Christianity is actually a story of mushrooms and astrology

For me the words insulting and demeaning come to mind more than "provacative" but to each his own.

"Ohiophinphan wrote:

For me the words insulting and demeaning come to mind more than "provacative" but to each his own.

I honor your choice to be insulted

mckenna at first glance seems like a nut job lol

A tragedy really.

Eh, have all the soma one would like...watch out for the fly algaric though..

"padre31 wrote:

A tragedy really.

Eh, have all the soma one would like...watch out for the fly algaric though..

You and I have a different definition of tragedy.

Never done mushrooms myself.

"Dol-Fan Dupree wrote:

You and I have a different definition of tragedy.

Never done mushrooms myself.

"tragedy"..a noble figure destroyed by their own internal flaws..

"padre31 wrote:

"tragedy"..a noble figure destroyed by their own internal flaws..

Aw, Greeks loved those.

I do not see what it has to do with this subject though

Wow...this looks like as much of a slap as if people would say that Witches worship the dev....oh wait, nevermind.

"Pagan wrote:

Wow...this looks like as much of a slap as if people would say that Witches worship the dev....oh wait, nevermind.

well as the saying goes man, witchin ain't easy.

:sidelol:

"Pagan wrote:

Wow...this looks like as much of a slap as if people would say that Witches worship the dev....oh wait, nevermind.

So I guess one missed the Walpergisnacht festivities?

:wink2:

Actually, this could prove to be a good topic for discussion if participants did not go out of their way to go over the top.

"Pagan wrote:

Wow...this looks like as much of a slap as if people would say that Witches worship the dev....oh wait, nevermind.

Which in the past, in this forum, I have also described as "insulting and demeaning"

"Ohiophinphan wrote:

Which in the past, in this forum, I have also described as "insulting and demeaning"

True, the topic, Pharmacology in Religion, is a good one to chat about as the history itself is fascinating, however to approach it with an ax to grind will just lead to more back and forth and not actual informational/viewpoint sharing.

"Ohiophinphan wrote:

Which in the past, in this forum, I have also described as "insulting and demeaning"

I wasn't aiming that at you, bro. It wasn't aimed at anyone in general...more just to show that it happens to everyone.

"padre31 wrote:

So I guess one missed the Walpergisnacht festivities?

:wink2:

Actually, this could prove to be a good topic for discussion if participants did not go out of their way to go over the top.

Actually, I don't celebrate Walpurgisnacht...but I'm failing to see how that relates to being misguidely linked to the devil.

And what would be a good topic, the OP or this? :lol:

"Pagan wrote:

I wasn't aiming that at you, bro. It wasn't aimed at anyone in general...more just to show that it happens to everyone.

Agreed. I didn't take it personally either. I wanted to point out, I oppose any person insulting another's faith or belittleing it. And that is not directed at Dupree either who was bringing up a piece for discussion. I looked at the piece which headlines this thread. The assumptions themselves are.... beyond my capacity to comment upon.

A discussion of pharmacology and drug use definately has a place in the discussion of history. Some kind of fungus in wheat or rye may well have played a role in the French revolution. To assume it has first place seems to me to be a simplistic reading of any history or faith.

"Pagan wrote:

Actually, I don't celebrate Walpurgisnacht...but I'm failing to see how that relates to being misguidely linked to the devil.

And what would be a good topic, the OP or this? :lol:

I didn't know Walpurgisnacht was a Pagan/Wicca festival? My maternal Grandmother was a Swede and talked about the festival when the farm animals were let back out into the pasture. She remembered it as a street fair kind of time with minimal religious overtones. Named for an English missionary saint isn't it?

That it would also have roots in an earlier "nature" festival is not surprising. Many feasts and festivals in central Europe have multiple threads of history.

"Ohiophinphan wrote:

Agreed. I didn't take it personally either. I wanted to point out, I oppose any person insulting another's faith or belittleing it. And that is not directed at Dupree either who was bringing up a piece for discussion. I looked at the piece which headlines this thread. The assumptions themselves are.... beyond my capacity to comment upon.

A discussion of pharmacology and drug use definately has a place in the discussion of history. Some kind of fungus in wheat or rye may well have played a role in the French revolution. To assume it has first place seems to me to be a simplistic reading of any history or faith.

Many faiths have ritualistic drug use, especially by the shamans. I do not think it is insult to insinuate that the early prophets from the old testements may have been shamans who used drugs. They were very different people.

I do think it is sad that we will never know the true origins of the modern day faiths due to the fact that anything that is "against" church doctrine would just be dismissed for various reasons.

"Ohiophinphan wrote:

I didn't know Walpurgisnacht was a Pagan/Wicca festival? My maternal Grandmother was a Swede and talked about the festival when the farm animals were let back out into the pasture. She remembered it as a street fair kind of time with minimal religious overtones. Named for an English missionary saint isn't it?

That it would also have roots in an earlier "nature" festival is not surprising. Many feasts and festivals in central Europe have multiple threads of history.

It isn't a Wiccan one, more a general Pagan one...and in Europe more so than the States. I don't know of anyone here who celebrates it.

We celebrate Beltane this time of year.

"Dol-Fan Dupree wrote:

Many faiths have ritualistic drug use, especially by the shamans. I do not think it is insult to insinuate that the early prophets from the old testements may have been shamans who used drugs. They were very different people.

What you say is quite true though shamanism in the Middle East is not a major part of the history of their ritualistic behavior. They were more commonly sacrificial religions. Shamanism and sacrificial priests are quite different.

I can't think of anything in Judeo-Christian-Islamic history that even suggests drug use. That doesn't seem to work for Egypt or the Mesopatamian faiths either, though there is some use of "hemp" in rituals later in history. Wine and "strong drink" (i.e.beer) were the drugs of choice in those cultures. If your authors were talking about India, China, South America, or sub-Saharan Africa, they would strike me as more credible.

"Dol-Fan Dupree wrote:

I do think it is sad that we will never know the true origins of the modern day faiths due to the fact that anything that is "against" church doctrine would just be dismissed for various reasons.

Certainly the Church would be skeptical as would Islam, etc. Yet scholars work within and outside the religious faith systems all the time. For example, there is significant evidence that a major contributing factor to the spread of Islam was the presence of quasi-Christian groups who had "lost" in the Christological controversies of their day. Neither group is terribly happy with that story but major scholars continue to do the work regardless.

Likewise many Judeo-Christian scholars today suggest Abraham is not one chgracter but a compilation of herioc figures. Again not a popular position among the faithful but it gets serious study.

I perfer to think issues of faith arise out of divine revelation but even if you choose not to believe that then doesn't it make sense that they arise out of a longing to explain why things are the way they are and attempts to control nature instead of arising from folks getting high?

I don't mind the quest for truth, it will lead where it leads. I find wild generalizations by groups with their own agenda to start with (The name "gnostic" in the title suggests a strong bias to start with) to not move the truth along very much and is at the root of my objections in this thread.

"Ohiophinphan wrote:

What you say is quite true though shamanism in the Middle East is not a major part of the history of their ritualistic behavior. They were more commonly sacrificial religions. Shamanism and sacrificial priests are quite different.

I can't think of anything in Judeo-Christian-Islamic history that even suggests drug use. That doesn't seem to work for Egypt or the Mesopatamian faiths either, though there is some use of "hemp" in rituals later in history. Wine and "strong drink" (i.e.beer) were the drugs of choice in those cultures. If your authors were talking about India, China, South America, or sub-Saharan Africa, they would strike me as more credible.

Certainly the Church would be skeptical as would Islam, etc. Yet scholars work within and outside the religious faith systems all the time. For example, there is significant evidence that a major contributing factor to the spread of Islam was the presence of quasi-Christian groups who had "lost" in the Christological controversies of their day. Neither group is terribly happy with that story but major scholars continue to do the work regardless.

Likewise many Judeo-Christian scholars today suggest Abraham is not one chgracter but a compilation of herioc figures. Again not a popular position among the faithful but it gets serious study.

I perfer to think issues of faith arise out of divine revelation but even if you choose not to believe that then doesn't it make sense that they arise out of a longing to explain why things are the way they are and attempts to control nature instead of arising from folks getting high?

I don't mind the quest for truth, it will lead where it leads. I find wild generalizations by groups with their own agenda to start with (The name "gnostic" in the title suggests a strong bias to start with) to not move the truth along very much and is at the root of my objections in this thread.

I think you can make the same argument for christians.

Also to your point before it, I do not see a difference as getting high does expand's one ability to think of why things the way they are and are a way of controlling nature. Most of the human experience is about getting high. There is the high that is from a substance such as alchohol, "drugs" or certain types of food or there is the high we get from experiences, such as love, religion or even seminars.

I have been to seminars with all of the fun jumping and shouting and high fiving. The rush after I was done was amazing. It is such an amazingly high experience.

The same for those mega-churches that people go to with the singing and the dancing and the healing. All about getting that religious high. It is really no different than taking a drug since a lot of the time the same chemicals released from each of the activities.

My point is basically that "getting high" in a religious context is different than "getting high" for escape.

in the western world we get high for an escape.

"Dol-Fan Dupree wrote:

My point is basically that "getting high" in a religious context is different than "getting high" for escape.

in the western world we get high for an escape.

OK, but the folks in the original post seem to see it everywhere! That is unjustifiable from any historical observation.

If that were happening within either the major faith (here for example any of the Abrahamic faiths) or within their opponents it would be mentioned either directly or indirectly within their sacred texts. An example of that would be the treatment of the use of alcohol which is challenged in both Hebrew and Christian scriptures and banned in the Koran. There is no comparable reaction to any use of hallucinagenics (sic) in any of the three's holy writ.

"Ohiophinphan wrote:

OK, but the folks in the original post seem to see it everywhere! That is unjustifiable from any historical observation.

If that were happening within either the major faith (here for example any of the Abrahamic faiths) or within their opponents it would be mentioned either directly or indirectly within their sacred texts. An example of that would be the treatment of the use of alcohol which is challenged in both Hebrew and Christian scriptures and banned in the Koran. There is no comparable reaction to any use of hallucinagenics (sic) in any of the three's holy writ.

Interesting question OhioP, smoking was of course not on anyone's horizon at that point in time in that region, the only possible references would be Elisha's stew being poisoned or Ezekiel's err.."bread" (I have to wonder if people realize what "Ezekiel's bread" was as a loaf sits in the local freezer case) the third possible episode of hallucigenic usage would be Saul and the Necromancer.

However, overall the usage would seem hindered by the fact there was not a huge selection of food items that could be psychotropic in that region as say compared to the Rainforrest in S America or Central and Western America.

The area of Babylon did have the Soma mushrooms available, however preperation was left to the priests of that kingdom, "Joe Babylon" was more of a malted beer drinker.