Interesting blog though.

I completely agree.

You bring up some very interesting questions. Of course we cannot really know for sure unless we develop time travel, but let me offer a few possibilities.

Perhaps as homo sapiens began to develop deeper relationships with each other, they started burying their dead as a sign of respect, or to keep the wild animals from desecrating the body in the hope that they may come back to life.

Perhaps they started painting on rock faces as ceremonial rituals at the start of each hunt. Keep in mind that many of the cave drawings were done in a single area of the cave, and were often drawn over previous drawings. Though this is not proof, it does support the theory of a spiritual ceremony of some sort, in a sacred portion of the cave.

Perhaps they started decorating their bodies to do a couple of things. 1: Signify some sort of rite of passage, and 2: to identify themselves with their clan or tribe as a means of acceptance and protection.

Regarding the existence of a soul…Science has debunked many aspects of modern revealed religion, but one thing science has yet to do is disprove the possibility of the existense of a soul, or the existence of a supreme entity for that matter. (It makes no sense to have one without the other) It is this possibility that Deists base their belief system in. I hope that helps.

Gregg100: “Based on what I’ve read, all Deists and Theists have at least one thing in common, a belief in some form of God.”

Bishop Rick: Some sort of supreme entity or God..Ok I’ll give you that one.

Gregg100: “This is in direct opposition to an A-Theist who believes there is no such thing as the God of the Deists and Theists. I place myself squarely in the camp of the A-Thiests.”

Bishop Rick: Fair enough.

Gregg100: “The interaction of parallel Universes to initiate our currently detectable Universe seems to support a concept of a permanent Cosmos.”

Bishop Rick: This is a totally different statement than what you originally made. On the concept of a permanent cosmos (as opposed to permanent universe) I must concede.

Gregg100: “If someone choses to assign the answers to many questions of why or what is the purpose of this or that to “God” or faith, that clearly is out of the realm of science…”

Bishop Rick: I never said that.

Gregg100: “Only an epistemological idiot would engage in such a conversation.”

Bishop Rick: Not sure how to take that one.

Based on what I’ve read, all Deists and Theists have at least one thing in common, a belief in some form of God. This is in direct opposition to an A-Theist who believes there is no such thing as the God of the Deists and Theists. I place myself squarely in the camp of the A-Thiests.

I am quite aware of the M-Theory (I enjoyed the development of the “P-brane”) as being developed by Dr. Lisa Randall and have attended two of her lectures on the subject. I see nothing in her work that is inconsistent with the concept of a permanent Cosmos. The interaction of parallel Universes to initiate our currently detectable Universe seems to support a concept of a permanent Cosmos. But we are talking about science, not faith.

If someone choses to assign the answers to many questions of why or what is the purpose of this or that to “God” or faith, that clearly is out of the realm of science and is a personal choice that I would not attempt to question. To me it would be equivalent to someone arguing with you when you say your favorite color is blue. Only an epistemological idiot would engage in such a conversation.

Where did religion originate and why?

I recomend you: Breaking the Spell by Daniel C. Dennett.

The universe is made up of matter, dark matter, and dark energy. The latter 2 being undetectable but can be predicted mathmatically (this part I believe and is supported by science).

(This part I am making up)
Now, just suppose that what makes us a conscience being, and makes us different from each other, is really just dark energy in the form of a spirit. When we die, this dark energy is not destroyed, but re-enters another body at the time of consciousness in some sort of reincarnation.

Allows for an afterlife of sorts without the need for a creator. Just something to think about.

I think I would consider Deism as more of a philosophy than a religion. Most deists do not believe in an afterlife, but many do. Personally I am still on the fence. I probably lean more towards there not being one, but still hoping. (not easy to give up old habits).

I’m not so sure about the Universe having always existed though. Science now has a theory that actually gets past the singularity and replaces string theory and relativity. This new theory is called M theory or Multiverse theory which actually allows us to get beyond the big bang, and also supports the big bang theory simply as a result of colliding universes (thus producing the big bang). If this theory is true, then our universe would most certainly have had a beginning.

I’m not sure we will ever escape the questions of “where/when/how did it all begin” but I think we need to put more credence to everything has a beginning and everything has an end, even beyond our earthly realm. The possibility certainly exists, and science is backing this up, not faith.

I am actually active LDS, but obviously, I don’t believe the doctrine. I stay active to promote a healthy marriage. My wife knows how I feel about the church but has made it clear where she stands, and if I want to continue in the family, I need to at least pretend.

I’m sure this is familiar to alot of folks on this blog.

Regarding Deism…I think deism is really for closet agnostics that are not willing to completely let go.
It allows for the possibility of life after death, or some type of supreme purpose, without dictating what it is. Deism is based on the belief that something created the universe, but whatever it is, does not interfere. That something could be a God, or just another universal force if you will. It is up to the individual how to interpret life, death, and everything in between. So, I guess in a way, we are all Deists.

I would like to think I reach out to non-religious deists as well as nontheists, but I do speak from an atheist point of view. Feel free to speak up on issues from a deist point of view anytime!

They don’t clarify anything these days, so any rationalization that works for you to keep the faith seems to be the order of the day…

Even still, I had the wacky idea until I left the church that hominids evolved into the human species until 30,000 years ago, and at some time around then God put the pre-earth spirits of Adam and Eve into bodies of the human species. They were the first to have actual spirits. I figured that was the time that humans began doing intelligent things.

I don’t know how I came up with that idea. I doubt it was from my biology class! It makes you wonder where I thought all the other humans without spirits went?

It’s funny to think about all the ways we try to justify our religion with reality.

Science and Creationsim, a collection of essays edited by Ashley Montagu back in 1984:

The “Creationists,” using the Book of Genesis as their main authority, have argued that evolution is an unsound explanation of the origins of life and its diversity and have sought in several states to introduce their ideas into public school curriculums. In refuting those claims, these essays reflect diverse fields of expertise and explore the creationism issue in all its aspects: scientific, historical, theological, legal, and educational.

Have you ever seen or read this book? I read it years ago, but I remember it as being very insightful and interesting.

I should probably get a copy of this newer book you mention to see all of the latest developments on this question.

This is a huge issue for me, particularly in terms of the short-sightedness of eroding US science education.

Biological evolution is a change in the genetic characteristics of a population over time. That this happens is a fact. Biological evolution also refers to the common descent of living organisms from shared ancestors. The evidence for historical evolution — genetic, fossil, anatomical, etc. — is so overwhelming that it is also considered a fact. The theory of evolution describes the mechanisms that cause evolution. So evolution is both a fact and a theory.

May I recommend the site, particularly the FAQs, for anyone with questions about what evolution actually is? Very often my first response to evolution criticism is “Wow. If [fill in the blank, for instance "two mosquitos, a mudhole, and then suddenly people"] was what evolution said, I wouldn’t accept it either.”

Talk.Origins FAQ