FRIHOST FORUMS SEARCH FAQ TOS BLOGS COMPETITIONS
You are invited to Log in or Register a free Frihost Account!


What if your faith isn't normal





Dacorian
I often ask myself whether I was losing my mind or dragged into the human desire for beauty. It's what you could call a 'new age religion' that's been haunted me for years. At first I refused the feelings I had for this creature and I ignored them because it is not possible in this society, and not because it seems childish. I did not believe in the spiritual or God or Satan and I still don't. I believe that we are made out of the four elements, lifeless made life and that the dragon is the first evolved being with wisdom with his fish- like appearance. only slightly less perfect than they are represented. four limbs, no fire or other weird things, but perfect to live in this life. So much that I can feel them.
call me crazy, that's why keep this for myself. I think its such a natural force left that is unique with living beings. Higher beings are not human, it's so stupid to think that the last evolved creature like us should deserve a human like god. It is hard to wear in this society because it also affects relationships with people. This I can not bind to human beings like it should. The creatures made of flesh and blood fighting to stay alive and still die deserve more respect than gods.


For 6 years i've been trying to find a group for this matter. People who worship dragons like they are a higher power. This is a difficult situation for someone who individually choose this belief because dragons remain a myth, for stories, games or movies. For many, dragons are just a toy and an escape from everyday life but not for dragon worshipers like myself. For me, the dragon has so much more. Call it a spirit guide, unbound to whatever. If I could pray for him I would do that, but alas. I don't know people like myself in this case but it would be so great if I could do this with others who understand. This is a religion and I am sure there are so many people with this same idea, but afraid to say this to anyone. The only religions who are accepted in social life are based on the superiority of humanity like christians or muslims. This belief has no name, it will only be seen as a lavish fantasy for people who love to roll play. But bowing to a beautiful picture of a dragon, no dragons figurines to collect and talk to the one statue. That is what Christians do but in this case not against a man or something that likes people in his surroundings. Approach as inferior, that's what counts.
Bikerman
Assuming this posting is serious:
I would say that you need to face the basic inconsistencies you express.
One the one hand you say you reject God, Satan and the 'spiritual', and in the next breathe you talk about 4 elements and dragons, as thought these were somehow rational.
Rational Statement 1: Dragons do not, and did not exist. There are animals (the Komodo Dragon for example) and there have been animals that have some of the many characteristics often granted to the mythical creature, but the idea that they exist or existed is deeply irrational.
Rational Statement 2: the idea that any creature resembling the mythical dragon could be 'perfect to live in this life' is inherently irrational. Any creature perfectly adapted for conditions would thrive and multiply. The fact that no such creature has ever been reliably recorded is therefore damning.
Rational Statement 3: we are not the final result of evolution and this talk of 'higher beings' seems to clash with the notion of flesh and blood dragons.

In short i think the whole idea, as expressed, is self-contradictory, irrational nonsense, and I therefore, within the spirit of the terms and conditions (and therefore abiding by the questions and positions expressed in the OP) say that you are out of your mind, as you allow for in the first sentence.
Ankhanu
Aye, the post is somewhat... jumbled. Feels very stream of consciousness; meandering all over the place without a real plan/destination. It presents some hurtles in understanding the intended message.

That said, what I think you're getting at (aside from the contradictions Bikerman pointed out) isn't a terribly uncommon thing... at least within the neo-pagan and new age communities. I've met many dragon worshipers through the years.

Obviously, a belief like this requires a heavy element of faith, but, so do the other concepts of religion and spirit. This is just a different flavour than most are used to eating... but it's the same basic dish all the same. If you look around the right online communities, I'm sure you'll find people of similar mind.
ocalhoun
Aw, don't worry about those guys. Haters gonna hate.

I, for one, think your religion sounds fun, and is just as legitimate as many others out there.


As for finding some like-minded people to be with, that will likely be difficult; I've never heard of any beliefs very similar to yours... It may be that there simply aren't any.
(Don't feel bad; I'm pretty sure that I'm the only Symphonist in the world, so I know how you feel.)

Though, I might suggest looking into various shamanic/totemic faiths... Some of those may accept a dragon as your totem 'animal', especially the way you talk about it being your spirit guide.
While they wouldn't exactly share your same beliefs, and they would all have different spirit guides, they might just be close enough so that you could have a sense of community with them.
Dacorian
This isn't what the most of the dragon worshippers believe, this is more deep in the understanding from all of it and so the understanding in life. In my eye's, god is just what people want but can never exist because people, humans are the last beings that may speak. Life after death is just what people want, the fear of dying is so great that they believe in old legends. This is not the legend with dragons as you know them from movies or games that can talk or breath fire or whatever, animal desire is so much more than it seems for human eye's. purity, freedom and equipped to escape from death as long as possible. No one can say that they never existed, no one lived long enough to make sure of that, just like no one knows something real about Jesus. This is called faith without following another person into it. This has no plan for humanity or something similar. I ask nothing from higher beings unlike the other religions... why do I do this? Because it's stronger than myself.

The other religions with dragons are made by kids from the age of 10 till 25 and than it dies most of the time. The cliche appearance is powerful and mighty, but in my view this is slightly less than how they are shown. The real spiritual world is more limited than ghosts in my eye's and I don't think that this has any force with people but more with dinosaurs and older things than that.

I know, I know, it's bizar! Psychologically irresponsible but that is with all religions and faiths. This is more what you can call a natural faith than supernatural.
Ankhanu
ocalhoun wrote:
Aw, don't worry about those guys. Haters gonna hate.


Hey now! I presented no hate!

ocalhoun wrote:
I, for one, think your religion sounds fun, and is just as legitimate as many others out there.

I stated your second part, but did not address any aspects of fun.


ocalhoun wrote:
As for finding some like-minded people to be with, that will likely be difficult; I've never heard of any beliefs very similar to yours... It may be that there simply aren't any.
(Don't feel bad; I'm pretty sure that I'm the only Symphonist in the world, so I know how you feel.)

Though, I might suggest looking into various shamanic/totemic faiths... Some of those may accept a dragon as your totem 'animal', especially the way you talk about it being your spirit guide.
While they wouldn't exactly share your same beliefs, and they would all have different spirit guides, they might just be close enough so that you could have a sense of community with them.


This is also what I suggested Razz
The venues I used to use for meeting with people with these sorts of views are all but dead now, so I won't even bother suggesting them... there's no one there to meet Razz That said, the people are still out there. I'm not sure where to begin looking for them, exactly, but they're out there and they like the internet (in many cases).

The shamanistic suggestion is a good one, and sounds like it fits with what Dacorian is saying.
Likewise, Dacorian, I wouldn't say that dragon worship is really something for kids 10-25... tell that to the various Asian cultures that revere the concept of the dragon. They're very important beings within their mythos. From what you've been describing, I get a more Asian sense of dragon than a Western sense of them... is this inaccurate?
Dacorian
ocalhoun wrote:
Aw, don't worry about those guys. Haters gonna hate.

I, for one, think your religion sounds fun, and is just as legitimate as many others out there.


As for finding some like-minded people to be with, that will likely be difficult; I've never heard of any beliefs very similar to yours... It may be that there simply aren't any.
(Don't feel bad; I'm pretty sure that I'm the only Symphonist in the world, so I know how you feel.)

Though, I might suggest looking into various shamanic/totemic faiths... Some of those may accept a dragon as your totem 'animal', especially the way you talk about it being your spirit guide.
While they wouldn't exactly share your same beliefs, and they would all have different spirit guides, they might just be close enough so that you could have a sense of community with them.


I tryed to get into this sort of communities but it wasn't what I see the dragon. Most of them see it totaly different and even a bit insulting for what I stand for so I just quit searching. But I found this forum and tryed it again to explain but it's always the same old end. This is a bit smilliar with Asian believes in dragons but not exact. Into all this years i've never seen anyone with the same faith, everyone is following others or believe in nothing. It's just how the dragon is known in this world, is why it can't fit in this society as faith or religion. The elemental force is even scientifically proved that this is a fact. It was worth a try, i still remain a human being who doesn't like to be alone in this kind'o'things.

Thanks for your sympathy. Wink
Bikerman
Quote:
The elemental force is even scientifically proved that this is a fact.
You have to know that you can't simply make that sort of assertion without challenge. What is this 'elemental force' that science proves? We have the strong and weak nuclear forces, gravity & electromagnetism (or you can conflate the 2nd and 4th into electroweak)....are you saying that science has discovered another force and I missed it?
tingkagol
lol @ bikerman Laughing

Dacorian, I'm sort of interested in how exactly you would describe the "Dragon" that you worship. You've already said it was beautiful. But let me ask you this: are you scared of it? Does it look menacing with all its scales, talons, and whatnot? And why is it not fire-breathing?

You've also said it's probably the asian type, so I guess the one from Dragonheart is out of the picture?


This one looks pretty cool:
Dacorian
I thought that the most were thinking that, but no, not even close. And than I just speak about the appearance because the behavior of this thing for me is not even acceptable. It's not cool or awsome or something like that, it's seriously and natural. Fear is what I use to have and like I said, I always refused to worship this until a certain moment when a type of psychological bomb exploded in my mind. This faith is really something you should do alone, however it would be nice to hear that I'm not alone. I have other names for him because 'dragon is so widely misunderstood and in people's ears just like I see now... once again. An exact description is something that I can't give you if you not take it seriously, and that is also with the idea and descriptions of this kind of connection.
Bikerman
What exact description? The only notions you have about dragons are those that you have picked-up from mythology. Unfortunately dragons are simply that - myth. Even if such a creature did ever exist (and it didn't, for a number of rather fundamental physical 'reasons', including thermodynamics, aerodynamics and biodynamics) it isn't here now - of that we can be pretty certain. So either there is some spiritual element to your 'belief', in that you imagine some sort of rapport or even 'link' with a now extinct species, or it is entirely moot.
Now I don't have a problem with that, unless you want to assert scientific backing for the idea, in which case I do, because I feel a compulsion to swear everytime someone claims scientific support for a plaintly metaphysical (at best) idea or concept.
Dacorian
That phenomenon of making up things has existed since mankind lives. The inteligentie of humanity is so great that he is going to belief things that are not there. But that is religion / faith in general. You never have the right to say that something is there or not, though it was a psychological support to the person who has faith in something. The world is very old, many things have been lost. The exact theory of evolution will always remain a mystery but I know that water and air creates life and so is earth and fire in a lesser form, but this 4 lifeless things are the only real force in this world, we are just the fruit of it which will always rot after some time. No, I don't worship the dragon because it should made life, it just was alive (yes, not according to you, but for me) and pure unlike us or the animals around us. Understanding of life and death was lost during evolution and so is pure wisdom. God should be like the main apple if I understand the bible but what about the tree? I can't read that. Anyway, I want to look into the past to increase their understanding of the present, although that is not needed because we all die some day. And what will I get after this: Nothing at all! just a usefull reference "live as long and as free as possible becaus death always comes too soon. That's why I can't kill someone because it would chase me for the rest of my life but not because someone is dead. It's so easy to say that it never existed if you don't even have a proof. My lord can be worshiped by everyone, a free animal is far more valuable than a captive man. Mentally and physically.

But I guess you do not take it seriously, so I just quit responding.
Bikerman
Quote:
You never have the right to say that something is there or not, though it was a psychological support to the person who has faith in something.
Yes, I do have that right, as do you and as does anyone else living in a society where there is freedom of expression.
I do not recognise any right to declare a belief off-limits for debate - by anyone - let alone the person posting the belief on a forum.
Quote:
The world is very old, many things have been lost. The exact theory of evolution will always remain a mystery
Nope. I don't think you really know much about evolution because if you did i doubt you would think it a mystery. It is actually blindingly simple.
Quote:
but I know that water and air creates life
No, you don't, and you have never seen water and air create life, because it cannot. The theory of spontaneous generation was refuted a couple of centuries ago.
Quote:
and so is earth and fire in a lesser form
Earth is not water, and neither is 'lesser'.
Quote:
but this 4 lifeless things are the only real force in this world, we are just the fruit of it which will always rot after some time.
So you think water, earth, fire and air are the only things 'real'? (Non of them are forces since a force requires the ability to do work. Air, water etc only 'have' force if they are out of equilibrium in some way. A cup of water will exert little or no force, other than the force instrinsically bound into its mass - in which it is no different from salt, tin or any other material.). This is a rather confused throwback to the Greek philosopher Aristotle who defined everything as a compound of these four 'elements'. We've learned a lot since then....
ocalhoun
Bikerman wrote:
What exact description? The only notions you have about dragons are those that you have picked-up from mythology. Unfortunately dragons are simply that - myth. Even if such a creature did ever exist (and it didn't, for a number of rather fundamental physical 'reasons', including thermodynamics, aerodynamics and biodynamics) it isn't here now - of that we can be pretty certain.

Rolling Eyes
I'm pretty sure he's not trying to say that dragons (as portrayed in popular mythology) do or ever did exist.
Trying to argue with him about that will only antagonize him over something you both agree on.


From what I can tell, he seems to think of the dragon as symbolic or spiritual, not physical.
It actually seems to remind me of some of the oldest known religions... where they (more or less arbitrarily) ascribed to their god(s) various physical forms/symbols, and yet viewed the deities as more impersonal than is the modern fashion... almost more of a force of nature.

It doesn't seem to be about deifying a physical object/being, nor about having any particular relationship with the 'god'... more like putting a face on the forces of nature.
Ankhanu
ocalhoun wrote:
From what I can tell, he seems to think of the dragon as symbolic or spiritual, not physical.


I've been trying to tease this out since the first post. He's been saying things that make a case for either phyiscal or spiritual/symbolic concepts of dragon... AND making cases that deny each idea. I'm still unsure which he actually means.

ocalhoun wrote:
It actually seems to remind me of some of the oldest known religions... where they (more or less arbitrarily) ascribed to their god(s) various physical forms/symbols, and yet viewed the deities as more impersonal than is the modern fashion... almost more of a force of nature.

It doesn't seem to be about deifying a physical object/being, nor about having any particular relationship with the 'god'... more like putting a face on the forces of nature.


I agree with these points, but, still hold some confusion about the actual belief. You and I have mentioned ideas along these lines in prior posts, but Dacorian has kinda dismissed them.
All in all, I'm mildly confused by this topic Razz I'm comfortable with the idea that this is heavily faith based, and that he doesn't really believe in deities... but other than that, even down to what a dragon might be, has been very tough to tease out.
Bikerman
It seems to me that if one makes a case against evolutionary theory then is therefore making a case FOR the physicalo existence of the (in this case) dragon - otherwise elvolution is not relevant.
tingkagol
Dacorian wrote:
An exact description is something that I can't give you if you not take it seriously, and that is also with the idea and descriptions of this kind of connection.

If by "seriously" you mean I have to be seriously considering dragon-worship, then it's a shame. It's really just curiousity on my part since this is the first time I've come across a dragon-worshipper.
deanhills
ocalhoun wrote:
I, for one, think your religion sounds fun, and is just as legitimate as many others out there.
Agreed. I could not help but think of Spike of the Magic Ponies Brigade:


ocalhoun wrote:
As for finding some like-minded people to be with, that will likely be difficult;
I don't agree. If one googles it, there is plenty information that connects dragons up with religious beliefs. For example the Website below:
Circle of the Dragon

The owner of the Website is careful to stress in his Basic Information page that his Website has nothing to do with spiritual or supernatural action or rituals, however to me that means that people must have contacted him for that, in order for him to have needed to make this statement:
Quote:
I understand that there are many spiritual traditions in the world, and I do not mean to discredit any of them or their intentions. However, the goal of this site is not to promote and form of spiritual or supernatural action or ritual of any variety. There are parts of this site that explore the beliefs and practices of religions in order to better explore the mythologies and stories about dragons, but the focus of this site remains on the stories of dragons and serpents.

It's a great Website and the Interactive Page looks as though it can really be fun.
IceCreamTruck
Bikerman wrote:
Quote:
but I know that water and air creates life
No, you don't, and you have never seen water and air create life, because it cannot. The theory of spontaneous generation was refuted a couple of centuries ago.


Meaning spontaneous generation of life in say a sealed glass of air and water, or spontaneous generation of protein from amino acids in a pool which later formed the first life-forms? We've already proven that amino acid generation just takes a small electrical current.

I thought spontaneous generation was a fundamental part of evolution. Please explain this comment further...

Subsequently, to the original poster/creator of this thread, an electrical current igniting swamp gas also explained first as strange fire breathing animals, but we have since proven this phenomenon happens occasionally because of methane build up, which is simply a byproduct of decomposing plant and animal matter, being ignited by lightning or other similar spark.

I imagine one cave man says to another I think there's a dragon living in that cave! "Throw a rock in there" says one of the more curious who lacked the courage to do so himself, so one of the other cave men did just that. The rock hits a wall of the cave and causes a spark which ignites a higher concentration of methane inside the interior of the cave and flames shoot out of the cave as the gas burns.

Not knowing any better the cave men all run because they think they've awoken the dragon that everyone was telling them lived in that cave, which was probably just a large carnivorous lizard who people think is a lot bigger than it really is because it eats such large prey: cows, horses, and goats.

Most lizards have a venomous amount of bacteria in their mouths to which we are not always susceptible, and it's more prevalent in some than in others. The Komodo dragon's bite alone won't kill you, but several weeks later when the wound still won't heal you'll realize a much more dangerous enemy has been introduced -- one you can't see. The Komodo dragon takes down HUGE prey but only after sneaking a few bites at first to infect the beast and make it possible for the slow Komodo dragon to overcome it, usually in a group of dragons long after it is weakened by the repeated bites that are each getting infected.

If you were loosing your cows, and saw the kind of bite marks left over you'd suspect a HUGE dragon like creature did it too, and that you could be next if you weren't careful. Also, grog and frank say it breathed fire at them when they went to it's cave to kill it, so you don't want to make it angry.

I completely side with Bikerman, and I'll back him up that he did behave according to the rules of this thread. You asked if you are totally nutz, and I too have to say "yes, these ideas are nuts".

You managed to get away from the lies of religion, but for some reason you are showing signs of their system of control. You believed them when they said you are not good enough and so you have to ask forgiveness from god, but you just didn't take the god part with you. You still seem to be suffering from their attempts to make you feel like you need something more, which is just how they keep you coming back and filling their coffers with your coins.

Now you are even worse off because you have the disease they are selling but not the cure. You're taking only the bad part of religion but none of the good? I regonise it because that's where I used to be many years ago when I dropped religion for my own path. I later realized that I have to drop all the ideas of religion if I am going to get any comfort because their system is designed to hook you even if you take only part of it, and it doesn't matter what part you take... eventually the you're hooked into the whole thing.

News flash... you don't need a higher power which is a lie they feed. They say what you don't know will hurt you, and if you don't believe you are going to hell, and you won't get your virgins... etc. pick your flavor! It's all disgusting to me because absolutely nothing they say has any proof/evidence which is the standard by which we relate information to one another, so you really can ignore them and also feel completely justified in doing so.

Also, Bikerman helped me considerably with one thought that really does change things.... just because you can't prove something doesn't mean that the opposite is true or should even be considered. Applied: Just because you can't prove Dragons do not exist doesn't mean they do exist. To decide on this bases is lunacy, bonkers, totally out of your mind.

Bikerman, feel free to adjust as needed for better understanding especially if I have misquoted you, but that's always going to be my take on how you helped me on an issue.

Dacorian, I think it's safe to say you don't believe in the folly of picking the wrong path if making one up is ok! I figure I should tell you that most religions of the world agree that making up religions is the wrong path.

Dacorian, I also close in asking why you don't pick something more plausible to "create" as a belief since it seems to me you feel the need to create something to believe in? Picking something that actually is plausible will at least thin the crowd of those in direct, legitimized, opposition to you and this belief, and your followers will have an easier time of swallowing the cult doctrine which you come up with. Beliefs of one or few people = cult. Only shared beliefs of many people gives religion status.
Bikerman
IceCreamTruck wrote:
Bikerman wrote:
Quote:
but I know that water and air creates life
No, you don't, and you have never seen water and air create life, because it cannot. The theory of spontaneous generation was refuted a couple of centuries ago.


Meaning spontaneous generation of life in say a sealed glass of air and water, or spontaneous generation of protein from amino acids in a pool which later formed the first life-forms? We've already proven that amino acid generation just takes a small electrical current.

I thought spontaneous generation was a fundamental part of evolution. Please explain this comment further...
Certainly.
Air is generally considered to be a mixture of Nitrogen, Carbon Dioxide, Oxygen and other gasses in varying proportions. Water is generally considered to be H2O. Life will not arise from any combination of those two. You need other molecules to even begin to make proteins (not to mention a fairly steady input of 'power').
Spontaneous generation refers specifically to the belief, originating with the early Greeks (Aristotle himself), that life would result from a variety of organic and non-organic sources. Thus, rotting meat 'generates' maggots,
Aistotle wrote:
Now there is one property that animals are found to have in common with plants. For some plants are generated from the seed of plants, whilst other plants are self-generated through the formation of some elemental principle similar to a seed; and of these latter plants some derive their nutriment from the ground, whilst others grow inside other plants, as is mentioned, by the way, in my treatise on Botany. So with animals, some spring from parent animals according to their kind, whilst others grow spontaneously and not from kindred stock; and of these instances of spontaneous generation some come from putrefying earth or vegetable matter, as is the case with a number of insects, while others are spontaneously generated in the inside of animals out of the secretions of their several organs.

This notion (and variations of it) dominated thinking until a few centuries ago. It was Pasteur who finally refuted it in the 19th century,
deanhills
IceCreamTruck wrote:
Dacorian, I think it's safe to say you don't believe in the folly of picking the wrong path if making one up is ok! I figure I should tell you that most religions of the world agree that making up religions is the wrong path.

Dacorian, I also close in asking why you don't pick something more plausible to "create" as a belief since it seems to me you feel the need to create something to believe in? Picking something that actually is plausible will at least thin the crowd of those in direct, legitimized, opposition to you and this belief, and your followers will have an easier time of swallowing the cult doctrine which you come up with. Beliefs of one or few people = cult. Only shared beliefs of many people gives religion status.
Check out the OP. He did not say he is a dragon worshipper, he is asking whether we know of people who are.

I always thought that this "conversion" game, i.e. wanting someone to think the same as we do, was limited to Christians ..... yet now aren't you doing the exact same thing? Asking someone to believe the same as you do?

I totally agree with Ocalhoun's point of view. It could be fun, why not! Keep an open mind! Let the guy find his own path, and if he needs to get in touch with people who are practising dragon religion, allow him to make his own enquiries. I don't think any of us are equipped to do that as none of us know anything about the subject. He asked us whether we knew of any dragon worshippers and obviously we don't.
Bikerman
deanhills wrote:
Check out the OP. he did not say he is a dragon worshipper, he is asking whether we know of people who are.
He quite clearly says that he would pray to the dragon but is looking for other people to do it with. Not quite the same thing.
Quote:
I don't think any of us are equipped to do that as none of us know anything about the subject. He asked us whether we knew of any dragon worshippers and obviously we don't.
Speak for yourself. He also elaborated and didn't simply ask for details. I actually know a fair bit about dragons, because I was an avid player of the Gary Gygax original 'Dungeons and Dragons' game, and I got quite good at it - in fact I became a dungeon master. That role involved researching the 'monster manual' and learning about all sorts of mythical creatures - griffens, centaurs, trolls, goblins, and dragons - lots of dragons. I can give you the physical characteristics, strength, intelligence, dexterity and magic abilities of any number of dragons. I can quote sizes and traits for bronze, green, black, copper, blue, and probably a few more of the chromatic dragons, without breaking sweat. In fact I would say that in this particular company I am somewhat of a dragon expert.
I prefer to play the Green dragon (lawful/evil), personally, though the Red (chaotic/evil) and Blue (lawful/evil) can be interesting. White dragons (chaotic/evil) are too vicious and stupid to make for good sport. The Bronze is too much of a goody-goody (lawful/good) and usually behaves very wisely, sensibly and boringly. The Green is certainly my favourite - sneaky, clever, a master negotiator and a mind like a chess grand-master.


A young Blue dragon and a very young green.


A mature Red dragon and a juvenille female white.


I can even go into some detail about the dragon God - Io - and the creation myth attributed to him and his battle with ErikHus the primordial King of Terror...

* Images taken from version 4 of the Monster Manual
Ankhanu
I've always been partial to blue and black dragons Wink


Good to see another D&D player... though I've switched over to Pathfinder these days; didn't care much for 4e. Playing a less serious game of 3.5 a couple years back I played a Half-blue dragon monk that was kinda interesting.

Io is kinda neat, but I prefer Tiamat and Bahamut, or setting specific gods like Takhisis in Dragonlance.
Bikerman
Ahh, you prefer the kids? Well, I'd have to go with Tiamat then - can't stand lawful good characters like Bahamut. Tiamat is a Goddess of Greed I seem to remember...Bahamut is the do-gooder who strives to keep daddy's creation together methinks...or have I got them reversed?

Anyhoo - I take it back, I'm not the only one who knows a bit about dragons here Smile
PS - Haven't played DnD for 15 years - I played like a demon at college and got my first magic user beyond level 10 whilst still breathing (the DM we started with was not the forgiving sort..)- 4 hit points was always living life on the edge - especially when your only magic was an L1 fireball which would just about singe a kobald..Smile
IceCreamTruck
I don't want to offend anyone, but I'm not making the connection between dragon worship, and D&D. D&D may contain a monster manual with great detail on dragons and color and whatnot, but that doesn't mean dragon worshipers out in the world know anything about D&D.

I'm sure D&D has taken it to the extreme, and my hope would be that any information contained in the monster manual would be from historical legend instead of just being fiction, but we don't know how much they got from historical reference versus just making up facts to put in the game.

I'm not dissing D&D as I too found it very fun at one point in my life, but I am putting forth that the apparent relationship between D&D and dragon worship might not have a firm foundation to stand on if the D&D text is really just fictional and made up for the sake of the game.

I think one should ignore D&D if they were looking for actual proof of the existence of dragons. That is really my point.
Ankhanu
I think the reference was a little tongue-in-cheek, IceCreamTruck... though much of what is in the D&D dragonlore is lifted directly from various Earth cultural lores. So there is a fair bit of similarity between what you'll read in literature and mythology and what you'll see in D&D. Of course, some additional liberties have been taken to make them more "interesting" and setting appropriate, but, you'll find that in any source that you might care to look at.

Also, you might be surprised how many dragon worshipers DO use the D&D dragons, or at least their archetypes, quite seriously and factor into what they describe as a dragon.

How much it has to do with Dacorian's dragon worship, I would guess very little. He hasn't said very much coherently on the nature of his dragons, but he has mentioned that they're not much like the Western concepts of dragons... which the D&D dragons are heavily based upon.
IceCreamTruck
Ankhanu wrote:
I think the reference was a little tongue-in-cheek, IceCreamTruck... though much of what is in the D&D dragonlore is lifted directly from various Earth cultural lores. So there is a fair bit of similarity between what you'll read in literature and mythology and what you'll see in D&D. Of course, some additional liberties have been taken to make them more "interesting" and setting appropriate, but, you'll find that in any source that you might care to look at.

Also, you might be surprised how many dragon worshipers DO use the D&D dragons, or at least their archetypes, quite seriously and factor into what they describe as a dragon.

How much it has to do with Dacorian's dragon worship, I would guess very little. He hasn't said very much coherently on the nature of his dragons, but he has mentioned that they're not much like the Western concepts of dragons... which the D&D dragons are heavily based upon.


Not tongue-in-cheek because I agree with you 99%... just leaving this point as "worth mentioning"

You are right. Smile
Bikerman
A surprising amount of Gygax's original stuff was based on 'actual' mythology (oxymoron alert!).
Here's the point though - the dragons CANNOT be completely different, because a common 'token' has been chosen by the OP, and that means these creatures must share at least some of the criticial identifying characteristics, otherwise the word 'dragon' would be a spectacularly bad choice....
What mythology teaches about dragons is summed up pretty nicely in the MM.
a) Flame or poison breathe
b) Great intelligence*, longevity, greed.
c) Flying*
d) Reptilian rather than mammalian
e) Big and difficult to best or kill.

*These both have to be explained (if at all) in terms of metaphysics or some system of non-rationality, except in some sci-fi which posits other changes to suit (low grav and/or huge atmospheric density for example).
Ankhanu
Even "dragons" in Star Wars maintain many of the classic dragon traits, though lean more towards the Asian archetype than the Western one. Duinuogwuin - Star Dragon

Ankhanu
It struck me that maybe Dacorian's concept of dragon MIGHT fall into line with some of the American concepts like Uktena. In seeking out some info to make sure that my remembered concept of Uktena or Quetzacoatl matches actual lore, I came across this little site on dragons that folks might find interesting:
http://www.theserenedragon.net/home.html
IceCreamTruck


Popular fiction writer covers the basics of dragons... just the basics! Smile But hey, it's fun, right?
deanhills
Great show ICT. Wish I could draw like that!
Ankhanu wrote:
I've always been partial to blue and black dragons Wink


Good to see another D&D player... though I've switched over to Pathfinder these days; didn't care much for 4e. Playing a less serious game of 3.5 a couple years back I played a Half-blue dragon monk that was kinda interesting.

Io is kinda neat, but I prefer Tiamat and Bahamut, or setting specific gods like Takhisis in Dragonlance.
These guys are really quite fascinating Ankhanu. Did you get an opportunity to study them during your undergraduate studies as part of a course or is most of a self-study and fun?

I actually like them in their animated form, would be great if the producer of the Magic Pony show could do something with dragons as well.Very Happy
ocalhoun
deanhills wrote:

I actually like them in their animated form, would be great if the producer of the Magic Pony show could do something with dragons as well.Very Happy

Um, they have... Three different dragons have been featured on that show already, just in the first season.
deanhills
ocalhoun wrote:
deanhills wrote:

I actually like them in their animated form, would be great if the producer of the Magic Pony show could do something with dragons as well.Very Happy

Um, they have... Three different dragons have been featured on that show already, just in the first season.
Right, I think I've seen all of them. They're not the main subject though. More like part of an obstacle course (with the exception of Spike).
quex
There is no such thing as "normal", only "common" and "uncommon". If you find that your ideas mesh with a great majority of those around you, you have a common opinion, belief, etc. If not, then your opinion is uncommon. Not normal, not strange, not right or wrong. Just uncommon.
ocalhoun
quex wrote:
There is no such thing as "normal", only "common" and "uncommon". If you find that your ideas mesh with a great majority of those around you, you have a common opinion, belief, etc. If not, then your opinion is uncommon. Not normal, not strange, not right or wrong. Just uncommon.

Well, in most cases, uncommon is abnormal.

The real distinction that needs to be made is that abnormal does not mean wrong. Neither does normal mean right.


The only reason that 'abnormal' has a negative stigma is because of the massive social pressure to conform to 'normal'... And of course society will label anything that fights against society's wishes as 'wrong'.
IceCreamTruck
ocalhoun wrote:

The only reason that 'abnormal' has a negative stigma is because of the massive social pressure to conform to 'normal'... And of course society will label anything that fights against society's wishes as 'wrong'.


Stop pressuring me to say "ponies are awesome", Ocalhoun! Smile I will never say it I tell you! NEVER! hahahahahahahahah.... eh hem. Twisted Evil

PS. I think ocalhoun really loves ponies!
ocalhoun
IceCreamTruck wrote:
ocalhoun wrote:

The only reason that 'abnormal' has a negative stigma is because of the massive social pressure to conform to 'normal'... And of course society will label anything that fights against society's wishes as 'wrong'.


Stop pressuring me to say "ponies are awesome", Ocalhoun! Smile I will never say it I tell you! NEVER! hahahahahahahahah.... eh hem. Twisted Evil

PS. I think ocalhoun really loves ponies!

Heh, you think the pony show is what makes me abnormal?
Rolling Eyes
You don't know me very well then. ^.^
IceCreamTruck
ocalhoun wrote:
IceCreamTruck wrote:
ocalhoun wrote:

The only reason that 'abnormal' has a negative stigma is because of the massive social pressure to conform to 'normal'... And of course society will label anything that fights against society's wishes as 'wrong'.


Stop pressuring me to say "ponies are awesome", Ocalhoun! Smile I will never say it I tell you! NEVER! hahahahahahahahah.... eh hem. Twisted Evil

PS. I think ocalhoun really loves ponies!

Heh, you think the pony show is what makes me abnormal?
Rolling Eyes
You don't know me very well then. ^.^


I think horses when I see you on here, cause you are everything horses (and ponies).

I thought you'd like that .45! Smile
deanhills
ocalhoun wrote:
Heh, you think the pony show is what makes me abnormal?
Rolling Eyes
You don't know me very well then. ^.^
I don't think that was what ICT meant, but even if he had, given what normal people tend to be like in society, I would feel quite complimented if someone should see me as abnormal. Most of Society's most brilliant and gifted people seem to have started out as being underestimated. I also think that being underestimated is always a great position to be in. Gives you the advantage.
IceCreamTruck
deanhills wrote:
ocalhoun wrote:
Heh, you think the pony show is what makes me abnormal?
Rolling Eyes
You don't know me very well then. ^.^
I don't think that was what ICT meant, but even if he had, given what normal people tend to be like in society, I would feel quite complimented if someone should see me as abnormal. Most of Society's most brilliant and gifted people seem to have started out as being underestimated. I also think that being underestimated is always a great position to be in. Gives you the advantage.


That's my point exactly. I'm a short person, and yet I played all the sports that require height in highschool, and I was consistently a starter on all the sports teams -- why? Because they look at me and see less than they attribute themselves, but thinking they were starting with more, and actually having an advantage over me doesn't help their mentality when training. They don't train as hard as I did, because they thought they could beat me without trying. I was the only one in training for hours every day trying to be "bigger" than I really am, and that played a huge role in my participation in sports, like basketball, and I'm only 1 inch taller than Spud Web. I think he was 5'5''.

Another place that my size was greatly underestimated was the wrestling ring. HUGE guys would have a big smile on their face when the match was starting, and it was always more and more comforting the bigger their smile was because I knew they were underestimating me. I consistently turns smiles upsidedown in the ring because it's easy to wear out a big guy... just keep them moving, and don't let them take a break. The bigger they are, the faster they pass out. I rarely pinned anyone in the allotted time as I usually went for racking a bunch of "get out of and put them into a hold" double points, but i was only ever pinned once, and that was by someone who was only a little bit bigger than me, and he was sadistic and very good at all the most painful holds. His goal was always submission, and it was a brutal match because it's hard to feel pain at the beginning of a match, but by the end it's really hard to take any more pain than you already have, and I tapped out to give him the win BECAUSE I didn't have anything left that I thought would turn the tables, and he clearly had the upper hand most of the time anyway as I was having trouble getting points on him. He would have won by points anyway, and he could have done some serious damage as I was doing my best to take much of the pain and work through it.
deanhills
IceCreamTruck wrote:
deanhills wrote:
ocalhoun wrote:
Heh, you think the pony show is what makes me abnormal?
Rolling Eyes
You don't know me very well then. ^.^
I don't think that was what ICT meant, but even if he had, given what normal people tend to be like in society, I would feel quite complimented if someone should see me as abnormal. Most of Society's most brilliant and gifted people seem to have started out as being underestimated. I also think that being underestimated is always a great position to be in. Gives you the advantage.


That's my point exactly. I'm a short person, and yet I played all the sports that require height in highschool, and I was consistently a starter on all the sports teams -- why? Because they look at me and see less than they attribute themselves, but thinking they were starting with more, and actually having an advantage over me doesn't help their mentality when training. They don't train as hard as I did, because they thought they could beat me without trying. I was the only one in training for hours every day trying to be "bigger" than I really am, and that played a huge role in my participation in sports, like basketball, and I'm only 1 inch taller than Spud Web. I think he was 5'5''.

Another place that my size was greatly underestimated was the wrestling ring. HUGE guys would have a big smile on their face when the match was starting, and it was always more and more comforting the bigger their smile was because I knew they were underestimating me. I consistently turns smiles upsidedown in the ring because it's easy to wear out a big guy... just keep them moving, and don't let them take a break. The bigger they are, the faster they pass out. I rarely pinned anyone in the allotted time as I usually went for racking a bunch of "get out of and put them into a hold" double points, but i was only ever pinned once, and that was by someone who was only a little bit bigger than me, and he was sadistic and very good at all the most painful holds. His goal was always submission, and it was a brutal match because it's hard to feel pain at the beginning of a match, but by the end it's really hard to take any more pain than you already have, and I tapped out to give him the win BECAUSE I didn't have anything left that I thought would turn the tables, and he clearly had the upper hand most of the time anyway as I was having trouble getting points on him. He would have won by points anyway, and he could have done some serious damage as I was doing my best to take much of the pain and work through it.
Great stuff. You should write a book about this. The wrestling was particularly interesting. Rarely that I see a wrestler that is not big, almost as though BIG is what is required. But how do you get them to get tired however? Some of them look as though they have lots of stamina to me, or do you have more? Very Happy
IceCreamTruck
deanhills wrote:
IceCreamTruck wrote:
deanhills wrote:
ocalhoun wrote:
Heh, you think the pony show is what makes me abnormal?
Rolling Eyes
You don't know me very well then. ^.^
I don't think that was what ICT meant, but even if he had, given what normal people tend to be like in society, I would feel quite complimented if someone should see me as abnormal. Most of Society's most brilliant and gifted people seem to have started out as being underestimated. I also think that being underestimated is always a great position to be in. Gives you the advantage.


That's my point exactly. I'm a short person, and yet I played all the sports that require height in highschool, and I was consistently a starter on all the sports teams -- why? Because they look at me and see less than they attribute themselves, but thinking they were starting with more, and actually having an advantage over me doesn't help their mentality when training. They don't train as hard as I did, because they thought they could beat me without trying. I was the only one in training for hours every day trying to be "bigger" than I really am, and that played a huge role in my participation in sports, like basketball, and I'm only 1 inch taller than Spud Web. I think he was 5'5''.

Another place that my size was greatly underestimated was the wrestling ring. HUGE guys would have a big smile on their face when the match was starting, and it was always more and more comforting the bigger their smile was because I knew they were underestimating me. I consistently turns smiles upsidedown in the ring because it's easy to wear out a big guy... just keep them moving, and don't let them take a break. The bigger they are, the faster they pass out. I rarely pinned anyone in the allotted time as I usually went for racking a bunch of "get out of and put them into a hold" double points, but i was only ever pinned once, and that was by someone who was only a little bit bigger than me, and he was sadistic and very good at all the most painful holds. His goal was always submission, and it was a brutal match because it's hard to feel pain at the beginning of a match, but by the end it's really hard to take any more pain than you already have, and I tapped out to give him the win BECAUSE I didn't have anything left that I thought would turn the tables, and he clearly had the upper hand most of the time anyway as I was having trouble getting points on him. He would have won by points anyway, and he could have done some serious damage as I was doing my best to take much of the pain and work through it.
Great stuff. You should write a book about this. The wrestling was particularly interesting. Rarely that I see a wrestler that is not big, almost as though BIG is what is required. But how do you get them to get tired however? Some of them look as though they have lots of stamina to me, or do you have more? Very Happy


I'm a little guy, so I did experience more stamina then most people, and my training was really cross country running, so I used to have much more endurance than I do now.

It used to be that I would size up my opponent into two categories: muscular guys tire quickly for the most part, but skinny guys will battle you all the way till the end. Their body will show you if they are a short powerful burst kind of person or if they are set up for endurance, and you switch the field on both players. The guy who probably likes bursts of energy and trying to go for the quick win must be met with having to use endurance to beat you, and the guy who's ready to endure and outlast you must be tempted into expending large amounts of energy quickly, and persistence helps you keep it together while you launch your attack. It's like chess... you move certain ways to make their weaknesses more obvious, and avoid giving them a strong play. Of course the actual match, and what happens, is somewhat random, but I am a believer in the art of war, and that being that information can help you win the battle and the war. I highly recommend that book -- The Art of War!
deanhills
IceCreamTruck wrote:
I highly recommend that book -- The Art of War!
I've heard about the book, and I definitely should check it out. I looked it up in Wikipedia and this Chinese idiom seemed to be right on for war:
Quote:
All warfare is based on deception

I also liked this quote:
Quote:
So it is said that if you know your enemies and know yourself, you can win a hundred battles without a single loss.
If you only know yourself, but not your opponent, you may win or may lose.
If you know neither yourself nor your enemy, you will always endanger yourself.

Source: Wikipedia
achowles
Bikerman wrote:
Statement 1: Dragons do not, and did not exist. There are animals (the Komodo Dragon for example) and there have been animals that have some of the many characteristics often granted to the mythical creature, but the idea that they exist or existed is deeply irrational.


So you think it purely coincidence that several completely disconnected cultures have large reptiles in their mythology - then hundreds of years later we find out that there were indeed substantial numbers of large reptiles roaming the world for millions of years?

Is it really so credible that some catastrophic incident completely wiped them out but left so much else unscathed? Not really. More likely the smaller ones that survived in the reduced oxygen atmosphere were hunted to extinction as mankind spread across the world. From there these exaggerated tales emerged.

While I think it's fair to say that tales of dragons and their capabilities have been grossly exaggerated, it would be illogical and irrational to claim that these myths don't have some kind of foundation to them.
Bikerman
achowles wrote:
Bikerman wrote:
Statement 1: Dragons do not, and did not exist. There are animals (the Komodo Dragon for example) and there have been animals that have some of the many characteristics often granted to the mythical creature, but the idea that they exist or existed is deeply irrational.


So you think it purely coincidence that several completely disconnected cultures have large reptiles in their mythology - then hundreds of years later we find out that there were indeed substantial numbers of large reptiles roaming the world for millions of years?
No I don't think it is a coincidence. It may be that the genome contains some predisposition to talk about large reptiles, but it is stretching belief a little further than I would be comfortable with. The alternative is your following hypothesis:
Quote:
Is it really so credible that some catastrophic incident completely wiped them out but left so much else unscathed? Not really. More likely the smaller ones that survived in the reduced oxygen atmosphere were hunted to extinction as mankind spread across the world. From there these exaggerated tales emerged.

Is this credible? Hmm. The hypothesis seems to be that giant reptiles DID exist during the oral-history period of mankind, or at least something to account for the legends.
Well, we know our own history (at least in broad strokes) pretty well and we know that there were no dinosaurs around then - unless you want to advocate the creationist line. Therefore we are left looking for some 'dragon-shaped' generator of fear and wonder. Personally I can't see what it could be.
But before even considering this hypothesis, and therefore before writing this, one observes due-dilligence and consults the literature and one finds a better hypothesis.
Viz:
a) Dragons seem to be present in the Sumerian tablets.
b) They migrate to the Greeks, using well established links
c) Thereafter they are associated with the 'ancients' lost knowledge and rediscovered by the Arabs and then western Christianity.
d) The rest is history Smile
Quote:
While I think it's fair to say that tales of dragons and their capabilities have been grossly exaggerated, it would be illogical and irrational to claim that these myths don't have some kind of foundation to them.
Which is why I never made any such claim.
The most likely origin is probably a loose conglomeration of tales of spitting cobras, the imagination of a sumerian poet, the spread of christianity, and time.....
achowles
Bikerman wrote:
...


Well, like I said, grossly exaggerated. Perhaps to the same degree as calling a shed a condo, but not without some basis in reality all the same. We might be talking about something not much more than a Komodo Dragon.

I think we can put the fire breathing and flying down to fanciful boasting about the poor creatures they'd slain. I think we've just got to accept that our ancestors wiped out many species that we've never even heard of. Equally, tales of gigantic creatures from the deep existed long before we had the means to plumb the depths of the oceans and see such things are real.

Some things are total bs, but most such things have some small basis in reality.

But of course none of this makes the OP's faith seem well grounded than that which they're inclined to disregard as fairy tales.
Bikerman
I think we will never know where many myths originate because it is a genuine evolutionary process. The dragon (to take the current example) can be seen as a meme - a unitary idea that can be spread both vertically (parent to child) and horizontally (person to person). It competes with similar but contradictory notions and co-operates in temprary alliances with other memes or memeplexes, such as christianity, where both memes are more likely to survive together than apart.
The more I think about this approach to analysis, the more merit I find in it. It does seem to be post-dictive (in that it seems to account for historic events but only after the fact) and it should certainly be predictive (and therefore testable).
ocalhoun
achowles wrote:

So you think it purely coincidence that several completely disconnected cultures have large reptiles in their mythology - then hundreds of years later we find out that there were indeed substantial numbers of large reptiles roaming the world for millions of years?

Is it really so credible that some catastrophic incident completely wiped them out but left so much else unscathed? Not really. More likely the smaller ones that survived in the reduced oxygen atmosphere were hunted to extinction as mankind spread across the world. From there these exaggerated tales emerged.

I'd say it's more likely that they found dinosaur fossils, and assumed them to be bones of a creature that still had living examples.

Classifying them as reptilian might just be a lucky guess, or might be that they noticed similarities between them and the smaller reptiles that they were aware of.
jeffryjon
Dragons are everywhere - at least in symbolic form. Worshiping them or at least holding them in high esteem has been common on and off throughout history. If you believe in dragons and the good or luck they bring, I'm sure you'll find others who'll join you. In England, we slayed ours - or rather some guy called George came over and did it for us - whereas the Welsh seem to still have quite a fondness of dragons which may explain why they hate the English (at least in jest). I recommend a tour of Wales as being your best chance of finding a group to join, though in some parts you may need to learn to speak Welsh first.
deanhills
jeffryjon wrote:
I recommend a tour of Wales as being your best chance of finding a group to join, though in some parts you may need to learn to speak Welsh first.
I've always wanted to visit Wales, never got that far. Can imagine that would be a very good theme for tourism as well? I think it is something I'd want to do for fun as well, and I'm sure it could be very educational too.
jeffryjon
Me thinks you'd love it - friendly bunch the Welsh as long as you can take a bit of the anti-English joking. They like to test your mettle first see if you can bounce back. A quick comment about them losing funds by charging you on the M4 bridge on the way INTO Wales usually gets a giggle.
Bikerman
jeffryjon wrote:
Me thinks you'd love it - friendly bunch the Welsh as long as you can take a bit of the anti-English joking. They like to test your mettle first see if you can bounce back. A quick comment about them losing funds by charging you on the M4 bridge on the way INTO Wales usually gets a giggle.

You need to bear in mind that Welsh customs are very different to those of Englishmen.

In England we have 'Guy Fawkes' night which commemorates the attempt to blow up the houses of parliament by burning a traditional effigy of Fawkes on a bonfire.
In Wales they have Owain Glyndŵr night which commemorates the Welsh uprising against the English by burning cottages belonging to English incomers.
In England we have girlfriends and wives. In Wales they have lambs and sheep.
In England we speak English, one of the most expressive and rich languages in the world. In Wales they speak welsh, a language which will rupture the epiglotis of non-natives and cause them to shower passers-by with spit, and in which Llanfairpwllgwyngyllgogerychwyrndrobwllllantysiliogogogoch is the name of a railway station.

Smile There is a tradition of us mocking the welsh and they us, which is normally good natured. In fact I love much of North Wales and live only about 10 miles from the border.
zbale
Dacorian wrote:
I often ask myself whether I was losing my mind or dragged into the human desire for beauty. It's what you could call a 'new age religion' that's been haunted me for years. At first I refused the feelings I had for this creature and I ignored them because it is not possible in this society, and not because it seems childish. I did not believe in the spiritual or God or Satan and I still don't. I believe that we are made out of the four elements, lifeless made life and that the dragon is the first evolved being with wisdom with his fish- like appearance. only slightly less perfect than they are represented. four limbs, no fire or other weird things, but perfect to live in this life. So much that I can feel them.
call me crazy, that's why keep this for myself. I think its such a natural force left that is unique with living beings. Higher beings are not human, it's so stupid to think that the last evolved creature like us should deserve a human like god. It is hard to wear in this society because it also affects relationships with people. This I can not bind to human beings like it should. The creatures made of flesh and blood fighting to stay alive and still die deserve more respect than gods.


For 6 years i've been trying to find a group for this matter. People who worship dragons like they are a higher power. This is a difficult situation for someone who individually choose this belief because dragons remain a myth, for stories, games or movies. For many, dragons are just a toy and an escape from everyday life but not for dragon worshipers like myself. For me, the dragon has so much more. Call it a spirit guide, unbound to whatever. If I could pray for him I would do that, but alas. I don't know people like myself in this case but it would be so great if I could do this with others who understand. This is a religion and I am sure there are so many people with this same idea, but afraid to say this to anyone. The only religions who are accepted in social life are based on the superiority of humanity like christians or muslims. This belief has no name, it will only be seen as a lavish fantasy for people who love to roll play. But bowing to a beautiful picture of a dragon, no dragons figurines to collect and talk to the one statue. That is what Christians do but in this case not against a man or something that likes people in his surroundings. Approach as inferior, that's what counts.


I happen not to share your beliefs (not that it matters), but I am sure you will find others who share them. Worse come to worse you could find people who think like you though nothing formal is organized and see how you can organize ideas together.

Good luck!
BigGeek
WOW, I actually thought everyone that posted in this topic was pretty civil and open about it. Even though it seems a little bit strange. But like many pointed out, so do other faith based belief systems, so it's not too much different. As far as finding like minded people for Dacorian to associate with in his belief system he might be a little bit challenged there, but as far as worshiping dragons, it may not be as hard for him to find similar minded people as he thinks.

As far as Dragons go, and the question about the existence of such a creature? I have to side with the folks that claim no such thing ever existed. I realize that many ancient cultures depict carvings, and drawings of them, yet I question the lack of any physical evidence, and lean toward the view that they were a myth or made up.

As far as making things up, mankind has a long history of that, much of which has been dis proven over time.

Now to get to the real shockers:

First off, Bikerman, I had no idea you knew so much about Dragons....impressive bit of knowledge, and every bit as impressive as your knowledge of Catholic Dogma!

Second,
Bikerman wrote:
Llanfairpwllgwyngyllgogerychwyrndrobwllllantysiliogogogoch


I think I strained something trying to pronounce this word Laughing
watersoul
BigGeek wrote:

Bikerman wrote:
Llanfairpwllgwyngyllgogerychwyrndrobwllllantysiliogogogoch


I think I strained something trying to pronounce this word Laughing


Nah, dead easy - when you're forced to learn a language from an early age, even when everyone can speak English.
I'm a Welshman by the way...involved in an ongoing operation of infiltrating England to steal their jobs, women and sheep Razz

PS, anyone who worships Y Ddraig Goch (The Red Dragon) is an unwitting servant of the coming New Welsh Order...be afraid, be very afraid Wink
Related topics
Are atheists more likely to be fellons?
Student and Teacher Conversation!!
Buddhism
Where has the "Christ" gone in Christianity?
Is faith necessary?
[Official] God - NO LONGER A STICKY
What Religion are You?
What is the usefulness of religion?
Proposal to posters on this forum
Something in which we can ALL have faith!?!?
Do you believe because of Fear
This is why one doesn't bargain with free-speech
Aferlife?
Atheist to theist to atheist
Reply to topic    Frihost Forum Index -> Lifestyle and News -> Faith

FRIHOST HOME | FAQ | TOS | ABOUT US | CONTACT US | SITE MAP
© 2005-2011 Frihost, forums powered by phpBB.