Religious self-identification...

[Hagazusa]

Re: Religious self-identification...

At the moment I define myself as agnostic. Not that I question the existence of a divine force in the universe. No, I just think that the divine can't be known by us humans. For now, at least.

[Dumuzi]

Re: Religious self-identification...

Christian Monotheist represent :P

Monotheists represent!

[Malflick]

Re: Religious self-identification...

Monotheists represent!

*Gives Dumuzi the Bro-Fist of YHWH*

[Dumuzi]

Re: Religious self-identification...

*Gives Dumuzi the Bro-Fist of YHWH*

[NightQueen]

Re: Religious self-identification...

Agnostic Pantheist and possible really soft (or hard depending on how you look at it) polytheist. I generally believe the gods are actually created by humans. Our collect beliefs in them sprang them into existence. I do believe that each one is a distinct entity, so that's why I'm not sure if I'm a really hard or really soft polytheist. I do believe in an ultimate power, but I have no idea what that is or if it really matters (I tend to think it doesn't).

[LunarHarvest]

Re: Religious self-identification...

Hard Polytheist.

Each deity is properly unique and independent in its own existence and actions. That's about it. :^^:

[shadow1982]

Re: Religious self-identification...

Hard Polytheist... but I am not sure if I believe all Gods of all cultures exist or all cultures worshipped the same gods through their own cultural lens. (I'm also not sure if that even made sense!!)

[Nightingale]

Re: Religious self-identification...

mine has fluctuated a lot over the years, but currently I am definitely a hard polytheist... like most of the rest of you, I see!

[Threshold]

Re: Religious self-identification...

I am a practicing pantheist, who happens to worship the Sun, because I can't help myself.

BUT...I also thing that lots of other paths are genuine, they just aren't my calling.

For me the Universe is the ultimate reality, and it's all I concern myself with.

No afterlife...better make this one count.

I don't believe in monotheism, in that I don't accept there is one god over everything..but I think that monotheists will have their monotheistic afterlife, they will just be surprised that the rest of us don't show up to their heaven or hell, or whatever afterlife various monotheists believe in.

[Medusa]

Re: Religious self-identification...

Hard Polytheist... but I am not sure if I believe all Gods of all cultures exist or all cultures worshipped the same gods through their own cultural lens. (I'm also not sure if that even made sense!!)

I think I'm going to be Polyatheist. All gods don't exist. Can that be a new name? I really like it

[Rae'ya]

Re: Religious self-identification...

Hard Polytheist... but I am not sure if I believe all Gods of all cultures exist or all cultures worshipped the same gods through their own cultural lens. (I'm also not sure if that even made sense!!)

Just so you know, this is actually the difference between 'hard polytheist' and 'soft polytheist'. Hard polytheists believe that all the gods exist as separate entities. Soft polytheists believe that all gods exist as manifestations of the same god/s... ie the same gods seen through different cultural lens. Soft polytheists differ on how many individual gods there are, depending on whether or not they are also pantheistic, duotheistic, an archetypist or whatever else underlies their polytheism. But generally, you can't be a hard polytheist if you believe that a significant portion of gods are just the same one worshipped through a different cultural lens.

[Louisvillian]

Re: Religious self-identification...

If I may ask, what is deism? To be honest, I see this term for the first time, and it's very interesting!

As said by others, the belief that deity exists but has had little to no effect on the world after its creation. And the general rejection of religious knowledge in favour of reason and observation as a way to justify the existence of said deity. For instance, many of the founding fathers of the United States were Deists, influenced by the philosophy of the 18th century Enlightenment/Age of Reason.

[Thorbjorn]

Re: Religious self-identification...

Me: panendeist, hard polytheist Asatruar.

If there is a God, it is the deist God more like the impersonal, nirguna ("without attributes") Brahman of Hinduism. It is simply the basis, ground, substrate of existence, or existence itself. Because this basis of existence permeates and pervades all, there is the panen-. I don't think this precludes the existence of individual gods. They are older, greater, wiser, more powerful and advanced beings than we are.

- - - Updated - - -

Hard polytheists believe that all the gods exist as separate entities. Soft polytheists believe that all gods exist as manifestations of the same god/s... ie the same gods seen through different cultural lens. ... you can't be a hard polytheist if you believe that a significant portion of gods are just the same one worshipped through a different cultural lens.

Given this definition, I just learned I'm actually a soft polytheist. Something new to learn every day.

[Aeran]

Re: Religious self-identification...

I don't feel that any one of those labels fully covers my worldview, but panentheism is the closest (although with aspects of monism, animism and polytheism - it's complicated )

[Rae'ya]

Re: Religious self-identification...

Given this definition, I just learned I'm actually a soft polytheist. Something new to learn every day.

Keep in mind the 'significant portion of gods' part in my last sentence though... it is certainly possible to be a hard polytheist and believe that some gods (almost the entire Roman pantheon comes to mind) are or were not completely distinct entities. I'm about as hard polytheist as it gets, but I actually believe that there are a few deities who were originally the same deity worshiped through a different cultural lens. So there's a little bit of room for cross-over in certain circumstances.