Just because

[Kaydon]

Here's another piece for you all to discuss. It's another take on magic
and manifestation <3

"I am the way, the truth and the life. Noone comes to the Father except
through me."

"I am" is a form of the verb "To Be". Be the I AM. Be what you want to
become. Act it out. Be the vibrational match for what you want. I think
therefore I am. I am therefore I have.

"The way". Being I am is the way. If you are being I am in a negative
context, you will attract negative results. Being I am in a positive
sense, attracts positive results.

"The truth". The truth of this whole statement. That being I am is the
way.

"The life". Being I am is the way to the life you desire.

"Noone comes to the Father except through me." By being I am, you
attain union with the creative force in the universe (The Father). You
are the creative force (comes to the Father).

Have fun :o)

<3
xoxoxoxoo

[Tom]

Post by Kaydon
Here's another piece for you all to discuss. It's another take on magic
and manifestation <3
"I am the way, the truth and the life. Noone comes to the Father except
through me."
"I am" is a form of the verb "To Be". Be the I AM. Be what you want to
become. Act it out. Be the vibrational match for what you want. I think
therefore I am. I am therefore I have.
"The way". Being I am is the way. If you are being I am in a negative
context, you will attract negative results. Being I am in a positive
sense, attracts positive results.
"The truth". The truth of this whole statement. That being I am is the
way.
"The life". Being I am is the way to the life you desire.
"Noone comes to the Father except through me." By being I am, you
attain union with the creative force in the universe (The Father). You
are the creative force (comes to the Father).
Have fun :o)

Flight of Ideas – A sequence of loose associations or extreme
tangentiality where the speaker goes quickly from one idea to another
seemingly unrelated idea.
Illogicality – Conclusions are reached that do not follow logically
(non-sequiturs or faulty inferences)
Word salad – Speech that is unintelligible because, though the
individual words are real words, the manner in which they are strung
together results in incoherent gibberish

[Tom]

Post by Tom
Flight

X-Authenticated-User: $$gwb280vy_w$wjxejkkrbzdfgdf
X-Complaints-To: ***@x-privat.org

[Sidney Lambe]

On talk.religion.course-miracle, Kaydon

Post by Kaydon
Here's another piece for you all to discuss. It's another take
on magic and manifestation <3
"I am the way, the truth and the life. Noone comes to the
Father except through me."
"I am" is a form of the verb "To Be". Be the I AM. Be what you
want to become. Act it out. Be the vibrational match for what
you want. I think therefore I am. I am therefore I have.
"The way". Being I am is the way. If you are being I am in a
negative context, you will attract negative results. Being I am
in a positive sense, attracts positive results.
"The truth". The truth of this whole statement. That being I am
is the way.
"The life". Being I am is the way to the life you desire.
"Noone comes to the Father except through me." By being I am,
you attain union with the creative force in the universe (The
Father). You are the creative force (comes to the Father).
Have fun :o)

You are certainly on the right track here. The Christians (which
includes ACIM) horribly distorted the teachings of Jesus to suit
themselves.

What Jesus was saying there, was that he brought people the
Truth about the nature of reality, and that there was no way to
happiness unless you heeded this Truth.

[Tom]

Post by Sidney Lambe
You are certainly on the right track here.

That's X-Authenticated-User: $$i1x1l_eugnb9cl$bayv

It seems someone doesn't like his real x-privat User ID posted. It's
certainly gotten a reaction. Anybody who wants to know who a post is
actually from should check the original headers.

[Angelique Bouchard]

Post by Sidney Lambe
On talk.religion.course-miracle, Kaydon

Post by Kaydon
Here's another piece for you all to discuss. It's another take
on magic and manifestation <3
"I am the way, the truth and the life. Noone comes to the
Father except through me."
"I am" is a form of the verb "To Be". Be the I AM. Be what you
want to become. Act it out. Be the vibrational match for what
you want. I think therefore I am. I am therefore I have.
"The way". Being I am is the way. If you are being I am in a
negative context, you will attract negative results. Being I am
in a positive sense, attracts positive results.
"The truth". The truth of this whole statement. That being I am
is the way.
"The life". Being I am is the way to the life you desire.
"Noone comes to the Father except through me." By being I am,
you attain union with the creative force in the universe (The
Father). You are the creative force (comes to the Father).
Have fun :o)

You are certainly on the right track here. The Christians (which
includes ACIM) horribly distorted the teachings of Jesus to suit
themselves.<

Not all do and it really depends on which Jesus you see or believe is
truth. The Jesus you talk about is the one that suits your own self,
as well.

Post by Sidney Lambe
What Jesus was saying there, was that he brought people the
Truth about the nature of reality, and that there was no way to
happiness unless you heeded this Truth.<

Or there is no way to the Father, except through him. Guess time will
tell, but as Zayton pointed out in another post, there are finding
more and more in archaeological digs, events and proof that matches
with the Bible.
It is very hard at this point, to deny much of it's truths.

[Sidney Lambe]

Post by Angelique Bouchard

Post by Sidney Lambe
On talk.religion.course-miracle, Kaydon

Post by Kaydon
Here's another piece for you all to discuss. It's another take
on magic and manifestation <3
"I am the way, the truth and the life. Noone comes to the
Father except through me."
"I am" is a form of the verb "To Be". Be the I AM. Be what you
want to become. Act it out. Be the vibrational match for what
you want. I think therefore I am. I am therefore I have.
"The way". Being I am is the way. If you are being I am in a
negative context, you will attract negative results. Being I am
in a positive sense, attracts positive results.
"The truth". The truth of this whole statement. That being I am
is the way.
"The life". Being I am is the way to the life you desire.
"Noone comes to the Father except through me." By being I am,
you attain union with the creative force in the universe (The
Father). You are the creative force (comes to the Father).
Have fun :o)

You are certainly on the right track here. The Christians (which
includes ACIM) horribly distorted the teachings of Jesus to suit
themselves.<

Not all do and it really depends on which Jesus you see or believe is
truth. The Jesus you talk about is the one that suits your own self,
as well.

Post by Sidney Lambe
What Jesus was saying there, was that he brought people the
Truth about the nature of reality, and that there was no way to
happiness unless you heeded this Truth.<

Or there is no way to the Father, except through him.

That doesn't seem likely. Because he says in Mattew that
the Kingdom of God is within us.

See? The Bible is a confusing document!

Post by Angelique Bouchard
Guess time will tell, but as Zayton pointed out in another
post, there are finding more and more in archaeological digs,
events and proof that matches with the Bible. It is very hard
at this point, to deny much of it's truths.

The Bible does contain many Truths. It also contains many
falsehoods.

The basic precepts of mainstream Christianity are destructively
erroneouss. They are fiction.

[Dennes De Mennes]

Post by Sidney Lambe

Post by Angelique Bouchard
Or there is no way to the Father, except through him.

That doesn't seem likely. Because he says in Mattew that
the Kingdom of God is within us.
See? The Bible is a confusing document!

it only becomes confusing if you think of jesus as a real human being.
when you consider it's just a metaphor for our fallen state and that in
the exact measure you bring the flesh or earthly desires under control
(or crucify the flesh), rather than letting them dominate you, then
you're sort of transcending matter and entering into spirituality...
there's no confusion as this is all internal...

octinomos

[Sidney Lambe]

On alt.religion.wicca, Dennes De Mennes

Post by Dennes De Mennes

Post by Angelique Bouchard
Or there is no way to the Father, except through him.

That doesn't seem likely. Because he says in Mattew that the
Kingdom of God is within us.
See? The Bible is a confusing document!

it only becomes confusing if you think of jesus as a real
human being.

I think of him that way because he was a real human being.

Post by Dennes De Mennes
when you consider it's just a metaphor for our fallen state

That's a Christian concept and is nonsense.

Our existence is Blessed. We haven't "fallen" anywhere.
We have just taken a side-trip into a fascinating dimension
of activity. For very good, didactic reasons.

Post by Dennes De Mennes
and that in the exact measure you bring the flesh
or earthly desires under control (or crucify the flesh),
rather than letting them dominate you, then you're sort of
transcending matter and entering into spirituality... there's
no confusion as this is all internal...
octinomos

Once again, you have bought a bunch of superstitious crapola.
Those are poisonous Christian concepts.

The Truth is that the body is the soul in chemical clothes.
The spirit becomes flesh. Energy changes form.

The Teachings of Jesus and Christianity are two very, very
different things.

Which version of Christianity are you addicted to? The
misnamed "Course in Miracles"?

[Dennes De Mennes]

Post by Sidney Lambe
On alt.religion.wicca, Dennes De Mennes

Post by Dennes De Mennes

Post by Angelique Bouchard
Or there is no way to the Father, except through him.

That doesn't seem likely. Because he says in Mattew that the
Kingdom of God is within us.
See? The Bible is a confusing document!

it only becomes confusing if you think of jesus as a real
human being.

I think of him that way because he was a real human being.

Post by Dennes De Mennes
when you consider it's just a metaphor for our fallen state

That's a Christian concept and is nonsense.

zoharic, actually.

Post by Sidney Lambe
Our existence is Blessed. We haven't "fallen" anywhere.

it's a metaphor to explain the spirit's descent into matter. you can't
imagine that pure spirit has all the bullshit that's inherent in matter,
do you? no... that's just all caused by our ignorant fallen state,
separated from the light.

Post by Sidney Lambe
We have just taken a side-trip into a fascinating dimension
of activity. For very good, didactic reasons.

fascinatingly stupid.

Post by Sidney Lambe

Post by Dennes De Mennes
and that in the exact measure you bring the flesh
or earthly desires under control (or crucify the flesh),
rather than letting them dominate you, then you're sort of
transcending matter and entering into spirituality... there's
no confusion as this is all internal...
octinomos

Once again, you have bought a bunch of superstitious crapola.
Those are poisonous Christian concepts.

i mean, don't throw the baby out with the bath water...

Post by Sidney Lambe
The Truth is that the body is the soul in chemical clothes.
The spirit becomes flesh. Energy changes form.

then why does it act all stupid.

Post by Sidney Lambe
The Teachings of Jesus and Christianity are two very, very
different things.
Which version of Christianity are you addicted to? The
misnamed "Course in Miracles"?

i follow magick, or the laws of nature.

octinomos

[Sidney Lambe]

On alt.religion.wicca, Dennes De Mennes

Post by Dennes De Mennes

Post by Sidney Lambe
On alt.religion.wicca, Dennes De Mennes

Post by Dennes De Mennes

Post by Sidney Lambe

Post by Angelique Bouchard
Or there is no way to the Father, except through him.

That doesn't seem likely. Because he says in Mattew that
the Kingdom of God is within us.
See? The Bible is a confusing document!

it only becomes confusing if you think of jesus as a real
human being.

I think of him that way because he was a real human being.

Post by Dennes De Mennes
when you consider it's just a metaphor for our fallen state

That's a Christian concept and is nonsense.

zoharic, actually.

It's Christian. I don't care what else it is.

Post by Dennes De Mennes

Post by Sidney Lambe
Our existence is Blessed. We haven't "fallen" anywhere.

it's a metaphor to explain the spirit's descent into matter.

The sirit does not "descend" into anything.

Post by Dennes De Mennes
you can't imagine that pure spirit has all the bullshit that's
inherent in matter, do you?

Yes. The body and world are the soul in flesh.

It's only "bullshit" to you because your mind is polluted
with poisonous Christian concepts.

[delete]

[Dennes De Mennes]

Post by Sidney Lambe

Post by Dennes De Mennes

Post by Sidney Lambe
Our existence is Blessed. We haven't "fallen" anywhere.

there's nothing blessed about it. our bodies are rotting away and
probably our minds as well with all the constant bullshit being thrown
at us...

Post by Sidney Lambe

Post by Dennes De Mennes
it's a metaphor to explain the spirit's descent into matter.

The sirit does not "descend" into anything.

if it didn't descend then it cannot ascend, and that's sad if you think
this state is it, and this is as good as humanity can become...

Post by Sidney Lambe

Post by Dennes De Mennes
you can't imagine that pure spirit has all the bullshit that's
inherent in matter, do you?

Yes. The body and world are the soul in flesh.
It's only "bullshit" to you because your mind is polluted
with poisonous Christian concepts.

chrisanity stole them from pagan sources...

octinomos

[Sidney Lambe]

Post by Dennes De Mennes

Post by Sidney Lambe

Post by Dennes De Mennes

Post by Sidney Lambe
Our existence is Blessed. We haven't "fallen" anywhere.

there's nothing blessed about it. our bodies are rotting away and
probably our minds as well with all the constant bullshit being thrown
at us...

Post by Sidney Lambe

Post by Dennes De Mennes
it's a metaphor to explain the spirit's descent into matter.

The sirit does not "descend" into anything.

if it didn't descend then it cannot ascend, and that's sad if you think
this state is it, and this is as good as humanity can become...

Post by Sidney Lambe

Post by Dennes De Mennes
you can't imagine that pure spirit has all the bullshit that's
inherent in matter, do you?

Yes. The body and world are the soul in flesh.
It's only "bullshit" to you because your mind is polluted
with poisonous Christian concepts.

chrisanity stole them from pagan sources...
octinomos

For some, it is pretending to work with 'supernatural' beings.

Some of them believe their own bullshit.

Show me someone who thinks magick is enticing some alleged
supernatural being into making things happen for you, and
I'll show you someone who thinks that carpentry is hiring
a general contractor.

I'm kind of disappointed here, octi. You've been gone for
a while and I was hoping you were actually learning something
worthwhile. Other than scratching your testicles raw.

[Dennes De Mennes]

In article <***@news.x-privat.org>, ***@alt.religion.wicca
says...

Post by Sidney Lambe
Show me someone who thinks magick is enticing some alleged
supernatural being into making things happen for you, and
I'll show you someone who thinks that carpentry is hiring
a general contractor.

i see it more like they are blind forces in nature that you can either
grasp and therefore get a deeper understanding of reality, or you can
ignore and it won't make a difference insofar as what the force will
do... only your understanding of the event will be different.

Post by Sidney Lambe
I'm kind of disappointed here, octi. You've been gone for
a while and I was hoping you were actually learning something
worthwhile. Other than scratching your testicles raw.

you make it sound like you missed me...

octinomos

[Sidney Lambe]

Post by Dennes De Mennes
says...

Post by Sidney Lambe
Show me someone who thinks magick is enticing some alleged
supernatural being into making things happen for you, and
I'll show you someone who thinks that carpentry is hiring
a general contractor.

i see it more like they are blind forces in nature that you can either
grasp and therefore get a deeper understanding of reality, or you can
ignore and it won't make a difference insofar as what the force will
do... only your understanding of the event will be different.

Post by Sidney Lambe
I'm kind of disappointed here, octi. You've been gone for
a while and I was hoping you were actually learning something
worthwhile. Other than scratching your testicles raw.

you make it sound like you missed me...
octinomos

I can't imagine anything drearier than a bunch of clueless
wannabe magicians parroting the psuedo-esoteric drivel that's
called 'magick' on the Web.

But I like you, regardless. And I like kids. Regardless. And
tawny pussy. Regardless.

You aren't actually clueless. If you were, you wouldn't
be here. You'd be scratching *MY* balls.

One step at a time. Easy does it. There's no hurry. We
have eternity.

Love,

Sid

[Angelique Bouchard]

Post by Sidney Lambe

Post by Angelique Bouchard

Post by Sidney Lambe
On talk.religion.course-miracle, Kaydon

Post by Kaydon
Here's another piece for you all to discuss. It's another take
on magic and manifestation <3
"I am the way, the truth and the life. Noone comes to the
Father except through me."
"I am" is a form of the verb "To Be". Be the I AM. Be what you
want to become. Act it out. Be the vibrational match for what
you want. I think therefore I am. I am therefore I have.
"The way". Being I am is the way. If you are being I am in a
negative context, you will attract negative results. Being I am
in a positive sense, attracts positive results.
"The truth". The truth of this whole statement. That being I am
is the way.
"The life". Being I am is the way to the life you desire.
"Noone comes to the Father except through me." By being I am,
you attain union with the creative force in the universe (The
Father). You are the creative force (comes to the Father).
Have fun :o)

You are certainly on the right track here. The Christians (which
includes ACIM) horribly distorted the teachings of Jesus to suit
themselves.<

Not all do and it really depends on which Jesus you see or believe is
truth. The Jesus you talk about is the one that suits your own self,
as well.

Post by Sidney Lambe
What Jesus was saying there, was that he brought people the
Truth about the nature of reality, and that there was no way to
happiness unless you heeded this Truth.<

Or there is no way to the Father, except through him.

That doesn't seem likely. Because he says in Mattew that
the Kingdom of God is within us.
See? The Bible is a confusing document!<

Depends on which language you speak and comprehend. It is confusing
and even hypocritical in some areas when you try to translate it and
define words by the English language. The word "Love" to us is far
different then the Greek original translation from "Agape". Translated
to English and through time where the word 'love' to us because soft,
romanticized and defines a number of emotions, it became easier to
insult and deny God/Jesus because he also has a harsh side to him.

Post by Sidney Lambe

Post by Angelique Bouchard
Guess time will tell, but as Zayton pointed out in another
post, there are finding more and more in archaeological digs,
events and proof that matches with the Bible. It is very hard
at this point, to deny much of it's truths.

The Bible does contain many Truths. It also contains many
falsehoods.<

I think my opinion is explained above, but also, people here or who
are Pagan, love to talk about visions/dreams and how they play a key
role in their belief but then deny the Bible of having merit because
some passages were dreams and visions. Odd. There is as much magic(k),
healing and miracles in the Bible but they were done by chosen people.
Selective fews, worthy of it. Though if you study the Gifts of the
Holy Spirit, you will find they account for those of us who do not
need tools. Those who have gifts without having to think about it,
without having to "divine" them, make poppets or use the moon and
seasons.

Post by Sidney Lambe
The basic precepts of mainstream Christianity are destructively  
erroneouss. They are fiction.   <

No more so then the beliefs of people who choose pagan gods,
demonology or energy that surrounds the earth to practice by. The only
difference is that, the Bible gives rules, ethics and moral. It states
there is the one God and the Messiah. It (He) gives you a choice.
Believe in the Holy Trinity or you don't get to Heaven. So, big deal.
What is the problem? Why are you and others so threatened by it? I see
more insults towards Christians from Pagans then I do the other way
around. Christians are simply following their rules. To deny people
who do not worship the God they believe in. The fear it translates to
for pagans, witches, wiccans, Alchemists etc can only be scene as that
there is enough evidence that it worries you enough to fight it back.
It should, I knew it my shiniest days as a pagan when all by me felt
at peace there was a threat of it being real. I never denied there was
a God or Jesus,

The fact as pagans remains the same. Pagan Gods and Goddess's really
do not give a crap what you do with your lives or what becomes of you
after. If they don't like you out of the blue, they turn their back on
you. They are not bound to Humans. They use humans. The trade off is
you are not bound to the Gods either. No set of rules to follow and
gosh, humans are so darn compassionate and non violent when left to
themselves..Not a hint of self centeredness..Bah.. Arrogance and
stubbornness.

You believe if you say it enough, fight it enough it won't be true. If
enough people think the same as pagans, even truer. You are afraid of
Hell, afraid of the "proof" , so, you shoot it down in huge numbers.
Fine. Your choice.                                

Post by Sidney Lambe
--
Sidney Lambe / Evergreen - usenet4444 (AT) gmail (DOT) com
Solitaire Wiccan Priest - Spellsinger Wiccahttp://tinyurl.com/63zc9bh-http://tinyurl.com/7vs9zb
All will be well. All manner of things will be well.- Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -

[Bassos]

Post by Angelique Bouchard

Post by Sidney Lambe
See? The Bible is a confusing document!<

Depends on which language you speak and comprehend. It is confusing
and even hypocritical in some areas when you try to translate it and
define words by the English language. The word "Love" to us is far
different then the Greek original translation from "Agape".

The 'original' 'translation' of the greek ?
Septuagint ?
You do know that the bible is written in hebrew (OT) and aramaic (NT) ,
right ?

You stupid woman.

[Angelique Bouchard]

Post by Bassos

Post by Angelique Bouchard

Post by Sidney Lambe
See? The Bible is a confusing document!<

Depends on which language you speak and comprehend. It is confusing
and even hypocritical in some areas when you try to translate it and
define words by the English language. The word "Love" to us is far
different then the Greek original translation from "Agape".

The 'original' 'translation' of the greek ?
Septuagint ?
You do know that the bible is written in hebrew (OT) and aramaic (NT) ,
right ?
You stupid woman.

Yes, I do know that, however, the first translations for English
mainly came from the Greek translation versions.

[Bassos]

Post by Angelique Bouchard

Post by Bassos

Post by Angelique Bouchard

Post by Sidney Lambe
See? The Bible is a confusing document!<

Depends on which language you speak and comprehend. It is confusing
and even hypocritical in some areas when you try to translate it and
define words by the English language. The word "Love" to us is far
different then the Greek original translation from "Agape".

The 'original' 'translation' of the greek ?
Septuagint ?
You do know that the bible is written in hebrew (OT) and aramaic (NT) ,
right ?
You stupid woman.

Yes, I do know that, however, the first translations for English
mainly came from the Greek translation versions.

Nah, that is why i referenced the Latin one.

Hebrew/Aramaic->greek->latin->english.

[zayton]

Post by Bassos

Post by Angelique Bouchard

Post by Bassos

Post by Angelique Bouchard

Post by Sidney Lambe
See? The Bible is a confusing document!<

Depends on which language you speak and comprehend. It is confusing
and even hypocritical in some areas when you try to translate it
and define words by the English language. The word "Love" to us is
far different then the Greek original translation from "Agape".

The 'original' 'translation' of the greek ?
Septuagint ?
You do know that the bible is written in hebrew (OT) and aramaic
(NT) , right ?
You stupid woman.

Yes, I do know that, however, the first translations for English
mainly came from the Greek translation versions.

Nah, that is why i referenced the Latin one.
Hebrew/Aramaic->greek->latin->english.

There are few examples of written Aramaic from the first century AD;
None of the New Testament was written in Aramaic.

[Bassos]

Post by zayton

Post by Bassos

Post by Angelique Bouchard

Post by Bassos

Post by Angelique Bouchard

Post by Sidney Lambe
See? The Bible is a confusing document!<

Depends on which language you speak and comprehend. It is confusing
and even hypocritical in some areas when you try to translate it
and define words by the English language. The word "Love" to us is
far different then the Greek original translation from "Agape".

The 'original' 'translation' of the greek ?
Septuagint ?
You do know that the bible is written in hebrew (OT) and aramaic
(NT) , right ?
You stupid woman.

Yes, I do know that, however, the first translations for English
mainly came from the Greek translation versions.

Nah, that is why i referenced the Latin one.
Hebrew/Aramaic->greek->latin->english.

There are few examples of written Aramaic from the first century AD;
None of the New Testament was written in Aramaic.

So now Jesus was Greek ?
Or is this your claim that the New Testament has nothing to do with Jesus ?

[zayton]

Post by Bassos

Post by zayton

Post by Bassos

Post by Angelique Bouchard

Post by Bassos

Post by Angelique Bouchard

Post by Sidney Lambe
See? The Bible is a confusing document!<

Depends on which language you speak and comprehend. It is
confusing and even hypocritical in some areas when you try to
translate it and define words by the English language. The word
"Love" to us is far different then the Greek original
translation from "Agape".

The 'original' 'translation' of the greek ?
Septuagint ?
You do know that the bible is written in hebrew (OT) and aramaic
(NT) , right ?
You stupid woman.

Yes, I do know that, however, the first translations for English
mainly came from the Greek translation versions.

Nah, that is why i referenced the Latin one.
Hebrew/Aramaic->greek->latin->english.

There are few examples of written Aramaic from the first century AD;
None of the New Testament was written in Aramaic.

So now Jesus was Greek ?

Jesus would have spoken Aramaic, but Greek was still the written language
taught throughout the Roman Empire in the first century.

Post by Bassos
Or is this your claim that the New Testament has nothing to do with Jesus ?

[Tom]

Post by zayton
Jesus would have spoken Aramaic, but Greek was still the written language
taught throughout the Roman Empire in the first century.

[Sidney Lambe]

A bunch more bitchy stuff that she has been posting for years in
her feeble attempts to drive me away.

Good thing for me that the woo-woo she calls "magick" couldn't
make water wet.

[delete]

Do like my new bitch filter? It allows me to call up a reply with the
body deleted.

[zayton]

Post by Bassos

Post by Angelique Bouchard

Post by Sidney Lambe
See? The Bible is a confusing document!<

Depends on which language you speak and comprehend. It is confusing
and even hypocritical in some areas when you try to translate it and
define words by the English language. The word "Love" to us is far
different then the Greek original translation from "Agape".

The 'original' 'translation' of the greek ?
Septuagint ?
You do know that the bible is written in hebrew (OT) and aramaic (NT)
, right ?
You stupid woman.

U,.... no.
The OT was written in Hebrew; but only a few aramaic words appear in the NT,
It was sritten in Greek.

[Sidney Lambe]

On Jun 14, 11:59=A0pm, Sidney Lambe

On talk.religion.course-miracle, Angelique Bouchard

On Jun 14, 10:52=3DA0am, Sidney Lambe

Post by Sidney Lambe
On talk.religion.course-miracle, Kaydon

Post by Kaydon
Here's another piece for you all to discuss. It's another
take on magic and manifestation <3
"I am the way, the truth and the life. Noone comes to the
Father except through me."
"I am" is a form of the verb "To Be". Be the I AM. Be
what you want to become. Act it out. Be the vibrational
match for what you want. I think therefore I am. I am
therefore I have.
"The way". Being I am is the way. If you are being I am
in a negative context, you will attract negative results.
Being I am in a positive sense, attracts positive
results.
"The truth". The truth of this whole statement. That
being I am is the way.
"The life". Being I am is the way to the life you desire.
"Noone comes to the Father except through me." By being
I am, you attain union with the creative force in the
universe (The Father). You are the creative force (comes
to the Father).
Have fun :o)

You are certainly on the right track here. The Christians
(which includes ACIM) horribly distorted the teachings of
Jesus to suit themselves.<

Not all do and it really depends on which Jesus you see or
believe is truth. The Jesus you talk about is the one that
suits your own self, as well.

Post by Sidney Lambe
What Jesus was saying there, was that he brought people the
Truth about the nature of reality, and that there was no
way to happiness unless you heeded this Truth.<

Or there is no way to the Father, except through him.

That doesn't seem likely. Because he says in Mattew that the
Kingdom of God is within us.
See? The Bible is a confusing document!<

Depends on which language you speak and comprehend.

You are so full of shit that it is coming out your mouth.

There are over 30,000+ offcially-recognized demoninations of
Christianity in the world today. And who knows how many
sects, orders, and cults?

Many of those organizations have highly-qualified scholars that
are experts in the languages involved. Duh.

And still, Christianity is a tower of babel full of arrogant and
stupid people like you who think they are the only one who can
properly interpret the original Biblical documents.

Many of those "denominations" are, in practical terms, not even
the same religions.

Shove your creepy religion. It stinks, and Harry Potter is
much more metaphysically accurate than it is.

[delete]

[David Dalton]

Post by Sidney Lambe

Post by Angelique Bouchard

Post by Sidney Lambe
See? The Bible is a confusing document!<

Depends on which language you speak and comprehend.

You are so full of shit that it is coming out your mouth.
There are over 30,000+ offcially-recognized demoninations of
Christianity in the world today. And who knows how many
sects, orders, and cults?
Many of those organizations have highly-qualified scholars that
are experts in the languages involved. Duh.
And still, Christianity is a tower of babel full of arrogant and
stupid people like you who think they are the only one who can
properly interpret the original Biblical documents.
Many of those "denominations" are, in practical terms, not even
the same religions.
Shove your creepy religion. It stinks, and Harry Potter is
much more metaphysically accurate than it is.

I have performed a perineum click divination that the four post-judged
collaborative components are on so for now I'm just hoping that the
four post-judged collaborative components will have a gradual and
subtle effect.

I am hoping that they will be able to split Ron and Hermione into anal
enemies.

DD

[Draco Malfoy]

Post by David Dalton

Post by Sidney Lambe

Post by Angelique Bouchard

Post by Sidney Lambe
See? The Bible is a confusing document!<

Depends on which language you speak and comprehend.

You are so full of shit that it is coming out your mouth.
There are over 30,000+ offcially-recognized demoninations of
Christianity in the world today. And who knows how many
sects, orders, and cults?
Many of those organizations have highly-qualified scholars that
are experts in the languages involved. Duh.
And still, Christianity is a tower of babel full of arrogant and
stupid people like you who think they are the only one who can
properly interpret the original Biblical documents.
Many of those "denominations" are, in practical terms, not even
the same religions.
Shove your creepy religion. It stinks, and Harry Potter is
much more metaphysically accurate than it is.

I have performed a perineum click divination that the four post-judged
collaborative components are on so for now I'm just hoping that the
four post-judged collaborative components will have a gradual and
subtle effect.
I am hoping that they will be able to split Ron and Hermione into anal
enemies.
DD

What is it with you creepos? Is it some weird form of pedophilic
perversion that requires you to shoe up on AFH-P every mid week?

[VD]

Post by Sidney Lambe
There are over 30,000+ offcially-recognized demoninations of
Christianity in the world today. And who knows how many
sects, orders, and cults?
Many of those organizations have highly-qualified scholars that
are experts in the languages involved. Duh.
And still, Christianity is a tower of babel full of arrogant and
stupid people like you who think they are the only one who can
properly interpret the original Biblical documents.
Many of those "denominations" are, in practical terms, not even
the same religions.
Shove your creepy religion. It stinks, and Harry Potter is
much more metaphysically accurate than it is.

Mr. Lambe, I see that you haven't lost your expertise in overly
expressed irrationality and inaccuracy compelled by ignorance ;>)

I have invited you several times to shoot over to alt.fan.harry-potter
and discuss this very subject. Instead, you feel demonically required
to crosspost your opinions without ever debating them. Sadly, I
confess, I bite once again.

Ms. Rowling has made it abundantly clear that the HP series was in
fact a compelling case of exposing the concepts and beliefs of
Christianity, at least her and her compatriots version of it. Here are
two links of facts from ms. Rowling and following discussions that
will educate you on this matter.

Proof Harry Is Rowling's "Jesus"

http://preview.tinyurl.com/3f6gx3j

Rowling On Oprah Re: Belief Systems" by VD

http://preview.tinyurl.com/3bft8ry

You will note that there exists a significant, conspiratorial effort
by Ms. Rowling to advance her/HP Christian fundamentals

BeauSeigneurs - Christian Collaborators Exposed? and

What Did The Christian Community and J.K.Rowling Get From The
Conspiracy To Link Harry Potter To Jesus?

I would also point you to...

http://preview.tinyurl.com/4y7rljf

...an excellent observation by our own Mr. Malfoy which highligts the
anti-Jewish sentiments of Ms. Rowling that juxtaposes her
pro-Christian theme in HP.

Conclusion? It is impossible for Harry Potter to be "much more
metaphysically accurate than Christianity" for obvious reasons.

[unknown]

Post by VD

Post by Sidney Lambe
There are over 30,000+ offcially-recognized demoninations of
Christianity in the world today. And who knows how many
sects, orders, and cults?
Many of those organizations have highly-qualified scholars that
are experts in the languages involved. Duh.
And still, Christianity is a tower of babel full of arrogant and
stupid people like you who think they are the only one who can
properly interpret the original Biblical documents.
Many of those "denominations" are, in practical terms, not even
the same religions.
Shove your creepy religion. It stinks, and Harry Potter is
much more metaphysically accurate than it is.

Mr. Lambe, I see that you haven't lost your expertise in overly
expressed irrationality and inaccuracy compelled by ignorance ;>)
I have invited you several times to shoot over to alt.fan.harry-potter
and discuss this very subject. Instead, you feel demonically required
to crosspost your opinions without ever debating them. Sadly, I
confess, I bite once again.
Ms. Rowling has made it abundantly clear that the HP series was in
fact a compelling case of exposing the concepts and beliefs of
Christianity, at least her and her compatriots version of it. Here are
two links of facts from ms. Rowling and following discussions that
will educate you on this matter.
Proof Harry Is Rowling's "Jesus"
http://preview.tinyurl.com/3f6gx3j
Rowling On Oprah Re: Belief Systems" by VD
http://preview.tinyurl.com/3bft8ry
You will note that there exists a significant, conspiratorial effort
by Ms. Rowling to advance her/HP Christian fundamentals
BeauSeigneurs - Christian Collaborators Exposed? and
What Did The Christian Community and J.K.Rowling Get From The
Conspiracy To Link Harry Potter To Jesus?
I would also point you to...
http://preview.tinyurl.com/4y7rljf
...an excellent observation by our own Mr. Malfoy which highligts the
anti-Jewish sentiments of Ms. Rowling that juxtaposes her
pro-Christian theme in HP.
Conclusion? It is impossible for Harry Potter to be "much more
metaphysically accurate than Christianity" for obvious reasons.

Rowling places her work in a clearly Christian _cultural_ framework,
and all of the above are, in my view, cultural references, just as
the images of her characters celebrating both Christmas and Easter
(in both cases, by the way, emphasizing the old pagan elements of the
modern holidays while having nothing clearly Christian [with the
possible exception of the Christmas carols sung by the armor suits at
Hogwarts]). As pointed out elsewhere, some people believing in
witchcraft have seen the Potter books as showing their culture and
their traditions very, very well indeed.

[Ian Anderson]

Post by unknown

Post by VD

Post by Sidney Lambe
There are over 30,000+ offcially-recognized demoninations of
Christianity in the world today. And who knows how many
sects, orders, and cults?
Many of those organizations have highly-qualified scholars that
are experts in the languages involved. Duh.
And still, Christianity is a tower of babel full of arrogant and
stupid people like you who think they are the only one who can
properly interpret the original Biblical documents.
Many of those "denominations" are, in practical terms, not even
the same religions.
Shove your creepy religion. It stinks, and Harry Potter is
much more metaphysically accurate than it is.

Mr. Lambe, I see that you haven't lost your expertise in overly
expressed irrationality and inaccuracy compelled by ignorance ;>)
I have invited you several times to shoot over to alt.fan.harry-potter
and discuss this very subject. Instead, you feel demonically required
to crosspost your opinions without ever debating them. Sadly, I
confess, I bite once again.
Ms. Rowling has made it abundantly clear that the HP series was in
fact a compelling case of exposing the concepts and beliefs of
Christianity, at least her and her compatriots version of it. Here are
two links of facts from ms. Rowling and following discussions that
will educate you on this matter.
Proof Harry Is Rowling's "Jesus"
http://preview.tinyurl.com/3f6gx3j
Rowling On Oprah Re: Belief Systems" by VD
http://preview.tinyurl.com/3bft8ry
You will note that there exists a significant, conspiratorial effort
by Ms. Rowling to advance her/HP Christian fundamentals
BeauSeigneurs - Christian Collaborators Exposed? and
What Did The Christian Community and J.K.Rowling Get From The
Conspiracy To Link Harry Potter To Jesus?
I would also point you to...
http://preview.tinyurl.com/4y7rljf
...an excellent observation by our own Mr. Malfoy which highligts the
anti-Jewish sentiments of Ms. Rowling that juxtaposes her
pro-Christian theme in HP.
Conclusion? It is impossible for Harry Potter to be "much more
metaphysically accurate than Christianity" for obvious reasons.

Rowling places her work in a clearly Christian _cultural_ framework,
and all of the above are, in my view, cultural references, just as
the images of her characters celebrating both Christmas and Easter
(in both cases, by the way, emphasizing the old pagan elements of the
modern holidays while having nothing clearly Christian [with the
possible exception of the Christmas carols sung by the armor suits at
Hogwarts]). As pointed out elsewhere, some people believing in
witchcraft have seen the Potter books as showing their culture and
their traditions very, very well indeed.

But Harry Potter is also about the fight of Good against Evil, and
about the fact that power corrupts, and that sometimes people have to
make sacrifices to be able to save others.

I have not read the HP books often enough to be able to draw a clear
parallel to Christian ideas, but I wouldn't rule out that some
closer inspection would find the one thing or the other.

Maybe I should do a re-reading :-) especially since Rowling has opened
her kimono re: her Christian underbelly.

[VD]

Post by Ian Anderson

Post by unknown

Post by VD

Post by Sidney Lambe
There are over 30,000+ offcially-recognized demoninations of
Christianity in the world today. And who knows how many
sects, orders, and cults?
Many of those organizations have highly-qualified scholars that
are experts in the languages involved. Duh.
And still, Christianity is a tower of babel full of arrogant and
stupid people like you who think they are the only one who can
properly interpret the original Biblical documents.
Many of those "denominations" are, in practical terms, not even
the same religions.
Shove your creepy religion. It stinks, and Harry Potter is
much more metaphysically accurate than it is.

Mr. Lambe, I see that you haven't lost your expertise in overly
expressed irrationality and inaccuracy compelled by ignorance ;>)
I have invited you several times to shoot over to alt.fan.harry-potter
and discuss this very subject. Instead, you feel demonically required
to crosspost your opinions without ever debating them. Sadly, I
confess, I bite once again.
Ms. Rowling has made it abundantly clear that the HP series was in
fact a compelling case of exposing the concepts and beliefs of
Christianity, at least her and her compatriots version of it. Here are
two links of facts from ms. Rowling and following discussions that
will educate you on this matter.
Proof Harry Is Rowling's "Jesus"
http://preview.tinyurl.com/3f6gx3j
Rowling On Oprah Re: Belief Systems" by VD
http://preview.tinyurl.com/3bft8ry
You will note that there exists a significant, conspiratorial effort
by Ms. Rowling to advance her/HP Christian fundamentals
BeauSeigneurs - Christian Collaborators Exposed? and
What Did The Christian Community and J.K.Rowling Get From The
Conspiracy To Link Harry Potter To Jesus?
I would also point you to...
http://preview.tinyurl.com/4y7rljf
...an excellent observation by our own Mr. Malfoy which highligts the
anti-Jewish sentiments of Ms. Rowling that juxtaposes her
pro-Christian theme in HP.
Conclusion? It is impossible for Harry Potter to be "much more
metaphysically accurate than Christianity" for obvious reasons.

Rowling places her work in a clearly Christian _cultural_ framework,
and all of the above are, in my view, cultural references, just as
the images of her characters celebrating both Christmas and Easter
(in both cases, by the way, emphasizing the old pagan elements of the
modern holidays while having nothing clearly Christian [with the
possible exception of the Christmas carols sung by the armor suits at
Hogwarts]). As pointed out elsewhere, some people believing in
witchcraft have seen the Potter books as showing their culture and
their traditions very, very well indeed.

But Harry Potter is also about the fight of Good against Evil, and
about the fact that power corrupts, and that sometimes people have to
make sacrifices to be able to save others.
I have not read the HP books often enough to be able to draw a clear
parallel to Christian ideas, but I wouldn't rule out that some
closer inspection would find the one thing or the other.
Maybe I should do a re-reading :-) especially since Rowling has opened
her kimono re: her Christian underbelly.

Ms. Rowling takes _modern_ misconceptions of magic and witchcraft, the
comic book view of it, and integrates that into a Christian world. No
one in the medieval world could have made any sense of Casper the
friendly ghost, but Rowling peoples Hogwarts castle with such
characters, and therein lies the fantasy.

By doing so, she slides her "Christian underbelly" with no real
transparency other than mixing it with the majickal soup.

This leaves Wiccan weirdos like Mr. Sidney Lambe, AP (Admitted
Pedophile) with nothing except the outlandish imaginations of what
Harry Potter is about. ;)

[Draco Malfoy]

Post by VD
Ms. Rowling takes _modern_ misconceptions of magic and witchcraft, the
comic book view of it, and integrates that into a Christian world. No
one in the medieval world could have made any sense of Casper the
friendly ghost, but Rowling peoples Hogwarts castle with such
characters, and therein lies the fantasy.
By doing so, she slides her "Christian underbelly" with no real
transparency other than mixing it with the majickal soup.

Ala Nicholas Flamel who really existed. He was a French alchemist who
allegedly succeeded in making the Philosopher’s Stone in the late
1300s.

According to historical documents and occult tradition, Flamel learned
how to make the Philosopher’s Stone through the esoteric Book of
Abraham the Jew. This text, supposedly written by the Jewish
Patriarch, contained various directions in hieroglyphic form.

Flamel and his Sorcerer’s Stone are only two examples of how Rowling
mixes reality with fantasy in her series. Book I also refers to
Paracelsus, Waffling, author of Magical Theory, which is included on
Harry’s list of required reading. Archbishop Adalbert of Magdeburg
(eighth century).

Unfogging the Future by a Cassandra Vablatsky. Could Vablatsky be an
anagram for Blavatsky? Doe woodchuckers chuck wood?

[VD]

Post by Draco Malfoy

Post by VD
Ms. Rowling takes _modern_ misconceptions of magic and witchcraft, the
comic book view of it, and integrates that into a Christian world. No
one in the medieval world could have made any sense of Casper the
friendly ghost, but Rowling peoples Hogwarts castle with such
characters, and therein lies the fantasy.
By doing so, she slides her "Christian underbelly" with no real
transparency other than mixing it with the majickal soup.

Ala Nicholas Flamel who really existed. He was a French alchemist who
allegedly succeeded in making the Philosopher’s Stone in the late
1300s.
According to historical documents and occult tradition, Flamel learned
how to make the Philosopher’s Stone through the esoteric Book of
Abraham the Jew. This text, supposedly written by the Jewish
Patriarch, contained various directions in hieroglyphic form.
Flamel and his Sorcerer’s Stone are only two examples of how Rowling
mixes reality with fantasy in her series. Book I also refers to
Paracelsus, Waffling, author of Magical Theory, which is included on
Harry’s list of required reading. Archbishop Adalbert of Magdeburg
(eighth century).
Unfogging the Future by a Cassandra Vablatsky. Could Vablatsky be an
anagram for Blavatsky? Doe woodchuckers chuck wood?

Draco = Dragon = guardians of the temples and treasures ;)

[Tom]

On Jun 15, 1:55 pm, Draco Malfoy

Post by Draco Malfoy
Ala Nicholas Flamel who really existed. He was a French alchemist who
allegedly succeeded in making the Philosopher¢s Stone in the late
1300s.

If a person really existed, does that mean anything alleged about them
must be true?

Post by Draco Malfoy
According to historical documents and occult tradition,

If historical documents really exist, does that mean what they say is
true? I have the same question about occult traditions. Of course it
can be a lot harder to tell whether or not an occult tradition is real
than it is to tell whether or not a document is real.

Post by Draco Malfoy
Flamel and his Sorcerer¢s Stone are only two examples of how Rowling
mixes reality with fantasy in her series.

And in "The Princess Bride", Inigo Montoya mentions during his sword
fight with the Man In Black that he has studied Agrippa. Agrippa was
a real person who was also the author of some historical documents and
the subject of occult traditions. So, by mentioning his name, William
Goldman also mixes reality with fantasy in his book.

Which means... what?

[Draco Malfoy]

Post by Tom
On Jun 15, 1:55 pm, Draco Malfoy

Post by Draco Malfoy
Ala Nicholas Flamel who really existed. He was a French alchemist who
allegedly succeeded in making the Philosopher¢s Stone in the late
1300s.

If a person really existed, does that mean anything alleged about them
must be true?

Does a barking dog mean he ate lima beans? You're post makes about as
much sense as this one does.

Post by Tom

Post by Draco Malfoy
According to historical documents and occult tradition,

If historical documents really exist, does that mean what they say is
true?

Does the barking lima bean dog die from gaseous attacks?

Post by Tom
I have the same question about occult traditions. Of course it
can be a lot harder to tell whether or not an occult tradition is real
than it is to tell whether or not a document is real.

Depends entirely on the document and the tradition. Yoiu were much
better of asking insignificant questions than offering up
insignificant, sweeping platitudes.

Post by Tom

Post by Draco Malfoy
Flamel and his Sorcerer's Stone are only two examples of how Rowling
mixes reality with fantasy in her series.

And in "The Princess Bride", Inigo Montoya mentions during his sword
fight with the Man In Black that he has studied Agrippa. Agrippa was
a real person who was also the author of some historical documents and
the subject of occult traditions. So, by mentioning his name, William
Goldman also mixes reality with fantasy in his book.
Which means... what?

Go away.

[Tom]

Post by Draco Malfoy

Post by Tom
On Jun 15, 1:55 pm, Draco Malfoy

Post by Draco Malfoy
Ala Nicholas Flamel who really existed. He was a French alchemist who
allegedly succeeded in making the Philosopher¢s Stone in the late
1300s.

If a person really existed, does that mean anything alleged about them
must be true?

Does a barking dog mean he ate lima beans? You're post makes about as
much sense as this one does.

Post by Tom

Post by Draco Malfoy
According to historical documents and occult tradition,

If historical documents really exist, does that mean what they say is
true?

Does the barking lima bean dog die from gaseous attacks?

Post by Tom
I have the same question about occult traditions. Of course it
can be a lot harder to tell whether or not an occult tradition is real
than it is to tell whether or not a document is real.

Depends entirely on the document and the tradition. Yoiu were much
better of asking insignificant questions than offering up
insignificant, sweeping platitudes.

Post by Tom

Post by Draco Malfoy
Flamel and his Sorcerer's Stone are only two examples of how Rowling
mixes reality with fantasy in her series.

And in "The Princess Bride", Inigo Montoya mentions during his sword
fight with the Man In Black that he has studied Agrippa. Agrippa was
a real person who was also the author of some historical documents and
the subject of occult traditions. So, by mentioning his name, William
Goldman also mixes reality with fantasy in his book.
Which means... what?

Go away.

If I go away, will I begone or bee gone? When I am away, am I a way,
without weigh(t) or simply away?

If a person is really away does that mean it is true he is away?

[Draco Malfoy]

Post by Tom

Post by Draco Malfoy

Post by Tom
On Jun 15, 1:55 pm, Draco Malfoy

Post by Draco Malfoy
Ala Nicholas Flamel who really existed. He was a French alchemist who
allegedly succeeded in making the Philosopher¢s Stone in the late
1300s.

If a person really existed, does that mean anything alleged about them
must be true?

Does a barking dog mean he ate lima beans? You're post makes about as
much sense as this one does.

Post by Tom

Post by Draco Malfoy
According to historical documents and occult tradition,

If historical documents really exist, does that mean what they say is
true?

Does the barking lima bean dog die from gaseous attacks?

Post by Tom
I have the same question about occult traditions. Of course it
can be a lot harder to tell whether or not an occult tradition is real
than it is to tell whether or not a document is real.

Depends entirely on the document and the tradition. Yoiu were much
better of asking insignificant questions than offering up
insignificant, sweeping platitudes.

Post by Tom

Post by Draco Malfoy
Flamel and his Sorcerer's Stone are only two examples of how Rowling
mixes reality with fantasy in her series.

And in "The Princess Bride", Inigo Montoya mentions during his sword
fight with the Man In Black that he has studied Agrippa. Agrippa was
a real person who was also the author of some historical documents and
the subject of occult traditions. So, by mentioning his name, William
Goldman also mixes reality with fantasy in his book.
Which means... what?

Go away.

If I go away, will I begone or bee gone? When I am away, am I a way,
without weigh(t) or simply away?
If a person is really away does that mean it is true he is away?

Why don't you go sit over in the corner with Sidney the PedoLambe and
contemplate your navel fuzz.

Is it fuzz? Is it really naval? Or navel? Or does anyone give a
pedofuck?

[Tom]

On Jun 15, 3:22 pm, Draco Malfoy

Post by Draco Malfoy

Post by Tom
If I go away, will I begone or bee gone? When I am away, am I a way,
without weigh(t) or simply away?
If a person is really away does that mean it is true he is away?

Why don't you go sit over in the corner with Sidney the PedoLambe and
contemplate your navel fuzz.

Draco, the person who forged this reply with my name and e-mail
address on it is the same guy who forges posts from Sidney Lambe and a
variety of other contributors to these newsgroups. He always posts
from the server "x-privat.org" but you can only tell that if you
bother to look at the fuller headers of the message. In order to
avoid becoming confused, check the headers. Of course, it may well be
that you don't actually care if you're confused or not. In any case,
it's kind of silly of you to tell him to go sit in a corner with
himself.

Of course, it's also silly of you to tell me to "go away". You
probably don't have the slightest idea why some folks are going to
find it humorously ironic, though, if you don't know much about the
history of alt.magick.

[Draco Malfoy]

Of course, it may well be that you don't actually care

Bingo. I don't care if you claimed to be forged because your Usenet
history is replete with circular arguments which are usually begun, as
you tried with me this time, the most ridiculous, self-answering
questions.

Point being, if you want a discussion, grow the fuck up.

[Tom]

Post by Draco Malfoy

Of course, it may well be that you don't actually care

Bingo. I don't care if you claimed to be forged because your Usenet
history is replete with circular arguments which are usually begun, as
you tried with me this time, the most ridiculous, self-answering
questions.
Point being, if you want a discussion, grow the fuck up.

This coming from a person calling himself "Draco malfoy"?

*larf*

[Draco Malfoy]

Post by Tom

Post by Draco Malfoy

Of course, it may well be that you don't actually care

Bingo. I don't care if you claimed to be forged because your Usenet
history is replete with circular arguments which are usually begun, as
you tried with me this time, the most ridiculous, self-answering
questions.
Point being, if you want a discussion, grow the fuck up.

This coming from a person calling himself "Draco malfoy"?
*larf*

Correct "Tom"?

<snigger>

[Tom]

On Jun 16, 10:13 am, someone pretending to be Tom

Post by Tom

Post by Draco Malfoy

Of course, it may well be that you don't actually care

Bingo. I don't care if you claimed to be forged because your Usenet
history is replete with circular arguments which are usually begun, as
you tried with me this time, the most ridiculous, self-answering
questions.
Point being, if you want a discussion, grow the fuck up.

This coming from a person calling himself "Draco malfoy"?
*larf*

That's a good point.

Getting mad at a rhetorical question because you think of it as a
trick instead of a legitimate debate technique (which it is) is also
pretty juvenile.

http://gardenoflifetemple.com/WordPlay/Erotema.html

[Draco Malfoy]

Post by Tom
On Jun 16, 10:13 am, someone pretending to be Tom

Post by Tom

Post by Draco Malfoy

Of course, it may well be that you don't actually care

Bingo. I don't care if you claimed to be forged because your Usenet
history is replete with circular arguments which are usually begun, as
you tried with me this time, the most ridiculous, self-answering
questions.
Point being, if you want a discussion, grow the fuck up.

This coming from a person calling himself "Draco malfoy"?
*larf*

That's a good point.

Congratulations on congratulating yourself. <rolls eyes>

Post by Tom
Getting mad at a rhetorical question because you think of it as a
trick instead of a legitimate debate technique (which it is) is also
pretty juvenile.

I think it is ineffectual discussion when facts not opinions are the
only thing relevant. I also think it is your substitute for
intelligence and a tactic to move discussion into a circular load of
horseshit.

I don't bite. I don't need to. We have waaaaaaay too many facts to
uncover in Harry Potter to be sidetracked with bullshit.

[Tom]

On Jun 16, 11:02 am, Draco Malfoy

Post by Draco Malfoy

Post by Tom
On Jun 16, 10:13 am, someone pretending to be Tom

Post by Tom
This coming from a person calling himself "Draco malfoy"?
*larf*

That's a good point.

Congratulations on congratulating yourself. <rolls eyes>

Congratulations on your ongoing success at confusing yourself.

Post by Draco Malfoy
I don't bite.

What with being toothless and all, that's probably for the best.

Post by Draco Malfoy
We have waaaaaaay too many facts to
uncover in Harry Potter to be sidetracked with bullshit.

Heh. I just love irony.

[VD]

Post by Tom
On Jun 16, 10:13 am, someone pretending to be Tom

Post by Tom

Post by Draco Malfoy

Of course, it may well be that you don't actually care

Bingo. I don't care if you claimed to be forged because your Usenet
history is replete with circular arguments which are usually begun, as
you tried with me this time, the most ridiculous, self-answering
questions.
Point being, if you want a discussion, grow the fuck up.

This coming from a person calling himself "Draco malfoy"?
*larf*

That's a good point.
Getting mad at a rhetorical question because you think of it as a
trick instead of a legitimate debate technique (which it is) is also
pretty juvenile.
http://gardenoflifetemple.com/WordPlay/Erotema.html

Therein above lies our differences. We have no need for word games.

At the moment the significance of Harry Potter is not obvious to the
rest of the world. A few people are beginning to see religious
undertones in the book.

This will soon begin to change, July 15th, 2011 will be the beginning
of a new spiritual age. The entire story of Harry Potter is a
carefully written and detailed guide for building the new, divine
human being and breaking up the earthly one.

[Draco Malfoy]

Post by VD

Post by Tom
On Jun 16, 10:13 am, someone pretending to be Tom

Post by Tom

Post by Draco Malfoy

Of course, it may well be that you don't actually care

Bingo. I don't care if you claimed to be forged because your Usenet
history is replete with circular arguments which are usually begun, as
you tried with me this time, the most ridiculous, self-answering
questions.
Point being, if you want a discussion, grow the fuck up.

This coming from a person calling himself "Draco malfoy"?
*larf*

That's a good point.
Getting mad at a rhetorical question because you think of it as a
trick instead of a legitimate debate technique (which it is) is also
pretty juvenile.
http://gardenoflifetemple.com/WordPlay/Erotema.html

Therein above lies our differences. We have no need for word games.
At the moment the significance of Harry Potter is not obvious to the
rest of the world. A few people are beginning to see religious
undertones in the book.
This will soon begin to change, July 15th, 2011 will be the beginning
of a new spiritual age. The entire story of Harry Potter is a
carefully written and detailed guide for building the new, divine
human being and breaking up the earthly one.

Yeah and for one, I am tired of wading water and posting up the latest
Emma Watson news.

OK, I lied about the latter. lol

[VD]

Post by Draco Malfoy

Of course, it may well be that you don't actually care

Bingo. I don't care if you claimed to be forged because your Usenet
history is replete with circular arguments which are usually begun, as
you tried with me this time, the most ridiculous, self-answering
questions.
Point being, if you want a discussion, grow the fuck up.

Mr. Tom is used to a different world of discussion, Draco, one mustn't
fault him for that.

The Majickals, my term, who populate the crossposted groups engage in
romantic discussions about the Christian faith, historical alchemy,
Wicca, etc. These are subjects where opinion rules and facts be
damned. ;) If you have an opinion, you are created equal.

In the world of discussion of Harry Potter/J.K. Rowling, the facts are
there but often must be weeded out with considerable effort.
Nonetheless, the author sets the rules, the playing field and the,
ultimately, differentiates opinion from fact.

The /fact/ that both have alchemical underpinnings is a tie that binds
however Ms. Rowling's use of alchemy is in no manner either an
endorsement of nor a belief in any such fantasy.

[Draco Malfoy]

Post by VD

Post by Draco Malfoy

Of course, it may well be that you don't actually care

Bingo. I don't care if you claimed to be forged because your Usenet
history is replete with circular arguments which are usually begun, as
you tried with me this time, the most ridiculous, self-answering
questions.
Point being, if you want a discussion, grow the fuck up.

Mr. Tom is used to a different world of discussion, Draco, one mustn't
fault him for that.
The Majickals, my term, who populate the crossposted groups engage in
romantic discussions about the Christian faith, historical alchemy,
Wicca, etc. These are subjects where opinion rules and facts be
damned. ;) If you have an opinion, you are created equal.
In the world of discussion of Harry Potter/J.K. Rowling, the facts are
there but often must be weeded out with considerable effort.
Nonetheless, the author sets the rules, the playing field and the,
ultimately, differentiates opinion from fact.
The /fact/ that both have alchemical underpinnings is a tie that binds
however Ms. Rowling's use of alchemy is in no manner either an
endorsement of nor a belief in any such fantasy.

If you don't understand some history of alchemy, you miss a shitload
of Christian associated teachings which are at the foundation of HP.

[VD]

Post by Draco Malfoy

Post by VD

Post by Draco Malfoy

Of course, it may well be that you don't actually care

Bingo. I don't care if you claimed to be forged because your Usenet
history is replete with circular arguments which are usually begun, as
you tried with me this time, the most ridiculous, self-answering
questions.
Point being, if you want a discussion, grow the fuck up.

Mr. Tom is used to a different world of discussion, Draco, one mustn't
fault him for that.
The Majickals, my term, who populate the crossposted groups engage in
romantic discussions about the Christian faith, historical alchemy,
Wicca, etc. These are subjects where opinion rules and facts be
damned. ;) If you have an opinion, you are created equal.
In the world of discussion of Harry Potter/J.K. Rowling, the facts are
there but often must be weeded out with considerable effort.
Nonetheless, the author sets the rules, the playing field and the,
ultimately, differentiates opinion from fact.
The /fact/ that both have alchemical underpinnings is a tie that binds
however Ms. Rowling's use of alchemy is in no manner either an
endorsement of nor a belief in any such fantasy.

If you don't understand some history of alchemy, you miss a shitload
of Christian associated teachings which are at the foundation of HP.

Ms. Rowling freely admitted later in her career her extensive
understanding and accumulated research into alchemy. Not wizardry,
alchemy.

It is one of her more miraculous achievements, the use of fable to
turn a trick and a teaching on the reader. She understood to /invent/
wizardry, she would have to become an alchemical know-it-all ;)

It wasn't until the release of Deathly Hallows did she begin to
discuss the Christian and alchemical themes in detail. Albeit they
were obvious, as I alluded, it was opinions inherent in discussions
not fact.

Thankfully, we can now remain inside the factual.

[Draco Malfoy]

Post by VD

Post by Draco Malfoy

Post by VD

Post by Draco Malfoy

Of course, it may well be that you don't actually care

Bingo. I don't care if you claimed to be forged because your Usenet
history is replete with circular arguments which are usually begun, as
you tried with me this time, the most ridiculous, self-answering
questions.
Point being, if you want a discussion, grow the fuck up.

Mr. Tom is used to a different world of discussion, Draco, one mustn't
fault him for that.
The Majickals, my term, who populate the crossposted groups engage in
romantic discussions about the Christian faith, historical alchemy,
Wicca, etc. These are subjects where opinion rules and facts be
damned. ;) If you have an opinion, you are created equal.
In the world of discussion of Harry Potter/J.K. Rowling, the facts are
there but often must be weeded out with considerable effort.
Nonetheless, the author sets the rules, the playing field and the,
ultimately, differentiates opinion from fact.
The /fact/ that both have alchemical underpinnings is a tie that binds
however Ms. Rowling's use of alchemy is in no manner either an
endorsement of nor a belief in any such fantasy.

If you don't understand some history of alchemy, you miss a shitload
of Christian associated teachings which are at the foundation of HP.

Ms. Rowling freely admitted later in her career her extensive
understanding and accumulated research into alchemy. Not wizardry,
alchemy.
It is one of her more miraculous achievements, the use of fable to
turn a trick and a teaching on the reader. She understood to /invent/
wizardry, she would have to become an alchemical know-it-all ;)

At least read Andreae's Alchemical Wedding.

Post by VD
It wasn't until the release of Deathly Hallows did she begin to
discuss the Christian and alchemical themes in detail. Albeit they
were obvious, as I alluded, it was opinions inherent in discussions
not fact.
Thankfully, we can now remain inside the factual.

No shit.

[Robert Scott Martin]

Post by VD
Ms. Rowling freely admitted later in her career her extensive
understanding and accumulated research into alchemy. Not wizardry,
alchemy.

She made mad gold out of thin air and puff. Out here in the romantic
crosspost, that count harder toward "success" than any identification of
her ineffable sources.

The Stone, as it were, is its own demonstration.

[VD]

Post by Robert Scott Martin

Post by VD
Ms. Rowling freely admitted later in her career her extensive
understanding and accumulated research into alchemy. Not wizardry,
alchemy.

She made mad gold out of thin air and puff.

She created reference within a subterfuge of fantasy, hid it so as not
to play off Warner Brothers or her public, and released it in Deathly
Hallows.

Post by Robert Scott Martin
Out here in the romantic
crosspost, that count harder toward "success" than any identification of
her ineffable sources.
The Stone, as it were, is its own demonstration.

The stone was an alchemical reference which initiated the subterfuge.

[Robert Scott Martin]

Post by VD

Post by Robert Scott Martin
The Stone, as it were, is its own demonstration.

The stone was an alchemical reference which initiated the subterfuge.

This is the work in ten words.

I like the cut of your jib.

[VD]

Post by Robert Scott Martin

Post by VD

Post by Robert Scott Martin
The Stone, as it were, is its own demonstration.

The stone was an alchemical reference which initiated the subterfuge.

This is the work in ten words.
I like the cut of your jib.

Thank you. ;)

[Tom]

Post by VD

Post by Draco Malfoy

Of course, it may well be that you don't actually care

Bingo. I don't care if you claimed to be forged because your Usenet
history is replete with circular arguments which are usually begun, as
you tried with me this time, the most ridiculous, self-answering
questions.
Point being, if you want a discussion, grow the fuck up.

Mr. Tom is used to a different world of discussion, Draco, one mustn't
fault him for that.
The Majickals, my term, who populate the crossposted groups engage in
romantic discussions about the Christian faith, historical alchemy,
Wicca, etc. These are subjects where opinion rules and facts be
damned. ;) If you have an opinion, you are created equal.

Some hold that opinion. I don't. It's one reason why my posts are
often so controversial. Both of you seem to be depending on sweeping
generalizations rather than deal with the specifics. That's one way
of weighting opinion more heavily than fact.

Post by VD
In the world of discussion of Harry Potter/J.K. Rowling, the facts are
there but often must be weeded out with considerable effort.

Discussions of literature are virtually always a matter of opinion
rather than fact. There is absolutely nothing factual in speculation
about Rowling's purpose in mentioned Flamel unless you can verifiably
demonstrated that she has said something specific about it herself.
It's entirely a matter of opinion.

Post by VD
The /fact/ that both have alchemical underpinnings is a tie that binds
however Ms. Rowling's use of alchemy is in no manner either an
endorsement of nor a belief in any such fantasy.

You say "both". Both who? Harry Potter and J K Rowling? The former
is a fictional character invented by the latter. Neither of them has
"alchemical underpinnings". The books Rowling wrote make mention of
alchemy and drop an occasional historical name. The character Harry
Potter learns alchemy as one of his Hogwarts studies but it's your
opinion, not a fact, that alchemy is an "underpinning" to his
character. There is also no evidence whatsoever that J K Rowling
herself believes in or practices alchemy and so has no "alchemical
underpinnings" of her own. Her demonstrated knowledge of alchemy
seems no greater than what a reasonably intelligent person would find
using any decent encyclopedia as a reference book. "Facts". Bah.
You're not dealing in facts here at all.

[VD]

Post by Tom

Post by VD

Post by Draco Malfoy

Of course, it may well be that you don't actually care

Bingo. I don't care if you claimed to be forged because your Usenet
history is replete with circular arguments which are usually begun, as
you tried with me this time, the most ridiculous, self-answering
questions.
Point being, if you want a discussion, grow the fuck up.

Mr. Tom is used to a different world of discussion, Draco, one mustn't
fault him for that.
The Majickals, my term, who populate the crossposted groups engage in
romantic discussions about the Christian faith, historical alchemy,
Wicca, etc. These are subjects where opinion rules and facts be
damned. ;) If you have an opinion, you are created equal.

Some hold that opinion. I don't. It's one reason why my posts are
often so controversial. Both of you seem to be depending on sweeping
generalizations rather than deal with the specifics. That's one way
of weighting opinion more heavily than fact.

Quite the contrary, Mr. Tom, as both Draco and I have consistently and
repeatedly pointed out. We have no need for anything except factual
discussion.

This statement of yours is what you might believe is controversial but
it is untruthful and disingenuous.

Again, both styles of useless discussions common in the World Of the
Majickals.

But not here, not any longer.

[VD]

Post by Tom

Post by VD
In the world of discussion of Harry Potter/J.K. Rowling, the facts are
there but often must be weeded out with considerable effort.

Discussions of literature are virtually always a matter of opinion
rather than fact. There is absolutely nothing factual in speculation
about Rowling's purpose in mentioned Flamel unless you can verifiably
demonstrated that she has said something specific about it herself.
It's entirely a matter of opinion.

Incorrect again. Unless you believe the author is a pathological liar,
we only use what we can corroborate from Ms. Rowling herself.

Mr. Tom, this need to run about flailing in miserable cliché and
pointless irrelevances are really a waste of your time.

[VD]

Post by Tom

Post by VD
The /fact/ that both have alchemical underpinnings is a tie that binds
however Ms. Rowling's use of alchemy is in no manner either an
endorsement of nor a belief in any such fantasy.

You say "both". Both who? Harry Potter and J K Rowling?

Draco and I.

[Draco Malfoy]

Post by Tom
Harry Potter and J K Rowling? The former
is a fictional character invented by the latter. Neither of them has
"alchemical underpinnings". The books Rowling wrote make mention of
alchemy and drop an occasional historical name. The character Harry
Potter learns alchemy as one of his Hogwarts studies but it's your
opinion, not a fact, that alchemy is an "underpinning" to his
character. There is also no evidence whatsoever that J K Rowling
herself believes in or practices alchemy and so has no "alchemical
underpinnings" of her own. Her demonstrated knowledge of alchemy
seems no greater than what a reasonably intelligent person would find
using any decent encyclopedia as a reference book. "Facts". Bah.
You're not dealing in facts here at all

Thank you for your time, asshole, but when you have a fucking clue wtf
you are talking about, come back. Until then, I have some advice for
you.

There are exactly two categories of people who might read any article
you post. The first group comprises those who know you're a liar, a
plagiarist, a fraud and an idiot. The second includes only those who
have never heard of you.

Your lies and incoherent nonsense just give the first group an
opportunity to laugh at you, and any of the second group who see that
crap will immediately migrate to the first.

If you want to maintain as good an image as possible, your best bet?

Shut the fuck up.

[VD]

the former is a fictional character invented by the latter. Neither
make mention of alchemy and drop an occasional historical name.

Make mention?

The character Harry Potter learns alchemy as one of his Hogwarts
studies but it's your opinion, not a fact, that alchemy is an
"underpinning" to his character.

No it is Ms. Rowling's factual statement.

There is also no evidence whatsoever that J K Rowling herself
believes in or practices alchemy and so has no "alchemical
underpinnings" of her own. Her demonstrated knowledge of alchemy
seems no greater than what a reasonably intelligent person would
find using any decent encyclopedia as a reference book. "Facts".
Bah. You're not dealing in facts here at all.

"I've never wanted to be a witch, but an alchemist, now that's a
different matter. To invent this wizard world, I've learned a
ridiculous amount about alchemy. Perhaps much of it I'll never use in
the books, but I have to know in detail what magic can and cannot do
in order to set the parameters and establish the stories' internal
logic." ~"Face to Face with J K Rowling: Casting a spell over young
minds," The Herald, 7 December 1998

Goodbye.

[Draco Malfoy]

Post by VD

the former is a fictional character invented by the latter. Neither
make mention of alchemy and drop an occasional historical name.

Make mention?

The character Harry Potter learns alchemy as one of his Hogwarts
studies but it's your opinion, not a fact, that alchemy is an
"underpinning" to his character.

No it is Ms. Rowling's factual statement.

There is also no evidence whatsoever that J K Rowling herself
believes in or practices alchemy and so has no "alchemical
underpinnings" of her own. Her demonstrated knowledge of alchemy
seems no greater than what a reasonably intelligent person would
find using any decent encyclopedia as a reference book. "Facts".
Bah. You're not dealing in facts here at all.

"I've never wanted to be a witch, but an alchemist, now that's a
different matter. To invent this wizard world, I've learned a
ridiculous amount about alchemy. Perhaps much of it I'll never use in
the books, but I have to know in detail what magic can and cannot do
in order to set the parameters and establish the stories' internal
logic." ~"Face to Face with J K Rowling: Casting a spell over young
minds," The Herald, 7 December 1998
Goodbye.

Here's another word of advice, Tommy. Dix has a double Ph.D and three
M.S, attended Oxford and M.I.T, CalPoly and taught at several post
graduate schools in several disciplines.

So don't feel so bad when you get your ass and your hat handed to you,
my Little Trick Pony.

*VVBG*

[Sidney Lambe]

You having a good time talking to yourself, Dimwit?

[delete]

[Tom]

On Jun 15, 3:14 pm, Draco Malfoy

Post by Draco Malfoy

Post by Tom

Post by Draco Malfoy
Flamel and his Sorcerer's Stone are only two examples of how Rowling
mixes reality with fantasy in her series.

And in "The Princess Bride", Inigo Montoya mentions during his sword
fight with the Man In Black that he has studied Agrippa.  Agrippa was
a real person who was also the author of some historical documents and
the subject of occult traditions.  So, by mentioning his name, William
Goldman also mixes reality with fantasy in his book.
Which means...  what?

Go away.

Too tough a question, I suppose.

[VD]

Post by Tom
On Jun 15, 1:55 pm, Draco Malfoy

Post by Draco Malfoy
Ala Nicholas Flamel who really existed. He was a French alchemist who
allegedly succeeded in making the Philosopher¢s Stone in the late
1300s.

If a person really existed, does that mean anything alleged about them
must be true?

Mr. Tom, I truly don't believe you are asking for an answer so I will
consider this question self-answering.

Post by Tom

Post by Draco Malfoy
According to historical documents and occult tradition,

If historical documents really exist, does that mean what they say is
true?

See above. Do you have a point I am missing? ;)

Post by Tom

Post by Draco Malfoy
Flamel and his Sorcerer¢s Stone are only two examples of how Rowling
mixes reality with fantasy in her series.

And in "The Princess Bride", Inigo Montoya mentions during his sword
fight with the Man In Black that he has studied Agrippa. Agrippa was
a real person who was also the author of some historical documents and
the subject of occult traditions. So, by mentioning his name, William
Goldman also mixes reality with fantasy in his book.
Which means... what?

That Ms. Rowling and Mr. Goldman used the same writing techniques?

[Tom]

Post by VD

Post by Tom
On Jun 15, 1:55 pm, Draco Malfoy

Post by Draco Malfoy
Ala Nicholas Flamel who really existed. He was a French alchemist who
allegedly succeeded in making the Philosopher¢s Stone in the late
1300s.

If a person really existed, does that mean anything alleged about them
must be true?

Mr. Tom, I truly don't believe you are asking for an answer so I will
consider this question self-answering.

You can address me simply as "Tom". I don't demand any honorifics.
And it is pretty much a rhetorical question.

Post by VD

Post by Tom
If historical documents really exist, does that mean what they say is
true?  

See above. Do you have a point I am missing? ;)

If you don't see the point, then you're definitely missing it. Let me
make it more clearly. Just because someone drops a name of a real
human being in a work of fiction or refers to some event that actually
happened does not mean that the work of fiction has some hidden
message beyond mere entertainment. There are some who like to assert
that the magic of the Harry Potter series is meant to be believed as
something that people can actually do. Perhaps that's not what Draco
meant to imply, though.

Post by VD

Post by Tom
Which means...  what?

That Ms. Rowling and Mr. Goldman used the same writing techniques?  

Along with the vast majority of other writers. Mentioning things that
actually happened or people that actually lived has the effect of
making the fictional world seem more realistic, which enhances the
suspension of disbelief that allows the reader to become more fully
involved with the story.

[VD]

Post by Tom

Post by VD

Post by Tom
On Jun 15, 1:55 pm, Draco Malfoy

Post by Draco Malfoy
Ala Nicholas Flamel who really existed. He was a French alchemist who
allegedly succeeded in making the Philosopher¢s Stone in the late
1300s.

If a person really existed, does that mean anything alleged about them
must be true?

Mr. Tom, I truly don't believe you are asking for an answer so I will
consider this question self-answering.

You can address me simply as "Tom". I don't demand any honorifics.
And it is pretty much a rhetorical question.

Mr. Tom, it isn't "pretty much" a rhetorical question, it is /exactly/
a rhetorical question. I have no idea what effect you are trying to
accomplish.

Post by Tom

Post by VD

Post by Tom
If historical documents really exist, does that mean what they say is
true?  

See above. Do you have a point I am missing? ;)

If you don't see the point, then you're definitely missing it.

Mr. Tom, are you soon to get to something other than self-serving,
roundabout and practically useless statements?

Post by Tom
Let me make it more clearly. Just because someone drops a name of a
real human being in a work of fiction or refers to some event that
actually happened does not mean that the work of fiction has some
hidden message beyond mere entertainment.

Anytime soon?

Post by Tom
There are some who like to assert that the magic of the Harry Potter
series is meant to be believed as something that people can
actually do. Perhaps that's not what Draco meant to imply,
though.

There is no one I have ever read or corresponded with on afh-p that
believes as you suggest. MOF, Ms. Rowling has been quoted several
times to the contrary in interview and in her own writings.

If this is your quest, you have spent a great amount of energy in
pursuit of a pointless point. ;0)

Post by Tom

Post by VD

Post by Tom
Which means...  what?

That Ms. Rowling and Mr. Goldman used the same writing techniques?  

Along with the vast majority of other writers.

...

Post by Tom
Mentioning things that actually happened or people that actually
lived has the effect of making the fictional world seem more
realistic, which enhances the suspension of disbelief that allows
the reader to become more fully involved with the story.

Except in this case, the reader would have to be very detailed in
their research or extremely fluent in their 13-14th century alchemy.

Since The Sorcerer's Stone was written for a target audience of
8-12yos, it can be fairly well assumed that Ms. Rowling's intent was
more inline with providing easily copied material lessening her
overall imaginative workload.

[Draco Malfoy]

Post by VD

Post by Tom

Post by VD

Post by Tom
On Jun 15, 1:55 pm, Draco Malfoy

Post by Draco Malfoy
Ala Nicholas Flamel who really existed. He was a French alchemist who
allegedly succeeded in making the Philosopher¢s Stone in the late
1300s.

If a person really existed, does that mean anything alleged about them
must be true?

Mr. Tom, I truly don't believe you are asking for an answer so I will
consider this question self-answering.

You can address me simply as "Tom". I don't demand any honorifics.
And it is pretty much a rhetorical question.

Mr. Tom, it isn't "pretty much" a rhetorical question, it is /exactly/
a rhetorical question. I have no idea what effect you are trying to
accomplish.

Post by Tom

Post by VD

Post by Tom
If historical documents really exist, does that mean what they say is
true?  

See above. Do you have a point I am missing? ;)

If you don't see the point, then you're definitely missing it.

Mr. Tom, are you soon to get to something other than self-serving,
roundabout and practically useless statements?

Post by Tom
Let me make it more clearly. Just because someone drops a name of a
real human being in a work of fiction or refers to some event that
actually happened does not mean that the work of fiction has some
hidden message beyond mere entertainment.

Anytime soon?

Post by Tom
There are some who like to assert that the magic of the Harry Potter
series is meant to be believed as something that people can
actually do. Perhaps that's not what Draco meant to imply,
though.

There is no one I have ever read or corresponded with on afh-p that
believes as you suggest. MOF, Ms. Rowling has been quoted several
times to the contrary in interview and in her own writings.
If this is your quest, you have spent a great amount of energy in
pursuit of a pointless point. ;0)

Post by Tom

Post by VD

Post by Tom
Which means...  what?

That Ms. Rowling and Mr. Goldman used the same writing techniques?  

Along with the vast majority of other writers.

...

Post by Tom
Mentioning things that actually happened or people that actually
lived has the effect of making the fictional world seem more
realistic, which enhances the suspension of disbelief that allows
the reader to become more fully involved with the story.

Except in this case, the reader would have to be very detailed in
their research or extremely fluent in their 13-14th century alchemy.
Since The Sorcerer's Stone was written for a target audience of
8-12yos, it can be fairly well assumed that Ms. Rowling's intent was
more inline with providing easily copied material lessening her
overall imaginative workload.

Which is what she readily admits. Rowling was a teacher turned author.
This is part of her "teacher's mode".

You couldn't possibly make the case that she is using historical
figures for loopback reality until much later in her career. I dunno,
maybe the Nazi like elements of Hallows I?

[Tom]

On Jun 16, 10:06 am, Draco Malfoy

Post by Draco Malfoy

Post by VD

Post by Tom
Mentioning things that actually happened or people that actually
lived has the effect of making the fictional world seem more
realistic, which enhances the suspension of disbelief that allows
the reader to become more fully involved with the story.

Except in this case, the reader would have to be very detailed in
their research or extremely fluent in their 13-14th century alchemy.
Since The Sorcerer's Stone was written for a target audience of
8-12yos, it can be fairly well assumed that Ms. Rowling's intent was
more inline with providing easily copied material lessening her
overall imaginative workload.

Which is what she readily admits. Rowling was a teacher turned author.
This is part of her "teacher's mode".
You couldn't possibly make the case that she is using historical
figures for loopback reality until much later in her career. I dunno,
maybe the Nazi like elements of Hallows I?

Rowling clearly assumed a little more knowledge of history in her
English audience than in her American audience, hence the change of
title from "Philosopher's Stone" (English edition), which she figured
English school children would be familiar with to "Sorcerer's
Stone" (American edition) since it was supposed Americans would not
understand the reference. In addition, any good writer of children's
fiction inserts information that will stimulate the (presumably) more
informed adults who may be reading the books along with or to their
children. Usually these insertions are missed by the kids but the
adults catch them and have their attentions held a little more
firmly. You see this happening in well-constructed children's movies
as well. It keeps the parents from becoming bored and wandering away,
which is, from the author's point of view, undesirable behavior the
children may imitate. In addition, it offers the adult an opportunity
to point out the obscure reference to their children in a "teachable
moment".

As you mentioned, Rowling was a teacher turned author. Teachers often
create "teachable moments", such as dropping the name of a pretty
famous alchemist (at least to historians) who really lived and sought
the Philosopher's Stone.

[Draco Malfoy]

Post by Tom
On Jun 16, 10:06 am, Draco Malfoy

Post by Draco Malfoy

Post by VD

Post by Tom
Mentioning things that actually happened or people that actually
lived has the effect of making the fictional world seem more
realistic, which enhances the suspension of disbelief that allows
the reader to become more fully involved with the story.

Except in this case, the reader would have to be very detailed in
their research or extremely fluent in their 13-14th century alchemy.
Since The Sorcerer's Stone was written for a target audience of
8-12yos, it can be fairly well assumed that Ms. Rowling's intent was
more inline with providing easily copied material lessening her
overall imaginative workload.

Which is what she readily admits. Rowling was a teacher turned author.
This is part of her "teacher's mode".
You couldn't possibly make the case that she is using historical
figures for loopback reality until much later in her career. I dunno,
maybe the Nazi like elements of Hallows I?

Rowling clearly assumed a little more knowledge of history in her
English audience than in her American audience, hence the change of
title from "Philosopher's Stone" (English edition), which she figured
English school children would be familiar with to "Sorcerer's
Stone" (American edition) since it was supposed Americans would not
understand the reference. In addition, any good writer of children's
fiction inserts information that will stimulate the (presumably) more
informed adults who may be reading the books along with or to their
children. Usually these insertions are missed by the kids but the
adults catch them and have their attentions held a little more
firmly. You see this happening in well-constructed children's movies
as well. It keeps the parents from becoming bored and wandering away,
which is, from the author's point of view, undesirable behavior the
children may imitate. In addition, it offers the adult an opportunity
to point out the obscure reference to their children in a "teachable
moment".
As you mentioned, Rowling was a teacher turned author. Teachers often
create "teachable moments", such as dropping the name of a pretty
famous alchemist (at least to historians) who really lived and sought
the Philosopher's Stone.

There you go again. Not one fucking thing you said is anything more
than an extension of the obvious.

Meh.

[VD]

Post by Draco Malfoy

Post by Tom
On Jun 16, 10:06 am, Draco Malfoy

Post by Draco Malfoy

Post by VD

Post by Tom
Mentioning things that actually happened or people that actually
lived has the effect of making the fictional world seem more
realistic, which enhances the suspension of disbelief that allows
the reader to become more fully involved with the story.

Except in this case, the reader would have to be very detailed in
their research or extremely fluent in their 13-14th century alchemy.
Since The Sorcerer's Stone was written for a target audience of
8-12yos, it can be fairly well assumed that Ms. Rowling's intent was
more inline with providing easily copied material lessening her
overall imaginative workload.

Which is what she readily admits. Rowling was a teacher turned author.
This is part of her "teacher's mode".
You couldn't possibly make the case that she is using historical
figures for loopback reality until much later in her career. I dunno,
maybe the Nazi like elements of Hallows I?

Rowling clearly assumed a little more knowledge of history in her
English audience than in her American audience, hence the change of
title from "Philosopher's Stone" (English edition), which she figured
English school children would be familiar with to "Sorcerer's
Stone" (American edition) since it was supposed Americans would not
understand the reference. In addition, any good writer of children's
fiction inserts information that will stimulate the (presumably) more
informed adults who may be reading the books along with or to their
children. Usually these insertions are missed by the kids but the
adults catch them and have their attentions held a little more
firmly. You see this happening in well-constructed children's movies
as well. It keeps the parents from becoming bored and wandering away,
which is, from the author's point of view, undesirable behavior the
children may imitate. In addition, it offers the adult an opportunity
to point out the obscure reference to their children in a "teachable
moment".
As you mentioned, Rowling was a teacher turned author. Teachers often
create "teachable moments", such as dropping the name of a pretty
famous alchemist (at least to historians) who really lived and sought
the Philosopher's Stone.

There you go again. Not one fucking thing you said is anything more
than an extension of the obvious.
Meh.

And again I point out, Draco, that Mr. Tom is performing within the
confines of his world. He is, at truth, consistent and should be at
least commended for this not denigrated for his limitations. ;)

[Tom]

On Jun 16, 10:44 am, Draco Malfoy

Post by Draco Malfoy

On Jun 16, 10:06 am, Draco Malfoy

Post by Draco Malfoy

Post by VD

Post by Tom
Mentioning things that actually happened or people that actually
lived has the effect of making the fictional world seem more
realistic, which enhances the suspension of disbelief that allows
the reader to become more fully involved with the story.

Except in this case, the reader would have to be very detailed in
their research or extremely fluent in their 13-14th century alchemy.
Since The Sorcerer's Stone was written for a target audience of
8-12yos, it can be fairly well assumed that Ms. Rowling's intent was
more inline with providing easily copied material lessening her
overall imaginative workload.

Which is what she readily admits. Rowling was a teacher turned author.
This is part of her "teacher's mode".
You couldn't possibly make the case that she is using historical
figures for loopback reality until much later in her career. I dunno,
maybe the Nazi like elements of Hallows I?

Rowling clearly assumed a little more knowledge of history in her
English audience than in her American audience, hence the change of
title from "Philosopher's Stone" (English edition), which she figured
English school children would be familiar with to "Sorcerer's
Stone" (American edition) since it was supposed Americans would not
understand the reference.  In addition, any good writer of children's
fiction inserts information that will stimulate the (presumably) more
informed adults who may be reading the books along with or to their
children.  Usually these insertions are missed by the kids but the
adults catch them and have their attentions held a little more
firmly.  You see this happening in well-constructed children's movies
as well.  It keeps the parents from becoming bored and wandering away,
which is, from the author's point of view, undesirable behavior the
children may imitate.  In addition, it offers the adult an opportunity
to point out the obscure reference to their children in a "teachable
moment".
As you mentioned, Rowling was a teacher turned author.  Teachers often
create "teachable moments", such as dropping the name of a pretty
famous alchemist (at least to historians) who really lived and sought
the Philosopher's Stone.

There you go again. Not one fucking thing you said is anything more
than an extension of the obvious.
Meh.

Of course it's obvious. That's why I surprises me that you disagree
with it.

You wrote: "You couldn't possibly make the case that she is using
historical figures for loopback reality"

And yet, in virtually the same breath, you admit that the conclusion
seems pretty obvious and is based on some pretty obvious evidence.

So what's your objection? Other than resenting me for pointing out
the obvious stuff you were clearly missing.

[Draco Malfoy]

Post by Tom
On Jun 16, 10:44 am, Draco Malfoy

Post by Draco Malfoy

On Jun 16, 10:06 am, Draco Malfoy

Post by Draco Malfoy

Post by VD

Post by Tom
Mentioning things that actually happened or people that actually
lived has the effect of making the fictional world seem more
realistic, which enhances the suspension of disbelief that allows
the reader to become more fully involved with the story.

Except in this case, the reader would have to be very detailed in
their research or extremely fluent in their 13-14th century alchemy.
Since The Sorcerer's Stone was written for a target audience of
8-12yos, it can be fairly well assumed that Ms. Rowling's intent was
more inline with providing easily copied material lessening her
overall imaginative workload.

Which is what she readily admits. Rowling was a teacher turned author.
This is part of her "teacher's mode".
You couldn't possibly make the case that she is using historical
figures for loopback reality until much later in her career. I dunno,
maybe the Nazi like elements of Hallows I?

Rowling clearly assumed a little more knowledge of history in her
English audience than in her American audience, hence the change of
title from "Philosopher's Stone" (English edition), which she figured
English school children would be familiar with to "Sorcerer's
Stone" (American edition) since it was supposed Americans would not
understand the reference.  In addition, any good writer of children's
fiction inserts information that will stimulate the (presumably) more
informed adults who may be reading the books along with or to their
children.  Usually these insertions are missed by the kids but the
adults catch them and have their attentions held a little more
firmly.  You see this happening in well-constructed children's movies
as well.  It keeps the parents from becoming bored and wandering away,
which is, from the author's point of view, undesirable behavior the
children may imitate.  In addition, it offers the adult an opportunity
to point out the obscure reference to their children in a "teachable
moment".
As you mentioned, Rowling was a teacher turned author.  Teachers often
create "teachable moments", such as dropping the name of a pretty
famous alchemist (at least to historians) who really lived and sought
the Philosopher's Stone.

There you go again. Not one fucking thing you said is anything more
than an extension of the obvious.
Meh.

Of

*PLONK* the turd.

You can have your disengenous pseudo-intellectual assholes back,
majkalfuckers. And that includes your pedophile Sidney Lambe.

Worship on.

[VD]

Post by Draco Malfoy

Post by Tom
On Jun 16, 10:44 am, Draco Malfoy

Post by Draco Malfoy

On Jun 16, 10:06 am, Draco Malfoy

Post by Draco Malfoy

Post by VD

Post by Tom
Mentioning things that actually happened or people that actually
lived has the effect of making the fictional world seem more
realistic, which enhances the suspension of disbelief that allows
the reader to become more fully involved with the story.

Except in this case, the reader would have to be very detailed in
their research or extremely fluent in their 13-14th century alchemy.
Since The Sorcerer's Stone was written for a target audience of
8-12yos, it can be fairly well assumed that Ms. Rowling's intent was
more inline with providing easily copied material lessening her
overall imaginative workload.

Which is what she readily admits. Rowling was a teacher turned author.
This is part of her "teacher's mode".
You couldn't possibly make the case that she is using historical
figures for loopback reality until much later in her career. I dunno,
maybe the Nazi like elements of Hallows I?

Rowling clearly assumed a little more knowledge of history in her
English audience than in her American audience, hence the change of
title from "Philosopher's Stone" (English edition), which she figured
English school children would be familiar with to "Sorcerer's
Stone" (American edition) since it was supposed Americans would not
understand the reference.  In addition, any good writer of children's
fiction inserts information that will stimulate the (presumably) more
informed adults who may be reading the books along with or to their
children.  Usually these insertions are missed by the kids but the
adults catch them and have their attentions held a little more
firmly.  You see this happening in well-constructed children's movies
as well.  It keeps the parents from becoming bored and wandering away,
which is, from the author's point of view, undesirable behavior the
children may imitate.  In addition, it offers the adult an opportunity
to point out the obscure reference to their children in a "teachable
moment".
As you mentioned, Rowling was a teacher turned author.  Teachers often
create "teachable moments", such as dropping the name of a pretty
famous alchemist (at least to historians) who really lived and sought
the Philosopher's Stone.

There you go again. Not one fucking thing you said is anything more
than an extension of the obvious.
Meh.

Of

*PLONK* the turd.
You can have your disengenous pseudo-intellectual assholes back,
majkalfuckers. And that includes your pedophile Sidney Lambe.
Worship on.

Too bad. It would have been enjoyable to have a select few of the
Wiccans and alchemistry pundits to enter the upcoming discussions on
the spiritual foundations of Harry Potter. Those Christian principles
delivered through the use of alchemical symbolism.

But alas, the few select chose not to participate and as is usual in
well too many discussion among the Majickals, it's mostly rot.

[Sidney Lambe]

Post by VD

Post by Draco Malfoy

Post by Tom
On Jun 16, 10:44 am, Draco Malfoy

Post by Draco Malfoy

On Jun 16, 10:06 am, Draco Malfoy

Post by Draco Malfoy

Post by VD

Post by Tom
Mentioning things that actually happened or people that actually
lived has the effect of making the fictional world seem more
realistic, which enhances the suspension of disbelief that allows
the reader to become more fully involved with the story.

Except in this case, the reader would have to be very detailed in
their research or extremely fluent in their 13-14th century alchemy.
Since The Sorcerer's Stone was written for a target audience of
8-12yos, it can be fairly well assumed that Ms. Rowling's intent was
more inline with providing easily copied material lessening her
overall imaginative workload.

Which is what she readily admits. Rowling was a teacher turned author.
This is part of her "teacher's mode".
You couldn't possibly make the case that she is using historical
figures for loopback reality until much later in her career. I dunno,
maybe the Nazi like elements of Hallows I?

Rowling clearly assumed a little more knowledge of history in her
English audience than in her American audience, hence the change of
title from "Philosopher's Stone" (English edition), which she figured
English school children would be familiar with to "Sorcerer's
Stone" (American edition) since it was supposed Americans would not
understand the reference.  In addition, any good writer of children's
fiction inserts information that will stimulate the (presumably) more
informed adults who may be reading the books along with or to their
children.  Usually these insertions are missed by the kids but the
adults catch them and have their attentions held a little more
firmly.  You see this happening in well-constructed children's movies
as well.  It keeps the parents from becoming bored and wandering away,
which is, from the author's point of view, undesirable behavior the
children may imitate.  In addition, it offers the adult an opportunity
to point out the obscure reference to their children in a "teachable
moment".
As you mentioned, Rowling was a teacher turned author.  Teachers often
create "teachable moments", such as dropping the name of a pretty
famous alchemist (at least to historians) who really lived and sought
the Philosopher's Stone.

There you go again. Not one fucking thing you said is anything more
than an extension of the obvious.
Meh.

Of

*PLONK* the turd.
You can have your disengenous pseudo-intellectual assholes back,
majkalfuckers. And that includes your pedophile Sidney Lambe.
Worship on.

Too bad. It would have been enjoyable to have a select few of the
Wiccans and alchemistry pundits to enter the upcoming discussions on
the spiritual foundations of Harry Potter. Those Christian principles
delivered through the use of alchemical symbolism.
But alas, the few select chose not to participate and as is usual in
well too many discussion among the Majickals, it's mostly rot.

So you think pedophilia is rot, do you?

I think you're both a buch of wannabee alchemists who couldn't
majickal their way out of shit.

[box750]

Post by Ian Anderson

Post by unknown

Post by VD

Post by Sidney Lambe
There are over 30,000+ offcially-recognized demoninations of
Christianity in the world today. And who knows how many
sects, orders, and cults?
Many of those organizations have highly-qualified scholars that
are experts in the languages involved. Duh.
And still, Christianity is a tower of babel full of arrogant and
stupid people like you who think they are the only one who can
properly interpret the original Biblical documents.
Many of those "denominations" are, in practical terms, not even
the same religions.
Shove your creepy religion. It stinks, and Harry Potter is
much more metaphysically accurate than it is.

Mr. Lambe, I see that you haven't lost your expertise in overly
expressed irrationality and inaccuracy compelled by ignorance ;>)
I have invited you several times to shoot over to alt.fan.harry-potter
and discuss this very subject. Instead, you feel demonically required
to crosspost your opinions without ever debating them. Sadly, I
confess, I bite once again.
Ms. Rowling has made it abundantly clear that the HP series was in
fact a compelling case of exposing the concepts and beliefs of
Christianity, at least her and her compatriots version of it. Here are
two links of facts from ms. Rowling and following discussions that
will educate you on this matter.
Proof Harry Is Rowling's "Jesus"
http://preview.tinyurl.com/3f6gx3j
Rowling On Oprah Re: Belief Systems" by VD
http://preview.tinyurl.com/3bft8ry
You will note that there exists a significant, conspiratorial effort
by Ms. Rowling to advance her/HP Christian fundamentals
BeauSeigneurs - Christian Collaborators Exposed? and
What Did The Christian Community and J.K.Rowling Get From The
Conspiracy To Link Harry Potter To Jesus?
I would also point you to...
http://preview.tinyurl.com/4y7rljf
...an excellent observation by our own Mr. Malfoy which highligts the
anti-Jewish sentiments of Ms. Rowling that juxtaposes her
pro-Christian theme in HP.
Conclusion? It is impossible for Harry Potter to be "much more
metaphysically accurate than Christianity" for obvious reasons.

Rowling places her work in a clearly Christian _cultural_ framework,
and all of the above are, in my view, cultural references, just as
the images of her characters celebrating both Christmas and Easter
(in both cases, by the way, emphasizing the old pagan elements of the
modern holidays while having nothing clearly Christian [with the
possible exception of the Christmas carols sung by the armor suits at
Hogwarts]). As pointed out elsewhere, some people believing in
witchcraft have seen the Potter books as showing their culture and
their traditions very, very well indeed.

But Harry Potter is also about the fight of Good against Evil, and
about the fact that power corrupts, and that sometimes people have to
make sacrifices to be able to save others.
I have not read the HP books often enough to be able to draw a clear
parallel to Christian ideas, but I wouldn't rule out that some
closer inspection would find the one thing or the other.
Maybe I should do a re-reading :-) especially since Rowling has opened
her kimono re: her Christian underbelly.

No it isn't. You might as well call "Ben-Hur" a Christian allegory.

[VD]

Post by box750

Post by Ian Anderson

Post by unknown

Post by VD

Post by Sidney Lambe
There are over 30,000+ offcially-recognized demoninations of
Christianity in the world today. And who knows how many
sects, orders, and cults?
Many of those organizations have highly-qualified scholars that
are experts in the languages involved. Duh.
And still, Christianity is a tower of babel full of arrogant and
stupid people like you who think they are the only one who can
properly interpret the original Biblical documents.
Many of those "denominations" are, in practical terms, not even
the same religions.
Shove your creepy religion. It stinks, and Harry Potter is
much more metaphysically accurate than it is.

Mr. Lambe, I see that you haven't lost your expertise in overly
expressed irrationality and inaccuracy compelled by ignorance ;>)
I have invited you several times to shoot over to alt.fan.harry-potter
and discuss this very subject. Instead, you feel demonically required
to crosspost your opinions without ever debating them. Sadly, I
confess, I bite once again.
Ms. Rowling has made it abundantly clear that the HP series was in
fact a compelling case of exposing the concepts and beliefs of
Christianity, at least her and her compatriots version of it. Here are
two links of facts from ms. Rowling and following discussions that
will educate you on this matter.
Proof Harry Is Rowling's "Jesus"
http://preview.tinyurl.com/3f6gx3j
Rowling On Oprah Re: Belief Systems" by VD
http://preview.tinyurl.com/3bft8ry
You will note that there exists a significant, conspiratorial effort
by Ms. Rowling to advance her/HP Christian fundamentals
BeauSeigneurs - Christian Collaborators Exposed? and
What Did The Christian Community and J.K.Rowling Get From The
Conspiracy To Link Harry Potter To Jesus?
I would also point you to...
http://preview.tinyurl.com/4y7rljf
...an excellent observation by our own Mr. Malfoy which highligts the
anti-Jewish sentiments of Ms. Rowling that juxtaposes her
pro-Christian theme in HP.
Conclusion? It is impossible for Harry Potter to be "much more
metaphysically accurate than Christianity" for obvious reasons.

Rowling places her work in a clearly Christian _cultural_ framework,
and all of the above are, in my view, cultural references, just as
the images of her characters celebrating both Christmas and Easter
(in both cases, by the way, emphasizing the old pagan elements of the
modern holidays while having nothing clearly Christian [with the
possible exception of the Christmas carols sung by the armor suits at
Hogwarts]). As pointed out elsewhere, some people believing in
witchcraft have seen the Potter books as showing their culture and
their traditions very, very well indeed.

But Harry Potter is also about the fight of Good against Evil, and
about the fact that power corrupts, and that sometimes people have to
make sacrifices to be able to save others.
I have not read the HP books often enough to be able to draw a clear
parallel to Christian ideas, but I wouldn't rule out that some
closer inspection would find the one thing or the other.
Maybe I should do a re-reading :-) especially since Rowling has opened
her kimono re: her Christian underbelly.

No it isn't. You might as well call "Ben-Hur" a Christian allegory.

You have to reach a bit inside Ms. Rowling to get to her underlying
Christian commitment.

In Rowling's interview *transcript* with Oprah, she claimed:

*Oprah:* "While Jo may have millions of fans around the world, she
also has her critics. Some have labeled Harry Potter as being too
dark and frightening for children. There have been religious critics
who have accused the books of promoting witchcraft, and some have
even campaigned for the books to be banned from schools. Jo says she
wasn't trying to make a religious statement when she wrote the books"
[that she was not trying to convert people to Christianity]

*Rowling:* "No, no, I am not. I'm not pushing any belief system here,"
she says. "Although there is a lot of Christian imagery in the books.
That's undeniable. But that's an allusion to a belief system in which
I was raised."

Go to 13:00 to 15:15

http://video.the-leaky-cauldron.org/video/1629

Notice how Rowling uses the term "belief system" which should be
translated as "particular faith i.e. Catholicism, Anglicanism, etc."
within the global concept of Christianity; as magic is a belief
system (within the global concept of wizarding). She was talking
about both of those belief systems in her response.

Rowling is very animated in the video about this belief system
description. She should be. It is a hot spot for her personally and
for Warner Brothers financially.

If Rowling had wished to deny *any* Christian motive, this would have
been the perfect opportunity to do so. Oprah wasn't asking questions
randomly; the interview was the culmination of topics they had
reviewed and approved.

She could have said: "I did not write Harry Potter with any intention
of promoting Christianity; the repeated Christian themes were
impossible to /not/ have been in the books."

Instead we hear "not trying to convert" and not "pushing"...a subset
of the Christian faith (Anglican, etc).

Ms, Rowling, the brightest witch <writer> of her time? :)

[Draco Malfoy]

Post by VD

Post by box750

Post by Ian Anderson

Post by unknown

Post by VD

Post by Sidney Lambe
There are over 30,000+ offcially-recognized demoninations of
Christianity in the world today. And who knows how many
sects, orders, and cults?
Many of those organizations have highly-qualified scholars that
are experts in the languages involved. Duh.
And still, Christianity is a tower of babel full of arrogant and
stupid people like you who think they are the only one who can
properly interpret the original Biblical documents.
Many of those "denominations" are, in practical terms, not even
the same religions.
Shove your creepy religion. It stinks, and Harry Potter is
much more metaphysically accurate than it is.

Mr. Lambe, I see that you haven't lost your expertise in overly
expressed irrationality and inaccuracy compelled by ignorance ;>)
I have invited you several times to shoot over to alt.fan.harry-potter
and discuss this very subject. Instead, you feel demonically required
to crosspost your opinions without ever debating them. Sadly, I
confess, I bite once again.
Ms. Rowling has made it abundantly clear that the HP series was in
fact a compelling case of exposing the concepts and beliefs of
Christianity, at least her and her compatriots version of it. Here are
two links of facts from ms. Rowling and following discussions that
will educate you on this matter.
Proof Harry Is Rowling's "Jesus"
http://preview.tinyurl.com/3f6gx3j
Rowling On Oprah Re: Belief Systems" by VD
http://preview.tinyurl.com/3bft8ry
You will note that there exists a significant, conspiratorial effort
by Ms. Rowling to advance her/HP Christian fundamentals
BeauSeigneurs - Christian Collaborators Exposed? and
What Did The Christian Community and J.K.Rowling Get From The
Conspiracy To Link Harry Potter To Jesus?
I would also point you to...
http://preview.tinyurl.com/4y7rljf
...an excellent observation by our own Mr. Malfoy which highligts the
anti-Jewish sentiments of Ms. Rowling that juxtaposes her
pro-Christian theme in HP.
Conclusion? It is impossible for Harry Potter to be "much more
metaphysically accurate than Christianity" for obvious reasons.

Rowling places her work in a clearly Christian _cultural_ framework,
and all of the above are, in my view, cultural references, just as
the images of her characters celebrating both Christmas and Easter
(in both cases, by the way, emphasizing the old pagan elements of the
modern holidays while having nothing clearly Christian [with the
possible exception of the Christmas carols sung by the armor suits at
Hogwarts]). As pointed out elsewhere, some people believing in
witchcraft have seen the Potter books as showing their culture and
their traditions very, very well indeed.

But Harry Potter is also about the fight of Good against Evil, and
about the fact that power corrupts, and that sometimes people have to
make sacrifices to be able to save others.
I have not read the HP books often enough to be able to draw a clear
parallel to Christian ideas, but I wouldn't rule out that some
closer inspection would find the one thing or the other.
Maybe I should do a re-reading :-) especially since Rowling has opened
her kimono re: her Christian underbelly.

No it isn't. You might as well call "Ben-Hur" a Christian allegory.

You have to reach a bit inside Ms. Rowling to get to her underlying
Christian commitment.
*Oprah:* "While Jo may have millions of fans around the world, she
also has her critics. Some have labeled Harry Potter as being too
dark and frightening for children. There have been religious critics
who have accused the books of promoting witchcraft, and some have
even campaigned for the books to be banned from schools. Jo says she
wasn't trying to make a religious statement when she wrote the books"
[that she was not trying to convert people to Christianity]
*Rowling:* "No, no, I am not. I'm not pushing any belief system here,"
she says. "Although there is a lot of Christian imagery in the books.
That's undeniable. But that's an allusion to a belief system in which
I was raised."
Go to 13:00 to 15:15
http://video.the-leaky-cauldron.org/video/1629
Notice how Rowling uses the term "belief system" which should be
translated as "particular faith i.e. Catholicism, Anglicanism, etc."
within the global concept of Christianity; as magic is a belief
system (within the global concept of wizarding). She was talking
about both of those belief systems in her response.
Rowling is very animated in the video about this belief system
description. She should be. It is a hot spot for her personally and
for Warner Brothers financially.
If Rowling had wished to deny *any* Christian motive, this would have
been the perfect opportunity to do so. Oprah wasn't asking questions
randomly; the interview was the culmination of topics they had
reviewed and approved.
She could have said: "I did not write Harry Potter with any intention
of promoting Christianity; the repeated Christian themes were
impossible to /not/ have been in the books."
Instead we hear "not trying to convert" and not "pushing"...a subset
of the Christian faith (Anglican, etc).
Ms, Rowling, the brightest witch <writer> of her time? :)

Look, there is no use in anyone include PedoLambe trying to undo
Rowling's own words. She admits to her Christian purposes for HP and
admits it was her fundamental reason for writing HP. What are you
going to do call her a fucking liar?

[zayton]

Post by VD

Post by box750

Post by Ian Anderson

Post by unknown

Post by VD

Post by Sidney Lambe
There are over 30,000+ offcially-recognized demoninations of
Christianity in the world today. And who knows how many
sects, orders, and cults?
Many of those organizations have highly-qualified scholars that
are experts in the languages involved. Duh.
And still, Christianity is a tower of babel full of arrogant and
stupid people like you who think they are the only one who can
properly interpret the original Biblical documents.
Many of those "denominations" are, in practical terms, not even
the same religions.
Shove your creepy religion. It stinks, and Harry Potter is
much more metaphysically accurate than it is.

Mr. Lambe, I see that you haven't lost your expertise in overly
expressed irrationality and inaccuracy compelled by ignorance ;>)
I have invited you several times to shoot over to
alt.fan.harry-potter and discuss this very subject. Instead, you
feel demonically required to crosspost your opinions without ever
debating them. Sadly, I confess, I bite once again.
Ms. Rowling has made it abundantly clear that the HP series was in
fact a compelling case of exposing the concepts and beliefs of
Christianity, at least her and her compatriots version of it.
Here are two links of facts from ms. Rowling and following
discussions that will educate you on this matter.
Proof Harry Is Rowling's "Jesus"
http://preview.tinyurl.com/3f6gx3j
Rowling On Oprah Re: Belief Systems" by VD
http://preview.tinyurl.com/3bft8ry
You will note that there exists a significant, conspiratorial
effort by Ms. Rowling to advance her/HP Christian fundamentals
BeauSeigneurs - Christian Collaborators Exposed? and
What Did The Christian Community and J.K.Rowling Get From The
Conspiracy To Link Harry Potter To Jesus?
I would also point you to...
http://preview.tinyurl.com/4y7rljf
...an excellent observation by our own Mr. Malfoy which highligts
the anti-Jewish sentiments of Ms. Rowling that juxtaposes her
pro-Christian theme in HP.
Conclusion? It is impossible for Harry Potter to be "much more
metaphysically accurate than Christianity" for obvious reasons.

Rowling places her work in a clearly Christian _cultural_
framework, and all of the above are, in my view, cultural
references, just as the images of her characters celebrating both
Christmas and Easter (in both cases, by the way, emphasizing the
old pagan elements of the modern holidays while having nothing
clearly Christian [with the possible exception of the Christmas
carols sung by the armor suits at Hogwarts]). As pointed out
elsewhere, some people believing in witchcraft have seen the
Potter books as showing their culture and their traditions very,
very well indeed.

But Harry Potter is also about the fight of Good against Evil, and
about the fact that power corrupts, and that sometimes people have
to make sacrifices to be able to save others.
I have not read the HP books often enough to be able to draw a clear
parallel to Christian ideas, but I wouldn't rule out that some
closer inspection would find the one thing or the other.
Maybe I should do a re-reading :-) especially since Rowling has
opened her kimono re: her Christian underbelly.

No it isn't. You might as well call "Ben-Hur" a Christian allegory.

You have to reach a bit inside Ms. Rowling to get to her underlying
Christian commitment.
*Oprah:* "While Jo may have millions of fans around the world, she
also has her critics. Some have labeled Harry Potter as being too
dark and frightening for children. There have been religious critics
who have accused the books of promoting witchcraft, and some have
even campaigned for the books to be banned from schools. Jo says she
wasn't trying to make a religious statement when she wrote the books"
[that she was not trying to convert people to Christianity]
*Rowling:* "No, no, I am not. I'm not pushing any belief system here,"
she says. "Although there is a lot of Christian imagery in the books.
That's undeniable. But that's an allusion to a belief system in which
I was raised."
Go to 13:00 to 15:15
http://video.the-leaky-cauldron.org/video/1629
Notice how Rowling uses the term "belief system" which should be
translated as "particular faith i.e. Catholicism, Anglicanism, etc."
within the global concept of Christianity; as magic is a belief
system (within the global concept of wizarding). She was talking
about both of those belief systems in her response.
Rowling is very animated in the video about this belief system
description. She should be. It is a hot spot for her personally and
for Warner Brothers financially.
If Rowling had wished to deny *any* Christian motive, this would have
been the perfect opportunity to do so.

But she did precicely that.
*Rowling:* "No, no, I am not. I'm not pushing any belief system here,"




Oprah wasn't asking questions

Post by VD
randomly; the interview was the culmination of topics they had
reviewed and approved.
She could have said: "I did not write Harry Potter with any intention
of promoting Christianity; the repeated Christian themes were
impossible to /not/ have been in the books."

*Rowling:* "No, no, I am not. I'm not pushing any belief system here,"

Post by VD
Instead we hear "not trying to convert" and not "pushing"...a subset
of the Christian faith (Anglican, etc).

*Rowling:* "No, no, I am not. I'm not pushing any belief system here,"

"_any belief system_"
_>

Post by VD
Ms, Rowling, the brightest witch <writer> of her time? :)

[VD]

Post by zayton

Post by VD
http://video.the-leaky-cauldron.org/video/1629
Notice how Rowling uses the term "belief system" which should be
translated as "particular faith i.e. Catholicism, Anglicanism, etc."
within the global concept of Christianity; as magic is a belief
system (within the global concept of wizarding). She was talking
about both of those belief systems in her response.
Rowling is very animated in the video about this belief system
description. She should be. It is a hot spot for her personally and
for Warner Brothers financially.
If Rowling had wished to deny *any* Christian motive, this would have
been the perfect opportunity to do so.

But she did precicely that.
*Rowling:* "No, no, I am not. I'm not pushing any belief system here,"

zayton, my statement is clear.

[Draco Malfoy]

Post by box750

Post by Ian Anderson

Post by unknown

Post by VD

Post by Sidney Lambe
There are over 30,000+ offcially-recognized demoninations of
Christianity in the world today. And who knows how many
sects, orders, and cults?
Many of those organizations have highly-qualified scholars that
are experts in the languages involved. Duh.
And still, Christianity is a tower of babel full of arrogant and
stupid people like you who think they are the only one who can
properly interpret the original Biblical documents.
Many of those "denominations" are, in practical terms, not even
the same religions.
Shove your creepy religion. It stinks, and Harry Potter is
much more metaphysically accurate than it is.

Mr. Lambe, I see that you haven't lost your expertise in overly
expressed irrationality and inaccuracy compelled by ignorance ;>)
I have invited you several times to shoot over to alt.fan.harry-potter
and discuss this very subject. Instead, you feel demonically required
to crosspost your opinions without ever debating them. Sadly, I
confess, I bite once again.
Ms. Rowling has made it abundantly clear that the HP series was in
fact a compelling case of exposing the concepts and beliefs of
Christianity, at least her and her compatriots version of it. Here are
two links of facts from ms. Rowling and following discussions that
will educate you on this matter.
Proof Harry Is Rowling's "Jesus"
http://preview.tinyurl.com/3f6gx3j
Rowling On Oprah Re: Belief Systems" by VD
http://preview.tinyurl.com/3bft8ry
You will note that there exists a significant, conspiratorial effort
by Ms. Rowling to advance her/HP Christian fundamentals
BeauSeigneurs - Christian Collaborators Exposed? and
What Did The Christian Community and J.K.Rowling Get From The
Conspiracy To Link Harry Potter To Jesus?
I would also point you to...
http://preview.tinyurl.com/4y7rljf
...an excellent observation by our own Mr. Malfoy which highligts the
anti-Jewish sentiments of Ms. Rowling that juxtaposes her
pro-Christian theme in HP.
Conclusion? It is impossible for Harry Potter to be "much more
metaphysically accurate than Christianity" for obvious reasons.

Rowling places her work in a clearly Christian _cultural_ framework,
and all of the above are, in my view, cultural references, just as
the images of her characters celebrating both Christmas and Easter
(in both cases, by the way, emphasizing the old pagan elements of the
modern holidays while having nothing clearly Christian [with the
possible exception of the Christmas carols sung by the armor suits at
Hogwarts]). As pointed out elsewhere, some people believing in
witchcraft have seen the Potter books as showing their culture and
their traditions very, very well indeed.

But Harry Potter is also about the fight of Good against Evil, and
about the fact that power corrupts, and that sometimes people have to
make sacrifices to be able to save others.
I have not read the HP books often enough to be able to draw a clear
parallel to Christian ideas, but I wouldn't rule out that some
closer inspection would find the one thing or the other.
Maybe I should do a re-reading :-) especially since Rowling has opened
her kimono re: her Christian underbelly.

No it isn't. You might as well call "Ben-Hur" a Christian allegory.

WTF?

Take a read:

<http://www.mugglenet.com/editorials/editorials/edit-beauseigneura01.shtml>

*CONCLUSION*

Rowling maintains,

“There is one thing that if anyone guessed I would be really
annoyed, as it is kind of the heart of it all. And it kind of explains
everything...everything has been building up to it, and I’ve laid all
my clues.”(245)

She has laid her clues. She has said she couldn’t answer questions
about the book’s religious content until the conclusion of book
seven.(246)

When questioned about her belief in God, Rowling avoids the question.

“This is so frustrating. Again, there is so much I would like to
say, and come back when I’ve written book seven. But then maybe [I]
won’t need to even say it ’cause you’ll have found it out anyway.
You’ll have read it.”(247)

She cautiously contradicts an interviewer’s assertion that her books
are free of references to God. “Um. I don’t think they’re that
secular,” she says, choosing her words slowly. “But, obviously,
Dumbledore is not Jesus.”(248)

Of course he isn’t – Harry is.

She has told us where to look to find out what is coming in the final
book – her Christianity. She has told us that it’s so easy a 10-year
-old could figure it out.(249)

The secret to Harry Potter is tied to Rowling’s Christianity. The
master of the red herring has done it. She has tricked the entire
world. What appears to be a book about witchcraft is a story about
Jesus Christ.

<eom>

[Draco Malfoy]

Post by unknown

Post by VD

Post by Sidney Lambe
There are over 30,000+ offcially-recognized demoninations of
Christianity in the world today. And who knows how many
sects, orders, and cults?
Many of those organizations have highly-qualified scholars that
are experts in the languages involved. Duh.
And still, Christianity is a tower of babel full of arrogant and
stupid people like you who think they are the only one who can
properly interpret the original Biblical documents.
Many of those "denominations" are, in practical terms, not even
the same religions.
Shove your creepy religion. It stinks, and Harry Potter is
much more metaphysically accurate than it is.

Mr. Lambe, I see that you haven't lost your expertise in overly
expressed irrationality and inaccuracy compelled by ignorance ;>)
I have invited you several times to shoot over to alt.fan.harry-potter
and discuss this very subject. Instead, you feel demonically required
to crosspost your opinions without ever debating them. Sadly, I
confess, I bite once again.
Ms. Rowling has made it abundantly clear that the HP series was in
fact a compelling case of exposing the concepts and beliefs of
Christianity, at least her and her compatriots version of it. Here are
two links of facts from ms. Rowling and following discussions that
will educate you on this matter.
Proof Harry Is Rowling's "Jesus"
http://preview.tinyurl.com/3f6gx3j
Rowling On Oprah Re: Belief Systems" by VD
http://preview.tinyurl.com/3bft8ry
You will note that there exists a significant, conspiratorial effort
by Ms. Rowling to advance her/HP Christian fundamentals
BeauSeigneurs - Christian Collaborators Exposed? and
What Did The Christian Community and J.K.Rowling Get From The
Conspiracy To Link Harry Potter To Jesus?
I would also point you to...
http://preview.tinyurl.com/4y7rljf
...an excellent observation by our own Mr. Malfoy which highligts the
anti-Jewish sentiments of Ms. Rowling that juxtaposes her
pro-Christian theme in HP.
Conclusion? It is impossible for Harry Potter to be "much more
metaphysically accurate than Christianity" for obvious reasons.

Rowling places her work in a clearly Christian _cultural_ framework,
and all of the above are, in my view, cultural references, just as
the images of her characters celebrating both Christmas and Easter
(in both cases, by the way, emphasizing the old pagan elements of the
modern holidays while having nothing clearly Christian [with the
possible exception of the Christmas carols sung by the armor suits at
Hogwarts]). As pointed out elsewhere, some people believing in
witchcraft have seen the Potter books as showing their culture and
their traditions very, very well indeed.

That's enough conditional and circumstantial evidence that a
speechless prosecutor could get a conviction with sign language. lol

Let's see what we have here.

-James BeauSeigneur (JB) Christ Clone Trilogy rights were sold and
reclaimed from Warner Brothers (WB).

<- http://www.facebook.com/ChristCloneTrilogy/posts/110104832373052>

- JB's daughter Abigail BeauSeigneur (AB) writes an *extremely* and
*extraordinarily* timely pro-Harry Potter piece for Mugglenet

<http://www.mugglenet.com/editorials/editorials/edit-beauseigneura01.s...>

and

http://www.selectivehouse.com/harrypotter.htm

- The piece was written in July 13, 2007 when

http://www.accio-quote.org/articles/list2007.html

*7* years *after Ms. Rowling (JKR) admits the Christian intentions* in
writing Potter.

<http://www.accio-quote.org/articles/2000/1000-vancouversun-wyman.htm>

- AB has been given the rare privilege of interviewing JKR

"Ms. BeauSeigneur builds her argument on interviews with Harry Potter
author J.K. Rowling..."

http://www.christiannewswire.com/news/715373653.html

and the Christian tabloids run with it.

- The inside cover of the U.S. edition of "Deathly Hallows" has "the
end of the piece, which is on the US edition's cover and viewable on
Amazon"...<not corroborated)

http://hsc.homestead.com/archive/2007/07_16_adler.html

Did I miss anything?

[Draco Malfoy]

Post by David Dalton
have performed a perineum click divination that the four post-judged
collaborative components are on so for now I'm just hoping that the
four post-judged collaborative components will have a gradual and
subtle effect.
I am hoping that they will be able to split Ron and Hermione into anal
enemies.
DD

Go for it. I'm all over that working out. lol

[Sidney Lambe]

Post by Draco Malfoy

Post by David Dalton
have performed a perineum click divination that the four post-judged
collaborative components are on so for now I'm just hoping that the
four post-judged collaborative components will have a gradual and
subtle effect.
I am hoping that they will be able to split Ron and Hermione into anal
enemies.
DD

Go for it. I'm all over that working out. lol

You are aware that I am still fucking Emma and
have been since she wat 10. Wiccan ceremonies.

[Draco Malfoy]

Post by Sidney Lambe

Post by Draco Malfoy

Post by David Dalton
have performed a perineum click divination that the four post-judged
collaborative components are on so for now I'm just hoping that the
four post-judged collaborative components will have a gradual and
subtle effect.
I am hoping that they will be able to split Ron and Hermione into anal
enemies.
DD

Go for it. I'm all over that working out. lol

You are aware that I am still fucking Emma and
have been since she wat 10. Wiccan ceremonies.

Yeah, got it Lambe. Fucking Emma. Yeah.

Yikes! I just had a horrible thought. What if Lambe and Ginny
WeaseLey should get together and procreate? I would think the result
would be quite horrid, all ass and no forehead, three balls and a
blue cravat.

[Sidney Lambe]

Post by David Dalton

Post by Sidney Lambe

Post by Angelique Bouchard

Post by Sidney Lambe
See? The Bible is a confusing document!<

Depends on which language you speak and comprehend.

You are so full of shit that it is coming out your mouth.
There are over 30,000+ offcially-recognized demoninations of
Christianity in the world today. And who knows how many
sects, orders, and cults?
Many of those organizations have highly-qualified scholars that
are experts in the languages involved. Duh.
And still, Christianity is a tower of babel full of arrogant and
stupid people like you who think they are the only one who can
properly interpret the original Biblical documents.
Many of those "denominations" are, in practical terms, not even
the same religions.
Shove your creepy religion. It stinks, and Harry Potter is
much more metaphysically accurate than it is.

I have performed a perineum click divination that the four post-judged
collaborative components are on so for now I'm just hoping that the
four post-judged collaborative components will have a gradual and
subtle effect.
I am hoping that they will be able to split Ron and Hermione into anal
enemies.
DD

I really can't tell whether this is David himself, or someone
parodying him.

[A B]

Post by Sidney Lambe

Post by David Dalton

Post by Sidney Lambe

Post by Angelique Bouchard

Post by Sidney Lambe
See? The Bible is a confusing document!<

Depends on which language you speak and comprehend.

You are so full of shit that it is coming out your mouth.
There are over 30,000+ offcially-recognized demoninations of
Christianity in the world today. And who knows how many
sects, orders, and cults?
Many of those organizations have highly-qualified scholars that
are experts in the languages involved. Duh.
And still, Christianity is a tower of babel full of arrogant and
stupid people like you who think they are the only one who can
properly interpret the original Biblical documents.
Many of those "denominations" are, in practical terms, not even
the same religions.
Shove your creepy religion. It stinks, and Harry Potter is
much more metaphysically accurate than it is.

I have performed a perineum click divination that the four post-judged
collaborative components are on so for now I'm just hoping that the
four post-judged collaborative components will have a gradual and
subtle effect.
I am hoping that they will be able to split Ron and Hermione into anal
enemies.
DD

I really can't tell whether this is David himself, or someone
parodying him.

Of course you can't then you are as stupid as a lightpole.

[Draco Malfoy]

Post by A B

Post by Sidney Lambe

Post by David Dalton

Post by Sidney Lambe

Post by Angelique Bouchard

Post by Sidney Lambe
See? The Bible is a confusing document!<

Depends on which language you speak and comprehend.

You are so full of shit that it is coming out your mouth.
There are over 30,000+ offcially-recognized demoninations of
Christianity in the world today. And who knows how many
sects, orders, and cults?
Many of those organizations have highly-qualified scholars that
are experts in the languages involved. Duh.
And still, Christianity is a tower of babel full of arrogant and
stupid people like you who think they are the only one who can
properly interpret the original Biblical documents.
Many of those "denominations" are, in practical terms, not even
the same religions.
Shove your creepy religion. It stinks, and Harry Potter is
much more metaphysically accurate than it is.

I have performed a perineum click divination that the four post-judged
collaborative components are on so for now I'm just hoping that the
four post-judged collaborative components will have a gradual and
subtle effect.
I am hoping that they will be able to split Ron and Hermione into anal
enemies.
DD

I really can't tell whether this is David himself, or someone
parodying him.

Of course you can't then you are as stupid as a lightpole.

Keep lightpoles out of this.

They don't go around preaching all puffy chested about defiling little
girls and lying about having sex with Emma Watson pre-puberty like
Lambe.

[Angelique Bouchard]

Post by Angelique Bouchard

Post by Sidney Lambe
See? The Bible is a confusing document!<

Depends on which language you speak and comprehend.

You are so full of shit that it is coming out your mouth.<

The Scottish say, "shittin through yer tith (teeth) means throwing up,
though.

There are over 30,000+ offcially-recognized demoninations of
Christianity in the world today. And who knows how many
sects, orders, and cults?<

Quite a few and even more since many Congregations have softened
Christianity to make it more palatable and get membership up. I love
the Catholic Religion but I am not a fan of "Pope-ism" or the
corruption. Early Christianity is amazing. The closest I feel
comfortable with is Episcopalian, which weirdly, I found out in my
Family Tree recently, my Great Grandfather came from Scotland and
formed/built the very same when he landed in America. I guess life
really is a circle.

Many of those organizations have highly-qualified scholars that
are experts in the languages involved. Duh.<

Agreed and the same is discussed and debated to this day. The
translation problems.

And still, Christianity is a tower of babel full of arrogant and
stupid people like you who think they are the only one who can
properly interpret the original Biblical documents.<

Wow, not sure where you picked up that I thought I was the only one.
Which original Biblical Documents? The ones that make the Bible of
today or the ones in the Vatican Archives? Still, yes, I have come to
the conclusion that the cornerstone, in fact the whole foundation is
built on the Christian concept. Jesus being the Savior.

Many of those "denominations" are, in practical terms, not even
the same religions.<

Agreed. Changed by humans down the line. Softened to take the fear out
of the ending. Softened to the English version of what love is. Good
example is that the Bible says many times we go into sleep state when
we die until the Second Coming of Christ. Ministers and people to this
day over ride that and say we are in Heaven when they lose a loved
one. We even say, they are now an angel which the Bible states are
creatures created by God. Not humans. All to comfort ourselves. Except
I question why many Denominations need that comfort if they totally
trust God to begin with. There are even those who claim they believe
in God and Jesus and have convinced themselves Angel Divination and
Channeling are of God. He, clearly states 'divination' is forbidden.
Since Angels were created by him, to serve him, they would not be
divination tools.

Shove your creepy religion. It stinks, and Harry Potter is
much more metaphysically accurate than it is.<

Doubtful, but if it makes you feel better.The silly world of
paganism.

[Sidney Lambe]

On Wed, 15 Jun 2011 19:09:04 -0700 (PDT), Angelique Bouchard wrote:

Do you like my new bitch filter, "Bouchard"?

It allows me to call up a response with the body deleted, so that
Idon't have to see the ignorant rantings of fools like you.

Here's your clue for the decade: Just because billions of people
believe that something is true with all their hearts, does not
mean that it is.

But I do understand your defensiveness about your bullshitters
religion. All religious fanatics believe that their beliefs are
facts. It goes with the territory. And they don't like what they
think of as facts to be questioned.

They do not like thinking for themselves.

I do not read the replies of this pompous fool. Dumb parrots with
fat heads are a dime-a-dozen on the Internet.

[Sidney Lambe]

A bunch more bitchy stuff that she has been posting for years in
her feeble attempts to drive me away.

Good thing for me that the woo-woo she calls "magick" couldn't
make water wet.

[delete]

Do like my new bitch filter? It allows me to call up a reply with the
body deleted.

[Daniel Baumgarten]

Post by Angelique Bouchard
Believe in the Holy Trinity or you don't get to Heaven. So, big deal.
What is the problem? Why are you and others so threatened by it? I see
more insults towards Christians from Pagans then I do the other way
around.

Neopagans and new agers ought to feel more threatened by Christianity
than vice-versa. Many of them are converted from Christianity during
adolescence. Christianity represents a despised parent, an abusive
authority, the broken promises of youth. (I am also describing my own
adolescent conversion to atheism here.)

Much of the new age scene today comes from sources that were openly
hostile to Christianity. 19th century Romanticism, which rejected the
levelling-down of Enlightenment humanism without returning to
Christianity, is the paradigm of "spiritual unbelief." Traditional
concepts such as ritual sacrifice, and Christian concepts such as
original sin, are discarded as barbaric, just as they are in
Enlightenment humanism; but the yearning for transformation that
exclusive humanism often fails to provide for is addressed in the domain
of the aesthetic by giving art and the experience of beauty a new,
central significance. That's the gist of it, anyway.

Post by Angelique Bouchard
The fact as pagans remains the same. Pagan Gods and Goddess's really
do not give a crap what you do with your lives or what becomes of you
after. If they don't like you out of the blue, they turn their back on
you. They are not bound to Humans. They use humans. The trade off is
you are not bound to the Gods either. No set of rules to follow and
gosh, humans are so darn compassionate and non violent when left to
themselves..Not a hint of self centeredness..Bah.. Arrogance and
stubbornness.

The old pagan religions before the rise of Christianity were full of
rules to follow, and many of the gods demanded sacrifice. Before the
modern world, warfare was commonly considered the highest human
activity, the one action that brought us closest to God or the gods.

The gods of neopaganism seem indifferent to human affairs by contrast,
because they are usually allegorical figures -- dead gods. I would be
interested to hear from a neopagan who believes in their gods in the
same way that a Christian or a Jew believes in God, by the way. Is there
anyone ritually sacrificing to their god who can read this and wants to
share their perspective?

[Dennes De Mennes]

In article <a1b5ee7f-8ebe-4e5f-b2bb-

Post by Angelique Bouchard
Or there is no way to the Father, except through him.

no one argues the metaphysical concept, just that some actual feller
came to earth and played the role... only fools would think that...

Post by Angelique Bouchard
Guess time will
tell, but as Zayton pointed out in another post, there are finding
more and more in archaeological digs, events and proof that matches

nothing can violate the laws of physics, not even god as we know
him/her. maybe once we leave the body we may see god in his/her true
manifestation, but not from our level...

everything in christianity comes from earlier cults, every single word
of it... there's nothing original in there...

octinomos

[Meltdarok]

Post by Dennes De Mennes
In article <a1b5ee7f-8ebe-4e5f-b2bb-

Post by Angelique Bouchard
Or there is no way to the Father, except through him.

no one argues the metaphysical concept, just that some actual feller
came to earth and played the role... only fools would think that...

Then you are not quite *grasping* the concept. He was *not* the first.
What he did was bring into *SHARP* conceptualization that Life is
precious, and sacrifice is *wrong*. The next step is a conscious
decision
to eat further down the food chain than mammals; then to stop eating
animals at all and start eating milk, honey, and fruits instead.

Post by Dennes De Mennes

Post by Angelique Bouchard
Guess time will
tell, but as Zayton pointed out in another post, there are finding
more and more in archaeological digs, events and proof that matches

nothing can violate the laws of physics, not even god as we know
him/her. maybe once we leave the body we may see god in his/her true
manifestation, but not from our level...

Heh, heh, that's how come I like the Bhagavad Gita! You can glean the
metaphysical conceptions *without* stupid arguments over if the story
is true or not.

Post by Dennes De Mennes
everything in christianity comes from earlier cults, every single word
of it... there's nothing original in there...

It's not about originality, it's the assumption that Jesus of Nazareth
*is*
the Christ (it is entirely possible that the *Christ* is some other
Hebrew
fellow), hence the propaganda of the New Testament. But of course,
that
is neither here nor there; Life on Earth is one *big* FAMILY. Period.

Post by Dennes De Mennes
octinomos

[Meltdarok]

Post by Meltdarok

Post by Dennes De Mennes
In article <a1b5ee7f-8ebe-4e5f-b2bb-

Snip-a-reeno<<<

everything in christianity comes from earlier cults, every single word
of it... there's nothing original in there...

It's not about originality, it's the assumption that Jesus of Nazareth
*is*
the Christ (it is entirely possible that the *Christ* is some other
Hebrew
fellow), hence the propaganda of the New Testament. But of course,
that
is neither here nor there; Life on Earth is one *big* FAMILY. Period.

Here it is nicely spelled out in a secular way.

Post by Meltdarok

Post by Dennes De Mennes
octinomos

[Dennes De Mennes]

In article <12cf70bf-2c3f-4ae1-9cf3-966df34f0b69
@fp11g2000vbb.googlegroups.com>, ***@aol.com says...

Post by Meltdarok

Post by Meltdarok

Post by Dennes De Mennes
In article <a1b5ee7f-8ebe-4e5f-b2bb-

Snip-a-reeno<<<

everything in christianity comes from earlier cults, every single word
of it... there's nothing original in there...

It's not about originality, it's the assumption that Jesus of Nazareth
*is*
the Christ (it is entirely possible that the *Christ* is some other
Hebrew
fellow), hence the propaganda of the New Testament. But of course,
that
is neither here nor there; Life on Earth is one *big* FAMILY. Period.

Here it is nicely spelled out in a secular way.
http://youtu.be/l7AWnfFRc7g

if you thought you had already explained it in the previous post, why
does it need to be further clarified... i don't like viewing videos
because on dialup it takes too long...

but you're right, what you wrote before made no sense, so i can see
where you felt you had to further explain it...

if christ works for you, then he is your messiah and master or whatever
you want, but there are good people who are atheist, who have never
heard of jesus and they're no worse morally than the christian folk.

clearly many jews don't accept christ, and they still have some kind of
relationship with their god as they understand him...and don't seem to
be lacking in spirituality.

i don't understand why this pressure to all be christian... let people
be whatever they want, so long as there's some moral compass even a
social one... doesn't even need to have religious connotations at all...

we're one family, but brothers fight, also...

octinomos

[Meltdarok]

Post by Dennes De Mennes
In article <12cf70bf-2c3f-4ae1-9cf3-966df34f0b69
@fp11g2000vbb.googlegroups.com>, ***@aol.com says...

Post by Meltdarok

Post by Meltdarok

Post by Dennes De Mennes
In article <a1b5ee7f-8ebe-4e5f-b2bb-

Snip-a-reeno<<<

everything in christianity comes from earlier cults, every single word
of it... there's nothing original in there...

It's not about originality, it's the assumption that Jesus of Nazareth
*is*
the Christ (it is entirely possible that the *Christ* is some other
Hebrew
fellow), hence the propaganda of the New Testament. But of course,
that
is neither here nor there; Life on Earth is one *big* FAMILY. Period.

Here it is nicely spelled out in a secular way.
http://youtu.be/l7AWnfFRc7g

if you thought you had already explained it in the previous post, why
does it need to be further clarified... i don't like viewing videos
because on dialup it takes too long...

Ok.

Post by Dennes De Mennes
but you're right, what you wrote before made no sense, so i can see
where you felt you had to further explain it...
if christ works for you, then he is your messiah and master or whatever
you want, but there are good people who are atheist, who have never
heard of jesus and they're no worse morally than the christian folk.

this what you don't understand yet, Christ transcends religion.
We are all part of the Entity formerly known as God, as such
have the chance to live on as 'energy' stored in other people's
brain as 'memories'. Good memories are "Heaven," bad ones
are "Hell".

Post by Dennes De Mennes
clearly many jews don't accept christ, and they still have some kind of
relationship with their god as they understand him...and don't seem to
be lacking in spirituality.

The Universe is alive, deal with it; no 'religion' required as we
upgrade
our respect.

Post by Dennes De Mennes
i don't understand why this pressure to all be christian... let people
be whatever they want, so long as there's some moral compass even a
social one... doesn't even need to have religious connotations at all...

No, there need be no 'religious' connotation at all, just respect for
the
BIG, HUGE, GIGANTIC being that is our larger Self.

Post by Dennes De Mennes
we're one family, but brothers fight, also...

Yeah, in the Bhagavad Gita, the warrior Arjuna was on the battlefield
in his chariot, about to face the enemy that was still his family--
when
he found out that his chariot driver was God. LOL!

I still crack up over the image I got when I read my first translation
of
when Vishnu appeared to Arjuna in His true form:


Vishnu: Yes, Arjuna! You *must* feel sadness at fighting your
brothers!

Arjuna: Lord?

Vishnu: But you are a warrior! And this battle must be fought!

Arjuna: Lord?

Vishnu: After the battle you will have time to morn for the dead I
take!

Arjuna: Lord!!!?

Vishnu: What is it Arjuna?

Arjuna: You are so sublime I am about to be destroyed!

Vishnu: Err, oh sorry Arjuna.

Post by Dennes De Mennes
octinomos

[Lady Azure, Baroness of the North Pole]

Post by Meltdarok

Post by Dennes De Mennes
In article <a1b5ee7f-8ebe-4e5f-b2bb-

Post by Angelique Bouchard
Or there is no way to the Father, except through him.

no one argues the metaphysical concept, just that some actual feller
came to earth and played the role... only fools would think that...

Then you are not quite *grasping* the concept. He was *not* the first.
What he did was bring into *SHARP* conceptualization that Life is
precious, and sacrifice is *wrong*. The next step is a conscious
decision
to eat further down the food chain than mammals; then to stop eating
animals at all and start eating milk, honey, and fruits instead.

Post by Dennes De Mennes

Post by Angelique Bouchard
Guess time will
tell, but as Zayton pointed out in another post, there are finding
more and more in archaeological digs, events and proof that matches

nothing can violate the laws of physics, not even god as we know
him/her. maybe once we leave the body we may see god in his/her true
manifestation, but not from our level...

Heh, heh, that's how come I like the Bhagavad Gita! You can glean the
metaphysical conceptions *without* stupid arguments over if the story
is true or not.

Post by Dennes De Mennes
everything in christianity comes from earlier cults, every single word
of it... there's nothing original in there...

It's not about originality, it's the assumption that Jesus of Nazareth
*is*
the Christ (it is entirely possible that the *Christ* is some other
Hebrew
fellow), hence the propaganda of the New Testament. But of course,
that
is neither here nor there; Life on Earth is one *big* FAMILY. Period.

Post by Dennes De Mennes
octinomos

Check the teachings of the MAASSIAH'S there are FAR more than "ONE"!
JESUS, isn't the First, the Last and damned well not THE ONLY "ONE", to ever
be Chosen, and ABSOLUTELY WAS "NOT" GOD, and SAID SO!

[Lady Azure, Baroness of the North Pole]

Post by Dennes De Mennes
In article <a1b5ee7f-8ebe-4e5f-b2bb-

Post by Angelique Bouchard
Or there is no way to the Father, except through him.

no one argues the metaphysical concept, just that some actual feller
came to earth and played the role... only fools would think that...

YEP!
You know!
Thing is the FOOLS, think it ONLY happened for them!
Once and ONCE Only!
Doesn't say that at all!
And "NEVER" say's JESUS, is "GOD"!
The CHURCH did that, during the Council of Nieciea!!

[Lady Azure, Baroness of the North Pole]

Post by Kaydon
Here's another piece for you all to discuss. It's another take on magic
and manifestation <3
"I am the way, the truth and the life. Noone comes to the Father except
through me."
"I am" is a form of the verb "To Be". Be the I AM. Be what you want to
become. Act it out. Be the vibrational match for what you want. I think
therefore I am. I am therefore I have.
"The way". Being I am is the way. If you are being I am in a negative
context, you will attract negative results. Being I am in a positive
sense, attracts positive results.
"The truth". The truth of this whole statement. That being I am is the
way.
"The life". Being I am is the way to the life you desire.
"Noone comes to the Father except through me." By being I am, you
attain union with the creative force in the universe (The Father). You
are the creative force (comes to the Father).
Have fun :o)
<3
xoxoxoxoo
--
"To be or not to be, that is the question. Unless you're a photon."

I caught that from Alice Bailey, she was GOOD at that kind of thing.
Few got the Hint!
Loved watching the Learned figure out Volumes of Encyclopedic Texts trying
to decipher the meaning of one word!