[Note: if you aren’t into religious stuff or are already pretty invested in a religion, feel free to skip this series of articles because it’ll be either boring or enraging.]
The transactional worship instinct probably emerges as a natural extension of hardwired human social instincts. The gods are assumed to have basically human attributes; humans can be dealt with by striking bargains; therefore the same can be done with the gods.
The same thing is also true of the alternative mode of engagement, where one seeks to model oneself on the gods. Humans have an instinct to emulate more successful and powerful humans.
The second instinct is probably more prevalent amongst children than adults - hero-worship being a more child-like trait. That in turn could explain why worship tends to predominate over emulation: the latter attracts primarily those who maintain a child's openness, flexibility, and humility.
Regarding worship v emulation, that's an interesting point. So few actually take the next step towards emulation. I'm thinking of Redditors watching and worshipping Marvel capeheroes, but never actually doing anything to start emulating them by becoming more heroic themselves.
And isn't modern religion largely a spectator sport? You watch the priests do their song and dance and believe that you are saved because you have the patience and free time to dedicate your Sunday to the free show.
Rolo, you present such challenging content. The video interview w/ the Gnostic was the most interesting part to me. But his heretical take on Marcion strikes me as too little, too late, not to mention, ridiculously pricey to read.: $75 for 200 pages!
My personal experience w/ worship was right in keeping w/ Carter's comments. I went from God worship to guru/master emulation as I moved from Catholicism to esoteric Christianity to Eastern martial disciplines to an neo-ancient Egyptian cult. Still have contacts w/ people from all of them, but I'm a free-range chicken now.
And yes, in the early days, I had an experience of prolonged prayer bringing about a very minor miracle.
Yeah, I didn't read it. But I've watched most of his free content and I read a lot about Marcionism before I discovered the Set-Yahweh connection thanks to Litwa. I'm thinking of getting his book though, it's awfully tempting, but I think I already get the gist of it...
If it's true that the Hebrews were held captive in Egypt, then the Set connection makes sense. Israeli archeologists (considered left-wing by Zionists) dispute the Egyptian internment saying there's lack of proof. I think the only proof is the "Hibiru" statement on some stele which might well pertain to them being a band of outsiders, assorted criminals (read illegal immigrants).
I THINK YOU ARE WAY OUT OF YOUR ELEMENT WITH THIS POST. IT MAKES LITTLE SENSE AND IS ACTUALLY A QUITE SUPERFICIAL TREATMENT OF A SERIOUS TOPIC. PERHAPS YOU MIGHT GET MORE FROM A RE-READING OF DOSTOYEVSKY' S THE BROTHERS KARAMAZOV OR THE MORE RECENT SOLZHENITSYN'S WORKS. CHOOSE ANY ONE OF THEM AND YOU WILL GET A BETTER UNDERSTANDING OF SPIRITUALITY, WORSHIP AND THE BASIC QUATIONS OF LIFE AND ITS MEANING.
I don't think it's superficial. Also your comment isn't very constructive. I've read Dostoevsky and it was his critique of Christian Judgement Day dogma and Dostoevsky's embrace of Hesychasm that got me thinking about these topics in the first place. Also, feel free to drop the caps lock.
Although many claim to know what spirituality is, especially those embracing the worship models you mention, the truth of the matter is that most "knowledge" consists of baseless claims. I'm not even sure where we can begin to investigate spirituality without dragging in synthetic mythologies in one form or another. It's too hard to avoid, and to the extent that art may have a spiritual connnection, mythology might actually form a bridge. Don't know. Anyway, I'm looking forward to your follow-ups.
Excellent exegesis Rolo. When it comes down to brass tacks. No "faith" or "belief system" political, philosophical, can be proven for example in a mathematical way 2+2=4. There is no discussion or debate about this. When it comes to theology, philosophy and ideology 2+2 can = 6 7/8's. Though I've been studying theology, esotericism, and philosophy in my university days and now as an avocation I take a different approach than many people. To debate the validity of a theology is a pointless argument that usually ends up with anger and hurled accusations of "heretic", "blasphemer" and "heathen". This accomplishes nothing. What's more important from my perspective is does this this theology, belief system "work for you". Does it give you comfort in times of need, does it makes sense to you and answers questions you might have about God, man, the world and afterlife? If so then it's worth you while to practice it. If it doesn't don't waste your time. Find a belief system that does work for you, or just create your own, based on your own research and life's experiences. I also don't believe you have to "buy the entire package". For example if 80% of a belief system works for you but 20% seems questionable or even idiotic then practice the 80% and throw out the other 20% or vice versa. If 20% really works for you but 80% seems out dated, out of whack, or just not for you, then use the 20% and forget the other 80%. I use these percentages for illustrative purposes obviously they can vary. Look simply stated, if you're sitting in a house of worship and every five minutes you're looking at your watch, and/or rolling your eyes thinking, "What there's more? Alright enough already!" then why are you there. Because it's your families "religion", are you afraid you'll be cut out of the will if you descent (that's often the case) ridicule by others. It's obvious this belief system is doing nothing for you except make you miserable. You don't need to sit in a house of worship for that. Have you looked around lately? That will do it big time! In summation "God" τα λογότυπα (the word) is not "religion". Religion is a business like any other business. Is this a bad thing? Not necessarily just see it for what it is not what you imagine it to be and then decide for yourself what path you want to travel. What I've learned over the decades and a unique life is that their are "many keys to the kingdom" find the one that unlocks the door for you and enter with an open mind and heart if it's your place then lock the door behind you. If not, then exit and remove the key from your ring and keep moving forward you'll find what you need, All you need is "faith" that there is a place for you in the universe and how you connect and interact with it and the beyond.
That Old Testament is pretty wacked. I remember a standup routine that Julia Sweeney used to do on it about how the nuns at her Catholic school would just gloss over it. I’m sure she’s a standard-issue shitlib now so so much for that Catholic education.
Your explanation of Old Testament God is typical "higher criticism", but interesting article nevertheless. I am interested to see how you would argue the possibility of non-worship. Whether you are a mambo-jumbo voodoo type in Africa or a true atheist, I would say that you would always end up worshiping that which is the perceived source of ultimate truth.
The transactional worship instinct probably emerges as a natural extension of hardwired human social instincts. The gods are assumed to have basically human attributes; humans can be dealt with by striking bargains; therefore the same can be done with the gods.
The same thing is also true of the alternative mode of engagement, where one seeks to model oneself on the gods. Humans have an instinct to emulate more successful and powerful humans.
The second instinct is probably more prevalent amongst children than adults - hero-worship being a more child-like trait. That in turn could explain why worship tends to predominate over emulation: the latter attracts primarily those who maintain a child's openness, flexibility, and humility.
Regarding worship v emulation, that's an interesting point. So few actually take the next step towards emulation. I'm thinking of Redditors watching and worshipping Marvel capeheroes, but never actually doing anything to start emulating them by becoming more heroic themselves.
The bugman raises a third and thoroughly degenerate way of relating to the numinous: neither worship nor emulation, but pure spectating.
And isn't modern religion largely a spectator sport? You watch the priests do their song and dance and believe that you are saved because you have the patience and free time to dedicate your Sunday to the free show.
Arena church as the mirror image to sportsball and capeshit. You're onto something there.
Interesting article and I look forward to your next post on this topic!
Rolo, you present such challenging content. The video interview w/ the Gnostic was the most interesting part to me. But his heretical take on Marcion strikes me as too little, too late, not to mention, ridiculously pricey to read.: $75 for 200 pages!
My personal experience w/ worship was right in keeping w/ Carter's comments. I went from God worship to guru/master emulation as I moved from Catholicism to esoteric Christianity to Eastern martial disciplines to an neo-ancient Egyptian cult. Still have contacts w/ people from all of them, but I'm a free-range chicken now.
And yes, in the early days, I had an experience of prolonged prayer bringing about a very minor miracle.
Yeah, I didn't read it. But I've watched most of his free content and I read a lot about Marcionism before I discovered the Set-Yahweh connection thanks to Litwa. I'm thinking of getting his book though, it's awfully tempting, but I think I already get the gist of it...
If it's true that the Hebrews were held captive in Egypt, then the Set connection makes sense. Israeli archeologists (considered left-wing by Zionists) dispute the Egyptian internment saying there's lack of proof. I think the only proof is the "Hibiru" statement on some stele which might well pertain to them being a band of outsiders, assorted criminals (read illegal immigrants).
I THINK YOU ARE WAY OUT OF YOUR ELEMENT WITH THIS POST. IT MAKES LITTLE SENSE AND IS ACTUALLY A QUITE SUPERFICIAL TREATMENT OF A SERIOUS TOPIC. PERHAPS YOU MIGHT GET MORE FROM A RE-READING OF DOSTOYEVSKY' S THE BROTHERS KARAMAZOV OR THE MORE RECENT SOLZHENITSYN'S WORKS. CHOOSE ANY ONE OF THEM AND YOU WILL GET A BETTER UNDERSTANDING OF SPIRITUALITY, WORSHIP AND THE BASIC QUATIONS OF LIFE AND ITS MEANING.
I don't think it's superficial. Also your comment isn't very constructive. I've read Dostoevsky and it was his critique of Christian Judgement Day dogma and Dostoevsky's embrace of Hesychasm that got me thinking about these topics in the first place. Also, feel free to drop the caps lock.
Bruh, ease off the caps lock lol
As an indicator of 'not a fucking argument', all caps never fails.
Although many claim to know what spirituality is, especially those embracing the worship models you mention, the truth of the matter is that most "knowledge" consists of baseless claims. I'm not even sure where we can begin to investigate spirituality without dragging in synthetic mythologies in one form or another. It's too hard to avoid, and to the extent that art may have a spiritual connnection, mythology might actually form a bridge. Don't know. Anyway, I'm looking forward to your follow-ups.
Excellent exegesis Rolo. When it comes down to brass tacks. No "faith" or "belief system" political, philosophical, can be proven for example in a mathematical way 2+2=4. There is no discussion or debate about this. When it comes to theology, philosophy and ideology 2+2 can = 6 7/8's. Though I've been studying theology, esotericism, and philosophy in my university days and now as an avocation I take a different approach than many people. To debate the validity of a theology is a pointless argument that usually ends up with anger and hurled accusations of "heretic", "blasphemer" and "heathen". This accomplishes nothing. What's more important from my perspective is does this this theology, belief system "work for you". Does it give you comfort in times of need, does it makes sense to you and answers questions you might have about God, man, the world and afterlife? If so then it's worth you while to practice it. If it doesn't don't waste your time. Find a belief system that does work for you, or just create your own, based on your own research and life's experiences. I also don't believe you have to "buy the entire package". For example if 80% of a belief system works for you but 20% seems questionable or even idiotic then practice the 80% and throw out the other 20% or vice versa. If 20% really works for you but 80% seems out dated, out of whack, or just not for you, then use the 20% and forget the other 80%. I use these percentages for illustrative purposes obviously they can vary. Look simply stated, if you're sitting in a house of worship and every five minutes you're looking at your watch, and/or rolling your eyes thinking, "What there's more? Alright enough already!" then why are you there. Because it's your families "religion", are you afraid you'll be cut out of the will if you descent (that's often the case) ridicule by others. It's obvious this belief system is doing nothing for you except make you miserable. You don't need to sit in a house of worship for that. Have you looked around lately? That will do it big time! In summation "God" τα λογότυπα (the word) is not "religion". Religion is a business like any other business. Is this a bad thing? Not necessarily just see it for what it is not what you imagine it to be and then decide for yourself what path you want to travel. What I've learned over the decades and a unique life is that their are "many keys to the kingdom" find the one that unlocks the door for you and enter with an open mind and heart if it's your place then lock the door behind you. If not, then exit and remove the key from your ring and keep moving forward you'll find what you need, All you need is "faith" that there is a place for you in the universe and how you connect and interact with it and the beyond.
This, exactly.
That Old Testament is pretty wacked. I remember a standup routine that Julia Sweeney used to do on it about how the nuns at her Catholic school would just gloss over it. I’m sure she’s a standard-issue shitlib now so so much for that Catholic education.
Your explanation of Old Testament God is typical "higher criticism", but interesting article nevertheless. I am interested to see how you would argue the possibility of non-worship. Whether you are a mambo-jumbo voodoo type in Africa or a true atheist, I would say that you would always end up worshiping that which is the perceived source of ultimate truth.
I've been influenced by the arguments of the mythicist people when it comes to the Old Testament.