If She is wrong…
(I wrote this as a reaction to someone’s suggestion that Halloween should not be celebrated by Christians, and someone else’s answer that Pagan beliefs do not necessarily go against Christian beliefs. It has been taken from another discussion board, and the discussion has by no way ended. I’ll add comments as the discussion progresses.)
NMOCM:
Ties to paganism doesn’t make something necessarily non-Christian. Christianity took and morphed many aspects of paganism as a way of conveying Christianity. It was a lot easier to convey Jesus’ message within the context of a pre-established culture than to try to abolish a culture and build a new one.
I’m all for using one religion’s traditions to enrich your own, but is that not utterly opportunist? At the very least it is reasonable, political and worldly. So worldly, in fact, that it is but one step away from being a complete atheist. ‘Hey, you know what? All the religions around us (except Judaism, but they’re sooo BC) have more gods and more traditions then we do! How can we convince them that our one and and only God (the father, the Son and the Holy Spirit) should rule them all. Through us. I mean we were our God was right when we He wrote the Bible’.
If you can pick and chose what you like or what comes in handy, doesn’t that sort of defeat the whole purpose of having a book of rules? A book of rules that, by the way, says that you shouldn’t celebrate anything not related to the one true God? He killed all of humanity for having a bit of sex, drugs and rock ‘n roll on the side, for goodness sake! All of which He created, too (via the devil. Ah, crafty…). To tempt us. How nice. God the merciful (I mean vengeful, depending on the doctrine you subscribe to) Father.
I’m fine with it all. Personally, I would like to see some Aphrodite celebrations. Daphne, she kicked arse. Generally, I would like to see more strong women, or more dancing around in the nuddy-pants incorporated in Christianity. I like dancing around in the nude. Or both.
So, yeah, Christians, make my day and participate in ancient, pre-Christian holidays all you want. In the meantime I will make my two-year-old believe in Saint Nicolas (Yes, yes, the true Santa! This bloke brought kids -who had been hacked to pieces and pickled(!)- back to life) and then I will slowly and lovingly chip away the foundations of his belief, by accidentally leaving a letter he wrote to Saint Nick on my bureau, or by unwittingly letting him see me feed the carrot he left for Saint Nicolas’ horse Amerigo to his hamster-to-be, or by letting him listen to the reasoning of his more sceptical classmates.
I hope, and trust, that this whole experience will give him little to no grief. I hope that he will be able to laugh about it and feel that he has a secret he shares with all us grown-ups to keep from the younger children. And I hope that he will learn to question what other people tell him. To ask why the Christian God is true, and why the Hindu gods, the ancient Greek ones or Saint Nicolas is not. Or why Allah is true. Or why Xenu is true. Or why there should be any kind of intelligent being that started us up and, if there is, if it does require believing in.
Because, if there is anything that all religions have in common it is that it is frowned upon, even in the literal idea, it is to ask questions. Just believe. After all, belief stops where knowledge starts.
I don’t mind if my son believes one thing or the other. I just want him to have given it some good thought. I just want him to use his Jahweh-given, or Allah-given, or Brahma-given, or Benu bird-given brains to question. And I don’t want him to feel obliged to country, culture or, worst of all, me, to believe or not-believe something.
If my son turns out to be wrong, She will forgive him. After all, She knows his parents. If She is not willing to forgive my son, I wonder why anyone should pray to Her at all.

Tja, hele filosofische vraag bestaat hij/zij. Eigenlijk ben ik er voor mijzelf wel uit. Ik weet niet of hij/zij bestaat. Het is trouwens helemaal niet interessant of hij/zij al dan niet bestaat. Argumenten voor zijn louter gebaseerd op niet wetenschappelijke aannames, dat wij geloof noemen en hebben vastgelegd in de bijbel. Een geschrift waarvan het nog bestaande alleroudste exemplaar zo’n 1000 jaar na Christus geschreven is. Daarvoor werd het van mens tot mens doorverteld; een ideale manier om het bij iedere passage iets aan te passen ( zowel door tijdsinvloeden als door ieders nijging om een niet-begrijpbaar verhaal begrijpelijk door te vertellen, in de hoop dat de toehoorders het snappen. Wat ze natuurlijk niet doen, zodat die weer hun eigen weergave aan anderen doorgeven).
Argumenten tegen zijn per definitie ook niet wetenschappelijk, omdat tegen zoiets onwetenschappelijk als geloven, je geen wetenschappelijke argumenten kan inbrengen.
Dus ben ik maar agnost, het scheelt veel overbodig gediscussieer en dus tijd en ergernis. Als jij ( en de niet weg te poetsen omgeving) Jasper bijbrengt dat er zo iets stoffelijks bestaat als sinterklaas, die kadootjes brengt, dan is dat voor Jasper een manier om te communiceren en overleven tussen zijn leeftijdsgenoten. Hebben wij ons vroeger niet uitgesloofd in discussies over bv. het voor en tegen van de Vietnam-oorlog, terwijl we nu weten dat het een conflict was om macht en geld; waarvan het beslechten geen wezenlijke verandering in de wereldorde heeft gegeven.
Kortom als je Jasper duidelijk maakt dat je het, net als ieder ander, ook niet weet, geef je hem de ruimte om zijn eigen weg in ( of door) religieland te vinden.
xa3