Isis/Osiris consipracy, sexual and occult symbology in art, crucifixion scenes

Mick West

Administrator
Staff member
ancient Babylonian religion of Isis and Osiris and also assert that it is the root of the Illuminati of which many of the elite internationalists are said to be.
That whole Isis and Osiris thing is interesting, as I've heard that people in the chemtrail community basically believe in that (as the deep background to the conspiracy).

Personally I don't see any real evidence for it, and it does not seem like there's going to be any one old mythology like that behind the working of the elite. The billionaires are a very varied bunch, with many different ideas. I suspect they would find such talk quite laughable.
 

Oxymoron

Banned
Banned
That whole Isis and Osiris thing is interesting, as I've heard that people in the chemtrail community basically believe in that (as the deep background to the conspiracy).

Personally I don't see any real evidence for it, and it does not seem like there's going to be any one old mythology like that behind the working of the elite. The billionaires are a very varied bunch, with many different ideas. I suspect they would find such talk quite laughable.
I laughed it off when I first heard about it, I agree it sounds silly. I guess that is why generally people don't investigate it. That and the fact it is time consuming and requires some considerable effort.

I listened to Bill Cooper's "The hour of the time", Mystery Babylon and researched some stuff from there. It is interspersed with some liberal helpings of portents of blood and doom and 'wake up sheeple' etc but the facts are startling and compelling. It is to do with 'deep politics' and the origins thereof and how it affects the here and now because there are (and that is fact), powerful people who believe and practice it. I greatly respect Bill Cooper's work whilst recognising that some of what he said came from his own particular political and religious orientation. He was far from perfect but then who of us are?

The series can be downloaded from
http://www.ukginger.net/mystery-babylon.php

It is well worth listening to and investigating further. Even some parts I was quite sceptical about or which didn't originally make sense to me, after investigation proved to be well founded.

I take on board what you say about the diversity of many of the rich and powerful but we all know that 'the old school tie' or the 'old fraternity' carries weight. Its like a family, brothers and sisters and cousins and parents may all have different leanings or capabilities, likes and dislikes and may well vehemently disagree with each other but they are still tied to each other.

Just an e.g that comes to mind, sorry it won't mean much in the U.S but no doubt there are similar examples of 'groups' that 'go on together' that are more relevant there.
Source: http://hat4uk.wordpress.com/tag/lord-mcalpine/

In the meantime, in what The Slog imagines is an entirely unrelated episode, we turn our attention to Ken Clarke QC MP’s wedding day as part of our new series The Level Playing Fields of Britain. Here we see a gay band of young blades in November 1964 just before Suedophile Ken pledged his troth and went on to claim the glittering prizes. One is struck – is one not? – by the astonishing coincidence via which every last usher invited by Jazzophile Ken went on to equally great things later. Yes, be it stuffing mad cow disease down their kids’ necks or selling out to Brussels, every one of these chaps became a shining light. They began by being awful pretty, and gradually they became pretty awful. Such is life.

{QUOTE}

Its like the knights of old being chivalrous. Undoubtedly they were... to each other but that chivalry did not extend to the peasants. It was a 'self protection code' much like an early Geneva convention but only applying to them and their families not to the riff raff.

http://library.thinkquest.org/10949/fief/medknight.html

[SIZE=+1] The code of chivalry demanded that a knight give mercy to a vanquished enemy. However, the very fact that knights were trained as men of war belied this code. Even though they came from rich families, many knights were not their families' firstborn. They did not receive an inheritance. Thus they were little more than mercenaries. They plundered villages or cities that they captured, often defiling and destroying churches and other property. Also the code of chivalry did not extend to the peasants. The "weak" was widely interpreted as "noble women and children". They were often brutal to common folk. They could sometimes even rape young peasant women without fear of reprisal, all because they were part of the upper class.[/SIZE]

and
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Siege_of_Limoges

When the city wall fell, Froissart mentions the massacre of three thousand inhabitants, men, women and children
Froissart's account is sometimes challenged as French bias.[4] Author Jim Bradbury does not dispute Froissart's account but simply states that Limoges was "not an exceptional atrocity."

I am quite surprised to see the 'Bohemian Grove' subject hasn't been addressed on this forum or the assertion that the Roman Empire didn't really collapse, it merely transformed itself into the Roman Catholic Church. All interesting stuff and all highly relevant to today.

“If you don't know history, then you don't know anything. You are a leaf that doesn't know it is part of a tree. ”
Michael Crichton
 
Last edited by a moderator:

MikeC

Closed Account
Also "Knights" were usually a small minority in medieval armies - the common "rank and file" had no such code even in theory.
 

Oxymoron

Banned
Banned
Also "Knights" were usually a small minority in medieval armies - the common "rank and file" had no such code even in theory.
Good point. It is also why the French Aristocracy were so outraged at the use of English archers who decimated them at Agincourt
 

Mick West

Administrator
Staff member
I laughed it off when I first heard about it, I agree it sounds silly. I guess that is why generally people don't investigate it. That and the fact it is time consuming and requires some considerable effort
So why does nobody spend that considerable effort in making this things more understandable, if it's real?

Why is there no diagram showing the key people involved, with linked reference material?

Why do I have to watch hours of YouTube video, or listen to old talk radio, to see what's going on? Why are sarcastic blogs like the one the Kenneth Clark photo comes from used as sources?

No. I think this is just a theory that people end up wanting to believe, just like all the other elite conspiracy theories. Cherry pick coincidences over a few hundred years and you can make just about any conspiracy you choose. You get a weight of "evidence" that seem convincing because there so much of it, and you can draw lines between bits of it. But really it's just a bunch of stuff, signifying very little beyond that rich people often act in their own self interest, and that who you know is often more important than what you know.

Take a step back. Assume for a while that there is NOT some vast conspiracy. Consider that world view. Now try to fit the observable facts into that world view - come up with plausible explanation for how each fact fits into the non-conspiracy world view.

Which facts can you not make fit?
 

MikeC

Closed Account
Good point. It is also why the French Aristocracy were so outraged at the use of English archers who decimated them at Agincourt
That's mythology - common soldiers had been killing knights since knights were invented. Even in the context of the 100 Years War English archers destroyed the French chivalry at Crecy in 1346 - 70 years before Agincourt.
 

Oxymoron

Banned
Banned
So why does nobody spend that considerable effort in making this things more understandable, if it's real?

Take a step back. Assume for a while that there is NOT some vast conspiracy. Consider that world view. Now try to fit the observable facts into that world view - come up with plausible explanation for how each fact fits into the non-conspiracy world view.

Which facts can you not make fit?
You are talking about thousands of years of history/religion/politics/secrets. People cannot readily make sense of stuff that occurred yesterday or the day before let alone 'thousands of years ago. No one says it is easy and no one is saying you 'must' do anything.

Believe what you like but you are telling people who have researched the subject that 'these things don't exist' and 'look at it this way' but you appear not to wish, for whatever reason, to investigate that which you are saying does not exist.

If I were to say, 'Your contrail explanations are a load of rubbish but I don't really understand what you are talking about and I'm not going to investigate the subject because it takes too long to check it out', what are you going to say? Probably, "fair enough but why are you attacking something you know nothing about?"

I refer back to the quote I used before:
“If you don't know history, then you don't know anything. You are a leaf that doesn't know it is part of a tree. ”
Michael Crichton

But that is fine, many people are quite happy to live with that, they like the simple life, no problem.
 

MikeC

Closed Account
Believe what you like but you are telling people who have researched the subject that 'these things don't exist' and 'look at it this way' but you appear not to wish, for whatever reason, to investigate that which you are saying does not exist.
Lots of people have "investigated" the same subjects and come to much more posaic conclusions than those who believe it is all part of some conspiracy or other, including people on here.

The fact that there are simpler explainations offered does not mean there was no research done to achieve them.
 

Mick West

Administrator
Staff member
If I were to say, 'Your contrail explanations are a load of rubbish but I don't really understand what you are talking about and I'm not going to investigate the subject because it takes too long to check it out', what are you going to say? Probably, "fair enough but why are you attacking something you know nothing about?"
Okay, what would be the equivalent of ContrailScience.com then? Where's something that even claims to be a simple written guide? I'd like to investigate, but I like material that is written down and has sources. Where is that?

I'm a big fan of history. I've a histomap of world history on my wall.
 

MikeC

Closed Account
And while I don't read Greek or Latin I have translations of Xenophon, Caesar, Thucidydes, Livy and Plutarch's "Parallel Lives" and others in Penguin editions from 30+ years ago - I started collecting as a teen. Thucidydes "The Peloponesian War" is particularly well worn, as is Livy's "The War with Hannibal". I have Loeb editions of Dio Cassius & Frontinus (Stratagems and Aqueducts) in the original with English on the facing pages, I have multiple modern works of military history from Babylonia to WW2 - about 35-40 shelf feet worth.

At the moment I am reading "Sowing the Dragons Teeth" and also have "Maurices Stratagikon" listed under "frequently brought together" and "Three Byzantine Military Treatises" and "The Byzantine Wars" under "customers also bought"- I spend WAAAAY too much on "ancient" (ie pre-gunpowder) historical works!!

now none of this is "alternative" or conspiracy" source material to be sure - but like Mick I have a long held and deep interest in history that dates back to my high school days when I took history in 5th form rather than a more "academic" topic, and my BA major is history, finished part time at a time when I was an aircraft mechanic and in my mid-30's!

so please do not assume that people on here have no interest in history!!
 

Jazzy

Closed Account
And while I don't read Greek or Latin I have translations of Xenophon, Caesar, Thucidydes, Livy and Plutarch's "Parallel Lives" and others in Penguin editions from 30+ years ago - I started collecting as a teen. Thucidydes "The Peloponesian War" is particularly well worn, as is Livy's "The War with Hannibal". I have Loeb editions of Dio Cassius & Frontinus (Stratagems and Aqueducts) in the original with English on the facing pages, I have multiple modern works of military history from Babylonia to WW2 - about 35-40 shelf feet worth.
Please stop before I die of jealousy. :)

I studied Virgil in the Latin, discovering how Achilles slew Hector the hard way. Now I regret my reaction to that, which was to concentrate on science, music, and art. I have a huge backlog of historical reading to do now...
 

Oxymoron

Banned
Banned
Guys, please don't personalise it, I did not mean to impugn your knowledge of history. I certainly do not claim historian status myself. All I was saying is, if you really want to debunk an idea, you should have as good a knowledge about the subject as possible and that will in this case need to include the esoteric understanding of Isis?Osiris and Horus and the connections which run through to the alleged Illuminati today.

It is not easy. It is not like regular history. Why? Because it is esoteric, arcane, occult, all of which simply mean 'hidden'!

Finding stuff which is hidden is naturally difficult especially if it is hidden by highly intelligent and secretive people. Add to that, most people believe occult means evil, satanic, witchcraft and are constantly told to 'avoid it like the plague or you will be taken over by demons and cast into hell'.

It is therefore unsurprising it is a path less well trod.

Mick has asked 'where is the website that proves all this', 'the equivalent of chemtrails.com'?

Well chemtrails are not really my interest and I don't feel qualified enough to give an opinion on them but I have looked at it and it definitely offers some powerful arguments against but I can't in all honesty say it 'disproves the existence of chemtrails.

But that is besides the point. I could argue 'where is the website that proves it doesn't exist' but that would really be counterproductive IMO

So what I propose is to ask a few questions, ask you to watch a few videos, analyse a few pictures and visit a few websites and see what we can all learn, if anything, from this experience.

Religion is at the base of all this and it matters not whether you believe in God or not or a particular religion or not. It is about what 'some' people in power believe, people who have the power to affect world changing events and policies.

So I propose you bear with me and we start with the following pic and I ask that you briefly describe what you see. You may want to blow it up a bit to make it clearer.

 
Last edited by a moderator:

Mick West

Administrator
Staff member
Why don't you just tell us what the point is. We are all intelligent people here, you don't need to gently lead us. Just explain.
 

Oxymoron

Banned
Banned
Why don't you just tell us what the point is. We are all intelligent people here, you don't need to gently lead us. Just explain.
I asked for the courtesy of allowing me to present an argument. It is a very intricate and largely hidden subject.

I am trying to make said argument in as concise and cogent manner as possible. With the best will in the world, I cannot write a few lines and hey presto 'prove' a theory. My time constraints will mean that I can only present it piecemeal.

I thought we were all discussing this as mature adults who share an interest, albeit from different perspectives, in conspiracy theories.

If you have a genuine interest, and I have no reason to suppose to the contrary, then please extend to me the requested courtesy. As I have stated before, there is no compulsion for anyone to read what I say, let alone give it any weight. We are all volunteers here.
 

Mick West

Administrator
Staff member
I suspect that interpreting that as a phallic image is something of a modern phenomena. We are exposed far more now to sexual imagery in various forms, and are far less familiar with highly emaciated bodies than people were in the middle ages (a time when sexual images were very unfamiliar, but death and starvation was all around).

You can see the shape that is being illustrated in this concentration camp survivor.

 
Last edited:

Mick West

Administrator
Staff member
I asked for the courtesy of allowing me to present an argument. It is a very intricate and largely hidden subject.

I am trying to make said argument in as concise and cogent manner as possible. With the best will in the world, I cannot write a few lines and hey presto 'prove' a theory. My time constraints will mean that I can only present it piecemeal.
Then present it. You don't have to ask what people see in an image, and just hint around the subject. Tell us what the point of the image is. What is it evidence of?
 

Oxymoron

Banned
Banned
I see a crucifix. I remember this being in the news a while ago because some people though the abdominal region looked a bit like a penis. I'm guessing that's Mary and Joseph at the bottom, then some angels, and God the Father on top?

It says IC XC, which are abbreviations for Jesus Christ.
Yes, many people have objected to it as being blasphemous and are told, 'you are imagining it' or 'I do not see it' or 'It does not exist' or it is simply pareidolia.

The interesting thing is that those self same arguments are used to 'debunk' many conspiracy theories.

Another interesting thing is the link you provide is not to the pic that I used but to another one 'of very many' instances where this has occurred throughout the ages and by very famous artists. In fact there are a number of them illustrated at that very site.

Artists are very precise, they do not accidentally do things and for 'many artists' to repeatedly do it over and over again cannot be put down to accident especially in such a serious matter of religion which could have resulted in torture and death for blasphemy/desecration.

Here is some more for you to consider, if you so wish.

http://malachitewitch.com/Did You Know/penis_worship.htm

Another insight to phallic worship in churches presented its self after World War 2, England. After investigating a recent bombing of an old church. At its alter, was found to have a large stone phallus within it. Further research showed that alters of approximately 90% of English churches built before 1348, had hidden stone phalli.

By Pagan tradition, the alter symbolised the female body - which is why Witches sometimes use a naked woman as their alter. Not wanting to be outdone, the churchmen inserted (no pun intended) their own representation of their worship - the penis - their hidden god!
 

George B

Extinct but not forgotten Staff Member
Yes, many people have objected to it as being blasphemous and are told, 'you are imagining it' or 'I do not see it' or 'It does not exist' or it is simply pareidolia.

The interesting thing is that those self same arguments are used to 'debunk' many conspiracy theories.

Another interesting thing is the link you provide is not to the pic that I used but to another one 'of very many' instances where this has occurred throughout the ages and by very famous artists. In fact there are a number of them illustrated at that very site.

Artists are very precise, they do not accidentally do things and for 'many artists' to repeatedly do it over and over again cannot be put down to accident especially in such a serious matter of religion which could have resulted in torture and death for blasphemy/desecration.

Here is some more for you to consider, if you so wish.

http://malachitewitch.com/Did%20You%20Know/penis_worship.htm

Another insight to phallic worship in churches presented its self after World War 2, England. After investigating a recent bombing of an old church. At its alter, was found to have a large stone phallus within it. Further research showed that alters of approximately 90% of English churches built before 1348, had hidden stone phalli.

By Pagan tradition, the alter symbolised the female body - which is why Witches sometimes use a naked woman as their alter. Not wanting to be outdone, the churchmen inserted (no pun intended) their own representation of their worship - the penis - their hidden god!
Interesting concept . . . sort of an inside joke for the higher ups in the organization . . .
 

Mick West

Administrator
Staff member
Yes, many people have objected to it as being blasphemous and are told, 'you are imagining it' or 'I do not see it' or 'It does not exist' or it is simply pareidolia.

The interesting thing is that those self same arguments are used to 'debunk' many conspiracy theories.

Another interesting thing is the link you provide is not to the pic that I used but to another one 'of very many' instances where this has occurred throughout the ages and by very famous artists. In fact there are a number of them illustrated at that very site.

Artists are very precise, they do not accidentally do things and for 'many artists' to repeatedly do it over and over again cannot be put down to accident especially in such a serious matter of religion which could have resulted in torture and death for blasphemy/desecration.
You posted a Bigallo crucifix. It's a derivation of the San Damiano cross. In the image you posted the delineation of the muscles is much more stylized, giving the more exaggerated effect. Icon painters generally copy other icon paintings, so that they look similar is not surprising. Here are two version of the Bigallo crucifix, obviously copied:




Sources:
http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Maestro_del_bigallo,_crocifisso_del_bigallo.jpg
http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Maestro_del_bigallo,_crocifisso_di_palazzo_barberini.jpg

I don't wish to be rude, but perhaps can you say where this is leading? Is the supposed inclusion of phalluses in religious art supposed to indicate something in particular, or is it simply suspicious?
 
Last edited:

Oxymoron

Banned
Banned
You posted a Bigallo crucifix. It's a derivation of the San Damiano cross. In the image you posted the delineation of the muscles is much more stylized, giving the more exaggerated effect. Icon painters generally copy other icon paintings, so that they look similar is not surprising. Here are two version of the Bigallo crucifix, obviously copied:




Sources:
http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Maestro_del_bigallo,_crocifisso_del_bigallo.jpg
http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Maestro_del_bigallo,_crocifisso_di_palazzo_barberini.jpg

I don't wish to be rude, but perhaps can you say where this is leading? Is the supposed inclusion of phalluses in religious art supposed to indicate something in particular, or is it simply suspicious?
"or is it simply suspicious?"

Would you mind elaborating on that, how would it be 'suspicious', is there an implication?
 
Last edited by a moderator:

Pete Tar

Senior Member
There's people that find phalluses in disney cartoons and think that proves a deliberate subliminal satanic agenda.
Penis! So what? It's just a relic of a puritan cultural hangup. You have to have a repressive christian interpretation of sex for a phallus to represent anything sinister.

People have been fascinated with genitals for as long as we've had them. And we do tend to visually turn things into them very easily.
 

Mick West

Administrator
Staff member
"or is it simply suspicious?"

Would you mind elaborating on that, how would it be 'suspicious', is there an implication?
I mean: is there a specific meaning? I don't know how you might think it suspicious. If you don't think it is then say so. If you do think it is then explain why. Please don't dance around the point.
 

Mick West

Administrator
Staff member
As an aside, years ago I worked as a programmer on a game, and the artist actually was prone to inserting hidden phalli in the artwork. Here's the cover for the game with a rather prominent example.



However he was not part of any ancient conspiracy or hidden religion, he just found it amusing.
 
Last edited:

Oxymoron

Banned
Banned
I mean: is there a specific meaning? I don't know how you might think it suspicious. If you don't think it is then say so. If you do think it is then explain why. Please don't dance around the point.
Well hang on a minute, I didn't say "or is it simply suspicious", you did. I simply questioned what you meant by it. You know me, I do look for occult/hidden meaning and simply couldn't fathom what you meant by it. Apparently you didn't mean anything but I would rather know.

Ok, so you said previously "That whole Isis and Osiris thing is interesting, as I've heard that people in the chemtrail community basically believe in that (as the deep background to the conspiracy)."

Me trying to be helpful, followed it up with... and here we are.

So, yes I am offering some evidence as to how the Isis/Osiris pervaded the Christian religion and was actually put in there by The Pope Constantine and his followers.

A small part of the evidence is the use of 'The missing part' in the Osiris story which is the phallus which denotes the 'generative part' of the religion. The story has an exoteric and an esoteric meaning. I am telling you the esoteric meaning and how it was hidden 'with the knowledge of the Papacy' within the Churches and doctrines of Christianity. How 'The Sabbath' was substituted for 'Sunday' which is pagan. How Christmas and Easter and many other 'Holy Days' are simply Pagan and go back to Osiris symbolised by 'the Sun' I touched on it briefly in another thread.

http://en.wikibooks.org/wiki/Hebrew_Roots/Neglected_Commandments/Idolatry/Satan's_Birthday

There are many instances of the Mockery of Christ not just the two that you cite. If you want more I am happy to provide them.

The important thing here is, these mockeries have the blessing of the Church.

You are talking about a time when 'witch trials' and the Inquisition were rampant. Who in their right mind was going to 'accidentally' or 'as a joke' put something in plain sight unless they were told to or had permission.

Who, under those oppressive and dangerous times would dare to point out 'The King Has No Clothes'!

Similarly today, most of the congregation sits there 'oblivious', if it is spoken of the speaker is made to feel at fault, they have imagined it, they have 'dirty minds', the Papacy approves it

It is the tip of the iceberg.

Its up to you, if you don't want to pursue it that is fair enough but I thought you were interested in Conspiracy Theories.
 

Mick West

Administrator
Staff member
I've been taught since a small child (in England) that Christian rituals have pagan origins. Christmas and Easter in particular were always known to be based on older pagan festivals. So I'm a little bemused as to the point you are making. Perhaps it comes as more as a surprise to people brought up in some American religions?

I think you've got off on the wrong foot with this particular image. I don't think it is deliberate, it's just abs.

Why don't you point out the evidence for "Isis/Osiris pervaded the Christian religion and was actually put in there by The Pope Constantine and his followers" and explain how it actually influences events today. Are you saying that people like Rockefeller are worshiping Isis/Osiris, or that there's some cult that's derived from it? Or just that they use the symbology for effect?
 

Mick West

Administrator
Staff member
You are talking about a time when 'witch trials' and the Inquisition were rampant. Who in their right mind was going to 'accidentally' or 'as a joke' put something in plain sight unless they were told to or had permission..
As a joke, probably not. But accidentally? Why not? Some devout christian artist diligently copying what he thinks is a holy work of art, puts a bit more shading on the abs than before? It seems eminently plausible.
 

George B

Extinct but not forgotten Staff Member
I've been taught since a small child (in England) that Christian rituals have pagan origins. Christmas and Easter in particular were always known to be based on older pagan festivals. So I'm a little bemused as to the point you are making. Perhaps it comes as more as a surprise to people brought up in some American religions?

I think you've got off on the wrong foot with this particular image. I don't think it is deliberate, it's just abs.

Why don't you point out the evidence for "Isis/Osiris pervaded the Christian religion and was actually put in there by The Pope Constantine and his followers" and explain how it actually influences events today. Are you saying that people like Rockefeller are worshiping Isis/Osiris, or that there's some cult that's derived from it? Or just that they use the symbology for effect?
So what is your take on the purpose of religion in general and Christianity specifically . . . ?? I know from ethnology the almost universal presence of religious practice and belief in human populations of all sizes and sophistication . . .
 

Mick West

Administrator
Staff member
So what is your take on the purpose of religion in general and Christianity specifically . . . ??
Purpose? I don't think it has a purpose in the sense of "the elite invented Christianity in order to ..."

It think it's a natural emergent human behavior. Christianity - well, it's just a very successful religion that's all. I think religions evolve via mutation and natural selection. Christianity is just how things ended up. If you look at the history of the Christian church it basically operated as a very successful franchise system, monks would go out, establish churches and funnel money back to Rome. The profit incentive was a strong evolutionary driving force. But I don't see a conspiracy or purpose for the church any more than I see one for McDonalds.
 

MikeC

Closed Account
Of course Christianity was the 2nd arm of government after Constantine II made it the official religion of the empire - and the effortof of Julian the apostate to repress it again just a few decades later bespeak to both a personal and political interst in it from the rulers.

but before then the worship of Roman Emperors was nothing new, Pharos had been "living Gods", and pretty much everty organised state had a "state religion" that helped keep people in line - one of the charges agaisnt Socrates that resulted in him "taking the hemlock" was "impiety" - and that by a "democracy"!

Again at the Peace of Augsburg 1555 we have this personal and political element reinvented for the pre-modern world with cuius regio, eius religio - whose realm his religion - the peasants are required to adopt the religion of the ruler of the state.

In these later times changing religion was sometimes as much a political act as one of conscience just like it was for constantine and Julian - as when Henry IV of France reportedly said "Paris is well worth a mass", converting from Huguenot to Catholic to obtain the throne of France in 1593 (he had been born Catholic but converted when his mother did).

I see nothing different in these ancient and late Renaissance attitudes, and not much difference between them and such modern politicians for whom religion is important - whethe they be moslem, christian, budhist or jewish or anythign else - if they can find a way to use religion to their advantage (personaly or politicially) they will do so.
 

George B

Extinct but not forgotten Staff Member
Purpose? I don't think it has a purpose in the sense of "the elite invented Christianity in order to ..."

It think it's a natural emergent human behavior. Christianity - well, it's just a very successful religion that's all. I think religions evolve via mutation and natural selection. Christianity is just how things ended up. If you look at the history of the Christian church it basically operated as a very successful franchise system, monks would go out, establish churches and funnel money back to Rome. The profit incentive was a strong evolutionary driving force. But I don't see a conspiracy or purpose for the church any more than I see one for McDonalds.
I am thinking more in . . . what need does religion fill in the lives of people . . . it must be a strong need for religion to be so universal a human trait . . .
 

Mick West

Administrator
Staff member
I am thinking more in . . . what need does religion fill in the lives of people . . . it must be a strong need for religion to be so universal a human trait . . .
People like certainty. It's an evolutionary trait. Uncertainty is fear, which is danger. I think it fills that simply need, but that need could be better filled with other things (like science)

Anyway, that would just be me armchairing. I'm sure you can find plenty of theories on the internet. Here's a page of stuff about evolutionary psychology in religions:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Evolutionary_psychology_of_religion

I generally agree with Richard Dawkins.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_God_Delusion#Roots_of_religion_and_morality
 

George B

Extinct but not forgotten Staff Member
People like certainty. It's an evolutionary trait. Uncertainty is fear, which is danger. I think it fills that simply need, but that need could be better filled with other things (like science)

Anyway, that would just be me armchairing. I'm sure you can find plenty of theories on the internet. Here's a page of stuff about evolutionary psychology in religions:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Evolutionary_psychology_of_religion

I generally agree with Richard Dawkins.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_God_Delusion#Roots_of_religion_and_morality
How do you explain the following:

1) Miracles
2) Religious visions
3) Spiritual possession
4) Exorcism
 

MikeC

Closed Account
My own personal belief is that religion was created in order to explain the unkown - the sun rising and setting, the progression of the seasons, the good or bad hunting. By inventing a deity who could control these things, and pretending we could affect the behaviour of such a deity "we" (humans) gained some illusion of control over these otherwise unfathomable aspects of the universe. I can't tell you who I got this idea from -as it was a while ago now - rest assured I am not capable of such deep and original thought :)

Following this reasoning I "explain" those things as something "we" do not yet fully understand but have invented a religious (mythical IMO) explaination for to assuage our ignorance.

However science seems to be drawing back the veil of ignorance on the possiession/exorcism side of things slowly - possession is now often though to be epilepsy, or, more recently possibly also anti-NMDA receptor encephalitis
 
Top