Deity Creation

[The Hammer]

I made a post under the neopagan DIR a few months back in regards to fictional pantheons, and I want to push out a similar thread here.

The RDNA (Reformed Druids of North America), have a deity in their pantheon, Dalon ap Landu, who does not appear in any historical works, and is suspected to be entirely invented. Many members of RDNA have claimed powerful experiences with this deity, though.

So, my question(s) are this: What makes a deity real to you? If one knows they are using a fictional deity, like Cthulhu for instance, but have personal experiences with it, is that deity in turn real? Do we call deities into being by giving them a name and calling upon them? Or are the deities of old just responding to new names?

 

[Sha'irullah]

A deity is a deity. The word god yet alone goddess is fairly vague. Having a fictional god is no different than a historical one because at one point they were all fictional. The only thing that matters is the meaningful behind the god. Does this god have any sort of meaning behind it and what is that meaning.
All the gods are inherently fictional as the word implies but even fiction is useful. You can worship whatever god you like but as long as it has meaning that is fine.

 

[George-ananda]

This is a interesting question, Hammer. Some thoughts and questions:

What is your opinion of the RDNA mainstream deities? If they are real what does that mean?

I heard one experiment where people created a ghost and it became real (I'll have to google as my memory fails me).

Can our collective thought forms actually produce a form on a higher plane?

Could a willing entity co-operate to respond to a name and form we create?

 

[George-ananda]

I heard one experiment where people created a ghost and it became real (I'll have to google as my memory fails me).

Found it. Here's the link:

Phillip the Ghost

The gist is they made up a person who lived in the past with many details about Phillip. Eventually they were able to contact a ghost who responded to Phillip and said he was Phillip through a Ouija board and rapping sounds. It even was able to move their table on heavy carpet and raise it on one leg.

I personally believe some spiritualist phenomena is real. And that we need to widen our understanding of what 'real' is.....fun stuff!

 

[The Sum of Awe]

I made a post under the neopagan DIR a few months back in regards to fictional pantheons, and I want to push out a similar thread here.

The RDNA (Reformed Druids of North America), have a deity in their pantheon, Dalon ap Landu, who does not appear in any historical works, and is suspected to be entirely invented. Many members of RDNA have claimed powerful experiences with this deity, though.

This is a great example of magic or even tulpas.

So, my question(s) are this: What makes a deity real to you?

Real can mean many things; real due to experiences with it (even if it is created), or it could mean real as in literally existing.

If one knows they are using a fictional deity, like Cthulhu for instance, but have personal experiences with it, is that deity in turn real?

In one sense of the word, yes.

Do we call deities into being by giving them a name and calling upon them? Or are the deities of old just responding to new names?

The latter makes sense. Another thing I'd add to that is: deities never had any official names and so any names we give them are just as good as any.

At the same time, the former is possible and is often done in the form of creating deities and naming them.

 

[fallingblood]

My view is that there is one supreme being (G-d if you will), who has many different facets. I would assume that a supreme being would be intelligent enough to know that different people need different things, and thus shows itself in a variety of ways. So just different names and views in regards to one.

 

[rumitoid]

I made a post under the neopagan DIR a few months back in regards to fictional pantheons, and I want to push out a similar thread here.

The RDNA (Reformed Druids of North America), have a deity in their pantheon, Dalon ap Landu, who does not appear in any historical works, and is suspected to be entirely invented. Many members of RDNA have claimed powerful experiences with this deity, though.

So, my question(s) are this: What makes a deity real to you? If one knows they are using a fictional deity, like Cthulhu for instance, but have personal experiences with it, is that deity in turn real? Do we call deities into being by giving them a name and calling upon them? Or are the deities of old just responding to new names?

If something makes a deity real to me, it is obvious I am creating said deity. Projection and transference. That there may be deities for specific things is absurd. Hinduism recognizes this essential fact, while also providing multiple gods for all occasions. Good is one!

 

[Orbit]

I'm not coming at this from a neopagan angle, but I share your concerns. I think the useful question may not be "is there an objective reality to the deity?" but rather "do I perceive the deity?". If you perceive it, and it has meaning to you, I think that makes it real enough to work with. I think we need to get away from a scientistic definition of "real" and look to an experiential definition of "real". If you perceive it, and it has meaning to you, it is real to you. That's all that matters.

Now if you expect that deity to "do" something for you, to act on the objective world, again experience will tell you if it's working.

 

[Quintessence]

Hammer, I think what you need to do is ask yourself "what makes something real?" That is not an easy question to answer, and a question I think people ask themselves far too rarely. And, in my personal opinion, my culture defines reality far, far too narrowly and in a fashion that is inconsistent with how they actually live their lives.

 

[The Hammer]

Hammer, I think what you need to do is ask yourself "what makes something real?" That is not an easy question to answer, and a question I think people ask themselves far too rarely. And, in my personal opinion, my culture defines reality far, far too narrowly and in a fashion that is inconsistent with how they actually live their lives.

I agree Quintessence, I wanted to pose this question for others to evaluate and reply to. My view is that if you take an aspect of "reality", give it a name, call upon it and it responds in kind; then it is real. I could very well call upon Baktus, God of pestilence/healing (bacterias, and virus'), and yes, that is something I just came up with, and I have no doubt in my mind that it would work and I could experience it. So in short, if you can experience it, then it is real.

The cosmic forces, and natural forces of the universe will respond to whatever it is they are called by. For they existed before us, and will exist after us, and therefore only have a name when we bestow it upon them.

 

[Quintessence]

That's pretty much how I roll. The details of my ontology are a little complicated and deliberate paradoxical, but at the end of the day it basically means defining reality as that which a person can be aware of in any fashion. Any fashion. This means not stuffing the otherworlds in to a "not real" category merely because I can't physically go there. It means not stuffing otherworldly denizens into a "not real" category merely because they are not physical persons. And it definitely means not stuffing ideological constructs (which to some extent is what many of the gods are, though they represent or reflect physical stuff) into a "not real" category.

Baktus actually sounds kind of awesome. I pretty much deify everything, and even though I'm a biologist, I tend to forget the utter dependence we have on things we can't see.

 

[The Hammer]

This is a interesting question, Hammer. Some thoughts and questions:

What is your opinion of the RDNA mainstream deities? If they are real what does that mean?

I heard one experiment where people created a ghost and it became real (I'll have to google as my memory fails me).

Can our collective thought forms actually produce a form on a higher plane?

Could a willing entity co-operate to respond to a name and form we create?

I honestly don't have any "opinions" on the RDNA mainstream deities in themselves, because I have never personally paid them any mind. But, with that I will add that of course they are real. They are as real as my example of Baktus above.

I haven't read the article on Phillip yet, but it is an interesting concept and not one I a opposed to. I have seen similar experiments done before.

Yes and no. I think that our collective and individual thought forms can call upon aspects of nature, which in turn respond to the name that we are addressing them with, and they act in kind. So half thought producing a form on another plane, and half entity responding to a name we create.

 

[syo]

What makes a deity real to you?

logic.