Define a Pagan Witch? (priests, rituals, mysticism, tradition, beliefs)

[Azhria Lilu]

Part of what Azhria and I were arguing about was whether or not Crowley had anything to do with the creation of Wicca. She said he didn't... you say he did. Which is true?

actually, where AC, Wicca and Witchcraft are concerned I actually said it isn't known for sure but that apart from his association with Gardner he had nothing to do with it.

[Master Hoomer]

I am not a satanist...or follow the Golden Dawn...

I follow the works of RJ Stewart(as a core)...who was taught directly by WG GRay in the 1970's...
Gray was an EX member of the GD that left...and had associations and dealings with Ms Firth (Dion Fortune)......

My "path/school ...whadeva!"...is chthonic based....the Underworld(qlippoth to a GD personage...but NO demons!...lol)...a mix of ritual magic..(qabbalah.angels yadda yadda) and faerys.....

Peersonally I still think I am a beginner...but whadeva...

I have no lodge either..maybe I need to seek one out....

I am meeting RJ for some "work" for the 2nd time this coming weekend....am stoked....

As for the argument..I can see how and why the GD got associated wioth satanism...

1. from an exoteric christian viewpoint they would be "evil".....The whole problem with satan is..he's largely a christian composite figure....exoteric christianity teaches that ANYTHING other than Jesus is evil bad and therefore satanic!....

2. the GD were perhaps at the forefront of the "Occult" revival...as noted leaning heavily upon Levi...then it is NOT unreasonable top my mind that the church of satan and other satanic organisations leant heavily and borrowed from the GD.....

The GD for all its faults IS an empowering system...

3. Crowley's "modern" thelema based organisation the OTO could be viewed as satanic....as is done so by some.....


But this is straying into Lunacy..again my actual concern for satanists....is NOTHING.....

Hmm the GD held orgies...where can I sign up?

[Gnosti Seauton]

Do what thou wilt shall be the whole of the law

1. from an exoteric christian viewpoint they would be "evil".....The whole problem with satan is..he's largely a christian composite figure....exoteric christianity teaches that ANYTHING other than Jesus is evil bad and therefore satanic!....

2. the GD were perhaps at the forefront of the "Occult" revival...as noted leaning heavily upon Levi...then it is NOT unreasonable top my mind that the church of satan and other satanic organisations leant heavily and borrowed from the GD.....

The GD for all its faults IS an empowering system...

3. Crowley's "modern" thelema based organisation the OTO could be viewed as satanic....as is done so by some.....

Very good points, and from that view point runt is completely right the GD would be satanists, but then so would the Buddists, Hindi, and Pagans.

[Runt]

*cries*

I am not saying the GD were Satanists! I am saying that there are striking similarities between both, but to say the GD were Satanists because they seem to believe some of the same things would be like saying that people who practice Druidism are Wiccans.

[Runt]

And I think you mis-wrote what I interpreted

LMAO, point taken! I will fix it.

Men of science have a "moral" obligation to discover truth. If the discovery of said truth means that an animal must lose it's life it is for the greater good and did not die vainly.

Everyone already knows that cats do not have 9 lives. That is why kittens die ONE time when drowned in a pond, and don't come back. If Crowley did NOT know that cats die only once, he was stupid and not intellegent at all. By acting in that way, he was trying to get attention and to offend people, and obviously had no true interest in "science" at all. There are better ways Crowley and the GD could have furthered "science" than by needlessly harming animals to test whether or not a mere SAYING was true.

Or what is more moral, willingly ignoring truth (becuase it panders not to you prejudices) or trying to discover truth so that others may live, learn, and evolve along side you.

Oh sure, I will discover LOTS of spiritual truths by killing cats! Sign me up now! (Sarcasm, by the way). Why didn't anyone kill Crowley to see if he really did have spiritual powers?

I think the answer lies some what between the 2 extremes. Yes we do have animal funcitionality and are in many ways equal to the beasts of the field. However we have also recieved through one mode or another, certain tools and traits which other animals do not possess. Such as the will to be something more than what we already are (just to name one but many spring to mind) these assets make us resoncible to our fellow creatures and thus higher in the hiarchy. Much like what a parent is to a child.

I think we are basically agreeing here. I was saying that because we are like animals but more "evolved" we have a responsibility to protect them. You were saying because we are more "evolved" we are NOT like animals, but we STILL have a responsibility to protect them ("much like what a parent is to a child").

Defend yourself by all means when need arises. But defending ones self is a hell-a-lot different than seeking revenge. By refusing to be around that person you take the wind out of the devil, they have no power over you. Revenge is letting an enemy have control over your actions.

Aye, I agree. Understand that I am not saying that the GD took it is far as Satanists probably would. I am just saying that perhaps they are not as inclined to stupidly "turn the cheek" (and keep turning the cheek instead of doing something about their problem) like a Christian would suggest they should do.

Demons have been around since the begining of humanity so Christianity has nothing to do with the demon aspect.

Aye, but Crowley used the CHRISTIAN name for the demon he "called" (Beelzebub). In my opinion, by naming the demon by its Christian name, he gave it the characteristics of a Christian demon. (If there have been demons since the beginning of humanity, then "Christian demons" probably also exist). By working with a Christian demon, he was practicing what the Christians would call "Satanism". While the Christian definition of Satanism, the fluffy bunny definition of Satanism, and the Church of Satan's definition of Satanism are not all the same (or really the same at all), by SOMEONE'S definition Crowley was practicing Satanism (though not by Crowley's definition or by yours, or, truly, even by mine, though I say he was practicing something SIMILAR to Satanism). *takes deep breath after all that*

And thus why discussion is such a healthy practise.

Aye. It is teaching me to write more precisely (*cough* and with more thought)... and teaching me that I am not always right about everything (a tough lesson for every teenager to learn).

However, most of the problems seem to be that I TRY to say something but can't, you guys tell me that it is not true and then proceed to write out what I was TRYING to say but couldn't (grr), and then I argue with you that I was saying what you were saying only it looked like I was saying something else (cuz I can't write).

And I'm supposed to be a "gifted" English student...