GOD ELECTIONS! VOTE YOUR FAVORITE GOD and VICE GOD!

[stvdv]

How about some of those extra ones I added in after the main one?

1. GOD VOTE for your FAVORITE GOD and why, and VICE GOD
2. PROPHET AND VICE PROPHET
3. KING and VICE KING
4. RELIGION / CULT and VICE RELIGION / CULT

Love (Prema) is the form of God
Desire (Kama) is the form of Vice God

Wisdom is the form of Prophet
Ignorance is the form of Vice Prophet

Reign is the form of King
Dominate is the form of Vice King

Church is the form of Religion
Brothel is the form of Vice Religion

Belief is the form of Religion
Deception is the form of Vice Religion

Charismatic leader is the form of Cult
Dogmatic leader is the form of Vice Cult

 

[DagonVarunaMitraApolloZan]

Hindu Gods and Goddesses are at peace with each other. Can't find two who will fight. Once Shiva and Krishna fought, but ultimately they became one - Harihara (Hari for Krishna, Hara for Shiva).

Harihara

That is true, but for this game one can even go to other pantheons or concepts, yet within the Vedic and Hindu writings, we do find incidents of some conflict, or within the overall scope of the Indus region and its developments:

For example, we have the Buddhists seemingly opposed to some of the ideas of the Brahmins, and perhaps even largely denying the Brahman and the Atman, and at least Brahma and Kama seemingly, among others.

Indra is often considered in conflict with the Asura, namely Vrtra and other names of things often thought of as related enemies like Vala, Namuci, Ahi, whatever (sometimes also thought of as alternative names for Vrtra or other associations of Vrtra).

There were major conflicts described in the Mahabharata and Ramayana between beings and names one might consider those of "gods" in at least some sense.

Indra in the Puranas came into conflict with some figure who cursed him, and Kama was blasted and made bodiless, and Shiva has been apparently greatly agitated and angered by various figures.

Sometimes certain sects and cults would come into conflict with each other, almost like martial arts schools, like various sects of Buddhists, or Buddhists vs Jain groups, or Sramanas and Buddhists vs Brahmins, and devotees of one God finding offensive or competing against devotees of some other (as humans are an abrasive and oft-agitated sort of sensitive creature that likes to take out its anger on whatever they can).

Shakyas or Saka, Then there came the Greeks (Yona) and the Christians later, besides incursions by others.
Then the Muslims came along, and there was a whole new debate emerging, and the Zoroastrians then came with their mutual conflict with the Muslims and the Hindus, The Khans and Sikhs and then British people, Christianity again, then Communism and more Atheism and rejections, Nationalisms, a whole mess of various oppositions and ideas, covering a huge area and many different communities.

Names even seemed to almost genetically (or as memes) compete until new terms became more dominant than others, or were introduced. Indra may have won out against Vrtra, but then Indra became far less brought up than perhaps Vishnu is today.

I think perhaps a good enemy God or VICE GOD for India might be its antithesis in the Islamic God Allah or the Christian God possibly even more so, since the one is rather hostile to iconographic representation and the other is wholly hostile to the actual beliefs and philosophy of Hinduism I think and frequently use Hinduism and Buddhism as examples of "False Religions" which the Muslims who are more educated haven't really taken to saying quite as much or quite as strongly (with their opposition mainly being centered on perceived idolatry or murti-making and images or "bhuths" used in worship practices or meditations.

Even Naraka can be qualified as a potential VICE GOD here, or anything else, from any context or system of ideas, even one's own made up ones (so long as it is explained).

 

[DagonVarunaMitraApolloZan]

Love (Prema) is the form of God
Desire (Kama) is the form of Vice God

Wisdom is the form of Prophet
Ignorance is the form of Vice Prophet

Reign is the form of King
Dominate is the form of Vice King

Church is the form of Religion
Brothel is the form of Vice Religion

Belief is the form of Religion
Deception is the form of Vice Religion

Charismatic leader is the form of Cult
Dogmatic leader is the form of Vice Cult

Totally awesome and fills me with lots of wonderful ideas, thank you so much for writing all those extra ones, I really appreciate it!

 

[Heyo]

Very interesting and creative! Would there be some entities as described by various peoples that you would not even want as potential options that come up and some you would definitely want in the rotation?

I wouldn't want to exclude any entity except that who wants to participate has to hold to the process. That way those who can't play nice with the others would exclude themselves.
Not that I'd expect much from a godly comity but it would by nice to have Isis, Odin or Athena in there so that there's at least one adult in the room.

 

[DagonVarunaMitraApolloZan]

Hindu mythological wars - Wikipedia

Æsir–Vanir War - Wikipedia

Ragnarök - Wikipedia

Theomachy - Wikipedia

Titanomachy - Wikipedia

War in Heaven - Wikipedia

Lebor Gabála Érenn - Wikipedia

Here are some Ancient "vs" type scenarios and factions:

Tuatha Dé Danann - Wikipedia
vs
Fomorians - Wikipedia

Æsir - Wikipedia
vs
Vanir - Wikipedia
vs
Jötunn - Wikipedia
vs
Fafnir - Wikipedia

Elf - Wikipedia

Aesir–Asura correspondence - Wikipedia

Deva (Hinduism) - Wikipedia
Deva (Jainism) - Wikipedia
Deva (Buddhism) - Wikipedia
vs
Asura - Wikipedia
Rakshasa - Wikipedia
Asura (Buddhism) - Wikipedia

Ahura - Wikipedia
Yazata - Wikipedia
Amesha Spenta - Wikipedia
vs
Daeva - Wikipedia

Twelve Olympians - Wikipedia
Olympian spirits - Wikipedia
Daemon (classical mythology) - Wikipedia
Greek hero cult - Wikipedia
Eudaemon (mythology) - Wikipedia
Agathodaemon - Wikipedia
vs
Titans (mythology) - Wikipedia
Giants (Greek mythology) - Wikipedia
Typhon - Wikipedia
Echidna (mythology) - Wikipedia
Cacodemon - Wikipedia
Kakodaimonistai - Wikipedia

Ülgen - Wikipedia
vs
Erlik - Wikipedia

Takamimusubi - Wikipedia
Amaterasu - Wikipedia
Takemikazuchi - Wikipedia
vs
Susanoo-no-Mikoto - Wikipedia
vs
Yamata no Orochi - Wikipedia
Takeminakata - Wikipedia
Amatsumikaboshi - Wikipedia

Chaos (cosmogony) - Wikipedia

Maat - Wikipedia
vs
Apep - Wikipedia

The Contendings of Horus and Seth - Wikipedia

Osiris - Wikipedia
Isis - Wikipedia
Horus - Wikipedia
vs
Set (deity) - Wikipedia

God - Wikipedia
vs
Devil - Wikipedia

Conflict between good and evil - Wikipedia

Law and Chaos - Wikipedia

Cthulhu Mythos - Wikipedia

Comparative mythology - Wikipedia

Comparative mythology - Wikipedia

Baal - Wikipedia
Hadad - Wikipedia
Anat - Wikipedia
vs
El (deity) - Wikipedia
Yam (god) - Wikipedia
Lotan - Wikipedia
Mot (god) - Wikipedia
Attar (god) - Wikipedia

 

[DagonVarunaMitraApolloZan]

I wouldn't want to exclude any entity except that who wants to participate has to hold to the process. That way those who can't play nice with the others would exclude themselves.
Not that I'd expect much from a godly comity but it would by nice to have Isis, Odin or Athena in there so that there's at least one adult in the room.

Haha, great "shout outs"! I love all those choices, and symbols for each inhabit my room and the table next to my bed and all over the place.

Overlooking me, and to which I look quite often, are symbols for Odin (in the form of a toy of Mortal Kombat's Raiden) and a ring with big blue jeweled eyes of an Owl for Athena, and for Isis, I may have a few things that could count, but I think one good one might be near the Owl, a Scorpion. Also there is a representation of Sutekh in a bronze or something donkey.

 

[DagonVarunaMitraApolloZan]

As Aphrodite once said on Xena, "My job is to keep people in bed and out of trouble". Sounds like a good idea to me and about more than 'just sex'. Her opposite number on the program is her half brother Ares, god of war.

Are your choices:
Aphrodite as GOD ELECT and Ares as VICE GOD opposed?

Feel free to make some choices!

 

[Aupmanyav]

That is true, but for this game one can even go to other pantheons or concepts, yet within the Vedic and Hindu writings, we do find incidents of some conflict, or within the overall scope of the Indus region and its developments:

Indra is often considered in conflict with the Asura, namely Vrtra and other names of things often thought of as related enemies like Vala, Namuci, Ahi, whatever (sometimes also thought of as alternative names for Vrtra or other associations of Vrtra).

There were major conflicts described in the Mahabharata and Ramayana between beings and names one might consider those of "gods" in at least some sense.
.. with their opposition mainly being centered on perceived idolatry or murti-making and images or "bhuths" used in worship practices or meditations.

Nice, The Artis Magistrate, appreciate your knowledge of Hinduism. (whatever you have and however you present it). I forget your old avatara as MitraVaruna .. Yes, Indra and Krishna competed at one time but they have adjusted to each other. Kama is a lesser God and cannot be put with Shiva. Vritra is an demon and cannot be included as Gods, Although Indra and Vritra make an excellent duo according to your scheme, and perhaps the oldest, going back to thousands of years to ice-age and perhaps to sub-Arctic regions.

Yeah, the Zoroastrians fought with the Central Asian Vedics, but by that time, many Vedics had arrived in India and had no inkling of what was happening back in Central Asia. The fight did not come to India.
Krishna was not fighting in Mahabharata and Ravana is not God in Ramayana. Those who cursed Indra were not Gods but sages.
Muslims have jinns, so do not know why they should have anything against 'bhoots' (ghosts), although the literal meaning of 'bhoota" is "what has come into perceivable existence", a living being or a thing, sort of "born".
As for cults, we have a clear combination in Dakshinachara and Vamachara (RHP and LHP) within Hinduism.
For kings, we have the example of the enlightened Janaka, and his opposite in Vena, an ancestor of Lord Rama, who in time turned into a vile king. However, his name preserves his former state of being bright which got transferred into the name of planet Venus.
We do not have prophets sent with messages, but among saints we have the opposites in the calm Vasishtha or Bhrigu, and the quick to anger Durvasa or Vishvamitra. The choice is yours.

 

[DagonVarunaMitraApolloZan]

Nice, The Artis Magistrate, appreciate your knowledge of Hinduism. (whatever you have and however you present it). I forget your old avatara as MitraVaruna .. Yes, Indra and Krishna competed at one time but they have adjusted to each other. Kama is a lesser God and cannot be put with Shiva. Vritra is an demon and cannot be included as Gods, Although Indra and Vritra make an excellent duo according to your scheme, and perhaps the oldest, going back to thousands of years to ice-age and perhaps to sub-Arctic regions.

Yeah, the Zoroastrians fought with the Central Asian Vedics, but by that time, many Vedics had arrived in India and had no inkling of what was happening back in Central Asia. The fight did not come to India.
Krishna was not fighting in Mahabharata and Ravana is not God in Ramayana. Those who cursed Indra were not Gods but sages.
Muslims have jinns, so do not know why they should have anything against 'bhoots' (ghosts), although the literal meaning of 'bhoota" is "what has come into perceivable existence", a living being or a thing, sort of "born".
As for cults, we have a clear combination in Dakshinachara and Vamachara (RHP and LHP) within Hinduism.
For kings, we have the example of the enlightened Janaka, and his opposite in Vena, an ancestor of Lord Rama, who in time turned into a vile king. However, his name preserves his former state of being bright which got transferred into the name of planet Venus.
We do not have prophets sent with messages, but among saints we have the opposites in the calm Vasishtha or Bhrigu, and the quick to anger Durvasa or Vishvamitra. The choice is yours.

Some people take the various names of characters in the stories who are depicted as human beings sometimes as the names of Gods or Demi-Gods which even might have had their own cults or worshippers (much like the Greeks worshipped Heroes). By the "Bhuth" I meant the word for "idols" or "statues", not the similar sounding word for ghosts, but I thought it might be spelled funny or lead to some misunderstanding. The Muslims believe in the Hindu ghosts, even all the various spirits most likely, but they interpret them as Jinn, and they may even go so far as to interpret Devas as potentially Angels or Jinn or otherwise as names and references to God that were symbolically turned anthropomorphic and then taken more literally by some people.

So some of the academics and and those studying these things interpret some of the sages to actually have been humanized divine figures at times potentially as well (that various things may have been euhemerized and turned into Gods and other things that were considered Gods by people, increasingly turned into human-like or even entirely human figures over the time that the stories were told and retold and the cultural trends and tendencies may have changed or there were new popular cults that couldn't accept these things as Gods anymore so chose to make them human figures instead, a trend which maybe the Sramana groups started towards by glorifying human beings even over Gods).

I love all the things you mentioned and all the choices, thank you so much for writing all of them out!

 

[DagonVarunaMitraApolloZan]

My picture for MitraVaruna was a picture of "Dagoth" from the second Conan the Barbarian film.

 

[Aupmanyav]

Some people take the various names of characters in the stories who are depicted as human beings sometimes as the names of Gods or Demi-Gods which even might have had their own cults or worshippers (much like the Greeks worshipped Heroes). By the "Bhuth" I meant the word for "idols" or "statues", not the similar sounding word for ghosts, but I thought it might be spelled funny or lead to some misunderstanding. The Muslims believe in the Hindu ghosts, even all the various spirits most likely, but they interpret them as Jinn, and they may even go so far as to interpret Devas as potentially Angels or Jinn or otherwise as names and references to God that were symbolically turned anthropomorphic and then taken more literally by some people.

So some of the academics and and those studying these things interpret some of the sages to actually have been humanized divine figures at times potentially as well (that various things may have been euhemerized and turned into Gods and other things that were considered Gods by people, increasingly turned into human-like or even entirely human figures over the time that the stories were told and retold and the cultural trends and tendencies may have changed or there were new popular cults that couldn't accept these things as Gods anymore so chose to make them human figures instead, a trend which maybe the Sramana groups started towards by glorifying human beings even over Gods).

I love all the things you mentioned and all the choices, thank you so much for writing all of them out!

Shramanas came much later, it was the shamans who did it (perhaps both the words have the same root) or Hodjas in Turkish (Ojhas as in Hindi and other Indian languages) as a Turkish poster informed me. Yes, statues, idols, lingas also will qualify as 'bhoota' (things).

"iyaṃ visṛṣṭiryata ābabhūva yadi vā dadhe yadi vā na l" from my favorite RigVeda hymn, 'Nasadiya Sukta'.
(The Gods are later than this world's production. Who knows then whence it first came into being?)
ābabhūva: (happened to be produced, babhūva)
Rig Veda: Rig-Veda, Book 10: HYMN CXXIX. Creation.

Among the various meanings of BhUta: that which is or exists (that means we are all 'bhūtas'. )
Sanskrit Dictionary for Spoken Sanskrit

The root of the word is "Bhū": 146-50 bheu-, bheu̯ə-, bhu̯ā-, bhu̯ē- : bhō̆u- : bhū- IE to be, exist; grow, prosper
Indo-European Lexicon: Pokorny Master PIE Etyma
Indo-European Lexicon: PIE Etymon and IE Reflexes (You may find this interesting)

 

[DagonVarunaMitraApolloZan]

Shramanas came much later, it was the shamans who did it (perhaps both the words have the same root) or Hodjas in Turkish (Ojhas as in Hindi and other Indian languages) as a Turkish poster informed me. Yes, statues, idols, lingas also will qualify as 'bhoota' (things).

"iyaṃ visṛṣṭiryata ābabhūva yadi vā dadhe yadi vā na l" from my favorite RigVeda hymn, 'Nasadiya Sukta'.
(The Gods are later than this world's production. Who knows then whence it first came into being?)
ābabhūva: (happened to be produced, babhūva)
Rig Veda: Rig-Veda, Book 10: HYMN CXXIX. Creation.

Among the various meanings of BhUta: that which is or exists (that means we are all 'bhūtas'. )
Sanskrit Dictionary for Spoken Sanskrit

The root of the word is "Bhū": 146-50 bheu-, bheu̯ə-, bhu̯ā-, bhu̯ē- : bhō̆u- : bhū- IE to be, exist; grow, prosper
Indo-European Lexicon: Pokorny Master PIE Etyma
Indo-European Lexicon: PIE Etymon and IE Reflexes (You may find this interesting)

Yeah, and the verse you quoted makes it seem to me that the term "deva" might have referred to things other than the origination, an idea which may not have been strongly present at the time of the writing of that verse or at least by whoever wrote it, later on, the idea of a non-generated eternal became more prevalent (especially now in competition with the other Cosmic Overlord religions). The deva appear to have names of the natural things and other concepts, or at least refer to them, and so it is only true or factual that even by today's scientific standards, these powers and things came into being later on and did not exist always, for example wind, water, fire, force, even space, dimension, distance, the sun, the moon, the planets, the constellations, and mankind, and mankind deeming themselves Gods and like Gods, all came later. Tracing back (using reasoning, mathematical thinking, linguistic thinking, and necessity for what would have to be in order for anything else to occur or be, or what can ultimately be held responsible for what is) one may conclude an underlying power, though only Theists might consider such a power to be intelligent, and furthermore, responsive.

The idols are even further than the "truth as it is" because they are symbolic representations of things which themselves did not exist from the beginning and were generated later on, and so were considered conditioned (where people like the Buddha or even Mahavira and possibly the Sramana types, were trying to revert into an unconditioned state of origination and beyond generation).

Thank you also for those great links!

 

[Aupmanyav]

Writer of that Particular hymn (Nasadiya Sukta) is supposed to have been Prajapati Parameshthi. We have various indexes on Vedas where among many other things, name of the writers and their lineage is mentioned (Anukramanis, although other than tradition, there is no proof of that). I think he considered the question of origination and rejected existence of Gods and let the question remain to be answered in future - just as I am doing it today some 3000 years later. I do not believe in eternity of the universe, that does not answer as to where it originated. Therefore, there must have been a time when the universe must not have existed. So, probably there is a 'non-existent phase' of 'what exists'. Perhaps that is what Prajapati Parameshthi meant when he intoned:

"Sages who searched with their heart's thought discovered the existent's kinship in the non-existent."

 

[DagonVarunaMitraApolloZan]

Writer of that Particular hymn (Nasadiya Sukta) is supposed to have been Prajapati Parameshthi. We have various indexes on Vedas where among many other things, name of the writers and their lineage is mentioned (Anukramanis, although other than tradition, there is no proof of that). I think he considered the question of origination and rejected existence of Gods and let the question remain to be answered in future - just as I am doing it today some 3000 years later. I do not believe in eternity of the universe, that does not answer as to where it originated. Therefore, there must have been a time when the universe must not have existed. So, probably there is a 'non-existent phase' of 'what exists'. Perhaps that is what Prajapati Parameshthi meant when he intoned:

"Sages who searched with their heart's thought discovered the existent's kinship in the non-existent."

Prajapati - Wikipedia.

Interesting that he carries the title that had been associated with Creation and Creative Activities or Origination and Founding activities in some sense!

My concern isn't in "what originated" so much as that there is an apparent "Force driving the appearance of animation and/or the appearance of Change and generation of exclusive experience", and so I call that Force "God" and consider it the encompasser of all intelligence, with its own intelligence in a sense that is responsible for all and each instance of apparent "change" or "motion". The difference is then not even what one calls whatever is doing that which is undeniably apparent, but if it is intelligent in any sense and responsive or reactive in any sense, and so there are those who say:

Yes it is intelligent, also it is responsive.
Yes it is intelligent, but not responsive.
No it is not intelligent, but it is responsive.
No it is not intelligent, and it is not responsive.

These are the 4 main types of understandings, which don't even deal with origination, but rather with what is present and can be said to be responsible for the "apparent change, apparent motion, apparent force" of this or that occurring or our generated moments of experience exclusive to us and what seems to appear in those moments.

I am of the school of thought that the "Apparent Change/Force/Motion/Animation" that we see before us, driven before us, is backed by intelligence and is responsive. This puts me in the category of most of humanity throughout the past, and even a lot (if not most in at least some way), of those today. There is no mannish creature involved in this, even though many people might literally believe in such.

A great many people now also believe in the other varieties I mentioned.

You may be of one of the two latter schools on the list there, which may say that "whatever at all is responsible for the appearance of change, motion, force, occurrence, animation, generation of experience, and whatever else" is possessing no form or semblance or type of anything that could really be called "intelligence" or "consciousness" despite our own intelligence and consciousness (so then is separate from us which exists within it and due to it, but it is without thought and we are with thought, apart from it in that sense). You then may either believe it is responsive to stimulus or interaction attempts in some way (even if its abiding by some sort of inexplicably automatic system that just happens to be unintelligently present), or that it is also not responsive at all, so that nothing one can do in any way might actually seem to influence it or receive any sort of reaction or response. So that would make it "double dumb" in a sense, neither intelligent, nor even responsive.

So the options are:
Intelligent-Responsive
Intelligent-Unresponsive
Unintelligent-Responsive
Unintelligent-Unresponsive

There is no denying that there is "apparent change" and that "something" by definition is moving all this apparent change, and by that I don't mean any figure like a man in outer space, but that the fact that it is moving shows there is a force at work. No one in their right mind, once they understand what is being discussed, denies that there is the appearance of change and clearly apparent motion and a force at work.

The only distinguishing factor becomes the intelligence in some sense and responsiveness or ability to interact in some sense.

One may think that "intelligence" would be necessary for "responsiveness" but this is not the case if one presents a model where a thing considered "unintelligent" like "water" shows "responsiveness" to various forms of interaction for example.

 

[Goddess Kit]

Me.

 

[ChristineM]

Not a believer in gods but if i was i would probably follow any goddess of love.

Also Anoia, the goddess of things that get stuck in drawers

 

[ChristineM]

As Aphrodite once said on Xena, "My job is to keep people in bed and out of trouble". Sounds like a good idea to me and about more than 'just sex'. Her opposite number on the program is her half brother Ares, god of war.

Squeeze me!!!

 

[DagonVarunaMitraApolloZan]

Me.

So, what are you like and all about? What are your selling points, positions, powers, all that!

 

[DagonVarunaMitraApolloZan]

Not a believer in gods but if i was i would probably follow any goddess of love.

Also Anoia, the goddess of things that get stuck in drawers

So it would be "Goddess of Love" for GOD ELECT and VICE GOD (which in this case means the "Bad God") being Anoia, the Goddess of Things that get stuck in drawers, haha, great choices. Anoia is so frustrating and makes a great VICE GOD.

 

[ChristineM]

So, what are you like and all about? What are your selling points, positions, powers, all that!

She is woman, that is often enough