gods not so different

What makes our God so special? Don't get me started... probably one of the main answers-at least for me- to this question is the fact that he is HOLY. He is holy, separate, and different. HE'S GOD. A HOLY sacrifice had to be made JUST so we could have communion with him. Through Perfection, we are made perfect. Because the great I AM is SO holy we had to be pardoned just to have fellowship with him.
What really stuck out to me was the fact that the gods in the Iliad are no different than the people they rule over. In other words, THEY ARE FULL ON SIN. They lie, cheat, commit adultery... on and on and on. What is so awesome about these gods? They are not mighty. They're just powerful. I'm reminded of Ecclesiastes... If these are the gods, what is the point in living? MEANINGLESS. VANITY. Having favor with these gods is no blessing. They have their own problems to worry about. I'm sorry, but I wouldn't want a god with hundreds of illegitimate children being my lord. Even IF Zeus gave his people the promise of eternity in paradise I can't say I would want to be a part of that house hold.
One of the things God has been showing me lately is his holiness. He is so awesome and different and His ways are SO much higher than mine... the Greek gods... not so much. I think it's sad when mortals have just as much a chance in having their lives "together" as the immortals do.
The Greek gods are great because... they live in the clouds. They control the elements... they make the wheat produce... whoo who...


ps: I commented on Rachel's post "Repeat"

How much of a god is Zeus anyways?

We all know from reading the Iliad that Zeus is the god that is in charge of the others. He is undoubtedly the strongest of the gods, but how much of a god is he? If he is so powerful, then he should have total control over every event that he chooses. Yet, I question his ability to control everything. After all, he had to pull out the scales before the battle started, and before he chose to observe it from Mount Ida. Did he do this as a sign that he is the top judge and that the scales have to obey him? Or did he pull the scales out because he had no choice, and that was a neccessary part in order to see the outcome of the war? If he was so almighty, then why did he have to pull those scales out? I think that even though he is the strongest god, there are still some things that are out of his control, such as the Fates. He can not alter the results of the scale once they have been weighed, so even Zeus, the almighty god, has to obey something. Since we know that, we can see that he isn't on the very top of everything. I knw that he would love to be able to control everything, due to his nature, but he can't control everything. He is the top god though, that is painfully clear, and he is already to express his power over others. He pulled out the scales though in front of all the gods so that everyone could see the results, and even he has to obey the scales, so even though he is the greatest of the gods, he is not the greatest being in existence.

And I commented on Malory's post.

Chess

I really wish that I had the time and energy to read every post. Maybe I’ll substitute that for facebook stalking ;)

Let me start by stating that, were I in the place of the Greeks or the Trojans, I would feel very much confused. It seems as if all the players in the game are not in fact players, but chess pieces. The gods are the real players, with Zeus at the head. Several places indicate that the driving force behind any one warrior was one of the immortals. In the first twelve books it isn’t as evident, but became much more noticeable in books fourteen through seventeen. While Hera distracts Zeus (in an oh so scandalous manner), Poseidon gathers the Achaeans to charge the Trojans. After the death of Patroclus, there is mass interference from the gods. It is almost as if every other rise in courage is backed by an immortal.

In book 15 Zeus says “Let Phoibos Apollo stir Hektor back into battle” (line 59)

In book 16 Zeus says “In Hektor first of all he put a temper that was without strength”

Another thing I’d like to point out (which we already touched on in class) is the close relationships of the warriors and the emotional reactions to their deaths. There were several instances where the death of a comrade would cause a fellow warrior to rise up and fight with more anger than ever before. This death of a brother of war became such an emotional volcano inside them. They seemed to ride the wave of rage, which gave them the power to take down their enemy, most often the man who killed they’re friend.

So my question out of all that is “who controls the emotions?”. The brotherly support among warriors seems to be of their own heart. But the cowardice or courage of Hektor and several other warriors throughout the battle seem to be in the hands of the gods. How much are the mortals really able to decide for themselves? Do they have free will or are they all chess pieces?

P.S. I commented on Anna Rhodes :)

OOps i forgot to say that i commented of Jessica's post

What horribe gods!

What do the Greeks really think of their gods? I know if I were them I would wish they would just go away.

Reading the first twelve book of the Iliad it seems to me that the mortals want a good outcome and justice, but the gods always lead them to their own desired paths. In the scene where Paris and Menelaus duel and Paris is flown away by Aphrodite, the soldiers want to just give over Helen and be done with the war, but of course Athene steps in, causing the fighting to start again.

Another example is Helen. In the past when I watched Troy or heard about the story I thought she was the trouble maker for running away from her husband, which is easy to believe when in the movie Menelaus is an old hairy guy and Paris is well Orlando Bloom, need I say more =P. But in the book it says that she misses her old husband and is humiliated by Paris’s cowardly behavior and her own destiny with him. From reading this in the book and our discussion in class I now think that she like the other mortals may have never wanted to leave her husband and old life but this trouble was forced on her by Aphrodite.

No wonder the Greeks believed that chaos is the normal in society when their gods are always in this constant battle with each other and use the mortals as pawns for their will. Is it really a blessing to be backed up by a god in battle? Sure it can bring you glory above your enemies, but like hector, Zues is only making him succeed to fulfill his over all plan for Hector to die at the hand of Achilles and all of Troy to be burned to the ground. What a wonderful favor Zeus is doing him!

If those were the only gods out there, perhaps a life without gods would be better. If that would be possible in Greek society with out gaining the wrath of those horrible immortals.

The Original Red Shirts

Alright, let us start the semester off right with a blog that will bring my nerdiness into the limelight. My blog topic is about the original redshirt, created by Homer. But, for those of you that aren't complete and utter nerds, I first need to expound upon what exactly a redshirt is.

How many of us watched Star Trek as a kid (or now)? Well a Redshirt is "the color of shirt worn by the nameless security personnel on the original Star Trek series. Their only job was to get eaten, shot, stabbed, disrupted, sped up and killed, frozen, desalinated, or turned into a cube and crushed. Their death would give William Shatner and DeForest Kelley a corpse to emote over, and Leonard Nimoy a corpse to, well, not emote over (Tvtropes.org)." After this happens, they are normally sworn to be remembered forever, and promptly forgotten, never to be mentioned again.

With that said, let us turn our attentions to Homer, or more specifically to Hector and his charioteers. Hector's charioteers, the two that are mentioned anyway, both die in the exact same manner and Hector 'greatly mourns their loss, but must keep going without stopping for their bodies.' Hector's charioteers are the epitome of a redshirt, merely there for Hector to briefly have someone to lament over, and never to be mentioned again.

This just goes to show that there is no such thing as an original idea, merely one that has been forgotten long enough to be recycled and claimed anew...or something like that.



P.S. I commented on Alexandra (a.k.a.) Captain Awesome's post

P.P.S. (This is Alisha)

Poor Helen.. Not so much

Ok, so here's what I don't understand. During Helen's little lamenting phase in book 3, everyone seems to express pity towards her. I understand that she's the daughter of Zeus, so it's natural for her to be beautiful in some way, but she apparently is the most beautiful woman to have ever lived right? And her life is so difficult because of this blinding beauty, correct? Well, there's no enchantment over her which forces her to be beautiful. Also, she chooses to dress in the most beautiful and extravagant clothing, and she's obviously not too much above primping. If being so beautiful is that big of a burden to carry, why doesn't she smear some dirt on her face or at least not fix her hair? Seeing as Homer feels the need to describe every little detail of the story, I'm fairly certain he would've said something about an obligation Helen has concerning her beauty, if there were any indication of one. The point is, why does everyone feel so sorry for Helen?

I would've thought it to be her beauty clouding the judgment of others, but the single fact that she even chastises herself proposed an inconsistency. The logical move here, to me, would be to make Helen ugly. The entire war would end since Paris probably couldn't just love her great personality, and everyone would go home. I can see why others wouldn't suggest this directly to Helen, but wouldn't she feel some sort of obligation to fix things if she could?

P.S. I commented on Jessica's post.