Make Your Own God

by Russell

Frequently I read writers who, it seems to me, are blatantly involved in the business of creating a new theology. What surprises me is that they, and so many of their readers, take their attempts seriously.

If gods or goddesses exists, perhaps the one thing that is certain about them is that their characteristics are not determined by people's imaginings. Traditional religions understand at least this. If you could convince the traditional Christian that the miracles of the Bible are all just someone's fantasies [1], or an ancient Greek that the gods were just men's imaginings, then they both would have the good sense to realize that their religions are false. So how can one possibly take seriously a religion that one knows is pure fantasy because one is making it up as one goes along?

Or does the writer, perhaps, claim to be a prophet, someone who speaks for the god(desses)? In this case, there is no need to rationalize *why* one sees the gods and goddesses the way one does, since there is no way to argue against someone who possesses Revealed Truth. (However, good prophets do tell their followers how to distinguish them from false prophets.)

I see no in-between here -- either the author is claiming to possess Revealed Truth, or it's all cow dung.

Why get into all this sloppy polytheism? Why get into theism at all? What you make up may be more appealing, more comforting, and less sexist than all the religions that have been made up in the past, but there is no reason to think it will be any more true. Or does this matter?

Russell

[1] This is why traditional Christians reject what archaeologists and historians teach about the origins of Judaism. They know that admitting to political and social origins for a religion belies its claim to truth.