Older than Wicca

[Akatlarion]

Hello All , I am Akatlarion

I suppose this a combination of an Introduction and a question . I am fairly new to this message board although I have read threads for awhile , this is the my first post, but I am not new to the pagan / wiccan faith. Although I am a very spiritual person , I also have an objective side that cares much about historical fact , and I keep running into a problem that is leading me to seek a faith other than wicca . Many sources online will state that wicca itself is a faith dating back a mere 60 years , and I find that deeply troubling , considering I thought I had devoted myself to a faith that pre-dates christianity , not one that a key person , apparently was Gerald Gardner , whom I am not about to look up to . I do not wish to trust in something apparently so new . Many will tell me I should not consider age when questioning validity of a faith , this is not what I wish to convey , that I am talking about validity , I only wish to be a part of the faith that has survived the test of time , polytheistic and non-judeo christian faiths have been around alot longer than 60 years , And I think I would feel better about getting back to the basics , untainted by the " fluffiness" of the modern age , is the pre-christian faith gone? the ancestors of old didnt live and die by wicca , I want the old ways in its true form but I cant seem to find what to study or whom to seek . I hope my first post wont produce a string of offended rants , I only seek knowledge and help .

[Celtique]

There are many things I have yet to learn about Wicca, and I've not been practicing for ages, but:

As far as ANY reading I have done about the subject, which is a lot, because I'm certainly not the type to call myself Wiccan if I don't even know what the word means...I've never come across anything saying Wicca was a mere 60 years old.

There may be sects, or Covens, or branches of Wicca recognized for the last 60 years. However; the basic veins and ideals of Wicca itself can be traced back before Christianity. I mean, heck, half if not more of the holidays most people celebrate these days are based on Wiccan traditions and ceremonies, but were changed to convert people from Wicca to Christianity or what have you. It's one reason there are mentions of so many varied gods and goddesses. Essentially they're all part of a whole, all representations of one truth, it's just up to us to figure out what method best serves us and brings us to a state of peace in our own surroundings.

I would suggest doing some reading by "accepted" authors on the subject of Wicca. Scott Cunningham, Raven Grimassi, and others named by the people that frequent this board. There are SO many less than reliable sources by people thinking they can turn cats into frogs and the like, it's hard to determine what is real and what is fallacy.

Anyway, Akatlarion, Wicca does indeed predate Christianity. It predates a LOT of things. Over the years things have changed...branches have broken away, and attempts to destroy Wicca have almost devastated it's followers, but it's survived. The true, simple, basic common themes remain the same.

I hope you find what you're looking for. Best wishes.

[Akatlarion]

Thank you for responding , It is difficult for me to find a common truth among the many controversial and different opinions often labeled as fact online , it was just recently that I have seen some people in chat rooms and on the site " Wicca For The Rest Of Us" that I have seen references to wicca being 60 years old , and it confused and disheartened me a great deal , perhaps they are simply refering to when it became more public , I do not know , I just would feel more assured to know if there is some faith more heavily rooted in the original faiths and practices , I have " Wicca A Guide for The Solitary Practitioner" by scott cunningham , I do not mean to offend anyone , Im just trying to search for truths among the varied opinions I have found , any information or guidance from anyone would be appreciated.

[RubyRose]

Okay here's my 2¢ worth.

Wicca is a branch of Paganism that was started up in the 1940's I believe, by Gerald Gardiner.
Paganism has been around a lot longer, and is probably what is known to have predated Christianity itself.
Wicca and Paganism are essentially two different things. While both can be viewed as practices, if you wish, Paganism is a more broader term than Wicca is. As Wicca is a subsect of Paganism, just like Druidism is.

Hopefully that all makes sense.

[Celtique]

Gah! I always type the word "Wicca" when I know I'm reffering to Paganism. *gags* Apologies for the confusion.

I need to proofread my posts 3 times before hitting submit, it seems.

[RubyRose]

Gah! I always type the word "Wicca" when I know I'm reffering to Paganism. *gags* Apologies for the confusion.

I need to proofread my posts 3 times before hitting submit, it seems.

:lol: That's cool. You effectively allowed me to put in my own 2¢ ...

[Celtique]

:rolleyes: Glad I could help. Heheheh.

[Laisrean]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Asatru

It sounds like what you may be looking for is Asatru, which claims to be at least 40,000 years old. :hairraise

[Rowan MoonDragon]

Okay here's my 2¢ worth.

Wicca is a branch of Paganism that was started up in the 1940's I believe, by Gerald Gardiner.
Paganism has been around a lot longer, and is probably what is known to have predated Christianity itself.
Wicca and Paganism are essentially two different things. While both can be viewed as practices, if you wish, Paganism is a more broader term than Wicca is. As Wicca is a subsect of Paganism, just like Druidism is.

Hopefully that all makes sense.

Ruby Rose is correct. Paganism has been around alot longer than Christianity. It is a broad term that can encompasses many paths. Wiccan, however, is relatively new compared to Paganism. Wicca is a branch of Paganism. Just like Luthern is a branch of Christianlity. Hope this helps.

[Mòrag Elasaid Ní Dhòmhnaill]

Really any of the reconstructionist paths might suit you better if you're looking for something that goes further back in history. Reconstructionism essentially is about recreating for modern worshippers the practices and religions of the ancient cultures.

Examples are:

Religio Romana (http://www.novaroma.org/main.html) which is based on ancient Roman religion.

Hellennismos (http://www.hellenion.org/), or Hellenic (Greek) based polytheism.

Kemetic Orthodoxy (http://www.kemet.org/home.html), a type of Egyptian reconstructionism.

Asatru (http://www.asatru.org/) is a branch of reconstructionism dealing with the Norse religion.

Celtic (http://www.thunderpaw.com/neocelt/), obviously this has to deal with the various peoples who spoke Celtic languages. It covers the religions of the ancient Irish, Scots, Welsh, Manx, Breton, Cornish, and British. Commonly lumped together, but as you research more you'll find many differences.

Druidry (http://www.adf.org), this is also Celtic, but many people consider Druidry and Celtic Recon to be quite different so I listed it seperately.

Romuva (http://www.romuva.lt/), the traditional religion of the Lithuanian people. Don't know much about this one, but the link might help you.

[grnpuffer]

If historical precedence is your only criteria for truth, then you will ultimately find yourself frustrated and no closer to your own truth. The christians claim a 2000 yr legacy... the buddhists claim a 2600 yr legacy... and so it goes. And yet if you examine the historical evidence, you will find that the modern expression reflects very little of the seed tradition- we are not living within the context of that time period, and each age through time has shaped the traditions according to it's own need. Furthermore, just because an idea was popular in the 1300's does not mean that it is any more useful or true in the year 2004. Just because 10,000 people say a foolish thing doesn't make it any less of a foolish thing. It can be equally said that evolution of consciousness in the 1300s may not be relevant today.

The requirement for historical precedence -as expressed in the west,both historically and in the modern times are not being made as a reflection of greater illumination or service to humanity. It's all about pedigree and the ego and real estate. It is by it's nature, not spiritual (are the fundamentalists the enlightened folks of the world?) Traditions from the east also suffer this problem... but then their methods are a bit more balanced since they're not as fanatical about murdering their sages and teachers as we are in the west.

Granted there are tremendous advantages in working a tradition with a historical lineage... people that have gone through the process can warn you of the speed bumps ahead. There is also the momentum of accumulated power within a tradition that take empowerments/initiations to a whole new concept. To get a view of what a tradional lineage feels like, explore www.world-view.org - especially the audio and text course material that you can download for free. It's very solid, and very intense. It's also rigid, dogmatic and inflexible.

HOWEVER.....two comments...

you and others have expressed concern/distain about the supposed 1960s origin of neopagnism/wicca. Your assumption is that since it's so 'new' then it must be superficial or contrived. However, if you read Gerald Gardner's books, it's striking how much he was NOT creating some new belief system (in fact, he shamelessly plagarized ideas and works from his contemporaries and other traditional sources). The radical thing about gardner is that he put his ideas in print (unheard of in the 1940s and 50s). He provided his own perspective on very old ideas: earth, lunar , and solar energies and the like. The folks I know who are initiates of the gardnerian path have experienced substantial personal and spiritual growth, not because they have a 'gardner decoder ring' but because they have successfully aligned themselves with ancient currents and archetypes.

Secondly, I think that an incarnation in a western culture has a unique dharma. If the only path to truth is to be found in the east, then we would all be sitting in loin cloths on the streets of Deli. I think in the west in general and in America in particular has a unique perspective on the religious experience. If you travel a bit and sample spiritual traditions all over the world, I think that you'll find a striking degree of vitality and creativity in the modern spiritual experience here that is absent elsewhere. It's that same vitality, creativity and capacity to think outside the box that has made it possible for some of our university physics departments to make outrageous/over the top discoveries about the nature of consciousness and the physical world. Who would have thought?

While I agree that the popular experience in neopaganism/wicca/neo-occult seems to want to avoid lift-off (prefering love spells to genuine inner growth), I do not agree that this is the limit of it's value. We've all benefitted from historical figures - poets, scientists, philosophers and politicians (including the american founding fathers)- that were associated with a variety of non conventional spiritual practices and beliefs. When was the last time that an inflexible, dogmatic and rigidly centralized tradition provided fertile ground for innovation? IMO, these institutions are stinking with historical precedence, yet are not prepared to help us from blowing ourselves and this planet to bits.

So to every body out there who are exploring new ground in their spiritual paths....
Keep up the good Work!!
We need your fresh perspective!

Best wishes

[mothwench]

Gah! I always type the word "Wicca" when I know I'm reffering to Paganism. *gags* Apologies for the confusion.


it's one of my pet peeves actually. but you're forgiven cause your avatar is so cute. :lol:

Akatlarion, have you heard of reconstructionism? i'll see if i can find some good threads for you to read, rather than go explaining things (mainly cause i'm a newbie myself and shouldn't really be explaining things at all)

also, if your interested in asatru, like laisrean suggested, look out for aefentid's norse heathenry class which is to start soonish i hope.

@laisrean: many asatruars would disagree. they usually say that the faith as such has been around for a very long time, but the word asatru as an organised faith is actually from this century. simply because the "old" asatruars never saw the need for a name. just like celtic reconstructionism certainly wasn't a concept back in 400 b.c.e.

edited to add: even if it's a new name, it's a very good name, and describes the faith perfectly. it means faithful to the aesir, the gods and goddesses of the norse pantheon. ( i tend to include the vanir and don't see the need for a seperate vanatru. )

[Jenett]

One other thing to keep in mind:

Different religions have different methods and foci. For *me*, Wicca is very much what I want. It works for me, it challenges me in ways I want to be challenged, and it has a structure and framework that allow me to explore other areas in a way that works well for me.

In particular, I wanted a religious structure that had space for psychic input, at least at times, and I heavily prefer a system which has an integrated context for magic use. I don't actively *do* a lot with either of these things, as it turns out, but having them built into the religious framework makes a big difference to me.

From there, the history made a lot less difference for me - either a religion has the framework I find helpful, or it doesn't, and the length of time it's been around doesn't make a lot of difference except for whether or not the framework proves to work.

If history is more important to you, and some of those framework issues are less important to you, then you may end up making different choices - and that's just fine. But it doesn't make Wicca bad anymore than, say, being one profession is worse than another profession: it really depends on where you want to focus, what you want the religion to help you do, what deities you want to work with, things like that.

[Ben Trismegistus]

Sorry dude. Wicca has only been around since the 1940s.

If it makes you feel any better, many of the beliefs which make up Wicca are derived from pre-Christian beliefs, and it is, by and large, the practices of the religion that date from the 20th century. Gardner took ancient beliefs from the Greeks and pre-Christian Britons (others later included Egyptian and other beliefs), and combined them with practices from medieval Ceremonial Magic and 18th century Freemasonry.

The religion is an amalgam, but many of the beliefs are universal. Regardless, if the religion resonates with you, it doesn't make a difference whether it originated 10,000 years ago or last Tuesday.

[Celtique]

it's one of my pet peeves actually. but you're forgiven cause your avatar is so cute. :lol:


*sighs in relief, wiping sweat from her brow* Phew! I was worried there a second. ;)
Hehehehe. Thanks for the compliment hun! *huge smile*

[Phae Talon]

I would suggest doing some reading by "accepted" authors on the subject of Wicca. Scott Cunningham, Raven Grimassi, and others named by the people that frequent this board. There are SO many less than reliable sources by people thinking they can turn cats into frogs and the like, it's hard to determine what is real and what is fallacy.

I wanna toss my two cents into the ring here ... I would have to say that from what I have heard (haven't read it yet myself), one of the very best books out there for the accurate history of Witchcraft has to be Triumph of the Moon by Ronald Hutton. I have heard nothing but praise for his objective historical viewpoint.

To the original poster ... if you are looking for something a little older than Wicca, you may want to check out A Witch Alone by Marian Green. She focuses on the folk practices that were part of the base of what later became Wicca. Though, I don't really think that age is what gives a faith validity. Either it works for you, or it doesn't. If you forge your own path, and create your own rites and holidays, does that mean that your spirituality isn't valid because it was your own creation (even if amalgamated from many other recognized beliefs)?

--Phae

[mato]

You might also want to refer to some of the Babalonian (sp) spiritual beliefs. Alot of those are prevalent in wiccan ideology.

[Heathen Dawn]

Religion isn’t wine; it doesn’t get better with age. Age may sometimes be a disadvantage, because of immoral traditions that can’t be shaken off (what I see in college every day—Muslim women with their veils). Wicca is about 50 years old. It’s a recent religion, and I like it that way. It’s also potentially international, it’s not tied to any culture. But if you’re looking for a religion with ancient roots, and something tied to a specific culture, I second the recommendation for Pagan Reconstructionist religions.

[aefentid]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Asatru

It sounds like what you may be looking for is Asatru, which claims to be at least 40,000 years old. :hairraise
Asatru is actually younger than Wicca, the reconstruction of Heathen beliefs began in Iceland in the 1970s.
http://www.angelfire.com/nm/seidhman/beinweb.html

in frith,
Æfentid

[DebLipp]

An interesting thing to consider as you examine this issue, is what you mean by the "age" of a religion.

The history of Wicca is likely to remain controversial. Did Gerald Gardner make it all up? If not, did his teachers? If not, how accurately could their religion -- ANY religion -- have survived underground?

Is Wicca based in ancient practice and belief? Absolutely. Is it also very modern? Absolutely. The thing is, the answer to both these questions remains the same whether or not Gardner lied about its origins.

Consider: Gardner claimed an ancient faith had survived underground, and that he had to rewrite the specific rituals both in order to preserve their secrets and because what remained to them was incredibly fragmentary. In order to write these rituals, he used extensive occult experience as well as extensive knowledge of folk traditions all over the world.

Now, an examination of the above paragraph will show that even if everything Gardner said was true, we already know that the rituals were rewritten. We know they were based on ancient sources but were rewritten in modern times. So this "age" thing is tricky.

But more importantly, every religion adapts to its era or dies. If Wicca is, hypothetically, very old indeed, it is still entirely changed by the modern wave of new members, publicity, and openness. Indeed, modernity has substantively changed Christianity and Judaism, so how not Wicca? I have argued on these boards before that Reconstructionist traditions are not ancient, they are modern -- the ancients didn't RE construct, and Reconstructionists DON'T do everything our ancestors did in precisely the way they did them.

In fact, every religious person must straddle the needs of modern life with the desire to be a part of an ancient energy stream. Throw away the ancient entirely, and you have too much of the fluffy thing you point to. Throw away the modern entirely, and you have a host of problems; you have Orthodox Jews living medieval lives, you have fundamentalist Christians trying to ban dating, ferchrissakes, and you have the spectre of human sacrifice hanging over you. These are not good things. Only by balancing the ancient with the modern can we see the whole picture.

[Akatlarion]

Thank you all for the very intrigueing , thought provoking responses :) I have indeed considered reconstructionism but I am hesitant due to some saying its a more strict practice which slightly intimidates me. As I feared judging by some parts of responses , I see in parts of my post I must have conveyed the message that I was coupling age with validity , and that the history is ALL I care about which is not the message I wished to send :( oh well , we all have our different interpretations , but the fact of the matter is the thought of the possibility that some guy 60 years ago , made a great deal of it all up ( which some people have blatantly stated to me ) was disturbing to me. I am in no way some anti wiccan because up to this point I have been a part of the faith- and happily I might add , but at some point in everyones life we inevitably come to doubt ourselves and our faith sometimes as well , which isnt necessarily a bad thing , I do not wish to follow something with blind faith and devotion , because it borders on ignorance to never question a single aspect of your faith........well In case Im making no sense ( which is quite possible because Im in a rather confused stage in my life :) ) I'll stop rambling to hopefully prevent further offense....which I honestly do not intend to cause . Thanks again for the great insights and different views , puts things in perspective for me during the troubling times I am presently dealing with.

[mothwench]

i see what you mean. i can imagine the dissappointment of someone being drawn to the so-called "old religion" (with no explinations as to what is meant by this) and then finding out it was invented in the 40's by gardner.

and please, don't stop rambling. i don't think you caused any offense at all. in my opinion, this is an important issue every wiccan should deal with, and it should be made aware of.

i'm not anti-wiccan either, in fact i think it would be rather suited to me, by my beliefs (celtic and norse) if i weren't such a sceptical person by nature. i simply can't base my faith on someone else's personal gnosis. and being a reconstructionist lets me form my own view of things without the information being altered, without things added or things left out to match a certain credo. now when (in a decade or so :rolleyes: ) i finally get the grasp of all things b.c.e. then i can read the books by gardner and cunningham and all the rest of them again, and see if they make any sense. who knows, maybe one day i will turn to wicca, but only if it makes sense to me.

[Ben Trismegistus]

i'm not anti-wiccan either, in fact i think it would be rather suited to me, by my beliefs (celtic and norse) if i weren't such a sceptical person by nature. i simply can't base my faith on someone else's personal gnosis.

Just a short comment on this. Despite the relatively recent invention of Wicca as a spiritual practice, I wouldn't call it a faith based on "someone else's personal gnosis". In fact, the Charge of the Goddess (one of the closest things Wicca has to an "official prayer") states, "For if that which you seek, you find not within yourself, you will never find it without."

The point of this is that Wicca is all about YOUR personal gnosis. The "new" parts of Wicca (which is to say, the stuff that was invented in the 1940s) is primarily ritual and structure. It's the nuts and bolts of the religious practice, rather than the theology itself.

In my coven, for example, I'm always amazed in the differences in personal theology among the members -- different beliefs regarding reincarnation, karma, deities, magic, etc. What unites us as a coven and as Wiccans is the way we practice -- casting circle a certain way, utilizing certain shamanic meditation practices, etc. And while we have certain basic theological points in common (the dual nature of divinity, elemental correspondences, etc.) we're each free to form our own personal beliefs regarding the theological universe and our individual place in it.

[mothwench]

well, for me, those are all things that should go without saying in a non-opressing religion and is not what i meant at all. what i mean is (please correct me if i'm wrong) that many wiccan ideals, theories and beliefs are based or at least inspired by books like the white goddess and the golden bough, both great works of literature in their own right, but unfortunately laced with misinterpretations, omissions, exaggerations and sometimes even blatent fabrications.

[Ben Trismegistus]

well, for me, those are all things that should go without saying in a non-opressing religion and is not what i meant at all. what i mean is (please correct me if i'm wrong) that many wiccan ideals, theories and beliefs are based or at least inspired by books like the white goddess and the golden bough, both great works of literature in their own right, but unfortunately laced with misinterpretations, omissions, exaggerations and sometimes even blatent fabrications.

Well, yes and no. Gardner was certainly inspired by the White Goddess & the Golden Bough, but modern Wiccans (usually) recognize that those books are tremendously flawed, and respect the books more for their literary or historical merit than as a real influence on their theology.

Additionally, the Wiccan ideas that grew out of those two books are generally things that Graves or Frazer took from pre-existing sources. The Triple Goddess, for example -- while Graves is credited with first codifying the Maiden/Mother/Crone form of the Triple Goddess, it was not a new idea. Individual Triple Goddesses appeared all through the ancient world, and Graves (and the English woman on whose ideas he based his own, whose name escapes me at the moment) simply took a specific aspect and interpreted it as a general aspect. Whether it's in fact "true" or not is unimportant - it's whether the idea resonates with you.

Does that make any sense?

[Heathen Dawn]

but the fact of the matter is the thought of the possibility that some guy 60 years ago , made a great deal of it all up ( which some people have blatantly stated to me ) was disturbing to me.

All religions are man-made; Christianity is too, and there was a time when it too was 50 years old. The pedigree game is pointless. “My religion is older, hence better, than yours” is a childish sport. Does the religion heal your spirit (http://www.geocities.com/eclecticsatyr/healing.htm)? That’s what counts.

[Romani Vixen]

Wicca is *neo*-pagan. But as others have stated there are many Pagan faiths that aren't nearly as new. It just takes a lot of reading to determine what in the religions are new and what isn't.

[Athena-Nadine]

Akatlarion, I'm sorry, but I strongly feel thaty you are going about all of this the wrong way. Now, don't misunderstand me; I know what you're saying. The point is, it seems to me as if you don't even know what you believe in your heart, and until you figure that out, no religion will be right for you, no matter its age.

[mato]

Religion isn’t wine; it doesn’t get better with age.

And yet like wine, people do stupid stuff when they have too much.

[mothwench]

:T sorry but that was just too funny.

[Akatlarion]

Akatlarion, I'm sorry, but I strongly feel thaty you are going about all of this the wrong way. Now, don't misunderstand me; I know what you're saying. The point is, it seems to me as if you don't even know what you believe in your heart, and until you figure that out, no religion will be right for you, no matter its age.


This is the first post Ive done that youve read and you already go ahead and assume you know ANYTHING of what I believe in my heart?! Im sorry but thats incredibly judgemental of you , and I dont appreciate it. What divine knowledge have you to state both whats right for me , a person you do not know or understand , and determine what is the "wrong way" to go about further understanding my faith . I have already said and will not say again that I was simply questioning ONE aspect of my faith , and I am NOT basing my whole belief system on age which no one seems to want to pay attention to , I wish I never posted on this board.

[Kaylara]

*Administrator Mode*

1. No flaming or abuse of other members is allowed in the community.

2. No bashing of other religions or personal Paths is allowed in this community. Discussion of Paths is allowed and disagreement is also allowed but the act of telling someone a Path is "invalid or wrong" (for example) is not allowed.

Please refrain from breaking the above rules, or else this thread will be closed.

*End administrator mode*

[Athena-Nadine]

This is the first post Ive done that youve read and you already go ahead and assume you know ANYTHING of what I believe in my heart?! Im sorry but thats incredibly judgemental of you , and I dont appreciate it. What divine knowledge have you to state both whats right for me , a person you do not know or understand , and determine what is the "wrong way" to go about further understanding my faith . I have already said and will not say again that I was simply questioning ONE aspect of my faith , and I am NOT basing my whole belief system on age which no one seems to want to pay attention to , I wish I never posted on this board.
Fine. Whatever. :rolleyes: But keep this in mind--we can only reply to the words you write. You posted here, saying that you were having trouble with Wicca because of its age, and asked if there are any Pagan religions that are older. You could get nothing but vague answers, because no one here has any idea of exactly what it is you are looking for. By just asking if we could point you to some religions older than Wicca, you make it seem as if you would jump right into a religion for the shallowest of reasons. How is anyone supposed to know that that is not exactly what you are basing your idea of religion on? People here have asked you why it matters so much to you, but you have chosen to ignore every single one of them.

If you are so sure of what you believe in your heart, why be so defensive when I was only trying to help? If you are so sure of what you believe in your heart, why does the age of a religion bother you so much? Do you think every other religion started out being over 1,000 years old? If you are so certain about what you believe in your heart, why do you need to find a specific religion at all? Why not just happily live your beliefs and enjoy your relationship with your gods?

Do you realize that by asking for completely different religions, you will be pointed to completely different beliefs? Possibly even different gods? Do your gods and beliefs mean so little to you that you would just be able to abandon them for something "older?"

For what it's worth, I am not Wiccan. I am a Reconstructionist. And there is a reason why there are so few of us compared to Wiccans. Most Pagans don't want the structure we live with in our religions. Many Pagans feel that reconstructionists restrict and confine themselves because each Reconstructionist religion has its own rules, even dogma. Most pagans do not share my religious views. Hence, they choose a different walk. And there's nothing wrong with that. *...shrugs...* That's their prerogative. By the same token, my religion is my religion because it is the only proper way I can see to honor, worship, and have a relationship with my gods. Just as every other Pagan chooses the religion that best serves that purpose for them.

Be angry with me all you want. *...shrugs...* Instead of expending that energy on me, maybe you should be using it to ask your gods what path you should be treading. Maybe then you'll realize one day that I was truly only trying to help you.

[Illuminatus]

Tried Judaism?

Can't get much older than that. 5764 years (possibly more) and counting!

[Heathen Dawn]

Tried Judaism?

Can't get much older than that. 5764 years (possibly more) and counting!

No, that’s the age of the universe. Seriously. When I was an Orthodox Jew my rabbis told me to kick evolution and millions of years and be a young-earth creationist.

But keep this in mind--we can only reply to the words you write.

So true. An oft-forgotten fact of using this communication medium.

[Kaylara]

Nallia, that Moderation was directed at you as well.

Again:

*Administrator Mode*

1. No flaming or abuse of other members is allowed in the community.

2. No bashing of other religions or personal Paths is allowed in this community. Discussion of Paths is allowed and disagreement is also allowed but the act of telling someone a Path is "invalid or wrong" (for example) is not allowed.

Please refrain from breaking the above rules, or else this thread will be closed.

*End administrator mode*
One more moderation needed here, and I will close this thread.

[TYRRHENUS]

When it was time to determine who would be the king of Latium, the twins went to the augur. Remus looked to the sky and said: "I see six eagles." Romulus then looked to the sky and said: "I see twelve eagles."
Romulus' supporters claimed quantity outranked precedence.
Remus' supporters claimed precedence outranked quantity.
In the many variations of the twins' story, Romulus always became the king. But in the end the Romans based the validity of a religion on precedence.
All societies have to come to a definition of religion. If we Neo-Pagans represent a society, then by all means we should continue the debate. Else, the matter should be dropped, for this need of precedence plagues us more than any hostility from religious fundamentalists and is literally tearing us apart.

P.S. I admit I'm guilty of it too.

[Akatlarion]

Ok, I see that I was more irritable this morning and I overreacted . I did not mean to create so much negative energy , and I see that I have and so , I apologise . I am not angry , and I hope everyone doesnt perceive me as something I am not for a simple matter of miscommunication . If anyone is angry with me , thats ok , Im a big girl and I can handle it. By looking at my original post I can see why this thread went in a bad direction , and once again for my actions I apologise. With the things going on in my life right now , I feel depressed enough already and I could do without the additional stress so , well... at this point no one knows me as anything but something Im not so , all I can do is own up for my foolishness and hope no ones going to dislike me just because I got upset and made my first posting experience a rather bad one :(