Views on Wicca

[chrisb]

Peace be with you all,

Just for the record, when I am not at Mass I “do” practice Ashtanga Vinyasa Yoga. He’s got me there!

A proud man is always looking down on things and people; and, of course, as long as you’re looking down, your can’t see something that’s above you. - C.S. Lewis

Peace, Love and Blessings,

 

[Marcellinus]

BlessedBe13:

Are you implying that he is…1 : capitalized : a Hindu theistic philosophy teaching the suppression of all activity of body, mind, and will in order that the self may realize its distinction from them and attain liberation
2 : a system of exercises for attaining bodily or mental control and well-being
???

I am implying that he has absolutely nothing to say and thus can only attempt at sounding enlightened and above such argumentation and making we who argue (which is not in itself a bad thing if it is truly the search for truth) sound unenlightened.

BlessedBe13:

By your reasoning, the whole world should become athiest since there is ***no ***evidence to prove that any God exists or is the “one true God”. And the Bible, Koran, etc. are not evidence.

There is not only evidence but proof of the existence of One Transcendent, Unchangable, Unmovable, Immutable, Eternal, Infinite, Cause of all perfection, motion, change, and existence. It is true that the Bible doesn’t prove God by its very existence but it is the Universe which tells us there are some qualities (such as existence, goodness, change, motion and existence) which cannot be explained without a cause, or more specifically The Cause.

 

[Heathen_Dawn]

Marcellinus:

There is not only evidence but proof of the existence of One Transcendent, Unchangable, Unmovable, Immutable, Eternal, Infinite, Cause of all perfection, motion, change, and existence. It is true that the Bible doesn’t prove God by its very existence but it is the Universe which tells us there are some qualities (such as existence, goodness, change, motion and existence) which cannot be explained without a cause, or more specifically The Cause.

I dare you to go to Internet Infidels Discussion Board and carry your words out to the atheists there.

 

[chrisb]

Marcellinus:

A contradiction is an error in reasoning. God cannot be both one and many. I really am having a hard time understanding why you are responding this statement. Do you disagree? Also I think your assumption that most people worship the same God but give him a different name is problematic. This is certainly true when Muslims worship Allah (“Allah” in arabic means “God”) but it is not true when the definition of what they are worshipping is starkly different from that of the one God.

Peace be with you Marcellinus,

A contradiction like “Virgin-Birth” and “3-in-1” or “to live one must die”. You mean those contradiction? These are “not” contradictions, they are Paradoxes and they aren’t suppose to be answered through reason, they are ment to shutdown the cognitive mind so that one can rest emply before the presense of God. God in His infinity is beyond “all” attempts at understanding. “No” attempts at reasoning God do Him justice and it is in error that you attempt such to your own folly and to the true presence of God, which you cloud behind your own pride at knowing something that you do not.

I mean they knew God as in, they recognized that God exists, and indeed tried to proove it to others. And you keep on talking about knowing yourself, how well can you know yourself if you don’t even know if there is a God? Knowing yourself comes with the assumption of a worldview not the otherway around.

I have given you direct quotes from these people of God and you merely offer me conjecture. Again you attempt to take “experiencing the presence of God” and place in a box of your own making. This is folly.

If words do not point to essences then responding to me by using words is essentially pointless.

Words don’t have to point to anything more than agreed upon ideas in which we use between us to communicate. As long as that happens, dialog is very valuable.

The meaning of the word “worship” is very clear. It means giving reverence which is due to a deity.

You assume that Heathen Dawn is using this term within the same context as you. That is an error of assumption that you should first investigate before leaping to conclusions. Sure “worship” is a word with a definition but you fail to understand that words can and do get used incorrectly all the time. You must discover exactly what he means by the use of the word “worship”.

God’s creation is not God according to St. Augustine, the Church, and reason.

I’m guessing you’re never read St. Augustine’s Confessions. Read the first page or so when he asks “where is God not” and then we should talk.

I’m sorry, but the difference between St. Francis and Heathen Dawn is paramount, whether you wish to admit it or not.

I think that is something to be determined first before we cast judgment. I am not defending Heathen Dawn I am arguing there is a much better means at approaching the entire situation. My desire to establish “common understanding” was and is on-going. Do you really think you’ve made headway?

I repeat, delivera nos a subjectivistis, O Domine!, and Pax Christi tecum as well.

If truly the first will be last and the last will be first, then you will be very far at the end of the line. St. Augustine once said:

For those who would learn God’s ways, humility is the first thing, humility is the second, humility is the third.

I would suggest that you read more St. Augustine.

PS: Again I don’t deny anything which you have argued I simply point to the fact that such reasoning is only the beginning and not the end.

Peace, Love and Blessings,

 

[Marcellinus]

chrisb:

A contradiction like “Virgin-Birth” and “3-in-1” or “to live one must die”. You mean those contradiction?

No, I mean contradictions like, monotheism and polytheism.

chrisb:

These are “not” contradictions, they are Paradoxes and they aren’t suppose to be answered through reason

I never said that we could answer everything through reason, certainly the existence of an omniscient God would mean that there would most definately be some things we cannot explain. But even then I don’t think we should shut down our reasoning faculties completely. Christ said we should be wise as serpents and soft as doves (or lambs, sorry I can’t remember the passage exactly).

chrisb:

God in His infinity is beyond “all” attempts at understanding. “No” attempts at reasoning God do Him justice and it is in error that you attempt such to your own folly and to the true presence of God, which you cloud behind your own pride at knowing something that you do not.

I’m not going to lie to you, I am a very prideful and fallen person, and if I have in any way been stubborn or hot-headed in my argumentation, I apologize. But I think you do the divine gift of reason an injustice by saying that using it to prove the Divinity is prideful. If that in itself is prideful then St. Thomas Aquinas was the most prideful man who ever lived.

chrisb:

I have given you direct quotes from these people of God and you merely offer me conjecture. Again you attempt to take “experiencing the presence of God” and place in a box of your own making. This is folly.

My problem with your quoting of the saints is the fact that you never quote anything of what they have to say about the definite proof of God’s existence through reason, which I am sure that St. Augustine at least must of mentioned. All you are quoting is when the saints are talking about devotional practices, likes silence and meditation.

chrisb:

Words don’t have to point to anything more than agreed upon ideas in which we use between us to communicate. As long as that happens, dialog is very valuable.

But that is essentially saying that words point to essences.
chrib:

You assume that Heathen Dawn is using this term within the same context as you. That is an error of assumption that you should first investigate before leaping to conclusions. Sure “worship” is a word with a definition but you fail to understand that words can and do get used incorrectly all the time. You must discover exactly what he means by the use of the word “worship”.

Alright, alright, if Heathen Dawn means by “worship” anything other than the actual meaning of the word will he please tell me so.

chrisb:

I’m guessing you’re never read St. Augustine’s Confessions. Read the first page or so when he asks “where is God not” and then we should talk.

There is a very great difference between “where” God is not, and “what” God is not. God is everywhere, but He is not everything, He is different from His creation.

chrisb:

I think that is something to be determined first before we cast judgment. I am not defending Heathen Dawn I am arguing there is a much better means at approaching the entire situation. My desire to establish “common understanding” was and is on-going. Do you really think you’ve made headway?

Yes. I think Heathen Dawn and I agreed that there must be one infinite being. Unfortunately, he wasn’t willing to go any further.

For those who would learn God’s ways, humility is the first thing, humility is the second, humility is the third.

I would suggest that you read more St. Augustine.

I have read St. Augustine, both his Confessions and his City of God.

 

[chrisb]

Marcellinus:

No, I mean contradictions like, monotheism and polytheism.

Peace be with you Marcellinus,

Then we should define the difference and make the distinction between what St. Francis does and what Wicca is doing. Until that is settled we lible to make a heresy out of St. Francis’ Canticle and that would be a huge mistake, in my oppinion.

I never said that we could answer everything through reason, certainly the existence of an omniscient God would mean that there would most definately be some things we cannot explain. But even then I don’t think we should shut down our reasoning faculties completely. Christ said we should be wise as serpents and soft as doves (or lambs, sorry I can’t remember the passage exactly).

I’m not suggest such, I’m merely trying to point out that we define that details of our Metaphysics too quickly at our own folly and note, Jesus said be “wise” as serpents. We should define the different of wisdom and logic?

I’m not going to lie to you, I am a very prideful and fallen person, and if I have in any way been stubborn or hot-headed in my argumentation, I apologize. But I think you do the divine gift of reason an injustice by saying that using it to prove the Divinity is prideful. If that in itself is prideful then St. Thomas Aquinas was the most prideful man who ever lived.

Ah, now are are standing before the Gates of Heaven and common ground is forming beneith us. This is start of true dialog and it is most welcomed. It is not be desire to do reason injustice but is my desire to know when it is necessary for real dialog it is also important to know it’s limits. If not you will reason yourself right out of the faith as many have done.

[to be continued]

 

[chrisb]

My problem with your quoting of the saints is the fact that you never quote anything of what they have to say about the definite proof of God’s existence through reason, which I am sure that St. Augustine at least must of mentioned. All you are quoting is when the saints are talking about devotional practices, likes silence and meditation.

It was important to demonstrate where they drew the line on logic and where they simply rested in faith. I don’t deny the necessity of reason and logic to illuminate doctrine, I merely suggest that it is only the start and should not be the end of our understanding of it.

But that is essentially saying that words point to essences.

I don’t think that this is accurate as essences are actual parts of reality and ideas are merely personal expressions of one’s interpretations of reality. Ideas can and often are limited in completeness and so are often at some level in error.

Alright, alright, if Heathen Dawn means by “worship” anything other than the actual meaning of the word will he please tell me so.

yes, there is a big different between reverence which we give to Holy Mother, Angels and the Saints and adoration which we reserve for God alone. Heathen Dawn could very well only be offering reverence toward creation and not adoration. If that is the case then there might be room for some common ground in which to open further dialog. If not then he is blaspheming and we both know that is bad.

There is a very great difference between “where” God is not, and “what” God is not. God is everywhere, but He is not everything, He is different from His creation.

Yes you’ve got a point but this takes us back to the inquiry regarding exactly what does Heathen Dawn mean but worship. We’ve got a lot of questions that need answering.

Yes. I think Heathen Dawn and I agreed that there must be one infinite being. Unfortunately, he wasn’t willing to go any further.

Well, don’t pat yourself on the back because we discovered that way before you arrived if you care to go back and read.

I have read St. Augustine, both his Confessions and his City of God.

So have I and I walked away humbled by his piety and gentleness not by his crafty argumentation. Do you practice any Lectio Divina?

Peace, Love and Blessings,

 

[BlessedBe13]

Marcellinus:

There is not only evidence but proof of the existence of One Transcendent, Unchangable, Unmovable, Immutable, Eternal, Infinite, Cause of all perfection, motion, change, and existence. It is true that the Bible doesn’t prove God by its very existence but it is the Universe which tells us there are some qualities (such as existence, goodness, change, motion and existence) which cannot be explained without a cause, or more specifically The Cause.

Please, show me the proof.

Even IF there was proof, that there is some being higher than us, there is no proof as to whether there is one, two, three, hundreds, etc., what qualities they hold, whether he/she/it is more like the Catholic, Muslim, Wiccan, other Pagan, Hindu, etc.(if any) religious ideas, etc. In short, even if it was proven that some sort of Divine Being existed, there is no proof about what it is like. And I’m sure many people would disagree that the qualities you described (goodness, motion, existance, etc.) come from some sort of God.

 

[Marcellinus]

BlessedBe13:

Please, show me the proof.

Alright, I will.

I think that you will acknowledge that the universe exists. Now anything that is brought into existence is brought into existence by something distinct of itself. One never finds things just popping into existence uncaused. All living things were brought into existence through reproduction from its parent(s). Now lets say there a five things that cause us to exist right now; what causes those five things to exist? 5 other things? And 5 more after that? But the chain cannot go back infinitely, otherwise you would have to say that an infinite amount of actions have taken place for a certain thing to happen (for example, existence), and of course, an infinite amount of actions can never be done. So in the end there must be a Cause which causes existence in all others, yet does not need something else to cause its existence. This is what we call God. The same formula can be applied to motion and change.

Now there can only be one God, for if there were two or more it would mean that there would be some way in which each god did not exist, and thus would rely upon something else for its existence. Yet how could they exist if there was not one source of all being giving them existence?

So we have found that there must be one Cause of all existence, change and motion, who is transcendant of these. And since he is the cause of all existence, he is the sum of all real spiritual qualities such as love, justice, mercy, and goodness (he cannot be the sum of evil because evil is simply a lack of goodness). So we see that there must be a Transcendant All-Good, All-Just, All-Merciful, All-Loving Cause of all existence, change and motion and He must care enough about His creation to continually give it existence.

BlessedBe13:

Even IF there was proof, that there is some being higher than us, there is no proof as to whether there is one, two, three, hundreds, etc., what qualities they hold, whether he/she/it is more like the Catholic, Muslim, Wiccan, other Pagan, Hindu, etc.(if any) religious ideas, etc. In short, even if it was proven that some sort of Divine Being existed, there is no proof about what it is like. And I’m sure many people would disagree that the qualities you described (goodness, motion, existance, etc.) come from some sort of God.

I don’t know, but the God I described above certainly sounds more like the Judeo/Christian/Muslim God to me than any other.