#christian panentheism

[many-sparrows]

Almost started crying because I was thinking about how I'll never be able to physically kiss Jesus's hands (I would have made a superb ecstatic mystic). But my boyfriend's strong hands are right here, in mine. And I can talk to my bestfriend late into the night just like I would talk to God in a prayer and her voice will answer back. I think it's imperative that we take our love and devotion to the divine and project it outward. What is the point of devoting your life to 12 hrs of prayer a day or poverty or silence if it does not move you to enrich the lives of others? Serving the Light we find in each other is the chief way to serve the Savior. Kiss Him by kissing the hands of those you love, see His face in the ones who need you, listen when He speaks through others, and so forth

[fierysword]

[brothernick]

[zenwannabe]

“When Christians hear the word “incarnation,” most think about the birth of Jesus, who personally demonstrated God’s radical unity with humanity. I want to suggest that the first incarnation was the moment described in Genesis 1, when God joined in unity with the physical universe and became the light inside of everything.” —Richard Rohr 

[handweavers]

one of the biggest things i will always reiterate about sikhi is that it isn't actually monotheistic, reading it as monotheism is a fundamental reduction of what "ek onkar" or one god means in the sikh cosmology. whether you are raised sikh and accept these meanings at face value or you are not sikh and just read the opening paragraph of the wikipedia page for sikhism to try to get an understanding, the sikh understanding of god is much better described as panentheism and not monotheism. the sikh god is not a personal god but a transcendental force and it's easier to speak of waheguru in metaphors that liken god to a person so people can understand the concepts but it's not meant to be taken literally. this is supported by panentheism being the primary worldview of most traditions within what we call hinduism, as well as sects of buddhism and also the positions of several islamic sufi philosophers who were fundamental in the establishment of sikh cosmology. all of these worldviews are linked by sharing versions of what we call pantheism/panentheism, but even trying to explain the depths of a panentheistic worldview is challenging because it is just so different in a very fundamental way from the christian worldview where there is a singular, personal god. even explaining how polytheism works within the south asian context requires this base understanding, because if you approach polytheism from a christian perspective you'll once again completely misunderstand the worldview. like "hinduism is like if they just had more gods, the way you view the christian god but imagine more of them" is also not true, not only because hinduism contains such a variety of worldviews and beliefs that making any general statement about what we call hinduism is always going to be reductive, but because it's also just not... how the worldview works, generally speaking lol. just explaining nondualism in the south asian context is so different from the christian worldview, the idea that you can just plug and play christianity into it is so absurd it's actually hilarious to me

[sheepskinnedgoat]

Personal Pantheon

MAN OF MANY FACES — Universe / Transcendence / Enlightenment DEMIURGE — Artist of Material Creation / Creator SOPHIA — Wisdom / Bridge to Enlightenment / Self-Sacrifice / Right JESUS OF NAZARETH — Living Word / Bridge to Sophia MARY MAGDALENE — Living Wisdom / Bridge to Sophia BEAST OF MANY NAMES — Knowledge / Afterlife / Ego / Left EARTH — Creation / Growth / Push / Merciless / Nurturing MOON — Push & Pull / Reflection / Community / Companionship SUN — Pressure / Leadership / Rage / Contentment SEA — Mystery / Death / Mysticism / Diversity / Pull FOREST — Secrets / Guardianship / Darkness / Growth / Healing LAKES & RIVERS — Flow / Freedom / Direction / Force / Perseverance

These are the entities, beings, spirits, deities, (or whatever you wanna call them) that I work most frequently with in my own personal belief system. This is probably the most succinct and neat I have ever been able to get with how I feel about them and what I relate them to.

[angelomorphix]

The Metaphysical

God is completely unknown.

We know nothing about God, but we have an intrinsic gut feeling that the universe is far from all that really exists. We also know nothing about God, but we affirm the necessity of his presence in our metaphysics so that our whole value system can be self-sufficient and not depend on any of the religions and worldviews that now form the foundation of social life and prevent humanity from being liberated. So when we say that God is totally unknown, we are affirming a God who cannot be comprehended in any way, and in doing so we are setting aside all existing ideas about God. The only self-evident thing we can say for sure is that God has no gender.

God forms in and of himself the whole world.

By discarding existing notions, we manifest our own picture of the world based on inner intuition, which organically complements the ideology of our movement. Knowing nothing about God except the intuition that he exists, we claim that God shapes the world within itself out of itself. In this way we give the world a value far greater than that of the clay pot as seen by the major religions of humankind.

God is the world and contains it within himself, but he also exists outside the world, space and time.

Since God forms the world out of himself and contains it within himself, God is the world, and the world is a direct extension of God. But God, who formed the world within himself, is still as superior to the inner world, being outside of time and space, existing within the world.

The world is real in relation to itself just as a dream is real in relation to itself.

Taking the world as one of dreams does not in any way diminish its reality, for in a realistic dream we can still live, act on our inner gut, and make the right decisions. The desire to escape from the dream only puts one in a loop of constant escape from one dream to another, while the absolute unwillingness to do anything makes any progressive reforms aimed at improving the quality of being in the world unwelcome as well.

God is as real about the world as the dreamer is real about his dreams.

Just as to the deep realistic dreamer the real world seems unreal, so to us the existence of God as that reality that transcends our world may seem unreal. But we argue that God is as real about the world as a sleeper is real about his dreams, meaning that each of us is the one God who watches his own dream.

The world and all forms of life in it are tangible extensions of God.

Assuming that God is the world, and the world is a direct extension of God, we affirm that accordingly all life forms in the world are extensions of God.

Each self is a continuation of: the common self of all life forms; the unconscious world; God.

As all forms of life are extensions of God, in reverse order, each individual is an extension of his species, each species is an extension of the evolution of living organisms, all living organisms are extensions of the world, and the world is a direct extension of God. Who were we before we were born, and who will we be when our physical bodies die? The best answer is that we were everyone and everywhere.

Each self is in the here and now exactly as much as it is in every other self and in the totally unknown God.

Understanding that our Self is not confined to our body or to the material world, but is everywhere, like a single ocean divided by islands, and even right now in God as the supreme reality outside the world, gives us the advantage of not having to seek salvation in another world, and not having to make the effort to escape it into a higher reality, because we are already everywhere and everywhere, and our goal is to form our own ideal world wherever we have the opportunity.

God does not intervene in the inner workings of the world, such as the laws of nature or evolution. The world exists according to its own internal laws. By asserting that the world and each of us is an extension of God, we nevertheless manifest that God, as a reality outside the world, has no effect on what happens inside the world, where the internal laws of the world apply.

Evolution and the inner processes of the world are not the result of God's will.

Thus, all of the inner history of the world, all of evolution, and all of life's forms, though a direct extension of God, are not the result of God's will as an out-of-world reality.

The world, divine at its core, is not divine in its forms and manifestations.

A world that is an extension of God, and thus fundamentally divine, is not divine in its inner processes and forms of manifestation, because the inner processes of the world are the result of the will of the world itself and not of God as an out-of-world reality, whereas the fact that the world was formed was the will of God as an out-of-world reality. The inner laws of the world are foolish and unconscious, and it can be said that they were all just a way to create intelligent life forms that, as an extension of God, will be able to change the world and themselves already as they see fit. We cannot abandon the ship of this world, but we can make it fit for acceptable life.

Nature, acting by crude laws, produces many forms of life, forced to multiply suffering as in a nightmare dream. The presence of sex is a direct consequence of evolution, a consequence of the crude processes of the inner world.

The existence of sex and the current reproductive organization of society creates the deepest injustice. All who are close to being sexless, who cannot accept their social sex or their gendered or sexual bodies, are discriminated against by sexually mature people of both social genders. Women are forced to suffer all their lives for the ability to give birth and then in the throes of giving birth to lifelong suffering creatures. Natural reproduction is a source of oppression and suffering for women. Perfect equality of perceptions with equal bodily circumstances - which would also mean equal treatment between people regardless of gender and age - is impossible with different body designs. Angelomorphism proposes a unified design of the sexless angelomorphic (angel-like) body.

The goal of Angelomorphism as a movement is to abolish social and biological sex, to create all the necessary conditions for the transformation of humanity into an angel-like race, which we call angelomorphs.

The abolition of the social sex is impossible without the abolition of the biological sex. Overcoming global problems is possible by artificially continuing human evolution. We must strive to create new beings more beautiful than the current generations of humans. The trait of the new humans is defined in Scripture: "They shall not marry and trespass, but live as angels of God. The more steps humanity takes to eliminate gender differences, the greater the chance of soaring on angelic wings from the ladder of evolution.

Technology is the way to lead humanity to angel-like, sexlessness, freedom, and unity of consciousness.

Angelomorphy suggests that technological abolition of sex and changing the architecture of society's reproductive system in favor of artificial reproduction will have the strongest emancipatory effect on the oppressed populations, improve the overall standard and quality of life, and a unified body model and voluntary united consciousness will qualitatively change the system of social relations.

[colorful-cryptid]

I found this to be extremely fascinating. I don’t know if I fully grasp or agree with every concept presented, but I’m increasingly discovering more about my own faith by exploring ideas such as this.

It’s clear to me that the ideas held by Eckhart as explained in this video are panentheistic in nature. At this point in my spiritual journey, I see no reason not to consider myself a panentheist.

Also, I love the lifestyle Eckhart advocated and lived, where he split his time between deep monastic study and carrying out the will of God in his service to others. I bet that would be a very fulfilling way to live.

[grimmstar-grimmoire]

Varieties of Theism

Agnostic Theism Whereas atheism and theism deal with belief, agnosticism deals with knowledge. The Greek roots of the term combine a (without) and gnosis (knowledge). Hence, agnosticism literally means “without knowledge.” In the context where it is normally used, the term means: without knowledge of the existence of gods. Since it is possible for a person to believe in one or more gods without claiming to know for sure that any gods exist, it's possible to be an agnostic theist.

Monotheism The term monotheism comes from the Greek monos, (one) and theos (god). Thus, monotheism is the belief in the existence of a single god. Monotheism is typically contrasted with polytheism (see below), which is a belief in many gods, and with atheism, which is an absence of any belief in any gods.

Polytheism Polytheism is the belief in the existence of multiple gods. The prefix ''poly'' means many, so polytheists believe that there are multiple divine forces in existence. The Greek and Roman pantheons are excellent examples of these, as they consist of many gods that govern different aspects of nature and essences of humanity. Some argue that Christianity is a polytheistic religion because of the worship of the Trinity. However, the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit are all aspects of a single God, making it a monotheistic religion.

Deism Deism is actually a form of monotheism, but it remains distinct enough in character and development to justify discussing separately. In addition to adopting the beliefs of general monotheism, deists also adopt the belief that the single existing god is personal in nature and transcendent from the created universe. However, they reject the belief, common among monotheists in the West, that this god is immanent—presently active in the created universe.

Henotheism and Monolatry Henotheism is based upon the Greek roots heis or henos, (one), and theos (god). But the term is not a synonym for monotheism, despite the fact that it has the same etymological meaning.

Another word expressing the same idea is monolatry, which is based on the Greek roots monos (one), and latreia (service or religious worship). The term appears to have been first used by Julius Wellhausen to described a type of polytheism in which just a single god is worshiped but where other gods are accepted as existing elsewhere. Many tribal religions fall into this category.

Pantheism The word pantheism is built from the Greek roots pan (all) and theos (god); thus, pantheism is either a belief that the universe is God and worthy of worship, or that God is the sum total of all there is and that the combined substances, forces, and natural laws that we see around us are therefore manifestations of God. The early Egyptian and Hindu religions are regarded as pantheistic, and Taoism is also sometimes considered a pantheistic belief system.

Panentheism The word panentheism is Greek for “all-in-God,” pan-en-theos. A panentheistic belief system posits the existence of a god that interpenetrates every part of nature but which is nevertheless fully distinct from nature. This god is, therefore, part of nature, but at the same time still retains an independent identity.

Impersonal Idealism In the philosophy of Impersonal Idealism, universal ideals are identified as god. There are elements of impersonal idealism, for example, in the Christian belief that "God is love," or the humanist view that "God is knowledge."

Autotheism The term ''autotheism'' is composed of two parts: the prefix, ''auto,'' and the root/suffix combination, ''theism.'' ''Auto'' means ''self, one's own, by oneself.'' So, autotheism is the belief that one is a god themself. It has also been described as someone who mistakes one's inner voices as God's voice within them.

Kathenotheism The belief that there are many gods, but only one deity at a time should be worshipped, each being supreme in turn.

Ditheism (or Duotheism) The belief in two equally powerful gods, often, but not always, with complementary properties and in constant opposition, such as God and Goddess in Wicca, or Good and Evil in Zoroastrianism and Manichaeism. The early mystical religion Gnosticism is another example of a ditheistic belief of sorts, due to their claim that the thing worshipped as God in this world is actually an evil impostor, but that a true benevolent deity worthy of being called "God" exists beyond this world.

Misotheism The belief that gods exist, but that they are actually evil. The English word was coined by Thomas de Quincey in 1846. Strictly speaking, the term connotes an attitude of hatred towards the god or gods, rather than making a statement about their nature.

Dystheism The belief that gods exist, but that they are not wholly good, or possibly even evil (as opposed to eutheism, the belief that God exists and is wholly good). Trickster gods found in polytheistic belief systems often have a dystheistic nature, and there are various examples of arguable dystheism in the Bible.

Animism Animism is the idea that all things—animate and inanimate—possess a spirit or an essence. First coined in 1871, animism is a key feature in many ancient religions, especially of indigenous tribal cultures. Animism is a foundational element in the development of ancient human spirituality, and it can be identified in different forms throughout major modern world religions.

Totemism Totemism is a system of belief in which man is believed to have kinship with a totem or a mystical relationship is said to exist between a group or an individual and a totem. A totem is an object, such as an animal or plant that serves as the emblem or symbol of a kinship group or a person. The term totemism has been used to characterize a cluster of traits in the religion and in the social organization of many primitive peoples.

[many-sparrows]

Last Wednesday, my pastor made us do some discussion during service (evil of her) (it was good for me, actually) and my friend Scott (middle aged, balding, white man) and I talked about how the familiarity of liturgy holds us. We also talked about protests; Scott talked about laying down on the hot Phoenix asphalt in the summer for the amount of time George Floyd was strangled and I talked about how many young people I see at vigils for Nex Benedict and trans remembrance.

Remember that God is just as much, and sometimes more, present out there is the world beyond the church door. On Good Friday, the curtain was torn, abolishing the separation of the Holy from everything else. God is out there, He just wears a mask sometimes. He'll catch your eye and wink flirtatiously before weaving between members of the crowd. Catch a glimpse of a grin here and the hem of a robe there. Follow him!

[fierysword]

Love can flow toward you in every moment: through a flower, in a grain of sand, in a wisp of cloud, in any one person whom you allow to delight you... Spiritual joy has nothing to do with anything ‘going right.’ It has everything to do with things going, and going on within you. It’s an inherent, inner aliveness. Joy is almost entirely an inside job. Joy is not first determined by the object enjoyed as much as by the prepared eye of the enjoyer. When the flow is flowing, it doesn’t matter what you’re doing... It’s all inherently sacred and deeply satisfying. As the nineteenth-century poet Elizabeth Barrett Browning put it, “Earth’s crammed with heaven, and every common bush afire with God.” All is whole and holy in the very seeing, because you are standing inside the One Flow of Love... This is the Ground of all Being out of which all things—and especially all good things—come. The river is already flowing, and you are in it whether you are enjoying it or not.

Richard Rohr

[hindahoney]

Hey I'm a conversion student and your last post got me thinking, what counts to you as idol worship? I've been interested in the concepts of pantheism and panentheism lately and whether these are "kosher" beliefs (this has been discussed by a number of rabbis I can't remember the names of).

If Christianity is distant from Judaism because of the Trinity and idol worship, what is there to say about Jewish beliefs in G-d being found everywhere, in everything, with every person and object and molecule being an example of G-d's being?

Is that idol worship? I know you wouldn't consider yourself an authority or expert but you seem to have a solid understanding of the meaning of the term, better than me at least!

FWIW I'm on the same "Christianity and Judaism couldn't be further from one another" bandwagon, I'm not trying to dispute that because I heartily agree! It just got me thinking, where does the boundary lie.

I think the lines can become blurred, and there has been debate about what constitutes idol worship. For example, some Jews hold the belief that the way Chabadniks hang up a picture of the Lubavicher Rebbe in their homes (I'm unfamiliar if other chassidim do this) and the way they speak about him borders on, if not is outright, akin to idol worship. Chabadniks would assert that they don't worship the Rebbe, so it isn't idol worship, and that he was just a great man whose teachings should be remembered. But this example is proof that the lines between what becomes idol worship, what constitutes an idol, and what constitutes worship, is complicated.

The belief that Hashem is in everything is not idol worship. It would only become idol worshipping if you started to worship anything other than Him. But this is easier said than done. To some people, they see money as an idol and believe people who are money-driven are committing idol worship. To others, social media is an idol. It gets all of our attention and we spend our entire days on it. Is that worship, even if it doesn't follow "traditional" ways of worship? To spend all of your time on something? I think there's a legitimate discussion to be had.

But if you want a clear, cut and dry answer: Any and all worship of anything other than Hashem is idolatry.

[orthodoxadventure]

As creator, then, God is always at the heart of each thing, maintaining it in being. On the level of scientific inquiry, we discern certain processes or sequences of cause and effect. On the level of spiritual vision, which does not contradict science but looks beyond it, we discern everywhere the creative energies of God, upholding all that is, forming the innermost essence of all things. But, while present everywhere in the world, God is not to be identified with the world. As Christians we affirm not pantheism but 'panentheism'. God is in all things yet also beyond and above all things. He is both 'greater than the great' and 'smaller than the small'. In the words of Saint Gregory Palamas, 'He is everywhere and nowhere, He is everything and nothing'. As a Cistercian monk of New Clairvaux has put it, 'God is at the core. God is other than the core. God is within the core, and all through the core, and beyond the core, closer to the core than the core'.

-- Kallistos Ware, The Orthodox Way

[rw7771]

The main forms of religious belief are:

Theism:

The belief in the existence of one or more divinities or deities, which exist within the universe and yet transcend it. These gods also in some way interact with the universe (unlike Deism), and are often considered to be omniscient, omnipotent and omnipresent. The word "theism" was first coined in the 17th Century to contrast with Atheism. Christianity, Hinduism, Islam, Judaism, Sikhism, Baha'i and Zoroastrianism are all theistic religions.

Monotheism:

The view that only one God exists. The Abrahamic faiths (Judaism, Christianity and Islam), as well as Plato's concept of God, all affirm monotheism, and this is the usual conception debated within Western Philosophy. Jews, Christians and Muslims would probably all agree that God is an eternally existent being that exists apart from space and time, who is the creator of the universe, and is omnipotent (all-powerful), omniscient (all-knowing), omnibenevolent (all-good or all-loving) and possibly omnipresent (all-present). The religions, however, differ in the details: Christians, for example, would further affirm that there are three aspects to God (the Father, the Son and the Holy Spirit).

Exclusive Monotheism: The belief that there is only one deity, and that all other claimed deities are distinct from it and false. The Abrahamic religions, and the Hindu denomination of Vaishnavism (which regards the worship of anyone other than Vishnu as incorrect) are examples of Exclusive Monotheism.

Inclusive monotheism: The belief that there is only one deity, and that all other claimed deities are just different names for it. The Hindu denomination of Smartism is an example of Inclusive Monotheism.

Substance Monotheism: The belief (found in some indigenous African religions) that the many gods are just different forms of a single underlying substance.

Pantheism:

The belief that God is equivalent to Nature or the physical universe, or that everything is of an all-encompassing immanent abstract God. The concept has been discussed as far back as the time of the philosophers of Ancient Greece, including Thales, Parmenides and Heraclitus. Baruch Spinoza also believed in a kind of naturalistic pantheism in which the universe, although unconscious and non-sentient as a whole, is a meaningful focus for mystical fulfillment.

Panentheism:

The belief (also known as Monistic Monotheism), similar to Pantheism, that the physical universe is joined to God, but stressing that God is greater than (rather than equivalent to) the universe. Thus, the one God interpenetrates every part of nature, and timelessly extends beyond as well. The universe is part of God, but not all of God. The word (which can be translated as "all in God") was coined by the German philosopher Karl Christian Friedrich Krause (1781–1832) in 1828 in an attempt to reconcile Monotheism and Pantheism.

Deism:

A form of monotheism in which it is believed that one God exists, but that this God does not intervene in the world, or interfere with human life and the laws of the universe. It posits a non-interventionist creator who permits the universe to run itself according to natural laws. Deism derives the existence and nature of God from reason and personal experience, rather than relying on revelation in sacred scriptures or the testimony of others, and can maybe best be described as a basic belief rather than as a religion in itself. The roots of Deism lie with Heraclitus and Plato, but it was also popular with the natural theologists of 17th Century France and, particularly, Britain, who rejected any special or supposedly supernatural revelation of God.

Pandeism: The belief that God preceded the universe and created it, but is now equivalent to it - a composite of Deism and Pantheism.

Panendeism is a composite of Deism and Panentheism. It holds that, while the universe is part of God, it operates according to natural mechanisms without the need for the intervention of a traditional God, somewhat similar to the Native American concept of the all- pervading Great Spirit.

Polydeism: The belief that multiple gods exist, but do not intervene with the universe - a composite of Deism and Polytheism.

Misotheism:

The belief that a God or gods exist, but that they are actually evil. The English word was coined by Thomas de Quincey in 1846. Strictly speaking, the term connotes an attitude of hatred towards the god or gods, rather than making a statement about their nature.

Dystheism:

The belief that a God or gods exist, but that they are not wholly good, or possibly even evil (as opposed to eutheism, the belief that God exists and is wholly good). Trickster gods found in polytheistic belief systems often have a dystheistic nature, and there are various examples of arguable dystheism in the Bible.

Ditheism (or Duotheism):

The belief in two equally powerful gods, often, but not always, with complementary properties and in constant opposition, such as God and Goddess in Wicca, or Good and Evil in Zoroastrianism and Manichaeism. The early mystical religion Gnosticism is another example of a ditheistic belief of sorts, due to their claim that the thing worshipped as God in this world is actually an evil impostor, but that a true benevolent deity worthy of being called "God" exists beyond this world.

Polytheism:

The belief in, or worship of, multiple gods (usually assembled in a pantheon). These gods are often seen as similar to humans (anthropomorphic) in their personality traits, but with additional individual powers, abilities, knowledge or perceptions. Hard Polytheism views the gods as being distinct and separate beings, such as in Ancient Greek Mythology. Soft Polytheism views the gods as being subsumed into a greater whole, as in most forms of Hinduism.

Henotheism: The devotion to a single god while accepting the existence of other gods, and without denying that others can with equal truth worship different gods. It has been called "monotheism in principle and polytheism in fact".

Monolatrism (or Monolatry): The belief in the existence of many gods, but with the consistent worship of only one deity. Unlike Henotheism, Monolatrism asserts that there is only one god who is worthy of worship, though other gods are known to exist.

Kathenotheism: The belief that there is more than one deity, but only one deity at a time should be worshipped, each being supreme in turn.

Animism:

The belief that souls inhabit all or most objects (whether they be animals, vegetables or minerals). Animistic religions generally do not accept a sharp distinction between spirit and matter, and assume that this unification of matter and spirit plays a role in daily life. Early Shintoism was animistic in nature, as are many indigenous African religions. Shamanism (communication with the spirit world) and Ancestor Worship (worship of deceased family members, who are believed to have a continued existence and influence) are similar categories.

Atheism (or Nontheism):

The belief that gods do not exist, or a complete rejection of Theism in any form. Some atheists argue a lack of empirical evidence for the existence of deities, while others argue for Atheism on philosophical, social or historical grounds. Many atheists tend toward secular philosophies such as Humanism and Naturalism. Atheism may be implicit (someone who has never thought about belief in gods) or explicit (someone who has made an assertion, either weak or strong, regarding their lack of belief in gods). Confucianism, Taoism, Jainism and some varieties of Buddhism, either do not include belief in a personal god as a tenet of the religion, or actively teach nontheism.

Agnosticism:

The belief that the nature and existence of gods is unknown and cannot ever be known or proven. Technically, this position is strong agnosticism: in popular usage, an agnostic may just be someone who takes no position, pro or con, on the existence of gods, or who has not yet been able to decide, or who suspends judgment due to lack of evidence one way or the other (weak agnosticism). The earliest professed agnostic was Protagoras, although the term itself, which literally means "without knowledge", was not coined until the 1880s by T. H. Huxley (1825 - 1895).

Humanism:

Humanism is more an ethical process, not a dogma about the existence or otherwise of gods. But in general terms, it rejects the validity of transcendental justifications, such as a dependence on belief without reason, the supernatural, or texts of allegedly divine origin. It is therefore generally compatible with Atheism and Agnosticism, but does not require these, and can be compatible with some religions. To some extent, it supplements or supplants the role of religions, and can be considered in some ways as "equivalent" to a religion.

[brightlotusmoon]

You mention being a Pagan Jew in your tags, so I thought I'd ask -- I'm a somewhat idiosyncratically polytheistic, sporadically witchy, formerly Christian individual with Jewish ancestry that I go back and forth on whether I want to reconnect with. I've been talking on and off about this with a Jewish mystic I met through what passes for a local trans community in my area.

But the thing that stops me is the monotheism. And I'm aware that this is a culturally Christian thing dealing with differences in the definition of theism, but also, I am A Simple Autism and not having straight answers about things makes my brain feel like it's going to spontaneously combust. I like my gods. I like the perspective I've built around my polytheism. I don't want to have to give that up and exchange it wholesale for something else. What I don't like is the fact that due to the nature of my specific path, I don't really have roots or traditions that I can point to and say "that's mine."

So... I'm aware that this is something everyone in this situation is going to handle differently, but I lurk on your blog and I admire your perspective about a lot of things, so I'm going to ask you. How do you reconcile those two parts of your being? If I choose to try to reconnect, how might I try to reconcile those two parts of mine?

~ @rebelmageblr

To be honest, I never thought to reconcile what has always been firmly rooted together. I'm Jewish but I'm not a monotheist nor a henotheist. It's actually pretty common for Jews to be polytheistic- or it was when I was young, maybe. To me, the "god" entity is mainly my self, humanity, the universe, nature, other gods. I was raised atheist but open, and I've found myself constantly exploring all sorts of belief systems. Like, it's just easy for me to call myself Jewish and pagan because it's how it feels, like the autism thing, you know?

You don't have to reconsider the polytheism, but it could be easier to imagine the monotheism like *vague waving* like part of the polytheism. Or pantheism. Or even panentheism. The idea of God As Everything.

[minnesotadruids]

Hey, question, I'm a Christian who always felt miserable while worshipping my God the way I was trained to, but still felt connected to Them, over the years I met witches and learned about paganism and a bunch of other things, and I realized that there was something I felt was missing. I want to try practising druidism as part of my spirituality but Idk the first thing about this stuff as I was never encouraged to learn about other faiths and practices. What's a good place to start learning and practising?

There's a lot of leeway and freedom in the direction you might choose to explore, as modern druidry is vast and dynamic. As for literary resources in terms of books that are current, an easy read, and with a fair amount of historical context (both for the ancient druids and the history of the modern revival movement of the last three centuries) I would recommend The Druidry Handbook by Greer.

Greer puts the history of druidry (both ancient and modern) in a context that makes a lot of sense. Some of the things he outlines for the modern druid practitioner can be either used or ignored as you deem fit. He's showing a small glimpse of what is available, and his book largely speaks on behalf of his druid order AODA (Ancient Order of Druids in America).

If you're in a situation where you don't want to be caught reading books about druidry, one helpful reminder is that druidry has drawn in many reverends over the last few centuries. Even back in the 1700s some of those Christian clergy exploring and reviving druidism espoused different theological topics that relate to druidry in different ways. Another option if you need to avoid physical books about druidry would be to do a bit of web research on:

Latitudinarianism

Deism

Pantheism

Panentheism

Soft Polytheism

Ecospirituality

You may have noticed by now that as I am an active member of the Reformed Druidry movement (RDNA) I tend to have my own biases in favor of this order more than others. There are a few dozen different druid orders out there, but you don't have to join an order to practice druidry. The RDNA's resources are always free, mostly in the form of PDF files. Like the rest of the Druidry Revival movement, the RDNA was also founded by non-pagans. In fact the RDNA founder David Fisher also became an Episcopal priest, and the order still draws in a fair amount of Christian druids. Everything in the RDNA can be subject to a purely metaphorical or symbolic interpretation, with everything potentially signifying something unique to the practitioner.

I'd be happy to help with any additional questions!

See also: this list of modern druid orders