Are people seriously Wiccan?

[destrekor]

Originally posted by: ruu
Re OP's original question:

I "tried" Wicca when I was younger; I found some of the rituals soothing and the philosophy interesting and better-fitting for my personality than anything else. I eventually stopped because I lost interest.

I don't find a belief in full-blown, horned-gods, spirit-of-the-moon "neo"paganism any more difficult to accept than the various popular flavors of Christianity. Viewed from the right angle, either belief system makes sense or is patently ludicrous. Frankly, I find various tribal religions just as believable as either Christianity or Wicca.

The tribal religions I tend to find more believable than any monotheistic religion.
Ancient beliefs like that of the Mayans, Inca, Navajo (various other American tribes), Egyptians, and even the ancient Greeks/Romans.
I've always been more interested in religion more as a means of advancing philosophy more than the art of worship. I'm not sure what to make of humanity's general move to monotheism - if it's just a direct result of multiple wars and conquests, or more importantly - if it's an evolution of human knowledge, or like falling off the ladder and starting over from the bottom. Will we ever reach a common belief in no deities, or at least reach a point where its more or less just accepted it is possible some deity made life possible, but is no longer worshipped in any way? That'd be better for humanity - don't need to ditch faith in a god, but no longer believe in religions and move toward uniting humanity once and for all.

 

[skace]

Originally posted by: So
Thanks. It's just so strange to me, I guess I just can't see how people can become convinced of such things.

I don't understand, what is so difficult buying into any religion? I mean you should either be able to buy into none or all because they are all based on faith (believing in something that cannot be demonstrated or proven).

It's strange that Wiccans believe in many gods as opposed to 1 that is omnipotent, omniscient, and omnipresent?

 

[Whoozyerdaddy]

Originally posted by: So
I mean, I understand that people believe the bigger religions, for various reasons. But are there really people honestly who believe in pagan gods as genuine powerful supernatural beings, or are they just joining a group whose philosophical outlook they agree with? If there are any professed neopagans here, I'm genuinely curious.

Funny how a lot of those alternate religions endorse smoking pot... I'm not saying, I'm just saying...

Personally, I don't need a religious excuse.

 

[ruu]

Originally posted by: destrekor
I'm not sure what to make of humanity's general move to monotheism

Memetic drift is my take on it.

Originally posted by: destrekor
Will we ever reach a common belief in no deities, or at least reach a point where its more or less just accepted it is possible some deity made life possible, but is no longer worshipped in any way? That'd be better for humanity - don't need to ditch faith in a god, but no longer believe in religions and move toward uniting humanity once and for all.

Oh, if only. Human beings are primed to be religious, though, and since we'll never all grow up in the same environment, we're never all going to come to an agreement on anything that we can think about, which includes religion. But it is certainly a nice thought.

Originally posted by: skace

Originally posted by: So
Thanks. It's just so strange to me, I guess I just can't see how people can become convinced of such things.

I don't understand, what is so difficult buying into any religion? I mean you should either be able to buy into none or all because they are all based on faith (believing in something that cannot be demonstrated or proven).

It's strange that Wiccans believe in many gods as opposed to 1 that is omnipotent, omniscient, and omnipresent?

Well, for example, sentient goat-creatures with horns seem, on the surface, more improbable than a human being rising from the dead (in the Christian manner). I think it's because Western culture teaches us early that talking animals are fantastic and fairy-tale-based, but the culture says nothing explicit about the dead coming back to life. I agree that one is not clearly more believable than the other.

 

[mwmorph]

Originally posted by: pontifex
i have no idea what's going on. all i know is that icebergslim is really coming off as some religious fanatic, even though he claims not be be religious?

You have never been in a thread Icebergslim has decided to join in on then. This is par for the course. There is no "winning" an argument with him I'be ever seen. He just doesn't address or even recognize facts or logic presented to him, it wont end until everyone else gets tired of it.

 

[skace]

Originally posted by: ruu
Well, for example, sentient goat-creatures with horns seem, on the surface, more improbable than a human being rising from the dead (in the Christian manner). I think it's because Western culture teaches us early that talking animals are fantastic and fairy-tale-based, but the culture says nothing explicit about the dead coming back to life. I agree that one is not clearly more believable than the other.

The dead coming to life aren't fantastic and fairy tale based? Uhh, Ghosts? Zombies? Ghouls? Phoenixes? Heck, Christianity even has "The Holy Ghost" which sounds like some sort of end boss monster. You are letting bias and familiarity affect your thoughts.

 

[LtPage1]

It's no different than being the goth kid in high school. The mainstream doesn't appeal to you, but you want to fit in somewhere.

 

[KIRBYEE]

.

 

[jagec]

Originally posted by: So
Are people seriously Wiccan?

No, they just do it for the lulz.

 

[Acanthus]

The people i know that are "Wiccan" are all in their 20s and smoke pot.

I get a strong feeling that they do it for the countercultural prospects and dont really give a crap about it.

 

[TroyEade]

Hope you all are enjoying the pagan festival of Yuletide? Most of the major celebrations, e.g. Christmas, Easter, etc... were originally pagan festivals.

 

[theblackbox]

i like how the newest buzz phrase is neo-, neopagan, neocon. almost seems like a demeaning term. shouldn't christianity, since it is a relative newcomer, be called a neoreligion as well.

these days, it seems the real question should be:

Are people seriously christian?

personaly, i am a theist, i just don't choose to choose.

 

[skace]

Originally posted by: Acanthus
The people i know that are "Wiccan" are all in their 20s and smoke pot.

I get a strong feeling that they do it for the countercultural prospects and dont really give a crap about it.

Come for the counterculture, stay for the orgies.

 

[manowar821]

I knew a few people who actually believe that Taro cards are legit. They even occasionally had to "cleanse the deck" because it had become tainted with evil or something. Maybe someone they don't like touched their deck of cards, I don't know.

All I know is... It's more of the same. At least these people don't start holy wars, like the big-three pagan religions, though. They just think they can read auras and know how to read your future. In the grand scheme of organized religion, that's not any more crazy than the big-three.

What I mean is... Wiccans are some of the most peaceful and understanding religious people I've met, to date. They fall short only to Buddhists and perhaps Native Americans.

They don't bother me, they don't try to start holy wars in the middle east, they don't run our country and steal our tax dollars... If it makes them nicer, and happier, so be it.

 

[shiner]

Originally posted by: nakedfrog
I identify as neo-pagan on religious identity tests, and I have a nice pentacle on the wall, but I don't actually practice anything. When I was younger I went to a few meetings/study sessions.

This exact one pentacle, actually
The outer ring says "I am the beauty of the green earth and the white moon among the stars."

Are they always after your Lucky Charms?

 

[shiner]

Originally posted by: IcebergSlim

Originally posted by: bobdole369
By definition.


typing "define: bigot" into google yields this result.


http://wordnetweb.princeton.edu/perl/webwn?s=bigot

S: (n) bigot (a prejudiced person who is intolerant of any opinions differing from his own)

That defines exactly what you are saying about Satanism IcebergSlim - thus YOU are a bigot.

Guilty as charged I am intolerant of devil worshippers.

Hahahahahaha....what a tool!

Baptist?

 

[shiner]

Originally posted by: IcebergSlim

Originally posted by: nakedfrog

Originally posted by: IcebergSlim

Originally posted by: bobdole369
"A satanist by definition is one who warships lucifer or the devil or satan."

Absolutely false. Satanists typically do NOT worship any deity at all.

You are mistaken friend. Oh and NO I'm not a Satanist. I'm Buddhist if you must know.

Who told you that? People that don't worship any deity are FUCKING ATHEISTS!

And... now stay with me... if some of those atheists want to call themselves "Satanists" to rile people like you up (and reap the tax benefits associated with churches), are they now automatically Satan worshipers?

So your telling me they Do everything a satanist does EXCEPT warship satan and i'm supposed to buy that? riiiiiiiiiight. If it looks like shit and smells like shit its shit dude.

Second time you've said that.

We talking Iowa class or something much smaller like an Arleigh Burke?

 

[pontifex]

Originally posted by: mwmorph

Originally posted by: pontifex
i have no idea what's going on. all i know is that icebergslim is really coming off as some religious fanatic, even though he claims not be be religious?

You have never been in a thread Icebergslim has decided to join in on then. This is par for the course. There is no "winning" an argument with him I'be ever seen. He just doesn't address or even recognize facts or logic presented to him, it wont end until everyone else gets tired of it.

oh, no, i'm very, very well of aware of icebergslim's posts.

 

[shiner]

Originally posted by: IcebergSlim

Originally posted by: BigJ

Originally posted by: IcebergSlim

Originally posted by: BigJ

Originally posted by: IcebergSlim

Originally posted by: nakedfrog

Originally posted by: IcebergSlim
A satanist by definition is one who warships lucifer or the devil or satan. The devil is gods fallen angel and enemy who rejects everything that god and in this case christianity stands for. By default a follower of Lucifer, the devil or satan must also reject Christian virtues and Christ and god. This is not difficult logic to follow.

What possible benefit could there be to worshiping Satan?
Why would someone worship a deity who only wants them so they can torture their soul for eternity?
It IS difficult logic to follow.

I never said Satanist were smart did I?

But to expand satan promises powers and pleasures while on earth in exchange for the soul. Others are weak minded or have mental disorders so are easy prey for manipulation.

Who'd you hear from that Satan grants powers and pleasures? A satanist?

No its all a con don't you get it....I never said he GRANTS powers and pleasures I said he PROMISES. BUT HE LIES! don't you see? Its a con game to win more souls.

Who'd you hear he promises from?

Its in the bible. Remember the snake?

The snake is long, seven miles....

 

[ruu]

Originally posted by: skace

Originally posted by: ruu
Well, for example, sentient goat-creatures with horns seem, on the surface, more improbable than a human being rising from the dead (in the Christian manner). I think it's because Western culture teaches us early that talking animals are fantastic and fairy-tale-based, but the culture says nothing explicit about the dead coming back to life. I agree that one is not clearly more believable than the other.

The dead coming to life aren't fantastic and fairy tale based? Uhh, Ghosts? Zombies? Ghouls? Phoenixes? Heck, Christianity even has "The Holy Ghost" which sounds like some sort of end boss monster. You are letting bias and familiarity affect your thoughts.

I already said:

Originally posted by: ruu
I agree that one is not clearly more believable than the other.

I was offering a speculative explanation as to why a person would find one thing more believable than another. All I said was that there is a Western cultural bias against talking animals, a bias which doesn't seem to exist in the same degree with regard to the reanimated dead. I don't know why this is; I was just making an observation.

 

[ultra laser]

People are dumb and will believe just about anything.

 

[meltdown75]

yes. i went to the movies with a girl that claimed to be wiccan in university. we went to watch Star Trek: Generations together.

 

[gotsmack]

Originally posted by: torpid

Originally posted by: CrackRabbit
And it is a valid comparison for what he was saying, The LaVey's Satanists are a cult movement that acts as a christian counter culture (perhaps that is how they got labeled satanists to begin with). Some neo-pagans groups are similar.

But you can't trust Satanists because they always lie. Therefore what they are really doing is worshiping Christ. I wish you guys would pay attention... this is much more simple than you are making it out to be. Let me summarize:

Pagans - worship deities other than "The One True God" and therefore worship Satan. Therefore they actively refuse to do anything moral according to Christian standards. Therefore they always lie. Therefore their worship of deities other than "The One True God" is a lie. Therefore they are Christians.

Satanists - worship Satan. Therefore they always lie. Therefore when they worship Satan they are lying about their worship to Satan himself. Therefore they are Christians.

Buddhists - follow the teachings of Siddhartha, which are basically the same as the teachings of Jesus. Therefore they are Christians.

Except buddha existed 500+ years before Jesus, so Christians are therefore Buddhists.