talkmagic.co.uk

playing devils advocate here...

faith and readings have a lot in common surely?

both make a fortune out of some meaningless bits of paper?

only joking in a way...

but they do both have more in common than either side will admit to really, both give hope to the lost at times, both can severely influence your life for better or worse...

both sides talk to the dead in some instances

both believe in some form of after life or spiritual force or energy

both can become extremely rich too

both can be used for good and evil intent...

I agree. I do have a sort of fascination with Christianity, but due to my beliefs and experiences have managed to turn that around into an interest in the whole Mary Magdalene, Royal bloodline stuff. All nonsense of course, but it gives me my Jesus fix man. (By the way, I live not far away from the heirs to the bloodline you know, the Devonshires in Chatsworth House).

Plus I believe that the early Christians were very new agey in their beliefs and practices (the Gnostics?), but of course they were all killed, burned, generally beaten up when the church became "organised" - and there it is again, that nasty after taste.

But yes, I do see how there are many similarities between what a reader does and what a priest does. And how that power can be used for good or ill. Belief's a funny old thing. I have no point. I'm just nodding quietly in the corner.

IAIN wrote:playing devils advocate here...

I wouldn't expect any less of you

IAIN wrote:faith and readings have a lot in common surely?

both make a fortune out of some meaningless bits of paper?

only joking in a way...

I'm not really sure where this comes from... well, I am - "The Past". But there is this common idea that there are svengali type characters, rubbing their hands together and poring over coffers brimful with gold and people's hard earned pennies.

My church (and I expect most Anglican churches are much the same in structure, if not in style) regularly set out to spend a little bit more than the previous year, with the faith that more money will come in... from somewhere. Sometimes that's everyone in the congregation giving a little bit more, sometimes that ends up being more people in the congregation, and sometimes a rich benefactor comes along. It's usually a combination of all three.

Yes, we have to give a certain cut to the Anglican church, but most of that goes on the wages for tiny little parish churches in the middle of nowhere who simply can't support a vicar on the weekly 50p from five old ladies. Five old ladies who almost certainly rely on the support and friendship they find in the church. I'm sure there's a bit of inefficiency in there somewhere, but show me any organization where that's not the case!

The rest of our money goes on upkeep on the premises, obviously, the wages of our staff and then all the different community projects. As TMW mentions, soup kitchens and the rest of it. Only a few months ago I went to our evening service and pretty much in place of a sermon was a description of all the different things our church does, things that people can be involved in practically as well as financially... things which every member of the church is encouraged to take ownership of.

What's more, if I want a detailed report of all accounts for the church, I know exactly who to go to.

And no, the vicar doesn't drive a mercedes

all i was suggesting was that the majority of all major religions loved a bit of money when they were starting up...

the catholic church certainly is very, very wealthy and powerful...ironic considering the whole camel/needle/rich man thing...

religion has certainly served a purpose as far as i can see, we needed controlling, we needed morals and so forth when we were all more animalistic...

so as an atheist i am happy to admit that we have a lot to thank organised religion for...

even flattening out local dialects/accents...hundreds of years ago, someone from cornwall wouldnt be understood by a yorkshire personage, due to the heavy local accent/slang and so forth...

once the bible was printed in english, and the bishops sent out to read it to the masses...people would scrimp and save, buy a bible and read it to the family..mimicking the bishops flatter duller london accents...hoping to emulate their peity as well as vocal inflections...

however, with great power, comes great responsibility, and unfortunately religion has also been responsible for a huge amount of death too...

religioin speaks to the masses - therefore has a mass effect
a reader speaks to a singular person - therefore has a singular effect

to be honest i dont quite know how i feel about either...i've read and dabbled with both, and can do my own form of "readings", but, they're definately not from a psychic vibe...

i've also looked at quite a few religions - and I'm still undecided which one would win a la top trumps...ganeesh always looked smart though..

I'll take Cuthulu hands down.


As the bumper sticker once said, "Why choose the LESSER of two evils?"

Honestly, I've always been drawn to Voodoo. All that incense, statues of Mary, chicken feet, crazy drums, spells and naked dancing. Not to mention zombies.

Oh wait. That was me in Ibiza in 1994.

themagicwand wrote:Honestly, I've always been drawn to Voodoo. All that incense, statues of Mary, chicken feet, crazy drums, spells and naked dancing. Not to mention zombies.

Oh wait. That was me in Ibiza in 1994.

I was wondering why the loa I summoned was calling out your name.... You sir were a naughty boy.

Excuse me I have some bourbon and a cigar to prepare.

I find it quite ironic.

And please do know I am not pointing any fingers here.

But the ideas posted here on this thread and the arguements that have arisen. Are the causes of the original thread topic, Witch Burnings.

It seems as though intolerance which arises not in the arms of religion or spirituality but in the hearts of men. Is the cause of this closed-mindedness towards others ideas has in history and even here on our modern day forum. We seem to have all well formulated ideas on how we perceive the world around us due to our own expierence, etc. But that does not mean our opinions are any more nor less than those arguing with us. We have made it quite clear that we do not agree with eachother. But that does not mean we should go about forcing our ideas on one another.

That is the farce of the Witch hunters. They are out trying to impose their world views on others who believe differenlty than them. And see where it has lead. To the DEATHS of INNOCENT people.

WHY, should a religion that many people adhere to be fundamentally incorrect just because it does not fit into your world view?

We live in a world of opinions. We live in a world of corrupted men, we live in a world of greed, of pride. We want to be better, to be more knowledgable than eachother. We want to be richer and wiser. We are never content with what we have.

Instead of seeing who is wittier or who knows more about religious history or the hidden dark sides of religious traditions. Why don't we go about becoming more, let's say open-minded towards eachother.

We already criticise the church for burning those at the stake who do not agree with their teachings. We crticise those who burn witches for their practices, We crticise sceptics for their biases towards the "un"-scientific community. Yet the only solution to our problem would be to stop with our nonsense. And instead share our beliefs. Tolerance means simply...Tolerating not accepting ideas and beliefs.

(sorry for that shaky definition, its the best I could think of off the top of my head Oh boy!)

Farlsborough, I've had to revise this retort a few times just so I wasn't overly "cutting" in that such is not my goal. But it is important for you to understand that my "attacks" on your beliefs, are not personal but are based on historicity. The quote of mine you used for kicking this little fun fest off with, pointing out how religionists will come out condemning this, that or the other until they discovered how to use it to their own advantage; the past century alone showing the pattern of screaming and inciting fear over Technology, the fact that Thomas Edison, Henry Ford and Nicola Tesla were all servants of evil, etc... until they started seeing how they could employ the technology these men brought into our world, to their advantage.

Music has always been a perceived tool of the Devil; we can go back to the days of Mozart and find invented evidence around his demonic ties, created by a resentful, ladder climbing gent that saw himself as being more pure and worthy of "his grace's blessings"... he was a man of the world seeking worldly treasures not an innocent who allowed the joys and tune of his very soul to compose for him, in honor of what he personally understood as the divine. Yet, we have a contemporary demonstration of this very same game; the condemnation of Rock & Rock in the 50s & 60s; Rapp during the 80s & 90s; Techno & Industrial since... and yet, within a decade of the first preacher's detraction, we find these very "instruments of the devil" within the confines of the church being USED by said institutions as a tool of recruitment -- a deliberate lure for reeling in the younger minds.

As the church was being formulated and built into what it became, it slowly usurped the days of high festival that were common to the people of Europe (primarily) along side the meaning of the symbols; over the course of a few short generations the Yule bush/Log had been given Christian significance as were the Eggs & Berries strong about them. But then, if one is to look at the history of this movement vs. the propaganda produced by its various leaders, you find that most all of what it believes to be "exclusive" and "unique" to them, actually came from far older and established traditions... unless of course you want to embrace that wonderful tale about the devil having a time machine so he could go back and change circumstances just to make Christians look like copy cats.... (it was actually a widely taught LIE for many generations).

Roughly a mile from my apartment there is a small knoll near where the State Mental Hospital once stood. It has a large carved stone sitting so as to mark the spot of Hangman's hill; a sight where, a bit over 150 years ago, "witches" were being executed right here in this land... an extension to the panic that began in Salem, Mass in the late 1680s... a pal of which still hoovers over much of New England, which is oddly superstitious when compared the rest of the nation.

The burning of a Witch or Buddhist Monk or Person of Color... it is all a matter of bigotry, a bigotry that is typically founded upon religious/political views that have taken a very hard and extreme turn. Even here in the U.S. being a known witch/pagan and a parent, can result in being drug into family court by the Child Protection Agency.... usually as the result of a good go'n to meet'n Christian stuck their big nose into someone else's life and went out of their way to create a problem... I know, I've been involved with a couple of those trials.

What's that got to do with Witch Burning?

At the height of the Burning Days one could make some quick cash by letting the local Bishop know who was doing wickedness... it would seem that little thing about not bearing false witness towards others got set to the side when it came to profiting... the bishop in question splitting an even share of the lands and holdings with the Inquisitor and of course, regional nobles once they found a fish to fry. Anyone that would speak up in defense of the accused would be seen as a co-conspirator and likewise loose their home, family, holdings and frequently their lives as well.

With that in mind, let's look at what I was just pointing out over non-Christian families being taken to court as the result of the good christian people nosing into things that aren't their business. Let's look at the very organized Christian movements here in the states to prevent none-Christians for holding jobs, having safe harbor (home), let alone the supposed constitutional rights when it comes to freedom of expression and personal belief.

You can apply every one of these things to the Gay community and in certain parts of the country, towards specific racial minority groups as well as (since 9/11) the Islamic Community. So I ask you in all sincerity, how am I supposed to view or speak kindly about such a duplicitous institution?

Now, just as we both know there are good people out there who aren't enveloped in all the social-political garbage the zealots love throwing around, we should both be able to accept that there are honest and good people that work as Readers/Psychics who have absolutely no desire to do harm on any level and yet, they must deal with schmucks who've read the Rowland book and thus, believe it perfectly fine to harass and give the local Readers a hard time, to waste their time and not pay them, etc.

I guess you could say that we share a common foe on that front in that I am very aware of how our cynical friends lash out towards anyone expressing any sort of faith. I cannot do that though I will denounce organized religion in all forms; there is a huge difference between being religious and being spiritual, the latter being more dogma free. On that front I will stand up to defend anyone for what they believe even if I can't buy into it myself; NO ONE has the right to tell others that they are being stupid or foolish because of what they believe and the testimony they may have around that faith... NO ONE!

I hope this somehow makes better sense and clears my position on things a bit.

Thanks for your post Craig. I think you identify the crux of the matter here...

Craig Browning wrote:Now, just as we both know there are good people out there who aren't enveloped in all the social-political garbage the zealots love throwing around, we should both be able to accept that there are honest and good people that work as Readers/Psychics who have absolutely no desire to do harm on any level

I'm very, very happy to agree with you on this point!

I will never try to deny that many, many bad things have happened in the name of God and been done by the church. But when you refer in your other posts to "the church", you make no distinction - and it feels like everyone is being tarred with the same brush; I'm sure I don't have to tell you how annoying that is! Whilst my first response was intended to be bit... "spikey", shall we say... I also wanted to highlight the unfairness or double standard I observed to be developing, i.e. "the church" as a whole is wicked, corrupt and all the rest of it, but when it comes to anyone who professes to be a Reader - well, they get the benefit of being judged on their own merits!

It saddens me when I see people who profess to be Christians behaving in a way that makes it seem very much the opposite, but ultimately to judge them too harshly becomes hypocritical - after all, no one's perfect - Christians above all should know that.

Interestingly (I think), a friend of mine two years ago was describing to me why started coming to church and became a Christian. He was working as a clerk for a law firm, and spent all of his time leafing through reports of these "terrible" deeds - theft, fraud, bodily harm, pages and pages of infidelity. I was fully expecting him to say something like, "when I saw how cruel people could be, I realised how wrong it all was blah blah blah", but what he actually said was "I realised that any one of those things could have been me. In that person's situation, I could have committed any one of those crimes."

That is very much the ethos of most of the people who come to my church; I gather it may not be the same in America. I personally think it's almost a miracle in itself that something can bring together a group of mismatched people who would never normally be friends (and I'm happy to admit there are some real oddballs...), and make them work for the good of the community.

It really irks me when people harbour this idea that "it's the ones who are seriously into it that are dangerous/crazy, most of them are harmless/nice people (i.e. because they're only partially involved...)". Biblical study, discussion and furthering what you might call the "spiritual life", "Christian life" etc. are supposed to lead to these things (and I expect some of you will remember them from Sunday school!): love, joy, peace, patience, gentleness, goodness, faith, kindness and self-control. Which of those things sound bad?! That is what's supposed to be developing in people to profess to have this faith. And if that ain't happening, then you've got to ask questions...

So somewhere, there is a balance to be had. On the one hand, it's a wussy answer to say "those guys who did bad stuff have absolutely nothing to do with me and my faith" - clearly, the church has to take some degree of ownership over the crimes of the past. But neither should we throw out the young babies that are popping up everywhere with the bathwater, and there has to be some common sense; I hardly think that you would be happy to shoulder the responsibility for crimes committed by anyone calling themself a mystic/Reader/sooth-sayer etc. over the last 2000 years?

Obviously, being a large and easily identifiable organisation makes it easy to see where the church has failed. But from communist regimes to African tribes, it is not the only group to wield it's power badly. All this acrimony towards "organised religion" - I personally think that history makes it clear that what is the problem is "organised humans"!

When I lived in Reno, Nevada there was a group of young people that referred to themselves as "followers of Jesus". I asked them why they used that term and the answer was simple, "The term Christian has become so ugly and tarnished in the world view that they wanted nothing to do with it because it had little to nothing to do with what Jesus himself taught or how he lived his life."

I always found that a wonderful and amazing sense of perspective, especially when you consider that it was not part of an "organization" but simply a bunch of college kids and a couple of thirty something adults that made a decision one afternoon while in the park and sharing testimony. To be honest, that is an idea I've kind of adopted myself in that the Pagan world tends to view me as being a bit more Gnostic than how they perceive the way "real" Druids were (a.k.a. New Age fantasies).

I do know form many friends that the European and Scandinavian views towards the church and bible itself are in great contrast to what we have in this country. I'm also aware that more people in Europe work with translations of the bible that aren't as "inaccurate" or controversial as the Queen James version (I still have problems understanding how people can embrace a book as being "sacred" when it was compiled by a known closet-case and supposed pedophile).

When I was in around 4 1/2 - 5 years old I had a friend down the street named Michael who my father wouldn't let me play with either at his house or ours even though I did play with him at school.

Why?

Because Michael was Black and according to Genesis (so I was being taught) People of dark skin were the decedents of Cane e.g. cursed of God. It would be some years later that my investigations and theological discussions would reveal that the famed "Mark of Cane" was in fact God's blessing and promise to preserve him and curse those that would do harm towards him or his progeny. But then similar things can be said when it comes to the biblical excuse for murdering "witches" (the proper translation actually meant poisoners/mercenaries) and of course the homophobia factors.

Being a teen in the 1970s growing up in the middle of the Ohio Valley, at the tip of the famed Bible Belt and all things ultra conservative, one tends to learn real fast to be nervous and self-loathing when dealing with sexual affinities. It's no wonder so many kids in those days were committing suicide or simply becoming junkies and yet, in my adult years I've seen even greater horrors around that same issue. The suicides are still prevalent but the beatings and family rejection have become far worse, most all of it coming out of those families that are anally religious.

I can't even describe how some of these kids, as young as 8 and 9 years old, the condition they were in when someone found them, only to discover that their parents threw them away because THEY WERE BEING KIDS and doing the things most every kid has done -- exploring and experimenting a.k.a. Playing Doctor. In most instances that's all it was but then there were those kids that couldn't stop the swish or the lisp when the spoke and when it was proven that they were gay, they were often brutalized by their own "God Fearing" parents and tossed to the curb... and that's the lucky ones.

As I mentioned, the agressive antics here in the states by "Christians" towards other Christians let alone what they've done to the Buddhist, Muslims and Pagans, it's insane! Compounding said bigotry along with what I mention above is the very deliberate yet, covert action that will curtail any sort of comfort zone for those the zealots despise. Though their efforts are slowly being chiseled away, there is still a huge amount of territory in which people lose their homes, jobs, and families as the end result of Christian oppression. My ex "wife" (we never got married but) was married to a black man the first go round, Manny passing away before the youngest boy was a year old. Nonetheless, the good folks of Oregon didn't like having half-breeds or anything that was not Lilly white in their neck of the woods except during planting and harvest season. What made things even uglier, in their mind, was that Marcy was a good ole Irish lass with the same milk white skin.

The "legal" battle that ensured after Manny's death literally had her and the kids being run out of town in the middle of the night... all in the name of God, Greed and Bigotry.

So as you can see I have many, many solid reasons to distrust anything that calls itself a Christian or "church" for that matter. Even the "good folk" tend to want to nail lifts on everyone's feet and "save" them. Ignoring the fact that some folks just aren't interested in that brand of "salvation".

Anywho... I hope this clarifies things better.

Lenny Bruce wrote:Every day people are straying away from the church and going back to God.

amen

Bet you didn't realise you could invite an essay with one word, did you Iain...

IAIN wrote:

Lenny Bruce wrote:Every day people are straying away from the church and going back to God.

amen

To a point. But it's a bit like the issue with private schools - send the "best" kids away, and the comprehensives get worse and worse. It takes a strong parent to send their kid, who they know they're bringing up well, to a sh*tty school because they believe in social equality, but some do it (not that I think there's anything wrong with comprehensives, but you catch my drift).

It may seem like the most loving thing to encourage everyone to fanny around, explaining and developing their own personal ideologies/theologies... "I interact with God in my own way" etc. That's all well and good, but how often do you meet up with a group of 100 other people who interact with God in their own ways, and decide that you want to put on a free English course for struggling immigrant families?

Of course, when people don't really know what they believe, it's something very different - or if people feel they're struggling with what they believe. But when I meet people who say "I'm a Christian, but I don't go to church, and I think all other Christians are (this, that and the other), and..." I think, "MAN UP."

Craig is absolutely right, the church is a human and flawed institution with ugliness in it's history, but if inspirational and kind people get involved, it can get better. I fully sympathise with those people he mentions - "followers of Jesus" - but really, they're not helping, they're wussing out. "I'm not one of the bad ones, I'm a nice one." Ahhh, bless 'em. Wouldn't we all like to say that? Which is why in my last post I mentioned that although some of the things done by the church are detestable, it has to take at least some ownership of all that.

Disassociation is the easy way out - trying to turn things around is harder, but necessary. Otherwise you get groups splitting off throughout the years... "I'm not with them", then when some other people disagree with the first splinter group, "I'm not with those guys either..." It's like people who sit on their @rses protesting against the actions of "the big wigs", "the man". How about, work hard, get into a position of authority and actually do something about it for goodness' sake!

I'm not saying that I agree with or support everyone who says they're a Christian, far from it. But we're asked to love our enemies, and sometimes, the hardest enemies to love are the ones who are supposed to be your friends. As a teenager I was a real naysayer, and found flaws in everything the church did. You know what - it was miserable, it was tiring, and it never did anyone any good. I honestly believe that if you end up finding yourself believing in the Christian message, you're also called to love and work with (even if that means "trying to radically overhaul") the other weirdos and misfits who you end up alongside.

Right, I'm tired, and I'd like to get out for an early morning jaunt tomorrow. Goodnight all

Sorry, double post. Doh.

Infinite wrote:I'll take Cuthulu hands down.

As the bumper sticker once said, "Why choose the LESSER of two evils?"

LOL Infy. Another Lovecraft fan?


Farlsborough - Much respect to you for posting the way you have in this thread.

I'm not going into detail here, but I have been at the very wrong end of Christianity in the past and it's truly awful. My experiences put me off for life and I want nothing to do with it any more. Strangely enough, I blamed the religion itself for a long time, but it wasn't that, it was the people who were to blame. I don't think Christianity is by any means without fault as an entity, but some of those who profess to believe and belong really have no business doing so because their actions belie their words. It's a shame.

What you have said here is about as tolerant and understanding as I have ever heard from anyone who calls themself Christian. It's just such a pity that there are so many who are borderline extremist in their views within Christianity. Some of the things I have seen and heard Christians do firsthand have disgusted me. They showed no modicum of faith or understanding of the teachings they were supposed to be following and were most definitely not using anyone good as a role model.

I hope nobody takes this post as Christian bashing, because it's not meant to be read as such.