Religion and Space

[RedStorm]

Thank you for all the input on this thread, I'm always fond of talking with good natured people about fun topics like this. If i give any offense to anyone, its not on purpose, i just have an arrogant nature that is hard to beat down sometimes. anyways i will try to address the posts that were sent to me, with good answers and maybe even a few counter arguments

 

[Riverwolf]

If i give any offense to anyone, its not on purpose, i just have an arrogant nature that is hard to beat down sometimes.

None taken, I get like that, too.

 

[RedStorm]

I didn't say "believed in," because I didn't mean that. I said, "some traditions and stories persisted." Most of these were either secularized or Christianized, however.

If you've ever decorated a Christmas tree, congratulations, you've participated in one such tradition.

It's only recently that some (including myself) have attempted to graft onto them our best estimates of what they might have looked like in a pre-Christian context, or what they might look like today had Christianity not effectively broken our lines.



Only two of them are big. Judaism is a fairly small, ethnic religion. (And I've seen it argued that "Abrahamic religion" as a term should be discarded, for lumping all three of them together despite being VERY different.)

There are three Major World Religions, yes, and Christianity and Islam are two of them. The third, however, is Buddhism.

Think of it in terms of a (very) rough threefold division of Eurasia: in the West, Christianity dominated the cultures; in the Middle, Islam; and the East, Buddhism. Obviously, one of these three is not like the other, insofar as the former two tried erasing the older ways, while Buddhism organically merged with the various indigenous traditions of the cultures it spread into, but it still had a profound impact on East Asian cultures, including their religions (despite being, ironically, kind of a minority religion in India, its country of origin).

Be careful when using "religion" as synonymous with Christianity and contemporary Western media depcitions of Islam; by doing so, you're effectively accusing us of being guilty-by-association of whatever your grievances are.

All that said, I share your frustration with the power dynamic we have in the West. The cultural ubiquitousness of Christianity, together with the invisibility of our own indigenous traditions, is VERY frustrating, and makes it very hard to celebrate our heritage with other people. It also makes it a task to examine my own conceptions of the world, and determine which of them owe their existence to a Christocentric zeitgeist, and what virtue or toxicity they may have. I've seen many atheists, Heathens, Neopagans, etc., speak and behave almost exactly like Christians (in both good and bad ways). I'm sure I've done it, too. That's just how ingrained it is.

I agree with what you have said here. Though i do think that Judaism still holds a popular tilt over lesser believed things like unbelief, paganism, etc. I mean unless i am wrong on this we can even see it in modern paganism, isn't the word in itself derogatory?

Let's think about the appropriate sample frame for a moment. Based on your definition of what space "really is," we can only include members of religions who exist in nations who have a reasonable chance of having something approaching modern education in the sciences. Anyone else should be thrown out of the data set, because it us unreasonable to expect them to have a contemporary, scientific understanding of space when they have no access to that view of reality.

With that refined sampling frame, we then need to make a very important distinction between religions that have "official teachings" and those which do not. For those who lack any official teachings, it is not appropriate for to say that the "religion" acknowledges or does not acknowledge anything, because it simply does not have that kind of unified dogma. In honesty, it makes much more sense to approach this at the level of individual beliefs for this reason, rather than pointing the finger at "the religion," for even in religions that have "official teachings," adherents of these religions do not necessary tow the party line.

All that said, what we'd end up with for the results would be something like this. There would be a chunk of individuals who simply never received the science education, although hypothetically they should have had access to it. We maybe should ignore those ones in the final analysis. Then there will be a chunk of individuals who interpret certain mythological texts literally, and while perhaps aware of the scientific consensus, choose to reject it in favor of a more meaningful narrative. Those are the ones we would want to look at - the mythological literalists. And as far as I'm aware, they're a distinct minority relative to the relevant sample frame for this question. But who knows... maybe someone has published a study. Cruise the primary literature if you're genuinely interested in a more academic answer to this question.

Yes, well this comes along with the point. Sorry if i wasn't clear, i am talking about the educated religious people who straight up deny the truth, as if the moon landing was holly wood. Believe it or not where i live this could be considered a very common belief

But Hinduism very much does address life on other planets. According to our religion the universe is teaming with life!

@RedStorm Hinduism talks about infinite universes and with all sorts of life forms throughout these universes (both higher, similar and lower beings).

Yes i mean in a worldly view point.

 

[Madhuri]

Yes i mean in a worldly view point.

We definitely believe that there are other physical beings in the universes. It isn't as concerning to our stories as the astral and spiritual beings and we absolutely do believe in other Earth like planets with physical life forms.

 

[RamaRaksha]

What religions acknowledge the existence of space for what it is? And how can one be believed in if it doesn't? I was on a christian chat the other day and they claimed that any alien life would be demonic? First of all if we are going off the christians interpretation i would call the opposing forces of god the good ones... but thats a point for another day. Anyways to deny alien life is foolish, theres simply too much of a chance for it to exist, maybe not close to the earth but still

Religions got into trouble by coming up with magic lands of plenty in the sky but then that is how they lure followers. Religions should focus on morals and ethics - how to lead a good honorable life which I believe the Buddha tried to teach by avoiding all talk of God but even Buddhism has fallen pray to magic lands of heaven and hell

Let's leave talk of space and the real world to Science. People need to dump religions and focus on faith and spirituality

 

[Riverwolf]

I agree with what you have said here. Though i do think that Judaism still holds a popular tilt over lesser believed things like unbelief, paganism, etc. I mean unless i am wrong on this we can even see it in modern paganism, isn't the word in itself derogatory?

With a lowercase "p", pagan is kind of derogatory, or at least used to be, as it was a synonym for "unorthodox", with connotations of, well, "stupid, dirty, backward peasants." Same with lowercase "h" heathen. They were used of anyone who didn't fit the established orthodoxy (or were just lower on the social ladder), including certain Christians.

However, with uppercase letters, Pagan (and Heathen) have been reclaimed as legitimate religious identities. That's not unprecedented; the term "Christian" was once a derogatory term that was reclaimed by its practitioners, as well.

If you're curious, a Pagan, or sometimes alternatively a Neopagan, is (broadly speaking) someone who practices any religion that is linked in some way to the historical pre-Christian traditions of Europe, or sometimes to pre-Islamic religions such as Kemeticism (Egyptian polytheism); or, a Pagan is someone who identifies as a Pagan. Some examples are Wicca, Hellenismos, Druidry (sort of), Celtic Recon, etc. (Sometimes Hinduism, and other East Asian indigenous religions, are lumped into the "Pagan" identity, though that's largely based on personal identity rather than hard classification, which is still up for debate.) Though whether Pagan and Neopagan are actually synonymous or not is something that's not wholly agreed upon in our communities.

A Heathen is someone who practices Heathenry, which is a modern religion/group of religions (despite what some might say) based on the historical pre-Christian/polytheist traditions of Germanic-speaking tribes. I am an Anglo-Saxon Heathen, and so base my practice loosely on the traditions of the Anglo-Saxon English (together with some Norse, post-Christian/Norman English, and Welsh stories and folklore.) Some other forms are Asatru (more strictly Norse Heathenry with an emphasis on the Aesir), Forn Sidu/Fyrn Siðr/Forn Sed (which I think tends to focus on more regional matters and folklore), and Theodism (which places more of an emphasis on tribal structure and reconstructionist, i.e., historically accurate, approaches). And yes, Heathenry is also under the Pagan umbrella. (All Heathens are Pagans, but not all Pagans are Heathens.)

I should point out that I'm from California, and the overculture here has a far more accepting (or at least tolerant) attitude towards religious diversity than, say, the South. I've never personally heard the word "pagan" used in its derogatory sense, and only heard "heathen" used in that sense in fiction.

 

[RamaRaksha]

With a lowercase "p", pagan is kind of derogatory, or at least used to be, as it was a synonym for "unorthodox", with connotations of, well, "stupid, dirty, backward peasants." Same with lowercase "h" heathen. They were used of anyone who didn't fit the established orthodoxy (or were just lower on the social ladder), including certain Christians.

However, with uppercase letters, Pagan (and Heathen) have been reclaimed as legitimate religious identities. That's not unprecedented; the term "Christian" was once a derogatory term that was reclaimed by its practitioners, as well.

If you're curious, a Pagan, or sometimes alternatively a Neopagan, is (broadly speaking) someone who practices any religion that is linked in some way to the historical pre-Christian traditions of Europe, or sometimes to pre-Islamic religions such as Kemeticism (Egyptian polytheism); or, a Pagan is someone who identifies as a Pagan. Some examples are Wicca, Hellenismos, Druidry (sort of), Celtic Recon, etc. (Sometimes Hinduism, and other East Asian indigenous religions, are lumped into the "Pagan" identity, though that's largely based on personal identity rather than hard classification, which is still up for debate.) Though whether Pagan and Neopagan are actually synonymous or not is something that's not wholly agreed upon in our communities.

A Heathen is someone who practices Heathenry, which is a modern religion/group of religions (despite what some might say) based on the historical pre-Christian/polytheist traditions of Germanic-speaking tribes. I am an Anglo-Saxon Heathen, and so base my practice loosely on the traditions of the Anglo-Saxon English (together with some Norse, post-Christian/Norman English, and Welsh stories and folklore.) Some other forms are Asatru (more strictly Norse Heathenry with an emphasis on the Aesir), Forn Sidu/Fyrn Siðr/Forn Sed (which I think tends to focus on more regional matters and folklore), and Theodism (which places more of an emphasis on tribal structure and reconstructionist, i.e., historically accurate, approaches). And yes, Heathenry is also under the Pagan umbrella. (All Heathens are Pagans, but not all Pagans are Heathens.)

I should point out that I'm from California, and the overculture here has a far more accepting (or at least tolerant) attitude towards religious diversity than, say, the South. I've never personally heard the word "pagan" used in its derogatory sense, and only heard "heathen" used in that sense in fiction.

I have said that before that these words are hate words - look them up in the dictionary - there is nothing complimentary about them. You are right that these are umbrella terms - my suggestion - why use them? Why not simply use the religious names as they are instead of lumping them under Pagan, Heathen etc?

I disagree that they are not derogatory - just because you have not heard people using them as such - just look them up in the dictionary - these words are abusive

 

[Riverwolf]

I have said that before that these words are hate words - look them up in the dictionary - there is nothing complimentary about them. You are right that these are umbrella terms - my suggestion - why use them? Why not simply use the religious names as they are instead of lumping them under Pagan, Heathen etc?

I disagree that they are not derogatory - just because you have not heard people using them as such - just look them up in the dictionary - these words are abusive

Read the beginning of the post.

That they were used derogatorily is the exact reason why we've reclaimed them. It's the same reason why they reclaimed the "abuse word" Christian.

They called us that derogatorily. Well, fine, then. We're Pagans. We're Heathens. And by Woden, we're proud Pagans. Hold the Heathen Hammer High!

I'm also a proud nerd and geek, thank you very much.

Here's your dictionary definition:

Pagan
1. (no longer in technical use) one of a people or community observing a polytheistic religion, as the ancient Romans and Greeks.
2. a member of a religious, spiritual, or cultural community based on the worship of nature or the earth; a neopagan.

As for Heathen, its new definition hasn't yet entered the dictionary. However, all that means is that the dictionary is now wrong and needs to be updated. Meanwhile, as an actual Pagan and Heathen, I have a better grasp on the meanings of these words than the dictionary.

 

[Quintessence]

I have said that before that these words are hate words - look them up in the dictionary - there is nothing complimentary about them. You are right that these are umbrella terms - my suggestion - why use them? Why not simply use the religious names as they are instead of lumping them under Pagan, Heathen etc?

What RW said. I'd also like to point out that some people don't have some specific religious name under the umbrella. For a very long time, I simply identified as contemporary Pagan or Neopagan because I was not affiliated with any specific movement within the umbrella.

 

[Etritonakin]

an empty vacuum that houses our galaxy and many others.

What pressing need? There is no religion that has proved anything that isn't open to interpretation.

Angels/spirits are spoken of in scripture -as well as "living creatures" which are apparently not human in at least the temple of God.

It is also written that eye has not seen -nor ear heard -what awaits us.
As far as I know, it is not specified in the bible that there are no other "children of God" -similar to our physical composition -on other planets.

However, it is written that the government of the entire earth -and then universe -perhaps beyond -will be headquartered on earth -beginning with the thousand year reign of Christ and those humans made immortal who will then rule under him.
Earth is unique in that respect according to scripture, and it is at least suggested that the Earth is unique thus far in its state -and the children of God from Earth will eventually oversee the ordering of the universe -having been given bodies which will allow power over even cosmic events.

(Pardon no book/chapter/verse in the following bible quotes -not used to iPad)

****************

Who shall change our vile body, that it may be fashioned like unto his glorious body, according to the working whereby he is able even to subdue all things unto himself.

For the creation was subjected to futility, not willingly, but because of Him who subjected it, in hope 21that the creation itself also will be set free from its slavery to corruption into the freedom of the glory of the children of God.22For we know that the whole creation groans and suffers the pains of childbirth together until now.…

For thus saith the LORD that created the heavens; God himself that formed the earth and made it; he hath established it, he created it not in vain, he formed it to be inhabited: I am the LORD; and there is none else.

Through faith we understand that the worlds were framed by the word of God, so that things which are seen were not made of things which do appear.

…6For a child will be born to us, a son will be given to us; And the government will rest on His shoulders; And His name will be called Wonderful Counselor, Mighty God, Eternal Father, Prince of Peace. 7There will be no end to the increase of His government or of peace, On the throne of David and over his kingdom, To establish it and to uphold it with justice and righteousness From then on and forevermore. The zeal of the LORD of hosts will accomplish this.

2And I saw the holy city, new Jerusalem, coming down out of heaven from God, made ready as a bride adorned for her husband. 3And I heard a loud voice from the throne, saying, "Behold, the tabernacle of God is among men, and He will dwell among them, and they shall be His people, and God Himself will be among them,4and He will wipe away every tear from their eyes; and there will no longer be any death; there will no longer be any mourning, or crying, or pain; the first things have passed away."…

Blessed and holy is the one who has a part in the first resurrection; over these the second death has no power, but they will be priests of God and of Christ and will reign with Him for a thousand years.

*******************
The thousand years is the time between the first and second resurrections (those in Christ at the first -the rest of the dead to judgment/purification at the second [when some will be saved "yet so as by fire]).
Though a thousand years is specified for those who reign with him, his reign will be eternal -and those who reign with him will be part of his government eternally (technically, everyone/everything will be part of his government) in some capacity.

 

[Ben Dhyan]

an empty vacuum that houses our galaxy and many others.

Not correct...have you heard of zpe (zero point energy) and or dark energy...they are probably the same medium that is omnipresent.... http://www.calphysics.org/zpe.html

 

[RamaRaksha]

Read the beginning of the post.

That they were used derogatorily is the exact reason why we've reclaimed them. It's the same reason why they reclaimed the "abuse word" Christian.

They called us that derogatorily. Well, fine, then. We're Pagans. We're Heathens. And by Woden, we're proud Pagans. Hold the Heathen Hammer High!

I'm also a proud nerd and geek, thank you very much.

Here's your dictionary definition:

Pagan
1. (no longer in technical use) one of a people or community observing a polytheistic religion, as the ancient Romans and Greeks.
2. a member of a religious, spiritual, or cultural community based on the worship of nature or the earth; a neopagan.

As for Heathen, its new definition hasn't yet entered the dictionary. However, all that means is that the dictionary is now wrong and needs to be updated. Meanwhile, as an actual Pagan and Heathen, I have a better grasp on the meanings of these words than the dictionary.

I have come across other definitions - basically anyone not belonging to Abrahamic faiths - fair enough - that's not bad, but then it also stands for someone who only cares about physical pleasures, drink and sex, heathen yes and some other abusive terms

Fact is if someone calls you a drunkard, would you claim that word as a label? That word was never meant to be a compliment - try asking a christian or a muslim to compliment another religion - these were never meant to compliment other religions - that's not how they came up - look at their history - they talk about love but their history is littered with mass murders of those not of their religion - they condemn non-members to eternal hell - that is the mindset where these words are coming from

Fact is that you are using an umbrella term because face it, your religion is not very popular and not have enough members? If they mock your religion as a cult, would you be as proud to embrace it?

Numbers and popularity don't make for a religion - your religion has a name - use it.

 

[jeager106]

What religions acknowledge the existence of space for what it is? ( by the o.p)

Just offhand I know of no major religions that give much time to a discussion
of space.
Strange question to ask on a religious discussion forum.
I feel that life on other planets is pretty much a given but what has that to do
with religion on earth in the hear and now???

If there were contact with an intelligent alien race I'd be most interested
in the alien view of a higher power.

Then again perhaps God and the Heavenly spirit creatures are and always
have been "the aliens".
Maybe we speculate of things already in our face?

 

[RedStorm]

What religions acknowledge the existence of space for what it is? ( by the o.p)

Just offhand I know of no major religions that give much time to a discussion
of space.
Strange question to ask on a religious discussion forum.
I feel that life on other planets is pretty much a given but what has that to do
with religion on earth in the hear and now???

If there were contact with an intelligent alien race I'd be most interested
in the alien view of a higher power.

Then again perhaps God and the Heavenly spirit creatures are and always
have been "the aliens".
Maybe we speculate of things already in our face?

I use to think that the gods of old were aliens, there seems to be a lot of references to that. I could definitely still believe that.

 

[jeager106]

I use to think that the gods of old were aliens, there seems to be a lot of references to that. I could definitely still believe that.

I can buy into that. In fact I've considered often when watching Ancient Aliens.
How do we know "god and angles" and such aren't aliens?

 

[Neo Deist]

The bible doesn't mention Aliens, so the beliefs Christians have regarding them are just speculation.

That's because the scrolls that make up the Bible were written thousands of years ago, by primitive people that did not have telescopes or microscopes. They thought the earth was the center of the universe, and that creation was the earth, sky, sun, moon and stars. That was the limit of their knowledge. Ancient man simply did not know any better.

We now know that the earth is not the center of the universe (galaxy or solar system for that matter), the sun and moon do not revolve around it (rising/setting), and that it is not flat with a danger of falling off the edge if you get too close.

There are BILLIONS of planets within our galaxy, and there are BILLIONS of galaxies within the visible universe. The odds that we are the only planet with life on it are astronomically small.

 

[Riverwolf]

I have come across other definitions - basically anyone not belonging to Abrahamic faiths - fair enough - that's not bad, but then it also stands for someone who only cares about physical pleasures, drink and sex, heathen yes and some other abusive terms

Fact is if someone calls you a drunkard, would you claim that word as a label?

False equivalence.

That word was never meant to be a compliment - try asking a christian or a muslim to compliment another religion - these were never meant to compliment other religions - that's not how they came up - look at their history - they talk about love but their history is littered with mass murders of those not of their religion - they condemn non-members to eternal hell - that is the mindset where these words are coming from

So? Words change meanings over time. Remember, "Christian" started out as a derogatory term, as well.

The very fact that it's not supposed to be a compliment is the reason we reclaim it.

Fact is that you are using an umbrella term because face it, your religion is not very popular and not have enough members?

You're not reading my posts in their entireties, are you?

We use the umbrella term of Paganism precicely because of the diversity. As I said earlier, some examples of Pagan religions, that proudly self-identify as Pagan religions, are Hellenismos, Religio Romana, Celtic Recon, Heathenry, Wicca, Druidry, Kemeticism, and many others.

If they mock your religion as a cult, would you be as proud to embrace it?

You're approaching this too much on an individual level.

We reclaimed these terms as communities. Not as individuals.

Numbers and popularity don't make for a religion - your religion has a name - use it.

I do use its name. That name is Heathenry.

And if you have a problem with us (not me; us) using that term, deal with it. It's not your place, or anyone else's, to tell us what we should or shouldn't call ourselves, as long as we're not appropriating any of your words in doing so.

 

[RamaRaksha]

That's because the scrolls that make up the Bible were written thousands of years ago, by primitive people that did not have telescopes or microscopes. They thought the earth was the center of the universe, and that creation was the earth, sky, sun, moon and stars. That was the limit of their knowledge. Ancient man simply did not know any better

We now know that the earth is not the center of the universe (galaxy or solar system for that matter), the sun and moon do not revolve around it (rising/setting), and that it is not flat with a danger of falling off the edge if you get too close.

There are BILLIONS of planets within our galaxy, and there are BILLIONS of galaxies within the visible universe. The odds that we are the only planet with life on it are astronomically small.

The only disturbing thing is that there have been billions of life forms that have come and gone on this little planet but we seem to the the only one so far that have evolved so much to create our world - no other life form on this planet comes even remotely close

So, yes life might and i think must exist in other planets - we ourselves could have come from other planets, other solar systems - but is life in other planets in this galaxy just small animals and plants and none like ours?

 

[Riverwolf]

I use to think that the gods of old were aliens, there seems to be a lot of references to that. I could definitely still believe that.

It's HIGHLY unlikely. Most of those hypotheses are based on misunderstandings of other cultures' iconography and histories, and in some cases, outright fabrication of facts.

 

[Neo Deist]

The only disturbing thing is that there have been billions of life forms that have come and gone on this little planet but we seem to the the only one so far that have evolved so much to create our world - no other life form on this planet comes even remotely close

So, yes life might and i think must exist in other planets - we ourselves could have come from other planets, other solar systems - but is life in other planets in this galaxy just small animals and plants and none like ours?

No one can say because we do not have the technology to travel to other planets outside of our solar system. We are mere infants when it comes to space exploration.