Hi Mogg, Nagasiva and all,
not meaning to distract from the conversation, but this topic is
convergent with one I've been discussing lately elsewhere, and more
importantly perhaps, thinking and writing about. That is, the
prevalence of syncretism in ancient Mediterranean and Middle Eastern
paganism.
Syncretism has a very bad reputation is some quarters of the modern
occult scene; sometimes with good reasons (Erzulie does not =
Aphrodite). There is also a marked tendency for this antagonism to
spill over into areas where it is out of place.
When writing about ancient religion where syncretism was a long
standing tradition, this antagonism virtually demands a reiterated
justification whenever syncretic features arise in the discussion.
This is perhaps less the case in some quarters of the neo-pagan scene,
and in the UK especially - but there is still a definite speed-bump to
be negotiated where historical syncretism is involved.
ALWays
Jake
On 21 February 2010 10:20, mandrake <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
> Dear nagasiva yronwode et al
>
> Picking up the thread from a week back -
> and you response to the idea of Abrahamic faiths as reactive or counter-
> religion"
> you say this is in no way unique, but can you give examples?
>
> I'm recalling this idea either from David Frankfurter or Jan Assmann -
> other religions of the ancient world,
> although aware of their differences with
> other cultures nevertheless operated a principle of "inter-translation"
> (Sorry to repeat myselt on this but it seems an important point worthy of
> attention)
>
> So for example although the Romans didn't like native British faiths, they
> nevertheless translated the names into their own system -
> thus Sulis-Minerva (Sulis= celtic, minerva = latin) - one can image what for
> example the Christian response would be -
> Sulis is a demon and its sanctuary is to be destroyed and replaced by such
> and such a saint or angel.
> This "intertranslation" is a feature of almost all other ancient religions
> apart from the Abrahamic.
> In a sense it is a distinct trend in history of religions and what
> distinguishes Paganism from Christianity.
>
> The early identity of early Christianity is very much determined by these
> kinds of reactions or counters to existing faiths -
> thus the need to erase previous religious history and indeed the history of
> its own construction??
> BTW I'm not saying this is all there is, just one important feature.
> It's just a theory but an interesting one and important for current Pagan
> identity I would think;
> connected as it is with the roots of fundamentalism.
>
> : )
>
> bb/93
>
> Mogg
>
>
>
>
>
>
>>
>>
>>>
>>> Other commentators have shown how the Abrahamic faiths are counter or
>>> reactive religions,
>>
>>
>>
>>>
>>> defined in contradistinction to others.
>>
>> this is in no way unique. religions separate themselves from proximate
>> cults all the time by
>> stipulating things they do not do which their
>> sibling religious are known to do comparably,
>> or which they do that the others forbid.
>>
>
|