Was Moses Wiccan?

This is such a silly thread.

First, the text in question is a pagan text. It simply appropriates a biblical figure like Moses, and uses him to convey whatever theology is being referred to in the allegories.

So, Moses certainly was not a Wiccan, or a pagan.

You're talking about one text verses the 5 books of Moses, all of which portray a Moses who stands more of a symbol for reason, and sensibility, which one could say is the divine guidance of God; in short, Moses is conscience. Even the name in the Hebrew, Moshe, and the derivation of the name from 'to draw' implies some activity of the mind. To draw from what? The 'waters' of possibility. From the undifferentiated waters of experience an understanding emerges which helps guide us through life, and eventually, out of our problems, our 'servitude' in Egypt.

reply to post by dontreally


This is a text from the Dead Sea Scrolls, that were most probably written by the Essenes, The Essenes were NOT pagan. This is not a pagan text.

1) The Essenes date from the last two centuries BCE to the first century CE.
2) The above being true, how is the Essene Book of Moses the original law of Moses? You've stated a false premise- or at least an undetermined one (as we've yet to find a copy of the book that dates correspondingly to your claim).
3) Wicca is a religion that was developed in the early 20th century. It post-dates Moses by a huge margin.
4) So, Moses was not a Wiccan.

Originally posted by windword
reply to post by dontreally

 

This is a text from the Dead Sea Scrolls, that were most probably written by the Essenes, The Essenes were NOT pagan. This is not a pagan text.

No, they weren't pagan. They were a Jewish sect. However, Moses couldn't have been Wiccan as Wiccans are pagan. Think of paganism as an umbrella term under which many different groups/beliefs reside. Wicca falls in that category.

Originally posted by LeSigh
1) The Essenes date from the last two centuries BCE to the first century CE.

That is the age of the Qumran community. Not the age of the sect of the Essenes.

Josephus wrote that the Essenes " . . . have existed from time immemorial," and " . . . for countless generations . . . "

Philo called the Essenes " . . . the most ancient of all the initiates . . ." and described their teachings as " . . . perpetuated through an immense space of ages . . ."

Some sources trace the Essenes to Enoch, a name which means founder or initiator. In the Book of Genesis, chapter five, Enoch is described as being the seventh generation from Adam. Seven in Esoteric numerology, represents completion, so Enoch as the seventh generation of humanity represented perfected humanity.www.thenazareneway.com...

2) The above being true, how is the Essene Book of Moses the original law of Moses? You've stated a false premise- or at least an undetermined one (as we've yet to find a copy of the book that dates correspondingly to your claim).

What do you mean, "corresponding dates?" Do you discount their version of the "Book of Isaiah" as well? We can be sure that these manuscripts are authentic based on the correctness of the other biblical books found with them..

3) Wicca is a religion that was developed in the early 20th century. It post-dates Moses by a huge margin.
4) So, Moses was not a Wiccan.

Duh!

It's really a rhetorical question, as it seems that Moses and God's law did honor Mother Earth. It makes perfect sense to me, I think that it's wrong to dissuade others from honoring the Earth, and I think this text is an awesome find. At the very least, Wicca is vindicated as being sanctioned by Moses!

reply to post by windword


Seriously? This book was found with the Dead Sea Scrolls. They've been dated. Has the book you're quoting been found earlier? If not- the truth value of your premise that it is the original law of Moses is false, at worst, and undetermined, at best. There's nothing to debate there.

You also can't claim the book isn't pagan and then turn around and claim Moses as a Wiccan- as Wiccans are pagan (modern pagans- but pagans). There's nothing to debate there either.

The only one attempting to project their beliefs here is you. I'm simply employing logic.

ETA: And- the Essenes were a sect of Judaism that were around from the 2nd century BCE to the 1st century CE. If they developed out of another sect it is irrelevant- as those sects weren't called Essenes.

The Jewish religion is considered an earth-ism sort of. I like reading this Moses thread. I thank mother earth everyday for helping make my stay on earth possible. I pray through her to the father or god, I feel she can get the message to god as good as Jesus can for others. I try to take care of my land as a tribute to mother earth. I can't say I was always good to nature but I now respect nature more instead of neglecting it or destroying it. I now am part of nature once again. If others want to destroy their Eden, I cannot do anything about it other than to warn them they are jeopardizing mans existence. The earth is something that needs to be respected, she is the mother of all life here. Maybe she isn't really alive by our definition, but the definition is wrong.

Originally posted by LeSigh
reply to post by windword

 

Seriously? This book was found with the Dead Sea Scrolls. They've been dated. Has the book you're quoting been found earlier? If not- the truth value of your premise that it is the original law of Moses is false, at worst, and undetermined, at best. There's nothing to debate there.

Employing that logic, the whole Bible is under the scrutiny. How do we know the Bible version on the story of the Ten Commandments is the right one? Your premise that the Bible is right and true is false, at worst, and undetermined, at best.

You also can't claim the book isn't pagan and then turn around and claim Moses as a Wiccan- as Wiccans are pagan (modern pagans- but pagans). There's nothing to debate there either.

Again, it's a rhetoric question. The theology of honoring the earth is a worthy value, and I don't see why it was omitted from the Bible.

The only one attempting to project their beliefs here is you. I'm simply employing logic.

That is a really cynical way of looking at threads that are posted on ATS. My goal was to introduce this amazing and profound text, that speaks of honoring Mother Earth and communing with her angels, to the ATS community for discussion.

Angels are biblical, not pagan. Why do you suppose that the RCC forbid the practice of communing with the very angels that ministered to Jesus in the desert, saved Lot from destruction, wrestled with Jacob, met with Abraham and took Enoch?

reply to post by windword

This is a text from the Dead Sea Scrolls, that were most probably written by the Essenes, The Essenes were NOT pagan. This is not a pagan text.

YES, the Essenes were Pagan, hence why they didn't live amongst the general population, and were generally regarded as outsiders.

I do not mean pagan in the pejorative sense; rather. I mean pagan in that it rejects the fundamental premises of Judaism in favor of a syncretic religion which combines Jewish monotheism with pagan traditions which emphasize the 'nonduality' of the godhead and living in accord with that perception - in communes - an agrarian lifestyle.

They may have been very great people, many of them. But they were 'pagan' in the sense that pagan means all religions which emphasize a plurality of powers. It was this 'nondualistic' approach which opened the way to seeing various powers in the world, which to the Hebrews, represented 'idolatry' i.e. the breaking up of parts of the world into 'archetypes'.

reply to post by windword


I'm not going to let you change the goal posts here. You won't goad me into an argument on this as this thread isn't about me or my beliefs on the validity of the bible. (You're assuming a whole lot.) It's about what you've stated. Stick to your own topic. I get it. I employed logic- and it made you defensive and negative.

reply to post by ucantcme

But Earthly Mother could very well mean your mom. The woman to which you were born onto the earth.

Could be. But my thought is, women die, some in childbirth. If the law was meant for all then those who had lost their mothers were out of luck.

Also, the commandment for the second morning required a greeting to the "angel of Earth." Now, I was always my mother's angel, but I don't think that's what the text means.

Originally posted by LeSigh
reply to post by windword

 

I'm not going to let you change the goal posts here.

You mean that you're going to dictate what I can discuss in my thread and dictate my motives for me too?

You won't goad me into an argument on this as this thread isn't about me or my beliefs on the validity of the bible. (You're assuming a whole lot.) It's about what you've stated. Stick to your own topic. I get it. I employed logic- and it made you defensive and negative.

I simply applying logic here.

The Dead Sea Scrolls are real and are not a joke. This text is worthy of discussion. There is more to address within the text than the parallels to Wicca or paganism. Personally, I'm fascinated by the suggestion of communing with angels. Aren't they God's messengers?

reply to post by windword


What you fail to realize is that I haven't once given you my actual opinion on your OP. Nor did I engage in ad hominem attacks against you. To make this thread about me and what you assume I believe is irrelevant to your stated topic. You seem to have a lot to say about what you think I assume and believe though. Believe me, had I put in my opinions on that complete with emotional appeal, there'd be no doubt.

Continue on. I'm done here. Have a good evening.

reply to post by LeSigh


I have no idea why this subject matter brings such hostility to you, and is forcing you to hold back your emotions and your true response to the OP.

But if you feel that you are doing me a favor in doing so, so be it and thanks.

Have a good night.

Originally posted by thePharaoh
MOSES WAS RAISED BY ELITE EGYPTIANS

IN EGYPT THE EARTH WAS A MALE GOD...not female

Moses took out a can of whop-ass on the Pharaoh's priests, and the my god is bigger than your god "guy" won the argument. Remember? Plagues?

reply to post by windword


The short answer to your premise is that no, the idea that Moses was "wiccan" is ridiculous. Wicca is one of the youngest religions on the earth and as already pointed out, was created in the 20th century by branding together pagan elements from various other occult practices with a very healthy helping of complete nonsense. Wicca is to magick and paganism as mormons and the JW's are to Christianity (Can't wait to get flamed for this one).

The long answer, is that yes: The bible is uncompromising in it's command for human beings to be "stewards of the earth" both in the OT, and in the NT. It states that people are not supposed to worship the earth (i.e the 1st commandment), but rather respect it, and take care of it. There are countless scriptures throughout the OT and NT that back this up, and even hints of God's retribution against those human forces who actively took part in the destruction of the earth for profit on the day of judgement presented in Revelations.

We are supposed to respect the earth, and take care of it. Not worship it.

No, but you are.

As far as I can see the gap between what we know as Wicca and the past is far to great to make any kind of judgement..

However it would be nice to have access to any of the many non glosses of the Vulgate that exist in Britain, since they probably come more from Druidic source (socials lores etc) than the Romanised ones and as such might give us a better insight into what people thought back then as opposed to what people now think they might have thought.

Once we have a clue as to what they really might have thought, we might then be able to make a judgement on any kind of similarity, but that's not going to happen any time soon, those books are locked up out of sight.

Originally posted by thoughtsfull
As far as I can see the gap between what we know as Wicca and the past is far to great to make any kind of judgement..

However it would be nice to have access to any of the many non glosses of the Vulgate that exist in Britain, since they probably come more from Druidic source (socials lores etc) than the Romanised ones and as such might give us a better insight into what people thought back then as opposed to what people now think they might have thought.

Once we have a clue as to what they really might have thought, we might then be able to make a judgement on any kind of similarity, but that's not going to happen any time soon, those books are locked up out of sight.

We know enough about Druidic practice to know that it is a far cry from what wiccans would consider acceptable ritual. For instance archaeological evidence has suggested Druidic rights included human sacrifice and cannibalism, which I am sure the majority of wiccans today would find incompatible with their views source .

The roots of wicca are easily traceable for anyone with the spiritual fortitude to research them. I would hope that at the very least the wiccan who is so inclined might embrace hermetic systems instead, as much of wicca's "ritual" is pilfered from these operations without the safe guards they afford the magician.

You are absolutely correct in assuming there is no connection between wicca and druidic rights, imo. We know very little about them except for what we have in roman accounts and archaeological evidence. Hence wicca could not have derived from the druids, period.

reply to post by DeadSeraph


I completely agree, that the roots of Wicca can be traced, predominately my neck of the woods in Southern England is a prime location, but that is because the cunning folk have always had a safe place in our society, and therein lies an intriguing trail.

If history looked back at the Roman Churches actions in my neck of the woods c1500s, i think it safe to assume they might come to a nasty conclusion about that snapshot of the Roman church, i.e Bishop Bonner of London deciding that the best way to get the flock here back in line with the Roman Church teachings was to have the largest human bonfire this country has seen, an act that is still unforgiven here abouts.

Such snapshots do not in my opinion give us a clear indication of what really went on, what the church really stood for, etc nor do snapshots and Roman accounts give us a clear indication as what Druidic culture, mores etc where all about.. which was why I mentioned those non glosses of the Vulgate..

Where it could be said St Augustine of Hippo and Jerome where influenced by Manichaeism, it could be said the British Clerics that opposed Rome has Drudic influence (they classified Rome as corrupt and not teaching the original word brought by Jesus. this was directly aimed at St Augustine of Hippo, Jerome etc)

So, we have the example of the cunning folk still existing even when Christianity in Britain was at it's most brutal, destroying and killing all those it deemed a threat, and we know the cunning folk existed in relative safety, as their communities protected them, therefore I feel it safe to assume that the same thing happened with Druidic influence in Bythonic society under Roman rule.

Given we know this clash occurred between the Christian Churches in Britain and Rome existed over who was/was not teaching the original word at the time Jerome translated the Vulgate, I think it is safe to assume the many non glosses of the Vulgate might give us some real indication of the true nature of Druidic influence, or at least give us a counter point to the bits we already know.

Bit of a complicated ramble, and a lot of assumptions on my part, but I guess that is the point, the gap between the guessing now and then is far to great to bridge without assuming... but we do have some sources, we just don't have access to them all, which is a real shame.