What's the difference between religion and mythology? If there is one

What's the difference between religion and mythology? If there is one

Other urls found in this thread:

youtube.com/watch?v=BNkSBy5wWDk
twitter.com/SFWRedditImages

mythology is dank as fuggg

jews

Seems like the only correct answer

> God

The non contingent ground of all being. The creator of the universe. Being itself.

> Zeus

Lives on a literal mountain

True, but also mythology needn't be about God or gods or even the supernatural at all. They explain things but there's no need for them to be religious. A mythological origin of a country might just deal with a hero-king shaping its foundation. That would be the clearest difference, I think.

Also.

Books of the bible are a history book in some cases. You can argue that it has a mythological framework with a basis in fact.

Christ existed and his movement was established as growing fervently a short time after his death. That is not a myth.

>Lives on a literal mountain
But surely this is a metaphor.

religion is dogmatic, it states rules.. myth is open to interpretaition, and replicates through interpretation, not having a single origin, rather multiple.. barthes has a nice essay: myth today..

>myth is open to interpretaition

How many sects of diffrent religions are there?

And both of these are just stories involving someone's religious worldview. So whats the practical difference?

>The creator of the universe

So whats the difference between God and the Chaotic nothingness that Greek the Greeks universe?

>my god is better than your god

There is no mythology that can't give historical true

Jews plagiarized Zoroastrianism, which is a pretty chill religion

We'd describe the piety and ritual of the Greeks as their religion, but their assorted stories and characters as mythology. Christian mythology would probably be things like Genesis and Exodus (and I have heard them described as mythological by Christians, not in a derogatory sense), or perhaps tales of the lives of the saints and Christian kings.

interpretation on rules is hardly interpretation....

>So whats the practical difference?

Everything.

It is the diffrence between life and death.

mythology is fan fiction
religion is a set of codes and morals based off of that fan fiction

Mythology doesn't conceive sin, but only personnel (...kid) offence torwards some god who is just a big guy, not the non contingent principle for a theleologically organized reality whose nucleus is the human bean.

One is accepted by society as fact you must tolerate and the other is accepted by society as fiction.

*tips fædora

that's very questionable
homer already wrote that certain things like, say, inhospitality are generally disliked by the gods
later it was rather elaborated by some philosophers and if you read say phaedo it has a full scaled description of heaven and hell where the sinners suffer

>somehow a valid counter point

So sin offends the Christian God
And bad behavior and impiety (according to Plato and others) offends the Greek Gods.
Both inform behaviors that should be followed by the individual

So whats the difference?

>The non contingent ground of all being.
The whole unmoved mover thing is from antiquity ya dingus. Aquinas copy pasted Aristotle.

And Zeus being on a mountain wasn't always interpreted literally. And there are equally (tbph probably even more) ridiculous physical things in any given Semitic religion about God or Heaven or anything.

Remember that Sin in the Christian tradition is the state of being without God. Its like a cavity that eats away at you.

Original Sin was our seperation from God.

That is what offends the Christian God.

Is this elaborated in the tradition of Greek Gods?

>Books of the bible are a history book in some cases. You can argue that it has a mythological framework with a basis in fact.
Historical Bible readings are boring and ignore (historically) the narrative techniques employed in the gospels. Treating the works as factual ignores at least as much of the majesty as treating them like stories.

sounds pretty close to some concepts of stoicism desu senpai

>Remember that Sin in the Christian tradition is the state of being without God. Its like a cavity that eats away at you.
Which Christians are we talking about here again?

Its in Genesis.

> In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth. The earth was without form, and void; and darkness was on the face of the deep. And the Spirit of God was hovering over the face of the waters. Then God said, “Let there be light”

and furthermore.

> I AM THAT I AM

>Original Sin was our seperation from God.

And being bad little boys and girls for listening to Promtheus used to be the Greek justification for life sucking. I mean there we're other reasons but clearly mythology informed their pre-scientific worldview, therefore similar to religion.

How does this prove there is a difference between religion and mythology? Are you saying Genesis proves the scientific authenticity of the Bible?

Example how this explination applies to the Timaeus or Xenophanes' view of religion?

This kind of ignorance just blows my mind. You're absolutely right I can't respond to this. Where would one even begin? You realise Zeus abducted and raped women? You realise your "bad behaviour offends the Greek gods" is absolutely ridiculous. Impiety, yes, bad behaviour, what? They themselves commit the "bad behaviour" every hour of every day. Bad behaviour would be impiety and whatever the Greek gods decided that day. They were impulsive, flawed creatures. Even the Greeks recognised a God, a true God, a God that defined and was, behind their myths. That's the God Socrates references and calls to witness what he does. And yet you quote Plato as if you know what you're talking about. Absolutely disgusting. I hate this realisation that I spend hours of my weeks on a site where people are just s ofucking ignorant like my neighbours are in real life. What am I fucking doing here, I hate this place and I hate these fucking children who know nothing and engage in endless, pointless discussions where they learn NOTHING but only try to reinforce their pathetic views adopted through very specifically NOT studying instead of the opposite. I revolt myself. I deserve to die.

Have you never read the Enuma Elish?

When in the height heaven was not named,
And the earth beneath did not yet bear a name,
And the primeval Apsu, who begat them,
And chaos, Tiamut, the mother of them both
Their waters were mingled together,
And no field was formed, no marsh was to be seen;
When of the gods none had been called into being,
And none bore a name, and no destinies were ordained;

Apsu was there before Jehovah m8. The Babylonian myth might be the progenitor of Greek creation and Jewish/Arab/Christian

No.

I am saying that the idea of an unmoved mover and non contigent ground of all being is unique to the Christian tradition. At least in the western world.

This is arguably the best idea there is of what a God would be.

This universe is causal and therefore a question is posited on its existence. If there is a God, he would be non contigent and not of the same nature as the universe or abide by its laws.

There are many other myths where the universe is created by some great clash of powers.Dare i say, that the universe was created out of Love in the Christian tradition.

>You realise Zeus abducted and raped women?

And? Whats that got to do with the fact that they thought he was real, scared of him and sacrificed animals to him to make sure he wasn't pissed off?

>I MEAN ITS THE CURRENT YEAR WHY SHOULD I HAVE TO EXPLAIN MYSELF

It's more that Zeus is kind of demiurge. He's not all powerful AND he's a bit of a twat. If he were a nice dude I don't think be would have given Pandora that gift.

Bit like old testament God.

funnily how apsu it's simply a local underground source of the fresh water and tiamut it's salt water

>And yet you quote Plato as if you know what you're talking about. Absolutely disgusting. I hate this realisation that I spend hours of my weeks on a site where people are just s ofucking ignorant like my neighbours are in real life.

You do know that Plato thought that the gods we're real and that people often worshiped them right? Socrates was apparently a very religious dude

>This is arguably the best idea there is of what a God would be.

Ok but....why does that make other religions mere mythology?

I've heard there's an argument for much of the Pentateuch being anti Babylonian propaganda, so the whole "STOP WORSHIPPING THEIR GODS" and the "YAHWEH EVEN MADE TWO DIFFERENT KINDS OF WATER" things are just to piss on the Empire next door that exiled a bunch of their upper classes.

I am only saying that when you apply diffrent factors to myths and religions; some fare better than others.

Logical consistency, empirical adequacy, and experiential relevance.

We could argue all day about how diffrent religions dont meet this criteria.

Socrates was labelled a heretic for hearing voices

>Logical consistency, empirical adequacy, and experiential relevance

Well non of those make sense in Christianity either. And even if it did you just picked this criteria at random because it fits your understanding of Christianity. Why do the ancient Greek practices and interpretations not count as religion?

You seem to be assuming things about what i think.

I am not arguing for the the complete logical truth of Christianity; i merely stated that aspects of Christianity hold more truth than other religions.

I do not deny that the greeks had a hold on some of these truths as well.

>i merely stated that aspects of Christianity hold more truth than other religions

not really, all you have demonstrated is that Deism has some logical consistency

Also why does this mean that other religions don't count as religions but mere mythology?

>Also why does this mean that other religions don't count as religions but mere mythology?

I didnt

sorry, didnt finish my post.

A myth is something which has ceased to be relevant to society.

So the OP image is correct?

Is question of the existence of this universe or the idea of a God who is personally interested in us ceased to be relevant?

No

So it is not correct and they are both religions?

I never said it could not be a religion.

The idea of a personal God is a myth to some.

There is no difference?

To you, there isnt.

To Christians or many other religious people, its a myth come true.

A god seperated from religion and myth (or one that is revealed through religion) is still a question worth investigating.

Religious beliefs and mythology are the same. Religion also involves religious practice, iconography, etc.

One problem when discussing religion and God is that the definitions involved can be very elastic. Most religious people believe in a patently false conception of God who forgives sins, who wants to be worshipped, who is three-in-one, or who sends prophets and cares deeply about human sexual activity.

But in discussions, for whatever reason, people frequently swap out that God for some vague, near-meaningless 'sophisticated' definition of God like "God is the universe", "The ground of being". Usually either a) ontological commitment to this conception of God is also unjustified, or b) the whole thing is a meaningless semantic game (as in identifying God with the Universe without further explaining what that means). This is what is doing. I wouldn't be surprised if he was a fairly conventional Christian or something and was just engaged in a motte-and-bailey strategy. In any case, nebulous deistic beliefs aren't what are meant by religion 99% of the time. What's meant is Catholicism/Judaism/Islam/Shinto/Paganism/etc.

Furthermore, Christians argue that God has come form the veil of the unseen to the seen with his personification in Jesus Christ.

What was once considered myth has become real. What was merely a question has become an answer.

A myth perhaps.

>patently false

I have been nebulous because i knew i would be criticised for bringing to much religious discussion into the mix.

It seems that i'm damned if i do and damned if i dont.

>the only specific word he uses in his whole rant is ontological and he also makes a sneer about sexual morality
Look, it's 13-year old me.

How about you read a bit of Aquinas instead of just those who reinforce your views since that age.

>>the only specific word he uses is ontological
>>the only specific word
What does this even mean?

>>makes a sneer about sexual morality
Sneer? I'm just talking about the properties that many conventional religions believe ascribe to God.

Also, this may have been what you intended, but your post is 100% lacking in substantive argument.

in a sense

the ancient religions indeed differed from christianity, they were not uniform, were not really international (these two points were very important for the success of christianity) and didn't utilize some advanced philosophy (which their followers invented) as well and as wide as christianity

but generally the phrase that mythology it's either dead (or not ours) religion it's true, this word is avoided to be used about alive (and respectable) religions. some dead greeks and alive niggers in the central africa had/have their mythology, christians have their holy books :^)

But there is no objective reason?

I miss when we used to be able to realize that religion was hardly the biggest problem anyone faces. And not end up parroting Sam fucking Harris.

This place has gone to the /pol/ dogs.

>Religion
A system of belief. A system of rituals. A system dealing with questions of ultimate concern etc. Are some definitions

>Mythology
(Ancient) literature dealing with said questions of ultimate concern. Foundational and formative for the system we call religion and (within the faith thus mystified as relaters of a cosmic truth). But again, there's many definitions.

>Religious beliefs and mythology are the same
They literally aren't.

It's also Jizz.

>I am saying that the idea of an unmoved mover and non contigent ground of all being is unique to the Christian tradition.
>what is Islam, Judaism etc
That's not even addressing things outside of the Abrahamitic tradition, then we get into Manicheanism, certain strands of Hinduism etc.

There is reason.

Ultimately though, it is subjective.

>Zeus lives on a mountain

LOL! Pagan scribblings XD

>God created the world in 7 days

It'sAReallySuperDeepMetaphorYouJustDontGetItTipsFedora

shut up

christ

Its basically an inverse on the "your argument doesn't count because edgy fedora"

What do you mean?

How many sects are stiflingly dogmatic over every aspect of their followers' lives?

Fuck off

Act like an adult

You didn't even explain what was wrong with my post!

It's obnoxious. I haven't come here in a long time, usually I'd see these kinds of posts on /mu/ as it was then. It's irritating to see discussion so simplified.

It was in response to idiotic bullshit like

The attitude in is also piss poor
> le spoonfeed me!

There's just no point hand holding if they're going to just say stupid shit with no effort but demand lots of effort from other people to be "corrected".

It's actually a lot like BDSM dominatrix shit.

It's not simplified though. People say those things all the time.

Zeus is cooler.

>being itself

God lives in the sky and rides clouds according to the OT

All of that "prime mover" Godhead shit comes from the greeks too

>God lives in the sky and rides clouds according to the OT

In some books, it's interesting that he's described as not some bearded man floating in the sky but a luminous cloud that constantly changes color. Though, the most representations of it that way were from material excised from the New Testament.

>God lives in the sky and rides clouds according to the OT
So OT God is a rip off of Socrates in Aristophanes' The Clouds?

for you, comfortable in your basement, maybe. for some in the world religion is literally a matter of life and death. and i am not just talking about people in mosul or whatever. Prince most likely died because of his religion- he reputedly refused surgery because johos don't want blood transfusions, so he chugged painkillers

Are you fucking retarded? Do I need to bring up all the fucked up shit that YHWH does in the bible? The stories about the greek gods are exactly as relevant as that, i.e. not very.

>I deserve to die.
pretty much

all religions have their own mythology, but not all mythologies are religions.

You made a low effort post complaining about his low effort post in response to another low effort post. I'm pretty sure you're taking objection to what he said and not his tone.

You can read greek myths historically, though. The iliad for example.

Are you fucking retarded?

> le we're all as bad as each other!
Get some fresh air m8.

Grow the fuck up.
youtube.com/watch?v=BNkSBy5wWDk

tldr?

God rides a cloud
Socrates rides a cloud
It follows that Socrates is God

QED

A religion has to answer man's basic fundamental questions. Why I here, why there something, what I do, where I go when die? So it answers these + also contains more specific doctrinal shit. The other main aspect is its communitarian function: worship, rituals, gatherings, ceremonies and the like.

So if it don't fulfill those ^^^ then it's mythology

the picture is correct. a religion just requires believers

>Why I here, why there something, what I do, where I go when die?
They often answer why something and sometimes why me but many don't bother with questions of death, at least not for a while

The early Jewish answer to the afterlife was "you just lay in the ground" pretty much.

Are your retarded? Religion and mythology are the same thing.

I wouldn't be surprised if the Bible had been written by a committee with a kind of ancient focus group.
> Yeah, this YHWH guy should be more like that crazy Socrates dude like in that play. THAT guy was FUNNY.

And the repetition was all redrafts.

Myth + rite = religion.

No more rites for the Zeus myth, so it's not a religion anymore.

neither of them are near truth, so why would the distinction matter?

>> le spoonfeed me!

Apparently asking for an explanation is spoon feeding. Get off this board you fucking pseud