Not sure where this belongs so I'll put it here.

Modern Pagans Honor Zeus in Athens

Zeus (http://enews.earthlink.net/article/int?guid=20070121/45b2f350_3ca6_15526200701211792605311)

ATHENS, Greece - A clutch of modern pagans honored Zeus at a 1,800-year-old temple in the heart of Athens on Sunday - the first known ceremony of its kind held there since the ancient Greek religion was outlawed by the Roman empire in the late 4th century.

Pagans? Do polytheistics count as pagans? I thought pagans believe in the forces of the nature but I think I'm wrong.

Awesome, good to see. Their claims are just as valid as anyone elses and I think they should be given their ancient worship sites back, as well as compensation from the government who took said places of worship... now who would that be... the Pope?

heh its a bit like the Asa-belief having flourished again in scandinavia. cant see why we should make a big fuss about it.

Supreme Council of Ethnikoi Hellenes (http://www.ysee.gr/index-eng.php)

@Equester:
I think the big fuss is that they're not allowed to practice their beliefs because they don't directly line up with the Christian (Orthodox) views. For instance, based on what the YSSE says, euthanasia isn't allowed there due to Christian beliefs, even though euthanasia was allowed back when Zeus was actively worshiped in Greece, which was in accordance with their moral standing and religious beliefs.

@Argohir:
My understanding is that pagans can be polytheists, but that is not always the case. For instance, Mother Earth and Father Sun would be pagan and polytheistic but just believing in Gaia would be pagan and monotheistic. Correct me if I'm incorrect.

@Abomination:
Wishful thinking, wishful thinking.

The restoration of Ethnic Hellenic religion involves more than just changing names and replacing a few idiots with more logical people. Ha, excellent indeed.

heh soubriquet, what i ment was, i cant see why the christians want to make such a big fuss about it. just let them whorship Zeus in peace.

Argohir,
the most common definition would be one who's not a Christian, Muslim, or Jew, especially a worshiper of a polytheistic religion, or an animistic religion.

Besides, these Greeks are idiots.

Awesome.

I love how these Zeus worshippers seem to be promoting a rather liberal agenda. Didn't Zeus go around raping women and blasting people with lightning bolts?

Sir Fink,
as for lightning bolts that's probably because of limited means.

Going around, and say, disguising themselves as stallions raping beautiful ladies like Europe would at this stage be devastating for their image. So they play nice, for now.

Well, that's interesting. Silly, but interesting. Hopefully they gain the rights of any other religious group (they sound saner than most...).

Would they have had to speek in Ancient Greek for the ceremony?

I disagree with the 'oh they're so cute and sensible' part of some of the above sentiments. Sure these folks do no one no harm, and I don't expect them to. But they are silly. One more esoteric take-what-you-like-and-stir outfit nonsense that I, suffice to say, detest. Usually it's a dose of Zen + Shintoism + Druidism + Indian Shamanism + Hinduism + Jewish Kabbalah (Cool! Mysticism!) + Sufi-Islam (Cool! More mysticism!) + maybe some Christianity for familiarity. Why not adding a dose of the AD&D pantheon? Mask is sure a way cool god. Oh how cute. What a wonderful feel-good coctail. And without all the hard questions religion normally involves. Yay!

Here it's ancient-greek-without-all-the-bad-stuff. Like slavery. Or animal sacrifice. Or incest. Or all the other stuff they don't like. It's artificial, and just like Volapük, it'll go away. And it's very silly. Bleh.

One more esoteric take-what-you-like-and-stir outfit nonsense that I, suffice to say, detest. A fine sentiment. We should be good herdlings and embrace the heritage of the days when Europeans weren't free to make choices of who to worship; when it was take-what-we-feed you-or-else.

Mask is sure a way cool god. Mask is past his cool days. He's now a lowly Lesser Power. Thanks to his own machinations, no less. Hardly cool. :p

Here it's ancient-greek-without-all-the-bad-stuff. Like slavery. Or animal sacrifice. Or incest. Or all the other stuff they don't like. It's artificial, and just like Volapük, it'll go away. And it's very silly. Bleh.Currently it seems more like Christianity is on its way out of Europe. I hope it wont let the door hit it on its bitter, bloody butt. Visited greater horrors on us, and through us, than animal sacrifice.

Paganism is still around. There are people who worship the old German, Scandinavian gods. People who go to Stonehenge for what they call Druidic ceremonies. Earth Mother worship is quite active. Fine with me if that is what you want and if you do no harm to others.

However, my own personal feeling is that these religions are pretty much modern ideas and only loosely based on ancient beliefs. The older the religion the less we know what was actually believed and practice.

Currently it seems more like Christianity is on its way out of Europe. I hope it wont let the door hit it on its bitter, bloody butt. Visited greater horrors on us, and through us, than animal sacrifice. Just wait until Islam is the dominant religion. It'll make the days of the much hated Christianity look pretty good by comparison.

Zeus? How utterly ridiculous.

Just wait until Islam is the dominant religion. It'll make the days of the much hated Christianity look pretty good by comparison.Whether Islam will put Christianity to shame is as much a question of future developements as the rise of Islam to dominance. The only certainty about the future is uncertainty.

Zeus? How utterly ridiculous.I recognize the spirits fostered by Christianity. Arrogance and condescension.

Dendri,
this is about digging out the ancient greek pantheon, and projecting on the humanistic and egalitarian ideas. The Greek gods were nothing like that. They were moody, greedy, vengeful, reckless, and ultimately had their heads full of frills if I still know my Homer. It is 'lego-ing' together a new 'religion' of convenience.

What today counts as 'Scottish folklore' is probably an 18th century re-invention. The Brits were so thorough and successful in supressing Scottish national identity, that there was barely anything left of it. It is most likely even the famous tartans had to be re-invented. And that was just a couple of hundred years ago. My point?

I have had the unique experience of having met a 'Druid' some years back. He was permanently uttering about 'knowledge' and 'secrets of nature'. I don't care about his beliefs. What repulses me is the background: Celtic druid culture was _wiped out completely_ over the milennia, first by the Romans and eventually by the Christian missionaries of the later empires over the next few centuries. They were thorough. There was nowhere he could possibly have gotten either 'knowlege' or 'secrets' from, because it is all irredeemably lost. That is, he either made, or dreamed, it all up. It's nonsense.

Where I agree with you is that Christianity in it's heartland must be truly weak if there are people falling for such junk.

What my druid and those Greeks have in common is the ultimately reactionary mindset, you read me right: That they think the 'good ol' times' were destroyed by evil Christianity, which brought nothing but evil and intolerance (Huh, huh) and now aim to 'restore it'. Restore from what?
It is very unlikely that it was any better before. With selective reading one can even make Timor's conduct look humane and measured I guess.

In my understanding what makes up being a good Christian is in _not_ being a herdling, but acting on your own conscience, because that's what you're supposed to be held accountable for at one day. It's the 'herdlings' who'll 'burn in hell'. I recognize the spirits fostered by Christianity. Arrogance and condescension.I'm so glad you're beyond such petty flaws.

Yes, the bogeyman that is Christianity is at it again, sowing hatred and intolerance. What was I thinking? Of course the cult of humanism displays so much more tolerance and humility.

I'm so glad you're beyond such petty flaws.A flaw you're well acquainted with, I can tell.

Well, I made an observation about Christianity. The lack of tolerance and respect for outsiders seems to be a foundation of that particular religion. And looking at your posts, you have been a good Christian indeed. Idiots, junk, silly, reactionary, overall derision ("my druid"). Your personal brand of responding to people that dare to challenge your decision in life by taking a different path. Your understanding of the egalitarian idea?

About the rest... What is artificial to you feels right to me in its core.
Whether or not the interpretation and emulation of old ways, the adoration of old gods, is coloured by romantic nonsense or authentic in your opinion is, forgive me, of no consequence. No-one who feels drawn to the ancient gods or the forces of nature would make a Christian of all people the judge of that. It is the longing that makes it real for the worshipper and the divine beings in question. For once, it isnt form over substance - blind obedience or eternal flames. This is about real desire, for which each "pagan" has a different reason, different answer. For once, everyone is entitled to free will, without the Damocles sword of "that's what you're supposed to be held accountable for at one day." :)

P.S.: I dont see how Olympians, for example, are any less fit to be worthy of worship in egalitarian societies, when a god as the Bible portrays him is...

Calm down people and knock off the personal attacks here.

Meh... one more religion that governs the way people think can't make that much differance.

Mostly I agree with Ragusa that the attempts to reconstruct dead religions are silly, ridiculous, and a little pathetic. Those who start the movement have basically made up their own god, and I really don't see how anyone can seriously believe in their own creation.

Those who convert come across as sheep to me - as with anyone who converts to religion (I'm sure I'm offending someone here, but hey, such is life). However, I also tend to get the added impression with new religious movements that they're trying to be edgy and cool with their new hip and funky religion (Wicca - I'm looking at *you*).

And inevitably, as the religion carries on, people in the first generation have children and are indoctrinated at an early age. They're probably blameless for their silly beliefs, but that doesn't make them look any better when they start spouting the nonsense that comes with it.

But the last two points go for any religion - and the first one is probably how I would've felt about the first Christians, had I known them. Or the first Muslims, or the first Hindus.

In my understanding what makes up being a good Christian is in _not_ being a herdling, but acting on your own conscience, because that's what you're supposed to be held accountable for at one day. It's the 'herdlings' who'll 'burn in hell'.lol - wow, your reading of the Bible must be a lot different than mine, what, with all those rules you have to follow blindly or burn in hell ... if that's not following the herd and being discouraged from following your own conscience I don't know what is...

Well it does seem Christians don't like it, then again they don't really like any other religion since it contridicts their own (the whole One God thing).

Despite the fact that it could be as bogus as... say... scientology, they still have the right to practice their beliefs and be allowed to worship in ways that are in accordance to the laws of the land.

Dendri,
as for neo-paganism, I recognize a dead-end when I see it.

Paganism was ultimately about the subordination man under the impression of an omnipotent dangerous nature, ultimately resulting from a lack of understanding the world. Cultures developed their respective narratives to satisfy the pressing questions. Today we're beyond that stage. We do understand the world far better than the Greeks did. We don't need such narratives anymore. We climb on Mount Olymp and see Zeus isn't there. Don't we have our science? Well, it seems to be lacking spice.
The eastern block tried to abandon the 'opium' of religion altogether, and built on their rational and materialistic Socialism. It failed, too.

In our Western culture Christianity is so deeply rooted as to be inseparable. Catholicism first had to become Protestantism to allow for Rationalism and Secularism. Galileo's discovery almost got him killed as a heretic for blasphemy. That he wasn't is in itself a sign of progress (well, or good luck). Only that set in motion the empiric revolution that brought us things like science or computers, and these great achievements of Christian western culture might well be Christianity's undoing in Europe. Soon the freed thinkers abandoned the concept of God.
You're right to refer to the shrinking numbers flocking into Europe's churches. Another aspect are our low birth rates. In this time where our knowledge and understanding of the world seems at its peak, or still ascending, we see people consciously going back to the forms of religion rooted in the age of ignorance, the dark age.

Clearly, rationality evidently hasn't answered all the questions, namely the undeniable desire for spirituality. And the Christian message seems lacking appeal for many, too. The approaches for ways out of this dilemma are manyfold: In Hippie times people went to Ashrams and explored Hindu and Buddhist spirituality. Then came the New Age, with new input. Man, it seems, wants, strives to feel rather than think.

There is 'charismatic' Christianity, as exercised especially in America. A very dynamic and lively phenomenon, and growing, that attempts nothing less but to roll back enlightenment by insisting that the Bible has to be understood literally, or that evolution is not teached in school because it is sinful.
Very remarkable in this context is that 'Islamism' is in large parts a parallel development based on parallel views and critiques about modernity. An Islamist's view on our hedonistic West will not be all that different than a Pentecoastal's.

Others, like our Greeks, embrace paganism in response. Re-embracing the Greek gods is a conscious act to done away the achievements of rationality brought to you by Christian influenced thinkers, let alone the atheist thinkers. It leads nowhere. But if it is not about that, it's merely a frivolous act, like smoking with a long cigarette holder.

But then, the point of faith is faith.

[ January 24, 2007, 22:35: Message edited by: Ragusa ]

Don't overlook the political issues here. I think I recall (but I'm getting a little forgetful) much hysteria at the time of Greece's entry to the EU over the Greek government practice of listing religious affiliation on identity papers. Much of what passes for religious discourse is really political posturing.

EDIT: at least that's certainly true here in good old Tennessee, home of the Scopes trial

While I agree with the majority of their opinions about christian church and religion, I can't take seriously guys who in year 2007 worship Zeus and the other ancient gods and wear armor and corinthian helmets when they practice their rituals.

@ Ragusa

Only that set in motion the empiric revolution that brought us things like science or computers, and these great achievements of Christian western culture might well be Christianity's undoing in Europe The empiric revolution had started almost 1500 years before in ancient Greece and it was the christian religion which stopped it. It was reborn in the arab world when the muslims scholars begun to study and translate the ancient texts and eventually passed to Europe after the fall of Constaninople. So, what you describe as "christian western culture" is in reality the rebirth of the ancient thought and it has nothing to do with christianity.

Don't overlook the political issues here. I think I recall (but I'm getting a little forgetful) much hysteria at the time of Greece's entry to the EU over the Greek government practice of listing religious affiliation on identity papers. Much of what passes for religious discourse is really political posturing.@revmaf
Not exactly. The religious affiliation was written down in our identity papers until 2000, when the socialist goverment following the EU guidelines about the protection of personal data decided to stop this practice. That had as a result the enraged reaction of the orthodox church, which tried to prevent it through demonstrations and through a "referendum" which gathered 3 millions votes. Even our current prime minister, leader of the conservative party back then, has voted in this "referendum" in his attempt to win the religious voters.

Ragusa, fair points.

Paganism, though, isnt a road leading nowhere. It's one of the roots of Europe. It continues to be in shapes of festivals, traditions, folklore, proverbs, vague sense of respect for trees, mountains, certain locations and such. The Pagan element has always been around us, only it isnt acknowledged, therefore loses much of its potential benefit. Me, I hope it could reintroduce us to an aspect of ourselves. And since you mentioned the crumbling birth rates of Europe - I wonder where Christianity and its career, the developements it facilitated, has lead us to. How to pick up the pieces, what role identity might play in turning that around.

While I agree with the majority of their opinions about christian church and religion, I can't take seriously guys who in year 2007 worship Zeus and the other ancient gods and wear armor and corinthian helmets when they practice their rituals. hehe then you should see the Asa believers in Denmark. running around in "viking" clothing offering beer and meat at old holy grounds while calling out to odin and thor ><

The empiric revolution had started almost 1500 years before in ancient Greece and it was the christian religion which stopped it. It was reborn in the arab world when the muslims scholars begun to study and translate the ancient texts and eventually passed to Europe after the fall of Constaninople. So, what you describe as "christian western culture" is in reality the rebirth of the ancient thought and it has nothing to do with christianity. damn straight, there is a reason we call the comming of the christian church the dark age.
it basically forced 1000years of ignorance down upon our western culture. and for a long time the arabs culture was more evolved then ours. embracing the greeks scientific breakthroughs and having a very open society, which then got hit by the smae ignorance religions bring as the western society had been.

^ ^ ^

Makes a very good point. One must remember that Roman and Greek science led the way, surprising that their religions were basically mirrors of each other (Jupiter-Zeus, Mars-Aeres, Neptune-Posideon etc. all held the same domains). Even Celtic, Norse and Gothic religions were similar and the Romans in their conquests recognised local religions... dare say accepting and incorporating them into their own.

Then Christians came and burned (often quite literally) everything heretical (i.e. non-christian, sometimes including people) and set themselves up as the new commonly practiced religion.

^^^^^^^^^
from Abomination, together with:
The empiric revolution had started almost 1500 years before in ancient Greece and it was the christian religion which stopped it. It was reborn in the arab world when the muslims scholars begun to study and translate the ancient texts and eventually passed to Europe after the fall of Constaninople. So, what you describe as "christian western culture" is in reality the rebirth of the ancient thought and it has nothing to do with christianity. from BOC.

There simply is no good reason for the above sentiments, neither in favour of the super-human Greek geniuses nor against the malicious Christian barbarians.

You have to realize that western European (and American) culture is rooted scientifically as well as religiously in the ancient Greece. A case can be made that the cult of Babylonian Goddess Ishtar was overtaken by Greek colonists in Asia Minor who gave her the name Artemis. Christianity later transformed her into Virgin Mary. This common practice which lead to a Roman pantheon that mirrored the Greek one was followed by Christianity as well – as is clearly evident in the way Christianity incorporated pagan rites and festivals into its liturgy, renaming them Christmas, Easter and the like.

Moreover, not alone the Christian pantheon reflecting older religious cults is an indicator for the roots of Christianity. The very theological ideal of a world of reasoning superior to a world of sense as displayed by St. Augustine or Thomas Aquinas can be traced back to Greek philosophy. The Greeks supposed, on the basis of geometry, that thought is superior to experience and the empirical approach. “If the world of sense does not fit mathematics, so much the worse for the world of sense.” (Bertrand Russell referring to Pythagoras’ ideals in ‘History of Western Philosophy’)

Russell believed mathematics to be the chief source of the belief in eternal and exact truth as well as in a super-sensible intelligible world.

The main strength of the Greek philosophers was their creativity and their open-minded approach to hypotheses (meaning not necessarily open-mindedness towards different life-styles, mind you). Most of their hypotheses developed a life on their own, surviving until today under major overhauls or minor changes.

The main flaw, however, of Greek philosophers was their way of thinking. They started deductively from what was held to be self-evident, not inductively from what was observed. Scientific method, which is best described by the latter of the two approaches, is mostly alien to the mind of a Greek philosopher.

In conclusion, we owe much of our philosophy and theology to ancient Greece – and some knowledge as well. Science, on the other hand, had to struggle to break free from the grip of theology and mysticism, which is, in essence, the grip of the Pythagorean ideal of deduction.

Yeah.

Scientific method, which is best described by the latter of the two approaches, is mostly alien to the mind of a Greek philosopher Aristotle, Archimedes, Galen, Hippocrates, sophists, peripatics, epicureans and stoics would disagree with that statement.

The very theological ideal of a world of reasoning superior to a world of sense as displayed by St. Augustine or Thomas Aquinas can be traced back to Greek philosophy As far as I know Aquinas'peripatetic axiom "Nothing is in the intellect which was not first in the senses", which is the basis of empiricism, is derived from Aristotle and his peripatic school.

Equester,
it basically forced 1000years of ignorance down upon our western culture.Nonsense. You look too short. That was not Christianity's fault, but the fault of the collapsing Roman Empire. In East Rome culture stayed very high, under christian state religion, until the the end of the 14th century.

BOC, The empiric revolution had started almost 1500 years before in ancient Greece and it was the christian religion which stopped it. It was reborn in the arab world when the muslims scholars begun to study and translate the ancient texts and eventually passed to Europe after the fall of Constaninople. So, what you describe as "christian western culture" is in reality the rebirth of the ancient thought and it has nothing to do with christianity.When it was rediscovered, it became a part of "chrstian western culture". That is sufficient for my point. The original, original, original roots don't change that. French fries are a Belgian dish, despite potatoes originally being from South America.

"Scientific method, which is best described by the latter of the two approaches, is mostly alien to the mind of a Greek philosopher."

Aristotle, Archimedes, Galen, Hippocrates, sophists, peripatics, epicureans and stoics would disagree with that statement. "The very theological ideal of a world of reasoning superior to a world of sense as dis-played by St. Augustine or Thomas Aquinas can be traced back to Greek philosophy."

As far as I know Aquinas' peripatetic axiom "Nothing is in the intellect which was not first in the senses", which is the basis of empiricism, is derived from Aristotle and his peripatic school.I’m not familiar with that particular quote of Aquinas, but I fail to see how it contradicts my points: “Thomas Aquinas can be traced back to Greek philosophy” vs. “Aquinas’ axiom is derived from Aristotle”. That’s what I said: Christianity is based upon Greek philosophy and mathematics. Deduction was the key element in both Christian theology and Greek philosophy. Aristotle’s metaphysics contained the arguments of the “unmoved mover” and the “first cause” that were central to Christian scholastic over the centuries.

As to your first remark: please read carefully what I really wrote. The achievements of ancient Greece are not to be belittled. However, it is a misrepresentation to say that modern science is based upon the names you throw around. Greek philosophers increased the knowledge of the civilized world, but they managed to do so mostly by chance and not by a systematic approach. In fact, there was no common approach to science. Observation and logical reasoning were confused in a given metaphysical argument to a bigger or lesser extent.

All in all, Greek philosophers held that you could start with the general and than derive deductively a statement about the special. This is contrasted by the scientific method, in which you observe the special and try to derive inductively a general statement.

I would be surprised if you could find a Greek philosopher who would call himself a scientist. So no, I don’t think that Aristotle, Protagoras and the Sophists, Plato, Socrates or any other would disagree with my above statement.

Again: there was no boundary to the imaginative power of ancient Greece, and this is its main contribution of which one cannot think too highly.

@Darkthrone

I’m not familiar with that particular quote of Aquinas, but I fail to see how it contradicts my points: “Thomas Aquinas can be traced back to Greek philosophy” vs. “Aquinas’ axiom is derived from Aristotle”. It does not contradict this one, it contradicts or better it supplements "The very theological ideal of a world of reasoning superior to a world of sense". What I mean is that both approaches - a priori assumptions and a posteriori observations - existed in greek philosophy, the first one expressed mainly by Plato and the second expressed mainly by Aristotle and his school.

Christianity is based upon Greek philosophy and mathematics As I see it, christianity used and in many cases twisted the greek philosophy in order to cover the gaps of the christian theories.

I would be surprised if you could find a Greek philosopher who would call himself a scientist. So no, I don’t think that Aristotle, Protagoras and the Sophists, Plato, Socrates or any other would disagree with my above statement I couldn't find one because the term "science", as we mean it today, is rather new (19th century I think), the term that was used previously was "natural philosophy" meaning the objective study of nature. Your whole quote was:

They started deductively from what was held to be self-evident, not inductively from what was observed. Scientific method, which is best described by the latter of the two approaches, is mostly alien to the mind of a Greek philosopher.Aristotle, for example, used the inductive method in order to arrive at conclusions, which were based on observations made by senses. So I still insist that all these ancient philosophers would not agree with you.

@Ragusa

When it was rediscovered, it became a part of "chrstian western culture". That is sufficient for my point. I think that you don't understand that the christian religion had nothing to do with its rediscovery, on the contrary christian fanatism and stubborness fought it and rejected it for as long as it were possible. Christian priests, for example, refused the adoption of the muslim medical technics, which were based on empiricism because "it was the medicine of the infidels". It, indeed became finally part of the western culture but not of the christian western culture, which even today is a prisoner of dogmatism and blind faith.

Nonsense. You look too short. That was not Christianity's fault, but the fault of the collapsing Roman Empire. In East Rome culture stayed very high, under christian state religion, until the the end of the 14th century The closing of schools of philosophy, the executions of philosophers like Hypatia have taken place in the eastern empire. There is no doubt, that the byzantine empire was far more civilized than the western Europe, however that doesn't change the fact that it was a theocratic state, where all the voices, which were against the teachings of the christian church, were annihilated and that the whatever culture it produced never reached the culture of the ancient world.

BOC, Christian priests, for example, refused the adoption of the muslim medical technics, which were based on empiricism because "it was the medicine of the infidels". It, indeed became finally part of the western culture but not of the christian western culture, which even today is a prisoner of dogmatism and blind faith.And there was a time they tolerated it again. Just like there was a time the knowledge and skill of the Arab world were forgotten again. Still it was the West which did have the industrial and scientific revolution over the last two centuries, with very little contribution on their part. The obvious implication is that the West, including Christianity, has learned.

I find it rather perplexing that you still blame Christianity for mistakes, or rather things they did then, perhaps for good reasons you do or can not comprehend anymore today - generally, for stuff they made ... err ... 1500+ years ago. Christianity has evolved in two milennia.

@BOC thanks for sorting me out on the religious affiliation/identity papers issue - knew there was something there but couldn't remember details.

On the intermingling of Greek and Christian traditions into modern thought, a fascincating (though horribly long) book called Mending Bodies, Saving Souls offers a history of hospitals in Western tradition. It traces the "saving souls" part of the tradition back to the Greek healing temples, and the "mending bodies" part back to Roman infirmaries for nursing sick soldiers back to health so they could return to duty.

@Ragusa

Christianity has evolved in two milennia.Yeah sure. 2000 years ago they were chasing pagans and destroying ancient temples, 1000 years they were preaching that killing infidels will lead you to heaven, 500 years ago they were claiming that the earth is flat and they were burning witches at the stake, 30 years ago they were burning rock records because it was the music of satan, today they are preaching against the evil condoms, like or not the christian stubborness has always been here. What you call evolution, I call it a battle of rear guard, where christianity abandons one fortress after another, when it can no longer defend it and chose a different target.

I find it rather perplexing that you still blame Christianity for mistakes, or rather things they did then, perhaps for good reasons you do or can not comprehend anymore today - generally, for stuff they made ... err ... 1500+ years agoThe game is called 'complete picture'. And it has to perplex you yet when you bring into this bits such as animal sacrifice in rites and incest in mythology far older than Christianity.

There is no such thing as a nominative 'Christian', or a nominative 'Muslum'...there are just a whole bunch of people who all choose to be stupid and/or ignorant in their own individual way because they think it makes them happier than the alternative. And maybe it does... My mom gets a certain gleam in her eye when she tells me how she believes certain people are in fact actually angels (I don't know whom in particular she means...), and my pop finds a certain meaning for his existence in the knowledge that one day the End-times will arrive (Israel and nukes). My point is that all religious people choose their own particular blind-spots---it is not assigned by the church. Even within the rigid walls of dogma constructed in the Vatican City, I'm sure the Pope and all of his cardinals have different beliefs about this aspect or that aspect of the material world. How do I know this? Because they are all individual human beings regardless of their wacky beliefs.

But I'm a human too...I wonder where I refuse to look?

Determinism. It's ugly. I don't like it. I don't want it to be true. I like having a free-will. I'm not going to be happy if it turns out that I do not. But it won't matter, since I won't have a choice in the matter regardless. That stinks. I like choices....I'm an American dammit.