Content Analysis of the works of religious discourse written in the process of the Islamic Revolution based on the theory of James Paul Gee

 The main goal of this article is to analyze the content of religious discourse works using the method of James Paul Gee’s discourse analysis theory. Religious discourse inspired by effective works and books was an attempt to attract people in the process of Islamic revolution. In this regard, the religious front took advantage of books such as Guardianship Of The Islamic Jurist: Islamic Government by Imam Khomeini (RA), Islamic Movements Of The Last Hundred Years by Morteza Motahari, Victorious Fighter In Ashura by Mohammad Hossein Beheshti, From Freedom To Martyrdom by Seyyed Mahmoud Taleghani, Immortal Martyr by Nematullah Salehi Najafabadi, The Path Taken by Mehdi Bazargan and Yes, Brother! It Was Like That by Ali Shariati.  In this article, authors seek to answer the question “how is the content analysis of the works of religious discourse in the process of the Islamic revolution based on the theory of James Paul Gee?” The religious discourse in the process of the Islamic Revolution is divided into two sub-discourses of revivalist thinkers (Noandishan e Mojaded e din) and modern thinkers (Noandishan e Motajaded e din). The method used in this article is the method of discourse analysis with the help of the discourse analysis theory proposed by James Paul Gee that is one of the most effective and specialized theories in describing the structure of a text and obtaining its linguistic elements and the relationship between elements. The findings of the research show that according to the seven components of James Paul Gee theory, the two sub-discourses are similar regarding life situation of Muslims, perception of Islam, lack of Muslims attention to Islam, Islam as a complete religion, religious identity of Iranians, the role of colonialism, religious concepts of value, dynamic jurisprudence, taking advantage of Ashura, returning to the self, drawing the ideal situation, supporting the oppressed and in political unity. On the other hand, the two sub-discourses differ in the pathology of society's problems, Iranology, nodal point, supporting or not supporting Pahlavi, explaining traditional religion, accepting new sciences and techniques, how to inform the audience, political matters, governance, the basis of legitimacy, reference groups, consecration, adherence to tradition, and  the cause of decline.