Witches Brew > The Book of Shadows
dragons
Phantom X:
Ack, I took what you said out of context. Im sorry, rough day at school about pagans and wiccans, ironically. But another question to you, Satan is PORTRAID evil, but does that mean that he is? There is only one side of the story and, so far, the only one. Everybody thinks they are doing good when they arent and its never fair to believe one side. Whos to say that Satan didnt have better intentions that God himself?
Devious Viper:
--- Quote from: Morticia on May 08, 2006, 03:30:18 PM ---
I can't recall one single witch I ever knew, myself included, who did a spell trying to cause harm to anyone.
--- Quote from: Morticia --- I know someone who called on Leviathan to assist in a revenge type thing, out of anger and jealousy. From the results, Leviathan can be a nasty bugger.
--- End quote ---
It doesn't really matter how educated someone is regarding this matter, it's difficult for me to ignore a personal experience.
--- End quote ---
Without educated, rational and objective study, all you are left with is superstition. Is that how you would define your religion?
And although people often cite 'personal experience' as evidence for their beliefs, the field of philosophy remains generally unconvinced that such experiences (at least, of the sort discussed in this post) provide independent epistemic warrant at all. If theistic beliefs are presupposed (and your Western upbringing would ensure exposure to countless stereotypes, myths, legends and symbols) then such experiences will no doubt reinforce them; much as a coincidental link between an event and a horoscope reading will reinforce the New-Ager's belief in astrology. But given the alternative explanations provided by rational, educated study, it would be a mistake to take the apparent 'evidence' at face value.
Morticia:
--- Quote from: Devious Viper on May 09, 2006, 02:32:29 PM ---
--- Quote from: Morticia on May 08, 2006, 03:30:18 PM ---
I can't recall one single witch I ever knew, myself included, who did a spell trying to cause harm to anyone.
--- Quote from: Morticia --- I know someone who called on Leviathan to assist in a revenge type thing, out of anger and jealousy. From the results, Leviathan can be a nasty bugger.
--- End quote ---
It doesn't really matter how educated someone is regarding this matter, it's difficult for me to ignore a personal experience.
--- End quote ---
Without educated, rational and objective study, all you are left with is superstition. Is that how you would define your religion?
And although people often cite 'personal experience' as evidence for their beliefs, the field of philosophy remains generally unconvinced that such experiences (at least, of the sort discussed in this post) provide independent epistemic warrant at all. If theistic beliefs are presupposed (and your Western upbringing would ensure exposure to countless stereotypes, myths, legends and symbols) then such experiences will no doubt reinforce them; much as a coincidental link between an event and a horoscope reading will reinforce the New-Ager's belief in astrology. But given the alternative explanations provided by rational, educated study, it would be a mistake to take the apparent 'evidence' at face value.
--- End quote ---
I keep forgetting that to post at Monstrous is a bit like being on a witness stand with attorneys and a judge probing every word, making me feel as if I have to clarify every single statement I make.
I stand behind my statement that I never knew anyone AT THE TIME I WAS PRACTICING witchcraft who had evil intentions. Never.
The person who attempted to summon Leviathan was someone I met two years later. He shared the story of his past experience with me.
You apparently have nothing better to do than to sit at your computer comparing my posts and looking for something that might be a minor inconsistency. Why?
As for calling my religion 'superstition', would you say the same about Moses's faith? Joshua's? I wasn't aware that the people God used as servants had gone to seminary for 'educated, rational and objective study.'
~Morticia
Phantom X:
~This is Phantoms reminder to remain civil when you are posting, I can already see where this is going~
Devious Viper:
--- Quote from: Morticia ---You apparently have nothing better to do than to sit at your computer comparing my posts and looking for something that might be a minor inconsistency
--- End quote ---
The one occasion when I have questioned the consistency hardly qualifies your accusation. How you experience this act is clearly at odds with reality. Furthermore, I am arguing with your posts, not you as a person. Why do you have to resort to ad hominem argument?
--- Quote from: Morticia --- As for calling my religion 'superstition', would you say the same about Moses's faith? Joshua's? I wasn't aware that the people God used as servants had gone to seminary for 'educated, rational and objective study.'
--- End quote ---
I didn’t call your religion superstition – I asked if that is how you would define it.
Moses – So-called “Man of the true God”, leader of the nation of Israel, mediator of the Law covenant, prophet, judge, commander, historian and writer…As a member of the Pharoah’s household, he was “instructed in all the wisdom of the Egyptians”, becoming “mighty in his words and deeds.” When he set off for Midian, God decreed he was not yet qualified to serve, and he had to undergo a further 40 years of training, in order for him to be the fitting one to lead God’s people. Moses was the learned author of the Pentateuch (Genesis, Exodus, Leviticus, Numbers and Deuteronomy); he is also credited with the book of Job, Psalm 90 and Psalm 91.
Joshua, son of Nun,the Ephraimite who was handpicked by Moses to be his “right hand man”, his senior attendant, and so was taught all that Moses knew.
I’d say that neither of them are particularly good examples to use to illustrate your point…
Moreover, I did not say that God’s chosen servants had to be educated – I merely stated that correct exegesis of the Bible is required in order to appreciate the vast depth of symbolism which graces its pages. “…Our beloved brother Paul, according to the wisdom given to him, has written to you, as also in all his epistles, speaking in them of these things, in which are some things hard to understand, which untaught and unstable people twist to their own destruction, as they do also the rest of the Scriptures…” (2 Peter 3:14-16)
Many of the prophetic truths of the Bible have been expressed through careful use of symbols – the book of Daniel, for example, packed with images and animals, some real, some fantastical, some explained, some left unexplained. Some symbols have been used , not to make the meaning clearer, but to deliberately conceal the message until God reveals their meaning at or near the time of the end. Many attempt to interpret these symbols according to their own ideas – or personal experiences – resulting in chaos and confusion. Biblical symbols must be carefully interpreted within the context of the Bible as a whole, and within the immediate context of when and where they were written down. Purely subjective interpretations are of no value whatsoever. The Bible stands as an inspired body of unifying and related instructions and history, interwoven with symbolic illustrations.
My final point on why “personal experience” makes for sloppy, lazy or just plain wrong, interpretation:
"Whether it brings the voices of heaven or of hell, it causes what must surely be the worst affliction a sentient, conscious being can suffer: the inability to tell what is real from what is imaginary. To the person with schizophrenia the voices and visions sound and look as authentic as the announcer on the radio and the furniture in the room.
In paranoid schizophrenia, the patient becomes convinced of beliefs at odds with reality, hears voices that aren't there or see images that exist nowhere but in his mind. ...The voices the patients heard were therefore as real to them as the conversations in the hallways they passed through en route to the lab... Yates*, who has a deeply religious background, had satanic hallucinations. ...The seeming authenticity of the voices means that people with schizophrenia can be barraged by commands that, they are convinced, come from God or Satan. That inference is not illogical; who else can speak to you, unseen, from inside your mind?"
(Newsweek, March 11, 2002, p. 46)
*Andrea Yates of Texas drowned her five children because "God told her to."
Navigation
[0] Message Index
[#] Next page
[*] Previous page
Go to full version