It often amazes me of the contentiousness that surrounds the intellectual discourses we have on the matters of religion, because of the emotional connectivity to religious concepts. It's always in some ways have its umbilical cord knotted to the emotive theory of ethics, and hence, if a person is anti-religious or does not seem to share or support emotional obscured concepts, then that person is expected to be ridiculed and despised based on their views....as if to say "how dare you or how could you ?" or in the Jamaican parlance " Yo fyah ! How u tinking suh twist up eh ?, suh how u fi do dat ?". Religion is the epitome of that notion for well over several millenniums. They're many within our ethnic cluster who have no idea or knowledge of the religious concepts that had forced upon their ancestors, and then promulgated throughout the ages, and now rests into the laps of those who are defending an idea they have little or no knowledge of, including the ones they had left in the Mother Land . It has been repacked repeatedly in our contemporary conceptual framework, with the ribbon of our ancestors *la*hd, sweat and tears. For one,  it's not the denomination of which you belong or spritual charismatic movement  is important within this discourse, but religion in its entirety. In other words, if you're indoctrinated into Christianity, and you're an Adventist, it's not the history of The Seventh Day Adventist you're supposed to be focusing on only , but Christianity in its entirety. On the matter of indoctrination, they're many of us, especially in Jamaica, who have been  brain washed and ushered into it , before the age of reason. The history of Christianity have pointed to groups of animal herders and wanderers who didn't have the opportunity to our modern knowledge of science and technology, and hence was oblivious to the environment and into what they've considered to be some sort of  phenomena that it have had to encounter. Therefore, base on their observations and perceptions they'd  formulated opinions or speculations which they had  hugged as truth,  that have been dispelled by the science community in the modern era. Think about it, the phenomena these folks had to contend with , were strange to their minds and the only way they could've made any sense of it was to ascribed human characteristics to them. Of course during subsequent ages the power of reasoning had emerged , thus given religion a more sophisticated type of thinking in the form of philosophy, with it's rigorousness and it's deliberate attempt to make sense of the self and its surroundings. From this several mode of thoughts had emerged , but two in particularly that stood out predominantly as it relates to religion and the concepts of whether God or gods exists or not., and they're theism and atheism. Many of us have a fair understanding of theism , but a rather obscure and twisted type of understanding about atheism or agnosticism. This is what most of us don't know , and that is, we attached a misconstrued opinion about morality. Many of us think that religion is a precursor of morality rather than the other way around, that was discovered by anthropologists, especially in the fields of cultural, biological and psychological anthropology or evolutionary psychology. In other words morality or some formed of order or the attempt to controlled the behaviors of those whose behaviors were considered to be a threat to the survival of the group, had  formulated long before religion was on the agenda. Of course, one could argue that there were some primitive concept of religiosity like animism and shamanism, but those were not considered to be organized in the sense of which we now hold, hence they're not necessary at this junction, and will duly discuss in a short while. As certain civilizations got more advanced and their organization skills got more sophisticated, but still lack the scientific knowledge of today,  they then eventually infused it (something like animism) with their organizational skills that formulated what come to be known as an Organized religion. The notion of god however is not much different from what we have today, perhaps only in degree, but that's it. The notion was heavily influenced by the observation of the environment and how it had affected the psyche of the ancient ones, but a lot more is needed to be said, however, that would be too lengthy for a forum of this nature. However, the brevity of it can be expressed by stating that inanimate objects like the sun was looked upon as not only a sustenance for life but personified into a transcended being, derived from conceptualized the sky, the earth along with the perceivable phenomena like thunder, lightening and water(Rivers and seas )...some phenomena were considered to be malignant, while others were benign, and of course in order to relate to them or understand them, then they were anthropomorphized or personified, meaning human characteristic were bestowed upon them, thus the invention of the gods. Whatever the ancients were going through or doing, they ascribed and proscribed that to those anthropomorphized concepts , and as times progressed it evolved , especially in Christianity or The Judeo-Christian or Monotheistic thoughts...Remember, that regions that had brought forth  monotheism or the one god concepts was very polytheistic in the beginning of  their philosophy or world views, but if you should research and study the mother of monotheism which is Judaism you could perhaps get a clearer understanding of how they've got to the single god concept. Now to address the person who had reply to my recent post , I thank you my friend, and I think I understood your thoughts....by the way you had responded to my post. It was not meant to attack and destroy anybody's  religious beliefs, but to simply bring a different perspective to the mix, and hence the forum. For religious person to get offensive and defensive of their religion is not a shame nor should it shake your faith and Apologetic dexterity in any form or shape, because that was not what I'd intended it to be, however I'd expected something of this nature,  because religion is heavily guarded by people's emotions, so I was prepared for that and therefore decided to add a twist to this forum nonetheless...If one should failed to grasped my concepts it will be taken on the platter of lack of understanding or I''m not clear enough, rather than by the disbelief of my post, hence I should take the blame without patronizing anyone with my egotism. By the way, There exist a plethora of knowledge out there, some bad , some good, some excellent and some are left a lot to be desire...I think that to solely depend  on one set of knowledge is very bad or dangerous in world were information are more rapid than any other period in our history. Knowledge is Power...Knowledge is wide and comprehensive....look around you, the Times are moved by knowledge...all Times, and knowledge is always changing like everything else...and what is now considered as truth, of course via knowledge, might not be truth by tomorrow's knowledge, therefore to hold on to what you perceived as truth by knowledge that had already being discorded into the pantheon of misconstrued views of life, self and the universe is not only backwards, but dangerous in an ever changing world. Humanity have reach thus far because of the pursuit of Knowledge, not on the notion of belief only. Belief is a part of knowledge, therefore because it's a part of knowledge , it's insufficient to rest all of your marbles into that basket, you need the entire thing...and the difficult part of all....is that it's every where....Peace MZJ!!!