Difficulty imagining an Invisible Pink Unicorn in the sky?

Post Reply New Topic

well, the idea of this, is if wether Christianity can be replaced in a distant future or perhaps not so distant, with a different religion with a different theology, in the sense, that the new deity does not longer require to be anthropomorphized 100% but rather having non-human physical characteristics such as a non-existing physical creature or the image of an alien being. This idea is taken from the atheist argument that the existence of fairy creatures poses the same ontological problem as the existence of God. As well, as partly from the idea of Brave New World's diety that replaced the old one with a person who actually existed, resulting in a radical change with a creation of a new theology although similar to Christianity in some aspects.

So, does this say something about humanity itself and our place here? wether the possibility that any object, anything can be converted into a deity, as it has been in the past such as animal worship as an example, is this an actual indication that the christian god does make as much sense as any other god or is it that the concept of the christian god is more powerful that a different religion with different deity is very unlikely?

Or is it, that the concept of the christian god is the ultimate on the evolution of deity-based religion that any idea of a new religion would be godless?

Certainly not - the next logical step for monotheistic deities would be ones who a) possessed a good and sane set of moral values and b) were postulated with a little basic understanding of the shape of the universe. None of the current crop satisfy these requirements. Christianity makes a decent try when it sticks to focussing on that guy telling people to be nice to each other, and doesn't drag in the evil patriarch with the smiting addiction who wants pigeon sacrifices.

So let's try:

1) God created the Universe.

2) The Universe is what it looks like.

3) God does not intervene on your behalf.

4) God does not need your worship; awe is appropriate and love will be appreciated.

5) Be excellent to each other.

(And that's it. No further books or reading required.)

It is probable that some group will invent itself about this for the sole purpose of attracting attention to their caricaturization of a set of argumentation far greater than their haughty minds have the ability to perceive.

Celestial Teapot or Cosmic Teapot as proposed by B. Russell seems very appealing. It only needs a manual of proposed codes, rituals, commands and voilà Teapotism is ready to be consumed or the other way around.

Again: Open window. Look up. THAT is what an invisible unicorn in the sky looks like. Same as an invisible God. Or an invisible Army of Flying Robots (which is cooler than both.)

Nitrogen and oxygen also look the same in the gaseous phase.

Yes, but we've clearly found distinct differences between the two substances.

Yes, but had we before Boyle argued against alchemy?

My point is that it is far too easy to make fun out of things which are not understood. Yes, oxygen and nitrogen have different properties, but both share the property of being invisible also. As do electrons, protons, neutrons. Momentum and energy, these are also items which are never seen, being properties of matter, but their effects are seen and by their effects they are known.

The mixture of contradictory adjective has a nice rhetorically effect and probably permitted the original author of the caricature to laugh at his own joke for hours on end, but such are the likes of Dawkins.

Our knowledge is limited at each point in time, but that's not really that relevant to the affair here. The idea here is just that there is no real justification for an invisible God over the unicorn or over the invisible army. The effects of all are known equally and as theoretical constructs, they are equally good.

Well, hopefully it did.

If you look at cults of personality-such as Hitler, Stalin, Mao, Pol Pot-they all place a living person at the center of a theology. Usually, when the person dies, the theology dies with him. Or, the person gets so crazy that his followers are destroyed because they got too dangerous-this happened with the Nazis, and even that didn't successfully wipe out ALL of them.

The real key here is for the new church to become the ONLY church in a geographical area, and wield enough influence so that dissenters are immediately wiped out. Mormonism has likely survived as long as it has because it established itself via settlement in areas that were previously lightly inhabited-Utah, Idaho, Nevada, Arizona-and managed to keep the outside world at bay for 70 years or so, until the invention of cars, airplanes, and radio.

Christianity's pre-eminent role in religion is largely traceable to the victory of Constantine in 306 AD, and the subsequent adoption of Christianity as the official religion of Rome. Rome wasn't really endangered for another century, so missionaries and soldiers spread it far and wide. After the Roman bureaucracy collapsed, the Christian Church was the only big institution left. The Pope wielded power over Christendom for another six centuries or so, until schisms started whittling away territory.

The prevalence of Islam in the Middle East is largely due to the fact that the Byzantines were unable to defend their territory after the Gothic Wars, so the Muslim armies simply whacked off most of Eastern Rome's lands, and promised the Christians freedom from persecution if they adopted Islam.

I don't think another religion could gain supremacy unless the West and the primacy of the USA was destroyed. Eliminating the US would leave a vacuum that would likely be filled by Islam. If the US took most Muslims down with it, Chinese Leninism and Russian mafia rule would only last until some charismatic prophet came along, which he inevitably would, and offered an alternative. And even then, you still have the fact that most of Africa follows some form of Christianity or Islam. It's likely that such beliefs would be blended with indigenous beliefs, and last until the new guy showed up, at which point everybody would convert to Spaghetti Monsterism or whatever.

I have a quibble with the poll: The Invisible Pink Unicorn (may she bless us all with her horn of goodness) is a goddess, not a god.

You see, the world is actually a dropped meatball. The invisible fire-breathing dragon in my garage was eating the Flying Spaghetti Monster when the Invisible Pink Unicorn spilled boiling-hot tea from Russell's Teapot onto the dragon, startling him and causing him to drop a meatball on the floor. All human ills are caused by the Fall from the table. We have fallen and can't get up, because the Invisible Pink Unicorn would never entertain such an unscientific practice as the "five second rule" and insists on leaving the meatball where it landed.

Yes, the gender of the deity is something that I should have considered.

*snerk*
That's just so ...off, that it actually sounds like a plausible religion. I think you've gotten it!

I have to say I really enjoyed the dish of spaghetti and the cup of tea that me and the IPU had the other night when she stopped by for a visit. Fascinating conversation too. Current events, choices in life, really interesting stuff, and you know what? Not one topic about stuff that happened 2000 years ago! She didn't even nag me to get that tattoo that i've been planning for so long either... Guess it's "my choice"

Really the IPU story is about free will... The unicorn is used because the old story about the Unicorn tellin' Noah' to Frig off and she wasn't going to go along with god's demand to board the ark and all that jizz-a-jazz

The Unicorn chose for herself to act by her own designs.

Mankind decides for themselves, if they choose to. Or they can decline the ability to freely choose their own path and destiny by following blindly behind what was written in the past for them to do.

So, not specifically the IPU, but something with the same metaphorical form will eventually take the place of what we now call religion. Granted by then it will not be seen as religion, which will have passed like a bad fad.

Choice will be seen as "the word' mankind will be seen as "god"
Proselytization will be going to the stars to preach the word to the heathen aliens.

Btw.. I believe that one of the options in the poll was that there was no scripture for the IPU... HUH?!?!?
http://www.palmyria.co.uk/humour/ipu.htm#bg

One day I might even write a gospel myself... She's had a lot of good conversations with me, so... wouldn't I be depriving the world, if i were not to share the inspiration and insight that she has bestowed upon me?