Originally Posted by
CFTraveler
... the Vatican Observatory have commented on more than one ocassion that the creation myth written in Genesis is simply leftover paganism, from ancient middle eastern traditions that persisted and were mythologized.
Right, Christianity has taken a lot (if not almost everything) from pagan religions. However, as much as I do like the first part, I do not like the last part of Consolmagnos' statement: ""Religion needs science to keep it away from superstition and keep it close to reality, to protect it from creationism, which at the end of the day
is a kind of paganism – it's turning God into a nature god."
This latter statement sends some bad vibes to me - even more in view of the latest enviromental Earth developments. Wouldn't we NEED desperately to have "nature as god" right now in this point of our history?
His statement is sth along the lines of "yeah, but in the end Christianity - if interpreted correctly and not superstitiously - is still wayyyyy better than any "pagan" cult.
I decidedly object to that.
I am not a pagan cultist (as a spiritual freethinker I do not belong to any religion now - but was raised as a Catholic, btw.) but I even see some great advantages in the "nature-connectedness" of the ancient animistic or nature-god(s) "pagan" cults.
Modern society has lost its connectedness to nature which the ancients still had. So I think that a kind of "nature god" (whatever it is) or "nature AS god" would still be better for our society than the anthropomorphic fear and awe-instilling guy that the Abrahamic religions created.
Therefore it is more than revealing to me that a while ago the Catholic Church uttered a statement to warn people of "nature worship" ... instead of worshipping "THEIR" God? To me that's an act of propaganda to "get rid of the competition' , since pagan cults are on the rise again among young people now.
„When one loses the deep intimate relationship with nature, then temples, mosques and churches become important.“
- Jiddu Krishnamurti
Bookmarks