Why religion was necessary; why it no longer is.

[Lion IRC]

Religion, as we mostly agree, is a man-made concoction...

(And women-made) But in any case, how did the first man (and woman) happen to stumble across religion?

...It is often founded partially on history, and mostly on fabrication. The likelihood of this explanation being the most accurate is backed up by observing a rumor being spread; starts as fact, changes a little bit from each person telling it until it's a story about a different person, a different situation, and a different outcome so that it's no longer recognizable. Happens all the time, and time is a multiplying force in it, too; the longer it goes on, the more warped it gets...

Why wouldn’t natural selection eliminate such an extravagant drain on human resources?

...What once were parables became accepted as fact by many and became truth even though it was neither truth nor fact, but it's largely assumed that because, hey, the more people think it's true, the more it's accepted as it.

Not a fan of the oral tradition I see. What would you favor as a replacement? Wikipedia? Mr Assange's unsourced, anonymously reported hearsay?

... History, after all, is written by the victors and ergo history is filled with liars.

Hmmm. Thats a great big slap in the face to historians. There are entire university faculties doing what you describe. One wonders what victorious New Atheism might tell lies about if ever some day they eventually rule the world. And what do we then make of the so-called Higher Criticism/Historical Method?
You know Bart Ehrman is a historian right?

... We have independent sources nowadays and archeological evidence for what we accept as fact but we still have to accept that sometimes even what was recorded may not entirely be true, which is why I always discard the argument for the supposed authenticity of the bible and the quran and the talmud, especially when there's far more of a void in regards to the supposed events than there are statements supporting authenticity, which is always a red flag.

Something needs to be done about modern archaeologists who dig up stuff which corroborates bible history. (Solomon, Caiaphas, Shishak, the lost city of Petra.)

... Removing the supernatural miracles that defy the possibility of reality and the utter lack of recent evidence...

I disagree. I say miracles happen every day.
http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/nova/body/life-g...racle.html

... The bible isn't much better, having been cobbled together 300 years after the fact by a bunch of people who never experienced anything and basically picked-and-chose what they liked and didn't like and canonized/discarded stuff at their whim.

Almost a million words. "cobbled" together over 1000 years. By 40 known writers.
Oh yeah, and it just so happens to be the most widely read and published book in human history.
Tale of Two Cities - 150 million.
The bible - over 6 billion!

... So, religion has always been a force of unification....

Yes and atheism is either a religion or it isnt.
If not, then you are effectively arguing for DISUNITY...the opposite of unity, cooperation, harmony, teamwork, family, etc, etc.

... Unification always comes in one of two ways; through ideas, or through force. Force is the easier method of unifying people, and ironically, it's the weakest....

I completely agree.

And so does that exemplar of fail, Tomas de Torquemada. (if he could talk he would agree with Mr Grayling)

I mean, how good can an idea really be if it has to be forced on people.

And conversely, how truly great and worthwhile must an idea be if people are willing to die for it.

Now, where were we? Theism?/Atheism?/Theism?/Atheism?

"