@TheCobbler,
An example of more natural panthea .
(fill in the blank) ________ goddess was impregnated with light by (fill in the blank) _______God.
(fill in the blank) _________ (some deity) hatched the Earth from a turtle's egg...
or
The earth was struck by a large comet and formed the moon which facilitated life to occur.
Which is more true, more natural, more intellectually factual?
The road back to nature is an incremental one, we more resemble the structures and inner workings of nature so we can more perfectly coexist with it.
Perhaps if our gods had the names of the elements rather than the elements having the names of our gods?
So our elements are now bound by the intellectualism derived from religion rather than our religion derived by the characteristics and nature of the elements.
A false story has been superimposed over our natural world.
I just wish the story was more true to actual nature and science rather than so manipulatively contrived and blatantly false.
We are filled with the "mythology of the son" that has brought us despots and arrogant rulers, yet few of us know of the "science of the sun"... which continues to bring us life. The sun tells a different story than religion.
Religious people seek the afterlife while dropping the ball on this life, this is unthinkable!
Though religion seems natural it is actually artificial. Religion is an unnatural tree of knowledge of good and evil for people seeking self deism and to persecute. While the tree of life (science) few desire to eat from.
More natural implies a element of truth and reality that is missing from religion.
There is the religion made by humans and then there is the story of the natural world (science) that is laid open like a book. Do we forsake the book of truth (science) for the book of vain imaginations?
Yet, we approach the story of nature like we already have the knowledge. This "religious" knowledge obfuscates the true parallels of our existence physical/natural and substitutes it with one of purely artificial and errant speculation based upon faith rather than observation.
The road back to nature and the focus upon the real works of our universe requires unlearining religion and then relearning the natural world the way it is and not the way it is superstitiously preconceived to be.
If our world does not proclaim the works of some god then adding a god to it only adds a subtle lie to every aspect of life and becomes a catalyst for reason gone awry.
The ruling powers of the world depend on the disconnect from science to substitute blind religious obedience to the people of the world.
Religion blinds one to the natural world, it obfuscates truth so the science of learning and discovery cannot shine through to our intellect and understanding.
So the truth is obfuscated by the shock and awe of religion and its claims of gods which exist beyond the realms of observation.
It is easy to move mountains that are based upon a lie...
I find religion intellectually stimulating, an exercise in mental calisthenics, like playing Tetris.
But I have to separate religion from my moral and ethical considerations because I do not trust the science behind religion.
Thus lies the crux of the problem, religion injects an unnatural perspective into the natural order of things and the results are the absurd and fictional conclusions of religious dogma. (i.e. god controls the weather)
Religion uses the instruments of words rather than the instrument of observation it uses grandiose intellectualism rather than evidence based methods. Thus it is more likely to impose error upon the natural interpretation of life rather than truth.
Religions borrow morality from one another like they have none of their own to impart...
Religion requires an obfuscation of morality to accept it...
