Pagan Discussion Thread III

[The Wiccan Israel]

Interesting. Now, three questions to every faithful pagan in the thread:

1) Is paganism a faith or a religion?

2) Does adhering to the paganism require a pre-modern, irrational worldview?

To answer your first question, just as Abrahamism itself is not a religion, paganism itself is not a religion. These are both collective terms to describe a group of religious communities. Meanwhile, Wicca, Hellenism, Asatru, etcetera are religions by themselves.

Adhering to paganism does not “require” anything but your word. Indeed, most pagans tend to believe in and practice the pre-modern ways of our ancestors. But to “require” anything from that would mean establishing a dogma and authority of some kind, neither of which can possibly represent Paganism as a whole.

Thank you (and Happy Easter).

Not that long ago, pagans around the world celebrated the Spring Equinox (also referred to as Ostara, where Easter gets its name). Personally, I believe the event of Jesus's crucifixion and resurrection is symbolic of rebirth and renewal, similar to the cycle of the seasons - the death and return of the sun.

That is cool that you believe that! And actually as a Pagan, what are your views on Christianity and on Jesus Christ?

As I was raised in a Roman Catholic family, Christianity remains an important (and sometimes unavoidable) part of my life. I believe that Jesus Christ was a real person who lived and died on the Earth. However, I would argue that his teachings were distorted by religious zealots, leading to the violent Christianization of Europe and the Crusades that followed. As regrettable and unfortunate as those events were, I cannot bring myself to hate Christians today.

Thank you (and Happy Easter).

Not that long ago, pagans around the world celebrated the Spring Equinox (also referred to as Ostara, where Easter gets its name). Personally, I believe the event of Jesus's crucifixion and resurrection is symbolic of rebirth and renewal, similar to the cycle of the seasons - the death and return of the sun.

Then what about Pesach? That's what the Christians appropriated for their holiday.

Elaborate on your question, please. Are you looking for my opinion on Pesach?

[The Alma Mater]

Thank you (and Happy Easter).

Not that long ago, pagans around the world celebrated the Spring Equinox (also referred to as Ostara, where Easter gets its name). Personally, I believe the event of Jesus's crucifixion and resurrection is symbolic of rebirth and renewal, similar to the cycle of the seasons - the death and return of the sun.

Then what about Pesach? That's what the Christians appropriated for their holiday.

As well. Christianity is an "anthology" or "best of" religion - it combined stories, rituals, festivities etc. from different sources and made it a cohesive whole. Similar to what Ovid did in his metamorpheses or the brothers Grimm in their bundles.

[The Emerald Legion]

I personally believe it's hard to answer that question, as it isn't so black and white! Paganism is inherently more open or "free form" than other schools of thoughts or religions. Their may be certian pagan practices that are best done at certian times of the year, or under certian conditions, but paganism as a whole is a decentralized religious practice. This makes it hard to define "commitment", as their isn't a standard for how much one has to indulge paganism for it to be considered "adequete"; there is neither a religious standard, or a societal standard (an example of a societal standard would be that most christians are expected to attend church at least once a week, and that the best time to do so is on sunday).

The standard doesn't have to be an official one, it can also be a personal standard. (even if, people ascribing to the same cult and having different standards, talks poorly about that cult consistence)
Without a boundary, any person on earth would be a pagan, and at the same time, no one would be a pagan. Which would make the label "pagan" a meaningless one.

To say, how do you recognize a wicca from a norse?
How do you recognize a wicca from a fan of harry potter?
Or what difference is there between a norse and a fan of the avengers?
What makes someone meditating different from someone resting their eyes?

Or more interestingly, how do you recognize a norse pagan from someone with north european culture and/or local traditions?
Isn't the pagan label just conflated with cultural customs?
Is paganism just cultural customs (local or appropriated from others) with esoterism added into it?

Would the presence of superstition and/or esoterism be the boundary from a pagan and just a person with cultural traditions?
Or are the various cultural traditions, just used as reference to give more credibility to something(paganism) which otherwise would be superstition by itself?
So is paganism just the superstition or esoterism, regardless of the cultural background used as host?


Rewording the previous question then:
How much present pagans are into superstition or esoterism? And how many of them aren't, but just like the folklore?
What is the share? 1to5 esoterists to folklorists?

1.) Relatively easily. Norse Paganism and Wicca are very different and visibly different. This can be hard to notice if you look primarily at Wiccans and the Wicca adjacent, because Wiccans have an unfortunate tendency to loot any pre-christian gods for their own purposes, but when you look deeper into Norse Paganism, the line becomes more distinct.

2.) I mean, this is just kind of a silly question. How do you tell the difference between a fan of Van Hellsing or Castlevania and a Christian?

3.) Again, a silly question. Pop culture representations tend to have very little to do with the actual faiths.

4.) Their intention. Obviously.

5.) While there are certain relics of Norse Paganism in Northern European Culture, the ideals and tenets of Norse Paganism has long since died out there. Norse Paganism has a distinctly.... bleak, worldview. For example, most Abrahamic faiths have some focus on charity, because the poor deserve help and you should love them like yourself. The sole emphasis on Charity in Norse Paganism is entirely selfish in motivation, namely that you want to be viewed well, and be seen as a generous person so as to earn friends. It's a faith steeped in the idea that the world is a terrible place, and the best you can hope for is to meet it on your terms and wrest what happiness and prosperity you can from it until the day it throws something at you you can't handle. And then the best you can hope for is that your struggles will be remembered.

6.) The rest of your questions are just all variations of claiming Paganism is just cultural traditions with some superstition added in. That's.... not really correct at all. Norse Paganism will be my example, but I'm fairly certain that most reconstruction faiths are like this. The religious beliefs carry their own inherent assumptions about the world. How those beliefs interact changes depending on the culture. For example, the Ancient Norse were incredibly Homophobic. While this is well known, and discussed, for the most part the Heathen community is not homophobic, barring those sections that are basically just Neo-Nazi's to begin with. Why? Because there's nothing in the religion saying you have to be. It's something we know existed. But there's nothing in the faith that really ties it to the faith, so it's more or less completely dropped.

[Lost Memories]

@Emerald Legion
Thanks for trying to answer all the questions, but you missed the point of them. The only intended question was the last one:

How much present pagans are into superstition or esoterism? And how many of them aren't, but just like the folklore?
What is the share? 1to5 esoterists to folklorists?

All the previous questions were rhetorical, or roundabout, or intended to be thought-provoking, given how the previous iteration of the same question above wasn't understood.

How much present paganism is lived with commitment, and how much of it is just a temporary fad?

All those questions did go around the point of, where is the line dividing a real pagan from a wannabe pagan? Or, what defines a real pagan?
Once that line is defined, how many of all the ones claiming to be pagan fall into the real group, and how many fall into the wannabe group?
Though, the top question already goes deeper than that real-fake duality.

Real-fake is a pretty common distinction to do, and it isn't ever clear cut, every religion, cult, or similar, doesn't have the same degree of "interest" across all its members (self-appointed or not), there are always different degrees of "interest". Some are very fond and active for their cult, some others practice just the bare minimum, and some others call themselves members while they don't practice anything, nor anything in their decisions or actions talks about their membership.

Rovid-9 answer was the one getting closer to addressing the point, claiming it's just hard to recognize a true pagan from a fake one.


Though, the answer on the nothern european and norse difference was an interesting one. Regardless of the point.
I would still hold that someone claiming to be a norse, but who doesn't believe in Valhalla, nor believes as a result to be called to die as a warrior (it's an example from a stereotype, whatever they actually believe in), is a norse in name only. Just someone using the name norse, without any other consideration.
(an other random thought-provoking example: "Crocodile Dundee was a Norse")


To sum it up, for there being any meaningful discussion about paganism, or any of the sects inside that macro-group, more meaningful than:
Pagan™: "hello everyone, i worship trains"
Replies: "that's cool, can you tell more about their myth? i could add them to my personal pantheon"
there first has to be a more clear definition of what a pagan is, and how to differentiate the various types of paganism. (which is also going to differentiate who isn't)
More clear than a foggy "we're all a big family, no need to exclude anyone, share the paganism" or "if i say i'm a wizard, no one can say i'm not", which sounds more confused than a teen having gender issues.

Asking about the rate of hardcore|proper pagans over the total, is just one of many ways to go around the definitions (presentations) part.
Something you guys will have to do, if you wish for this thread to last more than 15 pages. Or maybe you don't really care, that's legit too.
It isn't a matter of small demographic, if all the previous threads about paganism failed and fell into oblivion (like paganism itself ), it's a matter of content.

Unless the actual defining trait of pagan sects/cults is lack of organization and lack of coherence. It could actually be, but that just makes it hard to have any meaningful discussion about it, it would just devolve on the personal level without ever addressing the actual cults.
The alternative to the lack of a self-definition, is a definition from the outside. But that just opens a whole different can of worms, that is misinterpretation.


(btw, i'm definitely going to reuse the idea of the cult of trains, it has a lot of potential, a pantheon with all the train types, trains as metaphors of the thoughts, the wagons as stages of life, travel classes as caste system )

[Cetacea]

Interesting. Now, three questions to every faithful pagan in the thread:

1) Is paganism a faith or a religion?

2) Does adhering to the paganism require a pre-modern, irrational worldview?

Im not European (well I do have a Grandfather whose Ulster Scot) and my beleifs harken back to those of my native ancestors which was a form of advanced Animism in as much as everything was possessed of an intangible ‘essence/pneuma’ (which can be felt by things around it) and in that sense are alive and everything is connected in a genealogical taxonomy starting with ‘Earth-Mother and Sky-Father”

Anyway the questions
1. The term pagan originally just meant country dweller and thus the term just refers to the various beleifs and folk traditions that persisted in rural areas away from the sociopolitcal mainstream of Urban centers. Wicca has very little to do with Norse Heathenism nor Hellenistic Polytheism nor Shinto, its an overly broad umbrella term and in that regards is problematic as its impossible to discuss a common Paganism except in contrast to the ‘mainstream’ (which mainly means Christianity)

2. While my ancestors were animist with some movement towards polytheism, there was a philosophical tradition which posited beleif in a omnipotent First Cause from who all other things derived. Post-Christian analyst tended to suggest it was a shift towards Monotheism, but my own beleif is that its indicative of Panentheism and grand unification theory from the first seed in the void, splitting into a duality (Male-Female) and that giving birth to reality.

Anyway I raise the philosophical tradition in my beleifs (and certain branches of ancient beleif systems (paganism) like that of the Greeks) to discuss the assertion of an irrational, pre-modern worldview. Philosophical traditions allow for reanalysis and syncretisation of beleifs due to fundamental shifts in context, knowledge and worldview. In the modern age of science and rationalism I am able to maintain beleif that a river, a mountain, the stars in the sky are ‘living beings’. I am satisfied that trees and animals have souls, and I know for a fact that I share the same genealogical descent with them originating from our common Mother-planet (and that She is a child of the Stars).

I’d even go as far to say that the idea of the first Seed in the Void, swelling, developing, putting out rootlets and then spliting into two stems that kept circling around each other until they finally came together as Earth and Sky to bear fruit (and concious thought) works as a symbolic model of the Big Bang singularity (seed) and cosmic expansion.

Moreover I am satisfied just as the Physical Planet has its own magnetosphere, my physical body also generates a similar field around it and that it is quite possible that the electrical signals produced by the neurons in my brain, heart and gut all encode information into this field - the Concious mind is thus more than just the physical brain and the Spirit is much more than the Physical body.

Is the Universe itself Concious? - I leave that for you to contemplate...

[Albrenia]

Bit of an odd comment here from me, but Sun worship seems particularly justifiable to me. After all, it is the sole thing sustaining us and could seriously fuck us up by farting in our general direction.

[The Emerald Legion]

@Emerald Legion
Thanks for trying to answer all the questions, but you missed the point of them. The only intended question was the last one:

How much present pagans are into superstition or esoterism? And how many of them aren't, but just like the folklore?
What is the share? 1to5 esoterists to folklorists?

All the previous questions were rhetorical, or roundabout, or intended to be thought-provoking, given how the previous iteration of the same question above wasn't understood.

How much present paganism is lived with commitment, and how much of it is just a temporary fad?

All those questions did go around the point of, where is the line dividing a real pagan from a wannabe pagan? Or, what defines a real pagan?
Once that line is defined, how many of all the ones claiming to be pagan fall into the real group, and how many fall into the wannabe group?
Though, the top question already goes deeper than that real-fake duality.

Real-fake is a pretty common distinction to do, and it isn't ever clear cut, every religion, cult, or similar, doesn't have the same degree of "interest" across all its members (self-appointed or not), there are always different degrees of "interest". Some are very fond and active for their cult, some others practice just the bare minimum, and some others call themselves members while they don't practice anything, nor anything in their decisions or actions talks about their membership.

Rovid-9 answer was the one getting closer to addressing the point, claiming it's just hard to recognize a true pagan from a fake one.


Though, the answer on the nothern european and norse difference was an interesting one. Regardless of the point.
I would still hold that someone claiming to be a norse, but who doesn't believe in Valhalla, nor believes as a result to be called to die as a warrior (it's an example from a stereotype, whatever they actually believe in), is a norse in name only. Just someone using the name norse, without any other consideration.
(an other random thought-provoking example: "Crocodile Dundee was a Norse")


To sum it up, for there being any meaningful discussion about paganism, or any of the sects inside that macro-group, more meaningful than:
Pagan™: "hello everyone, i worship trains"
Replies: "that's cool, can you tell more about their myth? i could add them to my personal pantheon"
there first has to be a more clear definition of what a pagan is, and how to differentiate the various types of paganism. (which is also going to differentiate who isn't)
More clear than a foggy "we're all a big family, no need to exclude anyone, share the paganism" or "if i say i'm a wizard, no one can say i'm not", which sounds more confused than a teen having gender issues.

Asking about the rate of hardcore|proper pagans over the total, is just one of many ways to go around the definitions (presentations) part.
Something you guys will have to do, if you wish for this thread to last more than 15 pages. Or maybe you don't really care, that's legit too.
It isn't a matter of small demographic, if all the previous threads about paganism failed and fell into oblivion (like paganism itself ), it's a matter of content.

Unless the actual defining trait of pagan sects/cults is lack of organization and lack of coherence. It could actually be, but that just makes it hard to have any meaningful discussion about it, it would just devolve on the personal level without ever addressing the actual cults.
The alternative to the lack of a self-definition, is a definition from the outside. But that just opens a whole different can of worms, that is misinterpretation.


(btw, i'm definitely going to reuse the idea of the cult of trains, it has a lot of potential, a pantheon with all the train types, trains as metaphors of the thoughts, the wagons as stages of life, travel classes as caste system )

Sorry, it's honestly a bit hard to figure out your posts.

So, the first issue with this is... well. Wicca aside, Paganism isn't a religion. It's a description for several incredibly separate religions, which is part of what I was trying to explain. Partly because I simply have no idea how the Hellenic or Coptic faiths work. Hell, I'm ignorant of the particulars of Continental and Saxon Germanic practices, though I know they share a lot with Norse ones.

I know that in the more hardcore Norse Paganism, the fact that there isn't a single 'Orthodoxy' is commonly touted as a feature, rather than an error, and is certainly accurate to the time when the faith was in it's heyday. And while I personally find that to be a mistake. it is what it is. The basic issue is that we don't exactly have a solid system for being able to confirm contacts with the gods, or any of the other beings for that matter. So we either have to cause divides in our already small community fighting over whether this or that is actual divine intervention, or if it's just some dude being crazy.

As for the Valhalla thing, that is quite stereotypical. While getting into Valhalla by other means is certainly uncommon, there is precedent that coming to Odin's Hall by other means than dying as a warrior is not only possible, but potentially preferable to an afterlife as one of the Einherjar, given the example we have is Bragi, who was a mortal poet taken in because he was just that good at poetry that Odin wanted to recruit him. Mind you, some people still want to join the Einherjar. But even outside of Valhalla, the other afterlives aren't exactly bad places.

It's a bit hard to explain, but in the Norse Faith, the gods aren't.... you're not going to pray to Odin to ask him for help on every little thing the way a Christian would. In fact, it's rather interesting but the viewpoint for how to interact with the gods is more or less the same framework for dealing with other people. If you wish to curry favor with a god, you make sacrifices on a regular basis. Just as if you want to become friends with a person you should give them a gift.

In fact, the gifting cycle, along with a few other practices, are the easiest ways to tell a Norse Pagan apart from someone who just likes the myths.

[Washington Resistance Army]

I don't think you really can draw a line between a real or a fake pagan because pagan is simply an umbrella term used to describe a large amount of things. Wicca, witchcraft, animism and various strands of polytheism all fall under that label. You'd need to look deeper into each case to start making judgements.

[Rosmana]

I don't think you really can draw a line between a real or a fake pagan because pagan is simply an umbrella term used to describe a large amount of things. Wicca, witchcraft, animism and various strands of polytheism all fall under that label. You'd need to look deeper into each case to start making judgements.

You mean Paganism and NEO-paganism/new age beliefs?

[Washington Resistance Army]

I don't think you really can draw a line between a real or a fake pagan because pagan is simply an umbrella term used to describe a large amount of things. Wicca, witchcraft, animism and various strands of polytheism all fall under that label. You'd need to look deeper into each case to start making judgements.

You mean Paganism and NEO-paganism/new age beliefs?

Nowadays they're generally used interchangeably, much to the chagrin of some.

[Rosmana]

You mean Paganism and NEO-paganism/new age beliefs?

Nowadays they're generally used interchangeably, much to the chagrin of some.

I can understand that, its like thinking the the Roman Catholic Church is the same thing as a Baptist one.

Yes, that would grind my gears.

[The Islands of Versilia]

Though I am an atheist, I am sympathetic to paganism and the revival of native pagan beliefs and faiths in other countries, including my own (UK). I am interested in Anglo-Saxon heathenry the most and I want to start incorporating secular elements of old Anglo-Saxon culture into my lifestyle, though at the moment I lack the discipline to push myself to do so.

I am also on the spectrum and have never been able to muster any faith in spiritual or otherworldly things. I once tried to believe in the Norse pantheon but it just failed and I stopped trying to go against my inner lack of belief. I tend to take most things literal and if I can’t see it before my eyes or it doesn’t fit in my mundane world view then I don’t believe in that thing.

So I suppose my pagan sympathies are more political than anything and really an extension of my belief in inalienable identities and opposition to the Church and Mosque. This doesn’t bother me, of course, but it would’ve been nice if I had the willpower to truly analyse the stories of my forefathers and learn from them, even if I don’t believe in the supernatural elements.

[Revolutionary Indiana]

To the pagans of NS, I want to ask questions just out of curiosity:

1. Is paganism, for example Norse Paganism revival and the Hellenic paganism practice that recently has been estabilished in Greece, follow certain, organized practices (such as the liturgies in Christianity or the Hadith and Qur'an in Islam)?

2. If yes, then where did these rituals came from, is it the straightdescendant of the ancient Hellenic or Norse practices for example, or is it just the modern interpretation of what our old ancestors did before the arrival of Abrahamic religions?

3. If the latter point of my question is right (rituals are just modern interpretations), then where would the sense of what is good or bad (or how to follow divine command) in paganism came from? As far as I know (and correct me if I'm wrong), neo-paganism lacks the scriptures and guidelines to practice their religion as it was a thousand years ago for example, compared to Abrahamic religion.

[South Reinkalistan]

Though I am an atheist, I am sympathetic to paganism and the revival of native pagan beliefs and faiths in other countries, including my own (UK). I am interested in Anglo-Saxon heathenry the most and I want to start incorporating secular elements of old Anglo-Saxon culture into my lifestyle, though at the moment I lack the discipline to push myself to do so.

I am also on the spectrum and have never been able to muster any faith in spiritual or otherworldly things. I once tried to believe in the Norse pantheon but it just failed and I stopped trying to go against my inner lack of belief. I tend to take most things literal and if I can’t see it before my eyes or it doesn’t fit in my mundane world view then I don’t believe in that thing.

So I suppose my pagan sympathies are more political than anything and really an extension of my belief in inalienable identities and opposition to the Church and Mosque. This doesn’t bother me, of course, but it would’ve been nice if I had the willpower to truly analyse the stories of my forefathers and learn from them, even if I don’t believe in the supernatural elements.

I would actually like to say that I completely understand your position, and agree with you.

The issue I have with western organised religion (I.E the Abrahamic faiths) is that they're all primarily invader religions. They have come from somewhere. They were forced upon native populations until it was adopted. Now, naturally, I have no desire to whine about injustices that happened over a millennium ago, but it does highlight a few issues.

Modern cultures have found themselves considerably influenced by the religion they adopt, whilst the religion they adopt has not been influenced (to the same extent) by their culture. Entire Kingdoms have at times been - theoretically - held to the whim of the Pope. This is why I believe that Protestantism is preferable as a religious doctrine than Catholicism; Papal authority is categorically susceptible to corruption.

While I would consider myself a staunch atheist, I sympathise towards paganism; it holds meaning to the cultures with which it developed; adherents did not fall under paganism, they lived alongside it. This differs to organised religion. Pagan myths and tales would have Gods one was encouraged to respect, but Gods that would likely respect humans back. You could prove yourselves through feats of individual courage and talent, being an individual rather than another face in the crowd. Christianity, on the other hand, would expect one to be meek and subservient. This is how I, at least, interpret the difference.

That said, organised religion has only gotten to the level it is at now through immense popularity. If paganism had instead flourished, perhaps it would have developed the same sort of structure and order that Christianity can be reviled for today. This is why I'm always sceptical of doctrines that would insist upon the existence forces with higher power than that of what is immediately apparent and tangible. In short, how you view paganism is, in my eyes, the best way to view it. It's a way to oppose organised religion under the banner of something it has consistently sought out to destroy.

$0.02

[The Emerald Legion]

To the pagans of NS, I want to ask questions just out of curiosity:

1. Is paganism, for example Norse Paganism revival and the Hellenic paganism practice that recently has been estabilished in Greece, follow certain, organized practices (such as the liturgies in Christianity or the Hadith and Qur'an in Islam)?

2. If yes, then where did these rituals came from, is it the straightdescendant of the ancient Hellenic or Norse practices for example, or is it just the modern interpretation of what our old ancestors did before the arrival of Abrahamic religions?

3. If the latter point of my question is right (rituals are just modern interpretations), then where would the sense of what is good or bad (or how to follow divine command) in paganism came from? As far as I know (and correct me if I'm wrong), neo-paganism lacks the scriptures and guidelines to practice their religion as it was a thousand years ago for example, compared to Abrahamic religion.

1.) No. At least in the case of Norse Paganism. There are certain common threads drawn from the texts, but how those common threads are implemented varies wildly from group to group.

2.) Partly they come from texts, While we don't have a complete picture of Germanic pagan cosmology and ritual practice in particular is hard to come by save in bits and pieces, many of the old Norse Poems survive to the modern day, and from those we can attempt to put together the rest. As for the rest, the rest is piecemeal assembly from people just making things up as they go along. While ritual practice may share certain common factors, it is also very different depending on which group you're in.

3.) Well, part of the issue at least with Norse Paganism is there is no divine command. You do you, and maybe the gods will take notice and favor you. Or maybe they'll take notice and have you killed. Or maybe they'll take notice and do nothing at all. As for where the general structure comes from, for Norse Paganism one of the key texts is the Havamal. Which is more or less their equivalent to the Ten Commandments. Only it's less commandments and more 'Odin's Advice for not being a dumbass.' The most common ritual is sacrifice, which is more or less a way to give gifts to the gods. You find something you think makes a good gift for one of the gods, and you sacrifice it. Burning it is typical, since burning things is a way to force them into the other world. But there all manner of practices for what to do with sacrificed items and food.

You can try to curry favor with particular gods with your actions, and with sacrifices, but there's no guarantee. It's much like trying to become friends with say, the president of a country, or some other similarly powerful individual. Only more so, because they're gods.

[The Islands of Versilia]

Though I am an atheist, I am sympathetic to paganism and the revival of native pagan beliefs and faiths in other countries, including my own (UK). I am interested in Anglo-Saxon heathenry the most and I want to start incorporating secular elements of old Anglo-Saxon culture into my lifestyle, though at the moment I lack the discipline to push myself to do so.

I am also on the spectrum and have never been able to muster any faith in spiritual or otherworldly things. I once tried to believe in the Norse pantheon but it just failed and I stopped trying to go against my inner lack of belief. I tend to take most things literal and if I can’t see it before my eyes or it doesn’t fit in my mundane world view then I don’t believe in that thing.

So I suppose my pagan sympathies are more political than anything and really an extension of my belief in inalienable identities and opposition to the Church and Mosque. This doesn’t bother me, of course, but it would’ve been nice if I had the willpower to truly analyse the stories of my forefathers and learn from them, even if I don’t believe in the supernatural elements.

I would actually like to say that I completely understand your position, and agree with you.

The issue I have with western organised religion (I.E the Abrahamic faiths) is that they're all primarily invader religions. They have come from somewhere. They were forced upon native populations until it was adopted. Now, naturally, I have no desire to whine about injustices that happened over a millennium ago, but it does highlight a few issues.

Modern cultures have found themselves considerably influenced by the religion they adopt, whilst the religion they adopt has not been influenced (to the same extent) by their culture. Entire Kingdoms have at times been - theoretically - held to the whim of the Pope. This is why I believe that Protestantism is preferable as a religious doctrine than Catholicism; Papal authority is categorically susceptible to corruption.

While I would consider myself a staunch atheist, I sympathise towards paganism; it holds meaning to the cultures with which it developed; adherents did not fall under paganism, they lived alongside it. This differs to organised religion. Pagan myths and tales would have Gods one was encouraged to respect, but Gods that would likely respect humans back. You could prove yourselves through feats of individual courage and talent, being an individual rather than another face in the crowd. Christianity, on the other hand, would expect one to be meek and subservient. This is how I, at least, interpret the difference.

That said, organised religion has only gotten to the level it is at now through immense popularity. If paganism had instead flourished, perhaps it would have developed the same sort of structure and order that Christianity can be reviled for today. This is why I'm always sceptical of doctrines that would insist upon the existence forces with higher power than that of what is immediately apparent and tangible. In short, how you view paganism is, in my eyes, the best way to view it. It's a way to oppose organised religion under the banner of something it has consistently sought out to destroy.

$0.02

A way of simplifying my view could be done like this:

Imagine a tree of massive size, with hulking branches and leaves that shade a big area around it. Now this tree represents Abrahamism and its organisations, from the Muslim Brotherhood to the Catholic Church and the independent churches worldwide. Now imagine a woodsman, his family’s been living in the area for generations and have owned that land since time immemorial. This tree was planted by some guy from a really rich place but it’s cut from a foreign species of tree and has been ruining the woodsman’s lands for many years now. It’s roots aren’t that deep but it’s hurting the roots of the surrounding trees. The woodsman is paganism, the surrounding trees are neighbouring pagan or native faiths and the rich fellow is a Roman or missionary.

Since the tree was planted the woodsman wasn’t allowed to cut it down; he tried multiple times but every time the rich man sent his thugs and beat up the woodsman, stole his money and set his house on fire then made him pay the rich man back for trying to chop down his tree. It wasn’t until now that the woodsman’s great grandson (modern paganism) could petition to the local judiciary and make his case for him to be allowed to cut the tree down. I’m just a city dweller and I don’t like that tree either, but I won’t do anything about it because I know I myself can’t (I’m an atheist but I’m supporting paganism because I alone won’t have any affect on the tree/church). So I support the great grandson and he gets permission to cut the tree down. The rich man’s 37 descendants (Abrahamist denominations and sects) whine and whine, but they don’t have any right to whine so the grandson cuts down this tree, symbolically removing Abrahamism from the pagan lands.

So hopefully this makes sense.

[Ultimate Destructive Fighting Nation]

I'd also question the claim that exceptions to literal belief in stories were "rare and ended up badly", the go to example people tend to use is Socrates but despite blasphemy being the official reason he was put to death an examination of it paints a pretty clear picture that it was politically motivated. Beyond that even outright atheism wasn't too widely looked down upon, sans in Athens where it seemingly was a go to punching bag whenever something went wrong and the city leaders needed a scapegoat.

Atheism was considered "denying the gods of the state" though and was punished because it was considered treasonous.

Well, I’m a traitor then. I don’t believe in ANY gods.

[The Alma Mater]

Atheism was considered "denying the gods of the state" though and was punished because it was considered treasonous.

Well, I’m a traitor then. I don’t believe in ANY gods.

Which, in a country where people believe gods get angry if they are not worshipped enough, is indeed something people would get upset about.
Do your duty. Feed the deity.

[Nakena]

Well, I’m a traitor then. I don’t believe in ANY gods.

Which, in a country where people believe gods get angry if they are not worshipped enough, is indeed something people would get upset about.
Do your duty. Feed the deity.

Some gods like to be worshipped. Others are being empowered and manifested, presenced by certain deeds and activities.

[Hanafuridake]

Atheism was considered "denying the gods of the state" though and was punished because it was considered treasonous.

Well, I’m a traitor then. I don’t believe in ANY gods.

You aren't an ancient Athenian citizen.

[The Emerald Legion]

Though I am an atheist, I am sympathetic to paganism and the revival of native pagan beliefs and faiths in other countries, including my own (UK). I am interested in Anglo-Saxon heathenry the most and I want to start incorporating secular elements of old Anglo-Saxon culture into my lifestyle, though at the moment I lack the discipline to push myself to do so.

I am also on the spectrum and have never been able to muster any faith in spiritual or otherworldly things. I once tried to believe in the Norse pantheon but it just failed and I stopped trying to go against my inner lack of belief. I tend to take most things literal and if I can’t see it before my eyes or it doesn’t fit in my mundane world view then I don’t believe in that thing.

So I suppose my pagan sympathies are more political than anything and really an extension of my belief in inalienable identities and opposition to the Church and Mosque. This doesn’t bother me, of course, but it would’ve been nice if I had the willpower to truly analyse the stories of my forefathers and learn from them, even if I don’t believe in the supernatural elements.

I would actually like to say that I completely understand your position, and agree with you.

The issue I have with western organised religion (I.E the Abrahamic faiths) is that they're all primarily invader religions. They have come from somewhere. They were forced upon native populations until it was adopted. Now, naturally, I have no desire to whine about injustices that happened over a millennium ago, but it does highlight a few issues.

Modern cultures have found themselves considerably influenced by the religion they adopt, whilst the religion they adopt has not been influenced (to the same extent) by their culture. Entire Kingdoms have at times been - theoretically - held to the whim of the Pope. This is why I believe that Protestantism is preferable as a religious doctrine than Catholicism; Papal authority is categorically susceptible to corruption.

While I would consider myself a staunch atheist, I sympathise towards paganism; it holds meaning to the cultures with which it developed; adherents did not fall under paganism, they lived alongside it. This differs to organised religion. Pagan myths and tales would have Gods one was encouraged to respect, but Gods that would likely respect humans back. You could prove yourselves through feats of individual courage and talent, being an individual rather than another face in the crowd. Christianity, on the other hand, would expect one to be meek and subservient. This is how I, at least, interpret the difference.

That said, organised religion has only gotten to the level it is at now through immense popularity. If paganism had instead flourished, perhaps it would have developed the same sort of structure and order that Christianity can be reviled for today. This is why I'm always sceptical of doctrines that would insist upon the existence forces with higher power than that of what is immediately apparent and tangible. In short, how you view paganism is, in my eyes, the best way to view it. It's a way to oppose organised religion under the banner of something it has consistently sought out to destroy.

$0.02

I don't think that's exactly a good way of interpreting it. Most pagans I've seen get just as annoyed with Atheists as they do with Christians. More than one 'Heathen Atheist' has found themselves on the wrong side of Heathens who aren't atheists and who literally believe that the gods exist and work in our world, and aren't just archetypes and the movement isn't just an opposition to organized religion.

I at least, have gotten a hell of a lot more of an understanding for why the religious right acts the way they do about certain things. It doesn't entirely justify their excesses, but I can understand wanting to live your life by your values, and not being forced to live your life by anothers.

[Washington Resistance Army]

To the pagans of NS, I want to ask questions just out of curiosity:

1. Is paganism, for example Norse Paganism revival and the Hellenic paganism practice that recently has been estabilished in Greece, follow certain, organized practices (such as the liturgies in Christianity or the Hadith and Qur'an in Islam)?

Serious Hellenists do follow certain organized practices, ie we all organize altars in the same way and do the same sorts of prayer and offerings and whatnot.

2. If yes, then where did these rituals came from, is it the straightdescendant of the ancient Hellenic or Norse practices for example, or is it just the modern interpretation of what our old ancestors did before the arrival of Abrahamic religions?

We appeal to tradition whenever possible in regards to how things should be done. Common prayer stance and how things are done in that regard is a pretty straight descendant because we have a staggeringly large literature and archaeological base to draw from. Things become more muddled and thus modern when one begins worshiping deities whose cultic practices were private, or minor deities without a large historical base to draw from, and thus in need of reinvention because they were lost to time when polytheism was outlawed and destroyed in the empire.

3. If the latter point of my question is right (rituals are just modern interpretations), then where would the sense of what is good or bad (or how to follow divine command) in paganism came from? As far as I know (and correct me if I'm wrong), neo-paganism lacks the scriptures and guidelines to practice their religion as it was a thousand years ago for example, compared to Abrahamic religion.

This varies a lot in regards to what pagan religion you're discussing. Hellenism has a great deal of literature, including things that are good and bad and what you should live by, but you'd be correct in saying none of these things are scripture in the sense most commonly used today. Other religions aren't so lucky in this regard, Slavic pagans for example have to try and rebuild pretty much everything with very few original sources.

[Ultimate Destructive Fighting Nation]

Well, I’m a traitor then. I don’t believe in ANY gods.

Which, in a country where people believe gods get angry if they are not worshipped enough, is indeed something people would get upset about.
Do your duty. Feed the deity.

I’d be proud to die. It’s better to tell the truth and use common sense then to be a person that blindly and ignorantly worship nonexistent gods.
I’d have the same reactions to Christians. I’ve argued with a Pastor as I would with a Rabbi. I think we’d better look to ourselves and solve our problems then turn to God or Gods.

[Nakena]

Thoughts on Daoism?

[Hanafuridake]

Thoughts on Daoism?

For a major religious tradition, next to nothing is really known about it in the West. People tend to mostly project what they want it to be onto it more than trying to understand it. There's a good article about this which castigates authors such as Ursula Le Guinn and others for their misrepresentation of Daoist traditions.

That said, the Zhengao is a really interesting work (although the writer was almost certainly on some hallucinogens).