Yeah, and ties it to the Nazis, and the “Beast of Revelations”. We’re heading into Jack Chick territory.
Obviously I was summarizing; I didn’t even explain exactly why that bitch Arachne had it coming, or why the commonly-put-about tale of Medusa’s origin is a filthy slander.
Anyway, while God is far too wise not to be recognize Nyx’s formidable might and act accordingly, She isn’t AFRAID of her.
Droogie, that’s one horrorshow malenky tolchock to the gulliver, if not the yarbles, of ignorance!
Kiai hai-YAH!
Is it a legitimate whoosh if it’s so obscure, a bloke doesn’t have a fair chance of knowing it?
And I just spent most of TG weekend re-reading Robert Graves’ encyclopedia of the Greek Myths. (Which, in itself, is kind of fun!)
Latro (And Skald the Rhymer): (I missed the edit window…)
This is wholly new to me. I’d never heard of “Athenim” before! I don’t recall ever reading any posts by Skald the Rhymer that explain any of this. Is there a source he might be referencing, some neo-Athenian text that has a story of Athena kicking Zeus around? Is he making it all up himself, or does it come from somewhere? (Inquiring minds want to know!)
Drunky Smurf’s response is well worth rereading. I heartily agree with it, except that I don’t at all share the disdain that (I can’t help but feel) DS is projecting. Because I am one of those posters who lives for such days. Hooray for us, and long may our tradition continue.
To the OP: Your religion IS stupid. No biggie; they all are. You may or may not be stupid - you certainly aren’t stupid merely for having a religion - many very smart people have been religious (which, of course, means precisely fuck all regarding the truth of their beliefs). You appear to have the all-too-common idea that you have beliefs that deserve to be respected, because they are beliefs, and it is obvious that beliefs should be respected. I hope you will come to reconsider that meta-belief.
The shower of ridicule that you invite will, of course, provide you with a certain amount of mental armour. You’ll get the opportunity to be a martyr (only in a message board sense - thank fuck our species has moved on a little, in some places, in some ways). You’ll be able to complain about how mean everyone is. You’ll be able to smugly declare that if all those mean people want you to change your beliefs, they’re certainly not going to do it by being mean to you. You’ll be wrong about all that, but it will furnish you with a handy protection against actually examining your beliefs critically. As long as you can attack the messengers, you can ignore the message.
But if you’re intellectually honest (and you signed up to this board, right? :)), sooner or later you’ll have to come to grips with the sad truth that believing don’t mean shit. You’ll have to understand that reality really fucking matters. You’ll have to understand that anyone can make up shit to explain anything, but worldviews are worthless in and of themselves. What gives them value, if they’re about explaining the world, is how well they can be justified by logic, reason, and above all, experiment. And if they’re about choosing how to interact with your fellow humans, there’s the added yardstick of how well they end up making people’s lives better.
You’ll get to compare and contrast the difference between how the scientific method has improved our knowledge of nature and our living conditions, how moral philosophers and political reformers have improved our behaviour towards each other, and how religious leaders and thinkers have mostly held back that progress, in many cases having to be dragged kicking and screaming into a more enlightened worldview by their intellectual and moral betters (and then frequently attempting to revise history to claim credit for such progress).
But to start with, let’s just examine your antipathy towards the frosty treatment your beliefs have received, with a quick gedankenexperiment.
Q: What would scientific progress be, if we were to replace one of the keystones of the scientific method - that hypotheses must be mercilessly criticised and rigorously tested by experiment - by the following more touchy feely principle - that people’s beliefs should be respected no matter their content?
A: It would be COMPLETELY FUCKED.
I’m pretty sure that an actual Greek or neo-Greek religion wouldn’t use the Hebrew “-im” plural suffix in its name.
Well, you know those neo- types.
I’m not sure if I’m being whooshed by a joking feigning of incomprehension on your part, or if you’re still being whoohsed by a my facetious parody.
And lo me chelloveck bruthas looking for a bit of the ultra violent, viddy well your droogan leader. Worship thy Pee, Malchik and The Holy Dook or I’ll tolchock you in thee gulliver.
Apparently, you didn’t.
I wish you would come back to answer this one question, though: What kind of responses were you hoping and/or expecting to get?
That’s why I objected to Tomndebb’s comment: if you can’t tell…how can it really be called a whoosh?
I honestly thought you were referring to some story in which Athena defeated Zeus in combat and would have been entitled to seize his throne. I had never heard of it before, but there are a LOT of Greek Myths I haven’t heard of. I’ve read most of the biggies, and a handful of the minor ones, but I’m not such a damn fool as to think I know them all. You referred – in jest, it now seems – to a story I’d never heard of.
I’m NOT feigning ignorance. I took what you wrote at face value, and had no context to tell me it was a joke. So, in nothing more than earnest curiosity, I asked for a clarification. Deadpan parody is not intrinsically discernible from serious citation!
(As I mentioned, in Wonder Woman comics, Athena has kicked Zeus around at least once. Heck, Wonder Woman has kicked Zeus around!)
It’s a fascinating, rich, deep, and wonderful field of literature, and I adore it. (Well, yeah, both the comic books and the ancient myths!)
I’m notorious for claiming to be a literal rather than metaphorical Athena worshipper. While of course there’s no reason to think everybody’s read my posts, I thought the ridiculous nature of the story I was pretending to refer to gave things away. Anywoo, I’m sorry for misleading you.
I guess it’s Poe’s Law, or something similar: it’s all but impossible to produce a parody that is more outrageous than some of the real things people have said!
I totally missed this thread last week.
I doubt Bosstrain’s coming back, but I would like to mention that he and I are different posters. It got confusing the last time he rolled through here.
If all the advocates of this faith give up that easily, I can understand why no one has heard of it despite a two-thousand year history.
I am glad you mentioned this. Until this moment I thought you were he.
This is the point in sectarianism where even the most mind numbingly stupid details become important. For some reason, there’s a big divide on the exact name of God. You all know about the Jehovah’s Witnesses, but there are many variation of vowels with YHVH (or YHWH or YHUH). And Jesus’s name has also become important. Not thinking of yourself as a religion is a new one for me, though.
Not having any concrete beliefs or history, however, is sadly not new.
I once knew a remarkably stupid Pentecostal minister, leading a good-sized congregation in a medium-sized denomination, who averred that anyone who called God “Yahweh” was damned to hell by the act; only Jehovah or God was correct. Persons who pointed out the historical problems with that notion were “fooled by the enemy.”
I initially read that as “Karate Christian”. Would totally watch.