Which religion do you follow?

[Loki]

The question is straightforward. Tell us about it, and your level of devotion to it.

Let me know if you want more options in the poll.

[Thorum]

There is no god, gods, spirit of the universe, benevolent energy, ghosts, spirits, fairies, unicorns, magic, ESP, supernatural beings, life after death, etc...

There is nature.

"Religions are all alike - founded upon fables and mythologies." [Thomas Jefferson]

[Loddfafner]

If there were multiple options I would have checked each of these:

Heathen (where my heart is: spirituality attuned to the rhythms of nature and guided by the imagery of Norse mythology)

Protestant (as the heritage of my family though it has been several generations since any of us has stepped foot in a church for a reason other than architectural or musical appreciation. I was also shaped by episcopalian, presbyterian,and lutheran traditions which are distinct from catholic, orthodox, evangelical, jewish, or muslim cultures)

Agnostic (as a philosophical stance)

[Sally]

Roman Catholicism.

I probably veer towards a more traditional strain of Catholicism, though. Ever since I attended a Traditional Latin Mass almost twenty years ago, I have had a great affinity for a pre Vatican II style of Catholicism. Some of the vile practices I'd like to see supressed in the Church today: female altar servers, communion in the hand and lay people prancing all over the sanctuary, to name a few. These are trendy additions to the Mass that should be relegated to the liturgical closet of shame, along with the congregational sign of peace. Vatican II was an absolute and utter disaster, and it's really no surprise that Catholics are leaving the Church in droves.

As far as personal piety goes, others have said I'm devout, though I'd be reluctant to say so myself. I attend Mass weekly, go to Confession fairly regularly and say the Rosary daily. Nothing special, really, and I know others who are far more devout than I. ;)

[Jamt]

Lutheran.

Part of it for respect towards my ancestors. Some of it for appreciation of its moral values, which has proven it’s worth through generations. A bit is faith, I believe in the core message. One reason is contempt towards atheism and secular society, which is the main cause of declining civilization and nations. Old fashion fear of God in reasonable doses is good.

I have trouble with church-going, forgiving and a lot of other Christian creeds. Spiritually, my esteem of nature and material, my appreciation of women might not be very Christian.

I do not attend Mass. I respect other Christian sects that are high church more than those that are enthusiastic and unstable. And Buddhism makes a lot of sense.

[Psychonaut]

My religiosity is a complex issue to which there is no tight one-word description. :( For those interested, I'll break it down into categories for some semblance of coherence:

Ontology: I do not believe that any God is ontologically primary. I suppose one could deify and worship those entities that are truly thought to be primary (i.e. being, time, process), but there is no extant tradition of this.

Metaphysics: I do not believe any mythic cosmogony or cosmology to be true in the sense that the cosmogonies and cosmologies put forth by physicists are true. I believe that Jung and Campbell were correct in that these mythic matrices tell us more about the structures of our own psyches than do they the external world around us. Also, I am a monistic materialist. I do not believe in any substance other than matter/energy (which, as General Relativity tells us, are the same substance). I do not believe that there is a "soul" which is separate from the bio-electro-chemical pattern produced by our central nervous system that we call the "mind."

Epistemology: I follow Hans Vaihinger in espousing the epistemological view of Fictionalism. This relates directly to the way in which I view religions in general. Defining Fictionalism, Vaihinger states in The Philosophy of "As If" (p. viii):


Fictionalism is as follows: An idea whose theoretical untruth or incorrectness, and therewith its falsity, is admitted, is not for that reason practically valueless and useless; for such an idea, in spite of its theoretical nullity may have great practical importance.

Going off that, I believe that various religious paradigms (regardless of the falsity of their mythic cosmogonies and cosmologies) have a utilitarian value which has yet to be rivaled even slightly by any other system of thought. I believe that religion and only religion can successfully bind together an ethnic group. I believe that if we are to survive as a people, it will only be so if we have a spiritually in tact core to our society. The study that Wat Tyler poster elsewhere discussing the levels of religiosity in the US showed one thing: the areas with the highest levels of religiosity also have the lowest levels of miscegenation in the US. Heathenry is particularly suited to this purpose since it is, by nature, ancestrally based and ethnocentric. Christianity has served this function admirably in the past, but it's core of universalism has been lessening this effect in nearly all extant sects.

Aesthetics: For me, utilitarianism aside, religion is a principally aesthetic phenomena. When I step outside, I know from my education in the physical sciences that the sun is a flaming ball of gas; I know that the night sky is simple emptiness; I know that the moon is a hunk of rock; I know that the colors of the dawn are a trick of the sunlight. However, my knowledge of the mechanics of these is not replaced by my religion. Rather, my religion allows me to determine the way in which my mind interacts with these phenomena. For me, one of the most valuable things religion (and I'm primarily speaking of pagan religions here) can give us is a sense that Nature is sacred. Religion can allow us to be filled with senses of wonder, awe and numinosity as we gaze at the majesty of Nature.

Theology: Now, adding on to everything that's been said previously, I do believe that the Gods and Goddesses of all pantheons exist. I do not believe that they have any physical existence though. I believe that they exist in us and, just like our ancestors, are kept alive by us remembering them, telling tales about them, and celebrating their holy days. I believe that were we to die, our Gods would die with us. I believe that Jung was right in this area too, that the Gods exist within the Collective Unconscious of the peoples who created them. Myths are the dreams of a race.

Postmortem States: I do not believe in an afterlife. I believe that once your brain ceases to function, you are dead. My beliefs are est expressed by a verse from the Hávamál:



Cattle die, kinsmen die
the self must also die;
I know one thing which never dies:
the reputation of each dead man.

I believe in two types of immortality, the genetic type that we achieve through having children, and the type that men who do great deeds achieve.

I'm sure I left out a whole bunch. If you got any further questions about my beliefs, feel free to ask. It's always a work in progress and I'm always open to intelligent debate about any aspect of my thought. :)

[Sol Invictus]

benevolent energy, ghosts, spirits

I tend to believe that benevolent energy, ghosts, and spirits of the land, family and kin are all part of nature, our homes and the environment we inhabit which is why I think they should be respected, honoured, and never spoken ill of. I believe people can be tormented, or influenced by their actions by a Dæmon, Furies, Landwights or whatever you like to call them, leading people to depression, suicide, or even murder(s). Most often it is invited, but not to say it couldn't be beaten. I could go on but I won't. ^_^

[Eldritch]

I think of myself as an indifferent agnostic. I do respect (and in some cases, admire) people with more clearly defined religious convictions than mine, but I go to some lenghts in order to not number myself among them.

[Atlas]

I follow Roman Catholicism since I was baptised in 1994. Though I rarely attend the mass, even less pray at home, both of my grandma do it though. Young people have lost their faith maybe. Except for young Muslims. In that sense, I can admire them and islam.

[Loki]

I came to be a practicing Christian when I was 13 years old. I stayed with the faith until I was 27, then the doubts kicked in, and I became a realist. I am still an atheist, and now in my mid-thirties.

I can see the value of a practical tradition, as expressed in the heathenism of indigenous religions and beliefs. We have evolved along with our cultures, although the latter is far more recent and therefore more superficial. Nevertheless I am interested in exploring the wisdom of old, accumulated by trial and error, and philosophy of many generations. However neopaganism is not exactly an uninterrupted base of knowledge. It will have to be built up again, truths rediscovered. What I am unwilling to case aside though, is the knowledge of scientific research which has opened up many secrets of life, previously only understood through religious mysticism. In many ways we are past that stage. Reverting back to a previous state of ignorance is not exactly wise. I'm talking too much.

For me, I am first and foremost a realist. I don't believe in the physical existence of any god. A god or gods may exist in our minds, thoughts and desires. But they cannot exist without us, as they do not exist as independent entities. :)

[Vargtand]

I bow down to no man or deity, I do bow down to my native culture and would put that culture in front of anything else. I'm not spiritual but I would say that Asatro is closest to my heart. As it is my heritage.

[Äike]

I'm Lutheran, but I never go to church, I don't pray and I'm not religious at all.

I can be called Agnostic.

[Aemma]

Great thread Loki! :)

Well being a French Canadian and being of a certain age as well, one cannot come into this life and not be baptised Roman Catholic and go through a considerable number of the rites of the RC Church (the Sacraments of Confession, Communion, Marriage). French Canadian culture and the Roman Catholic Church have been inextricably bound since dot. This has changed some though, since the Quiet Revolution of the 1960's; the Roman Catholic Church has suffered here in French Canada as elsewhere.

All of this to say that despite my being Heathen, I still carry an emotional attachment to the Roman Catholic Church inasmuch as my ethnic identity is that of French Canadian which always presupposes some relationship with the Roman Catholic Church, imho at any rate.

But despite my love for my culture, spiritually I have always had difficulty giving myself over to the Christian mindset that seemed to be my one and only option in life. For the longest time, before professing Heathenry as my 'religion', I called myself a generic Theist, believing in (a) Power(s) greater than myself/us but not having any name nor face. Little did I know that this was really my belief in the power and magic of Life and Ancestral Spirit. And when I did finally stumble upon an 'organised religion' (said tongue-in-cheek of Heathenry of course ;)) which could effectively, but more importantly, authentically bring my spiritual beliefs in line with my cultural ones, without one compromising the other, my Being had finally found its true Home.

With respect to my own metaphysical thoughts, I guess mine follow Psy's a bit in that I believe that energy/ies is/are the buzz of life, if you will, yet manifested in countless ways. Where my thoughts differ from Psy's perhaps have more to do with how our own individual minds can interpret these energy patterns. Much like a dog can hear some sounds which to the human ear are impossible to be detected, I also believe that the human body is limited in its ability to experience and/or perceive ALL manifestations (ie., different patternings) of energy. To me this has many implications with respect to views on the concept of the multiverse and the after-life, two concepts which I very much DO believe in.

There's probably more that I could rant on about but I'll close it for now. :)

Again, great thread Loki. Thanks!

Cheers for now!...Aemma

[Lady L]

There is no god, gods, spirit of the universe, benevolent energy, ghosts, spirits, fairies, unicorns, magic, ESP, supernatural beings, life after death, etc...

There is nature.

"Religions are all alike - founded upon fables and mythologies." [Thomas Jefferson]

I strongly believe in ghosts and spirits. I have seen to much and heard one myself. It was not imagined and I am not crazy. I do not know about a God but I do feel there are Gods of some sort. Nature like Gods. I do feel there are higher powers that we may never know of until the time of death, if even then. I also truly hope for a life after death. And, since I have a strong belief in spirits that leads me to feel there is something after our life on earth's death.

Thorum, this post was not to start a back and forth of why we disagree but just to outline our differences. I respect people's beliefs. :)

[Beorn]

'Other'

I am God.

[Barreldriver]

In the past I have toyed around in various religious concepts. Started out Southern Baptists, went Atheist, then toyed around in Fyrnsidu and Asatru before I finally decided that I would settle with Fyrnsidu and Asatru, I am still in the beginning stages of acquiring knowledge, I'm still reading through the Eddas taking mental and written notes of what passes throughout my mind during reading and absorbing any side notes written throughout the translations. I'm also meddling with the various readings that have come up through links followed from various posters here and at other sites. Overall it's a lot to take in, but I am determined to absorb and utilize the information available.

Reason why I stuck with this is due to my love of heritage and cultural tradition, I am aware that scientific discoveries need to be kept in mind, however I am not willing to completely abandon and old way, I intend to compare and contrast and decide for myself where they compliment and work together (if at all). I also remain open to advice from many perspectives and look into the various sides at my own bidding.

I also see the Eddas now as more of a tale of what others of might have achieved and a sort of outline for potential behavior and achievement for the self, not so much as a literal doctrine (example the Christian Bible).

[Lyfing]

I'm Heathen. I follow in the footsteps of my ancestors. With every step I take we walk the world..:wink

Later,
-Lyfing

[EWtt]

I'd define myself as an Agnostic.

[Solwyn]

I chose Heathenism because although Catholicism coloured my life through culture and environment, I never felt truly connected to it. It is hard, though, to escape or not be affected by it to some degree, because if you belong to any of the French Canadian or Gaelic ethnic groups in this country, the Catholic Church is part of your life.

As much as I enjoy and have internalized the Odinist wheel of the year, I still enjoy those foods, activities, and celebrations that are a result of merging either the RC Church or Celtic Christianity with old pagan beliefs. I think many in the heathen community also feel this way but are reluctant to say it for fear of being criticized. Those folks are also my ancestors, and if I am going to revere and respect one, I should do so for all.

:thumbs up

[Aemma]

I chose Heathen because although Catholicism coloured my life through culture and environment, I never felt truly connected to it. It is hard, though, to escape or not be affected by it to some degree, because if you belong to any of the French Canadian or Gaelic ethnic groups in this country, the Catholic Church is part of your life.

As much as I enjoy and have internalized the Odinist wheel of the year, I still enjoy those foods, activities, and celebrations that are a result of merging either the RC Church or Celtic Christianity with old pagan beliefs. I think many in the heathen community also feel this way but are reluctant to say it for fear of being criticized. Those folks are also my ancestors, and if I am going to revere and respect one, I should do so for all.

:thumbs up

So very true Solwyn! A few of my own close Heathen friends hold their own Christian ancestors in contempt for being or having been Christian. I never understood that. Nor do I subscribe to that notion either. All of my ancestors, Christian and non-Christian alike, are revered, as it should be I believe. Otherwise a person is just yet denying another (and significant) part of themselves. I'm glad that you brought this up since I do believe that the notion of 'the ancestors' can be interpreted as too much of an intangible entity in Heathenry.

Cheers Solwyn!...Aemma

[Óttar]

I identify with the ancient mystery religions, which are initiatic and urban. I believe in a sort of monism. In ancient times, it was normal for someone to belong to several cults (in the ancient sense) at once. One could be initiated into the mysteries of Mithras, Isis, Dea Syria, Mars and not have any sense of conflict about it. Hinduism in its most highly developed form, Advaita Vedanta unifies different ideas and reduces things to nirguna Brahman that is to say a supreme spirit without attributes, but can be attributed attributes (saguna Brahman), a sort of contradiction.

I believe that nature is at once fluid and orderly. There are established patterns, but also an infinite number of variations. In certain Hindu texts, Brahman is referred to as the Manifest and the Unmanifest... I believe Brahman is both masculine and feminine, and neither at the same time. This is contradiction I know, but that which establishes laws need not also itself be restrained by those laws. We are ultimately not capable of understanding it except perhaps through experience (meditation, entheogens etc.)

Mediterranean indigenous religion, before its being supplanted by Christianity by imperial decree, was starting to evolve toward monism, that is, a belief in many gods united under a single divine force, or numinosity. This has its cognate in Hindu Dharma (which is a misnomer, Hindu is the Persian rendering of the Sindhu river, which was transmitted to the British who had a habit of categorizing everything, and having no other word for Indian indigenous customs, beliefs, and its vast often contradictory body of philosophies, used the term 'Hindu' as a convenient umbrella.) The term used in the texts was Sanathana Dharma i.e. the eternal religion (way, custom, natural law.. compare to Greek nomos, Roman Mos maiorum) because it never occurred to them to give their beliefs a name, this was an alien phenomenon exclusive to the Abrahamic creeds.

The Vedic people had a habit of exalting a particular deity as the highest deity while they were composing poems in honour of that deity to the exclusion of all others. This was called henotheism by the German indologist Max Mueller.. i.e. the belief that while other gods existed, by the devotee they were not necessarily regarded.

This manifested itself later on in Vedanta (Sanskrit: ved-anta lit. "The end of the Vedas" or "End of Knowledge") where any personal deity could be identified with the Absolute (Brahman). In this way, my ishta devi or patron deity is the goddess Kali as to me she represents the underlying fabric of reality, i.e. the most primal manifestation of that which is, blood, death, night, frenzy, dissolution, disorder, dynamic energy.. She calls to me in my innermost being, she is very literally encoded in my being. Something that I cannot transcend, nor do I really seek to, but instead I seek to celebrate and live in accordance with it.

[jerney]

I am/was raised Catholic. I'm really not that religious, but much of my family has been Catholic for hundreds of years and well, tradition is important to me and I see no reason to break it. So, if I have children they will be baptised Catholic and go to Catholic church.

[Absinthe]

Hinduism in its most highly developed form, Advaita Vedanta unifies different ideas and reduces things to nirguna Brahman that is to say a supreme spirit without attributes, but can be attributed attributes (saguna Brahman), a sort of contradiction.

Advaita Vedanta is the highest form of Hinduist traditions for you? :icon_ask: Interesting...care to elaborate? :)

[Frigga]

I am a Northern European pagan. I used to be Christian, but that way just wasn't for me.

I also believe that whatever you believe in, whether it is God, Jesus, Sheva, Odin, or even the Flying Spaghetti Monster, whoever devotes spiritual and emotional energy into believing in this entity, or thought system feeds its lifeforce so to speak. I remember that really bad miniseries of Merlin from the mid 90s, and Queen Mab died when everyone stopped believing in her. I think that it's the same thing. I believe that the Jewish, Christian, Islamic God did not used to be as powerful as it is now. The more people that worship it, and devote energy to it, the stronger and powerful it becomes. Our spiritualism is energy, and we in a sense nuture our own Gods and Goddesses through our devotion.

In that same vein, I also firmly believe that what you believe happens to you after death will happen. Atheists will just cease to be, Christians go to heaven, Hindus reincarnate, and those who are Odinists or the like (like me! :D) will go to one of the Halls of our Gods, or to Helheim, depending on how we live our lives. I don't believe that just because I'm a heathen that I'm going to the Christian hell. I have to believe in the Christian god, and in Satan for that to happen to me.

[Gooding]

No preferred religion.I honor nature, I'm aware of many wonderful theories from the scientific community regarding the creation of the universe and I've been involved in so many religions, I've come to believe that religion is subjective.At death, I believe that parts of my personality will rub off on the people I come into contact with and my physical and psychological genes will be inherited by my children and their descendants.My body will either disintegrate or turn to cinders, to be scattered to the wind.Nothing special, I'm just like any other organism! :) I do try to keep an open mind, but not one so open that my brain falls out. Afterlife? Any objective recording of such a thing? Nope.Anything's possible, but as personalities can alter dramatically even from one month to the next, I don't believe in some personality suddenly static and immortal because the brain and heart ceased to function.Dead is dead, although we do live on in the minds and hearts of those closest to us.Any energy we disperse is recycled back into the earth.I can only hope that once my body's absorbed into dust, some descendant might have the common courtesy to plant some high grade marijuana or some corn to be used for moonshine in my soil..:D I'd like to think my remains would be put to some constructive use.;)

[Barreldriver]

I am a Northern European pagan. I used to be Christian, but that way just wasn't for me.

I also believe that whatever you believe in, whether it is God, Jesus, Sheva, Odin, or even the Flying Spaghetti Monster, whoever devotes spiritual and emotional energy into believing in this entity, or thought system feeds its lifeforce so to speak. I remember that really bad miniseries of Merlin from the mid 90s, and Queen Mab died when everyone stopped believing in her. I think that it's the same thing. I believe that the Jewish, Christian, Islamic God did not used to be as powerful as it is now. The more people that worship it, and devote energy to it, the stronger and powerful it becomes. Our spiritualism is energy, and we in a sense nuture our own Gods and Goddesses through our devotion.

In that same vein, I also firmly believe that what you believe happens to you after death will happen. Atheists will just cease to be, Christians go to heaven, Hindus reincarnate, and those who are Odinists or the like (like me! :D) will go to one of the Halls of our Gods, or to Helheim, depending on how we live our lives. I don't believe that just because I'm a heathen that I'm going to the Christian hell. I have to believe in the Christian god, and in Satan for that to happen to me.

That is a magnificent idea, and further illustrates the connection between man and "gods".


Given this it is beyond a doubt in my mind if we make great things of ourselves as men and women we ourselves can become Gods.

That inspires and alternate thought process in my own mind, perhaps Odin was once a man that became a god, my thoughts behind this are the Aesir vs. Vanir wars, that from what I've read seem to match pretty well with wars that occurred in ancient Europe and the heroes of that war were elevated to god like status, and the fact that Odin is mentioned as a father of men, men father men, Odin was once man, after great heroism and the quest for further wisdom he was elevated to God like status and replaced Tyr. I see Odin as the Indo European Champion, Njorth the champion of the coastal pre-Indo European sea travelers and coastline dwellers, Tyr perhaps the champion of the general pre-Indo European peoples (being replaced by Odin, champion of the Indo-Europeans), another thought is that Tyr and Odin were rival IE champions one more dedicated to the magics and great wisdom(Odin) the other dedicated to preserving justice and self discipline (Tyr).

That is just an alternate view in my head, it is not concrete, just a thought, it is to be read with a discriminatory mindset. I want to discuss it and have it criticized, to see if it can be a valid argument.

[Angantyr]

The choice of Hinduism seems antithetical to a board dedicated to European preservationism. It represents a people, a culture and a mindset foreign to that of Europe and Europeans.

Just my two cents. ...

[Lyfing]

Hey Barreldriver,

Her post made me think too. You bring up very good points when it comes to being "gods"..

One of the things I think you are talking about goes with what Psychonaut said with..



Cattle die, kinsmen die
the self must also die;
I know one thing which never dies:
the reputation of each dead man.

And, with what Thomas Carlyle said in On Heroes, Hero-Worship, and the Heroic in History (http://www.gutenberg.org/etext/1091)


Thought does not die, but only is changed. The first man that began to think in this Planet of ours, he was the beginner of all. And then the second man, and the third man;—nay, every true Thinker to this hour is a kind of Odin, teaches men his way of thought, spreads a shadow of his own likeness over sections of the History of the World.

Odin is the god of poetry. Poets are the coiners of new ideas. With our Wyrd we create Worlds..!!

...:thumb001:

Later,
-Lyfing

[Psychonaut]

The choice of Hinduism seems antithetical to a board dedicated to European preservationism. It represents a people, a culture and a mindset foreign to that of Europe and Europeans.

Just my two cents. ...

Many of the same criticisms could be leveled against Christianity as well. Christianity certainly has the advantage of having been juxtaposed within European culture for quite some time, but Hinduism certainly shares more fundamental similarities with the old pre-Christian religions of Europe.

[Lulletje Rozewater]

Roman Catholicism.

I probably veer towards a more traditional strain of Catholicism, though. Ever since I attended a Traditional Latin Mass almost twenty years ago, I have had a great affinity for a pre Vatican II style of Catholicism. Some of the vile practices I'd like to see supressed in the Church today: female altar servers, communion in the hand and lay people prancing all over the sanctuary, to name a few. These are trendy additions to the Mass that should be relegated to the liturgical closet of shame, along with the congregational sign of peace. Vatican II was an absolute and utter disaster, and it's really no surprise that Catholics are leaving the Church in droves.

As far as personal piety goes, others have said I'm devout, though I'd be reluctant to say so myself. I attend Mass weekly, go to Confession fairly regularly and say the Rosary daily. Nothing special, really, and I know others who are far more devout than I. ;)

The orthodox/Latin is possibly the best.
The new-wave is a sell out.
Although I am not a Catholic anymore,I would say it is the better way for expressing your inner self,through religion.

[Lulletje Rozewater]

Religious faith is oasis in the heart which will never be reached by a caravan of thinking.
Faith is in all cases a choice between pleasures of this world and the peace of the next world.
I chose both the delights of this world and the peace of the next.
For I know in my heart that I am my own Supreme being and wrote one song, and it scans perfectly and it also rhymes perfectly with the seasons following each other year in year out.
My quest to sit on God's left or right hand and say "Hi" to Peter is futile....I stole the pearly gates.
Years and years ago when God threw me a pebble,into its wondrous lake, I disturbed its surface with countless circles in the form of questions and questions.
But when I reached the depths I became very still and thought;"give me Atheism and I will outdare the night."

And here I am exceedingly keen,but dumb in my celestial bed

[SwordoftheVistula]

Great thread Loki! :)

Well being a French Canadian and being of a certain age as well, one cannot come into this life and not be baptised Roman Catholic and go through a considerable number of the rites of the RC Church (the Sacraments of Confession, Communion, Marriage). French Canadian culture and the Roman Catholic Church have been inextricably bound since dot. This has changed some though, since the Quiet Revolution of the 1960's; the Roman Catholic Church has suffered here in French Canada as elsewhere.

All of this to say that despite my being Heathen, I still carry an emotional attachment to the Roman Catholic Church inasmuch as my ethnic identity is that of French Canadian which always presupposes some relationship with the Roman Catholic Church, imho at any rate.

But despite my love for my culture, spiritually I have always had difficulty giving myself over to the Christian mindset that seemed to be my one and only option in life. For the longest time, before professing Heathenry as my 'religion', I called myself a generic Theist, believing in (a) Power(s) greater than myself/us but not having any name nor face. Little did I know that this was really my belief in the power and magic of Life and Ancestral Spirit. And when I did finally stumble upon an 'organised religion' (said tongue-in-cheek of Heathenry of course ;)) which could effectively, but more importantly, authentically bring my spiritual beliefs in line with my cultural ones, without one compromising the other, my Being had finally found its true Home.

With respect to my own metaphysical thoughts, I guess mine follow Psy's a bit in that I believe that energy/ies is/are the buzz of life, if you will, yet manifested in countless ways. Where my thoughts differ from Psy's perhaps have more to do with how our own individual minds can interpret these energy patterns. Much like a dog can hear some sounds which to the human ear are impossible to be detected, I also believe that the human body is limited in its ability to experience and/or perceive ALL manifestations (ie., different patternings) of energy. To me this has many implications with respect to views on the concept of the multiverse and the after-life, two concepts which I very much DO believe in.

There's probably more that I could rant on about but I'll close it for now. :)

Again, great thread Loki. Thanks!

Cheers for now!...Aemma



I chose Heathenism because although Catholicism coloured my life through culture and environment, I never felt truly connected to it. It is hard, though, to escape or not be affected by it to some degree, because if you belong to any of the French Canadian or Gaelic ethnic groups in this country, the Catholic Church is part of your life.

As much as I enjoy and have internalized the Odinist wheel of the year, I still enjoy those foods, activities, and celebrations that are a result of merging either the RC Church or Celtic Christianity with old pagan beliefs. I think many in the heathen community also feel this way but are reluctant to say it for fear of being criticized. Those folks are also my ancestors, and if I am going to revere and respect one, I should do so for all.

:thumbs up

Why not both Roman Catholic and Heathen? That's how most of Asia and Africa is. Japan, for example, has had Buddhism and Shinto (their version of heathenism) alongside eachother for centuries and many people follow both. In Africa, it is not uncommon to find people with heathen, christian, and muslim charms to 'cover all the bases'

I suppose the coexistence in Japan and other Asian countries may have had to do with the peaceful and monastic nature of Buddhism, and thus it did not pose a threat to the divine status of the Emperor; in contrast to the situation in the west, where it was linked to a struggle for power between various tribes and kings-the Roman empire switched to Christianity as a way to gain control over an increasingly diverse empire, and later on northern kings switched to Christianity to gain support from the Catholic church and the 'civilized' world, later on the Protestant churches became a tool for northerners to achieve independence from the Latin world.

However this situation no longer exists in the west, as there is no longer much connection between religion and political power in most of the west.




However neopaganism is not exactly an uninterrupted base of knowledge. It will have to be built up again, truths rediscovered. What I am unwilling to case aside though, is the knowledge of scientific research which has opened up many secrets of life, previously only understood through religious mysticism. In many ways we are past that stage. Reverting back to a previous state of ignorance is not exactly wise.

That's a big question, if we are going to create a new religion, is it better to craft an entirely new religion (eg Creativity, and some would classify NS as this), or to dig up some old symbols to enhance the 'founding myths' of the new religion?

[Óttar]

I mentioned that in the ancient world it was possible for one to have multiple spiritual allegiances, but alas, one can't choose more than one with this poll.

[Loddfafner]

The poll is asking the wrong question. There may be religions one could follow, but a much more interesting question is which religion does one lead.

[Angantyr]

Many of the same criticisms could be leveled against Christianity as well. Christianity certainly has the advantage of having been juxtaposed within European culture for quite some time, but Hinduism certainly shares more fundamental similarities with the old pre-Christian religions of Europe.

But, I do level many of the same criticisms against Christianity. :mad:

[Aemma]

Why not both Roman Catholic and Heathen? That's how most of Asia and Africa is. Japan, for example, has had Buddhism and Shinto (their version of heathenism) alongside eachother for centuries and many people follow both. In Africa, it is not uncommon to find people with heathen, christian, and muslim charms to 'cover all the bases'

I can understand and appreciate what you are proposing here Sword but I don't necessarily agree with it. Furthermore, to use the example of Buddhism and Shinto is slightly misleading in that Buddhism is technically not considered a 'religion' per se, much like atheism or humanism are NOT religions per se.


I suppose the coexistence in Japan and other Asian countries may have had to do with the peaceful and monastic nature of Buddhism, and thus it did not pose a threat to the divine status of the Emperor; in contrast to the situation in the west, where it was linked to a struggle for power between various tribes and kings-the Roman empire switched to Christianity as a way to gain control over an increasingly diverse empire, and later on northern kings switched to Christianity to gain support from the Catholic church and the 'civilized' world, later on the Protestant churches became a tool for northerners to achieve independence from the Latin world.

However this situation no longer exists in the west, as there is no longer much connection between religion and political power in most of the west.

Agreed in terms of the previous connection between political power and the Church in our past history. However, from strictly a personal standpoint, there is the question of how I view my religion in terms of its primary purpose. Though I acknowledge that there is some element of the political in identifying oneself as Heathen (and I am only referring to a Folkish Heathen here), the spiritual dimension is much more important to me. In my opinion, the theologies of Christianity and Heathenry are very much mutually exclusive. I could never be of both spiritual persuasions in tandem and call myself an authentic follower of both traditions by the very fact that they are diametrically opposed spiritual belief systems. An excellent book which deals with the juxtapositions of Christianity and Heathenry is authored by Alain de Benoist entitled On Being Pagan. It is a truly excellent book which sets out the fundamental differences in thought between the desert creed and the folkish heathen one.

In my world, a Heathen worth his/her salt could not ever possibly hold authentic allegiances to both belief systems. I seriously cannot see how this could successfully done while keeping the integrity of either spiritual system intact.


That's a big question, if we are going to create a new religion, is it better to craft an entirely new religion (eg Creativity, and some would classify NS as this), or to dig up some old symbols to enhance the 'founding myths' of the new religion?

I surely hope that you are not referring to Heathenry as a "new" religion for it is very far from being such. Contrary to some New Age spiritual traditions that have popped up in the last while, Heathenry has been a Way of Life since the existence of our Folk. It is NOT a created religion but a reconstructed one. And these concepts are vastly different. The latter presupposes its prior existence in the anthropological history of a People while the former does not. And I think this is where as Heathens we have the most work to do: to educate our own Folk as to what our genuine pre-Christian pagan traditions and customs were/are and how they can be reclaimed without any political ideology associated with it.

Cheers Sword!...Aemma

[Solwyn]

Why not both Roman Catholic and Heathen? That's how most of Asia and Africa is. Japan, for example, has had Buddhism and Shinto (their version of heathenism) alongside eachother for centuries and many people follow both. In Africa, it is not uncommon to find people with heathen, christian, and muslim charms to 'cover all the bases'

I suppose the coexistence in Japan and other Asian countries may have had to do with the peaceful and monastic nature of Buddhism, and thus it did not pose a threat to the divine status of the Emperor; in contrast to the situation in the west, where it was linked to a struggle for power between various tribes and kings-the Roman empire switched to Christianity as a way to gain control over an increasingly diverse empire, and later on northern kings switched to Christianity to gain support from the Catholic church and the 'civilized' world, later on the Protestant churches became a tool for northerners to achieve independence from the Latin world.

However this situation no longer exists in the west, as there is no longer much connection between religion and political power in most of the west.


That's a big question, if we are going to create a new religion, is it better to craft an entirely new religion (eg Creativity, and some would classify NS as this), or to dig up some old symbols to enhance the 'founding myths' of the new religion?

I don't mix and match in the way you are suggesting because whether you want to call it Odinism, Asatru, or garden variety heathenism, it has a completely different world view than Roman Catholicism or Christianity. Were it not for the fact that it makes my family happy, I would quite honestly have nothing to do with any Catholic or Christian tradition, period. As it is, I enjoy them simply because 98% of my family goes to church and these moments bring them together; we live all over the world. These are also the days that I get off because most of Canadian society follows these holidays and celebrations, even though most don't have two sweet clues as to why.

I don't acknowledge Christmas because I believe in Christ, for example, because I believe Jesus Christ to be a fabrication cut and pasted from Egyptian mythology. I attend family dinners and celebrations to see family, not because I'm dying to rejoice about Jesus. Since these also mark culturally acceptable moments of celebration where I live, at 37 years of age I am used to them. Basically, when my parents are gone and I don't have them to make happy, there will be no more acknowledgment of it. As a family we have our Yule celebration and rejoice in the rebirth of the SUN, which makes a lot more sense to me, because I can see THAT reflected in reality. In fact, all of the Odinist holidays make more sense to me, and the more I show them to my parents, they see why.

There is no way I could reconcile two religions, especially when they teach such differing world views. Stand up and be strong vs turn the other cheek and take it? Woman is inherently weak and evil? We are born full of sin? Doesn't work for me. Besides, if we are to believe in the validity of Christianity as a religion, then it is the natural and organic religion of a specific group of people in the Middle East. It is their heathen religion, not mine. I have no Middle Eastern heritage, therefore this is not my way. Their myths and beliefs do not inform or support my language, culture, or ancestral history. We may not see anymore, just how grafting a stranger faith over our people has contributed to the breakdown of our various societies because after several centuries of Christian domination we are used to it.

If the Asians do it, good for them. I've had a few students that were from Vietnam that were Christian. They were quite concerned, fearfully so, that I might not be Christian, too, because I wear a hammer. I don't discuss my beliefs at work because I am a teacher and even though my students are adults, it is still inappropriate. When one student did some homework on my jewelry and discovered it's meaning, I was inundated with demands that I renounce my evil ways and submit to Jesus Christ. I asked them about their ancestral gods and got even more FEAR. "Oh no, that is superstitious and wrong, we could never....blah. blah. blah....." I see.....so you can trade one set of "superstitions", one that at the very least is supported and informed by your language, culture, and worldview, and give them up for a completely different one that leaves you too effing paralyzed to think.

Whatever.

[Lulletje Rozewater]

I flew once with Egypt Air to Cairo and stayed at the Möwen Pick Hotel.
They asked me at the reception whether I was a Christian or Muslim.
Look at my nose,I said--------I am a jewish apostate.
Dead Silence-bar bar bar beep beep-was their blabbering in Egyptian.
The receptionist asked what an apostate was.
It is a jew with a prostate,I replied.
Oh, yes,well we would advise you not to visit the inner city.
What a dump this Cairo is.
10.000.000 people smelling like a Papyrus drenched in goats milk

[Ulf]

I just make it up as I go.

[SwordoftheVistula]

I could never be of both spiritual persuasions in tandem and call myself an authentic follower of both traditions by the very fact that they are diametrically opposed spiritual belief systems.


There is no way I could reconcile two religions, especially when they teach such differing world views.

They're still far closer to eachother than Shinto is to Buddhism. Buddhism is like Christianity without the old testament, and Shinto is a very militant and nationalist religion.

[Óttar]

Shinto is a very militant and nationalist religion.

Only during WWII when Shinto was identified with the Imperial Cult.

Shinto is essentially Japanese animism.

[Bloodeagle]

I do believe the gods at one time were very real.
I believe that they shaped our genome and helped form our culture.

It is known that civilization emerged some 7000 years ago. From stone age to Mesopotamia overnight!

My religion is a religion based on the knowledge of and distrust for our creators.

[Óttar]

Advaita Vedanta is the highest form of Hinduist traditions for you? :icon_ask: Interesting...care to elaborate? :)

Vedanta (Ved-anta, end of the Vedas, as in the essence or objective.) gave Hinduism a sort of legitimacy in the face of Buddhism. It allowed Hindus to do philosophical battle effectively at a time when Buddhism could've swept all India. The main point is a defence of Atman or "self" in the face of the Buddhist anatman. It brought together various Hindu systems into a cohesive unit, and did away (partly) with the arcane ritualism and stultifying superstition of the Hinduism of the Brahmanas (The post-Vedic period after Hindus had entered the Ganges Valley away from the Indus river, and thus away from the non-settled culture of the Vedas.)

Buddhism and Jainism have had a deleterious affect on Hinduism. Vedic religion was originally about owning many cows (German viehe "cattle" related to English fee from Latin pecus as cattle meant wealth.) and having many sons.

There has been a conflict in Hinduism between the Hinduism of the grihastha or "householder" and the Hinduism of the sannyasin or "renunciant." I have always been a champion of the former, which agrees with Nietzsche that one must affirm life, indeed, "Pagans are those who affirm and celebrate life." As Nietzsche points out (and with which I have always agreed independently) Buddhism and Jainism are life-denying creeds; expressions of the latter current in the wider Hindu tradition.

Hinduism has always had to adapt in the face of hostile outside influence. Against Buddhism in its time, and later against Islam when the bhakti movement arose with a message of "getting back to basics" i.e. doing away with the dead skin and chaff of Brahminism. An example of evolution and adaptation at its finest.

[Baron Samedi]

Skeptical heathen of no real tradition (just edited this). My degree of passion on the matter depends on the day and how I'm feeling.

I generally have the most interested in the Gaulish/Briton deities and the Germanic ones, however.

I have tried to shake off the feelings of faith and such, even as recent as the past couple of weeks, but it is to no avail. The earth speaks to me, and it's a certain tongue that one cannot ignore.

I have no respect for the major 3 religions of this world.

[Electronic God-Man]

I don't practice Santeria...even if a certain thunder deity of theirs resembles Thor to some degree.

HrLJ6Saq7u4

But seriously, I would like to find my own path in Germanic heathenism. Problem is, I can't figure out yet if my strong interest in it is just that, only an interest or if there is something deeper there for me.

It would help if I would start thinking about some of the basic things I believe and go from there, but that requires a lot of personal reflection and time.

[Útrám]

I'm an Atheist in the classical sense of the word(Not A Theist), for the most part I don't mind religiosity. I try to distant myself as much as possible from these bigoted, nihilist, anti-theist militant douchebaggery movements.

[Amarantine]

The question is straightforward. Tell us about it, and your level of devotion to it.

Let me know if you want more options in the poll.

I was born in Christian Orthdox familly. But Montenenrgins are not religios in the same way as other Christians. Of course, we are proud that we kept our Christianity for centuries, and we think that we and Serbs the only authenthic Christians :D and the orthodox christianity is the original doctrine etc etc

Of course, I respect and love my Orthodox Christian tradition, this is something what is not even under question and never will be,but...some other beliefs are in me and around me (again some appears traditionaly and some are quite new for my country). But the subject is too much intimate. This is enough :)

[Loki]

... we think that we and Serbs the only authenthic Christians :D

And here I was, thinking that distinction belonged to the Spanish and the Irish! :eek: Oh well we never cease to learn. ;) :D

[Smaland]

My religion is Christian Identity (CI).

According to the Scriptures, in the Old Testament, ISRAEL was split into the House of Israel (the northern 10 tribes) and the House of Judah (the tribes of Judah and Benjamin) after the days of Solomon. I am using "ISRAEL" to stand for all 12 tribes, and I will use "House of Israel" or just "Israel" to stand for the northern 10 tribes only. The House of Israel fell into great sin, and so it was Divinely punished. Israel was taken captive and deported by the Assyrians around 720 BC.

According to the CI belief system, Israel never returned to Palestine. Instead, over time, Israel migrated north and west until it reached Europe, where it remains today. Of course, after Israel reached Europe, many Israelites emigrated, voluntarily or by force, to other parts of the world. These other parts include Australia, New Zealand, North America, Rhodesia, and South Africa.

Most of the House of Judah were taken along with Israel. If I remember the Scriptures correctly, fewer than 50,000 Judahites returned from Babylon.

Today's Jews are not ISRAELITES, they are Khazars.

The Old Testament prophecies concerning ISRAEL should not be "spiritualized" into something that applies only to the modern church. The prophecies made to ISRAEL still apply only to ISRAEL, and they will be fulfilled.

[Cato]

After some discussion online with fellow forum members and some self-reflection, I believe that Monism best describes my religious position.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Monism

I believe in:

One God, or the Monad, who has:

Aspects or manifestations, which can be regarded as gods and goddesses (lower cased in both cases to denote inferiority to God).
These gods and goddesses are the attributes of God, his "parts," which are personified and given mythical backgrounds. While I view God deistically, that is he cannot or will not intervene in the affairs of the universe (except via chance, fortune and irony- IOW Divine Providence), I do believe that God is not impersonal or unconcerned with human life. Rather, God is very concerned with our well-being, but lest he make us mere puppets by constantly meddling in the creation, he leaves it up to us to better or worsen our world. Also, the reason why the gods and goddesses are presented in anthropomorphic forms is, as Cicero pointed out, the human form is the most beautiful and utilitarian- humans literally have the form of the [conceptual] deities and the moral and intellectual likeness of the [true] Deity.

To use a biblical term, humans are literally the elokim, or divine beings, the Sons of God- one part mortal, or animalistic since we share many traits with animal life, and one part immortal.

[Poltergeist]

I have some vague feeling that there might be some God that is unknowable and that all kinds of religions and belief systems (but also systems of knowledge and science) are but attempts to grasp him or to know him. Halfway between theism and atheism, but tending more towards the latter. It's what they call these days "agnostic", I guess. But I don't like tags.

I don't follow any "organized religion", nor do I find the very concept appealing to me.

I abhor all kinds of religious fundamentalisms, but I have also strong dislike for the dumbass scientistic (not scientific!) reductionist dogma, which has revived again in the last years and which tends to explain away all the complexity of the man and the universe in mechanical fashion (like genetic determinism etc).

[Cato]

Given that I was once a lukewarm Christian, I used to believe in a personal God- or so I thought. Then, after my travels with that religon ended and I began travels anew, I began to understand that all Gods are personal. It's only that the God of the Christians, Jehovah/Jesus, is considered real by his followers and all others are merely pretenders.

What I believe in now is that there is a divine force or an ultimate reality that can be called the Supreme God. Among mankind, it manifests accordingly, rather like how different races have different words for the same idea or concept: the sun, birth, life, warmth and so on.

[Brynhild]

I'm a polytheistic Heathen, who walks in the footsteps of my ancestors. Ultimately, I hold the power over my own fate and destiny and I refuse to be subjected to any religion that holds sway over my free will.

Having said that, however, I do receive my own brand of guidance and reassurance from my practises and it doesn't matter to me what anyone else thinks of it, because at the end of the day, I walk my own path. I'm one step closer to that great big beerhall of my forebears.

[Cato]

There is an essential, sublime unity of all things, which I call God. I understand polytheism and its attendant myths metaphorically or merely as great literature and raucous storytelling. I no longer consider God to be personal in the sense that he cares about my well-being. Now, I realize that every moment when this seems to have been the case, it was my own self who was responsible for this sublime uplifting (we're our own saviors, this is the truth of religion). Yet, God "lives and moves" within us as I've posted elsewhere in the forums.

[quotablepatella]

I consider myself to be Agnostic, although I am a baptised Anglican. My mother's family are Anglican and my father's family are Catholic.

[National_Nord]

I am the closest Asatru

[DarkZarathustra]

Nietzschean. :thumb001:

[The Lawspeaker]

I am happy: I am Religionsfrei.

[Tabiti]

Baptised Orthodox (due to the trend of late 80's), raised by father atheists and mother didn't have any clue in christianity, because raised by atheists, but interested in esoteric studies. I call myself opponent of the traditional, organized, modern religions, because the only thing I see in them is weapon of mass manipulation. I'm searching the truth about the world and all facts about life existence in the ancient beliefs and traditions of my ancestors and trying to find the logic and missing links with the help of science. Yes, you can call me Pagan, but not that type of traditional, practicing Pagan. We will never know what exactly our ancestors had in mind, nor all of their real traditions, knowledge and spiritual practicing, so it is useless to follow blindly something unknown. We should try to gain the old wisdom back again and to apply it in the "modern" world, the future, since it is impossible to give back time.

[Flanders]

I was born and raised a Catholic. I still attend a Catholic University at the moment but I voted not-religious since I do not believe in God, the teachings of the Bible etc. anymore.

[Piparskeggr]

Hail all;

I am Asatru.

I was raised to be Roman Catholic; baptism, confession, communion, confirmation...but I gave up the Church for Lent after a Jesuit priest imparted some very odd (to me at the time) teachings during "Sunday School" the evening of 16 March 1975: reincarnation, past life recall, human auras/energy fields, feeling and controlling same. Didn't quite seem "orthodox" to me, who had already been questioning.

Late in the evening of 9 July 1989 I was participating in a sweat lodge with some friends. The text of the ceremony accompanying the experience was quite Germanic and Kurt (the sweat leader) encouraged us to use the time for meditating and, perhaps, gaining a vision. The sweat was the first of 3 parts in a ritual rededicating ourselves as friends within an SCA fighting household.

To this day, I believe that Uller gifted me with a visit to his lodge in the Yewdales.

Over the past 20 years I have had experiences of Uller and others of the Holy Powers, which have helped me and inspired me.

As to whether or not my beliefs are worthwhile; my parents think I am a better man for having them, though they are still Catholic.

[Will]

Other

I am uncertain. There is an atheist side to me but also one which believes that humans are more than their bodies, electrical beings perhaps who carry on into the 'afterlife'. Perhaps that is the side of me which wants to live on somewhere else and not simply end.

Either way, I do not worship any higher being(s).

[Gooding]

No preferred religion.I honor nature, I'm aware of many wonderful theories from the scientific community regarding the creation of the universe and I've been involved in so many religions, I've come to believe that religion is subjective.At death, I believe that parts of my personality will rub off on the people I come into contact with and my physical and psychological genes will be inherited by my children and their descendants.My body will either disintegrate or turn to cinders, to be scattered to the wind.Nothing special, I'm just like any other organism! :) I do try to keep an open mind, but not one so open that my brain falls out. Afterlife? Any objective recording of such a thing? Nope.Anything's possible, but as personalities can alter dramatically even from one month to the next, I don't believe in some personality suddenly static and immortal because the brain and heart ceased to function.Dead is dead, although we do live on in the minds and hearts of those closest to us.Any energy we disperse is recycled back into the earth.I can only hope that once my body's absorbed into dust, some descendant might have the common courtesy to plant some high grade marijuana or some corn to be used for moonshine in my soil..:D I'd like to think my remains would be put to some constructive use.;)

With that said, I've got to throw my persistent fondness for the Roman Catholic Faith I was raised in into the picture.Aemma and Solwyn said it better than I could, so I know that they'll understand me when I say that although I do have my own set of beliefs, I could never truly say "good bye" to the Catholic religion as it does form a good part of my identity and it is part of my heritage.I still have a couple of rosaries in my desk that my wife, despite her loathing of the Christian religion, will not dare throw away.That isn't all, as I do retain a fondness for certain American Indian spiritualities that led me to Asatru.I do retain the reverence for this land that I developed during that period of time as I retain the respect and sense of belonging to the Catholic Church that was molded into me decades ago.See how complicated things get when put under dispassionate analysis?:P

[Angantyr]

With that said, I've got to throw my persistent fondness for the Roman Catholic Faith I was raised in into the picture.Aemma and Solwyn said it better than I could, so I know that they'll understand me when I say that although I do have my own set of beliefs, I could never truly say "good bye" to the Catholic religion as it does form a good part of my identity and it is part of my heritage.I still have a couple of rosaries in my desk that my wife, despite her loathing of the Christian religion, will not dare throw away.That isn't all, as I do retain a fondness for certain American Indian spiritualities that led me to Asatru.I do retain the reverence for this land that I developed during that period of time as I retain the respect and sense of belonging to the Catholic Church that was molded into me decades ago.See how complicated things get when put under dispassionate analysis?:P

Clearly, it is a common thread to many. In many ways, I am vehemently anti-Christian and anti-Abrahamic in general. Yet, the Catholic Church is an integral part of my Quebecois heritage. And I lovingly keep some very old rosaries as a tie to my ancestors...but not as items with a religious purpose.

[Cato]

I think that we all have some residual attachment to the religions of our birth, even if we've moved beyond them. I was raised in a Methodist household, but I've moved beyond Christianity into a religious belief system that can only be called other. My views of Christianity are, at the best of times, ambivalent (I've got more respect for Jesus, even if he never existed, than for Paul; I've got more respect for the Old Testament than for the New; Jehovah, whoever he is, may or may not be God, but he still deserves respect; I've got the belief that even an incorrect belief in God is better than no belief at all, and yes, there is a single correct belief in God [and it's not Christianity nor atheism]; etc.). Yet, I still retain a modicum of respect for the influence and power of Christianity (or another other deeply-rooted belief) to change a person's life, for good or bad.

[Bari]

Officially i am roman-catholic. Myself i am atheist.

[Barreldriver]

I'm starting to head down a more Celto route. I've been reading more Celtic myths and legends than Germanic, and it seems more "natural" to my tastes.

[Guapo]

I've been "agnostic" since losing a child a few years ago.I've lost all faith that I had before while most people turn to it during bad times.I'm slowly trying to gain it back.

[Mrs Ulf]

I picked other. Mostly because I can't really classify my religion appropriately. I started out christian, but mostly because of upbringing.

At an early age I found great solace in traditional ways of thinking. It started with Native American culture. I enjoyed the traditional ways they looked at the earth and the animals. I had no idea my own heritage had its own traditional ways.

Next was witch crafty stuff, I did that for a little while. I laughed at the Wiccan rules, and was turned off by their harm none do as you will crap. I found it all too 'nerd at a renfaire'-ish, to even be classified as a religion. I however did find my love for herbalism from that.

When I did first learn about the whole Heathen/Asatru world I was pretty happy. I was mostly excited about the fact that my heritage had a past, and that I had something old and beautiful to be proud of.

However, I am the most unsatisfied unless I'm searching for something new, but my past still brings me to my current self. The gods are my strength as I carry myself into the unknown territories of my inner being.

If I were to pick a word for the faith I have, it would be Traditionalist. My being is a collective of faith and heritage that I fully intend to investigate to the best of my ability. I will continue to further myself and my faith as I go through life.

In short, I really do hate to commit myself to a single word or path, knowing full well I'll be a constantly changing person through every year I have here.

[Hrafn]

It is very hard for me to say what i am. I wouldn't call myself one of those names like traditionalist, perennialist or some newly coined names such as ''radical traditionalist''. I am neither futurist or post modernist and what to say about being a modernist. :)
I consider myself syncretist between certain practices, beliefs and traditions which are rooted in Europe (Goths,Cathars,old Viking beliefs, pre-Christian Alpine traditions, beliefs of ancient Germanic peoples altogether) which have roots in Vedic India (especially Vaishnavism) and very ancient Persia. To make it easier I consider myself adherent of Indo-European, precisely Indo-Germanic beliefs.

EDIT: With that in mind I symphatize and follow works of groups and people like: Geza von Nemenyi of GGG or Germanische Glaubens Gemeinschaft, Christopher Gérard of Société d'Etudes Polythéistes,then Northvegr Foundation and to some extent Rune Gild of Stephen E. Flowers. I very much like and read as well Alain De Benoist and his GRECE and i do like some ideas and concepts of Dr. Pierre Krebs and Thule Seminar (i don't quite agree with him on issue of Russia and that he is also member of Artgemeinschaft, but hey, you can't be perfect) and Dr. Tomislav Sunic ( again i have some issues with some for myself too extreme ideas and thoughts, but that is his ''problem'' and his view, not mine) who has whole corpus of interesting texts and books in Croatian and English language.

Many other people have big influence on me. Certainly probably most important is Ernst Jünger whose works i take nowadays as most crucial for my further spiritual growth.Not to forget in the end people like: Croatian Dr. Milan pl.Sufflay and Dr. Ivo Pilar (both of them early Croatian heathens and intellectuals),another Croatian prof. Kerubin Segvic who had his book on Croatian connection with the Ostrogoths,Julius Evola,Oswald Spengler,Mathilde Ludendorff,Ram Swarup,Henryk Skolimowski,Ludwig Fahrenkrog,Herman Wirth,Georges Dumezil and Mircea Eliade.All these people helped shape my spiritual outlook and belief.



Personally, i don't find any kind of Christianity (except perhaps what Cathars, Bogomils and Patarens did teach to some little extent - i really admire Cathars) at all interesting, Judaism and Islam (obviously), Buddhism and modern Hinduism or any other religion, sect or belief. Those don't interest me at all and i never had any interest in them.
I have to admit that i am fascinated by one Jesus Christ deity. It is one which depicts Jesus as a warrior king and not as some crucified sissy. Jesus is more depicted on that sculpture as Odin. There he looks very similar to sculpture of Odin at House Atlantis which is now sadly gone.
http://jeffdiehl.com/haus.htm

Sculpture of Jesus as warrior can be found in the crypt (crypt is actually part of old Viking place of worship/church) of Church of Our Lady in town of Aarhus, Denmark.

[Hrafn]

Oh, i forgot to mention above obviously Alain de Benoist as probably one of my main influences. :)

[asulf]

Living in France secular country .. aside from being baptized Catholic I have not received no lessons, nor seen or touched a Bible, not of offices or masses, no sign xtian in my family.
as far back as I can remember ever reference rather complete indifference shown to this current "religious, I grew up in the traditional Germanic values of my ancestors and the principles, values of Asatru or Odinism as our own truths So since I am always in connection with the Aesir and the Vanir and the long chain of my Ancestors
I am conciente gift that I have received no inheritance xtian to wear even though I respect those who practice this religion

[Murphy]

The question is straightforward. Tell us about it, and your level of devotion to it.


Raised Catholic. Everyone in my family is Catholic except for two uncles who are Protestant and married in, my father's first "marriage" was to a Protestant and my half-brother and half-sister from that relationship are Protestants though I don't have any contact with them.

My father and mother, and most of their generation in my family are pretty lax, though my father's elder brother isn't as he was once in the seminary. All my cousins etc., have been baptised and confirmed and most have attended or are attending Catholic schools.

My grandparents, great-uncles and aunts and extented cousins etc., tend to take their faith more seriously, especially the branch of my family that's in Ireland. I attend Church regularly for mass and confession or sometimes just for a talk with a priest.


Let me know if you want more options in the poll.

May I request that you change the heathen option? There was no need to add Traditional Religion after it.

Regards,
Eóin.

[SwordoftheVistula]

May I request that you change the heathen option? There was no need to add Traditional Religion after it.

Regards,
Eóin.

I concur on that one, since few heathens even share a religion with their parents, and most of their grandparents and ancestors on upwards for the past 1000-1500 years would be absolutely appalled at their choice of religion.

[Loki]

May I request that you change the heathen option? There was no need to add Traditional Religion after it.


The roots of heathenism are in native traditions, pre-Christian. I know it has been resurrected, and in quite a different form, though.

[Psychonaut]

I know it has been resurrected, and in quite a different form, though.

That really depends on which groups you're talking about. Some groups (not any that I'm affiliated with) strive for an absolutely accurate recreation of the religion of a specific tribe as it was practiced during a specific historical period. Rather than calling them selves Heathens, Odinists, etc. these types will usually use a variant of the word Theod, with the variation depending on the language of the tribe whose religion is being practiced.

[Liffrea]

Let’s also not forget that Christianity in northern Europe adopted and adapted much of it’s core from the indigenous northern European beliefs, if it hadn’t done so it would have got no where at all. So how far in fact can we say that native European religion actually died? Christianity was just as changed by Germanic belief as vice versa, to some degree Germanic Christianity is a distinct animal whose repercussions are felt through out history, I think we can trace much within the reformation to this divide between northern/Germanic Christianity and southern/Mediterranean Catholicism.

It’s also important to be aware that there is, frankly, nothing revolutionary at all in the story of Christ, Shaman-King, died/resurrected, a theme found in pretty much most cultures globally. Personally I think Christianity as a spiritual belief as opposed to an imposed religious system had less impact on the Germanic people’s than vice versa. My ancestors were Christianised Pagans, they just didn’t realise it, their descendents do.

[Murphy]

Let’s also not forget that Christianity in northern Europe adopted and adapted much of it’s core from the indigenous northern European beliefs

No. Christianity adopted pagan traditions and adapted them to their already existing Christian beliefs. For example, Christmas. They adopted a pagan celebration but gave it new meaning - the birth of Our Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ.

Regards,
Eóin.

[Fortis in Arduis]

I put Protestant Christian, because that was my upbringing, but I am attracted to Brahmin Hinduism, and have inculcated a few habits into my life.

I do not see much conflict. I rarely go to church, because I dislike the people, and I do not know my bible, but I tend more towards the 'high church' end of the spectrum - Church of England. I take communion once in a blue moon.

[Liffrea]

Originally Posted by Eóin
No. Christianity adopted pagan traditions and adapted them to their already existing Christian beliefs. For example, Christmas. They adopted a pagan celebration but gave it new meaning - the birth of Our Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ.

The date of Christ’s birth is disputed, September being a popular theory, what isn’t disputed is that Christians adopted the late December Roman feast of Saturnalia for their Christmas festival, when Christianity spread north it was conveniant for them to adopt the Yule festival which had comparable dates. They gave it Christian overtones, sure, but the date they chose to hold it was entirely an appropriation of Yule and other Pagan festivals.

[Cato]

I belong a religion which has its own holy trinity: me, myself and I. I am also the only member of that religion, thus making me a religious minority.

[Murphy]

I belong a religion which has its own holy trinity: me, myself and I. I am also the only member of that religion, thus making me a religious minority.

This forum must get a grant, musn't it :D!

Regards,
Eóin.

[Cato]

This forum must get a grant, musn't it :D!

Regards,
Eóin.

It sure must, since I'm in danger of extinction. The cardinal point of my religion is to engage in sarcastic criticism of life and not to repent for anything. :p

[Puddle of Mudd]

There is nothing better then after a long, grueling day of being without morales than coming home and enjoying my favourite dish of roasted baby accompanied by a 'glass of red' (blood of christians), after which I always make sure to sit down and read from my (un)holy atheist bible - 'The God Delusion' as penned by Richard 'Satan' Dawkins.

[Cato]

There is nothing better then after a long, grueling day of being without morales than coming home and enjoying my favourite dish of roasted baby accompanied by a 'glass of red' (blood of christians), after which I always make sure to sit down and read from my (un)holy atheist bible - 'The God Delusion' as penned by Richard 'Satan' Dawkins.

Uhhh..... :rolleyes:

[Rachel]

I was raised a Pagan .. and then added to it by becoming a Unitrian Universalist.. mainly becasue my mother feared her children would be taken away if it ever came to light that she was a pagan. ( it eventually did happen that i was taken away from my mother around the age of ten because of some neighbor calling the authorities and telling them that my mother was a witch and a lot of nonsense..)

so i was pagan behind closed doors and a Unitrian Universlisit in open ones.

Then i got to college .... and i started to think diffrently about a majority of what i was raised with and decided to d some real soul search and so after about four years i found asatru... and decided that because this religion had ethnic roots as ell as agreement to things that i felt were true i decided that i would make a large effort to get involved and learn more... and thats where i am today ... learning and attempting to get involved with the heathen community in Maryland.

now feel free to judge ;)

[Poltergeist]

Radical criticalism and anti-everythingism is the religion I follow.

[Dhib]

Islam: culmination of the Abrahamic legacy, Seal of the Prophethood, and a creed befitting scholar, warrior, and pacifist.

[Murphy]

Islam: culmination of the Abrahamic legacy, Seal of the Prophethood, and a creed befitting scholar, warrior, and pacifist.

You're kidding, right?

Regards,
Eóin.

[Dhib]

You're kidding, right?

Regards,
Eóin.

Peace be upon you oh Lover of Christ,

No, I am not kidding.

Go with God,
Dhib.

[Murphy]

Peace be upon you oh Lover of Christ,

No, I am not kidding.

Go with God,
Dhib.

I don't mean to be rude my dear man, but what on God's most beautiful green earth is a Mohammedan doing on a Cultural & Ethnic European preservation forum?

Regards,
Eóin.

[Cato]

I'm doing some soul-searching as of late, perhaps brought about by my late grandfather's passing. I don't know but something odd has happened: I've brought out the Bible for an actual bit of reading for the first time in a long while. :eek:

[Cato]

I don't mean to be rude my dear man, but what on God's most beautiful green earth is a Mohammedan doing on a Cultural & Ethnic European preservation forum?

Regards,
Eóin.

Playing a joke? He's not going to find a very warm welcome on here I think..

[Murphy]

I'm doing some soul-searching as of late, perhaps brought about by my late grandfather's passing. I don't know but something odd has happened: I've brought out the Bible for an actual bit of reading for the first time in a long while. :eek:

The Bible really isn't enough on its own Pallamedes. You should get a good commentary to go with it. May I recommend if you can get one, a Douay-Rheims Bible with Haydock commentary? Or even finding a Haydock commentary online and looking at the commentary if you get stuck on some passage in your current Bible.

The Bible only makes sense in light of Sacred Tradition.

Regards,
Eóin.

[Murphy]

Playing a joke? He's not going to find a very warm welcome on here I think..

I don't want to be mean, I am just curious as to why a Mohammedan is here.

Regards,
Eóin.

[Dhib]

I don't mean to be rude my dear man, but what on God's most beautiful green earth is a Mohammedan doing on a Cultural & Ethnic European preservation forum?

Regards,
Eóin.

I do not believe in the trinity. I do not pray to Semites, Greeks, Romans, nor their icons or images. I believe in the One God of Abraham, Moses, John the Baptist, and Jesus. That is all.

[Lutiferre]

I do not believe in the trinity. I do not pray to Semites, Greeks, Romans, nor their icons or images. I believe in the One God of Abraham, Moses, John the Baptist, and Jesus. That is all.

Why not? What is your problem with the trinity? Is it just a subjective dislike of it, or do you have some reasons for not believing it?

[Cato]

The Bible really isn't enough on its own Pallamedes. You should get a good commentary to go with it. May I recommend if you can get one, a Douay-Rheims Bible with Haydock commentary? Or even finding a Haydock commentary online and looking at the commentary if you get stuck on some passage in your current Bible.

The Bible only makes sense in light of Sacred Tradition.

Regards,
Eóin.

I should clarify by what I mean. Bible to me means Old Testament (Torah). My Bible is the Hertz Bible:

http://jesusblogger.wordpress.com/2008/02/27/pentateuch-haftorahs-dr-j-h-hertz-every-serious-bible-student-should-have-a-copy-of-this-book-on-their-shelf/

I don't have a Christian version of the Bible.

[Dhib]

Playing a joke? He's not going to find a very warm welcome on here I think..

That is not my intention.

[Cato]

I don't want to be mean, I am just curious as to why a Mohammedan is here.

Regards,
Eóin.

I personally don't care, but I don't want to see the forum turned into a platform for Islamic moralizing. :grumpy:

[Lutiferre]

I should clarify by what I mean. Bible to me means Old Testament (Torah). My Bible is the Hertz Bible:

http://jesusblogger.wordpress.com/2008/02/27/pentateuch-haftorahs-dr-j-h-hertz-every-serious-bible-student-should-have-a-copy-of-this-book-on-their-shelf/

I don't have a Christian version of the Bible.
There are some good commentaries on the Torah.

[Kadu]

but what on God's most beautiful green earth is a Mohammedan doing on a Cultural & Ethnic European preservation forum?

I would question quicker why an American and even more of mixed ancestry is doing on a Cultural & Ethnic European preservation forum.

[Dhib]

Why not? What is your problem with the trinity? Is it just a subjective dislike of it, or do you have some reasons for not believing it?

I do not have a problem with it, I just do not believe in it. Jesus was special man, a prophet created by God, but that does not mean he is God incarnate nor representative of God in Hus totality.

[Murphy]

I should clarify by what I mean. Bible to me means Old Testament (Torah). My Bible is the Hertz Bible:

http://jesusblogger.wordpress.com/2008/02/27/pentateuch-haftorahs-dr-j-h-hertz-every-serious-bible-student-should-have-a-copy-of-this-book-on-their-shelf/

I don't have a Christian version of the Bible.

I should have known it wouldn't have been anything Christian :D! So are you interested in converting to Judaism? You know they chop you when you convert :P?


I do not believe in the trinity.

Well, that was not my question. But you've caught my interest - why do you not believe in the Holy Trinity?


I do not pray to Semites, Greeks, Romans, nor their icons or images.

I do not pray to any icon or image, so we have no conflict there. However, I see no conflict with praying to the Saints; the historic Christian practice of asking our departed brothers and sisters in Christ—the saints—for their intercession (Loyalist, don't have a go at me here :D;)!)


I believe in the One God of Abraham, Moses, John the Baptist, and Jesus. That is all.

I also believe in one God.

Regards,
Eóin.

[Dhib]

I would question quicker why an American and even more of mixed ancestry is doing on a Cultural & Ethnic European preservation forum.

There are a fair number of Americans here.

[Murphy]

I personally don't care, but I don't want to see the forum turned into a platform for Islamic moralizing. :grumpy:

Oh, I am quite happy to have a Mohammedan or two. Then I can debate them on fair ground which I can't get at Islamic forums :).

Regards,
Eóin.

[Cato]

I should have known it wouldn't have been anything Christian :D! So are you interested in converting to Judaism? You know they chop you when you convert :P?

Conversion? Yuck. :puke:

I'm not really that chummy with Jews to begin with and I don't really want to join their little club. I know a few, but it's not like it's a buddy-buddy thing except in just one case (a pork-eating Jewish guy I knew from middle school), and I haven't seen the guy in years. I do, however, admire the commentaries that they've written on their own religion and the lengths they've gone to clarify the parts of the Bible that don't make sense.

[Murphy]

I would question quicker why an American and even more of mixed ancestry is doing on a Cultural & Ethnic European preservation forum.

Whilst I don't consider Americans to be European, they are closer to Europe the Mohammedans.

(Americans, don't take this as a slight. I just see you as Americans.)

Regards,
Eóin.

[Cato]

Depends upon what Europe you mean, the modern one with the modern borders or the archaic Europe that has no borders. I couldn't care less about the former, but I'm a son of the latter.

[Dhib]

Whilst I don't consider Americans to be European, they are closer to Europe the Mohammedans.

(Americans, don't take this as a slight. I just see you as Americans.)

Regards,
Eóin.

Yes, Americans are related to Europeans, but they are not. Some of them can become so through cultural assimilation, but will be outsiders. That is not a problem to those who are outsiders in the society they are born into simply because of their outlook in life, and no, I am not talking about White Muslims or others.

[jerney]

I would question quicker why an American and even more of mixed ancestry is doing on a Cultural & Ethnic European preservation forum.

Why choose him to make your point? Off the top of my head I can think of a few members here who admitted to having some non-European ancestry.

[Lutiferre]

I do not have a problem with it, I just do not believe in it. Jesus was special man, a prophet created by God, but that does not mean he is God incarnate nor representative of God in Hus totality.
According to Quranic revisionism, yes. According to Quranic revisionism, the "black stone" of Kaaba which was originally a pre-Islamic idol worshipped and called Khabár, was "found" by Abraham after the archangel Gabriel revealed it to him, and on which he had relations with a woman, for which reason it is now kissed to this day.http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/2/2e/Blackstone.JPG

Quranic revisionism doesn't show itself to have much merit, much less does Quranic theology in some aspects. For instance, the Word of God is considered co-eternal with God in Islam, just like in Christianity, and yet they fail to see the point of Trinitarianism, which is that Gods word (or technically called "intelligence") is so much his own that it is him; it is eternally with him, it's uncreated, and is divine and perfect in all regards, which is why it is also co-equal in it's substance, unlike the intelligence of a human intellect, which isn't completely harmonious with the intellect it comes from, being finite and imperfect, God is omniscient and whole, nothing is "lacking" of his divine fullness in its eternality; it's a hypostasis of his entire essence, just like the Father. The same applies to the Spirit, which is simply Gods will enhypostasized. An intellect's will comes after it's intelligence, since it founds its own direction on that intelligence, hence the will is third. Gods will is what founded the heavens and the earth, it is clearly divine and omnipotent and perfect and infinite. Some Muslims call God a "will" rather than a "person"; because they recognize Gods will is so much God that we can almost call God a will. In this sense, they also recognize the third person of the Spirit's substantial essence.

[Lutiferre]

I do, however, admire the commentaries that they've written on their own religion and the lengths they've gone to clarify the parts of the Bible that don't make sense.
I see commentaries and divine revelation as an extension of the same tradition. So I don't think it's one making sense out of what doesn't make sense, but one clarifying the orthodox interpretation and spirit in which it was written to begin with.

[Dhib]

Jesus is called the "Ruhullah", or the Word of God. He is recognized as such without being associated with God the Creator, Destroyer.

[Lutiferre]

Jesus is called the "Ruhullah", or the Word of God. He is recognized as such without being associated with God the Creator, Destroyer.
But the Word of God is eternal and in it's lack of defect and perfection, it's omniscient and perfect truth, it is itself consubstantial with the deity in it's fullness. Otherwise, it cannot be the true co-eternal Word of God, but must be something lesser. To say it is the Word of God and still deny it's Godhead, is blasphemy.

[Svarog]

I was born as a Christian Orthodox, thus far I voted for the option number 3, however, I am a traditionalist, I respect both Christian Orthodox and Serbian/Slavic old faith, I cannot call myself a heathen as I am not devoted to it, nor I can call myself a CO since I haven't been in church since 1995, still, as it is part of my heritage I respect it as such, am sure I am gonna go to church sometimes in the future, just as I love and respect the faith of my ancestors, to which, I honestly find myself and feel more connected than I ever did with the Christianity even when I was a kid and had a constant pressure from family, school etc to be a 'good' Christian. I had religious classes for 4 years in high-school, those stories just never got to me, some are even pretty funny..

[Kadu]

Why choose him to make your point? Off the top of my head I can think of a few members here who admitted to having some non-European ancestry.

My point was that his religion is not so important to determine whether he should be here or not as his ancestry.
As for his banning i can only express my discontentment as he could have been a fine add to the forum.

[Bjólf]

I'm agnostic.

[Lutiferre]

Radical criticalism and anti-everythingism is the religion I follow.

I take it to the next extreme by being anti-anti-everythingism including anti-radical-criticalism.

[Poltergeist]

I take it to the next extreme by being anti-anti-everythingism including anti-radical-criticalism.

Yes, why not? :p:p

Add also anti-lutiferrism if you wish.

[Lutiferre]

Yes, why not? :p:p

Add also anti-lutiferrism if you wish.
I am anti-that as well.

[Cato]

Why'd the Muslim guy get banned?

[Amapola]

In a contradictory way, I was sent to a Catholic School by agnostic parents. I strayed from religion very soon... before the age of 12 years old and never came back until I was 25, two years ago. Through my love for anthropology, I approached the history of my country, and thus the history of Catholicism as well. I understood it part of my identity and tradition but NOT as a simple "talk" for I immersed myself in it and was able to feel it easily; gradually my faith was settled and grew stronger. I improved in every single aspect of my self as well as my life started to look better and made sense. That's all.

[The Black Prince]

I'm agnostic.

But I do respect the strength of the concept of god(s) throughout time as a force to be reckoned with.

[Adalwulf]

I chose Heathenism, however I am not fully educated on it yet. It is something I plan to develop over time.

Although I do not believe in any sort of a God, I do value the cultural/moral teachings of some religions. My family is Christian so I tend to go with it for the sake of respecting them and convience, although I only loosely call myself such.

Ideally, I would prefer to have some sort of 'priest' to just figure this out for me. Religion will never be a core part of my life.

[Lysander]

Zealous Roman Catholic!

[Óttar]

Zealous Roman Catholic!
I hear that's quite similar to Facism. :thumb001:

Facism. Noun. from OF facisme > Latin facismus > Classical Greek facismos.

"The belief in faces."

[~°2012°~]

Any other - please specify

Esoteric Serranianism ;)

http://www.gullinkambi.net/wp-content/uploads/2009/10/Nos.jpg

[Wölfin]

I wouldn't know how to explain it very well... I consider myself, for now an "autonomous Christian". I believe in the sacred and the divine, but I don't believe it according to the Bible, and organized religion is growing more and more corrupt and so many, esp the extremists lose sight of what is important.
"Autonomous" because it is mostly something I do on my own.
"Christian" because that is the God and the angels I am the most familiar with, although in my mind it is not a hard set belief, rather the possbility I express the most often.
My beliefs are however most aligned with Shinto.

[Ulf]

This is now my religion

A2PlAUzAFIU

[Majar]

All faiths have some truth in them, I doubt there is one which is all truth. There shouldn't be any religious debate, because spiritual truth is subjective. I don't follow any one organized faith, I prefer to explore different ideas from various faith traditions, observe and test them. In that sense I follow the wisdom of the Buddha.


Do not believe in anything simply because you have heard it.
Do not believe in anything simply because it is spoken and rumored by many.
Do not believe in anything simply because it is found written in your religious books.
Do not believe in anything merely on the authority of your teachers and elders.
Do not believe in traditions because they have been handed down for many generations.
But, after observation and analysis, when you find that anything agrees with reason and is conducive to the good and benefit of one and all, then accept it and live up to it.

[Lulletje Rozewater]

http://miblogestublog.com/2008/12/11/playboy-mexico-decides-to-celebrate-virgin-mary-by-putting-her-on-its-cover/


Worship is a form of love and respect.
I believe love requires for parents to be models of authority for their children. We need to teach them to share in housework so that they may learn to care for themselves when they are older; we need to allow them to do little chores such as putting the knives and forks on the dining table ready and Playboy as their serviette :D

[poiuytrewq0987]

I follow the Orthodox Church of my country but I would not say I am very religious. I like my church because it held together my people during the dark age of the Bulgarians. So in a sense, I respect and revere my church but I don't attend mass or anything of that sort.

[Amapola]

...

[Pallantides]

I'm an atheist, but I do have respect for the religions of my ancestors and their cultural importance.

[SPQR]

Hellenistic Paganism

[Stossy]

Christianity - Catholic.

[Monolith]

I'm a practicing Roman Catholic and I consider my faith to be of great importance, as it is also one of the cornerstones of my identity.

[Nationalitist]

My religion is chauvinist nationalitism (no typo here).

[December]

My religion is chauvinist nationalitism (no typo here).
Your religion is the typical of an internetard (no typo here) who has a computer, internet and binge drinking paid by his parents. Once you were also a "slovenian blood preservationist". Now you have sticked to internetardism only.

[Anthropos]

Your religion is the typical of an internetard (no typo here) who has a computer, internet and binge drinking paid by his parents. Once you were also a "slovenian blood preservationist". Now you have sticked to internetardism only.

It must be as you say... that dead serious tone gave it away. :icon_smile:

[Nationalitist]

Once you were also a "slovenian blood preservationist".

That was only to gain my territoriality on Stirpes. :D

[December]

Do you always come in pairs? :D

[Eldritch]

I see the Stirpes metastasis continues to spread. :rolleyes:

Can't you guys at least confine it to one thread?

[Nationalitist]

Do you always come in pairs? :D

We are a legion.

[Hrimskegg]

Norse Paganism. I'm dedicated and especially so to the folks responsible for winter: Thorri, Skadi and Ullr. To quote a friend of mine, "I would live with eleven months of winter as long as I could take a vacation to someplace cold for a month." My connection to Ullr is particularly strong because I spend a good deal of time adventuring in the snow laden wilderness, and he has, as is my belief and experience, helped me along so I don't brain myself on some unassuming bit of rock or foliage. I could tell you stories, about some of the other Gods too, but this thread isn't the place for it. Suffice to say I am invested.

[Piparskeggr]

Heya Hrimskegg;


Norse Paganism...Skadi and Ullr...connection to Ullr is particularly strong...

Uller welcomed me in July, 1989; the book I am writing about him looks like it will end up in the 175 - 250 page range; not scholarly, but containing everything I can find where I mention him from the past 20 years.

Í Vinátta og Trú

Stefn Ullarsson Piparskeggr

[Hrimskegg]

Heya Hrimskegg;



Uller welcomed me in July, 1989; the book I am writing about him looks like it will end up in the 175 - 250 page range; not scholarly, but containing everything I can find where I mention him from the past 20 years.

Í Vinátta og Trú

Stefn Ullarsson Piparskeggr

Ha-ha! A wonderful project you've got yourself there, I wish you luck with it. I will be very interested to read it when it is complete.

[Gooding]

With that said, I've got to throw my persistent fondness for the Roman Catholic Faith I was raised in into the picture.Aemma and Solwyn said it better than I could, so I know that they'll understand me when I say that although I do have my own set of beliefs, I could never truly say "good bye" to the Catholic religion as it does form a good part of my identity and it is part of my heritage.I still have a couple of rosaries in my desk that my wife, despite her loathing of the Christian religion, will not dare throw away.That isn't all, as I do retain a fondness for certain American Indian spiritualities that led me to Asatru.I do retain the reverence for this land that I developed during that period of time as I retain the respect and sense of belonging to the Catholic Church that was molded into me decades ago.See how complicated things get when put under dispassionate analysis?:P

I'm Catholic, to have my marriage convalidated in one week after this coming Saturday. My wife's chilled out on her hatred of Christianity.No, I could never really say "good bye" to the Catholic Church although I've tried on several occasions. Now all I can say to the C.C. is "hello again, old friend".

[Amapola]

I can't say Goodbye to my Catholic faith either even if I have tried too, and many situations have made me wonder of it. Appart from reinsuring me in my Spanish identity, my faith has helped me feel better and view things in a more positive way. How could I leave something that's helped me be and feel better in the past years? I am hardly a practicing Catholic though: but I keep my faith.

[Camilla]

Orthodox\Catholic. My ancestros were from both sides orthodox and catholic so I feel myself comfort when I visit orthodox or catholic churches. Belief in God is the thing that still keeps me breathing and I find it very pity, every dar passing by the church and seeing that it is closed... European don't need religion anymore. That is what I have noticed living there.

[Cato]

Leaning heavily towards heathenry these days.

[Peachy Carnahan]

Im a jehovahs atheist.

[Lulletje Rozewater]

Im a jehovahs atheist.

Oi oi, There is a jehovah's church about 1 km to the right from the house and about 1.5 km from me also a LDS,but to the left.
Who do you think wants my blood:p:p

[Nationalitist]

Your religion is the typical of an internetard (no typo here) who has a computer, internet and binge drinking paid by his parents. Once you were also a "slovenian blood preservationist". Now you have sticked to internetardism only.

And what is your religion? Racial wankeritism?

[Lithium]

Paganism/eclectical witchery, inspired by the celtic traditions

[Nationalitist]

Paganism/eclectical witchery, inspired by the celtic traditions

Do you sometimes fly on a broom?

[Arrow Cross]

I find your lack of Christ-children... disturbing.

[Lithium]

Do you sometimes fly on a broom?

yes, actually I use only brooms, I don't use autotransport...

[Lenny]

I find your lack of Christ-children... disturbing.
One-third of voters answered Christian,
One-third answered 'No Religion',
One-third claim to follow 'Heathenry' or something else.

To me, the fact that many people claim to "not believe" things that are glaringly clear (the spiritual world -- Continuation of consciousness after death) is more curious than disturbing.

[Loki]

To me, the fact that many people claim to "not believe" things that are glaringly clear (the spiritual world -- Continuation of consciousness after death) is more curious than disturbing.

^^ Perhaps the above is not glaringly clear to them? :) I know to me it isn't. I would have no qualms being religious if my mind was somehow convinced of the fact of continuation of consciousness after death. But it isn't. I have seen no evidence of it. Where should I look? :)

[Anthropos]

^^ Perhaps the above is not glaringly clear to them? :) I know to me it isn't. I would have no qualms being religious if my mind was somehow convinced of the fact of continuation of consciousness after death. But it isn't. I have seen no evidence of it. Where should I look? :)
I don't know if you ever appreciated anything like that, but if you find that some things a religion says about this existence (here and now) are true (while not obvious to everyone), then maybe it could prove worthwhile to keep listening, reading and attending.

[Germanicus]

We are a legion.


:)

[Basil]

I don't follow any. I used to be quite religious once (in my early adolescence and mid-teens to be precise), but I lost my faith for a number of reasons. And I have been not able to re-establish it since then. Nonetheless, I hold Russian Orthodoxy and Christianity in general in relatively high regard.

[Grumpy Cat]

Science.

[Monolith]

Science.
Indeed, it really can be called a religion nowadays.

[Murphy]

Indeed, it really can be called a religion nowadays.

Just more evidence that all religions hold some truths, but the Church holds the full Truth revealed by God.

[Liffrea]

Originally Posted by Lenny
To me, the fact that many people claim to "not believe" things that are glaringly clear (the spiritual world -- Continuation of consciousness after death) is more curious than disturbing.

With respect I’m not sure how you can claim that they are clear…..

For those with faith it may be clear but faith is conviction and unconditional trust, perhaps it’s more a mindset?

My background comes more from atheism and then into Odinism, I don’t have a “faith” in the terms I used above I’m just more open to possibility that I once was. I’m more willing to accept I simply don’t know, and I’m happy with that, for me the joy is in the learning and understanding new concepts not arriving at certainties. I can have half a dozen contradictory ideas in my mind at any one time…….gives you headache but the creativity….

I may cease to exist at my last breath…truth is I would be just as happy than if there was continuation, perhaps there is more beauty in the finality of being……I have the, perhaps strange, notion that there maybe something after death but that it’s not for everyone just a select few who show certain qualities, what they are……

As for gods……whether Odin is a real being or just a phenomenon of my subconscious does it really make any difference at all? Whether it’s Odin, Jesus, Buddha etc isn’t the example more important than the substance? My Odinism has always been more philosophical than religious more practical than transcendent. I gave up blots and went into meditation because I simply had no idea what I was praying to or why……..unless I ever do, which I doubt I will, I won’t personally try again….I’m much happier just to ask and wonder.

[Loki]

Indeed, it really can be called a religion nowadays.

If science was a religion, it would have been the best and most practical religion available! ;)

[Monolith]

If science was a religion, it would have been the best and most practical religion available! ;)
Care to expand on that? :)

[Loki]

Care to expand on that? :)

Because science is all about gaining knowledge based on evidence and outcome from research - which is why modern medicine actually works, among innumerable other examples. Religion, on the other hand, makes a bunch of assumptions in its dogma, and will then defend it until death, regardless of any new evidence surfacing, proving the contrary. Religion is inflexible, whereas science is always open to correction, if new and better information becomes available.

[Anthropos]

Care to expand on that? :)
Sigmund Freud - not a bad writer - expounded that same opinion -


If science was a religion, it would have been the best and most practical religion available!

- in detail in his book Future of An Illusion.

He basically thought that religion had its day.

He also thought that 'science' was the best tool to dupe the masses into submission in order to save the grand, one-and-only Civilization known as Western Civilization.

(Not kidding you folks ... you can always read the book.)

:)


Because science is all about gaining knowledge based on evidence and outcome from research - which is why modern medicine actually works, among innumerable other examples. Religion, on the other hand, makes a bunch of assumptions in its dogma, and will then defend it until death, regardless of any new evidence surfacing, proving the contrary. Religion is inflexible, whereas science is always open to correction, if new and better information becomes available. There is no necessary opposition between religion and science properly so called. Until Evangelical 'creationists' started making their noises it was mostly people who were themselves secularists in the name of 'science' (improperly so called, i.e.; here we are dealing with a pseudo-religion like the one also advocated by Freud) who insisted on some intrinsic opposition between science and religion. We got 'Enlightenment', rationalism, 'free inquiry' and such. It sounds very good you know but at this point it's gone a bit out of hand, in my opinion, so that the followers of those who once insisted that religion was inhibiting science are now the ones who inhibit or control science, only from a different perspective.

[Monolith]

Because science is all about gaining knowledge based on evidence and outcome from research - which is why modern medicine actually works, among innumerable other examples.
Ah, no, I was referring to the fact that ordinary folk mostly blindly accept whatever certain scientists say, without questioning it. In a way, this kind of attitude reminds me of how religious dogmas were once accepted among the general populations, i.e. without opposition. Science as such works just fine, as it serves its purpose by making our lives better in many ways. It is people who make it flawed.

Religion is inflexible, whereas science is always open to correction, if new and better information becomes available.
That depends on the religion, naturally. I personally believe that the spectrum of scientific knowledge available to any human mind is but a small fraction of the universal Truth. If that is the case, human science will never be a religion, or a substitute for it, because it is limited by its very nature.

[Loddfafner]

To me, the fact that many people claim to "not believe" things that are glaringly clear (the spiritual world -- Continuation of consciousness after death) is more curious than disturbing.

I do not accept any of the following as acceptable sources of evidence:

1) what I wish were true.
2) what my elderly relatives wish were true.
3) whatever I was taught before the age of reason.
4) what imagery I recall from dreams or from drug-induced hallucinations.
5) what a nice man wearing a dress in a building full of phallic symbols insists is true.

[Amapola]

Hmmm Science also has its dogmas though.

[Liffrea]

Originally Posted by Alana
Hmmm Science also has its dogmas though.

A natural development, scientists are, after all, human and thus prejudiced…..imagine being told that your entire life’s work is total garbage….that’s what any true scientist has to be prepared to accept.

Remember in science (well most of the time) theory comes from empiricism, which is why cosmology is an exciting field at present, the standard model is in a make or break time…..there are a few who are starting to challenge some of the fundamental laws of physics.

[Nationalitist]

Though I am chauvinist nationalitist, on a second thought I would say teh Catholic agnosticism would be teh best religion for the bulk of Europeans, for the masses.

[Cato]

I look to science to, say, heal the hurts of the body but not of the soul. :)

I wouldn't read the Hermetica or Havamol to answer questions about medicine and healing the body's various ills anymore than I'd go to a doctor to find the meaning of life.

Different fruits, apples and oranges.

[Anthropos]

I do not accept any of the following as acceptable sources of evidence:

1) what I wish were true.
2) what my elderly relatives wish were true.
3) whatever I was taught before the age of reason.
4) what imagery I recall from dreams or from drug-induced hallucinations.
5) what a nice man wearing a dress in a building full of phallic symbols insists is true.

When you see genitalia everywhere, that's when you know you have found the philosopher's stone and reached that golden age of reason??


Though I am chauvinist nationalitist, on a second thought I would say teh Catholic agnosticism would be teh best religion for the bulk of Europeans, for the masses.

HAHA! :rotfl:

[Svipdag]

Actually, none. I am an agnostic with some curiosity about and sympathy for advaita Vedanta. I do not, or try not to "believe" anything. I either know or am not ashamed to admit that I do not know. I will not assert that a concept is true because I want it to be. Yet, to me, anyhow, this is what passes for faith. I.e. the assertion that what I do not know, perhaps cannot know, is true for a variety of invalid reasons.

1. I WANT IT TO BE TRUE. 2. Ipse dixit: Some authority figure said that it is true. 3. If I don't believe it , I'll go to Hell when I die. 4. It says so in the Bible, the Torah, the "glorious" Qur'an, the Avesta, the Tao Te Ching, the Dhammapada, The Vedas, the Upanishads, or the Popul Vuh.

And yet, and yet....sometimes an explanation based on an unproved assumption is more plausible than its alternative. Cosmology has revealed some truths which seem very unlikely to have happened by sheer accident.

There are many fundamental physical constants which simply ARE. There is no explanation for their values. Three of them are of fundamental importance because they bear on the possibility of the very existence of the universe.

First is the gravitational constant, the constant of proportionality between gravitational force, mass, and distance. Unless this constant has exactly the value it does, out to the sixth decimal place, bodie of matter would not hold together. Our planet is one member of a system of 8, or 9, or more planets held together by the solar gravitational field.

As we look out into space, we see star clusters, galaxies, and clusters of galaxies, all held together by gravitational attraction. Yet, these systems of bodies of matter would dissipate into space unless the gravitational constant had exactly its observed value.

Planck's constant relates the energy and wave number of quanta of electromagnetic radiation. Unless this constant has exactly the value it does out to six decimal places, a stable star cannot exist, there can be no equilibrium between release of energy and loss of energy as radiation.

The fine structure constant specifies the probability that a particle of matter will absorb or emit a quantum of electromagnetic energy. Radiative transfer of energy within stars depends on the value of this constant and, unless it has exactly its observed value, out to the sixth decimal place once again, a stable star cannot exist.

However, there is no known reason why any of these constants should have the value which it does. The range of possible values for these constants seems to be infinite. What a strange coincidence, then that not just one but three of these constants should have, out of an infinite range of possible values, just exactly those values which make it possible for this universe to exist !

Doesn't coincidence, out to the sixth decimal place, seem implausible ?Is thisnot so amazing as to boggle credulity ? To me, at any rate, the explanation, based on the unproved assumption of the existence of a Supreme Being with the power to set the values of the constants to just such values as would permit this universe to exist seems more plausible and convincing than coincidence, even though it embodies a large unproved assumption.

So, agnostic though I be, I find that three "inconvenient truths" force me to make a Deist assumption. Considering what this being is called upon to do, it is beyond our imagination or comprehension. If I am to say anything at all about the Supreme Being, I must confine myself to negatives. It is inconceivable and it is incomprehensible to our limited intellect which cannot even grasp eternity except in thin slices which we arrange sequentially and experience as time.

Do I "believe" in the Supreme Being. No. I am forced to assume its existence in order to arrive ata plausible explanation of the existence of our universe.This is neither faith nor belief. I am not assuming this because I want it to be so, but because I need the assumption to make sense of the universe.

[Hrimskegg]

I do not accept any of the following as acceptable sources of evidence:

2) what my elderly relatives wish were true.


So Odin does not count then? Being the All-Father.

[Baron Samedi]

I'm a Norse Pagan/Satanist/Kliffotic Initiate.

A clusterfuck, if you will.

What can I say? I love my blood.... I love my other blood and what He represents to my psyche....

And Western magic is just fucking awesome :)

[Liffrea]

Originally Posted by Svipdag
Doesn't coincidence, out to the sixth decimal place, seem implausible ?Is thisnot so amazing as to boggle credulity ? To me, at any rate, the explanation, based on the unproved assumption of the existence of a Supreme Being with the power to set the values of the constants to just such values as would permit this universe to exist seems more plausible and convincing than coincidence, even though it embodies a large unproved assumption.

It is perhaps more convincing than coincidence but the options aren’t between just providence and coincidence.

The concept of multiverse has a place in both cosmology and metaphysics. Some cosmologists believe that within the theory of inflation one can deduce the possibility of a continuing process of inflation and believe that the laws of physics themselves are a remnant of primordial universes and will extend into universes born of separate big bangs and developing into their own space-time pockets, where although the laws of physics may be the same the outcome may be different. If we accept this then there is no need for providence (at least to explain our universe) nor coincidence, we are just one of countless universes, of course the laws of physics weren’t set up in order for humans to come into being, rather the other way around, we exist as a consequence of the laws of physics, not as an end result.

Meanwhile in metaphysics some philosophers have built on naturalistic theories of cosmology. Some have theorised a quantum fluctuation emerging with space time leading to the creation of the laws of physics and the probability of “order” arising as a consequence of that. In that sense we are here because it’s a natural end result, similar concepts of integral order leading to complex multicellular life are being put forward in evolutionary theory. Another theory put forward is the possibility of the universe itself being a “living” organism and subject to selection. In some ways mirroring inflation, the idea is that black holes represent in effect eggs, a black hole singularity can become a “big bang singularity” leading to the creation of another universe. Universes are “selected” on their ability to create black holes.

Personally I think there is a lot to be said for the multiverse theory, though it doesn’t answer the fundamental question of why is there something rather than nothing.

[Svipdag]

A principle elucidated by William of Occam (1285-1349) to avoid burdening logical discourse with unnecessary assumptions is known as "Occam's Razor":
"Entia non sunt multiplicanda præter necessitatem." Entities are not to be multiplied beyond necessity.

This has also been called the principle of parsimony and interpreted to mean that the simplest explanation is the best. Surely, the assumption of the prior existence of an infinity of other universes, for the existence of which no evidence can exist now is the ultimate violation of this principle.

Such unnecessary and unjustifiable speculation opens the field of inquiry to any fantastic "explanation" which may occur to the imagination. It is exactly what Occam's Razor was proposed to combat.

[Nationalitist]

A principle elucidated by William of Occam (1285-1349) to avoid burdening logical discourse with unnecessary assumptions is known as "Occam's Razor":
"Entia non sunt multiplicanda præter necessitatem." Entities are not to be multiplied beyond necessity.

This has also been called the principle of parsimony and interpreted to mean that the simplest explanation is the best. Surely, the assumption of the prior existence of an infinity of other universes, for the existence of which no evidence can exist now is the ultimate violation of this principle.

Such unnecessary and unjustifiable speculation opens the field of inquiry to any fantastic "explanation" which may occur to the imagination. It is exactly what Occam's Razor was proposed to combat.

Occam's Razor is in itself a valid principle in some cases, but I noticed that it sometimes gets (mis)used by some people to justify their overly simplistic theories for which there are no sufficient proofs either, or even many counter-indications, but nevertheless those people defend their simplistic and ungrounded explanations merely on their very "simplicity" and using the argument of Occam's Razor. It is often misused by primitive minds.

[Liffrea]

Originally Posted by Svipdag
Such unnecessary and unjustifiable speculation opens the field of inquiry to any fantastic "explanation" which may occur to the imagination. It is exactly what Occam's Razor was proposed to combat.

As Nationalist has pointed out OC is sold as some kind of universal law in itself, which it’s not. It doesn’t take to much thought regarding history, politics, economics to see that OC has glaringly obvious flaws…..simplistic answers are the rarity not the norm. I'm not sure OC would have the same basis as Duhem-Quinne theory, which is the addition of a necessary hypothesis (usually without verification) an example being (until recently) dark matter.

In my opinion the tendency to reductionism is as much a problem in scientific theory today as an answer. One only has to study evolutionary science and the dominance of “selfish gene” theory to see the problem. It’s good for what it is but it’s far from the only picture.

[Beorn]

"This is a nation of sects. As a free soul, an Englishman goes to Heaven by whatever route he chooses."

Voltaire

[Puddle of Mudd]

None. Religion is complete and utter garbage.

[Murphy]

Religion is complete and utter garbage.

It obviously isn't, as you seem to pop up in every discussion related to religion with the sole intention of offering insults. So how garbage can it be when it gives you so much purpose in your life?

[Monolith]

None. Religion is complete and utter garbage.
Could you enlighten us all, by expanding on your views?

[vp01]

im an atheist. i used to believe till age of 12-14. after i became an atheist. very big thanks to brother :) im very glad that im not religious.

[W. R.]

So, there are plenty of people who can say without any shame that they are atheists. :eviltongue:

Well, at least those bezbozhniks are honest...

http://www.davno.ru/posters/collections/moor/img/poster-85.jpg

[vp01]

why there should be any shame?

[Monolith]

So, there are plenty of people who can say without any shame that they are atheists. :eviltongue:
Ah, but at least they will be easily identified when we revive the good ol' custom of burning blasphemers at the stake. :D

[W. R.]

I'd rather vote for hard labour. Ora et labora! :fpope:

[Austin]

I consider myself more of a societal adherent Christian in that while I do not go to church or pray or adhere to any guy in a 5000$ suit or a robe with golden goblets surrounding him, I do understand exceedingly well that my life will be easier in the society I live in if I am a Christian. I intend to do the whole family thing one day and that will be much smoother/easier for me if I am a Christian, if not mentally at least verbally and publicly. Also if it makes my girl happy then I don't really care, I'd rather be happy with her over creating drama over some insistence that there is no god, if there isn't then it won't hurt me to pretend there is to make her happy.

I don't however believe much if any of it, but my life is easier with it and I am a realist, being an atheist is great if you live in an open minded bastion of free thought, but the reality is most of us do not and will suffer in some form whether it be family/income/respect/love/whatever so I stay a Christian at least in image for that reason.

[Murphy]

Ah, but at least they will be easily identified when we revive the good ol' custom of burning blasphemers at the stake. :D

You know, I am honestly beginning to believe that the best solution is just to burn the heathen and the heretic. It's for the good of society and we can elt God deal with their souls.

Plus they wont be all over the place any more :D!

[Lulletje Rozewater]

You know, I am honestly beginning to believe that the best solution is just to burn the heathen and the heretic. It's for the good of society and we can elt God deal with their souls.

Plus they wont be all over the place any more :D!

At least we can than fight amongst ourselves.

[Murphy]

You know, I am honestly beginning to believe that the best solution is just to burn the heathen and the heretic. It's for the good of society and we can elt God deal with their souls.

Plus they wont be all over the place any more :D!

After some deep consideration and some obviously divinely inspired persuasion from a certain armed pagan, I am revisting my opinion.

Believe what you want, just don't hurt me :P!

[Bloodeagle]

Church of the SubGenius

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/a/a3/Bobdobbs.png

[Liffrea]

Originally Posted by Aequoreus
Believe what you want, just don't hurt me

Personally I preferred your first opinion. I have more time for the fire and brimstone burn in hell Christian than the limp wristed faggotry of “men” like Rowan Williams.

At one time the Church preached the only way to God was through Jesus Christ, repent or die, now they organise coach trips to Mosques, one of your Pope’s even kissed the Koran!

Of course not that I want to see the Church in such a position of power again, I prefer the chaos of open society and freedom of thought/speech, to organised thought and expression. Men like me would not have fared well in the burning times. But there is something about the single mindedness of the zealot, they can achieve great things, just make sure you point them away from you and have plenty of shiny objects to keep them entertained.

[Austin]

It isn't so much a black and white issue for me really. I don't believe the exact story of Christianity but at the same time I stay a Christian because it is my cultural inheritance and is the religion of the dominant civilizations currently. Also it instills good values overall in people and that is the reason a lot of people stay Christian in name and thought at least so as to retain values for their family and children, it is a good base for impressionable minds morally speaking. Also I see it as important to stay within the general frame of religion of the West and that is undeniably currently at least Christianity.

For instance I am not very religious but I retain its general values like I am 100% against homosexuality as I believe it hurts my culture and the West at large population wise. I also do not like the schools of thought in feminism that are anti-men as I believe that hurts the West as well and its people.

[Psychonaut]

After some deep consideration and some obviously divinely inspired persuasion from a certain armed pagan, I am revisting my opinion.

Believe what you want, just don't hurt me :P!

Good man. :thumb001:

[Franz]

I believe that religion and only religion can successfully bind together an ethnic group. I believe that if we are to survive as a people, it will only be so if we have a spiritually in tact core to our society. The study that Wat Tyler poster elsewhere discussing the levels of religiosity in the US showed one thing: the areas with the highest levels of religiosity also have the lowest levels of miscegenation in the US.

Do you have a link to the study? I’ve noticed lower levels of religiosity with increased miscegenation in the degenerative urban areas.

[Psychonaut]

Do you have a link to the study? I’ve noticed lower levels of religiosity with increased miscegenation in the degenerative urban areas.

I was comparing data from this Gallup discussing levels of religiosity in particular states (http://www.theapricity.com/forum/showthread.php?t=4055) with data from the Census Bureau on mixed marriages (p. 12) (http://www.census.gov/prod/2003pubs/censr-5.pdf). :)

[Austin]

I was in Alabama once and these two guys were in front of me and there was this black girl in front of them on street and one said "she's almost around the age" and the other said "yup damn shame". Racism is still veryyyyy open in much of the South. They were referring to olden slave days when white men could service young black slave girls.

[Psychonaut]

I was in Alabama once and these two guys were in front of me and there was this black girl in front of them on street and one said "she's almost around the age" and the other said "yup damn shame". Racism is still veryyyyy open in much of the South. They were referring to olden slave days when white men could service young black slave girls.

http://icanhascheezburger.files.wordpress.com/2010/03/129109688164224489.jpg

I don't know where you go to have all of these encounters that read like propaganda from an SPLC "real life story," but never in the decade that I lived in Alabama and Northwest Florida did I encounter people randomly making references to how they wished they could bed Black slave girls.

[Austin]

Well I have sorry if it disturbs your sense of decency lol

[Psychonaut]

Well I have sorry if it disturbs your sense of decency lol

Your butchery of my mother tongue disturbs my sense of decency far more than do your bizarre and hard to believe tales.

[Austin]

meh random peoples sense of my grammar on a forum aint exactly a huge worry of mine =)

[Raskolnikov]

Catholics: Closet atheists
Protestants: Closet homosexuals
Orthodox: Closet Catholics
Chistian other: Closet Jews
Atheists: Secular Christians
Heathenry: World of Warcraft is the same thing but has more followers.

[itsdumbledørebaby]

Grade A free-range organic fuckin' Satanist.. Although, at the moment, I have taken a liking to Norse Paganism. I try to stay true to my roots.

[Liffrea]

Originally Posted by Forrester
Heathenry: World of Warcraft is the same thing but has more followers.

An unfortunate amount of truth in that, many seem to treat it as an excuse to dress up.

[Murphy]

Catholics: Closet atheists

Wow, your insight into religious faith, theology, philosophy.. it just boggles the mind. You have convinced me to abandon my Catholic pretense and just come out as an atheist :rolleyes2:..

[Raskolnikov]

Oh, God, don't do that. Then you're right back where you started.

[Puddle of Mudd]

I'm heavily into my frequent acts of debauchery, so atheism suits me fine in that area.

[Pallantides]

Christianity is not really that much more foreign to Scandinavia than Norse religion is ,Norse/Germanic religion was introduced sometime in the Iron Age and Christianity in the early Middle Ages(ca: 1000 AD). Both are an important part of Scandinavian cultural development and Nordic identity.
Before that Scandinavians worshiped the sun and fat woman statues.:thumb001:


In general most scholars agree that the Bronze Age religion was centered around the sun or a sun god. The sun was carried across the sky on a wagon pulled by a horse. Rock carvings from this time period sometimes show a sun wheel (usually depicted as an equilateral cross in a circle) near or being held by a figure that seems to be male. The gender of this figure is not known with certainty, but is believed to be male because of a penis-like projection coming from the groin. It is interesting to note that while the sun seems to have been worshipped as a male figure during the Bronze Age, later Scandinavian pagan beliefs pictured the sun as a goddess (Sunna in Norse religion), and the word for "Sun" is generally attested with feminine grammatical gender in the later Germanic languages. It is unknown how this transition occurred; perhaps a merging of different cultures is the answer.

The Nomadic Sámi continued with sun worship well into the 18th century, they had many other gods but the sun was the most important aspect in Sámi religion and the Sámi consider themselves to be the "Children of the sun" or "sons and daughters of the sun"

[thundercreek]

I was born to a non religious Jewish mother and a non religious Catholic father. But in judaism if your mother is jewish than so are you wether you like it or not. I did practice Christianity for a little but i got tired of it after a while, so I guess you could say Im Jewish.

[obama549]

I think of myself as an indifferent agnostic. I do respect (and in some cases, admire) people with more clearly defined religious convictions than mine, but I go to some lenghts in order to not number myself among them.

I follow Roman Catholicism since I was baptised in 1994. Though I rarely attend the mass, even less pray at home, both of my grandma do it though. Young people have lost their faith maybe. Except for young Muslims. In that sense, I can admire them and islam.

[Solomon Kane]

I was born and raised as a Methodist.

[Grímkell]

So basically you're a racial atheist.

[Electronic God-Man]

LOL. What is this? The Twilight Zone?

[Psychonaut]

Uhhh...

What's up with the trolling?

[Grímkell]

If we're all a bunch of souless fuckers then why even bother caring about racial matters. It obviously doesnt matter then. The moon is a rock, like your head, but it does govern all sorts of inherent forces in nature, both spiritually, metaphysically, and physically. Its influence is undeniable. If you need religion to bind people together, then whatever religion you choose to use can work. Heathenry is a pagan religion just like Wicca or Druidism, using it to bind a bunch of souless fuckers together is pointless. Obviously religion to for you is just a trick of your mind, or better yet another form of facism.

[Svipdag]

Nirguna Brahman has no attributes of its own. However, such an entity is
inconceivable. In order to think about or to meditate upon the Brahman, it must possess some attributes. Therefore, it is permissible to assign some attributes to Brahman [such as incorruptability immortality, omniscience, omnipresence, etc.]

However, the being we imagine which has these attributes is not the true
Brahman . It is saguna Brahman, the only kind of Brahman which we can think about and imagine.

[Hess]

I am very surprised and quite frankly disheartened at how many people on here follow heathenism :(

[Piparskeggr]

I am very surprised and quite frankly disheartened at how many people on here follow heathenism :(

You'd rather we were what?

[DarkZarathustra]

Evergreen heident-ic Nietzscheaner! :thumb001:

[Monolith]

I am very surprised and quite frankly disheartened at how many people on here follow heathenism :(
It's a local phenomenon. ;)

[antonio]

The concept of follower is not much precise on talking about Spanish religiosity. For example, I'm a baptized and confirmed RomanCatholic, which is not strictly the same of being a follower of doctrine, Pope, etc...

[antonio]

I am very surprised and quite frankly disheartened at how many people on here follow heathenism :(

And what's the problem about it? At least they believe in somebody or something. :cool:

[Hess]

You'd rather we were what?

Well, if paganism gives you a sense of fulfillment and purpose, I would be a fool to tell you not to practice it.

but in a perfect world, I'd rather you were something not so outdated. Don't get me wrong, I appreciate our ancestors as much as you. I am, however, not willing to follow everything that they did just because they are my ancestors.

My objections to Heathenism(In your case, Asatru) are the same as my objections to Christianity.

Yes, I know it gives comfort and warmth. Yes, I know it seems like a very well thought out belief system. But at the end of the day, is it scientifically true? Can you scientifically prove the existence of Odin and other Norse entities?

Do these beings exist outside of your mind? If your answer is (as i suspect) no, then is the psychological gratification really worth the systematic self delusion?

[Grumpy Cat]

Yes, I know it gives comfort and warmth.

:lol: No it doesn't. It makes you hateful and bitter. I am an ex-Heathen. It gave me no comfort or warmth to speak of.

[Psychonaut]

Yes, I know it gives comfort and warmth.

Aye, some extremely bitter ex-Heathens aside, many of us enjoy a sense of spiritual community and fellowship that comes along with being a part of any religious group.


Do these beings exist outside of your mind?

Those of us who treat Heathenry or Paganism as a pantheistic or panentheistic type of nature religion would surely answer in the affirmative. When I hail the Sun, Moon, Earth, Land Wights or Night Sky, I am not closing my eyes and looking within; I am staring with eyes wide open at my Gods, prehending them in their numinosity.

[Heimmacht]

You can see the Gods in many forms of nature, that alone gives me comfort because we are all part of it.

I personally see the Gods as metaphors to nature, but in the times of our ancestors (they saw them as human-like beings) they needed it to comprehend the world around them.

[Monolith]

But at the end of the day, is it scientifically true? Can you scientifically prove the existence of Odin and other Norse entities?

Meh. Science is overrated anyways. Modernity is marked with a rather unhealthy obsession with 'evidence' and 'empirical measurement' to the point where people attempt to put just about everything into some solid, material frame (e.g. the whole IQ silliness). I tend to think reality is a bit more complicated than that.

[mymy]

I did test online to see what religion is the most close to me, and got "Liberal Quakers". I don't know anything about them.

[Talvi]

I dont believe in any sort of gods or deities or whatever because i just dont feel it. I am painfully unspiritual and feel no connectedness to the world or the universe.

[Belenus]

I am a heathen, specifically a Celtic heathen with some Greco-Roman influences. Unfortunately the state of Celtic paganism (AKA Druidism) is atrocious and ridiculous New Age hippy manure, as subversive as the multiculturalism it has been corrupted by. For those of us who believe you actually have to be an ethnic Celt to be a member of the religion, the whole situation is a little disheartening. Nonetheless, I am what I am and I shall not permit the errant ways of modern fools to discourage me.

I believe that Celtic paganism is in need of two steps to cleanse itself. First, it must learn from the folkish Germanic example. The basic principle of Celtic ethnicity being a prerequisite for Celtic religious participation should be established as a concrete rule. As part of this folkish revision, Celtic paganism should cease to call itself Druidism, as perhaps no modern 'druid' has anywhere near the training or wisdom to call himself such. And any foreign influences taken from African or Native American shamanism should be purged completely. A lot of Celtic lore may have been lost over the centuries, but it's a shameful thing to adopt totally alien beliefs as a cheap substitute. After these revisions have been made and a folkish Celtic paganism has been achieved, I think it needs to go further by instituting an orthodox, canonical theology. Paganism must rise to the status of a high religion if it is to play an important role in the future of European and Western civilisation. The only way to defeat Christianity is to beat it at its own game. An orthodox paganism, with all the virility and life-affirming principles inherent to it, would crush contemporary Christianity. Of this I have no doubt.

[Hess]

Just out of curiosity, do you have to be of a specific ethnicity to follow a specific brand of paganism?

For example, I am half French and half Croatian. Would I be allowed to practice, say, Celtic paganism?

Or would a portugese person be allowed to follow odinism?

[Psychonaut]

I am a heathen, specifically a Celtic heathen with some Greco-Roman influences. Unfortunately the state of Celtic paganism (AKA Druidism) is atrocious and ridiculous New Age hippy manure, as subversive as the multiculturalism it has been corrupted by. For those of us who believe you actually have to be an ethnic Celt to be a member of the religion, the whole situation is a little disheartening. Nonetheless, I am what I am and I shall not permit the errant ways of modern fools to discourage me.

I believe that Celtic paganism is in need of two steps to cleanse itself. First, it must learn from the folkish Germanic example. The basic principle of Celtic ethnicity being a prerequisite for Celtic religious participation should be established as a concrete rule. As part of this folkish revision, Celtic paganism should cease to call itself Druidism, as perhaps no modern 'druid' has anywhere near the training or wisdom to call himself such. And any foreign influences taken from African or Native American shamanism should be purged completely. A lot of Celtic lore may have been lost over the centuries, but it's a shameful thing to adopt totally alien beliefs as a cheap substitute. After these revisions have been made and a folkish Celtic paganism has been achieved, I think it needs to go further by instituting an orthodox, canonical theology. Paganism must rise to the status of a high religion if it is to play an important role in the future of European and Western civilisation. The only way to defeat Christianity is to beat it at its own game. An orthodox paganism, with all the virility and life-affirming principles inherent to it, would crush contemporary Christianity. Of this I have no doubt.

Question: since you already admit a degree of Graco-Roman influence, where do you stand on Gallo-Roman Paganism as a viable alternative to attempting to reconstruct British Celtic Paganism? For, it seems that there is really a wealth of textual and archaeological information for the Gallo-Roman syncretism that isn't there for Irish or Welsh Paganism.

[Wyn]

For example, I am half French and half Croatian. Would I be allowed to practice, say, Celtic paganism?

I wouldn't put too much thought into it. There are 'Norse pagans' and 'Odinists' without any Norse in them.


Or would a portugese person be allowed to follow odinism?

There are Spanish and Italian Odinists. ;)

[Belenus]

Just out of curiosity, do you have to be of a specific ethnicity to follow a specific brand of paganism?

For example, I am half French and half Croatian. Would I be allowed to practice, say, Celtic paganism?

Or would a portugese person be allowed to follow odinism?

I personally am not a purist. If you've got a good degree of Celtic ancestry and your inner character is strongly Celtic, then why should the beliefs of many of your ancestors be denied to you? However I think there's a point at which, if you don't have a significant line of descent or your heritage isn't evident in your bearing or appearance, then it would be a case for serious deliberation. That's why paganism needs to be highly organised, so that the grey areas can be cleared up.

As for a (I'm assuming ethnic) Portuguese practicing Nordic paganism - er, no. Portuguese have their own ancestral paganism (Roman, Celtic, etc.) and don't need to look to the North, where they never lived and have no biological connection.

[Hess]

How would you define celtic character?

And I was born in Russia, so obviously I wasn't raised with a French mentality ( which I guess would exclude me from Celtic paganism)

[Belenus]

How would you define celtic character?

And I was born in Russia, so obviously I wasn't raised with a French mentality ( which I guess would exclude me from Celtic paganism)

French mentality isn't Celtic. The mentality of the people of Brittany in northern France might be Celtic, though, as they are a Celtic folk. The French generally have Gallo-Roman heritage, so I guess they'd be acceptable as Celts or as Roman pagans.

As for what Celtic character is, read the myths of the Celts, get an idea of their worldview and values, genuinely attempt to view the cosmos the way they did. If it appeals to you and comes naturally, and if you possess other personality traits generally attributed to the Celts of history, then you've got enough of a Celtic racial soul by my standards. Either you'll 'feel it' or you won't. Just be certain that enough of your ancestry is Celtic (thus giving you an insight into the Celtic collective unconscious), or else you'd only be deluding yourself.

[Baron Samedi]

French mentality isn't Celtic. The mentality of the people of Brittany in northern France might be Celtic, though, as they are a Celtic folk. The French generally have Gallo-Roman heritage, so I guess they'd be acceptable as Celts or as Roman pagans.

As for what Celtic character is, read the myths of the Celts, get an idea of their worldview and values, genuinely attempt to view the cosmos the way they did. If it appeals to you and comes naturally, and if you possess other personality traits generally attributed to the Celts of history, then you've got enough of a Celtic racial soul by my standards. Either you'll 'feel it' or you won't. Just be certain that enough of your ancestry is Celtic (thus giving you an insight into the Celtic collective unconscious), or else you'd only be deluding yourself.

And how do you practice your faith, sir?

Most folks of Northern stock do the standard "Asatru" stuff... So I'm interested in your particular pathway.

[Belenus]

Question: since you already admit a degree of Graco-Roman influence, where do you stand on Gallo-Roman Paganism as a viable alternative to attempting to reconstruct British Celtic Paganism? For, it seems that there is really a wealth of textual and archaeological information for the Gallo-Roman syncretism that isn't there for Irish or Welsh Paganism.

Most of what has influenced me from the Greeks and Romans is philosophical, and thus possessed of a degree of universalism not permissible in faith-based folk inheritances. Things I incorporate into my spiritual philosophy that could be seen as existing outside the realm of abstract thought are numen, which must be experienced intuitively to be properly understood, and the heroic ethos of the Homeric poems. However the same heroic mentality abounds in Irish mythology.

I'm not so sure that British Celtic paganism is so sorely lacking. The 'meat' of the tradition has been preserved. The loss of the institutions of the druids and bards was a heavy blow, but such institutions could be brought back in the future. They would necessarily have a new character, but one suited to the modern Celtic population and composed only of ethnic Celts. Out of the myths and lore we still have, a living tradition would begin, and new lore would be added as time flows and new heroes emerge. The Christian Church, for instance, had only the life of Jesus to base a huge religious construct upon, and that worked well for them. The living Christian tradition branched out into grail lore, a number of radical metaphysical explorations (see: heresies), the near-mythic undertakings of the Crusaders, angel cosmologies, miracles of the saints and martyrs, etc.

But as for Gallo-Roman paganism, I think it's fine for Gallo-Romans and would probably even be suitable for many full-blooded Celts. But I'm not so pessimistic about British Celtic paganism's prospects given the right leadership and circumstances. And as long as the tradition of my own ancestors, rather than relatives of my ancestors, is available to me, then that is the path I choose.

[Hess]

French mentality isn't Celtic. The mentality of the people of Brittany in northern France might be Celtic, though, as they are a Celtic folk. The French generally have Gallo-Roman heritage, so I guess they'd be acceptable as Celts or as Roman pagans.

As for what Celtic character is, read the myths of the Celts, get an idea of their worldview and values, genuinely attempt to view the cosmos the way they did. If it appeals to you and comes naturally, and if you possess other personality traits generally attributed to the Celts of history, then you've got enough of a Celtic racial soul by my standards. Either you'll 'feel it' or you won't. Just be certain that enough of your ancestry is Celtic (thus giving you an insight into the Celtic collective unconscious), or else you'd only be deluding yourself.

I see. Thanks for elaborating. I was just interested because I used to dabble in thelema and order of the golden dawn back in the day. The things that you are describing, however, sound completely different

[Cato]

My mind is my own church.

[Baron Samedi]

I am a heathen, specifically a Celtic heathen with some Greco-Roman influences. Unfortunately the state of Celtic paganism (AKA Druidism) is atrocious and ridiculous New Age hippy manure, as subversive as the multiculturalism it has been corrupted by. For those of us who believe you actually have to be an ethnic Celt to be a member of the religion, the whole situation is a little disheartening. Nonetheless, I am what I am and I shall not permit the errant ways of modern fools to discourage me.

I believe that Celtic paganism is in need of two steps to cleanse itself. First, it must learn from the folkish Germanic example. The basic principle of Celtic ethnicity being a prerequisite for Celtic religious participation should be established as a concrete rule. As part of this folkish revision, Celtic paganism should cease to call itself Druidism, as perhaps no modern 'druid' has anywhere near the training or wisdom to call himself such. And any foreign influences taken from African or Native American shamanism should be purged completely. A lot of Celtic lore may have been lost over the centuries, but it's a shameful thing to adopt totally alien beliefs as a cheap substitute. After these revisions have been made and a folkish Celtic paganism has been achieved, I think it needs to go further by instituting an orthodox, canonical theology. Paganism must rise to the status of a high religion if it is to play an important role in the future of European and Western civilisation. The only way to defeat Christianity is to beat it at its own game. An orthodox paganism, with all the virility and life-affirming principles inherent to it, would crush contemporary Christianity. Of this I have no doubt.

Orthodox ANYTHING is a bad idea..... And has no place in any form of paganism.