Ask a Pagan, Part 2

[amber_lux]

You completely ignore even the possiblility that Jesus was, in fact, God. That would certainly explain the miracles. What you also ignore are the witnesses to these miracles who can be historically documented as real people.

There are reports from India of converts to Christianity doing the same miracles that are described in the Bible. Yogi fakirs do similar feets. Some of those feets are even more bizarre.

The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints keeps a registry of miracles that occured to members. It has so many that the Council of Twelve restricts it to the raising of the dead. Even there, they are restricting their records to the well and truely dead. People with no heart or brain activity recorded on the appropriate monitors for a prolonged period of time. I believe it is somewhere around twenty four hours.

The problem with the miracles of Christ, is that anybody who has had suitable training can replicate them on Earth, today.

Amber

 

[amber_lux]

That Christ lived and was crucified is verified by sources outside of Christian Scripture.

Origen’s failure to cite Josphus’ Testimonium Flavianum puts a crimper on the authenticity of that passage. The rest of the first and second century sources that are neither Christian scripture, nor the writings of Christians are equally suspect.

Amber

 

[AnAtheist]

That Christ lived and was crucified is verified by sources outside of Christian Scripture. He was a real man (and we believe, true God). We have credible witnesses to the life of Christ. When we examine his life, his words, his miracles, we come to the conclusion that he was who he claimed to be; the Son of the living God. You are free to decide otherwise, but to make the comparison to an imaginary character is just silly and has nothing to do with logic.

His life, his crucification maybe. But not his resurrection. Tacitus wrote that the Christians believe in Jesus, but not that he actually performed all the miracles ascribed to him.
But what is more likely?
That the life of a historical guru was put into a myth (the gospels do follow archetypical patterns) or that this is story really did happen?

Why are you so afraid to even consider the possiblity?

Afraid? I am not afraid to consider it, but it is far more unlikely than any other possibilty. Well, except for the Jesus was a demon possibility, that’s equally unlikely.

If you would like to get into this in more depth I am more than willing, but again, this is probably not the thread in which this should be discussed.

No thank you, I know all the arguments.

But to get back to the topic: I have never met a neo-pagan who believed their myths were historical reports. They are all very much aware that their myths convey a message, the truth you might say, through “invented” stories.
I say, so do the gospels. They convey a message even if the event did not take place historically. But that truth is not enough, is it? You Christians are afraid (sic!) that if the myth is not historical, the message is not true. Paulus did write that too. Hm, pagans are humbler there.

Take the story of Thjalfi and Röskva for example, it tells a lot about guilt, debt, atonement, and how to deal with it. But I doubt there are many pagans who search for the farm were those children lived and which Thor and Loki have visited.

 

[John_of_Woking]

My questions :1) What do these pagan ‘god’s’ do at the name of Jesus? 2) Are you repulsed by the Cross?

 

[Lokabrenna]

My questions :1) What do these pagan ‘god’s’ do at the name of Jesus?

I don’t have a direct line to the gods the way others might, but my guess is that they:

Wonder if I stubbed my toe because I’m swearing so much.

or

Roll their eyes: “Seriously? The exorcist routine again? Lame.”

1. Are you repulsed by the Cross?

That’s only for vampires, silly!

No, seriously, the gods generally don’t care if one of their followers attends church. No one’s going to burst into flames upon stepping over the threshold or coming into contact with holy water. I don’t have anything in particular against crosses, there’s one right outside my door and one in my bedroom. In fact, you probably wouldn’t know I was Pagan just by looking at my room. You would, however, know that bottlenose dolphins are my favourite animal and that I am a bibliophile. Maybe you would catch on if you looked in the bottom shelf of one of my bookcases, but most people don’t hang around there that long. The room I’m in now has a shelf dedicated to my tarot and oracle decks.

Now, I think some crucifixes are a little bloodier than I would like, but I think it’s a matter of personal taste.

 

[goldangel]

What is your opinion of the book the white goddess? I’ve heard it’s historically inaccurate as far as representing mythical beliefs but is related to modern Wiccan beliefs. Even if that’s true it still seems interesting except I’ve also heard the author is sexist and says women can’t be poets b/c poetry is based on some sort of love for the goddess (he has rare exceptions). That just seems irrational.

Is it worth reading even with sexism and historical inaccuracy?

Robert Graves, the late British poet and novelist, was also known for his studies of the mythological and psychological sources of poetry. With The White Goddess: A Historical Grammar of Poetic Myth, Graves was able to combine many of his passions into one work. While the book is so poetically written that many of the passages amount to prose poems, it is also frequently plot driven enough to feel like a novel, and it is rich with scholarly insight into the deep wells of poetry. Especially fascinating is the chapter in which Graves explores the ancient and ongoing practice of poets’ invoking the muse. Graves details the practice in both the Eastern and Western literary traditions, and shows specific similarities and differences among Greek, British, and Irish tales and myths about the muse. Graves has much to offer students of history and myth, but poetry lovers will also be fascinated with The White Goddess.

 

[Lokabrenna]

What is your opinion of the book the white goddess? I’ve heard it’s historically inaccurate as far as representing mythical beliefs but is related to modern Wiccan beliefs. Even if that’s true it still seems interesting except I’ve also heard the author is sexist and says women can’t be poets b/c poetry is based on some sort of love for the goddess (he has rare exceptions). That just seems irrational.

Is it worth reading even with sexism and historical inaccuracy?

I haven’t read it, but it is often quoted by Wiccan authors. To paraphrase a critique I once read of it: “Robert Graves was a poet and he wrote a good book about poetry, but as a source for actual history? He’s not exactly the most reliable source.” I see it as more of a “This is a book to read if you’re interested in the history of Wicca, but take it with a grain of salt.” I think that Anne McCaffrey’s Dragonriders of Pern is very important to the history of science fiction as a genre (especially regarding the portrayal of women) and H.P. Lovecraft was extremely influential in the horror genre, but I don’t agree with the gender essentialism of the former or the racism of the latter.

As for his feelings regarding the muse, I know this phrase is tossed around a lot, but I think he was a product of his time, and honestly, if he had said such things today, people would call him out on his BS and that would be that. I think it’s unfortunate that many (especially those who are new to Wicca) seem to accept that Graves is an authority on such things when he was more of an armchair historian.

I would say this is a good rule for many non-academic (but academic works aren’t immune to this) Pagan/Wiccan/Heathen books, especially those from a certain publisher coughLlewellyncough who are particularly notorious for being very paint by numbers and forcing their authors to adhere to VERY strict content guidelines (even when they want to cover more in-depth material). You know, read everything with a bucket of salt on hand.

Other than that, I’m definitely not an expert when it comes to Graves (not being Wiccan) but I’ve heard his The Greek Myths is better.

 

[amber_lux]

I haven’t read it, but it is often quoted by Wiccan authors.

Graves’ biggest problem is that he forgot he was supposed to be writing objective non-fiction.
He got caught up in his theories, without stopping to consider if there was any evidence to either support, or refute those theories.

especially those from a certain publisher

Once upon a time, one could buy a book they published, unread, by an unknown author, and be fairly confident that it would be useful addition to one’s library…

not being Wiccan

Bast.

Amber

 

[Lokabrenna]

Once upon a time, one could buy a book they published, unread, by an unknown author, and be fairly confident that it would be useful addition to one’s library…

I actually have a few books from “that publisher” that I like: Embracing the Moon: A Witch’s Guide to Rituals, Spellcraft, and Shadow Work by Yasmine Galenorn, Animal Speak by Ted Andrews, The Goddess Path and The Goddess Companion by Patricia Monaghan, all of these have informed my views in some way, even though the historical stuff is…questionable…but nowadays, sometimes you find a gem, but for every gem, there are at least ten books that rehash the same 101 material.

 

[goldangel]

Can you be wiccan and not believe in magic? That is, not believe that spells are any more accurate than would be expected by chance factors? I can understand how magic could influence the psyche of the person performing it, and I can also understand the concept of getting back harm when you have done harm. But I don’t know if you can be wiccan without believing that spells/magic affect the external world in other-than-natural ways. (I don’t know if everyone spells magic this way so I’m leaving it).

thanks.

 

[Lokabrenna]

Can you be wiccan and not believe in magic? That is, not believe that spells are any more accurate than would be expected by chance factors? I can understand how magic could influence the psyche of the person performing it, and I can also understand the concept of getting back harm when you have done harm. But I don’t know if you can be wiccan without believing that spells/magic affect the external world in other-than-natural ways. (I don’t know if everyone spells magic this way so I’m leaving it).

thanks.

The common spelling you will see is “magick” (the ‘k’ is used to differentiate it from stage magic). I’ve also seen it spelled “majik” (which I think is bordering on random silliness).

As for Wicca without magic, magic is a practice, you certainly don’t need to be Wiccan to practice magic, but it works both ways, that’s why a distinction is made between a spell and a ritual (although rituals might contain magical workings). Unfortunately, many books focus exclusively on the practice of magic and not a lot of time on discussing ethics or how to honour the gods. Off the top of my head: The Circle Within: Creating a Wiccan Spiritual Tradition by Diane Sylvan looks at ethics, relationships with deity, sacred space, creating your own rituals, that sort of thing, and Devoted to You: Honouring Deity in Wiccan Practice by Judy Harrow looks exclusively at relationships with deity (the nice thing about that book is that not all the contributors are Wiccan, which is highly unusual for a book like this).

 

[goldangel]

Thanks, I appreciate it. I don’t want to debate the effectiveness of magick but it’s not something that appeals to me personally in terms of reading; I’d rather focus on the aspects you identified and observing/honoring nature.

 

[Lokabrenna]

Thanks, I appreciate it. I don’t want to debate the effectiveness of magick but it’s not something that appeals to me personally in terms of reading; I’d rather focus on the aspects you identified and observing/honoring nature.

In that case, I would also recommend The Earth Path: Grounding Your Spirit in the Rhythms of Nature by Starhawk, with a caveat that she can seem REALLY, REALLY preachy at times, because she’s so into permaculture and generally reducing her impact on the environment, and her political views are greatly informed by her spirituality. However, she does have a few good things to say about being aware of the world around us: How many local birds can you name (without cheating and using a guide)? Do you know where your food and water comes from (the name of the body of water that it’s drawn from, the process by which it gets to you, etc.)? Things that a lot of us don’t notice as we go about living our lives.

 

[amber_lux]

Can you be wiccan and not believe in magic?

That definitely wouldn’t work for Traditional British Wicca.

Some of the more recent novelties that certain publishers attempt to pass off as being Wiccan, might have that lack as part of their belief system.

Depending upon the group, or individual, the different spellings of “magic” relate to different practices.

Amber

 

[vsedriver]

I personally find conceiving an “eternal” Primortal Stuff of creation just as difficult to conceive in as I would an eternal Creator who existed before our material universe was created…if you can, my hat goes off to you…eternal concepts boggle my mind…I find it difficult to conceive of millions of years back to paleolithic times…let alone eternity past and an infinite and eternal being we call God.

 

[vsedriver]

But I consider:

• the entire Jesus story is a myth
• Jesus was a historical person who appears in a myth

so a group of backwards fishermen, tax collectors, and other average joes just decided one day to buck their lifelong cultural traditions and beliefs and found a whole new religion by creatively making up stories about a guy they knew for only 3 years.

I think that’s harder to believe than a Jesus who could perform miracles.

 

[vsedriver]

There is no fallacy.

This is a fallacy:
If Jesus is God, then he can perform miracles. There are stories about Jesus performing miracles, therefore he is God.

With that kind of logic one can prove that Harry Potter is a real magician.

Harry Potter is a real magician. But Harry Potter isn’t real.

 

[vsedriver]

The problem with the miracles of Christ, is that anybody who has had suitable training can replicate them on Earth, today.

Amber

has anyone been scourged, hung on a cross, died, buried for 3 days and then risen from the dead?

 

[vsedriver]

However, she does have a few good things to say about being aware of the world around us: How many local birds can you name (without cheating and using a guide)? Do you know where your food and water comes from (the name of the body of water that it’s drawn from, the process by which it gets to you, etc.)? Things that a lot of us don’t notice as we go about living our lives.

I’d say that would depend on where you live. Country folk know these answers far more than city folk.

 

[Publisher]

so a group of backwards fishermen, tax collectors, and other average joes just decided one day to buck their lifelong cultural traditions and beliefs and found a whole new religion by creatively making up stories about a guy they knew for only 3 years.

I think that’s harder to believe than a Jesus who could perform miracles.

The original followers of Jesus may have been those things…BUT those that compiled and wrote the gospes were educated individuals…they were able to scour the Hebrew scriptures and compile a “liturgical” framework of Jesus life…Paul was an educated Pharisee. The “authors” of the rest of the NT is only know by “tradition”…the real authors, whom we have no idea who they really were obviously were educated individuals…conversant in Greek, Latin and most likely Aramaic and or Hebrew. “Backwards fishermen” might be able to read some Hebrew or Aramaic…maybe even a smattering of Greek, but literacy was quite low at that time in history.