Mount Carmel time... [Archive] - TheologyWeb Campus

Richbee

April 13th 2005, 10:42 AM

And with regard to Richbees' question, I would say the Scripture in general could be referred to as what I am taking up in resisting any power that might come my way. As D.L. Moody mentioned in my daily devotional reading this morning, "The sword of the Lord, and of Gideon."

As Amy Carmichael also mentioned in my other daily devotional that I read! That was, again, kind of odd.

Prov. 3:26 For the Lord shall be thy confidence.

When Gideon and his three hundred went out to face a foe far stronger than themselves they took a watchword, and they shouted it as they went forward. It was The sword of the Lord, and of Gideon (Judg. 7:18,20).

Shall we take as our watchword now, The Lord is our Confidence? Shall we say it to our own hearts when they are tempted to fear, and to each other, and to those who question us, and to our Lord? Will you say it aloud to Him now, even as you read the words? The Lord is our Confidence. Alleluia.

Blessings,

Lee

Thanks, I have a new Resource and some words of encouragement! :thumb:

The Sword of the Spirit is God's Word and the application is God's Wisdom!

Quote:

APOLOGETICS

My Wiccan Friend

By Greg Stier

Dare 2 Share Ministries

Most witches (often called Wiccans) are part of the contemporary neo-pagan movement which is rooted in the ancient god and goddess worship of several pre-Christian cults and religions (Greek, Celtic, Egyptian, Roman and Sumerian). While there is much diversity of beliefs among witches (because it, like the New Age movement, is not one centrally organized religion with a set creed or belief system) there are several common beliefs widely held among witches.

Some common beliefs among witches:

1. Rejection of absolute truth.

Witches believe that experience and mysticism are the final authority not some book or creed. Each person must find and define their own reality and belief system.

Biblical View:

"All Scripture is God-breathed and is useful for teaching, rebuking, correcting and training in righteousness, so that the man of God may be thoroughly equipped for every good work. In the presence of God and of Christ Jesus...I give you this charge: Preach the Word, be prepared in season and out of season....For the time will come when men will not put up with sound doctrine. Instead, to suit their own desires, they will gather around them a great number of teachers to say what their itching ears want to hear. They will turn their ears away from the truth and turn aside to myths." 2 Timothy 3:16-4:4

2. Tolerance

Witches believe that acceptance of other belief systems and religions (as long as those religions and belief systems are tolerant of theirs) is a must. Diversity is a virtue, dogmatism a sin.

Biblical View:

There is right and wrong. "Woe to those who call evil good and good evil...." Isaiah 5:20

Some things should not be tolerated. "I will set before my eyes no vile thing. The deeds of faithless men I hate; they will not cling to me. Men of perverse heart shall be far from me; I will have nothing to do with evil." Psalm 101:3,4

http://www.cbn.com/spirituallife/ChurchAndMinistry/Evangelism/My_Wiccan_Friend.asp

Most witches believe that they can cause changes in people and circumstances through invoking spirits, forces or gods in the unseen world. This is usually done through some prescribed ritual or incantation.

:poke:

Ouch!

Something hit me in my eye. What's that Spell? :glare:

Where are the Metaphysical Naturalist with their wet blankets when we need them?

Rich, please follow the campus decorum as stated when quoting copyrighted material.

If material owned by anyone other than the poster is used on the forum, proper citation must be given to the source, including a web link if available. Material may not be reposted from any copyrighted source without prior permission. All material is to be treated as copyrighted unless explicitly released into the public domain. If explicit permission has been granted by the copyright holder to repost on TheologyWeb, notification must be given to a moderator 24 hours in advance of reposting it. If such permission has not been obtained, only a summary of the original work may be posted, not exceeding two short paragraphs or one-half the length of the original work, whichever is shorter. Posts in violation of this section will be deleted without notice.

lee_merrill

April 13th 2005, 01:16 PM

Hi everyone,

Cu: Wiccans and Witches do not cast spells against people without a very good reason.

Would this be a good reason?

1Ki 18:21 Elijah went before the people and said, "How long will you waver between two opinions? If the Lord is God, follow him; but if Baal is God, follow him."

Cu: Youre just not that big of a deal.

So I should be pretty easy to knock over, then? But I think I’m leaning on someone strong. I know I’m not important, but isn’t knowing which spiritual beings are more powerful important? Thus I propose a test...

Dur: If 'they' care don't you think 'they' have the power to deal with it?"

Yes, I agree!

Judges 6:31 But Joash replied to those around him, "Are you going to plead Baal’s cause? Are you trying to save him? … If Baal really is a god, he can defend himself when someone breaks down his altar."

Their noses have been tweaked...

Dur: But as I said, I'll happily pray you are blessed by the Gods if you like.

I appreciate good will, how about treating this like a boxing match, and shake hands before and afterwards?

But I think I might have been taken up on this to some extent, having had an encounter of sorts last night (not meaning the arm-skin-pop this morning, either), tho that might have been coincidence...

Blessings,
Lee

technomage

April 13th 2005, 01:26 PM

Richbee

April 13th 2005, 01:33 PM

I appreciate good will, how about treating this like a boxing match, and shake hands before and afterwards?

But I think I might have been taken up on this to some extent, having had an encounter of sorts last night (not meaning the arm-skin-pop this morning, either), tho that might have been coincidence...

Blessings,

Lee

Ahem!

I think the ultimate challenge is the test for eternal salvation and our destination.

Rebirth and recycle?

Or, eternity with God in Heaven and with Jesus.

So, let's find out in say, 50 to 70 years. 100?

Now, Heaven can see Hell, but Hell can't see Heaven.

When, I get to Heaven, I will look down for the evidence of the Wiccans. (I bet the demons of Hell will have a big Party when the Wiccans march in and they say, "Fooled you with that "rebirth" hubris! :hehe: Reborn to eternal separation from God. (and Dee-Dee Warren)

Cu Mhorrigan

April 13th 2005, 03:58 PM

Would this be a good reason?

1Ki 18:21 Elijah went before the people and said, "How long will you waver between two opinions? If the Lord is God, follow him; but if Baal is God, follow him." No it would not. Think of it this way, We dont go around throwing spells at people willy nilly, and as far as I personally am concerned YHWH may have some power, but He could not stop the twin towers from comming down, He did Not stop the Tsunami, or anything else that a "God of Love" would notmally do. I am also not of two opinions I am of One. and it was an opinion shaped by My experience as a christian.

So I should be pretty easy to knock over, then? But I think I’m leaning on someone strong. I know I’m not important, but isn’t knowing which spiritual beings are more powerful important? Thus I propose a test...YOu dont get it, you dont use a 50mm canon to go shooting Ducks (There wont even be feathers left), or a bunker buster to do demolition (you will blow up many city blocks.) I am not about to waste the energy or the time to cast a spell on you because quite frankly you havent done anything so annoying to warrant me casting a spell on you.
I have nothing to prove to you nor have you really done anything worth Me gathering my energy and turning you into a newt or something.

Yes, I agree!
Judges 6:31 But Joash replied to those around him, "Are you going to plead Baal’s cause? Are you trying to save him? … If Baal really is a god, he can defend himself when someone breaks down his altar."
Their noses have been tweaked...

I appreciate good will, how about treating this like a boxing match, and shake hands before and afterwards?Lee again, I have to really be very annoyed with you to cast a spell on you. and I just dont see anything from you that would warrant that Kind of work.

But I think I might have been taken up on this to some extent, having had an encounter of sorts last night (not meaning the arm-skin-pop this morning, either), tho that might have been coincidence...
Blessings,
Lee
Uh huh.

lee_merrill

April 13th 2005, 08:59 PM

Hi everyone,

Justin: Are you game, Lee? Would you be willing to ask Jesus to strike us?
Well, Christians can't wield power like magic, though, Elijah acted at the Lord's command, not on his own initiative.

1 Kings 18:36 At the time of sacrifice, the prophet Elijah stepped forward and prayed: "O Lord, God of Abraham, Isaac and Israel, let it be known today that you are God in Israel and that I am your servant and have done all these things at your command."

Even Jesus did this:

John 5:19 Jesus gave them this answer: "I tell you the truth, the Son can do nothing by himself; he can do only what he sees his Father doing, because whatever the Father does the Son also does."

I could ask, but I can't say how God would answer, given that I don't have specific directions here.

Numbers 23:20 I have received a command to bless; he has blessed, and I cannot change it.

So my God's power is wielded by taking orders, not by giving them.

But casting spells, it seems, is different, "You do this, you get that." Maybe not, but if not, then spells are essentially the same as prayers, and all the power is really in the hands of the Wiccan deities, all of it, and is exercised at their discretion.

Which is not what people think of in connection with witchcraft, nor do Wiccans seem to think this, either...

Lee: Would this be a good reason? "If the Lord is God, follow him; but if Baal is God, follow him."

Cu: We dont go around throwing spells at people willy nilly.
How is this willy nilly, though? This is a formal challenge, a duel, sir, choose your weapons. Only I'm not even going to take a weapon, have at me…

Cu: YHWH may have some power, but He could not stop the twin towers from coming down, He did Not stop the Tsunami.
Is this implying, though, that God does not judge the earth?

Luke 13:4-5 Or those eighteen who died when the tower in Siloam fell on them-- do you think they were more guilty than all the others living in Jerusalem? I tell you, no! But unless you repent, you too will all perish.

And judgment can even be done in love.

Lee: I know I’m not important, but isn’t knowing which spiritual beings are more powerful important? Thus I propose a test...

Cu: you dont use a 50mm canon to go shooting Ducks (There wont even be feathers left) … I am not about to waste the energy or the time to cast a spell on you because quite frankly you havent done anything so annoying to warrant me casting a spell on you.

Perhaps I should be more provoking, be let-er-rip obnoxious here? Well, if you can indeed do this, then whale away, fire away, turn me into a newt!

I double-dog dare you!! No, I'm serious...

Lee: … how about treating this like a boxing match, and shake hands before and afterwards?

Cu: Lee again, I have to really be very annoyed with you to cast a spell on you. and I just dont see anything from you that would warrant that Kind of work.

Well, Wiccan credibility is at stake here, it would seem, if you could do this, yet you won't do this, when I step up to call your hand...

Lee: tho that might have been coincidence...

Cu: Uh huh

Well I usually get this happening on Monday nights, almost invariably, yet this time, it happened on Tuesday...

Blessings!
Lee

Cu Mhorrigan

April 13th 2005, 09:03 PM

Lee this is a waste of time if you want to produce amiracle, then go do somethign useful go heal the sick in the hospital.

lee_merrill

April 13th 2005, 09:08 PM

... if you want to produce amiracle, then go do somethign useful go heal the sick in the hospital.

I could deal with that. It does have to be under instruction to do this, though.

But I have heard that Paul Cain has foreseen a time when God will do this! And Paul told the Lord that he wants to be involved, too, "Don't leave me out of this," he said...

Blessings,
Lee

technomage

April 13th 2005, 10:19 PM

Well, Christians can't wield power like magic, though, Elijah acted at the Lord's command, not on his own initiative.

And just what precisely makes you think that the Lord and Lady have not given us commandments in this regard? What arrogance makes you presume that because you cannot understand our ethics that we have none? What

I could ask, but I can't say how God would answer, given that I don't have specific directions here.

I do have specific directions here, Lee. Those directions start with "Never boast, never threaten, never say you would wish ill of anyone." Believe me, they get a lot stricter from there.

And you, in your arrogance and stupidity, think you will "call my hand?" Lee, the only thing that you "call" is attention to your stupidity and hubris.

Justin

Durthorin

April 14th 2005, 12:20 AM

And you, in your arrogance and stupidity, think you will "call my hand?" Lee, the only thing that you "call" is attention to your stupidity and hubris.

He speaks to anger and you answer in anger. Beware that cup.

Brighid Bless, Dur

Durthorin

April 14th 2005, 12:38 AM

But casting spells, it seems, is different, "You do this, you get that." Maybe not, but if not, then spells are essentially the same as prayers, and all the power is really in the hands of the Wiccan deities, all of it, and is exercised at their discretion.

Which is not what people think of in connection with witchcraft, nor do Wiccans seem to think this, either...

Personally, I have found that magic is effecting the world around us by an act of will. The Gods when asked can and do strengthen that will so that we can do more with them than without them, but magic is by its nature as natural as the wind that blows over you. There is a parable told and a lesson taught that once a young witch sat at a table with his teacher who sat a ping pong ball on it and said, "Move this with the magic within you." The teacher departed and the student meditated, then evoked, invoked and used every skill he knew and the ball remained steadfast.

When his teacher came back, he cried out in Frustration, "Magic doesn't work!"

The teacher smiled, leaned down and took his hand.. guided it to the ball and nudged whereupon it rolled away, "This to is magic." The lesson is often that we use the simple, the proper tool for the task. Sometime that tool is no more complex than us, our will, our strength, our courage and our honor. What you ask is by our ethics dishonorable so as an act of will we choose not to.

How is this willy nilly, though? This is a formal challenge, a duel, sir, choose your weapons. Only I'm not even going to take a weapon, have at me…

Why, what harm have you done? What harm could you do to the Gods? None. None. Should we do it to prove your faith wrong? Why, your faith is of value to you, it helps and sustains you. Why would we as honorable followers of our Gods even at invitation choose to do this?

Perhaps I should be more provoking, be let-er-rip obnoxious here? Well, if you can indeed do this, then whale away, fire away, turn me into a newt!

I double-dog dare you!! No, I'm serious...

Well, Wiccan credibility is at stake here, it would seem, if you could do this, yet you won't do this, when I step up to call your hand...

Actually the first part is right, if we can not keep our ethical codes, then what credibility do we have?

Brighid Bless, Dur

technomage

April 14th 2005, 07:29 AM

Hi, Dur,

It's not so much "speaking in anger" as trying to warn the child who is playing with fire just how dangerous his actions are.

Justin

lee_merrill

April 14th 2005, 01:13 PM

Hi everyone,

Justin: And just what precisely makes you think that the Lord and Lady have not given us commandments in this regard? What arrogance makes you presume that because you cannot understand our ethics that we have none?
Well, Cu was saying if I went over a threshold of being provoking (Maybe I have crossed the threshold here?), I would be a candidate for some spells. Is punishing a person for insolence not allowed in the Wiccan ethics?

I was actually trying to get the cannons fired here, though also hoping to be provoking in a respectful manner!

Dur: I have found that magic is affecting the world around us by an act of will.
Yes, that has been my understanding of magic, too.

Dur: Should we do it to prove your faith wrong?
I’m not anxious to be mistaken about which spiritual beings are in charge. So help me out, here, let’s have a wrestling match, or bring up the best wrestler who can be called up here…

Lee: Well, Wiccan credibility is at stake here, it would seem, if you could do this, yet you won't do this…

Dur: Actually the first part is right, if we can not keep our ethical codes, then what credibility do we have?

Justin: It's not so much "speaking in anger" as trying to warn the child who is playing with fire just how dangerous his actions are.
Then if there’s real danger here, there is a possibility that the codes may not be kept. But I was trying to put this in a light that would make it a good decision, for my own good, remove any delusions I might have about being secure.

But either way, let’s have a test, and I won’t complain about being mistreated.

And along the lines of what power I have access to! Well, having spoken of obedience as being the only way Christ’s power is done, and not by my own initiative, I did think I was obeying instructions by starting this thread, this wasn’t my own idea, nor would I do this on a lark…

And I think I'm also to pray for you guys! Lord save these people, indeed even overthrow them if necessary, but save them.

So we’ll see what happens! I think I obeyed…

Blessings,
Lee

technomage

April 14th 2005, 01:36 PM

Well, Cu was saying if I went over a threshold of being provoking (Maybe I have crossed the threshold here?), I would be a candidate for some spells.

Cu is not Wiccan. Cu is Pagan. Please try to understand the fact that there is a difference between the two.

Is punishing a person for insolence not allowed in the Wiccan ethics?

What part of "never" in my quoted statement are you having problems with?

I was actually trying to get the cannons fired here, though also hoping to be provoking in a respectful manner!

Well, Lee, my friend, you got the cannons ... but you missed target on respect.

Then if there’s real danger here, there is a possibility that the codes may not be kept. But I was trying to put this in a light that would make it a good decision, for my own good, remove any delusions I might have about being secure.

Then for your sake, let me direct you towards some reputable Christian ex-occultists who can speak of magic from experience, and yet are Christian, so you don't have to constantly cast doubt on their veracity, as you have mine.

Ex-Witch Forum (http://exwitch.org/forum)

I'm a member there as well, but since you can't seem to listen to me and comprehend what I'm saying, perhaps you'll listen to them.

Good day to you, sir.

Justin

Richbee

April 14th 2005, 01:46 PM

Cu is not Wiccan. Cu is Pagan. Please try to understand the fact that there is a difference between the two.

Druids and Celtic peoples were all pagans.

But, then there is no objective truth, and only "perceptions".

You have your truth and Cu M. has his.

(Between drugs and the booze, what is reality? How does the co-dependency alter our "perceptions" of truth?)

lee_merrill

April 14th 2005, 08:45 PM

Hi Justin,

Lee: Well, Cu was saying if I went over a threshold of being provoking (Maybe I have crossed the threshold here?), I would be a candidate for some spells.

Justin: Cu is not Wiccan. Cu is Pagan.
I think he might disagree with you, though!

"Wiccans and Witches do not cast spells against people without a very good reason. … we just dont hate you enough nor have you done anything to warrant that kind of spell work."

Lee: Is punishing a person for insolence not allowed in the Wiccan ethics?

Justin: What part of "never" in my quoted statement are you having problems with?
But I didn't see "never" in what you said here, or whether such punishments might be considered ethical, thus I inquire about them.

Lee: I was actually trying to get the cannons fired here…

Justin: Well, Lee, my friend, you got the cannons ... but you missed target on respect.
No, I was hoping to be a target, not a cannoneer.

Lee: … for my own good, remove any delusions I might have about being secure.

Justin: Then for your sake, let me direct you towards some reputable Christian ex-occultists who can speak of magic from experience, and yet are Christian, so you don't have to constantly cast doubt on their veracity, as you have mine.
But I can't read a whole forum…

Now I do believe that occult power is quite real, I am not saying Wiccans can do nothing, I'm actually saying my God is able to protect and deliver me. Thus my (putative) delusion is not that I am secure because there is no possible attack, but that I am secure, if there is one, if there is a real one…

Exodus 18:11 Now I know that YHWH is greater than all gods…

Hebrews 13:6 So we say with confidence, "The Lord is my helper; I will not be afraid. What can man do to me?"

And I wish this confidence for you as well, by taking refuge in him. I have actually experienced this! This is not the first time I have been around the block in this sort of area, virtually all of my supernatural experiences have been rather hair-raising...

But (this to every Wiccan - and pagan!) hit the red button, please. Let's have a test, and I will not complain...

Blessings,
Lee

technomage

April 14th 2005, 09:23 PM

I think he might disagree with you, though!

I don't happen to give a rats barbecued behind what you think, Lee ... because obviously, communicating and listening don't seem to be on your thinking list right now.

"Wiccans and Witches do not cast spells against people without a very good reason. … we just dont hate you enough nor have you done anything to warrant that kind of spell work."

Lee, can a Jewish Rabbi who has never studied the New Testament give an authoritative answer to a question dealing with Christianity? Of course not--no matter how good a Rabbi he is, it's not his field of study. In the same way, Cu cannot give an authoritative answer on Wicca--no matter how knowledgeable he is in his own branch of Paganism, his answers are not necessarily accurate, because he does not walk the path, and has not studied it in depth. If you don't believe me, ask him.

Justin: What part of "never" in my quoted statement are you having problems with?
But I didn't see "never" in what you said here, or whether such punishments might be considered ethical, thus I inquire about them.

Oh, so it wasn't the word "never" ... the entire concept of reading for comprehension seems to have escaped you. So let me cut to the chase, since you seem to be to dense to understand complicated explanations:

The operative phrase was "Never boast, never threaten, never say you would wish ill of anyone."

So that leads us to a few simple conclusions....

1: To cast maleficent magic against you (or anyone else) is against our Craft Law.
2: I am not breaking Craft Law to justify your quest for a thrill.
3: I am not breaking Craft Law to illuminate your stupidity.

But I can't read a whole forum…

I'm beginning to wonder if you can read at all. :dunce:

I said "let me direct you towards some reputable Christian ex-occultists who can speak of magic from experience, and yet are Christian, so you don't have to constantly cast doubt on their veracity, as you have mine." That means sign on to the forum and talk to the ex-occultists.

See Lee.
See Lee click on this link (http://exwitch.org/forum).
See Lee register as a member. (Oh, sorry, was that too many syllables?)
See Lee ask questions and get answers from Christians.

Clear enough? Or do you want the version with pictures?

Justin

PS: Don't make me go through the "Dick and Jane" routine again just because you want to play stupid. I'm already laughing so hard I can barely type.

J

bandecoot

April 14th 2005, 10:50 PM

I may be way off base here, but lee are you aware of the rule of 3? This may only apply to the type of wiccan that I knew many years ago. But it basicly states that what you do, you recieve back 3 times. Its also known the tympanic rule.

So if they do nasty things to you, they get that same thing back 3 fold or 7 fold. Much the same principle as "what ye sow, so shall ye reap" You may have heard of it?

Of course as I dont believe in their Gods any more than I believe in your God, I am a neutral party in this.

The wiccans are of course free to correct any errors I may have made. I will read and learn.

Andrew

lee_merrill

April 15th 2005, 01:10 PM

Hi everyone,

Justin: The operative phrase was "Never boast, never threaten, never say you would wish ill of anyone."
Thanks for the clarification, I wasn’t remembering that statement.

Justin: So that leads us to a few simple conclusions....

1: To cast maleficent magic against you (or anyone else) is against our Craft Law.
How is casting a maleficent spell boasting, though? How is it threatening someone? Now it might be wishing them ill, but then by that rule, you should never send someone to jail either, or have them punished in any way that causes them pain.

So a spell to hit on someone could indeed be done with a good intent, and that is fine with me here, do this for my own good!

Which also implies I’m not thrill seeking here, but maybe I am stupid. So enlighten me! I’m not wanting to be in error about whether Wiccan power is the strongest, so let’s test it! Please and thank you.

Justin: I said "let me direct you towards some reputable Christian ex-occultists who can speak of magic from experience…”
Well, I have had encounters with occult power, yes I have! So I am not wondering if this is possible…

Andrew: are you aware of the rule of 3? This may only apply to the type of wiccan that I knew many years ago. But it basicly states that what you do, you recieve back 3 times.
Yes, I have heard this too, so (this to the Wiccans/pagans) do me good by demonstrating to me that I have a false security! Then you will have a threefold return on your good deed.

A win-win situation, so do make the point clear here that your power is on top. Otherwise, I shall consider that there are other powers that you have not accounted for, and that you should really not be Wiccans, if that is what you signed up for.

Now for myself: know that I am fully agreed with my Lord. Christ has put the Father and me into each other's arms. Many a sweet bargain He made before, and He has made this among the rest. I reign as king over my crosses. I will not flatter a temptation, nor give the devil a good word: I defy hell's iron gates.

Blessings,
Lee

technomage

April 15th 2005, 11:52 PM

So a spell to hit on someone could indeed be done with a good intent, and that is fine with me here, do this for my own good!

You really don't understand, do you, Lee? I'm sorry--I thought you were professing ignorance to get my goat, but you really don't comprehend why that's not an acceptable course of action.

Lee, despite what Richbee and people like him assert, Wicca does not state that there are "no absolutes." There are. Absolute Truth, Absolute Standards of right and wrong--these things do exist. Yes, it is quite true that a lot of "Wiccans" do not recognize these things, but they do exist.

You are asking me to do something that is absolutely wrong. Furthermore, you are asking me to do it for reasons that are absolutely wrong. And for both uses of the word "wrong," I mean that they are contrary to that Absolute Standard that I assert exists.

Lee, let me, for a moment, ask you to imagine the following conversation.

Justin: "So, your God will forgive all sin?"

Lee: "Certainly."

Justin. Well, here's a knife. Go stab that person over there and see if God forgives you or not."

That is the extent of wrong you are so casually asking me to commit. Call it ethically wrong, call it "sin," call it what you like: what you are asking violates the commandments of the Lord and the Lady, it violates the Laws of Wicca, and it violates the oaths that I have swore.

Lee, before I would cast malefic magic on you or anyone else, I would quite literally submit my body to whatever form of death you may wish of me. Not only do I, personally, feel that strongly about it, but that is the standard of behavior that the Gods require of me.

I will not--cannot--violate the commandment of my Gods, the laws of my faith, or the sanctity of my oaths for you or anyone else, Lee. I do not have the words to state my feelings in any stronger manner.

Justin

Richbee

April 15th 2005, 11:59 PM

You really don't understand, do you, Lee? I'm sorry--I thought you were professing ignorance to get my goat, but you really don't comprehend why that's not an acceptable course of action.

Lee, despite what Richbee and people like him assert, Wicca does not state that there are "no absolutes." There are. Absolute Truth, Absolute Standards of right and wrong--these things do exist. Yes, it is quite true that a lot of "Wiccans" do not recognize these things, but they do exist.

Yes, they do, but outside of God's standard, anything goes.

If we accept that only "good" witches exist in America, how can we account for the dark "evil" of European witches or Neopagaism?

England?

lee_merrill

April 16th 2005, 11:31 AM

Hi everyone,

Lee: So a spell to hit on someone could indeed be done with a good intent…

Justin: You are asking me to do something that is absolutely wrong. Furthermore, you are asking me to do it for reasons that are absolutely wrong. And for both uses of the word "wrong," I mean that they are contrary to that Absolute Standard that I assert exists.
Well, I assume if you were to catch Bin Laden you would not just set out dinner for him. Now if natural power can be used as punishment, why is it absolutely wrong to use spiritual power to do this?

I do actually hold that the use of occult power is indeed wrong, whether the intent is good or bad, but that's another topic…

But what I am asking is "There's a knife, now cut the tumor out of my belief system, though it may involve some pain in the process."

Or else I shall continue to believe that my God's power is greater than the power of Wicca and the occult, absolutely greater, and that I am not mistaken in this.

Richbee: If we accept that only "good" witches exist in America, how can we account for the dark "evil" of European witches or Neopagaism?
I do expect some Wiccans are willing to use occult power in bad ways, even! Thus my challenge here is not specifically to Justin, or anyone specifically, but to Wiccans and pagans in general here, and all the folks they might think to talk to, who might consider me challenging (flaunting, even!) their deities reason enough to raise a storm and send it to my address.

1 Kings 18:27 At noon Elijah began to taunt them. "Shout louder!" he said. "Surely he is a god! Perhaps he is deep in thought, or busy [that's a euphemism here], or traveling. Maybe he is sleeping and must be awakened."

Blessings,
Lee

technomage

April 16th 2005, 11:58 AM

Well, I assume if you were to catch Bin Laden you would not just set out dinner for him. Now if natural power can be used as punishment, why is it absolutely wrong to use spiritual power to do this?

Simple answer? You're not Bin Laden.

Do you have any concept of just how insignificant your insults are to the Lord and Lady? Dear heavens, Lee, scoffing merits nothing. Strictly on the human level, it's not within our authority to punish "blasphemy"--if the Gods decide to do something about it, They certainly do not require our intervention. But on the Divine level ... what makes you think They care if you scoff?

I do actually hold that the use of occult power is indeed wrong, whether the intent is good or bad, but that's another topic…

:yes: I'm aware of the Christian teaching on the topic.

But what I am asking is "There's a knife, now cut the tumor out of my belief system, though it may involve some pain in the process."

No, you are not--because you do not believe that there is a "tumor" in your belief system.

Or else I shall continue to believe that my God's power is greater than the power of Wicca and the occult, absolutely greater, and that I am not mistaken in this.

Would you like to know what's wrong with that belief, from my point of view?

Absolutely (pun intended) NOTHING!

Lee, your beliefs are your own. As another human being, even if I had the desire to change them, I do not have the authority to do so by force. Like you, I walk by the light I have ... and while I do believe that your "light" is flawed, I believe that mine is equally flawed. Why should I ask you to trade your lamp for mine, when mine is no better, and you are comfortable with yours. Worse yet, why should I attempt to force you to do so?

Your problem, Lee, is that you expect us to have the same religious motivations and desires that you do. We don't. We are not enjoined to proseletize ... there are a few self-proclaimed Wiccans who feel that they should, but that's their foolishness, not Wicca. We are not religiously enjoined to "punish wrongdoers," unless those wrongdoers are legally our responsibility: for instance, the Elders of a coven can assign punishment for a member of their coven who has done wrong, but cannot assign punishment for another Wiccan who is not a member of their coven. We are specifically prohibited to "punish" (your term) non-Wiccans.

You are asking Wiccans to do something contrary to Wiccan teachings, Lee. And as long as you fail to understand that, you will also fail to understand me.

Justin

Cu Mhorrigan

April 16th 2005, 06:12 PM

technomage

April 16th 2005, 06:27 PM

My own personal take is this...(And this is kind of where Justin and I differ in terms of Our theology) If somone is really out to do Me amd Mine harm, if they have reached a point where I have to lay the Magical Smack down on somone, they have done something to really get Me annoyed. I mean that Had to have really worked at it. So Much so that I need to get my hands dirty, and "witch smack" them (Mods Please Note I am using this to refer to casting Spells on someone not in a vulgar sense). For a person like yourself to really get under myy skin that bad, You would have had really ooverstepped your bounds in terms of your ethics Morality and spirituality. (Meaning you did something extraordinarily sinful to me) Hence you would be outide of your deity's realm of protective influence. (Meaning your Tushie would belong to me) Now your god may protect you out of His mercy, but It would be more out of pity's sake.
Cu, We may not differ as much as you think. Self-defense and defense of others is, by definition, not "malefic"--but I also follow the rules that it must be an active threat to my life or limb, or someone else's life or limb. And I tend to try to use "least effective force" when possible.

I do not feel it is worthwhile to do anything magically that one would not to mundanely. In other words, if I were to do a death spell on someone, it would have to be a person whom I would also be willing to kill. I've been in that situation once--not magically, but mundanely. I would be willing to "go to the knife" if it were required to save my life, or someone else's life--and I would be willing to do so magically or mundanely.

Lee, you do not threaten anything nor anyone. Neither my life nor anothers, nor anyone's safety. At best, you are a slightly silly but well-meaning person who's trying to make a point. At worst, you're being deliberately obtuse. Either way, I still consider you my friend ... even at your densest. :wink:

Justin

lee_merrill

April 16th 2005, 06:57 PM

Hi again, everyone,

But on the Divine level ... what makes you think They care if you scoff?
I suppose they are interested in worshippers?

Lee: But what I am asking is "There's a knife, now cut the tumor out of my belief system…"

Justin: No, you are not--because you do not believe that there is a "tumor" in your belief system.
But I'm not challenging me to do the surgery, either! Assuming your point of view is indeed correct, this would do me good, to dispel (with two L's?) my illusion of following the true God.

Lee: Or else I shall continue to believe that my God's power is greater than the power of Wicca and the occult…

Justin: Lee, your beliefs are your own.
But I'm more concerned that they be true! It is not problematic if there are other powers in the world, if they get along. However I don't think they do! Re the comment about any use of occult power being wrong, in the Christian view.

So if there are two opposing powers, then wouldn't it be helpful to know the characteristics of each, including which one is stronger, if one is definitely stronger than the other?

Cu: For a person like yourself to really get under my skin that bad, You would have had really overstepped your bounds…
I'm not actually fishing for a particular motive here, though, just step up and swing the bat, for whatever reason, or find a pinch hitter, for I don't believe every person with access to occult power is so scrupulous! No, I don't believe that.

Justin: At best, you are a slightly silly but well-meaning person who's trying to make a point.
In this area I am quite serious, though I'm adopting some strange postures to make this point! I have, I believe, experienced some being whacked on by occult power, and gone off the cliff, and found God's power there in any case.

I still experience this, I did today, only this is just the normal (normal supernatural?) stuff I experience, not extraordinary (so to speak!) supernatural happenings.

I did hear "Get ready!" in my head on Friday, tho that may have just been an alpha particle.

I ran a red light this morning, thinking of Merlin saying "Snick, snack, snorum" in the Sword in the Stone.

My arm is healed up now.

Well, enough blow-by-blow, I said 'till tomorrow…

Best wishes to you too, Justin, and to Cu, and everyone,
Lee

technomage

April 16th 2005, 08:47 PM

I suppose they are interested in worshippers?

Not by any information I have ever gained, any insight I have received, or any wisdom I have been vouchsafed. As I said: we are not called to proseletize.

But I'm not challenging me to do the surgery, either! Assuming your point of view is indeed correct, this would do me good, to dispel (with two L's?) my illusion of following the true God.

First you have to determine if you truly want to follow the true God. Then you have to determine if the God you currently follow is the True God. Those are your responsibility, not mine, and I refuse, point blank, to assist you in abrogating your responsibilities in this arena.

For my part, I only have two criteria:
1: Do you love God?
2: Do you love your neighbor, even if your neighbor is your enemy?

If those two criteria are true, then you're doing alright in my book.

Lee: Or else I shall continue to believe that my God's power is greater than the power of Wicca and the occult…

Justin: Lee, your beliefs are your own.
But I'm more concerned that they be true!

Then get off your butt and do your own research.

So if there are two opposing powers, then wouldn't it be helpful to know the characteristics of each, including which one is stronger, if one is definitely stronger than the other?

Lee, I do not even claim that my God is different from your God, much less that they are "opposing. You are the one who says they are "two opposing powers," not me. Therefore, it is for you to prove your claim, not me.

Have fun, Lee, because I don't even have a horse in this race.

Justin

lee_merrill

April 16th 2005, 11:02 PM

Hi Justin,

First you have to determine if you truly want to follow the true God. Then you have to determine if the God you currently follow is the True God. Those are your responsibility, not mine, and I refuse, point blank, to assist you in abrogating your responsibilities in this arena.
And a contest of strength is not an appropriate way of determining who is strongest? I think that's a pertinent request, in determining who is the true God, if such a test can be proposed.

Lee: So if there are two opposing powers, then wouldn't it be helpful to know the characteristics of each, including which one is stronger, if one is definitely stronger than the other?

Justin: Lee, I do not even claim that my God is different from your God, much less that they are "opposing."
I'm not claiming that either, in this statement! Only if there are two such powers, wouldn't knowing which one is strongest be a good idea? Especially if one power considers the other power to be evil.

Justin: Therefore, it is for you to prove your claim, not me.
I would say I have done this race before, actually, and have evidence that my God can and does hold me up, in such situations. Thus I do not consider that I am experimenting here, I'm convinced that my God is indeed the strongest…

I do this more because I was, I would hope, following instructions, and doing as I was told. But a match like this would be good evidence as to who has the valid claim to being God!

Now if there is a refusal to come to grips here, we shall not know the outcome. Although, if I may say so, we do then have some indication as to who is actually, really God.

Psalm 19:5 … like a bridegroom coming forth from his pavilion, like a champion rejoicing to run his course.

Not me being the champion, of course, but Him, for I don't have power I can raise. But the one who shows an eagerness for a contest gives an indication of knowing (if I may say so) what the outcome would be…

Blessings,
Lee

technomage

April 16th 2005, 11:16 PM

And a contest of strength is not an appropriate way of determining who is strongest? I think that's a pertinent request, in determining who is the true God, if such a test can be proposed.

Then it all boils down to one question, as far as I'm concerned: how can God contend against God? By my best understanding, you are asking God to contend against Himself: the moral equivalent would be to ask for a contest between Elohim and Adonai.

Not me being the champion, of course, but Him, for I don't have power I can raise. But the one who shows an eagerness for a contest gives an indication of knowing (if I may say so) what the outcome would be…

No, Lee, I have to disagree. What you are doing is flaunting your pride that your understanding of God is absolutely correct, and mine is not. What I have been trying to point out to you the entire time is that you are asking me to (in your terminology) sin against God for God's further glory.

Your own scripture asks, in Romans 6:1, "What then? Shall we sin more, so that grace may abound?" Go read Paul's answer to his own rhetorical question, for that is my answer to your "challenge."

Justin

Cu Mhorrigan

April 17th 2005, 09:52 AM

Cu, We may not differ as much as you think. Self-defense and defense of others is, by definition, not "malefic"--but I also follow the rules that it must be an active threat to my life or limb, or someone else's life or limb. And I tend to try to use "least effective force" when possible.

I do not feel it is worthwhile to do anything magically that one would not to mundanely. In other words, if I were to do a death spell on someone, it would have to be a person whom I would also be willing to kill. I've been in that situation once--not magically, but mundanely. I would be willing to "go to the knife" if it were required to save my life, or someone else's life--and I would be willing to do so magically or mundanely.

Lee, you do not threaten anything nor anyone. Neither my life nor anothers, nor anyone's safety. At best, you are a slightly silly but well-meaning person who's trying to make a point. At worst, you're being deliberately obtuse. Either way, I still consider you my friend ... even at your densest. :wink:

Justin
My point wasd Justin that for Him to get me to cast a spell on Him, He would really have to get me to the point were I am completely full of anger That I am in "Rhiastradhe" Or "Seeing Red" (I think I am spelling it wrong)which also means he did something really and Highly sinful to me or Mine (Especially Mine). WHich would also mean he was outside of His god's protection.

lee_merrill

April 17th 2005, 12:51 PM

Hi everyone,

By my best understanding, you are asking God to contend against Himself: the moral equivalent would be to ask for a contest between Elohim and Adonai.
And if it could be done, what would we think? What if Elohim wrote down that Adonai was an embodiment of spiritual evil?

The point is that we have two quite different views here, and I'm asking to test it.

What you are doing is flaunting your pride that your understanding of God is absolutely correct, and mine is not.
Umm, no. I'm trying to see if a diamond can scratch tempered steel, or vice versa, I'm proposing doing an actual test here, and not saying "My understanding must be correct, so there!"

Let's put it to the test, and if you have compunctions about doing this…

Cu: He would really have to get me to the point were I am completely full of anger.
So if I am extraordinarily provoking, I might get my test. Could you act as if I had made you quite angry, Cu? Or if not, could you call on someone else?

I have noticed that some folks I have met seem to be just looking for a ticket to hit on someone! Some of them might have access to occult power…

Blessings,
Lee

technomage

April 17th 2005, 01:05 PM

And if it could be done, what would we think? What if Elohim wrote down that Adonai was an embodiment of spiritual evil?

If someone found a book where such a statement was made, you would have grave doubts about the veracity of the book--for understandable reasons, because it would be in direct contradiction to your understanding of God.

Which is why I say that your scriptures are the work of men, not of God. The OT enshrined the Judean's contentions with their neighbors, and expressed that contention in religious terms. The authors of the OT were guilty of ethnocentrism--and so are you.

The point is that we have two quite different views here, and I'm asking to test it.

No, Lee--the point is you are asking to test your view, and yours alone. You have no consideration or even understanding of my view, and from what you've posted here, I have grave doubts that you are interested in learning what my view is. You are interested only in "winning" the contest.

When you understand that there is no conflict between YHVH and Kernunos--indeed, there can be no conflict--then you will understand where I'm coming from. Not until.

Justin

lee_merrill

April 17th 2005, 03:58 PM

Hi Justin,

If someone found a book where such a statement was made, you would have grave doubts about the veracity of the book--for understandable reasons, because it would be in direct contradiction to your understanding of God.
Might I be incorrect? Might the book be correct?

How is this impossible?

Lee: The point is that we have two quite different views here, and I'm asking to test it

Justin: No, Lee--the point is you are asking to test your view, and yours alone. You have no consideration or even understanding of my view…
I have been trying to understand your view, only that is not the purpose of this specific thread!

Yet if a contest could be arranged, and it occurred, if spiritual powers were in real opposition, wouldn't that affect your view? Regardless of how it turned out?

Thus wouldn't this contest be a test for your view, as well as for mine?

And (may I ask) do you really experience no opposition in the spiritual realm?

Blessings,
Lee

technomage

April 17th 2005, 04:16 PM

Might I be incorrect? Might the book be correct?

How is this impossible?

It's certainly not impossible that you're wrong ... but you don't believe it.

Lee, I posit that your view that Jesus Christ and Kernunos are two separate entities is an incorrect view. :shrug: OK, so what? Well, specifically for this "test" that you propose, that means that your asking a follower of God to violate God's word. (You may also be violating your own scriptures, in that you may be "putting your God to the test," but that's not my call.) I am specifically prohibited from doing what you have asked.

More generally, your proposed "test" would (in my view) be the action of a "house divided againt itself." Yet you seemingly have no possible comprehension that such could be possible.

To put things in terminology that you can understand (even though the terminology is not exactly correct), you are asking me to sin. The answer is no.

I have been trying to understand your view, only that is not the purpose of this specific thread!

You have been trying to understand my view, as a Wicca, or Cu and Dur's views as non-Wiccan Pagans?

Yet if a contest could be arranged, and it occurred, if spiritual powers were in real opposition, wouldn't that affect your view? Regardless of how it turned out?

Thus wouldn't this contest be a test for your view, as well as for mine?

No, it would not, because to even conceive such a "contest," I would have to step outside of Kernunos' commands for my life, and He would not permit me to cast such a spell even if I wanted to.

And (may I ask) do you really experience no opposition in the spiritual realm?

Depends on what you mean by the "spiritual realm."
* Do I fight against (as you would say) the world, the flesh, and the devil? Certainly.
* Do I fight against Jesus Christ? Certainly not.
* Do I fight against people who profess to follow Jesus Christ? Only when those people forget to follow the commandments in their Bible.

Justin

lee_merrill

April 17th 2005, 05:54 PM

Hi Justin,

Justin: To put things in terminology that you can understand (even though the terminology is not exactly correct), you are asking me to sin. The answer is no.
But it's still possible that the book is right and I'm wrong? If so, then the sooner we know this, the better, for the boundaries for sin will probably be quite different, depending on what the correct view might turn out to be.

And I'm just asking you to view the test, and the results, you need not do any more than that.

Justin: You have been trying to understand my view, as a Wicca, or Cu and Dur's views as non-Wiccan Pagans?
Well, all three, actually.

Lee: Thus wouldn't this contest be a test for your view, as well as for mine?

Justin: No, it would not, because to even conceive such a "contest," I would have to step outside of Kernunos' commands…
But I'm not asking you to cast a spell, I'm just asking if such a test (someone else can do the hexing) would be a test for your view, too, which I think it would be.

Lee: And (may I ask) do you really experience no opposition in the spiritual realm?

Justin: Depends on what you mean by the "spiritual realm." Do I fight against (as you would say) the world, the flesh, and the devil? Certainly.
Does "devil" mean an evil spiritual being? If so, there is reason for being interested in such a test as I propose. It would be nice to know if the devil can (or cannot) be defeated.

I think he is indeed real, and there is another one stronger than he is. I don't just think that, actually...

Ephesians 6:12-13 For our struggle is not against flesh and blood, but against the rulers, against the authorities, against the powers of this dark world and against the spiritual forces of evil in the heavenly realms. Therefore put on the full armor of God, so that when the day of evil comes, you may be able to stand your ground, and after you have done everything, to stand.

I have actually had times when I had to put this armor to the test, and miracle des miracles, I'm still standing…

Blessings,
Lee

Cynic Sage

April 17th 2005, 06:31 PM

technomage

April 17th 2005, 07:16 PM

But it's still possible that the book is right and I'm wrong? If so, then the sooner we know this, the better, for the boundaries for sin will probably be quite different, depending on what the correct view might turn out to be.

Again, that's your responsibility to investigate.

And I'm just asking you to view the test, and the results, you need not do any more than that.

:lol: Actually, no--if I were aware of a Wiccan taking you up on your dare, I am required to work against their spell, with any means available.

You have been trying to understand my view, as a Wicca, or Cu and Dur's views as non-Wiccan Pagans?
Well, all three, actually.

:rofl: Well, Lee, part of the problem is that you seem to be assuming that the answers are going to be identical. They aren't.

Does "devil" mean an evil spiritual being?

Literally? Not when I used the word. I do not believe in "The Devil," though I definitely have experienced spirits that seem to be hostile to life and to the Creator.(And yes, they can be defeated.)

I have actually had times when I had to put this armor to the test, and miracle des miracles, I'm still standing…

Splendid! But Lee ... I am not your enemy. Wiccans are not the enemy of Christians--though there are some foolish Wiccans who have failed to learn that. Why do you want someone who is not your enemy to smack you around?

Justin

lee_merrill

April 18th 2005, 12:02 AM

Hi everyone,

Johnny: "Thou shalt not put the LORD your God to the test", Lee.
Yes, but I thought I was obeying by issuing this challenge, certainly I can't do this on my own initiative, and certainly not in disobedience. Isn't that the force of Jesus' words? For Elijah (the namesake for this thread) did actually propose a test, when he was told to do so.

Not that I'm Elijah, of course! But just taking his example as making it not impossible to do this.

Lee: But it's still possible that the book is right and I'm wrong? If so, then the sooner we know this, the better…

Justin: Again, that's your responsibility to investigate.
Well, I'm actually not wondering! I proposed the test because I thought those were my instructions. But I have seen God deliver me and others, and don't actually have doubts that the God of Scripture is stronger. I'm mainly proposing this for the benefit of the Wiccans/pagans, who, it seems, are reluctant to take up the challenge, and some eagerness for this on my part may indicate what the two groups each consider to be the likely outcome.

Justin: I definitely have experienced spirits that seem to be hostile to life and to the Creator.
Well, now we certainly have spiritual beings in opposition, so then my question becomes a practical one for you, too, which of these beings is stronger?

Justin: And yes, they can be defeated.
So no need to be coy about this topic, yes, there is "war in the heavens." Now I wonder which side my God is on, in your view, and which side you would place the undoubtedly evil spiritual beings I have encountered…

Blessings,
Lee

P.S. I don't consider Wiccans enemies, by the way, those evil spiritual powers are the enemy, not people.

P.P.S. It's 12:00 midnight, I guess my test is actually officially over...

Malista_Dove

November 17th 2006, 03:52 PM

Hi everyone,

How about a little contest? All the Wiccans who may want to, may ah, "hit me with their best shot." You may pray for your God(s) to knock me down and/or out, and cast spells on me, and I will pray to my God for deliverance and protection, until this Sunday, April 17th...

Blessings,
Lee

You seem to have a very strong misunderstanding about Wiccan beliefs. What makes you think that we would want to cast spells on you to hurt you. This is ridiculous.

Wiccans do not wish to harm other people. Most Wiccans follow the Rede, "An ye harm none, do what thou will". None of us, I'm sure, want to create a contest that goes against our religion just for mere entertainment.

I know I'm very late with this post, but I thought I would leave a little something because I thought this was the one of the most ridiculous post I have read on this forum of Neo-Pagan religions.

I'm still in disbelief that you would think that we would want to cause you harm... :eh:

It is like trying to tempt a gentle lamb with a peice of meat.

lee_merrill

January 27th 2007, 01:25 AM

I did miss your reply, Malista, it popped up with the new forum setup, so ...

Wiccans do not wish to harm other people. Most Wiccans follow the Rede, "An ye harm none, do what thou will".
But how can you act in every instance in a way that will really harm no one, though? And does this mean never cause anyone any pain whatsoever?

Probably not, it is at times appropriate to take actions that will cause pain (like a nurse, for instance), to be helpful in the end, which is just what I was after, it is indeed helpful to know if Wiccan power is the strongest.

If not, I will look to see who can match that power, and also overcome it, and see if they would be worthy of worship.

I conclude this is so...

Blessings,
Lee

P.S. And if you say Wiccans are the lambs, I shall ask if there is no dark side

Durthorin

January 27th 2007, 10:52 AM

I did miss your reply, Malista, it popped up with the new forum setup, so ...

But how can you act in every instance in a way that will really harm no one, though? And does this mean never cause anyone any pain whatsoever?

...

The rede is not a law, it does not require that we achieve 0 harm. Its a guide, thus working to cause no harm or the minimal level of harm is our goal. As Wiccans we understand that we go thru life causing harm.. at a minimum we eat. What the rede tends to make us; is mindful of that harm. An thus we try to choose a way that causes the least harm to ourself and others.

lee_merrill

January 27th 2007, 08:21 PM

... thus working to cause no harm or the minimal level of harm is our goal.
So if you see that answering a challenge would do some good...

What the rede tends to make us; is mindful of that harm. An thus we try to choose a way that causes the least harm to ourself and others.
I must ask now though, if Wicca has a dark side, at least, with some...

Blessings,
Lee

tmancour

January 27th 2007, 09:48 PM

Yes, they do, but outside of God's standard, anything goes.

If we accept that only "good" witches exist in America, how can we account for the dark "evil" of European witches or Neopagaism?

England?

Um . . . there are plenty of "evil" witches in America. And plenty of "good" ones in Europe. Even England. Neopaganism (which Wicca is a part) isn't inherently evil any more than Christianity is. You know these things.

The problem Richbee is that to undertake such a "contest" would be a foolish expenditure of time and energy. And our religion values Wisdom and Truth the way yours values Faith and Dogma. So to condescend to such a contest would be a step off of the Path of Wisdom and . . . it's just not worth it.

Sorry.

Arion the Blue

tmancour

January 27th 2007, 10:21 PM

I must ask now though, if Wicca has a dark side, at least, with some...

Of course Wicca has a dark side. So does Christianity. There isn't a religion without a darkside. The difference between Christians such as yourself and Wiccans is that Wicca encourages us to KNOW the darkside, to UNDERSTAND the dark side, and be wise enough to know it's place in our lives. Christianity rejects the darkside but never escapes it, and in its rejection loses the valuable lessons it can teach. In its rejection it often causes "the rubberband effect", in which devout Christians use their religion as a justification for fulfilling their own dark sides.

As far as the "contest" as a whole, it's quite typical of Radical Male Monotheisms. Jehovah/Jesus/Allah all have a pathological preoccupation with who has the biggest metaphysical phallus. Most of the OT has Jehovah acting like a petulant adolescent, in need of constant affirmation and reassurance. When the three Abrhamic Faiths rub up against each other, the result is a religious "pissing contest" that emphasises might and power over wisdom and compassion.

Needless to say, the Goddess is above that sort of thing. Its contraproductive for her to indulge in such foolishness. That isn't to say she doesn't understand -- we all have our power-mad dark sides, even Abrahamic deities. Consider Her a Mom looking on patiently while a group of four year olds stands around seeing who can pee further.

The fatigue our culture has developed for this kind of juvenile behavior in the Abrahamic deities and their attendant priesthoods has been one of the big reasons that Wicca, Paganism and other Goddess religions have become so popular. It's not about Power -- it's about Wisdom. Smite, smite, smite, that's all you want to do. We're done with that. Raise our hands in defense, sure -- but the kind of contest you describe the only "takers" would be demonstrating their lack of wisdom. That isn't to say I'd discourage them -- most of us went through a militant period. But it's something for novice journeymen or older apprentices, and when they go badly (which they often do) it's a result of the inexperience and lack of wisdom of the student, not the power of the divinity.

Anyway, props for showing that Pagans and Wiccans are, largely, highly ethical folk. Or at least very wise folk. Apart from that, I don't much see what you accomplished.

Arion the Blue

technomage

January 27th 2007, 10:30 PM

So if you see that answering a challenge would do some good...

No, Lee. As I tried to explain earlier when you made this thread, doing so goes against our vows.

James Peter

January 27th 2007, 10:58 PM

How about reversing the challenge and having lee pray and ask God to smite you nasty heathens for being so evil while you trust in your gods to protect you?

Or does lee only want to take the easy side of the challenge? Much easier to make nothing happen than something...

lee_merrill

January 28th 2007, 09:14 PM

Hi everyone,

Lee: I must ask now if Wicca has a dark side…

Tmancour: The difference between Christians such as yourself and Wiccans is that Wicca encourages us to KNOW the darkside, to UNDERSTAND the dark side, and be wise enough to know it's place in our lives.
So, yes?

No, Lee. As I tried to explain earlier when you made this thread, doing so goes against our vows.
Um, no?

I’m getting conflicting answers, now one or the other must be true, this would not seem a matter of personal opinion, does Wicca include within its boundaries harming others? Now you make take a vow not to do so, but is that essential Wicca?

Or does lee only want to take the easy side of the challenge? Much easier to make nothing happen than something...
Well, as I said to Justin here previously, Christian power cannot be just wielded, nor do we take it in our hand to do this or that.

1 Kings 18:36 “… let it be known today that you are God in Israel and that I am your servant and have done all these things at your command.”

Note, this would rule out exercise of power independently, but such it seems is part of Wicca, the gods are like elder brothers and such, but not ultimate authorities.

There isn't a religion without a darkside.
Dualism certainly is not such a religion. Now if you mean people in every religion have a dark side, then I quite agree with you, but the question of interest is whether this is inside or outside the bounds of their religion, to act in harmful ways.

It's not about Power -- it's about Wisdom. Smite, smite, smite, that's all you want to do.
Well, no, I’m concerned about when others want to smite, whether my God can protect me. A practical and pressing question, I would say.

Anyway, props for showing that Pagans and Wiccans are, largely, highly ethical folk.
Wait, they have a dark side, and are highly ethical? That’s a mixed message.

But I don't mind if you would prefer to pick an area where I could use a blessing, and try and secure said blessing. I do think I could participate in that, with praying for an area of concern for one of you, and see then, who may answer.

Blessings,
Lee

technomage

January 28th 2007, 11:08 PM

We offered. He declined.

technomage

January 28th 2007, 11:25 PM

Um, no?

I’m getting conflicting answers, now one or the other must be true, this would not seem a matter of personal opinion, does Wicca include within its boundaries harming others? Now you make take a vow not to do so, but is that essential Wicca?

Lee, Durthorin and I are the only Wiccans on this forum (that I know of). Just as I would not go to a Muslim for a definitive answer on what Wicca is, or what Wicca does, I would not go to Arion or Cu for a definitive answer of what Wicca is, or what Wicca does--as much as I like and respect them, they do not practice Wicca.

And as far as Durthorin and I go--we follow different traditions of Wicca. Again, to continue the analogy, it would be like asking a Baptist about Catholicism. I am not just a Wiccan, Lee--I am a High Priest and Magus. That's a very specific tytle within my Tradition--outside of my Tradition, however, I still need five bucks to get a cup of coffee at Starbucks.

In my tradition of Wicca, yes, we are forbidden to use magic to cause harm. Period. Under any circumstances. We tried to explain that to you ... frankly, you act like you still don't believe it. Well, I will do my best to enlighten any misunderstanding you may have, but I am not responsible to break through your willful ignorance.

tmancour

January 29th 2007, 09:29 AM

Hi everyone,

So, yes?

Sorry if I think this is an essential difference between the Pagan religions and the Abrahamic.

Um, no?

I’m getting conflicting answers, now one or the other must be true, this would not seem a matter of personal opinion, does Wicca include within its boundaries harming others? Now you make take a vow not to do so, but is that essential Wicca?

You mistake custom and tradition for Dogma. The fact is that some traditions of Wicca are spiritually pacifistic. Others, like my own (yes, I was trained as a Wiccan in a Neo-Alexandrian tradition, and despite my pursuit of druidism I still consider myself a Witch, too), not so much. In matters of self-defense, defense of another or defense of the tuath (community) I am expected to exercise Wisdom in how I use my powers. I make no bones about the fact that I have used bad evil nasty spells against bad evil nasty people, but only when I was willing to accept the karmic burden on myself for my actions. It's not something one does lightly.

Note, this would rule out exercise of power independently, but such it seems is part of Wicca, the gods are like elder brothers and such, but not ultimate authorities.

Dualism certainly is not such a religion. Now if you mean people in every religion have a dark side, then I quite agree with you, but the question of interest is whether this is inside or outside the bounds of their religion, to act in harmful ways.

You confuse an Abrahamic conception of the godhead with a Pagan one. The Gods do not "give commands", trusting us to be wise or foolish enough to figure it out and live with the consequences. They are not "ultimate authorities" in the whacky Abrahamic sense. We're OK with that. There are plenty of war gods and gods of defensive violence out there to guide us in when to know to mess someone up.

Well, no, I’m concerned about when others want to smite, whether my God can protect me. A practical and pressing question, I would say.

Doubts, Lee? I thought y'all were all about some Faith?!? Faith=absolute belief without proof, and here you are seeking proof. Wouldn't it be more spiritually propitious to wait until you are actually in a lion's den to see if Jehovah can protect you? Of course, by then He might be vexed enough with you and your doubts to Call You Home. I hear he has a temper.

Wait, they have a dark side, and are highly ethical? That’s a mixed message.

Not at all. Indeed, acknowlegement of the darker side of humanity and its works, including religion, is the first step in living an ethical life. Just because I have the power and the impulse to use it doesn't mean that I should use it. Us Wise folk spend our entire lives learning how to navigate through those dark parts with our conscience as our guide. Where there is no temptation, there can be no merit, that's a basic truth of all mystical traditions.

But I don't mind if you would prefer to pick an area where I could use a blessing, and try and secure said blessing. I do think I could participate in that, with praying for an area of concern for one of you, and see then, who may answer.

Then accept my blessing for Wisdom and Tolerance. It's almost my patron goddess' holiday, and She's got a half-price sale on Wisdom. Take two, they're small.

Blessings,

Arion

Durthorin

January 29th 2007, 11:01 AM

So if you see that answering a challenge would do some good...

I must ask now though, if Wicca has a dark side, at least, with some...

Blessings,
Lee

If I thought that answering such a challange would cause no harm, yes it would be within my moral code to answer it. But having faith in the nature of magic and my Gods.. I believe it would cause harm. In point of fact at a minimum it would cause you to question your faith.. and one of the highest ideals of most Pagans is that we will not impose our will on another person. Sorry, I'm not going to try and change your mind, you have to decide you want to do that on your own.

Dark Side, we have individuals that are dark.. that twist the things they are taught and try to use them eiher thru ignorance or willfull desire for their own ends. Frankly, ever religion has people like that. When we find them we act to deal with them and protect our community from them. If we don't find them, we have faith the Gods will. Usually, my impression is having your community bring you back is a lot less painful.

Durthorin

January 29th 2007, 11:03 AM

....
In my tradition of Wicca, yes, we are forbidden to use magic to cause harm. Period. Under any circumstances. We tried to explain that to you ... frankly, you act like you still don't believe it. Well, I will do my best to enlighten any misunderstanding you may have, but I am not responsible to break through your willful ignorance.

save in defense...

technomage

January 29th 2007, 12:58 PM

save in defense...
Excuse me, Durthorin, you're correct--my phrasing should have been "egregious harm."

technomage

January 29th 2007, 12:59 PM

(yes, I was trained as a Wiccan in a Neo-Alexandrian tradition, and despite my pursuit of druidism I still consider myself a Witch, too)

I didn't know that--thanks for the gentle correction. :smile:

lee_merrill

January 29th 2007, 01:42 PM

... we follow different traditions of Wicca.
Yes, well, that means Wicca can allow harmful use of power within its borders? That was my question.

In my tradition of Wicca, yes, we are forbidden to use magic to cause harm. Period. Under any circumstances.
And you also don't believe in absolute morality, from what you have said, so then how am I to interpret your vow, and your commitment to keep it? This vow means whatever it might mean in your system of morality, not necessarily, mine.

[Edited to add attribution: Arion:] The fact is that some traditions of Wicca are spiritually pacifistic. Others, like my own (yes, I was trained as a Wiccan in a Neo-Alexandrian tradition, and despite my pursuit of druidism I still consider myself a Witch, too), not so much.
Fine, so now I need to convince you that pushing me down, or making the attempt, would be for a good purpose.

The Gods do not "give commands", trusting us to be wise or foolish enough to figure it out and live with the consequences.
This was actually my understanding of Wicca, so then you are free to exercise power by your own decision, Christians however, are not.

Lee: I’m concerned about when others want to smite, whether my God can protect me.

Durthorin: Doubts, Lee? I thought y'all were all about some Faith?!?
I meant that the question is an important one. I have confidence that God is able to protect me from occult power, having been (it would seem) subjected to constant oppression for years, virtually without letup. This has ceased, though it returned (oddly enough) in some measure yesterday.

If anyone with such power (hypothetically speaking) were to be reading this thread, and be willing to push on me with stuff like blasphemous thoughts, I may perhaps quote one David Livingstone, "Tell him to observe that I am not afraid."

Us Wise folk spend our entire lives learning how to navigate through those dark parts with our conscience as our guide.
So we're to reject any such impulses to harm others, for bad reasons? Would this be an absolute moral principle? And I thought acknowledging our dark side implied some measure of acceptance of it, such as the red claw in nature.

Then accept my blessing for Wisdom and Tolerance.
I was meaning some area that was more specific, I have a bad heart valve, would you pray for that? And let me know if there is some corresponding specific concern you have that I could pray for, or any other Wiccan here may let me know such a request.

Blessings in Christ,
Lee

technomage

January 29th 2007, 01:55 PM

Yes, well, that means Wicca can allow harmful use of power within its borders? That was my question.

Does Christianity allow Christians to pray for harm against unbelievers "within its borders?"

And you also don't believe in absolute morality, from what you have said, so then how am I to interpret your vow, and your commitment to keep it? This vow means whatever it might mean in your system of morality, not necessarily, mine.

:shrug: Lee, to be perfectly blunt, I am not sure you would believe any claim that I make--you've made quite a clear impression that because I am a Wiccan, you feel I have no morality whatsoever. At this point, I halfway expect you to ask me have I stopped beating my wife yet.

Fine, so now I need to convince you that pushing me down, or making the attempt, would be for a good purpose.

No, Lee. The only possible result of such an action would be to increase the contempt and distrust I have for you.

tmancour

January 29th 2007, 07:29 PM

Yes, well, that means Wicca can allow harmful use of power within its borders? That was my question.

Again, you confuse how Paganism works by insisting on using Abrahamic measurements. "Wicca" doesn't "allow" anything. The principals of the Craft are a set of guidelines on spiritual and moral behavior in conjunction with a potent religio-magickal system. The moral codes encourage you to not harm, because that is, ultimately, not in everyone's best interest. However, many of these same codes insist that the tribe be protected from hostiles. A lot is left up to individual interpretation, because every situation is different and the wise course of action for two different sets of situations with the same objective set of circumstances might be very different. Unlike the Abrahamic faiths, who establish one "law" as divinely given, and then spend all their time quibbling about interpreting the law.

Is there an ethically defensiable case for using offensive magick against someone? I can imagine that there would be, depending upon the circumstances. Just as Christianity acknowleges a harmful use of power, despite the "Thou Shalt Not Kill" commandment.

And you also don't believe in absolute morality, from what you have said, so then how am I to interpret your vow, and your commitment to keep it? This vow means whatever it might mean in your system of morality, not necessarily, mine.

The same could be said of your system of belief. The Abrahamic faiths have an impressive moral high-ground, on paper (see commandment above) yet when other faiths try to hold Abrahamics to account to their system AS THEY ARE UNDERSTOOD BY THE OUTSIDERS the Abrahamics have a litany of reasons why it doesn't work that way. So your commandment and your keeping of it means whatever it might mean in your system of morality, but not necessarily mine.

Fine, so now I need to convince you that pushing me down, or making the attempt, would be for a good purpose.

Not even then, actually. I can think of a thousand good reasons why any number of individuals should be pushed down (say, thirteen flights of stairs) for the good of the community, nation, or world. That doesn't mean that the Gods have required it of me, even if I had the opportunity. The "right" thing, objectively, might not always be the "wise" thing, and I try to act accordingly.

This was actually my understanding of Wicca, so then you are free to exercise power by your own decision, Christians however, are not.

Yeah, that's kind of why a lot of us left Christianity. What use Free Will if the only way into the afterlife means you cannot exercise it?

I meant that the question is an important one. I have confidence that God is able to protect me from occult power, having been (it would seem) subjected to constant oppression for years, virtually without letup. This has ceased, though it returned (oddly enough) in some measure yesterday.

Interesting. Would you extend that same confidence fo God protecting you from non-occult powers? Say, slipping and falling in front of a bus? Having your house burn down? IRS audit? It would seem that a divinity who only extended its protection to the occult realms shows either a fickle nature or a lack of potency. I mean, why would Jehovah keep the vampires off your back but let you get mugged by a crackhead? Inconsistant . . .

If anyone with such power (hypothetically speaking) were to be reading this thread, and be willing to push on me with stuff like blasphemous thoughts, I may perhaps quote one David Livingstone, "Tell him to observe that I am not afraid."

[/quote']

Your bravery is not in question here, Lee. Indeed, Pagans respect bravery highly . . . in its place. What you ask is a contest that will have very little practical benefit to either you or your "attackers" and a great possibility of unintended consequences. Not an attractive offer for anyone who claims Wisdom.

[QUOTE=lee_merrill;1832913]
So we're to reject any such impulses to harm others, for bad reasons? Would this be an absolute moral principle? And I thought acknowledging our dark side implied some measure of acceptance of it, such as the red claw in nature.

Yep. At least from my perspective. Your tradition may vary, but in my tradition the issue was not necessarily the motivation behind the impulse, but the practical outcome of such harm. What would be gained? What would be risked? Are the risks acceptable? Is the gain sufficient? Even after all of these questions are answered, you still think about it, try to imagine telling the story to your grandchildren (always a good way to judge its innate morality), agonize over it, have doubts, churn it around in your soul, and only when all the signs and portents and meditations are with you do you act. Or, conversely, you act on instinct in a crisis situation and come to terms with your decision later. Either way you have to live with the consequences. When those times come that unleash your dark side, you don't curse it -- that same "dark side" under other circumstances could be pro-survival. You correct your actions for the future with complete knowledge and understanding, not by rejecting your dark side. Again, your tradition may vary.

I was meaning some area that was more specific, I have a bad heart valve, would you pray for that? And let me know if there is some corresponding specific concern you have that I could pray for, or any other Wiccan here may let me know such a request.

Actually, Lee, my life is about as near-perfect as I could ask for ("better living through thaumaturgy"), but thank you. But I will not only mention you at my Imbolc circle, I'll try to solicit some sort of mention to Brigit on your behalf. Perhaps a poem or song. Or baked goods. Brighead loves the baked goods.

Blessed be,

Arion

lee_merrill

January 30th 2007, 12:49 AM

Hi everyone,

Lee: Yes, well, that means Wicca can allow harmful use of power within its borders? That was my question

Justin: Does Christianity allow Christians to pray for harm against unbelievers "within its borders?"
Not vindictively, no, but painful judgment is prayed for, there are many examples.

Psalm 9:19-20 Arise, O Lord, let not man triumph; let the nations be judged in your presence. Strike them with terror, O Lord; let the nations know they are but men. Selah

2 Chronicles 20:12 “O our God, will you not judge them? For we have no power to face this vast army that is attacking us. We do not know what to do, but our eyes are upon you.”

Psalm 69:22-28 May the table set before them become a snare; may it become retribution and a trap....

Revelation 6:10 They called out in a loud voice, "How long, Sovereign Lord, holy and true, until you judge the inhabitants of the earth and avenge our blood?"

Justin: Lee, to be perfectly blunt, I am not sure you would believe any claim that I make…
Really, Justin, you cannot expect me to believe you mean what I would mean by “if it harm no one” if morality is all relative, so no, I do not conclude a person whose morality is relative means what I would mean about a vow they made to harm no one.

Yet I subscribe to this trumpet-note here: “Every man has a physical right to think as he pleases; for it cannot be discovered how he thinks. He has not a moral right, for he ought to inform himself, and think justly.” (Samuel Johnson)

Arion: Again, you confuse how Paganism works by insisting on using Abrahamic measurements. "Wicca" doesn't "allow" anything.
Or disallow, I quite agree, there really are no firm boundaries in Wicca, since if “harm no one” is subject to private interpretation, we might as well drop the first clause as the Satan-worshippers do, and simply adopt the rule “Do as you please,” for that is what it boils down to.

The moral codes encourage you to not harm, because that is, ultimately, not in everyone's best interest.
This is absolutely true? And why do you seem to insist on this, thus forcing your morality on me here, may I ask?

So your commandment and your keeping of it means whatever it might mean in your system of morality, but not necessarily mine.
So really, you should not object in principle (though you may object practically) if I boil and eat you, that is simply another system of morality, just another one like yours. But no, though there are disagreements on whether an application is just or not, the principles are indeed absolute (“Don’t force your morality on me” is one notable example of popular relative morality’s absolute principles, it may be noted).

Not even then, actually. I can think of a thousand good reasons why any number of individuals should be pushed down (say, thirteen flights of stairs) for the good of the community, nation, or world.
Great, proceed with any and all spells, I renew my challenge, it will demonstrate that you worship the true god, given that in your moral system you would be concerned about me and other people to the extent of not wanting such to remain believing a delusion.

What use Free Will if the only way into the afterlife means you cannot exercise it?
I actually believe the real freedom is within the will of God, and that God’s will is not a monorail:

Genesis 2:16 And the Lord God commanded the man, "You are free to eat from any tree in the garden…”

Would you extend that same confidence fo God protecting you from non-occult powers? Say, slipping and falling in front of a bus?
Certainly, I have been healed of poisoning a number of times, so now I know God can deal with physical dangers. I also get audited about once every three years…

When those times come that unleash your dark side, you don't curse it -- that same "dark side" under other circumstances could be pro-survival. You correct your actions for the future with complete knowledge and understanding, not by rejecting your dark side. Again, your tradition may vary.
This challenge was for Justin, actually, and Malista Dove, for I do see that you embrace the whole spectrum. Justin, do you subscribe to “It’s not like right or wrong, it just is”? This seems to be a principle of Wicca, and yet when the moral questions become pressing, the note changes, and “we are all lambs that shun the meat.” Would you reject the lion nature that rends and tears and eats prey? Would you or Arion reject this for yourself?

If not, why not, isn’t this part of the seamless fabric of the whole?

But I will not only mention you at my Imbolc circle, I'll try to solicit some sort of mention to Brigit on your behalf.
Well, thank you, and your life I would expect is not all perfect, surely you have some concern or other that the living God, would be possibly called to address for you. I will report on the heart condition (I get extra beats several times a week as a rule).

2 Kings 1:3 'Is it because there is no God in Israel that you are going off to consult Baal-Zebub, the god of Ekron?'

Blessings,
Lee

technomage

January 30th 2007, 12:53 AM

Justin, do you subscribe to “It’s not like right or wrong, it just is”?

Again, Lee--why should I bother to answer your questions if you do not believe the answers?

lee_merrill

January 30th 2007, 01:44 PM

Again, Lee--why should I bother to answer your questions if you do not believe the answers?
But the problem is in fact that I do believe you when you say you hold there are no absolute moral principles, that each person's morality is relative. So then when you tell me that you made a vow you intend to keep, this must be within your own morality system, which might be very different than my own.

As an example, Muslims believe they can say anything to further a purpose (this perhaps stems from the fact that Allah can do anything, without regard to any moral principles, so they would seem in fact to not believe in moral absolutes). So what they tell you may be only what they want you to hear (not that you would do this, but I still have to address this possibility). As another example, "Islam is a peaceful religion", we are assured on many sides, only perhaps this is as long as you are not an infidel, or maybe as long as you don't walk on the sand near Mecca. So their system of morality, their understanding of this would be different than the Westerner's, we would not insert such qualifications. So a Muslim saying "I made a vow" may have unexpected qualifications, or may be intended for some effect the statement will have, and I see no way to know how to resolve this if a person does not believe in moral absolutes.

You say it's ten feet by your ruler, and I have no idea how long it is, because everyone gets to decide how long one foot will be, if we don't agree that it is even possible for there to be an absolute standard.

And even if by some means what I believe of your moral system is correct, how then is it at all certain that circumstances changing will not revise it tomorrow? For I would expect that your system of morality is not cast in concrete.

Blessings,
Lee

technomage

January 30th 2007, 02:05 PM

But the problem is in fact that I do believe you when you say you hold there are no absolute moral principles, that each person's morality is relative. So then when you tell me that you made a vow you intend to keep, this must be within your own morality system, which might be very different than my own.

Less different than you would ever believe, Lee. Your morality is also relative.

And even if by some means what I believe of your moral system is correct, how then is it at all certain that circumstances changing will not revise it tomorrow? For I would expect that your system of morality is not cast in concrete.

"Relative" does not mean "unfixed," Lee.

Lee, you may paint whatever pretty word pictures you choose--but what I see is a man who wants me to violate a vow for his own purient curiosity. Worse yet, I see a man who assumes that I would have no problem with violating my vow, because (to your mind) "Oh, it could change tomorrow."

Your arrogance, contempt for my path, and downright ignorance disgusts me, Lee.

lee_merrill

January 30th 2007, 02:15 PM

Less different than you would ever believe, Lee. Your morality is also relative.
Different, so then, the same? But if you mean they are similar in that they are both relative, then I still wonder how to know what you mean by 10 feet on your personal ruler.

"Relative" does not mean "unfixed," Lee.
I know, only if my view may vary from yours, then your view may then possibly vary at different times.

Lee, you may paint whatever pretty word pictures you choose...
I'm not playing games here, I know occult power is real, and casting harmful spells is indeed part of Wicca. You must know this, given the level of Wicca you are at, there is a dark side to it, and to skip around this is unconscionable.

... but what I see is a man who wants me to violate a vow for his own purient curiosity.
I am not actually wondering if occult power is stronger than God's.

Nor do I want you to violate a vow and harm someone just to satisfy curiosity, I would like though to put to the test the claim that occult power is ultimate power, that question would be worth answering for people other than myself, and I wouldn't mind a confirmation, given that I have experienced what seems to be intense oppression. As I have said before, you need not do this operation, Arion is welcome to proceed.

Worse yet, I see a man who assumes that I would have no problem with violating my vow, because (to your mind) "Oh, it could change tomorrow."
Why do people have different moralities, in your opinion? That would help decide whether a person's own morality system can change. You also and others do need to address for me this question:

Do you subscribe to “It’s not like right or wrong, it just is”? This seems to be a principle of Wicca, and yet when the moral questions become pressing, the note changes, and “we are all lambs that shun the meat.” Would you reject the lion nature that rends and tears and eats prey? Would you or Arion or Malista reject this for yourself?

If not, why not, isn’t this part of the seamless fabric of the whole?

Blessings,
Lee

technomage

January 30th 2007, 02:31 PM

Different, so then, the same? But if you mean they are similar in that they are both relative, then I still wonder how to know what you mean by 10 feet on your personal ruler.

Then why not ask, and skip the ridiculous and insulting charade posed by the OP?

lee_merrill

January 30th 2007, 02:42 PM

The only way I'm going to know is if we can both compare our rulers to an absolute standard, but this would seem to be what you do not believe in.

Blessings,
Lee

technomage

January 30th 2007, 02:46 PM

The only way I'm going to know is if we can both compare our rulers to an absolute standard,

Incorrect, Lee. Two relative standards can be compared against each other.

but this would seem to be what you do not believe in.

It's not "do not believe in," Lee--I am persuaded that an absolute standard does not exist.

lee_merrill

January 30th 2007, 04:03 PM

Two relative standards can be compared against each other.
Well, when you say you will help people given conditions X, then I still wonder what you mean by help them, you might mean "present Wicca in a favorable light," which I would not consider helping them. The only way to resolve this is to know for sure whether Wicca is a good path or not, in some sense independent of your or my opinion of it.

A more fundamental question is whether your needs may take precedence over my own, and when. Should a person always be self-sacrificial? Or is there no room for some considered selfishness, after appropriate evaluation?

This also cannot be resolved without some independent standard.

Blessings,
Lee

technomage

January 30th 2007, 04:09 PM

Well, when you say you will help people given conditions X, then I still wonder what you mean by help them, you might mean "present Wicca in a favorable light," which I would not consider helping them. The only way to resolve this is to know for sure whether Wicca is a good path or not, in some sense independent of your or my opinion of it.

A more fundamental question is whether your needs may take precedence over my own, and when. Should a person always be self-sacrificial? Or is there no room for some considered selfishness, after appropriate evaluation?

This also cannot be resolved without some independent standard.

If you're looking for an "independant standard," then you have the choice of the relative standard of community consensus, or the illusory "Absolute Standard" out of some book that proposes (falsely) to be from the hand of God.

Take your pick. I don't care. But leave me alone.

lee_merrill

January 30th 2007, 04:40 PM

If you're looking for an "independant standard"...
What I am saying instead, is without such a standard, there is no way to make comparisons such as those outlined above.

Take your pick. I don't care. But leave me alone.
I'm not willing to coast on such issues, it also seems we have a conclusion here, now you really do need to answer the other questions I posed to you, by which I mean the following:

Why do people have different moralities, in your opinion? That would help decide whether a person's own morality system can change.

And do you subscribe to “It’s not like right or wrong, it just is”? This seems to be a principle of Wicca, and yet when the moral questions become pressing, the note changes, and “we are lambs, actually.” Would you reject the lion nature that rends and tears and eats its prey? Arion? Malista? I would also hope to hear from you on this.

If not, why not, isn’t this part of the seamless fabric of the whole?

Blessings,
Lee

Durthorin

January 30th 2007, 05:20 PM

Why do people have different moralities, in your opinion?

Because they are individuals. Each person uniquely arrives at the things he believes are moral.. doing so is based on his upbringing, faith, ssociety and culture. Many items of that shared morality will agree with other people.. others will be of less or or greater importance.

That would help decide whether a person's own morality system can change. You also and others do need to address for me this question:

Every person can change in just about every facet of their lives.

Do you subscribe to “It’s not like right or wrong, it just is”? This seems to be a principle of Wicca, and yet when the moral questions become pressing, the note changes, and “we are all lambs that shun the meat.” Would you reject the lion nature that rends and tears and eats prey?

I have been a soldier and a cop.. accepting those callings required me to decide if I could or would take a life. I decided I could do so accepting that within my code of ethics how and why I would do it and that even if it was within those coes I would have to accept the ramification of that act. Many traditions do not see that as right or wrong, good or evil.. they see it as a matter of community and balance. An listening to this I'm coming to the conclusion that to use your analogy of the foot long ruler.. your being told we're on the metric system and continue to ask how many inches we have on our ruler.

Danu Bless, Dur

technomage

January 30th 2007, 06:01 PM

Lee, what part of "leave me alone" are you having trouble comprehending?

lee_merrill

January 30th 2007, 06:11 PM

Lee, what part of "leave me alone" are you having trouble comprehending?
If you have abandoned any claim to a system of thought worthy of consideration, then of course I have no quarrel with you. However, if you are going to speak of the benefits of Wicca, then I shall ask you my questions.

Blessings,
Lee (will get back to you later, Durthorin...)

technomage

January 30th 2007, 06:56 PM

If you have abandoned any claim to a system of thought worthy of consideration, then of course I have no quarrel with you. However, if you are going to speak of the benefits of Wicca, then I shall ask you my questions.

You have neither the moral capacity nor the wisdom to understand the answers.

lee_merrill

January 30th 2007, 07:07 PM

Well then, at least answer them for the benefit of those who do have such moral capacity and wisdom...

Blessings, still,
Lee

technomage

January 30th 2007, 07:32 PM

Well then, at least answer them for the benefit of those who do have such moral capacity and wisdom...

If one with those capacities asks, I shall.

lee_merrill

January 30th 2007, 07:51 PM

If one with those capacities asks, I shall.
Erm, it's not looking so reassuring, your profession of the Rede, I must say, if you feel you have a ticket to strike me with words after (we may be frank?) you got the worst of an argument here.

Blessings,
Lee

lee_merrill

January 30th 2007, 07:58 PM

Hi Durthorin,

Every person can change in just about every facet of their lives.
Yes, so then if someone assures me they have a firm commitment to a vow, and also that their morality is relative, I shall not expect that to be so firm as far as practical dependability.

[C.S.] Lewis: Leavis demands moral earnestness; I prefer morality.

Amis: I'm with you every time on that one.

Lewis: I mean I'd sooner live among people who don't cheat at cards than among people who are earnest about not cheating at cards...
Or people whose current moral perspective is not to cheat at cards...

I have been a soldier and a cop...
I admire people who do those jobs, but instead I was referring to predation, such as lions do, would you reject on principle, to use an extreme example, eating a human? Killing other offspring if you become the man of the house with a woman who has other children? Should everyone reject these?

... your being told we're on the metric system and continue to ask how many inches we have on our ruler.
Certainly if there are no moral absolutes, we cannot resolve the questions I am asking.

Blessings,
Lee

Durthorin

January 30th 2007, 08:22 PM

Hi Durthorin,

Yes, so then if someone assures me they have a firm commitment to a vow, and also that their morality is relative, I shall not expect that to be so firm as far as practical dependability.

All morality is by its nature relative. What isn't is an individuals code of ethics. The culture I'm a member of may say its alright to kill you.. my personal ethics would forbid it without reason. Yoou can see.. there is a qualifier.

[C.S.] Lewis: Leavis demands moral earnestness; I prefer morality.
Amis: I'm with you every time on that one.
Lewis: I mean I'd sooner live among people who don't cheat at cards than among people who are earnest about not cheating at cards...

Or people whose current moral perspective is not to cheat at cards...

Everyone is working on "current moral perspective" an at any moment that "moral perspective" can change.

I admire people who do those jobs, but instead I was referring to predation, such as lions do, would you reject on principle, to use an extreme example, eating a human? Killing other offspring if you become the man of the house with a woman who has other children? Should everyone reject these?

Any of those circumstances.. I can build a theoretical circumstance were they would be the moral choice. Would it be my personal ethical choice. No. Based on my ethics I would reject them at the start. But external factors would effect what is a moral choice.

Certainly if there are no moral absolutes, we cannot resolve the questions I am asking.

Blessings,
Lee

Then we can't resolve your problems.

technomage

January 30th 2007, 08:53 PM

Erm, it's not looking so reassuring, your profession of the Rede, I must say, if you feel you have a ticket to strike me with words after (we may be frank?) you got the worst of an argument here.

I have not "struck you with words," Lee. I did speak the truth, and if that hurts, then perhaps you should do something to correct it.

And there is no argument. There is only you asking that I do something that is contrary to my vows.

shunyadragon

January 30th 2007, 11:43 PM

lee_merrill

January 31st 2007, 12:00 AM

All morality is by its nature relative. What isn't is an individuals code of ethics.
So how many makes a code? Five people? Three? But I see no reason to insist on a group decision here.

Everyone is working on "current moral perspective" an at any moment that "moral perspective" can change.
Yes, but the question is whether I can discuss with you about such principles. If we agree there are absolute principles, there is hope of making progress, without that, none.

Any of those circumstances.. I can build a theoretical circumstance were they would be the moral choice.
Well, we part company here, sir, no, it is never right to do either of these.

Then we can't resolve your problems.
That is in fact my point, the point Justin does not acknowledge for some reason, perhaps you would want to discuss this with Justin? If there are no absolute standards, then indeed we can't decide such moral questions, not really.

Justin: I have not "struck you with words," Lee. I did speak the truth, and if that hurts, then perhaps you should do something to correct it.
Well, here, "You have neither the moral capacity nor the wisdom to understand the answers" could be construed as a slam, saying this is a charade implies I'm insincere, and so on. I have not insisted you break your vows (which is your complaint), I do insist that I have no reason to think your moral framework resembles mine, you need to now answer why people in your opinion have different moral frameworks, in order to advance the discussion.

The reason for a lack of answers on this point and others might indicate, it may perhaps be, a lack of answers! It might.

shunyadragon: Why don't you pray for God's army of angels to smit the pagans and heathens. That would be more in line with your belief.
It seems I must again repeat that Christian power cannot be wielded at will like Wiccans wield power by their own decision. And again, I am not relishing smiting, rather I have this question of whether in any given instance where occult power might be exercised, if my God can defend me.

I'm convinced he can, and recommend his shelter.

2 Samuel 22:31-32 ... the word of the Lord is flawless. He is a shield for all who take refuge in him. For who is God besides the Lord? And who is the Rock except our God?

And I have had occasion of testing this and found it true.

Blessings,
Lee

shunyadragon

January 31st 2007, 06:57 AM

So how many makes a code? Five people? Three? But I see no reason to insist on a group decision here.

Yes, but the question is whether I can discuss with you about such principles. If we agree there are absolute principles, there is hope of making progress, without that, none.

Well, we part company here, sir, no, it is never right to do either of these.

That is in fact my point, the point Justin does not acknowledge for some reason, perhaps you would want to discuss this with Justin? If there are no absolute standards, then indeed we can't decide such moral questions, not really.

Well, here, "You have neither the moral capacity nor the wisdom to understand the answers" could be construed as a slam, saying this is a charade implies I'm insincere, and so on. I have not insisted you break your vows (which is your complaint), I do insist that I have no reason to think your moral framework resembles mine, you need to now answer why people in your opinion have different moral frameworks, in order to advance the discussion.

The reason for a lack of answers on this point and others might indicate, it may perhaps be, a lack of answers! It might.

It seems I must again repeat that Christian power cannot be wielded at will like Wiccans wield power by their own decision. And again, I am not relishing smiting, rather I have this question of whether in any given instance where occult power might be exercised, if my God can defend me.

I'm convinced he can, and recommend his shelter.

2 Samuel 22:31-32 ... the word of the Lord is flawless. He is a shield for all who take refuge in him. For who is God besides the Lord? And who is the Rock except our God?

And I have had occasion of testing this and found it true.

Blessings,
Lee

What sort of test would falsify such a claim?

It sounds like buying insurance against being hit by an alien flying saucer. You can say the insurance worked, because you were not hit.

lee_merrill

January 31st 2007, 10:15 AM

What sort of test would falsify such a claim?

It sounds like buying insurance against being hit by an alien flying saucer...
Well, as mentioned, I have had occasion of testing this, if you have had no such encounters, great.

But in any case, Wiccans do claim there is real power they can wield, some exercise this power in harmful ways, some in beneficial ways, I'm willing to have such do either as a test, and I'm glad to try and have a mutual blessing test, and see what then may occur.

Certainly if nothing happens, that means either there was no power in the first place, or there was another power stopping it, this would be the exercise (as they do say) for the reader.

Blessings,
Lee

Durthorin

January 31st 2007, 12:17 PM

So how many makes a code? Five people? Three? But I see no reason to insist on a group decision here.

A society has morality, an individual has ethics. Each of us builds a personal code of ethics based on society and culture. American Society has a certain morality, Christianity has a certain morality.. often they are in conflict.. Often they agree. Your personal code of ethics is how you have come to reconcile those differences and fill in the blanks. You and I have different codes of ethics. You may say it is wrong to commit adultry because it violates the commandments of God, I say it is wrong because to do so would violate an oath I have given and inflict harm on my relationship with my wife.. an if she found out it would cause her emotional harm. Both of us have reached the same ethical outcome but for different reasons.

Yes, but the question is whether I can discuss with you about such principles. If we agree there are absolute principles, there is hope of making progress, without that, none.

Well, we part company here, sir, no, it is never right to do either of these.

But is doing what is moral the same as doing what is right? There are for example points in the Bible where God commanded men to perform actions that if you made th decision would have been immoral.. bu they obeyed God.. therefore they were right. but if the action was immoral.. and there is an absolute morality.. no matter if God ordered them or not, would they not sill be immoral? If God ordered you to slay your first born son, would that be moral?

That is in fact my point, the point Justin does not acknowledge for some reason, perhaps you would want to discuss this with Justin? If there are no absolute standards, then indeed we can't decide such moral questions, not really.

Other Traditions have other answers, just as differening Denominations in Christianity do. Neither Christianity or Wicca are monolithic in their answers to ethics or theology. I think we live better with our differences.. <chuckle> At least Gardenarians and Alexandrians havn't tried to kill each other over what direction to place water in.. (tho I will admit hearing fierce arguments.)

tmancour

January 31st 2007, 12:51 PM

Not vindictively, no, but painful judgment is prayed for, there are many examples.

Psalm 9:19-20 Arise, O Lord, let not man triumph; let the nations be judged in your presence. Strike them with terror, O Lord; let the nations know they are but men. Selah

2 Chronicles 20:12 “O our God, will you not judge them? For we have no power to face this vast army that is attacking us. We do not know what to do, but our eyes are upon you.”

Psalm 69:22-28 May the table set before them become a snare; may it become retribution and a trap....

Revelation 6:10 They called out in a loud voice, "How long, Sovereign Lord, holy and true, until you judge the inhabitants of the earth and avenge our blood?"

Sounds like a happy, well adjusted bunch of people . . . but are they suitable role models for young children? I don't know what's more scary, the idea that these folks would try to call down the power of the universe on their tribal foes, or that the godform in question would actually condescend to do so?

Really, Justin, you cannot expect me to believe you mean what I would mean by “if it harm no one” if morality is all relative, so no, I do not conclude a person whose morality is relative means what I would mean about a vow they made to harm no one.

Yet I subscribe to this trumpet-note here: “Every man has a physical right to think as he pleases; for it cannot be discovered how he thinks. He has not a moral right, for he ought to inform himself, and think justly.” (Samuel Johnson)

Our point exactly. We just place more emphasis on informing oneself and thinking justly.

Or disallow, I quite agree, there really are no firm boundaries in Wicca, since if “harm no one” is subject to private interpretation, we might as well drop the first clause as the Satan-worshippers do, and simply adopt the rule “Do as you please,” for that is what it boils down to.

No, it really doesn't. That's as damning a simplification of the Rede as I've seen. Because the same level of interpretation is applied to that second clause: it isn't an invitation to liscentiousness, as you infer, or we'd be the most popular religion in the country right now. It is an admonition to self-exploration for the purpose of discovering one's divine Will. When newbies discover the hard truth of the Rede, the weak fade away and often turn to some whacky brand of Christianity -- Wicca is work. The "firm boundaries" are constructed as we forge our spiritual strength. To allude that our morals are so flexible as to approve of high crimes is as purposefully false as using the Christian liturgy ("This is my Blood, this is my Body") as prima facae evidence of cannibalism. Judge us by our actions, not your interpretations of our rules. We'll extend you the same courtesy.

This is absolutely true? And why do you seem to insist on this, thus forcing your morality on me here, may I ask?

Absolutely? No. Usually? Yes. And I don't insist on "forcing" my morality on you. Wiccans adopt the Rede voluntarily, of their own volition. Unlike Christians, we don't seek to impose our methods of morality on others.

So really, you should not object in principle (though you may object practically) if I boil and eat you, that is simply another system of morality, just another one like yours. But no, though there are disagreements on whether an application is just or not, the principles are indeed absolute (“Don’t force your morality on me” is one notable example of popular relative morality’s absolute principles, it may be noted).

Well, "It's okay to force your morality on me . . . sometimes" is hardly an intellectually defensible position, now is it?

Great, proceed with any and all spells, I renew my challenge, it will demonstrate that you worship the true god, given that in your moral system you would be concerned about me and other people to the extent of not wanting such to remain believing a delusion.

Lee, Lee, Lee. It's YOUR trip about whether the god you worship is "the true god". Obviously you are having some doubts. I've pretty much made up my mind at this juncture, and if the failure of a theoretical spell is enough to sway over twenty years of spiritual discipline, then my belief isn't worth much now, is it? And it is well within my belief system to allow you to believe a delusion. We Pagan types have not been tasked to correct the ravings of madmen or fools. We teach, we learn, we do our best.

I actually believe the real freedom is within the will of God, and that God’s will is not a monorail:

Genesis 2:16 And the Lord God commanded the man, "You are free to eat from any tree in the garden…”

You are entitled to believe that. See my discussion about madmen and fools, above. I'm not here to correct you -- at most, I'm a bit part in your play that makes you feel important for a while for gently smacking the heathens. Sure, you're free to eat from any tree in the garden (except THAT one -- apparently Jehovah couldn't find a more protected spot. Face it, mythologically he set Adam up to fail.) I'm allowed to eat of any fruit in the world . . . but I've been granted the wisdom to know which ones would be a better idea and which would not.

Certainly, I have been healed of poisoning a number of times, so now I know God can deal with physical dangers. I also get audited about once every three years…

So does the fact I haven't suffered from anything more serious than dental surgery in over 20 years indicative of my divinity's ability to protect me? Or does it just prove I'm a careful and lucky guy?

This challenge was for Justin, actually, and Malista Dove, for I do see that you embrace the whole spectrum. Justin, do you subscribe to “It’s not like right or wrong, it just is”? This seems to be a principle of Wicca, and yet when the moral questions become pressing, the note changes, and “we are all lambs that shun the meat.” Would you reject the lion nature that rends and tears and eats prey? Would you or Arion reject this for yourself?

If not, why not, isn’t this part of the seamless fabric of the whole?

Face it Lee, Life is funny: nobody gets out alive. As for myself, should Nature intervene and send me off to my next incarnation, then that is for Her to decide. That doesn't mean I won't fight it or try to avoid it. But we all die, Christian mythology notwithstanding. It's natural. Everything dies. It isn't a problem.

Well, thank you, and your life I would expect is not all perfect, surely you have some concern or other that the living God, would be possibly called to address for you. I will report on the heart condition (I get extra beats several times a week as a rule).

2 Kings 1:3 'Is it because there is no God in Israel that you are going off to consult Baal-Zebub, the god of Ekron?'

Yeah, see, I don't live in Israel. None of my people did. So why should I care about their national god, just because he claims to be the demiurge and the omniscient, omnipresent and omnipotent? And no, I don't have a concern that I will be called before Jehovah's Throne and asked to give account. I firmly stand behind my spiritual decisions. I'm not going to worry about the judgement of a deity that I have already judged as unworthy of my worship.

And my life is about perfect. Let's see, loving wife, three healthy kids, great health, security, good house, decent income, great job, professional success, spiritual strength, opportunities to learn and practice . . . yep, I'm set. I've got a lot of dental work (due to a very foolish episode from my youth) but I'm not going to hold that up as proof that my life sucks. I'm grateful for what I have, and my religion, magick, and my gods are all to credit for it.

Hope the heart thing gets better. Brighead has been known to be a healing goddess. I'll see what I can do.

Oh, and look for harps in the next couple of days. If you see a harp of any sort, that's Brigit's message that She heard me and is acting on it. If She isn't too busy -- this is a crazy time of year for Her.

Blessings,

Arion

tmancour

January 31st 2007, 01:05 PM

Well, when you say you will help people given conditions X, then I still wonder what you mean by help them, you might mean "present Wicca in a favorable light," which I would not consider helping them. The only way to resolve this is to know for sure whether Wicca is a good path or not, in some sense independent of your or my opinion of it.

Lee, you help present Wicca in a favorable light just by posting here. Thank you!

What do you mean by a "good" path? Let's see what your definition of that is before we proceed.

A more fundamental question is whether your needs may take precedence over my own, and when. Should a person always be self-sacrificial? Or is there no room for some considered selfishness, after appropriate evaluation?

This also cannot be resolved without some independent standard.

While sacrifice for the good of the family, tuath or nation is indeed a value among most Pagans, we don't (most of us) subscribe to the kind of limitless self-sacrifice that Christian and Buddhists aspire to. Your needs take precedent over mine TO ME only in very rare, relative situations, and even then the decision to sacrifice is MINE alone. If I find it within my enlightened self-interest to do so, I might. In many other situations, not so much.

lee_merrill

February 1st 2007, 10:59 PM

Hi everyone,

Long post alert!!

Durthorin: A society has morality, an individual has ethics.
Even if alone on a desert island? I don’t see why.

You may say it is wrong to commit adultry because it violates the commandments of God, I say it is wrong because to do so would violate an oath I have given…
No, I also say it’s wrong because it harms other people, and violates the law of love.

But is doing what is moral the same as doing what is right?
Yes, that is what I understand and would say these words do mean what you said here.

There are for example points in the Bible where God commanded men to perform actions that if you made th decision would have been immoral.
Again the motive must be love, and acting in a person’s best interest, so if someone is drowning, it would be both moral and right to ignore a no-trespassing sign in order to save them. Acting by the rule-book is not always moral or what is right, unless the rule you mean is the law of love.

“Love does no harm to its neighbor. Therefore love is the fulfillment of the law.” (Rom. 13:10)

If God ordered you to slay your first born son, would that be moral?
Yes…

Genesis 22:2 Then God said, "Take your son, your only son, Isaac, whom you love, and go to the region of Moriah. Sacrifice him there as a burnt offering on one of the mountains I will tell you about."

Lee: If there are no absolute standards, then indeed we can't decide such moral questions, not really.

Dur: I think we live better with our differences.. <chuckle>
Certainly some issues are not right or wrong, and need not be decided one way or the other. Other issues do require an answer, such as cannibalism, and without absolute standards, there is no way to decide them. Let us note that it would not easily be done, to live with differences on the question of cannibalism…

Arion: What do you mean by a "good" path? Let's see what your definition of that is before we proceed.
One that benefits the people who follow it, in an ultimate sense, one that makes them unselfish, one that leads to truth.

Arion: I don't know what's more scary, the idea that these folks would try to call down the power of the universe on their tribal foes, or that the godform in question would actually condescend to do so?
So then there can be no possible judgment of justice? You are assuming that these requests for judgment are unjust.

While sacrifice for the good of the family, tuath or nation is indeed a value among most Pagans, we don't (most of us) subscribe to the kind of limitless self-sacrifice that Christian and Buddhists aspire to. Your needs take precedent over mine TO ME only in very rare, relative situations, and even then the decision to sacrifice is MINE alone. If I find it within my enlightened self-interest to do so, I might. In many other situations, not so much.
Quite so, so then there’s no way to resolve such questions with relative morality?

Our point exactly. We just place more emphasis on informing oneself and thinking justly.
Well, yes, but I would say Samuel Johnson did not mean thinking what you think! Which is what relative morality boils down to, it’s a tautology, it seems, and he undoubtedly meant more than that.

It seems by the way you all do conclude I don’t think justly! Which means you in fact have an absolute standard, if you (as it seems) expect me and others to concur in your conclusion.

Lee: … if “harm no one” is subject to private interpretation, we might as well drop the first clause as the Satan-worshippers do, and simply adopt the rule “Do as you please”…

Arion: the same level of interpretation is applied to that second clause: it isn't an invitation to liscentiousness, as you infer, or we'd be the most popular religion in the country right now. It is an admonition to self-exploration for the purpose of discovering one's divine Will.
Which would seem to mean what is right and wrong is based on your private interpretation. Now you might end up with a system that demands great privations and self-discipline, it need not be licentious, only you did choose that, so I think my point would still stand, even in that case. For in this case, you please to have high standards of discipline, and again we get “Do as you please.”

When newbies discover the hard truth of the Rede, the weak fade away…
They just don’t realize that they get to choose what harming others might or might not be.

To allude that our morals are so flexible as to approve of high crimes…
I note an absolute standard here…

Judge us by our actions, not your interpretations of our rules.
But I thought I was allowed my own interpretations? Why are you forcing your morality on me?!

And I don't insist on "forcing" my morality on you.
Well, you just forbade me to judge by my interpretation, you know…

Well, "It's okay to force your morality on me . . . sometimes" is hardly an intellectually defensible position, now is it?
Sure it is, if your morality is correct (requiring an independent standard). That’s why there are laws! You can’t legislate anything but morality. But of course, making a law doesn’t change people, so you can’t force your morality on people in that sense, they do have to choose it.

Lee, Lee, Lee. It's YOUR trip about whether the god you worship is "the true god". Obviously you are having some doubts.
Well, no, but I was seemingly being challenged back then, and thought of this by way of reply. Let’s have it out, you know…

… and if the failure of a theoretical spell is enough to sway over twenty years of spiritual discipline, then my belief isn't worth much now, is it?
I was really addressing those who claim to be able to ride over such as me. If you claim no such ability at all, or even no such inclinations, then you need not listen to my challenge.

And it is well within my belief system to allow you to believe a delusion.
That’s odd that you wouldn’t want me to know the (absolute, apparently) truth. Such a number of absolute principals! I think I shall adopt you as a fellow absolute moralist.

We Pagan types have not been tasked to correct the ravings of madmen or fools.
Ah. Two more principles for our collection here, I can be really a madman (and not just according to your perception) and also really foolish.

Face it, mythologically he set Adam up to fail.
I do agree.

I'm allowed to eat of any fruit in the world . . . but I've been granted the wisdom to know which ones would be a better idea and which would not.
Absolutely, eh? Sorry—can’t resist.

So does the fact I haven't suffered from anything more serious than dental surgery in over 20 years indicative of my divinity's ability to protect me? Or does it just prove I'm a careful and lucky guy?
I … have no idea. But the question is when there is a need (which you will certainly have some day, I would say) then which god can really help. I’ve actually had good health overall too—by the way.

But we all die, Christian mythology notwithstanding. It's natural. Everything dies. It isn't a problem.
But I was asking about whether we should imitate the lion in its predatory aspects.

So why should I care about their national god, just because he claims to be the demiurge and the omniscient, omnipresent and omnipotent?
It might be more than a claim? You would probably be aware that I have concluded it is.

And no, I don't have a concern that I will be called before Jehovah's Throne and asked to give account.
Maybe I should pray for you in that regard! To have it become clear, if this is true.

Hope the heart thing gets better.
I appreciate the good will. And I’ll let you know what turns up (or turns down!).

Oh, and look for harps in the next couple of days. If you see a harp of any sort, that's Brigit's message that She heard me and is acting on it.
Will keep the ol’ eye peeled for harpsies.

If She isn't too busy -- this is a crazy time of year for Her.
An idle mind is the, erm, devil’s workshop. :smile:

Blessings,
Lee

Durthorin

February 2nd 2007, 06:20 AM

Hi everyone,

Long post alert!!

Even if alone on a desert island? I don’t see why.

Born alone on a desert island, raised alone? If not then when your stranded on the island you arive with your societies mores, norms and cultural norms already in place. Those norms effect what you personal decide.. to quote a man, "No man is an island."

Again the motive must be love, and acting in a person’s best interest, so if someone is drowning, it would be both moral and right to ignore a no-trespassing sign in order to save them. Acting by the rule-book is not always moral or what is right, unless the rule you mean is the law of love.

An if the law of love says kill every man, male child and adult woman? Thats a strange sort of love? and contradicts: “Love does no harm to its neighbor. Therefore love is the fulfillment of the law.” (Rom. 13:10). Does it not?

Certainly some issues are not right or wrong, and need not be decided one way or the other. Other issues do require an answer, such as cannibalism, and without absolute standards, there is no way to decide them. Let us note that it would not easily be done, to live with differences on the question of cannibalism…

A flight went down in the Andes.. if I remember a soccer team was there.. to stay alive until rescue they ended up eating their own dead. Had they not done so they would have all died. Historically other occasions like this have occured. Right/Wrong.. moral? Those that rescued them seem to think they did the right thing in eating other human beings.

You have agreed that its moral to kill your own child if you think God commands you to do so.. yet you considering killing a child immoral do you

lee_merrill

February 3rd 2007, 04:49 PM

... if the law of love says kill every man, male child and adult woman? Thats a strange sort of love? and contradicts: “Love does no harm to its neighbor. Therefore love is the fulfillment of the law.” (Rom. 13:10). Does it not?
Not unless we know the end of these people, after death.

A flight went down in the Andes.. if I remember a soccer team was there.. to stay alive until rescue they ended up eating their own dead. Had they not done so they would have all died. Historically other occasions like this have occured. Right/Wrong.. moral?
I could see that, though being horrible, also being within the realm of moral possibility. What I refuse is to kill and cannibalize a living person.

You have agreed that its moral to kill your own child if you think God commands you to do so.. yet you considering killing a child immoral do you
Yes, taking life in our own hands is wrong, any life, yet God does determine the day of each person's death, and sometimes involves people in sending others to the next life, for he knows all the results. The question then becomes whether we can trust his wisdom.

You have not yet answered for me, nor Justin, whether we should adopt the posture of the lion at times. If I address your difficult questions, you all should respond to mine.

Blessings,
Lee

P.S. What happened to Justin the relative moralist, I also wonder. Not to mention Durthorin as well. For calling someone unwise means you are measuring by a standard independent of your view, or others...

tmancour

February 5th 2007, 03:14 PM

Again the motive must be love, and acting in a person’s best interest, so if someone is drowning, it would be both moral and right to ignore a no-trespassing sign in order to save them. Acting by the rule-book is not always moral or what is right, unless the rule you mean is the law of love.

“Love does no harm to its neighbor. Therefore love is the fulfillment of the law.” (Rom. 13:10)

Or "Love is the Law; Love Under Will." -- Aliester Crowley

Yes…

Genesis 22:2 Then God said, "Take your son, your only son, Isaac, whom you love, and go to the region of Moriah. Sacrifice him there as a burnt offering on one of the mountains I will tell you about."

So human sacrifice is moral in Christianity? Or is it only moral if "God" tells you to do it? How do you know the message is authentic? It seems like an awfully easy out, "God told me to do it -- it has to be moral!"

I think this gets to the heart of the matter: most Pagans wouldn't agree to do something amoral like religious infantacide just because a divinity asked them to. For us, Good is an independent concept from "God". Just because your amoral direction comes from a divine source does not mean that it is automatically good. Whereas to most Christians, anything Jehovah says or commands is Good by default, no matter how morally reprehensible it is. I suppose that's at the base of all Abrahamic fundamentalism. To me, it's like Marxism: a cheap way to justify violence.

One that benefits the people who follow it, in an ultimate sense, one that makes them unselfish, one that leads to truth.

. . . all of which are highly subjective ideals. Benefit to the people who follow it? I'm sure you would find plenty of people who benefit from Paganism -- myself included -- even in an "ultimate sense" (another phrase widely open to interpretation). Unselfishness, likewise, is a subjective measurement. To give to the poor might be unselfish in one perspective, but to do so to gain divine favor and at the expense of your own family would seem highly selfish. Even "self-sacrifice", often considered to be the highest form of unselfishness, has an element of selfishness within: the man who rushes into a fire to save a baby, and orphans his own four kids. Selfish? Or unselfish?

And then there is truth. Or Truth, if you prefer. While you Abrahamics only see Truth if it was written down by centuries-old literate desert nomads with a writing fetish, we Pagans see Truth as evident in our own eyes, through our own experiences. Which one is more "True"? Honestly, I find more Truth in a tree than a library of books. And to dismiss that perspective out of hand because my experience doesn't jive with your scripture is intellectually dishonest.

So then there can be no possible judgment of justice? You are assuming that these requests for judgment are unjust.

"Justice" implies a legal proceeding engendering a balanced argument on a level playing field. The situation here is not "just" -- the Hebrews are asking for a full-scale divine smackdown on people who don't share their culture, on the basis that they violated the rules of a culture that they don't belong to. How is that "just"? When is the wholesale slaughter of an entire tribe "justice"? Sounds to me like the usual petty bickering between tribal divinities that every culture on the planet has been subjected to.

Quite so, so then there’s no way to resolve such questions with relative morality?

I don't see why not.

Well, yes, but I would say Samuel Johnson did not mean thinking what you think! Which is what relative morality boils down to, it’s a tautology, it seems, and he undoubtedly meant more than that.

See, that's the problem with textual-based arguments (and religions): words mean things, but they mean different things to different people. When two people use the same text to justify radically divergent modes of thought, hilarity ensues. I'll stick with the Path of Wisdom, which doesn't hold the written word as implicitly holy.

It seems by the way you all do conclude I don’t think justly! Which means you in fact have an absolute standard, if you (as it seems) <b>expect me and others to concur in your conclusion.</b>

Emphasis mine. This is where we part company. I don't automatically assume that my opinion -- in this case that you don't think justly -- should automatically be shared by you or anyone else. I might argue to persuade you to think so, if I thought it would be Wise, but I do not insist that you adhere to my personal opinions as an absolute.

Which would seem to mean what is right and wrong is based on your private interpretation. Now you might end up with a system that demands great privations and self-discipline, it need not be licentious, only you did choose that, so I think my point would still stand, even in that case. For in this case, you please to have high standards of discipline, and again we get “Do as you please.”

My private interpretation is served by a lifetime of learning, experience, and development of Wisdom -- I trust it more than I trust anyone else's. I think you will find that those who use "Do What Thou Wilt" as a justification for amoral or immoral behavior (according to the LCD of society) discover quickly and painfully that their justifications have led them off of the Path of Wisdom. In those cases the practitioner is usuall either ostracized or imprisoned, depending upon the severity of their justification. But it is still as valid and moral as leafing through a book in a language no one speaks anymore from a culture that no one lives in anymore and finding a piece of text to justify the most outrageous of actions. The difference is that the Pagan takes personal moral responsibility for his or her actions, and doesn't pawn off their responsibility on a deity.

They just don’t realize that they get to choose what harming others might or might not be.

No, they learn very early on that whichever choice they make, they have to live fettered to the consequences. Many people don't have the stomach to look their own actions in the face, and end up finding a religion where they can abrogate their personal responsibility to a convenient deity. Once you realize that Wicca and most other Pagan religions requires a tremendous amount of study and discipline in order to work as a personal philosophy and religion, it's a lot easier to go to someplace where a quick baptism and confession makes all of your responsibilities go away without a lick of study. Wicca is not for the lazy.

I note an absolute standard here…
But I thought I was allowed my own interpretations? Why are you forcing your morality on me?!
Well, you just forbade me to judge by my interpretation, you know…

Sure it is, if your morality is correct (requiring an independent standard). That’s why there are laws! You can’t legislate anything but morality. But of course, making a law doesn’t change people, so you can’t force your morality on people in that sense, they do have to choose it.

Lee, I merely suggested that you judge us by our actions, I didn't demand it. You are quite free to judge me by whatever standard you choose, it bothers me not. And I see a difference in an individual's personal morality and the laws a secular society establishes for all people as part of the understood social contract. Many of those laws, BTW, have little or nothing to do with "morality".

That’s odd that you wouldn’t want me to know the (absolute, apparently) truth. Such a number of absolute principals! I think I shall adopt you as a fellow absolute moralist.

Not at all. It isn't that I don't WANT you to know the "Truth", absolute or otherwise, I just reccomend that you get your wisdom on your own. IMO Revealatory religions are pointless wastes of time that do little or nothing to challenge the spirituality of the individual, save by accident. If you want to know "my truth" for your own enlightenment, we can (and are) discussing the matter. But it is entirely up to us as individuals. Relatively speaking.

Ah. Two more principles for our collection here, I can be really a madman (and not just according to your perception) and also really foolish.

Lee, you can't be a proper Relativist without using a healthy dose of equivication: You might be a madman from my perspective, based on what little evidence I've got to work with. You might also be a fool, from my perspective, but I rarely pass that kind of judgement based on one or two foolish gestures. It usually takes a preponderance of the evidence over several years -- properly, a lifetime -- before I would make such an opinionated pronouncement. I was merely pointing out that if you are, indeed, a madman or fool, it is not my job to correct your notions. Heck, even if you aren't, it isn't my job.

I do agree.

Well that hardly seems fair or just, now does it?

I … have no idea. But the question is when there is a need (which you will certainly have some day, I would say) then which god can really help. I’ve actually had good health overall too—by the way.

Oh, I've had a need . . .

When my first son was born, he was born with several complications that necessitated that he go on life support within minutes of birth. It was a profoundly trying time for me, as my wife also had complications from labor and was unstable. She wasn't, medically speaking, supposed to be able to have kids in the first place (Helps to belong to a fertility religion sometimes!) but she did after I beseeched the Goddess for intervention. Likewise, when I prayed to Brighead, patroness of healing, newborns and motherhood, for Her benevolence on my son and wife, She came through in a big way. Both recovered fine, and I have two more healthy kids to boot.

But those hours were terrible. When the best pediatrician in the best natal ward on the East Coast gives your baby a 50-50 shot, it's crunch time. The Goddess Brighead came through for me, even marking my son with a flame-shaped birthmark around his navel.

So my question was answered. By the Goddess, not Jehovah.

But I was asking about whether we should imitate the lion in its predatory aspects.

The lion in the wild only slays at need, and for the sustenance of his pride. Actually it's the lioness, but still . . . I don't see why we shouldn't emulate the lion, then, in supporting our families. The lion, as any top-of-the-food-chain predator, doesn't kill for the pure joy of it -- they hold highly sensative and important roles in their ecology, and to engage in wanton bloodletting would undermine long-term survival. Just because you are a highly successful predator doesn't make you an amoral wasteful sadist.

It might be more than a claim? You would probably be aware that I have concluded it is.

As you are aware I have concluded that it isn't, on the principal of Silliness.

Maybe I should pray for you in that regard! To have it become clear, if this is true.

If you must. Don't cost nothin'. Won't do any good. But if you need the practice, go ahead. But I do not fear facing Jehovah or any other divinity. My conscience is clear. If Christianity's rules are, indeed, the ones that truly govern the universe, then I will gladly go to Hell knowing that my conscience is clear. Something I don't think Jehovah could honestly say.

I appreciate the good will. And I’ll let you know what turns up (or turns down!).
Will keep the ol’ eye peeled for harpsies.

Any sign of harps? Just curious. And Brighead was working overtime in my neck of the woods, delivering a made-to-order Snow Day for me and my kids. We celebrated by drawing pictures of what inspires us and putting them up on the family altar.

Arion

lee_merrill

February 7th 2007, 01:27 AM

Hi Arion,

Or "Love is the Law; Love Under Will." -- Aliester Crowley
Who also came up with the Rede? If so, current Wicca may not have such ancient roots as is professed.

So human sacrifice is moral in Christianity? Or is it only moral if "God" tells you to do it?
The second, only God knows enough to determine the time and manner of a person's death.

How do you know the message is authentic? It seems like an awfully easy out, "God told me to do it -- it has to be moral!"
Because people claim to be policemen, who aren't, that makes it where there are no authentic policemen?

For us, Good is an independent concept from "God". Just because your amoral direction comes from a divine source does not mean that it is automatically good.
I agree, God cannot lie, for instance, for lying is wrong in an inherent sense, and not just by divine decree.

Benefit to the people who follow it? I'm sure you would find plenty of people who benefit from Paganism -- myself included -- even in an "ultimate sense" (another phrase widely open to interpretation).
Not if the God of the Bible, if his power is pure, and occult power is essentially wickedness. This is in fact the Christian claim here.

Unselfishness, likewise, is a subjective measurement. To give to the poor might be unselfish in one perspective, but to do so to gain divine favor and at the expense of your own family would seem highly selfish.
Right, it's the motive that's critical, not even the deed per se.

And to dismiss that perspective out of hand because my experience doesn't jive with your scripture is intellectually dishonest.
This is absolutely, erm, true? You see, you are indeed a moral absolutist, as are all the Wiccans here, by demonstration from their own words. You speak from a perspective of real honesty, which is indeed valid, only it also is not relative. It is not Wicca, either...

... the Hebrews are asking for a full-scale divine smackdown on people who don't share their culture, on the basis that they violated the rules of a culture that they don't belong to.
No, the claim again is that occult power (of the idols) is essentially evil.

Psalm 115:8 Those who make them will become like them, and so will all who trust in them.

Such tests as the ones I propose here in this thread may perhaps clarify this somewhat.

I don't see why not.
So then how do you resolve the question of whether it’s good to present thaumaturgy in a good light, without an independent measure of thaumaturgy?

See, that's the problem with textual-based arguments (and religions): words mean things, but they mean different things to different people. When two people use the same text to justify radically divergent modes of thought, hilarity ensues. I'll stick with the Path of Wisdom, which doesn't hold the written word as implicitly holy.
But how does “become wise” not boil down to “think what you think,” if all morality is relative?

I don't automatically assume that my opinion -- in this case that you don't think justly -- should automatically be shared by you or anyone else.
Unless we are talking about intellectual dishonesty?

I think you will find that those who use "Do What Thou Wilt" as a justification for amoral or immoral behavior (according to the LCD of society) discover quickly and painfully that their justifications have led them off of the Path of Wisdom.
Yet another absolute principle! I quite agree, may it be said…

Galatians 6:7 Do not be deceived: God is not mocked. A man reaps what he sows.

The difference is that the Pagan takes personal moral responsibility for his or her actions, and doesn't pawn off their responsibility on a deity.
But you may have heard of the Day of Judgment?

Daniel 7:10 A river of fire was flowing, coming out from before him. Thousands upon thousands attended him; ten thousand times ten thousand stood before him. The court was seated, and the books were opened.

Once you realize that Wicca and most other Pagan religions requires a tremendous amount of study and discipline in order to work as a personal philosophy and religion, it's a lot easier to go to someplace where a quick baptism and confession makes all of your responsibilities go away without a lick of study. Wicca is not for the lazy.
Nor Christianity.

Luke 13:24 "Make every effort to enter through the narrow door, because many, I tell you, will try to enter and will not be able to.”

Arion: Judge us by our actions, not your interpretations of our rules.

Lee: But I thought I was allowed my own interpretations?

Arion: Lee, I merely suggested that you judge us by our actions, I didn't demand it.
Um, you gave me a clear dichotomy, “do this, not that.” I don’t interpret such as a suggestion, this is obviously a moral principle you subscribe to, and expect me to adopt if I have good insight.

Lee, you can't be a proper Relativist without using a healthy dose of equivication: You might be a madman from my perspective, based on what little evidence I've got to work with. You might also be a fool, from my perspective…
This however was in response to Durthorin and Justin, who clearly thought me first a madman and then a fool, and stated this in a way they expected me to see and agree with, again, if I had the grace to see it. You may be a relative moralist yourself, but from your comments above, I think not…

The lion in the wild only slays at need, and for the sustenance of his pride.
You have not apparently seen the nature show where the lion plays with the wounded antelope like a cat plays with the mouse.

Well that hardly seems fair or just, now does it?
Absolutely, now?

So my question was answered. By the Goddess, not Jehovah.
I’m sorry you went through that rough time, and I’m glad your son made it through.

As you are aware I have concluded that it isn't, on the principal of Silliness.
I have concluded God can deliver me, on the principle of survival, I do believe I have had tests in this area.

I note also another absolute principle here.

If you must. Don't cost nothin'. Won't do any good. But if you need the practice, go ahead.
Will pray for knowledge of a day of judgment, such as is taught in Scripture.

But I do not fear facing Jehovah or any other divinity. My conscience is clear. If Christianity's rules are, indeed, the ones that truly govern the universe, then I will gladly go to Hell knowing that my conscience is clear. Something I don't think Jehovah could honestly say.
You have a measure here you expect me to follow, apparently, by which you would defend yourself before Jehovah. How can you have a clear conscience, when you are claiming relative morality, and actually practicing the opposite, and this has been pointed out to you? This also would be deceiving yourself.

Any sign of harps? Just curious.
No, and a few heart extra-beats, but I will keep you posted.

Blessings to you and yours,
Lee

Durthorin

February 7th 2007, 02:09 AM

This however was in response to Durthorin and Justin, who clearly thought me first a madman and then a fool, and stated this in a way they expected me to see and agree with, again, if I had the grace to see it. You may be a relative moralist yourself, but from your comments above, I think not…

Lee, if you would be so kind as to clairify this. I do not think that I stated that you were a madman or a fool...

Brighid Bless, Dur

lee_merrill

February 7th 2007, 10:00 AM

Lee, if you would be so kind as to clairify this. I do not think that I stated that you were a madman or a fool...
Oops, you are right, you didn't say such, I must have somehow confused you with someone else. My apology...

Durthorin

February 7th 2007, 02:13 PM

Oops, you are right, you didn't say such, I must have somehow confused you with someone else. My apology...

Thank you Lee, my grandfather told me when I was younger never insult a man unless you have decided he's worth killing. An if your smart you'll deliver the insult when your standing on his grave.

Pragmatic man my Grandfather..

Danu Bless, Dur

*love*

February 7th 2007, 04:37 PM

*love*

February 7th 2007, 04:39 PM

Minds are like parachutes — they only function when open.’

— Thomas Dewar

technomage

February 7th 2007, 04:46 PM

You all should be ashamed of yourselves, especially you, lee, for starting this. It should'nt be a contest and if you were truly a christian, you would realize that. God teaches acceptance, not competition. I also think you should do a little research on paganism and what they beleive before you go attacking their gods and way of life. It is christians like you that give the rest a bad name.

Greetings, *love*,

Lee's fundamental position is that his understanding of God is correct, and that ours is not only incorrect, but our understanding places us in some measure of danger in this life, and in danger of eternal torment after we die. From what he understands, it's not a "competition," but trying to persuade us to leave a building that is on fire. In that, he's doing what he does out of love--completely selfless, altruistic love. He gains no benefit whatsoever if we were to become Christian, and he's not looking for any benefit.

My problem is that he consistantly refuses to understand what he proposes to be opposed to. Lee is actually arguing against a straw-man parody of what Wicca is, rather than what it actually is. I do not know if he honestly does not understand Wicca, if he chooses to remain ignorant, or if he simply cannot grasp what we're saying, but ... as a favor to us, please don't chide him for what he is doing. My only objection with him is how he is doing it.

*love*

February 7th 2007, 05:05 PM

technomage

February 7th 2007, 05:24 PM

that sounds like a comepition to me.

It was--but remember, the "competition" was how he was doing what he wanted to do. And as I said, my disagreement is not with what he is doing, but how he is doing it. :smile:

lee_merrill

February 8th 2007, 01:00 AM

You all should be ashamed of yourselves, especially you, lee, for starting this. It should'nt be a contest and if you were truly a christian, you would realize that. God teaches acceptance...
You are not, however, being very accepting of my view! Can't I have a different moral system?

And why would you prevail on me to adopt your (very absolute, by all appearances) principle?

Justin: Lee is actually arguing against a straw-man parody of what Wicca is, rather than what it actually is.
Then Wiccans do not believe in relative morality? I must say it does seem that they don't practice it!

Blessings,
Lee

technomage

February 8th 2007, 01:05 AM

Then Wiccans do not believe in relative morality?

Wiccans do not believe in your ill-conceived and near-libelous charicature of "relative morality."

lee_merrill

February 8th 2007, 01:15 AM

Wiccans do not believe in your ill-conceived and near-libelous charicature of "relative morality."
Um, can't I have a different moral system? Why do you not seem to accept my system?

It's not like my view is right or wrong, it just is...

Or words to that effect...

Blessings,
Lee

technomage

February 8th 2007, 01:17 AM

Um, can't I have a different moral system?

When your "moral system" involves telling lies about what I believe or how I think, then no. By doing so, your moral system intrudes unjustly upon me.

lee_merrill

February 8th 2007, 02:19 PM

When your "moral system" involves telling lies about what I believe or how I think, then no. By doing so, your moral system intrudes unjustly upon me.
Then you will need to explain for me why your comments (as this recent one as well) do not indicate any absolute standards.

You certainly expect me to see your point, only I might have a quite different view of what lying would be in my moral system. It also would seem that you are trying to impose your system of morality on me to some degree, as did "Love", as do all the people I discuss with here.

You all are not very Wiccan Wiccans, it would seem to me. Speaking from my system of morality and insight, of course!

Blessings,
Lee

technomage

February 8th 2007, 02:35 PM

Then you will need to explain for me why your comments (as this recent one as well) do not indicate any absolute standards.

No, Lee--I don't. I have tried to explain what Wiccan morality is to you. You dismissed, derided, and scoffed. At this point, sit in your own ignorance and enjoy it.

Durthorin

February 8th 2007, 03:21 PM

Then you will need to explain for me why your comments (as this recent one as well) do not indicate any absolute standards.

You certainly expect me to see your point, only I might have a quite different view of what lying would be in my moral system. It also would seem that you are trying to impose your system of morality on me to some degree, as did "Love", as do all the people I discuss with here.

You all are not very Wiccan Wiccans, it would seem to me. Speaking from my system of morality and insight, of course!

Blessings,
Lee

Reality is a matter of personal perspective. I have a story I tell on occasion to point out a problem that you seem to be having.

A Christian see's himself in this world as a man standing in a lifeboat while around him a ship sinks into icy killing water. In that water are hundreds of people. He tries to encourage them to swim to the life boat, he tosses them rope and drags them bodily from the freezing water. He is frustrated.. shocked and saddened when people swim away from the boat.. ignore the rope and tell him its the wrong color or even jum out of the boat once he pulls them in. He sees what he is doing as heroic, a duty to save lives.. and he can not understand the maddness of those that would choose to die rather than get in the boat.

At the same time a non-Christian sees himself walking thru a park.. its a sunny lovely day. He may have problems but nothing of major note.. then he encounters a man standing in a cardboard box.. screaming that he's going to die if he doen't get in the box.. throwing rolls of twine in his direction and if he steps to close dragging him into the box. To the man in the sunny park.. the guy in the box is not in touch with reality.

The problem is that both Christian and non-Christian have entirly different world views, the world they live in and how they see it is in many ways as different as the icy sea and the sunny park.

In my mind, your not here to chat.. to learn.. to even meet people and create friendships. You come here to witness. to win heathens to the Lord. If not in those terms you come here to present the Gospel in the hopes that God will move in their hearts and they will accept Jesus. Its your mission. An unfortunaly as a Pagan I'm always aware that in any converstion.. the mission is running behind your eyes and across your heart. An to the mission, I'm just an object.

Pagan's and many Christians have fundimentally different views of morality. Personally, I don't think either side can resolve those.