IWETHEY v. 0.3.0 | TODO
1,095 registered users | 0 active users | 2 LpH | Statistics
Login | Create New User
IWETHEY Banner

Welcome to IWETHEY!

New Christo-Paganism
I have been working on a page for this subject, which is a significant issue among some of the Pagan communities. My page will continue to evolve, as they all do, but I think it's in good enough shape now that I put it up for comment.

Jesus & Paganiam
New Interesting!
Thank you!

Wade.
New Some slight ambiguity.
This sentence:
He continues that the teachings of Jesus are not compatible with the teachings of Christianity, but that it may be possible to follow those teachings and also be a Pagan.
isn't quite 100% clear on which of those teachings it is one can follow as a pagan. Sure, you get from context that it's those of Jesus, not those of meity, but in the sentence itself the "those" is somewhat ambiguous. Might not need to be changed, or might be you want to.
--

   Christian R. Conrad
The Man Who (used to think he) Knows Fucking Everything


Mail: Same username as at the top left of this post, at iki.fi
New Thanks, I will clarify . . .
. . since that isn't a verbatim quote.
New Re: Christo-Paganism
I found this which I find to be correct as far as I can see.
You might be interested. It's largely about being a follower of Paul rather than Jesus.

https://danizier.wordpress.com/2011/04/22/paul-vs-jesus-and-james/
"Religion, n. A daughter of Hope and Fear, explaining to Ignorance the nature of the Unknowable."
~ AMBROSE BIERCE
(1842-1914)
New Thanks - an interesting piece.
I had already formed a suspicion that there was something amiss with Paul, but I haven't yet read Acts or the Epistles so could not comment on my own until I do.

On my page, I state very plainly that Jesus is going to want proof of belief in him, by seeing if the person followed his teachings - and this is sufficiently stated in the Gospels.

I might deal with Paul on a separate page.
New re Paul-o
A long-term SO (also incisively Feminist, which is to say, not burdened with cliché-ridden tropes) had derived many charges against the guy, the purest: a fucking-Misogynist-writ-large. So this is 1st-degree hearsay; still, P. had invested more due-diligence than had/have I. His fulminations re marriage, sex--advanced today--would typecast him amidst the more obviously 'evangel-deranged'--were it expressed anonymously before revealing the name of the perp (I wot).

Happy sleuthing; I realize that ya gots to go to the Source--which cant I deemed: too-silly-to immerse in, so abandoned 'research' shortly. (I did it to save the little-grey-cells from rebellion, plus sloth).

Carrion.. sometimes it's reprinted perpetually ... always a Clue(?)
New Re: re Paul-o
A religious woman I know, rather liberal, regards Paul as the John Birch of the bible. She was not impressed.
"Religion, n. A daughter of Hope and Fear, explaining to Ignorance the nature of the Unknowable."
~ AMBROSE BIERCE
(1842-1914)
New Yes, Paul will need a separate page.
One of the things I liked about my preferred Bible translation for many years was that it sub-titled the first eight chapters of Romans a "The Gospel According To Paul".

The main problem I have with the modern church and Paul is that the church won't teach doctrinal provenance. We know Paul's writings (at least the ones we still have) happened over at least a decade, possibly two. So his ideas developed over time, some influenced by the Jewish Christians still in Jerusalem. We also know that the order of his letters in the Bible are basically in order of size. This means that, in my experiences, most church-going Christians have no idea that there are "early Paul teachings" and "later Paul teachings" nor what they are. (Galatians is purported to be the earliest letter we have of his.)

The other aspect is that Paul was versed in early Greek Philosophy and he was likely influenced by this. Greek Philosophy is what seeded the modern ideas of hell and the afterlife. Jewish ideas of those at the first century were, I'm told, rather different. Again, most church-going Christians appear to not know this.

Wade.
New Spello
hypocricy should be hypocrisy
New Thanks
New Some notes
Great reference, but unless you want to set yourself up as a prophet you might want to include citations for ... well, most of it. :) I don't know enough of the source material to have much input on the content except that it all jives with what I know, and sharpens the point on some of the contradictions I've always seen.



Should adaptions be adaptations? It's "technically correct" but the longer form is more common. I had to look it up to see if there was a different meaning for the shorter.

"Conversion by the sword" was not invented by the Muslims, Christianity was promoted ..." Comma should be semi-colon.

Talking about the Confederate States, "succession" should be "secession".

You should probably provide a reference for the Southern politician in 2017 quote.

"but it's central feature" it's / its
--

Drew
New Thanks for the corrections and suggestions.
I will look more at citations, but they are not easy. Most of the Jesus side is directly from the Gospels. some items still don't have chapter and verse, but
many do and more will.

Paganism is a massively "distributed" movement with very few widely recognized references or authorities, but with well and widely understood principles. The one book I do reference, Godless Paganism, is very good, being composed of many short pieces by at least 30 non-theist Pagans of every stripe imaginable. Most Pagan literature is short pieces, just as early Christian literature was.

Paganism is held together mainly by the Internet. There are Web sites like Patheos, and magazines like Witches and Pagans. These publications tend to be a bit "Witchy", but that's the largest contingent. Lots of Witches write for their own, predominantly women refugees from Evangelical and other repressive churches.

Wicca is a semi-organized group ritual religion. It is supposedly (but not actually) based on ancient Celtic witchcraft, but no longer likes to be called "witches". "Witch", on the other hand, is a calling, mostly solo practitioners who cheerfully accept the term "witch" and re-conceptualize it.

By far, the majority of Pagans of all stripes are solo practitioners, belonging to no organization - though Pagans are now estimated to outnumber Presbyterians.

My descriptions of the Gospels would be hard to cite, as these sections are my own compilation from the opinions of literally dozens of biblical scholars. Much can be found in Wikipedia, but I also use other sources intermingled, particularly articles in Biblical Archaeology, and include my own direct reading of the Gospels.

Yes, I know - Wikipedia doesn't consider "original research" to be an acceptable citation.
New Couple more
When you say the Western Luke was the most "deliberately" revised, does that mean with careful deliberation, or with most deliberate intent to revise meaning?

"... that he is the Son of God. In John he preaches it ..." Period should be comma.

There are several places throughout the appendix where it reads like you're quoting but there are no quote marks.

Under food and shelter - and this complaint isn't with what you wrote but the teaching itself - the way that God provides for the birds of the heavens is that the birds spend all day hunting for food and building their nests. So if I'm going to rely on God to provide the same way, I'll be working my ass off.
--

Drew
Expand Edited by drook Nov. 24, 2019, 07:05:39 PM EST
Expand Edited by drook Nov. 24, 2019, 08:27:34 PM EST
New Thank you for your careful reading.
I have made adjustments as suggested by both your posts. The exception is things that look like quotes but have no quote marks. As I review and enhance, I'll watch for those - I don't think any are verbatim quotes, but they might benefit from being re-worded for clarity.

Thanks again.
New It's when the tone changes drastically that it reads as a quote
--

Drew
     Christo-Paganism - (Andrew Grygus) - (15)
         Interesting! - (static)
         Some slight ambiguity. - (CRConrad) - (1)
             Thanks, I will clarify . . . - (Andrew Grygus)
         Re: Christo-Paganism - (hnick) - (4)
             Thanks - an interesting piece. - (Andrew Grygus) - (3)
                 re Paul-o - (Ashton) - (1)
                     Re: re Paul-o - (hnick)
                 Yes, Paul will need a separate page. - (static)
         Spello - (crazy) - (1)
             Thanks -NT - (Andrew Grygus)
         Some notes - (drook) - (1)
             Thanks for the corrections and suggestions. - (Andrew Grygus)
         Couple more - (drook) - (2)
             Thank you for your careful reading. - (Andrew Grygus) - (1)
                 It's when the tone changes drastically that it reads as a quote -NT - (drook)

It goes up to "11".
132 ms