The following thoughts arose while reading an article about the setting up of a project, involving 9 European Universities to examine religious belief and behaviour (religiosity). The project is led by Oxford and is called EXREL.
“Primitive” religions are largely attempts to explain and control the environment. There are various spirits, gods and influences which determine or undermine the orderly running of things but may need propitiating from time to time. For example the Egyptians saw their main god (the sun) everyday, knew that they depended upon him for their existence, so made sure he came up every morning by carrying out appropriate ceremonies. We have a similar understanding, but call it science. The mystery is no longer there but the reality still is. Gods are seen as superior beings, with power over us, but are largely much the same as people. Add to this, in most cases, the question of what happens after death and you end up with a model which more or less fits most religions except:
The Judaeo/Christian/Islamic tradition.
Why is this? It is the only religion which postulates an eternal omniscient creator. A God who is completely beyond the comprehension of mere humanity, although a high proportion of believers probably still think in terms of a man with a white beard up there somewhere. Where did the idea come from? Why was it exclusively western?
1 comment:
Please flesh these thoughts out a bit. I'm not following entirely:
the reference to science
Where did the idea of an omniscient creator. . .?
Are you saying that this is still a western concept.
And so now science has taken it's place.
Is this why Indian gods still survive? Because so much of time is needed to placate them - leaving very little for reflection and questioning.
The gods of things, food and sex (- lack of confidence) have perhaps led us to have little time to reflect.
Post a Comment