Religions despise humans.
Like managing a 24,000 square-km cattle station but fixating on whether a nest of ants under a particular shrub appreciates you.
Source: twitter.com
Is there a term for simply believing gods unworthy of worship instead of non-existing? Or does that fall under the umbrella of agnosticism?
Agnosticism concerns knowledge. Atheism concerns belief.
I regard myself as an agnostic atheist. I don’t claim to know that no gods exist (although I will say the god of the bible cannot exist), but I necessarily conclude from everything presented to me so far that none exist (see also: Null hypothesis). This isn’t a claim of knowledge - I find the gods “Not Guilty” of existing, rather than “Innocent” of existing. If someone can reliably, verifiable prove one or more of the various gods exist, then I will believe. Until then, I remain skeptical.
I’m not quite sure I understand what you mean by “believing gods unworthy of worship instead of non-existing.” If “instead of” applies to the person, rather than the terminology, this seems to suggest someone who believes they do exist, but don’t think very much of it/them to worship it/them. This would make them a theist, as that term refers to holding belief.
If this is true, they might be described as a misotheist (”hatred of god”), or a dystheist (belief that god is not wholly good, and possibly evil). Although that might depend on why they found the god(s) unworthy, while still believing it/they do exist.
If it was more a case of the “instead of” applying to the terminology rather than the person, then they’re likely just an atheist. I don’t believe any gods exist, but there are very few gods I’ve ever heard anyone describe that weren’t petty, arbitrary and rather loathsome. Just like how I find Jar Jar Binks to be a particularly odious character. (Although, the villain theory makes him much more interesting.)
“Anything that wants to be worshipped is not worthy of even respect, much less worship.” - Jonathan Harper
I don’t aspire to have anyone or anything worship me. A higher form of life should have better self-esteem, be more self-possessed than a random imperfect human such as myself. Otherwise, it would be as pathetic as me getting my self-esteem and validation by demanding a nest of ants worship me. Anything that needed worship would be, by definition, imperfect - so, why would you worship it at all? Any existent god that was perfect would have no need of worship. Therefore, either way, god or no god, worship would be utterly pointless and unnecessary.
But this is ultimately trumped by my lack of belief anyway. Can’t hate or decline to worship a god that I find no reason to think exists in the first place. It’s more of a theoretical, a mental exercise to evaluate the position of those who do believe.
So, terminology for that might just be a skeptic. Or perhaps a book critic.
i think if god somehow proved he was real i still would not worship him unless he explains why he created humans flawed and wants us to suffer for said flaws, and also if hes all knowing why would he write things that would be interpreted by people in a way that it could cause violence, wars, death and suffering, etc
Agreed. Even if it existed, I wouldn’t worship it. Stephen Fry covers this beautifully.
Something that needy and that willing to abuse lesser creatures in support of its ego and narcissism, exhibiting a morality that’s less than ours - demonstrable in the difficulty of finding a human parent who agrees that setting their child on fire for disobeying them would be justified - means I’d be more inclined to hunt it down and destroy it than worship it.
Anything that needed worship would would be, by definition, imperfect. Perfect things are complete in and of themselves, lacking nothing. Least of all worship.
A thing that is imperfect doesn’t deserve worship. A thing that is perfect would have no use for it.