Sorry, didn't mean to hurt your eye's with the B word, but I've had some lingering thoughts that I need to push out of my head to make more room for more lingering thoughts.

May I respectfully suggest that if you truly consider the word bible to be hurtful to the eyes of Witches, you do indeed have lingering thoughts instilled by your upbringing as to the nature of witchcraft and the relationship to the Jewish/Christian faiths. Many modern Western Witches are far more knowledgeable with the Bible than many Christians as it is part of history and part of his or her cultural history/family background or even a prior faith. The Bible is, for those who do not consider it to be the word of God, usually considered to be just a book or two books written, edited and re-compiled by human beings.

But the more I read about leaders in the bible it becomes very aparent that Abraham, Moses, Noah and the rest were Shaman's, developing rituals to appease the god Yaweh in which used nature,dreams and spells to communicate his wishes for people.

Shaman is a word that has been used (blanket-wise) for a range of practices developed throughout north-eastern Asia by localised priests or doctor-priests. Through anthrology etc, there are numerous modern definitions as well. Some of these practices are common throughout all of humankind such as rituals, dreams and customs-practices that are at various points in time labelled as spellcraft and/or magic. It is not surprising that priests associated with a Jewish tribal deity would have such practices. What would be surprising (to them) would be to consider what they did being labelled by a Tungusian-originated word that did not occur in their languages. For in using such a word or label, its etymology and history is being implied or rather projected backwards. Perhaps you might find it useful to widen your historical studies out beyond an Abrahamic perspective and use this knowledge to place such activities within a broader human spectrum.

…yaweh says that witchcraft is bad, yet utilizes witchcraft/shamanism for his purposes.

There are numerous differences between shamanism and witchcraft as well as similarities – depending on how you are defining either or both. I believe it is King James version that first translates the Hebrew word for poisoner into the more evocative witchcraft.  For modern Pagan Witches whose 'Craft was re-defined in the 1930's, the Bible tends to be irrelevant as a descriptive source for what ‘witches do’ or what is valid. For indigenous belief systems labelled as witchcraft that existed or exist in alignment with or within Abrahamic faiths, biblical references or interpretations may be more relevant.

So what was witchcraft like way back then? to me it appears to be no different than what the big guys of the bible did,...

Witchcraft is an Old English word that has acquired numerous meanings down through its etymology. There is no record that the word existed or was in use however when the Bible was being composed in the Near East.  Thus one must be careful when projecting it backwards into history or when words in varying languages are translated into the term witchcraft by authors and commentators down through the centuries. The original words that did exist must be carefully considered as to what they actually meant at the time (if indeed this is even known) before simply being translated into 'witchcraft'. For the reader will then ascribe his or her definition of the latter and therefore may mis-understand the meaning and significance of said practices (being labelled) within the original context.
As none of the practices ascribed to any definition of witchcraft have been or are copyrighted or unique to witchcraft, to describe what witchcraft ‘was like way back then’, you would have to define what you mean by witchcraft and with non-biased sources) what was being so labelled back then. For example, the spectrum of systems known as Pagan Witchcraft have only existed for 70+ years but it’s mythological history (entwined with its actual history) draws on ancient records and streams of transmission. Therefore some of what is attributed to Pagan Witchcraft today existed back then. Only to make sense of these original sources, you need to study them within their proper contexts, not modern life.
There are probably close to a dozen books I can think of on the history of whatever might be labelled as witchcraft and/or magic within ancient times in an historical (not mythological) perspective as well as down through the last two thousand years that you might find enlightening. Let me know if you would like me to provide you with titles.

…so why do you think there is such a double standard in this book the bible?

IMO There isn't one. It is what it is. The bible has its own context of usage with the Abrahamic faiths. It is not applicable or relevant in all other contexts.

C.H.

sacrificialgoddess wrote:

I just think that what the Bible is talking about when it says witchcraft, and what your average witch is talking about when they say witchcraft are two different practices.

If you read The Malleus Maleficarum, which is the way that middle ages clergy determined if someone is a witch, you will notice there is nothing there remotely recognizable to witchcraft today.  Granted, the book was written by someone to heighten fears society already had, but I maintain that they weren't talking about anything we would really consider witchcraft today.

You know it is funny how people read these books like they were written last week. Completely out of context and with no real idea what any of the words really mean.

Pieces written only 100 years ago are misunderstood, We live such different lives now that what we write today will not properly be understood in 100 years time. How can we possibly know what something written a thousand years ago really meant to the writer, written in an entirely different language?

And I agree with everyone who said the word witch was not only stuck into the bible later, but the idea of what a Witch is, is entirely different in this time period from theirs, thousands of years back.

A Witch today is not what a Witch was then, the word did not exist either. I believe.

And also to reiterate others here, I am not offended by the bible unless it is being used against me, other wise it is just the holy writ of another faith. And I have no problem with other people having different faiths then my own.

kraventhearcher wrote:

Matt,
As previously stated, you have to take a work within its historical and social context.
The word in the bible for witch translates to the term "poisoner" out of the hebrew term chasaph. I don't have a Hebrew font or I'd spell it properly.
Like many languages back then, Hebrew and Greek are extremely difficult to learn because before modern times language was firmly rooted in idiomatic meaning specific to culture. Just look at the difference in the languages spoken across Greece, Italy, and even on Islands nearby like Sicily.
So, the term Chasaph had a specific cultural meaning inside Hebrew culture and meant a specific idea (or referenced numerous ideas) when used in that writing.
Likewise for why it was mis-translated by scholars into the word witch.

Well, that, and ancient hebrew didn't actually have vowels....  :p