Evolution of religious beliefs

Originally posted by Bardock42
Maybe. And maybe the next step is not to worship anything but yourself...in a sort of Randian way.

Ayn had her own problems though, and her inner clique of friends turned into a Ayn-centric cult where no one was allowed to disagree with her because they thought objective truth existed, and that she was the final authority on anything.

Personally, if I'm going to go with a selfish philosophy, it'll probably be Satanism (minus the voodoo stuff). It does away with objectivism but keeps the relative egoism.

why satanism, its just the opposite end of the religious spectrum.

Well Bardock has a little point. Satanism is just sort of a worship of yourself. It's not a belief in gods nor Satan, but only you. Not you as a god though, but that you are what is important in this life, so enjoy it...

I donno...is that what is being spoken about here? I didn't go back to the last page.

Also talking about selfishness, we all are. We are taught that it's not a good thing. Selfishness, however, it a healthy thing when it comes to who you really are. It's like the phrase: "To your own self be true." In saying this, where does what you are doing to please others subtract what it is doing to you. And is that really a good thing. Is that what you/we are meant to be doing here? IE. serving others to make them happy, or to make our own selves happy.

who the hell is bardock?

Originally posted by chickenlover98
why satanism, its just the opposite end of the religious spectrum.

Satanists generally don't believe in the actual existence of Satan. It's actually an interesting philosophy, though some of their curses/hexes/rituals/etc. get a little sketchy. But in terms of moral outlook on life, it's not unlike Ayn Rand's selfish egocentric dogma.

Both have their share of problems, and I don't endorse either one. Satanism doesn't do itself any favors by calling itself Satanism either, imo. Society can't help but be freaked out by a name like that, despite the fact that it's much more tame than people would suspect.

But there's nothing inherently wrong with being selfish, even when it manifests itself as altruism toward others. So they aren't totally despicable belief systems...just partially flawed.

...

But my comment was mostly a joke anyway. If I were a "Satanist" it would be purely for the shock value. Atheism tends to do the same thing to people, just on a far lesser degree of magnitude.

Originally posted by Bicnarok
I was wondering if religious beliefs have evolved in a negative or positive way.

People used to worship inanimate things like trees, rocks etc

Then they eventually realized it was rather silly so they decided to worship the sun, fire and other more impressive things.

Now that people know more about these things, therefore removing the awe effect, people are worshiping something they cannot even see.

Is this progress?

three things every human wonders at some point in their life -

Who created me (humans)?
Why am I here? (purpose of life)
What happens when I die?

Hence religion.

I actually think to an extent it could be argued that people amy become more "religous" in the sense that in the future reality will be harder to define. So therefore the way of the jedi and tolkeinism will become established religons.

Originally posted by chickenlover98
who the hell is bardock?

Originally posted by debbiejo
It's not "Who", it's "What."

😂 That was funny.

Originally posted by chickenlover98
who the hell is bardock?

You'll find out soon enough.....

Originally posted by Alfheim
I actually think to an extent it could be argued that people amy become more "religous" in the sense that in the future reality will be harder to define. So therefore the way of the jedi and tolkeinism will become established religons.

Doubtful, only because our methods of research and factual data available to us are much greater. Many people believe religions because they actually believe that the stuff happened that is detailed in their holy texts. They will never actually believe that, say, Gandalf lived, simply because we can prove that he didn't, and will be able to do so for the forseeable future.

Beyond that, those things would probably (rightly) be considered philosophies, and not become religious beliefs. I've actually found out a lot about the Jedi philosophies and people who practice them, and most of them believe in different religions as well. Jediism is just an addition to the way they live their life, not a superceding of their pre-established beliefs.

Originally posted by Bicnarok
Religion is also an easy way out, because lets face it what we humans know is not worth knowing in comparison to what probably is, especially when you consider the vastness of space. So a "oh God made it all problem solved, time to drink some beer and have fun" approach would seem appealing.

It's an easy way out for many people. But I don't think religion is an easy or simple thing for a lot of people who subscribe to it; whatever their version might be. There are a number of religious scholars who have dedicated their life to attempting to understand and quantify the mystery. Most religions are very complex. Unfortunately, more complex than most of the people who follow them realize. (And that's prime justification for religious leaders to take advantage of their followers.)

Originally posted by Bicnarok
I was wondering if religious beliefs have evolved in a negative or positive way.

People used to worship inanimate things like trees, rocks etc

Then they eventually realized it was rather silly so they decided to worship the sun, fire and other more impressive things.

Now that people know more about these things, therefore removing the awe effect, people are worshiping something they cannot even see.

Is this progress?

I believe worshipping a transcendant, immensley powerful being is an example in the evolutionary thought process than worshipping a rock or a man with an animal's head.

Originally posted by Quiero Mota
I believe worshipping a transcendant, immensley powerful being is an example in the evolutionary thought process than worshipping a rock or a man with an animal's head.

That only makes sense when the "transcendant immensley powerful being" doesn't act like an egotistic child.

exactly

Originally posted by SpearofDestiny
That only makes sense when the "transcendant immensley powerful being" doesn't act like an egotistic child.

Why should the nature of the "transcendent immensely powerful being" have any effect on whether the worship is an evolutionary thought process? It could be an evolutionary thought process regardless of how the attitude of the god in question changes.

I still think governments for most of civilization relied on religion so much that they were desperately obligated to explain everything according to religion. So whenever some unpredictable disaster happened, it was the fault of some superior being. Of course they couldn't say something like "the supreme being was feeling so heavenly and tranquil that he decided to end this good season with a hurricane". They had to make the god(s) seem egotistical and childish if their stories were going to fly. People picked up on it, and we see entire civilizations that believe that their gods would send earthquakes and floods and kill millions of people just to prove pointless childish things.

It makes perfect sense, especially if the "transcendent immensely powerful beings" were acting like egotistical children.