Donnmathan

Thank you for using the word "some," there. Some of us don't deal with Native American beliefs other than to show them passing respect - we're not Native Americans. Others (and I know one) go to the source, and learn Native American beliefs where and how they should be learned - with utmost respect and reverence, from the people who hold those beliefs and traditions. Do you not think that it could be the same for some of the Christians, Baidarka, in regards to Jewish faith and tradition? Or at least, it was at some point in time?

All of the above ignores one fact, however...New Agers are not, and never were, born and raised to Native American faith and traditions. The same can't be said of the Christians - the first Christians were a cult that formed in the Jewish faith.

Derec

I think Indians are being a bit silly when they complain about the New Agers. After all, many Indians take elements of xianity and mix it with their traditional beliefs. Why is that ok but non-Indians taking elements of Indian religions and mixing it up with their own is not? A bit of a double standard there ....

Note: copyright on both the Bible and the American Indian belief systems are long since expired. These beliefs are thus in the public domain and can be used by whomever in whatever manner desireable. That includes total bastardization of said beliefs.

Derec

Baidarka

Hi Derec

First of all most Native Americans don't appreciate being called "Indians". I think that us nonindigenous Americans should respect that. If some Native Americans have incorporated elements of Christian belief into their religion that is their right since it was forced on them by very aggressive Christian missionaries. It is their right because their children were stolen from them and sent to Christian schools where they were robbed of their culture. It is their right because we live on their land.
Your use of the word "silly" in this context is quite inappropriate.
It is true that Jews and Native Americans can not use the courts to legally put a stop to cultural theft but common decency, good taste, and ethics demand respect for other people's cultural property.
To picture how ugly the Christian libel really is imagine if some wacky white cult made Crazy Horse into a God and then blamed the Lakota for betraying him to his death, that they came to this conclusion through some sort of magical trance, and through the Lakota they then called all Native Americans guilty of this terrible Deicide.
The Romans robbed, raped and murdered in Israel. Then they stole the religion and rewrote and reinterpreted it to make themselves the good guys and the Jews the evil betrayers and killers of God.

Derec

Some don't mind, others do. In any case, the term "Native American" has not been used by Indians only, but also by US-born Americans that sought to demark themselves from immigrants.

Why? "Native", "indigeneous" are terms that Indians seek to demand more rights than the "non-native", "non-indigenous". I am a fiorm believer in equal rights before law.

Nobody is forcing anything on them today. Would you than say that, if you see coercion as a basis for that right, an Indian that has been brought up in a pure Manitou-worshipping fashion has no right to incorporate elements of Christianity in their beliefs?

Let us not talk about 100 years ago. Let us talk now, where Indian stone-age culture has special status. Child-abuse laws do not apply, see the brutal Sun-Dance custom. Part-Indian children can only be adopted by Indians. That means that an non-Indian close relative of the child (say a grandmother) has less righst to adopt the child than an Indian stranger. Indians can use drugs in their ceremonies.

And don't start me on tax exemptions, monopolies and special fishing and hunting rights!

Territorial boundaries shift and have done so throughout centuries and millenia. US is as much their land as Afghanistan is Macedonian. By the way, as much as non-Indian Americans have come to this country from Europe, Asia etc. so the Indians have coem here from other continents. They are not "indiginous" in the true meaning of the word.

After some time cultural treasures become public domain. Judaism isn't a monolith that has always existed either (and neither are Indian religions) but has itself evolved. Hebrews living around 700 BCE or thereabouts (before the exile and subsequent incorporations of elements of Zoroastrianism and Hellenism into Judaism) would not find much in common with 1 century BCE - 1 century CE temple Judaism. And even less with modern rabbinic Judaism or modern Christianity. As a matter of fact, I doubt that a 8th century BCE priest could decide which one is the proper successor of his religion.

Hey I didn't say Christianity wasn't silly, just that noone living today owns ancient religious texts/ideas. Therefore noone living today has either the legal nor moral right to restrcit their use.

Derec

Baidarka

"We don't want your books. Just your Genesis and your Laws out of which our savior is born and to which we become grounded with reality = full circle."

Those are our books you infernal sphinx

"Just look and see how the Law was needed to convict Joseph"

Convict who? Of what? Which Joseph?

"and later cricify Jesus"

Cricify???? Cricify???? Cricify???? Cricify???? Cricify???? Cricify???? Cricify???? Cricify????

"who had abandoned Judaism "

Where in tarnation can you find anything supporting the idea the Rabbi Yeshu abandoned Judaism.

"because he was grounded to the reality of Genesis"

How does Genesis lead one away from Judaism?

" in Luke's lineage."

Luke's lineage? What are you trying to say? Come on spit it out man!

"We don't care about you history and started counting on day one in the year of our Lord.

We don't care about your treasures and have our own piled ski-high in Rome. To accumulate these all you need is a brush and some paint when God is on your side."

Give us back the Coliseum (built with the ill gotten temple treasury) you Catholic treasure thief!

Weltall

I just had to comment on this. By that definition, nobody is indiginous to any part of the world except one tiny part of Africa. Therefore the French aren't indiginous to France, the Chinese aren't indiginous to China, the Russians aren't indiginous to Russia and your ancestors weren't indiginous to wherever they came from.

Baidarka

Derec-"Hey I didn't say Christianity wasn't silly, just that noone living today owns ancient religious texts/ideas. Therefore noone living today has either the legal nor moral right to restrcit their use."

To borrow a quote from the old Ronnie "there you go again" with that inappropriate word "silly".
Mystical Jewish evil is central to the Christian myth. Supersessionism is an ugly part of the Christian paradigm.
There is a difference between silly and evil.

Derec

That is my point. Nobody calls Russians indiginous to Russia, or French indiginous to France. The word "indiginous" is reserved to stone-age cultures, such as Indians and is usually used to demand some special rights for them. For example, it is ok for Indian Makhai tribe to hunt whales, but not for Norwegians or Japanese. All three cultures have whaling as part of their culture, but with Indians you can throw in the label "indiginous" ...

But we are going seriously off topic so I sugegst we drop it.

Derec

Occams_Razor

The comparison has some merit but the beliefs of all cited are equally fatuous.
Sprechen zie Englisch?
How does your proclamation that believers of your particular fairy tale are superior to believers of other fairy tales follow from the preceding statement?
Hmmm. So following this train of mangled logic, since the "technical" advances of the ancient greeks were so high, some might argue, well in advance of the catholics of which you speak so irrelevantly, can I presume that Zeus was a really cool god, worthy of much bowing and scraping by the you credulous lot?
If your god works in in mysterious ways, I guess it's only fair that you speak in like manner.
Keep telling yourself that. It's great justification for living a life on your knees, groveling among the thousands of others as equally convinced as you of the truth of their philosophical crutch.
Proved? We're not even sure he was a real historical person.

Ramonda

Agreed. It is human to learn from each other and individulize what we pick up. It's been done since history was recorded.

I don't think there is any tragedy for anybody to learn of another's culture even if it isn't in the depth of the other. It's a very good way to broaden one's view. How nice it would have been had the early settlers learned to appreciate the customs and beliefs and vice versa. We would have few regrets historically. Better late than never