Will Christians ever express remorse for "witch" burning?

[cole grey]

Why? Surely a god could just give them knowledge of good and evil, and be done with it?
...
Omnipotence does not allow for things "having" to be a specific way.

But existence is this way. If you, as schopenhauer did, want to say that life is a thing that should never have been, do it, but don't insist on it, some people think existence is ok. Maybe it is ok.

This could have been achieved without the need for suicide.

If God wanted to do it that way, who am I to say no? I'm sure God could have done it some other way, but if God wants to put part of God onto this planet and allow that part to be killed in that way, that is up to God, who are you to complain - it didn't cause you any suffering.

Not at all, the bible is a briefly entertaining fiction story just like Harry Potter. However, for the sake of this discussion, yes. Of course that can change if you can justify a reason why it shouldn't be considered as literal - and then do the courtesy of understanding that there would then be no valid reason to take any of it literally.

I read books all the time that contain both literal and metaphorical ideas. Sometimes the literal ideas spark connections to meanings, sometimes the metaphorical ideas remind me of real events and describe ideas about them.

And you're the man that decides which is which?

For me, I do. In just the same way EVERYONE can decide what they believe and don't believe. A lot of people decide their ideology on what seems sensible to them, and don't rely on the establishment's pre-packaged philosophies. You are probably a person who does this to formulate your own ideology - at least I hope you are.

 

[SnakeLord]

But existence is this way.

I never claimed otherwise, but this is hardly a response to my question and statement - that was made because of your claim that god "may have had to".

If you, as schopenhauer did, want to say that life is a thing that should never have been, do it, but don't insist on it, some people think existence is ok. Maybe it is ok.

Apologies, but I fail to see it's relevance to my post.

If God wanted to do it that way, who am I to say no?

Again this isn't really all that relevant. Your statement said that sacrifice was "to allow us", (an implication that the action had to be undertaken to achieve a certain result). My return statement was simply that the same result could have been achieved without suicide, (if we are under the impression that god is omnipotent).

I'm sure God could have done it some other way, but if God wants to put part of God onto this planet and allow that part to be killed in that way, that is up to God

Indeed, but your statements a couple of times implied necessity.

who are you to complain

Who's complaining? I thought this was a discussion.

I read books all the time that contain both literal and metaphorical ideas

There's quite a lot of other people that also read books all the time, (myself included). However, it's of no value to my statement. Once more:

"can {you} justify a reason why it shouldn't be considered as literal - (and then do the courtesy of understanding that there would then be no valid reason to take any of it literally)"

For me, I do. In just the same way EVERYONE can decide what they believe and don't believe. A lot of people decide their ideology on what seems sensible to them, and don't rely on the establishment's pre-packaged philosophies. You are probably a person who does this to formulate your own ideology - at least I hope you are.

So then, given your statements above, what exactly was the purpose and value of your last statement to me?:

"Must you take the bible as so artlessly literal? It can be both literal and figurative..."

 

[cole grey]

Snakelord,

God can do whatever God wants, and there are many ways I can imagine that would be better for everything, but I don't have one millionth of the necessary information to judge what the "best" ways are.
Perhaps the worst now is best for some people in the long run.

God could have simply created us with the knowledge of good and evil, so adam and eve would have known what to do, but no, they found out about good and evil by "fucking up". Perhaps we want to blame ourselves. Perhaps people that have interpreted scriptures wanted to blame their parents because they locked them in the closet.

God didn't have to die, but what is dying to God? What does that even mean? Maybe it just shows that God sympathizes with the pain we cause each other. Maybe it is God's way of saying, "I'm really sorry you guys are choosing to torture each other." Here is a memento so you can remember how bad pain is when another person feels it.

There's quite a lot of other people that also read books all the time, (myself included). However, it's of no value to my statement. Once more:
"can {you} justify a reason why it shouldn't be considered as literal - (and then do the courtesy of understanding that there would then be no valid reason to take any of it literally)"

Yes it has value to your statement. Specifically, there are many fictional and non-fictional books which contain BOTH literal and figurative language. Undeniably this is true, so there is absolutely no reason why, because part of a book is metaphorical, another part may not be literal. It happens ALL the time.

So then, given your statements above, what exactly was the purpose and value of your last statement to me?:
"Must you take the bible as so artlessly literal? It can be both literal and figurative..."

Here, and only here, you have a good point. Why shouldn't you be able to take it literally? Judge it however you like, i have no right to say it is impossible for your interpretation to be accurate.

I do however have a point when I show a flaw in your reasoning, i.e. "if any of the book is metaphorical, there is no reason to take any of it literally." All the other stuff about how things had to be or didn't have to be, especially when I say "perhaps", is just us shooting the shit really.

 

[Bells]

Most of the people who know me on this forum know that I am an atheist. While I have disagreed with Adstar in the past, I will admit he makes an important point which many of you seem to have disregarded.

You thinking that the children bear the responsibility of their ancestor’s wrong doings leads to situations like the Balkans. People carrying out vengeance because of a wrong doing perpetrated upon their distant ancestors.

The Witch Trials of the past were caused by mass hysteria and in many instances, this hysteria was helped along by the puritans eating contaminated wheat. Should we now force people of a religious group or belief to apologise for something only a few carried out hundreds of years ago? Does mere association to the group result in the people of today having to apologise for the few so long ago? Who would they apologise to? The women burnt and killed during those times were in the majority of cases Christian themselves. So should, for example, a newly baptised Asian Christian apologise for something people who are totally unconnected to them did in another time? Christianity is broken up into different sects. So should all Christians apologise even though their particular sect was not connected to the crimes of the past?

Now here is the point that so many of you missed in Adstar's post. Carrying forth hatred for the deeds of the past can result in the massacres and hatred that our generation have been unfortunate enough to witness in the Balkans and also in countries such as Rwanda. I've noticed that many in this thread have connected this to the treatment of Native Americans, slaves, etc. However there is a difference. Native Americans still suffer due to their treatment of the past and this treatment continues even though apologies have been made. Descendants of slaves still feel the damage that was done to their ancestors and their mistreatment continues today because the belief that they are somehow not equal has permeated down through the generations.

No one is denying that the murders of these women and some men during the witch trials was abhorrent and should never be repeated. But do not allow their mistreatment to lead to another form of mass hysteria by Atheists, Agnostics and non-Christians in seeking the destruction of a group for crimes that were committed generations ago.

So who should say sorry? Only Christians or humanity in general for its occurrence? What will be next? Will we pick through history and seize on another event and force the descendants of perpetrators (or of their nationality) of that event to apologise? What about African tribes who committed human sacrifices or killed people because they were somehow different and their religious leader thought that individual(s) posed a danger? Should their descendants also be made to apologise?

How about all of you here who claim you were Christians and are now either Agnostic or Atheists? Having read through these threads I don't see your apology? After all, if Christians today are to be forced to apologise, then shouldn't we as former Christians also be forced to apologise by our mere association because we once supposedly embraced Christianity? It would never end. Hatred and revenge is dangerous if allowed to permeate into future generations.

 

[spidergoat]

If they still believe in witches, then they are as responsible as those who lit the fires.

 

[Bells]

If they still believe in witches, then they are as responsible as those who lit the fires.

What many don't seem to realise is that it was not just witches who were burnt. But people who were somehow different. And again I ask, who should they apologise to? Themselves? Since the general majority of the women burnt were Christians themselves. However they were women who fell prey to people who were high on their own power and in some instances bad wheat. A birthmark on the face could result in a woman being burnt. Fear can and does lead to mass hysteria.

So now we attempt to lessen the range of people who owe an apology? By asking if they still believe in witches and then demanding they apologise? But witches still exist today as we've seen a plethora of people claiming themselves to be witches. So what now? Do we now demand that only Christians who believe that these so called 'witches' who exist today are in fact witches should apologise? Kind of a fine line isn't it? Won't that lead to another form of hysteria that caused the witch trials in the first place?

My point is that we shouldn't persecute a group of people for the behaviour of a group who fell under a banner called Christianity generations ago because those Christians persecuted another group of people. It's a never ending cycle. So do we now become the persecutors? We hold ourselves above them by forcing and persecuting them as the puritans did so long ago?

 

[cole grey]

I believe in witches. I met one at a party on saturday.

 

[spidergoat]

Apology is not persecution. What I mean is that Christians today have not changed one bit. The whole structure of Christianity is made for dominating others with a rigid social structure that stomps on any kind of dissent or non-conformity. They should be genuinely apologetic to themselves that they are continuing to be a part of this. They are continuing to try and control the free expression of sex, for instance, by trying to outlaw abortion, contraception, and gay marriage. Their elected representatives can't even handle a t-shirt without arresting the owner of the offensive garment.

Believe me, if it wasn't for the thin veneer of law that is still upheld in this country, they would be lynching and burning witches right now.

 

[Bells]

Apology is not persecution. What I mean is that Christians today have not changed one bit. The whole structure of Christianity is made for dominating others with a rigid social structure that stomps on any kind of dissent or non-conformity.

So Christians are the only ones guilty of remaining stagnant? What about those of other religious persuasions? Don't their beliefs, customs and social constructs remain the same since their beginnings? Can't they also be accused of non-conformity and having a social structure that is rigid within its boundaries?

The Witch burnings of the past were caused by mass hysteria. We've seen similar occurences since then. The latest that come to mind was the genocide in Rwanda, where neighbours massacred each other. Interviews with these murderers after the event saw them almost in shock. Almost all proclaimed that they didn't know how it could have happened that they could kill the people they once considered to be friends.

Forcing Christians to say sorry is one thing. But the recognition that it's not just their religion that was the cause is another thing. The prevailing aspect in the Witch burnings of the past was the mass hysteria that gripped the people involved. They didn't just burn people who proclaimed themselves as witches. They also burnt fellow Christians. Any differentialisation in one's appearance could result in someone being killed. A frog hopping across someone's foot could probably also have seen that individual murdered by a bunch of hysteric people who feared something that they as children had been taught to fear. Even today, children's stories are filled with evil witches, etc. Mass hysteria can happen too easily and it can too easily lead to the slaughter of others because of their belief, appearance, ancestry, etc.

My whole point is that it's not just Christianity who is to blame, but humanity as a whole. We've committed atrocities in the past (even before the witch trials), have done so since and will do so in the future. Blame a religion or belief system is easy as it allows us to lay the blame on someone other than ourselves... someone different or who believes differently to what we believe.

So what are we to do with this issue? How are we going to force Christians to say sorry or show remorse? Should we make each generation of Christians now and in the future sign a piece of paper expressing their remorse? Possibly a form with boxes.. tick 1 if a Christian... tick boxes 10-15 for past massacres caused by Christians.. etc? When and how will it end?

 

[mountainhare]

Light:

It is precisely your line of thinking that keeps the African slave issue alive today. And it causes a lot of unnecessary trouble. Depending upon your ancestry, are you also prepared to apologize for the actions of the Vikings? Or the Gauls? Or the Trojans? Or the Mongols? Or the Germans? Or the Japanese? Or the Italians? Or the... shall I go on?

The faulty reasoning of the politically correct doesn't matter. Society demands that you apologize because you are of the same religion as people who carried out atrocities 500 years ago. So do it, dammit!

LOL, what a bloody joke...

 

[spidergoat]

I blame almost all modern culture for this situation, but it wasn't always like this. There is no cure, except as individuals recognizing that culture is a limiting factor in the advancement of human beings. Any draconian measures to pursue remorse is counterproductive. It's not only Christianity but all patriarchal, hierarchical and dominating religions that share the blame for failing to preserve the Earth as the Eden it was.

 

[Medicine*Woman]

Most of the people who know me on this forum know that I am an atheist. While I have disagreed with Adstar in the past, I will admit he makes an important point which many of you seem to have disregarded.

The Witch Trials of the past were caused by mass hysteria and in many instances, this hysteria was helped along by the puritans eating contaminated wheat. Should we now force people of a religious group or belief to apologise for something only a few carried out hundreds of years ago? Does mere association to the group result in the people of today having to apologise for the few so long ago? Who would they apologise to? The women burnt and killed during those times were in the majority of cases Christian themselves. So should, for example, a newly baptised Asian Christian apologise for something people who are totally unconnected to them did in another time? Christianity is broken up into different sects. So should all Christians apologise even though their particular sect was not connected to the crimes of the past?

Now here is the point that so many of you missed in Adstar's post. Carrying forth hatred for the deeds of the past can result in the massacres and hatred that our generation have been unfortunate enough to witness in the Balkans and also in countries such as Rwanda. I've noticed that many in this thread have connected this to the treatment of Native Americans, slaves, etc. However there is a difference. Native Americans still suffer due to their treatment of the past and this treatment continues even though apologies have been made. Descendants of slaves still feel the damage that was done to their ancestors and their mistreatment continues today because the belief that they are somehow not equal has permeated down through the generations.

No one is denying that the murders of these women and some men during the witch trials was abhorrent and should never be repeated. But do not allow their mistreatment to lead to another form of mass hysteria by Atheists, Agnostics and non-Christians in seeking the destruction of a group for crimes that were committed generations ago.

So who should say sorry? Only Christians or humanity in general for its occurrence? What will be next? Will we pick through history and seize on another event and force the descendants of perpetrators (or of their nationality) of that event to apologise? What about African tribes who committed human sacrifices or killed people because they were somehow different and their religious leader thought that individual(s) posed a danger? Should their descendants also be made to apologise?

How about all of you here who claim you were Christians and are now either Agnostic or Atheists? Having read through these threads I don't see your apology? After all, if Christians today are to be forced to apologise, then shouldn't we as former Christians also be forced to apologise by our mere association because we once supposedly embraced Christianity? It would never end. Hatred and revenge is dangerous if allowed to permeate into future generations.

*************
M*W: Bells, thank you for such an enlightening post. I have always considered some form of 'poison' to have caused delusions among the young women of Salem. If their wheat was blighted, it could have been ergot that made them hallucinate. Previously, I attributed it to lead paint. Whatever the cause, it was manifest.

To right those past wrongs, I believe that anyone who claims to be a Christian even today is responsible for the witch burnings by association. It's one thing to be an American Citizen and rue the harsh treatment of the Native Americans. It's another thing to be a Christian and not acknowledge what Christianity did to innocent women and men. They are guilty by association. If someone chooses to be Christian, then he must acknowledge the evils that Christianity did through the ages. If he can still honestly claim to be a Christian, then he must assume the guilt of Christianity. When does this guilt end? Never.

It's never too late to beg forgiveness for crimes past. Most Americans have reconciled what our government did to the Native Americans, and we are truly sorry for that treatment. As with the slave issue, it may not have been our generation, per se, but it was out ancestors who perpetuated slavery, and for that, we are truly sorry.

But for crimes Christian, those who associate themselves today, are equally as guilty. Those innocent women who burned at the stake in the name of Christianity remain still on the soul and conscience of the modern-day Christians. Those who believe in Christianity are just as guilty as their eldest ancestors who burned them at the stake. Unless they ask for forgiveness for what their Christian ancestors cruelly did, there is no salvation for them.

When one chooses to be a Christian, they accept all the evils upon their soul of what Christianity did in eras past. One must beg forgiveness for that! Otherwise, they are nothing more than a clanging symbol. Christianity is the most evil, vile concept destroying humanity.

Is it better to be a Christian and beg for forgiveness for past Christian atrocities? Or, is it better to reject Christianity and free one's soul from evil? This shouldn't be too hard to answer.

Christianity has done enough to put the stake through the heart of humanity. It's time we conquer Christianity!

 

[Light]

*************
They are guilty by association. If someone chooses to be Christian, then he must acknowledge the evils that Christianity did through the ages. If he can still honestly claim to be a Christian, then he must assume the guilt of Christianity. When does this guilt end? Never.

"Guilt by association?" The guilt NEVER ends???

How can a single person today possibly be responsible for something done by others that have been dead for all these many years????

If your great-great-great grandfather shot someone during an argument, does that mean that YOU still bear the guilt of it today ???

Get real, lady, according to your line of thinking every single living, breathing individual is pretty much responsible for everything bad that's happened in the world during the past few million years!

Sheesh!

 

[superluminal]

Light,

I agree with MW on principle. The xian heritage is a horrific one. To claim it is to agree with it.

If your great-great-great grandfather shot someone during an argument, and you agreed completely with the argument and the shooting, and carried a gun just incase someone came along with the same argument, well, that makes you a christian.

 

[Light]

Light,

I agree with MW on principle. The xian heritage is a horrific one. To claim it is to agree with it.

If your great-great-great grandfather shot someone during an argument, and you agreed completely with the argument and the shooting, and carried a gun just incase someone came along with the same argument, well, that makes you a christian.

Har! Good one.

Thing is that her argument sounds a lot like - was it Brian Foley or Vince? - who claimed the two German engineers captured in Iraq were Nazis? (And every other German, for that matter.) Yep, makes a LOT of sense, doesn't it?

Ahhh... the "sins of the fathers" will forever be upon us...

 

[superluminal]

I guess I look at it this way. If someone today claimed to be a Nazi, and that it was a good thing based on the wonderful unifying effect it had on the german economy, technology, and people, while convieniently ignoring the holocaust parts, I'd have a problem with them.

Just as christians love to talk up the loving jesus parts of their book, while convieniently ignoring the atrocities committed therein, and in real life throughout history. I have a problem with them.

 

[Light]

I guess I look at it this way. If someone today claimed to be a Nazi, and that it was a good thing based on the wonderful unifying effect it had on the german economy, technology, and people, while convieniently ignoring the holocaust parts, I'd have a problem with them.

Just as christians love to talk up the loving jesus parts of their book, while convieniently ignoring the atrocities committed therein, and in real life throughout history. I have a problem with them.

Well, what I see as being just plain unrealistic and silly is trying to place blame/responsibility/whatever on individuals for acts done by others. I see no logic OR justice in that.

 

[superluminal]

I agree. But donning the cloak of xianity given its heinous past, is just one of the many reasons I hate xianity. Or any -anity for that matter. Hate em'.

 

[Bells]

To right those past wrongs, I believe that anyone who claims to be a Christian even today is responsible for the witch burnings by association. It's one thing to be an American Citizen and rue the harsh treatment of the Native Americans. It's another thing to be a Christian and not acknowledge what Christianity did to innocent women and men. They are guilty by association. If someone chooses to be Christian, then he must acknowledge the evils that Christianity did through the ages. If he can still honestly claim to be a Christian, then he must assume the guilt of Christianity. When does this guilt end? Never.

So how would you expect them to atone for the sins of the past generations? And what about the other religious faiths who have also committed atrocities in the past? And who would the Christians apologise to? As I've said before, the majority of the people killed during the witch trials were Christians themselves and most probably took part in the burnings of others before they came to fall to the hysteria.

Here in lies the point that you failed to recognise. Humanity as a whole needs to atone, not just one particular group of people. Humanity in general needs to realise what it is capable of and it is only through this recognition and prevention of it occuring again can we then say that we have atoned for what was done in the past.

You were once a Christian, so have you said sorry? Have you shown remorse? Merely becoming an atheist does not count MW. Have you done anything to prevent something like this from happening again? Merely telling Christians that they must become Atheists doesn't count either. What about the crimes committed against humanity in general today? What about the crimes being committed against women of all and no faiths at this very moment? The only way to show remorse for what happened in the past is to try to stop massacres and such crimes from happening again. Merely not believing in God or changing religion just won't cut it.

It's never too late to beg forgiveness for crimes past.

Who would they beg forgivness from? Witches of today? As I pointed out to you before, the high majority of the women killed were Christian themselves. So should they beg forgiveness from their God? But for atheists such as ourselves, that doesn't count either right since God does not exist. So should they beg forgiveness from atheists? Well we are hardly free from guilt as we form part of humanity that has repeatedly committed atrocities and crimes in the past and present.

Most Americans have reconciled what our government did to the Native Americans, and we are truly sorry for that treatment. As with the slave issue, it may not have been our generation, per se, but it was out ancestors who perpetuated slavery, and for that, we are truly sorry.

Yes. You've said sorry and assume that's all that needs to be done. But their mistreatment continues. Native Americans and African Americans are still not treated equally in your society. So what now?

But for crimes Christian, those who associate themselves today, are equally as guilty. Those innocent women who burned at the stake in the name of Christianity remain still on the soul and conscience of the modern-day Christians.

I would have thought that they remained on the conscience of every human being on this planet. Do you seriously think that only Christians need to 'say sorry'.. to whom exactly? Themselves? Since the women they burnt were Christian women part of their very own communities? We all need to say sorry by ensuring that such mass hysteria does not happen again. But it still does so in that as a whole, we have failed.

What about the Christians of yesterday? Are they somehow absolved of all guilt simply because they turned their backs on the religion or belief system? A tad hypocritical.. non?

Those who believe in Christianity are just as guilty as their eldest ancestors who burned them at the stake. Unless they ask for forgiveness for what their Christian ancestors cruelly did, there is no salvation for them.

Who are they to ask for forgiveness? You? Me? Their God? But again, that wouldn't count as we don't believe in God. So who do they beg for forgiveness from? Themselves since the people who were killed in primarily Christians themselves? So it's only Christians who are to blame? What about the massacres caused by others of other religious faiths of those who are atheists? Are they absolved simply because they aren't Christian? But that's another thread isn't it?

And now we come to the point of salvation. I thought you were an atheist MW. Who is to grant this salvation? Salvation given by whom exactly? Are atheists the ones to grant this salvation? If that is the case, then the atheists are trying to replace the God we disbelieve in with ourselves.

When one chooses to be a Christian, they accept all the evils upon their soul of what Christianity did in eras past. One must beg forgiveness for that! Otherwise, they are nothing more than a clanging symbol. Christianity is the most evil, vile concept destroying humanity.

So when chose to be a Christian you got down on your knees and begged for forgiveness? But what about now? You don't believe in God now, so who do you beg for forgivness for the evils committed by atheists today? Do you see the contradiction here?

MW, don't become the persecutor of the persecutors of the past. You are coming dangerously close to becoming like the puritans who burnt those women, men and children in the past. Don't let your zeal for your disbelief in God overcome you to such an extent that you start to persecute a group of people for their belief.. just like the Christians did to the so called witches in the past.

Is it better to be a Christian and beg for forgiveness for past Christian atrocities? Or, is it better to reject Christianity and free one's soul from evil? This shouldn't be too hard to answer.

Simply becoming an atheist does not free anybody from past atrocities, if we were to follow your argument. If you are an atheist, then you don't believe in 'evil' per se. You've made it impossible for them to atone. Because you're simply assuming that the only way they can atone is to leave their religion behind. But that doesn't work. They are still part of humanity who committed these crimes in the past. You're telling Christians that the only way to atone is to leave their religion behind. But that still does not detract from the fact that the atrocity occured. It does not make it go away. You're telling them to beg for forgiveness but then tell them that's not enough because as far as you are concerned, forgiveness from you can only be given if they become like you and me and stop believing. Be careful MW, you're wearing your atheism like it is a religion. You're also close to becoming a persecutor like the christians who burnt those women... only your prey are all christians.

Christianity has done enough to put the stake through the heart of humanity. It's time we conquer Christianity!

Just like the Christians attempted to conquer the witches in the past?

 

[mountainhare]

Bells pretty much has just pwned anyone here who thinks that Christians must apologize for the crimes of unrelated Christians eons ago.