Skip to main content

Humans, The Spiritual Nomads // Jessef Leslie

  Throughout all of history people have looked to the sky to answer the unknown and search for meaning in this life. Science, Religion and Mythology have been our way of making sense out of this random growth of cells and reproduction that we call existence. We know that something as intelligent as us can't come from an unintelligent source and in searching for it (the intelligent source) we all have come up with different answers. The Iliad opened me into the world of Greek mythology just enough to get me thinking about their gods and what makes their god different from ours. As well as what truths might they have had about human purpose and the afterlife.

  People are made in gods image. This is a line I have heard over and over again but yet every time people speak of god: they say that he is pure good, incapable of making mistakes, and is all knowing. This is a double-bind. Because when we say "he is all good", we seem to forget our ideas of good are simply from earth's knowledge of good and what is familiar to us. So what we consider good, might be considered evil by him which makes him being "purely good" a statement that depends on every persons idea of good and evil; "He can't make mistakes" contradicts us being made in his image, if he made us in his image then why were we given human nature that makes us so different. If he made us just like him why are we capable of mistakes, he must've put that ability in us... And if he did, why in so many religions does he punish us for simply using the human nature he breathed into us with the air? People seem to speak as if they are god and know everything about him... But everything we perceive and think is from a mortal, substantial view point and therefore we can't speak of what he is because human minds don't have the ability to perceive infinity from a two dimensional standpoint because we are three dimensional beings.

   Before i continue I'd like to speak briefly on the word Myth... This word is often compared to fake, story, or made-up. But i want to share how i define it here: "A story of exaggerated feats and/or losses that makes the big questions and divine understandable through characters that have relatable human nature and feeling." In the Iliad they use the gods to explain uncontrollable human emotions and desires. They thought the god was just like a human. Now remember they are an oligarchy/ democracy, this is very important in understanding their beliefs. So their religious belief is like their government, there were many citizens(gods) and leaders(demi-gods) who can vote but their were still a few people whose vote was stronger than others(Apollo v.s. Aphrodite) and these people were chosen by the archon(Zeus). Many people who i heard discuss Greek mythology said "there must be one main god who everyone takes orders from" (which is very ironic because we are living in a democracy that is supposedly run by "the people" so to view heaven as a monarchy run by 1 man is the complete reverse). This can be hard for a lot of westerners to understand because Christianity came from a time of kings. We refer to our one god as a king, lord, or king of kings because that is the era it came from. (Egyptian divine rule) So lets detach from this as we dive into taking something from the Greek polytheism for a moment. In the time they thought gods were just like humans: that they made mistakes, didn't know everything, and were perfect in very imperfect ways. They loved the same things humans loved, took part in events with them, fought with them, grieved with them, and loved with them. And as you can see some of these ideals are in Christianity and many other religions as well. The gods also represented figures to be like. As many of us think to be more like Jesus and learn from him, the Greeks did the same with their thoughts of Zeus, Heracles, Apollo, Achilles... I think we can learn a lot by looking at how Homer shows heaven as a democracy that makes mistakes. That we aren't all just sinners screwing up but that we are connected to the divine and with the energy in everyday, even in the little things we do like chariot racing or spear fighting our neighbors. 

  In conclusion, before i get called an atheist like Socrates did for daring to question his own beliefs. I'd like to say that from reading the Iliad,diving into eastern beliefs, and using my extended period of 19 years of experience as well. I've come to find that, though everyone's ideas may be different, we are all still connected by the fact that we are searching. Though we all go through different terrains and paths, we are all still looking for truth. Which is ultimately what makes us all human in the end. Our journey, love, and grief. And next time i disagree with somebody, instead of trying to argue my opinions... I'm going to try and remember what the Iliad taught me, that though we disagree we are both searchers in this jungle... And our grief, love, and disagreement is what makes us family even when we step on a snake or go down a dark path.


Thank you for reading, this does have some humor to it so please keep that in mind, i wasn't aiming to insult or put down any beliefs. This was to learn from the Iliad, make fun conversation, and bring up some questions that seem to have disappeared. 


commented on Haylee lynd's and Clabo's post

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Lovers of Wisdom, Not Power—Lily Caswell

In Book VIII of Plato’s Republic, Socrates talks about the possibility of having a well-governed city. However, he also talks about how that particular form of government is impossible to have. A well-governed city becomes a possibility only if you can discover a better way of life for your future rulers than holding office.” (Plato, p 215) Maybe his version of a better life was for those in office to not be lovers of power, since it would then become a fight among rival lovers. Socrates gets to the point that the only rulers who don’t love power are true philosophers. Philosophers are lovers of wisdom and knowledge and not power, ergo they are the perfect rulers. Absolute power corrupts and power corrupts absolutely, so I’m thinking that maybe the trick to being a good ruler is for you to be a philosophical person who loves wisdom and not power. I commented on Jamie’s and Isabelle’s posts.

Oedipus’ Children/Siblings—Lily Caswell

Ok, so Oedipus is a bit of a train wreck to say the least. I love the fact that even after Oedipus found out about his less-than-appealing relationship with his mother, he still tried to look after his children/siblings. After he gouged his eyes out, his children came to him at which point Oedipus talked about how that when they were old enough to marry, no one would want them due to them being products of incest. He said for the people not to condemn them based on what their father had done. Even after he knew what he had done and what his children were, he still wanted the best for them. I commented on Logan’s and Ian’s posts.

Dystopian Origins Uncovered ////// Isabelle Ferguson

  I think that ideas eventually run out of originality and circle back to the original idea. During this week's reading, many of Socrates’ suggestions for a place of perfection reminded me of some novels I’ve read depicting dystopian worlds. Disclaimer: There are spoilers ahead. You have been warned.        To begin, in  The  Giver  by Lois Lowry censorship is a major theme. The novel is centered around a boy who is receiving memories withheld from the population! The government in The Giver is especially careful to censor the memories that may cause strife, anger, fear, sadness, etc. In the adults, this society is cemented. So, the government is especially strict with the youth. Socrates talks about verses to “obliterate” to prevent the descriptions from doing “harm to our future warriors” for the better half of Book III (Plato, page 44). The warriors he speaks of are the youth. He goes on to list the multitude of verses that should be done ...