tecoyah

Lately....I have become a bit....edgy about religion. I have tried to understand "Why" my tolerance has become thin in this regard and settled on the clash between Islam and Christianity as the underlying cause of my frustration, this combined with the changes in power within the United States. I have tried over the years to study mutiple paths , as I think it best to at east understand the basis of faith, if not the intricate details that guide it.
This is why I am Pagan:

I never have to tell someone they are wrong, (though I might think they are, I am not forced to feel this way) there is a difference.

I dont have to read a book for guidance, but instead can read them all if I so choose and take the parts that make sense as my own.

I can admit I have no Idea who God is, and be perfectly content in my ignorance.

I can still dwell in a congregation of like minded people, for support, experience, and love.

I dont have to Judge everyone else based on what I consider fabricated guidelines, but instead can focus on just being as nice as I can.

I dont have to feel guilty that people are dying because my God says they should (whether true or not, I refer to how I feel)

Sex is a part of the faith....heh (had to throw that in there)

I guess I am posting this just to hear myself talk, and to express my dissatisfaction that people are killing each other in the name of a God, I see this as the worst form of Hypocracy imaginable.So...onto my question:

Does it make any sense at all....to support a God who tells you to Kill someone?

__________________
Holding onto anger is like grasping a hot coal with the intent of throwing it at someone else; you are the one who gets burned. - Buddha

TexanAvenger

These are some of the reasons I consider myself a Pagan as well. Some of them I think I realized in talking to you. I find it to be a much more open-minded, relaxed community and frame of existence... and one that fits me very well.

However, I've never viewed either the Christian or Muslim version of God as telling people to kill one another. Rather, I've always seen it as a matter of people using their god as an excuse for their desire to kill another. It doesn't make sense to me to support a god who tells one person to kill another. Even if you take out a moral perspective, it would not make sense for a god to create only to destroy.

Jinn

I'll add a few of my own reasons for being agnostic (pagan sounds so ..common) if you don't mind;

I'm not forced to defend positions I do not agree with; my "book" doesn't disagree with me.

I am free to learn from others, rather than fight my position to a bitter end.

I can leave an empirical life, knowing that all knowledge I possess has some construction WITHIN the natural laws.

I require no "faith" to be reassured, I can rely on fact alone.

I don't fear death.

Similarly, I don't have to live by any rules but my own; I do not fear retribution in the afterlife, nor reward.

I free to follow my own will, not God's Will.

Most importantly,

I can never use God or Allah or whomever as an excuse, justification, or rationalization for my actions. I am the ONLY one responsible for my actions.

Responsibility means taking credit for your actions; by this logic, I view stronly religious people (one's who would act in God's name) as irresponsible.

__________________
"I'm typing on a computer of science, which is being sent by science wires to a little science server where you can access it. I'm not typing on a computer of philosophy or religion or whatever other thing you think can be used to understand the universe because they're a poor substitute in the role of understanding the universe which exists independent from ourselves." - Willravel

Willravel

Is there irony in the fact that these reasons are among those that define me as an agnostic Christian? I think that the Abrahamic religions are just like any other philosophies...they can be used as a guideline on the path to enlightnement about the universe and the nature of our being, they can be used as a tool of society in order to gain a sense of community and make connections, they can be a tool for helping those in need, it can be a source of dogma and a strict set of guidlines to living, they can be a tool for deception and control....religion itself can preform many things for many different people. I, personally, do not believe that any of the Abrahamic religions excuses murder, violence, deception, selfishness, exclusivity, control, lust for power, or even lust for Jessica Simpson.

Religion is what it's followers make of it, and there are so many followers of the book with so many different perspectives that it is dangerous to assume they are of one mind set. I believe that the God mentioned in the texts of Judism, Christianity, and Islam is a real being that exists. I believe that the texts that He left behind contain incredible insight into our reality and that studying these texts can be helpful in gaining a better understanding of the universe and ourselves. If that's not your cup of tea, I have absolutely no problem with it. What I do have a problem with is the Pat Robertsons of the world who insist on creating a cult under themselves in the false name of God in order to gain selfishly. God is not a tool for gaining power any more than your high school band teacher. To use him in such a way as to impose your will onto people is the truest form of blasphemy and I am dissapointed in it's common use.

How can one murder in the name of God when "thou shall not kill" (Exodus 20:13; Deuteronomy 5:17)? It's simple...some people learn from the bible, and others use it as a tool for their own purpouses. Blessed are those who seek enlightenment at the expense of no others. Cursed are those who would use the name of God to excuse evil.

And sex is a huge part of faith. I have faith all the time. God, it's good.

Jinn

I really wish there were a word for people like you Will; your religion I can tolerate, even accept. Christians is too broad.. some people mean it simply as someone who believes in Christ, some use it as the label for someone who'd bomb abortion clinics in the name of God. Can we at TFP just make up a word for Christians with a head on their shoulders? Intellichristians or something? It's a small subset I realize, but there ARE Christians out there with a rational approach to life.. I think.

__________________
"I'm typing on a computer of science, which is being sent by science wires to a little science server where you can access it. I'm not typing on a computer of philosophy or religion or whatever other thing you think can be used to understand the universe because they're a poor substitute in the role of understanding the universe which exists independent from ourselves." - Willravel

Willravel

I call myself an agnostic, but I am somewhere between a Socialist Christian, an Abrahamic Reunitist, and a New Age Hippy. Maybe the term should be Conventionalist Christian or maybe Pacifistic Chrsitian. If there is already a term for me, it's non denominational for sure.

Ustwo

Pagans have been doing that for far longer than Christians have been around.

I think most current Pagans do it because they are unhappy with their current religion and are looking for a spiritual outlet. Most of it is just recently made up attempting to fit an old mold which has been long dead and would most likely horrify modern pagans.

Plus the term Pagan is just WAY to encompassing. Romans and Celts were both Pagan but very different in their approach.

Really I think the old Roman religion meshed well with human nature. The Gods were human in motivation and easy to understand. You could worship a sect and tolerance was found in that you didn't say the other gods didn't exsist, just that they were not your primary god.

Plus of course any religion with temple prostitutes is A+ in my book.

__________________
Agents of the enemies who hold office in our own government, who attempt to eliminate our "freedoms" and our "right to know" are posting among us, I fear.....on this very forum. - host

Obama - Know a Man by the friends he keeps.

tecoyah

I call them....Friends

__________________
Holding onto anger is like grasping a hot coal with the intent of throwing it at someone else; you are the one who gets burned. - Buddha

Zeraph

My friends, the word you're looking for is "eclectic" _____. Fill in what you like after it, i.e. eclectic philosopher, eclectic spiritualist, etc. or just say "I am eclectic in my beliefs". Not only does it describe you all better (most likely, I guess I don't know enough to say for sure) but it fits with your idea that one should not have to defend one's beliefs (since pagan carries a specific connotation to some that might get drilled with questions from a stranger and evoke a defensive response.)

Just a suggestion of course, but for me I've found over the years that it's easier to deal with people, and more accurate anyways to use the word eclectic. It probably also keeps me a little more opened minded by not lableing myself to one particular faith or philosophy.

Zyr

While I am agnostic, I disagree that the reasons listed are a good reason to follow that path, they are simply good things about it. Those things shouldn't be why you are what you are, but a part of being what you are. A religion shouldn't be chosen based on what is good and/or bad about it, it's about truth. If something is true, you should believe it, whether you like it or not.

Of course, while those things shouldn't be the sole reason to believe, they are cool. I'm just not a big fan of "I can admit I have no Idea who God is, and be perfectly content in my ignorance.". I admit I have no idea what/who god is, but I don't like the fact that I don't know.


I call them thinking Christians.

__________________
"Oh, irony! Oh, no, no, we don't get that here. See, uh, people ski topless here while smoking dope, so irony's not really a high priority. We haven't had any irony here since about, uh, '83 when I was the only practitioner of it, and I stopped because I was tired of being stared at."

Omnia mutantu, nos et mutamur in illis.
All things change, and we change with them.
- Neil Gaiman, Marvel 1602

politicophile

Zyr took some of the wind out of my sails, but I'll still chip in.

There are times when it seems like religious people are searching for truthiness rather than truth. The best religion is not the one that gives you good vibes or exposes you to a good community. Rather, the best religion is the correct one.

I'm sure some of you relativists out there are already formulating the objection that it isn't possible to know which religion is the correct one. This, of course, might be the case. If so, why would you follow the tenants of any particular religion? Arguably, to have the opportunity to belong to a good group of people and to get that good vibe.

Even if there are benefits to doing so, I still find it strange to adopt a viewpoint for other reasons than one's conviction in its truthfulness. I am reminded, in fact, of Plato's Noble Lie from the Republic. Lies are often useful, comforting, and fulfilling, but there is certainly a negative in taking comfort in the illusory.

To answer your question, Tecoyah, I surmise from the nature of paganism and from your responses that you are a pagan because you find pleasure and fulfillment in the belief that paganism is true.

In as respectful a manner as possible, I ask you why you have selected to believe in the truth of the pagan faith as opposed to the Christian, Jewish, Muslim, Buddhist, Hindu, Zoroastrian, Santeria, Shinto, Taoist, etc. etc. one. How is it that you have become convinced of the falsity of that multitude of faiths while maintaining the veracity of paganism? If you do not believe in the truth of paganism, am I correct in assuming that you are a pagan because of benefits it brings to your life that are independent of the religion's truth? If so, how do you feel about that?

__________________
The peculiar evil of silencing the expression of an opinion is, that it is robbing the human race; posterity as well as the existing generation; those who dissent from the opinion, still more than those who hold it. If the opinion is right, they are deprived of the opportunity of exchanging error for truth: if wrong, they lose, what is almost as great a benefit, the clearer perception and livelier impression of truth, produced by its collision with error. ~John Stuart Mill, On Liberty

msh58

forced on you. forced on me. I think that is one of the worst possible moves religious people can do to someone.

anything to do with religion is tricky, nothing can be proved that it is the right way, regardless of what religion is chosen.

I have a piecemeal approach to religion and philosophy. A bit here and bit there.

problem is if one of them followed by the book or the word or whatever is the right way.

Then i'm wrong and will probably pay for it dearly eventually. Thing is no one alive really knows the right way. And probably never will.

tecoyah

I dont think Paganism is true.....I just dont know If anyone will ever know truth, as far as God is concerned. In reality I choose the term Pagan simply because it carries no baggage (at least it didnt when I chose it....heh), and I dont have to pretend I know the answers. Nor have I claimed any faith as a falsehood, simply because there cant be a false faith if someone truly believes it. The term Pagan simply means not christian, and as I was raised as a practicing Catholic I am most familiar with the Bibles, and cant justify them as the words of a god in my mind, thus I am not Christian. After reading the Qu'ran I felt the same way about Islam, and Mohammad. I will Admit the Buddhist teachings have added much to my path, as did the Tao.
Thing is, as stated above, I can decide what to use....and what to toss out. Paganism isnt really a religion in the sense most are....as there is no one God who wrote a book for us to follow. Rather it is a respect for nature, and its creatures, as well as a way to tell the organized religions of the world that I dont want to accept someone elses God. Paganism is relatively undefined....and it is the freedom of admitting I make my own path,that draws me to it. I suppose to be brutally honest.....I just see most religions as a way for people to Lie to themselves.

Please unserstand this is only opinion, and not intended to debase anyones faith, as I see each persons belief as correct....for them.

__________________
Holding onto anger is like grasping a hot coal with the intent of throwing it at someone else; you are the one who gets burned. - Buddha

ngdawg

As the offspring of a Catholic father and Jewish mother, I started out life confused. My mother had agreed to raise the kids Catholic, just at a time when my father was becoming disillusioned with the church and its 'hypocrises'. Mom was never really faith-based as a Jew, it was more cultural with her family-I think the most they did was keep kosher and celebrate Passover. Only once was I brought to synagogue by my grandfather and I don't even remember it. At my First Holy Communion (a big deal in the Catholic faith), my mother cried, realizing she was, after all, a Jew. My siblings were not sent to church.
I 'dabbled'-going to different friends' churches-but by the age of 15 I knew I would never be religious. I never saw Christian holidays as Christian holidays-in my heart I knew that Easter wasn't a religious thing, nor was Christmas. They were and still are, to me, seasons of natural change and times for self-reflection and appreciation for life and all it holds.
Even though I have felt this way for decades, a full 3/4 of my life thus far, I never even gave a thought to giving a name. I still do not follow anything fully, but my core, as I have found out recently, is deeply Pagan. I don't believe there is one, if any God and certainly not a son of God. I think the bible is a collection of tales and fables with morals; not one single religion has ever followed it all literally-it is merely a 'guide', open to individual interpretations.
While many of my personal beliefs and thoughts fall into a 'Pagan' category and many natural 'habits' I have always had are found in Wicca in particular, I will probably never follow a specific path. I just don't have the mindset to be a ritualistic follower of anything at all and that's fine with me. I prefer the 'golden rule', just do the best I can, try not to do harm to anyone or anything and continue to learn as I go.

__________________
Don't blame me. I didn't vote for either of'em.

politicophile

"Many current pagans in industrial societies base their beliefs and practices on a connection to Nature, and a divinity within all living things, but this may not hold true for all forms of paganism, past or present. Some believe that there are many deities, while some believe that the combined subconscious spirit of all living things forms the universal deity." - Link

When I hear the term Pagan, I associate it with far more than just a failure to follow the Abrahamic tradition. Paganism is also a positive set of beliefs:

It sounds to me like you are not making any sort of knowledge claims about God. If this is true, are you, as a pagan, any different from an agnostic who happens to respect nature? You are on to something when you say that pagans feel the need to show religious people that you are different than them. In that respect, pagans and agnostics are generally not the same. In terms of belief structure, though, what is the point of using the pagan label instead of the agnostic one?

I couldn't disagree more strongly. What could "correct" mean, in the context of beliefs, other than "true"? Is there actually such a thing as a false, but correct, belief?

There is a great danger in irrationality. This danger is partly expressed by dogmatic adherence to corrupt religious practices a la Crusades, Spanish Inquisition, Aztec human sacrifice, suicide bombing, terrorism. It is also expressed by dogmatic adherence to non-religious beliefs, such as Soviet Marxism, Nazism, Scientology, social Darwinism, etc.

I am totally unwilling to say that Person A's belief in the racial inferiority of Jews is the correct belief for them. I would instead argue that Person A is wrong in assuming that Jews are racially inferior, and that their belief in this doctrine is incorrect. Why, then, would we give people a pass for irrational spiritual beliefs?

QUALIFICATION: I'm not saying that we should attempt to prevent people from believing in or expressing incorrect beliefs. Rather, I think we should acknowledge the fact that some beliefs are right and some a wrong. Facts are generally constant between individuals: Jesus was either the son of God for both you and I, or he was not the son of God for either of us: it makes no sense to argue that my belief that he was the son of God is correct AND that your belief that he was not is also correct.

__________________
The peculiar evil of silencing the expression of an opinion is, that it is robbing the human race; posterity as well as the existing generation; those who dissent from the opinion, still more than those who hold it. If the opinion is right, they are deprived of the opportunity of exchanging error for truth: if wrong, they lose, what is almost as great a benefit, the clearer perception and livelier impression of truth, produced by its collision with error. ~John Stuart Mill, On Liberty

tecoyah

Why argue it at all? What purpose is served by telling someone else they are wrong in your opinion, unless they request clarification. Using your example, I dont believe Jesus was the Son of God, any more than the Buddah was, but what chance is there I would convince you my way of thinking is better than yours, and would I do either of us a service by even attempting to do so?

The point is.....Why do I care in the least what God you pray to, as long as you dont try to kill/maim/hurt someone because of it. That was the entire reason for this thread, frustration based on realization that opposing religions are the reason people are dying, whether Sunni / Shiite....Christian / Muslim...it makes no difference to me, people are still dead.

__________________
Holding onto anger is like grasping a hot coal with the intent of throwing it at someone else; you are the one who gets burned. - Buddha

roachboy

i have quite a number of pagan friends--most of whom are also involved in one or another type of magical practice (these can be different from each other)--the core of the practices is meditation/visualization, which can then be directed in various ways as a function of the framework within which that practice is situated and the intent of the practioner.

i say this because i think itis from this viewpiont that the most basic distinction between the types of practices grouped together under the label paganism and more abramic (i guess that's a word, though i am spelling it wrong, i am sure) religions---there is no requirement that one impute a particular status to the images/entities that one uses primarily to focus one's attention via a meditation practice. so the question of "truth"--or more exactly, the logical register of truth claims---is unnecessary. i would imagine that the mode of evaluating the elements that one uses in the context of this type of practice would vary person to person.

for most of the folk i know, these practices are a type of devotion that may be a mode of expressing/articulating/developing a sensibility that is inclined toward what might be broadly termed religious----but is not itself a religion in the same way.

it follows, then, that the same kind of relation would be duplicated when statements about the practices as a whole are presented--that one would not use truth claims. they are unnecessary.

in policophile's post above, it seems that there is a blurring of types of "truth claims" and a confusion about what constitutes a "truth claim"---it looks like the core of teh reaction is directed at "relativism"--which is the inverse of "truth" in many varieties of discourse informed by "the history of western metaphyics" (to use anoutmoded buzzphrase)....from this, politcophile's post moves into the evaluation of linkages/ consequences of particular patterns of belief...and from that back into the register of truth claims, coming down in the end to what i take to be the following: if you are notinvolved with the register of truth claims,if you reject it, then you cannot evaluate linkages between types of belief and undesirable social or political correlates.

to argue forcefully that a particular outcome is wrong or undesirable does not even allow logically for a shift into a statement like "therefore the belief is false"---it seems to me that the arguments are stronger if they stay within their own logic--a cluster of beliefs (which may or may not be religious) may result in or be linked to undesirable outcomes and so are problematic. you could argue that the linkages between clusters of belief and outcomes render the beliefs ethically problematic. but it si quite another thing to say that they are "false"---which is the style of argument particular to partisans---from whom, typically, claims of the "falsity" of one system is linked to (explicit or implicit) claims as to the "truth" of another.


as for my own position on the question of paganism---i am sympathetic but do not myself work through any of the range of possibilities the term groups together--mostly because the naming of entities does not appeal to me aesthetically. and because the main practice i engage in, which works toward the same end, is music and so is abstract--for some reason, this is symmetrical with my more general understanding of what is out there. but the reasons i do not myself practice do not go beyond the aesthetic differences i have with my comrades--i sometimes do performances shaped by ritual, which, while i do not myself do them, i find to nonetheless be excellent as ways of jacking up the focus in/of the space (this in all sense of the term).....

__________________
a gramophone its corrugated trumpet silver handle
spinning dog. such faithfulness it hear

it make you sick.

-kamau brathwaite

Ustwo

You are using religion as a CAUSE of this violance, which I do not think is true.

Religion is being used as an excuse yes, but the greatest slaughters of humans in the last 100 years have had nothing to do with religion directly.

Religion is just an excuse.

__________________
Agents of the enemies who hold office in our own government, who attempt to eliminate our "freedoms" and our "right to know" are posting among us, I fear.....on this very forum. - host

Obama - Know a Man by the friends he keeps.

Poppinjay

Tecoyah, I think what you are really embracing is neo-paganism. Pagans have quite the history of beating on people over their beliefs. Neo-pagans, not so much.

It’s hard to put up much of an offense when your armor is hemp and your odor is patchouli.

Like will said, many of your beliefs are embraced by certain branches of Christianity. Give us another 10 years, it’s growing more in that direction every day, despite appearances. There’s a real generational schism in Christian beliefs and the only way churches will survive is to become more accepting and understanding of the real world, ie: as described in the Bible. In truth, a lot of modern day fundamentalism is revisionist Christianity.

To add to will’s tag, Jesus was black, Ronald Reagan was the devil, the government is lying about 911, and angels have never had wings.

__________________
I think the Apocalypse is happening all around us. We go on eating desserts and watching TV. I know I do. I wish we were more capable of sustained passion and sustained resistance. We should be screaming and what we do is gossip. -Lydia Millet

ngdawg

If one were to pull apart many of the rituals inherent to the Catholic church and many christian churches as well, one would find them steeped in roman/celt paganism. The lighting of candles in prayer, the floating of incense over the dead, communion wine, offerings(tithe) to the altar. Christian holidays are almost completely pagan in traditional rites. So while these ancient pagan rites have been absorbed, the clear acceptance and understanding of Pagan factors is, I believe a long way off, and the reason is mostly because of your last statement-the revisionistic christianity of today. In dealing with some pretty hardcore bible-toters, the more one brings up the similarities, the tighter the 'grip' a fundamentalist has on his/her bible, trying to convince-not sure whom, really-that those similarities could never be real.
(But that'd sure be fun to see that little light go on in some devout Episcopalian's head as they realize they're really Pagan after all )

__________________
Don't blame me. I didn't vote for either of'em.

Willravel

Can I be honest? I think the term "Pagan" is derisive, derogatory, and disadvantageous (as Al Sharpton would say). Christians, Jews, and Muslims use the word Pagan as a way to exclude and disrespect a group of spiritual people. Isn't there a better word for the group? Is my perception of the word incorrect? Is Pagan to non Abrahamics as the n word is to black people?

tecoyah

For some it is indeed said as an insult.....most dont really mind, and in fact it helps when figuring out who to avoid....heh

__________________
Holding onto anger is like grasping a hot coal with the intent of throwing it at someone else; you are the one who gets burned. - Buddha

Justsomeguy

The most odd concept is that generally there are two groups for religion: fundamentalists and rational, reasonable individuals. I feel practically anyone can be placed into this category. The first time I realized this was in high school when I realized that I shared more philosophical views with a Buddhist friend than most Christians in my Christian dominated school.

I have come across some fundamentalist Christians (both friends and family) that had a huge problem with me using a little profanity but had no problem voicing their racist feelings. I found this odd. Of course, this spans across any religion. Furthermore, I think you could break the world down into assholes and then there is the rest of it.

Edited to add, for all of those people that tell me my house was destroyed by Katrina as part of God's plan for cleansing an evil city, fuck you. And do some research about how "pure" your city is.

xepherys

A little bit of education, and my feelings:

First of all, the word Pagan needs to clarified. Of it's own accord, it doesn't strictly mean non-Christian. Pagan is a word used to describe followers of polytheistic religions. This would be seen as most non-Abrahimic religions from the time the word came to be. Jews, Christians and Muslims are certianly not pagans. However, I cannot consider myself a pagan do to it's etymology. It's a Middle English word that was created by the church (who else was so literate as to create new words at the time) or the nobility in support of the curch to describe, in a negative way, those that had beliefs structures that were entirely foreign to Christianity, Judaism and Islam. How is taking a word with negative meaning a healthy way to look at your spirituality? I view it much like black teens calling each other Nigger. While it's great to not let the word get you down, it's also ridiculous to take a word with negative meanings and just pretend it isn't that way (situationally speaking).

So, onto my beliefs. I agree with the OP and the following posts about why a non-organized religious/spiritual faith is best. Personally, I consider myself a non-denominational spiritualist. There are parts of MANY religions that I find intriguing, from Judaism and Islam to Roman and Greek Pantheons to Druidic practices and Wicca. Having beliefs, but also having room to grow, learn and change those beliefs allows for a very strong sense of self and understanding of your surroundings. Having a set book to guide you forces you to take many large parts of life on faith alone. Faith, as it has been said, cannot shield you from reality. And for those who say "there's no such thing as an atheist in a foxhole"... well, there's not much difference between luck and divine intervention. *shrug*

Edit: Willravel, I somehow didn't see your post about my first point. Hopefully it won't be seen as a duplicate point. *sigh*

Willravel

It's not a duplicate point, it's an agreement. I see "Pagan" the same way I see "Gentile" (non Jew), or "colored" (non-white). They are excluding a group of people, and it's a very blatent form of bigotry. I have many friends who are not Christian, Jewish, or Muslim, and practice their spirituality. I respect them. I hold them in high regard because they put up with a lot of crap from people belonging to Abrahamic religions. People like to think that the "Pagans" are a very small minority of people who really have no voice. Over a billion people world wide practice Hinduism. That's more people that I can shake a stick at.

tecoyah

Damn Pagan....heh

__________________
Holding onto anger is like grasping a hot coal with the intent of throwing it at someone else; you are the one who gets burned. - Buddha

nanotech

Tecoyah, I think the idea of God telling you to kill someone came from your watching news of supposedly "muslim" bombing cars, buses, churches etc. I would like to comment here with a question. How can we know they are muslims? People with masks that look like alqauida doesn't mean muslims. Who is BinLaden? He is a person that appears on media player from the internet every few months wearing clothes that resemble muslims. Does he really exist? Or is it all a "movie series" to create a story and divert the world from what is happening in some countries, and put their attention on bombings. Hollywood can make anyone look like anyone. There are people who have advantages of distracting the world because they are doing other things they don't want the news to show.

Thats what I heard:
- There were 400 Jews in the world trade centers who were phoned not to come to work that day.
- Most are of the "bombees" are innocent muslims in iraq.
- The school with children that went down was made by people all covering their faces.
- Thousands of palestinian homes are being demolished and much more civilian people have been killed in palestine and palestinians were being murdered each day. This was the world news until 9/11 came. Millions of palestinians have been killed from 1950 till now but that is no more the news being talked about around the world. One of the distraction methods.
A famous muslim, movie Producer, Mustapha AL Aqqad who made the famous movie "Al Risala" that costed 6 million$, a big budget at the time. The film talked about the whole journey of islam. Muslims consider the producer to be great acheiver and he was bombed in a hotel in Jordan by a terrorist who is thought to be a muslim. I don't think these are real muslims. Why would a muslim kill innocent people and even more muslims.

Just like any guy, I got this from news at CNN, people talking around world, and internet. With simple common sense I would conclude that the terrorists are not real muslims.

Conclusion: I think this to be some sort of conspiracy. So real muslims wouldn't do these murders and bombings. Hence, reagading the main topic, God doesn't tell people to kill each other.

Note: I respect Jewish, Christian, and Muslim people and consider them all to be good people. The 400 Jews who didn't go to work in the world trade centers is just the news i heard and doesn't reflect any view or opinion on Jews.

Ustwo

Millions of palestians killed eh?

Those evil Jews again.

__________________
Agents of the enemies who hold office in our own government, who attempt to eliminate our "freedoms" and our "right to know" are posting among us, I fear.....on this very forum. - host

Obama - Know a Man by the friends he keeps.

xepherys

nanotech-

I'm not really sure I follow. This sounds a bit like a conspiracy theory. First of all, do you have a link regarding these 400 Jews that were told not to be at the WTC on 9/11? I don't disbelieve you, but I can't find anything about it and I'm interested. As for Palestinians, I don't see that as non-news. I hear about it all the time. Isreal/Palestine has been an issue, however, for 60 or so years now (has it been longer?). So technically, it isn't "news" anymore. It's about as everyday as the existance of The Great Wall of China. So, in other words, how is this an issue? Yes, Isrealis and Palestians kill each other daily.

As for who gets bombed/killed and why would Muslims kill other Muslims? Well, first of all there are sects within Islam (just like within Judaism, though not quite to the same degree in modern times). Often, these sects will fight each other because they feel they are the true chosen of Allah and that the others are wrong. You can see this in Iraq with the Sunni and Shi'ite Muslims. You can also see this regarding Middle Eastern ethnic groups, regardless of religion. Persians look down on Arabs. Arabs look down on Kurds and Turkomen. Kurds just want to be free. Turkomen seem to just cope with things (lately at least). And then even in the Arab world there is still tribalism away from the urban centers. So... to answer you're question about why a Muslim would kill another Muslim... because they believe it's the right thing to do. I'm not sure where you are from since you have no location in your profile, but remember, there are a LOT of cultural influences that will drive one to madness. Look at Nazi Germany or WWII-era Japan. Do you think most people just wake up and say "I wanna roast Jews today!" or "I think dying in a firey ball for the Emporer sounds grand!" Not exactly... it takes a lot of effort to make MOST people feel that way, but it can be done. In the Middle East it's thousands upon thousands of years of culturalism, religion and tribalism that most "westerners" don't really understand very well.

Well, anyway, that may have drifted slightly off topic and I apologize... I just don't see much concrete in nano's post. :-/

asaris

Actually, my question on hearing this is how many people total didn't show up to work that day. The idea that 400 jews didn't show up doesn't really mean much unless we also know how many non-jews didn't show up.

__________________
"Die Deutschen meinen, daß die Kraft sich in Härte und Grausamkeit offenbaren müsse, sie unterwerfen sich dann gerne und mit Bewunderung:[...]. Daß es Kraft giebt in der Milde und Stille, das glauben sie nicht leicht."

"The Germans believe that power must reveal itself in hardness and cruelty and then submit themselves gladly and with admiration[...]. They do not believe readily that there is power in meekness and calm."

-- Friedrich Nietzsche

pan6467

My current lady friend is very much a pagan. So much so she will call herself "witch". I knew some of her friends through other Wiccans and Pagans these past few years. Each of these people who truly follow the teachings and writings of Silver Raven Wolf, Raymond Buckland, Laurie Cabot, or even Scott Cunningham to just name a few, are the most non-judgemental, caring, loving and open group of people as a whole I have ever met, in MOST cases. In some ways they are as close minded and prejudiced as those they accuse as being such.

According to those I have met the difference between Wicca and Paganism is that Wiccans acknowledge their dark side, not necessarily follow it, but acknowledge the darkness is just as powerful as the light.

The credo for them is "Do what you will so long as you hurt none".

Is it derogatory to call them Pagans and Witches when they themselves do? It depends on how open you are. It can be used as a slur but most everyone I have met is proud of the religious/philosophical choice they have made.

Personally, I love to learn all I can about the beliefs, and I respect them, but my lady friend says I am more a spiritualist as I follow my own drum and beliefs. I take into account all beliefs, learn all I can about each and see them all as the same.

Every religion to its followers teaches to love, live and share your experiences with others. Not one religion I have ever studied even suggests hurting an innocent man and many only say to in self defense if at all.

So where in does the problem lie?

The problem lies as it always does in man's own perceptions and fear of things he does not know or understand. The same fears that make a man prejudiced against skin color or sexist or hateful to anyone for whatever discriminatory label you wish to put on the hate.

The solution lies in not being afraid but of learning the belief and truly being open to those teachings. Once you are you see that the teachings themselves are harmless and close to each other.

Many talk of what Christ did during the years not covered in the Bible, many Pagans believe he was taken to the Celtic druids and taught their ways. To these people, it is evident in the 13 men (13 is the ultimate number for a coven), or in the Passion of Christ how it opens with him praying alone at night in the woods before going to dinner. Of course people can see into anything and get what they want to see out of it. Does that make it any less true? No. Perhaps what the Pagans believe about Christ is true.

Are the Mormons wrong for their belief that Christ was here and taught the Native Americans? Who knows? I will not play God and make that judgement.

Who's to say Christ, Jehovah, Mother Earth, Buddha, Confucious, Vishnu, Ra, Zeus, Guru Nanek Dev, Ra, or any other "God" or prophet or religious belief man has made or followed is not one and the same. Just that entity chose to expose himself in ways that the population at that time could understand. For it is not the true teachings men tend to follow but the interpretations of the supposed leaders that are followed.

EVERY MAJOR RELIGION, THAT IS NOT ENTIRELY MAN MADE (sorry Scientologists and Aetheriests) MAINTAINS THE EXACT SAME CONSTANT: NEGATIVITY BEGETS NEGATIVITY. And yet almost every religious leader (MAN/WOMAN) to maintain power and control of the masses preaches in negative tones.

That is the true problem........ not someone's beliefs. This is why I am a Unitarian Universalist, one doesn't have to identify to the confines and prejudices of a single religion. Instead you realize that all religion/spirituality is in the heart and soul of the individual and should be allowed it's proper growth. That growth being educating yourself to others ways so that you may understand them better and develop a respect and peace with them.... not a fear, a prejudice and hatred toward them.

__________________
I just love people who use the excuse "I use/do this because I LOVE the feeling/joy/happiness it brings me" and expect you to be ok with that as you watch them destroy their life blindly following. My response is, "I like to put forks in an eletrical socket, just LOVE that feeling, can't ever get enough of it, so will you let me put this copper fork in that electric socket?"

ngdawg

Pan, if you ever said you would not post anymore, I would drive to Ohio, hunt you down and drag you to a keyboard, watching until you posted once again.
Excellent response.....

__________________
Don't blame me. I didn't vote for either of'em.

roachboy

re. ng's earlier post about catholic rituals: the strange thing about most xtian variants/precursors--branches of the same tree--is that if you look at the practices--the enormous range of practices--people use to perform their faith, all are heterodox, all the result of syncretic processes--all are in motion, being fashioned and refashioned by communities who use them, who think about themselves and the world and themselves in the world through them. the internal ideology of these religions works at corss purposes with the dynamism of the practioners themselves. the philosphical underpinnings of xtianity has come to see being as determinate, as rituals performed as like objects which are identical with themselves and stable across time and are the same in every context---so the activities of people to adapt/change rituals is seen as little more than colorful local ornamentation.

last time i was in paris for any duration, i found myself on the bridge that spans the entrance to the overpass where diana spencer got spattered in a limo. there was a shrine built at the apex of the bridge--a kind of strange lumpy affair that had notes attached to it in various languages some of which had prayers to diana asking for her intercession written on them. "dear diana: ask god to heal my sister's leg please." at the time, i found this shrine supremely strange. and i have thought about it for a long time. i gradually realized that rituals are like this--people make them so they can think through them, they are built up from efforts to make meaning in and of the world, to think about agency in the world: and that the philosophical framework particular to catholicism does not let you thnk about this, because they see things the wrong way around.

catholicism controls for this by having a bureaucratic procedure for determining who is and is not a "real saint" and by doing that attempts to draw lines around what is and is not legitimate in order to stabilize and maintain an understanding of ritual as identical with itself and variation as local color.

the main thing that the mode of interaction with ritual and the world lumped together under the category "paganism" does is see ritual as something people make--patterned activity that enables modes of thinking about the world--thinking as cognition, thinking as performance--thinking as activity not hobbled by the ridiculous mind/body split--to unfold as they are. there is an entirely different philosophy implicit within that. this is the attraction of this way of thinking---for me at least.
the fact that i do not practice myself is a function of my disposition. i do not find personifications attractive--they do not speak to or for me. but the mode of thinking about human acitivity in general seems to me far more functional, and much closer to accurate materially, than anything xtianity, its variants and precursors, has to say.

and i think the world would be a better place--a more livable place--were the current hierarchy of established judeo-christian religions/"paganism" the reverse of what it now is. one can dream.....

__________________
a gramophone its corrugated trumpet silver handle
spinning dog. such faithfulness it hear

it make you sick.

-kamau brathwaite

ngdawg

I have always found it a tad strange to have 'saints', but I understand the need, the desire that something larger than our own mortals selves not only exists, but can and would do what we ourselves are unable to.
Indeed, I have my own 'patron saint', in the moon. Strange as it may sound, I have always felt that the one thing we all have in common is that. When I look at the moon, I know and feel that thousands more are doing the same and with that thought it mind, when it's full and bright, I ask it to watch over my loved ones. Wierd? Perhaps....I had always thought so, then found out it's actually a major part of other beliefs.
Many of us also are of the belief that our departed loved ones continue to play roles in our lives-I know I have some belief in that, but logic tells me 'nah'.
Perhaps it all boils down to my first sentence-the need to have faith in something or someone capable of handling the things we as earthbound humans cannot. It is my belief, though, that organized religions exploit this need and not necessarily in an good, altruistic manner.

__________________
Don't blame me. I didn't vote for either of'em.

xepherys

I LOVE this particular point. It is so very true. Even at the foundation of major religions. How are "spellcraft" and "prayer" any different from one another? Spellcraft, as it is, doesn't necessarily require some physical component. In both you are asking a deity or higher power to answer your wishes and help make something occur. Is praying to God for you lottery ticket to be a winner somehoe more divine that making an offering to the goddess asking for the same? Seems entirely too similar to me.

Pans points are awesome as well.... live and let live!

Ustwo

What I don't see here is a belief in god.

What I see is a belief in the concept of a god or higher power.

My thought is why bother lighting those candles, saying those prayers, or chanting your spell to a concept?

__________________
Agents of the enemies who hold office in our own government, who attempt to eliminate our "freedoms" and our "right to know" are posting among us, I fear.....on this very forum. - host

Obama - Know a Man by the friends he keeps.

roachboy

you assume, ustwo, that judeo-christian-style belief is the only possibility.
that would be in itself a judeo-christian view, yes?
outside that frame, it is an assumption that would only be of anthropological interest, really. it wouldnt be binding on anyone.

__________________
a gramophone its corrugated trumpet silver handle
spinning dog. such faithfulness it hear

it make you sick.

-kamau brathwaite

Ustwo

No I don't. I see very little difference beteen a judeo-christian style religion from any other out there, its all voodoo to me.

__________________
Agents of the enemies who hold office in our own government, who attempt to eliminate our "freedoms" and our "right to know" are posting among us, I fear.....on this very forum. - host

Obama - Know a Man by the friends he keeps.

Willravel

Your art of sarcasm is so honed that I can't tell the difference between sarcasm and seriousness anymore.

roachboy

ustwo:
i should maybe have said that in your post there is an assumption....
and i thought you were among those of us who are so made that we cannot believe in that sense, but i wasn't sure. my memory is dicey this afternoon. must the the weather.

__________________
a gramophone its corrugated trumpet silver handle
spinning dog. such faithfulness it hear

it make you sick.

-kamau brathwaite