Could the Gods of Ancient Greek Mythology Still Have Resonance Today?

[fiat lux]

When I read;
'Of the three Fates, Clotho sits with her spindle and whorl, twisting and spinning out the thread that is assigned for every creature from birth to death. At her left hand, her sister Lachesis, the dispassionate apportioner, marks the length of the thread. By their side stands the implacable Atropos, ready to cut the thread at the chosen point and bring a life to an end. Just as the Fates determine the length of mortal life, so also the ancient goddesses decide how long prosperity, health and peace are to last.

And know this: if the length of a life is already determined, men must act with courage, for they will die anyway when it is their time.'

Given that all religions contain metaphor, doesn't this still reverberate today?

 

[jonathan180iq]

It absolutely does - I am actually quite intrigued that these arguments aren't made more often when debating religions on this forum.

The fact is, the arguments made to define the existence and prevalence of any deity on this forum can be used to define the existence and prevalence of Zeus and Hera, who seem to be globally accepted as not being "real"... Once someone understands the theology of the ancient Greeks, then their apologetics are just as valid as those for all of the modern day mythologies, aren't they?

I'd challenge any theist to disprove the concept of the fates - they're just as legitimate as the concept of anything found in the anthologies of the Monotheists

 

[Jainarayan]

...]And know this: if the length of a life is already determined, men must act with courage, for they will die anyway when it is their time.'

Watched recently The 13th Warrior, you did? The Norns also spin and weave the fabric of one's life (the quote about the All-Father weaving the skein of life was a misquote), but it is not immutable. Even on a finished article of clothing, one can always sew a patch or decoration, or tailor it. I don't believe karma is fixed either. Though they are governed in some way, I believe that all these concepts are extremely fluid, and thread through many cultures (no pun intended, really).

 

[Quintessence]

Just so you know, Hellenic polytheism is alive and well.

 

[Jainarayan]

Just so you know, Hellenic polytheism is alive and well.

Until I started hanging out around Pagan sites, I had no idea. I thought of it the way I thought of Germanic Heathenry... dead as a door nail. Apparently almost all forms of ancient polytheism and Paganism are alive and kicking.

 

[Quintessence]

Until I started hanging out around Pagan sites, I had no idea. I thought of it the way I thought of Germanic Heathenry... dead as a door nail. Apparently almost all forms of ancient polytheism and Paganism are alive and kicking.

Most people don't know, and I'm kind of okay with that most of the time.

Especially when I think about the fact that while you'd be hard-pressed to introduce teaching Biblical mythology in public schools, most (perhaps all) public schools do some sort of unit on Pagan mythologies. There's all this freaking out about being secular in public schools, and yet we flagrantly discuss Pagan religion whenever we do a literary unit on Pagan mythologies. It's terribly, terribly amusing to me.

 

[Jainarayan]

Most people don't know, and I'm kind of okay with that most of the time.

Especially when I think about the fact that while you'd be hard-pressed to introduce teaching Biblical mythology in public schools, most (perhaps all) public schools do some sort of unit on Pagan mythologies. There's all this freaking out about being secular in public schools, and yet we flagrantly discuss Pagan religion whenever we do a literary unit on Pagan mythologies. It's terribly, terribly amusing to me.

What I think is further amusing, at least in my own twisted and warped world is that it's planting the seeds for a new crop of little Pagans in spite and in the face of all the evangelization (or so I hope ).

 

[LegionOnomaMoi]

Once someone understands the theology of the ancient Greeks

They had none. They didn't even have a word for "religion", nor does our word "religion" correspond to anything like Greek religion. Greek (and indeed religion in antiquity in general) was fundamentally a matter of practice, involved little or no systems of beliefs or doctrine, and the same cults varied widely from village to village and city to city. Most of those who haven't studied classics or ancient history understand Greek religion in terms of its creation by primarily 19th century arm-chair historians who, unable to fathom a religion that didn't involve a system of beliefs or some form of doctrine or at least a somewhat coherent "mythology", combed through Homer, Hesiod, Livy, Plutarch, Virgil, Ovid, etc., to create Greco-Roman mythology out of sources that ranged from important received myth to comedy and indeed sacrilege (Ovid, whose works were among the most used to create the modern notions of Greco-Romon religion, was not only writing comedic stories but prodding and poking the new regime, which got him in no small amount of trouble).

I have referred to Bremmer (whose study and work on Greek religion in particular is unsurpassed) more than once here, but it bears repeating. In fact, one need not go very far into one of Bremmer's seminal works (Greek Religion) to find how far the modern conception of Greek religion is from how Greeks understood it, as he describes for example the way in which Herodotus not only refers to various "religions" but how he is forced to: in terms of the deities worshiped and what the practices of such worship entails. He had no word "religion" to use, and the concept would have been utterly foreign.

 

[jonathan180iq]

They had none. They didn't even have a word for "religion", nor does our word "religion" correspond to anything like Greek religion. Greek (and indeed religion in antiquity in general) was fundamentally a matter of practice, involved little or no systems of beliefs or doctrine, and the same cults varied widely from village to village and city to city. Most of those who haven't studied classics or ancient history understand Greek religion in terms of its creation by primarily 19th century arm-chair historians who, unable to fathom a religion that didn't involve a system of beliefs or some form of doctrine or at least a somewhat coherent "mythology", combed through Homer, Hesiod, Livy, Plutarch, Virgil, Ovid, etc., to create Greco-Roman mythology out of sources that ranged from important received myth to comedy and indeed sacrilege (Ovid, whose works were among the most used to create the modern notions of Greco-Romon religion, was not only writing comedic stories but prodding and poking the new regime, which got him in no small amount of trouble).

I have referred to Bremmer (whose study and work on Greek religion in particular is unsurpassed) more than once here, but it bears repeating. In fact, one need not go very far into one of Bremmer's seminal works (Greek Religion) to find how far the modern conception of Greek religion is from how Greeks understood it, as he describes for example the way in which Herodotus not only refers to various "religions" but how he is forced to: in terms of the deities worshiped and what the practices of such worship entails. He had no word "religion" to use, and the concept would have been utterly foreign.

hmmm, I'll read up.

 

[gsa]

They had none. They didn't even have a word for "religion", nor does our word "religion" correspond to anything like Greek religion. Greek (and indeed religion in antiquity in general) was fundamentally a matter of practice, involved little or no systems of beliefs or doctrine, and the same cults varied widely from village to village and city to city. Most of those who haven't studied classics or ancient history understand Greek religion in terms of its creation by primarily 19th century arm-chair historians who, unable to fathom a religion that didn't involve a system of beliefs or some form of doctrine or at least a somewhat coherent "mythology", combed through Homer, Hesiod, Livy, Plutarch, Virgil, Ovid, etc., to create Greco-Roman mythology out of sources that ranged from important received myth to comedy and indeed sacrilege (Ovid, whose works were among the most used to create the modern notions of Greco-Romon religion, was not only writing comedic stories but prodding and poking the new regime, which got him in no small amount of trouble).

I have referred to Bremmer (whose study and work on Greek religion in particular is unsurpassed) more than once here, but it bears repeating. In fact, one need not go very far into one of Bremmer's seminal works (Greek Religion) to find how far the modern conception of Greek religion is from how Greeks understood it, as he describes for example the way in which Herodotus not only refers to various "religions" but how he is forced to: in terms of the deities worshiped and what the practices of such worship entails. He had no word "religion" to use, and the concept would have been utterly foreign.

This is very similar to what I have read about the creation of "Hinduism," which can now be said to constitute a religion. But isn’t it overstating the case to claim that there were not beliefs about the gods? How would the practice of interpretatio graeca work if there was no belief about the functionality of gods? Or for that matter how does this account for the apparent belief in divine wrath and punishment?

There’s no doubt that it was not as coherent as the later monotheistic religions (which were also not initially monotheistic and bore a much closer resemblance to traditional polytheistic pantheons).

 

[LegionOnomaMoi]

But isn’t it overstating the case to claim that there were not beliefs about the gods?

Of course. One can't believe in something without believing something about it. What was lacking was a belief-system or doctrine and what existed was something that was almost entirely a matter of practice/actions that permeated all spheres of life (and was indistinguishable from them).

Or for that matter how does this account for the apparent belief in divine wrath and punishment?

Hubris & Nemesis. Yes. However, there was no coherent formulation of this concept (which was largely literary or performative) and was also largely independent of the closest thing we can come to "religion". Certain beliefs like this were somewhat akin to modern superstitions: they were based upon notions relating to religion in certain ways but were basically quite distinct from them.

There’s no doubt that it was not as coherent as the later monotheistic religions (which were also not initially monotheistic and bore a much closer resemblance to traditional polytheistic pantheons).

And even monotheistic religions, while closer to the modern conception of religion, lacked fundamental components. For an in-depth study on the development of the modern conception, see e.g.,
Harrison, P. (1990). 'Religion'and the Religions in the English Enlightenment. Cambridge University Press.

 

[GoodbyeDave]

They didn't even have a word for "religion"

Neither did the Egyptians; nor do modern Chinese and Japanese. Think about how you use the word: almost always to talk about a plurality of religions: his religion as opposed to hers, the religions in a specific country, etc. The need for a word for religion comes in when you get invented religions with mutually contradictory definitions. In a society which practices its ancestral religion, the usual assumption is that religion is what everyone does. The ancient Greek who emigrated to India just worshiped in the local temples; an Indian on this site told me that if he were taken back in a time machine, he'd have no problem in worshiping in a Greek temple.

Greek (and indeed religion in antiquity in general) was fundamentally a matter of practice, involved little or no systems of beliefs or doctrine

It is true that all paganism is a matter of ritual practice, but every ritual conveys belief — and actually does so more effectively than merely reading or hearing about it would. For instance, the Greeks venerated their ancestors with libations and offerings. That tells us that they did not believe in reincarnation as a normal occurrence, as does the fact that classical authors comment on the fact that Pythagoreans did believe in it. Before dinner tonight I made offerings to my household gods, just as my ancient predecessors did. That implies that I believe in their existence and the fact that it is possible to interact with them: that I'm not an atheist or deist.

If you can tear yourself from Bremmer, I recommend Evan Zuesse's Ritual cosmos. It's about African religion, but a very good discussion of the nature of ritual and the symbolism involved.

 

[dgirl1986]

There are many pagans and atheist pagans who do not believe in literal gods but see them as symbolic or metaphors for life and it can still be relevant.

 

[LegionOnomaMoi]

Neither did the Egyptians; nor do modern Chinese and Japanese. Think about how you use the word: almost always to talk about a plurality of religions: his religion as opposed to hers, the religions in a specific country, etc.

That isn't the fundamental distinction. The modern conception of religion is based upon both a belief-system/doctrine and a component of sociocultural phenomena that is distinct enough to be considered in its own right. That wasn't true for most cultures throughout time.

The need for a word for religion comes in when you get invented religions with mutually contradictory definitions.

Which presumes that religions can have such contradictory definitions, and this didn't exist in any possible way that could motivate the coining of a term we can equate with "religion".

The ancient Greek who emigrated to India just worshiped in the local temples; an Indian on this site told me that if he were taken back in a time machine, he'd have no problem in worshiping in a Greek temple.

That tells us nothing about whether the individual understand anything about Greek "religion". More importantly, Greek religion differed from village to village and consisted almost entirely of which gods were worshiped and what this practice of worship consisted of. Thus it is almost meaningless to speak of Greeks worshiping in Hindu temples, even without considering the fact that modern Hinduism is basically a development staring from te 18th century CE.

It is true that all paganism is a matter of ritual practice, but every ritual conveys belief

So does washing your hands or sitting on chairs rather than the floor when eating. The question is whether such beliefs are comparable (and if so, how) to modern conceptions of religious belies. For the most part, they absolutely are not.

 

[Bunyip]

When I read;
'Of the three Fates, Clotho sits with her spindle and whorl, twisting and spinning out the thread that is assigned for every creature from birth to death. At her left hand, her sister Lachesis, the dispassionate apportioner, marks the length of the thread. By their side stands the implacable Atropos, ready to cut the thread at the chosen point and bring a life to an end. Just as the Fates determine the length of mortal life, so also the ancient goddesses decide how long prosperity, health and peace are to last.

And know this: if the length of a life is already determined, men must act with courage, for they will die anyway when it is their time.'

Given that all religions contain metaphor, doesn't this still reverberate today?

Absolutely yes. The Greco-Roman pantheon and the fantastic myths and parables within it are as wonderful, meaningful, instructive and useful as they ever were. It is treasure of immeasurable value to humanity.

 

[Saint Frankenstein]

Sure, why not? There's much beauty, wonder and wisdom in the mythos of the ancient Hellenes.

 

[LegionOnomaMoi]

Absolutely yes. The Greco-Roman pantheon and the fantastic myths and parables within it are as wonderful, meaningful, instructive and useful as they ever were. It is treasure of immeasurable value to humanity.

Plato regarded these as so horrific that they should be banned. Greek and Roman comedy made these myths into jokes, as did poets such as Ovid. Most of these "wonderful, meaningful, instructive" myths you refer to were considered entertainment to Greeks and Romans (or were considered sacrilegious).

 

[Bunyip]

Plato regarded these as so horrific that they should be banned. Greek and Roman comedy made these myths into jokes, as did poets such as Ovid. Most of these "wonderful, meaningful, instructive" myths you refer to were considered entertainment to Greeks and Romans (or were considered sacrilegious).

Your point?

 

[LegionOnomaMoi]

Your point?

Your portrayal of the myths and parables aren't Greek religion but the product of 19th century scholars trying to make Greek religion into what they believed religion was.

 

[Bunyip]

Your portrayal of the myths and parables aren't Greek religion but the product of 19th century scholars trying to make Greek religion into what they believed religion was.

You do have a wonderful imagination mate, but no I portray them as I see them - which is what I was asked by the OP to do.