2. See Rudolph Otto’s Idea of the Holy, 2^nd ed., tr. By John W. Harvey (New York: 1950).

3. By agnosticism let me clarify that I do not mean that I entertain all ontological systems as possibilities. In fact, I can honestly say that I do not embrace any. Acknowledging the limitations of the human mind in grasping Reality, whatever that may be, more accurately defines my position.

4. Richard Dawkins, Unweaving the Rainbow: Science, Delusion and the Appetite for Wonder (New York: Houghton Mifflin Co., 1998), p. x.

5. From The World As I See It, 1934.

6. was fortunate enough to have Ninian Smart serve as my M.A. and Ph.D. chairperson on my graduate committee at UC Santa Barbara. His friendly smile and jovial character was very appreciated during those highly stressed times preparing papers and studying for exams.

7. See Ninan Smart’s The Religious Experience (New York: Macmillan Publishing Co., 1991).

8. For a case example see Da: The Strange Case of Franklin Jones by David Lane (Walnut: MSAC Philosophy Group, 1995).

 9. According to Ken Wilber, a noted transpersonal psychologist, tribal people fit in the prerational category as they lack a cause and effect worldview, relying mainly on magic and symbolism.

10. Passage is found in Lewis Hopfe’s Religions of the World (New York: Macmillan Publishing Co., 1991), pp. 241-42.

11. Passage is found in Religions of the World, p. 133.

12. Passage is found in Religions of the World, pp. 179-81.

13. Passage is found in Religions of the World, p. 150.

1. See Francis Crick’s The Astonishing Hypothesis: The Scientific Search for the Soul.

2. See E.B. Tylor’s Primitive Culture (published in 1871).

3. The anthropological viewpoint suggests that to understand the origin of religion one should study the evolution of the human intellect. The mindset of primal human beings is key because it marks the first stage of it. Since we cannot go back thousands of years ago to investigate early humans many anthropologists examine present day tribal people who are untouched by civilization.

4. See Sir James Frazer’s The New Golden Bough: A New Abridgment of Sir James Frazer’s Classic Work, by Theodor H. Gaster (New York: 1959).

5. Freud also made the argument that God (at least in the Western religions) was nothing but a projection of our own earthly father onto a superhuman figure. See Freud’s Future of an Illusion (New York: 1976).

6. For Freud’s view on the origin of religion see his Totem and Taboo published in 1912-1913 (the English translation appeared in 1918).

7. See Emile Durkheim’s The Elementary Forms of the Religious Life. Translated from the French by J.W. Swain (London: Allen and Unwin, 1976).

8. Paul Twitchell’s Eckankar is a case in point. For more information see David Lane’s The Making of a Spiritual Movement: The Untold Story of Paul Twitchell (Del Mar: Del Mar Press, 1983).

1. See Karl Mannheim’s article in Robin Gill’s Theology and Sociology: A Reader (London: Geoffrey Chapman, 1987).

2. See Peter Berger’s The Heretical Imperative: Contemporary Possibilities of Religious Affiliation (Garden City: Anchor Press, 1979).

3. The core of the scientific method is the utilization of occam’s razor—shaving away "unnecessary, hypothetical entities" and opting for a falsifiable and more simpler explanation.

4. See Robin Gill’s Theology and Sociology: A Reader (London: Geoffrey Chapman, 1987).

5. Ibid.

6. See Ken Wilber’s Sociable God: Toward a New Understanding of Religion .(Boulder: Shambhala, 1984).

7. See Dick Anthony’s Spiritual Choices: The Problems of Recognizing Authentic Paths to Inner Transformation (New York: Paragon House, 1987).

1. See Rodney Stark’s and William Bainbridge’s The Future of Religion: Secularization, Revival and Cult Formation (Berkeley: University of California Press, 1985).