One Sec
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.
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.
Last edited:
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.
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.
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.
Last edited:
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.
What you do and believe now has got nothing to do with Scandinavian culture, world view and values 1200 plus years ago.
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.
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.
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.
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'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
If you can't see the blantant depiction of good v evil, well then I wonder what else you cannot see
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.
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.
As long as we can be civil and respectful, I'd love to continue this conversation.
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 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?
She's a Norwegian professor of religious history at the University of Oslo. This from the interwebs:
Here'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
Here'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
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.
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?
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.
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.
- Joined
- Sep 27, 2005
- Messages
- 16,339
- Reaction score
- 4,110
- Location
- East O' The Sun & West O' The Moon
- Website
- www.jlevitt.com
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?
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.
I'm with you on that one.
which would make it neo-christianity?
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.
Last edited:
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.
Last edited:
- Joined
- Oct 11, 2005
- Messages
- 6,698
- Reaction score
- 1,539
- Location
- The City Different
- Website
- www.chrisjohnsonmd.com
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.
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?
I can respect that. I stand by what I say too.