• Donate and support Agora Road's Macintosh Cafe to keep the forum alive and make any necessary upgrades to have a more pleasant experience! Update: I configured the site with Brave Browser, so you can send tips to the site with BAT.

    - Upgrade now for supporter only awards! In Three Tiers

    -- Agora Gold

    -- Agora Silver

    -- Agora Bronze

    Upgrades like "moods" username customization, profile customization, custom backgrounds, banners and much more!

    It will be under Account Upgrades

    Submissions for Tales of Agora Road Issue #4 is OPEN! MAKE AGORA CHAN ART BY CLICKING HERE

Evidence for Paganism

Ross_Я

Slacker
Joined
Oct 17, 2023
Messages
508
Reaction score
1,044
Awards
134
Website
www.youtube.com
if you look at Pagan mythology from a purely materialistic view the pantheon present there were probably a series of great men/women who sang praises of up
to the point of deityfication. Stuff like the theory that Wotan was a warlord who migrated from the Volga? to Scandinavia. Maybe they did hold supernational powers
to the point of godhood. If I am correct in pagan mythology the gods themselves were moral. The Germanic gods will die in Ragonark, the Greek gods will get overthrowned
just like they overthrew the Titans. The idea of gods being immortal is only expressed in Abrahamic religion as far as I know.
First of all, greek Gods are immortal. They might be overthrown - not sure about that - but it anyhow doesn't mean they will die. So are Titans, I think - immortal as well. But feel free to correct me if I'm wrong. Though since Titans are basically Old Gods, and the idea of immortality was pretty much the key to the concept of the Gods in the greek mythology, I'm rather sure about Titans being immortal as well.
Also, feel free to tell me if you wish to know more about Ancient Egypt, but, in two words, aegyptian religion kind of supported idea of immortality of Gods and human souls as well.
And I do not even know about countless of others ancient religions, but even by these two it is safe to say that the idea of Gods (and human souls) being immortal is not really anything knew by the time of Christ. If anything, you can see it as natural evolution of Roman beliefs at the time, as it was pretty much strongly implied by the surrounding religions that Gods are immortal. Ten bucks say Yahweh in yahwism was immortal as well.

Observation from an outsider: people that spend time collecting dead animal parts and rocks
I frankly hope paganism is not about that. Though I probably go for polytheism with my thoughts. Whatever.
 
Virtual Cafe Awards

Vitnira

Active Traveler
Joined
May 29, 2023
Messages
174
Reaction score
711
Awards
94
I'm going to make separate posts. First, let me give my definition for Paganism and how its core ideas differ from Abrahamic religions (particularly Christianity).

"Pagan" is a Christian word to refer to the "other". From wikipedia: "Paganism (from classical Latin pāgānus "rural", "rustic", later "civilian") is a term first used in the fourth century by early Christians for people in the Roman Empire who practiced polytheism or ethnic religions other than Judaism." Hindus are pagan, Shinto is pagan, Buddhists are pagan, Wicca is pagan, the Church of the Flying Spaghetti Monster is pagan. You make up a Pony-religion, that's pagan by this definition.

When we (including you) say pagan though, typically we're referring to people who follow ancient or reconstructionist European religions. This is the definition I will use, because typically Hindus and Shintoists don't call themselves pagan. Hindu, Shinto, and Buddhism are very pagan-adjacent and will come up often in this discussion since they are used in the reconstruction process.

Paganism is, and has always been, primarily orthropraxic ("right practice") vs Abrahamic orthodoxic ("right scripture"). This is a critical difference of mentality. Christianity does have some orthopraxis, but that is not the core of the religion.

Let's take Shinto as an example since it is orthopraxic (all indigenous religions are) and currently practiced by a heavily Westernized civilization. The rituals are done to create fertility, honor the dead, purify a space, marry two lovers. The average person participates in the ritual because It's Just What You Do. In modernity many perform this rituals even though they'll claim to be atheist - they do it "just to be safe". Many Japanese businesses keep temples to Inari (fertility, wealth). Next post I'll dive more into Jung and the psychology of these rituals and the purpose they serve for society - here I'm trying to set up the basis for orthopraxis. Essentially, you do the ritual because it's the spiritually right thing to do, and the priests craft these rituals to achieve a purpose (or at least the ancient ones did, it's unlikely modern ones know what they're doing and just keep the torch alive). Christianity has these too (Baptism, Eucharist) but it is not the focus of the religion. It is most likely that these rituals were incorporated into a totally orthodoxic religion idea to ease the transition from Pagan to Christian. Pagan religions have Ritual at the core.

Here's a short >redditcostanzayeahrightsmirk thread answering how the Romans/Greeks viewed their gods to reinforce this orthopraxic idea. There are two good comments here that sum it up well.

I think this mentality difference is the reason for your demands of "proof", and the Christian's need to argue for proof - you come from an orthodoxic mentality. A text is the foundation for your belief and must be "real" to believe in the religion - Christianity could not exist without the Bible. But a pagan needs no texts, no scripture. The Vedas, Eddas, Mabinogion, could all be torched tomorrow and the essence of paganism would still remain.

"What about myth?"

Myth is in a circular relationship with Ritual. Pagan Rituals and Myths change to suit the people, the climate, and the culture. Orthodoxic religions adhere to Scripture, which rarely changes.
This is the reason that Indo-European studies are interesting. We can see the common myth of the Thunder god slaying the Serpent, the divine Father, the Dawn goddess, the interweaving of Fate, and other concepts as they spread across Europe. We can see how they changed to suit the people.

Let's take Aurelius:
Live a good life. If there are gods and they are just, then they will not care how devout you have been, but will welcome you based on the virtues you have lived by. If there are gods, but unjust, then you should not want to worship them. If there are no gods, then you will be gone, but will have lived a noble life that will live on in the memories of your loved ones.
This is clearly an evolution of orthopraxic philosophy. If paganism had continued in Europe, I think we'd have seen some truly great minds expand on this. But it really highlights the idea "proof is irrelevant - do the right thing because it is the right thing".

Okay, that's great to a layman, but why would an intellectual believe in it? And here we get into the core of things - Myth and Paganism is layered. You can believe that Thor genuinely brings rain to fertilize crops and sacrifices please him, or, you can see it that Thor is a grouping of all of the concepts that represent Storms to a Viking-era Norseman - and the sacrifices are a ritual that still serves an important role for society. To a modern pagan, "What does it mean that the Germanics ascended Wodanaz, a previously-unknown wise man, to usurp Tyr, their Zeus?" is a far more relevant question than "is any of this real". It's about what the rituals and myth mean and how they affect your life. I'll expand more on this.

Some more things about paganism. There are three major groups: Wicca, Asabros, and everyone else.
Wicca is based on outdated scholarship and seems to be men's way of convincing women to dance around naked by a fire by convincing them there's a unified feminist moon goddess. They are the most plentiful pagans, they are pretty much entirely women who do stuff with crystals.
Asabros are those who are, as one user with a Japanese name I'm too lazy to tag put it, LARPing atheists. They go around with vegvisir tattoos and talk about how badass vikings are and yell HAIL ODIN a lot. They're like the masculine response to Wicca and equally stupid.
I personally don't consider either of these groups real pagans. I don't think anyone else does either.

"Everyone else" could also be called Reconstructionists and they're who I'm talking about here. We spend an inordinate amount of time looking at archeological publishings in foreign languages to piece together what the pre-Christian Europeans believed. We read about Hinduism and Buddhism and Shintoism to see how our ancestors might practice today. We're a bunch of goddamn losers. But this is also something that informs the philosophy - this is a constantly moving target. At any time an archeological dig could bring something new to the religion - but the orthopaxic nature (several Shinto shrines practice different worship of Kami than neighbors) means that there will never be full contradictions. The malleable nature of modern and historical Paganism tells us we can and should fill in the gaps with our own Gnosis. But the knowledge of what came before guides and gives structure to this praxis so it is not completely unmoored from the psychological truths of ritual.

Next I'm going to sit and watch the videos you posted in the other thread and see how they relate to polytheism, and write more directed at your actual question next.
 
Virtual Cafe Awards

Punp

3D/2D artist
Silver
Joined
Aug 4, 2022
Messages
797
Reaction score
2,771
Awards
220
Website
punp.neocities.org
These posts cement my belief that I made good philosophical friends in @Ross_Я and @Vitnira .

To offer something of interest to the thread, I read a short opinion piece recently about the importance of rituals. The summary is that the religious leader recognises the importance for a society to manifest their desire for rain in a rain dance, or say goodbye to a loved one at a funeral. Belief, narrative and hope are powerful tools in shaping our mental map of the world.

The priest (or rabbi, or druid, etc) is a shepherd of emotions.

As someone without a formal religion, but is nevertheless superstitious (and perhaps spiritual) depending on how much sleep I've got, I can testify that if all scripture was destroyed the human need to have something to believe in or to manifest our emotions into physical actions would facilitate the creation of another religion.

The question of whether Christianity or non-Christianity is the right path to spiritual satiation strikes me as a question of what flavour sandwich you should eat if you're hungry.
 
Virtual Cafe Awards

Walk in the Rain

It ain't Jesus or the devil. It's Jesus or you.
Bronze
Joined
Sep 15, 2021
Messages
1,702
Reaction score
5,660
Awards
300
The malleable nature of modern and historical Paganism tells us we can and should fill in the gaps with our own Gnosis. But the knowledge of what came before guides and gives structure to this praxis so it is not completely unmoored from the psychological truths of ritual.

Next post I'll dive more into Jung and the psychology of these rituals and the purpose they serve for society - here I'm trying to set up the basis for orthopraxis. Essentially, you do the ritual because it's the spiritually right thing to do, and the priests craft these rituals to achieve a purpose (or at least the ancient ones did, it's unlikely modern ones know what they're doing and just keep the torch alive)
This is interesting. Although I feel like it's still ignoring my question about the evidence of paganism taken the methods in analytical philosophy of religion. What I can gather is that there's is none but somehow this isn't an issue for paganism because it is orthopraxis. I agree that pagan rituals have profound psychological purpose and meaning. But you could say the same about many Christian or Islamic practices. This approach leaves me no reason to prefer practicing one over another. Furthermore, it's hard for most people to practice a ritual they are inclined to believe has no real spiritual significance, because the metaphysical realm the rituals lay claim to has no evidence for its existence.
Christianity has these too (Baptism, Eucharist) but it is not the focus of the religion. It is most likely that these rituals were incorporated into a totally orthodoxic religion idea to ease the transition from Pagan to Christian. Pagan religions have Ritual at the core.
Again, tangential. But the issue of rituals being central to Christianity has been a big controversy from the early church. Some have held that there's no salvation unless you're literally baptized or partake in the eucharist. I could argue that rituals are very, very important to Christianity and that the Christian life may be construed as a ritual in itself, ie, being called to follow Christ. But it's the same issue of discussion I've seen with these responses, coming back to contrasting paganism with Christianity instead of defending it in itself.

I think this frustration might just be a difference in methodology, but I did ask for a very specific one (natural theology or inductive/deductive arguments like those seen in analytical philosophy of religion...)
Here's a short >redditcostanzayeahrightsmirk thread answering how the Romans/Greeks viewed their gods to reinforce this orthopraxic idea. There are two good comments here that sum it up well.
Nice post. But according to those, the Romans did believe in a literal Mars to bless them in war. I imagine they would be inclined to think the rituals lack significance if you don't think there's any such being that embodies the powers of Mars. Am I missing the point?
I think this mentality difference is the reason for your demands of "proof", and the Christian's need to argue for proof - you come from an orthodoxic mentality. A text is the foundation for your belief and must be "real" to believe in the religion - Christianity could not exist without the Bible. But a pagan needs no texts, no scripture. The Vedas, Eddas, Mabinogion, could all be torched tomorrow and the essence of paganism would still remain.
Are agnostics and atheist are subscribed to an >orthodox mindset because they demand evidence? Furthermore, the Bible isn't the foundation for Christianity, which isn't even a controversial position as far as I'm aware. Christianity holds that the Holy Spirit and the death and resurrection of Christ are the basis for the religion. These were recorded on oral traditions (however reliable they may be or not is besides the point) before the Biblical canon was decided. Jesus didn't even speak Greek, as the meme goes. All Bibles in the World could be torched and the essence of Christianity would still persists because of the belief Christians have in the guidance of the Holy Spirit.

But again, I'm confused what's the relevance this has on there being positive evidence for paganism. Why should I take what you've described as pagan orthopraxis as supporting beliefs that are more likely to be true than, for example, atheism or agnosticism?
"proof is irrelevant - do the right thing because it is the right thing".
He's talking about ethics here, not the metaphysics of wherever the gods are real or not. I agree with him that you should do the right thing even if you don't know if gods or God exist at all. So you can live an outstanding ethical life while being an atheist, Hindu, agnostic, whatever. His statement here doesn't give evidence or even pragmatic reasons to hold to any pagan metaphysics.
To a modern pagan, "What does it mean that the Germanics ascended Wodanaz, a previously-unknown wise man, to usurp Tyr, their Zeus?" is a far more relevant question than "is any of this real". It's about what the rituals and myth mean and how they affect your life. I'll expand more on this.
This modern pagan can live like that sure. But I could never figure out how you can think something is not likely to be true, while holding to its rituals, and not feel cognitive dissonance.
I and many others find it hard to find meaning in rituals when reason sees no evidence to hold to the truths they claim to represent. The solution for many is holding to merely the symbolic importance of the ritual, it's probably not true yeah, but I do these rituals because of what they represent. That is a position I have sympathy for, but it doesn't seem to be what you're trying to argue here.

Again, the Romans with their orthopraxis still believed their gods were metaphysically real in the sense Christians believe Christ is the son of God.

The malleable nature of modern and historical Paganism tells us we can and should fill in the gaps with our own Gnosis. But the knowledge of what came before guides and gives structure to this praxis so it is not completely unmoored from the psychological truths of ritual.
The malleable nature of modern and historical Christianity tells us we can fill in the gaps with the revelation of the Holy Spirit... Why should I prefer Reconstructionist paganism to Christianity? Or be an agnostic and say there's no reason to believe that any of the 'pagan' gods were anything other than inventions of complex human psychology?

means that there will never be full contradictions
Say by time travel you could go to a point and place in time. let's make up a a religion X. Religion X also based itself on orthopraxis rather than orthodoxy. Then, thanks to your time machine you could go to the foundation of religion X and see a council of elder discussing how they're literally gonna make up a set of >myths and rituals in order to extract wealth from the peasants through offerings to these new and made up gods. And the end of the meeting, one elder asks 'Yo, we all agree this stuff is fake, not real, meaningless, and made up, right?' and all the elders nod. Perhaps not necessarily a contradiction (Buddhism can still be true even if the Buddha was a fraud, because Buddhism doesn't depend on Buddha), but at least something that would severely undermine my reasons for continuing to practice the rituals of religion X.

Is there anything at all that can show a set of pagan rituals to be false?

Thanks for your thoughtful response. I hope I havent being too frustrating lol. I can say you strike me as well meaning and honest.
 
Last edited:
Virtual Cafe Awards

Walk in the Rain

It ain't Jesus or the devil. It's Jesus or you.
Bronze
Joined
Sep 15, 2021
Messages
1,702
Reaction score
5,660
Awards
300
I've noticed people saying I'm asking them to prove paganism. That's not what's in the OP. I'm merely asking for good evidence, those are two very different things. I believe atheism has strong evidence yet I don't believe atheism is more likely to be true. I don't even think there's strict proof of Christianity.
 
Virtual Cafe Awards

Punp

3D/2D artist
Silver
Joined
Aug 4, 2022
Messages
797
Reaction score
2,771
Awards
220
Website
punp.neocities.org
I think @Vitnira summarised it well: you want "evidence" of paganism because your outlook is wholly Christian. Christianity is evidence-based and requires a history of paperwork for reference and proof. Paganism is a feeling which is true to the self because the belief makes it true.

"Paganism" as it's been defined above is personal to the practitioner and is formed of personal rituals and self-guided reinforcements.

If you want some form of conversion or aha moment, you won't get it from reading a text. You need to go out into nature and sit in a glade. Watch a bee wriggle for pollen in the waning light. See a predator crush the larynx of a deer. See rocks worn smooth by water.

If you saw these things from a Christian perspective it would be attributed to God's power. This is by design of Christianity's inclusive exclusiveness. By adopting all the pagan holidays (Halloween, Christmas) it replaces the mysticism of the personal experience with rote learnings which attribute it to a uniform religion.

This is not a value judgement, nor is it to say "Christianity bad", but to address your question we must also address your perspective - your question comes with personal distortion from the perspective of Christianity.
 
Virtual Cafe Awards

no_chill

Anti-Globalist Taskforce 8 "Florian Geyer"
Silver
Joined
Jan 27, 2021
Messages
601
Reaction score
2,947
Awards
194
What is it with your "evidence" all the time? @Remember_Summer_Days I ask genuinely. You sound like a redditor to me, demanding evidence for whatever subject but in reality its not that he seeks evidence but that he wants to refute it. And this is why I don't talk further with you about this subject.

Because it's your ego that is talking here. Not ego as outlined by Jung but ego in its original term.

And its so funny because your "evidence" for christianity is various scriptures and collections of work taken from around the world. Did you read the Bhagavad-Gita? You should. This was written 5000 years before the bible and outlines your god which has no name. It outlines even in more detail and more complete. Christianity was created by Judea (Jews) as a way to subvert the roman empire since they couldn't beat them militarily. So they opted to beat them from within. The turning point and what led to the downfall of the roman empire wasn't just their degeneration materialistically, like hosting public rapes of women by animal and yes this happened in the colusseum.

It was even more so degeneration of the soul and spirit. And this is what christianity does. It has no inherent teaching, it takes whatever it sees fit and incorporates it, making it their own. Thats why we still use germanic gods and sol and luna for our weekdays. And I really invite you to come her to europe and I will show you what christianity here is as opposed to the US. You would be thinking we never abandoned the original ways. Easter celebrations with eggs and rabbits, public bonfires during the aequinox, maypole dances where we wear a flower crown and dance in circles.

Christmas which is Mithras fest, all those public holidays, how every church has a garden.

5-8thth Dezember where we dress up as Krampus to scare people and to remember them. Etc etc. All this is hosted by the church here. And many more, I couldn't count them and list them all. Because they are too many and they became part of life here.

Christianity has taken everything from germanic and celtic paganism, otherwise it would have never survived here and because it doesn't have a culture of its own. Because it was made up by humans. The bible is full of contemporary bullshit the vedas on the other hand aren't.

On the other Hand, Theres things described in the vedas which can't even be translated to modern sanskrit. Weapons of air, earth and water (And no, they dont refer to bows, water buckets or similar, because those things are mentioned). Or the Vimanas( UFOs?) And the vedas described multi universe theory and alien life too. 6000 years before Einstein. Theres 400 000 beings in the universe that are similar to humans on earth. Theres ~3 million in total which the soul can inhabit. And no, it doesn't described all the subspecies individually or whatever. The bible has none of this because it was made by people of material. Not ethereal.

You are not in contact with the suprasensible, transcendental or divine. You are in contact with sentimental feelings. Even the prayers are taken from hermetic invocations, magic rituals. The habd folding of christians has been appropriated from brahmana of northern india. The word "Amen" refers to egypt which the Atlanteans inhabited. Its a hotch pot of various cultures and races. Similar to the US where you live in and which has no distinct race or culture of their own. And the original "Americans" are gated off in reservoirs. What a great analogy this is of Abrahamic to Pagan "Religions"
 
Virtual Cafe Awards

Walk in the Rain

It ain't Jesus or the devil. It's Jesus or you.
Bronze
Joined
Sep 15, 2021
Messages
1,702
Reaction score
5,660
Awards
300
You sound like a redditor to me, demanding evidence for whatever subject but in reality its not that he seeks evidence but that he wants to refute it.
>Ask for evidence
>Doesnt agree with it
>He only wants to refute evidence...!

By your admission on the OP on my profile and here, you've made clear you're not interested about providing evidence in the first place. So this feels beyond disingenuous. And instead of offering any arguments you come here to start a smear campaign.

What I dont understand is your need to constantly paint me in a bad light. I dont know what I did to cause you to seeth that much.

Much that you've said in the post pertains to Christianity and not paganism. Its not relevant to this discussion wherever Christianity is derivative from pagan beliefs. Like I've said way too many times, I could be an agnostic asking for evidence for pagan ideas, it doesnt matter to me if Christianity is fake.
You are not in contact with the suprasensible, transcendental or divine. You are in contact with sentimental feelings. Even the prayers are taken from hermetic invocations, magic rituals. The habd folding of christians has been appropriated from brahmana of northern india. The word "Amen" refers to egypt which the Atlanteans inhabited. Its a hotch pot of various cultures and races. Similar to the US where you live in and which has no distinct race or culture of their own. And the original "Americans" are gated off in reservoirs. What a great analogy this is of Abrahamic to Pagan "Religions"
:Lain: Ok. I draw the line at Amen coming from Atantean Egypt.

I'll delete any other posts that are attacking me and not adressing the OP. Futhermore, if you wanna show how superior your pagan ideas are to Christianity, make a thread about it.
 
Virtual Cafe Awards

Vitnira

Active Traveler
Joined
May 29, 2023
Messages
174
Reaction score
711
Awards
94
This is interesting. Although I feel like it's still ignoring my question about the evidence of paganism taken the methods in analytical philosophy of religion. What I can gather is that there's is none but somehow this isn't an issue for paganism because it is orthopraxis. I agree that pagan rituals have profound psychological purpose and meaning. But you could say the same about many Christian or Islamic practices. This approach leaves me no reason to prefer practicing one over another. Furthermore, it's hard for most people to practice a ritual they are inclined to believe has no real spiritual significance, because the metaphysical realm the rituals lay claim to has no evidence for its existence.

So I've spent some time looking over your other thread on "evidence for christianity" and I'm really struggling to find the evidence. I'm not trying to be a dick here saying "lol where's your proof", but the links seem to mention that there is study (but not particular studies or proofs). One of them mentioned natural theology, which lead to Descartes. Descartes and others make fine arguments for God, but I've yet to see a philosopher make an argument for specifically the Judeo-Christian God as opposed to a more vague definition that applies to, say, Brahman or any monotheistic paganism (Odinists, for example, believe that Odin as the Allfather ascended to Supreme Godhood). The more scholarly ones I've seen don't argue for Original Sin, Jesus, or Heaven which are all critical elements of Christianity - which you seem to address, as there not being strict proof for Christianity.

They also fail to make arguments for why there could only be one God, over Divinity being split into multiple entities - several work fine for Pantheism, and then therefore Polytheism and Animism. If the Trinity can be comprised of God, the Son, and the Holy Spirit all as God and their own entities, why can't there be a God that is also Odin and the Norse Pantheon and the Trees and Rivers and still God?

It would help me understand what you consider evidence for paganism to show me your evidence for the Judeo-Christian God and Jesus so I can describe it more in your mental framework.

And sorry but I have to grab the low hanging fruit: believing in Christianity gives a fantastic argument for paganism:
I am the LORD thy God, who brought thee out of the land of Egypt, out of the house of bondage. Thou shalt have no other gods before Me.
Thou shalt not make unto thee a graven image, nor any manner of likeness, of any thing that is in heaven above, or that is in the earth beneath, or that is in the water under the earth;
thou shalt not bow down unto them, nor serve them; for I the LORD thy God am a jealous God, visiting the iniquity of the fathers upon the children unto the third and fourth generation of them that hate Me;
Deuteronomy and Exodus. I guess it was so important they had to repeat it? But, yes, there's no purpose to being jealous of other gods if there are no other gods. :p

I know this isn't the kind of evidence you're looking for though.

I will say that there isn't any evidence made by pagans that I can find. Hindu and Shinto literature is written in other languages and if there are philosophers arguing for the existence of their religions, I can't find English references. Neo-Paganism is too new for there to be good scholarly work. I personally feel that the evidence from other philosophers arguing for God applies fine, as earlier stated, but I can't find anything specifically pagan written to prove it over atheism. I think there's something from Plato, but I'm not a Plato fan or Neoplatonist.

It doesn't help the Christians burned a lot of books in their conquest of Europe...but that's not a valid argument.

I'll respond more to your other replies next and give my personal philosophical framework, but know that it's not every pagan's mentality.
 
Virtual Cafe Awards

Ross_Я

Slacker
Joined
Oct 17, 2023
Messages
508
Reaction score
1,044
Awards
134
Website
www.youtube.com
Frankly, I think trying to find evidence for faith is pretty much an attempt to destroy the whole purpose, principle of faith, be it christian or any other one. I mean, isn't it called faith for a reason? You either believe or you don't.
 
Virtual Cafe Awards

dorgon

Violently Peaceful
Bronze
Joined
Feb 28, 2022
Messages
319
Reaction score
2,612
Awards
183
Website
dorgon.neocities.org
Frankly, I think trying to find evidence for faith is pretty much an attempt to destroy the whole purpose, principle of faith, be it christian or any other one. I mean, isn't it called faith for a reason? You either believe or you don't.
This is very true. I am a Christian, and the problem of asking about "proof" of Christianity or paganism or any other religion out there is that faith and divinity can't really be "proven". Faith is more of a trust, a relationship, or some sort of confidence in whatever you believe in. I believe Jesus is the Son of God because I trust his message, for example. Pagans believe in their deities because they trust them, and they believe that the rituals they do will give them blessings. For example, if I took LSD and saw Mary the Mother of God right in front of my eyes, would that count as "evidence"? If I prayed to Odin the night before an exam and aced the exam the day after, would that also be "proof"? Both of these examples are purely anecdotal and while seems illegit to a third party, someone who witnessed these examples firsthand may find themselves more convinced and closer to God or Odin. Someone who asks for "evidence" about any sort of religion implies that faith and belief can be measured as a quantity, per se, which isn't right. I mean, sure, there's Godel's proof and all that jazz, but those are for more secular (and logical) debates.
 
Last edited:
Virtual Cafe Awards

Vitnira

Active Traveler
Joined
May 29, 2023
Messages
174
Reaction score
711
Awards
94
I mean, sure, there's Godel's proof and all that jazz, but those are for more secular (and logical) debates.
I think Summer...or Rain...is making a fair point in asking the question though.

We live in an inherently secular/logical age. Atheism/agnosticism/Idon'tgiveashitism/Scienceism is the assumed religion in the West, and in the absence of something that feels believable it becomes a worship of the State, or of Pop Idols, Porn, Video Games..the hole for spirituality for many gets filled by something "real" that gives the person "meaning" and it's not usually a good thing. It's difficult for many to have faith. Having these discussions is good for sharpening ourselves to help others convert from pure materialism into something I see as mentally healthier.

It's also a lot more fun than having a debate about the Bible's infallibility for the hundreth time, which is most of the theological debate I get irl
 
Virtual Cafe Awards

dorgon

Violently Peaceful
Bronze
Joined
Feb 28, 2022
Messages
319
Reaction score
2,612
Awards
183
Website
dorgon.neocities.org
I think Summer...or Rain...is making a fair point in asking the question though.

We live in an inherently secular/logical age. Atheism/agnosticism/Idon'tgiveashitism/Scienceism is the assumed religion in the West, and in the absence of something that feels believable it becomes a worship of the State, or of Pop Idols, Porn, Video Games..the hole for spirituality for many gets filled by something "real" that gives the person "meaning" and it's not usually a good thing. It's difficult for many to have faith. Having these discussions is good for sharpening ourselves to help others convert from pure materialism into something I see as mentally healthier.

It's also a lot more fun than having a debate about the Bible's infallibility for the hundreth time, which is most of the theological debate I get irl
This makes a fair point, but then that becomes an entirely different discussion on its own. Rather than asking for evidence of a specific religion, I think your statement implies a sort of debate where we discuss if being spiritual in general benefits you and your soul and spirit (in which case, i think it generally does.) In stead of asking for "evidence" of a religion, I think a better question to ask is what circumstances, interactions with people/objects/environment and/or personal principles helped guide you to the belief you have today?
 
Virtual Cafe Awards

nsequeira119

DNW Expert
Joined
Jan 11, 2024
Messages
202
Reaction score
306
Awards
65
Website
tinyurl.com
I generally refrain from using the term "pagan" to refer to Celtic or Norse or Greek systems of belief, considering that the term was created specifically by Christians who wanted to lump all these extremely different systems of belief into one easily persecutable category. I moreso use the term "Indo-European" because there is at least some archeological evidence that all these pantheons did evolve from one relatively unified protohistoric pantheon.

As for evidence of paganism, I would say there isn't any- as an Atheist, I have to be honest with myself and admit that Zeus is just as fake as God, although he is a much more well-written character whom I respect a lot more. God can suck it, but Zeus has my respect until the day I die, after which point I will no longer exist in any capacity because there is no afterlife.

If you're going to delude yourself into believing fake shit, I would at least recommend believing in cool fake shit, like Thor's two goats that he constantly eats and resurrects. I guarantee there isn't anything that cool in the Bible.
 
Virtual Cafe Awards

Splendid Ap

Internet Refugee
Joined
Jan 26, 2024
Messages
7
Reaction score
2
Awards
2
Paganism has never really had a big focus on apologetics. the closest I can think of is the Neoplatonists proofs of God, many Neoplatonists, such as Emperor Julian, were pagans.