Guest alexhorseman Posted August 5, 2005 Share Posted August 5, 2005 I was just sitting here, thinking about God and religion as I so frequently do (more often than I'd like to admit), and I just thought of something... The Christians, of course, claim that their God is the one, true God and that all other Gods are false, correct? Well, if I'm not mistaken, the Christian God was, by no means, the FIRST God that man has worshipped. The concept of God has been around long before Jesus came to be. Primitive cultures began worshiping the God of fire, the God of rain, the sun God... you name it, the idea of God has been around a very very long time. So if the Christian God is the one, true God, and all other Gods, including Gods worshiped since before Jesus, were false Gods, then man invented those other Gods. Therefore, the idea of God was invented by man. Therefore, GOD HIMSELF, was invented by man. Would Christians have me believe we've been bumbling around through time, worshiping one God or another, until, lo and behold, the Christian God makes his appearance, and states, "Hey, all you guys need to stop believing in the fairy tale Gods you've all invented, they simply do not exist. Oh, and while I'm here, I should let you know that _I_ exist and that _I_ am the one true God, so believe in me!" Doesn't that strike anyone as totally incredible? Humans invent the concept of God long before the Christian God appears, but when he DOES appear, we didn't really invent him... he's the REAL God we've been searching for all along. How do our Christian friends explain that? Of course, maybe none of this makes sense... it's 12:30am here and it's past my bed time *grin* Horseman Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sokudo Ningyou Posted August 5, 2005 Share Posted August 5, 2005 What came first, the chicken or the egg? There's a quote somewhere that says, basically, if God didn't exist, man would create Him. It's all in the need for boundries. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BuddhistCommunist Posted August 5, 2005 Share Posted August 5, 2005 God creates dinosaurs, God destroys dinosaurs, God creats men, men destroy god, man creates dinosaurs....... Dinosaurs eat men, woman inherits the earth....lol just had to share that Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mythra Posted August 5, 2005 Share Posted August 5, 2005 DictionaryoftheGods_2_.htm There is actually quite a few passages in the bible that would lead one to believe that YHWH (as opposed to EL) was (at least in part) a VOLCANO GOD. Burning bush that was not consumed at the top of a mountain. (lava dome) Raining fire on Sodom and Gomorrah (volcano) YHWH was often represented by smoke and fire "There were thunders and lightnings, and a thick cloud upon the mountain, and a very loud trumpet blast...... And Mount Sinai was wrapped in smoke, because the LORD descended it in fire." Ex 16: 16-19 "Our God is a consuming fire" And, lots of other references. Attached is an interesting little "god" dictionary. It appears that YHWH had lots of company. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
quicksand Posted August 5, 2005 Share Posted August 5, 2005 The Christians, of course, claim that their God is the one, true God and that all other Gods are false, correct? Sorta. According to the Catholics only Pagan gods are false gods: Paganism, in the broadest sense includes all religions other than the true one revealed by God, and, in a narrower sense, all except Christianity, Judaism, and Mohammedanism. The term is also used as the equivalent of Polytheism. Well this is an understatement about paganism, of course, but notice how Islam and Judaism are considered in the same bracket as Christianity, which is decidedly polytheistic. Pagan's could readily except that Jesus as some sort of lower aspect of a high-god, but the Jews could not and this is why, as we know, that Christianity split off from its parent-religion. I've been reading about how the Trinity was established by the developing orthodoxy, and it wasn't something that happened overnight, and could never be resolved intelligibly and coherently. The main, central problem to establishing this Trinity doctrine (how in the hell can three-be-one without contradicting the Synoptics' is where Jesus clearly indicates that he less than the father?) was by a rhetorical slight of hand and Emp. Theosodius authority mandating that the Nicene Creed as orthodox (Jesus = God) and all other interpretations (ie Arianism/Sabellism: Jesus < God) as heretical (heresy literally meaning choice) and thus bringing the power of the state against non-mandated Christian doctrines. (And precedent for the authority to launch Crusades against other Christians predicated on Constitiane's transformation of Jesus of peace to Jesus of War.) But the contradiction between Doctrine and scripture still remains to this day. It's just ignored, or justified in such a way that to accept the argument as logical is to purposely and proactively engage in cognitive dissonance. The funny thing - which gives me the giggles, is that Christians do worship a Pagan God, not God (well, unless they switch between pagan-worship mode to monotheist mode). It's the irony of ironies that most Christian keep themselves blissfully pre-occupied not considering and thus relying on a dead Roman emperor's authority and the gerrymandering of language, that still fails to resolve the contradiction. There's a quote somewhere that says, basically, if God didn't exist, man would create Him. That was Voltaire, a man, who paradoxically was as responsible for the development of the scientific method as was Galileao. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest alexhorseman Posted August 5, 2005 Share Posted August 5, 2005 Good question Alex but don't wait for any worthwhile responses from Christians (well maybe Amanda) because you will not get them. We have tried and tried, separate threads have been started and NADA! <{POST_SNAPBACK}> Well, it looks so far like you might be right... I've not seen any responses from Xtians so far... which is a shame, I was really hoping to see what their explanation might be. Perhaps it's not something they can explain? I find that hard to believe... they have an answer for everything else, after all. If they can't reconcile that with their religion, then they are in effect acknowledging their religion is false (yes, I'm trying to bait them a little, I'm not that transparent, am I?) Horseman Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Amethyst Posted August 5, 2005 Share Posted August 5, 2005 Humans invented the idea of god to explain what they couldn't explain at first, like in telling tall tales around the campfire. It grew from there. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Amanda Posted August 9, 2005 Share Posted August 9, 2005 Well, if I'm not mistaken, the Christian God was, by no means, the FIRST God that man has worshipped. The concept of God has been around long before Jesus came to be. Primitive cultures began worshiping the God of fire, the God of rain, the sun God... you name it, the idea of God has been around a very very long time. So if the Christian God is the one, true God, and all other Gods, including Gods worshiped since before Jesus, were false Gods, then man invented those other Gods. Therefore, the idea of God was invented by man. Therefore, GOD HIMSELF, was invented by man. Would Christians have me believe we've been bumbling around through time, worshiping one God or another, until, lo and behold, the Christian God makes his appearance, and states, "Hey, all you guys need to stop believing in the fairy tale Gods you've all invented, they simply do not exist. Oh, and while I'm here, I should let you know that _I_ exist and that _I_ am the one true God, so believe in me!" <{POST_SNAPBACK}> Alex Horseman, it seems to me, that through these ages, there have been many different Gods, in many different cultures... yet, I think there evolved this concept that ALL these Gods are really the SAME God... a monotheistic approach. Maybe the Hindus are ahead of everyone on that perspective, in that EVERYTHING is part of God? Curiously, I've pondered the idea that perhaps God has been the original creator in a way that instigated, stimulated, to perpetuate all things, laying out universal laws, giving cosmic order, setting a direction... and in doing so is creating himself simultaneously. Maybe all in all, everything is an abiogenesis of God? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cerise Posted August 9, 2005 Share Posted August 9, 2005 So if all the gods are the same god...does that mean that god can be evil and good at the same time? Jesus and Satan are the same dude? That would get confusing at diner parties. Why must the number of the gods be one? Is it a magical number? Is it a rule somewhere (besides, of course, the Bible and the Koran) that the gods must be only one? Why would god feel the need to express that people should have no other gods before him if all other gods actually were him? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Amanda Posted August 9, 2005 Share Posted August 9, 2005 "Our God is a consuming fire" <{POST_SNAPBACK}> Mythra, in researching the word 'fire' in the Greek... I've found the word 'purose' with the root being 'pur', which means to cleanse intensely. Our words pure, purify, purity, purge came from this same root. Fire was a way they sterilized and cleared away all the rubbish. The word 'brimstone' means 'divine' so 'fire and brimstone' could mean to divinely cleanse intensely. I also think that volcanoes were prevalent ocurrences back then, and if one did not know the word 'lava'... might one call it the 'lake of fire'? Therefore, could we be standing on it? Looking up the work 'damnation', means judgement... and 'damn' means to judge. It seems to me we are all in eternal damnation... and when we say 'damn it', we are calling to judge the situation. A 'judgement', that's all. Could it be, and are there any other references in other religions, that God is using the metaphor 'fire' to communicate how he is divinely purifying us of disrespect and vanity? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cerise Posted August 9, 2005 Share Posted August 9, 2005 Why must gods speak in metaphor? Can they not say anything clearly? Is there anything you can be clear about, or must we all muddle through with your damned darkened glass.... It is because the god cannot be clear that tragedies in his name occur. I'm watching the old 90's movie, The Handmaid's Tale, right now. Have you read the book, Amanda? Seen the movie? That is what happens when people are forced to see through a glass darkly, the will of god. It's a scary thing. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TruthWarrior Posted August 9, 2005 Share Posted August 9, 2005 Man creates god in his own image. Here's white and black versions of jesus: People are always defining (and redefining) god(s) to fit their ideals, image and emotions. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mythra Posted August 9, 2005 Share Posted August 9, 2005 Here is how god started: UGG. Sun. Sun warm. Me like sun. Sun friend. Sun come every day warm Grog's skin. Me talk to sun tomorrow. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
quicksand Posted August 9, 2005 Share Posted August 9, 2005 Man creates god in his own image. Here's white and black versions of jesus: People are always defining (and redefining) god(s) to fit their ideals, image and emotions. Ethiopians make their gods black and snub-nosed, Thracians red-haired and with blue eyes; so also they conceive the spirits of the gods to be like themselves. Xenophanes --Attributed Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mythra Posted August 9, 2005 Share Posted August 9, 2005 Mythra, in researching the word 'fire' in the Greek... I've found the word 'purose' with the root being 'pur', which means to cleanse intensely. Our words pure, purify, purity, purge came from this same root. Fire was a way they sterilized and cleared away all the rubbish. The word 'brimstone' means 'divine' so 'fire and brimstone' could mean to divinely cleanse intensely. <{POST_SNAPBACK}> Amanda: since you're so hot on dissecting words: here is one for ya. The origin of the word ISRAEL. Three gods. ISIS RA EL Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DanInPA Posted August 9, 2005 Share Posted August 9, 2005 Three gods. ISIS RA EL AAAAACK!!!! The REAL Holy Trinity!!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Amethyst Posted August 10, 2005 Share Posted August 10, 2005 AAAAACK!!!! The REAL Holy Trinity!!! No, the REAL Holy Trinity is dark chocolate, milk chocolate, and white chocolate. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Amanda Posted August 10, 2005 Share Posted August 10, 2005 Amanda: since you're so hot on dissecting words: here is one for ya. The origin of the word ISRAEL. Three gods. ISIS RA EL <{POST_SNAPBACK}> How did you find that? Of course, I think that life is about a reconciling process of ALL things... so makes sense to me. I researched Israel in the lexicon... and the evolution hints to coming from other gods... not mentioning any names though. Thanks for sharing that with me! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
a midnight star Posted August 10, 2005 Share Posted August 10, 2005 How did you find that? Of course, I think that life is about a reconciling process of ALL things... so makes sense to me. I researched Israel in the lexicon... and the evolution hints to coming from other gods... not mentioning any names though. Thanks for sharing that with me! <{POST_SNAPBACK}> Um no again. Strong's lexicon: 256 'Ach'ab akh-awb' once (by contraction) oEchab (Jer. 29:22) {ekh- awb'}; from 251 and 1; brother (i.e. friend) of (his) father; Achab, the name of a king of Israel and of a prophet at Babylon:--Ahab. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 415 'El 'elohey Yisra'el ale el-o-hay' yis-raw-ale' from 410 and 430 and 3478; the mighty god if Jisrael; El-Elohi-Jisrael, the title given to a consecrated spot by Jacob:--El-elohe-israel. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 1201 Ba`sha' bah-shaw' from an unused root meaning to stink; offensiveness; Basha, a king of Israel:--Baasha. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 3128 yownath 'elem rchoqiym yo-nath' ay'-lem rekh-o-keem' from 3123 and 482 and the plural of 7350; dove of (the) silence (i.e. dumb Israel) of (i.e. among) distances (i.e. strangers); the title of a ditty (used for a name of its melody):--Jonath-elem-rechokim. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 3478 Yisra'el yis-raw-ale' from 8280 and 410; he will rule as God; Jisrael, a symbolical name of Jacob; also (typically) of his posterity: --Israel. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 3479 Yisra'el yis-raw-ale' (Aramaic) corresponding to 3478:--Israel. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 3481 Yisr'eliy yis-reh-ay-lee' patronymically from 3478; a Jisreelite or descendant of Jisrael:--of Israel, Israelite. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 3484 Yshuruwn yesh-oo-roon' from 3474; upright; Jeshurun, a symbol. name for Israel:--Jeshurun. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 5971 `am am from 6004; a people (as a congregated unit); specifically, a tribe (as those of Israel); hence (collectively) troops or attendants; figuratively, a flock:--folk, men, nation, people. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Amanda Posted August 10, 2005 Share Posted August 10, 2005 Um no again. Strong's lexicon: <{POST_SNAPBACK}> Midnight Star, which resource are you using to get these Strong lexicon's definitions? Are you using personal software, a book, or an online site? If it's an online site, could I get that info from you? I use http://www.crosswalk.com under Bible Study Tools... KJV with Strong Numbers and get this for 'Israel' from the OT... Strong's Number: 03478 Browse Lexicon Original Word Word Origin larXy from (08280) and (0410) Transliterated Word TDNT Entry Yisra'el None Phonetic Spelling Parts of Speech yis-raw-ale' Proper Name Masculine Definition Israel = "God prevails" 1 the second name for Jacob given to him by God after his wrestling with the angel at Peniel 2 the name of the descendants and the nation of the descendants of Jacob a. the name of the nation until the death of Solomon and the split b, the name used and given to the northern kingdom consisting of the 10 tribes under Jeroboam; the southern kingdom was known as Judah c. the name of the nation after the return from exile evolving from this: Strong's Number: 0410 Browse Lexicon Original Word Word Origin la shortened from (0352) Transliterated Word TDNT Entry 'el TWOT - 93a Phonetic Spelling Parts of Speech ale Noun Masculine Definition 1 god, god-like one, mighty one a. mighty men, men of rank, mighty heroes b. angels c. god, false god, (demons, imaginations) d. God, the one true God, Jehovah 2 mighty things in nature 3 strength, power Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
a midnight star Posted August 10, 2005 Share Posted August 10, 2005 SO because it wan't your site it was wrong? I went straight to strong's, not what some bible site says. You have what equates to one translation that is being interpeted and from only one verse. Mine shows the biblical translations from ALL verses that israel is used. You have to put them all together to get a whole picture. Just like you can not pick on verse out and decide that it means this without looking into the entire context that it was written in. Otherwise you are getting nothing but biblical half truths. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Amanda Posted August 10, 2005 Share Posted August 10, 2005 SO because it wan't your site it was wrong? I went straight to strong's, not what some bible site says. You have what equates to one translation that is being interpeted and from only one verse. Mine shows the biblical translations from ALL verses that israel is used. You have to put them all together to get a whole picture. Just like you can not pick on verse out and decide that it means this without looking into the entire context that it was written in. Otherwise you are getting nothing but biblical half truths. <{POST_SNAPBACK}> Midnight Star, thanks for sharing your opinion with me... The Bible site is wrong? The Bible and Strong do go together. Midnight Star, I went to the 'FIRST' reference in the Bible to seek the origination process that yields its CONCEPTION. How does researching consequent uses help in determining the synthesis of its FIRST application in language? I sense you and I didn't find explicitly what Mythra presented, and I think that Mythra is probably quite accurate. Maybe he logically deduced it because he has studied these dynamics extensively, all relative to the time this word came to be? Then again, maybe he has a resource that just states it for him without having to figure it out... which would be nice for those of us that are not as adept to all these timely, encompassing dynamics as he. Midnight Star, what Strong resource did you use? Strong's book? Strong's personal software? Strong's online site? If it is an online site, could you please share that information? I use to use the book exclusively, yet that got too time consuming... although I liked its results better. If you know a better site, I'd appreciate it very much if you could share that info with me. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts