"Discussions/posts that center themselves around other faiths will be deleted or moved to their proper boards."
Please delete this post if it remotely violates this rule.
I thought I'd try the Belief-O-Matic game to see what it had to say and was quite surprised to find my views are more Neo-Pagan (81%) than Nontheist (67%)! What's with that? Either the Belief-O-Matic needs to be recalibrated or I don't know what a Neo-Pagan is.
If you don't mind, I'd like to ask four questions... then I'll depart. I realize there might be little consensus on this. I suppose I'm really wondering what the different views are.
(1) Do Neo-Pagans tend to believe the cosmos is eternal or arose by natural processes vs. the work of a creator god or goddess?
(2) Do Neo-Pagans tend to view gods and goddesses as natural vs. supernatural?
(3) Do you think a person can be an Atheist Neo-Pagan?
(4) Is there much difference between a Neo-Pagan and a Pagan?
Thank you very much for your replies.
Peace.
"Some people claim that there's a woman to blame. But I know it's my own damn fault."
[QUOTE=wiscidea;970077]
If you don't mind, I'd like to ask four questions... then I'll depart. I realize there might be little consensus on this. I suppose I'm really wondering what the different views are.
(1) Do Neo-Pagans tend to believe the cosmos is eternal or arose by natural processes vs. the work of a creator god or goddess?
(2) Do Neo-Pagans tend to view gods and goddesses as natural vs. supernatural?
(3) Do you think a person can be an Atheist Neo-Pagan?
(4) Is there much difference between a Neo-Pagan and a Pagan?
[/QUOTE]
You're correct in assuming there isn't likely to be consensus on the answers. Paganism doesn't consist of many denominations of a single religion--it's a collection of different religions in a loosely-aligned movement.
1) You'll find that there are some who don't consider the origins of the universe to be worth spending time considering; they don't care, so they never spend time thinking about it. Others embrace notions of origins according to the belief sets of ancient religions, so the whole variety of thought arising from the past is still present in modern Paganism.
As for me, I see all beings--including gods--as being expressions of the Cosmos, so no creator gods. The Cosmos came into existence in whatever fashion it did--and the Big Bang explains that as well as any other explanation--and I'm not particularly worried about it beyond that.
2) I suspect pretty much all Pagan paths that observe deities regard them as part of the natural order. With an understanding of "supernatural" involving something outside the natural order, then I reckon the gods are viewed as natural.
3) I certainly do, though I know there are others who don't. A member of the local Pagan UU congregation refers to himself as polyatheist and is still recognizably Pagan. He served as the president of the board for a time, so the other Pagans in the congregation certainly accept him as Pagan.
4) There are disagreements as to what the term "Neopagan" covers. I use it to denote anybody practicing a Pagan religion that hasn't been continually observed over many centuries; Shinto, for example is Pagan and I wouldn't consider it Neopagan. Wicca, Druidry, etc. qualify as Neopagan, in my view.
As far as other differences...just the differences that would arise from having different religions! Shinto and Hinduism have vast differences and are both Pagan. Wicca and Druidry are both Neopagan and have differences because they are different religions.
Beliefnet doesn’t delete posts that remotely violate any rule. And since you are discussing Neo-Paganism which is the actual topic of this board, you are right on topic.
As both yourself Seventhcrow also noted, there is little consensus on this topic. So I will offer my answers below as another example of the diversity that exists.
The Belief-O-Matic is based on generic answers slotted into generic categories. At best, it provides you with a direction to explore further but it can’t tell anyone what they are.
Question 1: Do Neo-Pagans tend to believe the cosmos is eternal or arose by natural processes vs. the work of a creator god or goddess?
Well Neo-/Pagans are self-identified and self-defining. Validation is experiential. There is no singular mythos that is accepted so you will find Neo-/Pagans that think any of the above or something different. I agree with Seventhcrow that most Neo-/Pagans don't tend to give this much importance, which may be because mythos isn't required any longer to give that kind of validation. In my experience though, the majority of Neo-/Pagans tend to be polytheistic but that can cover a lot of ground.
Question 2: Do Neo-Pagans tend to view gods and goddesses as natural vs. supernatural?
Not generally. For example if you consider everything including one’s Gods to be natural (part of existence like everything else), then there can be no such thing as that which is outside of or greater (super-) than nature. Or are you perhaps thinking more along the lines of the Gods being beyond human comprehension and control? If so, then what lives beyond is also considered to be part of the natural generally. Just part we as humans' don't know about.
Question 3: Do you think a person can be an Atheist Neo-Pagan?
I think someone can certainly self-identify and self-define Neo-/Paganism as being atheistic. Whether others would recognise this as valid would be up to him or her as Seventhcrow's example shows. I myself would be curious to know what an atheist would be putting in the place of the gods for a foundation of faith? What does he or she have a 'relationship' to, in other words?
(4) Is there much difference between a Neo-Pagan and a Pagan?
Sometimes none at all which is why I tend to use Neo-/Pagan(ism) a lot. Neo-Paganism essentially means – New-Paganism and as such, it always has to have a counterpoint, usually that which is Old-Paganism. For example, if one defines Paganism as ancient religions then Neo-Paganism is used to define modern religions that are labelled as paganism. If one doesn’t care about ancient paganism, then he or she may simply use Paganism although paganism is a term that has many different meanings down through history. In the 20th century, there happened what I term a Paganism Movement and these days, I refer to this as the Neo-Paganism Movement in order to differentiate it from ancient/historic labelling of paganism as well as two historically labelled Paganism movements, neither spiritual in intent.
Hopefully that was helpful and I also hope you don’t depart after this but stay to participate further.
C.H.
No one cares how much you know until they know how much you care.
As just a little afterthought here, it's not that we who use "pagan" rather than "neopagan" dont care about ancient paganism. Not tryng to be aggressive but felt that needed mentioning. Also, if you are curious about paganisms, you need to visit the learn abouts or the community boards. Debate boards are open to everyone, even those who aren't pagans.
[QUOTE=tameless_heart;990792]As just a little afterthought here, it's not that we who use "pagan" rather than "neopagan" dont care about ancient paganism. Not tryng to be aggressive but felt that needed mentioning. Also, if you are curious about paganisms, you need to visit the learn abouts or the community boards. Debate boards are open to everyone, even those who aren't pagans.[/QUOTE] A good afterthought. Thanks for mentioning that.
C.H.
No one cares how much you know until they know how much you care.
Just want to let you know that I'm paying attention, I'm sincerely interested in your answers, and I want to assure everyone that I'm not trying to start an argument. I ask my questions, here, to learn.
Oh... my curiosity about the distinction between Pagan and Neo-Pagan was not intended as a means of suggesting one is somehow superior to other. Please don't allow this to generate a dispute where there is none.
Peace.
"Some people claim that there's a woman to blame. But I know it's my own damn fault."
[QUOTE=wiscidea;997319]Thank you for your replies.
Just want to let you know that I'm paying attention, I'm sincerely interested in your answers, and I want to assure everyone that I'm not trying to start an argument. I ask my questions, here, to learn.
Oh... my curiosity about the distinction between Pagan and Neo-Pagan was not intended as a means of suggesting one is somehow superior to other. Please don't allow this to generate a dispute where there is none.
Peace.[/QUOTE]
Wiscidea,
No worries dear. TH simply mentioned something that I hadn't made clear enough (for which I thanked her). She was just concerned about the possible tone of what she posted (unnecessarily).
I don't think being curious about P/NP has ever been considered as a suggestion that one is superior to the other. It is a just an obvious question that comes up regularly IME.
If anything did generate a dispute here at least it is on the right board to do so...:) I have also noted over time that agreement often teaches us little more than who else sees things similar to us. Whereas a debate or dispute makes everyone dig deeply into what they believe in order to articulate their points.
Glad to see you are dropping by regularly.
C.H.
No one cares how much you know until they know how much you care.
I thought I'd try the Belief-O-Matic game to see what it had to say and was quite surprised to find my views are more Neo-Pagan (81%) than Nontheist (67%)! What's with that? Either the Belief-O-Matic needs to be recalibrated or I don't know what a Neo-Pagan is.
If you don't mind, I'd like to ask four questions... then I'll depart. I realize there might be little consensus on this. I suppose I'm really wondering what the different views are.
(1) Do Neo-Pagans tend to believe the cosmos is eternal or arose by natural processes vs. the work of a creator god or goddess?
(2) Do Neo-Pagans tend to view gods and goddesses as natural vs. supernatural?
(3) Do you think a person can be an Atheist Neo-Pagan?
(4) Is there much difference between a Neo-Pagan and a Pagan?
Thank you very much for your replies.
Peace.
Number four first. I'm a pagan or neo-pagan whichever either of us chooses to call me. Sometimes I use Neo-Pagan to distinguish modern paganism from what we might call paleo-paganism with, you know, the head-hunters and child sacrifice and orgies. We hardly ever hunt heads and most of us are unwilling to sacrifice our own inner child. Orgies are an entirely different matter, but that's a story left untold. (That's my humorous answer.)
Number one now. As a pagan, I believe what cosmology currently teaches about the big bang, and I'm open to changing my views with the refinements of that cosmology. But if one views deity with a sense of the abstract incomprehensibility of a being identical to the far-flung universe and the unknown mystery from which it arose, there is no need to polarize the issue of creation. If God/dess is equated to the initial conditions, the primal laws and forces and constants of nature, as surely is appropriate, then your question becomes meaningless and the issue of calling it God or Memorex is baseless. Call it what you will. I will not have a religion that conflicts with established science, but much of science is not quite entrenched, so there is room for imagination and curiosity in our lives and in our world view.
Question number two. I view nothing as supernatural, only as perhaps unexplained. Look. You and I are conscious beings, but science cannot reach far enough to explain the qualities of our experience. It is called the question of consciousness, one of the unsolved conundrums of human knowledge. Our consciousness resides out of space in some dimensionless realm where neither shape nor size nor boundary nor location have meaning. We call it mental, psychic, aetherial, spiritual, etc. It is not a physical reality. Ideas are not physical realities. Love is not a physical reality. We exist in two realities of which both register upon our consciousness in their own characteristic ways. I am totally incapable of having any immediate experience of your hidden world, and I alone am capable of experiencing my own hidden world. How do I know that you truly exist as a conscious being rather than simply as some automaton of the imagination? I don't. I can't. I assume that you are there because you act so much like me in the visible, physical world that we share with each other and with all other conscious beings. Perhaps there are other conscious beings who have no visible body or whose body is so remote from our understanding that we cannot comprehend it. Perhaps the Earth is a conscious being. I only mean to suggest enough here to encourage you to ponder what the extent of nature and the natural world may be. Are gods and goddesses supernatural beings? No.
Number three. Yes. A person can be and I know some who consider themselves to be just that, pagan atheists. They believe in no god, but they celebrate life and the Earth as a sacred ecosphere to be treasured and protected. They may call upon deities, but see them only as symbols of the forces and influences at play in human existence. I worship the moon, not only by her many goddess names and images, but also as the moon, that beauty in the night (though she be cold and lifeless stone). Other pagans may be very devout and pious believers in deity. To each as they have need, from each as they are able.
Question four (revisited). The serious answer. The difference between a pagan and a neopagan is approximately the same difference as between a maiden and a girl.
Thank you for asking these wonderful questions. They have been a delight to answer. By the way, I scored 100% Neopagan on that Belief-O-Matic. I agree with that assessment.
