Thread 18070008

The Christian belief that pagan gods were “demons powerless to protect Rome” is schizophrenia. If anything the fall of Rome was punishment for embracing Christianity. Roman pagans believed in something called Pax Deorum in which continued worship of the gods was necessary for the survival of the Roman state. When Rome worshipped the gods, Rome was at its height and prospered and when Rome stopped worshipping the gods in favor of Christianity, Rome declined and eventually fell. So clearly the fall of Rome was punishment for not adhering to pagan traditions. It’s not a sign of their absence, but of their wrath. The gods do not rely on human worship to survive, they proclaim that if we want their blessings we pay tribute to them. When humans stopped worshipping the gods, the gods merely withdrew their blessings as punishment. Restore their rites and their blessings will return again.

Christians mock pagan gods without even understanding how pagans actually viewed their own gods. Pagans believed that the gods were personifications of forces of nature and that they were thus above human morality; they were neither good nor evil, they just were. There were also several schools of thought in late antiquity which reinterpreted the gods through philosophy and took the older myths as allegories instead of literal truths; such as Neoplatonism which believed that everything including the gods emanate from a single source called “the One”, Stoicism which believed that the gods were not anthropomorphic but rather more abstract beings, and Hermeticism which believed that the universe/reality itself was one divine organism. None of these beliefs contradict each other and if anything all complement each other. The gods are intermediaries between the ineffable One and the material world, to reject them is to cut humanity off from the cosmic chain which is an act of metaphysical impiety.

>>18070008 (OP)
Christians mock the diversity of pagan beliefs while conveniently ignoring Interpretatio graeca. All pagans worship the same gods. The names and figures change, but the archetype remains no matter the culture. That's why the Greeks and Romans had no problem accepting other people's gods or making parallels between their gods and foreign gods. That's also why Tacitus claimed the Germanic peoples worshiped Mercury. It was not exactly Mercury but a Germanic god (Odin) who was close enough to Mercury that Tacitus did not bother making a difference. A pagan can worship Ishtar or Venus or Aphrodite or Freyja, they’re all the same being anyways and none of this contradicts the previously-mentioned schools of philosophy, it complements it.

>against your own interests
fuck that. I'm not a brainlet

>The Christian belief that pagan gods were “demons powerless to protect Rome” is schizophrenia
lel
>The fall of Rome was punishment for embracing Christianity
Correlation isn’t causation. Rome’s decline involved economic collapse, barbarian invasions, and internal corruption, which were issues predating Christianity’s rise. Pagan worship didn’t save Rome during earlier crises like the Third Century. Blaming Christianity ignores these broader factors. Nice try, though.
>Roman pagans believed in Pax Deorum... When Rome worshipped the gods, Rome prospered.
Pax Deorum was a contractual view of divine favor, but Rome’s "prosperity" under paganism wasn’t as universal as you wish it was. Plagues, wars, and civil strife persisted. The empire’s peak under Trajan preceded Christianity’s spread, yet decline followed despite pagan rites. The gods’ "blessings" seem spotty at best.
>The gods do not rely on human worship... withdrew their blessings as punishment
If gods need no worship, why punish its absence? This smells like post hoc rationalization. If they’re so powerful, why didn’t they crush the Christian upstart? Sounds like divine temper tantrums, not cosmic justice.
>Pagans believed that the gods were personifications of forces of nature... above human morality
Fair point, but it undercuts your punishment narrative. If gods are beyond morality, their "wrath" is arbitrary, not principled. Pick a lane.
>Neoplatonism... Stoicism... Hermeticism... gods are intermediaries between the ineffable One and the material world.
These philosophies reinterpreted myths, but their abstract gods didn’t stop Rome’s fall either. Neoplatonism flourished under Christian emperors like Constantine. If anything, Christianity absorbed and outlasted these schools. Rejecting intermediaries doesn’t sever a “cosmic chain." On the contrary, it prioritizes direct communion with the divine.

>>18070010
Christians mock the diversity of pagan beliefs while conveniently ignoring Interpretatio graeca
Adaptability doesn’t prove all pagans worshiped “the same gods.” It was a practical tool for cultural exchange, not a theological claim of universal unity. Christians didn’t “ignore” it; they rejected polytheism’s premise entirely, seeing it as fragmented idolatry (Deuteronomy 6:4). Mockery? Maybe. But it’s a stretch to call it ignorance.
>All pagans worship the same gods. The names and figures change, but the archetype remains
Ishtar, Venus, Aphrodite, and Freyja share traits (love, fertility), but their myths, rituals, and cultural roles differ sharply. For instance, Ishtar’s warlike aspects aren’t in Aphrodite’s. If they’re “the same,” why the distinct cults and practices? Sounds like you’re projecting a monotheistic lens onto polytheism’s messiness.
>That’s why the Greeks and Romans had no problem accepting other people’s gods
Sure, syncretism was common. But acceptance wasn’t universal. Some gods (like early Christian depictions of Dagon) were mocked or marginalized. Tacitus equating Odin with Mercury shows interpretive convenience, not deep theological unity. Pagans still fought over whose gods were superior. Just look at the Greek disdain for “barbarian” deities.
>None of this contradicts the previously-mentioned schools of philosophy, it complements it
Neoplatonism and Stoicism could align with syncretism, but they don’t require it. Neoplatonists like Plotinus focused on “the One,” not a pantheon of interchangeable archetypes. Hermeticism’s divine unity leans closer to monotheism than polytheistic pluralism. Your claim of complementarity is more wishful than watertight. Philosophies often clashed with popular pagan practices. If all gods are one, why did pagans bother with such elaborate, distinct rituals? Seems like they missed their own memo.

>>18070008 (OP)
There was nothing wrong with Rome "falling" just as there is nothing wrong with a forest fire.
Both of these are a part of nature - to make way for new, healthier growth. There is no glory in geriatric senility.

>>18070288
>economic collapse, barbarian invasions, and internal corruption
Those started in the 3rd century, a time period in which Christianity was taking off.
>Plagues, wars, and civil strife persisted
Again, most of happened started in the 3rd century, a time period in which Christianity was taking off.
>If gods need no worship, why punish its absence
Because they are forces of nature and we must appease them so they don't destroy us
>Neoplatonism flourished under Christian emperors like Constantine. If anything, Christianity absorbed and outlasted these schools.
Nope, these philosophies were explicitly pagan ones and to reject paganism is to go against their core messaging.
>direct communion with the divine
Humans cannot directly connect with the One. The only way of contact is via the gods who are intermediaries and there is no way around this.

>pagan
Christian slur for the Roman religion
It's like black people calling themselves "niggers" unironically.
You are not a citizen of Ancient Rome or Greece, you will never be a part of their communal religion. Just like if you aren't Indian you will never truly be Hindu.

>>18070298
>Christians didn’t “ignore” it; they rejected polytheism’s premise entirely
And that's why they are retarded for reality is biased towards paganism
>but their myths, rituals, and cultural roles differ sharply
They all belong to the love goddess archetype and that alone is enough
>Just look at the Greek disdain for “barbarian” deities
Actually they equated barbarian deities with their own. For example the Scythian goddess Tabiti was equated with Hestia
>why did pagans bother with such elaborate, distinct rituals
To address that specific part of them in accordance with their current needs. Farmers sacrificed to Demeter in hopes for a good harvest, sailors sacrificed to Poseidon in hopes for stable weather at sea, etc. Christians have no reason to complain about this when they pray to specific saints instead of just Christ.

>>18070339
>Those started in the 3rd century, a time period in which Christianity was taking off.
Again: correlation isn’t causation. The Crisis of the Third Century began under pagan emperors like Severus. Christianity was a minority faith, barely 10% of the population by 300 AD. Blaming it for systemic failures is like blaming a toddler for a house fire. Pagan policies and overexpansion set the stage.
>Again, most of happened started in the 3rd century, a time period in which Christianity was taking off.
Repeating yourself doesn’t make it truer. Plagues (e.g., Cyprian Plague) and wars hit hard under pagan rule. Aurelian restored stability while persecuting Christians. If anything, paganism’s track record looks shaky here.
>Because they are forces of nature and we must appease them so they don’t destroy us.
If gods are amoral forces, their “punishment” is just nature doing its thing and not a deliberate smackdown. Demanding appeasement sounds like a divine protection racket, which is hardly the mark of omnipotent beings.
>These philosophies were explicitly pagan ones and to reject paganism is to go against their core messaging.
Neoplatonism influenced Christian thinkers like Augustine, who adapted its metaphysics to monotheism. Constantine patronized Neoplatonists while promoting Christianity. Pagan philosophies weren’t a monolith and you know it. Stoicism’s abstract “divine reason” fits better with Christian logos than temple sacrifices. Your “core messaging” claim ignores how fluidly these ideas were repurposed.

cont.

>>18070362
>Humans cannot directly connect with the One. The only way of contact is via the gods who are intermediaries.
Neoplatonists like Plotinus taught direct contemplation of the One, no gods required. Christianity’s direct communion (prayer, grace, etc.) bypasses intermediaries, rooted in Christ as the sole mediator (1 Timothy 2:5). Pagan gods as mandatory middlemen? That’s a bureaucratic cosmos, not a cosmic truth. If the One is ineffable, why trust fallible deities to bridge the gap? Cut out the middleman and aim higher.

>>18070352
>And that's why they are retarded for reality is biased towards paganism.
A bold claim but with zero evidence. Polytheism’s decline (despite its flexibility) suggests reality wasn’t exactly cheering for it.
>They all belong to the love goddess archetype and that alone is enough.
Archetypes are a modern lens, not a pagan dogma. Ishtar’s warlike edge and Freyja’s magic aren’t interchangeable with Aphrodite’s romance. Reducing them to “love goddess” flattens their complexity. If they’re all the same, why not just pick one and call it a day? Sounds like pagans didn’t get your memo.
>Actually they equated barbarian deities with their own. For example the Scythian goddess Tabiti was equated with Hestia.
Sure, Greeks sometimes equated foreign gods, but they also mocked “barbarian” practices (just look at Herodotus sneering at Persian rituals). Interpretatio graeca was pragmatic, not a love-fest. It often served to Hellenize or Romanize, not to celebrate equality.
>Farmers sacrificed to Demeter... sailors sacrificed to Poseidon... Christians have no reason to complain when they pray to specific saints.
Specific rituals for specific gods undercuts your “all gods are the same” claim. If Poseidon and Demeter serve distinct needs, they’re not just interchangeable archetypes. Christian saints aren’t worshiped but venerated as intercessors, pointing to one God (Catechism 956).

>>18070008 (OP)
https://www.enjoyhell.com

>>18070008 (OP)
Not a single person believe in odin or juptier or whatever, it's all either quirk chungus's who want to "feel spiritually" or neonazis who got too butthurt about Jesus being a brown Jew
You can't just reinstate a religion like it's a turn based strategy game, it doesn't work like that

>>18070347
Anon has it ever occurred to youthat at this point polytheists, new agers and anti Christian deists, atheists and agnostic at this point like being called pagan?

I led a pagan pride march back in 2007 for goofs, it's really not different than LGBTQ people taking back the term queer

>>18070298
>”
Thank you chatgpt

>>18070008 (OP)
I quite literally do not care about Rome falling. I'm a Christian and I'm also ethnically Germanix. I think that the dynamism of the Middle Ages forged Western Civilization as we know it. This is a non-starter.

>>18070403
>Not a single person believe in odin or juptier or whatever
No matter how many times you repeat this to yourself before bedtime, it still won't make it true.
>Jesus being a brown Jew
Everybody knows jesus is a brown jew.

>>18070347
>words change over time so defining an in-group is pointless

>>18070362
>Christianity was a minority faith, barely 10% of the population by 300 AD. Blaming it for systemic failures is like blaming a toddler for a house fire.
jews make up 2% of the US population.

>>18070588
You have no temples, you offer no sacrifices. You are not ancient Greek or Roman. You are LARPing.

>>18070405
Eww queer.

>>18070821
>You are not ancient Greek or Roman
I live in Italy, fuck off

>>18070834
>I live in Italy, fuck off
Notice the """subtle""" misdirection.
>I live in Italy
Not
>I'm Italian
So which shithole did you come from? How brown is your skin?

>>18070821
>no temple
>no sacrifices
>not the same as the ancient people
>larping
Kek. Fascinating projections.
Anyway, see >>18070588

>>18070821
>why no I don't believe in anything that you believe
>but let me tell you why you are not propitiating the Gods correctly

Ew

>>18070988
Greco-Roman religion was communal, not creedal. It was about belonging, not believing in a creed like Christianity and Islam. It was more like Hinduism and being Indian. I don't care what you believe, you can try your damndest to believe in Zeus or whatever, it's not going to work because you aren't in ancient Rome, you're just looking for a "WHITE" alternative to JudeoChristianity and Islam is too brown for you.

>>18071062
>meanwhile, in reality

>>18071148
LIVE ACTION roleplaying (LARPing)

>>18071242
Roleplaying is part of paganism and its not a bad thing.

>>18071303
ok sir what is "Paganism" just any religion that Christianity supplanted? If India becomes Christian, will Hinduism be part of Paganism?

Because pagan is just a pejorative used by Christians for anybody who isn't Jewish basically. Is Buddhism Paganism? Islam?

>>18071242
>nobody believes it
>okay you believe it
>but there are no communities
>okay there are communities
>but they're uhh *flips notes*
>LAAAAAARPING
>>18071774
Paganism is just non-yahwism. Atheism can be either or depending on your exact definitions.

>>18072212
The Almighty will smite you for worshiping a demon tree

>>18072212
So you are basically a Hindu lmao

Non-YHWHism is like half the planet at this point.
Not really a good way to divide the world's religions.

>>18072295
Why would Iupiter Optimus Maximus smite me for propitiating him at his sacred oaks?
>>18074051
>Non-YHWHism is like half the planet
Goyim are like 99.9% of the planet
>Not really a good way to divide the world's religions.
It's pretty common to have in-group and out-group terms like this. I don't make the rules.
But in modern parlance a pagan or a heathen is simply an unbeliever in yahweh.

>>18070386
>posts a JRPG picture, a picture made by pagans
You aren't not the brightest aren't you?

>>18074134
>But in modern parlance a pagan or a heathen is simply an unbeliever in yahweh.
You're extremely retarded. I'll relish watching you burn.

>>18074145
Sorry, what? I can't answer your question if I can't read what you asked.

>>18074147
tick tock!