The note on the topic "Which doctor is original" would discuss the concept of originality in the medical field. It would address the ongoing debate surrounding the authenticity and credibility of different types of doctors and health practitioners. In today's healthcare landscape, there are various types of doctors and health practitioners with diverse backgrounds and training. This has led to debates about which doctors can be considered as the "original" or most authentic in terms of medical practice. Traditional medical doctors, also known as allopathic or Western medicine doctors, receive extensive education and training in medical schools. They undergo rigorous medical training, including completing a residency program, to gain comprehensive knowledge and experience in diagnosing and treating various medical conditions.
They undergo rigorous medical training, including completing a residency program, to gain comprehensive knowledge and experience in diagnosing and treating various medical conditions. This traditional medical approach is focused on evidence-based medicine, using pharmaceutical drugs, surgery, and other conventional treatments. On the other hand, alternative medicine practitioners, such as naturopathic doctors, chiropractors, and traditional healers, offer different approaches to healthcare.
Is Ash Wednesday a Pagan Holiday?
Many Christians are starting to question these “religious” holidays that they are having to pay for, which is the normal origin of their questioning. “Why am I paying for this holiday?” “Where did this holiday come from?” Sounds cynical, I’m sure, but that seems to be the order in which these, so called, Christians question whether something is actually biblical or not. Well, I am sorry to inform you but Mardi Gras, Ash Wednesday, Lent AND Easter are all satan worship. I’m sure some of you just spit out your coffee, but sadly it is true. Read to the end of this article and you’ll find the real origin of these. Also, if you’re at all NOT convinced, you have nothing more than to open your own bible and read.
People are going to churches all over the land and getting ashes placed on their foreheads and have no idea what it means, nor where it came from. Nowhere in the Bible does it say any Rabbi or priest put an ash cross on someone’s forehead. Go look it up. It is satanic in origin, as is Lent and Easter. Some people might mistake the message of Christianity in general with the Lent observance of “giving up something” with repentance. The two are not the same. And, if you’re a Christian only during Lent, then what does that say about you? Let’s get to the proof, shall we?
Pagan Origin
The forty days’ abstinence of Lent was directly borrowed from the worshippers of the Babylonian goddess. Such a Lent of forty days, “in the spring of the year,” is still observed by the Yezidis or Pagan Devil-worshippers of Koordistan, who have inherited it from their early masters, the Babylonians. Such a Lent of forty days was held in spring by the Pagan Mexicans, for thus we read in Humboldt, where he gives account of Mexican observances: “Three days after the vernal equinox…began a solemn fast of forty days in honour of the sun.” Such a Lent of forty days was observed in Egypt, as may be seen on consulting Wilkinson’s Egyptians. This Egyptian Lent of forty days, we are informed by Landseer, in his Sabean Researches, was held expressly in commemoration of Adonis or Osiris, the great mediatorial god. At the same time, the rape of Proserpine seems to have been commemorated, and in a similar manner; for Julius Firmicus informs us that, for “forty nights” the “wailing for Proserpine” continued; and from Arnobius we learn that the fast which the Pagans observed, called “Castus” or the “sacred” fast, was, by the Christians in his time, believed to have been primarily in imitation of the long fast of Ceres, when for many days she determinedly refused to eat on account of her “excess of sorrow,” that is, on account of the loss of her daughter Proserpine, when carried away by Pluto…
Among the Pagans this Lent seems to have been an indispensable preliminary to the great annual festival in commemoration of the death and resurrection of Tammuz, which was celebrated by alternate weeping and rejoicing, and which, in many countries, was considerably later than the Christian festival, being observed in Palestine and Assyria in June, therefore called the “month of Tammuz”; in Egypt, about the middle of May, and in Britain, some time in April. To conciliate the Pagans to nominal Christianity, Rome, pursuing its usual policy, took measures to get the Christian and Pagan festivals amalgamated, and, by a complicated but skilful adjustment of the calendar, it was found no difficult matter, in general, to get Paganism and Christianity–now far sunk in idolatry–in this as in so many other things, to shake hands…
Let any one only read the atrocities that were commemorated during the “sacred fast” or Pagan Lent, as described by Arnobius and Clemens Alexandrinus, and surely he must blush for the Christianity of those who, with the full knowledge of all these abominations, “went down to Egypt for help” to stir up the languid devotion of the degenerate Church, and who could find no more excellent way to “revive” it, than by borrowing from so polluted a source; the absurdities and abominations connected with which the early Christian writers had held up to scorn. That Christians should ever think of introducing the Pagan abstinence of Lent was a sign of evil; it showed how low they had sunk, and it was also a cause of evil; it inevitably led to deeper degradation. Originally, even in Rome, Lent, with the preceding revelries of the Carnival, was entirely unknown; and even when fasting before the Christian Pasch was held to be necessary, it was by slow steps that, in this respect, it came to conform with the ritual of Paganism. What may have been the period of fasting in the Roman Church before sitting of the Nicene Council does not very clearly appear, but for a considerable period after that Council, we have distinct evidence that it did not exceed three weeks (Hislop A. Two Babylons. pp. 104-106).
admin 2019-03-11T06:50:12-04:00
These practitioners often emphasize natural therapies, holistic healing, and a focus on preventive medicine. They may utilize techniques like herbal medicine, acupuncture, chiropractic adjustments, or dietary changes to help patients achieve optimal health. The debate about which doctor is the most original stems from differing philosophical foundations and treatment approaches. While some argue that traditional medical doctors are the original and most reliable source of medical care due to their scientific approach and rigorous education, others advocate for the authenticity and effectiveness of alternative or complementary medicine practices. It is important to note that different medical systems have evolved throughout history and across cultures. Each system has its own unique principles and philosophies that shape the way practitioners diagnose and treat illnesses. Determining which doctor is original ultimately depends on one's perspective and personal beliefs about healthcare. In conclusion, the notion of which doctor is original is a complex and subjective topic. There are various types of doctors and health practitioners with different training and approaches to medical care. Rather than focusing on which doctor is the most original, it is important to prioritize patient safety, evidence-based practices, and open-mindedness towards different healthcare options. Ultimately, the goal should be to provide the best possible care and treatments for patients, regardless of the medical system or practitioner involved..
Reviews for "Voodoo and Witchcraft: Tracing the Origins of Witch Doctors"
1. John - 2/5 stars - I was really excited to watch "Witch Doctor Original" as I had heard great things about it. However, I found the movie to be quite underwhelming. The plot was predictable and lacked depth, and the characters felt one-dimensional. The special effects were also subpar, which was disappointing considering the genre. Overall, I feel like the movie had potential but failed to deliver.
2. Sarah - 1/5 stars - "Witch Doctor Original" was a complete waste of time for me. The storyline was confusing and all over the place, making it difficult to follow. The acting was also mediocre at best, with some of the performances feeling forced and unnatural. I was really disappointed with this movie, as I had high hopes going into it. I would not recommend it to anyone.
3. Mike - 2/5 stars - I had expected "Witch Doctor Original" to be a thrilling horror film, but it fell flat for me. The scares were clichéd and lacked originality, making it less impactful. Additionally, the pacing of the movie was off, with certain scenes dragging on while others felt rushed. I was hoping for a more engaging and suspenseful experience, but unfortunately, this movie did not deliver.