Religion: a survival mechanism?

quote:

---

Anything dealing with death is likely to have only come about long after things dealing with nature. Death, being so common, would likely have not garnered even a second thought.

---

I tend to agree. I don't think ancient man had a problem with death. Even the OT doesn't touch on a need for eternal life. It appears to have developed after the exile.

---

"The average man does not know what to do with this life, yet wants another one which lasts forever." --Anatole France

Isn’t one of the consequences of the fall of Man from paradise, that he has lost his immortality? The people who handed down this parable must have had thoughts about the end of their lives, or they wouldn’t have come up with this idea.A thinking mind is capable of ‘producing’ future. I think it is inevitable for a thinking mind to hit upon the idea of its own death. I imagine it must be a horrendous moment for a mind that has become used to producing plausible short-time futures, when it suddenly realises it hasn’t the first idea of what that ultimate future, death, is going to be like.

---

We are all atheists about most of the gods that humanity has ever believed in. Some of us just go one god further. - Richard Dawkins

Well, the idea of immortality was in there -- but it was in the tree of life.
Of course, it seems the idea of omnipotence wasn't in there. God was afraid that Man would eat of the tree of life, implying that he could not reverse its effects.Anyway, why are we going from 'the emergence of thought' to a written myth? I mean, there's like a couple hundred thousand years in between. I see you're not familiar with animism.

I didn’t bring it up, Purpledawn did:

quote:

---

I don't think ancient man had a problem with death. Even the OT doesn't touch on a need for eternal life.

---

I was talking about ancient man in general, as in ‘cave people’. That’s a bold statement. Could you please explain?

---

We are all atheists about most of the gods that humanity has ever believed in. Some of us just go one god further. - Richard Dawkins

quote:

---

Isn’t one of the consequences of the fall of Man from paradise, that he has lost his immortality?

---

The story of the fall of man that we possess in the Bible today is believed to be written down during the time of the two kingdoms. The J & E stories. The stories were then merged together sometime after the distruction of Israel.If we remember that oral stories change as the culture changes, then we realize that the author has written the story with his culture in mind. If you look at some of the Jewish legends written down by others, you see various renditions of the story. This excerpt also shows where the NT got the notion that one of the Lord's days equals a thousand years. In another version Adam gave up 70 of his years for his descendants.Today we assume that man lost immortality, but did he really? Our story is rather crytic, it can be argued both ways, which I think someone is in another thread. IMO, it doesn't imply immortality.

quote:

---

The people who handed down this parable must have had thoughts about the end of their lives, or they wouldn’t have come up with this idea.

---

Were they contemplating the end of their lives or explaining their life span? We know that all living things don't have the same life span. Maybe they were simply explaining why ours is the length it is. Hard to say what their actual thoughts were behind the story.This is the problem that arises when stories are not updated so that the integrity of the moral is retained as the culture changes. The Bible is stuck in time.

---

"The average man does not know what to do with this life, yet wants another one which lasts forever." --Anatole France

Are you suggesting that the death was a spiritual one only? That even before the Fall, humans would quite naturally die a physical death? You are right in that this is controversial and can be argued from differing worldviews. Being a Believer, I think that the striking difference between A&E and the rest of the animals was that humans alone were the first species to communicate with God. I also believe that it was God who initiated the conversation. Some would argue that the way that humans have behaved over the years, Dolphins should be the spokesman for the planet, rather than humans.

God was afraid??? As if He did not foreknow these developments???

As depicted in the Genesis myths, yup. It was real fear and surprise.

---

Aslan is not a Tame Lion

This brings up a point. I realize that my theory cannot be verified objectively, but I must point out that much of Christian Belief is unwritten and is interpreted and agreed upon among believers. One example is the origin of Satan. Milton tapped into a common belief...he did not invent it for his story. Was Genesis written by unbelievers or believers...now THAT is the question!

in the thread I suggest we continue, if there is still is need, as para has moved this particular thread on, was
all about BM threadwhere I noted at more;

quote:

---

this was done by a great but forgotten Englishman: William Kingdom Clifford, in 1875.
Change font
the word purpose has been used to which it is, perhaps, worth while to call attention. Adaptation of means to an end may be provided in two ways that we ar present know of: by processes of natural selection, and by the agency of an intelligence in which an image or idea of the end preceeded the use of the means. In both cases the existence of the adaptation is accounted for by the necessity or utility of the end. It seems to me convenient to use the word purpose as meaning generally the end to which certain means

---

from the logos of Gavin De Beer who went on to say the all was done with the limiting teleology to final causes and defining "teleonomics" when "blind chance" is in the community. Mayr went on to do some writing noticing word "teleomatics" and linking it to the notion of genomes'expressed as related to "programs" and thought the one long argument of evolution was made at length in part by dividing teleology into teleonomics, teleomatics, adapted systems, and cosmic teleology but this instead commits your fallcy should a transcendental analytic exist. Anyway, creationism is on the OTHER SIDE of such supposed and though while it is great for you not to care about the creation etc this is not possible should it be truely true that Mayr's side of the issue is only for the birds while THERE WAS NO OBJECTION to the phrase I noted, again at
all about BM thread.I will provide more quotes from Mayr and De Beer if you would like more documentation.The very intersting thing that happened when I went to court was that the Master heard the plaintiffs go on and on with their case WITHOUT Objection. In truth US Law did not recognize that there already was one, nor did case law and not even the psychiatrists that saw the case knew of its existence- namely to the objection of "FINAL" cause. In fact is only the modern revival of creationism that displays this objection clearly.Thus the idea of religion as a survival must survive something like this and yet it would be silly or niave should the evo psyche say not register the objection in the philsophy of final causes which is more like sophism if i was to guess outside the subject of this thread.It is not me that has the "other" hidden view of the evidence. All that was created by the elite biologists. My work looks more like a mistake than the correct visibility. It is not, but that's just me. Feel Free to do all the same you have in response to me over in this other thread. I have no probs with that. I wont be continuing in this thread if your response is only riding up parts unknown but perhaps to you and me.A meme able to operate directionally would be less a meme to me.This message has been edited by Brad McFall, 03-08-2005 08:49 AM

Is there a real difference? A difference that matters?I said: [They] must have had thoughts about the end of their lives, and I was deliberate in describing it in such general terms. Whether they were thinking about the end of their lives, or about the how and why of their lifespan, in the end, it comes down to their contemplating the transition of life to what comes after life. A certain preoccupation with death is what lies behind it all, I think. It comes with the territory.This message has been edited by Parasomnium, 07 March 2005 18:21 AM

---

We are all atheists about most of the gods that humanity has ever believed in. Some of us just go one god further. - Richard Dawkins

quote:

---

Are you suggesting that the death was a spiritual one only?

---

Not at all.

quote:

---

That even before the Fall, humans would quite naturally die a physical death?

---

The Jewish legends suggest that Adam had an alloted time. I'm suggesting that this aspect of the story may be explaining why humans live as long as they do, as opposed to, what happens after death or the loss of immortality.

---

"The average man does not know what to do with this life, yet wants another one which lasts forever." --Anatole France

quote:

---

A certain preoccupation with death is what lies behind it all, I think. It comes with the territory.

---

Personally, I see a difference. Understanding that death is a part of life and that all things die, IMO, doesn't necessarily breed a preoccupation with or fear of death.Christians, OTOH, have a preoccupation with eternal life. They feel that death is something to be saved from instead of a logical end to life.From what I've read of ancient religions, they were very life based in the beginning. Thanking gods or spirits for a good hunt, good harvest, rain, etc.I don't see religion as a survival mechanism. I view it as something that evolved out of rituals?

---

"The average man does not know what to do with this life, yet wants another one which lasts forever." --Anatole France

I can't see how the drugs provided means for you to be outside of yourself. Sorry if I misunderstood something, but if you can, try to explain what you mean to me. (posted this in school!)

---

The subtlety of nature is far beyond that of sense or of the understanding; so that the specious meditations, speculations, and theories of mankind are but a kind of insanity, only there is no one to stand by and observe it.
-Francis Bacon "Novum Organum"

Sure, Prophex! I want to answer you and also try and keep my personal answer to you within the framework of this topic. At EvC, I often wing it with off the cuff responses to various questions posted by the many members! I mean, why are we here?What is the purpose of our conversations if not to entertain, enlighten, inform, and sometimes annoy each other? I go deeper with some of the EvC members whom I sense are really trying to learn something (Like you and Porcelain) vs just trying to verbally joust with me for the sake of ego!What does the effect of drugs have to do with religion? Well, to begin with, a cause such as "getting high" is sometimes an option, a survival mechanism and even a belief that some troubled or naive youth(like I was) and adults embrace.Some may even argue that a true religious or spiritual epiphany such as the born-again experience that Christians have is nothing more than another chemically induced crutch and endless synapse stimulating loop that humans adapt in order to cope. I do not believe this, but others do.In my earlier response to you, I pointed out that I believed that my early drug experiences were a form of spiritual warfare. I just did not know it at the time. I hope that you and Chris stay away from that stuff, but you may know some friends that are caught up in it.Indeed, from the viewpoint of a parent, is it any worse for your teenager to be hooked on religion (in the framework of a manipulative and controlling church) or on Marijuana? To me, Jesus is not like a drug. He is the source of life, and there is nothing wrong with being hooked on a source...is there?Some would say that nobody wants to be hooked on anything! Well..what about oxygen. Does anyone object to being hooked on that? To get back to answering your question, I was obviously never outside of myself. This is basically impossible, although some shamans claim to practice astral projection. I am skeptical as to what it is that they are REALLY going through.There used to be a humerous quote that said that "Reality is for people who can't handle drugs." The other day, I counseled a young man who had just come off of a methamphetamine binge. He was twitching, he was thin, and he was confused. He was faced with handling both a withdrawl from drugs and dealing with reality that if he wanted to change, he needed to lose his life in order to find it.I did not "preach" to him, but I was and am there for him if he needs anything.Survival is about knowing when to fight and when to surrender.This message has been edited by Phatboy, 03-08-2005 13:30 AM