Did you know that there are 40,000 religions that have been introduced since the death of Jesus? 40,000 different ways to serve one God

Sometimes i wonder why Religion is on earth today and why people still value Religion. Please am not here to bring up a stupid thread, but am someone who is searching for the truth. Before i write on, I see Religion as the best kept secret on earth today, Most organized crime of all time and a big destruction to humanity.

Ever since the dawn of mankind, around 40,000 years ago, when God revealed the possiblity of his existence to mankind by giving humans a powerful imagination, people have wondered about their origins. Where did we come from? Who created us? Over the centuries, to answer these very basic questions, our storytellers have invented many myths, stories and dogmas. Religions are simply the outgrowth of these ancient myths and dogmas handed down from generation to generation and formalized into faiths, rituals and traditions.

For one why would GOD let innocent people die all around the world yet people claim GOD can preform miracles, well for one why would GOD choose to preform those "Miracles" on a select few people, aren't children in GAZA deserving of these so called miracles? People may say GOD can not interfere with free will, but the rockets which killed the children were not meant for these children, meaning free will was an non issue in this case. So why would GOD ignore these children and not save them from being killed, the most logical answer would be because,

"Religion is primarily a search for security and not a search for truth. Religion is what we so often use to bank the fires of our anxiety. That is why religion tends toward becoming excessive, neurotic, controlling and even evil. That is why a religious government is always a cruel government. People need to understand that questioning and doubting are healthy, human activities to be encouraged not to be feared."

What is Hell or Heaven, how are we sure they exist?
On what physical and spiritual conditions were the men who wrote the Bible and other religious book? Yes God created us, Why does He allow his people to suffer. Why does he allow bad things to happen to good people and vice versa?

I have been studying and reading so many historical books on when, what and how religion came about. I see religion as MAN-MADE, created by people who seeked power so they can rule the whole world in the name of GOD. nairalanders, have you guys read about when Rome ruled the world in the name of Religion?

Did we created religion or religion created us? yes this is a question for so many Africans especially Nigerians. I see people bow and worship top pastors in Nigeria. Pastors are meant to be humanitarians. To feed and help the needy through offerings from church. But they fly Jets, Drive luxury cars and move around on convoys and body guards. According to Nigerian constitution, Church is a public place, but why do pastors register church properties and offerings in their own names. I see highly organized crime here. Today's men of God speak with deception and false identities. They speak like scholars when they are not.

Talking about Religion crisis is not new in Nigeria and the world at large. Religion can be a very dangerous thing.

Lets be skeptical - be careful which religious beliefs, myths and dogmas you follow. You can either choose to believe these stories or not. Just remember they are all put forth by human storytellers. Religions are based on faith and do have a definite place in our society for moral guidance, marriage rituals and burial services, etc. - but never take religion too literally - there is no proof of physical evidence that any of these myths are true.
now my question, is it possible to believe in God without Religion

I believe in God, but only God of love, mercy, happiness, gift, forgiveness, honesty and many more good attibutes of human kind. You misplaced your wallet at a mall and a good fellow have it back for you, because of the love of God. People tend to do good all because of the love of God. I forgive you because its God's like. I see people call on God's name secretly when going for interviews. Yes there is God,

But why Religion, why this deceptive man made cult?

now my question, is it possible to believe in God without Religion

The answer is almost certainly yes.

Think about it. Which came first? The idea of God or the idea of religion? The idea of God must have come first and then the religion formed around it.

So how would the idea of God come about? In all probability it was man trying to explain the mysteries surrounding him. For example, a caveman saw a lightning bolt strike a tree. He has no concept of electricity or weather systems. All he sees is a massive, awe-inspiring flash of devastation. He then looks for an explanation and finding one not forth-coming attributes it to a god. God was literally the answer to the unanswerable. The religions then formed around Him to flesh out the story, to give him human traits and personalities and a purpose.

The problem occurs when we find answers for ourselves - for example, things like evolution theory.
Some people then refuse to accept those answers whatever the evidence and cling onto outmoded ideas. In cases such as these, religion becomes a hindrance. In the meantime, God moves on.

Bastage:

The answer is almost certainly yes.


The problem occurs when we find answers for ourselves - for example, things like evolution theory.
Some people then refuse to accept those answers whatever the evidence and cling onto outmoded ideas. In cases such as these, religion becomes a hindrance. In the meantime, God moves on.

Nice one

Why would anyone seek an explanation that was outside or his experience. For instance if I can make sparks by smashing two flintstones against each other and then I see a flash in the sky, am I not more likely to think that perhaps there were giant invisible flintstones in the sky. That just seems more obvious than concocting a god.

I think that belief in God involves a lot more than you are allowing for, Bastage.

Why would anyone seek an explanation that was outside or his experience.

It's human nature. In the example given, if you were to imagine two big flint stones, you would have to give them the properties of a flint stone. Therefore they wouldn't be able to float in the sky. Something would have to be holding them. Invisibility would also be a property that you would need an explanation for. We only have to look back through our history to see how the unanswerable is attributed to the gods.
Perhaps the flint stones idea would have come first, but once it was analysed it would have been found wanting and an alternative explanation would have been needed. As one would not be available, attributing it to God is a quite plausible explanation.

Just as an aside, take a look at the Norse God Thor. He was a giant who hurled lightning bolts. An ancient explanation for lighting? Answering the unanswerable?

I think that belief in God involves a lot more than you are allowing for, Bastage.

Agreed. But I am talking about how belief began. I also take into account man's sense of identity - wanting to believe that there is more than he can see. A need to believe that he is worth something. I believe that this idea would have been formed after the idea of God had been created though.

But when we look closer it would seem that man was terribly uninventive with creation of Gods, don't you think.  So the norse people came up with a hammer wielding Thor that caused lightning, the Yoruba came up with a hammer wielding Sango that caused lightning, the Greeks came up with a hammer wielding Zeus that caused lightning.  Goodness gracious me, everywhere you go all cultures come up with the same (give or take a few traits) diety that caused lightning.  In Dahomey it is Khevioso, in Igbo land it is Amadioha.  Why this lack of inventiveness?  Have you ever known human beings to be so uncreative?

ps. I don't think Invisible flintstones suspended in the sky are less believable than invisible Personalities suspended in the sky.

@post
the truth is that all religions fail to answer all questions that we as humans want to know about our reality and our role in the scheme of things. we don't even know why we exist. but we are certain there is a creator. Some religions were created by men granted but God did reveal himself to our ancestors and some religions were started based on this revelation. It is quite possible that God did not even start any religion but men did in their awe of his supreme powers.

But when we look closer it would seem that man was terribly uninventive with creation of Gods, don't you think.

Some of that may have been due to migration patterns and taking ideas from other cultures. But if not, maybe look at it another way?
Instead of being uninventive, it shows that humanity has a common urge to explain the unexplainable. The idea of a god being behind these occurences was such a strong one that it was able to gain such a strong following that it then gave birth to religions.

I don't think Invisible flintstones suspended in the sky are less believable than invisible Personalities suspended in the sky.

Neither do I, but it was a pretty common idea throughout ancient religions. But a moot point in this instance if we're talking about the beginnings. As I've said, the idea of the god would have come first. The personality would have come later as the religion was formed. Regarding that evolution: we can see that in action as religion evolved - the gods ceased living in the skies and took to the realms of the heavens.

Okay, but why the hammer? Why should a thunder god almost always wield a hammer? If it was from exchange of ideas and migration then why can we not see similar patterns in, say, technologies, or other cultural artifacts?
The Norse were seafaring people, the Greeks were sea faring people, if they had contact with the Yoruba then how come the yoruba didn't build boats that could travel on the high seas too. Okay, that's just one technology. How come the musical instruments that they used are so different from each other?
It is interesting that the one thing that most shows the commonality of all the human race is in fact religious forms and the depiction of the dieties and myths.

I can only guess at the hammer. Perhaps the sparks that are caused when a hammer hits an object and the loud noise?
Perhaps this is the easiest thing to associate with a thunder god once he has the personality attributed to him? Bear in mind that the hammer would have been one of the first and most important tools to early civilisations.

In the case of Thor, his hammer was also depicted as an axe or club. Depictions of power just as thunder and lightning are powerful?

Bros, you're gonna have to come up with something more compelling than that. I use hammer as the closest thing to describe it. It's not really a hammer. In yoruba it's called Ose Sango. Ose is not a hammer strictly speaking. it's a staff with a double headed part at the end.
http://www.flickr.com/photos/avmobley/3063851816/
Thor's hammer is called the mjollnir. Again not strictly a hammer or axe.
http://www.brentberryarts.com/1822b5580.jpg

http://www.mlahanas.de/Greeks/LX/Labrys.html

If mythology travels so easily between cultures, why not technologies?

If mythology travels so easily between cultures, why not technologies?

There's evidence that it does. What about pyramids? The plough?

But yet another thing to remember is that religions are based on older religions. An idea of God was probably one of the first things that mankind came up with, closely followed by religion. Is it possible that these attributes (such as the hammer) were in there at the beginnings of the first religions in the same localised area. Then as mankind spread across the face of the planet, he took those ideas with him and placed them in the later religions?

Let's say the first men to believe in god create a religion with a thunder god who wields a hammer. As their ancestors migrate to new areas, they take the idea of the thunder god and the hammer with them. Although we see what we think are independent occurences of thunder gods with hammers, could they all be related to that first one?

Technologies would be a little more difficult to transfer but say that the same thing happened with pyramids? The earliest men created pyramids (logical because it's the easiest and sturdiest thing to build). As they migrated to their new homes, those pyramids went with them.
Further technology would not travel so well as it wasn't there at the beginning. But it could travel in certain places - Thor Heyerdaal proved that the ancient people were able to traverse great distances.

The idea of this transference is not a new one. It is known as "diffusion". Prior to that, the over-riding thought was that mankind was isolationist. This doesn't seem to be borne out by the evidence though. The way that the big religions of today have spread around the planet shows that isolationism is a dead theory.

Pastor AIO:

Okay, but why the hammer? Why should a thunder god almost always wield a hammer? If it was from exchange of ideas and migration then why can we not see similar patterns in, say, technologies, or other cultural artifacts?
The Norse were seafaring people, the Greeks were sea faring people, if they had contact with the Yoruba then how come the yoruba didn't build boats that could travel on the high seas too. Okay, that's just one technology. How come the musical instruments that they used are so different from each other?

To add to Bastage's response, there really might be a simpler reason for the similarities between Mjolnir and Sango's thingy in the two different cultures: sparks fly when a hammer like object is struck against a hard surface. It is not inconceivable that the two cultures would have noticed that and unconsciously created deities with heavy objects to cause heavenly sparks, that is, lightning. It's actually not disimilar from the example of flints in your earlier post.

By the way, that is not to say syncretism didn't happen.

It is interesting that the one thing that most shows the commonality of all the human race is in fact religious forms and the depiction of the dieties and myths.

Archetypes, perhaps?

Pyramid is not a technology.(not sure what it was used for if it had uses). The technology via which pyramids were built are not known to us today. Perhaps they were built the same way in different cultures. Perhaps not.

However with the plough, you've got me stumped. But I supposed I could say that the simplicity of the plough makes it pretty much like the basket which can be found all over the world too. Or weaving cloth (apart from certain aborigine tribes).

Sparks fly when a hammer like object is struck against a hard surface. It is not inconceivable that the two cultures would have noticed that and unconsciously created deities with heavy objects to cause heavenly sparks, that is, lightning.

I don't think you saw my post but I wrote earlier:

Perhaps the sparks that are caused when a hammer hits an object and the loud noise?
Perhaps this is the easiest thing to associate with a thunder god once he has the personality attributed to him?

@ PastorAIO. Two people a couple of hours apart and already we see a common idea. Now put thousands of people together and give them centuries to work on it. The chances are that they could easily have come up with the idea.

Bastage:


@ PastorAIO. Two people a couple of hours apart and already we see a common idea. Now put thousands of people together and give them centuries to work on it. T[b]he chances are that they could easily have come up with the idea.[/b]

. . . amongst others. If two people can come up with an idea in 2 hours, then thousands of people given centuries ought to be able to come up with more ideas. Why the resilience of a few certain ideas across cultural boundaries?
Richard Dawkins has this dumb concept he calls Memes, obviously created to further attack religion.

A meme (pronounced /miːm/ - like theme) is a unit or element of cultural ideas, symbols or practices; such units or elements transmit from one mind to another through speech, gestures, rituals, or other imitable phenomena. The etymology of the term relates to the Greek word mimema for mimic.[1] Memes act as cultural analogues to genes in that they self-replicate and respond to selective pressures.

From here:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Meme

But the thing is that if Religious ideas are so backward and disadvantageous to man then why is it that religious memes outlive and spread further than technological memes. Surely selective pressures would ensure that technological memes will serve their hosts better than religious ones and thus spread and survive better.

Me, I'm of the opinion that if there is a word (say, 'Valley') in many different languages around the world then it is more likely that it is due to the fact that there are things called valleys all over the world and quite independently the different cultures can identify and name them.
In other words there are various ways in which ideas can arrive in a culture. Via communication with other cultures, or via direct experiential evidence. And of course, pure invention. Yet I think that Memes based on pure invention are less likely to survive.
personally I am of the opinion that these religious forms arose because people had experience of them.

smile4kenn:


now my question, is it possible to believe in God without Religion

But why Religion, why this deceptive man made cult?

The definition of Religion that I favour is that it is the practice of bonding together two separated things. Re- Ligere is Latin 'to Bind back'. Subsequent to experiencing God Man would have experienced a separation from God that left a gaping hole of unfulfilment. The attempt to bridge this abyss separating him from the divine (the attempt at atonement) is what we call religion. It is right at the center of all human endeavour throughout all the ages in every continent. But that is before it becomes recognised as a useful tool for controlling multitudes.

This how the bible defines religion

James 1:27:
27 Pure and genuine religion in the sight of God the Father means caring for orphans and widows in their distress and refusing to let the world corrupt you.

It is our religious leaders today that have changed the concept of religion.

KunleOshob:

This how the bible defines religion

James 1:27:
27 Pure and genuine religion in the sight of God the Father means caring for orphans and widows in their distress and refusing to let the world corrupt you.

It is our religious leaders today that have changed the concept of religion.

True words. But what is the corruption spoken about that we must guard against.

I consider the corruption of the world that which drives the wedge between God and humans in the first place.

Pastor AIO:

True words. But what is the corruption spoken about that we must guard against.

I consider corruption to be the ways of man which is contrary to the will of God. however this is a very broad definition.

KunleOshob:

I consider corruption to be the ways of man which is contrary to the will of God. however this is a very broad definition.

It is a broad definition but it is an accurate definition. Let us look closer at it. It postulates that there is a way to be that is according to the will of God. Let's call this way Righteousness. In other words doing the Right thing.

Then there are many other ways that are contrary to Righteousness. I believe that those contrary ways are entered into via following the impulses of the flesh rather than the impulses of the spirit. I believe that at every point and at every decision that a man makes he is drawn by these two contrary impulses and he has to choose one. Most of the time we go with the flesh. The impulses of the flesh seem more compelling and actually seem to make more sense at the time. The ways of the spirit can seem odd, illogical even and it takes trust and experience to learn to trust it.

I am of the opinion that these religious forms arose because people had experience of them.

By diffusion?
It's the easiest and most logical way to explain it and would be confirmed by more recent evidence.

But the thing is that if Religious ideas are so backward and disadvantageous to man then why is it that religious memes outlive and spread further than technological memes.

I would say that it's only within the last few centuries that religious ideas may have become disadvantageous. Prior to that they had huge advantages. Take the Hebrews of the Old Testament as an example - without their religion to tie them together, they would have probably just been like any other nomadic tribe. The belief in the common god with all his rituals and symbols was what held them together and drove them on. The same with the Egyptians, the Sumerians, early Christianity and Islam, etc.
All of those ideas are held onto and drive the religion forwards so that it becomes strong. And historically, when the religion becomes strong, the nations believing in it become strong. Prior to the religion, there may not even have been a nation!!!

In my view, it only became disadvantageous once the religions had become powerful. It took them from a state of growing to a state of trying to overwhelm everything in their path. Today, the means overwhleming the other religions. As they have all taken the same path and have been strengthened by the same bonds, it's only natural that they come into conflict.

Bastage:

By diffusion?
It's the easiest and most logical way to explain it and would be confirmed by more recent evidence.

What evidence? And what exactly do you mean by diffusion? Is that the same as communication?

Bastage:

I would say that it's only within the last few centuries that religious ideas may have become disadvantageous. Prior to that they had huge advantages. Take the Hebrews of the Old Testament as an example - without their religion to tie them together, they would have probably just been like any other nomadic tribe. The belief in the common god with all his rituals and symbols was what held them together and drove them on. The same with the Egyptians, the Sumerians, early Christianity and Islam, etc.
All of those ideas are held onto and drive the religion forwards so that it becomes strong. And historically, when the religion becomes strong, the nations believing in it become strong. Prior to the religion, there may not even have been a nation!!!

From a purely evolutionary naturalistic point of view there is absolutely no reason why religious ideas should better survive technological ideas whether in recent times or in ancient times.

Religion is not necessary to bring people together. Humans are social animals and come together like other social animals. Monkeys don't need a religion to band together and a Pride of Lions are not united by any religion either. That is just what certain species do.

It was not only the hebrews that had religion. All the other nomadic tribes had their own religions too.

I still believe that religion survives precisely because, far from being a mere invention of man's imagination, it is in fact a technology in itself. A technology for dealing with the spiritual world.

I think it all boils down to definitions here. What is God and What is religion ?
I think pastor's syntax of God and religion is wanting. If you say man had to first experience being separated from God first before experiencing God, how can one feel separated from something you do not know?
Furthermore, if man came up with the concept it would be very important to say what the attributes of God was. For example if the yoruba people came up with the concept of Sango, they had to also decide if the lightening bolts came when he was angry and that was very plausible, so they decide to kill 2 goats to make sango happy, in this case they have already developed a religion. The attributes of the God determined whether he was to be served or revered or even respected that in itself to me is practicing religion.
So to me there really is no separating the two, a God almost always comes with a religion.
Cheers.

To further iterate on why religion has survived this long.
Religion springs from man not being able to answer some questions the fundamental of which includes, the origin of our existence and the purpose of our existence.
Our brains process far more than that of a pride of lions or a pack of wolves and thus it is only logical that we would seek for more explanations than them, and when we cannot come up with these answers we find ourselves in the same position as our ancestors thousands of years ago looking for answers to the unknown and then we settle for the path of least resistance( cognitive dissonance) which is that a God must gave been responsible.

What evidence?  And what exactly do you mean by diffusion?  Is that the same as communication?

Communication, migration, competition for space. General contact between people of different religions. Aspects of those religions may then be absorbed by one or both.
Evidence we have is contained within most of the big religions of their absorbing ideas from other belief systems - ie: Judaism absorbing Babylonian religion, Christianity absorbing Judaism, paganism, Mithraism, etc., Islam absorbing Judaism, Buddhism absorbing Hindusim.
We can see the interplay and diffusion between these religions by the way that they have adapted ideas from others.

Religion is not necessary to bring people together.  Humans are social animals and come together like other social animals.  Monkeys don't need a religion to band together and a Pride of Lions are not united by any religion either. That is just what certain species do.

Agreed. But there is nothing that will bind those people together more than a shared belief in religion. For an extreme example to illustrate this, look at how religious cults operate.

It was not only the hebrews that had religion.  All the other nomadic tribes had their own religions too.

True. But their religions weren't powerful enough to make the conversions needed for them to grow. In the early days, the gods were gods of war. Their followers had the convictions and the strength of belief in those gods to be able to spread their religions. Take a look at the spread of Judaism and Islam - it was made by conquest. Even Christianity, had to create a "military" god, to spread itself and hold the land that it had taken.
Powerful gods meants powerful followers.

I still believe that religion survives precisely because, far from being a mere invention of man's imagination, it is in fact a technology in itself.  A technology for dealing with the spiritual world.

I don't know that I would class it as a technology. I see it as more of a tool. But that said, I am a theist and I do profess to be a Christian so I see it as quite a necessary tool. But like all tools, I also believe that it should be adapted for specific times and for specific jobs if need be (as long as it's underlying truth remains pure). Without that ability to evolve, it's a hindrance and not an aid. Hence my problem with dogma.

Chrisbenogor:

I think pastor's syntax of God and religion is wanting. If you say man had to first experience being separated from God first before experiencing God, how can one feel separated from something you do not know?. .      

I never said that you first have to experience separation from God before you experience God. (subsequent means coming after not before)

Yet the separation from God will leave you with a sense of Want.

You don't have to have a defined concept of Food before you can feel hungry.  If the connection between food and hunger is not instinctive for you then definately when you start to experience hunger and you think about it you will conclude that you didn't seem to suffer the pangs after you'd have a large dinner so therefore there is a connection between eating dinner and avoiding pangs of hunger.

Bastage:

Communication, migration, competition for space. General contact between people of different religions. Aspects of those religions may then be absorbed by one or both.
Evidence we have is contained within most of the big religions of their absorbing ideas from other belief systems - ie: Judaism absorbing Babylonian religion, Christianity absorbing Judaism, paganism, Mithraism, etc., Islam absorbing Judaism, Buddhism absorbing Hindusim.
We can see the interplay and diffusion between these religions by the way that they have adapted ideas from others.

Yet that doesn't explain why certain aspects survive and others don't. Yes ideas have always flowed between peoples but I also believe that ideas can be arrived at separately by different peoples without contact.

Bastage:


True. But their religions weren't powerful enough to make the conversions needed for them to grow. In the early days, the gods were gods of war. Their followers had the convictions and the strength of belief in those gods to be able to spread their religions. Take a look at the spread of Judaism and Islam - it was made by conquest. Even Christianity, had to create a "military" god, to spread itself and hold the land that it had taken.
Powerful gods meants powerful followers.

I think the sheer fact that the bible is full of stories of the hebrews turning to the religion of their neighbours is testament to the power and allure of those neighbouring religions.
Powerful Gods are also Gods that make a connection with the inner life and culture of people.

Bastage:

I don't know that I would class it as a technology. I see it as more of a tool. But that said, I am a theist and I do profess to be a Christian so I see it as quite a necessary tool. But like all tools, I also believe that it should be adapted for specific times and for specific jobs if need be (as long as it's underlying truth remains pure). Without that ability to evolve, it's a hindrance and not an aid. Hence my problem with dogma.

I meant technology in the sense of a tool, a methodology and a manner of doing things. I totally agreed with you that it needs to be adapted for specific times for there is no point pouring new wine into old skins.

Yet that doesn't explain why certain aspects survive and others don't.

Which aspects?
Maybe give some examples and we can examine them?

Yes ideas have always flowed between peoples but I also believe that ideas can be arrived at separately by different peoples without contact.

I don't dispute that. But I also believe that to some degree, those ideas arose because they were the simplest and most adequate for the job in hand. If we return to Thor, what tool would someone logically give a thunder god back then?

I think the sheer fact that the bible is full of stories of the hebrews turning to the religion of their neighbours is testament to the power and allure of those neighbouring religions.

Again, I don't disagree. But the fact remains that those religions died out whilst Judaism became stronger. They simply weren't as powerful. Sure, people converted back and forth but, in the end, the more powerful won.
If we take a look at one of those religions - Baal worship - we can even see where the Hebrews absorbed it and took it for themselves.


Regarding diffusion, you may find this link and a bit of further reading on the subject interesting:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Diffusion_(anthropology)

# Heliocentric diffusionism -- the theory that all cultures originated from one culture. (see Grafton Elliot Smith)
# Culture circles diffusionism (Kulturkreise) -- the theory that cultures originated from a small number of cultures.
# Evolutionary diffusionism -- the theory that societies are influenced by others and that all humans share psychological traits that make them equally likely to innovate, resulting in development of similar innovations in isolation.

@poster.
Good topic.
Many questions, only GOD has the answers.

Bastage:

I don't think you saw my post but I wrote earlier:

Lol. I did miss it - my eyes aren't what they used to be.