Discussion about this post

User's avatar
Unbekoming's avatar

Author's Note

This piece generated strong reactions, particularly from Christian readers who felt their faith was misrepresented. A clarification: this is a summary of Donald Teeter's book and his research into ancient religious practices. A summary is not an endorsement. Teeter traces what he believes are botanical origins of certain religious symbols and ceremonies. Whether you find this compelling, offensive, or somewhere in between depends on what you bring to it.

Neil Pryke warns that this mushroom is "one of the quickest ways to get from this world to the next." Philalethes offers the correction: Amanita muscaria (red with white spots) is not Amanita phalloides (the death cap, which is indeed deadly). Teeter's book addresses this confusion directly—the mushroom literature labels muscaria as "poisonous," but documented fatalities are extremely rare even when consumed fresh in large quantities. The preparation matters enormously.

Benn offers practical ground truth, recommending Amanita Dreamer for safe exploration and noting that microdosing works but requires proper curing and dosing. This is the kind of experiential knowledge that doesn't come from books.

Philalethes raises something worth sitting with: the distinction between mystae (eyes closed), epoptae (eyes opened), and pneumatics in early church classifications. The suggestion that bread and wine remain "symbolic" only to those who haven't encountered the living version is either heresy or insight, depending on your position.

Frank Revelo makes a pragmatic historical point I hadn't considered: Rome needed sober soldiers to defend against barbarian hordes. Replacing the original sacrament with ordinary bread and cheap wine may have been strategic necessity rather than spiritual evolution. Empires run on discipline, not ecstatic states.

To those who found this offensive: I understand. To those who engaged with curiosity rather than certainty: that's all any of us can do.

Thank you for reading.

Immaculata's avatar

“consume the flesh and blood of a god who dies and rises again, and you will become immortal”

That is absolutely not what Christianity says - that would be heresy. I would look carefully and deeply at what you are saying. And the Jesus you speak of: is evidenced in the Shroud of Turin by an atheist and Eucharistic miracles are evidenced by St Carlo Acutis. Why not do a truthful deep dive on that?

We have eternal life because we are made in the image and likeness of God. We are made by God, whether you believe this or not. Immortality is not provided by a substance. It is a symbol, which is then given its nature by God Himself. Hard to believe for a mere mortal.

If we must quote others’ ideology, or make up our own, we should strive to be accurate. Lies are unbecoming to those who have a responsibility to the Truth.

33 more comments...

No posts

Ready for more?