Announcements...

[chess]

I think that I might have given some people here some wrong impressions in the past. So, I'd just like to clear a few things up.
1. I am a Christian.
2. This means that I believe in one God, who expresses Himself as a Trinity of people - God the Father, God the Son, and the Holy Spirit.
3. This also means that I believe all other gods/godesses/deities-of-any-description are fakes, invented by humans or by Satan to trap people and keep them away from God.
4. In addition, I believe that everyone who isn't a Christian is going to Hell.
5. Understandably, I would really rather all you people didn't go to Hell. Hence, I'm praying for you. And I'm going to keep praying for you. Even if you ask me not to.

So, there we go.

Comments

Wiccan Rede; "An' it harm none, do what thou wilt"

[ravensstar.livejournal.com]

Christianity is a man made religion. It did not evolve naturally over thousands of years as the Old Religion has. Whole countries were classified as Christian when in actuality it was only the rulers who had adopted the new religion, and often superficially at that. In order for mass conversion, bishops and other priests of the new religion built their churches on the sites of other's temples. Forcing a change.
In those early days, when Christianity was slowly growing in strenght, the Old religion- Wiccans and other pagans- were considered rivals. Naturally, the Church wanted to rid itself of this rival. The gods of an old religion became the devils of a new. The God of the Old Religion was a horned God, so apparently it was the Christian's devil. So therefore, pagans are devil worshipers. When, in fact, our horned God, is our God of the hunt, and our Goddess is of Fertility and rebirth. Two halves of divinity.
The Devil is a purely Christian invention, an error due to mistranslation. The original Old Testament Hebrew Ha-satan and the New Testament Greek diabolos simply mean "opponent" or "adversary".
Non-Christians became known as Pagans and Heathens, which Latin Pagani and Heathen means "people who dwell in the country or on the heath". And becuase most "Non-Christians" lived on the outskirts of the towns (the country) they became known as such, and the derogatory sense is quite incorrect.
But what about Satanism? The early church was extremely harsh on its people. So they led a rebellion, albeit a clandestine one. They found that their lives were not ettered by worshiping a God of Love, they decided to pray to its opposite, so Satanism came into being. It was a parody of Christianity, a mockery of it. People were showing their disdain for authorities, going against the establishment. Mother Church found out about this. Satanism was anti-Christian, Witchcraft was anti-Christian, ergo witchcraft and satanism were one and the same.
We Wiccans live by the Wiccan Rede (in subject box) whic means "Do what you will... but don't do anything that will harm another. It is as simple as that.
There ARE Principles of Wiccan Belief. 13 of them. #10 states "Our only animosity towards Christianity , or to any other religion or philosophy of life, is to the extent that its institutions have claimed to be "THE ONLY WAY" and have sought to DENY FREEDOM to others and to supress other ways of religious practice and beliefs.

So, when I see things like your petty little "holier than thou
"1. I am a Christian.
2. This means that I believe in one God, who expresses Himself as a Trinity of people - God the Father, God the Son, and the Holy Spirit.
3. This also means that I believe all other gods/godesses/deities-of-any-description are fakes, invented by humans or by Satan to trap people and keep them away from God.
4. In addition, I believe that everyone who isn't a Christian is going to Hell.
5. Understandably, I would really rather all you people didn't go to Hell. Hence, I'm praying for you. And I'm going to keep praying for you. Even if you ask me not to." really gets to me.
We don't prance around saying You do not worship our God and Goddess, you are evil, you are going to hell. So what gives you the right to say that your beliefs are the only beliefs? That because people don't believe in your God they are going to hell? You can go right on wasting your breath and pray for us, but we do not need your help. We have survived your religions persecutions and have managed to live healthy, happy, morally wonderfull lives.


"We Wiccans give thanks to the Mighty Ones
For the richness and goodness of life.
As there must be rain with sun,
To make all things good,
So we must suffer pain with our joy,
To know all things.
Our love is ever with the Gods,
For though we know not their thoughts,
Yet we do know their hearts ~
That all is for good."

So mote it be
Love and Light
May the God and Goddess watch over you

Re: Wiccan Rede; "An' it harm none, do what thou wilt"

[jaq.livejournal.com]

Aren't all religions man-made? Perhaps we'd have a bit of a communication problem proving otherwise...

Re: Wiccan Rede; "An' it harm none, do what thou wilt"

[ruhe.livejournal.com]

I suspect that you're right. I think that "religion" as a form is something that is socially constructed to allow people words and actions to explore the Truth. In other words, I _am_ a Christian - but I don't see myself as a "practioner" of religion. Religion and religious practice sometimes gets in the way of the real thing.

I also find the idea that simply because one particular faith says that "other faiths are ok too - but faiths that don't make that claim are bad" is any less absolutist than one that says all other faiths are wrong. The logic the two arguments employ are identical - they simply come to slightly different conclusions.

Incidently, the early Christian theologian St. Augustine believed that all people had access to a piece of the good/word/truth - because by definition God had to be that great - but only true practicers of christianity (and I don't believe that he would extend this definition to all people who call themselves Christian) had the whole truth.

Re: Aren't all religions man-made?

[ravensstar.livejournal.com]

That, it quite true, but who is to say that one religion is the only religion? I find that to be a very ignorant trait in almost all people.

Re: Aren't all religions man-made?

[passage.livejournal.com]

This is a long post, if you want the important bit it's the one in bold, if you're low on time, just read that.

If you mean what you say then you are of course wrong, christianity doesn't believe it is the only religion (that would not be arrogance but utter blindness), it merely believes itself to be the right one.
I'm not quite sure how to clarify 'right one'. Only route to God perhaps?

If what you mean is that you think it arrogant that Christians believe their religion to be the only 'right'[1] one

Axiom 1: Self consistancy is required of a system. (i.e. contraditions are not allowed).
Definition 1.1: Religion: A set of beliefs relating to the existence, or not, of God, God's nature, and the impact of this on morality and ethics.
Definition 1.2: 'Holy book of x': that body of literature which is considered relavent to and canonical by religion x.
Deffintion 1.3 Chrisitanity: the religion that takes "The Bible" to be it's holy book[2]

Theorum 1: Christianity contains the belief that no one can reach God except through Jesus.
Proof of Thm 1: (resulting from deffinition 1.2 and 1.3)
John 14v6: "I am the way the truth and the life, no-one comes to the Father except by me" - Jesus speaking to his disciples at the last supper.
Acts 4v12: "Salvation is found in no one else, for there is no other name under heaven given to men by which we must be saved." - Peter speaking to the Jewish religious leaders about Jesus.

Theorem 2: The belief "Other religions (those that are not Christianity) are valid routes to God and acceptable by him" cannot be an element of Christianity.
Proof of thm 2: This belief contradics thm 1, by Axiom 1 this is not allowed.

Theorem 3: (we state this theorum informally) A christian must believe that Christianity is the only 'right' religion.

Deffinition 1.4: Christian: a person who subscribes to the religion 'Christianity'

Pf of thm 3: direct consequence of thm 2 and thm 3.

Deffinition 1.5: x is true where x is a religion is defined to mean that all the beliefs that are elements of x are true.

Theorem 4: Christianity and another religion cannot simmltaneously be true.

Pf of 4: If another religion were true then that would contradict the belief in Christianity that it wasn't (from thm 3), by axiom 1 this would invalidate Christianity.
If Christianity were true then by thm 3 any other religion must be false.

So if I am a Christian of course I believe Wiccan (sp?) to be false (were false has the usual meaning of 'not true'), not because I like being arrogant, but because if it wasn't then that would mean Jesus lied, hence wasn't sinless and hence couldn't have made attonement for my sins and the entire of Christianity would collapse messily.

So it is not a trait that is a result of ignorance, rather it is a result of knowning what my religion says!

Neil

P.S.: I know you wouldn't agree with some of what I say in this post, Firinel (most of it infact). I will get around to answering the points you raised (but not in this thread).

P.P.S.: in response to the subject line: I do hope not! (And indeed, believe not).

[1] I'm relying on you interpretting this intuatively, poke me if you want me to try and find a way of explaining it.
[2] As with all things one can define them in a number of ways, for sensible deffintions the equivalence of these deffintions can be demonstrated, this is frequently easiest if you start with the right deffintion, I claim that this is the right deffintion and can derive any sensible deffinition of Christianity. I chose it because it is more complete than any other reasonably lengthed deffintion.

Re: Aren't all religions man-made?

[speccy67.livejournal.com]

People tend to make dieties. There are those who opt out of such things.
At times I think to myself, perhaps they are better off. Outside of the looking glass looking in on Wicca's gods, Christians God, old Greek gods fighting it out.

Those who flee God, do they end up punished? I wonder. Punished on earth? They are layed to waste and corruption indeed. Read a part of Romans starting at chapter 1 if you'd like an example. You may find yourself looking into a very dim mirror.

Whats more appropriate to ask you though, is if you abandon your 'gods' do they get Jealous? My God does to no end.

Some group outside of Judiasm (I want to say Wicca or Zionist) 100 BC fashioned a man into a christ, to fool the jews. Today I know that man, only fufilled 100 items out of 481 items that the Messiah was prophecied to fufill.

The real Jesus Christ fufilled 481 items prophecied of his coming 100 years later. Only 2 more the Jews had that were unspoken. How can man become God? (I can't recall the other at the moment) When in fact it was God become Man.
There is a huge logical thought in all that the bible outlines, all the prophecies. In the way that our God has done things

Back to the point though

Religions, man made?
Religion, I use to think of this in terms, of a mechanical way of doing things for the means at the end.
As I have become a Catholic Christian, I have found it is to be an encompassing life. Not something done on Sundays. Not something thought of once, stated, and forgotten.

What is the one real true religion. When God became Man. When he did what was told of him. When he took on sin as most men have and denied even himself. (God denied Himself? An Athiest?) He pointed to the truth. Not a religion like Judiasm. He pointed to a way to treat all human beings. And whom to love above all else.

Most importantly, he allowed us to put idols away, for when you look on the image of Jesus. You view the face of God, the image of his likeness. No longer is he "I AM", the nameless creator, but Jesus. Yet still "I AM".

No other being has come down to earth like Jesus.

And to those who think God having been inactive for the past 2000 years. He was active 140 years ago, 300 years ago, 20 years ago, even now still today. For all time he will remain active.
There was a time, that I found out that The original religion was not Judiasm. Witch Craft, and other religions spanning further back in time to around 8000BC during the first recorded history (is there more?). Choosing one based on earliest would be an incorrect assumption.

We'd still be killing people to sacrific to our gods.

I even considered Judiasm. By all rights they'd kill me. I am unclean.
Anyway. There is one God. He saw to it that a new religion would survive, spread, and grow. The person Jesus came down to clarify all this for us.
He survived Death, to show us it isn't real.
And he showed us how we are to live our life properly. That there are no others like him.

Who made religion? God created Judiasm, when it wasn't done properly, he created christianity to superceed it.

So who were these first "gods" then?
Theory is great. Perhaps there were beings, and they got bored? Perhaps the care takers of our world, took advantage of our people, demanding sacrifices of humans.
Perhaps those beings never left, or were "swept" away.
In any case, it is not permissive to seek them out any longer.

Why compelled to say so much? Now I have to read those other really long posts.

Re: Aren't all religions man-made?

[passage.livejournal.com]

"So who were these first "gods" then?"

Sorry, I'm lost, WHO(/what)?

Neil

"An' it harm none, do what thou wilt", provided what you wilt do is chosen very carefully

[passage.livejournal.com]

This is only a fragement of a response, perhaps I'll write a longer reply, or perhaps Michelle will take up the issue (as you did raise it to her).

"So what gives you the right to say that your beliefs are the only beliefs?"

I don't think I've ever met anyone who thought their belief was the only belief. The only right belief, sure[2], but the only belief?

Perhaps you mean "What gives you the right to believe that your belief is the truth".

But that's a silly question too, because if you didn't believe it wasn't the truth you wouldn't believe it, simply by deffintion.

Perhaps you instead mean "What gives you the right to express your belief" (as we know from above that holding a belief is equivalent to believing it's true[1]).

Freedom of speach I think. But I'm not a legal expert. I think there are several applicable freedoms in UN human rights convention (which not all countries subscribe to, but I think the one I'm in does, and even if it doesn't I think it has equivalents in it's own law).

But if you're in America and can manage to claim that by communicating such a belief I'm teaching you how to break copyright protection then you could set the FBI on my under the DMCA.

Neil

[1] Hopefully that's an unneccessary sentence.
[2] Pretty hard to be a Christian and not think that when you have a savious who declares "I am the way the truth and the life, no-one comes to the Father except by me". Yes, I know you don't think that's true, but I do.

Re: "An' it harm none, do what thou wilt", provided what you wilt do is chosen very carefully

[ravensstar.livejournal.com]

It is not that I don't believe, or don't see it as truth, I just do not agree. I was raised Catholic, and have studied every religion I could, Taoism, Hinduism, Muslim, Islamic... The list is long. I am hurt every time I hear someone ignorantly proclaim that people who practice ther religions are going to hell. That is wrong. Truly, a lot in the world is wrong, and I am horribly sorry for infringing on her freedom of speech, which is what these wonderful journals are for, but it offends me. I sort of knew I shouldn't say anything, that I should keep my mouth shut. I was looking for a friend and found her instead, but, that day I just had to open my mouth. (or should I say move my fingers)I was not trying to slander her, to offend the masses, I guess I am just a little to naive still, for thinking that there is hope for people to just let people live how they want to live, with out persecution and prejudices. A thousand apologies

Get your facts straight

[rho]

If you're going to rant then at least get your facts right. Christianity is a natural offshoot from Judaism, which was itself a natural descendant of ancient Sumerian religions. It is Old.

Wicca, on the other hand, is an invention of the twentieth century, with the intention of emulating many of the prevalent European religions from before the coming of Judaism and Christianity. There is certainly no direct line of Wiccan practitioners going back anywhere mear as long as the pedigree of Christianity. Instead, it takes elements from various different religions. Now, I don't necessarily consider this a bad thing but if we're talking about age, heritage and natural evolution as important ways to judge a religion, then I know where my money is.

Re: Pedigree

[ravensstar.livejournal.com]

Are you talking about dogs or religious beliefs?

Re: Pedigree

[passage.livejournal.com]

This is a good question.

However, I find that I am unable to answer it myself.

Tell me, the post that you made which started this thread and which these (dog or religion) questions are reactions to.

Is that a post about a dog or religion?
And does the answer to that question help you with yours?

Neil

Re: Wiccan Rede; "An' it harm none, do what thou wilt"

[chess]

Yes, the name of Christianity has been used by people for their own personal, political and social ends. No, I'm not proud of that. However, I take the view that the very reason all those people chose Christianity to use and twist was that they were spreading some version of the truth - albeit highly distorted in whatever way served them best - and hence they were more believable.

In 'old times', names had meanings. So it's only sensible that the names used for the Enemy mean that kind of thing. The name is not important - it's the concept that's transmitted which is important. (The whole horned red guy thing is just to put a picture to the Devil - to the malevolent presence who has chosen to spread evil in the world. It's not Biblical and not meant to be taken literally. It probably was originally spread by the people who were using Christianity to advance their power base and so wanted to discredit the local concept of deity.)

I wasn't specifically condemning the Wiccan faith in my post. I agree that it does have elements of the truth within it - that is what makes it powerful. But it does not have the whole truth in it, and as such it is a trap for people's hearts and minds. And I will continue to pray that more people will escape from that trap.

Re: Wiccan Rede; "An' it harm none, do what thou wilt"

[ravensstar.livejournal.com]

I know you weren't condemning Wiccan faith, and I apologize for going way "off the deep end" with my reply to that.
You pray. I pray. Everyone, in some way, prays, but to say that because they do not pray to your God they are going to hell is a highly prejudiced remark.
Again I apologize for offending you, but the forces within me couldn't help but want to defend my belies, as well as anyone who doesnt worship the Christian God.

Re: Wiccan Rede; "An' it harm none, do what thou wilt"

[griffen.livejournal.com]

No religion is the "whole truth," no matter how much you want it to be. There are elements of the truth in all religions. It's why I'm an eclectic pagan. I can't be bound down to one particular path.

Please, get off your high horse. It's offensive, and you're not doing Christianity any favors by representing it as the One True Way.

I've often wondered why anyone would think that threatening nonbelievers with the painful wrath of an angry God would be a motivator for conversion. Logically that makes no sense.

Re: Wiccan Rede; "An' it harm none, do what thou wilt"

[chess]

Uhm... Christianity represents *itself* as the 'One True Way'. So I'm doing it precisely the same amount of favours that it does itself.

"I am the Way, the Truth, and the Life - no-one comes to the Father except by me" - John 14:6

Re: Wiccan Rede; "An' it harm none, do what thou wilt"

[b-weg.livejournal.com]

The Devil is a purely Christian invention, an error due to mistranslation. The original Old Testament Hebrew Ha-satan and the New Testament Greek diabolos simply mean "opponent" or "adversary".

'The History of the Devil', a sceptical history by an atheist, points out that the idea of a devil has been around for as long as any religion. What you suggest here is, I think, a corruption of the fact that the word 'adversary' is used instead of 'the devil' throughout the Hebrew original versions of the book of Job. However, the Devil was believed in by Jews long before Christians, and by many, many non-semitic religions. Likewise hell.

Re: Wiccan Rede; "An' it harm none, do what thou wilt"

[speccy67.livejournal.com]

My only current question of you is simply this.

Do you have happiness, and can you define what it is to you?

Do you know Joy, and can describe it to me?

Do you know love, and can tell me the difference between love between men/women, and love of your gods?

What of moral choices?

Are there penalties for those who choose christianity over one of your dieties? Or a one diety over another god?

Troll

[naath.livejournal.com]

All religeons are ostensibly inspired by devine revelation, and if you don't belive them they are all man (or hullocinogenic mushroom) made.

Just because you happen to be wiccan, you believe that wicca is dinley inspired and Christians aren't.

And for trolling youjust got lots n lots of BAD karma... be reborn as a flee!

Re: BAD karma

[ravensstar.livejournal.com]

tell me about it.

I do not however believe that Christianity is not a divine religion. I believe, in the deepest recesses of my self, that there is only one true (for lack of proper title, I guess) holy being. But I believe that he chooses to show himself in different ways to different people. I, personally, just find more comfort in Wicca.

Re: BAD karma

[naath.livejournal.com]

yeah yeah, wicca is great ('m pagan) doesn't mean Chess doesn't happen to like being Christian, or that she thinks that Christianity is divinely inspired.

I dunno, I think all religeons are kinda right, and kinda wrong... like the blind men wif the elephant in the story.

Re: BAD karma

[ravensstar.livejournal.com]

Talk about the blind leading the blind.
Heh...