A question for anyone not Jewish, Christian, Muslim or Baha'i?

Question

I hate the Y!A-imposed question mark.

Okay, whether you're atheist, agnostic, deist, Wiccan, pagan, Buddhist, Hindu, Shinto, Satanist, or whatever you are - you presumably don't believe (as I don't believe) that God actually spoke to Jesus, Muhammad, Noah, Abraham or any of the other prophets.

I don't believe in God at all so obviously I'm not going to think that. Even if you do believe in God or gods but not the Abrahamic prophets, this is my question:

Do you think that those prophets (if they even existed) genuinely _believed_ that they were talking to God? Or do you think they were pulling a fast one?

For some reason, I'm inclined to give them the benefit of the doubt and say that they had voices in their heads rather than that they were outright lying. I'm just curious what other people think.

Please no Jews, Christians and Muslims saying that they're insulted. That's why I asked the question this way.

lasermouse9: I know that. But I was referring specifically to the Abrahamic prophets. I should have said that.

Answer 1

As an agnostic, all I can tell you for sure is that I don't really know, but here's my speculations:

1. In accepting "pulling the fast one" one must assume that these people actually existed and were not metaphorical stories about larger social movements, such as the Jewish movement to be open to converts versus the old gaurd that insisted that lineage must be the only key to God's favor.

2. You also have to think about the time these people were in. Imagination is not the same today. Goblins don't lurk in the darkness of the night and dragons don't live at unknown bottom of that cave. In ancient times, people simply didn't know that. They saw some dinosaur bones and, if they assumed unwittingly that no life evolves or goes extinct, they suddenly think that those bones must have belonged to a creature living in their own time!

3. One cannot discount the transition from tribal cultures, where the schizophrenics of society become the witchdoctors/priests, such that perhaps these men were famous more for their real delusions and the stories that came from them than intended manipulation. Remember: pre-literate society did not have TV. So what's more entertaining then than a schizophrenic delusion?

4. If these men were real and trying to make a difference in the world around them, what would it take to build credibility? Alexander the Great claimed to be a son of Zeus. Why not Jesus a son of Jehovah (or Yaweh or whatever). Suddenly the message and plan gains instant interest.

That said, my guesses are:

* "Noah" was a myth.

* "Abraham" encompassed many stories into one legend as apparently a whole bunch of other guys in the Jewish lineages were just getting busy begetting.

* Moses may have been a real character greatly embellished and most certainly versed in Egyptian manipulation of the masses through claims of godhood. Or he may be a metaphor for a group of rabbi... But there definitely seems to be some element of something real behind the Exodus story, since it appears to be unique from other religious stories.

* King David definitely appears to be real, although some stories are probably embellished with mystical qualities and he - as many other monarchs, certainly used "divine right" as a means for legitimating his power. His writing/advice, however, qualifies itself with its humanity.

*Jesus may indeed have been real, but his story greatly embellished and modified by the See. He may not have had any divine powers or been resurrected, but he was most certainly part (or metaphorical representative) of a movement to
decentralize Judaism and open monotheism up to outsiders. The later writing of the Bible, of course, insisted on a recentralization as the Catholic church, which was not a part of Jesus's teachings. Had Jesus been for a Roman-controlled centralized monotheistic church, he might not have been executed at all!

* Muhammad was certainly a living person that likewise was part of a movement to break the control of a centralized theocracy. the fact that he replaced it with another centralized theocracy demonstrates the futility of trying to oppose human stupidity. I don't buy for a second that he had miraculous literacy or that he had no prior knowledge of Christianity or Judaism given that Mecca was a trading town and would have probably had a few through the area trading from neighboring countries. What he did, however, was to incorporate some local elements (ex: Jinn) into the concept so that Meccans could claim it as their own. Ethnocentrism is a powerful issue too! (Probably why few Chinese want to be saved by a white Jesus.)

So voices in their heads? Maybe... But it's just as likely they were saavy leaders of their day and did as a Ramses or Alexander might do in claiming a connection to the divine. Think about it though: merely claiming brute superior intelligence doesn't impress a violent world. It might intimidate or make someone feel inferior... right up until they bash your head in with a rock. ("How bright are you now, Mr. know-it-all?") So it wasn't until the invention of firearms and police forces that it really started to become increasingly safe to claim things based off of your own abilities, plus the false promise of some paradise is relatively enticing as well...

Answer 2

I'm a Buddhist, but I've been both a Christian and a Baha'i, so I might be able to deal with this question. In my line of thinking, I do not deny the existence of gods. However, even when I was with the other religions, I had a hard time seeing how the existence of gods made any impact into the world. I kept hearing about miracles, but never seeing any. I kept hearing about how God speaks to people, but I could never hear anything.

I've not put too much thought into the nature of the Abrahamic religions since deciding to be Buddhist. However, I do have a speculation. In Buddhism, there is the realm of gods, beings that have obtained to this station. However, it's not the best station as the lives of the gods are full of distractions that keep them from fully realising the Four Precepts.

Above the gods is the Universe, uncreated and infinite into the past and into the future, although as a scientist, I can understand that it's not static. If there is anything to God, it is the Universe itself, but I try to not associate pantheism into this.

Perhaps the Abrahamic religions are the result of some of the gods interacting with certain individuals. It might be just a touch of godliness or a full-blown conversation. However, I do not see the prophets as being con men, or even delusional. It would be more of a matter of interpretation.

Indeed, much of what we have about the Abrahamic faiths is actually second or third-hand sources. Who knows how much of the stories of revelations of prophets are accurate descriptions of events or the product of the writers' interpretations.

In the final analysis, it doesn't matter to me with a whole host of cherubim appeared before any of them. What matters is how the Universe is either better off or worse off. Despite some of the crap that we see in Judaism, Christianity, or Islam, I think that overall it have been a positive thing for humanity and the Universe, but that's just my opinion.

Answer 3

All right ..lets see..Buddha became "God" after sitting under a tree for some days.He told that he was a normal human being one day and the next day he woke up telling he had come in contact with God and spread all the ideas of buddhism.It's just the same as Prophet Muhammed's case
Hinduism Is not a religion but a way of life (shockin but true),,however now it is unoffically a religion.Whatever Hindus believe is based on the 2 epics, Mahabharata and Ramayana.
They have this vast imagination and so they belive in a no. of Gods and Godesses.Here Krishna, Rama are avthars of lord Vihnu ...in other words they were prophets
In Jainsim too..the prophet i.e Mahavir is belived as God

Answer 4

A few years ago, I read a book entitled "Abraham on Trial: The Social Legacy of Biblical Myth" (here "myth" refers to religious story, not "lie") by Carol Delaney. It is, in my opinion, a great book which explores the impact and legacy of this story.

It also considers a contemporary trial where a man killed his daughter because he felt that he was commanded by God to do so. In this case, unlike the story of Abraham, God did not intervene and the man murdered his daughter. How did the jury find him?

Not guilty.


By reason of insanity.

So how is it that the three major religions in the world have little problem believing that a man, Abraham, (let alone any of the other prophets) heard the voice of God yet in the contemporary world we find that a person who claims to hear the voice of God is insane.

Well, I guess we don't always. GW Bush claims that, too, and it got him elected president twice.

Answer 5

Pulling a fast one.

I wont call it lying. They were trying to make things better and improve quality of life for their people. They were great men and smart enough to know that involving God is necessary to get compliance from lay people.

Note regarding Savage _ green's post:
Hinduism is not based on Ramayana or Mahabharata. These two are great epics.

Ramayana sets up high ideals of family relations while Mahabharata tells us what not to do.

But Hinduism is too vast and too many other scholars and philosophers have chipped in besides the epic writers Valmiki and Vyas.

We do not have prophets exactly.

Buddha and Mahavira are not called God by their prophets. Both of these sects are rather "Nastik" in nature. Buddha did not turned Buddha in one day. He had searched for the knowledge and "god" for years. He just ultimately decided to drop his quest of God and concentrated on how to live life. Mahavira after defeating his brother in War left the kingdom. He felt having a kingdom does not mean anything if his own brother has turned his enemy because of it. He was not a coward and fought well and won. But then walked off.

In India we believe every soul is potentially divine and every living thing has a soul. So the term god is used very loosely. And often great people are referred to with such epitaph. But that does not mean we think all of them as the God or Brahm.

Answer 6

I originally clicked this to see all the christian answers. Well as I say. When you are out in the dark, camping with friends, and you see the wind blow leaves you think it is a person. You tell everyone, and they say they saw it even if they did not. Same with UFOs. People convince themselves into thinking they saw it. Some lie to feel like part of the group. The ones that started Christianity were out for money. Some prophets, etc were like the campers, some wanted money, and some were insane. I feel most were insane. When someone tells you they hear voices, that is bad, but when people start believing it, that is worse.

Answer 7

Noah is an ancient sumarian legend. Possibly there was a real person and event upon which it was based, but nothing like what's in Genesis. If there was a real Noah, he was likely just an ordinary guy who didn't consider himself a prophet at all.

Abraham is a fictional character.

Jesus is so mythicized in such a short period of time, that he cries out as being purely mythical. If there was a historical figure behind the legends, we have no way of knowing whether he claimed to talk to god.

Muhammed was an opportunist and butcher, but his own descriptions of his visions sound like classic temporal lobe epilepsy, which means he probably really thought he was talking to god.

You have to take them on a case by case basis.

Answer 8

Assuming there were real people behind the legends, and assuming that the majority of people in the days of the prophets shared a belief in prophecy, it's reasonable to suppose that Jeremiah and most of his seer brethren genuinely believed they were talking to God.

There may have been a few con artists among them; but not many. The job of prophet is a tough one and hardly profitable, at least in those days -- no network contracts or fancy cars for Jeremiah!

Answer 9

I guess we'll find out when the Hell-fires burn. But, just as a fact checker, we Christians don't all believe that Jews are necessarily going to Hell. AND you might want to note that Muslims and Jews would both have to be in two hells too. And what about Scientology, Wicca, Pagan, and all the other world religions? Are we going to Hindu Hell for eating Cows?

Answer 10

I think that most of the "prophets" really believed that what they were saying was the will of god. Not that they actually heard god's voice or anything, or even that they heard voices and thought it was god. I think they saw things that needed to be done or said, and truly believed that god wanted them to spread their message, and were so confident in their belief that they felt they could say it was the word of god.
For example: I'm not sure what book it's in, but in the old testament, god forbids men from eating the meat of certain animals (like pigs). I think what happened was that some smart dude figured out that people who ate pork got sick a lot (because of salmonella and such). He decided that pork must be bad for people, and prayed for enlightenment from god. He gets some kind of sign that affirms his belief that god wants people to stop eating pork. So he goes around telling everyone that god sayd don't eat pork. Less people get sick, and everyone is happy.