If the gods ‘exist’ then how can god do so? …or what does th

[Attila]

If the gods ‘exist’ then how can god do so? …or what does that mean for monotheists?

meant as lighthearted thread...

I can see although not agree with the argument, that the gods are in some way false or that they don’t exist for abrahamics, but if they do, how do you correlate them into you understanding of things?

For example I can see that Anubis could be considered to be a false judge, if god is the great judge and holder of truth. Though I don’t know how gaia is a false mother goddess, this would get a bit awkward if you then said god was the true mother.

Anyways, how do you understand these things and or correlate them?

[treegod]

In the 10 Commandments God describes Himself as "jealous." If He is the only God then what reason has He for being jealous? Obviously the monotheistic God is a polytheist

“You shall not make for yourself an idol in the form of anything in heaven above or on the earth beneath or in the waters below. You shall not bow down to them or worship them; for I, the LORD your God, am a jealous God...”

The Commandment says to worship only Him, not that you can't believe in the existence of other gods. Perhaps you might be able to Honour the gods of your ancestors in traditional ways as long as it doesn't look or feel like and act of worship according to God you can honour away (the Catholics have something like this to differentiate between the relationship they have with the Saints and their relationship with God).

But then I don't know what God means by "worship". The English word apparently comes from "to shape worth," to give something value. But I give value to my life, but surely that's not the same as worship meant in the Hebrew sense, is it?

[treegod]

Or for a more mystical bent God could be seen as the Ground of Being and the various gods expressions of this, but I find the implications of this on Christian belief far less interesting than what I said above

[Argenta]

I think it might be useful to look at India's example for an answer to this doubt. They' ve kept a pantheon with literally millions of gods, and, at the same time, the wonderful innocence of belief that whomever you personally worship is the G/god. This is, generally, explained either through a henotheistic approach -- that all gods simply come from one, whether Shakti/Durga/Kali, or Vishnu/Krishna/Rama, or whatever -- or a monistic one, in which the worship of any god leads to ultimate overcoming of illusion and seeing there is no difference between gods and ourselves, for we are all one in essence. (And I apologize for my over-simplification.)

I believe some of the Daoist beliefs come close to this, too, but am not so acquainted with their (theo)logical system.
They've managed quite nicely with this, at least until Allah got involved.

I'd say that, in a society which is predominantly polytheistic, this is not a major issue. The mind which can accept the multitude of divinities bends more easily around the thought that any individual may but needn't hold the T/truth. The problem arises when people try to see things from a strictly monotheistic side, which often reduces options of being in possession of T/truth.

[Jake]

But then I don't know what God means by "worship". The English word apparently comes from "to shape worth," to give something value. But I give value to my life, but surely that's not the same as worship meant in the Hebrew sense, is it?

You're right, it isn't. The Hebrew is "v'lo ta'avdem," probably better translated as "and you shall not serve them."

The verb usually translated as "to worship" is "avod" which means to work, to labor, to serve. The noun is "avodah," work, labor, service. A lot of English translations of the Hebrew text will use "work" or "labor" for avodah in the mundane sense and then "worship" when it's used in a religious context. Which can be a little misleading since while it's the same word in Hebrew, the English words "work" and "worship" have very distinct connotations.

[Attila]

treegod

In the 10 Commandments God describes Himself as "jealous." If He is the only God then what reason has He for being jealous? Obviously the monotheistic God is a polytheist

Haha nice one.

But then I don't know what God means by "worship". The English word apparently comes from "to shape worth," to give something value. But I give value to my life, but surely that's not the same as worship meant in the Hebrew sense, is it?

Interesting point! There is many a way to worship or not worship, as like how one may revere saints without worshiping them, although many people do worship them.
If we accept the gods exist as well as god [or something along those lines] then that leaves us with some manner of panentheism.
Personally I don’t think you can have both [god is absolute], and I see the gods as representing primal and other forces or other attributes, so god is replaced by the source/ceugant ot something.

Argenta

I think it might be useful to look at India's example for an answer to this doubt. They' ve kept a pantheon with literally millions of gods, and, at the same time, the wonderful innocence of belief that whomever you personally worship is the G/god. This is, generally, explained either through a henotheistic approach -- that all gods simply come from one, whether Shakti/Durga/Kali, or Vishnu/Krishna/Rama, or whatever -- or a monistic one, in which the worship of any god leads to ultimate overcoming of illusion and seeing there is no difference between gods and ourselves, for we are all one in essence. (And I apologize for my over-simplification.)

This is reasonable, though I take the third pagan option [as above]. I think how I see it is similar to Taoism although also very different, the dao is ‘the way‘, I see a more anarchistic vision of things. I think the essential unnameable tao is the same as our ceugant though.

jake

You're right, it isn't. The Hebrew is "v'lo ta'avdem," probably better translated as "and you shall not serve them."

I agree with that but apply it to all, this is fundamental to anarchism which I use as my ethical base. I see my gods more as like teachers, perhaps people worshiped them in the past and the gods accepted that in terms of respect, but I don’t feel they have a problem with not being worshipped.

[Frog]

The Tao is not so specific to be one of the three elements, but all of them.
Ultimately though, I see the Tao as being the single spirit entity that is referred to in many pagan paths.

For me then, this works quite happily. I see a single spirit entity but which can be morphed and adapted as required, holding both male and female, light and dark... and none of it. Consequently, it can become a single form (god) or multiple dieties as the personal communication develops or is required.

[Attila]

Yea I can see most of that, I do think many paths have some kind of tao.

I am unsure if it can be a single god, as I think gods make utility of it when manifest as deities. God could be the same, but then he wouldn’t be a creator, he would be as like a single pagan god. I am open minded though, as long as god is not absolute then I can see many ways he could be part of the equation.

[saphera]

I like the idea of a 'One GOD' as the 'Guiding-Organizing-Delivering' force that shapes all of reality...the glue.
And individual Gods and Goddesses being the Guiding-Organizing-Delivering forces that have a certain role as part of that whole.

Like ...if God was the frequency of white light ...then each God or Goddess would be an individual colour frequency.... all part of the white light frequency.

Enlisting the help of God as one.. through prayer...is asking and allowing the universal power to work for you in any way possible.
Enlisting the help of a particular God or Goddess....is like asking for help along specialist lines.... much the same with prayers to Archangels.
saphera.

[Davin Raincloud]

Argenta hit the nail on the head.

The India Approach is somewhat Holistic enough to explain it.

I'm finding the relaity of 'God' to be alot less personal of a relationship. I think it's because he/she/it is not a 'person' like us. (Let's not get into the whol is Jesus a deity thing lol).

The Dao is more like my relationship with God. The Way.

I do believe in 'other power', other than myself. I'm not that wrappe dup in myself, and I've come up against too many obsticles that I could not get around in my life.

Something is there, and we are all still trying to work it out, after millions of years of evolution of our species.

[Art]

I suppose one of the things that bugs me still is why some local God from the middle east would give a rat’s patoot about folks traipsing around the Welsh valleys. One would think that a God would be inclined to give most of His or Her attention to the people who speak the appropriate language and occupy the appropriate landscape before worrying about some group of zealots not connected to that land by blood or residence. Why should Isis give a hoot about somebody’s conjuration in Germany or for that matter why would Dagda raise a flabby thumb in concern over somebody living in Equatorial Africa? I suppose a case can be made about genetic ties and being grandfathered in somehow but that even seems just a little farfetched. Take for instance the notion of a God holding office hours and on the one hand he’s getting email from a supplicant five miles away who speaks the same language He or She does and whose family has lived in the neighborhood for umpteen generations. In the next line, He, or She is getting email from a housewife in Kansas who isn’t terribly sincere in the base case, is speaking one of the most difficult languages on earth (English) and a less-than-clear dialect of it…, and has a gene pool the sum total of which remained on the north side of the English Channel for 9000 years before they migrated (or were sold or recruited as the case may be.) Now which one is our God going to listen to, His or Her homie or the oddball girl in Kansas? Hmmmmm…….
On the other hand, one would not really expect for local Gods to be too terribly receptive to entreaty from some interloper. For instance, I could pray all day to the gods of the Choctaw and probably would not expect them to be all that on board with my request. After all, my forefathers operated a system of organized genocide against their children until those children were almost gone. I don’t think I could expect much sympathy.
Then of course there’s the case of those folks who try to hedge their bets and use Gods or Goddesses from a couple of different pantheons or regions in ritual. You know that has to alienate their affections since they’re being called over for tea with strangers who probably can’t even chat with them and may smell odd because of different diets. Pretty complex issue I’d say.

[Davin Raincloud]

I agree with what you say Art.

I'm beggining to believe that heritage/kin/culture is far more important than I first realized.

[Golden Eagle]

Anything 'exists' in the mind, whether that's one god or many. The concepts that we give names, physical features, functions, personalities, whatever. If you believe in something, then you'll be able to prove yourself right by finding things which can be interpreted to support your view (though they may be interpreted in different ways by others).

I agree that the Hindus seem to have worked it out with their pantheon, with all the different deities representing different aspects/personalities/functions of the one 'big' deity. Physically, it's impossible - a more abstract concept used to break things down and make it easier for people to understand, maybe. People like simple, clear ideas. I guess it's easier to pray to a specialist than a generalist, and probably more satisfying too.

But then this only is relevant to those who believe in physical, conscious deities. I'm sure there are many out there who don't view the divine as an actual bloke with a beard or whatever - but rather as various aspects of nature which can be summed up by the personality of a deity who is a lot easier to think about than the enormous and intangible concept of the character/essence/energy of love/war/justice/harvest/inspiration etc.

And of course the atheist answer: don't believe in any of them, so stop worrying and enjoy life!

[Frog]

Take for instance the notion of a God holding office hours and on the one hand he’s getting email from a supplicant five miles away who speaks the same language He or She does and whose family has lived in the neighborhood for umpteen generations. In the next line, He, or She is getting email from a housewife in Kansas who isn’t terribly sincere in the base case, is speaking one of the most difficult languages on earth (English) and a less-than-clear dialect of it…, and has a gene pool the sum total of which remained on the north side of the English Channel for 9000 years before they migrated (or were sold or recruited as the case may be.) Now which one is our God going to listen to, His or Her homie or the oddball girl in Kansas? Hmmmmm…….

of course, this assumes that the local god is able to speak in the languages that we understand anyway. If we can assume that god(s) has been around since before the earth began then they'll probably not understand the modern tongue anyway... and will probably continue to hark back to when all this was just space... not with the young upstart things that now inhabit that affordable housing complex called earth....

[Argenta]

Hmmm I like where this discussion is going to

One of the reasons I cut out of my previous religious affiliation was precisely because I felt the god(s) I was worshiping did not understand me, or I them. They had different preferences of food, clothes, weather, tools, and, most important for me, language. I figure, if I ever moved to India, I'd probably go back to this line of spirituality. However, living in Europe and using English almost more than my own language, it seems natural for me to look into some spiritual paths which I can understand, in the very basic meaning of the word. (That's why I'm still a bit nervous about the Celtic thingy: it looks like something cool, but I can't even pronounce it, let alone get it.)

It's not that I think it matters really, in the end, in the big picture. I do think that on some level there is no need for language, words, symbols, or anything else for the spiritual experience to make perfect sense. But on the level I'm at -- one engrossed in the everyday, concerned with whatever is physically closest -- it means the world to me to be able to connect with whomever is there on the next notch.

That's why one idea of Aristasian spirituality (though in other things they're as crazy a bunch as I've ever heard of) really chimed with me:
"We are also humble enough to recognise our lack of a living tradition in this world and to realise that spiritual practices and influences do require living transmission.That is why, while we consider ancient Goddesses from no-longer-living traditions to be important for purposes of comparison and understanding of our religious roots, we always recommend the use of images of Dea from living traditions* for actual devotion."

I found this works best for me, too: connecting to a deity that "survived" in its more or less original form until the present day. I feel such divinities "managed" to learn our language, are easier to connect to, and have a deeper theology surrounding them.

*Eg. they work with Mahalakshmi, Quan Yin, Virgin Mary and Tara.

[Attila]

edit; in my experience deities and people from anywhere can understand all languages [in the otherworld or intermediate zones/communications], that is languages are converted betwixt them.

saphera

I like the idea of a 'One GOD' as the 'Guiding-Organizing-Delivering' force that shapes all of reality...the glue.

Sure but how can you have a oneness which isn’t universal rather than absolute. Whatever the glue is then we and all things are part of it?

I would go with the tao or something like that, as you need something that is empty and formless having no entity. If not then the idea seams a little cumbersome to me ~ depends how one sees god though, many have a rather more occult view of ‘him‘.

Art

Why should Isis give a hoot about somebody’s conjuration in Germany

Was there not a cult of isis in germany? I seam to remember something about that in some classical text ~ the germanica I think. Other than that I see your point about locality, deities are simply mediums betwixt us and something universal &/or infinite [ceugant] which would otherwise be difficult to deal with.

I do think Mesoamerican deities wouldn’t mind if you wished to receive them, they know that there is always something bigger than a given culture or force. Perhaps as far as most deities are concerned it is simply a matter of choice for us. I know an american English language teacher who teaches in china [of English decent], and he had a ‘lucid’ chat with aztec deities concerning the state of the world ~ make of that as we will. It could be that where we are born matters primarily, though we are not limited to that.

[treegod]

But then I don't know what God means by "worship". The English word apparently comes from "to shape worth," to give something value. But I give value to my life, but surely that's not the same as worship meant in the Hebrew sense, is it?

You're right, it isn't. The Hebrew is "v'lo ta'avdem," probably better translated as "and you shall not serve them."

The verb usually translated as "to worship" is "avod" which means to work, to labor, to serve. The noun is "avodah," work, labor, service. A lot of English translations of the Hebrew text will use "work" or "labor" for avodah in the mundane sense and then "worship" when it's used in a religious context. Which can be a little misleading since while it's the same word in Hebrew, the English words "work" and "worship" have very distinct connotations.

Aha! Therre we go. That does make sense with a couple of Jesus' comments like "Not my will but the will of He who sent me" and "You cannot serve two masters at once." All to do with will. Strange how that has been missed and people associate "worship" with celebration and praise.

Ok, so I can believe in other gods. I can even honour, celebrate and praise them, just as long as I serve only Lord God Almighty and have no other master (not even myself can be master of myself!) And as long as no other god makes demands of me that go against the Will of God, then I can go along with them. Perhaps some gods migth fill the same place that Saints do in Roman Catholocism

I think I might consider being a polytheistic Christian, might make things interesting

Or perhaps henontheism, acknowledge a whole pantheon of gods but only focus on the Lord God Almighty.

In the 10 Commandments God describes Himself as "jealous." If He is the only God then what reason has He for being jealous? Obviously the monotheistic God is a polytheist

Haha nice one.

I thought so

[Ben Wood]

I think I might consider being a polytheistic Christian, might make things interesting

I think that sums up my position pretty well. As I type this post I look around the room, I can see my icon of the Virgin and Child and my alabaster statue of the Greek goddess Hera. I don't see any contradiction between my belief in Jesus and 'the gods'.

[FoxPhantom]

So if I was working and laboring for one person (which is God), Then that's worshiping?

[Merlyn]

God(s),
Family, with all the good and bad that comes with it.
The idea of a god of all gods is something to ponder...