Why did we stop inventing gods? The ancients were quite good at inventing new gods. The bible shows that the Jews invented many gods before deciding that god could not be defined and settled for “I am“, as the greatest expression of god. “I am” as spoken as a man. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KJkNs512Lsk Jews, in their oral tradition, gave man the last word in what god and his policies were to be. They accepted that the man they chose as head Rabbi of their Divine council had the power to overrule their written tradition. Man’s words, not an imaginary god, had the final say on policy. Man was supreme and not one of the imaginary gods. Christianity then changed much of the morals and policies of their newly invented god, Yahweh, and also transferred the power of god to a man. Jesus. Jesus was now placed at the power seat at the right hand of his newly invented god and placed Yahweh in the right hemisphere of the brain, as shown in the art of the day as depicted by Michelangelo in his creation painting in the Vatican. Islam then invented Allah, and so far, rightfully named him the last god to be invented. Foolish but true to date. I see that search for a god as a search for the best laws and rules to live life by. After all, we cannot follow an imaginary god and can only follow the laws and rules that those imaginary gods has spoken, recognizing of course, that only a person can speak those laws and rules and that it was really a wise person who was uttering those words. Gnostic Christians always saw those invented gods, specifically Yahweh, Jesus and Allah, as immoral and not worthy of us and that is why they named those gods as immoral and vile demiurges. This is not to say that those demiurges did not have some good policies but only says that a better god could and should be invented. Gnostic Christianity lost the god wars and was decimated the moment Christianity gained political power which they used to end freedom of religion. Are immoral demiurges like Yahweh, Jesus and Allah, the best that mankind can come up with? Why do you think we stopped inventing gods and settled for demonstrably immoral ones? Regards DL P.S. Gods are the opium of the people. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=N6uEMOeDZsA
Studying comparative mythologies, it becomes obvious that there were evolutionary forces at work in the pantheons of "gods". By and large, the old "gods" were nature "gods". By understanding the "god" one could predict natural events. Or, we had animistic "gods" which predicted animal strengths, weaknesses, and actions.------these were just simple nmenomics for understanding the world around us. And, then along came euhemeristic "gods" which may have evolved from telling stories about forebears, or, most likely, were rather morality tales, warning people of the strengths and pitfalls of certain behaviors or approaches. opiates: Have you never dreamed a solution to a current problem?
Ha... speek for you'rself... eh.!!! I invented a God who has morals as perfect as posible... described thru my chruch "New Age Christan Atheists".!!! PS::: You... just like all people are welcome to join.!!!
Whether concerning old or new "regulatory being-hoods"... It's questionable whether all instances of "god stuff" necessarily entail zoomorphic and anthropomorphic attributes. Which is to say, there may also be sacred attachment to abstract agencies divorced from concrete form, serving similar function but less frequently identified as such. Proponents of 20th century state atheism had reverence for Marxist philosophical concepts and ideological totems, which at least surely exemplify whatever more general hypernym might be selected for "gods" to be subsumed under. Entertainment and music celebrities seem to serve as substitutes for classic idolatry (thereby even retaining the narrower personhood theme), and intellectuals likewise have their icons from the literature, lecture, and research industry. "Gods" in traditional context could especially bloat into a liberally defined set when it comes to Japanese Kami and other offbeat affairs of Asia and obscure regions of the West. New Age bastardizations of this and that are generating chimeras which should qualify as "new" -- the initial, novel advents of old schools of deities fell out of such trans-cultural mixes. So the broad scope of this brand of human ideation / invention is unlikely to have truly faded.
I have yet to try such drugs but most mystics did have some drug of choice. I basically agree with what you eloquently put but before all that history, for a known 20,000 years, we worshiped female goddesses. I like that as compared to our present gods of war as uppity men have forgotten their duty to women and family. Regards DL
Cults with supernatural gods are not worthy as they push their fantasy more than morality. Regards DL
I am already there to most. I have been called that already but will stick to calling myself a Gnostic Christian. Regards DL
In the sense you put, I agree and think it better than losing ones thinking ability to some supernatural guy in the sky. Regards DL
It's all fantasy. Also beside the point. Also maybe your religious is about morality, but they don't all have to be.
The reason humans stopped inventing Gods is they came to the truth. It was sort of like doing R&D, with respect to a novel out of the box concept. Religion is unique to humans, therefore religion was way outside the box, with respect to animal instinct. The lion cannot hunt if he hallucinates. The founders begin their research by trying many things, until they finally discovered that which fits the bill. After the research was complete, the task became development; expand upon main religions. My approach towards religion and God is different from most. I walk a line between science and religion that treats both with credibility. If you study collective human symbolism and human psychology, it is well documented that the human brain can spontaneously generate symbols, such as in dreams. Many of these spontaneously generated symbols will be the same for all humans, regardless of culture. These collective symbols appear to be connected to human nature; human DNA, and not to cultural knowledge. They are innate to the human psyche. For example, most religions have a mother and/or father analogy. Although superficially different, as to who this may be, at the core all of these, it symbolizes a natural connection between the individual and the parent(s), which commands respect, love and trust, based on the configuration. Collective human symbolism, if you delve deeper, since it is common to all humans, will also define a hierarchy of symbolism, that essentially maps out the human psyche. Religions project this map. Once the natural maps were completed, after centuries of R&D, there was no real need to make new maps, since human nature has not changed in that time. These maps are not concerned with manmade, but with the natural terrain. Atheism is more about manmade maps; personal and cultural collective, which tend to change. In terms of mapping the human psyche, the center of the unconscious mind is what is called the inner self. The inner self is often the projection factor that is personified by the central God. The inner self is natural therefore it is morally neutral. It is not easy to explore the psyche that deep down, because there are many hazards and pitfalls. Religions allow one a way to tweak the operating system, down to the inner self, through a bridge which has been constructed. The proper attitude is necessary; faith, since the proper feeling is important to human nature; to make use of the commands lines. The natural command lines is why religion is often scary to atheism. Religion does not need drugs to get altered states of the psyche. It is done naturally. The inner self runs the personality firmware connected to our human nature, from which the symbols appear. The religions of polytheism mapped the psyche as deep as the firmware. Monotheism got the map deeper, all the way to the inner self. Christianity is unique in that the one God; inner self, was replaced by a trinity; father, son and Holy Spirit. The implication is either new natural firmware evolved, or the inner self set point was elevated, or both.
From what I read on the subject of the switch from female to male gods, it had to do with the switch to agriculture.
I do. But nobody deserves to go to hell if it is eternal suffering, not even Hitler or Stalin. I think if you were to be sentenced to hell for a couple of years for killing someone for instance that would make sense, it would be sort of like experiencing the suffering that you inflicted on others. Maybe if you prayed the wrong way to the wrong god you would have to take a train ride through hell on your way to heaven. Hitler and Stalin would be in hell for quite a while to make up for the suffering they caused, but not for eternity. I do not think it matters, when we die we just die.
If you was raised an taut to believe in the wrong God... then prayed to that wrong God... why woud you deserve a ride thru hell.???
I was being open minded - most religions believe that the people who are in other religions will burn in hell for all of eternity. This is all just hypothetical you know....
O sure... you'r ideas about punishment in a hypothetical hell are like a walk in the park compaired to Bible-God hell... but you do thank that some people deserve punishment... an the pont of my "hell" example shows that when you know the circumstances of the supposed crime it can become clear that punishment is not deserved.!!! I thank this applies to all "crimes" an punishment is never deserved an i wanted "Greatest I Ams" opinion on punishment.!!!
