i wonder when LARPagans will ever realize that the Norse gods were only really worshiped for about 400 years and that countries like Denmark Norway etc have been Christian for much longer at this point than they ever worshiped Thor and that they were also just the Roman gods that were brought there and localized by Scandinavian traders while prior to that they only followed a primitive animism.
>>17978707I'm Catholic, and although larpagans are basically infiltrated Indians or aesthetic atheists who continue the militant atheism of 2008 with a new look, this is a bit wrong, the Nordic characters are as old as Proto-Germanic (900 BC) and we can reconstruct them up to the PPG, going back to the CWC. But they are supreme losers with no historical or archaeological consistency
>>17978715>I'm Catholic, and although larpagans are basically infiltrated IndiansProof is that you only really started seeing them online since Indians gained Internet access.
>>17978715This OP is lowering himself to the negative IQ level of cringepagans by disguising the story, there is no evidence that "they were Roman gods", Tacitus who lived among the Germanic people at no time postulates any kind of "borrowing". animism is common in all neopagan fanfics. but yes, cringepagans like larp survivor should be put in the Muslim saddle>>17978707You are as much of a forger as they are.
>>17978719Not only that, the insults and arguments are strangely the same.>Jew killed on a stick.>Muh native religion.>Mary betrayed Joseph.And so on, it's strangely similar.
>>17978707The artifacts and archaeology of the Nordic Bronze Age show no direct evidence of a belief system shaped solely by animism. No serious researcher comes to these conclusions. Rather, calling pagan beliefs a religion, as e-pagans do, is historically false, and what we have today has Christian influence.
>>17978715I don't even defend the history of the ancient pagans anymore.The faggoagans have stolen the discourse. Absolutely everything related to ancient beliefs or mythology in general becomes a narrative about how bad Christianity is and paganism doesn't work. Sad because I just want to study mythology, so I'll let them screw themselves over. Neopaganism has infiltrated academia.Its just like some skyrim fanboys
Riveting discussion, OP
>>17978745>The faggoagans have stolen the discourse.Unfortunately, I must agree. Everything has become a paganism vs. Christianity dichotomy, and worse, a false dichotomy based on antagonistic precepts. It's not much different from the Marxist jargon of oppressor and oppressed, but swap it for Abrahamic and "pagan/Aryan," and boom, there's your dichotomy. This affects serious studies of mythology, which I enjoy.
>>17978755Most pagans are also brown, whether in the quantitative sense (most are Indian) or the many "anti-Abrahamic" pagans who are Indian, in fact, many pagans are even Brazilian. Nice try, but it didn't work.Crazy how larpagans has no problems listening to a mexican and a brazilian....
One of the most recited pagan posters on the internet, with followers and all, who strives to send everything they have to attack Christianity and Christians on a massive scale, instead of actually arguing why paganism is theologically superior or presenting transcendental approaches or substances beyond>the weak desert cult>the warrior religion>the ancestral cultis literally this Onlyfans prostitute, "larpagan"... How come all these "larpagan" influencers have this stance? Hmm, a shame, really
>>17978779>the weak desert culthow weak could it be if it conquered and converted their ancestors anyway?
Dumb cope thread made by seething faggots1) Christians weren't on 4chan until the influx during the Covid lockdowns.2) Christianity is a false and refuted religion, as well as the fastest dying religion on earth. Jesus never rose and he's never coming back. Adam and eve did not exist, there was no global flood, etc.3) white people are not Christian anymore and we will never go back to it4) the majority of Christians are brownYou losers need to come to terms with this rather than spending your Saturdays making seethe threads on a worthless website to cope. It's pathetic.
>>17978707It existed since antiquity you faggot since it would be more accurate to call it Germanic paganism since it was practiced not just by the 8th century Norse, but by all Germanic peoples since ancient times. The only reason it's mistakenly called Norse paganism instead of Germanic paganism is because most of our information on it comes from the Norse who were the last holdout of it by the 8th century AD. The other Germanic peoples in antiquity and even in the early middle ages worshiped the same gods, just referred to them by slightly different names because that's how different languages work. For example, the name of the god "Odin" (Old Norse: Óðinn) is just the Old Norse name for him. His name was rendered in Old English as Woden and Old High German as Wodan or Wotan. They all derive from the Proto-Germanic name reconstructed as *Wōdanaz. Similarly, the name of the god "Thor" (Old Norse: Þórr) is just the Old Norse name for him. His name was rendered in Old English as Þunor and Old High German as Donar. They all derive from the Proto-Germanic name reconstructed as *Þunraz.
>>17978721This. The only reason he referred to the Germanic gods by the names of Roman ones was because he was applying Interpretatio romana to them. “Mercury” was referring to Odin, “Hercules” was referring to Thor, and “Mars” was referring to Týr.
>>17978779>substances beyondsubstantial**>>17978798It's paradoxical: if Christianity is a weak and non-belligerent religion, how exactly was paganism conquered? If The answer is based on forced conversion and genocide, it doesn't refutes the core of the argument? If they were strong enough to commit genocide and kill pagans, then it follows that Christians and their God were not only belligerent and stronger than pagans, but it also shows that if the strong>weak philosophy is correct, paganism must necessarily be denied, since it refutes the above precepts.There is no way out, either Christianity is weak or it is strong.
>>17978818Then you must accept Christianity is weak as its been dominated and destroyed by atheism and secular humanism.
>>17978806it was a parallel they made, they did this with Greek gods too, very common among pagans>>17978799>4Globally, I think the number of non-white "Christians" is around 68%, but that has more to do with demographic issues in white nations. Also, consider that if you look at African Christianity, it's debatable whether it's even the same religion. They also never mention that 1 billion Indians are polytheistic Hindus, and Western paganism has no demographic support whatsoever, In Europe only 10-15% of Christians are non-White.It seems to stem more from jealousy that Europeans were able to spread religion all over the world, which is just anti-Colonialism (left wing).There are 1.1 billion brown pagans in India.
>>17978822>Then you must accept Christianity is weak as its been dominated and destroyed by atheism and secular humanismAtheistic ideologies dominated nothing, they were tried for a while in the 20th century, got a shitton of people killed, and were quickly abandoned.
>>17978834Define "pagan" in any way other than "not Jewish Christians or muslim".Over half a billion white people are not Jewish Christian or Muslim and thus would be pagan under any definition of paganism that is simply not one of those 3 religions. It's not a good definition
>>17978836No they weren't. Atheism is growing faster than any religion other than Islam and there are more atheists in 2025 than ever. Yes, atheists dominated Christianity, destroyed its cultural relevance, and continue to increase faster than any religion.I don't know why you guys pretend that atheism has ended.
>>17978822Have you changed your tune now? Will you no longer trust paganism as an abstract concept? Will you trust atheism to save you? But unfortunately, that's not the case either. While it's true that the population is becoming increasingly secular, there hasn't been a "defeat"; that's collider bias. Research what that means. Let's use Republican status in the US as an example. It's basically a function of religion and implicit white identity, so, conditional on being (R), those who care more about the former care less about the latter, and vice versa, although they are correlated. Among Republicans, those with higher white identity are less Christian (because you can cross the 10 threshold with, say, 2 for religion and 9 for white identity), and vice versa. And the reverse is true among Democrats (which is what we also observe).
>>17978836Communism isn't atheism because it just replaces traditional religions with a cult of the state and leaders and it has its own estaology.
>>17978841Your semantics didn't save you, unfortunately.There's no reason to create another definition for "pagan." Hindus are polytheists, neopagans are supposedly polytheists. There's no point arguing. The point was, which religion has more "brown" people, quantitatively, is definitely pagan. And if you argue that "there are different types of paganism," then that gives me reason to respond that there are different types of Christianity. I can cite what this anon argued>>17978849 and conclude that there are more white Christians than pagans quantitatively.
>>17978844all the 2000s "new atheists" since 2010 just became SJWs who make a cult around trannies and George Floyd, so...
>>17978859Except there aren't more white Christians than pagans if the definition for pagan is just "not jewish christian or muslim". Under that definition, every atheist is a pagan which is a nonsense claim.
>>17978822>>17978799White Christians clearly stand apart when it comes to their views of the aim of the church. 59% of them say that God is more concerned about individual morality than social inequalities. It's ~30% of other Christian groups. but that's very different from saying "atheism won", try again
Mocking larpagans for being brown-adjacent doesn't really work when the nearest church is basically a hispanic/filipinx social club
>>17978865>Except there aren't more white Christians than pagansThat's why I said your argument is flawed. You asked me to define "paganism." Paganism is polytheism, Hindus are polytheists. Therefore, Nordic, Celtic, Slavic, and Greco-Roman neopagans on the Internet combined don't address the inevitable fact of your argument:> Christianity is brown.Paganism is the brownest belief system possible. Quantitatively, there's nothing more to say here. Why exactly did you ask me to define paganism? If you want to separate types of "paganisms," that *necessarily* means I have to do the same. I can use white Christian groups in Europe or America to create an inflate argument that there are more white Christians than Internet neopagans, who, besides being low in number, have many people disguising themselves as white. Just assume your argument doesn't make sense, and if we're going to use any argument based on it, and please.. no ad hoc arguments ok?
>>17978822Those are both derivatives of christianized thought. You're a fish who can't see the water.
>>17978730they're also always like "why did Europeans and Arabs abandon their ancestral gods?"
>>17978869so be honest in concluding that this argument makes no sense, those who use this argument against Christianity are haploaustist atheists (neopagans), this is always raised, but the problem with the argument is that it can be nothing more than a mere quantitative argument, any attempt to change the precept through various objections is falsehood, the argument is quantitative in itself. with the Latin American combined, there are still more brown pagans than Christians.Or Hinduism isn't paganism?
>>17978834Anon I can guarantee that if I ask any priest or pastor in your hometown the question "Is Christianity incompatible with being brown/black?" not a single one will answer in the affirmative, and I suspect most would become quite hostile for even asking that question.
>>17978884The argument is worse when you realize that there are regions in Africa that still practice their belief systems, and if we expand the argument to simply "non-whites", traditional Asian religions and all their offshoots inflate the numbers even further.
>>17978862The sheer delusion it takes to pretend most Christian churches weren't supportive of BLM kek
>>17978779Tbf, this is in line with ancient pagan practices as priestesses of the goddess Ishtar (and any women worshipping at Ishtar’s temple really) would ritually prostitute themselves. I think temples of Venus and Aphrodite did something similar
>>17978884It is incredibly dishonest to imply a Yoruban and a Marathi 'pagan' take part in the same religious system as a Nigerian and Filipino Catholic do
>>17978886>Anon I can guarantee that if I ask any priest or pastor in your hometown the question "Is Christianity incompatible with being brown/black?"red herring fallacyWe're not discussing which religion would be more susceptible or not to the adherence of people of various ethnicities. The issue is still about which belief system features more ethnically brown people, but that would still be a problem for you. Classical paganism, and any belief system, in fact, doesn't function as racial mascots. You had classical Judaism, ironically, which you guys criticize so much, which was (and are) an "ethnic" religion, but that's not the case with paganism. Hinduism is open, and in fact even proposes, to the adherence of various groups of people anyway. And whether or not Christianity is a belief system doomed to multiracialism, paganism still manages to be more brown quantitatively, which is the core of your friend's argument. I can go further and say that the Romans, in their vast territory, integrated and even forced the conquered to adhere to the Roman religion. I'm talking about the areas around Anatoliain fact paganism was exactly successible and open to the integration of new ideas and concepts from other faiths (syncretism).
>>17978910All I know is the churches here are filled with browns and every church supports more of them coming over
>>17978910even more sothe native Egyptian religion had a marginal influence on the Greek belief system, paganism cannot necessarily be a 100% type of religion; no religion is
>>17978896The ones who got Democrat checks to plug BLM I'm sure did..
>>17978923>all you need is to wave around some $10k grants with no return conditions and christian leaders will do whatever you wantHumiliation ritual?
>>17978930nta but hey Jesus warned of false prophets who would come in his name
>>17978901>It is incredibly dishonest to imply a Yoruban and a Marathi 'pagan'No, it isn't.Paganism refers to polytheistic and animistic religious systems, characterized by a strong connection with nature and a calendar of seasonal celebrations. Both fall within this category. There are beliefs and rites to nature spirits and deities like Bathala in the Philippines and Africa. There are even human sacrifices to these spirits. Ironically, there's also a branch of this Yoruba religion in Latin American countries.But you've made a point; why not simply assume that what counts as "religion" is simply the most consistent state of each belief system? According to your argument, we can conclude that half of African Christianity is syncretic, and therefore it's dishonest to compare it to Christianity. And can we also say that latinx American Christianity, if it's not just a social or nominal and secular identity, also presents innovations and syncretism that aren't part of the original? This would ironically prove that there are more white Christians than pagans, if Christianity in its "purest" state were European. Terrible argument, anonymous
>>17978945But you've made a point; why not simply assume that what counts as "religion" is simply the most consistent state of each belief system? According to your argument, we can conclude that half of African Christianity is syncretic, and therefore it's dishonest to compare it to Christianity. And can we also say that American Christianity, if it's not just a social or nominal and secular identity, also presents innovations and syncretism that aren't part of the original? This would ironically prove that there are more white Christians than pagans, if Christianity in its "purest" state were European. Terrible argument, anonymous
>>17978945>why not simply assume that what counts as "religion" is simply the most consistent state of each belief system?That's my pointSee>>17978834
>>17978945>"paganism is basically the same religion because they some vaguely defined elements of religious practice">"ackhoally african chrisitans aren't REALLY christian because..."kek
>>17978923There was a vast parasitic class created during the Obama years of people who do nothing but collect government checks to rant on SM about toxic masculinity. Originally Democrats tried creating a permanent underclass of voters with the Great Society but that didn't really work because JaShaun is illiterate and has a double digit IQ so he's not very useful as a weapon except when you want to start a riot somewhere. They tried a different approach then by paying off upper middle class white people to vote Democrat because they can actually read and write, which makes them a more effective weapon.
>>17978779Keklooking at the arguments, the neopagans took a beating terrible circular arguments
>>17978960This was not an argument, but a concession. I appreciate all of you trying (you? sameflag)
Given the terminal decline of christianity in its former bastions I think you e-christians have much bigger issues than seething about the larpagans on a saturday morning
>>17978972No.there's only me and the other guy, but this is tiring, arguments are being repeated ad nauseam, I think I'm done here.I expected more from the glorifiers of Perun, Thor, Zeus or whatever character you wanted to use as a racial mascot.Bye, boys
>>17978974If paganism can be reduced to a few key elements to imply all 'pagans' everywhere more or less share the same religion I don't see why the same can't be done to Christianity - which, I suspect, would make a mockery of your attempted argument that brown Christians aren't 'really' Christian.Let's be honest I its not like you'd kick Newton out of your Christian club for his non-trinitarian views on Christ's nature
Christians literally can't reason and seem to have a need to lie and contradict themselves. I don't understand how they have this pathology, it's very strange.
>>17978878Are you genuinely a moron? How do you not understand what's being discussed right now?
>>17978707is that Greg Gutfeld?
>>17980078I thought it was Tony Blair at first
>>17978707Don’t be stupid anon. The Baltic peoples who have the most conservative IE branch of language and are hardly dissimilar to their IE ancestors genetically speaking, have a religion that’s rather doctrinally very primitive and do not differ so much from the strain of animism found throughout the very Northernmost Eurasia. Odin, Freyja, Ingwo, Bragi, Baldr, Nanna, Nerthus, the giants, and almost all familiar minor mythological figures like goblins, trolls, dwarves, draugr (revenants) etc. are from the Funnelbeaker EEF who were initially overran by the IE tribes but later made a population resurgence that also coincided with the reemergence of native European haplogroups I1 and I2b in the Bronze Age. These pre-Germanic tribes were culturally dominant over a large swathe of Northern Europe and placed a cultural adstrate upon the culture of the Indo-european tribes (rather than the other way around); their eventual union brought into existence the Germanic peoples and their typologically bizarre language that possess all the hallmarks of a creole language.Lets try to etymologize the names of the proto-Germanic gods using Proto-North-Caucasian, the language most close to the EEF language>PG Wōdinaz- (meaning ‘raving’) vs. >PNC *=ōƛĔ to laugh (with the *w= masculine class prefix)>PG Ingwō (god of fertility) vs.>PNC *=HiqwĀ(n) to bear, give birth>PG *Φrijjaz- (assumed to be derived from PG *ϕraiwjaz ‘fertile’) vs. >PNC *qqwVrē ‘fallow (of land)’ or *qwɨ̆ʔrV̄ / *rʔɨ̆qwV̄ ‘field, arable land’>PG *Baldr vs. >PNC *mōrŁV male>PG *Nerþuz vs.>PNC *nɨ̆wc(w)Ā prince, ruler; bride-groom>PG *Braɣīn- (god of poetry, solar deity)vs.PNC *mĕlc’c’ĭ ‘tongue’ or *bīrčV ( ~ -ē-,-ɨ̄-) ‘rich, honorable’
