Budding process of religion

[Redratio1]

I'm talk specifically about how religions develope through time. If you look at the growth of many religions they are usually based on previous traditions. Judaism has its roots in older traditions Zoroastism and more older Egyptian, and Babylonian influences. More importantly Judaism has spawned off a multitude of different religions. Most importantly for today are Christianity and Islam.

Christianity budded off into two subspecies almost immediately into the Romcan Catholic and the Greek Othodox, but even before that different sects were spring up vying for dominance. Then the Roman Catholic church budded into Protestant and Anglican, which just opened up the gates for different sects to developed.

I wonder how long before an entirely new species like the formation of the Christian religion out of Judaism, and Islam out of Judaism. Mormons are a contender, but so are strange sci-fi cults, new age religions, Pentacostals, or just plain old Baptists.

Another thing to wonder is if Islam is in the throes of a new revolution, after its own division into Sunni and Shia. A new prophet to guide a next species offspring of their religion? The field in Islam globally today is ripe with messianic characters. Khomeni was one of the greats for Shia. Bin Laden is one for radical violent Sunni conender. I'm sure there are many hundreds variations and personas I am leaving out.

[JoeR]

Hopefully it will just all die out

[cpwill]

almost immediately? it wasn't for 1,000 years that roman catholicism and greek orthodox split off..... heck, they split after the sunni/shia split, and they had a 600 year lead :p

as for zorastronarianism; it'd be tough to prove judaism as an offshoot, or even recieiving much from that religion; you'd have to prove a much more extensive network than is currently expected to have been prior to the establishment of the various biblical traditions.

[Redratio1]

You're right 1000 years, but Judaism is like 6000 years old.

What about my premise of my article, intead of picking out details.

[Redratio1]

Ok this thread is dead, but I wanted to kick it one more time to point out my motivation for it was to show that religions also go through an evolutionary cycle. The create new species, that try to usurp the previous or the adjacent religion.

[Smurf]

Religion implies knowledge out of faith, essentially it is a way for one person to justify their superiority over another. Religion is immoral and a perversion of the Basic Instincts of humanity.

It will change as long as Humanity is changing, or untill Humanity evolves beyond it's use.

[Redratio1]

It will change as long as Humanity is changing, or untill Humanity evolves beyond it's use.
It is a slave to the process of evolution and change like everything else in this universe.

[cpwill]

You're right 1000 years, but Judaism is like 6000 years old.

and doesn't show many serious signs of having been all that based off of zorastronarianism, the fact that there are parrallels is rather a flawed argument; as there are parrallel factors existant in virtually all religious beliefs, including those independently arising.

What about my premise of my article, intead of picking out details.

the premise isnt' something you want to lean on too heavily. certainly some religions are offshoots of or borrow heavily from others; however, there are too many independently arising religious beliefs to try to trace it back to some kind of single source, and no reason to try.

[MikeD4o7]

No reason to trace it back to one single source from tradition, but looking at it's roots in human psychology and sociology certainly fits pretty well. The fact that similar religions arise in socieities with similar structures should tell us at least something.

[HAVOC451]

No reason to trace it back to one single source from tradition, but looking at it's roots in human psychology and sociology certainly fits pretty well. The fact that similar religions arise in socieities with similar structures should tell us at least something.

Indeed it does. All religious writings are chronicals of human experience so they naturally have similarities. Religions also point to our human need to know the unknown. We simply must know why things are and we will not rest untill we have an answer even if we have to make it up.

[Simba]

I'm talk specifically about how religions develope through time. If you look at the growth of many religions they are usually based on previous traditions. Judaism has its roots in older traditions Zoroastism and more older Egyptian, and Babylonian influences. More importantly Judaism has spawned off a multitude of different religions. Most importantly for today are Christianity and Islam.

Christianity budded off into two subspecies almost immediately into the Romcan Catholic and the Greek Othodox, but even before that different sects were spring up vying for dominance. Then the Roman Catholic church budded into Protestant and Anglican, which just opened up the gates for different sects to developed.

I wonder how long before an entirely new species like the formation of the Christian religion out of Judaism, and Islam out of Judaism. Mormons are a contender, but so are strange sci-fi cults, new age religions, Pentacostals, or just plain old Baptists.

Another thing to wonder is if Islam is in the throes of a new revolution, after its own division into Sunni and Shia. A new prophet to guide a next species offspring of their religion? The field in Islam globally today is ripe with messianic characters. Khomeni was one of the greats for Shia. Bin Laden is one for radical violent Sunni conender. I'm sure there are many hundreds variations and personas I am leaving out.

Sorry. I came in thinking this was about buds......which I like...*begins to bow out, then changes mind to add*

I do rather like religion. I like the architecture, the music, can't imagine a world without it. You know. Now some can be stuffy, but you just got to pick the one thats good for you. They grew as they did based on need of the time. Guess you could call that budding. Hell, sure we could, I mean, whats this Mana From Heaven stuff, all over the bushes. If those weren't buds I don't know what is.

*Gets up...stretches.....finishes off coffee...signs off the forum...then yells to the girls to get in the truck for mass at St. Joan of Arc*

[xexon]

All things evolve. Those that don't, die.



x

[cpwill]

No reason to trace it back to one single source from tradition, but looking at it's roots in human psychology and sociology certainly fits pretty well. The fact that similar religions arise in socieities with similar structures should tell us at least something.

:shrug: the psychological and sociological nature of religion has been well established; it alters nothing and rather serves (i believe) to argue my side.

[MikeD4o7]

the psychological and sociological nature of religion has been well established; it alters nothing and rather serves (i believe) to argue my side.

How so? Maybe if they all established the same kind of deity then I could see how it would support your side... but even if you look at the most basic religions based on magics then you see them arising from the same social structures (tribal)... all the way up to religions with patriarchal deities arising in patriarchal societies.

[cpwill]

yeah, and why do you suppose that is?

[MikeD4o7]

The short answer, because similar societies are likely to come up with similar answers to similar questions... they rely on mostly the same things for survival therefor they hold the same things sacred. For example, there's a perfectly reasonable explanation why cows are considered sacred to Hindus, and why the consumption of pork is generally shunned in older middle-eastern religions.

[cpwill]

alright; so growth pattern is established, then; but what is the source.

[MikeD4o7]

The source is intelligence, symbolic capacity, and so on. Basically it's the way that questions needed to be answered. If you had no clue about what the sun actually was, but observed it... you would want an explanation too. If you were a person a long time ago before really any science was known at all... you wouldn't conclude anything about it being a burning ball of gas that's being moved by the force of gravity. You would probably accept whatever explanation seemed the most plausible to you given your experiences, knowledge, etc etc.

This is why a common thread that links almost all religions is the importance of the "breath" as it's connected to the actual life/soul/spirit or whatever. When somebody dies, they stop breathing. It's the first noticeable change in the person that you would see everytime somebody died. This accounts for why almost all descriptions of a soul or spirit or lifeforce in almost every culture is given a gaseous quality. It's described as floating, rising, escaping... etc etc.

That's one small example but that kind of thing applies to pretty much everything... sometimes it's much more complex than that... but there's a logical, anthropological, and sociological reason for the way that every religion developed the way that it did.. from the main tenets of every religion down to every nuance.

[cpwill]

okay, you've further explained the growth; but what i was asking was in the other direction.

[Kong]

Apparently many people of various religions believe that god communicates directly with them. I think this belief is just part of the human condition like superstition.

Certain social and early life experience cause some people to find profound belief in their own imagination. This profound belief mixed with excessive enthusiasm creates a messianic personality and leads to religious evolution. Some of the changes that survive are for the better I hope.

[cpwill]

but why would such a useless and completely insane notion be part of the human experience?

[Redratio1]

but why would such a useless and completely insane notion be part of the human experience?

Why not?

There are other notions that we have that make little sense.

[Strel]

There you go again, expecting everything to make sense!


cpwill you crack me up sometimes.

[cpwill]

here i am, expecting there to be reason :p

[Strel]

Faith and reason are not always inconsistent - but when they are, better to side with reason.

[cpwill]

i thought you just stated that things don't have to conform to reason? :angel:

There you go again, expecting everything to make sense!

[Strel]

They don't.

Faith is a fine substance with which to fill in the gaps.

Problem is, some people disagree over what are gaps and what are not...

[cpwill]

so wait; we should expect life to conform to reason? or faith? doesn't the law of causality state that all things which come to be have a cause?

[MikeD4o7]

okay, you've further explained the growth; but what i was asking was in the other direction.


You mean like why did religions come into existence? I think just to answer major questions that humanity had no clue how to answer. I think you probably had something more specific in mind though... what exactly do you mean?

[cpwill]

well, all told, isn't this a fairly odd way of answering the question? i mean; what is it that gives people this sense so uniformly that they all come up with the same answer?

[MikeD4o7]

Well, the only common link I really see between all of the answers that different religions provide is that they pretty much all put humanity at the center of existence. All the creation stories and the vast majority of miracle stories or whatever you want to call them revolve around the acts of humans or human-like gods.

Is there more of a connection than that between the basic tenets of all religions? It seems to me like all we know for sure is that humanity has always thought of itself as very important.

[cpwill]

Well, the only common link I really see between all of the answers that different religions provide is that they pretty much all put humanity at the center of existence.

:confused: no they don't; especially in christianity they put God there. we're quite insignificant.

All the creation stories and the vast majority of miracle stories or whatever you want to call them revolve around the acts of humans or human-like gods.

typically they culminate in them; and why not? it's a basic explination of how things came to be as they are today; how did we get here.

Is there more of a connection than that between the basic tenets of all religions? It seems to me like all we know for sure is that humanity has always thought of itself as very important.

unless, of course, that religion is judaism or christianity?

[Kong]

but why would such a useless and completely insane notion be part of the human experience?
It is not useless or insane; imagination is the mother of invention. The human mind attempts to make sense out of confusion. When things happen that the mind can not understand it imagines an explanation to make sense of the confusion. The human mind has excelled at solving puzzles for fun, profit and war.

Plenty of things are still a puzzle. One of these unsolved puzzles is an understanding of “spiritual things” and the voices some of hear in our heads. You may believe you are speaking with God, I am not so sure.

[cpwill]

oh, i have no doubt that humans search for justifiable (or even nonjustifiable, in many instances) reasons to shelve away a mystery; i'm simply wondering how in the world it could be that every single civilization to ever arise on the face of the planet could independantly come up with the same extremely bizare (and highly expensive) solution.

[Kong]

i'm simply wondering how in the ... could independantly come up with the same extremely bizare (and highly expensive) solution.
What extremely bizare and expensive solution are you referring to?

[cpwill]

the idea of a spiritual existance. an entire other realm? seems (once you look at it from a logical standpoint) a rather odd digression to solve the question of why we have the seasons. it only makes sense when you combine this question with a natural preexisting inclination towards the spiritual; but then, you have to ask yourself, from whence do we get this inclination?

[cicero191]

the idea of a spiritual existance. an entire other realm? seems (once you look at it from a logical standpoint) a rather odd digression to solve the question of why we have the seasons. it only makes sense when you combine this question with a natural preexisting inclination towards the spiritual; but then, you have to ask yourself, from whence do we get this inclination?

Wow. cpwill admitting that logic can't prove religion.

But maybe that just bolsters faith.

[eugene40]

oh, i have no doubt that humans search for justifiable (or even nonjustifiable, in many instances) reasons to shelve away a mystery; i'm simply wondering how in the world it could be that every single civilization to ever arise on the face of the planet could independantly come up with the same extremely bizare (and highly expensive) solution.


it is rather easy CP... it is just lack of knowledge on how the universe works in the time periods where religion bloomed..... Something made the big yellow circle in the ski rise for mose of the day then go away and replace it with a pale circle that casts a shadowy glow over everything..... Tada it must be the huge man holding up those circles.... he must be some kind of a "God" (translated through al known dialects) yaweh, Allah, God, vishnu,,, zeus,, etc etc..... it isn't that hard to see how they could develope the same kind of ideas given that they knew nothing of the universe and how it works..... it is rather a simple solution to the complexity of the universe.....

[Kong]

the idea of a spiritual existance.

Why do you consider an inclination towards the spiritual to be an extremely bizare and expensive solution?

[Kong]

the idea of a spiritual existance. ... it only makes sense when you combine this question with a natural preexisting inclination towards the spiritual; but then, you have to ask yourself, from whence do we get this inclination?
If I ask myself from whence do I get this inclination it is because I am aware of realities beyond the physical realm.

I am also aware that many children and adults are afraid of the dark. Children may be scared of monsters under their beds. Believing in something does not make it reality.

Question the belief. As a child gets older he/she may have the courage to look under the bed only to discover there is nothing there.

[DRMIZER]

A FEW FACTS FOR A MOMENT!

I've always thought, based upon evidence down through history that superstition was the first concept of belief which fell upon man in Africa, the cradle of life. The foundation on superstition was rooted in the unexplained and in fear of the unknown such a thunder and lightening and fire.

At some point later the Greeks picked up on the mythological aspects of superstition in an effort to explain everything from weather to love to life and death. The great thinkers "thought" that much was written in the stars and in many gods. Each god was in control of otherwise inexplainable phenomena including war, child-bearing, etc. Thusly was born the concepts of philosophy as were the Greek thinkers..

These beliefs were eventually transformed into a belief in many gods. But not gods of gold, metal, war, love and feast. The gods then became more reachable" as read in Habakkuk in the old testament. It states that god came from Teman, from a race of gods. Hence the belief that a god inhabited each mountain top and the OT story about Moses going to the mountain top to get the 10 commandments. The mountain gods were a common belief then. That's one of the reasons the jews could believe so readily in the idea of god on that mountain.

It was before the birth of Jesus that people began to believe in a more centralized concept of god in that there was but one god. Rather than release the entire concept of other gods the trinity was established to make some sense of the transition.

Superstition and religion are essentially the same. Both rely on unexplainable events. Both involve curses. Both attempt to explain happenstance with black cats, ladders, numbers, including 7's and 666's, demons, psychological phenomena, sickness, etc. They parallel each other closely except for the figures of worship. Superstitions don't involve figures of worship and are not prone to schedules, leaders, etc. Superstitions are based on the concept of chance. . . . . . .If I do this, then that happens.

In the middle ages, crazy people were dealt with in 3 ways. . . . . .Locked up. . . . .sold to traveling shows for entertainment or destroyed because they were filled with demons. Too bad some of these primitive concepts are still with us today. Fundamentalists still believe that psychology is no more than bunk and that most mentally ill people can be prayed into wellness or, "it is God's will."

So, we've come from superstition to religion to philosophy to psychology. And still today, Christians maintain their belief in a book more than 2000 years old as gospel filled with demons, folklore and witchcraft and call it rational.

If for just a single moment in time we look at the longitudinal development of our beliefs we can really come to grips with reality. But then, as originally thought, reality is too scary for some.

[cpwill]

Wow. cpwill admitting that logic can't prove religion.

no, merely stating that, unless it's true; there is no logical reason for the existance of religion in every society to ever arise on the planet.

[cpwill]

it is rather easy CP... it is just lack of knowledge on how the universe works in the time periods where religion bloomed..... Something made the big yellow circle in the ski rise for mose of the day then go away and replace it with a pale circle that casts a shadowy glow over everything..... Tada it must be the huge man holding up those circles.... he must be some kind of a "God"

yeah, see, that's the logical leap that, in reality, doesn't make sense. you seem to be claiming that it is logical that it happened because it happened; which is circular.

[cpwill]

If I ask myself from whence do I get this inclination it is because I am aware of realities beyond the physical realm.

but how can that be if there are no realities beyond the physical realm. it's like if there were no light in this universe, and therefore nobody had any eyes: we would have no words to describe light, the word "dark" would be entirely without meaning, it would be a concept utterly foriegn to our nature. if there were no spiritual; then we would have no concept of the spiritual within us; it would be utterly foriegn to our nature.

[JoeR]

if there were no spiritual; then we would have no concept of the spiritual within us; it would be utterly foriegn to our nature.

People had the concept of the "wandering womb" to explain hysteria, and it is blatantly false, but arose anyway.

I first was going to use the example of a unicorn, but then decided the use of something within the body might be a bit more appropriate.

[cpwill]

People had the concept of the "wandering womb" to explain hysteria, and it is blatantly false, but arose anyway.

i'm unfamiliar, what is the wandering womb.

I first was going to use the example of a unicorn, but then decided the use of something within the body might be a bit more appropriate.

:lol: the analogy hardly fits; for the Unicorn is made of things which we are aware of; it's a horse, it's something material, it's an animal, it's something that inherently exists in our universe. spiritualism is an entire other plane of existance.

[JoeR]

The wandering womb was a theory explaining female hysteria. The idea was that the womb literally wandered around the body causing it.

[cpwill]

:shrug: so, then? this falls under an even more reasonable category than unicorn.

[Kong]

Originally Posted by Kong
If I ask myself from whence do I get this inclination it is because I am aware of realities beyond the physical realm.but how can that be if there are no realities beyond the physical realm. ... if there were no spiritual; then we would have no concept of the spiritual within us; it would be utterly foriegn to our nature.You may have misunderstood. I am aware of realities beyond the physical or at least visible realm.

But, believing in something does not make it reality; beliefs need to be questioned.

For example many little children and some adults are afraid of the monsters that live under their beds. As the child or adult gets older they may find the courage to look under their bed and discover there are no monsters. Is there any logical reason for children around the world to believe that monsters live under their beds or in their closets, etc.?

It takes courage to question one’s beliefs but doing so is a path to spiritual, emotional and rational growth.

[cpwill]

monsters under the bed remain in the physical realm; and are therefore a bit more reasonable for a human child to believe in than some sort of crazy spiritual plane.

[Smurf]

What's your views on Santa Claus then lol

[Kong]

monsters under the bed remain in the physical realm; and are therefore a bit more reasonable for a human child to believe in than some sort of crazy spiritual plane.No, the monsters, like religious fantasies, exist in the mind/imagination of the child/adult, (they aren’t really there). Ya, now that you bring it up, the spiritual plane is kind of a crazy idea, like some kind of Voodoo or other primitive belief.

The spiritual realm is just an idea that exists in the mind of the individual or group. Each individual can have their unique idea what the spiritual realm is. There is no universal agreement on what the spiritual realm is. Even within the Protestant denominations they are many variations.

[JoeR]

Imagination is powerful.

[cpwill]

What's your views on Santa Claus then lol

:shrug: he'd be a physical being who lived within this world, with a known location, known characteristics. hardly an odd figure for imagination to turn to.

[cpwill]

Ya, now that you bring it up, the spiritual plane is kind of a crazy idea, like some kind of Voodoo or other primitive belief.

even wierder, even more of a crazy idea.

The spiritual realm is just an idea that exists in the mind of the individual or group.

according to Kant, yes. of course, he would say the same thing about a tree. :)

Each individual can have their unique idea what the spiritual realm is. There is no universal agreement on what the spiritual realm is. Even within the Protestant denominations they are many variations.

and, yet, as you put it, "each individual" seems to believe keenly in it's existance.

[Smurf]

Ya, now that you bring it up, the spiritual plane is kind of a crazy idea, like some kind of Voodoo or other primitive belief.I don't know what you two are arguing about Spiritual planes for, but metaphysics is a recognised science theory.

[JoeR]

and, yet, as you put it, "each individual" seems to believe keenly in it's existance.

Speak for yourself. I have never seen any reason at all to believe in any sort of spiritual realm.

[Redratio1]

There is nothing to believe that anything we see is anything but an illusion.

[cpwill]

Speak for yourself. I have never seen any reason at all to believe in any sort of spiritual realm.

"seen any reason" is a bit of a difference;)

however, if you like, i shall amend my statement: every people seems to have a keen awareness of it's existance.

[cpwill]

There is nothing to believe that anything we see is anything but an illusion.

and no reason to believe it, however, i am curious; if everything is an illusion; wouldn't the idea that everything is an illusion also be an illusion? :)

[Kong]

:shrug: he'd be a physical being who lived within this world, with a known location, known characteristics. hardly an odd figure for imagination to turn to.The same could be said about Jesus.

[JoeR]

:shrug: he'd be a physical being who lived within this world, with a known location, known characteristics. hardly an odd figure for imagination to turn to.

Most people's concept of god tend to reflect man. These spiritual planes are thought of like a physical place by many.

[cpwill]

The same could be said about Jesus.

yeah, but not God; who is a necessary precursor to Jesus.

[JoeR]

yeah, but not God; who is a necessary precursor to Jesus.

As I said, most people's concept of God tends to picture and mold him as a man, especially the farther back in religion you go (Greeks and Romans, I'm looking at you, picturing the Gods as living on top of Mount Olympus). God in the Old Testament for example seems very much like a man would be if he had absolute power (being absolutely corrupted)

At what point did the concept of God become more metaphysical? Seems that it goes along with scientific discovery, as we have to push God farther back the farther science goes.

[cpwill]

the idea of an alternate plane of existance; a super-materialistic one, has been around since the beginning of the Old Testament.

[Kong]

As I said, most people's concept of God tends to picture and mold him as a man, especially the farther back in religion you go (Greeks and Romans, I'm looking at you, picturing the Gods as living on top of Mount Olympus). God in the Old Testament for example seems very much like a man would be if he had absolute power (being absolutely corrupted)Other and older cultures worship/worshipped the sun, animals, trees, volcanoes, etc.

[Kong]

:shrug: he'd be a physical being who lived within this world, with a known location, known characteristics. hardly an odd figure for imagination to turn to.Is God a spiritual being who lives within this world, with a known location (everywhere) and know characteristics?

[cpwill]

God's existance extends beyond the material and the chronological. the idea of a material-less existance, among other things; would have been an incredibly crazy mental leap.

[Kong]

God's existance extends beyond the material and the chronological. the idea of a material-less existance, among other things; would have been an incredibly crazy mental leap.It is a vary natural mental leap. The belief in ghosts is prevalent in both children and adults throughout the world and through all of human history. Belief in ghosts is far more common then the belief that there is but one God. A child hears a strange noise in an unfamiliar house at night and the first thing to pop into their mind is ghosts (beyond the material and chronological).

[cpwill]

yes, ghosts serve as further examples of this wierd idea of the spiritual plane of existance, not to mention that of the immorality of the soul :confused:

[Kong]

Point is its not weird. Ghosts are the first thing that come time mind when a child hears a strange noise at night. Its just normal imagination. Hear a weird noise, imagine some kind of unearthly monster and hide. Probably this imagination caused those humans who had it to survive while some unseen predator killed off less superstitious humans.

Do you believe in ghosts?

[MikeD4o7]

Sorry for responding to this weeks later :P

no they don't; especially in christianity they put God there. we're quite insignificant.

:shrug: Maybe I shouldn't have said center of existence, but I think you know what I'm saying. There's no difference here. Make up a creator of the universe and have him put you at the center of the universe... it's just a two-step way of putting yourself on that pedestal.

typically they culminate in them; and why not? it's a basic explination of how things came to be as they are today; how did we get here.

Yes, but it's always humans or something that takes a human form that does it. You could argue that's technically not the case with Judaism/Christianity since God isn't specifically defined as having a humanoid shape physically... but look at the rhetoric in the OT when there are references to God. God's endowed with human traits in every passage practically.

unless, of course, that religion is judaism or christianity?

Actually Judaism is even a better example than christianity of people claiming themselves to be important. "God has a chosen people and who could it be... oh what do you know, it's us!".

What could actually have me scratching my head would be for example a religion that arose in Spain, then declared that the Italians were God's chosen people, or something along those lines... now there would be something worth looking into.

[MikeD4o7]

The idea of a "spiritual realm" isn't weird at all... I would imagine anyone who encountered death numerous times and had no scientific knowledge whatsoever might come up with a similar theory even if they had no been exposed to any religion. It's because we recognize people as more than a moving bag of meat that suddenly stops moving, we recognize them as individual personalities... it's easy to identify a "life" when you come in contact with one. When somebody dies... the body's there, but the "life" is gone. I don't think it takes any leap of logic whatsoever to speculate that many early peoples took it upon themselves to find explanations as to where the "life" went since they could still see the body in front of them and it obviously wasn't there anymore.

[Kong]

I believe in ghosts some of the time and spirits most of the time.

[cpwill]

:shrug: Maybe I shouldn't have said center of existence, but I think you know what I'm saying. There's no difference here. Make up a creator of the universe and have him put you at the center of the universe... it's just a two-step way of putting yourself on that pedestal.

...but, christianity doesn't do that either....

Yes, but it's always humans or something that takes a human form that does it. You could argue that's technically not the case with Judaism/Christianity since God isn't specifically defined as having a humanoid shape physically... but look at the rhetoric in the OT when there are references to God. God's endowed with human traits in every passage practically.

naturally; it's all we know, so we put what we can't describe into words that we can grasp. thus, God becomes "wise", even though a depiction of human "wisdom" doesn't actually apply to God, because that's the closest we can really come to explaining the reality.

Actually Judaism is even a better example than christianity of people claiming themselves to be important. "God has a chosen people and who could it be... oh what do you know, it's us!".

the problem then being that for folks who are trying to elevate themselves through their religion; the jews do a really bad job of it; the entire point of the OT seems to be 1. we are the chosen people, and 2. we really don't deserve it.

[cpwill]

Point is its not weird.

it's not unusual; this isn't to say it's not weird.

Ghosts are the first thing that come time mind when a child hears a strange noise at night.

actually i always imagined either robbers or monsters; however, the point you make is valid, even children seem to have a keen instinctive grasp on the spiritual.

Do you believe in ghosts?

to an extent.

[Kong]

Your right, weird may imply an unearthly or supernatural strangeness relating to an order of existence beyond the visible observable universe especially relating a god or spiritual realm. Weird beliefs are therefore normal.

[cpwill]

and how odd is that.