I know, I needed to write quickly and I hesitated to say worship, and I had a feeling the I would point it out.
The word God doesn't just mean the Christian concept of God. It is a more general term.
And that article is from a European that took up Hinduism, so what he says isn't necessarily the common belief in Hinduism. It is true that Brahman could not be equated to some man-like figure in the sky, but in the general meaning of the word God, it still could fit.
And I have spoken to various Hindus in the past, including a few Sadhus, and they didn't have issue with the word God, they used it when speaking in English about their Deities.
Nature comes from the word nasci (to be born), would it still fit with MDU Neter? Sometimes words in different languages that sound the same are related, either derived from each other, or both derived from another languages word, but that is not the case with many words.
I have tried to find evidence to explain why a person like the person in that article would think that they could make such a general statement to say that "no people of the ancient world believed the Sun to be God." While that may be true for some or even many ancient people, to say "no people of the ancient world", seems a bit presumptuous. And I wonder if he is doing the same thing as the people who thought that ancient people saw the Sun as God.
It is not really far-fetched to think that at least some people of the past might have regarded the Sun as God. It is the source of our Life, without it, we wouldn't exist. Like I said, I am not making a claim about ancient people one way or the other. But before making or supporting a statement like "no people of the ancient world believed the Sun to be God.", people should do the research needed to ensure that it is true. And in the case of that statement, people could continue to research for the rest of the existence of human beings, passing that research on generation after generation; and they would still never be able to prove that statement is true, because they will never know the thoughts and beliefs of all ancient people of all time and place.
Even the idea that Jesus Christ (Yeshua, Eashue etc.) did or did not exist. Nobody can really prove that either way. They can maybe prove that certain things written about him never happened, but that doesn't mean he didn't exist. It is not uncommon for people to exaggerate and add untrue events when writing stories about a person they look up to. And in their stories, they could even write things that are similar to other stories or myths. People often equate people they look up to as deities or heroes of the past.
There are so many people in history that have done great things and inspired people, and either they were not written about, or whatever was written about them was destroyed or just lost to decomposition. So while Jesus Christ may never have existed, the fact that there are stories about him, whether or not completely accurate, makes it possible.
It really doesn't matter to I whether or not Jesus existed. I Intention in Life is to improve Iself and Live more Iritual and Righteously as I grow. From I perspective, that is the most important thing and the Foundation of all other Works, so the existence of Jesus make no difference in that.
The point I am getting at in all this is that I and I should not make the same mistakes as the people I and I point out the mistakes of. If the blind belief in Jesus Christ, the Bible, God etc., without even attempting to figure out if it is true is something a person criticizes; then they should refrain in the blind belief of anything else, no matter how logical or probable it sounds to them. Those things can be Reasoned about, but with no assumption of truth, unless it is actually proven. Otherwise, it is just replacing one belief system with another belief system.
|
|