doppelgänger said:Recording that dream in some form probably was the first work of art.
Good point!
Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!
doppelgänger said:Recording that dream in some form probably was the first work of art.
Aren't superstitions spiritual in nature? *grin*darkpenguin said:Superstitions maybe?
darkpenguin said:How do you figure? I'm intrigued.
Willamena said:Aren't superstitions spiritual in nature? *grin*
I mean, if we believe that things have the power to happen of their own accord, or that an unseen force is manipulating them... doesn't that sound familiar?
Well, as a divinologist, and perhaps at the expense of a few of my fans, I will proudly reclaim them for the spirit, here and now, and hopefully find the time to write an article about it soon.darkpenguin said:Not really, they are a human irrationality, that doesn't make them spiritual.
JamesThePersian said:Because all my experience leads me to the certainty that God exists. In order to abandon those experiences simply because I can't prove them to others would be as irrational as trying to convince myself that I didn't see the gyr falcon in Iceland simply because I was the only one up early enough that morning and nobody else did. I find the idea that all evidence must be validated by a third party to be entirely irrational (after all if that were the case I could never know myself either) and so my personal experience is as good a set of evidence as anything else is. I may not be able to convince other people that my faith is more rational than their disbelief (and nor do I try to) but the disbeliever can never show me that their position is more rational than mine either. For me the evidence for God is so overwhelming as to make denial of His existence utterly irrational, and whether anyone else sees that is utterly irrelevant.
James
Willamena said:Well, as a divinologist, and perhaps at the expense of a few of my fans, I will proudly reclaim them for the spirit, here and now, and hopefully find the time to write an article about it soon.
darkpenguin said:I think we are going to have to agree to dissagree as I really don't see any middle ground here and it would be pointless to carry on arguing!
JamesThePersian said:I wasn't arguing. I was explaining my position, which is that ultimately all we know of the world is subjective and that therefore to deny subjective evidence is irrational. I will cheerfully argue with you if you persist in saying that humans aren't innately spiritual as I feel that the preponderance of the evidence of history, archaeology, anthropology and psychology militates against your position, but my previous post was really an aside. You asked me to explain so I did. I don't expect you to swallow my explanation as it clearly does not fit into your (equally subjective) view of the world and I certainly have no intention of trying to convince you that my perception is clearer than yours (however convinced I might be that that is true).
James
Sunstone said:If spirituality were optional for large numbers of humans, I suspect we would have found a society by now in which it didn't exist.
Sunstone said:When did religions first begin?
I personally believe they are as old as our species (at the least), which puts their origins back 160,000 years (at the least). But when do you think they began? Why?
michel said:The first evidenced religion, apparently:-
Sunstone said:When did religions first begin?
I personally believe they are as old as our species (at the least), which puts their origins back 160,000 years (at the least). But when do you think they began? Why?