Pagan Spiritual Values

I agree with everything that Starhawk said about Wicca, and I am a Wiccan. I wrote my own couplet for the Wiccan Rede: "If ye love one, love all; o'er all religions stand tall." Even Christians do not love everyone, with the exception of some of their saints. What is this love? An "agape" love for all, and an "erotic love" for one's lover, and a "filial" love for one's brothers and sisters in the faith. Agape love is pure love, based on the dignity and innate quality of worth of each being, from people to the soil we walk upon. That kind of love, if put into practice, could save the world. No more war over petty religious differences. I have hope for the future, and I believe such love should eventually embrace us all, or we will go to our ruin.

I agree with everything that Starhawk said about Wicca, and I am a Wiccan. I wrote my own couplet for the Wiccan Rede: "If ye love one, love all; o'er all religions stand tall." Even Christians do not love everyone, with the exception of some of their saints. What is this love? An "agape" love for all, and an "erotic love" for one's lover, and a "filial" love for one's brothers and sisters in the faith. Agape love is pure love, based on the dignity and innate quality of worth of each being, from people to the soil we walk upon. That kind of love, if put into practice, could save the world. No more war over petty religious differences. I have hope for the future, and I believe such love should eventually embrace us all, or we will go to our ruin.

Can't or don't want to read?
Bissell went further than Revere but Revere got all the credit. It made for better poetry.

www.bayequest.info/unbridled/unbridlednews-revere.htm

www1.whdh.com/news/articles/local/BO49091

Other sources include boston dot com, answers at yahoo.com.. but again, you don't want to acknowledge that you have no leg to stand on. Not my problem.

Funny you accuse me of doing the very same thing you are doing.

It's also funny that you quote Roosevelt- I'd agree with him if Iraq was anything like what he described as a 'worthy cause'. We had no business being there.

"They unprecedentedly have only one of some 12 appropriation bills passed."

Why do you think that is? The Dems have a VERY slim margin. People are p'o'd that the Repubs are keeping Dems from doing what they were supposed to do when elected- getting the troops out. We're finally starting to see where we should have been about four years ago. Whoopee.

Bush is the biggest disaster this country has seen and you're a wonderful example of what fear does to people. The propaganda machine has worked.

"The terrorists look the same as the innocent, and no one really knows who the enemy is, not even the Iraqis. That's why they are most of the victims."

So we should just kill everyone? Nice, that.

I'm still laughing at your 'the Dems caused 9/11'. Bush was in office when the memo came down the pike in August of 2001 that said that OBL was determined to strike in the US.. and did nothing.

He has now killed more Americans than OBL. Not to mention Iraqis. He has spent trillions of dollars on a war that has done nothing but explode a powder keg in the middle east.. our children are going to be picking up the tab for this. He sent all those troops over there to die, not to come home where he may have to be responsible for paying for their health care/schooling/job skill development/reintegration/therapy.

"George Washington prayed often; he even knelt down and prayed on the battlefield. I suspect many soldiers pray in time of war. Isn't that's why it's said, "There are no atheists in fox holes?"

Ask an atheist soldier sometime. And yes, they're out there. I think war creates new atheists.. and I certainly can't blame them for that. Washington knew that war must never be used preemptively to promote something. He understood that it wouldn't work. He was a smart guy.. and incidentally, didn't even need your Jesus. Just asked for a direct line. Deism and Christianity.. two VERY different things.

Here's a little gem I like- "Those would give up their liberties for a little safety deserve neither liberty, nor safety." Ben Franklin.

You're leaving? Watch for shadows.. if people are out to get us now, it's all thanks to King George. You're not my nemesis.. just another link in the web. Get involved, because it's going to take all of us to undo what W has done. Help out. And most importantly, get to know someone different than you. Don't be angry cause you can't 'pin down' someone's belief. It's a personal thing.. and you never knew anything about mine that you couldn't look up in your book and find some bad information. You know nothing of me. Learn from others and grow. Stop trying to push what is your opinion and your belief system onto others as the 'truth', cause you'll be decimated, and REALLY unsuccessful. Really try to understand others- try to walk a mile or ten in their shoes.. see the world through their eyes.. cause that's the only way out of this. What we do, right here, right now, matters. Love your neighbor as yourself. Namaste.

Blessed be.

If it wasn't for Bush there'd have been a lot more Iraqis alive and still living in their own homes. And there would be more than 4000 of our own in the same situation. At home, not dead.

Bush sent our troops over to die, not to come home. He's killed more Americans than died on that day. Notice how we can't even take care of our wounded and traumatized soldiers once they get home? The amount of money he's wasted on this stupid power grab is absolutely staggering, and will have costs that our children will have to bear.

We haven't really made any successes, we're only now starting to see where we should have been more than 4 years ago.

People are p'o'd at Congress because the Repubs have done everything in their power to stop the Dems from doing what the people asked for- to get them out of a needless, endless war. The war has lasted this long because the Repubs don't want out. They have nothing invested in this war.

Blackwater was granted immunity. No court martials, no accountability, nothing. It took the murder of civilians to finally get someone to do something.

"The terrorists look the same as the innocent, and no one really knows who the enemy is, not even the Iraqis. That's why they are most of the victims."

So we should just kill everybody? Nice solution, that.

Paul Revere didn't make that long trip. He was one of the Minutemen, but didn't get that far. Bissell was the one that made such a long trip. Longfellow immortalized Revere because he heard it from Irving. Plus, it made for better poetry. Nice try.

The Dems caused 9/11? Nice try. The August Memo that said that Bin Laden was determined to attack the US was ignored by the Bush Administration. They knew about it and did nothing.

It's funny you mention Roosevelt.. and I'd agree with that quote if Iraq was ANYTHING resembling a worthy cause.

Ben Franklin: Those who would give up liberty for a little safety deserve neither liberty nor safety.

Bush is the worst disaster this country has seen, and you're a great example of what fear does to people.

"Namely, you rely on historical sources though you unwittingly discredit historians, unless they agree with you."

You do the exact same thing, especially with Aristotle.

You're leaving? Watch the shadows.. and pay attention. It's about what we do, right here, right now. Don't force people to suffer as a 'prayer up to god'. Help out. Get involved. Love your neighbor as yourself. You may really be surprised.

Blessed be.

REPLY TO PRIVER:
“BLACKWATER”
As to Blackwater, get yourself in the middle of Iraq or Afghanistan and then be a critic. See what you'll do when someone who is approaching you and refuses to answer you. Sometimes they guess wrong, as our military sometimes does, but that's the way war is. You do the best you can.

Blackwater wasn't the only organization who was shooting when there was no response. Many that didn’t shoot died. The game is dangerous, and when your life is at stake, if you don't react you may not get another chance. The terrorists look the same as the innocent, and no one really knows who the enemy is, not even the Iraqis. That's why they are most of the victims.

To say that Bush's mistakes have killed the Iraqis would be laughable if it wasn't so hellishly disgusting and repugnant. Ask the Iraqi people who is killing them instead of the troglodytes and iconoclasts back bitters, and muckrakers. The Iraqis want us there and don't want us to go until Iraq is safe; bet on it.

The other day a Dem Congressman returning from Iraq admitted the Dems had caused, in his opinion, the war to last at least two years longer than it should have because the Iraq people feared the US was pulling out. The Iraqis got that idea from the cacophony of the Dems defeatism in the House and Senate who maligned and insulted their Iraqi president, the Iraqis elected under the threat of death from the terrorists, as are government officials.

The Dems maligned the Iraq parliament and the Dems have the lowest approval rating in history and the worst record in Congress. They unprecedented have only one of some 12-appropriation bills passed.

The Iraqi’s were starting to make their own bed with the terrorists for fear of a Dem pullout and that put a damper on their cooperation. said the Dem. Now that Iraqi people realize Bush could be trusted and was a man of his word, that he is not going to run out on them, they are coming back, and we are winning.

The Dems knew they were undermining the war and the confidence of the Iraqi people. Moreover, the anti-warmongering left-wing seditionists inspired them. They wanted to undermine the war and weaken the Iraqi's resolve to fight, as did the New York Times and all the mongrel left wing media in addition to Moveon.Org. and their Hollywood emulators. The Dems chose political expediency over the security of the country. They caused 9/11; don't kid yourself.

You can sit here and judge others in a comfortable surrounding but that's not where Blackwater is; they're in the arena of death. They have to make quick decisions because their life is at stake. Fifty-five didn’t make them quick enough.

Ask the Congressmen and Senators who were over there when Blackwater was guarding them. You think they didn't want Blackwater who lost only one customer? Think again.

Waxman and company are demagogues that are undermining the war. Has Waxman ever been there? I don't think so, and even if he were, he'd be the first one to ask for Blackwater to protect his ignominious derriere; make book on it.

Moreover, Blackwater didn't have free reign; they were under the auspices of the State Department.

I am now leaving the particular forum not for anything personal, but because there is something screwed up on it. It takes me forever to scroll, about a half hour to highlight on this forum, and every time I sign in on it, it jams up my computer at one time or another with ridiculous pop ups that my antivirus pop up programs can’t stop. When they appear, everything stops for about two minutes, or even at times the whole forum page disappears and that’s ridiculous too. This never happens on any of the other forums just this one.

Your nemesis is gone to fight and stir up the other sophists who live in the alternate world where up is down and down is up. So good by, adios. smile, and give your face a holiday. I am out of here.

REPLY TO PRIVER:
“BLACKWATER”
As to Blackwater, get yourself in the middle of Iraq or Afghanistan and then be a critic. See what you'll do when someone who is approaching you and refuses to answer you. Sometimes they guess wrong, as our military sometimes does, but that's the way war is. You do the best you can.

Blackwater wasn't the only organization who was shooting when there was no response. Many that didn’t shoot died. The game is dangerous, and when your life is at stake, if you don't react you may not get another chance. The terrorists look the same as the innocent, and no one really knows who the enemy is, not even the Iraqis. That's why they are most of the victims.

To say that Bush's mistakes have killed the Iraqis would be laughable if it wasn't so hellishly disgusting and repugnant. Ask the Iraqi people who is killing them instead of the troglodytes and iconoclasts back bitters, and muckrakers. The Iraqis want us there and don't want us to go until Iraq is safe; bet on it.

The other day a Dem Congressman returning from Iraq admitted the Dems had caused, in his opinion, the war to last at least two years longer than it should have because the Iraq people feared the US was pulling out. The Iraqis got that idea from the cacophony of the Dems defeatism in the House and Senate who maligned and insulted their Iraqi president, the Iraqis elected under the threat of death from the terrorists,as are government officials.

The Dems maligned the Iraq parliment and the Dems have the lowest approval rating in history and the worst record in Congress. They unprecedentedly have only one of some 12 appropriation bills passed.

The Iraqi’s were starting to make their own bed with the terrorists for fear of a Dem pullout and that put a damper on their cooperation. said the Dem. Now that Iraqi people realize Bush could be trusted and was a man of his word, that he is not going to run out on them, they are coming back, and we are winning.

The Dems knew they were undermining the war and the confidence of the Iraqi people. Moreover, the anti-warmongering left-wing seditionists inspired them. They wanted to undermine the war and weaken the Iraqi's resolve to fight, as did the New York Times and all the mongrel left wing media in addition to Moveon.Org. and their Hollywood emulators. The Dems chose political expediency over the security of the country. They caused 9/11; don't kid yourself.

You can sit here and judge others in a comfortable surrounding but that's not where Blackwater is; they're in the arena of death. They have to make quick decisions because their life is at stake. Fifty-five didn’t make them quick enough.

Ask the Congressmen and Senators who were over there when Blackwater was guarding them. You think they didn't want Blackwater who lost only one customer? Think again.

Waxman and company are demagogues that are undermining the war. Has Waxman ever been there? I don't think so, and even if he were, he'd be the first one to ask for Blackwater to protect his ignominious derriere; make book on it.

Moreover, Blackwater didn't have free reign; they were under the auspices of the State Department.

I am now leaving the particular forum not for anything personal, but because there is something screwed up on it. It takes me forever to scroll, about a half hour to highlight on this forum, and every time I sign in on it, it jams up my computer at one time or another with ridiculous pop ups that my antivirus pop up programs can’t stop. When they appear, everything stops for about two minutes, or even at times the whole forum page disappears and that’s ridiculous too. This never happens on any of the other forums just this one. So good by, adios. smile, and give your face a holiday. I am out of here.

IN REPLY TO PRIVER:
“PAUL REVERE”

“Revere became a figure of popular history and legend, however, because of his ride on the night of Apr. 18, 1775, to warn the people of the Massachusetts countryside that British soldiers were being sent out in the expedition that, as it turned out, started the American Revolution (see Lexington and Concord, battles of). William Dawes and Samuel Prescott also rode forth with the news. Revere did not reach his destination at Concord but was captured by the British; nevertheless, it is Revere who is remembered as the midnight rider, chiefly because of the poem by Henry Wadsworth Longfellow. He designed the first seal for the united colonies, designed and printed the first Continental bond issue, and established (1776) a powder mill at Canton, Mass.”

He was a Midnight Rider, one of three, he was captured before he reached Concord, nonetheless he was there, and history wasn’t wrong though Wadsworth may have been. However, Wadsworth wasn’t a Historian writing history; he was a poet. Moreover there is a difference between historical lore and historical fact.

In addition, you got your information from historians while at the same time you impugn their credibility. Now that is ridiculous isn’t it? Namely, you rely on historical sources though you unwittingly discredit historians, unless they agree with you.

As to the interview with Bush who said, he prayed to God to help him in his decision, I have never heard of any American President who did not pray to God. Maybe Clinton didn’t, but if he didn’t, he sure acted as if he did. Still it's hard to figure out why a guy with no conscience could pray, unless it was to Beelzebub, his patron saint, or to the pagan Goddesses of Love Aphrodite and Venus to give bring him a few temple prostitutes.

However, praying to God is not the same as saying God told him to invade Iraq though the Bush-wackers, who know little about praying, like to make it the same.

George Washington prayed often; he even knelt down and prayed on the battlefield. I suspect many soldiers pray in time of war. Isn't that's why it's said, "There are no atheists in fox holes?"

Back seat Generals, Monday night quarterbacks, the most uninformed experts we have, give us all kinds of advice as do the clueless Dems, or the shrieking Hillary, who has more war strategies than John Kerry did, and all the liberal columnists, and the anti-American blogs put together. Such critics have no responsibility if their plans fail. They just go on babbling into the darkness, like a horse better who only picks the winners after the race, and never bets any money.

Theodore Roosevelt:
“It is not the critic who counts, not the man who points out how the strong man stumbled, or where the doer of deeds could have done better. The credit belongs to the man who is actually in the arena, whose face is marred by dust and sweat and blood, who strives valiantly, who errs and comes short again and again, who knows the great enthusiasms, the great devotions, and spends himself in a worthy cause, who at best knows achievement and who at the worst, if he fails, at least fails while daring greatly. His place shall never be with those cold and timid souls who know neither victory nor defeat.”

And, now you have an excellent and profound portrait of President Bush, by a previous President.

Wow. That's flawed logic if ever I heard some.

All you've shown in all this time is a lack of concern for women and their ability to decide what is best for them. If you had your own way, babies would be born without the need for women or concern for the mother's health at all. All gays would be persecuted just for existing and loving whomever they do.
That's prejudice at it's finest. Nice.

Pain is not an indicator of evil. That's ridiculous. Tell that to a child suffering with cancer, that they got it by being a bad person.

If there were no men, there would be no bible. Man came from other creatures. Read your science. Age of the earth is about 4.6 billion years. Man, a few thousand at best.

"It's no more different for one's love of one's neighbor for the love of God when one offers up his suffering as a prayer to God to save others."

You seem to imply that killing a child is ok if it's 'offered up as a prayer to save others'. Your god demanded such tests. Saved from what, exactly?

How about the fact that people are not born bad- it's being told that by others and withholding vital education that can have others make an informed, educated decision about their own bodies.

IN REPLY TO PRIVER:
“LIVES OF THE UNBORN”
“There you go again with your not quite 'pro-life' agenda. I say again, if you are so concerned about children, then put your tax dollars and your home or livelihood where your mouth is and sponsor an unwanted foster child until the age of 18 or 21.”

ANS:
I support Catholic charities, what do you support? I wonder if you are injudiciously blind. How many times have I told you of the Catholics’ tremendous amount of care for stressed pregnancies, the mothers, and their families that is given by Catholic agencies and charities?

As many unborn, as possible, are being taken care of. The mothers must come to us, before they are legally murdered by the pro-abortion majority of liberal Dems, the troglodytes, barbarians, atheists, agnostics, and the pagans who believe morality is relative and abortion is a right. There is no right to evil.

Relativity rationalizes abortion as utilitarian and a personal choice, makes euthanasia acceptable if it’s a personal decision, and advances homosexual activity as a legitimate lifestyle in the Culture of Death.

IN REPLY TO
THE CREATOR AND A GODDESS:

“If there were no man, the earth would still be. She would still be, in some form. From the earth came man, and from man came your book and therefore, your God and your church.

ANS:
Man did not come from the earth; he came from God who created man into His image and likeness by giving man an immortal spiritual nature, of which the world can not give because it’s material.

The Bible did not come from man; it is the Word of God. Man was only chosen to record it.

IN REPLY TO:
Not really. Only since someone decided your god must be followed-or else.

ANS:
“The obligation to moral action in the natural order is, moreover, generally believed to depend on the motives supplied by religion; and it is at least doubtful whether it is possible for moral obligation to exist at all apart from a supernatural sanction or religion.”

Yes, man decided to adhere to the truth and the laws that were given to man by God because man reasoned to truth. Those who didn’t chose God’s advice destroyed themselves spiritually and physically because the violated their conscience and nature.

No one is forced into anything; man reasoned to God and was a witness to his Wisdom revealed to man in God's Creation. The Pharao Ramses II decided he didn’t think much of God or His Wisdom, so his whole army was drowned because of his obstanancy; his country and his people were devastated by the many plagues that were visited upon them and his son died from one of the plagues. Someone said, "Your arms are to short to box with God, He'll kick your butt." Unfortunately, many find that out when it's too late. So be wise and make your life fruitful.

IN REPLY TO:
"Human and Christian prudence suggest for the majority of sick people the use of medicines ...and have them administered according to the doctor's advice. Since in your view suffering has so much meaning why bother with painkillers at all?

ANS:
“It is evident again that all evil is essentially negative and not positive; i.e. it consists not in the acquisition of anything, but in the loss or deprivation of something necessary for perfection.

“Pain, which is the test or criterion of physical evil, has indeed a positive, though purely subjective existence as a sensation or emotion; but its evil quality lies in its disturbing effector, the sufferer.”

Again, suffering is an evil caused by sin, not something good or desirable. Sacrifice, as an offering up to God, is a prayer to God. It is a noble and propitious thing.

There is no greater love for man than one who sacrifices his life to save the life of others, as a soldier risk his life in war for his country and its people, or as one looses his life to save a victim in a burning house. So too is an offering up of one's suffering to Jesus.

I've seen a mother give up one of her kidneys to save her child's life. That's a lot of suffering and pain given for the love of her child. It's no more different for one's love of one's neighbor for the love of God when one offers up his suffering as a prayer to God to save others. Do Pagans, who offered babies up to their god have a problem with that?

Suffering is something that is an inevitable evil; it is not sought or wished for but unavoidable physical evil. However, when man suffers, instead of leaving it go for naught, he offers it up for as a sacrifice to God and joins it with the suffering of Christ on the cross for the conversion of sinners.

Christ died on the Cross that man might be saved from eternal death. Because God intensly loves man, the suffering on earth honor God by their joining in the sufferings of His only Son with their suffering for the conversion and reparation of the sins of others.

Why did it take the deaths of all those innocents for the State Department to finally do something about Blackwater? This is supposed to be a war fought by our army, right? so why then are these other folks even subcontracted in the first place? they are not subject to any penalties for their own crimes that they've committed. They got off without any penalties for killing anywhere from 8-20 people depending on the story you read. Many of the Blackwater folks were trigger happy.

The Armed forces have no say over what they do- they cannot be subjected to court martial. A lot of innocent Iraqis died because of their blunders. Only when it made news did the State Department do something. It's been shown through their OWN investigation that those people were fired upon without any provocation. This has been the MO of the entire administration- change nothing until reports surface of wrongdoing. Until then, accuse the reporters and dissenters of being 'unpatriotic'. You're a great example of what this does to people.

Bush stated in an interview with Bob Woodward that he 'appealed to a higher father' when asked about whether he allowed his father to give any advice. Check my sources? 60 minutes, CBS news, washington Post, Asia times, truthout. org, jurist.law.pitt.edu .. I could go on.

What do any of those terrorists acts you mentioned have anything to do with Iraq?

And what I really love is your invoking Saddam killing all those people.. when in fact is was the US who gave him the arms and the money to do that during the Iraq/Iran crisis under Reagan; at that time he was our own ally because we hated Iran more. We lost any claim to some sort of higher moral ground by saying we were removing a 'horrible person' who wouldn't have been quite as dangerous in the first place if it wasn't for us.

Funny you bring up the whole Stem cell research thing. Those embryos that are not used for IVF get thrown out anyway, thereby destroying any chance there may be to try new research to save lives.

I love how you invoke Al Qaeda- we can't even find the guy who masterminded 9/11. Where the hell is OBL? He's somewhere making home movies in Pakistan. We should have been looking for him, and only him. All the hijackers on those planes were.. SAUDIS. Iraq had absolutely no connection to the Twin Towers. The way to have gotten to Al Quaeda is NOT to have made them world Famous. OBL is now the de facto spokesman for any group with a grudge against the US. Why? Bush made it that way. So any group now can attract attention to any agenda they have by calling themselves al qaeda even though they may not have a thing to do with OBL himself. This is just what he wants.

During Sarcozy's recent visit, Bush invoked the relationship between George Washington and Lafayette, saying this new relationship would be based on that old one to try to reconnect France and the US- what Bush doesn't know, among other things is that Washington, in the last letter he wrote to Lafayette Washington said (paraphrasing): 'It doesn't matter HOW good an idea is. Promoting it by the use of force DOES NOT work'.

You talk about terrorism.. when in fact the only terrorists around are still in the White House.

The idea that Bush cares anything at all about life would be laughable if it wasn't so damned dangerous.

You're a wonderful example of how fear eats away at people at the expense of our democracy. What would your guy do? He went and upset the money changers and called for a change in the status quo, did he not? You'd probably call him a liberal scum too. And that's just sad. Even as a Pagan I can have some respect for the message of love that he was trying to bring.. although he certainly wasn't the first, the last or the most original one to do so.

You've no leg to stand on, my friend.

IN REPLY TO
PRIVER:
"I wonder how much you are concerned with 25 million lives over their. Bush seems to think those 3,000 and those 25 million had and have dignity. What's your view?"

ANS:
Every human being that God has created has equal dignity. God created man because He loved him. He loves all, and yes, even the terrorists. Have you heard of the Beatitudes? And so it is written, “What ever you do to the least of my brothers that you do unto me.” (Mathew 25: 31 to 46) Try reading it sometime.

IN REPLY TO:
What the hell does this have to do with anything?

ANS:
Is helping others a problem for you? Have you ever read the parable of the Good Samaritan? (Lk 10: 25-37)

How one regards human life matters. It has consequences. Over 48 million unborn have died from abortion because their lives had no value to pro-abortionists. Isn’t that what religion is all about? Is it not written, “Love your neighbor as yourself as God so loves you?” Mother Theresa is a Christian contemporary example of such love; what is a Pagan example?

IN REPLY TO:
“According to W himself, God TOLD him to invade Iraq. He doesn't give a damn about life.”

ANS:
Don’t believe ever ridiculous thing you read. Show your sources.

IN REPLY TO:
“If he ever cared about life he would have stayed far away from there. We have no business being there. Not that we ever did.”

ANS:
You might think about what you’re saying before you say it. Are not the Iraqis human, and their live matter? Here is just a few murders and assaults on Americans by these terrorists since the mid ‘70s before the 9/11 fiasco. Thousands have been murdered by these terrorists. Notwithstanding, Saddam murdered some 300,000 Iraq people, and maimed and raped as many. Saddam threatened the President's life and all Iraq's neighbors' and their sovereignty.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_terrorist_incidents#1970

“Al Qaeda took credit for September 8: TWA Flight 841: Bomb kills 88 on jetliner. Attributed to Abu Nidal and his terrorist organization. December 11:

“A bomb set off by the Puerto Rican nationalist group FALN in East Harlem, New York permanently disables a police officer. The officer lost an eye because of this act.

“December 29: Bomb explodes at New York's LaGuardia Airport, killing eleven and injuring 75.

“September 10-September 11: Croatian Freedom Fighters hijack a TWA airliner. One police officer was killed and three injured.

“June 25, 1996, Khobar Towers bombing -- In all, 19 U.S. servicemen and one Saudi were killed and 372 wounded; see FBI Most Wanted Terrorists.”

Are you suggesting we have no right to defend ourselves?

IN REPLY TO:
“And how is it caring for others, especially Iraqis when the government hires secret agencies that aren't even part of the Armed forces who can just go over and kill willy nilly without any accountability?”

ANS:
Absurdity begets absurdity. For willy-nilly killings try the terrorists. Willy-nilly is it? Some 55 of those body guards died protecting people they were hired to defend because the US couldn’t do it. Only one victim of these terrorists happened by Blackwater's heroic efforts.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Blackwater_USA#Iraq_War_involvement

“U.S. ambassador to Iraq, Ryan Crocker, told the U.S., "There is simply no way at all that the State Department's Bureau of Diplomatic Security could ever have enough full-time personnel to staff the security function in Iraq. There is no alternative except through contracts.”

“On October 5, 2007 the State Department announced new rules for Blackwater's armed guards operating in Iraq. Under the new guidelines, State Department security agents will accompany all Blackwater units operating in and around Baghdad.” Willy-nilly, I don’t think so.

"The State Department will also install video surveillance equipment in all Blackwater armored vehicles, and will keep recordings of all radio communications between Blackwater convoys in Iraq and the military and civilian agencies that supervise their activities. Still there is no will-nilly here.

The US House passed a bill in October, 2007 that would make all private contractors working in Iraq and other combat zones subject to prosecution by U.S. courts and Senate Democratic leaders have said they plan to send similar legislation to President Bush as soon as possible."[74] That isn’t will-nilly.

We are in a life and death struggle for survival in Iraq. The terrorists are wont to appear as humble citizens and are indistinguishable from innocent people. It’s easy to judge accidents as intentional in wars when your prejudice is an obstacle to your objectivity and especially when you’re not in Iraq experiencing the danger.

IN REPLY TO:
PRIVER:
“FAITH BASED ORGANIZATIONS”

ANS:
Who but charitable NGOs can be more helpful to the poor? Catholic World Charities are renowned for their work for the poor throughout the world.

Who has helped AIDS victims in Africa more than the Catholic charitable program “Dream?” Though you impugned the work of Mother Theresa, India, a pagan government, lauded her work and her love for their people. No government organization can match the works of charity by Christians. Not even the UN who went to aid tsunami victims and raped their children.

IN REPLY TO:
“The government has no business supporting 'faith based organizations.' We are a secular country. Founded that way, and remains that way. Besides, the only 'faith based organizations' he would promote are those that agree with his own twisted personal belief system.”

ANS:
So is the government's business aiding pregnant mothers by paying to have their unborn murdered? Why is it repulsive to you that government not support charitable organizations who will save these children, the mothers and their families, when the government supports Planned Parenthood that help murder their babies?

Again, you have been given multiple charitable organizations that aid and assist pregnant mothers, but you lament the government supporting them. Are you equally resentful of government's support of Planned Parenthood?

When we say we are a secular nation it doesn’t mean we are, a nation that is exclusive of the Creator, at least the Founding Fathers never thought so. They based all of our inviolable rights on being endowed by a Christian God.

You might try reading the Declaration of Independence some time and the Bill of Rights. While you are at it, try reading the Proclamation of Thanksgiving by President George Washington, our first president who was very familiar with the Founding Fathers.

You are living in an era of one of the greatest presidents in our time. We have an outstanding, economy, low inflation, and unemployment in spite of Katrina, the stock market scandals, the 9/11 disaster and the failing economy inherited from Clinton.

There still hasn't been a 9/11 since 9/11. That's not good enough, so maybe the country will get Hillary, the choice of the terrorists and another facilitated 9/11 from the Clintons. That is why bin Laden cheered the Dems victory in Congress and terrorists are supporting Hillary for president.

The president has restored the dignity to the White House after a pervert and consummate self-admitted liar occupied it and disgraced it.

Unfortunately, truth, dignity, and character didn’t matter to the majority and America reelected a degenerated misogynist misanthrope and his party. They are a good example of morality being relative. Lying is okay if it's about sex, even in a Federal Court. So too is adultery, if you're a Dem President.

We are winning a war the Dems continuously are undermining for political expediency as they did in Vietnam. The Dems' maladroit Senate Majority Leader is so politically and prejudicially blind; he lamentably claimed we’ve lost the war in the face of its patent victory.

Moreover, the liberals' penchant for Embryo research has failed, thanks to the President's belief that human life is sacred. The Father of Eugenics agrees; the embryo is human, as do the former Eugenics Chairman of Mao Clinic and the Father of IVF. Principles matter.

Moreover, Bush's ethic for the value of life is not twisted but distinguished and eminently remarkable. Because he chose two outstanding Supreme Court Justices, he has ended the horrific practice of Partial Birth Abortion that sucks the brains out a child while he is being born.

The Clintons vetoed an anti-Partial Birth Abortion bill twice. Incredibly, the Dems gave the Clintons a second term, when they nearly destroyed our nation’s integrity and generated the Culture of Death.

The President has buffeted Embryonic Stem Researchers (ESCR), who, not satisfied with the murder of over 48 million unborn, had proposed to murder millions of embryos.

ESCR is a crime against humanity, a sham, and a political ploy that has not produced one health benefit even although it has been fully funded in England since 1996.

Eschewed by Dems, adult stem cell research is proving the President’s astuteness. It is an expose of the debauchery of the pharisaical Dems, and their embodiment of the Culture of Death.

Now instead of murdering human embryos, thanks to Bush, science has discovered how to create a stem cell that is even more versatile than the sham promises of the ESCR

Alternate stem cell research has produce over seventy medical miracles that include cures for leukemia, and a break through for sugar diabetes.

The prosperity of our nation is due to a Presided who recognizes the dignity of all human life, and that the dignity of human life stems from the roots of God’s Christian moral absolute that all human life is sacred.

Apparently not reading again.

We are merely participants here until she shows us the door.

The goddess gives birth to the god every year. He is another aspect of her. Many faces, same divine. Self-generating, independent and immanent.

For me, all natures do change, because change is the only constant. Man has changed over the millenia, there's nothing to say that it won't in the future. Into what? who knows? Everything comes from Nature. And will return to her. For me, there is no escaping the natural cycle, no matter how much we want to.

Since for me the divine in Nature is absolutely everywhere, it's not possible to ever be separated. Hell doesn't exist. Your Heaven has no interest for me as you seem to forget. For me, my soul isn't necessarily exclusively mine forever, just part of a larger whole. What interests me is what we do, right now.

Starhawk puts it this way:
"'Polytheism’ means the belief in many different names and approaches to the sacred. While most of us believe in a deep, spiritual unity at the heart of existence, we also believe in the value of many different names, faces, symbols, and paths to that heart. No one has a monopoly on truth, in our teachings, and every religion and spiritual tradition holds a perspective that has value and is uniquely suited to some individuals’ needs."

"The Goddess is the great, creative life force, the living being whose body is the universe, the cycles of birth, growth, death and regeneration that animate all things. She is the oneness that underlies all, but different facets of her story and her power are revealed to us in the form of particular Goddesses and Gods from many different times and cultures. Each is like a gateway that leads us to a particular path of development and growth."

"The Goddess is not just God-in-a-skirt, she represents a different spiritual orientation, one which locates the sacred in this world, in the cycles of nature, in the body and all its processes, that sees sexual communion, birth, maturation, healing, and even death and decay as sacred processes."

"Religion is a human construct—the set of images, beliefs, stories, ethics and explanations we use to wrap our human minds around the Mysteries. Goddess—or God, Creator, whatever you choose to call the great underlying connectedness—is more than we can conceive."

"Every religious system is just one possible doorway through which we catch a small glimpse of the awesome love and creativity that infuses the multiverse. From the Pagan perspective, it’s all poetry. If I say, “My love’s eyes are as blue as the sea” and you say, “My love’s eyes are as blue as the sky”, we don’t need to fight a religious war about it. Maybe I thrill to Beethoven and you adore Beyonce — it’s all music."

This is my path. You have your view, I have mine. One is not better or more 'logical' than another, In your attempts to 'pin down' my belief you have shown what I think is a limited view of what Christianity could be about. The nature of my belief is always in flux and based directly on my own experiences. With new information, new experiences, comes new understanding. But it's all poetry, music. All paths are valid and lead to the same end.

Let me ask this. What do you, personally, get from your belief system?

IN REPLY TO
PRIVER:
“Limbo”

ANS:
Limbo never was a teaching or a dogma. It was an attempt to explain what happened to those who died without being baptized and whose only sin was Original Sin. No one was forced to believe it; it was an option.

IN REPLY TO:
"She is the natural cycle, which INCLUDES death. It is a part of her and she of it, because from death the cycle of life continues."

ANS:
In plant-life, the seed dies and the plant comes to life or fruition. In humans, life is eternal. The body dies but the soul, the force of life, is eternal. It doesn’t die and it doesn’t create human life, God does.

Again, you have given your Goddess parts, making It a dependent being. Therefore, it can not be a True God. It is a mortal god, but God is immortal.

IN REPLY TO:
"Can you ever think for yourself without resorting to quoting others?"

ANS:
Sorry to have to quote you so much, but you continuously forget what you write. References are to show that what I tell you is not only my concepts but also the concepts and conclusion of credible scholars and historians. They are concepts that have been tested and tried throughout the centuries. They've beam wedded in the wisdom of tradition, of which you cavalierly dismiss. Moreover, such references verify my rationale, and show their not just whimsical ideas but the beliefs of many.

IN REPLY TO
MAKING JUDGMENTS:

ANS:
The judgment Jesus was speaking of was the final judgment. Without judgments, we couldn’t surmise anything, Moreover, your interpretation would abolish Courts, and Justice and that would be ridiculous and irrational, wouldn't it?

In addition, we are all obliged to speak out against evil and counsel those of evil. Matthew 18:15-20 I believe it was Edmund Burk who said that the greatest evil is for good men to see evil and say nothing about it.

IN REPLY TO:
"'personal morality' isn't what's screwing up the country. It's people who insist that others…”

ANS
There is no personal morality, on personal belief. All moral laws exist in the Natural Moral Law created by God, and imbued in man’s nature. They are the laws that govern all Human Behavior, no matter what religion or belief. Any one who has their own moral laws makes morality relative and therefore meaningless. Namely, that which is against the moral proper behavior of man’s nature is adverse to it and not licit.

Violate the Moral Law and you end up in disaster. Countries that have done this, usurped the powers of God and decided what was moral. They implode from their own iniquity, or others destroy them because of their threat to society.

We have many examples of this, Cuba, North Korea, China, the Middle East, the totalitarian governments in Asia and Africa, and all the materialistic ideologies that rail against human nature. Their fate is death of man and death of man’s soul sending it to the depth of Hell.

IN REPLY TO:
"PROVE HEAVEN EXISTS. You have no way of doing so."

ANS:
Simply put, Heaven is God. When man resides in God, he is in heaven. Thus, prove there is a God and you prove there is a Heaven. You’ve been given six proofs of God from reason, notwithstanding Scripture. Try reading them.

As to Hell, if you're not with God, you're in Hell, Hell means not to be in Heaven God for all eternity. Those who contradict God condemn themselves to eternal damnation, because God can not have a contradiction.

IN REPLY TO:
"A Goddess has a gender."
Actually, she really doesn't.. we use the term Goddess for a couple of reasons- because she encompasses both male and female attributes at the same time, just as light and dark cannot coexist without each other."

ANS:
Now you’re changing your belief again. I think you might have at least looked at one of my links that noted a Pagan God is both sexes.

To the contrary, God has no sex. In addition, God can not have contradictory attributes. He is pure actuality, no potential, He is who is. He has no darkness; He is pure Light, meaning Pure Actuality. There is no Darkness in God. Darkness is the lack of Light but God lacks nothing.

IN REPLY TO:
"We also personify her that way because she is the cradle, the womb of all life. She gives birth to the Sun god who she mates with and he dies at the end of October until he is to be reborn at the winter solstice. And the cycle continues."

ANS:
You said you believed in a monotheistic god, and now you mention multiple gods, which is an oxymoron.

You write,”Paganism is not always polytheism. There are some that see the Divine as one creative overarching force and all the Gods/Goddess names are different facets of the same Divine.” Do you know what you believe? Accordingly, you believe everything is in constant flux, things that are. soon become things they weren’t because all natures change.

Aristotle's idea of the umoved mover doesn't justify the Christian god. According to him that god sat back and thought thoughts about himself thinking about thoughts all day. Which directly contradicts your bible.

Have a nice day.

I never said I was a strict polytheist. I wait to see what my experience will lead me to. If you ever read anything I've said you'd know that there are many different schools of thought within the umbrella term of Paganism. And they're all over the map. All part of the same thing. Nature. From which all life springs.

And it's interesting you say that I've 'mangled' your statement without bothering to explain yours. Why is it something good is the work of your 'god' and something bad the result of 'free will and choosing evil'?

All the rituals, tools, etc. in Christianity are rooted in Paganism. That has been for thousands of years before Christianity ever showed up. We have simply reclaimed them for what they are and adopted them for modern life.

Interesting you talk about the use of languages.. coming straight out of Druidism, that. Religious value of words. The irony was there was an emphasis on the oral tradition, and what was written down was the unimportant detritis.

Using your ill informed, Christian language and bad information to put words into my mouth that I've never said is a blatant attempt to define that which you do not know. I look at the history. What really happened in an attempt to suppress true knowledge in the face of a group that wanted solely political power, converts.. and money.

But again, you don't want real dialogue. You want conversion.. and obedience by your government to your own way. You want to institute a very dangerous slippery slope that allows the government to dictate the actions of its citizens in places that they don't belong. That is the ultimate in devaluation of human life, because you don't care one whit about those who are here already and struggling.

About governments who are hurting people with their policies.

I said you weren't listening. The quality of your responses are not rooted in anything I've actually said, but what you have claimed I've 'insinuated'. I don't say what I don't mean. I didn't say you were a bad person. And you call me prejudiced?

and your last paragraph once again proves my point that Paganism had led to Christianity. Of course Paganism was influenced by ideas in the orient as well. Why do you insist on beating a dead horse?

I ask again, what part of 'love your neighbor as yourself' are you following?'

IN RESPONSE TO PRIVER:
"Since God has endowed man with a free-will man can choose evil or good. If he chooses evil, he pays the consequences; if he chooses the Good, he reaps his just rewards."

“Wow. I missed this little gem, blaming the Jewish victims for what they went through on their 'free will' and 'original sin'

“Nobody deserves to have to go through what they and others did. You have just lost any credibility you ever had with such bigotry. That god sat around and did nothing. inexcusable, and unjustifiable by saying it happened because someone exercised the brains that they were born with. There is simply no justification for saying that. None.

May you never be in a position of political power.

ANS:
How you’ve managed to mangled my above statement is incomprehensible, but it is not surprising.

Yes, you do have a problem with languages, as you admit. Namely, you think all the languages are incomprehensible except your own, and if one doesn’t use your own language, what ever in heaven it is, their's is inconsequential.

You make truth relative and therefore meaningless. Facts, historical documents, truth, and reason are all relative to you. Absolute truth is subject to change and therefore has no credibility.

The ridiculous and absurd take precedence over reality because that is what relativity is. Yes, in your world, all things are changing and in effect, nothing is what it was.

What absurdity! The irrational becomes rational and the rational becomes irrational. As the great sage of improvidence, Al Gore once said, “Up is down and down is up!” And, so it is in the alternate world of gibberish rigmarole.

You claim that Aristotle, the Father of Logic, the designer of the Scientific Method, and the first to coin the term “circular arguments” is so simple minded that he didn’t know that his own proof of God is circular, but you know it is even though you inadvertently admit you have no sense of what an Unmoved Mover even is.

You deny all the scholarship and historical documentation of theologians and historians by claiming they are irrelevant and even false because you give them no standing in your alternate world of contradictions.

Further, you claim there are no moral absolute truths. Truth becomes relative and therefore unwittingly rendered meaningless. Hence, you write, “Nothing is ever absolute. And man's nature is changing all the time.” I wonder what nature he changes into if he ceases to be human.

Consequently, murder and stealing are not absolutely and admittedly evil; they are relative. It all depends on whom you are murdering or stealing from, I guess.

Moreover, you claim we only know what we think. Hence, it becomes impossible to known what is real because reality is only in the mind. I am sure you will disagree with that because it’s true and therefore irrelative in your fatuous world of chimerical inventions.

You deny the definition of a Pagan that is stated in the dictionary because you have your own definition in a language that no one speaks but you.

You go on about the wonderful world your Goddess has given you and then inexplicably say you haven’t chose a patron Goddess yet while at the same time denied you believed in polytheism.

Consequently you write,” “Wrong. I don't actually have a patron god/dess at the moment. Whether or not that changes in the future remains to be seen.” Notwithstanding, did you not claim that Paganism does not support Polytheism?

IN REPLY TO:
“Your examples do nothing to serve any argument because it's based firmly in your belief that what is true for you is true for everyone, and that's just not the case.

ANS:
First, they are not only examples; they are facts. Yes, reality does not depend on what one thinks; it exists in spite of whether you think it exist or not.

You might do a little historical research on Paganism. You might find instead of Paganism being the root of Christianity, it is Christianity that is the modern root of Paganism.

In doing so, you’ll find that Pagans, when on their odyssey searching for a god that would work for them, drifted toward adopting the rituals of Christianity and monotheism that actually worked for man.

Paganism was consistently a disastrous failure and the Pagans needed something that didn’t continuously end in disaster. Therefore, they saw the advantages in Christianity and were drawn toward many of its beliefs, monotheism being one. You might start with the link below.

http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/11388a.htm

“Whether Paganism made straight a path for Christianity may be considered from two points of view....Attention is nowadays directed, not only to the ideas of the Divine nature, the logos-philosophies, popular at the Christian era, but especially to those oriental cults, which, flooding down upon the shriveled, officialized, and dying worship of the Roman or Hellenic-Roman world. They fertilized within it whatever potentialities Paganism yet contained of purity, prayer, emotional religion, and other-worldliness generally.”

Oh, and btw..

Satanists have to believe in some form of Christianity. They just worship the other side. And the self.

The saints have seen satan? I'm sure they must have, otherwise they wouldn't be part of the Christian canon, now would they? Surely you can do better than that.

The devil has nothing to do with any pantheon in Paganism.

Paganism has always been linked to understanding and working with natural forces that abide in everything. And it still exists, even today.

Like I said, there are some folks who can make a pretty interesting case that Jesus himself was a witch.

Can't back anything up with anything other than one website with an agenda and name calling. Nice.

I ask again: what part of 'love your neighbor as yourself' are you following?

Come to think of it, I sincerely hope you don't speak for all Christians. I still have faith that there are Christians out there who can talk about their faith in a truly nonjudgemental way without condemning others. There are a few of those gems here buried among all the shouting at this site. Which is why those of us that are here make the effort to change the conversation. I hope to have one someday.

You have been fed a whole lot of misinformation, not just about Pagans and who we are, but you insist on not even attempting to get to know someone unlike yourself.

And I have to wonder why your faith is so shaky that you're threatened by the mere fact that your Church happened to place some of its holidays smack on top of those of the people who were celebrating the solstice long before Christianity ever showed up. Are you truly that incapable of looking at ALL the aspects of the history of the Church and making a conscious choice to accept those facts? Both good and bad?

I can understand the bad parts of American history and learn as much as I can about it as a way of making a CHOICE every day to believe in the promise of what America really is supposed to stand for. It strengthens my faith in the possibilities that America can be about. And makes me want to strive for that every day.

YOU don't get to define me or anyone else. Neither does a bible, dictionary or any other book. My beliefs are truly my own.

I can say honestly that I've actually told you remarkably little about what my particular path is and what it teaches. And that's a good thing, because you don't want to try to truly understand anything about how the world works. You prefer to insist that your little bubble is the truth for everyone when most empirical evidence doesn't even back up any of your claims. And when your own 'evidence' points to the same conclusion I've already stated, you are incapable of seeing what's right in front of your face.

I respect your right to claim that your path is true for you. It's what is right for you. And that's ok. When you begin to insist on it's 'correctness' for all people, particularly in light of some glaring errors by a church that you think is 'infallible', that is overstepping the line.

Seeing as how you judge others based on what they do and try to add additional condemnation and punishment on top of whatever consequences their actions have wreaked of their own accord. It is not up to you to be the judge. Seems to me that's what your guy Jesus was all about.

What part, exactly, of 'love your neighbor as yourself' are you following?

IN RESPONSE TO PRIVER:
"Ah.. I see it. The whole strawman about stalin is to try to tell us that we worship the devil."

ANS:
I don't believe you see anything. Never said such a thing. Stalin, by definition was a pagan, and did worship Satan.

IN REPLY TO:
Funny it took you so long to get to THAT misconception.

ANS:
What’s funny is you coming up with that canard.

IN REPLY TO:
Pagans don't believe the devil exists.

ANS:
That’s also something else that’s funny.

http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/11388a.htm

“What pagans are you talking about? Devil Worshipers are pagans. That ‘s unfortunate for them. I see you don’t believe in people being possessed. Some Saints have seen Satan. Padre Pio had wrestling matches with the Devil. Some pagan cults were called Beelzebub.

“There are no moral or spiritual ideas in the worship at all, no conception of a resurrection that might stir human hopes. Adonis personifies merely the life of the fields and gardens that passes away and blooms again. All that Hellenism could do for this Eastern god was to invest him with the grace of idyllic poetry" ("Cults of the Greek States", II, 649, 1896-1909; cf. Lagrange, op. cit., 220, 444 etc.)

"Mithraism is usually regarded as a rival to nascent Christianity; but Nature Worship ruined its hopes of perpetuity. "Mithra remained", says S. Dill, "inextricably linked with the nature-worship of the past." This connexion cleft between it and purer faiths "an impassable gulf" which meant its "inevitable defeat" ("Roman Soc. from Nero to Aurel.", London, 1904, pp. 622 sqq.), and, "in place of a divine life instinct with human sympathy, it had only to offer the cold symbolism of a cosmic legend" (ibid.). Its very adaptability,

“M. Cumont reminds us, "prevented it from shaking itself free from the gross or ridiculous superstitions which complicated its ritual and theology; it was involved, in spite of its austerity, in a questionable alliance with the orgiastic cult of the mistress of Attis, and was obliged to drag behind it all the weight of a chimerical or hateful past.

“The triumph of Roman Mazdeism would not only have ensured the perpetuity of all the aberrations of pagan mysticism, but of the erroneous physical science on which its dogma rested.

“We have here an indication why religions, into which the astral element entered largely, were intrinsically doomed. The divine stars that ruled life were themselves subject to absolute law.

“Hence relentless Fatalism or final Scepticism for those sufficiently educated to see the logical results of their mechanical interpretation of the universe; hence the discrediting of myth, the abandonment of cult, as mendacious and useless; hence the silencing of oracle, ecstasy, and prayer; but, for the vulgar, a riot of superstition, the door new opened to magic which should coerce the stars, THE CULT OF HELL, AND HONOUR FOR ITS MINISTERS -- things all descending into the SATANISM AND WITCHCRAFT OF NOT UN-RECENT DAYS.

"Even the supreme and solar cult reached not Monotheism, but a splendid Pantheism. A sublime philosophy, a gorgeous ritual, the support of the earthly Monocracy which mirrored that of heaven, a liturgy of incomparable solemnity and passionate mysticism, a symbolism so pure and high as to cause endless confusion in the troubled mind of the dying Roman Empire between Sun-worship and the adorers of the Sun of Righteousness -- all this failed to counteract the aboriginal lie which left God still linked essentially to creation.

(See F. Cumont, "Les religions orientales dans le paganisme romain", 2nd ed., Paris, 1909, especially cc. v, vii-viii; "Le mysticisme astral", Brussels, 1909, invaluable for references and bibliography; "Textes et Monuments . . . relatifs aux Myst res de Mithra", I, 1899, II, 1896; "Théol. solaire du paganisme rom.", Paris, 1909.)

“We do not hint that these elements which have been assigned as the origin of an upward revolution have always, or only, been a cause of degeneration: it is important to note, however, that they have been at times a germ of death as truly as of life.“

The above are facts, not fiction, or delusion, and not belief of some phony mysticism. Unfortunately, it’s the history of Paganism.

IN REPLY TO:
"You have to believe something exists in order to 'worship' it. Anyone who worships the devil believes in some form of christianity.

"Your examples do nothing to serve any argument because it's based firmly in your belief that what is true for you is true for everyone, and that's just not the case.

"Obviously not listening.

ANS:
Obviousely your not listening because you prejudices blind you to the truth.,

Wow. you really do love to hear yourself talk, don't you? In the words of Scarlett O'Hara "my how you do run on".

My statement was trying to get you to see that attempting to define my belief system as a Pagan when you obviously know nothing about who we are or what we do makes about as much sense as you standing in front of a group of African Americans and telling them what their lives are like.

Oh.. and people wrote the dictionary. Which reflects a certain bias of those doing the writing. If you actually looked at the word 'pagan' from the latin 'paganus',meaning 'country dweller'. That's it. All the other 'definition's come from an evidently slanted view.

On this:
'So is Jesus, who said He is God, a huckster, a magician who bamboozled hundreds of thousands of gullible people and rose from the dead when they murdered Him.?'

You said that, not I. There are some who can make a pretty good case for the idea that maybe Jesus himself was a Pagan. Assuming of course, that he actually existed. That I'm not convinced of either. There is no archaeological proof. Stories abound throughout time of resurrection of deities or semidivine characters all the time. It's a little too coincidental.

Interesting that you blame all the ills of society on abortion... 4000 of our people and who knows how many others have died in the wars and counting so far, that a self proclaimed Christian started. There are much bigger problems.

"You intimated that abortion didn’t cause mental breakdowns."

For some it doesn't. I know you don't like to hear that in your sweeping generalizations, but there you go. There are always exceptions.. and two sides to every story.

Of course you can't understand Jabberwocky.. but Lewis Carroll could. As we Pagans do. :)

Your path is your own. Not mine. All will lead to the end. All are valid.

The Goddess gave birth to all creatures, and therefore all gods. She is the true mother of all. She is both mother of all mothers and mother of all fathers. If it weren't for women, none of us would be here.

Change is the ONLY constant in this life.
I for one am excited about the possibilties of what life could be.

Oh, saying that the Constitution was based on your version of 'natural moral' says nothing about it being founded on any aspect of Christianity. IF anything, it's a product of the Enlightenment age. The realization of the dream of being able to pursue basic human rights. America is based on the Constitution, not the 10 commandments.

The founders were loose Deists. Not Christians.

As far as Christmas goes, you've already proven my point that a group of folks got together and said 'let's put Christ's birthday on the date that those folks over there celebrate the return of the Sun- maybe then they'll be more easily convinced to worship Jesus.' Why are you belaboring my point that you've already proven?

On your 'taking on a divine nature'.. what if we all have such a capacity..and that it's not acquired.. just a small part of our humanity.

I think it's about time we ended this, don't you? You seem to feel the need to be right.. discounting anyone who doesn't think like you- without looking at how the bigger cost of what you call 'pro life' has nothing to do with actual life and everything to do with pushing government into people's bedrooms and into their bodies. I sincerely hope for your sake that never happens, cause then you'd really see the effects of what you've wrought.

Blessed be.

IN REPLY TO PRIVER:
["You’ve done the same; you’ve chosen what you believed from many polytheistic gods, and, as you say, picked and chose one that was beneficial to you."]

“Wrong. I don't actually have a patron god/dess at the moment. Whether or not that changes in the future remains to be seen.”

IN REPLY TO:
Are you saying there are multiple Goddesses? You’ve abandoned your Goddess? That sure sounds like if you don't like one choose another.

IN REPLY TO:
[God was not created, “I am Who am,” no beginning and no end.]

“Actually he was created by those who wanted others to follow as they did.”

So is Jesus, who said He is God, a huckster, a magician who bamboozled hundreds of thousands of gullible people and rose from the dead when they murdered Him.?

IN REPLY TO;
You have absolutely no empirical proof that your view is somehow more objective than others. Such is the essence of 'faith.'

ANS:
The Founding Fathers seemed to think so. They based their Constitution on the Natural Moral and guaranteed man his inalienable rights, inviolable standards of civil rights that are immune from government interference. They are so authentic that they made America the envy of every nation in the World. No one has access to these rights more than Americans.

Moreover, the nations that have eschewed the wisdom of Christianity as proffered by the Catholic Church are social disasters. Look at the social order in the Middle East, China, and India. Look at what the Supreme Court has done in Roe v. Wade when it legalized murder of the unborn and negated the Right to Life of the unborn.

By that decision, man has the authority to determine what innocent life may live. Over 48 million have died so far. That number is six and a half times the population of New York City.

You can see the turmoil that occurred during the Twin Tower’s tragedy, only some 3,000 died. We are talking of over 48 million dead unborn by abortion. The Culture of Death is slowly encompassing the country and many are sleeping while it’s happening, just like it did to the Germans.

Notwithstanding there is the cannibalism of the body parts of the aborted that are being sold on the open market. We are moving toward the legalization of suicide. Suicide is becoming one of the leading causes of death in the land of plenty, because of the Culture of Death and the Sexual Revolution which triggered it.

The Moral Law is objective absolute rights of every human being. Those who reject the objective absolute Moral Law condemn themselves to ignominious and unmitigated adversity.

IN REPLY TO
"Reason confirms scripture? no, circular logic that you enjoy using confirms scripture."

ANS:
Please show the circular logic. Aristotle was the first to define “circular logic.” He is the Father of the Scientific Method, and the Father of Logic. Are you willing to show how he didn't know that his proof of God as the Unmoved Mover was “circular logic.” That would be ridiculous, now wouldn't it?

In addition your last post show you knew nothing about what an Unmoved Mover is. I have already said, “Know what you are saying when you say it.”

IN REPLY TO:
[You have been shown that Aristotle’s proof of God confirms the God who told Moses, “Tell them I am Who am.]

“Which ultimately means nothing since scripture is meaningless unless you choose to give it such.”

ANS:
Evidently so does reality to you. However, your statement doesn’t make sense. If nothing is meaningless since Scripture, every thing is meaningful since Scripture. That wouldn't be the "Circular logic," you're talking about would it. It looks more like a tautology.

IN REPLY TO:
“Nothing is ever absolute. And man's nature is changing all the time.

ANS:
That’s bizarre nonsense. If man’s nature changes at any time, he ceases to be human. Man, accordingly, would be something different every time he changes. What is he changing into?

If the Natural Moral Law isn’t absolut, the Founding Fathers were sure fooled. In addition, if murder and stealing are not absolutely illicit than they can be licit. The Hitler and Stalin regimes agreed with you, as does Communism and materialist in China. They all didn't mind killing people.

Look at the disasters these nations have wreaked upon their people and the world and themselves. They are a patent expose of the fallacy of your statement. Murder is always wrong; thievery is always wrong. Right to Life is an absolute value, otherwise you have no right to live, and that would be ridiculous.

IN REPLY TO:
I ask you again, would you attempt to define the black/latino experience of others in this country to a group of them, to their faces? I doubt it.

ANS:
That’s foreign to me. Are you reading my post or someone else’s? You never asked me that as far as I know. Moreover, you don’t know whether I am Black or Latino or what I do.

When I did say something about Blacks is was quoting, Bill Cosby who said that 70 percent of Black pregnancies are out of wedlock, and over 50 percent end in abortion. Before Jesse Jackson became a politically expedient Democrat, he said Abortion is Black genocide. Does that bother you?

IN REPLY TO:
“and carelessly throwing out names like stalin are an attempt to equate what you obviously don't know anything about with those who felt it ok to harm others. Which is a false premise, and therefore a strawman.

Now that’s real gibberish. You must talk in a discernable language. I can’t understand jabberwocky.

IN REPLY TO PRIVER
JESUS GOD AND MAN:
“Besides, I thought the story of your Jesus is that he's supposed to be 'god' himself made mortal. The result of sexual union between deity and mortal? Which is also a large part of any Pagan mythos.

ANS:
Jesus took on a human nature, a human nature and a Divine one. He did not cease to be God but had two natures. “Colossians are threatened with the deception of philosophy (ii, 8). St. Paul reminds them that they should think according to Christ; ‘for in Him dwelleth the fulness of the Godhead”

“Jesus is true God and true man. The “Lord Jesus Christ, the Son of God, the Only-begotten, generated of the Father that is, of the substance of the Father, God of God, Light of Light, True God of True God, begotten not made, the same in nature with the Father by Whom all things were made" (see Denzinger, 54).

http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/07706b.htm#I1

“3. The Hypostatic Union Of The Divine Nature And The Human Nature Of Jesus In The Divine Person Of Jesus Christ

http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/07706b.htm#I1

“The Divine nature was really and truly united with the human nature of Jesus, i.e., that one and the same Person, Jesus Christ, was God and man. We speak here of no moral union, no union in a figurative sense of the word; but a union that is physical, a union of two substances or natures so as to make One Person, a union which means that God is Man and Man is God in the Person of Jesus Christ.

“We now take up the crucial question of the nature of this fact, the manner of this tremendous miracle, the way of uniting the Divine with the human nature in one and the same

“The council had implicitly defined the union of the two natures in one hypostasis, a union called physical in opposition to the mere juxtaposition or joining of the two natures called a moral union.

“The human and Divine natures are united in one Divine Person so as to remain that exactly which they are, namely, Divine and human natures with distinct and perfect activities of their own.

“This union of the two natures in one Person has been for centuries called a hypostatic union, that is, a union in the Divine Hypostasis. What is an hypostasis? The definition of Boethius is a complete whole whose nature is rational.

“It is to be remembered that, when the Word took Flesh, there was no change in the Word; all the change was in the Flesh. At the moment of conception, in the womb of the Blessed Mother, through the forcefulness of God's activity, not only was the human soul of Christ created but the Word assumed the man that was conceived. When God created the world, the world was changed, that is. it passed from the state of nonentity to the state of existence; and there was no change in the Logos or Creative Word of God the Father. Nor was there change in that Logos when it began to terminate the human nature. A new relation ensued, to be sure; but this new relation implied in the Logos no new reality, no real change. All new reality, all real change, was in the human nature.

“Anyone who wishes to go into this very intricate question of the manner of the Hypostatic Union of the two natures in the one Divine Personality, may with great profit read St. Thomas (III:4:2); Scotus (in III, Dist. i); (De Incarnatione, Disp. II, sec. 3);"

IN REPLY TO:
"And perfect love and perfect trust are all Her ways. I get that you don't think so.. but this is my truth.. and everything she touches, changes".

ANS:
A Goddess can not be perfect it is a dependent being. Only Perfect Act, which is the First Cause of all Causes, can be perfect. It is a contradiction and therefore irrational to presuppose a contingent being is perfect act or a Creator.

IN REPLY TO:
I don't follow Augustine, either. Sorry. His words hold no water for someone who doesn't use them.

ANS:
You make a statement, and there is a reasonable argument against it, and you have no ratioinale to counter it. I assume you have no idea who he is. He is a brilliant thinker. By saying his rationale has no standing with you only goes to show your mind is closed to the truth because of your dispositions. We are talking about reason, and Augustine is a renown Metaphysician a former pagan and a renowned Theologian. In his Confessions he explains why chose Christianity over Paganism.

IN REPLY TO:
You often mention Aristotle.. who famously said 'Know your audience,' which you have proven you have failed to do.”

ANS:
Rather know what you are talking about before you criticize it. I only respond to what you write.

IN REPLY TO PRIVER
"You implied that the misery that laid ahead for some unborn, namely their quality of life, apparently justify their being aborted."

“That comes directly from some of the parents of those children themselves that I deal with every day. Not me. The anguish and hardships they face are real, on a day to day basis."

ANS:
Never said they were untrue.

IN REPLY TO:
For some of them if they had to do it all over again they may have done things differently. They've even told me as much. Read what I wrote, not what you 'think' is there.”

ANS:
Are you in another world? I quoted what you wrote. Do you not read what you wrote? I never said what you wrote was untrue. You intimated that abortion didn’t cause mental breakdowns. I gave you the testimony of a multiple personal testimonies that it did. Did you read just one of them. I suspect not. As you have written you act on intuition and that negates you reasoning.

IN REPLY TO:
["Communists are pagans; Fascists are pagans; materialist are pagans,"]

“Paganism is an overarching term for a series of religious beliefs. Encompassing none of the above. More proof you weren't listening. And as such it deserves such respect as to be capitalized, please.”

ANS:
All the above worship pagan gods.
Definition of Pagans:
1. One of a people or community observing a polytheistic religion, as the ancient Romans and Greeks.
2. a person who is not a Christian, Jew, or Muslim.
3. an irreligious or hedonistic person.
–adjective
4. pertaining to the worship or worshipers of any religion that is neither Christian, Jewish, nor Muslim.
5. of, pertaining to, or characteristic of pagans.
6. irreligious or hedonistic.

IN REPLY TO:
["Second, Pagans might worship holidays but Christianity does not."]

“What? Nobody said anything about worshipping holidays- like any religious system it has it's own days for celebration of the seasonal cycle."

ANS:
The Solstice is a celebration of the Sun God, and his birthday. It has certain rituals that honor the Sun on the day of the Solstice.

Celebration has one meaning in its definition thus: “To perform with appropriate rites and ceremonies; solemnize.” The Sun is an inanimate object, not a God. Pagans have worshiped the Sun God in their celebrations.

IN REPLY TO:
[You condemn the authenticity of a Goddess because you give it sexuality, making her mortal and not a god.]

“Um, nope. The Goddess is everything and everywhere for us."

ANS:
She is a woman god. To be a Goddess she must be feminine and have a gender, making her human, or a dependent being.

IN REPLY IN:
“Seeing as how none of us and no life at all would be here without the sacred union of both male and female in the sexual act, She is the giver of life.

ANS:
Since she is female making her a dependent being, she can not create a human life. God intercedes in the union of man and woman by giving the conceived a spiritual soul which is created by God, namely, made from nothing. The ensoulment is a creation by God of a being that hadn’t existed. A Goddess is not a Creator.

IN REPLY TO:
I condemn nothing. The only constant is change, repetition of ancient natural cycles of creation and destruction.. so I don't understand why it has to be some 'unmoved mover'.”

ANS:
By condemned is meant negated. God is changeless, consequently the Unmoved Mover, That means he doesn’t change; he is Perfect Act, lacks nothing in his being. Why he is the unmoved mover is shown in the previous post, with the link.

IN REPLY TO PRIVER
"You implied that the misery that laid ahead for some unborn, namely their quality of life, apparently justify their being aborted."

“That comes directly from some of the parents of those children themselves that I deal with every day. Not me. The anguish and hardships they face are real, on a day to day basis."

ANS:
Never said they were untrue.

IN REPLY TO:
For some of them if they had to do it all over again they may have done things differently. They've even told me as much. Read what I wrote, not what you 'think' is there.”

ANS:
Are you in another world? I quoted what you wrote. Do you not read what you wrote? I never said what you wrote was untrue. You intimated that abortion didn’t cause mental breakdowns. I gave you the testimony of a multiple personal testimonies that it did. Did you read just one of them. I suspect not. As you have written you act on intuition and that negates you reasoning.

IN REPLY TO:
["Communists are pagans; Fascists are pagans; materialist are pagans,"]

“Paganism is an overarching term for a series of religious beliefs. Encompassing none of the above. More proof you weren't listening. And as such it deserves such respect as to be capitalized, please.”

ANS:
All the above worship pagan gods.
Definition of Pagans:
1. One of a people or community observing a polytheistic religion, as the ancient Romans and Greeks.
2. a person who is not a Christian, Jew, or Muslim.
3. an irreligious or hedonistic person.
–adjective
4. pertaining to the worship or worshipers of any religion that is neither Christian, Jewish, nor Muslim.
5. of, pertaining to, or characteristic of pagans.
6. irreligious or hedonistic.

IN REPLY TO:
["Second, Pagans might worship holidays but Christianity does not."]

“What? Nobody said anything about worshipping holidays- like any religious system it has it's own days for celebration of the seasonal cycle."

ANS:
The Solstice is a celebration of the Sun God, and his birthday. It has certain rituals that honor the Sun on the day of the Solstice.

Celebration has one meaning in its definition thus: “To perform with appropriate rites and ceremonies; solemnize.” The Sun is an inanimate object, not a God. Pagans have worshiped the Sun God in their celebrations.

IN REPLY TO:
[You condemn the authenticity of a Goddess because you give it sexuality, making her mortal and not a god.]

“Um, nope. The Goddess is everything and everywhere for us."

ANS:
She is a woman god. To be a Goddess she must be feminine and have a gender, making her human, or a dependent being.

IN REPLY IN:
“Seeing as how none of us and no life at all would be here without the sacred union of both male and female in the sexual act, She is the giver of life.

ANS:
Since she is female making her a dependent being, she can not create a human life. God intercedes in the union of man and woman by giving the conceived a spiritual soul which is created by God, namely, made from nothing. The ensoulment is a creation by God of a being that hadn’t existed. A Goddess is not a Creator.

IN REPLY TO:
I condemn nothing. The only constant is change, repetition of ancient natural cycles of creation and destruction.. so I don't understand why it has to be some 'unmoved mover'.”

ANS:
By condemned is meant negated. God is changeless, consequently the Unmoved Mover, That means he doesn’t change; he is Perfect Act, lacks nothing in his being. Why he is the unmoved mover is shown in the previous post, with the link.

IN REPLY TO:
PRIVER: “THE DATE OF CHRISTMAS”
“One addition: the sentence should read Those that believe and search for evidence for a historical Jesus have placed his birthday in the mid spring early summer area. NOT mid winter.

ANS:
Theologians have determined that the birth occurred nearly every month of the year, not just mid Spring, or mid-Winter, or mid-Fall, or mid-Summer.

IN REPLYT TO:
“Um.. you've just justified my own point that the date of Christ's birthday was SELECTED as Dec 25. Not because jesus was actually born on that day.”

ANS:
To the contrary, it never was said that the 25th was accurate; I said it was a consensus by theologians. Try reading the links sometime and you might get something right.

As said before, the attempt to discover the actual date of Christ’s birth was all over the calendar. Some showed it to be in April. No one had a credible date. It was decided to be the 25th because it was the consensus of the majority.

Now making it a feast rooted in paganism is ridiculous. The Solstice is a celebration of the Sun God, not Jesus’ birth.

To the contrary, the date of Christmas on the 25th was chosen by a majority of theologians.

http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/03724b.htm

“The first evidence of the feast is from Egypt. About A.D. 200, Clement of Alexandria (Strom., I, xxi in P.G., VIII, 888) says that certain Egyptian theologians "over curiously" assign, not the year alone, but the day of Christ's birth, placing it on 25 Pachon (20 May) in the twenty-eighth year of Augustus.

“Others reached the date of 24 or 25 Pharmuthi (19 or 20 April). With Clement's evidence may be mentioned the "De paschæ computus", written in 243 and falsely ascribed to Cyprian (P.L., IV, 963 sqq.), which places Christ's birth on 28 March, because on that day the material sun was created. But Lupi has shown (Zaccaria, Dissertazioni ecc. del p. A.M. Lupi, Faenza, 1785, p. 219) that there is no month in the year to which respectable authorities have not assigned Christ's birth.

“Clement, however, also tells us that the Basilidians celebrated the Epiphany, and with it, probably, the Nativity, on 15 or 11 Tybi (10 or 6 January). At any rate this double commemoration became popular, partly because the apparition to the shepherds was considered as one manifestation of Christ's glory, and was added to the greater manifestations celebrated on 6 January; partly because at the baptism-manifestation many codices (e.g. Codex Bezæ) wrongly give the Divine words “Thou art my beloved Son, this day have I begotten thee,” lieu of “in thee I am well pleased”, read in Luke 3:22. Abraham Ecchelensis (Labbe, II, 402) quotes the Constitutions of the Alexandrian Church for a dies Nativitatis et Epiphaniæ in Nicæan times;

“The Egyptian monasteries still observe the "ancient custom"; but on 29 Choiak (25 December) and 1 January, 433, Paul of Emesa preached before Cyril of Alexandria, and his sermons (see Mansi, IV, 293; appendix to Act. Conc. Eph.) show that the December celebration was then firmly established there, and calendars prove its permanence. The December feast therefore reached Egypt between 427 and 433.

“Till the tenth century Christmas counted, in papal reckoning, as the beginning of the ecclesiastical year, as it still does in Bulls; Boniface VIII (1294-1303) restored temporarily this usage, to which Germany held longest.

THE YULE LOG
"The calend fires were a scandal even to Rome, and St. Boniface obtained from Pope Zachary their abolition. But probably the Yule-log in its many forms was originally lit only in view of the cold season."

IN REPLY TO PRIVER:
“And one more thing that occurred to me.. your blaming the Jews for the Holocaust negates any claim you have to being 'pro life?”

ANS:
What are you reading? This is not a Frenchman speaking to a Chinaman though you act like it. I never blamed the Jews for the Holocaust. That's pure asinine lunacy, preposterous and ridiculous. The Holocaust was caused by animals called Nazi Fascist.

IN REPLY TO:
“And you call ME lacking compassion? Your insistence on the idea of 'original sin' also would justify beating a child, torturing someone else, rape, and all other kinds of atrocities because their suffering is honorable. Exactly what are you trying to beat out of a child?”

ANS:
What absurdity, I can see why you believe in a Goddess. Is the English language all Greek to you? I never said you were not compassionate. I asked did you view it compassionate to put a child out of his misery because you decided he wouldn't have a quality life. Simply put, is it compassionate to put the child out of his misery? That is a question not a statement of your compassion.

This is what I have written:
[“What affect on the unborn does murdering them have in your view [that it is] being compassionate to put them out of their misery?]

[“Is it part of your pagan belief that abortion is a compassionate response to pregnancy of the poor pregnant woman who, in your judgment, can’t provide a quality of life that you deem acceptable because, the child is born an invalid, blind, dysfunctional, or handicapped? You certainly implied that,”]

Again when did I say “Original Sins” justified beating a child or torturing someone? Ridiculous and senseless, more so it is profound buffoonery.

Again, what was said is, "Because of 'Adam’s Sin,' sin entered the world and clouded man’s reason and weakened his resolve to do good and avoid evil." Original Sin never justified sin; it only caused evil to enter the world and made man susceptible and vulnerable to it. Original Sin is the cause of death.

Suffering is inevitable because of Original Sin. Everyone suffers because of the evil that entered the world, not because of the Jews, but because of one man’s sin, Adam.

Catholicism uses suffering as a prayer offered up to God to intercede and alleviate the suffering of others, a.k.a. the poor, the sick, the lonesome, the hungry, and the defenseless. When suffering is used as a prayer offered up to God, it is not wasted, it is noble and fruitful and pleasing to God because it is used to do good in the world.

A priest, now beatified, in a Nazi concentration camp offered his life up for a man, randomly picked out of a group of prisoners, to be executed for nothing he had done. The man had a wife and children. The priest took his place. He died for the good of another. That’s what is meant by offering one’s suffering up for the love of others.

The sacrifice of the priest is an imitation of Christ's suffering on the cross. God so loved man that He gave His very life up so that man may not suffer eternal death. No greater love has one for another that he gives up his life for the good of another. It is a personal sacrifice for the good of mankind. It is heroic, and yes, noble. Original Sin is not going about and making people suffer, and Original Sin is not blamed on Jews, but the sin of one man.

IN REPLY TO PRIVER:

"JUDEO-CHRISTIAN HERITAGE"

“Find me the exact quotation within the American Constitution that backs up that assertion. OH, wait.. there isn't one.”

ANS:
The God in every Constitution of the 13 Original Colonies was a Christian God. None of the constitutions had a pagan god. The Constitution of the United States was prefaced by the Declaration of Independence stating the purpose of the establishment of the sovereignty of the our country. It states that man was endowed by his Creator with certain inalienable rights. There is only one God who is the Creator. A Creator must be an Unmoved Mover, the First Cause, the “I am Who am,” the Christian God.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Unmoved_mover#Reasoning

Aristotle's argument for the existence of the unmoved mover progresses as folows: [citation needed]
1. There exists movement in the world.
2. Things that move were set into motion by something else.
3. If everything that moves was caused to move by something else, there would be an infinite chain of causes. This can't happen.
4. Thus, there must have been something that caused the first movement.
5. From 3, this first cause cannot itself have been moved.
6. From 4, there must be an unmoved mover

The Declaration
“When in the course of human events, it becomes necessary for one people to dissolve the political bands which have connected them with another, and to assume among the powers of the earth, the separate and equal station to which the laws of nature and of nature's God entitle them, a decent respect to the opinions of mankind requires that they should declare the causes which impel them to the separation.

“We hold these truths to be self-evident:

"That all men are created equal; that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable rights; that among these are life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness; that, to secure these rights, governments are instituted among men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed; that whenever any form of government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the right of the people to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new government, laying its foundation on such principles, and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their safety and happiness."

IN REPLY TO:
"But the treaty of Tripoli, signed in 1781 by the very same James Madison, Author of Our Constitution, stated in black and white that America is not founded on Christianity."

ANS:
To the contrary, Madison was speaking of one religion dictating the nation. Christianity was not the only religion permissible. The country was founded on "freedom of religion."

Man's inviolable rights were based on the Natural Moral Laws embedded in the Christian religion. Madison as Jefferson did not want a nation ruled by one religion as had occurred in England, or has happened in the Middle East. Moreover because of our Judeo-Christian heritage all religions were tolerated. Catholicism defends the freedom of religion, and the toleration of all religions, and teaches religious belief is a choice of the free will.

In addition, if our country was not founded on the principles of Christianity, whose principles was it founded on? Thomas Jefferson (paraphrased) wrote, "Where do we seek our moral standards if not the Church." The Church he was speaking of was the Christian Churches.

Christianity is one of the basic reasons for the “freedom of religion clause,” and man’s basic rights. It defends the inviolable rights of man, the right to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness stated in the Declaration and defended in the Bill of Rights. These rights were not based on any other religion than Christianity and its defense of the Natural Moral Law.

Oh, and on this:

"THERE IS NO DIRECT EVIDENCE OF DELIBERATE SUBSTITUTION,"

Are you sure about that? What if they're just not telling you about it? They don't tell folks about when their priests fool around with young children (barely even admitting it to themselves until the public outcry was so bad, then the payments began) It wouldn't be good PR to say that 'yes, we did that to the locals.'

The church kept immaculate records during the inquisition and throughout the dark ages.. and it wouldn't look too good to their followers to find out that some of their most sacred mythology and rituals came out of the practices of those around them at the time.

Pagans were more concerned with having enough food to get through the winter. And Pagans were not 'searching' for Christianity- Mithraism made it easier for some to accept the Church's teachings because of the similarities in them. The birth of the 'sun god' at Yule was replaced with the birth of the 'son of god', .. don't you think the church played that 'coincidence' up for all it was worth? Just a wee bit too convenient if you ask me.

To say that Pagans 'chased the Christian god' is just funny. It was Christianity who needed converts if it was to survive.

You have no leg to stand on on this one. Sorry.

But thanks for the laugh anyway.

Pagans were more concerned with having enough food to get through the winter. And Pagans were not 'searching' for Christianity- Mithraism made it easier for some to accept the Church's teachings because of the similarities in them. The birth of the 'sun god' at Yule was replaced with the birth of the 'son of god', .. don't you think the church played that coincidence up for all it was worth?

To say that Pagans 'chased the Christian god' is just funny. It was Christianity who needed converts if it was to survive.

You have no leg to stand on on this one. Sorry.

But thanks for the laugh anyway.

Why you insist on proving my point again.. is beyond me. Even your own sources confirm it. The worship of Mithras is just one of many stories that most likely influences the writers of the bible at the time. Also in there is the story of Gilgamesh, Inanna,Amenophis IV.. nothing is new. Just repackaged.

Pagans didn't much care what the Christians did until they were forced to convert under threat of death.

IN REPLY TO PRIVER:
December 25th:
"Those who believe in a historical jesus It was done because the church couldn't keep Pagans from honoring the solstice without it."

ANS:
Pure baloney. Check the links given you.
The Solstice may have some credibleness in influencing the date, but the feast was never pagan or caused by pagans, and not the root of Christmas.

IN REPLY TO:
"It wasn't 'attempting to keep the customs of the cultures in which it existed,' it was to make it easier to convert those they came in contact with."

ANS:
Do you have any credible proof of that? Document your statement. Of course, if the celebration of Christmas was caused by paganism, then Christmas would have to be pagan. Clearly, it's not. It's possible that one of the reasons for the 25th may have been the Solstice, but never was the Solstice the root cause of Christmas. Moreover, the Egyptian theologians had originally determined that the most accurate date was the 25th.

http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/03724b.htm

“Till the tenth century Christmas counted, in papal reckoning, as the beginning of the ecclesiastical year, as it still does in Bulls; Boniface VIII (1294-1303) restored temporarily this usage, to which Germany held longest.”

http://www.worldspirituality.org/december-25.html

“Why, we may ask, did the Church choose December 25 for the celebration of her Founder's Birth? No one now imagines that the date is supported by a reliable tradition; IT IS ONLY ONE OF THE VARIOUS GUESSES OF THE EARLY CHRISTIAN WRITERS.

“As a learned eighteenth-century Jesuit has pointed out, there is not a single month in the year to which the Nativity has not been assigned by some writer or other. The real reason for the choice of the day MOST PROBABLY was, that upon it fell an existing pagan festival."

You might note that it might have been pagans chasing the Christian God and imitating the rituals of Christianity rather then vice-versa.

“Mithraism resembled Christianity in its monotheistic tendencies, its sacraments, its comparatively high morality, its doctrine of an Intercessor and Redeemer, and its vivid belief in a future life and judgment to come. Moreover Sunday was its holy-day dedicated to the Sun.”

"What more natural than that the Church should choose this day to celebrate the rising of her Sun of Righteousness with healing in His wings, that she should strive thus to draw away to His worship some adorers of the god whose symbol and representative was the earthly sun! THERE IS NO DIRECT EVIDENCE OF DELIBERATE SUBSTITUTION, but at all events ecclesiastical writers soon after the foundation of Christmas made good use of the idea that the birthday of the Savior had replaced the birthday of the sun.

I'm not sure why you find it necessary to reprint stuff you've already said.. and that has proved my point. The choosing of Dec 25 was to take over the celebration of the solstice so that the Pagans at the time were more easily converted. I suppose now they're calling it 'keeping the customs of those that existed at the time, but all euphemisms aside the change was deliberate, to increase Christianity's numbers. Sort of the old 'if you can't beat them into submission, use trickery instead'.

Yule morphed into Christmas, and Easter was actually never renamed. Just another taking over by folks who couldn't find converts any other way.

IN REPLY TO PRIVER:
“Um, no gods control the elements.”

ANS:
Many Pagans believed the gods did control the elements. There’s the Rain God that Indians prayed to, and the Harvest Gods. God controls the elements through His Natural Laws imbued in the Universe at its creation. Have you ever heard of Noah's Ark and the Great Flood?

If one was born on Dec. 25, is it logical to say when they celebrate their birthday, the celebration is based on the Feast of the Solstice and has pagan roots? The same analogy applies to Christian feast days.

IN REPLY TO:
“All rituals that you described are taken directly out of Pagan use of them, adapted for the new religion, and given new meanings. Using the same elements to try to prove 'one god is better than another which works about as well as going to war to tell someone to live democratically.”

ANS:
What rituals are you talking about? If they are Christmas and Easter, they have nothing to do with paganism. They honor the one true God, Jesus’ birth, and the resurrection of Jesus.

The celebration of Christ’s birthday has nothing to do with any pagan feast days. Christmas is not celebrated by pagans.

Further, Easter is the celebration of the Resurrection of Christ. The variances of dates are due to different calendars. There’s not much of a problem with the years, but the difficulty comes when the dates are ascribed.

http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/03724b.htm

“The fixing of this date, of Christmas, fixed those too of Circumcision and Presentation; of Expectation and, perhaps, Annunciation B.V.M.; and of Nativity and Conception of the Baptist (cf. Thurston in Amer. Eccl. Rev., December, 1898).

“Till the tenth century Christmas counted, in papal reckoning, as the beginning of the ecclesiastical year, as it still does in Bulls; Boniface VIII (1294-1303) restored temporarily this usage, to which Germany held longest.

http://www.circlesanctuary.org/pholidays/SolsticeArticle.html

“Winter Solstice has been celebrated in cultures the world over for thousands of years. This start of the solar year is a celebration of Light and the rebirth of the Sun. In old Europe, it was known as Yule, from the Norse, Jul, meaning wheel.

“Today, many people in Western-based cultures refer to this holiday as "Christmas." Yet a look into its origins of Christmas reveals its Pagan roots. Emperor Aurelian established December 25 as the birthday of the "Invincible Sun" in the third century as part of the Roman Winter Solstice celebrations."

There is a similitude of dates but the meanings are very different. Christmas was never generated because of the Solstice but because of Christ's birth and nothing more.

"Shortly thereafter, in 273, the Christian church selected this day to represent the birthday of Jesus, and by 336, this Roman solar feast day was Christianized. January 6, celebrated as Epiphany in Christendom and linked with the visit of the Magi, was originally an Egyptian date for the Winter Solstice."

The Church always attempts to keep the customs of the cultures in which it exists, as long as they are not idolatrous. Thus, in African regions, some customs of the indigenous inhabitants were allowed in Catholic rituals, but none was idolatrous. The Christmas tree was a symbol of Christ who is the Light of Truth coming into the world, nothing that was pagan or idolatrous. There is a Christian history for this.

Moreover, if you had looked at the link you were given, you would have seen that the dates were all over the place, and it wasn't because of paganism, but the differences of calendars. A consensus agreed on Dec. 25th because it was held by a majority of the historians who tried to determine the exact date. The pagans had no influence on any meaning of the feast.

There is unequivocal proof the Christian God is the only God. Check your history. Those who have defied, ignored, and changed His precepts and teachings have sent their nations into chaos and oblivion. Some contemporary examples are East Germany vs. West Germany, North Korea vs. South Korea, and Singapore and Taiwan vs., China, Nazi Germany, and Japan in WWII.

America, one of the greatest nations in history; is probably the greatest example of the truth of the Christian God’s authenticity. America’s Constitution is based on our Judeo-Christian heritage, not on Materialism, or Fascism, not on Shintoism or Muslimism, not the cast systems of the Hindus, and all similar religions that are patent social failures.

The Bill of Rights is based on the Judeo-Christian Moral Laws that dictate man's absolute inalienable rights, rights that are not relative. They are not given by man, but are recognized by the Constitution. Because they are given by God, no government can licitly take them away.

Moreover, the social order of a nation is in direct proportion to its adherence to the Catholic Church’s social teachings and Moral Law precepts.

One addition: the sentence should read Those that believe and search for evidence for a historical Jesus have placed his birthday in the mid spring early summer area. NOT mid winter.

Um.. you've just justified my own point that the date of Christ's birthday was SELECTED as Dec 25. Not because jesus was actually born on that day. Those who believe in a historical jesus It was done because the church couldn't keep Pagans from honoring the solstice without it. It wasn't 'attempting to keep the customs of the cultures in which it existed,' it was to make it easier to convert those they came in contact with.

"America’s Constitution is based on our Judeo-Christian heritage,"

Find me the exact quotation within the American Constitution that backs up that assertion. OH, wait.. there isn't one.

But the treaty of Tripoli, signed in 1781 by the very same James Madison, Author of Our Constitution, stated in black and white that America is not founded on Christianity.

And one more thing that occurred to me.. your blaming the Jews for the Holocaust negates any claim you have to being 'pro life'. And you call ME lacking compassion? Your insistence on the idea of 'original sin' also would justify beating a child, torturing someone else, rape, and all other kinds of atrocities because their suffering is honorable. Exactly what are you trying to beat out of a child?

IN REPLY TO PRIVER:
“Um, no gods control the elements.”

ANS:
Many Pagans believed the Gods did control the elements. There’s the Rain God that Indians prayed to, and the Harvest Gods. God controls the elements through His Natural Laws imbued in the Universe at its creation. Through prayers, God can intercede if it be his will. Jesus controlled the seas, the heavens and all that was contained in them. Ever heard of Noah's Ark and tithe Great Flood?

IN REPLY TO:
“All rituals that you described are taken directly out of Pagan use of them, adapted for the new religion and given new meanings. Using the same elements to try to prove 'one god is better than another'.. which works about as well as going to war to tell someone to live democratically.”

ANS:
There is unequivocal proof the Christian God is the only God. Check your history. Those who have defied, ignored, and changed His precepts and teachings have sent their nations into chaos and oblivion. Contemporary examples are, East Germany vs. West Germany, North Korea vs. South Korea, and Singapore and Taiwan vs, China.

America, one of the greatest nations in history; it is probably the greatest example of the truth of the Christian God’s precepts' authenticity. America’s Constitution is based on our Judeo-Christian heritage, not on Materialism, or Fascism, not on Shintoism, not the cast systems of the Hindus and all similar religions that are patent social failures.

Moreover, the social order of a nation is in direct proportion to its adherence to the Catholic Church’s social teachings and Moral Law precepts.

If one was born on Dec. 25, is it logical to say when they celebrate their birthday, the celebration is based on the Feast of the Soltice and has pagan roots? The same analogy applies to the Christian Holidays. Many dates were chosen, but the 25th became the most popular. Notwithstanding, the celebration was never based on pagan theology or beliefs.

The celebration of Christ’s birthday has nothing to do with any pagan feast days. Christmas is the celebration of Christ’s birthday, and not the celebration of any pagan feast days. Further, Easter is the celebration of the Resurrection of Christ. The variances of dates are due to different calendars. There’s not much of a problem with the years, but the difficulty comes when the dates are ascribed.

http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/03724b.htm

“The fixing of this date, of Christmas, fixed those too of Circumcision and Presentation; of Expectation and, perhaps, Annunciation B.V.M.; and of Nativity and Conception of the Baptist (cf. Thurston in Amer. Eccl. Rev., December, 1898).

“Till the tenth century Christmas counted, in papal reckoning, as the beginning of the ecclesiastical year, as it still does in Bulls; Boniface VIII (1294-1303) restored temporarily this usage, to which Germany held longest.

http://www.circlesanctuary.org/pholidays/SolsticeArticle.html

“Winter Solstice has been celebrated in cultures the world over for thousands of years. This start of the solar year is a celebration of Light and the rebirth of the Sun. In old Europe, it was known as Yule, from the Norse, Jul, meaning wheel.

“Today, many people in Western-based cultures refer to this holiday as "Christmas." Yet a look into its origins of Christmas reveals its Pagan roots. Emperor Aurelian established December 25 as the birthday of the "Invincible Sun" in the third century as part of the Roman Winter Solstice celebrations."

There is a similitude of dates but the meaning of the celebrations are totally different. Christmas was never generated because of the celebration of the Soltice but because of Christ's birth, and nothing more.

"Shortly thereafter, in 273, the Christian church selected this day to represent the birthday of Jesus, and by 336, this Roman solar feast day was Christianized. January 6, celebrated as Epiphany in Christendom and linked with the visit of the Magi, was originally an Egyptian date for the Winter Solstice."

The Church always attempts to keep the customs of the cultures in which it exists, as long as they are not adulterous.

"Since God has endowed man with a free-will man can choose evil or good. If he chooses evil, he pays the consequences; if he chooses the Good, he reaps his just rewards."

Wow. I missed this little gem, blaming the Jewish victims for what they went through on their 'free will' and 'original sin'..

Nobody deserves to have to go through what they and others did. You have just lost any credibility you ever had with such bigotry. That god sat around and did nothing. inexcusable, and unjustifiable by saying it happened because someone exercised the brains that they were born with. There is simply no justification for saying that. None.

May you never be in a position of political power.

"Since God has endowed man with a free-will man can choose evil or good. If he chooses evil, he pays the consequences; if he chooses the Good, he reaps his just rewards."

Wow. I missed this little gem, blaming the Jewish victims for what they went through on their 'free will'..

Nobody deserves to have to go through what they and others did. You have just lost any credibility you ever had with such bigotry. That god sat around and did nothing. inexcusable, and unjustifiable by saying it happened because someone exercised the brains that they were born with. There is simply no excuse for that. None.

Ah.. I see it. The whole strawman about stalin is to try to tell us that we worship the devil. Funny it took you so long to get to THAT misconception.

Pagans don't believe the devil exists. You have to believe something exists in order to 'worship' it. Anyone who worships the devil believes in some form of christianity.

Your examples do nothing to serve any argument because it's based firmly in your belief that what is true for you is true for everyone, and that's just not the case.

Obviously not listening.

"You’ve done the same; you’ve chosen what you believed from many polytheistic gods, and, as you say, picked and chose one that was beneficial to you."

Wrong. I don't actually have a patron god/dess at the moment. Whether or not that changes in the future remains to be seen.

God was not created, “I am Who am,” no beginning and no end.

Actually he was created by those who wanted others to follow as they did.

You have absolutely no empirical proof that your view is somehow more objective than others. Such is the essence of 'faith.'

Reason confirms scripture? no, circular logic that you enjoy using confirms scripture. Which ultimately means nothing since scripture is meaningless unless you choose to give it such.

Nothing is ever absolute. And man's nature is changing all the time.

I ask you again, would you attempt to define the black/latino experience of others in this country to a group of them, to their faces? I doubt it.

and carelessly throwing out names like stalin are an attempt to equate what you obviously don't know anything about with those who felt it ok to harm others. Which is a false premise, and therefore a strawman.

IN REPLY TO PRIVEN
[dependent being that is caused.]

"This makes no sense seeing as how the God of the bible was also created. By those who wrote about it- and then imposed such onto other people by force."

ANS:
Whose not listening? God was not created, “I am Who am,” no beginning and no end. He always existed, and wasn’t caused or created. Thus, Aristotle reasons to the Uncaused Cause, or the Unmoved Mover. Consequently, Reason and Scripture are compatible; Reason confirms Scripture.

IN REPLY TO:
"No matter how they are identified"

ANS:
Terrorists devoutly believe in their religion, as was said of Saddam. They believed in it so much that they are willing to give up their lives for their beliefs. Are your beliefs that strong? Saddam worshiped daily in the temple of a pagan god. Stalin is said to have bene a devil worshiper.

IN REPLY TO:
"What? You obviously didn't read my sentence. In EVERY ACT OF LOVE, COMPASSION AND KINDNESS AMONG PEOPLE OF ANY OR NO FAITHS. A terrorist by definition shows none of these attributes. Besides, do you really think a terrorist calls himself that? That would really be news to me."

ANS:
You mean what you define as compassion and kindness. True they have no charity or love, but to them, they believe they do and that their god will reward them for what they do.

Now you can see your rationale working out. They say to you what you say in the defense of your beliefs, namely, “Says you. And that's your truth. And it's ok that I don't think the same way. You haven't proven such to me.”

You won’t prove to the terrorists that they are evil and lack compassion, because they have closed their minds to truth. You believe that Truth is relative. Yes their beliefs are relative to them.

And, since the good is relative and subjective, there are no real standards for them or you. Morality, in being subjective, makes morals whatever you want them to be since, as you claim, there is no objective truth and all truth is relative and subjective.

IN REPLY TO:
“Saddam picked and chose which parts he would apply, with the whole idea benefiting-him. Pure ego."

ANS:
He seemed to have plenty of followers, a whole religious sect who believed him. He believed he knew what was ethical. Even though he was wrong, he would say to you, “Who are you to tell me what to believe?” You’ve done the same; you’ve chosen what you believed from many polytheistic gods, and, as you say, picked and chose one that was beneficial to you.

REPLY TO:
"Stalin had nothing to do with us. Evidently, you don't know a thing about what fascism actually is. Not my problem. Stalin and the like often get lumped in with the atheists more than anything else- even though that's not really accurate either."

ANS:
They had a worldly god, just as pagans worshiped golden calves or the Sun, Stalin worshiped Power, and Saddam worshiped the god he created. He made himself a god as did Stalin. It is said Stalin had an altar and worshiped the Devil.

Yes, both were evil, but they defined evil as good, as you define your religion as good irrespective of objective reality. Stalin would ask you, "Who are you to tell me what is good or evil." Didn’t you say everyone had a right to choose his own beliefs and that it is subjective and relative?

Stalin and Saddam were evil because morality is not relative and subjective as you claim; it is universal, objective, and absolute. Dictators in the end don't make their own moral laws, they are made by God, and dire consequences ensue when they are broken.

IN REPLY TO:
"Man's nature IS relative. It's subject to learning, changing, experiences, growth.. why be afraid of that?"

ANS:
Man’s nature is not relative, it does not change. For it to change, man would cease to be man; he wouldn't have a human nature. His experiences and learning are not changes of his nature (the fundamental principles that make him be what he is). Truth increases the powers of the Intellect. The intellect defines human nature. If man's intelect changed, he wouldn't be a man. The access of knowledge is defined in philosophy as an accidental change.

Only one can be true. No religion is the true one unless it worships the one true God as God.

Says... you. again. and GK Chesterson doesn't speak for us. The fact that he returned to Christianity showed that he really just didn't get it. And that's ok too. He ultimately found what made him happy.. and that's the point.

"Feelings have an important part to play in one’s life but a person can not act on feelings not disciplined by reason; such causes irrational thought and promotes cynicism."

More proof you haven't read what I said. It's about using BOTH in balance, but not discounting anything that may be important. For me cynicism results as an emotional hardening- people's desperate attempts to NOT feel because someone told them they are ultimately born a bad person and that their feelings are wrong and dreams are not worth having.

I say bull.

"The God who created you says you must abide in Him ...and from the wiles of Satan who roams around the world seeking the ruin of souls."

First of all, my parents created me. Second, I don't believe in the existence of the devil at all. The only justification you can find is in.. again.. a book that I don't ultimately use. Not my book, not my problem.

More of your theology that has absolutely nothing to do with me.

It's YOUR belief system that says such things. And that works for you. Many paths to the same end. It's supposed to be that way, and that's ok.

But ultimately it doesn't even make sense to me, much less be anything that I would have anything to do with. I am not built that way.

Your attempts at conversion serve nothing but your own self interest.

IN REPLY TO PRIVEN:
“The Jews are the chosen people? I thought so once, too- until I heard my next door neighbor's account of watching her entire family murdered in front of her and the smell of the bodies in the camps.”

ANS:
By “chosen people,” is meant that God came to the Jews to form his covenant with humanity. It does not mean they are incapable of sin. As a people, they have sinned many times as is recorded.

Since God has endowed man with a free-will man can choose evil or good. If he chooses evil, he pays the consequences; if he chooses the Good, he reaps his just rewards.

http://www.reference.com/search?q=Polytheism

“Historically, the concept goes back to Abraham. Abraham lived in a world steeped in idolatry, which he concluded was contradicted by the reality of design in nature.

“Choseness was not part of God's ‘original plan.’ Initially all of humanity was to serve the role of God's messengers, but after the fall of Adam, humanity lost that privilege, and it was open for grabs. Only Abraham chose to take the mantel. If others would have (and they were offered the choice), they too would have joined in this special covenant which was sealed upon the giving of the Torah at Mount Sinai.”

IN REPLY TO:
“No god worth worshipping would ever subject his so called 'chosen people' to such horror. Which is what has given rise to an explosion of identification of secularism within the Jewish community. Of which I was one until my experiences led me to Paganism.”

ANS:
As said in the link above, God’s plan was not that Adam would sin. However, God gave men free-wills in that men would choose the Good and not be automatons programed to do so. Which do you prefer, no free-will or a free-will?

God did not cause evil, man did. Unfortunately, when Adam sinned he caused sin to enter the world. Consequently, the gates of Heaven were closed and the gates of Hell were open. With sin came resurrections, wars, plagues, famines, storms earthquakes, and the natural and moral evils we witness in the world.

Man’s nature was wounded by Original Sin and therefore, man had to be restored to his original nature. So God sent His only Son, the Redeemer to redeem the world. Although, man has been redeemed, and the gates of Heaven have been opened, there still remains the remnants of sin. Namely, if you steal something, but redeem your self, there must be restitution.

Man’s intellect is fallible: his free will is threatened by his concupiscence, therefore God has given man His Church to assist man on his journey to Paradise. God made His Church infallible in its teachings. Because God is Prescience and knows that man is susceptible to error, He sent the Paraclete to guard the Church from error in its teachings and beliefs.

IN REPLY TO
PRIVER:
[Paganism is polytheism; it has many gods, and pagans may choose any god who appeals to them.]

IN REPLY TO:
“Wrong again. There is often the monistic concept I mentioned above.. once again, you fail to listen.

ANS:
G. K. Chesterton wrote: "The pagan set out with an admirable sense to enjoy himself. By the end of his civilization, he had discovered that a man cannot enjoy himself and continue to enjoy anything else. Swinburne the poet would comment on this same theme: "Thou hast conquered, O pale Galilean; the world has grown grey from thy breath; We have drunken of things Lethean, and fed on the fullness of death."

Again, polytheism has many gods, you've chose one of them.

“Soft polytheism means that the person practicing a polytheistic religion believes that their gods are aspects of another god or goddess.

"Monism teaches that there is one ultimate reality and that the material world is an illusion, there is therefore only one reality as expressed in Hellenismos and Hinduism, Such philosophical traditions are Neoplatonism and Advaita."

Simply put there is only one God, no God of gender, and no different faces of god who contradict one another.

IN REPLY TO:
"It's our idea that all gods/goddesses' names. are different faces of some overarching Divine. By honoring whichever part calls to us, we honor the whole.

ANS:
Paganism is expressed in a variety of ways such as polytheism, shamanism, pantheism, or animism. They are not just different faces of the same God. Their beliefs contradict in part, or in whole, one another. Only one can be true. No religion is the true one unless it worships the one true God as God. Reality is what actually exists; it is truth, and truth can not contradict truth.

IN REPLY TO:
[The faith of the one true God is universal, its not subjective]

“It's all subjective. Just because you say it's not doesn't make it so. Reality is only our perception of it- and what we can find agreement on.

ANS:
If all knowledge were relative and subjective, it would be impossible to know reality and to realize God’s existence.

It’s not because I say it; reality is reality not one’s opinion. Anything else is irrational. Reality is what is, not what one agrees on. If knowledge were subjective, we couldn’t know reality but only what we think is reality, Plato’s false theory of knowledge. Reality is that which exists regardless of what anyone thinks.

IN REPLY TO:
[The Bible is the word of God speaking to man to guide man on his journey to God. The word of God is truth personified.]

“Says you. And that's your truth. And it's ok that I don't think the same way. You haven't proven such to me.”

ANS:
Again, you must prove what is obvious and rational to yourself. It can not be done if the mind is closed by its predispositions.

I have shown by reason why a Goddess is irrational, and you do not have a rational response why it isn’t. Your god is a caused god by having a gender, and that makes it a dependent being, but the Creator, by necessity, must be an uncaused self-sufficient being.

IN REPLY TO:
"Are you saying truth has no affect on your beliefs?"

"I don't believe the bible is *absolute* truth. I think there is some wisdom and much meaning has actually been lost or distorted. And seeing as how it gets retranslated and reinterpreted all the time, I suspect much has really been lost."

ANS:
Scripture does get reinterpreted all the time, but not by the Catholic Church in respect to its meaning which never changes. Its doctrines and teachings are the same from its inception.

IN REPLY TO:
[Feelings are fickle; if they trump reason.]

"It's not about trumping reason. It's about balancing and learning to trust when to listen to either. I understand myself well enough to know when my feelings are telling me something important. If you can't make that distinction, then it's got nothing to do with me."

ANS:
Feelings have an important part to play in one’s life but a person can not act on feelings not disciplined by reason; such causes irrational thought and promotes cynicism.

IN REPLY TO:
[Salvation depends on how sincere one seeks the truth and how well he abides by what he finds.]

“Salvation from what? Life? Who determined that we need to be 'saved' in the first place?”

ANS:
The God who created you says you must abide in Him by keeping his precepts, and sent his Son to redeem mankind from the Original Sin of Adam whose caused sin to enter the world. Salvation is the deliverance from the eternal punishment that ensues from sins against God, from falling into Hell, and from the wiles of Satan who roams around the world seeking the ruin of souls.

That punishment ensues the violation of God’s Natural Moral Laws is evidenced by the consequences that befall those who transgress them. Many nations that have ignored these precepts have imploded from their own iniquity, or have been put down by their neighbors because of their threat to others.

"From Scripture's establishment by God, the Church has not changed any of its doctrines and teachings, and it is guarded from error by God in its teachings and dogmas."

Really? I thought they recently eliminated limbo as the place where unbaptized babies who have done nothing wrong go. How is that not changing?

"One does not need the Bible to prove there is not such a thing as a Goddess. "

Seeing as how the earth exists under our feet, the Goddess is. Tangible. I can touch it, interact with it by planting things, and by breathing air. You have proved nothing.

"God has protected the Church from error with the gift of infallibility from its inception."

So you believe no mistakes have ever been made within the Catholic church? Really? I think there are a few hundreds of millions of dollars in priestly sexual abuse case coverups that would disprove that. Not to mention the silent justification of both the Holocaust and the slave trade. Funny you talk disparagingly about the Germans who sat back and did nothing and in the same breath venerate your Church who issued their platform of 'noninvolvement'. Hypocrisy, anyone?

"You have no sense of the meaning of suffering because you do not know its meaning and your paganism has no answers but death quickly."

Life and Death are both sacred to Pagans as they are the cycle that we all are a part of. It's all sacred, and not to be avoided if it's time. The question is, prolonging life to what end? Especially if you're so anxious to get into heaven?

Who ever said suffering is honorable or good? How about it just.. is? You think suffering is meaningful? By this logic you sound like you would advocate child abuse, because all 'suffering has meaning'. Do you?

"To the second, no one is justified taking their own life."

NO government anywhere has any justification in entering the most personal decisions of other people. Period.

"I can see you have little faith in your Goddess when it comes to death"

She is the natural cycle, which INCLUDES death. It is a part of her and she of it, because from death the cycle of life continues.

Can you ever think for yourself without resorting to quoting others? This sounds like casting judgement, which if I remember right your Jesus said something about... wait... oh yes. 'judge not lest you be judged.' It is not my business to punish someone else for deciding something that may be different than what I choose.

"You once said that you believed that bad deeds hurt everyone, do you think they won’t eventually hurt you."

Since everything I do comes back to me threefold, I take into consideration my actions BEFORE I act. Do I screw up sometimes? Sure. I'm human. But I correct where I can and change what I can and rectify what I can and learn what I must.

'personal morality' isn't what's screwing up the country. It's people who insist that others who don't think like them have nothing to contribute-and whose voices repeatedly get put down and insulted.

"everyone must go there."

PROVE HEAVEN EXISTS. You have no way of doing so.

"A Goddess has a gender."
Actually she really doesn't.. we use the term Goddess for a couple of reasons- because she encompasses both male and female attributes at the same time, just as light and dark cannot coexist without each other. We also personify her that way because she is the cradle, the womb of all life. She gives birth to the Sun god who she mates with and he dies at the end of October until he is to be reborn at the winter solstice. And the cycle continues.

"However, the Dems are fighting Bush's effort to assist Faith based organizations."

The government has no business supporting 'faith based organizations.' We are a secular country. Founded that way, and remains that way. Besides, the only 'faith based organizations' he would promote are those that agree with his own twisted personal belief system.

"I wonder how much you are concerned with 25 million lives over their. Bush seems to think those 3,000 and those 25 million had and have dignity. What's your view."

What the hell does this have to do with anything? According to W himself, God TOLD him to invade Iraq. He doesn't give a damn about life. If he ever cared about life he would have stayed far away from there. We have no business being there. Not that we ever did. And how is it caring for others, especially Iraqis when the government hires secret agencies that aren't even part of the Armed forces who can just go over and kill willy nilly without any accountability?

There you go again with your not quite 'pro-life' agenda. I say again, if you are so concerned about children, then put your tax dollars and your home or livelihood where your mouth is and sponsor an unwanted foster child until the age of 18 or 21.

"Goddess can not be a Creator (who made the Universe from nothing) because a Goddess is a dependent being, a being that is caused by another."

If there were no man, the earth would still be. She would still be, in some form. From the earth came man, and from man came your book and therefore, your God and your church.

"It’s been a problem for man since his creation."

Not really. Only since someone decided your god must be followed-or else.

"Human and Christian prudence suggest for the majority of sick people the use of medicines ...and have them administered according to the doctor's advice."

Since in your view suffering has so much meaning why bother with painkillers at all?

IN REPLY TO:
Which should be THEIR decision. NOT yours,
mine or any government's.” EVER.

ANS:
I can see you have little faith in your Goddess when it comes to death and appear to condone mercy killing if the suffering condones it.

http://www.newadvent.org/library/docs_df80eu.htm

“Human life is the basis of all goods, and is the necessary source and condition of every human activity and of all society. Most people regard life as something sacred and hold that no one may dispose of it at will, but believers see in life something greater, namely, a gift of God's love, which they are called upon to preserve and make fruitful. And it is this latter consideration that gives rise to the following consequences:

“No one can make an attempt on the life of an innocent person without opposing God's love for that person, without violating a fundamental right, and therefore without committing a crime of the utmost gravity.

“It is necessary to state firmly once more that nothing and no one can in any way permit the killing of an innocent human being, whether a fetus or an embryo, an infant or an adult, an old person, or one suffering from an incurable disease, or a person who is dying.

“Furthermore, no one is permitted to ask for this act of killing, either for himself or herself or for another person entrusted to his or her care, nor can he or she consent to it, either explicitly or implicitly. nor can any authority legitimately recommend or permit such an action.

For it is a question of the violation of the divine law, an offense against the dignity of the human person, a crime against life, and an attack on humanity

"Everyone has the duty to lead his or her life in accordance with God's plan. That life is entrusted to the individual as a good that must bear fruit already here on earth, but that finds its full perfection only in eternal life.

"Intentionally causing one's own death, or suicide, is therefore equally as wrong as murder; such an action on the part of a person is to be considered as a rejection of God's sovereignty and loving plan.

"Furthermore, suicide is also often a refusal of love for self, the denial of a natural instinct to live, a flight from the duties of justice and charity owed to one's neighbor, to various communities or to the whole of society.

"Although, as is generally recognized, at times there are psychological factors present that can diminish responsibility or even completely remove it. However, one must clearly distinguish suicide from that sacrifice of one's life whereby for a higher cause, such as God's glory, the salvation of souls, or the service of one's brethren, a person offers his or her own life or puts it in danger (cf. Jn. 15:14).

“It may happen that, by reason of prolonged and barely tolerable pain, for deeply personal or other reasons, people may be led to believe that they can legitimately ask for death or obtain it for others. Although in these cases the guilt of the individual may be reduced or completely absent, nevertheless the error of judgment into which the conscience falls, perhaps in good faith, does not change the nature of this act of killing,

"To the second, no one is justified taking their own life. That’s suicide, justified by the pagans in Japan and the Romans in particular.

"Human and Christian prudence suggest for the majority of sick people the use of medicines capable of alleviating or suppressing pain, even though these may cause as a secondary effect semiconsciousness and reduced lucidity. As for those who are not in a state to express themselves, one can reasonably presume that they wish to take these painkillers, and have them administered according to the doctor's advice.

"But the intensive use of painkillers is not without difficulties, because the phenomenon of habituation generally makes it necessary to increase their dosage in order to maintain their efficacy.

"At this point it is fitting to recall a declaration by Pius XII, which retains its full force; in answer to a group of doctors who had put the question: "Is the suppression of pain and consciousness by the use of narcotics ... permitted by religion and morality to the doctor and the patient (even at the approach of death and if one foresees that the use of narcotics will shorten life)?"

"The Pope said: "If no other means exist, and if, in the given circumstances, this does not prevent the carrying out of other religious and moral duties: Yes."[5]

"In this case, of course, death is in no way intended or sought, even if the risk of it is reasonably taken; the intention is simply to relieve pain effectively, using for this purpose painkillers available to medicine. “

IN REPLY TO PRIVER:
“Have you ever taken care of someone terminally ill? “
ANS:
Sure and watched them die.

IN REPLY TO:
“Throwing up blood on a regular basis? I have. Don't you dare tell me that if they decided that the pain is simply too much to stand that they wouldn't be 100% justified in wanting to end things in a way that would give them control over their own dignity in dying.”

ANS:
Suicide and Euthanasia are not dying with dignity. You have no sense of the meaning of suffering because you do not know its meaning and your paganism has no answers but death quickly. Try reading about it in the doctrines and teachings of the Catholic Church and you might learn something though it is doubtful.

http://www.newadvent.org/library/docs_df80eu.htm

This is an area where your Goddess has no standing, nor do you. And that’s a fatality you engender by being a Pagan; you begin in the world and you end in the world, so you think. However death is a journey into eternity and a gate to either eternal happiness or eternal damnation whether you believe it or not is immaterial; everyone must go there.

Schiavo starving to death and dehydrating for fourteen days in severe agony wasn’t dignified. She wasn’t a vegetable; she was a human person with all its dignity. Even a dog would not be allowed to suffer like that.

IN REPLY TO:
“It has nothing to do with whatever one calls the Divine. People are capable of choosing to better humanity. Even without the help of any gods, if they so choose.”

ANS:
To the contrary, no one has a right to do evil no matter how much they think it is justified. The Communist Stalin and Mao thought so, Idi Amine thought so, Hitler, and his boy thought so. Saddam thought so and so do the terrorists. They all designed their own morality and millions died from it.

IN REPLY TO:
“It's their actions that determine that. It took so few people to screw up our country as bad as it's gotten in the last 7 years. To fix it is going to take all of us.”

ANS:
The country is, as you put it, screwed up because those who think like you. Namely, morality is personal and relative, and so everyone has their own moral concepts.

IN REPLY TO:
“My values are fine, my life is wonderful.…And, I'm truly sorry that you can't realize that someone doesn't need 'your' version of god to find ultimate happiness- and instead feel it necessary to cast aspersions on me and what you 'think' I believe. If it makes you feel better, go ahead. I really don't care.

ANS:
That’s fine for you. It was fine for the Germans not to care until one day they woke up and found half of their country gone. Then they said, "How did this happen," but it was to late.

It wasn’t fine for the over 48 million unborn aborted of which you show little or no concern. It’s not fine for the millions of people dying from AIDS or STDs, though many of them thought homosexuality and fornication isn’t any one’s business until the got the viruses.

This has occurred causing the country, as you say, to be screwed up. It is happening because they had their own personal morality. You once said that you believed that bad deeds hurt everyone, do you think they won’t eventually hurt you.

We are over in Iraq fighting a war because the terrorists have a personal view of what is right and wrong, and now it has become our problem. I wonder how much you are concerned with 25 million lives over their. Bush seems to think those 3,000 and those 25 million had and have dignity. What's your view.

The moral view of the sanctity of life of the terrorists mattered and sure affected the 3,000 who were in the Towers. So what you think and others think matters.

IN REPLY TO PRIVER:
Again, it's like speaking bad French to someone who speaks Chinese and expecting some sort of submission.

IN REPLY TO:
You can’t understand the language because it is rational, and you don’t want to be rational. You make your beliefs subjective and your subjectivity is an obstacle to your reasoning. The proof of God is from reason, it is in consonance with the Scriptures because they both come from God.

IN REPLY TO:
“You have proven nothing but your ability to quote from a book that has been revised, reedited, reinterpreted, and cobbled together from a whole lot of influences over time.”

ANS:
You imply that the Scriptures have changed over time because of the various influences of man. However, you again are misinformed. The Catholic Church has never changed the fundamental teachings and doctrines given to it from God. Can you show any of the revisions?

To the contrary, Her teachings can only be changed by God who made them, and so far, He hasn’t chosen to do so, nor will He. God has protected the Church from error with the gift of infallibility from its inception. Is your faith protected by your Goddess?

IN REPLY TO:
“It's your path, your way. NOT mine. I get that. Do you?”

ANS:
No, it’s not my path, it’s God’s path. Yes, you have your own path, but it is your own, not the path God has given you.

IN REPLY TO:
“You have not shown anything but your inability to accept the fact that others do not think like you and are capable of coming to moral decisions without using your book. And honestly, that's not my problem. The world is a whole lot grayer than you make it out to be.

ANS:
To the contrary, you are living proof that others think different. My point is they are never correct when they contradict God, and that’s a problem. It’s been a problem for man since his creation.

IN REPLY TO:
Prostitution is only such if money is exchanged. Please read what is there, not what you assume is there.

ANS:
Are you saying there were no temple prostitutes? What history book are you reading from. Money is not the only means of paying for sex.

IN REPLY TO:
I work with infants and young children that are medically fragile, sometimes unwanted and neglected and horribly mistreated by those who are supposed to care for them."

ANS:
Murdering them is not a solution, as you seem to imply.

IN REPLY TO:
"Have you ever tried to teach a child born with no brain? I have. Have you ever tried to help get services for a family going broke because of their child's medical expenses?"

ANS:
Again having them murdered is not a solution. That was Hitler's solution. That is a problem for government and that's why it is based on our Judeo-Christian principles. That's why Catholics have their organizations to help people in need. However, the Dems are fighting Bush's effort to assist Faith based organizations.

IN REPLY TO
"I say again, if you are so concerned about child welfare then be a part of the solution. Foster an unwanted child until they're old enough to be on their own."

ANS:
Ever heard of Boys Town? You have been given an abundant amount of Christian organizations that care for unwed mothers, for problem pregnancies, and the child after their birth. They are in the link below, and they are on this forum page. Look for Birthright. Had I not told you Mother Theresa's organization said bring them to it?

http://www.priestsforlife.org/crisis.html

http://www.priestsforlife.org/afterabortion/index.htm

Evidently, you’ve closed your mind to these organizations, and that’s another error you’ve made in thinking.

IN REPLY TO:
“Don't get me started on the whole Terri Schiavo thing. The government had no business getting into other people's personal lives with that any more than they can tell someone else what to do with their own bodies.”

ANS:
People have no right to murder other people, nor is there a right to suicide. A Right to Life is suppose to be Constitutionally protected, at least it was in the Bill of Rights till Roe v. Wade.

So government has no right to tell someone what to do with their own bodies? Ridiculous! The Civil Law tells you every day what to do with your own body. For example, don’t take illicit drugs, don’t strip in public, and don’t lay in middle of traffic, can’t drive a car with no seat belts, can’t drive naked, can’t be a prostitute or a drug peddler, or molest and rape women and children.

And what about the body of the unborn. Do you not believe in equal rights?

IN REPLY TO: PRIVER:
“I find it odd to me that you use a book that I do not to try to tell me that my beliefs are irrational.

ANS:
One does not need the Bible to prove there is not such a thing as a Goddess. I told you that it is impossible by reason alone. I explained it to you and showed you Aristotle proved there could be no Goddess. Aristotle existed before the Bible existed. He’s one of the greatest pre-Christian philosophers in the world. Aristotle's proof of the Unmoved Mover is in consonance with the Scriptures and Christian philosophers.

A Goddess has a gender. That makes it a dependent or composite being, or a caused being. God can not be a dependent being; if He were, He would not be God. God is an uncaused being. Therefore, it is irrational to posit a female god.

IN REPLY TO:
“Again, it's like speaking bad French to someone who speaks Chinese and expecting some sort of submission. You have proven nothing but your ability to quote from a book that has been revised, reedited, reinterpreted, and cobbled together from a whole lot of influences over time.”

ANS:
I also have been quoting you.

You insinuate that the Scripture has been influenced by time to be in error. Have any examples? You can’t even understand why there can not be a Goddess. It’s not God’s fault you can’t understand the Scriptures, it’s yours. He reveals Himself to all through all his works and his existence and His love for man can be found by induction.

Consequently, since you claim it is a language you can’t understand, how can you criticize it?. In addition, you said the Scripture means “Zero” to you. That seems to suggest you know little about it.

What do you find is untrue. I am not trying to prove to you anything. Just stating the facts, and showing how unreasonable your Goddess is.

I don’t know what book you’re reading from, but the one I read has not been reinterpreted, or interpreted many different ways. Its meaning has never been change in any respect by its guardian, the Catholic Church.

From Scripture's establishment by God, the Church has not changed any of its doctrines and teachings, and it is guarded from error by God in its teachings and dogmas.

IN REPLY TO:
“It's your path, your way. NOT mine. I get that. Do you?

ANS:
To the contrary, you do not get it. First it’s not my path; it’s God’s path revealed to man. You have every right to refuse it, that’s your prerogative, but its not your prerogative to say which path is right, that is God’s domain and He reveals it to man.

IN REPLY TO:
“You have not shown anything but your inability to accept the fact that others do not think like you.

ANS.
Now that would be ridiculous since you are living proof of that.

IN REPLY TO:
“…and are capable of coming to moral decisions without using your book. And honestly, that's not my problem. The world is a whole lot grayer than you make it out to be.”

ANS:
We find God through reason not a Book. We reason the Bible is authentic.

It is a problem if one closes their mind to reality and reason, because of their dispositions. As the Supreme Court has done by legalizing murder of the unborn, and denying the authenticity of the traditional moral culture that this country was founded on.

You don’t need a book to know the Natural Moral Law; it is revealed to all men through reason, and is in consonance with human nature and the word of God.

Moreover, there can not be subjective moral standards. That would make morality meaningless. Morality would become what ever one wants it to be. However, you have implicitly implied morality is personal, relative, and your own.

The Supreme Court wrote its own moral code, and legalized murder. You do not need the Bible to know its error; you just have to see the over 48 million unborn aborted. A closed mind can not fathom the truth.

IN REPLY TO:
“Prostitution is only such if money is exchanged. Please read what is there, not what you assume is there.”

ANS:
I read what is written; at pagan temples, there were Temple Prostitutes. A prostitute is one who gives up her body for favors, not just money.

IN REPLY TO:
[To the contrary, just pointing out the unreasonableness of your beliefs, and have shown why they are irrational.]

“I find it odd to me that you use a book that I do not to try to tell me that my beliefs are irrational.

ANS:
I used no book; I used reason. I have said a Goddess is irrational because God is the Creator of the Universe. A Goddess can not be a Creator (who made the Universe from nothing) because a Goddess is a dependent being, a being that is caused by another. However, God is not caused because He is the Unmoved Mover, uncaused, as Aristotle explicitly shows. Aristotle had no Bible; he had reason, and he reasoned to one true God from the manifested works of God’s creation.

"I’m looking at history books, encyclopedias, and many sources including the Bible. If you are talking about the Bible, which passages are you pointing to that are in error?"

History books, like history, is always written by the victors. Including US history. People write their perceptions of others, and almost always have an agenda to promote- which is their way being the best way just because their armies were bigger.

Let's just look at US History. Does it ever cover the Trail of Tears? Did you know it wasn't even Paul Revere who made that famous ride? Washington Irving gave him that honor- the guy who was famous for his Sleepy Hollow stories worldwide. The guy who actually did it was Israel Bissell. That's just one small example.

Does it ever cover the staggering amount of dictators our government has supported and then later overthrown? (including but not limited to Saddam Hussein- where do you think he got the stuff he used to kill all those people in his country? The US gave him all those weapons because at the time we hated Iran more.) What about the history of women? How about the contributions of Black Americans or Latinos to society? They are reduced, if taught at all, to a unit or so- as if they only ever did a few things here and there. And then disappeared from sight. If we're ever going to understand US history we've got to look at the good, the bad and the really ugly. But is that ever taught?

A committee of people who know less about anything Pagan create what they 'define' as Pagan without bothering to input information from those who have more accurate information. And that becomes an encyclopedia. Information in there is often not updated to reflect new information or just plain inaccurate.

If you study archaeology at all you'd know that there was veneration of the female form long before the bible showed up. And there's proof for that. Actual tangible dolls showing enlarged female bodies have been dated as far back as about 30,000 years. Called the Venus of Willendorf, among others. Study world history sometime, especially the migration of peoples.

The bible itself is a conglomeration of books that have been taken from cultures of one particular area of the world, who in turn absorbed practices going around them at the time and filtered through a monotheistic filter. Tossing out important contributions like the Gnostics and the Talmud. Forgetting the original myths but putting just enough in there so that Pagans who read it would recognize their own features enough to adopt the new idea of monotheism. Deciding some stories were somehow better than another.

You want to really understand what Pagans are all about?
Read other world mythologies.. especially the stories of Inanna (the local goddess of the Mesopotamians- same geographical area covered in the bible), the Greeks, the Norse, the Druids, and the Egyptians, and then come back and tell me that the stories and themes in the bible are completely original. There are only a very few archetypes throughout mythology- the details, names and faces change throughout time. Look at the entymology of the words and practices we use today that owe so much to the Greek, Celtic, Latin and other cultures that we're supposed to be 'better' than. Read psychology, especially Jung. He used different terms but he understood it too. Read science and just marvel at what we know and what we don't yet understand.

"Is it part of your pagan belief that abortion is a compassionate response to pregnancy of the poor pregnant woman who, in your judgment, can’t provide a quality of life that you deem acceptable because, the child is born an invalid blind, dysfunctional, or handicapped?"

Read what I wrote. It was THEIR voice who said that. Not mine. They were the ones who deemed their children's quality of life unacceptable. And seeing as how I've never been IN that situation, I can't say what my decision would be.

"You appear to have no concern about that, simply because you know very little about it, and second, because you really don’t care. Consequently, you just go with the flow when the whole purpose of life is to be with God."

And you're partly right. I don't understand Christianity's obsession with the 'one true way', especially since I've started learning about Paganism. That's why I've tried to start discussions with Christians on a forum such as this. Only to be told what my experiences are and what MY life is and what I believe-rather than an actual dialogue where I can state how I feel about things without being told I'm going to 'hell' (which by the way is also a character in another Pagan mythos- Hel- the goddess of two faces, ruler of the underworld in the pantheon of the Norse.)

The thing about that is for me, Goddess is everywhere and in everything. I AM with her, right now, and always will be. Separation from that isn't possible. Therefore I'm never alone. I have peace. I'm not afraid to die because I know that I am doing everything I can do to make life better for those that I can help. Any god that finds someone who does the best that they can to help others during their lifetime somehow lacking and would punish them eternally for that isn't all Loving or worthy of worship in the first place.

Besides, if lying is one of the 'big 10' commandments, and your god is all knowing, why wouldn't he know that I was lying about believing in something that i don't? That shouldn't get one into heaven if your god means what he says. and as I reiterated before, Christian heaven holds no allure for me.

And why should relationships with other people be pushed back behind some abstraction of what 'MIGHT' happen once our bodies stop working? We're here now. Let's do what we can to make all of us better cared for.

You are grasping at straws and overgeneralizing by saying that women who make such a decision ALWAYS have trauma. Some do, and some don't. I happen to know a couple who don't.

Just like you enjoy 'defining' others by books that have nothing to do with us. You really want to know what we're about? Try reading some Pagan authors- Margot Adler- Starhawk- Grimassi. Eliphas Levi (a Christian, no less). Yo might learn something. The scariest thing to a patriarchal society is a woman with any sort of power. It's not about one side being any better than the other. It's about us as Pagans working to restore a balance that has been lost between both male and female. Working with Nature. Not trying to dominate it- because in a contest, Nature wins. All the time.

I ask you again, would you stand in front of a group of Native Americans or black people and try to tell them what their experience is?

IN REPLY TO PRIVER:
“The topic of this question is less Paganism this time around, but rather should caring for children be a parental or societal responsibility. The fact that you've turned it into a thing on abortion simply says to me that you're one of those folks who think that 'pro-life' ends at birth. So yes, put up or shut up.”

ANS:
Is it part of your pagan belief that abortion is a compassionate response to pregnancy of the poor pregnant woman who, in your judgment, can’t provide a quality of life that you deem acceptable because, the child is born an invalid blind, dysfunctional, or handicapped?. Some hospitals are placing them in utility rooms leaving them to die because the parents don’t want them. Hitler also was repulsed by the weak the sick and dysfunctional so he murdered them in gas chambers.

The point of your Paganism seems to be centered around, your relationship with people. Catholicism is centered around achieving eternal happiness. You appear to have no concern about that, simply because you know very little about it, and second, because you really don’t care. Consequently, you just go with the flow when the whole purpose of life is to be with God.

Subsequently, you write, “Therefore, I've considered three possibilities: If there's no reincarnation after I'm dead or no afterlife, I'm fine with that. If the energies that make up me/my soul rejoin that of the Earth, I'm fine with that. If whatever powers that be decide that I'd best be served learning things over again in a new body."

Thus, on your odyssey through life you have no idea of its destination or how to get there, and really aren't concerned about it.

That affects your view of the impaired unborn.
However, your view about human life is very important because it's based on your subjective view of Paganism.

IN RESPONSE TO:
[I know a lot about Paganism and its accomplishments.]

"Um, actually you don't. You might know what your book says.. but that book gets a lot wrong, too. It's based on really bad information.”

ANS:
I’m looking at history books, encyclopedias, and many sources including the Bible. If you are talking about the Bible, which passages are you pointing to that are in error?

IN REPLY TO:
[It’s evident, you can not tell the difference in proselytizing and telling the truth]

“You have failed to convince me your book is somehow ultimate truth and your way should be the only way.”

ANS:
I am not trying to convince you of anything, I am simply pointing your irrational inconsistencies with reality. You may or may not accept them but you can not reasonably refute them.

IN REPLY TO:
“Abortions cause women to have mental breakdowns? I happen to know a few who've had them who are just fine mentally. It was the best decision for them at the time. Why do you presume to know what goes on in another's mind?”

ANS:
I don’t presume to know what goes on in another’s mind. I measure their actions to the moral standards of the Natural Moral Law, and reason if the acts are in accordance with it. Abortion is never licit because it is murder, the intentional taking of an innocent human life. It is an intrinsic evil, and is never licit.

The Right to Life is the most important right of all humanity. If your dead, you have no rights.

As to reading your mind, I don’t presume to read your mind, I read what you write and presume what you believe from what you are saying.

A poll sometime back found that some ninety percent of women having abortions were forced by circumstances (society, parents, friends, boyfriends, husbands, finances, etc.) to abort, and if they had the chance to keep their baby, they would.

How many testimonies do you have time to read to know the trauma a woman goes through by having an abortion? Try these links below if you don’t believe the trauma abortions bring. Even the pro-abortionists say it is a mind-wrenching decision for a mother to have her unborn child murdered.

AFTER ABORTION:
http://www.priestsforlife.org/postabortion/postabortiontestimonywomen.htm

BEFORE ABORTION:
http://www.priestsforlife.org/postabortion/casestudyproject/casestudy957.htm

"Paganism is polytheism; it has many gods, and pagans may choose any god who appeals to them."

Wrong again. There is often the monistic concept I mentioned above.. once again, you fail to listen. It's our idea that all gods/goddesses' names. are different faces of some overarching Divine. By honoring whichever part calls to us we honor the whole.

"The faith of the one true God is universal, its not subjective"

It's all subjective. Just because you say it's not doesn't make it so. Reality is only our perception of it- and what we can find agreement on.

"The Bible is the word of God speaking to man to guide man on his journey to God. The word of God is truth personified."

Says you. And that's your truth. And it's ok that I don't think the same way. You haven't proven such to me.

"Are you saying truth has no affect on your beliefs?"

I don't believe the bible is *absolute* truth. I think there is some wisdom and much meaning has actually been lost or distorted. And seeing as how it gets retranslated and reinterpreted all the time, I suspect much has really been lost.

"Feelings are fickle; if they trump reason."

It's not about trumping reason. It's about balancing and learning to trust when to listen to either. I understand myself well enough to know when my feelings are telling me something important. If you can't make that distinction, then it's got nothing to do with me.

"Salvation depends on how sincere one seeks the truth and how well he abides by what he finds."

Salvation from what? Life? Who determined that we need to be 'saved' in the first place?

The Jews are the chosen people? I thought so once, too- until I heard my next door neighbor's account of watching her entire family murdered in front of her and the smell of the bodies in the camps. No god worth worshipping would ever subject his so called 'chosen people' to such horror. Which is what has given rise to an explosion of identification of secularism within the Jewish community. Of which I was one until my experiences led me to Paganism.

"dependent being that is caused."

This makes no sense seeing as how the God of the bible was also created. By those who wrote about it- and then imposed such onto other people by force.

“No matter how they identify themselves” would include the terrorists of the world. They devoutly believe in their religion, as was said of Saddam. He worshiped daily in the temple of a pagan god. Stalin’s was a devil worshiper, but no matter how he identified himself, your Goddess acknowledged his beliefs."

What? You obviously didn't read my sentence. In EVERY ACT OF LOVE, COMPASSION AND KINDNESS AMONG PEOPLE OF ANY OR NO FAITHS. A terrorist by definition shows none of these attributes. Besides, do you really think a terrorist calls himself that? That would really be news to me.

Saddam picked and chose which parts he would apply, with the whole idea benefitting-him. Pure ego.

Stalin had nothing to do with us. Evidently you don't know a thing about what fascism actually is. Not my problem. Stalin and the like often get lumped in with the atheists more than anything else- even though that's not really accurate either.

Man's nature IS relative. It's subject to learning, changing, experiences, growth.. why be afraid of that?

"You have no direction; you have no compass; you depend on your own intuition and emotions."

My intuition IS my compass. I trust it because it has led me to unbelievable frienships, jobs, homes, an active spiritual life, and the kind of love people often don't think they deserve. If they find it at all.

And yours seems to me to need to be led because you don't trust yourself that you are capable of thinking for yourself without any book telling you what is right or wrong. What are you scared of? And who told you your feelings were bad? They're not. They just are.. human.. and it's up to all of us to understand our own feelings and why we're motivated to do the things we do. There is a reason for all behavior. Which isn't always known consciously to us. It takes time, and work, to really get to know ourselves- and since so many of us don't- we can't even begin to know what others have gone through.

I would never attempt to stand in front of a group of African Americans and tell them that I *know* what their experiences are in today's society. I can't do that for Christians either. I am not one- but am often defined by them when they have not had my experiences, traumas, joys and life. We're saying it's time for this outright labeling to stop.

It's so much easier to label someone and define them than it is to actually try to understand and walk in their shoes. Because by so doing we can be changed as a result.. and change is scary. It's the justification for wars- the devaluation of the other- and the denial of humanity. Which turns men into monster.

I say we should value ourselves more.. and not depend solely on any person or book to tell us what we 'should' be doing. We already have the answers. It's not about 'proving' anything. If you can't find proof or meaning around you- then that's again, your problem. Not mine.

We have the capacity to do better.

IN REPLY TO PRIVER:
“And that his words are found in your bible. I respect that and am truly happy that you have found the way that is truth for you. However, it doesn't work like that for me. And I'm not threatened by that. My faith is not found in any book and is therefore truly my own. And no book can touch that.”

ANS:
The faith of the one true God is universal, its not subjective and its not based on Relativity, Utility or Situation Ethics, but on objective truth and the Natural Moral Laws that govern all human behavior.

Many Jews are in heaven; they are God's chosen people. Christ was a Jew. The Good Thief who died on the Cross went to Paradise.

Salvation depends on how sincere one seeks the truth and how well he abides by what he finds.

The book you speak of, I assume, is the Bible. The Bible is the word of God speaking to man to guide man on his journey to God. The word of God is truth personified. Are you saying truth has no affect on your beliefs?

Accordingly, you apparently have no one to guide you but rely on your own reconnaissance. Your god is not your compass if your beliefs are solely your own, as you’ve said. It appears from what you said that your journey is an odyssey with your Goddess speaking to you through your feelings. Feelings are fickle; if they trump reason.

IN REPLY TO:
“I don't understand how Christians can claim 'one real truth' when it's all relative, with experiences that are remarkably similar across cultures, as well as mythologies with the same themes across time.”

ANS:
Experiences are remarkably similar because we are all of the same nature, human, and our behavior is governed by the Natural Moral Law that is based on reason.

Truth is not relative. God is Immutable Truth; His Word is Truth as are His laws. The Natural Moral Law is not relative but based on the nature of man. It is universal and absolute because man’s nature is universal and absolute. It is the standard by which we measure our behavior in our interaction and relationships with society, with one another, and with God.

If the Natural Moral Laws were relative, man’s nature would have to be relative. Nature is the fundamental principles that make a thing be what it is. But, if man’s nature were relative; man’s nature would change because of circumstances. It follows, if man’s nature changes, man ceases to be human. He would have a different nature, the nature he had changed into, and the Moral Law would be meaningless because it only applies to human nature. In addition, man’s inalienable rights would change because they only apply to human nature.

Now, to be a man without a human nature would be a contradiction, ridiculous, and therefore impossible. Consequently, the Natural Moral Law, which dictates the inalienable rights due man’s nature, is universal, unchangeable and therefore absolute, and not relative or any of the other vagrant vicissitudes assigned to man’s nature by the iconoclastic or bohemians or any nonconformists.
.

IN REPLY TO PRIVER:
“My faith teaches me that the Divine calls to us in whatever voice, using whichever face will cause us to take action and make changes in our lives. For some that might be Jesus. And that's great. For others it might be the Goddess in one form or another. For still others it might be Mohammed. And that's ok that they're all different. For us, the destination is not as important as the journey. Each has their own lesson to learn on the way to the summit.”

ANS:
Yes, but what are these changes? You have no direction; you have no compass; you depend on your own intuition and emotions. There is no Mohammed god, no Goddess. Look at all the multiple directions the Pagans have gone, the Muslims have gone, the Hindus, who worship cows, their sects and their, devaluation of human life, and the deaths caused because their of their errant beliefs.

They can not be all right. And yes, it matters if you are not right. It mattered to the Russians in the Gulags of the USSR, to Cambodians, to the poor of the Congo, the Sudan, and to Mao's Chinese. Millions died because of their many faces.

They are some of the many faces that you say are ok. There are over 48 million aborted American faces that never got to take any journey. They are dead because others saw another face, the wrong face. There is a lesson, and that lesson is, “You better get things right, or the next victim may be you.”

IN REPLY TO:
“Paganism is not always polytheism. There are some that see the Divine as one creative overarching force and all the Gods/Goddess names are different facets of the same Divine.”

ANS:
Paganism is polytheism; it has many gods, and pagans may choose any god who appeals to them. That choice is the fallacy of Paganism; it eschews objective truth. Paganism is feelings, and feelings change, and so there is no one standard of belief, but many, and they contradict one another. All can not be true, or as you say “ok.” If they were, then God would be a contradiction, an irrational impossibility. A Goddess who sanctifies contradictions is a contradiction.

There can not be facets of the same Divine unless you suspend the self-evident principle of contradiction. That would render all thought meaningless, and that would be ridiculous.

IN REPLY TO:
“For me, The Goddess shows her love by bringing people into my life that has an enriching effect on it.

"Starting with my husband and my friends. She shows her love in the spring by the renewal of all that is green."

ANS:
Show that your Goddess causes the seasons. Did she create the Universe, the Sun the planets and the seasons? No, because that would be impossible, because she is a god from the world, a mortal god.

There can only be one Unmoved Mover who is not moved and therefore is the First Mover, the Creator, who sets forth the Natural Laws that orders the Universe. By the very fact that your god is a Goddess, you derogate her authority because she is a dependent being that is caused.

IN REPLY TO:
She shows her love in every act of compassion and kindness among people of all faiths, no matter how they identify themselves.

ANS:
“No matter how they identify themselves” would include the terrorists of the world. They devoutly believe in their religion, as was said of Saddam. He worshiped daily in the temple of a pagan god. Stalin’s was a devil worshiper, but no matter how he identified himself, your Goddess acknowledged his beliefs.

To the contrary, the true God gives man a compass to objective truth to which all human life is drawn. The contradictions of objective truth lead man to self-destruction, evidenced by the tyrannical dictators throughout history.

IN REPLY TO:
"I get that you think there is only one God."

ANS:
That’s what Aristotle, a pagan, and Aquinas proved. By necessity, there must be an Unmoved Mover, a First Cause of all causes. Nothing can cause something, and there can not be an infinite number of causes without a first cause because that would be irrational.

Therefore, there can only be one First Cause and that cause we call God, a self-sufficient being, Simple, Unchangeable, Omniscient, Prescient and Omnipotent.

"Christianity doesn’t worship Saints, they honor them and follow their examples. Christian holidays do not replicate pagan ones. Christmas is the celebration of the birth of Christ, the Incarnation; Easter celebrates the Resurrection."

Tell that to those who worship and venerate Mary. Tell that to those who petition one of the saints to find lost things, or be a protector of lost children. In fact, tell that to those who worship Jesus. I thought it was supposed to be about your god and his jealousness.

The name of Easter is taken directly from Ostara and the eggs and rabbits come directly out of Paganism. Celebration of the renewal of the world again in the spring. Own a Christmas tree? Pagan. Put up mistletoe? Celtic Pagan/Druidic. Yule log? Pagan. Most scholars who have studied the bible have placed Jesus's historical birthday somewhere in springtime.. but the Pagans required conversion so someone decided to place his birthday on Dec. 25 to replace Mithras, Saturnalia and Yule. The rebirth of the Sun god during the winter solstice abounds in the mythos. The frankincense, myrrh? Pagan again- herbs. The Magi, themselves, following a star? Pagan. Celebrate Halloween? Pagan. the list goes on...

Um, no gods control the elements. All rituals that you described are taken directly out of Pagan use of them, adapted for the new religion and given new meanings. Using the same elements to try to prove 'one god is better than another'.. which works about as well as going to war to tell someone to live democratically.

"You implied that the misery that laid ahead for some unborn, namely their quality of life, apparently justify their being aborted."

That comes directly from some of the parents of those children themselves that I deal with every day. Not me. The anguish and hardships they face are real, on a day to day basis. For some of them if they had to do it all over again they may have done things differently. They've even told me as much. Read what I wrote, not what you 'think' is there.

"Communists are pagans; Fascists are pagans; materialist are pagans,"

Paganism is an overarching term for a series of religious beliefs. Encompassing none of the above. More proof you weren't listening. And as such it deserves such respect as to be capitalized, please.

"Second, Pagans might worship holidays but Christianity does not."

What? Nobody said anything about worshipping holidays- like any religious system it has it's own days for celebration of the seasonal cycle.

"You condemn the authenticity of a Goddess because you give it sexuality, making her mortal and not a god. "

Um, nope. The Goddess is everything and everywhere for us. Seeing as how none of us and no life at all would be here without the sacred union of both male and female in the sexual act, She is the giver of life. I condemn nothing. The only constant is change, repetition of ancient natural cycles of creation and destruction.. so I don't understand why it has to be some 'unmoved mover'.

Besides, I thought the story of your Jesus is that he's supposed to be 'god' himself made mortal? The result of sexual union between deity and mortal? Which is also a large part of any Pagan mythos.

And perfect love and perfect trust are all Her ways. I get that you don't think so.. but this is my truth.. and everything she touches, changes.

I don't follow Augustine, either. Sorry. His words hold no water for someone who doesn't use them.

You often mention Aristotle.. who famously said 'Know your audience'.. which you have proven you have failed to do.

As always, blessed be.

"Christianity doesn’t worship Saints, they honor them and follow their examples. Christian holidays do not replicate pagan ones. Christmas is the celebration of the birth of Christ, the Incarnation; Easter celebrates the Resurrection."

Tell that to those who worship and venerate Mary. Tell that to those who petition one of the saints to find lost things, or be a protector of lost children. In fact, tell that to those who worship Jesus. I thought it was supposed to be about your god and his jealousness.

The name of Easter is taken directly from Ostara and the eggs and rabbits come directly out of Paganism. Celebration of the renewal of the world again in the spring. Own a Christmas tree? Pagan. Put up mistletoe? Celtic Pagan/Druidic. Yule log? Pagan. Most scholars who have studied the bible have placed Jesus's historical birthday somewhere in springtime.. but the Pagans required conversion so someone decided to place his birthday on Dec. 25 to replace Mithras, Saturnalia and Yule. The rebirth of the Sun god during the winter solstice abounds in the mythos. The frankincense, myrrh? Pagan again- herbs. The Magi, themselves, following a star? Pagan. Celebrate Halloween? Pagan. the list goes on...

Um, no gods control the elements. All rituals that you described are taken directly out of Pagan use of them, adapted for the new religion and given new meanings. Using the same elements to try to prove 'one god is better than another'.. which works about as well as going to war to tell someone to live democratically.

"You implied that the misery that laid ahead for some unborn, namely their quality of life, apparently justify their being aborted."

That comes directly from some of the parents of those children themselves that I deal with every day. Not me. The anguish and hardships they face are real, on a day to day basis. For some of them if they had to do it all over again they may have done things differently. They've even told me as much. Read what I wrote, not what you 'think' is there.

"Communists are pagans; Fascists are pagans; materialist are pagans,"

Paganism is an overarching term for a series of religious beliefs. Encompassing none of the above. More proof you weren't listening. And as such it deserves such respect as to be capitalized, please.

"Second, Pagans might worship holidays but Christianity does not."

What? Nobody said anything about worshipping holidays- like any religious system it has it's own days for celebration of the seasonal cycle.

"You condemn the authenticity of a Goddess because you give it sexuality, making her mortal and not a god. "

Um, nope. The Goddess is everything and everywhere for us. Seeing as how none of us and no life at all would be here without the sacred union of both male and female in the sexual act, She is the giver of life. I condemn nothing. The only constant is change, repetition of ancient natural cycles of creation and destruction.. so I don't understand why it has to be some 'unmoved mover'.

Besides, I thought the story of your Jesus is that he's supposed to be 'god' himself made mortal? The result of sexual union between deity and mortal? Which is also a large part of any Pagan mythos.

And perfect love and perfect trust are all Her ways. I get that you don't think so.. but this is my truth.. and everything she touches, changes.

I don't follow Augustine, either. Sorry. His words hold no water for someone who doesn't use them.

You often mention Aristotle.. who famously said 'Know your audience'.. which you have proven you have failed to do.

As always, blessed be.

IN REPLY TO:
PRIVER:
“If whatever powers that be decide that I'd best be served learning things over again in a new body."

ANS:
You have the only body you’ll ever get, any thing else would be irrational.

http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/04475a.htm

“Man is an individual, a single substance resultant from the determination of matter by a human form. Being capable of reasoning, he verifies the philosophical definition of a person: ‘the individual substance of a rational nature’". This is the doctrine of St. Thomas Aquinas (cf. I, Q. lxxv, a. 4) and of Aristotle."

What has your Goddess told you? You can not get a new body; you already have one given to you at conception and it is a property of your soul.

IN REPLY TO:
“...or a new life on this planet, I'm fine with that. I'm having a better life than I ever thought I would with so much love around me, why not try again?

ANS:
“Man is a creature of God in a created universe. All things that are, except God, exist in virtue of His unique creative act. As to the mode of creation, there would seem to be two possible alternatives. Either the individual composite was created ex nihilo (from nothing), or a created soul became the informing principle of matter already pre-existing in another determination.” (Ibid)

Human life is an act and all things that act, act for an end. The end of human life is eternal happiness or eternal damnation. If man ends in eternal happiness, he will be perfect and not desire anything. If man ends in Hell, it will also be eternal and his chances on earth are nil.

Man chooses his end by virtue of his free-will. By man’s nature, he is charged to do good and avoid evil. If he chooses evil, he will be damned for eternity in the eternal fires of Hell; if he chooses God, he will enjoy eternal happiness.

The consequences that ensue from man's violations of the Natural Moral Law on earth portend similar consequences that will eventuate in God's particular and final judgment after man's death. Namely, there is a consequence for violating God's laws and an eternal happiness if man chooses the good.

"Man is a substance, corporeal, living, sentient, and rational. It is a logical definition, having reference to a metaphysical entity. It has been said that man's animality is distinct in nature from his rationality, though they are inseparably joined, during life, in one common personality." (Ibid)

IN REPLY TO:
“The idea of Christian heaven is not someplace that matters to me since everyone I love is either Pagan or Jewish and wouldn't be there anyway.”

ANS:
Eternal salvation is made for all mankind, no matter what their religion. However, man must always seek the truth that informs his conscience and act according to what he believes to be true. Not to do so is a dereliction of man’s purpose on earth.

IN REPLY TO:
“Fire is a purifying element and since my body will be dead, I doubt I'd feel it anyway.”

ANS:
Your corporeal body will die but your soul is eternal and it will be judged by the God who created you for Himself. God's love is made evident by the sacrifice of His only Son who was crucified so that man may escape the ravages of eternal death, the fires of Hell.

Since man is a sentient being, the punishment will be sever and eternal for those who spurn God. Some of the saints have witnessed Hell. The three children of Fatima witnessed it and nearly fainted from the horror.

IN REPLY TO:
“I'll be in the arms of the Great Mother one way or the other- whether I'm buried or cremated and scattered to the four winds. I suspect we may all be surprised after death, and that's ok with me.”

ANS:
It may be so, but it won’t be in the arms of the “Great Mother,” it will be before the Christian God who created all humanity. It will be this God, who reveals himself to all man, whom you will meet, and not your Goddess.

Unfortunately, you will have to justify your life before Him, and not before your Goddess who has no power over you, and your Goddess, if she exist at all will also be judged by God. She as well as you has been created by the one and only true God who created all things and rules over all things.

IN REPLY TO:
PRIVER:
“I said that I cannot punish another person for making a decision that I don't know if I could make. Seeing as how I've never been in that situation myself, I don't know what I would do given the circumstances. What part of that do you not understand?”

ANS:
I can only answer from what you say. You implied that the misery that laid ahead for some unborn, namely their quality of life, apparently justify their being aborted.

IN REPLY TO:
“Actually sounds pretty Pagan, that Elisha. Use of the elements in some form is a facet in many of our rituals.”

ANS:
When it rains it rains on the good and the bad, but it didn’t happen here; it just got the Pagans. The Pagans claimed the elements and couldn’t follow through. Pagan gods do not control the elements, God does. Further, not only Pagans use the elements, God created them and they obey Him. God did flood the earth with rain, another set back for the Pagans. In fact, most, when they confronted God, in the end, never lived to tell about it. The imperative is, "Don't box with God, he'll kick your butt.

Moreover, I don’t think Pagans would rain down fire on their priests. Further, the Pagans were cutting them selves, madly jumping over their offering, screaming, and shouting for hours, begging their Pagan god to show he was their God. It didn’t happen, because their god couldn't deliver; moreover, he was only a specter of their imagination.

IN REPLY TO:
“The 'historical destruction' was not caused by Paganism. It was, as is all destruction of societies, about control over others. Power over. Force. Desire for conquest over lands and people. Telling people, they're 'wrong' by being who they were born to be, and trying to force conformity on people who aren't made that way. I don't shy away from the unpleasant aspects of early Paganism.”

ANS:
Communists are pagans; Fascists are pagans; materialist are pagans, and their destruction of nations, economies, people, individuals, and the social order is not only obvious, and historical, but also is happening now.

When the Natural Moral Law is ignored, countries become totalitarian, and dictators must rule by force. Why? It’s because human nature is violated and man's very nature rebels against the infringements on his inalienable rights.

God’s laws are immutable, inviolable. They are nondiscriminatory; they rain on all humanity.

IN REPLY TO:
“I seek to understand it in its own context. And Paganism never died. It's underground. It abounds in Christianity through the worship of saints, the placement of the holidays and many of the customs that take place on those days.”

ANS:
Christianity doesn’t worship Saints, they honor them and follow their examples. Christian holidays do not replicate pagan ones. Christmas is the celebration of the birth of Christ, the Incarnation; Easter celebrates the Resurrection. Christians do not worship fertility gods, harvest gods, sun gods, or golden calves. For it is written, "I am the Lord your God, thou shalt not have strange gods before me."

Second, Pagans might worship holidays but Christianity does not. Christianity worships God by setting aside days to honor Him in thanksgiving for His magnanimous love, mercy, and kindness to mankind.

IN REPLY TO:
How does the Goddess show her existence? The look of love in my husband's eyes. The ground under my feet.

ANS:
Your god shows her existence because of the ground you stand on? God shows his existence by His works. Creation is not the work of a Goddess, but the one true God. Creation is the path Aristotle takes to arrives at the Unmoved Mover. A Goddess is not the Unmoved Mover because the Unmoved Mover is not a composite as is a Goddess. You condemn the authenticity of a Goddess because you give it sexuality, making her mortal and not a god. The true God is immortal by necessity.

When there is no love in the spouses’ eyes, is there no Goddess? God is Perfect Love; the love of one another is a vicarious love for God, because man has been created to the image and likeness of God, and man’s eternal destiny is to live in the Eternal Love, God, and the Eternal Love to live in man. Therefore, man's life is a pilgrimage to this Eternal Love, the destiny of man.

Again, Augustine writes, “My Lord you made us for you. Our hearts are restless until they rest in You.” That is personified in the union of man and woman. No matter how much they love each other, their love is only a temporary journey to the ultimate Love, who is God. No mortal love is permanent or lasting but God's love is.

"To the contrary, just pointing out the unreasonableness of your beliefs, and have shown why they are irrational."

I find it odd to me that you use a book that I do not to try to tell me that my beliefs are irrational. Again, it's like speaking bad French to someone who speaks Chinese and expecting some sort of submission. You have proven nothing but your ability to quote from a book that has been revised, reedited, reinterpreted and cobbled together from a whole lot of influences over time.

It's your path, your way. NOT mine. I get that. Do you?

You have not shown anything but your inability to accept the fact that others do not think like you and are capable of coming to moral decisions without using your book. And honestly, that's not my problem. The world is a whole lot grayer than you make it out to be.

"It sounds like you did to me. "

Prostitution is only such if money is exchanged. Please read what is there, not what you assume is there.

I work with infants and young children that are medically fragile, sometimes unwanted and neglected and horribly mistreated by those who are supposed to care for them. Have you ever tried to teach a child born with no brain? I have. Have you ever tried to help get services for a family going broke because of their child's medical expenses? It's what I do for a living. Have you ever seen a child of rape's eyes looking at you wondering what's to become of them? I have.

We can't seem to be able to take care of those children that are already here. I say again, if you are so concerned about child welfare then be a part of the solution. Foster an unwanted child until they're old enough to be on their own.

Don't get me started on the whole Terri Shaivo thing. The government had no business getting into other people's personal lives with that any more than they can tell someone else what to do with their own bodies.

Have you ever taken care of someone terminally ill? Throwing up blood on a regular basis? I have. Don't you dare tell me that if they decided that the pain is simply too much to stand that they wouldn't be 100% justified in wanting to end things in a way that would give them control over their own dignity in dying. Which should be THEIR decision. NOT yours, mine or any government's. EVER.

It has nothing to do with whatever one calls the Divine. People are capable of choosing to better humanity. Even without the help of any gods, if they so choose. It's their actions that determine that. It took so few people to screw up our country as bad as it's gotten in the last 7 years. To fix it is going to take all of us.

My values are fine, my life is wonderful. I have a house, unconditional love from my husband, spiritual joy in my connections with the Goddess, a loving family and amazing friends and am able to strive for my dreams. And I'm truly sorry that you can't realize that someone doesn't need 'your' version of god to find ultimate happiness- and instead feel it necessary to cast aspersions on me and what you 'think' I believe. If it makes you feel better, go ahead. I really don't care.

Blessed be.

IN REPLY TO:
PRIVER:
“But you don't want dialogue.”

ANS:
To the contrary, just pointing out the unreasonableness of your beliefs, and have shown why they are irrational.

["You have intoned your approval of prostitutes to appease your god."]

IN REPLY TO:
Um, actually I never said anything about whether or not I approved of it. I said sexuality should be held sacred.

ANS:
It sounds like you did to me. “Our Goddess says that all acts of love and pleasure are her rituals- and our most sacred law is . An[d] it harm[s] NONE,…”

IN REPLY TO:
That includes being responsible about it, taking precautions to ward off disease and unwanted pregnancy, and honoring self and other, and doing no harm. To honor it as a part of life and a source of joy. One of many.

I never said I "advocated the killing of children."

ANS:
I said you IMPLIED that you advocated abortion, the murder of the unborn (and that is what Abortion is).

You wrote, “Oh, and I get to see firsthand on a day to day basis what the effects are of carrying a child to term that has no chance of a real, functioning adult life, and the hardships that it puts their parents through.”

To me, that implies your justification abortion, be because you have presumed some of the unborn life being aborted are not worth living and women should be able to have safe abortions. In other words, “I can’t blame them for aborting their child, because the child will not have a life of value. But the value of life is not one’s prerogative to determine.

There were people who wanted to murder a pregnant woman’s child. The husband and mother had to flee to another country. They had, nowhere to live, and she had to travel a long way by foot while pregnant. Her husband had no job and she had to have her baby in a stable that housed animals.

Another woman, who eventually died of tuberculosis, gave birth to eight children and with only three of them surviving infancy. She was poor; her husband was a violent father, and an alcoholic. Her first son, born died before his first birthday of unknown causes. Her next born died after six days, cause unknown. Her third was the first to survive infancy. Two others died 17 and 18 months after birth. Only three survived out of eight.

If the first child born in a stable, and the third of eight had been aborted by the abortionists, they would have aborted Jesus and Beethoven.

The point is no one has the right to determine who should live or die because it has been decided that the child’s circumstances of life would have no quality. We’ve seen that happen with Terri Schiavo by her husband’s representatives the Hemlock Society and Dr. Humane Death.

“The nature of death by starvation and dehydration is also being depicted as "gentle" in the words of the New York Times—the same New York Times which in 2002 reported starving people in India dying "clutching pained stomachs."—March 24, 2005 “Killing Terri Schiavo
by Thomas Sowell”

“Cranford "has advocated the starvation of Alzheimer's patients," Johansen said, "He has described PVS patients as indistinguishable from other forms of animal life, and that PVS patients and others with brain impairment lack personhood and should have no constitutional rights."

“Cranford is on the board of directors for Choice in Dying, formerly known as the Euthanasia Society of America, according to the International Task Force on Euthanasia and Assisted Suicide.”

"'The Terri Schindler-Schiavo case is not a "death with dignity' issue. So says Jane M. Orient, M.D., executive director of the Association of American Physicians and Surgeons (AAPS).”

“Terri Schiavo is being killed because she is inconvenient to her husband …and to those who do not want the idea of the sanctity of life to be strengthened and become an impediment to abortion. Nor do they want the supremacy of judges to be challenged, when judges are the liberals' last refuge.”

Why is Terri Schiavo important? She is important because her life had been deprived of human value and vitiated to the life of a vegetable to justify murdering her by an excruciating death of dehydration and starvation putting her in 14 days of agony. Human life has been devalued by abortion, and euthanasia is its natural prodigy.

As you have written, these things are serious. The Germans slept while Hitler eroded their humanity. When they woke up, it was too late, and millions died because no one cared about the truth.

Subscribe to the wrong God, and you subscribe to the wrong values, because inalienable rights are based on the Natural Moral Law and the God who made them when He created man.

When one gets their values wrong, you end up getting your life wrong and that could be disastrous not only for yourself, but for others as Hitler, Mao, Stalin, Saddam and the terrorists have proven. It’s too late for 48 million unborn who were legally murdered by abortion; it’s not too late for America yet.

"I know a lot about Paganism and its accomplishments;"

Um, actually you don't. You might know what your book says.. but that book gets a lot wrong, too. It's based on really bad information.

"It’s evident, you can not tell the difference in proselytizing and telling the truth"

You have failed to convince me your book is somehow ultimate truth and your way should be the only way.

Abortions cause women to have mental breakdowns? I happen to know a few who've had them who are just fine mentally. It was the best decision for them at the time. Why do you presume to know what goes on in another's mind?

IN REPLY TO
PRIVER
“Pro Choice doesn't mean 'anti life'.”

ANS:
To the contrary, you can’t see the truth before your very eyes. Pro-choice, a euphemism for pro-abortion, is all about a mother having a right to have her unborn child murdered. Over 48 million unborn have died because the Court manufactured a right for a mother to have her child murdered.

IN REPLY TO:
“It just means advocating education about ALL implications of sex, protected or otherwise, education about ALL forms of birth control, and teaching it in a way that will allow women to value their bodies and appreciate sex as a natural, beautiful part of human life.”

ANS:
If a woman wants to value her body she’ll obey the Natural Moral Law, which is designed to perfect her whole person. All forms of birth control are against the Natural Moral Law. They violate conjugal love in the institution of Marriage by separating the fecundity from the unitive, and therefore undermine the family.

IN REPLY TO:
“And IF someone chooses to terminate a pregnancy for whatever reason, it should be in a place where all procedures can be regulated and safe. Allowing for the continuation of a person's ... LIFE.”

ANS:
Absurdity begets absurdity. What makes the woman’s life more important than the child’s life? Can innocent defenseless human life be held hostage by the whims of another? Abortion cheapens human life. Billy Jean King had an abortion to play in a tennis match. She had her own child murdered for a tennis match. Abortion is the legal murder of an innocent human life, the child conceived, and moreover than taking the life of her unborn child; abortion denigrates the mother and her self-worth.

Normal birth is not a threat of death. Women do have births and live to tell it. The people that are dying are the aborted. They are the ones not continuing their lives. Evidently, you have no concern for them. You even implicitly justify their murder because you have prejudged them to have no life of quality defined by you. Hitler did the same. Moreover, you also imply the mother to be derelict if she has the child.

IN REPLY TO:
“It's way too simplistic to think that by forcing the government to make abortions illegal that they will somehow stop. Desperate women may resort to going to other countries with lower standards of practice or the old 'coat hanger'."

ANS
Maybe they might try not getting pregnant in the first place. Using your standard, laws against robbery aren't working because there are still bank robbers. So, abolish the law.

Moreover, we are legally permitting the intentionally taking the life of an innocent human being. That is legalized murder.

IN REPLY TO:
“Did making certain drugs illegal stop people from using them? NOPE.”

ANS:
That's the second time you've implied that if a law doesn’t completely stop an illicit activity that it should be abolished. Before abortions were legal, there were about 350 per year. Now there is some 1.3 to 1.5 million per year, and they are not safe. Women still die from so called safe abortions and abortions cause many women to have mental breakdowns

IN REPLY TO:
“I will not punish someone else for making a different decision than I might.”

ANS:
Really, what if they liked to burn down houses and they decide to burn down your residence? Accordingly, since arsonists still exist there shouldn’t be a law against arsonists according to you.

In REPLY TO:
“Paganism has been around in various forms forever...by...who understood that one's religion should be one's own business.”

Being around a long time doesn’t make Paganism right. War, murder, and theft have been around just as long. The standard is what good has it produced. In the wake of paganism is the Culture of Death. In America alone, over 48 million unborn have been murdered. Homosexuality has also been around as long and millions have died because of it.

Christianity is a religion of a God that loves His people. Paganism is a religion that cultivates the Sexual Revolution and the Culture of Death.

Religion is not an entity of privacy when it violates the Natural Moral Law or infringes on the social order, and the natural inalienable rights of the individual. Correspondently, abortion is an assault on innocent human life.

IN REPLY TO:
“Again, take your proselytizing elsewhere.”

ANS:
It’s evident, you can not tell the difference in proselytizing and telling the truth.

IN REPLY TO:
“Your answers clearly indicate that you know nothing about us and do not care to. And that saddens me because it cheapens the purpose of a forum such as this.
Blessed be."

ANS:
I know a lot about Paganism and its accomplishments; I know that there are no Goddesses or reincarnation. I know you implicitly approve the murder of unborn, if their lives, by your judgment, will be valueless. I know you have no authority to judge the value of anyone's life. I also know your not the monitor of the forum. So smile and give your face a holiday.

"I thought English was sufficient in the light of truth. Does this mean if one doesn’t agree with your view, there can’t be any real dialogue?"

But you don't want dialogue. You want conversion. I will not lie and pretend that I believe in Jesus when I don't and am not capable of so doing just because you or anyone else says so. I can't force myself to feel something I don't.

"You have intoned your approval of prostitutes to appease your god."

Um, actually I never said anything about whether or not I approved of it. I said sexuality should be held sacred. That includes being responsible about it, taking precautions to ward off disease and unwanted pregnancy, and honoring self and other, and doing no harm. To honor it as a part of life and a source of joy. One of many.

I never said I "advocated the killing of children." I said that I cannot punish another person for making a decision that I don't know if I could make. Seeing as how I've never been in that situation myself, I don't know what I would do given the circumstances. What part of that do you not understand?

Actually sounds pretty Pagan,that Elisha. Use of the elements in some form is a facet in many of our rituals.

The 'historical destruction' was not caused by Paganism. It was, as is all destruction of societies, about control over others. Power over. Force. Desire for conquest over lands and people. Telling people they're 'wrong' by being who they were born to be, and trying to force conformity on people who aren't made that way. I don't shy away from the unpleasant aspects of early Paganism- I seek to understand it in it's own context. And Paganism never died. It's underground. It abounds in Christianity through the worship of saints, the placement of the holidays and many of the customs that take place on those days.

How does the Goddess show her existence? The look of love in my husband's eyes. The ground under my feet. The sight of all living things. The change of the seasons. Weather. The air I breathe. The water I drink- and the fire that I cook with. The house I live in. My body. Myths. The stars. Music/art/creativity. Literature. Everything. For us, She is everywhere, in all and be all. Therefore it's not ever possible to be separated from her.

Do I think I have a soul? I don't just think it, I feel it. I know what it looks like for me. If I knew how to draw I could make a picture of it.

For me it's about energy. The animating life force. Which exudes from everyone and everything. Therefore I've considered three possibilities:

If there's no reincarnation after I'm dead or no afterlife, I'm fine with that.

If the energies that make up me/my soul rejoin that of the Earth, I'm fine with that.

If whatever powers that be decide that I'd best be served learning things over again in a new body or a new life on this planet, I'm fine with that. I'm having a better life than I ever thought I would with so much love around me, why not try again?

The idea of Christian heaven is not someplace that matters to me since everyone I love is either Pagan or Jewish and wouldn't be there anyway.

Fire is a purifying element and since my body will be dead,I doubt I'd feel it anyway.

I'll be in the arms of the Great Mother one way or the other- whether I'm buried or cremated and scattered to the four winds. I suspect we may all be surprised after death, and that's ok with me.

My faith teaches me that the Divine calls to us in whatever voice, using whichever face will cause us to take action and make changes in our lives. For some that might be Jesus. And that's great. For others it might be the Goddess in one form or another. For still others it might be Mohammed. And that's ok that they're all different. For us, the destination is not as important as the journey. Each has their own lesson to learn on the way to the summit.

Paganism is not always polytheism. There are some that see the Divine as one creative overarching force and all the Gods/Goddess names are different facets of the same Divine.

For me, The Goddess shows her love by bringing people into my life that has an enriching effect on it. Starting with my husband and my friends. She shows her love in the spring by the renewal of all that is green. She shows her love in every act of compassion and kindness among people of all faiths, no matter how they identify themselves.

I get that you think there is only one God. And that his words are found in your bible. I respect that and am truly happy that you have found the way that is truth for you. However, it doesn't work like that for me. And I'm not threatened by that. My faith is not found in any book and is therefore truly my own. And no book can touch that.

Blessed be.

IN REPLY TO
PRIVER
“MY path and those of many other Pagans doesn't include your book, or if it does, has FAR different interpretations of such.”

ANS:
You have intoned your approval of prostitutes to appease your god. Societies collapse when they violate the Moral Natural Laws. Sex is for the procreation of children in the context of marriage. Paganism is a Culture of Death and spurs the Sexual Revolution.

We’ve seen the results when the primary purpose of sex is self-gratification; over 48 million unborn dead have been legally murdered by abortion. AIDS, and STDs are devouring the nation. The corruption of the institution of marriage, and the degradation of self-worth are evident. Suicide soon will be the leading cause of death in America.

Ever heard of Baal, {1 Kings 18 cf.}? He was
the god of all pagan gods. Elisha challenged 250 Baal pagan priest to call their god to rain down fire on the holocaust they had prepared for Baal, and Elisha would call down fire from his God for his holocaust to his God. The Baal priests ranted and raved to Baal until past noon, crying louder and cutting themselves with knives and lances. But Baal remained silent.

Then Elisha built his altar with 12 stones representing his 12 tribes, and piled up wood for the offering and placed on it his bullocks. He ordered his people to pour four buckets of water on the offering and built a trench around the offering. He then ordered four more buckets be poured on the offering. Then he looked up to heaven and called down the fire. Fire fell down on the offering and consumed it. Then the people fell down in awe and the Baal prophets were taken down and slaughtered.

http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/02175a.htm

“Classical sources relate how the Carthaginians burned their children as offerings to Ba'al Hammon. Moloch was a god that sacrificed children and fits well with the Greek traditions of Cronus."

Where do these gods exist? How are they externalized, and demonstrated? What is their nature; how are they revealed?

IN REPLY TO:
“It's like having a teacher with a French accent and a 100 year old book written in Italian to try to learn German. If you want to have any sort of real dialogue, you need to learn to speak a different language.”

ANS:
I thought English was sufficient in the light of truth. Does this mean if one doesn’t agree with your view, there can’t be any real dialogue? That would mean your mind is clearly closed, and therefore it is unable to see or even seek the truth.

IN REPLY TO:
“Ask questions about what we're about. And please stop assuming that you think you know what I advocate or do not advocate.”

ANS:
I have never assumed anything about you, I only reply to what you write. What you don’t like is the history of paganism, and the historical destruction it engenders. You fail to justify them or acknowledge them and are impervious to them.

Paganism has so many gods, (from Beelzebub to Moloch, from Zeus to Aphrodite) that you can find a God for anything that you want to believe in. Therefore, it makes the Gods of Paganism meaningless, namely one is as good as the other.

What is the purpose of human life in relation to your Goddess? How has she shown her existence? How does she manifest herself? How does she show her love for her people or what is the reciprocation?

Do you believe you have an immortal soul? If you do, what happens to it at death? Does your Goddess have a Heaven or Hell? What proof do you have there is a Goddess?

Does your Goddess show love for its people and how is this manifested? The Christian God has manifested His Fatherly love for man repeatedly and in profound propitiousness and profundity.

Through the manifestation of His works, God's many intercessions and answers to those who call out to Him are evidenced in the miracles of Fatima, and Lourdes, in the Church's many saints, and in His guidance, given through His Church, God has shown His magnanimous and intimate benevolence and love for those who honor Him.

Paganism has many gods and they all are mortal. Paganism is a belief in many gods. Assyrian, Babylonian, Hindu, and the ancient religions of Egypt, Greece, and Rome; also Animism, Fetishism, Totemism, Monotheism, Pantheism, etc. Namely, they are not immortal because they are material gods. Their followers worship gods who are statues, animals, and planets.

Notwithstanding, there can only be one God. God is the ultimate cause of all things, Perfect, Self-sufficient, and the Unmoved Mover, Who lacks nothing because He is pure act. Therefore, God is immortal. Hence, since we are made to His image and likeness, we also are immortal.

IN REPLY TO
PRIVER
“When you use your book to narrowly define others who don't use it at all, you will run into problems.”

ANS:
No one is defining you; you define yourself. The use of the Bible is to show the rationality of Christianity and the contrast between Polytheism and Christianity. Christianity has flourished because Christianity is the most reliable and the most coherent guide to the purpose and destiny of man's eternal life. Polytheism is incomprehensible because its gods begin in the world, are of the world and they have no direction towards man’s final destination, which is eternal happiness.

Polytheism is an oxymoron. Of course, those who close their minds and rely on their predispositions can not know the truth or even seek the truth. Truth enlightens the mind; it is the food of the intellect, but a closed mind denies the intellect truth and condemns the intellect to live in darkness and error.

Since God is the Unmoved Mover, as both Aquinas and Aristotle have explicitly shown, many Gods are impossible, but Paganism is a religion of many gods. The Unmoved Mover is simplicity; He is not a composite, because composites are mortal, destructible, and changeable, but the Unmoved Mover is unchangeable, pure Act, and has no potency because He is the Unmoved Mover, the cause of all change who is unchangeable and therefore, immortal as Aristotle's proof shows.

In addition, God is not a species because a species notes a difference in a genus. Namely, genus is that which a thing is, but not that it is, or exists in itself. A species is the differences in a genus that actually and individually exist; the genus defines the species. For example, “man” is a genus; the species is the individual person and is differentiated from other individuals by its differences.

However, there are no differences in God because He is simplicity. Therefore, God can not be a species because species have differences to distinguish their individuality. Moreover, God can not be a genus because He is simple; as Aristotle shows, God is the Unmoved Mover. Hence, His essence is his existence. But, essence is what a thing is, and not that it exists. However, God’s essence exists, and He has no differences because His essence is His existence. Therefore, God can not be a species.

A Goddess has a difference, which is its sexuality to distinguish it from other Gods. Further, other gods or Polytheism denotes a difference between gods, and therefore, since they have a difference, they are composites and mortal. But, God is immortal by virtue of his simplicity. Consequently, there can not be a Goddess, who is complex or a composite by virtue of its sexuality.

Further, composites depend upon their components and components are an expression of potential change, or motion, or potency to act, or act to potency, or changeableness. However, the Unmoved Mover is none of these things.

Consequently, the Unmoved Mover is not moved, or changed, or in motion. Therefore, Polytheism, is a genus, and Goddesses and gods, in their differences, are species; they have differences and can not be the Unmoved Mover who has no differences, since His essence is His existence by virtue of being an Unmoved Mover.

In conclusion, it follows, a god that has differences can not be eternal, and can not be the Unmoved Mover who is eternal. A Goddess denotes a composite with specific differences. Since God is the Unmoved Mover, as Aristotle unequivocally shows, God is simplicity whose essence is His existence. Consequently, it necessarily follows; there can be no Goddess, who is not simple but composite.

I get it. You think the bible is truth. And that works for you. That's wonderful. It's your path, and it's not my place to dissuade you otherwise.

MY path, and those of many other Pagans doesn't include your book, or if it does, has FAR different interpretations of such. When you use your book to narrowly define others who don't use it at all, you will run into problems. It's like having a teacher with a French accent and a 100 year old book written in Italian to try to learn German. If you want to have any sort of real dialogue, you need to learn to speak a different language. Ask questions about what we're about. And please stop assuming that you think you know what I advocate or do not advocate.

Pro Choice doesn't mean 'anti life'. It just means advocating education about ALL implications of sex, protected or otherwise, education about ALL forms of birth control, and teaching it in a way that will allow women to value their bodies and appreciate sex as a natural, beautiful part of human life. And IF someone chooses to terminate a pregnancy for whatever reason, it should be in a place where all procedures can be regulated and safe. Allowing for the continuation of a person's ... LIFE.

It's way too simplistic to think that by forcing the government to make abortions illegal that they will somehow stop. Desperate women may resort to going to other countries with lower standards of practice or the old 'coat hanger'. Did making certain drugs illegal stop people from using them? NOPE.

I will not punish someone else for making a different decision than I might.

Paganism has been around in various forms forever. Cloaked and masked by people who pretended to even be monotheistic in public while not necessarily so in private.. who understood that one's religion should be one's own business. Again, take your proselytizing elsewhere.

Your answers clearly indicate that you know nothing about us and do not care to. And that saddens me because it cheapens the purpose of a forum such as this.

Blessed be.

IN REPLY TO PRIVER:
"The bible may be 'truth' to you, and that's great."

ANS:
Why would that be great if you think it is erroneous? To the contrary, the Bible is truth period. It doesn't depend on who believes it. Moreover, its truth is proven by those who contradict it, a.k.a. the Communist, the Fascist, the mundane worldly religions, and the radical fanatic cults who terrorize nations. Those who follow the anti-Christian message follow a path down the Culture of Death.

Can you point to the consequences of Paganism through out history and its accomplishments? At present, you, as a pagan, support the murder of the unborn, illicit sex to please a Goddess, and seem to be impervious to the consequences of sex for pleasure.

IN REPLY TO:
"But to me and other Pagans, it has nothing to do with us. Zero. Proselytizing doesn't mean a thing."

ANS:
A closed mind is a blind mind. A closed mind can not seek the truth because it shuts out those things adverse to its prejudices.

However, it should mean a lot not just to you, but everyone. Over 48 million unborn have been legally murdered in America. Have you not said pagans want to leave the world a better place? Is it better for the aborted dead children, and the many families who wanted to adopt them? Is it better for women to be prostitutes in the name of a Pagan god, than be faithful wives and mothers to their families?

You also wrote that Pagans believe what ever you do affects others. What affect on the world does murdering the unborn have in your view? Is it being compassionate and putting unborn out of their pending misery?

REPLY TO:
"Actually, since Mother Teresa didn't even think there was a God, so the reason for her mission seems to be one of something other than affiliation with her church."

What absurdity, if she didn't believe in God she would be the biggest hypocrite of our times, and she certainly wasn't that. Further, Mother Theresa said she believed in God; is she a liar? The poor, abandoned, and dying knew she believed in God. Everything she did was in the name of God; was she delusional? That would be absurd.

Mother Theresa's critics, because of their ignorance of the Catholic faith, misconstrued the expression of her experience of the "darkness of the soul."

"The Darkness of the Soul" means her soul was so attuned to God, that she felt abandoned by God when she couldn't be with Him. Thus, Jesus, dying on the cross, cried out, "My God, My God, why have you forsaken me." That's explained in the link below.

http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/08480a.htm

"The "Dark Night of the Soul", consists in the passive purgation, where God by heavy trials, particularly interior ones, perfects and completes what the soul had begun of its own accord, to empty itself of all things and even itself in that it may be one in God.

"Mystical theology is the science which treats of acts and experiences or states of the soul which cannot be produced by human effort or industry even with the ordinary aid of Divine grace. It comprises among its subjects all extraordinary forms of prayer, the higher forms of contemplation in all their varieties or gradations, private revelations, visions, and the union growing out of these between God and the soul, known as the mystical union.

"As the science of all that is extraordinary in the relations between the Divinity and the human spirit, mystical theology is the complement of the ascetical, which treats of Christian perfection and of its acquisition by the practice of virtue, particularly by the observance of the counsels.

IN REPLY TO:
"Or, with Christ. At least that she was honest about, that maybe she 'couldn't' know for sure if what she referred to as 'God' was real."

ANS:
Mother Theresa had no doubt Jesus was God, she talked to him constantly. Jesus motivated her benevolence and compassion for the poor and the abandoned. As said, she saw Jesus in every person. She was Jesus personified.

Posted on November 6, 2007 21:57

IN REPLY TO PRIVER:
"The bible may be 'truth' to you, and that's great."

ANS:
Why would that be great if you think it is erroneous? To the contrary, the Bible is truth period. It doesn't depend on who believes it. Moreover, its truth is proven by those who contradict it, a.k.a. the Communist, the Fascist, the mundane worldly religions, and the radical fanatic cults who terrorize nations. Those who follow the anti-Christian message follow a path down the Culture of Death.

Can you point to the consequences of Paganism through out history and its accomplishments? At present you, as a pagan, support the murder of the unborn, illicit sex to a Goddess, and seem to be impervious to the consequences of sex for pleasure.

IN REPLY TO:
"But to me and other Pagans, it has nothing to do with us. Zero. Proselytizing doesn't mean a thing."

ANS:
A closed mind is a blind mind. A closed mind can not seek the truth because it is closed.

However, it should mean a lot to you. Over 48 million unborn have been legally murdered in America and you, who said pagans want to leave the world a better place. Well it isn't better for the aborted dead children, and the many families who wanted to adopt them, nor is it better for women to be prostitutes in the name of a Pagan god, than be faithful wives and mothers to their families.

You also wrote that Pagans believe what ever you do affects others. What affect on the world does murdering the unborn have in your view? Is it being compassionate and putting them out of their misery?

REPLY TO:
"Actually, since Mother Teresa didn't even think there was a God, so the reason for her mission seems to be one of something other than affiliation with her church."

What absurdity, if she didn't believe in God she would be the biggest hypocrite of our times, and she certainly wasn't that. Further she said she believed in God; is she a liar? The poor, abandoned, and dying thought she believed in God. Everything she did was in the name of God; was she delusional? That would be absurd.

What Mother Theresa's critics, because of their ignorance of the Catholic faith, misconstrued what was her expression of her experience of the "darkness of the soul." "The Darkness of the Soul" means her soul was so attuned to God, that she felt abandoned by God when she couldn't be with him. Thus, Jesus, dying on the cross, cried out, "My God, My God, why have you forsaken me." That's explained in the link below.

http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/08480a.htm

"The "Dark Night of the Soul", consists in the passive purgation, where God by heavy trials, particularly interior ones, perfects and completes what the soul had begun of its own accord, to empty itself of all things and even itself in that it may be one in God. The soul becomes passive, but not inert, for by submitting to the Divine operation it co-operates in the measure of its power

"Mystical theology is the science which treats of acts and experiences or states of the soul which cannot be produced by human effort or industry even with the ordinary aid of Divine grace. It comprises among its subjects all extraordinary forms of prayer, the higher forms of contemplation in all their varieties or gradations, private revelations, visions, and the union growing out of these between God and the soul, known as the mystical union.

"As the science of all that is extraordinary in the relations between the Divinity and the human spirit, mystical theology is the complement of ascetical, which treats of Christian perfection and of its acquisition by the practice of virtue, particularly by the observance of the counsels.

IN REPLY TO:
"Or, with Christ. At least that she was honest about, that maybe she 'couldn't' know for sure if what she referred to as 'God' was real."

Mother Theresa had no doubt Jesus was God, she talked to him constantly. Jesus motivated her benevolence and compassion for the poor and the abandoned. As said, she saw Jesus in every person. She was Jesus personified.

IN REPLY TO:
"And I do wonder about someone who was there and did not seem interested in getting those folks proper medical care, or tackling the reasons they lived in poverty, rather than living in those conditions."

ANS:
What a ridiculous statement, her whole life was dedicated to the poor. She lifted up the dying from the gutters and garbage dumps where they were thrown and left to die. She wasn't a government official whose duty is to take care of those things.

Before you make these bizarre statements try reading a little about what you are criticizing. She was a Catholic in a hostile religious world, she was so dedicated to the poor she hounded the government officials to give her buildings to house the victims of an uncaring society that treated animals better than they treated people.

IN REPLY TO:
She certainly had the money to do so.

ANS:
What a foolish statement. She gave everything she had to the poor. She was the recipient of the Nobel Peach Prize, she gave all the money to the poor. She was given a new Cadilac, she sold it for the poor.

Those concerned about Mother Theresa formed a financial corporation to handle her donations. When she visited it, she shut it down because it was draing money that could be used for the poor. She slept on the floor because she would be using a bed the poor could use. This woman was renowned for her love for mankind. I have read many testimonies of those who visited her; they left in awe of her humility and compassion for all people.

http://www.reference.com/search?q=Mother%20Theresa
"On September 10, 1946, Teresa experienced what she later described as "the call within the call" while traveling to the Loreto convent in Darjeeling for her annual retreat. "I was to leave the convent and help the poor while living among them. It was an order. To fail would have been to break the faith."

Mother Teresa 'wanted all the unborn children'? She's not around anymore.

Again such cretinous preposterousnessd, her posterity is her Missionary of Charity sisters who are lionized around the world for their care for the poor.

"Teresa wrote in her diary that her first year was fraught with difficulties. She had no income and had to resort to begging for food and supplies. Teresa experienced doubt, loneliness and the temptation to return to the comfort of convent life during these early months. She wrote in her diary:

"Our Lord wants me to be a free nun covered with the poverty of the cross. Today I learned a good lesson. The poverty of the poor must be so hard for them. While looking for a home I walked and walked till my arms and legs ached. I thought how much they must ache in body and soul, looking for a home, food and health. Then the comfort of Loreto [her former order] came to tempt me. 'You have only to say the word and all that will be yours again,' the Tempter kept on saying ... Of free choice, my God, and out of love for you, I desire to remain and do whatever be your Holy will in my regard. I did not let a single tear come."

IN REPLY TO :
PETER HUFF: Peter

"Well stated for the most part, but also overstated, or should I say, stated over and over?

"I disagree with one of your comments however,

"Therefore, God gave the Church the gift of infallibility in its teachings and dogmas so that all man may know the Truth. As we see, the churches without infallibility are 26,000 in Christianity alone. contradicting each other in part or whole."

"God's Word is infallible, not any teachings of man that contradicts the Bible."

ANS:
That's absolutely true, man's interpretations that contradict the Bible are in error. But why does man have faulty interpretations? Because his intellect is fallible. That is evidenced by the many different religions that contradict in part or completely each other. Therefore, they can not be all be right.

That's why it was said before, it would be injudicious for an Omniscient God, therefore a Prescience God, to send his Son down and become a man for 33 years and die an ignominious death of agony to establish a church that would morph into error a short time after He ascended into Heaven.

Moreover, the New Testament has many quotes from its founder that God would send the Paraclete to guard the Church from error. Further if there were no humans that could interpret Scripture without error why even have the Bible.

Mt. 28:20 "...and teaching to obey everything I have commanded you. And, surely, I am with you always, to the very end of the age." Mt.10; "For it will not be YOU speaking but the Spirit of your Father speaking through you." John 15: 26-27 "When the counselor comes, whom I will send to you from the Father, He will testify about me. And, you must also testify about me, who has been with me from the beginning.

IN REPLY TO:
"I believe the reason for the many denominations is the incorrect interpretation of His Word. The traditions of man have crept into church history, especially the Roman Catholic Church. So, to state it properly, his word is infallible and without error, not necessarily His body on earth, the church.

ANS:
The teachings of the Church are not just the Bible. For example the Bible itself does not lineate the books of the Bible. The Church was guided by the Holy Spirit in choosing the books, and the Church is the sole interpreter of the Scriptures by reason of its gift of infallibility in its teachings and dogmas. In addition, the Scriptures were not completed until some seventy years after the Ascension.

Further, the Scriptures are replete with Jesus sending his disciples forth to teach all nations. There were little words written in those days, and the Scriptures were taught by the word of mouth. That is called the Traditions of the Church.

http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/15006b.htm

"The word tradition (Greek paradosis) in the ecclesiastical sense, which is the only one in which it is used here, refers sometimes to the thing (doctrine, account, or custom) transmitted from one generation to another; sometimes to the organ or mode of the transmission)." Thus St John writes if all the deeds of Jesus were written down it is doubtful the world could hold all the books used to record them--John 20: 24cf.

"There can only be one true Church and one God, find it and Him that you may have life everlasting."

IN REPLY TO:
"I agree in one true Church. That is those who God has called from every nation and tribe, and language of man, by His grace alone. Salvation is not given to us because of our good works, but because of His mercy in His Son, and what the Son has done. All glory goes to God alone!

ANS:
Predestination:
"Predestination (Latin prœ, destinare), taken in its widest meaning, is every Divine decree by which God, owing to His infallible prescience of the future, has appointed and ordained from eternity all events occurring in time, especially those which directly proceed from, or at least are influenced by, man's free will.

"Theology restricts the term to those Divine decrees which have reference to the supernatural end of rational beings, especially of man. Considering that not all men reach their supernatural end in heaven, but that many are eternally lost through their own fault, there must exist a twofold predestination: (a) one to heaven for all those who die in the state of grace; (b) one to the pains of hell for all those who depart in sin or under God's displeasure. However, according to present usages to which we shall adhere in the course of the article, it is better to call the latter decree the Divine "reprobation," so that the term predestination is reserved for the Divine decree of the happiness of the elect.

"Predestinarianism is a heresy not unfrequently met with in the course of the centuries which reduces the eternal salvation of the elect as well as the eternal damnation of the reprobate to one cause alone, namely to the sovereign will of God, and thereby excludes the free co-operation of man as a secondary factor in bringing about a happy or unhappy future in the life to come."
SEE LINKS BELOW.

www.newadvent.org/cathen/12378a.htm

http://www.newadvent.org/utility/search.htm?safe=active&cx=000299817191393086628%3Aifmbhlr-8x0&q=SALVATION+BY+GRACE+ALONE&sa=Search&cof=FORID%3A9#1175

November 1, 2007 5:35 PM | Report Offensive Comments

The bible may be 'truth' to you, and that's great. But to me and other Pagans, it has nothing to do with us. Zero. Proselytizing doesn't mean a thing.

Actually, since Mother Teresa didn't even think there was a God, so the reason for her mission seems to be one of something other than affiliation with her church. Or, with Christ. At least that she was honest about, that maybe she 'couldn't' know for sure if what she referred to as 'God' was real. And I do wonder about someone who was there and did not seem interested in getting those folks proper medical care, or tackling the reasons they lived in poverty, rather than living in those conditions. She certainly had the money to do so. Mother Teresa 'wanted all the unborn children'? She's not around anymore. How about you? Adopt a child that's unwanted and abused here.. or better yet, with special needs. Willing to have your tax dollars to go to funding health care for all children? I am.

Violating Natural Law? Well, since you went there, then by your standard, in vitro fertilization should be outlawed, correct? Couples who cannot for one reason or another conceive children naturally at all should not be allowed to have them through IVF, by your logic.

Um, first of all, who said there can only be one God? Certainly not me. Your definitions and your book don't apply. Try again. Besides, life and death are part of the same process.. and death leads to rebirth. For Pagans, it's all sacred.

Oh, and most of the Pagans I know were once Christians. Not me, though. You're right that I don't understand how Christians can claim 'one real truth' when it's all relative, with experiences that are remarkably similar across cultures, as well as mythologies with the same themes across time.

If this were an actual 'discussion', maybe you'd attempt to be nicer to those you disagreed with and ask questions about what they actually believed. Instead you come here with your book and ideas that frankly don't hold any water with us. and then try to put us down for thinking differently than you. Exactly how is that 'love'?

Again, what part of 'love your neighbor as yourself' are you following?

Oh, and neither Congress nor any other person nor government body will EVER decide for me what happens with my own body. I don't know if I could make the choice to terminate a pregnancy, because the situation has never presented itself. I cannot condemn another for making what for them is the best choice they can make with the information they have. IF there are consequences for them, they will deal with that on their own, and it's not my place to put more on them for that.

And I work with families who have premature children with birth defects and special needs, as well as those who have been abused and raped, so I see the consequences of poverty and infant mortality up close and personal. Starhawk is right on this. ALL children must be protected.

The topic of this question is less Paganism this time around, but rather should caring for children be a parental or societal responsibility. The fact that you've turned it into a thing on abortion simply says to me that you're one of those folks who thinks that 'pro-life' ends at birth. So yes, put up or shut up.

IN REPLY TO PRIVER:
"I have no idea why you are so angry.. But evidently you have no idea who we are or what our beliefs are. You're peddling something that is unwanted and unnecessary."

ANS:
First, it is you who are angry. Second, I am not interested in whom you are, but I am interested in what you say. If you call stating the truth as peddling something, that's your problem, not mine.

IN REPLY TO:
"We see our Goddess as all around us, in everything and everybody. even you. As such every action affects others. This is not an issue one takes lightly, even if the decision is not what you want."

ANS:
The Catholic Church teaches that man was made by God to the image and likeness of God so that God may rest in man, and man may rest in God. St. Augustine wrote "Oh God you made us out of your love for us. Our hearts are restless until they rest in you." Mother Theresa, the epitome of Christianity, saw Christ in every person, the unborn, the dying, the invalid, the helpless, and yes, even Teri Schiavo.

No it is not an issue your take lightly, violating the Natural Moral Law is deadly as has been evidenced by those who violate it.

IN REPLY TO:
"And yes, one in four pregnancies ends in miscarriage. Not abortion- unless you are willing to hold your 'god' responsible for such."

ANS:
I am not making God responsible, but you certainly have. God does not murder unborn; He permits natural abortions which is not murder. He doesn't permit therapeutic abortions which are murder. Since there can only be one God, you ironically have intimated your She-God is a murderer. Now that is a little ridiculous.

IN REPLY TO:
"This, like all of Starhawk's threads, is a place for Pagans to come together.. and we are capable of making our own decisions, even if you don't like the results.

ANS:
I think this forum is for stating opinions, and the subject is Paganism. It doesn't mean only pagans can state opinions. "On Faith" is an interactive conversation on religion. Has the Post assigned you to replace the moderators, Newsweek Editor Jon Meacham and Sally Quinn of The Washington Post?

IN REPLY TO:
"Take your proselytizing elsewhere. For someone who professes to follow the church that Jesus 'built', you certainly do not follow that whom your 'church' is said to be modeled after."

ANS:
I am not proselytizing anything. I'm just pointing out the irrational remarks in your post, and the incomprehensibility of what you say. Apparently you seem to know little about Christianity. If you did, you wouldn't be a pagan.

Notwithstanding, before you make such injudicious remarks about someone's religion, you might try reading the Catholic Catechism so you know what you are talking about.

IN REPLY TO:
"Oh, and I get to see firsthand on a day to day basis what the effects are of carrying a child to term that has no chance of a real, functioning adult life, and the hardships that it puts their parents through."

ANS:
Who gave you the imperious authority to determine who lives and dies by their quality of life and then dictatorially tell me I have no right to criticize such nonsense?

IN REPLY TO:
"Again, what part of 'love your neighbor as yourself' are you following?"

ANS:
For one part, I am a firm believer in love your neighbor as you love yourself. Therefore, I adamantly oppose the intentionally taking of an innocent human life of the unborn by cutting the child to pieces with a curette, or sucking the little child to pieces with a vacuum, or scalding it to death with saline solution.

Moreover, I voraciously denounce the inhumane murder of a child being born, by a butcher abortionist plunging a surgical scissors into the back of the child's skull and sucking out the child's brains, then sells its organs on the open market. Partial Birth Abortion has been proscribed just recently by the Supreme Court due to the efforts of Christians.

Notwithstanding, I, without question resolutely and tenaciously oppose a doctor strangling or drowning a child to death after it survived this murderer's botched abortion. Further, I, with out question, protest the starving of invalid babies, unwanted by the mother, and starved to death on orders of the doctor. Congress is now addressing those iniquities today.

In addition, I vehemently oppose demeaning women by making them prostitutes, and models for pornography.

You on the other hand have said, "“How about this. Every single person who says that abortion is murder should be required by law to adopt at least one unwanted, abused child that is already here and raise them to adulthood.” Is that your way of saying put up or shut up?

Mother Theresa wanted all the unwanted children rather then they be aborted. The Church, as shown, does not abandon the woman or her child. Her charities are renowned throughout the world. Her schools and universities are pre-eminent as are her hospitals and orphanages. Ever heard of Father Flannigan's Boys Town? All her mangnanimous works are an expression of the Church's love for humanity.

.. that should be THREE out of four pregnancies ends in natural miscarriage, in spite of parents' best efforts.

I have no idea why you are so angry.. But evidently you have no idea who we are or what our beliefs are. You're peddling something that is unwanted and unnecessary.
We see our Goddess as all around us, in everything and everybody.. even you. As such every action affects others. This is not an issue one takes lightly, even if the decision is not what you want.

And yes, one in four pregnancies ends in miscarriage. Not abortion- unless you are willing to hold your 'god' responsible for such.

This, like all of Starhawk's threads, is a place for Pagans to come together.. and we are capable of making our own decisions, even if you don't like the results. Take your proseltyzing elsewhere. For someone who professes to follow the church that Jesus 'built', you certainly do not follow that whom your 'church' is said to be modeled after.

Oh, and I get to see firsthand on a day to day basis what the effects are of carrying a child to term that has no chance of a real, functioning adullt life, and the hardships that it puts their parents through.

Again, what part of 'love your neighbor as yourself' are you following?

IN REPLY TO:
PRIVER:
“How about this. Every single person who says that abortion is murder should be required by law to adopt at least one unwanted, abused child that is already here and raise them to adulthood.”

ANS:
I can think of a better solution than that, if you don't want to become pregnant don't have sex. I think anyone who is pregnant should come to term and at least not murder it. That goes for the raped and incest pregnancies.

The Catholic Church, unlike your Goddesses Church does take care of not only the mother but her child too until the mother is able to take care of herself.

Mother Theresa had asked that if the Mother wanted to abandon her child to bring it to her. She cared for many abandoned children, and was happy to do so. Moreover, there are hundreds of religious places that will care for the child in stead of supporting the murder of it.

Has your Goddess ever thought about that instead of wallowing in sexual iniquity and making everyone else take responsible for it?

1-800-395-HELP or E-Mail

Birthright

Birthright has a network of almost a thousand pregnancy help centers throughout the United States. These centers offer pregnancy testing, counseling, and resources, including medical, financial, and personal assistance. The Birthright philosophy is that a woman coming in for help does not represent a "statistic", or an "issue,", but is rather a human being looking for help and support in a time of need. In addition to pregnancy help services, Birthright also provides links to doctors and others in the local community who can help a woman after the birth of her child.

1-800-550-4900

National Life Center

National Life Center's 24-hour hotline directs you to the closest Crisis Pregnancy Center in the United States and Canada.

1-800-848-LOVE

Bethany Christian Services

Bethany Christian Services is one of the nation's leading providers of adoption and crisis pregnancy support information. They operate a national hotline, which is active from 8 AM to 12 PM, 7 days a week. This hotline routes callers to one of 56 local offices, which can then provide local and regional information.

On-going education and support for parents are offered through our adoption support services. Bethany acknowledges that adoption is a life-long process and that adoptive families sometimes have unique issues and concerns. Bethany's adoption pre-screening and placement program is one of the most recommended in the country and they have placed more than 11,000 children in adoptive homes. In addition, Bethany provides good community-based follow-up, both for women who choose adoption or who raise their child themselves.

1-800-BETHANY

The Nurturing Network

Some 32,000 volunteer member resources nationwide provide individually tailored practical support to college and working women with unplanned pregnancies including counseling, medical, residential, and educational, employment and financial resources.

Several Sources Foundation

Several Sources Foundation provides a 24-hour crisis pregnancy help line, which can connect any caller to their local pregnancy help resources, including Catholic Charities, Lutheran Social Services, and others. Their database of pregnancy help resources is one of the most complete in the nation. See for yourself at their great website!

1-800-662-2678

Gabriel Project

From the Archdiocese of Galveston-Houston, Dr. Marcella Colbert directs this Catholic ministry that evangelizes and saves lives, using the local parish as the haven in which women who are pregnant and in need can hear an echo of Gabriel’s message, “You have nothing to fear!”
Especially those with special needs that don't have any chance for a real adult independent life.

November 2, 2007 6:22 PM | Report Offensive Comments

Posted on November 2, 2007 18:22
National Life Center

National Life Center's 24-hour hotline directs you to the closest Crisis Pregnancy Center in the United States and Canada.

1-800-848-LOVE

Bethany Christian Services

Bethany Christian Services is one of the nation's leading providers of adoption and crisis pregnancy support information. They operate a national hotline, which is active from 8 AM to 12 PM, 7 days a week. This hotline routes callers to one of 56 local offices, which can then provide local and regional information.

On-going education and support for parents are offered through our adoption support services. Bethany acknowledges that adoption is a life-long process and that adoptive families sometimes have unique issues and concerns. Bethany's adoption pre-screening and placement program is one of the most recommended in the country and they have placed more than 11,000 children in adoptive homes. In addition, Bethany provides good community-based follow-up, both for women who choose adoption or who raise their child themselves.

1-800-BETHANY

The Nurturing Network

Some 32,000 volunteer member resources nationwide provide individually tailored practical support to college and working women with unplanned pregnancies including counseling, medical, residential, and educational, employment and financial resources.

Several Sources Foundation

Several Sources Foundation provides a 24-hour crisis pregnancy help line, which can connect any caller to their local pregnancy help resources, including Catholic Charities, Lutheran Social Services, and others. Their database of pregnancy help resources is one of the most complete in the nation. See for yourself at their great website!

1-800-662-2678

Gabriel Project

From the Archdiocese of Galveston-Houston, Dr. Marcella Colbert directs this Catholic ministry that evangelizes and saves lives, using the local parish as the haven in which women who are pregnant and in need can hear an echo of Gabriel’s message, “You have nothing to fear!”

IN REPLY TO:
Priver:
"I have no idea what was just said here. Our Goddess says that all acts of love and pleasure are her rituals- and our most sacred law is

ANS:
When did she tell you this? Got any proof?

Your philosophy appears to be go out and have all the sex you want and if there just happens to be a pregnancy, just murder the child by having an abortion, unless you're having sex with some mystical person who doesn't exist, and then you don't have to worry your sanity and not about pregnancy.

REPLY TO:
"Meaning that all actions have consequences. Please learn something before coming here and speaking a language that has nothing to do with us and using it to cast judgment on those you don't agree with."

ANS:
It only has something to do with you if your violating the Moral Law, and that has an affect on all of society. If you're having abortions or approving abortions then it does have something to do with you.

IN REPLY TO:
An it harms NONE, do as you will.

Oh, it may not harm you in the short run, but it sure will in the long run. You have to be blind not to see the consequences free sex has already done.

As you say, actions have consequences, and the consequences to illicit sex, namely, sex outside of marriage, or for pleasure only, has a multitude of consequences and they are all bad--a.k.a. abortion, fornication, prostitution, infidelity, AIDS, and STDs, the destruction of Marriage, the family and the individual.

Then there is the devaluation of human life, an escape to the Drug Culture to escape one’s conscience. Did you know that suicide is becoming the top reason for deaths in America? They're just little things that only destroy a nation and its citizens. Nothing for any one who doesn't have common sense to worry about.

Why be disturbed about little things like that.

IN REPLY TO:
"Abortion was around long before it was made legal. Which led to the killing of so many women who had to settle for unsafe abortions that put their health in jeopardy. How is that protecting life?"

ANS:

Those women you speak of wouldn’t have put their lives in jeopardy if they had given birth. There are a plethora of safe hospitals for births. Abortion is always deadly matter to the mother as well as the child.

Have you any idea how many people these so called safe abortions have killed. How about first the 48 million unborn children, and a plentitude of mothers. One Abortionists in Chicago performed abortions on two women not pregnant, according to the Chicago Sun Times.

You seem to suggest that since abortion has been around so long that justifies it. Under that standard so has lying, and drugs and theft. Are they justified to, or is it just the murder of the unborn?

Murder is the unjustified and intentional taking the life of an innocent human being. Apparently, you don't mind that our country murdered over 48 million unborn. That is the population of nearly six cities with the population of New York. However, what if you were the one being murdered? I think you would be a little disturbed about that.

IN REPLY TO:
"If you want to go there, consider that only 25% of pregnancies even make it to term. By that standard, the 'god' that you speak so highly of is the biggest murderer of them all."

ANS:
I don't think it is God who is murdering unborn children; it’s against His Natural Moral Law. You might try the abortionists.

I have no idea what was just said here. Our Goddess says that all acts of love and pleasure are her rituals- and our most sacred law is An it harm NONE, do as you will. Meaning that all actions have consequences. Please learn something before coming here and speaking a language that has nothing to do with us and using it to cast judgement on those you don't agree with.

Abortion was around long before it was made legal. Which led to the killing of so many women who had to settle for unsafe abortions that put their health in jeopardy. How is that protecting life?

If you want to go there, consider that only 25% of pregnancies even make it to term. By that standard, the 'god' that you speak so highly of is the biggest murderer of them all.

How about this. Every single person who says that abortion is murder should be required by law to adopt at least one unwanted, abused child that is already here and raise them to adulthood. Especially those with special needs that don't have any chance for a real adult independent life.

IN REPLY TO
PRIVER
SEXUALITY:
November 1, 2007 12:02 PM
“Sacred prostitution was a form of honoring the Goddess who stated that all acts of love and pleasure are her rituals. Why shouldn't sexuality be sacred?”

IN REPLY TO:
Sexuality is sacred because it is for the purpose of creating humanity in the sacred institution of marriage. The womb is a sacred temple that houses human life. That temple is defiled when it is used for any other primary purpose such as for pleasure in itself, even for the purpose of pleasure for honoring a fictitious god. In those cases, sex is made a mockery of.

Since no true God could contradict its natural laws, no god could demand its own laws be violated. To do so would be a contradiction of itself.

Sex for only pleasure is an abomination. The consequences that follow such an ideology have brought forth the Sexual Revolution, and the Culture of Death.

The Sexual Revolution and the Culture of Death in America has generated the legal murder of some 48 million unborn by abortion. Thus, it is now legal to murder the unborn, by cutting little conceive children in the womb into pieces with a curette, or sucking the child apart by a vacuum, or scalding it to death by saline solution. Abortionists are allowed to strangle their botched abortions or drown them to death. So bad is this practice, the Congress is initiating a law to prevent it.

Of course, the abortionists have not only become rich by performing abortions, they have started an industry of selling the body parts to medical research and to hospitals for transplant organs. Today, life has been so cheapened, it is legal to kill an embryo, a human being.

Thus, was born the practice of partial birth abortion where the child, while being born, has a butcher plunge a surgical scissors into the back of the little infant's head and then sucks out its brains so that the body parts remain intact.

Of course, sex for pleasure alone has brought many more tragedies. Seventy percent of Black births are conceived out of wedlock and over half are aborted. Jesse Jackson, before it became politically expedient, said abortion was Black Genocide. It still is; but for Jesse, it's politically expedient to support it.

Further, sex for pleasure alone is destroying the institute of Marriage. Marriage is the foundation of all societies and civilizations. Divorce has risen to nearly fifty percent. More so, Marriage is being redefined to mean same sex marriages, an oxymoron, and family is anything one wants to make it.

As statistics recently show, one parent families are more prone to be law breakers. Further, one study showed that in the Los Angeles area only twenty-five percent of couples were married.

Prostitution is an assault on woman and marriage, and the fruit of marriage, the child. Woman is not made for the pleasure of man; she is a complement to man, as man is a complement to woman. Both are equal in dignity and purpose.

If one sanctions sex for pleasure alone, then by necessity they must sanction lust, adultery, fornication, and homosexuality that are all detrimental to the social order, because they are illicit forms of pleasure.

Evil ensues when sex is used illicitly, namely, when it is not used for the purpose it was designed for by God. Thus, AIDS has killed millions, and STDs are killing and maiming more.

Pleasure is a gift from God that accompanies the appetites and is not to be abused by frustrating the nature of the entity of the appetite. The appetites are necessities that sustain human life.

Thus, the pleasure of eating is a gift to one’s health. Eat for pleasure alone and you become a glutton. Abuse the pleasures of eating, and you become obese and endanger your health.

Light is a pleasure to the eye so it may see. Overindulge in light and you become blinded. Knowledge is a pleasure and food to the intellect so that man may know the truth. Abuse knowledge by not seeking the truth and you become incapacitated confused and frustrated.

Abuse sex and iniquities ensue. That should be obvious. Therefore, using sex for pleasure alone is an abuse of the sex act. It is an assault on Marriage, the family, and the individual and the conceived, because it is a violation of the natural primary end of sex, which is procreation.

Pleasure is only a gift that accompanies the sexual act as an inducement of the sustaining of the human race. If there were no pleasure in sexuality as in eating, there would be no human race.

Using language that has absolutely no meaning for Pagans is pointless. The bible is your book. Not mine. You do not get to define us.

I have no problem with your belief in the Catholic Church as the 'one true church', but I do not understand it. Didn't they just take out 'limbo' as a place where unbaptized babies who are incapable of doing 'evil' go? Seems to me they do change things.

I have yet to find any true empirical science that says anything definitive about the existence of Jesus himself as a historical figure. Until then, I remain agnostic on that matter as to whether or not such a person lived. I have no problem with anyone who actually tries to live his message, if he did in fact, exist. What part of 'love your neighbor as yourself' and 'judge not lest you be judged' are you following, exactly?

What exactly are you trying to prove? Pagans seek to understand in context what Pagans of those days believed, practiced.. and how the stories that lived back then became enfolded into what later became the bible. Paganism was never wiped out, although people have tried. It just went, and largely remains, underground. And we're ok with that. If you don't agree with it, that's absolutely your right to not believe/practice.

Blessed be.

IN REPLY TO
PRIVER
November 1, 2007 12:02 PM

“Using Bible quotes to someone who doesn't follow the Bible is like trying to test someone to find out what they know in English who has only heard Chinese their whole lives.”

ANS:
The quotes are to show why the Church believes what it believes. It’s not to show that they are true or false. More so, it is to show that the Church upholds the traditional teachings of its founder who is Jesus Christ, the Son of God, and therefore God.

You may use your reason to determine whether or not the overpowering evidence that is disclosed throughout the centuries, shows those who reject the Church’s traditions and wisdom, and the moral laws the Church teaches end up in social discord.

The social order of any nation or civilization is in direct proportion to its adherence to the Moral and Natural Laws, which are given to His Church by God, and promulgated by the Catholic Church. Below is a link that shows all what the Church believes. What do you disagree with?

http://www.vatican.va/archive/catechism/ccc_toc.htm

IN REPLY TO:
“You write us off as stupid, yet we are not only aware of the things you mention, we understand them in context.”

ANS:
Who are we? Everyone may not be as astitute as you. To the contrary, no one written anyone off unless one is incapable of thinking and reasoning.

The point that was made is first based on the assumption Christ is real and is God manifested by His works on earth and recorded in the Scriptures. Not only is his existence based on Scripture, but also from the studies of History, Archeology, Paleontology, and Anthropology.

No one that I have ever known throughout history but Christ had His whole life written some 300 years before he was born and when born, He fulfilled all its prognostications.

Moreover, no other church on earth has as its founder Christ, the Son of God. No other founder has manifested, through His miracles, the omnipotence and sacredness of God by instantly curing the leper, making the crippled and lame walk, raising the dead, commanding the seas and the heavens and the creatures in them, feeding thousands with two fish and five loafs. In addition, He was despised and murdered for his love and kindness and then rose from the dead.

Now we know that God is Omniscient. He is Truth; He created man; He is Almighty. We know that God can not deceive or be deceived. He is all Love, All Merciful, and Just; He is infallible, and definitely not stupid.

Therefore, He can not error because error is a lack of truth and truth is a lack of reality; but God is All Truth, All Reality, Self-sufficient, and as Aristotle says, God is the Unmoved Mover. Namely, God is Perfect, lacks nothing, and has no potentials. Hence, God is Pure Act. The attributes of God based on reason are found on the link below.

http://www.newadvent.org/utility/search.htm?safe=active&cx=000299817191393086628%3Aifmbhlr-8x0&q=the+Attributes+of+God&sa=Search&cof=FORID%3A9#915

Moreover, it is written that the ways of God are not the ways of man. Now if you compared the knowledge of man, who is fallible to the infallible mind of God, it would be like filling the whole Universe to it zenith, in all its existence, with sand and making the analogy that the sand is the mind of God. Man, in comparison would be just one grain of sand.

I have only asked one to use his reason. Now, why would God send His beloved Son down to earth to live like a human for 33 years and be crucified in order to establish His Church to manifest the truth if it were to teach error? He came that man may hear the truth and be guided to his final destiny through His Church. Now if the Church He established would fall into error after His Son left it, His Church would be teaching error.

We know Christian denominations, which are said to number some 26,000 alone, and that the multitude of other religions, contradict, in part or in whole, each other. However, the laws Christ gave His Church are not contradictory and can only be changed by God.

What religion can you name, other than the Catholic Church that has not altered its teachings and basic dogmas and beliefs from its conception? What Church was founded by God and not man, but the Catholic Church, and what Church has not broken the Apostolic line of authority but the Catholic Church.

Therefore, I have only said, that if you believe in a God, it is only reasonable that you believe in the Catholic Church, the only Church not instituted by man but God. I have set the reasons forth based not only on Scripture, but also in addition on reason.

Instead of acting as if you’ve been insulted or have an inferiority complex, answer the questions.

TTWSYFAMDGGAHJMJ, well stated for the most part, but also overstated, or should I say, stated over and over? (-:

I disagree with one of your comments however,

"Therefore, God gave the Church the gift of infallibility in its teachings and dogmas so that all man may know the Truth. As we see, the churches without infallibility are 26,000 in Christianity alone. contradicting each other in part or whole."

God's Word is infallible, not any teachings of man that contradicts the Bible. I believe the reason for the many denominations are the incorrect interpretation of His Word. The traditions of man have crept into church history, especially the Roman Catholic Church. So, to state it properly, his word is infallible and without error, not necessarily His body on earth, the church.

"There can only be one true Church and one God, find it and Him that you may have life everlasting."

I agree in one true Church. That is those who God has called from every nation and tribe and language of man, by His grace alone. Salvation is not given to us because of our good works, but because of His mercy in His Son, and what the Son has done. All glory goes to God alone!

Using Bible quotes to someone who doesn't follow the Bible is like trying to test someone to find out what they know in English who has only heard Chinese their whole lives. You write us off as stupid, yet we are not only aware of the things you mention, we understand them in context.

Sacred prostitution was a form of honoring the Goddess who stated that all acts of love and pleasure are her rituals. Why shouldn't sexuality be sacred?

If you believe that today's Pagans practice human sacrifice, you're extremely close minded and unaware of who or what we are and are attempting to use 'your' definitions to define us. We understand the past in it's own context, and are not afraid of it. Our present day rituals are done in the spirit of the old yet adapted to meet the needs of our times.

The Catholic Church is the 'one true church'? Then why are so many harmed by its teachings or its clergy?

IN REPLY TO
TERRA GAZELLE:
PAGANISM and TRUTH:
“You believe you are right...and you are, for you. We Pagans will honor you and your beliefs, not because we believe them, but that you have every right to feed your spirit what it needs."

ANS:
So if I believe offering up human sacrifices as atonement to God, as many Pagans did, that’s perfectly ok with you? I don’t think so, especially if you were one of the sacrifices. Some Pagans did that you know.

Then there were sexual goddesses, who were prostitutes in the temples, gods of fertility. Thus, to some, Pagans women were vessels of pleasure or "sacred temple prostitute" (Assante 2003:32). The assumption was it pleased the gods when sex was offered up to them in the temples.

http://www.matrifocus.com/SAM05/spotlight.htm.

So, not all beliefs are honorable, or righteous. So who determines what is right or wrong? That’s why God gave man the Catholic Church, to guide man to his eternal destiny.

Namely, all that acts, acts for an end. Since human life is an act, it acts for an end. That end is eternal happiness. Man alone can not know how the proper achievement of that end without the help of God, because man’s nature was wounded when Adam brought sin into the world by his disobedience to God.

Therefore, who but God knows what proper conduct is. Hence, God gives man the Church so that man may be in consonance with the Natural Moral Law and therefore God.

IN REPLY TO:
"We do not want you to be Pagan. We do not ask folks to join our church, no more then did any one ask us to become Pagan."

If Paganism is good for you, why wouldn’t you want everyone to enjoy this good and be a Pagan? Since you have written, “Community service is a part of our lives and we want to leave this world in a better condition then what we have now. We believe that what harms one, harms all.” Therefore, since we are all human, then what harms humanity harms everyone."

Pope John Paul II said when one commits a sin, no matter how small, it affects all humanity. He said it’s like a pebble being dropped in a silent pond, and the ripples echo throughout the pond. So too does even the smallest of evil echoes throughout the whole world against humanity.

IN REPLY TO:
"You need to find your own path to your God, as we need to feed our spirits with what we need and we to follow our paths. I truly believe that all paths lead to the truth and we will all be surprised."
terra

ANS:
To the contrary, not all paths lead to the truth, and man can not always find the truth. Since we are all of one human nature, the path to God is the same; one path can not contradict the other.

Many paths lead to eternal damnation. That’s why there is a Heaven and a Hell. The mission of man is to perfect himself by doing good and avoiding evil. To intentionally do evil and avoid the good is a path to Hell.

Therefore, it is essential to know what the good or truth is.

John 18: 33-40
“Pilate therefore went into the hall again and called Jesus and said to him: Art thou the king of the Jews? 34 Jesus answered: Sayest thou this thing of thyself, or have others told it thee of me?

"Pilate answered: Am I a Jew? Thy own nation and the chief priests have delivered thee up to me. What hast thou done?

"Jesus answered, 'My kingdom is not of this world. If my kingdom were of this world, my servants would certainly strive that I should not be delivered to the Jews, but now my kingdom is not from hence.

"Pilate therefore said to him, 'Art thou a king then? Jesus answered: 'Thou sayest that I am a king. For this was I born, and for this came I into the world; that I should give testimony to the truth. Every one that is of the truth heareth my voice.'

"Pilate saith to him, 'What is truth?' And when he said this, he went out again to the Jews and saith to them, 'I find no cause in him.'"

Hence, Pilate stood before Truth and knew it not. God came down to man after the fall of Adam to restore man to his original state of perfection. God sent his only Son who established his Church on earth, and sent the Holy Spirit to watch over it, and to keep it from error in its teachings and doctrines.

Mt 28:20 -
"Teaching them to observe all things whatsoever I have commanded you. And behold I am with you all days, even to the consummation of the world."

Since God is Omniscient, it would be irrational for God to create a Church that would be left to the fallible minds of men and have them teaching errors. However, God is not irrational. For Him to be so, would be a ridiculous contradiction. A Church that would teach error would defeat God’s purposes.

Therefore, God gave the Church the gift of infallibility in its teachings and dogmas so that all man may know the Truth. As we see, the churches without infallibility are 26,000 in Christianity alone. contradicting each other in part or whole.

There can only be one true Church and one God, find it and Him that you may have life everlasting.

IN REPLY TO TERA
VIRTUE:

‘What also makes you think we do not have virtues?’

To the contrary, that would be ridiculous. You only see what you want to see. The virtues of Catholicism compared to Pangan virtues is in there purpose. Christian virtues are an effort to be drawn into the presence of God, and have God rest in the virtuous. Pagan virtues have no true God to be drawn to, and are confined to a worldly good.

IN REPLY TO:
“Community service is a part of our lives and we want to leave this world in a better condition then what we have now. We believe that what harms one, harms all.”

ANS:
The problem is, when you leave this world, where will you go? However, those who are given much, it is expected much. Moreover, if you are not against us, said the Lord, you are with us. In adition God is also merciful.

St Paul:
“If I speak with the tongues of men and of angels, and have not charity, I become as sounding brass, or a tinkling cymbal.

And if I should have prophecy and should know all mysteries and all knowledge, and if I should have all faith, so that I could remove mountains, and have not charity, I am nothing. And if I should distribute all my goods to feed the poor, and if I should deliver my body to be burned, and have not charity, it profiteth me nothing.

Saint Paul may have had Mother Theresa in mind when he wrote, “Charity is patient, is kind. Charity envieth not, dealeth not perversely, is not puffed up, is not ambitious, seeketh not her own, is not provoked to anger, and thinketh no evil. It rejoiceth not in iniquity, but rejoiceth with the truth: It beareth all things, believeth all things, hopeth all things, endureth all things.“ Mother Theresa was Charity personified, not hypocrisy.

“Charity never falleth away: whether prophecies shall be made void or tongues shall cease or knowledge shall be destroyed. For, we know in part, and we prophesy in part. But, when that which is perfect is come, that which is in part shall be done away.

“We see now through a glass in a dark manner: but then face to face. Now I know in part: but then I shall know even as I am known. And now there remain faith, hope, and charity, these three: but the greatest of these is charity.” .”—1 Cor. 13: 1cf.

St. Paul’s Epistle personifies Mother Theresa.
Mother Theresa saw Christ in every human being, in the unborn, the dying, and in the sinner. Her Humility, her Charity, and her Love for all mankind, above all for children and the dying, were unrivaled by anyone existing in our contemporary times. Her virtues of humility, patience, charity, were all for the love of God.

In a context of intense materialistic religions, Mother Theresa was honored by millions of pagans during her funeral procession through Calcutta. Hundreds of thousands lined the street giving her homage as her body was being motorcaded through the city.

The world gave her homage. She was the recipient of the Congressional Gold Medal and the Pulitzer Peace Prize. In a sense, she may have been a thief who stole souls from Satan's grasp.

In the middle of a hostile battle between Israel and the Palestinians, Mother Theresa marched her nuns into the fray across the battlefield to give aid to the wounded in refuge camps. The battle ceased until she had finished. Not even the Palestinians and Jews would trespass on her integrity, her mission, and her intense passionate love for humanity regardless of their religion, because they knew her presence was holy and benevolent and she was the visible face of God on earth.

No hypocrisy in Mother Theresa. She was the epitome of the Catholic religion because she was a devout Catholic. Some people call themselves Catholic but they are in name only, like the Dem Senators in the US Senate, Kerry, Durban, Leahey, and Pelosi in the House.

TERRA GAZELLE:
IN REPLY TO;
PAGANISM:

IN REPLY TO:
“And you do know that ALL human fetuses start out first as female?"

ANS:
Really, that’s news to one of the greatest Eugenic Scientist in the world, the Father of Modern Eugenics, Dr. Jerome Lejeune, and former Chairman of Eugenics at Mayo Clinic, Hymie Gordon, and a host of other Embryologists and Eugenicists.

IN REPLY TO:
“As far as your vision of God? That is all it is. Just like, to me She is Goddess, and from Her came God. It is all what we believe."

ANS:
You can believe anything thing you wish. My God is real and He is not only proven to be real by History, archeologists, paleontologist, and Scriptures, He is proven by His miracles, His Saints, and by reason of his Creations.

A female God is a contradiction of terms, Aristotle points out in his Metaphysics. God is neither male nor female, He has no gender. He is God the Father in respect of his love for man and his authority, which He reveals to man from His Son and the Revelation in the Scriptures and Traditions.

What’s you proof of a female god?

IN REPLY TO:
"Patriarchy came after matriarchy. ..and even now, many societies are matrilineal if not matriarchal."

ANS:
I believe the first woman came from man—Genesis 2:21-25. “Then the Lord God cast a deep sleep upon Adam: and when he was fast asleep, he took one of his ribs, and filled up flesh for it. And the Lord God built the rib which he took from Adam into a woman: and brought her to Adam And Adam said: This now is bone of my bones, and flesh of my flesh; she shall be called woman, because she was taken out of man.”

A woman is head of the family when the husband is gone. Man, by his nature and gender, is the head of the family; woman is the heart of the family by her gender, both are equal in stature and dignity. Change it and you disrupt the nature of the family.

IN REPLY TO:
“To be claimed as a Jew...the Mother must be Jewish. it does not matter what the father is."

ANS:
And so what does that prove? The reality remains the same. Jewish is not a race, it’s a religion and a tradition as is Catholic, or pagan. Each religion can determine its own membership.

IN REPLY TO:
“They still keep the lunar calendar of the matriarchal societies.”

ANS:
I think we all use a universal calendar system throughout the world.

IN REPLY TO:
“And in fact so do Christians...when is Easter? The first Sunday after the First Full Moon after the Spring Equinox”.

ANS:
That doesn’t make the world a matriarchal or matrilineal. It sounds like feminism gone wrong.

IN REPLY TO:
“That is Pagan timing. All those little hints of the time the Jews worshipped The Queen of Heaven...which was the title of Astarte (Ashtereth of the bible).”

ANS:
According to the Ten Commandments, Jews weren’t allowed false pagan gods. Every time the Jews went pagan, they were put down by God and had to come back to God with their tails between their legs. Try looking at the book of Lamentations by Jeremiah.

IN REPLY TO:
"What makes you think that those who are not Christian have not tried it? 99%"

ANS:
What makes you think they did? If they had been devout Catholics, they would not have left the Church. Great credible and respected non-Catholic intellectuals of the world are legion who found solace in the Catholic Church—St. Augustine, Cardinal John Henry Newman, Malcolm Muggeridge, G.K. Chesterton are only a few. There are over a billion Catholics in the world today.

IN REPLY TO:
“of all Pagans in this country were born in a Christian family, went to church, Sunday School, the whole bit.:"

ANS:
If they were Catholic and were taught the faith properly, they would remain Catholic. No other church has a guarantee from God to infallibility as Catholicism. No other Church has kept its doctrines and teachings intact, and unchanging as given to the Church by God.

No other Church has the four marks of the Church. One, it is One in doctrine and teachings. Two, it is Holy in its founder, the Son of God. Three, the Church is Universal in its doctrines and membership. Namely, the Church is all encompassing. And, Fourth, the Church is Apostolic in its line of authority.

TERRA GAZELLE:
IN REPLY TO;
GOD’S GENDER:

IN REPLY TO:
“Gender roles for the Creator of all Life? Oh really."

ANS
Wrong again, there is no Gender in God. The role of Father is an analogy of a Father’s love for his children or humanity.

Again, there is no gender in God; He relates to man in the language of humanity, and He conveys His paternity to the human race is as an authority and governor of humanity so that men may know that God loves them as a Father loves his children.

IN REPLY TO:
"(who you say designed man in His likeness) gave life to all...when a man gives birth to a daughter I will believe that your Male God”

IN REPLY TO:
Again, there is no Gender in God. God is Father.” Augustine writes, “Lord you made us out of your love for us. Our hearts are restless, until we rest in thee.” The end of human life is to be in God and God in us.

Gen.1:26-28
“And God said: Let us make man to our image and likeness: and let him have dominion over the...whole earth, and every… creature that moveth upon the earth. And God created man to his own image, to the image of God, he created him, male and female, he created them. And God blessed them, saying: Increase and multiply, and fill the earth, and subdue it.”

Hence, “God made man to his own image; He made him, male and female.” Namely, God made them to compliment each other, and their natures are the equal, but their bodily properties are not equal, which is obvious. They are equal in dignity and nature, and not in their physical makeup.

IN REPLY TO:
"And you do know that ALL human fetuses start out first as female?"

ANS:
That may be know to you, but it sure wasn’t know to the Father of Eugenics, Dr Jerome Lejeune, or to the former Chairman of the Department of Eugenics of Mao Clinic, Dr. Hymie Gordon, or to any credible Embryologist and Eugenicist. They said there is no doubt that the conceived has the complete human nature at conception where its humanity is established.

IN REPLY TO:
“ok..as far as Moses and the 10 Commandents, have you ever read Hammurabi's code? Much older then Moses and the first written code of laws. In them you will find the 10 commandments.”

ANS:
No, you will not find the first four Commandments of the Ten Commandments in Hammurabi's Code. That’s forty percent of the Ten Commandments to start.

IN REPLY TO:
“Not like the middle ages where they went from rotting corpse to birthing a baby using the same tools and not washing hands. We still use herbs that are antibiotic that were used then.”

ANS:
What is the relevance?

IN REPLY TO:
“One way the Church would know there was a "Witch" was if they were clean. As the church fathers knew, the devil entered the body without a good layer of dirt. Baths were a daily as well as ritual routine for the Pagan.”

ANS:
What’s the point, is it that no one took baths but pagans? What Church are you talking about? There are no Catholic teachings about baths in respect to witches. Second, I don’t know any Catholic teachings that subscribed to such nonsense of witch hunting. Try the Puritans.

IN REPLY TO:
“Gender roles for the Creator of all Life? Oh really. I will believe that your Male God (who you say designed man in His likeness) gave life to all...when a man gives birth to a daughter.”

ANS:
I believe Adam gave birth to a woman; that ought to be enough. Genesis 2:21-25 “Then the Lord God cast a deep sleep upon Adam: and when he was fast asleep, he took one of his ribs, and filled up flesh for it. And the Lord God built the rib, which he took from Adam into a woman: and brought her to Adam. And Adam said: This now is bone of my bones, and flesh of my flesh; she shall be called woman, because she was taken out of man.”

Why is a gender role so risibly abstruse for you? Do you not believe in a mother and a father’s role? To the contrary, there is a difference between man and woman although the radical left can’t seem to tell the difference.

Why would man have to give birth? God made woman to do that, and it seems to have worked out quite well. Moreover, the conceived is formed by the union of man and woman. So both make a child. Maybe you need to consult your She-God about that.

TERRA GAZELLE:
IN REPLY TO;
TEN COMMANDMENTS:

Hammurabi's Code was one of many codes at the time he wrote it during cir 1800 BC. Also, scholars say the Egyptian's “Book of the Dead” was the code the Jews used as a source. Everyone has the Jews using every code imaginable but the one God gave them.

However, the Jews’ Ten Commandments were unique. They only had One True God. The pagan sects had multiple gods, which is an oxymoron as Aristotle shows in his Metaphysics. God is the Unmoved Mover. Moreover, the Lord says in the First Commandment, "I am the Lord your God, thou shalt not have strange gods before me." Ex 20: 2-17.

In addition, the “Book of the Dead” required no worship of God, and Hammurabi's Code recognized many gods.

When the pagans encountered the Jew’s God, the pagans were destroyed. Thus, in the Exodus, Ramsey’s Egyptian army was annihilated, not to mention the plagues God cast down on the Egyptians to free His people.

Moreover, God destroyed Babylon because it worshiped idols. (Jer. 50:1cf.) “Out of the North a Nation has risen and it shall make her land [Babylon] a desolation and none shall dwell in it; both man and beast will run away."

Note in 1 Kings 18 cf.:
Elias challenged four hundred and fifty Baal pagan soothsayers, prophets and their God before the Baal people. Elias called on the Baal prophets to prepare a holocaust and have Baal rain down fire to consume it. The Baal prophets ranted and raved to Baal until past noon, crying louder and cutting them selves with knives and lances and jumped over their offering. But Baal remained silent.

Then Elias built his altar. He ordered his people to pour eight buckets of water on the offering, first four, then another four. Then he looked up to heaven and called down fire. The fire descended on Elias’s offering and consumed it. Then the pagans fell down in awe and the Baal prophets were taken down and killed by the pagans for their worshiping false gods.

Further, they leave out the two great Commandments of Christianity, "Love your neighbor as you love yourself, and as God so loves you," and "Do unto others as you would have them do unto you."

Hence, the pagan moral codes circumscribe the love relation between God and man, as a paternal loving God and the sacredness of conjugal love in marriage. In Scripture, God depicts Himself as the Bridegroom and His Church the bride. He exhorts and reproves man to love God as the bridegroom loves his bride and as God loves His Church.

If you wish to have a feminine God, then you don't have the real God because God has no gender. You can call your god anything you like, but it won't be the God who created the universe and all Creation. It will be a god of your own choosing and made to your own liking, and not the real God. Further more it will be a god of illusion and no more effective than all the pagan gods of the past put together will.

Yes, God is the Father because He says He is, and He can not deceive or be deceived. He calls Himself Father so that those whom He watches over know He loves them as a Father.

TERRA GAZELLE:
IN REPLY TO;
TEN COMMANDMENTS:

Hammurabi's Code was one of many codes at the time he wrote it during cir 1800 BC. Also, scholars say the Egyptian's “Book of the Dead” was the code the Jews used as a source. Everyone has the Jews using every code imaginable but the one God gave them.

However, the Jews’ Ten Commandments were unique. They only had One True God. The pagan sects had multiple gods, which is an oxymoron as Aristotle shows in his Metaphysics. God is the Unmoved Mover. Moreover, the Lord says in the First Commandment, "I am the Lord your God, thou shalt not have strange gods before me." Ex 20: 2-17.

In addition, the “Book of the Dead” required no worship of God, and Hammurabi's Code recognized many gods.

When the pagans encountered the Jew’s God, the pagans were destroyed. Thus, in the Exodus, Ramsey’s Egyptian army was annihilated, not to mention the plagues God cast down on the Egyptians to free His people.

Moreover, God destroyed Babylon because it worshiped idols. (Jer. 50:1cf.) “Out of the North a Nation has risen and it shall make her land [Babylon] a desolation and none shall dwell in it; both man and beast will run away."

Note in 1 Kings 18 cf.:
Elias challenged four hundred and fifty Baal pagan soothsayers, prophets and their God before the Baal people. Elias called on the Baal prophets to prepare a holocaust and have Baal rain down fire to consume it. The Baal prophets ranted and raved to Baal until past noon, crying louder and cutting them selves with knives and lances and jumped over their offering. But Baal remained silent.

Then Elias built his altar. He ordered his people to pour eight buckets of water on the offering, first four, then another four. Then he looked up to heaven and called down fire. The fire descended on Elias’s offering and consumed it. Then the pagans fell down in awe and the Baal prophets were taken down and killed by the pagans for their worshiping false gods.

Further, the pagans leave out the two great Commandments of Christianity, "Love your neighbor as you love yourself, and as God so loves you," and "Do unto others as you would have them do unto you."

Hence, the pagan moral codes circumscribe the love relation between God and man, as a paternal loving God and omit the sacredness of conjugal love in marriage. In Scripture, God depicts Himself as the Bridegroom and His Church the bride. He exhorts and reproves man to love God as the bridegroom loves his bride and as God loves His Church.

If you wish to have a feminine God, then you don't have the real God because God has no gender. You can call your god anything you like, but it won't be the God who created the universe and all Creation. It will be a god of your own choosing and made to your own liking, and not the real God. Further more it will be a god of illusion and no more effective than all the pagan gods of the past put together will.

Yes, God is the Father because He says He is, and He can not deceive or be deceived. He watches over those who love him as a Father.

Hello again PaganPlace,

You said,

"If you believe rebellion itself is "Against God," why do you trust your idea of 'authority' so?"

Because God has revealed it and without it reality is hard to make sense of. Without God it is pretty hard to make sense of truth or logic or uniformity in nature or morals.

YOU: "In fact, if you believe that the things people did in the name of your God are 'ultimately right' because they and you can claim that whatever crosses your mind is 'The Will of God...'"

There is a standard to refer to. God has not left us as orphans. Only that which conforms to His standard of truth is 'right.' Many people have done all kinds of things in the name of God and of gods and as atheists, denying the very God that gave them life.

YOU: "Are you the one who knows anything about Justice?"

I know something. You can't have justice without an ultimate, absolute, objective standard. Who gets to decide which standard is just - Hitler, you? Does he/you make the rules on what is just.

It is like the code you live by, the Rede. Who decides what harm is? How do you know that you are doing good? Can you fathom all things?

YOU: "You seem to have the whole notion cleverly bypassed, and abstracted into, 'Whatever I want to say the only and unaccountable authority in the universe *says* is right, even if it's horrible."

There again, justice is doing what is just and right. Mercy is something different. Mercy is getting what you don't deserve, through the grace of God. What are the reasons that your account or the accounts of your pagan friends are just or right? Because as a group you 'feel' them to be. Well, lots of different groups 'feel' things to be so that are not actually so.

YOU: "But I'll still go after an assault victim who was too afraid to drop the charges against a man threatening to attack her again..."

And I respect you for that.

YOU: "Cause Christians said so, and she being the non-Christian must be in the wrong."

So we can all be wrong, but God is all knowing, all wise, the standard of truth and He is always right.

YOU:"That's not 'Justice,' Peter.

That's just you claiming to own it."

I don't own justice, God does. I abide by it as best as I can, just as I am sure you do.

PaganPlace,

ME: "How can truth contradict itself? Can truth ever be false? How can A = A and non-A at the same time and in the same relationship?"

YOU: "When A is incompletely defined, or a false equivalency is drawn?"

If a false equivalent is drawn, then it wasn't true in the first place. You are trying to redefine the very nature of what truth is.

truth

noun

1. Correspondence with fact or truth: accuracy, correctness, exactitude, exactness, fidelity, veraciousness, veracity, veridicality, verity. See true/false.
2. Freedom from deceit or falseness: truthfulness, veracity. See true/false.
3. The quality of being actual or factual: actuality, fact, factuality, factualness, reality. See real/imaginary.

You: "When something like that happens, maybe someone who claims to know everything about A isn't seeing the whole picture."

Then he/she would not be seeing the truth about A.

YOU: "We can say it's 'equally valid' for Christians to believe in Jesus, cause we're all people and we don't believe in 'truth claims' and books in the particular way you believe about your own."

If you do not have an accurate understanding of God then you are not worshiping God as He truly is. Jesus made this plain. (John 4:23-34)

So, if it is not true it is not valid. You have said something that is false.

YOU: "You believe that A involves certain definitions, restrictions, and limitations that we don't happen to hold."

As I said before, we both cannot be right when we state the opposite. Either Jesus is the only way to God or He is not. He cannot be both the only way and one of many ways.

YOU: "For this reason, we feel your *religion* can't be 'right' about how the universe is put together, cause it makes claim to contradict, well, just about every viewpoint out there. But it's not like you guys are the first ones to come along claiming *your* God is the supreme or only one to exist...."

What is your authority for stating this and is it absolute?

Truth is narrow. 2 + 2 = 4 is narrow. 2 + 2 cannot equal anything else for this statement to be true.

YOU: "We just think that's a pretty silly assertion to make."

So far you have not put together a valid claim.

YOU: "See, Pagans believe that sincere people can see the same thing in different ways, ...even that you could meet the Gods without *defining* them."

Sincere people can be sincerely wrong, as is the case much of the time.

YOU: "Basically, what you say is a problem in *your* thought, not so much an objective one."

That is your contention. My thoughts are governed by the thoughts of another who the Bible reveals as the ONE TRUE GOD. Yes, I can misinterpret what He says, but there is a standard that I can appeal to when you challenge my interpretation.

What is the standard that you appeal to? Does it claim to be an absolute error free standard?

YOU: "It's simply that you refuse to accept that your *givens and definitions* of things aren't the only ones."

No I don't. It would be foolish for me to believe that. The way that you look at the world is built upon certain non-negotiable core beliefs. You will not compromise those core beliefs because that would change the way you believe. All I'm doing is doing my best to show you the inconsistencies of what you believe. Only the Judeo-Christian worldview can make sense out of all of this. That has been my argument all along.

YOU: "Cause, certainly, without them, the form of belief you describe here wouldn't hold up."

I use the definition that God has revealed. They hold up just fine.

YOU: "Others are not bound by these limited views."

Whether you believe it or not, the Word of God says that one day you will stand before the judgment seat of God, either on your own merit or with the merit of One of infinite merit and worth.
That is the highest standard or rule that I can point you to. What is your highest standard?

YOU: "We know know that either of these definitions of 'A' (or any other constant you like) are *artifacts of how we *look* at something,* not their real nature."

There again, language is capable of conveying truth. If it was not nothing could be understood. Everyone would be deriving a different meaning from what was said. You can't deny logic without using logic. Words have meaning and the meaning is conveyed by the context and type of language used, as well as how the particular culture understands its colloquial. There are many factors that apply, but truth can be determined by what is said.

ME: "Can a dog be a cat? That would be contradictory with reality. Yet, you are saying that what you believe and what I believe are both equally valid positions to hold. I say they are not because they are contradictory."

YOU: "We'd just say you insist on a contradiction, and certain assertions that descend from one 'side' you've constructed around that contradiction, and then demand that 'Only one side is real!' *because you decided to believe that way.*"

Yes, I believe that God is absolutely true in His revelation to us. Logic, that we use to put these sentences together, would also say that two contradictory statements cannot both be true, at the same time and in the same way.

A is A.
A is not non-A.
A is either A or it is not-A

There is no middle ground.

ME: "I say there is only one true and living God."

YOU: "This puts you in the position of both trying to prove the unprovable, and prove a million negatives. So you may *insist* "There is only one God," but it's hardly logical. You only speak a 'contradiction' someone *made* because you like the corollaries."

Not true. God the one and only has revealed Himself to mankind by His Word, which says that Jesus Christ is the only means to know the one and only true God. It is not something I have come up with on my own. I appeal to the highest authority that I know, His Word. I'm only proving the God of the Bible for there is no other God.

You: "Or we could be humans, and all we can observe are a) That there's many Gods,in any sense we can know, any grand unities aside, and b) Some people don't like this idea, and thus make 'truth claims' that result in contradictions, then claim that the existence of the contradiction their insistences generated makes everyone but themselves crazy or something."

There again, both statements are opposite and therefore not logically consistent. How have you observed your supposed gods/goddesses, other than in your imagination and from the thoughts of some other subjective opinion? Is there a standard you can appeal to?

YOU: "You see, I'm what we call a 'soft polytheist.' I may believe that there could well be a grand unity of the universe, in which we and even the Gods are individuated parts, ...what I don't do is pick a particular limited being and say they *are* the only God in the universe."

There again you don't know. You are just speculating. The God of the Bible says that we can know Him over and over again, and what He says makes sense.

"See, from our perspective, what folks like you are doing, is *conflating* a Bronze-age Hebrew tribal God *with* the summation of all that is sacred in the universe, saying the material world isn't *part* of that one being, and also asserting that a certain narrative that doesn't fit observation is the "Only Truth."

Actually it does fit. For life comes from the living, intelligence from the intelligent, love from the loving, and goodness from the good.

Your proof that paganism came before the revelation of this one true God is very weak.

YOU: "We don't have to disbelieve your God *exists* to say we don't think you've got the definitive and exclusive picture of the universe that you *claim.*"

True, you don't have to believe. In fact the Bible says that you suppress the truth, but are you right?

YOU: "Your view exists, someone might well believe that, ...OK. It's when you start claiming *other* views aren't valid that we have these scuffles. But I know of no property of the universe that says people who see the world entirely differently absolutely cannot interact in consentual reality, or even, *gasp* Get along productively."

Sure you can, but you do so despite your worldview, for you keep borrowing from the Judeo-Christian foundation.

Those Pesky Witches!

~Little Miss Wanna-be~

"You fly on your brooms, they say, cursing and hexing those below...
This is the season for your flight they say...so up into the air we go.
What no flying, but here's my broom I say!
Come on now why did I join this troop,
if not to play?"

"A Harvest, what do you mean a Harvest ...
a celebration of the Earth?
oh how boring I say..."
(umm this penty is not what they say it is worth) .
"I came to fly, I wanted to so bad...but you all are stuck on the ground...
what fun is it to weave and sing making magick on the sound?
"A cat at least, black and glowing in the eyes?
I see a tail and a bright green eye on a kitten with a bell.
What fun is that?
What kind of hag are you...? A kitten? Where's the Hell?
You all are steeped in Devils Juice! Where is it by the way?
A time of remembrance of loved ones past?
Well I did not sign up for that,
Hi Ho this witch is gone!"
(I wonder if I can get my money back?)

~Witch~
"OK my Sisters and Brothers of the path...
little Miss Witch is gone."

"Shall we have our cider and barley cakes now?
or after we return before the dawn?"

So we put down our brooms and circle around, braiding the strands of fate,
together we sigh, and together we sing,
And together we enter the sky!
Our robes fly out and our capes whisper, " seee, seeee the Witches are free."

Over the rooftops we go, while sitting there in the circle glow.
The fire blazes on shadowed faces of witches half asleep...
Our dreams shaped on flickering lids and the ancient mysteries so deep,
For we are the sky, the stars, the glow of the moon...the sea and the waves...
But down to earth we must return, the dawn is about to break...

Awake we stir and heave a sigh, looking smilingly around,
We laughingly say "all are here; none are lost, amongst the silvery clouds".
We start our chant to the Horned One, He who will say farewell, for in the arms of the Wise Old One he will sleep and dream til Yule.
We start to circle round and round chanting as we go,
" OH Lord of Horns and Lord of Might bring to us the second sight...
Bring to us our loved ones bright, bring to us this SAMHAIN NIGHT!"
We rest and drink our cider hot, and nibble on the cakes.
We share a bit with Mother Earth, blessing Her for
our fate.

In the fires burning low, in the embers quiet glow
I see a face who will it be... that face is becoming more like me...
A different time, a different place,
Cleopatra? No just a mom, seems that is my fate.
But hold on now... there I do walk the round...
in the circle with my chums, Witches still will circle the ground.
In the future there will be Witches flying free like thee and me.
May we all Blessed be !

A Blessed and Happy Samhain to ye all here, On Faith!

terra

Anon,
You don't like us...get off our page. WE have One Panalist. One page...
I am not makeing any exuses for my feelings again. I am not going to try to explain again. I don't owe any of you anything. Period.

Paganplace..shall we now ignore these cowan muggles and go on with our intentions..
How will you celebrate Samhain? Have not seen you on Covenspace.

And dear...breathe. Don't let them get you down. They don't understand, they can't. They don't want to. I have gone from winning an award to being called intolerant. But then you are always called intolerant for not putting up with intolerance. But then I know not all Christians are so blind or deaf.

I too am a soft polytheist. The many parts of One.

Namaste,
terra

From what I've read here, I'd surmise that Pagans don't think, at all.

Anyway, Peter, maybe I'll be called names for *saying too much* on this issue, but, really, you bring us to the original point.

If you think, as you did above, that *everyone* deserves the death penalty, only you Christians have a special exemption....

Believe it or not, you guys end up actually treating people that way.

Then say *we* ought to be begging for your 'forgiveness' for doing or being what we were abused and assaulted for in the first place.

Be glad Pagans don't think like you in the first place.

And, further, Peter, in your response to Terra:

""I neither asked for or wanted his death...only justice. Justice is not slanted. True justice does not care who you are or what judgement man makes. Justice is the scale. It is a law of the universe."

You said...

"So how can you say that the Christian (Biblical) God is unfair in His judgment and carrying out of the death penalty on those who deserve justice (which is all of us)?"

Umm... Let me think, here. Somehow humans acting like it's given to them to try and enforce an indiscriminate 'death penalty' on *everyone* because of a book you like... doesn't sound like Justice to me. Or a lot of people.

If you believe we all deserve the death penalty, start with yourselves, how bout? Happens all too often as it is, so why are you so Hell-bent on spreading this idea to *others* who aren't even 'Children of Adam?'

"You use the examples of rape and murder from the Bible to decry that God, as revealed in the Scriptures, is unjust and unloving, but the Bible is brutally honest in its depictions of what sinful man has done that has not been in accord with God’s word."

So the book only was made to illustrate what happened before the book was written, to those whose only 'sin' was disobeying the book, or figures therein. Ah. So clear, now.

" You also have to take into account that God judged these sinful nations for their idolatry and rebellion and used other nations to bring about justice."

If you believe rebellion itself is "Against God," why do you trust your idea of 'authority' so?

In fact, if you believe that the things people did in the name of your God are 'ultimately right' because they and you can claim that whatever crosses your mind is 'The Will of God...'

Are you the one who knows anything about Justice?

You seem to have the whole notion cleverly bypassed, and abstracted into, 'Whatever I want to say the only and unaccountable authority in the universe *says* is right, even if it's horrible.

But I'll still go after an assault victim who was too afraid to drop the charges against a man threatening to attack her again... Cause Christians said so, and she being the non-Christian must be in the wrong.

Bah.

That's not 'Justice,' Peter.

That's just you claiming to own it.

Anyway, a little logic on this:

"How can truth contradict itself? Can truth ever be false? How can A = A and non-A at the same time and in the same relationship?"

When A is incompletely defined, or a false equivalency is drawn?

When something like that happens, maybe someone who claims to know everything about A isn't seeing the whole picture.

We can say it's 'equally valid' for Christians to believe in Jesus, cause we're all people and we don't believe in 'truth claims' and books in the particular way you believe about your own.

You believe that A involves certain definitions, restrictions, and limitations that we don't happen to hold.

For this reason, we feel your *religion* can't be 'right' about how the universe is put together, cause it makes claim to contradict, well, just about every viewpoint out there. But it's not like you guys are the first ones to come along claiming *your* God is the supreme or only one to exist....

We just think that's a pretty silly assertion to make.

See, Pagans believe that sincere people can see the same thing in different ways, ...even that you could meet the Gods without *defining* them.

Basically, what you say is a problem in *your* thought, not so much an objective one. It's simply that you refuse to accept that your *givens and definitions* of things aren't the only ones.

Cause, certainly, without them, the form of belief you describe here wouldn't hold up.

Others are not bound by these limited views.

It's like whether you want to say 'Light Is A Particle' or 'Light Is A Wave.'

If you had a thing for Maxwell, you might insist it can only be one of these in an absolute sense:

We know know that either of these definitions of 'A' (or any other constant you like) are *artifacts of how we *look* at something,* not their real nature.

Light can be observed to behave in either way *if you look at it in that manner, and not, in fact, otherwise.*

"Can a dog be a cat? That would be contradictory with reality. Yet, you are saying that what you believe and what I believe are both equally valid positions to hold. I say they are not because they are contradictory."

We'd just say you insist on a contradiction, and certain assertions that descend from one 'side' you've constructed around that contradiction, and then demand that 'Only one side is real!' *because you decided to believe that way.*

We see it otherwise: but you say:

"I say there is only one true and living God."

This puts you in the position of both trying to prove the unprovable, and prove a million negatives. So you may *insist* "There is only one God," but it's hardly logical. You only speak a 'contradiction' someone *made* because you like the corollaries.

"You say there are many gods and goddesses.
If both these statements are true then there is no difference between what is true and what is false, so the statement cannot be true that both statements are true."

Or we could be humans, and all we can observe are a) That there's many Gods,in any sense we can know, any grand unities aside, and b) Some people don't like this idea, and thus make 'truth claims' that result in contradictions, then claim that the existence of the contradiction their insistences generated makes everyone but themselves crazy or something.

You see, I'm what we call a 'soft polytheist.' I may believe that there could well be a grand unity of the universe, in which we and even the Gods are individuated parts, ...what I don't do is pick a particular limited being and say they *are* the only God in the universe.

There's a difference.

See, from our perspective, what folks like you are doing, is *conflating* a Bronze-age Hebrew tribal God *with* the summation of all that is sacred in the universe, saying the material world isn't *part* of that one being, and also asserting that a certain narrative that doesn't fit observation is the "Only Truth."

We don't have to disbelieve your God *exists* to say we don't think you've got the definitive and exclusive picture of the universe that you *claim.*

Your view exists, someone might well believe that, ...OK. It's when you start claiming *other* views aren't valid that we have these scuffles. But I know of no property of the universe that says people who see the world entirely differently absolutely cannot interact in consentual reality, or even, *gasp* Get along productively.

We'd say that's a feature, not a 'bug.' :)

*coming back after counting to about five hundred thousand.*

Frankly, what angered me about Cambpellite's claims was really that this thread turned to people insisting 'Pagans are unforgiving, thus inferior,' ... the case of people who are abusive and demand their kind of religious 'forgiveness' so they can keep up the same patterns without taking accountability often involves abuse...

So, what happens, Christians come on with their idea, 'You aren't qualified to dispute our defaming of you unless you're Christian, particularly because you were sexually-abused,' (not personally, 'harassed' might have been a better word, but I saw, particularly how in their world, being sexually-abused negatively impacts the victims in terms of anyone listening to them.)

As for Terra's circumstances, she was being expected to, not really 'forgive' but give up all potential of legal protection against a violent man who'd sexually-assaulted and threatened her over her religion in the name of his Christianity... so that this same man could get a place in line for organ transplants that otherwise would have gone to someone else.

He made no apologies or promises he wouldn't turn around and attack again, ...or in any other way make amends... he sent a relative to 'beg for Christian forgiveness' from someone he'd assaulted for not being Christian.

Now people want Terra to feel guilty for being put in *that* situation, even imply *she's* a murderer.

That's pretty heavy stuff considering it would have been putting her own life at risk in order for an 'unrepentant' violent man to take an organ transplant from someone *else,* who likely never hurt *anyone,* never mind continued to threaten them.

I mean, remember, those organs would be going elsewhere. She was being asked to choose this man's life over both her own and some other unknown person's, and Christians repeatedly use her telling of her story to insist that only Christians know 'forgiveness.'

As for me having *issues* about years of spiritual abuse and being talked to like that by the offenders... well, it's called post-traumatic stress, ...the individuals involved have been reconciled with in real ways or let go. The systems that create and enable these things, yes, can still make me angry when, yes, we're being, really, discounted as feeling humans and people of faith, both... for not participating.

I know a lot of Christians believe they've found the Greatest And Only Thing Ever... well, great, on some levels, but sometimes I see people buying into and insisting upon what abused them in the first place, then displacing it all by claiming people who don't are part of the problem.

Which is a pattern you see from abuse victims all the time, actually. Blaming, not the abusers, but those who stand up to them, for 'rocking the boat.' And/or themselves.

Now, some say, 'Ha, all this upsets you, we must have the superior religion.'

Trust me, I eally don't buy that. Being at peace with myself, well, is an ongoing thing. With the world... Can be harder when still seeming to e under attack, when trying to counsel people elsewhere who aren't that unlike me from setting out on self-destructive courses, because they've internalized some of these messages of valuelessness...

I'll add, too, that people who do counseling, need their own counseling, and doing this without appropriate support systems is... something that can really beat on one, (so sorry if that all was *too* angry for this forum. My 'retirement' from that was disturbed by a couple of cries for help, which I'm just not in the habit of turning down,) ...But there's a difference between 'serenity' and 'denial' and certainly between 'serenity' and 'smugness.'

These injustices are ongoing, and, yeah, can make one angry.

Too often I hear victims being *dehumanized* by those who deny the problems are really important, as long as one complies, ...my 'path to forgiveness' of people involved wasn't in labeling things as 'sin' and then invoking a supernatural write-off, but rather, in recognizing the humanity of those that I've seen to wrong myself and others.

If my heart's heavy, it's in having my own humanity still denied by so many, and seeming to have to bear more than my share of the load of outrage that perhaps shouldn't fall on just a few.

Too often, in short, I observe this 'sin and forgiveness thing' merely operates to bypass *compassion* ...maybe so people don't have to ever feel it.

I see it whenever a Pagan post occurs here, particularly when Terra is called a lesser person for having the temerity to be assaulted by a Christian who was trying to terrorize her out of her faith, then not turn around and become Christian, and leave her without what meager legal protections she had so the same man could live at yet another person's expense.

Pardon the anger. It passes.

Doesn't mean it's not real.

Hi Terra,

I’ve been away for a few days. There seems to be a lot of edginess in these posts. But, since I care dearly about the truth of God, I will take the time again to defend some of the comments that go against it, at the risk of creating more hard feelings. Hopefully you can find it in your heart to forgive me, as my Lord has taught me to do of others.

How can truth contradict itself? Can truth ever be false? How can A = A and non-A at the same time and in the same relationship?

Can a dog be a cat? That would be contradictory with reality. Yet, you are saying that what you believe and what I believe are both equally valid positions to hold. I say they are not because they are contradictory.

I say there is only one true and living God.
You say there are many gods and goddesses.
If both these statements are true then there is no difference between what is true and what is false, so the statement cannot be true that both statements are true.

I say that the Biblical God differs between night and day from the gods/goddesses of other religions.

Logic applies to reality, so therefore we can use it to test truth claims about reality.

Your claim that Christianity is borrowed from the pagan religions is not justifiable. You cannot show me how these gods/goddesses are based on real people. Jesus Christ was/is an historical person. You cannot show me how these mythological gods are similar to the God of Christianity. On the contrary, Christianity is based on the Jewish Scriptures that teach that we are to have no other gods before God almighty, because there are none that are truly God.

I found it curious that you deny the Christian God but you have the very same concerns about justice that we do as Christians. How can a good and loving God compromise justice? He would not be good if wrongful action was not addressed. Nor would He be just. That is why God sent His Son, so that His justice would also be satisfied. And the Son voluntarily came to this earth to meet the righteous requirements that God demands.

Here is what you said,

"I neither asked for or wanted his death...only justice. Justice is not slanted. True justice does not care who you are or what judgement man makes. Justice is the scale. It is a law of the universe."

So how can you say that the Christian (Biblical) God is unfair in His judgment and carrying out of the death penalty on those who deserve justice (which is all of us)?

You use the examples of rape and murder from the Bible to decry that God, as revealed in the Scriptures, is unjust and unloving, but the Bible is brutally honest in its depictions of what sinful man has done that has not been in accord with God’s word. You also have to take into account that God judged these sinful nations for their idolatry and rebellion and used other nations to bring about justice.

As for the body and the blood, I see there are lots of misconceptions, mainly coming from a Roman Catholic conception of the body and blood, called transubstantiation. I do not hold to a Roman Catholic position as to the body and blood of the Lord, for I do not find it to be accurate from Scripture. It is a position that is read into Scripture not taken out of Scripture.

Ps, forgiveness doesn't mean you accept bad things that people do and turn into a doormat, and that there's no consequence for action. It means you control your feelings of anger and resentment, and not demand restitution or punishment for your own sake.

Terra, you did the right thing, karmically, to file charges against your attacker. Violent people shouldn't be allowed to hurt others. You did the wrong thing, karmically, in refusing his sister. She was YOUR victim, because you had no compassion for HER pain in her brother's sickness. You nursed your boo-boo, in your words, at her expense, not just his. Maybe your Gods were giving you an opportunity to learn compassion, just as you were his opportunity. You did admit that he stopped his attack short of rape or murder. You've only thought of yourself and your own justice, and not considered the ripple effect your actions would have outside your own life.

The Bishop had every right to have Valjean arrested for stealing his silverware, but his compassionate nature compelled him to forgive, to act against his own interest. In his forgiveness he gave Valjean a whole new lease on life, and that created a ripple effect across the rest of the story. It's not Valjean versus Javert in a battle across France, it's the Bishop versus Javert, and Valjean is the battlefield. You're not only biggoted but you're stupid, and you don't know how to read.

Terra, it's hard for me to take you seriously, because I read above where you shouted down someone who disagreed with YOU. Not disrespected, just disagreed, and tried to share and explain via personal experience.

It also sounds like you're saying that Christians are a monolithic group, and they are not. Neither are Buddhists, Hindus, Muslims, Jews, or any other World Religions I can think of. You're guilty of what you're accusing others of doing - judging based on a label instead of looking at the individual.

Mercy, compassion, and forgiveness are central to all the word's major religions. If you don't believe me, look it up. Read some actual texts from other religions instead of spouting what you THINK you know about them. If we (meaning the entire planet) can agree to those three words, that one central concept, then maybe we can take the next step together, and stop killing each other so readily. I've read Starhawk's books and her posts here, so I know your attitude is not a reflection of hers, but man! Some of you really need to look in a mirror.

I'm a Buddhist myself. My family came from Asia, so I was raised as a Buddhist, but I'm American through and through. I won't say I'm an expert, but I took world religion classes in college, and I've read a lot. I think it's good to learn what other people think.

You, on the other hand, seem to think that you already KNOW what other religions teach, even though you clearly don't. So don't give me your excuses. You're just a bigot in a fancy costume.

PS, there's a big difference between what the talking heads on the news say Catholic Pope says, and what Catholic people in the world actually do. I've never met a mean hateful Catholic, and I live a half a mile from a big Catholic shrine. I like it there - it's beautiful and peaceful. But now I can say I met mean, nasty, spiteful, biggoted Wiccans.

Anon,
Pagans do know how to forgive...after all we have forgiven the inquisition,the Witch trials, the cops who have harrassed, etc.

We can undersand the human failing and the sacred spirit in each being...our hearts can go out to those who have wronged us and understand why they did the harm. But the Christian understanding of forgivness is not in our world view. Mercy and forgivness can be in some experiences...but that does nothing without balance. They harm and you forgive and nothing rights the balance.

Balance is big for Wiccans...please know that not all Pagans are Wiccan, but all Wiccans are Pagan.(and Pagan is a proper noun...capitolize) We have in our Charge:
You must have
Beauty and Strength
Power and Compassion
Honor and Humility
Mirth and Reverence within you.

You can not have balance with Forgivness without Justice and acceptance of wrong doing.

terra

Anon,
If this was an interactive website with audio, you would have heard a big sigh after I had read your post. You just do not get it... you read but have no understanding of what was said.

WE are people...real people with experiences, with lives, pasts and because of our beliefs...less baggage then what you all tend to think.

What makes you think that we are monolithic? That we are all of one thought and practice and experience? Each of us handle things in different ways according to our own experiences. And what makes you think that we have to do things in YOUR way? We are a religion. We have our own philosophies, our own laws and our own ways of handling life.

I understand that it is hard for someone of the Christian religion to really understand that we are not a off shoot of your belief. You ask that we respect you...(say anything about Christians, and you are bashing), but you feel that it is just swell to say we need to be more like you. That we need you to tell us how to handle discrimination, hate and pain, some of those experiences you will not have to face ever.

You frame your comments as trying to be helpful, just as Campbellite did...that we need to be forgiving for our own benefit. That we need to let go of our grivances...Who says we do not? I do not forgive those who have not addmitted to seriuously harming me...I also do not carry around any grudge. What happened happened, I accept the experience as a part of my learning. We all know that carrying around stuff like that causes stress and so harms ourself...its like drinking a cup of poison and expecting someone else to fall over dead.

We see the universe as having its own laws...and those laws do not depend on us doing anything. We have to live for today, tomorrow is gone...and if you live well in balance today, tomorrow will be a better place. See, we believe that we create our reality...live well it pains the people that hate you. Be happy and make miserable those who want you in hell. How we live is up to us, whether miserable or happy, its in our power. And being happy causes less wrinkles and irratates those who would like to see the end of us.

Having amnesia about those who have harmed us and what happened does not mean you have forgiven. And remembering the experience and wanting justice does not mean we are carrying around a rock instead of a heart. Forgivness is not high on the list of virtues for Pagans...because our code of living does not call on us to sit in corners nursing our boo boos.

And one more thing...I doubt if there is a Pagan alive that has not read Les Miserables and thousands of other books. At one time I had over 1900 books, I stopped counting at 1900. We are into science, history,philosophy, and every other knowledge known to man. Why do you take for granted that we have not read such a classic and would not want to? This is what we have been talking about...a casual disrespect toward us by those who do not know us and have not learned anything about us before giving their opinions.

When Judge Moore had his big rock with the 10 commandments taken out of his courtroom...those folks were screaming discrimination...they were holding onto that thing and praying. It looked like that old DeMille movie the 10 Commandments. Remember when Moses came down the mounatain with the tablets and the people were all over the Golden Calf...That is what it looked like..a bit of idol worship. Evrn if DeMille got it really wrong. But when you asked any Christian about it, they claimed " Non Christians hate Christians." I don't hate Christians. I was not born in a caccoon...I was and am part of a network of family and friends that are Christian.

So please stop looking down on us as if you need to guide us to your idea of enlightenment. All that does is cause estrangment between religions. We ask to be treated as equals in this country and on this planet.

Blessed be,
terra

I'm sorry, I thought this was a discussion of cross-faith values, from the perspective of the pagan worldview. Since compassion, mercy, and forgiveness are valued in many faiths, not just Christianity, I assumed that pagans would be willing to think it over and try it out. My bad.

Anon:

I hate no one. I do, hwever, resent the living daylights out of folks who take it upon themselves to tell me what I should and should not believe. It's why I now answer my door skyclad when I see through the peephole that the person on the other side is eother holing a stack of Watchtowers or has a name tag identifying his as Elder So-and-so.
There are Christians on this and other fora who are on a mission to convert everyonein sight (or online), as well as Christians on this and other fora who are not. I have no reservations about telling the former when they've crossed my line, and am willing to forgive the trespass if they are willing to own it. Even your Jesus requires that much for "salvation." On the other hand, I have had many a lively and edifying conversation with the latter sort of Christian, without either of us trying to convert the other, and I value those interchanges.

And I have read Les Miserables - many times. And yes, the Bishop is one of my favorite characters, precisely because of his compasion for Jean Valjean. And I understand that for the Bishop, the source of his compassion was his God. I simply maintain that the Christian faith does not have a monopoly on such compssion.

And for a different view of church officials and the damage that can be done by religiosity run amok, read another Hugo novel - The Hunchback of Notre Dame - the novel, not the Disney movie.

To the pagan people here. I don't think THIS thread has been asking you to become Christian. Maybe other people, but not so much here.

In reading the thread, I think Campbellite was asking you to try forgiveness for your own benefit. Maybe closure would be a better word. It sounds like you carry a lot of anger toward adults in your life who should have done better by you, and then you carry that over to other Christians, even if you don't really know what they personally think or believe. You interpret what Christians say based on your previous experience with some really nasty stupid people. It might be natural, but is it fair? Is it enlightened? Or is enlightenment not your goal? Maybe I'm off base here, but I thought the purpose of any religion is to make you a better person through personal growth.

Are you willing to challenge your own assumptions about the power of mercy and forgiveness? Read the novel Les Miserables, by Victor Hugo. Not the musical, not the movie. The original novel. Translated, of course. And if you do, look at the character of the Bishop. He's almost entirely left out of the movies and the musical, but he's really the most important character in the book because his actions set the entire plot in action.

If you don't want to read it, maybe you should look at yourself a little more closely. Are you really as open minded as you think you are? It's just a novel, and a classic at that. How threatening could it be? Unless you've already made up your mind and don't want to be confused by other opinions.

Just a suggestion.

TTWSYFAMOGGAHJMJ,
what a ID...

ok..as far as Moses and the 10 Commandents, have you ever read Hammurabi's code? Much older then Moses and the first written code of laws. In them you will find the 10 commandments..in them you will read that not even a dog could be killed without a trial. And Hammurabi was the king of babylon. Just where the Jewshad been after the Codes had been written on the Monolith.

Pagans had libraries and philosophies, they discovered 7 out of 9 planets...created democracy and schools...the first hospital was a Temple to Hathor where cleanliness was known to aid healing. Not like the middle ages where they went from rotting corpse to birthing a baby useing the same tools and not washing hands. We still use herbs that are antibiotic that were used then. One way the Church would know there was a "Witch" was if they were clean. As the church fathers knew the devil entered the body without a good layer of dirt.Baths were a daily as well as ritual routine for the Pagan.

Anyway...you say God calls Himself the Father because he says so. And He says so because he is right..and he is right because he says so.

Gender roles for the Cretor of all Life? Oh really. I will be lieve that your Male God(who you say designed man in His likeness) gave life to all...when a man gives birth to a daughter...And you do know that ALL human fetus starts out first as female?
As far as your vision of God? That is all it is. Just like to me She is Goddess, and from Her came God.It is all what we believe. Patriarchy came after matriarcy...and even now alot of societies are matrilinear if not matriarchal. To be claimed as a Jew...the Mother must be Jewish..it does not matter what the father is. They still keep the lunar calendar of the matriarchal societies. And in fact so do Christians...when is Easter? The first sunday after the First Full Moon after the Spring Equinox. That is Pagan timing. All those little hints of the time the Jews worshipped The Queen of Heaven...which was the title of Astarte (Ashtereth of the bible).

What makes you think that those who are not Christian have not tried it? 99% of all Pagans in this countrey were born in a Christian family, went to church, Sunday School..the whole bit. I did until I was 13...I could not take it any more. I found the Bible filled with hate and bigotry..and my sunday school teachers when asked questions did not know the answers..they only said that is what the bible says, or that is the way it is...or don't ask questions.

We have tried it.
What also makes you think we do not have virtures? Community service is a part of our lives and we want to leave this world in a better condition then what we have now. We believe that what harms one, harms all...

You believe you are right...and you are, for you. We Pagans will honor you and your beliefs, not because we believe them, but that you have every right to feed your spirit what it needs...we do not want you to be Pagan...we do not ask folks to join our church, no more then did any one ask us to become Pagan. You need to find your own path to your God..as we need to feed our spirits with what we need and we to follow our paths. I truly believe that all paths lead to the truth and we will all be surprised.

terra

ROTFLMAO,
Well sure I have moxie...
I also have the right to my own beliefs, thank you very much.I judge myself harder then any of you can judge me. After all I know me a hell of a lot better then you do.

Like Lepi said we do not have a Judgement day in the way you believe, as we also do not have a hell. If we have not learned the way to live in harmony with all...we will just have to do it all over again.
We know that there are millions of people that have the belief of hell and punishment...we don't. We do not tell you all not to believe as your religion and conscious tells you, can we not expect the same?

You think I have moxie? I have had to gain a hard shell for my own welbeing. Most Wiccans after being screamed at in public places or the 100's of other humiliations we all have gone through, have developed a harder edge. None start out that way, but after 30 years, yes I have moxie and can give as good as I get.

terra

IN REPLY TO:
PAGAN SPIRITUAL VALUES;
LEPIDOPTERYX:
“Would you like a tissue to wipe the foam off your lip?”

ANS:
Foam? What does foam have to do with the truth and pagans?

IN REPLY TO:
"As I read it, the claim was not that there was no evidence that practicing such things as kindness, patience, or proscription of behaviors such as theft and murder would make the world a better place; there is simply no reason to ascribe these ideals as belonging solely to any one religion, or even to religion at all.“

ANS:
The last I read, it was Moses who received the Ten Commandments. Civilization was pretty barbarian before that. Civilizations before had never had a moral code as so written in such moral absolutes. Man was subject more to force and superstition than laws in consonance to man’s nature. The Commandments are from God and imbued to an extent in all men's consciences.

However, God revealed to man what he must do to perfect his life, but he didn’t reveal everything to man. Man has to develop his conscience by seeking Truth, which is the food and nourishment of the intellect. By not doing so, man’s conscience atrophies.

Words mean what they say. Thus if one says, all religions share a belief that religion makes one better and the evidence is to the contrary, that means religion does not make anyone better.

Second, the natural end of human life is to seek perfection by doing good and avoiding evil. The virtues are a means to this end. Hence, all men by virtue of their nature seek the God who is Perfection and therefore, the Perfect Good, who is God. So man, by his very nature, seeks the Good by his virtuous acts. In addition, virtue is not the sole property of religion alone; virtue is the property of all men.

The difference between virtues in the Catholic Church vs. the Secular Society is that to the Church virtue is essential to accomplishing the end of human life or perfection. In the secular world, virtue is an option, relative, and pragmatic. In Catholicism, it is not a choice but a necessity.

Moreover, virtue is not innate but must be nourished, maturated, and developed. Thus, the State has an obligation and duty to present the conditions for virtuous acts because virtuous acts prefect the individual and therefore prefect the State. Still, not all men acquire virtue, nor do all nations nurture it.

Moreover, the Catholic Church is the guardian of man’s moral exigencies. Whose voice is heard in the defense of humanity any more than the Catholic Church? Her mandate is to teach all nations and Her institutions of education are ubiquitous and renowned. Her defense of society is expressed in Her defense of the institution of Marriage, the dignity of the person, and Her voice against the legalization of murder against the unborn. Her charities are munificent and benevolent. Her hospitals are profuse and copious.

In addition, the Church is the conduit of grace from God in Her Sacraments. These graces are essential in order to do good and avoid evil. The proof is those who do not receive them have a difficult time being good. Though the grace of God, His supernatural help, is not exclusive to the Church, but She is the source of all God’s graces.

Because of the fall of Man from God’s graces, man nature was wounded. Man's intellect became fallible, and his concupiscence became overpowering. Thus, man became prone to sin. The grace or supernatural help is given by God to help man overcome the temptations, the wiles, and vanities of the world.

Therefore, the Church does make one better. However, those who have never tried it are always ready to condemn it because they have no sense of its supernatural nature.

Thus, the Church has the supernatural sources to make man better and to practice the virtues. Where in the secular world, man is on his own; he has no intercessor. Though man is not isolated from God, his path to God is more difficult.

PAGAN SPIRITUAL VALUES;
IN REPLY TO: WICCAN:
“GODDESS?”

[“Again, there is no Goddess; that would be an irrational designation of God who is not a material being, but Perfect Act. God is Father not in reference to his gender but in reference to his love of all mankind."]

“Works just as well with: "Again, there is no God; that would be an irrational designation of Goddess who is not a material being, but Perfect Act. God is Mother not in reference to her gender but in reference to her love of all mankind."

ANS:
Yes, it works just as well as far as the grammar goes, but not as to the truth. Further, if you can not distinguish between a Father and a Mother then it's understandable. However, there is a difference between a Mother and a Father not only in gender, but in cultural authority, and gender roles.

Moreover, God designates Himself as Father and human fathers as the heads of the family, as He designates Himself as the head of all men. Thus, “Father” is a designation of God's authority; motherhood has no such designation in Scripture. The God of Heaven and Earth is the ultimate authority over all creation.

There is a Mother; it is God’s Mother Mary. However, God did not designate He was a mother, but a Father, and His Son in Scripture calls God the Father.

Again, if there is no difference to you between a Father and a Mother then you can call God anything you want. However, God was not designated as a Mother; He is designated as a Father by Himself and His Son.

Therefore, you may designate God as to what ever you wish, but it is irrelative. You can also substitute a gorilla, or a monkey, or a gazelle, or a whale, for Father, but it’s just a false designation made by man has no Scriptural Authority. With the same rationale, you can substitute daughter of God for Son of God, but it too would be irrelevant as well because it has no factual basis since God the Father is a matter of fact.

Moreover, the Church, designated by Christ as the visible representative of God on earth, has been given the gift of infallibility in its teachings and doctrines (Mt 10: 20, John 15:26-27). The voice of the Church is not that God is a Mother, but that God is Father.

ROTFL:

Those of us who don't believe in a final judgement and eternal rewards/pubishments aren't worried about a Judgement Day in which those rewards and punishments will be handed out. If I were to die right now, I would do so knowing that I did the best I could to be a decent human being and tried my best to correct the mistakes I know I've made. Any negative vibration I created that is still resounding in the Universe when I die, any unfinished business I leave, will draw me back to correct in my next life.

hello mam i m doing my b.ed programme n working on my seminar on spiritual values i liked ur article but my personal opinion is that forgiveness is always not possible some mistakes r unforgivable specially those mistakes which ruins others life.
rashmi sharma[masters in english literature]
adress.
2-d,highway apartments,
dda-sfs-flats gazipur crossing, new delhi 110096
MY AGE IS ONLY 23ys SO FORGIVE ME IF THEIRS ANY MISTAKE.THANK YOU.

Hooo wee! Terra Gazelle, if you think you're ready for Judgement Day, you're more deluded than I gave you credit for. Got to hand it to ya, though, you've got moxie.

Ma'at,
I am ready for your white feather and scale...as ready as any human can be.

I honor my people, my gods, my elders and my faith. Let Ma'at be witness.

terra

Are you sure you are ready for your karma, when it returns to you? Is your heart as light as a feather?

Verily I have come to thee, I have brought to thee Ma'at.
I have driven away for thee wickedness.
I have not done iniquity to mankind.
Not have I done harm unto animals.
Not have I done wickedness in the place of Ma'at.
Not have I known evil.
Not have I acted wickedly.
Not have I done each day and every works above what I should do.
Not hath come forth my name to the boat of the Prince.
Not have I despised God.
Not have I caused misery.
Not have I caused affliction.
Not have I done what is abominable to God.
Not have I caused harm to be done to the servant by his chief.
Not have I caused pain.
Not have I made to weep.
Not have I killed.
Not have I made the order for killing for me.
Not have I done harm to mankind.
Not have I taken aught of the oblations in the temples.
Not have I purloined the cakes of the gods.
Not have I carried off the offerings of the blessed dead.
Not have I fornicated.
Not have I defiled myself.
Not have I added to, not have I diminished the offerings.
Not have I stolen from the orchard.
Not have I trampled down the fields.
I have not added to the weight of the balance.
Not have I diminished from the weight of the balance.
Not have I carried off the milk from the mouth of the babe.
Not have I driven away the cattle which were upon their pastures.
Not have I captured the birds of the preserves of the gods.
Not have I taken the fishes [with bait] of their own bodies.
Not have I turned back water at its season.
Not have I cut a cutting in water running.
Not have I extinguished a flame at its hour.
Not have I violated the times for the chosen offerings.
Not have I driven back the cattle of divine things.
I have not repulsed God in his manifestations.
I, even I, am pure. Times four

Not have I done wrong.
Not have I despoiled.
Not have I robbed.
Not have I slain men: twice.
Not have I defrauded the offerings.
Not have I diminished [oblations].
Not have I despoiled the things of the god.
Not have I spoken lies.
Not have I carried off food.
Not have I afflicted [any]
Not have I committed fornication.
Not have I made to weep.
Not have I eaten my heart.
Not have I transgressed.
Not have I acted deceitfully.
Not have I desolated ploughed lands.
Not have I been an eavesdropper.
Not have I set my mouth in motion [against any man].
Not have I raged except with a cause.
Not have I defiled the wife of a man.
Not have I defiled the wife of a man.
Not have I polluted myself.
Not have I caused terror.
Not have I committed offense
Not have I inflamed myself with rage.
Not have I made deaf myself to the words of right and truth.
Not have I caused grief.
Not have I acted insolently.
Not have I stirred up strife.
Not have I judged hastily.
Not have I been an eavesdropper.
Not have I multiplied my words upon words.
Not have I harmed, not have I done evil.
Not have I made curses of the king.
Not have I fouled water.
Not have I made haughty my voice.
Not have I have I cursed God.
Not have I committed theft.
Not have I defrauded the offerings of the gods.
Not have I carried away offerings from the beatified ones.
Not have I carried off the food of the infant, not have I sinned against the god of the town.
Not have I slaughtered the cattle divine.

Warnings to those who call for Justice, for it shall be delivered.

PS, and I find it very ironic that the man that did not have a heart for me...needed a heart.

Fate can be a bytch can't she?

terra

I am not letting anyone die..and it was not a robbery. It was someone that did not like my faith so felt he had the right to break into my house and hurt me. He was also a man that had been in prison for 19 years for rape,kidnapping and numerous other crimes. It was not in my power to keep his fate from him, he asked for it and got what he earned.

Should I tell you what happened?
he broke in and attacked me as I was alone at night. I fought him and he beat the hell out of me. He finally got me into the guest bathroom and tried to take my clothes off...I fought him...he took a wash cloth and wet it. He looked down at me as he smiled and I was curled up between the toilet and the tub screaming, and had that dripping wash cloth in his hands...he was going to stuff that wet wash cloth down my throat. I was going to die. You ever feel that? Ever look into a man's eyes and know you were going to sufficate in a bathroom with no one to help you? Ever feel your cheek bone break? Ever had ribs busted? Ever see evil?

I grabed my Pentacle and held on and asked the Goddess to help me. She did. She gave me the right things to say...she was the one that enabled me to open that man's eyes to what he was doing and finally after 5 hours get him out of my home.

And when his sister came to my door and asked me to drop the charges on him I was going to...for a moment I really thought, yes, I am alive. But then I remembered all that the cops had told me about his record. Rape, kidnapping...his years in prison and all the escapes. The loss of faith I had of if you were kind to others they will be kind to you. See he worked for my husband and I on the land. He was hard put so we gave him work to do...I fed him, washed his clothes...and he did that to me.

It is murder only if I actively wanted something like that to happen...I turned his fate over to God/s...I neither asked for or wanted his death...only justice. Justice is not slanted. True justice does not care who you are or what judgement man makes. Justice is the scale. It is a law of the universe.

I would not give a farthling for your opinion of me. There are those on this forum I would care about...but you are not one of them

Should I turn the other cheek so that he could do it to someone else?

I have my own beliefs..and the Law of Return is one of them. What you put out comes back to you. It is not up to me to change your Karma.

You do not know me so stop judgeing,it is not your job to make judgments of those you do not know...you only know part of the story. You come on here and think you know what it's all about? You do not even use a name. Who are you? What is your story?
Sorry but you take your opinion and stuff it.

terra

Well, I don't have a dog in this fight, but I read through the posts. PaganPlace, Terra, and ocassionally Peter Huff seem the least tolerant to me. Since when is telling your life story an attack? A little projection going on, maybe?

And Terra, I question your adherence in your own stated values. How can you justify letting someone else die out of a personal sense of "justice" with not intentionally doing harm? You let a man DIE to get revenge for a robbery? What the &#^* is wrong with you?

I'm not a Christian, never have been, never plan to be. Those folks on TV give me the willies. But if the alternative is murder, I'll stand with the wackos any day.

Peace out.

Ashes
I rise,
I soar,
I bend,
I sing,
I fly on wings of destiny.
I shape
I braid,
I tie the knots,
I am the teller of things to come.
Winds that whisper in the trees,
Storms that pass away unseen
I the Witch will gather from you
The elements that will create and renew.
I will walk upon this Earth
Again the lines of death and rebirth.
Fires that burned you sent to me
I was ash in a muddy stream.
Fire and water now tell what I should know...
For I will reap what you have sown.
Terra Gazelle © 2004

It's always easy to step in and tell someone else how to react.
Paganplace is allowed to have her feelings and her say. She has a path to walk and has been given enough bumps in it by those who tell her how she should be or how she should feel...

A stalker she is not...a ranter maybe. But then ranting is what needs done now and then.

This forum is called On Faith..Not on Christianity or On Some Faiths...But each time Starhawk makes a comment some Christian comes on her page and makes nasty comments and then we are belittled as if we were two bricks loose, or nothing better then morons for our faith. We get it from the Christians, and from the Atheists...People come on here and give Bible verses as if they were supposed to be meaningful to us. The Bible is not a part of our religion. If you have something to say about your religion and you are trying to prove something to us, stop useing proof that we do not put much store in. Most of us were Christians at one time and did not think much of it or we would still be. We tend to be able to explain ourselves without finding it on some parchment.

I know Pagans that have been run out of business, out of their homes and their children taken from them because they were Pagan. A little girl pushed to suicide because she was studying Wicca...so exuse the rants if we get a bit upset over feeling pushed off the sidewalk in this home of the brave.

There is a basic difference between religions of the book and Mystery religions...I can read poetry and something will help me better understand the universe. I can see a sunset and better understand death...I can read what paganplace says and feel pride in who I am...and certainly of her. I did not have to forgive the one that wronged me. Forgiveness is not for me to do..mine was to release what harmed me, anger and pain. That was what wronged me more then any bruise...I had to release that and I did..in a way that a Witch does. We are not Christian. Stop disrespecting us in thinking we have to follow your ways...we have our own. The man that hurt me has his own path..and life. I have mine, it is up to me to travel my path as sure footed as possible. I live the Rede, or try to and do not intentionally harm anyone. For those Christians who come on a Pagan page and try to tell us how to feel or react...you are hurting us, Stop.

We want to be kind and considerate, and tolerant. But where does our tolerance allow for intolerance of others?

I enjoy this forum, I have found those that I really like here..Christian, Muslim and Pagan..all any of us want is equality and respect.

Paganplace...Goddess Bless-)o(
terra

Jeeze Louise, PaganPlace, sounds to me like somebody could use a little therapy. Whatever it is yer doin' now ain't working so well.

I find PaganPlace's comments rude and offensive in the extreme and I think it's pretty ridiculous the way she claims to speak for all pagans. After Campbellite openly shared his story of childhood abuse with her, she mocked him in a very cruel and insensitive manner. I think it's a real shame when one violently ranting voice can force another quite reasoned, peaceful and thoughtful poster off of the thread, and thus degrade the tone of the debate through sheer force of volume. Campbellite, I honor your spiritual journey and I appreciate the insight in your words. Starhawk, if you are reading this, I think it would be appropriate to step in and moderate to tone down some of the bullying that is going on here. Thank you.

Well, I hope saying that did you some good, E-fave.

Paganplace - yes, stalking, writing one post after another, being snide and challenging. and now you're starting to act the same way with me.

I'm leaving too. Hope you feel better and really hope one of your pagan friends picks up on this and gets through to you.

Yep, someone tries to invoke *my* abuse to say they're much more spiritually-evolved or something, and, I just checked, I cautioned Rev. Elliot on the meaning of 'science' (again) and other than that, have only been here.

Considering I unplugged for a day, turned up randomly, and Campbellite was on the spot rather quickly, ...who's 'stalking?'

You do me wrong.

Of course, definitions of things change so quickly, these days, but I got this wild idea that sitting here talking about things Cambellite said and not, like, knowing or caring where else he or she is, probably doesn't merit accusations of 'stalking.' Go figure.

Of course, last I heard, the 'stalking' you accuse me of would involve ... going to more than one place in pursuit of someone, which, unless I'm much mistaken, hasn't happened, especially since Campbellite passive-aggressively announced departure and I'm still 'here,' (and actually, if you could check, haven't posted anywhere else.)

So.

What are you saying again, E-fave?

"Stalking,' now, E-fave?"

That's interesting.

Thought Cambellite was the one trying to keep invoking my presumptive childhood abuse to say I was 'unenlightened' if I didn't bend knee a certain way.

Paganplace - I can't help but wonder what you're on. It's almost like you're stalking Cambpellite.

I say this at some risk -- that you might start stalking me.

Oh, well, it's only on the internet.

Still it's troubling. I wish you'd give it a rest.

Still not sure Cambpellite here ever realized that, just possibly everyone who was once Christian a) wasn't personally sexually-violated, and b) that that doesn't mean any given Christian can come along and claim 'spiritual superiority' by saying 'Oh, I forgave and say, 'Hey, kids, have more of the same.'

'Forgiveness' is *nothing,* if it's something the offender demands of the presumptive victims, using the fact that they may or may no have been abused as reason they should bend knee to the selfsame authorities.

As Pagans, we do not say that we are born needing to go begging for forgiveness.

We say, as America used to, that we are born with inherent worth and dignity, and that religions which violate that dignity, then conditionally offer it back....

Don't know what forgiveness *is.*

Cause that idea gets *backwards.*

Capiche?

Do as you will, I think what you've been saying was all about you in the first place, whatever you may have resorted to...

Whatever you think of the Wizard of Oz, we happen to think a little more of ourselves.

Since you've been here, you've done nothing but claim a) You know all about us, and b) what you're doing is the 'real answer' to the abuses of the system you support.

I've been pretty clear on this before.

Go as you will.

Just.

Don't expect to not get called on it when you use that dismissive language.

Believe it or not, it's not all about who they raped and how to let your ego survive it.

Which again seems to have been your insistence.

Frankly, if it took all that of me empathizing with *your* drama to just make the point we have our own viable religion, I think you among others show and utter failure of compassion.

So, hey, go in peace.

But you never got it.

OHOHOHOHOH! I just finally figured out why you're ranting.

You think my quote from the Wizard of Oz was a dig, that I was calling you namby pamby fantasy good witch flakes.

I was actually playing it straight, as in straight-man in comedy, with a straight face.

*I* have found no greater spiritual truth than that scene in the movie. That if you are looking for something, look inside, because if it isn't there, you'll never find it on the outside.

The Wizard of Oz is a classic, Campbell-ian Hero Quest story, with the protagonist on a journey in a strange land, set on her journey by a wise older person who often has magical powers, and assisted by others she meets along the way, who overcomes obstacles, and gains a great Gift, which is then brought back home to share with the hero's community.

You keep insisting I'm insulting you, but I'm really not. I've written about my journey, my path, my experiences, my growth. Nothing else. But I'm getting tired of feeling like I have to defend myself against insinuations. So after I hit POST I'm leaving this thread. You can go ahead and bash me in private if it makes you feel better.

It's too bad, really, because except for that, I've had such a nice time here. Oh well, c'est la vie.

Cause, you know what *I* have trouble getting out of my head...

It's not some easy idea I was 'evil' from the day I was born, but crying for others, being told I should let ignorant people hurt me and others and take the blame, and if I suffered, 'That's God punishing ya.'

That's the premise conservative Christians use for everything they do to hurt people in the name of 'salvation.'

It's *not* 'God Punishing ya.'

We do it to each *other* if we think we need to *appease* some judgemental God.

I day this ain't so.

Just ain't so.

These people don't even have *death* right.

They just do it over and over and wonder why it don't get better.

Get it?

I mean, see this, Campbellite? These Bible-Beaters are claiming, based on an authority your instincts find comfort in that we, (and you, if you weren't seeing that) don't have any real spirituality, for lack of in certain ways embracing the authority you yourself come here telling us to embrace.

Or be mocked as 'dreamers' or 'living in Oz,' ...as you have done...

Now. You figure you have touched something when you let yourself.

Was that about the authority of these summabiches, or about there's something in the world that your namesake was trying to talk about?

'The power of myth,' if you will.

Happens I seen a lot os stuff you don't want to look at.

More than that, no one owns it. Or you.

Till you make what some Asaru types cal 'frith.'

Ideas that don't register with the people that say 'Pagans are bad and damned.'

Seems you come here in the name of a guy who says, 'We shouldn't be slaves to this 'Sin' idea, what do I gotta do to show you this?

...Guessing that wasn't supposed to be 'Make everyone a 'slave' to certain ideas of 'sin' whoever and how many it hurts.

Guess what.

The good stuff woulda been there whether yer man Jesus spoke up or not.

In fact, people do more to try and enforce what he was speaking *against* so as to be 'saved' from it than they do actually emulating it.

I'm a Pagan. Stuff he was freaked out about isn't even my *world.*

Not that it wasn't tried.

I say we're people right here and right now, and this is BS, if we can't live together with some kind of respect.

Not granted, but *unalienable.*

No matter how holy you think you or I can be.

Cause, frankly, once religions start getting ideas certain things are conditional, you do the abusers' work *for* them

And here we are.

Swear to whom you like, just wake up and live.

Have to admit that 'Ex-Pagan' Christian witnessing cheeses me off.

If they don't get us, it's like, 'You're just like one of those spuds that comes claiming Pagan protection for your naughtynaughtybad worldview, so you can mess with people however you want like Christians assume everyone (themselves) would if given 'permission and magical powers' ...is there any reason for me to believe you ever talked to a Pagan in person in your life?'

Toe-dippers that that run out of attention on the Net and maybe stand and glower at people dancing the seasons in open circles, claiming they're so much 'darker and more in the know' than *community,* quibble over some detail, wander off with self-superior mutterings, then a few months later resurface with a claim they was 'saved' cause someone mollified their beaten-in-submission, and coming to a community circle didn't pad their ego by recognizing 'LOL, STFU, n00b!'

Yadda yadda.

Then discover they get lots of approving attention by telling Fundies what they want to hear, and all's a sudden, all's right with Mummy and Daddy-that-diddled-ya, all you gotta do is submit and ride the prolactin rush.

Call it a theology, and there you are.

Dark imaginings available when suggested by approval-givers when they need a diversion.

Now, not that I haven't had an issue in my life, but, figure we might happen to have some faith in what says we don't knuckle under to quite that pattern. And actually has to do with that 'something bigger than us' that people say we don't know, but mock whenever we talk about it. :)

Bigger than saving our personal souls, I'll tellya that.

No martyrdom required, but don't you *fricking* say *we* are taking the easy way out.

Personally, I got a number of memories I'm not particularly interested in taking to the next life, but we'll see.

Could be a personal flaw, but I'd rather remember some bad stuff than forget the simple fact that *just because the people who screw with you believe that belief means you can't be screwed with, however much they screw with you...doesn't make it so. *

The biggest and worst lie they tell you is that a strong human being with a brain can't be screwed with.

This is intended to create psychological double-binds when you realize you're being screwed with, and you'd have to accept 'shame' and 'sin' and 'eternal fear and devaluation' to admit you were being screwed with in the first place.

But.

Lady's good like that.

I think what constantly-perplexes the Fundies, and makes people who say, 'I'm not doing what I'm doing with religious oppression, even if I presume you were sexually-abused and try to jangle that trauma to make you believe in Jeezus, ...cause Jesus says I'm not that kind of person..'

Is that neither you nor your book own the world. Or our minds, or our hearts, nor our dreams.

We are better.

Any God don't like that can fricking watch.

Which wouldn't be any different from what the abusers say.

Dig?

We may not stress pie in the sky, but we do say *You better live what you got, toots.*

That does mean getting along, but don't even try saying you got some superior spirituality cause you got raped and bent your knees to the why and how.

That's *how they keep doing this,* Jungian.

And we *are* supposed to be the adults now. Not the people begging for life cause someone told us how 'shamed' we were cause being raped meant we were 'sexually stained with sin.'

I call BS.

We are here. Any Jesus don't like that, can lead, follow, or get out the Mother-lovin way.

Period.

" Terra Gazelle:

Paganplace...You go girl! lol

Ok shall we have a Samhain thread here or wait to see if the Higher Powers do ask a question that we can sink our teeth in?

terra"

Since when did we need permission?

Besides, there's another question up, the Christians won't be spouting Bible verses like that when it's obvious no one is listening.

:)

Hi, Terra! Glad to hear from you.

And, anyway, Campbellite: Joseph Campbell is probably in my list of 'Top Five people in History I'd Like To Have Dinner with... (Gods, but I could tell some stories,) ...I'm not trying to harsh on *your* faith, but, you do sell others short with claims of certain authority, and I don't know if you know what you sound like.

There's a good thing people can touch in our common dream: important part, perhaps, is not the 'masks of God' or which, in that way... it's what we do with it... not the Gods we 'make' but the *worlds* we make for ourselves.

I could no more believe in the Christian view of the *world* (and me, for that matter) than I could bite my own arm off, blame some inherent defect for it, and beg forgiveness for somehow previously dying and not getting shunting to one eternity or other, but instead waking up with a half-decent command of English, certain technical details it took waiting for the Internet to verify, and certain other experiences certain Churches thought it'd be safer for all concerned if I had beaten out of me before I 'imperiled my soul, and this is good parenting, to express these inculcated fears the world isn't like the Church says at whatever cost in humanity...'

As for Pagans not seeming to have met your needs.... well, terribly sorry, our clergy are way understaffed, have been since I found out there *were* Pagan clergy, and half of them are a little occupied just trying to keep safe space and civil rights to *be* of what belief you choose from being extinguished, never mind deal with every single bunch of kids playing with magic.

I come from a couple of thos,e I should know.

People often look at us not presenting 'easy answers' and 'unified authority' as a weakness... Gods know those of us who've been around the block a few times do our best to help, but I think where we have the *greatest* faith is that *this stuff does teach itself.* Never presented pre-packaged, however some publishers try, but, especially when you speak of conflict and forgiveness, *and how all that stuff works,* there's nothing like a good old-fashioned witch war.

It's practice. Especially about what we may attach ourselves to and end up bound and hurt by.

That's not 'Pagans and the Gods being unforgiving,' ....that's people recovering their humanity and finding out *why and how.*

The hard way, if necessary.

Paganplace...You go girl! lol

Ok shall we have a Samhain thread here or wait to see if the Higher Powers do ask a question that we can sink our teeth in?

terra

Lepi,
My thought exactly...or if 99.9% of the questions asked here would interest us. We find something in each question to discuss, even if it is just what someone else says.

I would really like to read what Starhawk has to say about Samhain. I bet it would be awesome.

terra

I think part of it, Campbellite, is that as Pagans, we just don't have a belief that the *Gods* are that judgemental that they're in the business of crucifying people eternally for apostasy, or in fact, rewarding people for believing in a susbstitute human sacrifice and obedience to irrational dictates with some eternal shangri-la...

We don't run around saying, 'Dionysius' wedding crashing was 'literally true, it happened somewhere physically, really,' cause... *we don't *need* to.*

This is not an 'article of faith' as an *obstacle* *between* us and the Gods, (one to be bypassed by permission and surrender) ...it's a *story* between us and the Gods, not a constructed crisis about authority and sexuality.

Constant impediment to discussion here is we 'Don't have a Bible, don't much care to.'

*tapping breast.* It's here, dig?

" Campbellite:

PaganPlace, I haven't taken anything you've said as attacking or whatever. I have not intended to defame or attck anyone's spirituality, either. I have called no one empty. My philosophy is entirely "live and let live." I still think you're responding to what you *think* I said, rather than what I actually said."

In this case, I think you're not hearing yourself on certain assertions and dynamics you're invoking. I *amplify* how some of this expresses in larger conflicts and contexts but don't worry, I don't think you're a bad person and all.

You have, however, expressed some rather blithe suppositions how only your new-re-found-religion means people know spirituality or even how to forgive.

And some mockery. Like with the Wizard of Oz thing and talking like it's somehow not possible that non-Christians can have our heads wrapped around mortality. You distance yourself from the more rabid Bible-beaters, yet you still use their talk of 'one true religion' to try and mock Pagans as 'wishful thinkers' ...and in fact take the standard tone of, 'If you were abused by us, you're obviously not qualified to tell us that it wasn't for your own good.'

You pick at the 'not believing in sin and forgiveness' thing, ...yet I question the expression of 'compassion' you think you hold.

(Mind you, talk like this may have to do with why Catholicism wasn't sorry to see the back of me. :) )

On this:

"The body and blood? The argument I've heard is, if a wife from Argentina and a husband from Sweden can adopt a baby from China, and that is THEIR daughter, then it's no stretch to say that THAT cracker and wine is the body and blood of Christ. It's hard to argue with logic like that. :)"

Well, that's not logic, that's embracing a metaphor.

A myth.

It's often a difficult point for Christians who believe, "Well, *my* myth is *fact* and your myth is just myth, and I will simultaneously say that calling my myth a myth is an insult, whereas I'll treat you as though calling your own myths as myths means you 'admit' my religion is superior for reasons that only make sense if you believe my myth about my myth."

It's very common in urban Pagan practice to talk about what Gods one's 'the child of,' ....'Ah, she's one of Athena's, what do you expect,' etc, etc... No less 'literally' true, in life and practice than 'transubstantiation,' ...and a *lot* more involved, usually...

Most Chrsitians, like you see here, will demand that their own book, (which serves a certain ritual function in their myths) *objectively means* things that they can't.

The language of Christianized 'logic' is biased toward a place of, 'I draw a certain conclusion or call it a draw.'

Cause it's very biased to make much to-do of the linguistic processes that come from, 'I accept this as given, then process it through my language as though language were mathematics,'

It can work, as long as you know your language and are willing to contest the statements you consider 'given,' ...but much wheel-spinning in thought happens if you take your 'givens' as 'Given.'

If you aren't willing to question the statements ou take as 'given' you can hang up in process for several hundred years without ever coming to meaningful observations.

And it's the 'unproven givens' that lead a lot of people who think they're being just so brilliant to fling Bible verses here like they think they're 'proving' something.

Sure, you can *ritually* say that 'This bread and wine is *literally and actually* the Body and Blood of Christ, but you can't have the blood, for some reason, ...but those people who believe the Gods demand nothing of sacrifice must be doing some horrible human sacrifice and all those dark things we don't want to face about ourselves, cause we're 'forgiven' and they *aren't,* for, umm, there's nothing to forgive! This is really eating Jesus... Or isn't! But we have a book! *sputter* Sex! You're bad! You must sacrifice babies! That's why baby Jesus sacrificed himself to feed us, and therefore, if anything happened it's cause of 'sin,' not our sacred non-mythical literal thing!'

How bout Pagans have some faith and your book isn't panacaea against all accountable wrongs...

And if we all got lucid a minute, we could probably make life better if we got together.

PaganPlace, I haven't taken anything you've said as attacking or whatever. I have not intended to defame or attck anyone's spirituality, either. I have called no one empty. My philosophy is entirely "live and let live." I still think you're responding to what you *think* I said, rather than what I actually said.

"I never took the loaves and fishes story literally. My take on it is that it was an admonition to share even if you don't have much, and that the fellowship would feed a hunger beyond the physical."

Yeah, Lepi: AKA: Stone Soup.

Something poor folks can know about. ;)

Well, I'd say *this* thread has enough to do with Samhain to raise the topic if we want.

Anyway, Campbellite: Perhaps you misinterpret the anger I may express at ongoing abuses... and even some of the mockery and dismissal we see here of Pagan beliefs, while you seem to be treating the matter as that the *religious system* that I've seen responsible for so much abuse... and not in my case physical sexual abuse, (I guess you could call it 'harassment,') ...but actual religious abuse, sure.

Your answer seems to have been to mock Pagan beliefs, deny there can be a spiritual component, that we know how to forgive, and suggest kneeling to the very thing that that abuse sought to program in...

Among them, as mentioned, people denying the responsibility for what they think, do, and say.

In fact, *demanding* a certain form of 'forgiveness...' which really only serves 'business as usual.'

I don't walk around carrying grudges against individuals... and it so happens I've been able to face death countless times without 'surrendering' to the very beliefs that to me aren't *life and forgiveness,* but actually, that which batters people into compliance with *soul-robbing* dynamics.

I see people demanding I 'seek forgiveness' for having the temerity to hold to my own beliefs and experiences, to actually take my comfort and strength from where it was always actually offered, not from where it was simply promised and demanded I beg for it.

I see no 'compassion' in these words that, 'Poor dear, ...Only through these things we say can you find solace or be considered a whole and spiritual person... (or even in fact, that only by obeying these self-styled 'authorities' can one be 'free' of the damage they do...)

I think that if in your 'Pagan' days you actually connected with the Gods as we consider ourselves to... Or in fact just saw how we work when someone else of any belief system is about to kick, you wouldn't presume our lives are so 'empty' cause we don't hold to your 'brand.'

This isn't to say that we don't value or practice 'forgiveness,' we just don't see it as it's often portrayed.

'Forgiveness' as spoken by Christians, at least, refers to a static, legalistic, judgemental view of the universe we don't have in the first place. (at least not as a 'highest structure...' ....we're people in this society, too, but we believe in change and karma and have our ways of addressing 'wrongs done,' ...in part by not seeing them as a 'thing' or a 'sin' or something that needs to be cleared off a cosmic court docket.

This isn't to say forgiveness isn't out there, or accessible, or useful, but... for your world to revolve around 'forgiveness' it must first revolve around this idea of 'sin,'

To us, wrongs done are wrongs done, and working past them is part of life, not a magical car-wash to reinforce systems of abuse that tend to enlist the abused through a sense of relief from the very abuse they perpetrated... if only you do what the abusers wanted, while it happens to others.

I never made a show of 'forgiving' the individuals that wronged me in that system... Just recognized their humanity, where they'd have it.

Survivor's guilt is a bit stickier.

But here's to absent friends. There was more to *them,* than being victims, too.

Terra:
**I got an answer back, something about it would not have much interest for the non Pagans. That he might ask Starhawk to write something about it.**

Interesting. And how much interest does he suppose non-Catholics had in Mother Teresa's journal entries about losing her belief in God?

To the Pagans...
I emailed David Waters with a suggestion of a question...with Samhain coming up I thought it would be intersting for a question about it. So that we could share what it is and stop some of the misconceptions about it.

I got an answer back, something about it would not have much interest for the non Pagans. That he might ask Starhawk to write something about it.

We will see.

I wish we could do something for ourselves about what Samhain is and how we celebrate.

terra

E FAv, thank you, that was effing hysterical. God, I loves me my ranting lunatics.

Campbellite,

Consider it a date.

Lep, I'll do that. And I hope you'll give me a call when you're in Seattle, for salmon, hazlenut torte, the freshest apples you've ever had, micro brew, and Real Coffee that doesn't come from a megacorporation. (Friends don't let friends drink corporate coffee.)

E-Fave:

I thought you knew your invite was a given. Come on over, cher!

Campbellite - if you have time, go over to the current Jacoby thread and check out what Duckphup is saying.

I'm not recommending or even suggesting that you respond to him, but I will say, I'd love to hear your thoughts on it.

Lepi -- Hey, what about me?

TTWSYFAMDGGAHJMJ:

Would you like a tissue to wipe the foam off your lip?

As I read it, the claim was not that there was no evidence that practicing such things as kindness, patience, or proscription of behaviors such as theft and murder would make the world a better place; there is simply no reason to ascribe these ideals as belonging solely to any one religion, or even to religion at all.

You have your book and you believe everything in it and that's fine for you. I'm glad you hae a path that works for you. It is not a path that works for everyone. And that's ok too.
As for things like healing the sick, I've had some pretty amazing results from Reiki that could be described as instantaneous.
I never took the loaves and fishes story literally. My take on it is that it was an admonition to share even if you don't have much, and that the fellowship would feed a hunger beyond the physical.
But there's no more objective proof of any of his miracles than there is of the rape of Persephone. Why? Because when you boil it all down, it's all just different versions of the same myth. And myth is that which is true, without needing to be factually accurate. Fact and Truth aren't necessarily the same thing.

IN REPLY TO:
PAGAN SPIRITUAL VALUES;

“If there’s one belief religions do share, sometimes against all evidence to the contrary, it’s that our practices and insights will make people better than they would be otherwise.

So, although Catholicism believes that the practice of virtues, (the Cardinal Virtues, Seven Gifts and the 12 Fruits—Love, Patience, Fortitude, Temperance, Kindness etc.) make people better, there is plenty of evidence against such belief?

In addition, according to your view, the observance of the Commandments “Thou shalt not steal;” “Thou shalt not murder;” “Thou shalt not covet thy neighbors goods, or thy neighbors wife;” and “Thou shalt not commit adultery,” doesn’t make society and therefore its people any better? More over you suggest they not be enforced, and there be no forgiveness. That’s nonsense.

What kind of lunacy is this. What is your evidence against that the practice of virtue, will not perfect the individual? Ridiculous, it’s not so in the real world, maybe it is so in the Alice in Wonderland world.

Moreover, what overwhelming evidence do you have to shows that keeping the two great Commandments, “Love thy neighbor as thyself,” and “Do unto others as you would have them do unto you,” does not make one better and society better?

Some one sure played a joke on the people who thanked Mother Theresa's for her mercy, love and kindness to them if there is much evidence to the contrary. The millions of people who lined the streets of Calcutta to see her funeral motorcade must have been delusional.

IN REPLY TO:
"Yet there are Buddhists who fail in compassion, Christians who lack charity, and yes, even Pagans…”

ANS:
Because people fail isn’t because of the Moral Law, and the precepts of the Church, but it’s because they do not adhere to them.

Religions fail because they are in error. There are 26,000 Christian churches alone, notwithstanding the Far East and Middle East religions. All contradict each other in part or in whole.

There is only one true Church. It is One and unchangeable in its teachings and doctrines; Holy in its founder, Christ; Apostolic in its authority, and Universal in its membership. The Church has the mark of infallibility, in that She is guarded by God from error in Her teachings and beliefs. Only the Catholic Church was created by the Son of God, who is God. Therefore, it would be foolish to choose any other belief. Pagans have no god except what they conjure up to be a false and mythical god.

Further, what other founder of religions INSTANTLY cured the sick, made the lame walk, the blind see, cured lepers, fed over 150,000 with two loaves and three fishes, walked on water, controlled the seas, commanded the creatures of the sea, and when they murdered him, rose from the dead? Certainly no any godesses that the pagans created.

The Jewish religion, though established by God, was abandoned by Jews when a new covenant was created by Christ.

Romans 1: 16cf.
"For the invisible things of God from the creation of the world are clearly seen, being understood by the things that are made. His eternal power also and divinity: so that they are inexcusable. Because that, when they knew God, they have not glorified him as God or given thanks: but became vain in their thoughts. And their foolish heart was darkened.

"For, professing themselves to be wise, they became fools. And they changed the glory of the incorruptible God into the likeness of the image of a corruptible man and of birds, and of fourfooted beasts and of creeping things."--St. Paul Romans

A word to the wise should be sufficient; Paganism is a dead end to nowhere and is a ploy to escape reality.

Campbellite:

If you ever find yourself in south Louisiana, look me up. You and Arminius have a standing invitation for gumbo, Guinness, and Cajun coffee.

Campbellite: "if a wife from Argentina and a husband from Sweden can adopt a baby from China, and that is THEIR daughter, then it's no stretch to say that THAT cracker and wine is the body and blood of Christ."

I get that, but still don't get why those people would want to eat and drink a human body.

I get your personal example too. You've interpreted the whole thing in a way that's not only palatable, and uncannibalistic, but is psychically nourishing.

How does it make you feel to know that people in that church (speaking generally)are taught to literally believe that they are eating the flesh and blood of Jesus?

I couldn't say how unique it is, either, but I'm sure you're right. I've heard other catholics (at soccer games or whatever) speak of both "those wonderful people at St John's" and "those weird people at St John's."

The body and blood? The argument I've heard is, if a wife from Argentina and a husband from Sweden can adopt a baby from China, and that is THEIR daughter, then it's no stretch to say that THAT cracker and wine is the body and blood of Christ. It's hard to argue with logic like that. :)

I view all of religion as poetry, not prose. It's not about fact, it's about truth. I grok it. So drinking the blood and eating the body to me means, bringing God inside me, to change me from the inside out, from little old me into The Body of Christ.

Lepidopteryx, Campbellite, I'm with you... There are those that say "You don't have to understand it, just believe it." but I'm more of a "You don't have to believe it, just understand it" kind of guy myself.

Campbellite - I'm familiar with Greely from years past and will check out the site.

I'm not conversant enough with catholic parishes around the country to say yours is unique, but I bet it is.

Unfortunately, I bet it's very fragile, too, and could change in a heartbeat.

How do people in our parish talk/think about communion - the whole body and blood thing?

What have you as an individual thought about eating Christ's body and drinking his blood?

E Fav, that's my dream, too.

The conversations we've had online have mirrored conversations I've had with people from church.

Dare I say that I've been blessed to find a really awesome local parish? And that the wife of the pastoral council head and I agreed that, bishops and popes be damned, folks need to spend less time worrying about hell and more time worrying about each other? And that the Faith Formation director believes that baptism is less about the forgiveness or original sin ("an outdated idea") and more about the joining with each other of the community of god? And that the priest said (in the homily) that he likes facing the congregation while blessing the eucharist, because there's only one Christ on the crucifix statue and 200+ Christs in the eyes of the people before him? And that the parish school principal said that the miracle of Christmas is not that Christ was born 2,000 years ago, but is born again and again, every day, in the hearts of those who still seek him? And that once a quarter, the parish brings food for the foodbank to the altar along with the gifts, as an offering to God?

And that all of this, in a warm and genuinely friendly community, is enough to make this former Baptist turned Pagan turned Buddhist turned technocrat Agnostic think that maybe, MAYBE, this whole Catholic thing is more than I'd expected?

I've been studying ancient Christian and Gnostic texts for twenty years. There's been remarkable new scholarship since the mid 90's. I've also been reading the works of Fr. Andrew Greeley, a novelist sociologist priest out of Chicago. He's got a website at http://www.agreeley.com/.

Hi Lepidopteryx,

"You obviously hold your beliefs very deeply, and I can appreciate that. I assure you, I hold mine every bit as deeply."

I understand that Lepidopteryx.

"You say I must convert or perish."

Conversion is up to God alone, not me.

Campbellite: “Catholic dogma is becoming much less dogmatic than it used to be.”

Sure sounds like it – also sounds like you found a good Catholic church and access to some good biblical information. I was raised Catholic and the occasional Catholic wedding or funeral I attend hasn’t reflected these changes. Do you know if others in your catholic acquaintance have similar viewpoints?

My dream is of Christian humanism – in which people practice the good teachings of jesus and the old testament and and don’t even bother with the other stuff. There’s no indoctrination of beliefs that defy the laws of nature and people can sing songs, light incense and chant to their heart’s delight. There can be many “flavors” depending on individual interests and preferences.

Meanwhile, you’re still dealing with the catholic church of today, with the sex scandals and cover-up and celibate male priests.

Peter,

You obviously hold your beliefs very deeply, and I can appreciate that. I assure you, I hold mine every bit as deeply.
I just don't get them all from a single source.

Just as you find aspects of my beliefs impossible for you to believe, I find aspects of yours impossible to believe.

You say I must convert or perish.
I say Vive la difference.

Campbellite, a couple of your statements caught my attention,

"I don't have to believe it literally. I don't think it was originally intended to be interpreted literally. The ancient and medieval person was way more open to symbology than we are today."

That is not what the Lord who bought the church with His blood (i.e. His life given) taught. He treated the Old Testament, the Scriptures of those times, as historical events. (i.e. Matthew 19:4-5; 23:35; 24:37 etc.)

So you are reinterpreting Scripture to fit your worldview rather than accepting it for what the Author's intent was meant to convey. What else is new?

"I, like you, have serious reservations about the Catholic church because of its bloody history."

So do I.

Hello One Way, Many Paths,

Peter, as much as I love your references, Matthew 7:13-14; John 10:1-11; John 14:6; and Acts 4:12 all talk about the way. Jesus was speaking not of himself as being the way, but the way he followed."

That is not what the Bible teaches, Many Paths.

"Salvation is found in no one else, for there is no other name under heaven given to men by which we must be saved." (Acts 4:12)

Now to make that verse say something other than what it actually says you have to read into, rather than take out of, the Author's intent. Language has specific meaning and that meaning is determined by the context of the verse(s).

"Whoever believes in Him is not condemned, but whoever does not believe stands condemned already because he has not believed in the name of God's one and only Son." (John 3:18)

"Anyone who does not believe God has made Him out to be a liar, because he has not believed the testimony God has given about His Son. And this is the testimony: God has given us eternal life, and this life is in His Son. He who has the Son has life; he who does not have the Son of God does not have life." (1John 4:10b-11)

Where do you come up with this stuff about many paths from Scripture?

"A subtle difference that church leaders have been preying on for the past 2000 years. In fact, 1 Timothy 2:5, is a good illustration of how christian leaders have distorted what Jesus said from the previous references."

The passage is plain. The "all men" in context would refer to men of all kinds as opposed to men without distinction, for the passage refers to everyone - then qualifies "kings and all those in authority", as to kind.

The ransom given for all men, would refer to kings and men in authority, but from other Scriptures also both Jews and Gentiles, free and bond men, male and female, peasants and kings, people from every tribe and language, etc (Revelation 5:9).

Jesus Christ came to save "His people" from their sins (Matthew 1:21) - i.e. a specific people. Notice what the verse says, "He will save." God is doing the saving; we are not saving ourselves by our good deeds. Our righteousness is dirty as compared to His glorious purity. That is why we need the Substitute.

Since some people will be cast into the Lake of Fire, the second death, Scripture reveals not "all" are saved. You would be hard pressed to find a verse that teaches every person without distinction. It would contradict other passages that teach eternal punishment.

Since the Christian does not know whom God has given ears to hear, eyes to see and a heart to believe, the message goes out into all the earth and it accomplishes God's purpose (Isaiah 55:8-11, esp. 11).

"Some people seem to know it’s God." E Fav, I agree that all humans have these experiences of discovering eternity. I call it god for want of an easier term. I've had similar experiences of transcendence that I do not associate with "God" however - mostly in nature, some in sex, some in discovering an exquisite passage in literature. I hearken to Joseph Campbell, who calls all these religions and experiences "Masks of Eternity." Same stuff, differnet faces.

In regards to the chants, rosary, music, repetitve prayer, etc. Again, I agree. I think the literalist worldview has wormed its way in to too many contexts. We can believe the virgin birth poetically but not physically. When I pray the rosary I know that these stories are icons - images that are intended to bring on a particular mental/emotional state which will open me up to view another Mask of Eternity. I don't have to believe it literally. I don't think it was originally intended to be interpreted literally. The ancient and medieval person was way more open to symbology than we are today.

I, like you, have serious reservations about the Catholic church because of its bloody history. I'm having a hard time accepting the many abuses the Church has enacted on the world. But I want to be open minded, so I read more, and I slowly begin to see the whole picture. For example, there's no dought that the Church bears some responsibility for the slaughter of millions in the Sp;anishh invasion of Meso-America. Pizarro murdered under a cross. But then, some how, God (there's that word again) revealed another Mask through the Virgin of Guadalupe. And she didn't appear as a spanish princess but as a Mexican peasant girl, pregnant and barefoot, bearing the symbols of the Mayan/Aztec mother goddess. As if to tell the Mexican people, Don't worry, I'm still me, just in a new costume.

Catholic dogma is becoming much less dogmatic than it used to be. I am a baptized Christian but not a confirmed Catholic. But someday I might be. The times they are a-changin'.

(Last spring I bought The complete Idiot's Guide to Understanding Catholicism. Funny, warm, a good read.)

Sorry Terra, that last post was for you.

Hi Lepidopteryx,

You said,

"Forgivness is for those who earn it through acceptance of their own actions."

That is the difference and contrast between religion and Christianity. Religion teaches you have to earn your place before God, by your good works and deeds.

It is all based on what you do,do, do, as if what you can do will measure up to God's perfect, pure, holy righteousness and justice.

Either that or it does not matter what you do, for you believe that God is good. Well, goodness does not overlook wrongful action. But it does supply a way of reconciliation for those who believe by the grace of God.

Forgiveness is a gift from God, secured through the Lord Jesus Christ and no one else. With Him, and His life as a Man, God was well pleased. His perfect life given on our behalf is what secures our peace and life with God. God has punished sin in His Son that those who believe will not have to pay the penalty themselves, for the soul that sins will surely die and be cast from God's presents on Judgment Day. For what do righteousness and wickedness have in common? They are opposed to each other.

What Arminius said was correct. Forgiveness without repentance is not what the Scriptures teach. It is repent and turn. But without God, that is impossible, for it relies on His grace and mercy and means, not our works. (Ephesians 2:8-10)

The good works that come after the new birth are the work of God, and our dependence on Him, not from us.

Hi Lepidopteryx,

You said,

"With all due respect, your Bible is an anthology. It makes sense that the NT would be written in such a way as to make Jesus the fulfillment of OT prophecy, since the folks who wrote the NT KNEW the OT and believed that he was the fulfillment of prophecy."

Actually there are various themes God has woven throughout the Bible, but it is a history from start to finish with poetic and figurative language used to convey thought and imagery. The context determines how the language is to be taken, just as the language you use determines how I understand what you have to say. A passage is to be taken plainly unless the language indicates otherwise.

You work from a presupposition that the Bible is anthology from start to finish, so that clouds your judgment as to looking upon it as anything more than a fairy tale with a moral message, just like Aesop's Fables.

It is extremely far fetched to compare the Bible to Gone With the Wind as a fictitious work. It does not make that claim, the people who lived during the periods both in the OT and NT times did not treat it as fiction, but as it is, the Word of God and historical. You are really stretching the point to turn it into fiction, Lepidopteryx.

Ever thought that you are the one who is molding it to suit your worldview, rather than taking it for what it is, an historical record and actual Word of God?

Just because you view life from a naturalistic standpoint you are not willing to allow God the Almighty any supernatural ability in His dealing with mankind.

As for molding Jesus into the promised Messiah of the Old Testament, it is awfully hard to make Him fit into over three hundred prophecies, written over four hundred to fifteen hundred years earlier, many of which describe His birth, life, death (including how He would die, in explicit detail) and resurrection.

Why didn't the Jewish leaders of the day produce His dead body after the disciples where claiming 'He is Risen', to put an end to the gospel proclamation and end the spread of Christianity once for all.

Why do we not have all kinds of literature during the period that refutes the 500 witnesses, and early accounts, those who actually saw the physical, risen Savior?

Then you have to consider the unity of the Scriptures, the constant themes, all pointing ahead to the chosen Messiah. As Jesus said,

"'How foolish you are, and how slow of heart to believe all the prophets have spoken! Did not the Christ have to suffer these things and then enter His glory?' And beginning with Moses and all the Prophets, He explained to them what was said in all the Scriptures concerning Him." (Luke 24:25-27)

Of course, you are going to look at the Scriptures only as your worldview will allow you to filter the information, because you have started from the position that you mentioned before, that God cannot reveal Himself to mankind only in one set of religious writings. Of course, we both agree that God is also revealed in what has been made, but that is not a written record. Therefore, you and I are going to disagree.

The Bible forbids molding God into an image, but to worship Him in spirit and in truth. That requires an accurate knowledge of who He is.

"I'm not saying that the writers of the NT were being deceptive,..."

Actually, that is exactly what you are saying, you probably just don't realize it. When people make statements like this it is a red flag as to what they are actually saying.

There is numerous references to eyewitness accounts throughout the New Testament.

"Many have undertaken to draw up an account of the things that have been fulfilled among us, just as they were handed down to us by those who from the first were eyewitnesses and servants of the word. Therefore, since I myself have carefully investigated everything from the beginning, it seemed good also to me to write an orderly account for you most excellent Theophillus, so that you may know the certainty of the things you have been taught." (Luke 1:1-4)

"after His suffering, He showed Himself to these men and gave many convincing proofs that He was alive...After He said this, He was taken up before their eyes, and a cloud hid Him from their sight." (Acts 1:3, 9)

"But he said to them, 'Unless I see the nail marks in His hands and put my finger where the nails were, and put my hand into His side, I will not believe it.'...Then He said to Thomas, 'Put your finger here; see My hands. Reach out your hand and put it into MY side. Stop doubting and believe.' Thomas said to Him, 'My Lord and my God!' Jesus said to him, 'Because you have seen Me you have believed; blessed are those who have not seen and yet have believed.'" (John 20:25, 27-29)

"That which was from the beginning, which we have heard, which we have seen with our own eyes, which we have looked at and our hands have touched - this we proclaim concerning the Word of life. The life appeared; we have seen it and testify to it, and we proclaim to you the eternal life, which was with the Father and has appeared to us." (1 John 1:1-2)

You cannot escape this eyewitness testimony throughout the Scriptures, Lepidopteryx.

"When the canon as it exists today was compiled, which texts would and would not be included were chosen by early church officials based on what texts they felt best suited their vision of what the church was supposed to be."

The process was guided by God and only those Scriptures that were intended and inspired became the canon, the rule, the standard that we have today.

The creeds and writing of the apostles were passed from church to church and only those documents that were handed down from the apostles and those God ordained to write an account became the Canon of Scripture. Both Jesus and the early church fathers confirmed over and over again what was and was not Scripture by quoting from it. As the gnostics were infiltrating the churches, teaching their secret knowledge, as they do today also, so these church fathers fought against their heretical teachings, because these people denied the Sovereign Lord and His teachings, and the faith that was one, for all delivered to the saints (Jude 3-4).

What you are teaching today, I'm sure has been refuted by the early church fathers many times.

"Gnosis was becoming a major threat to authority, and they couldn't have people deciding for themselves what they believed."

That is right, it was becoming a threat to the truth of the gospels. People were inventing myths and wives tales and had to be reminded and taught what te Scriptures actually taught.

"See to it that no one takes you captive through hollow and deceptive philosophies, which depends on human tradition and the basic principles of this world rather than on Christ." (Colossians 2:8)

"As I urged you when I went into Macedonia, stay there in Ephesus so that you may command certain men not to teach false doctrines any longer nor to devote themselves to myths and endless genealogies. These promote controversies rather than God's work - which is by faith...They want to be teachers of the law, but they do not know what they so confidently affirm." (1 Timothy 1:3, 4, 7)

"Christianity was a breakaway sect of Judaism,"

Actually it was a fulfillment of the Jewish Scriptures.

"in the same way that Protestantism would be a breakaway sect from Catholicism - lots of commonalities, significant differences, neither the One and Only True Path."

Actually Protestantism was a protest against the traditions that had crept into the church and a stand for the Biblical and Scriptural authority - Sola Scriptura, God's word alone. As in the early church history, now with the Protestant Reformation, men were defending the Word of God against heresy and bad teaching that went against the actual Word of God.

What Protestantism and Catholicism has become today in many churches does not follow the Word of God. Human tradition has again crept in.

Has anyone thought about the fact that the death penalty is big in the Christian right? That there was more drumming for war in the Churches then in the Pagan circles?

So where is the forgivness...and why is war in Iraq still so popular with the Christian Right, even long after it was proven that Iraq had nothing to do with 9-11?

Christianity is contrary...Not all Christians are banging the drum for continued war...but enough to make Bush a happy man. And now we have Iran being the scapegoat...

After 9-11 it was vengence, pure and simple.
How many Christians are on their knees begging for forgivness to those Iraqis still in grief over losing children and other loved ones? How many are understanding that a culture that was thosands of years old with much beauty is shattered, and millions of its people dead and more millions scattered?

Or is it only preaching to Pagans you are good at...umm Peter?

When I called on my Gods to release my pain to them...I knew that they would handle things...I did not have to carry hate or pain. I did not have to ask for vengence as I know that people get what they earn...and when you harm one you ultimately harm yourself. I let it go. I remember the occassion, but not with hate, its more in amazement that any one would do that. I have not forgiven that act...as he did not ask for my forgiveness and did not admit to wronging me. He just wanted his life saved, what he did to me was of no consequence to him or his family.. Should I forgive him? No. He has not earned it. I am not big on mercy for those who go out and hurt people. I was not the first he had hurt, and chances are I would not have been the last. Forgivness is for those who earn it through acceptance of their own actions. Like I sais, I have no hate or pain in me that I am carrying, I don't need it, why should I haul it around?

terra

Cambellite and Arminius: “I have had experiences that I can't explain”

Me too, but I never associated them with god talking to me or with any religious meaning. Don’t know why. It didn’t occur to me. A couple of them even happened in religious settings (Good Friday services, at Assisi) and when I was a believer. What I know is that they felt extraordinarily good - and different than anything else in my life. I suspect (but don’t know, of course) that the main difference among these experiences is how people interpret them. Some people seem to know it’s God.

Regarding the soothing qualities of religious chants, repetitions and music. I feel that too – even now that I’m an atheist. It’s ingrained in our human psyche – regardless of any particular religious tradition we’ve created around it.

So, I’d say – say the rosary if it makes you feel good – that doesn’t mean you have to believe that the virgin Mary bore a son who died for your sins and later lifted bodily to heaven.

I loved saying prayers in Latin – mainly, I think because I didn’t always know what I was saying – it just had a relaxing rhythm.

I think it’s incredibly easy for people, much too easy, to compartmentalize the soothing aspects of any religious (especially Catholicism) away from its dogma, it’s supernatural stories presented as fact and its troubling history.

I'd like to take a moment to point out that Peter does not represent all Christians. I'm with Lepidopteryx. Yes, we can all get along.

In the nick of time, check out the new guest post. http://newsweek.washingtonpost.com/onfaith/guestvoices/2007/10/most_christians_to_left_of_far.html

Peter, as much as I love your references, Matthew 7:13-14; John 10:1-11; John 14:6; and Acts 4:12 all talk about the way. Jesus was speaking not of himself as being the way, but the way he followed. A subtle difference that church leaders have been preying on for the past 2000 years. In fact, 1 Timothy 2:5, is a good illustration of how christian leaders have distorted what Jesus said from the previous references.

The religions we have now are not the religions that they were originally. Religious beleifs evolve, they are fluid and change as our understanding of the ALL changes. Some religions fail to incorporate new understanding; they petrify, and hopefully die out like the dinosaurs they are, or were. Sometimes we come to the wrong conclusions and erroneously incorporate them into our beleifs, usually to our lasting sorrow.

Just as the christians of today are not the same as the christians of 50 AD, so too the Wiccans of today are not the same as the followers of the Goddess 2000 years ago; or the muslims of today versus those of the year 700.

Mark 9:39 is apropos. It's a tough passage to understand, and there are a LOT of variations of it, Paraphrasing from http://bible.cc/mark/9-39.htm "And Jesus said, 'Forbid him not, for there is no one who shall do a mighty work in my name, and shall be able readily to speak evil of me" Don't blame others for following an independent course. Jesus is saying that those who work the same kind of work that he did should be regarded not as enemies, but allies. Thousands, in every period of church history, (including people today) have spent their lives in copying John's mistake. They have labored to stop everyone who follows the way of Jesus but aren't Christians, from working for Christ at all.

Peter:
**the Bible is a book like no other. As you say, it is written by the hands of over forty authors, over a period of fifteen hundred years, all with a consistent and unified message, revealing who God is in His nature and attributes, His dealing with mankind, and as such is an historical record from the beginning of His creation, into the Christian church age, as well as insight into the age to come. It explains why mankind does evil, the consequences of such evil and God's plan to put the situation right again.**

With all due respect, your Bible is an anthology. It makes sense that the NT would be written in suh a way as to make Jesus the fulfillment of OT prophecy, since the folks who wrote the NT KNEW the OT and believed that he was the fulfillment of prophecy. I'm not saying that the writers of the NT were being deceptive, but that the fact that they believed this colored their decisions as to how to relate a story. That's just human nature.
When the canon as it exists today was compiled, which texts would and would not be included were chosen by early church officials based on what texts they felt best suited their vision of what the church was supposed to be. Gnosis was becoming a major threat to authority, and they couldn't have people deciding for themselves what they believed.
Christianity was a breakaway sect of Judaism, in thesame way that Protestantism would be a breakaway sect from Catholicism - lots of commonalities, significant differences, neither the One and Only True Path.

**With any worldview to be consistent it needs to answer basic questions like what is out there (metaphysics), how can we know anything for certain, such as the nature of knowledge (epistemology), and what difference does it make (axiology). The Bible has that consistency. Does your faith?**

All faiths do that for their adherents. If they find that the faith doesn't answer those questions satisfactorily,they go looking for answers elsewhere. That is the nature of the spiritual journey.

**Without an absolute, objective, ultimate standard everything is governed by the whims and opinions of subjective humans. In such a world morals, truth, logic, purpose and meaning have no foundation in which to make sense of the why we "should" or "ought to" do something. Only God can make sense of that, and not just any god, because the gods of the different religions are all contradictory and therefore all cannot be true.**

Depends on how you define god and what you require of your god(s). You apparently require yours to personally make the rules, personally watch everyone to ensure that they obey the rules, and personally punish those who don't play by the rules. That's not what I require of my gods. You seem to need your god to be a literal being, separate from yourself to keep you in line, so that's the god you have. For me, deities serve better when they are present in everything from my morning coffee to my compost pile, so that's what I have. The important thing is that both your God and my gods and goddesses serve the same purpose - to remind us what it means to live as ethical people.

**You believe in many gods/goddesses, or at least two (as revealed from your posts), whereas I believe there is only one true and living God. One of us is wrong and the God of the Bible has revealed it is you.**

And there are multiple other books that would "reveal" that it is you who are wrong. The difference between us is that I don't require your path to be wrong for you in order for mine to be right for me, nor so I require the path that is right for me to be right for everyone. All roads lead to home.

**The names, places, peoples (in the Bible) are true to history and archeology and as such they are real people and places, not figments of the imagination.**

So are many of the names, places, events, etc. in "Gone with the Wind." That doesn't make it a factual account of the American Civil War.

**That is not true of what Terra says about her beliefs. It is all mythology to her and as such cannot be verified as actually anything other than the imaginations of people in rebellion to their Maker.**

Only if you insist on equating "myth" with "falsehood."

**The Bible is His sole written revelation to mankind. He has revealed in it as much as we need to know about Him and His salvation, this side of eternity.**

Sorry, but I have to agree with Blaze Starr on this one - she said "Never trust a man who says 'Trust me.'" I think that applies to gods too. If an omniscient, omnipotent being can't explain things so that my mortal brain can grasp it, then he ain't so much.

**Those histories of people recorded in the Bible got the result of their fruit of rebellion, justice and punishment, but some also got mercy and forgiveness.**

If your Flood-as-punishment-for-wickedness story was true, then there were children, infants, and even babies in utero killed in it. What exactly could anyone have done before being born to snark your god off?

**

Hi Terra,

I will try to make this short since it is late (hard for me).

You said,

"Tell me Peter how many manuscripts has your god written? And something else as far as finding the real...how close are you to finding that talking snake? And as far as Justice? What kind of Justice did your God in his myths mede out? A Flood that killed all the people on earth...fire and brimstone...killing all the first born in Egypt. Killing people for their land...the Mothers and the babes in the womb. Justice? I can not think of a horror book that I have read that can compete for the viciousness of the myths in the bible.
But then I am a neo Pagan and we tend to have our own myths..."

The Bible is His sole written revelation to mankind. He has revealed in it as much as we need to know about Him and His salvation, this side of eternity. All the rest, He has revealed are forgeries.

As for His justice, yes, He always does what is right and just for He is the standard. Those histories of people recorded in the Bible got the result of their fruit of rebellion, justice and punishment, but some also got mercy and forgiveness.

Justice is what we deserve, mercy and grace only come through the merit of the Lord Jesus Christ. A just Judge will not compromise justice. But the merciful God has provided a way of reconciliation in which His justice is not compromised. (2 Corinthians 5:18-6:2 for anyone reading this post who is curious)

"For the wages of sin is death, but the gift of God is eternal life in Christ Jesus our Lord." (Romans 6:23)

As for the miracles, God transcends nature, so what is supernatural is possible with Him. As for the talking snake, the devil being a spiritual being, could have spoken through the snake, as revealed in Scripture or actually possessed the serpent as was the example in the gospels of the demons possessing the herd of pigs.

I will try and answer your other questions tomorrow, Terra.

Hello Lepidopteryx, Arminius!

Hello Alexandria,

You said,

"I do not understand how you can take a book, written by the hands of men - possibly women as well, but multiple authors over hundreds of years, and say, with a straight face that it is factual and true because it says it is."

For one thing Alexandra, the Bible is a book like no other. As you say, it is written by the hands of over forty authors, over a period of fifteen hundred years, all with a consistent and unified message, revealing who God is in His nature and attributes, His dealing with mankind, and as such is an historical record from the beginning of His creation, into the Christian church age, as well as insight into the age to come. It explains why mankind does evil, the consequences of such evil and God's plan to put the situation right again.

It also claims over and over again to be the very words of God.

"And we also thank God continually because, when you received the word of God, which you heard from us, you accepted it not as the word of men, but as it actually is, the word of God, which is at work in you who believe." (1 Thessalonians 2:13)

"All Scripture is God breathed and is useful for teaching, rebuking, correcting and training in righteousness, so that the man of God may be thoroughly equipped for every good work." (2 Timothy 3:16)

"For prophecy never had its origin in the will of man, but men spoke from God as they were carried along by the Holy Spirit." (2 Peter 2:21)

This was what the Lord Jesus, Himself taught the disciples while He lived on this earth.

"But the Counselor, the Holy Spirit, whom the Father will send in My name, will teach you all things and will remind you of everything I have said to you." (John 14:26)

"I have much more to say to you, more than you can now bear. But when He, the Spirit of truth, comes, He will guide you into all truth. He will not speak on His own; He will speak only what He hears, and He will tell you what is yet to come. He will bring glory to Me by taking from what is Mine and making it known to you." (John 16:12-14)

(see also 1 Corinthians 2:6-16)

"You would not believe in a book that said, go, kill all the men you see over the age of 12 because god says to? And this is the word of god because it says so? There are many traditions and teachings of god, written as the word of the god involved - and you say they are not true but your book is? Because IT says so? This is supposed to be rational in some way?"

With any worldview to be consistent it needs to answer basic questions like what is out there (metaphysics), how can we know anything for certain, such as the nature of knowledge (epistemology), and what difference does it make (axiology). The Bible has that consistency. Does your faith?

Without an absolute, objective, ultimate standard everything is governed by the whims and opinions of subjective humans. In such a world morals, truth, logic, purpose and meaning have no foundation in which to make sense of the why we "should" or "ought to" do something. Only God can make sense of that, and not just any god, because the gods of the different religions are all contradictory and therefore all cannot be true.

For instance to say that God is a personal being and God is impersonal is an illustration of such a contradiction. Or that there is one true God and there are many true gods is a contradiction. Logically God cannot be both personal and impersonal at the same time and in the same manner. That would be like calling your dog a cat. It is either a dog or a cat, not both, and you make the distinction because you know what a dog looks like as opposed to a cat.

And that is one of the differences between what you believe and what I believe. You believe in many gods/goddesses, or at least two (as revealed from your posts), whereas I believe there is only one true and living God. One of us is wrong and the God of the Bible has revealed it is you.

Now to your next question,

"and you say they are not true but your book is? Because IT says so? This is supposed to be rational in some way?"

Yes, as a Christian I presuppose the truth of the Bible as mankind's highest authority. As such I can make sense of reality. You too have a worldview as does everyone else reading these posts, in which you build from/on a basic foundation the web of what you believe. On that foundation you will very seldom compromise because that would mean changing your belief. What is your highest authority?

The Bible is verifiable on many levels, because besides being a revelation from God, it is also His dealing with us in human history. The names, places, peoples are true to history and archeology and as such they are real people and places, not figments of the imagination.

That is not true of what Terra says about her beliefs. It is all mythology to her and as such cannot be verified as actually anything other than the imaginations of people in rebellion to their Maker. So what she believes does not correspond to what is real. When she points to the similarities between Jesus Christ and Osiris or Mithras or Iris or Attis or Dionysos or Astarte, these are just myths compared to the Lord Jesus Christ who actually existed in human history. The early church fathers exposed the pagan beliefs in their day as being nothing more than false worship as such worship was prohibited by God in both the Old and New Testaments. From my understanding, some of these mythological pagan writings about dying and rising gods cannot be traced before the second century, so there is evidence that some, instead of preceding Christianity, borrowed from it.

"Have nothing to do with godless myths and old wives' tales; rather train yourself to be godly." (1 Timothy 4:7)

"We did not follow cleverly invented stories when we told you about the power and coming of our Lord Jesus Christ, but were eyewitnesses of His majesty." (2 Peter 1:16)

That is what Terra believes in, a cleverly invented story, according to the Scriptures.

Besides this, the Christian teachings did not originate from earlier pagan religions, but from the Old Testament writings. Through these written prophesies about the coming of the Jewish Messiah, the Lord Jesus Christ, was to come. Besides being an actual history there are hundreds, maybe thousands of types and shadows found in the Jewish Scriptures concerning Christ.

http://tektonics.org/copycat/raglan.html

Enjoy.

Lastly, the death, burial and resurrection of the Lord Jesus Christ are extremely well attested to facts of history. They are what the Old Testament points to and what the New Testament reveals.

Check out the teachings of Gary Habermas both on the resurrection and on the mystery religions at,

http://www.garyhabermas.com/video/video.htm

That will explain to you the confidence we as Christians have in what we believe.

I hear you, PP. You're right, it's us now. We are the ones to make the world a different place. No one else.

I can tell you have a lot of anger about this issue. And the people who should have protected you used religion as a tool against you. That's sickening. You have a right to be angry.

I don't blame the victim, and I don't accuse anyone of being unforgiving. I believe that forgiveness is necessary for the one doing the forgiving, not the one who is forgiven. I've seen the power of forgiveness change lives.

When my sister lay dying, refusing to let me say goodbye because she associated me with the abuse of our parents, and I couldn't even cry, a stranger sat down with me and began to pray, and through her words my tears started to flow. I found I could forgive my father for f^&(ing me when I was six years old when it occurred to me that some one must have f$^(# him at six years old, too. I found I could forgive myself when I held my brand new baby and discovered that every child is a christ child - the one in diapers and the one holding the one in diapers.

I don't understand it myself, I can only say it happened, and it happens every time I kneel to pray.

If you can work your way through it, you'll find a great deal of relief. If you choose not to, that's your right. But I hope for your sake you find a way to let go of the damage done to you. That kind of hurt is like a weight that you carry around. You've carried it for so long you don't even notice it anymore. When you let it go, you'll realize how much it hurt to carry around inside you.

Whether or not you chose to forgive is up to you. I don't expect any posted epiphany here. You go on being arnry, if it works for you.

I never claimed to have the one true religion, and I don't presume to judge anyone. I said several times that I don't. I think you see my words and hear the excuses that were given to you as a kid. Perfectly natural. Every time I hear my mother's voice I hear the mockery and abuse she heaped on me, even if she's trying to say somethind nice. That's *why* I think that all religions are valid - so that if one well gets poisoned we can go to another.

I don't hate you, I don't condemn you or judge you or see you as any more flawed than anybody else. I see a flaw in the thinking of any person who believes that nursing a past hurt is morally equal to letting it go. I hope you'll see me as just another person, and not judge me or condemn me either.

I mean, *don't you get it?*

*We* are the adults, now.

Us. No one else.

We speak up, or no one does.

Us.

See, here it goes again.

"I hope that God, in mercy and love and healing, can reach that place in your heart and give you peace. god brings you back to him/her through another mask, but I think it's the same Power of Love that is behind them all."

How in the holy holly Hel do you figure I need you to tell me that after you come here claiming that somehow you have the One True Religion that gets to judge everyone?

"It is my firm wish that every priest, bishop, cardinal, deacon, pastor, father, uncle, brother, who harms a child or protects those who do, will be brought to justice."

Is that as 'unforgiving' as you started off here accusing Pagans of being? Cause maybe Starhawk said as much?

"In my life, it wasn't god who made my father molest me or my siblings, but it was god who helped me recover. I hope you recover too."

Don't you worry. May be that people *talking* like someone's version of God made certain things happen, but, actually, Lord and Lady were with me all along.

And that's why I'm still here being ornery atcha. :)

It didn't happen to me. I just had to watch, and people talking like you ensured there wasn't a damn thing I could do about it.

They said, 'pray the rosary' and 'bear your cross' and screw you, kids.

This one's not about 'forgiveness.'

It's just about life.

Anyway, for the studio audience, see what I mean about this 'forgiveness' thing? All you have to do is bow and scrape and you can say whatever you want about anyone without ever realizing you're being the 'bad guy.'

PaganPlace, thank you for your honesty. You were never to blame for what adults in power did to you or your friends. I don't blame you for being angry, or for leaving the church. You have every right to be hurt and furious. I hope that God, in mercy and love and healing, can reach that place in your heart and give you peace. god brings you back to him/her through another mask, but I think it's the same Power of Love that is behind them all.

It is my firm wish that every priest, bishop, cardinal, deacon, pastor, father, uncle, brother, who harms a child or protects those who do, will be brought to justice.

In my life, it wasn't god who made my father molest me or my siblings, but it was god who helped me recover. I hope you recover too.

Now I'm gonna go watch Keith Olbermann.

Or I could say:

"And when I hold a rosary in my hands, and feel the beads flow between my fingers as my mouth repeats the familiar words and my mind contemplates the Mysteries I can't begin to understand rationally, I feel Mary's mantle lay across my shoulders, and it warms me, strengthens me, and fills me with peace."

There's no place like home, Toto...

As before, blessings on your ways, but, no.

From the Catholic catechism, as noted previously:

"Those who, through no fault of their own, do not know the Gospel of Christ or his Church, but who nevertheless seek God with a sincere heart, and, moved by grace, try in their actions to do his will as they know it through the dictates of their conscience - those too may achieve eternal salvation."

While this seems like a very magnanimous gesture on the part of the church, when one considers the number of non-Christians who *have* heard the Gospel and rejected it, or who have, through their own faults, voluntarily passed on the opportunity to hear it, we're potentially looking at a huge number of people who will not "achieve eternal salvation". (I can't even begin to imagine how many others might be excluded based on *not* being "moved by grace".)

What happens to these "under-achievers", even the ones who've met all the other stipulations? While it, typically, isn't spelled out (in this age of soft-pedaling a rather brutal message), they, of course, will spend the rest of eternity in hell.

And though the church continues to take the edge off by now teaching: "Hell's principal punishment consists of eternal separation from God in whom alone man can have the life and happiness for which he was created and for which he longs.", that does not preclude experiencing that separation while frying like a piece of bacon.

No, Campbell.

Just.

No.

PaganPlace, I haven't condemned anyone. You are intentionally misrepresenting me. Please stop. You're starting to sound like a right wing fundamentalist pagan, and that just makes my head hurt.

Lepidopteryx, Paul makes my skin crawl, too. I think he's where the protestant movement went way too wrong. Augustine also pisses me off. But I love St Teresa, St Francis (canticle of the sun, anyone? as good a pagan prayer as was ever written.) and most of all Joseph Campbell, rest his soul.

There's one passage that keeps coming back to me this year. Remember the movie version of Wizard of Oz? At the end, after the Wizard has left, and Glinda comes to show Dorothy the way home:

Dorothy: Oh, will you help me? Can you help me?
Glinda: You don't need to be helped any longer. You've always had the power to go back to Kansas.
Dorothy: I have?
Scarecrow: Then why didn't you tell her before?
Glinda: She wouldn't have believed me. She had to learn it for herself.
Scarecrow: What have you learned, Dorothy?
Dorothy: Well, I—I think that it, that it wasn't enough just to want to see Uncle Henry and Auntie Em — and it's that — if I ever go looking for my heart's desire again, I won't look any further than my own backyard. Because if it isn't there, I never really lost it to begin with! Is that right?
Glinda: That's all it is!
Scarecrow: But that's so easy! I should've thought of it for you -
Tin Man: I should have felt it in my heart -
Glinda: No, she had to find it out for herself. Now those magic slippers will take you home in two seconds!
Dorothy: Oh! Toto too?
Glinda: Toto too.
Dorothy: Now?
Glinda: Whenever you wish.

And I will say, as Christian forgiveness goes, I'm still trying to forgive myself for not making more noise when my friends were getting molested, even if as an adult I should know the good Cardinal got a Vatican posting and immunity out of the deal... and the last time I went to confession, we all confessed to the same sins cause the priest was on the make and using the information obtained in there, and and we were covering for each other.

You may say I'm as a Pagan unforgiving, but I'm actually not sure I ever unlearned the blaming of myself, patient Goddess or not.

Or maybe it's just I seen the inside of various sacristies and know the dynamic when I see it in our politics.

I mean, it sounds like, according to Campbellite, Pagans are flawed, so I ought to have thumbed a rosary all my life, 'forgiven' those that hurt a bunch of people, and hoped the Mother would 'save' my inadequate-yet-commodifiable behind at some future date.

Can't say I'm not a flawed being, but somehow I can't see this not-trying thing.

Then again, I used to have a picture of 'The Ecstasy of St Theresa' over which I'd painted 'I'm So Bored With The USA.'

But hey. :)

Campbellite:
** I have at my desk a buddhist mandala calendar, a small relief of Lakshmi, a picture of St John the Evangelist, and random artwork and pics of my family.**

You sound a lot like me in a lot of ways. I grew up Baptist, and got into tons of trouble as a child for asking too many questions of my Sunday School teachers and not having enough faith. I couldn't tell you how many times I heard "You don't need to UNDERSTAND it, just BELIEVE it." But I DO need to have at least a rudimentary understanding of something to believe it. I have not been Christian for a couple of decades now, but I do think that Jesus had some really good ideas about how to treat other people, and I think that seven of the ten guidelines are just common sense ideas for living in any sort of community.
After realizing that the Christian path did not work for me, I began looking for one that did. The more I read and studied and learned about different paths, the more I realized that they all had arying amounts of wisdom and dreck.
The Pagan path made the most overall sense to me, and even then, there was no single tradition that I found I could embrace in toto. I finally realized that it was perfectly ok for me to take wisdom where I found it, and eave behind that which does not feed my soul, whether it was in the writings of Biblical authors (although I must say that much of Paul's writing makes my skin crawl), Starhawk, Stephen Hawking, or Dr. Suess, or an episode of Star Trek, The Simpsons, or Mr. Rogers' Neighborhood, or the lyrics of Bob Dylan, John Prine, John Lennon, or Leonard Cohen, or the poetry of e.e. cummings or Federico Garcia Lorca, or statements uttered by children, such as when my daughter was five, and declared to my ex when he told her that dragons only existed in her imagination, "Just because something is imaginary doesn't mean it isn't real!". Which, if you think about it, is really a pretty good explanation of the function of myth in the lives of humankind.

Let's put it this way: Claiming 'Ex-Pagan' credentials doesn't mean you *get* it, never mind have a right to 'condemn.'

Blessings on your ways, but you don't get us.

Not so much, Campbellite.

What you said is right up there.

PaganPlace, you are responding to what you *expect* me to say, not what I actually say. Read more carefully.

"On the contrary, I am a left wing nutjob who's flabbergasted at being so attracted to the Catholic Church. But then I remember that Mary is just another mask of The Great Mother, and it all makes sense again."

You're not the first one to 'remember' that....

Doesn't mean that you get to lambaste Pagans for not swearing by a rosary.

And what you may enable is on you.

See, you may think a lot of Pagans need to seek your 'forgiveness,' or you need some special excuse to find comfort in what's 'familiar,' but, ....no.

We're not the ones who think that way.

PaganPlace, I never said I look down on you. On the contrary, I see us as the same. We are all interrelated, inseperable. Read my posts, please.

Alexandria, I'm glad we've found that we agree on what's important. Just to fill out the picture, I have at my desk a buddhist mandala calendar, a small relief of Lakshmi, a picture of St John the Evangelist, and random artwork and pics of my family. I hope you see I'm not the right wing nutjob you expected to find. On the contrary, I am a left wing nutjob who's flabbergasted at being so attracted to the Catholic Church. But then I remember that Mary is just another mask of The Great Mother, and it all makes sense again.

And now that we're a happy lovefest (snark) let's take a moment for those who are being displaced by the fires in Cali, whatever their name. MSNBC reports that the SD fire department "Officials all but concede defeat to wildfires as estimated 1 million evacuate"

"Wicca has both a god and a goddess - there is usually more emphasis given to the goddess but there must be both to have balance. The emphasis on the goddess is often a reaction to the emphasis on a male god in the mainstream relgions."

Well, this also has to do with the fact that a lot of people label our Gods as devils, (this was actually done pretty studiously by the guys who thought male Gods were the most threatening to their new order) ....and where the Lady is foreign, there's probably a much more difficult cognitive disconnect regarding male deities.... Try talking about the Lord of the Hunt and it scares the *ahem* out of people, even if among some rare literate types, you can say, 'Know that Vision of St. Eustace? Like that. Only not presented as a surrogate for something else.'

Bright Gods are presented as 'lucifer' and, well, try to say Pan is about something good to some people.

Talk about grain-Gods who most resemble that Jesus guy, and you're a 'Satanic imitator,' ... basically, you can't win when the boys get in a pissing match, and that's by design. Goddess is easier, (and I tell you, no less dear or central for all this, for the same reason Campbell plies them beads and yet looks down on us)

Understand a bit of how we dwell on that Lady's green mantle, and the rest kinda follows. Saying we overemphasise the feminine is like saying saying we ought to compromise and drive a V-6 SUV for a sitting-in-traffic-half-the-day lifestyle. :)

Campbellite - yes, that was a slip - St Teresa was, indeed a carmellite - an order I am particularly fond of. God can be found almost anywhere you look.

It's Campbellite as in Joseph Campbell, the great mythographer who taught me that God can even be found in Christianity (of all places). But Carmellite is funny because of St. Teresa of Avila, the carmellite nun in 16th century Spain who wrote ground breaking texts about prayer and the inner life. Look her up, she's a remarkable woman. I take it as a compliment. :)

And I agree with you, all paths lead to the same place. I think maybe God makes as many paths as there are people to follow them, so that if we get pushed off of one we can find another. I say God as shorthand for "That which is the uniting of opposites, both imminent and transcendent" etc. because it makes my hands tired. but when I make my short prayer, when I'm annoyed or tired or whatever, I just put my hand to my chest and say, "Mama."

Campbellite - sorry I got your name wrong

Flutterby

Wicca has both a god and a goddess - there is usually more emphasis given to the goddess but there must be both to have balance. The emphasis on the goddess is often a reaction to the emphasis on a male god in the mainstream relgions.
Balance requires both - male dominance requires one and is out of balance.

PaganPlace, I'm saying perhaps Alexandria is being overly sensitive of the naming of the fire. I'm not blaming the fire on anyone. Fires happen.

The cigar line is a story attributed to Freud, and stands for "don't read too much into things."

Alexandria, I'm saying perhaps you're being overly sensitive of the naming of the fire. I'm not blaming the fire on anyone. Fires happen.

The cigar line is a story attributed to Freud, and stands for "don't read too much into things."

carmellite

I know the fire is named Witch Fire because of Witch Creek - that is not what I was talking about - the commentator saying that the name was "appropriate" did not refer to Witch Creek. The cigar is still a cigar.

I don't feel that anyone should change their beliefs based on anything I could say. Deity speaks to us in different ways. Christianity is not the only path - if it is your path then follow it to the best of your abiltiy. My only objection is to those who can't say - it's my path and my belief so I'm following it, they seemingly must be possessors of the only truth and the only way - and this is simply not true.

While we're discussing religious tragedies, I think one close to the top is the usurpation of religion for political purposes. The Zionists, Fundamentalists, and Islamists have all co-opted faith and turned it on its head for their own personal ambitions of riches and power.

It is probably the height of irony that if Christ were alive today, he's be a Jewish Democrat.

"Arminius:

"Jeez, Paganplace, lighten up a bit. I have anger at those who say things like that against you, for it is not justified in any sense. Just please don't blame all of us Christians! I know you don't, but you could say so."

If you read what's said to us above, are we really the ones who need to lighten up? (especially if Campbellite is trying to imply the 'Witch Creek fire' is so obviously the fault of 'witches...' Exactly what brand of cigar are you talking about, Campbell?)

Seriously. I don't think we're the ones levelling serious accusations here, at least not on the meaning of what Starhawk says.

Alexandria, there is a fire called Witch Creek Fire, which started, surprisingly enough, near Witch Creek. Here's a map:

http://www.signonsandiego.com/uniontrib/20071023/images/witch.pdf

Sometimes a cigar is just a cigar.

E Fav, that's what it sounds like to me, too. Even more, it sounds like the universalist belief that all, eventually, will be saved. And believe you me, it suprises no one more than this baptist turned pagan turned buddhist turned technocrat turning catholic.

But, like Arminius, I have had experiences that I can't explain, except in the Catholic framework. I don't "believe" in god, except that God has talked to me. I don't want to go to church, but when I needed comfort, the mass was the only place I could find it. I think repeating medieval prayers is assinine, except that they help me find my zen place better than anything I've ever experienced. I only know that when I held my newborn child on December 24, something happened to me. I found a way to let go of my past, by looking at my future. I found my own, personal Christ Child, and through my relationship with her, I've found a path back to a God I thought was dead and gone.

I still have a lot of problems with organized religion. I abhor the hierarchy and exclusiveness of the church. I hate them molesting children and hiding it, and throwing little old ladies out of their homes to pay the legal fees. I hate the discrimination against women and gay people, I hate the implication that their way is the only way.

But all that seems to be in the implementation, not in the teachings as presented in the catechism.

And when I hold a rosary in my hands, and feel the beads flow between my fingers as my mouth repeats the familiar words and my mind contemplates the Mysteries I can't begin to understand rationally, I feel Mary's mantle lay across my shoulders, and it warms me, strengthens me, and fills me with peace.

If this is a long way from pagan values, then let me bring it back around. Can pagan values leave me with my faith if I leave them with theirs? I see in my teachings that we're all headed to the same place after all. I hope yours does, too.

Jeez, Paganplace, lighten up a bit. I have anger at those who say things like that against you, for it is not justified in any sense. Just please don't blame all of us Christians! I know you don't, but you could say so.

Arminius

I mean, mind you, we usually hear of Christian 'forgiveness' in terms of being told we ought to 'repent' of the best and most honest and least harmful things in our lives in order to put people who *demand* forgiveness so they can once again place themselves in positions of authority over us after abuses for which they have neither apologized nor amended nor changed.

Kinda funny how everyone's leaping to call us 'unforgiving' after all this time of calling us 'islam-lovers' and 'soft on terror' for not advocating bombing the crap out of other countries in irresponsible and strategically-ineffective ways.

Pardon if we're shaky on what you think you're so much better about.

Well, Campbellite, consider that what many Pagans hear of Christian 'forgiveness' makes equally-little sense, even if we were raised to the idea.

Campbellite, you said:
"PaganPlace, if Glenn Beck is a Christian, then I'm a pumpkin pie. I don't care what he calls himself."

Yup. Apparently we feel alike about that Rush Bimbo wanna-be.

Arminius

PaganPlace, if Glenn Beck is a Christian, then I'm a pumpkin pie. I don't care what he calls himself.

E-Fav,

Damnit, you ask the most irritating questions! (BIG grin, tongue firmly in cheek.)

Answer to your question: I don't know how Peter came to his belief. I know (pretty much, it is subjective) how I came to mine. But did this change come from within? I think mine came from without. It came from God in that sunset. I cannot explain it otherwise. Logic fails utterly, and rhetoric is lost. Peter believes he has a defense. I have none. I just know what IS in my heart. Sorry if this seems lame, don't know what else to say. Perhaps it is akin to a Zen enlightenment.

Please keep up the difficult questions. It helps me think, and progress.

Arminius

I just read a news article about the "Witch Fire" where they said it was an appropriate name for the fire. Do witches burn things? Not as far as I know. Should witches be burned? No. Why is it appropriate then? Because the fire is evil and so are witches - bad logic there. The fire is not evil and neither are witches as a group. Still not working. Maybe it was because the writer wanted to be hateful to a group not involved in the story.

" Arminius:

"Paganplace,

Apparently you live in southern California. I hope you are not in danger there."

No, not me, btw, Arminius, but thanks. I'm about as far from that kind of danger as you would think one could get in America, though maybe not just lately. My worries are for a friend and a lot of other people that he lives among.

This friend, btw, is not Pagan, ...but he's one of the people that some Christian pundits hastened to call 'People that Hate America that are losing their homes tonight.'

I know this person as someone who does all manner of things that I say please Athene, without expectation of reward.

Just does.

And loves America an awful lot.

cambellite: "The Catholic Catechism says:
"Those who, through no fault of their own, do not know the Gospel of Christ or his Church, but who nevertheless seek God with a sincere heart, and, moved by grace, try in their actions to do his will as they know it through the dictates of their conscience - those too may achieve eternal salvation."

How about that - to me (a born catholic, turned episcopalian, turned atheist) that sounds like, "No one suffers for eternity."

I already knew that, but if catholics have figured out a way for it to work within their framework, that's great -- or at least a step forward.

Arminius, what I really want to know is how you and Peter could have communicated with the same Christian God and gotten such a different message?

PS, my theory is, that while you both experienced something very profound and life-changing, it actually came from within, and you are interpreting it as "God" - a concept which has a different meaning for each of you.

When did I ever say that I hated anybody. I certainly do not hate christians. I was raised episcopalian and went to catholic school - my great aunt was a nun. I have great respect for those who follow the teachings of christ. I do not, for one minute believe the stories in the bible are true but the teachings in the new testament are a good way to live your life. The teachings of the churches I went to, by the way, were that the only sin jesus died for was original sin - to allow those who were worthy into heaven as all were tainted by original sin and heaven was closed before that. Now it is all sins and purgatory is closed due to lack of business.

Hating groups of people is even less productive than hating individuals. I have great faith in my belief that my creator can take care of sorting out anything that needs it. Sins, wrong beliefs, etc. It is not my problem to change you or your mind. It is the contstant assertion that the stories you all believe are true because the story book says they are is irritating but not cause for hatred. By the way, what happened to the sadistic god of the old testament - did he get treated, perhaps medicated, when he changed to love one another from kill all the men women and children and take their land - seems quite a shift for one deity.

I think it's the tragedy of the human experience that we force reality to conform to our expectations of what we think it OUGHT to be instead of accepting it for what it IS.

If you have to follow a guidebook to feel spiritual, that's not spirit, it's mechanics.

That's one thing I admire about Wicca, in that it allows for the organic expression of the development of the human being with the assumption that the seed within is divine, not demonic.

However, I still find Wicca unbalanced in its insistance that divinity comes from the Goddess. There is a God, and a Goddess, and believe that Wicca has overcompensated for the Judeo-Christians in its attachment to her. Balance is both God and Goddess in equal measure each according to their essential being.

Campbellite:

All I can say is WOW! You said all this much better than I tried to do. We are definitely on at least similar wave lengths.

Thanks, and God bless,

Arminius

Alexandria, I think it is safe to say that those self-identified Christians who think it's ok to kill, rape, etc. because they said the magic words "Jesus come into my heart to be my personal lord and savior" are ... outside the mainstream of Christian thought. (read: stark raving bonkers)

No Christian theologian - Catholic, Protestant, Evangelical, even Fundamentalist - would support the idea that you can do evil things to people without consequence. Rather, these people who believe that way are NOT Christian, Not Christ-like specifically because they think that raping, killing, etc. is acceptible behavior, so long as you say the magic words.

To be a Christian means to further the work of Christ: feed the hungry, heal the sick, clothe the naked, shelter the homeless, give hope to the hopeless. I can do these things because I have discovered a strength and compassion I can only attribute to something outside me, which I call Christ, that has come into my life and made me a better person.

The greatest religious tragedy of the last hundred years is how the lunatics have redefined the Christian faith, from doing Christ's work to believing twenty impossible things before breakfast. Those people are wrong. I'm sorry they got to you first.

Please write these folks off as the lunatic fringe they truly are. And if these are the only "Christians" you've ever met, then I understand why you hate them. I'd hate them too. I was raised by people like that, too.

The Catholic Catechism says:

"Those who, through no fault of their own, do not know the Gospel of Christ or his Church, but who nevertheless seek God with a sincere heart, and, moved by grace, try in their actions to do his will as they know it through the dictates of their conscience - those too may achieve eternal salvation."

I would say that if the only Gospel you've ever heard is from those nutjobs, but you're still trying to do the best you can to be a good person and bring good into the world, you're "saved" even if you call yourself a Pastafarian.

Paganplace,

Apparently you live in southern California. I hope you are not in danger there.

Now, about Christianity. Any 'Christian' that cannot admit that he/she is not just as flawed as anyone else is no true Christian. Also, any reading of the Gospels will bring up repentance. Forgiveness is NOT a free ride; repentance is NOT trivial. You must promise to reform your life. It means a turning away from one's old life.

Arminius

Peter,

Yes, christians (meaning more than one) have specifically told me that they could murder, rape, steal and pretty much do anything they want and they would still go to heaven because they had accepted jesus as their personal saviour and all would be forgiven. I really did ask for clarification because I had been raised as a christian and never heard that before and found it hard to believe. Still find it hard to believe. Repentance was not mentioned.

Believe in whatever you want, just stop making your belief in a book that is "true because it says so" more important or more true than the belief of others who may also believe in a book that is "true because it says so." That is not what the books were intended for - they are stories to explain our creation and creator which is something none of us are actually capable of understanding.

Anyway, a bit later... I've been a little busy trying to ask some Santa Ana winds to forget about the Alamo, and I need a break. ;)

Terra, you said,
"Peter, You're not too good with history are you? Hamurrabi's code was before the Jews. There was no God of the Jews before there were Jews. The only Monotheistic God before that was Amun, the Sun God of the Egyptians, before they went back to the polytheistic old religion. If anything Moses got the 10 Commandments from Babylon while the jews were there."

Er... oops... we have a problem here. Moses is generally located sometime between 1500 and 1200 BCE. The Egyptian experiment in monotheism was, if I remember correctly, in this timeframe. But the Babylonian captivity was somewhere about 800 or so BCE. Moses never came anywhere near Hamurabbi's old stomping grounds. But Abraham came from that very area - Ur. Confusing, as is all early history.

Arminius

But, hey, ...this is a perfect chance to *find out* how Pagans deal with this 'forgiveness' thing, (not to mention conditions a bit upstream of forgiveness)

Like, stop the defaming and mockery and condemnation we see here.

Not to mention the agendas that still ongoingly hurt people.

Peter,

I said, "I feel that God will accept any good person, regardless of belief."

You replied, "Why do you feel this way? They are slaves to sin."

My reply: are not all of us slaves to sin in the Christian view? And are we not all equal in the eyes of God? Would you condemn your own children to hell if they converted to another religion? We are all God's children. Think.

Well, Arminius, I think in practice you won't find Pagans much different from any other people of good heart when tragedies occur.

See, though, we don't believe 'Flaw' is such a damning standard or accusation as it's so treated by many Christians and others who believe that 'Flaw' means alienation from 'God' and damnation, and other things too horrible to contemplate, thus meaning that people would rather hope for 'salvation' than address what they actually do to people...

'Repenting' often has little to do with actually changing or making amends or even, in some cases, ceasing to threaten and degrade the victims of certain treatment... all it says is, 'Take on this flag and the wrongs you do are washed away or even condoned,'

Takes the *accountability* away.

Frankly, I find Pagans are in fact a very forgiving lot... Sometimes I hang out with non-Pagans and find myself *shocked* what they propose doing to each other over various slights, as though it's no big deal.

We see people spitting bile about people they don't happen to like, ...it gets revealed they were, say, on huge doses of Oxycontin at the time, beg 'the forgiveness of the Lord' and go right back at it without apology or correction, just more self-righteousness.

This is the kind of 'forgiveness' we speak of not believing in... the forgiveness a rapist demands, lest the victim be called spiritually-inferior, as another way of denigrating those they abused in the first place, ...people who 'repent' so that their domestic abuse can be seen as 'righteously condoned' by the sect that helped them 'find Jesus.'

Like the Catholic Church that enabled and covered for priests that took advantage of queer kids who couldn't defend themselves, and 'repented' by ...becoming more homophobic and calling the victims 'disordered' ...queer or not, reinforcing the same stigmas that made the victims afraid to come forward in the first place...

While demanding 'forgiveness' of the people they *just stigmatized further by making it about sexuality and not abuse of power..*

You may believe 'sins can be washed away,' but sometimes it's just a whitewash.

Alexandria, I'm not sure if you're asking about GOD's "forgiveness of sin", or MY forgiveness of a wrong done to me by another person.

I think the ideal portrayed by all the major religions is that humans should forgive each other for wrongs done, and let bygones be bygones. We all need to Let It Go. We all, also, seem to have the same difficulty letting it go, so we continue to do horrible things to each other. But the ideal is still there, and we all keep working on it. Christians kill each other, Muslims kill each other, Buddhists kill each other (or else why would the Shaolin monks need to invent such incredible martial arts?) and I've even known hammer-wearing Thor followers (aka Pagans) to threaten destruction on dark skinned people who had the temerity to move to the wrong town. Self-identifying with a (or no) religion doesn't make you a better person than anyone else. Or, in Christian parlance, "all have sinned and fall short of the Glory of God."

So these ideals and our failure to live up to them are in part, I think, what the DL was referring to.

As to Christians being automatically forgiven for sin, even if they're not sorry? Nope, it doesn't work that way. I don't know a single Christian who would say that. I wonder if you heard this exact statement, or if you're following an argument about forgiveness to an extreme as a way of disproving the argument. But no, you can't go doing terrible things to each other and then say, oops, Jesus forgive me, and make everything ok.

First, Hello Lep, Wiccan, and Paganplace. I am amazed I found this discussion before you did. I've gotta go back and read your posts.

Next, Hello to E-Fav. As to my debate with Peter, well, it is complicated. He is totally imbedded in Christianity, and can accept nothing else as true. And he apparently is a literal believer. As I said, I came back to Christianity after a profound (to me) spiritual experience. That lets me (in my mind, at least) approach the Bible, through the Gospels, as a door, or a series of doors, to a Truth. It is NOT the end-all-of-all-end-alls. We see through a glass darkly.

And to all, something about Christianity and forgiveness. You are all missing a word here: repent. If you confess your sins, and repent, you will gain forgiveness. Repent means a turning away from your errors, a restructuring of your life so that you do not repeat those wrongs. It is not trivial.

Also about forgiveness: witness the Amish. They are real big on it. When that horrendous murder of several Amish schoolgirls happened, the Amish forgave, and gave actual support to the family of the murderer. I consider myself Christian, but I am pretty sure I could never have forgiven that murderer.

God bless, and glad all of you are here.

Arminius

I mean, even something as simple as the common phrase, 'Living well is the best revenge,' ...no, this isn't about *pursuing vengeance,* it's saying there's something better.

Even better than believing 'vengeance is the Lord's' as the Christians say.

One seeks to see things as they are and act accordingly.

I think the Christians here are leaping to mischaracterize Pagan attitudes toward this issue of 'forgiveness,' and simply don't understand the *context,* in which things like Justice aren't seen in terms of 'Someone else broke some rule and I am existentially-aggrieved because of the 'sin' or rulebreaking...'

In a sense, our universe is not modeled after some God who made rules for people to break, thus rendering people as some kind of horrible damnable creature if not 'perfectly-vindicated.'

A Christian said, 'Pagans are flawed.'

Sure. We're allowed.

We don't even need *"forgiveness"* to be allowed to be flawed. Just are.

Doesn't mean we hold 'forgiveness' in that kind of supernatural regard, ...it's another part of human experience, good in many circumstances, not so much in certain other ones.

Campbellite

No one said that pagans of any sort are perfect. Forgiveness is not forbidden either. When repentance has occurred, most people will forgive. Even the christian god requires repentance before forgiveness, a thing that many christians ignore. I have been told that you will be forgiven just for accepting jesus as your savior without repenting, and even for things done afterwards - because you are saved so you can kill or rape or steal and it won't count against you. Many persons of all persuasions are evil and misuse their religion for their own purposes but only christians are automatically forgiven. Moslems are rewarded for murdering it seems.

"Revenge" in my post just meant, as that phrase is intended to convey, going on with your life and having a good life without dwelling on the harm done to you, is the best way to pay someone back for having wronged you. It does not involve any sort of retribution toward the wrongdoer. It DOES involve letting go of the harm they did to you and leaving their justice up to god(ess). This is a thing christians in general have a problem with. There seems to be a lack of faith that god can handle his own problems - if we do not believe what our creator wants us to believe -why is it the problem of christians (or moslems or whoever) to correct us, or, sometimes kill us?
Can't god sort us out as he sees fit? Has your god no tolerance for good faith belief in what you think is right?

Tsk.

Ever notice how those who style themselves 'former pagans' never got it in the first place? :)

As for this:

"You know, when wiccans, pagans and the like incessantly, whether directly or subliminally, portray that they wrote the book on how to be at one with the earth and all around us (referred to as 'goddess')...when they make statements like the above..I have to agree that they are at one with the 'goddess of the tar pits, fumaroles and sulphuric acid vats'"

I kind of have to wonder what extremophiles ever did to this guy. :)

Yes, there's life, there, too. Don't happen to be a lot of myths about it, but, you seem to think that's insulting somehow.

Star-Hock:

What is your beef with Pagans?

Firstly, it's Wiccans and Pagans. Proper nouns, my dear, with proper capitalization.

Secondly, did you even read Starhawk's last paragraph?

"If there’s one belief religions do share, sometimes against all evidence to the contrary, it’s that our practices and insights will make people better than they would be otherwise. Yet there are Buddhists who fail in compassion, Christians who lack charity, and yes, even Pagans who drive SUVs and don’t compost their garbage. Knowing that, perhaps we can practice some compassion toward each other, judging people not by what they profess to believe but by their actions, and not blaming other religions for the transgressions of their imperfect followers."

And you reply, "You know, when wiccans, pagans and the like incessantly, whether directly or subliminally, portray that they wrote the book on how to be at one with the earth and all around us (referred to as 'goddess')...when they make statements like the above..I have to agree that they are at one with the 'goddess of the tar pits, fumaroles and sulphuric acid vats'"

Child, where did you get that idea from Starhawk's writing? I heard a plea for understanding, not judging religions harshly because of "the transgressions of their imperfect followers." What I did not hear was her having a "holier-than-thou" attitude just because we see the Goddess as immanent in everything, including you.

So's what's your beef?

Alexandria says "Living well is still the best revenge."

As a former pagan, I can also say that many pagan are as flawed as the Christians they hate. They nurse their wounds, and feed them, and even though they know they're not supposed to curse others lest it come back threefold, they hold rituals under the new moon and ask their gods to bring justice on those who have harmed them. They use the gods as their method of revenge.

But as a Christian I don't need revenge. I forgive and go on. I don't want you to suffer, I know what suffering is and I know that my god knows what it's like to suffer, too. It's awful, so I don't want that even for someone who has done me wrong.

So when I hold my rituals (aka prayer) I ask god to forgive me for harming others as I forgive those who have harmed me. And after saying it enough times, it starts to work inside me. And then eventually I find that I do forgive, because I have been forgiven myself.

It's just like Magick, but different.

Peter, you are still saying that the book is true because it says it is true. You are also saying I believe it because god said to me it was true. Do you discount what god said to ME about what path tho follow? Does that have no value in your belief system? Or are you sane and logical to follow that true book and listen to that small voice - and I am crazy to listen to the voice of god because it did not say what you think it should? Not making sense here. The book is true because it says so and my voices are better than your voices because they say what I expect them to. What if they said jesus is not your saviour, find another path? Still the voice of god or must you take meds now?

You folks are also confusing lack of forgiveness with hatred and revenge. Pagans (generilization here) tend to release negativity when purifying themselves for a ritual - and at other times as well. Negativity, such as hatred or dwelling on a wrong done to you, has a terrible effect on your life and we try not to carry that with us. That is a far cry from forgiveness but we have much more faith that the gods will take care of their business and correct the balance with the wrongdoer without any help from us. That is not a discussion of the legal system which operates on the purely physical plane to try to protect and handle the wrongdoers here in this lifetime. If you misuse or abuse me, you will pay for it, whether or not I even remember what happened and I need only to go on with my life. Living well is still the best revenge.

Merry Meet Everyone.
D'You like my new name? Cute eh?

Again, lets recount a set of major points on this post:

1) Buddhists fail in compassion
2) Christians are lacking in Charity

and ((((drumroll...bang cymbal)))

3) All pagans need is a trash compactor or to make very sure they drive something that gets over, say, 30 mpg.

You know, when wiccans, pagans and the like incessantly, whether directly or subliminally, portray that they wrote the book on how to be at one with the earth and all around us (referred to as 'goddess')...when they make statements like the above..I have to agree that they are at one with the 'goddess of the tar pits, fumaroles and sulphuric acid vats'

Or, in briefer terms:

"Peter Huff:
** So when someone offends you, insults you, calls you a name, there are two responses, to forgive by ignoring the offense, or to hold a grudge and try and make the person pay for the offense.**"

I would say we don't even think that way. :)

Who taught you those were the only options?

I'm reminded of something I heard a while ago. The question was, "Why is it good to have Pagan friends?" Of course, the answer is, "Because they worship the ground you walk on...!".

As for Pagan ideas of 'forgiveness,' well, for starters you have to understand that our ethics are generally based on the harm one may do, not on whether or not a book happens to proscribe a certain action: basically, we don't filter our morality through an idea of a divine judge and book of rules, and then hope justice and harmony will somehow percolate back down.

It's immediate, as well as ongoing, and I think this has the effect of teaching us to not attach ourselves so much to grudges that may bind us to the very people that have harmed us...

It's one of those things where, we don't *tout* forgiveness, or claim it as an entitlement, but in the process, I observe we end up *practicing* it a great deal more than some people who worship at the altar of 'Forgiveness for being the awful kind of creature Pagans don't believe we are anyway.'

We basically don't have this context of 'Sin' in the first place, ...forgiveness is based on its effects, ...and therefore I think one will find in practice, we're as forgiving a lot as any.

What we don't believe is that people are entitled to 'demand' 'absolution' of people they've wronged until things are set aright or at least reconciled.

Too often we see people demanding or claiming forgiveness for wrongs they've done and intend to keep on doing, believing they'll be forgiven for them by their God at some later point..

Common to a Wiccan framework is the idea of 'unbinding' ..simply not being personally attached, and thus constrained, through grudges to people who've wronged us, ...leaving all concerned more free to change, without denying that the wrong happened.

This often is expressed in terms of abusive people, who may believe being a strident enough Christian will put them in a position where they are not a wrongdoer for what they've done, without actually changing or making amends.

It's a process of letting go, there, not of denying the effects of harm, which has a way of victimizing victims twice.

Justice is something which comes about in process, if we let it, and reconciling with each other is something we must actively do.

" Anonymous:

"Is no one going to comment that "Starhawk" is a made-up, BS name worthy of derision for its self-parody?"

Again said by someone without even the guts to pick a screen name. :)

Personally, I think Starhawk is a more authentic name, chosen for its meaning and lived by, rather than picking one out of a handful of words that don't mean anything except that they came out of a book.

It's common to many spiritual traditions, including many Christian ones, to rename onesself: in fact, if you translate some of the more traditional European names out there, you might find that a good number of them translate into English in ways that would sound much like a lot of these 'Pagan names.' :)

"TTWSYFAMDGGAHJMJ:

Again, there is no Goddess; that would be an irrational designation of God who is not a material being, but Perfect Act. God is Father not in reference to his gender but in reference to his love of all mankind."

Works just as well with: "Again, there is no God; that would be an irrational designation of Goddess who is not a material being, but Perfect Act. God is Mother not in reference to her gender but in reference to her love of all mankind."

The Charge of the Goddess

I am the gracious Goddess,
who gives the gift of joy unto the heart of man.
Upon earth, I give the knowledge of the spirit eternal;
and beyond death, I give peace, and freedom,
and reunion with those who have gone before.

Nor do I demand sacrifice;
for behold, I am the Mother of all living,
and my love is poured out upon the earth.

Hear ye the words of the Star Goddess;
she in the dust of whose feet are the hosts of heaven,
whose body encircles the universe.

I who am the beauty
of the green earth and the white moon upon
the mysteries of the waters,
I call upon your soul to arise and come unto me.

For I am the soul of nature
that gives life to the universe.
From me all things proceed and unto me
they must return.
Let My worship be in the
heart that rejoices, for behold,
all acts of love and pleasure
are My rituals.

Let there be beauty and strength,
power and compassion,
honor and humility,
mirth and reverence within you.
And you who seek to know me,
know that the seeking and yearning
will avail you not,
unless you know the Mystery:
for if that which you seek,
you find not within yourself,
you will never find it without.

For behold,
I have been with you from the beginning,
and I am that which is attained
at the end of desire.

Peter Huff:
** So when someone offends you, insults you, calls you a name, there are two responses, to forgive by ignoring the offense, or to hold a grudge and try and make the person pay for the offense.**

There's offense and then there's offense, and ignoring it doesn't necessarily make it go away.

If someone calls me a b!tch in the heat of an argument, I may ignore it. But is it ok to ignore it when an obnoxious idiot calls my black friend a n!gger? There is name-calling and then there is name-calling.
And if I simply ignore it and don't call them on it, how does that solve anything? If it's even remotely possible that calling htem on it will make them think twice before doing the same thing to someone else, then can I ethically pass up a possible teachable moment?

I don't go about trying to get even. It isn't necessary, and would only do me harm in the long run anyway. Karma's like that.
But I also claim the right to defend myself against attack, be it physical or verbal.

A.C.Grayling. from The Daily Telegraph,UK.23/03/07.

Religious belief of all kinds shares the same intellectual respectability, evidential base, and rationality as belief in the existence of fairies.
Religious belief is humankind's earliest science. Judaism, Christianity and Islam are young religions in historical terms, and came into existence after kings and emperors had more magnificently taken the place of tribal chiefs. The new religions therefore modelled their respective deities on kings with absolute powers.

But for tens of thousands of years beforehand people were fundamentally animistic, explaining the natural world by imputing agency to things - spirits or gods in the wind, in the thunder, in the rivers and sea.

As knowledge replaced these naiveties, so deities became more invisible, receding to mountain tops and then to the sky or the earth's depths. One can easily see how it was in the interests of priesthoods, most of which were hereditary, to keep these myths alive.

With such a view of religion - as ancient superstition, as a primitive form of explanation of the world sophisticated into mythology - it is hard for non-religious folk to take it seriously, and equally hard for them to accept the claim of religious folk to a disproportionate say in running society.

This is the more so given that the active constituency of all believers in Britain is about eight per cent of the population. A majority might have vague beliefs and occasionally go to church, but even they do not want their lives dictated to by so small and narrow a self-selected minority.

The disproportion is a startling one. Regular C of E churchgoers make up three per cent of the population, yet have 26 bishops in the House of Lords. Now that religion is bustling on to centre-stage and asking for everyone's taxes to pay for faith schools and exemptions, this anachronism is no longer tolerable.

And all this is happening against the background of atrocities committed by religious fanatics in America, Europe and the Middle East, whose beliefs are not very different from the majority of others in their faith.

The absolute certainty, the unreflective credence given to ancient texts that relate to historically remote conditions, the zealotry and bigotry that flow from their certainty, are profoundly dangerous: at their extreme they result in mass murder, but long before then they issue in censorship, coercion to conform, the control of women, the closing of hearts and minds.

Thus there is a continuum from the suicide bomber driven by religious zeal to the moral crusader who wishes to stop everyone else from seeing or reading what he himself finds offensive. This fact makes people of a secular disposition no longer prepared to be silent and concessive.

Religion has lost respectability as a result of the atrocities committed in its name, because of its clamouring for an undue slice of the pie, and for its efforts to impose its views on others.

Where politeness once restrained non-religious folk from expressing their true feelings about religion, both politeness and restraint have been banished by the confrontational face that faith now turns to the modern world.

This, then, is why there is an acerbic quarrel going on between religion and non-religion today, and it does not look as if it will end soon.

IN REPLY TO:
PAGAN SPIRITUAL VALUES
“‘Forgiveness’ would not be my number three Pagan spiritual value. I would put justice, freedom, beauty, balance, ecological responsibility and creativity up there, not in any ranked order.

"Human forgiveness needs to come after The Goddess’ forgiveness—well, we don’t really see the Goddess as administering a system of transgression and punishment. Rather, she faces us continually with the challenges we need in order to grow.”

ANS:
To the contrary, Justice is giving one his due. A law without enforcement is a meaningless law. Hence, such an advocacy of impunity would be chaos to the social order.

It would be irrational If you don’t see a God administering a system of Justice for the transgression of man. What do you consider Justice is? Without Justice, one could act with impunity to be evil. “Thus a lawful sovereign has the right to rule his subjects for the common good."

Again, there is no Goddess; that would be an irrational designation of God who is not a material being, but Perfect Act. God is Father not in reference to his gender but in reference to his love of all mankind.

“Justice in its ordinary and proper sense…is a moral quality or habit that perfects the will and inclines it to render to each and to all what belongs to them.

“Because man is a person, a free and intelligent being, created in the image of God, he has a dignity and a worth vastly superior to the material and animal world by which he is surrounded. Man can know, love, and worship his Creator; he was made for that end, which he can only attain perfectly in the future, immortal, and never-ending life to which he is destined.

“God gave Man his faculties and his liberty in order that he might freely work for the accomplishment of his destiny. He is in duty bound to strive to fulfill the designs of his Creator, he must exercise his faculties and conduct his life according to the intentions of his Lord and Master.

IN REPLY TO:
"If we fail to meet those challenges, she just keep giving us the same ones over and over again, sometimes in more and more extreme forms. Sometimes a flat-out punishment might be easier to take. But we always have the chance to grow and change."

ANS:
“Because Man is under these obligations, he is consequently invested with rights, God-given and primordial, antecedent to the State and independent of it. Such are man's natural rights, granted to him by nature herself, sacred, as is their origin, and inviolable.

“A claim in justice, or a right in the strict sense, is a moral and lawful faculty of doing, possessing, or exacting something. If it were a moral and lawful faculty of doing something for the benefit of others, it belongs to the class of rights of jurisdiction.

“The rights, which belong to every human being inasmuch as he is a person, are absolute and inalienable. The right to life and limb, the essential freedom which is necessary that a man may attain the end for which he is destined by God, the right to marry or remain single, such rights as these may not be infringed by any human authority whatever.

“The doctrine on justice that has been gradually elaborated by Catholic philosophers and divines. The foundations of the doctrine are found in Aristotle, but the noble, beautiful, and altogether rational edifice has been raised by the labors of such men as Aquinas, Molina, Lessius, Lugo, and a host of others.

“The doctrine as it appears at large in their stately folios is one of the chief and most important results of Catholic thought. It fully accounts for the peremptory, sacred, and absolutely binding character with which justice is invested in the minds of men. It was never of greater importance than it is nowadays to insist on these characteristics of justice.

“They disappear almost if not altogether in the modern theories of the virtue. Most of these theories derive rights and justice from positive law, and when socialists and anarchists threaten to abrogate those laws and make new ones that will regulate men's rights more equitably, no rational defense of the old order is possible. It becomes a mere question of might and brute force.

“Even if some with Herbert Spencer endeavor to find a deeper foundation for justice in the conditions of human existence, it is easy to answer that their interpretation of those conditions is essentially individualist and selfish, and that human existence thus conditioned is not worth having; that the new social order peremptorily demands their abolition.

“The Catholic doctrine of justice will be found one of the main safeguards of order, peace, and progress. With even balance, it equally favors all and presses unduly on none. It gives the State ample authority for the attainment of its legitimate end, while IT EFFECTUALLY BARS THE ROAD TO TYRANNY AND VIOLENCE.

Terra, your story is tragic; I hope you will find peace after such a horrific attack.

I'd like to comment to all the non Christians, and point out that MANY (most?) Christians are NOT biblical literalists. We understand the stories of the bible as poetic truth, not historical fact. We're not stupid. Please don't paint us with the same brush as the Fundamentalist literalists. Those who are incapable of distinguishing Truth from Fact are deserving of pity, rather than ire.

That said, Terra, Christians would call for forgiveness for your attacker, not for his benefit, but for yours.

I was abused as a child myself, as were all of my siblings, male and female. Our father was a sick man. I found a way to forgive him, by realizing his actions were caused by his illness. My siblings never forgave. They have all lived with the consequences of this - alcoholism, drug addiction, depression, mental illness, homelessness, despair, and even death. (Yes, you can die from negative feelings.)

My sister died with anger in her heart. She was a mean, bitter, negative, ugly person. But she was my sister, and I will always love her. If she receives Justice in the here-after (whether hell or negation or reincarnation as a naked mole rat) it is only fair. But I pray for mercy, not justice.

I also returned to Faith after many years without it. I was raised fundamentalist - southern baptist, and ran screaming as soon as I left home. I followed a pagan path for a good decade. I practiced Buddhist meditation. I hated a God who would intentionally put me into the childhood I suffered. I looked for God everywhere, but it wasn't until I looked in my own heart that I found Him. When I realized that it wasn't God who put me there but God who brought me safely out, I learned what it means to believe.

I find myself returning to the Christian path against my conscious will. I'm still tainted by the religious abuse I suffered. But when I see the image of Christ on the cross, I see not a blood sacrifice for the original sin I didn't even commit, but God becoming completely human, even to the point of death, so that He could understand what we're going through.

And when my sister lay dying and our mother turned it into a pity party for herself, I asked God, "Why didn't you give me a mother with No Emotional Baggage?" and He whispered in the still small voice, "You can have mine."

Arminius: Like you, Peter Huff has also communed with God, "I tell you these things Arminius, because God has convinced me of them by His very word. I did not "feel" them or have God "audibly" speak them to me, but He has confirmed them in my heart, in my mind by the words of Scripture and by His Spirit."

But he got message very different from yours. What do you make of that?

IN REPLY TO:

IN REPLY TO:
PAGAN SPIRITUAL VALUES:

“The heart of our spirituality is the understanding that everything is interconnected and interrelated, and that the Goddess is immanent—embodied in the world, in nature and in human beings, not separate.”

ANS:

First, there is no Goddess; God is not a gender or a creature of sexuality. He is referred to as the Father because he acts as a father over those whom He loves.

Yes, all things are interconnected, but not by their natures, but by the presence of God maintaining their existence, otherwise, everything would be of one nature.

IN REPLY TO:
“Love and compassion spring naturally from that worldview, for love is the way we connect with the Goddess—love aroused by the beauty of the natural world, love stirred into being by our connections with each other, love that cherishes the well being of the beloved."

ANS:
Love and compassion do not spring from a world view, but from the goodness of the Creator that is recognized by the man in the works of God. We are connected to the Creator because He is Perfect Love, and we are drawn to God by his goodness.

Hence, all men seek perfection in the Good and Perfect Lover by an innate desire that imbues man’s nature. Thus, it is written, as Christ speaks to His Father, “And I have made known thy name to them and will make it known: that the love wherewith thou hast loved me may be in them, and I in them.”-- John 17:26cf.

Since God has made man to His own image, God abides in man and man abides in God. Thus, St. Augustine wrote, “Lord our hearts are restless until they rest in you.” Hence, love for God is personified in all the religions that worship the Creator and in all men who love Him.

IN REPLY TO:
"Of course, for us passionate, sexual, erotic love is also sacred--a way of deeply connecting to the Goddess—and that does not seem to be common in all major religions."

ANS:
"God is love, and he who abides in love abides in God, and God abides in him" (I Jn 4:16), The term "love", one of the most used and abused words in today's world, has a multiplicity of meanings. From them, however, emerges an archetype of love par excellence: the love of a man and a woman, which in ancient Greece was known as "eros".

“In the Bible, especially in the New Testament, the concept of "love" is examined closely, a development which results in setting aside the word eros in favor of the term agape to express a self-sacrificing love.

“This new vision of love, an essentially Christian innovation, has often been judged in a totally negative way as the rejection of eros and of bodylines. Although these tendencies have existed, the meaning of this deepening is different.

“The eros, implanted in human nature by the Creator himself, needs discipline, purification and growth in maturity if it is not to lose its original dignity or degenerate into pure "sex,” becoming a commodity.

“The Christian faith has always considered man as a being in whom there is a sort of interpenetration of spirit and matter, from which he draws a new nobility. We can say that the challenge of the eros has been overcome when body and mind are found to be in perfect harmony in the human being.

“At that point, love indeed becomes an "ecstasy", not in the sense of a fleeting moment of intoxication but as an ongoing exodus from the inward-looking self towards its liberation through self-giving, and thus towards self-discovery and the discovery of God: in this way the eros can uplift the human being "in ecstasy" towards the Divine.

“In short, eros and agape somehow need to be connected to each other. Indeed, the more the two find the correct equilibrium in their different dimensions, the more the true nature of love is realized.

Even if eros is at first mainly desire, in drawing near to the other person it becomes less and less concerned with itself, increasingly seeks the happiness of the other, bestows itself and wants to "be there for" the other. It is then that the element of agape enters into this love.

“In Jesus Christ, who is the incarnate love of God, the eros-agape reaches its most radical form. In dying on the Cross, by giving himself in order to raise and save man, Jesus expresses love in its most sublime form. He guaranteed an enduring presence of this oblative act through the institution of the Eucharist, in which he gives himself under the species of bread and wine as a new manna that unites us with Him.

“By participating in the Eucharist, we too are involved in the dynamic of his self-giving. We are united with him and, at the same time, with all others to whom he gives himself; thus, we all become "one body".

“In this way, love of neighbour and love of God are truly united. The double Commandment, thanks to this encounter with the agape of God, is no longer solely a precept: love can be "commanded" because it has first been given.

Is no one going to comment that "Starhawk" is a made-up, BS name worthy of derision for its self-parody?

Excellent discussion of Pagan values. I agree that forgiveness is not anywhere near the top of my list. As you say, "premature forgiveness can simply perpetuate systemic violence."

Hecate.

Terra stated:

>>Anonymus, it is special when someone calls their fellow religionists on wrong doing...very rare and special.

So, no pagan has a problem with charity or compassion?

Yeah, right. Talk about holier-than-thou.

(((((Yawn)))))) (again)

Beliefs are great to compare, but how do they transform your behavior towards others ? Do you think YOUR values primarily exist to define YOU , to tell YOUR story , to empower YOU and YOUR ego , or do they primarily exist to inform our behavior towards others ?

If they only understood the roots of their own religion! Unfortunately the yummy esoteric part was discarded and only the bland exoteric shell is honored anymore. Oh well, you can lead a horse to water but you can’t make him think…

Mad Love,
LOL...

Arguing with a Christian Literalist is like arguing with a brick wall...

Ahh well its the difference between a scriptural religion and a Mystery religion. They have it all by rote, we have to ponder the path.
Good Night..
terra

Terra, with God you either get justice or you get mercy.

Again, how solid a revelation have your pagan gods revealed themselves to mankind by? How many manuscripts are to be found of their writings and how far back do they date? How verifiable are they? How well do they conform to what is real? Have they any prophesies that can be looked into? What kind of justice do they reveal?
~~~
Tell me Peter how many manuscripts has your god written? And something else as far as finding the real...how close are you to finding trhat talking snake? And as far as Justice? What kind of Justice did your God in his myths mede out? A Flood that killed all the people on earth...fire and brimstone...killing all the first born in Egypt..Killing people for their land...the Mothers and the babes in the womb. Justice? I can not think of a horror book that I have read that can compete for the viciousness of the myths in the bible.

But then I am a neo Pagan and we tend to have our own myths...

terra

Amen, Terra!

"It has served us well, this myth of Christ."
-Pope Leo X

in this city i am in, Bursa, there are many with many languages.

sometimes when i pass by some people, i hear their vision for me in the language i am speaking. i hear them under my skin, shining words.

i sometimes hear the addresses of the readers on the messages, wherever they are, whenever.

i heard as "you are making us goddesses", breathful strong tranquillizing and shining words. it was surprising.

in the core, there is nature and mother earth with magnetic field. we are like worms in the apple, on earth.

our magnetic energy, with trees and animals, oceans and mountains, land and air, and inspirituality of us in body on earth within the wisdom and love of Earth and Beloveds, are the UNITY that nations have represented with many words and systems and rituals. even the totems are for this collective mind of humanity to gather union and unity on earth.

Jesus on the Cross in the Church is a TEXT readable as inspiritual as a Carving on the Tree. a Cloth on a Monk is readable as inspiritual as a Deer wrapped as a cube with Cords of Trees,

if you know the language of Mother Earth. till we speak, she invites us, embodiment after embodiment.

gravity is hospitality of Mother Earth, she is weightless as astronauts are in space journey.

because she is weightless, she can have her axis from 23.7 degrees to 46.5 degrees in her frame of relativity, and we are in a new house.

the Sun is not fixed in His journey in the space. we all His fleet sail in the space, meeting the energies of stars and planets that have passed where we are.

we have fresh breath and energy, new inspirations , homemade meals on our tables and new furnitures in our rooms.

Peter you mistake what mythology is. I freely admit that my myths are myths..lol. Mythology is a human truth wrapped in a layer of entertainment. You say that the virgin birth is true? So was it true for Mithra also...he came before your Jesus.

By what criteria can we decide what ancient godman stories were new and original, and what ancient godman stories were myths built up from the religious ideas of their day?

Here's what I mean...

When Osiris is said to bring his believers eternal life in Egyptian Heaven, contemplating the unutterable, indescribable glory of God, we understand that as a myth.

When the sacred rites of Demeter at Eleusis are described as bringing believers happiness in their eternal life, we understand that as a myth.

In fact, when ancient writers tell us that in general ancient people believed in eternal life, with the good going to the Elysian Fields/What Wiccans call Summerland, we understand that as a myth.
When Vespatian's spittle healed a blind man, we understand that as a myth.

When Apollonius of Tyana raised a girl from death, we understand that as a myth.

When the Pythia , the priestess at the Oracle at Delphi, in Greece, prophesied, and over and over again for a thousand years, the prophecies came true, we understand that as a myth.

When Dionysus turned water into wine, we understand that as a myth. When Dionysus believers are filled with atay, the Spirit of God, we understand that as a myth.

When Romulus is described as the Son of God, born of a virgin, we understand that as a myth.

When Alexander the Great is described as the Son of God, born of a mortal woman, we understand that as a myth.

When Augustus is described as the Son of God, born of a mortal woman, we understand that as a myth.

When Dionysus is described as the Son of God, born of a mortal woman, we understand that as a myth.

So how come when Jesus is described as
the Son of God,
born of a mortal woman,
according to prophecy,
turning water into wine,
raising girls from the dead, and
healing blind men with his spittle,
and setting it up so His believers got eternal life in Heaven contemplating the unutterable, indescribable glory of God,how come that's not a myth?

And how come, in a culture with all those Sons of God, where miracles were science, where Heaven and Hell and God and eternal life and salvation were in the temples, in the philosophies, in the books, were dancing and howling in street festivals, how come we imagine Jesus and the stories about him developed all on their own, all by themselves, without picking up any of their stuff from the culture they sprang from, the culture full of the same sort of stuff?

Ancient Pagans believed in various levels of divinity, with miraculous powers, coming down and going up to its home in the sky. Divine beings cared about people, listened to and answered their prayers. Gave them the power to prophesy. Even gave them a better deal in the eternal life that comes after death.

But you say your myth is true while mine is not? Myths are myths...whether in a bible or in Mythologies. You can not understand my religion because I do not need to believe all the stories are true. I understand the deeper truths inside of the cultural stories.

terra

Well if you do Peter, it'll be a first. Good luck with that.

Alexandria, I will try to give you the reasoning behind why it is logical to trust the Bible tomorrow, the Lord willing.

Alexandria, I think you are missing the point when you say,

"Most people are looking for mercy, not justice. I have done wrong but don't punish me - this is my main problem with christianity. Mostly christians are into mercy - I can kill, rape and steal but I will be forgiven because I believe."

I agree, people are looking for mercy and not justice, and I am extremely glad that we have a justice system here in Canada, and people who do wrong should be punished according to the law. But justice was put above forgiveness in Starhawks list of the greater virtues.

What I'm saying is that forgiveness is required for love in this world and God's command is that when someone wrongs me personally, as a Christian, I am to forgive that person as God has forgiven me.

"Non-christians say, in whatever form, I have done wrong and will bear the burden of it myself, no one will take it from me. This is a basic difference in concept. Personal responsibility for one's actions and justice from the hand of the creator (however viewed)."

There again, God's justice is infinite, for He is holy and pure. If you are to pay your wrongs then you are going to be paying for eternity.

As for the Christian, they recognize God's graciousness in His willingness to pay the debt in order that His justice will be met, not in them, but in His Son.

I had better go to bed.

I know you are not a Christian Terra. The Lord said that you would recognize them by their fruit. Your fruit does not conform to His teachings. I use the verse so that anyone who says I misrepresent the Scriptures can see what they say.

"As far as your Lord forgiving...did he not (in your Mythology) send his son to die...and it was to pay for sins he did not commit? So your God bought Justice with his son's (an innocents) life. That is injustice.That is not forgivness."

There again, you confirm that you do not understand God or the Scriptures. Jesus voluntarily came to this earth and gave His life for His people to make them right with God and to set an example of what true love is willing to do. (John 6:37-40; Philippians 2:5-11)

The Word of God is not mythology. You are mistaken. Your proof is shaky. Can you show me why what you believe is not to be taken as myth? Again, I'm asking for evidence.

As for your example, sorry to hear about your experience, but I don't fully comprehend what you are getting at with the story.

Peter,

I do not understand how you can take a book, written by the hands of men - possibly women as well, but multiple authors over hundreds of years, and say, with a straight face that it is factual and true because it says it is. You would not believe in a book that said, go, kill all the men you see over the age of 12 because god says to? And this is the word of god because it says so? There are many traditions and teachings of god, written as the word of the god involved - and you say they are not true but your book is? Because IT says so? This is supposed to be rational in some way?

Justice is best left to the gods - christian or otherwise. Perfect justice is not administered by humans at all.
Most people are looking for mercy, not justice. I have done wrong but don't punish me - this is my main problem with christianity. Mostly christians are into mercy - I can kill, rape and steal but I will be forgiven because I believe. Non-christians say, in whatever form, I have done wrong and will bear the burden of it myself, no one will take it from me. This is a basic difference in concept. Personal responsibility for one's actions and justice from the hand of the creator (however viewed).

Peter, You're not too good with history are you? Hamurrabi's code was before the Jews. There was no God of the Jews before there were Jews. The only Monotheistic God before that was Amun, the Sun God of the Egyptians, before they went back to the polytheistic old religion. If anything Moses got the 10 Commandments from Babylon while the jews were there.

You see the bible as written by god. That all it says is fact..I say it is your religion..and I respect your right to believe as you wish. You asking me if I can prove facts about mine is disrespectful. I do not need to prove to you what is true for me.

"It's not about who's right or wrong. No denomination nailed it yet, and they never will because they're all too self-righteous to realize
that it doesn't matter what you have faith in, just that you have faith. Your hearts are in the right place, but your brains need to wake up.
I have issues with anyone who treats faith as a burden instead of a blessing."
-- Serendipity in "Dogma", by Kevin Smith

“You can have justice without forgiveness, but can you have love and reconciliation without forgiveness? If I wrong you and you do not forgive me, are you showing love?”

Hi Peter. Yes, I suppose forgiveness is a prerequisite to love and reconciliation. I'm just saying that you can have forgiveness without reconciliation.

Spiritualy speaking, I see forgiveness as imperative for my own wellbeing. Reconciliation is optional.

Terra, with God you either get justice or you get mercy.

Again, how solid a revelation have your pagan gods revealed themselves to mankind by? How many manuscripts are to be found of their writings and how far back do they date? How verifiable are they? How well do they conform to what is real? Have they any prophesies that can be looked into? What kind of justice do they reveal?

Peter,
I am not Christian so why do you use those verses with me?

As far as your Lord forgiving...did he not (in your Mythology) send his son to die...and it was to pay for sins he did not commit? So your God bought Justice with his son's (an innocents) life. That is injustice.That is not forgivness.

How do I know it is just?
Well let me tell you how I know.

Bsck a few years ago my house was broke into...I told this story here once...any way I spent the night not really sure of what was going to be the result. I was beaten up pretty good and did manage to keep my virture in tact...thank the Goddess.
The police did not find the man...they also did not look for him, though I told them where he was. I hate guns but slept with one. I lived in a house with locked doors and darkened windows. If I had to go outside and I was by myself, I carried a gun. Two years I lived that way...oh it got easier. But I could not even soak in the tub without the worry that he was going to come back.

And Justice...the police did not care, after all I was a Witch, a Wiccan.

Well I had put my need for Justice in the hands of the Goddesses of Justice. I will not name them. ; )

One day there was a knock on the door. It was the man's sister...he had been at her house all that time, and she was asking me to drop the warrent...you see when a person had a warrent against them they can not be on the donor list for a new heart. Oh for a moment I really considered it, after all I was alive. Then I remembered I had turned over Justice to the Gods...and they were taking care of it. He did not have a heart for me...
That is how I know...I have found over the years that the gods have a since of irony as well as a dry wit.

terra

Terra, you said,

"Justice was not created by Christians..."

I agree with the above statement. Justice was created by God, but not any god.

"why do you think that your religion holds the standard? The ancient Greeks and Romans had the concept of Justice and Liberty, as did the cultures that came before them. In fact an eye for an eye and tooth for a tooth is biblical, but that came from Hamurrabi's Code; The king of Babylon, also the first known written code of law."

Because without the Biblical God you cannot make sense of justice. What is your absolute standard of justice Terra? How can I check it to verify that it is authentic and genuine? How have your gods or goddesses revealed themselves to mankind? Which pagan tradition are you going to believe out of the many, how far back do they go, how might I check them and why should I accept them as the standard. Do they say they are the standard?

The reason the Greeks and Romans had a concept of justice is, 1) because God has put that concept in every persons mind. Because people suppress the truth of God, they pervert the standard of justice. 2)God had His standard for justice recorded by man long before the Romans and Greeks, through the Hebrew Scriptures.

As for Hamurrabi's Code, who is to say that he did not established it from the Jews? And how do you know that the king of Babylon had the first written code of law? I would contend that the LORD gave Moses commands and regulations long before Babylon, whether written or verbal.

As with any standard that God sets, man perverts. That is one of the reasons God has preserved His Word.

Considering it not religion, but the pleasure of sex having sustained humanity, thus secured our survival.That obvious all but( few )that being religious or non religious.The body should take the centre in worship.Glory of the erect penis, as naked female form. Such given their rightful place at family as group gatherings,of worship, such enabling that children grow into adulthood with an healthy appetite for the flesh, love as desire, partaking in the many sexual pleasures.

Terra, you said,

"What is your degree of forgiveness?"

That would be both the example God has given to me by His word and by His Son. We ask God to forgive us our debt as we forgive those who debt against us. (Matthew 6:9-13) Jesus said,

"For if you forgive men when they sin against you, your heavenly Father will forgive you. But if you do not forgive men their sins, your Father will not forgive your sins." (Matthew 6:14)

I'll admit, that is not always an easy commandment, especially under some of the circumstances you have given. But "blessed are the merciful, for they will be shown mercy."

He also showed that we are to do this not just seven times but seventy seven times (Matthew 18:21-35). Now, if you are going to count the wrongs of a man seventy seven times, you're missing the meaning of the verse. Its worth reading if you are at all interested in God's requirements.

The Apostle Paul gives Christians still further examples to make clear to us,

"Forgive as the Lord forgave you." (Colossians 3:13) That is an infinite forgiveness.

Not forgiving causes a bitter seed to spring up inside of us. When it germinates and starts to grow, it grows into a plant which gives off more seeds of discontent and hatred.

I think the most succint way of saying what justice is, is this: Justice restores the balance. Injustice (and here, think of Themis with her Scales) causes an undue burden on the world. Justice seeks to restore that balance.

Terra, I agree with you completely. Life threatening harm? I can forgive, but I will certainly seek balance and if that means one must die so many can live...well, I am sure you know what I will do.

Terra, if you do not have a measurement/standard, how do you know it is just?

Mad Love,

You can have justice without forgiveness, but can you have love and reconciliation without forgiveness? If I wrong you and you do not forgive me, are you showing love?

Justice is getting what you deserve, mercy is getting what you do not deserve. That is why the Savior is so important. He willingly paid the penalty, served the sentence of justice, met the wrath of God's punishment for rebellion of those who would believe. So He fulfilled and satisfied God's justice and was able to offer God's love.

God has/will forgive those who are truly trusting in His Son because the Son lived a pleasing life, incarnate as a man, to meet the righteous requirements that we blew with the first sins of Adam and Eve. Our ancestry can be traced to imperfect great, great,....grandparents who have tainted the well, so to speak. Jesus, the second Adam lived a perfect life on earth, on behalf of those whom He will save.

Peter,

Justice does not have a measurment of degree...you can not have a little Justice. A little Justice equals no Justice.

What is your degree of forgivness? If a man stumbles against you and spatters your clotheing with mud...you can forgive that. If a man, drunk runs over your three year old son and kills him...and has a record of drunk driving, can you forgive? Would you chase the man down to pay for your dry cleaning? whould you let go the killer of your son? Would you want him prosecuted...could you forgive him or the justice system? does forgivness exclude the need for justice?

Justice was not created by Christians...why do you think that your religion holds the standard? The ancient Greeks and Romans had the concept of Justice and Liberty, as did the cultures that came before them. In fact an eye for an eye and tooth for a tooth is biblical, but that came from Hamurrabi's Code; The king of Babylon, also the first known written code of law.

Oh petty little harms are easy to forgive. But real harm? life threatening harm, life changeing harm? Justice. People get what they deserve, it's called Karma. And if man's system does not work...the laws of the universe do, the Gods are the ones that represent it. I have nothing eating at me...I got Justice.

terra

Hi Arminius,

I appreciate your comments,

"I am a seeker, a pilgrim trying to make my way up the mountain."

But when you say,

"But I do not claim that my path is the only one. I feel that God will accept any good person, regardless of belief. Also, I am very suspect of that last weird book in the bible."

What do you trust about the Bible as being true? Which parts can you say are truly inspired by God? What part of Jesus' statement do you doubt when He said to Pilate,

"You are right in saying that I am King. In fact for this reason I was born, and for this reason I came into the world, to testify to the truth. Everyone on the side of truth listens to Me." (John 18:37)

What about the numerous verses that describe God's word as truth (John 17:17 for one). Which ones are you going to believe?

What part of His teachings are you going to hang on to? (John 8:31-36)

In fact from that very verse on truth Jesus told those who did not believe Him,

"I tell you the truth, everyone who sins is a slave to sin. Now a slave has no place in the family, but a son belongs forever. So if the Son sets you free, you will be free indeed." (Verse 36)

So when you say,

"I feel that God will accept any good person, regardless of belief."

Why do you feel this way? They are slaves to sin.

How do you measure good? How do you know that your ideal of good is the same that God judges with? After all, He is pure and holy and righteous and just. Will a good person, as you see them, no matter what the belief, be able to live up to God's perfect standard?

How do you measure the motives of their mind? You see, "nothing in all creation is hidden from God's sight." (Hebrews 4:13) Do you trust that statement?

Well, how about this one,

"There is no one righteous, not even one; there is no one who understands, no one who seeks God. All have turned away, they have together become worthless; there is no one who does good, not even one." (Romans 3:10-12)

So what are you really believing about the Christian faith when you question what God has revealed?

Has He not asked us to,

"Trust in the LORD with all your heart and lean not on your own understanding; but in all your ways acknowledge Him, and He will make your paths straight." (Proverbs 3:5-6)

That is not to say that we, as Christians, are not to use our intellects to worship God. He has commanded that we do, that we be ready to give an answer to everyone who asks. To do so we need to know that His word is true, no matter what the world may say. Try explaining ethics without God, or anything else for that matter. I have yet to hear an atheist give a reliable standard for morality or truth.

I point you to the Scriptures because they are the highest authority that we have,

"in whom are hidden all the treasures of wisdom and knowledge. I tell you this so that no one may deceive you with fine sounding arguments." (Colossians 2:3-4)

I tell you these things Arminius, because God has convinced me of them by His very word. I did not "feel" them or have God "audibly" speak them to me, but He has confirmed them in my heart, in my mind by the words of Scripture and by His Spirit.

Why do you think that God will save someone on their merit before Him? Can they, or you buy or earn salvation when they/you have already broken His decrees? In that case Christ's sacrifice would be of no value. We would not need a perfect Lamb without spot or blemish if we could offer ourselves perfect before God.

Will not the Judge of all the earth do right? If not then He would not be a just God, which God Almighty is. He has revealed that the soul that sins shall die.

As the prophet Isaiah said,

"Who has believed our message...Surely He took up our infirmities and carried our sorrows, yet we considered Him stricken by God, smitten by Him, and afflicted. But He was pierced for our transgressions, He was crushed for our iniquities; the punishment that brought us peace was upon Him, and by His wounds we are healed. We all, like sheep, have gone astray, each of us has turned to his own way; and the LORD laid on Him the iniquity of us all...Yet it was the LORD's will to cause Him to suffer, and though the LORD makes His life [Jesus'] a guilt offering, He [Jesus] will see His offspring and prolong His days...by His knowledge My righteous Servant will justify many, and He will bear their iniquities." (Isaiah 53:1, 4-6, 10, 11b)

The question still remains, are those/us you call "good" going to offer their own sacrifice for sins or are they going to trust in the One who agreed before all eternity to met the requirements of a Just God on their/our behalf?

"because by one sacrifice He has made perfect forever those who are being made holy." (Hebrews 10:14)

Are they going to fall short of it because they did not rest from their own work instead of having faith in what He said? (Hebrews 4:1-11 with 2 Corinthians 5:17-6:2)

My prayer is that God would truly bless the study of His word to you Arminius, as He has been gracious and merciful to me in helping me to understand (1 Corinthians 2:10-16). God's wisdom is true wisdom my friend.

In the real world, for many victims of crime, abuse and other acts of violence, the road to healing is often difficult and traumatic enough without having to count on Justice to make an appearance. As a matter of fact...most victims are lucky if Justice even raises her head and makes herself known. Real healing only takes place when Love and Compassion join together to promote inner healing (which often cannot be accomplished without experiencing forgiveness from the heart). From that point on, one must trust Diety to bring Justice to the fore. If one is fortunate, Justice may be served in a manner which the victim can observe. More often than not, Justice comes in the form of Divine retribution...which is not always easy to observe. Karma does have it's place in the pot.

In the real world, for many victims of crime, abuse and other acts of violence, the road to healing is often difficult and traumatic enough without having to count on Justice to make an appearance. As a matter of fact...most victims are lucky if Justice even raises her head and makes herself known. Real healing only takes place when Love and Compassion join together to promote inner healing (which often cannot be accomplished without experiencing forgiveness from the heart). From that point on, one must trust Diety to bring Justice to the fore. If one is fortunate, Justice may be served in a manner which the victim can observe. More often than not, Justice comes in the form of Divine retribution...which is not always easy to observe. Karma does have it's place in the pot.

In the real world, for many victims of crime, abuse and other acts of violence, the road to healing is often difficult and traumatic enough without having to count on Justice to make an appearance. As a matter of fact...most victims are lucky if Justice even raises her head and makes herself known. Real healing only takes place when Love and Compassion join together to promote inner healing (which often cannot be accomplished without experiencing forgiveness from the heart). From that point on, one must trust Diety to bring Justice to the fore. If one is fortunate, Justice may be served in a manner which the victim can observe. More often than not, Justice comes in the form of Divine retribution...which is not always easy to observe. Karma does have it's place in the pot.

Peter wrote:

"When Starhawk talks about justice my immediate response is whose justice and how does she measure it? The same goes for all of the other virtues? What is her source of justice. Can she put a finger on it?"

Christopher responds:

That's really the wrong question to ask, because it implies there must be a "who" to administer justice, and that is not true. In fact, that is an example of what Starhawk might call "Power-Over," (see her book "Dreaming The Dark") an arbitrary assimilating system of hierarchical rewards and punishments that degrades humans instead of fulfills them.

Her answer to your question, which is in fact her *thesis statement* is that for Pagans who follow the Reclaiming tradition (and others as well), the source of justice is the necessity for interconnected forms of life to recognize their mutual dependence on one another. When justice arises from the recognition that we are all Children of Gaia along with other beings on the planet, we recognize the responsibility that comes with being interdependent on the environment outside ourselves, both living and nonliving.

For Reclaiming, the Goddess, immanent and embodied in the world, presents herself to us with the challenges and blessings of both life and death, so that in between emerging from Her and returning to Her, we have done our part to heal and raise the consciousness of the world.

I find this debate about forgiveness vs. justice interesting. Personally I don't see one negating the other. I can forgive you, but you are still free to swing at the end of a rope. A bit of a contradiction? Perhaps, but welcome to life on Earth.

Starhawk does not, I must point out, speak for all pagans.

Starhawk, like so many other pagans, seems to mistake Wicca for paganism. They are not the same. Many pagan faiths hold ethical systems which are very very different from the Wiccan Rede and which have accumulated around them a galaxy of liberal political causes masquerading as spiritual truths.

Not all pagans are eco-warriors. Not all pagans are liberals. Not all pagans are pacifists. Not all pagan religions are "Earth religions".

Peter,

First, I liked the hymn very much. Thanks.

Next, I will try to explain where I am at on this journey. Note especially that I make no judgments or claims to absolute truth. I am a seeker, a pilgrim trying to make my way up the mountain.

We approach Christianity differently. You are totally immersed in it, which is fine. I am entering it from the outside, from the spiritual aspect. My ultimate belief is that I KNOW that God is with me. I came back into Christianity because the Gospels made the most sense. What our Risen Lord had to say is very important to me, and Holy Week is a very critical and emotional time for me. I feel His passion very strongly then.

But I do not claim that my path is the only one. I feel that God will accept any good person, regardless of belief. Also, I am very suspect of that last weird book in the bible.

Also, if there is indeed a heaven, I am going to ask St Peter, or whomever, to please send me back into the world again. I will have unfinished work there.

I repeat, we see through a glass darkly.

And as long as we are sharing verse, here is my own offering, which explains much about me:

THE WORD

In the beginning was the Word

Reach out your arms and hug a friend,
Go praise a child, greet a stranger.
Now go outside and touch a tree
Smell a flower, hear the bird’s song.
In these places you find the Word
And you will know it is God's love.

And the Word was with God

Open your heart - to your surprise
You now will find God is with you.
The shock and joy will make you weep.
You will know then that God is love
Let him inside. You soon will know
You are with Him for eternity.

And the Word was God.

With tears of joy, you now will find
He’s been with you all of your life
If you had only bothered to look
You would have found that He was there
With perfect love. Give Him great praise!
And love your God and your neighbor!

Amen.

God bless,

Arminius

Anonymous:

Whose reality and common sense are we talking about, yours? So how do you know your worldview corresponds to what is real? Care to comment?

wow,you guys blow me away...it's like the teddy bears picnic on this wackiest of wacky threads.
Whatever happened to reality and common sense?

Hi Armimius,

You said,

"I am familiar with that. But I believe that the love and compassion of our Lord extends to all."

Okay them Arminius, I have some tough questions for you.

How do you know that the "all" spoken of in the Scriptures is all mankind without distinction and not all kinds of mankind without class? For instance, in Revelation 5:9 we see that Jesus purchased men from every tribe and language and people and nation, but we still see men separated from God in Revelation 21:14, 15.

So is the Sovereign Lord not able to save everyone? Has He just made salvation possible, but it demands that we exercise our will in saving ourselves by what we do what we believe? Do you still call that mercy and grace?

Please answer passages like John 6:36-44, 65; Romans 9:16; 1 Corinthians 2:14 or Ephesians 2:1-3 or 8-10 in regards to God's Sovereignty and man's free will.

That is why we can rejoice that God has been merciful and gracious to us Arminius, in granting us salvation, because He saves us completely from our sinfulness in His Son and gives us a new heart and a new nature. Thank goodness it does not depend on our own ability, something that all other religions teach, apart from the Judeo-Christian faith.

"And I think that He is not through sending His message to us."

He has sent all we need for salvation, Arminius. (Hebrews 1:1-3)

Blessings in Christ Jesus the Lord.

(Supper time)

Terra,

How do you know Ma'at is right? Is it by feeling or intuition alone or has Ma'at revealed herself in some tangible way to you?

When you say,

"Peter Huff, Justice is not according to someone's whim, that is not justice"

I agree with you. There has to be an absolute standard and measure, so I'm asking how is this revealed to you? How do you know that your goddess of justice is that absolute standard?

As for me, I am so thankful that the one true God has been merciful to me and is not holding all my wrongful actions against me.

He is teaching me, through His word of truth, what forgiveness really is.

"Justice is what is deserved...it is black or white."

I agree with you. But who decides what it is, you, the society you live in, your particular goddess?

"It does not matter who you know..or how much money you have, or how you see deity."

It most truly does matter in how you see Deity. You have to have an accurate understanding of God, in as much as God has been revealed, to worship God as God truly is.

"Forgivness and mercy is up to diety and that person's connection to diety."

Which one? If what you claim is deity is contradictory to what I claim is deity can both be right?

"How I feel about being wronged is up to me to deal with... to resolve my own feelings. That has nothing to do with forgiveness but in my own belief in justice."

Yes, it is up to you to deal with. To the extent that you are able to forgive wrongful actions against you will be the extent to how much bitterness you carry in seeking justice. It is not what you have eaten, but what is eating you.

Jesus was able to say, "Father, forgive them, for they know not what they are doing" as He was suffering and dying upon the cross. That is our example, what is yours?

What goes without saying is that some actions need to be dealt with with justice. The difference between your justice and God's justice, is that God always does right, for He is just,