[SPLIT from Are Spaniards and Portuguese people white?] Christianity and Paganism

[Loddfafner]

I don't see anything wrong with painting one's face and howling at the moon. It has been too long since I did anything like that.

[Anthropos]

I don't see anything wrong with painting one's face and howling at the moon. It has been too long since I did anything like that.

I didn't say it would be. I said that it comes closer to characterising modern 'heathens' or neopagans than the pre-Christian heathens. I don't approve of such falsifications of history. It is not just about a few singular mistakes. It is a whole subculture at this point.

[Jamt]

I don't approve of such falsifications of history. It is not just about a few singular mistakes. It is a whole subculture at this point.

You will only ware yourself out if you tear in to all things that you don’t approve of.

[Anthropos]

You will only ware yourself out if you tear in to all things that you don’t approve of.

It is a very marginal phenomenon and nothing much to worry about. At the same time, I don't like it. It's wrong by common sense and good manners, in my opinion, to make some kind of subculture out of unfounded revisionisms. It's parasitic, and causes new obstacles to cultural preservation, especially for people who may be drawn in to accept these revisions, as if it was 'our history' (as a result, for example, of some stereotypical perception of all serious historical accounts along with the traditional one as 'politically correct'). I have every right to say what I think about it.

[Jamt]

It is a very marginal phenomenon and nothing much to worry about. At the same time, I don't like it. It's wrong by common sense and good manners, in my opinion, to make some kind of subculture out of unfounded revisionisms. It's parasitic, and causes new obstacles to cultural preservation, especially for people who may be drawn in to accept these revisions, as if it was 'our history' (as a result, for example, of some stereotypical perception of all serious historical accounts along with the traditional one as 'politically correct'). I have every right to say what I think about it.

I believe it draws people to cultural preservation and traditionalism and that it’s a good thing, even the spirituality of it is good in many cases. Several of the Heathens on Apricity know a hell lot more about pre-Christian religion than most including me. No need to rip their heads off and scream hippy at them. Not all the time anyway.

And besides, a narrative and well grounded hypothesis is necessary to be able to say anything about spirituality or Scandinavian and European pre-history, otherwise we have nothing but archeological and scientific data and not much more. If you find anything specific that Psy or Lyf or someone else gets wrong in your opinion, take it up.

[Anthropos]

I believe it draws people to cultural preservation and traditionalism and that it’s a good thing, even the spirituality of it is good in many cases. Several of the Heathens on Apricity know a hell lot more about pre-Christian religion than most including me. No need to rip their heads off and scream hippy at them. Not all the time anyway.

And besides, a narrative and well grounded hypothesis is necessary to be able to say anything about spirituality or Scandinavian and European pre-history, otherwise we have nothing but archeological and scientific data and not much more. If you find anything specific that Psy or Lyf or someone else gets wrong in your opinion, take it up.

Falsifications:

1. The claims to a 'heathen tradition' is parasitic. Modern 'heathenry', despite superficial similarities, is not connected to pre-Christian heathenry.
2. The claim that European culture is heathen at the core with a Christian veneer is parasitic. Heathenry never preserved anything that could warrant this claim. The claims to that effect by modern 'heathens' or neopagans are fictional and have no basis. European culture is Christian. (This is still so despite secularisation: it cannot bring back heathenry.) Christianity did preserve its own sources and proofs that this is so. Remnants of pre-Christian culture in the outer applications do not change this quite simple fact, which is objective in nature. It does not depend on the religious point of view, but it can, on the contrary, easily be confirmed by atheists and agnostics as well as by those neopagans who don't stake such false claims.

[Fred]

Jamt, Anthropos and Saltimbanque all have been able to assess this subject without taking it personally. In that, so have I. I experienced a time in my life, when I chose the "what if?" route with respect to revisionist mockeries of non-Christian "religions" with some tie to Europe. At first, the material I had available was all ahistorically ignorant of true and documented traditions as they did exist. Far too many engaged people spend their time trying to reclaim something, by spin-doctoring and making counter-claims. One of the most amusing actualities of our time, is those who call Christianity a dead religion, but then go ahead and fancifully resurrect something our own ancestors progressed past, in their search for truth. While I speak of progression, it is only true progression insofar as man lost his way and then found it again. I believe truth, rather than simple ritual, is more important.

[Solomon_Grundy]

???

[Ibericus]

Whi did you revive a 2-yeard old thread ?