Isn't it kind of primitive to believe in a "god"?

Answer 1

no. but isn't it kind of primitive of you to dehumanize and demean the intelligence of people just because they don't share the same beliefs you do? that kind of tribalistic, hatemongering behaviour was definitely common among primitive people.

Answer 2

Aren't the companies that come out with the best product first considered better than companies that come out with later inferior products that they try to pawn off as being better than the original. What I'm getting at is that if by "primitive" you mean "first", "original", of "ancient origin", then you are right. It is "primitive" to believe in a god, which means that it is part of the human experience, something which transcends cultures and time periods, which, by the way, lends credence to the religious experience being something real.

If by "primitive" you mean the pejorative insinuation that belief in God is somehow lesser than belief in science, then no, it isn't primitive.

By the way, which seems to you to be a more intelligent response to the mystery of the universe, saying that we can know everything about it and prove everything we know or realizing that the entire universe is more complex than we can comprehend? You'll notice that in both science and religion you will find people of both types of mentality, ie those who have turned science into a faith to beat everyone else up with (science itself does not presume to be able to answer all the mysteries of the universe and therefore to exclude a dimension to reality that is beyond observation in the scientific sense) and those in religion who try to exclude science and use the Bible as their only evidence.

Answer 3

Considering that some of the greatest minds of all time have acknowledged a belief in God in some form or the other, I'd say that the exact opposite is true.

I'd love to see you tell the likes of Nicolas Copernicus, Sir Isaac Newton, Rene Descartes, and yes, Albert Einstein, that they were "kind of primitive" to believe in God.

Answer 4

Sharing person-friendly effective factors with apes isn't why present day biology is conscious with reality that human beings and tremendous Apes share a person-friendly ancestor. that's about DNA. How is it i am going to deduce from the wording of your question that you're merely yet another willfully ignorant Christian bigot -- a bigot who will ignore concerning the purpose reality for the sake of marketing the superstition that the Bible is completely the literal reality. won't be able to you spot that you're destroying Christianity by technique of insisting that a figurative allegory is a literal actuality? If the Bible is to proceed to be relevent for destiny generations, it should be periodically re-interpreted with the intention to proceed to be consistent with humanity's continuously increasing expertise of the universe all of us occupy. Denying the verifiable actuality of evolution and the validity of molecular biology undermines Christianity by technique of requiring that present day knowledgeable human beings deny the purpose reality (and person-friendly expertise) to develop into/proceed to be Christians. Genesis is a creation allegory, no longer the note-for-note literal genuine reality. that's extra ideal, the actual universe humanity has inhabited on the grounds that our beginnings, or the translation of a translation of a translation that become written by technique of an imaginitive shepard 3,500 years in the past? Get your self some preparation! Your obdurate willful lack of expertise is doing all of your reason far extra damage than strong.

Answer 5

No! everyone believes in a god of some sort. Atheists believe that 'matter' has all the qualities usually attributed to a supernatural creator God. i.e.they belive that matter was the first cause of the universe and everything in it, including the power to produce life, information, intelligence etc. So they believe in the god of 'matter'.
So it is simply a question of belief in which god makes the most sense.
A supernatural first cause, not subject to the laws of nature, or a naturalistic first cause which is bound by the laws of nature, but somehow (magically) manages to defy them, when it needs to (as in the creation of first life and information etc,)

Answer 6

In a sense yes. Man has been seeking God since the beginning of time. Even cultures that have not been in much contact with the modern world have independently developed a concept of God.

Answer 7

In all cultures, all religions, and all societies: Humanity strives to ride itself of animal ways and better itself to be “Divine“. The less we act like animals that are self-centered the more divine humanity gets. In fact, animals do not have the mental ability to reason a "God".

"God" started out primitive since he revealed himself to Primitive People. As humans became less primative and took in numbers, humans then bonded with God as more advanced, because God revealed more to our minds and allowed us to philosophies more so that we may have a better understanding of him.

Believing in God is opposite of primitive --- believing in God is sprinting towards human advancement.

Answer 8

yes ofcourse to follow a religion must be coming up from certanity tht it's the right one
but y don't u beleive in god think of everything surronding u this will show y u have to believe in god

Answer 9

It may very well be. But I would also argue that the urge to eat or have sex is also pretty primitive.

Answer 10

I think that somehow believe in "a God" is a way that we humans use to try to find answers to the things that we haven't been able to understand completely; is like an instinct of wanting to know everything and when you we cant find the answers to what you need "God is the solution".