----------------------------------------------------------------
Copyright 1994 by the Christian Research Institute.
----------------------------------------------------------------
COPYRIGHT/REPRODUCTION LIMITATIONS:
This data file is the sole property of the Christian Research
Institute. It may not be altered or edited in any way. It may
be reproduced only in its entirety for circulation as "freeware,"
without charge. All reproductions of this data file must contain
the copyright notice (i.e., "Copyright 1994 by the Christian
Research Institute"). This data file may not be used without the
permission of the Christian Research Institute for resale or the
enhancement of any other product sold. This includes all of its
content with the exception of a few brief quotations not to
exceed more than 500 words.
If you desire to reproduce less than 500 words of this data file
for resale or the enhancement of any other product for resale,
please give the following source credit: Copyright 1994 by the
Christian Research Institute, P.O. Box 500-TC, San Juan
Capistrano, CA 92693.
-----------------------------------------------------------------
"The Modern World of Witchcraft: Part Two" (an article from the
Christian Research Journal, Summer 1990, page 22) by Craig S.
Hawkins.
The Editor-in-Chief of the Christian Research Journal is
Elliot Miller.
-------------
In Part One of this series we briefly examined modern and
contemporary witchcraft, discussing some of the major beliefs of
this syncretistic movement. The present article will further
expound on witchcraft, and also critique it from a biblical,
metaphysical, epistemological, and ethical basis.
It is essential to keep in mind that this movement encompasses
a wide range of practices and beliefs. Consequently some of the
critiques presented in this article may require some adaptation or
modification in order to be applicable to certain variations of
belief within the broader system of witchcraft and neopaganism.
Nonetheless, the body of critiques presented here apply
_substantially_ to most witches and neopagans.
-------------------------------------------------------------------
*Glossary*
*epistemology:* The study of the origin and nature of
knowledge. Deals with questions like: What can we know? How do we
know it? How do we know it is _true?_ To what extent can we know
it? And so forth.
*ontology:* As used here ontology is a branch of metaphysics
(which in turn is a branch of philosophy -- _see_ Part One) and,
more specifically, is the study of the nature or essence of Being
-- the One -- and its relationship to creation and vice versa.
*panentheism:* The view that the world is _contained in_ and is
a _manifestation of_ the divine. Although the divine is immanent
_in_ and _to_ the world, it still transcends the universe to some
degree. As the human body is to the soul or mind, so the universe
is to the divine.
*problem of evil:* The origin and existence of evil in the
world. Traditionally, there are three main categories of evil:
metaphysical, moral, and physical or natural. Blindness, deafness,
and lameness are examples of _metaphysical_ evil; cruelty and
malevolence are examples of _moral_ evil; and earthquakes,
droughts, and tornados are examples of _physical_ evil. All moral
evil is the direct or indirect result of moral agents' free wills
or ability to choose. Physical and metaphysical evil may or may not
be the result of moral agents' choices.
*syncretism:* The combining or merging and synthesizing of
religions or religious beliefs, practices, and philosophies. This
results in new or hybrid religions that are composed of diverse
elements of the religions from which they were derived.
-------------------------------------------------------------------
*MAGICAL MANIPULATION*
Many witches do not believe in spirits, and most if not all
reject belief in a literal Devil or demons. Naturally, therefore,
they reject the idea that sorcery and divination are accomplished
by the agency of evil spirits. Many offer naturalistic explanations
for the working of magic and divination and other "psychic
technologies." On the whole, the occult community today has
expanded its definition of "the natural" to incorporate elements
that were earlier considered supernatural, placing them in the
category of the super- or paranormal instead. Yet, they are still
involved in the "old ways" -- that is, the occult.
*Now You See it, Now You Don't*
What has happened in the occult world in the past two or more
decades is just what C. S. Lewis described in his classic work,
_The Screwtape Letters_ -- which portrays an experienced demon
(Screwtape) writing letters of advice to a novice demon (Wormwood):
I have great hopes that we shall learn in due time how to
emotionalize and mythologize their science to such an
extent that what is, in effect, a belief in us, (though
not under that name) will creep in while the human mind
remains closed to belief in the Enemy [i.e., God]. The
"Life Force," the worship of sex, and some aspects of
Psychoanalysis, may here prove useful. If once we can
produce our perfect work -- the Materialist Magician, the
man, not using, but veritably worshipping, what he
vaguely calls "Forces" while denying the existence of
"spirits" -- then the end of the war will be in sight.[1]
Lewis's insights on the insidious strategy of Satan -- the
archenemy of our souls -- appear to have been right on target in
regard to modern occultism.[2]
When observations like Lewis's are made, however, it is not
uncommon to hear remarks to the effect that Christians attribute to
the supernatural everything they cannot comprehend -- if it cannot
be understood, it _must_ be the Devil. However, this charge is
unwarranted.
While it is unfortunately true that some Christians tend to
hyperspiritualize events and exclaim "the Devil did it," or "the
Devil made me do it," this is certainly _not_ the case with all.
Many Christians have pointed out alleged demonic (or divine)
occurrences which were -- in fact -- instances of fraud, anomalies,
psychosomatic phenomena, auto- or heterosuggestion, and so
forth.[3] Such Christians have demystified baffling occurrences and
accounted for them by their natural causes.
*Black, White, or Neutral?*
The critical question is, What is the actual source or causal
agent(s) of the occult (i.e., of divination, sorcery, and
spiritism)? Some witches like to make a distinction between black
and white magic/sorcery and divination. They claim that sorcery or
divination performed for unselfish and/or "benevolent" purposes (to
help others) is good. Thus, magic done with good intentions and
desired results is classified as _white_ magic. Conversely, sorcery
performed with selfish and/or malevolent motives and means (to harm
others) is classified as _black_ magic.
Other witches deny the validity of this distinction or find it
useless. Since they regard magic as a natural force they view it as
_morally neutral_ (i.e., not intrinsically good or evil). Like
electricity, some say, magic can be used _for_ good or evil -- but
just as one would not speak of black or white electricity, one
should not do so with magic either.
Christians too deny the validity of a distinction between black
and white magic or divination, albeit for entirely different
reasons. Whether called black, white, negative, or positive -- any
such distinction is illegitimate. Where the Christian and all
witches disagree is on the ultimate source, the actual identity,
the who or what behind the scenes of the occult.
It is the Christian's conviction that despite all their magical
theories, witches (and all other occultists) have failed to grasp
the true source of the occult. I therefore offer the following
biblical perspective on their beliefs and practices.
*WHAT SAYS THE WORD?*
Since witches do not generally accept the teachings of the
Bible, we will not spend much time on a biblical critique.[4]
However, even a cursory review of Scripture is enough to
demonstrate that the beliefs and practices of witches are utterly
incompatible with the Bible. Witches who honestly examine the
Scriptural testimony will have no choice but to admit that the
Bible condemns their beliefs and practices.
In fact, Scripture gives a blanket condemnation of _all_ forms
of the occult -- divination, sorcery, and spiritism -- in diverse
passages throughout the Old and New Testaments. For instance, in
Deuteronomy 18:10-12 God's view of occultism is expressed in the
following warning: "Let no one be found among you who sacrifices
his son or daughter in the fire, who practices divination or
sorcery, interprets omens, engages in witchcraft, or casts spells,
or who is a medium or spiritist or who consults the dead. Anyone
who does these things is detestable to the LORD..."
If this were the only biblical passage dealing with this issue,
it would be clear that all forms of the occult are denounced by
God. Yet, this is only one of many condemnatory references (see,
e.g., Lev. 19:26, 31; 20:6; 2 Kings 17:10-17; 21:1-6; 23:4-7,
24-25; 2 Chron. 33:6; Acts 13:6-12; 16:18; Gal. 5:20; Rev. 9:21).
Moreover, numerous forms of god and goddess worship are
explicitly condemned in Scripture. There are, for example, a
multitude of denunciatory references to worshipping or invoking the
various gods and goddesses of the Near Eastern religions: the
Assyrian and Babylonian Ishtar, the Ashtoreths of the Canaanites
(e.g., the Sidonians and Phoenicians), and so forth (e.g., Deut.
16:21; Judg. 2:10-14; 10:6-16; 1 Sam. 7:3-4; 12:10; 1 Kings 11:33;
2 Kings 23:13-15). Ashtoreth is described in 2 Kings 23:13 as "the
vile goddess of the Sidonians" (NIV), or -- as the KJV and NASB
translate it -- "the abomination of the Sidonians." The Bible
speaks out not only against worshipping, invoking, and consulting
pagan gods, but also against the idea that human beings --
individually or collectively -- are divine.
In one sense, witches are right about the antiquity of some of
their beliefs and practices. The belief that human beings are or
can become divine is a good example. In the first book of the Bible
(Gen. 3:5) we find the original proposal -- made by the serpent --
of the idea that we could become "like God." But Scripture
emphatically states that there is only one being who is God (Deut.
6:4; 32:39; Isa. 43:10-11; 44:6-8; 45:5-6, 14, 22; 46:9; Jer.
10:10-11; Mark 12:29-31; 1 Tim. 2:5; James 2:19). Though there are
many so-called gods or goddesses -- in the sense that people
worship entities conceived by their imaginations -- there is only
one God _by nature_ (1 Cor. 8:4-5; 10:20; Gal. 4:8). As one astute
observer remarked: "There are two foundational facts of human
enlightenment: (1) There is a God; and (2) You are not He."
Humankind has not only demonstrated a great proclivity towards
self-deification, it has also been strongly inclined to confuse
God's creation (or _His_ creative process) for the Creator Himself
(Rom. 1:21-25). This is certainly the case with those entangled in
the teachings of modern witchcraft.
Some witches have actually tried to reconcile the above
passages and others with their own practices. Nonetheless, the
Bible -- particularly in the original languages -- renders any such
maneuvering futile.[5] We therefore ask that witches at least
acknowledge that the Bible in no sense condones their practices,
but rather expressly condemns them.
*The Source of the Force*
Like a drunkard who continually returns to the bottle, so
mankind's bent toward self-deification and creation worship has
been irrepressible, as has been its blindness towards its own
deplorable predicament due to the ravaging effects of sin. To wit,
witches are deceived _not only_ about the inherent falsity of their
often sincerely held beliefs (see Prov. 14:12), but as well about
the _source_ of their misguided belief system. Despite what witches
claim, witchcraft originates from Satan -- the "father of lies" and
the "god of this world," and from man's corrupt nature. Thus,
though witches do not acknowledge the Devil's existence, they are
nonetheless (all the more so) trapped in the talons of his
tyrannical grip (2 Tim. 2:25-26).
To witches who believe that magic is a natural, neutral force
or power, Christians reply that it is rather empowered by "the
prince of the power of the air that now works in the children of
disobedience" (Eph. 2:2).
As such, whether witches acknowledge it or not, _all_ occultism
involves interaction and trafficking with demonic spirits (_see_
Lev. 17:7; 20:6; Deut. 32:17; Ps. 106:36-39; 1 Cor. 10:20-21; Rev.
9:20-21).[6] As W. Foerster comments, "For Paul witchcraft is
meddling with demons....But there can also be intercourse with
demons in the normal heathen cultus (1 C. 10:20f.)....While idols
are nothing...demons stand behind paganism."[7] Or, as Bietenhard
informs us, "Since dealing with demons lies behind sorcery...it is
rejected (Gal. 5:20)....Heathen worship brings men into contact
with demons (1 Cor. 10:20f.), for demons stand behind paganism in
general (Rev. 9:20)."[8]
This is why occultism in all its forms is condemned in the
Bible. Occultists therefore fall under the judgment of God for
participating in such inexcusable activities (Rom. 1:18-25; Eph.
4:18-19; Rev. 21:8; 22:15).
Since witches generally do not accept the Bible, and because
there are other inherent weaknesses and failings in their world
view -- metaphysical, epistemological, and ethical -- we can and
should critique witchcraft in these areas as well. This I shall
do in the remainder of this article.
*METAPHYSICAL MALADIES*
In Part One I discussed the importance of polytheism as
understood by witches and the related concept of an "open"
metaphysic -- that is, the position that there are multiple levels
of and meanings to reality. This is expressed in the belief that
there is "no one way or right religion for all," and no "one
truth."[9] We are told by witches that all religions lead in the
same direction; they simply take different paths to get there.
*Existential Essence*
Witches further believe that everything one experiences is in
some sense real and _therefore_ true. Since reality is multiple and
diverse, and since the possible levels or planes of meaning are
infinite, there is always _more_ to experience. We should therefore
remain open-minded and tolerant of differing views.[10]
Witches who think along these lines hold that everyone has a
_part of_ the truth, for every person operates from a limited
subjective perspective of the world.[11] And since no one has an
absolute knowledge or perspective of reality (ultimate reality is
inaccessible to us), all views and experiences must be seen as
equally valid. One view is as good or true as another (minimally,
it is true for that individual). Reality, then, is a matter of
perspective -- and everyone has a different one.
*Romantic Rationalizations*
Christians certainly grant that witches have the right to
believe whatever they choose, as much as we might disagree with
their views. However, we reject that logic and reason should be
ignored when we encounter two different views that are obviously
incompatible.
We also grant that life is complicated and diverse, and that
people can and do have an incalculable number of experiences.
However, this does not prevent us from knowing many significant
truths and facts about ultimate reality. We need to distinguish
between knowing _all_ about life or ultimate reality, which no
human being is capable of, and knowing _some_ true things about it.
These are two different issues. Without this distinction, we could
not make _any_ meaningful statements about reality.
*Experience and Truth*
Many witches fail to recognize a key distinction regarding the
validity of experiences. Over and over again, one finds a failure
on the witches' part to distinguish between _real_ experiences that
people actually have versus experiences that are _true._ For
instance, a man could have an experience or sensation of falling.
The feeling might be quite intense. Upon awakening from his sleep,
however, he realizes that he was not falling at all but lying on
his bed. Did he have the experience of _feeling_ like he was
falling? Yes. Was he _really_ falling? No! The latter question is
not "Did he have this experience?" but "was he _really_ falling?"
These are two entirely different issues. To confuse the two is to
commit the fallacy of equivocation.
We do not dispute that witches have many experiences that may
_appear_ to support their religion, but we must ask: Do these
experiences really prove their assertions or only prove that they
had some type of experience? Appealing to experience only
establishes that one might have _had_ one, not that one's world
view is _true._
The idea that each world view is like one more flower in the
garden of life is a nice sentiment, but it does not fit the real
world. In fact, it is nothing short of metaphysical madness. To
paraphrase and adapt a quip by Edgar Sheffield Brightman, "In a
world where Christianity and witchcraft are both true, we do not
have a universe, but a cosmic nut house!"
As we shall see presently, the metaphysical framework of the
witches' world has important implications in the realm of testing
truth claims.
*EPISTEMOLOGY*
With their emphasis on experience and their belief in the
intuitive and existential nature of truth, witches fall into
diverse epistemological sinkholes on the road to truth. One finds
a consistent appeal to "knowing" _not_ by the intellect but by
experience and "intuition." One also finds an implicit or explicit
depreciation or denial of the principles or laws of thought.
For example, Starhawk -- a popularizer of the
witchcraft/neopagan world view -- disdains what she terms "any
beliefs which would...deny the authority of experience...," thus
reinforcing what she calls "the lie that there is only one
truth."[12] In the same way, Margot Adler -- another popular
neopagan writer -- argues for the superiority of experience over
dogma, and metaphor and myth over theology, doctrine, and
creed.[13]
Although one often hears witches downplay or outright deny
doctrines, dogma, and beliefs -- still, they too vehemently
champion _their_ beliefs.[14] To say that experience and ritual are
more important than doctrine _is itself a doctrine._ Besides, how
is it possible to have rituals in the first place if there are no
beliefs to give them meaning? In short: no beliefs, then no
rituals. Additionally, one must assert doctrines or beliefs and use
logic to even refute the idea of doctrine.
*Is Logic Necessary?*
Many people berate the use of logic and talk as if they could
think and do without it. The fact is, however, that it is
impossible _not_ to use logic. Should a person attempt to refute
logic, he or she must use logic in the very process of refuting it
-- thereby refuting his or her own argument. Let us be clear on
this: one must _use_ logic to _disprove_ logic. For instance,
suppose someone asserts that magic and experience are beyond logic
and reason (i.e., logic does not apply to these realms). The person
making this assertion has failed to note that this statement is
itself predicated upon the use of logic -- that is, logic had to be
utilized to even formulate it. Logic therefore _does_ apply.
Due to limited space, we will consider just one of the primary
laws of thought -- the law of non-contradiction.[15] This principle
affirms that a statement cannot both be true and false (A cannot be
non-A) at the same time and in the same sense. For example, it
cannot be the case that one both can _and_ cannot (at the same time
and in the same manner) safely cross a busy street. It is one or
the other, but not both. If one says it _is_ both _and_ attempts to
keep his (or her) actions consistent with his words, he will end up
being run over. When people fail to yield to logic, they will also
end up being run over by their own arguments (i.e., they assert
false, self-defeating, and/or meaningless statements).
Some (many?) witches try to avoid the anvil of logic, but to no
avail.[16] A case in point is Stewart Farrar, who approvingly
quoted C. G. Jung's assertion that "everything human is
relative."[17] To which we respond: Is this statement relative too,
since it was uttered by a human? If it is _not_ relative, then the
statement is not true. But if the statement itself _is_ relative,
that would mean there are times when it is not true -- when some
things human are _not_ relative, and are hence _absolute._ But this
would contradict Jung's original statement. Thus, it is both false
and self-defeating. Clearly, the sword of logic cuts both ways.
*Magical Immunity*
Witches often attempt to defend their magic castle from the
battering rams of logic by erecting supposedly impenetrable
walls.[18] Different explanations and rationalizations are offered
to protect their views. These include the aforementioned
depreciation, denial, or alleged inapplicability of logic and
objective standards for discerning truth; postulating diverse
planes or levels of reality and meaning; dichotomizing between
emotions and the intellect, or between normal versus altered states
of consciousness; and a number of other distinctions. To be fair,
many of these attempts are simply sincere efforts to understand the
mysterious world of the occult. Nonetheless, such attempts appear
to be cases of special pleading and of employing double standards
-- resulting in an assumed immunity from the normal criteria of
truth-testing used to verify or refute a world view.[19]
No matter what explanations and defenses are used, however,
experience and intuitive feelings are often an essential element of
the witches' world view validation -- "It feels right; I have truly
experienced it." Witches "know" via powerful spiritual and
emotional experiences that their views are true. Therefore, they
can at times affirm apparently contradictory assertions.
Again, regardless of which of the above distinctions are used
to advance or protect the witches' world view, _the distinctions
themselves are based upon the validity of logic._ Try as they may,
witches simply cannot _not_ use logic.
Our pagan friends are, so to speak, "up the metaphysical
creek," without a trustworthy epistemological "paddle" -- and are
caught in a whirlpool of subjective circularity that makes one's
head spin. Witches cannot appeal to logic when it suits them and
ignore it when it refutes them and still expect to be taken
seriously.
As we shall now see, the use of logic in the categories of
"both/and" as opposed to "either/or" have implications not just
for _thinking_ but for _ethics_ as well.
*ETHICS*
Witches do not believe in the concept of sin as defined by
orthodox Christianity. Sin is viewed as an outdated concept that is
"only a tool used to shackle the minds and actions of people." The
only "sin" or evil is that of being unbalanced and out of harmony
or estranged from oneself, others, the varied life forms, and
Mother Earth. As there is no sin or divine retribution to be saved
from, "salvation" has only to do with attaining and maintaining
harmony with the above.[20]
To their credit, many witches consistently appeal to their
ethical code -- the Wiccan Rede: "an it harm none, do what ye
will."[21] They further claim not to use their occultic abilities
for malevolent purposes since they believe (1) that any evil done
to another will come back upon the perpetrator threefold or more,
and (2) in some form of reincarnation (and the moral law of karma
which governs it). Some, such as Donald Frew, incorporate other
guidelines to determine the rightness of an action, such as the
general consensus of the witchcraft community, common sense, the
laws of the state, science, and pragmatic considerations.[22]
While the aforementioned is true, the Wiccan Rede is not
consistent with -- nor does it logically or ontologically follow
from -- the world views most commonly held by witches: pantheism
and panentheism.[23] It must derive, then, from someone or
something external to or independent of the universe or Goddess/God
or Life Force itself. But how can this be? In both pantheism and
panentheism, _nothing_ is outside or independent of the One, and
even death and evil are an intrical and necessary part of
reality.[24] The witches' ethical code is therefore inconsistent
with their metaphysical world view.
This dilemma is reflected in the teachings of Starhawk. For
example, though she does not think destruction is necessarily evil,
she states: "The nature of the Goddess is never single...She is
light and the darkness, the patroness of love and death, who makes
_all_ possibilities. She brings both comfort and pain."[25]
Elsewhere she says, "As Crone, She is the dark face of life, which
demands death and sacrifice...In Witchcraft, the dark, waning
aspect of the God is not evil -- it is a vital part of the natural
cycle."[26] This aspect of the divine manifesting itself in
polarities is echoed by almost all (if not all) witches. Erica Jong
tells us that "Satanists...accept the Christian duality between
good and evil; pagans do not...Pagans see good and evil as
intimately allied, in fact, indivisible. They conceive of deities
as having several aspects -- creation, destruction, sustenance --
rather than externalizing all destruction and destructiveness
('evil') in the form of devils."[27]
*The Problems of Life*
Whether witches realize it or not, these views raise some very
problematic ethical issues: (1) Where does the Wiccan Rede derive
from? (2) If there is "no one right religion, way, or truth for
all," then why is this rule (the Wiccan Rede) universal? How do we
know that witches are not just trying to impose _their_ rule on us
to "shackle our minds and actions"? (3) How do witches account for
the origin and existence of evil and suffering?
Space forbids us from addressing each of these questions, but
the third should -- indeed _must_ -- be addressed.
*Evil*
In _Dreaming the Dark,_ Starhawk attempts to grapple with
ethical issues and the problem of evil: "Evil is a concept that
cannot be separated from the stories of duality. Power-over,
violence, coercion...are not evil in the sense of being part of a
force in direct opposition to good. Instead, we can see them as
mistakes, processes born of chance that spread because they have
served their purposes....The problem of evil is really a problem of
randomness."[28] Other witches appeal to reincarnation and the law
of Karma to explain the existence of some evil and suffering.
Raymond Buckland asserts, "For its own evolution, it is necessary
that the soul experience all things in life. It seems the most
sensible, most logical, [_sic_] explanation of much that is found
in life...Why should one be born crippled, another fit and
strong?...if not because we must eventually experience all
things"[29] (elipses in original). Sybil Leek offers similar
reasons for the existence and necessity of evil in the world.[30]
*Naturalistic Fallacies*
The above two explanations create more problems than they
solve. For instance, if one must experience all in life (as
Buckland suggests), does this include being abused, tortured, and
so forth?[31]
It logically follows from such a view that whatever is, ought
to be. This is known in ethics as the _naturalistic fallacy,_ as it
confuses "the way things are" with how they morally should be.
Hence, what about the child born with crippling birth defects who
dies an agonizing death within two years? Should we respond, "Oh
well, whatever is, _ought_ to be" and thus just accept it as the
way things are? No, even a witch could not consistently live by
this approach. The witches world view logically and ontologically
justifies _any_ condition or conduct.
This results in an inability to morally distinguish between
good and evil, right and wrong. With such a naturalistic approach
one can only describe the way things _are_ (e.g., the drink is hot
or cold). One cannot make a moral evaluation. If life and death,
comfort and pain, joy and sorrow, are inherent to the very nature
of the world, then how can one call any action morally wrong,
including burning witches? It can't be done. But witches _do_ say
some actions are wrong. Or are they simply saying that they do not
_prefer_ certain actions? Hardly! Intuitively, they/we know certain
things are wrong -- such as torturing witches, confiscating their
property, abusing children, and so forth. They do not say these
things are merely unpleasant or inconvenient; they insist that they
are _wrong._
Christians, then, have every reason to ask how witches answer
the problem of the existence of evil. This is a perplexing problem,
and merely dismissing it will not solve it.
*The Problem of Evil*
There are conspicuously few in-depth discussions of the problem
of evil in neopagan literature. Many witches seem ignorant of this
issue, or -- for a number of reasons -- do not believe it applies
to their particular world view. For these, the existence of evil is
not a problem, because they do not conceive of the Goddess/God or
Life Force as being omniscient, omnipotent, and omnibenevolent.
These witches explain the problem of evil in one of three ways: (1)
they deny that evil exists; (2) they appeal to finite godism (or
goddessism); or (3) they appeal to humankind's free will. Let us
briefly consider each of these.
Does evil exist? Is evil only an illusion? Or is evil _not
really evil_ but just unfortunate circumstances? These views are
delusions.[32] To say evil does not exist is to be blind to
reality, for evil not only exists -- _it is all around us._ From
cruelty, corruption, calamity, flood and famine, disease and
drought, hatred, war, suffering, misery, pain, injustices, rape,
murder, and on and on -- _evil exists._ Evil is a fact of life. And
it is not just a case of "unfortunate" circumstances or the "breaks
of life." It is _unfortunate_ when one gets a flat tire at night on
a country road in a rain storm. It is rank _evil_ to kill six
million Jews as Hitler did. The death of human beings is the
epitome of evil and is not "natural" but is the greatest nemesis we
face. The existence of evil delivers a debilitating blow to the
witches' world view.
But, some witches counter, the Goddess/God and/or Life Force
is/are finite -- that is, not omnibenevolent, omniscient, or
omnipotent. Thus, they/it cannot be held responsible for evil.
The defense of finite godism, however, is wishful thinking.[33]
Even finite godism/goddessism must grapple with the existence of
evil. If the Goddess and/or God are finite, this does not excuse
the evil _it/they_ have birthed. Do we hold a finite inflictor of
suffering upon humanity -- like a Hitler, Stalin, or Mao -- any
less culpable simply because they were not infinite in their
abilities? Clearly, the finite godism appeal will not exonerate the
Goddess and God.
At this point, some will answer that evil derives from
humanity's failure to live in harmony with nature and/or from
exercising free will. But this cannot be the answer either. Since
the Goddess/God or Life Force itself contains or causes both life
_and_ death, good _and_ evil, how can it be said that one is not in
harmony with them/it if one commits or causes suffering or death?
We acknowledge that free will might account for _some_ of the
evil in the world. At best, it might explain evil that derives from
one human being forcing his or her will upon another. But it
certainly cannot account for _physical_ or _natural_ evil.
Where, then, does evil come from? What is its origin? According
to the witch's world view, it can derive logically and
ontologically only from the Goddess/God or primal Life Force. Are
not they (or it) the ultimate source of all? If they (or it)
created everything, and everything is a part or manifestation of
them, then they are the source and origin of evil. If one says that
the Goddess/God are _not_ ultimate, then where did they come from?
Who created them or gave them their free will or nature?
Depending on whether a witch is a pantheist, panentheist,
and/or polytheist, there are only so many possible explanations for
the origin and existence of evil. The problems inherent in a
polytheistic, pantheistic, or panentheistic perspective on the
problem of evil are too numerous to list.[34] However, we will
address some of the more significant ones.
In a pantheistic or panentheistic universe, witches must
realize that, ontologically, evil emanates or flows naturally and
necessarily from the very nature of the ultimate Life Force.
Creation and the existence of evil are synonymous and
simultaneous.[35] This entails that suffering, death, evil, and so
forth are part of the Goddess/God's very essence or nature. Good
and evil are both aspects of the One. _All_ is contained in, arises
out of, or is a manifestation of the absolute universal Life Force
or principle. Evil is ultimately and necessarily part of the One
which is all. Therefore, in one sense or another, the universal
Life Force is responsible for all the pain, suffering, and evil
that has, does, or ever will exist.
In a polytheistic framework, the Goddess(es) and God(s) are no
more praiseworthy. From a brief survey of history and the evidence
around us, we would have to conclude that these divine beings are
blithering, bungling idiots -- sort of the Inspector Clouseaus of
the cosmos. They are either unwilling or unable because of their
limitations to eliminate evil. They should be held in contempt
inasmuch as they are responsible for much of the evil of our world
which they supposedly created.
Whether in a polytheistic, pantheistic, or panentheistic
universe, we can have no assurance that the Goddess/God or Life
Force _can_ or _wants to_ defeat evil. Nor can we be sure that this
is even an appropriate question, since in the latter two worlds
evil is part of the One's very nature. Therefore, evil will no more
cease to exist than these entities or the Life Force itself. In
other words, evil is eternal -- it will always be with us.[36] It
is eternal because it is either an aspect of the very nature of the
"divinity" which creates and composes all (pantheism, panentheism),
or these deities are too limited to permanently accomplish the task
(polytheism). Only an infinite and benevolent _personal_ God could
and will banish evil from the universe.[37]
This alleged Goddess/God or Life Force is not worthy of
reverence but of our rage. It is responsible for all or nearly all
the pain, suffering, and sorrow that has existed or ever will
exist. Who would want to worship or admire such a Goddess/God? This
is an affront to our moral sensibilities. The optimism of witches
and neopagans is not justified; despair ought to be their response,
and a longing for the death of this alleged Goddess and her
tyrannical rule.
The problem of evil is an acute dilemma -- indeed, an Achilles'
heel for witches and neopagans. In light of this issue -- and the
witches' emphasis on the joyful celebration of life -- we must ask:
Do they simply ignore evil because it is not joyous? Remember, the
goddess is not only _mother_ and _maiden,_ but _crone_ as well.
*POSTSCRIPT FOR PAGANS*
The world is full of wonder, beauty, and joy. This same world,
however, contains paralyzing heartache, agonizing pain, misery, and
the stench of death. Let us experience and appreciate the joys of
life. But let us view the whole panorama of life and not just a
postcard picture, nor turn a deaf ear or blind eye to the suffering
of humanity and creation -- which is bleeding to death from a fatal
wound unless a divine physician can administer a healing touch and
save us.
The witches' world is fraught with problems, and we have
attempted to point out just a few of the pitfalls in the interest
of their finding life -- and that more abundantly (John 10:10).
*Notes*
1 C. S. Lewis, _The Screwtape Letters_ (New York: Macmillan
Publishing Co., 1975), 33.
2 For striking examples of this, _see_ note 32 in Part One of this
series, and T. M. Luhrmann, _Persuasions of the Witch's Craft:
Ritual Magic in Contemporary England_ (Cambridge: Harvard
University Press, 1989), 202, 279-96.
3 _See_ Norman Geisler, _Signs and Wonders_ (Wheaton, IL: Tyndale
House Publishers, 1988), 47-81; _See_ also Danny Korem and Paul
Meier, _The Fakers_ (Old Tappan, NJ: Fleming H. Revell Co.,
1980); and Danny Korem, _Powers: Testing the Psychic and
Supernatural_ (Downers Grove, IL: InterVarsity Press, 1988).
4 _See The New International Dictionary of New Testament Theology_
(DNTT), ed. Colin Brown (Grand Rapids: Zondervan Publishing
House, 1980), vol. 2., s.v. "Magic, Sorcery, Magi"; _The
International Standard Bible Encyclopedia,_ rev. ed., ed.
Geoffrey W. Bromiley (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans Publishing Co.,
1980), vol. 1, s.v. "Divination"; _Ibid.,_ (1986), vol. 3, s.v.
"Magic, Magician"; _Ibid.,_ s.v. "Medium"; and _The New Bible
Dictionary,_ ed. J. D. Douglas (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans
Publishing Co., 1978), s.v. "Magic and Sorcery."
5 These attempts and the arguments which counter them are
available upon request.
6 _See_ the _DNTT,_ vol. 1, s.v. "Demon, Air, Cast Out." For the
definitive treatment, _see_ the _Theological Dictionary of the
New Testament_ (TDNT), ed. Gerhard Kittel, trans. and ed.
Geoffrey W. Bromiley (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans Publishing Co.,
1978), vol. 2, s.v. "_daimon, daimonion...._"
7 TDNT, vol. 2, 17.
8 DNTT, s.v. "_daimonion,_" vol. 1, 452.
9 _See_ Margot Adler, _Drawing Down the Moon: Witches, Druids,
Goddess-Worshippers, and Other Pagans in America Today,_ rev.
and expanded ed. (Boston: Beacon Press, 1986), 23-38, 169, 172,
299, 455; Raymond Buckland, _Buckland's Complete Book of
Witchcraft_ (St. Paul: Llewellyn Publications, 1988), 99; Scott
Cunningham, _The Truth about Witchcraft Today_ (St. Paul:
Llewellyn Publications, 1988), 66-67; Sybil Leek, _Diary of a
Witch_ (New York: Signet Books, 1969), 14; Starhawk, _Dreaming
the Dark,_ new ed. (Boston: Beacon Press, 1988), 37-38;
Starhawk, _The Spiral Dance_ (San Francisco: Harper & Row,
1979), 188-89.
10 _See_, e.g., Adler, 172.
11 _See,_ e.g., Luhrmann, 290-93.
12 Starhawk, _Dreaming,_ 22, 41.
13 Adler, 27-36, 169-73, 441-42, 455.
14 _See,_ e.g., Starhawk, _Spiral,_ 190, 197; Adler, 20, 169-73.
15 Consult Irving Copi, _Introduction to Logic,_ seventh ed. (New
York: Macmillan Publishing Co., 1982), 306-8.
16 _See,_ e.g., Starhawk, _Spiral,_ 188-90.
17 Stewart Farrar, _What Witches Do: The Modern Coven Revealed_
(London: Sphere Books, 1971), 43.
18 _See,_ e.g., Adler, 36, 43, 86, 164-65, 169-73; Starhawk,
_Spiral,_ 188-92; Luhrmann: 274-96, 301-3, 335-36.
19 For some good treatments on logic and adequate criteria to test
truth claims, _see_ Edward J. Carnell, _Introduction to
Christian Apologetics_ (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans Publishing Co.,
1976), 45-62; Norman Geisler, _Christian Apologetics_ (Grand
Rapids: Baker Book House, 1978), 141-47; and Norman Geisler and
William Watkins, _Worlds Apart: A Handbook on World Views_
(Grand Rapids: Baker Book House, 1989), 105, 262-69.
20 _See,_ e.g., Starhawk, _Spiral,_ 11-12, 14.
21 Despite the claim that witches _never_ use their real or
imagined abilities to harm another, there is ample evidence to
the contrary. References are available on request.
22 B. Alexander and D. Frew, _Christian/Pagan Forum,_ audio
cassette (A 010), (Berkeley: SCP, 1986), October, 19.
23 Space does not permit a thorough discussion of these points.
However, they are discussed at length by Geisler and Watkins in
_Worlds Apart,_ 75-146, 239-53, 255-69; and Geisler, _Christian
Apologetics,_ 173-213.
24 _See_ note 22.
25 Starhawk, _Spiral,_ 80.
26 _Ibid.,_ 29.
27 Erica Jong, _Witches_ (New York: Harry N. Abrams Publishers,
1981), 52.
28 Starhawk, _Dreaming,_ 43.
29 Buckland, 17.
30 Sybil Leek, _The Complete Art of Witchcraft_ (New York: Signet
Books, 1973), 146-47.
31 _See_ note 28 for the horrific results of this type of belief.
For some critiques of reincarnation, consult Mark C. Albrecht,
_Reincarnation: A Christian Critique of a New Age Doctrine_
(Downers Grove, IL: InterVarsity Press, 1989), 51-111, 127-30;
and Norman Geisler and J. Yutaka Amano, _The Reincarnation
Sensation_ (Wheaton, IL: Tyndale House Publishers, 1986), 57-86,
99-102, 107-9, 112.
32 _See,_ e.g., Norman Geisler and Winfried Corduan, _Philosophy of
Religion,_ 2d. ed. (Grand Rapids: Baker Book House, 1988),
297-98.
33 _Ibid.,_ 299-300.
34 _See_ notes 22 and 35.
35 Albrecht, 106-9.
36 _See_ Albrecht, 106-9, and note 22.
37 For a full discussion of this issue, _see_ Norman Geisler, _The
Roots of Evil_ (Grand Rapids: Zondervan Publishing House, 1979);
and Geisler and Corduan, _Philosophy of Religion,_ 293-385.
-------------
End of document, CRJ0069A.TXT (original CRI file name),
"The Modern World of Witchcraft: Part Two"
release A, April 25, 1994
R. Poll, CRI
(A special note of thanks to Bob and Pat Hunter for their help in
the preparation of this ASCII file for BBS circulation.)
-----------------------------------------------------------------
The Christian Research Journal is published quarterly by the
Christian Research Institute (CRI) -- founded in 1960 by the late
Dr. Walter R. Martin. While CRI is concerned with and involved
in the general defense of the faith, our area of research
specialization is limited to elements within the modern religious
scene that compete with, assault, or undermine biblical
Christianity. These include cults (that is, groups which deny
essential Christian doctrines such as the deity of Christ and the
Trinity); the occult, much of which has become focused in the
contemporary New Age movement; the major world religions; and
aberrant Christian teachings (that is, teachings which compromise
or confuse essential biblical truth).
Regular features of the Journal include "Newswatch," witnessing
tips and book reviews.
CHRISTIAN RESEARCH JOURNAL RATES: (subject to change)
One Year Two Years
U.S. Residents [ ] 20.00 [ ] 37.00
Canadian (U.S. funds) [ ] 24.00 [ ] 44.00
Other Foreign (U.S. funds) [ ] 36.00 [ ] 66.00
Please make checks payable to CRI
To place a credit card order by phone, call us toll-free at:
(800) 2-JOURNAL
To subscribe to the Christian Research Journal, please print this
coupon, fill in the necessary information and mail it with your
payment to:
CRI, P.O. Box 500-TC, San Juan Capistrano, CA 92693-0500
[ ] Yes! I want to subscribe to the Christian Research Journal.
Name: ___________________________________________________
Address: ___________________________________________________
Address: ___________________________________________________
City, State, ZIP: __________________________________________
Country: _______________ Phone: ____________________________
------------------
YOURS FOR THE ASKING
Did you know that CRI has a wealth of information on various
topics that is yours for the asking? In fact, a free
subscription to the Christian Research Newsletter is yours if you
contact CRI and ask for one saying that you found out about the
offer from this computer text file. We offer a wide variety of
articles and fact sheets free of charge. Write us today for
information on these or other topics. Our first-rate research
staff will do everything possible to help you.
Christian Research Institute
P.O. Box 500-TC
San Juan Capistrano, CA 92693
(714) 855-9926
---------------
End of file.