The Cauldron: A Pagan Forum (Archive Board)
April 23, 2017, 10:50:36 pm *
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
News: This is our Read Only Archive Board (closed to posting July 2011). Join our new vBulletin board!
 
  Portal   Forum   Help Rules Search Chat (Mux) Articles Login Register   *

Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
April 23, 2017, 10:50:36 pm

Login with username, password and session length
Donate!
The Cauldron's server is expensive and requires monthly payments. Please become a Bronze, Silver or Gold Donor if you can. Donations are needed every month. Without member support, we can't afford the server.
TC Staff
Co-Hosts:
LyricFox & Randall

Message Board Staff
Board Coordinator:
Sunflower

Assistant Board Coordinator:
Aster Breo

Board Staff:
Allaya, Chatelaine, Emma-Eldritch, HarpingHawke, Jenett, Morag, rocquelaire, Sefiru, Tana

CauldronMUX Chat Staff
Chief MUX Wizard:
Darkhawk

Reserve Staff:
Aisling, Bob, Catja, Fausta, Sperran, Steve

Cauldron Council:
Everfool, Jubes, Kelly, Koi, Melamphoros, Ocelot, Phouka, Sashapablo, Star

Cauldron Assistants
[Non-Staff Positions]

Site Assistants
[Non-Staff Positions]
Webmaster:
Randall

Important Information about this Archive Board
This message board is The Cauldron: A Pagan Forum's SMF Archive Board. It is closed to new memberships and to posting, but there are over 250,000 messages here that you can still search and read -- many full of interesting and useful information. (This board was open from February 2007 through June 2011).

Our new vBulletin discussion board is located at http://www.ecauldron.com/forum/ -- if you would like to participate in discussions like those you see here, please visit our new vBulletin message board, register an account and join in our discussions. We hope you will find the information in this message archive useful and will consider joining us on our new board.
Pages: [1]   Go Down
  Add bookmark  |  Print  
Author Topic: Monolatry?  (Read 5834 times)
Zahirah
Journeyman
***
Last Login:November 20, 2012, 02:47:07 pm
United States United States

Religion: Discordian Kemetic Orthodox
TCN ID: zahirah
Posts: 153


Famous Last Words: What Duck?

Blog entries (0)

DixieJo719
WWW

Ignore
« Topic Start: April 05, 2007, 07:39:15 am »

Monolatry is one of those subjects that positively makes my brain burn as I attempt to wrap my mind around the concept.

Quick definition from the Kemetic Orthodoxy:
Quote
Monolatry (from mono "one," latreia "worship") is a sophisticated form of polytheism where one believes in multiple gods, but yet worships Them one at a time.

It is also a system where multiple gods are understood as manifestations of one God-ness or one divine source (NOT one God, which is monotheism (mono=one theos=God)) and where any one god in the system can, by virtue of Its ability to be identified with the system in general, be syncretized or aspected with other divinities. Thus, in monolatry, the gods are Many And One, One and Many, at the same time without contradiction.

I guess my question for this SIG is - does monolatry fit in with Reformed Kemeticism?  Is it just a nice word created to encompass both hard polytheism, the syncretised deities, and the complexity of the Netjer?  A term that is beyond henotheism?  Or is it something else entirely?
Logged

"If people never did silly things, nothing intelligent would ever get done."
- Ludwig Wittgenstein, Austrian philosopher (1889 - 1951)

Welcome, Guest!
You will need to register and/or login to participate in our discussions.

Read our Rules and Policies and the Quoting Guidelines.

Help Fund Our Server? Donate to Lyricfox's Cancer Fund?

SatAset
Adept Member
*****
Last Login:November 06, 2011, 10:27:55 pm
United States United States

Religion: Kemetic Orthodox, Heathen, Orisa devotee
Posts: 886


Avatar and Sig Image by Lykaios

Blog entries (1)



Ignore
« Reply #1: April 05, 2007, 09:36:37 am »

Monolatry is one of those subjects that positively makes my brain burn as I attempt to wrap my mind around the concept.

Quick definition from the Kemetic Orthodoxy:
I guess my question for this SIG is - does monolatry fit in with Reformed Kemeticism?  Is it just a nice word created to encompass both hard polytheism, the syncretised deities, and the complexity of the Netjer?  A term that is beyond henotheism?  Or is it something else entirely?

There are two ways to view Netjer in Kemetic religion deities as far as I've heard or read in Egyptology books.  Monolatry is one; Hornung likes it.

Assmann coined a term called Cosmotheism. 

Excerpt from essay:

Monolatry--Plurifom Monotheism--Cosmotheism

"They [the ancient Egyptians] held on to both truths, the unity of god and the differientiated plurality of gods" (Assmann 12). Assmann's quote, ironically, is an excellent description of monolatry. Netjer as a unified force can be emphasized along with differientiated manifestations of this force (Monolatry-Pluriform Monotheism) or a more polytheistic approach can be emphasized (Cosmotheism).

Monolatry is described as one force with many distinct faces. The distinct forces are the Ancient Egyptian Gods and Goddesses--Wesir (Osiris), Ra, Aset (who is not Isis), Hethert (Hathor), Heru (Horus), Sekhmet, Bast, Sobek, Djehuty (Thoth), Nebet Het (Nephthys), and many others. Many roles and epithets of deities also overlap. Also deities can be syncretized such as Amun-Ra or Sobek-Ra; syncretic deities are the totality of the two Netjer such as Sobek and Ra to make a third entity Sobek-Ra.

Cosmotheism is a word coined by Jan Assmann to describe the relationship between the Gods and the cosmos. He describes this relationship as cosmic, cultic and mythic manifestations. He says that Netjer has a cosmic manifestation. The cosmic or natural manifestation is how the Netjer effects either nature or the larger cosmos. "Nut was not so much the sky as what the sky did, giving birth to the heavenly bodies and hiding them within herself, not so much the goddess of the sky as mother goddess and goddess of the dead" (Assmann 81). Hethert (Hathor) was also a sky goddess, but she "embodied its heavenly splendor" as a goddess of beauty and love rather than it's function (Assmann 81). In the same token Yinepu (Anubis) was the jackal headed god of emblamers, mummies and mortuary cults. His role in the cosmos was the transition between life and death. Also each name is more a description of a deity such as a title or a function, moreso than his or her "true name". An example of this could be Aset's name is written with the throne hieroglyph and as one of Her functions, She embodied the authority of the king.

The Netjer are forces of the cosmos--various parts of the seen and unseen realms. They have manifestations in the physical realm, some in their sacred animals; Sekhmet's attributes are like a cat after all, and I'm not just talking about Her head! Others, like Aset and Hethert, can be expressed in something beautiful. Their energies can be expressed in various forms and in various ways. Each manifestation describes a particular aspect of that Netjer's nature. Aset is not just a goddess of the throne, for instance, though that is a part of Her nature, but not the entirety of it. Likewise, Wesir is not just a god of the dead, he is also a god of agriculture. His nature does not stop there. That is just the beginning of Who He Is.

All the deities work to uphold ma'at with their respective roles, talents and governance.


The Search for God in Ancient Egypt by Jan Assmann

edited to add name of book
Logged

I am the Goddess of Who I can Become. I mix the magic of the sorceress with the blade of a warrior. I walk the liminal pathways to see the face of the Goddess, both terrible and kind. As She stares back at me, I tremble in awe and ecstasy.  --Me
Darkhawk
Chief Mux Wizard
Moderator
Adept Member
***
*
Last Login:January 01, 2017, 09:38:48 am
United States United States

Religion: Kemetic Feri Discordian
Posts: 2485

Blog entries (0)

WWW
« Reply #2: April 05, 2007, 12:56:16 pm »

Quick definition from the Kemetic Orthodoxy:

Just as a note -- I, personally, disagree quite strongly with the KO perspective on the gods.  I think they misinterpret and misrepresent Hornung's work and come dangerously close to what he described dismissively as a "vague, solar-tinged pantheism".

Quoting my translation of The One and the Many here:

Quote
Is the purpose of these combinations a clever priestly "equalisation" of conflicting religious claims, as Bonnet, like his predecessors, assumed? Must gods be "equated" with one another until one finishes with a vague, solar-tinged pantheism? Such an interchange of attributes, which leads towards uniformity, is un-Egyptian; if anything it is Hellenistic. The Egyptians place the tensions and contradictions in the world beside one another and live with them. Amon-Re is not the synthesis of Amun and Re but a new form that exists along with the two older gods. In this case one could, if necessary, provide arguments for an "equalisation" required by religious politics--however questionable such a method may be--but what could be the purpose of "equalising" Horus and Sothis or Harmachis, Khepry, Re, and Atum?

...

It is evidently unnatural for Egyptian gods to be strictly defined. Their being remains a fluid state to which we are not accustomed; it escapes every dogmatic, final definition and can always be extended and further differentiated.



Something I've been thinking on since I read Meeks & Meeks again recently -- I think it would be wise for us to think about netjer not as a translation of 'god' but of 'divine power'.  It is possible for something to be more netjer than something else -- the akhu are more netjer than the living, because they reside in the Duat.  The gods have servants who are less netjer than they are.  Etc.  I think the closest parallel to 'netjer' in a living religion I know of is 'kami'.  (http://www.wsu.edu/~dee/GLOSSARY/KAMI.HTM)

That things have netjer-nature is sufficient to unify them.  Because the gods are not bondary-distinct, they occasionally manifest the same divine power in the same direction, and this is where we find meaningful syncretisations.  One can think of divine power as a single thing, a one thing, and all of the powers as diverse, and I think that resolves the tangle of whatevertheism.
Logged

Plantman223
Senior Newbie
*
Last Login:June 26, 2011, 12:37:03 pm
United States United States

Religion: Kemetic Orthodox
Posts: 13


Blog entries (0)



Ignore
« Reply #3: August 07, 2007, 05:42:32 pm »

I just finished the books “Conceptions of God in Ancient Egypt-The one and the Many” by Erick Hornung which introduced me to the idea of Henotheism though I think Kathenotheism fits better (it’s a subset of henotheism). It’s the idea of worshiping one god at one time or as he puts it.

“in the act of worship, whether it be in prayer, hymn of praise, or ethical attachment and obligation, the Egyptians single out one god, who for them at that moment signifies everything; the limited yet colossal might and greatness of god is concentrated in and focused on the diety who is addressed, beside whom all other gods vanish into insignificance and mya even be deliberately devalued.”

Additionally Schelling and F. Max Muller “ Each god is to the mind of the supplicant as good as all the gods. He is felt at the time as a real divinity, supreme and absolute, in spite of the necessary limitations which, to our minds, a plurality of gods must entail on every single god. All the rest disappear from the vision…, and he only who is to fulfil their desires stands in full light before the eyes of the worshiper.”

This explains whey in some texts what one might consider a “lesser god” might be elevated to the highest of the highest. Yet at the same time Egyptians were reluctant to dissolve the uniqueness of each deity. From what I have read the Egyptians were hard polytheists and Kanenotheists at the same time. They worshiped all the gods and triads and such in groups AND the deities individually. I also agree that kami is the closest approximation but it still seems kinda off.
Logged
SharonTut
Senior Newbie
*
Last Login:November 27, 2010, 12:40:31 am
United States United States

Religion: Independent Kemetic/Buddhist
Posts: 8

Blog entries (0)



Ignore
« Reply #4: September 10, 2007, 04:25:15 pm »

Monolatry is one of those subjects that positively makes my brain burn as I attempt to wrap my mind around the concept.

I guess my question for this SIG is - does monolatry fit in with Reformed Kemeticism?  Is it just a nice word created to encompass both hard polytheism, the syncretised deities, and the complexity of the Netjer?  A term that is beyond henotheism?  Or is it something else entirely?

     I really enjoy these boards, and alas the only times I can log in are a few minutes before I have
to log off!

     The first time I had ever heard of 'monolatry' was in the KO's faq, and I thought it was some fifty-dollar word their me-sut had come up with. Evidently it's not?
     I read an article in the catalogue for "Hatshepsut: From Queen to Pharaoh" (fantastic exhibit, btw, too bad it only ran in three cities) entitled "The Role of Amun" by James P. Allen. It seems to catch the gist of
the subject for me, without using a fifty-dollar term for it (he simply called it 'the crisis of polytheism').
Basically, Egyptians began their culture as a strict pantheism, and in many ways remained so for most of pharaonic history. However, during the New Kingdom a new idea emerged that all netjer were manifestations of Amun, the Hidden One. Hence Amun-Ra, and the trinity of Amun-Ra-Ptah that gained especial emphasis during the Ramesside era. Dr. Hawass pointed out in the catalogue for the current Tutankhamun exhibit that Atonism shaped later ideas of Amun and oneness of Netjer.
     So, in short, I think that KO is trying to squash three millenia of Egyptian religion into a cookie-cutter doctrine that suits their purposes. Some people who are drawn to Egyptian faith are strictly pantheistic, just as many ancient Egyptians were; others see the different manifestations of Netjer as springing from a single source. HOWEVER, in ancient times that single source was not some unknown "godhead" but Amun, or in the Heliopolis region Ra, or in Memphis, Ptah...some of that interpretation was political. It's still political within the KO, they just don't want to admit it. That's my take, anyway.
     I also think a lot of modern scholars are looking at the Egyptian religion with a preset bias toward monotheism; Western culture is largely monotheistic, and I get a sense (even in Allen's article) that they keep looking for that trend in Egyptian culture with the subconscious thought that nobody can be a religious intellectual and be a polytheist. I think there need to be studies comparing Egyptian pantheism with modern polytheistic religions like Shinto (where kami comes from) and Hinduism. Even certain forms of Buddhism (such as Nichiren Buddhism, the sect I also practice) are pantheistic. Having that bit of background, I really don't understand all these scholarly theories coming out of German Egyptology these days about the Egyptians concentrating on sole entities. Osir, Aset and Horu are not the Father, Son and Holy Spirit. (And having been raised Catholic, I can remember some pretty strenuous intellectual gymnastics involving discussions of the Holy Trinity!)
     Just my take. And unfortunately, I must be off. Peace!

--Tut
Logged
SatAset
Adept Member
*****
Last Login:November 06, 2011, 10:27:55 pm
United States United States

Religion: Kemetic Orthodox, Heathen, Orisa devotee
Posts: 886


Avatar and Sig Image by Lykaios

Blog entries (1)



Ignore
« Reply #5: September 10, 2007, 06:35:12 pm »

The first time I had ever heard of 'monolatry' was in the KO's faq, and I thought it was some fifty-dollar word their me-sut had come up with. Evidently it's not?

Their Nisut has a Master's in Egyptology with a concentration in language from the University of Chicago.

There are others like Baines, Hornung etc who purport the theory of monolatry--the belief that God is One Source and plural at the same time.  Assmann has his view called Cosmotheism which I've discussed above.
And others, I think Leonard Lesko has Henotheism down. 

Many people can look at the same evidence or event or something and see it differently. 

For state documents in AE, the Egyptians did put Netjer and not a particular deity's name so that it could stand for any local deity one wished it to.   
Logged

I am the Goddess of Who I can Become. I mix the magic of the sorceress with the blade of a warrior. I walk the liminal pathways to see the face of the Goddess, both terrible and kind. As She stares back at me, I tremble in awe and ecstasy.  --Me
Journey
Adept Member
*****
Last Login:February 13, 2010, 03:43:29 pm
United States United States

Religion: None
Posts: 1821


Blog entries (0)



Ignore
« Reply #6: September 10, 2007, 10:38:45 pm »

Monolatry is one of those subjects that positively makes my brain burn as I attempt to wrap my mind around the concept.
Quick definition from the Kemetic Orthodoxy:
I guess my question for this SIG is - does monolatry fit in with Reformed Kemeticism?  Is it just a nice word created to encompass both hard polytheism, the syncretised deities, and the complexity of the Netjer?  A term that is beyond henotheism?  Or is it something else entirely?

Brain frazzel is common with Kemetics -  Wink

*takes a deep breath before beginning*

I take a more intuitive approach to Kemetics these days than I think most people do.  (not that I always did)
I really don't get all hung up into what Ancient Egyptians really believed anymore, because now I know you can't ever possibly know.  As Westerners we have a hard time understanding current Eastern cultures, to go back and claim to have figured out a dead one, well, to me that is just arrogance.

I hate over-annalizing the Kemetic religion and I know many scholars have had a field day with it, but it all reminds me of when you take a beautiful poem or piece of art and start talking about sentence structure or the pigment in the paint used. Somehow the whole beauty of the thing gets lost.

All I can give you is my opinion on the Kemetic religion.

Yes, I believe you can have monolatry and hard polytheism at the same time. I think this was how it was with the various social classes. Hard polytheism worked better for the lower classes, the spiritual and esoterical elements were for the nobels, the high Temple rituals were for the priests and Pharaohs.

I am not really sure there were as many "rules" to the religion as we think there are/were. I believe that the Kemetic religion was actually a very personal religion.  I am not talking about Temple priests or Pharaohs here, but what it meant to the common person on the street. 

It was a mix of superstition, regional beliefs, folklore and the "official religion" which changed over time.

For some reason the way Netjer is used these days grates on my nerves. To me it has always meant nature. If you think of it this way I think you are closer to its meaning; the nature of things, the order of things, nature as in plants and animals, her nature, his nature, the nature of the Gods, the nature of the universe, the forces of nature, and on and on. When I hear it used solely to mean "the Gods" well, I think that is only partly it, it goes way beyond that. If you were to say "all of Netjer is Amun", it means everything as in " all of nature" is Amun. It is complex, I know. Each God represents an idea or force of nature, so you are not just saying all the Gods are Amun, sort of, but more than that, all of the universe, its laws - everything is Amun.

Keeping in line with this thinking monolatry might be easier understood.  No one doubts that the sun, the ocean, the grass, are all part of nature, separate, but still all nature.  So, then the sun, the ocean , the grass are all parts of Amun (nature). The next step is to think of the nature (spirit)of the ocean, the nature (spirit) of the sun, the nature (spirit) of the grass, then you have nature within nature or spirits within a spirit. Now give the individual spirits a name so you can communicate with them (easy if you are an animist, but who hasn't tried talking to that plant to get it to grow?)  So, even if you give a concept (time) or a force (the ocean) a name, talk to it, respect it, honor it as an individual force of nature, it is still part of the larger total nature (order) of the universe.

Hence Amun would represent the order of the universe, while the "lesser" dieties would represent the elements, concepts, and forces of the universe.

I used Amun as an example of the "top God", but different peoples believe different ones are at the top, Re, Khnum, Amun-Re, etc.  It doesn't really matter what name you prefer at the top, the concept is still the same.

That is about the best I can explain monolatry and polytheism combined, all the brain squeezing technical theories of the Egyptologists aside.

I won't go into my own personal beliefs too much except to say that I think there are two forces at the top, male and female, yet both neither male or female.  Welcome to Kemeticism.  Grin

Logged
Chabas
Reserve Staff
Staff
Master Member
***
Last Login:August 15, 2014, 01:06:27 pm
Netherlands Netherlands

Religion: Kemetic
Posts: 444


Blog entries (1)


« Reply #7: September 11, 2007, 01:03:31 pm »

For some reason the way Netjer is used these days grates on my nerves. To me it has always meant nature. If you think of it this way I think you are closer to its meaning; the nature of things, the order of things, nature as in plants and animals, her nature, his nature, the nature of the Gods, the nature of the universe, the forces of nature, and on and on. When I hear it used solely to mean "the Gods" well, I think that is only partly it, it goes way beyond that. If you were to say "all of Netjer is Amun", it means everything as in " all of nature" is Amun. It is complex, I know. Each God represents an idea or force of nature, so you are not just saying all the Gods are Amun, sort of, but more than that, all of the universe, its laws - everything is Amun.

Where are you getting this from? Because it in no way matches up with what I know about the word.

--Chabas
Logged
SharonTut
Senior Newbie
*
Last Login:November 27, 2010, 12:40:31 am
United States United States

Religion: Independent Kemetic/Buddhist
Posts: 8

Blog entries (0)



Ignore
« Reply #8: September 11, 2007, 04:08:48 pm »

From SatAset--
"For state documents in AE, the Egyptians did put Netjer and not a particular deity's name so that it could stand for any local deity one wished it to."

   That is a very good point. I've read a translation of the Cairo calendar that frequently mentions
to honor "the god of your town". I'm beginning to think that in some ways, the Egyptians were a lot
more relaxed and inclusive than we are!   

Brain frazzel is common with Kemetics -  Wink

All I can give you is my opinion on the Kemetic religion.

Yes, I believe you can have monolatry and hard polytheism at the same time. I think this was how it was with the various social classes. Hard polytheism worked better for the lower classes, the spiritual and esoterical elements were for the nobels, the high Temple rituals were for the priests and Pharaohs.

I am not really sure there were as many "rules" to the religion as we think there are/were. I believe that the Kemetic religion was actually a very personal religion.  I am not talking about Temple priests or Pharaohs here, but what it meant to the common person on the street. 

       That is also a very good opinion and explanation. The modern Egyptologist almost certainly knows more
about the complex doctrines than the average Egyptian citizen would have! And much as I love to read about and work with a particular pharaoh, I'm beginning to take a lot more interest in how the commoners lived and worshipped. It's probably a lot closer to what we ourselves do, and would like to do.

        Gotta run again. Thanks for all the input, I'm so glad to have a good environment for discussion.
I'm learning a lot and the atmosphere is so much better than elsewhere.

--Sharon "Tut"

     
Logged
Journey
Adept Member
*****
Last Login:February 13, 2010, 03:43:29 pm
United States United States

Religion: None
Posts: 1821


Blog entries (0)



Ignore
« Reply #9: September 11, 2007, 05:44:20 pm »

From SatAset--
"For state documents in AE, the Egyptians did put Netjer and not a particular deity's name so that it could stand for any local deity one wished it to."

   That is a very good point. I've read a translation of the Cairo calendar that frequently mentions
to honor "the god of your town". I'm beginning to think that in some ways, the Egyptians were a lot
more relaxed and inclusive than we are!   

       That is also a very good opinion and explanation. The modern Egyptologist almost certainly knows more
about the complex doctrines than the average Egyptian citizen would have! And much as I love to read about and work with a particular pharaoh, I'm beginning to take a lot more interest in how the commoners lived and worshipped. It's probably a lot closer to what we ourselves do, and would like to do.

        Gotta run again. Thanks for all the input, I'm so glad to have a good environment for discussion.
I'm learning a lot and the atmosphere is so much better than elsewhere.

--Sharon "Tut"
  

Welcome to the cauldron!
Logged
Journey
Adept Member
*****
Last Login:February 13, 2010, 03:43:29 pm
United States United States

Religion: None
Posts: 1821


Blog entries (0)



Ignore
« Reply #10: September 12, 2007, 11:07:33 am »

Where are you getting this from? Because it in no way matches up with what I know about the word.
--Chabas

Glad you asked.  Many years ago (and I do mean many) it used to be very common when talking about Egyptian words to admit that we really don't have an exact translation of what they meant.  Just as we still admit that we don't know how they were pronounced.

It used to be understood that the definition of words, like ntr (now called The Netjer) would be defined with an implied disclaimer of sorts that might go something like this; The closest we can come to translating this word is "God or Gods" but it probably means more than that, it could mean divine power, or divine order, basically it means the Ancient Egyptian concept of God/Gods.

Seems to me few people ever say the best definition or the closest we can translate anymore. A lot of people now seem to think that translations are clear cut when really they are not.

NOT most people on this board however! People here are very knowledgeable. That is what I love about this board, it is not based on Kemetic 101 fluff.

The word nfr is another one, I always thought of the translation something like this; The best definition translates as "beauty", but it possibly can also mean a beauty through rightness of being, it can be thought of as the Egyptian idea of beauty or what makes a person beautiful.

Now after adopting the Ancient Egyptian religion, I have a personal feel for ntr, that for me translates as the order of nature, the order of the universe.

As I stated in my post above, all I can give you is my personal opinion of the Kmetic religion. And I hope my opinion made sense.  Smiley
Logged
SatAset
Adept Member
*****
Last Login:November 06, 2011, 10:27:55 pm
United States United States

Religion: Kemetic Orthodox, Heathen, Orisa devotee
Posts: 886


Avatar and Sig Image by Lykaios

Blog entries (1)



Ignore
« Reply #11: September 12, 2007, 03:04:48 pm »

the order of nature, the order of the universe.

I think that would be ma'at

"Powers" is a good translation and one I've seen often for the word Netjer.  Netjer uphold ma'at (the order of nature and the universe, the balance of the scales, integrity, rightness, etc). 
Logged

I am the Goddess of Who I can Become. I mix the magic of the sorceress with the blade of a warrior. I walk the liminal pathways to see the face of the Goddess, both terrible and kind. As She stares back at me, I tremble in awe and ecstasy.  --Me

Donor Ad: Become a Silver or Gold Donor to get your ad here.

Tags:
Pages: [1]   Go Up
  Add bookmark  |  Print  
 
Jump to:  
  Portal   Forum   Help Rules Search Chat (Mux) Articles Login Register   *

* Share this topic...
In a forum
(BBCode)
In a site/blog
(HTML)


Related Topics
Subject Started by Replies Views Last post
What is Monolatry? « 1 2 3 4 »
Reformed Kemeticism SIG
Nehet 57 10949 Last post December 17, 2009, 10:17:23 am
by WebenBanu
EU Cookie Notice: This site uses cookies. By using this site you consent to their use.


Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.14 | SMF © 2006-2008, Simple Machines LLC
TinyPortal v0.9.8 © Bloc
Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!
Page created in 0.065 seconds with 48 queries.