Theweirdtophat
Well-Known Member
It's not about what is accurate, but believing in something and holding onto that belief as it helps people keep going.
-
Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:- Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
- Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
- Access to private conversations with other members.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!
Why do you believe?
- Thread starter TruthSeekers
- Start date
It's not about what is accurate, but believing in something and holding onto that belief as it helps people keep going.
Because I don't believe in a single overarching supreme being, entity or condition that is omnipotent, omniscient, and omnipresent. It doesn't make sense to me. Rather, I believe there are a host of gods, goddesses and spirits throughout the universe(s) in many shapes and forms and with many names. They are not omnipotent, omniscient, or omnipresent. Not all of them are benevolent either. Some are downright nasty.
TruthSeekers
New Member
The 911 hijackers held on to their beliefs. They truly believed they were doing God's will. Does this make their actions correct and the beliefs valid?
The question is based on the false assumption that polytheists believe their religion is the only valid one, and that we want to make others believe it. Nothing could be further from the truth. Polytheists' attitudes tend to be "you have your gods, I have my gods, maybe they'll do lunch [sometimes syncretizing and combining pantheons], and it's all good".
TruthSeekers
New Member
Why do you believe this? Is it important to you that your beliefs are correct? Or is it more important to just believe in something?
Poseidon is not only the god of the sea, he is the sea; Thor is not only the god of thunder he is thunder; Vayu is not only the god of air and wind, he is air and wind; Agni is not only the god of fire, he is fire. Because these things exists, the gods exist.
Theweirdtophat
Well-Known Member
It's a bit of an exaggeration. What I mean is various people that believe what they want. However if they harm innocents, that's already a give away that their beliefs are wrong from the start. Morally logically and ethically. Really, I doubt they even believed in their extremist views and know deep down it's wrong but use it as an excuse to hurt others.
For the reason that you know. (It has much to do with where I live). It doesn't make much sense to me, a woman, to choose Allah, or Mohamud actually. I suspect Allah is another name for Jehovah. The only thing I have heard about Krishna is to stir a pot one must stir in only one direction. It is much is too easy to break that rule. I do not know if it is a real rule and I was thinking of asking sometime. So, I'm asking. Is there a rule about which way a pot must be stirred? I am a cook.
I think the religion of Jesus Christ is the best choice for women.
TruthSeekers
New Member
LOL, That philosophy is better than most but it does not address the question of what is true. Why do you choose the believe in many Gods or any God? Is there something that has convinced you?
The idea of an overarching omnipotent, omnipresent and omniscient supreme being isn't logical to me. There is a book I recently read called A World Full of Gods An Inquiry Into Polytheism. In it the author, John Michael Greer makes a compelling case for the illogic of monotheism and the logic of polytheism. The book didn't cause me to believe what I do, it supports what I believe, which is correct for me. The way I think, I can't not believe in something.
TruthSeekers
New Member
Yes, my example was extreme. I disagree that "deep down" the hijackers felt their actions were wrong. The point I was trying to make is that unfounded beliefs or false beliefs can be very harmful and not good for humanity. So I am asking you to question your own belief with fresh eyes and tell me why it is true.
Cephus
Relentlessly Rational
So you were indoctrinated and you're unable to give it up?
I think it's pretty much answered here http://www.religiousforums.com/threads/why-do-you-believe.179179/page-2#post-4391639 But as to why I believe in any God(s), The Gods are powers, and we are surrounded by powers (the Holy Powers as we call them). Truth is relative.
Theweirdtophat
Well-Known Member
Even though I'm not really a polytheist, I could see it being more logical than just one all powerful deity. Of course some would have a pantheistic attitude and say everything we see IS God or have a panetheistic attitude and say this universe is inside God and that God is the universe plus more. I think Thor, Isis and various deities existed but I personally didn't believe they were "deities" although they are powerful and I believe they helped make us what we are today. I could understand why some would worship them. I just personally don't even though I don't doubt their existence. I don't doubt that there ARE extremely powerful beings responsible for creation but I personally don't believe the beings written in ancient times were responsible for creating the Earth, us, ect. But I have no problem with those that do worship deities and a lot of them are cool, like Thor, Demeter, ect. I however, tend to work with various nature spirits like animal, stone, and plant spirits.
I just believe that belief is important. It's about having faith and having that faith keep you going on in life. Some try to figure out which religion is right but I don't think that's important. It's not about finding out which religion is right, but trying to find out which religion is right for you.
Heathenism is actually pantheistic because everything does have a divine origin and connection. Here's a pretty good explanation http://norse-mythology.org/concepts/pantheism/ One thing that stands out in Germanic Heathenism is that the gods don't demand or even ask for worship. They're happy to get it, but they have bigger fish to try, what with running the universe and such. The creation myth is just that... a myth. I do not believe any Heathen literally believes that Odin and his brothers slew a giant and created the universe out of the body, or that Odin's grandfather was licked out of ice by a cosmic cow. But Heathens also venerate, revere, worship the spirits of the land, be they stones, trees, waterfalls, etc., as well as the ancestors. In fact, Heathenry is supposed to be more about worshiping the spirits and ancestors than the gods.
Theweirdtophat
Well-Known Member
So it really is kind of pantheistic as well as animistic.
In fact a lot of pagan religions have animistic and pantheistic and sometimes panetheistic ways of life. Panetheism doesn't seem as common for some reason. As far as myths go, I wonder if many of those are metaphors for something else. I believe almost all legends have some truth in them. Otherwise they probably wouldn't be legends in the first place. I could understand how a powerful being might want to be worshipped. However an all powerful deity probably wouldn't want or care about worship if they could accomplish anything with a mere thought.
It is perhaps worth remarking upon something learned in an undergraduate psychology course back in the day.
Let us imagine a group of people are looking at some paintings in an art gallery. The people move from room to room, with some of the paintings appealing to them, and others not. Eventually, each person finds a painting or two that they might call their favorite from the collection. Then, these people are asked to analyze why they chose those paintings as their favorites. They are asked to rationalize a decision that was not rational to begin with, but was a more instinctive, emotional, experiential response to the art. Some of the people asked to rationalize their emotions are able to do so. Unfortunately, as part of that process, something about the painting is disenchanted. It is no longer good enough to simply like the painting just because. There has to be an identifiable reason why they liked the painting. Now, they can no longer look at that painting and experience a simple, raw emotion. Some of these people who were able to rationalize now start questioning why they even liked the painting in the first place. Some of those will then decide they don't like the painting after all, and forget all about that raw, emotional experience they first had. By intellectualizing and rationalizing their experience, they have, in effect, disenchanted it.
Don't get me wrong. There is something to be said for analysis, and there is a time and a place for it. There are also places it doesn't belong, and times where it robs us of the joy of experiencing life. Religion, having more in common with the arts, is often one of those places and times. It is less about analytics than it is about being and experiencing. Our day-to-day experience of life in general is like that, really. The human animal is not about being rational, or logical, or scientific. It's about being emotional, experiential, and passionate. In contemporary culture, the current fashion is to intellectualize everything. We enshrine Enlightenment values. It's not good enough to say just because. We reject Romanticism. It seems that some days, we could be doing a much better job of balancing intellectualizing to prevent over-intellectualizing; of allowing experiences to simply be.
Let us imagine a group of people are looking at some paintings in an art gallery. The people move from room to room, with some of the paintings appealing to them, and others not. Eventually, each person finds a painting or two that they might call their favorite from the collection. Then, these people are asked to analyze why they chose those paintings as their favorites. They are asked to rationalize a decision that was not rational to begin with, but was a more instinctive, emotional, experiential response to the art. Some of the people asked to rationalize their emotions are able to do so. Unfortunately, as part of that process, something about the painting is disenchanted. It is no longer good enough to simply like the painting just because. There has to be an identifiable reason why they liked the painting. Now, they can no longer look at that painting and experience a simple, raw emotion. Some of these people who were able to rationalize now start questioning why they even liked the painting in the first place. Some of those will then decide they don't like the painting after all, and forget all about that raw, emotional experience they first had. By intellectualizing and rationalizing their experience, they have, in effect, disenchanted it.
Don't get me wrong. There is something to be said for analysis, and there is a time and a place for it. There are also places it doesn't belong, and times where it robs us of the joy of experiencing life. Religion, having more in common with the arts, is often one of those places and times. It is less about analytics than it is about being and experiencing. Our day-to-day experience of life in general is like that, really. The human animal is not about being rational, or logical, or scientific. It's about being emotional, experiential, and passionate. In contemporary culture, the current fashion is to intellectualize everything. We enshrine Enlightenment values. It's not good enough to say just because. We reject Romanticism. It seems that some days, we could be doing a much better job of balancing intellectualizing to prevent over-intellectualizing; of allowing experiences to simply be.
So it really is kind of pantheistic as well as animistic.
I could understand how a powerful being might want to be worshipped. However an all powerful deity probably wouldn't want or care about worship if they could accomplish anything with a mere thought.
I agree, panentheism doesn't seem to be common in Paganism. The only polytheistic religion I can think of that has panentheism as an element, among others, is Hinduism. Because Germanic Heathenry doesn't have anything akin to Brahman, the Tao, Jehovah, or Allah, there's nothing to be "in". I'll concede to monism vis-à-vis the Big Bang... we're all ultimately made of hydrogen. And I know a lot of people who are full of air.
I also agree about the legends and myths have some kernel of truth or insight.
Akivah
Well-Known Member
Are you saying that one can not have a valid belief unless there is 100% agreement for that belief among every person on Earth?
You might consider the viewpoint that the various religions are like roadmaps leading to the same mountain summit. The road maps all have different starting points (the culture, times and spiritual history of the particular culture where the religion was born) but all have the same end-point. Those that try to tell you that their roadmap is the only correct roadmap are naïve.