TSR Pagan Society

Scroll to see replies

Isn't LaVeyan satanism basically classical liberalism with atheism mixed in and then given a name to antagonise Christians? Or am I missing something?

Reply 141

Hylean

Original post by joanna-eve

Absolutely. Fluffies tend to be the less ...academically rigorous, I've noticed.
Have you read this article?

I have. The person has written every reason why I cannot stand Ravenwolf and avoid books by her and her ilk. Anyone with a stupid name is a straight put-off for me. The problem I have with fluffies is that they tend to infect everyone, regardless of the attempts made by the more serious ones. If enough fluffs spell it "fluff" then newcomers will learn that as the official term, which is fine, but that's just the tip of the iceberg. It worries me to think there is an entire generation of Wiccans who think and feels like Ravenwolf all because of the power of the fluffs.

Original post by Keckers

Isn't LaVeyan satanism basically classical liberalism with atheism mixed in and then given a name to antagonise Christians? Or am I missing something?

And some magic, ritual and a large dose of hypocrisy mixed in.

(edited 12 years ago)

Reply 142

Etoile

Original post by Hylean

Absolutely. Out of interest, whom do you consider 'her ilk'? DJ Conway, Edain McCoy, maybe Laurie Cabot?
There are a lot of very poorly written and researched books on the market these days and that is definitely not good. Hopefully though, people have enough common sense to realise that some of it is absolute rubbish (like McCoy and the Celts worshipping potatoes :facepalm:

)

Reply 143

Howard

Original post by Keckers

Isn't LaVeyan satanism basically classical liberalism with atheism mixed in and then given a name to antagonise Christians? Or am I missing something?

I don't think there is any such thing as "LaVeyan satanism" LaVey just had his own ideas......you can pick and chose and separate the wheat from the chaff as you see fit. I doubt anybody considers LaVey a font of all wisdom and strictly follows his ideas to a tee. It's just one man's ideas. It's not intended as dogma.

Reply 144

Hylean

Original post by Howard

Tell that to his followers, his Church and his tours...

Reply 145

Howard

Original post by Hylean

Tell that to his followers, his Church and his tours...

Sure.

I'm sure I could tell that to any one of his followers and they would all agree wholeheartedly that they don't hold a monopoly on the subject. There's is just one expression of Satanism.

But whether they agree or not the simple fact is the number of members of LaVey's church (and/or strict followers of his ideas) are tiny in comparison to the total number of Satanists worldwide.

Reply 146

Storm_Raven

Original post by Hylean

Why do you spell it "magick"?

Why Loki, of all beings? After all, he will lead the jötnar against the Æsir in Ragnarök and is generally considered an enemy of the Norse Gods. When dealing with the "Northern Tradition", what are your sources?

I'm not attacking, but I am curious.

No problem, it can take people a bit like that.

My sources are the not only the Eddas which were written by Christian clerics, but also personal experience. The tale of Ragnorok to which you refer is believed to be a number of separate stories stitched together after the Christianisation of Norway and was written down by Snorri Sturlson (see Dictionary Of Northern Mythology by Rudolf Simek), if you read Saxo Grammaticus version of the Eddas it is very different.

Yes Loki is the trickster, but if you look at the Eddas he is the reason the gods get their greatest gifts, he also gets them out of at least as much trouble as he gets them into, he is an able companion to Thor, advising the use of guile when straightforwardness and brawn won't win the day, after Loki is chained under the snake, his place is taken by the thrall Thialfi.

For me Loki is the bringer of change and the god who makes you view yourself with all your comforting self delusions stripped away as well as being a trickster, though he does need balancing out.

Raven

Reply 147

Hylean

Original post by Storm_Raven

Technically, the Poetic Edda wasn't written by Christian clerics, rather recorded by them. A small difference, but an important one. Loki appears in Völuspá, which deals heavily with Ragnarök, as a friend to the jötnar there as well. So obviously the tale of Ragnarök isn't just stitched together by Snorri. Scholars date Völuspá to the turn of the 11th century, though its placing varies.

As for Saxo, Loki doesn't factor in his tales at all, unless you count the brief visit by Thorkillus to Utgarthalocus.

It's also interesting that Loki appears to have had no cult at all. There are no definitive place names named after him; no references to Loki worship in any of the historical accounts from that era; and no definitive archaeological evidence for him either. Most scholars view him as primarily a being of myth, much like Baldr, whose belief was located mainly in Norway and thus, Iceland. Also, we have to remember that the Eddas are actually a collection of various traditions, so we shouldn't take them as evidence for a unified Norse belief. As I said, Loki is a North Western God, whilst Óðinn was based primarily in the South, around Denmark and England. Óðinn as a belief barely made it to Iceland, which was staunchly a Þórr country.

I do apologise. Again, I'm not trying to attack them as understand them. Hopefully, by explaining them, I'll better understand and you'll have a better hold on them yourself. :smile:

Loki, unfortunately for you possibly, happens to be a specialist subject of mine. Did you know some scholars argue he is a fire spirit, a dwarf and even a spider?

Just really interesting that you chose him as your personal God.

Original post by Storm_Raven

Yes Loki is the trickster, but if you look at the Eddas he is the reason the gods get their greatest gifts, he also gets them out of at least as much trouble as he gets them into, he is an able companion to Thor, advising the use of guile when straightforwardness and brawn won't win the day, after Loki is chained under the snake, his place is taken by the thrall Thialfi.

With the exception of the last bit, you've got a very good point. I've no idea where you got the idea that Þjálfi takes over from Loki after the chaining. There's no proof anywhere in the sources for that, at all. :confused:

It's an interesting point, but untenable, especially as Loki and Þjálfi are at times interchangeable.

Nonetheless, all his good deeds for the Æsir are forced upon him. He never does anything willingly and though he helps them, it's always under duress. Moreover, none of the sources ever describe him in positive terms. He is "hinn slægi ás" or "hinn lævísi" and is the father of all monsters, as well as Hel, Jörmungandr and Fenrisúlfr. Should we be worried about you? :p:

Original post by Storm_Raven

For me Loki is the bringer of change and the god who makes you view yourself with all your comforting self delusions stripped away as well as being a trickster, though he does need balancing out.

Raven

An interesting interpretation of the evidence. How do you work round the fact that he is currently bound? Doesn't that make it a bit difficult for him to answer? Do you sacrifice?

I realise this sounds like an attack, but it really isn't. Just trying to understand you and your choice. I have no issue with your beliefs and no desire to shake them, prove them wrong, or whatever. I do like the fact you've been looking at some of the scholarly work on him and the rest of the Norse gods. That's a very good thing and something that a lot of people don't do.

Reply 148

acat

I occasionally have Eris break through my psyche :biggrin:

. Any Eris lovers out there?

Reply 149

Storm_Raven

Hylean, I don't see you as attacking me or my beliefs, just questioning them, which I regard as entirely fair and I must say you have done so in a respectful and reasonable way, which is more than I've had from some fundamentalist Odinists in the past.

I totally agree that the Eddas are a collection from various traditions and that different areas worshipped different gods, gave them different responsibilities and attributes as well as names. However whilst the likes of the Volupsa were dated to the turn of the 11th century, it was a time when Christianity would have been in conflict with the old traditions which were oral and may well have varied from village to village, let alone between countries, Christianity also was gaining the upper hand especially in the courts and other areas of power.

We are still left with the fact that the Eddas we recorded by a Christian Cleric in the court of a Christian king at a time when it would have been politically correct to say the least to Christianize them and portray Loki as a Satan like character, though I don't deny his dark side.

Thialfi takes on Loki's role of advising Thor when and how to use guile and cunning, when strength and straightforwardness would be to no or little avail.

Loki definitely has links to fire and may well have been a fire spirit with his father being Farbauti (cruel striker, possibly lightning) and his mother Laufey (leafy or leafy isle, possibly a particular tree), there has been some speculation that the carved faces found in a number of ancient smithy's maybe that of Loki.

Personally I regard the Eddas as an incomplete guide and as allegorical tales to explain the universe in terms the people could understand, for Snorri mentions many gods and goddesses but does little more than give a brief description of their responsibilities.

I regard the tale of Ragnorok with suspicion asthe tale of Ragnorok bears remarkable resemblence to that of Revelations in the Bible, personally I don't see Loki as bound because there is no way of tell when these events are meant to take place. I also view it as entirely possible that Ragnorok could be and allegory referring to the battle between the invading Christian faith and that of the indigenous Heathen faiths during the later part of the Dark Ages.

Even if there was no appreciable cult of Loki during the Dark Ages he is certainly very popular with a lot of Modern Heathens, many of whom in my experience have independently reported very similar experiences of him. His role as the trickster, bringer of change and his association with fire are all acknowledged and celebrated by modern Lokians, often to the cries of don't put the Lokians in charge of tending the campfire from other Pagans, apparently we're even worse pyromaniacs than other Heathens as if that's possible. :eek:

Raven

Reply 150

Hylean

Original post by Storm_Raven

Fair enough.

Original post by Storm_Raven

I totally agree that the Eddas are a collection from various traditions and that different areas worshipped different gods, gave them different responsibilities and attributes as well as names. However whilst the likes of the Volupsa were dated to the turn of the 11th century, it was a time when Christianity would have been in conflict with the old traditions which were oral and may well have varied from village to village, let alone between countries, Christianity also was gaining the upper hand especially in the courts and other areas of power.

Nyah, I take issue with the term "conflict". Obviously there was bloodshed, with the likes of Ólafr Tryggvason, but for the majority of people there wasn't that much conflict. We assume there was, but it's all supposition. What does the farmer up in the Norwegian mountains care about the fights of kings below? We don't know where the poems were written down, so we can't really comment on the circumstances in which they were recorded. Moreover, it's highly likely that they existed for a long time before they were codified in the Poetic Edda. Like you said, it was an oral tradition.

Let's not forget that Christianity was also an oral tradition at that time, making for a dialogue between the two traditions, where both were influenced. There's too much emphasis in Norse scholarship on the idea that Christianity influenced the Nordic beliefs and not the other way round.

Original post by Storm_Raven

We are still left with the fact that the Eddas we recorded by a Christian Cleric in the court of a Christian king at a time when it would have been politically correct to say the least to Christianize them and portray Loki as a Satan like character, though I don't deny his dark side.

No, we're not. There's no evidence anywhere that they were recorded by a cleric in a court. Snorri wasn't a cleric and he only spent a small amount of time in the court of the Norwegian king. We have absolutely no idea about where the poems were first recorded or by whom.

As for the Loki part, there is no evidence that Loki has been influenced by Christianity. That idea is wholly linked to the idea that somehow Christianity was the superior culture and did the influencing but was never influenced. A holdover from the days when scholars were Christian and didn't like referring to The Bible as a mythology. Loki's dark character is emphasised in even the earliest poems, which suggests he was always conceived as having negative characteristics.

This is not to ignore the Gosforth stone and cross and the others, but those pictures do not necessarily have to be Loki, nor do they necessarily have to be the Devil. There are numerous legends around the world about a bound giant, so the symbology would be recognisable to multiple faiths.

As for Snorra Edda, well Snorri was writing that for skálds, not the king, which throws a different light on his use of the material at hand. Especially when you compare Snorra Edda with Heimskringla.

Original post by Storm_Raven

Thialfi takes on Loki's role of advising Thor when and how to use guile and cunning, when strength and straightforwardness would be to no or little avail.

There's no proof for this though? Nothing in the poems or tales suggests that Þjálfi takes over from Loki. In fact, as I suggested, there are version of the same myth where both appear in the same role. Some scholars have argued that this means there were two different traditions: Loki in the west, Þjálfi in the east and because of the Eddas, we just assume they existed together. Beyond this, there's no real chronology in the myths to suggest that Þjálfi is Loki's successor. It's an interesting idea, but totally untenable.

Original post by Storm_Raven

Loki definitely has links to fire and may well have been a fire spirit with his father being Farbauti (cruel striker, possibly lightning) and his mother Laufey (leafy or leafy isle, possibly a particular tree), there has been some speculation that the carved faces found in a number of ancient smithy's maybe that of Loki.

What about his mother's other name, Nál? As far as I'm aware, there's only one forge stone that could be Loki and that's the Snaptun Stone. Ironically, it backs up one of the least credible sources, Snorri, hehe.

The fire-spirit connection has largely been discredited by scholars since Grimm first put it forth. The similarity between Loki and Logi is weak, especially when one considers the pronunciation of the words. Beyond this, the Snaptun Stone deals with air, not fire, and Loki is more often connected with air than fire in the myths. Triin Laidoner has argued that Loki should be conceived as a air-spirit, if we are to assume anything about him, more than a fire-spirit. Loki is the air that fuels Logi; he is the air that fuels the forge; he flies in various forms, etc.

Original post by Storm_Raven

Personally I regard the Eddas as an incomplete guide and as allegorical tales to explain the universe in terms the people could understand, for Snorri mentions many gods and goddesses but does little more than give a brief description of their responsibilities.

More than likely, but by doing this, you can arguably say anything about Loki or the others. It's always best to evaluate Snorri in light of the Poetic Edda.

Original post by Storm_Raven

I regard the tale of Ragnorok with suspicion asthe tale of Ragnorok bears remarkable resemblence to that of Revelations in the Bible, personally I don't see Loki as bound because there is no way of tell when these events are meant to take place. I also view it as entirely possible that Ragnorok could be and allegory referring to the battle between the invading Christian faith and that of the indigenous Heathen faiths during the later part of the Dark Ages.

It could be. However, I don't really think heathens ever really viewed Christianity as an opposition to their beliefs. Certainly historical accounts from the beginning of the conversion attempts show that they view the Christian God as just another one in a large group. Moreover, the similarities mean nothing. There are many instances of similar tales popping up in far apart areas with no connecting factor. That said, I've not really seen too many glaring similarities as such to throw huge doubt on the authenticity of the early parts of Ragnarök. The bit about the new world is suspect, but anything before that isn't.

As for Loki being bound, Völuspá is very clear on that. The change in tense shows that. She talks about Loki being bound in the present tense and then uses future tense when discussing him being freed for Ragnarök. If the Gosforth cross and the other carvings are of Loki, then he was conceived as being bound by the time they were carved. Lokasenna also suggests he was bound and Snorri claims he is the reason for earthquakes. As we still have earthquakes, then Loki should still be bound.

Original post by Storm_Raven

Even if there was no appreciable cult of Loki during the Dark Ages he is certainly very popular with a lot of Modern Heathens, many of whom in my experience have independently reported very similar experiences of him. His role as the trickster, bringer of change and his association with fire are all acknowledged and celebrated by modern Lokians, often to the cries of don't put the Lokians in charge of tending the campfire from other Pagans, apparently we're even worse pyromaniacs than other Heathens as if that's possible. :eek:

Raven

"No appreciable cult" is misleading. There is no evidence at all for any cult of Loki. There was never any talk about Lokamenn in the sagas nor reference to him anywhere in the historical accounts about the heathen worship in the North. Ah well, you've explained yourself. That's all I can ask for.

I disagree with your scholarly method and feel that you and other Lokians are picking and choosing to make the god you want, not what he is/was. I find this an awful lot in reconstructed religions or ones that base themselves off the older ones. Why do you all feel he is a trickster as opposed to a spider or a dwarf? Why not a culture hero or one of the other myriad interpretations floating around? Why fire-spirit and not air or water, as some scholars have suggested? Nyah, I apologise. I'm not trying to get at you, per sé, but the mentality behind it. I've spent so much time researching Loki that a lot of what you're saying just doesn't work at all with the evidence.

I wish pagans/heathens would spend more time properly analysing the evidence (this is not at you, but a general comment). There are so many websites out there which proclaim to know what they are talking about, but suggest that Merlin is a god or list attributes of various deities which just don't exist. I could never follow a god without adequately analysing the sources for him and deciding whether the information out there follows or ignores the evidence. A big problem is that our theologians are not the people on the websites, etc., but the scholars: anthropologists, folklorists, religious historians and the like. They are the ones who give us our theories on the gods. We assume that, as experts, they can be trusted. Thus, some ideas get supported when they shouldn't and others get left by the wayside when they shouldn't. We all need to be a lot more critical of everything. Hopefully that will start happening soon.

Reply 151

IPlayThePiccolo

Hey can anyone on this thread explain to me what they believe in Paganism etc? I'm firmly Christian but I'd like to know because I know a lot of people say Paganism is witchcraft and stufff..

Reply 152

DYKWIA

I pray to the great sun god every morning. I'm just off to make a sacrifice now, so if anyone wants to join me I'll be at stonehenge.

Reply 153

Hylean

Original post by IPlayThePiccolo

Hey can anyone on this thread explain to me what they believe in Paganism etc? I'm firmly Christian but I'd like to know because I know a lot of people say Paganism is witchcraft and stufff..

Read the thread. There are various posts relating to pagan beliefs.

Reply 154

Hylean

Original post by joanna-eve

)

Aye, us Celts love the great potato god. HAIL MR TAYTO! :worship:

Nyah, I tend to avoid the books these days. I've got a good collection, but every time I wander into Waterstones and read the backs of the books, they all sound like Ravenwolf. Half the websites I visit are just as bad. It's annoying. I hate sifting through chaff just to find a tiny bit of wheat.

Such bad scholarship in the pagan world these days and I can't help but feeling Ravenwolf is to blame.

Reply 155

Etoile

Original post by DYKWIA

I pray to the great sun god every morning. I'm just off to make a sacrifice now, so if anyone wants to join me I'll be at stonehenge.

Apart from the sacrifice, a great deal of people do do that.

Reply 156

Etoile

Original post by Hylean

Aye, us Celts love the great potato god. HAIL MR TAYTO! :worship:

I can see where she got the idea, what with the whole potato famine thing, but it's just that potatoes aren't native to the British Isles, or even Europe :facepalm:

Do you have an Irish accent? :sexface:

Nyah, I tend to avoid the books these days. I've got a good collection, but every time I wander into Waterstones and read the backs of the books, they all sound like Ravenwolf. Half the websites I visit are just as bad. It's annoying. I hate sifting through chaff just to find a tiny bit of wheat.

Such bad scholarship in the pagan world these days and I can't help but feeling Ravenwolf is to blame.

Sometimes it's better to look at specialist shops (generally online) for stuff like this. Secular bookshops usually don't have a great variety, and yep they buy in the flashy Ravenwolf-esque stuff for eager fluffies to buy...vicious circle it seems! :sigh:

Yes, there are a lot of bad websites too (even a lot of information on witchvox is questionable, and don't get me started on half the people!) - I find what's best for me is to discover it myself. Why do I need someone to tell me how to dress my altar for a sun festival? Obviously sun colours, oak, gold etc are appropriate. Why do I need someone to tell me how to connect to my deities? I can form a far more meaningful relationship by myself.
To be fair, I think scholarship is worsening generally. On the internet you can post unedited nonsense, many people never read books, there is less interest in academia which is very sad.

Reply 157

Hylean

Original post by joanna-eve

I can see where she got the idea, what with the whole potato famine thing, but it's just that potatoes aren't native to the British Isles, or even Europe :facepalm:

Yea, them Christian Irish folk worshipped the great Mr Tayto all the way up until the separation of the two states, when we relegated him to crisp mascot.

Do you have an Irish accent? :sexface:

Yes.

What accent do you have?

Original post by joanna-eve

Specialist shops aren't the easiest to find in Reykjavík. There was one in Belfast, but it got burnt down when the mall it was in was set fire to. It never reopened as far as I'm aware. I've got Vivianne Crowley, some Cunningham, The Witch's Bible by Stewart and Janet and a few other things. Cunningham pisses me off, but is relatively sound. But yea, it's a horrible circle. Newcomers read the stuff in Waterstones, think it's the way and slowly that's how paganism becomes seen in the eyes of believers and nonbelievers. Not a good thing.

Original post by joanna-eve

To be fair, I think scholarship is worsening generally. On the internet you can post unedited nonsense, many people never read books, there is less interest in academia which is very sad.

I know, it depresses me. I'm still doing my research on the Celtic gods. I've done all that I can on the Norse ones without wanting to shoot myself in the head due to boredom and anger at academics. More people need to see what the scholars are saying, read up on the archaeology and critically evaluate the sources. I once saw a very decent website which told me that Merlin was the god of Magic. I was not impressed. Apart from the tendency to take any mythological or legendary figure and turn them into a god, the person was pretty good. Saddening really.

Reply 158

Etoile

Original post by Hylean

Yea, them Christian Irish folk worshipped the great Mr Tayto all the way up until the separation of the two states, when we relegated him to crisp mascot.

Yes.

What accent do you have?

Irish accents are :sogood:

I have a bit of an odd one :colondollar:

me dad's scouse but I live on the south coast of England so it's all a bit mixed up lol

Less demand I suppose, since there's not many people in Reykjavik at all, let alone pagan ones :L Do you have Waterstones there then?
I quite like Cunningham's style and presentation but not so much how he makes out that Wicca can be pretty much anything.
Then again, some of the more respected authors were pretty cringey at the time...

So what are you studying, ancient history? Are you at uni in Reykjavik?
I read something that said Merlin married Guinevere :rofl:

Reply 159

Hylean

Original post by joanna-eve

Irish accents are :sogood:

I have a bit of an odd one :colondollar:

me dad's scouse but I live on the south coast of England so it's all a bit mixed up lol

Weirdo.

Original post by joanna-eve

Less demand I suppose, since there's not many people in Reykjavik at all, let alone pagan ones :L Do you have Waterstones there then?

No, but I come back every now and then to see my mum and dogs and I'm always in Waterstones. It's my favourite shop.

Original post by joanna-eve

I quite like Cunningham's style and presentation but not so much how he makes out that Wicca can be pretty much anything.
Then again, some of the more respected authors were pretty cringey at the time...

Nyah, he aggravated me when he wrote the Christians stole Easter from pagans and his basis was the fact Easter is based on a lunar calendar. He completely overlooked the Jews using a lunar calendar and Easter was always connected to Passover. That kind of sloppy work does not impress me.

Yea, they were an interesting group back then. It's no wonder that Wicca gets so lost in fluff.

Original post by joanna-eve