You just declared 500-750 million homo sapiens outside of your definition of humanity.

But if you feel this is a reasonable interpretation of what I actually said, I cannot imagine how you arrived at it.

which I would have thought was pretty obvious.

And does Trump cheat on his score pad?

Are you a Quaker? Is this your answer? How did you/they come to know this about their god?

These are rhetorical questions, as you won't answer them.

Exodus 25 : 8

Religion of some form or another exists in all known cultures, even officially atheistic ones, but not all people in those cultures believe in gods. People in North Korea probably practice their ancestral religions in secret, and/or join in the state quasi-religion, which is worship of the Kim family.

Some religions, like Buddhism, are officially agnostic (I'm aware that a Buddhist reads these threads and claims that Buddhism is not a religion, but in the sense I am speaking, it would be considered a non-theistic religion. If it is still not a religion, it only strengthens my argument).

Taoism is a nontheistic religion/philosophy.

The earliest religion was probably animism, which is not theistic. It simply believes that every object has a spirit.

As long as you equate religion with theism, you will be missing the forest for the stones.

And if some talk about gods, it may be that many feel a need for, say, leaders.

Probably God and Jesus are based on human leaders, or "lords." God and Jesus are called lord, about 8,000 times in modern Bibles. More times than they are called God, or Jesus, or Christ.

This possibly suggesting that human leadership is universal; and the notion of gods is parasitic, dependant, derived, from that base.

Many gods are anthropomorphic, or resembling men. Suggesting that legends of gods are derived from great human beings. Rather than vice versa.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dust_%28His_Dark_Materials%29

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Force_%28Star_Wars%29

And, yes, I know you're referring to the Judeo-Christian deity. What of Hindus? Where are their gods? Nobody's head is that large.

Many people can look at the same thing and describe it differently.

You should look more closely into Hinduism, which is one of the three major world religions at this time. Their deities are not even close to being reflections of your "Creator" deity.

And that's just now. If you want to look back in history, or at minor religions, your claim is even less apt.

Just take them non-literally and they pretty much look like a reflection of anything. Agni, the god of fire, is actually a metaphor for curried lamb, which makes you thank the Creator for the gift of water.

However, I am fond of curried lamb (or mutton), so perhaps I should worship Agni. It's so complicated...

Redefine god to mean something else that has no power or agency or anything. I.e., redefine god so that everything that makes it a GOD is gone.

Then, while you smirk and think you've beaten those mean old atheists at last, they're laughing at you because you're going to go back and believe in the same "creator" god with all those additional characteristics heaped on, and not even notice what you did to your position.

Where is God? is a good question to ask of those that are trying to prove that god DOES exist.

As to your Quaker point of view, seems to me that that answer is good data for an overarching claim that humans created god in our image. Or at least the image we would like ourselves to be.

We've been over this. Quelle surprise you didn't actually retain what we'd agreed upon last time.

An interesting claim.

It appears I was thinking of a different poster.

I found our conversation about it, and you just bowed out without solving anything.

To return to your original claim in the OP, you said "universally".

Humans are not universally attracted to theism. Period. All I need to falsify your claim is a SINGLE human exception. Therefore I grant you one; me. I am not attracted to theism. Therefore your claim is false.

Correctly stated, using the language of human sociology researchers, 'statistically speaking humans are predisposed to faith'. 'The Cognition, Religion and Theology Project’ performed a landmark study on this. It's not 'Universal' and not actually 'about' religion at all.

Re-phrased, children are predisposed to believing purpose-based explanations. Do you understand the distinctions. Probability and chance are higher-order abstracts that are difficult for humans to grasp. 'Because X did it', oral traditions, stories, human children are predisposed to accepting these, while rejecting the former.

It doesn't mean 'faith' or 'belief' is hard wired in humans. You are abusing that study's findings. Please stop it.

Argumentum ad populum is, he thinks, his ultimate thread-ender when it comes to belief vs. non-belief. A majority of people (in most countries, not all of course) believe in a god of some sort, therefore according to gil, theism is right and atheism is wrong.

He'll never abandon anything that can be twisted to support this.

Or misunderstanding?

"Atheism is wrong"?

Deal with it.

But I cannot understand the motivation.

You've made that crystal clear.

So that he can take as a given that people 300,000 years ago were theists.

One might think if Christianity were a universal truth one wouldn't need to do that.

has been used to promote morality to the mass of people. Also, to reduce the fear of death.

Where is God? I have wondered that my entire life. Also, wonder about if there is a God and if so, what is it/he/she.

I really can't imagine that I am even close to unique in my confusion/skepticism.

knowledge. That was what was holy, not some dividing abstract idea used by those who seek to control. Maybe god really is knowledge.