as in, I don't believe in God. But I do believe in my Goddess Aphrodite... not just believe, I *know* Her.

All atheists should read the ancient book De Rerum Natura (On the Nature of Things) by Lucretius. Way ahead of his time, he explains everything in the world by physical laws and the workings of chance, without divine intervention, like most scientists today. *And* he begins the book with a beautiful hymn to Venus (Aphrodite) whose power makes it all flow. There's no contradiction.
aphroditespriestess aphroditespriestess
22-25, F
4 Responses Aug 23, 2014

I'm atheist too

No - you have missed the definition of Atheist. That is to believe in no category of a supreme being of any kind. Not simply the classic from the European history of Jesus, or any of the other god's, as in the Greek Pantheon, the Roman Pantheon, the Nordic Pantheon, the Ancient Egyptian Pantheon, or out side the European histories like the Vedic traditions of India or their later Pantheon. Atheist is the belief that there is no greater being - Including Aphrodite who was a part of the Greek Pantheon by the way. And Venus was simply the Roman counter part to the Greek's Aphrodite. You are in simply giving her attention a theist and are practicing a form of Theism. Perhaps not a highly currently popular form of it, but none the less a theist. To be an Atheist, you would have to give up all forms of supreme being, or icon's there of, and belief that there was nothing superior than basically "Mankind".

Sweetheart, I defined what I meant by "atheist" at the start - I don't believe in God. But thanks for a thoughtful response!

Not my definition, nor can there be one exclusively for you, or any one - the definition is a mutually agreed upon social convention - that is the power of language and why when we "break convention" we introduce ambiguity. We actually destroy the value of language when we do not use the word as it is intended, as it was previously defined by the original intent of the words usage. The word becomes grey or muddy if abused, and eventually has no clear meaning at all. I did not pick the definition of Theism, Theist, or Atheist but I respect the need for it's correct usage. It is my understanding ( I am extracting the feeling of the rules here, not exactly sure where to find them - letter for letter so to speak) the only time you are "permitted" in language to define a new word, is when it is in truth a "new word" not an old word given a new definition.

So by your word's you are a Theist who follows Aphrodite. Of which there are many people who do this, although they may choose a different god or goddess to follow.

Meanwhile my Goddess laughs at all definitions and playfully enjoys the energy in all arguments.


1 More Response

Well, there is a contradiction if you're claiming to be an atheist who believes in a literal Aphrodite. Goddesses are still gods, as the term goddess is just an unnecessary gender-segregating term specified for female deities. In other words, there is no evidence for Aphrodite, the god of love.

I think we had enough bare knuckled discussion on the subject in my thread. Me.. I will just be content to admire and ogle Aphrodite.

You do sound rather sour, sourpennies! :P
It's not about the kind of evidence you have in mind... and there is a *huge* difference between a male or gender-neutral capital-G God, and the Goddess Aphrodite.

That's kind of irrelevant, though. Atheists dismiss all gods, capital G or not, including Aphrodite. I agree that there is indeed a huge difference between her and Yahweh, but one thing they share in common is a lack of evidence (personal experience notwithstanding). And yes, I am sour. I'm in no position to deny that.

I will have to look for an English version, my Latin is lacking.

Thank you.

There are good English versions and see the book by Stephen Greenblatt that experimed mentions.