Join the Unexplained Mysteries community today! It's free and setting up an account only takes a moment.
- Sign In or Create Account -
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 5
Mr. Argon

Anthropomorphic Godhead

236 posts in this topic

I find the idea of an Anthropomorphic Godhead as bizzare. It makes me think about some bearded vindictive man looking angrily at sinners down here from somewhere beyond the clouds,

What is your opinion about this?

Edited by Mr. Argon
4 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

bizzare

Not absurd this time?

Is there a subtlety to your different choice of words?

5 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
20 minutes ago, eight bits said:

Is there a subtlety to your different choice of words?

Yes. There is.

:P

Edited by Mr. Argon
4 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
33 minutes ago, Mr. Argon said:

What is your opinion about this?

I think this loving father God of Christianity worked pretty well for almost two thousand years.

Today, we need more sophisticated concepts to satisfy our intellect.

6 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, papageorge1 said:

Today, we need more sophisticated concepts to satisfy our intellect.

:yes:

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
51 minutes ago, Mr. Argon said:

I find the idea of an Anthropomorphic Godhead as bizzare. It makes me think about some bearded vindictive man looking angrily at sinners down here from somewhere beyond the clouds,

What is your opinion about this?

You made me think of some great George Carlin standup.

5 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, Piney said:

George Carlin

Who is that? Oh forgot I have a google over here, gonna check it out.

Edited by Mr. Argon
1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

He loves us and he needs money......Also vindictive .. Heh. Not a nice Georgey i mean(though he looks a bit like some fresco depicting Anthropomorphic God). But that other loving bearded angry man beyond the clouds.

Edited by Mr. Argon
6 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Mr. Argon said:

I find the idea of an Anthropomorphic Godhead as bizzare. It makes me think about some bearded vindictive man looking angrily at sinners down here from somewhere beyond the clouds,

What is your opinion about this?

Put in to the context of it being all but inevitable that in the search for answers man would develop a religion before science then no, I don't find it bizarre, shocking, surprising or unexpected that the deity/deities created would be anthropomorphic.  I'm much more surprised by the ones that don't look like men such as the Hindu and Egyptian gods.

Why do you bother with this question since it's obvious what you really mean to do with this thread is to say people that believe in God are stupid?

3 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, OverSword said:

Why do you bother with this question since it's obvious what you really mean to do with this thread is to say people that believe in God are stupid?

No. That is not the case at all. I believe in God for example.

3 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

My mistake :ph34r:

Can I ask why you think it bizarre?

Edited by OverSword
1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, OverSword said:

 

My mistake :ph34r:

Can I ask why you think it bizarre?

Because I am much more inclined to think of a God as mystery. Personally. Can't consider a Perfect Being in any shape whatsoever. Think that an anthropomorphic God is nothing but a weak symbolic representation of that Being at best.

Edited by Mr. Argon
2 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

God is just Man writ Large; and since we exist, presumably God does too, or at least could. Anthropomorphic God just shows the limits of our imagination, and Nasty AG that early priests lived in bad neighborhoods. Presumably the real thing is something we can't imagine.

4 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, Mr. Argon said:

Because I am much more inclined to think of a God as mystery. Personally. Can't consider a Perfect Being in any shape whatsoever. Think that an anthropomorphic God is nothing but a weak symbolic representation of that Being at best.

But does it surprise you that people would imagine God as looking like themselves?  I think it's obvious that is the how God would be imagined.

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, OverSword said:

But does it surprise you that people would imagine God as looking like themselves?

Yes. It very much surprises me.

2 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
15 minutes ago, OverSword said:

I think it's obvious that is the how God would be imagined.

Why do you think it is obvious? There is even one religion which depicts a Supreme Being as a flying spaghetti monster, for example.

Edited by Mr. Argon

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, PersonFromPorlock said:

God is just Man writ Large; and since we exist, presumably God does too, or at least could. Anthropomorphic God just shows the limits of our imagination, and Nasty AG that early priests lived in bad neighborhoods. Presumably the real thing is something we can't imagine.

Yes. This sounds interesting to some degree. It is nice to hear other points of view.I would not consider our imagination that limited - it allows us to picture a Supreme Being as a Flying Spaghetti Monster too, for example. I also heard some people consider a possibility of Pink Farting Cosmic Unicorn in that regard, but I can't remember whose idea that was.

And I can't really (at this point of discussion) understand this "God is just Man writ Large" - Presumably the real thing is something we can't imagine. - this sounds pretty reasonable to me.

I understand that man is considered a microcosm in occult teachings, but I haven't found an explanation for such a claim.

Edited by Mr. Argon
2 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Like the Gospel of Philip states:

''God created man. Man created God.

That is the way it is in the world; man make gods and worship their creation.

It would be fitting for the gods to worship man."

Edited by TruthSeeker_
3 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

In the beginning, the heavens and the Earth came from somewhere. Don't know where or how or what exactly, but that s**t happened. And it was so.

Then some billions of years of stuffs happened and yadda yadda, man came up from the dust of the Earth (through evolution).

And Man said "let there be light!" And he invented fire.

Then man said "Let us make God in our image." And it was so.

Then man proceeded to kill each other over who built the better God. They also measured dick sizes.

Then some dude came up with science, and now here we are today. Amen.

 

- The Better Bible

4 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Aquila King said:

Then man proceeded to kill each other over who built the better God. They also measured dick sizes.

What can you do? They jumped out of a (cosmic) womb in the Beginning with a loud war cry, after all.

"Then some dude came up with science, and now here we are today. Amen".

About the questions regarding the Unknown - the pastafarians offer more plausible anwsers than that sort of woo.

Big Bang sounds far more rediculous than flying shaghetti monster.

That line above in italics also implies that science created us. It is a confirmation that it is a ( true :no:) religion. Just found out it is a True Bible. Just waiting for a moment when Scientists launch their unholy war against the infidels. Judging by an attitude of the prophets of Science it is quite a militaristic dogmatic religion. Pastafarians are peaceful and not that many in Numbers - Scientists along with their fraction of atheists count almost a billion fervent devotees.

It also follows it's messiah is a "Some Dude".

Some Dude - goes nice with other (twisted) religious terms such as bozon, big bang etc..

Edited by Mr. Argon

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Maybe this is Some Dude. That Dude believed in God, what an irony of destiny.

:whistle:

Edited by Mr. Argon

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well, Genesis 1 v 27.  “So God created man in his own image, in the image of God he created he him...”, so I imagine that suggested to folks that God looked like a human being, if you take it literally.  However, as I believe the bible is written by men for men, the idea that God looks like a human must have started earlier than the written texts of the bible....:rolleyes:

4 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It is not obvious that gods of any kind came early in religious development. When they do come along, they are not necessarily in human form. Even the poster children of human-looking gods, the gorgeous Greek ones, are giants and shape-shifters, not humans unless they want to be.

Shape-shifting is a very old idea of spiritual power, and survives into one of the newer global gods, risen Jesus. His dad supposedly appeared to Moses as a fire, so shape-shifting is a family thing, I guess. In general, though, neither traditional Jews nor traditional Muslims make any image (attribute any form) for their Gods.

Christians had a fight about images among themselves, and it so happened that the image makers won; it could have gone the other way. When the image makers did win, no surprise that they continued the tradition of Greco-Roman handsome gods (no godesses, please, we're Christians) - but there's that bird, too. The Rodney Dangerfield of gods, the third person of the triune god, nobody remembers the bird when God comes up.

Coming at it from the other direction, anthropomorphization is a human cognitive thing, and not specifically religious. Many animals really do have what can be usefully called a personality - hardcore useful for hunting, husbandry and not becoming prey. Recognizing personality, that non-human intentional beings exist, promotes survival.

Anyway, none of this strikes me as bizarre. I don't affirmatively believe that a god exists, nor that if one did, it would go out of its way to adopt a form to which we might relate as if to a fellow human. On the other hand, I don't readily imagine the divine as a plate of spaghetti, either.

6 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 hours ago, Mr. Argon said:

I understand that man is considered a microcosm in occult teachings, but I haven't found an explanation for such a claim.

It has to do with the quality of data; if I weigh some thing, the thing and the scales I weigh it on may be there; or, I may be dreaming. But my experience of weighing it is certainly there. In other words, the surest information we have about the world is subjective, not objective, and so our most accurately informed picture of the world evolves from our experience of ourselves.

Edited by PersonFromPorlock
2 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

@Mr. Argon

First off, I was casually joking whilst stating my position. Why are you acting as if I made some deeply serious argument here?

7 hours ago, Mr. Argon said:

Big Bang sounds far more rediculous than flying shaghetti monster.

facepalm.jpg

Sure. Literally everything we observe about our universe is a ****ing hoax. I challenge you to actually explain to me the science of the Big Bang. I'm serious. Don't look it up, don't link something off-site, I'm asking you to explain to me what you currently know about the scientific evidence in support of the Big Bang. My guess is you know nothing, and yet despite this you laugh off the plausibility of it.

And the really ironic thing here is, the Big Bang is one of the greatest pieces of evidence one could use in defense of the concept of a God. Literally everything that exists in our universe exploding into existence instantaneously from seemingly nothing with extreme precision. If Atheists and Materialists wanted to invent a scientific theory that better suits their worldview, they would've stuck with their Steady State theory previously. But they didn't, because denying the Big Bang is tantamount to denying all of science. It's just flat ridiculous.

7 hours ago, Mr. Argon said:

That line above in italics also implies that science created us. It is a confirmation that it is a ( true :no:) religion. Just found out it is a True Bible. Just waiting for a moment when Scientists launch their unholy war against the infidels. Judging by an attitude of the prophets of Science it is quite a militaristic dogmatic religion. Pastafarians are peaceful and not that many in Numbers - Scientists along with their fraction of atheists count almost a billion fervent devotees.

It also follows it's messiah is a "Some Dude".

Some Dude - goes nice with other (twisted) religious terms such as bozon, big bang etc..

:huh: Dude, wtf are you even talkin' about?

Again, I was casually jokin' around. No need to get all serious with it.

I mean, yeah, I think most scientists have a materialist bias, but for God sakes they aren't jihadists or some s**t. Where do you justify this BS?

This is Alex Jones level conspiracy theorist wackiness.

2 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!


Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.


Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 5

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.