talkmagic.co.uk

Thanks EckoZero!

If someone asked me if i was truly magical or i used special powers i would make sure that they fully understood that the answer was no and i would explain why.

As "christian magicians" its said that when doing magic the message should come before the trick.
I totally agree with this in a way.

I have lead a fair few sunday schools at my church. (we call it activ8 and have lots of loud music and disco lights) AND i have used magic.
However, magic is not always suitable. Sorry to the non-christians here for the next bit but for example last weeks sunday school theme was "holy spirit" - there is just no easy way to descibe the holy spirit in a magic trick so that idea went. And we stuck to the normal ways of teaching it.
However, on the other hand i would like to know that the children had fun and enjoyed coming to church and to learn that message later on, than be bored stiff as they walked out and not want to come again.

Anyway, I'm going off topic now.

I shall end my post.

Taneous I half agree, and half don't. Eeeee, isn't this fun

I agree that some people cop out of things without looking into it for themselves too much - for instance (and a slightly bizarre "instance"), I had a long and repetitive debate with a christian girl over LSD (!). I said that I wouldn't take it because of the possible detrimental effects, but *if* in some theoretical world it could be guaranteed 100% that it would not be harmful to you in anyway, now or in the future, I would try it out of curiosity to see what it's like to "play with the senses". She said she wouldn't, even though she was curious - she couldn't accept even the theory of it not being "bad", Mr. Mackay had ingrained it so well!

Please don't get me wrong - I'm a thinker - I am.

On the flipside, I think prudence and wisdom is by no means a bad thing. On the surface it seems great, doesn't it? "Try anything once", "don't knock it 'til you've tried it" - but knowing that something has the potential to turn on you and steering clear of it even though it may mean you throw out a speck of baby with that bathwater can be the wise thing to do. You only have to look at alcoholism... I bet there *are* some people out there who can recover from alcoholism and enjoy the odd drink now and again, but it just doesn't really happen - why? Because compared to the small amount of enjoyment, there's a lot of potential risk.

There are probably things occultists do that aren't actually to do with pagan rites or anything - just a bit of candle-making or olde worlde homeopathy, I dunno - but the fact is that my life is much happier when I focus on God, and live as I believe he wants me to, rather than when I try to push the boundaries and feel out the edges of what's safe and what isn't safe myself. As I've mentioned before on this thread (I think) - man cannot be trusted, including me! You see something gold and glinting at the other end of a dark alley full of slightly shady looking characters... perhaps it's a gold brick, and they're just friendly homeless people... it's always a possibility - but, perhaps it's a milk bottle top, and they're a group of muggers. Is it "a cop out" to know you could be missing out on something small, but walk by anyway?

And it *is* small, that's just the thing! For me, compared to a life knowing and walking with Christ, any small reward for curiosity piddles into insignificance. For you, Taneous, it may seem like I or other Christians are missing out totally - for us, it's a very neglible price to pay!

Finally, back to the "who to trust" issue. The reason I think this way is because I trust God and his plans in my life. All these things - things I could look into whilst still remaining true to my faith - the point is, at that point, you are putting a *lot* of trust in yourself as judge - something which you'll find is not recommended in the Bible! It's perfectly possible I would find my own happy level of involvement, but it's also possible I'd go too far - I know that I have that potential, and to be honest I believe everyone else does too, just in different areas. That's what "sin" is, basically; being king of your own life, when (IMHO) we weren't designed to function like that. So yes - "I" could try this and "I" could look into that, but ultimately "I" do not trust "I" to always know what is good for "I", so I'm happy to err on the side of caution.

thanks Farlsborough for you interesting post.

hmm - this is an interesting discussion - but I think I'll let it rest for now. If you want - pm me and we can discuss it some more.

Can i just applaud everyone who has contributed to this post for not turning into an attack of other beliefs and kept it a level-headed discussion, which, I feel, will have been helpful/enjoyable for all!

Farlsborough wrote:Taneous I half agree, and half don't. Eeeee, isn't this fun

I agree that some people cop out of things without looking into it for themselves too much - for instance (and a slightly bizarre "instance"), I had a long and repetitive debate with a christian girl over LSD (!). I said that I wouldn't take it because of the possible detrimental effects, but *if* in some theoretical world it could be guaranteed 100% that it would not be harmful to you in anyway, now or in the future, I would try it out of curiosity to see what it's like to "play with the senses". She said she wouldn't, even though she was curious - she couldn't accept even the theory of it not being "bad", Mr. Mackay had ingrained it so well!

Please don't get me wrong - I'm a thinker - I am.

On the flipside, I think prudence and wisdom is by no means a bad thing. On the surface it seems great, doesn't it? "Try anything once", "don't knock it 'til you've tried it" - but knowing that something has the potential to turn on you and steering clear of it even though it may mean you throw out a speck of baby with that bathwater can be the wise thing to do. You only have to look at alcoholism... I bet there *are* some people out there who can recover from alcoholism and enjoy the odd drink now and again, but it just doesn't really happen - why? Because compared to the small amount of enjoyment, there's a lot of potential risk.

There are probably things occultists do that aren't actually to do with pagan rites or anything - just a bit of candle-making or olde worlde homeopathy, I dunno - but the fact is that my life is much happier when I focus on God, and live as I believe he wants me to, rather than when I try to push the boundaries and feel out the edges of what's safe and what isn't safe myself. As I've mentioned before on this thread (I think) - man cannot be trusted, including me! You see something gold and glinting at the other end of a dark alley full of slightly shady looking characters... perhaps it's a gold brick, and they're just friendly homeless people... it's always a possibility - but, perhaps it's a milk bottle top, and they're a group of muggers. Is it "a cop out" to know you could be missing out on something small, but walk by anyway?

And it *is* small, that's just the thing! For me, compared to a life knowing and walking with Christ, any small reward for curiosity piddles into insignificance. For you, Taneous, it may seem like I or other Christians are missing out totally - for us, it's a very neglible price to pay!

Finally, back to the "who to trust" issue. The reason I think this way is because I trust God and his plans in my life. All these things - things I could look into whilst still remaining true to my faith - the point is, at that point, you are putting a *lot* of trust in yourself as judge - something which you'll find is not recommended in the Bible! It's perfectly possible I would find my own happy level of involvement, but it's also possible I'd go too far - I know that I have that potential, and to be honest I believe everyone else does too, just in different areas. That's what "sin" is, basically; being king of your own life, when (IMHO) we weren't designed to function like that. So yes - "I" could try this and "I" could look into that, but ultimately "I" do not trust "I" to always know what is good for "I", so I'm happy to err on the side of caution.

That my learned friend, that was a fantastic post... It actually explained in english what it is you as a Christian believe you are doing by following your faith.. I've read this sort of thing so many times and somewhere along the way others have lost the plot..... thankyou...

ditto (to the last 3 posts)


(haha ditto to pitto!)

Wow that's the second time in two days that awful joke has been made on TM Tom!

ooh nearly making me personal record!

Ok - thought I'd stir a bit again

Who were the wise men that visited Jesus - and why is it quite acceptable that they used astrology to find where he was born?

This is relevant to this thread in that they are reffered to as the magi (the same word from which we get 'magic') and it has to do with faith. I'll leave it at that for now..

That is an interesting question - but I think the main thing you're missing on the end is what they did when they got there

It says they were from the East, and also they ask "who is the one who is born king of the Jews? We saw his star in the East and have come to worship him."

A few things strike me about this:
a)they weren't Jewish, yet they had still studied the scriptures and believed the prophecies.
b)they weren't Jewish, but it was still a big enough deal for them to make the trek.
c)they weren't Jewish, but they still recognised Jesus' power and authority.

In those times, these guys will have been of high zorastrian standing - scholars, advisers etc. The astrology they practiced was what gave rise to many principles of astronomy and mathematics, not just Mystic Meg's column in the Sun. These were men of science.

Ooh I see taneous back to stir again!

Thank you Farlsborough for your response.

Farlsborough wrote:That is an interesting question - but I think the main thing you're missing on the end is what they did when they got there

I'm not missing anything - just asking the question

...this is just semantics, but i find it odd that when disasters happen it's "mother nature"...tsunamis, volcanic eruptions...killing thousands upon thousands....

..mother nature gets all the blame...it suddenly stops being "an act of God"...

...and i think the word man-kind should always be written with a question mark after it, as often those two halves of the word dont always go together if you see what i mean...

...i feel that it is within human nature to be both good and evil, occasionally both, sometimes an evil action could also be for the greater good...

...out of curiosity - can anyone name an atheist that started a war?

I find fundamentalists (not mentalists that believe in fundaments) extremely scarey...

..didnt tarots cards adapt into playing cards?...

You have a lot of questions

What I found really helpful and inspiring recently was working through 'the Power of Myth' by Joseph Cambell - with Bill Moyers. His understanding of the concept of God is inspiring in that he saas the word "God" as a reference to 'something' that cannot be understood or explained - the transendant, the mystery of being.

Yes - fundamentalism in all forms is scary. The other thing that is unfortunate is that it is often the only thing that people see of a certain religion (I include atheism as a religion b.t.w.) There are a lot of deeply spiritual people that truly make a difference to humanity within most of the religions. They just don't make as much noise as the fundamentalists..

As for an atheist starting a war - I can't think of any right now - but there are many more reasons that war starts other than religion. Often religion is the excuse used to justify a war - but the root is usually elsewhere. I think that's the true meaning of blasphemy..

(edit) - a good read on the topic of fundamentalism is Karen Armstrong's 'The battle for God'. She deals with fundamentalism in both Christianity and Islam. I found it not such an easy read - but it gave me a new perspective as to some of the reasons for religious militancy. It's always good to try and understand these things within the historical and cultural context out of which they come..