Don’t you have to be a bit older than twelve to post here?
The obvious reasons have been demonstrated.
Go hang out with Isaac Bonewits for a while…He’lol straighten ya right out kid.
Martin
Welcome, Sun and Sea. I like your spirit and enthusiam but you need to be a little more careful about where you get your information. There are some fragments of truth in your OP but the details are mostly wrong. Yes there was some Pagan influence on Christianity but not the influences you posted. Jesus’ “crown” probably came from the Roman Sol Invictus cult ( a Roman sun god) , not Wicca (which didn’t exist yet). Nobody knows even the year of Jesus’ birth, much less the day. Christmas is set on the Roman Saturnalia. We all knew Easter bunnies were Pagan in origin. Nobody is shocked.
I hope you hang around for a while because you can learn an awful lot from the other posters here, and it’s also a good place to hone your debating skills.
I know all this Wiccan stuff seems new and exciting to you but hang around here and talk to some other Wiccans and Neo-Pagans so you can sort out the truth from the BS a little bit.
Believe it or not, there are some pretty smart and well-informed people here of every religious bent. I think maybe a better tact for you to take would be to open a new thread (or just continue in this thread) asking for good information on Wicca. What you will get here is going to be much better than those websites, I promise you.
Welcome to the SDMB, Sun and Sea. Don’t be afraid by the responses you’ve received thus far. You seem bright for someone of your age, and that’s a gift.
Something you will come to learn, though, is that from time to time you must challenge, or perhaps merely investigate, your own beliefs. This may strengthen them, or may revise them. It depends person to person. Blindly accepting something for an indefinite amount of time, though, is likely to make you ignorant to what may be better alternatives that are to be discovered.
So far your personal beliefs have been challenged by a multitude of posters. Rather than rely on citing numerous websites for your assertions, refer to specifics. It may take time, but it’s standard practice. Furthermore, inre (in response to) Wicca, it may do you well to research the historical roots of Wicca. You may quickly learn that there are no traces of it preceeding the 20th century. This should get you to a start. Of course, even if you come to accept that Wicca is a more modern religion, that of course does not negate its specific values. It should not undermine any validity you place in the faith, and you should be aware of that at all times.
Crowley is better known for his participation in other types of magick.
Two main branches of wicca are Gardnerian and Alexandrian; people trace their “lineage” back to those two, based on who they learned from and who that person learned from. But this can only be traced to the early 1900’s, though there is a claim that the information was passed down someone’s family through the ages.
Folklore has been around for years and some people do claim to be hereditary witches. I’ve met some who have made this claim, but don’t have any basis to determine whether or not it’s true. I do know that some of the traditions in a Stregeria (Italian Witchcraft) book that I gave a friend were things she had seen in Sicily; keeping in mind that her family is from an out of the way place, where traditions don’t change very quickly, that’s probably true.
Historically, Cecil is right; drugs were involved; if you look at the ingredients in spells, there are psychotropic agents and some of the people who thought they were flying thought so because of something they’d ingested or an ingredient in an ointment.
You have it a little backwards with regard to the new religion and old religion combining; it was the Christian church that incorporated the pagan symbols into the new religion to induce people to join. In Southern American slave culture, the African gods were superimposed on Catholic saints, eventually creating syncretic religions, so you’re right, it can work both ways.
Pan is actually from the Greek Pantheon; you’re thinking of the Horned god who is the Goddess’ consort.
I’d recommend seeing what books your local library has, if any. Otherwise you want to find people who actually know wicca to teach you. In my experience, the people who wear the pentacle charms and talk about witchcraft/wicca a lot are the ones who are rebelling and identifying themselves as such because they think it’s cool, and have a book. People who are both more knowledgable and more sincere don’t make a point of mentioning it to everyone.
You can find books on wicca at regular bookstores or at new age shops. You may find better information there than on your webpage links; unless the webpage provides a bibliography you don’t know how good the information is.
There are a lot of books out there to choose from, and you want to find a good beginner book.
Isn’t the minimum age for the SDMB supposed to be 13?
Even if it is, perhaps we could make an exception for this guy. He writes unusually well for a 12-year-old, even though some of the ideas in the OP are a little–ahem–wacky.
Atreyu, I’m a girl. To others, okay, maybe my ideas are wacky, but thanks to all the people who are saying I should focus on one thing at a time - instead of attacking me. I think I will focus on one thing at a time - and I admit I made a bunch of errors in details - I just wanted to get the ideas right out there and didn’t pay attention to tiny details. When I was talking about Pan being the happy little god of fertililty and spring, I meant it in a general terms. Whether he was also the god of pastures and woodlands had nothing whatsoever to do with whether my statements about him being the Christian’s devil were true. I think I’m going to pay attention to one point now, probably the devil horn thing… See you all later!
Pan is an interresting little critter.
He may very well be a pre-Greek God. When the Indo-Europeans came Hermes took over.
In mythology this is often transformed into the new God being the father of the old God, probably because the father is more important. Same as with Zeus being Athena’s father but Athena was there first.
Early Hermes has the same characteristics as Pan, in that he is a pastoral God who dances with nymphs and is known as the trikster. Only later does he develop into the messenger of the Gods as we know him in the classical sense.
Anyway, what was I on about…?
Hmm, er… yes, quite an old God, possibly connection with other old mediterranean horned gods. Must look into that… sometime.
Back to work now, bye bye.
I have edited the OP to provide links to the columns by Cecil.
You might also want to check out What is the historical basis of the Wicca religion (modern witchcraft)?
Sun and Sea, this is an adult site, meaning that we generally do not permit people under age 13 to participate. I have therefore temporarily banned your name from posting. If you think that an exception should be made in your case (and we do allow exceptions from time to time, for people who are intellectually mature even though underage), please go to the Registration Agreement. There is a form there for requesting permission to post even though you are underage. Copy and paste the form and mail it to me, and we’ll consider your situation.
I’m not sure that “historical ingredients for spells” are entirely relevant for Wicca, as a modern religion and one in which “ingredients” are often dismissed as irrelevant. I don’t think it’s legit to argue that Wicca is a modern faith and at the same time argue for historical practices that have already been established to have little or nothing to do with Wicca.
To the OP: Wicca is a modern neopagan religion, one that has among some of its practitioners established a mythology of time and oppression. I’d figure that the ahistorical and the historical divisions in Wicca are probably the deepest rift in the faith, beyond mere denominational issues, and those people in the historical school are entirely likely to call people who buy into the myth “fluffy bunnies” and suspect that they’re getting their history and theology from Llewellyn books.
Wicca derived from the concatenation of a large number of factors. The Romantic period’s modifying of the imagery of the Greek and Roman gods was one of them. The Masonic secret societies were another – and it’s from these that Wicca developed its pseudohistory of secrets handed down from ancient times. English herblore and craft witchery, which did survive in the more rural areas, was a third. I suspect that there are people who have had family traditions of various sorts who had some influence; one of the large figures of the origin (Gardner, I believe) was said to have, in addition to the other stuff he added to create Wicca, been initiated into a family tradition by his grandmother. Whether this is true or folklore is unknown. I suggest reading Hutton’s The Triumph of the Moon, which is a very good source for the history of Wicca that can be substantiated with documents. (Some Wiccans object to it because Hutton is very firm about documentation and doesn’t accept oral tradition.)
Neopaganism has a number of branches, of which Wicca is probably the largest, or at least the best-known. Wicca itself subdivides almost as enthusiastically as Christianity: in addition to the major denominations (Alexandrian and Gardnerian), there are a number of smaller ones, Faery Wicca, the solitaries, the eclectics who consider themselves Wiccans, and the division that some of the people on alt.religion.wicca.moderated have taken to calling the Llewellynists. Other neopaganisms include things like the Church of All Worlds. Some might include the reconstructionist/revivalist movements (Asatru, Nova Roma, Kemetic, Hellenic) in neopaganism; I’m slightly inclined against, given the effort that is put into researching and implementing the old worldviews. I wouldn’t include shamanic paths or the faiths of various indigenous peoples in neopaganism, as those do have continuity; however, this is muddled by the number of neopagans who pull things out of those traditions and implement them into their own (which aggravates some of the original owners of those traditions).
Religious traditions tend to borrow back and forth from each other. Christianity’s ties to Mithraism are known; ancient Judaism may well have been an influence on or influenced by the Atenist revolution in Egypt; an Italian acquaintance of mine says that many of the old traditions live on blended with Catholicism there; the old pagan stories from Poland became part of the folk Christian mythos, with tales of how God and the Devil collaborated on the creation of the world; Buddhism’s influence tweaks a lot of modern practices, especially those that have any meditations; Amerind practices have been pilfered by Wiccans; I’d tend to say that one of the Wiccan approaches to the divine owes a great deal to Christianity. To say nothing of the creole traditions like Voudoun. . . .
I must say, i’m 16 and i know of nobody who would say these things
Now thats more like it.
I myself have read a lot of these ‘facts’ before, as I’m sure many other people have, but you have to learn not to believe everything you read. Its only true if Cecil wrote it.
God that’s exquisite!
I must show it to the friend who forced the Celestine Prophecy upon me…
Hoo boy! Looks like the resident Wiccans get their own version of His4Ever 
Let’s throw out a bit of information first. For a definitive history and academic investigation into Wicca and NeoPaganism in general, I recommend two books, Drawing Down the Moon by Margot Adler and Triumph of the Moon by Ronald Hutton. Both are excellent texts on the modern pagan movement and are respected in both the NeoPagan circles and in academia.
Sun and Sea, while you throw out some interesting ideas, there’s a lot of misinformation there, too. If you’re trying to connect Wicca to the “witch craze” of the Middle Ages and early Modern period, you’re sadly mistaken. As Prof. Hutton makes clear in his book, Wicca was found by Gerald B. Gardner in the 1940s and 1950s. Od Gerald make it sound ancient to appeal to the groundswell of pagan romanticism that had risen up in Britian during the 19th and into the 20th centuries.
Yes, Wiccans worship the earth, tho that’s an overly simplistic phrase to use. The spectrum of believe goes from viewing the earth (our planet) as the physical embodiment of the Goddess to seeing it as a more modern, ecological viewpoint, that as (arguably) the most intelligent species on the planet, it’s our job to take care of this planet, viewing it as sacred. Check out Adler’s text for details.
Regarding the Devil, that’s another matter entirely. How Satan or the Christian Devil took on his present image is a matter of debate. Again, check out Hutton for some arguments. Presently there’s no clear-cut line that can be traced from Antiquity to the present image. Your romantic, idealized idea of a conquering people changing the religion of the conquered into demons and devils is again, simplistic. One could argue that Clement of Alexandria did this, but was in the second century of the Common Era, not later, as you imply.
As for the symbolism of broomsticks and devil’s horns, again more conjecture. The meaning of those symbols and the practices associated with them are lost to us. We have only hints and suggestions in old practices and folk customs. Since Antique Paganism was an oral tradition, nothing was written down. We don’t know what exactly they practiced nor are we ever likely to know.
A few other points…
Where in the world did you get this? I’ve never heard of any Wiccan group holding to these tenets. Care to provide a reputable citation for this? As others have pointed out, the Da Vinci Code is fiction. Unless you can provide a reputable citation, I’m going to say you’re blowing smoke on this.
Re: Drawing Down the Moon, the chapter on Asatru is horrible. One of the Asatruar I know has seriously suggested just ripping out those pages and using them for kindling.
I wish I could remember his entire rant, but basically he was of the opinion that Adler’s prejudices wrote that chapter instead of her reasearch.
In case anyone is still paying attention, The Man Himself on the Holy Grail (“The Holy Grail is an invention. It turns up in works of fiction.”) and whether Jesus and Mary Magdalene were lovers (“It’s probably all crap.”).
just a note on Devil’s horns- the Hebrew word in the Jewish Scriptures that is translated “demon” or “devil” is Se’ir, which means “shaggy goat” (once in the KJV Isaiah it is translated “satyr”), also the Fourth Beast in Daniel 7 as well as the Sea-Beast & the Land-Beast of Revelation 13 are horned-
ten on Daniel’s & on the Sea-Beast, two on the Land-Beast.
So the horned status of the forces of evil goes back to both Testaments.
Of course, in Revelation, the Lamb is seven-horned.G
Why would you want to do that to Isaac? He’s a really nice man.
And Dragonstar, damn you! I wanted to be the one to correct tomndebb! He’s usually so eloquent and correct and superb, I was all excited to catch that little mistake. Harrumph.
Well, since others are indulging in the rare pleasure of correcting tomndebb let me jump into the conversation. Having read Bloodline of the Holy Grail I can say that it isn’t true that no one claims to know the date of Jesus’ birth. In that tome Laurence Gardner, or whatever the author’s real name is, claims that Jesus was born on March 1st, 7 BC . He cites this date from Barbara Theiring’s Jesus the Man. Unfortunately for him I also own a copy of that work so I can state that his cite doesn’t back up his claim. Without going into the rather unlikely manner in which this intelligence was gathered let me just say that Theiring merely claims that March 1st was Jesus’ official birthday but doesn’t pretend to know the actual date of birth. The other book gives March 1st as the real date and another as the official birthday. Note that March 1st was a Sunday and not a Saturday and that Bloodline names the daughter of Jesus and Mary Madgalene as Tamar/Damaris instead of Sarah so this book is unlikely to be Sun and Sea’s source. ( Though Sarah means “princess” so it might be a title substituted for a name, a common theme in both of the mentioned books. )
I think that Tom is pretty much right though. No reputable authority claimes to know which day Jesus was born.
I went back and re-read the subchapter on Norse paganism and its groups. You’re right, Adler didn’t do too well. See spoke with groups that have a very conservative specific agenda with regard to their practices. Unfortunately, it wasn’t til later that more moderate groups like the Troth came along. Hindsight is always 20/20. 
Okay, now can you demonstrate a continuous link between those images portrayed in the J/C Bible and how the devil is viewed today? In other words, are the passages in the Bible the basis for the commonly held image of the devil and can you prove it?
Umm, no. Really, some early Church fathers backfigured to come up with a date for the birthday of Jesus. They very well could have been wrong, mind you, but the evidence does not show any thing like “Hey, let’s set the Birthday on Dec 25, as there is a big holiday there anyway” (and they would have been wrong, as Saturnalia was Dec 21st). Note, that they could have come up with just about ANY day and it would have been close to a Roman holiday- there were many, many of them. Besides, Saturnalia is on the wrong day- maybe you mean the festival of Sol Invictus- again, not exactly the right day (Dec 23rd), but closer, and more popular around that time. If they had really just wanted to set “Christmas” on a big pagan holiday- why not get the right day? :rolleyes: I mean, don’t you think they might have owned a calendar? :rolleyes: Note that I am NOT claiming that the “early church fathers” came up with a CORRECT date, just that they seemed to be sincere in their calculations.
Odd that the early Church would have picked Pan as the god to model Satan after- Pan was very insignificant, and had no major temples I know of, nor was he a challenge to Xainity. If they had wanted such a God, why not Jupiter, Saturn,or Apollo?
Lilarian: “Christianitie’s ties to Mithranism are known”- correct- literally. Actually, remember Xianity came before Mithranism was popluar, and thus Mithranism likely borrowed from the Christians more that the other way around.
The traditional meaning of “witch” is: “a woman who practices sorcery or is beleived to have dealings with the devil”. And has been so since around Will Shakespear’s time. Now, if modern Wicca wants to call themselves “witches” fine by me, but don’t get your panties in a bunch if dudes equate “witch= satanist”, as that was the meaning of the word for some 400 years before modern Wicca tried to upsurp it for their own. Why not use another word without all the nasty conotations? That being said, it would seem that the founders of Modern Wicca did try to use some bits & pieces of “ancient knowledge”. So, if Modern Wicca wants to claim “ancient roots”, well, OK. Just know that there seems to be no direct connection, or at best- a tenuous one.