RE: Gor as a religious movement?

Create a
Free Account

As the Collar Turns:

Collarchat.com - BDSM Forum

Home Login Search

RE: Gor as a religious movement?

View related threads: (in this forum | in all forums)

Logged in as: Guest

All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> Gorean Lifestyles >> RE: Gor as a religious movement?

Page: << < prev 1 [2] 3 next > >>

Message

<< Older Topic Newer Topic >>

RE: Gor as a religious movement? - 8/17/2009 3:51:28 PM

Dinnardin

Posts: 368
Joined: 1/9/2007
Status: offline

Koa...be warned...there are raisins in the pie.

John, AKA Dinnardin

(in reply to Koa)

Profile

Post #: 21

RE: Gor as a religious movement? - 8/19/2009 7:50:48 AM

Koa

Posts: 272
Joined: 7/27/2005
Status: offline

Hahaha

_____________________________

Lo Koa Bosk

...but to take truth for granted is not to know it. Truth not won is not possessed. We are not entitled to truths for which we have not fought.
(Marauders, p.7)

(in reply to Dinnardin)

Profile

Post #: 22

RE: Gor as a religious movement? - 8/23/2009 6:43:37 PM

Aswad

Posts: 6620
Joined: 4/4/2007
Status: online

quote:

ORIGINAL: Musicmystery

The "Initiates" on Gor are clueless as the reality of their "Priest-Kings," who are an advanced species, not gods.

What is a god?

I've yet to see a better explanation than "advanced species", "idea" or "archetype" for most uses of the word.

quote:

It's a comment on the mentality of humanity.

One of his less lucid commentaries, at that. There's been a fair bit of work on the utility of religion at various stages of cultural development. And I would note that a lot of the problem with religion appears among Goreans, in people that read the books as the average bible-thumper reads the bible. Context is important. A lot of things in the bible, as one example of a religious source, are present to create- to use a biology term- an impermeable membrane, to seperate the Jewish people from the people of Caanan long enough for them to reestablish a culture and an identity as a people. A lot of other things are practical knowledge, like the passage in Leviticus that deals with molds, which seems archaic to us. Just like rhetoric is a more human modality of communication than logic is, so, too, religion is a human thing in a far more positive sense than Norman seems to give it credit for. And that's before moving into the topic of division of labor.

Health,
al-Aswad.

P.S.: Using the judeo-christian-islamic traditions as an example because they're so easy to take a shot at, even for one who follows such a tradition (though, by Leonidas' definition, I'm not following them as a religion; I'm not sure I care to agree with the definition he offers, but that is mostly academic).

P.P.S.: There are a few leaps of faith in science. The assumption that there is a single, external, observable reality that can be predicted to some extent would be the most prominent one. Certainly, that is an assumption which intuitively makes sense, and most of it isn't strictly necessary. Still, science does rely on faith in some basic, irreducible ideas. Those ideas are merely a lot more minimalistic and [currently] more productive than those in most [modern] religions. You could certainly call it a religion, even without the assumptions many scientists add (just like there are variations between denominations within a "single" conventional religion), but I would be more inclined to call science a form of divination. And an absolutely brilliant form of divination, at that, in terms of accuracy and palatability. I employ it a lot. But, then again, an idea from my own faith is that our faculty for reason is in itself sufficient evidence of a mandate to apply that faculty to life. Evidence ("in favor of"), not proof, obviously. It's faith, after all.

< Message edited by Aswad -- 8/23/2009 7:08:39 PM >

_____________________________

"If God saw what any of us did that night, he didn't seem to mind.
From then on I knew: God doesn't make the world this way.
We do." -- Rorschack, Watchmen.

(in reply to Musicmystery)

Profile

Post #: 23

RE: Gor as a religious movement? - 8/23/2009 7:12:16 PM

Musicmystery

Posts: 15304
Joined: 3/14/2005
Status: offline

quote:

quote:

ORIGINAL: Musicmystery

The "Initiates" on Gor are clueless as the reality of their "Priest-Kings," who are an advanced species, not gods.

What is a god?

I've yet to see a better explanation than "advanced species", "idea" or "archetype" for most uses of the word.

Aswad,

If you're going to use terms in their metaphorical sense, then everything is potentially a god--or religion as the OP proposes.

Point being?

Tim

_____________________________

Yes, I still update my blog--thanks to all who asked!
http://writingtrue.blogspot.com
Gorean FAQ Threads

(in reply to Aswad)

Profile

Post #: 24

RE: Gor as a religious movement? - 8/24/2009 10:26:08 AM

Aswad

Posts: 6620
Joined: 4/4/2007
Status: online

Tim,

My point is: you're asserting the priest kings aren't gods, without defining what a god is.

Care to define it to clarify exactly what you are asserting?

You note that they are known by the Initiates to be an advanced alien species. But any gods with corporeal form would, by definition, be either alien life or terrestrial life. And some kind of corporeal form is presumably necessary for physical interaction with humans. If you are restricting the definition of what gods are to something non-corporeal, then you make assumptions about religion that are false for some religions: living gods have been a feature of mainstream religions up to WWII (Japan). Again, since you're not supplying a definition of the term, it's hard to argue against your assertion, since its meaning is left vague.

For whatever it's worth, I agree that there's no basis for turning Gor into religion, or viewing it as one. It would be far more accurate to call it a cult (as was discussed here a few years back, if memory serves), though that word has some negative connotations that don't apply.

Health,
al-Aswad.

< Message edited by Aswad -- 8/24/2009 10:29:39 AM >

_____________________________

"If God saw what any of us did that night, he didn't seem to mind.
From then on I knew: God doesn't make the world this way.
We do." -- Rorschack, Watchmen.

(in reply to Musicmystery)

Profile

Post #: 25

RE: Gor as a religious movement? - 8/24/2009 12:28:01 PM

Musicmystery

Posts: 15304
Joined: 3/14/2005
Status: offline

quote:

My point is: you're asserting the priest kings aren't gods, without defining what a god is.

Care to define it to clarify exactly what you are asserting?

Come on, Aswad--I know you aren't this obtuse.

The OP asked a question about Gor/religion. Not surprisingly, I'm using god in the common sense.

If Contrarism is your religion, enjoy. Still has nothing to do with Gor.

_____________________________

Yes, I still update my blog--thanks to all who asked!
http://writingtrue.blogspot.com
Gorean FAQ Threads

(in reply to Aswad)

Profile

Post #: 26

RE: Gor as a religious movement? - 8/24/2009 1:28:29 PM

mnottertail

Posts: 35843
Joined: 11/3/2004
Status: offline

*In Gregorian Chant*

Priest: What did you do with the incense pot?
Congregational Response: I left it in the hall 'cause it's too damn hot!

Priest: 'K, show's over!! Let's go get some boys!!!!!

_____________________________

Kam Fong as Chin Ho

For in the final analysis, our most basic common link, is that we all inhabit this small planet, we all breathe the same air, we all cherish our children's futures, and we are all mortal. JFK

(in reply to Musicmystery)

Profile

Post #: 27

RE: Gor as a religious movement? - 8/30/2009 9:02:45 PM

Aswad

Posts: 6620
Joined: 4/4/2007
Status: online

quote:

ORIGINAL: Musicmystery

Not surprisingly, I'm using god in the common sense.

My point being that the common sense of the word is a very nebulous idea, almost entirely undefined.

I do get what you're getting at. The question is, do you realize the implication of pegging an argument on an undefined quantity in a science fiction setting, where there is every reason to include an alien species with god-like powers- managing a species in the manner of some gods from real-world mythologies- in such a vague definition of the term?

I'm not trying to be contrary, obtuse, or anything else of the sort.

I'm simply inviting you to consider whether you may have reached a premature conclusion, without contesting whether the conclusion is correct or not. This goes to what you've commented earlier about not allowing oneself to be confined by the limits of one's own preconceptions, which requires carefully considering whether someone who supposedly isn't all that obtuse might have a point after all. A few years back, I would've answered the same as you did, and found the replies I've made to be contrary. My reason for that would be that I hadn't reflected enough on it at the time, however.

Are you sure you have?

I've learned a lot from you in the course of my time here, and found many things to reflect on in what you've written. I have been in the wrong with my thinking sometimes. I don't mind admitting that. You're smart, well read, and have the benefit of age. If I didn't stand to learn from you, something would be amiss. But we've been focusing on some different things in the course of our respective reflections and reading, so it doesn't seem unreasonable that I may occasionally have some food for thought to offer in return.

True, I have indeed been contrary at times, so I can understand why you'd assume this was one of those times.

It isn't. It may be one of those times when I'm wrong, but it's not one of the times I'm being contrary.

And if I'm wrong, I'd be happy to learn where I messed up my thinking. Again.

Health,
al-Aswad.

_____________________________

"If God saw what any of us did that night, he didn't seem to mind.
From then on I knew: God doesn't make the world this way.
We do." -- Rorschack, Watchmen.

(in reply to Musicmystery)

Profile

Post #: 28

RE: Gor as a religious movement? - 8/31/2009 4:31:27 PM

Musicmystery

Posts: 15304
Joined: 3/14/2005
Status: offline

Aswad,

That all sounds good--until you look at the rhetorical purpose.

ALL words are nebulous. They're symbols. Every belief could be considered a religion, or a science, or a walnut if we stretch the definition far enough. Change the parameters to suit your needs, and sure, means anything you want.

It's a meaningless reflection on language--despite your purpose of delving deep into the philosophical corners of the semantics.

I, on the other hand, answered a question. Consequently, I didn't construct a carefully defined architecture first. I just answered the question. If you'd like a go at the OP philosophically, have at it.

Btw, thanks, but I'll pass on the mantle of sagehood--only a fool would claim it, and there's so many heads under the damn thing already, I'm astounded everytime a new one forces its way under.

Live well,

Tim

_____________________________

Yes, I still update my blog--thanks to all who asked!
http://writingtrue.blogspot.com
Gorean FAQ Threads

(in reply to Aswad)

Profile

Post #: 29

RE: Gor as a religious movement? - 8/31/2009 6:13:10 PM

Aswad

Posts: 6620
Joined: 4/4/2007
Status: online

Sadly, I can't read the tone of your reply, Tim.

Taking it at face value, we aren't actually communicating here, but rather talking past each other.

We will have to disagree as to it being meaningless, and further disagree that it's really about language.

But, sure, let's use language as the hook to try to connect here, since you seem to think that's where I'm at.

Yes, all words are nebulous, since language is a consensus process, which leaves the matter of degrees: water is toxic at a certain number of liters per day, but it's still a fairly solid assertion that water isn't a poison, wheras hydrogen sulfide clearly is. If someone asks you if a bottle is poisonous, you don't answer "hell, yeah, it's got water in it," or "no, it's just chlorine, go right ahead." That's not the point of contention. There's a route from the word poison to the idea of a poison. When a second- or third-language learner first starts out talking to native speakers, the route is traced frequently for a lot of words, as they need to take the scenic route via the established vocabulary. When the word is "god," however, there isn't a route to anywhere. It's turtles all the way down. I'm not talking about the absence of something for the word to refer to. I'm saying it doesn't actually refer to anything. It has zero semantic content (or near-zero, if you count the elicited response(s) as part of the semantic payload).

As for the mantle of sagaciousness, I wasn't heaping that one on you. I didn't go out of my way to avoid a compliment, but I was trying to explain that I don't have the grounds to assume that (a) I am correct, and (b) you fail to see it. I am arrogant, but not so much so as to dismiss the possibility of an error on my part, nor so much as to assume I made my point well enough to discern from your replies whether you got it and addressed it too tersely for me to understand, or missed it and replied accordingly. That said, there's a compliment in my caring enough to attempt to word things so as to get the point across without offense (though it appears I may have failed on both counts). I paid attention a while back when you said I was out of line, and realized you were right, took a sabbatical to figure out what the root cause was and how to do address the root cause, then came back. I have some respect for your opinons. Enough to challenge them. Therein lies the compliment.

As for addressing the OP... if anyone wants to turn it into a religious movement, that's their business. IMO, it misses the point by several leagues to do so, but there's enough material there that if someone did try, a thousand years from now, nobody would be able to tell the difference between that and lots of other alien-centric religions. Sure, the PK can be godheads, if you like. I find it counterproductive, potentially destructive and contrary to the values espoused by most characters I identify with in the books, but hey.

As for aliens not being gods... I realize I've rejected the Apocalypse of John repeatedly. But if I were to comment as if I did lend it credibility, then I would note that in that text, the vessel described is as close as a first millennium CE person could come to describing the only remotely plausible means to implement an Alcubierre metric that I have seen. That is, given the assumption that the metric can be realized and used for FTL travel, then the description given is how someone back then would have described its most likely apparent form. In that sense, it's as likely as not that the text, if lent any credibility in the first place, is referring to an alien or time traveller... one known to the John in question as "god."

It's not a question of whether Gor could be used for some religious purpose, but whether it should.

And if the question is directed at me, the answer is "almost certainly not."

Health,
al-Aswad.

_____________________________

"If God saw what any of us did that night, he didn't seem to mind.
From then on I knew: God doesn't make the world this way.
We do." -- Rorschack, Watchmen.

(in reply to Musicmystery)

Profile

Post #: 30

RE: Gor as a religious movement? - 8/31/2009 7:24:55 PM

Musicmystery

Posts: 15304
Joined: 3/14/2005
Status: offline

quote:

It's not a question of whether Gor could be used for some religious purpose, but whether it should.

And if the question is directed at me, the answer is "almost certainly not."

Welcome home.

Tim

_____________________________

Yes, I still update my blog--thanks to all who asked!
http://writingtrue.blogspot.com
Gorean FAQ Threads

(in reply to Aswad)

Profile

Post #: 31

RE: Gor as a religious movement? - 8/31/2009 7:39:08 PM

Rule

Posts: 7806
Joined: 12/5/2005
Status: offline

I haven't read the thread; only Aswad's last post (30).

quote:

ORIGINAL: Aswad
When the word is "god," however, there isn't a route to anywhere. It's turtles all the way down. I'm not talking about the absence of something for the word to refer to. I'm saying it doesn't actually refer to anything. It has zero semantic content (or near-zero, if you count the elicited response(s) as part of the semantic payload).

I have to correct you here, Aswad. I realized years ago that the word god is etymologically related to the English and Dutch and German words 'good', 'goed' and 'gut' (all having the same meaning of well / benevolent / property), as well as to the Icelandic (thus Old Norse) 'goda' (which means 'judge'); encountering that word goda in one or more of the sagae was a pleasant surprise to me. So essentially, the word god equates to beings that are good, benevolent, wealthy (as in source of wealth) and righteous judges.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Aswad
Sure, the PK can be godheads, if you like. I find it counterproductive, potentially destructive and contrary to the values espoused by most characters I identify with in the books, but hey.
...
It's not a question of whether Gor could be used for some religious purpose, but whether it should.
...
And if the question is directed at me, the answer is "almost certainly not."

I concur and surpass: definitely not. The human gods are human, even Satan.
As for a Gorean religion, *shrug*, Goreans do not even know the difference between slaves, subs, ordinary humans and cowards like me. Ignorance is not a good foundation for a religion.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Aswad
As for aliens not being gods... I realize I've rejected the Apocalypse of John repeatedly. But if I were to comment as if I did lend it credibility, then I would note that in that text, the vessel described is as close as a first millennium CE person could come to describing the only remotely plausible means to implement an Alcubierre metric that I have seen. That is, given the assumption that the metric can be realized and used for FTL travel, then the description given is how someone back then would have described its most likely apparent form. In that sense, it's as likely as not that the text, if lent any credibility in the first place, is referring to an alien or time traveller... one known to the John in question as "god."

I wrote a word by word interpretation of the Revelation in 1987 from a Dutch translations when I perceived what it truly was about. Ought to publish it, of course...
Your interpretation is incorrect.

(in reply to Aswad)

Profile

Post #: 32

RE: Gor as a religious movement? - 8/31/2009 10:04:02 PM

Aswad

Posts: 6620
Joined: 4/4/2007
Status: online

quote:

ORIGINAL: Rule

So essentially, the word god equates to beings that are good, benevolent, wealthy (as in source of wealth) and righteous judges.

Lexicographically speaking, yes. Language, however, is defined by use in a consensus fashion. Again, it doesn't perform the task of refering to anything. It doesn't represent anything. It does, however, convey a vague connotation of right, pleasant, helpful, necessary, or whatever else might be considered a positive or normative feeling by the speaker. When talking about the word in a context that is not yet formed, and a culture that is fictional, even this sense of the word is so vague as to be useless.

quote:

Ignorance is not a good foundation for a religion.

Actually, it might be argued that ignorance is an excellent foundation for a religion. Depends on the kind of religion one is founding. Ignorance of ignorance is still ignorance, and recognizing the human need to be ignorant of some things (goes back to the whole idea of division of labor in the abstract) is a form of awareness, not a form of ignorance. Certain things complicate the experience of life unneccessarily without adding anything that's worth the price. And some things have a proven history of working out in a certain way. Religion is more concerned with group identity, norms and overall quality of life than what tends to be the case for individual spirituality.

quote:

Your interpretation is incorrect.

I can work my way through Dutch if I need to, though a word by word translation is rather useless. Since I haven't yet given a complete interpretation, it would be interesting to see how you have arrived at the conclusion that it is incorrect. This isn't the thread to elaborate on my interpretation, but I can probably write up something if you're horribly curious. The gist of it is that it doesn't go with the rest of the corpus, though.

We're getting way off track here, as Tim has pointed out already.

Health,
al-Aswad.

_____________________________

"If God saw what any of us did that night, he didn't seem to mind.
From then on I knew: God doesn't make the world this way.
We do." -- Rorschack, Watchmen.

(in reply to Rule)

Profile

Post #: 33

RE: Gor as a religious movement? - 9/1/2009 8:12:29 AM

Elisabella

Posts: 3939
Joined: 5/22/2008
Status: offline

-FR-

Not to get this wonderful discussion off track, but I'm thinking it's on the wrong track - the etymology of the word "God" and "Gott" is from a variety of sources, including the Sanskrit "hu" which means "to invoke or implore," the Persian word for God, "Khoda," and the Proto-Indo-European "ghut, meaning "that which is invoked."

Aswad I'm surprised at you! You're not one to accept a BS etymology at face value without confirming it yourself! Then again, the tone of that post might have just fallen under the category of "don't bother wasting too much time arguing with someone convinced of their infallibility," n'est-ce pas?

http://wahiduddin.net/words/name_god.htm

Also the word in the Romance languages, dieu/dios/dio (Fr/Sp/It) comes from Latin "deus" which is a Romanization of the Greek "Zeus," who, I don't need to point out, was hardly a shining beacon of all that is good and holy.

Aside from ancient pantheons I suggest looking into the Abraxas mythos. Christianity was heavily influenced by Zoroastrianism (God/Satan equivalent to Ahura Mazda/Ahriman) in that they have a "god form" that is good, and a "high devil" form that is bad. Not all religions feel the need to separate the concepts of light and dark into separate entities.

As above, so below.

< Message edited by Elisabella -- 9/1/2009 8:33:19 AM >

_____________________________

you're just an empty cage, girl
if you kill the bird

(in reply to Dinnardin)

Profile

Post #: 34

RE: Gor as a religious movement? - 9/1/2009 8:35:38 AM

Rule

Posts: 7806
Joined: 12/5/2005
Status: offline

Thank you for the information and the link, Bella. I am most interested.

As for Zeus, he was a good guy, embodying life itself, always fighting evil and other dangers to humanity, and promoting hospitality. At the end of his near thousand year reign, he caused the Divine to end his reign and his creation and to set theology and the world on a new track, the creation of another god. I know one of his contemporary avatars very well.

(in reply to Elisabella)

Profile

Post #: 35

RE: Gor as a religious movement? - 9/1/2009 2:49:32 PM

Aswad

Posts: 6620
Joined: 4/4/2007
Status: online

quote:

ORIGINAL: Elisabella

Aswad I'm surprised at you! You're not one to accept a BS etymology at face value without confirming it yourself! Then again, the tone of that post might have just fallen under the category of "don't bother wasting too much time arguing with someone convinced of their infallibility," n'est-ce pas?

Actually, the etymology simply wasn't relevant. I was making the point that lexicographic thinking is outdated. Language is a living tradition, and modern thought reflects that. It is the difference between looking to the past and to the simplicity of hard and fast rules, versus looking to the present, the unknown variables, and the ever changing realities around us.

As an analogy: knowing that I have some genes which are mostly found on the British Isles, along with some which are native and associated with the groups that raided extensively, tells me that somewhere back in time, I probably have an ancestor that was grabbed during a raid, then caught the eye of the chieftain or somesuch. It doesn't tell me who I am, however. That, I can discover by paying attention to myself, my actions, my thoughts, and so forth, as well as drawing on what I learn about human nature and so forth.

I rarely dismiss Rule out of hand.

He's a bit oblique in his approach, but very often has interesting thoughts if one can decipher them.

Health,
al-Aswad.

_____________________________

"If God saw what any of us did that night, he didn't seem to mind.
From then on I knew: God doesn't make the world this way.
We do." -- Rorschack, Watchmen.

(in reply to Elisabella)

Profile

Post #: 36

RE: Gor as a religious movement? - 9/1/2009 2:56:44 PM

mnottertail

Posts: 35843
Joined: 11/3/2004
Status: offline

Hvordan har du det, Aswad?

quote:

ORIGINAL: Aswad

As an analogy: knowing that I have some genes which are mostly found on the British Isles, along with some which are native and associated with the groups that raided extensively, tells me that somewhere back in time, I probably have an ancestor that was grabbed during a raid, then caught the eye of the chieftain or somesuch.
Health,
al-Aswad.

I would suspect it is the other way 'round. They have a vast danelaw in england, and they had a king named Canute, not Aethelrod (well, they did that too). Other than the rather pedestrian quibble about who fucked who, I am in some agreement with your post.

Jarl Hup

< Message edited by mnottertail -- 9/1/2009 2:57:40 PM >

_____________________________

Kam Fong as Chin Ho

For in the final analysis, our most basic common link, is that we all inhabit this small planet, we all breathe the same air, we all cherish our children's futures, and we are all mortal. JFK

(in reply to Aswad)

Profile

Post #: 37

RE: Gor as a religious movement? - 9/1/2009 7:18:10 PM

Rule

Posts: 7806
Joined: 12/5/2005
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Aswad
Actually, the etymology simply wasn't relevant. I was making the point that lexicographic thinking is outdated. Language is a living tradition, and modern thought reflects that. It is the difference between looking to the past and to the simplicity of hard and fast rules, versus looking to the present, the unknown variables, and the ever changing realities around us.

I agree for the most part with the etymology Bella linked to, and disagree with one or a couple of bits which often already are in contention.
I do think, though, that the etymology is not complete. There were no explicit mentions of the words that I listed, though there were similar forms. 'Good' in 'goodbye' for example is etymologically related to 'God'. In particular I missed the etymological connection to the word jew, which in my opinion also means 'good', and its various forms in the Germanic languages. That these connections are now lacking does not mean that I am wrong, nor that they may not be added at a later time. Science is always in flux, changing, and etymological science is no different.

I am not an etymologist, nor a linguist. If I want to know whether a word is related to another, I do go for the dictionary.

Yes, I do am aware that language is an evolving information system. I am also of the opinion that concepts are persistent. Some words do get in disuse, lots of words change, but the concepts in my opinion rarely change - unless a shift of concept paradigm occurs, perhaps. A chair is a chair. A rose by any name will attract aphids.

I have done a fair bit of research into ancient and less ancient western European place names, trying to locate lost places by their names. I have found some of such places only because a fragment of their original name persists in modern names.

The concept of God has throughout history always been the same. In polytheistic cultures people often or always distinguish between the non-corporeal, omnipresent Divine and the various human incarnate gods, the changing ruler of whom is always identified with the Divine. The confusion about the concept of 'god' in monotheistic cultures arises because the theological revolution introduced by the incarnate god of the Jews (called the Father when he got his position), was to abolish the worship of the incarnate gods (including himself) and to worship only the Divine (the holy ghost). Since the ruling incarnate god is always identified with the Divine, by definition there is identity between the Father and the Holy Ghost. (Later Jesus was added to that duo, as the early Christians recognized the power change. Since Jesus was identified with the Divine, they must have argued that he had also identity with the dethroned incarnate god of the Jews, thus justifying Jesus' succession of that god.)

< Message edited by Rule -- 9/1/2009 7:37:23 PM >

(in reply to Aswad)

Profile

Post #: 38

RE: Gor as a religious movement? - 9/1/2009 9:16:55 PM

Elisabella

Posts: 3939
Joined: 5/22/2008
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Aswad

quote:

ORIGINAL: Elisabella

Aswad I'm surprised at you! You're not one to accept a BS etymology at face value without confirming it yourself! Then again, the tone of that post might have just fallen under the category of "don't bother wasting too much time arguing with someone convinced of their infallibility," n'est-ce pas?

Actually, the etymology simply wasn't relevant. I was making the point that lexicographic thinking is outdated. Language is a living tradition, and modern thought reflects that. It is the difference between looking to the past and to the simplicity of hard and fast rules, versus looking to the present, the unknown variables, and the ever changing realities around us.

As an analogy: knowing that I have some genes which are mostly found on the British Isles, along with some which are native and associated with the groups that raided extensively, tells me that somewhere back in time, I probably have an ancestor that was grabbed during a raid, then caught the eye of the chieftain or somesuch. It doesn't tell me who I am, however. That, I can discover by paying attention to myself, my actions, my thoughts, and so forth, as well as drawing on what I learn about human nature and so forth.

I rarely dismiss Rule out of hand.

He's a bit oblique in his approach, but very often has interesting thoughts if one can decipher them.

Health,
al-Aswad.

Fair enough, and it's a valid analogy.

I'm not familiar with Rule's posts, I'm a bit spacey when it comes to names. I have a tendency to get a bit testy when I see "religion" and "god" equated to Judeo-Christian beliefs.

Anyway back to your point (which is an OT to begin with, but a really interesting OT) I get what you're saying. Any sufficiently advanced technology would appear to be magic to someone without that technology. Or alternatively, seen as a sign of divinity.

It's my own personal belief that [edited: most] religions' gods are a combination of a person who once lived, a mythos built around an archetype inherently valuable to humanity, and the whitewashing of time. So while you've really asked more questions than you've answered, I think I see where your questions are heading.

Good to see you online again btw!

< Message edited by Elisabella -- 9/1/2009 9:26:25 PM >

_____________________________

you're just an empty cage, girl
if you kill the bird

(in reply to Aswad)

Profile

Post #: 39

RE: Gor as a religious movement? - 9/2/2009 3:00:16 AM

Elisabella

Posts: 3939
Joined: 5/22/2008
Status: offline

quote:

The concept of God has throughout history always been the same. In polytheistic cultures people often or always distinguish between the non-corporeal, omnipresent Divine and the various human incarnate gods, the changing ruler of whom is always identified with the Divine. The confusion about the concept of 'god' in monotheistic cultures arises because the theological revolution introduced by the incarnate god of the Jews (called the Father when he got his position), was to abolish the worship of the incarnate gods (including himself) and to worship only the Divine (the holy ghost). Since the ruling incarnate god is always identified with the Divine, by definition there is identity between the Father and the Holy Ghost. (Later Jesus was added to that duo, as the early Christians recognized the power change. Since Jesus was identified with the Divine, they must have argued that he had also identity with the dethroned incarnate god of the Jews, thus justifying Jesus' succession of that god.)

I'm thinking this is a bit of an oversimplification. If it were true, then when old whats-his-name (deformed guy married to Nefertiti) tried to introduce monotheistic sun worship to Egypt, it would have taken. But that concept was so foreign to them, the idea of one almighty god, it didn't last past the pharaoh's death.

In the Greek pantheon, what was the representation of the non-corporeal, omnipresent divine? Zeus? The Titans? The Muses? I don't think a guy whose wife regularly bested him or a group who was led by a guy whose infant son killed him and the rest are the best examples of ultimate godhood. The muses might stand a chance at it, but there were seven (I think? It's nearly 5 AM and I'm really not in the mood to open a tabfest on my browser) and why split one into seven? I suppose you could ask, why split it into three, but they didn't really do much splitting in early Christianity, more of a re-working the facts to fit a pre-chosen conclusion. Mithras lives, now he's a Jew.

Anyway, aside from Zoroastrianism and Judaism I am really not that familiar with any pre-Christian Western pantheons that had a One Supreme Allfather God, but I'm definitely willing to hear about them.

Oh and BTW yes, "god" and "good" are likely linguistically linked, that I wouldn't have argued with, but saying one is derived from the other, well...hell I have a linguistics fetish and I can't force myself through more than a few pages of PIE theorizing without wondering "how the bloody hell do they fit this half syllable into twenty different unrelelated English words???"

Also, totally unrelated, but after hearing one too many of my fiance's colorful Aussie sayings, I looked up the origin and while I couldn't find it, I found virtually identical phrases in 17th-18th century English thieves cant, which I found absolutely hilarious and immediately commenced teasing him about. Then again while they did get the convicts, we got the puritans, and well...let's just say i'm moving there.
/random nerdery

Take care.

ETA: I hate to feel like the history police here but the etymology of "Jew" is from Hebrew "Yehudah" which derives from the place-name Judah and is usedd to refer to the tribes of Israel. And damn it you made me open another tab, cause I knew it was derived from "Judah" but didn't want to just say it based on My Word Alone(tm) so here. Bloody enjoy it. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jew_(word)

ETA #2 After posting that I realized that if we want to go back to PIE, the name Judah means "praised/celebrated" which could definitely have come from that PIE root that gave us God. Thats pretty freaking awesome. I was looking at "Jew" as an "iu" sound, as in "Iudaea" but reading it as ye-hu-dah and knowing how hebrew pronounces some "h" sounds...it totally could be related to "ghut."

Now I lay me down to sleep.

oh okay, not really, I never sleep when I plan to, cause if I can think well enough to think I *should* sleep it only means I'm not tired enough to actually do so.

Bah. I'm probably going to regret rambling so much in the morning (early afternoon) once i've reread this and it's too late to edit.

< Message edited by Elisabella -- 9/2/2009 3:21:59 AM >

_____________________________

you're just an empty cage, girl
if you kill the bird

(in reply to Rule)

Profile

Post #: 40