|
Prurient Squid posted:Traditionally Quakers don't regard any place or time as sacred because they don't "mark times or seasons". Could you expand on that? How does one do basic survival things like planting crops without keeping track of seasons? Or do you just mean seasons aren't celebrated in a religious sense, no planting or harvest festivals etc?
|
#
?
Jul 1, 2023 18:27
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 3, 2024 13:33 |
|
|
Prurient Squid posted:Maybe pacing myself would be a good idea in case I get sick of it. It was a post genesis 7th day joke
|
|
#
?
Jul 1, 2023 18:28
|
|
|
Yeah, it's celebrations. And maybe resting every seven days might not be a bad idea!
|
|
#
?
Jul 1, 2023 19:09
|
|
|
Prurient Squid posted:Yeah, it's celebrations. tradition
|
|
#
?
Jul 1, 2023 19:13
|
|
|
I'll provide the ELCA Lutheran (mainline Protestant) answer to this. Also note that Lutherans only have two sacraments, baptism and communion, unlike Catholic and Orthodox, which have more. The reason for this is a bit in the weeds. Baptism: As long as the baptism was done in the name of the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit, there's no need for another baptism. The only large denominations that aren't trinitarian would be Latter Day Saints and Jehovah's Witnesses, though there are smaller denominations as well. Someone coming from one of those groups would require a trinitarian baptism but most traditions recognize each other's baptisms. Communion: We practice open communion so anyone who believes what we believe about communion is welcome at the table. Note that this varies widely within Protestantism and even within Lutheranism, it's a denomination to denomination thing who can commune. Catholics and Orthodox have materially different beliefs regarding the presence of the body and blood in the bread and wine at communion from what I do, transubstantiation vs. "in with and under", and there's other denominations that don't believe in the presence of the body and blood at all. Also, just because my denomination practices open communion doesn't mean that I would take communion at a church that does not. It would be highly disrespectful and likely actually sinful to do so. Funnily enough, this means that I would not take communion at the church where I was confirmed despite it also being Lutheran. If someone from a denomination that practices closed communion came forward, they would be welcome just like anyone else, but members of those denominations are highly unlikely to do so, as while we don't view it as spiritually harmful, they likely do. Clergy: We maintain a list of denominations with whom we are in "full communion". This means we can take communion at each other's churches and share clergy without the need for the clergy to be ordained separately by the other denomination. Where I am at, it is not unusual for someone to be a pastor for two denominations at once, which would happen when, for example, the local Presbyterian and ELCA churches cannot individually afford to hire a pastor so they basically pool their money and share. Happens a lot in rural areas. However, note that this doesn't mean that those denominations have identical beliefs. Beyond being historically distinct and having their own traditions and organizational structures, there are material theological differences, but each denomination has agreed that the differences are not so much that we cannot work together in that fashion. This winds up manifesting in odd ways sometimes. Like when the ELCA and the Episcopal Church (one of the American branches of the Anglican Church) agreed to be in full communion, there was a big discussion over the concept of apostolic succession. The idea there is that it matters whether the clergy of a denomination stand in an unbroken line of succession going back to the apostles. The ELCA believes in "the priesthood of all believers" which basically says that having apostolic succession doesn't matter and it matters a lot to the Episcopal Church. They absolutely could not accept an ordination by someone not in that apostolic line and we don't care, so a compromise was reached that at each ELCA bishop installation, an Episcopal bishop would be present and thus would bring that bishop into the line of apostolic succession, so then when they ordain ELCA clergy, they are automatically in that apostolic line and thus on a long enough timescale all ELCA clergy would be eventually brought in. It was a big enough deal that a section of ELCA churches split over the issue and formed LCMC, Lutheran Congregations in Mission for Christ, in protest over the compromise. I'd close by noting that these discussions make the differences between denominations seem large, in practice our theological underpinnings are quite similar. We as Lutherans confess the Nicene Creed, as do most other Protestants, Catholics, and Orthodox. Orthodox reject the later inclusion of the so-called filioque clause, which wasn't present in the original creed and got added by the Roman Catholic Church in what I can only describe as a real dick move. But regardless, the rest represents a massive list of the ways in which our beliefs are the same, but like so many non-religious things, most folks don't want to talk about all the myriad ways we are similar and prefer to focus on the relatively fewer ways we differ.
|
|
#
?
Jul 1, 2023 19:27
|
|
|
As the resident Filioque denier, I actually wouldn't put it that harshly. My read of the filioque situation (which might not be 100% accurate) is that it was originally added by local Western churches to help Germanic tribes make sense of the Creed; but then in the cross-generational game of telephone that followed, everybody kind of forgot that they added it, until it got to the point where the Pope was wondering why the East wasn't using it.
|
|
#
?
Jul 1, 2023 20:14
|
|
|
Keromaru5 posted:My read of the filioque situation is that it was originally added to help Germanic tribes make sense of the Creed, and was originally condemned even by Rome; but then in the cross-generational game of telephone that followed, everybody kind of forgot that they added it. And what hacked off the Eastern church wasn't the wording itself, but that the Roman church had added it without consulting them. There had been an agreement that any further changes to the Nicene Creed would be done by mutual consent at a synod.
|
|
#
?
Jul 1, 2023 20:18
|
|
|
Keromaru5 posted:As the resident Filioque denier, I actually wouldn't put it that harshly. My read of the filioque situation (which might not be 100% accurate) is that it was originally added by local Western churches to help Germanic tribes make sense of the Creed; but then in the cross-generational game of telephone that followed, everybody kind of forgot that they added it, until it got to the point where the Pope was wondering why the East wasn't using it. That's fair, and to be clear, I don't have an actual opinion on who is right about that particular theological point. I just really dislike that we treat it as an expression of theological unity across churches when it's got that big asterisk saying that yeah no it is except for this point but we're gonna pretend that it's still the creed determined at the Council of Nicea. Or, maybe put another way, an ancient mistake is still a mistake.
|
|
#
?
Jul 1, 2023 22:15
|
|
|
The idea that this is the visible marking of an old schism/doctrinal conflict makes a lot more sense than looking at the thing-in-itself.
|
|
#
?
Jul 1, 2023 23:36
|
|
|
Prurient Squid posted:I was coming back from an event in the pouring rain and I realised that everything was exactly the way I thought it was and I had a feeling of certainty that had nothing to do with being right or playing the opinion game. And then I passed a surplus stock shop with a cardboard packing box with "Zen matresses" written on the side and took it as a sign. I told the clerk about this today and he knew exactly what I meant. About a feeling of certainty without needing to make it into an opinion. It's how he feels about Quakers. e: After meeting finished I bought an umbrella! Prurient Squid fucked around with this message at 13:45 on Jul 2, 2023 |
|
#
?
Jul 2, 2023 13:39
|
|
|
[quote="Keromaru5" post="532908566"] Communion: As stated above, you have to be a full member of the Orthodox Church to receive Communion, and you can only take Communion at an Orthodox church. A Catholic church would allow me to, but Orthodoxy wouldn't. Also some Protestant churches practice a relatively open communion, so any baptized Christian can take communion there, but it'd probably get me put under a penance by my own church if I did. They don't even believe in Transubstantiation, so what would I get out of it? Oh dear, this poses a probIem for me, as my Quaker faith says that aII shared meaIs are communion with God "Do not forget to show hospitality to strangers, for by so doing some people have shown hospitality to angels without knowing it." I read this as every meaI is communion, and if someone does not feeI weIcome at my tabIe, I have commited a faiIing!
|
|
#
?
Jul 2, 2023 14:31
|
|
|
Prurient Squid posted:I told the clerk about this today and he knew exactly what I meant. About a feeling of certainty without needing to make it into an opinion. It's how he feels about Quakers. Squid, your post about that feeling of certainty reinforced by seeing a literal sign was really interesting to me; signs, auspices, omens were an important aspect of my religion when it was a modern religion, as they were for many of the religions that were its contemporaries. But nowadays -- in my experience -- seeing signs and omens is a quick way to get called crazy or, even worse, start perceiving yourself as crazy. My willingness to accept an unusual or timely sighting as a "sign" has increased over the last year and a half, but I still fight my rationality and fear of being perceived poorly for my beliefs. Tillich has been helping me address and find a peace with this: again and again in his discussion of symbols, of mysticism, of faith vs reason I am accepting that seeing, understanding, and responding to signs and symbols is part of the language of faith and how we experience it. This book has a number of sections that have aided in my untangling of my own prejudices, but here's one I got to just last night: Dynamics of Faith posted:[T]he estrangement of faith and of reason in themselves and in their mutual relationship must be overcome and their true nature and relation must be established within actual life. The experience in which this happens is a revelatory experience. The term “revelation” has been misused so much that it is difficult to use it at all, even more so than the term “reason.” Revelation is popularly understood as a divine information about divine matters, given to prophets and apostles and dictated by the divine Spirit to the writers of the Bible, or the Koran, or other sacred books. Acceptance of such divine informations, however absurd and irrational they may be, is then called faith. Every word of the present discussion contradicts this distortion of the meaning of revelation. Revelation is first of all the experience in which an ultimate concern grasps the human mind and creates a community in which this concern expresses itself in symbols of action, imagination and thought. Wherever such a revelatory experience occurs, both faith and reason are renewed. Their internal and mutual conflicts are conquered, and estrangement is replaced by reconciliation. This is what revelation means, or should mean. I quote that section to help me say that if you had that feeling of revelatory certainty, followed immediately by a sign that confirmed what you were feeling, and furthermore a community member with whom you spoke understood your interpretation of the experience as a sign -- it is my turn to speak with certainty -- you were given that knowledge with purpose. It will help guide you. One of my favorite quotes to come from my own faith is that ma'at, cosmic balance and harmony, "lies as a path in front even of he who knows nothing." Knowing that following ma'at will guide me safely forward reassures me every day. Whatever your name is for the energy that I know as ma'at, it is laying out your path for you to follow if you so choose. Dynamics of Faith also posted:Theologians sometimes have contrasted faith and mystical experience. They say the distance between faith and the ultimate can never be bridged. Mysticism tries to merge the mind with the content of its unconditional concern, with the ground of being and meaning. But this contrast has only limited validity. The mystic is aware of the infinite distance between the infinite and the finite, and accepts a life of preliminary stages of union with the infinite, interrupted only rarely, and perhaps never, in this life by the final ecstasy. And the faithful can have faith only if he is grasped by the content of his ultimate concern. Like sacramentalism, mysticism is a type of faith; and there is a mystical as well as a sacramental element in every type of faith. For me, the auspice that really hit me over the head was in April. Just about as soon as the calendar year ticked over I started getting a particular deity with Whom I had never had a relationship pointed out to me, like, a lot. A whole bunch of signs I was grudging about accepting as signs started popping up wherever She was concerned, but I was kind of holding out for lack of a better term. I managed to rationalize away every individual occurrence, even though it was getting pretty difficult to dismiss everything as a whole. Then on Earth Day I straight up got sent a white dove, Her sacred bird, a few hours after I had held a conversation with my coworker about doves in mythology, a particular God for Whom they were a symbol, and how (heretofore unrelated) I had always wanted a pet pigeon.  Check my post history for pigeon/dove pictures if you like, I wrote about him in the Bird Crazies thread a few days ago. Okay. Very well. Signs are real. I am listening.
|
|
#
?
Jul 2, 2023 16:13
|
|
|
Cyrano4747 posted:It was a post genesis 7th day joke Also I got/laughed at your joke, fear not 
|
|
#
?
Jul 2, 2023 17:04
|
|
|
I read your words LITERALLY A BIRD and I take them seriously. Thanks for your interest and your thoughts. While reading your post I bought a bunch of books. One of them the aforementioned Dynamics of Faith. The others were Biblical Religion and the Search for Ultimate Reality by Tillich and a book on Spinoza.
|
|
#
?
Jul 2, 2023 18:39
|
|
|
I hear you, poster Bird, I had a similar big experience which came after a bad car accident. Though I have less fear of being judged - I guess my exposure to Jewish habits and backgrounds makes me more comfortable with the prospect of just being secretive - I have regularly gone "well did you actually have that or did you just think you did because you were scared after the car wreck." "Hm... Could be," I've thought to myself usually, "but if I am fooling myself, what's the harm?"
|
|
#
?
Jul 2, 2023 19:00
|
|
|
LITERALLY A BIRD posted:For me, the auspice that really hit me over the head was in April. Just about as soon as the calendar year ticked over I started getting a particular deity with Whom I had never had a relationship pointed out to me, like, a lot. A whole bunch of signs I was grudging about accepting as signs started popping up wherever She was concerned, but I was kind of holding out for lack of a better term. I managed to rationalize away every individual occurrence, even though it was getting pretty difficult to dismiss everything as a whole. Then on Earth Day I straight up got sent a white dove, Her sacred bird, a few hours after I had held a conversation with my coworker about doves in mythology, a particular God for Whom they were a symbol, and how (heretofore unrelated) I had always wanted a pet pigeon. I am trying to figure out which Egyptian deity is associated with pigeons or doves and am Having Difficulty, which is most likely a skill issue on my part. I know exactly how this feels, though. There was a time in my life when I was being veritably showered with signs - people kept giving me reproductions of papyri with Isis painted on them, I was having dreams about Her, my teacher unexpectedly gave me a statue of Her, but I was sitting there with fingers in my ears going LA LA LA I CAN'T HEAR YOU. I had a deep interest in Isis but firmly believed that it would be rude to just assume the Queen of Heaven would take notice and was holding out for a particular kind of ritual where I could confirm this and meanwhile I was being metaphorically beaten on the head with a sistrum. Fun times!
|
|
#
?
Jul 2, 2023 19:38
|
|
|
"Oh, Lord, when I drowned, why did you not send me rescue?" "What are you talking about, Steve? I sent you two boats and a helicopter."
|
|
#
?
Jul 2, 2023 20:20
|
|
|
I am really glad that post was helpful, Squid -- I hope that the books you bought are too.  and Nessus, your post is in turn helpful for me; thank you. That was actually exactly the problem I was having with this God showing up in my life, Hamish -- point of origin. The Egyptian pantheon has embodied the only Divine relationship I have ever experienced in my life and I have never wanted or needed more. But I had been having similar experiences to what you describe with Aset, centered for me around Inanna/Ishtar of Mesopotamia. I don't know anything about Mesopotamian religion! Or didn't, anyway. I did learn She was syncretized with Aset at a couple points, actually, up to and including being addressed as a Queen of Heaven. So maybe showing up unexpectedly is just how the Queens roll. Once I had even decided if it was okay for me to work Ishtar into my personal religious practices I then had to figure out how, exactly, to honor Her without straying too far from the forms of worship I am used to providing. What helped me wasn't actually the Aset connection, but realizing Ishtar also had connections to Astarte -- I remembered that name, Astarte was in The Contendings as a foreign Goddess given to Set as a bride/consolation prize when Heru is declared rightful king of Egypt. I have always felt some sympathy for that Goddess, who did not seem to have much of a choice in the matter and Set seems like a jerk to me, personally. The deity I have been encountering remained most strongly identified as Ishtar, though, not Astarte, so this forced me to do a lot of thinking about syncretism in ways I had never really had to summon a personal understanding of before. How it happened, why it happened, what it really means in terms of Divine identity. Previously I have always just been able to go "oh those guys? They don't matter, They're other people's Gods." I have recently had to approach a lot of things I have held as the Truth as, perhaps, just a Truth instead. Here's a neat paper on polytheism someone sent me a little while back -- there is a part that talks about "if we believe Gods are beings with will and agency They can absolutely choose to recruit worshippers outside Their usual pool if They want" that provided a very helpful perspective for me. It sounds like you have already figured out your relationship with Aset but you may enjoy reading it anyway! https://cdn.discordapp.com/attachments/700490695886241922/1104923732805439628/amrita-university-talk.pdf Also,  at us having loosely parallel old pantheon experiences.
LITERALLY A BIRD fucked around with this message at 14:15 on Jul 4, 2023 |
|
#
?
Jul 2, 2023 20:21
|
|
|
Nessus posted:"Oh, Lord, when I drowned, why did you not send me rescue?" This comes to mind a lot.
|
|
#
?
Jul 2, 2023 20:22
|
|
|
I think the main difference is that we very much believe that the bread and wine are the Body and Blood of Christ, and take seriously St. Paul's warning about taking Communion unworthily to our own condemnation. Not that anyone can truly be worthy, but in the sense that we should recognize what it is and prepare for it with prayer, fasting, and confession. We take Communion to unite ourselves to Christ and let him deify us, and if the one receiving doesn't share the Orthodox faith, or refuses to repent of some grave sin, it's not of any benefit. Besides, even if one can't take Communion for whatever reason, all the parishes I've been have been more than happy to share the antidoron with non-Orthodox. Plus there's coffee hour. And Greek Fests and bake sales.
|
|
#
?
Jul 2, 2023 21:21
|
|
|
Exodus is where this gets good it seems. I like the staff turning into a snake.
|
|
#
?
Jul 3, 2023 10:41
|
|
|
That bit of Exodus is interesting to me. I recall it only faintly, and upon trying to Google the passage just now my work Internet filter seems to block a lot of the sites with direct Bible quotations lol, but I recall wondering about some of the implications of the confrontation. Both the Egyptian and Israelite Gods were working magic through the priests/Moses and Aaron. Even though Aaron's snake swallows the other snakes, that's still strong implication that not only were/are the Egyptian Gods real and capable of working extraordinary magic, followers of the Hebrew God were also capable of working magic through Him -- something always seen to be demonic or pagan in origin today. Speaking of snakes, an article about how their symbolism got warped as they passed between competing religions -- bonus includes another prominent Queen of Heaven figure. https://mythologymatters.wordpress.com/2014/10/06/yahwehs-divorce-from-the-goddess-asherah-in-the-garden-of-eden/ LITERALLY A BIRD fucked around with this message at 12:25 on Jul 3, 2023 |
|
#
?
Jul 3, 2023 12:21
|
|
|
Jesus commands his followers to be like snakes! Be wise as serpents but innocent as doves.
|
|
#
?
Jul 3, 2023 12:33
|
|
|
Snap, that is a really interesting piece for my "serpents in religious symbolism" puzzle. Thank you! It dovetails (pun intended!) neatly with:that article posted:Serpents were also considered wise and sources of knowledge, and thus were used in divination. (The Hebrew noun for serpent (nāḥāš) connotes divination; the verb nāḥaš means to practice divination, and observe omens/signs.) The negative aspects of snakes/serpents seem to dominate the positive ones in today's cultural awareness, and I have been interested in how that developed. Jesus emphasizing the positive aspect of the serpent is great, thank you. LITERALLY A BIRD fucked around with this message at 15:56 on Jul 3, 2023 |
|
#
?
Jul 3, 2023 12:36
|
|
|
This should really go in a Judaism thread, but this is my closest so hopefully y’all can help/point me somewhere better : Someone I know is working well in advance on a very large multi-religion holiday display and they have nuanced question about menorot : they’ve got several large menorot that they were going to light appropriately, but they also have several smaller ones in harder to reach places that are supposed to be purely decorative. The question is if it’d be offensive to just have those lit generally during the season. They can have them all on or all off, but having individually lit candles on the smaller ones wouldn’t be very practical (they’re up in weird, hard to reach places). All my Jewish friends, even the most observant ones, don’t really care about Hanukkah at all so they haven’t been helpful. I’m asking an acquaintance who works with local Orthodox communities for her thoughts but I’m sure more information would be appreciated. Anyone have any thoughts or places to dig more? Sorry again if I’m massively barking up the wrong tree. I’d rather I look like a dickhead than someone get offended down the line.
|
|
#
?
Jul 3, 2023 16:08
|
|
|
Mildly related to religion. Greta Gerwig is adapting at least two Narnia films for Netflix. Not what I would've guessed she'd do after Barbie.
|
|
#
?
Jul 3, 2023 16:19
|
|
|
LITERALLY A BIRD posted:Even though Aaron's snake swallows the other snakes, that's still strong implication that not only were/are the Egyptian Gods real and capable of working extraordinary magic, followers of the Hebrew God were also capable of working magic through Him -- something always seen to be demonic or pagan in origin today. One can see the change over time in how God is thought about in the Bible and at the beginning yeah that’s not inaccurate. It’s more obvious in the original languages the word /name of God changes over time with how God was thought about, and who is writing. Where we just see the word God without any changes unless a good translation is making it obvious.
|
|
#
?
Jul 3, 2023 16:24
|
|
|
Xiahou Dun posted:This should really go in a Judaism thread, but this is my closest so hopefully y’all can help/point me somewhere better : i'm not sure "offensive" is quite the right word but it would be immediately obvious to most jews that it wasn't jewish people who set up those decorations. personally, i would not really be bothered, that kind of thing happens all the time. but i do know some people who are particularly sensitive about that stuff and like to point it out. thats about as far as it goes though. religiously speaking, hanukkah is not a very important holiday. its a commemoration of a fairly obscure battle. its become culturally bigger because it happens at the same time as xmas and thus gives jewish kids a chance to exchange presents and do "holiday stuff". plus there's gambling! i come from a semi-secular west coast family though so you might not want to take my word for it depending on where you are.
|
|
#
?
Jul 3, 2023 18:45
|
|
|
Bar Ran Dun posted:One can see the change over time in how God is thought about in the Bible and at the beginning yeah that’s not inaccurate. It’s more obvious in the original languages the word /name of God changes over time with how God was thought about, and who is writing. Where we just see the word God without any changes unless a good translation is making it obvious. you have created an appealing opening for me to ramble about a thing i enjoy and by golly im turbo-high enough to steer my posting-barque thru aforesaid opening welcome aboard, on this barque we  so. names of god in the hebrew and christian scriptures. it's a culturally convoluted knot and also the ropes are trying to bite you. they might be eels idk im not a ropeölogist. anyway looking into the names of god is like encountering a tangled gordian knotwork of eels, each bound to the others like an aquatic rat king: youre probably drowning but at least it's interesting textually, god has an individual, personal name which in modern latin alphabet renderings is yhvh, yhwh, yahweh, jehovah, etc. but the name of god is powerful. there have been varying degrees of taboo over uttering or writing it. writing it as “lord” or “the lord” is the most common in english, but it's not a new strategy—the septuagint (e.g.) does basically the same thing. it's an established convention!! different contributors have added/subtracted/altered all sorts of things in layers over the years. the use of “el shaddai” in genesis 17 and early in exodus (as the name that abraham etc knew god as)?? probably added comparatively late, to emphasize the power of god revealing his personal name to moses. the name of god is powerful. el and elohim are the real trips, tho. both are usually translated as god but...complexly. yhvh, as mentioned, is the personal name of the god of the israelites. the phrase god of the israelites is used in christianity as a synecdoche for god, the singular divine being, but it also works as a straightforward, plain-language description of yhvh in the oldest layers of the text. yhvh was the name of the national god of the israelites, treated henotheďstically or monolatrously by the text but not necessarily by the israelites the text is describing. the israelites are canaanites/phoenicians, they know and respect other gods to the degree that the text repeatedly and emphatically demands that they stop worshiping them. sometimes it's telling them that the national gods of other ethnic groups are bozos and only jerks would worship a bozo, sometimes it's night vandalism. anyway, enough about that for the moment; now i need to complain about this piece of poo poo paper. do not read this paper. it is exceedingly bad. the author seems completely unaware that ugaritic exists. he treats el as strictly a personal name but treats its ostensible plural as a common word. sorry bucko, that isnt how words roll!! el is a word that can variously refer to a god (generally) or to a specific god. like this is decently attested in both directions: we got poo poo talking about el the specific guy (not not baal); and we got the entire corpus of the language and several related languages dating all the way back to akkadians swiping the sumerian 𒀭 to write il/ilu, a word meaning god so loving hard that prepending it to a name (or even a fairly bland word, like namtar [fate, or specifically an ill fate; unrelated to the character from the early farscape ep dna mad scientist, whose name was merely ratman backward, as the character was a very large, manlike space rat]) is how you indicate a divine entity in text. i told you that el was a trip!! the upshot of this is that you need to deploy context clues really hard to figuring out if an el is referring to el the divinity, or el a divinity. thankfully, you dont have to check if it means el the idea of divinity broadly, because that's one of the ways elohim is here to vex us. elohim datasheet:
and that's enough about elohim imo. twistier than el but good gravy, check out this el action: it's uncontroversial to say that el the ugaritic top god and yhwh the natl god of the israelites became conflated, and baal the [gestures expansively] general canaanite god shares a great deal w both. all three end up marrying asherah, which just makes me think that it was generally assumed that a male pantheon head would be matched w the queen of heaven. that yahweh/asherah link is so well known that this is literally a picture from wikipedia's yahweh article (see below)  fig. 1 literally a picture from wikipedia anyway im getting sidetracked. baal famously smacks yam, the sea, around. this is loosely like babylonian natl god marduk walloping tiamat but i will argue that there is a critical distinction in how we should understand yam and tiamat that lines up along a yam/tehom line, and i will argue it so forcefully that you will quite simply lose interest in engaging my points sincerely. but check out how neatly that subdual of the sea jazz lines up w the actions concerning the sea that the god of the israelites undertakes: gates it up, sets its boundaries, etc. gives job respite from the sea (which job thought a fine medium to escape god), and really only is said to create leviathan (so far as i recall) in psalm 104, which does not and cannot count because it is a lightly-massaged egyptian prayer altered to refer to yhvh. worth noting that god moves over the face of the deep: tehom. the tiamat word!! speaking of tiamat, yhvh absorbing traits of other gods as he rose in prominence isnt some specifically predatory thing or even particular to the israelites. apropos tiamat, check out the enűma elish and watch marduk, the babylonian natl god, take any divine traits that arent nailed down or enki's long story short, it's difficult to say what el shaddai means because no one has a convincing idea of what shaddai means. the name of god still has some unrevealed power, i guess. i hope you have enjoyed my boat, and these eels
|
|
#
?
Jul 4, 2023 04:51
|
|
|
Elohim? I hardly know him!
|
|
#
?
Jul 4, 2023 05:05
|
|
|
I gotta admit that at a certain point when reading that I began to read it as being about the House of El, aka Superman's family on Krypton; that said, you could do worse than imagining Superman in these contexts.
|
|
#
?
Jul 4, 2023 06:47
|
|
|
Squizzle posted:you have created an appealing opening for me to ramble about a thing i enjoy and by golly im turbo-high enough to steer my posting-barque thru aforesaid opening 
|
|
#
?
Jul 4, 2023 12:19
|
|
|
Three Teachings of Wu Hsin (Non-Duality) https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aWlduIKlJQQ
|
|
#
?
Jul 4, 2023 13:09
|
|
|
1) hi squizzle 2) that post owns 3) so YHWH gets used a lot in, like, """""contemporary""""""""" episcopal liturgies (meaning written like 30+ years ago lol) but i dont think i'll ever be able to fully stop the substitution when i officiate or w/e (adonai, hashem, etc) 4) the development of the current Big G-God is fascinating to me because i love syncretism. i made a (not incredibly controversial but still eyebrow-raising) comment on how politically savvy it was for both jesus and the later apostles to utilize Torah and the oral stories in order to make this new jewish weirdo sect seem appealing. then i got to tell a bunch of old ppl that there's... been one than more messiah? (sort of) and that was a trip. ive been in an incredibly low-mood state for the last two weeks or so so i've not been up on my reading &c but i feel like i wanna know more about david haMelech and how he completely lost the plot (i love david, he's like Leto II)
|
|
#
?
Jul 4, 2023 17:49
|
|
|
Prurient Squid posted:Three Teachings of Wu Hsin (Non-Duality) edit: oh poo poo, Squid, i've been reading a lot about non dualism and its influences on the eight circuit model of consciousness (yes, i know, i know -- but its interesting and a cool paradigm to think about how we're built imo shut up). do y'all here in the thread feel that non-dualism is a worthwhile thing to think about, and if so, does it cross ways w/yr current faith experience?
|
|
#
?
Jul 4, 2023 17:53
|
|
|
Nessus posted:I gotta admit that at a certain point when reading that I began to read it as being about the House of El, aka Superman's family on Krypton; that said, you could do worse than imagining Superman in these contexts. i mean close enough to be merely mistaken instead of wrongheaded an entirely accurate img of my posting station sinnesloeschen posted:1) hi squizzle adonai is one of my favs. while attested before, it significantly rises in prominence as a title for the god of the israelites, during the hellenized af second temple period.......when adonis-centric mystery religions would have been significant cultural presences, and would have been one popular and two eerily familiar to anyone familiar w canaanite tammuz veneration. i dont think it was an intentional “well this word is ours now so we can pretend everyone loves our god” but i do think adonis/persephone was strong influence from being a major cultural presence
|
|
#
?
Jul 4, 2023 18:35
|
|
|
another thing that baal and el have in common is their “the dude” naming strategy
|
|
#
?
Jul 4, 2023 18:36
|
|
|
Squizzle posted:i mean 
|
|
#
?
Jul 4, 2023 18:56
|
|
|
Nessus posted:Indeed. So it is written: monument mythos-rear end origin story
|
|
#
?
Jul 5, 2023 00:34
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 3, 2024 13:33 |
|
|
My copy of Dynamics of Faith arrived.
|
|
#
?
Jul 5, 2023 10:54
|
|