To Midnight Star

[Guest Zoe Grace]

I have a bad thread hijacking habit...dont' mean to do it...the witch discussion is interesting and thought perhaps it deserved a thread of it's own.

 

Midnight if you wish to continue to discuss the meaning of the word "witch" both past and present or anything else regarding "witchcraft" We should probably start stating our sources. It's the only way to have a reasonable debate...and I would prefer it to be a debate and not mudslinging. (I don't think it's mudslinging NOW, I just don't want it to devolve to that...and usually assertions without source material leads quickly to the ad homs.)

 

Note: in the below reply I haven't cited sources. If this is going to turn into a full blown debate, I will...but until then I just posted a reply.

[a midnight star]

OK, where to start. First, I also would enjoy a good debate on this and I am capable of debating an issue without it getting personal. If I felt like it is or was a personal attack.

 

 

I gave you the Hebrew word directly translated from the Ot (which was written in hebrew) word. I went to Strong's Concordence. I have also heard that the word witch in the hebrew could also be translated to mean "poinsoner". But since that was told to me by christians that were exwitches, I do not take that as seriously. I felt that it was another attempt of christians to change things to make them fit.

 

***early pagans didn't call themselves witches, midwives didn't call themselves witches.****

 

Agreed. Then it wasn't a matter of labeling themselves as much as a way of life. It is what they knew just as much as a lot of us were born as christians and it was just the way it was.

 

****I said that evil witches who had sex with satan etc. etc. never existed...it's a mythological concept.*****

 

Actually if you really want to get technical, that is actually biblical. I haven't told you my actual beliefs have I? Here, this will give you more of an idea where I am coming from.

 

I believe that paganism has been around longer than even the Jewish religion. I also believe that it started before the flood. I believe that the Old Ones walked the earth before the flood and that was the reason for the flood. There is nothing in the bible that states so, but there is also nothing that says nay either. But there are some things in Genesis that points to it being a logical theory.

 

See, I am forging my own path. One that I can believe in. OK biblical references:

 

Genesis 6:4-5

4 There were giants in the earth in those days; and also after that, when the sons of God came in unto the daughters of men, and they bare children to them, the same became mighty men which were of old, men of renown. 5 And GOD saw that the wickedness of man was great in the earth, and that every imagination of the thoughts of his heart was only evil continually.

 

This doesn't bother me. What the bible calls "wickedness and evil" and what I consider wicked and evil are two different things.

 

*****The term witch was coined to describe what Christians BELIEVED people not like them did****

 

Or what they didn't understand. The flying on brooms came from a fertility ritual. There has been another theory of what had happened in Salem. Bad bread. I know that it seems simple, but for those of us who have tripped on LSD it is entirely possible. Zygote(SP) is a parasite that live on wheat. It is also the exact same thing that LSD is made from. I have seen fish eat me carpet, I have seen colors explode off the wall and run together as it drained off the shower wall.

 

Using the word witch was also a convient way for the church to get rid of it's enemies, so they took what was real and perverted it to fit their ends.

 

****Why is that word so important to you? If it's meaning according to you has been changed beyond all reasonable meaning, why do you still like it? Does part of you enjoy the flying on broomsticks stereotype as much as you hate it? The pointy hats? the black cats? It's become a sortof mythology of sorts hasn't it?***

 

Well, to be totally honest, yes that is a part of it. A small part. I am rebellious enough to enjoy the idea that I am what they fear. They meaning christians. When I first came into paganism I thought what most christians thought. I was furious with god and went to "switch sides". I honestly thought that I was going to Satan to get my revenge. Yes, I wanted revenge on all those christians who had hurt me. I wanted my parents to pay. Not with their lives, that would be too quick. I wanted them to spend every day of their long lives suffering like they have made me suffer. Now, I mostly want to change the connotations that are associated with the word "witch". Christian's greatest asset it fear. Take away the fear and they have nothing.

 

*****Do you imagine I just rolled out of bed this morning thinking to forever define "witchcraft" for all time? In the modern pagan vernacular a witch is someone who practices magic.******

 

Honestly, I didn't know. I don't know you well enough to make that kind of judgement. Especially on what you know or didn't know. If you took my post to mean that i thought you were stupid, I am sorry. It was never meant to be. I wasn't going to assume that you knew or didn't know anything, I simply don't know you that well. I too didn't wake up this morning and decide that this is what this means. I have been studying for 4 years and I have been posting on pagan sites for almost as long. I am not new at this. Not as old as I like, but I can't speed up time.

Not all pagans consider themselves to be witches. And not all witches practice magic. To some it is simply worshipping the god/dess. It is the same thing as those who see the word witch or see Diana on my profile and automatically think "wicca".

 

 

****However to be REALLY REALLY technical, despite it's bad connotations, the only people who really SHOULD call themselves witches are those practicing something of a more traditional nature with British cultural background.*****

 

True. BUt there is a problem with this. One, it is very hard to find an OLD path. One that hasn't been made up like a patchwork such as Wicca. I have been looking for the last 4 years. I would especially like to find an old Celtic religion. I am second generation Irish born in the US. BUt so far it isn't there or it is so secret it could take years if ever to find.

 

***As for Wicca, Wicca isn't a new upstart of an old religion. Wicca is a baby religion. It was invented in 1939 by Gerald Gardner (I know you know who started the religion, this is more for those at home) There is evidence that Gardner lied about his sources****

 

Ok, change the word upstart to "a patchwork" of ideas. I agree with your description of Wicca. I used upstart to mean; new, not original. In the same way christianity is an upstart of jewish origin.

 

Merriam-Webster's definition:

1 : one that has risen suddenly (as from a low position to wealth or power) : PARVENU; especially : one that claims more personal importance than is warranted2 : a start-up enterprise

- up·start /'&p-'/ adjective

 

With this definition, Wicca is an upstart. Wicca mean wise, but wicca and witch are not interchangable.

[Guest Roamin' Lion]

Tomato.....tomahto....let's call the whole thing off.

[a midnight star]

Tomato.....tomahto....let's call the whole thing off.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

 

Why? I enjoy debates as long as it doesn't get personal. Who does it hurt? Nobody! Who does it help? Nobody, unless you consider the boredom I live in without coming here and having a good conversation.

 

So, NO. If Zoe wishes to continue this enlightening conversation, I will continue to do so.

[RedPillAddict]

Midnight, just wondering...So you believe that a worldwide flood actually happened?

 

 

BTW, I've got a book in front of me right now called "witches" by T.C. Lethbridge. Havent read it yet...got a huge bulk of books at a sale.

[Vixentrox]

I've always had a passing interest in witches, witchcraft, the occult, ect. Though I've never studied it overly in-depth, maybe I should some day.

[a midnight star]

Yep. But I don't believe that everyone died. The Giants in the bible sure look to me to be 1/2 human and 1/2 gods. Now, that is my thoughts. I have tried and tried to reprogram myself to disbelieve some things that I just can't disbelieve. So in my search, I have found a path that I can feel at peace in. Most pagans either disagree with me outright or they see where my thinking comes from. Most cultures have a "flood" story. It is not exclusive to the bible.

 

***BTW, I've got a book in front of me right now called "witches" by T.C. Lethbridge*****

 

WOW!! Just looked it up at Amazon. It looks like what I am looking for. I will ask some friends (those that I trust to lead me right) what they think. Will let you know as soon as I know. I like his titles.

[RedPillAddict]

Yep. But I don't believe that everyone died. The Giants in the bible sure look to me to be 1/2 human and 1/2 gods.  Now, that is my thoughts. I have tried and tried to reprogram myself to disbelieve some things that I just can't disbelieve. So in my search, I have found a path that I can feel at peace in. Most pagans either disagree with me outright or they see where my thinking comes from. Most cultures have a "flood" story. It is not exclusive to the bible.

 

***BTW, I've got a book in front of me right now called "witches" by T.C. Lethbridge*****

 

WOW!! Just looked it up at Amazon. It looks like what I am looking for. I will ask some friends (those that I trust to lead me right) what they think. Will let you know as soon as I know. I like his titles.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

I've read into witchcraft a little bit here and there. I am fascinated by some of it. As far as the flood goes, theres not any proof at all where there should be(ie where did all the water go, etc)had there been a flood, and most stories come from the middle east where the black sea incident can explain it for the most part. As seen here:http://www.nationalgeographic.com/blacksea/ax/frame.html

 

I cant quite force myself to believe that there was ever a half-man half-god since i dont believe there are such things as Gods(or giants for that matter).

 

let me know if you read that book. I will probably read it soon enough.

[Amethyst]

I researched Wicca and Paganism when I was deconverting. Even read a few spellbooks. To me, if you want to call yourself a witch, fine. If not, fine too. I personally couldn't believe that any of it was any more real than Christianty. But whatever.

[a midnight star]

I researched Wicca and Paganism when I was deconverting.  Even read a few spellbooks.  To me, if you want to call yourself a witch, fine.  If not, fine too.  I personally couldn't believe that any of it was any more real than Christianty.  But whatever. 

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

 

that will work. to each their own. Nobody's jouney in life is the same, so of course our paths will be different. Isn't it our differences that make like exciting?

[a midnight star]

SFS,

Here are some reviews of T. C. Lethbridge

 

http://www.fearofspeed.net/tcleth.html

 

http://www.findarticles.com/p/articles/m..._102910351

 

From what I can gather from the opinions I asked for, there is nothing negative but all positive.

 

I haven't had the chance or to tell you the truth, the inclination to debunk what I was taught yet. But here is the story I was told. Whether it is fact or fiction, I honestly don't know.

 

The dino's lived before the flood but were drowned. (doesn't explain the water dino's though) anyways, with the dino's and the water pressing down on the earth it accelerated the process, so that is where we get oil.

 

Like I said, this is incomplete and may in fact be a bunch of unprovable bullshit.

[a midnight star]

While I was finding facts for another thread I found this. I knew that the flood was and is in many myths and not just one or two. Here is the link:

 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Deluge_(mythology)

[a midnight star]

It is just going to be another one of those things on which we will never know the whole truth. Speculating is fun though.

[RedPillAddict]

SFS,

  Here are some reviews of T. C. Lethbridge

 

http://www.fearofspeed.net/tcleth.html

 

http://www.findarticles.com/p/articles/m..._102910351

 

From what I can gather from the opinions I asked for, there is nothing negative but all positive.

 

I haven't had the chance or to tell you the truth, the inclination to debunk what I was taught yet. But here is the story I was told. Whether it is fact or fiction, I honestly don't know.

 

The dino's lived before the flood but were drowned. (doesn't explain the water dino's though) anyways, with the dino's and the water pressing down on the earth it accelerated the process, so that is where we get oil.

 

Like I said, this is incomplete and may in fact be a bunch of unprovable bullshit.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

well...the dinosaurs werent around anytime close to the supposive "flood". Most myths say the flood happened about 6-8,000 years ago. Dinosaurs havent been around for 65 million years. I know it is in many different myths worldwide, but thats becasue of the spreading of the stories. A world wide flood could not have happened. Its impossible on so many different levels.

 

 

I think you and I are talking about 2 different floods anyway. Most myths talk about the recent flood(like noahs ark). It is believed though, that a comet hit the earth causing floods and other problems like gases in the earth being released that killed the dinosaurs. There is of course no written record of that. There may have been terrible floods caused by huge tidal waves from the comet. What the water and lack of sunlight didnt kill, the gases released from the earth due to temperature changes did. l

[a midnight star]

*****well...the dinosaurs werent around anytime close to the supposive "flood". Most myths say the flood happened about 6-8,000 years ago. Dinosaurs havent been around for 65 million years. I know it is in many different myths worldwide, but thats becasue of the spreading of the stories. A world wide flood could not have happened. Its impossible on so many different levels.*****

 

I don't believe this. Carbon is not accurate enough to date this. Once something ages to a point you really can't trust the carbon. The weight of the water would have messed up the dating process anyways. BUt again this is my opinion and you know what they say opinions are like!

[Ouroboros]

*****well...the dinosaurs werent around anytime close to the supposive "flood". Most myths say the flood happened about 6-8,000 years ago. Dinosaurs havent been around for 65 million years. I know it is in many different myths worldwide, but thats becasue of the spreading of the stories. A world wide flood could not have happened. Its impossible on so many different levels.*****

 

I don't believe this. Carbon is not accurate enough to date this. Once something ages to a point you really can't trust the carbon. The weight of the water would have messed up the dating process anyways. BUt again this is my opinion and you know what they say opinions are like!

The weight of the water in a flood would not have messed up most of the dating methods. Most of them are based on radioactive half-life, and you can't fake it, or change it.

[RedPillAddict]

*****well...the dinosaurs werent around anytime close to the supposive "flood". Most myths say the flood happened about 6-8,000 years ago. Dinosaurs havent been around for 65 million years. I know it is in many different myths worldwide, but thats becasue of the spreading of the stories. A world wide flood could not have happened. Its impossible on so many different levels.*****

 

I don't believe this. Carbon is not accurate enough to date this. Once something ages to a point you really can't trust the carbon. The weight of the water would have messed up the dating process anyways. BUt again this is my opinion and you know what they say opinions are like!

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

They may be slightly off on the dates...but not by millions of years. Maybe a few hundred thousand. Still, there is no proof of a worldwide flood...anywhere.

[Valgeir]

The weight of the water in a flood would not have messed up most of the dating methods. Most of them are based on radioactive half-life, and you can't fake it, or change it.

 

Exactly, that's why carbon dating is used in the first place. Because it's so consistent.

[a midnight star]

BUt as I pointed out, not only is carbon dating inaccurate it is also based on assumptions. So for me it can not be taken as fact and more than the evolution theory and the big bang theory. It all comes down to, we just don't know.

[Vixentrox]

They may be slightly off on the dates...but not by millions of years. Maybe a few hundred thousand. Still, there is no proof of a worldwide flood...anywhere.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Of course, to primitive people...a large localized flood might have SEEMED to cover the whole world.

[Skankboy]

Even if cardon dating were unreliable, which I don't believe it is. There is no evidence for a global flood. Believe me, if there were, geologists and biblical scholars would be all over it.

 

A global flood would leave some pretty obvious markers, those markers simply don't exist...

[a midnight star]

***** Believe me, if there were, geologists and biblical scholars would be all over it.******

 

To be honest here? I believe that biblical scholars would. But there are those who believe that they would. I would not put it past the "scientific" world to come up with any excuse to prove that it wasn't. BOth sides can be debunked.

 

***Even if cardon dating were unreliable, which I don't believe it is. ****

 

It is unreliable after 50,000 years. Or at least that is what the scientific community claim.

 

Ok after looking around there different types of dating. The first Carbon 14 is unreliable after 50,000 years.

 

Quote:

The fact that carbon-14 has a half-life of 5,730 years helps archaeologists date artefacts. Dates derived from carbon samples can be carried back to about 50,000 years. Potassium or uranium isotopes which have much longer half-lives, are used to date very ancient geological events that have to be measured in millions or billions of years.

 

http://www.bbc.co.uk/history/archaeology/c...ndating_1.shtml

 

Which lead me to looking at isotope dating. But, there are a lot a assumptions that have to made to take this as fact.

 

 

Quote:

All radiochemical methods of dating have some uncertainties associated with them. Several assumptions must be made in determining an age. Perhaps the most significant assumption is the supposition that the sample was a closed system throughout its existence, that is, no parent or daughter isotope was gained or lost. Another assumption involves the amount of daughter isotope present at the formation of the sample. Generally, this is taken as zero for rare isotopes. The strongest evidence for the age of a sample is obtained when two different radiochemical dating methods produce the same result. Because the chemical properties of daughter products are so very different, any geological transformation of a rock sample will have quite different effects on the sample's daughter isotope contents. Potassium and rubidium frequently occur together in rock samples, making this pair particularly important for radiochemical dating.

 

http://scifun.chem.wisc.edu/chemweek/uranium/uclock.htm

[RedPillAddict]

To be honest here? I believe that biblical scholars would. But there are those who believe that they would. I would not put it past the "scientific" world to come up with any excuse to prove that it wasn't. BOth sides can be debunked.

 

 

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Sorry, but that sounds like something a christian would say. Scientists arent out to lie to prove myths wrong. Thats not how the "scientific world" works. Thats how RELIGION works.

 

I dont see many of these topics as being debatable. There are no half God-half man beings. there are no giants. Dinosaurs didnt die 6000 years ago. You say "It is just going to be another one of those things on which we will never know the whole truth. Speculating is fun though." Thats not true. Thats why we have science...so we can throw away unreliable myths for facts.

[Ouroboros]

Even if cardon dating were unreliable, which I don't believe it is.  There is no evidence for a global flood.  Believe me, if there were, geologists and biblical scholars would be all over it.

 

A global flood would leave some pretty obvious markers, those markers simply don't exist...

C14 is not the only method to do the dating, there is K-Ar for instance (Kalium-Argon), and there are more. Most based on half-life calculations.

 

But then we have also sediment, rings, ice-layers etc. There's a lake that has 10,000 years of sediment layers to tell history, and it doesn't support any universal flood mythology, at least not the last 10,000 years, which covers beyond humans written history.

 

And there are ice that have layers of longer history than that (I can look it up later), and there's no trace of a world flood. But there's evidence of life forms that we didn't know about before, that can live in sub-zero.

 

So the flood never happened, at least not World Flood version, but it was likely a local event, a trader that manage to save his family in a localized flood at the outflow of Euphrates.

[Amethyst]

But I think the actual word that means wise one had a different but similar root.

 

Um, isn't that Wicca?

 

I seem to remember that from the books I read.