True...and Crowley was not a Christian although he used "The Beast" and "Our Lady of Babalon" as deity symbols....he wasn't a Satanist either although some tabloids paint him as such.

Quote:

<font face="Verdana, Arial" size="2"> Waning Moon Conrad wrote: There are plenty.....the Catholic Mass for example! jpbrooks: Well, actually I was referring to Paganism in general, not specifically to the form(s) of Paganism that perform rituals that parody those of Christianity.

You misunderstand me here (I think).

The Catholic Mass is a piece of ritual magic as is the transubstantiation at its climax. The Chalice as a symbol of receptivity and thus a tool for invoking the divine, various solar deity symbolism connected to the Christ narrative by Catholicism, Eastern Orthodoxy and probably the Coptic Church as well.

I'm working my way through "On the Mysteries" by Iamblichus of Chalcis and I shan't be surprised at all if I find references to rituals that parallel the Catholic Mass which are yet applied to pagan divinities.

The sort of symbolism used in the ritualistic lineages of Christianity don't just arise out of nowhere.

But I now realize that I misunderstood you. You were referring to specifically Wiccan paganism.

There are some things that are definitely pagan and some that are Celtic as well and which are used by Wiccans, the Triple Goddess is a good example. I think we could safely say that the provenance of the magic circle is not stictly and exclusively Judao-Christian.

The only thing I can really say is that some stuff and perhaps a lot of stuff in Wicca is definitely borrowed.

Buddhism helped itself to some Hindu symbolism and cosmology. Buddhism and Shivaite Tantricism hopped into bed with each other and produced Vajrayana. How then can I disapprove of Wicca borrowing?

Quote:

<font face="Verdana, Arial" size="2">jpbrooks: I think I see your point. I always thought that the Judeo-Christian "elements" in Wicca were due to Aleister Crowley whose work influenced both Gardner and Sanders, and who himself was heavily influenced by Freemasonry. Freemasonry espouses a "universal brotherhood" among humans and compatibility with all of their religions. So, it is not surprising that Crowley, in his work, would find it easy to draw on the ritual forms and symbols of other religions.

I think you're absolutely right here. It actually goes a little bit further apparently. Crowley was actually paid to write the first Book of Shadows by Gardner after Gardner left the Ordo Templi Orientis because the OTO wasn't big enough to contain both of their egos.

I just realized a vital error in my first posting... I meant to say "My sister claims that Paganism is the only religion that DOESN'T contradict science"

Of course that is a bunch of rubbish. Is anyone else here just plain sick of Miss Cleo?

-Derek

Detached9 wrote:

Is anyone else here just plain sick of Miss Cleo?

jpbrooks:

I'm not recommending her services, (or the services of any other "psychic", for that matter), but I personally find her rather attractive and, at times, entertaining.

Waning Moon Conrad wrote:

You misunderstand me here (I think).
The Catholic Mass is a piece of ritual magic as is the transubstantiation at its climax. The Chalice as a symbol of receptivity and thus a tool for invoking the divine, various solar deity symbolism connected to the Christ narrative by Catholicism, Eastern Orthodoxy and probably the Coptic Church as well.
I'm working my way through "On the Mysteries" by Iamblichus of Chalcis and I shan't be surprised at all if I find references to rituals that parallel the Catholic Mass which are yet applied to pagan divinities.

The sort of symbolism used in the ritualistic lineages of Christianity don't just arise out of nowhere.

jpbrooks:

I think you're right about this.
I grew up in a very "protestant" Christian environment, where not much attention was paid to liturgical forms and symbols in worship, (unless you were part of the clergy, and were required to know about such things). I have only recently begun to study the relationship between ritual and human psychology.


[This message has been edited by jpbrooks (edited May 27, 2001).]

Hmmm, OK. A religion contradicts science by denying facts which scientific research has found. Maybe the Wiccans do manage to perform some magic (I'm ever sceptical, of course), but it wouldn't contradict scientific facts, for there may be a scientific explanation for psychokinesis and all tha. On the other hand, any religion that denies biological evolution, heliocentricity, spherical earth, geological dating timescale, gravity, cause of disease by germs, cause of earthquakes by plate tectonics and other findings of science is in contradiction to science.

Who's Miss Cleo?

And one apologetic for the scientific errors in such supposedly revealed works as the Bible is that those revelations had been oversimplified for the benefit of their audiences. Buf if such oversimplification had been done, then why was that important fact not revealed to us?

However, several of the key discoveries of modern science can easily be stated in terms that people unfamiliar with modern science can understand. Examples:

* The Earth being shaped like a ball and moving around the Sun

* Relativity of motion (a key part of Newtonian as well as Einsteinian physics)

* Evolution by natural selection

* Various physiological functions (lungs are for absorbing air, circulation of blood, brains commanding bodies through nerves)

* The water cycle (oceans - evaporation - air - clouds - precipitation - creeks and streams and rivers - oceans)

* Continental drift

* The origins of various kinds of rocks and of fossils

* The great age of the Earth

But the descriptions which touch science in the Bible and the Qur'an are not just simplified, they're plain wrong! The Bible, for instance, in its account of origins says humans were created separate from animals. In reality there's no such separation. True, mankind has exceptional intelligence, but so do birds have flight, which mankind lacks.

Evolution fits philosophical necessity very well. I think of God - God is the Infinite, the Totality. The Infinite cannot be separate from the Totality, from the Creation, because then there would be a part where God ends and the Creation starts, and it wouldn't be an infinite God. So the creation (nature) and the creator (nature) must be the same. New entities, like plants and animals, are created by modification on existing matter - evolution. Evolution is thus the only possible way of creation. Supernaturalism is the separation of the Creator from the Creation, which is a denial of God's infinity.

Ipetrich - here in the US there are commercials for a supposed "Jamaican" (or something like that) psychic named Miss Cleo. She speaks in a bad Jamaican/Irish/Scottish accent, fumbles with cards not bearing any resemblance to real Tarot cards, and tells worried women that their either pregnant or their boyfriend is cheating on them.

If you call Miss Cleo - she'll tell you everything you want to know.

An alternative mode of "evolution" would be design by extraterrestrial visitors. However, there is no positive evidence for such visitors, such as (say) cutting tools made from pure diamond, and there is also the interesting results of biogeography, which suggest that whatever process creates new species must be constrained by how the members of these species can travel. Constraints which would not apply to extraterrestrial visitors, let alone supernatural beings.

However, devnet is quite right about the errors such the Bible, the Koran, and other supposed revelations. Consider how Leviticus states that rabbits chew the cud and how grasshoppers are among four-legged animals. And how most of the various kinds of birds, lizards, and orthopterans are not clearly identified with distinctive features of each. Thus, there could be some comment that a crow is a bird that is black all over, that looks like a big songbird, and that goes "caw". However, such identifications would quickly reveal that a bat is an unusual kind of "bird" that looks much more like a mouse.

And even in matters of the nature of reasoning, there are interesting deficiencies. For example, the Bible tells us that a prophet whose predictions are falsified is a false one. However, there is nothing on trivial predictions, or on ambiguous or unfalsifiable ones. Predicting wars in the Middle East is an example of the former; the famous Croesus oracle is an example of the latter, since its prediction of victory could be confirmed by a victory of either side. Lucian of Samosata understood the principle a bit better when he discussed Alexander of Abonutichus's pulling off a similar reinterpretation scam.

Wow. ok...

jp: no prob... been outa town anyway...

Sorry. Most people don't know this. Note to self, ask before leaping in.

No, I am not a Wiccan. Some of my best friends are, though! Some of my best friends are Satanists as well... FBW's have a tendancy to froth at the mouth over Satanism--- regular Wiccans don't have the same problem... (one of said wiccan friends is married to one of said sataist friends... weird holidays in THAT house )

What resaon would you agree with Z. Budapest?
And yes, the concept of living life 'harming none' is an impossible goal. That's why many pagans don't follow it. But it looks good in court battles to prove pagans have a moral code to follow

(Asking before guessing) what do you mean?

There are plenty of symbols which are inherently paganh--- meanings change to make them fit other religions (like the cross--- a preChristian symbol of protection now a Christian symbol of salvation).

Ditto. however, the more educated in the religion pagans do not make that claim. They will admit we don't know much about the traditions to begin with, let alone to recreate them.

Wicca is a sore spot with me because of the influences of the Christian religion on it. It 'feels' to me that the religion is just a fewer rules female friend christianity. But I guess most religions are influenced by the ones near them.

In five hundred years, if wicca is still around, will anyone care?

Detached:
Whoa! No, paganism supports science and research--- (although others will disagree with me here ) but it has many many elements which science will (currently) scoff at!

I like Miss Cleo. She's funny... (I read cards too--- her readings are cool :rolleyes Miss Cleo is a late night card hawker with a big turban and a fake accent whom my MIL hates.

I am thinking of calling her, though. I am a sucker for stuff like that!

There is an expression in pagan circles 'all magic is science not yet discovered.' (or undiscovered, take your pick.

Pagans are 'perfectly capable' of seperating 'fact' from 'myth'. You prove to me Odin was 'just a man' and you have not detracted from his wonder and power one jot. Myths are part of the human animal's way of relating to the world around it. They are 'true' in that way--- that they answer some primal need that either all humans share or that primitive humans needed to have filled. They do not have to be literally true to hold water. Or to be legitimate teachings.

What a post to follow up a vacation with...