|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
 Posted: Tue Jan 22, 2008 3:33 pm
I've seen in other threads that some people have tested their gods to see if it was really them speaking to them, or if they really wanted the person in question to honor them. But for some reason I feel a bit of trepidation when it comes to doing that. For one thing, how would one go about testing the god? For another, is this somewhat demanding or selfish of the person to ask a god to prove they exist/want that person to honor them?
|
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Tue Jan 22, 2008 5:53 pm
Yeah, I can see it as being a little bit selfish, but at the same time, you have to know who you're dealing with. It's not likely, but it is possible for spirits to imitate others and lead you astray. I've never really had any concern whether or not I was speaking with Bast, but I do occasionally hear the voice of Amun and wonder if it's really Him.
How would you go about doing it? Well, that's up to you. Ask for help with something, see if it comes. Ask for confirmation of secret knowledge only you hold. There are plenty of ways to go about doing it, but you have to do it the way in which you feel most comfortable.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Wed Jan 23, 2008 11:45 am
Well, would the divinity in question appreciate such a line of inquiry?
Some may be okay with, or even endorse it, others may be offended beyound belief.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Wed Jan 23, 2008 12:59 pm
If you believe that there are entities that would lie about such things, then it's a good idea the same way it's a good idea to test people on the internet before inviting them into your home.
Of course, if you don't believe in such entities, I wouldn't bother.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Wed Jan 23, 2008 1:51 pm
Sophist I've seen in other threads that some people have tested their gods to see if it was really them speaking to them, Largely because until you know what you are doing when it comes to dealing with non-corporeal beings, it is very easy to set up Mr. Darks as people have confused the nature of an invocation based experiential theology with other pagan traditions. Look at it this way: When you read the Eddas, the Bible, etc- who was contacted directly by the gods? Heros, Prophets, Rulers. When you log onto the internet- who is being contacted directly by the gods? Everybody and their gold fish. And how many of these people are being called to save the universe or be Aphrodite's special personal sex slave? Why the shift? What changed from the religious expressions of ancient cultures and the modern expression? And is it universal amongst the pagan scene? Well, it isn't universal amongst the scene in my experience. My experience shows recons are far less likely to say they are "a special person chosen by God Y to accomplish task V". Granted, this is personal experience based on my time here on Gaia and other online sites, with the pagan scene I am part of offline, my time working in the book store etc. The other group that has a limited "I'm The One" folks I have seen is the Trad Witchcraft scene- not the Neo-Witchcraft, but the Lineaged Wiccans and other family trads that are well grounded. Cultural expectations in the pagan scene has shifted in part due to misrepresentation of Wicca. Wiccan and Meso-pagan traditions that have invocation practices are different than the older Temple Religions. While the Temple Religions of the Greco-Roman and Egyptian cultures had direct divine experiences, most of this was limited to the temple itself and the special rituals there, largely in part because of some of the technology involved in generating these experiences. Buckland and Cunningham mass marketed the concept of everyone being their own clergy- as Wicca is a religion made up completely of clergy. They also perpetuated invocation practices and divine-to-human experiences as common occurrences. In Wicca, they are- invocation is part of the religion. In many of the older religions- they weren't. Offerings may have been given, but someone who wasn't trained by a Temple wasn't going to go and profane the gods by invoking them in their living room. But this is what so many neo-pagans expect these days. Light a candle and mutter something and have Odin poof into your livingroom. And when it doesn't happen? Well, some grow from the experience and gain a better understanding of humanity's relationship with the gods. Some people change religions- they go to invocation based traditions or they return to the faith of their youth. Others make s**t up to make them feel better about themselves- they delude themselves to justify their shift from their old theology to their current theology, or at times, they do it to feed their ego. Are there some beings that take an active role in their lives of their followers? Yep. Are they legion and are they pandering to every teen looking to establish their own Value Autonomy or disenfranchised Christian looking for "spirituality"? Hardly. Is it a good thing that these people delude themselves to feel better? Well, it sure treats a symptom. But I am not a big fan of treating symptoms over problems- so I habitually suggest people test their experiences- with gods and otherwise. Quote: or if they really wanted the person in question to honor them. The experiences of others I have spoken to has yet to reveal a single instance wherein the gods punished an individual for seeking the truth about their experiences. Is it possible? Could happen. Can it be done in a disrespectful way? Yes- and in which case, good on the gods for giving the person an arse chewing. Quote: For one thing, how would one go about testing the god? One of my favorites is comparing UPG to history, or looking to turn UPG to CG. Quote: For another, is this somewhat demanding or selfish of the person to ask a god to prove they exist/want that person to honor them? Is it demanding? Well, depends, are you making a demand? Is it selfish? Yes. Is selfish synonymous with "bad"? No. We have the right to explore our experiences and protect our wellbeing. SlaineWildfire It's not likely, but it is possible for spirits to imitate others and lead you astray. I completely disagree. Not only does it ignore the possibility of thoughtforms who are designed to deceive, but it provides a false sense of security. Fiddlers Green Well, would the divinity in question appreciate such a line of inquiry? Some may be okay with, or even endorse it, others may be offended beyound belief. Any specific ones come to mind?
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Wed Jan 23, 2008 2:03 pm
I can understand how someone would need the reassurance, but I also feel this could lead a person to disappointment if this person isn't well grounded. I can't tell you how many people I've seen, from many religions, who complain "I prayed and prayed and asked for such and such, but (insert deity here) didn't listen." Could this be considered failing a test? Even if the prayer is answered, a lot of people are so impatient or expect a certain result, but get something else. I guess we just live in a world of instant gratification, even from the Divine.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Wed Jan 23, 2008 3:26 pm
TeaDidikai SlaineWildfire It's not likely, but it is possible for spirits to imitate others and lead you astray. I completely disagree. Not only does it ignore the possibility of thoughtforms who are designed to deceive, but it provides a false sense of security. What are you disagreeing with? At first glance, it seems as though we're saying the same thing... *confusion* EDIT: Upon further reading... Are you referring to the frequency of such entities existing? Well, I don't believe in evil, and I don't believe in creating paranoia for no reason. I believe that there are spirits who are deceivers, and I do believe that there are spirits who are malevolent, but in my experience, the quotient of "bad" to "neutral" spirits is more on the oder of 1 to every 20 or so. Maybe I'm just lucky, maybe I just have a positive energy, who knows. But I don't think there's any reason to breed paranoia in someone by telling them that it's very likely that they're being lied to or used by some deceitful spirit.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Wed Jan 23, 2008 5:01 pm
TeaDidikai Fiddlers Green Well, would the divinity in question appreciate such a line of inquiry? Some may be okay with, or even endorse it, others may be offended beyound belief. Any specific ones come to mind? For which instance?
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Wed Jan 23, 2008 9:04 pm
SlaineWildfire Upon further reading... Are you referring to the frequency of such entities existing? Yep. Quote: Well, I don't believe in evil Your lack of belief doesn't invalidate it's existence. And since when is caution a synonym for paranoia and why does it have to be "evil" for it to mislead someone or misrepresent itself? Any or all. I was curious if some of the offended ones would roll off your tongue.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Wed Jan 23, 2008 9:39 pm
When Bast first spoke to me I tried to find out everything I could about her. looked her up on the net (found a lot of falts statments), Bought some books on Egyption paganism and thier gods/goddess (not much on her), and lastly I just meditated and talked to her. I didn't really think of it as testing her, I just wanted to make sure it was Bast who was contating me.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Wed Jan 23, 2008 9:44 pm
Neko_Bast I just wanted to make sure it was Bast who was contating me. What convinced you?
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Wed Jan 23, 2008 9:49 pm
you know...I can't remember sweatdrop It must not have been anything dramatic or it would have stuck in my memory.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Wed Jan 23, 2008 9:50 pm
TeaDidikai Look at it this way: When you read the Eddas, the Bible, etc- who was contacted directly by the gods? Heros, Prophets, Rulers. When you log onto the internet- who is being contacted directly by the gods? Everybody and their gold fish. And how many of these people are being called to save the universe or be Aphrodite's special personal sex slave? Why the shift? What changed from the religious expressions of ancient cultures and the modern expression? And is it universal amongst the pagan scene?
I mean consider how the modes of worship and opportunities for contact with the gods have evolved over the years, taking the Greek pantheon as an example. In the original Hellenic context, you generally had the priests acting as the intermediaries for the worshipers, or worshipers would place offerings and so on as you mentioned. I'm not extremely well versed in how the ancient Greeks worshiped, but if I understand correctly the idea of gnosis (where gnosis means personal unmediated contact with the divine) wasn't in common currency.
But the playing field these days is much different after the emergence and popularization of the postmodern approach to magic, resulting in such diverse authors as (former) chaos magician Phil Hine and pop witch Christopher Penzack advocating methods for seeking out direct contact with the gods, say nothing about the relative ease of obtaining hallucinogenics such as DMT, LSD, or psychedelic mushrooms (if that's your thing).
I like to think that the more we seek out the gods, the more likely they are to answer us. Maybe, with the pagan and neo-pagan scenes flourishing the way they are, many gods are more influential and active now than they were in their original cultures. Maybe the gods are answering our calls more because more of us are calling. Maybe our decentralized, individualistic society has placed us in a more genuine and empowering position to communicate with the gods from?
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Wed Jan 23, 2008 11:09 pm
Gideon Starorzewski Just to provoke a bit of interesting discussion, what if there has been somewhat of a paradigm shift in how humans and gods interact? If such can be supported, more power to it. I'm not saying it is impossible for gods to do such. I am saying however- that to assume such is happening without seeking the truth is foolish. Quote: I mean consider how the modes of worship and opportunities for contact with the gods have evolved over the years, taking the Greek pantheon as an example. In the original Hellenic context, you generally had the priests acting as the intermediaries for the worshipers, or worshipers would place offerings and so on as you mentioned. I'm not extremely well versed in how the ancient Greeks worshiped, but if I understand correctly the idea of gnosis (where gnosis means personal unmediated contact with the divine) wasn't in common currency. And what I am seeing amongst the Hellenic community is that direct and dramatic experience still isn't common. This is one reason I mention the difference between the generic neo-pagans and the Recons. The other thing that has happened is that people have changed the concept of Patron Gods around. No longer is it a god who is paid tribute to based on lifestyle, but these figures are now assumed to take an active role in one's life on a personal and direct level. Quote: But the playing field these days is much different after the emergence and popularization of the postmodern approach to magic, resulting in such diverse authors as (former) chaos magician Phil Hine and pop witch Christopher Penzack advocating methods for seeking out direct contact with the gods, say nothing about the relative ease of obtaining hallucinogenics such as DMT, LSD, or psychedelic mushrooms (if that's your thing). However- I would challenge these folks to meet the same measures that the Catholic Nuns and Buddhist Monks in Andrew Newberg's show when their brain activity is in the same place. Quote: I like to think that the more we seek out the gods, the more likely they are to answer us. I think that is a lovely view- however, the objective hard polytheist in me reminds myself that just because we seek a relationship, doesn't mean we receive one. Otherwise, the world would have no stalkers. Quote: Maybe, with the pagan and neo-pagan scenes flourishing the way they are, many gods are more influential and active now than they were in their original cultures. I would hardly call this flourishing. I mean- Christendom, Judaism and Islamic populations make up almost 55% of the world's population. Almost 16% are non-religious (secular humanist, agnostic etc) and that doesn't even address the Baha'i and other monotheistic or "Meso-Pagan" groups that could be argued to worship YHVH. Quote: Maybe the gods are answering our calls more because more of us are calling. If neo-paganism accounts for roughly a million people, worshiping gods from all around the world compared to whole populations worshiping the gods of their lands prior to conversion, the numbers for your assertion don't add up. Quote: Maybe our decentralized, individualistic society has placed us in a more genuine and empowering position to communicate with the gods from? I'd argue that the attitudes common amongst the portions of the scene that have the higher incidences of these kinds of experiences do not support a "genuine" desire to communicate with the gods as much of it is tainted with disenfranchisement.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Thu Jan 24, 2008 9:15 am
I read something awhile ago about experiences in (I want to say) training for a Navy Seal (though it might be another elite corps thing).
In the training, the individuals are given tasks to complete, and once they're done, they're given more to do. No one tells them they did a good job, or provides any sort of positive reinforcement, since, when it comes down to doing it for real, they may be on their own, and they just have to carry on from objective to objective. (I'm sure they would be told if they did something wrong, however.)
Is it like that?
That is, one might setup an altar, and go through a ceremony, offering, etc... and then simply trust, at all times, that the deity is satisfied, without, say, some sort of feeling that, say, Dionysus really appreciated the wine offered?
Or is it just the big things, like you mentioned about individuals being called to save the world or such?
Or is it something in between?
Sorry, I'm just trying to make sure I understand.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Reply
