Views on Wicca

Status
Not open for further replies.

synger

Confessional Liturgical Lutheran
Supporter
Sep 12, 2006
14,537
1,565
59
✟44,856.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
My cousin is Pagan, Wiccan, and specifically a Druid. She's one of the nicest, most understanding people I've ever met and she's my closest cousin. Now I've been asking her about her beliefs and common base beliefs of Wiccans. And all the devil worshiping sacrificing babies garbage that's thrown around when a person hears 'Wicca' is false. It's actually a very free and spiritual faith. I'm looking more and more into it myself.

Now what are your views on it?

My best friends are neo-Pagan (she primarily wiccan, and he with a shamanistic influence), and we have a LOT of Pagan and Wiccan friends. In fact, in one of our social circles we are the decidedly "token Christians".

The history is recent, and can be traced back a hundred or so years. I think there is a great deal of influence from other religions, like karma and reincarnation from some Eastern beliefs. There is a GREAT deal of variety among Pagan practice. Some have groups that worship together. There is a very activ pagan community in the Washington area. But many of them are also "solo practitioners".

My husband refers to our friends lovingly as "smorgasboard pagans." They do a great deal of reading and worship, and as things "resonate" with them, they add them to their theology. So what one pagan does or believes may be very different from the next one.

When we recently went to the wedding of my best friend's son, she was very accomodating. She knows from previous discussions that I will not, as a Christian, attend pagan worship. I believe that anything that has a magical ritual aspect is forbidden to me. I will refuse to attend rather than be party to invocations to other gods. She was gracious enough to organize the ceremony so that the ritual part was done first, then the guests were brought to the wedding spot in the woods, and the marriage ceremony performed.

My five-year-old daughter was a little confused. This was the first wedding she'd been to, and she wasn't sure what was going on. With their help, we explained that they worshiped the spirits in all of creation, and respected and honored them, and asked their protection and blessing and guidance in their daily lives. (remember, my friends are pagans with a heavy dose of shamanism, so this fits)

She was rather upset after that, because it really hit home that her good friend, their daughter, didn't know Jesus. We talked to her about it, and the next time they came to visit, we heard her sharing JEsus stories with Yanna, their daughter.

It's hard to disagree so much about things that are so important, especially with people you love so much and care so deeply for.
 
Upvote 0

synger

Confessional Liturgical Lutheran
Supporter
Sep 12, 2006
14,537
1,565
59
✟44,856.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Hit the wrong button before I could finish.

Anyway, I think it really boils down to this:

Neo-Paganism is a lovely, sweet nature-based religion of respect and honor. That being said, I believe that pagans are deceived, just as I think all non-Christians are deceived, in thinking that they can live a "good enough" life. The idea of karma, which in Paganism is held forth in the three-fold law (what you do, whether good or ill, will return three-fold), is fine as far as it goes. It's as good a guideline as the Golden Rule, but it doesn't bear out in observation. Bad people don't always have three times the bad brought back on them, for instance. So then you have to get into the idea of reincarnation, which many of my Pagan friends believe in, to reconcile the idea of justice working out over time.

And that just gets back to trying to be "good enough." Like almost every other religion, Paganism is at its core a "works-based" religion. It is gentler in its approach than many others, but the bottom line is there.

Christianity is the only belief system that breaks us out of striving for that unreachable summit of "goodness". We know we're not "good." Even the nicest of people has their selfishnesses and flaws. Ultimately, it's impossible to know how much is "good enough" in other belief systems. And so people can become discouraged and defeated.

In Christ, we are justified, made righteous, made "good", not by what we do or have done... but by Christ's sacrifice for us on the cross. Our "goodness" flows from that sacrifice.. not out of fear or attaining for perfection for perfection's sake.. but out of love and gratitude for God's grace.

No other belief system has that sort of grace and mercy, let alone has it at its core.
 
Upvote 0

JoeMerchant

Newbie
Apr 15, 2007
14
0
27°57'N 82°46'E
✟19,925.00
Faith
Baptist
Marital Status
Single
Politics
US-Republican
Well.....first off, being Wiccan I can tell you that we're NOT possesed by the "devil" or "satan" or whoever you want to refer to. We don't even believe in a "evil" being. It's a Christian concept. We don't need a "evil" being to blame mans "sins" on. The evil that man does is brought about by MAN. We don't ask you to try to save us, because we believe that we don't need saving. We DO believe in God, and many of us even believe in Jesus and all that believing in Him entails. Yes, believe it or not, there ARE Christian Wiccans!
I was a Christian for 40 years. I promoted the Christian faith in every way I could...through publications, ministering to others, and spreading the "Word". But I became very concerned about the path that the Christian church has taken. I saw MANY so called Christians practicing their faith on Sundays (or Saturdays) and putting it off the rest of the days of the week. You know what I mean, and if you don't, your just not paying attention. THESE are the people that you need to pray for. THESE are the people who need saving! To say you're a Christian and then live an unChristian lifestyle is an insult to God AND your religion!
In the Wiccan lifestyle, we believe that you should live a good, wholesome life EVERY DAY.....not just in church. And you shouldn't need the punishment of hell to make you do so.
Yes, there are some that claim to be Wiccan that REALLY are satanist...but the two are further apart than TRUE Wicca and Christians.
You can say what you want about the witchcraft aspect of Wicca. I can sit here and type till my fingers fall off and many of you wouldn't believe it anyways because you've been conditioned to believe otherwise, just like many would believe its a SIN just to THINK about it....remember I was a Christian for MANY years....I questioned MANY things about Wicca, but have many of the answers that I looked for. I cant say that about the Christian faith.
Many Wiccans don't even use "spellcrafting" in practice.
I don't need to be saved....I'm NOT possessed....I dont need to be "born again", I was born just fine the first time.
Also, I have the UPMOST respect for your religion (just not many of the people who claim to practice it) so is it so much to ask that you have some respect for mine?
Brightest Blessings to all of you....
Wisc Wiccan

This is a rather curious post. What sort of church did you attend? I ask because I find it difficult to believe that in 40 years of simply being alive, much less being a practicing Christian actively ministering to others, that you never learned that people are quite imperfect and often do not practice what they preach, regardless of what it is that they preach.

What's also puzzling is that you also seem to have chosen to adopt an obviously intellectually dishonest argument for leaving Christianity. At it's core, your argument for leaving the faith is that Christians are sinners, so therefore Christianity is fundamentally false. Please forgive me if I sound harsh, but this truly makes me wonder if you ever had a grasp of the basic tenets of Christianity to begin with.

I do agree with you about the state of the church though. It's pitiable in some areas and utterly corrupt in others. Having said that, we are not called to follow the church, but rather Jesus.
 
Upvote 0

Wiccan_Child

Contributor
Mar 21, 2005
19,419
673
Bristol, UK
✟31,731.00
Faith
Atheist
Marital Status
In Relationship
Politics
UK-Liberal-Democrats
My husband refers to our friends lovingly as "smorgasboard pagans." They do a great deal of reading and worship, and as things "resonate" with them, they add them to their theology. So what one pagan does or believes may be very different from the next one.
As ecceletic as it can be, Paganism is united by a reverence for nature (among other things); this stops Pagans from being too distant from one another (like, say, Islam from Jainism).

My five-year-old daughter was a little confused. This was the first wedding she'd been to, and she wasn't sure what was going on. With their help, we explained that they worshiped the spirits in all of creation, and respected and honored them, and asked their protection and blessing and guidance in their daily lives. (remember, my friends are pagans with a heavy dose of shamanism, so this fits
This fits Paganism in general, Shamanism and all.

She was rather upset after that, because it really hit home that her good friend, their daughter, didn't know Jesus. We talked to her about it, and the next time they came to visit, we heard her sharing JEsus stories with Yanna, their daughter.

It's hard to disagree so much about things that are so important, especially with people you love so much and care so deeply for.
I dunno, my mum is a rather religious Christian, and I would disagree with most of her beliefs. She's no novice when it comes to intellectual discussions, but she defers to my expertise (insofar as...) concerning new topics, and I wouldn't be so cruel as to challange her faith.
I disagree with her, but I don't openly contest her.

Anyway, I think it really boils down to this:

Neo-Paganism is a lovely, sweet nature-based religion of respect and honor.
You make it sound like the Klingon culture. (Neo-)Paganism is not about respect and honour in and of themselves, but rather a collective respect of the natural world.

That being said, I believe that pagans are deceived, just as I think all non-Christians are deceived, in thinking that they can live a "good enough" life.
I don't understand. I believe you are creating a strawman in which non-Christians make up their own rules for salvation.

The idea of karma, which in Paganism is held forth in the three-fold law (what you do, whether good or ill, will return three-fold), is fine as far as it goes.
First, Karma is a Hindu notion, not a Pagan one. Second, the Law of Three-Fold Return is held by only a minority of Pagans.

It's as good a guideline as the Golden Rule, but it doesn't bear out in observation. Bad people don't always have three times the bad brought back on them, for instance.
The Second Law of Thermodynamics is but a statistical trend; it is not a concreate physical law. Likewise, the Three-Fold Law (assuming it exists), is not "You throw a rock, three rocks get thrown at you", sorta thing.

So then you have to get into the idea of reincarnation, which many of my Pagan friends believe in, to reconcile the idea of justice working out over time.
Reincarnation has nothing do to with the Three-Fold Law (though Karma, which you referenced earlier, plays a part in Eastern reincarnation myths).

And that just gets back to trying to be "good enough." Like almost every other religion, Paganism is at its core a "works-based" religion. It is gentler in its approach than many others, but the bottom line is there.
No. The 'core' of Paganism is at least a spiritual respect for nature.

Christianity is the only belief system that breaks us out of striving for that unreachable summit of "goodness".
That, and the other Abrahamic religions. And Buddhism. And basically every other religion that has an endpoint.

We know we're not "good." Even the nicest of people has their selfishnesses and flaws. Ultimately, it's impossible to know how much is "good enough" in other belief systems. And so people can become discouraged and defeated.

In Christ, we are justified, made righteous, made "good", not by what we do or have done... but by Christ's sacrifice for us on the cross. Our "goodness" flows from that sacrifice.. not out of fear or attaining for perfection for perfection's sake.. but out of love and gratitude for God's grace.

No other belief system has that sort of grace and mercy, let alone has it at its core.
Quite.
 
Upvote 0

chris777

Senior Veteran
Aug 8, 2006
2,005
114
GA
✟17,817.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Single
Politics
US-Others
Semantics. The events leading up to (and indeed after) the crucifixtion are unnecessary.
That is a matter of your perspective. if we were not given free will for example, and God just forced salvation(and obedience)upon us then it is a possibility.
You spoke of me as unorthodox, Ill provide an example.
You say it is unnecessary, but was it really?
ask yourself, why those events were an absolute requirement.
And as I have said, this limits his omnipotence. By definition there is another way.
perspective
you are basically testing God because you disagree with his methods. the ability to do something is not the same as the requirement to do so., nor is it indicative of the alternatives.
just because he could or can, does not mean he has to, or should.

Nevertheless, there were witnesses to the resurrection of Mithras. Do you doubt their testimony?
I have not seen it, I have my own suspicions about these so called "parallels" and their origin.

Wait, none of these witnesses gave their own testimony? Paul merely referenced them when he wrote some decades after the events allegedly took place? Is there any independant, first-hand account of the ressurection of Jesus?
You are the one who doubts it, why not go our and ask them yourself?
Thats the point, the Epistle is sent if you were alive back then you would be free to go and ask, them yourself, to put the rumors to rest, once and for all, yet I see no where anyone disputed it.

One word: fraud. What makes you think Paul actually went around asking people for their testimony?
I don't as they likely discussed it as witnesses and not converts in the since we would be.
You can doubt it, but you aren't the first, and apparently your fellow doubters from that time did not feel it important enough to dispute at all.
Blind faith has a dangerously powerful influence over humans.
so does doubt

I'm sorry?
you mentioned a six legged vs 4 legged insect disproof of the bible, and I stated the praying mantis has 4 legs.

Where have I claimed this?
I was basically stating that I have frequently heard of evolutionary gaps of drastic change being consistent with evolution, unless it is supportive of say the Flood.
I personally have dispute with evolution in general, and slipped into a bit of off topic.


Irrelevant, though I would be interested to hear your thoughts on Evolutionary theory. I am talking of variation in a single human chromosome. Even the most staunch fundamentalist acknowledges 'microevolution'.
I am not them.
I believe it is more of an example of breeding, using existing genetic information in the so called "evolved" animal. but like I said its a bit off topic.

Self-replicating systems + time = systems better at self-replication. What's not to get?
Oh I Got it, I believed it like most who are exposed to its indoctrination through school did, I even tried the theistic evolution route when I was in my agnostic stage, as it was the predominant explanation.
the problems present when you start reducing it to its fundamental components, like a motor, it is a system, compromised of smaller interdependent systems working together for the whole.
but if you start removing components it breaks down.
I did a longer explanation a while back before I abandoned the TE sub forum, as they asked if anyone was a te, and became a creationist, though I technically don't consider myself one. I have problems with several creationist beliefs, particularly with their attempt to appease the "intellectual elite" I am a Biblicists, though I am far from an expert in the scriptures.
But I explained my stance as simply as I could without doing a huge paper on the issue. and was attacked for being honest. By "christians" no less, well one was an atheist, but not one of the Christians called out anyone for making unfounded attacks on me, and after discussing the overall issue of the indoctrination of evolution, among other things for quite some time, the attacks seemed as Good a reason to leave that area for good.
After further reflection on the issue, it appears more indicative of a generalized doubt and departure from the scriptures overall, rather than a battle of the evidences, that it has "devolved"(pun intended) into.
That's nice
Just saying that a feeling is not always the best thing to follow, in all cases, like my ex wife for example, that was something I should have followed friends advice on than my own feelings of the matter.
 
Upvote 0

Wiccan_Child

Contributor
Mar 21, 2005
19,419
673
Bristol, UK
✟31,731.00
Faith
Atheist
Marital Status
In Relationship
Politics
UK-Liberal-Democrats
That is a matter of your perspective. if we were not given free will for example, and God just forced salvation(and obedience)upon us then it is a possibility.
You spoke of me as unorthodox, Ill provide an example.
You say it is unnecessary, but was it really?
ask yourself, why those events were an absolute requirement.
perspective
I see no reason why the events were absolutely necessary. Can you explain to me why they were?

you are basically testing God because you disagree with his methods. the ability to do something is not the same as the requirement to do so., nor is it indicative of the alternatives.
just because he could or can, does not mean he has to, or should.
On the contrary, but creating an entity with such restricting qualities as omnipotence, omniscience, omnibenevolence, etc, you create an entity that is very, if not entirely, predictable.

I have not seen it, I have my own suspicions about these so called "parallels" and their origin.
Mithras was born of a virgin on December 25th. A traveling teacher and master, Mithras also miracles, had twelve companions, and died for man’s sins only to be resurrected on the following Sunday. The crucifix, water baptism and the breaking of bread and wine is involved in the memorial of this event.

Bull and cave themes are common in both faiths, venerating the patron saint of soldier. Both religions used the rite of baptism, and each participated in an outwardly similar type of sacrament, bread and wine. Both Mithra and Christ were supposedly visited by shepherds and Magi. It has been claimed that both Mithraism and Christianity considered Sunday their holy day, though for different reasons. It is noticable that the title of "Pope" (father) is found in Mithraic doctrine and seemingly prohibited in Christian doctrine. The words "Peter" (rock) and "mass" (sacrament) have significance in Mithraism. Mithraism and early Christianity considered abstinence, celibacy, and self-control to be among their highest virtues. Both had similar beliefs about the world, destiny, heaven and hell, and the immortality of the soul. Their conceptions of the battles between good and evil were similar (though Mithraism was more dualistic), including a great and final battle at the end of times, similar to Zoroastrianism. Mithraism's flood at the beginning of history was deemed necessary because what began in water would end in fire, according to Mithraic eschatology. Both religions believed in revelation as key to their doctrine. Both awaited the last judgment and resurrection of the dead.
"When inducted into the degree of Leo, he was purified with honey, and baptised, not with water, but with fire, as John the Baptist declared that his successor would baptise. After this second baptism, initiates were considered 'participants,' and they received the sacrament of bread and wine commemorating Mithra's banquet at the conclusion of his labors."[4]
Both Christianity and Mithraism were popular amongst soldiers. Mithraism was largely a soldiers' cult, and under emperors like Julian and Commodus, Mithra became the patron of Roman armies. Christianity also developed a huge following in the military, and even civilian Christians began to refer to themselves as milites ("soldiers"), in reference to the disciplined life they felt called to, while those less disciplined outside the faith were called pagani, borrowing the Roman military slang for "civilians".
Mithras had no mother, but was miraculously born of a rock, or the petra genetix. His worshipers partook of a sacramental meal of bread marked with a cross as one of seven Mithraic ritual meals.
Some writers have said that a mithraeum on the Vatican Hill was seized by Christians in 376 AD. Among them John Holland Smith wrote that "Gracchus suppressed the worship of Mithras at the cave on the Vatican hill," however he cites no evidence. No Mithraeum is known on the Vatican hill and the actions of Furius Maenius Gracchus are described only by Jerome, who does not mention the location, which suggests it was a private shrine instead.
The Mithraic festival of Epiphany, marking the arrival of sun-priests ("Magi") at the Savior's birthplace, was adopted by the Christian church only as late as 813 CE.

  1. Leahey, T-H (2004). A History of Psychology: Main Currents in Psychological Thought, 6th, Pearson Prentice Hall. pp. 77
  2. Cumont, Franz (1911). Oriental Religions in Roman Paganism. pp. 191, 193
  3. http://penelope.uchicago.edu/Thayer...opics/Religion/Mithraism/David_Fingrut**.html
  4. Larson, Martin A. (1977). The Story of Christian Origins. pp. 190.
  5. de Riencourt, Amaury (1974). Sex and Power in History. pp. 135.
  6. Smith, John Holland (1976). The Death of Classical Paganism. pp. 146.
  7. Platner (1929). Topographical Dictionary of Ancient Rome.
  8. Jerome, Letter 107 (To Laeta) -- see discussion at Internet Infidels
  9. Brewster, H. Pomeroy (1904). Saints and Festivals of the Christian Church. pp. 55.
  10. Taylor, J.. Pythagoreans and Essenes: Structural Parallels (Collection de la Revue des Études Juives, 32). Leuven: Peeters. ISBN 90-429-1482-3.
  11. Wood, Ralph C.. Biography of J. R. R. Tolkien.
As you can see, the mythologies of Mithras and Jesus are nearly identicle.

You are the one who doubts it, why not go our and ask them yourself?
Thats the point, the Epistle is sent if you were alive back then you would be free to go and ask, them yourself, to put the rumors to rest, once and for all, yet I see no where anyone disputed it.

I don't as they likely discussed it as witnesses and not converts in the since we would be.
You can doubt it, but you aren't the first, and apparently your fellow doubters from that time did not feel it important enough to dispute at all.
And this proves... what? That the NT is unreliable? That we should take it on faith?

so does doubt[/quote[
Doubt is a reasonable, often expected, response to extraordinary claims. Blind faith serves no purpose except coption and control of the masses.

you mentioned a six legged vs 4 legged insect disproof of the bible, and I stated the praying mantis has 4 legs.
Technically, the forearms of the praying mantis are modified limbs. That aside, are you seriously suggesting that the Hebrews considered the locust to appear to have four legs? Have you even seen one?

I was basically stating that I have frequently heard of evolutionary gaps of drastic change being consistent with evolution, unless it is supportive of say the Flood.
By whom?

I personally have dispute with evolution in general, and slipped into a bit of off topic.
So the science is sound, but you just... don't like it? Abusrd.

I am not them.
I believe it is more of an example of breeding, using existing genetic information in the so called "evolved" animal. but like I said its a bit off topic.
This is microevolution.
1) Evolution is defined as a change in the frequency of alleles in a given population.
2) Populations have been observed to experiance a change in the frequency of their alleles.
3) Therefore, evolution has been observed.
Anti-evolutionists feel that there is some distinction between adaptation and speciation. This, of course, stems from the Judaeo-Christian notion of 'kinds', which is never defined.

the problems present when you start reducing it to its fundamental components, like a motor, it is a system, compromised of smaller interdependent systems working together for the whole.
A crude analogy for the workings of relatively complex biological systems, but OK.

but if you start removing components it breaks down.
Why would you start removing parts of an interdependant system?
I also suggest you watch this video. It is basically proof that evolution is a blind watchmaker.
http://www.videosift.com/video/Evolution-IS-a-Blind-Watchmaker

I did a longer explanation a while back before I abandoned the TE sub forum, as they asked if anyone was a te, and became a creationist, though I technically don't consider myself one. I have problems with several creationist beliefs, particularly with their attempt to appease the "intellectual elite" I am a Biblicists, though I am far from an expert in the scriptures.
Do you believe that the universe was intentionally created? If yes, then you are a Creationist. Otherwise, you are not (even if you answer, 'I don't know').

But I explained my stance as simply as I could without doing a huge paper on the issue. and was attacked for being honest. By "christians" no less, well one was an atheist, but not one of the Christians called out anyone for making unfounded attacks on me, and after discussing the overall issue of the indoctrination of evolution, among other things for quite some time, the attacks seemed as Good a reason to leave that area for good.
Not to be rude, but surely one must consider a stance on it's own merits, not on the behaviour of it's adherants? To disbelieve in evolutionary theory merely because some of it's adherants were mean is... daft.

After further reflection on the issue, it appears more indicative of a generalized doubt and departure from the scriptures overall, rather than a battle of the evidences, that it has "devolved"(pun intended) into.
It's not so much a battle of the evidences, as it is 'We have the fossils. We win'. Arrogant? Maybe, but we certainly have a right to be.

Just saying that a feeling is not always the best thing to follow, in all cases, like my ex wife for example, that was something I should have followed friends advice on than my own feelings of the matter.
Indeed. However, you misunderstand my phraseology: I deliberately used the term 'feeling' to counter epsitimological claims by the Christians who say they 'know' that their faith is true. Wicca and Witchcraft offer more than just a nebulous 'freedom'. As does Christianity, in fact, but at least my faith delivers what it promises.
 
Upvote 0

IamRedeemed

Blessed are the pure in Heart, they shall see God.
May 18, 2007
6,078
2,011
Visit site
✟24,764.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
The Word says that whatsoever is not of faith (in Christ) is sin. (Romans 14:23b). If we are not serving Christ, we are already serving satan, whether we do incantations, cast spells etc or not. As we cannot serve two masters. We are either on the path that leads to life, or headed for destruction. There is no third choice or PC comfort zone.
So, in essence, if we aren't serving one, then we must conclude that we are serving the other. (Matthew 6:24)

Being 'one the of the nicest people in the world', even though it is a great quality by our standards as humans, it is not a quality that can earn us entry into heaven.

Our personal merits outside of God, are meaningless as compared to the holiness of God. And are insufficient to pay for sin, since the wages of sin is death. The only way we can enter a relationship with God (aside from entering heaven) is by receiving His Gift of LIFE, by repentance and a life committed to serving Christ.
(Romans 6:23)

our highest and best are mere filthy rags, outside of the righteousness of God in Christ. (
Isaiah 64:6, Romans 3:22 )

We must repent and put our faith in Jesus Christ. We must, in the words of Jesus,
love the Lord God with all
of our heart, mind, soul and strength and love our neighbor as ourselves. (Matthew 22:37,39) But we also do not omit the first to follow the second. Jesus named them in that order for a reason. which we find in verse 38 "This is the first and greatest commandment."
as well as Luke 4:8b
"Thou shalt worship the Lord thy God, and him only shall your serve"

So, if we are practicing any religion or philosophy that is outside of Christ, we are also outside of Christ.
And there is no such TRUE thing as "Christian wicca"just to let you know in case that comes up.

There is a "such" thing, but it is not a true thing and is an oxymoron. God will not share His glory. Christ has no fellowship with Belial, nor does light with darkness.
(Isaiah 42:8, Isaiah 48:11, 2 Corinthians 6:14)




My cousin is Pagan, Wiccan, and specifically a Druid. She's one of the nicest, most understanding people I've ever met and she's my closest cousin. Now I've been asking her about her beliefs and common base beliefs of Wiccans. And all the devil worshiping sacrificing babies garbage that's thrown around when a person hears 'Wicca' is false. It's actually a very free and spiritual faith. I'm looking more and more into it myself.

Now what are your views on it?
 
Upvote 0

*Starlight*

Let the Dragon ride again on the winds of time
Jan 19, 2005
75,337
1,471
37
Right in front of you *waves*
Visit site
✟133,073.00
Faith
Christian Seeker
Marital Status
Single
From what I've seen, Wicca encourages people to act in a good way towards others... so Wicca is ok :) I don't agree with all their beliefs, but it doesn't matter... everyone has different beliefs, and they are all equally valid, since it's impossible to prove who is right when it comes to religions.
 
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

.Sabre.

Aliens ate my custom title.
Supporter
Sep 6, 2006
14,762
679
34
Chasing the sun's fading light
✟40,588.00
Faith
Atheist
Marital Status
Single
Politics
UK-Liberal-Democrats
From what I've seen, Wicca encourages people to act in a good way towards others... so Wicca is ok :) I don't agree with all their beliefs, but it doesn't matter... everyone has different beliefs, and they are all equally valid, since it's impossible to prove who is right when it comes to religions.
Thanks for saving me all that typing. :kiss:
 
Upvote 0

IamRedeemed

Blessed are the pure in Heart, they shall see God.
May 18, 2007
6,078
2,011
Visit site
✟24,764.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
How can someone on one hand say they know Jesus, say on the other that it is impossible to know which is the right way?

Jesus said, " I am the way the truth and the life, no man comes to the Father, but through me."
John 14:6


Do you believe Him?



From what I've seen, Wicca encourages people to act in a good way towards others... so Wicca is ok :) I don't agree with all their beliefs, but it doesn't matter... everyone has different beliefs, and they are all equally valid, since it's impossible to prove who is right when it comes to religions.
 
Upvote 0
D

DMagoh

Guest
Mithras was born of a virgin on December 25th. A traveling teacher and master, Mithras also miracles, had twelve companions, and died for man’s sins only to be resurrected on the following Sunday. The crucifix, water baptism and the breaking of bread and wine is involved in the memorial of this event.

It's amazing how people try their best to disprove Jesus, even if it means ignoring the truth and making up stuff to suit their deceptions.



What Mithraism Isn't
is an excellent source:


Mithras was the son of a virgin. We have a large number of representations of the birth of Mithras. (Clauss, pp. 63 - 71, shows some of these, as does Ulansey, pp. 36 and 96.) He rises from a rock, with a dagger in one hand and a torch in the other. He is wearing a cap. There are no women in any of these im-ages.

He was attended at his birth by shepherds. In images of Mithras' birth from the rock he is sometimes accompanied by two small figures. The same figures appear flanking the images of Mithras killing the bull in the Mithraic temples, the most important cult image of Mithraism. They're dressed like Mithras, and usually one carries a torch pointing up and one pointing down. In no representations are they connected with sheep or with any tools of shepherding. There are some rare examples when other figures, such as Saturn or Oceanus are present, and a few show a snake as well. In short, there are never shepherds present.

He was considered a great travelling teacher and master. The main event in the life of Mithras is the killing of a bull. After this he ascends to heaven, so any travelling and teaching would have to have been done prior to the sacrifice. We have some representations of his life between his birth and the death of the bull. (Clauss dedicates chapter 8, "The Sacred Narrative," to these.) We know from these that he went hunting, he procured water by shooting an arrow at a rock, and he carried the bull to a cave. That's it. There was neither travelling nor teaching.

Mithras had twelve followers. I've already mentioned the two torchbearers. They are present in almost every image of Mithras killing the bull. Other figures can occur, some more frequently than others. The sun and the moon are very common, although they are clearly meant to be up in the heavens looking down at the death of the bull rather than accompanying Mithras. Oceanus and Saturn, whom I mentioned earlier as sometimes present at Mithras' birth, are also sometimes found in the tauroctony, although outside of the main scene. There are, however, no twelve companions. Perhaps this idea came from the fairly common representation of the circle of the zodiac surrounding Mithras and the bull. Whatever the source, the point is made moot, since as we have seen Mithras didn't travel or teach, so he would have had neither companions nor followers.

He was killed and buried in a tomb. Sometimes we are even told that he was crucified. I am perplexed at how to respond to this. I suppose one way is say that no Mithraic scholar seems to be aware of any image, inscription, or text to this effect. If the makers of these lists know of one, I ask them to send the references to me and I will pass them on to the scholars.

After three days he rose again. This is easily answered. Since he didn't die he couldn't have risen from the dead.
 
Upvote 0
D

DMagoh

Guest
From what I've seen, Wicca encourages people to act in a good way towards others... so Wicca is ok :) I don't agree with all their beliefs, but it doesn't matter... everyone has different beliefs, and they are all equally valid, since it's impossible to prove who is right when it comes to religions.

How can someone on one hand say they know Jesus, say on the other that it is impossible to know which is the right way?

Jesus said, " I am the way the truth and the life, no man comes to the Father, but through me." John 14:6

Do you believe Him?

Amen sister! :amen:

Sorry, they wont be equally valid on Judgement Day.
 
  • Like
Reactions: IamRedeemed
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

KarrieTex

HOOK EM HORNS
Supporter
Nov 2, 2006
11,880
788
52
Houston, Texas
✟38,214.00
Faith
Baptist
Marital Status
In Relationship
Politics
US-Republican
I believe the key emphasis here is the difference between belief and knowledge.

You believe Jesus is the only way to salvation, but you cannot know that.
Not true.

I KNOW it just as much as I believe it. Your logic follows the same thinking as "I think therefore I am."
 
Upvote 0

chris777

Senior Veteran
Aug 8, 2006
2,005
114
GA
✟17,817.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Single
Politics
US-Others
I see no reason why the events were absolutely necessary. Can you explain to me why they were?
it is different for different people, Take the blasphemous passion of the Christ movie that not only adds substantially to the scripture, but adds the entire narrative of sufferings, in the film. some seem to feel a connection to that sort of thing, you obviouslly do not, but the scriptures are for all people for all time, so while one portion may mean little to one person, it may be of extreme use to another.
On the contrary, but creating an entity with such restricting qualities as omnipotence, omniscience, omnibenevolence, etc, you create an entity that is very, if not entirely, predictable.
Again you are viewing things from the perspective of doubt, and then placing your own constraints upon them.

Mithras was born of a virgin on December 25th. A traveling teacher and master, Mithras also miracles, had twelve companions, and died for man’s sins only to be resurrected on the following Sunday. The crucifix, water baptism and the breaking of bread and wine is involved in the memorial of this event.

Bull and cave themes are common in both faiths, venerating the patron saint of soldier. Both religions used the rite of baptism, and each participated in an outwardly similar type of sacrament, bread and wine. Both Mithra and Christ were supposedly visited by shepherds and Magi. It has been claimed that both Mithraism and Christianity considered Sunday their holy day, though for different reasons. It is noticable that the title of "Pope" (father) is found in Mithraic doctrine and seemingly prohibited in Christian doctrine. The words "Peter" (rock) and "mass" (sacrament) have significance in Mithraism. Mithraism and early Christianity considered abstinence, celibacy, and self-control to be among their highest virtues. Both had similar beliefs about the world, destiny, heaven and hell, and the immortality of the soul. Their conceptions of the battles between good and evil were similar (though Mithraism was more dualistic), including a great and final battle at the end of times, similar to Zoroastrianism. Mithraism's flood at the beginning of history was deemed necessary because what began in water would end in fire, according to Mithraic eschatology. Both religions believed in revelation as key to their doctrine. Both awaited the last judgment and resurrection of the dead.
"When inducted into the degree of Leo, he was purified with honey, and baptised, not with water, but with fire, as John the Baptist declared that his successor would baptise. After this second baptism, initiates were considered 'participants,' and they received the sacrament of bread and wine commemorating Mithra's banquet at the conclusion of his labors."[4]
I am aware of the influence it had upon catholicism, and the incorporation of paganistic ideas into the faith leavening it. I am also aware of many of the pagan holidays being incorporated such as Ishtar.

Both Christianity and Mithraism were popular amongst soldiers. Mithraism was largely a soldiers' cult, and under emperors like Julian and Commodus, Mithra became the patron of Roman armies. Christianity also developed a huge following in the military, and even civilian Christians began to refer to themselves as milites ("soldiers"), in reference to the disciplined life they felt called to, while those less disciplined outside the faith were called pagani, borrowing the Roman military slang for "civilians".
I was not however aware of this, though it does shed light on constantines mas sprinkling "baptisms" of soldiers, as well as the baptism of all but the sword arm of some "christians".
However I fond no scriptural justification of warmongering in the spread of the gospel.

Mithras had no mother, but was miraculously born of a rock, or the petra genetix. His worshipers partook of a sacramental meal of bread marked with a cross as one of seven Mithraic ritual meals.
Some writers have said that a mithraeum on the Vatican Hill was seized by Christians in 376 AD. Among them John Holland Smith wrote that "Gracchus suppressed the worship of Mithras at the cave on the Vatican hill," however he cites no evidence. No Mithraeum is known on the Vatican hill and the actions of Furius Maenius Gracchus are described only by Jerome, who does not mention the location, which suggests it was a private shrine instead.
The Mithraic festival of Epiphany, marking the arrival of sun-priests ("Magi") at the Savior's birthplace, was adopted by the Christian church only as late as 813 CE.
  1. Leahey, T-H (2004). A History of Psychology: Main Currents in Psychological Thought, 6th, Pearson Prentice Hall. pp. 77
  2. Cumont, Franz (1911). Oriental Religions in Roman Paganism. pp. 191, 193
  3. http://penelope.uchicago.edu/Thayer...opics/Religion/Mithraism/David_Fingrut**.html
  4. Larson, Martin A. (1977). The Story of Christian Origins. pp. 190.
  5. de Riencourt, Amaury (1974). Sex and Power in History. pp. 135.
  6. Smith, John Holland (1976). The Death of Classical Paganism. pp. 146.
  7. Platner (1929). Topographical Dictionary of Ancient Rome.
  8. Jerome, Letter 107 (To Laeta) -- see discussion at Internet Infidels
  9. Brewster, H. Pomeroy (1904). Saints and Festivals of the Christian Church. pp. 55.
  10. Taylor, J.. Pythagoreans and Essenes: Structural Parallels (Collection de la Revue des Études Juives, 32). Leuven: Peeters. ISBN 90-429-1482-3.
  11. Wood, Ralph C.. Biography of J. R. R. Tolkien.
As you can see, the mythologies of Mithras and Jesus are nearly identicle.
That is subject to interpretation. While I could pull the info on mithras and do a point by point comparison ,and contrast, i personally feel no need to waste the time with it, its like comparative religion, back when i saw all of the parallells between multiple faiths, I glossed over the differences, differences such as in your comparison.
As I stated in my last post, if the scripture is true then that means mithras is not of God, and if its not for Christ then it is against him, and who is it that makes the author of mithras?
I am sure you will call it simplistic, but I have neither the time nor the inclination to do some sort of exhaustive comparison and contrast of it, or all other religions, as I have already done so to the extent of the satisfaction of my own doubt.
And this proves... what? That the NT is unreliable? That we should take it on faith?
not that you just doubt it.
Doubt is a reasonable, often expected, response to extraordinary claims. Blind faith serves no purpose except coption and control of the masses.
As someone once told me in a reply that is a cop out, the accusation that the bible is used as a means to controll the masses is propaganda frankly, it cannot be maintained unless only 1 party has access to the scriptures themselves, like say the Jim Jones cult where he kept them away from his followers. if you believe otherwise then by all means provide some examples, but once I began to read them for myself I quickly dismissed that atheistic baseless nonsense.

Technically, the forearms of the praying mantis are modified limbs.
A viewpoint you have incorporated into your world view through your indoctrination in evolution, the same could be said of our arms based on framing it through the presumptions of evolution.

That aside, are you seriously suggesting that the Hebrews considered the locust to appear to have four legs? Have you even seen one?
first off i am not convinced the verse is expressly speaking of locust.
however using your reply about the mantis the hind legs could also be considered modified limbs.

practically anyone in the TE sub forum. if the search function went back far enough I might could pull up some names , but you could possibly search it.
I also do not recall hearing an alternative explanation for "explosive" jumps in evolution in the so called fossil record.


So the science is sound, but you just... don't like it? Absurd.
like I stated I have done some exploration into it ,and its notions, and found them flawed, but thats a whole other topic altogether.
This is microevolution.
1) Evolution is defined as a change in the frequency of alleles in a given population.
2) Populations have been observed to experiance a change in the frequency of their alleles.
3) Therefore, evolution has been observed.
Anti-evolutionists feel that there is some distinction between adaptation and speciation. This, of course, stems from the Judaeo-Christian notion of 'kinds', which is never defined.
breeding could also produce the same definition, however it does not involve new genetic information, only the reshuffling of already existing information and is not evolution. as for the so called anti evolutionary stance they are affected by the very same propaganda as the pro evolution side, only they seek to limit it because that would be too much of a stretch, I however see no such distinction.
their is more involved than just genetics, the factors are exponentially expansive, but its a whole diatribe, and I say blaaa


A crude analogy for the workings of relatively complex biological systems, but OK.
I was just being simplistic, as the factors are ridiculously complex.

Why would you start removing parts of an interdependent system?
well one I had decided to "create" some aliens for a story a friend was working on, back when i fancied that sort of thing, and I was dissatisfied with how most aliens are portrayed as having characteristics that were not so alien, so I though I would wind the clock back to the beginning. But kept running into problems when fast forwarding the project in the absence of a preconceived system.

I also suggest you watch this video. It is basically proof that evolution is a blind watchmaker.
http://www.videosift.com/video/Evolution-IS-a-Blind-Watchmaker
Got to love how their defence of evolution hinges on the foundation that they are not explaining abiogenesis or life origin, particularly when if one investigates the problems with evolution from abiogenesis, and the flaws inherent with that , that it falls apart.
a system is an inherent requirement for evolution to even function,
I find it fundamentally flawed that evolutionist have zero problem with having a theory based upon zero foundation, (the relegation that origin does not matter to evolution) When without origin to set up and define the said syetems they believe to see evolution occuring inside of, it is merely a notion, and has little meaning, except of course to financial and busness gain, but oh that would be implying evolution has a controll nature in its propaganda, and that the spread of its belief is beneficial to many who propagate it.
again i say blaaa
http://www.videosift.com/video/Evolution-IS-a-Blind-Watchmaker

Do you believe that the universe was intentionally created? If yes, then you are a Creationist. Otherwise, you are not (even if you answer, 'I don't know').
I suppose that if you are basing it on that notion then you would consider me a creationist, though I have many problems with the more popular ones. I would liken it to where I have been called a fundamentalist, and I frankly don't feel the vast majority are fundamental enough in the scriptures.
However as the scriptures tell me to only be concerned wih being called a Christian, I tend to avoid other labels.


Not to be rude, but surely one must consider a stance on it's own merits, not on the behaviour of it's adherants? To disbelieve in evolutionary theory merely because some of it's adherants were mean is... daft.
no I just abandoned the debates of the issue,
I came to my conclusions independently.


It's not so much a battle of the evidences, as it is 'We have the fossils. We win'. Arrogant? Maybe, but we certainly have a right to be.
or foolish, limited evidence is just that limited.


Indeed. However, you misunderstand my phraseology: I deliberately used the term 'feeling' to counter epistemological claims by the Christians who say they 'know' that their faith is true. Wicca and Witchcraft offer more than just a nebulous 'freedom'. As does Christianity, in fact, but at least my faith delivers what it promises
I am probably going to regret this , but
what?
 
Upvote 0

chris777

Senior Veteran
Aug 8, 2006
2,005
114
GA
✟17,817.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Single
Politics
US-Others
Not true.

I KNOW it just as much as I believe it. Your logic follows the same thinking as "I think therefore I am."

just a food for thought, who is known as I AM?

so what do you suppose that quote is really saying?
 
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

*Starlight*

Let the Dragon ride again on the winds of time
Jan 19, 2005
75,337
1,471
37
Right in front of you *waves*
Visit site
✟133,073.00
Faith
Christian Seeker
Marital Status
Single
How can someone on one hand say they know Jesus, say on the other that it is impossible to know which is the right way?

Jesus said, " I am the way the truth and the life, no man comes to the Father, but through me."
John 14:6


Do you believe Him?
Umm... religious beliefs are something you BELIEVE in, not something you KNOW.
 
Upvote 0
Status
Not open for further replies.