Gods different from other superpowered beings

Please don't call pagan gods assholes. Some people actually follow them, and there are MANY gods that most people would deem "nice," "compassionate," or "reasonable."

edited 5th Sep '15 8:40:06 PM by Sharysa

Just because someone believes in a god that doesn't make that god free from criticism, even if that someone thinks said god is really nice and reasonable and compassionate and just plain misunderstood desu.

edited 6th Sep '15 1:51:15 AM by Eagal

Sorry for getting defensive. In my experience, the Double Standard regarding "pagan gods are incomprehensible bastards, but Capital-G God is COMPASSIONATE and REASONABLE" is annoying because everyone intentionally ignores that Capital-G God has plenty of moments where he's just as overbearing and vicious as his pagan counterparts. Especially in the Old Testament.

If Christians can adapt the Bible's tenets to modern-day society without anyone batting an eye, why is anyone surprised that modern pagans do the same thing?

Back on subject: The comparison of gods to kings is a very good point to take in mind, especially since kings often claimed divine right to strengthen their rule. Either they themselves were descended from gods, or the gods allowed them to kill the previous king, who was probably claiming divine descent in turn.

edited 6th Sep '15 11:17:36 AM by Sharysa

" everyone intentionally ignores that Capital-G God has plenty of moments where he's just as overbearing and vicious as his pagan counterparts. Especially in the Old Testament."

Nobody here is saying this right now, many people here now the abrahamic god is...strange to said the least and even I post the same thing a few post in this thread so calm down.

"If Christians can adapt the Bible's tenets to modern-day society without anyone batting an eye, why is anyone surprised that modern pagans do the same thing?"

You dont see much christian comunities dosent it? who they aplie their scripture into a modern day is a huge thing around them: from conservative saying they sold out,liberal christian saying the other are nutjobs,cafeteria catholic(the christian version of fluffy bunny which for some reason people have more sympathy....I ask why...)

But anyway, back on topic:

"The comparison of gods to kings is a very good point to take in mind, especially since kings often claimed divine right to strengthen their rule. Either they themselves were descended from gods, or the gods allowed them to kill the previous king, who was probably claiming divine descent in turn."

Or in the case of china, they said throne was giving by gods itself so if a ruler was bad, the gods clearly withdraw their blessing and he was kick out.

But in that case, why god have king on their own? would you consider Zeus,Odin,Ra king or more "primer inter pares"? I just find the idea of god having king being absurd as a hole consider how powerfull being thei are in the first place

It's not in this particular thread, but a lot of Christians in America are really quick to mention that the Old Testament is "the product of a different time and society" or something.

On-topic: Gods tend to have kings of their pantheon because the king of the gods serves as an Ultimate God that people pray to for REALLY important things.

That said more of america than this thread, dosent it?

And more important? now sacred hospitality is important thing for the greeks(it pretty much kickstar the war on troy) but thunder?....why? a least Ra is consistent(kind of)

In my setting, I consider anything with sentience to count as a god to a universe if they are...

1. ...the creator of it (comparable to a video game's programmer).

2. ...not within it, but still able to interact with it from outside (comparable to a video game's player).

3. ...a collection of its natural laws (comparable to a section of video game code).

This is for a setting where different universes have different sets of natural laws and can interact with one another in different ways. There will be creatures that are far from super powered but will be called gods by people in the right universe.

edited 7th Sep '15 2:16:10 PM by MarkerMage

Which tie back as the idea of god as a title giving by mortal as a proper definition for them.

In my case God are just part of reallity, like a face for it, almost like a software of a computer with mortal just being random AI if you want it.

The word "god" descends from one meaning "to invoke", so a god is anything you address prayers to, technically.

If I wanted to write a story rooted in Vodoun, for example, I'd depict the "gods" as superheroes who can hear prayers and answer those that fall into their jurisdictions. That would mean every ghost was a low-level superhero, too, because many ghosts become "gods" over time in this tradition. So, basically, Scion.

edited 8th Sep '15 9:03:39 PM by nekomoon14

I think gods would be "of something". God of flies, god of sea, god of Earth. They would be entities associated with something, and that if they were killed this whole something would go down with them, Fisher King style. I know some religions have an unique god for all things, but we need a strict definition.

Sound logic.

Perhaps the definition of a god is "a being who's recognized as a god, is worshiped through some form of ritual, and has a certain amount of control over their accepted sphere(s) of influence."

In my setting, strictly speaking, worship is the only thing necessary to be considered a god.

But the main pantheon of gods, being nigh-omnipotent extra-dimensional beings of vague origin who created the universe, most closely fit the bill for what is commonly considered a god and, lovely people that they are, are rather cliquey (how is that a word?!?!?) and don't take kindly to prattling mortals, or even immortal spirits that are otherwise inferior to them in terms of power, who aspire to be their peers.

Well, the reason why my gods are like that is because it follows Real Life history until a certain point in 1995, where Boris Ieltsin makes a very, very bad decision...If my gods depended on worshipping, they would be dead or dying because of Jesus Christ, Mohammad and Buddha...

edited 11th Sep '15 4:06:36 PM by MeetTheNewBoss

"God. He is the Great Exception to every rule, even the contradictory ones. Especially the contradictory ones."

That is because the abrahamic god is the literaly sense of the word: a damn mary sue.

I meant the pagan gods are falliable, sometimes very assholish while in the theory the abrahamic god is perfect: he can do anything,beat anything, be as distant or clost as you need, and there is nothing you cant do about it, is like a superman fanfiction play complete serious manner

"I think the bigger issue is how so many Fantasy writers and readers insist on everything in their stories making pure, logical sense."

Because usually and too put it blunly, sometimes religion dosent have damn sense, there is to many version,sect or retelling about the same thing, went you show gods are real...well, it dosent happen anymore, with D&D they take all the mystery on gods, they are marvel/dc hero who need people to kept their mojo, I prefer more warhammer in that way.

anyway, I will anser more of this in the thread "your religion" I did time go on how I tocuh this subject.

I suppose a distinction would be made of a scale of sentience and possibility of manifesting in the material realm.

To elaborate, on the one hand we have Physical Gods, beings far more powerful than mortals (Note that this also applies to superheros and in fact there are notable overlaps). But are known to be just as sentient as mortals.

At the other end, we have the more abstract gods. Metaphysical beings that work In Mysterious Ways that may or may not be sentient at all, being a concept rather then a being, and manifesting as phenomena more then than as a sapient form.

Incoming spoilers(?)

Of course this is more of a sliding scale thing because of several cases of mortals attaining godhood. Examples include the various heroes of Greek Mythology, Herakles in particular. as well as Madoka Kaname. But the circumstances are different. In Herakles' case he was already a demigod and when he gained his godhood he stayed a Physical God. Madoka on the other hand became an abstract concept of Hope and AFAIK the jury is still out if she was still conscious as the Law of Cycles before the events of Rebellion.

All in all Physcial Gods can be seen as supernatural beings, one step below metaphysical gods. But it is more of a question of semantics, metaphysics and philosophy.

(Also regarding Greeks, there might be an overlap depending on the God or their children, the Hesperides for example are seen as abstract beings, or symbols of the gift of their apples. The same might apply to other mythologies)

edited 21st Sep '15 9:26:57 PM by MorningStar1337

I'd say it's less of two distinct divisions and more like a sliding scale of physical gods to metaphysical gods. I think a lot of the pantheons like the Greek/Romans played around with this a lot, with one day them being ordinary superpowered assholes and the next them starting to defy logic and whatnot.

Basically, the more physical a god is, the more they actually have to physically put in a logical, "scientific" (I say the term loosely) connection between action and response. So like Zeus might carve out a crater by hitting it really hard with a thunderbolt. That's physical, he created an explosion that made the crater. If we assume he has those abilities to begin with, then he can do that.

On the flipside, say Hera puts eyes in Peacocks. That... doesn't really make any logical sense outside of the loose fable logic that most similar legends operate on. It's the level that's more abstract than just cause-response, one that doesn't always have to make sense beyond just what happened.

So it also depends on what you want as a god. Do you want someone that's worshiped and uber powerful? Well Superman himself could probably fit the bill better than a lot of other contestants. Do you want more of an abstract god? Well then you start shifting towards reality warping and dream logic and doing what the fuck you want because you can and it works because you say it works. And of course there are scales inbetween, after all a completely physical god would probably just be a man and a completely abstract god isn't much more than just a really strong feeling.

Actually you're right on it being a sliding scale. Which is why mortals can become gods and why demigods exists (as well as the examples I cited).

I supposed the next question would if gods really do need prayer badly to exist or stay powerful if they are physical or not.

edited 22nd Sep '15 3:16:19 AM by MorningStar1337

Hm. Terry Pratchett's SmallGods and MonstrousRegiment go into how that might work...

Basically, Gods Need Prayer Badly is pretty much the only effective check on that level of power, and from a writing perspective it's pretty much required that a character have some sort of palpable weakness^note In this case, the "palpable" thing is relative and relies on decent writing to really allow a mortal reader to understand it fully - we don't have a ready equivalent to being on "faith support" to really feel like an actual being.

Arguably a large part of the more abstract gods is that they aren't really "characters" in the same sense that the more physical gods are. So when you put down such an easy quantifiable weakness like that you're limiting them in a strong way, and honestly it just might be easier to just make them a bit more physical than defeating the purpose of why they are abstracted.

True. Problem is, the more abstract a god is, the harder it is to use them as a character or plot device (there's not much difference between a fully abstracted god and an Ass Pull). Even a single weakness helps pin them down as much as anything.

Then again, I'm areligious. I have trouble conceptualizing something so inherently abstract as a deity to begin with, so I have to resort to storytelling techniques... which is how these gods have historically been communicated to the masses anyway, so I don't think I'm too far off the mark.

& So out of curiosity, what is your take on Yahweh then. He is immune to Gods Need Prayer Badly, is not a Physical God, and has no weaknesses, and yet is as much a character as he is a plot device. Do you view him as an abstract being or as just another character?

Abstract being who can't be arsed to take direct action Himself after a certain point. He's so poorly written that the author has to create a whole 'nother character just so other people in the story have someone to interact with directly - and people pretty much universally like the new character better!

(But yeah, totally taking the piss on this one. No one take it as a direct insult, please.)

edited 29th Sep '15 12:47:53 PM by DeusDenuo

Interesting. Then again, The Bible was not written for entertainment value.

What makes him poorly written?

edited 29th Sep '15 3:50:55 PM by shiro_okami

Inconsistent characterization probably, you do have to question how he went from flooding the earth for a month and more than a week to helping an oppressed group escape Egypt to testing one mans fate by letting his supposed arch enemy give him a Deus Angst Machina to incarnating himself as the aforementioned new character meant to die for everyone sins (Though that might be interpreted to include his own).

That inconsistencies isn't limited to him, the 4 Gospels had this as a selling point (It was meant to appeal to different audiences). The fact that there are 4 religions based around Yahweh (Judaism, the original religion, Islam and Christianity, sects based on Judaism with own own sects and Mormonism, one of said sects had its own canon, much like Islam and Christianity had its own canon differing from the Old Testament. As well as Gnosticism which gave rise to the concept of the Demiurge and seems to had been associated with the Abrahamic religions) means that Alternate Character Interpretation is also an issue.

There might be other issues with the writing but this is the only one I can think of and it might not be Deus Denuo's issues with the writing anyway.

edited 29th Sep '15 10:05:07 PM by MorningStar1337