PDA

View Full Version : Do You Believe in the Literal Existence of the Gods?



Loki
Thursday, November 24th, 2005, 07:09 PM
Do you believe that Thor, Odin, Frey, etc actually exist as gods? Are they real entities?

jcs
Thursday, November 24th, 2005, 07:26 PM
Do you believe that Thor, Odin, Frey, etc actually exist as gods? Are they real entities? Define 'real.' The only thing approaching reality is one's thought of such-and-such as real. The task of man is to unify his thoughts with the world around him. Now, what does an understanding of gods as external entities do? They could be 'real' or 'unreal' in this sense, but who cares? Skepticism is too simplistic: it breaks the world and thoughts down into a true/untrue dichotomy. Rather than asking, "Is this true?" "Is that false?", one should ask, "How is this true?" "How can I understand this in a way such that I can learn from it?" I find this pertainent:
Here's a question with relevance to a problem touched on by Deleuze, that of multiplicities - that a concept (a 'multiplicity') has several subsumed 'singularities' (e.g. Hobbes' social contract: man as a wolf to man, man possessing the capacity to reason, surrender of political sovereignty to a central organisation). However, concepts are intensive multiplicities, in that adding or a singularity in relation to the multiplicity changes its nature (hence 'intensive' vs 'extensive'). The extension (or retraction) of multiplicities can also not change its nature, but rather encompass a larger number of singularities (e.g. the concept 'American' can be extended in its application to incorporate more people into the concept) without altering the concept, in which case the multiplicity is extensive. To answer your question - Spengler used 'organism' as an intensive multiplicity. He employed it in a different context which altered its definition. 'Literality' is contextual. http://www.thephora.net/forum/showpost.php?p=15528&postcount=17 Are the gods 'real'? Should we understand them 'literally'? Would my understanding of them as real or non-real change my understanding of the gods in any way? Methinks not. ;)

Death and the Sun
Thursday, November 24th, 2005, 07:33 PM
The only thing approaching reality is one's thought of such-and-such as real.

The only useful thing I learned during my philosophy studies was a sure-fire method of curing someone who has the "outside reality does not exist" syndrome.

The solution is to ask him/her to climb to the roof of the tallest being around, and throw themselves off the roof. If they refuse to do it, it means that they believe in an objective outside reality after all. And if they actually do it, well, they won't claim that "outside reality does not exist" anymore either, because they'll be dead.



;)

Loki
Thursday, November 24th, 2005, 07:35 PM
Define 'real.' The only thing approaching reality is one's thought of such-and-such as real. The task of man is to unify his thoughts with the world around him. Now, what does an understanding of gods as external entities do? They could be 'real' or 'unreal' in this sense, but who cares? Skepticism is too simplistic: it breaks the world and thoughts down into a true/untrue dichotomy. Rather than asking, "Is this true?" "Is that false?", one should ask, "How is this true?" "How can I understand this in a way such that I can learn from it?" I find this pertainent: Are the gods 'real'? Should we understand them 'literally'? Would my understanding of them as real or non-real change my understanding of the gods in any way? Methinks not. ;)

I don't think you understand my question. If they 'really' exist, they would be literal entities with or without your or my existence - whether people believe in them or not. If it's only in your mind, then it means they do not really exist. I don't think this is so difficult to comprehend.

jcs
Thursday, November 24th, 2005, 07:40 PM
The only useful thing I learned during my philosophy studies was a sure-fire method of curing someone who has the "outside reality does not exist" syndrome. The solution is to ask him/her to climb to the roof of the tallest being around, and throw themselves off the roof. If they refuse to do it, it means that they believe in an objective outside reality after all. And if they actually do it, well, they won't claim that "outside reality does not exist" anymore either, because they'll be dead. The external, of course, 'exists,' but its existence means nothing to the subject save in its relation to the subject, and the best way for the subject to relate to his objects is for him
to unify his thoughts with the world around him
I don't think you understand my question. If they 'really' exist, they would be literal entities with or without your or my existence - whether people believe in them or not. If it's only in your mind, then it means they do not really exist. I don't think this is so difficult to comprehend. I understood, and my response to the question is that all that is meaningless to the subject. I object to people worrying their little minds about trivial concerns, and permitting their understanding to be crippled as a consequence of these trivialities. Thus I refrained from voting.

Loki
Thursday, November 24th, 2005, 07:47 PM
I object to people worrying their little minds about trivial concerns, and permitting their understanding to be crippled as a consequence of these trivialities. Thus I refrained from voting.

I am not worried at all about this, merely curious. :) And I don't think it's a triviality. If one can't tell what you actually believe in then there's somewhere a problem, I think...

We have previously discussed that Asatruars cannot by definition be atheists as well. Of course this would naturally assume all Asatruars would vote 'Yes' in this poll. Or not?

Siegfried
Thursday, November 24th, 2005, 09:46 PM
They exist as [Jungian] archetypes of the Germanic soul.

Sigurd
Thursday, November 24th, 2005, 10:28 PM
They do.

Our gods are not some sign for metalheads to dress up as ancient Germanics on a weekend for a horn of mead or a round of LARP.

While our gods are also a manifestation in everything that is natural, they still exist as such, they are not solely symbolic.

Loki
Thursday, November 24th, 2005, 10:44 PM
They do.

Our gods are not some sign for metalheads to dress up as ancient Germanics on a weekend for a horn of mead or a round of LARP.

While our gods are also a manifestation in everything that is natural, they still exist as such, they are not solely symbolic.

I wonder then if these gods of the Northmen, if they exist, are even concerned at all with the folk's welfare. My guess is they are not in the slightest. Either that, or they are powerless.

Arcturus
Thursday, November 24th, 2005, 10:47 PM
Crom, I have never prayed to you before. I have no tongue for it. No one, not even you, will remember if we were good men or bad. Why we fought, and why we died. All that matters is that today, two stood against many. Valor pleases you, so grant me this one request. Grant me revenge! And if you do not listen, the HELL with you!


;)

Sigurd
Thursday, November 24th, 2005, 10:47 PM
Well, first of all, no there is no such guy running around acting as a heathen jesus, and while we do have certain devotional kind of rites, we don't ask our gods for help all the time, they want us to find a way.

Anyway, I've been able to connect with the gods on various occasions, so as far as I am concerned, they exist.

Loki
Thursday, November 24th, 2005, 10:48 PM
Anyway, I've been able to connect with the gods on various occasions, so as far as I am concerned, they exist.

This point is interesting. I would like to hear more about your personal experience. I have had some 'spiritual' experiences in my life as well, so it would be great if you want to share that with us sometime.

Sigurd
Thursday, November 24th, 2005, 10:52 PM
I'll try to get it written out some time. ;)

HIM
Thursday, November 24th, 2005, 11:25 PM
I wonder then if these gods of the Northmen, if they exist, are even concerned at all with the folk's welfare. My guess is they are not in the slightest. Either that, or they are powerless.

Excellent point. I've always wondered that too. If they exist, do they care only of Northmen or do they care of other folk also? And if they care only of Northern folk, then do the gods of other folk exist as well? And what of peoples of mixed ethnicity? Would they follow the same standards that tNP does?

Personally I do not believe that they exist. However, I do believe that some sort of higher power exists. I've read tons of books on astrophysics and cosmology and I just don't see how a higher force couldn't exist. But I don't believe any of the traditional Christian dogma or any other ideas they have about their god. I have my own ideas and set of principles. And since I follow my own beliefs and worship the god that I believe exists, I feel that I can call Him whatever I like, so perhaps "Odin" does exist. Just not how he traditionally has been portrayed, but more like a modern day version of Him that I perceive. Does that make any sense? Sometimes I have trouble explaining such things.

Sigurd
Thursday, November 24th, 2005, 11:37 PM
First of all, declare me an insane part of the Germanic people if you will, but I have talked to some other heathens who said they have had some similar experiences where they felt as though there was some power of divinity close by on certain occasions. Some stronger, some weaker. Some not at all.

Well, I'll put it in short terms. As I've just realised that I've posted a lot of them on Odinist.com, but all over that place :D

I'll put it into single and frequent examples. I will include the folk-related ones as well as the divine ones in as it is kind of connected.

Single examples:

My first "vision". I saw an "old man" on a mount with for my taste having "too many legs" while I was peering into the sun some day on a hill.

My ancestors & Old Norse, ec. Had a dream, people waved from the shore, someone shouted to the seamen something like Ark ok Friðr (which I later found out to have been an actually Old Norse greating). View switched to ship. My ancestors were on, every single one of them, even ones I had never met or seen, and when I checked with old pictures there was perfect resemblance. The mast was also rune inscribed.

Another dream. It featured an old language as well. A large tree also kept recurring (Yggdrasil, obviously). I was talking a language that seemed very old Germanic styled to me, in that one.

Also, I once, upon clutching my Mjollnir close, felt Donar's power very close for some time. I ended up with having such an adrenaline rush that I had to run around the building for several times until I really calmed down.


More frequent examples:


I often have two ravens appear in front of my window, randomly, and they seat themselves. Everytime I look again, after I looked away, they are gone. (Ravens - In the middle of Aberdeen! I mean you would expect seagulls, but, well...)

I can when I don't use runes "properly" draw on some runes to see some meaning in them. On some occasions, I can let my mind go, and it will focus on a Rune, and may tell me its meaning, at least for the season, or for a purpose, or whatever...


-Jera kept on returning when it was Harvest time (one of the rune's meanings).
-When Oðal came to me some times, I would have a kind of "map" appear of Germanic lands, and it would often stop around the area of (ancient) Thuringia, or such. Since 1)Germanic Thuringian heathens were known to have had wavy hair in many circumstances. And, indeed, almost everyone in my family, even my grandfather, whose haircolour is (well was before it went white ;)) a very light blonde, has natural wavey hair. The whole thing is from two sides. Plus my surname coming from Old High German. Plus some of my not so unrecent ancestors were from like middle Germany. Very likely as to the middle to east nowadays germany being my "true" fatherland, as such.



I can often be found staring into the distance, praising Mother Jorth as in such. Whenever I feel close to nature, I also feel some closeness to my ancestral gods.



And all those experiences...

HIM
Thursday, November 24th, 2005, 11:52 PM
That's quite interesting, Sigurd. Hmm....I cannot recall if I have had any similar experiences. Evidentally not strong enough for me to remember anyways.



Also, I once, upon clutching my Mjollnir close, felt Donar's power very close for some time. I ended up with having such an adrenaline rush that I had to run around the building for several times until I really calmed down.


However, I did have a similar experience when I first got my Mjolnir. I was being an idiot on my motorcycle and almost killed myself, but somehow I was miraculously saved. This was the first time that I had worn the Mjolnir while riding and I have always worn it ever since. It was quite an experience!!!

Sigurd
Thursday, November 24th, 2005, 11:55 PM
And what of peoples of mixed ethnicity?


I don't accept them in my faith. That's tough luck then. It is a folk-based religion and if they have no common ancestry, then, well,...
I am tolerant on borderline cases like the Finns or the Irish. But I usually draw the line at 85-90% requirement (that's BTW, when it is suspected to have left your genes as good as), as close as to 100% as possible desired, for those who are not, as long as there is not something really inflicting like bushmen or native american stuff.

Blutwölfin
Friday, November 25th, 2005, 12:33 AM
For Loki and HIM:

Gods aren't responsible for what people do with their lives. They are teachers, maybe even some sort of guide, but they won't encroach. They advice you - not always in a clear way - how to act in special situation. Read the Hávamál and you will see it! We were told how to act, we were told how to treat others - if we don't stick to it, then it's not Odin's fault and he hasn't to adjust our mistakes.


To the topic:

Call me old fashiones, call me mad - yes, I believe they exist. But not in the shape you might expect. Each God has a special meaning and description. Look at Thor for example, the God of Thunder. When the sky gets dark, when huge mountains build of clouds take over the once light blue and peaceful atmosphere, when the air gets electric, then THIS is Thor - not a man with a red beard.

When you are struggeling with yourself, don't know what to do, have no one to ask and then you suddenly hear a voice deep inside or just get the feeling of strength and power from one moment to the other, than this might be Odin's wisdom.

When someone attacks you and after a second of being overwhelmed by the offence you grow and have not the slightest feeling of fear anymore, than this might by Tyr's fighting spirit.

They don't need human bodies, they're just there. The masquerade is just for us, for we aren't able to understand the greater meaning of all yet.

The Gods exist and they gave us everything we needed for leading a better life. They gave us advice in the poems, they gave us themselves in a form we needed to understand what they are, they gave us the Runes to learn about how everything really is - and what they, the Gods really are. Now it's on us to do the right things with this knowledge. We haven't yet figured out - or we forgot over the centuries - but we will grow again.

Frans_Jozef
Friday, November 25th, 2005, 01:01 AM
For Loki and HIM:

Gods aren't responsible for what people do with their lives. They are teachers, maybe even some sort of guide, but they won't encroach. They advice you - not always in a clear way - how to act in special situation. Read the Hávamál and you will see it! We were told how to act, we were told how to treat others - if we don't stick to it, then it's not Odin's fault and he hasn't to adjust our mistakes.


To the topic:

Call me old fashiones, call me mad - yes, I believe they exist. But not in the shape you might expect. Each God has a special meaning and description. Look at Thor for example, the God of Thunder. When the sky gets dark, when huge mountains build of clouds take over the once light blue and peaceful atmosphere, when the air gets electric, then THIS is Thor - not a man with a red beard.

When you are struggeling with yourself, don't know what to do, have no one to ask and then you suddenly hear a voice deep inside or just get the feeling of strength and power from one moment to the other, than this might be Odin's wisdom.

When someone attacks you and after a second of being overwhelmed by the offence you grow and have not the slightest feeling of fear anymore, than this might by Tyr's fighting spirit.

They don't need human bodies, they're just there. The masquerade is just for us, for we aren't able to understand the greater meaning of all yet.

The Gods exist and they gave us everything we needed for leading a better life. They gave us advice in the poems, they gave us themselves in a form we needed to understand what they are, they gave us the Runes to learn about how everything really is - and what they, the Gods really are. Now it's on us to do the right things with this knowledge. We haven't yet figured out - or we forgot over the centuries - but we will grow again.

Sounds very much like Christianism dressed in some pagan travesty...yes, it is very difficult to live in a lonely and indifferent Universe of monades confined in their insular existence and thriving on their unique and inexplicable existence, unmoved movers of their own right, with a sole purpose, to exist as a negation of what is void and false, without cause or intended by some cosmic demiurg...to sit yonder of the Pole Star, and have the world orbiting around your axis...

beowulf wodenson
Friday, November 25th, 2005, 04:18 PM
From personal experience I suspect that the super-natural does exist, wights, spirits, etc. Also if there are no gods or god or whatever it begs the question where did life originate? I recognize evolutionary bio-processes as such, but where did the processes get their start, complex systems, the 'spark' of life itself? I believe in the gods as the native conceptions, understanding of Divinity, of the Germanic peoples. I suspect the true nature of the divine can't truly be known by man. Religion is a way to try to "bring to Earth" things outside the realm of ordinary understanding.
I can't prove to you that the gods exist or don't, I believe that they do, is all, and some personal experience has somewhat reinforced that idea.

"I don't accept them in my faith. That's tough luck then. It is a folk-based religion and if they have no common ancestry, then, well,...
I am tolerant on borderline cases like the Finns or the Irish"

Indeed. I concur wholeheartedly.

beowulf wodenson
Friday, November 25th, 2005, 04:44 PM
I wonder then if these gods of the Northmen, if they exist, are even concerned at all with the folk's welfare. My guess is they are not in the slightest. Either that, or they are powerless.As per that , consider well that our ancestors eventually forsook them for the foreign semitic god. Why should the gods be all very concerned about the descendants' welfare at large? I rather hope the gods as such are somewhat concerned with those that honor them today, who can say? The lore always has it they were concerned with their own motives but also helped mankind at times, giving of runes, poetry, life, warding by Thorr, etc.
Who can pretend to understand motives of the divine if they exist, anyway?

Frostwood
Friday, November 25th, 2005, 06:35 PM
Gods aren't responsible for what people do with their lives. They are teachers, maybe even some sort of guide, but they won't encroach. They advice you - not always in a clear way - how to act in special situation. Read the Hávamál and you will see it! We were told how to act, we were told how to treat others - if we don't stick to it, then it's not Odin's fault and he hasn't to adjust our mistakes.

Yes, this is the fundamental difference between the exoteric and esoteric. Wherein one can rely on the God of the New Testament at any given time for comfort and protection, these gods are support in the same way as an old tree provides moment's support for a weary traveler - it doesn't travel with him - or the mighty winds buff up the sails of ships and send them speeding towards home. They are there, but it's up to you to listen to them - they are not some little stool to take from your backpack and to sit on when you are feeling slightly tired.


Call me old fashiones, call me mad - yes, I believe they exist. But not in the shape you might expect. Each God has a special meaning and description. Look at Thor for example, the God of Thunder. When the sky gets dark, when huge mountains build of clouds take over the once light blue and peaceful atmosphere, when the air gets electric, then THIS is Thor - not a man with a red beard.In short, they are the impressions people have gained from observing natural phenomena, which are then personified, underlining the relationship between man and a specific part of the world. I think jcs' question, "How?", is relevant here. How to understand them as it is futile to bicker about whether they exist literally or not, as it's clear that they exist: whether as darkening clouds and booming thunder or some red-bearded fierce fellow in someone's mind f.ex. Interpretations and age-old wisdom, passed from father to son.

Loki
Friday, November 25th, 2005, 07:04 PM
I think jcs' question, "How?", is relevant here. How to understand them as it is futile to bicker about whether they exist literally or not, as it's clear that they exist: whether as darkening clouds and booming thunder or some red-bearded fierce fellow in someone's mind f.ex. Interpretations and age-old wisdom, passed from father to son.

With all due respect, one can use this rationalization in support for claiming the existence of Santa Claus and the Tooth Fairy too.

jcs
Friday, November 25th, 2005, 07:11 PM
With all due respect, one can use this rationalization in support for claiming the existence of Santa Claus and the Tooth Fairy too. With all due respect, one really misses the point when trying to rationalize existences or non-existences of such things. ;)

Loki
Friday, November 25th, 2005, 07:21 PM
With all due respect, one really misses the point when trying to rationalize existences or non-existences of such things. ;)

My approach to life is a rational one. :)

Frostwood
Friday, November 25th, 2005, 07:29 PM
Sounds very much like Christianism dressed in some pagan travesty...yes, it is very difficult to live in a lonely and indifferent Universe of monades confined in their insular existence and thriving on their unique and inexplicable existence, unmoved movers of their own right, with a sole purpose, to exist as a negation of what is void and false, without cause or intended by some cosmic demiurg...to sit yonder of the Pole Star, and have the world orbiting around your axis...

That sounds like a valueless state, when gods have died and you have cast yourself into the gaping void. Not to mean that this state of inner void is something horrendous and that it must be avoided at all costs, but rather a necessary visit if one is to change interpretations or revalue the world. Like when Conan told Crom to go to hell if he wouldn't satisfy the barbarian's plea for revenge, he essentially plunged headfirst into the void and then came back from the search, having found revenge as it was there for him to take. So, it could be said that actually Crom was that revenge itself, Conan just had to quest for it and to create that value.


With all due respect, one can use this rationalization in support for claiming the existence of Santa Claus and the Tooth Fairy too.

Of course. :)

They exist too, but what phenomena they represent or what form they have, that is unclear to me as I haven't delved too deeply into the essence of the Tooth Fairy & co.

Loki
Friday, November 25th, 2005, 07:32 PM
Of course. :)

They exist too, but what phenomena they represent or what form they have, that is unclear to me as I haven't delved too deeply into the essence of the Tooth Fairy & co.

Perhaps there's info here (http://www.cryptozoology.com/). ;)

Fox
Friday, November 25th, 2005, 08:41 PM
It seems some of the heathens are having trouble answering this question with a simple yes or no so I'll take the liberty to answer it for them: No, they don't exist.

:rolleyes:

jcs
Friday, November 25th, 2005, 09:19 PM
My approach to life is a rational one. Words are interesting: a noun (or adjective+noun, as above) only has meaning if it describes something which exists in contrast to its opposite. 'Rationality' contra 'irrationality,' right? And 'irrationality' is silly, so we should all be 'rational,' right?--but what is 'rationality'? All one's rationalizations are little more than justifications of 'irrational' valuations. Let's think about it: when one rationalizes that this or that exists or does not exist, one is using reason as a tool to affirm one's pre-reasoned valuations--rationalizations are thought-inertia.
My approach to life is a rational one. But what is all this? Are my words excuses for me to be irrational? For one to believe in something for which we lack proof? What, do you think I have been trying to affirm all this silliness of belief, despite rationality? I'm not trying to affirm the existence of anything, nor make excuses for believing in something for which there is no evidence...
It seems some of the heathens are having trouble answering this question with a simple yes or no so I'll take the liberty to answer it for them: No, they don't exist. "Admit it, silly heathen, you don't believe in your gods!" Okay, I confess: I don't! I don't!--is that what you'd like to hear? ...would that change anything? We all seem a little too caught up in this 'belief' issue. Of what avail is belief? To hell with belief; 'I believe in nothing!'--now can we please try to understand?
No, they don't exist. So, having uselessly struggled to arrive at this meaningless conclusion, let's ponder 'understanding.' How should one understand the gods? Well, how does one understand figures in literature?--metaphorically. Of course, the gods are not mere metaphors--we lose a great deal of understanding in treating them as metaphors alone without the vital sacred component--but maybe you silly skeptics can move toward a fuller understanding if you can dispense with the nonsense of this 'existence' issue and begin with a metaphor. :)

Loki
Friday, November 25th, 2005, 10:30 PM
Words are interesting: a noun (or adjective+noun, as above) only has meaning if it describes something which exists in contrast to its opposite. 'Rationality' contra 'irrationality,' right? And 'irrationality' is silly, so we should all be 'rational,' right?--but what is 'rationality'? All one's rationalizations are little more than justifications of 'irrational' valuations. Let's think about it: when one rationalizes that this or that exists or does not exist, one is using reason as a tool to affirm one's pre-reasoned valuations--rationalizations are thought-inertia.

The ability to reason has set us apart from other living beings on earth, and the ability to make informed decisions based upon rational conclusions, is why we have civilization and technology that actually works and make our lives easier. In all seriousness, if one cannot think rationally, or don't appreciate its importance, then you belong in an asylum or require medication. ;)


But what is all this? Are my words excuses for me to be irrational? For one to believe in something for which we lack proof? What, do you think I have been trying to affirm all this silliness of belief, despite rationality? I'm not trying to affirm the existence of anything, nor make excuses for believing in something for which there is no evidence...

Okay... but actually my thread required an answer to affirm belief in this subject or not. Is this your answer, i.e. that you refuse to answer the actual question? Quite an elaborate reason for your refusal, but I accept it nevertheless. ;)


"Admit it, silly heathen, you don't believe in your gods!" Okay, I confess: I don't! I don't!--is that what you'd like to hear? ...would that change anything? We all seem a little too caught up in this 'belief' issue. Of what avail is belief? To hell with belief; 'I believe in nothing!'--now can we please try to understand? So, having uselessly struggled to arrive at this meaningless conclusion, let's ponder 'understanding.' How should one understand the gods? Well, how does one understand figures in literature?--metaphorically. Of course, the gods are not mere metaphors--we lose a great deal of understanding in treating them as metaphors alone without the vital sacred component--but maybe you silly skeptics can move toward a fuller understanding if you can dispense with the nonsense of this 'existence' issue and begin with a metaphor. :)

I have never concluded that Heathens were 'silly', or that their beliefs were... I merely asked about your beliefs. It is a curious enquiry, that's all. I myself am very fascinated by the religion of my forefathers. There is no need to become so defensive either. I am not anti-Heathen or anything. On the contrary. :) I am not a skeptic either. I believe in the power of folk religion on the psyche, and its legitimate spiritual influence. I do not, however, believe that these gods exist in reality. Unfortunately, what this thread has become, is a questioning of reality itself (perhaps as a defense mechanism by insecure god-believing Heathens?). This is not necessary. Reality is reality, whether we perceive it to be or not.

Frans_Jozef
Friday, November 25th, 2005, 10:33 PM
That sounds like a valueless state, when gods have died and you have cast yourself into the gaping void. Not to mean that this state of inner void is something horrendous and that it must be avoided at all costs, but rather a necessary visit if one is to change interpretations or revalue the world. Like when Conan told Crom to go to hell if he wouldn't satisfy the barbarian's plea for revenge, he essentially plunged headfirst into the void and then came back from the search, having found revenge as it was there for him to take. So, it could be said that actually Crom was that revenge itself, Conan just had to quest for it and to create that value.



You have misunderstood my position, besides values, principles and ethics are merely human assets, as ideas or forces shaping and determining a quality of behaviour intrinsical to a population, a race even and certainly matching the inner and unpenetrable, individuating and mysterious core, or quintessence of a given person...something that permeates the entire nature of a being, barring any conception or definition...and this very essence could be encapsulated in notions of souvereignity, centrality or a polar function and stability or ataraxia, the way I described in my thread on Epicurean Friendship:

http://www.forums.skadi.net/showthread.php?t=12144

And this central force acts without causality nor by interference of some higher powers, which as puppet masters carry through a program and subjugate a being; on the contrary, it exists in opposition to derived power that always has to be re-acertained and claimed by force and coercion as with the delusial idoles from the people of the Book or the Heathens, and set things in motion spontanious and free without the requirement of getting itself into the action...

KraftAkt
Friday, November 25th, 2005, 10:50 PM
The concept of heathens is fascinating to me. It is the believe of our forefathers of our race. Therefore it might even is the optimal religion for our people.
We need a religion that makes us strong and is true to our race.

palesye
Friday, November 25th, 2005, 11:14 PM
Religion: Christian - Protestant

??

KraftAkt
Friday, November 25th, 2005, 11:26 PM
??

Its the religion I was raised with. So I am seeing its flaws.

Blutwölfin
Friday, November 25th, 2005, 11:58 PM
Sorry, but this is not a thread to discuss Christianity. Start another thread about it here (http://www.forums.skadi.net/forumdisplay.php?f=126) if you want, KraftAkt.

Arcturus
Saturday, November 26th, 2005, 02:37 AM
We need a religion

We do? That's up for debate, but that's a whole other thread entirely...

beowulf wodenson
Saturday, November 26th, 2005, 02:19 PM
Reality is reality, whether we perceive it to be or not.


Exactly. Whether one believes or not in the gods does not dictate their existence or non-existence.

alphaknave
Wednesday, November 30th, 2005, 10:19 PM
They are real. Is Odin a physical man in the clouds? No. Is he an entinity we can understand fully with the right wisdom? Yes. Does he exist? YES.

Tapio
Friday, December 2nd, 2005, 01:03 AM
I don`t know, I don`t care. If there is god or gods, I will live this life my way. And if its a wrong way, then hell with it.

Sigurd
Friday, December 2nd, 2005, 01:09 AM
Like a guy the other day in the pub said..."If you cannot find the truth at the bottom of a pint, you will never find it."

So damn true. :D

Xanthochroid
Friday, December 2nd, 2005, 01:25 AM
The norse Gods were more likely personified heros or events of the far past, And I mean far. And they will occasionally come back and help you with something if you call. :)

I think that the ideal nordic is spiritual, no matter the religion he/she embraces. Even if the deity you worship does not exist, there are many important teachings to heed to. :annoysigr
Atheism and materialism are beliefs and traits of our opposing forces, Mongrels, Jews etc...
The final war in this cycle will be fought between spiritualists(there is spirit in the universe) and materialists(there is nothing but matter in the universe).
Heck, in a less significant way, WWII was such a war.

As for me personally, I worship black holes. :D

On another note... Not too long ago I was told in a dream that Loki(the God mind you, not the admin) somehow made a huge cosmic blunder and ended up killing all the other Gods indirectly, thus leaving humanity unguarded, and it is up to him now to come to Earth to correct his mistake and save humanity, reversing its devolutionary direction...

Sigrid
Friday, December 2nd, 2005, 12:04 PM
Worlds die, suns burn out, universes shrink and constellations grow cold and distant. In the realm of gods these things are nanoseconds in eternity.

Worlds return. Suns are born. Life arrives like sperm frozen with starstuff in comet’s tails. World’s are penetrated and fertilized by shards of cosmic ice that melt to make living tissue and the evolution of beings. Gods preside. Gods conceal themselves from beings become wise and egotistical and adventurous. Gods wait. Gods whisper to their emissaries. Religions bloom and die. Blood flows. Destruction looms. Beings despair. Death becomes the great destroyer, the ultimate god. Doubt takes its place. The microscope is employed to find gods. They cannot be discovered. They do not respond to litmus tests or magnification, to x-rays or bombs. Beings declare that gods are dead or unreal. Beings decide to go it alone. Gods grant them this liberty. Beings stride out into the world, armed with test tubes, chemicals and measuring equipment. The world is charted and surveyed, explored, analysed and colonized. The findings are debated, synthesized, quantified, objectified, purified, mortified, transmogrified, deified, fortified, and categorized. The gods are declared unnecessary. Man becomes the great creator and the ultimate god. He builds for himself many citadels and worships his victory over gods by celebrating his domination over every living creature in his world.

Man grows lonely. Man tries to use sex as the ultimate weapon against his alienation from gods. Gods pay him back for this abuse by sending fatal diseases wrapped up in pretty parcels to the many brothels in the mind of man. Man becomes terrified. As millions die man doubts his own power as a creative force. Man decides he must be a destructive force instead. A bad god. An evil impostor. The real god is nature. Nature is enshrined and worshipped as a great leveller. Man does not realise just how right he is and under his guidance nature levels everything to a common denominator and man is this denominator and becomes the root of all conundrums and the answer to all questions and the be all and end all of the world. Man believes that nature has led him to a grand revelation. The proper study of the world is man. Man had ignored the wisdom of Alexander Pope who said the proper study of mankind was man. What did Alexander Pope know? He lived in the Age of Reason and that had been declared unreasonable long ago and consigned to the vaults of human folly. An age in name only. Away with it and its ideology of the chain of being that ran all the way from god to beetles and back again. Man needed something more than chains and ages to satisfy his craving for self knowledge and power.

Man invents a community of souls and calls it socialism. Nature is rejected in favour of this new god. Nature is yesterday’s news. Today’s news is about social relevance and social contracts and laws and wars and whores. Society is everything. Nature is nothing. Obey your new god. With all this social contracting and expanding sex returns as a viable prospect for livening up the new religion. It is ensconced in the citadel and redeified with an apology. Sex responds by rampaging through the world and calling up a few of its former accomplices from the world of nasty diseases. A veritable orgy of global proportions takes place which engenders a new plague. Man ignores it and when millions start dropping dead he accords it high status and asks his acolytes to worship it as a kind of demi-god. Sort of second in command to the great socialist god, only not as holy. To be afflicted with this particular illness means that you have shown loyalty to man beyond the bounds of duty and will die a hero’s death and be remembered forever in the annals of socialist history as a very very good person and a warrior for the greater cause of humankind and its god, which is to stay away from anything that might make you think that maybe nature shouldn’t have been thrown out so hastily.

Humans grow restive and terrified and need comfort in their travail. Nature is restored as a servant of socialism. Man’s pantheon begins to take on polytheistic proportions. To avert disaster and keep society’s mind on what really matters man invents a new name for the whole shebang and calls it Multiculturalism. An edict is announced and circulars are sent out to all previously devoted servants of the old system. There is now a new system in operation. “You will obey this one. It has a name and a nature and a number. You will be its new priests and priestesses. Your effort will be rewarded with great big gobs of cash. If you don’t obey this edict you will be arrested and humiliated before your peers. If that doesn’t work you will be deprived of your employment by a visible ethnic minority. If that doesn’t move you to contrition, you will be sent to a large building in the middle of the Multiculti and there you will be tried for treason and placed into a prison of the high priest’s discerning. The key will be thrown away and you will not be asked to plead until you have died of stress induced heart failure or a convenient stroke and then your case will be dismissed but your memory will be allowed to live on into folk memory as an example of what not to do and who not to be.”

The edict works like a charm. In fact the edict is a charm. Man declares himself a magician. He elects a grand wizard from among his political cohorts and forms a world government. Certain elements of the human horde take offence and begin a bombing spree. They have since invented a god of their own to rival the god of socialism and are pitting the power of their deity against the power of the god of the Multiculti. A bun fight ensues with people taking sides and organising protests that never get anywhere and uttering threats that have no substance. The bombs go off at regular intervals but the system is so well entrenched that not even an upstart deity can ruffle its feathers or stop it from smiling idiotically but with sinister determination. Man re-invents a new ploy to win over the rival group. Man introduces mass immigration into his global community from places where the holy power has not yet penetrated and offers new acolytes great big gobs of cash or the promise of welfare benefits and employment to enter and celebrate diversity with the gods of Socialism and Debauchery. Then he gives to another minor deity greatly improved powers and ensconces Media as a helpmate and servant to Socialism and Debauchery.

Nature, in the wings, weeps with frustration, helpless without deific power and so condemned to act in the only way she knows how to save the world from man and his confounded religions, his obsessions with his gonads and his sheer lack of common sense. In desperation and in response to her instincts, Nature calls on the old gods.

Across the universe, in their halls of gold the gods are watching the spectacle of the cosmos, their ears tuned for the sound of Giallarhorn. Nature visits the winds and asks that they blow hard over the wastelands among the withered roots of Yggdrasil to reveal Heimdall’s buried treasure. The winds are only too eager to help and create a veritable medley of hurricanes to unearth the long silent trumpet of the long departed Watchman of the Rainbow Bridge.

As man is about to give the final flourish to a document that will condemn his species forever to bondage and madness in a world beset by pestilence and need, by power and greed and by an overarching hunger that has no ending, a strange unfamiliar sound is heard seemingly from far away. The hordes of dead-eyed acolytes stop in their tracks and listen. The sound seems like a call, then like music and then like a drum. Humanity is stricken with longing. Socialism, Debauchery and Media tremble with dread. They recognise only too well this sound. They quickly issue declarations to the leaders of the Divine Commune and begin to negate rumours of an earthquake and tsunami rolled into one that have begun to circulate all the way from Delling’s Hall to Billing’s Hall.

“Stay calm”, the authorities command. “We will fix everything.” More edicts go out, more instructions follow. The sound increases. The world waits.

In the heart of Asgard, in the halls of the Einheriar, the holy warriors turn from their tasks and look to the west. On the skyline Heimdall is standing, the shining one, the White God, his horse’s main streaming golden on the cosmic wind. The horn is speaking. Its voice proclaims “It is time.”

From the fields of Asgard the horses come galloping. Each with a mane as bright and fiery as the mane of Gulltop. The Einheriar have put on their armour, their blades and their helms of steel. Odin is wearing the golden helmet of Ragnarok. The warriors leap on the galloping horses and rush like a tide from the gates of Asgard as the Milky Way opens the star road and the warriors thunder out of mythology and into the imaginations of the people who stand transfixed at the sound of Giallarhorn.

Officials splutter and rush around, issuing more edicts and proposals, legislating and pontificating, and here and there shouting “off with his head”, but the sound of the approaching warriors is deafening. The Rainbow Road rises in an arch across the worlds, clasps the steely road of the Milky Way and Odin leaps the gap on the back of Sleipnir. The space between us and our true gods is breached and the warriors of legend meet their descendents as Yggdrasil heaves its mighty roots from the grave and spreads its canopy once more over the wells.

The rest will be history.

Do the gods exist? Do we exist? Yes? Then our gods exist. And as long as we exist and are aware of our existence we shall know and be aware of our gods. As long as every race exists and is aware of its existence that race shall know its own gods. And whenever any group is threatened by the attempt of man to become his own creator or make of nature what she was never meant to be, these gods will ride out of every kind of hall and hunting ground, and every blessed isle and with their hosts of warriors will they reclaim their people from that which seeks to destroy them and the world that was once given to them by nature and in which and through which they first found and got to know their own gods.

When Heathens today ask you to join them, they are asking only one simple thing. They are inviting you to come home.

Slå ring om Norge
Sunday, December 4th, 2005, 02:22 AM
Hi!

You may as well consider them archetypes. But archetypes ar not nescessary any less alive than humans. A human life laste for maybe 100 years, and archetypic entity may live thousands of years, depeneing on how it is nurtured.

Jehova started his career as a lesser sumerian war demon, and has through a few milleniums been promoted to an omnipotent figure. For those that wishes to believe in him.
And that is the point. We believe in gods. BE LIVE, also through adoration and sacrifice we creates life to *supernaturals.

susamel

christi_us
Sunday, December 4th, 2005, 08:34 AM
I'm not sure because I'm a Catholic and I do believe in God, the Virgin Mary, and Jesus. My paternal relatives are Catholics (except my sister-she's an athesist), also. But, I'm open-minded about things.

jcs
Sunday, December 4th, 2005, 09:22 AM
I'm not sure because I'm a Catholic and I do believe in God, the Virgin Mary, and Jesus. My paternal relatives are Catholics (except my sister-she's an athesist), also. But, I'm open-minded about things.
Just don't be too open-minded!

I have come to a conclusion: the child is most gullible of us all, believing in everything he is told, imagining a world of make-believe. We move beyond this primitive mentality, we become scientists, we become teenagers; we lose our ability to imagine, and with it, our innocence. Few of us mature past the teenage years, it would seem, for beyond this iconoclasm, this acting out, this skepticism, there is something more: sophism, nihilism, absurdity, pure and true. I believe in nothing! Belief is none of my concern. Rather: understand! Rather: imagine without faith in our images! Make without believing!
Come, now, skeptics, it is time to grow up: let us try to rediscover innocence!

GreenHeart
Tuesday, December 6th, 2005, 04:26 PM
First of all, declare me an insane part of the Germanic people if you will, but I have talked to some other heathens who said they have had some similar experiences where they felt as though there was some power of divinity close by on certain occasions. Some stronger, some weaker. Some not at all.

Well, I'll put it in short terms. As I've just realised that I've posted a lot of them on Odinist.com, but all over that place :D

I'll put it into single and frequent examples. I will include the folk-related ones as well as the divine ones in as it is kind of connected.

Single examples:
My first "vision". I saw an "old man" on a mount with for my taste having "too many legs" while I was peering into the sun some day on a hill.
My ancestors & Old Norse, ec. Had a dream, people waved from the shore, someone shouted to the seamen something like Ark ok Friðr (which I later found out to have been an actually Old Norse greating). View switched to ship. My ancestors were on, every single one of them, even ones I had never met or seen, and when I checked with old pictures there was perfect resemblance. The mast was also rune inscribed.
Another dream. It featured an old language as well. A large tree also kept recurring (Yggdrasil, obviously). I was talking a language that seemed very old Germanic styled to me, in that one.
Also, I once, upon clutching my Mjollnir close, felt Donar's power very close for some time. I ended up with having such an adrenaline rush that I had to run around the building for several times until I really calmed down.More frequent examples:
I often have two ravens appear in front of my window, randomly, and they seat themselves. Everytime I look again, after I looked away, they are gone. (Ravens - In the middle of Aberdeen! I mean you would expect seagulls, but, well...)
I can when I don't use runes "properly" draw on some runes to see some meaning in them. On some occasions, I can let my mind go, and it will focus on a Rune, and may tell me its meaning, at least for the season, or for a purpose, or whatever...
-Jera kept on returning when it was Harvest time (one of the rune's meanings).
-When Oðal came to me some times, I would have a kind of "map" appear of Germanic lands, and it would often stop around the area of (ancient) Thuringia, or such. Since 1)Germanic Thuringian heathens were known to have had wavy hair in many circumstances. And, indeed, almost everyone in my family, even my grandfather, whose haircolour is (well was before it went white ;)) a very light blonde, has natural wavey hair. The whole thing is from two sides. Plus my surname coming from Old High German. Plus some of my not so unrecent ancestors were from like middle Germany. Very likely as to the middle to east nowadays germany being my "true" fatherland, as such.
I can often be found staring into the distance, praising Mother Jorth as in such. Whenever I feel close to nature, I also feel some closeness to my ancestral gods.
And all those experiences...

I have ravens that spy on me too. They always fly away when I look at them. There are two, but they come one at a time though.

I too have wavy hair, like my father, although it is reddish and not blond.

I have also had dreams about the large tree, and finding the well of mimir.

A few years ago I was wishing desperately for a child, and I asked (over a time period of about a week) Odin if he would give me a child I would spread the word about him. Well one night he came to me in a dream with Thor by his side, and said "I will give you a son and you shall name him Ve." Three months later I was united with my husband who had been deported back to Germany, and told my husband about the dream. He made me take birth control but I still got pregnant when it didn't work for 2 years before, without using anything. Then I dreamed that I had the most beautiful blond twins, and I knew my son would be born under Gemini, sign of the twins. He was born on the last day of Gemini, at 10 PM. You couldn't cut it much closer!

I also believe in reincarnation because I have had quite a few dreams about my past lives. When normally I dream about things I do in every day life, or getting into physical fights and I always have my "this life" persona too. But these dreams it's me but I'm someone else living in a past time. They most often occur when I'm facing a problem that I have to try to decide. I think this is past life wisdom guiding me still in this life.

Well of course the gods exist!


I wonder then if these gods of the Northmen, if they exist, are even concerned at all with the folk's welfare. My guess is they are not in the slightest. Either that, or they are powerless.

If the gods always did things for us, they really would not be doing us any favors. We are to be a strong race. When anything else is really beyond our power any more they can and often do step in. Anyway, the gods have their reasons for what they do and don't do. When christianity was implemented, it is said that the gods were bound. But I can assure you that if they were ever bound, now they are free again.

Cythraul
Thursday, January 15th, 2009, 10:44 AM
If you're a Pagan or Heathen, you accept the existence of at least one spirit-realm. That is the basis of Paganism. This realm exists concurrently with our perceivable world but is immaterial. Our senses have evolved to filter out these other realms but through meditative and ceremonial rituals we are able to glimpse or even journey within these other realms. They are as real as our material realm and actually have a daily bearing on what happens here in our 'normal' world. When people talk of magic, it is a means of making the spiritworld affect our material world in one way or another.

So with all that in mind, the gods are entities who exist within these spirit realms. You'll feel nothing more than their presence here in our world - if you know what you're looking for. To see them or communicate with them properly, you'll need to journey to the spirit realms that they inhabit.

So yes, they exist.

Carl
Thursday, January 15th, 2009, 11:48 AM
So with all that in mind, the gods are entities who exist within these spirit realms. You'll feel nothing more than their presence here in our world - if you know what you're looking for. To see them or communicate with them properly, you'll need to journey to the spirit realms that they inhabit.

So yes, they exist.


interesting that you bring this back... its a difficult subject for anyone!

when you enter their realm, do you not leave behind the normal human voice of sceptical scrutiny? you open yourself to their world long before you really know them ....whoever they should turn out to be.

Rozenstorm
Thursday, January 15th, 2009, 12:34 PM
The whole revival of paganism in Europe began with Nouvelle Droite with Alain de Benoist* (or New Right, not to be mistaken with the American New right which is neo-conservatism) who were atheists and anti-religion. But since atheism was predominantly occupied by masonic views of either socialists or liberals they wanted a non-universal, ethnic variant, hence paganism. Nobody actually believed in those Gods riding the sky with a chariot and what not. Most were either agnostic or atheist.

I'm a fan of de Benoist, but of course, as a Christian, I don't share his anti-christian views. Still, it explains how paganism isn't meant a actual belief but as a society model...

*
Alain de Benoist is a French academic, philosopher, a founder of the Nouvelle Droite (English: New Right) and head of the French think tank GRECE. He is little known outside his native France. Benoist bills himself as a critic of liberalism, free markets and egalitarianism.

Alain de Benoist was born in Saint-Symphorien and attended the Sorbonne. He has studied law, philosophy, sociology, and the history of religions. He is an admirer of Europe and paganism.

Benoist is the editor of two journals: Nouvelle Ecole ("New School") since 1968 and Krisis since 1988. His writings have appeared in Mankind Quarterly, The Scorpion, Tyr, Chronicles, and various newspapers such as Le Figaro. The New Left journal Telos has also published some of Benoist's work, which led to protests from some scholars on the editorial board. In 1978, he received the Grand Prix de l’Essai from the Académie Française for his book Vu de droite: Anthologie critique des idées contemporaines (Copernic, 1977). He has published more than 50 books, including On Being a Pagan (Ultra, 2005, ISBN 0-9720292-2-2).

Core Views

Alain de Benoist was previously associated with different right wing persons linked with the Algerian independence war. From being close to fascist French movements at the beginning of his writings in 1970, he moved to attacks on globalisation, unrestricted mass immigration and liberalism as being ultimately fatal to the existence of Europe through their divisiveness and internal faults. His influences include Antonio Gramsci, Ernst Jünger, Jean Baudrillard, Helmut Schelsky, Konrad Lorenz, and other intellectuals.

Against the liberal melting-pot of the U.S., Benoist is in favour of separate civilisations and cultures. He also says he opposes Jean-Marie Le Pen, racism and anti-Semitism. He has opposed Arab immigration in France, while supporting ties with Islamic culture. He has also tried to distance himself from Adolf Hitler, Vichy France or Aryan supremacy, in favor of concepts like "ethnopluralism," in which organic, ethnic cultures and nations must live and develop in separation from one another. He also opposes Christianity as inherently intolerant, theocractic and bent on persecution.

Benoist has made pointed criticism of the United States: "Better to wear the helmet of a Red Army soldier," he wrote in 1982, "than to live on a diet of hamburgers in Brooklyn." In 1991, he complained that European supporters of the first Gulf War were "collaborators of the American order."

Benoist argues that heredity is dominant role in forming an intellectual elite. In addition, he says egalitarianism is destructive because it ruins the superior qualities and genetic aristocracy in the human race. Benoist argues that Europe must return to its pre-Christian roots and uses the Indo-European model, such as Nordic, Celtic, Greek and Roman civilisations, as an alternative to communism and capitalism. "We want to substitute faith for law, mythos for logos... will for pure reason, the image for the concept, and home for exile," he once wrote.

Benoist has said he opposed racism and violence, saying he is building "a school of thought, not a political movement." He also said that "an intelligent racism, which has a sense of ethnicity, is less harmful than an intemperate, leveling, assimilating anti-racism," -- and violence-prone extremists used the quote as a slogan. While he has complained that nations like the United States suffer from "homogenization," due to multiracial industrialization, he has also distanced himself from some of Jean-Marie Le-Pen's views on immigration.


His critics, such as Thomas Sheehan, argue that Benoist has developed a novel restatement of fascism. Roger Griffin, using an ideal type definition of fascism which includes "populist ultra-nationalism" and "palingenesis" (heroic rebirth), argues that the Nouvelle Droite draws on such "fascist" ideologues as Armin Mohler and Julius Evola in a way that allows Nouvelle Droite ideologues such as de Benoist to claim a "metapolitical" stance, but which nonetheless has residual "fascistic" ideological elements. Benoist's critics also claim his views recall Nazi attempts to replace German Christianity with its own paganism.

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

Cythraul
Thursday, January 15th, 2009, 02:02 PM
when you enter their realm, do you not leave behind the normal human voice of sceptical scrutiny? you open yourself to their world long before you really know them ....whoever they should turn out to be.
Entering the other realms is above all a method of self-discovery. On my first spiritworld journey, I learnt more about myself than I could have imagined. I've not actually encountered the gods we all know. Perhaps I'm yet to, or perhaps the spirits I have encountered are those gods but with different names. I have one ally who very much resembles the classic depiction of Woden. I must endeavour to discover more about him.

To believe in spirits at all, one must abandon normal human scepticism. That goes for ALL religions who believe in a 'God' (without exception) and spiritual traditions. Our sceptical scrutiny - human as it is - is the result of our Earthly, material existence. To see beyond the five senses, it is necessary to loosen one's familiar Earthly perspective on reality at least slightly.



Still, it explains how paganism isn't meant a actual belief but as a society model...
That is, unless your Pagan belief isn't revivalist ;). Don't assume that Paganism is only practiced today because a few atheists thought it might be fun. Paganism has always, and will always be in our blood and in our soul.

Rozenstorm
Thursday, January 15th, 2009, 07:39 PM
That is, unless your Pagan belief isn't revivalist ;). Don't assume that Paganism is only practiced today because a few atheists thought it might be fun. Paganism has always, and will always be in our blood and in our soul.

As if. If there are two heathen people on this forum here that got their religion given through by their parents, I'd be surprised. Besides, a real religion goes beyond the limits of politics. The number of left-wing pagans is, euh, insignificant.

Cythraul
Thursday, January 15th, 2009, 08:46 PM
As if. If there are two heathen people on this forum here that got their religion given through by their parents, I'd be surprised.
It needn't have been handed down through parents to be genuine. 'Revivalist' Paganism typically refers to Neo-Paganism (like Wicca) or, like your earlier quote suggests, a superficial version of an ancient tradition. Mine is niether of these, nor was it taught by my parents. It is an authentic, timeless interpretation of the belief system recorded in myth and poem, with the unteachable gnosis added by way of ritual meditation.


Besides, a real religion goes beyond the limits of politics. The number of left-wing pagans is, euh, insignificant.
Is this in reference to Alain de Benoist? A real religion does go beyond the limits of politics, and yet Alain de Benoist, according to the text you quoted, was more interested in the (a)political system that could arise from a revival of Paganism than he was the actual heart and soul of the religion itself. Paganism, more so than Christianity, should be beyond politics. A traditional Pagan cannot be 'left-wing' because Paganism equates to Pan-Nationalism, and 'right-wing' only really exists as a term to counter-balance the pre-existing notion of 'left-wing'. :P

Sigurd
Thursday, January 15th, 2009, 09:00 PM
By the time de Benoist first made his name known, there was already a vibrant revival of Odinism going on in England, America, and Iceland. If we're looking a few decades further back you have Alexander Rudd Mills in Australia (30s), and even long before that Guido von List and his Armanen-Futhark in Germany, and the list could go on(methinks 1902?). As to the term Odinism, that was used by even earlier pioneers already in the 19th century. ;)

rainman
Thursday, January 15th, 2009, 10:38 PM
Yes- they are real astrological forces and forces of nature. These "energies" are real like electricity, gravity, bio-energy etc. and yes they effect you whether you believe in them or not. Are they myths literal or correct? No. Are these real physical beings? No. The gods dwell inside you- they effect human beings. Without humans or something to act on the divine would not exist fully (in part yes, but not fully). Think of light. A plant needs light to live. Without the plant there is still light- but no life. Without the light the plant cannot exist for long either. The gods are a spiritual light that unites with the human mind to create the god-head. The human god or "goth".

Psychonaut
Thursday, January 15th, 2009, 10:53 PM
It really depends on what is means by literal. I don't really think that many, if any, of the myths represent literal, historical truth. However, as a few of you know, I do believe that a handful of the Gods (like the Sun and Moon) have a definite physical existence. With the others, I'm not so sure. I've encountered them in visions and hears them during rites, but none of that has given me a clue to the manner of their existence. That they exist is of no doubt to me, but I'm not yet sure that that entails.

Rozenstorm
Friday, January 16th, 2009, 11:39 AM
It needn't have been handed down through parents to be genuine. 'Revivalist' Paganism typically refers to Neo-Paganism (like Wicca) or, like your earlier quote suggests, a superficial version of an ancient tradition. Mine is niether of these, nor was it taught by my parents. It is an authentic, timeless interpretation of the belief system recorded in myth and poem, with the unteachable gnosis added by way of ritual meditation.

Well, I didn't said that a religion had to be handed down to be real. Still, tradtion is credibility. It was a reply to the statement that not all paganism is revivalist. Well, most really is, the other is in truth a marginal number that can be regarded as futile. It's like a cyclical movement of revival and fading, but then under any circumstances allways really small considering. :) Not that I don't understand the attraction of heathenry. I mean, it's wild, dangerous, national, able-bodied, sexy while Christianity implies some egalitarianism, 'love and understanding',... However! I prefer a vigilant Christianity. The one that drove us to the Crusades and should now deliver us from evil, embodied in (socio-)liberalism, immigration, etc.



Is this in reference to Alain de Benoist? A real religion does go beyond the limits of politics, and yet Alain de Benoist, according to the text you quoted, was more interested in the (a)political system that could arise from a revival of Paganism than he was the actual heart and soul of the religion itself. Paganism, more so than Christianity, should be beyond politics. A traditional Pagan cannot be 'left-wing' because Paganism equates to Pan-Nationalism, and 'right-wing' only really exists as a term to counter-balance the pre-existing notion of 'left-wing'. :P

Exactly, he wants paganism not as a real religion but more as a society model. Furthermore, yes, he wants that, and de Benoist isn't left-wing now, is he. :)

Cythraul
Friday, January 16th, 2009, 12:00 PM
It's like a cyclical movement of revival and fading, but then under any circumstances allways really small considering.
If it is a cyclical movement of revival and fading, it is only because of the attitude exemplified by your statement here:


I prefer a vigilant Christianity. The one that drove us to the Crusades and should now deliver us from evil, embodied in (socio-)liberalism, immigration, etc.

I may be wrong, but you seem to be insinuating that Heathenry is proven to be inferior to Christianity due to its intermittency - ie because it must be revived again and again, it must not convey the truth that Christianity does. But remember, Christianity includes a policy of conversion, Paganism doesn't. Christianity has maintained lies and oppressive methods to periodically destroy Paganism each time it rears its ancient head.



Not that I don't understand the attraction of heathenry. I mean, it's wild, dangerous, national, able-bodied, sexy while Christianity implies some egalitarianism, 'love and understanding',
With all due respect, I don't like the way you're painting Heathenry as a 'trendy new fad' - like Qabbalah, the Atkins Diet or adopting 'brown children'. Heathenry is not dangerous or sexy. It is natural, ancient, free and familiar. If it weren't familiar, Christianity wouldn't have had to adopt all the major Pagan festivals to convert Europe to 'the new religion'.

Rozenstorm
Friday, January 16th, 2009, 12:41 PM
If it is a cyclical movement of revival and fading, it is only because of the attitude exemplified by your statement here:

So it has nothing to do with the fact that it's extinct for the last 1500-2000 years...


I may be wrong, but you seem to be insinuating that Heathenry is proven to be inferior to Christianity due to its intermittency - ie because it must be revived again and again, it must not convey the truth that Christianity does. But remember, Christianity includes a policy of conversion, Paganism doesn't. Christianity has maintained lies and oppressive methods to periodically destroy Paganism each time it rears its ancient head.

Well, I wouldn't call it inferior, after all, they're all religions witch you can't measure by scientific standards. Nontheless, Jesus and a universal power is more plausible than thundergods flying around and magical ravens. It's true though that Christianity uses oppressive methods, but I'm glad to say that the Inquisition and stuff is over.



With all due respect, I don't like the way you're painting Heathenry as a 'trendy new fad' - like Qabbalah, the Atkins Diet or adopting 'brown children'.

Well, euh, yes. It's like a fashion statement among nationalists.

If paganism constructs to the traditional family, social order, cohesion and the continuation of it, like conservative Christianity does, maybe I'll reconsider my opinion. It's no coincidence that Christian value's are conservative value's.

Sigurd
Saturday, January 17th, 2009, 10:01 AM
If there are two heathen people on this forum here that got their religion given through by their parents, I'd be surprised

If Blutwölfin is still around, I think she'd beg to disagree. She actually comes from a long line of people, who still had the "Old Gods" as a family belief and was brought up in that faith by her father, so I believe she once told. ;)


So it has nothing to do with the fact that it's extinct for the last 1500-2000 years...

I must say that I do not appreciate the ignorance you are showing, but maybe I can care to enlighten you that many of the celebrations/traditions which you now fundamentally consider Christian are not entirely Christian at all.

The most notorious example of this would of course be Yule ("Christmas"):


The description the bible gives us about the surroundings and environment of Jesus' birth hardly suggest a birth of his in actual wintertide, hinting more towards spring or summer by my interpretation. Besides, take into the account the census. The Romans may have had a few Draconian crackpots who ruled with an Iron Hand like Pilates, but even they would not have scheduled a census in December, a season that is hardly tropical by all stretches of imagination even in Palestine.

The Twelve Days of Christmas directly link back to the Twelve Nights of Yule. Twelve was also an important number to our ancestors: 12 months, 12 Aesir gathered in Lokasenna, and last but not least that which I think is probably the guiding force why pre-Christian faiths celebrated it for twelve days: The fact that the difference between the Sun Year and the Moon Year are approx. 12 days allows to reflect back to each month on a different day.

The still celebrated tradition of the Perchtenlauf (you even see in the name the reference of the Perchten as the Holdafolk landwights, Perchta/Holda being two names for the same goddess, further north also known as Frigga) is directly based upon the Wild Hunt, believed to either have been led been led by Odin or his wife Frigga (for whom Perchta and Holda are two alternative names). They are usually celebrated around the time of what once was perahtun naht, the bright/luminous night or by a reference to Holda/Perchta/Frigg, of course the "Mother Night".

Christmas is still called "Weihnachten" in German, id est derived from wih naht, meaning the sacred night. I am not inferring anything, but Considering that Ve/Wih was one of Odin's brothers, and the fact that we stand almost alone in that ... ah, never mind, the Scandinavians still call it Jul/Jol, and old-fashioned Christians even still called it Yule in Britain which has a common root as "wheel", in Anglo-Saxon it would be hweol. I don't have to stress that this wheel would be the wheel of the year and seasons, showing that it is a seasonal festival not a birth festival of any Judaeo-Christian demigod, do I? ;)

I am not a friend of Vikernes, but recognise there is some value in his writing. One of that is his highlighting that in old folk tradition, Heimdall/Rig, the Culture Bringer and Guardian of Asgard brought children their presents --- in a chariot pulled by reindeers or related animals (!). As such it is hardly surprising that today's "Santa Claus" (St. Nicholas Day is actually celebrated as a separate festival for this philanthropist bishop in the German-speaking countries on December 6!) is based upon the still existing Scandinavian traditions, though you later had a so-called Julbocken responsible in Sweden. The merging between these two traditions may have come over the use of Dutch Sinterklaas.

I can't find the reference now, but I seem to recall to read that even the "Christmas Tree" was a tradition which was again adopted in the 19th century after it had been an ancient tradition. I'll find it at some point, though.


Another important one would be the tradition of the Easter Bunny at Easter. Not only is the name of the festival still derived from the Germanic Spring Goddess Ostara/Eostre (OHG/OE), but this very goddess' sacred animal was a hare, which was believed to be able of laying eggs. Now if that doesn't seem familiar... ;)

And finally, let's not forget Hallowe'en (All Hallows' Eve) and All Hallow's Day, on the continent also All Souls' Day. Possibly caused by the fogginess that November oft brings, our ancestors for sure believe at this time of the year which meant the official end of autumn and the official begining of winter, were the veils to the realm of hel particularly thin. To be allow entrance into these Halls to be amongst their ancestral spirits, people thus dressed up in terrifying masks ... that's why the people still dress up on Hallowe'en (save for trick and treat, that was the confectionery industry in the 30s).

All in all, it goes without saying that had our traditions been totally submerged, no one would have accepted the new faith so readily. So they sought to merge them.

And even then, it did not always happen that they accepted this new faith:


We now know that the Finns in the Häme region, after the "Second Crusade To Sweden" (1238? 1248? 1238-1248?) did the following: After the Swedes left, they went into Lake Katuma and washed their baptism off, continued living their Heathen lives for several hundred years, some families even well into the 19th century.

Lithuania was a Heathen Country until 1368, when the Teutonic Order arrived and destroyed their last temple Romuva in what later was to be Prussia.

Revolts of "Old Believers" were reported in Sweden until well into the 16th century


I will also not highlight too much about the "period of dual faith" at this point, I think that's information enough for now for you to let sink into your mind on your way to enlightening yourself about what I feel are misconceptions. :)

TiusArm
Saturday, January 17th, 2009, 11:33 AM
I think the Gods are real, because when I don´t think they are real I wouldn't be a Heathen. So I would deny my faith (the faith you don´t believe in, isn´t a faith).

Heathen Greetings,
TiusArm

Rozenstorm
Saturday, January 17th, 2009, 11:52 AM
If Blutwölfin is still around, I think she'd beg to disagree. She actually comes from a long line of people, who still had the "Old Gods" as a family belief and was brought up in that faith by her father, so I believe she once told. ;)

Well, that's one.


I must say that I do not appreciate the ignorance you are showing, but maybe I can care to enlighten you that many of the celebrations/traditions which you now fundamentally consider Christian are not entirely Christian at all.

The most notorious example of this would of course be Yule ("Christmas"):


The description the bible gives us about the surroundings and environment of Jesus' birth hardly suggest a birth of his in actual wintertide, hinting more towards spring or summer by my interpretation. Besides, take into the account the census. The Romans may have had a few Draconian crackpots who ruled with an Iron Hand like Pilates, but even they would not have scheduled a census in December, a season that is hardly tropical by all stretches of imagination even in Palestine.

The Twelve Days of Christmas directly link back to the Twelve Nights of Yule. Twelve was also an important number to our ancestors: 12 months, 12 Aesir gathered in Lokasenna, and last but not least that which I think is probably the guiding force why pre-Christian faiths celebrated it for twelve days: The fact that the difference between the Sun Year and the Moon Year are approx. 12 days allows to reflect back to each month on a different day.

The still celebrated tradition of the Perchtenlauf (you even see in the name the reference of the Perchten as the Holdafolk landwights, Perchta/Holda being two names for the same goddess, further north also known as Frigga) is directly based upon the Wild Hunt, believed to either have been led been led by Odin or his wife Frigga (for whom Perchta and Holda are two alternative names). They are usually celebrated around the time of what once was perahtun naht, the bright/luminous night or by a reference to Holda/Perchta/Frigg, of course the "Mother Night".

Christmas is still called "Weihnachten" in German, id est derived from wih naht, meaning the sacred night. I am not inferring anything, but Considering that Ve/Wih was one of Odin's brothers, and the fact that we stand almost alone in that ... ah, never mind, the Scandinavians still call it Jul/Jol, and old-fashioned Christians even still called it Yule in Britain which has a common root as "wheel", in Anglo-Saxon it would be hweol. I don't have to stress that this wheel would be the wheel of the year and seasons, showing that it is a seasonal festival not a birth festival of any Judaeo-Christian demigod, do I? ;)

I am not a friend of Vikernes, but recognise there is some value in his writing. One of that is his highlighting that in old folk tradition, Heimdall/Rig, the Culture Bringer and Guardian of Asgard brought children their presents --- in a chariot pulled by reindeers or related animals (!). As such it is hardly surprising that today's "Santa Claus" (St. Nicholas Day is actually celebrated as a separate festival for this philanthropist bishop in the German-speaking countries on December 6!) is based upon the still existing Scandinavian traditions, though you later had a so-called Julbocken responsible in Sweden. The merging between these two traditions may have come over the use of Dutch Sinterklaas.

I can't find the reference now, but I seem to recall to read that even the "Christmas Tree" was a tradition which was again adopted in the 19th century after it had been an ancient tradition. I'll find it at some point, though.


Another important one would be the tradition of the Easter Bunny at Easter. Not only is the name of the festival still derived from the Germanic Spring Goddess Ostara/Eostre (OHG/OE), but this very goddess' sacred animal was a hare, which was believed to be able of laying eggs. Now if that doesn't seem familiar... ;)

And finally, let's not forget Hallowe'en (All Hallows' Eve) and All Hallow's Day, on the continent also All Souls' Day. Possibly caused by the fogginess that November oft brings, our ancestors for sure believe at this time of the year which meant the official end of autumn and the official begining of winter, were the veils to the realm of hel particularly thin. To be allow entrance into these Halls to be amongst their ancestral spirits, people thus dressed up in terrifying masks ... that's why the people still dress up on Hallowe'en (save for trick and treat, that was the confectionery industry in the 30s).

All in all, it goes without saying that had our traditions been totally submerged, no one would have accepted the new faith so readily. So they sought to merge them.

And even then, it did not always happen that they accepted this new faith:


We now know that the Finns in the Häme region, after the "Second Crusade To Sweden" (1238? 1248? 1238-1248?) did the following: After the Swedes left, they went into Lake Katuma and washed their baptism off, continued living their Heathen lives for several hundred years, some families even well into the 19th century.


Lithuania was a Heathen Country until 1368, when the Teutonic Order arrived and destroyed their last temple Romuva in what later was to be Prussia.

Revolts of "Old Believers" were reported in Sweden until well into the 16th century


I will also not highlight too much about the "period of dual faith" at this point, I think that's information enough for now for you to let sink into your mind on your way to enlightening yourself about what I feel are misconceptions. :)
Finland was part of Sweden from 1219 to 1809. Are you sure? The conversion in Scandinavia was indeed a process of long and complex progress. Anyway,

I am aware that many traditions of heatheny were introduced in Christianity in Europe (I have no problem with that), just like many feature's of Latin-American religions were introduced in Christianity there. And perhaps I should have used a more broad term in time when it comes to extinction, it depends on the region and how far you were from the cultural and political center of Europe. Still, I stand corrected. Nonetheless, we can broadly say that a thousand years ago heathnery was a marginal custom.

Jäger
Saturday, January 17th, 2009, 01:56 PM
"True religion offers neither polemic nor dogma." - Erwin Rohde

Aryan religion cannot be anything else than symbolism.

Rozenstorm
Saturday, January 17th, 2009, 07:33 PM
"True religion offers neither polemic nor dogma." - Erwin Rohde

Aryan religion cannot be anything else than symbolism.

A religion is, by definition, filled with some dogma's. It requires a leap of faith. Belief where proof is not given.

Sigurd
Saturday, January 17th, 2009, 07:42 PM
A religion is, by definition, filled with some dogma's. It requires a leap of faith. Belief where proof is not given.

The same could, in a way, be said about most new science disciplines anyhow: It's the Special Theory of Relativity, for instance. There's no proof for it yet, so therefore we can only assume it to be fact, or reject the argument offered. To believe in E=MC² actually takes quite a large leap of faith. ;)

The same would go for any spiritual points. Many, or most with faith, will subscribe to some sort of spiritual, supernatural force. Technically, there's also no way to say that it is always unexplainable, it may yet become an explainable matter. On the other hand, one could claim that certain energies are provable in certain areas and certain circumstances and ascribe that to said being. That'd be again another theory.

Overall, the propositional character of science and the propositional character of natural-based, factual faith are at part there --- you have some results present, yet you interpret them in a way which cannot yet be proven, but may well be provable at a latter stage. As such, they are anything but contradictory --- and since more and more science seems to establish that which was once well-known amongst the Ancients, it shows that there's hardly any contradiction between the two: The physical and metaphysical remain two not too dissimilar disciplines trying to describe similar phenomena.

Now, how to link the combination between supernatural forces and revolutionary science --- don't let me get started on all the Vril Stuff, otherwise it'd just become yet another essay, and it'd just detract from the topic, as the Vril stuff would be something to discuss elsewhere. ;)

Rozenstorm
Saturday, January 17th, 2009, 07:45 PM
The same could, in a way, be said about most new science disciplines anyhow: It's the Special Theory of Relativity, for instance. There's no proof for it yet, so therefore we can only assume it to be fact, or reject the argument offered. To believe in E=MC² actually takes quite a large leap of faith. ;)

The same would go for any spiritual points. Many, or most with faith, will subscribe to some sort of spiritual, supernatural force. Technically, there's also no way to say that it is always unexplainable, it may yet become an explainable matter. On the other hand, one could claim that certain energies are provable in certain areas and certain circumstances and ascribe that to said being. That'd be again another theory.

Overall, the propositional character of science and the propositional character of natural-based, factual faith are at part there --- you have some results present, yet you interpret them in a way which cannot yet be proven, but may well be provable at a latter stage. As such, they are anything but contradictory --- and since more and more science seems to establish that which was once well-known amongst the Ancients, it shows that there's hardly any contradiction between the two: The physical and metaphysical remain two not too dissimilar disciplines trying to describe similar phenomena.

Now, how to link the combination between supernatural forces and revolutionary science --- don't let me get started on all the Vril Stuff, otherwise it'd just become yet another essay, and it'd just detract from the topic, as the Vril stuff would be something to discuss elsewhere. ;)

Interesting viewpoint. Still, the leap in religion is quite bigger, we can assume... Between God(s) and scientific hypotheses lies a big distance...

Jäger
Saturday, January 17th, 2009, 08:02 PM
A religion is, by definition, filled with some dogma's. It requires a leap of faith. Belief where proof is not given.
A dogma is not just an assumption of an unproven hypothesis (axiom). A dogma is a statement not open for change (namely the unknown is not admitted but rejected, despite that it is unknown). Things that don't change are dead. (The same goes for definitions ;))

"All is flux, nothing stays still" - Heraclitus

Cythraul
Saturday, January 17th, 2009, 08:28 PM
Aryan religion cannot be anything else than symbolism.
'Cannot'? But it is. Symbolism is not religion, and our Aryan ancestors would not have held so strongly to their religion had it been merely 'symbolism'. Heathenism is, and was a spiritual wisdom tradition, not merely a method of explaining science. Whatever your own personal feelings towards spirituality, it's undeniable that our ancestors believed in the concept of spirit.

Ullarsskald
Saturday, January 17th, 2009, 08:34 PM
Hail;

In my own life experiences, I have formed a belief that the Gods are real beings, who are actually within my life. This is true for me, without proof I can give others.

The Holy Ones are also figures in my thoughts and dreams; being given shape to which I can relate, and a voice that sings to my heart of hearts, fueling my faith.

Jäger
Saturday, January 17th, 2009, 09:33 PM
Symbolism is not religion ...
Indeed, Aryan religion is, and of course it doesn't end there.


... and our Aryan ancestors would not have held so strongly to their religion had it been merely 'symbolism'.
What are you refering to here?


Heathenism is, and was a spiritual wisdom tradition, not merely a method of explaining science.
I don't see how this would contradict each other?
Spiritual wisdom is science, see Mathematics or Meta-Physics (or Philosophy in general).


Whatever your own personal feelings towards spirituality, it's undeniable that our ancestors believed in the concept of spirit.
Err, yes, and so they (most likely) created symbols for it, e.g. a hammer swinging being called Thor :).

rainman
Saturday, January 17th, 2009, 09:39 PM
The way I take Asatru: it a religion of doing not a religion of belief. We actually have records from the Greeks and Romans before the Christian era to show that this was the case with their pagan religion (there's some long word for it forgot what its called). If you do the rituals, follow the morals, and live your life by the culture of Asatru then you are Asatruar. You don't need to profess belief in anything. Though belief does exist- if you didn't believe the religion had some merit you wouldn't do it! But anyone can say they believe- doing proves you believe. So we come back to where we started- it's a religion of doing, not of belief.

In regards to faith- Asatru is a "faith" but not a blind faith. Most of us haven't been able to measure, examine and test every statement made in Asatru. nor can we say the same about science or other cultural assumptions. We generally trust our community. We trust the religion until it gives us reason not to. If we think something about the religion is irrational- we should question it. If something seems untrue- question it. In this way Asatru is dogmatic, but not in the Christian sense. We need a common ideology that binds us, but we don't force people to believe this with blind faith. We don't even feel the religion is for everyone.

Too many Asatruar are stuck in Christian modes of thinking.

Ullarsskald
Saturday, January 17th, 2009, 10:00 PM
Hail Rainman;


{snip} ...Greeks and Romans before the Christian era to show that this was the case with their pagan religion (there's some long word for it forgot what its called). ... {snip}

The word you are seeking is Orthopraxy - right practice, which is the way that the Hellenic and Roman religions do look to have been done. The duty was to perform the rituals and sacrifices in the correct manner, on the correct days, whether or not the Gods actually listened.

I do think that Heathenry is more Heteropraxic, where we have an historical set of rituals (Blót, Sumbel and Husel), but each sets their own manner in how to accomplish them.

I agree, however, that an important part of our way IS to do, rather than just believe.

Dreyrithoka
Sunday, January 18th, 2009, 03:08 AM
Personally, I subscribe to the more Jungian side of things, combined with a "belief powers such entities" ideal. As far as the thread is concerned, methinks 'tis interesting to note how smoothly it hath flowed in the past few hours without trolling as opposed to the days preceding said obvious attempt...

rainman
Sunday, January 18th, 2009, 05:39 AM
I didn't mean it in a ritual way. Though that is correct to do the rituals to be part of the religion. But more in the fact that I speak a certain language (and I do think those of us in English speaking countries should have some home tribal language to set us apart from utgard. Maybe old English or Old Norse or something, but if not in the least speak a Germanic language) anyway I speak a certain language, have certain customs, maybe even dress in a certain way, attend certain meetings, live by certain morals etc. because I AM Asatruar, not because I believe in it. Because I want to be more Germanic or I was raised that way or whatever. Not even relating to gods so much as just relating to a culture and a way of life. For example many Jews are atheist. Yet they are Jewish. They honor the customs of their people. They study their people's history. They show up at the synagog at least on certain holidays. And so on- not because they believe in a diety, but because they ARE Jewish and that defines them as a group. I see culture and "religion" as iseperable in this sense. You can't just wake up one day and say "I'll convert to Asatru" then another day change your mind.

I don't think I'm fully Asatruar. In my view of the religion you need a community and be a part of that community- not just online but on a regular basis, maybe meet at least once a week, live in close proximity etc. Besides community you need to be imersed in the world view, in the customs and the ways of a people. Almost have to be raised in it to fully be a part of it. Yet I call myself a midling as I don't really do the rituals at this point because I don't have the community. But I'm happy with being a midling- its a step in the right direction. At least hopefully I can raise kids who can be fully Asatruar and form some community at some point.

What I mean is those values you were taught as a child and those worldviews are always with you in some form. You might be 80% Asatru or something but never 100% until you are raised in that culture and totally a part of that community. At least in my opinion, in my own version of Asatru. Just like as Steven McNallen puts it a person doesn't wake up one morning and say "I think I want to be a Lakota Sioux"- a folk way is a little different than more conventional religions. Maybe folk way is a better word than religion. You are typically born into it or at least part of it by heritage in some way, then you accept to live that way. Then that's the gist of it. Being a complete lifestyle a little hard to take on and off like a cloak or a belief.

Þórir
Sunday, January 18th, 2009, 08:17 AM
I think that if myths are not meant to be taken literally, then the characters in them, the gods, probably shouldn't be either, or at least that they have deeper meanings than just the literal. Personally I believe that the gods represent spiritual/physical principles, forces, and also archetypes of the Germanic peoples. They could also be distinct personalities and historical figures who inspired the myths.

Cythraul
Sunday, January 18th, 2009, 01:17 PM
I see that I've misinterpreted your position here Jäger.



Err, yes, and so they (most likely) created symbols for it, e.g. a hammer swinging being called Thor :).
Yes. In this sense Aryan Paganism is symbolic, but it is not overall an allegory for non-existent spirituality. I assumed when you called it symbolic that this is what you meant.



I don't see how this would contradict each other?
Spiritual wisdom is science, see Mathematics or Meta-Physics (or Philosophy in general).
I fully agree. I think science, through meta-physics, is actually growing towards religion, rather than away from it. There'll come a time soon when atheism is no longer the most scientific standpoint one can take. For example, recent scienctific discoveries hint at a holographic universe (http://www.newscientist.com/article/mg20126911.300-our-world-may-be-a-giant-hologram.html), which reconciles the Meso-American belief of Maya - that our perceived world is illusory.

SuuT
Monday, January 19th, 2009, 04:28 PM
Troublesome terms (as already mentioned/alluded to throughout): 'Literal', 'Existence', 'Real', 'Believe', Et. al.

However, there must be some manner of acknowledgement that one can over-rationalise the question: the use of Logic and Epistemological inquiry, while important, must needs a back-burner to the fact that most of the cosmos remains elusive to us. And yet, we do possess a capacity for accessing (if only glossing their surfaces, never fully penetrating a centre) divine mysteries. As David Hume humbles us thus:


Philosophy would render us entirely Pyrrhonian, were not nature too strong for it.

(Yes, I am puposefully invoking irony via the invocation of Hume.)


And so it is with reason, in so far as reason follows in the wake of the emotive nature of the divine: one does not sit stoically and attempt to reason-out why their mother has died; one does not sit in idle comtemplation of the sea, as if it were an equation, calculable; one does not determine the essence of power - in its entirety - in rumination.

The nature of the divine, of the gods, lies in all of the doing that occurs all around us; of which we are either unaware (willfully or ignorantly), or, unable to define: were we able to shakle the divine - to fix or lay down definitely and with certitude, that is - what the gods are (their respective ontological status - individuated), we would, by that act alone, become gods ourselves.....with that said, and in further irony, it would follow that it is possible to attain godhood, whilst still enfleshed. It would further follow that gods and demi-gods walk amongst us: en summa, having a biological, and yet transcendent, duality. 'Reason' dicatates that we acknowledge this possibility, and explore it further. If one follows 'reason', one must eventually answer "Yes" to the question posed. Bearing in mind, of course, that a god or demi-god need not be recognised as such by those who are not, to retain their status.

This all follows logically, and yet Logic remains a blunt instrument in so far as the terms that necessitate Logic and 'reason' are not substratal, but are designatory: terms are the feed that we follow back to our own, and other, minds.


It is a god-like act, to spark other minds. - for in so doing, we hand another the key that was given to us by whatever god(s) we have earned the favour of.

In short; yes, the gods exist. And we all get from them what we have sought, and earned, by our own, respective, doing.


"...exhausted, I was able to raise my axe, but not my shield; Odinn saw to it that it was none the less raised. The important thing was that I had the will to act; and in so doing, was empowered to finish [...] thus began the birth of my spirit..."

Vingolf
Monday, January 19th, 2009, 08:40 PM
Do you believe that Thor, Odin, Frey, etc actually exist as gods?
Religious belief is a Semitic neurosis. The Germanic gods are gods of the blood; they demand sacrifice, not belief.

Rozenstorm
Friday, January 23rd, 2009, 04:16 PM
I keep hearing this stuff about 'Aryan religion'... Since when is race religion. Well, it is with the Jews, but we are not Jews, are we?

Cynewulf
Friday, January 23rd, 2009, 09:03 PM
I keep hearing this stuff about 'Aryan religion'... Since when is race religion. Well, it is with the Jews, but we are not Jews, are we?

Prior to the conversions to the mono-god universalist semitic and other religions people had their own ethnic beliefs. These beliefs and the gods that are part of them were/are largely exclusive to the ethnic groups that practiced them. Thus an ethnic religion and the ethnic group that spawned it are essentially inseparable from one another. Taking this a stage further there are similarities between religions of the ethnic groups that make up the indo-European family. These similarities can be termed to be facets of the indo-European or Aryan religion and are exclusive to that group it came from.

Hierwend
Friday, January 23rd, 2009, 11:08 PM
Whether tangible or not(actual physical body, spiritual being or any mixture of that) I believe the gods are real.

Psychonaut
Friday, January 23rd, 2009, 11:54 PM
I keep hearing this stuff about 'Aryan religion'... Since when is race religion. Well, it is with the Jews, but we are not Jews, are we?

It was with many of the Indo-European tribes as well. Toutatis was, by definition, a God of the Folk for the Gauls. Saxnot most likely served the same function for the Saxons, as did Yngvi for the Ynglings, and so on.

Grimsteinr
Monday, January 26th, 2009, 01:44 PM
Prior to the conversions to the mono-god universalist semitic and other religions people had their own ethnic beliefs. These beliefs and the gods that are part of them were/are largely exclusive to the ethnic groups that practiced them. Thus an ethnic religion and the ethnic group that spawned it are essentially inseparable from one another. Taking this a stage further there are similarities between religions of the ethnic groups that make up the indo-European family. These similarities can be termed to be facets of the indo-European or Aryan religion and are exclusive to that group it came from.

The 2 Universalist mono-god Semitic Spin-off religions Cristianity and Islam differ somewhat from the Jewish religion, in that they have a deified Prophet, who revealed the Truth to their followers, who links them with their God. In a way Buddhism is similar, I think, except that it is more a revealed Philosophy, than religion. The Jews have more than one prophet. But Judaism is more organic and belongs to one Folk, one Ancestral People.

The Germanic Folkways, though are not revealed, as such. The Germanic Gods, the Aesir and Vanir are Folk Gods, of the Germanic Folk. As such they are, or seem to me to be, an integral part of the Ancestral Folkway of the Germanic Folk.
As long as it can be said that a Germanic Folk exists, then perhaps the Germanic Gods will exist, in the Blood and Bones and Brains, or Psych`es, of
the same Germanic Folk. The Germanic Folk give existence to the Germanic Gods, the Aesir and Vanir.

Existence is a difficult word to qualify, here. I do Believe that They exist, on several levels. I think Belief is, what it is. I believe They, our Gods, interact with us, on several levels. Some Folk who stand, or have stood in Blot, acknowledge that. Like many things Spiritual, some people have that Awarenesss, because of Belief. Some do not.
Everyone is not on the same level of Spirituality. That is not a bad thing, or a good thing. It just is the way of humanity.

Norman Pride
Wednesday, November 15th, 2017, 06:23 PM
I don't believe they exist as physical, tangible beings, no. More than believing in the gods as literal beings, I believe in what they signify and stand for, as well as associating their heritage. Also, the manifestation of forces of nature has been linked to the gods.

FaustianSpirit
Thursday, December 28th, 2017, 08:53 PM
Do you believe that Thor, Odin, Frey, etc actually exist as gods? Are they real entities?
I believe that they actually exist but I don't believe their "existence" is as black and white as say the Christian belief in Christ. I do believe they are powerful spiritual and divine entities but I find that overthinking and trying to define their existence or reality is a hindrance. Meditate on their existence and feel your ancestral and blood connection to them. Declutter your mind and open yourself to a different plane of existence.

Terminus
Friday, December 29th, 2017, 06:30 AM
The names, characteristics, and myths were attempts to give expression to lofty ideals.

We can see quite clearly how much the conception of god has degenerated in the creeds given by the churches. God is represented as an immaterial and distant anthropomorphic being, alienated from the whole of humanity, human beings cannot stand on equal footing with him. The Mormon Joseph Smith delved a great deal into assessing these creeds and their explanations and he concluded that they were impious and meaningless, as did Ernst Haeckel.

There are probably innumerable gods which fill the earth and the universe, in the manner of "divine" atoms.

Rodskarl Dubhgall
Friday, December 29th, 2017, 06:47 AM
Odin is an ancestor of Queen Elizabeth II. Sure, I believe it.

SpearBrave
Friday, December 29th, 2017, 02:43 PM
The Gods exist in the literal sense because we as Germanics exist in the literal sense. You have to look upon the Gods as our ancestors, the fathers and mothers of our race and culture. They are what separates us from other peoples and yet bind us together as a people.

Theunissen
Friday, December 29th, 2017, 08:44 PM
The Gods exist in the literal sense because we as Germanics exist in the literal sense. You have to look upon the Gods as our ancestors, the fathers and mothers of our race and culture. They are what separates us from other peoples and yet bind us together as a people.

I agree on the deified ancestor hypothesis, at least basically. To me that makes the most sense, that the figures that were to become the Gods, were initially ancestors and the memory of them.

This was btw. also the view of Isaac Newton.
http://www.newtonproject.ox.ac.uk/view/texts/normalized/THEM00098

Sean_Jobst
Wednesday, January 24th, 2018, 10:27 PM
One of the biggest "proofs" of the existence of the old gods is that their folk continue to exist, the cumulative effort of our ancestors resting with us, and calling us back to the old ways. Carl Jung would call this the "collective unconscious". Indeed, in Germany during the early 1930s Jung saw stirrings of the Wotan archetype. In the 19th century, such Scandinavians as the Swedish writer Thomas Thorild and the Danish poet Adam Oehlenschlager similarly saw a Thor archetype stirring the events of their time. Somewhat related, but there seems to be an increase in Odin sightings in Sweden: http://www.gornahoor.net/?p=9076

As a recovering monotheist who has proudly shed that Semitic past and is now drinking from the well of my ancestors, I most certainly "believe" - the word itself is loaded and seems to convey Abrahamic dogma - in the literal existence of the gods. But what are they, I don't know - its Mysteries. Whether that's archetypes, ancestors deified, or otherwise I don't know - but the proof is within our blood.

Having studied theology back when I was a monotheist, I don't see the concept of "one god" as any more "real" than that of multiple gods, even though I convinced myself otherwise at the time. Multiplicity manifests all around us, within nature. There need not be "conflict" inherent in the idea of multiple gods, whereas the multiplicity within nature and the universe has no such problem with harmony.

In theory, monotheists believe in one god who is omniscient and omnipresent, all-knowing and all-wise. But in practice, they delegate some of this one god's powers to lesser beings. For example, in the form or angels, prophets, sages, etc.. Why would such a superior being who is already capable of all things, need to delegate some of these superior powers to intermediaries?

Aelfgar
Wednesday, March 14th, 2018, 11:45 PM
I'm open-minded, but I would need some evidence that these pagan gods exist independently outside the imaginations of those who claim experience of them. I've read an occult theory that the more a god is thought about or revered, the stronger its existence. So perhaps they come and go.

If they do exist, how do they interact with the gods of other pantheons? Do they have minds as such?

Theunissen
Friday, March 16th, 2018, 01:08 PM
....
In theory, monotheists believe in one god who is omniscient and omnipresent, all-knowing and all-wise. But in practice, they delegate some of this one god's powers to lesser beings. For example, in the form or angels, prophets, sages, etc.. Why would such a superior being who is already capable of all things, need to delegate some of these superior powers to intermediaries?Because it's in his nature also to delegate authority to beings that work in his creation. God is a respecter of the sovereignty, he delegates.

Rodskarl Dubhgall
Sunday, May 20th, 2018, 02:44 AM
Might as well ask why we were created. I'm not exactly Unitarian or Trinitarian. I don't believe that mere mortals are capable of defining God in any specific number of dimensions and manifestations. Oneness and polytheistic views of Divinity are merely shades of the spectrum.

Wuotans Krieger
Saturday, November 24th, 2018, 09:13 PM
I wonder then if these gods of the Northmen, if they exist, are even concerned at all with the folk's welfare. My guess is they are not in the slightest. Either that, or they are powerless.

You are thinking like a man and not as a God. If you wish to understand the Gods then you need to jettison what is clearly a Christian mindset. It is obvious to me that you have one.

Are the Gods Merely Archetypes?




The question of the nature of the Gods is something which has given me much food for thought over recent months. Following a recent conversation with somebody I wish to set forth my thoughts regarding this issue so that people who read this and my other blogs may understand the position which I take on this issue.

I believe that our Gods may be understood on a number of different levels. I accept the theory that they may be viewed as archetypes in a Jungian sense. Many modern heathens and I stress the word modern, are influenced greatly by Jung's work on archetypes, especially his essay Wotan (1936). Whilst I believe that Jung's contribution to the subject is useful and has a great deal of merit I do not accept that this is all that the Gods are. Let me quote the most relevant part of Wotan here:

"Archetypes are like river-beds which dry up when the water deserts them, but which it can find again at any time. An archetype is like an old water-course along which the water of life has flowed for centuries, digging a deep channel for itself. The longer it has flowed in this channel the more likely it is that sooner or later the water will return to its old bed."
Of course the Germanic peoples were heathen for much longer than they were held under the grip of Christianity which by comparison is just (an unfortunate) blip in time. The people are thus able still to find their ancient deities with not too much trouble for in a sense they are part of our very nature and the fabric of our being. Jung believed that given the right circumstances they could manifest themselves within the collective life of a people. In his assessment of the phenomenon of the rise of National Socialism in Germany I believe that his analysis in this regard is correct. However it is sheer folly on our part to believe that this all that the Gods are. Jung was a scientist and the founder of Analytical Psychology but he was not a follower of the Ancient Ones. We should thus not feel ourselves to be constrained by his interpretation as it is the interpretation of a scientist but I feel that many heathens have been. In fact Jung took a rather scathing view of people who believed that the Gods had an existence independent of the people who honoured and believed in them:

"A mind that is still childish thinks of the gods as metaphysical entities existing in their own right, or else regards them as playful or superstitious inventions." (Wotan)

This is a typical materialist and almost atheist perspective. Jung, the scientist would seem to know better the nature of our Gods than our ancestors. Jung, like everyone was a product of his time and sought to explain the 'irrational' in rational terms and this simply does not work. Thus whilst I value Jung's contribution it is a grave mistake for us to regard his interpretation as the only valid one. Our ancestors certainly did see the Gods as existing "in their own right" and gave due reverence to them (See Tacitus's Germania). If all the Gods are are archetypes then why give them reverence or even honour? Are we not deceiving ourselves? For if they are only archetypes then all we do is give honour to a part of ourselves. I fail to see why our ancestors would think this way. The Gods as archetypes is a 20th and 21st century rationalisation of the divine and for some strange reason it is only the heathen deities that are rationalised in this way, not the Abrahamic one!


Edred Thorsson discusses the nature of the Gods in chapter 11 of his very interesting A Book of Troth :

"What are the gods and goddesses? To this question there can be many answers. Much depends on the level of understanding any one true man or woman has at one time. REAL gods, like REAL people, are not one-dimensional easily defined, pigeonholed entities. Some understand the gods as pure mental or psychological constructs, some as true living beings, and others as forces of nature. The troth does not put limits on types of understandings that true folk come to on this."
In my opinion Edred's presentation of the Gods is far more honest than that of Jung's. There is no reason at all why the Gods cannot be viewed in more than one way. They are complex and as Edred has said "are not one-dimensional easily defined, pigeonholed entities". I certainly do not think that anyone who has spent mere weeks or months meditating on this can come to a valid opinion. To know the Gods takes a lifetime and I have spent half of my life on this sacred quest and I am still searching for answers.


Stephen A. McNallen in his Asatru. A Native European Spirituality states:

"They exist on the very margins of our comprehension...yet, as we shall see, they are intimately involved in all that we are. Secondly, they are powers. They are potent, energy-filled, with capacity for action on a scale we can hardly imagine.

"For hundreds of generations, our ancestors believed the Gods and Goddesses to be as real as their own family, as real as the mountains hovering on the horizon, or the clouds blowing through the sky."
Modern man in his conceit believes that he is the pinnacle of all that is, that there can be no higher power. If you are a heathen and only believe the Gods to be manifestations of psychic impulses within the Collective Unconscious then how do you differ from a pure atheist? Is your understanding of the Gods thus superior to that of our ancestors who were not influenced by Christianity or materialist science? If we believe that there are forces and powers, sentient beings that exist in different dimensions or on a higher vibrational frequency then why is it so difficult to accept the concept that we are the product of a divine agency, not 'evolution', a purely materialistic and faulty concept, for modern man as he is today is not the product of 'evolution' but involution!


http://aryan-myth-and-metahistory.blogspot.com/2018/08/are-gods-merely-archetypes.html