What makes people think that believing in God is primitive?

Question

I keep hearing people on here saying that believing in God is primitive. Well how is believing that we came from monkeys and tadpoles not primitive. I think it's a little silly to call something primitive that you don't understand, Intellegent Design is just as viable and believable as evolution if not more believable. I'm sorry if I'm offending anyone, but that's the way I feel. I would like to hear everyone's opinion even if you are angry with me. Thanks.

I understand that animals and people adapt over time, but I don't see hard facts that people came from the same ansetors as monkeys. Lucy was probably a monkey, not an early human. Besides that point, I didn't say that Intellegent Design had anything to do with evolution, I said it was just as possible as evolution. There are many organisms in nature that cannot exist through evolution such as fractals and the golden ratio. Just take a look at this site, it gives more examples for intellegent design; http://www.ideacenter.org/contentmgr/showdetails.php/id/1136

Thanks for your answers so far, I can tell you all are strong in what you believe, and that's good, but I have good reason to believe in Intellegent Design, and I don't consider myself primitive. I also liked the answer about Isaac Newton- there are many great scientists in history that helped in giving proof towards Intellegent Design. Thanks for reading and answering.

For the Native American thing, Native American's had complex nations all over America, they were extremely healthy people until Europeans came and made them sick, they had all kinds of different architecture, so please don't call Native Americans primitive. They were I would say almost equal to the Roman Empire. I don't believe in the same gods they did, but they did not lack intellegence.
Also, science is a constantly changing area. Once the world was flat, now it's round, once we were the center of the universe, then the sun, now we know that we are in a vast universe with no specific center. So how can we say that science is proven. For the big bang, how can we just pop into existance from a big explosion, where did the explosion come from, how was the explosion generated?
Why am I able to argue my point so well and put some of you scientists to shame, and then you still call me primitive. I guess I'm the dumb one for still trying, I'm sorry I even bother lol.

You know what, I'm sorry for the last thing I said, some of you guys are giving good answers for evolution, and you have the right to believe that. I still apreciate your answers, I just don't want to be called primitive, I'm not trying to be vein. I do wish Intellegent Design could be taught as a theory though, I think we would gain more proof and facts for it if we took the time to look at it, without thinking of it in a religious since. I've learned that God is able to be explained by more than religion. God isn't locked up in a book, He has all the power, and we might not understand everything about him, but he holds science in his hands, science wouldn't exist without him, and I guess we're all primitive compared to him, I'm not saying I believe in him any more, I'm saying I know he exists, and I am going to stick to that!

I'm going to leave this one up to voting. I might not agree with the one most voted for, but I think everyone gave their best answer, so they all have a good chance of winning. Thanks for answering everyone.

Answer 1

And don't you think it's equally silly to speak of evolution when you obviously don't fully understand it? What's the difference?

Some people act like neanderthals on both sides.

Answer 2

It goes to show that there is still stupidity in this world beyond belief. Grouping people of a culture, racial group, party affiliation, religion, etc… shows a lack of mental understanding. I do not say the word intelligence for it is a fact that many people can spend years in the educational system obtaining degrees. These self-proclaimed geniuses are blinded by all their intellect and fail to look at the simple solution.
“There are people in this world just plain narrow-minded.”

Look across the board at the human species. Not one individual will think exactly alike or have the same values as the next. Truly stereotyping does work but key factors have to fit criteria when making judgements. Two or three factors do not create a deduction.

Individuals in the scientific community have banded together in order to actually create their own conviction. I wouldn’t call them a CULT because cults are known to be unscientific. I wouldn’t call them a RELIGION because true religions follow a written moral code.

This scientific conviction is now spawning subcultures with high amounts of bigotry against anyone who doesn’t believe like they do. Looks kind of familiar with the extreme radical religious movements we see today. They are not even true religions. They are CULTISH..

Religion is not a science.. It is more history…


Moreover it’s not how we came to be. That was only a small part of any religious text.
Religious text shows us our history and how we should continue our lives.

Answer 3

Well think about the Native Americans. We'd consider them uncivilized now, because they hunted animals and lived in huts, and wore and used animal skins and body parts, primitive right? Well they also believed that there were spirits in the trees and rocks and everywhere else. Modern day people, even the ancestors of said Native Americans think that's silly. How can a tree have a soul? Well believing in God is just as primitive, how can thin air in space have a soul, and a brain? We're relying on our own imaginations to explain things we haven't yet learned about. The same way when we were little we imagined a monster in the closet because we were too scared to get up and look for ourselves. It explained the unexplainable so we accepted it for truth, and that's what we're doing with the concept of God.

Answer 4

Intellegent design isn't difficult to understand, "genius."

Evolution doesn't state that humans came from monkeys, it states that the two species share a common ancestor.

Intellegent design doesn't contradict evolution at all, because evolutionists just say that species change over long periods of time, which is a proven fact. Evolution has nothing to do with gods or the Big Bang.

Answer 5

You asked your question using words like "belief" and "feel" and asking for peoples "opinion"

Primitive people, such as the Israelites believed in God. To continue belief in a Bronze Age deity without any supporting evidence is primitive superstition.

ID is not science. It is barely even pseudo-science. ID does no original research, it's only purpose is to attack real science, and evolution. By their own admission. You may find it more "believable" because you already "believe" in God and the Bible. Unfortunately, your "belief" doesn't make it the truth.

I don't really understand your bizarre accusation that because scientists think that man ultimately evolved from more primitive creatures, that is a primitive belief. That makes no sense. Evolution is not about belief, it is about research, testing, and accumulated knowledge. I accept that evolution is at present, the most reasonable and accurate explanation of the diversity of life we see around us.

Answer 6

The first concept of a higher power (one god) was that of Mother Nature!. I believe it was by Humans before we where called ”Homo Sapiens”. Females are the barer of life. Think about this, doesn’t it make more sense that god is a female "Barer of All Life" universal. Evolution is an adjustment to the environment (survival) based on time. Since Mother Nature controls evolution this would combine Science and Religion into one Philosophy of our origin.

Answer 7

Evolution has mountains of evidence including repeatable experimentation, DNA evidence, fossils etc. Intelligent Design has claims by a handful of people who lived almost 2000 years ago. Given the propensity of people in history to make false claims I choose to base my beliefs on evidence.

Answer 8

god is a 2000yrs old fairy tale for primative man it is out of date intellegent design was just the way christians tried to get god into science an faled the same thing thay tried with creation and failed because god is a fairy tale and not real this is the 21centry not the stone age we do not need gods ands monsters like primative man

Answer 9

Because primitive people invented God to explain things that they did not understand. To continue to believe in God when we have the scientific method to help us understand our world is anti- progressive or primitive.

Answer 10

denying cold science in its face is primitive and intentionally regressive behavior.
I know evolution is still and unproven theory, but its so disgustingly possible I consider it to be postulate.
I dont believe it is primitive at all to believe there may be something else greater out there. But to assume we are either the only beast created of its visage is quite vain and cynical a stance to take against all evidence of nature around you.
I believe in a fear of god and the greater unknown mysteries. I believe there may or may not be a greater power. But to assume its identity is to railroad its potential to a dead end mentality about it. I believe the second you stop fearing it or wondering on it is when you limit your own greater capacity for respect and begin to define the world in your own way.
So what is a primitive way to look at things? And what is a highly evolved, or mature, or civil way to look at things then? Which way defines you and which way leaves you ready for anything?
What is the difference?
I dont deny any theory except that we would be the only beast created of God's visage. Or that the earth has only existed for a handful of thousands of years I find laughable. For that is built upon the vanity that we are already devine before we have proven a single intention or regardless of our gain in conscience on the mortal coil. Why is it I have a dog that does not eat me and is friendly to all? Why is it that I have cats that do not fear the dog? In nature they would be enemies, food, predator and prey to one another. They are personified though and friendly towards one another. But to assume they do not have souls, while I might is rediculous.
All I am trying to demonstrate is a middle ground here for you to consider really.
If God is all powerful. Then why dobut his capacity to design and implement life on a planet that indeed did start with bacteria and mutate forward to where we are now? I think arguing against that would be to undermine God's power. That is fairly obvious.
So in essence if I were to tell you you are related to pond algae, perhaps you would take offense. But, I would not. It has a common thread called life. To say it is not of God is to disrespect God's potential to see it there.
So to vainly reorganize your question to serve my own purpose here: I will say that believing in God is definately primitive. I admit perhaps my own healthy dose of fear of the unknown is primitive. But what is worse is to be so tangibly offendable out of private vanity rather than grasping towards truth and pushing truth. I know for a fact I am primitive in my views. Because obviously there is so much more to explore and discover in teh universe.
It is not those athiest folks or an agnostic like me that will bring doom to the world. It is the crazies that believe to thier very core with masturbatious thoughts of glory what lies for them hereafter without any more proof than a few words from other men in the past, vast amounts of respect to idols and a desperation to see a balance for thier vain labors to bear fruit, fulfill their own prophesis and see that reality is the last thing left in consideration. quite primitive.

Answer 11

Intelligent Design is NOT as viable or believable. If that was the case, then it would be taught in classrooms. The problem is...there is NO proof of intelligent design. Evolution, on the other hand, IS taught because it IS proven.