The problem with paganism (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Casual Banter] >> Off the Grid



Message


AFace4Smother -> The problem with paganism (9/4/2005 12:13:18 PM)

Modern paganism is diluted, watered down, neutered and weak "New Age" fluff. it is largely the product of Freemasonic revisionism, as the founders of modern neo-pagan thinking were nearly all Freemasons resulting in what, in most cases, boils down to diluted freemasonic ritual, bits of middle-eastern ceremonial magick, with psuedo-celtic window-dressing. Most people would probably be very surprised to learn just how much of the "New Age"movement was engendered by proto-Nazi aryanists and in some cases actual Nazis. What is the problem with modern paganism? the answer is manifold. First of all, most pagans have been so indoctrinated by the judeo-christian ideology that has become ambient to western culture that they are unable to divorce these ethics from their supposedly non-christian religious practices. You simply cannot take out important parts of paganism because they are not "PC" without destroying the very spirit of these beliefs. To do so is an insult to our ancestors. The Great Rite(ritual sex), natural hallucinogens, and perhaps even headhunting and human sacrifice are an important part of these beliefs and must continue to be a part of them. Period. Also modern wicca/paganism is based on the mythical idea that it is a sort of universal "Old Religion", this is a misrepresentation of paganism and animism as synonyms. Actually the true "old religion" is animism(sometimes called shamanism mistakenly which is actually the practice of gnosis that originated in animism), which is the wellspring of ALL religion. Paganism is a farmers religion, and farming is a new practice relatively speaking and has never been universal. furthermore farming (as civilized cultures practice it ) is the rape of the earth. Farming of this sort is inherently the plunder, conquest and enslavement of the land and in time the Earth itself. It is war. It seems a bit hypocritical to claim to be an "earth religeon" or to worship nature and then to worship agricultural deities that in essence represent the conquest of nature and the rape of the earth. The original people of this planet were not farmers, they were mostly hunter-gatherers, and they were not pagans but rather they were animists. Their gods were not chimerical entities dwelling in some remote heaven or Olympus, rather their gods were alongside them and all around them, dwelling in the forest, and the mountains, the rocks and streams. It is suspicious that the civilizer gods, the agricultural gods, of nearly all civilized cultures, were said to have descended from the sky or the stars to teach man to toil and build, to mine and to plunder the earth, and yea, even to make wars of conquest, often on the less "civilized" hunter-gatherer/animist tribes around them(now the story of Cain and Abel starts to make some sense). So in conclusion it seems paganism is a step away from the pure worship of nature and the Earth's indigenous gods, and toward the worship of what sounds conspicuosly like extraterrestrial imposters posing as gods in order to enslave and civilize/domesticate us. Of course some of this is speculation on my part but i am not speaking of this as a complete outsider, I have have been a serious researcher of suppressed archeology for many years and have been a student of the occult for twice as long, and an initiate of a Gardnerian coven to boot (I've since moved on to animism mixed with a bit of Thelema). Of course i realize I have made some pretty strong charges here and i invite discussion and encourage others to research and check into what I have said here. By all means don't take my word for it. If you are interested I can also recommend excellent books, and I recommend as an excellent starting point the books of Daniel Quinn including Ishmael, The Story Of B, My Ishmael, Beyond Civilization, Providence, and The Holy.





LadyAngelika -> RE: The problem with paganism (9/4/2005 12:29:39 PM)

Here you go :)
[image]http://www.collarchat.com/upfiles/36532/061F468664D5468AAFC6059042777A19.jpg[/image]

And welcome to the boards. I always appreciate a thought provoker, especially those who invite others to challenge him.

- LA




JohnWarren -> RE: The problem with paganism (9/4/2005 12:31:26 PM)

It's a sad fact we really don't know that much about pagan ritual and belief. Primitive people didn't keep records and as societies shifted and changed much was lost and even more was adapted.

There are lots of hypotheses, a few theories and very few facts.

The more certain an author is that he's or she's right, the more likely that you are reading a Charles Frambach Berlitz or a Erich von Daniken.




perverseangelic -> RE: The problem with paganism (9/4/2005 2:09:04 PM)

Ok, some aspects of your post hit a nerve, so I'm off to make a huge rant now.

"Pagan" isn't a religion. It is a descriptor of any non-judeo-islamic-christian religion.

When one calls oneself a pagan, one gives no information about one's belief system save it is not judeo-islamic-christian. I am a kitchen witch. I have very little in common with a Dianic Wiccan or a Druid. We are both pagans.

When people say "I am a Pagan" they seem to think they are refering to some age-old religion of the earth and the "natural" people. This just plain isn't true. Using pagan as a religion references the fairly recent developments in neo-pagan and new age religions. This isn't a BAD thing. It just isn't the "old religion."

Don't get me wrong, there -are- old religions. They -are- pagan. They simply aren't Pagan, capitol P. For example, someone who practices a native american shamanistic religion is most definatly practicing an old religion. They are also most definatly pagan. But to use "pagan" as the only definition of religious practice is to say very little about the religion.


Argh. I get frustrated when people tell me they are Pagan, and expect that to tell me something about what they worship. It's kinda like saying "I have blonde hair" I know something about you, but nothing about what you actually think or believe.


Obviously, this is something I've thoughta bout, partially because of my activity in the neo-pagan community.




darkinshadows -> RE: The problem with paganism (9/4/2005 2:53:09 PM)

For myself, I have always seen the word 'Pagan' as the word 'Christian'.
Within the word Christian - there can be baptist, methodist, CoE... and countless others.
Within the word Pagan - there can be druid, wiccan, shamanistic practises.

I have always seen people who proclaim their 'christianity' as the 'one true way for all' and all other 'religions or practises' as false, watered down or weak as people who themselves who have no wisdom, are slightly naive, with an arrogance with no desire to see past their own desires and life. I see people who proclaim Paganism in the same way, as no different.

Peace and Love




EmeraldSlave2 -> RE: The problem with paganism (9/4/2005 3:31:53 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: AFace4Smother
Modern paganism is diluted, watered down, neutered and weak "New Age" fluff.

You lost me right here. This essay has been in existence since before the ancient Greeks. "Kids these days just don't have respect...back in OUR day we were the real thing"

MMhmm.




IronBear -> RE: The problem with paganism (9/4/2005 9:40:59 PM)

Being brought upin family who worshiped the prechristian gods of ancient Ireland, I can only say that what i practive is something which I see as being authentic and not fluffy. Certainly the lodge practices are of the older format (I'm the 3rd generation of my family who has rised to Grand Master of the lodge) Like always I/we keep to ourselves.





Faramir -> RE: The problem with paganism (9/4/2005 9:43:34 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: JohnWarren

It's a sad fact we really don't know that much about pagan ritual and belief. Primitive people didn't keep records and as societies shifted and changed much was lost and even more was adapted.

There are lots of hypotheses, a few theories and very few facts.

The more certain an author is that he's or she's right, the more likely that you are reading a Charles Frambach Berlitz or a Erich von Daniken.



I would disagree.

In the broadest ssense of the world, we have a detailed picture of Germanic and Scandanavian paganism - the Icelandic Sagas are an incredible wealth to mine.

In a more narrow, Celtic sense, we have an archelogical record, but also a fantastic series of ethnographies of pagan cultures by Roman historians. Yes, in some places we are thin (like Kernunos), but in other places there is a lot of detailed info.

In the sense that neo-paganism is a sort of melange of influences, without a clear historical line, then I can kind of see where the the OP is coming from.

As a Christian, I embrace my pagan heritage. I see my pagan heritage as a presage - I see God giving the Word to the tribes of Israel, and pictures and stories to my pagan fathers. I see both lines unified in Christ. I know Pagans might not feel the same way. For me, there is tremendous truth and vitalilty in pagan traditions - I despise when Christians in America freak out over anything that "smacks of paganism."




perverseangelic -> RE: The problem with paganism (9/4/2005 9:55:03 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Faramir

In a more narrow, Celtic sense, we have an archelogical record, but also a fantastic series of ethnographies of pagan cultures by Roman historians. Yes, in some places we are thin (like Kernunos), but in other places there is a lot of detailed info.


Sadly, these are of debatable accuracy.

There are lots of things in the Roman histories that simply don't jive with surviving examples of material culture, which makes the religious cultural observations suspect. They're pretty clearly colored with a cultural bias.

Which sucks. I do early Irish recreation. There is a distinct lack of reliable texts and examples.




Lordandmaster -> RE: The problem with paganism (9/4/2005 10:01:12 PM)

OK, not to seem obtuse here (since I don't know anything about "neo" paganism), but weren't the Romans themselves pagans? The Greeks? Or have the definitions changed since, say, the Council of Sardica?

Just in case they haven't: I don't think it's very persuasive to say that we don't have good records about Greek and Roman religion.




kisshou -> RE: The problem with paganism (9/5/2005 4:14:23 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: AFace4Smother
What is the problem with modern paganism? the answer is manifold. First of all, most pagans have been so indoctrinated by the judeo-christian ideology that has become ambient to western culture that they are unable to divorce these ethics from their supposedly non-christian religious practices. You simply cannot take out important parts of paganism because they are not "PC" without destroying the very spirit of these beliefs. To do so is an insult to our ancestors.The Great Rite(ritual sex), natural hallucinogens, and perhaps even headhunting and human sacrifice are an important part of these beliefs and must continue to be a part of them. Period.


Am I the only person who read this and felt that advocating human sacrifices is wrong and also against CM TOS? I was really upset reading this post.




EmeraldSlave2 -> RE: The problem with paganism (9/5/2005 8:18:54 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: kisshou
Am I the only person who read this and felt that advocating human sacrifices is wrong and also against CM TOS? I was really upset reading this post.

Depends on the the type of human sacrifice. A huge tenet of the christian religion is based on a human sacrifice- the process of Jesus Christ being put on the cross to die and then being reborn again. The human sacrifice in that instance is very much celebrated. The subtly cannibalistic act of communion could be considered a form of human sacrifice as well.

I'm not against human sacrifice as a whole, as long as its a voluntary act made sincerely and not through coercion (and don't have other people dependent upon them for support and guidance such as children).




kisshou -> RE: The problem with paganism (9/5/2005 9:51:29 AM)

To do so is an insult to our ancestors. The Great Rite(ritual sex), natural hallucinogens, and perhaps even headhunting and human sacrifice are an important part of these beliefs and must continue to be a part of them. Period.


quote:

ORIGINAL: EmeraldSlave2
quote:

ORIGINAL: kisshou
Am I the only person who read this and felt that advocating human sacrifices is wrong and also against CM TOS? I was really upset reading this post.

Depends on the the type of human sacrifice.


Involuntary human sacrifice and head hunting is what AFace4Smother posted.
I know this is wrong and am against it.
That is why it is not "PC" as the OP also stated.
Hopefully someone more eloquent than myself will be able to convince the OP of this.
I wonder if he has ever read 'The Lottery'.




frenchpet -> RE: The problem with paganism (9/5/2005 9:55:23 AM)

It's an interesting topic. Too bad you didn't bother to make paragraphs, I would certainly have commented it.




EmeraldSlave2 -> RE: The problem with paganism (9/5/2005 10:50:53 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: kisshou
I wonder if he has ever read 'The Lottery'.

The Lottery was voluntary, everyone in the town accepted the ritual. Mrs. Hutchinson didn't even say that they shouldn't do it at the end, only that it wasn't fair or right. However, she had participated in the ritual itself and consented to being part of the society and its consequences. To me it would be like a person fighting against being arrested when they've broken a law.

I don't think that's a clear enough example to support your case, though it remains a fascinating one.

I agree that non consensual murder is generally wrong, and I don't think it harbors much good for spiritual purposes, but human sacrifice itself is a power act, and to harness that within a ritual could be very beneficial.




perverseangelic -> RE: The problem with paganism (9/5/2005 6:01:10 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Lordandmaster

OK, not to seem obtuse here (since I don't know anything about "neo" paganism), but weren't the Romans themselves pagans? The Greeks? Or have the definitions changed since, say, the Council of Sardica?

Just in case they haven't: I don't think it's very persuasive to say that we don't have good records about Greek and Roman religion.


No, I was just unclear.

The Greeks and Romans are, of course, pagan.

Faramir had refered to Green and Roman histories of the celtic and other Britanic tribes. I was making a comment about the accuracy of the Greek and Roman writings on those cultures, which -are- of debatable truthfulness for the reasons I mentioned.

We obviously have accurate records of Greek and Roman history and religion. I'm sorry for the poor wording.





Faramir -> RE: The problem with paganism (9/6/2005 1:28:05 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: perverseangelic

Sadly, these are of debatable accuracy.

There are lots of things in the Roman histories that simply don't jive with surviving examples of material culture, which makes the religious cultural observations suspect. They're pretty clearly colored with a cultural bias.

Which sucks. I do early Irish recreation. There is a distinct lack of reliable texts and examples.


No doubt we can debate a lot of things - but until I see some good, scholarly evidence to make me think that the excellent histories left to us should be thrown out wholesale, I won't.

The charge "colored with culture bias" seems particualrly mertiless. Any work is contextual. Every history has a cultural bias - every writer has a cultural, gender, chronological, ad infinitum bias. The person making the charge "We can't trust what you wrote because it is pretty clear you have a cultural bias," is highly suspect, because it's pretty obvious they have a cultural bias.

I have much more confidence in say, Tacitus or Julius Caesar, then the sort of revisionist culture warriors who have no antiquities background - but have an axe to grind over gender and religious issues.

No no - I prefer scholarship to axegrinding.




Lordandmaster -> RE: The problem with paganism (9/6/2005 4:07:19 PM)

Now there's the pot calling the kettle black.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Faramir

who have no antiquities background





frenchpet -> RE: The problem with paganism (9/6/2005 4:25:13 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Faramir
I have much more confidence in say, Tacitus or Julius Caesar, then the sort of revisionist culture warriors who have no antiquities background - but have an axe to grind over gender and religious issues.


!! It's not like Julius Caesar wrote to be historically accurate and culturally neutral. He wrote because it's always the winner who gets to write History.
My latin classes are a bit lost in the mist of my highschool years now, but I remember there was something funny about his description of the celtic pagan rituals.

But I'm OK to have more confidence in Tacitus' Germania, as far as foreign pagan rituals are concerned.




Lordandmaster -> RE: The problem with paganism (9/6/2005 6:14:04 PM)

If anyone is SERIOUSLY interested in how Roman writers misrepresented their Germanic and Celtic neighbors, I recommend this book:

Peter S. Wells, The Barbarians Speak: How the Conquered Peoples Shaped Roman Europe (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1999).

You might also be interested in:

Bettina Arnold and D. Blair Gibson, eds., Celtic Chiefdom, Celtic State: The Evolution of Complex Social Systems in Prehistoric Europe (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1995).

They're both tough reading, and Caesar-lovers probably won't enjoy them.




Page: [1] 2   next >   >>

Valid CSS!




Collarchat.com © 2025
Terms of Service Privacy Policy Spam Policy
0.046875