Hazlitt, original or not I really like the part about the nubile young woman.
Craven, this is a great thread!
Since I've never been able to make up my mind, I veer between Ragman and Asherman.
I think that humans need reasons. There have always been so many questions about the physical and spiritual world; religion provides a sanctuary that lessens our fear of not knowing.
Ragman's concept of a collective intelligence fits, in a way, with Asherman's concept that nothing is real. It is true that atoms are not physical, with no material characteristics, but they are real. Energy is real, and it could contain intelligence.
In other words, I don't know, I just feel that a collective intelligence makes a certain sense. I guess that makes me a theist.
god
I agree with Asherman, that, IN A SENSE, all is God and there is no God: the Cosmos is in a sense Divine, but it contains no particular God-like being. Like Ragman I choose not to anthropomorize this "divinity". Instead of a cosmic humanoid, I prefer a Cosmic Legume: a Supreme Bean.
But seriously, my only concern is with the political actions of fundamentalists of all "faiths." They are a menace, particularly because or their Sacred Absolutism, which justifies anything. But theologically, I am, with gratitude to Maraso, an apathiest.
And I no longer argue with fundamentalists at a fundamentalist level. It lowers my thinking to that of theirs. Literalism is the stuff of childish fairy tales. If one wants to explore the universe metaphorically, I can be engaged. I have a brother who is a fundamentalist minister. He has been trying to save my soul for decades now, while I have been trying--with equal arrogance--to save his mind. We have both failed.
JLN, The failure you speak of between you and your brother is a universal phenomenon. It happens between the various religions, and also between the non-religious and the religious. It's an unending cycle of failures. c.i.
JLN, my Colorado relatives are fundamentalist Christians. We don't talk about religion anymore. I'm pretty sure that, since I live within 2 hours of New York City, they assume my soul was lost long ago.
Hmmm, your idea of a Supreme Bean is appetizing, as long as it comes with melted pepper jack cheese and salsa.
We were talking about communion, weren't we?
This forum will combine well with the 260 religions forum.
c.i.
Why aren't we given the choice of defining ourselves as agnostics or deists?
wc
Or pantheists or mystics or gnostics.
"Druids" are ancient? I like "mystics" and "witches." They're still active today.
c.i.
atheism
And sorcerers? How would you classify practicioners of Vodoo?
And what about animists? I guess they would be pantheists, at least some forms of animism. There are some who do not believe that everything is endowed with spirit/life/anima--only moving things.
The Druid Tradition is ancient, and represents one of the wellsprings of inspiration of the Western Spiritual Tradition. But even though it is ancient, it is as relevant and alive today as it ever has been.
All spiritualities grow and change - and Druidry has changed too - and now it is experiencing a Renaissance. Every month new Druid groups form, new websites spring up, and new books are published. Druidry has become a vital and dynamic Nature-based spirituality that is flourishing all over the world.
atheism
Is anyone here a Druid?
How can be any Druid here? The modern Celts are either Catholic (Irish), or Protestant (Scottish and Welsh).
or america or canada or anywhere that allows freedom of religion.
I do not mean that Druids are prohibited. But this religion disappeared hundreds years ago, when the dwellers of the British Isles got baptized.
religion
The Druids may have disappeared but Druid religion can persist.
as an example of a "non-existent" religion, the Reformed Druids of Northfield Minnesota USA lists 4,000 members.
