i'm lost...

[rmcdra]

Esiris

Sanguina Cruenta

Yeah, I get around the "Gnostics don't worship the god of Abraham" because they're descended from his religion, but the syncretic religions leave me dumbfounded.

I've seen some pagan authors call them pagan. Most of them are tied in with Christianity, so I guess it depends on if Christians would consider it heretical but not worth kicking them out or if it's worthy of excommunication.

Historical Gnostics were Christians. "Gnostic" was a catch-all term coined by St. Ireneus as a slur against various sects of Christianity he didn't like. The equating of Gnostics to pagan was basically a way for the Church to distant itself from these extremist sects and justify how they were the "true" heirs of Christian tradition, while the Christianities labeled as Gnostic were somehow corrupted forms of the true teachings.

Modern Gnostics are mixed in the Pagan/Abrahamic dichotomy. Some consider themselves Christian, some consider themselves Pagan. Some consider themselves both 0.0.

My group considers itself Abrahamic since our mythos is based in the Abrahamic religion but we know we are Judeo-Christians. Because of our differences in mythos my group will refer to us as Gentile Christians since we reject Abrahamic and Noahide Code.

As to how other Christians treat Gnostics it depends on the Church. Surprisingly, Catholics tend to be sympathetic to Gnostics that are close to Valentinianism since it's mostly a proto-Catholic system and if Valentianism is filled in the right way it doesn't necessarily conflict with Catholic teachings but is controversial to say the least. Liberal Anglicans tend to welcome Gnostics. As for other Churches it differs from church to church. Some Churches do consider Gnostics pagan and there's quite a bit of writings from various evangelical websites about how Gnosticism is "Paganism dressed up like Christianity". In the end it mainly depends on who's in charge of a particular church and if a Gnostic would be problematic for their church.  

[Esiris]

Sanguina Cruenta

I wouldn't consider them runes myself. Runes aren't symbols... They're mysteries. Separate energies.

Hmmmm... when I read over the site, I got the impression that there were/could be Mysteries in them.

rmcdra

Historical Gnostics were Christians. "Gnostic" was a catch-all term coined by St. Ireneus as a slur against various sects of Christianity he didn't like. The equating of Gnostics to pagan was basically a way for the Church to distant itself from these extremist sects and justify how they were the "true" heirs of Christian tradition, while the Christianities labeled as Gnostic were somehow corrupted forms of the true teachings.

Modern Gnostics are mixed in the Pagan/Abrahamic dichotomy. Some consider themselves Christian, some consider themselves Pagan. Some consider themselves both 0.0.

My group considers itself Abrahamic since our mythos is based in the Abrahamic religion but we know we are Judeo-Christians. Because of our differences in mythos my group will refer to us as Gentile Christians since we reject Abrahamic and Noahide Code.

As to how other Christians treat Gnostics it depends on the Church. Surprisingly, Catholics tend to be sympathetic to Gnostics that are close to Valentinianism since it's mostly a proto-Catholic system and if Valentianism is filled in the right way it doesn't necessarily conflict with Catholic teachings but is controversial to say the least. Liberal Anglicans tend to welcome Gnostics. As for other Churches it differs from church to church. Some Churches do consider Gnostics pagan and there's quite a bit of writings from various evangelical websites about how Gnosticism is "Paganism dressed up like Christianity". In the end it mainly depends on who's in charge of a particular church and if a Gnostic would be problematic for their church.

It gets too complicated for me. But then, every now and then some parishes up and decide they need to excommunicate Mambos, Houngans and other people- so I try and keep my head down.  

[Viz_22]

Esiris

Viz_22

Yeah, I can see your point in a lot of things. I still have no transport though... I'm at a university that's an hour away from home, but if I want to go home I need to arrange something with my parents.... Having a coven that could work for me that's seven hours away just... quite impossible right now sweatdrop

That's okay. wink

Quote:

I consider myself Wiccan (be it wrong in any one else's eye) because I follow the Rede as best I can (Hah...not a great point to make, right?)

Funny thing is the Rede isn't a foundation of Wicca. Most Wiccans I know talk about it philosophically, but it isn't part of Wicca itself.

Quote:

but I'm also working my way into having all the tools (money....bleh...).

Do you know how to consecrate them to make them Wiccan tools as opposed to another religions tool?

Please don't take this the wrong way, but even as a Seeker, I'm not seeing anything you mentioned that is Wiccan specific.

Quote:

I'm trying to become more traditional (I guess that makes me a Seeker - HA but eh...) because I would like to be in a coven - as long as it works for me.

Seeking can be an amazing experience, even if Wicca isn't where we end up.

Quote:

And yeah.... Maybe in some/most faiths/paths the deities do care about the structure that they are worshiped in, but what if someone created the lore to be that way to create structure to follow?

In that case, it would become obvious very quickly that the structure wasn't divine edict.

The quick way to test this would be to check the revelations of the peeps who aren't initiated against the ones who are.

Quote:

I feel that as long as the intention is there and that the deities receive attention, why should they care?

I figure it's got to do with the feeling that Wicca isn't about just any attention. Someone yelling at you is giving you attention- that doesn't mean it's welcomed attention.

Quote:

Besides, shouldn't they know the position you're in if you're unable to follow the structure exactly?

Yep, they know. Part of being a Seeker though is waiting and working towards the goal, even if you aren't where you want to be at that moment.

Quote:

So for now, I'll call myself Wiccan, though I'm probably Neo-Wiccan/Neo-Pagan or w.e.... If only because I'm working my way to that point.... If I offend anyone by calling myself Wiccan, I'll stop voicing it but I can't promise I still won't believe it :/

I know that it upsets some people on Gaia, and out of respect I tend not to do it myself.

I mean, there are lots of things Seekers can do that can piss off Wiccans- most of it has to do with feeling like we deserve to have them just give us whatever we want because we're asking.

Wiccans are Neo-pagans, and witches but they're something else too- not even something more, but something else. I don't think you should just have to take my word for it that you shouldn't call yourself Wiccan. But if you're willing to share more of what you believe and how you feel it makes you Wiccan, maybe you can understand where I'm coming from better. Is that okay?

Well, I guess I have a hard time defining what makes me believe it... I guess it's just a feeling?
But looking and thinking about it more, I thought maybe I'm more Neo-Wiccan? Because a good part of that applies to me (at least I think so...).  

[Esiris]

Viz_22

Well, I guess I have a hard time defining what makes me believe it... I guess it's just a feeling?
But looking and thinking about it more, I thought maybe I'm more Neo-Wiccan? Because a good part of that applies to me (at least I think so...).

See, a lot of this stuff isn't really Wiccan.
In my seeking, I've been part of the Outer Courts- the ones I have been with haven't really been anything like what they described.

When I looked at her resources at the bottom, they both are about two well established religions that aren't Wiccan. The first is Standing Stone, the second is Reclaiming- amazing and fulfilling paths, but not really Wiccan. Do you think one of those might be what you're seeking?  

[Viz_22]

Not sure... but I thought the Standing Stones was just an example Cunningham came up with in his book, not an actual pathway?  

[razielarcha]

Anannsul

Yes dragon runes. I shall link you. ^_^
Dragon-runes.com

I had a calling to runes and at first I thought norse.. so I collected some Popsicle sticks (because I had read you can use them) and I wrote down all the norse runes... but I NEVER put them on the sticks. Why? Because I didn't feel connected to the norse runes... so I just had a bag full of sticks with nothing on them. While searching for different types of Runes I saw dragons and immediately knew those were the ones. So these are my runes. ^_^ I used them quite often until I found my dragon tarot deck. (Which also took me a while to find.)

Anannsul, are you sure you have a connection to runes, or to the word/notion of dragons?

There's a tarot deck out there for about everything. I seriously bet I could find one for football or calculators if I looked hard enough. The pictures on them are just more pleasing to the person's eyes. They still have the same basic meanings which are basically European pagan. For example, The hanged man is often thought of as Odin hanging from Yggdasil in order to discover the runes.

Also, the dragon runes, as Sanguina said, don't really come off as runes. Bind runes maybe, but nothing connected with any historical lore. Try looking into the Norse runes again (from a reputable source. None of those Llewellyn publications). They should be able to explain to you how runes can be combined and stacked to look differently. Runes themselves can be as simple as the rune Isa to as complicated as the Helm of Awe. This site on the dragon runes, really doesn't come off well. From their 'Druatch' language, it really seems like they have been reading too much Tolkien. To me, it appears like they were trying to take syllables and possibly obscure words or names and tried to spell them in a Anglo-Saxon reminiscent style. Considering these are what appears to be bind runes and the language uses no grammar and sounds that would seem to be impossible for a dragon to use ( 'M' sound, 'W' sound... it would require lips to make those sounds) I would use caution. Just because they say that they are for dragons doesn't mean that they're not still Odin's.  

[Esiris]

Viz_22

Not sure... but I thought the Standing Stones was just an example Cunningham came up with in his book, not an actual pathway?

Standing Stone is a bona fide religious path.  

[Viz_22]

Esiris

Viz_22

Not sure... but I thought the Standing Stones was just an example Cunningham came up with in his book, not an actual pathway?

Standing Stone is a bona fide religious path.

You learn something new every day.  

[Anannsul]

razielarcha

Anannsul, are you sure you have a connection to runes, or to the word/notion of dragons?

There's a tarot deck out there for about everything. I seriously bet I could find one for football or calculators if I looked hard enough. The pictures on them are just more pleasing to the person's eyes. They still have the same basic meanings which are basically European pagan. For example, The hanged man is often thought of as Odin hanging from Yggdasil in order to discover the runes.

Also, the dragon runes, as Sanguina said, don't really come off as runes. Bind runes maybe, but nothing connected with any historical lore. Try looking into the Norse runes again (from a reputable source. None of those Llewellyn publications). They should be able to explain to you how runes can be combined and stacked to look differently. Runes themselves can be as simple as the rune Isa to as complicated as the Helm of Awe. This site on the dragon runes, really doesn't come off well. From their 'Druatch' language, it really seems like they have been reading too much Tolkien. To me, it appears like they were trying to take syllables and possibly obscure words or names and tried to spell them in a Anglo-Saxon reminiscent style. Considering these are what appears to be bind runes and the language uses no grammar and sounds that would seem to be impossible for a dragon to use ( 'M' sound, 'W' sound... it would require lips to make those sounds) I would use caution. Just because they say that they are for dragons doesn't mean that they're not still Odin's.

It could be just dragons... but i've used the runes plenty of times before I got my tarot deck. They worked perfectly fine. Every once in a while I'll get the calling to use the runes to answer a question.. sometimes I'll get the calling to use the tarot.

The names for the dragon runes do throw me off though... I don't know something about the names don't really fit... So you might have a point.. but the meaning and feeling is what I usually focus on. Not so much the names.

I don't know about the norse runes. I've looked... got out of it.. looked again... and decided with the dragons. I don't know what throws me off... =/ I wish I could explain it. I usually go for intuition. If something is telling me no... I usually don't do it. Which is why I won't touch a ouji board.

 

[Esiris]

Anannsul

I don't know about the norse runes. I've looked... got out of it.. looked again... and decided with the dragons. I don't know what throws me off... =/ I wish I could explain it. I usually go for intuition. If something is telling me no... I usually don't do it. Which is why I won't touch a ouji board.

It might be off because you haven't explored the mysteries themselves.