Somewhere between paganism and atheism

[dgirl1986]

I have previously been a pagan, and have been atheist for the last few years. I still do not believe in gods as literal beings and my default position is to look at scientific evidence but I always feel my old paganism tugging at the corners of my mind.

Thoughts on this? Are there atheist pagans or pagan atheists here? Am I making myself cray cray?

 

[Quintessence]

I don't understand this "gods as literal beings" talk. I strongly suspect this perspective is a hangover from teachings from classical monotheist religions, and in particular mythological literalism that became the rage in certain Christian circles and unfortunately has a dominant voice in dialogues about theology in Western culture. As far as I'm aware, such mythological literalism simply had no place in the Paganisms of the past, and I see no reason to apply that Christian idea to Paganisms of contemporary times.

Seems to me that if you worship (aka, honor, venerate, deeply value, give praise to) something, those are your gods whether they are labeled as such or not. Ritual worship is one of the hearts of Paganisms, historical or contemporary. If one isn't worshiping anything, then yes, one would be an atheist... and also not Pagan (to my mind). However, virtually all "atheist" Pagans I've dialogued with worship things. For whatever reason, they don't/can't view the things they celebrate as gods and don't/can't view themselves as theists in spite of behaving exactly like theists. To me, atheist Pagan is an oxymoron. Most of the folks who call themselves that to my view are really theists (because they are worshiping things, and gods are that which a person or culture deems worthy of worship). And if they aren't, they're probably armchair Pagans or scholars of Pagan religions, not religious devotees.

All that said, I find the whole "theist" and "atheist" labels useless and too problematic to be worth salvaging. I think it sets up an overly-simplistic starting point for dialogues as well as false dichotomy considering the ideas evoked by "theism" tend to be limited to Abrahamic/monotheist conceptions in my culture. Kinda wish the words would go away.

 

[VioletVortex]

Most Pagans are not literalists. We range from deists to pantheists. To me, the gods exist on varying levels, starting with the symbolic level, and up to an energetic level, meaning the gods are forces which we personify to make them more relatable.

 

[The Kilted Heathen]

From my experience yes, most Pagans are literalists. We believe the gods to be actual beings and intelligences - rather than Jungian archetypes. We don't believe Thor to literally be a red-bearded, physical person walking around the clouds, but we believe him to absolutely be there.

With that said, though, there are atheistic Pagans who view the gods as metaphors, symbols, yet still are immersed in the culture and find practical application. They honor their ancestors (atheistic doesn't mean non-spiritual), and take part in practical festivals.

 

[lovesong]

It seems to me that most of us are literalists, at least so far as to say that the gods are true, sentient, individual beings. There's no reason to assume that ancient peoples were not literalists, in fact I would argue that they took the stories of the gods in a much more literal way than we do today. They didn't have the same scientific understanding of the world that we do, and we have overwhelming evidence of sincere devotions to the gods in ways that just wouldn't make sense if they weren't believed to be true beings. This being said, I don't think literalism, or theism at all, is necessary; there are plenty of folks that prefer to take a more metaphoric approach to it. I would just like to point out that if science is conflicting with theism for you, remember that the two can coexist; the gods don't have to negate science and science doesn't have to negate the gods. But whatever you decide, don't stress yourself out, just do what feels right and enjoy yourself.

 

[VioletVortex]

From my experience yes, most Pagans are literalists. We believe the gods to be actual beings and intelligences - rather than Jungian archetypes. We don't believe Thor to literally be a red-bearded, physical person walking around the clouds, but we believe him to absolutely be there.

With that said, though, there are atheistic Pagans who view the gods as metaphors, symbols, yet still are immersed in the culture and find practical application. They honor their ancestors (atheistic doesn't mean non-spiritual), and take part in practical festivals.

Yes, most do believe in the deities as energies, but they are personifications of such forces, not literal physical beings. That was what I meant. The line is blurry for me, though.

 

[The Kilted Heathen]

Every Pagan that I've ever met and spoken with believes them to be literal beings, with various physical manifestations in this reality.

 

[VioletVortex]

Every Pagan that I've ever met and spoken with believes them to be literal beings, with various physical manifestations in this reality.

Do you mean that you believe they exist physically as extradimensional beings, or beings transcendent of dimension?

I think that these forces exist in our world due to an overlap between our dimension and another. It's not a complete overlap, which is why they present themselves as very elusive energies.

 

[The Kilted Heathen]

We (myself and those I've spoken with) believe the Gods to be individual beings that are both spiritual and made manifest through various aspects of this reality. However that translates out; I don't like mucking up what is said and believed with unnecessary jargon.

 

[VioletVortex]

We (myself and those I've spoken with) believe the Gods to be individual beings that are both spiritual and made manifest through various aspects of this reality. However that translates out; I don't like mucking up what is said and believed with unnecessary jargon.

I just don't see why there should have to be one specific theological philosophy (meaning view on the reality of the deities) one has to adhere to in Paganism. The gods do manifest themselves as aspects of nature, I think that is inarguably true throughout Paganism.

Again, I have a LHP perspective.

 

[dgirl1986]

I guess it is seen as horrific if you combine paganism with other things.

 

[The Kilted Heathen]

Again, I have a LHP perspective.

Hammer, you don't need to keep telling me that you coming from a LHP perspective. I know this. I don't forget it every day. But I'll tell you here, now, that Heathenry doesn't have "left hand" or "right hand" paths. We have frith and not frith, peace and hostility, defense of inner-yard against outer-yard, and returning actions in like turn.

So far as how the Gods are seen, you can view it however you want. But know that it's your view. My own view differs from many Heathens that I associate with. What I disagreed with was your claim in Post #6 where you said that "most view the gods as energy personifications" or some such. Which is a statement that cannot be quantified or validated, and speaks for an awful lot of people.

I guess it is seen as horrific if you combine paganism with other things.

Not horrific, just sometimes foolish. There are some things that are just as water and oil, and will never mix. Other are as oil and vinegar, and while they may seem to mix for a while, it never lasts.

 

[VioletVortex]

Hammer, you don't need to keep telling me that you coming from a LHP perspective. I know this. I don't forget it every day. But I'll tell you here, now, that Heathenry doesn't have "left hand" or "right hand" paths. We have frith and not frith, peace and hostility, defense of inner-yard against outer-yard, and returning actions in like turn.

So far as how the Gods are seen, you can view it however you want. But know that it's your view. My own view differs from many Heathens that I associate with. What I disagreed with was your claim in Post #6 where you said that "most view the gods as energy personifications" or some such. Which is a statement that cannot be quantified or validated, and speaks for an awful lot of people.


Not horrific, just sometimes foolish. There are some things that are just as water and oil, and will never mix. Other are as oil and vinegar, and while they may seem to mix for a while, it never lasts.

No religions have a Left Hand or Right Hand Path. It's more about how one is viewing the religion, the "path" is a personal way of viewing it. I know I present myself as a pompous know it all. I don't mean to assert that I am objectively right, or that I have some sort of authority in Paganism. Let's face it, I'm new to Paganism, having called myself one for about 8 months now. I know very little other than what I see from my own point of view.

Paganism is compatible with some religions. Pardon my controversial statement, but I think it is compatible with other Pagan religions, Satanism (debatably a form of Paganism), and various philosophies. It is not, however, anything to be fused with Abrahamic religions. I think that the very philosophies of these two religions conflict with each other greatly.

 

[The Kilted Heathen]

Paganism is compatible with some religions. Pardon my controversial statement, but I think it is compatible with other Pagan religions, Satanism (debatably a form of Paganism), and various philosophies. It is not, however, anything to be fused with Abrahamic religions. I think that the very philosophies of these two religions conflict with each other greatly.

It depends. From a Heathen perspective, Celtic religions mesh okay-ish. Slavic religions are often considered Heathen, but not always, yet they mesh quite well. Greek and Roman have a few more problems with compatibility, as their rituals and gods have significant differences.

Arguably, and just as controversially, Satanism is an offshoot of Abrahamism. You will find very few who would consider it a form of Modern Paganism. And from disagreements that we've had here, I'm not certain at all that it's very compatible with numerous branches of Paganism. There are certainly clashes with Heathenry that cut to the core of Heathen ethics.

 

[dgirl1986]

.Not horrific, just sometimes foolish. There are some things that are just as water and oil, and will never mix. Other are as oil and vinegar, and while they may seem to mix for a while, it never lasts.

I am looking at possibly combining paganism with my non belief of gods (atheism), environmentalism, humanism, science stuff and psychology knowledge. Does that make sense? *prepares for flaming and being called an idiot*

 

[The Kilted Heathen]

I am looking at possibly combining paganism with my non belief of gods (atheism), environmentalism, humanism, science stuff and psychology knowledge. Does that make sense?

It does, and quite a few Pagans do just that. While they don't literally believe in the gods, they usually view them as metaphors or poetic personifications (kind of like America's Lady Liberty and Columbia), and still observe Pagan holidays which overall coincide with the cycle of the year. It is possible to do with little conflict or drama.

 

[VioletVortex]

It depends. From a Heathen perspective, Celtic religions mesh okay-ish. Slavic religions are often considered Heathen, but not always, yet they mesh quite well. Greek and Roman have a few more problems with compatibility, as their rituals and gods have significant differences.

Arguably, and just as controversially, Satanism is an offshoot of Abrahamism. You will find very few who would consider it a form of Modern Paganism. And from disagreements that we've had here, I'm not certain at all that it's very compatible with numerous branches of Paganism. There are certainly clashes with Heathenry that cut to the core of Heathen ethics.

Abrahamism itself is a distortion of Egyptian polytheism to begin with. It's not even valid as an "original religion". Yahweh is essentially Ra. Satan in the bible was probably a composite character of various gods and devils, some of Indo-European origin, others of Middle Eastern etc. The name was probably applied to several deities, and they all ran together eventually into one devil.

 

[The Kilted Heathen]

Canaanite, actually. Who had interactions with Egyptian, but it's different. Yahweh is a sky god, whereas Ra is more associated with the sun. Satan in the bible (Ha-Satan) is actually an angel, not a deity at all, and his name applies to him alone. Disagree with it though you might, it's also very biased to say that Abrahamism is "not a valid religion," else the same could be said of many - Satanism included.

 

[VioletVortex]

I am looking at possibly combining paganism with my non belief of gods (atheism), environmentalism, humanism, science stuff and psychology knowledge. Does that make sense? *prepares for flaming and being called an idiot*

It is my view that Pagans and Satanists who refer to themselves as atheists are actually slight theists. So yes, you could be "an atheist and a Pagan at the same time". It is essentially the deification of archetypes and ideas, and in that sense, it is a form of deism. Whether or not it is theism, however, is debatable. LaVeyan Satanism does these, and while it holds rather strongly that it is an atheistic movement, it really has some theistic leanings. Many Pagans and Satanists have a fear of calling themselves theists as they associate that with Christianity.

Environmentalism and Paganism go hand in hand, with nature being a significant way to the gods. Humanism could be considered more relatable to Satanism, which holds that "Satan is within man". Spiritualituitself is a pseudoscience, and definitely somewhat compatible with mainstream science. Lastly, psychology is a major part of spirituality.