Wiccans are Satanists?

[technomage]

The Accusation

Wiccans are Satanists?

There are some Christians who accuse Wiccans of being Satanists - either stating that we are deceived by Satan to do his work for him 1 or accusing us of being "crypto-Satanists," deceiving others with our claims of innocence. 2 For several years, many Wiccans have attempted to simply disclaim these accusations and carry on. While there is validity in this course of action, it has never effectively refuted the accusations themselves. For this, an examination of the accusation as a whole is necessary.

Roots of the Accusation

The roots of such accusations go deep - deeper, even, than some Wiccans suspect. While many Wiccan sources point to the Medieval and Renaissance accusations as the source of these accusations, the "witch-craze" of the Middle Ages was actually a continuation of earlier Pagan fears and superstitions. 3 Even back in pre-Christian times, "Witches" were the "ultimate outsider," who "strove to tear down society." 4

The direct source for many accusations, however, is Medieval and Renaissance. Here, with the advent of the Malleus Maleficarum, 5 we see some of the "modern" accusations against Witches take a recognizable form, including accusation of orgiastic sex rites, ritual torture and sacrifice of humans and animals, rejection of Christianity, the "Black Mass," and most importantly, a Pact with the Devil that condemns the witch to hell, but allows her power while she lives on Earth. This is not the sum of all accusations against Witches, but it is from these roots that other accusations grow.

And to some extent, this is the fault of Wicca - or, at least, of some Wiccan authors. From the first book published on Wicca, attempts have been made to "prove" that modern Wicca is descended from survivals of a pre-Christian religion. 6 It has long been alleged that the "Witches" killed in Europe and America during the witch-craze of 1450-1750 were our "spiritual ancestors," or were innocents that the Church mistakenly accused while the "real witches" went underground. The historicity of such claims has been discussed elsewhere on my web-site, 7 but it is important to know that the first ones to make the link were Wiccans.

Gardner linked Wicca to these people, asserting that they had "gone into hiding," and that the coven he found - and was initiated into - was one of the last "survivors" of this persecution. But what were we "linking" ourselves to? What are the "Witches" who were burned, hung, pressed with stones, dunked, searched and pricked for marks, and were generally harried from the face of the earth?

Who Are the Witches?

According to the Malleus Maleficarum, witches were evil creatures who committed "high treason against God's majesty," 8 and who enter into a "contract" with the devil. 9 Accusations of specific evils done by witches have varied over the centuries, 10 but in Christian teaching, the core accusation was the pact with the Devil - in the eyes of the Church, it was this act that made the others possible: indeed, Kramer, quoting S. Augustine, states that the Pact between the witch and the devil is the only way to make a witch. 11 This belief affects the course of Christian teaching concerning witchcraft to this day.

What has this to do with Wicca today? It is very possible that, by attempting to claim a connection with medieval witches, modern Wicca has done far more to foment these rumors than any Christian source. Gardner, Valiente, et al did borrow concepts and information from sources that could only be considered "literary Satanism," including the Malleus, 12 Jules Michelet's Satanism and Witchcraft, 13 and Charles Leland's Aradia. 14 But they also borrowed from other sources, including Freemasonry and Co-Masonry, 15 Naturalism, 16 Ceremonial Magic, 17 and perhaps the Woodcraft lodges 18 and the Ancient Druid Order. 19 (It should be noted that there are a few Wiccans who claim that these organizations either "borrowed" these concepts from Wicca/Witchcraft, or developed them independently.)

It is true, modern Wiccans do not have the same religions those who were called "witches" by Medieval, Renaissance, and Colonial witch-hunters. It is also very true that modern Wiccans cannot point to the texts of Gardner to establish this fact. Therefore, we must look elsewhere for a defense.

Defense Against the Accusations.

One of the largest problems with differentiating Wicca from Satanism is defining the terms. There are some Christians who say that "ALL pagan religions are controlled by Satan," and use Matthew 12:30 as the justification. There are some who believe that we are not Satanists, but are wrong - deceived by Satan, or by our own "sinful nature" 20 - and use Galatians 5:19 as the justification. On the other hand, the most commonly accepted definition of Satanism is much simpler - one who worships Satan, or a member of the Church of Satan. Even here, it is still possible to get into some confusion, as the two groups are mutually exclusive. One who worships Satan (also called Theistic Satanists, or Diabolists) believes in an actual entity called Lucifer, the enemy of Jehovah, and renders worship to that entity; members of the Church of Satan believe in no gods, demons, or spirits, and the closest they come to worshipping anything is their doctrine that Satanism is "as complete indulgence of the Self". 21

In and of itself, Wiccans do not hold with Satanism, whether you define it as the Church of Satan does, or as Diabolists do. Wicca does believe in giving honor to the Gods, but Wiccans do not believe that their God and Goddess are "opposed" to the Christian God. Wicca also does not believe in "complete indulgence of the Self," and while enlightened self-interest is important, we do not strive to do so without regard to the cost to others. 22

But what about the Satanists, and their views? Indeed, the Church of Satan and other "Satanic" organizations have been fairly scathing of Wicca, saying that Wicca encourages "complacency, hypocrisy, prejudice, and self-righteousness," 23 (It must be admitted that not only are Wiccans frequently just as scathing of Satanists as they are of us, but that we started this mutual game of "The Dozens" with our attempts to distance ourselves from Satanism.)

A corollary from the Christian scriptures comes to mind: when Jesus is accused of casting out devils by the power of devils, He is quoted as saying "A house divided against itself cannot stand." If Wiccans and Satanists (of either LaVeyan or Diabolist varieties) are, indeed, the same (or similar) as some Christians claim, then considering the mutual acrimony of many in the groups, one would think that the Christians have little to worry about.

Reasons for the Accusations

In part, this accusation seems, to the author, to be based in fear - fear that Wiccans or Satanists will somehow uproot the Christian way of life. Part of the problem is a lack of differentiation. By the logic of some Christians, if we are Satanists. (Back to Mat. 12:30 and Gal 5:19) then we must do all of the "things that the Satanists do." This lack of differentiation between what each group does, and what some Christians believe that we do, leads to some of the other stories discussed in this section, such as "Wiccans use human and animal sacrifice in their rituals," or that "Wiccans reject Christ and Christianity."

But there are factors of the accusations that point to other reasons, and one that needs to be seriously considered is control - a type of control that some Wiccans might call "power-over." 24 The original accusations in the Malleus were made to establish not only the existence and presumed "evil" of witches, but was also an argument that the Church were the only people capable of trying witches. In a similar vein, many of the new accusations seem to be motivated by Christian groups who are either attempting to influence legislative process, 25 or to gain influence with other Christian churches and organizations. It is also possible that some of the witch-hunting was used for the more sordid purpose of personal financial gain. 26

Fear and control - these are certainly not complementary motivations, and it is only with much consideration that the author has mentioned them. Even at that, they are only mentioned as possible reasons for these accusations, and not as definite "proof" of a Christian conspiracy to wipe out Wicca. But since the possibility does exist, it becomes even more imperative to refute the accusations.

Refuting the Accusations

This is precisely where any such refutation breaks down. If there are Christians who make these accusations who honestly believe them, then they have only to say that we, as Wiccans, are lying when we deny that we are Satanists. 27 If there are some so-called Christians who do not believe their own accusations, but make them as "propaganda," as part of a campaign to gain some form of "power-over," then they have already lied to make the accusations; nothing prevents them from continuing the lies to defend them.

But if there are people - for whatever the differences in faith, Christians are also people - who honestly fear Wiccans, and who honestly fear that we are Satanists, there may be some hope of communication, and of relieving that fear. The most effective way to do so is to speak and act in a manner that will let them know that Wiccans are not fearsome antagonists, that we do not strive for the destruction or overthrow of their way of life. Come to think of it, neither do the Satanists, but that's another issue entirely.

Regardless of the responses used, it should be realized that most Christians will never agree that Wicca is "good." Those Christians who say that Wicca is "evil" may not have the option of deciding otherwise - their scriptures state (Deu 18:10) that witchcraft (and therefore, presumably, Wicca) have no place in their society.
To refute this accusation, the author can only respond thus: "I do not worship Satan." The reader may - indeed, must - interpret that statement as they choose.

[technomage]

Works Cited

Church of Satan official website: www.coscentral.com (http://www.coscentral.com/)

Gardner, Gerald B. Witchcraft Today. (New York: Citadel Press, 1955)

Gardner, Gerald B. The Meaning of Witchcraft. (New York: Samuel Weiser, 1959)

Gibbons, Jenny. "Recent Developments in the Study of The Great European Witch Hunt." Privately published on the Internet at http://www.cog.org/witch_hunt.html

Greer, John Michael and Gordon Cooper, "The Red God: Woodcraft and the Origins of Wicca," Gnosis: A Journal of the Western Inner Traditions, Issue 48 [Get reference and make link]

Haviland, William. Cultural Anthropology. (Fort Worth: Harcourt College Publishers, 1999)

Hutton, Ronald. The Triumph of the Moon. (London: Oxford 1999?)

Leland, Charles G. Aradia, or the Gospel of the Witches. (London: David Nutt, 1899) Reprinted on the Internet at www.sacredtexts.com (http://www.sacredtexts.com/)

Kramer, Heinrich and James Sprenger. Malleus Maleficarum. Originally published in 1486, no publication information. The Malleus has been published on the web at www.malleusmaleficarum.org (http://www.malleusmaleficarum.org/).

Michelet, Jules. Satanism and Witchcraft: The Classic Study of Medieval Superstition. Publication information unavailable.

Schnoebelen, William. Wicca: Satan's Little White Lie.

"Survivor Speaks, A." Author unknown. Quoted on the Internet at http://www.omphalos.net/files/anti/anne01.html.

Footnotes:

1: Examples of Christians who believe we are deceived include William Schnoebelen (Wicca: Satan's Little White Lie, ); "Dave and Angel" (see http://www.exposingsatanism.org/witchcraft.htm and http://www.daveandangel.com/CRN/Questions_and_Answers_About_Wicca.html); Al Denson of Cutting Edge Youth Ministry ( see http://www.ceym.org/cf14.html); and Steve Russo (see http://www.briomag.com/briomagazine/spiritualhealth/a0002284.html). The reader should note that this is not an exhaustive list, but is a brief survey of sites currently available on the Internet.

2: Examples of Christians who believe we are lying include Tammy Ritchie (http://www.sounddoctrine.com/ptimes/, no longer on-line); Cohen Reckart (see http://www.acjc.org/acjc/halloween.htm and http://jesus-messiah.com/apologetics/wcraft/run.html); and Steve Van Natten (Mr. Van Natten had an essay at http://www.balaams-ass.com/journal/warnings/cabot.htm which stated that people could not be genuine witches "unless she has sacrificed animal minimum [sic] to Satan or Lucifer. That is a fact well known to the Craft, and they hate for this story to be exposed." This essay is no longer on line, but is still being published in a subscription-only CD-ROM.)


3: While the author knows of no current peer-reviewed works on this topic, he is currently engaged in research on this hypothesis.

4: Anthropological definitions of witch-craft tend to indicate that some cultures include the concept of "nightmare witches," where "the nightmare witch is the very embodiment of a society's conception of evil." Please see Haviland, Cultural Anthropology, pp 398-404.

5: The Malleus was first published in 1486, and was intended to be used as a "guidebook" for Inquisitors. It was rejected by the Church for official use. ("Actually the Inquisition immediately rejected the legal procedures Kramer recommended and censured the inquisitor himself just a few years after the Malleus was published. Secular courts, not inquisitorial ones, resorted to the Malleus": see Gibbons, "Recent Developments...." http://www.cog.org/witch_hunt.html)


6: The pre-Christian origin of Wicca was one of the main theses of Gardner's Witchcraft Today, but this thesis was not explicitly stated until the publication of his second book: see Gardner, The Meaning of Witchcraft, p 9.


7: This note refers to "Wiccan History and History Myth", a work by Justin Eiler / Earthstar Tradition, currently in progress.


8: Malleus Maleficarum, Part I, Question I, Page 2, http://www.malleusmaleficarum.org/part_I/mm01_01b.html.


9: "It is necessary that there should be made a contract with the devil, by which contract the witch truly and actually binds herself to be the servant of the devil and devotes herself to the devil." Malleus, Part I, Question I, Page 2, http://www.malleusmaleficarum.org/part_I/mm01_01b.html.


10: (This note refers to "Witch Accusations: Modern and Ancient," a work in progress.)


11: "The abomination of witchcraft arose from this foul connexion of mankind with the devil." Malleus, Part I, Question II, Page 3, http://www.malleusmaleficarum.org/part_I/mm01_02c.html.

12: Gardner made much of the Church accounts of Sabbats, both as printed in the Malleus and as popularized by Margaret Murray. See Gardner's Witchcraft Today and The Meaning of Witchcraft, passim.

13: I used to have complete documentation of several points that were referenced from Michelet's book, but no longer have that file, and I do not currently own a copy of Gardner's books to reconstruct the list. When I can, I will re-create the list.


14: Including the Charge of the Goddess - see Witchcraft Today, p 42, and Aradia, Chapter 1.

15: Including the concept of 3 Degrees, and the ritual phrases of "Merry meet, Merry Part, and Merry Meet Again" and "So Mote It Be."


16: Gardner was, himself, a Naturalist, and it is by his influence that nudity gained such importance in Wiccan ritual.

17: Including the concept of working within a circle - though for different reasons than most Ceremonial magicians. See Witchcraft Today, p 46.

18: See Greer, John Michael and Gordon Cooper, "The Red God: Woodcraft and the Origins of Wicca," "Gnosis: A Journal of the Western Inner Traditions", Issue 48. See http://www.lumen.org/issue_contents/contents48.html for information on obtaining this article.


19: See Hutton, Ronald. Triumph of the Moon. Oxford Press. 1999. [Page cite].

20: Schnoebellen, William. Wicca: Satan's Little White Lie. (Chick Publications. Ontario, California.) Quoted from http://www.chick.com/reading/books/179/179intro.asp.

21: Condensed from http://www.churchofsatan.com/, an unofficial website related to the Church of Satan. The reader should be warned, however, that defining CoS Satanism as "Complete indulgence of the Self" is a gross oversimplification.


22: In Laveyist Satanism, there is no evil in putting your needs before others - indeed, this is commendable, because by doing so you express a greater awareness of your own predatory animal nature. In Laveyist philosophy, to put the needs of others before yourself is foolish, and the concept of "selfless sacrifice" is idiocy.


23: Blanche Barton, "From Our High Priestess". Quoted from http://www.churchofsatan.com/, an unofficial website related to the Church of Satan, http://www.churchofsatan.com/Pages/BBWelcome.html.


24: The concept of "power-over" indicates that one person is attempting to usurp or negate another person's autonomy. This is not "lawful" authority, but domination.


25: One example is the testimony of "Anne," given in front of the Idaho state legislature in 1990. Please see http://www.omphalos.net/files/anti/anne01.html.

26: Such as may have been the case with Mike Warnke. Please see http://www.cornerstonemag.com/features/iss098/sellingsatan.htm.

27: This note refers to Apologia: "Wiccans lie to cover their heinous activities?", also on my web-site.

[Jillyn'Toast]

Hm... that was pretty interesting.

I wouldn't have even thought to connect Wicca with Satanism. I thought the title was a joke at first, lol. From what I've read, including the Satanic Bible, I don't think Satanism sounds anything like Wicca. Admitted, I only know about the Leveyan type of Satanism and not much about Wicca at all... but Satanism is a sort of way to get around having moral accountability. They believe in the same God as Christianity, they just think he's cruel, prudish, controlling and unjust. I think it's in their statements of faith that they say God stands for abstinance and self deprivation, while Satan stands for indulgence and acceptance. I don't think they really even believe in Satan, they chose him as more of a mascot, since Satan is usually taken to be the opposite or arch nemesis of God. It's sort of like trying to be as opposite of Christianity as it can. Really, I've known a lot of nice Satanists. They were nice people, good personalities, just a little bitter and had misguided morals. I can't say thats all Satanists, but thats the ones I've known. Moving on...

Why would anyone say that Wicca qualifies as that? I guess it doesn't hold well...

I don't think that choices are made with the influence of either God or Satan exclusively. I think humans have a free will completely unique to themselves. Of course God and Satan can influence that free will, no denying that, but the choice is all ours. I think "the devil made me do it" argument is quite off.

And following that same line of thought... if everything thats not inherently Christian is a cohort to the Devil in some way, would that make Islam of the devil as well? What about Judaisism? Are religions the only things that qualify? What about corporations? Is Mattel of the devil? What about Ebay?

Anyway... I guess reading that just made me want to rant :tongue: sorry.

[Timothy Leary]

From what I've read, including the Satanic Bible,

Wait a sec - such a thing really exists? I'd read a few lines claiming to be from one, but they were all sarcastic jokes.

And following that same line of thought... if everything thats not inherently Christian is a cohort to the Devil in some way, would that make Islam of the devil as well?

That claim has been made in by persons posting in the Islam forum of this board.

What about Judaisism? That's been claimed before. In fact, there are some people who think we sacrifice Gentile children and use their blood during passover. Crazy, eh?

[technomage]

I wouldn't have even thought to connect Wicca with Satanism.
It's an accusation that started flying around in the late 1970s-early 1980s, and has become ... well, less common, if not totally uncommon. There are some similarities to the "Blood Libel" that Christians have applied to Jews, heretics, and Witches in the Medieval and Renaissance times, and is a remnant of those accusations.

[/quote]They believe in the same God as Christianity, they just think he's cruel, prudish, controlling and unjust.[/quote]
Well, not exactly. LaVeyist Satanists don't believe that God exists--at all. They do, however, believe that the Church has pushed the idea of "God" to enforce morals--or, from their point of view, the Church is "cruel, prudish, controlling and unjust."

And following that same line of thought... if everything thats not inherently Christian is a cohort to the Devil in some way, would that make Islam of the devil as well? What about Judaisism?


Are religions the only things that qualify? What about corporations? Is Mattel of the devil? What about Ebay?
Ebay, probably not. Mattel's questionable. The one you have to really watch out for is Micro$oft. Hey, did you know that if you play a Windows CD backwards, it plays Satanic music? Which is almost as bad as when you install the program normally....

[/quote]Anyway... I guess reading that just made me want to rant :tongue: sorry.[/QUOTE]
Dear lady, be welcome to rant in my threads whenever. :lol:

Justin

[technomage]

Wait a sec - such a thing really exists? I'd read a few lines claiming to be from one, but they were all sarcastic jokes.
Nope ... the one by Anton LaVey is the real thing. Basically, it's six parts shock value to one part self-indulgence, with a splash of occultism.

That's been claimed before. In fact, there are some people who think we sacrifice Gentile children and use their blood during passover. Crazy, eh?
:shrug: We've been accused of the same for our Sabbats ... but as far as I'm concerned, you've got a lot more reason to complain. We've only put up with it for a few decades: the Jews have gotten kicked around by so-called "Christians" at least since the days of Justin Martyr.

Justin

[kiwimac]

Not just Jews or Muslims or Witches, I'm afraid. May the Good Lord help you if your the WRONG flavour of Christian.

Kiwimac

[Minnesota]

I had a half hour conversation with LaVey some years ago. He's as full of himself (pretty much all act, in my opinion) as his book is a piece of invented fantasy. But I do give him credit for pulling it off as well as he has. Do I think he really believes in and exhorts Satan? Nope. It's pretty much "Let's Pretend" (like, for profit).

[savedbygrace]

In fact, there are some people who think we sacrifice Gentile children and use their blood during passover. Crazy, eh?
yes, very crazy, seeing how Christianity's origins start in Judaism... :twitch:

[James Peter]

And following that same line of thought... if everything thats not inherently Christian is a cohort to the Devil in some way, would that make Islam of the devil as well? What about Judaisism? Are religions the only things that qualify? What about corporations? Is Mattel of the devil? What about Ebay?


Where the line should be drawn but to be honest, yes. All religions except Christianity (and by that I mean genuine discipleship of Jesus Christ) are lies and deceptions conceived by the devil, satan, lucifer...whatever you want to call him.

If "nobody comes to the Father except through the Son" then all other religions are false and as such cannot come from the Father but much instead come from the "Father of Lies who has been lying since the beginning".

Whilst saying that Wicca is directly worshipping satan and is in that sense satanism is grossly ignorant what Wicca is it worshipping and using the "gods of this world" (aka demons). In a way worshipping and communing with such fallen angels is setting yourself up against God in rebellion and as such is following Satan.

As for corporations and such...many would be a pretty good front for the "principalities and powers".

[technomage]

Greetings, James,

All religions except Christianity (and by that I mean genuine discipleship of Jesus Christ) are lies and deceptions conceived by the devil, satan, lucifer...whatever you want to call him.

If "nobody comes to the Father except through the Son" then all other religions are false and as such cannot come from the Father but much instead come from the "Father of Lies who has been lying since the beginning".

Whilst saying that Wicca is directly worshipping satan and is in that sense satanism is grossly ignorant what Wicca is it worshipping and using the "gods of this world" (aka demons). In a way worshipping and communing with such fallen angels is setting yourself up against God in rebellion and as such is following Satan.

So, there is nowhere that a religion could have come from simple human error, without the intervention of this Satan?

Then how do you account for those who are non-Christian, but who still manifest the "Fruits of the Spirit," as discussed in Gal 5:22-23. And I fear I would have to reject any arguments that these are "false fruits," based on Matt 7:17-18.

Justin

[Heathen Dawn]

All religions except Christianity (and by that I mean genuine discipleship of Jesus Christ) are lies and deceptions conceived by the devil, satan, lucifer...whatever you want to call him.

If "nobody comes to the Father except through the Son" then all other religions are false and as such cannot come from the Father but much instead come from the "Father of Lies who has been lying since the beginning".

Whilst saying that Wicca is directly worshipping satan and is in that sense satanism is grossly ignorant what Wicca is it worshipping and using the "gods of this world" (aka demons). In a way worshipping and communing with such fallen angels is setting yourself up against God in rebellion and as such is following Satan.

Nice sermon, my friend, but you are mistaken.

[James Peter]

So, there is nowhere that a religion could have come from simple human error, without the intervention of this Satan?

Well ultimately all human error comes from rebellion against God which is a result of "the intervention of this Satan". A lot of it comes down to how you view freewill, outside influences, etc. No decision comes purely from inside us, we are shaped by our experiences of the world and so whilst I wouldn't argue that every deception has its direct causal root in the Father of Lies I think I would maintain that ultimately he is the root of them. He is, afterall, the 'Prince of this World'.

Then how do you account for those who are non-Christian, but who still manifest the "Fruits of the Spirit," as discussed in Gal 5:22-23. And I fear I would have to reject any arguments that these are "false fruits," based on Matt 7:17-18.


Okay I'll do my best to deal with this.

The contrast is set up, flesh against spirit in an almost classical dualism of 'good' versus 'evil':

"fornication, impurity, licentiousness, idolatory, sorcery, enmities, strife, jealousy, anger, quarrels, dissensions, factions, envy, drunkenness, carousing" against "love, joy, peace, patience, kindness, generosity, faithfulness, gentleness, and self-control".

Bearing good fruit doesn't just mean having the 'positive' attributes from that list it also requires not having the negative aspects, because "those who belong to Christ Jesus have crucified the flesh with its passions and desires".

Of course looking down that list you will find an awful lot of things shouldn't be in the Church which are in fact found within the 'church'. Enough that it would pretty much demolish the argument I'm making unless I make it explicit that I believe that where the flesh has not been crucified I would question if the Spirit of God is...afterall the passage you cited in Matthew leads on to point out that many who claim to know the Lord actually are not known by Him in return.

I don't know how convincing you're going to find that but in my mind if there was somebody who bore all of the good fruits without commiting say idolatory (as something which is relevant to this topic) then there would be an issue to deal with. In fact there is the entire issue of those who have never heard the gospel at all and all the complications which arise out of that but we're sticking to a modern, western arena where that isn't really a factor.

[technomage]

Well answered, James. :thumb:

I will say that I believe that Christianity is in error on several respects, but I also have to acknowledge that my own Wicca is also in error on those same respects. To my view (a view that I know you will not be able to agree with), both doctrines are human inventions.

However, while acknowledging the errors, I also state that there is much that is admirable within Christianity. I wish that Christianity could acknowledge the admirable facets of other paths ... but I also know that such is not to be. However, the main purpose of these threads is to offer the information to Christians who wish to oppose Wicca of what we really stand for, rather than what some "Christian" books have said that we stand for. I am glad to see that you're already aware of the distinctions there.

Oh, and by the way--welcome to TWeb!

Justin

[Heathen Dawn]

However, while acknowledging the errors, I also state that there is much that is admirable within Christianity.

Almost everything except the fire-insurance policy (aka gospel).

[technomage]

Almost everything except the fire-insurance policy (aka gospel).

Hmmm... HD, I can't even grouse about that too much. As an outgrowth of Jewish theology, Neo-Platonic philosophy, and the Apocalyptic tenor of the times it originated in, it's done remarkably well ... so long as it was seen as a religion, and not as a political power.

In some respect, the Constantine's Edict of Tolerance was the worst possible thing to ever happen to Christianity, and it's all been downhill from there.

Justin

[steamer]

Where the line should be drawn but to be honest, yes. All religions except Christianity (and by that I mean genuine discipleship of Jesus Christ) are lies and deceptions conceived by the devil, satan, lucifer...whatever you want to call him.

Hmm, by this standard your god is inept as most of the world disbelieves in Yahweh. Perhaps an actual omni-being might have been able to do slightly better. Have you ever considered that your god might not exist as something other than only internal to your brain?


If "nobody comes to the Father except through the Son" then all other religions are false and as such cannot come from the Father but much instead come from the "Father of Lies who has been lying since the beginning".

Perhaps Yahweh is the father of lies? How would you know the difference? "Hi god, do you lie?" "Nope", "How do I know your not lying?" "You'll have to trust me on that."


Whilst saying that Wicca is directly worshipping satan and is in that sense satanism is grossly ignorant what Wicca is it worshipping and using the "gods of this world" (aka demons). In a way worshipping and communing with such fallen angels is setting yourself up against God in rebellion and as such is following Satan.

Hmm, this is deep. Satan perverts the true gospel and this young fledgling of Satan accuses others of following Satan...What is Satan's plan here but to try to get those who disbelieve in Satan's perversion to follow it. I'm sorry Jimmy P. We have enough of what your selling here already, sell crazy somewhere else.


As for corporations and such...many would be a pretty good front for the "principalities and powers".

Hi Jimmy, aren't you the lucky one being self employed and all.

[Durthorin]

Evil satanic corporations.......hmmmmmm

Microsoft.

Brighid Bless, Dur

[Warcraft3]

Nice sermon, my friend, but you are mistaken.

You sure did pack alot of thought and good arguements into that one liner :thumb:

Keep up the excellent replies :wink:

[James Peter]

I will say that I believe that Christianity is in error on several respects, but I also have to acknowledge that my own Wicca is also in error on those same respects. To my view (a view that I know you will not be able to agree with), both doctrines are human inventions.

Of course on that last point I am naturally going to disagree with you but on the first I won't. 'Christianity', if taken to be what is lived out by the majority of 'Christians' around the world is in error. I won't go into details and please don't think I am saying that I am perfect but Christianity in theory is – just humans have a way of messing things up.

I wish that Christianity could acknowledge the admirable facets of other paths

Again I'll freely admit that many other religions have admirable facets but the problem is that they all fall down on the key point. Can they lead to justification before God on the last day? The answer is no (biblically at least). Thats what really matters and thats what outweighs all the other factors.

Almost everything except the fire-insurance policy (aka gospel).

Considering the gospel is Christianity...”Jesus heals and Jesus saves – everything else is just details” as a friend of mine once said. Yes, believing in the gospel has consequences for how we live our lives but “Christ Crucified” is the heart of Christianity.

Hmm, by this standard your god is inept as most of the world disbelieves in Yahweh. Perhaps an actual omni-being might have been able to do slightly better.

I guess it depends on whether you think God just wanted everyone to believe in Him or not. If that was the case then He could have made Himself much more 'obvious'. Alternatively you can stop thinking in terms of this world being the actual purpose of creation – heaven isn't simply candy to offer people in return for them being 'good' it is actually the entire point of everything. Think about the classical dilemna of why God didn't simply create a perfect world where everybody is, well, perfect. The general argument taken is that it must be better for creatures to have free will than not to and to simply be automata(so if you don't believe in FW this argument has no merit at all). The way things are everyone who is in the 'new heaven and new earth' has freely chosen to love and worship God. You end up with a perfect world where everyone also has free will. This world, then, is simply transient and what occurs here is dwarfed by what the consequences in the rest of eternity are.(Whilst here my position is unorthodox I think it can be sustained although this isn't the place to argue it.)

Have you ever considered that your god might not exist as something other than only internal to your brain? Perhaps Yahweh is the father of lies? How would you know the difference? "Hi god, do you lie?" "Nope", "How do I know your not lying?" "You'll have to trust me on that."

Yes I have. I'm not just a blind, brainwashed idiot...honest. :wink:

Its a very valid question though and the answer is this: I've seen things which leave no explanation other than the supernatural. Once the supernatural is acknowledged to exist the question is then what form does it take? I have witnessed that the 'name of Jesus' does have dominion over every other name. I've seen 'God' act perfectly as the bible describes Him. Is it possible that YHWH is simply the strongest of many 'gods'? Perhaps, although if He is then he is the strongest by such a margin that the others can hardly be compared to Him. Its not that the other 'gods' don't have power but simply that their power is limited by His. Additionally I always found polytheism's definition of a 'god' to be rather lacking. Monotheism makes sense (as does Atheism theoretically) but I do not believe that the 'gods' of polytheism should be described as 'gods'. Just semantics maybe though.

Hi Jimmy, aren't you the lucky one being self employed and all.

A few points.

1)I didn't say that all corporations were 'evil', or even that any specific ones were. However if you consider how many people suffer and die each day as a direct result of the greed of such corporations you don't need to have any religious convictions to describe them as 'bad'.
2)I never expressed an opinion about how we should deal with such organisations or about the status of individuals within the organisations. It is upto the individual's conscience whether they are comfortable taking a paycheck earnt at the expense of others' suffering. In all honesty though our entire lifestyles are built on the poverty of others and so even those who don't work directly for such corporations still share in their guilt.
3)I'd prefer you not to call my Jimmy please, its just a pet peeve of mine. James is shorter than Jimmy so whats the point? JP is fine just not Jim or Jimmy please. :thumb:

Long post, I hope I dealt with everything you all raised though.

[Heathen Dawn]

Considering the gospel is Christianity…“Jesus heals and Jesus saves – everything else is just details” as a friend of mine once said. Yes, believing in the gospel has consequences for how we live our lives but “Christ Crucified” is the heart of Christianity.

If the gospel (a misnomer, since it is bad news, not good), that fire-insurance scheme, that Mafia-like protection racket, is the heart of Christianity, then Christianity is a pitiable religion indeed. If the heart of Christianity is the afterlife claim that its adherents go to heaven while nonadherents go to hell, then it is no better off than Islam, which claims the same, or much less Buddhism, which brings a promise for the here and now. A religion whose heart is the afterlife, where no-one can go to check and then come back to report, verifying and falsifying, is the worst form of charlatanism.

The heart of Christianity is 1 Corinthians 13 and the personal relationship with God. That is a heart worthy of commendment. The gospel of the heaven-carrot and hell-stick is a common and lowly religious commodity; love and relationship, on the other hand, have no price and are rare to find.

[James Peter]

If the gospel (a misnomer, since it is bad news, not good), that fire-insurance scheme, that Mafia-like protection racket, is the heart of Christianity, then Christianity is a pitiable religion indeed. If the heart of Christianity is the afterlife claim that its adherents go to heaven while nonadherents go to hell, then it is no better off than Islam, which claims the same, or much less Buddhism, which brings a promise for the here and now. A religion whose heart is the afterlife, where no-one can go to check and then come back to report, verifying and falsifying, is the worst form of charlatanism.

You are misunderstanding what the gospel is. The good news isn't that we are going to face judgement, that was nothing new. The good news was that because of Christ's atoning death we could be found righteous at that judgement. That the God who created the heavens and the earth had chosen to come, live and die Himself so that we can be made righteous and justified - not just on the Last Day but from this day until forever. Everything else comes out of the fact that through the Cross we can be restored to the place in creation that we were created for, to be able to walk with the Father instead of in rebellion against Him.

[Heathen Dawn]

You are misunderstanding what the gospel is.

No, you are. You’re only looking at the little good news there is, and overlooking entirely the humongous bad news. The good news is that anyone who accepts Jesus as Lord and Saviour will be saved from hell. The bad news is that the majority of mankind won’t do so and will end up in hell.

Of course I don’t believe all this yang, but I stand by my statement that the word “gospel” is a misnomer, deceptive advertising.

[James Peter]

No, because that was already accepted as being fact within Judaism. The concept of Judgement did not come from Jesus or the Apostles, it comes from the Law and the Prophets originally. You are viewing the gospel as 'Christianity' as it is seen today, the complete message. I'm seeing the gospel in the terms that Jesus and Paul saw it. The gospel was the new, saving covenant which dealt with a problem that already existed and had nothing to do with the consequences for those who chose not to believe it. Rejecting the gospel left you no worse off than you were before you heard it, you were already fallen and seperated from God trying to find atonement through the Law. The gospel was simply "there is another way".

[steamer]

I guess it depends on whether you think God just wanted everyone to believe in Him or not. If that was the case then He could have made Himself much more 'obvious'. Alternatively you can stop thinking in terms of this world being the actual purpose of creation – heaven isn't simply candy to offer people in return for them being 'good' it is actually the entire point of everything. Think about the classical dilemna of why God didn't simply create a perfect world where everybody is, well, perfect. The general argument taken is that it must be better for creatures to have free will than not to and to simply be automata(so if you don't believe in FW this argument has no merit at all). The way things are everyone who is in the 'new heaven and new earth' has freely chosen to love and worship God. You end up with a perfect world where everyone also has free will. This world, then, is simply transient and what occurs here is dwarfed by what the consequences in the rest of eternity are.(Whilst here my position is unorthodox I think it can be sustained although this isn't the place to argue it.)

I do think that if there are to be consequences based on the the knowledge of an actually existent god then god must allow his existence to be known. Since he has not done so, there is an opportunity to develop an informed opinion that he does not exist. Since there is no free will to choose to be with a non-existent god, the analogy and the method fails.


Yes I have. I'm not just a blind, brainwashed idiot...honest.

Its a very valid question though and the answer is this: I've seen things which leave no explanation other than the supernatural. Once the supernatural is acknowledged to exist the question is then what form does it take? I have witnessed that the 'name of Jesus' does have dominion over every other name. I've seen 'God' act perfectly as the bible describes Him. Is it possible that YHWH is simply the strongest of many 'gods'? Perhaps, although if He is then he is the strongest by such a margin that the others can hardly be compared to Him. Its not that the other 'gods' don't have power but simply that their power is limited by His. Additionally I always found polytheism's definition of a 'god' to be rather lacking. Monotheism makes sense (as does Atheism theoretically) but I do not believe that the 'gods' of polytheism should be described as 'gods'. Just semantics maybe though.

Both Christians and Wiccans share this belief that they have experiences which leave no explanation other than the supernatural. All ideas are either imagined or perceived. If they are perceived ideas then they come to us from the outside world via our senses. If they do not come from our senses then those ideas are internally generated; they are imagined. I very much doubt that either Christians or Wiccans ever actually experience events which are not explainable by some natural event or process. The event (perceived idea) is linked (imagined idea) to god(s) (imagined idea(s)). This belief is internally generated. Whatever perceivable event occurred the "connection" of that event to the deity of choice is internally generated. As to the name of Jesus having dominion, I doubt that it has dominion over those that do not believe in his divinity, as would probably be the case of those superstitious enough to think they are posessed. For the most part I believe confirmation bias is responsible for god(s) imagined workings in the world. The link between the event and the deity is always an imagined idea. All links between an imagined cause and a perceivable effect are imagined until the cause is actually observed. I can easily attribute any event in my life to Superman if I like. Superman is an imagined idea, but if I get a good parking spot at the mall (perceivable event) I can mentally link (imagined idea) that good occurrence to Superman rather easily.


1)I didn't say that all corporations were 'evil', or even that any specific ones were. However if you consider how many people suffer and die each day as a direct result of the greed of such corporations you don't need to have any religious convictions to describe them as 'bad'.

It's a quibble, but people run corporations. A corporation is no more evil than your car.


2)I never expressed an opinion about how we should deal with such organisations or about the status of individuals within the organisations. It is up to the individual's conscience whether they are comfortable taking a paycheck earnt at the expense of others' suffering. In all honesty though our entire lifestyles are built on the poverty of others and so even those who don't work directly for such corporations still share in their guilt.

Our lifestyles are not built on the poverty of others. Mine isn't anyway. Is this part of the Christian denegration of the current world? How does it help you to ignore the beauty of this world by focusing on the uglyness and the evil. Does this help you to justify building the imaginary world to come in your mind? Does it validate your unwillingness to work on this world? Perhaps you are not doing enough to make the perceivable world better for your children because you are too focused on this other world which probably only exists in your brain.


3)I'd prefer you not to call my Jimmy please, its just a pet peeve of mine. James is shorter than Jimmy so whats the point? JP is fine just not Jim or Jimmy please.


There's already a JP here, you don't want that association, trust me. I will call you Jimmy when you get preachy and James when you're not.

[James Peter]

I do think that if there are to be consequences based on the the knowledge of an actually existent god then god must allow his existence to be known. Since he has not done so, there is an opportunity to develop an informed opinion that he does not exist. Since there is no free will to choose to be with a non-existent god, the analogy and the method fails.

This isn't theplace to deal with you questioning the assumptions that the argument is ultimately built upon. The entire 'problem of evil' is completely irrelevant unless you accept for argument's sake that there actually is a God. Its an aside anyway.

Both Christians and Wiccans share this belief that they have experiences which leave no explanation other than the supernatural. All ideas are either imagined or perceived.

Indeed the vast majority of the world's population has some concept of the supernatural/divine. Only a small minority would agree that it is completely imagined, the question is really what is the nature of the supernatural regions. As this is supposed to be a dialogue between Christians and Wiccans I think its perfectly reasonable to take as an assumption that 'something' exists, as both sides have experiences of it.

I very much doubt that either Christians or Wiccans ever actually experience events which are not explainable by some natural event or process.

You can doubt all you want, once again this isn't the place to take up that argument.

It's a quibble, but people run corporations. A corporation is no more evil than your car.

No, a corporation is no more 'evil' than any other collective of people have the potential to be. If a country can be 'evil' then a corporation can be; if a gang who kidnap children for the use in satanic rituals can be 'evil' then a corporation can be. A corporation is an entity of people not an inanimate object.

Our lifestyles are not built on the poverty of others. Mine isn't anyway. Is this part of the Christian denegration of the current world?

I'm sorry but it is simply fact that the wealth of the West is based upon and completely unsustainable without the poverty of the 'Majority World'. If those who produce the clothes and food we import were paid by the standards that we accept to receive then the prices would be hugely inflated. Our entire economy is based upon cheap imports and entire nations are held in poverty by debt repayments. Those statements have absolutely nothing to do with how I want to portray the world, but are simple economic facts. Pleasant to think about? Of course not. Relevant to the topic? Not really. Still true though.

[steamer]

Indeed the vast majority of the world's population has some concept of the supernatural/divine. Only a small minority would agree that it is completely imagined, the question is really what is the nature of the supernatural regions. As this is supposed to be a dialogue between Christians and Wiccans I think its perfectly reasonable to take as an assumption that 'something' exists, as both sides have experiences of it.

You are correct that the forum is currently theist only. So far I've been allowed to post because there are atheist Wiccans which do not qualify as theist. I think their belief is that it is all symbolic and any "experience" they have is imagined or powered by themselves. I just happen to agree with that idea. You are right though and I will limit my comments here to the questioning side.

[Edit to add]

I don't see the theist only sign here anymore. Is this forum no longer theists only?

[Heathen Dawn]

As this is supposed to be a dialogue between Christians and Wiccans I think its perfectly reasonable to take as an assumption that 'something' exists, as both sides have experiences of it.

Generally speaking this would be a safe assumption, yet there are some Wiccans (perhaps even a sizable minority) who don’t believe in the Gods and Goddesses literally, in any personal divinity as you Christians are used to. They would talk about the Divinity inherent in nature, but this would be pantheistic talk, of the kind that scientists like Albert Einstein and Ursula Goodenough would feel comfortable with. Just so you know there is much diversity in the Wiccan scene, indeed in the neopagan scene as a whole. I’m a literal polytheist, but I can’t deny I’m not the only sort of pagan there is.

[James Peter]

Okay well naturally if I try to address multiple entirely different views which also disagree with each other all that is going to happen is that we get very, very confused. Pantheists I can deal with elsewhere if you want but lets keep the thread vaguely limited so that we can have serious discussion. I guess my view would be that those who view it all as just symbolic are no more 'wiccan' than those christians who view things entirely as symbolic are christian. Of course the pagan scene is diverse, it always has been...so lets just try and get back on topic, which I think was something about me acknowledging that whilst there is a distinction between satanists, those who practice the dark arts and wiccans they are all ultimately related to Satan in that they are all rebellion against the Living and True God etc?

And steamer I'm not asking that you have to be a theist to join in this discussion, simply that you grant that there is some form of supernatural reality...or if you don't want to talk about Wicca in the context of vaguely orthodox christianity that you simply bring whatever you want to say to a more appropriate thread and point me in its directions and I'll address your concerns there.

[Heathen Dawn]

so lets just try and get back on topic, which I think was something about me acknowledging that whilst there is a distinction between satanists, those who practice the dark arts and wiccans they are all ultimately related to Satan in that they are all rebellion against the Living and True God etc?

Well, yes, the term “Satanism” has two meanings this way: a definite religion called Satanism, which is a religion in its own right just as Islam and Buddhism are, and the Christian concept of Satanism which is synonymous with satan-worship. Those are two different things.

The belief that all non-Christians are Satanists (in that sense of satan-worshippers) is nothing but the component of an insecure and wicked creed. The ascription of the divine experiences of non-Christians to demons plunges Christians into an epistemological quagmire. For if we believe that Satan can transform himself to an angel of light, then we can also believe that he can masquerade as the creator of the universe and inspire people to write the Bible. Back atcha!

[James Peter]

The belief that all non-Christians are Satanists (in that sense of satan-worshippers) is nothing but the component of an insecure and wicked creed.

I think 'Satan-followers' would be much more accurate than Satan-worshippers. Everyone who does not submit to Christ and so instead continues to rebel against God is following Satan and also is deceived by Satan. For neither of those statements will you ever hear me appologise because they are just too fundamentally true for me to be able to deny. Its not the result of any creed though, its older than the oldest christian creeds. Its something which I could trace back through the Old Testament if you were really interested in such an illustration. Its something which the gospels and letters clearly reflect. Its as old as the Cross itself.

The ascription of the divine experiences of non-Christians to demons plunges Christians into an epistemological quagmire. For if we believe that Satan can transform himself to an angel of light, then we can also believe that he can masquerade as the creator of the universe and inspire people to write the Bible. Back atcha!

There is no doubt at all that its a difficult situation and that many are deceived, thats not something that I will contest at all. What I will point out though is that the issue is explicitly addressed in Scripture, although if you're going to go for the whole 'well the writers were deceived to' that isn't going to be of much value. All i can say is that the early church saw clear demonstrations of the superiority of Christ and the Name. In a world surrounded by 'false gods' in a much more literal sense than we are today they survived and flourished.

[technomage]

Steamer, I don't remember this specific forum ever being "Theist Only." It's open now, and I hope it remains that way, not only for the reason that you mention (that not all Wiccans or NeoPagans are Theists), but also because to my mind, we may have as much to learn from the Atheists as we do from other Theists.

[InChristAlways]

I think 'Satan-followers' would be much more accurate than Satan-worshippers. Everyone who does not submit to Christ and so instead continues to rebel against God is following Satan and also is deceived by Satan. Hi all. God appears to have "2 hands" in the bible. A right hand of righteousness and a left hand for judgement/testing. As in the story of Job, where satan was symbolically the "left hand" of God and used it as a "testing" for his righteous servant Job, so He also uses it to test those that are His "chosen". God "creates" both evil and peace and unfortunately, while we are here on earth in the "vessels of clay", we must also be strengthend in Jesus in purity and righteousness to gain access to the "heavenly" kingdome prepared for us.
So if anyone is a "satanists" it is only because God Himself allows it, but scripture also says Every Knee will bow to Him in the ages of ages.romans 14:11 For it is written: ["As] I live, says the LORD, Every knee shall bow to Me, And every tongue shall confess to God." 12 So then each of us shall give account of himself to God.

Isaiah 45:6 That they may know from the rising of the sun to its setting That [there is] none besides Me. I [am] the LORD, and [there is] no other; 7 I form the light and create darkness, I make peace and create evil; I, the LORD, do all these [things.']

1 kings:19 Then [Micaiah] said, "Therefore hear the word of the LORD: I saw the LORD sitting on His throne, and all the host of heaven standing by, on His right hand and on His left. 20 "And the LORD said, 'Who will persuade Ahab to go up, that he may fall at Ramoth Gilead?' So one spoke in this manner, and another spoke in that manner. 21 "Then a spirit came forward and stood before the LORD, and said, 'I will persuade him.' 22 "The LORD said to him, 'In what way?' So he said, 'I will go out and be a lying spirit in the mouth of all his prophets.' And the LORD said, 'You shall persuade [him,] and also prevail. Go out and do so.' 23 "Therefore look! The LORD has put a lying spirit in the mouth of all these prophets of yours, and the LORD has declared disaster against you."

May the Spirit of the living God lay His finger of inspiration upon these words that we may be able to see that in all these things the HAND OF GOD was made known. Babylon was a negative force, but listen to what the Lord says about that old heathen tyrant, Nebuchadnezzar: "Behold, I will send and take all the families of the north, says the Lord, and Nebuchadnezzar the king of Babylon, MY SERVANT, and will bring them against this land..." (Jer. 25:9). Here God calls Nebuchadnezzar HIS SERVANT, and in Isa. 45:1 He calls CYRUS, the Persian king, HIS ANOINTED ONE. Do you understand what God was saying? Nebuchadnezzar GOD'S SERVANT, and Cyrus HIS ANOINTED? This could never be according to this day's teaching! but God's Word says so.

[James Peter]

Okay lets deal with those verses one by one?

Isaiah 45:7 the word that the KJV renders 'evil' can also be rendered simply distress, sorrow, trouble etc. Its not so much evil in our modern conception of the term as it is the opposite of peace, which is what is it put in tension against in the verse.

1 Kings 22:19-23 merely reflects that God is truely God - that all the spirits obey him. Remember though that Ahab was being punished and had abandoned the worship of God - so God gave the spirit permission to lead him to the destruction he had chosen and deserved. That the consequence of rebellion against God is death is something that is pretty clear throughout the OT. Once Ahab had repeatedly ignored warning to turn back to God he was led to destruction by the lying spirit, yes. The point is though that he deserved it and was being justly punished.

Whats your point about Cyrus and Nebuchadnezzar? That God used those who were not of Israel to punish Israel? Again it simply shows that God has dominion over everything. A servant of the Lord is simply one who does the Lord's will - and the Lord's will was to rebuke Israel for her unfaithfulness. Does it mean that Nebuchadnezzar was a servant in the same manner that Daniel was? Of course not.

So yes, if your point is that YHWH has dominion over all the spirits and allows them dominion over this world temporarily to bring about His purposes then you're right - but its hardly a shocking revelation.

If your argument is that serving Satan is just the same as serving God then I'm afraid you're stretching things too far. Even though Satan is allowed to be 'the prince of this world' for a short while he is still going to be judged for his actions, pride and rebellion and so will everyone else. Its one thing to marry a whore and adultress like Hosea did at the direct command of the Lord and entirely another to simply be an adulterer. You can't use that as justifications for your actions.

[Geifodd]

Howdy!

My name is Geifodd and I am what is referred to within the Satanist subculture as a theistic Satanist or Luciferian (actually I prefer the good ol' term Diabolator or "Devil worshiper"). Which is to say that, contrary to LaVeyan Satanism, which is atheistic in nature and which revolves around the idea of worshiping yourself as a god, I am a believer in the existence of the Judeo-Christian Devil (whom I also believe to have had many pre-Christian faces), and I religiously worship Him as my god. I shall post a new thread in this section of the board soon containing a quick and general explanation of what people such as myself believe, but for the purposes of this thread I will simply point out that as I as a Satanist do recognize that Wicca and Satanism are not the same religion by any means. I should also point out that I am very respectful of Wiccans, and I hope that I shall be received in the same context.

Thank you all.

Geifodd
Your Friendly Neighborhood Devil Worshiper

[technomage]

Howdy!

My name is Geifodd and I am what is referred to within the Satanist subculture as a theistic Satanist or Luciferian (actually I prefer the good ol' term Diabolator or "Devil worshiper"). Which is to say that, contrary to LaVeyan Satanism, which is atheistic in nature and which revolves around the idea of worshiping yourself as a god, I am a believer in the existence of the Judeo-Christian Devil (whom I also believe to have had many pre-Christian faces), and I religiously worship Him as my god. I shall post a new thread in this section of the board soon containing a quick and general explanation of what people such as myself believe, but for the purposes of this thread I will simply point out that as I as a Satanist do recognize that Wicca and Satanism are not the same religion by any means. I should also point out that I am very respectful of Wiccans, and I hope that I shall be received in the same context.

Thank you all.

Geifodd
Your Friendly Neighborhood Devil Worshiper

Hi, Geifodd, and Welcome!

I for one have a great deal of respect for CoS, ToS, and Theistic worshippers--however, please be aware that my respect is occasionally demonstrated as good-natured insults. You nasty devil-worshipper, you. :hehe:

Welcome to TWeb!

[Geifodd]

Thank you for the welcome, Cup of Mystery! To be true, my sense of humor may be quite similar to your own, so I expect we shall get along nicely. :lol:

I do have one question though; on the main page of this site, under the "Wiccan/NeoPagan" listing, it says "Goat Heads and Harry Potter not allowed." My question is, what's wrong with goat heads and Harry Potter? Do people here take offense at J. K. Rowling's books? I ask because I would like to know beforehand before I offer any opinions about the Harry Potter books, should such become necessary.

Geifodd
Your Friendly Neighborhood Devil Worshiper

[technomage]

I do have one question though; on the main page of this site, under the "Wiccan/NeoPagan" listing, it says "Goat Heads and Harry Potter not allowed." My question is, what's wrong with goat heads and Harry Potter? Do people here take offense at J. K. Rowling's books? I ask because I would like to know beforehand before I offer any opinions about the Harry Potter books, should such become necessary.

Nah--the sub-title is more for humor's sake than anything, as far as I have been able to determine. As for the goat's heads, we can't deny that--we'll lose one of the better Rolling Stones' albums. :em7:

[Bill the Cat]

Thank you for the welcome, Cup of Mystery! To be true, my sense of humor may be quite similar to your own, so I expect we shall get along nicely. :lol:

I do have one question though; on the main page of this site, under the "Wiccan/NeoPagan" listing, it says "Goat Heads and Harry Potter not allowed." My question is, what's wrong with goat heads and Harry Potter? Do people here take offense at J. K. Rowling's books? I ask because I would like to know beforehand before I offer any opinions about the Harry Potter books, should such become necessary.

Geifodd
Your Friendly Neighborhood Devil Worshiper
Geifodd,
It was a witty sub-line for our forum, as we have many others that are there to be light hearted. However, generally speaking, Satanism discussions are to be kept in the Comparative Religion forum, not the Wiccan / Neo-Pagan one. This thread discusses the differences, so you have permission to post in this thread.

Let me or another mod know if you need any assistance.

Bill
:btc3:

[Geifodd]

Geifodd,
It was a witty sub-line for our forum, as we have many others that are there to be light hearted. However, generally speaking, Satanism discussions are to be kept in the Comparative Religion forum, not the Wiccan / Neo-Pagan one. This thread discusses the differences, so you have permission to post in this thread.

Let me or another mod know if you need any assistance.

Bill
:btc3:

Just another quick question: What about the Satanists who consider themselves to be a subcategory of Neo-Paganism? (Such as myself. Wicca is not necessarily the end all/say all of Neo-Paganism. There is such a thing as Dark Paganism, and many Satanists consider themselves to be a variety of Dark Pagan.)

Geifodd
Your Friendly Neighborhood Devil Worshiper

[technomage]

Just another quick question: What about the Satanists who consider themselves to be a subcategory of Neo-Paganism? (Such as myself. Wicca is not necessarily the end all/say all of Neo-Paganism. There is such a thing as Dark Paganism, and many Satanists consider themselves to be a variety of Dark Pagan.)

Note that I'm not a moderator or administrator. I don't even play one on TV.

For my part, I would be a bit confused by someone who believed in/worshipped the Judeo-Christian Devil and classified themselves as Pagan. To the best of my understanding, that's a contradiction in terms.

However, I quite agree that Wicca is not the be-all and end-all of Paganism. I'm honestly not sure that "Dark Paganism" is all that well defined a category, unless one is defining a sub-set of Paganism by non-Pagan (specifically, Christian) standards--which again I would see as a contradiction in terms.

[Geifodd]

Cup of Mystery:

"For my part, I would be a bit confused by someone who believed in/worshipped the Judeo-Christian Devil and classified themselves as Pagan. To the best of my understanding, that's a contradiction in terms."

Not especially. You see, part of the trouble would be that most Satanists, while certainly recognizing and appreciating the Prince of Darkness as a character in Judeo-Christian mythology, also see Him as a multi-faceted entity who has had many pre-Christian forms, and who Himself is not limited to the Judeo-Christian paradigm. I need only direct you to the Temple of Set as a primary example of Satanists who interpret the Prince in a non-J/C fashion. They believe, for instance, that the entity that Christians call "Satan" today is identical to the one that the ancient Kemetians referred to as Set. There are other varieties of Satanist who identify Satan with other pre-Christian deities, such as the Greek Pan and Prometheus. A study upon these deities and their respective influences upon the later Judeo-Christian mythology will reveal how such associations by Satanists are significant, if not completely accurate. (I myself am not sure it is acceptable to identify Satan with earlier deities or not, but I certainly agree that He is not limited to the Judeo-Christian platform, and that He is something far too immensely complicated to be explained away as a mere "fallen angel").

For instance, we agree that Satan is the Enemy of Jehovah -- but the majority of Satanists do not accept that Satan is merely some angel that Jehovah created and that rebelled against Jehovah. Rather, the common consensus is that Satan is really a pre-Christian pagan god of darkness and initiation, which is actually something a bit closer to Zoroastrianism than to Christianity, except without the "God of Evil" business (Satanists see "good" and "evil" as mostly subjective terms that have no real absolutes, but are determined entirely by perception and circumstance). But the fact still remains that a great many Satanists identify themselves as Pagans, and they do not see any inherent contradiction in this. In fact, it has been said that Satanism is at least one tradition that represents a "meeting point" between the pre-Christian pagan cultures and the Judeo-Christian culture.

"However, I quite agree that Wicca is not the be-all and end-all of Paganism. I'm honestly not sure that "Dark Paganism" is all that well defined a category, unless one is defining a sub-set of Paganism by non-Pagan (specifically, Christian) standards--which again I would see as a contradiction in terms."

Actually I was referring to what John Coughlin has written about the subject. John Coughlin himself identifies as a Dark Pagan and not as a Christian. According to Coughlin, Dark Paganism is any variety of Paganism which places special emphasis on the darker deities/powers, as opposed to the "brighter" deities/powers. Naturally Pagans would typically understand that both light and darkness are essential (as do Satanists), but there have been Pagans who some would refer to as "white lighters" or, more insultingly perhaps, "fluff bunnies," who seem to want to ignore the dark side of Nature. John Coughlin and people like him are people who reacted against the "white lighters" by supporting a form of Paganism that places special emphasis on the dark side of Nature. I believe he has written a book about it, but further information about him should be easy enough to find if you run a Google search on him. I would not want to post a link to his website here, as I have been recently informed that this is considered advertisement on this board, and I have no wish to frustrate the moderators.

However, the point to all this is that many Satanists consider themselves to be practicing an earth-based religion, and they consider Lucifer to be a god who is of the dark side of Nature -- therefore they consider themselves Dark Pagans. However, this is certainly not the case with all Satanists, confusingly enough. Also, some Satanists are neither monotheists nor duo-theistists, but polytheists (I myself qualify as a polytheistic Satanist). Therefore, as a polytheistic Satanist, I would qualify more for the term Pagan than a Satanist who either believes (1) that Satan is the one and only true God, or (2) that Satan and Jehovah are the only two deities that exist. (And both of these viewpoints exist within theistic Satanism.)

[bandecoot]

Hey Frog boy!

I have just read this thread, interesting I must say. I had no idea that there were so many subsects (is that the right word?) of Wicca. I had heard of Dianic wicca from a friend of mine, but most people that I know who might be wiccan dont talk to me about it for the obvious reason. Having a Black Helicopter as a heraldic device on one of my sheilds might be Anachonistic but it gets the message across. :grin: The one I use for enactments has my family Crest on it of course. Hand Dexter "Neither spare nor scorn" as the motto. Ne Parcas Nec Spurnus.


I am now more au fait. I have had a strange request from one of my Wiccan friends however and I did not want to start a new thread to ask you about it.

She has asked me to make her a dagger out of 3 metals: An Iron core with copper then silver fixed on both sides of the blade. What on earth would that be for? In fact do you know how hard it is to find plain old Iron these days?

I am hesitant to ask her, as I have made it fairly clear in the past that im not all that interested in her faith but this one has me truly puzzled. I have done a search on the significance of the 3 metals to wicca, but im still at a loss.

Sorry to hijack the thread. Hi Geifodd, Welcome to Tweb.

[tmancour]

Of course on that last point I am naturally going to disagree with you but on the first I won't. 'Christianity', if taken to be what is lived out by the majority of 'Christians' around the world is in error. I won't go into details and please don't think I am saying that I am perfect but Christianity in theory is – just humans have a way of messing things up.


And that's one of many former Christians/Current Pagan's arguments against adhering to the Church and the scriptures: humans will always mess up any attempt at order and organization by any rule-book -- so why adhere to a complicated system based on a text that must be subject to human interpretation when we know dang well we're just going to mess that up to and be unhappy, (breath) when we can instead try to live a life without intolerable guilt and blind obedience and pursue happiness as we see fit -- since no matter how devoutly you devote your life to Jehovah your probably going to burn, anyway? Not to mention the fact that you have to accept this rule-book completely on faith, with no garuntee that it's correct in any manner, and pick it out from its competitors with little or no evidence that it is any more or less correct.

We'd rather be happy than right, if being right means staking your whole life on one chancy guess. :smile:




Again I'll freely admit that many other religions have admirable facets but the problem is that they all fall down on the key point. Can they lead to justification before God on the last day?


If you don't accept the Bible, particularly the Book of Revelation, as literally true, then the idea of a last day and a divine judgement is an unpleasant nihlistic fantasy and an interesting historical note, at best.


. . . you can stop thinking in terms of this world being the actual purpose of creation – heaven isn't simply candy to offer people in return for them being 'good' it is actually the entire point of everything.


On what basis, besides the scriptures, do you base the logic of this statement upon?


Think about the classical dilemna of why God didn't simply create a perfect world where everybody is, well, perfect. The general argument taken is that it must be better for creatures to have free will than not to and to simply be automata(so if you don't believe in FW this argument has no merit at all). The way things are everyone who is in the 'new heaven and new earth' has freely chosen to love and worship God. You end up with a perfect world where everyone also has free will.

And everyone who didn't make it, this omnipotent and omnibenevolent being condemns to an eternity of pointless suffering and torture. Nice guy. While I give him points for motivation, I take away many more for using fear and intimidation as an underlying threat. Not someone who I want to worship.


This world, then, is simply transient and what occurs here is dwarfed by what the consequences in the rest of eternity are.(Whilst here my position is unorthodox I think it can be sustained although this isn't the place to argue it.)

This world, and all things, are ultimately transient, in any religion. You are basing the way you live your life in this world on the word of an ancient book, with no garuntee save faith that you're right. I can respect that, even if I don't agree. The problem is, your co-religionists are really anxious to make everyone think that way. If we hold an alternate opinion -- even if we agree that the book is right -- then we are punished in this world in ways that are not consistant with the book. Pagans think of this world as transient, too, and how we live now does have eternal consequences -- but not in the same way. Because of reincarnation, we add the experiences of our many life-times together, and each life teaches us something new.



Its a very valid question though and the answer is this: I've seen things which leave no explanation other than the supernatural.


So have we all. I accept this as an axiom.


Once the supernatural is acknowledged to exist the question is then what form does it take?

Agreed. This is basic phenomenology and thaumaturgy.



I have witnessed that the 'name of Jesus' does have dominion over every other name.

I've experienced opposite results. Not that I considered it a "divine pissing contest", but I've seen occasions when the 'Name of Jesus' didn't come through -- and the name of "Brighid the Thrice Bright" did. Was it the name? Or the person saying the name? There are all factors in basing your decision about the origins of those phenomena.


I've seen 'God' act perfectly as the bible describes Him. Is it possible that YHWH is simply the strongest of many 'gods'? Perhaps, although if He is then he is the strongest by such a margin that the others can hardly be compared to Him.

Strength doesn't mean that much to me -- wisdom does. The fact that you place a premium on strength (of any sort) to determine the validity of a deity and the worthiness of his/her worship smacks of Bronze Age patriarchal/military ideal that is inconsistant with how human beings currently live on the planet. Why strength and power as a determining factor? Why not wisdom? Or compassion? Or love? Or beauty? Or knowlege? Or any number of other attributes that are more suited to a beneficial human society than strength?


Its not that the other 'gods' don't have power but simply that their power is limited by His. Additionally I always found polytheism's definition of a 'god' to be rather lacking.

That's because the whole idea of divinity in polytheism is different than the idea of God that arose from radical monotheism -- but we use the same terms to describe it. Miscommunication ensues. By your meaning of the word, equating it with "Omnipotence, Omnipresence, Omnibenevolence, Omniscience" then no, our gods don't measure up to your standards. But interpreting it as "supernatural manifestations of useful universal memes", Jehovah doesn't measure up to ours. Even with Jesus and the Holy SPirit thrown in, the whole Trinity comes way short of our conception of a good deity. Maybe if you deified Mary . . . but you can't do that without a major re-editing.

You see, without the Goddess, the Divine Feminine principal, no amount of power is going to impress us. Sure, Jehovah the War God, the Sky God, the Thunderer, the National God of Israel and the Ayahtollah of Rock-and-Rollah, is impressive -- but not as impressive as a woman who endures thirty four hours of labor to push something the size of a watermelon out of a part of her body that is the size of a lemon. THAT's impressive. And worthy. And your religion, by and large, denegrates that whole sphere of humanity, and it's not something that I want to be involved with.


Monotheism makes sense (as does Atheism theoretically) but I do not believe that the 'gods' of polytheism should be described as 'gods'. Just semantics maybe though.

Perhaps. What is divine? I guess that's the whole point of this forum. But like pornography, I "know it when I see it". And I've seen the divine a lot, enough to my satisfaction, and it ain't always got the "Approved by Jesus" seal on it. Not even mostly.

Your religion (at least the part of it most prevalent in my neck of the woods) talks about having a "personal relationship" with Jesus. Is that part of the imagining of the godhead more important than the whole demiurge, "I created the universe and you should worship me because I'm a badass" side? Because I have a very personal relationship with Brighid, and you know what? It doesn't matter that she doesn't pass out miracles with every breath. What matters to me is her knowlege and wisdom, which she shares liberally.


Arion

[technomage]

Having a Black Helicopter as a heraldic device on one of my sheilds might be Anachonistic but it gets the message across. :grin:

:lmbo: Oh, I bet that gives the snarks and authenticity fubba-wubbas some knots in their knickers!

The one I use for enactments has my family Crest on it of course.

Tinctures, laddie, what are the tinctures? Don't you know aqnything about heraldry? :hehe:

She has asked me to make her a dagger out of 3 metals: An Iron core with copper then silver fixed on both sides of the blade. What on earth would that be for?

There have been a lot of attempts to make a scientific theory of magick--most of these are pseudo-science (and some are "fluffier" than others), but the basic reason for something like this is to provide high-conductivity metals for the ritual knife. Copper supposedly readily accepts and retains a magical charge; silver is traditionally a metal associated with ritual daggers, and iron (again, traditionally) is proof against the unseeligh Sidhe (inimicable Faery). Perhaps she wants to combine these attributes into one blade.

In fact do you know how hard it is to find plain old Iron these days?

The easiest way would be to extract the iron from iron oxide, or from iron ore. If she wants you to go to that much effort, I'm hoping she's willing to pay for the labour!

[Bill the Cat]

Just another quick question: What about the Satanists who consider themselves to be a subcategory of Neo-Paganism? (Such as myself. Wicca is not necessarily the end all/say all of Neo-Paganism. There is such a thing as Dark Paganism, and many Satanists consider themselves to be a variety of Dark Pagan.)

Geifodd
Your Friendly Neighborhood Devil Worshiper

G, (you don't mind if I call you G?)

One of the reasons we provide these sub-forums is so we can categorize our discussions. This forum was created to discuss specifically Wicca, but includes some basic paganism discussions. Traditional and neo-Satanism do not fall under these narrow categories, so Comparative Religions is where they will be posted. Hope that explains it a bit better.

:btc:

[bandecoot]

:lmbo: Oh, I bet that gives the snarks and authenticity fubba-wubbas some knots in their knickers!

The hand and a half and the potential for an accident on the field keeps them quiet. BTW thet Claymore you showed me is 3/4's again the weight of mine. That thing would be dangerous on a reenactors field. Unless you pulled the swing or Really trusted your partner andwere built like a tank.

But I hang the EAC Sheild over my pavilion. I never actually use it. Its made of Balsa sheeting. :teeth: But yes every year I get a complaint, I challenge them in the Grand melee they shut up. :)




Tinctures, laddie, what are the tinctures? Don't you know aqnything about heraldry? :hehe:

Not a lot, honestly. But the hand is argent with a ruff of blue and white. My wife is the One who does Medieval History. I am Republican Rome remember. Ill posta jpg in Jardinprayers self pic's of the coat.



There have been a lot of attempts to make a scientific theory of magick--most of these are pseudo-science (and some are "fluffier" than others), but the basic reason for something like this is to provide high-conductivity metals for the ritual knife. Copper supposedly readily accepts and retains a magical charge; silver is traditionally a metal associated with ritual daggers, and iron (again, traditionally) is proof against the unseeligh Sidhe (inimicable Faery). Perhaps she wants to combine these attributes into one blade.

Well that sounds fair. She has been having a fairly Rubbish time just recently. I am about the only Metal worker she knows that can work with silver. It was and it is a very pretty blade. I still cant work out why she asked me to make it though. She knows my Presuppositions fairly well.

It's not a combat type thing No channels for blood and no Guard at all. In fact the Thing looks a lot like a Clovis Blade. I cant show you because she asked me not to take any photos. Its all very strange. What I am worried about is have I done a stupid thing?



The easiest way would be to extract the iron from iron oxide, or from iron ore. If she wants you to go to that much effort, I'm hoping she's willing to pay for the labour!

I charge people I don't know, I never charge friends. As for the Iron, I used some old Cast Iron from a demolition yard. I bought 20 kilos just on the off chance this is a trend.


But she did give me a haematite ring a a gift. I have learned not to refuse token gifts. Even if I dont charge friends. Haematite is Crystalline iron ore. It looks good next to my Welsh silver knotwork ring. The black looks quite nice next to the silver.

[Krusader]

The Accusation

Wiccans are Satanists?

There are some Christians who accuse Wiccans of being Satanists - either stating that we are deceived by Satan to do his work for him 1 or accusing us of being "crypto-Satanists," deceiving others with our claims of innocence. 2 For several years, many Wiccans have attempted to simply disclaim these accusations and carry on. While there is validity in this course of action, it has never effectively refuted the accusations themselves. For this, an examination of the accusation as a whole is necessary.

Roots of the Accusation

The roots of such accusations go deep - deeper, even, than some Wiccans suspect. While many Wiccan sources point to the Medieval and Renaissance accusations as the source of these accusations, the "witch-craze" of the Middle Ages was actually a continuation of earlier Pagan fears and superstitions. 3 Even back in pre-Christian times, "Witches" were the "ultimate outsider," who "strove to tear down society." 4

The direct source for many accusations, however, is Medieval and Renaissance. Here, with the advent of the Malleus Maleficarum, 5 we see some of the "modern" accusations against Witches take a recognizable form, including accusation of orgiastic sex rites, ritual torture and sacrifice of humans and animals, rejection of Christianity, the "Black Mass," and most importantly, a Pact with the Devil that condemns the witch to hell, but allows her power while she lives on Earth. This is not the sum of all accusations against Witches, but it is from these roots that other accusations grow.

And to some extent, this is the fault of Wicca - or, at least, of some Wiccan authors. From the first book published on Wicca, attempts have been made to "prove" that modern Wicca is descended from survivals of a pre-Christian religion. 6 It has long been alleged that the "Witches" killed in Europe and America during the witch-craze of 1450-1750 were our "spiritual ancestors," or were innocents that the Church mistakenly accused while the "real witches" went underground. The historicity of such claims has been discussed elsewhere on my web-site, 7 but it is important to know that the first ones to make the link were Wiccans.

Gardner linked Wicca to these people, asserting that they had "gone into hiding," and that the coven he found - and was initiated into - was one of the last "survivors" of this persecution. But what were we "linking" ourselves to? What are the "Witches" who were burned, hung, pressed with stones, dunked, searched and pricked for marks, and were generally harried from the face of the earth?

Who Are the Witches?

According to the Malleus Maleficarum, witches were evil creatures who committed "high treason against God's majesty," 8 and who enter into a "contract" with the devil. 9 Accusations of specific evils done by witches have varied over the centuries, 10 but in Christian teaching, the core accusation was the pact with the Devil - in the eyes of the Church, it was this act that made the others possible: indeed, Kramer, quoting S. Augustine, states that the Pact between the witch and the devil is the only way to make a witch. 11 This belief affects the course of Christian teaching concerning witchcraft to this day.

What has this to do with Wicca today? It is very possible that, by attempting to claim a connection with medieval witches, modern Wicca has done far more to foment these rumors than any Christian source. Gardner, Valiente, et al did borrow concepts and information from sources that could only be considered "literary Satanism," including the Malleus, 12 Jules Michelet's Satanism and Witchcraft, 13 and Charles Leland's Aradia. 14 But they also borrowed from other sources, including Freemasonry and Co-Masonry, 15 Naturalism, 16 Ceremonial Magic, 17 and perhaps the Woodcraft lodges 18 and the Ancient Druid Order. 19 (It should be noted that there are a few Wiccans who claim that these organizations either "borrowed" these concepts from Wicca/Witchcraft, or developed them independently.)

It is true, modern Wiccans do not have the same religions those who were called "witches" by Medieval, Renaissance, and Colonial witch-hunters. It is also very true that modern Wiccans cannot point to the texts of Gardner to establish this fact. Therefore, we must look elsewhere for a defense.

Defense Against the Accusations.

One of the largest problems with differentiating Wicca from Satanism is defining the terms. There are some Christians who say that "ALL pagan religions are controlled by Satan," and use Matthew 12:30 as the justification. There are some who believe that we are not Satanists, but are wrong - deceived by Satan, or by our own "sinful nature" 20 - and use Galatians 5:19 as the justification. On the other hand, the most commonly accepted definition of Satanism is much simpler - one who worships Satan, or a member of the Church of Satan. Even here, it is still possible to get into some confusion, as the two groups are mutually exclusive. One who worships Satan (also called Theistic Satanists, or Diabolists) believes in an actual entity called Lucifer, the enemy of Jehovah, and renders worship to that entity; members of the Church of Satan believe in no gods, demons, or spirits, and the closest they come to worshipping anything is their doctrine that Satanism is "as complete indulgence of the Self". 21

In and of itself, Wiccans do not hold with Satanism, whether you define it as the Church of Satan does, or as Diabolists do. Wicca does believe in giving honor to the Gods, but Wiccans do not believe that their God and Goddess are "opposed" to the Christian God. Wicca also does not believe in "complete indulgence of the Self," and while enlightened self-interest is important, we do not strive to do so without regard to the cost to others. 22

But what about the Satanists, and their views? Indeed, the Church of Satan and other "Satanic" organizations have been fairly scathing of Wicca, saying that Wicca encourages "complacency, hypocrisy, prejudice, and self-righteousness," 23 (It must be admitted that not only are Wiccans frequently just as scathing of Satanists as they are of us, but that we started this mutual game of "The Dozens" with our attempts to distance ourselves from Satanism.)

A corollary from the Christian scriptures comes to mind: when Jesus is accused of casting out devils by the power of devils, He is quoted as saying "A house divided against itself cannot stand." If Wiccans and Satanists (of either LaVeyan or Diabolist varieties) are, indeed, the same (or similar) as some Christians claim, then considering the mutual acrimony of many in the groups, one would think that the Christians have little to worry about.

Reasons for the Accusations

In part, this accusation seems, to the author, to be based in fear - fear that Wiccans or Satanists will somehow uproot the Christian way of life. Part of the problem is a lack of differentiation. By the logic of some Christians, if we are Satanists. (Back to Mat. 12:30 and Gal 5:19) then we must do all of the "things that the Satanists do." This lack of differentiation between what each group does, and what some Christians believe that we do, leads to some of the other stories discussed in this section, such as "Wiccans use human and animal sacrifice in their rituals," or that "Wiccans reject Christ and Christianity."

But there are factors of the accusations that point to other reasons, and one that needs to be seriously considered is control - a type of control that some Wiccans might call "power-over." 24 The original accusations in the Malleus were made to establish not only the existence and presumed "evil" of witches, but was also an argument that the Church were the only people capable of trying witches. In a similar vein, many of the new accusations seem to be motivated by Christian groups who are either attempting to influence legislative process, 25 or to gain influence with other Christian churches and organizations. It is also possible that some of the witch-hunting was used for the more sordid purpose of personal financial gain. 26

Fear and control - these are certainly not complementary motivations, and it is only with much consideration that the author has mentioned them. Even at that, they are only mentioned as possible reasons for these accusations, and not as definite "proof" of a Christian conspiracy to wipe out Wicca. But since the possibility does exist, it becomes even more imperative to refute the accusations.

Refuting the Accusations

This is precisely where any such refutation breaks down. If there are Christians who make these accusations who honestly believe them, then they have only to say that we, as Wiccans, are lying when we deny that we are Satanists. 27 If there are some so-called Christians who do not believe their own accusations, but make them as "propaganda," as part of a campaign to gain some form of "power-over," then they have already lied to make the accusations; nothing prevents them from continuing the lies to defend them.

But if there are people - for whatever the differences in faith, Christians are also people - who honestly fear Wiccans, and who honestly fear that we are Satanists, there may be some hope of communication, and of relieving that fear. The most effective way to do so is to speak and act in a manner that will let them know that Wiccans are not fearsome antagonists, that we do not strive for the destruction or overthrow of their way of life. Come to think of it, neither do the Satanists, but that's another issue entirely.

Regardless of the responses used, it should be realized that most Christians will never agree that Wicca is "good." Those Christians who say that Wicca is "evil" may not have the option of deciding otherwise - their scriptures state (Deu 18:10) that witchcraft (and therefore, presumably, Wicca) have no place in their society.
To refute this accusation, the author can only respond thus: "I do not worship Satan." The reader may - indeed, must - interpret that statement as they choose.




How can any Christian call Wicca good, when the Bible itself, calls it evil. Those who do not worship the true God, worship another - the "god" of this world, who is Satan. Wiccans worship at the altar of Satan. Read Galatians 5 for a New Testament view of witchcraft.

[tmancour]

How can any Christian call Wicca good, when the Bible itself, calls it evil. Those who do not worship the true God, worship another - the "god" of this world, who is Satan. Wiccans worship at the altar of Satan. Read Galatians 5 for a New Testament view of witchcraft.


Then I guess you have to ask yourself: Am I going to be a Christian or am I going to be an American -- or can I find a way to do both? For the Constitution and the Bill of Rights garuntees our right to worship the Old Gods, including the Goddess. So the question to Christians is, can you truly love your neighbors, as Jesus commanded -- all your neighbors, mind, not just the Christians -- and be good Americans, or are you going to support a Christian theocracy that would trample the very freedoms we, as a nation, pride ourselves on?

Intriguing question, no?

Arion the Blue
High Druid of Durham

[Krusader]

Then I guess you have to ask yourself: Am I going to be a Christian or am I going to be an American -- or can I find a way to do both? For the Constitution and the Bill of Rights garuntees our right to worship the Old Gods, including the Goddess. So the question to Christians is, can you truly love your neighbors, as Jesus commanded -- all your neighbors, mind, not just the Christians -- and be good Americans, or are you going to support a Christian theocracy that would trample the very freedoms we, as a nation, pride ourselves on?

Intriguing question, no?

Arion the Blue
High Druid of Durham

Excuse me, but is there anything in my post which states that I would enforce Christianity as the official religion of the United States. Don't set up straw men - your argument is simply silly.

[tmancour]

Excuse me, but is there anything in my post which states that I would enforce Christianity as the official religion of the United States. Don't set up straw men - your argument is simply silly.


No, but the attitude that "all non-Christians are satanists" has led to much pain, suffering, and bloodshed in the world. As the United States Constitution was, partially, put together to avoid that kind of violence, it saddens me to see so many American Christians use their faith as an excuse to justify a legal pogrom against non-Christians. While you, personally, might not enforce Christianity as an official American religion, there are many -- and not few who are now in power -- who wouldn't hesitate to do this, if they could find a way. Indeed, for some it is their stated purpose.

So if I seem a little jumpy when someone calls me a Satanist -- giving carte blanc to ignorant rednecks everywhere to do me ill -- please understand why. If someone is a "Satanist" under the Christian regime, there is nothing to stop them from mentally and emotionally justifying some pretty extreme reactions.

Straw man? Perhaps, in regards to your personal post. I think the larger question is still valid.

Arion the Blue

[technomage]

How can any Christian call Wicca good, when the Bible itself, calls it evil. Those who do not worship the true God, worship another - the "god" of this world, who is Satan. Wiccans worship at the altar of Satan. Read Galatians 5 for a New Testament view of witchcraft.

If you will actually read the article, you will discover that I acknowledge that no Christian can call Wicca "good." You will also discover that I acknowledge that some Christians believe that we are either "deceived by Satan to do his work for him 1 or ... 'crypto-Satanists,' deceiving others with our claims of innocence." And you would even have discovered that, like you, I cited Galatians 5 for a Biblical view of witchcraft.

Is there some reason why you're repeating my statements? It would be truly curious to think that you might actually agree with me.

[Krusader]

[QUOTE=A Cup of Mystery]If you will actually read the article, you will discover that I acknowledge that no Christian can call Wicca "good." You will also discover that I acknowledge that some Christians believe that we are either "deceived by Satan to do his work for him 1 or ... 'crypto-Satanists,' deceiving others with our claims of innocence." And you would even have discovered that, like you, I cited Galatians 5 for a Biblical view of witchcraft.

Is there some reason why you're repeating my statements? It would be truly curious to think that you might actually agree with me.



I did read it, and was responding to your statement that Christians do not consider Wicca to be good.

A good site for those seeking deliverance from the occult realm is found at:

http://www.exwitch.org/cms/

I found several testimonies there that seem to indicate that Wiccans might not be as happy as they claim to be!

[technomage]

I did read it, and was responding to your statement that Christians do not consider Wicca to be good.

You phrased your statement as though you might be disagreeing with me, but that portion of your grammar was somewhat ambiguous.

A good site for those seeking deliverance from the occult realm is found at:

http://www.exwitch.org/cms/

I found several testimonies there that seem to indicate that Wiccans might not be as happy as they claim to be!

Some are, some are not, and I will gladly direct those Wiccans and Pagans who are not happy to the ExWitch website. And by the way, I am a member of the Exwitch Forums (http://exwitch.org/forum/index.php)--you'll find me under the username veritas.

[Durthorin]

[QUOTE=A Cup of Mystery]If you will actually read the article, you will discover that I acknowledge that no Christian can call Wicca "good." You will also discover that I acknowledge that some Christians believe that we are either "deceived by Satan to do his work for him 1 or ... 'crypto-Satanists,' deceiving others with our claims of innocence." And you would even have discovered that, like you, I cited Galatians 5 for a Biblical view of witchcraft.

Is there some reason why you're repeating my statements? It would be truly curious to think that you might actually agree with me.



I did read it, and was responding to your statement that Christians do not consider Wicca to be good.

A good site for those seeking deliverance from the occult realm is found at:

http://www.exwitch.org/cms/

I found several testimonies there that seem to indicate that Wiccans might not be as happy as they claim to be!

Some Wiccans aren't happy and become Christians.
Some Christians arn't happy and become Wiccans.
Some of both give up on religion of all sorts and become non-theists.

So what is your point?

Brighid Bless, Dur

[Krusader]

[QUOTE=Crusader]

Some Wiccans aren't happy and become Christians.
Some Christians arn't happy and become Wiccans.
Some of both give up on religion of all sorts and become non-theists.

So what is your point?

Brighid Bless, Dur

Why don't you go there and read some of the testimonies, and maybe get enlightened.

[Cynic Sage]

Why don't you go there and read some of the testimonies, and maybe get enlightened.

How can personal testimonies be an effective argument if all religions (and even non-religions, like atheism) have them?

[technomage]

How can personal testimonies be an effective argument if all religions (and even non-religions, like atheism) have them?

Testimonies may not be conclusive arguments, but they can be illustrative, and therefore effective. And for my part, if someone is not happy with Wicca, I would be pleased to send them to ExWitch, or anywhere else they needed.

[tmancour]

Testimonies may not be conclusive arguments, but they can be illustrative, and therefore effective. And for my part, if someone is not happy with Wicca, I would be pleased to send them to ExWitch, or anywhere else they needed.

And if someone was not happy with Christianity, I would direct them to Witchvox, or ADF, or anywhere else I think they would be happy. There are plenty of Seekers who dabble with both our religions. I find it disrespectful for Christians to try to prey on Wiccans, when we extend them that courtesy for their own Seekers. Evangelism is the gateway to fascism.

Wiccan Seeker: "I've got some issues with a few of the things I've been taught."
Christian Evangelist: "You need to come to my church, pray to Jesus, and leave all that 'tools-of-satan' stuff behind. Or you'll burn in hell. Believe me, you'll feel even better after you've converted a few yourself."

Christian Seeker: "I've got some issues with a few of the things I've been taught."
Wiccan: "Have you talked to your pastor? Try prayer, it's a lot like meditation, and it helps you sort things out. Don't be afraid to burn some incense, maybe play some music. Aromatherapy is a very helpful tool. Do you think you have too much dairy in your diet?"

:lol:
Arion

[Cynic Sage]

Christian Seeker: "I've got some issues with a few of the things I've been taught."
Wiccan: "Have you talked to your pastor? Try prayer, it's a lot like meditation, and it helps you sort things out. Don't be afraid to burn some incense, maybe play some music. Aromatherapy is a very helpful tool. Do you think you have too much dairy in your diet?"

:lol:


Xtian: I'm having trouble understanding the correct interpretation of this passage.

Wiccan: Stop eating so much dang Cheese.

[technomage]

Xtian: I'm having trouble understanding the correct interpretation of this passage.

Wiccan: Stop eating so much dang Cheese.
Behold, the power of cheese?!?!

Nah ... maybe not. :demure:

[tmancour]

Behold, the power of cheese?!?!

Nah ... maybe not. :demure:


Christian: BEHOLD, THE POWER OF CHEESE!!!

Wiccan: That tofu stuff? You can't even tell the difference. Really.

[Durthorin]

[QUOTE=Durthorin]

Why don't you go there and read some of the testimonies, and maybe get enlightened.

Been there read some.. been to exChristian.net and read ex-Christian testimonies as well. Again..there are people who leave all faiths. So what is your point?

Brighid Bless, Dur

[technomage]

Christian: BEHOLD, THE POWER OF CHEESE!!!

Wiccan: That tofu stuff? You can't even tell the difference. Really.
:lmbo:

Tofu is e-e-e-e-evil! :b_evil:

[Krusader]

No, but the attitude that "all non-Christians are satanists" has led to much pain, suffering, and bloodshed in the world. As the United States Constitution was, partially, put together to avoid that kind of violence, it saddens me to see so many American Christians use their faith as an excuse to justify a legal pogrom against non-Christians. While you, personally, might not enforce Christianity as an official American religion, there are many -- and not few who are now in power -- who wouldn't hesitate to do this, if they could find a way. Indeed, for some it is their stated purpose.

So if I seem a little jumpy when someone calls me a Satanist -- giving carte blanc to ignorant rednecks everywhere to do me ill -- please understand why. If someone is a "Satanist" under the Christian regime, there is nothing to stop them from mentally and emotionally justifying some pretty extreme reactions.

Straw man? Perhaps, in regards to your personal post. I think the larger question is still valid.

Arion the Blue

I do not believe that ALL Non-Christians are Satanists. Those involved in occultic worship, spells, socery, etc., are obviously drawing upon demonic forces to accomplish their purposes.

Any "god" so called that is not the Triune God of the Bible is a false god. Satan is called the "god" of this world, and there are many who worship him, knowingly or not.

[Krusader]

How can personal testimonies be an effective argument if all religions (and even non-religions, like atheism) have them?

You know, Johnny, I cannot believe that you - a Christian - have asked the above question.

[Cynic Sage]

You know, Johnny, I cannot believe that you - a Christian - have asked the above question.

Beleive it.

[tmancour]

I do not believe that ALL Non-Christians are Satanists. Those involved in occultic worship, spells, socery, etc., are obviously drawing upon demonic forces to accomplish their purposes.

Any "god" so called that is not the Triune God of the Bible is a false god. Satan is called the "god" of this world, and there are many who worship him, knowingly or not.


So, essentially, you are saying that all non-Abrahamists are Satanists. Hindus, Buddhists, Shinto, Tao, everyone.

[anewlife]

Woah that would make Geifodd happy if that were true?
:eek:
j/k Geifodd. Hope you enjoy the forum thusfar...

[Geifodd]

Woah that would make Geifodd happy if that were true?

LMAO, Hell no! That would mean that all the members of the Church of Scientology are Satanists, and I don't want anything to do with their kind.

[Krusader]

So, essentially, you are saying that all non-Abrahamists are Satanists. Hindus, Buddhists, Shinto, Tao, everyone.

What I am saying is that whoever does not worship the True God, worships a false god - the "god" of this world.

[tmancour]

What I am saying is that whoever does not worship the True God, worships a false god - the "god" of this world.


Uh, apart from taking your word for it, how do we know that the True God is the god of the Bible? I mean, all we have is this book whose origins and authorship are suspect, and whose meaning has been widely and poorly interpreted over the millenia. Oh, by the way, which Bible? RSV? KJV? Coptic? Catholic? Gnostic? How do we know which one to believe?

That's the trouble with closed-canon text-based monotheisms.

Arion