• Welcome to the Fantasy Writing Forums. Register Now to join us!

Religion in Your World: Believing, Doing, Belonging

Mara Edgerton

Troubadour
Someone commenting on a New York Times article today referred to Judaism as a 'creed'--and I cringed. Whatever we are, we're not a creed.

This is a common mistake among people raised with Christianity as the dominant religion--this idea that what you believe makes you a member of a particular religion. And that fact is worth some consideration when we build a religion for our stories.

Neil Gillman, a Jewish theologian, says in Sacred Fragments that there are three parts to being religious, and that each religion emphasizes them differently: belonging (what defines you as being a part of your religion?), doing (what do you do as part of your religion?) and believing (what sort of creed, if any, does your religion demand?)

(There are no right or wrong ratios here. I'm going to use two real life religions to get the ideas across, but I'm not saying one religion or ratio is better than another.)

Believing is a big deal in Christianity. Accepting certain doctrines is what makes you a Christian. In fact, C.S. Lewis argued in Mere Christianity that your acceptance of said doctrines is more important in defining you as a Christian than your morals: "When a man who accepts the Christian doctrine lives unworthily of it, it is much clearer to say he is a bad Christian than to say he is not a Christian."

But believing is much less important in Judaism--and it doesn't define you as a Jew. Unlike Christians, we don't conflate believing and belonging. There are only two ways of becoming a Jew: be born of a Jewish parent (usually the mother, but some branches accept patrilineal descent) or convert to Judaism. As a Jew, you might deny any of the thirteen tenets Maimonides thought Jews should believe. To some, that might make you a bad Jew, but not a non-Jew. Heck, you can deny the existence of G-d all you want. Chris Hitchens was still a Jew, one of my personal favorites in a long line of Jewish atheists.

What you do is important to all religions, but again the emphasis is different. Most religions expect each member to be a mensch: to do good deeds. The theology behind those good deeds might vary, but the result is often the same. But how important is doing apart from that?

In Judaism, crazy important. How we interpret the law, and consequently what commandments we keep, generally separates one branch of Judaism from another. That mostly comes down to doing--perhaps with a side of believing when it comes to the interpretations. Do we need to keep the Sabbath or keep kosher? Do we have to dress a certain way? Do we need to live in a Jewish community?

In Christianity, on the other hand, doctrine (and consequently organization) usually separates one denomination from another. So that mostly comes down to believing, with a side of doing--going to confession or not, for example--depending on the beliefs.

So how do these apply to the religions you've created? How does someone become a member of the religion? Does your religion conflate believing and belonging as Christianity does, or are these two separate issues, as in Judaism? What doctrine, if any, must members accept? What sort of things specific to your religions are members expected to do, and how important are they?

Should I give an example of my own? Ok, you twisted my arm. In my WIP Death of a Diviner, what you do marks you as part of the dominant religion. If you go to a priest or turn up at a shrine periodically, you're considered a devotee. There are popular beliefs, and priests like to argue about them, but no one will ask you to confirm them. There's no official way to be born into or convert to the religion--you either worship or you don't. So this religious system conflates belonging and doing.

You might not be sincere--you might be a regular at a shrine for social or political reasons. If anyone found out, you would still be considered religious, but not particularly devout. ;)

Your turn!
 
Last edited:

Scribble

Archmage
Edit: I didn't read the guidelines, so wasn't sure if I was in violation. I saved my comments in a file to post later after I check them out.
 
Last edited:

Trick

Auror
The only thing I would add is that it seems one thing might be lacking from the direction of this post. People actually believe in their religions. Not all of them, obviously, but there are many faithful (fill in the blank)s who attend their respective places of worship, scheduled or not, and live their lives according to a code because they believe it to be correct. For them it's not a study in human interaction or behaviour required to keep up appearances, it's real. They can even be offended by having what they do religiously defined in socio-scientific terms. I think, if this is purely for us as writers to create believable religions and followers thereof, we should know whether the character believes in the teachings of their church or not. If they pick and choose among the things their G-d (not sure why everyone writes it this way) has set down for them to believe they may be looked down upon by other members of their faith. If they believe wholeheartedly and try their very best to follow the code by which they believe they must live, that is a fundamental aspect of the character. If they attend religious worship for the sake of appearances, that is also something that will affect what kind of person they truly are. I suppose what I'm saying is that religion can be viewed in many ways but what's important is how the POV character views it and to represent that well, once we decide how the character feels, writers would do well to draw from real life church goers and fallen away members of religions because there is a lot of belief and emotion that we can use to show it in our work and help it ring true.
 
Last edited:

Scribble

Archmage
G-d (not sure why everyone writes it this way) .

Some people feel it is disrespectful to refer to G-d in a matter of fact way, that it is a sacred word, and His name should be respected.

I'm an atheist, but I try to be respectful of people's beliefs. I don't want to upset people unnecessarily. So. I use god or gods when discussing gods in general, and G-d when referring to the Abrahamic god by name.
 

Steerpike

Felis amatus
Moderator
Religion has the potential to look quite different in a fantasy world. Think of a world where magic exists, or even where the gods might be directly interactive, so that there is not disputing the fact that they exist. Not much room for atheism in such a setting. It seems likely that followers will be defined by which god they revere (not necessarily which one they believe in, because you'd believe in all of them that were proven to exist).

Some may reject all of the gods (even in a fantasy monotheistic world where one god is the only game in town) if they don't agree with any of their teachings or prescriptions for mankind. See, for example, Dostoevsky's chapter entitled "Rebellion," from The Brothers Karamazov.
 

Trick

Auror
Some people feel it is disrespectful to refer to G-d in a matter of fact way, that it is a sacred word, and His name should be respected.

I'm an atheist, but I try to be respectful of people's beliefs. I don't want to upset people unnecessarily. So. I use god or gods when discussing gods in general, and G-d when referring to the Abrahamic god by name.

That's understandable. I went with it because it seemed the norm and I've seen it that way in other posts. I am not an atheist but I do my utmost to remain respectful of others beliefs as well. It's actually interesting to me that I would not think of that as a reason. To me, G-d is just the English word used to describe the/a creator but it makes sense that some could be bothered or offended by the title/name being bandied about. I discuss G-d so often outside this thread that perhaps the terminology involved feels somewhat commonplace; definitely something I can ponder in future.

If this question bothers you, feel free to let me know but I am just genuinely curious; as an atheist, do you avoid POV characters who believe in a religion or, possibly, religion as a whole when you write?

EDIT: The reason I ask is because some authors come across as believing in G-d and sometimes their religion even seems apparent but I don't think I've ever thought, "I bet this author is an atheist." If you know what I mean.
 
Last edited:

Scribble

Archmage
If this question bothers you, feel free to let me know but I am just genuinely curious; as an atheist, do you avoid POV characters who believe in a religion or, possibly, religion as a whole when you write?

Oh no, not at all. I am fascinated by religion, I've studied just about all of them to one degree or another. I've read the major books in detail. My mother is a spiritual director in the Catholic church, I've had a lifetime of theological discussion and debate.

Myths reveal Truths about being human, about being born, living, and dying. I don't mean myths in the sense of "made up stories", but cultural stories that resonate Truth for humans. It could be an enlightening myth, such as the story of Buddha, or it could be the myth of vampires. Vampires provide stories and images for dealing with death, fear of aging, power or the lack of it. They are modern day myths, reinvented over and over again, just as Greek people reinvented the god Apollo, over and over again. We humans can't help but do this, it's just the way we are.

Talking about old time mythology, that's interesting to me as a writer. We tend to get not much more than a Ray Harryhausen view of mythology, with harpies and vengeful gods. But, these people in the past were not idiots, even if we think their beliefs are quaint from our modern perspective. They were as intelligent as you and I. They lived with a different perspective of a smaller and more mysterious world. I'm more interested in writing about people who lived in such a time. I must assume that they never saw the gods themselves, although there must have been many reports. People in general were probably not skeptical about such sightings. There's writing from Greek philosophers who certainly were, but I don't want to write about a guy who sits around and thinks all day. The farmer in the field who thinks he's angered Zeus by not sacrificing a bull is interesting.

While facts rule much of our modern existence, Truth is something we need to live, which is not necessarily equivalent with facts. They are different kinds of things. So, when I go into writing about religion, I am after Truths, not facts. I'm not really interested in proving or disproving the existence of G-d. That is a tired old topic which is for me largely settled. I don't know that the universe wasn't created by an intelligence but I don't feel any responsibility for disproving it. If I did, I would probably end up writing a story about an unjust god and the suffering of people. It would become a political thing. I can criticize religion in non-fiction, blogging, or chat on Reddit or at the pub, but I have no desire to put it in my fiction.

But fictional religion, sure. That's amazing stuff. I like to think of the evolution of religion. Humans naturally create religion, whether or not gods exist. If you believe in a particular belief, there are a vast number of religions in which you don't believe. Why did all those people do that? For what purpose? Does it have to have gods and spirits? There are religions that do not have any gods, some that have many, some with one. That is interesting to me, how and why people develop religions.

We soak in it, in our culture. I mean, my Biomancer story... I realized he's a gardener who is wrestling with the question of whether or not to bring forth flesh humans on a new world. There are some archetypal elements that creep in, whether I want them or not. I can't escape my own iconography, it's in my skin.

This is at the core of human culture, for as far back as early humanity it seems. Neanderthals, our cousins and partial ancestors (for Eurasians) buried their dead with tools and weapons and food. What were they thinking about? What was their spiritual life like? What was their religion?

I am interested in what people think about gods. I'm interested in the psychology of believing in gods, of doubting them, of fearing them, of trying to sway them. So, when there are gods in my stories, they are not actually G-d, but powerful beings subject to similar frailties. G-d is too big for any story of mine. I would have to either make him small enough to be able to interact with people in a real way, or I would make him too big and distant to have anything to do with the story. I'm not interested in putting the Abrahamic G-d on trial. There's no point.

This is fascinating stuff. I can't imagine why anyone would avoid it all together just because they don't believe the supernatural element is true. Au contraire! This is great material for fiction!
 

Scribble

Archmage
Religion has the potential to look quite different in a fantasy world. Think of a world where magic exists, or even where the gods might be directly interactive, so that there is not disputing the fact that they exist. Not much room for atheism in such a setting. It seems likely that followers will be defined by which god they revere (not necessarily which one they believe in, because you'd believe in all of them that were proven to exist).

Some may reject all of the gods (even in a fantasy monotheistic world where one god is the only game in town) if they don't agree with any of their teachings or prescriptions for mankind. See, for example, Dostoevsky's chapter entitled "Rebellion," from The Brothers Karamazov.

There are religions where there are no gods in them, in our actual world. Taoism, Buddhism and Cārvāka (Hinduism) to name a few. Several billion people believe in these, so they aren't small.
 

Trick

Auror
But fictional religion, sure. That's amazing stuff. I like to think of the evolution of religion. Humans naturally create religion, whether or not gods exist.

I agree on this point. In a way I envy your position because my biggest struggle with fantasy religions is to keep my own views out of the picture. Not basic right and wrong but the specifics I believe in. I know I can have a religion similar to my own but I don't want to preach from a fantasy book. I've gotten the feeling, as a reader, that I was being spoken to from a soap box; in one particular case it was more political but with a religious bent and I agreed with the message, which made it all the more irritating to have it pounded over my head repeatedly. Stopped reading the series because of it actually.
 

skip.knox

toujours gai, archie
Moderator
Mara's OP makes an excellent point. In some religions, you are born into it. That was the case with many of the Germanic tribes in Europe. Each tribe had its gods. An outsider (say, a Roman) might sit back and say oh, these sky gods are really all the same thing, but for the member of the Lutizi or the Abodrites, those were *their* gods, worshipped at *their* shrines, often with very specific geographic locations. You didn't "believe in" gods, and the Latin word religio really doesn't properly describe what was going on.

These same pagan tribes, when confronted with Christianity, at first were completely baffled by the notion that "believing in" a god meant abandoning the worship of their own gods. You sacrificed to a god. You listened to a god. Believing in a god was a bit like saying you believed in water. It took them a long time (and many conquests!) to begin to understand the Christian version.

Mara's point, if I may be so bold as to re-state it for her, is that we as fantasy writers often project a specifically Christian understanding of religion onto our fantasy religions. This becomes particularly relevant when we make religious conflict part of the narrative. I had a lot of problems with "Thomas the Unbeliever" for exactly this reason. I had to let go consciously of my historian's mind-set in order to give the author an even break.

Anyway, I just wanted to thank Mara for the OP. I don't have an immediate use for religious themes in Altearth, but the day is bound to come, and I'll keep these comments on the back burner. I'll just move this pot over here, and that pan over there and ... ah, plenty of room. Good old back burner.
 

Mara Edgerton

Troubadour
The only thing I would add is that it seems one thing might be lacking from the direction of this post. People actually believe in their religions. Not all of them, obviously, but there are many faithful (fill in the blank)s who attend their respective places of worship, scheduled or not, and live their lives according to a code because they believe it to be correct. For them it's not a study in human interaction or behaviour required to keep up appearances, it's real. They can even be offended by having what they do religiously defined in socio-scientific terms. I think, if this is purely for us as writers to create believable religions and followers thereof, we should know whether the character believes in the teachings of their church or not. If they pick and choose among the things their G-d (not sure why everyone writes it this way) has set down for them to believe they may be looked down upon by other members of their faith. If they believe wholeheartedly and try their very best to follow the code by which they believe they must live, that is a fundamental aspect of the character. If they attend religious worship for the sake of appearances, that is also something that will affect what kind of person they truly are. I suppose what I'm saying is that religion can be viewed in many ways but what's important is how the POV character views it and to represent that well, once we decide how the character feels, writers would do well to draw from real life church goers and fallen away members of religions because there is a lot of belief and emotion that we can use to show it in our work and help it ring true.

I didn't think I left out belief--believing is one of the big three things, along with doing and belonging, that comprise a religion. Neil Gillman, whom I'm following on this, is a devout Jew and a theologian and a philosopher, so he wasn't denigrating the place of belief in religion either. (And, for the record, I'm a real life religious, synagogue going Jew, albeit not as observant as I should be. ;)) But the point Gillman makes is, I think, a good one. Belief is important to different religions in different ratios. For some, as in Christianity, a person's beliefs define them as a member of their religion--they arguably can't be a 'true' member without those beliefs. In others, as in Judaism, beliefs don't serve that function.

Just to be clear, the only time I brought up attending religious services for the sake of appearances was in my fictional world, because there are certainly characters who do so. (And that is an historical fact in our world as well--I'd imagine across the board in all religions.) And I agree that we can draw certain conclusions about characters to whom appearance is so important. Or perhaps certain conclusions about the society they live in.
 
Last edited:

Mara Edgerton

Troubadour
Religion has the potential to look quite different in a fantasy world. Think of a world where magic exists, or even where the gods might be directly interactive, so that there is not disputing the fact that they exist. Not much room for atheism in such a setting. It seems likely that followers will be defined by which god they revere (not necessarily which one they believe in, because you'd believe in all of them that were proven to exist).

Some may reject all of the gods (even in a fantasy monotheistic world where one god is the only game in town) if they don't agree with any of their teachings or prescriptions for mankind. See, for example, Dostoevsky's chapter entitled "Rebellion," from The Brothers Karamazov.

I think the components of believing, belonging and doing still hold true, even in a world in which the gods so actively meddle. But in that case, believing in the gods' existence would not be so much an issue as simply believing them--that is, believing and trusting what they say. Then you still have the question as to how you belong to a particular god's fold, and what that god requires you to do.

(Some say, by the way, that in many religions trusting is theoretically more important than a casual belief that the Divine exists. But most of us haven't spoken to the Divine in as direct a fashion as a fantasy story might allow. ;))
 

Mara Edgerton

Troubadour
That's understandable. I went with it because it seemed the norm and I've seen it that way in other posts. I am not an atheist but I do my utmost to remain respectful of others beliefs as well. It's actually interesting to me that I would not think of that as a reason. To me, G-d is just the English word used to describe the/a creator but it makes sense that some could be bothered or offended by the title/name being bandied about. I discuss G-d so often outside this thread that perhaps the terminology involved feels somewhat commonplace; definitely something I can ponder in future.

If this question bothers you, feel free to let me know but I am just genuinely curious; as an atheist, do you avoid POV characters who believe in a religion or, possibly, religion as a whole when you write?

EDIT: The reason I ask is because some authors come across as believing in G-d and sometimes their religion even seems apparent but I don't think I've ever thought, "I bet this author is an atheist." If you know what I mean.

The G-d thing, in Judaism, is a custom but not, strictly speaking, a requirement. I think the only version of G-d's name we're supposed to be really careful writing is the one spelled out by the Hebrew letters Yod Heh Vav Heh--technically, if a paper has those letters written out in Hebrew you can't casually dispose of it. You bury it instead. But I tend to play it safe, hence I often use the dash when I'm writing or typing G-d, in any language: hence All-h in transliterated Arabic or Di-s in Spanish, etc.

That said, I don't think you'll offend anyone by writing out G-d in the usual fashion. It's usually an individual preference anyway.
 
Last edited:

Steerpike

Felis amatus
Moderator
I think the components of believing, belonging and doing still hold true, even in a world in which the gods so actively meddle. But in that case, believing in the gods' existence would not be so much an issue as simply believing them--that is, believing and trusting what they say. Then you still have the question as to how you belong to a particular god's fold, and what that god requires you to do.

(Some say, by the way, that in many religions trusting is theoretically more important than a casual belief that the Divine exists. But most of us haven't spoken to the Divine in as direct a fashion as a fantasy story might allow. ;))

Yes, I think the trust issue would be very important. This is essentially what Dostoevsky speaks to in the "Rebellion" chapter I mentioned above. You have Aloysha, the monk, and Ivan, the skeptic. Ivan recounts a litany of horrors from the news of the idea, including some atrocities against children, and he ponders how that fits in with conceptions of god. In thinking about how god, as Ivan sees it, has arranged things, he says:

Listen! If all must suffer to pay for the eternal harmony, what have children to do with it, tell me, please? It's beyond all comprehension why they should suffer, and why they should pay for the harmony. Why should they, too, furnish material to enrich the soil for the harmony of the future?....

What do I care for a hell for oppressors? What good can hell do, since those children have already been tortured? And what becomes of harmony, if there is hell? I want to forgive. I want to embrace. I don't want more suffering. And if the sufferings of children go to swell the sum of sufferings which was necessary to pay for truth, then I protest that the truth is not worth such a price....

I don't want harmony. From love for humanity I don't want it. I would rather be left with the unavenged suffering. I would rather remain with my unavenged suffering and unsatisfied indignation, even if I were wrong. Besides, too high a price is asked for harmony; it's beyond our means to pay so much to enter on it. And so I hasten to give back my entrance ticket, and if I am an honest man I am bound to give it back as soon as possible. And that I am doing. It's not God that I don't accept, Alyosha, only I most respectfully return him the ticket."


There you have the essence of the trust issue, right? Ivan isn't directly questioning the existence of god, he's just saying "Look, if this is how things are set up, then I don't want any part of it."

Thus, the title of the Chapter, "Rebellion."

In the fantasy context, this could certainly play out with one god, and if you have multiple gods who are known to exist and whose teachings conflict, then it seems to me this has to play out, inherently. People in your world will be rejecting the idea of following certain gods, not because they don't believe in them (they know they exist), but because they lack the trust you're talking about. That is, they don't accept that the god's view of how they should live is the correct one, or what is best for them.

Is that what you're getting at?

Because if you follow an approach similar to what Dostoevsky does with Ivan, illustrated above (and, I might add, Alyosha has his own counter and defense to Ivan after this), setting up this kind of trust scenario in a fantasy story could be a powerful way to explore real-world issues. They wouldn't even have to be real-world religious issues, necessarily, just anything that you could pull under the umbrella of a fantasy religion. If you wanted to comment negatively, you could have the character who represents Ivan, and a lack of trust, get the better of the argument. If not, you have the character who embodies trust on the strongest footing.

So you've gone beyond how doing, being, and trust impact the religions within the context of your fantasy world to how those things actively influence theme. That's pretty cool, in my view.
 

Mara Edgerton

Troubadour
If you wanted to comment negatively, you could have the character who represents Ivan, and a lack of trust, get the better of the argument. If not, you have the character who embodies trust on the strongest footing.

Ah, it's worth pointing out that in a Jewish context, Ivan could be seen as a heroically and devoutly religious person--at least based off your quote. Abraham and Moses both argued with G-d, after all, and the gentile Job is often revered for shaking his fist at G-d and demanding that G-d give an account for unjust actions.

The general rule seems to be that if you're arguing with G-d in the name of compassion, you're always on the right track. ;)

In fact, I've heard Noah criticized for not arguing with G-d and G-d's way of doing things. "The Jewish response to human suffering," one Jewish speaker said, "should never be to huddle in a boat and ride out the storm!" (Noah was a gentile too, actually, but the point holds.)

Now, I'm a progressive Jew, so I'm not sure how this all plays out in more Orthodox circles--but Ivan would certainly be welcome in any synagogue I've ever attended, and he would no doubt be a favorite of the rabbi and a favorite at Torah Study. :)

(Again, I'm just going off your quote and assuming that Ivan doesn't make a habit of kicking puppies or anything.)

So you've gone beyond how doing, being, and trust impact the religions within the context of your fantasy world to how those things actively influence theme. That's pretty cool, in my view.

Absolutely, and I encourage that--deep thinking about religious issues as part of an author's theme is almost always a win for me. But my original intent was more modest.

There's something to be said for remembering the basics as well. As Skip pointed out, we in the western world tend to view religion through a Christian lens, because it's so dominant. I'm not critiquing Christianity here, but I am pointing out that other religions work differently. There's really no justification, for example, in referring to Judaism as a creed--a common enough occurrence. We're not a creedal religion. Not that beliefs are unimportant, but they don't make us Jews and they're outweighed by what we do.

So I just wanted to point out that when we think about the religions we build, we might want to consider this: to really think about how believing, doing and belonging work in each religion we're creating. After that, yes--we should dig deeper.
 
Last edited:

Devor

Fiery Keeper of the Hat
Moderator
In Christianity, on the other hand, doctrine (and consequently organization) usually separates one denomination from another. So that mostly comes down to believing, with a side of doing--going to confession or not, for example--depending on the beliefs.

Must . . . resist . . . faith . . . works . . . . discussion . . . . ARGGGHHHH!!!!!


So how do these apply to the religions you've created? How does someone become a member of the religion? Does your religion conflate believing and belonging as Christianity does, or are these two separate issues, as in Judaism? What doctrine, if any, must members accept? What sort of things specific to your religions are members expected to do, and how important are they?

In my setting, well, the gods are real and are part of the same system. So there aren't religions as we understand it. The Phoenix-goddess decides where you are reborn or if you enter Nirvana. You can shoot for a better next-life, or not. That's between you and the Phoenix. The other gods are focused on other things.

Different people have different attitudes towards how they feel about the gods. And there are the ten serving traditions, groups of people who dedicate their lives to perfect some philosophy towards the magic the gods have placed in the universe. But you don't see different religions the way you do in our world.
 

Devor

Fiery Keeper of the Hat
Moderator
Now, I'm a progressive Jew, so I'm not sure how this all plays out in more Orthodox circles--but Ivan would certainly be welcome in any synagogue I've ever attended, and he would no doubt be a favorite of the rabbi and a favorite at Torah Study. :)

I worked at a Chassidic organization for a while, and they always complained that the Messiah was late. So I've definitely seen that attitude.

As a Catholic, tremendous emphasis is put on the idea that God will listen to us and to the Church, so that it's our job to intercede on behalf of the world. So maybe that attitude, watered down a lot.
 

Mara Edgerton

Troubadour
Must . . . resist . . . faith . . . works . . . . discussion . . . . ARGGGHHHH!!!!!

ROFL! From my outsider's perspective, even in varieties of Christianity that put faith and works on an even setting (as C.S. Lewis pretty much did, actually, saying they were the two handles on a pair of scissors or some such), what you believe is of a deep importance in defining you as a Christian that has no equivalent in a religion like Judaism. So I think the issues of how much weight we put on believing, doing and belonging stand.

(And, like I said, most world religions would like us each to be a mensch. In real 'faith alone' Christian traditions, the mensch-hood flows from the changed heart of a believer--or that's what I understand them to be saying.)

In my setting, well, the gods are real and are part of the same system. So there aren't religions as we understand it. The Phoenix-goddess decides where you are reborn or if you enter Nirvana. You can shoot for a better next-life, or not. That's between you and the Phoenix. The other gods are focused on other things.

Intriguing! On what sort of criteria does the Phoenix-goddess judge whether you should be reborn or enter Nirvana? Is the aim to be an all around mensch, or are there ritual requirements as well? Or does entering Nirvana involve enlightenment?
 
Last edited:

Mindfire

Istar
I agree on this point. In a way I envy your position because my biggest struggle with fantasy religions is to keep my own views out of the picture.

I'm going to be honest, I think this is a losing battle. Your writing is an expression of yourself so, to some extent, if what you believe in doesn't seep into your work somehow, you might be doing it wrong. Personally, rather than try to keep my beliefs out of my work, I try to maintain a balance. I don't try to stifle them, but I avoid soap-boxing also. For example, the creator deity in my world, though he goes by several different names and titles, is pretty much the Abrahamic God, full stop. (And the Trinitarian view of him at that.) And one culture that reveres him are heavily influenced by Old Testament Judaism. But I treat it as just another facet of the world. I'm not trying to give the reader a "message" per ce. In all honesty, the main reason God exists in my fictional universe is that I find myself unable (or perhaps merely unwilling) to imagine a universe where he doesn't exist.

Of course, while Akalesh* is the one true deity, other religions that don't believe in him or consider him a lesser spirit do exist. For the sake of variety. The most prominent of these other pantheons, the gods of Beorgia, are actually ancient creatures that were accidentally created during experiments intended to discover a way to achieve immortality, whose minds were later merged with the magical essences of eldritch demons. Later, their physical forms were destroyed while their consciousnesses were banished to a pocket dimension, from which their priests summon a portion of their power in order to perform magical feats. So while the Beorgian gods do technically exist, they are not "true gods" since not only are they many many orders of magnitude less powerful than Akalesh, but during their tenure on earth they were petty, vindictive, and tended to act like spoiled children. (Like the Greek pantheon!) Magic and religion are somewhat intertwined in my world and I wanted to have magical forces to empower the evil magic users (of which the Beorgian gods are but one) while not diminishing Akalesh's divine supremacy. When it comes to things like this, with the proper amount of creativity and worldbuilding, it is possible to have your cake and eat it too.



*One downside of the "many names" thing is that referring to the One in casual conversation with people unfamiliar with my work becomes... complicated. For the sake of this thread I'll just pick my favorite name for him, Akalesh, and try to be consistent in its use.
 
Top