Why is Paganism Booming in Europe and Beyond?

[Token]

Random videos about the issue:

LGBTQ Pagans #1: Gay Pagans & Hetero Male Pagans

The question came to me over a year ago, WHY are there so many gay pagans and why does everyone assume that a male pagan must be gay? These are my personal thoughts on the subject, not developed out of any in depth research like I've done recently with general pagan prejudice.

Funny how they talk about Christianity being anti-women, male chauvinist etc. while worshipping extremely patriarchal and warlike Indo-European pantheons. These idiots managed to turn virille, aggressive and misogynist religions where going to war and raping women was everything in a person's life into LGBT fairy tales.

[Óttar]

Funny how they talk about Christianity being anti-women, male chauvinist etc. while worshipping extremely patriarchal and warlike Indo-European pantheons. These idiots managed to turn virille, aggressive and misogynist religions where going to war and raping women was everything in a person's life into LGBT fairy tales.

The Vanir were not "extremely patriarchal and warlike". They were associated with the Earth and fertility. Tacitus tells us that the Germans had great respect for their women. The women wore keys which symbolized their domestic authority.

While the Vikings did have the concept of ergi, "effeminate, womanish behavior among men" which they generally regarded as shameful, we have instances in Norse mythology of gods (e.g. Wotan) shape-shifting into women (which some scholars see as a form of shamanism) for the sake of gaining spiritual knowledge.

[The Lawspeaker]

Funny how they talk about Christianity being anti-women, male chauvinist etc. while worshipping extremely patriarchal and warlike Indo-European pantheons. These idiots managed to turn virille, aggressive and misogynist religions where going to war and raping women was everything in a person's life into LGBT fairy tales.

Amazing, isn't it ? Fleeing from one group of post-modern idiots, they turn to another group of post-modern idiots. Heathenism isn't authentic as it lacks all continuity to the pre-Christian era and had to be reconstructed and that reconstruction took place in the wake of the 1968 revolts as a fuck you to Christian European civilisation.

[Regnera]

Christianity remains in its purest essence: a destructive anti-European sect derived from Judaism.

I can't see any anti-European(or anti other ethnics) in Christianity itself,Christianity is not an ethnic religion,if Christianity is anti something,that would be non-believers,not some ethnities.

[Daco Celtic]

I think YouTube personalities like Survive the Jive and ThuleanPerspective (Varg Vikernes) are helping to popularize it.

[Hruodberht]

Funny how they talk about Christianity being anti-women, male chauvinist etc. while worshipping extremely patriarchal and warlike Indo-European pantheons. These idiots managed to turn virille, aggressive and misogynist religions where going to war and raping women was everything in a person's life into LGBT fairy tales.

All those false notions of "patriarchy", are from the feminism and cultural Marxism, stemming in turn from the pseudo-patriarchates of the Semitic and Judeo-Christian societies, in which the woman is an object of little value and of "sin". In Jewish mythology, Eve, the woman, causes humanity to fall into "original sin", a concept that does not exist in Indo-European cultures. According to the book of Genesis (3:16), Yahweh punished Eve by saying: I will increase your pains when you have children, and with pain you will bring them to birth. But your desire will take you to your husband, and he will have authority over you.

The role of women within the authentic patriarchy is very different from this Semitic pseudo-patriarchy to which the Marxists allude. Contrary to the distorting feminist idea, which describes patriarchy as a system where women are placed in the background, where they do not enjoy freedoms or rights, where they play a role "inferior" to that of men and where they are oppressed, destroying its nature, in the genuine patriarchates the woman is not oppressed but has a place next to man, and is treated with respect and dignity. The feminist description does not respond in any way to the patriarchy of civilizations as remarkable as that of Ancient Greece, that of Rome and that of the Germanic peoples, where women enjoyed infinitely more freedom than in pre-Indo-European matriarchal societies where paradoxically yes there was and still exists repression against women, and in turn, a remarkable devaluation of man.

During the European patriarchates the woman had her role as mother and wife. This role is not a "social construction", but something biological that characterizes it. In patriarchy women are not spoiled or spoiled, in the same way that men do not submit to their whims.

Within the patriarchy there were strong female figures. Thus, within the ancient Greek religion we find Athena and Artemis-Diana, examples of austere, chaste and wise goddesses, as opposed to the matriarchal myths that still persisted in the polis.

Sparta was a reaction against the later decline of Greek civilization and the last vestige of patriarchy in its purest form. From its conception the Spartan woman was subjected to a hard training like the men but unlike these, its education, although severe, did not reach the degrees of violence of the masculine training.

Spartan women boxed, practiced wrestling, swimming, gymnastics and dance, participated together with men in tournaments and games, knew how to read and write, ate the same rations as men and also had the freedom to choose who they could marry, something unthinkable in other city-states. This freedom consists of knowing how to choose the best man to procreate, the best warrior. That was the concept of sexual freedom that the Indo-Europeans had: knowing how to choose the best man, the best woman of their race to continue the lineage.

It is ironic and something that modern feminists do not know, or simply annoy them so much that they ignore it, the fact that in the only pure patriarchy that existed in Greece women enjoyed more freedoms and rights than in other parts of the region.

Because of his education and the severity of his training, Sparta had the most beautiful women of his time. Homer called Sparta "Land of beautiful women." Spartan women were known for the extraordinary beauty, austerity and maturity in which they were women in other regions of Greece.

The Spartan women despised the dyes, the jewels and the luxuries, which they looked at as signs of decadence. Spartan patriarchal education gave a class of women on the verge of perfection, proud, athletic, wise and free who outnumbered the women of their time, and do not compare them with modern women anymore.

In the Scandinavian medieval societies (vikings), the woman was the transmitter of the culture and knowledge of her society, being the one who carried the affairs of the house. And when the man was not present, he took care of the whole farm. The Viking woman freely disposed of her dowry and could apply for divorce whenever she thought fit; the Viking woman was not owned by anyone and in fact, the rape of a free woman was one of the few cases in which the Vikings applied the death penalty. The Viking woman had a voice to freely say what she thought appropriate and to make decisions. The Viking woman was an essential part of society.

As a legacy of pre-Christian morality, the female figure had an important relevance in the Middle Ages through the figure of the Lady (from the French dame, 'madam' and this one from the Latin domina, 'ama', 'mistress of a house '). This archetypal woman was described as a beautiful woman who impelled the warrior and the poet to perform great feats.

The courtly love of the time consisted of a lady of high birth who served as the spiritual engine of the knight in the jousts and crusades.

The Lady brought man closer to the Divine. The poetic figure of Beatriz in the work of Dante is an example of this figure. The counterpart of the Lady would be the Witch, an ugly old woman who represented the obscurantism of matriarchy, a being that took man away from the light and took him into the darkness.

The male warrior was responsible for defending his homeland, the community where his women were, defending them from the invader; He fought for the land in which they were born: his motherland. The earth always had a maternal role, properly feminine, being the duty of their sons to fight and die for those lands in which their women and their families lived. Seeing this we can say that patriarchy was always protective of women, contrary to what feminists would have us believe.

The patriarchy also gave exceptional women who stood out for their deeds and for defending their land, although they were not too many because in general the female character does not encourage such behavior. We have Boadicea, who led the struggle of the Britons against the Romans, Joan of Arc and monarchs like Queen Isabella the Catholic and Catherine the Great, both empire-makers.

[Hruodberht]

I can't see any anti-European(or anti other ethnics) in Christianity itself,Christianity is not an ethnic religion,if Christianity is anti something,that would be non-believers,not some ethnities.

When I say that it is anti-European, I mean that the native faith European accepts manifestly different ways of contemplating and being in the world. They also highlight totally different ways of conceiving time, history, identity, diversity, morality, family, society, man, nature, etc.

A spirituality than emerged from the world, and from the environment that surrounds us, while the Judeo-Christian vision imposes itself against the world, the idea that man as being different from the natural order and only finds proof of his superiority over nature by dominating and mistreating unnecessarily.

[Hruodberht]

Amazing, isn't it ? Fleeing from one group of post-modern idiots, they turn to another group of post-modern idiots. Heathenism isn't authentic as it lacks all continuity to the pre-Christian era and had to be reconstructed and that reconstruction took place in the wake of the 1968 revolts as a fuck you to Christian European civilisation.

Reconstructionism helps us to know many things, but that does not mean that paganism consists in doing archeology of faith. No, a religion is not about faithfully recreating how things were done in the ninth century or in the period of splendor that we want, it's about living the faith. It would not make sense to a Christian of our day to dress like the first Christians to hold a celebration or to say that if something was not done at the time of the catacombs it has no validity. Why is a blot more valid for Thor in 10th-century Iceland than an offering to Nerþus in the Neolithic, an oath before Tîwaz in the Germania of Arminius, or the Bodan cult of a Swabian in the sixth-century Gallæcia?

The resurgence of paganism arises also in the face of necessity; rather, it expresses a need, in another way another civilization, or, better yet, a modernized version of "scientific and cultural Hellenism" that was once a common reference for all European peoples.

For the average Christian, anyone who does not agree with their ideology is false, this temporality is just a pretext, an excuse to justify hatred and rejection towards anyone who does not think like you, because I remind you that within Christianity itself Each faction is exclusive of one another, Catholics reject the Orthodox and these turn to the Lutherans, so the story that paganism has no continuity blah, blah, does not tense, the fall of Christianity has been brewing since the Renaissance, through the Enlightenment and French Revolution, in addition to the various progressive movements that allowed fighting for the separation of the Church-State and freedom of religious worship.

If Christianity is disappearing, it is not as a consequence of paganism, but of itself, if it offers a universal vision of the world, its potential for conflicts and violence is inevitable, that at any moment it can arise and clash with the constituted order. ..

People like you, the so-called Christian nationalists are a bag of contradictions, paradoxes and inconsistencies everywhere, detesting paganism (the indigenous religion of the continent that say to love so much) with the same monotheistic rage that characterizes the Jews. You demonstrate an infinite metaphysical and theological ignorance when considering paganism as a crude form of libertine and materialist pantheism (I recommend reading Julius Evola).

He who hates paganism hates Europe. In fact, it is the voice of the genocidal Jehovah (or Jesus or Allah) who speaks through them. You are not a friend of Europe, you are not a complete European, you do not value nature, you are a simple Semitic infiltrator who loves death. For you Europe is just a nest on which the Vatican must deposit the egg to begin its harmful universalism, and that is why it has become a powerful tool that promotes our extinction, tying to be nourished, with non-Europeans for to maintain their influence in society.

[Óttar]

Traditional Christianity (Catholicism and Orthodoxy) is a Hellenistic cake with Judaic shit frosting on top. As the saying goes, "One rotten apple poisons the bunch" or rather 'a bit of poison ruins the whole well.' Saying that the Bible is the best guide to morality is ludicrous. The phrase "Biblical morality" is the greatest oxymoron there is. Anyone who thinks that Iron Age desert morality is fit for the 21st century is living a pipe-dream. It is a book of genocide, rape, torture, murder, and religious intolerance. Sure, there's a few pithy parts about "feed the poor", "love your enemies" etc. but that certainly does not redeem the text as a whole. To claim otherwise is willful ignorance and intellectual dishonesty. There is much more morality in Aesop's fables than in the Bible.

[The Lawspeaker]

Reconstructionism helps us to know many things, but that does not mean that paganism consists in doing archeology of faith. No, a religion is not about faithfully recreating how things were done in the ninth century or in the period of splendor that we want, it's about living the faith. It would not make sense to a Christian of our day to dress like the first Christians to hold a celebration or to say that if something was not done at the time of the catacombs it has no validity. Why is a blot more valid for Thor in 10th-century Iceland than an offering to Nerþus in the Neolithic, an oath before Tîwaz in the Germania of Arminius, or the Bodan cult of a Swabian in the sixth-century Gallæcia?

The resurgence of paganism arises also in the face of necessity; rather, it expresses a need, in another way another civilization, or, better yet, a modernized version of "scientific and cultural Hellenism" that was once a common reference for all European peoples.

For the average Christian, anyone who does not agree with their ideology is false, this temporality is just a pretext, an excuse to justify hatred and rejection towards anyone who does not think like you, because I remind you that within Christianity itself Each faction is exclusive of one another, Catholics reject the Orthodox and these turn to the Lutherans, so the story that paganism has no continuity blah, blah, does not tense, the fall of Christianity has been brewing since the Renaissance, through the Enlightenment and French Revolution, in addition to the various progressive movements that allowed fighting for the separation of the Church-State and freedom of religious worship.

If Christianity is disappearing, it is not as a consequence of paganism, but of itself, if it offers a universal vision of the world, its potential for conflicts and violence is inevitable, that at any moment it can arise and clash with the constituted order. ..

People like you, the so-called Christian nationalists are a bag of contradictions, paradoxes and inconsistencies everywhere, detesting paganism (the indigenous religion of the continent that say to love so much) with the same monotheistic rage that characterizes the Jews. You demonstrate an infinite metaphysical and theological ignorance when considering paganism as a crude form of libertine and materialist pantheism (I recommend reading Julius Evola).

He who hates paganism hates Europe. In fact, it is the voice of the genocidal Jehovah (or Jesus or Allah) who speaks through them. You are not a friend of Europe, you are not a complete European, you do not value nature, you are a simple Semitic infiltrator who loves death. For you Europe is just a nest on which the Vatican must deposit the egg to begin its harmful universalism, and that is why it has become a powerful tool that promotes our extinction, tying to be nourished, with non-Europeans for to maintain their influence in society.

In the meantime, you still follow the Modernist Left-wing playbook. You just call it differently. You, Ottar and other heathens are anti-Europeans because you turn away from established and centuries old European traditions.