Vivandall.. .
Member
Is there any evidence that suggest greek mythology is real?
-
Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:- Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
- Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
- Access to private conversations with other members.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!
Evidence?
- Thread starter Vivandall.. .
- Start date
Er... what do you mean by "real?"
As far as I'm concerned, if you can experience it in any fashion whatsoever, it is real.
I suspect you mean "real" in the extremely narrow empirical naturalism sense of the term. Honestly, I find that to be a really silly question to ask about any mythology. Mythology is not nor was ever intended to be descriptive of reality in the sense of empirical naturalism. Mythology is storytelling. It's like art. Asking if mythology is "real" is like asking if the subject of an abstract painting is "real." It misses the point entirely.
As far as I'm concerned, if you can experience it in any fashion whatsoever, it is real.
I suspect you mean "real" in the extremely narrow empirical naturalism sense of the term. Honestly, I find that to be a really silly question to ask about any mythology. Mythology is not nor was ever intended to be descriptive of reality in the sense of empirical naturalism. Mythology is storytelling. It's like art. Asking if mythology is "real" is like asking if the subject of an abstract painting is "real." It misses the point entirely.
Whiterain
Get me off of this planet
It's going to go into personal experience. The Gods acted with people individually if you read well.
They directed and aided heroes on journeys that involved them. The Gods are Gods but not really politicians
the way Man sees them. The make moves, decisions and
choices like you. People refute politics is involved but politics is involved. King of Kings, God of Gods.
They make choices in and out of battles and history and with people individually, seeming not to make mass
appearances. The way the Gods operate in politics is a mystery but in a persons everyday life they seem to
interact with quite a few people that request their attention, or entities on their behalf.
Google the Vatican museum
The proof is in people who believe in the Gods and have had authentic experiences. The Gods have a plan certainly,
look at the World. It's may not be what you want. The Earth is paying for our leaders reckless negligence and greed.
It's horrifying that these mad men have done to our home, our home. People say and say again the Gods/ God isn't real,
that is because society made up a God, one to blame. The Gods work off of prophecies as well, theirs and others and the
fates/norns. But the Norns. But the Norns...
The labrynth of the Minitaur may have been found and destroyed during Nazi occupation. That's a ***** of a decision to me.
The Nazi were using it as a cache.
Sustenance has always been an issue since the beginning and the end. Man can not live on bread alone. These arguments
are all out of jealousy or some type of superiority complex. I acknowledge the Gods as forces and people that were before Man,
pre-Man civilization on Earth. But Man will get all the credit for the archaeology being God and Man may share features.
Religious fanaticism is something Man must overcome, it is just fanaticism. I think the Crucifixion was a historical event and involved the Gods.
Monotheism has been a disaster since the start. "God" became something to blame. It wasn't that there were only 1 Almighty God, it was that this region, people, where only supposed to worship this 1 God, his kingdom.
Jesus and Zeus may be exclusive to each not YHWH. YHWH seems much more kin to Thor, But that's not going to be established. While Zeus and Thor are a lot alike, Thunderers, in the Illiad.
I mean, I came to some notion that Jesus Christ was Ares, not Zeus. Or Ares is YHWH. No Man spends to much time getting to know Ares.
But the middle east seems to have some role in all of it, Sumeria, Babylon.
They directed and aided heroes on journeys that involved them. The Gods are Gods but not really politicians
the way Man sees them. The make moves, decisions and
choices like you. People refute politics is involved but politics is involved. King of Kings, God of Gods.
They make choices in and out of battles and history and with people individually, seeming not to make mass
appearances. The way the Gods operate in politics is a mystery but in a persons everyday life they seem to
interact with quite a few people that request their attention, or entities on their behalf.
Google the Vatican museum
The proof is in people who believe in the Gods and have had authentic experiences. The Gods have a plan certainly,
look at the World. It's may not be what you want. The Earth is paying for our leaders reckless negligence and greed.
It's horrifying that these mad men have done to our home, our home. People say and say again the Gods/ God isn't real,
that is because society made up a God, one to blame. The Gods work off of prophecies as well, theirs and others and the
fates/norns. But the Norns. But the Norns...
The labrynth of the Minitaur may have been found and destroyed during Nazi occupation. That's a ***** of a decision to me.
The Nazi were using it as a cache.
Sustenance has always been an issue since the beginning and the end. Man can not live on bread alone. These arguments
are all out of jealousy or some type of superiority complex. I acknowledge the Gods as forces and people that were before Man,
pre-Man civilization on Earth. But Man will get all the credit for the archaeology being God and Man may share features.
Religious fanaticism is something Man must overcome, it is just fanaticism. I think the Crucifixion was a historical event and involved the Gods.
Monotheism has been a disaster since the start. "God" became something to blame. It wasn't that there were only 1 Almighty God, it was that this region, people, where only supposed to worship this 1 God, his kingdom.
Jesus and Zeus may be exclusive to each not YHWH. YHWH seems much more kin to Thor, But that's not going to be established. While Zeus and Thor are a lot alike, Thunderers, in the Illiad.
I mean, I came to some notion that Jesus Christ was Ares, not Zeus. Or Ares is YHWH. No Man spends to much time getting to know Ares.
But the middle east seems to have some role in all of it, Sumeria, Babylon.
Last edited:
Vivandall.. .
Member
^People believing in the Gods has authentic experience,for example?
So you are saying greek mythology is fake then?Just because it is mythology does not mean it is necessary fake imo,it is just a word place on by other people,that being said I am not exactly a believer in greek mythology just asking if there is any evidence.
Last edited:
Infinitum
Possessed Bookworm
There's a clear gap between modern thinking and ancient thinking here. You are asking for scientific evidence for something that was part of a culture where truth in this sense didn't have as much meaning. If you look at most ancient religions their deities had a strong connection to everyday life. You have gods of family, hunting and fertility and hundreds of minor deities for the forest, the sea and the land. When I read the ancient myths I get the sense that the gods were a way of making sense of perfectly natural phenomena. They were also one of the major sources of entertainment. Take Ovid's Metamorphoses for example. On the surface the poems tell stories of gods and magic, but on a deeper level they're about questions you might find yourself asking in everyday life. Here's one:
Phaethon, the long lost son of Helios, the god who rode his flaming chariot over the sky as the Sun, comes to his father and asks for a boon. Helios promises him whatever he asks for, but then the Phaethon asks for the one thing Helios doesn't want to give him: he wants to ride his father's chariot for one day over the sky. Helios begs him to reconsider, but when Phaethon doesn't give in he covers the boy with a protective salve and gives him very specific advice on what to do in order not to burn the earth or the sky. But Phaethon isn't able to follow the advice, damages the sky and scorches the land and is finally struck down by Zeus, who can't let him cause any more destruction.
We know the Sun isn't a horse chariot and thinking how advanced the Greeks were in astronomy there's no reason to think they believed so either. The story is about a father's grief over a son who refuses to listen to his advice. It's however also true that the Greek took their gods very seriously. Take Socrates for example, who is told to have been sentenced to death partly because of his lack of beliefs in the gods.
Phaethon, the long lost son of Helios, the god who rode his flaming chariot over the sky as the Sun, comes to his father and asks for a boon. Helios promises him whatever he asks for, but then the Phaethon asks for the one thing Helios doesn't want to give him: he wants to ride his father's chariot for one day over the sky. Helios begs him to reconsider, but when Phaethon doesn't give in he covers the boy with a protective salve and gives him very specific advice on what to do in order not to burn the earth or the sky. But Phaethon isn't able to follow the advice, damages the sky and scorches the land and is finally struck down by Zeus, who can't let him cause any more destruction.
We know the Sun isn't a horse chariot and thinking how advanced the Greeks were in astronomy there's no reason to think they believed so either. The story is about a father's grief over a son who refuses to listen to his advice. It's however also true that the Greek took their gods very seriously. Take Socrates for example, who is told to have been sentenced to death partly because of his lack of beliefs in the gods.
No, I'm saying it's mythology.
Mythology = sacred stories of truth and meaning for a culture's peoples.
Mythology =/= lies, falsehoods, fake.
By and large, mythology is simply not intended to be taken with the kind of literalism you're probably demanding of it by asking if there is empirical evidence of it's "truth." Mythology speaks its truths artfully, through poetry, allegory, metaphor, etc. I would also bear in mind that Pagan gods are immanent, not transcendent. They're typically personifications of various aspects of reality that pervasively influence human existence. So in a sense, if you want "evidence" for the existence of Demeter, look at agriculture, because there she is.
Heim
Active Member
It would be appropriate if you'd define what you mean by 'evidence'.
If you mean empirical evidence, as mentioned before, then no. No, there is no such evidence in support of greek mythology.
The empirical method is very powerful and crucial to many areas of science, but it is not the only form of evidence.
Vivandall.. .
Member
-If there are no empirical evidences,then does it have any other types of evidence?
-So you mean they only exist as symbols and even for the believers they do not think the greek gods literally exist?
-So you mean they only exist as symbols and even for the believers they do not think the greek gods literally exist?
Heim
Active Member
Yes, one might try to put a rational argument in order to defend the existence of these gods.
And yes, for some people they may exist as symbols, or rather experiences.
If there is one thing lurking on this forum has learned me, it's that concepts of god and spiritual experiences are as diverse as people are diverse.
These things are, quite honestly, extremely hard to explain to someone who isn't familiar with polytheism and immanent god-concepts.
The gods literally exist. The gods are various aspects of reality given poetic name and artful form. If you want "empirical evidence" for poetry and art, you're not going to find it. But the stuff the poetry and art references is obviously real, even by the narrow standards by which my culture tends to define reality. As mentioned in a previous example, if you want to find Demeter, look no further than agriculture or farmland. She is there. Ever been gripped by panic? Then you have known the touch of Phobos.
Won't let me frubal you. ^_^
You mistakenly call them "only" symbols. Symbols are extremely powerful. They are transformative. They move someone to a new level of awareness. They change someone from inside. They allow them to see beyond the narrowly defined limits of their lack of imaginations.
To demand empirical evidence of a symbol, or to them dismiss it as "only a symbol" when such a challenge is met with empty hands (it's an inappropriate question to begin with) is to betray a subtle form of literalism itself. Like those who mistake the symbol as a sign, those who reduce the symbol to a literal object, those who believe in a literal Ark that carried all the worlds animals, a literal god who literally controls the literal forces of nature, those who demand or seek for evidence to either 'believe' or 'disbelieve' are themselves literalists, they are thinking exactly the same.
I think it's much more appropriate to say "only literalism" than "only a symbol". Literalism is what is lacking, what's behind the curve, what is missing the truth of the symbol.
I think you may enjoy this essay. Though the context is Biblical literalism, it directly applies to your question. From the essay:
"But the problem is even more deep-rooted. A literalist imagination -- or lack of imagination -- pervades contemporary culture. One of the more dubious successes of modern science -- and of its attendant spirits technology, historiography and mathematics -- is the suffusion of intellectual life with a prosaic and pedantic mind-set. One may observe this feature in almost any college classroom, not only in religious studies, but within the humanities in general. Students have difficulty in thinking, feeling and expressing themselves symbolically".
Biblical Literalism: Constricting the Cosmic Dance
Vivandall.. .
Member
Then what about the stories on horoscope and so on?
To be honest, I'm only somewhat convinced by this argument. My chosen form of symbolic expression is the written word, not that I'd generally describe it in those terms. I write various fiction, and I'd be the first to admit it's largely...erm...tripe (to put it politely). But it also commonly includes allegorical elements.
At the same time, I am very much what I suppose you are referring to here as a literalist. I'm more than happy to concede that there can be wisdom in symbols and metaphor. There are much more subtle ways to communicate than mere words. But the source of such symbols is perhaps where we differ? Or at least where the importance we place on such things may vary.
Being an atheist, and a literalist actually doesn't mean I fail to see the importance or transformational potential of metaphor and allegory. But it means I see the source of the wisdom as human, with all that entails (fallibility, for one thing), and would critically evaluate whatever learning I gathered from what I read.
God is a metaphor for that which within us is God. To know ourselves truly, is to know God. You cannot evaluate critically what is transcendent to reason. You simply fall into it. You simply dance it.
"Our situation calls to mind a backstage interview with Anna Pavlova, the dancer. Following an illustrious and moving performance, she was asked the meaning of the dance. She replied, “If I could say it, do you think I should have danced it?” To give dance a literal meaning would be to reduce dancing to something else. It would lose its capacity to involve the whole person. And one would miss all the subtle nuances and delicate shadings and rich polyvalences of the dance itself."
Last edited:
That's the hurdle I can't (don't want to) jump over, though.
I believe I understand what you're saying. But I simply look at life in a different manner. To know ourselves, truly, is to free ourselves. To know ourselves, truly, is to gain a level of peace and calmness that is otherwise impossible. But I don't think we can best know ourselves by blindly following the metaphorical wisdom of other humans. I think the journey to enlightenment lies within, and all that we gather from outside ourselves (including allegory) are tools. Useful for some, perhaps all, but commonly discarded, misunderstood, or poorly applied.
For me...at least...it is the application of reason that allows me to best understand the tools, the symbols, and draw on the gathered wisdom of those who came before. To stand on the shoulders of giants, so to speak.
To be fair, I've been accused of being an overthinker, and what I am seeking (and have increasingly found, although it's never as constant as would be ideal) is self-confidence, understanding of myself and my place in the world, and calmness/peace. I'm probably not going to end up dancing naked around a may pole.
Absolutely. Not a word I disagree with. Preaching to the choir.
People will always take metaphor and reduce it to a matter of literal understanding. They do so for a simple reason. They haven't yet developed "as if" thinking. They are concrete-literal in whatever they see. "I just don't get it" is the sort of response to metaphor. If it's not factual, it has no value. It doesn't register. Changing the symbols to new symbols will not change the underlying inability to access them.
True, and I agree. Studying postmodernist thought, myth studies, ethnography, semiotics, etc, gives an underlying rational structure as to how these things operate. Engaging directly with them however is quite different. That requires not just learning the mechanics of the steps of a dance and then moving your feet as instructed. It is taking the structure of dance, and inhabiting it with the freedom of expression from within. Then, you are dancing.
Same difference between someone simply learning how to play the right notes in music, and someone actually being a musician. The former plays music, the latter is played by music. It requires letting go of thinking and reasoning your way through song. The same is true of being human. At that, is the spiritual. We are free, and knowing that and living that is the spiritual.
Don't limit yourself.To be fair, I've been accused of being an overthinker, and what I am seeking (and have increasingly found, although it's never as constant as would be ideal) is self-confidence, understanding of myself and my place in the world, and calmness/peace. I'm probably not going to end up dancing naked around a may pole.
To be serious though, I'll make a suggestion. Practice meditation. What you find in there is self-knowledge, self-awareness. And this is for me where symbolism truly plays a role towards that end. It is though the symbol, that you open what has always been there within. It is through the symbol, you experience that, know that, and become that. Symbols are to move you to a new level, a new depth. Once that move occurs, the symbols are complete. A thought that arose in me during my meditation today has some bearing on this whole discussion. That thought was, 'do not constrict life from living through you'. We learn to allow in meditation. We learn to dance. We learn to allow life to dance though us. As we do that, we then know who we truly are.
I hope this helps put some clearer understanding to what these things are and how they function.
Last edited:
Vivandall.. .
Member
Ok,what do you guys think about horoscopes?
Me? A form of popular entertainment.