Aswad
Posts: 9374
Joined: 4/4/2007
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: Andalusite
Aswad, I would say that the Jews demonize rather than deify Hitler, but even so, from talking with my father, and friends who are Jewish, he wasn't regarded as more than human, rather the focus of hate and fear. He certainly hasn't had his name invoked at any temple or synagogue I've visited, unlike the way Satan is frequently mentioned in Christian services.
I agree that "goddess" isn't used in a religious way by the submissives in question, but I still feel it is very inappropriate and disrespectful, not just to my faith, but to ones which do revere actual goddesses. I would be angry if someone called me that (whereas I might not particularly care for some other titles, but wouldn't be especially offended by them), and it is something that I have refused potential partners over, when I was looking in the past.
Demonization and deification are one and the same, just with a difference in how one relates to the deified figure: the demonic is that of which we do not approve, while the divine is that of which we do approve, with the caveat that the approval usually has to be ratified by a large body of people. In any case, the fact that they vilify, rather than venerate, does not change the fact that a man has become a legend that is invoked in a wide range of contexts for effect, frequently in a rather ritualistic manner, and that his legend is part of the mythology by now. His name and deeds are invoked as justification for the 'chosen people' to be entitled to special considerations that are not afforded others (including the Romani, who tend to be forgotten in the context of the Holocaust). The same is done these days with regard to Palestinians, except the Bible is what is invoked there.
Don't get me wrong, I am quite aware that the Jewish people (going with the self-designation as a people) are as diverse as any other group of similar size, if not more so. A specific subset are recognizably described by what I say, though, so please just pretend I've added the appropriate qualifiers to the generic name, and I shall in turn pretend that you have qualified the term 'Christian' appropriately before ascribing the frequent invocation of Satan during services. There is indeed such a set of Christians, among the various people under that denomination (which also describes a larger and more diverse group where Satan plays a very variable part).
As for taking offense at being treated as a god/dess, my take on it is simple:
A god/dess is that which is worshiped by one or more people.
If someone worships me, that makes me a god, albeit a small, insignificant and fallible one. This is no different from how the god-kings of old were worshiped by their people, or how the idolu of Hollywood are worshiped by teenagers around the world, or how the genius loci of various cities or people have been the object of worship by populations over the ages (nowadays, for instance, the idea of the United States of America is worshiped by many, with the flag serving the same purpose as the cross does for Christians- one of the reasons the Jesuits objected to its use).
Godhood does not imply infallibility, and indeed the lowest common denominator is worship.
For that matter, I haven't seen anything to indicate that god/desses are unable to worship greater ones. In the time of the Babylonian king Hammurabi, it was still common practice to regard the king as a god, much like with the pharaos of Egypt. Nonetheless, Hammurabi himself worshipped greater gods than himself, including Marduk, who can be seen as the prelude to Jesus, occupying that place in that pantheon, just as Enki (who became EAL, and later the אל of Judaism- cf. אלוהאימ and יהבה, the Hebrew name for Enki, though they may have mixed in Enlil) and Ninlil (who became Aššera, then was banned by- I think- Jeremiah) and Enlil. The coincidence of the Babylonian exile of the Jews at this time is interesting, of course, given the contemporary and later parallells.
So, while desiring elevation to godhood by way of worship may be vain and narcissistic, accepting the status if worship occurs is little more than acknowledging a reality which is of little to no consequence. As far as I know, being worshipped is not known to confer or bestow anything on a mortal that was not already there, nor to prevent said mortal from any sort of worship. Indeed, Saul suggests that slaves should accept their masters as proxies for their god, which you can look up in any ordinary copy of the 'New Testament'.
As such, ridiculing anyone who is worshipped might be seen as blasphemy or sacrilege.
Whether one extends such considerations to all belief, is a personal choice.
Just a thought.
Health,
al-Aswad.
P.S.: I am not, as far as I am aware, being worshipped by anyone. Just to clarify that.
< Message edited by Aswad -- 6/4/2010 10:02:42 AM >
_____________________________
"If God saw what any of us did that night, he didn't seem to mind.
From then on I knew: God doesn't make the world this way.
We do." -- Rorschack, Watchmen.
|
RE: SLAVE AND RELIGION - 
Profile
I don't personally know anyone who has earned any of those titles outside of Ren Fair or SCA, so I was speaking of people who get them that way, or who choose them as terms of endearment in their dynamic/relationship. Of course, anyone who has actually earned them is entitled to them! I just don't run in those circles, so if someone did introduce themselves that way, out of context and without explaining that they were hereditary nobility, my first assumption/inclination would be that they were involved in historical reenactment. I'd probably use the title, depending on the context, but not take it seriously unless I were specifically informed. I personally don't use Mistress for exactly the same reason. It calls to mind the days when someone would say something along the lines of, "Mistress, wilt ye hither with me to yonder privy?" rather than power exchange dynamics at first blush.
I generally don't seek to control other people's behaviour or spiritual lives, just explaining that this is the way I personally feel about it. Of course, I don't get any say in other people's spiritual, power exchange, or sex lives, and if it works for them, it just does. I just don't want to be involved. By contacting me with an e-mail or profile that says such things, they are seeking me out, not the other way around. I felt it made it immediately obvious that they hadn't read my profile, as I had specifically listed it as something not to address me by, and why, when I was looking at the time.
New Messages
No New Messages
Hot Topic w/ New Messages
Hot Topic w/o New Messages
Locked w/ New Messages
Locked w/o New Messages
Post New Thread