It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
originally posted by: Specimen
a reply to: FyreByrd
Well if they were retelling of old tales, which takes of the scriptures could we be talking about?
I am assuming that it's the oldest because of said fossils, but those rememants could be 60000 years old, but if that's culture or a religion with natural order of things... that I will never tell.
And yes I accept that those rememants might not have no revelance to modern Hinduism at all.
Why not just call Judaism, Babylonian or Sumerian( I can never really tell the difference), and Christianity Greek and Judaism.
originally posted by: JOHNNEIL
There was no male ego to corrode in the seat of power, rather it was the softer feminine spirit that took the position of power as a way to naturally balance out the equation.
The ancient texts then show how an ancient war happened between the solar and lunar cults where the solar powers eventually overthrew the lunar (feminine) and then monotheism became the status quo. This caused mass division and made conquering and controlling easier over the next thousands of years.
As the article shows, the worlds first organized, dominant religion in civilization history was worship of the goddess.
originally posted by: JOHNNEIL
The ancient texts then show how an ancient war happened between the solar and lunar cults where the solar powers eventually overthrew the lunar (feminine) and then monotheism became the status quo.
EVOLUTIONARY thinking does not stop with its gradual development of man from inanimate matter. It also makes the supreme God a product of evolution. In the beginning primitive man had no concept of an Almighty God, this evolutionary thinking says. Man first evolved the idea of many gods, and from these many gods the concept of one Almighty God developed. So according to this theory monotheism evolved from polytheism, and it is the view that is generally taught with the same airy glibness and dogmatism that accompanies the teaching of organic evolution.
Life magazine of December 12, 1955, published the article “The Dawn of Religion,” with the subtitle: “Awed by the phenomena of nature and by the mysteries of life and death man evolved a belief in higher powers and rites to honor the spirit world.” Written by the evolutionist Lincoln Barnett, the article said:
The article, as is customary in evolutionary writings, cites an imposing list of scholarly authorities as proof of accuracy. This, of course, is no proof to anyone except those willing to follow men blindly.
Are there any facts to prove or disprove the speculation that polytheism preceded monotheism?
THE EVIDENCE FROM PRIMITIVE CULTURES
Scientists seek out the origins of religion by archaeological investigations of the mute remains of ancient peoples and by studying the religious beliefs of the most primitive cultures whose members still live on earth. Lincoln Barnett agrees with this and says that for this latter category the “prime representatives are the Aborigines of modern Australia.” He states: “That their religion has its roots in the depths of prehistory cannot be questioned. And that a similar, if less complex, form of belief prevailed among Palaeolithic men 100,000 years ago is also an indubitable fact.”
But when we go to the roots of these primitive religions we find, not polytheism, but monotheism, the belief in high gods, and the more crude and polytheistic elements of their worship are discovered to be later additions and indicate a degeneration from an original monotheism into polytheism. For example, among the Australian tribes those of the southeast are the oldest, and concerning their religion researcher W. Foy writes: “It is at first sight surprising to find, especially in South-East Australia, a belief in one god, known as ‘father’ or ‘grandfather,’ who is supposed to have created man and the principal phenomena of nature.” Foy adds that this one high god has a son at his side, “acting as mediator between him and man.”1 [Origin and Growth of Religion, by Dr. Wilhelm Schmidt, professor at the University of Vienna, pages 242, 243.]