What is so strange about the idea that a god literally throws lightning through the sky? Lightning is…

As I said, I'll accept that people believed any number of crazy things in general. I certainly haven't rejected the idea that people believed certain natural events were divinely guided, or even associated with specific gods. I've been skeptical of the idea that the ancient greeks popularly believed in a specific mechanism of how lightning gets in the air. I think they didn't get much further than vague connections, poetic attributes. I've asked for evidence on this, Zach's routine has been two dramatic sources and a rationale of 'Well they believed other stuff I think is crazy so why not this'.

I don't see why anyone's rearing up over this anyway. Unless there's something important in the understanding aside from the reasonable truth.

Zach,

It's easy to see that you wave your hands and reject the evidence.

Yes, I'm just burying my head in the sand against two hurling lines, one from a dramatic political play, the other from the Iliad, which otherwise proves the greeks were convinced about lightning's mechanism.

Your motto seems to be 'if I think they believed in something outlandish, then they believed in anything I can imagine them believing'. Sorry, I'll pass on that. The whole affair seems like a caricature - and for the record, I'll question a caricature even if it's one of atheists, or darwinism, or even friggin scientology. Your case is poor. Believe it if you want - it seems important to you. For me, I'm just going to regard it with skepticism.

nullasalus: You've sourced a play and the iliad here, Zach. C'mon, it's not hard to see why I'm skeptical of this claim.

It's easy to see that you wave your hands and reject the evidence.

Raevmo: I guess there are no old Greeks among the readers.

I doubt nullasalus would even accept the word of Socrates, Socrates not being a typical representative of the Classical Greek world.

The fact that people debated the literalism of their historical myths in the 5th century is evidence that people had beliefs in anthropomorphic gods, gods that hurled lightning, that tempted with golden apples.

The Ethiops say that their
gods are flat-nosed and black,
While the Thracians say that
theirs have blue eyes and red hair.
Yet if cattle or horses or lions
had hands and could draw,
And could sculpture like men,
then the horses would draw their gods
Like horses, and cattle like cattle;
and each they would shape
Bodies of gods in the likeness,
each kind, of their own.

Considerably easier IMO than to believe that a god would send his son to the middle east to be tortured to death and then resurrect him again to teach humankind a lesson. Talk about cold trails.

BINGO… there it is folks when all else fails trot out ol faithful

You've sourced a play and the iliad here, Zach. C'mon, it's not hard to see why I'm skeptical of this claim. It's a much-repeated line that always bugged me, and more and more it's looking like a canard.

What is so strange about the idea that a god literally throws lightning through the sky? Lightning is visible, and it's easy to see why people would believe such a thing in the absence of other explanations. Considerably easier IMO than to believe that a god would send his son to the middle east to be tortured to death and then resurrect him again to teach humankind a lesson. Talk about cold trails.

I'm not really sure who you expect will buy your argument that most ancient peoples didn't believe their own religion, including anthropomorphic deities who lived on Mount Olympus. Including visitations, such as the violent conception of Helen of Troy.

And I'm not talking about any of them. I'm talking about one oft-repeated, poorly-sourced claim that I'm skeptical of. And considering the counter-evidence, rightly so.

Just because some people believe strange things, even wrong things, doesn't mean they believe everything we say they do, on the terms we do.

Do Christians really, firmly contend that Jesus rose from the dead?

You haven't shown equivalence between the two claims. Not by a longshot. And yes, most Christians do - but I've never heard one offer up a possible mechanism, with the exception of Frank Tipler talking about quantum possibilities.

You've sourced a play and the iliad here, Zach. C'mon, it's not hard to see why I'm skeptical of this claim. It's a much-repeated line that always bugged me, and more and more it's looking like a canard. I'd have little concern if it WAS the case - what, like I'm an apologist for the greek pantheon here? - but when a trail is cold, it's cold.

nullasalus: And America rained down death on its enemies

I'm not really sure who you expect will buy your argument that most ancient peoples didn't believe their own religion, including anthropomorphic deities who lived on Mount Olympus. Including visitations, such as the violent conception of Helen of Troy.

nullasalus: did the greeks really, firmly contend that lightning was caused by a bearded Olympian hurling stuff across the sky?

Do Christians really, firmly contend that Jesus rose from the dead?

But Zeus hurls lightning.

And America rained down death on its enemies in (pick your war), Saddam promised the streets would run with blood, etc. The point stands.

Again, your question concerned what ancient Greeks believed, not some conformity to your ideas of what constitutes a mechanism.

No, a mechanism is a mechanism, at all times. I had no doubt that the greeks thought lightning may have been a portent, even a work of the gods. Just as they thought comets and other things were. But what we're seeing here is far, far too weak of a connection between the gods and lightning to have their contention 'disproved' by the study of electric discharge. I said from the start I was willing to accept a poetic conception. Poetics and vagueness are all I really see.

As you recognize the distinction, it makes me wonder why you keep conflating the concepts. And why you think that people can believe that the Red Sea literally parted for the Israelites, but think that the ancient Greeks would not believe in a Zeus on Mount Olympus hurling lightning bolts. Have you read Homer? Or any books on ancient Greek religion?

Plenty. Do you read things to understand them, or merely to rack up ammo in a discussion?

I have no doubt that people CAN believe quite a number of things. Are there some buddhists who practice cannibalism because they want to get fat like some of those buddha statues? Quite possibly. Are there people who think L Ron Hubbard reincarnated as Christ after his death - and travelled back in time to die on the cross? Hey, maybe. Are there people who think all the world came out of primal chaos and nothingness, accidentally formulated some rational laws, and exists without purpose or meaning? Sure, it's possible.

Contingent on evidence. I don't see much here.

Do you have any reason to suppose that many ancient Greeks didn't believe in the literal existence of gods who intervened in the lives of mortals? How do you explain the philosophical debates concerning this issue in the 5th century?

I have no doubt they did. But I'm not questioning that. It's been this narrow question here, again and again - did the greeks really, firmly contend that lightning was caused by a bearded Olympian hurling stuff across the sky? That's a distinct question from 'Did the greeks believe that, somehow, lightning was a work of the divine'? That I can see. I can see plenty of people thinking that otherwise natural, normal events are the stuff of divine will. But no reference to or real concern of mechanism is necessitated in such a belief.

nullasalus: I can hurl insults at someone

But Zeus hurls lightning.

nullasalus: And you seemingly have tremendous trouble with this point. Believing that Moses struck the Nile and it turned to blood does not describe a mechanism - it's explaining a singular event, a miracle that God worked.

Again, your question concerned what ancient Greeks believed, not some conformity to your ideas of what constitutes a mechanism.

What is the mechanism that keeps the Earth in orbit? Gravity. What is gravity? The mechanisms that keeps the Earth in orbit. You can play the turtles all the way down game, if you want. But it doesn't make much of an argument.

nullasalus: There's a difference between attributing acts to God, and describing mechanisms.

As you recognize the distinction, it makes me wonder why you keep conflating the concepts. And why you think that people can believe that the Red Sea literally parted for the Israelites, but think that the ancient Greeks would not believe in a Zeus on Mount Olympus hurling lightning bolts. Have you read Homer? Or any books on ancient Greek religion?

Do you have any reason to suppose that many ancient Greeks didn't believe in the literal existence of gods who intervened in the lives of mortals? How do you explain the philosophical debates concerning this issue in the 5th century?