Advice & Suggestions for Reading Roth’s Posts

Sometimes I feel like this fellow with some of the responses I get in the comments regarding my posts (lol)! The bear being the commenter who’s either nit-picking, missing the point entirely, or has their shorts in a twist because … PAGAN … heaven forbid!

I assume that the readers have basic reading comprehension skills, a degree of common sense, and open minds. With some commenters, I have to wonder. Also, sometimes I’m accused of posting “questionable things” and not providing “proof” for my posts. So, allow me to clarify what I post, how I select what I post, and, once again, my motives.

#1 I share, share, posts that I see elsewhere that interest me and that I believe may interest some, not all, readers. It’s up to the reader to decide if they think the post is worthy of their time.

#2 The shared posts come from sources I trust. I trust. If the reader doesn’t trust the source, always identified, it’s up to the reader to research for themselves. I give no guarantee of the truth in a shared post.

#3 My motive in posting is education, pure and simple. Making the reader aware of something they may have missed or not known.

#4 Christian readers often get their shorts in a twist when I share historical, ethical, or cultural posts that they deem ‘Pagan.’ The term ‘Pagan’ covers a lot of ground from New Age, Satanic, Skin Head, Wiccan, etc. – anything not Christian. So, if the reader wants to label me, I’m a Deist on the order of Thomas Jefferson (Recommended reading: Sworn on the Altar of God: A Religious Biography of Thomas Jefferson by Edwin S. Gaustad) and an Animist (Animism is the belief that animals, natural objects, phenomena, and the universe itself possess a distinct spiritual essence or soul). I see the Divine in nature, revere my ancestors, and look to the Gods and Goddesses of my pre-Christian ancestors as archetypes. I no more believe them to be ‘real beings’ than I believe Yahweh is a real being. I don’t worship them, or rocks. Yes, I’ve been accused of worshipping rocks, too. I pray to the Creator of All. That’s my path based on my study and experience. When I offer posts concerning our pre-Christian ancestors, that is the direction I’m coming from, not Satanism or demon worship.

#5 I sometime follow a post with a Roth Note. That would be my comment or opinion on the shared post. Mine. The reader doesn’t have to read them, share them or like them. Opinions are just that, opinions. I offer mine for what they’re worth.

#6 If I write a post myself, I’ll always make that clear. When I do so, debate is encouraged. I reiterate David’s rules for comments which include no personal ad hominem attacks and that those disagreeing provide some evidence or reasoned explanation for their point of view.

So that’s it. Just trying to clarify things so I’m attacked less frequently by the bear!

5 1 vote
Article Rating

3 responses to “Advice & Suggestions for Reading Roth’s Posts”

  1. I enjoy the posts for what it is worth and at times they might get me to think.

    As for them being called at times “pagan” does not bother me as a agnostic,I am always wondering/seeking/searching.

    I would suggest to those that do not like the posts,move on to a post of your liking.

    To those that disagree with a post(any,not just these posts,stae why you disagree and if possible show proof of why you disagree.

    I would like to think besides govt. glow worms folks who come here probably have much more in common then apart.

  2. Lee Vail AKA Kalev Efrayim Avatar
    Lee Vail AKA Kalev Efrayim

    So, you’re more of an intellectual than most of the reader of Appalachian Renegade are? That’s what I get from this advice and suggestions. Just my opinion.

  3. Some of those comments are, I believe, from people who do not possess very good critical thinking skills. The Bible teaches that the truth of Gods’ existence can be deduced from the natural world. So it follows that our ancestors beliefs came from the knowledge and observation of the world. They rightly deduced that the world around them was a creation and sought to come up with an explanation of both creator and creation. It’s not that they got it “wrong” as word of the Son of God had not reached them. So the arguments of “Satan, demons, oh my” kind of falls flat with me. And if you were pushing “paganism” you’re doing a really poor job getting converts.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

3
0
Would love your thoughts, please comment.x