An Anthropological View of Religion

[rousseau]

Another blog post I wrote for shits recently.. someone might as well be reading them.

Over the past few years I never had the intention of studying religion, it just sort of turned out that way. In 2016 I made it a goal of mine to finish reading Paul Johnson's 'History of Christianity', and then throughout 2017 I did some sporadic reading on several other religions.

Over that time I not only studied a handful of religions directly, but in addition I did some reading on the sociology of religion, and the anthropological view of culture.

If that all sounds heavy-handed, it's only to say that I started getting a clearer view of religion as a thing that people do, what it's origins were, and how/why specific belief systems are formed. Honestly, I could probably write a book on the topic rather than just a blog post, but a blog post is the task of the day so we'll see what comes out of it.

Christianity: A Case Study

In the long-view, and from an outsider's perspective, Christianity is actually an extension of Judaism. While considered a separate religion, from an anthropological view it's theology was formed for the sole purpose of improving on the out-dated, and unnecessary rules of Judaism, which would ideally give it a more widespread appeal. This strategy largely worked, which is why there are so many Christians out there today.

From this fact we can infer an important, and crucial point about religion: that their theology (rules) always adapt to the material problems of the day. This is as true in pre-historic religions, as it was in early Judaism, to Confucianism and Daoism. At any point in the history of any religion, it's rules were in a constant state of evolution to adapt to the lives of it's believers.

Throughout the long history of Christianity there were countless examples of this. In the early days there were schisms over the nature God itself, later there were updates in how sin was forgiven, and in more modern times many Christian sects have had to adapt to an increasingly secular world by doing things like accepting gay marriage.

What about morals?

The moral codes arising out of religions also take on an eerily important material purpose. In most cases, someone would look at the world around them in their day, see what problems they could see, and enact codes which would help people survive. One recurring pattern that can be seen almost everywhere is that of 'non-violence'. In the Abrahamic family of religions the brunt of rules centre around not harming other people, while in the Asian brands 'ahimsa' is ever-present.

Bottom line here is that if you do away with the concept of the divine, almost every religion ever conceived has produced ideas that help people live in harmony with the world around them in some respect.

The corollary here is that even for the sceptical, religions have a lot to teach us, regardless of what they say about things like creation and the afterlife. With some careful study, one can take many of their ideas and learn to live a good life.

How they all tie together

When one looks at the huge diversity of religions and their thought it might look chaotic, but they can all be tied together in a neat little package, with some important commonalities. That is, they all address existence, suffering, and the afterlife.

For a lot of people these are central problems to life. First, why am I here, second, why am I suffering and how can I stop it, and three, what happens after I die?

Most religions that we know of today came about in the pre-scientific era where there were no reasonable answers to any of these questions. You had societies of people living in a world without much intrinsic understanding of how things worked, and various religions were the result.

Invariably, no matter where you were in the world the religion you followed would somehow explain the existence of the world, how you could stop suffering, and what happens in the afterlife. This would have the purpose of resolving the cognitive dissonance that people in their day felt about their life. Many of them needed, and wanted an answer, and religion provided it

Conclusion

No grandiose conclusions or morals here, this is only a topic that I find interesting and wanted to write a bit about.

I believe a lot of people don't really think about religion from a historical perspective, and where the customs of various religions comes from, and I think there is a lot of value in starting to understand them in that way.

 

[T.G.G. Moogly]

I don't see moral codes arising from religion but rather religion incorporating moral codes. As such religion is simply another vehicle for transmitting moral codes that are presently popular.

But religions must also be efficient. Most people today do not appreciate that it took great time and expense to be a proper pagan, similar I suppose to being Jewish. Orthodox Christianity was infinitely simpler in comparison and far more rewarding, thus becoming much more popular. People want the most bang for the buck and religion is no exception. People migrate to the religion in which they see the most gain for themselves. People also migrate from religion for the same reason.

How would I identify "religion" as a behavior in a species were I an observer, and I was unfamiliar with the concept? How would we program an AI to recognize religious behavior? It's very possible that there are species on the planet doing "religious things" that we're missing.

 

[Valjean]

In primitive cultures religion can't be disentangled from the rest of the culture.
In the tribes that gave rise to the dominant religions today, moral precepts were confined to the tribe itself. Different moral rules applied to outsiders -- or no rules at all.

Religious or moral growth generally involves decreased tribalism and expansion of one's moral universe.

 

[humbleman]

Christianity: A Case Study

In the long-view, and from an outsider's perspective, Christianity is actually an extension of Judaism. While considered a separate religion, from an anthropological view it's theology was formed for the sole purpose of improving on the out-dated, and unnecessary rules of Judaism, which would ideally give it a more widespread appeal. This strategy largely worked, which is why there are so many Christians out there today.

Christianity as up-dating Judaism it might be acceptable in some degree, but the widespread of it is not because improvement.

On the contrary, Christianity became most popular when pleased the doctrines of men rather than pleasing the doctrines of God.

This is to say, the new laws consenting the use of marijuana for recreation purposes are pleasing people with drug tendency problems than pleasing the care of the integrity of the human body which should be a purpose to make a law. Then, a law backing up consumption of drugs will be more popular than a law restringing its consumption.

You go to a Pentecostal Church. In order to be a member of the church in general, you only need to rise your hand and accept publicly that the Christ is the son of God, that he died for you and so forth. To become a member of that specific congregation you must assist to "classes" and prepare and be baptized.

The whole process is practically a piece of cake.

On the other hand, you renounce listening music other than religious music, as if in the wedding where Jesus went to the music was religious and not secular music for dancing... sure... right... You must renounce drinking beer, wine, rum, etc... as if Jesus and his apostles never had a drop of wine while preaching around... sure... right...

Then, becoming a Christian is not that hard, you can eat whatever you want, you work any day of the week, you obey the laws of the congregation over the laws of the bible.

With Judaism is different. You want to be a member of the synagogue, you might be told to come back next week. And you will hear the same request every week. You might quit your intentions. But, if you preserve, and they see you really want to be a member and you are changing many things in your life BEFORE being a member, then you petition might be considered.

Actually, the new testament calls for something similar to what Judaism request from a potential new member.

Lots of Christian churches won't include in purpose the main requisite of REPENTANCE before becoming a member, before baptism.

Repentance in the bible is not committing sin again. People is confused when they think repentance is crying loud and show suffering. Repentance is simply recognizing the actions and thoughts were negative or wrong and don't doing them anymore.

Christian churches won't teach the right way, otherwise they shouldn't be so many.

From this fact we can infer an important, and crucial point about religion: that their theology (rules) always adapt to the material problems of the day. This is as true in pre-historic religions, as it was in early Judaism, to Confucianism and Daoism. At any point in the history of any religion, it's rules were in a constant state of evolution to adapt to the lives of it's believers.

The biblical religion is not about pleasing man, the biblical religion is about pleasing God.

The current widespread of Christianity was taught by Jesus when he said in a parable that the Kingdom of Heaven is like a woman (Church) mixing leaven (foreign doctrines, paganism, idolatry, etc) to the flour (God's doctrines) so the mass increased fast and big... hey! That is Christianity!

Throughout the long history of Christianity there were countless examples of this. In the early days there were schisms over the nature God itself, later there were updates in how sin was forgiven, and in more modern times many Christian sects have had to adapt to an increasingly secular world by doing things like accepting gay marriage.

See? I told you. You are just part of the "dark side". You call sin as "adaptation".

On the day of judgement God will say, "adaptation My ass, you are calling good what I declared is an abomination"... and the angels will see another soul going down to the lake of fire...

 

[rousseau]

Christianity as up-dating Judaism it might be acceptable in some degree, but the widespread of it is not because improvement.

On the contrary, Christianity became most popular when pleased the doctrines of men rather than pleasing the doctrines of God.

This is to say, the new laws consenting the use of marijuana for recreation purposes are pleasing people with drug tendency problems than pleasing the care of the integrity of the human body which should be a purpose to make a law. Then, a law backing up consumption of drugs will be more popular than a law restringing its consumption.

You go to a Pentecostal Church. In order to be a member of the church in general, you only need to rise your hand and accept publicly that the Christ is the son of God, that he died for you and so forth. To become a member of that specific congregation you must assist to "classes" and prepare and be baptized.

The whole process is practically a piece of cake.

On the other hand, you renounce listening music other than religious music, as if in the wedding where Jesus went to the music was religious and not secular music for dancing... sure... right... You must renounce drinking beer, wine, rum, etc... as if Jesus and his apostles never had a drop of wine while preaching around... sure... right...

Then, becoming a Christian is not that hard, you can eat whatever you want, you work any day of the week, you obey the laws of the congregation over the laws of the bible.

With Judaism is different. You want to be a member of the synagogue, you might be told to come back next week. And you will hear the same request every week. You might quit your intentions. But, if you preserve, and they see you really want to be a member and you are changing many things in your life BEFORE being a member, then you petition might be considered.

Actually, the new testament calls for something similar to what Judaism request from a potential new member.

Lots of Christian churches won't include in purpose the main requisite of REPENTANCE before becoming a member, before baptism.

Repentance in the bible is not committing sin again. People is confused when they think repentance is crying loud and show suffering. Repentance is simply recognizing the actions and thoughts were negative or wrong and don't doing them anymore.

Christian churches won't teach the right way, otherwise they shouldn't be so many.



The biblical religion is not about pleasing man, the biblical religion is about pleasing God.

The current widespread of Christianity was taught by Jesus when he said in a parable that the Kingdom of Heaven is like a woman (Church) mixing leaven (foreign doctrines, paganism, idolatry, etc) to the flour (God's doctrines) so the mass increased fast and big... hey! That is Christianity!

Throughout the long history of Christianity there were countless examples of this. In the early days there were schisms over the nature God itself, later there were updates in how sin was forgiven, and in more modern times many Christian sects have had to adapt to an increasingly secular world by doing things like accepting gay marriage.

See? I told you. You are just part of the "dark side". You call sin as "adaptation".

On the day of judgement God will say, "adaptation My ass, you are calling good what I declared is an abomination"... and the angels will see another soul going down to the lake of fire...

To some people it may sound like a sin, to others it's a means of making the business more efficient.

Christianity in practice is, and always has been, an organisation that's inextricably tied to profit. The people who run it depend on it's success, and so the things they do and believe depend on what will cause that success, which is my point.

If Christianity originally had anything resembling real, definite principles then almost every adherent in it's history would be deep in the pits of hell at this point. Oh wait.. unless the guy you're giving money to says it's ok. Neat trick eh?