Jump to content
Join the Unexplained Mysteries community today! It's free and setting up an account only takes a moment.
- Sign In or Create Account -
sci-nerd

God without scriptures?

191 posts in this topic

Recommended Posts

Guyver
17 minutes ago, Will Due said:

 

God doesn't require blood sacrifice. Men do.

Men require it because they think it encompasses the making of a deal.

I give you blood. You give me providence.

 

 

You know what’s a real fail?  It doesn’t even work.  I violated the first and only blood covenant I willingly (I was circumcised) ever made.  I was blood brothers with a guy once and I failed him.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Will Due

 

Today there are some who look back at blood sacrifice and think how primitive it is.

Tomorrow there'll be some who'll look back at that and think how primitive, to think it's all God's fault.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Tatetopa
3 hours ago, Jodie.Lynne said:

Could you provide a link? As far as I know, there is very little known about Anasazi culture. But my data may be out of date.

I am going to defer to Piney for accuracy.  I think there is at least one, and maybe no more than one site where a small community was destroyed and human remains show cut marks on the bones that would indicate butchering.  It was in the locale and time period we associate with Pueblo and Anasazi people.  Reason for the incident is not known.

If you talk to Hopi people, they may tell you that the Anasazi are only unknown to the  White Dominant Culture.  Hopi and other people in the region have a tradition of wandering and settling as climate changes  shift resources. Oraibi Pueblo on HopI Third Mesa has been inhabited for a thousand years give or take. The Anasazi were either their ancestors or their neighbors.

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Hammerclaw
39 minutes ago, Guyver said:

Very interesting.  Isn’t that true?  I mean, it’s obvious that blood sacrifice is a big part of the bible.  So, God requires blood.  A kind of blood-god then?  I mean, the life is in the blood.  

Yet, I know it’s offensive to believers to hear the term blood-god, and I’m sorry to use it, but I think the point should be made.  The bible speaks of a God that requires blood sacrifice.

Just as is ritual cannibalism part of Christianity. This is my blood you drink, this is my body you eat. Myself, I have no idea what the deity wants, should that creator exist. On the other hand, religions based on the possibility take all sorts of liberties imagining it. Blood offerings are relics of animism carried over into the cosmic ecclesiastical cult of personality that are anthropomorphic deities. 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Tatetopa
2 hours ago, Jodie.Lynne said:

Yet again, these are the religions of a specific area of the planet. It seems that slaughtering your enemies to the last man woman and child is mostly a middle eastern thing.

Even in the saga of the Trojan War, various gods chose sides, and had favored heroes, but the people involved had personal goals to meet, and the different gods were often at odds with each other. As far as I can recall, Zeus never commanded the Greeks to slay all the trojans, he simply aided certain heroes.

The point that I am trying to make (and feel that I am failing at), is that the god of the OT seems much more bloodthirsty that gods of other pantheons.

Good point, the OT god seems to be a war and conquest god as do other city state gods in the region.  Some cultures have war gods that just want the warriors to be brave and fight well.  The OT god did seem to relish that kill every last man woman and child tactic. I think  it is a method  of conquest  not entirely limited to the middle east.  Ghengis Khan did the same to cities that resisted, and if he was angered, down to the dogs and cats too.  I don't know much about the Mongol deities, but I think it was a pantheon of  mostly elemental and nature gods.  I believe there was a sacred place where Mongol Khans were proclaimed, and I think from reading a book about GK, it was an area of lakes, rivers, mountains, and forests, not the steppes we traditionally think of.

I think also the Central Americans had gods that were literally bloodthirsty.   The belief was that blood was the sacred thing that made the world survive.  People offered their own as well as  sacrificing captives.  In that case, the gods did not want their peoples to obliterate other civilizations, just harvest some of them for the needed blood.  Check out Aztec  "flowery war."  

 

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guyver
23 minutes ago, Hammerclaw said:

Just as is ritual cannibalism part of Christianity. This is my blood you drink, this is my body you eat. Myself, I have no idea what the deity wants, should that creator exist. On the other hand, religions based on the possibility take all sorts of liberties imagining it. Blood offerings are relics of animism carried over into the cosmic ecclesiastical cult of personality that are anthropomorphic deities. 

Exactly.

  • Like 1

Share this post


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

A God who requires blood sacrifice to please it sounds evil to me.  It seems to me that the real God wouldn’t require any blood sacrifice from the life it created in the first place because it would be so far above the need for human emotional response to almost despise it.

Yep, I always wondered about Abraham and Issac.  Why would you follow a god that told you to sacrifice your son?  Doesn't seem like the type of deity you would want to trust or hang around.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Will Due

 

God didn't tell Abraham to sacrifice his son. Men did.

Abraham told men that it's ridiculous to sacrifice your child.

So did Moses.

 

 

Edited by Will Due

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Tatetopa
55 minutes ago, Habitat said:

odie is very much enamoured of mentioning blood lusting Gods, for the very good reason that they make a mockery of the idea of God, and that is the purpose of the exercise, to make God seem ridiculous and most improbable.

On this point I would disagree.  Blood lusting gods were the paradigm for god four or five thousand years ago. Even into OT times, when people seemed to be replaced mostly by rams. (Good practical way for herding people to get rid of excess rams who do not provide milk or young.  Sacrifice a ram to god, take care of your obligations, then eat the ram.)  To Moses or Abraham or Ashurbanipal, that is not a mockery of god but the essence of his being.  People and times change, it may seem blood lusting by our standards, but might  seem a quite reasonable way to treat competitors and enemies at the time..

 

  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Habitat
1 minute ago, Tatetopa said:

On this point I would disagree.  Blood lusting gods were the paradigm for god four or five thousand years ago. Even into OT times, when people seemed to be replaced mostly by rams. (Good practical way for herding people to get rid of excess rams who do not provide milk or young.  Sacrifice a ram to god, take care of your obligations, then eat the ram.)  To Moses or Abraham or Ashurbanipal, that is not a mockery of god but the essence of his being.  People and times change, it may seem blood lusting by our standards, but might  seem a quite reasonable way to treat competitors and enemies at the time..

 

I probably should have made it clearer, it is Jodie-Lynne I was referring to, as wanting to make God ideas seem ridiculous, which I think angry and bloodthirsty Gods are, being all too obviously, anthropomorphism. The world has moved on, by and large.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Will Due
35 minutes ago, Tatetopa said:

Blood lusting gods were the paradigm

 

Which is an example of how ridiculous and spiritually debasing erroneous ideas of God really are.

But now there's a new paradigm.

Believe that God isn't an idea at all. But rather, a blood thirsty monster to rant and rave about while bystepping all responsibility for being a very real personal monstrosity yourself. 

 

 

Edited by Will Due

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Sherapy
4 hours ago, Mr Walker said:

lol of course I am the one who is "limited", yet could live in any religion which was not intended to do harm 

Read as you will.

Unless you have a pressing need, to go against your community is foolish.

You will be insulted, ostracised, subject to physical and  social media pressures You wont be protected by authorities because, in opposing your society you oppose the rule of law of that society Youmay be gaoled or at least fined   

This is worth while  honorable ,and tolerable, if your reasons  are sound and practical,  but dumb if its just being belief driven and comes from obstinacy.

Go and find somewhere you can live in peace, with neighbours of a similar mind .

Like me, you live in a tolerant society, but try walking to the shops in the nude and see how tolerant your society is. :)

Ask if you can marry your sister  (or brother) and see what happens. 

Go to Saudi Arabia before the law was changed,  and try to drive.

Drink alcohol, hold hands, or kiss in public, in a Muslim country and see what happens  (or even kiss on a bus in some american states )

You just feel safe because our society has a wide tolerance of social behaviours, but it only extends so far  

Carry a gun in public in Australia, and see what occurs 

How do your examples support your argument?

The argument that it is foolhardy and insane to go against a religious belief system.

Otherwise you will  be ostracized, subject to physical horrors and not protected by the authorities. 

Are you suggesting that going nude to the store, marrying your sister, not driving a car, kissing ona bus,  etc are religious tenets? 

Your argument  doesn’t make sense. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Mr Walker
52 minutes ago, Sherapy said:

How do your examples support your argument?

The argument that it is foolhardy and insane to go against a religious belief system.

Otherwise you will  be ostracized, subject to physical horrors and not protected by the authorities. 

Are you suggesting that going nude to the store, marrying your sister, not driving a car, kissing ona bus,  etc are religious tenets? 

Your argument  doesn’t make sense. 

I never made THAT argument

MY argument was that, unless there is a pressing need, a wise man fits into his community in EVERY respect; so  (just to take the religious point) I could have been a jew in my community or a Muslim but then "OH  no place to worship no other people to worship with"  it is easier and more functional to choose the belief of your community so you can socialise and worship with others 

I am actually a bit differnt to others in my community. We do not drink and we do not dance or go to entertainments or the hotel. 

I don't play organised/competitive  sport, and i am not involved with clubs of any type   BUT despite that difference, i fit right in  because i  hold  other common values

There is no difference between religious tenets and other things you value and believe in. 

If you  step outside the laws and customs of your community, you will reap  consequences from the   law and community. These can range form mild, like ostracism, to severe, like gaoling or harassment   This means one should only do so for very good reasons

The kissing on a bus is definitely a moral value, based on religious beliefs. Nudity is really only a problem because of religious beliefs.(at least in climates like my own ) 

While there are genetic reasons for not having children with a sibling, it is basically religious reasons that  define and restrict who can marry whom around the world

But my point was much wider than religious 

it can be difficult as a non drinker  assimilating in a community where alcohol is a part of everything. (Or being a drinker in a community where alcohol is banned)    

Even now it can be extremely difficult living in some communities if you are gay, bi, transsexual etc  You can do so if you  need to and be protected by law,  but it would be "better" for you in a community where you were accepted .

  I will put it very simply to you If you  were a gay woman, would you choose to live in California or in Texas ? 

Edited by Mr Walker

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Mr Walker
2 hours ago, Tatetopa said:

Hold on a second, are you describing the rest of the world or the Middle East and the big three monotheistic traditions?

That was how the entire world lived in ancient times. Short, harsh, and brutal lives.  Most modern people who do not study history, or read books, have no idea.

Most  adults were in constant pain much of the time, as studies of their remains indicate.  7 or 8 out of 10  children born did not live to reproductive age, and most women died in, or as the result of, childbirth .

Killing all  your male enemies, including boys, was the norm, and women and children were intergrated into the victor's culture as wives or slaves.

Studies of grave sites shows many more men and boys killed in war and sacrificed,  than women or girls  The y were valuable( if vulnerable)  breeding additions to a tribe or clan and would not grow up to be warriors seeking vengeance 

 

it seems to be a male thing :(  

https://books.google.com.au/books?id=L_j0ZTidkXMC&pg=PT416&lpg=PT416&dq=which+ancient+gods+demanded+slaughter+of+enemies&source=bl&ots=sIKEECYyE4&sig=ACfU3U1nMePiOVVY8xFBJvA2qHsZhfX6Tw&hl=en&sa=X&ved=2ahUKEwjZj9CPl93gAhWTeisKHfkJCqcQ6AEwD3oECAIQAQ#v=onepage&q=which ancient gods demanded slaughter of enemies&f=false

 

Archaeologists excavating the Anasazi Pueblo site at Sacred Ridge, Colorado, have found an enormous deposit of mutilated human remains. Mass graves have been found before at Ancestral Pueblo sites, some of them showing evidence of horrific violence, cannibalism, deliberate desecration of the dead, probably inflicted to terrify enemies.

The Sacred Ridge charnel pit, however, is the earliest and definitely the largest ever found. It dates to around 800 A.D., a period when the first Ancestral Pueblo villages were forming.

The entire assemblage comprises 14,882 human skeletal fragments, as well as the mutilated remains of dogs and other animals killed at the massacre site — Sacred Ridge, southwest of Durango, Colo.

Based on the archaeological findings, which include two-headed axes that tested positive for human blood, co-authors Jason Chuipka and James Potter believe the genocide occurred as a result of conflict between different Anasazi Ancestral Puebloan ethnic groups.

“It was entirely an inside job,” Chuipka, an archaeologist with Woods Canyon Archaeological Consultants, told Discovery News.

“The type of event at Sacred Ridge is on the far end of the conflict spectrum where social relations completely melt down,” he added, mentioning that the Sacred Ridge “occupants were targeted to take the blame.” […]

The unearthed bones and artifacts indicate that when the violence took place, men, women and children were tortured, disemboweled, killed and often hacked to bits. In some cases, heads, hands and feet appear to have been removed as trophies for the killers. The attackers then removed belongings out of the structures and set the roofs on fire.

Chuipka and Potter think the slaughter was the result of massive social stress possibly coupled with severe environmental hardship like a drought, and that the deceased were targeted as group scapegoats. Biodistance analysis done on the teeth of Sacred Ridge human remains indicate that the dead were genetically connected to each other and distinct from neighboring populations. The extent of the mutilations and their systematic disposal suggest the mass killings were planned as such, not spur of the moment responses to circumstances like the other Ancestral Pueblo mass graves which show evidence of starvation cannibalism, war and witch hunts.

These unique characteristics of the Sacred Ridge mass grave suggest to the authors of the study intentional ethnic cleansing

 

http://www.thehistoryblog.com/archives/7705

Edited by Mr Walker
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Tatetopa
1 hour ago, Will Due said:

Which is an example of how ridiculous and spiritually debasing erroneous ideas of God really are.

How can you say that is an erroneous idea of who god really is?  How do you think another paradigm is more authentic?  If paradigms change with human society changing, then it seems god is more an evolving human idea that an independent being.

  • Like 2
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Tatetopa
7 minutes ago, Mr Walker said:

Studies of grave sites shows many more men and boys killed in war and sacrificed,  than women or girls  The y were valuable( if vulnerable)  breeding additions to a tribe or clan and would not grow up to be warriors seeking vengeance 

Kind of like sacrificing rams instead of sheep.  Very practical.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Mr Walker
Just now, Tatetopa said:

Kind of like sacrificing rams instead of sheep.  Very practical.

In those resource scarce  times, with huge mortality rates,  practicality was important. 

Slavery, and   keeping women alive as breeders etc., was very practical, as was killing off the male population of rivals.

  There were many times in human history, right up the Roman empire, when the human population of the earth actually decreased significantly, as deaths were much greater than births due to diseases and illness, as well as warfare.  For a long time the very survival of the species was at stake, and this determined human behaviours for millennia 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Habitat
2 hours ago, Tatetopa said:

How can you say that is an erroneous idea of who god really is?  How do you think another paradigm is more authentic?  If paradigms change with human society changing, then it seems god is more an evolving human idea that an independent being.

Anger and cruelty are animal and, particularly, human traits, that arose because they have biological survival value. The idea this is mirrored in "Immortal" beings, is rather a stretch, for even the most open minded thinker.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
DieChecker
9 hours ago, Tatetopa said:

I am going to defer to Piney for accuracy.  I think there is at least one, and maybe no more than one site where a small community was destroyed and human remains show cut marks on the bones that would indicate butchering.  It was in the locale and time period we associate with Pueblo and Anasazi people.  Reason for the incident is not known.

If you talk to Hopi people, they may tell you that the Anasazi are only unknown to the  White Dominant Culture.  Hopi and other people in the region have a tradition of wandering and settling as climate changes  shift resources. Oraibi Pueblo on HopI Third Mesa has been inhabited for a thousand years give or take. The Anasazi were either their ancestors or their neighbors.

I think I read about this in a National Geographic magazine. I think they found several sites were DNA confirmed the bones that were ritually cleaned, assumedly by butchering, were from neighboring tribes.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
DieChecker
9 hours ago, Tatetopa said:

Yep, I always wondered about Abraham and Issac.  Why would you follow a god that told you to sacrifice your son?  Doesn't seem like the type of deity you would want to trust or hang around.

If you read the whole story, Abraham got a LOT out of the deal he initially made with God. Land, Flocks, Wealth... Giving up one child probably seemed not such a big deal given that God had held up his end till then.

Got to remember the context that this was 3000-3500 years ago when just about anyone might try to kill you for just walking by their village.

  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
DieChecker
On 2/26/2019 at 3:59 PM, sci-nerd said:

Would God even be a subject today, if it wasn't for the Bible?

How much do we owe the Bible for today's theism? Including the Quran, which is post Bible (and obviously strongly inspired by it!).

Take into account the emergence of science, during the last 200 years.

Would we just add an S, and say Gods ??!

I'd agree with most people who posted that we'd have religion regardless, or something similar. When deprived of religion, communist citizens followed up with Hero (Lenin) worship, and worship of the leader. We see this today in North Korea.

We've seen people who are "post"-religion instead turn to Aliens/UFOs, and Ghosts, and other supernatural subjects. We're basically wired to WANT to believe in something like religion.

Edited by DieChecker

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
DieChecker
10 hours ago, Guyver said:

I can’t imaginr how the real God would require blood sacrifice.  

10 hours ago, Guyver said:

A God who requires blood sacrifice to please it sounds evil to me.  It seems to me that the real God wouldn’t require any blood sacrifice from the life it created in the first place because it would be so far above the need for human emotional response to almost despise it.

That is because you live in the year 2019. If you lived in the year 1500 BC it would not be very hard for you to imagine.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Sherapy
8 hours ago, Mr Walker said:

I never made THAT argument

MY argument was that, unless there is a pressing need, a wise man fits into his community in EVERY respect; so  (just to take the religious point) I could have been a jew in my community or a Muslim but then "OH  no place to worship no other people to worship with"  it is easier and more functional to choose the belief of your community so you can socialise and worship with others 

I am actually a bit differnt to others in my community. We do not drink and we do not dance or go to entertainments or the hotel. 

I don't play organised/competitive  sport, and i am not involved with clubs of any type   BUT despite that difference, i fit right in  because i  hold  other common values

There is no difference between religious tenets and other things you value and believe in. 

If you  step outside the laws and customs of your community, you will reap  consequences from the   law and community. These can range form mild, like ostracism, to severe, like gaoling or harassment   This means one should only do so for very good reasons

The kissing on a bus is definitely a moral value, based on religious beliefs. Nudity is really only a problem because of religious beliefs.(at least in climates like my own ) 

While there are genetic reasons for not having children with a sibling, it is basically religious reasons that  define and restrict who can marry whom around the world

But my point was much wider than religious 

it can be difficult as a non drinker  assimilating in a community where alcohol is a part of everything. (Or being a drinker in a community where alcohol is banned)    

Even now it can be extremely difficult living in some communities if you are gay, bi, transsexual etc  You can do so if you  need to and be protected by law,  but it would be "better" for you in a community where you were accepted .

  I will put it very simply to you If you  were a gay woman, would you choose to live in California or in Texas ? 

You have not visitied Texas ( I have several times ) or lived in California, well, I do.

In both states, being gay is accepted. 

Perhaps,you are filtering through your own culture or beliefs and then projecting them outward. 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Edited by Sherapy

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
DieChecker
On 2/26/2019 at 4:39 PM, Jodie.Lynne said:

If I could choose a belief, it would be in the old gods. Many of them represented forces of nature, and were very similar to the people who worshipped them.

The gods epitomized what the worshippers valued most: courage, loyalty, honesty, and morality, according to the society that made up the worshippers.

To the best of my knowledge, none of the old gods demanded the deaths that the Judeo-Christian god did. The old gods may have favored one side or the other, but they never commanded that entire tribes be wiped out, "in their name".

None of the old gods demanded genocide, or mass slavery, or that all the virgin females of a conquered tribe be forced into marriage.

Just my 2 centavos on the subject.

Yeah, I'm going to agree with most everyone else and disagree. Many, if not most, of the older gods were just as bloodthirsty, and required just as much violence, anger, hate toward the other guys. This was not so much true Inside a pantheon, but cross pantheon the gloves were off.

I believe they recently found archaeological evidence of some Druid caused Roman genocides in Western France. I think I read it in a National Geographic magazine.

This idea that the "old gods" were rainbows and unicorns, happy-happy joy-joy, is New Age crap that has been almost completely made up.

 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
DieChecker
On 2/26/2019 at 5:12 PM, Jodie.Lynne said:

Except for the fact that Judaism, Christianity, and Islam do NOT evolve, you'd be correct.

And before you tell me that that have, any advances by any of those faiths was done kicking and screaming and dragging their heels in the dirt, and only FORCED to pay lip service to any ideas that run contrary to their beliefs.

I'd disagree here too. Christianity has evolved many, many times, and still does. Just in the last 40 years the number of denominations has doubled. There is a denomination for just about everyone now. Want to not eat pork, but drink wine, and go to church on Wednesday nights, and wear only black clothes, and carry a cross only on your keychain... Likely there is a denomination for you....

 

  • Like 1

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

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.