Religeon

[Not Brainwashed]

Im am From Essex in England and i do not believe in God, I do see how i can believe something i cannot see, feel, smell etc. Can anybody please explain how you do believe in " God "?
Thanks

[Zzyzx]

.

I have demonstrated magic with my atheist lovers and friends. That is how I am able to further believe in the validity of my own experiences.

Can you explain further the “magic� which you have demonstrated?

I may as well write a book if I were to do that, so no, I can't on here. There are many magic books out there, though.

Are you willing to demonstrate your magic tricks to a skeptical group – one that might include "Myth Busters"? What kind of magic tricks might you perform for them? Or, does your magic ability disappear when it is questioned or challenged?

[beankitty]

I make no attempt to convince others that they should consider my personal experiences to be “real�.

Me neither. That would be a waste of time.

Yes, and maybe leprechauns and Santa Claus are real too – just as gods and spirits may be real.

Gods have been worshiped since the beginning of humankind. Santa Claus has not.

Therefore, we should not conclude that we know what occurred thousands of years ago.

No, but we can speculate. And based on speculation, we can culturally evolve.

What I spoke of above is personal experience and observation – nothing particularly scientific. One need not study science or be aware of science in order to expect “sunrise� or falling objects.

It doesn't matter if one studies science or not. It still is science. And spirituality is NOT science, or even logical.. so it is not supposed to be analyzed by science.

Perhaps by some definitions of “god� that would be true. However, it is moot since “explain everything� is infinite.

What definition of “god� do you use in this discussion?

It varies. What I was referring to there was the one you're thinking of, that would make the statement true.

What questions could you ask that a cleaver but evil supernatural being (a “Satan� or equivalent if such things existed) could not handle readily in a convincing way?

I don't have any questions, that's why I didn't list any.

I do not think that you can devise any set of questions that would serve to identify an imposter “evil spirit�.

I agree with you.

Are you being silly or do you actually believe that all of the thousands of “gods� actually exist? If the latter, kindly expand on that subject. If the former that is not ethical debate.

I really do believe in all the Gods, I just do not worship all of them. I am a Hellenic pagan, we worship the Graeco-Roman pantheon. I am not joking around. The organization in America is called "Hellenion" - there's also one in Greece but I don't know the name of it.

"Welcome to Hellenion, a US-based religious organization ("church") dedicated to the revival and practice of Hellenic polytheism. We approach Hellenic religion from the reconstructionist perspective, which includes both an emphasis on historical precedent and respect for personal spiritual inspiration. We offer local congregations, study opportunities, and fellowship for those who worship the Olympians and the other deities of ancient Greece in a traditional way."

Yes, those “beliefs� have quite a following. I have not encountered anyone who worked in scientific fields who believed that psychics and astrology were valid.

What about those in science who believe in an omni- benevolent/present/potent et al. God? How is that different from belief in psychics and astrology?

HOW, exactly, does astrology (or psychics) “WORK� for anyone? What does that mean?

Self-fulfilling prophecies is an example.

What does “true for them� mean?

I don't know how to explain that further.


That may be “evidence enough� if the matter is private and personal; however, if it is presented to others as truth more than a claim is required to be credible.

Therefore, it should only be presented to those interested, or who inquire, or share the same belief. But to claim "evidence" and insist upon it without any indication of proof is pretty pointless - self-defeating, if you will.


We all share some realities in the real world we inhabit. There ARE factors about the Earth and its environments that we all exist within.

Well, I figured that was a given.


Can a human have an “individual truth� that includes an ability to breathe water instead of air – or to fly unassisted – or to live without eating or drinking – or to move a mountain?

Those are all "abilities" in opposition to science. I was trying to count those out with the example of gravity. I am talking about what is true to another differs from person to person. You know, like opinions.. where there's no real answer.


If you are unwilling to substantiate claims of performing “magic� it is unethical to attempt to make such claims in debate.

You asked me how I validate my own personal experiences to myself, and I gave you an appropriate answer, because as you have mentioned, it is a private and personal thing - spirituality, that is - no? I don't find it "unethical" at all that there's nothing more to say on the subject.

I am aware that there are many books concerning what is known as “magic� (which I define as “the art of producing illusions�).

Close. We call it, "the art of changing consciousness at will."

One of the early books that related magic tricks is known by some as “the bible� (available in 100+ different versions).

Yes, that would be one. I would consider the Bible rather recent as far as magical texts goes.


A common feature of magical tricks is that they cannot be demonstrated under conditions that preclude illusion and fraud. Claims of magic are fairly common. Demonstrations are not.

You mean like Uri Geller's bending of spoons? Right. I do not care for these magic tricks either. I do not care for tricks.

[beankitty]

.

Are you willing to demonstrate your magic tricks to a skeptical group – one that might include "Myth Busters"? What kind of magic tricks might you perform for them? Or, does your magic ability disappear when it is questioned or challenged?

All Pagans are skeptical - that is how we became Pagans to begin with. What tricks are you talking about? I'd love to go on Myth Busters or have a chat with James Randi about what I believe, and what Paganism is about. I could try to explain Witchcraft for them as well. But as far as performing magic on stage? We are not magicians. This misconception is the reason people add a "k" on the end of "magic" in order to separate the two. Ritual is personal, and to be conducted between fellow believers. It is not a game. I don't need anyone to believe in magic - or believe in Zeus. It's just a belief, not a "fact."

[Beto]

.

Are you willing to demonstrate your magic tricks to a skeptical group – one that might include "Myth Busters"? What kind of magic tricks might you perform for them? Or, does your magic ability disappear when it is questioned or challenged?

All Pagans are skeptical - that is how we became Pagans to begin with. What tricks are you talking about? I'd love to go on Myth Busters or have a chat with James Randi about what I believe, and what Paganism is about. I could try to explain Witchcraft for them as well. But as far as performing magic on stage? We are not magicians. This misconception is the reason people add a "k" on the end of "magic" in order to separate the two. Ritual is personal, and to be conducted between fellow believers. It is not a game. I don't need anyone to believe in magic - or believe in Zeus. It's just a belief, not a "fact."

Isn't witchcraft about "influencing a favorable outcome" through "will"?

[beankitty]

.

Are you willing to demonstrate your magic tricks to a skeptical group – one that might include "Myth Busters"? What kind of magic tricks might you perform for them? Or, does your magic ability disappear when it is questioned or challenged?

All Pagans are skeptical - that is how we became Pagans to begin with. What tricks are you talking about? I'd love to go on Myth Busters or have a chat with James Randi about what I believe, and what Paganism is about. I could try to explain Witchcraft for them as well. But as far as performing magic on stage? We are not magicians. This misconception is the reason people add a "k" on the end of "magic" in order to separate the two. Ritual is personal, and to be conducted between fellow believers. It is not a game. I don't need anyone to believe in magic - or believe in Zeus. It's just a belief, not a "fact."

Isn't witchcraft about "influencing a favorable outcome" through "will"?

Yeah, you could say that. There's no official agreement on what it is - there are many different takes. But that is one of them. It's like an intricate form of prayer.

[Beto]

.

Are you willing to demonstrate your magic tricks to a skeptical group – one that might include "Myth Busters"? What kind of magic tricks might you perform for them? Or, does your magic ability disappear when it is questioned or challenged?

All Pagans are skeptical - that is how we became Pagans to begin with. What tricks are you talking about? I'd love to go on Myth Busters or have a chat with James Randi about what I believe, and what Paganism is about. I could try to explain Witchcraft for them as well. But as far as performing magic on stage? We are not magicians. This misconception is the reason people add a "k" on the end of "magic" in order to separate the two. Ritual is personal, and to be conducted between fellow believers. It is not a game. I don't need anyone to believe in magic - or believe in Zeus. It's just a belief, not a "fact."

Isn't witchcraft about "influencing a favorable outcome" through "will"?

Yeah, you could say that. There's no official agreement on what it is - there are many different takes. But that is one of them. It's like an intricate form of prayer.

In a very broad sense of "prayer", perhaps.

Suppose we have several people tossing a coin a thousand times. One of which is what we might consider a powerful witch. For the sake of argument, one that is recognized by several covenants, as the "real deal". If such a person desires to, can the distribution be affected to an unlikely degree, so as to provide a measure of evidence (subjective as it is) to support authenticity?

[Zzyzx]

.

I make no attempt to convince others that they should consider my personal experiences to be “real�.

Me neither. That would be a waste of time.

I thought you were promoting, defending or debating some form of god worship in public. Is that not true?

Yes, and maybe leprechauns and Santa Claus are real too – just as gods and spirits may be real.

Gods have been worshiped since the beginning of humankind. Santa Claus has not.

Is the length of time a proposed or imaginary entity has been worshiped by humans verification of truth or existence?

Therefore, we should not conclude that we know what occurred thousands of years ago.

No, but we can speculate. And based on speculation, we can culturally evolve.

Thank you.

You certainly may speculate. When doing so in debate it is ethical to identify your comments as speculation.

I am not certain that cultural evolution can proceed based upon speculation alone.

What I spoke of above is personal experience and observation – nothing particularly scientific. One need not study science or be aware of science in order to expect “sunrise� or falling objects.

It doesn't matter if one studies science or not. It still is science. And spirituality is NOT science, or even logical.. so it is not supposed to be analyzed by science.

I agree that spirituality is not logical (or reasonable or rational) in my opinion.

Science CAN investigate CLAIMS made in support or defense of religion – such as claims that dead bodies come back to life, or that the Earth was flooded "to the tops of mountains" or that the Earth stopped rotating on command. Those claims do NOT hold up under investigation.

Do your magical claims hold up under investigation? Have you checked?

What definition of “god� do you use in this discussion?

It varies.

That is convenient.

What I was referring to there was the one you're thinking of, that would make the statement true.

I am not thinking of a "god". I have seen no indication that "gods" are anything more than products of human imagination. I challenge the claims made by worshipers that their "gods" performed "miracles" (or magical tricks).

I do not think that you can devise any set of questions that would serve to identify an imposter “evil spirit�.

I agree with you.

Then you must agree that you could not distinguish between a "good god" (or "benevolent spirit" or whatever) and an "evil spirit" or "evil god" or imposter, correct?

Are you being silly or do you actually believe that all of the thousands of “gods� actually exist? If the latter, kindly expand on that subject. If the former that is not ethical debate.

I really do believe in all the Gods, I just do not worship all of them. I am a Hellenic pagan, we worship the Graeco-Roman pantheon. I am not joking around. The organization in America is called "Hellenion" - there's also one in Greece but I don't know the name of it.

Are you recruiting, promoting, soliciting or proselytizing?

Yes, those “beliefs� have quite a following. I have not encountered anyone who worked in scientific fields who believed that psychics and astrology were valid.

What about those in science who believe in an omni- benevolent/present/potent et al. God? How is that different from belief in psychics and astrology?

Perhaps it would be appropriate for one of the "standard" theists to answer your question. I know the difference in definition of the terms, but am not knowledgeable about such things because I regard them all as products of human imagination.

HOW, exactly, does astrology (or psychics) “WORK� for anyone? What does that mean?

Self-fulfilling prophecies is an example.

What is known as a "self-fulfilling prophesy" is NOT unique to psychics, astrology or religion. Any condition in which a person who is convinced that something will happen (regardless of source) and is influenced to act in the direction of the prediction is a "self-fulfilling prophesy".

A baseball player saying and believing "I think that I will strike out" is likely to set in motion a series of events that result in "striking out". That can be considered a "self-fulfilling prophesy". Show how that is evidence that "astrology works" for someone.

What does “true for them� mean?

I don't know how to explain that further.

I suggest that "true for them" indicates nothing more than personal perception or opinion.

That may be “evidence enough� if the matter is private and personal; however, if it is presented to others as truth more than a claim is required to be credible.

Therefore, it should only be presented to those interested, or who inquire, or share the same belief.

I am interested and I inquire. Kindly present the evidence.

Am I required to share your beliefs before the "magic" works or before evidence can be presented? If so, that is the same "argument" presented by Christians when they cannot provide evidence of their magical claims.

But to claim "evidence" and insist upon it without any indication of proof is pretty pointless - self-defeating, if you will.

I agree. If one cannot offer evidence or proof their statements are pointless.

Do you offer proof that gods are real or that magic "works" in the real world (not just in the opinion of believers)?

We all share some realities in the real world we inhabit. There ARE factors about the Earth and its environments that we all exist within.

Well, I figured that was a given.

If "given", are realities about the real world true for all of us? If so, how can what is "true" for one person about such things be different from that which is "true" for another?

Can a human have an “individual truth� that includes an ability to breathe water instead of air – or to fly unassisted – or to live without eating or drinking – or to move a mountain?

Those are all "abilities" in opposition to science. I was trying to count those out with the example of gravity. I am talking about what is true to another differs from person to person. You know, like opinions.. where there's no real answer.

I agree that opinions differ. Are you saying that truth is opinion?

If you are unwilling to substantiate claims of performing “magic� it is unethical to attempt to make such claims in debate.

You asked me how I validate my own personal experiences to myself, and I gave you an appropriate answer, because as you have mentioned, it is a private and personal thing - spirituality, that is - no? I don't find it "unethical" at all that there's nothing more to say on the subject.

Those things that are private and personal cannot be used to substantiate claims. In my opinion, it is inappropriate to discuss or refer to things that are private and personal in a debate – knowing that they will not or should not be discussed.

Secret "evidence" is not valid in debate.

I am aware that there are many books concerning what is known as “magic� (which I define as “the art of producing illusions�).

Close. We call it, "the art of changing consciousness at will."

What is the difference between "illusion" (defined as "a misleading image presented to the vision; or something that deceives or misleads intellectually) and "the art of changing consciousness at will"?

How do you define the latter term?

One of the early books that related magic tricks is known by some as “the bible� (available in 100+ different versions).

Yes, that would be one. I would consider the Bible rather recent as far as magical texts goes.

If the bible is recent, by implication you have reference to many older magical texts. Can you identify such texts and give dates of origin?

A common feature of magical tricks is that they cannot be demonstrated under conditions that preclude illusion and fraud. Claims of magic are fairly common. Demonstrations are not.

You mean like Uri Geller's bending of spoons? Right. I do not care for these magic tricks either. I do not care for tricks.

What magic DO you "care for"? Kindly answer in your own words and do not merely cite a web page, book or reference only (as is appropriate in debate). I am not debating a web site. I ask YOU.

All Pagans are skeptical - that is how we became Pagans to begin with.

When one is skeptical they typically require that claims be substantiated. Do you (or Pagans) do that when claims of "magic" are made?

What tricks are you talking about?

I am talking about whatever "magic" you think you have performed or demonstrated as claimed. You are being less than forthright about what you claim to be able to do.

I'd love to go on Myth Busters or have a chat with James Randi about what I believe, and what Paganism is about. I could try to explain Witchcraft for them as well.

I obviously was not asking if you were willing to do a talk show interview.

But as far as performing magic on stage?

There was no suggestion of performing magic on stage. I asked if you were willing to demonstrate your magic abilities before a group that did not share your belief that you can perform magic.

We are not magicians. This misconception is the reason people add a "k" on the end of "magic" in order to separate the two.

What distinguishes between your "magic" and that of a "magician"?

You fail to show any difference between your "magic" (or "magick") and that performed by "magicians" (or illusionists). Kindly do so.

Ritual is personal, and to be conducted between fellow believers.

Does your "magic" not "work" unless all present are "fellow believers"?

It is not a game. I don't need anyone to believe in magic - or believe in Zeus. It's just a belief, not a "fact."

In what "magic" do you indicate believing?

If it is "just a belief" and is "not a fact", what distinguishes your magic from imagination?

[beankitty]

I thought you were promoting, defending or debating some form of god worship in public. Is that not true?

I wasn't aware that was an attempt to "convice others" of my beliefs.


Yes, and maybe leprechauns and Santa Claus are real too – just as gods and spirits may be real.
Is the length of time a proposed or imaginary entity has been worshiped by humans verification of truth or existence?

No, but you are mocking ancient cultures' belief systems, comparing them to Santa Claus. Whether or not Gods are imaginary is no reason to compare a beautiful culture's history to something silly.

I am not certain that cultural evolution can proceed based upon speculation alone.

Why?


Do your magical claims hold up under investigation? Have you checked?

No. Again, science cannot measure spirituality.

Then you must agree that you could not distinguish between a "good god" (or "benevolent spirit" or whatever) and an "evil spirit" or "evil god" or imposter, correct?

Yes, I agree.

Are you being silly or do you actually believe that all of the thousands of “gods� actually exist? If the latter, kindly expand on that subject. If the former that is not ethical debate.

Are you recruiting, promoting, soliciting or proselytizing?

No... and I find it offensive you have suggested that. Why are you asking me to "kindly expand on the subject" if you are just going to suggest I'm proselytizing?

What is known as a "self-fulfilling prophesy" is NOT unique to psychics, astrology or religion.

Of course it isn't... it's a term in psychology... hence why I suggested it was an example.

A baseball player saying and believing "I think that I will strike out" is likely to set in motion a series of events that result in "striking out". That can be considered a "self-fulfilling prophesy". Show how that is evidence that "astrology works" for someone.

Someone buys an astrological planner for their sign in 2008, they follow the guide, and selective filtering weeds out the "forecasts" that don't match. So the person thinks hey, this stuff really works! And they rely on these planners to live their lives.

What's an example of the way "psychics" work for people? Seeing a psychic can be the same thing as seeing a psychologist - are psychics not at least a little knowledgable about psychology after all? Psychics can provide advice, comfort, reassurance, everything. Sounds like it works pretty well to me.

I suggest that "true for them" indicates nothing more than personal perception or opinion.

Yes.

Am I required to share your beliefs before the "magic" works or before evidence can be presented? If so, that is the same "argument" presented by Christians when they cannot provide evidence of their magical claims.

Yes.

Do you offer proof that gods are real or that magic "works" in the real world (not just in the opinion of believers)?

How can you prove that magic works and not attribute that to opinion?

If "given", are realities about the real world true for all of us? If so, how can what is "true" for one person about such things be different from that which is "true" for another?

Perception.


I agree that opinions differ. Are you saying that truth is opinion?

Sure - I think it can be. Some people say Gods are not real, others say they are. That truth is decided on opinion, until we know for a fact.

Those things that are private and personal cannot be used to substantiate claims. In my opinion, it is inappropriate to discuss or refer to things that are private and personal in a debate – knowing that they will not or should not be discussed.

Okay, so for the future, I should just gloss over answering personal questions directed at me?


What is the difference between "illusion" (defined as "a misleading image presented to the vision; or something that deceives or misleads intellectually) and "the art of changing consciousness at will"?

Changing consciousness isn't a false image, last I checked. Say you use meditation to resolve inner conflict - break bad habits, lose weight, whatever. How does that correlate to an illusion? If you protest against the use of plastic bags and influence those arounds you, what does that have to do with illusions?

How do you define the latter term?

Using will, intention, to change the world around you, and the world within you.


If the bible is recent, by implication you have reference to many older magical texts. Can you identify such texts and give dates of origin?

Sure. The ancient Egyptians loved magic! I like the Book of the Dead - that's what, c. 1300 B.C.E.?
How about the ancient Semitic text of spells - dating back to third millenium B.C.E.?
Ancient Greece has a lot of magic as well. And let's not forget the epic of Gilgamesh.. and Inanna..

What magic DO you "care for"? Kindly answer in your own words and do not merely cite a web page, book or reference only (as is appropriate in debate). I am not debating a web site. I ask YOU.

Sheesh. You are fiesty! I care for witchcraft, not tricks. It's just like an intricate form of prayer.

When one is skeptical they typically require that claims be substantiated. Do you (or Pagans) do that when claims of "magic" are made?

Yes. Claims made by others within the Pagan community are not made into "beliefs" by the followers. We all believe different things, based on personal experience. That's why we don't have a Bible of sorts.

What tricks are you talking about?
I am talking about whatever "magic" you think you have performed or demonstrated as claimed. You are being less than forthright about what you claim to be able to do.

I really don't understand what you are asking.


There was no suggestion of performing magic on stage. I asked if you were willing to demonstrate your magic abilities before a group that did not share your belief that you can perform magic.

Are you asking if I would be willing or if witches in general do? The Church and School of Wicca frequently has workshops of demonstrating magic to those who do not believe it.


What distinguishes between your "magic" and that of a "magician"?

You fail to show any difference between your "magic" (or "magick") and that performed by "magicians" (or illusionists). Kindly do so.

The so-called "magic" you are referring to is the stereotypical view of witchcraft - related to slight-of-hand stage tricks and whatnot. Magick, however, is finding our connection to Nature, the Earth. Magic is living in the balance - altering our lives to be balanced, to be responsible, to care for ourselves and others. It is changing ourselves in order to change global consciousness.

Magick is realizing that the things we imagine, we have the Power to create.

In what "magic" do you indicate believing?

See above.. although that is a very limited and short description.

If it is "just a belief" and is "not a fact", what distinguishes your magic from imagination?

Imagination has given birth to the things around us, like this computer I'm typing on. It is the first step to creation. So why would it need to be distinguised from imagination?

[Zzyzx]

.

I wasn't aware that was an attempt to "convice others" of my beliefs.

What is your motivation for posting to this forum?

Is your proposed "magic" a form of supernaturalism?

Is the length of time a proposed or imaginary entity has been worshiped by humans verification of truth or existence?

No, but you are mocking ancient cultures' belief systems, comparing them to Santa Claus. Whether or not Gods are imaginary is no reason to compare a beautiful culture's history to something silly.

Comparing ancient cultures' belief systems to Santa Claus may well be insulting Santa, and it is the beliefs that may be silliest (and most damaging).

I am not certain that cultural evolution can proceed based upon speculation alone.

Why?

I am not certain because I have seen no evidence to affirm that cultural evolution can proceed based upon speculation alone. Notice that I said, "I am not certain" and did NOT say "cultural evolution cannot . . ."

Would you care to provide that evidence?

Do your magical claims hold up under investigation? Have you checked?

No.

Thank you. If you have not checked whether your claims of performing magic are true, how can you ethically claim to have performed magic?

Again, science cannot measure spirituality

Science CAN measure CLAIMS made in the name of spirituality. When claims are made that events are influenced by "magic", those claims can be studied to see if there were actual effects AND if all other causes can be eliminated.

Apparently you realize that claims can be scientifically analyzed – and refuse to identify the "magic" that you claim to have performed or to perform magic in public. .

Are you recruiting, promoting, soliciting or proselytizing?

No... and I find it offensive you have suggested that. Why are you asking me to "kindly expand on the subject" if you are just going to suggest I'm proselytizing?

You made a claim in a debate forum. I asked for verification. I made NO suggestion, but asked for evidence of truth. That evidence has not been provided.

What's an example of the way "psychics" work for people? Seeing a psychic can be the same thing as seeing a psychologist - are psychics not at least a little knowledgable about psychology after all? Psychics can provide advice, comfort, reassurance, everything. Sounds like it works pretty well to me.

By the same reasoning telling one's troubles to a bartender can "work" if the bartender offers advice, comfort and reassurance. Correct?

Is that the way "magick" works too?

Am I required to share your beliefs before the "magic" works or before evidence can be presented? If so, that is the same "argument" presented by Christians when they cannot provide evidence of their magical claims.

Yes.

Thank you

You make my case. "Magick" ONLY "works" if a person believes in magic.

Things that are true or factual do not depend upon belief – as jumping from a tall building will demonstrate. No matter what one might believe about not falling the truth is that they will fall.

Do you offer proof that gods are real or that magic "works" in the real world (not just in the opinion of believers)?

How can you prove that magic works and not attribute that to opinion?

1. Predict that you can make something happen using your "magic".
2. Make it happen in full public view.
3. Demonstrate that other possible causes have been negated.
4. Answer critics' criticisms with evidence.

Those things that are private and personal cannot be used to substantiate claims. In my opinion, it is inappropriate to discuss or refer to things that are private and personal in a debate – knowing that they will not or should not be discussed.

Okay, so for the future, I should just gloss over answering personal questions directed at me?

In the future you should NOT make claims that you cannot or will not substantiate with evidence.

What is the difference between "illusion" (defined as "a misleading image presented to the vision; or something that deceives or misleads intellectually) and "the art of changing consciousness at will"?

Changing consciousness isn't a false image, last I checked. Say you use meditation to resolve inner conflict - break bad habits, lose weight, whatever.

Are you claiming that your "magic" (changing consciousness at will) is demonstrated by resolving inner conflict, breaking bad habits, losing weight, etc?

If so, how do you account for the same things happening involving people who do not "do magic"? Has each person who has deliberately lost weight performed "magick"?

How does that correlate to an illusion? If you protest against the use of plastic bags and influence those arounds you, what does that have to do with illusions?

Protesting against use of plastic bags has nothing to do with illusion AND NOTHING to do with "magic" or "magick".

How do you define the latter term? [Referring to "the art of changing consciousness at will"]

Using will, intention, to change the world around you, and the world within you.

How does that differ from "Non-Magical" will or intention to change the world around or within?

If I decide to change something in my environment and do so, have I demonstrated the ability to perform "magic" or "magick"?

Sheesh. You are fiesty! I care for witchcraft, not tricks. It's just like an intricate form of prayer.

I am a realist – who is not easily persuaded by smoke and mirrors. I ask questions that often expose the weakness, misunderstanding or falsity of supernatural claims.

It is interesting that you compare witchcraft to prayer – neither can be shown to produce the results claimed.

When one is skeptical they typically require that claims be substantiated. Do you (or Pagans) do that when claims of "magic" are made?

Yes. Claims made by others within the Pagan community are not made into "beliefs" by the followers. We all believe different things, based on personal experience. That's why we don't have a Bible of sorts.

How does the Pagan community verify that claims made by members are true, actual, literal? Are there tests or investigations into magical claims – or are such claims just accepted as being true without investigation?

What tricks are you talking about?

I am talking about whatever "magic" you think you have performed or demonstrated as claimed. You are being less than forthright about what you claim to be able to do.

I really don't understand what you are asking.

1. You apparently are claiming that you can "do magic".
2. I ask if you have actually done "magic" and can demonstrate having done so.
3. What do you not understand about that very straight-forward question?

There was no suggestion of performing magic on stage. I asked if you were willing to demonstrate your magic abilities before a group that did not share your belief that you can perform magic.

Are you asking if I would be willing or if witches in general do? The Church and School of Wicca frequently has workshops of demonstrating magic to those who do not believe it.

I ask specifically if YOU are willing to demonstrate your magic abilities before a group that does not share your belief that you can perform magic.

What about that question is difficult to understand?

What distinguishes between your "magic" and that of a "magician"?

You fail to show any difference between your "magic" (or "magick") and that performed by "magicians" (or illusionists). Kindly do so.

The so-called "magic" you are referring to is the stereotypical view of witchcraft - related to slight-of-hand stage tricks and whatnot. Magick, however, is finding our connection to Nature, the Earth.

How is "magick" different from naturalism / naturism (which stress connection to nature)?

If I live very close to nature and seek connection to nature, am I performing "magick" or "witchcraft"?

Magic is living in the balance - altering our lives to be balanced, to be responsible, to care for ourselves and others.

What, exactly, is the meaning of "balance" as you use the term?

If I am "responsible" and "care for myself and others" am I performing "magick"?

It is changing ourselves in order to change global consciousness.

How is this "magick" different from any cultural change that involves "consciousness"?

How is this "magick" any different from simply deciding to change something about the self (such as losing weight or learning about a subject or becoming more compassionate)?

Magick is realizing that the things we imagine, we have the Power to create.

If an inventor imagines a device and creates it, has s/he performed "magick" by your definitions?

If it is "just a belief" and is "not a fact", what distinguishes your magic from imagination?

Imagination has given birth to the things around us, like this computer I'm typing on. It is the first step to creation. So why would it need to be distinguised from imagination?

It seems as though you are attempting to hijack imagination and creativity to call them "magick". Those things exist in people who are not Pagans, Wicca's, Supernaturalists, etc – so they are NOT owned by (or exclusive to) witchcraft.