Morgan Freeman: 'I Think We Invented God'

[SecularMotion]

Does playing God onscreen give you unique insight into deity? The Science Channel seems to think so: It cast Morgan Freeman as the host of its new series, "Through the Wormhole With Morgan Freeman."

When TheWrap asked the man with the magnificent voice about one of the coming episodes, titled "Did we invent God?," the distinguished actor didn't hold back.

Freeman said answering whether he was an atheist or agnostic was "hard" because the actor thinks "we invented God."

"So if I believe in God, and I do, it's because I think I'm God," he said.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/06/08/morgan-freeman-god-religion_n_1580521.html?ref=mostpopular

[AnotherMcIntosh]

1. Why, for some, is God a male bipod which looks like us except for being invisible?

[cbayer]

2. Probably for the same reason that the depiction of aliens is often more human than not.

[ZombieHorde]

4. The Bible says we were made in his image. nt

[dmallind]

5. technically "our" image - and no not a royal plural either

Of course there are plenty of verses in scripture that come from El's and Yahweh's henotheistic pasts

[AnotherMcIntosh]

8. I like the invisible part.

[rug]

11. I've always thought that referred to consciousness.

[ZombieHorde]

12. If I remember correctly, the RCC interprets that claim as being about souls, not the flesh.

So many Christians agree with your point of view on the subject.

However, many other Christians do think the claim is about our flesh, and so they believe in a male God.

[rug]

13. I'm not sure what the RCC interpretation is.

But it strikes me that, assuming there is a God, the one characteristic that humans would have in common with it is self-consciousness.

Crap, now I have to look it up.

[meow2u3]

14. The RCC states that God is neither male nor female

God only happens to be addressed as a "he" because of the patriarchal structure of most human languages.

Another thing: God created humans (and others), but not the other way around.

[rug]

18. That's true. There is no gender in God.

[laconicsax]

20. Nice slogan.

[rug]

21. It's a description not a slogan.

[laconicsax]

22. It reads like a slogan.

You know, like "There's no 'I' in team," and "You can't spell 'slaughter' without 'laughter.'"

[rug]

23. Slogans don't read. People read.

To paraphrase a slogan.

[laconicsax]

24. Semantic games already?

[laconicsax]

19. Question.

How can the RCC hold that God is neither male nor female if the Trinity is a father, a son, and a ghost that can impregnate women? That would seem to indicate that God is two men and a spiritual penis.

[AnotherMcIntosh]

28. That seems to be the way that it has been for centuries.

In plain English, we commonly think of a "father" as a "he." Also, of course, we commonly think of a "son" as a "he."

And now we're being told that "he" doesn't mean "he."

(Some of us mere mortals are also confused by the apparent contradiction of there being only one God, and yet there is the father-God and, perhaps, a son-God who is also a God or a son with God-like powers. To others, however, this is perfectly clear.)

[laconicsax]

30. It isn't clear to anyone.

http://www.desiringgod.org/resource-library/articles/what-is-the-doctrine-of-the-trinity

Most importantly, it isn't even clear to Mr. D or Jesse:

[AnotherMcIntosh]

33. Not clear to anyone? It is to those with religious certitude.

[laconicsax]

34. You're confusing "certitude" with understanding.

Last edited Tue Jun 12, 2012, 04:31 PM - Edit history (1)

Like with other divine "mysteries," "certitude" is achieved by just saying that it isn't meant to make sense (as in the link I provided).

[AnotherMcIntosh]

36. Nope.

[ZombieHorde]

15. I believe the RCC says the claim is about souls, as opposed to flesh, around the time

they accepted the theory of evolution.

I think they were explaining why they believe the TOE does not contradict the Book of Genesis.

[rug]

17. Well, here's the Catechism:

357 Being in the image of God the human individual possesses the dignity of a person, who is not just something, but someone. He is capable of self-knowledge, of self-possession and of freely giving himself and entering into communion with other persons. And he is called by grace to a covenant with his Creator, to offer him a response of faith and love that no other creature can give in his stead.

Now, I wonder what they mean by self-knowledge.

[Starboard Tack]

16. I think every individual creates their own image, if an image is necessary.

As we do with any character in a book, unless there's a Classics Illustrated version. I seriously doubt that any believers hold some kind of image in their mind. Abstract concepts don't have legs or gender, but writers of stories do.

[cbayer]

3. It appears that he, like many others, believe in a spiritual god that lives within each human.

[dmallind]

6. Which part of that intra-human god was the demiurge?

[cbayer]

7. Showing my ignorance in the area, I have to admit that I had to look that up.

And I have no idea how to answer your question in light of that.

[AnotherMcIntosh]

9. Of course, we invented God. And a scholarly work documents how JC was invented

by the Romans.

Why? To respond to the Roman-Jewish conflict in the first century and undermine the Jewish revolutionary leaders by offering a "peaceful Messiah" and a religious promise that the oppressed would purportedly be rewarded in heaven. In his book Caesar's Messiah, Joseph Atwill tracks events in Roman history and shows how the Roman history was incorporated with the invention of JC.

[daaron]

25. Ayup. Mithras in shepherd's clothing. nt

[laconicsax]

27. What changed your mind?

http://www.democraticunderground.com/121826856#post15

[daaron]

32. Facts changed my mind about Mithras long ago -->

If you read between the lines in the post of my you linked to, you'll see there's plenty of room for Mithras in the Levant back then. In fact, Mithraism was a recently developed cult during the formative years of early Christianity (150 BC to the fall of Jeru) practiced by Roman nobility, and with historic ties to Sol Invictus (indeed Mithras is depicted with Sol in a number of Mithraeum).

If you're asking specifically about what changed my mind about calling myself "agnostic Christian" - here's the link explaining my thinking. The facts haven't changed about early Christianity, which I was always interested in, and the study of which I always have balanced with archaeology, commentary, and extra-biblical texts. Just my life situation has changed - it's now easier to say, "I'm atheist" here in rural Missouri, because it means I don't have to explain myself. It wasn't hard to do - I was raised by non-believers.

[laconicsax]

35. I meant about Atwill's confused thesis.

Namely that the Romans invented Christianity to stop the Jews from rebelling.

[daaron]

37. Oh that. Yeah, simplistic crap.

What we think of as Roman Christianity was a syncretism of syncretisms - all too localized by region and the influence of, especially, Zoroastrian and Hermetic thought in Alex. and south (think Nag Hammadi). But it's no exaggeration to say that the Roman Christians, with the help of Constantine's partisans, helped matters along by realigning the Christian holy calendar with the Mithraic/Sol Invictus one - while at the same time excluding every tradition (the heresies) that didn't align with the freshly minted orthodoxy.

To stop the Jews from rebelling? No. To stop the Romans from rebelling.

[laconicsax]

26. I seem to recall there are significant problems with that thesis.

And as I see, you participated in that thread.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/121826856

[AnotherMcIntosh]

29. To the extent that Gospel-defenders support their mystery religion and deny Atwill's thesis,

I don't see nor recall any problems with his thesis.

Until I read that thread, I was unaware of Atwill's work Caesar's Messiah. There are hundreds and perhaps thousands of variations of the various religions all under the Christian umbrella. Each variation is its own mystery religion under an overall mystery religion. Atwill's thesis, that Christianity was invented by the Ceasars to offset the more aggressive Jews rebelling against the Romans in the first century makes sense to me.

[laconicsax]

31. I'm pretty sure it doesn't have to do with "Gospel-defenders"

Atwill's thesis isn't well grounded in history and has a poor understanding of the Judaism and its Messianic prophesies.

It banks everything on "history isn't always recorded accurately" and "we'll never know exactly what happened."

[spin]

10. Morgan Freeman has a great voice but ...

I often find myself falling asleep while watching "Through the Wormhole With Morgan Freeman."

It's not that I find the series boring, it's just that his voice simply relaxes me.

I find the program asks some very deep questions and has plenty of material to make you think.