|
Post by Rion on Dec 8, 2010 17:49:43 GMT -1
We need a vegetation god at harvest and a warrior god when there's a burglar at the door so it seems to me that neither the warrior nor the farmer gods would be one more important than the other, just more valuable in the season. Looking back we might see a conflict but to the average Joe of those times woudn't it just be a matter of calling on whoever is most needed at the time? *like*
|
|
|
Post by Lee on Dec 9, 2010 8:07:18 GMT -1
i think Peter hits the nail on the head
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 10, 2010 5:51:13 GMT -1
If i could return to a question I had earlier; We differentiate between Religion and a way of life. A religion is something you carry with you and will practice wherever you may be. A way of life will change with the environment you are in. My notion of the Tribes before conversion was that they had a way of life that naturally included the local Gods. If individuals, for whatever reason, moved from one community to another they didn't insist on their Gods following them it was more a matter of changing your way of life to suit the new environment. That is my understanding of pre-christian custom and what I mean by folk-ways as different to religion. I could be wrong and I'm certainly willing to hear counter arguments.
|
|
|
Post by redraven on Dec 10, 2010 5:55:53 GMT -1
The differentiation was instigated by the Abrahamic religion's inherent exclusivity. It's a trait still carried on today, even though they profess to worship the same God. I think your analogy about local Gods is spot on.
RR
|
|