MovieChat Forums > Hercules Discussion > Did the God's exist?

Did the God's exist?


There were many mythical creatures in the movie and talk of the Greek Gods, but did they actually exist in this world or are the creatures just there?

reply

[deleted]

Obviously.

````````````
Imagine that.

reply

No, they did not ACTUALLY exist, but the people believed in them, to answer for things that happened on Earth.

reply

they were just as non existing as today's "God"

reply

Says you.

I speak for all mediocrities in the world. I am their champion. I am their patron saint.

reply

I think in this version there were no gods, which is weird seeing as how every other crazy being existed why not them?

http://patienceisavirtureidonothave.blogspot.com/

reply

I was almost thinking that they were gonna go with that interpretation toward the end of the film too (that all the bad $hit that happened was a result of human failings/delusion--ie, everyone thinking they knew what the gods wanted but really these beliefs only served their own ambitions). That maybe there were mythological creatures that existed in this version of Ancient Greece, but no actual gods.

One thing gets in the way of that though--the lightening bolt that just happened to strike Hercules' sword/knife when he's suiciding on the funeral pyre. Seemed pretty god-directed to me. But aside from that, yeah...oh okay, and I guess some of Herc's strength (especially how capable he was as a baby, handling those snakes), doesn't really make sense, unless Antaeus/The Cretan Bull was something more than human as well. So yeah, I guess the lightening bolt and Herc's more-than-mortal strength would need the gods to be real, to be explained, in the film (though plenty of Herc's strength can apparently be credited to his own ambition/efforts/training-under-Chiron).

A lotta Greek Mythology fans would've cried foul if there turned out to definitely not be any gods in the film, but it might've given us an interesting take. I don't care that much about accuracy with something this old and not believed to have actually happened (some of the other stuff folks actually believe in--like Jesus and the Old Testament and whatnot, would love to have factual evidence, a video recording of the past or something). How many times have these myths been re-made and re-told ? I suppose some people are waiting for an 100% accurate, definitive film or TV series--kinda needs to be a TV series, or a group of mini-series, if they wanna cover everything Hercules and maybe everything Greek Mythology as well--but it doesn't seem likely to happen.

reply

"Says you"

and anyone that bases their beliefs on evidence and not "faith."

We are not enemies, but friends. We must not be enemies.

reply

and anyone that bases their beliefs on evidence and not "faith."

We are not enemies, but friends. We must not be enemies.


and here in lies the problem with religious people like yourself. You base your athiestic religious belief on the faith that there is no god, yet you cannot provide any evidence that a god does not exist. You are a hypocrite and you are no different than the muslim, christian, hidnu or whomever who cannot prove that their god does exist. the difference is that the athiest religion attempts to portray themselves as being of science when in fact they use faith just as strongly as any other religion in their zealous quest to belittle those who do not hold their belief system. The insecurities of the religious will always lead to closed mindedness.

reply

Dude, atheism is not a religion, even though many of its proponents may seem like religious fanatics in their enthusiasm.

If you tell me you own an ostrich and you keep it in a pen in your backyard, the onus of proof is on you. If you say you're a millionaire, let's see the mansion or the cars or, if you're rich but live simply, the bank statements to back it up.

It's the same thing with God/gods. If the people believing in him/her/it/them can't produce anything substantial to at least heavily support the potential existence of one, then there's no point in believing or even giving a chance to the fairy tale. If you don't wanna completely count it out, that's cool, be a skeptical agnostic, but don't put any stock or energy into something that, so far, we see no real sign of.

Atheists have proof and tested theories to back up their reasons for why they see the world as they do (no, not proof of the lack of God, but again, the onus of proof is on the believers to produce, it is not the responsibility of atheists to come up with). There're still miles to go in understanding just our own world and human and animal physiology, nevermind the universe, but we're gaining new insights all the time. Science/the scientific method is continually producing information. The search for god produces none.

reply

You obviously do not understand the definition of "religion." And I was not referring to anything that can be proven. I was referring to the vast majority of athiests who are "religious" in their quest to prove that a "god" does not exist. Athiests are no different than any other religious sect. They become emotional and then begin to ignore science so they can "prove" they are the truth.

reply

We all become emotional when it comes to those things which we feel passionate about. An emotional response in yourself caused you to reply to express your irritation (or fatigue) of hearing what you perceive to be the usual atheist bull$#!t. Don't phrase it as if you're above the natural human tendency of emotions getting the better of us.

"Athists are no different than any other religious sect."

Okay, let's go with your "atheism is a religion" conviction for the sake of argument.

I'd say they're quite different. They tend not to create holy wars (so far, knock on wood) in the name of [insert favored deity here--in this case, logic]. They continually look for answers to the mysteries of life that aren't based on 2000+ year old fairy tales (well, the intelligent--or at least, non-lazy--ones do. I know there're a whole lotta angry atheists, especially online, who rant just for the sake of ranting. Though to give them some leeway, maybe they're just frustrated with the status quo). Meanwhile, my Catholic mother believes the same thing my grandmother and her mother believed, in the same way, based on the same unchanging information from The Bible and the teachings laid down by their priests. My mother even justified her beliefs to me in that way when I challenged her on it once. "It's what I was raised with." I know there're more thoughtful religious types out there're who're a lot more open minded and continually searching for answers, but I've found my mother's reasoning is pretty widespread. Just go with the flow.

A quality atheist does not ignore science to "prove" god doesn't exist. An atheist can not prove that and should know that. What atheists are [usually] doing is saying, "I don't believe in God/a god/gods" and, if they're curious enough or care, adding "but why do you ? Show me a good reason why."

Burden of proof's on the religious. Otherwise we have a whole lotta folks running around this planet who's reasons for doing what they do and feeling the way they feel is based on unsupported and/or poorly reasoned nonsense. I can exist just fine without having them answer my question(s) (so far, it doesn't look like they can anyway, even for the few who're willing to sit down and discuss it all), though admittedly the stupidity that religion sometimes breeds does infringe and interfere with my overall life. Even if atheists sequestered themselves in their own little community made up entirely of atheists (which'd be kinda sad, IMO, 'cause then we're just giving up on the great species-wide challenge of trying to understand and connect with eachother), the ripple effect of decisions made outside that community (and the atheist village's likelihood of needing to rely on the mixed outside world) would be felt.

What do you believe ? Or if you have a complete lack of belief, what would you consider yourself ? And if you're not a fan of labels, how would you categorize yourself if someone held a gun to your head and forced you to choose ?

reply

What do you believe ? Or if you have a complete lack of belief, what would you consider yourself ? And if you're not a fan of labels, how would you categorize yourself if someone held a gun to your head and forced you to choose ?


agnostic. People can believe whatever they wish. I believe there is not proof one way or the other. The only problem I have is when people start forcing their beliefs upon others, whether that be some christian, muslim, or athiest. Makes no difference to me. All of them can be just as religious as the next. And all of them will try to force their belief system on others when they belief they are right. believe what you want, but let others do the same. The problem with the athiest movement is that they refuse to see how they do exactly what they accuse, what they call the "religous" movement of doing. I have no problem with people either believing or not believing in a god type of being. Just stop trying to force your belief on others when none of you have any proof of such an existence.

reply

Duncan_Idaho02 on Sun Aug 29 2010 01:10:20 said: "You obviously do not understand the definition of "religion." .........Athiests are no different than any other religious sect. They become emotional and then begin to ignore science so they can "prove" they are the truth. "

duncan I think you are not the one who has looked at any definitions. please look up "religion" on wikipedia and "atheism" as well.

Also you are the only one emotional on this thread.

reply


This is inaccurate. Like it or not, prior to the Big Bang, there was a belief in the scientific community in the steady-state theory that the universe had always been as it is now. The Big Bang showed a definite starting point that was completely unexpected -- the entire thing pouring out from a pinhead point a set amount of time ago. If that is not evidence for God, then there is nothing that could be accepted as evidence for God by your standard.

reply

Not true. I'd accept plenty as an indication of God/the supernatural. Sure, even with some crazy miracles happening, many folks (including myself) might first seek to come up with more likely explanations (aliens, natural phenomena not yet experienced or studied, etc). But that constant questioning of the legitimacy of whatever proof or indication we're presented with is the only sane way to tackle these things. If we become complacent when we're told too-simple explanations or we just go with our first best guess, it could lead to more of what we alraedy have, billions of ignorant folks.

I don't buy into the oft-repeated idea that the Big Bang (or how that starting mass came to be) is proof enough of God/a god, but I see where you're coming from. Folks'll say, "but someone must have set the ball in motion". Why must that be the case ? It's easy to fall into the trap of thinking that a self-aware/sentient being making a purposeful decision to make all this had to have been the case, and we belive this because we are self-aware/sentient beings--but we're kind of an anomoly, as far as we can tell, so far, aren't we ? Other living beings don't have that self-awareness. Plants don't have to think and choose to grow or produce flowers and fruits in a certain pattern. Why must the universe have been created that way, why couldn't it have happened naturally/on its own, mindlessly and random, chemicals reacting to chemicals/atoms to atoms, or whatever stuff existed way back when ?

reply

first of all, humans arent so different from animals and plants, we perform according to out instincts just like them, we may have wider view and more choices but we still operate in the same way. instincts.


and i completely agree about the fact that atheists are zealous sometimes even more than believers. atheists tend to claim that they are above the simple minded people, even though they just walk in the path of their friends and only led to the way of atheism by parents or social affect.
also most atheists have no idea about science or history yet they stand and shout of their beliefs.



atheism may not be a religion because they do not believe in any kind of existence of some deity but they are very much religious about their beliefs, even more than those simple minded who they claim others are.


for my own personal belief, im agnostic, i dont believe in religion but not because of the stupid idea of religion is the cause of suffering(actually religion leads to helping many). but because i never found an explanation for worshiping anything in the first place(and i looked).


you explain things by saying its alien !?!??! wow...




AND ABOUT THE POST

i think that the movie was telling us that there are no gods and the deeds of the people are done by the people for the people and excused with the name of the gods. just like politicians.

but the lightning and rain is to make us start this conversation and ask the question you asked.

my opinion is that in this movie the gods do exist but the rituals of the people are far from the gods. but maybe zeus did save hercules because he had an important role in his future.

reply

@Duncan. That is a long disproved fallacy. Disbelief is not a religion. A persons disbelief doesn't follow any of the basic structures or psychological mechanisms as religion.
Not ascribing supernatural or superstitious answers, not believing in ghosts or spirits or gods is not a religion .

reply

That is a long disproved fallacy. Disbelief is not a religion. A persons disbelief doesn't follow any of the basic structures or psychological mechanisms as religion.
Not ascribing supernatural or superstitious answers, not believing in ghosts or spirits or gods is not a religion .


Please be more specific, what exactly is a "disproved" fallacy? If you mean that athiests are just as religious as people who believe in a god, you are wrong. Do you even know what the definition of religion is? I will give it to you as defined by wikipedia:
Religion is a cultural system that creates powerful and long-lasting meaning, by establishing symbols that relate humanity to truths and values.[1] Many religions have narratives, symbols, traditions and sacred histories that are intended to give meaning to life or to explain the origin of life or the universe. They tend to derive morality, ethics, religious laws or a preferred lifestyle from their ideas about the cosmos and human nature.


Here is a definition by encarta:


1. beliefs and worship: people's beliefs and opinions concerning the existence, nature, and worship of a deity or deities, and divine involvement in the universe and human life
2. system: an institutionalized or personal system of beliefs and practices relating to the divine
3. personal beliefs or values: a set of strongly-held beliefs, values, and attitudes that somebody lives by

I could also give you the merriam webster definition as well. What many, including you, almost always fail to recognize, is that the definition is not limited to belief in a diety. It is beliefs or values that are strongly held. This includes the vast majority of athiests. In my work at the university I run into people like this all the time. I see it infiltrating how they apply the scientific method. It is most unfortunate as people make assumptions based on their personal belief system. whether athiests want to believe it or not, they base their strong belief system, not on science or proof, but on a faith and a value system. Just as those who believe in their god, whatever god that may be, base their belief on a faith and a value system. science will never be able to prove or disprove the existence of a "god" type of being. so belief or disbelief, is based on faith that you are right. Unfortunately, many become so obsessed in this belief that they either cannot or will not see any other point of view. they also become militant and obnoxious.


reply


An atheist is not religious. Atheism is not a religion. All atheism means is you do not believe there is a god. That's not religious. It's simply what you think is true.

reply