|
|
| Yes or No? |
| Yes |
|
81% |
[ 9 ] |
| No |
|
18% |
[ 2 ] |
|
| Total Votes : 11 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
 Posted: Fri Nov 25, 2005 9:48 am
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Fri Nov 25, 2005 12:02 pm
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Fri Nov 25, 2005 1:29 pm
Sacred-Texts are primary sources and translations of primary sources, so the validity and usefulness of the material depends on who wrote it, who translated it, and where it came from.
What are your source standards, religiously?
|
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Fri Nov 25, 2005 3:32 pm
Deoridhe Sacred-Texts are primary sources and translations of primary sources, so the validity and usefulness of the material depends on who wrote it, who translated it, and where it came from. What are your source standards, religiously? Yeah. I don't trust things that are interpreted by other people, so if it's a translation, I don't really rely on it. However, most the stuff on that site is originally written in English, so that's a plus. From there, I like to make sure that the author has some sort of credibility on the subject and that I can find the same information from other sources as or more credible. Thank the Goddess I took a lot of writing classes in high school and learned how to basically judge a source. However, I still like to see what others more knowledgeable in Paganism would think of the sources on this site. I'm afraid I have a tendancy to be ridiculously cautious. sweatdrop
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sat Nov 26, 2005 5:56 am
i wouldn't put much stock in the book of shadows part, since that seems to be submissions by any joe pagan out there. but the other page is pretty much fine. all the books look like older sources, written before it was omg teh cool to be pagan. that doesn't mean they're necessarily GOOD for accuracy's sake (here i'm looking at Margaret Murray), but they're generally read just for a background in the original attitudes behind Wicca and the like.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sat Nov 26, 2005 11:34 am
The interesting thing about neo-paganism is that unless you're looking for information about old religions (such as who practiced what in the 10th century, etc) or reconstructionist religions (or mystery religions) pretty much anyone can be considered "accurate". Opinions are just that, opinions. If I think that water is blue and you think it's aqua, well, we can be both right, can't we? Or if I think that winter is a season associated with the element of air and you think that it's associated with the element of water, who's to arbitrarily decided what's right and wrong? We all need to go with our gut instincts on these things.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sun Nov 27, 2005 10:23 am
SlaineWildfire The interesting thing about neo-paganism is that unless you're looking for information about old religions (such as who practiced what in the 10th century, etc) or reconstructionist religions (or mystery religions) pretty much anyone can be considered "accurate". Opinions are just that, opinions. If I think that water is blue and you think it's aqua, well, we can be both right, can't we? Or if I think that winter is a season associated with the element of air and you think that it's associated with the element of water, who's to arbitrarily decided what's right and wrong? We all need to go with our gut instincts on these things. I didn't think of that. Good point. Paganism is so much harder than Christianity. Probably because it requires you to think for yourself....(not to be bashing Christianity. I'm sure if you did Christianity right you'd have to think for yourself, but, in my previous experience, it was a lot of doing what you were told.)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sun Nov 27, 2005 10:05 pm
Actually, this site is just hosting the compliation created by a group called "Riders of the Crystal Wind." Ages ago a bunch of people on a BBS system collected all their articles and stories together and called it a BOS. It does have some good articles and a huge number of people have used it as a base for their own BOS.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Reply
