Despite their fictional basis, fiction-based religions are genuine religions because the activity and beliefs of which they consist refer to supernatural entities which are claimed to exist in the actual world. As such, fiction-based religions can be contrasted with fandom which, as a form of play, creates a fictional play world rather than making assertions about the actual world.
Some of the FB groups I chanced upon do both.
There are people who "feel" they are elves or fairies but admit that elves and fairies in their original (non-human) form can only exist in a different dimension, not in our reality.
I, for one, never wanted to attach much importance to the terms that Lada Haldeson used to identify and describe herself ("Elda", "One of the First Men"...), but I do recognize she is no more human than I am a bedside lamp.
And that makes me think that it's not easy to say that all Tolkien writes in his books is invented.
Does that make me a religious person... or a gnostic ?
(The answer I'd love to give to Davidsen and Hoeller is: it just makes me myself!
Categorizing people is not always the most perceptive thing to do, especially if they don't categorize themselves in the first place, which is what happens in the case of many Tolkien spirituality groups)
Lúthien wrote: ↑
Mon Sep 24, 2018 6:34 pm
You can only talk about the whole matter with someone who already knows what you’re talking about, because that basic understanding has to come from your own experience. But a third party who doesn’t have that experience wouldn’t be much wiser afterwards.
When I was just a child I kept repeating to my parents that this is the main characteristic of the objective truth.
Not sure whether to look at that little child as a baby-gnostic or a baby-religious man, in light of this...