4 ms·

If you travelled back in time to ancient Greece, what would say to people who described polytheism with great reverence and said they believe in Zeus, Poseidon,

If you travelled back in time to ancient Greece, what would say to people who described polytheism with great reverence and said they believe in Zeus, Poseidon, and Hades because they represent the ultimate truth?

OtterCoder 10y ago
I'd say the same thing I say to atheists who are convinced we are in a simulation: "That's one way to look at it."
- cLeEOGPw 10y ago
  Then you sound condescending and all-knowing, when the real answer is - we don't know. It may be AI, it may be fluctuations, it may be some experience based thing, they are all different and are not "ways of looking at it". Don't pretend to know more than you do.
catawbasam 10y ago
Look past the labels and you will find some familiar ideas: "The life of the unmoved mover is self-contemplative thought ("νοήσεως νόησις (noeseos noesis)", i.e. "thought of thought").[1][2] According to Aristotle, the gods cannot potentially be distracted from this eternal self-contemplation because, in that instant, they would cease to exist." from Wikipedia on Aristotle's Metaphysics
- redial 10y ago
  Was that supposed to answer op's question?
  - catawbasam 10y ago
    It was meant as a suggestion to Whitneyland that many religious traditions, including ancient paganism, contain ideas in common with some recent religious thought. They aren't necessarily as fundamentally opposed as they might appear at first glance. Also, while they clearly pre-date modern ideas of science, the thoughts of a person like Aristotle are worthy of consideration.
    - redial 10y ago
      If everything can mean anything, then yes, they are all equal. And no one is discounting Aristotle, I don't know where you are getting that idea.
meric 10y ago
I wouldn't, history clearly shows God intended their descendants to believe in his oneness, I lift not one finger and their idea of how the universe came about grew to God the One over time, on no action on my part. There's no need to proselytise IMO, and when I talk about it, it's more for sharing intellectual curiosity.
- WhitneyLand 10y ago
  >their descendants [came] to believe in his oneness Not all of them did :). Also I understand you are not trying to proselytize, we have the same motivation in commenting. I am still curious about the other possibility - If you travelled 1000 years into the future and found no one believed in God anymore than we believe in Zeus: Would it bother you to live a lifetime of staying silent, or being discriminated against by nearly everyone as being a crackpot?
  - meric 10y ago
    It would not bother me at all. I would not try to convince them (what I mean by not prosthelyzing) but I won't (or cannot ;) keep silent on purpose.
fiatjaf 10y ago
The way Greeks treated their polytheism is very different from the fundamental Christian attitude towards God. You should had predicted this if you were actually gave a sincere thought to the matter instead of just repeating this atheistic arguments.
- redial 10y ago
  > The way Greeks treated their polytheism is very different from the fundamental Christian attitude towards God. That is his point, why would you choose a christian point of view instead of a greek one, besides personal preference?
  - fiatjaf 10y ago
    The Christian point of view sort of encompasses the Greek one. It's an insight on top of Greek religion, not against it. It is more complete, makes more sense in general. I'm sure many smart Greeks would agree with it if they had known it.
- WhitneyLand 10y ago
  I'm not repeating anyone else's arguments, the thought just came to mind. Also, I didn't say anything about atheism. Finally, I do give sincere thought to these matters and try not to ever be disrespectful of anyone's belief system. Sorry if you felt that way.
  - fiatjaf 10y ago
    I know you think the thought just came to your mind, but it is so repeated that I think it came not from your pure experience and thinking. I'm sorry if I offended (and keep offending) you, also. Also, although you didn't say anything about atheism, you surely are an atheist, right?

OtterCoder 10y ago

I'd say the same thing I say to atheists who are convinced we are in a simulation: "That's one way to look at it."

cLeEOGPw 10y ago
Then you sound condescending and all-knowing, when the real answer is - we don't know. It may be AI, it may be fluctuations, it may be some experience based thing, they are all different and are not "ways of looking at it". Don't pretend to know more than you do.

catawbasam 10y ago

Look past the labels and you will find some familiar ideas: "The life of the unmoved mover is self-contemplative thought ("νοήσεως νόησις (noeseos noesis)", i.e. "thought of thought").[1][2] According to Aristotle, the gods cannot potentially be distracted from this eternal self-contemplation because, in that instant, they would cease to exist." from Wikipedia on Aristotle's Metaphysics

redial 10y ago
Was that supposed to answer op's question?
- catawbasam 10y ago
  It was meant as a suggestion to Whitneyland that many religious traditions, including ancient paganism, contain ideas in common with some recent religious thought. They aren't necessarily as fundamentally opposed as they might appear at first glance. Also, while they clearly pre-date modern ideas of science, the thoughts of a person like Aristotle are worthy of consideration.
  - redial 10y ago
    If everything can mean anything, then yes, they are all equal. And no one is discounting Aristotle, I don't know where you are getting that idea.

meric 10y ago

I wouldn't, history clearly shows God intended their descendants to believe in his oneness, I lift not one finger and their idea of how the universe came about grew to God the One over time, on no action on my part. There's no need to proselytise IMO, and when I talk about it, it's more for sharing intellectual curiosity.

WhitneyLand 10y ago
>their descendants [came] to believe in his oneness Not all of them did :). Also I understand you are not trying to proselytize, we have the same motivation in commenting. I am still curious about the other possibility - If you travelled 1000 years into the future and found no one believed in God anymore than we believe in Zeus: Would it bother you to live a lifetime of staying silent, or being discriminated against by nearly everyone as being a crackpot?
- meric 10y ago
  It would not bother me at all. I would not try to convince them (what I mean by not prosthelyzing) but I won't (or cannot ;) keep silent on purpose.

fiatjaf 10y ago

The way Greeks treated their polytheism is very different from the fundamental Christian attitude towards God. You should had predicted this if you were actually gave a sincere thought to the matter instead of just repeating this atheistic arguments.

redial 10y ago
> The way Greeks treated their polytheism is very different from the fundamental Christian attitude towards God. That is his point, why would you choose a christian point of view instead of a greek one, besides personal preference?
- fiatjaf 10y ago
  The Christian point of view sort of encompasses the Greek one. It's an insight on top of Greek religion, not against it. It is more complete, makes more sense in general. I'm sure many smart Greeks would agree with it if they had known it.
WhitneyLand 10y ago
I'm not repeating anyone else's arguments, the thought just came to mind. Also, I didn't say anything about atheism. Finally, I do give sincere thought to these matters and try not to ever be disrespectful of anyone's belief system. Sorry if you felt that way.
- fiatjaf 10y ago
  I know you think the thought just came to your mind, but it is so repeated that I think it came not from your pure experience and thinking. I'm sorry if I offended (and keep offending) you, also. Also, although you didn't say anything about atheism, you surely are an atheist, right?