So it's a common trope that beliefs give gods power, but I don't actually think that's how it works. In significant part, "power" doesn't seem like a useful way to phrase what gods do in the first place.

What I do think is that belief helps give gods *form*. How a particular god manifests and expresses themself is due in part to what folks expect of them. It's bidirectional, since a god does tell followers some about who they are. The manifestation is negotiated.

@starkatt And yeah in general, I cannot overestimate how spot-on this is, in my experience. I would like to re-post a very resonant quote that I found of, in all things, a tabletop RPG book:

"The Gods don’t need humans, but they do need humanity — not to exist, not to maintain their power, but as a mirror. Human worship is the way by which the Gods know themselves."

@indi @starkatt as much as I like the story American Gods, I think it's wrong about the life cycle of deities. I think that it's *very* difficult and rare for a god to "die." they change, they adapt, but their core is built around one or another fundamental aspect of human nature, and unless/until *that* aspect in all of humans disappears, the god will still be with us--even if we don't know its name, or see it as a personified force.

@green @starkatt 💯 yeah. American Gods has some bits that are very insightful and helpful, like the notion of culturally-bound and -influenced multiples of the Gods, but the core conceit, while useful for dramatic tension, isn't very good theology.

That sorta "Gods eat belief" thing that's been portrayed so strongly by Gaiman and Pratchett and Molyneux really gets in the way of actual practice sometimes IMO.