The subfield of comparative
religions can be exciting because the beliefs, values, symbols, myths, and
rituals can introduce a person to such different ideas that the rush of making
a discovery can even be felt. Jaroslav Pelikan, a twentieth-century historian
of Christianity, once said that he had learned so many languages just so he
could have access to ideas that were not as of yet available in English. Such
ideas could be very different than the historian’s extant knowledge. It is
perhaps like the early European explorers in America finding plants and
cultures that were so unlike those of Europe because the distance had not
allowed for cross-pollination and the influence of cultural exchanges. I
contend that one reason why religions can be very difficult to compare is that
elements of them in a given topic can be so different in kind as to not be
comparable. Religions may even be based on variables that cannot be directly
compared because they are so different in kind. The related paradigms also may
not be comparable. Therefore, it may be that religious comparison is more
fitting to comparing sects (e.g., denominations) within a given religion. Even
when continuity exists between an established religion and a new one in the
same context, the foundational variables may be so different in kind that they
are not comparable. I will look at cosmology (e.g., Creation), ritual (e.g.,
sacrifices) and divine attributes (e.g., truth and love) below to support my
claim.
The full essay is at "Comparing Religions."
