Is being Wiccan moral?

[Volos]

Originally posted by : Blissman

What does the Wiccan faith say to the Genesis of man (and of the universe)? Of the Origins of The Lady and The Lord? Of man? Does Wicca believe that there will be an end of the Universe? Does Wicca place man in perspective to the universe? Is there a Wicca Wedding Ceremony? (If so, please elaborate).

The Universe: Generally Wiccans and Pagans believe that the universe is part of the ultimate Diviene. This is panentheism not pantheism as is offten ascribed to us. Panentheism indicates that the Univers was not created ex-nihlo (out of nothng) but rather out of the Divine itself. This allows the Divine to simultaneously be immanent and transcendent.

The Divine is not dependant upon the universe in anyway however the universe and all within it are wholly dependant upon the Divine.

As to why the universe was created and continues to exist, only the Divine can answer that.



Humans: Wiccans and Pagans do not believe in “special creation” human being are not intrinsically different from or better than any other creature or organism. We do not even hold a unique place here in that we are moral agents or that we are self aware. There seems to be more than a few other creatures capable of these things. We are part of nature, not above it or given domain over it.

I think this is the biggest difference between Pagan and Christian worldviews. Because of their beliefs Christians must view themselves as special while Pagans must view themselves as general.



The Divine and the individual Gods and Goddesses: All Gods are one God and all Goddess are one Goddess and the two are one.

Generally the individual Gods and Goddess are viewed as being ultimately parts of the Divine itself. They are for lack of better words, masks or personas taken on by the Divine. The all encompassing Divine is by definition incomprehensible and incredibly abstract. Such a being would be almost impossible for humans to relate to on a personal level. The Gods and Goddess are intermediaries that the Divine uses for our benefit, (not the Divine’s benefit)

Incidentally Pagans view the Christian God to be just another example of the many Gods and Goddesses that people may forge a relationship with.



End of the Universe: One of the big differences between the Pagan world view and the Christian world view is the concept of time. Christians view time as linear, the universe started on a specific date, it continued to the present time and will someday end. Pagan’s view time as cyclical not linear. Time is seen as a series of repeating cycles. One age follows another, death is followed by rebirth, summer becomes winter. The sun , moon and the heavens repeat their cycles regularly.

The ultimate result of this view of time is that Pagan’s do not look to the past for their religion, we do not celebrate histories or quasi historic dates rather we live in the eternal present.



Will this universe come to an end? I believe so, since everything that is born also dies. Will there be a new universe? I also believe this to be so. Since rebirth always follows death.



Yes there are Wiccan wedding cermonies. Alex and I were married in such a cermony eight years ago. Neither of us are Wiccan I am a Pagan and he follws the spirituality of the Ojibwa. It seemed that Wicca was a happy compromose for us and the fact we knew several licenced Wiccan ministers certianly helped.



Marriage among pagans is viewed both in the practical sense and in the spiritual sense. On the practical side it unites tow families and creates a new family. There are provisions for “trial marriages” where a couple may be married for a year and a day to test the waters as it were and at the end of that time decide if the marriage will be dissolved or become permanent. There are provisions for same gendered marriage. On the spiritual side the act of marrying permanently binds you to that other person and as such is not a thing to be taken lightly or jumped into.

 

[Mylinkay Asdara]

Whitehorse: I think Volos has answered most of what you ask, but I would like to re-touch on this:

I'm beginning to get the impression that in wicca, there is no sense of morality. No right or wrong. So these gods and goddesses would not have a moral component to them.

Well I have to say that again, the gods/the Divine/Deity did indeed give us all free will and does not exist to police us here on earth. We deal with our own consequences when we do things with magick that are harmful to others.

As for disolving a bond it would be solely on the caster's side. Let's say I have broken up with 'tom' and I still find myself thinking about him overly often and pining for him, but he's moved on to another relationship and didn't treat me very well when we were together anyway. Thinking about him like this is a sign of his unhealthy hold over me and I want to be free of that. I might do an aura cleansing to remove any umbilical he might have and some of the negative feelings that may have built up there. I may also choose to light a white candle and pray over it to re-purify myself of such ickyness. That's what I meant when I used the example, but I re-read it and realized I wasn't very clear about it - my bad

 

[TheOriginalWhitehorse]

I only have a couple of minutes right now; I'll try to answer these better later. But for now, this is what strikes me: if man seeks these gods/goddesses on his own terms, then he himself is the basis of morality. But there is no good human being. So this would mean those deities are not moral. There is no higher law in this religion. So this do-no-harm philosophy would really be more accurately stated, "Don't let the boomerang hit you on the back of the head." Moreover, if these deities are not related to this energy, then why do people use religious means to tap into it, and why can evil people become so powerful through this means? After all, they are invoking and/or evoking these deities in order to harness this energy, correct?

Also, about the earth and everything in it being part of the divine: how can that which is physical and temporal be part of that which is eternal and spiritual?

 

[Mylinkay Asdara]

if man seeks these gods/goddesses on his own terms, then he himself is the basis of morality. But there is no good human being. So this would mean those deities are not moral.

You're discussing our religion in context of your religious views, not ours. The systems really aren't compatable, so you won't get very far that way. We hear the gods call us as you hear your God call you. We choose the structure of worship, not the gods, because Deity is not concearned ultimately with the form you choose to connect with Deity through. In your religion there 'is no good human being' - we don't believe in origenal sin, sin, or that humans are inherently bad or flawed. So in our beliefs there are good human beings. Our Deity is too ultimate for morality (was God moral when he killed all those in the flood? You will say that we can not judge God because God is by nature good and therefore all that He does regardless of what we see it as is by it's own definition good. Deity is the same situation) What morality can we impose on the Ulitmate?

Moreover, if these deities are not related to this energy, then why do people use religious means to tap into it, and why can evil people become so powerful through this means? After all, they are invoking and/or evoking these deities in order to harness this energy, correct?

Deity is conneced and related to all things.

The question of powerful 'evil' people who use magic... you do realize that Deity has a 'dark side' too, don't you? Hurricanes, Floods, Death, Disease, these things are all natrual and considered 'bad' by some 'negative', 'evil' even. There are personas of Deity that represent this aspect of Deity. The Morrigan comes to mind (War Goddess) and others. People who use negative energy for negative things are not Wiccan, they may be pagan, but they are not wiccan. Wicca does not believe in calling upon the destructive forces of the gods for the purpose of doing harm. Other branches of paganism do not frown on the practice though.

 

[Blissman]

This is certainly a fascinating thread. If I were to look at this philosphically, excluding differences of perceiving time (for this post), I see two fatal problems. Please understand that while I enter this as a philosphical post, I will be biased towards Christianity, that being my faith.

Wicca is a fatal position. It is fatal to Wiccans. Here is why: Man is not perfect. By whatever reason anyone who may be, who is reading this thread, be it by faith or a philosophy, man does not live as perfect beings. As a result, we make mistakes. We will, as mortals, always make mistakes. Man is born with a few instincts.
We have the instinct to survive (as individuals), and the instinct to suckle at our mothers. breast. I suppose that one might argue that the instinct to suckle at our mothers breast is part of our instinct to survive. Non-the-less, we have these two instincts. We also have the instinct, curiousity. Infants are knowlege sponges. So too are adults. Throughout our lifetime we seek to know. Everything. We will not reach an ideal goal of knowing everything, but we seek it. We want to know what makes the world run, how it ticks, for both practical reasons and to satisy an endless curiosity which serves no practical use. We search and learn each day that we live. We educate others, and we also learn from others (most importantly, practical information). We also have an instinct to thrive, and gain control over our world. This is power. However anyone may **** power, it's misuse, power also includes our buiding of shelters, overcoming forces of nature to drink water. Power includes clothing, warmth, cooling, obtaining and preparing food, and medicine. We need knowlege to drive power; we need both to live. I had said that we have an instinct to live personally. We also have an instinct to live as a species. Too often, in life we fail, and harm ourselves, or harm others, or perhaps we may harm all. What is one of the devices that we use to protect ourselves, others, or all? One such device is a concept which we call law. Laws and a similar concept, rules, by which we must behave, are also called morals. Laws, rules, and morals are standards. These standards say, "No, do not do that", for that harms man. They also say, "Yes, do this, for 'this' benefits man. Religions (any religion) which set morals in addition to laws benefit man, for there are many conditions where there are no laws.
Man does not always obey laws. Man does not obey rules. Man does not always obey morals. We risk harm to ourselves, to others, and we risk harm to all if we do not obey laws, rules, or morals. For what reason does man fail? We fail because we do not test those actions which we propose to do in reality, that it may be measured against laws, rules, and morals. We fail when we do not accept the limits of conduct imposed by our laws, our rules, and our morals. We fail when we cannot effect changes in our proposed behavior, or cannot judge them. And we fail because, as we are imperfect, we are at times failures. If laws, rules, or morals instruct us to be harm to ourselves, to others, or to all, we will create our failures. If we choose to break our laws, rules, and our morals, we will also choose our own failure. If we have no laws, or no rules, or no morals we will also harm ourselves, by neglect. Morals, if followed, do not only control us. They also guide us so that we may make decisions where there are no laws, no rules, indeed nothing. You have said that in Wicca, there are no morals (not by faith, that is). But there are, guides, general rules of conduct. There is a 'feedback loop', so-to-speak; for anything harmful that you do to others you will be harmed three times to you. But what exactly defines harm(s)?
Not, if you will, Sins, for it is a personal morality. Christianity has morals, called sins. But as man is imperfect we also recognise that our actions by reason of free will, we will never free us of a dilemma; no matter how well we conduct ourselves, we cannot conduct ourselves perfectly. We need a perfection to judge us. We need a perfection to forgive us the fact that we are not perfect, nor can be perfect. We have God, who is perfect. We also have this perfection, God, we call Him Jesus, to forgive us of our imperfect nature. God, perfection had created us, had created all life, had created all things, and had created the universe and reality itself. Man can not do this, for it can only be done by an absolute, by perfection, by God, by Jesus. Does this give Christians a license to behave unlawfully, without rules, or without the conduct which our morality teaches us? No. For the forgiveness is not to permit us to conduct our lives immorally, without rules, or without law . Forgiveness is for our souls. We have a concept of 'soul'. Soul is eternal. It comes from divinity. Our bodies will die. We have free will, and can live lives as good men or we can live as evil men. We may choose how we want our souls to 'reside' after we are no longer alive, in heaven or in hell. Our forgiveness is that our souls may not live in hell, rather in heaven. Laws and rules control our lives. Morals control us, and morals also guide us. There are many strange dichotomies in life. Every Wiccan whom I have met has acted morally, kind, with decency. But Wicca, the faith, of these wonderful people, does not teach this to Wiccans (as it had been described to me, and as I understand it). My faith, Christainty, teaches that this is an evil (that is Wicca, as a faith, is evil). But again, all of the Wiccans that I have met, do not act this way. Indeed, no one Wicca has acted this way with the slightest evil. Christianity, along with other faiths in the world which have morals, can not be perfect for all people whom call themselves Christian. Christains also break laws, rules, and our own morals, sometimes we sin. Obviously, not all Christians act this way. Why then, if sometimes Christians sin, is Christianity any better that no faith? Because we do not always sin, we have morals to tell us not to sin, and to guide us so that we may not sin, if we so judge ourselves our actions before we do them.
Without guides, without defined morals, you have no test in reality, no standards to which you may compare as an anchor. Self judgement will work - up to a point. But as man is biased to approve himself, that 'point', floats. If it hits a rock, you are destroyed. Morality can sometimes fail too. It can be a trap. Too harsh, too much judgemental, can become hate. Hatred destroys. Hatred can become God, (for any faith).

Many people look at what is happening in the world, and see horrors. We see it in other countries, and we see it here. We lament the use of drugs for pleasure. Drugs destroy and kill. We lament too much violence. We lament too much sex. Violence kills. Sex leads to deadly illness, and unwanted children. Kids sometimes say that they know that drugs will kill, but they do not care. When laws, and rules are broken or ignored, and when morality does not exist, there is destruction and there is death. I do not mean to imply that Wicca causes all of this. But look at the implications when no morals exist. And too, when they are ignored. Please adopt morals in to Wicca. I do not wish to see you perish.

Thank you,
Blissman

 

[Havoc]

Blissman you are not getting the point, or Whitehorse for that matter.

Wicca has the highest morals a human can have. "Harm None".

In essence all codified laws come down to preventing you from harming your neighbour, and preventing him from harming you. The problem with codifying laws is that they creat loopholes. We see this in the Pharisees that your Christ hated so much. They had loopholes up the ying-yang and caused great harm. Your Christ is said to have recognised this. As the story goes when asked about the law he answered rather simply.

Luke 10:25 And, behold, a certain 1lawyer stood up, and tempted him, saying, 2Master, what shall I do to inherit eternal life?

26 He said unto him, What is written in the law? how readest thou?

27 And he answering said, 1Thou shalt love the Lord thy God with all thy heart, and with all thy soul, and with all thy strength, and with all thy mind; and thy neighbour as thyself.
28 And he said unto him, Thou hast answered right: this do, and thou shalt live.

No long codified set of laws. No list of "thou shalt nots". No smacking each other around over interpretations of scripture. Just love the Divine, your neighbour and yourself. How do you love? You do no harm.

The pharisees were masters of law. A Pharisee on a long journey could continue to travel on the sabbath by having a slave run ahead the day before and place old shoes, rags, and other worthless items at set intervals along the way. You see Levitical Law allowed one a certain distance to travel on sabbath as long as it was between your property. Now the Pharisees were following the letter of the law but not the intent. That, unfortunatly is the way of codified law.

We have a different way. We don't try to codify what "do no harm" means. We don't create a priestly class of lawyers to tell us what to do and not to do. Each of us is responsible for the wayb we treat our neighbour and ourselves. It is an awesome and heavy responsibility.

I cannot go to a book and look up my actions and finbd loopholes for the Rede. I must carefully examine each and every action I take, magickal or mundane, for it's effects on myself and others. I must weigh each decision I make against the only measure that matters... harm. Ignorance of the law is certainly no excuse for me because the "law" is simple and overriding, "no harm". I can never hold up a book as excuse for causing harm. I must face my responsibilities naked, unadorned with codes, books, and excuses.

"Harm none" is not an abscence of morality, it is the epitome of morality.

 

[Mylinkay Asdara]

Man is not perfect.

Agreed. Never said man was perfect, nor does Wicca believe that to be the case (what would be the point of re-incarnation if we are already perfect?) but I did say that man can be good. Good does not = perfectly good 24/7.

If we choose to break our laws, rules, and our morals, we will also choose our own failure. If we have no laws, or no rules, or no morals we will also harm ourselves, by neglect. Morals, if followed, do not only control us. They also guide us so that we may make decisions where there are no laws, no rules, indeed nothing.

Couldn't agree more.

You have said that in Wicca, there are no morals (not by faith, that is). But there are, guides, general rules of conduct. There is a 'feedback loop', so-to-speak; for anything harmful that you do to others you will be harmed three times to you. But what exactly defines harm(s)?

The morality of Wicca is to 'do good and not harm' it's a catch-all because in any situation that's the thing to be doing. You seem to think that we lack morals because we don't specifically say 'don't engage in sex with other people if you are married' and 'don't kill people' and 'don't kick people when they're down' and so on. We believe that's all covered in : do no harm. I don't see why it's not understood that the statement is meant to cover about all the issues.

We need a perfection to judge us. We need a perfection to forgive us the fact that we are not perfect, nor can be perfect.

Where as we don't think we should judge ourselves against anything other than ourselves because we can never be perfect in this live or incarnation, so we must judge ourselves by our standards (meaning asking yourself: am I a better person now that I've grown a few years, or have I become someone I don't like anymore? Is the person I am today who I want to be, or can I be more if I try harder?) We weren't created to be perfect, we can try to achieve enlightenment, but we don't need to be forgiven for being as we were created.

We have a concept of 'soul'. Soul is eternal. It comes from divinity. Our bodies will die. We have free will, and can live lives as good men or we can live as evil men. We may choose how we want our souls to 'reside' after we are no longer alive, in heaven or in hell.

Up to the 'in heaven or hell' part we agree. We believe in the Summerland where we go when we die to recover, review our lessons learned on earth, spend time with the divine and then we come back to learn more lessons once we've healed and recuperated from the rigors of this fleshy life.

Morality can sometimes fail too. It can be a trap. Too harsh, too much judgemental, can become hate. Hatred destroys. Hatred can become God, (for any faith).

Yes, but I still fail to see why each rule must be separate and specific. If you can't follow a general rule you can always set up some guidelines for yourself (some wiccans and covens have morals and laws of the individual or group in their book of Shadows that everyone has agreed on -or if the person is alone that they have commited to hold themselves too- but this isn't something that happens often).

Sex leads to deadly illness, and unwanted children.

One word: Condoms.

Please adopt morals in to Wicca. I do not wish to see you perish.

Again: see above. Plus, each wiccan is his or her own person, only she or he can decide their path.

 

[TheOriginalWhitehorse]

Blissman you are not getting the point, or Whitehorse for that matter.

Wicca has the highest morals a human can have. "Harm None".

In essence all codified laws come down to preventing you from harming your neighbour, and preventing him from harming you. The problem with codifying laws is that they creat loopholes. We see this in the Pharisees that your Christ hated so much. They had loopholes up the ying-yang and caused great harm. Your Christ is said to have recognised this. As the story goes when asked about the law he answered rather simply.

No long codified set of laws. No list of "thou shalt nots". No smacking each other around over interpretations of scripture. Just love the Divine, your neighbour and yourself. How do you love? You do no harm.

The pharisees were masters of law. A Pharisee on a long journey could continue to travel on the sabbath by having a slave run ahead the day before and place old shoes, rags, and other worthless items at set intervals along the way. You see Levitical Law allowed one a certain distance to travel on sabbath as long as it was between your property. Now the Pharisees were following the letter of the law but not the intent. That, unfortunatly is the way of codified law.

We have a different way. We don't try to codify what "do no harm" means. We don't create a priestly class of lawyers to tell us what to do and not to do. Each of us is responsible for the wayb we treat our neighbour and ourselves. It is an awesome and heavy responsibility.

I cannot go to a book and look up my actions and finbd loopholes for the Rede. I must carefully examine each and every action I take, magickal or mundane, for it's effects on myself and others. I must weigh each decision I make against the only measure that matters... harm. Ignorance of the law is certainly no excuse for me because the "law" is simple and overriding, "no harm". I can never hold up a book as excuse for causing harm. I must face my responsibilities naked, unadorned with codes, books, and excuses.

"Harm none" is not an abscence of morality, it is the epitome of morality.

Quick comment-who determines the law? The human being. And we all know we are hopelessly flawed. I know people who have done others great harm, rationalizing and reasoning to themselves about why they were really just doing the person a favor. The Pharisees were a perfect example, and Jesus called them a brood of vipers. They were telling themselves they were keeping the law, but the spirit of this law wasn't in them, and they violated it all over the place with their hypocrisies, which Jesus pointed out. They eclipsed the law with their own man-made code. Jesus pointed this out as well. Man is not capable of morality aside from the Spirit of God. Man simply suppresses the truth and becomes desensitized-again, the Pharisees.

Learning to interpret the Bible correctly simply means learning to recognise and put our human tendencies aside. I've seen people use scripture to try to contradict other scriptures that were distasteful to them. This is obviously not a good use of scripture, and it's possible they didn't realize what they were doing. But the point is, the flaw is with us-not God's word. If it takes diligence to understand God's word, that's what it takes, then.

Moreover, this leaves a lot of questions about these divine beings. But more tonight.

 

[Mylinkay Asdara]

And we all know we are hopelessly flawed.

Your religion teaches you that. Ours doesn't. We don't believe that to be true. We don't claim to be perfect, but we aren't hopelessly flawed either. Falling short of perfection, we each must do the best we can.

 

[Blissman]

Your religion teaches you that. Ours doesn't. We don't believe that to be true. We don't claim to be perfect, but we aren't hopelessly flawed either. Falling short of perfection, we each must do the best we can.

We are hopelessly flawed to accurately judge ourselves. Because we are imperfect, we will make errors, and because we seek self-gratification, we, when we attempt to judge ourselves, can not be objective. We will deceive ourselves, approve our own actions while assuring ourselves that we are are our own impartial judges. Believing that one can judge yourself to act morally is self-deception.

 

[TheOriginalWhitehorse]

No such written authority exists. If someone were to claim such I don’t know of any Wiccan or Pagan that would believe them or pay any attention.

Okay; that's what I understood. That would coincide with the philosophy that man is the author of his own religion and morality.

The basis of Neo-Pagan spirituality is ones individual relationship with the Divine. There is no correct way to have such a relationship, there are no prescribed activities or works one must do to achieve this. In rejecting authoritarianism in the structure of religion Neo-Pagans embrace their unique relationship with the Divine.

This would mean that the human is more sovereign than the god or goddess. In rejecting authoritarianism, the person becomes a law unto himself. Is this a more pleasing philosophy to man, or to the divine, it makes me wonder.

I cannot say why people as a whole embrace Wicca or other Pagan religions I can only speak for myself. I was a Pagan long before I knew such a religion existed. As I child I worshiped members of the Greek pantheon. It was only in my late teens that I learned I wasn’t the only one praying to and relating to the old Gods. Personally I appreciate the advanced ethical philosophy of Paganism as well as the inclusiveness of the religion, every one is welcomed as they are, even Christians.

The inclusiveness is popular right now; postmodernism still has some very loyal advocates. I guess, for me the highest life pursuit anyone can have is truth. Because once that is the primary goal, everything is real. Everything is what it seems. Nothing on this earth truly satisfies, other than God, living in the soul. It's true:

Galatians 5

5:1It was for freedom that Christ set us free; therefore keep standing firm and do not be subject again to a yoke of slavery.

The truth really does set us free.

There is a great amount of responsibility in any action. Every choice we make has consequences and repercussions not just magic.

Yes, but this doesn't satisfy me. The principle here is to avoid repercussions, not to acknowledge the Creator's rightful place or to do rightly for the reason that it is right. And why would an evil person use the supernatural to achieve this effect? Why would these gods help him? If this energy is benign in the sense that it is unrelated to these gods, either they are not truly sovereign. Man would be. And i think mankind would like that idea. But if it spiritually benign, then why does the person who means to use it for evil use supernatural means to harness it? Why does he seek it through religion? So we're back to the deity problem. Either they are not moral, or not sovereign. Either way, this puts man in the driver's seat and makes him higher than God. This is impossible.

As for your statement that the Gods and Goddesses do not discriminate or do not have moral values: For the Divine to grant free will but to them restrict or limit the free will granted is an indication that free will does not really exist at all. If one embraces the concept of free will (and Pagans do) then the Divine will not discriminate and treat all as equals and leave us to the consequences of our choices.

Actually, sovereignty and free will are not mutually exclusive. God never works without the desire of the being. He is not invasive. Demonic spirits, are though. They seek direct control. God provides the means and timing and providence for His people to find Him. And, He promises that anyone who seeeks Him diligently will find Him. So He gives everything away for free including His own blood, but, this takes place by His own merciful and sovereign decree. Demonic spirits never give anything away for free.

If we are to have free will and the ability to be moral agents that means our will is free and the consequences of our actions our ours alone. This in not the absence of ethics on the part of the Divine but rather the logical conclusion of ethics and free will.

Well, God decides what the laws are, and anyone is invited to partake. Those God has chosen are the ones who persevere. But anyone who seeks Him will find Him, by Hos own promise.

You of course realize that the exact same thing can be said of you God and your religion, that it is the result of less than ethical spirits.

How so? Please explain.

One does not need physical objects at all. Any more than Christens need to build churches to worship in. There is the difference between not needing objects and enjoying objects.

I've been told these are aids in harnessing energy. Apparently this is part of the worship, and that's why they are using them.

Define what makes one person evil and what makes another good. Honest people will say that it is difficult in the extreme. One might point to a mass murder and say that is evil because he has killed many people. However the same could be said of a soldier in war who has killed many people. Why is one good and the other evil? Where is the line between good and evil?

That's just it-man doesn't have the right to decide this. Only God does. To get this answer, we'd need to go to His witten law. The variables of an absolute are different from situation ethics in that they are consistent, and the authority is God Himself.

For a less extreme example: let us say person A shot and killed person B. Is person A evil? What if person A is a drug smuggler and person B is a police officer, does this make person A more evil? What if person A is the police officer, does this make the shooting of person B good?

You're right; we'd need all the information to see what category it falls under. God does not permit murder. He does permit authorities to make and enforce laws including capital punishment. Murder and government are not the same thing, and God distinguishes between the two. Same for war.

As I said above if we accept the concept of free will and embrace the idea that we are responsible for our actions the question becomes why should the Divine discriminate?

Because God is the only one who has a right. And We discern what His will is and act accordingly. (Or try to, although we stumble in many ways.) We have free will to make decisions. What we do not have is sovereignty. There's a difference between the two. Some will choose in their free will to take it, but then God will be God and decide how He feels about that.

You may want to read the War Prayer by Mark Twain, it is both disturbing and enlightening in how it uses religion to pray for and take joy in the pain and suffering of others.

I'd be delighted. And it sounds like it would make a wonderful discussion topic as well.

Pagans believe much the same, that the Divine both wholly immanent (present in the world) and wholly transcendent (separate from the world). The Universe was not created ex-nihlo (out of nothing) but is an intrinsic part of the Divine itself. The Divine is not dependant nor does it need the universe, the universe however is dependant upon and does need the Divine. Modern Pagan Artists have taken to illustrating this by depicting the Goddess as pregnant with the world.

How can that which is temporal and tangible be part of the eternal and spiritual? The earth is not eternal; all scientists will affirm this, Christian or secular. So it would have to come about some how.

Because the universe is not a separately created object it and everything within it (including us) has intrinsic value because it is part of the Divine. That is the basis of Pagan ethics, that everything has intrinsic value, that everything is sacred. We are not divine beings, but we are part of the Divine but so are cats and cockroaches and oak trees.

Then part of the divine would die, and therefore it would not be eternal. This would be a contradiction of it's own attributes.

In the Pagan worldview sin is a strange and ultimately alien concept. By sin I am referring to not only (lower case) sin, the disregard for a set of authoritarian moral codes, as well as (upper case) SIN humanities refusal to live in something other than complete dependence on the Christian God. Neither are possible in Paganism. In the case of sin there are no authoritarian moral codes, we live with the consequences of our actions knowing our decisions reflect upon us. In the case of SIN since the Divine is immanent and we are part of the Divine there is no way we can be separate from the Divine no matter what we say or do or believe, it just isn’t possible.

But where dioes morality come from? It is a divine quality. I cannot come from man, because we are inherently flawed. No one in their right mind would claim not to be flawed. If they do, a spouse or parent would come forward and heartily disagree.

I have similar impressions with your religion and the apparent lack of morals exhibited by your God.

I'm certainly open for discussion.

I have been told numerous times that it is not odes actions that determine ones destination after death rather it is ones status as “saved” or not saved. Ultimately this means that a truly good person who is not a Christian is, by the tenants of your religion, condemned to eternal torment in the Christian hell while a less than moral person who made a deathbed conversion would spend eternity in paradise. So it appears that your God does not care about moral choices made while living. I cannot view this as moral no matter how I look at it.

I know a lot of people that say it, but it isn't true. While God can forgive any past offense (except for the one He chooses not to forgive), He does require repentance.

As it is written:

Hebrews 10

10:26For if we sin wilfully after that we have received the knowledge of the truth, there remaineth no more sacrifice for sins,

10:27But a certain fearful looking for of judgment and fiery indignation, which shall devour the adversaries.


This doesn't refer to human weakness, by the way, because no one is sinless, but it refers to a willful determination to go in the way of sin.

Once again your statement can be turned on your religion.

Sure; anyone can ask anything, but what wins in the end is the truth.

If your God is the only such being than why does he allow these lesser spirits to manipulate humans so? This would men your God is not sovereign in that he either does not care, cannot do anything about it or is unaware that it is happening.

Several reasons. In the case of King Saul, it was a punishment for disobedience, as a king can lead his entire nation into judgment by the example he sets. In the case of Paul of Tarsus, it was to keep him in a right spirit and to sanctify him, which only made God act more powerfully in him. I find it ironic that he could drive out demons, perhaps as a partial result of his having one of his own that he could not drive out. Because that demon afflicted him in a way that humbled him, and it only made Paul that much more powerful God works in paradoxes, and this is one: the weaker we are, the more powerfully God uses us. Just for clarification, Paul was afflicted by a demon-he was oppressed, not possessed. Of course. But Saul, I cannot be sure. It could be he was possessed, but I'm not certain. God didn't reveal this.

[/quote]

There are those who have made a study of magic and believe that it is related to quantum physics and manipulation of probability fields.

I know, but I am skeptical.

Light exhibits qualities of being simultaneously a wave and of being individual packets of energy or quanta. Scientists have known for over a century that if you construct an experiment to “prove” that light travels in waves light will oblige and travel in waves. If you construct an experiment to “prove” that light travels in discrete packets of energy, light will oblige and travel in discreet packets. Early quantum theorists called this the observer effect. It seems that quantum activities, especially those related to probability, actually NEED an observer to make things happen.

Yes, but I don't think energy has a will or a mind, so I'm skeptical about this, to be honest.

 

[TheOriginalWhitehorse]

You're discussing our religion in context of your religious views, not ours. The systems really aren't compatable, so you won't get very far that way.

Actually, I'm looking at it from the standpoint of logic, though.

We hear the gods call us as you hear your God call you. We choose the structure of worship, not the gods, because Deity is not concearned ultimately with the form you choose to connect with Deity through.

But we all have this intuitive knowledge that we are accountable by God. Sure, it can be suppressed. But we do have a sense of right and wrong, and that we are accountable. Hence the feelings of guilt. Guilt implies accountability.

In your religion there 'is no good human being' - we don't believe in origenal sin, sin, or that humans are inherently bad or flawed.

But we know in our heats this cannot be so. No one would honestly claim to be perfect.

So in our beliefs there are good human beings. Our Deity is too ultimate for morality (was God moral when he killed all those in the flood?

Well, here's the thing: if we don't believe God has a right to make the laws for His creatures to abide by, if people don't think He has a right to do what He wishes with His own creation, what leg do we have to stand on? By what right do we claim to be a law unto ourselves? We are the created, not the creator, and the people God destroyed in that flood were murderers and they were evil.

You will say that we can not judge God because God is by nature good and therefore all that He does regardless of what we see it as is by it's own definition good. Deity is the same situation) What morality can we impose on the Ulitmate?

Exactly my point-God imposes it on us, thank God. What a horrible world it would be to live in if He didn't! Of course, He allows people to reject it, but then later on he reserves the right to be God and have an opinion about what the clay from His hands have done. So an immoral god would be no god at all.

Deity is conneced and related to all things.

How can the temporal and tangible be part of the spiritual and eternal? It's illogical.

The question of powerful 'evil' people who use magic... you do realize that Deity has a 'dark side' too, don't you? Hurricanes, Floods, Death, Disease, these things are all natrual and considered 'bad' by some 'negative', 'evil' even. There are personas of Deity that represent this aspect of Deity. The Morrigan comes to mind (War Goddess) and others. People who use negative energy for negative things are not Wiccan, they may be pagan, but they are not wiccan. Wicca does not believe in calling upon the destructive forces of the gods for the purpose of doing harm. Other branches of paganism do not frown on the practice though.

No, actually-we do. We are dark. We sin. We want to usurp divine authority. It happens every day. God isn't dark because He responds to what we do; we are dark for the deeds that deserve these things.

As it is written:

I John 1:5

1:5This is the message we have heard from Him and announce to you, that God is Light, and in Him there is no darkness at all.

 

[TheOriginalWhitehorse]

Volos, while I was posting I got automatically logged out and was not able to recover all my answers to you. This seems to happen a lot in these debate threads. In fact, a lot of us here were complaining about trojan horses. I'll repost. You were very gracious and generous with your answers and deserve a good reply.

 

[Volos]

Originally posted by : Whitehorse

I only have a couple of minutes right now; I'll try to answer these better later. But for now, this is what strikes me: if man seeks these gods/goddesses on his own terms, then he himself is the basis of morality. But there is no good human being. So this would mean those deities are not moral. There is no higher law in this religion. So this do-no-harm philosophy would really be more accurately stated, "Don't let the boomerang hit you on the back of the head." Moreover, if these deities are not related to this energy, then why do people use religious means to tap into it, and why can evil people become so powerful through this means? After all, they are invoking and/or evoking these deities in order to harness this energy, correct?

I can add little to what Mylinkay Asdara has already said in this area.

I would like to emphasize that Pagans do not view human’s as “fallen” or intrinsically bad. This is not to say we are somehow perfect but by the same token we are not corrupted either.



I am failing to see how having a unique individual relationship with the Divine provides any indication that the various Gods and Goddesses are without morals.



You are exactly right there is no “higher law” there is also no law in this religion. The ethical code accepted by most is the Wiccan rede, (if it harm none, do as thou will) a rede not a law, it translates literally as a piece of good advice. And like all advice one can take it or not. It is not quite as you so colorfully phrased it “Don’t let the boomerang hit you on the back of the head.” Rather it is an encouragement to carefully examine not only the consequences of your actions but also the motivations of your actions. Please notice the rede does not suggest we do as we WHIM. Ultimately this is a challenge of introspection, to know what we really want beyond the whim of the moment. The classic example is that of the student who chooses to study for an exam rather than go to a party, because what she really wants is to be a doctor. Again, balance is needed. Always going to the library rather than the movies is the road to burnout, not the road to becoming a doctor. There are others values in life, such as sensuality, intimacy, spirituality, that get ignored in a compulsively long-term orientation. So, our responsibility is not to mechanically follow some rule like "always choose to defer gratification in your own long-term self interest,” but to truly listen to ourselves and to make the best possible choices we can.

Also, about the earth and everything in it being part of the divine: how can that which is physical and temporal be part of that which is eternal and spiritual?

How can it not be?

 

[Volos]

Originally posted by : Whitehorse

Quick comment-who determines the law? The human being. And we all know we are hopelessly flawed. I know people who have done others great harm, rationalizing and reasoning to themselves about why they were really just doing the person a favor. The Pharisees were a perfect example, and Jesus called them a brood of vipers. They were telling themselves they were keeping the law, but the spirit of this law wasn't in them, and they violated it all over the place with their hypocrisies, which Jesus pointed out. They eclipsed the law with their own man-made code. Jesus pointed this out as well. Man is not capable of morality aside from the Spirit of God. Man simply suppresses the truth and becomes desensitized-again, the Pharisees.

I will go out on a limb and guess you are talking about universal moral laws. For a moral law to be universal it would have to be applicable to all moral agents in all situations, in all cultures and at all times. I can think of no specific moral “law” which does not suffer from exceptions aside from the universal “do unto others”. It is relatively easy to identify situations where so called universal moral laws do not apply. I can think of no situation where the acting in the best interests of the one’s you love is wrong.



I do not believe human beings are “hopelessly flawed” and do not understand why anyone would think so in the first place. You say you know people who have done great harm to other, causing pain and suffering by their actins. I am sure you will admit you also know people who have done great good and by their actions have brought joy to people’s lives. Do people make poor ethical choices? All the time. But people also make good ethical choices and hopefully with each decision we make we grow a bit wiser in our decision making process.



Simon Blackburn has written a very good book entitled “Being Good: A Short Introduction to Ethics, in it he looks at what he called “the challenge of relativism” and how the various forms of ethical structures affect us and each other. In the end he asks what if it is only us making up these moral codes as we go along and if it is just us does that really change our reasons for being moral at all. It is a fascinating read and I strongly suggest you pick it up.

 

[TheOriginalWhitehorse]

I can add little to what Mylinkay Asdara has already said in this area.

I would like to emphasize that Pagans do not view human’s as “fallen” or intrinsically bad. This is not to say we are somehow perfect but by the same token we are not corrupted either.

Please understand, I ask this respectfully as a matter of debate: First of all, why does God not have the right to govern the clay of His hands? Secondly, do you suppose that the lessened sense of sinfulness in paganism may be related to the fact that man is making the rules? If we each decide what is right and wrong, will we not rule in our own favor, in accordance with our personal preferences?

I am failing to see how having a unique individual relationship with the Divine provides any indication that the various Gods and Goddesses are without morals.

It isn't in the individual realtionship; it's in who the authority is. Man goes to god on own terms. Invokes or evokes for the purpose of gaining own wishes. For help in gaining power to carry out own will. Decides own ethics. Innately we should know we are not more powerful, so we don't have the right to do these things. God is God, but we are not.

You are exactly right there is no “higher law” there is also no law in this religion. The ethical code accepted by most is the Wiccan rede, (if it harm none, do as thou will) a rede not a law, it translates literally as a piece of good advice. And like all advice one can take it or not.

Yes. Now, we would expect there to be a moral component in religion. We all have innately engraved on our hearts this sense of justice, this sense of right versus wrong. And it doesn't come from us. Calling up deities on man's own terms, this cannot be right. It isn't fitting.

It is not quite as you so colorfully phrased it “Don’t let the boomerang hit you on the back of the head.”

Rather it is an encouragement to carefully examine not only the consequences of your actions but also the motivations of your actions. Please notice the rede does not suggest we do as we WHIM. Ultimately this is a challenge of introspection, to know what we really want beyond the whim of the moment. The classic example is that of the student who chooses to study for an exam rather than go to a party, because what she really wants is to be a doctor. Again, balance is needed. Always going to the library rather than the movies is the road to burnout, not the road to becoming a doctor. There are others values in life, such as sensuality, intimacy, spirituality, that get ignored in a compulsively long-term orientation. So, our responsibility is not to mechanically follow some rule like "always choose to defer gratification in your own long-term self interest,” but to truly listen to ourselves and to make the best possible choices we can.

I understand. May I ask, again with all respect, what is the center of gravity, as it were, in this?

Moreover, the Christian religion likewise makes provision for all these things. But they are not sought primarily. The "center of gravity" is the Kingdom of God and the wellbeing of others as direct manifestations of that. And as a result of our focusing on God, He likewise gives us everything we desire. Because our desires are conforming to His as we seek His kingdom.

How can it not be?

Because it is physical; it isn't spirit. It's like mixing apples and oranges. Moreover, how can that which has a beginning be a non-created part of something that has no beginning? It's impossible.

 

[Volos]

Originally posted by : Blissman

You have said that in Wicca, there are no morals (not by faith, that is). But there are, guides, general rules of conduct. There is a 'feedback loop', so-to-speak; for anything harmful that you do to others you will be harmed three times to you. But what exactly defines harm(s)?

I will agree that Wicca and Paganism reject the concept of authoritarian morals. That does not mean that our religions are without ethics however. Please note that there is a subtle but important difference between ethics and morals. Morals are in my understanding the what we do but ethics are the why we do. Pagans believe there exists no set of universal moral codes on which to resolve moral dilemmas. Any such moral law falters in that it cannot cover every unique situation you may find yourself in. Rater than looking to a set of flawed moral laws that cannot cover all moral dilemmas Pagans look to a simple ethic when making moral choices.



I believe you are talking about the three-fold return. While often applied to ethical situation this is equally a law of physics. Every action has an equal and opposite reaction. In moral terms this concept is common to all religions that I am aware of (as you sow, so shall you reap) the part about things returning three times seems to be a harmless embellishment.



Like the Wiccan rede this is not a moral law” rather it is an observation that your actions have consequences and what decisions you make will affect you for better or for worse. Do not think of it as moral law or a judgment or even a social constraint. It is a principle of nature which has been observed and described.

We need a perfection to judge us. We need a perfection to forgive us the fact that we are not perfect, nor can be perfect.

I am aware of no such needs.



To what end is this judgment you speak of? If you are applying some sort of eternal afterlife based on this “judgment” then you have stumbled into one of the flaws of your religion not mine. Allow me to illustrate with an analogy,



I make rules for my pets ("thou shall not scratch the furniture with thy claws") and the rules define morals for my pets or at least they define good and bad behavior. Since rules that are not enforced are meaningless and my pets can only do wrong in secret or very quickly (before I can stop them). Since your God is omniscient and presumably very quick, no one should be able to actually break his rules. Hence, if God actually forbids something then that something can never occur. Your God has supposedly presented you with a long set of moral rules and it is your job to know these rules before getting into any moral dilemma, further it is also your job to apply these rules correctly. If your God defines behavior A as bad and makes a rule about it he apparently does nothing on earth to enforce this rule (or any of his rules for that matter) Rule-breakers are punished only later with Hell. This would be analogous to me making the "no scratching" rule, letting the cat merrily scratch the hell out of every piece of furniture in my house, and then punishing the cat years later by soaking her in gasoline and setting her ablaze. If I did such a thing, I would justly be seen as a cruel, vicious and evil person. I do not believe that your God is not cruel, vicious or evil (although a few of his followers certainly qualify) and if he truly wanted behavior A to stop he would stop it before he had to punish beings anyone.



Every Wiccan whom I have met has acted morally, kind, with decency. But Wicca, the faith, of these wonderful people, does not teach this to Wiccans (as it had been described to me, and as I understand it). My faith, Christainty, teaches that this is an evil (that is Wicca, as a faith, is evil). But again, all of the Wiccans that I have met, do not act this way. Indeed, no one Wicca has acted this way with the slightest evil.


Please adopt morals in to Wicca. I do not wish to see you perish.[/quote] You contradict yourself



On the one hand you say that every Wiccan you know is a good people who act in moral ways. On the other you say that Wiccan’s have no morals and must adopt your morals. By your observations you admit Wiccans are getting along just fine without a set of authoritarian morals which does not explain your plea/demand that Wiccan’s promptly create a set of moral codes that cannot be followed..

We are hopelessly flawed to accurately judge ourselves. Because we are imperfect, we will make errors, and because we seek self-gratification, we, when we attempt to judge ourselves, can not be objective. We will deceive ourselves, approve our own actions while assuring ourselves that we are are our own impartial judges. Believing that one can judge yourself to act morally is self-deception.

And what is believing that you are so flawed and so corrupt that you cannot judge yourself? Is that not being morally self-deceptive?





Ultimately what you are saying is that Wicca is not moral because it is not what you believe. This is not a philosophic flaw of Wicca.

 

[Volos]

Originally posted by : Whitehorse

Okay; that's what I understood. That would coincide with the philosophy that man is the author of his own religion and morality.

Humans are the authors of all religions, including yours. Religion is simply a means to express a spiritual need or desire.

The basis of Neo-Pagan spirituality is ones individual relationship with the Divine. There is no correct way to have such a relationship, there are no prescribed activities or works one must do to achieve this. In rejecting authoritarianism in the structure of religion Neo-Pagans embrace their unique relationship with the Divine.

This would mean that the human is more sovereign than the god or goddess. In rejecting authoritarianism, the person becomes a law unto himself. Is this a more pleasing philosophy to man, or to the divine, it makes me wonder.

Authoritarianism is rejected because it is inherently flawed not because of the desire to elevate the self.



I do not believe at all that it is a more pleasing philosophy, if anything it is quite terrifying to embrace the idea that I personally am responsible for my actions, that there is no big daddy up in the sky that will pat me on the head and say it is all right if I manage to screw up. By rejecting authoritarian rules I am saying that I need to be a moral agent in EVERY action and decision I make, I am taking responsibility for my every action and my every inactions and let me tell you that is a difficult position to be in.



Sovereign? I have no delusions about how much in my life I control.

The inclusiveness is popular right now; postmodernism still has some very loyal advocates. I guess, for me the highest life pursuit anyone can have is truth. Because once that is the primary goal, everything is real. Everything is what it seems. Nothing on this earth truly satisfies, other than God, living in the soul. It's true:

What I find really fascinating is how Christians rally to the defense or modernism and attack post modernism. Yet five hundred years ago when modernism was emerging it was the Christian who most vigorously attacked it

The truth really does set us free.

The truth that makes men free is for the most part the truth which men prefer not to hear.

-Herbert Agar

There is a great amount of responsibility in any action. Every choice we make has consequences and repercussions not just magic.

Yes, but this doesn't satisfy me. The principle here is to avoid repercussions,

Am I or any other Pagan posting here not being clear? There is no possible way to avoid the consequences of our actions or our choices. Repercussions happen no matter what we do, I can no more avoid the repercussions of my ethical choices than I can avoid the earth’s gravity.

not to acknowledge the Creator's rightful place or to do rightly for the reason that it is right.

How does the belief that the reason to act in a morally good way is because that is the right thing to do work with the concept of after death reward and punishment? If one makes moral decisions based on the hopes of an after death reward or in fear of an after death punishment than can you say that person is acting in anything but a self-serving way?

Why would these gods help him? If this energy is benign in the sense that it is unrelated to these gods, either they are not truly sovereign. Man would be. And i think mankind would like that idea. But if it spiritually benign, then why does the person who means to use it for evil use supernatural means to harness it? Why does he seek it through religion? So we're back to the deity problem. Either they are not moral, or not sovereign. Either way, this puts man in the driver's seat and makes him higher than God. This is impossible.

I believe the answer to this is free will.



Your religion suffers with the same problem.



There are those Christians who use their religion to promote evil and act in evil ways. I can site a recent example where a 16 year old girl was murdered by a 40 year old men because she refused to have sex with by saying she was a lesbian. The consensus of more than a dozen posters here was that the man in question did no wrong because the girl was a homosexual and therefore deserving of death. If this and similar atrocities carried out in your God’s name are truly wrong why does your God allow them to happen? By your argument either your God is not moral enough to care or your God is not sovereign enough to do anything about it.

The answer to this dilemma for Christian philosophers has been to invoke free will. It works well for them and by the same token free will works for Pagans too.

One does not need physical objects at all. Any more than Christens need to build churches to worship in. There is the difference between not needing objects and enjoying objects.

I've been told these are aids in harnessing energy. Apparently this is part of the worship, and that's why they are using them.

I understand that Catholics and eastern orthodox use rosaries as a focus for prayer and meditation. They certainly do not need them yet they still use them.

Pagans believe much the same, that the Divine both wholly immanent (present in the world) and wholly transcendent (separate from the world). The Universe was not created ex-nihlo (out of nothing) but is an intrinsic part of the Divine itself. The Divine is not dependant nor does it need the universe, the universe however is dependant upon and does need the Divine. Modern Pagan Artists have taken to illustrating this by depicting the Goddess as pregnant with the world.

How can that which is temporal and tangible be part of the eternal and spiritual? The earth is not eternal; all scientists will affirm this, Christian or secular. So it would have to come about some how.

I recently talked about the Pagan conception of time, in hat it is non-linear in nature. You are trying to apply your linear concept of time to eternity which is impossible. This world/universe began yes but we cannot say that this is the only time it has begun or that its end is in anyway permanent.



Pagans do not view physical/spiritual as a dichotomy. The two are not separate.



The only metaphor I can think of is the relationship between the soul and the body. The soul has an existence outside or beyond the body, the soul preexists the body and survives the bodies death. Without the soul the body is nothing or dead material, with the soul it is however alive. Her you have an eternal thing (the soul) existing within a temporal thing (the body). The spiritual existing with the physical.

Because the universe is not a separately created object it and everything within it (including us) has intrinsic value because it is part of the Divine. That is the basis of Pagan ethics, that everything has intrinsic value, that everything is sacred. We are not divine beings, but we are part of the Divine but so are cats and cockroaches and oak trees.

Then part of the divine would die, and therefore it would not be eternal. This would be a contradiction of it's own attributes.

Rebirth always follows death. No part of the Divine dies, transformed, renewed but not die.

But where dioes morality come from? It is a divine quality. I cannot come from man, because we are inherently flawed. No one in their right mind would claim not to be flawed. If they do, a spouse or parent would come forward and heartily disagree.

Morality does come from humans. And as I have noted morality IS flawed, there are no universal moral codes, claws that apply to all situations, all persons, all cultures at all times.

First of all, why does God not have the right to govern the clay of His hands?

We are back to the basic differences between our religions. I cannot and do not believe we are objects separate form the Divine.

Secondly, do you suppose that the lessened sense of sinfulness in paganism may be related to the fact that man is making the rules?

Sin is nonexistent not “lessened.” It makes no sense whatsoever in the pagan religions.

If we each decide what is right and wrong, will we not rule in our own favor, in accordance with our personal preferences?

Would you do this? If the reason you would not is an external force what does that say about your personal ethics?

It isn't in the individual realtionship; it's in who the authority is. Man goes to god on own terms. Invokes or evokes for the purpose of gaining own wishes. For help in gaining power to carry out own will. Decides own ethics.

Recently I read about Pat Robertson leading his congregation in prayer that the more liberal justices of the United States Supreme Court would either become physically ill or die so that they can be replaced with conservative judges. Was Robertson not invoking his God to further his own wishes and desires?

God is God, but we are not.

The Divine is the Divine. I am not Divine and neither are you nor are is other human Divine. I have never met anyone who claims otherwise. Why do you insist on ascribing this notion to Pagans?

 

[TheOriginalWhitehorse]

Blissman you are not getting the point, or Whitehorse for that matter.

Wicca has the highest morals a human can have. "Harm None".

Well, there are a couple of difficulties here. For starters, to not harm someone is not the same as to proactively love that person. We have sins of commission, sure; and then there are sins of omission, where we could have done something, but chose not to. Or sometimes out of ignorance. Not knowing how to handle something correctly.

Jesus summed up the law this way:

Matthew 22:37-39

Love God with all your heart, mind, soul, and strength, and love your neigbor as yourself.

Of course there are the 10 commandments, and there is I Corinthians 13 which gives more specifics.

But here's the part that wicca is missing: it's the first part-loving God. It is impossible to do this without recognizing God's right to rule over what He created. It's that inclination in man to be sovereign over God-an inclination that fails to be quenched through human means. We have to know this just doesn't hold water.

In essence all codified laws come down to preventing you from harming your neighbour, and preventing him from harming you. The problem with codifying laws is that they creat loopholes. We see this in the Pharisees that your Christ hated so much.

Well, it doesn't create loopholes. Man creates loopholes when he doesn't want to submit to what is written. The problem isn't with the law, but with the heart of mankind.

Moreover, it wasn't the ceremonial law that Jesus had problems with, since these were from God,and Jesus was God. So He couldn't disagree with Himself. It was the fact that the Pharisees were not getting it; they were paying more attention to the outward actions thatn the spiritual health of their hearts. They were also adding their own law. That always gets man into trouble when he just has to get in there and muddle up God's law and add his own stuff. Man cannot keep God's law. So the Pharisees added their own, called the Tradition of the Elders. And this was something they *could* keep, for it was of their own invention. But the law to love, this they could not keep. The weightier laws of compassion and mercy, they could not keep. Here is what Jesus said about their traditions:

Matthew 15

15:1Then came to Jesus scribes and Pharisees, which were of Jerusalem, saying,

15:2Why do thy disciples transgress the tradition of the elders? for they wash not their hands when they eat bread.

15:3But he answered and said unto them, Why do ye also transgress the commandment of God by your tradition?

15:4For God commanded, saying, Honour thy father and mother: and, He that curseth father or mother, let him die the death.

15:5But ye say, Whosoever shall say to his father or his mother, It is a gift, by whatsoever thou mightest be profited by me;

15:6And honour not his father or his mother, he shall be free. Thus have ye made the commandment of God of none effect by your tradition.

15:7Ye hypocrites, well did Esaias prophesy of you, saying,

15:8This people draweth nigh unto me with their mouth, and honoureth me with their lips; but their heart is far from me.

15:9But in vain they do worship me, teaching for doctrines the commandments of men.

They had loopholes up the ying-yang and caused great harm. Your Christ is said to have recognised this. As the story goes when asked about the law he answered rather simply.

Yes, and He could do that at that point because He had come to fulfill all those ceremonial laws. But the moral law remains.

No long codified set of laws. No list of "thou shalt nots".

Well, it's true that Jesus fulfilled the ceremonial law, but the moral law remains. Killing and bearing false witness are still wrong, and that.

No smacking each other around over interpretations of scripture. Just love the Divine, your neighbour and yourself.

Oh, but that's the good stuff! We enjoy this very much. In fact, it might actually be considered an act of love to provide some good material with which to beat each other over the head...just kidding.

Actually, it is important to know the truth and it does take careful study and a lot of careful, precision discernment. Becuase one tiny miscalculation, like a miscalculation on a compass, can take someone way off in the wrong direction. So we should be able to discuss it kindly and gently. And people do get beat up a lot. But it's their failure, not that of God's law.

How do you love? You do no harm.

That's a start. And also to proactively put others first. But most importantly, to know our place in the universe. To submit to God and put our wills aside. He truly is so gracious and so faithful.

The pharisees were masters of law. A Pharisee on a long journey could continue to travel on the sabbath by having a slave run ahead the day before and place old shoes, rags, and other worthless items at set intervals along the way. You see Levitical Law allowed one a certain distance to travel on sabbath as long as it was between your property. Now the Pharisees were following the letter of the law but not the intent. That, unfortunatly is the way of codified law.

Was it the Levitical law or the tradition of the elders? Maybe I read through it too hastily. But yes, the Levitical law was meant to bring us to Christ. As it is written:

Romans 5:20-21


5:20Moreover the law entered, that the offence might abound. But where sin abounded, grace did much more abound:

5:21That as sin hath reigned unto death, even so might grace reign through righteousness unto eternal life by Jesus Christ our Lord.

We have a different way. We don't try to codify what "do no harm" means. We don't create a priestly class of lawyers to tell us what to do and not to do. Each of us is responsible for the wayb we treat our neighbour and ourselves. It is an awesome and heavy responsibility.

Well, my problem isn't so much with simplicity or complexity; it's Who the authority is. Man simply doesn't have this sovereignty. Only God does, and we can't escape His judgment, so I think it's far better to just prepare for it and help each other along the way. The truest form of love is the kind that comes from God, in truth, and is given to each other. If I were headed off in a wrong direction, I would place far greater value on having my best friend slap me upside the head than to tell me what I wanted to hear. I really would.

I cannot go to a book and look up my actions and finbd loopholes for the Rede. I must carefully examine each and every action I take, magickal or mundane, for it's effects on myself and others. I must weigh each decision I make against the only measure that matters... harm.

But what about God? See, the laws are only loopholes to the Pharisees because their will was never inclined to God's heart. It was part ignorance, and part pride, I think; you have to admit that they were extremely zealous. If their wills had been in tune with God, it would have been a delight. Following the Lord's law isn't a burden, but a delight.

Ignorance of the law is certainly no excuse for me because the "law" is simple and overriding, "no harm". I can never hold up a book as excuse for causing harm. I must face my responsibilities naked, unadorned with codes, books, and excuses.

But who established this law?

I don't understand what you are saying about holding up a book as an excuse for causing harm. The Bible is what leaves us without excuse. The scripture is like a light, shining in the dark places of our hearts to reveal what is there. Christ is the cloak. Not an excuse, but God's provision of mercy for what we cannot do. Moreover, responsibility is a matter of life or death in the Christian faith. It's just, we have a responsibility not to *be* evil, not simply to avoid the trappings of evil. But motive is every bit as important: to glorify God, who is worthy. There is great purpose in this. We do not live to the glory of man.

Here is our love:

1 Corinthians 13: 1 - 13

1*Though I speak with the tongues of men and of angels, and have not charity, I am become as sounding brass, or a tinkling cymbal. 2*And though I have the gift of prophecy, and understand all mysteries, and all knowledge; and though I have all faith, so that I could remove mountains, and have not charity, I am nothing. 3*And though I bestow all my goods to feed the poor, and though I give my body to be burned, and have not charity, it profiteth me nothing.

4*Charity suffereth long, and is kind; charity envieth not; charity vaunteth not itself, is not puffed up, 5*Doth not behave itself unseemly, seeketh not her own, is not easily provoked, thinketh no evil; 6*Rejoiceth not in iniquity, but rejoiceth in the truth; 7*Beareth all things, believeth all things, hopeth all things, endureth all things.

8*Charity never faileth: but whether there be prophecies, they shall fail; whether there be tongues, they shall cease; whether there be knowledge, it shall vanish away. 9*For we know in part, and we prophesy in part. 10*But when that which is perfect is come, then that which is in part shall be done away. 11*When I was a child, I spake as a child, I understood as a child, I thought as a child: but when I became a man, I put away childish things. 12*For now we see through a glass, darkly; but then face to face: now I know in part; but then shall I know even as also I am known. 13*And now abideth faith, hope, charity, these three; but the greatest of these is charity.

"Harm none" is not an abscence of morality, it is the epitome of morality.

But the question is, who commissioned it? Does it entail the love of the Creator and submission to His holy will? He is so gracious. So worthy. He is love.

 

[Havoc]

Sorry Whitehorse:

God doesn't find it necessary to rule with an Iron fist, He's not going to sit in Judgement on anyone, and he doesn't believe in your Bible any more than I do.