@Fallen_Angel I;m going to split this in a mo. 
Yes, you did:
Your profile says heathen, thatās not clairvoyance. I usually like heathens but they tend to favour lore over UPG and self-created methods. Your own first post above carries that air:
As for the restā¦ like I said, there seems to be some talking at cross-purposes going on here. 
Thank you.
Some have issue with Thorssonās association to the Temple of Set and his Satanic leanings. Some of the heathens I know feel that this may have influenced his works in even a subtle way and they donāt want the connection to an out Satanist.
Personally, Iāve never felt a āSatanic Vibeā from his rune work. He tends to stick very close to the lore and sources he had.
Speaking of those sources, others donāt like his drawing on Von Listās UPG for inspiration in his books. But, I find Von Listās 11 months of blindness and gnosis to be rather poetic and (highly) probably spiritually significant.
It isnāt even that. Most people in heathen circles shun him because his books contain numerous incorrect things. Mispelling common magic terms and misrepresenting them. Misclassing gods. Inserting complete nonsense like his hammer rite and making the sign of the cross and calling it a hammer on your chest. The wrong assosciations with common magic things like elements and elementals. The list goes on and on. Some of his stuff is good and yes even he references sagas and eddic lore in his books (sounds like a religious guy who rejects magic I guess?) but he also interjects concepts that have nothing to do with Norse magic.
I was in the Temple of Set for a short time. The magical theory in much of his work draws directly from Setian magical theory. When you see terms like āobjective universeā and " subjective universe" you now know where that comes from. Not making a value judgement. Merely pointing out something that may not be obvious to some.
Ah, thank you.
Iāve never been in the Temple of Set, so I wouldnāt have caught that.
He most certain is not. In fact, one could argue heās more a Satanist (having met him, heās a super nice guy!). He is definitely LHP, hands down, and as the most magnificent and powerful goddess @Lady_Eva has said, heās written a plethora of information on it, especially as it corresponds to Heathenry.
Agree to disagree.
How do you define Wiccan?
There is a sharp distinction between Wicca and the lhp as espoused by the ToS of which Thorsson was a ranking member. Thorsson is no Wiccan by any measure. If you mean that he has taken traditional lore and stretched it over a Setian framework, you might be on more solid ground.
Anything that stinks of that white light do gooder bullshit. Regardless of whether or not they are āLHPā he could be Anton Lavey himself and if it wreaks of that white lighter nonsense Iām calling it wiccan.
Okay, now we get into a sticky situation. I am not going to deny that Thorsson includes elements that may be considered RHP. But there is a difference between the content of his books and the man. Thorsson is LHP, through and through. The RHP elements, I believe, are added to benefit the reader, make his works more palatable and popular, and because there may be an element of truth in them.
But, I also agree to disagree if this still doesnāt jive with you.
Thorrsson isnāt Wiccan and Iāve read most of his books, and Iāve never seen any āwhite lighter bullshitā. Iāve seen some questionable comparisons to Set in his Runa publications, but no white light bullshit. Does he include ideas about healing with the runes? Yeah, he does. But heās presenting a whole system and curriculum of Rune work, not just edge lord bullshit. I hate Wiccans too, but going full on edge lord isnāt practical either.
The way i see it, the runes and the rest of norse mythology operate in an interesting binary opposition.
The runes havent changed since they began, but a lot of norse mythology has been lost, excepting I believe it is so old, it is codified in the body. So the most exciting thing for me is unlocking knowledge, because i feel like the mythology still needs things added, such as goddesses fleshed out. the stories also echo eachother so much, it reminds me of ancient Greek theatre in how mutable they are made to be.
But as for the runes, I think its very specfic and should be very clear. I dont know much about how someone can get it wrong, maybe just not spending enough time with the rune being used.
I personally tend to do blood rites with entities such as thor, loki and odin but like I said, all of those practises are blood rites to me so I Ā“d say that if it works, it works. And besides, itĀ“s also possible to learn from norse gods easily through blood rites if you donĀ“t know anything about the templates of it: Not much else to say