"All Gods are One God"

[Recursive Paradox]

TeaDidikai

Patch>> Care to describe the term in more detail?

Recursive Paradox

Didn't you say that Etherism struck you as monistic soft polytheism, Tea? Or similar at least? I can't remember now.

Can't remember. I'll take a look later.

Things might be different now with the philosophical ban on worship gleaned from my interpretation of the Three Principles/Pillars.  

[patch99329]

TeaDidikai

Patch>> Care to describe the term in more detail?

I believe that there are a finite amount of gods in the world. Some of them are simply known by different names in different cultures. Good examples would be Zeus/Jupiter Poseidon/Neptune etc.
However, it's not that simple. Odin isn't zeus by virtue of being head of a pantheon, and I'm sure that many gods are indeed unique to a pantheon.

That said, I also think the gods all eminated from a single source, and are no more connected than you are to me.  

[Recursive Paradox]

patch99329

That said, I also think the gods all eminated from a single source, and are no more connected than you are to me.

Sort of like godly evolution from a single point or a birthplace of oneness from which they come?  

[patch99329]

Recursive Paradox

patch99329

That said, I also think the gods all eminated from a single source, and are no more connected than you are to me.

Sort of like godly evolution from a single point or a birthplace of oneness from which they come?

Pretty much.
I think everything eminated from this source, and they are closer to it than we are.

Sallustius, who is one of my favourite philosiphers, wrote a great piece about what he called 'the first cause'.

Quote:

Next in order comes knowledge of the first cause and the subsequent orders of the Gods, then the nature of the world, the essence of intellect and of soul, then providence, fate, and fortune, then to see virtue and formed from them, and from what possible source evil came into the world.
Each of these subjects needs many long discussions; but there is perhaps no harm in stating them briefly, so that a disciple may not be completely ignorant about them.
It is proper to the first cause to be one - for unity precedes multitude - and to surpass all things in power and goodness. Consequently all things must partake of it. For owing to its power nothing else can hinder it, and owing to its goodness it will not hold itself apart.
If the first cause were soul, all things would possess soul. If it were mind, all things would possess mind. If it were being, all things would partake of being. And seeing this quality in all things, some men have thought that it was being. Now if things simply were, without being good, this argument would be true, but if things that are _are_ because of their goodness, and partake in the good, the first thing must needs be both beyond-being and good. It is strong evidence of this that noble souls despise being for the sake of the good, when they face death for their country or friends or for the sake of virtue. - After this inexpressible country or friends or for the sake of virtue. - After this inexpressible power come the orders of the Gods.

 

[patch99329]

Celeblin Galadeneryn

Zeus isn't even from the same Indo-European source material as Odin. Zeus' name cognate in the Norse Pantheon is Tyr, whom he shares a couple functions with, whilst his most obvious function is taken up by Thor.

I don't think I was clear in what I meant. I was saying that zeus simply isn't Odin period. xD

Quote:

I would also be very careful in immediately assuming that the Roman Gods are the Greek ones. Calling Mars the Roman Ares brings with it all sorts of flaws. Neptune was a better one to name though. it has a name cognate with an Iranian water god, Apam Nepat.

Yepyep.
I've recently been looking at the roots and origins of the names of different gods. Venus and Aphrodite, whilst similar, seem to come from completely different places. The whole thing is surprisingly interesting and fast becoming a hobby.
Even if two gods ARE the same being, I don't think I could relate to them in the same way though. It's like a different 'aspect' of the god.

Quote:

Studying Indo-European culture is one of the things that made me a Monistic Hard Polytheist. I mean, it was one thing to discover that a horse is a horse is a horse, but a horse ritual, is a horse ritual, is a horse ritual led to looking at the connections a little more.

I'm much the same.  

[patch99329]

patch99329

Celeblin Galadeneryn

Studying Indo-European culture is one of the things that made me a Monistic Hard Polytheist. I mean, it was one thing to discover that a horse is a horse is a horse, but a horse ritual, is a horse ritual, is a horse ritual led to looking at the connections a little more.

I'm much the same.

Upon further thought. This is why I believe there are a finite amount of gods in the world.
I think it's amazing that some cultures that have never had contact before have beliefs and practices that are so similar.