Page 3 of 4

Posted: Thu Feb 22, 2007 2:50 pm
by Kitsune
I'm not certain I even want to enter this little catfight.... but... (sigh)

I do not understand why you must fear your God. For your little "ant bully" argument there, of course he's going to leave sugar out for you guys and protect you from stuff you can't understand. And heck, all he's asking is that you never try looking elsewhere, learn new things, improve yourself, or ask questions about anything. But you try to walk away from this "kindness" and he will squash you. Yes he could find horribly imaginative ways to make us suffer, but then, who would he have to rule? The answer is NO ONE. Why is it that people look at people like Saddam Huissen and say, "Oh, he ruled by fear, and he killed many people, simply because they didn't support him... He's bad and we should punish him", but when it's their God doing the same thing, it's perfectly all right?

Not trying to start an argument here... I'm just trying to say that it's hypocritical to say that those traits you so despise in tyrants are deplorable, but that it's okay when your God does the same thing. After all, I don't remember Saddam's friends complaining when he slipped them a little sugar either. ;)

I believe in following something that is above those traits, something timeless, beautiful and understanding. I believe that sometimes it takes more strength to take someone's beating quietly for something you believe in, then to stand up loudly, fight, die, and never be able to get the true picture across.

Just for the record, this is not an attack on Graver or his religion. This is a point that I wish to understand from the viewpoint of someone who follows his religion. (well, here's hoping I don't get flamed for this... :-? [-o< )

Posted: Thu Feb 22, 2007 3:03 pm
by Graver
The difference is that he's not the one doing the squishing when we stray away, but he isn't going to protect us from other things that might squish us. The further away from him we get, the more things there are that can do horrible things to us.

Think of it like this, if you need to hire a bodyguard wouldn't you rather hire one that could entirely destroy you? You wouldn't wanrt Clay Aiken for a bodyguard, because anybody can break Clay Aiken just by sneezing on him. No, you want the biggest, baddest, brutalist guy on your side. So, he's on your side, but you might still be afraid of him. He can turn would-be assassins into paste, but he could do the same thing to you if he chose to.

So, he's worthy of fearing, but that doesn't mean he's going to make your fears come true. :-x
That was said in full knowledge that this is the PAGANlibrary?

plz don't
So, are you saying that Christians are 100% not welcome here at all?

Posted: Thu Feb 22, 2007 3:28 pm
by Kitsune
I guess the difference for me is that I don't worry about people. I don't want the most brutal guy in the lunchyard protecting me, because he may be able to stop any assassin, but if I don't toe his way, I'm toast. :lol:
The difference is that he's not the one doing the squishing when we stray away, but he isn't going to protect us from other things that might squish us. The further away from him we get, the more things there are that can do horrible things to us.

Does he ever say what he's protecting us from? He's not protecting us from ourselves, he's protecting us against the unknown. Hmm, to me this seems to be another George Bush thing. "We don't know what, and we don't know when, but I say the terrorist colour for today is Red and High, and you should all be glad of my protection!" ;)

Like I said, I still believe that to truly show your god that you follow them, you can't be terrified of them. Healthy caution should still be recognized, but if nobody can stop him then what is stopping him from killing you? Just the fact that he likes you today, it seems. :-) Oh, of course, those "I'm above my own law" morals, that I was discussing above. :-? My Goddess is above those morals. We should be wary of her displeasure, but not so much that we can't respect her. Awe is the proper way to feel about a god. Adding in Fear to the mix, to me simply says that he doesn't feel secure enough about his power and abilities to understand that his true followers (those who follow out of love) will follow him regardless of what other choices there are.

I can understand why he needed to be a brutal God when he first came about and tried to find converts. It was a different world, a harsher world, and he needed to be so brutal that no one would dare oppose him and he would find converts at all. :lol: But the world has changed, and I think he needs an image upgrade. ;)

Posted: Thu Feb 22, 2007 3:53 pm
by Graver
Healthy caution should still be recognized, but if nobody can stop him then what is stopping him from killing you?
So, when have I ever displayed any sort of fear that God was going to smite me? I think you are taking "fear" to mean "cower in terror" instead of "Amazed and thrilled" whenever it is displayed.

I am not terrified of my God. I know he's not going to do terrible things to me, but I also know he's capable of doing things that I can't even comprehend.

As for the "other" things, they're hardly a mystery. I know exactly what is out there, exactly what they are capable of, and exactly how eager they are to do them. I can see their attempts to move in my life, and have seen their success. I have seen them move in others lives, their successes and failures.

Posted: Thu Feb 22, 2007 3:57 pm
by morgana
Wow, who knew that my post would generate such a heated debate? Well ok, I had thought it was possible, but it's just a shame that the debate is no longer about what the original topic was about.

Yes, I do believe that if god(s) exist or even just energy, the force of life, is a beautiful force. Do I believe that he/she/it is a "pushover?" No. simply put, it just is. And for those who believe in god or gods, I do believe Daibanjo was right in saying that to paint a picture of a bully and a jealous being as god DOES do he/she/it a HUGE disservice. If god was really that way then he would be nothing more than human. For if there is in fact something greater than us humans, should it not truly BE greater, in ALL aspects?

Even showing god as the so-called "gentle giant" has it's limitations, for that implies that if you make nice with him, you'll have him to fight all your fights for you, rather than doing it yourself, and if there is something I believe is truly important to learn, it is self reliance and taking responsibilities for your own actions. Simply put, (and I believe saying this may tick you off a bit) don't put TOO much faith in god, cuz when you do, god (being the good parent that he is) will decide it's time for you to learn to fly on your own, and will boot you from the nest. And though most see it as abandonment, and a display of god's cruel side, it's just his way of saying "it's time for you to fly on your own now" and this is when most people endure the biggest hardships in their lives. Most people think that it's god testing their faith, I believe it's god saying "You need to learn how to believe in yourself as much as you believe in me."

Posted: Thu Feb 22, 2007 5:26 pm
by Mahala
Graver, I ask you this, If it's not ok for you to be accused of blasphemy, that why is it ok for you to accuse Pagans/Wiccans of such,even if it's a joke? Oh, and Graver, calling people "petty little children" when they're adults is rude.

A summary of some of the best comments I've heard so far: (Not including members names Bcuz I don't want to argue.)

I do not understand why you must fear your God. For your little "ant bully" argument there, of course he's going to leave sugar out for you guys and protect you from stuff you can't understand. And heck, all he's asking is that you never try looking elsewhere, learn new things, improve yourself, or ask questions about anything. But you try to walk away from this "kindness" and he will squash you. Yes he could find horribly imaginative ways to make us suffer, but then, who would he have to rule? The answer is NO ONE. Why is it that people look at people like Saddam Huissen and say, "Oh, he ruled by fear, and he killed many people, simply because they didn't support him... He's bad and we should punish him", but when it's their God doing the same thing, it's perfectly all right?

I don't want the most brutal guy in the lunchyard protecting me, because he may be able to stop any assassin, but if I don't toe his way, I'm toast.

It does insinuate that God is a mean bully, when I know for certain that he is not. The Bible makes it clear that God is a jealous god, wanting worship and adulation for himself and himself alone - implies to me that there are greater and more powerful Gods worthy of worship out there than he is if he is that jealous.



Mahala

Posted: Fri Feb 23, 2007 12:26 am
by Jescissa
Hey, I got a 'best comment' :-D WOOT! Thanks Mahala!
Graver wrote:So, when have I ever displayed any sort of fear that God was going to smite me? I think you are taking "fear" to mean "cower in terror" instead of "Amazed and thrilled" whenever it is displayed.
Y'know, I think we're just quibbling over semantics here...

Fear n. - an unpleasant emotion caused by the threat of danger, pain or harm, (archaic meaning - a mixed feeling of dread and reverence)

We're all using the modern meaning of fear, while Graver is using the archaic meaning. Has that cleared anything up for anyone?

Posted: Sat Feb 24, 2007 9:44 am
by Graver
Thank you Jessica. I should have tried the dictionary before I tried dumbing it down and using not-entirely-accurate analogies. There is much Webster can teach us. :P

Posted: Sat Feb 24, 2007 9:55 am
by Jescissa
Graver wrote:There is much Webster can teach us. :P
:-D I don't know where I'd be without my trusty OED!

I love the way words expand in meaning or contract in meaning, it's so interesting, but can be confusing like in this situation.

In my pocket of Wales, our English dialect is a little different from other places. 'Gay' used to mean 'happy', then it came to mean 'homosexual', now it means 'bad' or 'stupid'. I don't use it for the last meaning, it really grates on me that a word indicating homosexuality has come to mean 'bad' to people, I don't want to let other people think that I think homosexuality is bad but it is interesting to observe what other people say, there are people I talk to who have no recollection that 'gay' used to mean anything other than 'bad' and are surprised when I bring up the word's many and varied meanings.

I suppose it's like the word 'silly', in Old English it used to mean 'happy' or 'joyful', now it means 'daft' or 'foolish'!

Posted: Sun Feb 25, 2007 3:00 am
by Ragnar
Graver wrote:Thank you Jessica.
Who is JESSICA??? :smt017 :dontknow:

Posted: Sun Feb 25, 2007 3:23 am
by Jescissa
Me :lol: (My real name is Jessica, but I sometimes go by Jescissa online because my friends think I'm a little like Narcissa Malfoy from Harry Potter :lol: :lol: )

Posted: Sun Feb 25, 2007 3:36 am
by Ragnar
The carelessness by which some people fail to correctly read names, though, is a clear indicator as to why some people are not "prepared to go through all those refrences". May be it's because they can't?

Posted: Sun Feb 25, 2007 10:02 am
by Graver
Or maybe it just shows that I'm enlightened and knew that her real name was Jessica, while the rest of you couldn't see beyond what was in front of your eyes?

Or, maybe...

Aoccdrnig to a rscheearch at Cmabrigde Uinervtisy, it deosn’t mttaer in waht oredr the ltteers in a wrod are, the olny iprmoetnt tihng is taht the frist and lsat ltteer be at the rghit pclae. The rset can be a total mses and you can sitll raed it wouthit a porbelm. Tihs is bcuseae the huamn mnid deos not raed ervey lteter by istlef, but the wrod as a wlohe. Amzanig huh?

Posted: Sun Feb 25, 2007 10:06 am
by Jescissa
Graver wrote:Aoccdrnig to a rscheearch at Cmabrigde Uinervtisy
I find that piece of research fascinating, it reveals a lot about the way we humans actually read!
Graver wrote:Or maybe it just shows that I'm enlightened and knew that her real name was Jessica
I'm not questioning your enlightenment, Graver, but you're not the only one who has called me Jessica on the board. :lol: I don't pick people up on it because my real name and my screen name are so close that it doesn't really matter.

Posted: Sun Feb 25, 2007 10:47 am
by Graver
;) I was sarcasming myself. I'm in no way enlightened. At least it was you that I called wrong. I might have called someone Rigner or Wallow or who knows what else?

It was just a case of me seeing my name and the Cmabrigde effect taking place.

BTW, I thought real pagans hated stuff like Harry Potter, Buffy, and all that because of how it misrepresents you all. Is that a misperception on my part?