Loki was Jesus?

[GoldenSiren]

. . .

 
Wow. That's an interesting viewpoint. The only thing that's not sitting right with me (besides my natural and probably unfair notion to bristle and side-eye anything involving Christianity :whis:. . .  :ange:) would be that I find it hard to tie in Jesus Christ with someone commonly thought of as a god in his own right. Now, correct me if I'm wrong, but isn't Christ not actually a god in the sense that Thor or Odin are gods, but part of the three-part Holy Trinity, and THAT is what as worshiped as the monotheistic god? Kind of a one-god-that-divides-into-three-parts thing.  

SOOO... if your theory holds, what is the mythology tied into Loki that could tie into that? Is there anything in his myths that involves threes? Does he turn into three different forms maybe? ( I need to do more research. It's becoming more and more apparent. Dang. I'm lazy ). And I'm also seconding the comment on Loki commonly thought of as "evil". But then again, Christianity tends to think that everything that isn't Christianity is evil, so that point could be moot.

On a slightly different note, I have another question about Loki that I'm hoping someone could answer, about him and snakes. Does he favor them (like how Athena favors the Owl), or no? Just curious

[Lokabrenna]

On a slightly different note, I have another question about Loki that I'm hoping someone could answer, about him and snakes. Does he favor them (like how Athena favors the Owl), or no? Just curious

There's really nothing that indicates that he particularly likes snakes in the lore, although he is associated with them by way of Jormungandr (who is his child, after all) and the serpent that drips venom on his head. Still, it's a popular symbol for Loki.

Although, I associate him with red foxes because I see him as a redhead but also because of the animal's reputation for cunning in the West.

[GoldenSiren]

There's really nothing that indicates that he particularly likes snakes in the lore, although he is associated with them by way of Jormungandr (who is his child, after all) and the serpent that drips venom on his head. Still, it's a popular symbol for Loki.

Although, I associate him with red foxes because I see him as a redhead but also because of the animal's reputation for cunning in the West.

Alright, thanks I was only curious because the next morning after another late-night comment-fest here on the Cauldron, I mentioned on the Deity Drama thread that I didn't think Loki was the cause of the whole shebang (entirely on a gut feeling. But I felt a lot of positive energy after I posted my take, and it wasn't from my patron or matron. It felt like approval). The next morning I woke up to a member of my family screaming, and came downstairs to find a snake (still very much alive) chillin' on my dining room floor next to my cat, who was obviously the one that brought it in. Luckily I have no fear whatsoever of serpents, so I gently carried it out and released it away from the house and my fearful family members. Afterward, the minute I returned, my cat came up to me, meowed, and rubbed against my leg as if saying "good work" before  disappearing.

Now, I'm not one for omens, but I've known for a long time that my cat is in the favor of my matron, Bastet. She is also highly perceptive for a feline. She has never shown any interest in snakes before or after that time, and never brings in live things. Ever. Her prey of choice is always the bird. But again, I brushed it off. Later that day, I did some research on Loki and read about the serpent-dripping-venom, and had a "Huh..." moment, but didn't find anything that showed he favored them, so I dropped it again. Then I read on here somewhere that a follower of Loki wears a snake necklace to represent him. . . and I felt that presence again. My friend also just gave me some snake statuettes. So now I'm sitting here rubbing my forehead trying to figure out what is going on... :hdsk: someone care to enlighten me? It's making my head hurt.


. . . I also have every intention of not permanently derailing the thread just hoping I can resolve the issue without making a whole new thread about it. I have every intention of helping to resume the original thread direction ASAP

[Juniperberry]

Wow. That's an interesting viewpoint. The only thing that's not sitting right with me (besides my natural and probably unfair notion to bristle and side-eye anything involving Christianity :whis:. . .  :ange:) would be that I find it hard to tie in Jesus Christ with someone commonly thought of as a god in his own right. Now, correct me if I'm wrong, but isn't Christ not actually a god in the sense that Thor or Odin are gods, but part of the three-part Holy Trinity, and THAT is what as worshiped as the monotheistic god? Kind of a one-god-that-divides-into-three-parts thing.  

Early converts were Arians, which is the belief that Jesus is a lesser god/separate deity to God.

SOOO... if your theory holds, what is the mythology tied into Loki that could tie into that? Is there anything in his myths that involves threes? Does he turn into three different forms maybe? ( I need to do more research. It's becoming more and more apparent. Dang. I'm lazy ). And I'm also seconding the comment on Loki commonly thought of as "evil". But then again, Christianity tends to think that everything that isn't Christianity is evil, so that point could be moot.

He had the three monster offspring. That's all I can think of.

Don't feel lazy. I appreciate your comments in this thread. Like I said, its an OTT theory, but I'm enjoying the conversation and lore tidbits being thrown out. Not everything has to be a yes or no discussion. Sometimes it's just fun to play with what-ifs. I never would've wondered if Loki was connected to a Trinity, and I like thinking outside the box like that.

Eta: This is also the most civil convo on Loki that I've started so yay for that, too.

[GoldenSiren]

Early converts were Arians, which is the belief that Jesus is a lesser god/separate deity to God.

Didn't know that. Hmm, that certainly DOES add to your theory

He had the three monster offspring. That's all I can think of.

. . .well, let's see if we can apply that. Maybe. . .MAYBE that could be applied in the sense that Loki IS his children, or rather that they were three aspects of him; making a Trinity (equate that to Christ as a god, now divided into the Holy Trinity)!!! :cool: Yes? No? Maybe?

Don't feel lazy. I appreciate your comments in this thread. Like I said, its an OTT theory, but I'm enjoying the conversation and lore tidbits being thrown out. Not everything has to be a yes or no discussion. Sometimes it's just fun to play with what-ifs. I never would've wondered if Loki was connected to a Trinity, and I like thinking outside the box like that.

Why thank you : I'm glad my strange way of thinking is actually beneficial for once lol and I'm finding this fun too. The tune and lyrics "one of these things is not like the otheeerrr..." keeps popping into my head as I'm thinking about this :p it feels kind of like a Divine Matching Game to be honest good stuff.

Eta: This is also the most civil convo on Loki that I've started so yay for that, too.

Really? How are the convos usually like?

. . . I just thought of another thing. Would Loki be considered Jesus NOW or THEN? Would they be the same thing, or different sides of a common center?
To elaborate: maybe way back in the day, Loki was essentially Jesus. However as time passed, things shifted. Loki or Jesus partially separated from the other, and then became like the flip sides to a single card. One was more good and moral ("Christlike") and the other became more mischievous and "evil", but were still part of a common whole. Then, as more time passed and more people worshiped one or the other as different gods, that's what they became. No longer tied together. Now today Loki and Jesus aren't associated, but waaaaayy back then, they were the same. Like... twins-ish?    . . .What about that?

[spoOk]

Didn't know that. Hmm, that certainly DOES add to your theory


 . . .well, let's see if we can apply that. Maybe. . .MAYBE that could be applied in the sense that Loki IS his children, or rather that they were three aspects of him; making a Trinity (equate that to Christ as a god, now divided into the Holy Trinity)!!! :cool: Yes? No? Maybe?

 Why thank you : I'm glad my strange way of thinking is actually beneficial for once lol and I'm finding this fun too. The tune and lyrics "one of these things is not like the otheeerrr..." keeps popping into my head as I'm thinking about this :p it feels kind of like a Divine Matching Game to be honest good stuff.

 Really? How are the convos usually like?

. . . I just thought of another thing. Would Loki be considered Jesus NOW or THEN? Would they be the same thing, or different sides of a common center?
To elaborate: maybe way back in the day, Loki was essentially Jesus. However as time passed, things shifted. Loki or Jesus partially separated from the other, and then became like the flip sides to a single card. One was more good and moral ("Christlike") and the other became more mischievous and "evil", but were still part of a common whole. Then, as more time passed and more people worshiped one or the other as different gods, that's what they became. No longer tied together. Now today Loki and Jesus aren't associated, but waaaaayy back then, they were the same. Like... twins-ish?    . . .What about that?

 
I think what folks are missing tho is that junipers original idea was around the idea of Christianity being an invading 'antipagan/heathen' type of religion. sooooo....loki being an invention to try and tie Jesus existence into the heathen world view and make sense of it would likely include a dislike for the guy anyhow. so it makes sense that they would stamp him with evil tendencies. he wasn't a warrior in the same way as Thor etc. he was quite Vulcan compared to the Norse Klingon type thing. imagine what worf would think of Jesus?!
I digress....

Loki's sister was helle right? wouldn't she be sorta like Mary magdalen? with the whole maligned by all but still loved by loki/Jesus thing?

[GoldenSiren]

I think what folks are missing tho is that junipers original idea was around the idea of Christianity being an invading 'antipagan/heathen' type of religion. sooooo....loki being an invention to try and tie Jesus existence into the heathen world view and make sense of it would likely include a dislike for the guy anyhow. so it makes sense that they would stamp him with evil tendencies. he wasn't a warrior in the same way as Thor etc. he was quite Vulcan compared to the Norse Klingon type thing. imagine what worf would think of Jesus?!
I digress....

Ahh, you may very well be right, but is he an "invention" any longer? I consider him (now, in this day and age) to be a god in his own right. I am wildly guessing about 99% of this here, but it's all something to think about anyways.

Loki's sister was helle right? wouldn't she be sorta like Mary magdalen? with the whole maligned by all but still loved by loki/Jesus thing?

Wow. Never thought of that! . . . I'm finding this waaay too fun :

[StudiodeKadent]

Now, correct me if I'm wrong, but isn't Christ not actually a god in the sense that Thor or Odin are gods, but part of the three-part Holy Trinity, and THAT is what as worshiped as the monotheistic god? Kind of a one-god-that-divides-into-three-parts thing.  

I'm not a Christian but I know a lot of Christian theology. Let's just say "it's complicated."

This issue of the Holy Trinity is one of the biggest intellectual circle-jerks in Christian theology (it also formed the basis for the discussion of a classic problem in philosophy called the Problem Of Universals) (apologies if my language was rude), and there are tons of different theories.

The Roman Catholic version is based on a version of Aristotelian Essentialism with three separate "essences" subsisting in one singular being (how? It's a miracle!). This is called, IIRC, hypostatic conousia or something like that.

Then there are the Unitarians, who deny the Trinity (John Adams, the second President of the United States, was a Unitarian) and most Unitarians deny Original Sin as well.

Even within the Catholic Church there are a lot of varied viewpoints in spite of the "official" version (the hypostatic whateveritis).

The Orthodox and Anglicans tend to go for the "it's a miracle, we're not going to demand you subscribe to any specific philosophical understanding of it, but let's just say that our God is so damn cool he can be three things and one thing at the same time."

And with the Protestants, it varies from sect to sect.

And many individual Christians will have their own unique theory too.

Take five random Christians, ask them this question, and you'll get six different answers.

[mlr52]

I'm not a Christian but I know a lot of Christian theology. Let's just say "it's complicated."


Then there are the Unitarians, who deny the Trinity (John Adams, the second President of the United States, was a Unitarian) and most Unitarians deny Original Sin as well.

It is now "Unitarian Universalist" (when speaking of individuals)  and we consider Jesus to be a Prophet not a part of a God.

[StudiodeKadent]

It is now "Unitarian Universalist" (when speaking of individuals)  and we consider Jesus to be a Prophet not a part of a God.

 
I know that the church which John Adams belonged to was one of the founding organizations of Unitarian Universalism... but isn't the UUA theologically much less specific (i.e. more room for variation (Not That There's Anything Wrong With That)) than the old Unitarian Christian church?

But yes, historically speaking you're absolutely right.

[mlr52]

I know that the church which John Adams belonged to was one of the founding organizations of Unitarian Universalism... but isn't the UUA theologically much less specific (i.e. more room for variation (Not That There's Anything Wrong With That)) than the old Unitarian Christian church?

But yes, historically speaking you're absolutely right.

 
Yes we are more open, the focus of the Unitarian part had changed.  In 1581 Michael Servetus( also Miguel Servet or Miguel Serveto or Michel de Villeneuve, aka Reves) wrote "On the Errors of the Trinity" which was the bases for Unitarianism.  

"Any discussion of the Trinity should start with the man. That Jesus, surnamed Christ, was not a Hypostasis but a human being is taught both by the early Fathers and in Scriptures, taken in their literal sense, and is indicated by the miracles he wrought. He, and not the Word, is also the miraculously born Son of God in fleshly form, as the Scriptures teach - not a hypostasis, but an actual Son. He is God, sharing God's divinity in full; and the theory of a communicatio idiomatum is a confusing sophistical quibble. This does not imply two Gods, but only a double use of the term God, as is clear from the Hebrew use of the term. Christ being one with God the Father, equal in power, came down from heaven and assumed flesh as a man. In short, all the Scriptures speak of Christ as a man." (http://www.godglorified.com/errors_of_the_trinity.htm)

[hlewagastir]

I have had little time lately and have not been able to participate in this thread. I have skimmed the thread but not read it in depth, so my reply to Juniper might touch on something which have already been discussed.

There isn't really any evidence of him, aside from a few late medieval objects.

We have a surprisingly big body of sourcematerial, which has been assessed to be pre-Christian, that mentions Loki:

Read the list of sources... Haustlong (around 900), Husdrapa (late 10th century) and Thorsdrapa (10th century) are generally considered to be pre-Christian in origin*. Thrymskvida is still being debated but Lokis appearance in Scandinavian versions could be an indicator that he appeared in an original heathen myth.
Then there is the Snaptun stone which is most definitely of heathen origin.

*Sources:
Magaret Clunies Ross, A History Of Old Norse Poetry And Poetics, D.S Brewer, 2005.
Preben Meulengracht Sørensen, Kapitler af Nordens litteratur i oldtid og middelalder, Aarhus Universitetsforlag, 2006.

Edit: And the Gosforth Cross, from the first half of the 10th century, which depictures the bound Loki and Sigyn.

I wrote this on AL, where I´m called Jansson, and Exile rightly pointed out that the statement about the Snaptun stone was a little brash - though our best guess is that it portraits Loki.
http://www.asatrulore.org/index.php?page=Thread&threadID=8713

The "evidence": Loki is well-known as Thor's almost companion. During the long conversion process smiths began making molds for a piece of jewelry that incorporated both Thor's hammer and the cross. Christ and Thor were companions.  

Or maybe the Hammer-Cross jewelry were a general commentary on polytheistic acceptance of several deities, including Christ, the sagas have several reports of people worshiping Thor along with Christ without the anti-oldgods link between Christ and Loki.

Next is Ragnarok. It's also well-known that Ragnarok is heavily influenced by Christian themes. Some even see it as a metaphor for Christianity's victory over heathenry. Loki leads the charge against the Aesir, just as Christ would lead the charge of Christianity. Loki would equal Christ, who defeats the gods at Ragnarok.

In Snorris Edda and in Völuspá itself Loki is uniting with monsters, daemons of death and achieving his goals by treachery, breaking peace/treaties and so on... Stuff which Christ never do, but stuff which the devil do all the time - from a Christian theological context that kind of deeds are Satans table and not Christs.

The turning point of heathenry is the death of Baldr. Baldr is the brightest and best son of the gods. Loki masterminded his murder and nothing was the same. If Baldr represents the future of heathenry, and Loki kills this, then Loki could represent Christianity killing the continuity of an old way of life.

Or, mythological figures like Balder and Frodi resembles Christ/the good, while the Devils tools, like Loki, are used to demonstrate how the Old gods fall into decay because they lose their best man.
So the Old gods are unable to overcome death, and are unable to revive the best/most Christlike of their kin, while Christ himself conquers death and resurrect... It is the same theme as on the Gosforth Cross: Where the Old gods fail, Christ prevail. Everything that the heathen gods do, Christ do better!

In Lokasenna, Loki insults the Aesir and accuses them of obscenities. As Iceland converted, it was recorded that Christian Icelanders slandered Freyja, calling her a bitch, and Odin a dog.

Yes and like Loki that skald was banished... Both are examples of transgression figures. And in Lokasenna Loki completely fulfills his role as a transgression figure... He breaks frith, call names, stir up shit, kills people, flees like a coward and he is severely punished. Again here he is doing stuff that Satan do but Christ never(!) do.

Loki was unusually named as his mother's child, not his father's. It was pretty odd for that culture. An important detail about Jesus, though, was that he was son of the virgin Mary.

Well, I´m not sure why Lokis mother is stressed more than his father... Maybe it is simply because of the poems themselves: "Loki Laufeyjarson" simply sounds better than "Loki Fárbautison". The goal of the skalds was not only to convey information but also to make beauitiful poetry, and that´s just easier when the words goes well together...
The focus on Christs mother is probably because she´s a virgin, which is super cool according to Roman-Greco culture, which was THE culture back in those days.

Loki runs from the angry Aesir,  builds a net, and then transforms into a fish. Loki was caught, chained to three stones and Sigyn caught poison with a cup. Christ (the fisherman of men) was arrested, nailed to a cross, and Mary Magdalene collected his blood in a cup, the Marian Chalice.

In Norway fishing was pretty big, so the myth might as well be an explanation of the origin of the fishingnet... Lokis punishment would probably have seemed as much more brutal, and less courtly than that of Christ, to the Norsemen. Lokis punishment involved eternal torture by snake (snake is pretty bad), outlawry, and the dishonorable destruction of his family (one son turned into a wolf, brother kills brother = all the stuff which signals the dissolvement of the society in Völuspá, and which must have seemed horrible to the Norsemen who valued family and honor so much).
Christs punishment have a theological purpose outside of "a really hard punishment for a bastard", Lokis punishment is pretty much just to underscore the decay of the Aesir, and what we do with transgression figures.

What if the same is true for the Loki mythology? People, especially those forced to convert, would want to bitch and moan. Would they create stories and foklore to express themselves like those of the Mother Goose rhymes? Were stories of an emasculated Loki, untrustworthy Loki, and outsider Loki really just ways that the old guard used to represent the effeminate, untrustworthy,  outside god Christ?

The folklore representation of Loki seems to be nicer than the impression of him in the Edda(s).
The folklore might as well be the heathen gods and stories living on in a kind of, old tradition, low mythology mix of stories.

Or maybe it wasnt ridicule. Maybe the eddas recorded the mythology of a people who were trying to come to terms with new gods, new perspectives. Look at the difficulty many modern pagans have going from Christianity to paganism. It doesn't seem logical that they would have completely dropped their old beliefs for Christian Gospel so there very well may have been a time when they tried to rationalize Christ within their own understandings of the gods. They might have included his presence in older myth and folklore.

Maybe there isn't any evidence of Loki because we aren't looking for the right things; churches, cross, priests.

So...thoughts?

Please read through this thread, there you´ll find my perspective on Loki, and the stories dealing with him.

http://www.asatrulore.org/index.php?page=Thread&threadID=8713

[Juniperberry]

We have a surprisingly big body of sourcematerial, which has been assessed to be pre-Christian, that mentions Loki:

Yeah, I was really surprised by that. Normally one hears the standard line that there isn't any evidence of Loki other than the myths, seeinv that that's a bit of a misrepresentation was interesting.

In Snorris Edda and in Völuspá itself Loki is uniting with monsters, daemons of death and achieving his goals by treachery, breaking peace/treaties and so on... Stuff which Christ never do, but stuff which the devil do all the time - from a Christian theological context that kind of deeds are Satans table and not Christs.

My line of thought was similar to how we mock Jesus today, calling him a zombie, for example, even though he clearly doesnt eat brains. I do agree that it's highly unlikely for Loki to be Jesus, but I'm also really curious on how much politics and social commentary was picked up and placed in the mythology by Snorri. We have this separation of church and state which they didn't, so did their folklore serve as a pundit?

Yes and like Loki that skald was banished... Both are examples of transgression figures. And in Lokasenna Loki completely fulfills his role as a transgression figure... He breaks frith, call names, stir up shit, kills people, flees like a coward and he is severely punished. Again here he is doing stuff that Satan do but Christ never(!) do.

Absolutely. The fun parts of this thread, for me, were the different ideas being thrown out (even in disagreement) that gave me new search terms and different avenues of thought. (Ex.  White Christ+Loki, Hel+Holy Ghost+Christianity.) Yes, I'm defending my reasons for making a silly thread. ;p But it really was helpful in exploring other perspectives and sources concerning the mystery of Loki and it gave me a better appreciation for the evidence out there.

Well, I´m not sure why Lokis mother is stressed more than his father... Maybe it is simply because of the poems themselves: "Loki Laufeyjarson" simply sounds better than "Loki Fárbautison". The goal of the skalds was not only to convey information but also to make beauitiful poetry, and that´s just easier when the words goes well together...

I wonder, too, if it has to do with Loki's otherworldly connections. It's too long to discuss here but women were more of the liminal beings that transverse this world and the other, supernatural a bit unto themselves, and considering Loki's gender-shifting, maybe Laufeyson is meant to highlight that.

The folklore representation of Loki seems to be nicer than the impression of him in the Edda(s).
The folklore might as well be the heathen gods and stories living on in a kind of, old tradition, low mythology mix of stories.

I tend to appreciate the lower mythology more, myself. The common man was less likely to be truly converted and only gave lip service to the church while maintaining their regular lives and beliefs.  

Please read through this thread, there you´ll find my perspective on Loki, and the stories dealing with him.

http://www.asatrulore.org/index.php?page=Thread&threadID=8713

A good read. Thanks for all the info.