home
RSS
October 4th, 2011
01:57 PM ET

Kentucky town celebrates Pagan Pride Day

Pagans turned out to celebrate the fall harvest in Louisville, Kentucky, CNN affiliate WDRB reports. "It's a celebration of all polytheistic religions," Pagan Pride Day coordinator Mike Avery said.

Read the full story at WDRB
- CNN Belief Blog

Filed under: Druids • Kentucky • Paganism

soundoff (241 Responses)
  1. Al

    Looks like a real humdinger.

    October 4, 2011 at 8:56 pm |
  2. snow

    Guess from God's point of view, its better that there be polytheism.. I mean, think how lonely it must be for God who is going to hang around for eternity – and all he gets to do is create this, create that and create some more.. The worst part is, there are either people who praise him, worship him and suck up to him every opportunity.. or there are people who simply don't give a dam about him. Just no one to sit along or hang out with.. Lonely, much?

    October 4, 2011 at 8:27 pm |
    • Yup

      That is why the monotheism of Christianity is actually polytheism. There's God, there's Jesus, there may or may not be a holy ghost, there's Satan, there's a bunch of good and bad angels . . . yes, monotheism is quite crowded in Christianity. The one and only god needs other gods to help pass the time.

      October 4, 2011 at 8:51 pm |
    • J.W

      You have it all wrong. I would love to sit down and have a beer with God.

      October 4, 2011 at 9:07 pm |
  3. kimsland

    There are multiple (billions; trillions) of suns in space
    Maybe this is what they mean?

    I wouldn't be praising them as gods though. Um, they're stars.
    That would be like ants praising a merry go round. All praise the wonders of the merry go round

    October 4, 2011 at 8:14 pm |
  4. Muneef

    The Pagans of Mecca used to make their God idols from palm dates at harvest and during outer harvest they would start eating their date Gods piece by piece....!

    October 4, 2011 at 8:12 pm |
    • Feenum

      Which is no weirder or dumber than the beliefs and practices of the bizarre religion that replaced it.

      October 4, 2011 at 8:17 pm |
    • John Richardson

      Sounds like communion.

      October 5, 2011 at 10:25 am |
    • THE BROWN NOTE

      so is that why your people worship a rock found in the dirt

      October 5, 2011 at 10:49 pm |
  5. hippypoet

    the SUN needs a day! oh thats right, it has 2, the summer solstice and the winter solstice...but whos counting right

    October 4, 2011 at 8:07 pm |
    • ThinkForYourself

      Doesn't it have a day once a week?

      October 5, 2011 at 1:41 am |
    • John Richardson

      Don't forget the equinoxes!

      October 5, 2011 at 10:26 am |
  6. False Prophet Spotting Service

    OK, whatever. It's just that I just had to flag a false prophet for bearing false witness. Major false prophet generator, that false witness business! So, anywho, I didn't notice much in the way of atheism or militancy in this thread. That got my attention. Always does. And I must remain vigilant! But you seem a little too flaccid to count as a false prophet, so far, anyway. You kinda actually have to say something to be a false prophet, ya know? Oh well. Go back to your fun. Viel spass or whatever!

    October 4, 2011 at 8:03 pm |
    • False Prophet Spotting Service

      Whoops! That was a reply to martinipaul in the thread started by Samsword!!!

      October 4, 2011 at 8:04 pm |
    • martinipaul

      Spot: how did you know I just ran out of viagara?

      October 4, 2011 at 8:10 pm |
    • False Prophet Spotting Service

      Hey, I'm not saying I'm omniscient or anything. I'd have to flag myself if I did, eh? But some things are revealed, even if we kinda wished they weren't ....

      October 4, 2011 at 8:22 pm |
    • Yup

      The phrase "false prophet" is a redundant redundancy.

      October 4, 2011 at 8:55 pm |
    • False Prophet Spotting Service

      @Yup Hmmmmmmmmmm. Ok, I benevolently choose not to smite thee. I'm just that kinda guy!

      October 4, 2011 at 8:59 pm |
    • martinipaul

      I'd smite thee but I'm busy with Spot now that my viagra supply is renewed.

      October 4, 2011 at 9:15 pm |
    • False Prophet Spotting Service

      @martinipaul Uh, come again? No, let me rephrase that ...

      October 4, 2011 at 9:18 pm |
  7. kimsland

    Pagan Pride Day?
    That's funny. if I drove past that I think I'd crack up laughing. (actually I would)
    There is NO godsssssss.
    I suppose enjoy the day and fun, but don't believe in that rubbish kids whatever you do.

    October 4, 2011 at 7:59 pm |
    • Wiccan priestess

      But it is our own right, just as it is yours, to believe in what we wish to. Just because someone says what we believe is not true or real, doesn't make it so. Everyone has the right to believe in whatever they want to, especially if it is a comfort to them.

      October 5, 2011 at 9:20 am |
    • THE BROWN NOTE

      ive never heard mother earth scream when i stabbed it

      October 5, 2011 at 10:50 pm |
    • Les

      @The Brown Note

      The reason you haven't heard Her scream is that the sound of gas drilling is louder than Her voice.

      October 7, 2011 at 4:57 pm |
  8. as my good prophet says

    may the light of the ALMIGHTY SUN be upon you all.

    October 4, 2011 at 6:07 pm |
  9. Synapse

    Would've loved to hear what George Carlin would've had to say about the Parade.

    October 4, 2011 at 4:40 pm |
    • Central Srutinizer

      He might say, "The only good thing ever to come out of religion was the music."

      or

      "Doesn't anybody belive in Goblins? You never hear about this.. Except on Halloween and then it's all negative sh-it. And what about Zombies? You never hear from Zombies! That's the trouble with Zombies, they're unreliable!

      October 4, 2011 at 5:14 pm |
    • Don't Shoot Bill Murray! It's Only Zombie Make-Up !

      The problem with zombies is that they are slow and clumsy. I mean, can you imagine watching a game of zombie football? Actually, that might be pretty freaking funny! Hell, The Zombie Olympics could be hilarious! Zombie gymnastics . . . zombie ski jumping . . . zombie pole vault . . . yes, it would be much more fun to watch, especially if

      I wonder what sport Jesus, the founding zombie of Christianity, would play?

      October 4, 2011 at 5:44 pm |
    • Central Scrutinizer

      @dont's shoot

      Well naturally it would be Sport Fishing on the 700 Club.

      October 4, 2011 at 6:43 pm |
    • Moose

      What parade?

      October 4, 2011 at 11:59 pm |
  10. Samsword

    Okay... so I know this is off topic. But I just had a very interesting thought (I'm sure somebody has already thought of it... but it's new to me okay? 😉 )

    Cause and effect is the basis of all Scientific reason. We don't know what came before the Big Bang, but most people speculate that there have been an infinite number of universes in the past, and there will be an infinite number in the future. (When you get into infinite loops... probability does strange things.) It is by this reasoning that Atheists often point out that it only makes sense that Life would spring up "by chance."

    However, by that same infinite law of probability then, could it not be probable to assume that in some distant past a universe existed in which a God-like "super-intelligence" could have evolved. Furthermore, because of infinite recursion, it is equally probably that a God-like being would have evolved prior to that. Etc, etc. Following these lines, there is a good chance that these god-like "super-intelligences" could have been involved in the evolution and perpetuation of other beings.... (possibly us?)

    I know this sounds like science fiction, and I realize this is a drastically different concept of "eternal God" than Christians etc would like to consider. But I thought it was something that is interesting to think about... What does anyone else think?

    October 4, 2011 at 4:18 pm |
    • ThinkForYourself

      It is an interesting thought, but I would argue that the multiverse theory – at least those that I know about, postulate that other universes simply have different laws of physics. So, I don't know that an infinite number of universes would necessitate a sort of universe-wide intelligence, but you'd think it would be within the realm of possibilities. If you look at a quantum mechanical model of multiple universes I think you could likely rule out the possibility of a universal intelligence, at least one that would arise at the beginning, since that model is more of a tree structure.

      No matter what, neither theory would coincide with a christian god because no deity would be required for the inital creation of the universe. As you postulate the question, such an intelligence would be a product of the properties of the universe rather than the inverse.

      I would also argue that causality is not a fundamental underpinning of the scientific process as relativity would suggest that causality is time-based and thus could be reversed. Others have raised the possibility that causality is simply a human construct.

      October 4, 2011 at 4:59 pm |
    • Samsword

      Interesting idea ThinkForYourself. I'll definitely have to reconsider my theory within the ideas of relativity. Of course when you get into relativity, time becomes a very interesting thing! It's hard for me to wrap my head around... So I would postulate that it's still possible that a super-intelligence could still have evolved (is, was, has already... etc) But that depends on the infinite nature of the multiverse. If there ARE infinite universes, and time is relative, the theory I think could still be valid, albeit from a different perspective. But I just don't know enough about these things. More research I guess! =)

      But I agree, it's definitely different from the traditional Christian/Muslim/Jewish concept of Monotheism. (I do try to think outside the box ofte ) Anyway, thanks for your input!

      October 4, 2011 at 5:18 pm |
    • John Richardson

      One notable difference between your idea and the more typical "eternal god" like Jehovah is that your idea is actually intelligently reasoned and interesting. The big challenge for it would be what might the upper limit be not just on intelligence, but power to put that intelligence to use. When speculating about what may or may not have evolved in universes with physical laws different from our own, we are on very shifty sands at best. But I myself would postulate that true omniscience, ie knowing everything that ever has occurred, is occurring and will occur within any one universe, let alone across universes is probably a logical impossibility, perhaps even provably so if and when we have relevant axions not just set up to ensure a desired result. In any case, our OWN intelligence is probably too limited to full grasp our deepest origins. And postulating a Deistic god, let alone a personal god like Jehovah, just because we lack deep data and can at best barely get our minds around the relevant concepts continues to strike me as an empty exercise. Your idea would at least be worth using as a premise for a sci fi novel.

      October 4, 2011 at 5:47 pm |
    • martinipaul

      Intelligent reasoning?

      October 4, 2011 at 6:45 pm |
    • martinipaul

      Carefull, carefull. People might think militant atheists are nerds.

      October 4, 2011 at 6:52 pm |
    • False Prophet Spotting Service

      @martinpaul Who are you assuming is a militant atheist?

      October 4, 2011 at 7:32 pm |
    • martinipaul

      Spot: read the posts and take your pick. Not every atheist is militant. I know, I used to be one. Even when I was an atheist I wouldn't hang out with these losers. The same names, you must have changed yours, appear on every Christian belief blog article. If that's not being militant then what is? I'm a gambler and I would wager money that the average agnostic/atheist really doesn't give a damn about these articles. Atheists on this belief blog are here to smash and bash. I have no problem with that because I'm just here for fun.

      October 4, 2011 at 7:54 pm |
    • ThinkForYourself

      @John Richardson – re: the sci-fi novel, arguably Asimov's foundation trilogy at least touched on this idea – an evolving universal consciousness.

      October 4, 2011 at 8:10 pm |
    • Samsword

      @John Yes it's a good point. I realize we have no way of knowing the limit to intelligence. But I've been thinking about our current technological advances. Especially "cloud" technology. And then you have the recent things like controlling remote controlled objects (helicopters is the one they've used) with the electrical pulses of one's brain. And I got to thinking, what if biology and technology get so advanced that we can project our thoughts into the "cloud?" Suddenly subjective experience becomes observable and objective. And who knows what could lead from there? If we could somehow figure out how to work around/through time and space, a type of "omniscience" might even possible. (Note: I doubt this would ever be the gnostic greek definition of "omniscience," but highly developed super-intelligence for sure. Perhaps even an intelligence that could project itself onto and effect matter directly from an energy state? Yeah, yeah, I know it's sounding very Sci-Fi, and it's all speculative at this point. Anyway, thanks for indulging me, and good points!

      October 4, 2011 at 8:26 pm |
    • Samsword

      @Think, I really need to read the foundation trilogy. I keep hearing cool stuff about it! I myself just thought of a Sci-Fi short story that I want to write now! (It's just too good to pass up eh?)

      In the story, the last "of our kind" (who actually is a highly evolved version of us) drifts silently and lonely in space. (The earth has long "been spent" and the sun "grown cold") He contains the sum of all human and superhuman knowledge before him, and eventually learns to project his intelligence beyond the limits of a body. Eventually "it" learns to surpass time-and-space. It spends aeons watching the evolution of the multiverse. Out of an experiment, It curiously decides to explore the moment of singularity in which the Big Bang occurred. It sees nothing. So It reaches out with it's mind and connects to that singular point in time.... causing an extreme reaction… the Big Bang Then It realizes that It IS the creator... It is God, and time is cyclical. A sort of cosmic "chicken and the egg" thing.

      I know it's just Sci-Fi... but a cool concept eh?

      October 4, 2011 at 8:29 pm |
    • John Richardson

      @Samsword Go for it! A cyclical infinity is a lot more plausible in some ways than a truly "open at both ends" infinity.

      I had a couple of memorable "god dreams" way back in my late teen years. One was just viewing the universe as sort of (oddly orange and glowing) glassy "lense". God hands touched it and everything went immediately black. Obviously, the end of the universe was meant here. It was startling and gave me my first real sense of deep nothingness, a feeling which was far from pleasant, but also fascinating and somehow compelling. I have since instilled that feeling from time to time by simply meditating on the thought "what if there had never been anything?" It's easiest enough to think that thought, but when you really, really FEEL the deep strangeness of what that would mean, it's quite a trip!

      October 4, 2011 at 9:10 pm |
    • Bucky Ball

      Samsword and ThinkForYourself
      Your assumption that the same dimensions of space-time exist, (or would or could exist) in other universes is not founded on anything, and one cannot make that assumption, without knowing the laws of physics of those other universes. Maybe they don't have our same dimensions, and so to speak of anything "happening", (a time based concept), in another universe, without knowing the laws of that universe is a HUGE illogical leap. One cannot make the assumption that things are the same everywhere, even the most basic things. Anything that requires "time" to pass to happen, cannot be postulated "before" time existed, which for us, as far as we know, began at the Big Bang, (especially the "god" and "vreation" myths, all of which REQUIRE time to exist, BEFORE it started,which is totally illogical.)

      October 4, 2011 at 10:39 pm |
    • Samsword

      @John Sounds surreal, but you're right, very compelling! I had a similar experience, though a bit different as well. Mine wasn't a dream, but a powerful thought and feeling that came as I was driving to work actually. It's hard to explain, but it was both a feeling of the interconnectedness of everything, and also a feeling of relative nothingness. It began with a crazy thought about the cells of the human body What if they were self-aware? Would they realize they were part of something grander? What about the molecules they are made up of? Then I began thinking the inverse. What if people were just the "cells" of the human race, or even the global ecosystem? Would terrorists and tyrants simply be "cancerous humans?" And I got to thinking. What about our solar systems, galaxies and universes? In fact, what if the Big Bang were just an infinitesimally small "spark" in a sub-atomic particle within a much larger universe etc. It was quite overwhelming, but also exhilarating.

      October 4, 2011 at 10:55 pm |
    • Samsword

      @BuckyBall I actually corrected myself later, and postulated that this "super-intelligence" would have been evolving (is evolving, has already evolved, whatever) In ours or a separate universe. The only real presumptuous leap I'm making, is in an infinite universe theory (which we don't know.) If there are an infinite number of universes spawned by the Big Bang. Then it stands to reason, by the laws of probability, that there could be identical or similar universes. Possibly (perhaps even probably) one in which the evolution of a super-intelligent "god-like" being would be possible. This is NOT a "creationist" theory. I'm theorizing, that there could be "god(s)" as powerful timeless being(s), but ultimately the product of the universe like us. (The "off-the-wall" idea is that these beings could also possibly be agents in our creation/evolution.)

      Also, I said at the beginning this is all speculative. I'm not even saying I completely adhere to this idea. When it comes to macro-cosmology, everything is speculative (based on reason perhaps, but speculative nonetheless) Anyone who tells you otherwise... well... is lying. Cuz' we simply can't reach that far yet, we don't have the tech or know-how...

      October 4, 2011 at 11:17 pm |
    • Bucky Ball

      But "evolving" is a time dependent concept, which, ITSELF requires time.

      October 5, 2011 at 12:59 am |
    • Samsword

      @Bucky... wait... are you arguing against Evolution? Are you arguing against the existence of time at all? I mean I understand it's "relative," but it still exists. Most scientists agree that humans evolved from lower life forms. I was postulating that there could be life that has evolved into "super-intelligent" beings. And if at some point these "super-intelligences" could ascend beyond time (which is speculative) they would be "eternal..." Thus ALWAYS having been eternal... because they are timeless. (Though the evolution of that intelligence could be mapped to/through a particular time and place... They no longer would be.) They always would have been. Perhaps even playing a role in THEIR own evolution; thus once again returning to the cyclical eternity. Of course this IS assuming that "intelligence" has no real limit... which again, is speculative. Time conundrums are simply something human minds can't really conceive, since it's so outside our everyday cognitive abilities.

      October 5, 2011 at 1:44 am |
    • ThinkForYourself

      @BuckyBall:
      "Your assumption that the same dimensions of space-time exist, (or would or could exist) in other universes is not founded on anything, and one cannot make that assumption, without knowing the laws of physics of those other universes."

      I agree completely with your post. I hadn't meant to make that assumption. The later point about causality was just meant to highlight that it is not necessary in our current universe – though I didn't make that clear.

      October 5, 2011 at 1:46 am |
    • kimsland

      That's ironic, according to probability (and lack thereof) it could just as easily be probable that a invisible teapot also exists in our universe between the Earth and the Sun.
      But is that probable? Scientifically speaking and also because I agree that the human mind is extremely limited in universal knowledge, then I suppose it most certainly is probable.

      So this is where we get down to basic common sense. Is it probable that a man called jesus walked on water and healed the blind etc? NO it isn't. Just because everything might be probable doesn't make everything true. In actual fact it's so non probable that its insignificant, even to the absolute point of ridiculous.

      Human minds and scientific probability do not cross into the fairytale land of possibility, otherwise its possible that we don't even exist. What doesn't exist is the most common sense debate and 100% probability that there is no god. If you are speaking of higher intelligence in the universe, I certainly hope so, since humans themselves are not ever lasting we may need some help one day. But as for 'god'? You can pray all day for this probability and you'll get nowhere.

      Are atheists right? PROBABLY, since there no other plausible option that we have ever (or may ever) seem likely.

      October 5, 2011 at 1:55 am |
    • Bucky Ball

      Nope, not arguing against evolution. "I understand it's 'relative', but it still exists.". Agree, but so far, all we know is that it, (time), exists in THIS universe. So to postulate that a super being "evolved" or "exists", (both temporal concepts), OUTSIDE this universe, is, as yet, an unknown. I would propose that our term "eternal" is really a meaningless one, in that it "means" that a being "exists" "forever", both of which terms actually have NO meaning without the existence of time. To "exist" outside time, is a concept which we cannot encompass. To "exist" without time, ("being" in our definition, requires that one/it "moves" from one "moment", (or some other unit/division of time, to the next), is simply a meaningless concept to us, as we cannot imagine being without time. And to propose that there is "existence" without time, in our terms/definitions, is simply illogical, and essentially, meaningless. Cheers. 😈

      October 5, 2011 at 7:28 am |
    • Samsword

      @Bucky Okay, that's fair. It would require a universe such as ours, or at least with a temporal reality similar to ours. Which is what I was saying about the infinite universes. If there are infinite universes, there are likely universes similar to ours... or perhaps it's even possible within our own... But you're right, we simply don't know enough about our own universe let alone what lays outside of it. (Let alone the limit to intelligence, and what achievements are even possible) Good points.

      Just as a side note, I personally find the Big Bang theory lacking. Really it just seems like a filler to make "the math work," and believe that we will ultimately find other evidence that will likely alter the theory. At macrocosmic levels, all we have are mathematics to solve problems and gaps. We don't actually really know anything... unfortunately.... =/ It's just what makes the most sense, given what we DO know.....

      So I realize that all of this is just a thought experiment... I just thought it was a fun idea. Thanks guys, good points! =)

      October 5, 2011 at 10:05 am |
    • John Richardson

      @BuckyBall I would love to explore the possibility of a universe with two temporal dimensions. What would it be like if there were not just long and short intervals between events, but wide and narrow ones? 😀

      October 5, 2011 at 10:30 am |
    • John Richardson

      @BuckyBall I don't see why other universes can't have their own time. Indeed, I would assume that many would. Time may have begun with the big bang IN OUR universe, But some other universe could have been trundling along with its own timeline independently of ours.

      October 5, 2011 at 10:35 am |
    • Bucky Ball

      Hey JR
      How are you ? I like that 2 dimension idea. Sort of Flat Eddy ! Heh heh. Actually it you look at the light pole down the road, with a bug on it, you get some idea of what your "flat" universe would look like to an observer, (but not really).
      I didn't mean to imply that time as we know it would be excluded from other universes, but to assume it's the SAME, it a bit presumptuous. The four dimensions that we can detect here, (apparently among the... what ...11? 28? that there may be here), may not be the ones that pop out, or are detectable in other dynamics, in other universes, (or even to other beings in this universe), or at least we can imagine that. At this point I assume nothing. 😈

      October 5, 2011 at 12:36 pm |
    • Bucky Ball

      "(Let alone the limit to intelligence, and what achievements are even possible)"
      Have you read Kurzweil's "The Singularity is Near". It has some great points about the impending VAST improvements in human intelligence, and it's use of cooperative machines. Take for example how much better our memories are than 10 years ago. I save MANY things in the "cloud", which are retrievable in a few seconds, which 10 years ago would take hours to go look up, and try to find. With implantable chips, human, self-evolving bio-machines will be VASTLY superior to what we know today, and that is not far off. The limits of that intelligence you were speaking of, will be FAR different looking in a few years from now.

      October 5, 2011 at 12:54 pm |
    • Samsword

      @Bucky ..... übermensch? O.O

      Jk , But seriously good point! I myself have thought about the future of technology, in reference to us as people. It's interesting to think of what effects tech will have on evolution and human intelligence... exhilarating stuff, I think!

      October 5, 2011 at 6:03 pm |
    • Les

      Your atom analogy has been published before. Dr. Sagan, on one of his shows went to the large window and said, "Have you ever wondered what it would be like to live in an atom? Look around you', if I recall correctly. With quantum physics recently defining our universe as having 11 dimensions instead of just 3, your theories are well within what is possible according to modern theories of physics.

      October 5, 2011 at 10:37 pm |
    • THE BROWN NOTE

      where would this god live though

      thats the problem

      with the vacuum of space

      October 5, 2011 at 10:51 pm |
  11. SoWhat

    People are already celibrating Pagan holidays. Christmas, Easter and Halloween are all Pagan holidays. And Sunday is a Pagan weekly holiday. I've never understood why Christians go to to church on the first day of the week and call it by it's pagan name, 'Sunday' The same with Easter. Easter is the name of a pagan goddess. If Christians really knew what Easter was all about they would hide their faces in shame, they would abolish the Easter bunny and the easter egg and egg hunt. Halloween is defined as "Holy Evening", but it is anything but holy.

    October 4, 2011 at 4:06 pm |
    • Carrie

      Easter eggs and christmas ornaments are adopted from pagan rites: The menstrual blood of a virgin was painted onto eggs as a fertility rite and evergreens were decorated with cow testicles to celebrate the fertility and rpocreation. I wonder how many sanctimonious Christians are ignorant of their own tradition's roots.

      October 4, 2011 at 4:15 pm |
    • Samsword

      Yes this is true! However, religious significance is a subjective thing. A ritual or holiday only has whatever significance a person attributes to it. (Don't get me wrong, this can have powerful implications to the human mind and faith.. rather like music actually.) Most Neopagans would also point out that a "sacrament" is as equally a "magical rite" as anything else. And they're right! (no pun intended 😉 )

      So while the origins of these holidays are very pagan. The modern practice are very Christian (except for Halloween, which is still largely pagan)... But I don't think it really matters, just my 2 cents (But this is coming from the guy who celebrates Chinese New Year, Diwali, Hanukkah, and more.) Personally I don't think God would care either. Any reason to celebrate life and perpetuate goodwill seems, to me, a benevolent God would endorse.

      October 4, 2011 at 4:29 pm |
    • John Richardson

      Yes, Samsword, but what is truly irksome is when Christians start yammering about how we must all get back to the "true" or "orignal" meaning of Easter or Christmas, idiotically as-suming that this means the resurrection and birth of Jesus. By now, it is fair to say that December 25th was once a major Pagan festival, became a major Christian festival and is now primarily in many lands a major consumerist festival. And that's fine by me!

      October 4, 2011 at 5:54 pm |
    • Samsword

      @John. Yeah... it's a good point... As a "Christian" (you may have guessed by now that I am not your typical Christian, so I don't speak for them as a whole.) I enjoy the story and symbolism of the Nativity story, but if it's not meaningful to you, then it serves no purpose to celebrate it. But what I would say, is that you can celebrate the "spirit of Christmas" in your own way. In that you can use it as a time to just enjoy the lights, the music, family and friends, treats and gift giving. I think this is the most meaningful part of the holiday for everyone anyway.... Just a celebration of general goodwill. =)

      October 4, 2011 at 8:45 pm |
    • John Richardson

      @Samsword Indeed. In fact, that is the Spirit of Saturnalia that the early church tried to stomp out and couldn't. So they co-opted it.

      But I freely admit that I don't just like Solstice, Yule, Saturnalia, the spirit of consumer spending, etc. I like Christmas. The Christmas story is the one bit of Christianity I find truly beautiful and Christmas eve services are the only Christian services in which I recall ever having had a spiritual experience, and I had them regularly in both Methodist and Catholic churches.

      I also do love the lights and the music, both secular and Christian. I play a little keyboard and a lot of harmonica and Christmas songs are among my favorite things to play, any time of year. Indeed, just today I taught myself Harry Belafonte's "Mary's Little Boy Child". I can play dozens of them and have va-gue plans for Youtubing a lot of them this season. We'll see.

      Oh, I also have had periods in which I have had spontaneous musical hallucinations. I happen to be in one such period now, though it is minor compared to some prior periods. But the first song I hallucinated, and it was QUITE an experience figuring out that it was indeed a hallucination, so perfect was the rendition, was The Little Drummer Boy and Christmas music has been by far the single most represented genre in my musical hallucinatory career. And that follows a known trend in musical hallucinations: hallucinated music tends to be music of great sentimental significance to the person hallucinating.

      October 4, 2011 at 9:42 pm |
    • Samsword

      @john That's really cool! I think that you're method of celebration could actually be defined as more truly "Christian" than what most Christians do. =)

      October 4, 2011 at 10:24 pm |
    • ThinkForYourself

      You know what I find odd about the whole co-opting other religion's rituals and holidays is that many christian denominations forbid or discourage the practice of anything even remotely connected to a different religion (I'm looking at you, RCC). For example – yoga. Even if someone practicing yoga finds health benefits from the practice and puts zero religious stock in the practice's roots, the practice is still discouraged. Often the reason cited is one bible passage that claims its bad to eat the meat of an animal sacrificed by another religion because, even though you don't believe that religion, you're implicitly supporting it. Yet the same churches that discourage such practices have no problems putting up trees at xmas time. Maybe there's some sort of statue of limitations on rituals that I'm not aware of.

      October 5, 2011 at 1:53 am |
    • John Richardson

      ThinkForYourself writes: "Maybe there's some sort of statue of limitations on rituals that I'm not aware of." I think that's exactly right! Or at least some sort of "realpolitik", whereby things that have become culturally normalized or, as in the case of solstice celebrations, long since were are co-opted when defeating them is not longer remotely likely.

      October 5, 2011 at 10:43 am |
  12. larryb

    Thank GODZZZZZZZ for Colin. Love your style man.

    October 4, 2011 at 3:55 pm |
  13. Reality

    Pagans are just as weird as Christians, Muslims, Hindus, Buddhists and Jews.

    To wit:

    Mocking spells, curses, covens, black magic, witches, voodooing dolls, hoodooing the results, shadow books, maypoles,
    god(s) and goddess(es), The Horned God is one of the two primary deities found in pagan religions. He is often given various names and epithets, and represents the male part of the religion's duotheistic theological system, the other part being the female Triple Goddess. Then there is Gerald Gardiner !!!

    October 4, 2011 at 3:30 pm |
    • Carrie

      Pagan can also mean I DO NOT SUBSCRIBE TO ORGANIZED RELIGION OR ANY TRADITION OF ANY KIND

      October 4, 2011 at 4:16 pm |
    • Reality

      pagan

      American Heritage Dictionary:
      pa·gan

      (pā'gən)
      n. 1. An adherent of a polytheistic religion in antiquity, especially when viewed in contrast to an adherent of a monotheistic religion.
      2. A Neopagan.
      3.Offensive. a. One who has no religion.
      b. An adherent of a religion other than Judaism, Christianity, or Islam.

      4. A hedonist.

      [Middle English, from Late Latin pāgānus, from Latin, country-dweller, civilian, from pāgus, country, rural district.]

      Read more: http://www.answers.com/topic/pagan#ixzz1ZqvcbFka

      October 4, 2011 at 5:57 pm |
    • .........

      plz hit report abuse on all reality posts

      October 4, 2011 at 8:18 pm |
    • .........

      p.s. I'm secretly in love with Reality.

      October 4, 2011 at 8:51 pm |
  14. Doc Vestibule

    To quote Homer "God bless those pagans"

    October 4, 2011 at 3:04 pm |
  15. Colin

    In about 100 years, I expect there will be a festival in small Kentucky town in which the few remaining Christians get together and fondly remember and celebrate their sky fairies – god, his son Jesus, the good fairy Mary, the holy spirit, lots of little angels, and saints and the naughty ground-troll, the Devil.

    Curious onlookers will marvel and reporters will quote that about how their silly Dark Ages beliefs were "still quite popular, even into the early 21st Century. With the advent of the internet and social media, however, their days were numbered, as the upcoming generation had greater access to information and were no longer captive audiences to the superst.itions of their parents."

    Wish I would live to see it..

    October 4, 2011 at 3:02 pm |
    • TruthPrevails

      lol...you love p*ssing off the christians, don't you?

      October 4, 2011 at 3:27 pm |
    • herbert juarez

      The sad truth is you both will be in unimaginable torment at just the beginning of eternity,unless you repent and turn to God.Christianity will prevail and flourish until Christ returns then enter into the millenium and beyond.You both will be forgotten,and never remembered by anyone anywhere.You only insult yourselves.God bless

      October 4, 2011 at 9:06 pm |
    • Yuiop

      herbert, how again is eternal torment fair punishment for minor things done wrong by a human in a finite lifetime that doesn't necessarily know any better?

      Oh, right, it isn't. Your god is just an ass-hole. Got it now.

      October 4, 2011 at 9:11 pm |
    • John Richardson

      The really sad truth is that Herbert is at his most gleeful when imagining people subject to unimaginable torment for all eternity. Fortunately, he is ONLY imagining it.

      October 4, 2011 at 9:13 pm |
    • herbert juarez

      There are no minor transgressions before God, all have sinned and fall short of the glory of God.Eternal life is not measured by the good you do vs. the bad.Salvation and peace with God is by faith through grace in accepting the Lord Jesus as God the Father has accepted Him.At judgement the only issue is do you know Jesus, and more important does Jesus know you.God bless

      October 4, 2011 at 9:19 pm |
    • herbert juarez

      @john richardson
      There is no joy in watching people destroy themselves and cause harm to others.You are a very judgmental and misguided individual.God bless

      October 4, 2011 at 9:22 pm |
    • J.W

      I do not believe a person can do whatever they want and just say that they know Jesus. It isnt like you can get into heaven just because you know the password or something.

      October 4, 2011 at 9:24 pm |
    • False Prophet Spotting Service

      Herbert Juarez writes: "At judgement the only issue is do you know Jesus, and more important does Jesus know you." And many who think they know Jesus will find out that Jesus does NOT know them. Remember that, Herbert Juarez.

      October 4, 2011 at 9:24 pm |
    • John Richardson

      Yo, HJ! Did YOU just call ME judgmental?

      Tell me. If you "know" Jesus and Jesus "knows" you, but specifically knows that you are a flaming hypocrite, do you still get to go to heaven?

      October 4, 2011 at 9:27 pm |
    • ThinkForYourself

      @herbert:
      "You are a very judgmental and misguided individual."

      -Pot, kettle, have you two met?

      October 5, 2011 at 1:48 am |
    • herbert juarez

      @false prophet
      Well thank you for your insight,I am well aware of that fact ,being as I am the one who brought it up.Are you?God bless

      October 5, 2011 at 4:59 am |
    • herbert juarez

      @john richardson
      All sins past ,present and future are covered by Jesus for those who believe.Flaming hypocrisy as well.Which part of not earning your way into Gods grace are you having trouble with?God bless

      October 5, 2011 at 5:02 am |
    • herbert juarez

      @think for
      You are a real joke, using that sign in and parroting atheistic garbage.Why not comment on the complete statement or would that really cause you to"think for yourself"?God bless

      October 5, 2011 at 5:07 am |
    • Rick

      Herbert: How do you expect that people can fear retaliation from a being in which they do not believe? Is your belief so bereft of logic that you must resort to empty proxy threats to gain converts, or in the case of the threats, prisoners?

      October 5, 2011 at 9:35 am |
    • herbert juarez

      @rick
      If you saw someone in mortal danger,would you warn them or just go about your logic?God bless

      October 5, 2011 at 8:25 pm |
  16. The Bobinator

    Polytheism is no less valid then monotheism. Actually, it's better, because it's more likely there is a being who has limited supernatural powers rather then a being who has infinite supernatural powers.

    Both are absurdly unlikely however.

    October 4, 2011 at 2:48 pm |
    • Colin

      Indeed bob. I have never understood wwhy the Christian sky-fairy believers think “polytheist” is somehow “inferior” to monotheism. Once you make the quantum leap into Wonderland by believing in sky-fairies, what difference does if make if you believe in one or many?

      Even worse, I don't understand why the Christians believe they are monotheistic, given that they believe in god, the devil, guardian angels, the holy spirit, Jesus, many demons in hell, the Virgin Mary, the angel Gabriel, thousands of saints, all of whom apparently make Earthly appearances periodically, and all of whom inhabit their life-after-death lands with magic-sacred powers of some kind.

      October 4, 2011 at 2:52 pm |
    • William Demuth

      Dude

      Wiccan chicks shag like wet sheep dogs trying to dry off after falling in a lake!

      Plus they get you a discount at the head shop in the mall.

      October 4, 2011 at 2:59 pm |
    • DamianKnight

      @ Colin

      "Even worse, I don't understand why the Christians believe they are monotheistic, given that they believe in god, the devil, guardian angels, the holy spirit, Jesus, many demons in hell, the Virgin Mary, the angel Gabriel, thousands of saints, all of whom apparently make Earthly appearances periodically, and all of whom inhabit their life-after-death lands with magic-sacred powers of some kind."

      Perhaps you need to understand the word "monotheism." ": the doctrine or belief that there is but one God " – Merriam-Webster Online Dictionary.

      There is one God in Christianity. The Holy Spirit and Jesus are manifestations of the same "God." Ice is still water, just a different form of it. Same concept. Satan, Gabriel and the other angels are not God. Neither are demons. Neither is the Virgin Mary, and neither are the saints (of which, most Christian denominates do not adhere to the idea of 'Saints' like Catholics and/or Orthodox do). Therefore, the belief there is "one God" is what makes Christianity monotheistic.

      October 4, 2011 at 3:32 pm |
    • William Demuth

      Damian

      Jesus CLEARLY refers to his father as a distinct being.

      Obviously one of the two of you are either a liar or poorly informed.

      Perhaps the polytheistic label cut through even your level of indoctrination?

      A hierarchy or superior beings? So is a Saint a God to a Saint Bernard?

      Such silliness from such a bright person. It’s truly a shame.

      And what of the Space Ghost? Is he Harpo to Jesus’ Groucho?

      Perhaps the polythiestic label cut through even your level of indoctrination

      October 4, 2011 at 3:54 pm |
    • DamianKnight

      -sigh- William, I've explained this all to you several times. You either are too obtuse to understand or are just looking to pick a discussion where you can make ludicrous leaps in logic based on an out of context comment I made. I am choosing not to indulge you this time.

      October 4, 2011 at 4:19 pm |
    • Yuiop

      William, dude, too funny, that line about the wiccan chicks. ROFL.

      October 4, 2011 at 9:13 pm |
  17. myweightinwords

    I went to my first Pagan Pride day 10 years ago. Nice to see Kentucky catching up.

    October 4, 2011 at 2:35 pm |
    • Moose

      This was the 6th annual PPD–not as far behind the times as you imply.

      October 5, 2011 at 12:08 am |
    • myweightinwords

      For what it's worth, Moose, I couldn't read the whole article seeing as I visit this forum in the morning on my work computer before my day starts and my work network blocks the craziest things. I could only judge by the tidbit given in the snippet posted above.

      October 5, 2011 at 10:43 am |
  18. Major

    Why does the headline say "Kentucky town"? Louisville is the 17th largest city in the entire country, for crying out loud.

    October 4, 2011 at 2:35 pm |
  19. William Demuth

    Free minded Red Necks!

    May the Gods Bless them!

    October 4, 2011 at 2:27 pm |
    • Redneck louie

      who yall callin redneck

      October 4, 2011 at 9:11 pm |
  20. DamianKnight

    First again! Take that, Chuckles!

    October 4, 2011 at 2:17 pm |
    • William Demuth

      Small things my freind, small things.

      October 4, 2011 at 2:27 pm |
1 2 3
Advertisement
About this blog

The CNN Belief Blog covers the faith angles of the day's biggest stories, from breaking news to politics to entertainment, fostering a global conversation about the role of religion and belief in readers' lives. It's edited by CNN's Daniel Burke with contributions from Eric Marrapodi and CNN's worldwide news gathering team.