> Hi Milo,
> "The concept of a church or a temple is a Pagan
> Actually this statement is incorrect. Pagans are not
> responsible for the concept of constructed edifices as places
> of worship.
What you should be stating is that Pagans were responsible for the concept of constructed edifices as places of worship, BUT these were Pagans of the Lesser Mysteries of the Eleusinian Mystery Schools. In fact you stated that later in your post (see further below):
> Exactly the opposite. Pagans (true Pagans not your
> misconceived version) revered Nature. Their places of gathering
> were sacred groves, springs, large trees especially the Oak,
> grottos, large stones, caves, dells, wells, pools, hilltops and
> significant places of natural beauty.
The rituals at Bohemian Grove would be a good example of Pagans following the Greater Mysteries of the Eleusinian Mystery Schools because they gather under the open sky in a grove and appear to worship nature. Would you agree, and if not, why not?
> Because you still hold the erroneous belief that the Church of
> Rome is rooted in Paganism you make these false statements.
It's not a misconception that the Church of Rome is rooted in a form of Paganism.
> It would appear that you lump anyone who is not a Christian, Jew
> or Muslim into the Paganism basket.
It depends how you define the word "Pagan". I generally ascribe the label to those who revere Pagan deities, or who practice customs derived from Pagan origins. It's not a black and white issue, however because many people aren't consciously aware that they be practising Pagan customs, etc. I therefore wouldn't necessarily describe these people as being Pagan.
There are many alternative life styles and belief paradigms to Pagan religion, so it's clearly a misconception you have that I lump everyone who is not a Christian, Jew or Muslim as being Pagan. In other words, the Pagan religion (including the Greater Mystery School of the Eleusinian Mystery) is simply another belief system amongst many other forms of belief systems. Many atheists are not pagan, and I wouldn't lump humanists in with Pagans either, for example.
> To clarify my position, I
> am only referring to the Pagans of the Eleusinian Mystery
> Schools of which there were two branches - the Lesser Mysteries
> and the Greater Mysteries.
> Some of those initiates of the Lesser Mystery School may have
> been absorbed into the Church of Rome, and probably were. That
> is why there is a power within that organisation which is
> difficult to put a finger on. But those of the Greater
> Mysteries would never have been members of that church. If you
> could ever understand just what their belief system was, you
> would know why.
> So please, no more half-cocked stuff about Paganism. I have
> been through this with before on at least two other threads. If
> you wish to bang on about it with others, fine, but your
> comments on this thread are unnecessary.
My comments on this thread are not unnecessary. You claimed, for example that the Roman Church is not rooted in Paganism, but it clearly is, although you're free to point out that it's not the kind of Paganism you follow.
Post Edited (16-Oct-13 03:42)