check this out.
if you go to google.com and search images for cruithne, it's one of the images that appears.
(i thought i'd stay away [for now] from using as avatar the cheery fellow carrying the severed head.).
Check this out. If you go to google.com and search Images for Cruithne, it's one of the images that appears. (I thought I'd stay away [for now] from using as avatar the cheery fellow carrying the severed head.)
Love and regards,
Cruithne - who prefers that nearly all heads remain attached.
as per my previous "proclamations of self-achievement" .
i passed my exam !
wohoo ... passed another exam !.
Hey Simon,
It may well be that I will pursue one of those MCSD thingies myself, one of these days. I'm working on getting into an online Master's degree program first, but after I get the degree, I will probably go for some kind of certification as well.
I got a bachelor's degree in computer science in 1987 and worked as a programmer / software engineer for 13 years (84-96 inclusive). I got out of the industry for a while, and am now in a software admin job that enables and encourages me to do some custom programming, mostly database-related.
I want to have the career that I deserve, and would have had if it hadn't been for the "dumb yourself down and refuse opportunities" attitude / policy induced by my former religion.
An option is to create a commerically viable software system, and I've started talks with someone who is an expert in the sales processes of an indsutry that neeeeeds a good point-of-sale system. Not sure where that is going to go, but if we can make it happen, it will fulfill a dream and possibly earn us a few dollars.
Warm regards,
George
...because i can't, not after what they said to me.
i've been noticing more an more that i'm more athiest than anything else because i don't have a gret attachment to god or spirituality.
ive mentally grouped it as a pseudoscience.
Belief in Divinity, or in a fundamentally loving and beneficent Universe, is absolutely not dependent on, or necessarily correlative with, belief in the Bible.
I have not "read the Bible," although occasionally I have looked up verses to remind myself of what they say or to compare translations, since I left the Witnesses. I have less interest in reading the Bible now than in reading the Koran or the Bhagavad Gita (which I actually attempted, a while back).
However, I meditate and practice magick, which is to say that I pray and attempt to commune with and receive direction from the loving Consciousness that presides over all, which I presume to exist. I seek to harmonize myself with my environment (to the extent possible without violating "higher" principles), for my own benefit and others'. After I left the Witnesses, I still recognized my own spiritual inclinations, and needs that I felt could be best met via a spiritual approach to life. In fact, in dealing with my many problems that were caused or exacerbated by being a Dub for 30 years, I made the assumption that the exterior aspects of my life would improve as I grew spiritually. That approach weems to have worked for me. I basically sought spiritual growth through a variety of (potentially) helpful means that the JWs try to turn people away from - mysticism, metaphysics, intuition, psychological holism (recognizing and cultivating the subconscious and unconscious), meditation, energy work, shamanism, magick, Paganism.
Love and regards,
George
don't get me wrong, i'm as guilty as the next guy.
i love reading on here, lurking if you will (i am a woman of very few words) but you know, i still remember what those anal warts (elders) would say at meetings about "apostates" etc.
do you think we're just playing the part because we left the org, i mean, do you get what i'm saying?
I don't care what the elders or JWs expect, one way or t'other.
Why am I here? Because I think YOU - all you other I's who am here also - are a pretty interesting bunch o'folks. Once in a while, I need a little support, or at least someone (or ones) to talk to about things that occur in my life, and I know others here need that support and/or a listening ear too. Topics of discussion can be things that are common to all people, or things that particularly relate to JWs and ex-JWs. Sometimes I enjoy, and find particularly valuable, the perspectives of others whose world view was once that of the JWs, as mine was - regardless of the fact that we have all become marvelously diverse in our views since leaving the Witnesses. Sometimes I feel that I have something potentially valuable to offer in response to someone else's question, or need to discuss a particular topic.
The GB occasionally gets something right, and they may be partially correct in assessing the motivations of "apostates." However, their degree of correctness is of absolutely no consequence to me. I no longer acknowledge them as the mouthpiece of some "faithful and discreet slave."
George
alright...now i'm settling down from a great weekend which i will post on in other threads our good friends have already started, but if you don't want to be seen then tell me now.
i know badger?
and the lovely blonde from dallas i had the pleasure of meeting needs to be covered, tres.
You may post any and all pix of me. I don't recall doing anything too embarassing, and I have no reason to conceal my activities.
Warm festapostapixieish love and regards,
George
now, please remember, jw my entire life.
therefore, many prejudiced and warped ideas.. the deal is that a very nice co-worker invited me to a 'christmas play' at her baptist church and i accepted.
the play is tonight, and i have all these messed-up ideas that perhaps it's wrong to step foot into another church; or that perhaps since i've been taught all my life that demons reside in the false religion churches that i'll be bothered by these demons if i attend this event tonight.. please, help me win over these live-long thoughts.
Doubtfully Yours,
I write to you as an ex-JW who turned to a form of Neo-Paganism about two and a half years after leaving the Witnesses - and I was a sincere Witness for more than 30 years. I bring up my current spiritual path not to "freak you out," but to hopefully make what I am about to tell you more meaningful and impactful.
For many months after leaving the JWs, I entertained no thoughts of entering any sort of church. It would have been a mistake for me to do so prematurely! Maybe it is too soon for you - only you can really make that decision, and I strongly suggest that you do not force yourself, if you think it would really bother you. On the other hand, if this is a step you think you are ready for, there does come a time when it is necessary to move a little bit outside of your "comfort zone," and try new things.
When the right time came for me, I accepted a friend's invitation to go to church with her - to an interfaith, metaphysically-oriented "community church." I went as an observer only, initially, but soon found myself comfortably participating in all of the activities. Later, when I learned that my personal working hypotheses about how the world works had evolved toward Neo-Paganism, I took the same approach. "I will go and observe, and if anything disturbs me seriously, I can always leave," I said to myself. I did not leave. I stayed, and returned, and found that, in general, what my JW background had given me reason to expect in such congregational settings could not have been further from the truth.
Love and regards,
George
recently i had the opportunity to read the first three or four chapters of a very interesting book: the jesus mysteries : was the "original jesus" a pagan god?
i regret that circumstances prevented me from completing my reading.
i may choose to purchase a copy of this book for my personal library, and so that i can finish reading it.
Recently I had the opportunity to read the first three or four chapters of a very interesting book: The Jesus Mysteries : Was the "Original Jesus" a Pagan God? I regret that circumstances prevented me from completing my reading. I may choose to purchase a copy of this book for my personal library, and so that I can finish reading it.
http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/tg/detail/-/0609807986
If anyone doesn't know it already, amazon.com quotes media reviews of books, and indivuduals may add their own evaluations. (I've reviewed a few books at amazon.com, and one of my acquaintances has reviewed more than 200 books for them....)
From the back of the book jacket, here are some of the controversial ideas this book advances, stated in question form:
What if . . .
* there were absolutely no evidence for the existence of a historical Jesus?
* for thousands of years Pagans had also followed a Son of God?
* this Pagan savior was also born of a virgin on the twenty-fifth of December before three shepherds, turned water into wine at a wedding, died and was resurrected, and offered his body and blood as a Holy Communion?
* these Pagan myths had been rewritten as the gospel of Jesus Christ?
* the earliest Gnostic Christians knew that the Jesus story was a myth?
* Christianity turned out to be a continuation of Paganism by another name?
The review by Publisher's Weekly states:
" This is at once a wonderful and a terribly flawed book; at times it is absolutely on target, and yet it yields to such vitriol and inflated language that it will be easily dismissed. The authors postulate that Christianity as we know it, regardless of the teachings of its founder, ultimately distilled and usurped the greatest wisdom inherent in pagan traditions. Specifically, they charge that Christianity looted the traditions of the Osiris/Dionysus cults - borrowing, synthesizing and domesticating what was most sacred to Greco-Roman civilization. Freke and Gandy assert that Christian history is "nothing less than the greatest cover-up of all time. Christianity's original Gnostic doctrines and its true origins in the Pagan Mysteries had been ruthlessly suppressed by the mass destruction of the evidence and the creation of a false history to suit the political purposes of the Roman Church." The authors compare the revolution of the imperial Christian church (which finally suppressed pagan worship) to the Communist revolution in Russia, arguing that both saw enormous bloodshed and suppression of all dissent. This kind of polemic detracts from the usefulness of this study. The book's great tragedy is that many of its most scholarly kernels of insight, such as the authors' discussion of Secret Mark or their tantalizing analysis of the Lazarus material, will be lost to responsible discussion. In sum, this is a disappointing, sensationalist polemic ."
I often (usually!) find myself disagreeing with Publisher's Weekly's reviews, and this one is no exception. It appears likely to me that this review was written by someone whose religious toes got stepped on by the facts as brought out in the book, and their too-obvious implications - or someone who is trying to anticipate the reactions of such people, and to "speak for them," in effect. Again, I've only read a portion of the book, but I thought the authors showed admirable objectivity abnd restraint. They assert that they both came from Christian backgrounds, and began their research with pro-Christian biases. Their conclusions, they say, are those that are simply most reasonable in the light of the evidence they present, and I found no exceptions to that rule in the chapters that I read.
Literalist Christianity, a.k.a. (self-described) "orthodox" Christianity, will find itself under attack by the authors' thesis and research, and it is to be expected that resistance, in the form of negative reviews and otherwise, will flow from that camp.
For me, The Jesus Mysteries presents a new, alternative, rational explanation of origins of Christianity, that appears to be very soundly and firmly based in a balanced consideration of historical fact - "the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth," rather than merely the half-truths, lies, and distortions that have been passed down as "history" to serve the purposes of the worldly and religious powers of Christendom.
To me, considering the work of these authors, and accepting the bulk of their conclusions as valid, does not invalidate or demean Christian tradition, although it certainly requires a reinterpretation that abandons an entrenched insistence on taking literally anything in the New Testament or in orthodox Christian theology.
As a person who has spent some time struggling internally with the supposed sharp distinction (underlined and emphasized by orthodox Christianity, and particularly sects like the JWs) between monotheism and polytheism, I particularly appreciate the authors' analysis of this issue, wherein they view Paganism through a monotheistic lens (using the words of classical philosophers and historians) and Christianity through a polytheistic one (quoting the Bible itself, as well as expressions of mainstream Christian theology), ultimately showing that the apparent dualistic division between the two approaches to Divinity is largely artificial, and much blurrier than is commonly supposed.
As I understand it, the authors conclude that the only essential differences between Christianity and the Mysteries of classical Paganism are 1. unreasonable, superstitious insistence on a literalist interpretation of the basic teachings (NONE of which are unique to Christianity); and 2. The insistence that we humans have exactly one chance for salvation by choosing the one and only right way in this life, with eternal blessings or cursings to follow as a result of that choice.
The removal of these peculiar features would leave the world with essentially a Gnostic form of Christianity - a religion that would be a tool for spiritual growth, and a source of motivation to moral and ethical excellence, but that would not be dogmatic and exclusionary in nature, and that would not be a suitable tool for the control of the many by the few.
I fully realize how difficult it will be for someone who is still in the JW religion but having a few (though possibly serious) doubts, or someone who has recently left the faith after being sincerely convinced that it was "the Truth," or even someone who has left the JWs and turned (or returned) to orthodox Christianity, to approach material like this open-mindedly. I myself would not have been comfortable reading this book until fairly recently (having left the WItnesses in early 2000).
Love and regards,
George
first, let me say thanks to all our wonderful hosts/hostesses in dallas for arranging this great weekend.
everyone had such a good time, and there are so many funny things that happened!
special thanks to jesika and her boyfriend for letting me stay at their house, and providing all the beer for me and jesika's wild friday night.
I had ***wonderful*** time; I'm sorry I didn't get to chat at length with very many of you, but I seem to function best in one of two modes: wall flower, watching and listening to everyone else; or involved in a topical conversation with one or two people at a time. As far as those whom I did get to know a bit are concerned, I felt that I formed some strong and lasting bonds. I hope so. Now that I've actually met a few and talked with a few people face-to-face, I'll be more motivated to participate in the forum regularly.
Love,
Cruithne a.k.a. George
if i'd just pretended to have an anxiety disorder and had a few panic attacks while out in service, i could have been spared the horrors of theocratic ministry school and going out in service.
i would've missed out on a lot of field-service trips to edward's apple orchard, but i could have stayed at home and put off getting baptized until i had enough money saved from my paper routes to make a proper break for it!
why didn't i think of this ten years ago?
Genuine moods disorders arise as a result of being a sincere JW.
if anyone can be said to have "asked for it" by their behavior, i suppose it would be me.
not only did i turn my back on the organization and walk away, but i got involved with "false religion," and wrose yet with neo-paganism and the occult.
(oooh, creepy!
I can't reply to all of your responses in the manner that they deserve. I do appreciate the many kind expressions.
I thought of sending postcards ot my children. Everything is out in the open, no potential surprises inside an envelope, and they're not worth returning to sender. At worst, they will just be discarded.
For Ian and others who have lost contact with children and others close to us: People make their choices, usually with good intentions. I do not hold my children's behavior against them. I hope they will have a change of mind and heart eventually.
Yes, my family know my thoughts and feelings on spiritual matters, and my activities. Perhaps I was foolish to be so open with them, but again I was setting an example; if you cannot be open with your family, then who can you be open with? - JW families being a violation of norms and "the rules," in that respect.
I do not shun JWs. The ones I knew personally no longer have anything to do with me. Those whom I meet in the course of my activities I treat kindly, and only on one occasion have I found it appropriate to share information about my past with a newly-met JW. I was seeking her assistance in a professional capacity, at the time. She was unable to do anything for me, but to her credit, she tried, and even talked with an elder on my behalf. I think he advised her to disengage from me, which was okay.
I expect that refusing my letter was a family decision. I know not whether the kids were the instigators.
As far as my political beliefs are concerned, as with everything else I will go where my processing of the available information leads me. I had strong opinions even when I was a JW, just didn't see any point in trying to do anything about them.
Bisous, no worries about sharing the first thoughts that came to your mind. I didn't see your initial reply as "selfish."
If I failed to reply directly to your words, it doesn't imply a devaluation of them. All that was said was important.
Warm regards,
George
