Well, what does religion provide, what is its function? How is religion beneficial to survival?
I think that would differ depending on the religion. Religion as a whole is so broad that about the only benefit it would provide universally would be the same as all other social institutions- community, an opportunity for discipline and expression of agreeable standards, stuff like that.
Above and beyond that, theism provides the benefit of being true, which makes it more desireable than the alternatives by default.
It keeps you from going to Hell.
OK zeus. You had an agenda here. Get it out. What are YOUR views? It’s hard to answer a question if you can’t plant your own flag.
I’ve often asked myself this question, and one answer I can come up with is the blindness of evolution.
As we evolved, the need to be able to transmit information to one another was much more important than the actual idea being transmitted. In other words, the logic of the information wasn’t important, but simply perfecting the recording and spreading of the information was.
Religion compelled people to write information and communicate ideas, as if priming society and our race for science.
I’m just throwing the idea out there, it’s a possibility, but I have no idea how one would go about verifying such a speculation. 
Religion has provided a projection of perfection for which to chase after, subconsciously.
Since the first writings were not religious in subject matter, dorkydood, I don’t think that hypothesis works.
The benefit of theism is that it provides a crude, but somewhat workable, explanation for religious experience. Since a crude explanation is better than none, most people who undergo religious experience become theists. It’s not unlike an ancient metalworker believing that the spirits of water in the temper work together with the spirits of fire in the forge to provide a blade with the benefits of both elements and so make it stronger than an untempered blade; there are better models for why tempering the blade is beneficial, but that one will do in a pinch – certainly it’s better to believe that sort of thing than to work the iron improperly.
The problem an atheist has in addressing theism is that they don’t understand that it’s a crude model of something real. With something like the belief that the sun is the fiery chariot of a god, one may observe that the sun is actually an enormous sphere composed mostly of hydrogen that undergoes nuclear fusion at its core, and whose gravity holds the earth itself in its orbit, and this is not only a better accounting scientifically but it also makes the sun even more grand and remarkable than it would be if it were a god’s chariot. It is not a nothing-but explanation, and does not attempt to deny that the sun itself exists.
Atheists are incapable of doing that with theism, because most of them don’t really understand what it is that they’re arguing against – hence threads like this one.
Religion provides a means of social unity that is not necessarily tied to race. Even if it is, it still provides a strong unifying force.
Well, this doesn’t relate to religion specifically, but our belief in deities in general is suggested to perhaps have evolved because of how we view our parents as infants, when we are helpless, and supposedly rely on an “omnipotent” source for our food and care. This attachment carries on through adulthood.
Thought that was kinda interesting.
d00d, how do you know that it’s the thought of god that recalls one’s father, and not that one’s father reminds one of God?
'Cuz God doesn’t exist, daddy does.
Isn’t that what they call “affirming the consequent”?
Most people who enjoy theisms – feel as though such ideas bring them closer to hope, justice and meaning.
God punishing the wicked and rewarding the righteous, for example, appeals to a person’s hunger for justice, etc. Even whilst injustice still exists, just like it always did.
I’m not sure who “they” are, but I apologize for not being more specific.
I have deduced that God does not exist, through reasoning done outside the subject at hand.
I have also deduced that religion exists, but based on false premises, and the cause of those beliefs can be explained biologically.
Therefore, the biological explanation behind a false belief in God might be based upon my previous post’s speculation.
“Deduced”? Like a “demonstration”? Those are strong words where I come from.
Have you put your argument on this board yet?
Pascal’s wager.
haha. thats the best argument.
i forgot who it was but there was a “someones name gamble” that stated it doesnt matter if there is a god or not you should just believe so you dont go to hell. its a good point.
that was it. i think… i dont remember 
This topic reminds me of one of the first posts I started on this board; it was on what differences it makes to philosophy if God is excluded. I’ve seen these differences since then on this board.
There seem to be two somewhat cohesive theories of existence: one theistic, one atheistic – and their differences are fairly standard in argument. It just seems to me that either God is only within you, or God is both within you and in the world outside of you. (And since I believe in a world outside of me, I believe in God.)
Religion is here isn’t it?