It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Thank you.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
Originally posted by Leveller
There's a risk when using the word "Paganism", that it's way too general to apply to any belief other than those that are recognised as being the major religions today. It seems that you and I have had a misunderstanding over the context in which it was used.
The word "pagan" stems from the Latin "paganus" which meant "country people".
It was a word that was sometimes used by Romans in contempt for those outside the city walls because they were viewed as crude and uneducated.
It predates Christianity by centuries but is not known whether it would have been applied in a strictly religious sense. Possibly it would - "pagan" could mean anything viewed as "backward" by those who saw themselves as "modern" thinkers.
In later Latin, the word came to mean "civilian". As early Catholics saw themselves as "Soldiers of Christ", the word pagan was taken to interpret the opposite.
It was cetainly a word that was in effect before Christianity had spread throughout Europe, used by both Romans and Christians and would seem to have first been used in the area where Christianity was born - being applied to those country folk of Rome who clung to their old gods instead of embracing the new religion.
www.etymonline.com...
The main problem with the word today is that, apart from the non-Christian, non-Islamic, non-Judaic, etc. way it is applied, there really is no clear definition of what it actually means. It's way too general and one often has to guess the context in which it is used as I have above.
Gathering from your later words, you seem to be referring to a resurrection of goddess worship and here I don't dispute the idea that the resurrection of this mode of religion may have been influenced by the spread of Catholicism in France, in the mid 4th century AD. But the context in which I see your use of the word "pagan" makes the addition of the word "resurrection" a necessity.
Incidentally, the actual word "pagan" was used in a "Christian" sense by Tertullian (one of the early Church fathers) in the 3rd century AD. Again, he referred to himself as one of the "milites Christi" (soldiers of Christ) and it became natural to refer to non-Christian or non- Jewish as pagani, "civilians". In Histories 153 he refers to "soldiery demoralized by intercourse with the civilians (paganos)" - a reference to how pagans were affecting the morale of the early Christians.
Originally posted by freudling
OK, let's see how long we can keep this thread on track. What is the deal with the book?
Originally posted by Leveller
The Biblical prophecies have not been fulfilled. Even with your very dodgy interpretation of a few of them coming to pass, the major prophesies in Revelation have not occured. endtimes than current events of today. You have merely manipulated the word to suit you cause.
Originally posted by svcadet32
hold on a minute chief, i might be me but i always though that Jesus Christ was THE SON OF GOD?!!! but then agian that might just be me.
[edit on 15-2-2005 by svcadet32]
Originally posted by TgSoe
Leveller, speaking of prophecies I saw a while back on TV that they were looking for the walls of Jericho. You know the ones Joshua marched around 7 times singing praises to God and the walls came tumblng down. If I remember correctly this wall was pretty wide at the top and high. They have looked high and low for this thing and it should be pretty hard to hide something of this size and magnitude. Not that it couldn't be burried under the earth somewhere but far as I know they have still not found it.
The main problem with the word today is that, apart from the non-Christian, non-Islamic, non-Judaic, etc. way it is applied, there really is no clear definition of what it actually means. It's way too general and one often has to guess the context in which it is used as I have above.
Originally posted by IComeWithASword
I found the article and the author kind of disturbing. I thought the Masons
Originally posted by BlackGuardXIII
Roberto Calvi's death under Blackfriars Bridge comes to mind.
Originally posted by freudling
What about the text. Does anybody want to repsond to its claims?