Abrahamic Faiths... What's the Big Fuckin' Deal?!?!

So throughout my foray into studying the so-called LHP, there is always the hugest hard-on in relation to religion, but especially Abrahamic faiths. As I began to read more into these things, and saw them compared to other cultures, not only was it clear that people had extreme issues with the Abrahamic faiths in general, but that the issues were so large to the point of being ridiculously biased. In honesty, I would say that the Abrahamic faiths in terms of violence and indoctrination were at least trumped by the religions of China, and that in terms of being uniquely violent or oppressive, it is no more so than any known culture that spawned a massive world civilization.

So I’m wondering, and acknowledging the fact that this may get to be argumentative, what the hell makes Abrahamic faiths so much more notorious than the cultures of the East, the ancient European religions, and even those in the ancient Americas? It really just seems like Abrahamic faiths are the new kid on the block, and honestly so little attention is normally placed on cultures outside of the Abrahamic faith that it is placed as the root of human problems rather than a CONSEQUENCE of human problems.

2 Likes

The answer is simple: for those of us in the west, it’s the religion we’re familiar with.

True, but after a point I would think the focus would evolve beyond just this religious paradigm and realize that the problems in the Abrahamic faith are consistent in all of known history amongst various spiritual groups. But the fact that it is constantly brought up as being more bigoted, narrow-minded, or servile than the preceding pagan religions… I’m just wondering how this is surmised when it clearly isn’t the case. It’s not just newbies who perpetuate this bias; the bias actually originates with folks who been at this for a while.

I’m wondering why this bias is continuously perpetuated when the problems that attributed to Abrahamic faiths are not even remotely unique to it, nor can it be said that the Abrahamic faiths are bigger troublemakers in human history than anyone else with the biggest gun at the time.

If the goal is to be able to root out the issues of humanity, is it the best move to focus on the biggest manifestation of the problem at this time, or to actually see what causes something like it to exist in the first place? Or are people just looking to be mad hahaha… I’m really wondering! I feel like people are looking at a cough, and saying, “Hey, that cough is a cold!!” They’re taking a symptom and assigning the whole problem as the symptom itself, rather than seeing that a cough indicates that a cold exists. The Abrahamic faiths are taken as the “whole” problem rather than just an indication of a problem, know what I mean? If not, there wouldn’t be erroneous references to Eastern, ancient Egyptian, Middle Eastern, or others as being “more open” cultures when they were rambunctiously violent and oppressive to people based on the same modes of thinking.

The problem is people imo. You see people with this kind of mindset in the lhp community as well.

Sure, I’ll bite, in the hopes this stays about debating issues, not personalities, and also that it’s not just cool sometimes to “agree to disagree” but also, vital to accept that disagreeing is an important thing to honour in its own right, for its own sake - something that I’m going to get to below. :slight_smile:

So, why do I, taking myself as a prime example since my feelings date back to childhood, have such an issue with the Abrahamic faiths of Judaism (least so - again, I’ll get to that), Christianity, and Islam - to me, there are three simple issues that differentiate these faiths from the examples you named above:

  1. Monotheism.

The Abrahamic faiths seek to deny the right of their people, and (aside from Judaism) the right of any other people they can exert influence on, to worship other gods.

They all hold that their god is the one True God and have various stances to invalidate and then eliminate unbelievers, and those who adhere to other belief systems.

This “right to worship” inevitably extends to right to contact other spirits of any kind, including ancestors, nature spirits, spirits of the planets, or to perform any kind of magick that involves them - something seen most clearly in Leviticus.

This was less of a problem when the only monotheists were the Jews, who had no divine mandate to spread their faith and who were also closer to the writings where their god warns it’s a jealous god (which is a different thing entirely to saying other gods don’t exist) - somewhat restrictive for them maybe, but not a major problem for everyone else.

This changed with Christianity, which contained at the start a clear compulsion to spread the message that there was only one True God, and to eliminate contact with other spirits of any kind in so doing - but, Christianity’s message of one true god (and the inevitable restrictions that creates) couldn’t have existed without Judaism, so with large amounts of respect to Jewish people who’ve faced quite enough hostility, their monotheism is at the foundation of this, to a large extent.

But not, it seems to me, through their own choice, and the Christian underpinnings of anti-Semitism, plus the aggression they face from Muslim nations, have been a painful burden for Jews for centuries.

Getting back to this lockdown on contacting other spirits, magick is a natural human phenomena, a normal desire for most people, even when it goes no further than using “lucky” dates to choose lottery numbers - the point’s been made here, recently, and in serious academic writings, that the earliest cave paintings were acts of magickal intent, sympathetic magick, and probably something close to what we now call the Law of Attraction, where you strongly visualise (and even write down) the desired outcome.

Simply put, the attempt to first, ban all contact with even the most natural and benevolent spirts who are part of our world, and secondly, to prevent magickal acts that can be done in harmony with these spirits, is a savage form of thought-policing.

Once you have an institution and a power structure with a vested interest in thought-policing, in herding the very SOULS of living people, then you have a hotbed for atrocities, of which things like the witch-hunts, the Inquisition, and the destruction of native European spirituality, right up to present day ISIS and their destruction of archaeological sites, are the inevitable and inescapable final conclusion.

The moment you tell me your one god is the only god, and that hell awaits anyone who fails to believe this and who fails to serve the one true God by spreading that message, then you’re set on the pathway to outbreaks of madness, because most people actually DO wish to do the right thing, by themselves and by others, and when what that is becomes so warped, repressive, and unnatural, we’re fucked.

This phenomena didn’t exist in the past, prior to the spread of the monotheistic Abrahamic faiths.

Let me repeat that - this didn’t happen at any other time - the Romans viciously conquered and enslaved almost all of Europe, the Middle East, and northern Africa, but they did NOT threaten people with eternal hellfire for not worshipping Roman gods, they did NOT attempt to police the vital spiritual connection of their conquered lands - neither did the Egyptians, no slouches themselves when it came to a bit of empire building through sword and terror, neither did the Sumerians, Indians, and I’ve seen no evidence of it either in south America.

Pagans (or whatever you want to call people who have a jumble of gods, natural forces and ancestor veneration) do NOT have a vested interest in thought-policing people in this manner: despite their wars and occasional destruction of temples in conquered lands, that core belief that only their religion is correct, and that it must be spread and enforced, has never caught on under a non-monotheistic belief system.

One small, sick idea like that is a corrosive thing that festers right to its ultimate explosion in violence, something that’s been tested in modern-day psychological experiments such as the the Stanford Prison Experiment and the Milgram Experiment, it’s even seen “in the wild” in the acts of German citizens during WW2, not to mention several times over in Soviet Russia, Cambodia, and Rwanda - all of which were stirred up by telling the perpetrators they were serving that which was CORRECT and sanctioned by their leaders.

All of these clearly and unequivocally showed, repeatedly and without exception, that perfectly normal people will act with atrocious brutality towards other people when they feel they have authority backing that action up, when it is the “correct” thing to do,and despite never having acted that way in the past.

So no, with respect to c.j. lee and others, the problem is NOT the people - sure, ideas like this catch on quickly with nutters, but both history and scientific studies have shown clearly that we’re all prone to it when the correct motivation is introduced.

While pagan nations had empires, nothing in paganism, animism nor (sorry) the modern-day LHP contains that same toxic mandate to police your brother’s soul, or cut his life short if he won’t comply - pagans, animists, individuals of any belief system can of course be violent wackjobs, it’s the nature of our species, but only when the mass of society feels their souls are in peril and have been thought-policed to believe they must implant their beliefs in others, does it become an ISIS-level global problem.

  1. Unquestioning adherence to the past.

Because Monotheism alone has a vested interest in policing thoughts and beliefs, including the natural tendency of mankind towards magick and spiritual contacts, it must set itself up to be beyond question or criticism.

This usually shakes down into endless defences of how some ancient set of writings are the flawless word of the only “true” god (all other non-corporeal spirits painted as evil, and there to drag you to hell, or simply non-existent) and once this is established, mere human attempts to question those writings are stamped down violently, and discouraged by the establishment at every level.

We see that with the way every new scientific and social change in the west has actually weakened people’s faith in Christianity, and the way modern-day Taliban and Islamic State leaders seek to draw their people back (except for weapons and communication tech of course - thought-police tools par excellence) to a mediaeval social milieu which provides no fodder for questioning the wisdom of living by guidelines set some 1436 years ago.

The Christian church performed a similar act when opposing the Bible being printed in languages other than Latin, when they viciously and legally persecuted homosexuals, when they opposed the use of anaesthesia during childbirth because of a line in a book that was over 2000 years old and nothing to do with medicine, so yet again the natural healthy tendency of humans to evolve and explore their potential is crushed by monotheism, which relies on a core act of controlling the thoughts of others.

  1. Social effects.

Monotheistic religions follow certain set patterns - they ban, or at least heavily suppress, magick, and they outright attempt to prevent any kind of social progress that may challenge the infallibility of millenia old writings.

Societies in general have often had phases of violence, wars over resources especially, this is nothing unique to monotheism and cannot be laid solely at its door - what does change however, is the unique need to go to war over souls, to enforce not just rulership but beliefs, something we saw when the Conquistadors destroyed south American cultures by the bushel in order to “save their souls” - a similar sincere missionary zeal lay behind a lot of the destruction of native north American, African, Australasian and island-nation cultures.

The cross (and now, the crescent moon) have been too useful in guaranteeing compliance of a sheep-like frightened people (denied magick, and taught that wisdom lies only in the past closer to their holy books) and their use as tool of financial and military oppression means that they’re uniquely appealing to tyrants and dictators, since these faiths carry not just threat of earthly doom, but of eternal hellfire.

Holding onto ideas about gays, the status of women, and the value of unbelievers and even animals that were in vogue among a small desert tribe many centuries ago, when in fact society as a mass is plainly BEYOND ready to move on, is moronic, and incredibly damaging and divisive.

We also see this with the heavy numbers of faithful Christians who both challenge the idea our environment may need protecting (since their God made it, he’ll look after that stuff, and hey tree-hugger, aren’t you really just a witch?) and also the apocalyptic Christians and (with ISIS, Muslims as well) who believe that the world MUST end soon in order for them to get their paradise.

And we’re not talking about a handful of freaks and fringe-thinkers here, either - we’re talking about heavyweight politicians in the west (especially America) who oppose environmental protection laws wherever possible, and the driving force of the Islamic State is their desire to establish a Caliphate which is a part of their own “end times” bonanza for the faithful.

This is lunacy, sanctioned for them by their God and preachers, and held up by the nagging fear of hell which is indoctrinated from childhood on - and it’s a lunacy that cannot exist without the core underpinnings of 1. denial of the validity of other spiritual beings and 2. thought-policing other people to ensure their beliefs align with yours.

On the opposite side, the Renaissance, the Protestant Reformation, the Age of Enlightenment, and even modern developments like stem-cell research, only flourish when the heavy hand of centuries-old monotheistic dogma is weakened - positive proof that these faiths are repressive and regressive, and (once they begin to spread) fundamentally anti-human in nature.

No other cultures or belief systems, for all their military conquests, blood-drenched empires, and deep religiosity, have had these three toxic motivations, backed up as Christianity was by its inheritance of the decaying Roman Empire and the memory of the military/financial heft that it had once enjoyed through expansionist policies, and by the fact modern Islam has found its home over some of the world’s richest oil reserves.

All of this - the political turmoil of our era, the ongoing tensions in the middle east, have spread from the beliefs of one desert tribe, and arguably, at first, the beliefs of one man, Akhenaten, the first powerful man in recorded history to say that everyone should only worship just one god, and that he was its only annointed son.

This alone is the key point upon which the empires of lunacy in the Middle East, and globally, pivot upon: that it’s imperative to make someone else believe as you do, and legitimate to kill them if they refuse. Without that religious belief, that moral imperative, you just have normal human greed and aggression, which is a much less problematic thing.

And the very real fears - hell, we see people talk about them on here alone, almost every month - that they’ll risk eternity in hell just for trying to exercise their innate human hunger for MORE than just material knowledge, for authentic spiritual contact, show how deep this antiquated bullshit can reach into the fears and hearts of decent people who are raised with them.

Case for the defence?

I’ll provide what I’m aware of:

  1. Christians ended the widspread pagan practice of enslaving neighbouring tribes and even one’s own tribespeople as forced labour (or for sale abroad) in northern Europe (though the later Church continued to support the feudal system in which serfs, like the land, actually belonged to the baron who owned it). But they did that - check.

Christian activists were also behind the abolition of the African slave trade centuries later, though Islam still permits the owning of slaves, which has flourished as an idea under the Islamic State once more.

  1. Christianity ended the system in Europe whereby a murder victim’s life was rated at a cash price, with a low-status person worth little while a member of the nobility was worth more - this came directly from the Bibilical, actually Judaic, belief that lives are innately equal because they’re created by God the father.

Of course, this belief found its own weird extreme of expression via Marxism and communist thinking, which have killed and oppressed millions in Soviet-era Russia, China, and Cambodia, but still I think most of us outside those places and eras rather like the idea in principle. So, score one there as well.

  1. Islam was the first force to oppose practices of widow-burning in India, and to oppose the injustices of Hindu caste structure: the entire Bhakti movement in Hinduism sprang up as a result of these challenges and that movement resulted in some social improvement for people in India, and also lies behind the importation of Vedantic thought to the west.

Islam also (though this is two Abrahamic faiths duking it out) originally offered better social status for women and better scientific understandings than contemporary Christendom for several centuries, but I propose that this is simply because the holy book the Christians followed was older than the new holy book the Koran, showing that progress, and not anything innate to faith, is the key here, and that book-oriented religions are always going to end up backwards.

I propose, though of course cannot prove, that many of these liberating things would have come about naturally as technological progress gave people more leisure time, less fear and immediate struggle for survival, and better medical care for women around childbirth (which is arguably the reason women had such low status a lot of the time - we were rendered expendable by biological reality) but that’s only theoretical, and you’re welcome to dismiss it.

These are the charges I lay against monotheism, and the Abrahamic faiths - I don’t lay them against sincere and honest Jewish individuals, Christian individuals, nor Muslim individuals, who are all trying their best in a complicated world.

My beliefs are a result of the way I was raised, and the opportunities I’ve had, so I can’t condemn or blame anyone simply for not being me!

In that respect I also make the claim that outside that driving need to “save and convert” that’s unique to monotheism (also its offshoot, communism), one can be as angry as one likes at a religion, without it needing to spill over into jihad, witch-hunts, etc - because my anger is real, strongly supported by my own personal spiritual explorations even, but I have no pressing moral compulsion to ram my own beliefs deep into the heart of our Christian neighbours, my Jewish friend, or some innocent Muslim girl sitting on a bus.

I lay these charges at the core beliefs that underlie, ONLY, the monotheistic beliefs of these faiths, which shut down human potential while offering incentives to kill even when resources are plentiful and there’s no pressing need to do so.

They are toxic, and almost flawlessly designed to curtail human evolution whilst stirring the worst excesses of violence and hatred.

4 Likes

I get where your coming from but I still think people have free will and it’s a bunch of bad apples making this experience called life shitty. Granted not all of us are born philosophers, meaning that everyone doesn’t question everything and people are susceptible to becoming violent but I don’t really see how this applies to my present everyday life.

Sure I disagree with what ISIS is doing but do I really care? Do I make it my reality? No. It is what it is to me and I’ll leave it to that because I don’t see the point in wasting my time and energy in this when I could be doing something that makes me feel happy.

The only real problem I have with all of this is this…What’s the difference between creating order under the law of an external god and harming your fellow man v.s. being your own god, forging your own universe and harming your fellow man? To me this is different sides of the same coin, the only real difference being that it comes from people with different beliefs.

If we want to be better than these people then we need to stop perpetuating the same hateful nonsense that they do. Every grimoire I pick up nowadays is about hate. This is the root to all of these problems IMO and it makes us no different than them if we fall victim to the same mindset.

I don’t fear the stake, I embrace it.

The reason why I made that last comment is because I think people act out of fear when they do these things. I refuse to be a part of this cycle of perpetuating hate and fear. If it means death so be it. (That’s where I’m at in my current understanding)

When you decide to either become your own god (which isn’t strictly how I’d define the LHP or my own concept of theogenesis, btw), or whether you choose to follow a religious path (including revisions of Christianity and Islam) that do NOT compel you to convert or kill others, then you’re no longer anyone’s problem in that respect but your own.

The issue is the moral imperative drummed into people from birth, or conveyed to susceptible via methods that are identical to brainwashing, that they must take a belief they hold and insert it into other people - or account for their failure to their own god, and also risk seeing those people go to hell.

And that unbelievers are hell-bound, which makes their lives - if they refuse to hear the message - worthless anyway, in the eyes of the highest authority, their God himself.

As I explained above, some messages are uniquely dangerous and compelling, and have been proven to be, without exception, in groups of normal and otherwise non-violent people, and monotheism exploits those to a higher degree than any other force.

Free-will can only exist within the confines of an individual’s own belief system, and that’s what these religions have laid claim to.

And I’m not suggesting you personally have to do anything about this, or even care :slight_smile: - I was simply responding to barbarasboy’s question in the OP, from my own analysis of the uniquely problematic aspects of monotheism.

And I’ve made it clear I hope both in this post and with my actions in general that I don’t hate or fear individual Jews, Christians, or Muslims… unless they’re assholes on a personal level, but then so are some pagans and magicians.

2 Likes

When you decide to either become your own god (which isn’t strictly how I’d define the LHP or my own concept of theogenesis, btw), or whether you choose to follow a religious path (including revisions of Christianity and Islam) that do NOT compel you to convert or kill others, then you’re no longer anyone’s problem in that respect but your own.

The issue is the moral imperative drummed into people from birth, or conveyed to susceptible via methods that are identical to brainwashing, that they must take a belief they hold and insert it into other people - or account for their failure to their own god, and also risk seeing those people go to hell.

And that unbelievers are hell-bound, which makes their lives - if they refuse to hear the message - worthless anyway, in the eyes of the highest authority, their God himself.

As I explained above, some messages are uniquely dangerous and compelling, and have been proven to be, without exception, in groups of normal and otherwise non-violent people, and monotheism exploits those to a higher degree than any other force.

Free-will can only exist within the confines of an individual’s own belief system, and that’s what these religions have laid claim to.

And I’m not suggesting you personally have to do anything about this, or even care :slight_smile: - I was simply responding to barbarasboy’s question in the OP, from my own analysis of the uniquely problematic aspects of monotheism.

And I’ve made it clear I hope both in this post and with my actions in general that I don’t hate or fear individual Jews, Christians, or Muslims… unless they’re assholes on a personal level, but then so are some pagans and magicians.[/quote]

What about people who break free from these belief systems? I did, on my own pure curiosity. I wasn’t bound or brainwashed, I acted on my own free will.

What triggered it?

Edit to add:

And don’t you find it disgusting and weird that you even have to think about the possibility of being burned at the stake just for not being part of their religions?

Doesn’t that set off alarm bells that something’s pathological?

I don’t feel the need to burn people at the stake for not working with the spirits I work with, or even for thinking my theogenesis concept is utter lunacy - so why give nutters who do act like that a free pass, as though their hate is somehow more valid than your life?

Just questions, I’m not trying to harangue you here, but it seems a weird compromise to make IMO. :slight_smile:

What triggered it?[/quote]

I always questioned everything since I was a child. It wasn’t what triggered it, it was when I moved out of my parents house I found myself free to pursue what I was interested in.

People are just victims of circumstance imo. When I lived with my parents as a minor I had to live by their rules but that doesn’t mean that I didn’t questions things or have freedom in my own thoughts.

Idk, I guess I was just weird compared to most people I knew. Instead of caring about external things like that, I lived multiple lives in different realities in my head.

But wasn’t part of that because witches are no longer hunted and burned, occultists are free to write books, even have websites and public profiles, and there was no witchfinder general, or shariah police, to crush your first explorations?

These liberties we have are not free, they were paid for in blood at every turn, from the earliest calls to translate the Bible out of Latin onwards.

People are just victims of circumstance imo.

My point precisely, which is why these specific beliefs stifle free will choices to a large extent, then seek to outlaw, persecute and harass them whenever possible.

Even conventionally religious Hindus are free to choose which god (if any) they wish to have as their ishta devata, it’s not mandated to be the one their parents or village hold as most dear to them, so even other fairly straight-laced religions don’t attempt the level of through-policing and belief dictatorships found in the monotheistic faiths.

I’m just not worried about things anymore, even when it’s that extreme. Idk, my Kundalini has worked out a lot of the blocks I’ve been dealing with for some time and I’m okay with dissolution, death or whatever. This doesn’t mean I want it to happen but if it does, then it does. I believe I know where I’m going if this happens and I’m fine with it. Until then, I’m going to keep living and enjoying life.

Sure my example was cliche, and I’m not looking to be a martyr either but I understand that things sometimes happen out of my control. I guess I’m just tired of fighting with people. This is a time of healing for me.

But wasn’t part of that because witches are no longer hunted and burned, occultists are free to write books, even have websites and public profiles, and there was no witchfinder general, or shariah police, to crush your first explorations?

These liberties we have are not free, they were paid for in blood at every turn, from the earliest calls to translate the Bible out of Latin onwards.

People are just victims of circumstance imo.

My point precisely, which is why these specific beliefs stifle free will choices to a large extent, then seek to outlaw, persecute and harass them whenever possible.

Even conventionally religious Hindus are free to choose which god (if any) they wish to have as their ishta devata, it’s not mandated to be the one their parents or village hold as most dear to them, so even other fairly straight-laced religions don’t attempt the level of through-policing and belief dictatorships found in the monotheistic faiths.[/quote]

You’re right to a certain degree but I think regardless of the times I would have found the path I walk on one way or another. I feel the same about you. That’s the point, we would be doing this regardless if people were going to kill us because of this or not.

Can’t argue with that! :slight_smile:

I don’t feel inclined to give a thumbs-up to these faiths nor their apologists who act as though they’re akin to any other belief system, nor to concede that they maybe do have the right to supress belief and control what spiritual contacts are permitted, and which are not, but there are also times I don’t feel like arguing - today just happened not to be one of them… :wink:

I say again, I treat individual people on their merits (although I’ll happily lay forth my beliefs if they attempt to convince me of the superiority of theirs) and England being as it is, I was lucky to be raised in a secular society.

I’m not so sure I’d have the ability to practice as I do if that wasn’t the case, but luckily, that’s mostly irrelevant for both of us, as we don’t currently face serious threats simply from what we happen to believe or practice, and we’re even able to form communities, online and off, without any great need for secrecy.

I do know that authors, especially those writing about yoga, core shamanism, spiritual healing, and later LHP philosophies and black magick subjects have helped me evolve and develop my thinking - I practiced in secrecy and isolation as a child, unaware there were such things as grimoires even, and I remember the strain and burden only too well, so I’m very grateful to live where and when I do!

It is the root of human problems but also the consequence of human problems in that most more modern religions were created to control people. Back in the days before the christian crusades and ‘you must covnert or die’ bullshit started happening on a mass scale, people openly practiced whatever they believed. I imagine magicians in some communities still had to hide when in the presence of others not like them but other religious beliefs were practiced openly and witches had their own little communities where they kept to themselves to avoid public criticism until they too were invaded and many went into hiding or were forced to give up their beliefs to soare their own lives after watching their friends and loved ones being brutally murdered for not converting to christianity.

With this in mind, as well as other evidence and contradictions, it should be obvious that many people had it in their agenda years ago to make christian based faiths the number one big dog in the U.S. and other countries. I mean, why else would you kill someone for not converting to your beliefs unless it was because you did not want them around to be able to teach future children their way of life? Getting rid of opposers seems like a fail proof way to make sure no one in the world would be alive to mention the older path systems that they were so desperately trying to get rid of, and eventually if no one in their communities even knew that other religions existed then they would have no need to question christianity because they would think it’s all that ever has existed.

But their plan has been backfiring over the years as countries that allow freedom of choice have had people come forward and say, thyey have right now I want mine too and I’m not settling for no! Which then inspirea others to be brave and come forward and demand their rights too when they realize that people are no longer killed on a mass scale just for admitting they have alternative beliefs in the U.S. Not saying religious motivated murders don’t happen anymore, yes they do and they happen too often, but the local courthouses and governments are no longer in control of the witch hunts and executions. So people feel safer these days, most of the time, coming forward and demanding their rights to personal beliefs.

Other religions try to force people to convert but monotheistic religions such as christianity and islam are talked about more often because they seem to have made the biggest impression on the entire world and not just their immediate country and local communities. These two religions don’t just try to enforce conformity in their countries and provinces, states, etc. they try to force it all over the world like Islam by moving their citizens to countries where people are free to choose like U.S. and U.K and Canada and starting their own little section of town and then later demanding that local governments allow them their rights then once they have those rights they start violently trying to enforce this on others. And christians or radical muslim groups like Isis don’t try to sneak in thru the back door like the other muslims do, they just go in and start killing people or rioting and picketing.

Every day on the news you hear of Isis cutting someone heads off for believing in Jesus, or a group of christians throwing trash and food at a young girl going into an abortion clinic because she would not listen to them when they tried to use scare tactics to talk her out of getting an abortion. I read an article about that once and one of the picketers took it too far and hit the girl in the head with canned food until she suffered a concussion because she inside the clinic anyway and didn’t come back until about an hour later so they knew she had got an abortion and were trying to punish her for god. But you rarely ever hear of other religions doing things like that, I know they do, but the news loves to focus on islam and christian oriented mishaps so you never hear of the other stuff when it happens, so I imagine this is why everyone seems to have such a problem with only those two relgions.

2 Likes

I’m sure if you christian guys told about this website and your occult practices to your church priest, the priest wouldn’t be happy at all - in fact most of the people there wouldn’t consider you as christian. So i see it as trying to play both sides at the same time.

Islamic priest and community would probably be even more furious than the christian ones, as they seem to take it more seriously nowadays than the modern christians.

But in the old days christians killed a fuckload of pagans and told that all our gods that are openly discussed in this website are satan and satan is bad and your going to suffer in a lake of fire etc etc…

So after all this, i can’t see how does it make any sense to be a christian and something that by christians mainly is considered pagan and evil at the same time.

“Burn the witch” - sayeth some christian.

1 Like

Sure, I’ll bite, in the hopes this stays about debating issues, not personalities, and also that it’s not just cool sometimes to “agree to disagree” but also, vital to accept that disagreeing is an important thing to honour in its own right, for its own sake - something that I’m going to get to below. :slight_smile:

So, why do I, taking myself as a prime example since my feelings date back to childhood, have such an issue with the Abrahamic faiths of Judaism (least so - again, I’ll get to that), Christianity, and Islam - to me, there are three simple issues that differentiate these faiths from the examples you named above:

  1. Monotheism.

The Abrahamic faiths seek to deny the right of their people, and (aside from Judaism) the right of any other people they can exert influence on, to worship other gods.

They all hold that their god is the one True God and have various stances to invalidate and then eliminate unbelievers, and those who adhere to other belief systems.

This “right to worship” inevitably extends to right to contact other spirits of any kind, including ancestors, nature spirits, spirits of the planets, or to perform any kind of magick that involves them - something seen most clearly in Leviticus.

This was less of a problem when the only monotheists were the Jews, who had no divine mandate to spread their faith and who were also closer to the writings where their god warns it’s a jealous god (which is a different thing entirely to saying other gods don’t exist) - somewhat restrictive for them maybe, but not a major problem for everyone else.

This changed with Christianity, which contained at the start a clear compulsion to spread the message that there was only one True God, and to eliminate contact with other spirits of any kind in so doing - but, Christianity’s message of one true god (and the inevitable restrictions that creates) couldn’t have existed without Judaism, so with large amounts of respect to Jewish people who’ve faced quite enough hostility, their monotheism is at the foundation of this, to a large extent.

But not, it seems to me, through their own choice, and the Christian underpinnings of anti-Semitism, plus the aggression they face from Muslim nations, have been a painful burden for Jews for centuries.

Getting back to this lockdown on contacting other spirits, magick is a natural human phenomena, a normal desire for most people, even when it goes no further than using “lucky” dates to choose lottery numbers - the point’s been made here, recently, and in serious academic writings, that the earliest cave paintings were acts of magickal intent, sympathetic magick, and probably something close to what we now call the Law of Attraction, where you strongly visualise (and even write down) the desired outcome.

Simply put, the attempt to first, ban all contact with even the most natural and benevolent spirts who are part of our world, and secondly, to prevent magickal acts that can be done in harmony with these spirits, is a savage form of thought-policing.

Once you have an institution and a power structure with a vested interest in thought-policing, in herding the very SOULS of living people, then you have a hotbed for atrocities, of which things like the witch-hunts, the Inquisition, and the destruction of native European spirituality, right up to present day ISIS and their destruction of archaeological sites, are the inevitable and inescapable final conclusion.

The moment you tell me your one god is the only god, and that hell awaits anyone who fails to believe this and who fails to serve the one true God by spreading that message, then you’re set on the pathway to outbreaks of madness, because most people actually DO wish to do the right thing, by themselves and by others, and when what that is becomes so warped, repressive, and unnatural, we’re fucked.

This phenomena didn’t exist in the past, prior to the spread of the monotheistic Abrahamic faiths.

Let me repeat that - this didn’t happen at any other time - the Romans viciously conquered and enslaved almost all of Europe, the Middle East, and northern Africa, but they did NOT threaten people with eternal hellfire for not worshipping Roman gods, they did NOT attempt to police the vital spiritual connection of their conquered lands - neither did the Egyptians, no slouches themselves when it came to a bit of empire building through sword and terror, neither did the Sumerians, Indians, and I’ve seen no evidence of it either in south America.

Pagans (or whatever you want to call people who have a jumble of gods, natural forces and ancestor veneration) do NOT have a vested interest in thought-policing people in this manner: despite their wars and occasional destruction of temples in conquered lands, that core belief that only their religion is correct, and that it must be spread and enforced, has never caught on under a non-monotheistic belief system.

One small, sick idea like that is a corrosive thing that festers right to its ultimate explosion in violence, something that’s been tested in modern-day psychological experiments such as the the Stanford Prison Experiment and the Milgram Experiment, it’s even seen “in the wild” in the acts of German citizens during WW2, not to mention several times over in Soviet Russia, Cambodia, and Rwanda - all of which were stirred up by telling the perpetrators they were serving that which was CORRECT and sanctioned by their leaders.

All of these clearly and unequivocally showed, repeatedly and without exception, that perfectly normal people will act with atrocious brutality towards other people when they feel they have authority backing that action up, when it is the “correct” thing to do,and despite never having acted that way in the past.

So no, with respect to c.j. lee and others, the problem is NOT the people - sure, ideas like this catch on quickly with nutters, but both history and scientific studies have shown clearly that we’re all prone to it when the correct motivation is introduced.

While pagan nations had empires, nothing in paganism, animism nor (sorry) the modern-day LHP contains that same toxic mandate to police your brother’s soul, or cut his life short if he won’t comply - pagans, animists, individuals of any belief system can of course be violent wackjobs, it’s the nature of our species, but only when the mass of society feels their souls are in peril and have been thought-policed to believe they must implant their beliefs in others, does it become an ISIS-level global problem.

  1. Unquestioning adherence to the past.

Because Monotheism alone has a vested interest in policing thoughts and beliefs, including the natural tendency of mankind towards magick and spiritual contacts, it must set itself up to be beyond question or criticism.

This usually shakes down into endless defences of how some ancient set of writings are the flawless word of the only “true” god (all other non-corporeal spirits painted as evil, and there to drag you to hell, or simply non-existent) and once this is established, mere human attempts to question those writings are stamped down violently, and discouraged by the establishment at every level.

We see that with the way every new scientific and social change in the west has actually weakened people’s faith in Christianity, and the way modern-day Taliban and Islamic State leaders seek to draw their people back (except for weapons and communication tech of course - thought-police tools par excellence) to a mediaeval social milieu which provides no fodder for questioning the wisdom of living by guidelines set some 1436 years ago.

The Christian church performed a similar act when opposing the Bible being printed in languages other than Latin, when they viciously and legally persecuted homosexuals, when they opposed the use of anaesthesia during childbirth because of a line in a book that was over 2000 years old and nothing to do with medicine, so yet again the natural healthy tendency of humans to evolve and explore their potential is crushed by monotheism, which relies on a core act of controlling the thoughts of others.

  1. Social effects.

Monotheistic religions follow certain set patterns - they ban, or at least heavily suppress, magick, and they outright attempt to prevent any kind of social progress that may challenge the infallibility of millenia old writings.

Societies in general have often had phases of violence, wars over resources especially, this is nothing unique to monotheism and cannot be laid solely at its door - what does change however, is the unique need to go to war over souls, to enforce not just rulership but beliefs, something we saw when the Conquistadors destroyed south American cultures by the bushel in order to “save their souls” - a similar sincere missionary zeal lay behind a lot of the destruction of native north American, African, Australasian and island-nation cultures.

The cross (and now, the crescent moon) have been too useful in guaranteeing compliance of a sheep-like frightened people (denied magick, and taught that wisdom lies only in the past closer to their holy books) and their use as tool of financial and military oppression means that they’re uniquely appealing to tyrants and dictators, since these faiths carry not just threat of earthly doom, but of eternal hellfire.

Holding onto ideas about gays, the status of women, and the value of unbelievers and even animals that were in vogue among a small desert tribe many centuries ago, when in fact society as a mass is plainly BEYOND ready to move on, is moronic, and incredibly damaging and divisive.

We also see this with the heavy numbers of faithful Christians who both challenge the idea our environment may need protecting (since their God made it, he’ll look after that stuff, and hey tree-hugger, aren’t you really just a witch?) and also the apocalyptic Christians and (with ISIS, Muslims as well) who believe that the world MUST end soon in order for them to get their paradise.

And we’re not talking about a handful of freaks and fringe-thinkers here, either - we’re talking about heavyweight politicians in the west (especially America) who oppose environmental protection laws wherever possible, and the driving force of the Islamic State is their desire to establish a Caliphate which is a part of their own “end times” bonanza for the faithful.

This is lunacy, sanctioned for them by their God and preachers, and held up by the nagging fear of hell which is indoctrinated from childhood on - and it’s a lunacy that cannot exist without the core underpinnings of 1. denial of the validity of other spiritual beings and 2. thought-policing other people to ensure their beliefs align with yours.

On the opposite side, the Renaissance, the Protestant Reformation, the Age of Enlightenment, and even modern developments like stem-cell research, only flourish when the heavy hand of centuries-old monotheistic dogma is weakened - positive proof that these faiths are repressive and regressive, and (once they begin to spread) fundamentally anti-human in nature.

No other cultures or belief systems, for all their military conquests, blood-drenched empires, and deep religiosity, have had these three toxic motivations, backed up as Christianity was by its inheritance of the decaying Roman Empire and the memory of the military/financial heft that it had once enjoyed through expansionist policies, and by the fact modern Islam has found its home over some of the world’s richest oil reserves.

All of this - the political turmoil of our era, the ongoing tensions in the middle east, have spread from the beliefs of one desert tribe, and arguably, at first, the beliefs of one man, Akhenaten, the first powerful man in recorded history to say that everyone should only worship just one god, and that he was its only annointed son.

This alone is the key point upon which the empires of lunacy in the Middle East, and globally, pivot upon: that it’s imperative to make someone else believe as you do, and legitimate to kill them if they refuse. Without that religious belief, that moral imperative, you just have normal human greed and aggression, which is a much less problematic thing.

And the very real fears - hell, we see people talk about them on here alone, almost every month - that they’ll risk eternity in hell just for trying to exercise their innate human hunger for MORE than just material knowledge, for authentic spiritual contact, show how deep this antiquated bullshit can reach into the fears and hearts of decent people who are raised with them.

Case for the defence?

I’ll provide what I’m aware of:

  1. Christians ended the widspread pagan practice of enslaving neighbouring tribes and even one’s own tribespeople as forced labour (or for sale abroad) in northern Europe (though the later Church continued to support the feudal system in which serfs, like the land, actually belonged to the baron who owned it). But they did that - check.

Christian activists were also behind the abolition of the African slave trade centuries later, though Islam still permits the owning of slaves, which has flourished as an idea under the Islamic State once more.

  1. Christianity ended the system in Europe whereby a murder victim’s life was rated at a cash price, with a low-status person worth little while a member of the nobility was worth more - this came directly from the Bibilical, actually Judaic, belief that lives are innately equal because they’re created by God the father.

Of course, this belief found its own weird extreme of expression via Marxism and communist thinking, which have killed and oppressed millions in Soviet-era Russia, China, and Cambodia, but still I think most of us outside those places and eras rather like the idea in principle. So, score one there as well.

  1. Islam was the first force to oppose practices of widow-burning in India, and to oppose the injustices of Hindu caste structure: the entire Bhakti movement in Hinduism sprang up as a result of these challenges and that movement resulted in some social improvement for people in India, and also lies behind the importation of Vedantic thought to the west.

Islam also (though this is two Abrahamic faiths duking it out) originally offered better social status for women and better scientific understandings than contemporary Christendom for several centuries, but I propose that this is simply because the holy book the Christians followed was older than the new holy book the Koran, showing that progress, and not anything innate to faith, is the key here, and that book-oriented religions are always going to end up backwards.

I propose, though of course cannot prove, that many of these liberating things would have come about naturally as technological progress gave people more leisure time, less fear and immediate struggle for survival, and better medical care for women around childbirth (which is arguably the reason women had such low status a lot of the time - we were rendered expendable by biological reality) but that’s only theoretical, and you’re welcome to dismiss it.

These are the charges I lay against monotheism, and the Abrahamic faiths - I don’t lay them against sincere and honest Jewish individuals, Christian individuals, nor Muslim individuals, who are all trying their best in a complicated world.

My beliefs are a result of the way I was raised, and the opportunities I’ve had, so I can’t condemn or blame anyone simply for not being me!

In that respect I also make the claim that outside that driving need to “save and convert” that’s unique to monotheism (also its offshoot, communism), one can be as angry as one likes at a religion, without it needing to spill over into jihad, witch-hunts, etc - because my anger is real, strongly supported by my own personal spiritual explorations even, but I have no pressing moral compulsion to ram my own beliefs deep into the heart of our Christian neighbours, my Jewish friend, or some innocent Muslim girl sitting on a bus.

I lay these charges at the core beliefs that underlie, ONLY, the monotheistic beliefs of these faiths, which shut down human potential while offering incentives to kill even when resources are plentiful and there’s no pressing need to do so.

They are toxic, and almost flawlessly designed to curtail human evolution whilst stirring the worst excesses of violence and hatred.[/quote]

So I can agree, to an extent, that the motivations are SOMEWHAT unique, although this is based on particular people’s interpretations, and NOT on what is actually there. However, what I look to understand is not the motivations, but the results of those motivations and where they come from. There is mention of a “denial” of the ability to worship other gods, and I can understand how this can be interpreted as being “limiting”. However, when it came down to what as practically going on with pagan religions at the time, and how people associated to the divine, it was pretty clear to me that the movement to have “one God” was based on:

  1. Simplification of focus as to the “Source” of divinity and
  2. A departure from what pagan people were doing: Taking power forms, and becoming ruled by them to a point of being outrageously dependent on something that, at the end of the day, had no power until humans realized it.

I posit this based on two things that are obvious in the Bible: Most of the founding members in the Old Testament, and many in the New Testament, were blatant sorcerers and the eventual personification of “God” that resulted during the Golden Calf.

Abraham’s lineage was one of idolmakers. Now from a normal standpoint, Abraham’s family only makes statues, but you all here know full and well that idol making is an action of sorcery. Also, not only is it an action of sorcery, but it’s an action that is based solely on the Magician’s ability to act as the “Creator”, coming from a place of “Source” power and fashioning the deity from there.

Now the standard idea is that Abraham stopped worshiping other deities because he believed in the “One, True God.” However, what this means has a completely different context when you realize that Abraham was not just a sorcerer, but one in a line of several sorcerers. He came to a point where he felt, “Why the hell am I worshiping my own creation as if it has power over me? This thing has no power outside of what I animate it with from the Eternal Source… 'da fuck is wrong with me??”

His father, Terah, even acknowledges this, but tells Abraham to get out of doge because that’s not the healthiest mentality to live by as an idol maker. So Abraham’s departure from reliance of externalized power forms to working and commanding directly from “The Source” is a natural progression for a sorcerer to take, and can easily be seen in this text if taken from a sorcerer’s perspective.

This is continuously re-affirmed in the stories of the forefathers. Unlike what people romanticize them as, these guys were quite rich, shrewd, and eve schemed a great deal. Abraham would walk into new villages, and have Sarah identify as his sister so that he would not be attacked for having a pretty wife. Then, some high-ranking official would get thirsty, try to marry her, and be assailed with attacks from God. The thing is, that in these tales you see that almost everyone who comes in contact with the “Hebrews” knows that they are “with God.”

How do they know this, though, if this God is relatively personal to only the Abrahamic line? It’s because they were sorcerers, and it was known at that time that, to be any sorcerer of merit, you had to pull from the the “same” Source, even if you gave it different names. And this to me is further evidenced by magical texts like the ones Bardon created. When you are a magician, you are essentially acting as “God” on Earth, and I believe this was understood in those times. But when you see Jacob wrestling with an “angel”, basically demanding a blessing with all his power… this is a sorcerer here.

The problem is that, for normal people, these type of understandings are hard to attain. But this isn’t a problem inherent to Abrahamic faiths, damn near every known religion has a “veiled” source of ridiculous power. But humans have seemed hellbent on departing from their nature to be divine, and this has not been different for pagans or monotheists. Who gives a flying fuck about how many gods you can worship when, at the end of the day, they are your “Lords”?

The idea that humans were blatantly unworthy of divinity, or somehow below divinity, is hardly the birth-child of Abrahamic faiths. In actuality, the Abrahamic texts have far ore inclusions of the human being as being “nigh unto God”, so much so that other divine beings (angels) can be seen having some resentment towards this. But instead of walking in heaven or some council, God is seen making it “his” exact purpose to walk with the people as they were traveling.

In comparison to Middle-Eastern gods before, YHWH is extremely benevolent and sees people in a light of being holy. This The Middle Eastern gods before this one were explicitly invested in ruling humans, and placing them in a level of servile obedience. In the East, you have Indra constantly sabotaged human beings from reaching levels of enlightenment based solely on the fact of being scared of their power. The Greek gods constantly raped, killed, and toyed with humans like they were play things, to a point where Zeus, on top of having thousands of illegitimate kids, also had several children who were abominations due to having sex with women in animal form.

One of the issues here that I perceive is that people assume that because Christianity and other Abrahamic faiths have blatant known references to certain lines of thought that are “limiting”, that others didn’t possess because there is an absence of that in our current knowledge of those cultures. The problem with that is due to two things: Many ancient cultures are mostly unknown to us because their rights and practices were lost to time and, because of this, we don’t have a really high amount of knowledge on their religious practices.

For example, The Greeks and Romans certainly had a hell, and in fact they had several hells. The Christian concept of hell is NOT one that originated with the Judaic lore, but is borrowed primarily from Greek and Roman hell concepts. Tartarus is the base-line model of the Christian concept of hell, and was a place of punishment for people. How prevalent was the fear of this place? Can’t be said, but the 4 people who were used as examples were definitely there for eternity. Moreover, the idea that people would be punished at a moment’s notice for wronging gods is also prevalent in this same culture, even if it was done by absolute mistake. Diana straight up kills an individual for accidentally seeing her naked, and Rhea Silvia was buried alive for being raped by Aries.

So the current of powerlessness that we see in humanity, in relation to spirituality, is highly prevalent in pagan religions. As for thought-policing, the only thing that is unique about monotheistic faiths is that it comes from one source, rather than possibly several. So even if you got the choice to choose a god, what the hell does that do to remedy thought-policing when wronging that god has the same types of consequences as wronging a monotheistic god? Moreover, in contrast to just one god, you can upset another god who you don’t even work with, and still have to pay for what goes on with that god.

So rather than one god’s set of rules and guidelines, you got several you gotta watch out for, even if they aren’t your primary god. I can’t consider that even remotely liberating, and certainly not simple. At least with one god you can go to the same manual over and over again, and even with a threat of hell on the way, at least you only gotta worry about one guy sending you there. Eastern religions got thousands of hells, and you can piss off the wrong guy once and poof, you’re done.

What I am getting at is this: these problems within the monotheistic religions can only be considered unique in a state of bias, at least from what I can see. Thought-policing is a pretty huge thing in not just most known religion, but in terms of social group stratification in general. But threats of eternal damnation aren’t even remotely unique to monotheistic religions, not by a long-shot. Moreover, when it comes to these things, there are several ways of “repenting” from that, to a point where you have got to be a complete slave to not see your way out.

And that’s the thing: most people are slaves. But this was something that, as I said before, was a current within human civilization WAY before now, and was done to extents that were comparably more drastic and absolute than the monotheistic religions. The concept of the “Divine Right of Kings” is something that has existed since the Egyptian “god-kings” in every known part of the world, and going against them meant damnation in this life and the next. That type of egregious thought-policing is a human thing, it’s not unique at all to the monotheistic religions. If anything, the monotheistic religions would not allow you to get thought-policed by any human being as “God” himself, whereas a pagan religion easily allows for a human to hold Divine authority just because they said they do.

I’m not into any religion, primarily because the dependence on looking at gods as something “other” than the self is just getting completely outdated. But I feel as sorcerers, holding biases against certain groups for having thinking patterns that are honestly held throughout history by everyone… I can’t see that as being helpful at the group level. It also makes certain information superfluous and in many cases inaccurate, because these alternative cultures are presented in a light as being radically different than monotheism, when in practice they all seemed to devolve into nonsense.

And the design with monotheism is not “flawless” in any sense based on it’s ability to keep people down. Hell, if it wasn’t for being monotheistic, I probably would not have gotten into magick. But this is because I started to understand that the Abrahamic God was supposed to be the everything and nothing of creation and creations yet to happen. When I started to get back to the basics, I started to see things differently. For example, YHWH is, in many ways, like many other gods. Despite having all the power in the world, he can’t seem to work with humans beyond holding a great deal of petty human flaws. And as I saw this with other gods, it started to dawn on me that this was due to human orientation to divinity, and not what divinity was doing “on it’s own”.

Moses had two Torahs, the first of which was supposed to be a manual for immortality. He stops this when he sees that, despite all the miracles the people had seen from God, that they could not approach the idea of a naked Source that did not rule them through some concept that came from the time in slavery. They worship a Golden Calf, and explicitly say, “Aaron, fashion us a golden god for us to be ruled by in Moses’ absence.” Moses whole mission was liberation, but when he sees the people willfully re-enter a state of slavery, he realizes the Torah he made could not be utilized by these people. So he smashed that, and came back with the second Torah, which is what we have now. It still has the essence of immortality in it, but now people gotta rummage through stories of a god that, like many others, is personified and thus hard to understand as being unlimited because, in it’s personification, it’s going to have human personality flaws.

Again, this does not justify anything that people in these faiths have done, it’s all been monstrous. But we are talking about the inherent nature of these religions, and not how they evolved in practice based on what people started doing with them. If we take that logic, every last single known religion is a 100% slave system, regardless of how many gods are running the slave ship.

As for me personally, I definitely had to risk death to do what I am doing, and my roommate was probably 8x more likely to be in danger than I was. At best, I felt that my practice would put me in a place of isolation from my family, which was honestly 98% of my social network. You gotta understand, in my family, and many other Flip families, you are tied really closely at the hip. So isolation from your family is extremely devastating, and mine is a bit militant when it comes to the people who are “exiled” from it. We could hit them with a car on accident, and wouldn’t even bother planning a funeral for them hahaha. My roommate was threatened by his dad at least 3 times with death for his insubordination, primarily because he was fed up with the fact that his religious practice (Judaism) had absolutely nothing to do with the Torah and everything to do with some folks interpretation of the Torah.

I had his help in learning these things through conversations, but for whatever reason he was able to learn it through his own resourcefulness. But we both risked a lot, and yet the risk honestly wasn’t as great as it appears. Again, we are talking about people being “stripped” of free-will, but being those people myself more times then I would like to admit, I learned that it was all my own choice. It doesn’t matter that I wasn’t aware of it, it was mine. I reconciled my fear of isolation and death from my family because, at the end of the day, I felt like I was isolated and dead already. Doesn’t matter how it appeared, that’s how it felt so I was like, “Hell, if it happens, at least it’s completely in the open.”

So this idea of stuff not being people’s choices… that’s a fuckin’ cop out and it comes from the same place that slavery mentalities come from that are accused in the RHP. In RHP, you give your will over to a deity by certain, but here we are giving personal responsibility away to others for individual, personal circumstances. Both take the power away from the individual and give it to a controlling figure… it’s a cop-out.

If LHP is about taking you power into your own hands, you gotta take the whole damn thing into your hands. It’s not the church’s fault that I or any other person believe in an Odin-archetype God who will take care of us if we kiss his ass. We chose or choose that, and despite seeing several things that looked pretty suspect, we did not question them for a fear that, despite it’s constant over-looming, never was realized in the first place. If I am talking about being my own sovereign, all-powerful being, it doesn’t serve me to place the personal responsibility for my situations on someone else, nor can I condone this in other magicians. If I feel that humans have the potential to be all-powerful beings, then my placement of responsibility is going to be done on an individual basis every time, and not on something that can detract a person from realizing their power, whether it manifests in a pleasant or unpleasant manner.

That’s why I find it a bit too prevalent now, because this blame-game is giving way too much power to people who are not the magician. It doesn’t help that this relay of information is terribly biased toward one group of “aggressors” in the first place, but even still the responsibility for the world’s state of affairs is placed in hands that are not the magicians. So how is a person supposed to really excel to their full potential if they continuously reinforce this division of responsibility when the goal is absolute sovereignty? I certainly can’t consider it intelligent that anyone could give claims about the “limits” of magic, what does and does not “work”, or things of that nature as an LHP practitioner if they were continuously falling back on ideals that rob people of claiming their responsibility for their whole life.

But I do believe I get where this is coming from, I’m just glad that I got to avoid it and I didn’t get prone to attach my problems to being inherently rooted in my Catholic upbringing. Honestly, I never acted like a Catholic in the first place, and I don’t know a single person who should not be dead 57 times/day based on Catholic doctrine. That’s precisely what I mean, if you can’t see this obvious, real-life happening before you as a message that something you are believing is not exactly all that right… can’t even consider that anything but personal choice right there.

I respectfully disagree with you on this single point - neither Hinduism nor Judaism attempt to force people to convert, it’s not mandated by their scriptures, in fact it’s anathema to them (both will persecute their own if they stray, but that’s a different issue) - Buddhists have some desire to teach their faith to others, but that’s a religion based primarily on the teachings of a human being, Siddhartha Gautama, same with the more modern Hare Krishna sect, who seek converts, but again this is based on a god-man, Krishna, and neither have the expansionist zeal nor enacted as many atrocities in pursuit of winning people over as the Abrahamic faiths.

Probably because although they believe their leader’s teachings to be superior, they don’t believe teranl hellfire without redemption awaits unbelievers, simply a rather less favourable reincarnation, but they tend to judge a person’s likely fate based on their deeds and not dogma alone.

None of the classical faiths - Greek, Egyptian, or Roman, nor ancient northern European, took any interest in forcing people to abandon their own gods and adopt theirs, in fact Rome absorbed elements from other culture even while being a political and military powerhouse, and shrines to the goddess Isis were set up in Rome, just as Egypt permitted people to worship their own gods in peace and sometimes adopted them, which seems to be the case with the god Bes.

I suspect polytheism differs in this distinctive fashion since your neighbours and family are likely to prefer different gods within the same pantheon - just as the modern day Hindu may coose a different ishta devata to his father’s or mother’s, the ancient Greek may have preferred Aphrodite, while her father honoured Hermes, and so on.

Once you start having a concept that there’s only one true god, or only one god that humans are permitted to worship and call upon, the motivation to save people, and spread His word, grows into the seeds of something completely different…