|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
 Posted: Tue Nov 10, 2009 8:39 am
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Wed Nov 11, 2009 10:14 am
 |
|
|
|
Collowrath On my end, I am a hard polytheist because I have interacted with and formed relationships with deities that I know are not the same. I didn't necessarily know about hard/soft polytheism until I had well established that Perun who loves and protects Slavs could not be the same as an Irish god who won't have anything to do with a non-Irish, and neither of them could be Ares who hates everyone simply because they are male. Even if I show soft-polytheist tendencies in some instances, there is too much diversity for me to reconcile them all. But, ymmv.
But doesn't the soft polytheistic view say that all gods are aspects of One? I don't think different gods have to be similar for this idea to work. It reminds me of one idea that the Universe had to differentiate itself to know itself better. Does this ring a bell to you?
Quote: Ahhh, plans within plans! I'm no stranger to a multivalent world-view. I had to write a pathways thread in part so I could sort my own thoughts and reconcile (or at least, organize) my world views - not to mention that I kept getting the feeling that people reading my posts were gonk 'ing and that I really should explain myself. =D
I was thinking of writing a Pathways thread myself, but I feel like it might just end up being a "research" thread or something. While I have religious beliefs, I only sometimes make offerings, and I've never done it in a formal capacity. I feel like I'm not that far ahead yet.
Quote: Sophist I humbly ask your patience with my ignorance. smile No need to ask. smile
heart
Quote: Reconciling acknowledging a deity from a monotheist religion with my polytheist world view was difficult for me at first. Since then I've come to two things: 1) initial Jewish accounts through the Old Testament were not exclusive. Strict monotheism seems to be a more recent addition to Abrahamic religions. Exodus in particular seems to be foaming at the mouth with monolateral tendencies - a reading supported by my theology professor as at least consistent with historical Judaism. Also, 2) my relationship with and reconstruction of Hellenic practice has shown me that gods can be just as capricious and mean-spirited as humans can. Hell, I don't think you could call very many creatures in Slavic mythology very nice either. And they don't have to be. Essentially what I'm getting at is that our Gods don't have to be honest and it's not their responsibility to come down and tell a bunch of monotheists off either.
That makes sense. Where did this idea of God being omni- (insert noun here) originate? Was it part of original scripture, or did it come later with apologists? It would clear up some confusion on my part, I think. One of the things I recently learned about Kemetic religion is that they understand that gods are born, and therefore must die. They are also limited in their power to the existent. I thought that was fascinating. I wonder if conceptions of the OT God was similar? Both religions conceive of the time before the existent as "chaos/water." Maybe they were similar in other conceptions of deity as well. |
 |
|
|
|
|
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Wed Nov 11, 2009 10:59 am
|
|
|
 |
Sophist But doesn't the soft polytheistic view say that all gods are aspects of One? I don't think different gods have to be similar for this idea to work. It reminds me of one idea that the Universe had to differentiate itself to know itself better. Does this ring a bell to you?
A couple things to note about soft polytheism. There are a couple different expressions- one of which assumes a single divine being expressing itself completely differently across human experience.
Another form relies on an idea of archetypes that different deities embodied and how their relationship within different cultures gave rise to different names for one being without uniting them with other deities within their pantheon.
There are a few issues I have with soft polytheism.
The first one that comes to mind is that some of these beings have expressed individuality and protection from other deities to the extent that were soft polytheism accurate, they would be manipulating humanity at the threat of destruction in violation of their own oath. This is similar to the issue you have when individual deities within mythology swearing destruction to other deities.
The second issue I have is with the implication that my gods- who have direct prohibitions against actions such as raping little kids- would be considered the same as the gods who ask cults to rape little kids.
Lastly, there are oaths of destruction in place wherein if some deities violate their oaths of exclusion, their people parish. ~checks mirror~
Hmmm... hasn't happened yet.
Quote: I was thinking of writing a Pathways thread myself, but I feel like it might just end up being a "research" thread or something. While I have religious beliefs, I only sometimes make offerings, and I've never done it in a formal capacity. I feel like I'm not that far ahead yet.
Quote: That makes sense. Where did this idea of God being omni- (insert noun here) originate? Was it part of original scripture, or did it come later with apologists? It would clear up some confusion on my part, I think.
All powerful:Jeremiah 32:17-27
All knowing: 1 John 3:20
All present: Ps. 139: 7-12
All loving: 1 John 4:7-8
Compound these with other tradition outside of the Tanakh and the New Testament and you have a better cosmology that explains the principles within the scriptures.
Quote: One of the things I recently learned about Kemetic religion is that they understand that gods are born, and therefore must die. They are also limited in their power to the existent. I thought that was fascinating. I wonder if conceptions of the OT God was similar?
Nope. In fact, scripture states YHVH is eternal- 1 Timothy 1:17. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Wed Nov 11, 2009 12:09 pm
|
|
|
|
TeaDidikai Sophist But doesn't the soft polytheistic view say that all gods are aspects of One? I don't think different gods have to be similar for this idea to work. It reminds me of one idea that the Universe had to differentiate itself to know itself better. Does this ring a bell to you? I'm familiar with that ideology. A couple things to note about soft polytheism. There are a couple different expressions- one of which assumes a single divine being expressing itself completely differently across human experience. Another form relies on an idea of archetypes that different deities embodied and how their relationship within different cultures gave rise to different names for one being without uniting them with other deities within their pantheon. There are a few issues I have with soft polytheism. The first one that comes to mind is that some of these beings have expressed individuality and protection from other deities to the extent that were soft polytheism accurate, they would be manipulating humanity at the threat of destruction in violation of their own oath. This is similar to the issue you have when individual deities within mythology swearing destruction to other deities. The second issue I have is with the implication that my gods- who have direct prohibitions against actions such as raping little kids- would be considered the same as the gods who ask cults to rape little kids. Lastly, there are oaths of destruction in place wherein if some deities violate their oaths of exclusion, their people parish. ~checks mirror~ Hmmm... hasn't happened yet.
Thanks for articulating the other views of sp.
Um...if one is a hard polytheist, then if God claims he is the only god that exists, wouldn't he then be lying? Wouldn't that contradict his omnibenevolence? And if he's not lying and just does not have experience or interaction with other deities, wouldn't that contradict his omniscience and omnipresence? How does a Christian pagan ameliorate these ideas?
I was not aware of such oaths. I guess that would make sp a rather difficult p.o.v. to maintain.
TeaDidikai Sophist I was thinking of writing a Pathways thread myself, but I feel like it might just end up being a "research" thread or something. While I have religious beliefs, I only sometimes make offerings, and I've never done it in a formal capacity. I feel like I'm not that far ahead yet. Pathways is about your path. If that's where your path is at- I say go for it.
Thanks for the encouragement. I am considering it, I'll just have to get all my notes and thoughts together into something digestible, and that is rather too epic for me at the moment what with schoolwork and etc. It does sound like a fun project once the semester's over. And if it would help any other newbie Kemetic practitioners, it would be completely worth the effort.
TeaDidikai Sophist That makes sense. Where did this idea of God being omni- (insert noun here) originate? Was it part of original scripture, or did it come later with apologists? It would clear up some confusion on my part, I think. Original scripture. All powerful:Jeremiah 32:17-27 All knowing: 1 John 3:20 All present: Ps. 139: 7-12 All loving: 1 John 4:7-8 Compound these with other tradition outside of the Tanakh and the New Testament and you have a better cosmology that explains the principles within the scriptures. Sophist One of the things I recently learned about Kemetic religion is that they understand that gods are born, and therefore must die. They are also limited in their power to the existent. I thought that was fascinating. I wonder if conceptions of the OT God was similar? Nope. In fact, scripture states YHVH is eternal- 1 Timothy 1:17.
Ah, gotcha. Thanks. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Wed Nov 11, 2009 1:28 pm
|
|
|
|
Sophist Um...if one is a hard polytheist, then if God claims he is the only god that exists, wouldn't he then be lying? Wouldn't that contradict his omnibenevolence?
Lastly even if he was "lying", we'd have to establish if such was an instance of him speaking a truth we cannot fathom or he was manipulative.
To be frank, the translation work I have done leans towards monolateral theology given to a chosen people.
All of which shouldn't be confused with the personal opinions of followers.
Quote: How does a Christian pagan ameliorate these ideas?
Quote: I was not aware of such oaths. I guess that would make sp a rather difficult p.o.v. to maintain.
Quote: Thanks for the encouragement. I am considering it, I'll just have to get all my notes and thoughts together into something digestible, and that is rather too epic for me at the moment what with schoolwork and etc. It does sound like a fun project once the semester's over. And if it would help any other newbie Kemetic practitioners, it would be completely worth the effort.
Welcome. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Wed Nov 11, 2009 2:51 pm
|
|
|
|
TeaDidikai This isn't part of Wica. It might be helpful if you don't confuse personal opinions with religious doctrine. It's very difficult to sort through within Wica since it's an orthopraxic mystery cult.
It's just what they told me, I'm not going to try to contradict them.
Quote: Not really- since The Father as a theistic construct within Christendom is by definition not the sum of the godhead amongst Trinitarian theology.
Really? That's news to me; I've always been told "The Father" is the big guns.
Quote: If you reread your post, you'll see how it contradicts itself, since for it to be synonymous with The One, it could not merely be a part of their god equal to the Son and the Holy Spirit.
I can't entirely see how. The One, as far as my knowledge of this theory goes, created the God and Goddess from and by himself; and The Father created the Son and Holy Spirit. (if the explainers of the Trinity were incorrect in some areas, forgive my ignorance).
Quote: I don't really see how. Perhaps you could explain why you think that.
Quote: What makes you think that qodesh ruwach or hagios pneuma is feminine? Linguistically it makes no sense.
Simple: Jesus, male. God, male.
It's an idea brought on by people challenging the bible and considering it sexist, coming to the conclusion that, maybe, the "Holy Spirit" is feminine.
Quote: Let's look at it this way- what part of the Holy Spirit was ritually flogged in order to make it love Yeshua?
I don't quite understand the phrasing of your question.
Quote: Then they are likely very ignorant of Christendom, Wica or even more likely, both.
I cannot possibly disagree with you on that.
Quote: Mary is not worshiped, especially not amongst Catholics. People get excommunicated for that s**t- though that doesn't keep bigots from spreading that rumor as anti-Catholic propaganda. Here's the thing- you say "well-established", well, what makes him qualified. I mean, hell- John Hagee has a Mega-Church, but the idiot can't translate Hebrew or Greek to save his soul. Pun intended. And why did you challenge the pastor? What was your motivation?
Ehm, understandable.
I was struggling for a proper adjective to explain him in short - he's very strong in the understanding of Christian beliefs.
I went to him after the lesson on how "you'll go to hell if you don't believe such and such" and asked a simple question (wasn't challenging) and he brought on a whole bunch of crap that made my blood boil. After the discussion I felt the desire to get opinions from other Christians. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Wed Nov 11, 2009 7:36 pm
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Wed Nov 11, 2009 9:46 pm
|
|
|
|
TheBelikov It's just what they told me, I'm not going to try to contradict them.
Quote: Really? That's news to me; I've always been told "The Father" is the big guns.
These beings are equal in substance but expressed differently. The unified form is commonly addressed as The Godhead.
Quote: I can't entirely see how. The One, as far as my knowledge of this theory goes, created the God and Goddess from and by himself; and The Father created the Son and Holy Spirit. (if the explainers of the Trinity were incorrect in some areas, forgive my ignorance).
Quote: Simple: Jesus, male. God, male.
Quote: It's an idea brought on by people challenging the bible and considering it sexist, coming to the conclusion that, maybe, the "Holy Spirit" is feminine.
Not a very good platform for a position.
Quote: I don't quite understand the phrasing of your question.
What correlation does this have to the Holy Spirit and Yeshua?
Quote: Ehm, understandable. I was struggling for a proper adjective to explain him in short - he's very strong in the understanding of Christian beliefs.
What studies has he done in the comparable and contrasting positions of Christian Tradition with popular lay understanding?
Quote: I went to him after the lesson on how "you'll go to hell if you don't believe such and such" and asked a simple question (wasn't challenging) and he brought on a whole bunch of crap that made my blood boil. After the discussion I felt the desire to get opinions from other Christians. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Thu Nov 12, 2009 10:15 pm
|
|
|
|
TeaDidikai You've been fed bad information. These beings are equal in substance but expressed differently. The unified form is commonly addressed as The Godhead. Those who explained the Trinity were incorrect. You have to remember that according to scripture the Godhead is unchanging.
Well that's brilliant. (and thanks)
Quote: Oh goodness. You're running off modern corporeal gender understandings and applying them to ancient non-falsifiable beings?!
No. I did not apply the genders. When I first asked my question, it was an errant, briefly pondered thought of simple correlation; I didn't start attaching genders to "non-falsifiable beings". This is NOT my idea, it is my attempt to try to understand some convoluted theories and what others may or may not have sparked them.
Quote: So, they don't have any justification for their position other than their own biases and ignorance? confused Not a very good platform for a position.
Not biases, some of them are actually Christians, but perhaps ignorance. And there's no undeniable proof that the bible's prophets weren't even a little sexist (the thing is, since I've no proof of this I've no position).
Quote: The Lord ritualistically flogged the Lady in order to teach her to love him. What correlation does this have to the Holy Spirit and Yeshua?
Well my first thought is Jesus dying on the cross, but that makes completely no sense and is utterly besides the point, so: none what-so-ever.
Quote: How do you know this? Is it that he has a scholarly understanding? Does he read Aramaic, Hebrew, Latin, Koine? What studies has he done in the comparable and contrasting positions of Christian Tradition with popular lay understanding?
I'm pretty sure he could speak Latin and Hebrew, he'd supposedly converted over fifty people through twenty-one (or so) mission trips, and I can't remember, but he did something any Christian would find unquestionably holy and godly in Europe, the Middle East, and multiple parts of Africa for over a decade. He went to private Christian schools all his life and "gave his wife twelve children for the Lord's service". The man can speak to you in only biblical verses, and he knows nearly half the bible. He's understandably done little contrast, but I must give him the credit for studying other religions (i.e. the major ones). And even though he is not tolerant, he is not ignorant of Traditions of Wicca. I'm pretty sure I'm remembering all this correctly. For all I know he and his bloody pamphlets were lying.
Quote: Which positions pissed you off?
Pagans go to hell, period; you challenge the Lord too much you're on the path to hell; and I don't even know where this came out of the convo but somewhere in the Old Testament it says to not drink human blood. (honestly I don't know why it made me mad, but it did).
Also, it was the condescending tone he was using, his rough deliverance of it, and how he had a biblical remark for every sentence. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Thu Nov 12, 2009 11:31 pm
|
|
|
|
TeaDidikai Collowrath That's their prerogative. Mary may be worshiped by some Catholics, but that doesn't make it okay in the eyes of the Church. This helped me clarify the problem I was having with demi's position as well. There are lots of things done by Catholics that are against the religious teachings. And yes, some of them continue to be Catholic in name even after doing these things. I was thinking about how there are also murderers and rapists within the Catholic Church. We don't presume these positions are valid in the eyes of the Church or a part of Christendom simply because folks do it and happen to be Catholic.
May I ask a question before I reply to the previous statements?
Who is the Virgin of Guadalupe, from a polytheist perspective? |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sat Nov 14, 2009 10:58 am
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sat Nov 14, 2009 11:07 am
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sat Nov 14, 2009 11:16 am
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sat Nov 14, 2009 11:21 am
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sat Nov 14, 2009 5:24 pm
|
|
|
|
TheBelikov Not biases, some of them are actually Christians, but perhaps ignorance.
Quote: I'm pretty sure he could speak Latin and Hebrew, he'd supposedly converted over fifty people through twenty-one (or so) mission trips, and I can't remember, but he did something any Christian would find unquestionably holy and godly in Europe, the Middle East, and multiple parts of Africa for over a decade. He went to private Christian schools all his life and "gave his wife twelve children for the Lord's service". The man can speak to you in only biblical verses, and he knows nearly half the bible. He's understandably done little contrast, but I must give him the credit for studying other religions (i.e. the major ones). And even though he is not tolerant, he is not ignorant of Traditions of Wicca. I'm pretty sure I'm remembering all this correctly. For all I know he and his bloody pamphlets were lying.
I'm in a position where when people wish to talk to me about YHVH traditions, they need to provide proof that their position is founded. I have the ability to fact-check a lot of things that most of the laity can't. Were I in the same position, I would want something more telling of the source of their authority myself. It's how I respond to traditions I am not versed in.
Quote: Pagans go to hell, period;
Quote: you challenge the Lord too much you're on the path to hell;
Quote: Also, it was the condescending tone he was using, his rough deliverance of it, and how he had a biblical remark for every sentence. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Reply
