If you love Christmas, thank a Pagan



In article <[email protected]>,
GQ <[email protected]> wrote:

> Unfortuately that seems to be the case for a goodly portion of them
> but there are true Pagans that people would not even know because they
> just live their lives without belittling others and without bothering
> others.

Interestingly enough, it is some of these self proclaimed pagans who
have been so combattive and insulting in this (and other) threads.

Regards,
Ranee

Remove do not & spam to e-mail me.

"She seeks wool and flax, and works with willing hands." Prov 31:13

http://arabianknits.blogspot.com/
http://talesfromthekitchen.blogspot.com/
 
On 19 Dec 2005 10:26:03 -0600, Bob Terwilliger wrote:


>>> Do you feel the same way about the Jesus-fish? Same idea of abbreviation.
>>>
>> Bob the fish was also a sign, between christians, during persecutions
>> in the roman times. Pretty much gang signs in early A.D.
>
>*sigh* Yes, I know. You failed to address the fact that it's an
>ABBREVIATION. Pan, the Greek word for fish is spelled
>iota-chi-theta-upsilon-sigma. In the arcana of the early Christians as well
>as those espousing the Jesus-fish today, the "chi" stands for "Christ."
>(http://www.ichthys.com/ichthys_explanation.htm) So it seems to me that
>using "X" to denote Jesus is just as respectful or disrespectful as using a
>Jesus-fish. I was asking how YOU felt about that. I thought my post made
>that clear.

*Sigh* No you didn't make that clear.
I feel that the fish is fine. Now if you feel that there is no
difference between 3/400 A.D. and today *sigh*. You tell me that most
people,on the street,know that Chi = Christ and Chi = x .
And tell me that most people didn't use X=Christ until say 20 years
ago, and that they used it because X = Chi.
>
>(Besides, Buddha doesn't care if you call him "B-man." Indifference is one
>of the highest goals in Buddhism.)
And if I met Buddha he would laugh, but his adherents might not.
>Bob
>
 
Ranee wrote:

> Interestingly enough, it is some of these self proclaimed pagans who
> have been so combattive and insulting in this (and other) threads.

You mean Jill, right? Go ahead, it's okay to say what you really mean: You
mean Jill. I can understand Jill's frustration at the way the conversation
has turned against her, when all she did was express her disbelief. She
also expressed her distaste for some sandwiches (that *I* thought sounded
mighty good). Suddenly she's in everybody's gunsights.


<highschool>
I hate her. She's SUCH a *****! Let's CRUCIFY her!
</highschool>


<Sheldon>
She has a nice rack but she's probably a WOP.
</Sheldon>

Bob
 
Pan Ohco wrote:

> *Sigh* No you didn't make that clear.
> I feel that the fish is fine. Now if you feel that there is no
> difference between 3/400 A.D. and today *sigh*. You tell me that most
> people,on the street,know that Chi = Christ and Chi = x .
> And tell me that most people didn't use X=Christ until say 20 years
> ago, and that they used it because X = Chi.

*sigh* It's not my fault that you failed to comprehend my earlier post. The
information was all there, you just didn't process all of it. When I wrote
"Same idea of abbreviation," what did you THINK I meant?

People have been using X=Christ for CENTURIES, and it is EXACTLY because Chi
is an abbreviation for Christ. Are you claiming that you never saw "Xmas"
before 1985?

So even though you think that "fish=jesus" is not disrespectful, you think
that "x=jesus" is -- even though they're using EXACTLY THE SAME GREEK LETTER
to denote the word "christ."

How about a little consistency, Pan?

Bob
 
Ranee Mueller wrote:
> In article <[email protected]>,
> Melinda Meahan - take out TRASH to send <[email protected]>
> wrote:
>
>>I second the motion. My secular history textbook at a secular college
>>said that the reason why the Roman Empire made such phenomenal conquests
>>is that they would incorporate the pagan religious customs of each group
>> into some Roman Catholic ritual(s) in order to more easily attract
>>them so they could be more easily conquered. If you think about it, it
>>was a really intelligent way to assimilate them.
>
> I think you are confused. The Roman Catholic church was never in
> charge of the Roman Empire.

Hmm, well, then maybe it was the Romans who incorporated pagan rituals
into Roman culture, then. But I vividly remember reading it and being
astounded, because it was the first time I had a history book that
wasn't full of boring history trivia junk and it made an impression on
me that someone could use history to try to explain how things came to
be, and it was the start of my learning to like history.
 
Bob Terwilliger wrote:
> Ranee wrote:
>
>
>>Interestingly enough, it is some of these self proclaimed pagans who
>>have been so combattive and insulting in this (and other) threads.
>
>
> You mean Jill, right? Go ahead, it's okay to say what you really mean: You
> mean Jill. I can understand Jill's frustration at the way the conversation
> has turned against her, when all she did was express her disbelief. She
> also expressed her distaste for some sandwiches (that *I* thought sounded
> mighty good). Suddenly she's in everybody's gunsights.
>
>
> <highschool>
> I hate her. She's SUCH a *****! Let's CRUCIFY her!
> </highschool>
>
>
> <Sheldon>
> She has a nice rack but she's probably a WOP.
> </Sheldon>
>
> Bob
>
>

What, am I not combative and insulting? :)
People are *****y on usenet sometimes. Fact.

--

saerah

"Peace is not an absence of war, it is a virtue, a state of mind, a
disposition for benevolence, confidence, justice."
-Baruch Spinoza

"There is a theory which states that if ever anybody discovers exactly
what the Universe is for and why it is here, it will instantly disappear
and be replaced by something even more bizarre and inexplicable. There
is another theory which states that this has already happened."
-Douglas Adams
 
On Mon, 19 Dec 2005, Pan Ohco wrote:

> On Sun, 18 Dec 2005 16:16:12 GMT, EastneyEnder wrote:
>
> >Just out of curiosity as I've never had a Christmas tree before, and think I
> >might buy a small one this year (potted so it can be used again!), has
> >anyone suggestions on what to put on the top? When I was a kid we had a
> >fairy... I thought of a star, but would prefer a more non-Christian symbol.
> >Although I am sort-of Christian on paper, I lean more towards
> >non-conformist/humanist/pagan (whatever) these days and can't think of
> >anything tasteful and pretty (no santas or snowmen please).
>
> How about a Santa hat, we do this in our home. Gets away for the old
> joke about an angle with a tree shoved up its ass.
>
>

The Santa hat is a really cute idea. I buy into the whole Christian (not
Religion) thing, but even I like the santa hat (for my pagan tree <g>).

For a few years, I had a tiny wreath with little lights on it with a base
that fit on the top of the tree. For a while I had an ornament (for lack
of a better word) that was glass. It had the base, which was elongated,
then a large ball, like any tree ball, and then it had and
elongated-to-a-point thingie. The ball in the center said, "Tis the
Season..." ("to be jolly" is the last part of that quote). Geez, I guess I
was buying "pagen" and didn't even know it! <g>

For several years, my mom had that beautiful ribbon people were/are
putting on trees instead of garland. Hers came with a big, beautiful bow
with streamers that you put at the top of the tree. It looked like the bow
had been tied at the tree top and then wound down around the tree from the
top - even though it was two separate pieces. It was cool.

A bow made out of that great ribbon would be a great "topper".

Elaine, too
 
<snip/snipe>

<snip/snipe>

<snip/snipe ad nauseum>


Uh, peace on earth, goodwill towards men. (Ya think???)

Spitz
--
"Home, James, and don't spare the horses!"
 
EastneyEnder wrote:
> Just out of curiosity as I've never had a Christmas tree before, and think I
> might buy a small one this year (potted so it can be used again!), has
> anyone suggestions on what to put on the top? When I was a kid we had a
> fairy... I thought of a star, but would prefer a more non-Christian symbol.
> Although I am sort-of Christian on paper, I lean more towards
> non-conformist/humanist/pagan (whatever) these days and can't think of
> anything tasteful and pretty (no santas or snowmen please).
>


How about a rainbow?

Best regards,
Bob
 
OmManiPadmeOmelet wrote:

> In article <[email protected]>,
> "Gregory Morrow" <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>
>>The Pagans I've encountered are just about the stupidest persons I've
>>ever known...they fall into the "New Age" category and IMNSHO that
>>should re - named the "Moron" category...
>>
>>--
>>Best
>>Greg "I think it's time to get re - birthed..."
>
>
> <snork> I know what you mean...
>
> I am pagan myself, but, like any "fad" religion, we get our share of
> nutcases as well.
>
> Oddly enough, I've met more quack x-tians than I have quack pagans tho'.
>
> ;-)
>
> Cheers!


I'm reading several days worth of this thread at once.

You do know that Landover Baptist Church is a parody made up of
stereotype characters, don't you? Betty Bowers is not a real person,
even if she is "better than you".

And you only get to count Dr (?) Andy Chung once.

Kind of lowers the numbers a bit, don't it?

Bob
 
Kate B wrote:

> "Melinda Meahan - take out TRASH to send" <[email protected]> wrote in
> message news:[email protected]...
>
>>It was Golden Gate University in San Francisco, about 25 years ago.
>>
>>Kate B wrote:
>>
>>>What are you talking about and please identify the "secular" college
>
> that
>
>>>had text books that taught that the Roman Empire was operating with the
>>>Roman Catholic church as its guiding light? Christianity was not
>
> exactly
>
>>>popular during the empire building era of ancient Rome. While I agree
>
> with
>
>>>what Peter Aitken said what you contributed is pure and utter BS.
>>
> I was crabby in my reply but can you honestly believe that Golden Gate
> University selected text books that opined as you stated:
>
>
>>"My secular history textbook at a secular college
>>said that the reason why the Roman Empire made such phenomenal conquests
>>is that they would incorporate the pagan religious customs of each group
>> into some Roman Catholic ritual(s) in order to more easily attract
>>them so they could be more easily conquered. If you think about it, it
>>was a really intelligent way to assimilate them." ????
>
>
> Are you, perhaps, just "mis-remembering" what you were supposed to have
> learned 25 years ago: i.e. That the Roman Empire was more than happy to
> accept the traditions of conquered folks and adapt them to "meld" with
> whatever they felt needed to be part and parcel of being a "new Roman".?
> This had nothing to do with "Roman Catholic" rituals. The first Roman
> Emperor that embraced "Christianity" was Constantine and he wasn't baptised
> until shortly before his death in 327 a.d. (reminder, BTW, he was the
> Emperor who moved the capital of Rome from Rome to Constanople and let's not
> mention the false decretals like the "donation of Constantine"). The Roman
> Empire, at least in the west, didn't long survive that move. You do recall
> the sack of Rome and the so-called beginning of the "dark ages"? Probably
> not. Never mind!
>
> Kate
>


Y'all are confusing the Roman Empire (Caesar, etc.) with the Holy Roman
Empire (Charlemagne, etc).

Bob
 
Spitzmaus the Molester writes:
> <snip/snipe>
>
> <snip/snipe>
>
> <snip/snipe ad nauseum>
>
>
> Uh, peace on earth, goodwill towards men. (Ya think???)

Your rheteric is much too reminescent of CHRISTmasy... who do you think
you're fooling with that sneak in the back door claptrap. It's the
friggin' DISHONESTY of it all that's offensive, and you're simply
adding more disingenuous fuel to the yule log. You need a new script
that doesn't reek like a Hallmark card. Perhaps if yoose self
rightious religeous fanatics actually practiced Peace all year instead
of just talking about it (lip service) with your honkytonk carnival
ritualistic kewpie doll displays and commercializing it to death for
one day. Yoose religious nuts talk a good Peace but each and every one
of yoose is a violent scourge on this planet. Religion is the
antithesis of Peace. Only when all religion is erradicated can there
be Peace. Religion is no less violent a concept than the rape of small
children, in fact that's what catholicism is based in, with that
friggin' jesus ******* the worst child molester the planet has ever
seen. Wtf do yoose think that santa garbage is all about.. hey kid,
c'mere and sit on my lap, want a toy you gotta do good... right! And
then uncle Spitzmaus gets his little niece to sit in his lap and play
with his toy... and he does tickle-tickle back... hehehe, hohoho

You know you wanna do her. (Ya think???)

Sheldon Candycane
 
Spitzmaus replied:

> <snip/snipe>
>
> <snip/snipe>
>
> <snip/snipe ad nauseum>
>
>
> Uh, peace on earth, goodwill towards men. (Ya think???)


Both my response to Ranee and sarah's response to me were tongue-in-cheek.

Just how heavy-handed does humor have to BE around here?

Bob
 
jmcquown wrote:

> GQ wrote:
> > On Sat, 17 Dec 2005 11:58:02 -0600, "jmcquown"
> > <[email protected]> wrote:
> >
> >> Gregory Morrow wrote:
> >>> kevnbro wrote:
> >>>
> >>>>> The Pagans I've encountered are just about the stupidest persons
> >>>>> I've ever known...they fall into the "New Age" category and IMNSHO
> >>>>> that should re - named the "Moron" category...
> >>>>
> >>>> Yet another fine example of "believe what I believe or you're a
> >>>> moron/evil/unpatriotic/going to hell/immoral/unethical/a liberal/a
> >>>> terrorst etc. etc. etc. etc. insert self-rightious accusation
> >>>> here".
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> Yet you cannot refute the veracity of what I said - go ahead, TRY...
> >>
> >> Thank you for calling me stupid.
> >>
> >> Jill
> >>
> > Just ignore it Jill.
> /begin rant
>
> I mostly do, but I kinda like Greg so for him to make a sweeping statement
> like that floored me. I don't go around announcing my religious beliefs. I
> think people who do that are just asking to be shot down (not literally
> shot, just, they are looking for challenges or challengers so they can start
> an arguement about who is RIGHT). I try not to get involved in all that.
> But I don't like to be called stupid, either. Greg has never met me so he
> can't lump me in with "stupid".


I apologize Jill, you are just about as far from "stupid" as it is
possible to get :)

--
Best
Greg
 
GQ wrote:

> On 17 Dec 2005 09:03:28 -0800, "Gregory Morrow"
> <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> >The Pagans I've encountered are just about the stupidest persons I've
> >ever known...they fall into the "New Age" category and IMNSHO that
> >should re - named the "Moron" category...
>
> Unfortuately that seems to be the case for a goodly portion of them
> but there are true Pagans that people would not even know because they
> just live their lives without belittling others and without bothering
> others.


All too true. Virtually every pagan I've encountered has to make a big
deal out of their beliefs, how "enlightened" they are and such. Not to
mention all the claptrapped baggage that they carry around, e.g. "re -
birthing", healing crystals, "past lives", how "everything that has
existed since the beginning of time exists in me", how their souls all
emanated from Alpha Centauri or wherever...I mean why not just smoke a
joint and eat a big box of Ding - Dongs and mellow out, it's a LOT more
productive use of yer time.

Come to think they are no different than the hysterical adherents of
most of other belief systems...they just stick out more I guess for
their sheer ridiculousness.

A truly "spiritual" person should be so secure in their beliefs that
they should not have to inflict their beliefs on others or be yammering
on about it. No different than being an ex -smoker, a vegan, a
Republican, or an ex - alky, if you are secure there is no need to be
constantly bringng the subject up and berating others...

In the long run Pagans and their ilk are harmless bOObs - at least they
aren't dangerous motherf*cking Muslims....

--
Best
Greg
 
Bob Terwilliger wrote:

> Ranee wrote:
>
> > Interestingly enough, it is some of these self proclaimed pagans who
> > have been so combattive and insulting in this (and other) threads.
>
> You mean Jill, right? Go ahead, it's okay to say what you really mean: You
> mean Jill. I can understand Jill's frustration at the way the conversation
> has turned against her, when all she did was express her disbelief. She
> also expressed her distaste for some sandwiches (that *I* thought sounded
> mighty good). Suddenly she's in everybody's gunsights.
>
>
> <highschool>
> I hate her. She's SUCH a *****! Let's CRUCIFY her!
> </highschool>
>
>
> <Sheldon>
> She has a nice rack but she's probably a WOP.
> </Sheldon>


SILENCIO, ****...!!!

--
Best
Greg
>
> Bob
 
**** wrote:

> Spitzmaus replied:
>
> > <snip/snipe>
> >
> > <snip/snipe>
> >
> > <snip/snipe ad nauseum>
> >
> >
> > Uh, peace on earth, goodwill towards men. (Ya think???)
>
>
> Both my response to Ranee and sarah's response to me were tongue-in-cheek.
>
> Just how heavy-handed does humor have to BE around here?


Don't look now, but your "humor" just sank the Bismarck...

--
Best
Greg
 
OmManiPadmeOmelet wrote:

> In article <[email protected]>,
> "Gregory Morrow" <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> > The Pagans I've encountered are just about the stupidest persons I've
> > ever known...they fall into the "New Age" category and IMNSHO that
> > should re - named the "Moron" category...
> >
> > --
> > Best
> > Greg "I think it's time to get re - birthed..."
>
> <snork> I know what you mean...
>
> I am pagan myself, but, like any "fad" religion, we get our share of
> nutcases as well.


I apologize if I offended, it's the clueless "faddists" that have made
major pests of themselves in my life as of late...


> Oddly enough, I've met more quack x-tians than I have quack pagans tho'.


They even have teevee channels devoted to them I hear ;---p

--
Best
Greg
 
zxcvbob wrote:

> OmManiPadmeOmelet wrote:
>
> > In article <[email protected]>,
> > "Gregory Morrow" <[email protected]> wrote:
> >
> >
> >>The Pagans I've encountered are just about the stupidest persons I've
> >>ever known...they fall into the "New Age" category and IMNSHO that
> >>should re - named the "Moron" category...
> >>
> >>--
> >>Best
> >>Greg "I think it's time to get re - birthed..."
> >
> >
> > <snork> I know what you mean...
> >
> > I am pagan myself, but, like any "fad" religion, we get our share of
> > nutcases as well.
> >
> > Oddly enough, I've met more quack x-tians than I have quack pagans tho'.
> >
> > ;-)
> >
> > Cheers!
>
>
> I'm reading several days worth of this thread at once.
>
> You do know that Landover Baptist Church is a parody made up of
> stereotype characters, don't you? Betty Bowers is not a real person,
> even if she is "better than you".


Utter nonsense....I used to date Betty once...but then I turned queer
because I watched that perverted Jar - Jar Binks...


--
Best
Greg
 
Greg wrote:

>> Just how heavy-handed does humor have to BE around here?
>
> Don't look now, but your "humor" just sank the Bismarck...


Oh look, Greg's introducing *****iness into this thread too.

Bob
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top Bottom Back