Disqus - Latest Comments for bbittner

Re: US siriusxm

Bill Bittner — Sat, 13 Mar 2021 14:25:33 -0000

Same thing happening to me. Restarted phone. Uninstalled and installed. Still crashing.

Re: The best (and worst) on-screen female scientists

Bill Bittner — Tue, 07 Jan 2020 11:19:35 -0000

Jodie Foster in Contact

Re: After Hours Episode 15 – With Manic Velocity

Bill Bittner — Mon, 07 Nov 2016 10:56:37 -0000

ALSO, you mentioned some top EVE streamers you follow. Could you post the list here?

Re: After Hours Episode 15 – With Manic Velocity

Bill Bittner — Sun, 06 Nov 2016 21:31:24 -0000

Loved the episode. AND applied to the Stay Frosty corp!

Re: Best Christian Movie Ever? You Might Be Surprised.

Bill Bittner — Tue, 14 Apr 2015 18:14:25 -0000

I'd have picked Chariots of Fire

Re: Maybe Wicca is Not a Nature Religion?

Bill Bittner — Sun, 02 Nov 2014 06:10:01 -0000

I think Wicca, witchcraft and other Pagan paths are at their best when they include all the spheres of this existence, such as the natural, the personal and the communal. Sometimes I describe my path not as a nature loving spirituality but as a universe loving spirituality. I think the recent emphasis on nature has been to address an imbalance. Nature has long been neglected (or even reviled) by the mainstream faiths. And at the same time we Pagans should aim for balance. We should not focus so much on Nature that we forget and neglect our fellow man or woman.

Re: Polytheism is the Future

Bill Bittner — Thu, 28 Aug 2014 11:09:46 -0000

In most cases, I believe polytheism is less prone to fundamentalism. And yes, there are a few reasons to that.

One reason is pure mathematics. The more deities, the more sects devoted to those individual deities. And there less likely to be large numbers of the devotees to one deity in one place. So even if they do become fundamentalist about that one deity, they probably won't be able to make much noise or damage.

But one thing I like about polytheism, at least in a post-modern sense, is that there is often a a tendency to be more flexible. Most neo-pagans chose their patron deity or deities. Very few were raised to venerate that deity by their parents from a young age. Also, since there is less religious-specific info about (some) of these deities, a lot of devotees have had to fill in the holes. And what you put in the holes will most likely to be different than what your fellow devotee put in them. (So, if you turn into a fundamentalist, you'll be a fundamentalist sect of one)

I also embrace polytheism (or perhaps more accurately, "soft" polytheism) because, for me, it reflects the ambiguity of who or what is that divine persona or personas that may or may not be "out there" and may or may not have created the universe.

I became involved with Hinduism before neo-paganism, and it is still an element of my spirituality. And thought it is possible that none of the Hindu gods and goddesses ever existed, and are purely fictional creations, it made total sense to me to be devoted to them. To me, this mysterious divine persona, often referred to as "God", is such a transcendent, largely unknowable or undefinable mystery, that any name, image or persona we ascribe to he/she/it, would be a fiction as well. Thus, being devoted to the "fictional" Krishna is no more irrational than being devoted to the "fictional" Judeo/Christian/Islamic "God" Or Captain America or Doctor Who for that matter.

And what about historical personas? Well, if Jesus did exist, people obviously are devoted to him, whether or not his nature was divine. Which is why I think other historical persons make great stand-ins for traditional gods or goddesses. For example, for some people, wouldn't Freddy Mercury make a great stand-in for Cernunnos?

So, by being devoted to a persona that may be "fictional" in a historical sense, it prevents me from making blind, concrete assumptions. It prevents me from putting "God" in a box. And, ironically, by relating to the divine mystery in the form of a statue or picture of a mythological god or goddess (i.e., an "idol"), it makes me less prone to "idolatry"

Re: Entertainment Geekly: 'Community' survives. Television dies?

Bill Bittner — Tue, 08 Jul 2014 16:37:50 -0000

I love EVERY character on Community. And really dislike every character on TBBT...except for Leonard, who just simply bores me.

Re: Kristian Nairn Talks 'Game of Thrones' Theories, 'Hodor Line' | Movies News | Rolling Stone

Bill Bittner — Tue, 08 Jul 2014 14:07:50 -0000

Every time somebody asks him "Are you sick of saying Hodor?" he should respond... "Hodor." (Or, "I am Groot.")

Re: Longing for God

Bill Bittner — Fri, 14 Mar 2014 14:42:39 -0000

This is a test.

Re: Is Doctor Who a Religion?

Bill Bittner — Mon, 06 Jan 2014 16:53:04 -0000

I think the line between philosophy and religion is a little blurry. Buddhism is equally thought of both as a religion and a philosophy.

Re: Is Doctor Who a Religion?

Bill Bittner — Sat, 04 Jan 2014 13:28:26 -0000

I myself have been a part of many religions. And I’ve come to my own personal understanding that IF there is a supreme being or reality behind all of “this,” we can only guess the nature of such a being or reality. Thus all religion is conjecture. And all religious personalities (like Jesus, Mohammed, Buddha, Moses, Krishna, etc.) are either inaccurate or altogether made up.

I myself am okay with “made-up” representations of a possible supreme being or reality. Some of the Hindus that “worship” gods such as Krishna know very well that he never existed historically. But through culture and tradition, Krishna has become a being that for all intents and purposes “exists.”

So to me, it is quite sensible to think of the essense of Doctor Who as a representation of some supreme reality. And if not to worship, be inspired and comforted by.

I answered this in full in my blog....

http://whatbillthinks.tumbl...

Re: Fandom Today 550- The Day of the Podcast

Bill Bittner — Sat, 04 Jan 2014 12:42:39 -0000

Seeing Capaldi in Pompeii made me more optimistic about him as the Doctor. By his look, you assume he can only play mean and crotchety. But in Pompeii, he was very human and could obviously do vulnerable.

Course, I'm not saying the Doctor needs to be vulnerable. He just obviously needs a range.

SPOILERS!?

I haven't seen "The Day of the Doctor" yet, so I don't know how a type like Capaldi was needed. I've heard mention that something happens in the episode that demands a certain kind of Doctor.

Does that mean he needs to be on more of a war-footing, thus a tougher doctor? Or, is he going to be more of a older-uncle type like Hartnell?

Frankly it would be need to see a kind of Older-Uncle/Grandfather type. Like Gandalf or Dumbledore.

Granted, you can't answer any of these questions without divulging spoilers. Of course you can mention them for the others in this thread that have seen "Day of the Doctor". So if you do so, just please put a big SPOIERS alert.

(And yes, I need to finish up the last Tennant season, and make my way through all the Smith ones. But I know that won't take long and, like everyone else, I'll have months to wait to see Capaldi)

Re: Fandom Today 550- The Day of the Podcast

Bill Bittner — Fri, 03 Jan 2014 14:30:27 -0000

Right now I just finished the Fires of Pompei.

And I am ABSOLUTELY enjoying it more and more. I'm totally obsessed now. And as much as I loved Eccleston, Tennant's Doctor is absolutely superb. Never been so drawn ,more to a fantasy/sci-fi/comic character.

Also going crazy with the merchandise, ebooks, audio books and radio dramas.

It's just so moving to see a fictional character that cares so much about humanity, but also needs humanity. Such a great mixture of happy-go-lucky, wide-eyed childishness with super-serious, don't-mess-with-me attitude. Makes other genre heroes like Spiderman, Superman and Captain Kirk so cold in comparison.

And BTW, just loved the recent appearance Tennant and Smith made on Graham Norton.

(And that's another new obsession. Watching so much Graham Norton on YouTube. And now would really like to visit England as well.)

Re: Fandom Today 550- The Day of the Podcast

Bill Bittner — Thu, 19 Dec 2013 15:12:49 -0000

Just finished the first season of the new series. Just loved it. Especially "Father's Day," the "Empty Child" episodes, and the "Bad Wolf" episodes. So good, but often emotionally draining to watch.

I don't think I've had the same emotional connection with any American produced sci fi or other genre series. Is it possible Americans are more uncomfortable with melodrama / emotion in their genre stories than the reputedly stiff upper lip Brits.

I'm absolutely hooked. And miss the Eccleston Doctor already. Shame he didn't want to continue. Curious what differences he had with the producers / execs.

Re: Fandom Today 550- The Day of the Podcast

Bill Bittner — Tue, 17 Dec 2013 15:00:15 -0000

Thanks for featuring these movies. I've been a marginal Dr. Who fan. I was much into Tom Baker when I was younger. But the recent stuff, only caught some of the Eccleston season.

But I REALLY enjoyed "An Adventure..." Such a class production. And yes, very tear-jerking at times. And it made me want to see more performances by David Bradley. I haven't seen anything by him outside of Harry Potter and Game of Thrones (and World's End), but now I want to see more. And I hope he gets offered other roles other than "mean ole bastard" roles.

I want to move onto "The Day...," but wonder if you think I'd enjoy it more if I waited till I saw some (or all) of the Tennant and Smith seasons. .

I'm also curious if any of the older crew or cast involved with "An Adventure..." have fond memories of the first Dr. Who seasons, and therefore were especially joyful about being a part of such a monumental part of their childhood and British culture.

Re: A Link Between Worlds is the Truest and arguably Best Zelda Ever Crafted

Bill Bittner — Wed, 27 Nov 2013 16:28:08 -0000

I played "A Link to the Past" years ago when it first came out. And since then, it has been my 2nd favorite game of all time (behind Final Fantasy II (US)) And I can still see that montage that played after you beat the game.

And I've played every Zelda since. And nothing has given me the same "Zelda" feel as "A Link to the Past" did until now. And you hit it on the head. The perfect blend of everything, including the important "exploration" aspect.

There were a number of games from that era that excelled in exploration: Zelda: A Link to the Past, Castlevania: Symphony of the Night, Super Metroid, Final Fantasy II (US). And part of the fun of exploration is finding those surprise places or things, a practice that goes back even further (Super Mario Brothers, the arcade Goonies, or heck, even Atari Adventure.) And Zelda: A Link Between Worlds gets this aspect very right.

I'm curious what your order of faves is.

I think mine is...

1. A Link to the Past
2. A Link Between Worlds
3. Ocarina of Time
4. Links Awakening
5. Skyward Sword

Re: Why You Can't Worship Jesus Christ and Be Pagan

Bill Bittner — Fri, 22 Mar 2013 11:53:56 -0000

"I do not go into Christian churches to stand up and invoke the Goddess"

Yes, that would be rude, because Christians are monotheistic, and focused on Jesus, or in the greater concept, the Trinity.

"And I resent it when we have an open ritual and someone steps up to invoke Jesus into a Pagan circle."

Well, Pagans are technically polytheists. But, yes, I could see how that would make you uncomfortable. And, as a former Christian, who is now primarily a devotee of Brighid, but still hold Jesus and Mary in a special place, that would make me uncomfortable as well. But not because I would be against it. But because it would make other Pagans uncomfortable. But I think Jesus makes a lot of Pagans uncomfortable, is that it's still "too soon."

A lot of Pagans carry a grudge against Christianity and Jesus, and understandably so. Christianity has caused the world, and individual people, like me, a lot of pain. So even though Jesus may be a very worshipable Deity or an Ascended Master, he's connected to strongly to a often destructive religion. So to me, invoking Jesus at a Pagan ritual is not "wrong," but it could be (depending on the attendees), insensitive and un-PC.

Also, keep in mind, this all depends on the Pagan circle, doesn't it? If you were in an Asatru circle, and you invoked Kali or Diana, wouldn't that also be odd? Or, if you were at a C.U.U.P.S. circle, I don't think the Jesus-invoking would be as odd, as long as he was equally evoked with other Deities. But, I think that would only be done if no one present had any objections. (And cleared anonymously ahead of time, so no one had to object publicly.)

Re: Why You Can't Worship Jesus Christ and Be Pagan

Bill Bittner — Thu, 21 Mar 2013 12:10:14 -0000

Just because Progressive Christianity is a minority within Christianity, doesn't mean it's not valid. Perhaps Progressive Christianity is actually Christianity, and mainstream Christianity is really a collection of new religions, started at varioius times, by various people (Constantine, Luther), that has nothing to do with Jesus.

Re: Why You Can't Worship Jesus Christ and Be Pagan

Bill Bittner — Thu, 21 Mar 2013 11:58:04 -0000

The Jesus presented by the Bible and mainstream denominations may not be the same as the Jesus that some Christian Pagans are devoted to.

So why do you conclude that the Christian God wants to destroy Paganism? Did the Christian God appear to you and say, "I want to destroy Paganism." Or, are you basing this belief on the Christian scriptures and institutions. I long ago stopped giving any credence to the Christian scriptures and institutions.

So how do we know Jesus? Perhaps via the Gospels. But not necessarily so. There are many Deities that are worshipped today with little scriptural information. So I don't think the dogma presented in the Gospels has to define Jesus.

So if we ignore the Gospel and the institutions, who is Jesus? Well, that's up for the devotee to find out. And if they discover that what they learn from him, via direct communication, fits within the principles of Paganism, then I don't see why they can't worship Jesus and be a Pagan.

Also, I do understand that the title of your post is meant to provoke a reaction. But I do find it interesting that most of your article seems to say that "You can't be Christian and be a Pagan." And to me, this is a more defensible thesis. But I see little to support that "You can't worship Jesus and be a Pagan." You keep tying Jesus to Christianity. And I think this is a very narrow-minded view. Such tying together of two concepts is purely a cultural and textural concept, not a universal truth.

Yes, I grew up loving Jesus. But currently, my primary devotion is to Brighid. But, I believe Jesus is still there, just as all the other God/desses, Spirits, and Ascended are there. And even though I'm not drawn that much to him lately, I know I can turn to him later, just as I can turn to Cernunnos or Diana.

Re: Where Does Love Fit into Pagan and Polytheist Traditions?

Bill Bittner — Thu, 14 Mar 2013 07:19:28 -0000

I heartily believe that Love should be, and needs to be the center of Paganism. And I think this stunning, wonderful, anti-bullying video does a great job of explaining why...

http://www.youtube.com/watc...

Re: Where Does Love Fit into Pagan and Polytheist Traditions?

Bill Bittner — Mon, 11 Mar 2013 07:19:08 -0000

Have a lot to say about this topic. But right now, I only have the time to leave a quote by Rumi:

"Love is the endless ocean of God."

Re: Loop of Brighid: The Mysticism of Devotion, Part 4

Bill Bittner — Fri, 01 Mar 2013 14:22:05 -0000

Great article. Thanks for posting. And of course, as one who follows the path of Bhakti, these roles are familiar to me. However, the roles of Strength, Champion and Hound are new to me. Thanks for educating me.

Re: Are Christians the New Jews?

Bill Bittner — Fri, 22 Feb 2013 07:11:11 -0000

Maybe, one day, Christians will become the dominant religion in the U.S. We might find Bibles in Walmart and in motel rooms. Christian television networks. Hell, we might even have a Christian President.

Sarcasm aside. My wife, who is an Athiest, was majorly outcast amongst the parents of our daughter's school. Religious and racial discrimination is country-contextual. Yes, Christians are persecuted in many Muslim countries. But in the U.S., the Muslims and the Athiests are at the bottom of the totem pole. And anti-Christianity comes mostly from left. Not the mainstream. And they are really attacking evangelical Christians. They just use the term Christian as a shortcut.

And by the way, why doesn't Walmart sell the Torah, Koran or Bhagavad Gita?

Re: Enough of Because: The Nature of Pagan Authority

Bill Bittner — Fri, 22 Feb 2013 06:49:42 -0000

Just some more food for thought. In your other article, you said you can't worship Jesus and be a pagan. (Hell, I think you can worship Captain America and be Pagan.) And of course, you see why I disagree. But there were mentions in these comments about being "Christian" and Pagan. And to me, that's a different story. Because I think the "prevailing" definition of Christian, across all the denominations, is belief in and the acceptance of the concepts in the Apostles' Creed. Thus, I am not a Christian. But I still love Jesus. As well as Brighid, Mary, Krishna, Rama and Hanuman.

Another thing to think about is whether Paganism is a religion or an umbrella. Christianity is a religion, with multiple denominations. But Hinduism, is more like an umbrella, with multiple religions. (And multiple denominations or sects within those religions.) Thus, the umbrella-ness is dependent on common characteristics rather than creed or belief. And in my mind, the umbrella of Paganism is held together by some characteristics, such as (and I'm just brainstorming here) a connection to earth and seasons, acceptance of multiple deities and an absence or de-emphasis of an authoritative scripture or dogma.