Very true, in fact when my old school teachers family first arrived from Croatia they were the only Catholics that owned land in the entire county and had a armed standoff with the KKK on their homestead. Later while Jim Crow laws were still around they alwase were the lifeguards for colored hours at the pool because the were essentially considered a minority the same as the colored folks.
That is dependandt on the seperate religion. Kallisto and mlamg and myself will all hold different ethical codes, but they usually seam to reflect the parent cultures ideals. For my particular religion a pad pagan would be a coward or a liar, or one who lacks conviction and discipline. Cowards dont go to Valhalla, no matter the successes of their life.
Oh really. So are you telling me that the Roman State and religion were not interwoven? Are you trying to tell me that the Emperor was not considered to be a God? To defy the emperor was to defy a god. Or are you trying to argue that the Imperial cult of Rome was actually a myth?
Anything that is non Abraham is not pagan. Does anybody consideres philosophical religions as pagan?. Is non theistic religions are pagan?. Is atheism is Pagan?. Before Abraham , faith in true God existed. Melchizedek offered offerings to whom?. Noah and family prayed to whom?. Animism is an umbrella term used to identify those faith which searches for God, through this nature and natural forces. Paganism is an umbrella term used to identify those faith involves idol worships (false Gods created from human imagination), considers natural forces are under the control of pagan gods. In paganism it may contain worship of natural forces , but in another way such as worshiping personified Gods who controls that natural force. It is often used to deceive animists.
I’m saying that you are giving the impression of having no working knowledge of Roman religion. Roman religion was a domestic religion, practiced primarily in the homes and focused on the honoring the gods with divine spirits of the household and land. The Imperial cult was the establishment of a monarchy - part of the transitioning Rome from a republic to an empire. Pagan religion did not include the worship of kings (who ruled pre-republic) or senators (republic) or the ruling families. It paralleled Roman religion in that the imperial cult was made to be as important to the well-being of governing Rome along side the religious cults of the gods. Just as civic order, military defense and healthcare are also essential to the well-being of a society. The temple priesthoods of the gods were not like the Christian Church.
The emperor was deemed god-like, as in divinely influenced. Not part of the pantheon of gods, not part of the cyclical religious festival, not part of home worship etc. And if he distinguished himself in battle, as Julius Caesar did, during his triumphus a slave stood behind him holding a laurel wreath above his head while whispering “momento mori” -“remember you are mortal.”
Please see above.
Nor did I say everything non-Abrahamic is pagan. Please note this time the first sentence that you captured in my quote:
The first type of spiritual worship and still part of some practices today.
Paganism is no more idolatry than Catholicism, which has been pointed out to you more than once. Why do you chose to ignore? Shall we now proceed with assertions that Catholicism is idolatry despite adherents insistence to the contrary just because others maintain that it is?
So how do you explain the granting of the status of apotheosis to Roman Emperors? Apotheosis doesn’t just mean divinely inspired, it means deification. You can dress up the Roman pagan beliefs as some sort of cosy, home-based religion with no connection with the Roman state.The fact is however that the Roman state and the Roman pagan belief systems were intertwined, so much so that Roman emperors were deified.
But see what you have to realize is when we say thing like this.Because the discussion isn’t about whether other religions comply with your church’s teachings. That’s like expecting Catholicism to be measured by the ways of another religion. Should Catholicism be deemed “false” or “delusional” etc. because it’s different from what another religion holds true?
See above.
There’s a difference between “this is what we believe/practice and how it differs from yours” versus “this is the one right way, you’re wrong and hopefully one day see we’re right and you’re wrong”.
Why is this thread allowed to exist on this forum ?With all due respect, I will pray for you, but no questions because I am not interested in what you are trying to sell!
Dialogue with the intent to understand.Why is this thread allowed to exist on this forum ?
Paganism is not an option folks !
Respectfully asking a pagan “which false gods do you worship?” is the wrong approach.Dialogue with the intent to understand.
God Bless
It wouldnt be the first time a deity had condemned people to death (not that I think the emperors were divne.)
Then why is there a non-catholic are of the Forum and why are you in it?Why is this thread allowed to exist on this forum ?
Paganism is not an option folks !
So if I walked up to you, raised my arms and shouted “I AM THE WAY! THE TRUTH! THE LIGHT!” would you follow me as your god? anyone can say anything.But see what you have to realize is when we say thing like this.
I AM the way the truth and the light. That is scripture. Jesus is the only person Human and Divine that has ever said this.
So when we state things like that it is our faith we are quoting. No just our Opinion.
I think thats where much understanding is comming from here.
Here is a fine example.
See to it that no one captivate you with empty human tradition according to the elemental powers of the word and not according to Christ.
That is not making a judgement on you. It is a quote from the word of God.
As you can counter YOUR GOD not mine. And I agree with you.
But its how can we have a discussion. It seems you just want us to sit here and say:yup::yup::yup:
Nice try, but that’s a fail. It doesn’t go unnoticed you dodge anything you don’t want to acknowledge, or perhaps you just don’t have an answer.
Contort it however you please, it’s still incorrect.But that’s just it - it is opinion. It’s your opinion based on what you believe is true and what you hold to be scripture. The point I’m making is that it is not universally applicable as other religions have their sacred texts and beliefs, leading to adherents’ personal opinions, which are as unshakeable as your own.
Sorry, I can only reiterate the above. That’s like me telling you that you “the rules” are per what another religion maintains, which determines the terms in which all discussion of your religion must be approached by.
And I genuinely appreciate your openess.But its how can we have a discussion. It seems you just want us to sit here and say:yup::yup::yup:
I don’t expect anyone to change their beliefs, rather the point I was making is how one chooses to convey those beliefs. Sort of like the old saying “you attract more flies with honey than vinegar.” How something is approached is just as important as the message itself, and makes all the difference as to whether the other party will remain open to hearing it.I answered your question. My answer is not incorrect. What exactly have I dodged? Or do you count ‘dodging’ as not agreeing with you?Nice try, but that’s a fail. It doesn’t go unnoticed you dodge anything you don’t want to acknowledge, or perhaps you just don’t have an answer.
When did I ever say that all emperors were declared as deities?
The ruling family did benefit, and this was intertwined with the religious beliefs that enabled them to do so. Was the deified emperor regarded as a deity just by his own family? No
It was part of pagan Roman religious beliefs that the emperor in question had indeed been deified. As far as the pagan Romans, that emperor was a god. To argue that that was not part of pagan Roman religious beliefs is nonsense.
He was regarded as deity.
It matters not, both represent the pagan religious beliefs of the time.
I suppose you are right. For Christians, it is about faith (not proof) and being drawn to Jesus’ teachings that are so compelling in terms of eternity. No man would declare what Jesus declared, if he was not who he said he was, unless of course he was crazy and I do not think Jesus was just a 1st century deluded crazy man. As a sane man, (nothing more) claiming to be the messiah, there would be nothing to gain in this life, for the man, Jesus. Jesus being who he said he was, is the only way his teachings make any sense. Of course anyone, if they try hard enough can poke holes in an idea that is believed.
Can you give me a reason(s) why you believe (have faith in their existence) in the pagan gods?
Don’t you know that they were mentioned in some 13th century Icelandic poems, so they must be true.