Is Neopaganism in any way related to classical paganism?

[Ukko]

So saying "I'm a Pagan" and *not* accepting a lot (Many? Most? Depends on the brand, I assume) of the rituals and practices of paganism seems questionable. Note that I'm not saying "Killing people is good," or "Sacred violence is keen," just that it was an aspect of the trellis, and if you ain't got that, you end up with a vine in a different shape, which makes it questionable as to whether or not that's the kind of vine you really want in the first place.

But you (or your friend) havent mentioned alot of the rituals. You just focussed on sacrifice and (doing what SF&C said) "taking this or that small element and attempting to paint those elements as being fully representative of the entire whole" or, making out that this element was all it was and that not adhering to it invalidates everything.

But lets have fun for a moment. Out of those of you who think that these things are necessary to be a "proper pagan", which ones are going to, in a society that claims freedom of religion for all and the right to practice, fight for the right of the pagan to kill people? Because whats the point of arguing that they are not "really pagan if they dont do all that the pagans did" when they are not even allowed the choice to do so?

The fact is, this is the 21st century, we no longer kill people for luck, a better harvest or victory in war and we dont have to. Im not gonna hang someone from a tree and stab them with a spear, and christians arent gonna burn any witches. This is 2011, and that is the reason.

EDIT: Is it me or is everything im saying in here coming across sarcastic and confrontational?

[Ukko]

The Jews didn't rebuild the temple because the Romans wouldn't let them. After the second Jewish War (133-136 AD) Jews weren't allowed within a hundred miles of Jerusalem, excepting once a year when they were allowed within eyeshot, so they could weep over lost glories. By the time this was no longer an issue, they were several centuries without a temple, and the Synagogue style of Judaism - which had been evolving in the late Temple period anyway - was dominant. Other powers claimed the location, and none were particularly keen on it being rebuilt. So your answer is: Political reasons.

You can't have sacrifices without the temple, and the temple can only be *there.* Also, to maintain the continuity of worship, new sacrifices can not begin without the ashes of the Red Heifer, which are lost. Failing those two things, it's a dead issue, and Judaism has been forced to evolve past the need for sacrifices. *fortunately* the book of Isaiah has God saying a lot of critical stuff about sacrifice anyway.

As to Christianity, pick a practice and I'll tell you why we don't do it anymore, if I know.

But then that isnt a religious reason for the Jews to no longer sacrifice. Its others that have, by various means, prevented the tradition from continuing, much like pagans and sacrifice.

[SF_and_Coffee]

Don't you suppose that it's possible for modern Paganism to have evolved and changed just as Christianity and other faiths have done since the times of their own inception?

Perhaps. In which case, it's a good thing I'm open to talking about it, rather than railing on in my ignorance, right?

You missed the thrust of my post completely, which was that when it's pointed out that religions like Christianity or Judaism don't do certain things now that they used to do, you chalk that up to those religions having evolved away from some practices and into new ones (or that there are external reasons which are valid). Yet somehow you seem to think that Paganism can't be Paganism unless it adheres completely to all of the ancient practices which are ascribed to it. Why the double standard?

[Gatefan1976]

I think you are missing the point. The question is why modern pagans do not do these things since ancient pagans did. For example, Ancient Jews (Particularly the bigger group known as Hebrews) sacrificed animals. Jews have provided an explanation as to why these sacrifices no longer continue based on their religious views. The simple explanation is that No temple= No sacrifices. They could do it if they had a Prophet, but they don't have one (For this they have an explanation as well).

Both Ukko and SF&C did adress this, the simple answer is that paganism has evolved to suit the world it lives in now.

So the question is, why don't modern pagans act out their religious lives like the ancient pagans? Why do modern pagans that might believe in X pantheon of gods or beliefs not do the same things as did their ancient counterparts. This is what "Heather's" complaint is all about. R3 isn't acusing any pagans past or present of any form of savagery or barbarism from what I can tell. For example:

A core component of many pagan systems is the desire to understand the world both within and without. When we were more ignorant, we used to think that sacrificing an animal would help with better crops and apease the gods, these days we have far more reliable methods to grow better crops, thus removing the percieved "need" to sacrifice anything. As to apeasing the gods, we just found other, more socially acceptable things to do. For example, in many traditions there is the "thanksgiving style" feast where you thank the gods for thier aid and support, and a portion is kept aside for the gods, in essence, sacrificed, to them.

He mentioned violence, once again. Jews have an explination as to why they don't go around killing everyone off like their ancestors did. Now what about Modern Pagans, do they have an explination as to why they don't do it anymore?

Well, for starters, it's illegal
For seconds, when exactly *did* they go around "killing everybody off"??

Ancient Pagans ate meat. How do modern pagans who claim that vegetarianism is part of their pagan beliefs reconcile this discrepancy?

You've got me there, stumps me as well. To my knowledge, there is no *religious* reason for it at all.

Who cares about "issues" this is about religious beliefs, not attributing value judgements on these actions. Though I wouldn't call American/Canadian Native Americans pagan per se (unlike some of their co-continental "friends" south of the modern border), I don't know if old world pagans did this. But let's say they did. The question is why don't their modern counterparts do it today? An explination is what is being asked for. Today, Jews continue to fast and so do Christians (it's an individual thing that shouldn't be publicized...according to the bible). Self mutilation is slightly still practiced by some Catholics, and to be honest there is some debate on whether or not such a practice is even biblical. So your comparable here isn't the best one but even if it was, Jews and Christians explain why the practice either remains or is abandoned. "Heather" (I quote because I know her not) wants to know why pagans today abandon these practices, and she wants (from what I can tell here) a religious answer.

I think the problem here is a disconnect between *ritual* and *religion*
Vision quests and the various methods to go about them have NOT been abandoned, not by any stretch of the imagination. Heathers group *Chose* not to do them, for whatever reason, and thats thier call, perhaps they found a different way to achieve a similar result, I don't know.

How could you forget the Aztecs

I didn't, I just did not use them as an example because I know very little about Mesoamerican belief structures.

Once again, this isn't about attributing value judgements. Christians have a very good explanation as to why people aren't going onto the cross for our sins every year around Passover. So what explanation do modern pagans have for not continueing this belief that their ancient counterparts had? A religious explanation, not a legal one. The point is to explain it away on religious terms. This is something that R3's friend never got, a religious explanation for these differences.

It is not nessesary anymore, there are other ways to achieve the same results based on our knowledge now. I'm sure if I hunted hard enough I could come up with some lovely "prose" answer, but it would not be MY answer.

[SF_and_Coffee]

To expand on something that Gatefan1976 mentioned, in many Pagan (and even Wiccan) traditions, it is customary to regularly pour a libation to one's deity or deities -- meaning that a ritual beverage (often ale or wine, but it can be anything) is poured into a glass or cup, and then a portion of what's in the cup is ceremonially spilled on the ground as an offering. The person who does this then drinks what's left in the cup, and shares it with others if they are present. A similar ritual may be performed with food items such as bread, sweet cakes, cookies, etc. wherein the food is consecrated to the deities but then consumed by the people participating in the rite. These are modern-day remnants of or stand-ins for ancient sacrificial practices.

If you think about it, this isn't all that different from the bread and wine of Christian communion being a substitute for the flesh and blood of ancient Jewish Temple sacrifices, is it?

[Gatefan1976]

Taboos? "Don't eat pork," "Don't touch menstruating women," "Don't eat certain kinds of trigger fish at certain times of the year," "Anything that washes up on the beach belongs to the king," "Only the king can surf," etc.

Hmm
None I can think of of the top of my head no, but I will look into it.

Violence: Well, the Berzerkers were violent, according to what I've read they were barely-contained even in peacetime. There was a sacred aspect to violence in some primitive faiths. ("Primitive" In the sense of chronology).

It's not the violence so much that was sacred, it's the notion that you touched on earlier that the Bezerkers were "touched by Odin". To Christianise the concept, they were touched by god. As such it was the duty of the priest/esses to take care of them. I believe there are strong Christian traditions that follow the same notion of offering aid and comfort to the sick.

Vegetarianism: Intended as a joke. I've known a lot of Wiccans who are really obsessive about it.

As I said to Tood, I can think of no religious reason why that is relavent, Lifestyle choice, sure.

Heather's point - and we've kind of interpolated it enough that we're getting into my point, I guess - is that religion is to a degree a game you're playing with your own mind. You're building a metaphor, a framework for seeing things beyond the merely physical and temporal, and the rituals and assumptions are sort of like the trellis that shapes the vines.

Ahhh.............
I know this well.

Don't have that, you end up with just a bunch of easy-to-trip-over mostly-useless crap on the ground.

So you prune, to continue the analogy.

Eventually, if one is serious enough and willing to put enough effort into it, one can transcend these, and get a greater understanding - this is commonly what mystics do - but you need to start from somewhere. It's all a learning curve. If one picks an existing franchise, then one has all the benefits and disadvantages of that franchise, but the disadvantages are part of the learning curve as well, and learning to work around them is at least as important as going "Oh, cool!" to the good stuff. If one chooses to say "I'm a Christian," but ignores Communion, denies the Divinity of Christ, ignores the Pauline epistles, and completely discards the Gospel and Acts naratives, well, *are* they a Christian?

Very good, but this comes down to one question really.
Is the BELIEF more important than the RITUAL, or the other way around?

They may be, but from an outsider's perspective it seems rather notional, and they've put themselves in a position where they're not really getting any of the good stuff or the important not-as-good stuff. Thomas Jefferson, for instance, occasionally identified himself as a Christian, but it was entirely in the philosophical sense, not in a religious or metaphysical sense.

Is there something inherently wrong with that idea?

So saying "I'm a Pagan" and *not* accepting a lot (Many? Most? Depends on the brand, I assume) of the rituals and practices of paganism seems questionable. Note that I'm not saying "Killing people is good," or "Sacred violence is keen," just that it was an aspect of the trellis, and if you ain't got that, you end up with a vine in a different shape, which makes it questionable as to whether or not that's the kind of vine you really want in the first place.

If I plant a Passionfruit vine, no matter what support structure I use, I will get passionfruits, its what I planted.

Christianity has evolved quite a bit over the last 2000 years, and dogma aside there are some massive terra incognitas in its early history. One could make a strong (but ultimately probably futile) argument that it isn't.

Futile, yes. It may not be *exactly* the same, but its core elements remain intact. Neopaganism may not be *exactly* the same as "Old skool" paganism, but it's core elements remain intact.

[Gatefan1976]

to expand on something that gatefan1976 mentioned, in many pagan (and even wiccan) traditions, it is customary to regularly pour a libation to one's deity or deities -- meaning that a ritual beverage (often ale or wine, but it can be anything) is poured into a glass or cup, and then a portion of what's in the cup is ceremonially spilled on the ground as an offering. The person who does this then drinks what's left in the cup, and shares it with others if they are present. A similar ritual may be performed with food items such as bread, sweet cakes, cookies, etc. Wherein the food is consecrated to the deities but then consumed by the people participating in the rite. These are modern-day remnants of or stand-ins for ancient sacrificial practices.

if you think about it, this isn't all that different from the bread and wine of christian communion being a substitute for the flesh and blood of ancient jewish temple sacrifices, is it?

No, it isn't.

[aretood2]

A havent really seen any explanations as to why Jews and Christians dont continue all the practises they once did. There is a whole heap of stuff written in the texts which folks choose not to do today. Where are all these "legitimate religious" explanations?
And why not Rebuild temple = continue sacrifice?

EDIT: That sounded very sarcastic!

There is a perfect thread where you can seek the answers to your questions, two actually. One is Christian specific. The explanations exist.

That said, we just want to know the Pagan explanations. Like R3 said, why go on on our ignorance and not ask? If Heather missed something or just been with the "wrong" group of pagans...then shouldn't we be more informed than her? In other words, this isn't about validating practices past or modern, but explaining why and how specific things have changed between the ancients and the modern pagans.

But you (or your friend) havent mentioned alot of the rituals. You just focussed on sacrifice and (doing what SF&C said) "taking this or that small element and attempting to paint those elements as being fully representative of the entire whole" or, making out that this element was all it was and that not adhering to it invalidates everything.

I reiterate: Enlighten us...no really, you don't have to explain everything. Just pick one thing. It brings us one step closer to understanding and being less ignorant, is this not a valid objective?

But lets have fun for a moment. Out of those of you who think that these things are necessary to be a "proper pagan", which ones are going to, in a society that claims freedom of religion for all and the right to practice, fight for the right of the pagan to kill people? Because whats the point of arguing that they are not "really pagan if they dont do all that the pagans did" when they are not even allowed the choice to do so?


The fact is, this is the 21st century, we no longer kill people for luck, a better harvest or victory in war and we dont have to. Im not gonna hang someone from a tree and stab them with a spear, and christians arent gonna burn any witches. This is 2011, and that is the reason.

EDIT: Is it me or is everything im saying in here coming across sarcastic and confrontational?

In some places door to door preaching is illegal, but that hasn't stopped some Christian groups from doing it anyway.

But then that isnt a religious reason for the Jews to no longer sacrifice. Its others that have, by various means, prevented the tradition from continuing, much like pagans and sacrifice.

*raises hand* I sorta gave the reason. No Temple means no sacrifices (It's in the Bible). And the temple has to be in that specific spot, and a few other legal injunctions are involved. They are actually "Fulfilling The Law" in the bible by not sacrificing animals today like they did before. I want an explanation like this, this is what we are asking for (I think, I can only really speak for myself).

You missed the thrust of my post completely, which was that when it's pointed out that religions like Christianity or Judaism don't do certain things now that they used to do, you chalk that up to those religions having evolved away from some practices and into new ones (or that there are external reasons which are valid). Yet somehow you seem to think that Paganism can't be Paganism unless it adheres completely to all of the ancient practices which are ascribed to it. Why the double standard?

No double standard on my part. I have not seen or heard of an explanation like in the case of the Jews. Without an explanation, what else do we have to conclude other than say that today's pagans are not connected to the ancient ones? In the absence of an explanation, can you blame us for this conclusion? We therefore ask about how this evolution took place. We need not a detailed encyclopedia, just a starting point. An example or two.

Both Ukko and SF&C did adress this, the simple answer is that paganism has evolved to suit the world it lives in now.

This is a start, now how? Why? Where? When? Who? What?

A core component of many pagan systems is the desire to understand the world both within and without. When we were more ignorant, we used to think that sacrificing an animal would help with better crops and apease the gods, these days we have far more reliable methods to grow better crops, thus removing the percieved "need" to sacrifice anything. As to apeasing the gods, we just found other, more socially acceptable things to do. For example, in many traditions there is the "thanksgiving style" feast where you thank the gods for thier aid and support, and a portion is kept aside for the gods, in essence, sacrificed, to them.

Something like this is what was being asked for. So do go on, tell me about this "Thanksgiving style" feast. Elaborate about its ancient counterpart and how it evolved...if you don't know, that's okay. You could pick something that you know more about.

You've got me there, stumps me as well. To my knowledge, there is no *religious* reason for it at all.

Some, or it is the impression that I have, base their vegetarianism on their pagan beliefs. That is they say they are vegetarian because of their pagan lifestyle. Now

I think the problem here is a disconnect between *ritual* and *religion*
Vision quests and the various methods to go about them have NOT been abandoned, not by any stretch of the imagination. Heathers group *Chose* not to do them, for whatever reason, and thats thier call, perhaps they found a different way to achieve a similar result, I don't know.

I wouldn't know, I think talking about this with R3 would be more productive since he would know more about her group...

I didn't, I just did not use them as an example because I know very little about Mesoamerican belief structures.

My ancestors praise you...but according to the Mexican national narrative, my ancestors were not enemies of the Aztecs...so...BOOO!!! Shame on you! You offend me sir *makes snobby face*

It is not nessesary anymore, there are other ways to achieve the same results based on our knowledge now. I'm sure if I hunted hard enough I could come up with some lovely "prose" answer, but it would not be MY answer.

Any valid answer would do *shrugs* you're the expert on Paganism around here...

[SF_and_Coffee]

Gee, and here I thought, "Well, they evolved from the older practices to a newer set of practices" should be as acceptable an explanation regarding Paganism as it is regarding Christianity. Silly me.

[aretood2]

Gee, and here I thought, "Well, they evolved from the older practices to a newer set of practices" should be as acceptable an explanation regarding Paganism as it is regarding Christianity. Silly me.

Well coming from someone who wants to know specifics for the sake of knowing more about....the world. I don't really think it is too much to ask. No one is making or forcing anyone to answer questions, this isn't a trap in where if you can't provide an answer someone like me would go "HA! So they aren't real pagans!" It's just a simple case of curiosity. It's no different then wanting to know more about the five pillars of Islam, or the Noble truths of Buddhism. It's not like these beliefs are some big secret that prevents pagans from sharing them....are they?

[SF_and_Coffee]

No, but the point about double standards is that if "it evolved" is a good enough answer for one group of religions (and the person who began by asking all of these questions seems to think it is) then it has to be good enough for all the others as well.

And honestly, "modern paganism has evolved practices that are different from ancient paganism" really IS the only answer anyone is likely to get, because it happens to be the truth. No one can explain it further, because there really isn't any further explanation that hasn't already been discussed on this thread.

Please note that I am speaking as a Pagan here. You and R3 asked a question regarding the religion I happen to embrace, and as a practitioner and student of that religion, I am answering the question. I really don't know why that isn't good enough.

[aretood2]

No, but the point about double standards is that if "it evolved" is a good enough answer for one group of religions (and the person who began by asking all of these questions seems to think it is) then it has to be good enough for all the others as well.

And honestly, "modern paganism has evolved practices that are different from ancient paganism" really IS the only answer anyone is likely to get, because it happens to be the truth. No one can explain it further, because there really isn't any further explanation that hasn't already been discussed on this thread.

Please note that I am speaking as a Pagan here. You and R3 asked a question regarding my religion, and as a practitioner and student of that religion, I am answering the question. I really don't know why that isn't good enough.

Actually, "It evolved" is not a good enough answer for any religion be it Christian or not. It is too ambiguous. I don't see why anyone ought to be satisfied with such an answer when it comes to changes in Christianity (be it perceived changes or real changes). To be honest, I'd say that if anyone gives you that as an answer, then they really haven't explained why these "Changes" exist in Christianity. Therefore there is no reason why you should consider it a valid explanation, because it is not. It is the bases of an explanation, but not an explanation itself. The explanation is how did it evolve and the reasoning behind it. GF sorta went over a broad example or two of this. I just wouldn't mind getting to know more.

[SF_and_Coffee]

I'm not saying whether I accept or don't accept it for Christianity, but R3 certainly seems to. And it absolutely is true for Paganism. I mean, really, what other answer is there besides evolution due to the fact that some things are no longer legal, and some phenomena are better-understood these days could there possibly be?

Occasionally, Occam's Razor really is your friend.

[Gatefan1976]

This is a start, now how? Why? Where? When? Who? What?

I gotta ask Tood, *What* are you looking for here?
A historical diatribe??
Paganism as the "whole entity" people want to decribe it as was systematicly destroyed by Christianity, its writings, few as they were were destroyed, it's "holy spaces" torn down and churches dedicated to Jehovah built on top of them, It's gods demonized to the point where the "modern visual interpretation" of Satan is no more than Kernunnos with his cloven hoofs and horns.

Honestly, and we are still on conversational levels here, what exactly do you expect to survive a progom that was run for almost 2000 years?? Quite frankly, I'm sometimes *amazed* that anything survived. Sheesh, up until 1953, "witchcraft" was ILLEGAL in England.

Something like this is what was being asked for. So do go on, tell me about this "Thanksgiving style" feast. Elaborate about its ancient counterpart and how it evolved...if you don't know, that's okay. You could pick something that you know more about.

What do you want to know?
The simple answer is that "traditional" sacrifieces were no longer "viable" due to the law, and unwilling to totally abandon the idea or belief, the pagans adapted. Instead of sacrificing an animal on the gods altar, they left offerings instead. Let me ask you a question as a devout person. IF Christianity was declared illegal tomorrow, would YOU not find another way to worship Jehovah?

Some, or it is the impression that I have, base their vegetarianism on their pagan beliefs. That is they say they are vegetarian because of their pagan lifestyle. Now

Then they are ignorant.
Many Vegetarians base thier choice on the idea of "meat is murder", yet by doing so, they ignore the idea that plants share in conciousness as well, and "murdering" a plant is somehow more "acceptable" Guess what, it isn't. Humans *by design* are omnivores, we operate best on a mixture of plant and flesh matter. It's not "immoral" to eat meat, or plants, its a function of our existance. These days however we know enough to mitigate the need for one or the other if one chose to.

I wouldn't know, I think talking about this with R3 would be more productive since he would know more about her group...

Sure.

My ancestors praise you...but according to the Mexican national narrative, my ancestors were not enemies of the Aztecs...so...BOOO!!! Shame on you! You offend me sir *makes snobby face*

Enlighten me, this is not a one way street as far as I am concerned

Any valid answer would do *shrugs* you're the expert on Paganism around here...

One:
I am NO expert, I am the FIRST person to say I'm ignorant, I have IDEAS, no more.

Two:
What is valid?
A book with a nigh 2000 year history? 3600 year history?
Sorry, someone burnt mine

[Gatefan1976]

Well coming from someone who wants to know specifics for the sake of knowing more about....the world. I don't really think it is too much to ask. No one is making or forcing anyone to answer questions, this isn't a trap in where if you can't provide an answer someone like me would go "HA! So they aren't real pagans!" It's just a simple case of curiosity. It's no different then wanting to know more about the five pillars of Islam, or the Noble truths of Buddhism. It's not like these beliefs are some big secret that prevents pagans from sharing them....are they?

Tood
No offence, seriously, but you DO KNOW these are "Mystery religions" we are talking about yeah??

[SF_and_Coffee]

< would green ^ for these two latest posts, if Gateworld would let her.

(Someone burnt mine, too. Imagine that!)

[Gatefan1976]

< would green ^ for these two latest posts, if Gateworld would let her.

(Someone burnt mine, too. Imagine that!)

Hey,
It's the THOUGHT that counts..............

[aretood2]

I gotta ask Tood, *What* are you looking for here?
A historical diatribe??
Paganism as the "whole entity" people want to decribe it as was systematicly destroyed by Christianity, its writings, few as they were were destroyed, it's "holy spaces" torn down and churches dedicated to Jehovah built on top of them, It's gods demonized to the point where the "modern visual interpretation" of Satan is no more than Kernunnos with his cloven hoofs and horns.

More or less...yes. Whatever is left to examine is of interest to me...you know as someone who enjoys history. I am shooting in the dark here. Which is why I ask many questions, because I simply am not informed.

Honestly, and we are still on conversational levels here, what exactly do you expect to survive a progom that was run for almost 2000 years?? Quite frankly, I'm sometimes *amazed* that anything survived. Sheesh, up until 1953, "witchcraft" was ILLEGAL in England.

To be honest, I am amazed that we know what we know about anything that happened before the 1800's. History has many holes in it. But what is out there varies despite how unforgivable the times have been. Like I said, shooting in the dark. I mean we sorta have all ten tablets of the Epic of Gilgamesh. And that is way older than the vikings. Grant it, Middle Eastern cultures had writing which makes preservation a lot easier.

What do you want to know?
The simple answer is that "traditional" sacrifieces were no longer "viable" due to the law, and unwilling to totally abandon the idea or belief, the pagans adapted. Instead of sacrificing an animal on the gods altar, they left offerings instead. Let me ask you a question as a devout person. IF Christianity was declared illegal tomorrow, would YOU not find another way to worship Jehovah?

This is a good explanation I guess. As for your question, no, I would not find another way to worship him. I would do it anyway. It never stopped Jews under Greek rule when Judaism was illegal nor Christians when Christianity was illegal in the Roman Empire...

Then they are ignorant.
Many Vegetarians base thier choice on the idea of "meat is murder", yet by doing so, they ignore the idea that plants share in conciousness as well, and "murdering" a plant is somehow more "acceptable" Guess what, it isn't. Humans *by design* are omnivores, we operate best on a mixture of plant and flesh matter. It's not "immoral" to eat meat, or plants, its a function of our existance. These days however we know enough to mitigate the need for one or the other if one chose to.

Perhaps that is a tad harsh to put it. There is a Christian version of this as well. In the Bible Apostle Paul speaks of some who refrain from eating meat on account of their faith. He said that one ought not to judge them as they shouldn't judge meat eating Christians. This is so because it is a matter of faith. I was wondering if there is an equal situation in any Pagan group.

Enlighten me, this is not a one way street as far as I am concerned

From what I know/remember, in order to keep the Sun coming up every day the Aztecs were required to offer up human sacrifices. This is based on the belief that the gods sacrificed themselves in some capacity to help bring about the current world. By getting a warrior (their own or a defeated enemy) to sacrifice his heart, they would insure the continuation of this world by offering their own sacrifice in return. It was considered an honorable death, and in some way a connection to their gods. The "sacrificee" would become part of the world/go in some way. I am a little fuzzy on the details.

Obviously this no longer happens. The belief has been largely destroyed by the spread of Catholicism. I don't think there are any real groups out there that profess the same form of Aztec paganism, most that I have heard about blend Paganism with Catholicism.

A good question is, would these groups be considered actual Aztec pagans? Or are these neopagan groups no longer related to Paganism of old?

One:
I am NO expert, I am the FIRST person to say I'm ignorant, I have IDEAS, no more.

Two:
What is valid?
A book with a nigh 2000 year history? 3600 year history?
Sorry, someone burnt mine

Compared to me that is....yes you are. Speaking on relative terms here, not literally.

I don't understand. By valid I mean religiously valid, as in you just didn't pull it out of a certain body part, that it is a system of beliefs that developed over time across generations....

Tood
No offence, seriously, but you DO KNOW these are "Mystery religions" we are talking about yeah??

Did I not say I was ignorant?

[Gatefan1976]

More or less...yes. Whatever is left to examine is of interest to me...you know as someone who enjoys history. I am shooting in the dark here. Which is why I ask many questions, because I simply am not informed.

Sure, I can totally dig that.
I would start narrowing down exactly *what* you want to look at though.
IF you wanted to look at Norse beliefs, pick up or look at online Lee M Hollanders translation of the Edda's for example.
I dunno, sounds like you want to know more, and as much as I'd like to say I can tell you all you want to know, I just can't.
If you want a list of "suggested reading" however, I could probably provide that.

To be honest, I am amazed that we know what we know about anything that happened before the 1800's. History has many holes in it. But what is out there varies despite how unforgivable the times have been. Like I said, shooting in the dark. I mean we sorta have all ten tablets of the Epic of Gilgamesh. And that is way older than the vikings. Grant it, Middle Eastern cultures had writing which makes preservation a lot easier.

Well, this is *somewhat* related to the idea of writing (the act of physically recording information), can be a good or bad thing, But I don't think that's what you are talking about. History has a funny way of "appearing" or being "proven" when we really need it sometimes.

This is a good explanation I guess. As for your question, no, I would not find another way to worship him. I would do it anyway. It never stopped Jews under Greek rule when Judaism was illegal nor Christians when Christianity was illegal in the Roman Empire...

No it did not, it did however get people crucified, fed to lions and burnt at the stake.
Are you REALLY ready to die for no reason besides that you believe in Jehovah??

Perhaps that is a tad harsh to put it. There is a Christian version of this as well. In the Bible Apostle Paul speaks of some who refrain from eating meat on account of their faith. He said that one ought not to judge them as they shouldn't judge meat eating Christians. This is so because it is a matter of faith. I was wondering if there is an equal situation in any Pagan group.

Hmm
Purely "faithwise", no, not that I am aware of.

From what I know/remember, in order to keep the Sun coming up every day the Aztecs were required to offer up human sacrifices. This is based on the belief that the gods sacrificed themselves in some capacity to help bring about the current world. By getting a warrior (their own or a defeated enemy) to sacrifice his heart, they would insure the continuation of this world by offering their own sacrifice in return. It was considered an honorable death, and in some way a connection to their gods. The "sacrificee" would become part of the world/go in some way. I am a little fuzzy on the details.

Notice the use of your word "honorable"
Why did Christ become a sacrifice?

Obviously this no longer happens. The belief has been largely destroyed by the spread of Catholicism. I don't think there are any real groups out there that profess the same form of Aztec paganism, most that I have heard about blend Paganism with Catholicism.

This is actually a very astute observation. UNLESS your parents were pagan, in the "west" it is VERY likely that you grew up with some form of Christian background, or Athiest/Agnostic.

A good question is, would these groups be considered actual Aztec pagans? Or are these neopagan groups no longer related to Paganism of old?

Let me answer with another question, If a Christian does not believe in the triumverate, does that make them any less Christian?

Compared to me that is....yes you are. Speaking on relative terms here, not literally.

HAHAHAHAHAHAA!! Thank You, but it's not deserved.

I don't understand. By valid I mean religiously valid, as in you just didn't pull it out of a certain body part, that it is a system of beliefs that developed over time across generations....

In other words, it has the "weight" of history upon it.
No, I cannot provide that either, as I said, someone burnt my copy, and apparently SF&C's as well.

Did I not say I was ignorant?

Yes you did, and thats no small thing to admit, and admirable.
My point is, these are "mystery religions", you are sorta asking me to tell you how the Pope is chosen. Even if I DID know, I'm not supposed to tell you

[SF_and_Coffee]

Let me answer with another question, If a Christian does not believe in the triumverate, does that make them any less Christian?

Actually, it is perfectly possible for a Christian to not believe in the Trinity, and yet still be Christian. This doesn't necessarily mean that Trinitarians will accept them as such, but the 16th century Unitarians were indeed Christians who simply believed the God was ONE being rather than a trinity, hence the name "Unitarian" applied to their particular brand of the faith. Also, in very early Christianity, the doctrine of the Trinity had not yet been invented or solidified, so it can be argued (rather successfully) that a great number of the first Christians knew nothing of the Trinity, and therefore did not believe in it.

I can give citations if anyone wants, as this is all historical material. Bear in mind that I am not only a Unitarian-Universalist in addition to being Pagan (this is actually not uncommon, modern UUism being a somewhat different creature from its spiritual forebears, despite having evolved directly from them) but I am also a lay historian specializing in the medieval and Renaissance eras.