Will Christians ever express remorse for "witch" burning?

[SnakeLord]

However, most witch trials were held before secular courts, not church courts, and the secular courts were decidedly less scrupulous in their methods

Let it be remembered that wiki is freely editable, and to be honest this sentence seems so out of place that it doesn't belong.

A) During the time when the religious masses were burning or drowning the non-religious, there wouldn't have been 'secular courts', because those 'secular people' would have been burning on stacks of hay.

B) Even to this day christianity has an overwhelming say on matters - indeed including legal ones. You even have to put your hand on a bible and swear by it's god when you stand up in court. Does that sound very "secular" to you? And that my little woody, is 2006.

Out of interest, Twain says:

Then it was discovered that there was no such thing as witches, and never had been. One does not know whether to laugh or to cry. Who discovered that there was no such thing as a witch--the priest, the parson? No, these never discover anything. At Salem, the parson clung pathetically to his witch text after the laity had abandoned it in remorse and tears for the crimes and cruelties it had persuaded them to do. The parson wanted more blood, more shame, more brutalities; it was the unconsecrated laity that stayed his hand. In Scotland the parson killed the witch after the magistrate had pronounced her innocent; and when the merciful legislature proposed to sweep the hideous laws against witches from the statute book, it was the parson who came imploring, with tears and imprecations, that they be suffered to stand.

There are no witches. The witch text remains; only the practice has changed. Hell fire is gone, but the text remains. Infant damnation is gone, but the text remains. More than two hundred death penalties are gone from the law books, but the texts that authorized them remain.

It is not well worthy of note that of all the multitude of texts through which man has driven his annihilating pen he has never once made the mistake of obliterating a good and useful one? It does certainly seem to suggest that if man continues in the direction of enlightenment, his religious practice may, in the end, attain some semblance of human decency.

Accountability began with Jesus, and he lived up to every dot and tittle of the old testament law

No he didn't. He broke the sabbath - indeed stating that it didn't mean shit to him. Thus he broke "old testament law". Try again.

 

[Woody]

Who burned the witches?

For years, feminist scholars have argued that witch hunts were inspired by a reactionary, misogynistic church. But new scholarship, like Lyndal Roper's "Witch Craze," reveals that the real villains were the neighbors.


[Woody's comment: and Jesus said love your neighbor as yourself ]

Feb. 1, 2005 | It's hard to imagine a more nightmarish experience than being at the center of a classic witch trial: accused of obscure misdeeds by your neighbors, defending yourself against the looking-glass-world logic of the authorities, suffering an escalating course of torture designed to "loosen your tongue" -- and at the end of it all, the gallows, the block or the stake.

From the ReligionTolerance web site:

The facts are that almost all of the information that is generally accepted as truth by the Neopagan community about the "burning times" is wrong:

The total number of victims was probably between 50,000 and 100,000 -- not 9 million as many believe.

Although alleged witches were burned alive or hung over a five century interval -- from the 14th to the 18th century -- the vast majority were tried from 1550 to 1650.

Some of the victims worshiped Pagan deities, and thus could be considered to be indirectly linked to today's Neopagans. However most apparently did not.

Some of the victims were midwives and native healers; however most were not.

Most of the victims were tried executed by local, community courts, not by the Church.

A substantial minority of victims -- about 25% -- were male.

Many countries in Europe largely escaped the burning times: Ireland executed only four "Witches;" Russia only ten. The craze affected mostly Switzerland, Germany and France.

Eastern Orthodox countries had few Witch trials. "In parts of the Orthodox East, at least, witch hunts such as those experienced in other parts of Europe were unknown...."

The Orthodox Church is strongly critical of sorcerers (among whom it includes palmists, fortune tellers and astrologers), but has not generally seen the remedy in accusations, trials and secular penalties, but rather in confession and repentance, and exorcism if necessary...."

Most of the deaths seem to have taken place in Western Europe in the times and areas where Protestant - Roman Catholic conflict -- and thus social turmoil -- was at its maximum.

From the Burning Times website

Many witches were burned alive, needless to say. It is alleged by church authorities that many who were burned had either recanted their confessions at the last moment or did not repent for their crimes. The burnings were executed by civil authorities because the church would have no part in the murdering of people.

Well it looks like a lot of atheists reactionaries are uninformed, but they are eager to start their own witch-hunt (pun intended) to burn christians at the stake for their beliefs. This is fueled by misinformation, willful negligence of the facts, and a human nature to blame others for their own failings.

 

[Woody]

SL said:

You even have to put your hand on a bible and swear by it's god when you stand up in court.

As a christian I have refused to do that, instead I have "affirmed" to tell the truth in the court proceding because the bible says I should never swear by anything, but let my yea be yea, and my nay be nay.

James 5:12

But above all things, my brethren, swear not, neither by heaven, neither by the earth, neither by any other oath: but let your yea be yea; and your nay, nay; lest ye fall into condemnation.

Does Brittain allow the affirmation option or is it more primitive and intolerant to peoples' religious beliefs, forcing them to swear on a bible against their own conscience? Geez

 

[SnakeLord]

Well it looks like a lot of atheists reactionaries are uninformed, but they are eager to start their own witch-hunt (pun intended) to burn christians at the stake for their beliefs. This is fueled by misinformation, willful negligence of the facts, and a human nature to blame others for their own failings

No disrespect Woody, but can we really be expected to take 'the mystica.com' seriously - a site dedicated to belief in Atlantis? Or indeed religious tolerance that states: "Harry’s, (Potter), magic is of an entirely different nature from real-world witchcraft", and goes on to condemn Harry Potter for being evil?

Try again.

 

[Woody]

No disrespect Woody, but can we really be expected to take 'the mystica.com' seriously - a site dedicated to belief in Atlantis? Or indeed religious tolerance that states: "Harry’s, (Potter), magic is of an entirely different nature from real-world witchcraft", and goes on to condemn Harry Potter for being evil?

Try again.

It did not come from christianpropaganda.com. Rather it came from a group of people (Wiccans) that were on the flaming end of the stake. These are the witches of this day and time.

Yes, I expect you to take the information seriously. If you don't then I conclude you are in willful negligence, and therefore I should not take you seriously.

can we really be expected to take 'the mystica.com' seriously - a site dedicated to belief in Atlantis?

Quite humorous, and you told me Jesus was about as real as the tooth fairy, Lenny the Leprechaun, et al. Are you now discriminating between "real" fairy tales and fake ones? Indeed Laughable! Another oxymoron -- "real fairy tale"

 

[iam]

Oiginally posted by Woody
Secularists PERFORMED the executions, and they used religion as their excuse. They wanted to blame other people for their own problems, and hence they picked out someone they didn't like, and called them a witch. Read the history books. If you are a secularist then Finger's atcha dude.

How do you define a christian or a secularist? You mean a secularist who uses the religion to justify a heinous act? Or do you mean someone who believes they are christian and uses the religion to justify a heinous act?

What's the difference? Are you trying to say a christian would NEVER commit any wrongdoing, be misled, or make a mistake????? Your head is in the clouds and you're being hypocritical. More importantly than who, the finger points condemningly at your religion. My original point is the real issue, Why does your religion condemn witches so viciously?? When christians themselves are superstitious? I'm proving to you and giving you a reality check on your religion. Neither christians, christianity, or the bible are innocent or free from the responsibility of the wrongs and crimes committed by christians whether "secularists" did also. The bible creates division and is extremely judgemental and prejudicial not just based on moral grounds but based on different religions and cultures that did not embrace or worship the judeo-christian god. Christianity is also responsible for evil because it is inherently divisive, predatorial, and intolerant. That is just old-fashioned common prejudice under an umbrella called religion. Meaning christianity is not fundamentally different from secularists when it comes to defending or attacking based on one's beliefs.

 

[snake river rufus]

No, the churches used the church for their own witch trials, and no torture was administered nor capital punishment executed.

The secular courts were interested in the torture and such.

In the Salem trials, the government seized the property of the supposed witches. They odviously had a vested interest in a conviction.

You don't get to revise history that easily. The secular courts were made up of the same type of people who made up the church's courts, as was the government.

 

[Woody]

SL said:

No he didn't. He broke the sabbath - indeed stating that it didn't mean shit to him. Thus he broke "old testament law". Try again.

Jesus did not break the sabbath law.

Jesus has a direct question for you:

I will ask you one thing; Is it lawful on the sabbath days to do good, or to do evil? to save life, or to destroy it?

(Luke 6:9)

We both wait for your answer. (This is gonna be good)

 

[iam]

King James Version: "Thou shalt not suffer a witch to live."

The Promise: Contemporary English Version: "Death is the punishment for Witchcraft."

Revised English Bible: "You must not allow a witch to live."

How is it that "secularists" used the bible incorrectly? Are you saying if it was a "real" witch then it is justified? Who determines who is a real witch? Even the bible is really horrible by including anyone and everyone who has visions or dabbles in any type of occult, it even includes natural psychics who were born with this gift. The bible is inherently chockfull of nasty and predatorial agendas. Christians don't have a leg to stand on in defense on this matter. It is the same as a parent who teaches their child to hate another race and tells them they should not be allowed to live. That child goes out and commits murder and the parent refuses to take responsiblity for what he has taught. This is no different.

Apologize. It was wrong, The bible is also wrong as well as those secularists and christian.

But

This is where it gets to the nitty-gritty and comes full-circle again. Christians will not apologize because they claim those who commited these crimes were not truly christian anyways. Even this is no excuse because the very nature of the bible which christians base their religion and ideology upon is responsible for the condemnation and murder of countless innocent. Therefore christians are just as evil as those they condemn to be guilty or not.

 

[Woody]

How do you define a christian or a secularist? You mean a secularist who uses the religion to justify a heinous act? Or do you mean someone who believes they are christian and uses the religion to justify a heinous act?

What's the difference? Are you trying to say a christian would NEVER commit any wrongdoing, be misled, or make a mistake????? Your head is in the clouds and you're being hypocritical. More importantly than who, the finger points condemningly at your religion. My original point is the real issue, Why does your religion condemn witches so viciously?? When christians themselves are superstitious? I'm proving to you and giving you a reality check on your religion. Neither christians, christianity, or the bible are innocent or free from the responsibility of the wrongs and crimes committed by christians whether "secularists" did also. The bible creates division and is extremely judgemental and prejudicial not just based on moral grounds but based on different religions and cultures that did not embrace or worship the judeo-christian god. Christianity is also responsible for evil because it is inherently divisive, predatorial, and intolerant. That is just old-fashioned common prejudice under an umbrella called religion. Meaning christianity is not fundamentally different from secularists when it comes to defending or attacking based on one's beliefs.

Perhaps Christians should be apologizing to christians.

From Who Burned Witches

The all-time grand champion exterminator of witches was Ferdinand von Wittelsbach, Catholic prince-archbishop of Cologne, Germany, who burned 2,000 members of his flock during the 1630s.

Now that's one heck of a way to build church membership! I wonder if the offering plate was used to "weigh in on a witch."

It never happened in my church.

 

[Woody]

King James Version: "Thou shalt not suffer a witch to live."

The Promise: Contemporary English Version: "Death is the punishment for Witchcraft."

Revised English Bible: "You must not allow a witch to live."


How is it that "secularists" used the bible incorrectly? Are you saying if it was a "real" witch then it is justified? Who determines who is a real witch? Even the bible is really horrible by including anyone and everyone who has visions or dabbles in any type of occult, it even includes natural psychics who were born with this gift. The bible is inherently chockfull of nasty and predatorial agendas. Christians don't have a leg to stand on in defense on this matter. It is the same as a parent who teaches their child to hate another race and tells them they should not be allowed to live. That child goes out and commits murder and the parent refuses to take responsiblity for what he has taught. This is no different.

Apologize. It was wrong, The bible is also wrong as well as those secularists and christian.

But

This is where it gets to the nitty-gritty and comes full-circle again. Christians will not apologize because they claim those who commited these crimes were not truly christian anyways. Even this is no excuse because the very nature of the bible which christians base their religion and ideology upon is responsible for the condemnation and murder of countless innocent. Therefore christians are just as evil as those they condemn to be guilty or not.

That's Old Testament stuff.

It (the OT) also says you are supposed to kill anyone that gathers sticks on the sabbath (saturday) -- well I guess that means no campfires and weenie roasts on the weekend.

A disobedient son is to be stoned to death -- Would there be a single male left in america?

So the end result is that you use the Old Testament (written primarily for the Jews) and claim it applies to the New Testament Age (after Christ). This error was also made by the witch-burners. Hence, you see how easy it is to use the bible as an excuse for wrongdoing.

Ask yourself a question: Would Jesus approve of witch-burning?

 

[Medicine*Woman]

Perhaps Christians should be apologizing to christians.

From Who Burned Witches

Now that's one heck of a way to build church membership! I wonder if the offering plate was used to "weigh in on a witch."

It never happened in my church.

*************
M*W: You claim to be a christian, therefore, you are just as guilty today as the witch-hunters were in their day. You embrace the same evil they embraced. People don't change.

 

[Woody]

*************
M*W: You claim to be a christian, therefore, you are just as guilty today as the witch-hunters were in their day. You embrace the same evil they embraced. People don't change.

Human nature was the evil embraced. You are right when you say it doesn't change.

I have a question for you: Would the Jesus in the bible approve of witch-burnings?

Next: Is it a bad thing for me to follow His example?

And lastly: What did he do that I shouldn't be doing?

 

[iam]

That's Old Testament stuff.

It (the OT) also says you are supposed to kill anyone that gathers sticks on the sabbath (saturday) -- well I guess that means no campfires and weeny roasts.

A disobedient son is to be stoned to death -- Would there be a single male left in america?

So the end result is that you use the Old Testament (written primarily for the Jews) to claim it applies to the New Testament. This is the error that the witch-burners made as well. Hence, you see how easy it is to use the bible as an excuse for wrongdoing.

Ask yourself a question: Would Jesus approve of witch-burning?

No, I won't ask myself that because that is not the point whether he did or not because it does not state his opinion on the matter. As a matter of fact Jesus did not condemn any aspect of the old testament. The important thing is the bible is taken as the complete word of god. If christians disagree or believe it is wrong then the misleading or unfit text should be divorced from it. You say others use the bible as an excuse for wrongdoing. You are right, there are those who do but the bible is as guilty for defending it. So, therefore you are defending the indefensible.

 

[Woody]

No, I won't ask myself that because that is not the point whether he did or not because it does not state his opinion on the matter. As a matter of fact Jesus did not condemn any aspect of the old testament. The important thing is the bible is taken as the complete word of god. If christians disagree or believe it is wrong then the misleading or unfit text should be divorced from it. You say others use the bible as an excuse for wrongdoing. You are right, there are those who do but the bible is as guilty for defending it. So, therefore you are defending the indefensible.

Satan, himself, used the bible when he tempted Jesus.

Here's an example of how it works, take a couple of verses out of context and presto:

And he went and hanged himself. (Mat 27:5)

Go, and do thou likewise (Luke 10:37)

So the bible says kill yourself - verbatim.

 

[iam]

Satan, himself, used the bible when he tempted Jesus.

Here's an example of how it works, take a couple of verses out of context and presto:

And he went and hanged himself. (Mat 27:5)

Go, and do thou likewise (Luke 10:37)

The bible says kill yourself.

Yes, I know that. But you don't have to take things out of context to do evil. By any decent moral standards, there are countless evil deeds condoned in the name of god in the bible. YOU are taking things out of context by using this example as well.

 

[Woody]

Yes, I know that. But you don't have to take things out of context to do evil. By any decent moral standards, there are countless evil deeds condoned in the name of god in the bible.

such as (New Testament example please)

things Jesus did that are immoral:________

 

[iam]

such as (New Testament example please)

things Jesus did that are immoral:________

This posts is a perfect snapshot of christians and christianity. No different from any dishonest, biased, secular or not pighead.

You keep harping on the new testament and conveniently tuck away the old testament or anything that is shown to be flawed but NEVER admit it or disown it. Its a juggling act because you don't disagree with the old testament and its teachings. If christians believed the old testament teachings are wrong then they would drop it from their religion altogether but they DON'T. They don't because they do believe in it and are just patronizing nonchristians and putting on a facade and front because you know by today's standards it is despicable. Christians are just biding their time until they can again do what they do full force from societal constraints and resistance. In the meantime, they are trying to get as many recruits by projecting it as all innocent when in reality the ideology is not, it has a very dark side. Thats called false advertising and advertising is what christians do.

Original post by Woody
Ask yourself a question: Would Jesus approve of witch-burning?

What do you mean by asking this question? Is it how many ways can you kill a witch? What is the proper way to kill a witch? Or is killing a witch just wrong?

If christians claim that every word, old testament and new testament wholly is the complete and perfect wold of god and jesus christ is the son of god, how can you pose the question above? The obvious answer would be yes

Did not Jesus' father say don't suffer a witch to live? Is not the bible the perfect world of god? Is not god the father of christ? Are not god, his father and son one according to christianity? Then they have the same agenda and if it appears otherwise then they are both crooks and frauds playing both sides of the fence. Don't let the left hand know what the right hand is doing tactics.

 

[cole grey]

By the way, I don't consent to pre-marital sex, and I hope my daughter stays out of it.

Would you vote for a law prohibiting pre-marital sex?

 

[Woody]

Would you vote for a law prohibiting pre-marital sex?

Yes I would -- but it wouldn't matter.

There used to be fornication laws but they don't do any good, just like the sodomy laws of today. Also there are cohabitation laws that almost no-one enforces. They (the laws) wouldn't be enforced -- and the penalty isn't something you vote on either.

If I could vote on a penalty, it would be a requirement to attend a class that explains the negative outcomes of their behavior such as unwanted pregnancy, venerial disease, and marital problems in later life.

So in effect these laws are a way of telling the lawless people that they are doing something wrong.

So vote all you want to -- who is listening, who really cares, and who is going to enforce it?