|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
 Posted: Thu Feb 11, 2010 6:11 pm
Rizu-Sensei xLady Tsukiyox I’ll erase this feeling…
I still have a long life don’t I?
kono omoi wo keshiteshimau ni ha
mada jinsei nagai deshou? Again the split of the Roman Catholic Church occured in 1517. The things you read off of a google search can be very misleading and even false. Whereas things that have been well researched by reputable scholars, is neither.
Again, Martin Luther caused the division of the Church and the birth of the various demoninations. His protests and his letters are what fueled the split because he felt that the Church's practices were not Christ-like and that they were greedy.
I’m
natsukashiku naru
konna itami mo kangeijan again, i'm not referring to that. what i'm talking about was a split of people that were christians, not christianity itself. a social split more than a religious one. this HAS been researched by reputable scholars, which is probably because it was true, actually happened, and WAS RECORDED. seriously, look it up: "SCOPES TRIAL". just because you didn't here about something doesn't mean it didn't happen, and it doesn't mean that the people that know about it are wrong. I’ll erase this feeling…
I still have a long life don’t I?
kono omoi wo keshiteshimau ni ha
mada jinsei nagai deshou? Okay I'm going to nitpick a bit:
It would be nice if you used perfect grammar that way the people you debate with understand what you're saying.
The split in Christianity was a social and religious one. Martin Luther was proposing social reform for the Catholic Church. Thus the Protestant Reformation was born.
The whole point behind the ruling was because many people didn't think that Evolution was apart of the "normalcy" they had sought for after coming out of WWI. People thought at that time Christianity was the normal thing and should be taught because that's how it was before World War I.
The trial doesn't however show a social split in Christianity. It shows that people have an issue of accepting new theories because it doesn't seem compatible with their religion. Because these new theories in a sense disrupts the sense of normalcy.I’m missing the feeling…
so this pain is also welcomed!
natsukashiku naru
konna itami mo kangeijan
|
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Thu Feb 11, 2010 7:25 pm
Dsay Valentine Love to Paint KasaChan Next month I am going to begin the process of Self-Initiation to Buckland's non-traditional form of Wicca, Seax-Wica.....yes I know it's not recognized as Wicca because it has rules that Buckland started. I know the history. I am not an idiot, so don't treat me like I am.
In my opinion Seax to Wicca in like Mormon to Christianity.
A lot of Christians don't consider Mormons Christian, and a lot of Wiccans don't consider Seax Wicca.
I get it. It is all clear to me now, thank you everyone whom I argued with for the past week or so. I am set in stone.
The rest is just semantics over this word "wicca" I know Btws who say that they're valid because they do things exactly Gardner's way, just don't have the initiated line back to him. I know BTW's who say that they have lineage back to Garner they just incorporate different Gods and Goddesses. There are hundreds of people out there lying about their lineage, who can really know for sure. I know British Traditionalists who are no more spiritual (and in some cases less) than people who proudly say they learned out of books.
Are you a better person for your studies?
I do believe there need to be standards, but I don't think they can be set here. I don't think you can buy a Silver Ravenwolf book and a pentacle and then call yourself Wiccan because you say so, but unfortunately we just don't have hard and set rules. The line is very thick and very grey where wicca starts and ends (unless you are one of those who say lineage back to Gardner end of story)
I think it is time that Wiccans realize that the word is acceptable for others to use. Call yourselves Gardnerians if you believe your lineage is true, but more harm than good is being done by discounting the true magick of others because of this word you are clinging to.
I applaud you on becoming Seax Wiccan, good luck in your endeavors. Be proud. I have had the good fortune of meeting Raymond Buckland several times (he lives here in Ohio) he is a highly spiritual man and wise human being.
kage no neko Vixen: You can't at all accurately compare Wicca and Christianity. They function so completely differently, it's not a matter of "oh, I just don't like you / believe what you do". Wicca is Gardner's religion. He set the rules down to say that you have to do this, or else you're not practicing his religion. It's like if I take my beliefs and establish my path with my own rules and call it "Potatoes of Doom" and make one of the rules to be a Potato that you have to always keep a potato in your left pocket. It's my religion, I can make it as silly as I want! You don't want to stuff a potato into your pocket every day? Then don't, but you can't be a Potato. Why? 'cause it's mine, I said so. With Wicca, Gardner established it, said that you have to follow the core.. You change that, do anything that's different from the rules he set down, you're not practicing Wicca.
so Potatoes Of Doom goes on for a while, until two people argue, "what potato is best?" half decide red russet, and half yukon gold. which is right? then theres the sect of purple potatoes, and THEN the sweet potatoes and yams jump into the mix. then there are those who think it dosent matter, a potato is a potato. are any of them right or wrong, though all are following the guidelines?
and i thought wicca was older then gardner? if he made rules it would be HIS sect, right?
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Thu Feb 11, 2010 7:30 pm
xLady Tsukiyox Rizu-Sensei xLady Tsukiyox I’ll erase this feeling…
I still have a long life don’t I?
kono omoi wo keshiteshimau ni ha
mada jinsei nagai deshou? Again the split of the Roman Catholic Church occured in 1517. The things you read off of a google search can be very misleading and even false. Whereas things that have been well researched by reputable scholars, is neither.
Again, Martin Luther caused the division of the Church and the birth of the various demoninations. His protests and his letters are what fueled the split because he felt that the Church's practices were not Christ-like and that they were greedy.
I’m
natsukashiku naru
konna itami mo kangeijan again, i'm not referring to that. what i'm talking about was a split of people that were christians, not christianity itself. a social split more than a religious one. this HAS been researched by reputable scholars, which is probably because it was true, actually happened, and WAS RECORDED. seriously, look it up: "SCOPES TRIAL". just because you didn't here about something doesn't mean it didn't happen, and it doesn't mean that the people that know about it are wrong. I’ll erase this feeling…
I still have a long life don’t I?
kono omoi wo keshiteshimau ni ha
mada jinsei nagai deshou? Okay I'm going to nitpick a bit:
It would be nice if you used perfect grammar that way the people you debate with understand what you're saying.
The split in Christianity was a social and religious one. Martin Luther was proposing social reform for the Catholic Church. Thus the Protestant Reformation was born.
The whole point behind the ruling was because many people didn't think that Evolution was apart of the "normalcy" they had sought for after coming out of WWI. People thought at that time Christianity was the normal thing and should be taught because that's how it was before World War I.
The trial doesn't however show a social split in Christianity. It shows that people have an issue of accepting new theories because it doesn't seem compatible with their religion. Because these new theories in a sense disrupts the sense of normalcy.I’m missing the feeling…
so this pain is also welcomed!
natsukashiku naru
konna itami mo kangeijan
Please don't behave in this matter, I do believe we are above this. A reasonable remark would have been something along the lines of "Could you please clarify what you are saying." The way you put it, to be honest, you come off sounding like a petty b***h.
BTW THS S N NFRML DBT S PPL CN SPLL N S WHTVR KND GRMMR THY WNT. (add in the vowels, it's fun)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Fri Feb 12, 2010 12:25 pm
xLady Tsukiyox Rizu-Sensei xLady Tsukiyox I’ll erase this feeling…
I still have a long life don’t I?
kono omoi wo keshiteshimau ni ha
mada jinsei nagai deshou? Again the split of the Roman Catholic Church occured in 1517. The things you read off of a google search can be very misleading and even false. Whereas things that have been well researched by reputable scholars, is neither.
Again, Martin Luther caused the division of the Church and the birth of the various demoninations. His protests and his letters are what fueled the split because he felt that the Church's practices were not Christ-like and that they were greedy.
I’m
natsukashiku naru
konna itami mo kangeijan again, i'm not referring to that. what i'm talking about was a split of people that were christians, not christianity itself. a social split more than a religious one. this HAS been researched by reputable scholars, which is probably because it was true, actually happened, and WAS RECORDED. seriously, look it up: "SCOPES TRIAL". just because you didn't here about something doesn't mean it didn't happen, and it doesn't mean that the people that know about it are wrong. I’ll erase this feeling…
I still have a long life don’t I?
kono omoi wo keshiteshimau ni ha
mada jinsei nagai deshou? Okay I'm going to nitpick a bit:
It would be nice if you used perfect grammar that way the people you debate with understand what you're saying.
The split in Christianity was a social and religious one. Martin Luther was proposing social reform for the Catholic Church. Thus the Protestant Reformation was born.
The whole point behind the ruling was because many people didn't think that Evolution was apart of the "normalcy" they had sought for after coming out of WWI. People thought at that time Christianity was the normal thing and should be taught because that's how it was before World War I.
The trial doesn't however show a social split in Christianity. It shows that people have an issue of accepting new theories because it doesn't seem compatible with their religion. Because these new theories in a sense disrupts the sense of normalcy.I’m missing the feeling…
so this pain is also welcomed!
natsukashiku naru
konna itami mo kangeijan
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Fri Feb 12, 2010 12:26 pm
BTW THS S N NFRML DBT S PPL CN SPLL N S WHTVR KND GRMMR THY WNT. (add in the vowels, it's fun)
what the heck does that say? are you speaking martian?????? O.O
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Fri Feb 12, 2010 1:52 pm
KasaChan xLady Tsukiyox Rizu-Sensei xLady Tsukiyox I’ll erase this feeling…
I still have a long life don’t I?
kono omoi wo keshiteshimau ni ha
mada jinsei nagai deshou? Again the split of the Roman Catholic Church occured in 1517. The things you read off of a google search can be very misleading and even false. Whereas things that have been well researched by reputable scholars, is neither.
Again, Martin Luther caused the division of the Church and the birth of the various demoninations. His protests and his letters are what fueled the split because he felt that the Church's practices were not Christ-like and that they were greedy.
I’m
natsukashiku naru
konna itami mo kangeijan again, i'm not referring to that. what i'm talking about was a split of people that were christians, not christianity itself. a social split more than a religious one. this HAS been researched by reputable scholars, which is probably because it was true, actually happened, and WAS RECORDED. seriously, look it up: "SCOPES TRIAL". just because you didn't here about something doesn't mean it didn't happen, and it doesn't mean that the people that know about it are wrong. I’ll erase this feeling…
I still have a long life don’t I?
kono omoi wo keshiteshimau ni ha
mada jinsei nagai deshou? Okay I'm going to nitpick a bit:
It would be nice if you used perfect grammar that way the people you debate with understand what you're saying.
The split in Christianity was a social and religious one. Martin Luther was proposing social reform for the Catholic Church. Thus the Protestant Reformation was born.
The whole point behind the ruling was because many people didn't think that Evolution was apart of the "normalcy" they had sought for after coming out of WWI. People thought at that time Christianity was the normal thing and should be taught because that's how it was before World War I.
The trial doesn't however show a social split in Christianity. It shows that people have an issue of accepting new theories because it doesn't seem compatible with their religion. Because these new theories in a sense disrupts the sense of normalcy.I’m missing the feeling…
so this pain is also welcomed!
natsukashiku naru
konna itami mo kangeijan
Please don't behave in this matter, I do believe we are above this. A reasonable remark would have been something along the lines of "Could you please clarify what you are saying." The way you put it, to be honest, you come off sounding like a petty b***h.
BTW THS S N NFRML DBT S PPL CN SPLL N S WHTVR KND GRMMR THY WNT. (add in the vowels, it's fun)I’ll erase this feeling…
I still have a long life don’t I?
kono omoi wo keshiteshimau ni ha
mada jinsei nagai deshou? It's not being a "petty" b***h. Quite frankly saying that is just rude. As a captain shouldn't you refrain from making such comments? I was being respectful when I said that. In a debate, it's good to be able to state your point in a clear and concise manner. If the other person can't understand what your points are then how is the debate going to flow?
And your last point makes you seem like an ignorant b***h to be blunt (Which only means that you can't make those kinds of comments if I can't. Meaning fairness. Good for one, Good for all. And all that jazz.) I’m missing the feeling…
so this pain is also welcomed!
natsukashiku naru
konna itami mo kangeijan
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Fri Feb 12, 2010 1:56 pm
Rizu-Sensei xLady Tsukiyox Rizu-Sensei xLady Tsukiyox I’ll erase this feeling…
I still have a long life don’t I?
kono omoi wo keshiteshimau ni ha
mada jinsei nagai deshou? Again the split of the Roman Catholic Church occured in 1517. The things you read off of a google search can be very misleading and even false. Whereas things that have been well researched by reputable scholars, is neither.
Again, Martin Luther caused the division of the Church and the birth of the various demoninations. His protests and his letters are what fueled the split because he felt that the Church's practices were not Christ-like and that they were greedy.
I’m
natsukashiku naru
konna itami mo kangeijan again, i'm not referring to that. what i'm talking about was a split of people that were christians, not christianity itself. a social split more than a religious one. this HAS been researched by reputable scholars, which is probably because it was true, actually happened, and WAS RECORDED. seriously, look it up: "SCOPES TRIAL". just because you didn't here about something doesn't mean it didn't happen, and it doesn't mean that the people that know about it are wrong. I’ll erase this feeling…
I still have a long life don’t I?
kono omoi wo keshiteshimau ni ha
mada jinsei nagai deshou? Okay I'm going to nitpick a bit:
It would be nice if you used perfect grammar that way the people you debate with understand what you're saying.
The split in Christianity was a social and religious one. Martin Luther was proposing social reform for the Catholic Church. Thus the Protestant Reformation was born.
The whole point behind the ruling was because many people didn't think that Evolution was apart of the "normalcy" they had sought for after coming out of WWI. People thought at that time Christianity was the normal thing and should be taught because that's how it was before World War I.
The trial doesn't however show a social split in Christianity. It shows that people have an issue of accepting new theories because it doesn't seem compatible with their religion. Because these new theories in a sense disrupts the sense of normalcy.I’m missing the feeling…
so this pain is also welcomed!
natsukashiku naru
konna itami mo kangeijan I’ll erase this feeling…
I still have a long life don’t I?
kono omoi wo keshiteshimau ni ha
mada jinsei nagai deshou? You keep missing my point time and again. The split within the Christian religion occured in 1517. THere was no split in 1925. The Scopes Trial outlines how the Hoover administrated wanted things to go as close to "normalcy" as possible. People didn't think Evolution was apart of that normalcy. neutral I’m missing the feeling…
so this pain is also welcomed!
natsukashiku naru
konna itami mo kangeijan
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Fri Feb 12, 2010 3:11 pm
As a Captain, I will tell you both to watch it. Kasa, do not get wrapped up in ignorance.
P.S. To: Lady Tsukiyo, I do believe it is important to state a point in a clear and concise manner, but it is not to be expected from everyone. To do so would be ignorant.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Fri Feb 12, 2010 7:07 pm
xLady Tsukiyox Rizu-Sensei xLady Tsukiyox Rizu-Sensei xLady Tsukiyox I’ll erase this feeling…
I still have a long life don’t I?
kono omoi wo keshiteshimau ni ha
mada jinsei nagai deshou? Again the split of the Roman Catholic Church occured in 1517. The things you read off of a google search can be very misleading and even false. Whereas things that have been well researched by reputable scholars, is neither.
Again, Martin Luther caused the division of the Church and the birth of the various demoninations. His protests and his letters are what fueled the split because he felt that the Church's practices were not Christ-like and that they were greedy.
I’m
natsukashiku naru
konna itami mo kangeijan again, i'm not referring to that. what i'm talking about was a split of people that were christians, not christianity itself. a social split more than a religious one. this HAS been researched by reputable scholars, which is probably because it was true, actually happened, and WAS RECORDED. seriously, look it up: "SCOPES TRIAL". just because you didn't here about something doesn't mean it didn't happen, and it doesn't mean that the people that know about it are wrong. I’ll erase this feeling…
I still have a long life don’t I?
kono omoi wo keshiteshimau ni ha
mada jinsei nagai deshou? Okay I'm going to nitpick a bit:
It would be nice if you used perfect grammar that way the people you debate with understand what you're saying.
The split in Christianity was a social and religious one. Martin Luther was proposing social reform for the Catholic Church. Thus the Protestant Reformation was born.
The whole point behind the ruling was because many people didn't think that Evolution was apart of the "normalcy" they had sought for after coming out of WWI. People thought at that time Christianity was the normal thing and should be taught because that's how it was before World War I.
The trial doesn't however show a social split in Christianity. It shows that people have an issue of accepting new theories because it doesn't seem compatible with their religion. Because these new theories in a sense disrupts the sense of normalcy.I’m missing the feeling…
so this pain is also welcomed!
natsukashiku naru
konna itami mo kangeijan I’ll erase this feeling…
I still have a long life don’t I?
kono omoi wo keshiteshimau ni ha
mada jinsei nagai deshou? You keep missing my point time and again. The split within the Christian religion occured in 1517. THere was no split in 1925. The Scopes Trial outlines how the Hoover administrated wanted things to go as close to "normalcy" as possible. People didn't think Evolution was apart of that normalcy. neutral I’m missing the feeling…
so this pain is also welcomed!
natsukashiku naru
konna itami mo kangeijan i'm not talking about THE split, i'm talking about A split. christians were fighting about it amongst themselves, with nobody really caring about whose idea it was, or why it was created, was the point i was trying to make. i compared this to the concept of covens, which wiccans are fighting over, no matter whose idea it was or the intention of its creation. and also, before you start critisizing my grammar, maybe you should learn what a "comma" is. some of your points were a bit muddled, and could do with some cleaning up, but i'm going to be polite and not drag your mistakes into a religious argument.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Fri Feb 12, 2010 9:20 pm
xLady Tsukiyox KasaChan xLady Tsukiyox Rizu-Sensei xLady Tsukiyox I’ll erase this feeling…
I still have a long life don’t I?
kono omoi wo keshiteshimau ni ha
mada jinsei nagai deshou? Again the split of the Roman Catholic Church occured in 1517. The things you read off of a google search can be very misleading and even false. Whereas things that have been well researched by reputable scholars, is neither.
Again, Martin Luther caused the division of the Church and the birth of the various demoninations. His protests and his letters are what fueled the split because he felt that the Church's practices were not Christ-like and that they were greedy.
I’m
natsukashiku naru
konna itami mo kangeijan again, i'm not referring to that. what i'm talking about was a split of people that were christians, not christianity itself. a social split more than a religious one. this HAS been researched by reputable scholars, which is probably because it was true, actually happened, and WAS RECORDED. seriously, look it up: "SCOPES TRIAL". just because you didn't here about something doesn't mean it didn't happen, and it doesn't mean that the people that know about it are wrong. I’ll erase this feeling…
I still have a long life don’t I?
kono omoi wo keshiteshimau ni ha
mada jinsei nagai deshou? Okay I'm going to nitpick a bit:
It would be nice if you used perfect grammar that way the people you debate with understand what you're saying.
The split in Christianity was a social and religious one. Martin Luther was proposing social reform for the Catholic Church. Thus the Protestant Reformation was born.
The whole point behind the ruling was because many people didn't think that Evolution was apart of the "normalcy" they had sought for after coming out of WWI. People thought at that time Christianity was the normal thing and should be taught because that's how it was before World War I.
The trial doesn't however show a social split in Christianity. It shows that people have an issue of accepting new theories because it doesn't seem compatible with their religion. Because these new theories in a sense disrupts the sense of normalcy.I’m missing the feeling…
so this pain is also welcomed!
natsukashiku naru
konna itami mo kangeijan
Please don't behave in this matter, I do believe we are above this. A reasonable remark would have been something along the lines of "Could you please clarify what you are saying." The way you put it, to be honest, you come off sounding like a petty b***h.
BTW THS S N NFRML DBT S PPL CN SPLL N S WHTVR KND GRMMR THY WNT. (add in the vowels, it's fun)I’ll erase this feeling…
I still have a long life don’t I?
kono omoi wo keshiteshimau ni ha
mada jinsei nagai deshou? It's not being a "petty" b***h. Quite frankly saying that is just rude. As a captain shouldn't you refrain from making such comments? I was being respectful when I said that. In a debate, it's good to be able to state your point in a clear and concise manner. If the other person can't understand what your points are then how is the debate going to flow?
And your last point makes you seem like an ignorant b***h to be blunt (Which only means that you can't make those kinds of comments if I can't. Meaning fairness. Good for one, Good for all. And all that jazz.) I’m missing the feeling…
so this pain is also welcomed!
natsukashiku naru
konna itami mo kangeijan
I don't defend being called a b***h, I know I was being a b***h. I am too opinionated, that's actually why I don't add stuff to this chat, just things about what you guy are saying.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sat Feb 13, 2010 5:05 pm
i've never mentioned this before, but i REALLYREALLYREALLY like nilla wafers. O.O
*munches nilla wafers* heart
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sat Feb 13, 2010 5:08 pm
Nilla Wafers rock. Pass that box over here, let me grab a handful.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sat Feb 13, 2010 5:10 pm
Rizu-Sensei i've never mentioned this before, but i REALLYREALLYREALLY like nilla wafers. O.O *munches nilla wafers* heart While they're delicious, they dry my mouth out. They're saliva sponges and make me thirsty.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sat Feb 13, 2010 5:39 pm
*tosses vix the box*
it's ok kage....i'm eating them with moxie, and it tastes alright. eating them with liquid is perfectly acceptable. heart
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sat Feb 13, 2010 6:47 pm
I agree with that. 3nodding
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
