First off, I’ll just butt in here. How is it illogical in your eyes? What is so different in the world now compared to 5500 years ago?
It's seemingly illogical in most peoples eyes. Here is an example I sometimes use, just to show how the "god excuse" has dwindled off into nothing, being taken over by 'reality'.
Firstly ask a person what caused the ten plagues. People will always respond that god did it as a punishment against the Egyptians for enslaving the jews.
Next ask that same person what caused the bubonic plague. People will always say "rats", (or some variant thereof).
As time progresses, and people start to understand more about the planet, god goes more and more out of focus. For early people, the only excuse for a plague would have been a pissed off, powerful sky being.. but you see how quickly that all changes when people learn more about the world?
Nobody turns round and says "god cause the bubonic plague because he was angry with sinful Europeans". The reason for this, is because better understanding of the world makes people understand that the reality was indirectly because of rats.
Surely, in order to be consistant, one must say god caused the bubonic plague, the flood in India, the earthquake in Los Angeles, and the thunder storm last week up the road. But of course they wont, because it goes against the truth of what we as a people understand. Thousands of years ago they didn't know, and as such we cannot blame them for thinking it was the power of some guy in the sky. They weren't going to say the ten plagues were because of natural reasons, because they didn't know about or understand those natural reasons.
The same does not apply to people in the year 2004.
A long time ago, people used to think that someone who had a headache had an evil spirit in his head, and then set about chopping that evil spirit out of their head. This does not imply that evil spirits ever existed, but simply that these people did not know what caused headaches, or how to deal with it.
The same applies to god. As science and understanding move forward, god vanishes off into the horizon.
I don’t think Sumerian texts are the oldest, check this out and note the mention of a deity
The mention of "a deity" is unfounded considering it goes on to say that nobody can, and most likely never will, understand what the symbols mean.
Further to that, wse.edu says:
"We know nothing of the religion of the Harappans. Unlike in Mesopotamia or Egypt, we have discovered no building that so much as hints that it might be a temple or involve any kind of public worship. The bulk of public buildings in the city seemed to be solely oriented towards the economy and making life comfortable for the Harappans."
It then goes on to say:
"We do, however, have a number of tantalizing figures on various seals and statues. What we gather from these figures (and we can not gather much), is that the Harappans probably exercised some sort of goddess worship. There is, however, some sort of male god (maybe) that has the head of a man with the horns of a bull. In addition, we believe from various artifacts that the Harappans also may have worshipped natural objects or animistic forces, but the circumstances of this worship can only be guessed at. "
So judging from this site, it would appear these people possible had more than one god, and their main one being a goddess, not a god. There are many other cultures with female gods aswell, so we are left with yet another question.
What's to say, if there is a god and one god only, that it's a bloke?
Through the process of deduction we should be able to arrive at a more accurate understanding of what went on back then and what these words mean
Was that a yes or a no to my question?
So how do you conclude there's only one god?
Since when has the majority been correct? Maybe on who wants to be a millionaire, ask the audience.
Since when has the minority been correct?
My God is not modern; He’s been around a while
What god would that be, and how long is 'a while'? And.. according to who? What makes those who wrote about this specific god any more valid than the writers who spoke of multiple gods, female gods, mortal gods?
There is a good answer for the above, but I forgot it. If you’re really interested I’ll find out for ya, let me know.
Sure, go for it.
EDITED: Actually, have you ever thought the "us" could be referring to angels?
Only if those angels are of the same nature and status as god itself.
"Let us make man in our own image, in the likeness of ourselves.."
No. The link above should clear what you said here up, unless the link is not genuine in your eyes.
"Genuine" is a broad term. I don't accuse the site of purposeful fallciousness, but it most certainly doesn't give itself any real credibility in the long run. Need I repeat: "So probably we will never know what the symbols mean,"?
Further to that, it seems you've become confused with the statement. It says: "Experts believe they may have indicated the contents of the jar or be signs associated with a deity"
Associated with
a deity, not
the deity. It's unlikely the culture would depict hundreds of gods on one jar, and the statement in no way claims that these people believed in only one deity, but that this jar has some
unknown symbols on it that might be signs of a deity.
Failing that, visit wse.edu.
Yes, there seems to be many gods mentioned, but I believe in JEHOVAH (English Translation) as the LORD Almighty.
Ok, so it's translated as the "lord almighty". Neither of those words implies that he is the only one.
"Lord" is a symbol of rank. He would have no need for rank if he was the only one.
"Almighty" means he's the most powerful of the gods, and as such is given the rank of Lord.
Without The Son of God, Jesus Christ I would be heading where your heading (obviously you’ve got time to change your mind I hope).
Oh.. Where am I heading?
I’m a Christian, all other gods are false in my opinion (call it arrogance but I call it faith).
So it's like a diceroll? Roll the wrong number and you're in deep shit?
The only problem being that nobody knows what number they're supposed to roll - and so they roll anyway, and when faced with a number have little choice but to have "faith" that the number is the right one.
No offence, but I find that daft.