Sufficiently advanced technology is indistinguishable from magic.
Sufficiently analyzed magic is indistinguishable from technology.

And what is religion, if not believing in god (or some other universal force or principle), and following the will/guidance of that god (or force, or principle), so if the god is irrefutably real, and is the monarch of your country, the religion and worship become indistinguishable from simply living a secular life according to the secular (or religious, as they do come from god) laws of the nation you live in.

Irish and Jews, for two...

Indistinguishable, but fundamentally different in what they are. It doesn't matter if from some superficial view they appear to be identical. If religion lacks any actual quality that makes it religion, it isn't, and that matters.

To those that do not follow a religion, the fact that it is not real is a pretty important distinction. To put it bluntly, a religion based on a God which does exist would be a very different beast than the religions of the real world.

Of course, Twilight was pretty much wrong. (It's my understanding that Lauren had, I guess in the quest version of the series, planned for Twilight to become Zacora's apprentice to expand her knowledge beyond the hermetic magic she's versed in).

Not canon. Her attitude is completely consistent with how magic works in the show.

Canon! *puts on fan goggles on*


What is religion to you? Because it seems like you two are disagreeing on the definition of the word.

In what way would they be fundamentally different?
One is a way to control and/or manipulate the forces of the universe to create an effect of some sort.
The other is a way to control and/or manipulate the forces of the universe to create an effect of some sort.

In much of fiction, magic requires some sort of tools to do, ever heard the term magitech? as in, magical technology?
Magic is not real, and therefore has no set of characteristics, so therefore any acutal difference is in your mind, or the mind of who ever is doing the thinking.

Also, what quality does make a religion to you?
I gave one definition, Belief in, and worship/following of, a god, universal force or a principle, and then showed how it could morph into a form that can't be told apart from a secular society.



To the believers, their god is real, that's why they believe, the point is, that when the god requires no faith, and can be reached through mail, and is the one personally making the laws and ruling the land, lot of trappings and rituals most religions have are no longer required.

On an unrelated note, I am so glad that the quest version of the series never happened.

Belief in one or many Gods seems to cover it pretty well.

In worshipping one or many Gods. You can't just substitute Gods with something else and have it still be religion. It falls apart.

That isn't so much a definitiion but the definition.

Except that secularism is fundamentally not religious.

But their God isn't a God so... it doesn't work.

I'm not making a terribly complicated point here...

Ok, so let me see if i got this straight.
Religion (to you) equals belief in god (i disagree, and so do many budhists).
Therefore, we must either conclude that either Celestia is not god (matter of opinion), or ponies do not believe in the existence of Celestia?

Religion is a collection of cultural systems, belief systems, and worldviews that establishes symbols that relate humanity to spirituality and, sometimes, to moral values. Many religions have narratives, symbols, traditions and sacred histories that are intended to give meaning to life or to explain the origin of life or the universe. They tend to derive morality, ethics, religious laws or a preferred lifestyle from their ideas about the cosmos and human nature.

The development of religion has taken different forms in different cultures. Some religions place an emphasis on belief, while others emphasize practice. Some religions focus on the subjective experience of the religious individual, while others consider the activities of the religious community to be most important.

Not all religions believe in god or gods, trying to stick to one set definition may lead to a misunderstanding of the situation here.

This. This is exactly what we've encountered here, and I couldn't have put it better myself. Sobana, dear friend, you have hit the nail on the head once again. Adam, you seem to be arguing based on both A) Celestia is not a god and B) All religions must focus on a belief in some form of god or gods. You seem to be taking these points for granted, but the simple fact is that the former is debatable (please define "god" and explain how Celestia does not fit the bill?) and the latter is outright erroneous--Buddhism is a religion focused around the pursuit of enlightenment by emulation of a single human being, Shinto is the belief that everything, living, non-living and formerly-living alike, has a spirit. Hay, technically speaking, Jedi qualifies as a religion, and it just has the Force. Religion cannot be divided into simple atheism-vs.-monotheism-vs.-polytheism. There are ideologies and belief systems that do not require any god or gods at all. Your argument is based an a false assumption, my friend.

tl;dr:


BTW-@sobana - I've noticed you have quite an interesting habit of posting as a sort of class-spaz-type persona 98% of the time (no offense--it's actually made you one of my favorite posters), and then every once in a while, your written voice will change, and you'll interject into some discussion with a well thought out post that completely nails the issue at hand. You are exactly the type of person whom I was proud to call my friend back in high school. You are golden. Don't ever change.

No..she was in fact wrong in the show, as evidenced by Zacora's mysticism and especially Pinkie Sense.

We've yet to see any evidence of Zecora's mysticism being 'Random' and unexplainable. Indeed, Zecora and Twilight keeping the same books in their respective collections implies rather the opposite.

Twilight's & unicorn magic in general are, of course, perfectly compatible with twilight's position.

And the Pinkie sense simply hasn't been sufficiently analysed. Being different from what Twilight knows != unexplainable and fundamentally illogical.

It's not a religion because it's not a religion. It's a monarchy. There's a huge difference. Not only does this "religion" not have anything to do with Gods, it also says nothing of creation, the afterlife or anything that religion actually does. It simply does not many of the actual criteria. It's only similar to religion in the aspects that aren't actually unique to religion.

It was a simply explanation of why the situation at hand doesn't apply. I see you can copy and paste from Wikipedia. Good for you. How does that description apply to the question at hand?

Yes I understand Buddhism doesn't necessarily need to have a God. Seems like a non religious religion to me but whatever. I was giving a simple explanation, no need to pitch fork and torches me about it. I considered Buddhism but didn't want to complicate the question. Celestia was suggested as the deity, and she's not one. To suggest she is doesn't make much sense and shows a gross misunderstanding of the series. Her power is very grounded in the reality of the show, and not fundamentally different from many other unicorns other than perhaps a simple level of power.

Don't. Just don't.

Whatever, you're all still wrong if you think the ponies are religious. They have nothing close to what you're describing in Shinto and Buddhist philosophies. There's nothing spiritual about their relationship with Celestia.

The single worst moment in the show. I am glad this is inconsistent with the message the show otherwise has given every time.

Exactly. Twilight failed in her analysis of the situation. She can make mistakes like anyone.

The very fact that all three types of magic are internally consistent and repeatable as well as the treatment of Unicorn(and Equestrian magic in general) as a science says volumes.

Twilight didn't initially think that curses like Poison Joke's mechanical effects existed. Maybe curses don't, but the actual effects of Poison Joke exposure are defined, studied and reversible.

That implies a mechanical understanding of the things in question.

Zecora knows a branch of magic completely separate from Twilights, and it is also consistent in its function.

Even Pinkie sense is consistent. Action X leads to Reaction Y and so on.

So while Twilight was prejudiced against some things outside her personal bubble of knowledge, that did not make them any less true. Heck, "You don't believe because you don't understand!" As Pinkie said.


As to the topic on religions in Equestria, it depends entirely on what you mean by that. Worship of deities, worship of a concept? That, or belief in one or the other? Belief and worship don't have to be together, nor do they need to be apart.

Equestrians obviously believe in the Princesses, though I wouldn't say they worship them. Respect on the other hoof they have in spades.

Or, maybe they are all like Orks. In it for the parties and random fun.




She was not wrong, just being stubborn in her view that there weren't other types of magic out there. It can hardly be inconsistent with the rest of the show when both Zecora's skills and Pinkie sense operate under their own set of rules. Her views were more like saying that there is no such thing as a number system with fewer than 10 numbers (Then you get base 8 and stuff like that). Wrong, but out of ignorance.

Monarchy, with immortal god-monarchs at it's helm, who every day rise and lower the sun and the moon, who's very words are punctuated by thunder and lightning if they are not carefull, with powers far beyond mere mortal ponies.
You can stomp your foot all week if you want, but that does not make you right, nor does it suddenly make religion conform to your incredibly narrow definition of it.

And you haven't answered my question, do you deny the godhood of Celestia and Luna, or do you claim that ponies do not believe they exist?


How? Maybe in the way that it contradicts your claim religion has only one small, narrow, set of definitions, and must include gods.
So no need to be snide about someone actually bringing something to the table instead of just going "no, just because".

Also, about the Pinkie sense & Zecora issue.
There has been nothing shown that contradicts Twilights stated claim that magic is predictable.
Zecora does not use magic, she uses herbal remedies (super effective natural remedies), and Pinkie sense was not meant to give the aesop of "hug evidence and reason", but "believe your friends", they bungled that one to insane degree, but they never stated that there could be no explanation, just that we don't have one, now (really, i was dissapointed they did not make any references later about Twilight doing further studies about it).
And even if Twilight was later prooved wrong about single issue, that does not invalidate the claim, it simply means Twilight was wrong, and needs to make a note about it, and study/do research more.

It is never established in canon that the princesses are deitic in nature.

It might be implied, but it's never stated.

It's also never stated OR implied that they aren't.

Well...

The princess do not precede pony civilisation, indeed, they merely took over part of the job pony civilisation was doing already in the first place. Their capabilities are thus implied to not be greater than those of the unicorn-collective, they're clearly not responsible for the rise of pony civilisation in the first place, and last but not least, they're disinclined to accept worship (Well, these days, anyway).

That's actually quite a bit less than even relatively low-end pantheons in history, and arguably counts as implying they aren't deities.

As does the whole 'Calling them princesses', really.

That's true; pony society existed prior to Celestia and Luna taking the reigns, the sun and moon were handled without them, and if we can take the Hearth's Warming Eve pageant as being reasonably accurate then even some mild precursor of the brand of magic associated with the Elements of Harmony was employed by a common unicorn (Clover the Clever) before the royal sisters showed up and discovered the true Elements.

Personally, I don't hold with the idea that they're deities. Unusually powerful, sure; and immortal (or so long lived to be as good as), but not gods. At least not IMO. Since the show hasn't (and never will) say one way or the other, since I'm sure religion is a topic they'd rather avoid, people will always just choose their preferred fan speculation.

It's easy to see why Celestia and Luna would've risen to power, given their extraordinary powers and the fact they overthrew Discord. It must have been a blow to pony society, after finally overcoming the Wendigos and uniting, to have Discord show up. Even with Discord gone, without the sisters' guidance, it's entirely possible things would've devolved once again into bickering; taking generations to make the same progress they'd already achieved before. So it isn't as if they could've just shown up, beaten Discord, and then hit the road again. All the ponies would no doubt have been eager to have them lead.

If there is a religion (or perhaps multiple religions) in Equestria, I don't think they'd need to revolve around the royal sisters. Maybe some weird, modern Equestrian equivalent to Scientology might; but I'd think it more likely that there'd be some leftover religions floating around from the days before Celestia and Luna, before Discord, and perhaps before the founding Equestria itself, when the various subspecies of pony were still divided. I think that would be more interesting than a religion revolving around Celestia.

None of that acutally stops them from being deities, or be considered ones (plenty of religions believe in gods younger than humankind).

However, that's fairly irrelevant to my point, which was that if we consider the princesses as gods (and calling them princesses instead of gods implies nothing in any direction), then the religion worshipping them could easily take shape completely indistinguishable from secular goverment (a point nobody has yet to actually debate, except Adam who keeps insisting that it is not, and cannot be, religion, because he says so).

Also, just because they are not gods, does not mean they could not be considered such (or nearest equivelant thereof) by the ponies, and just because they are gods, does not mean ponies might not think of them as such.


All good and reasonable points.
Yet, the possible divinity of the two princesses, is largely a matter of opinion for now (almost certainly the devs do not think of them as such, or atleast will avoid making any such claims to avoid controversy, so all of this shall remain nothing but amusing fanon), and largely depends on ones definition of what makes a god (i don't really have one, but i've read enough fantasy, as well as different mythologies, to have a very wide tolerance on what constitutes a god in a work of fiction).

Are they immortal? What's the lifespan of the average pony? A being like dischord seems much more God like. I don't think any fit the bill.

Stomping my foot doesn't make me right. Being right makes me right.

Don't pretend I haven't accepted that my original assessment was over simplified, something I was well aware of when I posted it. Stop having such a narrow view of what I'm saying.

I deny the Godhood of Celestia and Luna. I have made that quite clear.

What a stupid statement. No one would say this.

You're not saying anything. I asked how the Wikipedia explanation of religion applied where mine did not. Since you're trying to make the point that Celestia and Luna are Gods, your issues with my simple explanation of religion are irrelevant, as you are trying to argue they fit into that simple explanation.

I am a God. It never been stated OR implied that I am not. Spike is a God. It has never been stated OR implied that he's not. Derpy is a God. It has never been stated OR implied that she's not. I could go on...

Except that there's no religion, no worship, nothing they do has anything in common with most religions, they're not divine and not Gods. Other than that, it fits really well.

I've given many reasons. You haven't defended your point at all.

But they aren't considered Gods by the ponies.

One can argue that school is the same as a job because of many similarities, but if you don't get paid to go to school, it's not a job. You seem to be doing this. Drawing parallels on everything but the actual relevant point of what would make it a religion.

Something being a God isn't really a matter of opinion. Though one can have a religion simply by believing someone is a God. This does not seem to be a view anyone in the My Little Pony universe shares. You say the name Princess doesn't matter. Doesn't it? It's the name their subjects call them. Clearly they view them as Princesses, not Gods, so by your own logic, it is not a religion.

Who would've thought that a religion thread outside PnR would end up going so well?



(Not that I don't appreciate Dvandom's original intention...)

I don't think the forum matters much. Maybe in Mayhem a religion thread would do better...

All things considered, it has been rather civil and we have hashed out a couple of points. These days however people associate conflicting views(Especially ones that make them uncomfortable[religion/politics/etc]) being discussed with flamewars. That's not a failing of the discussions themselves however.

I'll admit, though, that I am a little bit disappointed. When I saw a religion thread pop up, I was expecting at least one jihad to be declared over something before the thread lived out its life...

You are a human being and there are many more of your kind. We know the limits of your power and benevolence, and that they are not infinite. Spike is a dragon and there are many more of his kind. We know the limits of his power and benevolence, and that they are not infinite. Same goes for Derpy. And every other living creature on the show.

Except for Celestia and Luna.

They are Alicorns and we do not know that there are any more than three of their kind. Every 24 hours they each forcibly move an entire heavenly body, and there is no evidence or reason to believe that this causes either them any sort of pain, distress or fatigue. We know that moving the Sun does not require all of Celestia's power, since she raised BOTH the Sun and the Moon every day for a full millenium. Even that, we have no reason to believe would require more than even a fraction of her full power. She and her sister are the only characters we know of whose limits we couldn't possibly guess, both because said limits would have to be beyond astronomical for them to perform their daily chores, and because we've never seen either of them approach their ultimate limits (Nightmare Moon doesn't count, since we don't even know what she/it actually is/was, and thus cannot discount the idea that her/its presence somehow constricted or negated Luna's power). We don't even know whether or not they HAVE limits.

Same goes for Celestia and Luna. Just saying it doesn't isn't changing anything.


We know nothing more of their own power than we do about that of unicorns.

The fact is there's nothing heavenly about the sun or moon. They just happen to be in an area people used to think of as heaven, that we now know as a simple part of space.

Why does a level of power required to move a planet matter at all? Is the Enterprise a God because it can move things with it's tractor beam? This has no relevance. The residents of Ponyville change the seasons. The Princesses control day and night. There's no fundamental difference aside from maybe scale, which does not explain the difference between mortal and God.

A thought occurs to me. How does one define a god? And are we speaking of the polytheistic type of god, who is not infallible, whose power and abilities are not infinite, or the Judeo-Christian or Islamic God, who is perfect, omnipotent, omniscient and omnipresent? I suspect much of the misunderstanding here is being caused by my using the former while you are using the latter, hence your consistent capitalization of the word "god."

No one in these discussions actually worships Princess Celestia. I think that explains much of the calmness right there.

I suppose a distinction could be made. I still don't think Luna and Celestia have enough in common with greek or roman gods to make the comparison valid.

Simply put, they are not worshipped, they don't speak of creation, they don't speak to the afterlife. These things are pretty consistent to almost any religion. Surely it's possible we find fringey one offs that don't have one of these, but if someone can think of one where none of these 3 exist, maybe we can start to discuss this.

The important point here is to find reasons why they could be considered deities. Preferably actual ones, rather than Pharaoh-deities.

Being called a specific title and not another one doesn't imply anything?

Well, I guess we can do away with language altogether, then. It's seemingly irrelevant.

Anyway, just to be clear here - what level of 'Deity' are we talking about? If we're just talking 'Considered a deity because of whatever - we'll call it the Ramses variant of divinity -, it certainly removes a lot of the arguments thrown about, though of course, it'd still require in-universe references concerning the Princesses being considered deities, rather than royalty, which has thus far been rather lacking, to say the least.Sure. So, have we seen ponies worshipping the princesses?

No?

Have we seen ponies doing plenty of other everyday things?

Yes.

Have we seen ponies interacting with the princess on multiple occasions, giving us a good idea of their attitude towards them?

Yes.

Well, that was easy. Fun with evidence, kids!

They are immortal, or close enough for it to not make a difference for the regular ponies, they are far more powerfull than regualr ponies, they can raise the fricking SUN.
Enough for me to not deny their possibly godhood out of hand (also, until we define god, the whole divinity debate remains largely about personal opinions).


I assume you have not actually read the point i have been trying to make, which is, irrespective of wether or not the princesses are gods, if they were thought of as such, their worship could take a form that is identical, or near enough for it to not be noticeable to us, with a secular non religious government/nation.

Or, if you mean by the "language is irrelevant" the point i made about what they are called in the show being irrelevant on wether or not they are god, consider this, if they are gods, and want to be called princesses instead of gods, why would they not be called such?
Also, in a religion with several gods (atleast Luna and Celestia in this case, possibly others), would you refer to them as god, or with name and/or title?


Have you actually read my point?
Which was that if the ponies consider princesses to be gods, their worship could take a form identical to, or close enough to be indistinguishable from, a secular government/nation?

You're not getting it.

It's really quite simple.

• The Princesses aren't called Gods
• The Princesses aren't treated as Gods
• Nowhere are the Princesses referred to as Gods

'They could be' 'Might be' 'Maybe' doesn't cut it. It's not about what might be, but about what is actually shown and seen on the show. If you wish to argue in favour of the Princesses' divinity - specifically, them being the subject of Pony religion -, provide conclusive evidence of it, not 'We have not seen it, nowhere is it shown, but it might be... In my mind!'

You're basically arguing in favour of fanon. 'If they were thought of as', 'If they wish to be addressed by a different title', 'If here and if there'.

If isn't enough when virtually the entirety of the available evidence in favour amounts to 'If what we're shown in the show is actually all wrong.[/i]'

It's similar to saying that if everything that points to Rezo being a normal human being is wrong, he might really be an elder god from outer space!

The burden of proof lies on the side that wishes to argue against the status quo, and 'Proof' implies more than 'If'. In particular, it requires more than 'If something we've never seen and goes straight against everything we have seen'.

You are, of course, right insofar as a pony religion centered around the Princesses would, in many ways, resemble a secular system - but then you break it all by saying that the one form of evidence that could actually decide this question, namely, whether the Princesses are referred to and treated as Gods or not is not applicable because they could 'Choose' being called Princesses, which is a line of reasoning that's sawn right off by Occa's Razor. When you've to deliberately disallow evidence, it's safe to say that your position is untenable.

Incidentally, I think we should get away from the Princesses' feats (Longlivity, three-in-one phenotype, and - less significantly, since it was done before them - moving celestial bodies), and concern ourselves chiefly with the ponies' relationship with them. In the end, we're arguing whether the Princesses are subject to a pony religion, and their physical capabilities are irrelevant to this - see the pharao example earlier.

That's just silly.

Everyone knows you're a priest who went blind as a result of having a piece of a demon king sealed within you.

Thank you Rezo. Well put.

I am not, and have not, tried to prove or claim that they are gods, they divinity or lack thereof is completely irrelevant to the argument i have made.
Also "As Celestia is my witness" could be argued as pointing towards the "considered as gods" argument, but that is also irrelevant.


And here you actually grasp my point, then swerve wildly at the opposite direction.
My point was, is, and most likely will remain, that if, and that's the important part, it makes the actual divine nature, or lack thereof, of the princesses irrelevant, as the argument is about if this one point was true, then this is what might happen, so, if princesses were considered as gods by the pony population, then their religion could easily become indistinguishable from a secular govermental structure.
Wether or not the princesses are, or are considered as, gods, is irrelevant to the claim i have made.


I'm not sure why we should, their feats clearly set them apart from the population, they do things human societies traditionally assign to gods (move heavenly bodies), my argument was that the ponies relationship, even if they are gods, might not translate to a worship we could recognice.

It's not. You're not making sense. Even in this very post every comment you make relies on the ponies considering them as gods. You can't just say it's irrelevant when you keep claiming they are and arguing in that favour.

If i am not making any sense to you, i assure you, it is due to any lack of sense in me.

What i am presenting is a prediction/speculation of how pony religion might form, if, the princesses were seen as gods by the ponies.
The divinity, or lack thereof, is irrelevant to the idea on what might happen if they were.
And can you please point me where i have argued that Princesses are gods, instead of that they might be, or might be seen as, ones?
Because i can't remeber having done that, and would like to see any possible errors i have made in trying to convey my point.

Then we agree, the ponies are not religious.

No, because i do think they probably are religious.
I just do not claim my opinion as fact, and accept other opinions equally valid in the absence of evidence.
I am saying, that given the information we have, we can't know if they are religious.

And we pobably never will, as i doubt the producers will want to take the story in that direction.

I was trying to keep that a secret :<

So embarrassed by that shenanigans~

Ha ha ha ha of course not.

For some reason, i find it very hard to believe you.

Believing that something is true when there's no evidence? Now it's starting to sound like religion!

Actually, there is evidence, it just is not conclusive, or plentifull.
And most likely there will never be any actual canonical proof one way or the other, as i doubt the producers want to deal with irrate parents.

Even if there is a religion or various religions in Equestria, it's likely the case - as on Earth - that only some of them actually follow it; and with wildly varying degrees of adherence, at that.

I think it basically comes down to the fact that we all like to see ourselves represented in some way in fictional characters whom we like. As an atheist myself, I don't have any particular need to see the ponies as religious creatures; and in fact I'd like to think that some of them genuinely aren't, assuming there is some kind of religion in that world. Although the idea of that world having a religion doesn't particularly bother me, either; I'd just think it unrealistic if everyone agreed on it, since I've never actually witnessed such a thing in life.

But like I said earlier, what I'd most like to see explored is the older, pre- and early Equestrian days. And perhaps any "pagan" type belief systems that could have cropped up during Discord's first reign; perhaps some ponies went bad and began worshiping him.

Are we talking about religion or your pet theory about ponies? They're indistinguishable at this point...

LOL.
We are talking about the fact that you think that ponies are not religious, and i think it more probably that they are.
I also find it believable to think that they would consider the princesses as godlike beings (for certain value of godlike, nobody is claiming them omnipotent or omniscient as far as i know).
Ofcourse, when i say that ponies are probably religious, i mean it in the same way that humans are religious, that is, humans have religions, even if not everyone follows or believes in them (i personally am an atheist).