarian. The various differences as well as similarities noted now with the Boboshanti Rastafarian are mixed with what was in the book as well as what was discussed in class. First thing I noticed that all Rastafarian shared were the colors of Ethiopia. This tie back to Ethiopia, and Africa on a larger scale, is very dominant in the Rastafarian religion whether or not it is Boboshanti. What was different with the Boboshanti was that their colors were flipped in comparison to the other Rastafarian - red on top versus green on top.
This particular portrayal of Rastafarianism by the Boboshanti was very different that what I was understanding from the book as well as the Bob Marley videos. It seemed that Rastafarians would be very laid back so as to be as far out and away from the system as possible. The Boboshanti though on the other hand are very hard working people with regards to spirituality. This more or less is close to the "normal" ideal of being hard working and dedicated. Another thing that I noticed that was different with the Boboshanti was their English. The idea portrayed in the book and confirmed with the interview clip with Bob Marley made me to believe that their English would be very hard to understand because it was Patois with a Rastafarian twist. However the English of the Boboshanti was easier to understand and not much of the lingo I expected was used.
I guess that with a religion there would be many different interpretations of it but that they would still be similar in ways. This is shown with the Boboshanti part of Rastafarianism - they still are Rastafarian but of a different kind because some of the views differ and clash. I think what I'm trying to say is that religion or Rastafarianism is like a sport and the Boboshanti are one of the many teams of that sport. Of course then there would be differences between the Boboshanti and other Rastafarian just like how various sports team within the same sport are different from one another. With the Boboshanti it was basically a different point of view of the Rastafarian religion brought to our attention.

Post2Week7

After having watched all six parts of James Hall's video presentation Lawrence Pilgrimage I would like to revisit the issue that was raised in class on Wednesday I believe. One of the parts that we watched in class on Wednesday was part four. It related to the Kebra Negast that we read for that class day. The issue that was raised was roughly about the idea of story making in terms of religion. I do believe that the Kebra Negast was referred to as being a work of fiction in some way or another or rather to that extent if anything.
Assuming that it is indeed a work of fiction, the issue about believing in it and worshiping it came up. After having watched part four of Hall's Pilgrimage we raised the issue about the idea of making up a story about Lawrence University. The story was about how, according to legend, the Fox River was patrolled and led by a large mystical gazelle that now appears on the Lawrence seal. The gazelle had to flee because of civilization and left two droppings outside of Briggs, now known as One Rabbit Two.
I don't see how this story can just get dismissed so fast without really regarding it at all. I think that it might just be that we all believe that it can't be possible mostly because it directly affects us as Lawrentians. By that I mean that perhaps the feeling is disbelief that something like that could exist here on this mundane campus in a mundane town. That dismissal of the story of Lawrence legend carried over to become a dismissal, more or less, of the Kebra Negast. Now I know that people believe in the Kebra Negast just like how people believe in the Bible, so why is the Kebra Negast dismissed and the Bible isn't?
I feel that just because you don't believe in something because it is not your religion that it doesn't make those religions false. I understand that most religions conflict with each other so they all can't be true but that doesn't mean that they all are entirely false. This idea of the legend of the gazelle could very well be true as well as the Kebra Negast. The issue, it seemed, was the idea of story telling or rather the making up of stories. If the Kebra Negast works for people then why won't the gazelle one work too? I don't really see a difference in the two types of story tellings. They both more or less fill in the blanks and spaces of history and they seem to work as well. Most other religions, if not all, do the same thing too - they have stories that explain events and things - and there is no true way to tell if they are made up or not but they are believed in nonetheless.

Kebra Negast

It appears that from the portion that we read from the Kebra Negast, Ethiopia is going to become the new Israel in a way. This is apparent in the dream that King Soloman has - the light/sun leaves Israel paying no heed and goes to become over Ethiopia. I see the light/sun to be quite analogous to the favor of the LORD, which has clearly left Israel for Ethiopia. Also, from this portion, it is as if Ethiopia has been lacking wisdom and became subservient to King Soloman so as to acquire more wisdom. This is shown through the Queen of Ethiopia leaving to stay with the King for some time to learn his wisdom. Later on, the son of the Queen and King, looking awfully similar to the King, also says something about the shift from Israel to Ethiopia. It sort of says that the King has a new replacement now, the new son. Also, with the Queen saying that women shall no longer rule and that the seed of the King shall only rule, she means that the son is now going to be the new ruler.

Dearborn

I found the video to be quite interesting and I also found out so much that surprised me. It was quite amazing to be learning about a different religion and a different culture so close to me, Michigan. I could never imagine something so important to be so close to where I live, here in Appleton, Wisconsin. What I really liked about the religion and the culture is that they are trying to become better known by the city as well as others. I thought it to be quite amazing to have one of their buildings right in the middle of town, on the main street - Michigan Avenue, across from the city hall. What I really found to be amazing was how well the relationship was between the various groups of the religions and cultures within the churches. Well, I found it to be quite an informative video. I hope other religions and cultures can learn from this example and take actions to become better recognized in the area that they exist.

Photo

http://flickr.com/photos/lido_6006/221439880/
A photo with a religious theme/subject from flickr.com, this photo is called "Religion: keep changing like a chameleon." This is indeed a photo in which one can observe the "system of symbols" that Geertz defines religion as. In fact, this is a photo of many of the various symbols that religions use in their respective systems. This photo is of a chameleon made up entirely of religious symbols. I am not sure if these symbols have been constructed by religious traditions nor am I sure that they have existed since the beginning of their respective religions. However, this picture is clearly about the "system of symbols" because we have the Wheel of Dharma, the Christian Cross, the Star and Crescent, the Aum, and the Star of David to name most of them. (I think I see the Pentagram in there too.) Anyways, these are all symbols for their respective religions. Those religions with a "system of symbols" to represent them include Buddhism, Christianity, and Islam to name a few. Religion is indeed a "system of symbols" whether or not it was intended to be that way and religion is now mostly only known for their symbols.

Post2Week5

Saint Augustine is quite the teacher on Christianity. His views on interpretation of the various religious texts and scriptures that they have are so diverse and versatile. I find it interesting that there is no absolute way in which one can interpret any one piece of religion. Also, one can take the religious texts and scriptures, or well rather Augustine's teachings, and apply them to just about any issue. The whole idea about anything is right and/or just if done for the reason of love, and more specifically in the love of God, is quite a good concept, or rather rule of thumb, when determining if something is acceptable or not.
I was surprised when in last class' discussion the issue of gay marriage arose and Saint Augustine's On Christian Teachings was able to be applied to it. Usually you hear that marriage is only a union between a man and a woman, but with Saint Augustine's teachings in mind, gay marriage is acceptable because of the love that is there and also perhaps the love of God is there too. Also, in last class' discussion the whole idea about being polygamous was justified with Saint Augustine's On Christian Teachings. It was because of the reason of reproduction that polygamy was justified. I really like how such versatility has arrived because of Saint Augustine. Such versatility has also helped with interpretations of the Psalms that we just got done looking at.