Secular Spirituality

[EyeofOdin]

Coming from a heathen who considers himself very spiritual and religiously reverent, I'm also very secular and I wish other religious people would be so too.

I never accept or believe in anything unless it's a proven fact (recreated or observed without room for question). Spiritual entities are not factual (although by definition, having some evidence with varying degrees of strength, we can consider spirit theoretical).

What I know: I go to my personal altar sometimes, say words which most would say is an invokation to deities (ex Thor and Odin), then give offerings on the altar to Odin and Thor, ask for something, say a conclusion to the ritual and leave the altar. I then see that it appears as if entities are answering by the names of Odin and Thor and they both appear to either give a clear, coincidental and timely omen denying my request or it's given to me in the same manner.

Conclusion: I personally theorize that Odin and Thor exist on some level and have responded to my pagan ritual. Other deities may exist too, possibly all of them, but I can't say for sure nor theorize because I haven't seen any evidence. I can't say these gods definitely exist because there is room for error.

So do I BELIEVE the heathen gods exist? No. I don't believe in anything I can't say I know is proven to be factual, and I've never observed a deity without room for error. Do I THINK gods exist? I think they may exist, but I'm not pretending to know based on "faith".

The same goes for afterlife. COULD I go to Valhalla after death in spiritual form, spending the rest of time being served food and alcohol by Valkyrie goddesses and spending that time with the god of war, magic and death? Sure, just as possibly I could go to Heaven, Hell, Elysium, experience nirvana or cease to exist as a conscious person. I've never been dead, talked to a dead person or someone's who's been dead and the "dying" be without room for error. I don't know what happens after death, and I don't pretend to know "in my heart" or "with faith". I don't think with my heart or by faith. That's for emotions and thinking with emotions leads to irrationality. I think with my brain, logic, science and rationality. All I know is what's been recreated or observed and what's here and now. The rest varies from lies to conjecture to well supported theories.

So basically, I think we need to at least accept spirit as being in the same realm as macro-evolution. They have strong evidence and are a good possibility to reality, but we don't know to be for sure "factual". As far as we know FOR SURE, religion is made up of cultural stories, internal emotions, worship of abstract entities and sometimes really spooky stuff which could be authentically from or caused by said spirits or coincidence.

 

[Kirran]

To be honest, I think we should keep spirit separate from such things as evolution. The former is very subjective, while the study of the latter is less so.

This is by no means to denigrate, or subtract from your experience, but I think that religious and spiritual experiences are more personal and more variable. They aren't to be quantified.

 

[serp777]

Coming from a heathen who considers himself very spiritual and religiously reverent, I'm also very secular and I wish other religious people would be so too.

I never accept or believe in anything unless it's a proven fact (recreated or observed without room for question). Spiritual entities are not factual (although by definition, having some evidence with varying degrees of strength, we can consider spirit theoretical).

What I know: I go to my personal altar sometimes, say words which most would say is an invokation to deities (ex Thor and Odin), then give offerings on the altar to Odin and Thor, ask for something, say a conclusion to the ritual and leave the altar. I then see that it appears as if entities are answering by the names of Odin and Thor and they both appear to either give a clear, coincidental and timely omen denying my request or it's given to me in the same manner.

Conclusion: I personally theorize that Odin and Thor exist on some level and have responded to my pagan ritual. Other deities may exist too, possibly all of them, but I can't say for sure nor theorize because I haven't seen any evidence. I can't say these gods definitely exist because there is room for error.

So do I BELIEVE the heathen gods exist? No. I don't believe in anything I can't say I know is proven to be factual, and I've never observed a deity without room for error. Do I THINK gods exist? I think they may exist, but I'm not pretending to know based on "faith".

The same goes for afterlife. COULD I go to Valhalla after death in spiritual form, spending the rest of time being served food and alcohol by Valkyrie goddesses and spending that time with the god of war, magic and death? Sure, just as possibly I could go to Heaven, Hell, Elysium, experience nirvana or cease to exist as a conscious person. I've never been dead, talked to a dead person or someone's who's been dead and the "dying" be without room for error. I don't know what happens after death, and I don't pretend to know "in my heart" or "with faith". I don't think with my heart or by faith. That's for emotions and thinking with emotions leads to irrationality. I think with my brain, logic, science and rationality. All I know is what's been recreated or observed and what's here and now. The rest varies from lies to conjecture to well supported theories.

So basically, I think we need to at least accept spirit as being in the same realm as macro-evolution. They have strong evidence and are a good possibility to reality, but we don't know to be for sure "factual". As far as we know FOR SURE, religion is made up of cultural stories, internal emotions, worship of abstract entities and sometimes really spooky stuff which could be authentically from or caused by said spirits or coincidence.

I see your post full of irreconcilable contradictions. What's more likely--that odin and thor exist or that you simply had a delusion/hallucinations, like so many sane humans have? I may have had some hallucinations under certain conditions, but just because I thought I saw something doesn't mean I believe its true. You seem like you demand a good amount of evidence, which is sensible, but then suddenly some weird perceptual experience convinces you that thor and odin could very possibly be real? You seem much too intelligent to make such a determination. And how are you able to determine a so called "timely omen" over say the much more likely coincidence and/or a pattern seeking type 1 error? Timely omens are not consistent with your demand for rigorous evidence. And just because a timely omen happened doesn't make thor or oden real in the slightest. Its also illogical that deities would communicate through arbitrary and ambiguous omens which could easily cause false positives or be missed entirely. And furthermore, What reason would thor or odin have to personally answer your prayers? Its seems very petty of them.

In conclusion you're simply looking into things way too much. You're finding patterns where none exist--just like our ancestors who assumed a predator was in a bush even when only the wind caused a rustle, and just like all religions, which is why we have so many mutually exclusive religions.

 

[Rick O'Shez]

So basically, I think we need to at least accept spirit as being in the same realm as macro-evolution. They have strong evidence and are a good possibility to reality, but we don't know to be for sure "factual".

What is the "strong evidence" for spirit?

Also could you say what you mean by "secular spirituality"? Do you mean non-religious spirituality, and if so could you describe what that looks like in practice?

 

[LuisDantas]

I fear that however well-meaning the idea of secular spirituality may be (and it seems at first glance to be quite a bit so), in most situations secular is understood to simply mean "not religious", and therefore there will be a lot of confusion about the exact meaning of that idea.

Also, it should be recognized that "macro-evolution" is not at all a matter of belief, except perhaps for the origin and emphasis on that specific naming. It is just not comparable to spirits.

 

[EyeofOdin]

I see your post full of irreconcilable contradictions. What's more likely--that odin and thor exist or that you simply had a delusion/hallucinations, like so many sane humans have? I may have had some hallucinations under certain conditions, but just because I thought I saw something doesn't mean I believe its true. You seem like you demand a good amount of evidence, which is sensible, but then suddenly some weird perceptual experience convinces you that thor and odin could very possibly be real? You seem much too intelligent to make such a determination. And how are you able to determine a so called "timely omen" over say the much more likely coincidence and/or a pattern seeking type 1 error? Timely omens are not consistent with your demand for rigorous evidence. And just because a timely omen happened doesn't make thor or oden real in the slightest. Its also illogical that deities would communicate through arbitrary and ambiguous omens which could easily cause false positives or be missed entirely. And furthermore, What reason would thor or odin have to personally answer your prayers? Its seems very petty of them.

In conclusion you're simply looking into things way too much. You're finding patterns where none exist--just like our ancestors who assumed a predator was in a bush even when only the wind caused a rustle, and just like all religions, which is why we have so many mutually exclusive religions.

Let me rephrase. I do the rituals because it looks like I've gotten results from them and I keep doing them based on the theory (with the evidence of the events said in the ritual happening, the things asked for suddenly being owned by me or an event that's completely the opposite of events which would imply said entities in ritual are saying "no" to whatever request and never anything in between) that gods answering the names Odin and Thor will keep seemingly responding. By definition, I cannot call anything factual except for what I'm doing and what I experience, but not the gods themselves nor anything spiritual, because spirit hasn't been remade or observed, which is necessary to make a "theory" a "fact", and I only believe in facts.

I would like to think these entities exist and are interacting with me, but the only evidence is mythology and events which could just as likely be coincidences. How can I call it a fact? And why would I believe wholly in something not factual? And why would I do anything but speculate but be open to theories? Being a personal theory, I've seen good evidence, but I can't call anything but what I see factual.

It's the same way how gravity or macro evolution aren't factual, aren't theoretical. Nobody's observed or remade gravity, but objects consistently fall as evidence. Micro evolution, species evolving over time, is factual, as it's been seen without room for error. Macro evolution, the first life forms branching out into all earth's species throughout life's history, is a theory. We have the fossils and genetics but we can't practically prove it because we can't observe a bacterium species evolving into an elephant practically.

When it boils down to it though, although I don't accept any of the mentioned theories as facts, I am of the opinion that the *most likely* but *not definite* conclusions are the gods are real, so is gravity and we come from a walking fish. Do I know that? Idk, wasn't there, and I prefer knowledge over faith.

I know the popular Yahweh allegedly makes faith a virtue according to Christians and deity submission to the Muslims, but it's said the Heathen Gods and Goddesses don't think highly of those who honor or make themselves a slave to gods or goddesses without evidence or a real need and applaud the pensive secular, even if he were an atheist or venerate a different culture's god(s).

 

[Kirran]

In science, a theory is a body of established facts which is consistent as an explanation for existing evidence.

Just to clear up the definition here.

 

[EyeofOdin]

What is the "strong evidence" for spirit?

Also could you say what you mean by "secular spirituality"? Do you mean non-religious spirituality, and if so could you describe what that looks like in practice?

No I mean realistic religion, where people practice not because they blindly accepted the ideological filter that was downloaded into their brains from infancy involving blind faith (which Heathens equate with ignorance) but because they have convincing UPG, leaving spirit the most likely answer.

I'm just saying, the atheists are right. People who say things like "in my heart of hearts and in my faith in Jesus Christ, I know the bible is factual" or "I believe in my god because I know for a fact that he's real (based on nothing but happy thoughts)" sound really ignorant and are giving all religious people a bad rep.

 

[EyeofOdin]

In science, a theory is a body of established facts which is consistent as an explanation for existing evidence.

Just to clear up the definition here.

In science, a theory is a body of established facts which is consistent as an explanation for existing evidence.

Just to clear up the definition here.

Thank you!

 

[EyeofOdin]

I fear that however well-meaning the idea of secular spirituality may be (and it seems at first glance to be quite a bit so), in most situations secular is understood to simply mean "not religious", and therefore there will be a lot of confusion about the exact meaning of that idea.

Also, it should be recognized that "macro-evolution" is not at all a matter of belief, except perhaps for the origin and emphasis on that specific naming. It is just not comparable to spirits.

I know macro evolution isn't a matter of belief. That's my point.

 

[EyeofOdin]

To be honest, I think we should keep spirit separate from such things as evolution. The former is very subjective, while the study of the latter is less so.

This is by no means to denigrate, or subtract from your experience, but I think that religious and spiritual experiences are more personal and more variable. They aren't to be quantified.

I agree. As a whole, there shouldn't be anything spiritual accepted as a fact. I'm talking about justification for personal adherence. I'm saying if your justification is blind faith, you've drunk the kool-aid, and my community and I don't consider faith an honorable virtue. You did something without any reason other than someone else told you it's a good idea. Are you gonna jump off a bridge too? Okay, a little extreme... If it hadn't happened many times before. "To drink the kool-aid" actually comes from a cult which killed itself because the members knowingly poisoned themselves with poisoned kool-aid. Why? They had faith the person telling them to was right.

 

[Unveiled Artist]

In your first part, I noticed that Thor and Ordin answered your request at the altar. The latter half is disproving this as non factual. Do you know you recieved an answer from these Gods or do you think or wish you do and by coinsedence the answers appeared?

I agree completely that we must know our beliefs as facts. I did a thread of asking people to sharw their beliefs as facts. Two and two doesnt have room for error. Religious experience does.

Religious experience is not based on facts no matter how hard they make Jesus promiss real and mythological Gods exist, there is an error because one, we cant go back in time and two because so we only know these things by stories.

It helps to find a faith that can help you. Its healthy to find one that is rational. However, many religions are not like that and we have to accept that if we are to base our life on it.

Coming from a heathen who considers himself very spiritual and religiously reverent, I'm also very secular and I wish other religious people would be so too.

I never accept or believe in anything unless it's a proven fact (recreated or observed without room for question). Spiritual entities are not factual (although by definition, having some evidence with varying degrees of strength, we can consider spirit theoretical).

What I know: I go to my personal altar sometimes, say words which most would say is an invokation to deities (ex Thor and Odin), then give offerings on the altar to Odin and Thor, ask for something, say a conclusion to the ritual and leave the altar. I then see that it appears as if entities are answering by the names of Odin and Thor and they both appear to either give a clear, coincidental and timely omen denying my request or it's given to me in the same manner.

Conclusion: I personally theorize that Odin and Thor exist on some level and have responded to my pagan ritual. Other deities may exist too, possibly all of them, but I can't say for sure nor theorize because I haven't seen any evidence. I can't say these gods definitely exist because there is room for error.

So do I BELIEVE the heathen gods exist? No. I don't believe in anything I can't say I know is proven to be factual, and I've never observed a deity without room for error. Do I THINK gods exist? I think they may exist, but I'm not pretending to know based on "faith".

The same goes for afterlife. COULD I go to Valhalla after death in spiritual form, spending the rest of time being served food and alcohol by Valkyrie goddesses and spending that time with the god of war, magic and death? Sure, just as possibly I could go to Heaven, Hell, Elysium, experience nirvana or cease to exist as a conscious person. I've never been dead, talked to a dead person or someone's who's been dead and the "dying" be without room for error. I don't know what happens after death, and I don't pretend to know "in my heart" or "with faith". I don't think with my heart or by faith. That's for emotions and thinking with emotions leads to irrationality. I think with my brain, logic, science and rationality. All I know is what's been recreated or observed and what's here and now. The rest varies from lies to conjecture to well supported theories.

So basically, I think we need to at least accept spirit as being in the same realm as macro-evolution. They have strong evidence and are a good possibility to reality, but we don't know to be for sure "factual". As far as we know FOR SURE, religion is made up of cultural stories, internal emotions, worship of abstract entities and sometimes really spooky stuff which could be authentically from or caused by said spirits or coincidence.