Tim Alexander Interviewed in Ideon Antron

[Twinkle]

Thyrsos was formed by followers of the Hellenic Religion. They fight for its Restoration, its legal recognition in Hellas, defend the original authentic pre-Christian tradition, and contribute to the spread of the Hellenic Civilization worldwide.

I was honored to be asked by Evangelos, from Thyrsos, for an interview in their online magazine Ideon Antron (Cave of Ideas). The magazine is published quarterly in the Hellenic language, and discusses Hellenic values, history, and art.




ttp://hellenismos.us/b/2011/01/interview-in-ideon-antron/ (http://hellenismos.us/b/2011/01/interview-in-ideon-antron/)

The English Translation can be found above.

[Erebos]

I agree with a lot of what he says, but the way he generalizes that all Neopagans are bastardizing traditional religions is rather offensive. A lot of Neopaganism is pretty flaky, I'll admit that freely, but my impression of traditions like Wicca, Feri, or those centered around the Goddess movement, are trying to build new traditions of paganism that reflect the needs of the contemporary world, which is why many of them (though not all) are focused on political issues like feminism and environmentalism.

One has to understand that ancient religious traditions reflect the societies they came from, and the social and cultural constructs that were in place then. From a Hellenic perspective, a person could argue that the gods represent certain social ideologies. For example, Zeus represents ultimate patriarchal authority, Ares the destructive yet necessary power of war, Artemis the wild and untamed virgin who represents young girls before they are tamed by marriage, Hera the chaste, ideal wife who oversees marital devotion and childbirth (a woman's only real functions). I love ancient Greek culture, and I think many aspects of their religious traditions are still relevant, but sometimes to rebuild a religion from sources thousands of years old can be problematic to modern people. For many people, practicing a tradition from a hyper-militaristic culture where men were socialized to be soldiers and women couldn't do anything without a male guardian, is not that appealing.

A neo-pagan tradition like Wicca, for example, is meant to be more "primitive" than complex pantheons of advanced ancient societies, honoring the most basic forms of the divine rather than various gods who reflect ancient social ideologies. Although, many neo-pagans incorporate the worship of ancient gods as personifications of natural forces, for example Aphrodite as the goddess of the generative powers of nature rather than as a patroness of prostitutes, or Zeus as a god of weather and male virility rather than as king of the gods.

Goodness, I'm long-winded. My point is that I don't think it's fair to paint all neo-pagans with the same brush, or claim that Reconstructionism is superior.

[Twinkle]

Reducing the gods to archetypes, for a Reconstructionist, is absolutely bastardizing the religion and shows a distinct lack of understanding what it is that people are actually taking from it. So yes...a broad brush is being used, but unfortunately, your post just exemplified the problems that Hellenic Recons face. :)

For example, your understanding of the religious practice vs. the culture of the religion shows that you are not understanding that Reconstructionists only reconstruct *religious* practice.

I'm not trying to be aggressive or nasty here....I'm just trying to show you the perspective of the Recon and how these religions are seen by those that practice authentically.

[Fiamma]

Reducing the gods to archetypes, for a Reconstructionist, is absolutely bastardizing the religion and shows a distinct lack of understanding what it is that people are actually taking from it. So yes...a broad brush is being used, but unfortunately, your post just exemplified the problems that Hellenic Recons face. :)

For example, your understanding of the religious practice vs. the culture of the religion shows that you are not understanding that Reconstructionists only reconstruct *religious* practice.

I'm not trying to be aggressive or nasty here....I'm just trying to show you the perspective of the Recon and how these religions are seen by those that practice authentically.

So you're saying that such other religions aren't authentic religions, or at least a Real Hellenic Reconstructionist wouldn't consider them as such?

If that's not what you're saying, I'd really like to know what you are saying

[Twinkle]

So you're saying that such other religions aren't authentic religions, or at least a Real Hellenic Reconstructionist wouldn't consider them as such?

If that's not what you're saying, I'd really like to know what you are saying


I've expressed my opinion many times...here on MW and on many online venues. You know what it is, and it is certainly not what you are implying, here. I have no interest in rehashing arguments or old drama simply for the sake of it.

[Erebos]

Reducing the gods to archetypes, for a Reconstructionist, is absolutely bastardizing the religion and shows a distinct lack of understanding what it is that people are actually taking from it. So yes...a broad brush is being used, but unfortunately, your post just exemplified the problems that Hellenic Recons face. :)

The thing is, though, not all neo-Pagans reduce the gods to archetypes. My examples were meant to show how the natural functions of the gods differ from social functions. Aphrodite's role as patroness of prostitutes has little meaning in a society where prostitution is not the norm, and so her cosmogonic role as a generative nature goddess has more meaning to many neo-pagans.


For example, your understanding of the religious practice vs. the culture of the religion shows that you are not understanding that Reconstructionists only reconstruct *religious* practice.

That's what makes things problematic, then, because there was no distinction between religion and culture in antiquity. Imposing the modern view of religion as a distinct, monolithic entity on an ancient system that doesn't share this model can be very tricky. To honor gods from a culture outside of the context of said culture makes things very difficult.


I'm not trying to be aggressive or nasty here....I'm just trying to show you the perspective of the Recon and how these religions are seen by those that practice authentically.

I didn't take what you said as nasty or aggressive. It's a discussion, disagreement is natural.

[Erebos]

Anyway, I wasn't trying to start a discussion about the validity of Reconstructionism. The main issue is that I think the way Mr Alexander talks about other Pagan religions is very divisive, which I don't think the Pagan community needs. If that's how he and his posse really feel, I wonder why they frequent neo-pagan forums at all, unless it's just to spread the good news about Hellenismos. Glory hallelujah.

[Twinkle]

Anyway, I wasn't trying to start a discussion about the validity of Reconstructionism. The main issue is that I think the way Mr Alexander talks about other Pagan religions is very divisive, which I don't think the Pagan community needs. If that's how he and his posse really feel, I wonder why they frequent neo-pagan forums at all, unless it's just to spread the good news about Hellenismos. Glory hallelujah.


Well...the problem is that the Pagan community has become so inclusive that it waters down or bastardizes completely authentic ethnic traditions...creating a sort of universalism that isn't all that helpful to the Pagan community.

What should be celebrated is our diversity...which is why we frequent neopagan forums. To celebrate the vast number of religions that make up Paganism, while remaining true to our own religions.

Further, I don't think you understand or even observed where this article was coming from. It's a Greek organization, in Greece. These people are ethnikoi Hellenes who enjoyed Tim's books, agree largely with his opinions, love the Hellenismos.us website, and searched him out for an interview... as he is one of the few self identified American Hellenists who actually practices the authentic religion.

Are you suggesting that the ethnikoi Greeks practicing their religion in their homeland are Tim's "posse"? Seriously?

I find your Glory Hallelujah comment interesting. In all actuality, what Tim stated in the article was that the vast majority of Neopagan religions stem from Christianity. So...while they may have gone polytheistic, or practice soft polytheism (all gods are one God), the bottom line is that the Christian worldview is what hasn't changed. In essence, it's monotheism.


Further, we can also distinguish quite clearly what is religious practice vs. cultural norms. Slavery, as has been brought up in numerous threads as an example, has no religious significance. Nor does the example of women in the culture. There were actually very many successful women in Greece...I can give you a list of their names, if you'd like....but I digress. Honestly, there is more evidence of the religious connotation of slavery in the Holy Bible than there is in Hellenismos. And you know why that is? Because there is *no* religious connotation in regard to women or slavery *within the religion of Ancient Greece*.

I think I've explained all I can at this point...as this discussion has been done to death. Please view the other threads in this subforum if you're still having trouble with the whole culture and religion thing within Hellenismos.

It's a shame that we can't post one thread in the Hellenic Recon subforum about our own religion without someone getting their panties in a wad because they simply don't like it.

[Erebos]

Further, I don't think you understand or even observed where this article was coming from. It's a Greek organization, in Greece. These people are ethnikoi Hellenes who enjoyed Tim's books, agree largely with his opinions, love the Hellenismos.us website, and searched him out for an interview... as he is one of the few self identified American Hellenists who actually practices the authentic religion.

Are you suggesting that the ethnikoi Greeks practicing their religion in their homeland are Tim's "posse"? Seriously?

The ethnikoi Greeks are funny. This video epitomizes the problems I see in that community:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1dZrkJdQ7TI

Never mind the interview, but the ritual on the left side of the split screen seems to show a wedding. The couple circle the hearth fire like a Greek Orhtodox wedding where a couple circles the altar. The way the ritual space is set up also appears very Wiccan in style, as communal worship in ancient Greek involved processions and sacrifices rather than people in a circle doing non-sacrificial rituals.

Ancient Greek weddings, for example, involved an oral contract between the groom and the father of the bride, and a procession to bring the bride into the household of her new husband where the marriage is consummated on a special couch. The procession involved marriage hymns and offerings given to deities that oversee marriage, but there was no religious "ritual" like a handfasting or Judeo-Christian wedding.


I find your Glory Hallelujah comment interesting. In all actuality, what Tim stated in the article was that the vast majority of Neopagan religions stem from Christianity. So...while they may have gone polytheistic, or practice soft polytheism (all gods are one God), the bottom line is that the Christian worldview is what hasn't changed. In essence, it's monotheism.

I was being facetious, pointing out the irony in how Tim says neo-pagans have a Christian mindset, yet he comes across as rather Evangelical himself. I've read his views on issues like marriage and magic, and they don't seem to have much basis in ancient Greek sources. Marriage I've gone into above, and while magic was not as prominent in Greek culture as it was in say, Egypt, and was viewed with suspicion by official cults and the educated wealthy, it wasn't a heinous sin in the way Tim often describes, and charms, talismans, and sympathetic rituals do seem to have been used by the common people.

The article mentions Neo-Platonism, and I think you also mentioned you follow this school, Twinkle. Isn't the concept of the One, the Demiurge and the World Soul rather close to monism (not monotheism)?

I get the sense that people who make claims that soft polytheism equals monotheism have done very little research into a variety of polytheistic religions. Monism (one deity or power manifesting in plural forms) and polytheism often go hand-in-hand. The three main schools of Hinduism, for example, are Shaivism, which views Shiva as the Supreme Being, as the All who other gods are manifestations of; Vaishnavism, which believes the same thing about Vishnu and his avatars as the Supreme Being; and Shaktism, which views the Supreme Being as Shakti or Devi ("the Goddess"), who manifests as other gods and goddesses. In the Bhagavad Gita, Krishna (an avatar of Vishnu) calls himself the Supreme God, but that other gods are part of him, so worshiping them is the same as worshiping him. In ancient Egypt, each city had its own deities, and as they came into contact, the gods would be identified with each other. Ra was identified with gods like Osiris and Atum (I don't remember the exact quote, but an Egyptian text calls Osiris "the soul of Ra"), while Hathor became identified with Sekhmet, Isis, Nut, Bast, etc. Hathor was even sometimes viewed as the Ogdoad (eight gods of Hermopolis) in one being.

[Twinkle]

Gods!! What a long and rambly post!! It's difficult what to address first. I do thank you for stopping your criticisms of Hellenismos, as this is a path protected forum and I realize you just don't care for Hellenic Reconstruction. You've stated it more than once, and I can respect that. You must also respect the parameters of where you are posting.

Honestly, I think you are still lacking a basic understanding of Neoplatanism, Monotheism, and Soft Polytheism.

I think that once again, Tim nails it down so that it's very simple to understand. Please allow me to educate you...if you really want to be educated, that is.

http://hellenismos.us/f/YaBB.pl?num=1295624179/0#0

[Erebos]

I've read over the hellenismos.us website many times, although now I do my best to avoid it for the sake of my mental health. I have nothing at all against Hellenismos, as I have spoken to many informed people who make it work. Tim's way, however, is flawed.

Anyway, I'm just a nice boy who doesn't have the stomach for the drama Tim and his people stir up. I just feel the need to speak up when I see a problem, but as usual, these kinds of discussions don't go anywhere.

Twinkle, honestly, from reading your posts I think you're a good person and you always mean well, despite your devotion to a flawed svengali. Because of this, I will offer you some advice: don't drink the Kool-Aid.

[Twinkle]

So then, I presume from your statement that what you consider "informed people who make it work" are neopagans that call themselves Hellenists and therefore share your worldview.

[C. Iulia Regilia]

I'm more of a Roman but I do find value in what Tim does, though he does have a confrontational personality. I think he's right in saying that the Wiccan concepts and some Neopagan concepts are closer to Monotheism than traditional paganism. Further, Platonism was just one school of thought, others probably disagreed. I think that especially when starting out, it's best to be strict in defining exactly what a religion is and what it means. To not do so is to make the religion a catch-all for anyone who is remotely connected to Greek gods, leading to chaos. Like it or lump it, Discordians are not hellene, even though they worship Eris.

I dislike the notion that other paths are "bashing" recons because they don't do things that we do. ADF isn't celtic recon, and is frankly a separate religion. So long as they don't claim that what they do is authentic to ancient Celtic Religion, they aren't bashing anyone. Same with other groups. So long as you don't claim that the religion you practice is identical with the ancient practice, it's not bashing. Gnostics and Satanist do not bash Christianity -- they are not Christians and do not claim to be.

I don't even claim to be a Roman Recon because I really can't claim with a straight face that the things I do as a modern American in Religio Romana is the same as what would have been done in Rome.

[mercurialmaven]

I've read over the hellenismos.us website many times, although now I do my best to avoid it for the sake of my mental health. I have nothing at all against Hellenismos, as I have spoken to many informed people who make it work. Tim's way, however, is flawed.

Anyway, I'm just a nice boy who doesn't have the stomach for the drama Tim and his people stir up. I just feel the need to speak up when I see a problem, but as usual, these kinds of discussions don't go anywhere.




This. I was a member of the Tim's forum for 2 months. I mostly read as, it seemed like a giant "How everyone else is doing it wrong." wank fest. If I want all of that I'll go to Gen Con. In fact, I AM going to Gen Con. LOL!

There are only so many times the topic of "What is and is not Hellenismos" can be discussed. My last post to the group Facebook page was something along the lines of "Just another self important **** stroking thread. Isn't this your wife's job?" and I was done.

I have been fortunate to make friends with some very wonderful, hard core, Hellenists and I love them dearly. They helped me find paths that led me into a deeper spirituality and faith while bringing me into accord with the gods I attempt to serve. Some of the lessons I've learned from these individuals who actually manage to WALK THEIR TALK, are more than anything I've ever gotten from sitting on Hellenismos.us

[C. Iulia Regilia]

This. I was a member of the Tim's forum for 2 months. I mostly read as, it seemed like a giant "How everyone else is doing it wrong." wank fest. If I want all of that I'll go to Gen Con. In fact, I AM going to Gen Con. LOL!

There are only so many times the topic of "What is and is not Hellenismos" can be discussed. My last post to the group Facebook page was something along the lines of "Just another self important **** stroking thread. Isn't this your wife's job?" and I was done.

I have been fortunate to make friends with some very wonderful, hard core, Hellenists and I love them dearly. They helped me find paths that led me into a deeper spirituality and faith while bringing me into accord with the gods I attempt to serve. Some of the lessons I've learned from these individuals who actually manage to WALK THEIR TALK, are more than anything I've ever gotten from sitting on Hellenismos.us

I do see your point, but I think Tim is mostly focused on the PRACTICE of Hellenismos, not the theory. And it is true that in ancient times people were very particular about their rituals. There are records (mostly the ones I've read are from Rome, but it was similar in Greece) of people playing flutes during the sacrifice to drown out any unorthopraxic sounds. It was important that the sacrifice be carried out just so, including that the cow must look up to heaven before being killed. That's just how it is.

Other groups do focus more on the phliospohic and theological aspects of hellene religion, and the idea of piety, what the gods want etc. That's just not Timothy and not Hellenismos.us. They are acting as the keepers of the temples, and that is a major function of any traditional religion.

[Twinkle]

The nature of the Gods and various philosophical leanings has never required "a right way" to think or believe. In fact, it was just that sort of musing and arguing that the ancient philosophers, did. What ties us all together is practice...and really - these were all discussions that were tied into core concepts - virtue, ethical behavior, etc.

What the base of the practice is though....is just what I said....PRACTICE.

Where it gets dicey - and people have difficulty - is worldview. Worldview means that we have to understand why we practice in the correct way. In my opinion, we cannot be orthopraxic without understanding, and implementing - the worldview of the ancients in a religious context.

So....there are a number of not only practices, but beliefs that would not fit into Hellenismos....and yeah....people are going to end up "doing it wrong" if they call the quarters waving an athame, or calling Hekate and Hermes their personal patron Gods. It simply wasn't how it was done in terms of practice, or religious worldview.

Of course, people can always claim it is a modern adaptation, and that we must adapt. On that - we would absolutely agree. The real issue is if the adaptation still falls in line with correct practice - which of course, includes worldview. If we look at my example with that lens - we can see that it doesn't.

In the end, people will do what they want to do and call it whatever they want. State it in public, and they need to be able to back it up with source material.

The practice is what it is. Yes - there are pompous assholes out there, but quite frankly - Tim is the least of anyone's worries. The thing that is so infuriating about him is that he backs up what he says with actual source material, and it pisses people off because he won't back down off it. "I just feel this is how it should be" won't cut it with a Reconstructionist - and that's how it goes with any Reconstructionist, really - not just the Hellenic Recon.

We have at least one group out there changing the Athenian calendar because "Zeus told them to". We have another Wiccan coven claiming that they are the "true teachers of the Hellenic Religion" based off nothing but some personal UPG.

Sure - we can all be agreeable and claim that what they do is the Hellenic religion - but ultimately, it's not intellectually honest. Backing away from what we practice and know to be true just to be agreeable isn't really anything that either myself or Tim can do in good conscience - especially when the public practice still has to be implemented. It's not like we even go looking for this stuff. The last group posted a YouTube video claiming Tim was an ass. We didn't even know who they were until we saw them calling the quarters (incorrectly, I might add) calling forth Hermes to come forward and guard the watchtowers. Or something.

There are many of us actually do practice what we say. We are deeply religious and care very much about bringing our religion out in the forefront with public practice in addition to the home practice.

We cannot do that if there are no clear delineations between what *is* Hellenismos, and what *is not*.

There is no need for anyone to be offended. Everyone should practice as they see fit.

The thing of it is - religion is and always be exclusionary by nature. You either believe a, b, and c....or you do a, b, and c.

The attempt by many neopagans and others to try and make Hellenismos all inclusive will never be accepted by those of us reconstructing the religion.

That shouldn't be an issue if people are secure in what they believe and why they believe.

This desire for acceptance for a particular practice or belief as Hellenismos is the real issue. The idea that anyone (especially Tim) would challenge it makes people froth at the mouth.

For all of those that hate Tim and what he stands for - they sure seem might pissed that he doesn't "accept them."

If what he says means nothing - then don't listen to him. It shouldn't matter what his opinion is - yet for some reason - it *does*...otherwise people wouldn't be in such a hurry to denigrate him.

Maybe that requires some introspection from those that hate the website and its founders so much.

[C. Iulia Regilia]

The nature of the Gods and various philosophical leanings has never required "a right way" to think or believe. In fact, it was just that sort of musing and arguing that the ancient philosophers, did. What ties us all together is practice...and really - these were all discussions that were tied into core concepts - virtue, ethical behavior, etc.

What the base of the practice is though....is just what I said....PRACTICE.

Where it gets dicey - and people have difficulty - is worldview. Worldview means that we have to understand why we practice in the correct way. In my opinion, we cannot be orthopraxic without understanding, and implementing - the worldview of the ancients in a religious context.

So....there are a number of not only practices, but beliefs that would not fit into Hellenismos....and yeah....people are going to end up "doing it wrong" if they call the quarters waving an athame, or calling Hekate and Hermes their personal patron Gods. It simply wasn't how it was done in terms of practice, or religious worldview.

Of course, people can always claim it is a modern adaptation, and that we must adapt. On that - we would absolutely agree. The real issue is if the adaptation still falls in line with correct practice - which of course, includes worldview. If we look at my example with that lens - we can see that it doesn't.

In the end, people will do what they want to do and call it whatever they want. State it in public, and they need to be able to back it up with source material.

The practice is what it is. Yes - there are pompous assholes out there, but quite frankly - Tim is the least of anyone's worries. The thing that is so infuriating about him is that he backs up what he says with actual source material, and it pisses people off because he won't back down off it. "I just feel this is how it should be" won't cut it with a Reconstructionist - and that's how it goes with any Reconstructionist, really - not just the Hellenic Recon.

We have at least one group out there changing the Athenian calendar because "Zeus told them to". We have another Wiccan coven claiming that they are the "true teachers of the Hellenic Religion" based off nothing but some personal UPG.

Sure - we can all be agreeable and claim that what they do is the Hellenic religion - but ultimately, it's not intellectually honest. Backing away from what we practice and know to be true just to be agreeable isn't really anything that either myself or Tim can do in good conscience - especially when the public practice still has to be implemented. It's not like we even go looking for this stuff. The last group posted a YouTube video claiming Tim was an ass. We didn't even know who they were until we saw them calling the quarters (incorrectly, I might add) calling forth Hermes to come forward and guard the watchtowers. Or something.

There are many of us actually do practice what we say. We are deeply religious and care very much about bringing our religion out in the forefront with public practice in addition to the home practice.

We cannot do that if there are no clear delineations between what *is* Hellenismos, and what *is not*.

There is no need for anyone to be offended. Everyone should practice as they see fit.

The thing of it is - religion is and always be exclusionary by nature. You either believe a, b, and c....or you do a, b, and c.

The attempt by many neopagans and others to try and make Hellenismos all inclusive will never be accepted by those of us reconstructing the religion.

That shouldn't be an issue if people are secure in what they believe and why they believe.

This desire for acceptance for a particular practice or belief as Hellenismos is the real issue. The idea that anyone (especially Tim) would challenge it makes people froth at the mouth.

For all of those that hate Tim and what he stands for - they sure seem might pissed that he doesn't "accept them."

If what he says means nothing - then don't listen to him. It shouldn't matter what his opinion is - yet for some reason - it *does*...otherwise people wouldn't be in such a hurry to denigrate him.

Maybe that requires some introspection from those that hate the website and its founders so much.

I see your point if someone is claiming to be Helenic Recon and is doing witchy practices, that's out of line. Or if someone is claiming to speak for a god and getting HIm out of character, yeah I see the point. As I said before, this is the founding era for all recon and revivalist religions -- and unless we put down good and strong roots based on actual hellenic (and in my case Roman) ideas, what we'll have is a mess of nothing and no way to recover the original faith. I hope, and it may happen, that Classical Religions will be as rich and varied as Hinduism and Shinto and other pagan survivals. That, however must wait until the foundation is secure enough to hold such diversity.

One thing I personally see lacking at times with the Hellenismos.us approach is that there's no real sense of communion with the gods, which for better or worse, neo-pagans seem to be better at. I just don't see very often where a person feels a "call" from a god to do something or does something simply out of religious feeling to the gods. Maybe it's just that recons aren't as open to sharing such thoughts. I dunno. I think that is probably the only real weakness of the recon approach. We're bad at listening to the gods themselves. Or maybe I'm just bad at it...

[Twinkle]

It seems to be a question of balance. And as mortals, all of us need to work on that in one way or another regardless of religious ideation.

Swing too far in either direction, and we're out of balance.

While many of us have wonderful UPG's, they are considered personal and not necessarily shared with everyone and their mother. Sometimes they are shared in close circles, but the communion with the Gods is an aftereffect of worship, not the primary focus....and certainly not required in order to be a practitioner of Hellenismos. I think that here is the key difference between the neopagan and the Reconstructionist.

[C. Iulia Regilia]

It seems to be a question of balance. And as mortals, all of us need to work on that in one way or another regardless of religious ideation.

Swing too far in either direction, and we're out of balance.

While many of us have wonderful UPG's, they are considered personal and not necessarily shared with everyone and their mother. Sometimes they are shared in close circles, but the communion with the Gods is an aftereffect of worship, not the primary focus....and certainly not required in order to be a practitioner of Hellenismos. I think that here is the key difference between the neopagan and the Reconstructionist.

I get that, it was more an observation than anything else. Go talk to a neo, and they had a conversation with Apollo last night, and he likes fishy sticks. I won't say that they're always right, but there is certainly something to be said for those experiences -- in the context of piety and proper sacrifice. I do my worship because I believe that the 12 deserve it, but I don't know that having such communions is a bad thing either. I think we're in potato potahto mode here though. It's not the point, but it's a good thing.

[Twinkle]

I don't disagree. My insight into Hera through UPG has had valuable application for me. I just don't feel that it would have valuable application for anyone else, and I am always suspect of those that want to spout their gnosis everywhere.

We also have to keep in mind that some of the stuff I hear is just absolutely beyond the pale for me...and I have to wonder about the person's mental health. Some of the stuff is just delusional...either that, or just plain bullshit.

I guess it's more a question of intent, than anything else.

[Tobias]

I don't disagree. My insight into Hera through UPG has had valuable application for me. I just don't feel that it would have valuable application for anyone else...


Huh. I guess it's no big surprise that I feel exactly the opposite. I'm about a hundred times more interested in what your personal experiences are with Hera than I am about hearing once again how people need to follow certain rules if they want to call themselves Reconstructionists. :)

There is a mystery behind our experiences with divine beings. The Christians I've hung around always insist that certain rules must be kept, and that those rules are more important than experience. In fact, sometimes there is quite a bit of persecution for those who place experience in front of the rules.

One of the big faults I find with Evangelical Christianity is the fact that the mystical relationship with Jesus is locked behind the vault door of doctrine. That everybody everywhere knows just exactly what steps you must take to accept Jesus into their heart, but nobody really knows why they would want to do it. Unless you are frightened by hell, or pressured by society, there isn't any motivation for doing so!

But if people would just spend more of their time talking about the benefits of their relationship, and how much different their life is because of that; then the reason for conversion takes on a whole new meaning. It is a lifestyle, that has real world applications, and hopefully involves a system of theology and cosmology that make sense out of the difficult world we live in.

[Twinkle]

I've spent a lot of time talking about worship - and how the benefits of that have made me a better person. Living well - with piety, ethical and a sense of reciprocity creates its own effect.

The grand mystical experience is wonderful - but so is worshipping and living well.

We don't need to have some wonderful experience with Deity to be aware of their presence in our lives.

[Tobias]

I've spent a lot of time talking about worship - and how the benefits of that have made me a better person. Living well - with piety, ethical and a sense of reciprocity creates its own effect.

The grand mystical experience is wonderful - but so is worshipping and living well.

We don't need to have some wonderful experience with Deity to be aware of their presence in our lives.


Rules that define a religion are useful for scholars, and those who are interested in what scholars have to say about their religion. Otherwise, the rules of a religion need to have a purpose. They should work to promote the objectives of the religion, which hopefully has to do with living well and treating other people kindly. :)

The denominations of Christianity often fall into the trap of over emphasizing the rules to the point where the purpose for them is lost. To the outsider, it looks like the sole reward for obeying the rules is to qualify to become one of them. Not that their lifestyle or religion is the least bit appealing! I think this happens when any religious group finds itself at war with another group over the right to the title of their religion.


Now, when it comes to the principles that promote mystical experiences, I'm not sure if religion can actually teach these. In Christianity we are a subset of a specific group. Not everybody "gets" it. IDK why. But generally it's a matter of taking some of the same teachings and doctrines that the general population hold to, and seeing a deeper meaning behind them. It's easy to imagine some of those who have gone on before have placed key markers in the religion that are there to help guide the future generation of mystics! Otherwise, responsible mystical practice is taught one on one from person to person. ...Not something that's possible when reconstructing an old religion, I don't think! But something that the new adherents can develop between themselves if they are free to openly share their experiences.

But at any rate, the bulk of religion is about living well and worshiping correctly. :thumbsup: And after people can see the benefits that piety brings into a person's life, then they are much more interested in the rules and principles that promote the lifestyle.

[C. Iulia Regilia]

Rules that define a religion are useful for scholars, and those who are interested in what scholars have to say about their religion. Otherwise, the rules of a religion need to have a purpose. They should work to promote the objectives of the religion, which hopefully has to do with living well and treating other people kindly. :)

The denominations of Christianity often fall into the trap of over emphasizing the rules to the point where the purpose for them is lost. To the outsider, it looks like the sole reward for obeying the rules is to qualify to become one of them. Not that their lifestyle or religion is the least bit appealing! I think this happens when any religious group finds itself at war with another group over the right to the title of their religion.


Now, when it comes to the principles that promote mystical experiences, I'm not sure if religion can actually teach these. In Christianity we are a subset of a specific group. Not everybody "gets" it. IDK why. But generally it's a matter of taking some of the same teachings and doctrines that the general population hold to, and seeing a deeper meaning behind them. It's easy to imagine some of those who have gone on before have placed key markers in the religion that are there to help guide the future generation of mystics! Otherwise, responsible mystical practice is taught one on one from person to person. ...Not something that's possible when reconstructing an old religion, I don't think! But something that the new adherents can develop between themselves if they are free to openly share their experiences.

But at any rate, the bulk of religion is about living well and worshiping correctly. :thumbsup: And after people can see the benefits that piety brings into a person's life, then they are much more interested in the rules and principles that promote the lifestyle.

Mysteries are mysteries because they're supposed to be hidden. I do think as I've said a million times, this is the founding era. we need both sides and we need to be somewhat picky, but I don't think that it means that you should never talk about your experiences. Maybe it's a devine clue that taken in context with what archeology knows.

[Sekhmet Soul30]

I got tired of all the arguing that's going on here. Sparkle has the right to have her own opinion, a opinion that I happen to share. I have Tim's book "A Beginner's Guide to Hellenismos" and I absolutely love it. He makes it easy to start practicing the Hellenism religion and I'm glad that he has the respect of those that practice and that he's respected in return.

The part that seems to be hard for people to understand is that magic(k) is considered Hubris, according to his book, and that makes me believe that witchcraft (or whatever it was called) wasn't practiced by a majority of people. I liked his festival calender, his hymns that he edited, and I believe that this book is perfect for those that wish to start practicing. People may not like what he has to say but he has the right to say it.

Just like I have the right to follow it.

[Twinkle]

Sparkle thanks you. ;)

[Sekhmet Soul30]

Sparkle thanks you. ;)

No problem. Why does people have a problem with Timothy. I personally like him.

[Fiamma]

Isn't the subject of people's likes and dislikes of a particular individual a bit off topic here?


No problem. Why does people have a problem with Timothy. I personally like him.

[Twinkle]

Isn't the subject of people's likes and dislikes of a particular individual a bit off topic here?


Only if someone steps in and says they like him, apparently.

[Fiamma]

Seriously? I could always respond with my own opinion, but I think that talking about disliking the guy is just as off topic here.

I wouldn't have said anything if the comment was about the contents of his books or anything else he's had to say which are relevant here. The thread could be nothing but a bunch of rapturous odes about how much people love what he has to say, and while I might argue my disagreement with the points, I'd never argue its place here despite what I might think of Tim personally.


Only if someone steps in and says they like him, apparently.

[Twinkle]

:) I read over the thread in its entirety - and quite a bit of this was quite personal in regard to Tim. I only noticed the disapproval when the comments were positive.

I'm reminded of one my favorite quotes when I read over this thread:

"Methinks thou dost protest too much".

[Fiamma]

:) I read over the thread in its entirety - and quite a bit of this was quite personal in regard to Tim. I only noticed the disapproval when the comments were positive.

I'm reminded of one my favorite quotes when I read over this thread:

"Methinks thou dost protest too much".


Ummmm...no. There are plenty of other favorable things said in this thread- I don't object to them because those things were said about relevant points of discussion, such as opinions on his books on the topic of Hellenic religion.

But it's nice to know that I would not have been off topic if I had posted my own feelings instead.

I'm going to go and start a thread on a religiously-related topic now. Anyone who wants, feel free to join.

[Sekhmet Soul30]

I personally have no problem posting how much I like an author. I like giving authors that I like a positive response. People do it all the time.