From tyagi@HouseofKaos.Abyss.com Sun Oct 2 11:42:09 1994 Received: from localhost (tyagi@localhost) by jobe.shell.portal.com (8.6.4/8.6.5) id LAA20686; Sun, 2 Oct 1994 11:42:06 -0700 From: tyagi mordred nagasiva Message-Id: <199410021842.LAA20686@jobe.shell.portal.com> Subject: Re: Great Martyrdom Cult To: jde768s@nic.smsu.edu (Engwall Jonathan D) Date: Sun, 2 Oct 1994 11:42:06 -0700 (PDT) Cc: tyagi (tyagi mordred nagasiva) In-Reply-To: from "Engwall Jonathan D" at Oct 2, 94 03:10:28 am X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.4 PL0] Content-Type: text Content-Length: 3710 Status: OR Kali Yuga 49941002 You write: |It is now three in the morning. I have just taken a bath (no v-sex crap |here) in completely darkness. I had a vision. I saw a square with |lines conecting the corners and crossing at the center in a single |perfect point. Not an amazing vision in itself.... But what I saw |in this square cut into four equal triangle was: |The Father |The Son |and The Adversaries. |I have given up the concept of good and evil. |Such things are subjective...good to one is evil to another. |Therefore I do not see a 'good' god and an 'evil' satan |I see two intertwined entities. |Not unlike the hemishperes of the brain. |The Father and The Son. |Creator and Created. |These two are mortal. |They are controlled. Interesting. I'm not sure how this relates to what follows. :> |The point where I lose your line of thought in your theory is at the |shift of Roman paganism to Christianity. Co-opting? Usage of labels originally intended by an oppressed minority as identification now blurred in meaning, the labels now being assumed like a mantle, diffusing the rebellion and co-opting the insurgence. |I can see here a man who is the perfect Adversary who wrestles control |of the mortal from his opponents. They, the mortals, are like the people |watching a |debate/conflict/struggle who may not agree, may even disagree to |their very core with they debator who is winning, but they cannot voice |their disagreements because they are not powerfull enough adversaries. I don't understand this. |Everyone knows who is winning a Presidential election. |They may agree with the Democrat, but they will still vote Republican. Not sure how this connects. |I think that my basic disagreement with your theory is that you |present this cult as something that is taken over/stolen by the |majority forcing the cult to dissappear for a time until it can |reappear. The cult is not taken over/stolen, the LABELS are. It is a battle of words and the control of language in the war to control the mind. |I would see it |as a conflict by a very powerfull few over how those that 'observe' the |conflict will label themselves. And I see it as both (as in the Roman-pagan=|Christian thing) a direct and conscious assault on the labels in order to diffuse rebellion and (as in the Witch => nature-worshipper) infusion of membership with different goals and experiences, associating different thoughts and feelings with the process of identifying with the label. |This also causes me to question |your conection of Wicca/Satanism (I understand your logic there) to |early Christianity (Cultist followers of Jesus the Crist). If I merely |understand you incorrectly, I appologize. I'm not that good with my history, but my poor understanding is that the early Christians were persecuted for their beliefs and practices, even though they weren't proselytizing. They were disparaged by the pagans who thought them 'alien' and 'worthy of violence' (perhaps 'a lower class'). The terms 'Wicca/Wicce' and 'Shaitan/Satan/Satanist' weren't around at that time, likely, but the spirit of the insurgence, of practicing an unpopular religion in the face of oppression, of martyring to the cause while bringing up the very real feelings and associations with oppressive power (the cross was an execution/torture device) fits in perfectly with the Witch-link to 'the Burning Times' and, less directly (since this is the latest development of the GMC), the use of the oppressive terminology of the Judeo-Christian establishment against it ('satanist') is a more offensive movement against this very same opponent. |I think I have said all that I intended to say. Ditto