Ive read a little about the shift from polytheism to monoaltry to monotheism among semites and also with the Egyptian cult of Aten.
Assuming some priests like money and power, wasn’t this a way to monopolize religion, similar to how communist bureacrats try to control the entire economy or how capitalist oligarchs implement corporate monopolies? What about banning idols? Was there an economic advantage in some priests doing this?
Yes this has implications for christianity. Im interested in a discussion, not bashing.
Ugh, just lost an effortpost to a garbage tor connection. But this is s good topic so I'll fkn do it again
a way to monopolize religion
Absolutely. It introduced the idea of "other Gods are fake and must be erased" as part of religious doctrine. There was religious conflict before that, but it was framed more as "lets see whose God is stronger" and probably involved other reasons the conflicts would have happened anyway. But now all of your followers are on a daily, lifelong mission to either destroy or convert any followers of any other religion.
Banning idols seems to me like more semetic semantics. For example is there much difference between Jesus hanging on a cross in a Catholic church vs a statue of Frey? But if "no idols" is part of your doctrine, then it gives you a justification for destroying the religious symbols of others, helping to wipe them from mankinds memory completely until yours is all that remains.
Ugh, just lost an effortpost to a garbage tor connection.
Been there. If it gets crazy long I put it to the clipboard.
is there much difference between Jesus hanging on a cross in a Catholic church vs a statue of Frey?
Lots of jews consider that to be idolatry, the cross thing. Protestants seem to view praying to statues of saints like the Virgin, idolatrous. Is it a hold-over from the era of heavy pagan idolatry? Maybe.
Its interesting to note that Abraham’s dad was a priest and idol maker of some other god in Ur, until he ran into political trouble and had to leave in a hurry.
Who benefits from idols and how do they benefit? In the bronze age or whatever. Maybe lots of people were building competing idols and using them to collect offerings to the idols? Also, when people went to war they would capture each others idols, and maybe humiliate them. Maybe they viewed idols as a vulnerability.
I think that example came to mind because when Europe was being Christianized the Christians were closer to today's Catholics (and Eastern Orthodox). I'm not sure how much the concept of idol worship came up when they were killing everyone though.
I can say that as a child I did pray to that Cross as well as saints, and as an adult I pray to images of Pagan Gods so I guess I've experienced what "idol worship" is like. It's really just a physical or visual representation of a religious concept to help you focus on and connect with it. Especially if it's beautiful art, it elicits a certain feeling and keeps your mind from wandering away from whatever it represents. And because of the very strong feelings that can be part of a religious experience it does become something more than that, kind of like a cherished belonging, but more. The benefit is straightforward, it's just part of practicing the religion.
It's not just White Pagans and Catholics though. The Hindus and Bhuddists do it, and it's not much different than religious focal points even in non-idol religions. For example Islam has this special water you can bring back from wherever. I've had it explained to me from a friend and even drank a little. (I was never muslim I just knew somebody) Similar reverence, it's just a thing to focus on. Even jews, when they pray to that Roman wall or the reverence they have for a torah scroll or blowing that horn thing. I've experienced that in person too (if they only knew they let SecretHitler in lol) and it's very similar, just a different religion and not technically an "idol"
As for capturing an idol and humiliating it etc, that would probably fly as a sacrifice in Paganism but it's complicated. I couldn't just go buy a Koran and pretend I did something good by destroying it for Wotan. But if I managed to get a muslim immigration center shut down, and offered a Koran that came from that place? Fuck yeah the Gods would be very pleased and that's a real sacrifice. Does that make sense? Other groups might not have something tied to the religion, but it would still be a way to express victory and dominance. If you watch the excellent German show Barbarians, the scene where they take the Roman eagle is probably an accurate portrayal of what I mean.
There existed a serious power struggle between the crown and the cloth.
One of the ways in which the priests kept power was through illusion (stage magic) and the over complication of the faith.
Every little thing needed the blessing of the gods, but more importantly, the blessing from the right god, in the correct temple (which could change based on a plethora of factors)
This meant you NEEDED a priest to tell you what to do and where to go. This is an open invitation to corruption which they took to with glee.
By simplifying the faith. The farmer didn't need the priest to tell him exactly where to go, what to give / do etc.
He could just go to his local temple, make a simple offering of his choice, and receive the good fortune / blessing.
This pissed the priests off bigly, and some posit that it was this insult to the cloth that got the wheels of freemasonry started, but that's conjecture
[ - ] HughBriss 1 point 2.0 yearsMay 6, 2022 14:55:29 ago (+1/-0)
Helena, this is a serious response, notwithstanding my snarky comment below. Monotheism is a fairly new concept in religious thought. The people living in Palestine at this time were allegedly descendants of Abram/Abraham. These people were never held in captivity in Egypt, but had sufficient contact with them to learn of the abortive attempt to introduce monotheism in Egypt. Apparently the Abrahamic people thought it was a nifty idea and they incorporated it. It's my understanding that there was an attempt to monopolization among that group of people so that the new god Yahweh would be supreme over Baal, Moloch, and whatever feminine deity was worshiped at the time.
Literally the rest of the ancient world was polytheistic, and I think you are correct that whatever preceded Yahweh worship was thought to be a threat to the new religion. When there were more adherents to this new faith, these tribes went to way with everyone around them as a show of force that their god was stronger than their god. This developed into what was later the Judaism of the Hebrew scriptures.
I believe Jesus appeared on earth to repudiate the jews who were claiming they were the God's chosen ones. However, I also believe that the god of the Hebrew scriptures was simply a demiurge and not the supreme God. This would appear to be polytheistic, except there is only one supreme God, not even God's son Jesus.
Judaism was forced on Christians when Constantine decreed that the official Christian bible would also contain the Hebrew scriptures. This was neither asked for nor desired, but was forced on Christians by jews living in Rome at the time. It was a very successful ploy at intruducing jewish thought to Christians who already had a very good philosophy and theology of their own.
Food for thought. Most of this is true, and some of it is my opinion. Take it as you will.
I know about the Hyksos invasion, which probably is the basis of the hebrew exile in egypt. The hyksos arrived in egypt prior to 1800 bc which is when they make their power play and declare themselves kings of northern egypt. They are largely defeated and expelled by Ahmose around 1500, although he kept some of them as slaves according to inscriptions. So I think that Moses and his followers are likely to be a slave caste decended from these captors, circa 1200, although perhaps they have an increasing amount of freedom since Moses is pretty assimilated and a favored son of the royal fam.
Were these jews influenced by the Akhenaten episode which happened in the 1300s? Or was Akhenaton himself part hebrew/hyksos? The Hyksos became powerful while promoting the cult of Set, whom they identified with their Semitic god El (never referred to as yahweh until Moses spoke to the burning bush while living with the Midianites who worshipped a god called Yahweh.) The cult of Set continued to be popular with elites long after the Hyksos were supposedly driven out.
Is it possible that Hyksos/Hebrews infiltrated the aristocracy and eventually the royal family in the person of Akhenaten? Yes, he worshipped the wrong god, but the timing is interesting. If Moses was accepted in the Egyptian royal family why not other semites? Maybe monotheism started with Set, and then Aten, and then Yahweh, each time by hebrew/hyksos demogogues?
I also believe that the god of the Hebrew scriptures was simply a demiurge
Thats interesting. I guess this is a gnostic kind of thing?
Thank you for the reply. I find no fault with either your facts or your postulations. My knowledge of the Hyksos is minimal, but the idea that Moses, whether he existed or not, was one of them is likely, even probable. But since there's so little to go on, one can only postulate.
Thats interesting. I guess this is a gnostic kind of thing?
Not exactly gnostic, although a fair amount of gnosticism influenced the early Christians, as much as Greek philosophy (particularly Stoicism) and reasoning influenced their methodology in argument. I prefer the very earliest version of the story of Jesus, which is best documented by Marcion of Sinope. I doubt whether the early Christians in the congregations he established every used the word demiurge, but they regarded the god of the Hebrew scriptures a minor god and an angry one at that, certainly the one they regarded as the true god, who is a god of love. This is why I, as they did, reject the Hebrew scriptures entirely as not inspired by God. It's all about the anger, violence, and retribution of Yahweh as documented by the most narcissistic people on earth. Even by their own scripture, they were fickle and faithless.
The earliest Christian congregations were self-organized and didn't have a central authority outside of the congregation. When the congregations began organizing and created leadership over multiple congregations, the idea of "heresy" began, and things like the Apostles Creed were framed to establish orthodoxy. This yet another form of the monopolization you first posted about. It was inevitable when the new religion grew from individual congregations to a church that this would come about, which is why I am what is called unchurched, because I won't expose myself to dogma from an entity that regards itself as having the monopoly on true faith.
I don’t know why you would say that. This is the atheist sub. I posed a question to atheists. Non-atheists are welcome to chime in. I specifically discouraged bashing . But I have my beliefs and I think its fair for me to discuss them on this forum. I didnt say anything disparaging about christians, but this is not a christian forum. If having an atheist topic is intolerable to you, maybe you need to find one.
Monotheism was invented by slaves as a survival mechanism. A slave does not have a choice in who he serves, so a society of slaves are going to create a god that is as ruthless as his master. because if obeying one demanding god is a matter of survival, obeying one master will be easy.
It's more than that. Akhenaten has genetic scarring from gene modification. He was not natural, he was a golem created by jewish sorcery to rule Egypt.
Damn, I've never heard that before! Can I quote you on that? I'm sure it's original and definitely didn't originate with a disgusting slob of a jew who never worked a day in his life and wrote a book about making all property and assets communal under the rule of totalitarian councils composed of jews.
[ - ] HughBriss 1 point 2.0 yearsMay 6, 2022 14:40:12 ago (+1/-0)
It's difficult to say. I think they were responsible for introducing atheism to western Europe as a way to weaken the influence of Christianity during the "age of enlightenment". Atheists were just as smug and self-righteous as many Christians. It had exactly the effect jews wanted.
I don’t disagree with that. I think jews start ideological revolutions to undermine the traditional regimes. A lot of atheists are pretty smug and self righteous. Intolerance of theism is an ideology and so is the government-is-magic belief that many socialist atheists live by.
[ + ] SecretHitler
[ - ] SecretHitler 2 points 2.0 yearsMay 6, 2022 15:30:40 ago (+2/-0)
Absolutely. It introduced the idea of "other Gods are fake and must be erased" as part of religious doctrine. There was religious conflict before that, but it was framed more as "lets see whose God is stronger" and probably involved other reasons the conflicts would have happened anyway. But now all of your followers are on a daily, lifelong mission to either destroy or convert any followers of any other religion.
Banning idols seems to me like more semetic semantics. For example is there much difference between Jesus hanging on a cross in a Catholic church vs a statue of Frey? But if "no idols" is part of your doctrine, then it gives you a justification for destroying the religious symbols of others, helping to wipe them from mankinds memory completely until yours is all that remains.
[ + ] PostWallHelena
[ - ] PostWallHelena [op] 2 points 2.0 yearsMay 6, 2022 16:25:13 ago (+2/-0)
Been there. If it gets crazy long I put it to the clipboard.
Its interesting to note that Abraham’s dad was a priest and idol maker of some other god in Ur, until he ran into political trouble and had to leave in a hurry.
Who benefits from idols and how do they benefit? In the bronze age or whatever. Maybe lots of people were building competing idols and using them to collect offerings to the idols? Also, when people went to war they would capture each others idols, and maybe humiliate them. Maybe they viewed idols as a vulnerability.
[ + ] SecretHitler
[ - ] SecretHitler 1 point 2.0 yearsMay 6, 2022 20:18:21 ago (+1/-0)
I can say that as a child I did pray to that Cross as well as saints, and as an adult I pray to images of Pagan Gods so I guess I've experienced what "idol worship" is like. It's really just a physical or visual representation of a religious concept to help you focus on and connect with it. Especially if it's beautiful art, it elicits a certain feeling and keeps your mind from wandering away from whatever it represents. And because of the very strong feelings that can be part of a religious experience it does become something more than that, kind of like a cherished belonging, but more. The benefit is straightforward, it's just part of practicing the religion.
It's not just White Pagans and Catholics though. The Hindus and Bhuddists do it, and it's not much different than religious focal points even in non-idol religions. For example Islam has this special water you can bring back from wherever. I've had it explained to me from a friend and even drank a little. (I was never muslim I just knew somebody) Similar reverence, it's just a thing to focus on. Even jews, when they pray to that Roman wall or the reverence they have for a torah scroll or blowing that horn thing. I've experienced that in person too (if they only knew they let SecretHitler in lol) and it's very similar, just a different religion and not technically an "idol"
As for capturing an idol and humiliating it etc, that would probably fly as a sacrifice in Paganism but it's complicated. I couldn't just go buy a Koran and pretend I did something good by destroying it for Wotan. But if I managed to get a muslim immigration center shut down, and offered a Koran that came from that place? Fuck yeah the Gods would be very pleased and that's a real sacrifice. Does that make sense? Other groups might not have something tied to the religion, but it would still be a way to express victory and dominance. If you watch the excellent German show Barbarians, the scene where they take the Roman eagle is probably an accurate portrayal of what I mean.
[ + ] UncleDoug
[ - ] UncleDoug 2 points 2.0 yearsMay 6, 2022 14:30:12 ago (+2/-0)
Who was the first pope in the Catholic Church?
What did Edward Gibbon 'The History of the Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire' have to say on the matter?
You either know semitic faiths are a long con for money and power, or you are willfully ignorant of the facts to protect your adult coping mechanism.
[ + ] PostWallHelena
[ - ] PostWallHelena [op] 0 points 2.0 yearsMay 6, 2022 14:42:05 ago (+1/-1)
[ + ] diggernicks
[ - ] diggernicks 2 points 2.0 yearsMay 6, 2022 14:49:03 ago (+2/-0)*
[ + ] WanderingToast
[ - ] WanderingToast 1 point 2.0 yearsMay 6, 2022 17:26:53 ago (+1/-0)
There existed a serious power struggle between the crown and the cloth.
One of the ways in which the priests kept power was through illusion (stage magic) and the over complication of the faith.
Every little thing needed the blessing of the gods, but more importantly, the blessing from the right god, in the correct temple (which could change based on a plethora of factors)
This meant you NEEDED a priest to tell you what to do and where to go. This is an open invitation to corruption which they took to with glee.
By simplifying the faith. The farmer didn't need the priest to tell him exactly where to go, what to give / do etc.
He could just go to his local temple, make a simple offering of his choice, and receive the good fortune / blessing.
This pissed the priests off bigly, and some posit that it was this insult to the cloth that got the wheels of freemasonry started, but that's conjecture
[ + ] QuasiVoat
[ - ] QuasiVoat 1 point 2.0 yearsMay 6, 2022 16:36:41 ago (+1/-0)
[ + ] HughBriss
[ - ] HughBriss 1 point 2.0 yearsMay 6, 2022 14:55:29 ago (+1/-0)
Literally the rest of the ancient world was polytheistic, and I think you are correct that whatever preceded Yahweh worship was thought to be a threat to the new religion. When there were more adherents to this new faith, these tribes went to way with everyone around them as a show of force that their god was stronger than their god. This developed into what was later the Judaism of the Hebrew scriptures.
I believe Jesus appeared on earth to repudiate the jews who were claiming they were the God's chosen ones. However, I also believe that the god of the Hebrew scriptures was simply a demiurge and not the supreme God. This would appear to be polytheistic, except there is only one supreme God, not even God's son Jesus.
Judaism was forced on Christians when Constantine decreed that the official Christian bible would also contain the Hebrew scriptures. This was neither asked for nor desired, but was forced on Christians by jews living in Rome at the time. It was a very successful ploy at intruducing jewish thought to Christians who already had a very good philosophy and theology of their own.
Food for thought. Most of this is true, and some of it is my opinion. Take it as you will.
[ + ] PostWallHelena
[ - ] PostWallHelena [op] 1 point 2.0 yearsMay 6, 2022 15:52:26 ago (+1/-0)
Were these jews influenced by the Akhenaten episode which happened in the 1300s? Or was Akhenaton himself part hebrew/hyksos? The Hyksos became powerful while promoting the cult of Set, whom they identified with their Semitic god El (never referred to as yahweh until Moses spoke to the burning bush while living with the Midianites who worshipped a god called Yahweh.) The cult of Set continued to be popular with elites long after the Hyksos were supposedly driven out.
Is it possible that Hyksos/Hebrews infiltrated the aristocracy and eventually the royal family in the person of Akhenaten? Yes, he worshipped the wrong god, but the timing is interesting. If Moses was accepted in the Egyptian royal family why not other semites? Maybe monotheism started with Set, and then Aten, and then Yahweh, each time by hebrew/hyksos demogogues?
Thats interesting. I guess this is a gnostic kind of thing?
[ + ] HughBriss
[ - ] HughBriss 0 points 2.0 yearsMay 6, 2022 18:16:11 ago (+0/-0)
Not exactly gnostic, although a fair amount of gnosticism influenced the early Christians, as much as Greek philosophy (particularly Stoicism) and reasoning influenced their methodology in argument. I prefer the very earliest version of the story of Jesus, which is best documented by Marcion of Sinope. I doubt whether the early Christians in the congregations he established every used the word demiurge, but they regarded the god of the Hebrew scriptures a minor god and an angry one at that, certainly the one they regarded as the true god, who is a god of love. This is why I, as they did, reject the Hebrew scriptures entirely as not inspired by God. It's all about the anger, violence, and retribution of Yahweh as documented by the most narcissistic people on earth. Even by their own scripture, they were fickle and faithless.
The earliest Christian congregations were self-organized and didn't have a central authority outside of the congregation. When the congregations began organizing and created leadership over multiple congregations, the idea of "heresy" began, and things like the Apostles Creed were framed to establish orthodoxy. This yet another form of the monopolization you first posted about. It was inevitable when the new religion grew from individual congregations to a church that this would come about, which is why I am what is called unchurched, because I won't expose myself to dogma from an entity that regards itself as having the monopoly on true faith.
[ + ] i_scream_trucks
[ - ] i_scream_trucks 0 points 2.0 yearsMay 6, 2022 20:05:21 ago (+0/-0)
[ + ] PostWallHelena
[ - ] PostWallHelena [op] 0 points 2.0 yearsMay 6, 2022 21:07:45 ago (+0/-0)
[ + ] Master_Foo
[ - ] Master_Foo 0 points 2.0 yearsMay 6, 2022 15:57:35 ago (+0/-0)
A slave does not have a choice in who he serves, so a society of slaves are going to create a god that is as ruthless as his master. because if obeying one demanding god is a matter of survival, obeying one master will be easy.
[ + ] NaturalSelectionistWorker
[ - ] NaturalSelectionistWorker 0 points 2.0 yearsMay 6, 2022 15:44:27 ago (+0/-0)
[ + ] diggernicks
[ - ] diggernicks 0 points 2.0 yearsMay 6, 2022 13:24:14 ago (+1/-1)
[ + ] PostWallHelena
[ - ] PostWallHelena [op] 1 point 2.0 yearsMay 6, 2022 13:32:58 ago (+1/-0)
[ + ] SecretHitler
[ - ] SecretHitler 2 points 2.0 yearsMay 6, 2022 15:06:47 ago (+2/-0)
[ + ] diggernicks
[ - ] diggernicks 0 points 2.0 yearsMay 6, 2022 15:15:46 ago (+0/-0)
[ + ] diggernicks
[ - ] diggernicks 0 points 2.0 yearsMay 6, 2022 13:34:31 ago (+0/-0)
Impressive to be sure.
[ + ] PostWallHelena
[ - ] PostWallHelena [op] 0 points 2.0 yearsMay 6, 2022 13:42:12 ago (+0/-0)
[ + ] diggernicks
[ - ] diggernicks 0 points 2.0 yearsMay 6, 2022 13:43:26 ago (+0/-0)
[ + ] HughBriss
[ - ] HughBriss 0 points 2.0 yearsMay 6, 2022 13:41:49 ago (+0/-0)
[ + ] diggernicks
[ - ] diggernicks 0 points 2.0 yearsMay 6, 2022 13:43:05 ago (+0/-0)
Just because one of if the the biggest assholes to ever live said it doesn't make it untrue
[ + ] HughBriss
[ - ] HughBriss 0 points 2.0 yearsMay 6, 2022 14:36:58 ago (+0/-0)
[ + ] diggernicks
[ - ] diggernicks 0 points 2.0 yearsMay 6, 2022 14:45:49 ago (+0/-0)
Don't get mad at the messenger just because the message upsets you
[ + ] PostWallHelena
[ - ] PostWallHelena [op] 0 points 2.0 yearsMay 6, 2022 13:46:53 ago (+0/-0)
[ + ] HughBriss
[ - ] HughBriss 1 point 2.0 yearsMay 6, 2022 14:40:12 ago (+1/-0)
[ + ] PostWallHelena
[ - ] PostWallHelena [op] 0 points 2.0 yearsMay 6, 2022 14:48:07 ago (+0/-0)
[ + ] NaturalSelectionistWorker
[ - ] NaturalSelectionistWorker 0 points 2.0 yearsMay 6, 2022 15:47:19 ago (+0/-0)
[ + ] PostWallHelena
[ - ] PostWallHelena [op] 0 points 2.0 yearsMay 7, 2022 10:18:42 ago (+0/-0)