The General Religion, Mythology, and Theology Thread

Arch-Catholics who had other things on their plate roughly at that time too, mind, re: the fighting against Moors in Spain. Ergo, people who must have been damn convinced that 1, the trip could be a success and 2, that success could help them, to give Columbus the time of day, much less their money and patronage.

They funded him after they won from their pillaged gold.

"The Catholic Monarchs, probably themost zealous Catholic rulers around at the time."

A lot of Italians would vehemently dispute this. The Trastamaras were allegedly pirates with a throne.

Figures. If they weren't sure there was gold (or silver, or heck something) to be plundered, they wouldn't have agreed at all.

I remember reading that Columbus was the biggest gamble the Catholic Monarchs took as they also had some debts with the Italian bankers. That Columbus managed to succeed to find lands even richer than what the Vikings found before was their greatest stroke of luck.

Which is ironic, considering that it was the italians (sicilians) who asked the Crown of Aragon to get involved and overthrow the Capet monarchs.

Edited by raziel365 on Apr 16th 2019 at 10:25:50 AM

Weird question perhaps, but I figured I might as well throw it out there:

Let's say you're not religious per se, but something unexpectedly positive just happened in your life and you suddenly feel a need to perform some kind of "to-whom-it-may-concern" or "just-in-case" thank you ritual, how would you go about doing that?

I would say: pay it forward.

If something unexpectedly good happens to you and you feel the need to do something in exchange because otherwise it feels unearned, you can always choose to do something nice for someone else without expecting compensation.

Not only do you then retroactively 'earn' your good fortune, but theologically speaking most benevolent conceptions of a higher power would consider doing good for others as a result of their blessing to be suitable recompense.

Edited by Robrecht on Apr 20th 2019 at 9:40:00 PM

I'm a Christian, so assuming for a moment you know that whole sphiel and perspective. What I would probably do is figure out what the event is worth to me, not in terms of money, but in terms of time and effort and then put that into some way of giving back to the community. There are always places looking for volunteers.

Theology, skip if uninterested. At the base question if "What does God want from me?" Other then I feel like the obvious within Christianity of a relationship with you. There is how God wants to live your life. YMMV on the specific prescriptions of behavior, but to me it's clear that God wants us to not look out for ourselves, but also each other. Not just on an abstract money level, but much more importantly on a personal level of what we do in our day to day lives. Someone can give a lot of money, but not be involved. Indeed for many people giving money is a way to keep from having to get personally involved.

Oh and from my perspective getting involved is nice, but should be what you do in response to having a relationship rather then a replacement for it.

Edited by Soban on Apr 20th 2019 at 3:48:19 PM

If you're interested in thanking supernatural help, with a psychology that's even remotely human-like... well, picture it like this: kind people, upon having helped another, will appreciate a sincere "thank you", but will be uncomfortable if you overdo it. Those that, in exchange for their help, expects you to turn back and grovel on your knees, that crave praise, worship, obedience, submission, self-abasement, that you love them more than your family, that you put them before everything else in your life, things like that... they may not be worth your time. Look for one that did you good out of sheer gratuitous benevolence, and then bring a smile to their face by taking the opportunity to be gratuitously benevolent yourself when it comes before you.

Be creative about it, like a Boy Scout seeking their Good Deed of the Day; look for the opportunities. I particularly recommend that you get personally involved in a long-term commitment with an organization dealing with a problem that is dear to your heart, with a systemic approach. Find the role where your skills are the most useful.

Edited by Oruka on Apr 20th 2019 at 1:40:06 AM

Oh hey, it's my favourite Anarcho-Communist playing up his southern heritage to reach the preppers, Justin King.

That he is. Recently he did a Q&A explaining how he used to downplay his heritage and his accent for the sake of being taken seriously, but accidentally found out that, when he made videos in his original accent, the audience was bigger and the attention more keen, so he stuck to what helped him get his message out.

But we're going off-topic.

Actually, I have a sincere question: do y'all know of any interventionist, theist deity, that one may credit for a stroke of good luck, but that doesn't demand worship or being treated as your Lord and Master? One that believes "good deeds are its own rewards" applies to itself?

Not outside D&D campaigns, no. Religion has been a political tool for almost as long as the concept existed. Gods that do not demand worship and submission have no purpose in that context.

What Kayeka said, as far as I know (not that I'm an expert). You might see gods that are humble as members of a pantheon, like Hestia or something, but you need a proud go-getter god somewhere to credit for stuff or your religion's basically dead in the water. If someone narrowly misses getting hit by a cart and starts loudly thanking all the gods they know, and you come over and interject "Ah, but it could also have been the work of Hypothetica, she whose miracles are indistinguishable from coincidence and who doesn't really care if you thank her or not!", you're going to get a confused look at most, not a new convert.

Basically, if the act is indistinguishable from something that could have happened naturally, the beneficiary of the good luck has no reason to assume it's divine intervention unless they already believe in the proposed humble god, or they're told that they were helped because of the humble god. In the former case, they already do honor and praise the humble god, meaning the god gets its adulation anyway; and in the latter case, telling someone you did a good deed for them while also insisting you don't need any recognition for it is hypocritical and makes you look kind of scummy.

And all of that's just assuming the god even actually exists. If it doesn't, then the religion is a fabrication made to wield societal influence... whose message is that there is no reason to feel beholden to the fabrication at all. It's self-defeating.

A very open-ended question gets framed and extrapolated in very specific ways. I'm going to be more specific later, but, for now, imagine that your GM has made you do a "Perceive" roll, and then said "nothing happened, carry on".

Are there pools of water about? Because if pools of water... I bet aboleth. If no pools of water... start worrying that you might have annoyed/ caught the interest of a sphinx, couatl, a powerful fey or lich. Or, worse; a bored dragon with a scrying orb/ their own prying abilities.

If in doubt, blame the Warlock. Or Rogue.

Edited by Euodiachloris on Apr 21st 2019 at 10:57:40 AM

So I just came back from church, my Easter Service was pretty typical for my church. We obviously prayed for the people suffering in Sri Lanka, the sermon touched on the idea of environmental rebirth, it has a person story from the vicar about renewing a run down green space in London and basically talked about how we have a duty to try and renew the earth and heal the environmental damage done to it.

It also touched on recent environmental protests in London, saying that while breaking the law is wrong, it’s understandable in the face of such environmental harm (to both younger generals and the developing world) and that sometimes it has to be done to bring about change, such as votes for women and civil rights in the US. Also how while sure protests were inconvenient for commuters, people in the third world dying to environmental disasters are suffering much more and they’re not the ones causing climate change. Then we had a bit about how the former arch-bishop fo Canterbury has said that as Christians it is out duty to hold government to account and ensure that it works to protect those who need protection, regulate companies that pollute and that we (keep in mind that this is a rural middle-class church) may need to accept a lesser standard of living so as to help younger generations and people in the developing world.

As always the C in Co E can also stand for Communist.

Your priest is

Communism wasn't particularly friendly to the environment though. Rapid ill-thought out industrialization isn't all that great for the ecosystem. To say nothing of how badly it fucks up the agriculture, leaving a lot of people hungry.

<cough>Great Leap Forward<cough>

Edited by M84 on Apr 21st 2019 at 8:24:30 PM

@Corvidae: check out The Seven Lucky Gods.

Otherwise Karma.

Edited by DeMarquis on Apr 21st 2019 at 8:28:03 AM

The joke doesn’t work if I say anarcho-communist. But yes, communist governments have a bad history of environmentalism, I’ve got an essay on the subject somewhere.

This is pretty standard for my church, we’ve had sermons on how income inequality is evil, how Jesus treated women on their period with respect and not as if they were unclean, and on how reading the bible literally is dangerous.

Also the vicar has commented to me about how own experiences seeing the evils of the Shah of Iran before the Iranian revolution.

@Oruka

Not that I know of, but I think there is a "My burden is light" argument to be made for Christianity.

Arguably, nembutsu practice in Pure Land Buddhism would qualify in a limited degree. By merely chanting "Namu Amida Butsu" you more or less can save yourself, regardless whether you believe or not. The reasoning coming from the doctrine of mappo, where humans in this degenerate age are incapable of achieving enlightenment by their own power (jiriki) and must put their faith in an outer one (tariki). Amida Buddha has merely made this possible, rather than expecting any actual gains (being a bodhisattva). Although this is an oversimplification.

On a more practical level, this is the reason why it also spread so quickly among the regular people, who did not have the ability nor time to study Buddhism in any real detail.

Edited by TerminusEst on Apr 21st 2019 at 7:45:03 AM

Pure Land Buddhism kind of undercut the whole foundation of Japanese Buddhism, yeah. The original worldview was cruel and unreasonable by design (with several million years in hell more or less guaranteed just by living your life) to convince people to study, so the addition of a way to escape the cycle while also getting as long as you wanted to study, hang out with your previously-deceased family and loved ones, and even ask the Buddhas themselves if you had questions? It makes sense why it spread so fast.

That would be Jodo Shinshu specifically (should've clarified), the other Pure Land sects had the same basic shared cosmology (all the hells etc.). Shinran radically altered the base assumptions.

So it still isn't standard per say, although still the largest individual sect in Japan.

Edited by TerminusEst on Apr 21st 2019 at 8:51:23 AM

Now I know where that line from Ninja Slayer came from...

Edited by Oruka on Apr 21st 2019 at 8:59:24 AM

I've actually been reading up a little on Shinran and his fellows for work (not too much deeper than Wikipedia), and he seems like he was a really cool guy, actually. Certainly one of the sect founders who actually practiced humility.