Do all christians not understand paganism?

[DragonofAna]

In what universe is calling someone a wannabe not an insult?

 

And you may not have said what they wanna be but the fact that the clause preceding it was "Being a witch is a way of life" there's a pretty heavy implication as to what you meant.

 

I'm not trolling I'm just making an observation, that you have double standards when i comes to discussing things that are close to your religion. It reminds me of when Grahame talks about the other abrahamic faiths.

 

You totally have no understanding of paganism. It is not one path of the craft. It is a whole variety of paths. There are many people who become pagans before choosing a path to follow, and then they progress onto a path and no longer wish to be called pagans. This goes for Norsies; followers of the egyptian mythos; satanists and so on. Paganism is just a general term and not specific to one particular path.

I have met many pagans and many many ex pagans. It all boils down to terminology as used by those who follow whatever path. But the fact is that as things are and have been for the past 40 years - pagans are wannabes.

 

At least I did not call them wiccans

[plekhanov]

Yeah - I know how to use google as well funnily enough - not that I need to.

 

Strangely enough there are dictionary definitions and then there are widely held definitions and the two do not often meet.

And your grounds for claiming that your personal redefinitions are "widely held" are what exactly?

 

Well let's just call it a matter of faith

The historical record is there for all to see, there simply are no good sources upon what "old school" druids did or believed for you or anyone else to base current practices upon. This isn't a matter of faith but one of fact.

[DragonofAna]

And your grounds for claiming that your personal redefinitions are "widely held" are what exactly?

 

Ooo my! did I say they were my definitions? How pompous of me! The definitions I use are what are generally used by the people who I know who are involved in various paths of the craft. They are not global to the best of my knowledge.

 

The historical record is there for all to see, there simply are no good sources upon what "old school" druids did or believed for you or anyone else to base current practices upon. This isn't a matter of faith but one of fact.

 

I do not practice Druidism.

What you do not care to take any notice of, or are unaware of, is that over the past 50 or so years much has changed concerning how people view paths. Wicca is hailed as the new form of witchcraft. The druid of 50 years ago are completely different from the druid of today.

But please continue with your written knowledge and lack of understanding.

[plekhanov]

Ooo my! did I say they were my definitions? How pompous of me! The definitions I use are what are generally used by the people who I know who are involved in various paths of the craft. They are not global to the best of my knowledge.

So your redefinitions aren't "widely held" at all then are they? They are in reality restricted to a narrow subculture.

 

But the thing is norks didn't start this thread on a forum devoted to the subculture you seem to operate in. Norks started it on a general board where people use and understand the mainstream definitions of the terms rendering your bitching about "misuse of terminology" absurd.

 

I do not practice Druidism.

What you do not care to take any notice of, or are unaware of, is that over the past 50 or so years much has changed concerning how people view paths. Wicca is hailed as the new form of witchcraft. The druid of 50 years ago are completely different from the druid of today.

But please continue with your written knowledge and lack of understanding.

Why shouldn't they change they're all just picking & choosing & making it up as they go along?

 

You not I are the one who claimed "old school druid" exist & unlike modern druids actually "have a clue about druidism" all I've done is point out that in reality none of them "have a clue about druidism".

 

All contemporary druids are following stuff made up during the early modern & modern periods and your pretence that one variety is any more valid than another is simply absurd.

[DragonofAna]

So your redefinitions aren't "widely held" at all then are they? They are in reality restricted to a narrow subculture.

 

Correct. Restricted to a few thousand British and european and Australian and American wiccans, witches, satanists etc. But really probably not shared by everyone.

 

But the thing is norks didn't start this thread on a forum devoted to the subculture you seem to operate in. Norks started it on a general board where people use and understand the mainstream definitions of the terms rendering your bitching about "misuse of terminology" absurd.

 

It was a complaint about the misunderstanding of terminology from one faith to another that started the thread, and if people of different faiths have different ideas about what each faith is all about then no-one can really know anything about any of them.

 

Why shouldn't they change they're all just picking & choosing & making it up as they go along?

 

Course they are. And you have proof of this that cannot be disputed by anyone so who are we to argue?

 

You not I are the one who claimed "old school druid" exist & unlike modern druids actually "have a clue about druidism" all I've done is point out that in reality none of them "have a clue about druidism".

 

All contemporary druids are following stuff made up during the early modern & modern periods and your pretence that one variety is any more valid than another is simply absurd.

 

whatever you want to believe. some of the druids I know claim that their knowledge has been handed down through generations, and would not recognise the stuff you find in modern books on the subject. That is where faith comes in. And when you are talking about faith then you should understand that faith before you start attempting to preach what they can and cannot believe and what is or is not true for them.

 

Two minutes surfing the internet for information is not really a very good start.

[KenH]

Paganists are nutjobs, satanists are nutjobs. So they may not be exactly the same, but what does it really matter, neither of them should be taken seriously.

[kered9]

@ Plekhanov

 

You are not replying from a position of several years of research, this clearly isn't a topic you would pursue off you own bat.

 

For widely held definitions of things such as paganism why not try joining the pagan federation. Wow, what a limited sub culture, the pagan federation itself.

 

Information regarding druids and how some practices may have been continued even to this modern era cannot be gleaned from any single source, especially not Google.

[plekhanov]

Correct. Restricted to a few thousand British and european and Australian and American wiccans, witches, satanists etc. But really probably not shared by everyone.

 

It was a complaint about the misunderstanding of terminology from one faith to another that started the thread, and if people of different faiths have different ideas about what each faith is all about then no-one can really know anything about any of them.

 

whatever you want to believe. some of the druids I know claim that their knowledge has been handed down through generations, and would not recognise the stuff you find in modern books on the subject. That is where faith comes in. And when you are talking about faith then you should understand that faith before you start attempting to preach what they can and cannot believe and what is or is not true for them.

 

Two minutes surfing the internet for information is not really a very good start.

Their knowledge may well have been "handed down through generations" thing in those generations only go back a few centuries not millennia.

 

Those who regard themselves as Druids are of course free to believe any damn fool thing they want (in fact believing damn fool things is a requirement to be a druid). Thing is though they aren't free to make hard claims about reality, such as that an unbroken chain passing knowledge from ancient druids to those who claim to be their heirs exists, without others having the right to point out that their is zero evidence to support that grand claim.

[DragonofAna]

Their knowledge may well have been "handed down through generations" thing in those generations only go back a few centuries not millennia.

 

Those who regard themselves as Druids are of course free to believe any damn fool thing they want (in fact believing damn fool things is a requirement to be a druid). Thing is though they aren't free to make hard claims about reality, such as that an unbroken chain passing knowledge from ancient druids to those who claim to be their heirs exists, without others having the right to point out that their is zero evidence to support that grand claim.

 

Not sure what you mean by this. If there are druids out there who make claim to having knowledge handed down over thousands of years then that is the claim they make. Sorted. It is up to everyone else whether they beleive what these druids claim or not.

 

The druids always believed in spoken rather than written knowledge, but there came a time when they were unable to maintain a way of life where this was possible, and thus wrote their knowledge down that others who had a right to the knowledge would be able to figure it out.

 

I am not saying this is true or accurate, but a possibility. I am not going to slamdunk someone for their belief that they know how the druid were 3000 years ago. I really don't care. Druidism is not part of my path.

[plekhanov]

@ Plekhanov

 

You are not replying from a position of several years of research, this clearly isn't a topic you would pursue off you own bat.

 

For widely held definitions of things such as paganism why not try joining the pagan federation. Wow, what a limited sub culture, the pagan federation itself.

 

Information regarding druids and how some practices may have been continued even to this modern era cannot be gleaned from any single source, especially not Google.

I am replying from the position of having had a few lectures upon the subject & read a few articles & chapters upon it at University. As with many things about ancient Britain the paucity of sources about the druids & how little we can claim to know about them with any confidence was freely confessed & complained about by those attempting to research the subject.