How would the biblical versions of angels fare up against Zeus at his utmost powerful version? You can use any biblical/mythical versions of Judiac-Christian-Islamic writings including from as late as the 1700's such as John Milton's Paradise Lost. except for any comics and anime versions.
what you are not understanding is orphic Zeus isnt the original Zeus that most people know, he is a very unique version of Zeus, you cant compare him with angels since he is transcendent and immenent and omnipotent and everything and everyone. In orphism Zeus like God created everything, Zeus unlike God isnt male, Zeus unlike God is all being (for example God is not satan, God is not michael, while Zeus is phanes and all the immortals), God isnt all things (for example God isnt the breath of everyone, God is not the earth, God is not the air, yes God created all these things but he isnt them) Zeus is all things and more than all, God got opposed, Zeus didnt and it isnt even possible since he is all beings, it would be like attacking himself. His only feat is swallowing all of creation, including Phanes(who was considered to be God of orphism) and every other diety. Then he recreated them all and merged with them becoming all dieties and all things.
That sounds more like Hindu Mythology when you think about it. I, however, do not agree with your statement that God is male. He is a genderless spirit and it just so happens that the male gender is the base form of Hebrew pronouns. The same thing happens in angels, which are also genderless. I don't think that thought entities which take the visual form of giant intersecting rims that are completely covered in eyes can conceivably be called male. Let alone an outright formless and invisible spirit such as God. Now, if you're thinking of the concept of the trinity, that's an entirely different thing and something whose scriptural validity is highly suspect. Anyways, this reminds me of the phrase "stop hitting yourself", which would be surprisingly apt for any instance of armed conflict occurring in a universe operating under an Orphic system.
Blah, blah, blah, jeez don't you stop? Orphic Zeus is directly taken from Christian mythology and other sources, so in many respects would equate to Judeo-Christian god in many ways.
He's only explaining what his feats are, calm down. The source Orphic Zeus derives from are relatively meaningless if he has the superior demonstrations of power, really. And God tired out creating the universe in six days, didn't he? Or rather Earth, given that's all that was really described in Genesis IIRC. He won't be defeating an embodiment of Earth/the universe in any appreciable timeframe, much less the legions of the Angels he created.
Im talking about ORPHIC zeus, not hesoid's not homer's, Orphic Zeus (by far the most powerful version of him). And what i said is true Um im trying to prove a point here, what's with blah blah blah? something bothering you? But you have to agree that God in not all being nor all things, Zeus is, that's the main difference (and a big one)
I didn't say anything against your description of Orphic Zeus, only about your assertion that God is male, which He most certainly isn't. You could rest without having been tired in the first place. That argument about stamina is up there with the iron chariots. And even in the lowest calcs, the Genesis creation also included the creation of the Sun, the Moon, a massive number of stars, all of which created from the universe's first light, which He also created. Regardless of what scale you use, that's still a little bit more than Earth. There's also the whole constant universal expansion-esque thing going on in later books. In some Jewish works, there are also some angels as large as planets.
The OP a- Severely limits angel mythos if it's pre-1700's and restricted to abrahamic mythology and b- puts non-omnipotents up against, at least, a near-omnipotent. Kinda pointless.
Pretty much. They're not even in the same weight class. This is like pitting Charmander against the Ebon Dragon.
Dude the reason I got fed up of MasterEon is due to this thread: http://forums.spacebattles.com/threads/zeus-mythology-vs-living-tribunal.229911/ Read it and despair.
LOL, btw i know this is not on topic but to end that thread look at this: http://apollonios.tripod.com/hellenic/eea5.html read the what is the cosmos part so? convinced? and who do you think wins this?
Doesnt Genesis state that "In the beginning God created the Heavens and the Earth"? The Heavens are used to depict all stars and planets in the sky. So a lot more then just earth.
Nope full of crap as always, it is someone trying to explain and wank off Orphic teachings all at the same time.
how so? Cosmogony: The physical frame of the World (Cosmos) is self existent, self propelled and self retained. The world is perpetual and consists of an infinite number of universes. Each universe has a starting point in time, but no end. Each universe consists of the two cosmogonic substances and is suject to expans ion and contraction, periodically. The closest modern scientific equivalent to Orphean Cosmogony is the model proposed by Karel Velan in his work «The Multi-universe Cosmos», Plenum Press eds., New York NY, 1992. source: http://apollonios.tripod.com/hellenic/eea6.html another one: The basic Cosmologic principles of the Hellenic religion The basic Cosmologic principles of the Hellenic religion derive from Orphean Theology, as preserved through the centuries in the Fragmenta Orphicorum. Other sources are theOrphean Hymns to the Gods and the living oral tradition, which was never extinguished, although it survived underground. The Cosmos [viewed as the infinite multitude of Universes (conglomerates of matter), within the infinite Space and perpetual Time] has always existed, is self-motivated, self-regulated and ever-changing (evolving). The Natural Law (in its broadest conception) was never created, but always existed virtually, in the pre-creative state of our Universe, the «unspeakable principium». The Cosmos (either viewed as the infinite multitude of Universes, or as the World) is a value. So is Man and Life in its broadest conception. Conscience and Higher Conscience are produced by the ever-evolving Cosmos; obviously, they appear later in the creation process. The Cosmos is a physical system that has no place for arbitrary non-physical entities (like the «evil»). The Cosmos is not opposed by any power. History is cyclic and never-ending. Every Universe in the Cosmos expands and contracts consecutively, governed by the physical laws (and only by them); there is neither an ethical meaning in these titanic phenomena, nor a cause, external to the Cosmos. source: http://apollonios.tripod.com/hellenic/eea4.html can you be specific on why isnt this true?
If you cannot understand that is someone trying to explain and wank-off Orphic teachings at the same time there is no hope, and it is done so way after the texts in question were written, 1992, as your post even refers to it. In addition the fact that the texts you linked to last time state none of the above, and that by taking the spirit behind them it shows none of the crap the above fuckwit has tried to explain. The fact that you blatantly continue this fallacy shows your total dishonesty.
let's put you blaming me of wanking aside because i could say you are a troll, but let's keep it civil and you explain to me how is this not true?
Hardly, you fail accept evidence or apply an ounce of logic or science on this subject and take things as read. Not how this board works I'm afraid. Try reading my previous post, I said it is someone that wrote an article in 1992, after the texts were written by a thousand years plus - it's quite simple and not rocket science. Meaning he is trying to explain Orphic teachings in a total bullshit manner. This was explained to you in the other thread.
ok, and this source is also trying to explain it in a bulshit manner right?: http://agis10.tripod.com/ancientgreekreligion/id1.html and this also: http://www.astrologicon.org/cosmos/cosmotheasis-hellenic-religion.html so they also are explaining it in a bulshit manner or not? please help me understand.
We've went through this in the other thread and I'm not going to re-hash your fucking stupidity, yet again. The fact that you cannot get it through your head says quite a lot about you.
yeah we have but this is new proof that i gave you so you calling me fucking stupid and telling that other sites are explaining in a bullshit manner isnt going to prove your point. but anyway i guess i cant convince you and i dont fucking care.
Yes, those 2 sites are basically the equivalent of citing fan fic about your favorite sci-fi universe to prove your point.
i gave another 2 sites they say the same thing, and there are more, so could it be that they are all not true?
If they're all parroting the same source material, sure. How often do you hear Wiccans claiming how ancient their religion is because of a few authors in the 80s and 90's claiming it while not realizing that it was invented whole cloth in like the 50's.
but the think is they are not parroting from the same source material. this is religion they are talking about why would they lie? there isnt a reason why all those sites would lie
Because they are taking the most liberal uses of language and applying their own meaning and interpretation - same as you did in the previous debate. In the same manner that their version of cosmos included other universes is blatant crap (something which you espouse). Cosmos meaning: the world or universe regarded as an orderly, harmonious system.
