Anyhow, would Sanae be a zeek or a feddie? Don't cop out by saying "AEUG."

>>50166170
>including the popular understanding of the word "god"
Ancient popular or modern popular? None really fit for what you reference, as:
>>50166609
>God as a boundless, almost impersonal Being, a view the Greeks could've never accepted because of their opposition to the concept of infinity(Aristotle, for example, wrote extensively against even the possibility of actual infinity)
50/50 correct (Greeks, and Romans, did end up abstracting further and further as an adaptation), but any Greek thinker you'd single out is always at least a borderline pariah deviant within the actual religious and cultural norms of their time. The pagans would have inevitably come to boundless reconceptualizations because even without Abrahamism (which emerged from pagan (and, again, certainly ancestral) war god Yahweh worship) they'd have to deal with societal and civilizational growth with all the issues involved.

>>50168825
>it's also undeniable that much of the iconography associated with western Christianity was still taken from Greek views on divinity. While they accept God as being formless and infinite, the popular perception of God is as an older man, very evocative of portrayals of Zeus
Even with the argument of "Greek and Roman arts were the best art references western artists could work with", Classical depictions were meant to remind people to keep their edge in being territorial, including spiritually and religiously territorial. Just any anthromorphizations and anthropocentrisns persisted since Mesopotamia as the relevant historical source.

>specifically from the portrayal of the god Cupid/Eros
True enough.

>Catholic view and treatment of their saints is also very evocative of the polytheistic structure of classical myth/religion
Christianity was never monotheistic, ever.
The Catholics double down on traditions of ancestral worship that every old religion started with (yes, especially the Greeks and the Romans, read the Ancient City), but since Christianity is practically cosmopolitan, they pragmatically try to lean into spiritual ancestry.

Ad hoc discussions are truly cursed. Some of the real fun in researching Oriental, Japanese mythology comes from conditions and emergences of amalgams they had to progress with. "Well, people have to invent something!" and "Yipee! Archetypes!" styles of thought wouldn't explain why's and how's of what Japan ended up being.
This is extra funny to say in the Sanae thread where her character lore is all about "ancestral worship? Well, the living person is the latest ancestor in line" from her IRL inspiration with a smoking gun cultural history if you're aren't initiated to the insight yet.

Seems like the real, actual, concrete distinction between "Western!" "Japanese!" is that the former is very reluctant and centralized in adding (spiritual) ancestors to the pantheon (because lmao "canons". Modern christianity is built on the sin of the Roman Church using power to butcher "heretic" fellow Christians into submission).
The Japanese practices meanwhile are more decentralized as to for what to include into the ancestral worship for their country as a community. Practical structure of "animism" certainly helps, but you need to understand their regional ancestral worship gravity and culture to get it.