I’m not usually inclined to post too much about theology. And I use the word theology, because the nature or truth of God/s/ess/es, the Divine, Divinity, Deity is very complex and for me exists inside a system in which the quintessential practice is the alteration of perception and expereince. There is therefore much less theology and a great deal more science and philosophy. ‘Truth’ in this way is, most broadly, useless for anyone else except for me, as experienced as part of a whole. Yesterday’s ‘truth’ may influence, but not necessarily hold in today’s perspective, or expereince, and to be perfectly honest, I do not require it too.
It must follow that I do not then require anything that might be termed God to be real or true. This is an interesting notion, I’m also OK there. If tomorrow definitive evidence was produced to show that no gods existed, I would not be particularly phased, since these terms are used to describe an experience, a perspective, which does not need to be true for any person except for me, or necessarily for longer than the expereince of it lasts. This follows for things which might not be termed gods; spirit in any or all forms, pantheistic or animistic.
But why make mention of it now?
I had the pleasure of reading Gede Parma‘s post today, and it spoke volumes to me in terms of my expereince and beliefs. Prompted by Crowdsourcing Pagan Theology over at The Wild Hunt, which is possibly the most ambitious project I’ve come across in terms of Pagan Theology, ever. I can not recommend enough that you read both. Because whilst I have no ambition to convince anyone of anything or any ‘fundamental truth’ I do think people should think on the very nature of truth and belief, and how we as individuals partake of both on a grand scale that includes individual truth that forms and informs our lives but does not hold for any other person or even any other time, right through to those truths like gravity, that can not be denied by any person regardless of their particular worldview, and hold every moment.
It points to something very particular. And that is something I have made mention of here before. The fact that the term ‘pagan’ is a very very loose term. But primarily it is used to describe a belief system(s). It is a religious consideration. At least for those ‘outside the square’ and even sometimes in it. Or perhaps from a Christian perspective, or even a western Materialist one. What struck me about Gede’s response is that it pointed to my experience of Witchcraft, as a system in which belief and religiosity may or may not play a part. In a blunt way, Pagan is to Witchcraft what Theology is to Philosophy, or, what orthodoxy is to orthopraxis.
What I would suggest is for you to get your thinking caps on, test the grey matter, and think about it. Philosophise, it’s good for you. Personally, if I believe anything, it is that when we allow ourselves the opportunity to contemplate these grand, all encompassing and difficult ideas, we get closer to meeting the full potential of our consciousness; that is, where imagination/creativity and abstraction, and reason and logic exist in equal measure, and we can enter a place of awe.