Is it fair to lump all the pagan religions togather?

Is it fair to lump all of the polytheistic religions into the pagan box? Shouldn't we have "religion" type names for them all?

When we refer to the pantheons of the Norse, Greeks and Romans. We always call them mythologies, while the far newer and shorter lived modern religions we apply the religion tag. Giving them added credibility. Shouldn't these far older religions be givin the same respect as Judaism, Islam and Christianity? For all of us with European ancestry these are the real religions of our fore fathers.

a reply to: Entreri06

I can see making the argument to turn the Norse one back to a religion since they are starting to follow it again in Iceland, and Wicca is generally called Wicca rather than paganism. We also refer to Voodoo and Santeria in the states when talking about the sort of hodge podge religions that grew up around the slave cultures of the islands and plantations which are a mix of tribal pagan religions, Native American spiritual beliefs and Christianity.

But in general, pagan is a term that refers to a nature or earth based polytheistic religion. There are so many of these in the world that the term pagan is used as a catch-all like monotheistic. You can find a version of a pagan religion for many African, Native American, Latin American tribes for example. Each would have it's own name. You also have the neo-pagan revival movements attempting to resurrect Norse, Germanic and Lithuanian pagan religious traditions.

So ... pagan.

It is definitely not fair to lump all so-called pagan religions together. They all come from different time periods and different cultures so they are unique. There may be many similarities between say Norse and Greek systems of belief (both have an extensive pantheon, both have: sky/thunder gods, messenger gods, underworld deities, both feature familial connections between deities, etc.) but they are dissimilar in more ways than they are similar.

a reply to: Entreri06

I think looking for meaning to life is more likely to be found in the clouds than the so called religions!

a reply to: Entreri06

No Pagan does not encompass anything close to describing a religion, belief whatever. Christians made the term up, and so it denotes nothing more than non christian sentiments.

Paganism, or rather non monotheistic paradigms, are representative of culturally evolved products outside of Christendom. IE things that actually make sense.

a reply to: ketsuko

Popular sentiment does not make a definition in my opinion. It's an opinion, Paganism is not the all embracing term everybody ascribes to it. People have to actually CARE about other cultures enough to get to the root of their volition. As much as folks throw the "racist" term around Im surprised that liberals haven't spanked this hating into non existence. Its as if the whole world is Muslims and Christians with a tinge of Hinduism. Everyone needs to step off and leave everyone else to their preferred BS.

I cannot stand fundamentalists of ANY kind

Personally I would like a revival of the greek pantheon. Such a interesting and colorful set of demigods they had,

originally posted by: SaturnFX
Personally I would like a revival of the greek pantheon. Such a interesting and colorful set of demigods they had,

Heard!

originally posted by: SaturnFX
Personally I would like a revival of the greek pantheon. Such a interesting and colorful set of demigods they had,

Well then ... go for it.

Nothing stops the two of you.

a reply to: BlueJacket

Where did I imply pagan was a religion? It's not. It's a decription of a series a religious systems that are nature based and have multiple deities or spirits.

It's like calling the systems with one deity monotheistic. That's not hateful either.

Now if we are talking about a specific one of the type of religions in question, then we talk about that one. It's like saying I am being hateful when I am talking about a dog or a ball because there so many types of dog or ball. You might have a point if we are specifically discussing Yorkies or footballs and I persist in generally discussing dogs or balls.

a reply to: Entreri06

If my understanding of the etymology is right, the word comes from 'paganus' (latin) meaning 'rustic' or 'from the country' (as opposed to the city). So it's an insult of sorts, meaning 'not urban' and therefore by implication, not civilised.

So yes, I agree we should call them by their proper names...but do we know them? The term 'pagan' has pretty much encompassed all religions without a Church to the extent that we don't have names for all of them anymore. It's a real shame and you raise a good point.

a reply to: beansidhe

Isn't it ironic how language has evolved? Words become insults when we want them to, but somehow people never let that go because it doesn't suit them to let it go. It's simply more fun to be a victim.

Tell me what belief system we are discussing and we discuss that one. But until then, tell me what the acceptable general term ought to be.

I think that in many cases, when someone uses the word pagan what they really mean is platonic orientalism.



👣

originally posted by: soulpowertothendegree
a reply to: Entreri06

I think looking for meaning to life is more likely to be found in the clouds than the so called religions!

That doesn't strike me as a very evolved spiritual philosophy. I am not suggesting you couldn't glean meaning from such an endeavor, but it seems lacking in substance.

a reply to: ketsuko

Don't know, is the short answer. Pagan is as good as any, and people know what it means.
It's a Latin word, so we can blame the Romans. I don't mean the term is used as an insult these days - it isn't. But it was mildly derogatory at the time. And then it becomes common use -everyone wants to appear civilised, right? - and before you know it all sorts of practices, beliefs and knowledge get swept up under that one term and the individual strands get lost.

Language is as much a constraint for us as it frees us to express ourselves. Ironic, as you say.

originally posted by: Entreri06


Is it fair to lump all of the polytheistic religions into the pagan box? Shouldn't we have "religion" type names for them all?

in my opinion (no) -- there are civilized polytheist.

polytheism is used in generalizing fashion when comparing with other religions, or what Islam was say in the year 600AD

Hindus are some of the nicest people you'll meet...

---

a family friend and excellent public performer...

a reply to: BlueJacket

Paganism..is not best described by "nature religions" please dont make me show you.

originally posted by: ketsuko

originally posted by: SaturnFX
Personally I would like a revival of the greek pantheon. Such a interesting and colorful set of demigods they had,

Well then ... go for it.

Nothing stops the two of you.

Not the same when you do it mostly for cosplay.
There was a wiccan coven in my town that practiced a ancient Egyptian pantheon. I think it was an excuse for them to dress in white and gold frankly.
That was kinda neat.

originally posted by: BlueJacket
a reply to: BlueJacket

Paganism..is not best described by "nature religions" please dont make me show you.

Well it seems that after the introduction of Christianity to the Greek, the later establishment of the Roman Holy Catholic Church referred to any uncivilized or barbaric peoples as Pagans, regardless if they had 1 nature god or 50.

Being that this style of the use of the word "pagan" was held significantly longer and really didn't attain popular use until the later establishment, I would say that the 'Greek' paganism the OP mentions is just plain polytheism, as the Ancient Greeks we're civilized.

"Pagan" implies barbaric or uncivilized.

a reply to: AinElohim

Hah! thanks man, I enjoy you. You certainly cause me to reflect, research, or double check my own "beliefs" before I post...hell and then, occasionally again mid thread