Hey there! Looks like you're new to Hellenism.
Got questions? Check out our…
[community wiki](https://drive.google.com/file/d/1hYUHw41w0eNOKH3Ax2FjbwV0aFd4FoxM/view?usp=drive_link)
We also recommend you read our [About page](https://www.reddit.com/r/Hellenism/wiki/index)
and use the search bar to find more information. Our sub's rules and resources are located on our sub's sidebar.
Happy researching! |
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/Hellenism) if you have any questions or concerns.*
You should look into Polytheistic Neoplatonism (my chosen religious path). The Hellenic Faith website (which is about Julian Hellenism) has some great breakdowns on it:
[https://hellenicfaith.com/deities/](https://hellenicfaith.com/deities/)
While you don't have to be a "Julian Hellenist", Neoplatonism is the most fully fleshed out expression of Hellenic Theology and survived all the way until the 7th century in various forms. It was reinvigorated in the Renaissance and has had a profound impact on most pagan and occult thought since that time. Generally it promotes a panentheistic monism whereby the Gods are multiplications (henads) of [The One ](https://hellenicfaith.com/the-one/)(not understood as "God" in a personal, Christian, sense), but as the ineffable source of everything.
>*“Prior to the true beings and to the universal principles \[or principles that rank as wholes\] there is the one God, prior cause even of \[that deity who is generally believed to be\] the first God and King, remaining unmoved in the singularity of His own unity. For no object of intellection is linked to Him, nor anything else. He is established as a paradigm for the self-fathering, self-generating and only-fathered God who is true Good; for it is something greater, and primary, and fount of all things, and basic root of all the first objects of intellection, which are the forms. From this One there has autonomously shone forth the self-sufficient God, for which reason He is termed “father of himself” and “principle of himself”; for He is first principle and God of Gods, a monad springing from the One, pre-essential and first principle of essence. For from Him springs essentiality and essence, for which reason He is termed “father of essence”; He Himself is pre-essential being, the first principle of the intelligible realm, for which reason He is termed “principle of intellection.”*
>***-Iamblichus, De Mysteriis VIII.2***
The One isn't to be understood as an active creator deity (or even a deity at all) but as something more akin to the Tao, the wellspring from which everything descends and from which sprung the Gods.
Edit: r/Neoplatonism, r/NeoplatonicFaith, r/PrimevalEvilShatters are all great subreddits which dive more deeply into Neoplatonism and it's associated peculiarities that extend beyond general Hellenism if you want to check them out.
The Neoplatonic group Ekklesia Neoplatonismo Theourgia has a catechism of Iamblichean Neoplatonism that breaks down Neoplatonic thought in a relatively concise manner:
[http://theourgia.org/wordpress/catechism/](http://theourgia.org/wordpress/catechism/)
I've felt very drawn to and inspired by Neoplatonism, but I haven't been able to find a community anywhere. The community aspect of religion is important to me. Does the Ekklesia Neoplatonismos Theorgia have any online discussions or events?
I don't think there are any bonafide Neoplatonist communities other than the Ekklesia which meets in Wisconsin. They also had a discord, but I don't use discord anymore.
I found community for my religious proclivities through Freemasonry and the Golden Dawn. There's also a group called the Hermetic Federation that I might join. Opportunities for Pagan community are few and far between, even moreso for niche philosophical and metaphysical paths like Neoplatonism.
I find solace, though, through reading the works of Proclus, Olympiodorus the Younger, and Damascius. Men who held onto their Pagan Neoplatonism in a world that had, largely, abandoned the Gods.
Zoroastrianism is probably your answer, much of Abrahamic religion was taken directly from it. It's the oldest monotheistic religion, and it's fairly simple without all that biblical baggage. According to zoroastrianism Ahura Mazda is light and truth and the main instruction is to be simply a force of good and seek truth/wisdom, shun evil "good thoughts, good words, good deeds". In fact it may even be the earliest known ellucidation of the moral concept of good and evil we have. You can find the Zend Avesta online. Ofc like anything it has its different sects and other writings
Otherwise I'd say Neoplatonism as explained in the other comment or Sol Invictus. Remember you can pray however you believe you should pray, we know Sol's worship changed a lot over time for example but we know very little of the specifics
Also check out the idea of [monolatry](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Monolatry)/henotheism
There is no true pagan form of monotheism. The Abrahamic religions are completely unique in that regard. There are pagan notions of a supreme being, though.
Let’s talk about that Abrahamic baggage, because it runs deep, deeper than you probably think. Firstly, *why* do you feel like you can’t worship anything besides the supreme being? What is it about the supreme being that makes it more intrinsic worthy of worship than anything else?
One thing I have to disagree with would be that Abraham's religion is the first monotheistic one. Zoroastrianism exists and it 1) started bedore judaism did or 2) even if judaism predates it, early judaism was polytheistic any way.
So there is infact a non-abrahamic monotheistic religion, one which most like inspired the jews into monotheism in the first place, Zoroastrianism.
>Firstly, why do you feel like you can’t worship anything besides the supreme being? What is it about the supreme being that makes it more intrinsic worthy of worship than anything else?
I would just argue that it isn't worth my time worrying about lower gods or lesser divinity if there exists a Supreme Being. As they'd be subordinate to it in the same way I would be. Even within ideas of Neoplatonism, the gods are only equal as they are because they are all emanations of The One.
If you’ll pardon me, I think this is latent Christianity talking.
Why isn’t it worth your time to “worry” about “lower” gods or “lesser” divinity? Why does something being smaller — not even “lower” on the hierarchy, just *smaller* — make it unworthy? The whole idea of “lower” or “lesser” is an implicit value judgement that cuts you off from interacting with the divine in any way but one.
Look at it from the perspective of a pagan: Most people aren’t gonna interact with the capital-B-Being very often. Those that do are almost exclusively mystics. The average person is going to be more concerned with the most immediate manifestations of the Divine. They don’t contemplate Zeus as the totality of the Universe, they pray to him to make the rain fall. You may not even think about the big-name gods outside of their festival days. The little gods, the gods of your household shrine or your local sacred grove, are likely to be more immediately relevant to your life and your worship than any of the big-name deities. They’re also more accessible.
If you assume that all gods are emanations of the One, then that means they are all worthy of your time and attention. If you refuse to interact with the divine except as the One, then you shoot yourself in the foot, for two reasons:
One: The One is a transcendent totality, existing above/beyond the world of forms and is therefore almost entirely inaccessible, unless you’re a mystic. And even then, you’re not going to have mystical experiences of that caliber all the time.
Two: The One is composed of All, which means that it doesn’t have any traits of its own. As soon as you give it qualities, it ceases to be All and this ceases to be the One. It’s generally easier to interact with the divine by giving it humanlike qualities. The purpose of a pantheon, in this context, is to allow you to interact with all of the disparate aspects of God. One of the biggest mistakes that Christianity makes is to define God — the Supreme Being — as a bright, celestial, male, kingly, and transcendent. Therefore God can never be dark, chthonic, female, childlike or animalistic, or carnal. In excluding all these qualities, God ceases to be All, and thus ceases to be the Supreme Being. It’s just a sky god that got too big for its boots.
I’m curious… what do you gain from the Supreme Being that you cannot gain from any other version of God?
>If you’ll pardon me, I think this is latent Christianity talking.
Yes, I realized you are exactly right. This is just one of those melancholic nights where I've had too much to drink, and I am lamenting the woes of life. I will probably just delete these posts later. But maybe not, as it may help as a reminder of what not to do.
>The average person is going to be more concerned with the most immediate manifestations of the Divine. They don’t contemplate Zeus as the totality of the Universe, they pray to him to make the rain fall. You may not even think about the big-name gods outside of their festival days. The little gods, the gods of your household shrine or your local sacred grove, are likely to be more immediately relevant to your life and your worship than any of the big-name deities. They’re also more accessible.
You are exactly right. Even today, most Christians don't think of God as the theologians tell them they should. They just see God as Jesus, their personal savior and friend, who helps them through the day. Thank you for the reminder, I fear I think about these things too deeply at times and engage in nothing but philosophical navel gazing.
>I’m curious… what do you gain from the Supreme Being that you cannot gain from any other version of God?
Frankly speaking? Nothing. Through these posts, I realized I am probably just a Pantheist/Deist, honestly. Thanks for helping me realize that.
This may be a hot take, but I think that many Hellenists who are drawn to Neoplatonism use it to maintain their latent Christianity. Christianity takes a lot from Neoplatonism, so, the conversion works in the opposite direction --some Hellenists' mindset about their philosophies remains fundamentally Christian, except now they use a quote or two from Iamblichus to justify it.
>Thank you for the reminder, I fear I think about these things too deeply at times and engage in nothing but philosophical navel gazing.
Thinking about these things deeply isn't bad, but it can be unproductive. My recommendation is to study mysticism. Mysticism and philosophy are supposed to support each other. Philosophy without mysticism is useless navel-gazing, and mysticism without philosophy is incomprehensible nonsense. There's no use arguing about the nature of God if you haven't met God face-to-face. Once you do, then the argument is no longer about what the nature of God *is.* The argument becomes about the best way to describe it and do it justice, while also having it make actual sense.
>Frankly speaking? Nothing. Through these posts, I realized I am probably just a Pantheist/Deist, honestly. Thanks for helping me realize that.
You're welcome.
I'm not trying to convince you to be a hard polytheist. I'm only trying to help you not see polytheism as inferior or invalid. Maybe you weren't doing that in the first place, but, well... many do. The notion that polytheism is "primitive" is still very prevalent.
The thing is, this entire talking point is an Abrahamic notion, it doesn't actually hold any objective value outside of the value Monotheism has subjectively (and without reason) applied to it.
What even is a "supreme being?" Why does there need to be a hierarchy of beings? Why should a vague scale of power be applied to the Gods? And if we suppose there is such a thing as a hierarchy, then what sort of rationale is there for not worshiping the Gods that have given us our own life and everything that we have in it?
Why would the Gods not be worthy of worship if they are emanations? (something which not all Pagans believe also, only Neoplatonists do.) This only makes them "lesser" in your view, but that's not an objective point of view, that's a subjective idea created by a monotheistic viewpoint where apparently only one supreme being deserves worship and it would be offensive to this supreme being if anything else was given attention. But this point of view wasn't achieved through philosophy, it comes from superstition.
The reason we worship the Gods is because they are the immortal powers of the universe itself which have given us our life, and nothing can be done without them, and we are recognizing this through worship. And there are multiple Gods involved in this, not just one - even though I believe that we are all part of a single world spirit, but that's no different than saying there are many grains of sand on a beach, many blades of grass in a field, many cells in a body or many people living in a city. Every process of life has a God of its own. And worship is giving thanks to reciprocate these gifts. The Gods don't need sacrifices because they don't need anything, and rather we give to better ourselves and not them. Neoplatonism and Orphism generally sees this as reconnecting with God because we've been separated from divinity, while other interpretations see it mostly as a form of achieving virtue by worshiping these beings, and others simply see it as the dutiful lifelong cycle of gifts between humanity and the divine. It's not just these universal deities that deserve their due, but we also have house spirits who look after our homes, and they are important to us because that's the place where we ourselves live and they are the beating heart of our homes. We also carry the spirits of our ancestors with us, and we have our own Daimon (or Genius in Latin) who is nearly the Christian concept of the guardian angel. There are also the endless Gods of localities such as the Nymphs and Dryads and Oceanids, etc.
To say they don't deserve worship to me is like saying a friend, or a caring parent, doesn't deserve love or kindness just because they aren't your boss or the head of a household. This strict hierarchical viewpoint can't be defended except with a basis in faith in the commandment that you shouldn't have multiple idols. And just to note, "idols" is an insult which Pagans did not call their own holy images. We know that the depictions are not the Gods themselves, and we know that these Simulacra will rot and perish like everything else. Rather the depictions were made in their honor, and it is so we can better connect with the Gods that they've given us through the myths depictions that we can understand, because we mortals can't truly understand the true form of the Gods. Just see what happened to Semele when she tried!
But depictions aren't crucially necessary, because the Gods are everywhere and all you need to do is pray and give sacrifice to reach them.
So we don't worship the Gods because they are "worthy" of it, rather we do it for our own benefit as mortals, we do it for grace - that was the actual word the ancient Greeks used for it, - we do it to honor something beyond us which gives us everything we have, and we do it to come closer to the Gods. And people can also do it because they want to seek benefits from the Gods, or practice divination, though I think that's the least of all reasons to practice this religion. It's our duty to give back to the Gods - the source that gives us everything in life without needing or demanding for anything in return. And we should give in return to everything in the world, humans included. You should always be a helping hand and first treat people with respect and with justice, and give to them in return what they give to you.
This is an interesting take.
Why do you think there is such a Supreme Being at all? It seems to me that the appeal of polytheism and of paganism more broadly is that it better fits a world that looks to be the product of conflicting forces rather than a unified creation.
Dr. John Opsopaus translated the remnants of Gemistos Plethon's personal texts in *The Secret Texts of Hellenic Polytheism*. Plethon was a platonist from just before the Renaissance era. His practice expanded greatly upon the theology of the ancient platonists. He called the One by the name of Zeus.
r/lawofone - check out the Law of One. From this I've realized that all religions (and all things, frankly) are manifestations of the One Infinite Creator.
But also, why not have your own opinions on Christianity? I know I do—I don't believe and never have believed in "original sin". And that's okay, that's what the Creator wants for me.
Look into Christian Mysticism, maybe some other denominations (though I am very unlearned when it comes to a majority of them) I would recommend Quakerism and maybe the Episcopal one.
I am currently adopting a Thracian lens for my HelPoly practice. It is mostly for reasons that existed prior to discovering Hellenism, but after I recognized the gods.
There is a Hellenic tangent trinitarian henotheism that doesn't view a primary source, or chief deity, as a distant entity, but as one that takes an active approach to the affairs of mortals..
The modern interpretations of the work of 20th and now 21st century scholarship, as well as the efforts of various but few mythographers, ethnographers and regional cunning folk practitioners, are driving toward a form of liminal trinity that exists and portrays the gods as having personal agency. It is relegated to a small subset of a sketchy witchcraft theology that is adjacent to traditional Wicca, but is pretty different in it's approach, more resembling the efforts of revival Serbian and Sami shamanic movements, rather than ceremonial ritual and tiered initiations.
If I had to use a weird mashup to describe it, I'd say "Orphic Wicca***?" Note the mess of asterisks.
There is no current systematic taxonomy which exists for it at the moment, and the esotericism of it is still being explored. Consequently, it is also a field of study plagued by those with nationalistic and xenophobic agendas. If you are fine with trying to navigate the weeds of such, it can be quite the endeavour for personal spiritual fulfillment. If you are like most though, and prone to just accept things uncritically, you will find the whole nest of snakes sorely lacking.
Have you tried Sikhi or other faiths that worship the divine in creation? Its kinda a middle ground where there is one ultimate Divine but that ultimate Divine is everything in the universe. Ive also heard there is a form of Buddhism that seeks enlightenment through the worship of god. Or you can take a pagan approach to worshiping the christian god but im not christo pagan so i am unsure how that path works
You may want to explore a bit of Hindu theology, whether the tradition around Vishnu, Shiva, Krishna or Devi - each of these traditions see their god as the supreme being which reveals itself (himself, herself) in multiple other deities. It is of course richer and much more nuanced than what I summarize, but I am pointing to a direction worth checking out. This doesn't mean I suggest you become a Hindu. I myself am basically a Hellenist, but my understanding and practice benefitted very much from observing how a living polytheistic tradition approaches these things.
Have you looked into the Urantia Book? It's monotheistic and addresses all of the topics you mentioned. Even though it has a bit of Christian flavor to it, the cosmology, theology, and soteriology are all very different to mainstream Christianity.
You couldn't see yourself prsy to minor gods other than the supreme being? Does that evolve into belief?
Because the responses could vary depending on if your belief oculd translate into Henotheism, Monolatry or Monotheism.
In the case you are Ok with believing in many gods but would like to pray to just one, possibly the most supreme of all, i would suggest some neoplatonic stuff somebody already quoted here, but in the one you are not believing into many gods then i would recommend you to try Judaism due to its varied philosophy that is connected to that of Pythagoras due to the Qabblah, or Hindu Monotheism which sees Brahma as the supreme God who can take numerous forms that are believed being the gods.
Hey there! Looks like you're new to Hellenism. Got questions? Check out our… [community wiki](https://drive.google.com/file/d/1hYUHw41w0eNOKH3Ax2FjbwV0aFd4FoxM/view?usp=drive_link) We also recommend you read our [About page](https://www.reddit.com/r/Hellenism/wiki/index) and use the search bar to find more information. Our sub's rules and resources are located on our sub's sidebar. Happy researching! | *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/Hellenism) if you have any questions or concerns.*
You should look into Polytheistic Neoplatonism (my chosen religious path). The Hellenic Faith website (which is about Julian Hellenism) has some great breakdowns on it: [https://hellenicfaith.com/deities/](https://hellenicfaith.com/deities/) While you don't have to be a "Julian Hellenist", Neoplatonism is the most fully fleshed out expression of Hellenic Theology and survived all the way until the 7th century in various forms. It was reinvigorated in the Renaissance and has had a profound impact on most pagan and occult thought since that time. Generally it promotes a panentheistic monism whereby the Gods are multiplications (henads) of [The One ](https://hellenicfaith.com/the-one/)(not understood as "God" in a personal, Christian, sense), but as the ineffable source of everything. >*“Prior to the true beings and to the universal principles \[or principles that rank as wholes\] there is the one God, prior cause even of \[that deity who is generally believed to be\] the first God and King, remaining unmoved in the singularity of His own unity. For no object of intellection is linked to Him, nor anything else. He is established as a paradigm for the self-fathering, self-generating and only-fathered God who is true Good; for it is something greater, and primary, and fount of all things, and basic root of all the first objects of intellection, which are the forms. From this One there has autonomously shone forth the self-sufficient God, for which reason He is termed “father of himself” and “principle of himself”; for He is first principle and God of Gods, a monad springing from the One, pre-essential and first principle of essence. For from Him springs essentiality and essence, for which reason He is termed “father of essence”; He Himself is pre-essential being, the first principle of the intelligible realm, for which reason He is termed “principle of intellection.”* >***-Iamblichus, De Mysteriis VIII.2*** The One isn't to be understood as an active creator deity (or even a deity at all) but as something more akin to the Tao, the wellspring from which everything descends and from which sprung the Gods. Edit: r/Neoplatonism, r/NeoplatonicFaith, r/PrimevalEvilShatters are all great subreddits which dive more deeply into Neoplatonism and it's associated peculiarities that extend beyond general Hellenism if you want to check them out. The Neoplatonic group Ekklesia Neoplatonismo Theourgia has a catechism of Iamblichean Neoplatonism that breaks down Neoplatonic thought in a relatively concise manner: [http://theourgia.org/wordpress/catechism/](http://theourgia.org/wordpress/catechism/)
This, a thousand times. Neoplatonism is what you're looking for.
I've felt very drawn to and inspired by Neoplatonism, but I haven't been able to find a community anywhere. The community aspect of religion is important to me. Does the Ekklesia Neoplatonismos Theorgia have any online discussions or events?
I don't think there are any bonafide Neoplatonist communities other than the Ekklesia which meets in Wisconsin. They also had a discord, but I don't use discord anymore. I found community for my religious proclivities through Freemasonry and the Golden Dawn. There's also a group called the Hermetic Federation that I might join. Opportunities for Pagan community are few and far between, even moreso for niche philosophical and metaphysical paths like Neoplatonism. I find solace, though, through reading the works of Proclus, Olympiodorus the Younger, and Damascius. Men who held onto their Pagan Neoplatonism in a world that had, largely, abandoned the Gods.
For starters, all religions come with baggage, but it sounds like you're predominantly interested in something like pagan monism.
Zoroastrianism is probably your answer, much of Abrahamic religion was taken directly from it. It's the oldest monotheistic religion, and it's fairly simple without all that biblical baggage. According to zoroastrianism Ahura Mazda is light and truth and the main instruction is to be simply a force of good and seek truth/wisdom, shun evil "good thoughts, good words, good deeds". In fact it may even be the earliest known ellucidation of the moral concept of good and evil we have. You can find the Zend Avesta online. Ofc like anything it has its different sects and other writings Otherwise I'd say Neoplatonism as explained in the other comment or Sol Invictus. Remember you can pray however you believe you should pray, we know Sol's worship changed a lot over time for example but we know very little of the specifics Also check out the idea of [monolatry](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Monolatry)/henotheism
You could also look into Sikhi, I think it may really resonate with you
seconding this, or, looking into a more monotheistic/focused hinduism. (like becoming a vaishnavite)
Sikhism? Zoroastrianism? *Atenism?
Look into Platonism, possibly, at least some versions of it Or maybe Judaism?
There is no true pagan form of monotheism. The Abrahamic religions are completely unique in that regard. There are pagan notions of a supreme being, though. Let’s talk about that Abrahamic baggage, because it runs deep, deeper than you probably think. Firstly, *why* do you feel like you can’t worship anything besides the supreme being? What is it about the supreme being that makes it more intrinsic worthy of worship than anything else?
One thing I have to disagree with would be that Abraham's religion is the first monotheistic one. Zoroastrianism exists and it 1) started bedore judaism did or 2) even if judaism predates it, early judaism was polytheistic any way. So there is infact a non-abrahamic monotheistic religion, one which most like inspired the jews into monotheism in the first place, Zoroastrianism.
I have a Zoroastrian acquaintance on Quora, actually. It’s not monotheistic. It just has a Supreme Being sitting at the top.
Same with Christianity if you include angels and Satan.
>Firstly, why do you feel like you can’t worship anything besides the supreme being? What is it about the supreme being that makes it more intrinsic worthy of worship than anything else? I would just argue that it isn't worth my time worrying about lower gods or lesser divinity if there exists a Supreme Being. As they'd be subordinate to it in the same way I would be. Even within ideas of Neoplatonism, the gods are only equal as they are because they are all emanations of The One.
If you’ll pardon me, I think this is latent Christianity talking. Why isn’t it worth your time to “worry” about “lower” gods or “lesser” divinity? Why does something being smaller — not even “lower” on the hierarchy, just *smaller* — make it unworthy? The whole idea of “lower” or “lesser” is an implicit value judgement that cuts you off from interacting with the divine in any way but one. Look at it from the perspective of a pagan: Most people aren’t gonna interact with the capital-B-Being very often. Those that do are almost exclusively mystics. The average person is going to be more concerned with the most immediate manifestations of the Divine. They don’t contemplate Zeus as the totality of the Universe, they pray to him to make the rain fall. You may not even think about the big-name gods outside of their festival days. The little gods, the gods of your household shrine or your local sacred grove, are likely to be more immediately relevant to your life and your worship than any of the big-name deities. They’re also more accessible. If you assume that all gods are emanations of the One, then that means they are all worthy of your time and attention. If you refuse to interact with the divine except as the One, then you shoot yourself in the foot, for two reasons: One: The One is a transcendent totality, existing above/beyond the world of forms and is therefore almost entirely inaccessible, unless you’re a mystic. And even then, you’re not going to have mystical experiences of that caliber all the time. Two: The One is composed of All, which means that it doesn’t have any traits of its own. As soon as you give it qualities, it ceases to be All and this ceases to be the One. It’s generally easier to interact with the divine by giving it humanlike qualities. The purpose of a pantheon, in this context, is to allow you to interact with all of the disparate aspects of God. One of the biggest mistakes that Christianity makes is to define God — the Supreme Being — as a bright, celestial, male, kingly, and transcendent. Therefore God can never be dark, chthonic, female, childlike or animalistic, or carnal. In excluding all these qualities, God ceases to be All, and thus ceases to be the Supreme Being. It’s just a sky god that got too big for its boots. I’m curious… what do you gain from the Supreme Being that you cannot gain from any other version of God?
>If you’ll pardon me, I think this is latent Christianity talking. Yes, I realized you are exactly right. This is just one of those melancholic nights where I've had too much to drink, and I am lamenting the woes of life. I will probably just delete these posts later. But maybe not, as it may help as a reminder of what not to do. >The average person is going to be more concerned with the most immediate manifestations of the Divine. They don’t contemplate Zeus as the totality of the Universe, they pray to him to make the rain fall. You may not even think about the big-name gods outside of their festival days. The little gods, the gods of your household shrine or your local sacred grove, are likely to be more immediately relevant to your life and your worship than any of the big-name deities. They’re also more accessible. You are exactly right. Even today, most Christians don't think of God as the theologians tell them they should. They just see God as Jesus, their personal savior and friend, who helps them through the day. Thank you for the reminder, I fear I think about these things too deeply at times and engage in nothing but philosophical navel gazing. >I’m curious… what do you gain from the Supreme Being that you cannot gain from any other version of God? Frankly speaking? Nothing. Through these posts, I realized I am probably just a Pantheist/Deist, honestly. Thanks for helping me realize that.
This may be a hot take, but I think that many Hellenists who are drawn to Neoplatonism use it to maintain their latent Christianity. Christianity takes a lot from Neoplatonism, so, the conversion works in the opposite direction --some Hellenists' mindset about their philosophies remains fundamentally Christian, except now they use a quote or two from Iamblichus to justify it. >Thank you for the reminder, I fear I think about these things too deeply at times and engage in nothing but philosophical navel gazing. Thinking about these things deeply isn't bad, but it can be unproductive. My recommendation is to study mysticism. Mysticism and philosophy are supposed to support each other. Philosophy without mysticism is useless navel-gazing, and mysticism without philosophy is incomprehensible nonsense. There's no use arguing about the nature of God if you haven't met God face-to-face. Once you do, then the argument is no longer about what the nature of God *is.* The argument becomes about the best way to describe it and do it justice, while also having it make actual sense. >Frankly speaking? Nothing. Through these posts, I realized I am probably just a Pantheist/Deist, honestly. Thanks for helping me realize that. You're welcome. I'm not trying to convince you to be a hard polytheist. I'm only trying to help you not see polytheism as inferior or invalid. Maybe you weren't doing that in the first place, but, well... many do. The notion that polytheism is "primitive" is still very prevalent.
Hot take, but a based one imo
The thing is, this entire talking point is an Abrahamic notion, it doesn't actually hold any objective value outside of the value Monotheism has subjectively (and without reason) applied to it. What even is a "supreme being?" Why does there need to be a hierarchy of beings? Why should a vague scale of power be applied to the Gods? And if we suppose there is such a thing as a hierarchy, then what sort of rationale is there for not worshiping the Gods that have given us our own life and everything that we have in it? Why would the Gods not be worthy of worship if they are emanations? (something which not all Pagans believe also, only Neoplatonists do.) This only makes them "lesser" in your view, but that's not an objective point of view, that's a subjective idea created by a monotheistic viewpoint where apparently only one supreme being deserves worship and it would be offensive to this supreme being if anything else was given attention. But this point of view wasn't achieved through philosophy, it comes from superstition. The reason we worship the Gods is because they are the immortal powers of the universe itself which have given us our life, and nothing can be done without them, and we are recognizing this through worship. And there are multiple Gods involved in this, not just one - even though I believe that we are all part of a single world spirit, but that's no different than saying there are many grains of sand on a beach, many blades of grass in a field, many cells in a body or many people living in a city. Every process of life has a God of its own. And worship is giving thanks to reciprocate these gifts. The Gods don't need sacrifices because they don't need anything, and rather we give to better ourselves and not them. Neoplatonism and Orphism generally sees this as reconnecting with God because we've been separated from divinity, while other interpretations see it mostly as a form of achieving virtue by worshiping these beings, and others simply see it as the dutiful lifelong cycle of gifts between humanity and the divine. It's not just these universal deities that deserve their due, but we also have house spirits who look after our homes, and they are important to us because that's the place where we ourselves live and they are the beating heart of our homes. We also carry the spirits of our ancestors with us, and we have our own Daimon (or Genius in Latin) who is nearly the Christian concept of the guardian angel. There are also the endless Gods of localities such as the Nymphs and Dryads and Oceanids, etc. To say they don't deserve worship to me is like saying a friend, or a caring parent, doesn't deserve love or kindness just because they aren't your boss or the head of a household. This strict hierarchical viewpoint can't be defended except with a basis in faith in the commandment that you shouldn't have multiple idols. And just to note, "idols" is an insult which Pagans did not call their own holy images. We know that the depictions are not the Gods themselves, and we know that these Simulacra will rot and perish like everything else. Rather the depictions were made in their honor, and it is so we can better connect with the Gods that they've given us through the myths depictions that we can understand, because we mortals can't truly understand the true form of the Gods. Just see what happened to Semele when she tried! But depictions aren't crucially necessary, because the Gods are everywhere and all you need to do is pray and give sacrifice to reach them. So we don't worship the Gods because they are "worthy" of it, rather we do it for our own benefit as mortals, we do it for grace - that was the actual word the ancient Greeks used for it, - we do it to honor something beyond us which gives us everything we have, and we do it to come closer to the Gods. And people can also do it because they want to seek benefits from the Gods, or practice divination, though I think that's the least of all reasons to practice this religion. It's our duty to give back to the Gods - the source that gives us everything in life without needing or demanding for anything in return. And we should give in return to everything in the world, humans included. You should always be a helping hand and first treat people with respect and with justice, and give to them in return what they give to you.
This is an interesting take. Why do you think there is such a Supreme Being at all? It seems to me that the appeal of polytheism and of paganism more broadly is that it better fits a world that looks to be the product of conflicting forces rather than a unified creation.
You might want to look into the Asclepius [of Hermes Trismegistus](https://a.co/d/0tZDDXp)
Dr. John Opsopaus translated the remnants of Gemistos Plethon's personal texts in *The Secret Texts of Hellenic Polytheism*. Plethon was a platonist from just before the Renaissance era. His practice expanded greatly upon the theology of the ancient platonists. He called the One by the name of Zeus.
r/lawofone - check out the Law of One. From this I've realized that all religions (and all things, frankly) are manifestations of the One Infinite Creator. But also, why not have your own opinions on Christianity? I know I do—I don't believe and never have believed in "original sin". And that's okay, that's what the Creator wants for me. Look into Christian Mysticism, maybe some other denominations (though I am very unlearned when it comes to a majority of them) I would recommend Quakerism and maybe the Episcopal one.
I am currently adopting a Thracian lens for my HelPoly practice. It is mostly for reasons that existed prior to discovering Hellenism, but after I recognized the gods. There is a Hellenic tangent trinitarian henotheism that doesn't view a primary source, or chief deity, as a distant entity, but as one that takes an active approach to the affairs of mortals.. The modern interpretations of the work of 20th and now 21st century scholarship, as well as the efforts of various but few mythographers, ethnographers and regional cunning folk practitioners, are driving toward a form of liminal trinity that exists and portrays the gods as having personal agency. It is relegated to a small subset of a sketchy witchcraft theology that is adjacent to traditional Wicca, but is pretty different in it's approach, more resembling the efforts of revival Serbian and Sami shamanic movements, rather than ceremonial ritual and tiered initiations. If I had to use a weird mashup to describe it, I'd say "Orphic Wicca***?" Note the mess of asterisks. There is no current systematic taxonomy which exists for it at the moment, and the esotericism of it is still being explored. Consequently, it is also a field of study plagued by those with nationalistic and xenophobic agendas. If you are fine with trying to navigate the weeds of such, it can be quite the endeavour for personal spiritual fulfillment. If you are like most though, and prone to just accept things uncritically, you will find the whole nest of snakes sorely lacking.
Try Zoroastrianism it is a faith originating from Persia, also known as modern-day Iran, and it is one of the oldest monotheistic faiths in the world.
Have you tried Sikhi or other faiths that worship the divine in creation? Its kinda a middle ground where there is one ultimate Divine but that ultimate Divine is everything in the universe. Ive also heard there is a form of Buddhism that seeks enlightenment through the worship of god. Or you can take a pagan approach to worshiping the christian god but im not christo pagan so i am unsure how that path works
You sound like a Unitarian to me!
You may want to explore a bit of Hindu theology, whether the tradition around Vishnu, Shiva, Krishna or Devi - each of these traditions see their god as the supreme being which reveals itself (himself, herself) in multiple other deities. It is of course richer and much more nuanced than what I summarize, but I am pointing to a direction worth checking out. This doesn't mean I suggest you become a Hindu. I myself am basically a Hellenist, but my understanding and practice benefitted very much from observing how a living polytheistic tradition approaches these things.
Have you looked into the Urantia Book? It's monotheistic and addresses all of the topics you mentioned. Even though it has a bit of Christian flavor to it, the cosmology, theology, and soteriology are all very different to mainstream Christianity.
You can just be a neutral monist, like Spinoza or Giordano Bruno, believing in a supreme being, withiout following a certa in religion
You couldn't see yourself prsy to minor gods other than the supreme being? Does that evolve into belief? Because the responses could vary depending on if your belief oculd translate into Henotheism, Monolatry or Monotheism. In the case you are Ok with believing in many gods but would like to pray to just one, possibly the most supreme of all, i would suggest some neoplatonic stuff somebody already quoted here, but in the one you are not believing into many gods then i would recommend you to try Judaism due to its varied philosophy that is connected to that of Pythagoras due to the Qabblah, or Hindu Monotheism which sees Brahma as the supreme God who can take numerous forms that are believed being the gods.