A Christian challenge

[KarenNC]

**I’m not sure how many people you are going to convince with that argument, because I believe, and I assume that other Catholics here do as well, that while one could say that the Muslims, Jews, and Christians all worship the same god - namely the God of Abraham - it is incorrect to do so, because each groups’ understanding of that god is so radically different. **

So you are saying that the Catholic Church teaches that Christians do not actually worship the same God that the Jews worshipped and continue to worship? If not, then what is the relevance of the entire Jewish Scripture to Christianity? Why would it matter if Jesus was the Jewish Messiah and why work so hard to offer evidence that He fulfilled prophecies made by a different God to a different people? Why would the Jewish Scriptures have any more bearing on Christianity than the Rig Veda?

Pope John Paul II seemed to have been under the impression that they do, indeed, all worship the same God: catholicnews.com/jpii/stories/story04.htm

Perhaps I made an incorrect assumption that that meant Catholics also believed that?

**When I am praying St. Gertrude’s prayer for instance, and it mentions the “Eternal Father” and his “Divine Son” I certainly don’t think that I am worshipping the same god as the Muslims only under a different name as you assert. **

Do you believe that you are worshipping the same God as the Jews? Or is it just the Muslims that you consider to have a different God?

I’m not the one asserting that all three Gods are the same. In fact I very clearly said that I frankly don’t see convincing evidence that the three are the same. That statement has not set well in the past with other members of this forum, however, (from any of the three religions) so I am not as sure as you seem to be that you are in the majority here on that point.

And as for us attaching old scripture to a new god as you also assert - well we believe that God was always the Trinity “as it was in the beginning now and forever world without end.” - not that it just came about when Jesus revealed it to us.

Did you read the part of that sentence that said “Christians do not consider that Jesus is a new God …?”

**Simply your analogy doesn’t work, because Christianity is continuous whereas Paganism died out for the main part, and was recreated by people like Crowely. **

Are you saying that your test of the existence of a God is continuous worship? Does that mean that if for some reason the human worship of the Christian God ceased, that the Christian God would also no longer exist or that the Christian God would suddenly be proved to be less real?

I don’t believe that the existence of my Gods is dependent on human worship. They are.

The point of that was that Christians have no trouble understanding that a deity (namely their own) could make a new covenant with a different group of followers that differed radically from the covenant made with His original followers while remaining the same deity. I don’t see how that is radically different than many Neopagan religions assert.

If you are under the impression that all Neopagan religions sprang from Crowley, or even that all of them are identical with some form of Wicca (and I do not deny that Gardner and Crowley had connections), witchcraft or ceremonial magic, then you are mistaken.

cont.

 

[KarenNC]

Neopaganism is rootless as far as I see.

Might help the discussion to explain your source of information about Neopaganism and which groups that fall under that umbrella term you are discussing.

** It might say that it is the same, but its understanding of the gods are probably entirely different, along with the manner of worship. **

The key word here is “probably.” This tells me that you have made a judgment about the manner of worship and understanding of the Gods by not just one Neopagan religion but all of them, even though the term encompasses religions as different from each other in their own way as Hinduism and Christianity, without having any real knowledge of either the manner of worship or the understanding of deity by any of them, much less all.

First, there is not an “it.” Neopaganism is an umbrella term that is used to broadly describe a very diverse set of independent religions (not sects or denominations of one religion). To meaningfully discuss things such as understanding of deity or manner of worship, you need to narrow down the topic quite a bit. It’s rather like trying to talk about the manner of worship or understanding of deity of all monotheists—one must specify which ones.

I simply don’t understand why one would become Neopagan.

And many people simply don’t understand why one would become a Christian, much less a Catholic.

As you don’t seem to have an accurate understanding of what the term Neopagan encompasses, I am not surprised. There is a lot of misinformation out there. If you are willing to wade through some kneejerk pettiness, excessive sarcasm and at least one call for an online exorcism, you might find some interesting information in an extensive thread from a few months ago that began in response to an article in This Rock called Anti-Neopagan Apologetics.
forums.catholic-questions.org/showthread.php?t=124238&highlight=neopagan+apologetic
The thread is called “Neopagan Apologetics.”

You might check at a local library or bookstore for either “The Complete Idiot’s Guide to Paganism” (yes, I know—I didn’t pick the title, but I am assured it is a very useful intro survey book ) or “Paganism: an introduction to Earth-centered Religions.” Either will give you a decent overview of modern Neopagan movements and some insight into the community as a whole. The second book is by Joyce and River Higginbotham, can’t remember off hand who wrote the first one. A much larger one is “Drawing Down the Moon” by Margot Adler, which was relatively recently reissued.

It will help you immensely in talking about religion with Neopagans of various stripes if you have a basic understanding of what they are and what they are not, particularly if your purpose will be to evangelize. You’ll get a lot farther in being taken seriously rather than dismissed out of hand immediately. It will also help you in sorting out the ones who are serious about their religion from those who, unfortunately, are simply using the term for shock value or have a misunderstanding about it themselves.

 

[Catholig]

Karen,

You posted quite a bit, and I’ll need to read it, and consider it throughly before giving an answer.

Catholig

 

[Chancellare]

Neopaganism is rootless as far as I see.

Might help the discussion to explain your source of information about Neopaganism and which groups that fall under that umbrella term you are discussing.

** It might say that it is the same, but its understanding of the gods are probably entirely different, along with the manner of worship. **

The key word here is “probably.” This tells me that you have made a judgment about the manner of worship and understanding of the Gods by not just one Neopagan religion but all of them, even though the term encompasses religions as different from each other in their own way as Hinduism and Christianity, without having any real knowledge of either the manner of worship or the understanding of deity by any of them, much less all.

First, there is not an “it.” Neopaganism is an umbrella term that is used to broadly describe a very diverse set of independent religions (not sects or denominations of one religion). To meaningfully discuss things such as understanding of deity or manner of worship, you need to narrow down the topic quite a bit. It’s rather like trying to talk about the manner of worship or understanding of deity of all monotheists—one must specify which ones.

I simply don’t understand why one would become Neopagan.

And many people simply don’t understand why one would become a Christian, much less a Catholic.

As you don’t seem to have an accurate understanding of what the term Neopagan encompasses, I am not surprised. There is a lot of misinformation out there. If you are willing to wade through some kneejerk pettiness, excessive sarcasm and at least one call for an online exorcism, you might find some interesting information in an extensive thread from a few months ago that began in response to an article in This Rock called Anti-Neopagan Apologetics.
forums.catholic-questions.org/showthread.php?t=124238&highlight=neopagan+apologetic
The thread is called “Neopagan Apologetics.”

You might check at a local library or bookstore for either “The Complete Idiot’s Guide to Paganism” (yes, I know—I didn’t pick the title, but I am assured it is a very useful intro survey book ) or “Paganism: an introduction to Earth-centered Religions.” Either will give you a decent overview of modern Neopagan movements and some insight into the community as a whole. The second book is by Joyce and River Higginbotham, can’t remember off hand who wrote the first one. A much larger one is “Drawing Down the Moon” by Margot Adler, which was relatively recently reissued.

It will help you immensely in talking about religion with Neopagans of various stripes if you have a basic understanding of what they are and what they are not, particularly if your purpose will be to evangelize. You’ll get a lot farther in being taken seriously rather than dismissed out of hand immediately. It will also help you in sorting out the ones who are serious about their religion from those who, unfortunately, are simply using the term for shock value or have a misunderstanding about it themselves.

If in my previous posts I was uncharitable to your opinions, I apologize sincerely.

Reading from your postings and from the references and links you indicated, I assume you believe that your religion has some good things to offer, otherwise you won’t be there, right?

I’m only trying to understand your opinion here and I don’t want to argue with you on that. But can you summarize your reasons for being a Neopagan?

 

[KarenNC]

** Reading from your postings and from the references and links you indicated, I assume you believe that your religion has some good things to offer, otherwise you won’t be there, right?**

Exactly. Not much point otherwise. It would certainly have been infinitely easier personally and socially for me to have remained at least a nominal Christian, to be nothing or to have converted to another accepted monotheistic religion such as Judaism. It would not, however, have been honest or, in my opinion, ethical.

I’m only trying to understand your opinion here and I don’t want to argue with you on that. But can you summarize your reasons for being a Neopagan?

At root, because it fits the experiences I have had of divinity better than any other religious system of which I am aware, the Greek Gods are the ones that have called to me since childhood and because I am a better person in following this faith.

I am a Hellenic Neopagan Unitarian Universalist (say that three times fast ). Might be easiest to break it down:

The first (Hellenic) tells which pantheon I follow–the Greek Gods. For more information on this part, you might find these sites useful, though, as with any religion, there is a continuum of practice and belief.
hellenion.org/index.html
ecauldron.com/dc-faq.php

The Neopagan part is easy–in modern culture, the “pagan” part has come to be applied to basically any non-Abrahamic religion. The “neo” means that I fully understand that I am not practicing my religion in exactly the way the ancient Greeks would have and I have no desire to do so in detail. I am not an ancient Athenian, Spartan, etc. I certainly draw inspiration from the stories told by the ancient Greeks about the ways in which their culture interacted with the Gods, but I also value my own personal experiences with Them.

I am a Unitarian Universalist as it is a non-creedal religious organization and it provides a community which shares my aims of social justice and mutual support in individual religious journey. There aren’t a lot of Hellenic Neopagans in my area (read–“I don’t know of any others than my family” ) and a religious community is important to me.

My husband’s blog may also prove helpful to you
executivepagan.wordpress.com/

 

[Bennie_P]

I am a Hellenic Neopagan Unitarian Universalist (say that three times fast ). Might be easiest to break it down:

The first (Hellenic) tells which pantheon I follow–the Greek Gods. For more information on this part, you might find these sites useful, though, as with any religion, there is a continuum of practice and belief.
hellenion.org/index.html
ecauldron.com/dc-faq.php

The Neopagan part is easy–in modern culture, the “pagan” part has come to be applied to basically any non-Abrahamic religion. The “neo” means that I fully understand that I am not practicing my religion in exactly the way the ancient Greeks would have and I have no desire to do so in detail. I am not an ancient Athenian, Spartan, etc. I certainly draw inspiration from the stories told by the ancient Greeks about the ways in which their culture interacted with the Gods, but I also value my own personal experiences with Them.

I am a Unitarian Universalist as it is a non-creedal religious organization and it provides a community which shares my aims of social justice and mutual support in individual religious journey. There aren’t a lot of Hellenic Neopagans in my area (read–“I don’t know of any others than my family” ) and a religious community is important to me.

My husband’s blog may also prove helpful to you
executivepagan.wordpress.com/

These are difinitions the Church gives to parts of the Religious beliefs you seem to adhere to, in your opinion are they a fair definition in part? if not which parts do you disagree with? And why?

Neopaganism: a title often rejected by many to whom it is applied, it refers to a current that runs parallel to *New Age *and often interacts with it. **In the great wave of reaction against traditional religions, specifically the Judaeo-Christian heritage of the West, many have revisited ancient indigenous, traditional, *pagan ***religions. Whatever preceded Christianity is reckoned to be more genuine to the spirit of the land or the nation, an uncontaminated form of natural religion, in touch with the powers of nature, often matriarchal, magical or Shamanic. Humanity will, it is said, be healthier if it returns to the natural cycle of (agricultural) festivals and to a general affirmation of life. Some “neo-pagan” religions are recent reconstructions whose authentic relationship to original forms can be questioned, particularly in cases where they are dominated by modern ideological components like ecology, feminism or, in a few cases, myths of racial purity.

Pantheism: (Greek pan = everything and theos = God) the belief that everything is God or, sometimes, that everything is in God and God is in everything (panentheism). Every element of the universe is divine, and the divinity is equally present in everything. There is no space in this view for God as a distinct being in the sense of classical theism.

PONTIFICAL COUNCIL FOR CULTURE
PONTIFICAL COUNCIL FOR INTERRELIGIOUS DIALOGUE
JESUS CHRIST
THE BEARER OF THE WATER OF LIFE
A Christian reflection
on the “New Age”

vatican.va/roman_curia/pontifical_councils/interelg/documents/rc_pc_interelg_doc_20030203_new-age_en.html#fnref107

 

[Chancellare]

** Reading from your postings and from the references and links you indicated, I assume you believe that your religion has some good things to offer, otherwise you won’t be there, right?**

Exactly. Not much point otherwise. It would certainly have been infinitely easier personally and socially for me to have remained at least a nominal Christian, to be nothing or to have converted to another accepted monotheistic religion such as Judaism. It would not, however, have been honest or, in my opinion, ethical.

I’m only trying to understand your opinion here and I don’t want to argue with you on that. But can you summarize your reasons for being a Neopagan?

At root, because it fits the experiences I have had of divinity better than any other religious system of which I am aware, the Greek Gods are the ones that have called to me since childhood and because I am a better person in following this faith.

I am a Hellenic Neopagan Unitarian Universalist (say that three times fast ). Might be easiest to break it down:

The first (Hellenic) tells which pantheon I follow–the Greek Gods. For more information on this part, you might find these sites useful, though, as with any religion, there is a continuum of practice and belief.
hellenion.org/index.html
ecauldron.com/dc-faq.php

The Neopagan part is easy–in modern culture, the “pagan” part has come to be applied to basically any non-Abrahamic religion. The “neo” means that I fully understand that I am not practicing my religion in exactly the way the ancient Greeks would have and I have no desire to do so in detail. I am not an ancient Athenian, Spartan, etc. I certainly draw inspiration from the stories told by the ancient Greeks about the ways in which their culture interacted with the Gods, but I also value my own personal experiences with Them.

I am a Unitarian Universalist as it is a non-creedal religious organization and it provides a community which shares my aims of social justice and mutual support in individual religious journey. There aren’t a lot of Hellenic Neopagans in my area (read–“I don’t know of any others than my family” ) and a religious community is important to me.

My husband’s blog may also prove helpful to you
executivepagan.wordpress.com/

I admire your openness in expressing your IMHO, hunger for spiritual growth.

In your first answer you seem to defer the benefit you enjoy from pursuing your religion’s world-view. But since you mentioned that you have become a better person in following the “Greek Gods”, it is still unclear as to:

1. What do you mean by ‘better person’?
2. How do you know the truth?
3. What do you want from Chistians like us in CAF?

 

[KarenNC]

**Neopaganism: a title often rejected by many to whom it is applied, it refers to a current that runs parallel to *New Age *and often interacts with it. **

Yes, the Neopagan community and the New Age community often overlap. In my opinion, it is the part of the community that is the farthest from the New Age movement that dislikes using the term Neopagan precisely because people tend to conflate the terms. You will also find folks who shy away from the Neopagan label because it has become in many people’s eyes to mean only Wicca, and more particularly eclectic Wicca.

Personally, I am not a fan of the New Age movement. I do keep the Neopagan label, however, as I feel it is a useful word and I don’t plan to cede it to one particular group. It’s not vastly different from a Catholic trying to get folks to understand that the word “Christian” does not only mean the kind of Christianity practiced by an Evangelical Protestant. This does mean that I spend a lot more time trying to explain what that means for me, but then I choose to use the label.

** Whatever preceded Christianity is reckoned to be more genuine to the spirit of the land or the nation, an uncontaminated form of natural religion, in touch with the powers of nature, often matriarchal, magical or Shamanic.**

This is certainly true of a lot of folks who describe themselves as Neopagan. Personally, I find this an overly romantic notion. I am not following this religion because I was looking for something more magical, shamanic, matriarchal, uncontaminated, etc.

I do not believe that there was some pan-North American unified peaceful indigenous religion (as is claimed by some) any more than I believe that there was a pan-European Neolithic peaceful Goddess-worshipping matriarchal society before the evil worshippers of the Sky Father came in and destroyed it all. These things are simply not supported in what we know (as limited as that can sometimes be) of these periods.

I don’t see anything inherently “better” about worshipping a monotheistic Goddess than a God. I don’t believe that all the Gods and Goddesses are facets or expressions of a singular God, nor of a duotheistic Lord and Lady.

** Humanity will, it is said, be healthier if it returns to the natural cycle of (agricultural) festivals and to a general affirmation of life. **

While I certainly believe that humanity will be healthier and better served if it pays more attention to how we live here than in some form of afterlife and to how the way in which we live affects all the other life on this planet, I don’t think any form of Neopaganism is the only way to do that. The teachings and exhortations to do so exist to some level or other in all religions of which I have knowledge, including the monotheistic ones (now I will say that I am ill-informed about Islam in this respect).

It isn’t any specific cycle of festivals (of any religion) that will accomplish this. It is the acknowledgement that we are all part and parcel of the world and then acting as if we believe that and that it matters. There is no “Nature” that exists separately from humanity–we are not outside looking in. We (by this I mean my family) do follow the Wheel of the Year cycle as we find it a convenient way to keep us mindful of the cycle of the seasons and the pointers that that cycle gives to the cycles of our lives. The festivals are merely opportunities to stop and reflect mindfully on these things.

cont.

 

[KarenNC]

Some “neo-pagan” religions are recent reconstructions whose authentic relationship to original forms can be questioned, particularly in cases where they are dominated by modern ideological components like ecology, feminism or, in a few cases, myths of racial purity.

Very true. Wicca, for example, the largest of the Neopagan religions, can not be documented to exist prior to Gerald Gardner. The particular understanding of the Goddess in the triple form of Mother/Maiden/Crone can be traced back to Robert Graves. If you are interested in further reading on this, I highly recommend the book “Triumph of the Moon” by British historian Ronald Hutton. He examines the societal and philosophical trends from the late 18th and 19th centuries that set the stage for many changes in modern thought and religion, including the rise of Wicca in Britain. The second half of the book is a detailed account of the birth and development of Wicca in Britain, its importation to America where it mixed with radical feminism, and how that changed form moved back to Britain to change the face of Wicca there. A fascinating look at the way in which a religion can change and develop very quickly in the early years. Chas Clifton has written a book that looks at Wicca in America called “Her Hidden Children: the Rise of Wicca and Paganism in America.” I have not read this one, but it has been highly recommended to me and I have read some of his other writings.

The Neopagan religions with which I am familiar (as opposed to the groups who are using the name as a front for their racist agenda) denounce any teachings of racial or ethnic superiority. One should not judge all Neopagan religions on the basis of such deviant groups any more than one should judge Christianity by the Ku Klux Klan.

I do challenge the implicit assumption in that statement that a religion requires an “authentic relationship to original forms” to be valid. Authentic and valid are not synonymous. I could reconstruct to the nth detail a ritual from ancient Greece and it would be authentic in every way, but without the real presence and existence of the Gods, it would not valid. In the same way, no, pouring a libation of Diet Pepsi (if that is what you have on hand at the time) is not authentic, but if it is, by the criteria of your experience in relationship with a particular deity, accepted, then it is certainly as valid as any other.

To take an example from Christianity, while a “guitar mass” may not be to the taste of everyone (or, for that matter, one done in the style of a medieval mass in Latin or a traditional one done in English), and is certainly not “authentic” in terms of being an exact replica of something done by a first-century Christian, that does not make it invalid as a religious rite.

**Pantheism: (Greek pan = everything and theos = God) the belief that everything is God or, sometimes, that everything is in God and God is in everything (panentheism). Every element of the universe is divine, and the divinity is equally present in everything. There is no space in this view for God as a distinct being in the sense of classical theism. **

You will have noticed that I cannot and do not claim to speak for all Neopagan religions or even all followers of Hellenic Neopaganism. I can only speak for my personal understanding. Most Neopagan religions are more about orthopraxy (right action) than orthodoxy (right belief). There is not a centralized dogma.

Personally I am not a pantheist, though I might be considered by some a sort of panentheist, I suppose. I believe that my Gods are separate distinct beings from humanity, from a tree, from a rock, from a waterfall. I do not believe that They exist totally apart from the universe–They are part of existence as well. They do not stand outside of time and existence in the way that the Christian God is seen to do.

They are not personifications of natural forces, either. When I am moved to reverence at the sight of a beautiful waterfall, of the ocean, of the power of a storm or a bond of love and affection between humans, I see the Gods within that experience, but They are not only that experience or that thing or that event which I am witnessing.

 

[KarenNC]

**In your first answer you seem to defer the benefit you enjoy from pursuing your religion’s world-view. **

In what way am I deferring? I don’t understand your point here–could you clarify?

**But since you mentioned that you have become a better person in following the “Greek Gods”, it is still unclear as to:

1. What do you mean by ‘better person’?**

I am more at peace with myself, with my family, with my community. I find a greater connection to the world in which I live and am more mindful of it and my place in it, as well as the impact that my actions have on it. I am able to be honest with myself about the reality of my religious experiences without having to perform all sorts of mental gymnastics and contortions to try to fit those experiences into a mold that was never designed for them. I am more willing to speak out for causes of social justice. I strive to live a responsible, ethical, pious and just life and take responsibility for my actions.

2. How do you know the truth?

In order to answer usefully, I need to know what you mean by the phrase “the truth.”

3. What do you want from Chistians like us in CAF?

Understanding and acknowledgement that I am following an actual religion, even if you do not agree with it or think it is bunk, just as I give that to Christians and those of other religions. This includes not putting quotation marks around words referring to my Gods, referring to Them or to my religion as “so-called,” and other such that you would not do to someone who followed a Buddhist, Hindu or other path, even though those are neither Christian nor monotheistic.

That this is a religion that I came home to after just as much serious soul searching, thoughtful reflection, etc as any convert to any religion, including Christianity.

That, yes, I take this seriously, just as seriously as you take your religion.

That, yes, I find benefit in it just as you find benefit from your religion.

That, yes, I believe my Gods are real just as you believe your God is real.

That I am a sane, intelligent, productive adult member of society just like the majority of Christian. In fact, I am a quite traditional and fairly conservative person in most ways.

That I really have no vested interest in proselytizing and would really rather simply be left alone to live my life, but will speak up to correct misinformation about my religion. I am also not ashamed of my religion and see no benefit in pretending that I believe other than I do.

That I am not playacting, rebelling against my parents or society, a social outcast living in my parent’s basement, playing an extended form of D&D, worshipping the Christian Devil in any form, or engaging in a romantic fantasy of some matriarchal or “noble savage” Utopia that never existed.

That I do not believe in UFO’s, aliens, crystal power, that I am the reincarnation of some priestess from Atlantis or some person who was killed as a witch in the witchhunts, or that I am the subject of some vast conspiracy or persecution.

That I am interested in worship of and relationship with my Gods, not in performing spells, cermonial magic, manipulating or controlling the universe, invoking anything, etc. and that it is not my goal in life to do bad things to Christians.

That will do for a start .

 

[Bennie_P]

I’m only trying to understand your opinion here and I don’t want to argue with you on that. But can you summarize your reasons for being a Neopagan?

At root, because it fits the experiences I have had of divinity better than any other religious system of which I am aware, the Greek Gods are the ones that have called to me since childhood and because I am a better person in following this faith.

I am a Hellenic Neopagan Unitarian Universalist (say that three times fast ). Might be easiest to break it down:

The first (Hellenic) tells which pantheon I follow–the Greek Gods. For more information on this part, you might find these sites useful, though, as with any religion, there is a continuum of practice and belief.
hellenion.org/index.html
ecauldron.com/dc-faq.php

I am a Unitarian Universalist as it is a non-creedal religious organization and it provides a community which shares my aims of social justice and mutual support in individual religious journey. There aren’t a lot of Hellenic Neopagans in my area (read–“I don’t know of any others than my family” ) and a religious community is important to me.

My husband’s blog may also prove helpful to you
executivepagan.wordpress.com/

This is from the link you posted, would to be fair to think most Hellenic polytheists base their faith on resentment/anger against the failings of individuals within Christian coummunities? and it is an act of rebellion because of past hurts, hang ups or even misunderstandings of Christianity or what Chirst taught?

"How do Hellenes view Christianity? Most Hellenic polytheists were raised as members of one of the dominant monotheistic faiths (if we had any religious upbringing at all). It must be admitted that some individual Hellenes harbor lingering anger toward their birth religions, usually as a result of abuse at the hands of religious leaders or well-meaning family members. But most would agree that, from a more objective standpoint, Christianity is simply irrelevant to our traditional beliefs and practices—as are Judaism, Islam, Buddhism, etc.
On the whole, we take a live-and-let-live position regarding those of other faiths. Only when Christians try to convert us, slander our gods, or try to impose their beliefs as the “one true way” do we oppose their efforts."

 

[KarenNC]

This is from the link you posted, would to be fair to think most Hellenic polytheists base their faith on resentment/anger against the failings of individuals within Christian coummunities?

No, it would not. I am not sure how you get that from the quote (my emphasis added) “It must be admitted that some individual Hellenes harbor lingering anger toward their birth religions,” and “**most **would agree that, from a more objective standpoint, Christianity is simply irrelevant to our traditional beliefs and practices—as are Judaism, Islam, Buddhism, etc. On the whole, we take a live-and-let-live position regarding those of other faiths.”

and it is an act of rebellion because of past hurts, hang ups or even misunderstandings of Christianity or what Chirst taught?

No.

Most Hellenes do not base their faith on negating another one, on resentment or anger, on rebellion or on anything other than their sincere belief and experience of the reality of their Gods.

Are most Christians Christian because they are angry at, resentful or rebelling against Jews or Buddhists? To be not something is not the same as being actively against it. To say that someone is a Norwegian citizen and not a Japanese one is not to say that the person is Norwegian due to anger or resentment toward the Japanese, even if the Norwegian was born a Japanese citizen. There are many positively based reasons why someone might convert or immigrate. Certainly it can be assumed that they found something in the new country or religion that was of benefit to them that they did not find in the old one, or else there would be no impetus to make a change

To put it another way, your position would be like saying that because some individual converts to Catholicism harbor lingering anger or resentment toward their Protestant upbringing, it is then fair to say that most converts to Catholicism from Protestantism did so only because of an act of rebellion against Protestantism, not because they found what they believed to be a fuller expression of their experience of spiritual reality in Catholicism.

 

[Bennie_P]

This is from the link you posted, would to be fair to think most Hellenic polytheists base their faith on resentment/anger against the failings of individuals within Christian coummunities?

No, it would not. I am not sure how you get that from the quote (my emphasis added) “It must be admitted that some individual Hellenes harbor lingering anger toward their birth religions,” and “**most **would agree that, from a more objective standpoint, Christianity is simply irrelevant to our traditional beliefs and practices—as are Judaism, Islam, Buddhism, etc. On the whole, we take a live-and-let-live position regarding those of other faiths.”

quote]

I appoligize, using words like some & most is misleading either way. Leaves a lot of room for assumption.

What are you thoughts on the incident of Paul among the Hellenes from the book of Acts?
Acts 17:22 - 34 And Paul stood in the midst of the Areopagus, and said, Ye men of Athens, in all things, I perceive that ye are very religious. For as I passed along, and observed the objects of your worship, I found also an altar with this inscription, TO AN UNKNOWN GOD. What therefore ye worship in ignorance, this I set forth unto you. The God that made the world and all things therein, he, being Lord of heaven and earth, dwelleth not in temples made with hands; neither is he served by men’s hands, as though he needed anything, seeing he himself giveth to all life, and breath, and all things; and he made of one every nation of men to dwell on all the face of the earth, having determined their appointed seasons, and the bounds of their habitation;
that they should seek God, if haply they might feel after him and find him, though he is not far from each one of us: for in him we live, and move, and have our being; as certain even of your own poets have said, For we are also his offspring.
Being then the offspring of God, we ought not to think that the Godhead is like unto gold, or silver, or stone, graven by art and device of man. The times of ignorance therefore God overlooked; but now he commandeth men that they should all everywhere repent: inasmuch as he hath appointed a day in which he will judge the world in righteousness by the man whom he hath ordained; whereof he hath given assurance unto all men, in that he hath raised him from the dead. Now when they heard of the resurrection of the dead, some mocked; but others said, We will hear thee concerning this yet again. Thus Paul went out from among them. But certain men clave unto him, and believed: among whom also was Dionysius the Areopagite, and a woman named Damaris, and others with them.

 

[ChristIsTheWay]

3. What do you want from Chistians like us in CAF?

Understanding and acknowledgement that I am following an actual religion, even if you do not agree with it or think it is bunk, just as I give that to Christians and those of other religions. This includes not putting quotation marks around words referring to my Gods, referring to Them or to my religion as “so-called,” and other such that you would not do to someone who followed a Buddhist, Hindu or other path, even though those are neither Christian nor monotheistic.

That this is a religion that I came home to after just as much serious soul searching, thoughtful reflection, etc as any convert to any religion, including Christianity.

That, yes, I take this seriously, just as seriously as you take your religion.

That, yes, I find benefit in it just as you find benefit from your religion.

That, yes, I believe my Gods are real just as you believe your God is real.

That I am a sane, intelligent, productive adult member of society just like the majority of Christian. In fact, I am a quite traditional and fairly conservative person in most ways.

That I really have no vested interest in proselytizing and would really rather simply be left alone to live my life, but will speak up to correct misinformation about my religion. I am also not ashamed of my religion and see no benefit in pretending that I believe other than I do.

That I am not playacting, rebelling against my parents or society, a social outcast living in my parent’s basement, playing an extended form of D&D, worshipping the Christian Devil in any form, or engaging in a romantic fantasy of some matriarchal or “noble savage” Utopia that never existed.

That I do not believe in UFO’s, aliens, crystal power, that I am the reincarnation of some priestess from Atlantis or some person who was killed as a witch in the witchhunts, or that I am the subject of some vast conspiracy or persecution.

That I am interested in worship of and relationship with my Gods, not in performing spells, cermonial magic, manipulating or controlling the universe, invoking anything, etc. and that it is not my goal in life to do bad things to Christians.

That will do for a start .

You want us to acknowledge your religion as real? Do you really need us to say that? Is it some kind of reassurance?

Anyways, I have immense trouble taking seriously the 15 year old neopagan who practices “magic” and seems to be quite angry with everyone. You, though, don’t fit that description. You seem to be serious about your religion and have a realistic view of it and the world.

Of course I don’t agree with much of anything you say but I see no reason to deny that your religion is real.

 

[Catholig]

Karen,

In reply, my belief concerning whether or not Christians, Muslims, and Jews all worship the same god is complicated. If you compare the concepts of the God each of us worship then you will find that they are different - this goes without saying really, because Christianity believes in the Trinity while Judaism and Islam don’t. As to where the prayers of each of these denominations go - I don’t know. I believe that Judaism was worshiping the Trinitarian God, even if they didn’t know it at the time, but that is about all I can say.

And as to your comment concerning whether a god’s being worshiped affects its existence - I guess the answer would be an I-don’t-know, because while I believe that if god is outside of time, and truly the creator, the creations acknowledgement doesn’t make it real, it just being as you said, I also think that a god that someone simply invents can’t be true - that the god has to be known. I don’t see why a god would keep itself hidden from its creations…

Catholig

 

[Catholig]

Karen,

In reply, my belief concerning whether or not Christians, Muslims, and Jews all worship the same god is complicated. If you compare the concepts of the God each of us worship then you will find that they are different - this goes without saying really, because Christianity believes in the Trinity while Judaism and Islam don’t. As to where the prayers of each of these denominations go - I don’t know. I believe that Judaism was worshiping the Trinitarian God, even if they didn’t know it at the time, but that is about all I can say.

And as to your comment concerning whether a god’s being worshiped affects its existence - I guess the answer would be an I-don’t-know, because while I believe that if god is outside of time, and truly the creator, the creations acknowledgement doesn’t make it real, it just being as you said, I also think that a god that someone simply invents can’t be true - that the god has to be known. I don’t see why a god would keep itself hidden from its creations…

Catholig

 

[KarenNC]

** I appoligize, using words like some & most is misleading either way. Leaves a lot of room for assumption.**

True, but it would be disingenuous to imply that they can and usually are substituted equally one for the other without changing meaning.

What are you thoughts on the incident of Paul among the Hellenes from the book of Acts?

What I get from the passage is that, like any good speaker, Paul grabbed onto a convenient occurrence (finding the altar to the unknown God) as a prop for a speech to try to convince his audience of his claims and then says that he did indeed convince several of them, though not all.

As to the parts of the speech claiming that the ancients believed in phyiscal idols of stone. gold, silver, etc or lived only in temples, I don’t think much of it. The ancients did not believe that the Gods dwelled only in temples or were only their statues anymore than the Jews believed that their God was confined to the Ark of the Covenant or the Holy of Holies in the Temple or that Catholics believe that Jesus is only the image on a crucifix. Celsus, for instance, wrote about the subject (as found in “Christians as the Romans Saw Them” by Robert Louis Wilken): "Christians had contempt for these ancient and hallowed ways. They would have nothing to do with ‘temples and altars and images,’ even though they did not take the trouble to understand why men built temples and worshipped images. They claimed that an image of stone or wood or bronze or gold could not be a god. But such ‘wisdom is ludicrous. Who but an utter infant imagines that these things are gods and not votive offerings and images of Gods.’ " (pp. 118-119).

The ancients did not give the Gods offerings in the belief that the Gods “needed” what they were given in some sort of physical way any more than the Jews thought they were literally feeding their God by bringing burnt offerings. For the Hellenes, sacrifice and offerings were designed to bring one into relationship with the Gods, to establish a guest-host relationship. The Gods were honored guests at the sacred meal.

 

[KarenNC]

You want us to acknowledge your religion as real? Do you really need us to say that? Is it some kind of reassurance?

No, it was a request for respectful and civil discourse in serious theological discussion. I enjoy comparative theology and theological debate, but only when both parties are willing to approach it in a civil manner rather than an insulting and demeaning one. It is fully possible to disagree with something while still treating it with a measure of respect.

You are welcome to go to my public profile, click on my posts that discuss my religious beliefs (rather than the ones that are just providing general information) and take a look at some of the other posts surrounding those if you would like an example of what I mean by treating another in a demeaning and insulting manner. It is entirely too common on this forum.

** You seem to be serious about your religion and have a realistic view of it and the world.**

Thank you, I believe that I do. It may also help that I am 44 and have been wrestling with some of these questions for many years.

Of course I don’t agree with much of anything you say but I see no reason to deny that your religion is real.

Thank you. Agreement is neither expected nor required.

 

[KarenNC]

**In reply, my belief concerning whether or not Christians, Muslims, and Jews all worship the same god is complicated. **

Fair enough. Religion is a complicated thing.

** I also think that a god that someone simply invents can’t be true - that the god has to be known. I don’t see why a god would keep itself hidden from its creations…**

Well, part of it lies, I believe, in the use of the word “God” in modern English. For a polytheist, “God” does not automatically denote an omnipotent, omniscient, omnibenevolent Creator of the Universe. Pretty much by definition, if you believe that there are multiple Gods, They are not all going to be omnipotent.

The vast majority of Gods are not seen as creators of humanity, much less the sole Creator of all that is. I see no reason to suppose that all beings of the classification “God” would be necessarily interested in humanity, and, even if They were, that humanity would the sole focus of Their attention at all times. Nor do I see any reason to suppose that such, assuming They had an interest in humanity at all, would necessarily be what humanity would consider to be benevolently disposed toward us.

I see no compelling reason to believe that humanity has already been in relationship with every possible entity in the classification “God.” I don’t see that it is impossible that some such entity who has heretofore not expressed an interest in humanity might not begin to do so for His or Her own reasons or that one that has been known in a certain way would not choose to reveal other aspects of His- or Herself. This should not be a foreign concept to Christians, since they believe that their God waited multiple thousands of human years to reveal Himself as Trinitarian in nature.

 

[Chancellare]

In what way am I deferring? I don’t understand your point here–could you clarify?

You were not so clear in stating the spiritual gains out of joining your religion.

In order to answer usefully, I need to know what you mean by the phrase “the truth.”

That’s actually what I wanted to ask you first but did not put it that way.

That I really have no vested interest in proselytizing and would really rather simply be left alone to live my life, but will speak up to correct misinformation about my religion. I am also not ashamed of my religion and see no benefit in pretending that I believe other than I do.

Fortunately or unfortunately, by joining this blog, do you realize that you have exposed yourself under the scrutiny of others? Once you start shooting paintballs at others, you have to be ready with paints all over your suit, don’t you realize that?

That I am interested in worship of and relationship with my Gods, not in performing spells, cermonial magic, manipulating or controlling the universe, invoking anything, etc. and that it is not my goal in life to do bad things to Christians.

That will do for a start .

That’s a tall order if you go to a Catholic site like this. It’s a bit puzzling how we can help you worship your “Gods” by talking to people like us.

Instead, we can show you how our God can help you worship even better. In commercial lingo, we have the “economy of scale”, so to speak. Sorry for that. That’s part of the ‘entrance ticket’, I guess.