Page 1 of 1

Agnostos Theos

PostPosted: Mon Feb 16, 2009 8:34 am
by Q Valerius
"Sive deus sive dea" was meant to not offend whichever form the deity took. Their language was gendered, so they didn't want to offend a female deity by calling her "deus", and vice versa.

Re: Agnostos Theos

PostPosted: Mon Feb 16, 2009 7:50 pm
by Valerius Claudius Iohanes
Salve, Formose Viriuste -

Formosus Viriustus wrote:... could he not have been, say the patron god of the sceptics and such ?

Whether intended as that originally, who can say? But I would certainly have made an offering or two.

I credit the Gods to the extent I do because of three things:
(a) their permanence in our ideas and psyches;
(b) human helplessnes before dynamic, chaotic nature; and
(c) the ultimate and severe limitations to human knowledge.

Gods, Spirits, alternate Selves - they're perennial. We, however, are not only foredoomed but most ephemeral - all it takes is one fall or a little scratch, sometimes, to wipe the individual out. And then, what can we know, aside from what we feel, measure, or infer? Even if Mercurius ipse would come to me, how can I prove the visitation was real when even little things sometimes fool me completely? I can't even know the heart of another human being.

So God as storm, light, inner voice, creator, cosmic machine - all these images, Others, suspicions, "sure and certain hopes" could be referenced by a "Deus Ignotus". That's my personal thought.

Also, and aside from the topic - welcome to the Fora. If you want, drop an intro in the Introductions Forum.

Vale bene.

Re: Agnostos Theos

PostPosted: Tue Feb 17, 2009 12:19 am
by Valerius Claudius Iohanes
Salve iterum, Formose Viriuste!

Nil timendum! The Introductions Forum is at the top level, the "Board Index". As they say, 'You can't miss it!'

Vale bene.