The Abrahamic Dillema

Note: The term “Abrahamic” will be used often here as an easier form of “Judeo-Christian-Muslim.” Generally, Christianity is the religion criticized by Pagans, but as any influence by the big three monotheistic religions is generally frowned upon, I’ll be using this term for ease. Furthermore, my purpose here is not to criticize the beliefs of others when and if Christian elements are found within them. Everyone is free to believe whatever they want to. My only point in writing this is to clear up the smoke that has risen around these influences, to see where they more clearly lay.

Pagan religions by their very nature usually pride themselves in being free from Christian influence. In “light” Pagans this usually takes the form of the belief that one is practicing a purer form of religion, a freer form, or a more ancient one. In darker Pagans these same reasons are often given, and those who follow a Left Hand Path often reject anything Abrahamic due to the characterization of such religions as being the opposite of the ideal LHP mindset. There are growing trends in Paganism to assume “more Pagan than thou” and “Darker than thou” attitudes based on how much Christian influence one is or is not perceived to have. My purpose here is not to champion Christianity or defend the presence of Abrahamic influences and thought patterns in modern Pagans. Rather, in writing this I hope to tackle the question of what really is Abrahamic, so that such influences may be more properly addressed, and abuse of the term cannot be furthered.

For example, Isaac Bonewits, perhaps the man who (unfortunately) had the most influence in defining “Paganism,” relegated pretty much any alternative religion he did not approve of to the category of “Meso-Pagan,” under the context of such religions supposedly containing Christian influences. On the other hand, “Neo-Pagan” was concluded to be mostly free from Christian influences, while also including several other ridiculous prerequisites such as how one perceives deities and how one feels about the environment. This unfortunately did a lot to alienate many groups such as dark and LHP Pagans, Santerians, and Reconstructionist Pagans, who may otherwise have been stronger members and allies of the current Pagan community. Who’s really who in the Abrahamic finger pointing?

It seems obvious, doesn’t it? You would think you could smell Christianity a mile away, and many Pagans do in fact believe this. But through hearing both the anti-Christian rantings of many RHP Pagans, and the vehement rejection of anything remotely Abrahamic of many LHPers, I have come to the realization that it isn’t so clear. There are things that many Pagans tout as tenets of their beliefs that are clearly Christian in origin, and similarly, there are many things that are accused of being Abrahamic in thought which are not necessarily. Here is my list and discussion of these concepts, which I may add to when and if I find more such common misconceptions. So far, most of these concepts were found on the two far sides of the scale: strongly RHP Wiccans, and strongly LHP Pagans.

1. “Most Christians don’t even know what their religion is about; they just go to church and follow their dogma mindlessly.”

So do many Pagans. How many Wiccans know their religion was created in the 1950’s? How many Pagans realize that the k was added to magick by Aleister Crowley? How many Pagans have you seen that learn all about their deities from some two sentence description on a website? How many Wiccans have really analyzed the Rede and the Threefold Law to figure out if it’s actually something they believe, let alone if it even makes sense? And how many “party Pagans” have you seen that rarely if ever do rituals or anything else, but mainly seem in it because they get to run naked through the woods every Beltane? Being mindless about religion or simply not taking it seriously is not an Abrahamic trait- it’s a human trait, and Pagans succumb to it just as any other group can.

2. “Pagans are not like Christians because they believe in the God AND Goddess.”

In my observation, many Pagans have simply grafted Pagan words onto Christian beliefs. Most Pagans of this type tend to focus on the Goddess rather than the God; Wicca seems pretty much built around that focus in particular. In such cases, the Goddess becomes their supreme deity, while the God becomes a secondary character (basically, switch the Catholic roles of Jesus and Mary). Even without this, many Pagans still exhibit Abrahamic thinking in the very way they believe their gods to be.

What do I mean by this? How many times have you heard a Pagan talk about how loving the Goddess is, how forgiving, how gentle, etc. Outside of Goddess fans, many Pagans simply believe that the gods in general are loving, forgiving, caretaking, etc. In such cases, the Pagan gods have been robbed of their personality, their spice, their bite, their wildness. Instead they simply become a rebellious way to worship the very same principles the Christians do.

That’s not to say that Pagans shouldn’t believe the gods contain love and forgiveness as well, merely that they should recognize the individual personalities of their deities, and not be afraid to acknowledge that these deities are a far cry from the ideals of Jesus.

3. “Pagans are not like Christians because they realize the divine has many aspects.”

Many Pagans believe that all deities are merely aspects of the god and goddess, who are in turn aspects of one whole, supreme being. This is very interesting, considering that it points to monotheism. If you really analyze it, Christians could be seen as being even more polytheistic than Pagans who hold this belief; Christians at least believe that Saints, Angels, the Virgin Mary, etc. are all separate and individual divinities, even if they won’t break down and call them “gods.”

When asked about polytheism, I have heard several Pagans say, in a tone as if it was an obvious fact, “Of course I don’t believe in a whole bunch of gods. I just use the idea of different gods to understand the many ways in which god manifests.” If you want to hold that belief, that’s fine, but I would like you to ask yourself this question: Why do you? The matter-of-fact tone in which I hear statements like this made leads me to believe that the major reason for rejection of polytheism, a very strong trait in many ancient Pagan religions, is due to an Abrahamic upbringing. Whether blatantly stated or not, modern society looks down on the belief in multiple deities. Such beliefs are considered superstitious or primitive, or at best exotic or fantastic, and it becomes “clear” that the more evolved in thinking one is, the more one believes in only a single deity (and, the way things are continuing in this scientific age, there is a growing trend among some to believe that even further advancement calls for the belief in no gods). Children are raised to believe that plural gods are outdated beliefs held only by the most ancient of peoples and “primitive” tribes who haven’t felt the touch of civilization.

The assumption of monotheism has been so ingrained in Western culture that the founders of Wicca decided not to (or perhaps had no desire to) contest it. A Pagan falling under this Christian influence might never question the “oneness” of the deities they refer to, the very idea of only one god being so ingrained into their psyche that it seems the obvious truth when one peels away all the layers of mythology one has caked their religion in. The common teachings of many Neopagan paths merely reinforce this belief unquestioningly. In the end, my only request to those who hold this belief is to acknowledge rightfully where it came from: the Christian influences held by many Neopagan founders, or an attempt to make a strange religion seem more acceptable to the Christian society around it. It is not an ancient belief held since the dawn of time, but a very Abrahamic one.

4. “The desire to worship a god/the belief the gods are greater than man is Abrahamic.”

This one is more common in the LHP circles, but RHP Pagans aren’t immune to it either, though on the lighter side of the Pagan spectrum this attitude is usually expressed as, “The gods are our equals/the god(dess) within/your gods should walk beside you.” Again, nothing wrong with it if you don’t want to worship or believe in gods. I do have some personal opinions about the people who decide to call on gods and believe in them, but think they’re happy equals, but that’s a rant for another time. Is it Abrahamic to desire to worship a deity, or see them as greater than you? Not at all, and I think this is perhaps one of the most ridiculous Abrahamic accusations out there. Since time immemorial mankind has believed in beings greater than themselves, worshipped them, revered and feared them. If that’s not your cup of tea, then go with your bad self. But don’t label it as Abrahamic just because Christians do- they’re just following suit of the Pagan cultures before them.

5. “An it harm none, do what thou wilt.”

How can I put the Wiccan Rede in a discussion about Abrahamic influences? It isn’t specifically Abrahamic by itself, and as I suspect the original meaning was intended, it’s not very Abrahamic at all. But Pagans succumbing to Abrahamic thinking have turned it into something more restrictive than Christian moralities.

I can’t tell you how many Pagans I’ve seen incapacitated by the Wiccan Rede, a law which they are so quick to brag about being their only one. I’d rather have ten or more specific laws than one so broad sweeping as this, personally. It has been speculated that the original meaning was more a command to exact your will than anything else. Today, however, it is more often interpreted as a command to never, ever harm another. The “do what thou wilt” portion is lost in a sea of uncertainty caused by excessive worry over “bad karma” if you swat a fly or defend yourself from an enemy. How is this any better or more free than a Christian excessively worrying about going to hell? At least in that case the Christian knows what to do; confess and pray for salvation. A Pagan following the Rede is often lost because of the vagaries of its wording. I have seen Pagans incapable of defending themselves even in extreme situations because they’re terrified it constitutes “harming.” Why?

Simply put, I think this excessive concern over not hurting anything is Abrahamic in origin. As much of a shock as it would be to some RHP Pagans, ancient Pagans didn’t have much concern whatsoever about harming anyone, by magick or other means. In fact, harm was one of the most common reasons for performing magic in the ancient world. Even today, tribal societies that have survived into these times still tend to fear magic and the idea of curses. If these people were living in a world of “harm none,” they would have no such concerns as they’d all be using their magic to heal and help each other. Don’t believe me? Do a little bit of research; and I mean by reading some anthropological books on the subject, not the latest book in the New Age section.

6. "Dualism is a Christian trait, and Pagans are free of it."

Dualism is a trait based mainly in Christian thought, I agree. But are Pagans as a whole really free of it? Dualism in this case tends to mean a belief in good and evil. It is true that verbally, most Pagans that I've seen reject the belief in good and evil. But do they really in thought and practice?

Often, I don't think that is the case. There are many Pagans who do not use the words "good and evil," but do clearly succumb to the moral stereotypes they claim to reject. One of the biggest problems between dark and light Pagans is that there is a general discomfort towards the more darkly inclined. Many light Pagans are quick to claim that the practices of dark Pagans and LHPers are not true Paganism because they are "negative." On closer inspection, it seems that many are still quite in the thrall of the dualism they claim to reject, only substituting words like "negative," "destructive," or "harmful" in the place of evil. The words may change, but the attitude remains the same.