That is encouraging. I will try to write more aphorisms.
On this thread it appears you found no answer and you have no method of investigating the matter further. So for you as much as me the origin of the word God remains in time out of mind like I said before.
Yes, correct, the meaning is lost in time for now. You can go on reading into it whatever you like. Which is likeliest to be some bastardization of the Roman religion it was applied for over a thousand years to until very recently, and still in many places by many people. Specially in the eastern hemisphere, where the continuity of tradition itself, the fracture we are discussing notwithstanding, is much stronger. Incidentally, it is much stronger because the authority of the Roman empire proper was much stronger there for a much longer time. In the west, the authority was less, but then, the native Roman population was much larger, so that even if the Gothic population has become much more stranded, much more divorced from tradition and any sense of history, the Roman tradition itself continues strong in a more folk, that is, less state oriented capacity. And our church continues traditions that were established even in pre-Christian times. So, too, does the Slavic church, but in their case, the pre-Christian traditions are, firstly, not Zeusian and, secondly, much younger, rooted in a much more savage people. We know what purple in the robes of Catholic priests means. But what do the black and red colors and the hoods of Orthodox priests mean? We are left to conjecture. But it is very real. This all, of course, is dealing with religious tradition that is far posterior to whenever ‘God’ was knowingly employed in its actual meaning. There may be traces, there may not, this is all very interesting. There likely are, and very significant ones, considering the name is unanimously used by all Gothic peoples from the borders with China to the eastern Pacific coast. I would very much like to know that meaning. What does ‘God’ mean?
You will also likely include some heavy Platonic elements, which I have described fit tremendously well to a people with little to no traditional reckoning, and specially one where state authority did not, in any case, implement some level of continuity. And possibly some bastardization of Budism as well, considering that the very concrete nature of Budism can fill the vacuum of concrete reality in the aforementioned elements, and its life weary nature makes it compatible with an ahistoric view. Budism is not universalist, but it does promote and accommodate ignorance of history. Please understand, I do not mean that Goths knowingly ignore history. I simply mean that, lacking any kind of relatively strong tradition, and, in any case, being very young as a people, they lack the capacity to understand its existence. Contact with a civilized people is required, like Romans or Jews or Greeks. Precisely enemies number #1, 2 and 3 for the common Goth.
You may ask why, for example, Indians don’t share this antagonism. And the answer is that the Romans mixed their blood with them. The Indian of today is Roman. Those that are not, or are less mixed, will have more of a tendency for fascist or otherwise rebellious behavior. Goths are an innately racist people, they do not mix. But in lands where the Roman toungue is spoken, they do mix. They are made civilized. In the east they mixed too, with Huns, but it is different. This was not a voluntary mixing. Still, I believe the very fact of mixing blood with another people gave them a civilized perspective that more wild Goths lack.
This originally pretty good thread decided into a ludicrous attempt to slander Indo European culture.
This culture is far older than Jewish, Greek, let alone Roman culture; the fact that the Roman nihilists have imposed their bureaucratic fascism on the actual population of Europe is as impressive as festering cancer is impressive.
The actual culture we have here has, however, remained impervious to the disease you admire so much.
“Goths”… who ever heard of that except the eunuchs of Rome? Rome is an empty placeholder. At least that is what it became after it shed it’s principal deity, whom no one now seems to even know about.
Me again…,
If someone stomps on a heart while having the best times of their life, they will gain disrepute.
Yes, Ecmamdo, and how many times have you stomped on a heart in your heavenly ecstasy? I lost count.
People here are ridiculous assholes, narcissists - Ive come to accept that.
For the longest time I was as a generous god, showering the forum with immaculate as well as very bloody wisdoms, but I have decided to become a human among humans, and share in the all round hilarity of our species.
My heavenly ecstasy… I’ve seen and been through some extremely harsh hell realms for 28 years…
One after the other after the other. I actually know enough about hell to know it even gets worse than mine.
Here’s another one of my aphorisms…
Don’t get cocky about hell. At some point you have to love yourself.
One of mine…
What defines you is what you choose from the ocean of wisdom.
You do not learn civilisation from your genes, but from your culture.
This whole thing is just a bizzare litany of prejudice and misconceptions.
You can obviously write, but how the fuck did you collect such a massive range of misconceptions and nonsense?
It’s amazing just how wrong you are in so many matters I shudder to think how you’ve collected this series of beliefs.
Have you ever been to school or are you completely self taught?
Presumably you went to school to learn to write. When did it all go wrong for you?
Has anyone ever used the phrase schizophrenia in relation to your personal mental health, because the only other person I know who has ever demonstrated such a muddled and prejudiced set of views is my schizophrenia brother.
One of mine.
The closer a person gets to the truth will drive them mad. If they survive it (no suicide) the bliss is untold.
QED: people here are narcissistic assholes. Maybe there’s one or two truly decent ones around, I think Wendy is one of them but I have no idea really if that’s truly the case.
In any case, this derails the topic.
The absurdities espoused here by the OP who has grown so insolently ignorant all of a sudden, are a blemish on the noble topic of religion.
The oldest religions of Earth are Shamanic, and the Indo European Shamanism dates back at least sixty thousand years.
The shamanic realm of Odin ranges from Kamtsjatka the Gates of Hercules.
Rome had this hilarious notion of ‘restoring peace’, meaning massacring everybody and burning all the cultural artifacts they could find.
“Peace has been brought to Gaul! Too bad all the Gauls stood in the way!”
Communists avant la lettre.
One of mine.
If you destroy something beautiful, you’ll regret it.
FC,
What the fuck dude. You’re complaining about all the posts here but yours and calling us narcissists?
What the fuck dude?
Vittorio -
If you could answer that question I might be able to answer your question (or at least give you a pointer as to where to look) - or maybe not.
The impossibility of absolute homogeneity?
Or: the lack of power of “nothing” to enforce itself?
Oh wait Im someone else… or… aren’t we all, in the end, the same no-mind?
The well that the Hebrews conceptualize, Ayn-Soph (No-Limit) births their gods, Eheieh (I am that I am), YHWH, the Elohim, and all the others. It is the same well as the Buddhistic Void - all these ideas are the same, the result of pushing human intuition to its natural limit.
Ok… whatever. That’s not an aphorism though.
Now… I understand the OP is about theological aphorisms. I’m contributing direct religious aphorisms which he pointed out.
It’s not so terrible if I sneak these into the thread.
Why the fuck would I quote someone else about passé stuff when I can post state of the art modern stuff?
If someone makes this same thread in 100 years, they’ll be quoting me, because by then it’ll be part of the canon. (Meaning that this a response theologically)
There is more to know. And looking back at the posts between you and James - James actually gave you every opportunity to see it. In his admitted reluctance - he stated what God is all about in the very practical sense (the construct and methods) but in a way that those unqualified could not see it. There is a very profound reason to not just tell everyone (he mentioned that as well) - so he revealed it cryptically. Without being vetted and ordained - there are very good reasons to not reveal any more than the basic idea - “The Creator”. You apparently disqualified yourself.
I’m just going to lay down something that is about the most heartfelt words in existence:
There’s got to be a way to construct reality so that we know for sure that we’re not hurting a living being no matter what we do, while still having all of our desires met forever.
That’s my personal comment on religion and it’s failings … if this had been thought / taught, say, 60,000 years ago… can you even imagine how awesome this world would be?
It boggles even my mind.
Lots of interesting opinions in there. Funny how you criticize the Goths as “innately racist” and then you talk about “mixing the blood” of peoples. How is that not racism? I see race as a social construct that gets conflated with ethnicity.