.

Dear diver dan,

.

I have the impression from your last post that we are pretty much on the same wavelength. You have touched a chord that resonates with me. We seem to be playing the same tune with a similar refrain but using slightly different words.

My only comment relates to your last paragraph :

« The need for a religion to follow, is embedded in the mammalian brain with all other natural instincts. It’s as instinctive as the need for sex and eating »

In my view, it was precisely the survival instinct that prompted primeval man to conceive of the existence of supernatural spirits (invisible gods) that animated nature and caused awesome and sometimes terrifying and destructive natural phenomena. This conception which we call religion allowed them to plead with the gods (prayer) and make offerings and sacrifices, including human sacrifices (scapegoats), to placate them and obtain their indulgence.

In other words, as they had no other way of defending themselves from severe droughts, floods, bushfires, lightning, earthquakes, volcanos, and the occasional terrifying meteorite, etc., religion was conceived as their only possible strategy for survival in which they fervently placed all their hopes and faith.

We have no way of knowing precisely when all this occurred, but it is estimated that mankind separated from our common ancestor with the chimpanzees about 7 million years ago and that anatomically modern humans appeared in Africa approximately 300,000 years ago, so let's take that as the time scale for the origin of religion.

Just how long it will continue to exist, of course, is anybody’s guess.

As you can see, diver dan, my opinion is similar to yours in so far as the origin of religion is concerned. I see it as a defence strategy developed at the behest of mankind’s survival instinct.

.

(Continued …)

.

.

(Continued …)

.

But that was, let us say, at the most 7 million years ago, and at least 300,000 years ago. We have learned quite a bit about nature and natural phenomena since then. Many (but not all) of us no longer believe in multiple gods. Many now believe in a unique, all-encompassing God. Many believe in the human sacrifice to the God of Jesus (scapegoat) as their saviour, and many others do not. Yet many others remain sceptical of the relevance of the strategy, while still others reject it completely.

7 million years later, nothing has changed so far as our survival instinct is concerned, and the existential angst of many of us remains intact. If anything has changed it is the reason for our angst. In addition to the everlasting prospect of eternal death from which none of us can escape, many of us feel menaced in our very existence for various reasons – simply because of our identity, race, colour, religion (or lack thereof), personal feud, hatred, etc.

In such cases, religion is undoubtedly a precious source of solace for those who are ready, willing, and able to believe in its tenets.

As Saul of Tarsus may be interpreted as having said :

« It’s not God or religion that saves – it’s faith alone that saves ! »

Though he did not say that precisely, it could certainly be implied from what he did say, and in fact, I believe that the statement as indicated has worked miracles in several cases according to the personal accounts of a number of individuals who had been trapped for several days under the concrete and rubble of collapsed buildings due to earthquakes.

Belief is a powerful attribute that should never be underestimated. Trump has masterfully demonstrated this ever since the 2020 US presidential election which he claims to have won. He has relentlessly hammered home the fantastic lesson that reality doesn’t matter. It’s belief in reality that matters. And it’s easier to change people’s belief than to change reality.

That strangely sounds like religion to me.

.

Dear Dan,

«I form the view that mans need for religion and it’s rituals, is as old as man himself, and he will carry this need to the end of time.»

The need for religion, yes.
For rituals? I am not that sure.

«The need for a religion to follow, is embedded in the mammalian brain with all other natural instincts. It’s as instinctive as the need for sex and eating.»

I doubt you could find the need for religion in brains. Brains are but gross physical matter which is generated by our genes for the selfish purpose of their survival - and genes have no need for religion, from their perspective they probably consider religion an unnecessary headache...

The need for rituals - maybe, but then not every ritual is religious.

You seem to be drawn with Banjo Paterson into a discussion about anthropology, which is more than fine, but has very little to do with religion. Banjo just wrote:

«In my view, it was precisely the survival instinct that prompted primeval man to conceive of the existence of supernatural spirits (invisible gods) that animated nature and caused awesome and sometimes terrifying and destructive natural phenomena.»

So far so good, it is all an anthropological phenomenon, but then he continues:

«This conception which we call religion allowed them to plead with the gods (prayer)...»

- and you would know too well that such behaviours have nothing to do with religion. Like rituals, prayer too can be used as a religious practice, or as [at least what one believes to be] a useful tool for everyday success.

The logical mistake many people make is in the deduction:
A. Fearful people pray to gods.
B. Religious people pray to God.
Therefore:
C. The religious are fearful people who pray for practical results that could alleviate their anxiety.

Well as a religious person you already know that this is not the case.

So go ahead, do enjoy your discussion of anthropology, psychology, zoology, etc., but please do not commit this mistake of considering religion to be related to any of them.

Dear Yuyutsu,

You have your own idiosyncratic definition of religion and god. Nobody else has any obligation to accept your definition.

Dear Yuyutsu,

My definitions of god and religion are:

God is an imaginary entity whose existence is believed in by superstitious people.

Religion is a relict of a pre-scientific age adopted by superstitious people.

Dear David F.,

I don't think you liked it when Nazi propaganda portrayed Jews as viruses and leprechauns.

In a similar fashion, secular society today portrays religion as some primitive, substance-less, superstitious and irrational belief; and similarly caricatures God as some silly, imaginary and impossible deity. That is an insulting mockery which hurts, so if your intention behind your definition is to hurt people, then go ahead.

It is true that the West was controlled for centuries by powerful and abusive churches which CLAIMED to represent God, fake syndicates that CLAIMED to be religious. It is understandable why Western society turned against these organisations, but in doing so they also hurt the innocent religious people who had nothing to do with the church's abuses of power.

To stop this mockery, one should at least admit that "religion" has substance, that it is real, not just a flimsy idea in some people's feverish minds. At least this is respectful, even if you still don't know exactly what that substance is. Once this is established, it is fair enough to point at particular churches (which possibly promoted such feverish flimsy ideas in order to scare their members into sumission) and claim that they fail to provide this substance, thus are unworthy to be called "a religion".

Next one may want to learn what this substance is. Should you care to ask the religious people themselves (not their corrupt churches) rather than to lay your own trip on them, they never claim that religion is meant to protect them from earthquakes, lightnings, lions and infections, but rather to protect one from their own character flaws and weaknesses, to purify their own mind and heart, to fight and overcome their internal daemons. While describing this process using their own terminology which usually (but not in Buddhism for example) includes the use of 'God', if you care to listen patiently (because studying a different terminology takes time) you will find that this process of purification is what they actually mean to be the substance of religion.