• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!
  • Welcome to our archives. No new posts are allowed here.

Gobekli Tepe: The World’s First Temple?

S

soylentgreen

DP Veteran
Joined
Jan 8, 2017
Messages
18,819
Reaction score
5,167
Location
new zealand.
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Other
The theists reason as to why religion can exist is because there is a god. Atheists, while having to admit that in fact religion does exist, are forced to a more secular reason for its existence.

Archaeologists have found a temple in turkey that they believe to be the oldest so far found. Around 11,000 years old. This finding can be used to support a theory of how civilisation started and what part religion played in it.
Gobekli Tepe: The World?s First Temple? | Page 2 | History | Smithsonian
To Schmidt and others, these new findings suggest a novel theory of civilization. Scholars have long believed that only after people learned to farm and live in settled communities did they have the time, organization and resources to construct temples and support complicated social structures. But Schmidt argues it was the other way around: the extensive, coordinated effort to build the monoliths literally laid the groundwork for the development of complex societies.
Click to expand...

For nearly two million years humans lived as small tribes of families and were nomadic or possessing of a small territory in which they hunted and gathered. But they were spiritual as they left signs such as cave drawings and some stone figurines.
The same time as this temple appears is around the same time we also see the first attempts of a civilisiation. The change that made possible for a civilisation to appear was that spiritualism which treated all spirits as equal including humans, changes to the most basic tenet of religion. " God gives man dominion over the animals".
Building Göbekli Tepe Gallery -- National Geographic
The T-shaped pillars seem to be stylized human beings, an idea bolstered by the carved arms that angle from the "shoulders" of some pillars, hands reaching toward their loincloth-draped bellies
Click to expand...

Images of the temple show animal figures are on the walls but the central pillars upholding the whole structure are carved with the images of man. Where as prior to this temple when humans painted on walls they showed pictures where humans were often only stylised two dimensional stick figures and greater attention had been payed to detail on the animals which were often coloured or shaded and often in 3D. The first portrays man as the central figure because it is where the concept of a god was first created and gave that dominion. While the second was spiritualism where every living creature had a spiritual value and some were even greater than mans.

This dominion given by a god gave them a reason to gather in larger numbers so as to build the temples needed and the proof of gods existence and a temple needed to worship was the bounty of the surrounding land. To create that temple also had the effect of creating systems where larger and larger groups could live together with a reason to cooperate instead of just a tribal system which then became a civilisation.

Religion is a tool by which humans first managed to create societies beyond the ability of any one person knowing all others in the society which was the usual social condition for two million years.

Today, do we still need religion or is it a tool well used but time to put away as we now have many other such ways of binding people to large societies such as national pride or sports or wealth?
 
soylentgreen said:
The theists reason as to why religion can exist is because there is a god. Atheists, while having to admit that in fact religion does exist, are forced to a more secular reason for its existence.

Archaeologists have found a temple in turkey that they believe to be the oldest so far found. Around 11,000 years old. This finding can be used to support a theory of how civilisation started and what part religion played in it.
Gobekli Tepe: The World?s First Temple? | Page 2 | History | Smithsonian


For nearly two million years humans lived as small tribes of families and were nomadic or possessing of a small territory in which they hunted and gathered. But they were spiritual as they left signs such as cave drawings and some stone figurines.
The same time as this temple appears is around the same time we also see the first attempts of a civilisiation. The change that made possible for a civilisation to appear was that spiritualism which treated all spirits as equal including humans, changes to the most basic tenet of religion. " God gives man dominion over the animals".
Building Göbekli Tepe Gallery -- National Geographic


Images of the temple show animal figures are on the walls but the central pillars upholding the whole structure are carved with the images of man. Where as prior to this temple when humans painted on walls they showed pictures where humans were often only stylised two dimensional stick figures and greater attention had been payed to detail on the animals which were often coloured or shaded and often in 3D. The first portrays man as the central figure because it is where the concept of a god was first created and gave that dominion. While the second was spiritualism where every living creature had a spiritual value and some were even greater than mans.

This dominion given by a god gave them a reason to gather in larger numbers so as to build the temples needed and the proof of gods existence and a temple needed to worship was the bounty of the surrounding land. To create that temple also had the effect of creating systems where larger and larger groups could live together with a reason to cooperate instead of just a tribal system which then became a civilisation.

Religion is a tool by which humans first managed to create societies beyond the ability of any one person knowing all others in the society which was the usual social condition for two million years.

Today, do we still need religion or is it a tool well used but time to put away as we now have many other such ways of binding people to large societies such as national pride or sports or wealth?
Click to expand...

I think calling it the first temple is a bit of a stretch. Because I would think that the first buildings and temples would have been made out of easier to handle materials like wood,straw, animal skins, rammed earth. mud or clay or a combination of those things. Stone gets used because its stronger, lasts longer than those materials and is mostly fireproof. Its one of the reasons why European castles eventually stopped being made out of wood.
 
A temple from a non-Christian religion form over 11,000 years ago? It's getting harder and harder to explain the "6,000 years ago a few jews in a garden were the start of the universe" theory.
 
RabidAlpaca said:
A temple from a non-Christian religion form over 11,000 years ago? It's getting harder and harder to explain the "6,000 years ago a few jews in a garden were the start of the universe" theory.
Click to expand...

You realize there aren't a lot of young Earth creationists, right?
 
countryboy said:
You realize there aren't a lot of young Earth creationists, right?
Click to expand...

In the bible belt there's far more than you think. I grew up in a community of them. It's just hard to believe you have the one true religion when there are tons of religions that predated your religion.
 
RabidAlpaca said:
In the bible belt there's far more than you think. I grew up in a community of them. It's just hard to believe you have the one true religion when there are tons of religions that predated your religion.
Click to expand...

Actually, if you take a critical look at the evidence, it's not that difficult. And no, there just aren't a lot of young earth creationists, Bible belt or no.
 
countryboy said:
Actually, if you take a critical look at the evidence, it's not that difficult. And no, there just aren't a lot of young earth creationists, Bible belt or no.
Click to expand...

Really? What evidence are you critically looking at that explains a temple that predates your entire religion by 5,000 years? How does this temple fit into your timeline?
 
jamesrage said:
I think calling it the first temple is a bit of a stretch. Because I would think that the first buildings and temples would have been made out of easier to handle materials like wood,straw, animal skins, rammed earth. mud or clay or a combination of those things. Stone gets used because its stronger, lasts longer than those materials and is mostly fireproof. Its one of the reasons why European castles eventually stopped being made out of wood.
Click to expand...

I agree, there's no proof that GT is a temple as of this point. A number of archaeologists have surmised that it may just be a storehouse for grain. The point is we don't really know at this time what it was meant for. But the fact that it exists is a great find and a boon to ancient history.
 
countryboy said:
Actually, if you take a critical look at the evidence, it's not that difficult. And no, there just aren't a lot of young earth creationists, Bible belt or no.
Click to expand...
42% of the country believes the Falsehood:

"God created human beings pretty much in their present form at One time within the last 10,000 years or so."​

That belief is Not exactly the same as YEC, in that (or 'only in that') the poll didn't ask that further age question beyond humans origin. But probably a good percent believe that as well.
The (42%) belief is near as bogus as YEC, and worse than any Conspiracy Theory.

The small redeeming part of the poll: non-God-Guided [Real] Evolution has increased from 9% to 19% from 1982-2014.

In U.S., 42% Believe Creationist View of Human Origins | Gallup

mh7klzb21ue_tb0a1h_86q.png
 
Last edited:
mbig said:
42% of the country believes the Falsehood:

"God created human beings pretty much in their present form at One time within the last 10,000 years or so[/u]."​

That belief is Not exactly the same as YEC, in that (or 'only in that') the poll didn't ask that further age question beyond humans origin. But probably a good percent believe that as well.
That belief is more bogus than any Conspiracy Theory.

In U.S., 42% Believe Creationist View of Human Origins | Gallup

mh7klzb21ue_tb0a1h_86q.png
Click to expand...

Yeah, gonna hafta call :bs
 
jamesrage said:
I think calling it the first temple is a bit of a stretch. Because I would think that the first buildings and temples would have been made out of easier to handle materials like wood,straw, animal skins, rammed earth. mud or clay or a combination of those things. Stone gets used because its stronger, lasts longer than those materials and is mostly fireproof. Its one of the reasons why European castles eventually stopped being made out of wood.
Click to expand...

The difference is in the building materials. The ones you describe as smaller and easier to build would not have drawing power of needed labour to kick start a civilisation. Just as these first civilisations were practice shots so probably was the idea and development of a god and the need for a large temple .
 
jamesrage said:
I think calling it the first temple is a bit of a stretch. Because I would think that the first buildings and temples would have been made out of easier to handle materials like wood,straw, animal skins, rammed earth. mud or clay or a combination of those things. Stone gets used because its stronger, lasts longer than those materials and is mostly fireproof. Its one of the reasons why European castles eventually stopped being made out of wood.
Click to expand...

It is called a first temple only by the recognition that is the oldest discovered so far.
 
PoS said:
I agree, there's no proof that GT is a temple as of this point. A number of archaeologists have surmised that it may just be a storehouse for grain. The point is we don't really know at this time what it was meant for. But the fact that it exists is a great find and a boon to ancient history.
Click to expand...

These sort of finds generate this kind of debate and it is perfectly reasonable to speculate upon the evidence that so far exists.
 
soylentgreen said:
It is called a first temple only by the recognition that is the oldest discovered so far.
Click to expand...

I think it may only be called a temple, because they cannot figure out another use.
 
soylentgreen said:
Images of the temple show animal figures are on the walls but the central pillars upholding the whole structure are carved with the images of man. Where as prior to this temple when humans painted on walls they showed pictures where humans were often only stylised two dimensional stick figures and greater attention had been payed to detail on the animals which were often coloured or shaded and often in 3D. The first portrays man as the central figure because it is where the concept of a god was first created and gave that dominion. While the second was spiritualism where every living creature had a spiritual value and some were even greater than mans.

This dominion given by a god gave them a reason to gather in larger numbers so as to build the temples needed and the proof of gods existence and a temple needed to worship was the bounty of the surrounding land. To create that temple also had the effect of creating systems where larger and larger groups could live together with a reason to cooperate instead of just a tribal system which then became a civilisation.

Religion is a tool by which humans first managed to create societies beyond the ability of any one person knowing all others in the society which was the usual social condition for two million years.

Today, do we still need religion or is it a tool well used but time to put away as we now have many other such ways of binding people to large societies such as national pride or sports or wealth?
Click to expand...

I think there should be no doubt that religion played a huge role in building civilization. However, I want to introduce a couple of points of complication.

First, as far as we can tell, the notion that there is such a thing as religion separate from a way of life is a fairly recent one--it was actually an invention of the Protestant Reformation. Evidence from ancient Egyptian, Mesopotamian, Greek, and Indian civilizations tells us that those people envisioned their gods walking around with them, day to day, and spiritual reality being a foundational part of reality overall.

Second, as a related point, there is a hypothesis that those people's conscious experience of the world differed from our own--the reason they thought gods exist is because they literally encountered them.

The first point is generally accepted by most anthropologists and historians of religion. The second is much more controversial, but if it is true, it would explain a great deal. It would also mean that we moderns could be considered somehow broken or incomplete. I have come to suspect that the purpose of ritual and meditation is to reawaken that original consciousness possessed by our pre-historical ancestors. This would explain why people sometimes experience mystical visions or other such under the influence of ritual or meditation techniques.
 
longview said:
I think it may only be called a temple, because they cannot figure out another use.
Click to expand...

They have figured out other uses for it. It was also a storage room for grains. Which still does not mean that it was not also a temple.

There is the archaeological evidence of death worship which is consistent with early temples and worship.
 
ashurbanipal said:
I think there should be no doubt that religion played a huge role in building civilization. However, I want to introduce a couple of points of complication.

First, as far as we can tell, the notion that there is such a thing as religion separate from a way of life is a fairly recent one--it was actually an invention of the Protestant Reformation. Evidence from ancient Egyptian, Mesopotamian, Greek, and Indian civilizations tells us that those people envisioned their gods walking around with them, day to day, and spiritual reality being a foundational part of reality overall.

Second, as a related point, there is a hypothesis that those people's conscious experience of the world differed from our own--the reason they thought gods exist is because they literally encountered them.

The first point is generally accepted by most anthropologists and historians of religion. The second is much more controversial, but if it is true, it would explain a great deal. It would also mean that we moderns could be considered somehow broken or incomplete. I have come to suspect that the purpose of ritual and meditation is to reawaken that original consciousness possessed by our pre-historical ancestors. This would explain why people sometimes experience mystical visions or other such under the influence of ritual or meditation techniques.
Click to expand...

Prior to the discovery of religion humans still lived a spiritual life. Demonstrated by cave drawings and stone relics that have been found. In that world the spirits lived among them in the shape of animals and plants. They accepted that spirits were real because the animals were real. That was what walking among them would have meant then. If you treat everything as if it has mystical abilities then seeing gods, spirits or any manifestations is going to happen.
India is a good example. A belief system where every living thing has a soul. Which results in india having 33 million gods.


This is not a case of one day there was no such thing as religion and the next it was. In fact if such a case could be proven then that would be a good bit of evidence of a god actually existing. Because the odds of one not existing in that circumstance are greater than if one did. Instead the more likely scenario is that religion developed first in more primitive, smaller attempts which would have risen and the fallen. Until it had developed enough to create the means of starting up civilisation.
 
soylentgreen said:
Prior to the discovery of religion humans still lived a spiritual life.
Click to expand...

I agree. That's why I said the notion of religion as separate from everyday life was a late invention. For ancient peoples, what we would today call spirituality suffused every aspect of life, and they made no distinction between mundane and spiritual activities.

soylentgreen said:
Demonstrated by cave drawings and stone relics that have been found. In that world the spirits lived among them in the shape of animals and plants.
Click to expand...

Well...not so fast. Certainly, it appears that ancient peoples thought of animals and plants as being possessed of something like a soul or spirit. Foxes, dung beetles, horses, lions, crocodiles, trees, vines, etc. etc. all manifested some hidden being. But we find representations of beings not obviously from the natural world among tokens of prehistoric art and in early literature such as the Pyramid Texts, the I Ching, or the Akkadian Gilgamesh poems. These are not so easy to explain by a purely naturalistic spirituality.

soylentgreen said:
They accepted that spirits were real because the animals were real. That was what walking among them would have meant then. If you treat everything as if it has mystical abilities then seeing gods, spirits or any manifestations is going to happen.
India is a good example. A belief system where every living thing has a soul. Which results in india having 33 million gods.
Click to expand...

I'm not sure the conclusion follows from the premises in the India example. That every living thing has a soul does not necessarily imply that there are 33 million gods. Therefore, the fact that there are 33 million gods in India isn't necessarily explained by the belief that every living thing has a soul.

soylentgreen said:
This is not a case of one day there was no such thing as religion and the next it was. In fact if such a case could be proven then that would be a good bit of evidence of a god actually existing.
Click to expand...

Depends on what you mean by religion. I'm curious why you think that would be evidence for the existence of God.

soylentgreen said:
Because the odds of one not existing in that circumstance are greater than if one did. Instead the more likely scenario is that religion developed first in more primitive, smaller attempts which would have risen and the fallen. Until it had developed enough to create the means of starting up civilisation.
Click to expand...

Why do you think that's more likely?
 
ashurbanipal said:
I agree. That's why I said the notion of religion as separate from everyday life was a late invention. For ancient peoples, what we would today call spirituality suffused every aspect of life, and they made no distinction between mundane and spiritual activities.



Well...not so fast. Certainly, it appears that ancient peoples thought of animals and plants as being possessed of something like a soul or spirit. Foxes, dung beetles, horses, lions, crocodiles, trees, vines, etc. etc. all manifested some hidden being. But we find representations of beings not obviously from the natural world among tokens of prehistoric art and in early literature such as the Pyramid Texts, the I Ching, or the Akkadian Gilgamesh poems. These are not so easy to explain by a purely naturalistic spirituality.
Click to expand...
The later ones cannot because by then the influence of civilisation must be taken into account. But the earlier drawings that way predate any signs of civilisation are different.
This is looking at the art work itself and seeing what it tells us. That animals especially the big ones were drawn in 3d which takes artistic effort above that of merely drawing. While man is often represented as styled stick figures usually in 2d. This could be argued that more attention and greater powers were given to these animals which makes sense as they were more powerful than any one humans in real life. It is only later when we find temples being built that the images change to where man has the center and animals are set back in the walls. .

I'm not sure the conclusion follows from the premises in the India example. That every living thing has a soul does not necessarily imply that there are 33 million gods. Therefore, the fact that there are 33 million gods in India isn't necessarily explained by the belief that every living thing has a soul.
Click to expand...
No, it is just a fact that where a culture has a belief that every thing has a soul there are 33 million gods. Yet in the western society of one god there we find the usual thinking is that man has dominion over all because only man has a soul.
Depends on what you mean by religion. I'm curious why you think that would be evidence for the existence of God.
Click to expand...
As i said this is a secular explanation. No need to bring a fantasy creature in to explain things. That was just an observation about how this works than an argument for god.


Why do you think that's more likely?
Click to expand...

If it could be proven, Big if, but still for the sake of an argument it could be shown that religion was created in one place at one time. Really. what would be the odds on man getting right the first time without intelligent interference. possible but unlikely.
 
I fail to see what this has to do with politics.
 
CrabCake said:
I fail to see what this has to do with politics.
Click to expand...

The heading states; Discussion of Religion from a political, societal, or cultural stand point.

This is a discussion of how society developed by the use of religion.
 
soylentgreen said:
The heading states; Discussion of Religion from a political, societal, or cultural stand point.

This is a discussion of how society developed by the use of religion.
Click to expand...

Fair enough. So, it's the sub-forum which is poorly named.
 
Spartacus FPV said:
With what argument/evidence?
Click to expand...

Well, for starters, in the post I was responding to, claimed that 42% subscribe to the young earth theory. But the poll cited as evidence of that, makes no such claim. Furthermore, Gallup makes it exceedingly difficult to find the metrics of their actual poll, so I'm inclined to suspect a very small sampling.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom