For the first two “then”s, the conclusions seem plausible but far from the only possible ones if the possibility of (knowable) gods were taken seriously. It sounds like saying that if you live under an unjust government, you should act like it doesn’t exist until you get arrested, rather than either accepting it or trying to fight it.
As Marcus Aurelius was a philosopher king, I get the feeling this quote is in the context of the gods being unknowable. The unjust government, on the other hand, is here and knowable.
St. Augustine—“A God understood is no God at all.”
Though I remember at least once being told that God’s “mystery”, that is, the inability to figure him out, understand him, or be absolutely certain he’s there, was part of a reason to worship him.
Since St. Augustine was a Christian, I don’t think he fits. By “knowable” I meant something like “we can identify an action that they’re more likely to regard as worship than as blasphemy, thereby making the question of whether to worship them relevant”. I’m uncomfortable with my use of the action/inaction distinction there, but I’m going to leave it.
Alternate interpretation of the Marcus Aurelius quote: It illustrates how far thoughts fit ideals. Regardless of whether he took gods seriously, they were distant enough that he could make grand moral claims without worrying about living up to them.
For the first two “then”s, the conclusions seem plausible but far from the only possible ones if the possibility of (knowable) gods were taken seriously. It sounds like saying that if you live under an unjust government, you should act like it doesn’t exist until you get arrested, rather than either accepting it or trying to fight it.
As Marcus Aurelius was a philosopher king, I get the feeling this quote is in the context of the gods being unknowable. The unjust government, on the other hand, is here and knowable.
Were there people who advocated worshipping unknowable gods?
Arguably. The main one I could find was this:
Though I remember at least once being told that God’s “mystery”, that is, the inability to figure him out, understand him, or be absolutely certain he’s there, was part of a reason to worship him.
Since St. Augustine was a Christian, I don’t think he fits. By “knowable” I meant something like “we can identify an action that they’re more likely to regard as worship than as blasphemy, thereby making the question of whether to worship them relevant”. I’m uncomfortable with my use of the action/inaction distinction there, but I’m going to leave it.
Alternate interpretation of the Marcus Aurelius quote: It illustrates how far thoughts fit ideals. Regardless of whether he took gods seriously, they were distant enough that he could make grand moral claims without worrying about living up to them.