Are Native American "Dreamcatchers" Evil?

  • Thread starter Thread starter CatholicSam
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
Renton405 said:
Are the Indians still living here in the US??

No one has true ownership of this country. This country is a democracy

Settlers came here and started building the beautiful nation as it is today… Nobody kicked anyone out… There was fighting, but not people being exported, there was enough land for everyone…but you can thank the settlers that came here that built the beautiful country as it is today…Im sure if Whites were the first people here in North America and claimed that only white people could settle there or else they will scalp them and kill them you would find that horribly discriminating. Why should it be different for anyone else??
Click to expand...
Which history books are you reading? The settlers DID kick the Indians to the curb. It’s a known FACT in history that the white ‘christian’ men would take land that wasn’t theirs, killingas they went. Look at how the white men took people to be their slaves (africans). Are you going to justify that and say men are for the taking (it wouldn’t surprise me). No, I will not thank the settlers for what they did to the american Indians. And frankly, I think America was much more beautiful before the settlers uprooted it and turned beautiful forests in ugly cities.
 
Teeliumtrozzle said:
No, they’re not evil.They are not Catholics, and what they’re doing is part of their religion,and is therefore a good thing for them.You should NOT throw them out(especially seeings how its really their country), and you should respect their faith.However, if they have never heard about Jesus then its good to teach them, but let them convert if they want, and do not force anything on them.
Click to expand...
It is not THEIR country… No one has the right to claim a whole continent. They were simply living there when the settlers came… This country is for everyone living in it, whether your white, black, mexican, jew, etc… This country is a democracy, when you buy a land in this country, that land is yours and no one elses…
 
Renton405 said:
The government payed 4.5 million to the Indians for that land. And the Cherokee chief said yes…

To pay for land you have to own it??
Click to expand...
You are greatly simplifying things regarding the 4.5 million dollars and the one Cherokee chief.

And as for the second part, to pay for land, one must agree with the concept that land is purchasable. That is what I was saying, but from the perspective of the Native Americans having to own it first.
 
mmortal03 said:
You are greatly simplifying things regarding the 4.5 million dollars and the one Cherokee chief.

And as for the second part, to pay for land, one must agree with the concept that land is purchasable. That is what I was saying, but from the perspective of the Native Americans having to own it first.
Click to expand...
The hyprocrisy is that they claimed the whole continent. Plus none of the indians payed for any land. They just said it was theirs… And as far as I know there were settlers that came through russia into alaska before they even existed…
 
Renton405 said:
The hyprocrisy is that they claimed the whole continent. Plus none of the indians payed for any land. They just said it was theirs… And as far as I know there were settlers that came through russia into alaska before they even existed…
Click to expand...
There was more than one tribe, and they did not all collectively have one opinion. Further, it wasn’t strictly an argument of owning the land, it was the fact that they were already on the land, living, and that they were THERE. It isn’t like they were just going to move because someone else walked onto their land. They had to live there. It was where they were settled and where they were supporting themselves.
 
mmortal03 said:
There was more than one tribe, and they did not all collectively have one opinion. Further, it wasn’t strictly an argument of owning the land, it was the fact that they were already on the land, living, and that they were THERE. It isn’t like they were just going to move because someone else walked onto their land. They had to live there. It was where they were settled and where they were supporting themselves.
Click to expand...
No, this is where I disagree. First off the Indians are a pre-columbian heritage, so in reality their original country is not America. Scholars who follow the Bering Strait theory agree that most indigenous peoples of the Americas descended from people who probably migrated from Siberia across the Bering Strait, anywhere between 9,000 and 50,000 years ago… The indians were hostile immediatly to the settlers who came over, ruining bridges, attacking miners, killing their livestock, setting buildings on fire and killing mothers and children… There were many many treatys signed for peace and offered to them…
 
Renton405 said:
No, this is where I disagree. First off the Indians are a pre-columbian heritage, so in reality their original country is not America. Scholars who follow the Bering Strait theory agree that most indigenous peoples of the Americas descended from people who probably migrated from Siberia across the Bering Strait, anywhere between 9,000 and 50,000 years ago… The indians were hostile immediatly to the settlers who came over, ruining bridges, attacking miners, killing their livestock, setting buildings on fire and killing mothers and children… There were many many treatys signed for peace and offered to them…
Click to expand...
If it weren’t for these ‘hostile’ savages you speak of, the settlers would have quickly died of starvation. Does the first Thanksgiving in the New Land ring a bell to you? The indians were the ones who showed us ‘civilized white christians’ how to plant corn. It’s because of them that there are even white men in america.
 
Renton405 said:
The indians were hostile immediatly to the settlers who came over, ruining bridges, attacking miners, killing their livestock, setting buildings on fire and killing mothers and children… There were many many treatys signed for peace and offered to them…
Click to expand...
Yes, many treaties, and many were horribly broken by the white man my friend. The Indians were incredibly betrayed and slaughtered. Not all Indians were hostile that is a ridiculous broad brush you have there. I’m sure the descendants of Wounded Knee (if there are any) would love to read this one. :rolleyes:
 
Aramis said:
So, I take it you do not decorate easter eggs, celebrate easter under that name (both derived directly from Eoster, a pagan spring holiday), have Christmas trees nor wreaths, decorate with holly and mistletoe (both from Germanic pagan midwinter celebrations), use several of the modern month names (January is from Janus, June from Juno, July from Julius, August from Augustus), use the days of the week (Monday=Moondaeg, Tuesday=Tiewsdaeg, Wednesday=Wotansdaeg, Thursday=Thorsdaeg, Friday=Friggdaeg or Freysdaeg, Saturday= Saturns Day, Sunday= Sun’s Day).

These are all pagan inheritances that are incorporated over the centuries into both east and west (to varying degrees).
Click to expand...
Very impressive list of links to former pagan symbols. However, anyone knows these sybbols (Easter eggs, Christmas trees, etc.) that those that exhibit them is foundationally about Christ.

Tell us, are the Dream catchers about Christ too?
 
Santa is derived from the saint, St. Nicholas… So it is mostly a christian thing. The trees and ornaments I dont know much about, but I have feeling it dosen’t come from only one source…

technically pagans were here before christians and maybe even Jews so people can say pretty much anything comes from paganism. Just because two groups may do the same thing here and there at times dosen’t always mean they are related…

The earliest record of an evergreen being decorated in a Christian celebration was in 1521 in the Alsace region of Germany. But it dosen’t say anything about it being of pagan origins

First, careful study shows that Western Christians were celebrating Christmas on 25 December in the late third century, before the Sol Invictus festival was widely celebrated in the Empire 1. So Christians did not create this feast to oppose a popular Roman one. As far as Christmas being a “continuation” of a pagan festival, this seems unlikely when one considers the abhorrence many Christians felt toward paganism. Believers of Jewish descent did not suddenly lose their deep aversion to idolatry after Baptism, and converts from paganism often despised the religions which they left behind. Thousands of Christians died during the Romans persecutions rather than engage in pagan rites. Why would they embrace the hated celebrations of their persecutors?
 
Renton405 said:
Santa is derived from the saint, St. Nicholas… So it is mostly a christian thing. The trees and ornaments I dont know much about, but I have feeling it dosen’t come from only one source…

technically pagans were here before christians and maybe even Jews so people can say pretty much anything comes from paganism. Just because two groups may do the same thing here and there at times dosen’t always mean they are related…
Click to expand...
St. Patrick came to Ireland when it was paganistic. The people worshipped a “Sun god.”

St. Patrick while proselythising them plucked a three-leaf shamrock to symbolize the Trinity. This gave the people some kind of perception.
But it was the “Sun god” that St. P had a struggle with. The symbol was a circle…represented the Sun. The people could not get beyond the “Circle” and the Cross was overlooked for the Circle.

St. P INCORPORATED the Circle in the center of the cross-members forming what we today know as the “Celtic Cross.”
 
anamchara said:
Hey Julianna, I see this thread caught your eye as well 😉
Click to expand...
Hey there. 🙂 Yeah, I know. My daughter made a dreamcatcher in Catholic school. It’s here in the house somewhere, I had to hide it, just in case Renton decided to call the Vatican police on me. 😃

It saddens me when folks come on the boards asking if this or that is evil and the pious come streaming out of the woodwork.

God given common sense prevails in this situation. Scare tactics and threats of heresy will not bring questioning people to the church…in fact the opposite will happen. Sometimes absolutes can be killers of faith without intention. A paperclip can be deemed evil if it’s purpose it to produce evil. A dreamcatcher…is a harmless cultural item. It doesn’t come with instructions and incantations. Geez louise…we need to dare to think for ourselves. :rolleyes:

To answer the OP’s question:

No, Native American “Dreamcatchers” are NOT evil.
 
Julianna said:
Hey there. 🙂 Yeah, I know. My daughter made a dreamcatcher in Catholic school. It’s here in the house somewhere, I had to hide it, just in case Renton decided to call the Vatican police on me. 😃

It saddens me when folks come on the boards asking if this or that is evil and the pious come streaming out of the woodwork.

God given common sense prevails in this situation. Scare tactics and threats of heresy will not bring questioning people to the church…in fact the opposite will happen. Sometimes absolutes can be killers of faith without intention. A paperclip can be deemed evil if it’s purpose it to produce evil. A dreamcatcher…is a harmless cultural item. It doesn’t come with instructions and incantations. Geez louise…we need to dare to think for ourselves. :rolleyes:

To answer the OP’s question:

No, Native American “Dreamcatchers” are NOT evil.
Click to expand...
:rotfl:well put! The Vatican police lol!

No, they are not evil and I’m sure the Native Americans would be deeply offended if they knew Catholics felt this way…

now there’s a way to win converts :rolleyes:
 
anamchara said:
:rotfl:well put! The Vatican police lol!

No, they are not evil and I’m sure the Native Americans would be deeply offended if they knew Catholics felt this way…

now there’s a way to win converts :rolleyes:
Click to expand...
Not all Catholics…thank goodness. 🙂

I thought the days of using scare tactics to bring people to the church or back to the church were long gone…apparantly not. Reminds me the ol’ Starbucks thread…😃
 
Julianna said:
Not all Catholics…thank goodness. 🙂

I thought the days of using scare tactics to bring people to the church or back to the church were long gone…apparantly not. Reminds me the ol’ Starbucks thread…😃
Click to expand...
Actually many Catholics are Native American including my nephews wife. I’d love to hear what she would think of all this :eek:
 
anamchara said:
Actually many Catholics are Native American including my nephews wife. I’d love to hear what she would think of all this :eek:
Click to expand...
If I were her, I’d laugh hysterically at the ignorance and believe that some people are just more comfortable in their own box. 😉
 
johnstown_johnn said:
Would you bring a OUIJA Board into the house just for “decorations?”
Click to expand...
No, it just wouldn’t fit with my decor. Of course not, it would look silly on the wall or on a plate stand. Unless your room has a “game board” theme, it might look alright. Not my cup of tea though. 😃

If your theme is Native American or southwest style, a dreamcatcher would look fine. Or maybe in a den if you are a collector or Native American history is a hobby.
 
This thread has gotten to be so ridiculuos. A dream catcher (even in the non-native beliefs) is not evil.

One can have a dream catcher in their house and not even think twice about it being something evil. As it has already been explained a dream catcher tells a story. Story telling is very important in our culture. A ouija board’s (as someone so nicely compared the two) whole intention is to talk to the dead. Two totally different things, not even close.

This thread reminds me of the thread where someone stated that “yes” catholics do worship statues and you cannot ever, ever convince me other wise. Except it is, YES native americans use dream catchers to bring evil into the house, and you can never tell me other wise, oh and also you are all drunks and thieves.

I am sorry but the blatant hatred for the Native Americans by some members here (and you know who you are!) really saddens me. How can one call themselves Christian but say such horrible things about their own brothers.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top