Way to 'kill' any God?

Don't get me wrong, this is completely hypothetical.

All religions are based faith or how much a person believes in the religion correct? So that means the followers of any said religion should have knowledge on the Deity/Deities.

Now for the hypothetical part: If you were able to completely erase ALL knowledge on any given religion and had to the power to remove all relics and sources of knowledge of that religion from the face of the world so that the populus could not relearn it, it would then be a 'dead' religion right? No one to know about it, so no one to believe in it. Bye bye 'God'.

NOTE: This is not an attack made to state that there is no higher power. I honestly don't know. The point of it is to state that in my honest opinion no one knows what's out there and therefore is ridiculous to state that any Human made Deity is the supreme ruler of the Universe.

To Kill a God

That's the way to do it.

It's the fate of all deities, eventually, to go the way of the 8-track.

Relevance is a tough standard in this day and age. Man understands the workings of too many miracles.

And when will morality be irrelevant?

As well, the God will still be there, just called by a different name.

Originally posted by Jamuhn
And when will morality be irrelevant?

As well, the God will still be there, just called by a different name.

If you're saying the God would still be there, then someone acknowledges it's existence, AKA - Believing in that God. But if knowledge of that God is completely erased, how can one believe in it? All that would be done I think is another religion is created to fill in the gap it seems more then 50% of the Human Race has of 'Feeling Alone'.

Blue,

I can see what you are getting at and I understand the point. I think it's quite interesting actually.

If all knowledge of the supposed God was erased, physical as well as within our minds, God then ceases to exist.

How would God then be known to us? Would he then have to make a physical re-appearance?

Like the thought process. Cheers

this theory would only apply if we created God in our heads rather than God created us. in this case, God never existed in the first place.

if someone somehow erased all memory of your parents and all physical proof of them that would make them no less your parents.

[edit on 16-8-2005 by passengername]

A surprisingly large number of religions propose that Humans BECOME Gods, when they accomplish spiritual enlightenment.

even weirder, most are christian sects... not your snake handler wackos either... but some mainstream sects...

ways to kill gods... easy... just be taken over by Roman catholics, and they will convert all your previous gods into saints... makes for an easy conversion...

gods only become vunerable through their names, for to name something is to command it. Hence, as mythographer Robert Graves said, "God's their titles take, from gods they captive make".

In ancient Israel, the name of God, or tetragramatton, was a closely gaurded secret, for God could be invoked, through his name, to do the bidding of the tribe. Only the priests knew the name, and they passed it down within the priest hood, through use of a 'formula' by which the name coud be derived. This was considered safer than the priest actually telling his acolyte. There was the possiblity that they might be over heard. By the way, this is related to the kabbala.

In ancient Egypt, Isis gains power over Ra by learning his name. She molds a serpant from clay, and some of the god's spittle that has fallen on the ground. She then leaves it where it may bite the god, who likes to wander in the cool of the afternoon. When the snake does bite Ra, isis promises to cure him, only if he reveals his sacred name to her. When she learns it, she uses it to empower herself. Old Testament readers will see the familiarities, not only with the Garden of Eden stories, but the fiery snakes that bit the Israelites as they wandered in the dessert. It's no secret that the jews borrowed much of their religion from Egypt, and Moses himself was a high priest, and half brother of Ramsis 2.

In most tribal cultures people are given several names: a public name by which everyone knows them, and family name by which their relatives call them, adn a 'medicine name' or initatoty name, that they might recieve after somne rite of passage. The medicine name is sacred, and they must keep it a secret. There is supposedly power in that name, and if others learn of it, they might gain power over the name's possesor.

Originally posted by passengername
this theory would only apply if we created God in our heads rather than God created us. in this case, God never existed in the first place.

if someone somehow erased all memory of your parents and all physical proof of them that would make them no less your parents.

[edit on 16-8-2005 by passengername]

The parent part is flawed because there would still have to be a middle man that says "These people are your parents." If indeed all information that stated that said people were your parents - from records, your mind, and everyone else who knows that specific fact, even biological evidence - Then they would not be your parents.

Observation proves existence. If no one was in the woods to see the tree fall, who's to say the tree fell? You have to BELIEVE it fell, especially if the only way you've obtained information that it fell is through word of Mouth (Hey, that's how religions have been passed down through the ages.) To believe the tree fell, you must have information that it fell. If you cut the source of the information - Then no tree has fallen.

Not to mention christianity has survived for thousands of years ... so much for trying to "erase" it ... >_>

God existed well before he created people or revealed Himself to them, so I don't buy your argument.

Originally posted by Zeta_101
Not to mention christianity has survived for thousands of years ... so much for trying to "erase" it ... >_>

How long did the Greek Mythology last? The Egyptian Heliopolis? Thousands of years if I'm not mistaken - Everything must die at somepoint, Christanity will too.

[edit on 8/16/2005 by BlueApocalypse]

Originally posted by djohnsto77
God existed well before he created people or revealed Himself to them, so I don't buy your argument.

That is a belief. A belief requires knowledge. If you erase the knowledge, then no belief can be formed based upon that knowledge. My argument is still valid.

This is one of the arguments i love hearing.

If nobodys ever seen a boat or made boat or heard of a boat then boats dont exist same as religion and gods their all human constructs.

Take away all knowledge of them and they cease to exist

isnt reasoning wonderful.

Originally posted by BlueApocalypse
That is a belief. A belief requires knowledge. If you erase the knowledge, then no belief can be formed based upon that knowledge. My argument is still valid.

Actually, your argument is partially invalid.
Why?
A belief does not entirely require knowledge or it to be knowledge-based.
A belief requires faith, just as disbelief requires faith.
Faith is the missing link in your argument of belief requires knowledge.

Furthermore, your hypothesis does not take into account a God who does not require subjects to believe, to have knowledge, or to have faith.
Perhaps there is a God that exists that cares little if you or anyone else believes based on knowledge or has belief based on faith.
Perhaps the God simply exists outside of such relative earthlyconcerns; it exists because it simply exists, requiring no belief or worship or mention.




seekerof

[edit on 16-8-2005 by Seekerof]

Originally posted by Seekerof

Originally posted by BlueApocalypse
That is a belief. A belief requires knowledge. If you erase the knowledge, then no belief can be formed based upon that knowledge. My argument is still valid.

Actually, your argument is partially invalid.
Why?
A belief does not entirely require knowledge or it to be knowledge-based.
A belief requires faith, just as disbelief requires faith.
Faith is the missing link in your argument of belief requires knowledge.

seekerof

[edit on 16-8-2005 by Seekerof]

But you have to learn about the belief before you can even have faith in the belief. Do you ever hear someone say "I have faith in God and my religious beliefs, yet I know absolutely nothing about either of the two."

Knowledge is required for a basis of belief or deciding for yourself if you think the said subject is true or false. Faith is only the hope that what your believing in is correct whether true or false.


[edit on 8/16/2005 by BlueApocalypse]

If one has to learn to believe, then who taught the original belief to the first believer; who taught the originator of that belief?




seekerof

[edit on 16-8-2005 by Seekerof]

Originally posted by Seekerof

Furthermore, your hypothesis does not take into account a God who does not require subjects to believe, to have knowledge, or to have faith.
Perhaps there is a God that exists that cares little if you or anyone else believes based on knowledge or has belief based on faith.
Perhaps the God simply exists outside of such relative earthlyconcerns; it exists because it simply exists, requiring no belief or worship or mention.

seekerof

[edit on 16-8-2005 by Seekerof]

....Did you not read the very end of my post?

"NOTE: This is not an attack made to state that there is no higher power. I honestly don't know. The point of it is to state that in my honest opinion no one knows what's out there and therefore is ridiculous to state that any Human made Deity is the supreme ruler of the Universe.

Originally posted by Seekerof
If one has to learn to believe, then who taught the original belief to the first believer; who taught the originator of that belief?

seekerof

[edit on 16-8-2005 by Seekerof]

What does that matter? Why must you know what X is if you know that X has taught Y who has taught Z. No matter if you specifically know who or what passed on the information, the information has been passed down.

It matters and you did not answer the question.
You are basing BELIEF entirely around learned knowledge.
Knowledge when?

If belief is learned as you so assert, then who taught the first believer; who taught the orginator of that belief; who gave the first believer, the originator of the belief, first knowledge?

If you cannot answer it, then your argument, postulation, and hypothesis crumbles based on BELIEF=LEARNED KNOWLEDGE.

It matters not to you because quite frankly, you cannot answer what is asked.






seekerof

[edit on 16-8-2005 by Seekerof]