Masonic Initiation Rituals and Mormon Temple Ceremonies

I have been trying to explain this for decades (me also being an initiate of several lodges and other initiatory bodies + having recieved the LDS endowment once upon a time).

The few liknesses between (especially) The Royal Arch and the Nauvoo Endowment (LDS Temple Ritual) are smaller than many think and the history where Masonry and Mormonism meets often obscured.

Ps: No obligations are broken in the video to Freemasonry or Endowment and it is not meant as proselytatization. Purely academic comparison).

Christian Wingnuts And Modern Atheists Both…

1: Have a feeling of saving those of other opinions.

Since they have the “truth” it is ok to persecute those who disagree, bombarding them with argument after argument until they give up, not because they are convinced but because they are tired and overwhelmed.

Imagine living in Catholic Europe in the High – Late Middle ages, when everybody was shanting the same poppycock until you either ended up in mortal danger or complied.

Today Atheism (which is not a new idea. There are mentions of atheists in Norse Sagas written in the 1200´s) has taken up a similar role of converting those straying from the straight and narrow to the truth.

Somehow, they have both “gotten” something that the whole rest of the world has missed and now they have to help all the other poor bastards.

And when the numbers of adherents go up that makes them happy (as oppose to many pre Christian, as well as contemporary ,often ethnic,”religions” who couldnt care less about numbers and have no interest in growing for its own sake.).


2: Pretend to be persecuted (by eachother and in general). Just like Pagans in the 60´s blamed it all on the Christians, todays Atheists blame it all on “religion” (a concept that is almost worthless and undefinable by the standards of serious anthropology) and Wingnuts blame it all on the Gay, political left or pretty much anything else.

3: Make easy answers by pointing out the horrors that are the results of whatever they dislike (by a good use of selective viewing. Worked for Nazis since the 1920´s so why not?).

The Christian blaming a lot of things on the lack of morals in society (as if Atheists where less moral???).


Westbourough Baptist Church.

In Sweden we have had sexual education since the mid 50´s, naked pictures, diagrams and the whole song and dance.

What country has more teenage pregnancies, Sweden or the US???

The Atheist blaming things on “religion”, as if it was some separate thing in itself ( I would argue that terms like “religion” and “magic” are ethnocentric construcs of a Judeo/ Christian society.).

The fact that Nazi and Communist death camps alone has a body count dwarfing any crusades, suicide bombing or similar must mean that politics and ideology (including democracy) are “evil” and should be abolished too???

4: Narrows down wide topics like belief, the existence of God (or lack of it), ethics and so on to one ontology, one epistomological model and so on.

They then carry on as if it was the “real” way of seeing things / thinking.

For Atheists that would be using materialism as ontological model and approach it only by rationalism and empirism and simply ignoring all other philosophy since the dawn of mankind up till now.

Christians love throwing value conservatism around, declaring society under threat of moral breakdown without their mythology to back it up.


Atheist symbol. The “Atom” design incorrectly implying a connection to science.


5: Using bogus science to further their agendas and reasoning.

For Atheists it is usually hard sciences. For Christians often soft sciences.

Examples being trying to prove that God (another silly term that means nothing in itself) doesent exist by using physics.

Or trying to actually find Noa´s ark on mount Ararat by launching expeditions and using “archeology”.

The physics in this case arent bogus, only the application of it.

A bit like proving an apple tastes good in inches.

The archeology however is total make belive.

If i where to launch an expedition to a Norwiegian fjord, sending down divers  and finding more and more “evidence” that the Hammer of Thor was down there, people would regard me as insane.


6: Insist on using narrow definitions of whatever they attack. Definitions that generally dont fit most of what actually gets implicated in the attack.

Usually “religion” to an Atheist means something resembling Christianity or at least Abrahamic religions.

Historically, monotheism, faith based religions and so on are not the most common (most pre Christian European religions where polytheistic and orthoprax, leaving your thoughts, feelings, beliefs and anything else  going on in your head private….usually, it would seem, even from the Gods, them not being omnipotent, omniscient or even necessarily Omnibenevolent .).

The fact that Christianity is so dominating today can be blamed mainly on Constantine II, not on any inherent quality or flaw in the religion(s) itself ( pre Nicean).

In short, by being made a state religion in Rome ( = the known world) it got a head start and a mentality of proselytisazion that other cults generally didnt have.

Pre Christian Rome had a policy (for their own reasons if nothing else) of toleration to the cults in lands they occupied as long as the cult didnt threaten the empire (as was the case with the Jews and the Druids and the pre Nicean “Christians”).

Often foreign cults where even imported and sometimes even incorporated into the main cult.

The same can be said about the Hellenistic world.

Serapis. Egypto/Hellenistic God
Picture: Open Source

There where syncretic cults all over Europe and Northern Africa.

In Norse sagas there are warnings (some of them from the God Odin) about being too “devoted” ( = over sacrificing ).

To compare an Abrahamic cult to an ethnic cult in Papua New Guinea is just silly and childish.


There are a whole bunch of religions that does not have:

*A creator of the world.

*A God.

*A universe to have been created in the first place.

*Faith as a reqirement.

*An afterlife.

*Rewards after life.

*Punisment from previous incarnations.




*A central moral.




*Centralized practices or lithurgies.

….and so on and so forth.

Some even blur the borders between religion and philosophy (and can be seen both ways, Buddhism, Daoism, Confusianism, Thelema, Discordianism. The list can be made long.).

Some practices can be seen as spiritual and/or ritualistic and with a heritage from religion and/or culture but has no set belifsystem (or a very broad inclusive one) connected to them (Freemasonry, Yoga, Tantra, Kabbalah, Hermeticism, Neoplatonism. ).

7: Selective historiocity.

Atheists and Christians alike forget that during the High Middle Ages it was Islamic thought that stood in the forefront of science and Christians who where the crazy, uneducated  “suicide bombers”.


Much of contemporary chemistry, astronomy, medicine, mathematics, geometry and so on goes back to Islamic thinkers of that time.

Atheists forget that atrocities towards those who have the wrong opinions in countries where Atheism where  / are mandated by law makes even the Spanish inquisition seem like a fart in space (Pol Pot, China, Soviet, North Korea and so on).

Pol Pot and his merry Khmer Rouge. All Atheists putting any Inquisitor to shame.


I do agree however that the “political ideologies” of those countries could themself be argued to be religions.

Christians fail to see that there is inherent in the very fabric of their religion  to make “all men disciples”.

That is, spiritual and cultural imperialism.

I am, i guess, lucky to live in a country where most people are secular and apotheistic (= dont give a flying f**k whether God exists or not).

Religion usually does not creep into politics, medicine, education or other secular areas.

When a Lutheran , an Atheist and a Heathen  end up drinking beer at the same table there are usually no “funny looks”between them ( if they are even aware of eachothers beliefs).

It leaves room for those with a beliefsystem or practice outside of the mainstream to practice in peace and the possability of a pluralistic society where even several contradicting answers to the same question can be considered “right”.

It might be seen as a bit post modern but i believe (belief again) in the individual, the rights of the individual and the individual experience of existence.

I belive in the individual expression and i belive that the individual is forever a mystery to any other individual.

Thus, what goes on in your soul (in lack of a better term) is beyond scrutiny or judgement from me.

I cant prove ( and have no interest in proving) the existence of God(s).

On the other hand´i can´t prove the existance of minds other than my own either.

I still find interaction with both rewarding.

Mythopoeia, Modern Myth, Cultural Appropriation, Reconstructivism And Buy One Shackle, Get Two

I bet i can create a perfectly “valid” (says whom?) system of religion and/or magic combining Myth from the past…..say Norse Mythology, Weirdos at better Nightclubs, Lamplight Fantasy, Gothic Horror, Hermeticism , Raja Yoga, 1920´s-1950´s Pin Ups, Movies and Jogging.

Question is, why would i?

Would it be a simple mental jack off, an exercise in symbologistic thinking or a searching and working within myth

of a contemporary nature?

Elder Sign, modelled after the version described by Derleth.
Open Source.
I know of magicians working with the Cthulu Mythos, AS IF it was “true” (it is NOT some historical Babylonian mythology. “REAL” Babylonian, Sumerian, Caanaanite, and so on worship is best described in Reconstructivist religions like Natib Qadish) and i have myself (intentionally) experimented with a blend of concepts from the roleplaying game “Mage: The Ascension” and historical/contemporary techniques from real world mystical/magical practices.
Intersting enough, WITH results….good ones. Enlightening ones.
It should be said that i dont consider myself a Cayote (Chaos Magician) but rather a Hermeticist.
I have earlier written on the, close to, hysteria over symbols:
“The War Of The Unholy Squiggle”
Cultural appropriation:
“Cultural Appropriation”  and “Gamigo´s Cute And Fun Racism”
Adaption of cultural and/or ancient religion/culture to your own circumstances:
“Orthopraxy, Living Custom And The Non Nordic Born Heathen”
Pagan and/or Esoteric dogmatism:
“International Order Of Wingnuts”

As well as about Mythopoeia:

AND “Fakelore”:

So how do i reconsile those opinions?

Easy, it all comes down to acknowledgement, awareness and respect.

I have seen one of my Gods, Thor, both as a superhero, “flying” with his hammer [sic] and a skinny ass, grey skinned alien (Stargate).

Cultural appropriation or mythopoeia?

I leave that up to you.

In neither case is itt said that they are ACTUALLY presenting Norse myth or culture.

It is fiction, meant for enterteinement.

The real question, life imitating art, can it be valuable as a source of contemporary myth?

Does it represent the mind (and soul) of modern man.

Does these stories, together with contemporary myth, media, movies, comics as well as verbal myths tell a story from “within” man, explaining mans condition, nature and the nature of existance/the world, society and mans place in it?

Let´s start with some simple definitions:

1: The term mythology can refer either to the study of myths, or to a body or collection of myths.  As examples, comparative mythology is the study of connections between myths from different cultures, whereas Greek mythology is the body of myths from ancient Greece. A myth is defined as a sacred narrative explaining how the world and humankind came to be in their present form, within the field of folkloristics.Many scholars in other fields use the term “myth” in somewhat different ways. In a very broad sense, the word can refer to any story originating within traditions.

2: Mythopoeia (also mythopoesis, after Hellenistic Greek μυθοποιία, μυθοποίησις “myth-making”) is a narrative genre in modern literature and film where a fictional mythology is created by the writer of prose or other fiction. This meaning of the word mythopoeia follows its use by J. R. R. Tolkien in the 1930s. The authors in this genre integrate traditional mythological themes and archetypes into fiction.

Tolkien wrote Mythopoeia (the poem) following a discussion on the night of 19 September 1931 at Magdalen College, Oxford with C. S. Lewis and Hugo Dyson in order to explain and defend creative myth-making. The discussion was recorded in the book The Inklings by Humphrey Carpenter.

The poem refers to the creative human author as “the little maker” wielding his “own small golden sceptre” ruling his subcreation (understood as genuine creation within God‘s primarycreation).

3:  Mythopoeia in litterature- William Blake‘s “prophetic works” (e.g. Vala, or The Four Zoas) contain a rich panoply of original gods, such as UrizenOrcLosAlbionRintrahAhania and Enitharmon. Blake was an important influence on Aleister Crowley‘s Thelemic writings, whose dazzling pantheon of invented deities and radically re-cast figures from Egyptian mythology and the Book of Revelationconstitute an invented mythology of their own.

The Cthulhu Mythos of H. P. Lovecraft was likewise taken up by numerous collaborators and admirers.

In this category are the Cthulhu Mythos of Lovecraft and literature by Henry Rider Haggard and George MacDonald; the latter two C. S. Lewis praised for their “mythopoeic” gifts.

The repeated motifs of Jorge Luis Borges‘s fictional works (mirrorslabyrinthstigers, etc.) tantalizingly hint at a deeper underlying mythos and yet stealthily hold back from any overt presentation of it.

The pulp works of Edgar Rice Burroughs and Robert E. Howard contain imagined worlds vast enough to be universes in themselves[citation needed], as does the science fiction of Frank HerbertE. E. “Doc” Smith and Michael Moorcock[citation needed].

T. S. Eliot‘s The Waste Land was a deliberate attempt to model a 20th-century mythology patterned after the birth-rebirth motif described by Frazer.

Neil Gaiman‘s novels deal with various mythologies, and combines them into a single, cohesive world.

Stephen King‘s novels and short stories form an intricate and highly developed mythos, drawing in part on the Lovecraftian, with characters such as the demonic Crimson King andRandall Flag appearing in several (otherwise unrelated) works, as well as a supernatural force known only as “The White”. The Dark Tower series serves as a linchpin for this mythos, connecting with practically all of King’s various storylines in one way or another.

Star Maker by Olaf Stapledon is a rare attempt at a cohesive science fiction mythos.

Frank McConnell, author of Storytelling and Mythmaking and professor of English, University of California, stated film is another “mythmaking” art, stating: “Film and literature matter as much as they do because they are versions of mythmaking.” He also thinks film is a perfect vehicle for mythmaking: “FILM…strives toward the fulfillment of its own projected reality in an ideally associative, personal world.” In a broad analysis, McConnell associate the American western movies and romance movies to the Arthurian mythology, adventure and action movies to the “epic world” mythologies of founding societies, and many romance movies where the hero is allegorically playing role of a knight, to “quest” mythologies like Sir Gawain and the Quest for the Holy Grail.

Filmmaker George Lucas speaks of the cinematic storyline of Star Wars as an example of modern myth-making. He claims: “With Star Wars I consciously set about to re-create myths and the classic mythological motifs.” The idea of Star Wars as “mythological” has been met with mixed reviews by some reviewers and critics: Frank McConnell says “it has passed, quicker than anyone could have imagined, from the status of film to that of legitimate and deeply embedded popular mythology.” John Lyden, the Professor and Chair of the Religion Department at Dana College, argues that Star Wars does indeed reproduce religious and mythical themes: specifically, he argues that the work is apocalyptic in concept and scope.The Decent Film Guide’s Steven D. Greydanus agrees, calling Star Wars a “work of epic mythopoeia”. In fact, Greydanus argues that Star Wars is the primary example of American mythopoeia.

In classical music, Richard Wagner‘s operas were a deliberate attempt to create a new kind of Gesamtkunstwerk (“total work of art”), transforming the legends of the Teutonic past nearly out of recognition into a new monument to the Romantic project.

In popular music, George Clinton‘s ParliamentFunkadelic collective produced numerous concept albums which tied together in what is referred to as P-Funk mythology.

The musical collective NewVillager constructed a mythology from Joseph Campell’s Monomyth of which all their music, art, and videos serve to express.

The band Rhapsody Of Fire have created and tell the stories of a full-developed fantasy world with tales of epic wars between good and evil, although many elements are taken directly from Tolkien and other authors.

Michael Jackson, King Of Pop. Photo: Fair Use

Comic books have been called the twentieth century’s version of the epic. In The Mythos of the Superheroes and the Mythos of the Saints, Thomas Roberts observes that:

“To the student of myth, the mythos of the comics superheroes is of unique interest.”
“Why do human beings want myths and how do they make them? Some of the answers to those questions can be found only sixty years back. Where did Superman and the other superheroes come from? In his Encyclopedia of the Superheroes, Jeff Rovin correctly observes, “In the earliest days, we called them ‘gods’.”

Superman, for example, sent from the “heavens” by his father to save humanity, is a messiah-type of character in the Biblical tradition. Furthermore, along with the rest of DC Comic‘sJustice League of America, Superman watches over humanity from the Watchtower in the skies; just like the Greek gods do from Mount Olympus.

Jack Kirby’s Fourth World” series, with the cosmic struggle between Darkseid‘s Apokolips and the gods of New Genesis and Mister Miracle and Orion as messiah-figures is another good example. Neil Gaiman‘s Sandman series created a mythology around the Endless, a family of god-like embodiments of natural forces like death and dreaming.

Role-playing games often include invented mythologies for their players to interact with. Examples include the Forgotten Realms setting of Dungeons & Dragons, the world of White Wolf‘s Exalted, and the Elder Scrolls which boasts a mythology which could be argued is as detailed as Tolkien’s. Their computer counterparts, computer role-playing games, sometimes have elaborate fictional universes that continue to be explored over many sequels, such as the best selling Final Fantasy X which along with its sequel Final Fantasy X-2 sold 10 million copies and boasts a legion of enthusiasts of its Fictional Universe.

In the TV series Battlestar Galactica, an invented mythology is an important foundation of the plot. A vast majority of the humans, or Colonials, are polytheists and believe in the gods ofKobol, whose names and attributes are very similar to those of the Classical gods of Greece and Rome, such as ZeusAthenaApolloAres or Hera. One of the religious books of the Colonial canon was written by or named for the prophet Pythia. The Book of Pythia tells the story of the fall of the planet Kobol (where according to legend Humanity had first arisen), the exodus of the Twelve Tribes to their new planets (the Colonies), and the journey of a Thirteenth Tribe to a planet called Earth. The Cylons, a robot race, believe in one sole god and it has been suggested that the origins of their religion may be in the Temple of Five, a sacred place which appears in Pythia’s prophecy and was found by the Colonial and Cylon fleets.

[Personal note: Comic book superheroes are generally not the creators of existence or the universe and seldomly the upholders or destroyers of it either. They never have an immanent quality , they are “people” given powers from an “outside” force, science, magic, aliens or what have you, and thus in my view are more reminding of “Hero´s”, demigods or archangelic forces. Lesser than the creators, more than ordinary people,fighting for some “higher” cause]

The chaosphere is a popular symbol of chaos magic. Many variants exist. For more, see Symbol of Chaos.
Open Source.


Belief as a tool in Chaos Magick

Chaos magic claims that belief can be an active magical force. It emphasizes flexibility of belief and the ability to consciously choose one’s beliefs, hoping to apply belief as a tool rather than seeing it as a relatively unchanging part of one’s personality. Various psychological techniques are employed in order to induce flexibility of belief. Other chaos magicians suggest that people do not need “belief” to work magic. Austin Osman Spare asserts in the Book of Pleasure and various other works that Will formulates Desire which promulgates Belief.


Philosophy in Discordianism

There are as many interpretations of Discordianism as there are Discordians, centering around the words “Ancient Greeks”, “Chaos Worship” and “Anarchism”. This is an extremely debatable assertion as to what would define Discordian philosophy as a whole. Indeed, it is a notion directly confronted by the concept of the Eristic Illusion, as mentioned in the following passage, a summary of part of the Discordian philosophy which appears in the Principia Discordia:

Here follows some psycho-metaphysics.If you are not hot for philosophy, best just to skip it.The Aneristic Principle is that of apparent order; the Eristic Principle is that of apparent disorder. Both order and disorder are man made concepts and are artificial divisions of pure chaos, which is a level deeper than is the level of distinction making.With our concept-making apparatus called “the brain” we look at reality through the ideas-about-reality which our cultures give us.The ideas-about-reality are mistakenly labeled “reality” and unenlightened people are forever perplexed by the fact that other people, especially other cultures, see “reality” differently.

It is only the ideas-about-reality which differ. Real (capital-T) True reality is a level deeper than is the level of concept.

We look at the world through windows on which have been drawn grids (concepts). Different philosophies use different grids. A culture is a group of people with rather similar grids. Through a window we view chaos, and relate it to the points on our grid, and thereby understand it. The order is in the grid. That is the Aneristic Principle.

Western philosophy is traditionally concerned with contrasting one grid with another grid, and amending grids in hopes of finding a perfect one that will account for all reality and will, hence, (say unenlightened westerners) be true. This is illusory; it is what we Erisians call the Aneristic Illusion. Some grids can be more useful than others, some more beautiful than others, some more pleasant than others, etc., but none can be more True than any other.

Disorder is simply unrelated information viewed through some particular grid. But, like “relation”, no-relation is a concept. Male, like female, is an idea about sex. To say that male-ness is “absence of female-ness”, or vice versa, is a matter of definition and metaphysically arbitrary. The artificial concept of no-relation is the Eristic Principle.

The belief that “order is true” and disorder is false or somehow wrong, is the Aneristic Illusion. To say the same of disorder, is the Eristic Illusion.

The point is that (little-t) truth is a matter of definition relative to the grid one is using at the moment, and that (capital-T) Truth, metaphysical reality, is irrelevant to grids entirely. Pick a grid, and through it some chaos appears ordered and some appears disordered. Pick another grid, and the same chaos will appear differently ordered and disordered.

Reality is the original Rorschach. Verily! So much for all that.

—Malaclypse the Younger, Principia Discordia, Pages 00049–00050

And this, from the Principia Discordia‘s very beginning, a Discordian koan:

Greater Poop: Is Eris true?Malaclypse the Younger: Everything is true.GP: Even false things?M2: Even false things are true.GP: How can that be?

M2: I don’t know man, I didn’t do it.


Chao (pronounced “cow”) is a neologism for a single unit of chaos. In Discordianism, the chao is a symbol of the ‘pataphysical nature of reality. The word is a pun, enabling this quatrainfrom the Principia Discordia:

To diverse gods do mortals bow; Holy Cow, and Wholly Chao.

Sacred Chao

The Sacred Chao

The Sacred Chao is a symbol used by Discordians to illustrate the interrelatedness of order and disorder. It resembles a Yin-Yang symbol, but according to the Principia Discordia:

The Sacred Chao is not the Yin-Yang of the Taoists. It is the Hodge-Podge of the Erisians. And, instead of a Podge spot on the Hodge side, it has a pentagon which symbolizes the Aneristic Principle, and instead of a Hodge spot on the Podge side, it depicts the Golden Apple of Discordia to symbolize the Eristic Principle. The Sacred Chao symbolizes absolutely everything anyone need ever know about absolutely anything, and more! It even symbolizes everything not worth knowing, depicted by the empty space surrounding the Hodge-Podge.
—Malaclypse the Younger, Principia Discordia, Page 00049

The choice of the pentagon as a symbol of the Aneristic Principle is partly related to The Pentagon in Virginia near Washington, D.C., partly a nod to the Law of Fives, partially for the Golden Ratio references associated with the pentagon/apple allegory, and wholly for the five-sided pentagon from the “Starbuck’s Pebbles” story in the Discordia. The Golden Apple of Discordia is the one from the story of The Original Snub (below).

Law of Fives

The Law of Fives is summarized in the Principia Discordia:

The Law of Fives states simply that: All things happen in fives, or are divisible by or are multiples of five, or are somehow directly or indirectly appropriate to 5 The Law of Fives is never wrong.
—Malaclypse the Younger, Principia Discordia, Page 00016

Like most of Discordianism, the Law of Fives appears on the surface to be either some sort of weird joke, or bizarre supernaturalism; but under this, it may help clarify the Discordian view of how the human mind works. Lord Omar is quoted later on the same page as having written, “I find the Law of Fives to be more and more manifest the harder I look.”

Appendix Beth of Robert Shea‘s and Robert Anton Wilson‘s The Illuminatus! Trilogy considers some of the numerology of Discordianism, and the question of what would happen to the Law of Fives if everyone had six fingers on each hand. The authors assert that the real Law of Fives is realizing that everything can be related to the number five if you try hard enough. Sometimes the steps required may be highly convoluted. Incidentally, the number five appears five times within the quote describing the Law of Fives, which is stated in 23 words.

Another way of looking at the Law of Fives is as a symbol for the observation of reality changing that which is being observed in the observer’s mind. Just as how when one looks for fives in reality, one finds them, so will one find conspiracies, ways to determine when the apocalypse will come, and so on and so forth when one decides to look for them. It cannot be proven wrong, because it proves itself reflexively when looked at through this lens.

At its basic level, the Law of Fives is a practical demonstration that perception is intent-sensitive; that is, the perceiver’s intentions inform the perception. To whatever extent one considers that perception is identical with reality, then, it has the corollary that reality is intent-sensitive.

The Law of Fives is related to the significance of the number 23 and the 23 Enigma in the Illuminatus!-trilogy, as 2 plus 3 equals 5.


Otherkin are a community of people who identify themselves as non-human in all but outward form, contending that they are, in spirit if not in body, non-human animals or creatures traditionally associated with mythology or folklore. Belief in otherkin is related to the changelingconcept.

A regular {7/3} heptagram known as theElven Star or Fairy Star is used by some members of the otherkin subculture as an identifier. Open Source

The therianvampire, and draconic subcultures are related to the otherkin community somewhat, and are considered part of it by most otherkin, but are culturally distinct movements of their own despite some overlap in membership.[1]

Some may claim to be able to shapeshift mentally — meaning that they may experience the sense of being in their particular form while not actually changing physically. The existence of Otherkin is variably explained as being made possible through reincarnation, having a nonhumansoulancestry, or symbolic metaphor.

Otherkin identify with familiar creatures from mythology, folklore and religion along with various terrestrial animals: angelsdemonsdragons,elvesfairiesspritesaliens

The oldest Internet resource for otherkin is the Elfinkind Digest; a mailing list started in 1990 by a student at the University of Kentucky for “elves and interested observers”. Also in the early 1990s, newsgroups such as alt.horror.werewolves and on Usenet, which were initially created for fans of these creatures in the context of fantasy and horror literature and films, also developed followings of individuals who identified as mythological beings.

On 6 February 1995, a document titled the “Elven Nation Manifesto” was posted to Usenet, including the groups alt.pagan and alt.magick. OnUsenet itself, the document was universally panned and considered to be either a troll or an attempt to frame an innocent party. However, enough people contacted the original author of the Elven Nation post in good faith for a planned mailing list to spin off from it.

The modern otherkin subculture grew out of these elven online communities of the early-to-mid-1990s, with the earliest recorded use of the term otherkin appearing in July of 1990 and the variant otherkind being reported as early as April 1990.

Now, i´m not implying that all those who burp out something about being an Atlantean vampire with the possability of Vulcan “Mind Meld” tecniques be taken seriously.

Neither am i saying WHOM should be taken seriously.

Neither am i saying that books, film or music are the only sources of modern myth.

As a matter of fact, i would claim that the main bulk of modern myth is in our mind, immanent, part of us, the way we see things, what we fantasize, the way we talk, dress and so on.

Photo: Brad Pitt- Interview With A Vampire. From:

I bet quite a few of us gets strangely touched by the fates of Louis, Lestat and Claudia in “Interview With A Vampire”.

There already is a folkloric and mythological theme in the vampire itself, via the Gothic Novel to more contemporary litterature and other medias (including roleplaying games).

Some has gone so far that one hardly recognize the loner, stranger, predator/parasite sexual figure any longer and even less so the “Draugr”, undead, walking , pest spreading corpse of medeaval times.

If this is the deluting, refining or diversifying of a symbol i leave up to you.

Why is the Middle Earth stories of J.R.R Tolkien the most sold (and copied in the genre) work of litterature save only the new Testament?

Perhaps because both are myth (NOT meaning “untrue”), touching something deeper than mere narrative.

In the circles (no pun intended) in which i have moved and i enjoy, all from Cybergoth, BDSM,LARP, Occult, Masonic, Goth, Vintage, Religous, myth is abound in the way people dress, behave, believe, pretend, talk ,but to a less visuable degree, so is it in society in general.

I once wrote:

” Often, when asked to describe “myth” people naively say something like “Myth was a primitive way of describing natural phenomena like thunder or fire”. Think of one of your ex´s. Think of the dreams you shared, your plans….how everything was going to be. Now think of that same relationship as you see it now. THIS is why we have (and always had) myth. If you are the sum of your experiences and your experiences are partly myth,you must be partly myth. It has immanence. More than anything, mythology describes YOU, helps you understand YOU”

And i stand by that.

Leonard Nimoy as Mr Spock in “Star Trek”. The Vulcan greeting gesture inspired by Kabbalah and the Hebrew letter “Shin”. They say he got it from his Rabbi (Myth?).

I dont see ancient myths as “dead” as one writer called them.

I simply see the contemporary once as…well….contemporary.

The celebrity, The CEO, The Loser, The Conspiracy, The A Type Personality,Big Brother, arent they all figures of contemporary myth?

The Reconstructivist might say Eccletism and Syncretism is “throwing the baby out with the bath water”, not getting the full picture or cultural appropriation.

The Ecclectist might say that the Reconstructivist is the one not getting the full picture by not adapting beliefs and practices to oneself (most people in fact NOT being ancient Greeks, Norse sailors or Romans….unless they´re Othekin *Grin*).

The Syncretist may say that a mix of two (or more mythologies, beliefsystems or what have you is in fact not a mix….not anymore. It is a third NEW. The new concept is greater than the sum of the  components.

The simple truth is that every beliefsystem, Religion, Magical practice, Fashion, Music style, Dance style or anything else i can think of includes both tradition, ecclectism, syncretism and inspiration.

Thinking moves forward.

It also rests upon previous thinking.

Ideas of Relativism and later Existentialism and Absurdism are hardly new.

If i came home to someone who had an altar to the Avengers or the Justice League of America i might luagh at the inside, thinking of the person as either heckeling religion and/or magic or as a (probably teen) wannabe.

I might however have walked into a Magus who have trancended the absurd, the silly and immersed himself in the modern myths, even the rather tacky and colourful ones.

In Method Acting, acting becomes close to Invokation.

In the techniques of Igor Stanislawski, Lee Strassberg, Samford Meisner and Stella Adler acting becomes close to Invokation …..well…..since it is an inner art.

It differs from many other techniques since it is an inner art.

Assuming Godforms is no strange concept tp Ceremonial Magicians.

There is a concept akin to “group think” or the “collective consciousness” of Jung known to Esoterics of most western traditions:

Egregore (also egregor) is an occult concept representing a “thoughtform” or “collective group mind”, an autonomous psychic entity made up of, and influencing, the thoughts of a group of people. The symbiotic relationship between an egregore and its group has been compared to the more recent, non-occult concepts of the corporation (as a legal entity) and thememe.

Many magicians and occultists think this is what you reach in your rituals concerning carachters from fiction.

Alternatives might be that some entety sees your description as “fair enough” and responds.

That all mythical concepts are archetypes.

Thus you bring forth archetypes from within.

And many more depending on beliefsystem.

I bet more of you recognize this symbol:

Bat Signal. Open Source.
….than this one:
sekhem style sistrum. Open Source.
The sistrum was a sacred instrument in ancient Egypt. Perhaps originating in the worship of Bastet, it was used in dances and religious ceremonies, particularly in the worship of the goddess Hathor, with the U-shape of the sistrum’s handle and frame seen as resembling the face and horns of the cow goddess.
Get my point?
Some favorite blogs right now:
Modern Mythology
The Valentines-black magic, rock and roll and sex

Occult Ego

Howcome many bloggers (often “occult” and even more often “Thelemic”) have a need to state clearly that they dont care what others think and that those who dont like it are welcome to go somewhere else?

I KNOW i dont have to read what you write!

If i think you´re an ignorant “tard” i will either tell you so….or not, at my own discretion.

And while mentioning your Order memberships and years of practice, did it ever occur to you that someone (like me) might have practiced since you where five and has been a member of Orders not even generally known outside of Europe (my way of saying “I´m not impressed”)?

Write your stuff.

Like with all geekery, only fellow geeks are impressed. I move (as instructed) to the next blog….since you are …silly.

93 93/93


I have writen in another place about keeping your inner feelings, plans, dreams and thoughts secret, lest people poop on them.

In short, what is most valuable to you, especially your dreams, should not be profaned by (however well meaning) naysayers and others.

One reason for why Magickal ceremonies and rituals are usually kept rather secret.

Their power would be diminished by telling “the world” about them.

Symbolized by the fact that spirituality, including Magick, Mysticism,Yoga and pure Religion (of a more than intellectual kind) belongs over the abyss on the Etz Chaii (Tree of Life).

That is Yechida, Chia and Neschamah (Kether,Chokmah and Bina).

In other word, hidden from the cosmos, or in this case the rational mind (Ruach).

I have begun to think about energy waste and distraction in my own life.

The more boring my life is, the more it gets posted on Facebook and similar places.

If my life was more interesting i might not WANT to reveal everything and even if i did, i would be too occupied experiencing it.

Maybe our posting of every fart on social medias rob us of power, a leakeage of sorts by throwing our whole inner self out there, unprotected and bare for anyone to scrutinize, judge or even insult for the heck of it.

It seems a whole lot of time is spent either attacking or defending ideologies, sexualities, spiritualities and so on.

In Freemasonry, they have a guy called the “Tyler” outside the door of the Temple, guarding it from intrusion.

If you see your life, your mind, your plans as a Lodge….do you have a Tyler? Does everything in there have the correct passwords and tokens?

That is, has thoughts, emotions, habits that are really unfamiliar to your spirituality, your sexual orientation, your ideology……simply YOU as an individual, snuck in?

I´m not talking about seeing others point of views, i´m talking about the bombardements of culture, telling you what is “right and wrong” (are you a Buddhist with largely Christian ethics because you where brought up/live in a Christian culture for instance?), telling you that you are “fat” despite the fact that you are skinnyer than Marilyn Monroe simply because our ideals have gone haywire?

Are we putting ourselves up as targets and then whine when we are judged by cretins?

It is one thing to bravely stand up for something, another to paste yourself everywhere out of shear Narcissism.

Another thing, now a big part of my (Spiritual) work is the backwards look.

I have been living in yesterday, in memories for too long.

That includes trying to become what i was again.

Isnt the whole work one of transformation?

Shouldnt we reinvent ourselves?

Symbolically one could see it as pure energy (and that is what it is, even nif not in form of a ray or anything similar).

Concentrated in one place it is stronger than if leaking in every direction.

Balanced it affects more than unbalanced.

Aiming it in the wrong direction, or several directions diminishes it.

Experinces and lessons learned are one thing, living a rerun of yourself another.

Aim for the next you.

It should be said that inspiration fuels the Temple so utter silence and an introvert attitude is not what i´m talking about (energy must be in motion).

Simply a moderation and caution with spillage.

Pearls before swine being the perfect metaphor.

International Order Of Wingnuts

I cant help but feeling that most Esoteric orders and Pagan organisations are starting to seem more and more like absolutist Churches . Everyone monopolizing some “truth” ( philosophical poppycock) and being in contact / lineage or otherwise authorized by someone kewler than who authorized the others.

I´m a bit bored…

… so i´ll waste some time whoring myself out!

Personal Tumblr:

The Beautiful Times (Nostalgia, Music, Vintage, Fashion, 1700´s – 1980´s):

Forn Sed (Viking Age, Norse Mythology, Norse Culture, History, Archeology, Anthropology)

Esoterica (Magic, Occult, Kabbalah, Alchemy, Rituals, Witchcraft, Satanism, Astrology):

The Roaring Twenties (Jazz Age, Flappers, Charleston, Gangsters, Prohibition, Silent Movies):

The Roaring Twenties (Facebook Page):

Vintage Clothing (Facebook Page):

Freemasonry for the 21st Century

My thoughts: Though this article is about Freemasonry (and its modernisation) it could be interesting to others too. “Starfish” and “Spider” organisations are highlighted by such orgs as Wikipedia, Napster, Skype and even terrorist cells.

” Perhaps this is a reason for why Heathenry in the Nordic countries seem to function and have functioned with such little strife. It was never centralized since there was no way TO centrilize it (too small population on too vast areas). I often feel that why in the US often (not always) there is a bickering about “Universalists” and “Folkish”, the Swedish Heathens just pour a beer by a tree as they always have, with very few craps to give about how their neighbour does it. In Sweden we often use the word “Folkrörelse” (peoples movement) to org with little or no central governing.

Wiccan and other strains of  Witchcraft are also thriving by not being centralized.

My only personal concern is that the baby isnt thrown out with the bathwater.
I belive in tradition,continuation, lineages, charters and heritage AS WELL as rejuvenation.

Freemasonry for the 21st Century


In The Starfish and the Spider: The Unstoppable Power of Leaderless Organizations, authors Ori Brafman and Rod Beckstrom group organizations into two broad categories: starfish and spiders.[i] Spiders are coercive, centralized organizations with rigid rules and hierarchy, whereas starfish are open and decentralized organizations lacking a clear chain of command.[ii]

At first glance, spiders and starfish may seem to resemble each other, but in fact, they are very different.[iii] Whereas cutting off the head of a spider will kill it, a starfish does not even have a head to cut off. Not only will the starfish not die, its parts will regenerate. If you cut a Linckia, or long-armed starfish, into two pieces, you will get two starfish. Cut it into five pieces and you will get five starfish. This is the amazing power of an open, decentralized network.[iv] You can’t kill it; and, attacking it only makes it stronger.

Open, decentralized networks have enormous power, and they are extremely resilient. A fundamental principle of Starfish organizations is that when attacked, in response they become even more open and decentralized, and therefore more resilient to attack.[v] The Apache Indians, Napster and its progeny[vi], Skype, Craigslist, Alcoholics Anonymous, and even, ominously, Al-Qaeda, are all classic examples of Starfish organizations. The Apache outlasted the Spanish conquistadores; Napster brought the major recording labels to their knees; Skype rendered the telephone industry’s long-distance profit model obsolete; and, Craigslist eviscerated newspaper ad revenues. All these starfish all took on spider organizations and beat them.

My favorite starfish example is Wikipedia because it illustrates one of the best principles of starfish organizations: “put people into an open system, and they’ll automatically want to contribute.”[vii] Wikipedia is a multilingual, web-based, free content encyclopedia project, operated by the Wikimedia Foundation, a non-profit organization. Wikipedia’s articles are written collaboratively by volunteers around the world and the vast majority of them can be edited by anyone with access to the Internet. Steadily rising in popularity since its inception, it currently ranks among the top ten most-visited websites worldwide.[viii] This popular, comprehensive, dynamic, and constantly improving free resource is entirely the product of the undirected cooperation of people worldwide. Open systems have the capacity to bring out the very best in people, rewarding collaboration and community oriented thinking.

There are several additional principles of starfish organizations that also help explain their success. Being decentralized, intelligence is spread throughout the system, often coming from the edges, closer to where the action is.[ix] Open systems can easily mutate to accommodate a changing environment.[x] Starfish have a tendency to sneak up on you.[xi] As starfish invade industries, industries become more decentralized, and overall revenue decreases.[xii] The record labels never saw Napster coming, and their profits have yet to recover from their lack of vision.

Some photos taken during midsummer blot / my birthday . As a Swedish Heathen i dont feel at all governed by any body of other Heathens.

The paradox of grand lodges is that taken together, they are the starfish that make up Freemasonry, but each individually is a monstrous spider within its own jurisdiction. Freemasonry is the ultimate starfish example. It is comprised of hundreds of grand lodges, so many that the exact number is unknown. There are traditional grand lodges, Prince Hall Affiliated grand lodges, co-masonic grand lodges, International grand lodges, grand orients, and probably dozens more. The self-proclaimed mainstream grand lodges do not recognize many of the other grand bodies, but this matters little to the amorphous body of Freemasonry. Kill any single grand lodge, another grows in its place, and the body of Freemasonry goes on with little notice.

But individually, grand lodges are classic spider organizations: highly centralized, rigid, and oft-times coercive. Grand Masters rule a rigid hierarchical structure with absolute authority. Grand lodges attempt to control communication among lodges (prohibiting the circularization of the lodges concerning any legislation pending before the Grand Lodge[xiii]) even among members (dissenting opinions are censored on heavily moderated online official forums). But take away the Grand Master and his officers, and the grand lodge dies. But not Freemasonry.

W6. Founded 1851 in my hometown, Gothenburg. Has lodges all over Sweden but not outside. Like so many fraternal (Masonic and other) organisations, most Orders in Sweden has a central Grand Lodge, Mother Lodge or similar. Many, though, seem to face similar problems as Masonry. An Order might be thriving compared to another Order, but not compared to any soccer / football supporter club, model airplane society or even motorcycle gang.

Grand lodges need not be spiders, however. They could devolve power back to their constituent lodges and assume a more supportive role. They could become more democratic, flatten the hierarchy, and become less rule-bound. They could evolve back into the starfish that they once were. In fact, our survival depends on it! Grand lodges are themselves an innovation to the body of Freemasonry. With the formation of the Premier Grand Lodge of England on June 24, in 1717, a new masonic institution was created. Originally created to restore the tradition of an annual feast, this body quickly expanded in scope, which in turn led to the explosive growth in masonic lodges over the next two centuries.[xiv]

One way to recapture the explosive growth of our past would be for grand lodges to decentralize their organizational structures. Imagine an organizational structure that turns the pyramid upside-down, where individual lodges are primary, having broad discretion to govern their internal affairs. The rights and immunities of lodges and their members would be expansive, whereas the power of any grand officer would be strictly limited (and maybe even nonexistent). Each lodge could choose the ritual that best suited them; determine the manner in which their candidates would progress; in which degree to conduct business; what lodges offices will be elective and how to elect their officers; and, whether alcohol could be served on lodge property. The primary function of the central organizing body would be simply to function as a mutual support association to serve a vast and growing network of independent lodges and provide the means for interconnectivity among them.

Any masonic body professing allegiance to the fundamental core ideology of Freemasonry should be welcomed. Independent lodges, mainstream lodges, Prince Hall affiliated lodges, in short, any lodge that practices Freemasonry. Active cooperation with other grand bodies outside of the U.S. mainstream, like the George Washington Union, Le Droit Humain, and other women-only and co-masonic lodges should also be encouraged. Isn’t it about time to once and for all do away with artificial racial, gender, religious, and political distinctions among people, especially among Freemasons?

I do not suggest that lodges change their individual character (e.g. all-male or all-female), only that we update the antiquated recognition apparatus too used to declare groups of good men (or women) as irregular. Men-only, women-only, and co-masonic lodges could all exist side-by-side, meeting separately behind tiled doors, but always working together outside the lodge room to promote Freemasonry and benefit humanity. Likewise, lodges predominantly comprised of a single ethnic group would undoubtedly continue to exist, but they could, within this new decentralized context, also recognize and cooperate with one another as well, beginning at long last the hard work of chipping away at the cultural barriers that kept them separated for over two centuries.

Although it is also a spider organization, the Scottish Rite (here I must qualify that my comments apply only to the Northern Masonic Jurisdiction, as I am unfamiliar with the Southern), of all masonic groups, is perhaps the best situated to face the challenges in the 21st Century. As an institution, it is the largest and wealthiest masonic body in the U.S.A. Of all masonic bodies, its leaders seem most acutely aware of the need to modernize its organization. Its leaders not only preach change but are actually putting into practice that change that they preach. Almost everyone in the NMJ is by now familiar with the new I.C.E. concept which instructs that our Scottish Rite programs be Inspirational, Convenient, and Enjoyable.

But the brutal truth is that Scottish Rite is a stone giant with feet of clay. It is still strong, but it stands on the state grand lodge system upon which it is wholly dependent for its prospective members and therefore for its future. What the Scottish Rite needs to survive is a growing pool of Master Masons. Unless the Scottish Rite plans to start making new Masons on its own, its prospect for growth is not very promising. Where will the Scottish Rite find its candidates? New lodges could help address the membership gap.

But whether the Scottish Rite starts making its own Master Masons or finding them in new places, either road would lead to the same end: a growing body of Masons independent of mainstream grand lodges. If all concerned were willing to meet on the level, new systems could work in concert with the present grand lodge system. Nothing says that the systems must be mutually exclusive. In fact, a rational approach would be to encourage all alternatives and to let them compete with one another, and through the competitive process improve Freemasonry overall. Clearly the Ancient Accepted Scottish Rite would be the primary beneficiary of this competition, and in fact, its survival may depend on it.

In conclusion, the great Temple of Solomon is the perfect symbol for Freemasonry. Like it, our Temple has been laid waste by the ruthless hand of ignorance, the devastations of war, and the unsparing ravages of barbarous force. But, the destruction of Solomon’s Temple did not destroy the Jewish people or their culture; they and their culture thrive in spite of the loss. Their ultimate triumph serves as an example for the potential to build a growing network of new masonic lodges, all working to call the very best people together to labor for the betterment of all humanity. A Freemasonry for the 21st Century!


Freemasonry for the 21st Century

[i] Brafman, Ori and Rod A. Beckstrom. The Starfish and the Spider: The Unstoppable Power of Leaderless Organizations. New York: Penguin Group, 2006.

[ii] To classify an organization as a spider or a starfish, Brafman and Beckstrom ask the following ten questions: 1. Is there a person in charge? 2. Are there headquarters? 3. If you thump it on the head, will it die? 4. Is there a clear division of roles? 5. If you take out a unit, is the organization harmed? 6. Are knowledge and power concentrated or distributed? 7. Is the organization flexible or rigid? 8. Can you count the employees or participants? 9. Are working groups funded by the organization or are they self-funded? 10. Do working groups communicate directly or through intermediaries? Brafman, 46-53.

[iii] Brafman, 36

[iv] Brafman, 35.

[v] Brafman, 21.

[vi] Napster II, Kazaa, K+, Grokster, eDonkey, and ultimately eMule

[vii] Brafman, 74.

[viii] See generally,

[ix] Brafman, 39-40.

[x] Brafman, 40.

[xi] Brafman, 41.

[xii] Brafman, 45.

[xiii] §34.02(h)(3) Ohio Masonic Code.

[xiv] Hamill, 47