Science VS. Religion

[AxisMundi]

.....That tells us the different religions didn't arise out of a need to address questions the others weren't answering, but for some other reason.

IMHO...

We know that the earliest belief systems were Shamanic and Animistic in nature. Man lived intimately close to nature, as part of nature, so it is natural (no pun) that we would seek answers to things within Nature herself.

As Man grew in numbers nomadic family units became clans, then tribes, villages, cities, nations.

The oldest gods are almost all animal forms. As civilizations developed and grew, growing father from nature in the process and more "humancentric", we begin to see humi-form deities, gods and goddesses with both animal and human features. At the height of civilization, and removal from nature and an all but complete immersion in our human selves, we see Deities completely human in form with all the attributes, foibles, and desires of human beings.

Religion, again IMHO, not only seeks to answer such fundamental questions as who we are and why we are here, but also offers the emotional stability of parental figures, of wise Elders, etc.

leaving out the theopolitical for the moment, of course, and the inherent power religion can being to it's clergy.

 

[painted wolf]

Native faiths don't have animal gods... and tend to be monotheistic.

wa:do

 

[Azakel]

Native faiths don't have animal gods... and tend to be monotheistic.

wa:do

I think what confuse people are the Animal Spirits, or other Spirits found within the belief......for lack of a better word for an example......like 'Angels'
Please correct me if I be wrong.

 

[Jose Fly]

Because I understand what myth is.

And myth to you is......?

 

[Storm]

And myth to you is......?

At its most basic, narratives used to illustrate religious principles.

ETA: IOW, "God is omnipotent" is not myth; it's theology.

 

[painted wolf]

I think what confuse people are the Animal Spirits, or other Spirits found within the belief......for lack of a better word for an example......like 'Angels'
Please correct me if I be wrong.

Sort of...?
Spirits can be anything and have any purpose. Some represent archetypal animals, phenomena and even abstract concepts. They are much more complex than people are willing to grant "primitive" religions.

wa:do

 

[AxisMundi]

Native faiths don't have animal gods... and tend to be monotheistic.

wa:do

"Native" faiths, by which I'll assume your talking of the 1st nations, does ahve Animistic Spirits.

Egypt, Celt, Hindu, and more all exhibit cross-over deities.

 

[painted wolf]

A lot of African, Australian, Oceanic and South American spiritualitys are included.

Monotheistic... sans animal gods

wa:do

 

[AxisMundi]

A lot of African, Australian, Oceanic and South American spiritualitys are included.

Monotheistic... sans animal gods

wa:do

And how far from Nature have those people strayed?
Please re-read my post, obviously you missed a lot.

 

[painted wolf]

And how far from Nature have those people strayed?

How about the moon....

Please re-read my post, obviously you missed a lot.

not really... you are making a false connection between "level of civilization" and religious expression. Your pattern is not reflective of reality.

wa:do

 

[Mr Cheese]

No cookie for you.

I am well aware of the mysticism of the Katana, Wakasashi, and Tanto (the latter two created when a Katana broke). The Katana and Bo (long staff) are my preferred weapons outside of SCA Fencing.

You claimed that "tool making was a divine interaction", yet only show, as I thought you would, that it was the end user who applied anything approaching divine to the tool.

Cookies are waiting for you as soon as you can show proof that tool making was considered a religious affair.

you asked for an example of an ancient culture...
I mentioned one....

 

[Mr Cheese]

The "spiritual knowledge of a saint" or "mystically enlightened human being" is how religion differentiates itself from myth? How so?

The difference is the same as the difference between reading about having sex and having sex.

And how are those principles and the results they generate validated?

:sarcastic other people have them...

So who's right? And how do you tell?

We get bumper stickers with guppies on

Its not a matter of beign right... they are both maps
that lead to the territory. A map of toy land made by Hasbro
is a map of toy land made by hasbro. A map of toy land made by fisher price is a map of toyland made by fisher price. Neither are toyland, but they help you get and navigate around toyland.


Again, you're avoiding the issue. If, as you said, different religions arose mostly to address questions the others weren't addressing, we would expect to see little overlap in the questions addressed by different religions. Instead, we see the exact opposite.

In our office today it was a certain temperature. Many found it warm, some wore coats to work today, others did not. When in the office some put on spaceheaters, others were wearing tshirts.

All these people are "reacting" to the same "question" but no two have the same response.

In summary your allusion I propose is garbage....c'mon you can do better

That tells us that your assertion is wrong.

If you say so....
wake me up when you post again

You're changing the subject. The issue is as I described. Even though the Borneo people and Catholics have different approaches, there is significant overlap in the questions their religions attempt to answer.

According to what you claimed, we shouldn't see this because one of those two arose because a need to address questions the other ignored

I have a nice meal. I tell my friend that I really l;ike the salad. She likes the soup.
We have both discussed different issues, but are both discussing a meal.

:sleep:

 

[Jose Fly]

At its most basic, narratives used to illustrate religious principles.

ETA: IOW, "God is omnipotent" is not myth; it's theology.

So for you, "myth" and "religion" are synonymous?

 

[Jose Fly]

Ok Mr. Cheese. Thanks for your time.

 

[Storm]

So for you, "myth" and "religion" are synonymous?

Not at all, I thought I made that clear. I even gave an example. Myth is an aspect of most religions. Big difference.

 

[Jose Fly]

Ah, I see. Maybe I need to be more specific. When I said...

"Perhaps all religion is myth. How would you tell?"

...I meant "myth" in the sense of "fiction" or "fantasy". So, how would one tell if religion is totally made-up fiction?

 

[Storm]

Ah, I see. Maybe I need to be more specific. When I said...

"Perhaps all religion is myth. How would you tell?"

...I meant "myth" in the sense of "fiction" or "fantasy". So, how would one tell if religion is totally made-up fiction?

I figured, but you asked what *I* meant, and I told you.

Point of clarification: would you categorize secular philosophies so? If not, how do you tell?

 

[Jose Fly]

I figured, but you asked what *I* meant, and I told you.

Ah, so you knew what I meant, but responded differently anyways. Thanks.

Point of clarification: would you categorize secular philosophies so? If not, how do you tell?

Which ones?

And again, how would one tell if religion is totally made-up fiction?

 

[Storm]

Ah, so you knew what I meant, but responded differently anyways. Thanks.

If you didn't want to know what I meant, why did you ask?

I'd like to refine my definition, though:
Myth is narrative which illustrates religious/ philosophical principles. IOW, attempts to answer the larger questions via storytelling.

Which ones?

Take your pick.

And again, how would one tell if religion is totally made-up fiction?

I'll answer after you give me the information I requested.

 

[Jose Fly]

All right. Thanks for your time Storm.