Why do you believe in God, or why not?

[basics]

Muizer,

When Noah and his family landed back on dry ground they already knew the Gospel and so they passed it on to their offspring who in turn passed it on and so forth. The sad part is that what they relayed became in many cases twisted making for other beliefs so God set aside Abraham that through him the true Gospel would be retained and its carriers the Israeli nation and out of whom the Christ would come which He did. So yes, you are correct in saying that a person can only become a Christian by the hearing or reading of the Gospel. The one sure thing is that even among the most isolated peoples the knowledge of there being a God was known by them.

Regarding the experiences of a religious nature for sure these events do happen and they happen because of the evil powers still at work even in our day. That will only change when Jesus Christ comes back to put all things in order including the end of the devil and his followers. No longer will he be able to convince people that God doesn't exist or that He doesn't mean what He says for on that day " Every knee shall bow and every tongue confess that Jesus Christ is Lord." To the religious He will say, " Depart from Me for I never knew you." That is what is written.

My experience is that I learned that man cannot become a Christian of his own volition, that it is God Who saves and that the Bible is His word as if He wrote it Himself warts and all. With this depleted body of mine the only strength I have left is the Gospel and being able to impart it as I do here.

[chriscase]

Surely God is incapable of losing his own creations?

[basics]

chriscase,

When Adam and Eve sinned God handed them over to the evil one, Satan, paving the way for the coming of Jesus Christ to save a certain people for Himself. Oh we may think this is all about man but no, for throughout history it has all been about God and His saving Grace, why? Because as is written, we were made for His good pleasure, us being bitpart players in His story. So yes, God is incapable of losing anything as we, creation, are all part of His Sovereign will which will be concluded when Jesus Christ returns to begin the new creation. From that point on there will be no more outer space rather a creation that knows only Light, those in that place enjoying it whilst over the chasm all the others not so. That is how Jesus described it and how it will be.

[MaximiIian]

Fair enough. I dated a Wiccan for some time in my twenties, and boy was the Goddess good to me for a while. Not that I particularly believed any of it literally.

To be fair, a significant minority of Wiccans don't believe in their gods as literal beings; they see them as Jungian archetypes that "live" within us, and ritual as a way of actualizing that potential, or at most as thoughtforms or egregores/tulpas. That's part of why "open source" Neo-Wicca is apt to distill the gods into a singular masculine God and a singular feminine Goddess (whereas initiatory Wicca just used "God" and "Goddess" as public-facing terms for gods whose names were oathbound).
That theological perspective has declined in the past 30 years, though, and has very little presence outside of Wicca within the broader Modern Pagan movement..

[MaximiIian]

I’d be interested to know more about how you conceptualize and acknowledge the old gods.

For me? They are beings of pure spirit, but nevertheless intimately tied into the world around us. In the same way that a human body might have a soul, the world around us has gods and spirits-- and not just nature, but humanity as well, and concepts near and dear to us. And like the human soul, they can subtly shift things towards whom they favor, though I doubt they can do impossible things in a flashy and dramatic fashion like you'd see in the stories. Myth is not the religion, after all.

And while they are primarily spirit, they are still beings with a mind, thoughts, feelings, and personality-- or at least, the capability of such. I believe that a god starts with an energetic spiritual presence, what the Romans called the numen, and that a personality, preferences, etc. may emerge over time through a feedback loop. A god's identity might be shaped by who it interacts with, whether that's other gods, or human worshippers, it might find that it likes some things more than others, and then those people it interacts with pick up on that and go to them for expertise and aid in that area. Not quite "we shaped them just as much as they shaped us", but definitely more of a reciprocal relationship and less of them existing fully formed a priori. I do very much see them as thinking, conscious beings that we can interact with, directly and indirectly, like any other personal entity, just that their "body" is either incredibly vast or incorporeal.

But that's just me. Plenty of pagans have different views, some very complex, some very simple. Some set aside theology and focus on practice and experiences. It runs the whole spectrum.

My understanding of paganism is there’s a more modern view of what the “gods” are. While the names, rituals and attributes of them are recognized and adhered to, to an extent, the gods are merely a way to refer to and understand the natural world in a spiritual way - that is, representations of nature, rather than literally existing outside of and independently from nature.

There's a diverse range of opinions, as pagan religions are not orthodoxic usually, though the most common belief in Modern Paganism is polytheism, a genuine belief that there are many gods.
Some Pagans, like Neoplatonists and Hermeticists, are panentheists and see the gods as impersonal and external to the universe, yet still able to interact with it through intermediary spirits, and often see some kind of supreme god that they are part of. Some are atheopagans who see the gods solely as a way for us to represent natural forces and abstract concepts, and spiritually relate to them, as you mention.

For the most part, these are outliers, and aren't very representative of Modern Paganism. Which isn't to say that they are wrong or incorrect, that would be an argumentum ad populum fallacy; I'm only reflecting on the demographic trends within Paganism, and what might be representative of the mainstream within Modern Paganism. Atheopaganism was more common, though never really the majority in any one sect; it has declined considerably in the past 30 years, which has also seen the growth of devotional polytheist traditions, reconstructionist approaches, and widespread reportage of spiritual experiences that align with a polytheistic view (which, again, has no bearing on its true-ness, but it is a factor in people generally drifting towards that view).

I think it's a mistake to see panentheism and atheopaganism as "more modern" and polytheism as "less modern"-- Neoplatonists existed in the Ancient world, and so did people who saw the gods as abstracted archetypes. These views have been part of the polytheistic philosophical tradition for thousands of year. We are just in the midst of reviving them and restarting the conversation.

For my part, I’m a former Christian, just not the edgy, resentful kind. I consider biological evolution fundamentally incompatible with Biblical Christianity and so I was intellectually forced to deconvert.

I don't have any intention of re-converting you to Christianity, I have my own many quibbles with it. However, I would be remiss if I didn't point out that mythology is not taken literally in many religions across the world. Sacred narratives, whatever their source, don't have to be literally true for them to carry some meaning for you or your people.

[basics]

There's myth and there's reality and so it won't surprise anyone to hear me say that my eighty plus years on this planet has shown me that there is a God on Whom one can believe on and trust. I know that all through my life He has been there guiding and protecting me till I reached the point when He called me to account for my wickedness by revealing Jesus Christ to me. In those moments He changed my life forever something I could never do by myself and from that time on I have experienced many things beyond the natural and treat as normal. Therefore it comes as no surprise to read of the disbelief of many in these threads as I was once one of you but I'm not sorry to have to say that you are all wrong as all will find out on that great day when Jesus Christ returns to confirm exactly Who He is. The Gospel is the key to where you go next so grasp it whilst you can.

[Morticia Iunia Bruti]

For me? They are beings of pure spirit, but nevertheless intimately tied into the world around us. In the same way that a human body might have a soul, the world around us has gods and spirits-- and not just nature, but humanity as well, and concepts near and dear to us. And like the human soul, they can subtly shift things towards whom they favor, though I doubt they can do impossible things in a flashy and dramatic fashion like you'd see in the stories. Myth is not the religion, after all.

And while they are primarily spirit, they are still beings with a mind, thoughts, feelings, and personality-- or at least, the capability of such. I believe that a god starts with an energetic spiritual presence, what the Romans called the numen, and that a personality, preferences, etc. may emerge over time through a feedback loop. A god's identity might be shaped by who it interacts with, whether that's other gods, or human worshippers, it might find that it likes some things more than others, and then those people it interacts with pick up on that and go to them for expertise and aid in that area. Not quite "we shaped them just as much as they shaped us", but definitely more of a reciprocal relationship and less of them existing fully formed a priori. I do very much see them as thinking, conscious beings that we can interact with, directly and indirectly, like any other personal entity, just that their "body" is either incredibly vast or incorporeal.

But that's just me. Plenty of pagans have different views, some very complex, some very simple. Some set aside theology and focus on practice and experiences. It runs the whole spectrum.

...

A good summary. i like it.

[Lord Thesaurian]

But that's just me. Plenty of pagans have different views, some very complex, some very simple. Some set aside theology and focus on practice and experiences. It runs the whole spectrum.

Interesting. Is this reciprocity something that attracts you to paganism, or is the latter something you find spirituality compelling for other reasons? That is to say, how do you see the gods’ impact in your personal life, and how do you elicit or acknowledge it? Maybe it doesn’t quite work that way, but I’m trying to appropriately frame the question of what you get out of it.

I think it's a mistake to see panentheism and atheopaganism as "more modern" and polytheism as "less modern"-- Neoplatonists existed in the Ancient world, and so did people who saw the gods as abstracted archetypes. These views have been part of the polytheistic philosophical tradition for thousands of year. We are just in the midst of reviving them and restarting the conversation.

Ah ok, that makes sense. Thanks! I guess I assumed atheist aspects would be a later development. I spend too much time on streaming platforms, if you have any video recommendations regarding the conversation.

I don't have any intention of re-converting you to Christianity, I have my own many quibbles with it. However, I would be remiss if I didn't point out that mythology is not taken literally in many religions across the world. Sacred narratives, whatever their source, don't have to be literally true for them to carry some meaning for you or your people.

I appreciate that. I think most of what I can take away from Christianity doesn’t need a god and the rest is simply true in my view. That being man will destroy himself eventually, or even soon, regardless of whether or not gods and devils have anything to do with it. As depressing as that might seem, I don’t think I’m in any danger of succumbing to nihilism. But if there’s one thing the Christians get right, it’s that there’s no hope without Jesus. To be fair, I could see myself worshipping the sun, if I didn’t know it was the sun. The ancients were onto something there. Even early Christians sometimes dallied with both. There’s at least one guy who hedged his bets.

[MaximiIian]

Interesting. Is this reciprocity something that attracts you to paganism, or is the latter something you find spirituality compelling for other reasons?

It's something that I've come to believe and feel due to my experiences with the gods, and with spirits of local places. I came to Paganism before those experiences, so it's not necessarily something that attracted me to Paganism in the first place. Though I suppose it's definitely something that keeps me interested, in being part of something larger than myself but still where I can make an impact.

That is to say, how do you see the gods’ impact in your personal life, and how do you elicit or acknowledge it?

At the most basic level, prayer and offerings being made and answered, and divination in various methods to find if it was coincidence or not.
Delving deeper, and this takes a bit of practice to cultivate, one might have a sensitivity to their presence, an awareness of their energy, and responding it to it. I can feel when Dionysos or Pan are present, etc. It took time, effort, and practice to do so-- and I believe this is a skill anyone can cultivate via experience, I don't think it's a "spiritual gift" that only a few have, but it is something that is deliberately cultivated, and probably something that was more widespread in societies that were based on an assumption of polytheism.
More complicated are ritually-induced altered states of consciousness, to place one's mind in an ecstatic or trance state where things like possession, clairvoyance, mediumship, etc. are more likely to occur. What the Greeks would call epiphaneia, and relate to the religious states induced in various mystery religions and ecstatic rites, marked by the direct presence of a deity or spirit in or through a person. These can be quite disorienting, and will probably knock your ass out, so they shouldn't be done without preparation.

And certainly all of these things are a bit of a leap of faith, and a skeptic could easily handwave it as wishful thinking or pareidolia; these are all things I consider and take into account. I am skeptical of my own experiences. I believe that they are real because I can recognize their strangeness, I can note their consistencies, and I have at times shared the experiences with other people who could attest to it. But I know these are subjective, and I don't expect others to take them at face value or believe them-- unlike Basics over here.

Ah ok, that makes sense. Thanks! I guess I assumed atheist aspects would be a later development.

I mean, yeah, I think among atheopagans, the viewpoints they most often espouse, are influenced more by modern psychology, especially Jungian psychology. But the broad idea of abstracting the gods to the point that they aren't seen as beings with agency but as a psychological construct, goes back to ancient philosophers like Anaxagoras, Euhemerus, and Cicero.

I spend too much time on streaming platforms, if you have any video recommendations regarding the conversation.

Oh definitely. Mainly, on Youtube, I'd check out Ocean Keltoi, who is a Heathen (Germanic Pagan) video essayist, who has a whole video series on polytheistic theology and philosophy (and another video about polytheism that's not in that playlist); and Aliakai, a Hellenic Pagan video essayist, who has a range of videos mainly about practice and Greek philosophy, but she does address some questions of theology among Hellenic reconstructionists, especially Mythological Literalism, Latent Christianity, Folkism, and how we talk about our religious experiences.

But if there’s one thing the Christians get right, it’s that there’s no hope without Jesus.

I'm not too sure about that. The more universal, hope-filled things attributed to Jesus, I would say aren't anything that hadn't already been said and attributed to Dionysos, and the Bacchic and Orphic mystery cults.
And all the rest about Jesus' attributed message, is highly contextual to 1st century Judaea and not really relevant to anyone outside of that context.
He ain't that special, in my opinion.

[basics]

Maximilian,

After four thousand years of predicting He would come and how He would come and you say He is nothing special or words to that effect. His union with Mary was not natural yet never knowing a man she bore Him to manhood. That academics from a foreign country travelled a great distance to pay Him homage and Herod when he heard plotted to kill Him is nothing special? What other figure in history has had such an impact on mankind as has Jesus Christ?

[MaximiIian]

After four thousand years of predicting He would come and how He would come

Vague prophecies about a Messiah which could be-- and were-- applied to several candidates.

His union with Mary was not natural yet never knowing a man she bore Him to manhood. That academics from a foreign country travelled a great distance to pay Him homage and Herod when he heard plotted to kill Him is nothing special?

You can't use Biblical narratives to justify a Biblical narrative idea. That's just circular logic.

What other figure in history has had such an impact on mankind as has Jesus Christ?

In terms of impact? Alexander the Great, easily, probably more.
And tbh, if it weren't for the formation of a wider Hellenistic world, Judaism would not likely have had the cultural conflicts and influences that led to Christianity emerging. Late Second Temple Judaism gave birth to a variety of sects, such as the Essenes, who were mystical in their approach and believed intensely in apocalypse and the imminent arrival of the Messiah. Early Christianity was not the only one of those, and this is what I mean-- it was just the one that adapted enough to survive among the Gentiles and come out on top. Very little of it was original, it kitbashed Judaic apocalypticism, Greek philosophy, and Dionysian liberation theology into a single package.

[basics]

Maximilian,

Unfortunately these other candidates never did what Jesus Christ did and is still doing. The Bible is God's word to us so how can it be circular logic if it does what it says it does, which is to bring men and women to a knowledge of what Jesus Christ our Creator did for them at Golgotha. But, not only that rather to lead and educate them in their new life in Christ. An example of its effect was that when the Falklands War was imminent Bible sales went through the roof, why? As for Alexander, what did he ever do in comparison to what Jesus Christ did?

[MaximiIian]

Unfortunately these other candidates never did what Jesus Christ did and is still doing.

Their followers would direct the same criticism towards Jesus of Nazareth, and any other competing claimants. Anything you can say about Jesus, they could say with equal faith towards their messianic figures. If your only argument is "but mine is the correct one though"...you have a very poorly-constructed argument, and one that's impossible to prove. Even Christian theologians in the Middle Ages didn't hinge things on faith alone-- and there's a reason for that, faith-based arguments get you no closer to understanding the divine.

The Bible is God's word to us so how can it be circular logic if it does what it says it does

Because you are using the text itself to prove the text's validity. That's the definition of circular logic.

As for Alexander, what did he ever do in comparison to what Jesus Christ did?

Of god and woman born, like your Jesus, but far more materially accomplished. Conquered east as far as India, and brought Thrace, Egypt, Persia, Syria, the Levant, and Anatolia firmly into the Greek cultural sphere, thereby spreading Hellenic philosophy, language, and culture across the known world. Without Alexander, there would be no wider Hellenistic (and then Greco-Roman) world reaching across Europe, West Asia, and North Africa. Without Alexander, there would be no spread of Greek learning, and the attendant progress in science, mathematics, and philosophy. The very basic ground of Western civilization was laid by Alexander and his successors.

Further, without Alexander, there would be no Jesus. Greek hegemony over the Land of Israel provoked conflict between Hellenistic Jews and the traditionalist Maccabees, leading to the Maccabean revolt and the Judaean war for independence. Without that, there's no factionalism to weaken Judaea enough for it to fall under Herod with Roman backing, and then subsequently under Roman domination. Without that, you likely would not see the general atmosphere of dread, apocalypticism, and social and culture upheaval that characterized Late Second Temple Judaism, from which Christianity sprang (probably as a variant of the Essenes). In a historical view, it's a pretty clear chain of events from one to the other. Change any one of those links in the chain, and the social conditions that created Christianity and its early leaders might not even have any reason to happen.

[basics]

Maximilion,

As Jesus Christ is our Creator, Alaexander wouldn't have been able to rise up unless the Lord had destined it so, but then He did another great thing when He destined Gt Britain to have the largest empire the world has ever seen and whose influence has yet to be surpassed. Where was Greece in all that as it is no more than a bankrupt nation today? Sadly, Britain today is on a slide for the basic reason that its people are turning their backs on God to devious practise and thoughts directly against the Word of God but thankfully there are still a people in it who hold fast to the Bible and whose teams of Evangelists are still at work spreading the Good News in many nations saving both physically and Spiritually many from abuse by hideous regimes.

You see following Jesus is not just about faith alone but in the doing, the doing that Jesus himself would have done in His time on earth. That's where the Bible is so important because it lays out any situation wherein a person can have his or her life completely changed for the betterment of their future destiny. That cannot happen unless God makes it happen and the Bible tells us how it does and in what sequence. You see it from the dead letter but the person who is born again of the Spirit of God now sees it because his or her eyes have been opened where they now see it as a Living Word to enjoy and learn from. That's where real Faith comes from because before like you we didn't have any until God the Father revealed Jesus Christ to us and imparted His Faith into us so that we could have no more doubts about Him.

[Lord Thesaurian]

It's something that I've come to believe and feel due to my experiences with the gods, and with spirits of local places. I came to Paganism before those experiences, so it's not necessarily something that attracted me to Paganism in the first place. Though I suppose it's definitely something that keeps me interested, in being part of something larger than myself but still where I can make an impact.

More complicated are ritually-induced altered states of consciousness, to place one's mind in an ecstatic or trance state where things like possession, clairvoyance, mediumship, etc. are more likely to occur. What the Greeks would call epiphaneia, and relate to the religious states induced in various mystery religions and ecstatic rites, marked by the direct presence of a deity or spirit in or through a person. These can be quite disorienting, and will probably knock your ass out, so they shouldn't be done without preparation.

Sounds pretty intense. How would you differentiate these experiences from being high on drugs or mentally ill? I only say so because that’s the common conclusion about what was happening to ancient oracles etc.

And certainly all of these things are a bit of a leap of faith, and a skeptic could easily handwave it as wishful thinking or pareidolia; these are all things I consider and take into account. I am skeptical of my own experiences. I believe that they are real because I can recognize their strangeness, I can note their consistencies, and I have at times shared the experiences with other people who could attest to it. But I know these are subjective, and I don't expect others to take them at face value or believe them-- unlike Basics over here.

You may have answered my previous question here. It’s a matter of comparing notes? I agree faith and dogma are probably a much bigger aspect of monotheism, because there being only one God is the whole point. I guess I’m just having trouble parsing what differentiates a “hard polytheist” from an open-minded atheist who enjoys shrooms, functionally speaking. And maybe the point is there isn’t as much difference as there would be with a monotheist. But I tend not to take pagans more seriously from a religious standpoint than I would someone who deeply enjoys the classical world as a hobby. But I suppose that’s just my former monotheist bias, because most atheists probably consider monotheists just as “delusional” as polytheists.

Oh definitely. Mainly, on Youtube, I'd check out Ocean Keltoi, who is a Heathen (Germanic Pagan) video essayist, who has a whole video series on polytheistic theology and philosophy (and another video about polytheism that's not in that playlist); and Aliakai, a Hellenic Pagan video essayist, who has a range of videos mainly about practice and Greek philosophy, but she does address some questions of theology among Hellenic reconstructionists, especially Mythological Literalism, Latent Christianity, Folkism, and how we talk about our religious experiences.

Would you say Germanic paganism or Hellenic paganism is the more common tradition among modern pagans? For some reason I have this view of Hellenic paganism as purely historical whereas Germanic paganism seems more timeless in the sense that you can probably practice anywhere there’s trees and birds.

I'm not too sure about that. The more universal, hope-filled things attributed to Jesus, I would say aren't anything that hadn't already been said and attributed to Dionysos, and the Bacchic and Orphic mystery cults.
And all the rest about Jesus' attributed message, is highly contextual to 1st century Judaea and not really relevant to anyone outside of that context.
He ain't that special, in my opinion.

Tbf, I bet most pagans, at least in Jesus’ day, would consider physical resurrection, either of God or man, to be a disgusting and nonsensical prospect. It was the Greeks/Romans, after all, who incorporated the concept of an immortal soul into Jewish apocalypticism. That’s how today we have the weird combo story where the souls of Christians ascend to heaven upon death, but also, for some reason, come back on judgement day to reunite with their physical bodies for a bit of cosmic theater. Jesus may have been one of many prospective messiahs in his day, but he was certainly the only successful one, probably beyond his wildest dreams. Apollonius of Tyana, for example, was a hugely popular pagan version of the messiah canonized very late in mythology as an anti-Christian polemic, so we can see influences working in both directions.

Further, without Alexander, there would be no Jesus. Greek hegemony over the Land of Israel provoked conflict between Hellenistic Jews and the traditionalist Maccabees, leading to the Maccabean revolt and the Judaean war for independence. Without that, there's no factionalism to weaken Judaea enough for it to fall under Herod with Roman backing, and then subsequently under Roman domination.

While it’s true Judaism as we know it was changed forever by Hellenistic influence, Jewish messianic tradition was not the result of that. The redeemer who will come to restore Israel to glory has been around for as long as the Jewish people have been getting rekt by foreign empires, expected to arrive around the time Jesus did. That’s why so many Jews listened when Jesus said he was the messiah, and why Jewish leaders leveraged significant political capital with the Romans to ultimately silence him. Jesus was a Jew and his followers were Jews. It is my view the universalism now attributed to him was an anachronistic development by Gentiles who did have the Greco-Roman frame of reference you mention. That is, Jesus did not intend to start a new religion. The only difference between the first Christians and mainstream Second Temple Judaism was the belief that Jesus was the one true Messiah. Even in terms of monotheism, it’s my understanding Roman paganism had already begun to consolidate around Sol Invictus as the preeminent god of gods by the late imperial period, rather than being solely a product of Christianity.

[MaximiIian]

Sounds pretty intense. How would you differentiate these experiences from being high on drugs or mentally ill? I only say so because that’s the common conclusion about what was happening to ancient oracles etc.

Well, I've never been high or had any kind of psychosis. So I can't say, though experience, how they're similar.
I suppose my opinion is that the use of entheogenic drugs doesn't make such experiences any less real or genuine. Rather, it simply lowers one's psychological barriers to receiving a divine experience.

When it comes to mental illness, particularly psychosis and other conditions that cause a break with reality, that is...trickier? You do have to watch out for folks promoting spiritual bypassing, which is using spirituality to downplay mental disorders; and you do have to do a bit more work to parse your psychosis from your spiritual experiences. From what I understand, spiritual and religious experiences retain their "strangeness", and you are lucidly aware that they are weird; whereas in a psychotic break, it's more like dream logic, where completely bonkers sh!t makes perfect sense to you. But again, I don't have any severe mental illness, so it's a bit outside of my wheelhouse, I only know what little I do from a friend who has a dissociative disorder, and practices paganism, and the very public struggles they've had.
I do not think that mentally ill people should be thrown under the bus in this; we can adapt the way we talk about spirituality and spiritual experiences to be inclusive of them, while also looking out for their mental health and getting them help when they need it.

It’s a matter of comparing notes?

For some, yeah. It has been increasingly more common, over the past 25 years, for shared gnosis to inform the interpretation of one's own UPG, a kind of "peer-reviewed gnosis". The internet as a networking tool has greatly further this, as pagans today can very easily talk to each other about practices and experiences in a way that they just couldn't before.
At the same time, there has been a bit of a backlash against the UPG/SPG/VPG concept; the delineation between the three can lead to a situation where a practitioner doubts their experiences to the point of paralysis or inflexibility, and an overreliance on incomplete sources. The Hellenic youtuber Aliakai has a video about it, and she largely comes down on the side of trusting yourself, trusting your experiences, and looking at the concept of spiritual experiences from the same lens that ancient Greeks did (i.e. epiphaneia).

I guess I’m just having trouble parsing what differentiates a “hard polytheist” from an open-minded atheist who enjoys shrooms, functionally speaking.

Not sure what you mean here. The difference is pretty obvious: hard polytheists believe that the gods are real beings with agency and personalities. An atheist, no matter how open-minded to the possibility of spiritual phenomena, does not believe in any gods.

Would you say Germanic paganism or Hellenic paganism is the more common tradition among modern pagans?

It depends on how narrow your definitions are. I'd say that Heathenry and Hellenic Reconstructionism are about equal in size. But Hellenic paganism, if we define it broadly to include any religious or spiritual practice involving Hellenic gods or based in the Classical tradition, is much more common. Just think about it-- Witches, Wiccans, Eclectic Pagans, and others gravitate to the Greek gods, in part because they're called by the Theoi, but also because the Theoi are deeply embedded in the popular consciousness and are a lot of people's first point of contact with the idea of polytheism.

Tbf, I bet most pagans, at least in Jesus’ day, would consider physical resurrection, either of God or man, to be a disgusting and nonsensical prospect.

The few times it is depicted in Greco-Roman religion, like with Dionysos and Adonis, those resurrected are meant to be incredibly strange figures, existing outside of the norm. It's worth noting that the Dionysian cult had to be purposefully "tamed" by Greek city governments before they were accepted, in part because Dionysos was such a radically challenging figure.

While it’s true Judaism as we know it was changed forever by Hellenistic influence, Jewish messianic tradition was not the result of that. The redeemer who will come to restore Israel to glory has been around for as long as the Jewish people have been getting rekt by foreign empires, expected to arrive around the time Jesus did.

Right, I didn't mean to imply it was the only cause of it. Just that it was the latest in a long line of foreign oppression, which accelerated that messianic/apocalyptic tradition. My point was more that the Hellenistic expansion led to the specific factional debates within Judaism that characterized the Late Second Temple period.

It is my view the universalism now attributed to him was an anachronistic development by Gentiles who did have the Greco-Roman frame of reference you mention.

For the most part, yes. Now, I suspect that the Essenes might have already been drifting into a universalizing mentality; but so little about them and their ideas are known for certain, so it's hard to say, and their mysticism may have been influenced by Orphism anyway. Regardless, the Christians pretty quickly (like, even within the Gospels' writing) took on influence from Middle Platonism and Stoicism. For the most part, I'd say that Early Christianity came to be Hellenistic Judaism taken to its "logical" conclusion-- Judaism that's become so Hellenized that it's no longer Judaic at its core, which made it palatable to the Gentile masses. A change made necessary in order to survive when it became clear Jesus was not coming back within the lifetimes of its founders.

Even in terms of monotheism, it’s my understanding Roman paganism had already begun to consolidate around Sol Invictus as the preeminent god of gods by the late imperial period, rather than being solely a product of Christianity.

Yes and no. Sol Invictus was given a high place as the god of the army and the personal guarantor of the emperor's sovereignty, possibly as an outgrowth of Aurelian's existing dedication to a sun god. But Jupiter remained important well into the same time period, as evidenced by Diocletian's devotion to him. Consolidation around Sol Invictus did not displace the state cults to the other gods, it more just added a new layer.

A more substantial revision would have been what Emperor Julian was doing, had it lasted longer. His Neoplatonist interpretation was monist, though it stopped short of monotheism. But it's important to note that Neoplatonism was more of a school of thought among the Roman elite, and doesn't really reflect the popular religion.

[basics]

So when a Nimrod pilot prays out loud when all the electrics on the plane close down even the engines just after take off and moments later everything comes back on, his fourteen crew being witnesses, that pilot is a mental case? When I travel ten miles locked in second gear yet after some prayer when my wife was in the shop we were going to the gears unlocked and have been fine ever since, that makes me a loonie? When a little girl's eyes are straightened after being severely squint from birth due to the laying on of hands and prayer, her mother and the others there were mentally ill?

No my friends the power of prayer in the name of Jesus did these things just as is written for there is a God, Father, Son and Holy Spirit, Who keeps His Word to all them who are born again of the Spirit. Of course if one is not born again of the Spirit of God one can only speculate and mock these things but after falling from a building head first and receiving only a broken collar bone, being nearly run over by a train, surviving four car crashes, being prevented by God from murder, my victim being dead before I could get to him, surviving cancer of the bladder, having a new heart valve inserted after having two mini strokes which alerted the doctors to the problem with my heart, knowing that I have a kidney stone found out after my gall bladder was removed and now suffering severe chest and back pains, how does one answer why I am still alive if there is no God?

One day, probably sooner than later, you won't see me on these threads, probably many saying thank god he is gone as that seems to be a common phrase from unbelievers so where will I be? A dead nothing or someone raised to life awaiting a new body that has no defects being with the One Who has protected me all my life until it was time to call me home? Yes one day we will all know.

[antaeus]

So when a Nimrod pilot prays out loud when all the electrics on the plane close down even the engines just after take off and moments later everything comes back on, his fourteen crew being witnesses, that pilot is a mental case? When I travel ten miles locked in second gear yet after some prayer when my wife was in the shop we were going to the gears unlocked and have been fine ever since, that makes me a loonie? When a little girl's eyes are straightened after being severely squint from birth due to the laying on of hands and prayer, her mother and the others there were mentally ill?

No my friends the power of prayer in the name of Jesus did these things just as is written for there is a God, Father, Son and Holy Spirit, Who keeps His Word to all them who are born again of the Spirit. Of course if one is not born again of the Spirit of God one can only speculate and mock these things but after falling from a building head first and receiving only a broken collar bone, being nearly run over by a train, surviving four car crashes, being prevented by God from murder, my victim being dead before I could get to him, surviving cancer of the bladder, having a new heart valve inserted after having two mini strokes which alerted the doctors to the problem with my heart, knowing that I have a kidney stone found out after my gall bladder was removed and now suffering severe chest and back pains, how does one answer why I am still alive if there is no God?

One day, probably sooner than later, you won't see me on these threads, probably many saying thank god he is gone as that seems to be a common phrase from unbelievers so where will I be? A dead nothing or someone raised to life awaiting a new body that has no defects being with the One Who has protected me all my life until it was time to call me home? Yes one day we will all know.

When people are confronted with death, they will look for every answer they know - including the supernatural. It is a sign of their desperation, not evidence of God.

I have exclaimed "oh my God" when I've seen something odd. The fact that someone exclaims "oh my God" is not evidence of God, it is evidence that someone has learned the phrase "oh my God" and nothing more. The fact that someone makes a plea to God when they're facing death is not evidence of God, it is evidence of that person's understanding of the concept of a god, and that they are desperate.

As for your impending doom, we're all united by that likelihood. At least for the next few decades. Beyond that we're going to see life-extension technology push our deaths back, perhaps indefinitely. I wish I could be around for that time, not because I'd like to live forever in this world (although that would be nice)... but rather because I'd like to see what happens to God, when people stop dying, or fearing death.

[basics]

antaeus,

Every person in the world is confronted by death from the very moment they are born, why? You talk of future accomplishments to keep people alive yet after billions of years of evolution that has not happened simply because there is a God Who has already determined the lifespan of each individual ever born and nothing will ever change that. God has placed many things on this planet that help us in the healing process some we are only now discovering yet there is still only One Way to eternal life and that is by our God and Saviour, Jesus Christ. So as this technology does not arrive as you think it might, why not try asking Jesus Christ to come into your life to assure you that you can have it in abundance with Him by your side?

[conon394]

You talk of future accomplishments to keep people alive yet after billions of years of evolution that has not happened

I thought you allowed only ~6000


------------

So when a Nimrod pilot prays out loud when all the electrics on the plane close down even the engines just after take off and moments later everything comes back on, his fourteen crew being witnesses, that pilot is a mental case?

No such event is recorded in Nimrod issue reporting. I am to assume a plane with a crew of at least 14 nobody was doing anything but waiting on the pilot praying? A plane is a profoundly complex thing and Nimrod loaded with gear and all of it looking to use power as the plane transfers to using its jets and takes very much more so than any civilian aircraft. Anyone who got out of order could easily have blown a fuse, overloaded the system etc. On a pane with as many engines as a Nimrod loosing all power would be intensely rare and since you can't name the particular version I can't say if it had a APU (for example only the newest B52 refits will have an APU because with so many engines the chance of them all going down was considered really remote). But even a total flame out can be solved by diving to relight the engines or the APU.