Are pagan religions seeing a sudden revival and boost in popularity Veeky Forums? If so, why?

>Especially the T. Is that Esoteric Trumpism or something?
Tau cross. Used in Freemasonry. Sometimes paired with a serpent.
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tau_Cross
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nehushtan

>my practize

What the fuck do you even practize?
You write about detaching yourself from the material to defie the demiurge in one place and then to tantric fuckmagic and how to make yourselv a minor bhodisvhata in the next just to skip to western witchcraft which would be sneered at by most religions abrahamic or not because its edgy af.

Did you actually made something coherent that could be organized in a book or something?

>The 20th century would have been a chance but the second worldwar devoured that.
We had two, actually, the revival that bordered between GD and Thelema and the commercialization of Wicca in the New Age movement.

As for the hand,
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hamsa

I'd imagine the bottom right is simply a fertility goddess symbol.

Bottom left could possibly be a peyote cactus.

>What the fuck do you even practize?
Thelema, as a meta-philosophy to be applied as an overlay to spiritual experimentation.

I don't favor for detachment from materiality.

Elements of Gnostic, Tantrik, and Thelemic materials all make incorporations of traditional witchcraft.

I'm actually currently writing an anthology entry on the relationship between Crowley and Abhinavagupta through the lens of Hunter Thompson.

I have almost 100 pages of notes on Chumbley's Dragon Book of Essex which track through midrash, tantra, yazidism, Sefer Yetzirah, Crowley's unpublished initiations, Mandaean influence on Italian Neoplatonic revivals, etc.

>the commercialization of Wicca in the New Age movement.

That was just hippies hippying around to spell fuck you to their parents and the society which had grown ugly in their eyes with its war legacy while the world just started to open more again to travel.

Nothing big but a big bullshit production as a sideeffects of good times and the west realigning itself. The 20s was when a lot of stuff was much better researched (compare the likes of asatru to Friedrich Hielschers take on germanic religion) and made by people who had to deal with suffering and a time of uncertainity which seems to make for the best religious tales.

>hippies hippying around
The New Age didn't actually start until the seventies.

>The 20s was when a lot of stuff was much better researched
By amateurs? Sure. We've made a fuckload of progress since then and have materials those guys didn't have access to.

>seventies
old hippies approaching the midlife crisis, even worse!

I agree that ressources today are much better then abck then, but between the new age movement and what happened during the 20s seems to be a great discrepancy in the quality of people that got away with going into the occult.
In the early 20th century, it wasnt socially trendy or accepted, while the fewer educated classes often still remembered the great philosophersof the century before quiete vividly which makes for better theological groundwork.

Im notthat knowledgable and am admitting that im partially talking out of my ass, but there should be a reason that every normie knows crowley, masons and his local failed prophet or seer from that time, while nobody who isnt activly researching occult stuff or new age movements is aware of the ramblings over magic crystals and channeling angels you can witness as relict of this new age stuff on the worst of payTVs (at least in yurop.)

I typed this but am unhappy with my point, im way too tired so I go.

>every normie knows crowley
Lol, not at all.
Every normie has heard his name and seen a pic. I can count on two hands the number of Thelemites who are actually competent with the corpus.

>Are pagan religions seeing a sudden revival and boost in popularity Veeky Forums?
Yes, but only Esoteric Kekism.

>If so, why?
Because Kek is objectively real.

Nobody is pagan outside Veeky Forums.

I've read that old beliefs never actually disappeared from here (Slovenia). An ethnologist was writing down names of houses in one of the more isolated regions and collected people's stories along the way. He discovered that many still knew about specific parts of the countryside where rocks allegedly containing energy were located. A few years ago, he went back to one of the holy caves and found new offerings there.

Those beliefs survived from stone age, even after Catholic repression. Other beliefs (there was no unified belief as dispersed communities believed in many different things) included faith in a bull in the sky, in snakes, magical mountain goats etc.

The real euro pagan ways are just 'traditions' rural folk do and always have without real argumentation being levered towards their realness. - like how we paid respects to the leaf child during mayday in my village

The 'organised' occult-ish pagan-ish type stuff is just too removed from these almost instinctual folk roots to be meaningful in any other way than to be an example of a purposely obscurantist circlejerk. It's just manufactured.

Wow you just spouted a whole bunch of edgy bullshit.

And what exactly is bullshit about it?

>which never happens because once you become an atheist you never stop being one

Got any proofs?

t. Catholic with a passionate hate of LARP Catholicism, converted from atheism

Neo-paganism was born when Romantic era protestants erroneously believed the lack of the meaningful and sacred in Protestantism was inherent to all Christianity. This coupled with being exposed to exotic dharmic religions led them to seek elsewhere. Misguided by delusions they sought to revive the primitive animism of their ancestors. The results have been awful and neo-paganism remains a faith only practiced by freaks, deviants and outcast. Since freaks, deviants and outcast are on the rise neo-paganism is rising with them.

>Neo-paganism was born when Romantic era protestants erroneously believed the lack of the meaningful and sacred in Protestantism was inherent to all Christianity.

And they were completely right. Christianity is literally a religion build around insulting humanity and decency

>A religion revolved around being a Christ-like person is indecent.

>that Christ-like person tells me I should follow his suicidal doctrines, even if it ends up ruining my life, and possibly killing me

Yes, indecent

>that Christ-like person tells me I should follow his suicidal doctrines, even if it ends up ruining my life, and possibly killing me

Wtf are you talking about? Sounds like some shitty anecdotal your using to juge a doctrine over 2000 years old with over 1 billion followers.

The internet makes memes possible.

youtube.com/user/Styxhexenhammer666
Best Friend styxhexenhammer666 freely admits he couldn't get a reliable publisher/marketer, but now that he's established a niche on the interwebs, he doesn't need to .

In order to take part in a religion you need access to texts and like minded individuals. The interwebs allow access to both, and as technology improves, there is a greater feeling of connection with these people who are in different parts of the county or world.

>Neo-paganism was born when Romantic era protestants erroneously believed the lack of the meaningful and sacred in Protestantism was inherent to all Christianity.

They were correct. Christianity focuses on an otherworldy essence as the focal point of its sacredness and its central figure is an utterly inhumanly pure preacher that no one can actually learn from or aspire to, except perhaps in the sense that someone can aspire to being the hero of a saturday morning cartoon. It rejects the material world and its pleasures as something evil, and even suggests that your suffering is just a hiccup on your route to an eternal otherworldly paradise.

Neopaganism, for all of its faults, is a step in a positive direction, since the gods typically embody all aspects of the human condition, and don't make random select components of it evil except in so far as they're actually detrimental to your being or the conduct of society, it also endorses embracing and cherishing the world.

>Wtf are you talking about?

I'm talking about loving my enemies, when they want me dead. And I don't give a flying fuck how many followers you managed to trick into your bullshit beliefs, if they don't benefit me and those around, I'm not interested, and neither are you

>its central figure is an utterly inhumanly pure preacher that no one can actually learn from or aspire to

Christ says we should be perfect, as our Father in heaven is perfect. We strive to be like Christ, but when we fail Christ forgives us. Your conclusion is both pessimistic and false.

>It rejects the material world

Your getting Christianity mixed up with Gnosticism.

>and its pleasures as something evil

Again not true. Christianity rightfully teaches pleasure isn't the same as happiness though.

>since the gods typically embody all aspects of the human condition, and don't make random select components of it evil except in so far as they're actually detrimental to your being or the conduct of society, it also endorses embracing and cherishing the world.

Worshiping whores and rapist while glorifying worldly pleasures as the peak of existence is a step backwards.

I can get revering nature and shit, but to actually believe fucking Thor is up there?

Thor is responsible for lightning, yes.

>Christ says we should be perfect, as our Father in heaven is perfect. We strive to be like Christ, but when we fail Christ forgives us. Your conclusion is both pessimistic and false.

And why should we strive to be perfect, knowing that we can't be perfect?

>Your getting Christianity mixed up with Gnosticism.

No, this is Christianity I'm talking about. One of the religions that turns reality into a waiting room for death.

>Again not true. Christianity rightfully teaches pleasure isn't the same as happiness though.

Sure, so do most philosophers. But Christianity is pretty explicit in that basic pleasures like pride in your success, or the enjoyment of sexual pleasure are "sins."

>Worshiping whores and rapist while glorifying worldly pleasures as the peak of existence is a step backwards.

You missed the point completely, then. You're expected to learn from their failings as well as aspire to their virtues. With Germanic paganism especially, the fallibility of the Gods is a huge theme, since a lot of what goes down in Ragnarok is their own fucking doing.

>No, this is Christianity I'm talking about. One of the religions that turns reality into a waiting room for death.

Where exactly does Christianity reject the material world?

>But Christianity is pretty explicit in that basic pleasures like pride in your success, or the enjoyment of sexual pleasure are "sins."

Christianity sanctifies romantic love in Song of Songs as well as Sirach. Likewise pride should be avoided as all good things come from God, but Christianity doesn't condemn the fact that these things are good.

Yes, in Poland at least.

No, it's a natural process.

Thor is a metaphor for that natural process, among other things

So why not just cut out the "god" and worship nature itself

i converted into my own religion after my gods started giving me nice things

Nature on it's own is mysterious, beautiful, and dangerous. It goes beyond us, it is the essence of godliness. In order for man to have a better relationship to these forces he mythologizes them.