It is likely that in primitive cultures, the deities were most likely seen as unpredictable, impulsive, but powerful beings. Morality is a much more complex idea.

This is interesting. Consider that the Germanic tribes of Northern Europe were originally not complex societies and yet they had Woden, Thor, et. al. And at the same time, the Roman Empire was flourishing and they had their own parallel constellation of gods and goddesses. Apparently no “Big God” was needed for the formation of a complex society in that case. Then there was early Greek civilization where there was no “Big God”.

Maybe it’s the other way around. Complex societies arise first, and later their religions evolve into something more sophisticated, enabled by specialization and the economy of scale.

Perhaps with the continuing advancement of societies that we see today, ever more sophisticated religions are being developed. I’m thinking of New Thought religions and the proliferation of spirituality.

Great post. I consider myself a archaeology enthusiast. I read this text, I will find the name, that.discussed various religions and their concept of the afterlife. The text noted that the push towards a punitive afterlife (hell) originated around the push towards a more universal religion, i.e. the conquering types, Judaism, etc. God is simply a reflection of what people wish to impose on others. An excuse to push their agendas under the guise of god, for example that BS manifest destiny drivel.

Archaeology clearly shows how oracles/preachers claimed access to a deity and by extension elevated themselves in the process. Or as this church marquee indicates from a old Richard Pryor movie.

Its clear to me. When we got 'material rich' enough to release certain groups from the constant production of food. These people spent time thinking and it was this class (the priest/healer) who learned to interpret the world.

Very interesting. Thank you for sharing. The evolution of gods is a great way to understand our past and our minds imo.

I think a major contributing factor to moving from spirits to gods and from gods to fewer gods to monotheism can be seen through the lens that societies expanded by assimilating and consolidating other societies and those gods.

A good example can be seen by Moses’ intent to supplant Abraham’s Canaanite principle God El w Yahweh. When he went up Sinai to get the commandments, the ppl already reverted to worshipping El, often depicted as a bull (golden calf).

Here’s an example of the two gods distinguished.

“When Elohim gave the nations their inheritance, when he separated the sons of man he fixed the borders of the ppl in accordance with the number of the gods. Yahweh’s own portion was his people.”
Deuteronomy 32 8,9

Moses fused the names, call them the same god, “Yahweh-Elohim”. This followed Israel’s growth and consolidation of power into a kingdom.

Another good example of god consolidation is when Constantine tried to quell the political turmoil of 2nd century Rome. At the time there were four emperors as well as Rome’s old god Pantheon. Factions abounded. He wanted unification and knew religion was key. He paved the way for Christianity with the edict of Milan then used the slogan “one god, one emperor.” Constantine called for the council of Nicea so that the early Christians could get their story straight about Jesus’ essence because there was great division even with this basic question. Constantine made it clear he’d only accept a one-god answer so they have him one in the form of the Trinity. Constantine then moved to consolidate the empire with the Christian god the sole god of the empire.

Just a couple examples of intent to consolidate people into kingdoms and empires by consolidating their gods, as well as national identities, cultures, values, customs, etc.

I don't think most people today have much understanding of animism / spirit worship / ancestor worship.

It was a different beast from monotheism or even polytheism. Even getting away from the "one true god" mindset of monotheism is difficult for people today.

But it was religion just the same. It just lacked the moral regime of more elaborate religious ideologies. It didn't constrain behavior beyond placating and respecting your ancestors and nature. If Jane's bicameral mind hypothesis was correct, it also was a different way of relating to your own subconscious. In that scenario the "morphing" may have been at least in part an epigenetic shift.