Since religion or spiritual beliefs have been part of human society for thousands of years by billions of people, it must fill certain human “needs.” It doesn't seem to matter what “gods”, beliefs or practices – as long as some supernatural force is recognized.

Can we identify those needs that account for the prevalence of religious beliefs? I'll start with a few basic ideas.



1. Explain the unknown: It seems to make little difference whether the explanation is correct or even rational, as long as there is some answer to “why” or “how” things exist or occur. Spirits, gods, or sins can be evoked to account for droughts, storms, illness, etc (and thereby relieve the necessity of seeking a true explanation or cause and effect relationship).

2. Allay fear of death: with proposal of a “soul” (or something else) that continues to exist after a person dies – and a promise of “everlasting life”, or heaven, or reincarnation, etc. It doesn't seem to matter if the proposed “afterlife” is true or not as long as it is believed.

3. Provide structure: Many or most prefer a set of rules to follow. If a “god” can be visualized as the origin of a code of conduct, individuals and societies can simply follow (or expand) the rules without need for decisions about right and wrong.

4. Priest class: Individuals can gain influence (and possible wealth) by identifying themselves as “representatives of god” or some variation of that claim. All that is required is that they convince others that they have some special knowledge of or relationship with a supernatural being or force.

5. Give life “meaning”: (Perhaps someone can expand on this?)

I don't know people who 'need' religion so the answer escapes me

those I know 'choose', religion, God, themselves as God, ,,,or whatever it is that structures their own way of life,,,

If religion did not fill some common human need it doesn't seem as though it would be so persistent over time and population.

Perhaps people "choose" one of the religions or belief systems that fills their "need." For instance, we "choose" to eat when we experience the need known as hunger.

I "choose" Non-Theism because I do not fear of death (preferably well into the future). I look for answers to the "unknown" in the real world and am not hesitant to accept "I just don't know" when answers are elusive. I decidedly do NOT want structure imposed by others (particularly by preachers, politicians or public consensus -- but decide what I think best under the circumstances (based partially on wide reading of great thinkers of the past and present and primarily upon my own decisions -- for which I take full responsibility).

My life has great "meaning" without linking that somehow to a deity or supernatural spirit (or karma, the universe, friendly spirits or whatever). I damn sure don't aspire to fame and fortune through becoming a guru or preacher or "leader" to others.

And yet you frequent the general religion board so often John. But maybe you, like me, enjoy the thrill of debating people who haven't given due diligence to their research. =)

Speaking of which, how about those autism-causing vaccines? hehe =p

I have autism myself, but it certainly did not come from a clean needle.

perhaps some people do,, I do no tknow those people

my choice is just my choice,, its not born of need but options and preference,,,

many things have been around ,,murder, nations, politics,,, I dont know that any of them are much more than a natural capacity to choose options that best fit not only needs, but wants

people choose things out of WANT ,, or Need, or Both

I chose religion because I Wanted to, those I know made a similar choice

Mark,

I enjoy debating several topics including religion. In my experience most religionists are NOT very well informed about religion in general or even the basics and history of their chosen belief system (beyond dogma).

Most seem to have adopted a religion that is popular in their culture and accept "on faith" what they are told or what they read -- without giving serious consideration to truth, accuracy, applicability or alternatives.

Christians I have debated have usually been poorly or incorrectly informed about how the bible came into existence or how Christianity became a dominant religion (by being selected as the official religion of the Roman empire -- or why that occurred).

Most may know the stories and some favorite verses, but seem unaware that those stories were written decades or generations after the claimed events or conversations -- by people whose identity is unknown (beyond assigned names, Mathew, Mark, etc) and who cannot be shown to have witnessed what they write about -- and their sources of information are equally unknown.

Testimonials, particularly if they are ancient, seem to convince many that the writer had special knowledge of "gods" or supernaturalism.

It is surprising how often Pascal's Wager is offered as a "Killer Argument" in spite of it's glaring flaws.

I studied sociology and psycology.Its broaderns the mind.But the spiritual world exsists.I follow my religion coz if i didn't i wld die,i wld look alive to u.I didn't choose it,it chose me.What we experience and wat is revealed to us determines our reaction and dat in turn a result,all are variables.God and his son Jesus christ are a constant.Science jst a clever subject.

I never understood the belief in religion myself. I know some look at it as giving hope and I think if it gives them strength; who am I to question it? As long as it brings them happiness; that is what counts.

people invented religion , and as usual , invention is needed by people to take advantage of each others by it's means .

Tens of thousands of religions, cults, sect, denominations, etc worshiping (and/or fearing, loving, hating, inventing) THOUSANDS of proposed "gods."

If one of the proposed "gods" was real, a person has half a percent chance of guessing the right one (in a minimum of 2000 listed). Yet almost all worshipers are absolutely convinced that their "god" is real and all others are "false gods." The irony . . . . the bigotry . . . .

Professional religionists (any whose income is derived partially or wholly from religious services) and organized / commercial religions (any who accumulate wealth, including palaces of worship) prosper by convincing customers (known as parishioners, "the faithful", or other euphemistic terms) to support the religious establishment and hierarchy.

Religious promotion is similar to any other commercial promotional activity – create a "need", offer a "solution", and emphasize product differentiation ("our in-group is superior to others, we are special, we're going to heaven and they are going to hell, etc"). This, of course, results in divisiveness, distance, distrust, disrespect – and often suspicion, hostility, conflict and even warfare.

People tend to adopt religions and "gods" that are popular or acceptable in their society, family, or association groups ("I just happened to choose Islam in a society that is 95% Muslim --�� or Christianity in a society that is 80% Christian").

Most appear to believe (at least outwardly or to some extent) that what they are told about religion and "gods" by clerics or religious writers. Those who obey clerics and writers are promised rewards (often "after you die" -- which insures no returning dissatisfied customers) and those who disobey clerics are threatened with "eternal punishment" by some sects (and in many instances actual physical punishment in real life at the hands of religionists).

Since there is no verifiable evidence that humans possess a "soul" (or any facet that transcends death), and that the supposed "afterlife" exists or that reincarnation occurs, the religious promises and threats cannot be shown to be anything more than products of human imagination.

Yes, religion is said to provide hope for the hopeless, relief for the downtrodden, reassurance concerning death, "meaning" for life, and rules to live by. Those items are important to some people and not to others.

Being believed by millions or billions is NO assurance of truth or accuracy. When the vast majority of people thought disease, drought, famine, storms, and/or defeat in battle were "punishment for sins against gods" or "the work of demons", neither was truthful or accurate. When most believed that the sun orbited the Earth, that was likewise dead wrong, no matter how many believed otherwise.

Beliefs are like that -- opinions that may be right or may be wrong -- usually without available means to determine which.

people will choose what their experience and surroundings support,,,human life comes with the natural tendency to adapt and to acquire a belief system

being right or wrong is not always something that is quantifiable when it comes to values or the intangible,,

Since beliefs regarding the intangible (defined as: Incapable of being perceived by the senses; and/or Incapable of being realized or defined) are personal opinion and preference, "right" and "wrong" (or correct / incorrect) don't seem to apply as they might in those things that can be detected and studied using the senses (including instruments).

Thus, ANY belief regarding characteristics or attributes of the invisible / undetectable must be considered as valid (or invalid) as any other since none can, by definition, be substantiated.

Unfortunately, a human tendency seems to be to regard one's personal opinions and preferences as superior to those of others -- "My favorite god is real and all others are false" or "I know how to worship and others are wrong" etc.

Actually msharmony hit the nail on the head,it's because people choose it.Still a lot has to do with influence from parents to children but as they become adults religion can be up to the individual.Do i need it ,nope it serves no purpose to me.Hindus,christians,jews and muslims they seem to follow the traditions and choose to accept their faiths.
I choose not to accept deities as the answer for purpose.Why? Cause man created purpose just like they invented gods.

written history is often 'substantiation' of things we didn't personally see or experience,,,,

as is verbal history,, as in when my mom tells me about her grandmother, I trust she is being truthful,, though I can be wrong because I wasn't around WITH her grandmother


the books of the bible are substantiating for billions, as are the words of Jesus regarding the father that are contained within it,,,

we all do everything from choice, some choices are harder than others and some choices suck, but except for being born or dying, there is nothing we do that we do not choose to do

whether it is be 'allegiant to the flag',, or 'loyal to the country' or 'God fearing',,,,

we all choose standards,,,its just human

. That's too good.

Nobody needs religion we as humans need simple things take it back to hunter & gatherer we need air,food,water,shelter and love. You know it's funny all these remote places on earth where people still farm hunt and live off the land they are all statistically happy than us in this reality or so called real world. I think we might have created some kind of missing link between us an nature an it's reality. Ancient tribes in the past and today contact they're gods through meditation and psychedelics in saying this I'm far from a religious person, Though I'm down with the beliefs of being able to interact with some sort of higher being in some sort of alternate consciousness. Peace

Going back to live the way the Australian Aborigines live,without all the Survival-Savvy?
Good Luck!

Are you serious dude I'm sure the aborigines were fine surviving before white man arrived.

Written and verbal history is transmitted by humans, who are fallible, subject to error and inaccurate observations or conclusions, almost always biased in some degree or direction, sometimes deceptive or downright fraudulent. What is written as "history" represents one person's or one group's opinion of events.

Historians attempt to minimize these problems when possible by consulting a number of sources discussing an historical person or event, "disconnected" sources representing different viewpoints, to allow "cross-checking" for verification. When many sources present very similar accounts that lends credibility. When there are conflicting reports or only single or limited source, credibility is questionable.

Religious writings, the bible included, are not intended as historical documents (or generally regarded as such by theologians and scholars). Although they may contain occasional historically accurate information, their purpose is to promote a religious view (i.e. they are strongly biased). The stories they tell and claims they make about people, conversations or events are very seldom recorded by "disconnected sources." Particularly, claims of "miracles" and supernatural events are not reported by sources outside the religious writings themselves.



We tend to trust mother because we have a personal relationship with her, we observe her integrity and her reputation for truthfulness. However, we tend to be less trusting of anonymous people whose reputation for honesty and accuracy we do not know.

The identity and characteristics of bible writers is largely unknown. Even concerning Mathew, Mark, etc, theologians and scholars know almost nothing -- even their actual identity or name. What is known is that they wrote about people, events and conversations from decades or generations earlier, they did not likely observe any of the events or conversations they describe – and their sources of information are unknown.

That gospel writers sometimes tell similar stories is very weak "substantiation" -- just as having four salesmen working for the same company making overlapping claims (and perhaps copying from each other) cannot rationally be regarded as substantiating one another.

I see all religions as a means of control and power. Your given a set of guide lines to live by and if you violate that something bad will happen too you when you die. So even if we don't catch you, god will catch you and god knows what you did. More people have died and been horribly tortured in the name of religion than any other group.