are you religious? if yes, to what extent and which religion?
Imagine being this fucking stupid.
Every pagan cunt I know is a mouth breathing dead end.
The only place I've seen them show up is /pol/.
I've known two pagans. One was a really successful woman in her 50-60's and had been practicing for years. She had her shit together. Really cool, genuine woman.
The other is a woman who is in her early 30's, lives off of her husband, suffers anxiety/depression, has 2 kids for some reason (complains about it all the time) and can't hold a job. And she has to shove this pagan shit down my throat every time I see her.
It's a shame that the religion has been stigmatized in the way it has, but as they say, stereotypes exist for a reason. Paganism is such an amazing and interesting religion, and if it didn't make me look batshit crazy I'd be a pagan, too.
the only pagan Ive met was an incel obsessed with >muh vikings. whats the point of converting to paganism other than autistic /pol/ shit. you know its all made up so youre just doing it for iconography? but you can listen to folk music and wear tacky jewellery without being pegan
What point are you even trying to make? Yeah, most modern day members are crazy but that doesn't invalidate an entire religion and practice. You sound really ignorant.
>>29596>Yeah, most modern day members are crazy but that doesn't invalidate an entire religion and practice.
You're got this backwards. The fact that only crazies are into it doesn't invalidate the religion, the religion is already invalid so it only attracts crazies.
>>29597>has met one (1) single pagan that was crazy>makes blanket assumptions about paganism and it's members as a whole
now you just sound fucking stupid.
>>29598>now you just sound fucking stupid.
I'm not the one defending paganism here.
the whole thing IS invalid tho. its obviously all made up so theres no reason to believe in it. its not like christian/jew/muslim where youre born into it. why would you convert to something you know is bs?
Not really spiritual but I follow slavic pagan traditions since I'm from Serbia.
Ortodox christianity is really close to paganism, but I chose to ignore the christian side of it.
im a filthy uneducated anon, explain me mormon christianity pls
nu-religion is trash. norse religion is dead and largely lost to time, you're a larper.
gee moid ur mum lets you hab 2 gfs??
You guys are baiting but I'll bite.
people CONVERT to religions every day. People who are born into christian families convert to Judaism etc etc. So my original point still stands and you guys are making the worst arguments I've ever heard like seriously are you even trying
I'm jewish, don't care about the traditions tho
husbands become gods of planets
haram wives need his handshake to live in the celestial space kingdom
Do you have a single brother in the IDF?
…asking for a friend
>>29618THE GOYIM KNOW! SHUT IT DOWN!
If you don't understand the symbolism and the metaphyscis behind it you aren't even scratching the surface and so your opinion is basically invalid.
I understand liking the symbolism but converting to it? Come on.
what a complete non-response tbh. why would symbolism and "metaphysics" be a reason to believe something that is completely false
Pagans aren't converting to "symbolism">>29632
you shouldn't refute my response simply because you don't understand a word in my post
not all forays into theology are to determine if the events happened in the bible, (or whatever religion) all happened literally, or to try and prove that their perception of god is the true one.
many pagans see the "gods" as representing immutable forces in the world (whether that be violence, beauty etc). And many of the stories or parables of these Gods are made as lessons on human nature and the world at large, these lessons provide wisdom of the perennial truths of the world and human nature these stories were made to convey.
Even many of the pagans of old (especially in ancient rome and Greece) did not believe in the Gods literally (though many of the poor did), but appreciated the values and lessons in that faith, or saw the Gods as their own sort of force or even an aspect of one-greater-force. personifying these "gods" for ease of explanation and identity
this is why Rome would force people into religious rites, even atheists, because it was important to understand and respect the philosophy and values of thier faith and society.
basically nearlly all pagans of today don't believe that Tyr or Jupiter (same God) wander about in the sky, but believe in what they represent and try to learn or respect the qualities of that particular god. Sorry for my english
When I said "it" I meant paganism.
what they represent is also complete nonsense tho. all the good parts are just common sense that have nothing to do with religion. all the actual pegan parts are cringe and pointless
the same is true of pretty much all religion, but its less cringe to be a christian/jew/muslim because theyre the big religions and most people were just born into them by default
where do you think our notion of common sense came from and whats right and wrong came from? It came from religious morality born of Indo-european paganism and it influences on the abrahamic faiths mostly.
Do you think cavemen tribal leaders all just new to emulate all the qaulites of a god like Odin and become a perfect leader? You then proceed to ruin a theological discussion by making an "argument" of popularity and don't actually debate the substance and tenets of those faiths
>>29645>It came from religious morality born of Indo-european paganism
this is completely false, it is innate to human biology, pretty much all peoples across the world have the same moral values. it has nothing to do with religion
>Do you think cavemen tribal leaders all just new to emulate all the qaulites of a god like Odin and become a perfect leader?
the concept of odin, and all religious figures were based off of humans. youve got it the wrong way round. morals arent based on religion, religion is based on morals. this is the only explanation for religion being invented
>>29648>pretty much all peoples across the world have the same moral values.
currently nearly All the world is now heavily influenced by the abrahamic religions and some philosophy from pagansim or been controlled and created by nations under this influence
and in what timeframe are you talking about? do you think the aztec society shared the same morals as english society?
>this is the only explanation for religion being invented
Just because this is the only reason your mind can summon doesn't make this true in any way.
>and all religious figures were based off of humans.
so all powerful gods are emulating humans…… lmao
lets not forget that the sum of all moral values does not simply equate to "killing = bad"
>this is completely false, it is innate to human biology
where have you got this from?
you are making huge completely unfounded statements without evidence, I am simply trying to put forth a point of view and explanation
>>29649>Just because this is the only reason your mind can summon doesn't make this true in any way.
no its literally the only way it could of happened. humans invented religion. therefore they invented the values of religion
>so all powerful gods are emulating humans…… lmao
no, all powerful gods obviously dont exist. theyre fictional characters written by people, based off of pre existing figures/values
>>29649>lets not forget that the sum of all moral values does not simply equate to "killing = bad"
pretty much all positive values come from humans innate empathy. all the shitty "morals" are propagated through religion
you seem to be saying that religion is based directly off of human behaviour, it isn't. It is based from IDEAL human behaviour.
Humans have PERSONIFIED idealism by expressing them as Gods. You cannot merely invent a perennial truth, it is transcendent. it is a permanent element of the universe humans can observe and understand, though was never invented.>>29651
yeah shitty morals like lets not have human sacrifice. sure is worthless this religion thing
im personally agnostic, i believe that there is a general meaning and purpose to the existence of us and the universe, but i dont believe that there is an entity that rules over anything, much less cares about what us puny humans do with our lives.
Anton LaVey kind of pictures what i mean better:
"Man—using his brain—invented all the Gods, doing so because many of our species cannot accept or control their personal egos, feeling compelled to conjure up one or a multiplicity of characters who can act without hindrance or guilt upon whims and desires. All Gods are thus externalized forms, magnified projections of the true nature of their creators, personifying aspects of the universe or personal temperaments which many of their followers find to be troubling. Worshipping any God is thus worshipping by proxy those who invented that God."
I would say this is quite a wise post
and a decent post apart from>Worshipping any God is thus worshipping by proxy those who invented that God.
this is a strange statement, it is like loving an idea means you also by default love the creator of the idea, which isn't necessarily true
for instance i like this quote, but I don't like LaVey
>>29652>It is based from IDEAL human behaviour
the idea as thought of by humans without religion. it isnt based directly off of human behaviour, but it is based directly off of human morals. but humans dont act 100% moral. religion doesnt make people adhere to morality any more than they naturally would
>yeah shitty morals like lets not have human sacrifice
what??? any human sacrifice that has occurred it BECAUSE of religion. no one is sacrificing if they dont believe in anything to sacrifice to…
also even if a religion was the foundation of morals (which its not), there still is literally no reason to have anything to do with peganism in 2019. a modern secular society provides all the framework for morality without any of the pointless cringe elements that peganism has
How can one convert
into their original religion?
its not their "original" religion, you have nothing to do with your ancestors or what they believed you cringelord
I lost my faith in god at 13 and became an atheist, then I lost my faith in everything at 26 and became a christian.
A modern secular society has no basis for morality, that's the point. Its 'morality' is infantile tribalist commercial trends that can 180 at any time, there is little to no basis, consistency, or integrity. It's pretty much a immoral free-for-all of being mentally castrated by whatever thoughtless shit you get socially shamed into believing or participating in at a given moment. Religious morality has a layered and completely coherent and logical system down from metaphysics to social pragmatism. Secular society doesn't have anything but whatever is currently convenient for economic and political purposes of a select few sociopaths. Which can change within a matter of weeks with no one questioning it, just hiding and purging evidence of what once was. In truth these societies today are authoritarian, fragmented and braindead.
mostly true, but secular morality does have one flimsy basis, which is 'progress'
which is not so much a basis as it is a constantly shifting state of morality in which everything everybody believed 50 years ago is considered intolerably evil
personally, I don't really want to buy into a moral system where my cultural descendants are basically guaranteed to think that I was a misguided bigot because I didn't believe in some insane obscurantist nonsense concocted by a bunch of depraved freaks in an ivy league humanities department
>>29655>the idea as thought of by humans without religion.
no, ideas and qualities that were identified
not thought up of. people didn't gather around and say, "we are going to believe this and that because lmao i just though it all up">>29676
both of them yeah, it's mandatory to all citizens>>29628
if you actually believe this youre retarded and beyond hope tbh. we live in a mostly secular society and it is the most moral humanity has ever been>In truth these societies today are authoritarian, fragmented and braindead.
this is garbage. youre obviously just some /pol/ traditionalist>>29678>progress is bad
I dont even know what youre trying to say tbh…
>>29645>It came from religious morality born of Indo-european paganism
Common sense morality as we know it today of thou shalt not kill, thou shalt not steal etc is from the 10 Commandments. Ancient pagans were mostly pederasts who sacrificed children.
dont kill, dont steal etc existed for 1000s of years before the 10 commandments or peganism. they have nothing to do with religion. its innate human morality
It is innate to know these things are wrong but it wasn't a commonly held societal value before Abrahamic religions made it into law. In the Old Testament narrative the ancient Jews are constantly being tempted to go back to worshiping the pagan gods of the surrounding culture and sacrifice babies to entities like Ba'al and Moloch.
>>29695>it wasn't a commonly held societal value before Abrahamic religions made it into law
a complete lie pushed by conservatives who dont want the west to become more secular
nah you're an idiot, the concept of "progress" is a nothing, with the right media and money what is seen as "progress" one day can be viewed as "regress" on another.
again the whole idea of morality cannot simply be reduced to >killing is bad, guys
there is so much more. Religion doesn't just say don't do this and don't do that, it provides a framework for life and provides ideals to strive towards and to emulate.
Religion is also deeply spiritual, not just a set of rules
where is your evidence for this?
also we believe today in abrahamic religious societies that killing anyone is bad, but many pagan faiths basically said that anyone outside the tribe or culture is fair game
what is acceptable at one time and place may be different in another, morality like that is very fluid and thus is changed and dictated by religion, slavery is outlawed today but was extremely common in europe long ago, the idea that slavery is bad isn't innate in humans
except its not. it hasnt been one straight line, but things have in general always improved>>29699
it cant be reduced to just "killing is bad" but it can be reduced alot. all of the positive values religion provides are just natural human values. the framework religion provides is usually bad. religion is basically common sense morals everyone has without religion anyway + pointless and often harmful "framework"
I think gods or god-level beings probably exist but I doubt that those beings can be understood by any current organized religion or would care to directly affect my life. I’d call myself an agnostic but I would have associate myself with smart people.
I do think religion is really important for a lot of people and does a lot of good on an individual level but I can’t personally get on board with 100% of what any of them preach. Also any large powerful religion that informs the politics of the region is somewhat suspicious to me.
You send your youth out to expose them to abuse for attempting to convert others while receiving support with the other they’re paired with, solidifying an ‘us vs. them’ mentality so that they never leave their religion. Preachers of any kind, whether door-to-door or street, aren’t trying to save your soul; they’re reaffirming their own beliefs.
Theology is meant to provide meaning to the universe, make order from its chaos, shed light on its beginnings & ends, explain the problem of evil and give humans significance within it.
Paganism seems silly to me because even 2500 years ago when Plato walked the earth it was already in discredit among the educated. Paganism fails as a sincere theology because it cannot satisfy an honest desire for truth, at best it can offer a few instructive stories or allegories, religions should be made of sterner stuff. (The troubles Christianity has had in satisfying these same doubts has been the story of western philosophy since the Enlightenment so i put it aside)
Modern paganism, in the Varg mold, seems to be more than anything a handmaiden for ethnic nationalism, a kind of mystical pretense for racism (whatever merit this has is neither here nor there.)
what about vajrayana buddhism or the Mystery religions of persia, egypt and the greco-roman world?
most of them are polytheistic but at the same time have a form of methaphysics
But memes are meant to be enjoyed anon.
Buddha was a deadbeat dad who named his son "ball and chain" and abandoned his wife and child, why would you trust anything someone like that has to say about spiritual truth?
isnt that the story of the buddha? he abandoned his family etc
Hmm, Crystal Cafe, perhaps we should research this more.
From what I gather Buddha was a Prince and his family was already rich around the time Buddha took off. You'd think the family hung around to care for the woman and her child but I know that India (or wherever that region was) had peculiar traditions concerning a wife and husband which perhaps may have been a bit biased against the wife.
I'm reform Jewish. Hope this place isn't shitty like 4chan's /pol/
if you want to believe that story you have to also take into consideration that it was a common practice in that period and gautrama was filthy rich so his family didn't need him anyway, also when his son wanted to meet him he receive him into his group and help himbecome an arahat, butthats beside the point because vajrayana buddhism wasn't conceived by gautama buddha but by the mahasiddhas
but that's not even the point in here, the point is that there could be paganic religions with an honest desire for truth
no it's just an allegory, the fact that his son is called rajula (chain) is what gives it away
Even if it didn't actually happen and that's just his lore, it's a pretty shameful origin story for a supposed spiritual guru. Even if they were financially well provided for there is nothing noble about deserting your family.
Everyone in my family is catholic except for me
I'm not sure what I am, I've never been religious and I definitely don't believe in Abrahamic religions…
I read up on LaVeyan Satanism and I thought it sounded interesting but I think my family would disowned me if I called myself a satanist.
I was briefly into that once to be edgy and piss off my parents but there's nothing good about it philosophically, it's just self-indulgent hedonism. Plus in LaVey's Satanic mass ritual a naked woman's body is used as a table and men in attendance are prescribed to fully clothed and women are nude. Even if you don't ever actually attend one and just assent to Satanism philosophically that's objectifying and dehumanising, I wouldn't want to be part of a community that treats women like that.
>>29901>it's a pretty shameful origin story
not in the social context of the nepalese culture of those times, being an enlightened hermit was one of the most important and respected lifestyles
That doesn't make it right just because it was their culture. It was once acceptable to own slaves in many cultures, that doesn't make it good or respectable. Why would you trust anyone to teach you timeless universal spiritual truths when that person couldn't even rise above the evils of their own particular time and culture?
because there's no spiritual teacher, philosopher or messiah capable of completly going beyond their own cultural frame, no one can't achieve complete objectivity
basically all of modern secular moral beliefs were utterly fringe or completely unheard of 100+ years ago, and yet morality is innate and common sense?>things have in general always improved
You don't think progress is a good thing because things have always improved, you think things have always improved BECAUSE you are a progressive.
How do you justify the fact that your moral convictions basically didn't exist more than 50 years ago? If they aren't imposed by god, or by historical precedent, what are they based on? The only explanation which can justify it is the idea that things are always getting better. Otherwise they're completely arbitrary.
But if the most recent condition of society is, by definition, better than all previous conditions or society, then that means any moral fad that gains widespread popularity tomorrow or 5 or 10 or 100 years from now must be true and good and moral, specifically BECAUSE it's novel.
That is the basis of secular morality. Truth is whatever is hip and current, and is always subject to change. Somehow, people buy into this.
>>29930>Nietzsche approaches>"today i am enlightened not by a phony god's blessing but by my own Will to power, also, all women are cows that need to be whipped">Tips fedora*>Goes back to his home to write whiny melodramatic letters to Lou Salome begging her for sex and berating her for dating Chad instead of an UberNiceguy like himself.
How about a small religious minority controling the biggest media monopolies and finantial institutions of the world and only allowing members of their own sect in positions of power.
that's just an ad hominem, doesn't matter if nietszche was a loser, he still proved (and he wasn't the only one to be honest) without a doubt that jesus was a product of his time
>>30055>he still proved (and he wasn't the only one to be honest) without a doubt>philosophy>prove anything>prove anything without a doubt
please, philosophy is nothing more than elaborate opinions, that's like saying that Schopenhaur proved without a doubt that all women are thots.
the idea that all thinkers are bound by their cultural context is a very 19th century type of thing to have thought