Rabbie. Thanks for that quote. It makes a lot of sense to me.
Although, I'm not sure I agree 100% that religion offers an easy explanation. I think that in most cases people
do choose it as a simplistic solution that requires less deep thought, and in that sense it's pretty accurate. But I think that even if you do believe in God, there's still a lot of deep thinking required if you're going to discuss it with other intelligent people because you need to integrate it with everything else that you know, or can conceptualize. I think that, as with any belief system that tries to deal with big picture questions, you need to stretch your mind way outside your natural comfort zone to deal with many of the topics that arise. I think there is a point at which you begin to recognize that there ARE in fact limits to what you can conceptualize because our frame of reference is too restricted by our experience and education.
I think the best thing about that quote, for me, is that it could also be used to encapsulate how I feel about the issue of conceptualizing God (and consequently my refusal to click any of the poll options provided because none of them reflect my views accurately). I think that there is a God and I have my own conception of what 'God' is. I recognize that my conception of God is strongly influenced by my having been born and raised in a western country where Christianity was the historically dominant religion. I can also understand that other people, even other Christians, conceive God in their own way through a filter of their own experience and cultural influences. I put the diversity of religious thought on earth down to the diversity of human experience and cultures. For every person who exists and believes in God/god, there is a unique perception of what God is. Some people have more similarities in perception than others. We tend to label these groups 'religions', but look within those groups and you'll find varying opinions. Heck, over time, you'll find varying opinions from just one person!
The very fact that history shows that humanity seeks to explain unknown phenomena by invoking 'God' is an interesting observation in itself. Why would we do that? It makes no sense to do so if it's just not true, does it? So why would humanity have evolved to blame some unknown being for the vagaries of real-world phenomena (apparently a false premise) when anyone who took a contrarion view should have learned more about the world that is true, and thereby benefitted from that learning and that attitude, and gained an evolutionary advantage. If it's not true, and a hindrance to learning truth about the world, surely natural and cultural selection would have eliminated it long ago?
In any case, I can understand and appreciate that my conception of God is not necessarily the one and only 'correct' conception. It's likely, IMO, that no one has it exactly right. That doesn't mean that there is no 'correct' conception, but rather that none of us may be able to fully grasp it given the limitations of our understanding, and the tools for learning that we have at our disposal.
Alisa said:
What explanation of the meaning of life can you get from religion that you can't get from other sources?
What other sources are you referring to?
.....Genesis is enough. Although the Book of Job has an interesting part that could indicate God is referring to dinosaurs and not an elephant (or hippo) and crocodile, both of which are often mentioned in Bible footnotes but the descriptions don't match either. 
