> If things didn't happen the way some
>of the supplemental material says it did (gods and whatnot begetting
>other gods and whatnot) why is it presented that way?
Much of the God Learner mythology (giving every god two parents, yoking myths together in Procrustean fashion) is true only from a very narrow viewpoint, and not that of the people whose myths are being discussed. It's as if Europeans landing in the New World had rewritten their Bibles to explain the deluded notions of the benighted barbarians they found there. Or like Christian Identity, the movement in which northern Europeans are the lost tribes of Israel and everybody else is descended from Cain...but I digress.
Assuming there is an objective viewpoint which is universally true for all time, how would we know it when we saw it? Greg Stafford has said that _everything_ ever written for RQ has been from a subjective viewpoint. Even if he hadn't said that, we'd still never be able to tell if a document represented Truth or somebody's truth. Even truth spells have been known to fail. Just as in the real world, different people will tell you different things, and the truth of the matter may be unknowable.
Powered by hypermail