PDA

View Full Version : Discussion of Good & Evil in Various Religions



Medievalist
06-12-2008, 05:59 AM
Norse Mythology had a sense of good and evil. Even it's mythical epic battle of Gog and Magog is parallel to the Apocolyptic passages in Revelation and Ezekiel.

Err that's because Gog and Magog are in fact entirely Biblical.

Willowmound
06-12-2008, 05:03 PM
Norse Mythology had a sense of good and evil.

No. Your example isn't from Norse mythology, and your knowledge of it is clearly limited.

You wanna cram dualism into Norse mythology, it would be something more along the lines of order vs. chaos. But even that is a gross oversimplification.

And further: whereas in Christianity (for instance) the aim is for good to conquer evil, in Norse mythology, when you read between the lines, it's all about balance. Order should not conquer chaos, as that would upset all things.

You say "sense of good and evil" as if those concepts are actual things. They're not. They are cultural artefacts. Pre-Christian Norse culture did not share them.

Mr Flibble
06-12-2008, 05:27 PM
Ragnarok, the Twilight of the Gods, represents a great conflict between
good and evil powers. Fenris was evil too

One of the basic tenets of Odinism ( one of the nine charges) is : To suffer no
evil to go unremedied ...

Odinists see good and evil, just from a different angle: Evil must be opposed and
expelled. However good and evil are often relative. Moral judgements must vary
according to time and situation. Nothing is purely good or purely evil : There is none so
good he is without all flaw, and none so wretched he is without all virtue.

So evil is to be conquered.

Willowmound
06-12-2008, 06:01 PM
You are simply wrong.

And who are these "odinists" you speak of?

Mr Flibble
06-12-2008, 06:04 PM
People like me : Odinists. It's a religion, my religion as it happens.

And you're going to need more evidence than 'you're wrong', particularly as that is one
of teh ways I practise my religion.

Those are in fact some of the tenets of that religion.

I'll post all nine charges if you like :) Plus relevant material from the Hamaval.

Willowmound
06-12-2008, 06:08 PM
I am not talking about neo-paganism. I am talking about pre-Christian Scandinavian culture. You know, where Norse mythology comes from.

What you do and believe now has got nothing to do with Scandinavian culture, world view and values 1200 plus years ago.

slcboston
06-12-2008, 06:09 PM
No. Your example isn't from Norse mythology, and your knowledge of it is clearly limited.

You wanna cram dualism into Norse mythology, it would be something more along the lines of order vs. chaos. But even that is a gross oversimplification.

And further: whereas in Christianity (for instance) the aim is for good to conquer evil, in Norse mythology, when you read between the lines, it's all about balance. Order should not conquer chaos, as that would upset all things.

You say "sense of good and evil" as if those concepts are actual things. They're not. They are cultural artefacts. Pre-Christian Norse culture did not share them.

Well.... No. Just flat-out no.

Our concepts of what makes up good and evil may well be cultural artifacts, but the notions themselves - of there being a set of behaviors and values that are right, and a set that is wrong, is very much an ancient idea. I could beat you over the head with examples from a myriad of cultures, but that would be pointless.

Secondly, there is very much a dualism in Norse mythology. (Yes, I've read it extensively, too. There, now we've both established our credentials. Can we dispense with the "I'm holier than thou" arguments, please? No more ad hominem.)

Now, it's not a strict duality in the sense that there are only two sides, and that everyone on both sides marches in lock-step. That particular notion is, again, very modern. But there are two opposing views, broadly stated, that are represented one each side by varying groups and degrees. Hence the final battle, which is essentially between two sides.

I would argue that the attempt to *not* read dualism into this is the artefact here, the post-modern attempt to take modern comfort levels - whether philosophical or religious - and impose them on what came before.

Mr Flibble
06-12-2008, 06:11 PM
What you do and believe now has got nothing to do with Scandinavian culture, world view and values 1200 plus years ago.

Ah, so what christians believe is nothing to do with Isreali culture 2000 years ago?

My religion is based on the ancient texts, as is christianity.

I was also talking about Norse Mythology -- which is where those charges / tenets come from.

PS I try very hard to be respectful of all faiths here.

The least you could do is the same.

Willowmound
06-12-2008, 06:22 PM
Ah, so what christians believe is nothing to do with Isreali culture 2000 years ago?

My religion is based on the ancient texts, as is christianity.



I'm sorry, but Christianity has been alive since the first Christians. The pre-Christian Scandinavian belief system died out. What exists as religion now, are modern revivals based on the medieval texts that still survive (written by Christians).

I am talking about the culture that produced these myths. I am, basically, talking about history.

Willowmound
06-12-2008, 06:29 PM
Now, it's not a strict duality in the sense that there are only two sides, and that everyone on both sides marches in lock-step. That particular notion is, again, very modern. But there are two opposing views, broadly stated, that are represented one each side by varying groups and degrees. Hence the final battle, which is essentially between two sides.

I would argue that the attempt to *not* read dualism into this is the artefact here, the post-modern attempt to take modern comfort levels - whether philosophical or religious - and impose them on what came before.

An interesting take on it. However, I maintain my position. That the focus on the precieved dualism in Norse mythology is due to the Abrahamic influence on Western thinking.

Mr Flibble
06-12-2008, 06:33 PM
I'm afraid I'm just going to have to laugh at your willful, insulting, and frankly narrowminded ignorance and walk away.

If you can't see the blantant depiction of good v evil, well then I wonder what else you cannot see

Willowmound
06-12-2008, 06:48 PM
I study this. I share this view with scholars like Gro Steinsland.

Now, why would I want to insult you? That wasn't not my intent at all. I say again that I'm talking about history. And I reiterate that modern Odinism and Åsatru are revival religions. I contend that they bear little resemblence to Iron Age Scandinavian culture. Neither of these statements are meant as insults. Two are facts and one is conviction.

Birol
06-12-2008, 07:49 PM
The above posts were split from the Tolkien thread (http://absolutewrite.com/forums/showthread.php?t=103223&page=5) in Novels.

Ken
06-12-2008, 07:58 PM
Odinists. It's my religion.

a cool wench ye be.
Maybe one day we might ransack a village, together :-)

Sarita
06-12-2008, 08:41 PM
As long as we can be civil and respectful, I'd love to continue this conversation.


An interesting take on it. However, I maintain my position. That the focus on the precieved dualism in Norse mythology is due to the Abrahamic influence on Western thinking.This is always highly fascinating to me. In my area of expertise (if you could call it that, yet,) the Incan Culture, it's easy to see how Spanish/Catholic influences have changed the way they worship in Peru (and most of South America) today. Many of the native families still have ties to the Incan Sun worship, but they incorporate Christian worship right into it. Very interesting and almost entirely different from the worship that was going on in the pre-conqueror days.


I study this. I share this view with scholars like Gro Steinsland.I did a quick google search, but most of the results are -erm, not in English. Could you give us some links or a few quotes about Steinland's theories/ideas?

Willowmound
06-12-2008, 09:08 PM
She's a Norwegian professor of religious history at the University of Oslo. This from the interwebs:


Gro Steinsland (b. 1945) is a professor of the history of religion at the University of Oslo. Her field is the Viking era and Nordic Middle Ages. She is also a guest lecturer at Linacre College, Oxford and a guest professor at RheinischeFriedrich-Wilhelms University, Bonn. Steinsland has published a number of articles and books.

Here (http://www.dur.ac.uk/medieval.www/sagaconf/steinsland.htm)'s a sample of her work (though not on the specific topic under discussion).

Her Norse Religion: Myths, Rites and Society (Pax Forlag, 2005) is the definitive introductory textbook in her field, and I believe the first one fully incorporating the last 30 years' research.

She's pretty well known in the relevant academic circles. To put it mildly :)

Shweta
06-12-2008, 09:11 PM
You are simply wrong.

And who are these "odinists" you speak of?


I am not talking about neo-paganism. I am talking about pre-Christian Scandinavian culture. You know, where Norse mythology comes from.

What you do and believe now has got nothing to do with Scandinavian culture, world view and values 1200 plus years ago.
I don't think it matters whether or not Astaru is a revival religion. It's a religion that's grown out of an older one, one way or the other. Claiming that it has nothing to do with older Scandinavian culture, claiming that one knows what another person does and believes, and putting "odinist" in scare quotes, shows both ignorance and deep condescension. It's hardly what I'd expect of good scholarship.

So it's hard for me to see how we'd start a discussion based on that.

Mr Flibble
06-12-2008, 09:12 PM
I study this. I share this view with scholars like Gro Steinsland.

Now, why would I want to insult you? That wasn't not my intent at all. I say again that I'm talking about history. And I reiterate that modern Odinism and Åsatru are revival religions. I contend that they bear little resemblence to Iron Age Scandinavian culture. Neither of these statements are meant as insults. Two are facts and one is conviction.

I will accept that you did not intend to insult me.

However, your intepretation of teh mythological texts is not fact. It is your interpretation, no more no less, and you should be aware that there are many other interpretations.

My interpretation ( based on my study of the mythologies) shows a rather blatant good v evil. Not acceptance for the sake of balance, of good versus evil. As Slcboston stated, there are two broadly opposing camps, but the whole nature of the mythologies, to my mind, is individualism within the law, so no one will be either wholly good, or wholly evil, because either good or evil actions come from the individual. Evil is relative. Now this isn't something that is common thought in christian culture, so I can see how it might be misinterpreted as 'there is no good and evil', but you really have to look at the mindset of the people at the time, in that religion. They had a sense of good and evil, even if your cultural upbringing means their concept of those constructs is at odds with what you believe. Just because you don't see it that way does not mean they didn't.

I'm more than willing to discuss this. I'm happy for you to state, with examples, why you believe I am wrong. However if you state something as actual fact, you should back it up. Stating that someone else's interpretation is 'simply wrong' is inflamatory.

As for the revivialsim....we'll agree to differ on that one, although I would contend that modern christianity is very different from the religion as practised 2000 years ago too, which would make it neo-christianity? :D

Shweta
06-12-2008, 09:15 PM
I'd like to note, on another line of thought altogether, that right vs wrong action runs deeply through Hindu mythology.

Which is not the same as good/evil, but I wonder if that word choice biases the discussion, since the lexical item "evil" has an awful lot of Christian baggage in English.

I'd certainly accept that only Christianity (maybe) really holds to a notion of evil as that word has come to mean in English. But that is really an overly limited meaning, I think.

rugcat
06-12-2008, 09:17 PM
An interesting take on it. However, I maintain my position. That the focus on the precieved dualism in Norse mythology is due to the Abrahamic influence on Western thinking.I am under the impression that in the final battle (Ragnorak) the forces of chaos prevail over the gods and the universe dissolves into chaos.

Is this accurate (broadly speaking) and could you further enlighten me on this?

Willowmound
06-12-2008, 09:23 PM
I don't think it matters whether or not Astaru is a revival religion. It's a religion that's grown out of an older one, one way or the other.

I'd rather say it's built on incomplete snippets of a culture that is long gone. So I'm afraid I can't accept that it's grown out of pre-Christian Scandinavian culture. It's re-imagined, I'd say.



Claiming that it has nothing to do with older Scandinavian culture, claiming that one knows what another person does and believes, and putting "odinist" in scare quotes, shows both ignorance and deep condescension. It's hardly what I'd expect of good scholarship.

I'll give you the quotes. But I still hold that any link between modern Odinism and the old faith is tenuous at best.

Willowmound
06-12-2008, 09:28 PM
As for the revivialsim....we'll agree to differ on that one, although I would contend that modern christianity is very different from the religion as practised 2000 years ago too,

I'm with you on that one.


which would make it neo-christianity? :D

But not on that one, since Odinism disappeared and had to be re-invented/rediscovered/resurrected (take your pick), whereas Christianity has been continuous.

I'll apologise for my tendency toward categorical statements. Yes, since the culture we're discussing is forever gone, all we can do is interpret. I'll try and be less bombastic in my statements. But I still stand by what I said.

Willowmound
06-12-2008, 09:37 PM
I am under the impression that in the final battle (Ragnorak) the forces of chaos prevail over the gods and the universe dissolves into chaos.

Is this accurate (broadly speaking) and could you further enlighten me on this?

Well, from the texts we have, it would appear that the gods and the giants pretty much annihilate one another, with a handful of survivors on both sides and one human couple, Liv (whose name means life) and Livtrase (whose name might mean "one who clings to life"). From these two, and from the survivors of the giants and the gods, a new world will grow.

ColoradoGuy
06-12-2008, 09:38 PM
But not on that one, since Odinism disappeared and had to be re-invented/rediscovered/resurrected (take your pick), whereas Christianity has been continuous.
I agree, although the continuity of Christianity resembled the punctuated equilibrium notion of evolution--long periods of apparent stasis punctuated by sudden "speciation" into various sects and splinter groups.

Mr Flibble
06-12-2008, 10:02 PM
But not on that one, since Odinism disappeared and had to be re-invented/rediscovered/resurrected (take your pick), whereas Christianity has been continuous.

Odinism wasn't practised openly, I'll give you that. But considering the persecution that went on...Christians learned a lot from the Romans on that one :)

I happen to know a few people ( two swedes and a dane) who can trace back their family's practise of Odinism as far back as they can trace their family -- but again not openly. Even now, most odinists don't proclaim their faith in public.

So whether it's an underground religion that is re-emerging, or a revival, it's something I like to keep an open mind about.

And, what if there had been a break in christianity? Would that make the bible less valid in your eyes? Would all of a sudden christianity become a second class religion?



But I still stand by what I said.

I can respect that. I stand by what I say too. :)

Sarita
06-12-2008, 10:20 PM
And, what if there had been a break in christianity? Would that make the bible less valid in your eyes? Would all of a sudden christianity become a second class religion?To be fair, I can't see where Willow called Odinism a second class religion...

Mr Flibble
06-12-2008, 10:41 PM
It seemed implied...but if that wasn't intended, then sorry.


And who are these "odinists" you speak of?

If he thought it a proper religion would he have put scare quotes round it?


Scare quotes are often intended to provoke a negative association for the word or phrase enclosed in the quotes, or at least a suspicion about the appropriateness or full truth that might be presumed if the quotes were omitted.

TrickyFiction
06-13-2008, 12:12 AM
This is an interesting conversation. I'm learning.


And, what if there had been a break in christianity? Would that make the bible less valid in your eyes? Would all of a sudden christianity become a second class religion?

I have a question for those who know about this culture. Was the old Norse religion a religion "of the book"?

What I know about Christianity is that it has always been "of the book" because it sprang from Judaism, which shifted to an "of the book" faith when it lost its temple. (When I say "the book" I'm not talking about the Bible/canon, since it wasn't compiled until Rome owned the religion. I'm talking about the uncommonly high reverence of scripture in these religions.)

The reason I'm asking is that if the old Norse religion was not "of the book," I'm not sure it's comparable that way.

Nateskate
06-13-2008, 02:23 AM
I'm sorry, but Christianity has been alive since the first Christians. The pre-Christian Scandinavian belief system died out. What exists as religion now, are modern revivals based on the medieval texts that still survive (written by Christians).

I am talking about the culture that produced these myths. I am, basically, talking about history.


The apocolyptic references to Gog and Magog were first written between 500-700 B.C. and since much of this was carried into the Babylonian and Persian cultures, as Ezekiel wrote of these things during the time of captivity, it's quite possible the prophecies in Ezekiel 38 and 39 could have influenced or been changed and a varient wound up in the west.

I'm not saying that the Norse Myths are looking at good and evil in the same Judeo/Christian sense, but the battle of Gog and Magog- which may indeed have come later in Norse myths, was an Epic Battle between good and evil, although it is a kind of war of the gods of their mythology.

And again, as this relates to Tolkien, and LOTR, remember his analogy on faire stories, likening fairy tales from the past as one large pot, and throughout history it keeps being added to.

When I speak of Norse Myths, I'm merely referring to the ones I know, which may be later versions, and how I interpret them. But regardless, I'm certain that Tolkien didn't draw a line in the sand, in terms of what age he drew myths from. He obviously borrowed some clearly english myths that were fairly contemporary.

Carole
06-13-2008, 03:12 AM
I'd love to see Patti ring in here. As I understand it, she is also well versed in Norse...um...mythology, religion...don't wanna make anyone mad :)

Medievalist
06-13-2008, 08:42 AM
What exists as religion now, are modern revivals based on the medieval texts that still survive (written by Christians).

Err. . . I'm completely uninterested in the religious debate issues, but not all Icelandic texts, the Old Norse texts, were down by Christians. Yes, I know Snorri Sturluson was, but the people who wrote down the sagas mostly were not.

Medievalist
06-13-2008, 08:45 AM
She's a Norwegian professor of religious history at the University of Oslo. This from the interwebs:



Here (http://www.dur.ac.uk/medieval.www/sagaconf/steinsland.htm)'s a sample of her work (though not on the specific topic under discussion).

Her Norse Religion: Myths, Rites and Society (Pax Forlag, 2005) is the definitive introductory textbook in her field, and I believe the first one fully incorporating the last 30 years' research.

She's pretty well known in the relevant academic circles. To put it mildly :)

She's very well respected.

Medievalist
06-13-2008, 08:52 AM
The apocolyptic references to Gog and Magog were first written between 500-700 B.C. and since much of this was carried into the Babylonian and Persian cultures, as Ezekiel wrote of these things during the time of captivity, it's quite possible the prophecies in Ezekiel 38 and 39 could have influenced or been changed and a varient wound up in the west. .

They're really not at all Norse Nate; really. They aren't even Germanic roots as words--they can't in fact, be Norse. They are completely Near Eastern. Might you be thinking of something else? Gog and Magog aren't even two people--one is a king, and one is a place.

They've been incorporated into folklore, because of medieval scribes who knew the Bible, much as Noah was incorporated into Irish myth, and indeed, as Magog was, as well.

Medievalist
06-13-2008, 08:59 AM
I have a question for those who know about this culture. Was the old Norse religion a religion "of the book"?

It was not; runes were directly inspired by contact with Greek and Roman writing systems--there was, therefore, no book.

There were however elaborate myths with religious values preserved in very carefully structured and memorized poems, along with a variety of other kinds of knowledge, ranging from family lines of descent, to laws, to parables, etc.

We don't, really, know all that much in practical terms about, say, ritual practices; we have tantalizing references, some of them contradictory, and some rather scattered archaeological evidence.

Medievalist
06-13-2008, 09:02 AM
And again, as this relates to Tolkien, and LOTR, remember his analogy on faire stories, likening fairy tales from the past as one large pot, and throughout history it keeps being added to.

But Tolkien was speaking of a very specific kind of story when he wrote about faerie/fairy tales; not all myths.


He obviously borrowed some clearly english myths that were fairly contemporary.

Not so much, actually, and most of those were about very specific places, more folklore than myth. He really was looking to the medieval texts.

Willowmound
06-13-2008, 04:18 PM
I happen to know a few people ( two swedes and a dane) who can trace back their family's practise of Odinism as far back as they can trace their family -- but again not openly. Even now, most odinists don't proclaim their faith in public.


Hrm. I am Norwegian and I have to say that I'm more than a little sceptical when I hear stuff like this.

I'd be interested in hearing how they have traced it.

There are remnants still of the old faith in Scandinavia, but these exist in the form of Christmas (Yule) traditions, midsummer celebration traditions, creatures in folk tales (our trolls, basically, are the old giants), in (now dead) superstitions, and of course everywhere in place names and given names.

I'm pretty into this stuff, I study it and I write about it, and I must say that Odinism doesn't really exist in Scandinavia. I'm speaking broadly here, of course.

Willowmound
06-13-2008, 04:26 PM
Err. . . I'm completely uninterested in the religious debate issues, but not all Icelandic texts, the Old Norse texts, were down by Christians. Yes, I know Snorri Sturluson was, but the people who wrote down the sagas mostly were not.

How do you determine that? I think you are mistaken. Are there specific sagas you know that were written down by pagans (for lack of a better word?)

Mr Flibble
06-13-2008, 04:29 PM
Hrm. I am Norwegian and I have to say that I'm more than a little sceptical when I hear stuff like this.

I'd be interested in hearing how they have traced it.

I'm not 100% sure.


There are remnants still of the old faith in Scandinavia, but these exist in the form of Christmas (Yule) traditions, midsummer celebration traditions, creatures in folk tales (our trolls, basically, are the old giants), in (now dead) superstitions, and of course everywhere in place names and given names.

I'm pretty into this stuff, I study it and I write about it, and I must say that Odinism doesn't really exist in Scandinavia. I'm speaking broadly here, of course.

It certainly does exist. Ok it's not a huge religion or anything, the numbers are small, but I know ( online anyway) a lot of odinists, and at least 80% are from scandinavia. I'm not sure how it is out there, but here certainly it's not something you broadcast to everyone you meet.

Willowmound
06-13-2008, 04:30 PM
It seemed implied...but if that wasn't intended, then sorry.

If he thought it a proper religion would he have put scare quotes round it?

I apologise for the quotes. I didn't actually know there were people who called themselves Odinists. I'd only ever heard people talk about Åsatru.

I don't like any religion much, but I certainly don't think yours is worse than any oher. :)

Mr Flibble
06-13-2008, 04:40 PM
I apologise for the quotes. I didn't actually know there were people who called themselves Odinists. I'd only ever heard people talk about Åsatru.

I don't like any religion much, but I certainly don't think yours is worse than any oher. :)

Fair enough. I'd call it asatru, only I don't have the right keyboard for the squiggley bit....besides most people would go 'huh?', whereas odinist -- well it's pretty obvious :)

Willowmound
06-13-2008, 04:40 PM
It certainly does exist. Ok it's not a huge religion or anything, the numbers are small, but I know ( online anyway) a lot of odinists, and at least 80% are from scandinavia. I'm not sure how it is out there, but here certainly it's not something you broadcast to everyone you meet.

Clearly. And I'm sure there would be hundreds. But in terms of visibility and influence, they are like the neo-druids here in Britain, which is to say low and none, respectively.

My point being, Scandinavia isn't a bastion of Odinism. Not saying that you ever claimed it was. :)

Nateskate
06-13-2008, 07:39 PM
They're really not at all Norse Nate; really. They aren't even Germanic roots as words--they can't in fact, be Norse. They are completely Near Eastern. Might you be thinking of something else? Gog and Magog aren't even two people--one is a king, and one is a place.

They've been incorporated into folklore, because of medieval scribes who knew the Bible, much as Noah was incorporated into Irish myth, and indeed, as Magog was, as well.

Ah, a bit of philology. Yes, indeed, these were Middle Eastern, and from such an early period. I looked at ancient maps to try to pinpoint where they were in the ancient world, and those maps are so ancient- the kinds with the sea-serpents, that they weren't very helpful.

The O.T does trace Gog from Noah. However, there is so little written in history, that the relevence of Gog and Magog, except that they are mentioned in apocalyptic literature, are so vague, that it is difficult to know whether these names have some kind of metaphorical significance, rather than depicting literal kingdoms.

Tirjasdyn
06-13-2008, 09:33 PM
I'd certainly accept that only Christianity (maybe) really holds to a notion of evil as that word has come to mean in English.


That denies the Zoroastrian contribution to Christianity. :D

Nateskate
06-14-2008, 08:00 PM
That denies the Zoroastrian contribution to Christianity. :D

People forget that Christianity is really rooted in Judaism, and is not the root, but the branch. Judaism was assimilated into multiple cultures throughout history, and so, the commonalities found in other religions can really be traced to early Jewish writings.

But people also are unaware that there were other spiritual writings that predate the Law of Moses. We know from the Old Testament that there was a law given to Noah and his sons. And we also know of the book of Enoch, of which it was written, "Enoch walked with God..."

Perhaps there are multiple "Books of Enoch", but the early Church was aware of this book, as it is mentioned in one of the Epistles.

Some theorize that Noah carried books on the Ark, whether or not that's true.

I'm just saying that there are going to be similar thoughts in many religions- regardless of what is inspired- or revelatory- because even science now believes that Mankind sprung from the same geographical area- the Eve Doctrine, which is an evolutionary, not religious doctrine. So, there were shared thoughts at different points in history.

JoshEllingson
12-04-2009, 11:16 AM
I'd rather say it's built on incomplete snippets of a culture that is long gone. So I'm afraid I can't accept that it's grown out of pre-Christian Scandinavian culture. It's re-imagined, I'd say. I'll give you the quotes. But I still hold that any link between modern Odinism and the old faith is tenuous at best.

hmmm...are you aware that the it was not until the the 14th and 15th centuries that paganism was 'offficially wiped out' in Scandinavia? Most of the Scandinavian countries retained their Heathen beliefs, while claiming to be Christian. Hell, what other countries do you know of that have government employees whose job is soley to go to construction sites and make peace with the land wights? I have been studying religion and history most of my life and can tell you that modern Asatru, (my religion), is based on Pre-Christian ideology. Some of the religion has had to change, obviously, or it would be an irrelevant religion in the modern world.

btw. there are know references from the desert religions in the eddas, which are where the tenets of our religion comes from.

Willowmound
12-04-2009, 02:57 PM
Wow, resurrecting an old thread here!


hmmm...are you aware that the it was not until the the 14th and 15th centuries that paganism was 'offficially wiped out' in Scandinavia?

Officially? What official source are you referencing?


Most of the Scandinavian countries retained their Heathen beliefs, while claiming to be Christian.

On what basis do you claim this?


Hell, what other countries do you know of that have government employees whose job is soley to go to construction sites and make peace with the land wights?

Are you suggesting Scandinavian countries do? If you are, you have been horribly mislead, I'm afraid.


btw. there are know references from the desert religions in the eddas, which are where the tenets of our religion comes from.

Not quite sure what you mean by this.