Real Gods?

[oldnitro]

Does it make more sense that people used to worship the sun and other Gods that were part of their environment as opposed to an elderly gentleman sitting on a throne up in the clouds? I know which one makes more sense to me.

[VHG]

>>>>>as opposed to an elderly gentleman

If god created the heaven and earth and all the animals, why do we always picture them as a "old man".

As "man" did not appear on the earth for millions / billions of years, but the universe was already created, why would they choose to look like a man?

Maybe they look like a dinosour?

Or maybe there is some green bug eyed monster living on another planet in another galaxy and god looks like them?

Just shows you how stupid the whole thing is.

[WaldoMcFroog]

Well, I don't think that many Chrisitians seriously imagine they're worshiping an old man on a cloud any more than than they think there's chubby cherubs with harps flapping about the place.

In response to VHG's point, this image almost certainly came about because the Bibble refers to man having been made in God's image. The straightforward interpretation is that this means God has two arms, two legs and a head (of course, believers will tell you that it doesn't mean that at all, although they're collectively not entirely clear what it *does* mean). It's no great leap to see that if this 'man/God' created everything, he must be predate the oldest person and ergo must be old.

One only has to look at the emergence of Egyptian monotheism (Atenism) to see how easy it is to move from an obscure sun deity to the supreme deity to the sole deity. Not only that, but some writers have suggested that Aten was the same God that Moses worshiped, so the answer to oldnitro's question is that according to some they're essentially the same thing.

[vetuste_ennemi]

Far more sense, Old Nitro. At least if you're looking for supernatural explanations of the world we live in. It's easy to see how monotheism developed from earlier polytheisms, but it's a poor theory because it has no explanatory power.
Polytheism on the other hand makes sense in its own terms. When early man viewed the world he would have seen massive forces of whose causes he was ignorant and whose effects could be at one time beneficial and at another destructive. If he assumed a supernatural cause he might have dreamed up, say, a god of the sea (among others). Let's call him Poseidon. Poseidon was not especially concerned about human welfare otherwise boats wouldn't founder in storms. In fact he seems a bit of a capricious b****r. Perhaps he gets the hump easily, gets out the wrong side of the ocean, takes offence if some humans disrespect him, falls out with other gods even. On the other hand, catch him in a good mood and he can be quite helpful. Now the Greek polytheism of my example does at least explain the world we actually observe and is based on natural, even (accepting its basic premise) logical inferences. No logical inference could ever lead you to the monotheism of the Bible or the Koran, which has centralised supernatural power by chucking out all the old gods and with them all the get-out clauses which might explain pain, suffering and the flawed design seen everywhere in the natural world.

[jomifl]

V_E, polytheism does seem to have been an attempt (perhaps naive) to explain the workings of the world. It is possible that following the logic of polytheism, lesser gods could be invoked to account for subsets such as a lesser god 'aqua' to control the behaviour of water, the god 'sine' to control waves etc. Following this concept you could have an empirical description of the world not too far removed from the modern scientific model but based on 'gods'. This could work quite well as the inherent flexibility of being able to invoke 'gods' as required would allow understanding and progress. Monotheism on the other hand is inflexible and intolerant and contradictions of dogma are seen as 'blasphemy' often resulting in the death of the proponent of new ideas or progress. Polytheism seems to have the ability to adapt and accept change, surely the better option?

[wildwood]

The Rain God that the American Indians used(?) to worship was nearly real. At least their dancing for rain was occasionally answered with a good downpour. That is a better response than by the mainstream religions.

[beso]

Monotheism caught on quickly because it saved everyone from having to spend half their day praying to a multitude of gods.

Moreover the one all powerful god could overwhelm any prayers sent to the lesser gods by one's enemies.

The change is also not unlike a coup by a fascist dictator whose minions will ensure that all dissent is quashed and any alternative candidates as leaders neutralised.

[keyplus90]

None of what you mentioned make any sense to me.

[oldnitro]

I`m afraid sense and logic is not one of your strong points KP

[beso]

It doesn't make sense to a religious person because the religious filter every observation through a presumption that their holy text is the ultimate truth about everything.

If they did not have such blinkered vision they would be able to comprehend what is said sufficiently well to raise a counter argument.

[mibn2cweus]

//It doesn't make sense to a religious person because the religious filter every observation through a presumption that their holy text is the ultimate truth about everything.

If they did not have such blinkered vision they would be able to comprehend what is said sufficiently well to raise a counter argument.//

. . . or, heaven forbid, finally come to the realisation that they never had a leg to stand on.

[keyplus90]

And that did not make any sense either.

[beso]

Your intellectual inadequacies are not our problem keyplus.

It doesn't surprise me that you don't get it. Anyone who thinks the Qur'an is divinely inspired and Mohammed (pox be upon him) is a great man would have to be intellectually impaired.

[naomi24]

To the rational, it makes no sense to worship anything. However, to the uneducated it would have made perfect sense to worship the Giver of Life - the sun.

[goodlife]

If atheist of today, whether he be a Communist or be of another political faith, thinks that in this modern nuclear, space age it has become old-fashioned to believe in an invisible god. In ancient times belief in one God or in many gods was part of the everyday life of the people in general.

So every reasonable person will agree that there is no use in worshiping and serving a false god. No lasting good is gained from worshiping a god that does not exist.

If gods, our own or those of others, are false, then we should want to know it. If, among all the numberless gods worshiped today, there is the one living and true God, then we should call for the evidence and seriously consider it. By his very own evidence and by the evidence produced by his witnesses on earth the true God should be able to prove before the court of the universe that he is the God, the divine Being, worthy of the worship of everybody.

[rowanwitch]

Or we can just try to look at the universe with an open mind and accept that for now there are things we do not understand and try to avoid creating some 'other' power to explain things...

[Old_Geezer]

And which one does make more sense to you ?

[LazyGun]

@goodlife
One thing right in your post.
"So every reasonable person will agree that there is no use in worshiping and serving a false god. No lasting good is gained from worshiping a god that does not exist."
Spot on, no argument from me.

But you let yourself down with the last paragraph, which, starts reasonably enough by calling for evidence of a living god. You then veer into fantasy land by asserting the evidence is unquestioned and available to all, when, in fact, there is not a jot of evidence for such a supernatural being. Shame really, that post started so well...

The only evidence there is for god is some people claiming to hear voices in the head, various stone age oral histories and cobbled together holy books, and the occasional claimed "miracle" and err, thats it. And the rest of us have to put up with all the garbage that religion brings to modern society - ethnic cleansing,the savage beatings of "witches" to drive out alleged demons, honour killings, forced marriages, fanatical priests, cultural division, the teaching of lies in science, interference in womens reproductive rights, the enshrinement of divison of peoples based upon religion, sexually repressed priests being sheltered from justice by their religion, lives mangled by a false guilt over their sexuality, children deprived of modern medical care because prayer is better.......

There is probably no God, so stop worrying and enjoy your life :)

[goodlife]

LazyGun@ //There is probably no God, so stop worrying and enjoy your life//

I am, I will not seek a blessing from any false god or swear by any lifeless idol. Instead, when they bless themselves or swear an oath, they will do so by the God of faithfulness. (Isaiah 65:16)
His true witnesses will have reason for complete confidence in God, for he will have proved himself to be true to his promises.

[LazyGun]

Well, yoou faithful have waited a long time for your god to display any evidence at all of their existence- around 2000 years or so now? Have patience................

Meanwhile, the rest of humanity can carry on evolving and maturing, and maybe we can finally outgrow the shackles and prejudices of religion. Oh blessed day! :)

[goodlife]

That because you don't know time.