Page 1 of 3 123 LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 26

Thread: What Role Does/Should Religion Play in Lives of Modern Human Beings?

  1. #1
    Account Inactive

    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Last Online
    Thursday, July 5th, 2012 @ 06:07 AM
    Subrace
    Atlantid
    Country
    United States United States
    Location
    Metropolis
    Gender
    Age
    41
    Family
    Single
    Occupation
    Journalist
    Religion
    Protestant
    Posts
    6,666
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    0
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    29
    Thanked in
    29 Posts

    What Role Does/Should Religion Play in Lives of Modern Human Beings?

    State what you consider to be the role of religion in today's world.

    To me, religion is a cultural factor that makes us all the more aware of our place in a multicultural society. Being White, and not being Protestant, for example, will make one more susceptible to identity crises, or related problems. It's better to be a culturo-ethno-religious group, than it is to be a solely cultural group. It makes us stronger. That's just my opinion. If you don't agree, give me your idea on the place of religion in our modern reality first and foremost, and then tell me why you think I am wrong.

  2. #2

  3. #3
    Senior Member
    Moody's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2002
    Last Online
    Tuesday, July 10th, 2012 @ 09:18 AM
    Status
    Available
    Ethnicity
    English
    Ancestry
    Albion
    Subrace
    Paleo-Atlantid
    Country
    United Kingdom United Kingdom
    State
    Essex Essex
    Location
    England
    Gender
    Family
    Single adult
    Occupation
    Investigator of Souls
    Politics
    Pan-Germanic Nationalist
    Religion
    Runosophy
    Posts
    1,904
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    0
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    17
    Thanked in
    17 Posts
    The problem arises when religion is not ethnic-based and rather states that the religion itself is for all people, whoever they may be, as long as they believe in, or follow that religion.

    In other words, when the religion has universalist pretentions.

    And most religions do have this; Christianity certainly has.

    So, we are looking for a religion which has a strict ethnic basis and is therefore particularlist, not universalist.

    Of course, many theologians would say that religion is by its very nature, universalist.

    If that is so, then religion is destructive of any ethnic-based movement.
    Why are there beings at all, & why not rather nothing?
    [Leibniz/Heidegger]

  4. #4
    Senior Member
    velvet's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Last Online
    Sunday, March 8th, 2020 @ 03:10 AM
    Status
    Available
    Ethnicity
    German
    Ancestry
    Northern Germany
    Subrace
    Faelid
    Country
    Germany Germany
    State
    North Rhine-Westphalia North Rhine-Westphalia
    Gender
    Age
    47
    Zodiac Sign
    Sagittarius
    Family
    Married
    Occupation
    Pestilent Supremacy
    Politics
    Blut und Boden
    Religion
    Fimbulwinter
    Posts
    5,000
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    1,295
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    1,486
    Thanked in
    680 Posts
    The idea of a universal god really is absurd. Why would one have such a god? Of what use could it possibly be, specially in terms of supporting to maintain ethnic homogenity, or the awareness of ethnicity at all, when everyone can worship this god? I find it a rather offensive thing, a god or pantheon is for one folk only, other folks cannot come and occupy this, the folk's cult-culture, steal it and make it their own. Why would they do that anyway? Only when they have no pride in their own folk, their gods and their culture.

    Culture grows from cult/cultus/ritus, and this grows from the people. It just is not universal. To make it such turns quite some things upside down, and then it also cannot fulfill any useful role anymore in maintaining the ethnic group or their culture.

    Christianity eradicated the connection beween ethnic group - > cult -> culture, as it only can replace the cult-part because it doesnt possess cultural aspects itself and requires culture to be present when it comes and hijacks it. It still created damage, it cut off the flow of renewing energy from the ethnic root into the culture-tree, and when culture is one aspect of the life-fueling forces that keep a folk growing and developing, then it's high time to get rid off it again.


    Spirituality, cult, culture makes only sense within an ethnic definition. To disregard the ethnic element, as all monotheistic religions do, is damaging to the ethnic element. But without the ethnic element, there is no more culture, as it is bound to die like a tree whose roots are cut off.
    Ein Leben ist nichts, deine Sprosse sind alles
    Aller Sturm nimmt nichts, weil dein Wurzelgriff zu stark ist
    und endet meine Frist, weiss ich dass du noch da bist
    Gefürchtet von der Zeit, mein Baum, mein Stamm in Ewigkeit

    my signature

  5. #5
    Senior Member

    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Last Online
    Monday, February 20th, 2017 @ 11:02 AM
    Ethnicity
    Dutch
    Gender
    Posts
    527
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    0
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    4
    Thanked in
    4 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by velvet View Post
    The idea of a universal god really is absurd.
    Because?

    Why would one have such a god? Of what use could it possibly be, specially in terms of supporting to maintain ethnic homogenity, or the awareness of ethnicity at all, when everyone can worship this god?
    What do you mean, "use"? Gods are not means or tools. Gods are to be approached for favour and good fortune, not for service to men.

    I find it a rather offensive thing, a god or pantheon is for one folk only, other folks cannot come and occupy this, the folk's cult-culture, steal it and make it their own. Why would they do that anyway? Only when they have no pride in their own folk, their gods and their culture.
    You find it offensive? Really?

    In the old days nations already figured they were pretty much worshipping the same gods as the nations neighbouring them. The Romans looked upon the gods whom our heathen ancestors were worshipping and recognised them as the gods they themselves were worshipping. And vice versa. Our heathen ancestors didn't contemplate the gods as their gods, who rule over Germania, but as the gods, who rule over Middle-Earth, i.e. the world of men. They had their own stories and nomenclature regarding the gods, but so do Christians from different cultures with regard to God. In other words, the pantheon of our heathen ancestors was universal. Only their relationship to the divine was particular. And again, so it is in the Christian world.

    Culture grows from cult/cultus/ritus, and this grows from the people. It just is not universal. To make it such turns quite some things upside down, and then it also cannot fulfill any useful role anymore in maintaining the ethnic group or their culture.
    Man can only reach the divine when the divine allows it and reaches down to man. That is a 'top-down process'. If the divine can be reached under the conditions laid out by man, then it is not the divine, for by definition the divine is above man. The man who makes demands in spiritual matters will only invite the company of demons, who are eager to prey on the hubris of man.

    Christianity eradicated the connection beween ethnic group - > cult -> culture, as it only can replace the cult-part because it doesnt possess cultural aspects itself and requires culture to be present when it comes and hijacks it. It still created damage, it cut off the flow of renewing energy from the ethnic root into the culture-tree, and when culture is one aspect of the life-fueling forces that keep a folk growing and developing, then it's high time to get rid off it again.
    Christianity doesn't "hijack" it. It presupposes pre-existing ethnic culture, and functions as its crown and mantle. It sanctifies the nation. It doesn't "require" any culture, the folk requires culture, and Christianity does not deny the folk its culture. It only corrects course here and there, to ensure a good fate for the souls of the different nations. As the Bible shows, nationhood continues into and throughout the afterlife.

    Spirituality, cult, culture makes only sense within an ethnic definition. To disregard the ethnic element, as all monotheistic religions do, is damaging to the ethnic element. But without the ethnic element, there is no more culture, as it is bound to die like a tree whose roots are cut off.
    Ethnic identity is very important. Christianity by itself does not disregard the ethnic element. Christianity soaked in a thoroughly liberal and decadent environment is another matter.

    Why do I never hear you about how the majority of neopagans are cosmopolitan liberals eager to mix with the world? Are they still somehow "Christian" in your eyes? What strength and credibility does you argument have when everything about our predicament is supposed to be the fault of Christianity and the Jews? And what authority does your neopagan faith hold? Does it follow logic? Nay, all I see in your long-winded posts is an appeal to sentiment.

  6. #6
    Senior Member
    Moody's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2002
    Last Online
    Tuesday, July 10th, 2012 @ 09:18 AM
    Status
    Available
    Ethnicity
    English
    Ancestry
    Albion
    Subrace
    Paleo-Atlantid
    Country
    United Kingdom United Kingdom
    State
    Essex Essex
    Location
    England
    Gender
    Family
    Single adult
    Occupation
    Investigator of Souls
    Politics
    Pan-Germanic Nationalist
    Religion
    Runosophy
    Posts
    1,904
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    0
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    17
    Thanked in
    17 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by Anlef View Post
    In the old days nations already figured they were pretty much worshipping the same gods as the nations neighbouring them. The Romans looked upon the gods whom our heathen ancestors were worshipping and recognised them as the gods they themselves were worshipping. And vice versa. Our heathen ancestors didn't contemplate the gods as their gods, who rule over Germania, but as the gods, who rule over Middle-Earth, i.e. the world of men. They had their own stories and nomenclature regarding the gods, but so do Christians from different cultures with regard to God. In other words, the pantheon of our heathen ancestors was universal. Only their relationship to the divine was particular. And again, so it is in the Christian world.
    The Romans wanted to appropriate the Germanic gods to their own, as a means of conquest, just as the succesor religion to the Roman Empire, Christianity, appropriated the Germanic festivals.
    Most of the parallels made by the Roman pagans to Germanic gods are fairly absurd; - Odin + mercury? The links are tenuous at best.
    The Germanic Middle Earth was was populated by Germanics, and also by dwarves and trolls and other subhuman beings who were non-Germanic.
    The Gods and Goddesses of the Germanics were Germanic too; and they were not thought to universalise over non-Germanics.
    The gods were particular to tribes and to tribes within tribes.
    The pagan Germanics prided themselves on the distance and separation they maintained from other races.

    The God of the Christians - and their Saviour too - are Semitic.

    It is Semitic arrogance to believe that a Semitic god and saviour rules non-Semitic peoples.

    Man can only reach the divine when the divine allows it and reaches down to man. That is a 'top-down process'. If the divine can be reached under the conditions laid out by man, then it is not the divine, for by definition the divine is above man. The man who makes demands in spiritual matters will only invite the company of demons, who are eager to prey on the hubris of man.
    That is the Semitic view.
    Germanic humanity is not even a slave to his own gods and goddesses; so how could he be a slave the gods of other races?
    The Germanic Gods are the expression of the very best examples of the Germanic race: the master race.
    Why are there beings at all, & why not rather nothing?
    [Leibniz/Heidegger]

  7. #7
    Senior Member
    velvet's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Last Online
    Sunday, March 8th, 2020 @ 03:10 AM
    Status
    Available
    Ethnicity
    German
    Ancestry
    Northern Germany
    Subrace
    Faelid
    Country
    Germany Germany
    State
    North Rhine-Westphalia North Rhine-Westphalia
    Gender
    Age
    47
    Zodiac Sign
    Sagittarius
    Family
    Married
    Occupation
    Pestilent Supremacy
    Politics
    Blut und Boden
    Religion
    Fimbulwinter
    Posts
    5,000
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    1,295
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    1,486
    Thanked in
    680 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by Anlef
    If the divine can be reached under the conditions laid out by man, then it is not the divine, for by definition the divine is above man. The man who makes demands in spiritual matters will only invite the company of demons, who are eager to prey on the hubris of man.
    Exactly, that's why christianity is worship of a demon.

    The rest is answered by Moody already.
    Ein Leben ist nichts, deine Sprosse sind alles
    Aller Sturm nimmt nichts, weil dein Wurzelgriff zu stark ist
    und endet meine Frist, weiss ich dass du noch da bist
    Gefürchtet von der Zeit, mein Baum, mein Stamm in Ewigkeit

    my signature

  8. #8
    Account Inactive

    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Last Online
    Thursday, May 3rd, 2012 @ 09:29 PM
    Ethnicity
    English
    Ancestry
    Mainly Yorkshire
    Country
    England England
    State
    Yorkshire Yorkshire
    Location
    Yorkshire
    Gender
    Age
    35
    Politics
    Libertarian
    Posts
    2,109
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    0
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    31
    Thanked in
    31 Posts
    I wouldn't mind belonging to a folk religion, so long as it was sufficiently exclusive. As a way of binding a people together, placing everyone on the same cultural page, giving people a singluar goal to work towards, I think it would be beneficial. This type of security and direction is what the majority of people will always need, and they'll look for it one way or another. We may as well allow people a healthy solution, rather than see the hotch-potch of silliness that sprouts today, with people believing the first pseudo-profound thought that enters their head.

    I can't agree, philosophically, with any religion. But if it added another layer of familiarity and spiritual bondage with my people, I'd willingly submit to it. Certain things are more important than truth.

    I think the best type of religion is one that acknowledge's its mythical roots, that sees itself as a piece of culture and not something literal. Weakness of dogma should flow from this implicit understanding. It should remain a cultural tie and not something that stunts scientific and philosophical understanding.

  9. #9
    6th army lives matter
    Chlodovech's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Last Online
    @
    Ethnicity
    Flemish
    Ancestry
    Frankish
    Country
    Holy Roman Empire Holy Roman Empire
    Gender
    Religion
    Catholic
    Posts
    3,807
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    2,230
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    3,296
    Thanked in
    1,523 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by Moody View Post
    So, we are looking for a religion which has a strict ethnic basis and is therefore particularlist, not universalist.
    It depends on what you're looking for, ... it's difficult for a particularist religion to lay claim to the full truth, but I guess that's not your objective when proposing to revive/create a tribal religion in modern times.

    Let's not forget particularist religions have proven themselves to be vulnerable for penetration by foreign deities and ideas as well, the Romans jumped at every chance to enlarge their pantheon.

    Neither is a particularist religion going to ward off foreign lifestyles (or foreign genes, for that matter) and technology per definition, again the Roman empire is the best example of this fact. The provinces of the Roman empire usually had no qualms about imitating their rulers as much as possible.

    If that is so, then religion is destructive of any ethnic-based movement.
    Theoretically speaking that could be true, but this point you make is historically flawed, I would say. For instance, the split between Orthodox and Western Christianity is a cultural-ethnic affair. Arabs will turn to the Church(es) of the East, and not directly to Rome or Moscow. There are exceptions, like the Poles or the Hungarians, but they are exceptions - and curiously enough they're amongst the most ethnically aware peoples of Europe.

    And let's not forget that there exists no Western nation(-state) without there being a strong Christian foundation or justification for it.

    Ultimately, I can be catholic or I could be heathen, but I can never be Italian or Argentinian - or a Dane - or anything else but Flemish. There's no contradicition at all. Especially not in our times, where nation-states have replaced empires and kingdoms while at the same time church and state are separated. A particularist religion with a strong racialist undertone religion would simply be an affair of nationalists with a knack for mysticism and a feel for the divine.

    IMO, the immigration policy of a nation is what matters most for preserving its ethnic homogenity, it's a sociopolitical choice, not a religious one - and everything else serves as an interesting afterthought.
    “War is waged by men; not by beasts, or by gods. It is a peculiarly human activity. To call it a crime against mankind is to miss at least half its significance; it is also the punishment of a crime.” - Frederic Manning, The Middle Parts of Fortune

  10. #10
    Spenglerian
    „Friend of Germanics”
    Funding Membership Inactive
    Caledonian's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Last Online
    Tuesday, July 26th, 2011 @ 05:30 AM
    Status
    Available
    Ethnicity
    Scottish
    Ancestry
    Scotland,England, Germany,Austria,Switzerland
    Subrace
    Alpinid
    Country
    United States United States
    Location
    Sverige snart nog
    Gender
    Age
    34
    Family
    Single adult
    Occupation
    RecyclingPlant / College Student
    Politics
    Socially Progressive Nationalism
    Religion
    Atheist, Nihilist, And Mystic
    Posts
    2,432
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    0
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    20
    Thanked in
    20 Posts
    As a atheist I would say none at all.

    However if people must insist on being religious I would like to see it restricted to private family with the occasional festivities of the public community without intervention or support from the state.
    National Socialism is the only salvation for Germanics and Europids everywhere. Capitalism, libertarianism, and communism is the enemy.

    National socialized collectivism must prevail over radical individualism.

Page 1 of 3 123 LastLast

Similar Threads

  1. "Jews Will Play a Leading Role in Multicultural Europe"
    By Roderic in forum Immigration & Multiculturalism
    Replies: 69
    Last Post: Saturday, November 21st, 2020, 02:53 PM
  2. 'Trading Germans': the Secret Cold War Traffic in Human Beings
    By Siebenbürgerin in forum Germanic Diaspora, Enclaves, & Influences
    Replies: 8
    Last Post: Saturday, October 13th, 2018, 08:19 PM
  3. Why is Left-handedness Relatively Uncommon in Human Beings?
    By Ingvaeonic in forum Medical & Behavioral Genetics
    Replies: 7
    Last Post: Tuesday, May 16th, 2017, 06:25 PM
  4. Civilization As Agriculture Or Farming of Human Beings
    By Caledonian in forum Cultural & Linguistic Anthropology
    Replies: 7
    Last Post: Saturday, May 14th, 2016, 11:48 PM
  5. Most human beings 'natural born slaves'
    By Werwolf. in forum Psychology, Behavior, & Neuroscience
    Replies: 3
    Last Post: Tuesday, April 11th, 2006, 05:26 AM

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •