"Theist": is a Transitional Form In Human Cultural/Cognitive Evolution

Again, Con's argument is completely Off Topic.This debate is not about the trustworthiness of the Bible, which is entirely untrustworthy.Though I will digress and make one paragraph off topic to address Con's mistaken claims.Firstly: Alexander The Great, left many witnesses and writings from independant sources to his existence along with signs and destruction in his rampage. Alexander left a massive trail of evidence, though those pieces sourced from such independant witness accounts that are still in existence for verification are believable, the rest can be considered as dubious and likely imaginary.Jesus left absolutely no observable evidence and no trail of witness accounts, so the two are completey different accounts, Alexander has external verifiable evidence for his existence, Jesus does not.It's so simple that a ten year old should understand the difference.Secondly: What happened to Mary, mother of Jesus?It appears she didn't support the myths created about her son and appreciate his resurrection.She disappeared and likely distanced herself completely from the rot they fabricated within the 70 years after his death. A comic book writer could create a fictitional character in under 6 months, the creation of the fictional, miracle performing Jesus, took much longer. So we wonder why they took so long, likey they were still hoping for Jesus to return and fulfil his promise to his disciples of achieving glory within their lifetimes, which Jesus failed to deliver.Con needs a course on Rational Critical Thinking, which would show him his gross errors!http://scienceblogs.com...http://quichemoraine.com...Now Finally, Back on the Debate Topic:Theists are a Transitional Form in the Cultural/Cognitive Evolution of Humans.Con: Issued some outdated, now considered incorrect concepts that language arrived all of a sudden.The vast majority of Linguistic Historians totally disagree:" “Continuity based theories are currently held by a majority of scholars, but they vary in how they envision this development. Among those who see language as being mostly innate, some — notably Steven Pinker[8] — avoid speculating about specific precursors in nonhuman primates, stressing simply that the language faculty must have evolved in the usual gradualistic way.[9] Others in this intellectual camp — notably Ib Ulbæk[10] — hold that language evolved not from primate communication but from primate cognition, which is significantly more complex. Those who see language as a socially learned tool of communication, such as Michael Tomasello, see it developing from the cognitively controlled aspects of primate communication, these being mostly gestural as opposed to vocal.[11][12] Where vocal precursors are concerned, many continuity theorists envisage language evolving from early human capacities for song.” From: http://en.wikipedia.org...For how Religion and Meaning of Scripture has changed since the first ancient writings, here is an interesting rational look:http://adversusapologetica.wordpress.com...More on the Evolution of Language which Follows Culture! “And what about language? The current hypothesis is that it is only within the context of collaborative activities in which participants share intentions and attention, coordinated by natural forms of gestural communication, that arbitrary linguistic conventions could have come into existence evolutionarily. Conventional languages (first signed and then vocal) thus arose by piggybacking on these already understood gestures, substituting for the naturalness of pointing and pantomiming a shared (and mutually known to be shared) social learning history. This process was, of course made possible by humans’ unique skills of cultural learning and imitation, which enable them to learn from others and their intentional states in uniquely powerful ways (Tomasello 1999). As part of this same evolutionary trajectory, human beings also began to create and pass along culturally various grammatical conventions organized into complex linguistic constructions that codified complex types of messages for use in recurrent communicative situations. We thus need basic evolutionary processes, working in several different ways, to explain the origin of the underlying psychological infrastructure of human cooperative communication. But then in addition, to explain the origins of humans’ 6,000 different conventional languages, we also need cultural-historical processes in which particular linguistic forms are conventionalized in particular speech communities, and then sequences of these are grammaticalized into grammatical constructions, and then all of these conventions and constructions are passed along to new generations via cultural learning. “ “Origin of Human Communication” Michael Tomasello, 2008. The 2013 Census shows an ever increasing movement away from Christianity and Religion in General, as Australia moves to becoming one of the most Secular countries on the planet, The US is likely to follow, with similar trends forecasted: "In the 21st century, religion in Australia is predominantly Christian. In the 2011 Census, 61.14% of the Australian population were recorded as adhering to Christianity. Historically the percentage has been far higher and the religious landscape of Australia is diversifying, along with multicultural immigration and 22.3% of people with no religious affiliation.[1] 22.3% of Australians declared "no-religion" on the 2011 Census, and a further 8.55% did not answer the question.[1] The remaining population is a diverse group which includes Buddhist (2.46%), Islamic (2.21%), Hindu (1.28%), Jewish (0.45%) and Sikh (0.3%) communities. The Constitution of Australia of 1901 prohibits the Commonwealth government from establishing a church or interfering with the freedom of religion." From: http://en.wikipedia.org... Here is a similar set of Statistics on Religious Diversity: http://openparachute.wordpress.com... I particularly like the New-Zealand chart, showing a steady decline in Christianity and a steady incline in no-religion. These Statistics Completely Support my Hypothesis of the Decline of Religion as the world becomes more educated and our Cognitive framework becomes on average more Rational. People are being guided by industry and educational institutions to becoming more Rational (RQ levels) and as a consequence, superstitions, such as Religion which are entirely based on Irrational concepts will ultimately suffer! Personal irrational beliefs may never disappear, though organized religion will have to find improved ways to survive in an more Rational, Skeptical and Critical society! Thanks to Con for his time and Input! Though Con Never really tried to attack the Topic!