Powerful Pagans

[Anonymous No.5832145]

What is the most humanistic and empowering pagan philosophy and why is it Norse Germanic paganism?

>inb4 Hellenismos sophists promote boylove and temple prostitution

[« Ƹ̵̡Ӝ̵̨̄Ʒ » !mxvabIoSIE No.5832165]

>>5832145
Why do you perpetuate the use of this insulting Christian term?

I can't take you seriously

[Anonymous No.5832177]

>>5832145
it is. it's pretty much perfect.

[Anonymous No.5832180]

>>5832165
easier to say than "norse germanic ethnic religion"

[Anonymous No.5832189]

I'm a Hellenist, I guess I can respect Germanticists who fight wars, but I'd find is strange if someone actually held that faith but never tried getting involved in combat. Wouldn't that make you a somewhat shoddy person by those standards?

[Anonymous No.5832304]

>>5832189

For me, the battle is living virtuously and with honor.

Warfare is not always about blood and steel. It can be about heart and mind as well.

If the need arose, I would absolutely fight for the flesh, but today the war is for your spirit and your mind, and if you don't have absolute authority over either of them, how would father Odin ever consider allowing you into Valhalla, or mother Freyja into Folkvangr?

[Anonymous No.5832329]

>>5832304
I don't know, I'm not an expert on your faith, but I'm pretty sure it would peeve warriors in Valhalla who had killed many men and fought for days in bloody and exhausting combat to earn their place, to sit next to someone who never fought and died and bed and claims his deeds of glory to be in the realm of critical thought.

Maybe it's a misconception of Valhalla on my part, I don't know. What are the major moral tenets of your faith?

[kitty !kitty/EnNg No.5832350]

>>5832329
they probably have a separate place in valgalla for those who didn't fight but saw their life as a struggle. you know how warriors in valhalla gather together and fight each other to practice for the ragnarok, these warriors of spirit gather together too, sit behind tables, write papers, make phone calls, smoke, some drink, that's how they will oppose the giants when the ragnarok come

[Anonymous No.5832365]

>>5832329

Ah, so you're one of those "true worshipers" that believes in paganism literally?

I'm not sure what you're expecting, Valhalla is an ideal, not a literal place.

And let me ask you, who fought a harder battle? The Viking warrior who picked up a sword and a shield and swung them around until they were killed, or the man or woman who fought their entire lives to maintain their sanity and spiritual composure in a corrupted world of sophisticated brainwashing in every facet of daily life?

I can only wish my enemies were on the other side of a field, ready to meet me in honorable battle to the last man. Unfortunately modern life is nowhere near that parsimonious.

[Anonymous No.5832402]

>>5832365
I don't believe the myths literally, no, neither did many of the Greeks. I do of course believe in the Gods as real (if you don't believe in your Gods, after all, it's not a faith) if not anthropomorphic, but I see Hades as just eternal oblivion in human terms.

And as for the morals, I take that very seriously and literally, and that's really the part I was curious about in regards to the Norse faith.

[Anonymous No.5832416]

>>5832145
There's literally nothing wrong with enjoying the beauty of young men.

[Anonymous No.5832449]

>>5832402

There's little to any evidence that the ancient Norse (or any other pre-Christian European society for that matter) widely believed in the gods as literal persons. Many of the gods and their stories were based on living or ancestral rulers and heroes who became part of the cultural mythos. In ancient Greece for example, qualities of the gods from city to city could vary, sometimes dramatically, as various additions or re-interpretations were made to suit the local aesthetic or traditions.

So, why would I "believe" in the gods when my ancestors didn't either? The gods are the bearers of cultural and moral and ethical traditions through time. I honor my gods, I pay homage to them, I call on them reflexively; I would suppose this is all the ancients ever widely considered "worship" themselves.

Now, I do also hold animistic/spiritistic esoteric beliefs, much the same way as the ancients did; essentially "sympathetic magic." This poractice does include the "summoning" or the gods to my aid or service or assistance. Most of what we consider "worship" in pre-Christian societies falls under this category. The ancients were trying to alter the forces of nature sympathetically through the exercise of venerating or appeasing these "gods" which served as common and accessible "foci" for their intended effect.

Do you worship Zeus because you're afraid he's going to ruin your home with a wrathful storm if you don't kill a goat for him?

I mean, I'm failing to understand your distinct perception of what these religions actually entail.

[Anonymous No.5832451]

>>5832145
I prefer christianity. What is nobler than love?

[ΟΥΤΙΣ No.5832464]

>>5832449
This is retarded, they sacrificed animals and people to gods they didn't believe existed?

[Anonymous No.5832466]

Can non-Germanic people worship the Norse gods?

[Anonymous No.5832467]

>>5832451
killing people

[Anonymous No.5832474]

>>5832464

Right, I know it's difficult for you to understand because your entire understanding of the world is perverted by the schizophrenic ideation inherent to the Abrahamic faiths, but it's possible to simultaneous worship gods, believe that certain actions that reference them can have material effects, and also lack a belief in their literal existence.

The ancients were not as simplistic and stupefied about the supernatural and your common Abrahamic imbecile is today.

[Anonymous No.5832481]

>>5832464

Right, I know it's difficult for you to understand because your entire worldview is perverted by the schizophrenic ideation inherent to the Abrahamic faiths, but it's actually possible to simultaneously worship the gods, believe that certain actions that reference them can have material effects, and also lack a belief in their literal existence.

The ancients were not as simplistic and stupefied about the supernatural as your common Abrahamic imbecile is today.

[Anonymous No.5832485]

>>5832466

Sure they can, why couldn't they?

You might not be welcome at a blot, but I'm sure no one can deny that they'd be flattered that you took an affinity to their ancestral gods.

[Anonymous No.5832541]

>>5832449
>This poractice does include the "summoning" or the gods to my aid or service or assistance.
See, I'd consider that blasphemy.

>Do you worship Zeus because you're afraid he's going to ruin your home with a wrathful storm if you don't kill a goat for him?
Sacrifice to Gods in Hellenismos has and always been really a matter of sharing a meal. The only parts the ancient Greeks burned were the inedible bits, but it was a token of sharing with the Gods and honoring them. Same for me with my meals.

[Anonymous No.5832569]

>>5832541

>See, I'd consider that blasphemy.

Why would you? Obviously you don't understand the esoteric aspect of pre-Christian European religions. Since you're Hellenismos, you should start with learning about the mystery schools.

>Sacrifice to Gods in Hellenismos has and always been really a matter of sharing a meal.

I'm glad you understand this, I actually have to explain this frequently with shithead Christians who don't actually understand what the point of a "sacrifice" actually is. Thank you for at least proving you understand that much.

You honestly do have a lot to learn about pre-Christian religious beliefs though if you don't understand that many of the devout were essentially into sorcery and divination, not just traditionalist veneration.

[Anonymous No.5832607]

>>5832481
Athenians would drag bodies out to crossroads away from the city to stone them for a while, offering the disturbed soul to Hekate, making sure the crossroads inside or directly next to the city wouldn't be haunted by it.

You're holding a way too modernist view of things. Aristotle and Plato aren't all of Greece. (even though Plato is the source for the above) A lot of people will have been extremely pious. The role that oracles (Delphi) and fate plays in myths would make you think contrary to your statement as well.

[Anonymous No.5832616]

>>5832145
It is fitting to give worship and sacrifice to the powers that let us prosper under heaven so that we may grow strong in our friendship to the ruin of our foes.

http://youtu.be/rlejY77UldI

[Anonymous No.5832629]

>>5832616
at least you didn't post some metal shit

[Anonymous No.5832631]

>>5832145

Stoicism is very good

[Anonymous No.5832676]

>>5832569
>Why would you? Obviously you don't understand the esoteric aspect of pre-Christian European religions. Since you're Hellenismos, you should start with learning about the mystery schools.

>You honestly do have a lot to learn about pre-Christian religious beliefs though if you don't understand that many of the devout were essentially into sorcery and divination, not just traditionalist veneration.
I know all about them, I just don't subscribe to any. Just because the Greeks weren't dunderheads who killed off different sects doesn't mean cults are on the same page as traditional Hellenismos. For instance, I'd never pray with an Orphic Hymn.

[kitty !kitty/EnNg No.5832694]

>>5832676
>For instance, I'd never pray with an Orphic Hymn.
you are probably so mean that you eat beans too
quite a lot of negative reincarnations await

[Anonymous No.5832722]

>>5832694
Yeah, not a Pythagorean either, neither am I a Platonic, though I respect Platonists.

[Anonymous No.5833539]

>>5832607

>You're holding a way too modernist view of things.

No, you are. I in fact am closer to the pre-Christian animistic view of the gods. You need to actually learn about animism before you speak like you understand anything about the ancients.

[Anonymous No.5833558]

>>5832365

>The Viking warrior who picked up a sword and a shield and swung them around

> the man or woman who fought their entire lives to maintain their sanity and spiritual composure in a corrupted world of sophisticated brainwashing in every facet of daily life?

please kill yourself if you think your contemporary existence is difficult because of ads

your ancestor would spit at you

[Anonymous No.5833561]

>>5833539
I like how you managed to write an entire sentence without actually saying a single thing.

[Anonymous No.5833570]

>>5833558

>because of ads

Yeah...ads.

That's what he meant.

Surely commercials are the pinnacle of invasive brainwashing of which he spoke.

Truly, how could he be so vain....

>I thought /lit/ was supposed to be an intelligent board?

[Anonymous No.5833579]

>>5833570

>implying that the ideology brainwashing wasn't present in nord cultures in the form of religions and traditions

It's the same shit, no one ever has gotten so butthurt about traditions and propaganda as today childs who lack any pre-contemporary conflicts

And I really doubt that you live in middle east or in some pre-communist state near old USSR

[Anonymous No.5833614]

>>5833579

>being this blue pilled

[Anonymous No.5833625]

>>5833614
I had almost forgotten that /pol/ is, well.

[Anonymous No.5833655]

>>5833625

That sure is an...interesting....use of the Oxford comma.

[Anonymous No.5833765]

What is the norse germanic pagan philosophy? That strength and honor are the highest, most noble virtues, that a true man rejoices in the hardship of life and feels dislocated in an environment not dominated by challenge and conflict?

Is the norse germanic pagan philosophy to acknowledge how inherently dissatisfying a life of ordinary comfort and simple pleasures really is? That such a life is comparable to a degenerative disease of the body, and spiritual corruptor of the soul/mind.

Is the norse germanic pagan philosophy to foster the notion that being conditioned in a modern, materialistic consumerist society is little more than a curse? A perpetual caging of ones masculine urge, ones fighting spirit. Ones neverending, vague, yet deep yearning to KNOW what it is like to face the merciless wrath of the elements, to bravely face frightening foes in perilous combat.

I don't know, /lit/. I don't know. Maybe because I havent read enough. Maybe I havent lived enough. Maybe its nothing but vain talk and silly dreams or unrealistic romanticizing of mythic history. Maybe its simply my human need for personal identification desperately grasping and clinging onto something that makes a little more sense than the other garbage the world offers me, yet is in actual fact not more valuable than anything else.

You tell me.

[Anonymous No.5834531]

>>5833765

Pretty much. The only purpose to human sentience is to provide meaning for itself.

We're just self aware matter. Everything beyond procreation is mere fantasy.

Material existence is devoid of any intrinsic meaning.

[kitty !kitty/EnNg No.5834560]

>>5833765
>Is the norse germanic pagan philosophy to acknowledge how inherently dissatisfying a life of ordinary comfort and simple pleasures really is? That such a life is comparable to a degenerative disease of the body, and spiritual corruptor of the soul/mind.

when was the last time when you loaded coal, cut trees or something

[Anonymous No.5834594]

Fri hals pagan bræður.

[Anonymous No.5834638]

Do you guys consider gods whose names are cognates, like Tyr, Jupiter, and Zeus to be the same god?

[Anonymous No.5834896]

>>5834638
I dont, I mean you can, but I don't know why you would.

[Anonymous No.5834910]

>>5832165
>Christian

Why do you perpetuate the use of this insulting Roman term?

I can't take you seriously

[Anonymous No.5834957]

>>5833765
norse germanic specifically? amerilard with swedish heritage detected
the difference between indo-european aristocratic warrior "philosophies" are cosmetic

[Anonymous No.5835357]

>>5832165
lol

[Anonymous No.5835366]

>>5834910

You're right, around these parts we call them Abrahamic imbeciles.

[Anonymous No.5835391]

>>5834531
Material existence is devoid of any instrinsic meaning, sure, but perhaps some ways of living will make a human FEEL that its more meaningful, regardless of it being purely biological.
>>5834560
I've never done either of those you mention. I've done hard manual labor on rare occasions, but nothing more. I never claimed anything else

>>5834957
Im born and raised in Scandinavia

[Anonymous No.5835394]

>>5834638
As a Hellenist, I certainly do.

[Anonymous No.5835397]

>>5832165
quit being a little bitch. being offended by a superficial is not a part of being a pagan.

[Anonymous No.5835446]

>>5832180
Asatru. Would you call christianity a Hebrew Abrahamic ethnic religion or would you just call it Christianity?

[Anonymous No.5835450]

>>5835397
Pagan really is an awful term to use, though, it clusters your faith in with new age types who use ancient religions as a buffet and add and remove whatever they want without any respect for tradition of morality of these faiths.

You should use Odinism or something.

[Anonymous No.5835455]

>>5835450
I do use Odinism, but I'm not worried about labels.

[Anonymous No.5835469]

What is the Iliad or Odyssey of Forn Siðr,

[Anonymous No.5835482]

>>5832145
Paganism ultimately speaks about human emotions. To me it doesn't matter if norse or hellenic

[Anonymous No.5835495]

>>5832189
>I'm a Hellenist

I'm sorry, I just can't stop laughing at this

[Anonymous No.5835530]

>>5835446
>Would you call christianity a Hebrew Abrahamic ethnic religion

Yes.

[Anonymous No.5835566]

>>5835530
Regularly? Whatever

>>5835495
>2015-1month
>Still not an Agnostic-Hellenist

[Anonymous No.5835684]

>>5833765
You do know the vikings were the same guys who became priests in the middle ages, right?

They were, generally speaking, individuals who were not the first son. This means, under Germanic law, they didn't get an inheritance from their father- so they couldn't be a farmer or landowner and had to go raiding for their living.

Of course, it wasn't really raiding; for the most part, it was threatening towns that didn't have the necessary defenses to repel them. They would then be paid off in slaves and gold and leave.

For the most part, they preferred to avoid conflict- a dead viking isn't a rich one, and they knew they could sail a bit further up the river or along the coast and threaten some other village for whatever material wealth it had.

They only really fought with the express purpose of creating colonies, as that would mean they could stop being vikings and do what they couldn't at home- become a landowner. Military retainers, for the most part, simply served to keep the peasants in line and deter other raiders from asking for money by proving that if it came to a fight the raiders would lose too many men.

With the coming of Christianity, this inheritance problem was solved with the priesthood and a change from to Germanic law to something more akin to Roman law.

You're just romanticizing something; modern history has, for the most part, dispelled the image of the viking as a bloodthirsty savage.

A basic materialistic reading of North Germanic history- based exclusively on the literary and archaeological sources we have- supports this reading and leaves little room for the romantic image so dear to modern "heathens" or whatever you guys call yourselves.

What you really want is to live in the 1800s, when people took romanticism as serious history, instead of something interesting as a cultural movement.

This is coming from someone who loves the romantics and reads Ancient Norse. I'm just not a fetishizing idiot about it.

[Anonymous No.5835991]

>>5835684

Wait, what are you whining about?

That people have retaken the ancient beliefs for themselves and you think they're deluded?

Maybe you need to rethink your post-modern existence and realize that not everyone is as fucking boring in their worldview as you are.

Some of us enjoy coloring our worldview with rich and storied traditions and beliefs.

[Anonymous No.5836014]

>>5835991
Did you read it? I'm saying we should understand history, not some bullshit made up by people in the 19th century to help them build a nation.

I obviously find this stuff enjoyable and interesting- which I clearly stated- but don't like it when people do this.

I'm saying you haven't "retaken" those old beliefs. You've retaken much newer ones, mainly from Scandinavian romanticism, and are confusing them with the beliefs of actual vikings. You're just a romantic who is 200 years late to the party.

I'm saying you're wrong. You're also deluded, but you just don't have a basic understanding of the history you claim to care about.

Does it make sense to claim you care about this history and belief system but not base your understanding of it IN THAT HISTORY AND BELIEF SYSTEM, or am I missing something here?

[Anonymous No.5836150]

>>5836014

What are you basing your understanding of Odanism on?

You seem to be completely and utterly fucking unaware that pan-European paganry was NEVER orthodox in any fashion whatsoever, and your entire bullshit thesis here is that someone adopting the ideology and aesthetic for themselves today is engaging in heterodox delusions.

That's not how animistic polytheism works, you imbecile.

If I had to hazzard a guess, you're another Abarahamic imbecile who is also incapable of understanding how the ancients were simultaneously capable of "worshiping" the gods and not believing they were literal beings. You can shove your perverse monotheistic worldview right back up your ass where it belongs, because paganism has always and will always be an ever evolving syncretic exercise in spiritual, ethical, and traditional synthesis from a variety of sources and ideals.

Get rekt, kid.

[Anonymous No.5836197]

>>5836150
That's not what I'm saying. I'm saying this value construction based on romantic imagery and characterization of a historical time period is unrelated to the time period.

You immediately jump to an ad hominem that doesn't describe me, and admit you're just talking about a projection you've created: "If I had to hazzard [sic] a guess, you're another Abarahamic imbecile". This last paragraph would let me call judeo-christian beliefs "pagan", because I'd just say it's syncretism. So you just believe in some shit you came up with. I also literally never said anything about the existence or nonexistence of the gods in north germanic pagan belief systems.

But back to that first chunk of bullshit you came up with. You're saying there's no need to follow orthodoxy, so you're admitting your ideas don't relate to north germanic paganism, or at least that they don't have to. Secondly, you're obviously saying that whatever you believe in is not Abrahamic, so purity does matter to you. This is cognitively dissonant, because you're agreeing with me that your paganism is not something.

We have common ground here. I'm just basing my claims about what paganism is on historical and cultural research, instead of an acceptance of a narrative that was socially crafted EXPRESSLY WITH THE INTENT of forming a national identity for certain groups of people.

So while we agree that ancient paganism was not a certain thing- Abrahamic- you don't understand that it was also not some metalhead's wet dream of raping and pillaging for "honor" or some other horseshit.

I'm just trying to base my understanding of a complex social phenomenon- north germanic paganism- on what we know about it, not a fake image created by people whose material reality and time period was much closer to ours than the one you use to legitimize your beliefs.

I'm not a theist and I'm not a kid, and you're the rekt one. Why? Because I base my understanding on north germanic paganism in history as told by those people, not bullshit invented to help foment nation building in Scandinavia or metalheads in the late 20th century.

tl;dr you can't read, you can't argue, and you don't understand where your religious beliefs come from. Sure, your "belief system" isn't Abrahamic, but you sound much more Abrahamic than I do.

[Anonymous No.5836207]

>>5835684
>>5836014
>>5836197
This guy here.

I have to give the /pol/ trolls posting about Neopaganism a 10/10, given the length of my aforementioned comments.

I just hope they know they're trolls, and that they go back to goddamn stormfront

[Anonymous No.5836222]

>>5836197

>I base my understanding on north germanic paganism in history as told by those people, not bullshit invented to help foment nation building in Scandinavia or metalheads in the late 20th century.

As do I, dumbass.

You've really constructed a massive strawman here to make yourself feel better about your argument, that you know the "AKCHUAL HYSTCHRY" of the Germanic pagans and that the entire body of Asatru and Odalists are just deluded, racist, nationalist revivalists.

You're a real cunt.

[Anonymous No.5836228]

>>5836207
I'm the Hellenist in this thread, I don't even post on /pol/, I'd appreciate it if you did not lump me in with Nazis.

[Anonymous No.5836263]

>>5836222
I gave a very straightforward explanation for my position, and you just sit there and say things. Go read the first thing I posted about how this whole value construction present in germanic neopaganism ignores history and then respond to me, and not the strawman you're making. The first thing I did was explain how I'm not using a strawman argument. Now it's doubly clear you aren't responding to what I'm saying, so have fun and remember you're wrong.

>>5836228
I'm sorry, you're not a nazi. I realize I wasn't clearly referring to the guys I'd been arguing with, who I will still maintain are nazis. The lack of clarity was my fault.

[Anonymous No.5836309]

>>5836263
>this whole value construction present in germanic neopaganism ignores history

Yeah, but you've just asserted that without presenting any evidence to support it. You literally came in this thread, said "nuh uh, vikings weren't like that" and claimed a triumphant victory, when the reality is that Asatru/Odinism/Odalism/etc. are all faithful reconstructions of pre-Christian Germanic religious beliefs based on the available sources, and syncretized with modern understanding and relevance (i.e. we don't seek out honorable death in martial combat as an ideal to aspire to).

Why come here and shitpost for the sake of shitposting? Either present some sources or GTFO.

[Anonymous No.5836321]

>>5836263

There is literally nothing wrong with being a National Socialist.

Fuck off back to reddit, faggot.

[Anonymous No.5836324]

>>5836150
>>5836014
>muh ancient tradition
>"It literally is not an ancient tradition and has no basis in reality, your ancestors were never like this"
>w-w-well, uh, it doesn't have to be true, me believing that people believed this is enough for it to be real!
That guy is right. You got rekt bro. You're just taking romanticized ideas about the past, interpreting them through your personal and contemporary lens, and then projecting them onto people who would have laughed at you for believing it.

The fact that you tried to tack "post-modern" on there as an insult is dumb, because it applies to you and the fact that you obviously do not give a shit about the actual truth of your "ancient tradition" and would much rather substitute it for your own personal idea of what the truth should be.

[Anonymous No.5836337]

>>5836324

>explains paganism never had an orthodoxy to begin with; no refutation
>explains paganism has always and will always be syncretic; no refutation
>tacitly implies that contemporary paganism is exactly the same in foundational character as every other pantheistic/polytheistic/animistic religion on earth through the entirety of human history; no refutation

Nigger, do you have any idea how every religion on Earth has undergone change over time? That was the entire point the post you referenced, you're just too fucking stupid to understand it.

Nigger over here acting like he's going to check the mic for his bro.

What a bitch.

[Anonymous No.5836346]

>>5836324
>and then projecting them onto people who would have laughed at you for believing it.

Who the fuck does this? Certainly no-one practicing Asatru. We know acutely we can never know the extent or exactitude of our ancestors beliefs because all the records were destroyed and the culture suppressed by the Abrahamic invaders.

More projection and strawmen from imbeciles.

[Anonymous No.5836350]

>>5836337
That really wouldn't be a problem, except the "Pagan" here is claiming to revive the "ancient tradition", so whether or not that tradition ever existed in the first place is in fact important. Sorry, bud. Vikings weren't some kind of Nietzschean ubermenchs like it seems like you imagined them to be.

[Anonymous No.5836355]

>>5836350
Not that anon, but that's exactly what they were. Nietzsche's model for the ubermensch was warrior aristocracies and he listed ancient Greece, Japan, and Vikings as examples.

[Anonymous No.5836356]

>>5836337
>>5836346
>Nigger
>Nigger
>fucking stupid
>strawmen

/pol/, it's time for you to take a deep breath and calm down or leave for a little while, you're having trouble adjusting.

[Anonymous No.5836369]

>>5832350
>they probably have a separate place in valgalla for those who didn't fight but saw their life as a struggle.

In which case SJWs would be everywhere.

[Anonymous No.5836373]

>>5836355
Unfortunately for Neitzsche, he did not have access to contemporary archeological and historical research. The other anon's post specifically mentions the 19th (1800s to 1900) century romanticized view of ancient cultures like the Vikings, and bingo: Nietzsche was alive from 1844 to 1900. It's not a surprise that he took that romanticized ahistorical account very seriously.

[Anonymous No.5836414]

>>5836150

You're such a fucking moron it's unreal.

>how the ancients were simultaneously capable of "worshiping" the gods and not believing they were literal beings.

Sounds like you're imposing your own bullshit on your ancestors. I'm sure if they came back it'd be your head on a pike.

[Anonymous No.5836435]

>>5836346
>Who the fuck does this? Certainly no-one practicing Asatru. We know acutely we can never know the extent or exactitude of our ancestors beliefs

THEN WHAT THE FUCK ARE YOU EVEN ARGUING FOR IF YOU JUST ADMITTED YOU'RE JUST MAKING SHIT UP

HOLY FUCK NEO-PAGANISTS

[Anonymous No.5836518]

>>5836435
You clearly don't understand the modern religion then. Not even modern Christians have to same beliefs as the ones from back then

[Anonymous No.5836587]

>>5836518

>You clearly don't understand religion then

ftfy.

also,

>>5836414

Then explain why gods constantly changed, sometimes even existing or not existing based on which city you traveled to within the same cultural territory. Or how about the fact that new myths were constantly rewritten or improvised through time, or how gods were absorbed or dropped as new rulers came and went either by conquest or succession.

Tell me faggot, who's real, Vulcan or Hephaistos or Sethlans, and why when someone who's patron deity in Rome was Vulcanus did they happily offer worship to Hephaistos when in Greece? Was Loki an enemy or an ally of Odin? Why do some gods' friends, rivals, children, siblings, or mates differ from myth to myth, or from city to city, frequently simultaneously?

ProHint, dipshit: because animistic deities were never considered literal beings.

Seriously, you're on 85 IQ nigger tier right now.

[Anonymous No.5836600]

>>5836587
it seems to me that you cling to the Abrahamic conception of god or gods as being absolute immovable beings

>but if htey're not than they're not gods

not in the abrahamic sense no, but in the pagan sense they still are

[Anonymous No.5836635]

>>5836600

I think you're replying to the wrong poster. I agree with you 100%. when I put

>You clearly don't understand religion then

I meant that was more accurate than telling >>5836435 that he doesn't understand " modern religion," when in fact he doesn't understand religion at all, in any time period.

I'm with you 100% that it was only until the schizophrenic Abrahamic perversion of the concept of deity came along that people began to understand supernatural beings as literal creatures who were static and immovable of character and robust in identity and behaviors over time.

My personal theory is that Abrahamic deific staticism was an aristocratic ploy to impose authoritarian control over the ethics and mores of the governed. If everyone is gaoded into agreeing that some deific figure is literal and everyone agrees on the same qualities, then everyone can be assumed to have relatively the same set of personal and traditional values.

Abrahamic faiths are just a compliance tool.

[Anonymous No.5836680]

>>5836635

>dis nigga git it

[Anonymous No.5836692]

>>5836635
>supernatural beings as literal creatures
>I've never read any ancient religious account
that's cool, thank you for posting.

[Anonymous No.5836693]

>>5836373
Er, you''re saying Germanic warrior aristocracy is ahistorical?

[Anonymous No.5836713]

>>5836692

>I've never read any ancient religious account

Cite one, pretentious faggot.

[Anonymous No.5836746]

>>5836635
>My personal theory is that Abrahamic deific staticism was an aristocratic ploy to impose authoritarian control over the ethics and mores of the governed.

Not really 'your theory' when you essentially described the divine right monarchs once believed they had.

[Anonymous No.5836758]

>>5836713
>Gesta Danorum
>Bohuslan agricultural glyphs
>Uppsala temple with statues of Thor
>literally every single depiction of Norse or Germanic gods depicts them specifically as anthropomorphic or literal creatures
>the fucking Heimskringla, the Old King's Saga, describing the origin of Norse royalty from Odin himself traveling to Scandinavia from Asgard, itself says that it's a literal and accurate account and that calling it anything else "would be mockery and not praise”.
There's literally no evidence that the pre-Christian Norsemen did not believe the Gods were "literal creatures" who actually existed, and all the evidence shows that they did. Please stop projecting your own opinions onto ancient cultures and ignoring all archaeological and historical evidence.

[ΟΥΤΙΣ No.5836773]

>>5836713
Jesus Christ, have you read ANY ancient philosophy? You think all the arguments in Symposium are just metaphorical?

>>5836758
No, you see, Jews invented superstition, it didn't exist before they fostered it upon the West in the form of Christianity. Before Christ, everyone was rational and scientific and didn't believe in ghosts or gods or magic.

[Anonymous No.5836787]

>there are people on /lit/ right now that don't think Norse paganism is childish and silly

[ΟΥΤΙΣ No.5836794]

>>5836787
It is in the sense that subscribing to Bushido or the Klingon religion is. You can't even get into heaven unless you died in combat, I'm not going to take a fat neckbeard seriously when he poses as a devout follower of religion that's almost made-to-order for guys trying to reclaim any shred of imaginary masculinity they never had.

[Anonymous No.5836796]

>>5836787
It's not, you fucking Abrahamic imbecile. It's masculine, beautiful, and strong, and you don't fucking need to believe in gods to be a Norse pagan.

[Anonymous No.5836802]

>>5836758

Heimskringla overtly euhemerizes the Aesir though. It's a Christian author deliberately saying "instead of believing that the gods of this country were gods, you should believe that they were wizards from Turkey who fooled the norse into believing they were gods". It doesn't prove anything whatsoever about what those who put credence in the norse religion actually believed, because it sets out from the premise that a wizard did it.

The real argument against "revivalist" paganism has nothing to do with whether the gods were believed in as "real" or not, except that this debate is evidence of why paganism is incapable of revival except as a capitalist fad. Pagan and heathen both mean a countryman, a man of the land. Technological society has shunted men of the land out of the west. The city is the temple of modern culture, and companies are its priesthoods as advertisement is its holy text. In such context, belief in Odin, Zeus, Christ is necessarily sham

[ΟΥΤΙΣ No.5836806]

>>5836796
But then you'd just be pretending to be retarded.

[Anonymous No.5836817]

>>5836773
I get where you're going, and I like it and think it's both funny and appropriate for the thread, but the Symposium is completely different from an ancient literary work discussing the gods that states that it is supposed to be literally true and historically accurate.

>>5836802
>It's a Christian author
There are no non-Christian authors describing the Norse religion, if you'd like to use this as an argument against the Heimskringla then you must discount literally every single Norse Saga written that we have. It's also why I listed archaeological evidence, you silly goose.

You're right though, Paganism will never "come back" except as some kind of pre-masticated spirituality for secularized Westerners. We can agree on that.

[Anonymous No.5836823]

>>5836796
I know all too many Norse pagans (Ásatrúarmenn) to be fooled by your bs. Pic related, average Ásatrúarmaður.

[Anonymous No.5836825]

Are there any good English translations of the German book of heroes?

[ΟΥΤΙΣ No.5836831]

>>5836817
>I get where you're going, and I like it and think it's both funny and appropriate for the thread, but the Symposium is completely different from an ancient literary work discussing the gods that states that it is supposed to be literally true and historically accurate.
Okay, maybe ancient peoples didn't universally buy their fairy tales, but they definitely thought the gods were real, but to say they didn't believe in them is something quite different. Just like 19th Americans could distinguish between the Devil as a character in an American folk story, and the Devil as a being they actually believed in.

[Anonymous No.5836838]

>>5836817
>There are no non-Christian authors describing the Norse religion
Except one. Völuspá. It's written by Snorri but the actual poem is very likely much older.

[Anonymous No.5836847]

>>5836838
Snorri, for Heimskringla, also uses a much older pre-Christian source (Hryggjarstykki). I don't see how the situations are any different.

[Anonymous No.5836854]

>>5836847
Because Völuspá is a complete, and well preserved work by itself.

Also Hryggjarstykki is writtten in the 12th century by which point Iceland was already mostly Christian (Iceland converted in the year 1000 and Snorri lives in the 13th century). I have never heard of it being written by a pagan.

[Anonymous No.5836870]

>>5836758

This is pretty good bait.

>Gesta Danorum

Which passage, faggot? Which passage gives you the idea that they viewed the gods as literal.

>Bohuslan agricultural glyphs
>Uppsala temple with statues of Thor
>literally every single depiction of Norse or Germanic gods depicts them specifically as anthropomorphic or literal creatures

Yeah ok, you're literally fucking retarded. This isn't even bait tier, you're just a goddamned idiot.

>S-Superman is a literal person b-becuase he's drawn right here in this c-comic book! O-obviously the mid-20th century authors viewed him as a l-l-literal creature!

>>the fucking Heimskringla, the Old King's Saga, describing the origin of Norse royalty from Odin himself traveling to Scandinavia from Asgard, itself says that it's a literal and accurate account and that calling it anything else "would be mockery and not praise”.

From the wikipedia: " It is not common to believe in the detailed accuracy of the historical narrative and historians tend to see little to no historical truth behind the first few sagas, however, they are still seen by many as a valuable source of knowledge about the society and politics of medieval Norway."

Also,

>describing the origin of Norse royalty from Odin himself

This is a common foil in bardic recantations of history, and also a common tactic among various rulers and heroes to claim some provenance from the gods themselves. It was a boast that was made with the expectation that it would be lived up to, and a point of shame if those expectations weren't met. Do you, imbecile, have any fucking idea how many rulers and heroes and pretenders claimed divine provenance? Fucking all of them, because the mythological tradition of the Germanic peoples was that they were ALL CHILDREN OF THE ALL FATHER, EVERY LAST ONE.

You've really reached Pareto retardation.

[Anonymous No.5836876]

>>5835684
just wanna point out that viking warriors tended to not be bishops. bishops more than not tended to be from already landed aristocratic backgrounds. the christianization of scandinavia probably had vikings as bishops but the continent rarely did, if at all.

everything else you typed is correct though.

[Anonymous No.5836888]

>>5836870
>From the wikipedia: " It is not common to believe in the detailed accuracy of the historical narrative and historians tend to see little to no historical truth behind the first few sagas, however, they are still seen by many as a valuable source of knowledge about the society and politics of medieval Norway."
Yes, no modern historian believes those Norse sagas to be literally true, because they know the Norse gods don't actually exist. Congrats on realizing that.

>It was a boast that was made with the expectation that it would be lived up to
Except he said it was literally true.

All you're doing is saying that any evidence that disagrees with you is fake or wrong, without actually presenting anything that shows you're right or even showing why all the evidence is wrong.

Go on, all you need is one single ancient pagan literally saying "I believe in the Gods, but I don't believe the Gods walk the earth or ever did" and that's it, you'll have decimated any chance of even opposing you. Don't worry, I'll wait for you to post that quote.

[Anonymous No.5836916]

>>5836888

"Although we know a little from observations made by Tacitus and Caesar, most of what we know of Norse mythology comes from Christian times, beginning with the Prose Edda of Snorri Sturluson (c.1179-1241). Not only does this mean the myths and legends were written after the period when they were routinely believed, but Snorri, as is to be expected, occasionally intrudes his non-pagan, Christian world view."

Again, these are corrupted accounts of a culture that was already become bygone, as told by a man who he hilself believed the Abrahamic myths as literal manifestations and thus, incapable of offering an unbiased, sane account of the culture and spiritual practice of the Norsemen.

We can't rely on Christian contemporaries, but we can rely on deductive logic and inference.

Can you explain to me how you reconcile the logic of them believing the gods were literal, and yet they would routinely revise or retell their myths according to changing customs or the whims of a particular ruler? If they viewed the gods as literal beings, wouldn't it be blashpemy to just whimsically alter who was related to whom by blood or marriage, who killed whom and for what reasons, etc etc etc?

You fail at logic, and the best you have is pointing to ART as being LITERAL and falling back on a ex post facto CHRISTIAN author's recounting of corrupted myths and histories.

Fucking pathetic.

[Anonymous No.5836937]

why are you people on /lit/? shouldn't you be fingering cat's entrails or reading your horoscopes for answers?

[Anonymous No.5836942]

>>5836937

>mythologies aren't /lit/

Oooo-kay.

[Anonymous No.5836947]

>>5836916
There is no pre-Christian written account of Norse religion, which is why I also mentioned the archaeological evidence. Sorry, bud.


>"well, like, isn't it just logical?"
>"even though there's no evidence for what I believe, and any evidence that exists is against it, I have faith that I'm right!"
good post

>still no quote
I'll keep waiting, it's okay. I'm sure that evidence that proves you're right is out there somewhere.

[Anonymous No.5836949]

Quick question here, how many of you have actually read the Eddas and/or Heimskringla?

[Anonymous No.5836965]

>>5836937
Fuck off, unlike those Abrahamic imbeciles, the followers of Asatru have no need for that kind of superstitious bullshit. We make and follow our own way.

[Anonymous No.5836967]

>>5836949

I have.

>>5836947

Ever heard of the comparative method of antropology?

Start here, faggot:

http://www.jstor.org/discover/10.2307/177566?uid=3739920&uid=2&uid=4&uid=3739256&sid=21104801022791

when you have a basic understanding of how we understand cultural evolution through time, then we can talk.

[Anonymous No.5836975]

>>5836965
>follower of Asatru
>not Ásatrúarmaðr
>followers of Asatru
>not Ásatrúarmenn
>mfw

[Anonymous No.5836983]

>>5836967

Actually, before you behoove yourself to get a crash course on historical anthropology, go look at where the European pantheons originated from.

ProHint: they share a lot of common archetypal deities with academics having some very prolific theories on how they inter-relate.

[Anonymous No.5836997]

>>5836983

>expecting an Abrahamic to have an understanding anything academic

lel

[Anonymous No.5837001]

>>5836967
>still no quote
>all evidence is still against his position
>still no evidence at all supporting his position
That's cool, just post it whenever you feel ready m8.

[Anonymous No.5837010]

>>5837001

>say things are the way they perceive them
>offer no actual evidence
>claim the other side was summarily defeated

Christian triumph over logic, everyone.

[Anonymous No.5837033]

>>5837010
Whoa, euphoric pyramid, my fellow atheist.

[Anonymous No.5837036]

>>5837010
There's literally no evidence to support the idea that the ancient Norsemen who said their gods were real, walked the earth, and looked over them, and simultaneously did not believe that they were real. All evidence shows and supports that, surprise surprise, the norsemen did actually believe their gods were real and actually existed. I'm kind of impressed, it seems like you've been posting in this thread for a while, and you've managed to consistently avoid giving any actual evidence at all for your position while still arguing about it. Good going, and I mean that without any sarcasm this time. If you do post some actual evidence, any at all, for your position I'll be very interested in seeing it.

>he called me wrong
>obviously, he's a Christian!
Nope.

[Anonymous No.5837054]

>>5837036

I've posted a couple of thought experiments for you to try and muddle your way through with your pathetic reasoning ability, and you failed at even that.

How and why could or would I ever attempt to delve into the academic theories of spiritual beliefs in pre-Christian Europe when you're incapable of even working through the absolute basic most thought experiment regarding the evidence we know about them?

This is of course, still completely excluding the fact that we don't even have to actually examine the Norse sources at all to be able to infer copious amounts of probabilistic theories on how they thought and behaved by the methods of comparative anthropology.

You're fucking stupid.

Try harder next time.

Also, the thought experiment challenge still stands. Take a stab at it if you feel like banging your few loose neurons together to try and get a spark.

[Anonymous No.5837061]

>>5836916
>>5837010
>>5837054
I can't handle all this fedora-tipping condescension

[Anonymous No.5837065]

>>5837061

K faggot. Goodnight.

[Anonymous No.5837067]

>>5837054
>type out a couple of paragraphs
>didn't manage to say anything except "you're dumb and I don't have to prove I'm right!"

oh boy, I hope you're using sage at least. Are you ever gonna post that evidence or no?

[Anonymous No.5837073]

>>5837065
>le cuck me me
Welp, final nail.

[Anonymous No.5837076]

>>5837065
>>5836916
>>5837054
>feel like banging your few loose neurons together to try and get a spark
>K faggot
>You fail at logic
>Fucking pathetic.
>Abrahamic imbecile

[Anonymous No.5837701]

>>5835684
Hello, original guy you replied to here. I'm not at all ignorant of what you said, and I'm not really THAT much of a romantic. My message in general was trying to purport something along the lines of life as it was lived by viking-era scandinavians is no longer necessary and haven't been necessary for a long time, and I find that a bit sad. I was thinking something like "their life, however unpleasant and full of hardship and physical pain and discomfort, was a great, great deal more satisfying than the life we live now in our modern world". It was just a general, quick jotting down of some of the initial thoughts I usually get when I read about norse paganism.

[Anonymous No.5837707]

>>5832350
underrated post

[Anonymous No.5837717]

>>5836876
he doesn't say that the individuals that became vikings became priests, just that the "class" of people that became vikings became priests after christianization

[Anonymous No.5837722]

>>5836222
just stop it anon, this is embarrassing
the guy clearly knows what he's talking about

[Anonymous No.5837734]

>>5837054
>hurr durrr u dumb u stupid u don't understand trvue paganism hurr durrr

[Anonymous No.5837736]

>>5837701
It seems that you were born in the wrong generation, my dear sir
Sorry about that

[jacob !zEiO0doWi6 No.5837743]

paganism is disgusting

think about it

human sacrifice is an abomination

the pagan gods were literally demons. I mean literally. Hermes Trimestigus even admitted this. He said outright that the way an idol was made was by using magical incantations to invite a demon into a statue.

Guys. Paganism is not good or empowering. There is nothing good or empowering about being possessed by demons and that happened very often among the pagans.

[Anonymous No.5837751]

>>5837743
wow it's like everything you know about paganism is from christian misconceptions

[Anonymous No.5837753]

>>5837743
>let me argue against your silly stupid superstitions
>with some silly superstitions of my own
Goddamnit, christians who believe the world to be infested by demons are still 2pagan4me.

[jacob !zEiO0doWi6 No.5837757]

>>5837751
mate, when Tacitus wrote about the Germans even he was disgusted that they did human sacrifice

the thing about demons being involved in paganism is from a pagan, Hermes Trimestigus.

>>5837753
>implying that it isn't

[Anonymous No.5837759]

>A 10th-century Arab Muslim writer named Ahmad ibn Fadlan produced a description of a funeral of a Scandinavian chieftain who was on an expedition on the eastern route.

>The dead chieftain was put in a temporary grave, which was covered for ten days until they had sewn new clothes for him. One of his thrall women volunteered to join him in the afterlife and she was guarded day and night, being given a great amount of intoxicating drinks while she sang happily. When the time had arrived for cremation, they pulled his longship ashore and put it on a platform of wood, and they made a bed for the dead chieftain on the ship. Thereafter, an old woman referred to as the "Angel of Death" put cushions on the bed. She was responsible for the ritual.

>Then they disinterred the chieftain and gave him new clothes. In his grave, he received intoxicating drinks, fruits and a stringed instrument. The chieftain was put into his bed with all his weapons and grave offerings around him. Then they had two horses run themselves sweaty, cut them to pieces, and threw the meat into the ship. Finally, they sacrificed a hen and a cock.[9]

>Meanwhile, the thrall girl went from one tent to the other and had sexual intercourse with the men. Every man told her: "Tell your master that I did this because of my love to him". In the afternoon, they moved the thrall girl to something that looked like a door frame, where she was lifted on the palms of the men three times. Every time, the girl told of what she saw. The first time, she saw her father and mother, the second time, she saw all her relatives, and the third time she saw her master in the afterworld. There, it was green and beautiful and together with him, she saw men and young boys. She saw that her master beckoned for her By using intoxicating drinks, they thought to put the thrall girl in an ecstatic trance that made her psychic and through the symbolic action with the door frame, she would then see into the realm of the dead. The same ritual also appears in the Icelandic short story "Völsa þáttr", where two pagan Norwegian men lift the lady of the household over a door frame to help her look into the otherworld.

[Anonymous No.5837761]

>Thereafter, the thrall girl was taken away to the ship. She removed her bracelets and gave them to the old woman. Thereafter she removed her finger rings and gave them to the old woman's daughters, who had guarded her. Then they took her aboard the ship, but they did not allow her to enter the tent where the dead chieftain lay. The girl received several vessels of intoxicating drinks and she sang and bade her friends farewell.

>Then the girl was pulled into the tent and the men started to beat on the shields so her screams could not be heard. Six men entered the tent to rape the girl, after which they forced her onto her master's bed. Two men grabbed her hands, and two men her wrists. The angel of death put a rope around her neck and while two men pulled the rope, the old woman stabbed the girl between her ribs with a knife. Thereafter, the relatives of the dead chieftain arrived with a burning torch and set the ship aflame. It is said that the fire facilitates the voyage to the realm of the dead.

>Afterwards, a round barrow was built over the ashes, and in the centre of the mound they erected a staff of birch wood, where they carved the names of the dead chieftain and his king. Then they departed in their ships.

This is so much better than temple prostitution.

[kitty !kitty/EnNg No.5837767]

>>5837753

pagan human sacrifices are a legit criticism, they certainly existed

>...And there were
>nine dogs of the table that had belonged to the lord Patroklos.
>Of these he cut the throats of two, and set them on the pyre;
>and so also killed twelve noble sons of the great-hearted Trojans
>with the stroke of bronze, and evil were the thoughts in his heart against them

[Anonymous No.5837769]

>>5837761
>Six men entered the tent to rape the girl, after which they forced her onto her master's bed. Two men grabbed her hands, and two men her wrists. The angel of death put a rope around her neck and while two men pulled the rope, the old woman stabbed the girl between her ribs with a knife.


Shit, that escalated quickly. I figured shed' just voluntarily burn to death or have someone quickly stab her.

[kitty !kitty/EnNg No.5837773]

> Six men entered the tent to rape the gir

that is actually quite weird, why would they rape a girl which was supposed to be a concubine of their dead leader, isn't it a sign of an extreme disrespect to the dead

[jacob !zEiO0doWi6 No.5837776]

>>5837759
>>5837761
see, disgusting

the worst thing about this is that they called such practices "holy"

[jacob !zEiO0doWi6 No.5837777]

the girl's visions were probably given to her partly by derangement caused by drugs and partly by demonic influence

demons are always involved in rituals like this

[Anonymous No.5837783]

>Paganism
>2014
You faggots need to read Hegel's Philosophy of History. When you do you'll understand the degree to which you're regressing mentally.

[Anonymous No.5837784]

>>5837777
>>5837776

Oh please you talk of demons and how human sacrifice is horrible but completely ignore the atrocities of Christians. If pagan religions had as long as Christianity did to reform themselves and change in accordance to the beliefs of modern societies they'd probably stop sacrificing people too.

[Anonymous No.5837787]

>>5832466
considering Odin hails from Troy, I'd say why not?

[jacob !zEiO0doWi6 No.5837788]

>>5837784
>but completely ignore the atrocities of Christians

Such as? Please do not give me examples of Christian hypocrites who acted against Christian principles. The pagans cited above were not hypocrites; they acted in accord with their principles.

If you are talking about things such as burning heretics I think that the burning of heretics can be justified.

[Anonymous No.5837789]

Does anyone here know where I could find good reading material or sources on Slavic paganism? I'm very interested in the subject.

[Anonymous No.5837790]

Why does everyone on 4chan collectively masturbate to Nordic and Germanic stuff? Are you all 14/88 German Americans or something?

[Anonymous No.5837791]

>>5837788

>If you are talking about things such as burning heretics I think that the burning of heretics can be justified.

Okay buddy I'm not going to make the mistake of getting baited by that.

[jacob !zEiO0doWi6 No.5837793]

>>5837791
a doctor is someone who can remove an harmful infection
you wouldn't say a doctor acted wrongly for killing a disease that existed inside a body

similarly, a heretic is someone who threatens the social body like a disease
a plague like the Black Plague killed thousands of people's bodies but not their souls
a heretic kills people's souls and is therefore a greater threat than a plague.

from a Christian point of view apostasy from the Faith is worse than physical death; so you can understand why the burning of heretics can be justified (in the case where they are actively promoting their heresies obstinately and are leading others astray).

[kitty !kitty/EnNg No.5837799]

>>5837783

neoplatonic paganism actually has some similarity to christianity which was strongly influenced by neoplatonism too, saint augustine, boethius who was widely appreciated in the medieval europe (dante placed him in the paradise together with aquinas) while he was a neoplatonic and didn't even mention christ in his 'consolation of philosophy', also iamblichus, the teacher of julian the apostate was widely recognized by christian philosophers during the renaissance

[Anonymous No.5837802]

>>5836373
I was with you until you posted this.
Sure, Vikings weren't the romanticized 'Till Valhall' warriors we know from the 1800s. They were far more realistic and indeed were actually more interested in gaining land to farm on. They did so, however, by taking up the sword and shield. A large part of their society was built around warfare and navalry

[Anonymous No.5837807]

>>5837773
You should remember that Fadlan was looking at the Rus through a muslim filter.
He thought one of the most cleanly people of their time were automatically "unclean" because they didn't use running water every time they cleaned themselves.

[kitty !kitty/EnNg No.5837814]

>>5837789

that's actually a problem. it's not a very popular topic, i looked for a bit recently in a similar thread
wiki article has some references, but i dunno if you can find those books (some of them like 'women who run with the wolves' are definitely crap too), boris rybakov's seems to be the best one, a classic work on the subject but i dunno if it even was translated to english despite being quoted, those scientists who are interested in slavic paganism usually know russian

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Slavic_mythology#References

[Anonymous No.5837818]

>>5837793
>when pagans do it, it is wrong!
>when Christians do it, it is for the greater good!

nice reasoning brah, I am not convinced

[kitty !kitty/EnNg No.5837820]

>>5837807
>Fadlan was looking at the Rus

what
the quote is clearly about scandinavians

[Anonymous No.5837821]

>>5837818

don't bother responding to him man he's just going to further shit up the thread perpetuating his bullshit

[kitty !kitty/EnNg No.5837835]

oh, and also about 'women who run with the wolves', i read it, that's actually a cute book but it's a psychological book and is not a serious reference to mythology in any way, it's pretty eclectic too, so it's a nice book but a crappy reference to any mythology

[Anonymous No.5837855]

>>5837820
Early Rus were both Scandinavian, Slavic and neither.

[Anonymous No.5837857]

>>5837799
Yes, but that was the Middle Ages. It's 2014. Hellenism, etc. have been dead for a long time, whereas Christianity is strong. Islam is better than paganism.

[kitty !kitty/EnNg No.5837870]

>>5837855
irregardless of all those norman theories that's definitely not a report about them but about original scandinavians which live in their scandinavia

>>5837857
it was a question of the philosophy though, i don't defend their modern hobby religion

[Anonymous No.5837887]

>>5837870
I know, you and I are pretty much on the same page.

[Anonymous No.5837929]

>>5832145
Wait, what good is paganism if it soesn't have boylove and temple prostitution?
The jndigenous religions of nordic countries, asatru and lutheran christianity, seem to be designed for maximum boredom.

[Anonymous No.5837941]

>>5837717
right. which isn't true.

[Anonymous No.5837971]

>>5837759
>>5837761

Yes, it makes perfect sense that a Muslim would have all these intimate details of what went on in Germanic village, down to what when on in private quarters...

Abrahamics confirmed for nigger tier retards.

[Anonymous No.5837975]

>>5837870

>irregardless

Confirmed imbecile.

[Anonymous No.5838520]

>>5837971

He was part of an Abassid embassy to the Volga Bulgars. The Vikings he met there were traders; he didn't observe a "Germanic village."

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Volga_trade_route
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ahmad_ibn_Fadlan

>being this oblivious

[Anonymous No.5838542]

>>5837971
Dude, that guy was Antonio fucking Banderas, I would think twice before shit-talking him.

[Anonymous No.5838556]

my odin, pure ideology!

[Anonymous No.5838705]

>>5838520
>he didn't observe

He didn't observe anything. a Muslim wouldn't have been party to a Viking death ceremony, ans especially not party to the private inner working of some death ritual.

"many of the peoples and societies to Ibn Fadlan were "like asses gone astray. They have no religious bonds with God, nor do they have recourse to reason"."

I mean, it's the same story with you fucking dumbasses purporting the Christian sources are credible.

Abarahamic observers ARE NOT CREDIBLE sources, as EVERY ONE of them are writing for the express purpose of painting everyone else as heathens that need converting, while flattering their own preconceptions and worldview.

Seriously, how the fuck are there so many nigger tier retards on /lit/ or all places?

Also, these FUCKING CAPCHAS ARE FUCKING IMPOSSIBLE. FUCK YOU MOOT YOU FUCKING FAGGOT.

[Anonymous No.5838718]

>>5837975

Irregardless is used more often in English. Don't take whatever your Microsoft Word is saying for granted.

[Anonymous No.5838723]

>>5838705
>Abarahamic observers ARE NOT CREDIBLE sources
In that case, good look trying to follow a creed you know fuck all about. Virtually everything we know about northern paganism comes through abrahamic observers.

[kitty !kitty/EnNg No.5838734]

well, he definitely couldn't see many of those details

>Six men entered the tent to rape the girl, after which they forced her onto her master's bed. Two men grabbed her hands, and two men her wrists. The angel of death put a rope around her neck and while two men pulled the rope, the old woman stabbed the girl between her ribs with a knife.

was he among those men who raped the girl and saw how she was stabbed?
if not how did he know?

[Anonymous No.5838748]

>>5838734
Well, he spent some time with the vikings, maybe they filled him in on the stuff he couldn't directly see? Practitioners of human sacrifice probably wouldn't try to hide this fact, especially if part of their strength comes from everyone being scared of them.

[Anonymous No.5838780]

>>5838718

Irregardless is not a word, dumbass.

[Anonymous No.5839540]

Relevant:

>http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/article-2865229/Raping-pillaging-Viking-conquests-like-romantic-breaks-DNA-reveals-warriors-brought-women-raiding-British-Isles.html?ITO=1490&ns_mchannel=rss&ns_campaign=1490

Abrahamics BTFO.

[Anonymous No.5839789]

>>5832631
yes.

[Anonymous No.5840414]

>>5837701
I'm sorry but that's just sad. You'd rather be forced by your inability to sustain yourself to go threaten people you don't know with physical violence so that you don't die?

And you live in the time of the world when we could conceivably feed the whole world. Vikings would much rather live today than when they did.

You're the definition of romantic if you think that life was better then.

Anyways, you can go do most of that. Go live in the northern Canadian, Alaskan, Scandinavian, or Uralic mountains. It'll be pretty similar, and nobody will give a fuck you're doing it.

Alternatively, move to Somalia and join a pirate gang. They have way more in common with vikings than you do. A poor economic situation forces them to take to the sea and use piracy and pillaging to assure that they don't die from a lack of resources. The only difference is they don't live in cold mountains, but instead a hot as fuck desert. Also there's an international community with the ability to protect its trade routes and attempt to give aid to at least some of those people.

But you're really more concerned with "muh aryans white pride" and a romantic and nazi influenced conception of vikings than you are with living like them, since you can't find meaning in a world filled with alienation.

Maybe try Marx. Just throwing that out there.

I'm the guy who responded to your post with that long material reading of Viking history, i.e. the guy who posted >>5835684

[Anonymous No.5840666]

>>5837717
Thanks for getting my back, that was exactly what I meant. I thought it was clear I was talking about social classes and not individuals.

>>5837701
By the way I forgot to say something important when I wrote >>5840414 about romanticism. I've really only engaged with early German romanticism, but one of the defining characteristics is that precise feeling you're describing: it was better in the past, I wish I were living then, etc. Novalis' "Christianity or Europe" is a great example, but my favorite is "Bread and Wine" by Hölderlin. I did my research work in a master class on that poem. The point of both of those works- and many others by the Romantics- was that life was better in the past, and something about modern society- which to the Germans normally just meant certain elements of the Enlightenment- is depriving life of its meaning.

Your attempt at expressing what you were thinking by saying "their life, however unpleasant and full of hardship and physical pain and discomfort, was a great, great deal more satisfying than the life we live now in our modern world" is definitionally romantic, and for some of the Romantics was the entire point of their writing, be it philosophy, history, philology, literature, etc.

I don't mean this to be insulting, just to clarify a word that's really important for understanding what I've been saying the whole time (and I hope this leads you to some literature that gets how you feel).

[Anonymous No.5841640]

>>5832189
>>5832304
>>5832329
>>5832350
I can't stand literal interpretations of the Eddas. Valhalla as we imagine it was invented by Christian scribes and Romantic authors. Its original translation was not 'slain-hall,' but 'slain-rock'- it was a word referring to a boulder inhabited by a spirit. In fact, the afterlife in early Germanic polytheism probably had nothing to do with halls in the sky. It was probably centered more around the grave-mound. Valhalla was an idea that came late in the Viking Age due to Christian influence. It may be in the spirit of the Germanic warrior's way, but it's not canon.

>>5833765
Germanic ethics flowed naturally. They were based on keeping your word. In their rough, tribal society, sticking together was important, so oaths of fealty were sworn. Too fulfill these oaths, you often had to be bold and aggressive enough to protect your tribe and raid in times of need. The tribes were so piss poor that wealth was the great goal, and it became a game of who could take the most shit from the others. But once wealth was won, it had to be shared among the tribe to strengthen bonds of loyalty. So out of this flow you get the virtues:
-Loyalty
-Trustworthiness
-Balls
-Military prowess
-Generosity
-Hospitality
It all stems from loyalty/family though. That's what's important. You can be Asatru without chopping heads off, but you can't be Asatru without fiercely fighting for your loved ones. The religion is ideal for soldiers and farmers, but as long as you're looking out for your tribe, you're fine. Those ancient dirt farmers and reavers would be fucking stoked to live in our society.

>>5834638
No. They're more like cousins.

>>5835469
Elder Edda. But take it with a cup of salt.

>>5835684
This guy understands.

>>5836965
Fuckkk, you're so stupid. These people had tons of divination methods, religious gambling, oaths, taboos, and a culture rooted in tradition. You think they weren't superstitious and 'followed their own way'?

>>5837776
The root of the word 'holy' is 'whole,' meaning everything was considered holy.

>>5837929
Don't worry, Germanic warriors kept concubines, and even practiced pederasty in some obscure tribes. And they totally banged their slaves in front of all the men as the evening's entertainment.

>>5838705
He was pretty fair in his treatment, I think. The rape and human sacrifice wasn't inconsistent with other accounts, and he also thought the Rus were handsome.

[Anonymous No.5843070]

>>5836825
m8 Heldenbuch is shit as Carlyle pointed out, just read Das Nibelungenlied.

[Anonymous No.5843080]

>>5837787
That section of the prose Edda is an interpolation by Snorri, it's not canon.