L. A. Times: Bring the Greek Gods back!

I is a linky

The world, as the Greek philosopher Thales wrote, is full of gods, and all deserve respect and honor. Such a generous understanding of the nature of divinity allowed the ancient Greeks and Romans to accept and respect other people’s gods and to admire (rather than despise) other nations for their own notions of piety. If the Greeks were in close contact with a particular nation, they gave the foreign gods names of their own gods: the Egyptian goddess Isis was Demeter, Horus was Apollo, and so on. Thus they incorporated other people’s gods into their pantheon.

What they did not approve of was atheism, by which they meant refusal to believe in the existence of any gods at all. One reason many Athenians resented Socrates was that he claimed a divinity spoke with him privately, but he could not name it. Similarly, when Christians denied the existence of any gods other than their own, the Romans suspected political or seditious motives and persecuted them as enemies of the state.

The L.A. Times and paganism? No surprise there. Of course the Greek gods are preferred, since they meet certain human standards as opposed to the monotheistic God who is just not acceptable.

Peace,
Ed

Amen! :thumbsup:

So at this rate; how much longer do you think it will be tbefore people start thinking of Neo-Paganism as more than just a lot of Hippies that are just being rebelous?

I look at it this way. Some think man invented God, but for some reason or other, God will not go away. So, if God is not going to go away, they’ll just accept (or attempt to market) the Greek gods. If they think people will go for it, they’ll continue. If people don’t go for it, then on to Plan B.

And then C, D, E, and so on, until monotheists begin to respond. Assuming we ever respond. But I, for one, will not be receptive to the idea(s).

Peace,
Ed

Speaking as a former neo-pagan (subscribed to it during my teens, did a lot of reading, etc) it’d be easy to quell, relying on any number of arguments, especially two:

  1. Lack of scripture; all they have are pop-culture books written in the last half a century or so.

  2. Lack of lineage; all neo-paganism can be traced back to the 20th century, where it can be shown as a purely man-made construct with no historical underpinnings.

There’s no spiritual maturity to neo-paganism in any of the infinitesimal versions i’ve seen (given there’s no centralization, tradition, or continuation). It’s not that hard to undermine; I don’t think we really need to worry about it for now, in the sense that we’ve got “bigger fish to fry.”

DISCLAIMER: The views and opinions expressed in these forums do not necessarily reflect those of Catholic Answers. For official apologetics resources please visit www.catholic.com.