Debate and Discussion

Witch
skoolmunkee at 11:59AM, Feb. 24, 2009
(online)
posts: 7,058
joined: 1-2-2006
Well that was an extremely childish response. Is that how you respond to everyone who says something you don't like?


I was just raising the point that you've mentioned quite a few times in this thread that people who know you are a witch treat you in a negative way, and your response to them (from what you've said in this thread) is very negative in turn. No, we're not standing next to you, we can only go on what you tell us- which VERY much sounds like ‘I’m totally innocent and those guys are stupid meanies, I was SO MAD.' The way a person responds to being treated poorly can say a lot about that person- and a lot of people will treat others poorly JUST to see those reactions.

You can't avoid the fact that some people know you're a witch, however they might have found out- what you need to be careful of (regardless of what might or might not have happened in incidents we don't know about firsthand) is how you act in response to a person saying something you don't like. Which you've made a great example of in this thread. If people know they can't get you mad or get your goat, they'll leave you alone. If people know they can piss you off and get you to say something regrettable, they'll take every opportunity.
  IT'S OLD BATMAN
last edited on July 14, 2011 3:42PM
BffSatan at 12:30AM, Feb. 25, 2009
(online)
posts: 1,478
joined: 3-2-2008
Niccea
Actually. He was born in the year 3 A.D. so he is 2,006 years old.
Which is why theological discussions are are pointless.
Actually there are numerous dates ranging from 6 BC to 6 AD, so you can't really say with certainty when he was born, 2000 was a good guess.

But yeah, kind of a pointless thing for me to bring up.
last edited on July 14, 2011 11:20AM
DARKNES at 6:11AM, Feb. 25, 2009
(offline)
posts: 80
joined: 7-22-2007
skoolmunkee
Well that was an extremely childish response. Is that how you respond to everyone who says something you don't like?


I was just raising the point that you've mentioned quite a few times in this thread that people who know you are a witch treat you in a negative way, and your response to them (from what you've said in this thread) is very negative in turn. No, we're not standing next to you, we can only go on what you tell us- which VERY much sounds like ‘I’m totally innocent and those guys are stupid meanies, I was SO MAD.' The way a person responds to being treated poorly can say a lot about that person- and a lot of people will treat others poorly JUST to see those reactions.

You can't avoid the fact that some people know you're a witch, however they might have found out- what you need to be careful of (regardless of what might or might not have happened in incidents we don't know about firsthand) is how you act in response to a person saying something you don't like. Which you've made a great example of in this thread. If people know they can't get you mad or get your goat, they'll leave you alone. If people know they can piss you off and get you to say something regrettable, they'll take every opportunity.

I'm so sorry for snapping like that yor totaly right…. sorry
last edited on July 14, 2011 12:07PM
bravo1102 at 6:49AM, Feb. 25, 2009
(online)
posts: 3,323
joined: 1-21-2008
crocty
Well I didn't know we were getting technical here. I was just rounding it down, as I was assumming Darknes did. :o
Although if we did get technical I'd have said he was 2009 years old, but whatevs. >_>
:O Wait 2008!

Let's get really complicated! The religion started after he was thirty-three so does this mean the religion is really only 1973 years old?

Then there's the apparent or imagined age of Goddess worship which in the 1970s was pushed back to Old Europe of about 5000 years ago, so feminists and wiccans proudly proclaimed to be descended from the oldest religion. Gotta love the 1970s-early 80s and all those Woman's Studies classes I took. Then came the right wing Backlash (good book BTW)

One of the oldest deities though is the strong woman goddess of war/fertility etc like Ishtar/Isis/Artemis who some consider to be the model for the Mother Goddess referred to by our modern neo-pagans.

Of course Ishtar is always portrayed naked. My kind of goddess. ;)
last edited on July 14, 2011 11:33AM
DARKNES at 7:28AM, Feb. 25, 2009
(offline)
posts: 80
joined: 7-22-2007
Does anyone hear belive in re-carnation?
last edited on July 14, 2011 12:07PM
Niccea at 7:37AM, Feb. 25, 2009
(online)
posts: 5,543
joined: 8-10-2007
DARKNES
Does anyone hear belive in re-carnation?
Up in the air for me really. My parents often joked that I was a reincarnated priest. When I was younger I made elaborate hand gestures that looked like a blessing of some sort.

But I do believe in the unexplainable.
last edited on July 14, 2011 2:12PM
bravo1102 at 8:13AM, Feb. 25, 2009
(online)
posts: 3,323
joined: 1-21-2008
DARKNES
Does anyone hear belive in re-carnation?

Rein-carnation. re-carnation sounds like re-gifting a bouquet of flowers.

I used to, but then it was pointed out that there are more people alive today than have lived on the earth previously combined So there are either a whole lot of new souls or the previous ones are fragmented up which to me means they would lose whatever significance reincarnation could have. Then there are ghosts. Wouldn't that cut down the number of souls available for reincarnation even further?

Unless there are an immense number of worlds (and universes?)and the souls are from all over and reborn all over which again really delutes a lot of the power behind reincarnation as your soul could have previously inhabited a slug being of Skaros VI and mine a Grey Alien who died in the Roswell Crash and what the heck does that have to do with where we are now?
last edited on July 14, 2011 11:33AM
ozoneocean at 8:21AM, Feb. 25, 2009
(online)
posts: 24,995
joined: 1-2-2004
bravo1102
One of the oldest deities though is the strong woman goddess of war/fertility etc like Ishtar/Isis/Artemis who some consider to be the model for the Mother Goddess referred to by our modern neo-pagans.
The oldest mother goddess imagery I've seen are the enormously fat, round, big-boobed featureless little carvings. They pre-date the “strong” Artemis type by many aeons.
As you know, that huntress Artemis/Diana worship isn't that ancient, it's just a minor Greek deity that's been magnified in importance by modern people. True mother/fertility goddesses were far more primitive. - Ranging from big, fat pregnant shapes, to stylised vaginas to multi-breasted blobs. And the male gods are just as ancient, taking their own particular forms…

———-
Romantically I'd love to believe in reincarnation, especially of the original Hindu type, but daily life makes the world look a lot less mysterious and more mechanical unfortunately.
 
last edited on July 14, 2011 2:33PM
crocty at 10:35AM, Feb. 25, 2009
(online)
posts: 6,673
joined: 8-16-2007
bravo1102
Let's get really complicated!
D:
THIS NEW SITE SUCKS I'M LEAVING FOREVER I PROMISE, GUYS.
NOT BLUFFING, I'M GONE IF YOU DON'T FIX IT.
Oh god I'm so alone someone pay attention to me
last edited on July 14, 2011 11:52AM
lba at 10:45AM, Feb. 25, 2009
(online)
posts: 2,686
joined: 5-29-2007
ozoneocean
The oldest mother goddess imagery I've seen are the enormously fat, round, big-boobed featureless little carvings. They pre-date the “strong” Artemis type by many aeons.
As you know, that huntress Artemis/Diana worship isn't that ancient, it's just a minor Greek deity that's been magnified in importance by modern people. True mother/fertility goddesses were far more primitive. - Ranging from big, fat pregnant shapes, to stylised vaginas to multi-breasted blobs.


If I recall right, the oldest of those was the Venus of Willendorf which is from about 24,000-26,000 BC. And we don't really know for certain whether it was a image of a goddess or merely a sort of good luck charm for fertility in the shape of the most desirable traits of a woman. But needless to say, we've been making reliquaries of that type for quite some time now.
last edited on July 14, 2011 1:29PM
skoolmunkee at 12:44PM, Feb. 25, 2009
(online)
posts: 7,058
joined: 1-2-2006
DARKNES
I'm so sorry for snapping like that yor totaly right…. sorry
It's okay :] We all do that kind of thing from time to time, I've done it too. In any case, regardless of what conflicts you may have about your chosen religion, the only way to ‘win’ is to be totally unshakable. You know what you believe- people who can't tolerate your personal preferences deserve to be left behind, not gotten into arguments with or whatnot. Actually that applies for any situation where a person finds their life choices meet with disapproval.


Reincarnation… hm. The point about there being more souls now than there have been is interesting. I don't think I really believe in reincarnation, but if I did, I'd probably believe that some souls are reincarnated and some aren't. In fact I'd almost want to argue that reincarnation is a reward (and not a necessary stage of personal transformation like some religions).
  IT'S OLD BATMAN
last edited on July 14, 2011 3:42PM
lastcall at 2:28PM, Feb. 25, 2009
(offline)
posts: 1,358
joined: 11-3-2007
BffSatan
Niccea
Actually. He was born in the year 3 A.D. so he is 2,006 years old.
Which is why theological discussions are are pointless.
Actually there are numerous dates ranging from 6 BC to 6 AD, so you can't really say with certainty when he was born, 2000 was a good guess.

But yeah, kind of a pointless thing for me to bring up.

When did we ever have scientific proof that Jesus was even born? ….Or is this just the Bible telling us his birthday? …'Cuz to me, the Bible is simply a storybook.

Just my opinion; don't mean to offend.

last edited on July 14, 2011 1:28PM
ozoneocean at 6:56PM, Feb. 25, 2009
(online)
posts: 24,995
joined: 1-2-2004
lastcall
'Cuz to me, the Bible is simply a storybook.
It depends on the context you view it in… In one sense the books of the bible are the founding documents of Western civilization.
-I don't follow the Christian religion, and yet I know this is so ;)

But even when you look at them apart from the massive cultural influence, it's still a lot more than “a storybook”. It's an exhaustive collection of myth, lore, law, philosophy, and history - not just often apocryphal “historical” events that it records, but much more importantly the cultural histories of the peoples listed.

It's important to realise that those books are more than just some lovey dovey tales about hippy dippy Jesus, or silly stuff about floods, Eden, and beggeting this and that person.
———————————-

I think with Reincarnation you have to start with the original Hindu source and not really think about the later Buddhist modifications until you've unraveled the former. THEN you can go about having a look at the modern understanding of the concept and seeing how that fits in.
From were it originated, reincarnation is really a way of enforcing the social strata from a multi generational perspective- making sure people know their place in society, that it's not just because they were born into a certain family, but because it reflects their soul's place on the wheel of life.
So in a lot of ways reincarnation is a very bad thing for people…
 
last edited on July 14, 2011 2:33PM
bravo1102 at 10:10PM, Feb. 25, 2009
(online)
posts: 3,323
joined: 1-21-2008
ozoneocean
bravo1102
One of the oldest deities though is the strong woman goddess of war/fertility etc like Ishtar/Isis/Artemis who some consider to be the model for the Mother Goddess referred to by our modern neo-pagans.
The oldest mother goddess imagery I've seen are the enormously fat, round, big-boobed featureless little carvings. They pre-date the “strong” Artemis type by many aeons.
As you know, that huntress Artemis/Diana worship isn't that ancient, it's just a minor Greek deity that's been magnified in importance by modern people. True mother/fertility goddesses were far more primitive. - Ranging from big, fat pregnant shapes, to stylised vaginas to multi-breasted blobs. And the male gods are just as ancient, taking their own particular forms…


Artemis is Isis who is Ishtar and goes back to Sumeria. She was among the earliest protrayals of a human form as a “deity”. (Though Annunaki really doesn't mean deity.) Before that the forms might as well be good luck charms because archeologists just don't know what was done with them, only that they show up. They assume they are “goddesses” because some archeologist called them “venus” figurines.
However, the context and written evidence says that Ishtar/Astarte/Artemie/Isis was a goddess and worshipped and revered as a fertility goddess and a warrior. That's the image that Fraser grabbed a hold of in The Golden Bough and it may not go back to Old Europe but it most likely came from the Land Between the Two Rivers and Ishtar/Isis. Even the ancient Greeks knew Artemis came from Isis (and Isis from Mesopotamia) and they had much better source material to consult than we do.

Now why did she wear those goggles and have wings? Because she was a combat pilot! Oh yeah! ;) Bows, arrows? Nah, air-to-air missiles baby! The first Top Gun was Ishtar!
last edited on July 14, 2011 11:33AM
ozoneocean at 11:39PM, Feb. 25, 2009
(online)
posts: 24,995
joined: 1-2-2004
No Bravo. The line is shaky, VERY shaky if you're tracing Artemis lol!
I'm sorry, but you're drawing a very long bow, as were the romanticist archaeologists that connected the dots to start with ;)
I don't entirely dismiss the different meanings of those earlier goddesses, but really, they weren't that focussed on being warriors, that sort of thing was mostly exaggerations added to the minor deity Artimes/Diana from Greek and Roman myth later.

I love how both you and lba dismiss the much earlier depictions of goddesses. lol!
I'm sorry, but they were not alone. There also exists similar imagery from all over the globe in all sorts of forms, AS WELL as the aforementioned multi-breasted figures and vagina representations.

——————-
I can say that because I'm currently wearing a monocle, a top hat and a pair of spats. Literally.
The attitude doesn't come with the clothes, but it fits. :)
 
last edited on July 14, 2011 2:33PM
Product Placement at 1:08AM, Feb. 26, 2009
(online)
posts: 7,078
joined: 10-18-2007
bravo1102
I used to, but then it was pointed out that there are more people alive today than have lived on the earth previously combined So there are either a whole lot of new souls or the previous ones are fragmented up which to me means they would lose whatever significance reincarnation could have. Then there are ghosts. Wouldn't that cut down the number of souls available for reincarnation even further?

I actually don't follow any reincarnation philosophy but if my Hindu lore check doesn't fail me then a human can reincarnate as an animal and vise verse. If I remember correctly, Humans are considered the highest form of life and those who live a unclean life get reincarnated as a lower life form while those animals that are pure get upgraded. Since humans have wiped so many species of the face of the map it kinda makes sense that there are more humans since there are fewer animals, right?

Icelandic folk beliefs strongly support the existence of ghost, spirits and hidden folk. Every family has at least a handful of people who claim to have a second sight. Finding someone who can read the future for you is not a difficult thing over here.

I know a couple of women who follow Wicca faith or a similar one and I remember once when one of them, who never liked me for some reason, told me that she didn't like to go into a fog because the pathway between our world and the spirits is stronger at that time. Out of curiosity, how can increased moisture levels help spirits cross over to our world?
Those were my two cents.
If you have any other questions, please deposit a quarter.
This space for rent.
last edited on July 14, 2011 2:50PM
bravo1102 at 3:28AM, Feb. 26, 2009
(online)
posts: 3,323
joined: 1-21-2008
ozoneocean
No Bravo. The line is shaky, VERY shaky if you're tracing Artemis lol!
I'm sorry, but you're drawing a very long bow, as were the romanticist archaeologists that connected the dots to start with ;)
I don't entirely dismiss the different meanings of those earlier goddesses, but really, they weren't that focussed on being warriors, that sort of thing was mostly exaggerations added to the minor deity Artimes/Diana from Greek and Roman myth later.

I love how both you and lba dismiss the much earlier depictions of goddesses. lol!
I'm sorry, but they were not alone. There also exists similar imagery from all over the globe in all sorts of forms, AS WELL as the aforementioned multi-breasted figures and vagina representations.

——————-
I can say that because I'm currently wearing a monocle, a top hat and a pair of spats. Literally.
The attitude doesn't come with the clothes, but it fits. :)

All of which are open to interpertation. I've seen them and even handled one. Ishtar is not open to interpretation. The connections to Isis and Ishtar to Hecate and Artemis are commented on by the Greeks themselves! If I could wander around the library of Alexandria ca. AD35, I know all the evidence was there and is lost to us because of the later veneers glossed over the original cults by the Greeks and Romans in their classical eras long after the origins were forgotten or burned up in one diaster or another. Nah. The Sumerians, Chaldean and Babylonian models don't matter even if they invented the alphabet that passed to Phoenicia and thence to the Greeks. What else arrived with those letters?

Isis and Ishtar were always warriors. Babylonian mythology parallels Greek. Athena is yet another variation of the Ishtar/Isis warrior goddess.
last edited on July 14, 2011 11:33AM
ipokino at 9:15AM, Feb. 26, 2009
(offline)
posts: 161
joined: 2-25-2007
DARKNES
Does anyone hear belive in re-carnation?

I believe, very strongly, that re-incarnation is a choice one is allowed to make after death. My belief structure has a very clear idea of what Gaia is, how She came to be and what Her purposes and goals are. Human beings are Volitional ‘inputs’ for lack of a better concept. Each human being–or ‘volitional’ becomes totally connected within Gaia after death. One can remain in this ‘connection’ (I probably will, because I confess…living is frightening to me…) or one can petition to re-incarnate.

I am strongly of the FAITH that this is so, because I was witness to my Grandmother's re-incarnation…in a vision. (She is currently about eight years old and living in Ireland–of all places.) Incidently, when I woke from this vision I was crying because I had been in Summerland, and returning to this life was so depressing it was incredible.

Anyway, that was my take on re-incarnation.
last edited on July 14, 2011 1:02PM
DARKNES at 1:23PM, Feb. 26, 2009
(offline)
posts: 80
joined: 7-22-2007
ipokino
DARKNES
Does anyone hear belive in re-carnation?

I believe, very strongly, that re-incarnation is a choice one is allowed to make after death. My belief structure has a very clear idea of what Gaia is, how She came to be and what Her purposes and goals are. Human beings are Volitional ‘inputs’ for lack of a better concept. Each human being–or ‘volitional’ becomes totally connected within Gaia after death. One can remain in this ‘connection’ (I probably will, because I confess…living is frightening to me…) or one can petition to re-incarnate.

I am strongly of the FAITH that this is so, because I was witness to my Grandmother's re-incarnation…in a vision. (She is currently about eight years old and living in Ireland–of all places.) Incidently, when I woke from this vision I was crying because I had been in Summerland, and returning to this life was so depressing it was incredible.

Anyway, that was my take on re-incarnation.

What gave you the idea that it was your grandmother you saw in your vision….. and if it was it is very possible you had what i like to call a preminission, you saw into the future maybe your grandmother soul is with the gods and her soul is not to be ‘'recyled’' for another hundred years….. just a thought!

Another wierd thing just imagine a mother just gives birth to her baby and the woman dies several hours later is it then possible that the baby will be older then the mothers new life??

I do think it is a very important thing….. i am just speaking for myslef but who wants to be staying heaven for eternity so if anything in this case an exit is just a door to somewhere else! (hope i'm making sense)

last edited on July 14, 2011 12:07PM
ipokino at 9:28AM, Feb. 27, 2009
(offline)
posts: 161
joined: 2-25-2007
DARKNES
What gave you the idea that it was your grandmother you saw in your vision….. and if it was it is very possible you had what i like to call a preminission, you saw into the future maybe your grandmother soul is with the gods and her soul is not to be ‘'recyled’' for another hundred years….. just a thought!

Another wierd thing just imagine a mother just gives birth to her baby and the woman dies several hours later is it then possible that the baby will be older then the mothers new life??

I do think it is a very important thing….. i am just speaking for myslef but who wants to be staying heaven for eternity so if anything in this case an exit is just a door to somewhere else! (hope i'm making sense)

Well, it was her face and body I ‘saw’ and we were standing in parts of her ‘home’ which I recognized. Of course the ‘home’ was a construct put there to provide a frame of reference for me. The ‘home’ was actually just a physical avatar of my Grandmother's Memory Model. Once she left to be reborn, the ‘home’ model disappeared and I was left in a featureless room with a poster of Trinity Church Dublin and a name and a date of July 4, 2001 (the dream occured that very day)

As for staying in Summerland–don't think its a place of heavenly rest. Gaia has a purpose and a need for all the volitionals She can create and sustain. There is really important work for Volitionals to do in Summerland. Re-incarnation is simply an option. Not everyone is brave about taking on all the horrible things life can dole out–ask someone who has been murdered or tortured…its hard. I'm chicken…
last edited on July 14, 2011 1:02PM
Druchii at 2:03PM, Feb. 27, 2009
(online)
posts: 252
joined: 4-29-2008
DARKNES
Come on tell me what ye think of witchcraft

I think I know enough to know I know absolutely nothing about it. I've had a few friends that were eclectic or solitary witches, and known some people that were involved with a coven like aspect in college.

But it never did much for me.

I think it's a view on life, and not much more. Works for some, but not for others.
last edited on July 14, 2011 12:17PM
Druchii at 2:10PM, Feb. 27, 2009
(online)
posts: 252
joined: 4-29-2008
ozoneocean
The oldest mother goddess imagery I've seen are the enormously fat, round, big-boobed featureless little carvings. They pre-date the “strong” Artemis type by many aeons.
As you know, that huntress Artemis/Diana worship isn't that ancient, it's just a minor Greek deity that's been magnified in importance by modern people. True mother/fertility goddesses were far more primitive. - Ranging from big, fat pregnant shapes, to stylised vaginas to multi-breasted blobs. And the male gods are just as ancient, taking their own particular forms…

You're referring to the venus of willendorf, are you not? (A prop make of one was featured in the movie the 13th Warrior.)

When I was still in college, I had a brilliant professor who had some volunteer artists draw ourselves laying down on the ground from our eye's vantage point, looking down towards our feet. We were asked to do this in as little clothing as possible so that we could see where the shapes and lines of the human form met.

Astonishingly, all of our renderings, ESPECIALLY the women's looked like photo viewpoints he had taken of the Venus of Willendorf, from it's headtop down it's side to it's feet. His theory was that it was not necessarily representative of a large woman as much as a misunderstanding of perspective and creation of something in the round.
last edited on July 14, 2011 12:17PM
Hakoshen at 2:14PM, Feb. 27, 2009
(offline)
posts: 2,090
joined: 11-23-2008
This post is LONG, but it has a bottom line. Skip there if this is going to be a tl/dr situation.

Religion, like people, tends to evolve over time.

As societies start out, they tend to attatch religious significance to the things around them, and to the forces that affected them. These were/are totemic religions, where the varied aspects of society in their purest state were worshipped and held as gods.

Then, over time as culture and whatnot progress, society changes and people become less and less willing to embrace a raw, “shamanistic” way of belief, and then these religious forces take on names and faces, whether they be humanoid, animalistic or what have you. They dont worship the sun anymore, the worship the being that moves it.

Then you have the alternate evolution for a religious state which is monotheism, where all the power and religious significance is consolidated into a single being, or as we Christians would say, God. Then again, it's not just us Christians who believe in this god. Christians are (and don't crucify me for this people) an offshoot of Judaism where people believed Jesus of Nazareth was the messiah. The particular sect was founded 2k years ago, but the core beliefs of most westerners DOES go back further. Nobody I know personally worships Jesus, we worship God, in Jesus's name, in the same way you'd swear on your grandmother's grave kinda thing (maybe I'm a poor Christian for this, but whatever).

Now, I find there are generally two kinds of people who convert religions; people who become disillusioned with the faith that they have and decide that they want one that appeals to their desires, and then you have the people who either had no faith to begin with and seek some meaning to their life and often imprint on the first, or most prominent one they are exposed to (which is kind of the same thing). Then of course you have people who reject religion altogether, which is basically the same as reason one.

Most people I've heard of, and I say heard of because I don't know any, who are witches or wiccans were not born as such, and converted from Christianity, or most commonly, Catholocism, because Catholocism has a rigid, my way or the highway approach to the Pearly Gates, which was part of the reason for the foundation of the Protestant church, but that's a whole, much longer story I'm sure you've heard before. However, this is as far as I'm concerned, one of the many stereotypes that surround smaller religious faiths. Let's face it. They get a pretty bad rap due to poor exposure.

Then of course, you have the scripture that more or less says “you shall not suffer a witch to live” or something along those lines, and it's pretty fairly spelled out in the Christian faith to convert non believers. It's a poor choice of words to call yourself the very thing a different, and much larger religious group is commanded to exterminate. Tolerance is kind of written out of the Bible.

That raises an interesting point in my opinion. It's kind of a double bladed sword in that regard for when you ask someone to respect your religious beliefs, you in turn have to respect theirs, one of which includes converting you from yours. A vicious, bloody isn't it?


Bottom line: I don't know anything about witchcraft or wiccans personally. But as a religious minority, expect persecution. The jews got it, the Christians got it, and so does anyone else who dares go against the grain.
God needed the Devil, the Beatles needed the Rolling Stones, Hakoshen needs me.
I'm the enemy he requires to define him.
Soon or later, he'll bring me back to life again for another epic encounter of shouting about power levels and grimacing.
-Harkovast
last edited on July 14, 2011 12:40PM
DARKNES at 4:10AM, Feb. 28, 2009
(offline)
posts: 80
joined: 7-22-2007
Then of course, you have the scripture that more or less says “you shall not suffer a witch to live”

alot of sense was just made,

As i was catholic before i got the ‘'calling’' to wicca

When i was primary school still catholic the main point the priest was telling us that God (jesus) was forgiving and excepting!

But as the scripture states ‘'you shall not suffer a witch to live’' well is it because this witch does not have the same religion!

Why does it not say kill the jews, muslims and anyone different from us!


Is there anyone here he can say that this scripture is correct, is there anyone here who can say the Salem witch trails was correct?????
last edited on July 14, 2011 12:07PM
Hyena H_ll at 2:06PM, Feb. 28, 2009
(online)
posts: 1,568
joined: 11-13-2008
DARKNES
Then of course, you have the scripture that more or less says “you shall not suffer a witch to live”

alot of sense was just made,

As i was catholic before i got the ‘'calling’' to wicca

When i was primary school still catholic the main point the priest was telling us that God (jesus) was forgiving and excepting!

But as the scripture states ‘'you shall not suffer a witch to live’' well is it because this witch does not have the same religion!

Why does it not say kill the jews, muslims and anyone different from us!


Is there anyone here he can say that this scripture is correct, is there anyone here who can say the Salem witch trails was correct?????
The Old Testament is talking about people thought to have contact with demonic/Satanic powers, which they used to harm or kill other people. There's a lot of scripture that was socially and culturally relevant to the time it was written, and the mindset of the culture from whence it came. I mean, find me a modern Christian that follows Deuteronomy to the letter. Those kinds of rules and commandments are largely recognized by religious scholars and leaders as being out of context in contemporary setting. In any case, I assure you those passages do not refer to your religion.

The Salem witch trials had little to do with the persecution of actual witches; most of the “witch trials” didn't. It was more about social control and mass paranoia spread by the Church, that was the result of specific social conditions of the time. Sure, some of the people executed during the “Burning Times” practiced folk magic/medicine, or believed that by entering into Satanic pacts, they could gain power. But most had nothing to do with what you'd think of as witchcraft. Many were simply falsely implicated by other “witches” while being brutally tortured.

And for that matter- name me a religious sect that hasn't at one time been persecuted or had its members put to death.
last edited on July 14, 2011 12:52PM
Hakoshen at 2:32PM, Feb. 28, 2009
(offline)
posts: 2,090
joined: 11-23-2008
DARKNES
But as the scripture states ‘'you shall not suffer a witch to live’' well is it because this witch does not have the same religion!

Well, that's simply incorrect.

The thing is, like any scripture taken out of context, it has an entirely different meaning. No single scripture should be taken alone, but it's what everyone does. The 21st through 23rd books of Exodus is basically laying down some laws and punishments for common crimes.

Though less commonly known, a more accurate translation is “kill any woman who practices magic”. The original scripture referred to a type of shamanism that was viewed in a negative light, but the subtext of the word was specifically feminine. It's not saying that they were satanists, or that they were even of a different religion, just that they were women doing something that was considered to be pretty harmful to society. A later verse states that anyone who offers up a sacrifice to a different god will be executed, but I think that this is in reference to the altar that God instructed them to build. After all, God layed down all these laws just after he busted these people out of Egypt, so I'm pretty sure He'd be pissed if people went around offering up sacrifices to Ra.

DARKNES
Is there anyone here he can say that this scripture is correct, is there anyone here who can say the Salem witch trails was correct?????

Well they obviously frakked up there. But you see, the Puritans were some of the most hard core religious people there were, and religion was EVERYTHING. When a couple of people started having fits and seizures that were of a magnitude they'd never seen, they of course attributed it to the devil. Then, when they started figuring that someone had brought these ailments upon them, it's pretty easy to say these people who hexed others were evil and had to die, Exodus 22:18 or not. People being executed for hexing others goes back to the code of Hammurabi, so it's not just a Christian thing. Another thing to consider is that they viewed anyone who did ANYTHING bad as being of the devil, not just hexing others.

The scripture isn't so much saying kill people who were different religiously, but people who harmed others, or harmed society or it's values. However, in present times the word witch is so synonymous with satanism (thanks to the witch trials), which is why people who claim to be witches are automatically assumed to be religiously their enemies.

If you did all the same practices and you were worshiping Allah, Buddha or Thor, well that's one thing because those are different religions. However if you do those things and you're worshiping Satan, the written enemy of God, now it's a problem because it's the same theological belief, just the opposite spectrum.

Hyena H_ll
And for that matter- name me a religious sect that hasn't at one time been persecuted or had its members put to death.

Exactly. The very people who burn witches were thrown to lions earlier in times.
God needed the Devil, the Beatles needed the Rolling Stones, Hakoshen needs me.
I'm the enemy he requires to define him.
Soon or later, he'll bring me back to life again for another epic encounter of shouting about power levels and grimacing.
-Harkovast
last edited on July 14, 2011 12:40PM
lba at 4:19PM, Feb. 28, 2009
(online)
posts: 2,686
joined: 5-29-2007
ozoneocean
I love how both you and lba dismiss the much earlier depictions of goddesses. lol!
I'm sorry, but they were not alone. There also exists similar imagery from all over the globe in all sorts of forms, AS WELL as the aforementioned multi-breasted figures and vagina representations.

I'm not dismissing anything about goddesses dude. I didn't even mention them other than to say that as far as I know, we have no evidence that the Venus of Willendorf was supposed to be or not be anything. We just make guesses on what it was.
last edited on July 14, 2011 1:29PM
ozoneocean at 6:57PM, Feb. 28, 2009
(online)
posts: 24,995
joined: 1-2-2004
lba
ozoneocean
I love how both you and lba dismiss the much earlier depictions of goddesses. lol!
I'm sorry, but they were not alone. There also exists similar imagery from all over the globe in all sorts of forms, AS WELL as the aforementioned multi-breasted figures and vagina representations.

I'm not dismissing anything about goddesses dude. I didn't even mention them other than to say that as far as I know, we have no evidence that the Venus of Willendorf was supposed to be or not be anything. We just make guesses on what it was.
And I didn't even mention the Venus of Willendorf , so I suppose we're not even having a conversation. :)

-Bravo, I have to reiterate that I haven't seen much to indicate Ishtar and Isis were that much focussed on warrior cultism. -Artemis was always a very minor goddess, and Athena was mainly a city goddess of the Athenians alone and completely unrelated to Artemis, except being female. And again, that doesn't change the fact that most early goddesses were focussed on fertility and not war. We have numerous examples of that all through the ancient world. -although it was very popular with 19th C romanticists to create constant bloodlines between gods and goddesses and to emphasis traits that appealed to them (warrior etc.) we know from all the archaeological remnants that such things were not typical, although they they did exist.
 
last edited on July 14, 2011 2:33PM
bravo1102 at 8:46AM, March 2, 2009
(online)
posts: 3,323
joined: 1-21-2008
For teh goddesses other than Ishtar (Astarte and some earlier names) yes, the evidence is tenuous except that she is the probably model for the other goddesses that disseminated through trade in the early ancient world.

Babylonian and by extension the Sumerian texts they were copied from speak of Ishtar as a warrior and a fighter, she could even be interpreted as a top gun type pilot. (Though that is based on some dubious translations of Sumerian texts “cloud chariot” as an aircraft like the vihmana in the Vedas) Your dubious bloodlines were commented on by the Greeks and Egyptians and Babylonians as well as the 19th Century romanticists. The base deities are too close in their original images to imagine otherwise. Something happened in the 10,000 years between the venus figures and the first cities. Nah. ;)

I've gottenthis by reading the original stories and noting the similarities and then the ancient commentary on them in addition to the later commentary. Somehow what Herodatus and Ovid said is often different from what the 19th Century twits said and the later reinterpretation in the 20th Century. That's my take on it and all those images of Ishtar with lightning bolts and bows and arrows don't exactly bespeak a fertility goddess even if she also served that function in the tales going over the creation of Mankind.
last edited on July 14, 2011 11:33AM
lastcall at 9:40AM, March 2, 2009
(offline)
posts: 1,358
joined: 11-3-2007
I'm still confused why this is in the General section. It seems more like a Debate/Discussion topic.
last edited on July 14, 2011 1:28PM

Forgot Password
©2011 WOWIO, Inc. All Rights Reserved