Will Christians ever express remorse for "witch" burning?

Should christians express remorse for all those burnt in the past, for being witches

  • Yes, christians should apologise for the wrongs of their ancestors.

    Votes: 19 48.7%
  • No, why should christians apologise because their ancestors burnt witches?

    Votes: 3 7.7%
  • No, people shouldn't apologise for the murders committed by their ancestors - they werent there

    Votes: 13 33.3%
  • I believe witches exist today - some of them believe in "evolution"

    Votes: 4 10.3%

  • Total voters
    39
Bells said:
Human beings, be they of a religious faith or atheist, are capable of crimes beyond imagination and have committed those crimes. If we were to follow your reasoning, then we should just exterminate ourselves right now because when one thinks back to crimes committed against other human beings and animals in general that we are truly sorry about, then we should cease from embracing humanity and our very existence as a whole.

I don't think that is what was meant. If, for example, if you willingly embrace an ideology that condones the slaughter or oppression of people due to religious differences then YOU are guilty by association. If you embrace an ideology that believes those not of your race should be slaughtered/oppressed then YOU are guilty by association. Why? Because you SUPPORT it and EMPOWER it to CONTINUE. KNOWINGLY!

If you want to talk of the sheepish cowardly deceit of the christian community, BRING IT ON! I have known MANY CHRISTIANS THROUGHOUT MY LIFE and they will tell me(in private) that they agree with the old testament slaughter of those they deemed 'pagan'(men, women, and children).
 
Last edited:
Medicine Woman said:
*************
M*W: I haven't followed the recent Mohammad cartoon thing, but generally speaking, my point was that we are born a citizen of the country we live in, and unless we renounce our citizenship when we are mature enough to know what we're doing, that's somewhat different than embracing a religion as a mature person knowing full well it was responsible for atrocities against humanity.

I know it is impossible to ask forgiveness from the folks who were murdered by the Church during the Inquisition just as it isn't very easy, for example, to ask the Japanese people to forgive our country and its leaders (before our time) for the devastation of Hiroshima and Nagasaki. I believe true forgiveness must come from the heart even though we would never be able to personally ask to be forgiven for the atrocities our ancestors caused. My point is that we must forgive ourselves which includes forgiving our ancestors by having the desire in our hearts to be forgiven. Asking for forgiveness, regardless of however many thousands of times we have to acknowledge the guilt that we have inherited, is tremendously cleansing to our psyche. We were not there and had no part of the bomb droppings in Japan, just as we were not there and did not participate in The Burning Times, but there is no reason we shouldn't seek forgiveness for those atrocities. The second point I was trying to make was that we also inherit our citizenship, and we do have the power to change our country's actions, even if it is a very slow process through voting for our lawmakers. Embracing Christianity, on the other hand, that was responsible for evil deeds in the past, is the same as being guilty for the horrors that were done in the name of Jesus Christ. Where does the guilt end and the forgiveness begin? If one does not seek forgiveness, if only from the inner dark recesses of one's heart, then one will not be forgiven.

MW, I don't believe you realize it but you are using some pretty confused semantics to create something that just isn't reasonable.

For example, I don't know if the issue is settled (but if not it will eventually be) but there was a big flap about the Boy Scouts discriminating against gays.

By your logic, some little fellow who joins the Scouts a hundred years from now would be guilty of that discrimination.

My whole point is simply this - many things have been done by groups/nationalities/organizations in the past. BUT - they learned better and no longer do those things now. And no one now living - who might be a part of one of those groups - has absolutely NO responsibility for past actions.

Now if you actually want to be realistic about this whole silly affair I will certainly agree that blame and guilt ARE due if someone joins such an organization that is ACTIVELY doing horrible things TODAY. Yes, now that is what "guilt by association" really means - not at all they way you are trying to apply it.
 
iam said:
I don't think that is what was meant. If, for example, if you willingly embrace an ideology that condones the slaughter or oppression of people due to religious differences then YOU are guilty by association. If you embrace an ideology that believes those not of your race should be slaughtered/oppressed then YOU are guilty by association. Why? Because you SUPPORT it. KNOWINGLY!

If you want to talk of the sheepish cowardly deceit of the christian community, BRING IT ON! I have known MANY CHRISTIANS THROUGHOUT MY LIFE and they will tell me(in private) that they agree with the old testament slaughter of those they deemed 'pagan'(men, women, and children).
Bring it on? Bring what on? Do you want me to discuss the deceit of the Christian Community? Well I'd oblige, however I am an atheist.

Guilt by historical, racial or religious association is a dangerous thing and history has proven again and again the results.
 
Bells says,

Yet, the bible clearly says that witches exist and that they should be killed.

It also says anyone that picks up sticks on the sabbath should be stoned to death.

Numbers 15:32-36

And while the children of Israel were in the wilderness, they found a man that gathered sticks upon the sabbath day. And they that found him gathering sticks brought him unto Moses and Aaron, and unto all the congregation. And they put him in ward, because it was not declared what should be done to him. And the LORD said unto Moses, The man shall be surely put to death: all the congregation shall stone him with stones without the camp. And all the congregation brought him without the camp, and stoned him with stones, and he died; as the LORD commanded Moses.


Also, a son that shows disrespect for his father should be put to death according to the mosaic law for the Jews.

Things have changed since those days.
 
I will certainly agree that blame and guilt ARE due if someone joins such an organization that is ACTIVELY doing horrible things TODAY

If, right now, I believed in and support the nazi regime and ideology of the past. If, right now, I believed they were right. If, right now, I did not have the power to carry out my ideology. Does this absolve me of guilt? No...just because I'm not currently active, I support it.
 
Woody said:
Bells says,



It also says anyone that picks up sticks on the sabbath should be stoned to death.

Numbers 15:32-36




Also, a son that shows disrespect for his father should be put to death according to the mosaic law for the Jews.

Things have changed since those days.
Psst..

I think Nasor is the one who said that... ;)
 
Guilt by historical, racial or religious association is a dangerous thing and history has proven again and again the results.

That is not what I'm talking about. You are purposely evading the point. If christians believe nonchristians deserved to be slaughtered, is that not guillt by association, though granted their are laws that prohibit it today. By SUPPORTING it also means TAKING ON THE RESPONSIBILITY.

There are middle-easterners that do not support Al-quaeda and there are those who do. Those who do are guilty by association because they agree and support the ideology that was responsible for american lives. How is that not 'guilt' whether it was done in the past or could be done in the future. It is about responsiblity. To join is to be responsible for the party that you willingly support.

Is every German citizen guilty for the holocaust? Absolutely not, but anyone who agrees, follows, purports the ideology that was responsible for that atrocity is GUILTY by association. It is the choice of the individual to take on the responsiblity of that ideology. One does not exist without the other.
 
Last edited:
iam said:
If, right now, I believed in and support the nazi regime and ideology of the past. If, right now, I believed they were right. If, right now, I did not have the power to carry out my ideology. Does this absolve me of guilt? No...just because I'm not currently active, I support it.
That's pretty much a tangent. We're discussing people who ARE members of a group.
 
Light said:
That's pretty much a tangent. We're discussing people who ARE members of a group.

Heh, so am I. Christianity and Neo-nazism. Do these not exist today? If their ideology has not changed but is curtailed(external forces) from fully carrying out their agenda, is the members not 'guilty by association'?
 
iam said:
Heh, so am I. Christianity and Neo-nazism. Do these not exist today? If their ideology has not changed but is curtailed(external forces) from fully carrying out their agenda, is the members not 'guilty by association'?
Yes, but guilty only IF they still burned witches and/or killed infidels (as others ARE doing right now) which they do not.

Have you never heard of reform??? Do some African and South Americans still practice cannibalism? Many of their ancestors did.
 
iam said:
Heh, so am I. Christianity and Neo-nazism. Do these not exist today? If their ideology has not changed but is curtailed(external forces) from fully carrying out their agenda, is the members not 'guilty by association'?
Just another point; I've met hundreds of Christians (and happen to be one myself so I meet them regulary) and I've yet to come across even one that has the "agenda" you seem to be charging them with.
 
Light said:
Just another point; I've met hundreds of Christians (and happen to be one myself so I meet them regulary) and I've yet to come across even one that has the "agenda" you seem to be charging them with.

Then, you're being fooled. I grew up in a southern baptist community, not by choice. I was forced to go to church every sunday and wednesday. We were members of numerous churches in my formative years. This is 'inside' sympathy. Of course, no one is going to publicly state that they believe that nonchristians should be killed in the name of their god! Of course, many find distasteful that extreme solution. BUT they do justify every act done in the 'Bible'. And that means justifying every atrocious and violent act done in the name of their 'God'. If you refute this, that is TYPICAL. The church is comprised of two people, perpetrators and the naive, easy pickings.

Have you never heard of reform??? Do some African and South Americans still practice cannibalism? Many of their ancestors did.

That's interesting. Reform? Are christians "reformed" because they realize that a moral heresy was committed or because they need to obey current laws such as separation of church and state? Do christians believe in the separation of church and state? Probably not. Does it not state in Deuteronomy that the god of Abraham smite a pagan people and then cursed their descendants for generations to come? Those who were not RESPONSIBLE for the sins of their forefathers. Innocent people? YES IT DOES. The problem with christians and christianity is it is inherently dishonest. Why? Because they purport to be something they are not. If you agree with a doctrine or ideology but not the consequences, then you can't defend it. You can't be half-pregnant. That is DISHONESTY, LIES, DECEIT. Unfortunately.
 
Last edited:
iam said:
Heh, so am I. Christianity and Neo-nazism. Do these not exist today? If their ideology has not changed but is curtailed(external forces) from fully carrying out their agenda, is the members not 'guilty by association'?

*************
M*W: Yes, these ideologies exist even today. The agendas are the same, even those who are disguised by some societal fluff.
 
i am, true Christians have always been true Christians and false christians have always been false. This is the problem with the discussion. False christians are being portrayed as Christians and Followers of Jesus are being falsely accused of murderous intent. Followers of Jesus are true Christians. He is their Lord as well as their Redeemer. True Christians believe Jesus and follow His teachings. Those that burned witches where not following His teachings therefore Jesus was not Lord to those who committed these acts.

Jesus said of these:
Luke 6
46 “But why do you call Me ‘Lord, Lord,’ and not do the things which I say?

So true Christians of today are against witch burning just as true Christians of the past where against witch burning.

True Christians are not brothers in faith with false christians, never where and never will be. They are two different religions that use the same name and claim the same inspiration, but the truth is they are not the same.


All Praise The Ancient Of Days
 
Adstar said:
i am, true Christians have always been true Christians and false christians have always been false. This is the problem with the discussion. False christians are being portrayed as Christians and Followers of Jesus are being falsely accused of murderous intent. Followers of Jesus are true Christians. He is their Lord as well as their Redeemer. True Christians believe Jesus and follow His teachings. Those that burned witches where not following His teachings therefore Jesus was not Lord to those who committed these acts.

Jesus said of these:
Luke 6
46 “But why do you call Me ‘Lord, Lord,’ and not do the things which I say?

So true Christians of today are against witch burning just as true Christians of the past where against witch burning.

True Christians are not brothers in faith with false christians, never where and never will be. They are two different religions that use the same name and claim the same inspiration, but the truth is they are not the same.


All Praise The Ancient Of Days

Clever, but only to the blind. If you don't agree that the Bible is the infallible word of God and that every deed recorded in the Bible was justified by the god of Abraham then it is YOU who are not the true christian. Is this not the precepts of christianity? Therefore, are you a christian or are you not? Are you in agreement with all its precepts? This is what I stated earlier. Christians purport christianity to be something it isn't. You mention witchburning. The Bible clearly states that 'witches' exist and they are an abomination. This also includes anyone who dabbles in the 'occult'. Yet this is a double standard because christians themselves practice the occult. YES, THEY DO. Praying to unseen entities, having visions of the future, but of course in the name of THEIR god. You did not address the atrocities committed by your GOD in the old testament? Oh wait a minute, of course, I'm sure YOUR GOD had a good justification for it? Why is it christians play delusionally innocent regarding THE BLOOD SPILLED BY THEIR PEOPLE? Or did your GOD MAKE A MISTAKE AND IS THE BIBLE RIDDLED WITH HYPOCRISY OR FALSE IDEOLOGY? I AM WAITING FOR YOUR REPLY...
 
Last edited:
Woody said:
Bells says,
It also says anyone that picks up sticks on the sabbath should be stoned to death.

Numbers 15:32-36

Also, a son that shows disrespect for his father should be put to death according to the mosaic law for the Jews.

Things have changed since those days.
For the vast majority of the history of the church, christians did in fact burn witches. If you were to ask someone from 1200 AD about the issue they would likely tell you that no “real christian” would object to burning a witch - and they could make pretty persuasive arguments from the bible to back it up. If you want to say that anyone who would burn a witch isn’t a real christian, then “real christians” are apparently a very recent development who didn't exist for the first 3/4 of the christian church's history.
 
iam said:

Does it not state in Deuteronomy that the god of Abraham smite a pagan people and then cursed their descendants for generations to come?


Abraham had multiple wives too. Know of any christians that have communal marriages? :rolleyes:
 
Woody said:
iam said:

Abraham had multiple wives too. Know of any christians that have communal marriages? :rolleyes:

*************
M*W: Well for one, Charlemagne, an early christian warrior and conquerer of the West, and emperor of the HRE, crowned on Christmas Day by the Pope in the year 800 AD. He had some 13 wives and concubines.
 
Woody said:
Abraham had multiple wives too. Know of any christians that have communal marriages? :rolleyes:
I think you are missing his point. In fact, you are actually helping to make his point for him. Adstar said that the christians who burned witches weren't real christians, because real christians wouldn't burn witches.

The problem is that people's definition of what makes someone a "real christian" has been changing ever since the founding of the church. Christians arbitrarily choose what parts of the bible to obey and what parts to ignore, and all the people who disagreed about which particular verses to follow is quickly labeled as "not a true christian". This is just more of the same from Adstar.

By pointing out that christians no longer (for the most part!) find it acceptable to have multiple wives, you are just listing one more example of how christians change their own rules.
 
Nasor said,

Christians arbitrarily choose what parts of the bible to obey and what parts to ignore, and all the people who disagreed about which particular verses to follow is quickly labeled as "not a true christian". This is just more of the same from Adstar.

By pointing out that christians no longer (for the most part!) find it acceptable to have multiple wives, you are just listing one more example of how christians change their own rules.

Multiple wives never was acceptable:

Gensis 2:23-24

And Adam said, This is now bone of my bones, and flesh of my flesh: she shall be called Woman, because she was taken out of Man. 24 Therefore shall a man leave his father and his mother, and shall cleave unto his wife: and they shall be one flesh.
One man and one woman is the biblical model for marriage and it always has been.

To you and other nonbelievers, christian conduct may appear to be arbitrary.

Christians are no longer under the curse of the law but they are under grace. That means we no longer practice all the rules brought by Moses for the Hebrews.

Gal 3:10-13
For as many as are of the works of the law are under the curse: for it is written, Cursed is every one that continueth not in all things which are written in the book of the law to do them. Christ hath redeemed us from the curse of the law, being made a curse for us:

This is the difference between Jews and christians. Jews are under the law by their own choice. The witch burning stuff is old testament, as well as stoning to death the following: an adulterer, a person that works on the sabbath, a disobedient son, etc. That's all in the OT -- and Jews believe in the OT only.

Why don't you ask a Jewish person if witches should be burned?

You won't find it in the New Testament because we believe in grace.
 
Last edited:
Back
Top