PDA

View Full Version : We Are The Other People



Dria El
July 14th, 2001, 08:52 PM
I got this out of an ezine I subscribe to. It's VERY interesting. One of these days I'm going to get my Bible back from my mother so I can check this out.


We Are the Other People
by Oberon (Otter) Zell

"Ding-dong!" goes the doorbell. Is it Avon calling? Or perhaps Ed McMahon with my three million dollars? No, it's Yahweh's Witlesses again, just wanting to have a nice little chat about the Bible... Boy, did they ever come to the wrong house! So we invite them in: "Enter freely and of your own will..." (Hey, it's Sunday morning, nothing much going on, why not have a little entertainment?) Diane and I amuse ourselves watching their expressions as they check out the living room: great horned owl on the back of my chair; ceremonial masks and medicine skulls of dragons and unicorns on the wall; crystals, wands, staffs, swords; lots of Goddess figures and several altars; boa constrictors draped in amorous embrace over the elkhorn; white doves sitting in the hanging planters; cats and weasels underfoot; iron dragon snorting steam atop the wood stove; posters and paintings of wizards and dinosaurs and witchy women, some proudly naked; sculptures of mythological beasties and lots more dinosaurs; warp six on the star-filled viewscreen of my computer; a five-foot model of the USS Enterprise and the skeleton of a plesiosaur hanging from the ceiling; very, very many books, most of them dealing with obviously weird subjects... To say nothing of the great horned owl perched on the back of my chair and the Unicorn grazing in the front yard. You know; early Addams Family decor. And then, of course, it being late in the morning, you can expect Morning Glory to come wandering out naked, looking for her wake-up cup of tea. Morning Glory naked is a truly impressive sight, and the Witlesses look as if she'd set titties on stun as they stand immobilized, hands clasped over their genitals.
With the stage set and all the actors in place, the show is ready to begin. Their mission, of course, is to save our heathen souls by turning us on to "The Word of the Lord"— their Bible. I guess they figger some of us just haven't heard about it yet, and we're all eagerly awaiting their joyous tidings of personal salvation through giving our rational faculties to Jesus. Every time they come around, I look forward to trying out a new riposte. Sure, it may be cruel and sadistic of me, but hey, I didn't call them up and ask them to come over; they entered at their own risk! This time should be pretty good. After letting them run off their basic rap while lovely Morning Glory serves us all hot herb tea, I innocently remark: "But none of that applies to us. We have no need for salvation because we don't have original sin. We are the Other People."

"Hunh? What?" they reply eloquently. It's clear they've never heard this one before. "

Right," I say. "It's all in your Bible." And I proceed to tell them the story, using their own book for reference: (Genesis 1:26) The [Elohim] said, "Let us make humanity in our own image, in the likeness of ourselves, and let them be masters of the fish of the sea, the birds of heaven, the cattle, all the wild beasts and all the reptiles that crawl upon the earth." Elohim is a plural word, including male and female, and should properly be translated "Gods" or "Pantheon." (1: 27) The Gods created humanity in the image of themselves, In the image of the Gods they created them, Male and female they created them. (1:28) The Gods blessed them, saying to them, "Be fruitful, multiply, fill the earth and conquer it. Be masters of the fish of the sea, the birds of heaven and all living animals on the earth."
Now clearly, here we are talking about the original creation of the human species: male and female. All the animals, plants, etc. have all been created in previous verses. This is before the Garden of Eden, and Yahweh is not mentioned as the creator of these people.

The next chapter talks about how Yahweh, an individual member of the Pantheon, goes about assembling his own special little botanical and zoological Garden in Eden, and making his own little man to inhabit it: (Gen 2:7) Yahweh God fashioned a man of dust from the soil. Then he breathed into his nostrils a breath of life, and thus the man became a living being. (2:8) Yahweh God planted a garden in Eden which is in the east, and there he put the man he had fashioned. (2:9) Yahweh God caused to spring up from the soil every kind of tree, enticing to look at and good to eat, with the tree of life and the tree of the knowledge of good and evil in the middle of the garden. (2:15) Yahweh God took the man and settled him in the garden of Eden to cultivate and take care of it. Now this next is crucial: note Yahweh's precise words: (2:16) Then Yahweh God gave the man this admonition, "You may eat indeed of all the trees in the garden. (2:17) Nevertheless of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil you are not to eat, for on the day you eat of it you shall most surely die." Fateful words, those. We will refer back to this admonition later.
Then Yahweh decides to make a woman to go with the man. Now, don't forget that the Pantheon had earlier created a whole population of people, "male and female," who are presumably doing just fine somewhere "outside the gates of Eden." But this set-up in Eden is Yahweh's own little experiment, and will unfold to its own separate destiny. (2:21) So Yahweh God made the man fall into a deep sleep. And while he slept, he took one of his ribs and enclosed it in flesh. (2:22) Yahweh God built the rib he had taken from the man into a woman, and brought her to the man. Right. Man gives birth to woman. Sure he does. But that's the way the story is told here. (2:25) Now both of them were naked, the man and his wife, but they felt no shame in front of each other. Well, of course not! Why should they? But take careful note of those words, as they also will prove to be significant...
Now this next part is where it starts to get interesting. Enter the Serpent: (Gen. 3:1) The serpent was the most subtle of all the wild beasts that Yahweh God had made. It asked the woman, "Did God really say you were not to eat from any of the trees in the garden?" (3:2) The woman answered the serpent, "We may eat the fruit of the trees in the garden. (3:3) "But of the fruit of the tree in the middle of the garden God said, 'You must not eat it, nor touch it, under pain of death." (3:4) Then the serpent said to the woman, "No! You will not die! (3:5) "God knows in fact that on the day you eat it your eyes will be opened and you will be like gods, knowing good and evil."
What a remarkable statement! "Your eyes will be opened and you will be like gods, knowing good and evil." The Serpent directly contradicts Yahweh. Obviously, one of them has to be lying. Which one, do you suppose? And, if the serpent speaks true, wouldn't you wish to eat of the magic fruit? Wouldn't it be a good thing, to become "like gods, knowing good and evil"? Or is it preferable to remain in ignorance?

(Gen. 3:6) The woman saw that the tree was good to eat and pleasing to the eye, and that it was desirable for the knowledge that it could give. So she took some of its fruit and ate it. She gave some also to her husband who was with her, and he ate it. (3:7) Then the eyes of both of them were opened and they realized that they were naked. So they sewed fig leaves together to make themselves loincloths. The author makes an interesting assumption here: that if you realize you are naked you will automatically want to cover yourself. Further implications will unfold shortly...

(Gen. 3:8) The man and his wife heard the sound of Yahweh God walking in the garden in the cool of the day, and they hid from Yahweh God among the trees of the garden. (3:9) But Yahweh God called to the man. "Where are you?" he asked. (3:10) "I heard the sound of you in the garden," he replied. "I was afraid because I was naked, so I hid." (3:11) "Who told you that you were naked?" he asked. "Have you been eating of the tree I forbade you to eat?"

And so the sign of the Fall becomes modesty. Take note of this. The descendants of Adam and Eve will be distinguished throughout history from virtually all other peoples by their obsessive modesty taboos, wherein they will feel ashamed of being naked. It follows that those who feel no shame in being naked are, by definition, not carriers of this spiritual disease of original sin!

(Gen. 3:12) The man replied,"It was the woman you put with me; she gave me the fruit, and I ate it." Right. Blame the woman. What a turkey! (3:13) Then Yahweh God asked the woman,"What is this you have done?" The woman replied, "The serpent tempted me and I ate." So of course she blames the serpent. But just what did the serpent do that was so evil? Why, he called Yahweh a liar! Was he wrong? Let's see... (3:21) Yahweh God made clothes out of skins for the man and his wife, and they put them on. Out of skins? This means that Yahweh had to kill some innocent animals to pander to Adam and Eve's new obsession with modesty!

And now we come to the crux of the Fall. Yahweh had said back there in chapter (2:17), regarding the fruit of the tree of knowledge, that "on the day you eat of it you shall most surely die." The Serpent, on the other hand, had contradicted Yahweh in chapter (3:4-5): "No! You will not die! God knows in fact that on the day you eat it your eyes will be opened and you will be like gods, knowing good and evil." So what actually happened? Who lied and who told the truth about this remarkable fruit? The answer is given in the next verse: (3:22) Then Yahweh God said, "See, the man has become like one of us, with his knowledge of good and evil. He must not be allowed to stretch his hand out next and pick from the tree of life also, and eat some and live forever."

Get that? Yahweh himself admits that he had lied! In fact, and in Yahweh's own words, the Serpent spoke the absolute truth! And moreover, Yahweh tells the rest of the Pantheon that he intends to evict Adam (and presumably Eve as well) to keep them from gaining immortality to go with their newly-acquired divine knowledge. To prevent them, in other words, from truly becoming gods! So who, in this story, comes off as a benefactor of humanity, and who comes off as a tyrant? THE SERPENT NEVER LIED!

This story, to digress slightly, bears a remarkable resemblance to a contemporary tale from ancient Greece. In that version, the Serpent (later identified as Lucifer, the Light-Bearer) may be equated with the heroic titan Prometheus, who championed humanity against the tyranny of Zeus, who wished for people to be mere slaves of the gods. Prometheus, whose name means "forethought," gave people wisdom, intelligence, and fire stolen from Olympus. Moreover, he ordained the portions of animal sacrifice so that humans got the best parts (the meat and hides) while the portion that was burned to the gods was the bones and fat. In punishment for this defiance of his divine authority, Zeus condemned Prometheus to a terrible punishment for an immortal: to be chained to a mountain in the Caucasus, where Zeus' gryphon/eagle (actually a Lammergier) would devour his liver each day. It would grow back each night. Zeus promised to relent if Prometheus would reveal his great secret knowledge: Who would succeed Zeus as supreme god? Prometheus refused to tell, but history has revealed the answer...
The interesting thing about all this is that the Greeks properly regarded Prometheus as a noble hero in his defiance of unjust tyranny. One may wonder why the Serpent is not so well regarded. On the contrary, snakes are loathed throughout Christiandom. (3:23) So Yahweh God expelled him from the garden of Eden, to till the soil from which he had been taken. (3:24) He banished the man, and in front of the garden of Eden he posted the cherubs, and the flame of a flashing sword, to guard the way to the tree of life.
So that's it for the Fall. But the story of Adam and Eve doesn't end there. (Gen 4:1) The man had intercourse with his wife Eve, and she conceived and gave birth to Cain... (4:2) She gave birth to a second child, Abel, the brother of Cain. Now Abel became a shepherd and kept flocks, while Cain tilled the soil. (4:3) Time passed and Cain brought some of the produce of the soil as an offering for Yahweh, (4:4) while Abel, for his part, brought the first-born of his flock and some of their fat as well. Yahweh looked with favor on Abel and his offering. But he did not look with favor on Cain and his offering, and Cain was very angry and downcast. Well, why shouldn't he be? Both brothers had brought forth their first fruits as offerings, but Yahveh rejected the vegetables and only accepted the blood sacrifice. This was to set a gruesome precedent: (4:8) Cain said to his brother Abel, "Let us go out;" and while they were in the open country, Cain set on his brother Abel and killed him.

Accursed and marked for fratricide, (4:16) Cain left the presence of Yahweh and settled in the land of Nod, east of Eden. We can assume that the phrase "left the presence of Yahweh" implies that Yahweh is a local deity, and not omnipresent. Now Eden, according to (Gen. 2:14-15), was situated at the source of the Tigris and Euphrates rivers, apparently right where Lake Van is now, in Turkey. "East of Eden," therefore, would probably be along the shores of the Caspian Sea, right in the Indo-European heartland. Cain settled in there, among the people of Nod, and married one of the women of that country. Here, for the first time, is specifically mentioned the "other people" who are not of the lineage of Adam and Eve. i.e: the Pagans.
So let's look at this story from another viewpoint: There we were, around six thousand years ago, living in our little farming communities around the Caspian Sea, in the land of Nod, when this dude with a terrible scar comes stumbling in out of the sunset. He tells us this bizarre story, about how his mother and father had been created by some god named Jahweh, and put in charge of a beautiful garden somewhere out west, and how they had gotten thrown out for disobedience after eating some of the landlord's forbidden magic fruit of enlightenment. He tells us of murdering his brother, as the god of his parents would only accept blood sacrifice, and of receiving that scar as a mark so that all would know him as a fratricide.

The poor guy is really a mess psychologically, obsessed with guilt. He is also obsessively modest, insisting on wearing clothes even in the hottest summer, and he has a hard time with our penchant for skinny-dipping in the warm inland sea. He seems to believe that he is tainted by the "sin" of his parent's disobedience; that it is in his blood, somehow, and will continue to contaminate his children and his children's children.

One of our healing women takes pity on the poor sucker, and marries him... (4:17) Cain had intercourse with his wife, and she conceived and gave birth to Enoch. He became the builder of a town, and he gave the town the name of his son Enoch.
With both of their first sons not turning out very well, Adam and Eve decided to try again: (4:25) Adam had intercourse with his wife, and she gave birth to a son whom she named Seth... (4:26) A son was also born to Seth, and he named him Enosh. This man was the first to invoke the name of Yahweh. Now it doesn't mention here where Seth's wife came from. Another woman from Nod, possibly, or maybe someone from another neolithic community downstream in the Tigris-Euphrates valley. But her folks also, cannot be of the lineage of Adam and Eve, and must also be counted among "the other people."
But whatever happened to Adam? After all, way back there in chapter Gen. 2:17, warning Adam about the magic fruit of knowlege, Jahweh had told him that "on the day you eat of it you shall most surely die." So, when did Adam die? (Gen. 5:4) Adam lived for eight hundred years after the birth of Seth and he became the father of sons and daughters. (5:5) In all, Adam lived for nine hundred and thirty years; then he died. Hey, that's pretty good! Nine hundred and some odd years isn't bad for a man who's been told he's gonna die the next day!

Well, the story goes on, and maybe next time the Witlesses come to visit I'll tell more of it. But suffice it to say that those of us who are not of Semitic descent (i.e., not of the lineage of Adam and Eve) cannot share in the Original Sin that comes with that lineage. Being that the Bible is the story of that lineage, of Adam and Eve's descendants and their specialn relationship with their particular god, Yahweh, it follows that this is not the story of the rest of us. We may have been Cain's wife's people, or Seth's wife's people, or some other people over the hill and far away, but whichever people the rest of us are, as far as the Bible is concerned, we are the Other People, and so we are continually referred to throughout.

Later books of the Bible are filled with admonitions to the followers of Jahweh to "learn not the ways of the Pagans..." (Jer 10:2) with detailed descriptions of exactly what it is we do, such as erect standing stones and sacred poles, worship in sacred groves and practice divination and magic. And worship the sun, moon, stars and the "Queen of Heaven." "You must not behave as they do in Egypt where once you lived; you must not behave as they do in Canaan where I am taking you. You must not follow their laws." (Lev 18:3) For Yahweh, as he so clearly emphasises, is not the god of the Pagans. We have our own lineage and our own heritage, and our tale is not told in the Bible. We were not "made" like clay figurines by a male deity out of "dust from the soil." We were born of our Mother the Earth, and have evolved over aeons in Her nurturing embrace. All of us, in our many and diverse tribes, have creation myths and legends of our origins and history; some of these tales may even be actually true.

Like the descendants of Adam and Eve, many of us also have stories of great floods, earthquakes, volcanic eruptions and other cataclysms that wiped out whole communities of our people, wherein "I alone survived to tell the tale." Nearly all of our ancestral tribes (and especially those of us who today are reclaiming our own Pagan heritage) lack that peculiar obsessive body modesty that seems to be a hallmark of the original sin alluded to in the story of the Fall. We can be naked and unashamed! Why, our Goddess even tells us, "as a sign that you are truly free, you shall be naked in your rites." Not being born into sin, we have no need of salvation, and no need of a Messiah to redeem our sinful souls.

Neither heaven nor hell is our destination in the afterlife; we have our own various arrangements with our own various deities. The Bible is not our story; we have our own stories to tell, and they are many and diverse. In a long life, you may get to hear many of them... May you live long and prosper!

Niamh
July 14th, 2001, 09:53 PM
Interesting...
I would have to say that from what I remember of the Bible from my Catholic school years that they've got it all right. Of course, I could be dreadfully wrong, so double checking is a good thing to do (I'm going to do it myself tonight). I have a strange feeling that you might be able to find the full text of the Bible on the web somewhere. The Gutenberg Project might have done it, but I don't know how searchable it is; ie you might not be able to jump around to different chapters. Why don't I go search now and find out...

Niamh
July 14th, 2001, 10:01 PM
You can download a copy of the Old Testament of the Bible from http://www.gutenberg.net
I didn't try doing it because the files are huge and I've (darn it!) run out of zip disks!

Lucidia
July 15th, 2001, 01:15 PM
*nods and chuckles* thanks for sharing....

stirata
July 15th, 2001, 01:27 PM
VERY interesting to say the least. BB. :)

Kaylara
July 15th, 2001, 05:11 PM
Oberon Zell does it again!

Kaylara

EasternPriest
July 16th, 2001, 02:14 AM
Originally posted by Kaylara
Oberon Zell does it again!

Kaylara

Oberon Zell gets it wrong again? Needless to say, there are more than a few problems with his "interpretations" of the Bible, both in logic and context. Since the article is lengthy, it will take a little time to respond properly, but I will.

Blessings.....

Wyrdsister
July 16th, 2001, 07:59 AM
Originally posted by EasternPriest
Oberon Zell gets it wrong again? Um, you realize that's not what Kaylara said, right? Just checking...

Wyrdsister

Sunday's Child
July 16th, 2001, 09:25 AM
hummmm... very interesting. Didn't Adam and Eve use Fig leaves to cover up?

Ravenhart
July 16th, 2001, 11:12 AM
Very nice! Excellent thread!
I never believed in that whole "Adam and Eve were the first people" thing. To me that was like saying that the stork delivered my little sister. It also showed how a man will blame a woman for anything.
!I salute you!

Blessed Be!

Rævyn Cigány
July 16th, 2001, 11:55 AM
Originally posted by EasternPriest


Oberon Zell gets it wrong again? Needless to say, there are more than a few problems with his "interpretations" of the Bible, both in logic and context. Since the article is lengthy, it will take a little time to respond properly, but I will.

Blessings.....

Actually, it is because Oberon Zell is NOT Christian, EP, that he's probably (if not defiinitely) got it right!!! Even myself, as a born-and-raised-and-confirmed-and-married-ugh,ad nauseum Roman Catholic, I always questioned the validity of the Bible...in any approximation. The Bible is a good reference book, but those that take the Bible as complete gospel truth (excuse the pun), is really not quite up-to-date on the whole thing: the Bible is written by MAN for one thing (and yes, even books like Ruth and Esther were written by MEN), not God, and although it is claimed to be the words of God Himself spoken through the prophets and apostles, etc, I don't believe that for a second. I could go into great detail about what I believe after seeing many facets of the religious spectrum (if you care to know, I've been a member of almost every major faith at some point in my life; my mother at the time had no problem with me exploring other religions), but at this time, I think it would suffice to say that if EP believes that Oberon is flawed in his opinions that is fine, he has a fundamental (excuse the other pun! ;) I"m pulling your leg, EP, please do not be offended!!!) right to his opinion! I however agree with 99% of this article. 'Nuff said (gee, I wonder where the phrase "long winded" came from :p)

BB
Rae )0(

silvrsnstr
July 16th, 2001, 04:33 PM
I will be sure to point this out to my mother and get grounded.

Blessings,
Crimson StarRaven

Wyrdsister
July 16th, 2001, 10:31 PM
Originally posted by silvrsnstr
I will be sure to point this out to my mother and get grounded. EEEK!! 8O Okay, maybe that's not the best idea... ;)

Wyrdsister

silvrsnstr
July 16th, 2001, 10:34 PM
I don't beileve in the best idea. for me, its not possible. the worst however, is within hand reach. ;)

bluecat
July 16th, 2001, 11:45 PM
I have that posted on my site ...

With proper credit and permission from Oberon ... of course ... :cool:

Blue

EasternPriest
July 17th, 2001, 12:43 AM
Originally posted by Rævyn Cigány


Actually, it is because Oberon Zell is NOT Christian, EP, that he's probably (if not defiinitely) got it right!!! Even myself, as a born-and-raised-and-confirmed-and-married-ugh,ad nauseum Roman Catholic, I always questioned the validity of the Bible...in any approximation. The Bible is a good reference book, but those that take the Bible as complete gospel truth (excuse the pun), is really not quite up-to-date on the whole thing: the Bible is written by MAN for one thing (and yes, even books like Ruth and Esther were written by MEN), not God, and although it is claimed to be the words of God Himself spoken through the prophets and apostles, etc, I don't believe that for a second. I could go into great detail about what I believe after seeing many facets of the religious spectrum (if you care to know, I've been a member of almost every major faith at some point in my life; my mother at the time had no problem with me exploring other religions), but at this time, I think it would suffice to say that if EP believes that Oberon is flawed in his opinions that is fine, he has a fundamental (excuse the other pun! ;) I"m pulling your leg, EP, please do not be offended!!!) right to his opinion! I however agree with 99% of this article. 'Nuff said (gee, I wonder where the phrase "long winded" came from :p)

BB
Rae )0(

The largest problem I see with the article is his invented translations for the Bible. True, he has a right to his opinion, but there is no "right" to present misinterpretation as fact.

It's also interesting that he somehow is credible because he is not a christian..credibility has no religion, it is an individual trait.

Like I said, it will take awhile to respond the the thread properly, but I will.

EasternPriest
July 17th, 2001, 12:48 AM
Originally posted by Rævyn Cigány


Actually, it is because Oberon Zell is NOT Christian, EP, that he's probably (if not defiinitely) got it right!!!


at this time, I think it would suffice to say that if EP believes that Oberon is flawed in his opinions that is fine, he has a fundamental (excuse the other pun! ;) I"m pulling your leg, EP, please do not be offended!!!) right to his opinion! I however agree with 99% of this article. 'Nuff said (gee, I wonder where the phrase "long winded" came from :p)

BB
Rae )0(


Logically then, the fact that I am not Pagan makes me more qualified to interpret pagan writings????

And, I am no where near "fundamental"

emraldshadowcat
July 17th, 2001, 04:04 AM
I'm definitely going to let several people I know read that! That will keep them off of my back for a while!

Faery-Wings
July 17th, 2001, 07:18 AM
As with just about everything of a religious nature, the meaning is up to the individual's interpretation. This individual (me!) likes it! :D

Thanks for sharing Dria.

Chris

EasternPriest
July 17th, 2001, 04:42 PM
Originally posted by chryssi1
As with just about everything of a religious nature, the meaning is up to the individual's interpretation. This individual (me!) likes it! :D

Thanks for sharing Dria.

Chris

That is true as far as it goes. There are, however, things in many religious writings that are what they are. In other words, no matter how you choose to interpret them, it doesn't change the original meanings.

sylphanie
July 17th, 2001, 05:50 PM
Before anything else, I just want to say I'm not a Biblical scholar. I have a few nice little resources at my disposal, including some great translations and concordances and things, but I don't have all the necessities for some really great arguments as to why the article stinks.

Well, the whole issue of Genesis aside.... I think the only reason the Jehovah Witnesses 'gave up' after that argument is because they figured that the family wouldn't convert, anyway. The Witnesses I've known feel compelled to 'offer salvation' to everyone, regardless of how obvious it is that the 'gift' won't be accepted. ^_^

But, at any rate.... I think the author if the article really went out of his way to interpret the Bible to fit his personal beliefs. Christians do it all the time, but pagans do it, too, so.... *shrug*

First off, that's the first time I've ever seen "elohim" translated as "pantheon." They're angels, spirits, divine but certainly not deities. Yahweh wasn't simply 'one of many.' In fact, Yahweh just means, "I am." Can you think of a stronger way to say 'monotheism?'

Secondly, God never really said that they would 'die.' There are a lot of words that can be translated as death, and a lot of ways that various institutions have chosen to mutilate texts to fit their viewpoints. God said that the two would finish, end, 'stage off.' In other words, they had a choice - Tree of Life, or Tree of Knowledge. They chose the latter. End of story. All that meant was that they would have to die eventually, and they did.

Thirdly, I'd love to see some archaeological evidence for "skinny dipping in the warm inland sea" or neopagan-like goddess worship from six thousand years ago in agricultural communities near the Caspian Sea. Let alone the bizarre implication that ALL other societies aside from the nomadic pastoral Jews had similar cultures and belief structures.

Fourthly, the Bible was NOT written by men. Biblical scholars have generally determined that, in the Torah itself, at least one of the major authors was a female. YES, ancient Judaic culture was very patriarchal. However, we also have had a couple thousand years of constant political flux throughout Europe and the Middle East, and even if original texts weren't in the least misogynistic mistranslation upon mistranslation would certainly change that.

All told, I have no lineage from the Middle East, for as far back as anybody from Europe can really tell. All my ancestors trucked their butts out of the inner-Asian steppe sometime between seven thousand and seven hundred years ago. I guess it's nice to finally see the 'untold' story of my ancestry. I guess I should walk around naked now, since all of my culturally-imbued hang-ups about public nudity are just illusions.

Yes, it's annoying as anything when people proselytize. Especially when they just don't shut up ("God, save me from your followers!"). But if you're going to analyze a religious text, ESPECIALLY if it's not your religion, then be respectful and do it some justice.

Sylph

BrightStar
July 17th, 2001, 06:19 PM
Hi all!
I've read this before and really liked it.But I've only read the Bible 14 times now,so I could be wrong!
But I'd always wondered how Cain was able to go to another place,find a wife and start a new family.So my feeling has always been that there were "other people".Had to be.I always ask the witnesses I get here about that,never have got a straight answer.But I always offer them a cool drink and invite them in.My pentacle and statue of Pan kind of spook them though.
Peace and Love
BrightStar

gunner
July 17th, 2001, 06:41 PM
sometime i'll tell the story of one of my encounters with the witnesses... it takes a peculiar sense of humour to appreciate it though.

Dria El
July 17th, 2001, 11:07 PM
Originally posted by gunner
sometime i'll tell the story of one of my encounters with the witnesses... it takes a peculiar sense of humour to appreciate it though.


I have a peculiar sense of humor. <hint, hint> ;)

Rævyn Cigány
July 17th, 2001, 11:49 PM
Originally posted by EasternPriest


The largest problem I see with the article is his invented translations for the Bible. True, he has a right to his opinion, but there is no "right" to present misinterpretation as fact.

It's also interesting that he somehow is credible because he is not a christian..credibility has no religion, it is an individual trait.

Like I said, it will take awhile to respond the the thread properly, but I will.

No, when you put it like that I agree with you...




Logically then, the fact that I am not Pagan makes me more qualified to interpret pagan writings????

*opens mouth, inserts foot* whoops...okay, I guess I said that wrong...what I meant to say is NOT that being Pagan made him credible, but having a completely non-Christian background and/or opinion gave him the advantage of a non-biased opinion....at least, that's what I think I mean...do you understand what I'm trying to say??? Grrr....*sucks on foot for awhile* Sorry, EP, offense was NOT meant!!!

Blessings,

Rae )0(

p.s. and just because I ramble on like a soup sandwich does NOT make me an idiot (at least not today) :p

Rævyn Cigány
July 17th, 2001, 11:53 PM
Originally posted by EasternPriest



And, I am no where near "fundamental"

And I never said you were!!! I was making a joke, for heaven's sake!!! Grr, EP, I even SAID I was pulling your chain!!! *sigh* can't be a joker anymore :(

BB

Rae )0(

sapphiresdarkhorse
March 2nd, 2006, 04:38 PM
HEHEHEHEEHEHEHEHEEHE!

usually I just "release the hounds" but that was delicious! :yayah:

EponaCapaill
March 2nd, 2006, 09:56 PM
I was just thinking about this thread, thanks for bumping it up!

Morrigan_Wolfwind
March 2nd, 2006, 11:35 PM
Hmm. The "Other People." Sounds ambiguous but also neutral, which seems pretty good to me.

I read the Bible out of boredom when I was around eight and had nothing else to do (or couldn't do anything else if I was in church), I didn't get the meaning of half of the passages, and it's interesting how I can still remember a good portion of it when I haven't touched a Bible in years.

Personally, I would have just said a polite "No thanks, I'm Catholic already" and shut the door.

Cindlady2
March 4th, 2006, 03:48 AM
First...Thanks for digging this up! I had seen it before and now I can't get to the site again.

2nd... I did go back and re-re-re-reread Genius... and yes, he did seem to make some passages fit the way he wanted them. However I always felt there were way too many gaps and unanswered questions in Genius. (It was almost like reading a 'reader's digest condensed book')

3rd..."The largest problem I see with the article is his invented translations for the Bible. True, he has a right to his opinion, but there is no "right" to present misinterpretation as fact."EasternPriest

To this I say the Bible has been interpreted, translated, interpreted, and misinterpreted for thousands of years. (King James was one of the worst in wanting things 'his way') And scholars even question how true to original meaning the Torah is. The 'hand' as well as the thoughts of man have always played a large part in how the Bible was interpreted through out different cultures and different times. The only way to get a clear, factual, interpretation on what God says and means... Is for God himself to write it with his own hand, in every language, in every century.

One of the interesting things I've noticed about the Pagans I have meet is the large majority of them came from Christan backgrounds. Yet they choose to be pagan.

Ok... rambled enough!

Darakash
March 4th, 2006, 11:01 AM
Ok, this thread caught my eye this morning (thanks for resurrecting it, it is an interesting read)...so, I read all the posts, and then I went to a bible resources website and read the Genesis Chapters (1-3)in both the New International Version and the New American (Catholic) Version.

In terms of the author's deliberately adjusting the text to fit his argument, I found two main examples of this in the Adam and Eve Story (I didn't get into the Cain and Abel thing, because I knew my post would get too long!) when the author states:


(Genesis 1:26) The [Elohim] said, "Let us make humanity in our own image, in the likeness of ourselves, and let them be masters of the fish of the sea, the birds of heaven, the cattle, all the wild beasts and all the reptiles that crawl upon the earth."

And

(1: 27) The Gods created humanity in the image of themselves, In the image of the Gods they created them, Male and female they created them. (1:28) The Gods blessed them, saying to them, "Be fruitful, multiply, fill the earth and conquer it. Be masters of the fish of the sea, the birds of heaven and all living animals on the earth."

The Bolded (by me) words have been changed from both of the versions I read....As in both versions say nothing about the Elohim saying anything--they both say "And God said..." and where the word "they" or "the gods" is bolded, both versions simply say "God" or "he;"

However, I find it very interesting that the section saying "Let us make humanity in our own image, in the likeness of ourselves," Is NOT in fact changed from either of those versions....who is this WE? This same we/us plural use is accurately quoted from verse 3:22 as in: "See, the man has become like one of us..."

This sort of plural along with a few other interesting passages, such as:
Genesis 1:27 "So God created man in his own image,
in the image of God he created him;
male and female he created them." Now, is it just me or does this clearly state that Male AND Female are the image of God? Which to me would indicate that God is not in fact, male! This coupled with the whole "WE" factor, certainly makes one pause about the monotheistic, Patriarcal bent of most Christian interpretations of the nature of God...

See, it seems to me, that Yaweh NEVER said there were no other Gods, just that His people were to worship no other gods besides or "before" him...as in Exodus 20:2 -20:5 when he is quoted as: "I, the LORD, am your God, who brought you out of the land of Egypt, that place of slavery.
3
You shall not have other gods besides me.
4
You shall not carve idols for yourselves in the shape of anything in the sky above or on the earth below or in the waters beneath the earth;
5
you shall not bow down before them or worship them. For I, the LORD, your God, am a jealous God, inflicting punishment for their fathers' wickedness on the children of those who hate me, down to the third and fourth generation;"

I have no idea whether any Christian churches or Clergy or Scholars accept the idea that Jehova is not portrayed as the ONLY God in the Bible, but I do not personally know a single Christian who believes this, every practicing Christian I know, whether they are Catholic, Born Again, Protestant, or Non-Denominational believes that Jehova is THE God, there are no others and any other "God" that someone may believe in or worship is actually Satan "The Prince of Lies" leading people away from the "one TRUE God..."

I know it seems I am getting of topic here, but actually, in my mind this ties in with the author's presentation/argument...(however flawed it may be)...simply put, even the Bible itself seems to recognize the existence of "The Other People"...people, who unlike the Chosen who God led out of Egypt, have no obligation to worship Jehova, and do in fact, worship other Gods--who do exist.

Now another misquote or changed quote from the Author is the following:

"You may eat indeed of all the trees in the garden. (2:17) Nevertheless of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil you are not to eat, for on the day you eat of it you shall most surely die."

It seems the author deliberately altered this to meet his "God lied and the Serpent didn't" argument. In the versions I check this bolded portion reads:
(NIV): "for when you eat of it you will surely die."
(NAB): "the moment you eat from it you are surely doomed to die."

Now, even though the NAB version does say "the moment" it seems pretty clear that this means, that at that moment he (this admonition against eating the fruit is given directly to Adam, before Eve is created) is doomed to death, which he would not have known if he did not eat it...not so much that he would die at that moment

That being said...the author does have a point, because, well, ok, follow me here....Before they ate of the tree of knowledge, according to the above bible passages, they were not "doomed to death" or "would NOT die"...which, I would think, would indicate that they were in fact, immortal. So, then why, would there even BE a Tree of Life whose fruit would Give them immortality? The tree that God now would not allow them access to and had guarded by flaming swords, etc? I mean, hmm, well, the whole Tree of Life thing actually makes me wonder if the author's interpretation, as in "if you eat this fruit you will die immediately" makes more sense by virtue of the fact that they apparently had not eaten of the Tree of Life previously and yet, were immortal....egad, i am confusing myself! Ok

I will stop now!

Morgandria
March 4th, 2006, 11:24 AM
*shrugs* I neither want or need a Biblical justification for my path or existence. It is really just that irrelevant to me.

Dria El
June 3rd, 2006, 08:08 PM
I was thinking about this article recently and lo and behold! Here it is, resurrected again.

One thing I wanted to mention to those who still don't 'get' the bible is that maybe you should look at it in a different light.

Some time ago I had an epiphany of sorts and it all became clear to me (at least much more so). I thought I'd share my epiphany with you and maybe it'll help you make sense of the 'chaos'.

Try looking at the bible (brace yourself!) not so much as a literal storybook but more as a shamanic storybook. Now, I know this isn't a new idea but I'd never really grasped the whole concept until I'd read some other shamanic books and kinda gotten a 'feel' for how they think.

Anyhow, try it. You might like it.

ps. wb me

TaysatWesir
June 3rd, 2006, 08:54 PM
I got this out of an ezine I subscribe to. It's VERY interesting. One of these days I'm going to get my Bible back from my mother so I can check this out.


We Are the Other People
by Oberon (Otter) Zell

"Ding-dong!" goes the doorbell. Is it Avon calling? Or perhaps Ed McMahon with my three million dollars? No, it's Yahweh's Witlesses again, just wanting to have a nice little chat about the Bible... Boy, did they ever come to the wrong house! So we invite them in: "Enter freely and of your own will..." (Hey, it's Sunday morning, nothing much going on, why not have a little entertainment?) Diane and I amuse ourselves watching their expressions as they check out the living room: great horned owl on the back of my chair; ceremonial masks and medicine skulls of dragons and unicorns on the wall; crystals, wands, staffs, swords; lots of Goddess figures and several altars; boa constrictors draped in amorous embrace over the elkhorn; white doves sitting in the hanging planters; cats and weasels underfoot; iron dragon snorting steam atop the wood stove; posters and paintings of wizards and dinosaurs and witchy women, some proudly naked; sculptures of mythological beasties and lots more dinosaurs; warp six on the star-filled viewscreen of my computer; a five-foot model of the USS Enterprise and the skeleton of a plesiosaur hanging from the ceiling; very, very many books, most of them dealing with obviously weird subjects... To say nothing of the great horned owl perched on the back of my chair and the Unicorn grazing in the front yard. You know; early Addams Family decor. And then, of course, it being late in the morning, you can expect Morning Glory to come wandering out naked, looking for her wake-up cup of tea. Morning Glory naked is a truly impressive sight, and the Witlesses look as if she'd set titties on stun as they stand immobilized, hands clasped over their genitals.
With the stage set and all the actors in place, the show is ready to begin. Their mission, of course, is to save our heathen souls by turning us on to "The Word of the Lord"— their Bible. I guess they figger some of us just haven't heard about it yet, and we're all eagerly awaiting their joyous tidings of personal salvation through giving our rational faculties to Jesus. Every time they come around, I look forward to trying out a new riposte. Sure, it may be cruel and sadistic of me, but hey, I didn't call them up and ask them to come over; they entered at their own risk! This time should be pretty good. After letting them run off their basic rap while lovely Morning Glory serves us all hot herb tea, I innocently remark: "But none of that applies to us. We have no need for salvation because we don't have original sin. We are the Other People."

"Hunh? What?" they reply eloquently. It's clear they've never heard this one before. "

Right," I say. "It's all in your Bible." And I proceed to tell them the story, using their own book for reference: (Genesis 1:26) The [Elohim] said, "Let us make humanity in our own image, in the likeness of ourselves, and let them be masters of the fish of the sea, the birds of heaven, the cattle, all the wild beasts and all the reptiles that crawl upon the earth." Elohim is a plural word, including male and female, and should properly be translated "Gods" or "Pantheon." (1: 27) The Gods created humanity in the image of themselves, In the image of the Gods they created them, Male and female they created them. (1:28) The Gods blessed them, saying to them, "Be fruitful, multiply, fill the earth and conquer it. Be masters of the fish of the sea, the birds of heaven and all living animals on the earth."
Now clearly, here we are talking about the original creation of the human species: male and female. All the animals, plants, etc. have all been created in previous verses. This is before the Garden of Eden, and Yahweh is not mentioned as the creator of these people.

The next chapter talks about how Yahweh, an individual member of the Pantheon, goes about assembling his own special little botanical and zoological Garden in Eden, and making his own little man to inhabit it: (Gen 2:7) Yahweh God fashioned a man of dust from the soil. Then he breathed into his nostrils a breath of life, and thus the man became a living being. (2:8) Yahweh God planted a garden in Eden which is in the east, and there he put the man he had fashioned. (2:9) Yahweh God caused to spring up from the soil every kind of tree, enticing to look at and good to eat, with the tree of life and the tree of the knowledge of good and evil in the middle of the garden. (2:15) Yahweh God took the man and settled him in the garden of Eden to cultivate and take care of it. Now this next is crucial: note Yahweh's precise words: (2:16) Then Yahweh God gave the man this admonition, "You may eat indeed of all the trees in the garden. (2:17) Nevertheless of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil you are not to eat, for on the day you eat of it you shall most surely die." Fateful words, those. We will refer back to this admonition later.
Then Yahweh decides to make a woman to go with the man. Now, don't forget that the Pantheon had earlier created a whole population of people, "male and female," who are presumably doing just fine somewhere "outside the gates of Eden." But this set-up in Eden is Yahweh's own little experiment, and will unfold to its own separate destiny. (2:21) So Yahweh God made the man fall into a deep sleep. And while he slept, he took one of his ribs and enclosed it in flesh. (2:22) Yahweh God built the rib he had taken from the man into a woman, and brought her to the man. Right. Man gives birth to woman. Sure he does. But that's the way the story is told here. (2:25) Now both of them were naked, the man and his wife, but they felt no shame in front of each other. Well, of course not! Why should they? But take careful note of those words, as they also will prove to be significant...
Now this next part is where it starts to get interesting. Enter the Serpent: (Gen. 3:1) The serpent was the most subtle of all the wild beasts that Yahweh God had made. It asked the woman, "Did God really say you were not to eat from any of the trees in the garden?" (3:2) The woman answered the serpent, "We may eat the fruit of the trees in the garden. (3:3) "But of the fruit of the tree in the middle of the garden God said, 'You must not eat it, nor touch it, under pain of death." (3:4) Then the serpent said to the woman, "No! You will not die! (3:5) "God knows in fact that on the day you eat it your eyes will be opened and you will be like gods, knowing good and evil."
What a remarkable statement! "Your eyes will be opened and you will be like gods, knowing good and evil." The Serpent directly contradicts Yahweh. Obviously, one of them has to be lying. Which one, do you suppose? And, if the serpent speaks true, wouldn't you wish to eat of the magic fruit? Wouldn't it be a good thing, to become "like gods, knowing good and evil"? Or is it preferable to remain in ignorance?

(Gen. 3:6) The woman saw that the tree was good to eat and pleasing to the eye, and that it was desirable for the knowledge that it could give. So she took some of its fruit and ate it. She gave some also to her husband who was with her, and he ate it. (3:7) Then the eyes of both of them were opened and they realized that they were naked. So they sewed fig leaves together to make themselves loincloths. The author makes an interesting assumption here: that if you realize you are naked you will automatically want to cover yourself. Further implications will unfold shortly...

(Gen. 3:8) The man and his wife heard the sound of Yahweh God walking in the garden in the cool of the day, and they hid from Yahweh God among the trees of the garden. (3:9) But Yahweh God called to the man. "Where are you?" he asked. (3:10) "I heard the sound of you in the garden," he replied. "I was afraid because I was naked, so I hid." (3:11) "Who told you that you were naked?" he asked. "Have you been eating of the tree I forbade you to eat?"

And so the sign of the Fall becomes modesty. Take note of this. The descendants of Adam and Eve will be distinguished throughout history from virtually all other peoples by their obsessive modesty taboos, wherein they will feel ashamed of being naked. It follows that those who feel no shame in being naked are, by definition, not carriers of this spiritual disease of original sin!

(Gen. 3:12) The man replied,"It was the woman you put with me; she gave me the fruit, and I ate it." Right. Blame the woman. What a turkey! (3:13) Then Yahweh God asked the woman,"What is this you have done?" The woman replied, "The serpent tempted me and I ate." So of course she blames the serpent. But just what did the serpent do that was so evil? Why, he called Yahweh a liar! Was he wrong? Let's see... (3:21) Yahweh God made clothes out of skins for the man and his wife, and they put them on. Out of skins? This means that Yahweh had to kill some innocent animals to pander to Adam and Eve's new obsession with modesty!

And now we come to the crux of the Fall. Yahweh had said back there in chapter (2:17), regarding the fruit of the tree of knowledge, that "on the day you eat of it you shall most surely die." The Serpent, on the other hand, had contradicted Yahweh in chapter (3:4-5): "No! You will not die! God knows in fact that on the day you eat it your eyes will be opened and you will be like gods, knowing good and evil." So what actually happened? Who lied and who told the truth about this remarkable fruit? The answer is given in the next verse: (3:22) Then Yahweh God said, "See, the man has become like one of us, with his knowledge of good and evil. He must not be allowed to stretch his hand out next and pick from the tree of life also, and eat some and live forever."

Get that? Yahweh himself admits that he had lied! In fact, and in Yahweh's own words, the Serpent spoke the absolute truth! And moreover, Yahweh tells the rest of the Pantheon that he intends to evict Adam (and presumably Eve as well) to keep them from gaining immortality to go with their newly-acquired divine knowledge. To prevent them, in other words, from truly becoming gods! So who, in this story, comes off as a benefactor of humanity, and who comes off as a tyrant? THE SERPENT NEVER LIED!

This story, to digress slightly, bears a remarkable resemblance to a contemporary tale from ancient Greece. In that version, the Serpent (later identified as Lucifer, the Light-Bearer) may be equated with the heroic titan Prometheus, who championed humanity against the tyranny of Zeus, who wished for people to be mere slaves of the gods. Prometheus, whose name means "forethought," gave people wisdom, intelligence, and fire stolen from Olympus. Moreover, he ordained the portions of animal sacrifice so that humans got the best parts (the meat and hides) while the portion that was burned to the gods was the bones and fat. In punishment for this defiance of his divine authority, Zeus condemned Prometheus to a terrible punishment for an immortal: to be chained to a mountain in the Caucasus, where Zeus' gryphon/eagle (actually a Lammergier) would devour his liver each day. It would grow back each night. Zeus promised to relent if Prometheus would reveal his great secret knowledge: Who would succeed Zeus as supreme god? Prometheus refused to tell, but history has revealed the answer...
The interesting thing about all this is that the Greeks properly regarded Prometheus as a noble hero in his defiance of unjust tyranny. One may wonder why the Serpent is not so well regarded. On the contrary, snakes are loathed throughout Christiandom. (3:23) So Yahweh God expelled him from the garden of Eden, to till the soil from which he had been taken. (3:24) He banished the man, and in front of the garden of Eden he posted the cherubs, and the flame of a flashing sword, to guard the way to the tree of life.
So that's it for the Fall. But the story of Adam and Eve doesn't end there. (Gen 4:1) The man had intercourse with his wife Eve, and she conceived and gave birth to Cain... (4:2) She gave birth to a second child, Abel, the brother of Cain. Now Abel became a shepherd and kept flocks, while Cain tilled the soil. (4:3) Time passed and Cain brought some of the produce of the soil as an offering for Yahweh, (4:4) while Abel, for his part, brought the first-born of his flock and some of their fat as well. Yahweh looked with favor on Abel and his offering. But he did not look with favor on Cain and his offering, and Cain was very angry and downcast. Well, why shouldn't he be? Both brothers had brought forth their first fruits as offerings, but Yahveh rejected the vegetables and only accepted the blood sacrifice. This was to set a gruesome precedent: (4:8) Cain said to his brother Abel, "Let us go out;" and while they were in the open country, Cain set on his brother Abel and killed him.

Accursed and marked for fratricide, (4:16) Cain left the presence of Yahweh and settled in the land of Nod, east of Eden. We can assume that the phrase "left the presence of Yahweh" implies that Yahweh is a local deity, and not omnipresent. Now Eden, according to (Gen. 2:14-15), was situated at the source of the Tigris and Euphrates rivers, apparently right where Lake Van is now, in Turkey. "East of Eden," therefore, would probably be along the shores of the Caspian Sea, right in the Indo-European heartland. Cain settled in there, among the people of Nod, and married one of the women of that country. Here, for the first time, is specifically mentioned the "other people" who are not of the lineage of Adam and Eve. i.e: the Pagans.
So let's look at this story from another viewpoint: There we were, around six thousand years ago, living in our little farming communities around the Caspian Sea, in the land of Nod, when this dude with a terrible scar comes stumbling in out of the sunset. He tells us this bizarre story, about how his mother and father had been created by some god named Jahweh, and put in charge of a beautiful garden somewhere out west, and how they had gotten thrown out for disobedience after eating some of the landlord's forbidden magic fruit of enlightenment. He tells us of murdering his brother, as the god of his parents would only accept blood sacrifice, and of receiving that scar as a mark so that all would know him as a fratricide.

The poor guy is really a mess psychologically, obsessed with guilt. He is also obsessively modest, insisting on wearing clothes even in the hottest summer, and he has a hard time with our penchant for skinny-dipping in the warm inland sea. He seems to believe that he is tainted by the "sin" of his parent's disobedience; that it is in his blood, somehow, and will continue to contaminate his children and his children's children.

One of our healing women takes pity on the poor sucker, and marries him... (4:17) Cain had intercourse with his wife, and she conceived and gave birth to Enoch. He became the builder of a town, and he gave the town the name of his son Enoch.
With both of their first sons not turning out very well, Adam and Eve decided to try again: (4:25) Adam had intercourse with his wife, and she gave birth to a son whom she named Seth... (4:26) A son was also born to Seth, and he named him Enosh. This man was the first to invoke the name of Yahweh. Now it doesn't mention here where Seth's wife came from. Another woman from Nod, possibly, or maybe someone from another neolithic community downstream in the Tigris-Euphrates valley. But her folks also, cannot be of the lineage of Adam and Eve, and must also be counted among "the other people."
But whatever happened to Adam? After all, way back there in chapter Gen. 2:17, warning Adam about the magic fruit of knowlege, Jahweh had told him that "on the day you eat of it you shall most surely die." So, when did Adam die? (Gen. 5:4) Adam lived for eight hundred years after the birth of Seth and he became the father of sons and daughters. (5:5) In all, Adam lived for nine hundred and thirty years; then he died. Hey, that's pretty good! Nine hundred and some odd years isn't bad for a man who's been told he's gonna die the next day!

Well, the story goes on, and maybe next time the Witlesses come to visit I'll tell more of it. But suffice it to say that those of us who are not of Semitic descent (i.e., not of the lineage of Adam and Eve) cannot share in the Original Sin that comes with that lineage. Being that the Bible is the story of that lineage, of Adam and Eve's descendants and their specialn relationship with their particular god, Yahweh, it follows that this is not the story of the rest of us. We may have been Cain's wife's people, or Seth's wife's people, or some other people over the hill and far away, but whichever people the rest of us are, as far as the Bible is concerned, we are the Other People, and so we are continually referred to throughout.

Later books of the Bible are filled with admonitions to the followers of Jahweh to "learn not the ways of the Pagans..." (Jer 10:2) with detailed descriptions of exactly what it is we do, such as erect standing stones and sacred poles, worship in sacred groves and practice divination and magic. And worship the sun, moon, stars and the "Queen of Heaven." "You must not behave as they do in Egypt where once you lived; you must not behave as they do in Canaan where I am taking you. You must not follow their laws." (Lev 18:3) For Yahweh, as he so clearly emphasises, is not the god of the Pagans. We have our own lineage and our own heritage, and our tale is not told in the Bible. We were not "made" like clay figurines by a male deity out of "dust from the soil." We were born of our Mother the Earth, and have evolved over aeons in Her nurturing embrace. All of us, in our many and diverse tribes, have creation myths and legends of our origins and history; some of these tales may even be actually true.

Like the descendants of Adam and Eve, many of us also have stories of great floods, earthquakes, volcanic eruptions and other cataclysms that wiped out whole communities of our people, wherein "I alone survived to tell the tale." Nearly all of our ancestral tribes (and especially those of us who today are reclaiming our own Pagan heritage) lack that peculiar obsessive body modesty that seems to be a hallmark of the original sin alluded to in the story of the Fall. We can be naked and unashamed! Why, our Goddess even tells us, "as a sign that you are truly free, you shall be naked in your rites." Not being born into sin, we have no need of salvation, and no need of a Messiah to redeem our sinful souls.

Neither heaven nor hell is our destination in the afterlife; we have our own various arrangements with our own various deities. The Bible is not our story; we have our own stories to tell, and they are many and diverse. In a long life, you may get to hear many of them... May you live long and prosper!
OMG! that was great thanks for sharing it! :D

HeavensHope
June 3rd, 2006, 09:28 PM
hm...I could've sworn that I made a reply...wasnt it deleted or something?