Memories of the 28th Century

I think that life without any religion would be more difficult. It is easier to believe in something. Of course, religious structures have been created by people so they are full of mistakes.

If you mean religious thought, then I would agree. If you mean organized religion, then I disagree. The two are quite different.

I know that, for example The Church, doesn`t have much in common with Christianity. That is why I don`t practice any religion (ritauls).

But it has a lot in common with what is described by some comspiracy theories.

Peterl, I think you have a very naive and ancient perspective on something that has long been utterly defeated and is evaporating. They are finished.

Naive? In what way? And what has "been utterly defeated and is evaporating?" Religion is making more money now than ever before, and it isn't just because the money is worth less, and there are still people around who are sure that there is a vast international comspiracy that they like to call the Illuminati; this "group" should be considered different from the Illuminati of Bavaria of the 18th century.

Do you believe that the Book of Revelations is literally accurate?

Peter, it is known that not all scripture has been chosen as a canon. Very often translation changes the meaning. It is very easy in this way to manipulate people. For example, there is no word that women cannot be priest as far as I know.

Yes, it is easy to pick and choose when one has a more than million words to choose from. And yes the editing of translations has made huge changes. There are some Christians who don't realize tha Judaism was polytheistic until the time of David or later. These days they are translaing "elohom" (gods) as God.

The Roman Church banned the marriage of priests less than 1000 years ago.

Language is a very good way of manipulation. About 3 years ago, in Poland a group of young people created a translation of Bible to a slang. I was shocked when I read that the answer of the Church was that they weren`t interested in it. In my opinion, this translation wasn`t apropriate and they should do something with the publication.

How one says something is often more important than what one says. The style, verbiage, sentence structure, etc, that one uses shows how the speaker thins and views the world. There were good reasons for only certain translations being accetped. I don't know Polish slang, but slang generally isn't very good at expressing much.

You must believe me that it sounds very stupid. What`s more, The Holy Scripture, in my opinion, shouldn`t be translated. We have here churches with celebrations in Latin.

I tend to agree. I was brought up going to Catholic Churches that used the Latin mass, and it was fine with me.
I think that translating the Bible was not a good idea, but putting the magic of a religious ceremony into the ordinary language makes it less mysterious and more commonplace. It changed the experience from going to a special place to going to an ordinary social event.

Translation didn`t make people to read Bible. It seems to me that people going to the church don`t know why they go there. So translating The Holy Scripture for them was meaningless. We should go back to Latin, I think. However in Poland it`s rather imposible.

Translating it into the local languages made it easier for those who wanted to to read the thing, and that didn't do any good for anyone except the publishers.

I think it is much better to go back to the original Gods and Goddesses, but we would have to do that in Proto-Indo-European to get it right.

I am not so sure whether we can go back. We don`t have such conscience, I think. For example, I couldn`t live without city. I don`t feel any need of contact with the nature.
Proto- Indo-European is very far away from us. In Poland we do not have contact with those elements which created polish culture. Maybe it`s only my opinion but it seems to me that it`s correct.

Yes, the Poles of today are very far removed in culture from the Sarmatian culture, and you probably are better off that way. Most people are different from ancient cultures, but the essentials are still the same; the basic human needs are the same and the sources for those things are still the same. The differences are in how the needs are fulfilled and how people express their feelings and thoughts. And there would still be followers of all of the Proto-Indo-European Gods and Goddesses from the major one like Djeus Pater to one who are largely forgotten like the wonderful Ekwamedha.

Even if you don't interact with unaltered nature, it is still there, and it is still essential to the world as a whole. Our food still comes from the Earth even if we don't grow it ourselves.

Many people give their children russian names such as Lena, Olga or Igor. I have nothing against Russia but it seems to me a little bit stupid. I would rather choose an international name, for example Victor, David, Anna (I don`t like my name), Mary, Arthur and so on. You probably wouldn`t be able to pronounce my second name, Małgorzata. But there are more and more people giving very old names (Stanislav, Franciszek etc).

Your sentence about the nature remind me Thoroux a little.

Olga and Igor are Germanic names, not Russian. Those and some other names were slipped into Russian because Rurik was from what is now Sweden. He was a Varangian and brought a bunch of other Varangians along when he was hired to be the military protector of Kiev. The origin of one's name isn't very important, but it is important that one like one's name.

And if you go back a little further in time, they were all the same people. Celts, Slavs, Germans, Greeks, Armenians, Kashmiris, Persians, etc.

In Poland they`re considered as russian. I am impressed by your knowledge, I must say

I can understand them being thought of as Russian, but those names are more common in Germany and Scandinavia.

Someone has to remember those things.