Choosing Gods

I was originally going to start this thread with an anecdote about finding myself in a high class brothel through no intent of my own. But then I thought better of it. But if I had told the anecdote the main point would have been how the ladies put themselves on display while at the same time studiously appearing to not notice that they were on display. Quite skilled professional bearing!

I would have explained that a hotel employee took me there without telling me where we were going. My first reaction being that I felt that I was somehow obliged to spend money at the establishment, since I was there and all. Try as I might to strike some compromise with the owner, like maybe just a drink and a table dance or something of the sort, he was quite shocked and adamant against the notion.

"This isn't one of those low class places down-town, this is up-town, and we have standards." He then proceeded to lecture me on the differences between low-class meaningless entertainments and the necessary service his establishment made available to a discriminating clientèle, "one man one woman up in a room."

About that time it finally dawned on me that I hadn't asked to be there. It was totally somebody else's idea, so really I was under no obligation to even stay there, so I walked out and the hotel employee caught up with me outside. And during the whole conversation, the ladies, judging by their demeanor, never noticed a thing.

If I had told the anecdote, then I would have tried to draw some analogy about people's approach to choosing gods, like "that one looks good, I'll go with that one."

Having passed over the anecdote that I alluded to, I then thought perhaps I would use an example in order to lecture upon the limitations and implications involved in choosing a particular deity. The Flying Spaghetti Monster seemed suitable as an example.

The Flying Spaghetti Monster (FSM) first appeared in print in May 2005, see Open Letter, however, the Church has existed for hundreds of years. Moreover, the FSM created the universe.

One of the first obvious implications of accepting the FSM as a deity is the conflict which may arise if the person already has within his or her pantheon another deity who is also claimant of creator status. For how could more than one creator co-exist, especially if they are unknown to each other?

The reason that I decided not to use the Flying Spaghetti Monster as an example to lecture from is the matter of pirates. It seemed to me that it would cause an undue amount of internal conflict within readers who had originally accepted FSM to then later on in their education discover that a certain positive attitude toward pirates was also expected of them.

Having excluded the alluded to anecdote and the example of the Flying Spaghetti Monster, what then am I left with to discuss for the purposes of this thread?

The personal testimonies that people have about how a god or goddess has helped them, perhaps even saved them from some harm or danger?

What exactly is the obligation placed upon the helped and/or saved toward the god or goddess? Is it required to name, define, and preach the glorious message and name of the saviour? What would happen if someone mistook the saviour for some saviour popular and in vogue in the saved's particular neighbourhood or society?

Wouldn't it be sad if a local deity received no credit as saviour and some World famous deity got all the credit?

From what I can tell, and seems evident, there are very few people that really do "choose" their god. If there was any large populous around that notion we would see varying degrees within the demographic of any particular nation of religious followers, but we don't.

What we see (generally) are individuals who were simply force-converted at birth because that's what their parents believed in. They are taught "this is the truth, the way, the light and there are no other options". Honestly, it's a sickening approach to raising a child.

Of course not all religious parents do this, and most definitely not all are so extreme. However, even in an innocent tone or a subtle conjecture, the vast majority state that their beliefs are correct, and all others are wrong.

There is very little choice in the matter. If you're a Muslim, you were probably raised as one. If you're christian, you were probably raised as one. If you're Hindu, you were probably raised as one.

Freedom of choice is very rare when it comes to religion

a reply to: Ghost147

From what I can tell, and seems evident, there are very few people that really do "choose" their god. If there was any large populous around that notion we would see varying degrees within the demographic of any particular nation of religious followers, but we don't.

Anecdotal evidence, sometimes even on ATS, suggests that many people raised with a particular religion, at some point in their lives reach some external or internal crisis point. From there, they look further into the religion they were raised in.

Also, some ATSers customize their views, become heterodox and even heretics. That does demonstrate some personal choice.

a reply to: pthena

God himself can not save the person that pours gasoline on
themselves and lights a match.

a reply to: pthena

I'm not denying that people have a choice, or that some have made one. However, the majority are basically just breed into the religion they are currently in.

a reply to: randyvs

Thank you for that. seems to demonstrate a serious crisis point.

God himself can not save the person that pours gasoline on
themselves and lights a match.

I can only assume that the match didn't get lit, seeing as someone lived to write the lyrics.

a reply to: Ghost147

the majority are basically just breed into the religion they are currently in.

The majority, yes. I don't think that the majority is reflected by the zealous propagators, but rather those who have a personal testimony of salvation.

anyone who asks for money or fame in order to be a hero, isnt really a hero.

a reply to: TzarChasm

that makes it hard to be an out-and-open hero type. even for a god, who will either be locked into a box for our leisurely examination or terminated on the spot. because gods are uncontrollable and we know how the government feels about that.

So the actual savior may be just as happy to let the credit be taken by the world famous characters who have already exited the building one way or another.

Thank you. Then perhaps we need feel no pity for the unknown, because they preferred to escape notice.


ETA

Why did you edit your fine post away?

a reply to: pthena

because what i said was really wordy and unnecessary. doesnt take a lot of common sense to figure out that people who want to be rewarded for doing a good thing probably didnt do it for the right reasons.

Our Lady of Guadalupe

Official Catholic accounts state that on the morning of December 9, 1531, a native American peasant named Juan Diego saw a vision of a maiden at a place called the Hill of Tepeyac, which would become part of Villa de Guadalupe, a suburb of Mexico City. Speaking to him in his native Nahuatl language (the language of the Aztec empire), the maiden identified herself as the Virgin Mary, "mother of the very true deity" and asked for a church to be built at that site in her honor.
. . .
Following the Conquest in 1519–21, the Spanish destroyed a temple of the mother goddess Tonantzin at Tepeyac outside Mexico City, and built a chapel dedicated to the Virgin on the site. Newly converted Indians continued to come from afar to worship there, often addressing the Virgin Mary as Tonantzin.

When I remember to celebrate December 9-12, I make sure to eat corn. (see Tonantzin)

a reply to: TzarChasm

Your post is what reminded me of Our Lady of Guadalupe. If no other benefit is gained by this thread, at least I now remember what I had forgotten.

Thank you very much indeed!

In 2008 I was dating this girl and things were moving pretty quickly. Then all of the sudden she dropped off the earth as far as talking to me, seeing me and just completely ignoring me. To say the least I was crushed and was lost. At the time I was a confirmed Lutheran and I began praying for guidance and help. I never got any sort of feeling of help or response.

I had a few friends who were solitary Wiccans so started talking to them learning more about it, I took a chance and prayed to Aphrodite and asked if the girl I was seeing would comeback and was the one. In a dark closed bedroom I heard a female voice say no there is someone else. I took that as a sign that Wiccan was the religion for me. And, the voice was right shortly afterword I met my wife of 6 years come July

When I set out to do my self dedication I chose Artemis and Apollo as my God and Goddess. I chose Artemis out of all the Goddesses she was the one I most identified with. I love nature and wildlife another reason is she doesn't particularly care for men and I felt that would help keep me from asking for too much. Example of this is instead of going out and looking for a limb to fashion into a wand, I asked her to find me a wand and as stepped out the door a branch of the tree fell nearly hitting me.

I chose Apollo because of his connection to Artemis and him being a God of divination and nature.

a reply to: jholt5638

I love nature and wildlife another reason is she doesn't particularly care for men and I felt that would help keep me from asking for too much. Example of this is instead of going out and looking for a limb to fashion into a wand, I asked her to find me a wand and as stepped out the door a branch of the tree fell nearly hitting me.

Artemis is a good choice for men, to know of her is to know she is beyond you. I've got a scar to remind me.

Also wands do present themselves. There's even a Harry Potter reference.


ETA

Is it common Wiccan belief to consider Apollo as primarily oracular as opposed to things like truth, knowledge, poetry and song?

a reply to: pthena

Being primarily self taught I can't speak for all Wiccans. But, for me I look to Apollo for divination mostly Tarot I pray to him for to see the truth behind the cards and the knowledge to understand their meaning

Apollo has a creator - Zeus, and Zeus came from Chronos.

This can get tricky because at one point the name "Zeus" was used by the Greeks who discovered monotheism to refer to the one true God.

The beliefs about the One God may be different, the name may be different, the way different groups of people discovered monotheism may be different, but it is still The One God/Source.

If there is a one true God - Creator of all Life, as believed by monotheists around the world, then the next step is figuring out if there are Beliefs About the One God of Life and Creation that are a contradiction to figure out truth, and it is logical to concluded that the One God who is Creative is Loving/Merciful, rather than hateful/destructive.

a reply to: arpgme

This can get tricky because at one point the name "Zeus" was used by the Greeks who discovered monotheism to refer to the one true God.

I do believe that the Philosophers eg. Plato and Aristotle did use the name Zeus when referring to metaphysical underpinnings of reality. I could be totally wrong. "Theos" is sometimes considered to be a word of unknown origin.

Here are some quotes from Wikipedia page Wiccan views of divinity

a being higher than any of these tribal gods is recognised by the witches as Prime Mover, but remains unknowable, and is of little concern to them.
. . .
A key belief in Wicca is that the gods are able to manifest in personal form, either through dreams, as physical manifestations, or through the bodies of Priestesses and Priests.
. . .
Wiccan theology largely revolves around ontological dualism. Ontological dualism is traditionally a sacred gender polarity between the complementary polar opposites of male and female, who are regarded as divine lovers.
. . .
there are also several possible theological conceptions of an ultimate (impersonal) pantheistic or monistic divinity, known variously as Dryghtyn or "the One" or "The All." This impersonal ultimate divinity is generally regarded as unknowable, and is acknowledged but not worshiped. This monistic idea of an ultimate impersonal divinity is not to be confused with the monotheistic idea of a single supreme personal deity.

it is logical to concluded that the One God who is Creative is Loving/Merciful, rather than hateful/destructive.

The Unknowable may just be ambivalent, neither one or the other according to human perspective. Just a maybe, since unknowable may actually mean unknowable.

I'm not Wiccan myself, but I am finding some quotable material related to them.

You might be interested in an old thread I wrote: That Old Kingdom of "Heaven" Canard

a reply to: pthena

a reply to: randyvs

That doesn't look like Chris Cornell in the picture.

There is a big difference between being depressed at home (the song) and burning as a public protest against injustice (I'm only assuming that's what the picture is).

Father Sky & Queen of Heaven

Back in the old days, two or three days ago, I was a heathen with no understanding of what or who the Queen of Heaven is (even though she was explained to me over and over by at least one ATS poster).

I had a primitive duality: Mother Earth/Father Sky. I didn't believe in a king in the sky, like Zeus, just the Big Blue Sky. I thought that must be Cronus. But the Sky is only Blue in the day time. I couldn't account for such a half finished sky. I let it lie.

But now I know Sky Father is not merely mate to Earth Mother(perhaps not even), He is Father in Heaven of the Queen of Heaven(realm beyond the dome). In the day time, the light comes through the atmosphere and bounces around, making the illusion of the blue dome, but at night people can see right through the atmosphere, right through the illusion barrier and see through billions of miles and billions of years.

For years and years I resisted Venus, Aphrodite, and even Inanna. But now I don't have the need to resist. Inanna had her two sons and has been Queen of Heaven for a long time.

Sorry Cronus. Anu and Inanna, Sky Father of Queen of Heaven. The heavens are complete, day and night.

More to come. There is much on Earth to explain, and the Ocean, and the springs.