Our server costs ~$56 per month to run. Please consider donating or becoming a Patron to help keep the site running. Help us gain new members by following us on Twitter and liking our page on Facebook!
Current time: April 18, 2024, 3:36 am

Thread Rating:
  • 2 Vote(s) - 2 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
The Evolution of Religion
#1
The Evolution of Religion
Religions, or the mythology they embrace, are usually presented as a static body, however, there is evidence that each new religion that takes the place of an older one is simply building upon many of the myths which already existed. This is evolution.

An example to make things a bit clearer:
A few days ago, while I was researching for a reply, and I came across ancient sumerian gods and I noticed a great parallel between An (or Anu) and the god of the OT.

A quick brush of History: In Mesopotamia (present day Iraq, give or take a few acres), around the year 4000BCE a people were settled there, around a city called Sumer. These people were the Sumerians. Around 2270BCE they were conquered by the Akkadians (yes, it's a locked wiki article). About the year 1900BCE, Babylon, further South, became the ruling city, retaining the semitic language of the Akkadians for everyday use, and the Sumerian language for religious rites (About Babylonia).

Ok, I think this is sufficient to understand the rest.

Sumerians had a pantheon of gods, but there were 3 (yes, three) that were the main ones:
http://www.britannica.com/EBchecked/topic/28989/Anu Wrote:Anu, (Akkadian), Sumerian An, Mesopotamian sky god and a member of the triad of deities completed by Enlil and Ea (Enki). Like most sky gods, Anu, although theoretically the highest god, played only a small role in the mythology, hymns, and cults of Mesopotamia. He was the father not only of all the gods but also of evil spirits and demons, most prominently the demoness Lamashtu, who preyed on infants. Anu was also the god of kings and of the yearly calendar. He was typically depicted in a headdress with horns, a sign of strength.
His Sumerian counterpart, An, dates from the oldest Sumerian period, at least 3000 bc. Originally he seems to have been envisaged as a great bull, a form later disassociated from the god as a separate mythological entity, the Bull of Heaven, which was owned by An.

http://www.britannica.com/EBchecked/topic/58985/Enlil Wrote:Enlil, Mesopotamian god of the atmosphere and a member of the triad of gods completed by Anu (Sumerian: An) and Ea (Enki). Enlil meant Lord Wind: both the hurricane and the gentle winds of spring were thought of as the breath issuing from his mouth and eventually as his word or command. He was sometimes called Lord of the Air.
Although An was the highest god in the Sumerian pantheon, Enlil had a more important role as the embodiment of energy and force and authority.

and

http://www.britannica.com/EBchecked/topic/175484/Ea Wrote:Ea, (Akkadian), Sumerian Enki, Mesopotamian god of water and a member of the triad of deities completed by Anu (Sumerian: An) and Enlil. From a local deity worshiped in the city of Eridu, Ea evolved into a major god, Lord of Apsu (also spelled Abzu), the fresh waters beneath the earth (although Enki means literally “lord of the earth”). In the Sumerian myth “Enki and the World Order,” Enki is said to have fixed national boundaries and assigned gods their roles. According to another Sumerian myth Enki is the creator, having devised men as slaves to the gods. In his original form, as Enki, he was associated with semen and amniotic fluid, and therefore with fertility. He was commonly represented as a half-goat, half-fish creature, from which the modern astrological figure for Capricorn is derived.

Ea, the Akkadian counterpart of Enki, was the god of ritual purification: ritual cleansing waters were called “Ea’s water.” Ea governed the arts of sorcery and incantation. In some stories he was also the form-giving god, and thus the patron of craftsmen and artists; he was known as the bearer of culture. In his role as adviser to the king, Ea was a wise god although not a forceful one. In Akkadian myth, as Ea’s character evolves, he appears frequently as a clever mediator who could be devious and cunning.


The fact that they're 3 is reminiscent of the christian mythology's trinity.
God the father is clearly a mirror of An. Embraced by the hebrews and renamed yahweh.
Enlil as the embodiment of Energy and force appears as the original idea of "holy ghost".
Ea appears as a purifier, appears in later myths in baptisms.



From a non-believer point of view, the evolution of the concept of the divine may appear almost intuitive.
At some point in the evolution of the human species, the concept of another plane of existence must have sprout up on the minds of people.

Possibly, originating in the cult of the dead, the fear of death, the unknown of what comes after you die.
As a first approach, people would like the idea that death was not the end. Eventually, they would realize that good and bad people should be separated in that different plane, someone should have the power to enforce such separation.... someone eternally living in that plane.

I don't know, but this view seems realistic.
Eventually the concept evolved to encompass several features of the natural world and you'd get a god for each unexplainable event.

Noticing the strong effect such beliefs have over the common people, their leaders would then encourage them as a way to consolidate their own power.

And you end up with city-states where you can find organized religion playing a big role in the lives of the people.

Some cities get conquered, others share their beliefs through trade, well, beliefs spread, become even more organized, more followers, more more.

Countries/empires are created under one religion and they keep spreading.


And the rest is history.



What causes some particular religion to take on more adherents than another?
- Well, in the dark ages, we had the inquisition forcing christianity on the European peoples.
- Before that, there were the romans which spread their ideologies quite efficiently, but I fail to know the exact method.
- Before the romans, there was a tendency to incorporate the conquered people's gods into the conqueror's pantheon.
Reply
#2
RE: The Evolution of Religion
I think, but I am to tired to look for sources now and re-check it, that religion filled mankind's need for social hierarchy. And someone's gotta be on top of it.

And isn't one god way more competitive than a god for every fart?
Reply
#3
RE: The Evolution of Religion
All this info from Sumerian stems from the sky people, the annunaki. Less of a religion in that annunaki are regarded as extra terrestrials. An evolution of gods from normal ass physical creatures. Man we really screwed up!
Reply
#4
RE: The Evolution of Religion
[rant]

I hate to be a stickler for accuracy but it's not 'evolution' is it; rather it's 'change'.

Sorry but misuse of the word 'evolution' to mean 'change' is a pet peeve of mine, especially when creatards use the word to misrepresent it (e.g. 'stella evolution' Angry).

I recommend that before using the word 'evolution' people consider this simple test:

1. might one be able to calculate equivalents/analogues of allele frequencies
2. might one be able to state their equivalents/analogues of cladistics/phylogeny

If 'yes', you're justified in using the word 'evolution' as an analogy.
If 'no', it's just 'change'.

[/rant]
Sum ergo sum
Reply
#5
RE: The Evolution of Religion
I used Evolution in the meaning it had before Darwin applied it to biological species:
http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/e...=t&ld=1123 Wrote:evolution
noun
1.
any process of formation or growth; development

Spec, apparently, these annunaki were the children on Anu:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anunnaki Wrote:According to later Assyrian and Babylonian myth, the Anunnaki were the children of Anu and Ki, brother and sister gods

So, instead of a celestial plane, they actually conceived a planet? Never heard of that one.
Reply
#6
RE: The Evolution of Religion
Quote:From a non-believer point of view, the evolution of the concept of the divine may appear almost intuitive.
This is the key.

First, try explaining similarities in religions from a literal Biblical viewpoint.

Second, note that people frequently get sloppy with assumptions because it seems so intuitive.
Reply
#7
RE: The Evolution of Religion
(December 3, 2012 at 11:53 am)John V Wrote:
Quote:From a non-believer point of view, the evolution of the concept of the divine may appear almost intuitive.
This is the key.

First, try explaining similarities in religions from a literal Biblical viewpoint.

Second, note that people frequently get sloppy with assumptions because it seems so intuitive.

hmmmm tricky... can you provide a sumerian equivalent of the bible?
I'd wager they wrote the book well before the hebrews wrote the Torah.

But why am I arguing over books written by people? The thread is about beliefs in gods, not beliefs in the contents of books.
Reply
#8
RE: The Evolution of Religion
(December 3, 2012 at 12:00 pm)pocaracas Wrote: hmmmm tricky... can you provide a sumerian equivalent of the bible?
I'd wager they wrote the book well before the hebrews wrote the Torah.
Suppose there are similarities between a Biblical text and another religious text, and the earliest extant copy of the other text is older than the earliest copy of the Biblical text.

1. So what? As you note, the evolution of texts seems intuitive. So, people merely note that one text is older than another and has similarities, and allow people's intuition to infer that the later copied from the earlier. This is sloppy. The actual transmission is dismissed with a general wave of the hand - the latter must have acquired the material from the former via trade or conquest. Well, no, that's not a given. You need convincing evidence of the transmission to have anything more than speculation. Atheists frequently note our tendency to make patterns out of data to explain religion, but generally fail to apply this tendency to their own arguments. perhaps you're just intuitively seeing a pattern that doesn't really exist.

2. A Biblical viewpoint also explains similarities between the bible and other religions. Romans tells us that early people knew God but didn't want to worship him, so they made up their own gods. It wouldn't at all be surprising for some of these peoples to include some of the truth into their new religions. Then, when God gave the truth to Israel, there were similarities to older traditions.

In short, we see patterns that fit into our pre-existing paradigm.
Reply
#9
RE: The Evolution of Religion
Similarities in texts of different religions mean that stories about god A have been adapted to fit god B. This means that, at least, a part of the god B story is made up by humans.

Biblical viewpoint, romans?.. I'm talking well before the romans were around. People already believed other deities before yahweh was ...... ad@pted.
Anyway, you then say that god gave the truth to Israel... isn't it much simpler, given all the similarities, to see this truth as arising from the "older traditions"?

You want to have your god present itself to human kind somewhere in the far past; humans then build a number of pantheons of gods and he eventually comes back to lay the truth on people again.... and few years later drops his son around the same geographical position, just to make a point.

I see naturalistic patterns. You see supernatural ones. I find my patterns more probable than yours.
Reply
#10
RE: The Evolution of Religion
(December 3, 2012 at 12:32 pm)pocaracas Wrote: Similarities in texts of different religions mean that stories about god A have been adapted to fit god B.
Not necessarily. You need to show evidence of transmission. for that claim to be more than speculation or intuition. It could also be that A stories and B stories were seprately adapted from earlier C stories, or the similarities could be mere coincidence.
Quote:Biblical viewpoint, romans?.. I'm talking well before the romans were around. People already believed other deities before yahweh was ...... ad@pted.
The book of Romans in the Bible, specifically the first chapter.
Quote:Anyway, you then say that god gave the truth to Israel... isn't it much simpler, given all the similarities, to see this truth as arising from the "older traditions"?
I don't see how we could quantify which is simpler, and simplicity does not necessarily imply truth anyway.
Quote:You want to have your god present itself to human kind somewhere in the far past; humans then build a number of pantheons of gods and he eventually comes back to lay the truth on people again....
Yes. Similarities between other religious texts and OT texts make perfect sense in the Biblical paradigm.
Quote:I see naturalistic patterns. You see supernatural ones. I find my patterns more probable than yours.
Of course you do.
Reply



Possibly Related Threads...
Thread Author Replies Views Last Post
  An evolution of sexuality via religion Foxaèr 5 1390 April 15, 2016 at 10:54 am
Last Post: Crossless2.0
  Religion hurts homosexuality but homosexuality kills religion? RozKek 43 10699 March 30, 2016 at 2:46 am
Last Post: robvalue
  Terrorism has no religion but religion brings terrorism. Islam is NOT peaceful. bussta33 13 4893 January 16, 2016 at 8:25 pm
Last Post: The Grand Nudger
  Religion's affect outside of religion Heat 67 19757 September 28, 2015 at 9:45 pm
Last Post: TheRocketSurgeon
Rainbow Gay rights within the template of religion proves flaws in "religion" CristW 288 49195 November 21, 2014 at 4:09 pm
Last Post: DramaQueen
  Evolution, religion, and ignorance. Esquilax 341 78369 May 24, 2014 at 6:18 pm
Last Post: Chas
  Kin Selection Explaining the Evolution of Religion Foxaèr 2 1660 April 20, 2014 at 1:47 pm
Last Post: Anomalocaris
  Evolution, Intelligence, Suggestibility and Religion Bipolar Bob 5 2208 November 17, 2013 at 3:43 am
Last Post: MindForgedManacle
  Religion Vs Religion. Bull Poopie 14 5177 September 8, 2010 at 9:02 pm
Last Post: Oldandeasilyconfused



Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)