Any pagans here?

I was raised with a blend of eclectic Pagan and Buddhist beliefs, which my sister and I still practice in our lives today.

 

I don't know if I would necessarily label myself as "pagan" but I definitely feel more in tune with a lot of the broader concepts than other religions or belief systems. It's definitely something I enjoy learning about and researching and as I say, there are certain aspects that really resonate with me.

 

so you really believe zeus poseidon are real?

 

Maybe. I'm an atheist for now but I'm sort of experimenting with LaVeyan Satanism and Wicca right now...

 

I'm a born again atheist!

 

not that i find it any different than believing in more mainstream religions, except that people are raised ot believe in them

 

that doesn't make it real. a song of ice and fire is no less interesting from a narrative point of view but nobody believes white walkers and armies of zombies are real. i don't believe voldemort is real just because harry potter books arguably make a more interesting read. i'm not a christian and i'm not defending christianity. since you're not a christian either i think i can count on you not taking my criticism of your beliefs as an attack against you and your group/faith, and i'll try and exploit this rare occasion to reach to a more open-minded type of believer. your beliefs, on one hand, could be less dangerous than christian beliefs because i assume you won't try to do politics with them and use them to justify disriminating against people who disagree with them or don't live by them, as christians and muslims often do. it might also have christians and muslims face a different type of religion, one that isn't simply a lack of beliefs (atheism) or a very similar set of beliefs (other abrahamic religions, most notably islam). british philosopher bertrand russel said that beliefs can be challenged not only by unpleasant clashes with reality, but also confrontations with other beliefs, even if they're equally unreasonable. on the other hand, though, and i'm sorry if this is a little harsh, your faith, if (and only if) so it can be called, might have reached a new level of madness, becuase contrarily to christians, who are irreversibly brainwashed at a young age, you actively picked up your religion by yourself. for example you wouldn't have to be insane to be a nazi in germany during world war two, but i think you'd consider insane anyone who is nowadays. since religion is not a simply an innocuous excentricity, but rather one of the main causes of suffering in the world, it scares me to see it appear in new and even crazier forms. i'm sorry if this is a little harsh, but i'd like you to think about what i've said. if you're wondering why i'm so obsessed with religion, that's because i've been witnessing how harmful it is on both a political and a personal level, and not just because absurd beliefs are uncanny per se.

 

To be fair, that wasn't a justification as to why Alayna's faith is real or not, (not that I think one is needed) It was an answer to your question, and in all honesty, I would say it is a more interesting mythos than the Christian one.

You're right, I think that is harsh. I don't think it's fair to infer a new level of "madness" just because it's a faith outside of social norms. (Regardless of whether you feel the same regarding Christianity etc)
If anything, the fact that this ISN'T a mainstream faith, to me at least, demonstrates a more sound approach to the taking on of a faith or belief system. Arguably, it's one that's going to have to be actively sought out and considered before being adopted, unlike a Christian or Muslim faith that are far more widely integrated with society. The fact that there are aspects of the faith/religion/belief system that resonate with an individual indicates a level of thought and consideration rather than just blindly accepting the principals as gospel (so to speak!)

I understand where you are coming from, and I completely agree that you don't have to look too far to see the catastrophic effects that religion has had on society. BUT I would also argue it is anyone's right to have a faith or belief system that they feel is right for them, and branding them "absurd" or crazy just because they don't fit with a certain view of the world is unfair. Faith on an individual, personal scale can be a thing of great comfort and guidance. I don't consider myself religious, but I do accept that.

I don't mean to sound like I'm having a go, but I just thought your response brought up some interesting points I had some thoughts on.

 

yeah, i whish i could've found a way to say it all more politely. you apparently consider religion as something purely personal, so we basically agree about all that's important and there's no way i can have a heated debate with you, unless i decide to turn into an asshole and attack your decision to believe in something imaginary, which is none of my business. i'll go back to that later on though, so brace yourself. i also understand following a religion for it's philosophical value without really having "faith", which is kind of the oriental approach to religion i guess. what i don't understand (not that i really have anything against) is actually believing certain gods are real, and if we're talking about vague pantheistic stuff such as life force and things deeply connected to the human psyche, that's understandable (not reasonable, but relatable), but tales of gods that are actually people with superpowers, well, you know where i'm getting at. i don't even believe you when you say you think they're real. i guess "believing in them" is part of the whole picture. maybe a way to express your fondness of ancient culture. i can relate to that. hellenic polytheism dates back to a time when religion wasn't violent, oppressive, or even intollerant. it wasn't often used as a means of power by large institutions such as the church, but rather as a means to express and incarnate all kinds of feelings, to create a collective database of narrative art. maybe i'm projecting, but polytheism could be used a champion for certain values against mainstream religions. i don't think that's what youre trying to do i've read of people doing that. in m opinion it kind of sets those values at the same level as the those of the other religions. the battle would be bwtween two equally irrational beliefs, while we don't need religion to support reasonable ideas. they should be able to support themselves and organised religions should be overcome rather than defeated. you probably already agree with all of this, so i'm sorry if i'm turning this into an echo chamber. it's just nice to have a polite conversation once in a while.

 

Well, I think it SHOULD be personal- sadly a lot of them are far too institutionalized and that's where the problems stem from when it's pushed on a large scale.

Now, the whole thing about "the decision to believe in something imaginary" To me, at least is part of the problem. Regardless of whether it's an atheist arguing this or coming from a "rival" religion. There is always this need for one part to prove that they are right and that the other POV is nonsense or made up. Maybe this is the idealist in me talking, but things would be SO much easier if people could live and let live and accept that people have different views on the world rather than having to prove that "X" is right and "Y" is wrong. Granted, this approach isn't applicable to everything in life, but for me it absolutely does apply when it comes down to something personal like faith on an individual level. After all, you could argue endlessly with OP on why it is or isn't real, but at the end of the day, that is veeeery unlikely to change the fact that it's what they believe.

Well obviously I can't speak for OP on this matter, but for me, I see both sides. For example, I wouldn't say that I personally believe in Gpd's in the stereotypical sense. but I also accept that as unfeasible as it sounds, we really have no way of knowing 100% one way or the other. No one alive today was there when most religions were founded, especially ones with roots in legends that go that far back. So for anyone to say categorically, in favor or against, is ultimately down to arrogance. Neither party can argue a 100% foolproof case one way or the other.

Not at all, I agree

 

sorry my computer is slow and i have troubles multiquoting though it'd be useful now. the first point i'll make, and i think we agree on this, is that it's mostly christians and muslims who have troubles with people refusing to believe in their religion or accept its arguable practical corollaries. they often say they have no morals, like, "if you don't believe in the bible, how do you figure out murder is wrong?). now you may bring up atheists (at least they can be atheists), not happy with religion or creationism being taught in schools, but that's not being not ok with people having a religion, it's not being ok with that religion meddling with public affairs. the second and less important point, and we seem not to agree on this, is that debate among different religions rarely take place. christians might say that muslims are violent. muslims will say that christians are bad for other reasons but they hardly ever discuss about which religion is more likely to be true. if they did, that wouldn't go anywhere.atheists do bring up other religions to prove that christians/muslims are actually atheists themselves in relations to all religions but one and conclude that there's no reason to think that one religion is any different. i'm sure they have snobbed your beliefs because they sound ridiculous to them and that, on their part IS arrognance, because, as you have said, there's no way for them to prove that their beliefs are any more valid. BUT, for an atheist, is it really arrogant to dismiss your (or better OP's, since you said you don't really believe in gdp's (what does that stand for btw?) in the way i'd think you do) beliefs are ridiculous? they don't have similar beliefs themselves. if i told you that my cat is god and that if you don't all worship him he'll destroy us all, you'd call me crazy. how are gdp's any different (except i don't know what they are but i assume greek gods). if you believed that, let's say, your dog is god (not just backwards), then it'd be arrogant of you to call me crazy for believing my cat is god, but since you don't, you have all the right to do so. that said, as long as i don't try to force people to abide to me religion and force them to behave and think in a certain way in order not to piss off my cat who would then annihilate us all, and instead keep my "religion" personal, then let it be. and since that's what polytheism has always done, apparently, then i don't have any problem with it unlike with christianity and islam.

 

That's true, but I also think education is key, so long as it's administered in as balanced and objective manner as possible. So long as say the sciences are not sacrificed in favor of it I think there is definite value in having religious studies in education.

I actually agree to a point. What I was getting at in my last post was that (in my experience at least) the discussions rarely seem to be about promoting an understanding or acceptance of certain points of view, but more about points scoring as to why one is more believable or acceptable than the other. And as you say, they don't get anywhere.

To me it doesn't make sense when people bring up other religions as a way to almost "disprove" another, to me the whole point of a religion or belief system is that the individual finds something in one particular path, that resonates more than others- so to me it seems obvious then, that they wouldn't believe in the other, if that makes sense?

I won't lie, Gpds was meant to be Gods but by the time I noticed the typo the time limit on editing posts was up and I couldn't change it

No It's not necessarily arrogant to dismiss the beliefs themselves, but what I do consider arrogant, is the dismissal of the possibility that could be anything other than their point of view. And to be honest, that goes for atheists, Christians, Pagans..Whoever really. The refusal to acknowledge even the possibility of something beyond what they believe is arrogant. But it seems to happen a lot.

See I'd argue against the idea that you have the right to call other belief's crazy, just because you believe one and they believe another- because after all. your idea that your dog is a god is no more valid than my cat is one. It's arrogant to believe that others can't find validity in whatever they believe.

Ultimately I think we agree that as long as nothing is forced upon anyone else then it's best to just accept that others have different beliefs and can find validity in it. Personally, I find it fascinating what others believe. I love learning about it all and having the opportunity to find out more.

 

I agree with this and your previous post, but it won't let me like it for some reason.

And(I'm talking generally now, not to Taraeos) I thought the point of the thread is to see who on here has a similar religion to the OP, not to tell us we're crazy for our beliefs or be challenged on it. I don't mean to be shooting down any kind of debate in general of course, and everyone has a right to his/her opinion and should be able to debate and discuss, I just don't think this thread is the right place to do so. Anymore than a therapist should think there's something wrong with you for being gay or trans, there are some therapists who put religions like this down as a symptom of a mental disorder (which is just as awful as putting down that being gay shows there's a mental problem with you.) And it just came off in a challenging, dismissive way, even though I don't fully believe that was McCanory's intention, it just certainly came off like that.

Yes, I'm still studying the different Pagan beliefs before I make a decision, and it is supposed to be a very personal, meaningful thing. I find it's more meaningful when someone chooses a religion they feel most resonates with them. And no one should have to justify their religion or reasons it's meaningful to them. Unless their religion causes harm and death to others or is like those cults where you're supposed to do incest and have sex with kids or something, as long as it's not that and not hurting others or children, is it truly necessary to try to talk someone out of something that brings them peace and helps them through hard times and being a better person? Just because it's considered alternative and not the "right" or "normal" religion?

I really didn't mean to preach, it just upsets me when people of peaceful religions are challenged on it, so my response is biased with my emotions towards that. I just mean to put my two cents in and just say I believe there's a time and place and way to discuss and debate things. Not that any scholarly debate should never take place about things- just in the right way is all.