Sunday 1 November 2009

“… in his own image.”

The Divine Spark Goes the Other Way

It's said in one of the great religious books that “God created man in his own image, in the image of God created he him.”

But isn't it truer to say that man created his gods in his own image? In the image of man created he his gods?

From Yahweh to Wotan and from Zeus to Zoroaster, the virtues, vices and behaviour of the gods man has written about -- written about in stories from Genesis to The Lay of Alviss --- are those of man himself.  But they're of man himself writ large. His gods have super-human jealousies; super-human anger; super-human lusts. They’re not just powerful, they’re all-powerful; they’re not just knowing, they’re all-knowing; they’re not just present, they’re present everywhere and at once – they’re omniscient, omnipotent and omni-present you see, and they’re all these three things (usually) because the men and women who’ve written the stories about their gods have simply taken human qualities and made them more so.

Fact is, the reason man “knows” his gods and their attributes is not because his gods have revealed themselves or because his gods have a specific nature, but because man himself has revealed them in the stories and songs and poems he’s created about them in order to help explain his primitive world, and to have stories to tell at night around his fire. He’s created them in his own image, with his own strengths and weaknesses, just more so.

Fact is, the stories man tells about his gods tell more about man than they do about the gods, since the gods they talk about never have existed. The great religious books and stories of history are a pre-philosophic, pre-scientific way by which primitive men attempted “to explain the universe, to give a coherent frame of reference to man’s life and a code of moral values” – to give his world meaning in stories entertaining enough to be told and retold.

On the first day man discovered his world.

On the second day he created his gods to explain it.

And on the third day, he came to understood he needed better explanations, and better understanding of his world if he was to truly explain it.  It was not enough to say that God created the world, since if that were true then who created God?

But the answer to that one is simple. 

Who created God? We did. That should been always clear.

Who “created” existence? No one; existence was always there. Our gods were just our first primitive way of explaining that to ourselves.

Which means the Divine Spark in Michelangelo’s famous painting goes precisely the opposite way it’s normally understood.

WhoCreatedWhom

13 comments:

KG said...

For someone who's convinced gods don't exist, you seem awfully preoccupied with them PC. ;-)

There are enough real evil bastards to fight, without worrying about the Christians and their God.

Anonymous said...

How did the earth and man come out of nothing, if not for God? Nothing begets nothing. So wrong, your post.

Sean said...

Anon, Who say's that the Earth and Man came out of nothing? That is just a bland assertion on your part. The Earth and then Man was formed by the natural process of the universe, which is not nothing, but rather evertything. You pretend there is a problem where there is in fact none, then invent a solution where one is not required.

LGM said...

KG

It's important because people need to understand that faith in supernatural spirit monster thingmaboobits is idiotic. It's a form of insanity and it leads to terrible consequences.

Put it this way, if a man was racing towards you up the street, screaming at the top of his lungs that there was a fire breathing dragon chasing him, yet following him there was nothing...., then you'd think he was playing a not very clever joke or he was quite insane.

Living your life, or significant portions of it, like that screaming man leads to terrible outcomes. It means that either you hear voices talking to you or you obey some freakshow (possibly wearing a dress) who hears the voices.

Which freakshow to choose? Now that's an interesting question. It's random really. They're all pretty much based on the same mumbo-jumbo. Choose a fruity loopy flavour. Take your pick. More importantly and far more worryingly is this. How insane do the stories and instructions need to be before you'll say, "No more!"? By the time that stage is reached many people have far too much of an intellectual investment to think, let alone to question, let alone refuse to follow further into the madness.

The choice is between using one's faculty of reason in a consistently logical manner or abandoning logic and abusing one's reason. Live as one should or behave, for at least part of the time, shackled and insane.

LGM

LGM said...

KG

If you're quick and PC hasn't deleted the offending post yet, there is a good example of a mentally ill critter immediately prior to my post. Look above (just in case the offending contribution has been expunged, I am not referring to Sean).

LGM

Anonymous said...

"In his own image" indeed - God is always an old white guy with big hair, and Jesus a blue eyed blond...only Judas looks like an Arab, as a rule. Hilarious.

Relatives of mine are moving back to the US soon and are currently looking for private schooling for their 5 year old in Oregon. They simply cannot find a school that is secular, and say that those of us here in NZ have no idea how much religion infiltrates all aspects of life in the US. In fact this issue alone is making them think twice about moving back.

Sus said...

Red, while I'd love to see the US Republicans rediscover the virtues of limited govt, I don't share your faith in Sarah Palin at all.

And on the religious note, it's worth remembering that this is a personal blog, not that of the Libertarianz party.

An Objectivist is, by definition, an atheist, so this is never going to be the place to find pro-religious material. Readers will, however, find plenty to the contrary! :)

OTOH, non-atheist readers who want to learn more about the Libertarianz will find no mention of religion whatsoever on the party site.

It's important to note the distinction.

Sus said...

Ruth, I share your friends' belief. I'd go so far as to say that the US is unique in the west, in that respect.

They always have had more of a religious society, of course, but the backlash after eight years of Clinton has seen it escalate in recent times, IMO.

Anonymous said...

Thanks for the link RB. My relatives have bought 500 acres near Rosedale - they are viticulturalists - and have looked everywhere for a secular school. The schools all want to know what church you go to and so on.

****

I agree Sus - it is not just a matter of religious values (many of which are good), but the fact that religion permeates the entire school curriculum in all subjects. They have found a small Jewish school about an hour drive away that says it only teaches Judeo-Christian values in a once a week class, but that is a drive she didn't want to make twice a day.

KG said...

LGM, that's not a particularly honest characterization of religiously-inclined people.
The fact is, very many devout religionists lead their lives according to the tenets of their faith and those include such things as forgiveness, honesty etc. Yes, so do very many atheists lead similar lives, without any reference to religion.
But your comment is no better than mine would be if I characterized atheists as amoral scumbags due to their lack of faith.
"Live as one should or behave, for at least part of the time, shackled and insane" is to denigrate millions of people who lead largely blameless lives.
And "as one should"? Should, according to whom? You're shading into arrogance there.
I'm willing to bet there's far less drug abuse, STDs, murder, assault and child abuse in a Mennonite or Amish community than there is among the atheists of Dearborn or Wellington.

LGM said...

KG

The characterisation of the religious is accurate. You have missed the fundamental point. Here it is again.

Every person has a vital choice to make. Each may use their faculty of reason consistently & logically or instead may abuse it by substituting faith in some random belief. That's THE vital choice that MUST be made.

One of those options leads to terrible consequences, as it is immoral and inhuman. The other allows one to live as one should, according to one's nature.

The fact is that many (the vast majority in the West) lead their lives in spite of their religious beliefs. They compartmentalise their lives, keeping the religious portions separate from their day to day living. Such people are inconsistent and intellectually dishonest (dishonest in that they fail to seriously examine the contradictions they encounter between reality and their beliefs- which is a necessary first step). A religious believer who fails to thoroughly compartmentalise is soon identified as a kook, a fundamentalist, a terrorist (potential or actual) or simply quite insane. Consider why that is so and why it is that civilised society is secular and atheist.

LGM

Anonymous said...

Shouldn't that be :

"Peter has created blog in his own image"?

All of the pagan gods fall down because of contingency, lack of wholeness and the failure the satisfy the criteria of sufficient cause.

This blog included.

Unknown said...
This comment has been removed by the author.