Will Christians ever express remorse for "witch" burning?
- Thread starter Huwy
- Start date
snake river rufus
Registered Senior Member
Only if the nonxian is a pagan. What atrocities have groups of atheists committed in the past?Woody said:
wrong.Nasor said:
The commandments of christianity are, "love god with all your heart mind and soul", and "love your neighbor as yourself".
If you disobey these to follow something else in the bible, you may still be a christian, but are very confused as to the primacy of christ's leadership of the church.
Those people who killed the witches may have been christians, but they were not practicing christianity according to the right rules, i.e. christ's commandments to his disciples. Maybe people who are confused about God aren't loving God with all yet, it is hard to even put a quantifier on that statement, but killing someone is not loving, that is for sure.
cole grey said:
*************
M*W: First, let me explain that those "witches" who were burned were the grandmothers, mothers, sisters, aunts, wives and daughters of christian men. They weren't "witches." Their worst crime was easing the pain of childbirth with herbal teas (now prepackaged and readily available at your local market).
Someone on the forum recently mentioned that the theory of fungus on grain was thought to have caused hallucinations. This probably is true. I've always attributed the hallucinations to some sort of chemical poisoning like leaded paint. For whatever reasons, maybe some of the girls had epilepsy and were seen having seizures, and people thought they were in league with the devil. (BTW, this was the devil THEY created in their minds).
Incidentally, it was not a crime for a husband to provide his laboring wife with herbal teas and curative poltices when she was in the throes of labor, but let an old woman in the village do it, and she was burned at the stake!
These were not just crimes created by the christianity PTB, they were crimes enforced by the patriarchy -- which are one and the same, if you ask me.
One needs to go back and research what one considered to be a "witch" in those days. The correct title, "wiccan," meant a person who was close to and understood Earthly things like plants, animals, minerals, and how to use them effectively to heal the sick and conquer disease. These same people, mostly women, however, were devout christians who believed God gave them the Earth as a gift of life, and they cared for it accordingly.
In those days, "wicca" wasn't a religion, it was having a certain "knowledge." That ancient lore wasn't the least bit evil, but because it offered healing properties that cured the sick, the Church said that it was "of the devil," so nine million women were put to death because of their love of nature and the knowledge they gleaned from it.
Now we see those herbs and knowledge of the natural world as positive. So those killers were the ones who were doing wrong, we agree on that.
But in addition, people who come straight out and worship the devil in rituals could not, and would not, be burned today by most, if not all, christian organizations. And anyone who would suggest burning them has a serious misunderstanding of christianity.
But in addition, people who come straight out and worship the devil in rituals could not, and would not, be burned today by most, if not all, christian organizations. And anyone who would suggest burning them has a serious misunderstanding of christianity.
SnakeLord said:
Witch burning is in the old testament. We've already had our discussion about law (old testament) versus grace (new testament). Christians believe in grace provided through christ. Jews believe in the law as a means of salvation. Witchburning is in the OT law, as I've already said.
As Jesus said, "love" fulfills all the old testament laws. If you love you will not kill, steal, bear false witness, etc.
iam said:
I agree with the Bible. that every action carried out by God or ordered by God was justified. Nothing i put in my post was against the will of God.
Yes witchcraft and the practices of the occult are evil and Christians are to take no part in it. But this does not put the people deceived by such beyond salvation. wiccans and occultists can be saved.
This is not the occult. The God of Abraham is not a demon.
Yes God was justified in all that He did and ordered.
Because my Christian brothers have spilled no blood in history.
God made no mistake when He ordered the Jews to carry out His wrath neither did he make a mistake when He told us Christians to love our enemies and show mercy and longsuffering toward the lost so that some may come to accept the Messiah Jesus and be saved.
One more thing i am using the caps key on your keyboard does not give your words any more meaning or authority.
All Praise The Ancient Of Days
SnakeLord said:
Listen to the bible:
I Timothy 1:8-11
anything else that contradicts the right teaching -- I hate to say it but that sounds like you, Snakelord, and the law-works doctrine you preach.
By the way, the law was not fulfilled until Jesus died on the cross and fulfilled every dot and tittle of it so believers could live under grace. I find it interesting that slave-trading is right in there with rest of the sinful deeds -- yet somebody will come along and say they were "christian." lol
Does that mean believers can ignore the law? No far from it. Believers know they live in great peril if they go against the law by this example:
1 corinthians
(Woody says, "fornication, adultery and incest all in one act -- pretty gross.")
God lets satan destroy their body that their spirit might be saved. No fun!
Last edited:
There's the problem. The bible supports both positions. While jesus is quoted as specifically telling you what to do and what not to do, you obviously think you're free to ignore it because you can find a contradictory passage. All that does is show beyond any doubt that those contradictions are there and that the bible is overly worthless.
I guess that's why theres a few thousand different sects of christianity, all of whom claim themselves to be "true" christians. You're no different to them whatsoever. Just another nitwit thinking he's 'more' christian than everyone else. Personally I find it hysterical.
See my point?
The only thing is, your brand of christian actually detests me, in that according to you you don't have to do anything, or even behave for that matter. Just some quick; "I believe in jesus", and it's all hunky dory.
At least certain other brands of christians believe they actually have to work for it.
While you're both stupid, their beliefs are certainly more commendable.
Adstar said:
*************
M*W: You are without a doubt the most ignorant member of this forum. I used to think it was Woody, but twice now you have proven that Adstar is a fool.
SL said,
My brand of christianity is called fundamentalist christianity You address me as though I am the only that believes the way I do -- this is an error on your part. Silas pointed this out -- when you ignore my culture you demonstrate your own irrationality making you "just another nitwit" (using your own words). I stand by the fundamentalist doctrine 100% down the line. Actually my doctrinal responses are quite predictable if you understand my culture. I didn't say you have to agree with it -- just try to understand it, and you can not. Your best attempt at an explanation is to say it is "irrational," yet my doctrinal responses are highly predictable.
"Fundamentalist" means I take the bible literally as transcribed in the original language (not english), in the original cultural setting, and in the context of the entire bible to weigh in on the grey areas. This means that Jesus is the only answer to salvation and all other biblical passages are subordinate to this authority.
For example: Ist Corinthians 1:18
You are perishing, therefore you think the idea of Jesus saving someone from hell is a foolish one -- that is what my biblical culture teaches. You do think it is foolish (don't you?), therefore, it confirms my belief that you are perishing.
This is called legalism. It is not biblical and it's origin is based on demonic self-pride -- the kind of pride that caused Cain to slay Able. From the Wikipedia:
Legalism in Christian theology is a pejorative term referring either to the imposition of excessive religious rules of behavior (also known as letterism) or to a system of meriting salvation through doing good works, something the Apostle Paul denied was possible (Ephesians 2:8-9).
My brand of christianity is called fundamentalist christianity You address me as though I am the only that believes the way I do -- this is an error on your part. Silas pointed this out -- when you ignore my culture you demonstrate your own irrationality making you "just another nitwit" (using your own words). I stand by the fundamentalist doctrine 100% down the line. Actually my doctrinal responses are quite predictable if you understand my culture. I didn't say you have to agree with it -- just try to understand it, and you can not. Your best attempt at an explanation is to say it is "irrational," yet my doctrinal responses are highly predictable.
"Fundamentalist" means I take the bible literally as transcribed in the original language (not english), in the original cultural setting, and in the context of the entire bible to weigh in on the grey areas. This means that Jesus is the only answer to salvation and all other biblical passages are subordinate to this authority.
For example: Ist Corinthians 1:18
You are perishing, therefore you think the idea of Jesus saving someone from hell is a foolish one -- that is what my biblical culture teaches. You do think it is foolish (don't you?), therefore, it confirms my belief that you are perishing.
This is called legalism. It is not biblical and it's origin is based on demonic self-pride -- the kind of pride that caused Cain to slay Able. From the Wikipedia:
Legalism in Christian theology is a pejorative term referring either to the imposition of excessive religious rules of behavior (also known as letterism) or to a system of meriting salvation through doing good works, something the Apostle Paul denied was possible (Ephesians 2:8-9).
Last edited:
Adstar said:
*************
M*W: Abraham, who probably didn't anymore than Moses or Jesus did, was a pantheist. He did not worship the monotheistic god. Please do some reading of extrabiblical texts. You are making a fool of yourself.
Woody said:MW said:
At one time you said Jesus never existed. Have you changed your mind?
*************
M*W: No, I haven't changed my mind. Jesus never existed.
Adstar said:
*************
M*W: What makes you think we are perishing? That is your own wishful thinking, but you're wrong.
The error on your part is in not realising I am talking to you, not anyone else. Comprende?
What are you blithering on about?
Alas I do have to agree with it, along with everyone else. If people dare not, you display that gross ignorance and say it's because "they don't understand it". Such is the self righteousness of christians.
Where did I say that?
Your brain already has.
No more so than the idea that Frodo saved Middle Earth. It's a slightly interesting but not so well written work of fiction. What I do know is that you are a fool for buying the word of ancient shepherds and really thinking that some old jew got 2 of every animal on the planet and put them on a boat.
Lol, you and your demons. Grow up wouldya?