Path: typhoon.sonic.net!feed.news.sonic.net!in.100proofnews.com!in.100proofnews.com!prodigy.com!newsmst01.news.prodigy.com!prodigy.com!postmaster.news.prodigy.com!newssvr27.news.prodigy.com.POSTED!cfe93d50!not-for-mail Message-ID: <4058B2E0.939515DF@pacbell.net> From: Joseph Littleshoes Reply-To: jpstifel@pacbell.net Organization: Omnitheistic Church X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.01aC-DIAL (Macintosh; U; PPC) MIME-Version: 1.0 Newsgroups: alt.magick.tyagi,alt.religion.wicca,alt.witchcraft,alt.pagan Subject: Re: Is Witchcraft Satanic (&Potter Books Therefore Demonic!)? X-Priority: 3 (Normal) References: <404be9a7$1_1@news.tm.net.my> <4Sc5c.8725$_3.112019@typhoon.sonic.net> <16a5f$4056105e$d89e2d68$15464@dcanet.allthenewsgroups.com> <40575497_3@corp.newsgroups.com> <99065$405768eb$d89e2d68$25692@dcanet.allthenewsgroups.com> <2dK5c.18401$iT1.404744247@news-text.cableinet.net> <5b261$405787c7$d89e2d68$26638@dcanet.allthenewsgroups.com> <40589344$0$3301$cc9e4d1f@news-text.dial.pipex.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; x-mac-type="54455854"; x-mac-creator="4D4F5353" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Lines: 56 NNTP-Posting-Host: 67.118.253.144 X-Complaints-To: abuse@prodigy.net X-Trace: newssvr27.news.prodigy.com 1079554812 ST000 67.118.253.144 (Wed, 17 Mar 2004 15:20:12 EST) NNTP-Posting-Date: Wed, 17 Mar 2004 15:20:12 EST X-UserInfo1: OX[SSWWG\RWYBPH]^JKBOW@@YJ_ZTB\MV@BT]_MIJQR@EPIB_VUKAH_[MTX\IS[K[NGYJJFNOFZR_G[BUNTAOQLFE^TEHRPI]PZZRP_BMDSFQFL_]CBHXRWCMDCUZAZN@D_AKMNLEI]MWHCSXL^]NNC__CZFGSGHYYXWPFG@SCAVA]\FT\@B\RDGENSUQS^M Date: Wed, 17 Mar 2004 20:20:12 GMT Xref: typhoon.sonic.net alt.magick.tyagi:46386 alt.religion.wicca:829956 alt.witchcraft:69722 alt.pagan:389775 Jani wrote: > "Gemini" wrote in message > news:5b261$405787c7$d89e2d68$26638@dcanet.allthenewsgroups.com... > > Jani wrote: > > > > > "Gemini" wrote > > > >>As a pagan, its no suprise that "the devil" was given horns, as > the god > > >>in most pagan beliefs is referred to as the "horned-one" and > depicted > > >>with antlers, as this made the pagans of the time (actually not > pagans > > >>then) seem "evil" > > > > > > > > > Arggghhh - horns are *not* the same as antlers ... > > > > > > > I know that. Very early depictions of "The Devil" were a 1/2 goat > man > > with antlers - and almost exact description of "The Horned One" from > > > pagan beliefs. > > Well, Christianity certainly took various horned and antlered deities > and > lumped them all in together as "the devil" wherever representations of > them > appeared. But the antlered god and the horned god have different > origins and > attributes, since there wasn't a single set of homogenous "pagan > beliefs". > Cernunnos isn't much like Pan, just as stags aren't much like goats. > > Jani Theological implications of the "adversary" (the Devil) are one thing, the pictorial representation, its iconography are another, and can be traced back to the old male fertility gods of Greece and Rome. That the "Devil" is simplistically offered as a religious "scapegoat" is interesting in its "Baphomet" image but i think Crowley summed it up very well in his XVth Trump of his Tarot deck, making the predominant symbol that of the phallus. A very good, but hard to find book to illustrate this point is "Phallic art of Pompeii." But a general survey of the image of the devil from about the 4th century c.e. on will demonstrate to all but the most closed minded fundamentalist the reasonableness of the assertion. After all, it was much easier to demonize an existing image than to invent a completely new one. -- Joseph (IO PAN IO PAN) Littleshoes