The Pagan Thread...

Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you:

No adverts like this in the forums anymore.
Times and dates in your local timezone.
Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance.
Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely.
Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net.

If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

**SilverMK2**

But they are old and mysterious, so must be right! After all, everything that is old and mysterious has to be true

I don't really see a great deal of difference between any religion, old, new, extinct or active.

Although you have to laugh at some of the stuff new age pagans get up to.

**Wolfstan**

The best thing about the old gods is that they reflect human nature. The old gods are never looked upon as perfect, they are a mirror image of ourselves, but with powers.

**Manchu**

olympia wrote:
Cryonicleech wrote:What I like about Paganism is that there's multiple Gods for multiple things.

However, I'm still on the Catholic boat.

They have that in Catholicism too--they're called Saints

**Albatross**

If you're going to believe in something totally ridiculous, might as well go all out!

What, like you guys do? Most 'pagan' belief systems are related to the seasons and human interaction with nature - such things were vitally important for human survival in Iron-Age Britain for example. The whole community would starve if the crop failed - in that context it would make sense to sacrifice or make an offering to some sort of 'God of Crops'.

'Let he who is without sin cast the first stone'.

Christians believe in some pretty strange gak, guy. That's all I'm saying.

**MeanGreenStompa**

Orkeosaurus wrote:People who worship completely unrelated gods are the worst.

No, I'm not going to respect your "religion" if it includes Athena, Thor, Osiris, Quetzalcoatl, and every other god you learned about when you checked out "Mythology for Kids!" from your local library.

Planescape mutha-hugger

I worship the Lady of Pain, the soon to be Mrs Stompa!

**Manchu**

Albatross wrote:in that context it would make sense to sacrifice or make an offering to some sort of 'God of Crops'.

Assuming you've got the right logic here (which is far from obvious: I don't know why modern people are so convinced that people from the past think the same way as we do), you think that there is some logical connection between killing an animal and weather conditions?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/B._F._Skinner#Superstition_in_the_pigeon

I'm not entirely convinced that you or several other Dakka users have really taken Christianity seriously enough to know the first thing about it. And before you protest that you have been in a church building more than once in your life, let me say "who cares?"

In any case, I was talking about people who currently identify as "pagan," a word that is used with about as much specificity as the phrase "new age," not the actual people of ages past. (Although I should say that I regard those ancient religions, whatever they were actually like, as barbarous unless I allow myself to romanticize them into something they probably were not.) The fact that you (plural, not just you Alby) are engaging me on other terms indicates that you're not really interested in anything I have to say apart from indicating that you are somehow "open minded" (although poorly informed or simply uneducated seems closer to the point) while I fit your ready-made category of "typical religious bigot." This, coupled with past experience, leads me to believe that actually engaging with you in a discussion about Christianity (still plural here, Alby, and mostly not about you now, and please read this next part in the voice of Rowan Atkinson) would accomplish less than inviting a bottle of furniture polish to share its opinions about Immanuel Kant.

**olympia**

Some pagan beliefs are straight up wacky! The greeks had loads of stories about gods impregnating mortal women who then gave birth as virgins. That's just plain weird--silly pagans!

**Frazzled**

This thread has nothing to do with Bikers. Frazzled goes off to sulk.

**Manchu**

Frazzled wrote:This thread has nothing to do with Bikers. Frazzled goes off to sulk.

A mention of 40k in OT. I think I just broke all the rules.

Automatically Appended Next Post:

olympia wrote:Some pagan beliefs are straight up wacky! The greeks had loads of stories about gods impregnating mortal women who then gave birth as virgins. That's just plain weird--silly pagans!

Hey-oh! Oh oh . . . wait. No.

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

**Mannahnin**

http://www.neopagan.net/NeoDruidismCalendar.html

The Winter Solstice is a Minor High Day, usually occuring around December 21st or so of the civil calendar. Also known as Yule and Midwinter, this is a day sacred to Sun, Thunder, and Fire Deities. Large fires were built outdoors and Yule Logs lit indoors, in order to rekindle the dying Sun and help it to return brightly to the Northern skies. Burnt logs and ashes from the Midwinter fires were kept as a talisman against lightning and house fires. It was also a custom in many parts of Paleopagan Europe to decorate live evergreen trees in honor of the Gods (cutting down a tree to bring indoors is a blasphemous desecration of the original concept). This is considered, along with Midsummer, the best day of the year to cut mistletoe. Among some Mediterranean Paleopagans, a date on or near this was celebrated as the Birthday of Mithras and/or the Feast of Saturnalia (which the Christians co-opted to use for the birth of Christ).

http://www.neopagan.net/PaganDefs.html

Defining Paganism: Paleo-, Meso-, and Neo-
(Version 2.5.1)
Copyright © 1979, 2007 c.e., Isaac Bonewits

The term “Pagan” comes originally from the Latin “paganus,” which appears to have originally had such meanings as “villager,” “country dweller,” or “hick.” The Roman army used it to refer to civilians. The early Roman Christians used “pagan” to refer to everyone who preferred to worship pre-Christian divinities, whom the Christians had decided were all “really” demons in disguise, based on the habit of rural folks holding on to their old faiths longer than city folks, as well as because the polytheists were unwilling to enroll in “the Army of the Lord.” Over the centuries, “pagan” became simply an insult, applied to the monotheistic followers of Islam by the Christians (and vice versa), and by the Protestants and Catholics towards each other, as it gradually gained the connotation of “a false religion and its followers.” By the beginning of the twentieth century, the word’s primary meanings became a blend of “atheist,” “agnostic,” “hedonist,” “religionless,” etc., (when referring to an educated, white, male, heterosexual, non-Celtic European) and “ignorant savage and/or pervert” (when referring to everyone else on the planet).

Today there are many people who proudly call ourselves “Pagan,” and we use the word differently from the ways that most mainstream Westerners do. To most of us, “Paganism” is a general term for polytheistic religions old and new, with “Pagan” used as the adjective as well as the membership term. The overwhelming majority of all the human beings who have ever lived were or are Pagans, and we believe that there is an enormous wealth of spiritual insight and strength to be gained from following a Pagan path. There are three important points to be noted here, however:

Like the members of every other religious community, we Pagans have the right to define ourselves and to demand that our definitions, rather than (or in addition to) those invented by individuals and institutions hostile to us, be quoted or referenced when we are discussed by the mass media.

Like the names of all other religions and their followers, “Pagan” and “Paganism” deserve a capital letter, just as “Buddhist,” “Christian,” “Protestant,” or “Bahai” do.

Like other general terms for religions, “Pagan/Paganism” requires modifying prefixes or adjectives in order to communicate specific approaches, denominations or sects. The following are the ones I have settled upon over the last thirtyfive years:
“Paleopaganism” or “Paleo-Paganism” is a general term for the original polytheistic, nature-centered faiths of tribal Europe, Africa, Asia, the Americas, Oceania and Australia, when they were (or in some rare cases, still are) practiced as intact belief systems. Of the so-called “Great Religions of the World,” Hinduism (prior to the influx of Islam into India), Taoism and Shinto, for example, fall under this category, though many members of these faiths might be reluctant to use the term. Some Paleopagan belief systems may be racist, sexist, homophobic, etc. There are billions of Paleopagans living and worshiping their deities today.

“Mesopaganism” or “Meso-Paganism” is a general term for a variety of movements both organized and nonorganized, started as attempts to recreate, revive or continue what their founders thought were the best aspects of the Paleopagan ways of their ancestors (or predecessors), but which were heavily influenced (accidentally, deliberately and/or involuntarily) by concepts and practices from the monotheistic, dualistic, or nontheistic worldviews of Zoroastrianism, Judaism, Christianity, Islam, or early Buddhism. Examples of Mesopagan belief systems would include Freemasonry, Rosicrucianism, Theosophy, Spiritualism, etc., as well as those forms of Druidism influenced by those movements, the many Afro-Diasporatic faiths (such as Voudoun, Santeria, Candomble, etc.), Sikhism, several sects of Hinduism that have been influenced by Islam and Christianity, Mahayana Buddhism, Aleister Crowley’s religion/philosophy of Thelema, Odinism (some Norse Paganism), most “Family Traditions” of Witchcraft (those that aren’t completely fake), and most orthodox (aka “British Traditionalist”) denominations of Wicca.

Also included as Mesopagans would be the so-called “Christo-Pagans,” those who call themselves “monotheist Pagans,” and perhaps those Satanists who worship the Egyptian deity Set, if there really are any. The Satanists who insist that they don’t worship anything other than themselves but who like to use the name Satan because it’s “scary,” are simply Christian heretics, along with the Secular Humanists and other Western atheists, because the God and Devil they don’t believe in are the ones defined by Christian doctrine. Some Mesopagan belief systems may be racist, sexist, homophobic, etc. There are at least a billion Mesopagans living and worshiping their deities today.

“Neopaganism” or “Neo-Paganism” is a general term for a variety of movements both organized and (usually) nonorganized, started since 1960 c.e. or so (though they had literary roots going back to the mid-1800’s), as attempts to recreate, revive or continue what their founders thought were the best aspects of the Paleopagan ways of their ancestors (or predecessors), blended with modern humanistic, pluralist and inclusionary ideals, while consciously striving to eliminate as much as possible of the traditional Western monotheism, dualism, and puritanism. The core Neopagan beliefs include a multiplicity of deities of all genders, a perception of those deities as both immanent and transcendent, a commitment to environmental awareness, and a willingness to perform magical as well as spiritual rituals to help both ourselves and others. Examples of Neopaganism would include the Church of All Worlds, most heterodox Wiccan traditions, Druidism as practiced by Ár nDraíocht Féin and the Henge of Keltria, some Norse Paganism, and some modern forms of Buddhism whose members refer to themselves as “Buddheo-Pagans.” Neopagan belief systems are not racist, sexist, homophobic, etc. There are hundreds of thousands of Neopagans living and worshiping their deities today. As “Neo-Paganism,” this term was popularized in the 1960’s and 1970’s by Oberon Zell, a founder of the Church of All Worlds.

The term “Neopaganism” has nothing to do with the Catholic Church’s recent use of “neo-paganism” to refer to Hitler’s Germanic Mesopaganism, which incorporated nineteen centuries of Christian anti-semitism and dualism. Hitler, after all, considered himself a good Christian and was perceived as such by many, if not most, German Christians at the time. The Catholic Church is simply trying to distract attention away from its responsibility for creating the Western cultural environment that dehumanized Jews, and from its pathetic record in opposing the Holocaust while it was going on (not to mention the value to the Church in trashing competing new religions by associating us with the Nazis).

These three prefixed terms do not delineate clear-cut categories. Historically, there is often a period, whether of decades or centuries, when Paleopaganism is blending into Mesopaganism, or Mesopaganism into Neopaganism. Furthermore, the founders and members of Mesopagan and Neopagan groups frequently prefer to believe (or at least declare) that they are genuinely Paleopagan in beliefs and practices. This “myth of continuity” is in keeping with the habits of most creators and members of new religions throughout human existence, and should not be taken too seriously.

When doing searching on the Net, you should be aware that some people do and some don’t hyphenate these terms, especially “Neo-Paganism,” that many Neopagans drop the “Neo-” entirely (especially in casual use), and that many outsiders refuse to capitalize the names of our religions. More confusingly, many Mesopagans and Paleopagans refuse to use the term “Pagan” for themselves at all, having accepted the mainstream Christian definitions. One sign of progress, however, occured when the publishers of Hinduism Today — a fabulous monthly journal published in a dozen languages around the globe — printed an editorial a few years back in which they proudly accepted the term “Pagan” on behalf of the one billion Hindus in the world!

Obviously, the use of this vocabulary is currently in flux, and you may need to try variant spellings, capitalizations, and hyphenizations to find what you’re looking for.

Some of this material is taken from my Pagan Glossary of Terms, elsewhere on my website. I will eventually have a page here listing definitions for Paganism and Neopaganism written by other Pagan authors and groups.

Copyright © 1979, 2007 c.e., Isaac Bonewits. This text file may be freely distributed on the Net, provided that no editing is done, the version number is retained, and everything in this notice box is included. If you would like to be on one or more of Isaac Bonewits’ emailing lists, click here to get subscription information.

Is having access to this material worth a few dollars, punts, pounds, or euros to you? Click the button to make a fast and secure donation to Isaac and Phaedra Bonewits, so they can afford to keep this website going and growing! Or you can suggest to your local Occult/New Age bookstore that they bring him and/or her out for one of his or her colorful presentations, or you could visit their Blatant Hucksterism Page, or you could just send money to them at PO Box 1010, Nyack, NY, USA 10960-8010.

**Albatross**

Assuming you've got the right logic here (which is far from obvious: I don't know why modern people are so convinced that people from the past think the same way as we do), you think that there is some logical connection between killing an animal and weather conditions?

There is no logical connection whatsoever - neither is it logical to believe that Jesus died for my sins, or that God even exists at all. That's my point. I know a little bit about early pre-christian religious practice in Britain - much of it seems to have been related to the seasons and their immediate environment, as well as fertility. Let's not start flaming each other.

I'm not entirely convinced that you or several other Dakka users have really taken Christianity seriously enough to know the first thing about it. And before you protest that you have been in a church building more than once in your life, let me say "who cares?"

Nice assumption - I was however raised Catholic - church, sunday school, the whole nine yards.

In any case, I was talking about people who currently identify as "pagan," a word that is used with about as much specificity as the phrase "new age," not the actual people of ages past. (Although I should say that I regard those ancient religions, whatever they were actually like, as barbarous unless I allow myself to romanticize them into something they probably were not.) The fact that you (plural, not just you Alby) are engaging me on other terms indicates that you're not really interested in anything I have to say apart from indicating that you are somehow "open minded" (although poorly informed or simply uneducated seems closer to the point) while I fit your ready-made category of "typical religious bigot." This, coupled with past experience, leads me to believe that actually engaging with you in a discussion about Christianity (still plural here, Alby, and mostly not about you now, and please read this next part in the voice of Rowan Atkinson) would accomplish less than inviting a bottle of furniture polish to share its opinions about Immanuel Kant.

I never said you were a bigot - I've NEVER said or implied that. I'm merely saying 'judge not, lest ye be judged'. I agree that there is a certain amount of 'pick-and-choose' as far as modern 'Paganism' is concerned - Wicca is an area of interest for me, as it's modern incarnation is (in part) derived from Old Irish (and British, in the wider sense) religious tradition - but it's not a belief system I subscribe to. One could argue that the same criticisms could apply to Mormonism and The Jehova's Witnesses. You could also argue that it applied to Christianity, given it's relationship to Judaeism. As for barbarism - sacrifice is a feature of early religion, simple fact. Personally, I think one could regard Christianity, Islam and Judaeism as 'barbaric' as they belong to an earlier, less sophisticated and more superstitious time. I'm not judging or attacking anyone here - that's just the way I see it. Please try not to be offended.
Manchu - please don't make assumptions about my level of intelligence or education, you know absolutely nothing about me apart from what you may have read on this Tabletop Wargaming website. At the end of the day, your religion (you are Christian, correct?) requires substantial leaps of faith to believe certain things are possible, or that certain events took place - I was merely pointing out that this being the case, perhaps it's a little unwise to criticise other people's belief systems. Such actions only ever lead to
'Flame-Jihad' (I love that term, I'm nicking it

).

I'm not a member of The Atheist Taliban.

**Shaman**

Hermes heh.. Its funny I picture a John Howard (Mr sheen) look alike with a name like that.

Simon Cowell is obviously worshiping the right god then heh.

Oh Hermes Bless me with a money tree.

Nine Inch Nails calling money its own god is no help to be I need a sky wizard to give me money.

**Mannahnin**

Trent also sang "My God pouts on the cover of a magazine". So in the pantheon of NIN, you can also worship celebrities. You might be able to thus convince one of them to give you money.

**halonachos**

I like saints being catholic is awesome there's a saint for everything.

VITUS

Also known as
Guy
Memorial
15 June; restricted to local calendars since 1969
Profile
Legend says Vitus was the son of a Sicilian senator; Christian at age twelve. Preacher. Miracle worker. Valerian had him arrested and tried to break his faith; he failed. Vitus and some of his household fled to Rome where he freed Emperor Diocletian's son of an evil spirit. Vitus would not sacrifice to the gods, and his cure was attributed to sorcery. Arrested again, this time with the household he had brought with him. Tortured. Freed from prison during a storm in which temples were destroyed; an angel led them back to Lucania. One of the Fourteen Holy Helpers.
For obscure reasons, some 16th century Germans believed they could obtain a year's good health by dancing before the statue of Saint Vitus on his feast day. This dancing developed almost into a mania, and was confused with chorea, the nervous condition later known as Saint Vitus' dance, the saint being invoked against it.

Additional Information
Catholic Online
Died
martyred c.303 in Luciana
Patronage
actors, against animal attacks, against dog bites, against lightening, against storms, comedians, Czechoslovakia, dancers, dog bites, dogs, epilepsy, epileptics, lightening, Saint Vitus dance nervous disorders, snake bites, storms
Prayer to Saint Vitus
Dear Vitus, the one thing we are certain about is that you died a martyr's death. In early times, churches were dedicated to you in important places. In the Middle Ages, your intercession obtained cures from epilepsy so that this disease came to be called "Saint Vitus' Dance". Inspire comedians to make people dance with laughter and so bear goodwill toward one another. Amen.

Automatically Appended Next Post:
His saint day is easy for me to remember because its my birthday!

**BluntmanDC**

Manchu wrote:
Albatross wrote:in that context it would make sense to sacrifice or make an offering to some sort of 'God of Crops'.

Assuming you've got the right logic here (which is far from obvious: I don't know why modern people are so convinced that people from the past think the same way as we do), you think that there is some logical connection between killing an animal and weather conditions?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/B._F._Skinner#Superstition_in_the_pigeon

I'm not entirely convinced that you or several other Dakka users have really taken Christianity seriously enough to know the first thing about it. And before you protest that you have been in a church building more than once in your life, let me say "who cares?"

In any case, I was talking about people who currently identify as "pagan," a word that is used with about as much specificity as the phrase "new age," not the actual people of ages past. (Although I should say that I regard those ancient religions, whatever they were actually like, as barbarous unless I allow myself to romanticize them into something they probably were not.) The fact that you (plural, not just you Alby) are engaging me on other terms indicates that you're not really interested in anything I have to say apart from indicating that you are somehow "open minded" (although poorly informed or simply uneducated seems closer to the point) while I fit your ready-made category of "typical religious bigot." This, coupled with past experience, leads me to believe that actually engaging with you in a discussion about Christianity (still plural here, Alby, and mostly not about you now, and please read this next part in the voice of Rowan Atkinson) would accomplish less than inviting a bottle of furniture polish to share its opinions about Immanuel Kant.

and let it not be forgotten that christmas and easter were placed on 'pagan' holy days to allow for easier conversion of the masses, going to a church of england school i have been taught and read the bible (not all of it) and many parallels can be drawn from that holy text to many other pagan belief systems, they are a guide to living in thart culture, people haven't changed much in 2000 years (just there external pool of knowledge and understanding) but their enviroments have, so the belief systems have changed over time. the old religions off the world are mostly polytheism in nature but it seems no different to modern monothiesisms (a single god representing all parts)

i feel its just a cycle, religions are created and then they fade, or murge with other religions and new ones better suited to the world replace them

**halonachos**

"Too many religions, but only one god" then?

**Da Boss**

This thread annoys me because apparently those who can dish it out can't take it.

**Wolfstan**

The conversion to Christianity has to go down as one of the biggest cons on the planet. New religion comes along and tells you about their wonderful God, he's not so violent as their Gods. no need to make sacrifices, he cares about you... conversion done. Then the real part kicks in. They forget to mention the whole "suffering" bit, that to be really loved by God you have to spend your whole life being miserable and that to sin is the greatest crime against God... unless you make a suitable donation to your local Clergy, then all is forgiven.

Old Gods let you get on with your life.

**Altered_Soul**

Mannahnin wrote:Trent also sang "My God pouts on the cover of a magazine". So in the pantheon of NIN, you can also worship celebrities. You might be able to thus convince one of them to give you money.

If you happen to look at that song out of context

.

But I agree, I want my money, TOM CRUISE!!!

**Mannahnin**

Don't take things too literally.

**dogma**

Da Boss wrote:This thread annoys me because apparently those who can dish it out can't take it.

Yes, its funny how that works.

olympia wrote:
They have that in Catholicism too--they're called Saints

Yes, yes they do.

Though, to be fair, the saints are not gods in the sense that Christians use the word God. They are, however, very much analogous to gods in the sense that Pagans, Hindus, and other polytheists use the word god.

**generalgrog**

It's amazing what you can learn on the OT.

GG

**JD21290**

Since we are actually going on about more than just a single religion here, ill drop in a Q. for anyone to answer.

Show me proof that a god or greater being does exist.

by this i mean actual proof, not "the bible", a book that was written through a series of stories that had been passed on from person to person.

**dogma**

There isn't any. That's the nature of faith.

**generalgrog**

dogma wrote:There isn't any. That's the nature of faith.

Well I wouldn't totally agree to that. Although a healthy dose of faith is required.

Some would say that the mere fact that we exist is "proof", and that was sufficient for most people, up until the 19th century.

The fact that we exist on this planet, and our planet is specifically located in just the right spot in the universe for life to exist, is what I'm talking about. (Before the conniption fits start, I know a person can take the view that this proves nothing, but it doesn't mean that another point of view may disagree)

Also the new theory of "irreducible complexity" proposed by Dr. Micheal Behe is a sign that the creation science is catching up to evolutionary science, when it comes to the debate regarding intelligent design.

GG

p.s. you can google irreducible complexity, and get many hits so I don't feel the need to give a science lecture on it.

p.p.s. here we go again it seems all roads lead to this topic....sigh

**Mannahnin**

http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/behe.html

Irreducible complexity was demolished almost as soon as it came out. Intelligent Design is a deliberately deceptive disguise for creationism, and there's almost no science in it at all, despite a couple of otherwise intelligent people (like Behe) being involved in it.

While I give thanks to the gods for our existence, and believe they gave the "spark" in the beginning of life, I sure don't deny Evolution.

**Da Boss**

generalgrog wrote:
dogma wrote:There isn't any. That's the nature of faith.

Well I wouldn't totally agree to that. Although a healthy dose of faith is required.

Some would say that the mere fact that we exist is "proof", and that was sufficient for most people, up until the 19th century.

The fact that we exist on this planet, and our planet is specifically located in just the right spot in the universe for life to exist, is what I'm talking about. (Before the conniption fits start, I know a person can take the view that this proves nothing, but it doesn't mean that another point of view may disagree)

Also the new theory of "irreducible complexity" proposed by Dr. Micheal Behe is a sign that the creation science is catching up to evolutionary science, when it comes to the debate regarding intelligent design.

GG

p.s. you can google irreducible complexity, and get many hits so I don't feel the need to give a science lecture on it.

p.p.s. here we go again it seems all roads lead to this topic....sigh

All roads only lead to this topic if you keep on bringing it up mate.
Though, it'd help if you'd do some reading on what the scientific method is. Cheers.

**generalgrog**

Da Boss wrote:All roads only lead to this topic if you keep on bringing it up mate.
Though, it'd help if you'd do some reading on what the scientific method is. Cheers.

Uhhh I didn't bring it up, JD21290 did.

GG

**Mannahnin**

He asked for proof. While I agree that it's a pretty silly question, and would prefer he had not soiled this thread with it, that's not the same thing as launching an evolution discussion.

**generalgrog**

Mannahnin wrote:http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/behe.html

Irreducible complexity was demolished almost as soon as it came out.

So just pasting a link to talkorigins proves that it was demolished.....Hardly.

I love how people make bombastic claims like this or that was demolished or absurd, etc.etc. when they don't know what they are talking about.

GG

Automatically Appended Next Post:

Mannahnin wrote:He asked for proof. While I agree that it's a pretty silly question, and would prefer he had not soiled this thread with it, that's not the same thing as launching an evolution discussion.

Well the two are interlinked from my perspective.

GG