what was the first religion?

If one were to use only the bible and define religion simply as relationship to God, then religion started in the time of Eden, approximately 6000 years ago.

Is that what you were asking?

No. What you are assuming is that christianity was the first religion, but that is just a guess.

Certainly, the bible does not specify christianity as the first religion. That should bre self evident. So now I don't know what the heck you are asking.

My post assumed only that one would CONSIDER the bible and did not discount other avenues of inquiry , no matter how fruitless. :wink:

Bearism...

You just think its ALL about you. Eh, BPB? :wink:

Sun worship is a good candidate. Mother/Fertility is hard to count out as matrilineal primitive societies are not unusual but Earth worship got big with agriculture so we've got a fairly recent revival of all of that obscuring the view.

Other than that - early humans and pre-humans liked to draw animals so that might've had a religious component, Totemistic or Pagan. God-king or ancestor worship is the theme of the oldest literature - and some pre-humans had funerals - the only problem with that being a candidate is weak societal structure/history - but I bet it did pop in and out of the scene from the beginning while lingering as a matter of superstition.

The idea of Christianity and Judaism as religions in the same sense is incorrect though, on the basis that it's functionality is different. The old religions were all about what made an impression and all-purpose low-octane attempts at putting order to natural (and toward the end human) phenomena. Judaism and Hinduism are a turning point because they produce a more viable society. Modern monotheistic and/or prophet-based religions take it one step further - they produce a viable and especially virulent society.

There is some evidence of Neanderthal religion; Cave Bear stuff and burial rituals. But the evidence is debatable.

That was around 100k years ago. However, at 70k years ago we had this.

This first religions seemed to focus more on the life around us, rather than the stars and moon. Dangerous animals were probably foremost in our ancestors minds. Dangerous animals probably seemed like an insurmountable problem needing to be solved; worthy of religious fervor.

Gilbey-

Read The Golden Bough. It answers your question fairly well.

The exploitation of credulity in the aid of personal self-interest.








































Nothing has changed since that time.

ros wrote-



Yeah--like half-baked scientism pursuing personal objectives.

Religion got going with the transition of early man from hunter gatherer to farmer. He could put stuff in the ground, but he couldnt make it grow. For that he needed the right amount of rain and sunlight. Its not a great leap of imagination to invent a rain god and a sun god. Also the excess food allowed for the development of a priestly class, who did very little useful work, except for keeping the gods which they had invented, happy. Its not rocket science.

It is in its later stages.

Setanta wrote-



Such as Jesus for example.

And one can exploit incredulity for personal interest too. In satire for example. In revolutionary sophistries as well.



The diffusion of the exploitation has reached the point of being a market place and the social backgrounds of the "exploiters", who can be called "entertainers" pushing it a bit, has changed considerably.

Setanta makes no allowance for genuine dedication to do good, such as one sees in nuns working in desperate conditions, and he can fairly be thus assumed to take a very dim view of the human condition.

Given that logical progression he is obviously simply lacking in exploitative skill and is expressing envy at those who do have.

I hope he is not trying to get the exploitation of one's fellow human beings made into a felony. Things would go downhill at an alarming rate if that came to pass.

neologist wrote-



It is only a quip. The man himself was delivered into the next world through the offices of a priest and the last sacrament. Resignedly according to eye-witnesses. "There's no sense making unnecessary enemies at this point" is one version.

In the main, i agree with this. However, i would place the origin of the religious dog and pony show further back in the past.

Thag go kill mammoth now--everybody eat good ! ! !

Thag, Thag old buddy . . . com'ere buddy. You don't want to just rush off and panic all the mammoth--we could starve over the winter. We'll need to paint some mammoth pictures on the cave wall, and have a big dance around the fire in mammoth costumes to make sure the spirit of the mammoth doesn't queer the pitch. I could help you out with all of that, but, you know, all that painting and dancing, it takes it's toll . . .

What Og want?

Well, Thag, if you bring down that mammoth, as you will undoubtedly will after i've communed with the Great Mammoth Spirit, just keep the liver for me . . . 'K?

(the next day)

Sheeka, you lusty young slut . . . have you ever tasted mammoth liver?

No atheists in a foxhole, you say?

Oh--there are some. Voltaire wasn't one though.

Love the idea but I'm not sure it was exploitive at the start - I mean wouldn't there have to be agriculture or other eatin' technology before the art of taking it easy while others work could really be advanced? Superstition probably made people act stupidly and they could still exploit for social status, and hunted/gathered/manufactured items but my impression is that they ran lean on all that.

As for altruistc nuns - to the lions I say!