Germanic/Norse Religions...

[Clarakore]

There is a difference between animism and panpsychism and for that matter pantheism and panentheism as well are all differing terms.

[Frank Merton]

Well they are different words.

[Clarakore]

I should have clarified that Mr. Walker definitely knows the difference between these terms.

Oh I "approve" of pagan type worship. It is a direct form of communion with the cosmic consciousness. I have long and profitable conversations with trees and other forms of nature. It is not their consciousness with which I converse but with the universal or cosmic consciousness which permeates all life . So where some, as an example, might sense tree dryads, I connect directly to the cosmic consciousness via the tree, rather than perceive a tree occupied by its own spirit or dryad.

Only wanted to add working terms for what he was discussing in case others wanted to further research these concepts and then add two more closely related terms. All interesting concepts.

[HollyDolly]

My father's people are german,but have really no idea what they believed before St.Boniface went around Germany hitting them in the head with the cross.His family has been catholics in Bavaria and Baden ever since that time.Now there might be a few who are lutheran,but how many I don't know. His mother's family the Steldts are lutherans. There were crusades to convert the people of Latvia,Lithiuania,Estonia,and Prussia mainly by the Teutonic Knights.Some cousins of hers the von Lillienschilds

go back in the records of the City of Riga to the 13th or 14th century and belonged to an order of knights,the Livonian Knights of the Sword who later were absorbed into the Teutonic knights. That's like momma's family .They are hungarians,but i don't have a clue what they believed and i really don't have any buring desire to worship the ancient gods of either side. I'm sure that there may still exist peoples in those land swho secretly taught the old ways and faith to their children and it ispassed down through their families.However i don't think this is something they parade around outsiders.

[Clarakore]

I'm sure that there may still exist peoples in those land swho secretly taught the old ways and faith to their children and it ispassed down through their families.However i don't think this is something they parade around outsiders.

Very interesting family history you have here. Fascinating to the ultimate degree! I especially liked this tidbit and you are right, traditional forms are passed down, rarely hyped as they can cause waves with the formal church, and in many cases it takes on a feminine expression since mothers pass on the knowledge to their daughters. In my culture we do small things, old things, like rubbing an egg over a child to rid them of the evil eye, these go farther back than the church.

[+DieChecker]

Yet Pagans are laughed at if they try to resurect the old religions. "Oh what funny clothes they wear, Oh now ridiculous they are" is the cry.

I think rather then laughing at their practices, most thinking Christians simply disagree that these Neo-Pagan Nordic Followers are practicing what was once practiced.

Christianity has run continuously since the time of Christ, while Norse Paganism was extinct in large part for 500+ years. It is like bring back an extinct language... we may have clues to spelling and sentance structure from written manuscripts, but the day to day usage has been lost.

[Clarakore]

I think rather then laughing at their practices, most thinking Christians simply disagree that these Neo-Pagan Nordic Followers are practicing what was once practiced.

Christianity has run continuously since the time of Christ, while Norse Paganism was extinct in large part for 500+ years. It is like bring back an extinct language... we may have clues to spelling and sentance structure from written manuscripts, but the day to day usage has been lost.

I have to disagree with the pagan vs Christian tone (making comparisons between the two and claiming one is superior) of this post, sorry mate.

Christianity has taken on many different forms and expressions throughout history, while the text might have remained consistely the same after the Romans standardized what was to be considered "official cannon", there is a wide variety of how Christians interpreted the books and in what they placed emphasis on. Christians in China today will not have the same concerns as Christians in the deep American South of thirty years ago.

Even how Christians view the Devil, hell, and the afterlife has changed, nothing is unbroken about Christianity in this sense.

We have a historical source that illustrates how the concept of dualism (I find dualism to be an illusion), whom many Christians hold as truth, was not necessarily embraced by Christians of other eras. The following example comes from a diary written between 1640 and 1683 by a Ralph Josselin, a Puritan vicar of Earl Cone.

The full diary has been analysed published (Macfarlane 1970a, 1976), and we may mention some of conclusions to be drawn from the source covering the middle of seventeenth century. The projection of the distinction between good and into strong beliefs in heaven and hell does not show itself in this diary:‘

belief in the after-life does not play an important part in his private thoughts as recorded in the Diary. There is not a single direct reference to hell or to damnation. It thus seems that a Puritan clergyman, who might have been expected to use heaven and hell as threats or inducements to himself and his congregation, showed the most tepid interest in both.’ (Macfarlane 1970a: 168)

Josselin was preoccupied with misfortune, illness and insecurities of various kinds. There are consequently many moving passages on death and disease. Yet what is striking in the Diary is the conviction that all suffering derived from God. In Josselin's thought there emerges very clearly principle that pain and evil came from God. There is no hint in the Diary that Josselin envisaged an alternative source of evil, Satan for example. Again he traces his own and the nation's troubles back to God' (Macfarlane 1970a: 173). Basically, 'Josselin seems to have accepted that pain was either divine purge, as in the story of job, or a punishment' (p. 174). Guilt strike throughout the Diary, for Josselin blamed himself for much of the suffering of those around him; in the most famous instance, he linked too much chess playing to illness and death. Thus, the roots of evil were ultimately in his own corrupt heart. It was no use blaming other people. The cause was either a loving God testing him, or his own, or the nation's failings. There is no suggestion that Josselin blamed witches, Satan or anyone else.

http://www.alanmacfa.../FILES/evil.htm

As we can see many Chrisitans today in America blame everyone else for what they consider evil. When it comes to terrorism they blame Muslims or politicians who disagree with their views but never themselves, not even a hint of examination in their roles at all.

Somewhere, at some point in time, the general American Christian preoccupation with the Devil, hell, and the afterlife began, but it isn't a universally held belief among all Christians, from the past or even at present.

Even today the emerging church conversation is deconstructing the current built up dogmas and placing emphasis on postmodern approaches that look to blur the lines between denominations instead of maintaining them.

This is taken further in the Ancient-Future movement of Christianity which examines every Christian era possible and draws practices from the past incorporating them into their own belief systems today. Admittedly this is a form of reconstructionism.

Christianity has paused during one moment of its entire history and chose to remain frozen in it. The Ancient-Future model of Christianity allows the postmodern Christian to choose which customs, rituals, and rites work for them by adapting practices from the whole catalog of Christianity. There is nothing stopping anyone from worshiping and believing as they wish, we might be discouraged, but we should honor what makes sense to us as individuals.

http://www.unexplain...3

Edited April 22, 2013 by Leave Britney alone!

[Tutankhaten-pasheri]

I think rather then laughing at their practices, most thinking Christians simply disagree that these Neo-Pagan Nordic Followers are practicing what was once practiced.

Christianity has run continuously since the time of Christ, while Norse Paganism was extinct in large part for 500+ years. It is like bring back an extinct language... we may have clues to spelling and sentance structure from written manuscripts, but the day to day usage has been lost.

Certainly day to day usage has been lost, but that is no reason why some cannot make an effort to create a new Paganism on the ruins of the past. Christianity is a foreign religion to me. I am not bound by that religion and will not conform to it, it is not my master, it is nothing to do with me, why does it impose on me? What does my religion have to do with Christians? it is my affair, not theirs. What do they fear that they attack so strongly? Are they really scared of some "hippies" banging drums and chanting in forest? I have some philosophy borrowed from Hollywood. "I'm drinking wine and eating cheese, and catching some rays, you know". Life is too short

[+DieChecker]

I have to disagree with the pagan vs Christian tone (making comparisons between the two and claiming one is superior) of this post, sorry mate.

Christianity has taken on many different forms and expressions throughout history, while the text might have remained consistely the same after the Romans standardized what was to be considered "official cannon", there is a wide variety of how Christians interpreted the books and in what they placed emphasis on. Christians in China today will not have the same concerns as Christians in the deep American South of thirty years ago.

Yes, but the evolution and changes of Christianity and its thousands of denominations is pretty well documented, whereas the Norse religion came to a stop and then people tried to revive it using existing folktales, festivals and other customs, which themselves probably evolved over that 500+ years. Is there documentation from the 17th century on where Norse religious followers were at in their belief system? I've not seen it if it exists.

What I was on about was the claim that Norse religion is the exact same today as it was in the 10th century. Which it is not, because the various ceremonies, practices and forms of worship disappeared. Such did not happen with Christianity.

Somewhere, at some point in time, the general American Christian preoccupation with the Devil, hell, and the afterlife began, but it isn't a universally held belief among all Christians, from the past or even at present.

Even today the emerging church conversation is deconstructing the current built up dogmas and placing emphasis on postmodern approaches that look to blur the lines between denominations instead of maintaining them.

And, if I was a Religious Scholar, I could go and research every tidbit you are bringing up here. But such is impossibile with the Norse, as there is not enough records to show anywhere near the detail.

Christianity has evolved surely, but it did not pass away like the Norse religion did and have to be recreated using a handful of datapoints and a lot of assumptions.

[+DieChecker]

Certainly day to day usage has been lost, but that is no reason why some cannot make an effort to create a new Paganism on the ruins of the past. Christianity is a foreign religion to me. I am not bound by that religion and will not conform to it, it is not my master, it is nothing to do with me, why does it impose on me? What does my religion have to do with Christians? it is my affair, not theirs. What do they fear that they attack so strongly? Are they really scared of some "hippies" banging drums and chanting in forest? I have some philosophy borrowed from Hollywood. "I'm drinking wine and eating cheese, and catching some rays, you know". Life is too short

I really have no care about people practicing Norse religion, or practicing the Jedi religion for that matter. What I was pointing out is that it is a reconstructed religion, and thus it will be subject to scrutiny of claims of unbroken worship for tens of thousands of years. Claiming some old sites, gods, ceremonies, festivals and customs as your own does not make an actual ancient religion. It creates a modern religion that mimics the ancient religion.

Do neo-Norse pagans believe they can only get into Valhalla by dying in battle??

[Mr Walker]

@Mr Walker. Yes, I agree with you. I think I may have slightly misunderstood the sense of your post I quoted. Some of this is a struggle within our own minds between the rational and the irrational. We like the idea of (friendly) elves and such inhabiting our forests, but know in reality it is total nonsense. Sometimes....

Yes; making paganism very hard for an individual mind to truly accept in a modern world. But the idea of a god "out there somewhere", because we do not KNOW it is impossible via science, still is acceptable to us. (modern scientific thinking humans)

[Tutankhaten-pasheri]

I really have no care about people practicing Norse religion, or practicing the Jedi religion for that matter. What I was pointing out is that it is a reconstructed religion, and thus it will be subject to scrutiny of claims of unbroken worship for tens of thousands of years. Claiming some old sites, gods, ceremonies, festivals and customs as your own does not make an actual ancient religion. It creates a modern religion that mimics the ancient religion.

Do neo-Norse pagans believe they can only get into Valhalla by dying in battle??

I have no idea because I am not Norse. Is there a difference between having a concept of going to Valhalla and of going to heaven?. I cannot answer for either religion. Also there is a presumption that Pagans have to "prove" themselves to Christians, to be as pedantic as many Christians, to be constantly quoting some book. Will not do this, Pagans have nothing to prove to anybody. As for Paganism mimiking an ancient religion, nobody that I know is under any doubt that modern Paganism is a new creation. The term neo is used, in my opinion, not in the sense of "new" but in the neo-nazi sense. Using "neo" conflates modern Paganism with fascists in the eye of the unknowing public, a public that has been subjected to Christian propaganda for millenia. I don't see why Paganism can be dismissed because it is being created from ruins, why is it not valid? can there only be Christianity? this seems to be the view here (Not yours, but generally on this froum) Why are we attacked so strongly by Christians, what do they fear? Not a specific question to you, just a general one that never seems to get any kind of answer.

PS, perhaps somebody who follows Asatru could contribute here as it is not my religion, I simply defend Pagans in general, and seemingly rather alone at times....

Edited to remove references to Isis, Horus, Osiris and Atenism as that is a complication too far on this thread

Edited April 23, 2013 by Atentutankh-pasheri

[+DieChecker]

I have no idea because I am not Norse. Is there a difference between having a concept of going to Valhalla and of going to heaven?. I cannot answer for either religion. Also there is a presumption that Pagans have to "prove" themselves to Christians, to be as pedantic as many Christians, to be constantly quoting some book. Will not do this, Pagans have nothing to prove to anybody. As for Paganism mimiking an ancient religion, nobody that I know is under any doubt that modern Paganism is a new creation. The term neo is used, in my opinion, not in the sense of "new" but in the neo-nazi sense. Using "neo" conflates modern Paganism with fascists in the eye of the unknowing public, a public that has been subjected to Christian propaganda for millenia. I don't see why Paganism can be dismissed because it is being created from ruins, why is it not valid? can there only be Christianity? this seems to be the view here (Not yours, but generally on this froum) Why are we attacked so strongly by Christians, what do they fear? Not a specific question to you, just a general one that never seems to get any kind of answer.

Who said it was invalid? Just call a modern religion based on an ancient religion what it is... a modern religion.

The difference between Valhalla and the Christian Heaven is that you had to die in a battle to go to Valhalla. A very specific occurance. I was just wondering it neo-Norse-pagans believed this? Because that would go Directly to whether they are following an ancient religion or a modern religion drawing on the ancient religion for insperation. If the Neo definition of Valhalla includes anyone who simply tries hard, then that is a new thing to the religion and not ancient.

True enough that Christianity has changed just as much, but that change is documented over time. Where is the Norse documentation of these changes over time? They simply don't exist, because the neo-Norse simply took what they liked... names, places, ceremonies, traditions... and mashed it together and just filled in the rest with what they liked....

And there is nothing wrong with that in reality. Just don't go around calling it ancient Norse, because it isn't.

It is like the language modern Hebrew, a hodge podge of everything ever recorded in the Hebrew language and using the pronunciation from Yiddish and Jewish liturgical sources. It is derived from ancient Hebrew and uses elements of it, but is a reincarnation, rather then a continuation.

The language's revival eventually brought linguistic additions with it. While the initial leaders of the process insisted they were only continuing "from the place where [Hebrew's] vitality was ended", what was created represented a broader basis of language acceptance; it includes characteristics derived from all periods of Hebrew language, as well as from the non-Hebrew languages used by the long-established European, North African, and Middle Eastern Jewish communities, with Yiddish (the European variant) being predominant.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Revival_of_the_Hebrew_language

[Tutankhaten-pasheri]

And there is nothing wrong with that in reality. Just don't go around calling it ancient Norse, because it isn't.

I quote myself

I have no idea because I am not Norse

and again

PS, perhaps somebody who follows Asatru could contribute here as it is not my religion, I simply defend Pagans in general, and seemingly rather alone at times....

I wish for $ everytime I have been mis-quoted on forum this past week

And generally for all. As I am clearly not understood in English, here is laid out some of what I believe, and only some, as there is sooo much more.

http://www.dazzle.ru/spec/ra.shtml

I'm sure google will give a great translation and nobody will have any problems properly understanding I also thought to link to a site explaining humour, but that wouldn't be a joke here....

Edited April 23, 2013 by Atentutankh-pasheri