this post was submitted on 06 Jun 2025
678 points (98.7% liked)

People Twitter

7238 readers
996 users here now

People tweeting stuff. We allow tweets from anyone.

RULES:

  1. Mark NSFW content.
  2. No doxxing people.
  3. Must be a pic of the tweet or similar. No direct links to the tweet.
  4. No bullying or international politcs
  5. Be excellent to each other.
  6. Provide an archived link to the tweet (or similar) being shown if it's a major figure or a politician.

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] [email protected] 3 points 15 hours ago* (last edited 15 hours ago) (14 children)

That's a linguistics debate. Are all Christians fake christians just because the god they believe in is an imaginary friend? Or are they real christians because they actively believe in their imaginary friend?

Or was your argument that the age of a belief lends creedence to it's legitimacy regardless of its truth value?

[–] [email protected] 2 points 13 hours ago (7 children)

It is a wholly constructed faith based partly on fragments of things that existed previously but with no input from those cultures so there's no "authentic" Wiccan beliefs other than those from the 1950s.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 12 hours ago (4 children)

Sure, but that could be said about any belief system depending on when you start the clock.

While I don't personally believe in the authenticity of claims from any non-testable belief/faith/spiritual system, I do believe that any person who genuienly says they hold to one can fairly be called a member of that group.

Be it Wiccans, Christians, Scientologists, Saitanists, or Jedi. Hence why I say this is a linguistics conversation. An "authentic Wiccan" dosen't need our approval, nor is the validity of their beliefs relavent to them using the term to describe themselves.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 10 hours ago* (last edited 10 hours ago) (1 children)

Sure, but that could be said about any belief system depending on when you start the clock.

Not really? We don't have distinct points of creation for many faiths. With Wicca it can be set in a specific time and place. You aren't going to find Wiccans from 100 years ago.

Wicca is a blend of multiple different religious ideologies that existed in Europe at some point in the past. If you took someone from modern day Colchester in 200ce they might recognize parts of their ancestral faiths but parts will be from other tribes and peoples. Hence Wicca doesn't have an "authentic" set of beliefs as much as an intentionally created one. That's different from something like Judaism or Christianity whose views weren't created by people with the intent of creating a fait h.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 6 hours ago

That’s different from something like Judaism or Christianity whose views weren’t created by people with the intent of creating a faith.

I would disagree with this on a couple levels.

First off, we do have records of many faiths being created by compiling previously established beleifs. The Council of Trent compiling the cannonical faith of Catholic doctrine stands out as a great example.

And even if a faith was intentionally created, why should that undermine the concept that its adherents could claim to be real members? Buddhism for example was cannonically an intentionally constructed belief system.

I fail to see why a person who describes themselves as a Wiccan has any less right to choose their beliefs of their own accord, and then be counted as a real member of that group. Or alternatively, why a long standing faith system gets to be exempt.

load more comments (2 replies)
load more comments (4 replies)
load more comments (10 replies)