Pagans, heathens and infidels

Status
Not open for further replies.
I know, Brian. I was being kind of pedantic, all religions start somewhere and somewhen, almost all of them are variations on a theme, recycled for whatever age they happened to be created in.
Take for instance the virgin birth, crucifiction, resurrection and assendance. This theme has been repeated over and over, from religion to religion. It predates christianity by thousands of years.
Asatru is sort of a dilated Odinism, their was recentlyish an Asatru temple founded in Iceland. Think it was their first built.

It is a sincere shame that white supremisists took up Odinism as theirs, and strange really, as the vikings had no such prejudices, they had an extremely equalitarian society.

I have read extensively on religions and so on. They are fascinating.
 
Brian Turner said:
Most followers also tend to focus on the positive life and peace elements, and completely reject anything relating to death or violence, even though these were originally integral.
Click to expand...

True, and I do think this reinforces the idea that a lot of modern "spirituality" is basically a rejection of the awfulness of the modern world. The biggest question Science has yet to answer is: what morality replaces religious morality? Humanism is still very young...
 
I'm not sure science can answer that, since morality is a choice, rather than something natural. We don't need religion in order to make the right choices in life. In fact, I would say a great many poor choices have been made because of, or at least in the name of religion.
 
I've always found wicca to be a strange mixture of beliefs, with old european folklore mixed with much, much older hermetic traditions. Again, very much a case of 'pick which bits you like best' and make a religion out of it. And there is nothing wrong with that of course, it is, after all how most religions have come about, and if it makes people be better people, then great stuff. It is unfortunate that it became very popular with certain circles because they (entirely wrongly) believed Alistair Crowley had something to do with it.
 
Quellist said:
I've always found wicca to be a strange mixture of beliefs, with old european folklore mixed with much, much older hermetic traditions. Again, very much a case of 'pick which bits you like best' and make a religion out of it. And there is nothing wrong with that of course, it is, after all how most religions have come about, and if it makes people be better people, then great stuff. It is unfortunate that it became very popular with certain circles because they (entirely wrongly) believed Alistair Crowley had something to do with it.
Click to expand...

Agreed, but for me the distinction is there is a consistent theme to wicca which is living in harmony and working with the Earth's cycles - be that moon, sun or season - whereas new agers will throw a Native American's shaman medicine wheel in with chakra focus, healing with Ascended Masters (calling Jesus Sanander or Sandalphon) and use angels, Zeta Reticuli, Nordic and Reptoids, Quabbalah and Crop circles whilst holding a piece of quartz crystal and chucking a bit of Reiki at you the whole time they're channelling Nefertiti to out-spiritual you.

It's a bad business :D

pH
 
Phyrebrat said:
new agers will throw a Native American's shaman medicine wheel in with chakra focus, healing with Ascended Masters (calling Jesus Sanander or Sandalphon) and use angels, Zeta Reticuli, Nordic and Reptoids, Quabbalah and Crop circles whilst holding a piece of quartz crystal and chucking a bit of Reiki at you the whole time they're channelling Nefertiti to out-spiritual you.
Click to expand...

This was also what the ritual magicians of the Theosophist/Golden Dawn period (late Victorian and just after, Crowley et al) tended to do, though. As I understand it, no one tradition was held to have more power than another; they were all cobbled together into a system of "resonances".
 
HareBrain said:
This was also what the ritual magicians of the Theosophist/Golden Dawn period (late Victorian and just after, Crowley et al) tended to do, though. As I understand it, no one tradition was held to have more power than another; they were all cobbled together into a system of "resonances".
Click to expand...

I agree but there is a basic consistency to Wicca that the others lack, especially the founding tenet of 'And harm none'

So mote it be ... ;)

pH
 
Phyrebrat said:
there is a consistent theme to wicca
Click to expand...

Wicca has a standard text via Gardner, something the rest don't. For good or for ill...

HareBrain said:
This was also what the ritual magicians of the Theosophist
Click to expand...

I'm glad Theosophy was mentioned - at the turn of the 20th century Leadbeater claimed he'd found the incarnation of Jesus in a young Indian boy. But when that boy grew up, he turned against not just Theosophy, but all forms of organised belief:

“Man cannot come to [truth] through any organisation, through any creed, through any dogma, priest or ritual, nor through any philosophical knowledge or psychological technique. He has to find it through the mirror of relationship, through the understanding of the contents of his own mind, through observation and not through intellectual analysis or introspective dissection…”

- Krishnamurti
Click to expand...

Funnily enough, Monty Python repeated that same spiritual tenet more simply in Life of Brian, when he tells his followers that they don't need to follow anybody - that they've got to discover it for themselves:


Anyway, I think we're digressing from Toby's original questions, which I presume were for historical research. :)
 
Quellist said:
I'm not sure science can answer that, since morality is a choice, rather than something natural. We don't need religion in order to make the right choices in life. In fact, I would say a great many poor choices have been made because of, or at least in the name of religion.
Click to expand...

Excellent points.

I suppose a lengthier version of my point would be - if we could agree on a common scientific description of the human condition, could that be used to move towards a new, non-spiritual humane morality? I think it could.
 
Quellist said:
When someone tells me they are a pagan, I like to ask which actual gods they worship. The confusion on their faces is priceless, as a great many people who 'say' they are pagans actualy don't understand what the term means.
Click to expand...

Really? Any of them I've come across (admittedly only on-line) have been willing to go into alarming amounts of detail about the exact differences between the Wotan they worship vs. the Odin of others
 
WaylanderToo said:
be very careful with "kaffir" as for South Africans it has a VERY different meaning
Click to expand...
True indeed, though it was actually borrowed from the Arab traders who used it to refer to the black African...pagans...they did business with.

Linguistic tidbit: In Thailand and other SE Asian countries foreigners are generally referred to as "faranghee" (hard 'g') which derives via Arabic from 'Frank" ( as does 'foreign').
 
galanx said:
I used to be agnostic, but now I'm not so sure.
Click to expand...

I'm not unsure. I'm just not prepared to believe something that requires (quite literaly) blind faith. When I have some evidence, I'll give it some thought.
 
galanx said:
Arabic from 'Frank"
Click to expand...
Frank as in the pre French Franks?
Interesting too that the Welsh are the British and "Welsh" from the Anglo Saxon word meaning foreigner. It was Queen Elisabeth First that popularised the idea that the English were also British (to bolster claims to Americas via a semi-mythic Welsh prince).
 
They teach Paganism as part of the Religious Education curriculum in England, I learned recently. Would be interesting to know more about what they cover and how they define it!
 
I meant to say they teach about Paganism - not that they are actually training people in it. But it is a topic. Unlike Humanism/Atheism which is currently Not Included.
 
They would have to include paganism, otherwise it isn't religious education. There are, after all many,many recognised pagan belief systems. For instance, Hinduism would be classified as a pagan religion as it isn't abrahamic, it is polytheistic and the christian and muslim churches say it is wrong. So by deifinition, it is a pagan religion.
 
The best definition of "Pagan" I have seen is "Not of a main stream religion."

Being pagan doesn't mean you worship any particular god/goddess, or for that matter, any god at all.

I follow a Druidic path. That doesn't mean I follow all 300+ gods and goddesses that have been identified as being worshipped by the Keltoi. It doesn't mean I follow any of them.

All I'm saying is that you can't define the religion of other individuals (as some posts here seem to come close to); each person must define their beliefs for themselves.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top