Wow, so much to say and yet so little time . . . First of all, I’m glad that we are able to have these conversations and that we are both mature enough to discuss this intellectually so that we won’t become insulted by the other’s opinions. I think these discussions will be good for both of us as long as we maintain this attitude. :D! Second of all, I’m sorry if I make you uncomfortable with my more formal method of debate. I’m used to discussing theological and ethical things using correct grammar, spelling, and sentences because of the fact that I am a Reconstructionist. Our discussions are typically very formal because of the fact that our religion is so deeply connected to the scholarly aspects of life that it carries over into our discussions, and hence into my personal writing as well. If you’d prefer our conversations to be more informal I could easily do that. Having said all of that, on with the show!
I’m sorry about the mix-up between Andrew and Anthony, faulty information is inexcusable in an intellectual debate. This will teach me to check my information!! Bad Larissa, bad Larissa!
And commonly the definition of “lost things” is thought of as material. However, i believe that this is a misconception and myth that has developed over time.
What about the life of St. Anthony and the history of the Catholic Church led you to that conclusion? I know nothing about St. Anthony besides that he presides over “lost things”, so I’m not trying to criticize you, I am simply curious.
Ideally we would pray to St. Anthony because we have lost our soul or self.
Why would you not pray to God instead? Is not God more powerful than the powers of this petty human? Is it perhaps because St. Anthony is someone who can identify with these feelings of loss? Or because he is a more personal entity which can interact with on a more personal basis than an infinite God?
You tend to take everything concerning Catholicism so literally . . .
And how am I supposed to take it? I unfortunately am not a telepath (or I would be getting a much better History grade!), and therefore must resort to literal definitions. If you do not plan on saying what you mean then why say it?
We hold them high because they fill a special place in our heart. We do the same to anyone who has left an imprint in our life. This is just a human characteristic.
Just to remind you, you were discussing ancestors when you said this (just so you don’t have to look it up!). But is not the reason spirits are worshiped because they are held up on high in human minds? And the point I am trying to make is exactly what you just said, that this habit of exalting humans and multiple spirits is an essential human characteristic, and that mostly everyone is polytheistic at heart.
I think there is a distinct difference between loving someone and worshiping someone.
I would love to hear the difference, because if we’re discussing the kind of passionate erotic love that I think we are then I really can’t think of a difference. Both the lover and the god are given gifts, both material and non-material. Both the lover and the god arouse (not that kind of arouse!) a passionate and devoted love in the person, and both the lover and the god have an intimate relationship with the person that no one else can have. Could not the lover therefore be logically “treated” in the same way in the person’s mind, and therefore worshiped?
I do not pray to Ryan or believe that he is perfect.
It depends on what your definition of “pray” is whether you do it or not. You most likely do not offer him prayers of supplication because you don’t believe he has the power to save you from any sort of spiritual damnation. However, you do have intimate conversations with him, do you not? Those conversations, because they are so deep and intimate to you two alone could be considered contact prayers, where you’re mostly relishing in each other’s presence and searching for a deeper connection. Lol, you concept of a god is very skewed by the monotheistic legacy. A god does not have to be perfect to be a god. The Hellenic gods are not perfect by any means, and the Norse gods aren’t even immortal, never mind perfect! It’s part of their appeal.
As much as I love words I really just hate them sometimes.
Lol, for me it depends on whether or not these words are written or spoken. I love the written word, but speaking for me is so annoying. I suppose it’s mostly because I’m not that good at communicating my thoughts orally, which is why I tend to like to write out my opinions and beliefs. Oh, and the fact that the English language is not a very good language to express oneself in might have something to do with it!
Again, I don’t think of placing flowers on a grave as a sacrifice. It’s a mere remembrance.
You would be unique in that belief, because most people tend to give items to the dead person on their grave. The flowers are the dead person’s flowers, rather than the person who placed them there’s. It’s not only flowers. Remember in Don’t Say a Word when the little girl put the doll in her father’s grave? That wasn’t an act of remembrance, that was a gift, or an offering. Whatever you prefer to call it! It’s the natural human tendency to offer something material to the dead, or to a deity. Do these instincts come from nowhere?
My interpretation of the burning of incense is to remind us of our roots and where we came from.
Perhaps I was a little far-fetched on the incense thing. To me as a pagan (note the “little ‘p’”) incense has natural connections with prayer and offerings because of the fact that the smoke rises into the heavens, bringing our prayers along with it.
We are born of dust and it is to dust that we return.
Speaking of “dust” on Ash Wednesday? Is this a coincidence? Or perhaps *dun dun dun* religious propaganda!!!!!! Kidding, an accident most likely. Or perhaps it is a sign from Jesus or Yahweh telling us that our conversation is blessed? We may never know! *dramatic music plays*
Offerings should be intangible because ideally material things should not constitute the mainstream of our life.
A Dionysian would not agree with you, my friend! She (or even he) would probably say that it is only through the indulgence of our desires that we see who we truly are beneath the layers of masks we build to protect ourselves from the revelation of our true self. She would probably also say that by permanently subduing these desires we are permanently burying our true selves, and therefore are going nowhere. However, I am not a Dionysian, so I should probably shuttup! As a Hellene, however, I would have to argue that the offering of material things is more helpful to building a relationship with a deity than non-material things, mostly because of our half of the relationship. When I offer a stick of gum, or a piece of bread to a god I am not honestly expecting the god to waltz down from Olympos (quite a long waltz if you ask me, lol!), pick up the piece of bread, eat it, burp, and say “Thanks! I needed that! I was starving!” I do it because it is a physical representation of my willingness to give up something valuable to me (what could be more valuable than food?) in order to form a better relationship with the god, or to even show my appreciation for the help he/she has given me. Most sacrifices tend to involve a material object because we as humans are very sensory-oriented beings which need a tangible object to prove to our minds that we truly have sacrificed. Was not Jesus’ “ultimate sacrifice” just as material as it was spiritual?
In my opinion the purpose of religion is to set you on the path to salvation and goodness. Is that not the purpose of every major world denomination?
Yes, it is, but you are forgetting that I do not belong to a major world denomination, thank Zeus! I, and practically every other Reconstructionist, do not ascribe to the whole goodness=salvation=eternal happiness=run around like insane bunnies on crack theory. I’d elaborate, but I’m getting too lazy, lol!
We just define gods much differently.
Lol, I’ve noticed! It comes from the monotheistic tradition, I suppose.
. . .but I see how you’ve come to your conclusions.
It’s always a good thing for one to understand the reason’s for another’s opinions! :D!
Hun, I know what hubris means. Do I seem that stupid?
Do you really want me to answer that Jessica? Lol, Hermes put me up to it! But even so, I must accept the blame *bows head in shame*.
And since when do animals worship?
A Muslim would say that animals are in a natural state of worship, but I am not a Muslim. But to answer your question let me ask you a question. Has Bruno ever been extraordinarily happy? Sad? Angry? Are not these states of emotions, these pure states of emotion, honoring the gods who preside over these emotions in a way that is greater than our own? In this respect, I believe that animals do worship, at times more purely than we humans do.
Animals live life out of pure instinct and experience.
Are we any better?
See how much more interesting your creation story is? It’s like a soap opera.
Come now, no need to get jealous because my religion is cooler than yours! Lol! I mean, I belong to it, so it has to be made cool just by my presence. But seriously, no one really believes in that story anymore. It’s just a cool story to tell which talks about the nature of both Zeus and mankind.
It’s just a glorified version of Adam and Eve.
Except for the fact that these myths were probably created earlier than the Hebrew one, and the fact that they were most definitely created without Jewish intervention. Also, when you don’t write these things down as a point of reference, things do tend to get embellished. The story wasn’t probably originally as detailed.
Hope=free will.
No, hope would equal hope, lol! Hellenic theology says humans always had free will, we don’t need a box to get it!
The world will keep getting worse until it comes to an end and God will return to earth and lead us to salvation.
To clarify, I never said that was what I believed, I said that was what Hesiod believed. Hellenismos is not orthodoxic, so I frankly don’t have to believe in any sort of theological argument that anyone brings up if I don’t think it makes sense, short of atheism. I personally believe that we’re getting better in some respects, and worse in others. It’s all about the eternal balance, I suppose.
How realistic are half of your beliefs?
*raises eyebrows* If my appeared to be realistic to the majority of the world they wouldn’t be called beliefs, they would be called truths.
. . . I find it hypocritical to make fun of any of the far-fetched Catholic ideas.
Which ones weren’t far-fetched again? Lol, sorry. Hermes again. Shame on you Hermes for mocking Jessica’s beliefs, shame shame!
And I know you like to be able to make fun of what you believe. But it’s hard for me to find anything silly or worthy of being made fun of.
Perhaps Hermes should pay you a visit! But then again, you may not want that because you’ll get this annoying *glances at Hermes peeking over shoulder and smiles* voice in your head cracking jokes all the time that you have to say/write. Perhaps I should beg Apollon to teach me some self-control!
To me it’s all very true and I can find explanations for each and every thing.
How unfortunate! I find it’s the not-knowing and the discovering that’s the interesting part of life.
Just as I don’t make fun of your beliefs because I see where they originated.
Humor is an interesting form of criticism. It can be very constructive as it can get your point across in an amiable way.
Bahai’is stand for a united world religion and they’re way ahead of us for it.
Why would you want a unified World Religion? So everyone can become little drones and all believe in the same thing? Our differences are constructive to the growth of both ourselves and others. Also, no one religion can suit everyone’s personal needs, and I believe it’s arrogant to try to create one.
As Ryan and I discussed for nearly 3 hours tonight . . .
*raises eyebrows, prepares to make some comment about idol-worship, but remains silent*
I’m not going to even try to quote that strange mix of he’s and they’s you gave me, lol! But I don’t believe that all gods are good, and even the nicer ones aren’t all “good” in our sense of the word. Gods have different rules to follow, as they are different beings, and our sense of morality cannot be applied to them.
. . . everything is united.
But if you unite everything into this big mesh of . . . something, then you deny the true essence of what each individual thing is. If you meshed 100 people in a room from all over the globe and then asked them to submit a completed questionnaire on their individual habits, personalities, and opinions and then took the majority’s view on each question and turned those habits, personalities, and opinions into a person you would come up with a person that does not exist. It would be this fantasy creation that would comprise of parts of the individuals from which it came, but it would not be a true representation of the individuals in that room. By creating this imaginary person you are not getting to know the 100 people in that room, but getting to know some idealized fantasy. That is the danger of unification.
The complexities are unnecessary,
If they were necessary they wouldn’t be complexities. If they were necessary then people probably wouldn’t desire them. Simplicity is not always best.
But I owe all of this thought and most of the opinions I’ve expressed to Ryan because he’s helped me come to these conclusions. Without him I’d be nowhere.
Jessica! You are needlessly complicating our discussion by that unnecessary comment! I’m ashamed! Simplicity is best, you know! Best leave Magnet-Boy to his own separate sphere! Lol! Oh yeah, and I forgot, *gags from too much mushiness*. Is there such a thing as too much online PDA's?
Larissa
*I smell dead people . . . oh wait, it’s just your breath!*
No comments:
Post a Comment