paganism

Like trinity....
And changing saturday to sunday, did you know why by the way?
Year after year christians worshipped their lord on saturday but then this leader wants to change it all to his day, sunday(the suns day,they used to worship it) the coming day they worshipped the moon, monday.

 

If trinity is not an innovation ryu, then how come its not even mentioned by Jesus(may peace be upon him). The word isnt even an existing one in the bible...
^^

 

What can also be proven as historical fact is that until the conversion of the emperor Constantine, Chrisitans were mercilessly persecuted by the Romans, who incidentally were Pagan. Now Beginning with the reign of the Emperor Theodecius, the first emperor to declare Christianity the offical state religion of Rome, as well as the last to rule a united Empire Christians have mercilessly persecuted non-Christians. Now this is of course not the case for all Chrisitans at all times, or even for all Christian governments; but that is not really the point. The point is that movements and groups percieved as a threat by the power strcture will almost always be persecuted. Whether the power structure is Chrisitan, or Muslim, or Pagan, or secular, doesn't really seem to matter much. If we woke up tomorrow and Pagans ran the world they would most likely do all the awful nasty things that Christians have done and are doing. This would not be because they were Pagans, but because they were in power. Similarly, Christians have perpetrated horrible atrocities not because they were Chrisitans, but because they were in power.

Additionally, it irks me to no end that many Christians want to practice "old testament history", that is to say that they take the old testamnt to be a litteral and infallible historical resource. This, to be blunt, is a load of crap. Things like Noah's flood, Jonah and the whale, Moses crossing the Red sea, are a combination of parable, allegory, fable, grain of truth stuff (the seven plagues for example) etc. . . and should not be taken literally. There is some historical evidence for the various battles and wars taking place in, for example, the books of Kings, but the stories in Kings are by no means accurate. They provide a general description of real events much colored by myth, prejudice, embellishment, and the like.

It irks me equally when Pagans do what amounts to the same. If it is your faith position that Christians destroyed all evidence of ancient pagan rituals and that you still somehow know what those rituals were then state it as such, that is your right. It is, however, obviously contradictory and revisionist when posited as an historical fact.

 

Let me stop you there - you're talking crap.

<retracted while I check my sources>The romans never persecuted anyone, if anything they were keen to help the local peoples keep their own cutoms and beliefs because it would be easier to rule them.</retracted>

As for Constantine, he was converted, on his death bed, against his will. The decision for rome to become christian was simply a way of trying to keep the pease, half the population were pagan, the other half christian, the christians has a slight advantage, so they went with the majority.

Anyway, we can't be held accountable for the actions of our ancestors, and we're not claiming that you should be either - but look at the modern world, and what christanity is doing to the world...

 

No Dan, let me stop you there. I had immense respect for you until that bundle of british bullshit fell from your fingertips.

The Romans took what they wanted, slaughtered, enslaved, raped, pillaged, made the Norse look like the cast of Mr Roger's Neighborhood, and ruled half the world with an iron fist. All in the name of PROGRESS.

Eh, but the Christians have still done worse.

 

LOL, that's funny

I'll have to check my sources, but I'm sure what I've said it correct - but, until I can provide some back up for this, please, allow me to retract my statement above...

Oh, just one other thing tho, for christians, anything that's non-christian, is classed as pagan... even if the romans did do this, they were following their own beliefs and cutoms, as you say, in the name of progress, not due to any sacred text or otherwise. You can't associate what they did, specificlly, with paganism - there are no ties.

 

Oh I don't. The Roman gods were gods of convenience and the Romans worshipped them when it was convenient. Rome's destruction and scattering of the Celtic tribes was driven by trade, territory and disdain for barbarism (by their definition). Conquest and religion seem to be indigenous to Christianty. Even the Muslims don't seem to want to take anything in the name of Allah except each other.

 

well, they (the muslims living in the caliphate of the west, on the iberian peninsula) did try to conquer europe in the 8th century c.e.

http://www.answers.com/topic/battle-of-tours

 

Then what really is a "pagan"? Its a very board term.Would this also mean that Hindus,Buddists,Jews, ect. are pagan? Form what I have herd it seems that what we call "pagans" on this site anyone who's religon is not really mainstream....So really yeah "Pagans" stop calling your self that and say Wicca or what ever the "pagan" religons are."Pagan" is just 2 confusing a word.

 

Well, that "let me stop you there thingie" that you did may have sounded all cool and snazzy, but it is apparent that you also stopped there and didn't read the rest of my post. I made it abundantly clear that the Pagan Romans did not persecute people because they were Pagan but because they were the ruling elite of the time.

 

When people talk about 'pagan' today, they normally mean neo-pagan - which, for all purposes intent, means earth-based religion.

I can't call myself 'wiccan' because I'm not a wiccan, neither am I a druid, or any of the other demoninations - I'm pagan, and that, as a label, is more than enough for me (I'm actully an 'atheist pagan', but lets not confuse things right now )

 

Jews are not Pagan because they are monotheistic, and worship the same God, the God of Abraham. As are Muslims. Most Buddhists are also monotheistic, though there are exceptions. Hindus are polytheistic but I wouldn't call them Pagans, Hindu is much older than traditional Paganism and they consider the term Pagan an insult. So no, anything not Christian is not necessarily Pagan by default.

I am a Celtic Neo-Pagan, that is to say, I am a freeman pledged to a clan of 5th Century Celts, and a Neo-Pagan. While we reference certain deities, we mostly worship the earth, her bounty and her seasons and we celebrate the Pagan holidays.

Jumbo, you said it best, they considered themselves the "ruling elite" but the point Dan is missing is this (and I've made it before but never got a satisfactory rebuttal): If Rome gave satellite states the right to practice their own customs and beliefs, then why was Gaelic Druidry a crime punishable by death on the spot without trial in the first three centuries AD? Just as it pushed the Celts out of central Europe, Rome nearly destroyed the practice of Druidry. And all of this 600 years BEFORE Constantine.

That's like saying, "Put out your hand, Johnny... the lion just wants to smell you." If there was self rule it was only an illusion, and only then in the Isles.

 

I didn't this as being fact, I meant this as being the christian view.

Explain what you mean by 'traditional paganism'? I'm sure you'll find that paganism, in one form of another, is far far older than any other religion.

As I said, I retracted my statement while I check my facts.

 

The Romans, especially republic and early empire, often let various conquered people keeps their religions as long as they were fairly clam about it and kept their beliefs in the home. The Romans did not spend time converting people to their religion ever, at least not until the Christian empire. However, if the Romans percieved various rerligious pratices as in anyway a threat to their power they very quickly stomped all over those folks. The Druids were a very independent people, and their religious practices reflected this, at least in realtion to Roman rule.

 

I accept your apology

 

They [the romans] also stompped all over the early Chrisitans, who were percieved as a very big threat indeed. That perception turn out to be well founded at least insofar as the Roman religion was concerned, as Christianity eventually supplanted and subsequently suppressed the old Roman religion.

 

I think that's the entire point of this discussion. Christianity supplants and suppresses EVERYTHING except itself. It's the secondary reason we are in Iraq, Afganistan and probably next will be Iran. It's a crusade for the new millenium! We have stemmed the red tide, no let our new battle cry be Convert the Muslim Hordes!

I hope that someday I will have the pleasure of seeing Bush mounted the way they did Mussolini.

 

But that is not the entire point. It is not Christianity exclusively that does this, it is power that does this. Religion is meerly a convienint tool. Islam did exactly the same thing for hundreds of years as is still doing it in large areas of Africa and southeast Asia. As much as everyone on this site kisses ass to Buddism, Buddism did the same thing in China and Japan for centuries. Essentially the same thing was done in the name of Communism in numerous areas. Look at all the evil that the Isrealies and Palestinians are doing to eachother, neither side is Christian.

There seems to be this attitude that oohh those evil Christians are so mean and awful, but everybody else in the whole world is just so full of hugs and love all the time. Yet folks steadfastly refuse to actually look at history or current events; all of which indicate that religion is a red herring. It is power, regardless of the particular religion used as an excuse, that has been doing all sorts of evil stuff for thousands of years.

 

Actually it's narrow-minded ideology (which is what you just said, I know). There are plenty of people in the world who wield power and don't invade other countries, don't commit acts of genocide, and don't tell me what I should think, to whom I should pray, etc.

 

Well of course. I did not intend to imply that all people would wield power have been evil and horrible. There are good folks have held variously amounts of power, or who could have had they chosen to. Gandhi, for example, could easily and succesfully have declared himself supreme emperor of India and proceeded to do all kinds of evil stuff, yet he did no such thing.

Additionally, there is power and then there is power. The head of state of Spain, for example, may have power in that country. However, Spain is not nearly powerful enough to get away with the shit that the U.S.A., or China gets away with or that the Soviet Union got away with during the cold war. Were Spain that powerful I would take any odds that it would start doing the same kind of harsh shit. Back in the day Spain was that powerful and, correspondingly, perpetrated all kinds of evil.