The Divine used as an excuse.

I find the Divine to be a poor excuse for demanding what anyone should agree to. If you have to force your beliefs on someone else, how do you know they really believe what you say? In ancient times, it was enough for the tyrant to declare how the Divine favored his (or her) regime. It really didn't matter to the poor guy at the bottom of the ladder what the monarch said. Life was not any better for believing it.

It was only blasphemy against the tyrant that got anyone into trouble since the tyrant was always the Son of the Divine.

It is not only in North Korea that the tyrant was considered God. Even the Roman Emperors were considered Gods which is the reason for the Greek word "blasphemy" was used in the Christian Gospel for the Sanhedrin deciding that Jesus committed blasphemy. They weren't saying that he declared himself their God. They were saying that he had declared himself a God equal to the Roman Emperor.

The Western term God is derived from the human avatar for the Divine of that religion. Judaism may have been different since it always rejected man-gods, but King David was derived from the god Tammuz. That was the god that was supposed to have been born in a cave in Bethlehem. There are no archaeological remains proving King David's existence. There were none for King Saul either. 

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Public Cooperation Is Not One Church of Thought.

The blood sport.