tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21219785.post5666456872939275153..comments2023-12-01T18:05:24.875-05:00Comments on Debunking Christianity: The Terrible Christian Legacy of the Witch Hunts.Unknownnoreply@blogger.comBlogger37125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21219785.post-72506535771782745052007-06-12T16:38:00.000-04:002007-06-12T16:38:00.000-04:00I tried Christianity, more times than I care to re...I tried Christianity, more times than I care to remember, when I was young. It's preachers just kept calling me a "cursed" liar, and attacking me for what sins they imagined I was committing. They refused to ever listen, or open their eyes to what was being done to me(perhaps they were child molesters, themselves, like the ones that routinely hunt "women's children", like me). <BR/><BR/>They would always get around to attacking my mother eventually, because my father had abandoned us, and she was just not willing to pick up some other male on the rebound(women left in poverty with children attract mostly pedophyles, as a rule). Instead of looking the other way, as she was told to do like a good little sheep, she chose to made her own way in the world, work by day, college by night. In their eyes, she was apparently to blame for the fact that the man who had deceived her was a lying, womanizing, deceitful, thieving, brutal, alcoholic. <BR/><BR/>Getting back to the topic, the reason "God" did not command His children(men) to NOT kill witches, is that "God" wants witches to be killed. (a witch was defined as any woman with the power of independents; i.e. knowledge, intuition ... ) This is to allow men to go on abusing women, and "women's children". <BR/><BR/>That is what "God" is really all about. This concept of "God" comes down from the "cavemen". "God" was invented by a group of alpha males, who enjoyed doing what ever they pleased to anyone who was powerless to escape them; especially "women's children" - but not "men's children", that would be disruptive to "His children"(men). And "God" wanted them to do what ever they pleased to any woman that was either unwilling (but not to one claimed by one of them, that could disrupt male unity), or not sexually attractive enough for them to want to mate with(elderly/not fertile - when most women that have remained independent reach the zenith of their knowledge, or intuition). <BR/><BR/>Basically, "God" was invented so that men could "get their rocks off" as often as possible, without annoying other men. Witches, women that achieved independence, were a threat to this.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21219785.post-55676138364679280962007-05-26T13:39:00.000-04:002007-05-26T13:39:00.000-04:00When it comes to prophesies, I think that people a...When it comes to prophesies, I think that people are, as my songwriting teacher used to say, wishing meaning into words.<BR/><BR/>The fact is that there are so many ways to interpret or misinterpret the Bible is a big head scratcher to me. Why would someone, God included, put so much at stake for another person and not give them UNMISTAKABLE words to go by. Just the fact that we are having this discussion is very telling indeed.<BR/><BR/>Now I am not talking about belief here, so this is not a matter of having faith.Michaelhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06259137356946877274noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21219785.post-81859101731656161152007-05-26T02:16:00.000-04:002007-05-26T02:16:00.000-04:00Hi l-n-g,by the question marks I guess you are say...Hi l-n-g,<BR/>by the question marks I guess you are saying that I didn't make myself clear.<BR/><BR/>for the moment, stipulating that the bible is historical.....<BR/><BR/>I think if the transfiguration is what Jesus meant, then it was a very ambiguous and potentially misleading thing to say. I expect that while the disciples where in awe of the transfiguration, I don't think they equated that with what jesus said and if they did, then I am sure they were disappointed as I am. As a Christian I would have prefered it to be shown to be a redaction, proven to be a later addition to the text. As it stands, he gave the impression of one thing, and did another. This is called a 'bait-and-switch'. It is more of that fraud stuff I was talking about.<BR/><BR/>And you really should respond to Benny.<BR/><BR/>Heres a prediction, you are going to see a white animal tomorrow and it will be sign that you will not have to come to a complete stop at an intersection. <BR/><BR/>Please let me know if it comes true. I trust, since you are a christian you will be honest.<BR/>;-)Anonymoushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17353286859864448748noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21219785.post-49086660805434345252007-05-25T19:22:00.000-04:002007-05-25T19:22:00.000-04:00Wow, that was one poor attempt to counter Till's a...Wow, that was one poor attempt to counter Till's argument. Simply asserting that Micah 5:2 is talking about Jesus doesn't make it so. That's right, l-n-g, simply asserting something doesn't make it true.<BR/><BR/>Why don't you try actually addressing Till's arguments? What about his refutation of Ross's other 12 claims? Here are the links again, in case you misplaced them:<BR/><BR/>http://www.infidels.org/library/magazines/tsr/1996/1/1unpro96.html<BR/>http://www.infidels.org/library/magazines/tsr/1996/2/2ross96.html<BR/>http://www.infidels.org/library/magazines/tsr/1996/3/3ross96.htmlAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21219785.post-91519488441432952122007-05-25T18:35:00.000-04:002007-05-25T18:35:00.000-04:00Wow, that was one poor attempt to dissuade Micah 5...Wow, that was one poor attempt to dissuade Micah 5:2<BR/><BR/>But you Bethlehem Ephrathah, though you are little among the thousands of Judah, yet out of you shall come forth to Me the One to be Ruler in Israel, Whose goings forth are from of old, from everlasting (Micah 5:2, NKJV). <BR/><BR/><BR/>Note "whose goings forth are from of old, from everlasting." That would be Jesus.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21219785.post-58504692858861085322007-05-25T18:31:00.000-04:002007-05-25T18:31:00.000-04:00??http://www.reasons.org/resources/apologetics/pro...??<BR/><BR/>http://www.reasons.org/resources/apologetics/prophecy.shtmlAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21219785.post-64631215980510591622007-05-25T06:32:00.000-04:002007-05-25T06:32:00.000-04:00Hi L-n-g,I would call the transfiguration solution...Hi L-n-g,<BR/>I would call the transfiguration solution a 'bait-and-switch'. This creates a dilemma because it means that Jesus/God cheated on his promise or he was wrong.Anonymoushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17353286859864448748noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21219785.post-34356361154344033342007-05-25T01:56:00.000-04:002007-05-25T01:56:00.000-04:00Devotional Verse of the Day05/24/07 "Blessed be Go...Devotional Verse of the Day<BR/><BR/>05/24/07 <BR/>"Blessed be God, which hath nor turned away my prayer."<BR/>--Psalm 66:20 <BR/><BR/>In looking back upon the character of our prayers, if we do it honestly, we shall be filled with wonder that God has ever answered them. There may be some who think their I prayers worthy of acceptance--as the Pharisee did; but the true Christian, in a more enlightened retrospect, weeps over his prayers, and if he could retrace his steps he would desire to pray more earnestly. <BR/><BR/>Remember, Christian, how cold thy prayers have been. When in thy closet thou shouldst have wrestled as Jacob did; but instead thereof, thy petitions have been faint and few--far removed from that humble, believing, persevering faith, which cries, "I will not let Thee go except Thou bless me." Yet, wonderful to say, God has heard these cold prayers of thine, and not only heard, but answered them. <BR/><BR/>Reflect also, how infrequent have been thy prayers, unless thou hast been in trouble, and then thou hast gone often to the mercy-seat: but when deliverance has come, where has been thy constant supplication? Yet, notwithstanding thou hast ceased to pray as once thou didst, God has not ceased to bless.<BR/><BR/>When thou hast neglected the mercy-seat, God has not deserted it, but the bright light of the Shekinah has always been visible between the wings of the cherubim. <BR/><BR/>Oh! it is marvellous that the Lord should regard those intermittent spasms of importunity which come and go with our necessities.<BR/><BR/>What a God is He thus to hear the prayers of those who come to Him when they have pressing wants, but neglect Him when they have received a mercy; who approach Him when they are forced to come, but who almost forget to address Him when mercies are plentiful and sorrows are few. Let His gracious kindness in hearing such prayers touch our hearts, so that we may henceforth be found "Praying always with all prayer and supplication in the Spirit."<BR/><BR/><BR/>Yours for Him<BR/><BR/><BR/><A HREF="http://Bible.Godadsense.com" REL="nofollow">Bible.Godadsense.com</A>The New Covenanthttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01202079996932944341noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21219785.post-24408015209256839962007-05-25T00:58:00.000-04:002007-05-25T00:58:00.000-04:00Farrel Till responds to Hugh Ross's claims of fulf...Farrel Till responds to Hugh Ross's claims of fulfilled biblical prophecies (l-n-g's link):<BR/><BR/>http://www.infidels.org/library/magazines/tsr/1996/1/1unpro96.html<BR/>http://www.infidels.org/library/magazines/tsr/1996/2/2ross96.html<BR/>http://www.infidels.org/library/magazines/tsr/1996/3/3ross96.html<BR/><BR/>Infidels.org's page of rebuttals and refutations of Hugh Ross arguments:<BR/><BR/>http://www.infidels.org/library/modern/theism/christianity/ross.htmlAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21219785.post-49714544669123626492007-05-24T20:33:00.000-04:002007-05-24T20:33:00.000-04:00For Matt. 16:28 there are two possible answers.To ...For Matt. 16:28 there are two possible answers.<BR/><BR/>To me the most likely answer is the transfiguration. Peter, James, and John saw Jesus as he will look when he comes again. This second coming is also referred to as "the Son of Man coming in His kingdom."<BR/><BR/>The second possibility is that John himself saw Jesus coming in his kingdom when he was given revelation. That is possible, but I would say no to that idea because Jesus infered SOME will see, and that usually means more than one.<BR/><BR/>Also a 1/3 of the bible is prophecy. (I've heard different percentages but I think this one is pretty close). Consider that much of the bible, from God, dedicatied to letting people know what's going to happen.<BR/><BR/>http://www.reasons.org/resources/apologetics/prophecy.shtmlAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21219785.post-34000633603972338112007-05-24T00:34:00.000-04:002007-05-24T00:34:00.000-04:00hi l-n-g,Apparently you like to avoid all the corr...hi l-n-g,<BR/><B><I>Apparently you like to avoid all the correctly predicted prophecies.</B></I><BR/><BR/>Matthew 16:28 doesn't seem to have happened, or do I have a misconception?<BR/>That's a pretty big one I think.<BR/><BR/><B><I>"Truly I say to you, there are some of those who are standing here<BR/>who shall not taste death until they see the Son of Man coming in<BR/>His kingdom.” (NASB) Matt. 16:28</B></I>Anonymoushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17353286859864448748noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21219785.post-23678897426231703832007-05-23T22:42:00.000-04:002007-05-23T22:42:00.000-04:00I believe I am the one with the eyes open, and you...I believe I am the one with the eyes open, and you are the one with your mind set on trying to find any little error possible in the bible. What you come up with are pretty lame reasons to disprove the bible.<BR/><BR/>You must realize Christianity is unlike any other religion in the world. Because my parents are christians doesn't mean I'm a christian. It's personal faith.<BR/><BR/>Hmmm.... how many written sources are there from the time of Jesus besides the bible or anything else involving Jesus? Why has this document stood the test of time? I guess since you are of little faith you would expect the documents written 2000 years ago to be perfectly intact and easy to read.<BR/><BR/>Apparently you like to avoid all the correctly predicted prophecies. Huh? Please answer me, and don't skip around. How many other propheciss in human history have come true, if any? You must be really set against christianity and the bible to ignore those, but no, I forgot, you are the open-minded one.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21219785.post-70187433449842485922007-05-23T12:50:00.000-04:002007-05-23T12:50:00.000-04:00live-n-grace:Your statement "The bible is perfect ...live-n-grace:<BR/>Your statement "The bible is perfect and without error....There is NO other document in HISTORY that comes even close to it." is, simply, a lie. Not one you are telling us, one you were told and are repeating.<BR/>Rather than being a parrot, will you <B>please</B> explain the specific points about the 'story of the woman taken in adultery' and the 'Great commission' at the end of Matthew. These do not appear in the earliest manuscripts we have -- we don't have the 'original autographs' and are not discussed by the earliest commentators. Either they are later additions, or they were omitted in the early manuscripts -- if so, why? Do you have an explanation?<BR/><BR/>Then deal with the 'march of the dead' in Matthew, and the 'Slaughter of the Innocents' by Herod, both of which are not only not mentioned by <B>any</B> non-Biblical source, when they are both stories that would have been told repeatedly, but also are not mentioned by any other Gospel -- in most cases not even by those Gospels that 'didn't make the cut.'<BR/><BR/>Maybe you can explain these problems, but covering your eyes and repeating 'the Bible is perfect' doesn't do it. Again, check out the references to blogs by believers such as Chris Tilling and Ben Weber and see what they -- and their believing readers -- think of the idea of 'biblical inerrancy.' (And neither of them are 'liberal Christians.' Chris is an evangelical, his teacher is Max Turner, and Richard Bauckham (sp?) is a regular contributor.) Do you really think whatever pastor you are quoting can match them in knowledge, when they have spent years in believing studies of the Bible?Prup (aka Jim Benton)https://www.blogger.com/profile/08376467128665482055noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21219785.post-82003617568368820092007-05-22T16:44:00.000-04:002007-05-22T16:44:00.000-04:00The bible is perfect and without error. If there ...The bible is perfect and without error. If there is any error, word play, then that is through translation. There is NO other document in HISTORY that comes even close to it.<BR/><BR/>By the way, one of the minor translations errors is in the NIV. There is no Acts 8:37.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21219785.post-91224188698354557112007-05-22T14:47:00.000-04:002007-05-22T14:47:00.000-04:00Thanks for the tip Kyle, but I do read carefully a...Thanks for the tip Kyle, but I do read carefully and seek to understand them. Just because someone doesn't see things the way you do doesn't mean they don't seek for understanding. When John posted this and I read it, it made me think and wonder. Upon investigation I discover that the word witch may have not been in the ancient Hebrew language, something scholars seem to agree on. So I then wonder what that verse must have really said. Everyone has ideas, no one is sure. Regardless of that little question, witch hunts were not right.<BR/>Oh, and between me and you, if this bible is, as you say an accurate representation of the inerrant autographs, we're in trouble.Richhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05816549810869986623noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21219785.post-17129132959207991672007-05-21T17:30:00.000-04:002007-05-21T17:30:00.000-04:00The thing that has been left out in this discussio...The thing that has been left out in this discussion is that the 'witch hunts' are a genocide of women by the patriarchal church & society. Its male domination.<BR/><BR/>I believe the last 'witch' was burned only a few decades ago in a remote part of Europe. The idea that women's power, which was the knowledge of healing & child bearing was too dangerous & required subjegating. I believe the medical profession (men) also gained a great deal from 'demonising' women & their knowledge of sexual reproduction & healing.<BR/><BR/>Also...I'm aware that some xians still view using 'herbs' such as cannabis as 'witchcraft'.<BR/><BR/>Crazy!snakeyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08695267072981070812noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21219785.post-38652726915387958582007-05-21T11:58:00.000-04:002007-05-21T11:58:00.000-04:00Oops, can't quite shut up. Kyle, modern people sh...Oops, can't quite shut up. Kyle, modern people should avoid getting involved with occult practices because they are fradulent. They don't exist. They don't happen. People are not fooled by demons into believing in them, they are fooled by clever tricksters, and by their own ignorance of certain basic principles of magic -- the stage kind -- and of critical thinking.Prup (aka Jim Benton)https://www.blogger.com/profile/08376467128665482055noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21219785.post-31822781645251726262007-05-21T11:55:00.000-04:002007-05-21T11:55:00.000-04:00John, you and Kyle are posting as fast as I am, so...John, you and Kyle are posting as fast as I am, so I'll just leave my comments up and step back.Prup (aka Jim Benton)https://www.blogger.com/profile/08376467128665482055noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21219785.post-50494885599311425132007-05-21T11:53:00.000-04:002007-05-21T11:53:00.000-04:00Kyle:No, demons -- those visitors who drifted into...Kyle:<BR/>No, demons -- those visitors who drifted into Christianity from Zoroastrianism -- do NOT exist. They were explanations created to explain barious physical and mental diseases, as well as being the Zoroastrians explanation for the 'problem of evil' -- one which makes a bit more sense than the Biblical ones. They have become yet another 'answer for which there is no question.'<BR/><BR/>As for biblical inerrancy, I wish you'd do a bit more research. Your assumption that we have "an accurate representation of the innerant autographs" is simply not true. (For example, the 'story of the woman taken in adultery' and the 'Great Commission' at the end of Matthew are both now known to be later additions, totally lacking in the earliest sources.)<BR/><BR/>Don't take my word for it. I would suggest you check out two blogs, both by believers and theologians. The first is FAITH AND THEOLOGY<BR/>http://faith-theology.blogspot.com/2007_05_01_archive.html<BR/>which recently ran a poll -- admittedly a humorous one -- on the 'worst theological invention,' in which 'Biblical inerrancy' came in tied for first.<BR/>(If you are wondering, the blogger, Ben Myers, has a PhD in seventeenth-century theology and is doing postdoctoral research presently -- as well as being a believer.) The post is at May 4th, but you might also read his comments on 'Three things I believe: three things I do not believe" at May 7th.<BR/><BR/>The second is CHRISENDOM, <BR/>http://www.christilling.de/blog/archives/2007_05_01_archive.html<BR/>run by Chris Tilling, an evangelical Christian currently studying for his doctorate under Max Turner at the University of Tubingen. In his post of May 1st he links to the FAITH AND THEOLOGY poll -- before the winners were announced -- and to his own series on inerrancy. I believe you might find his writing and research of interest.Prup (aka Jim Benton)https://www.blogger.com/profile/08376467128665482055noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21219785.post-41914461724035574612007-05-21T11:51:00.000-04:002007-05-21T11:51:00.000-04:00Kyle, The church is not under the Mosaic covenant,...Kyle, The church is not under the Mosaic covenant, but it is a theocracy in the same sense as was the case in the Old Testament. Contrary to some pietistic views of Jesus, his was a political movement. (more on this at a later date).<BR/><BR/>Besides, Jesus did not come to overturn the OT Law. He said so. The difference was that the early Christian movement had no political power. So when the church gained political power they turned to the Law of Moses to see how to run a country. It was the natural thing to do. <BR/><BR/>You're interpreting the Bible through the lenses of democracy (which is a recent development in history), and hence you have a false understanding of these things.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21219785.post-80228681700084374622007-05-21T11:43:00.000-04:002007-05-21T11:43:00.000-04:00So then, a magician (soothsayer, psychic, wizard, ...So then, a magician (soothsayer, psychic, wizard, witch, etc) is someone under the influence of demon activity (or a fraud). They could cast spells such as curses on someone, and the demons could use their powers to make the Magician 'think' they cast magic, by harrassing the intended victim, for example. This would have the effect of ensnaring the Magician in the ideology that led him to think that his magic is real. <BR/><BR/>A person like this is under a strong delusion and can lead others to destruction by teaching others to practice magic. God considered this a capital offense for people living in Israel, the chosen land. The state of Israel was to be pure, and anyone living there who committed magic was to be put to death to purge the nation of evil practices. The purpose of the law was not to be barbaric to magic users, but to deter its practice. If they never come out of the delusion then when they die, they go to Hell. I argue that it would be unloving for God NOT to set the standard so high against magic use. Modern people should read and fear getting involved with occult practices because God lovingly warned them of the dire eternal consequences.<BR/><BR/>So now that I laid out the background info I would like to address the subject of witch trials. In the nation of Israel, God was King (theocracy) so religious crimes were under the governmental jurisdiction. It was God's prerogative to punish magic users with death. Modern governments are not direct theocracies and hence have different degrees of authority. A government has the right to bear the sword (Rom. 13) against capital crimes. Religious crimes are not under government authority so heresy should not be punished by goverment. Hurtful religious practices (like blowing up buildings) should be punished but not holding and teaching wrong beliefs. <BR/><BR/>So, in summary, societies where witch hunts take place are misguided and working under an assumed jurisdiction which they do not possess. They were dead wrong to kill witches.<BR/><BR/>John charges God with an 'utter failure to effectively communicate' about not killing witches. God commands that people read all his words and love the truth. When they do this then they discover that Israel was a special situation where God was in charge and so not all laws transfer to other governmental structures. If people do not love the truth and don't do the most clear things (carefully read God's word), then God is not to be blamed for their sinful deeds.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21219785.post-55073679157954545542007-05-21T11:26:00.000-04:002007-05-21T11:26:00.000-04:00Thanks Prup. But as you can tell from Kyle, Christ...Thanks Prup. But as you can tell from Kyle, Christians who believe the Bible also believe there are demons. Therefore according to them there truly are witches who work real magic. What should be done with them, granting everything else the Bible says, if they truly exist? That's my question. Why wasn't God clear on this? That's my question. <BR/><BR/>If however, God wants witches to be killed, then why isn't the church obeying God?Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21219785.post-12384572288882910782007-05-21T10:53:00.000-04:002007-05-21T10:53:00.000-04:00rich,When you have a wart on your toe, do not saw ...rich,<BR/><BR/>When you have a wart on your toe, do not saw your own leg off to 'fix' the problem.<BR/><BR/>In the same way, you must read the scriptures carefully and seek to understand them when there is a difficulty, not challenge their authenticity. There is a rich manuscript tradition from where we can test today's translations. This work has been mostly done and we can be highly confident that what we have is an accurate representation of the innerant autographs.<BR/><BR/>Prup,<BR/>About magic: I do not think that such magic as you read about in sword and sorcery books is real. However, as a Christian that accepts a supernatural world that can influence ours, I believe it is quite possible for some 'magic' to exist. Demons are at war with God and they use deception to ensnare humans. Someone could pray for a sign that False God X is god, and they get a glowing light in the sky. In reality, I think it is in their mind, not tangible. Demons can influence the thoughts of people, and in the extreme, they can inhabit and substantially control their behavior (possession). I have read accounts of Occult practices where people really believe magic occurred. I do not know the extent of what demons can do, but they can at least create images and impressions in peoples' minds. For the record, I don't think they can manifest themselves in physical form.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21219785.post-11061315731713731492007-05-21T10:01:00.000-04:002007-05-21T10:01:00.000-04:00I'd add that maybe an even more serious problem is...I'd add that maybe an even more serious problem is the tacit assumption in the Bible that 'witches' and 'magic' and 'soothsaying' and 'astrology' and other similar things are both 'evil' and 'real.' (The Bible and Christian thinkers do not condemn such people as fraudulent, but as 'getting their powers from the devil,' -- or, for the Old Testament -- not so monotheistic as is frequently portrayed -- from 'false gods.'<BR/><BR/>If the OT God had simply said that there was 'no such thing as magic,' not only would many lives have been saved, but, perhaps, many years of wandering down false paths would have been eliminated.<BR/><BR/>Why should an all-knowing God -- and a God who is the Creator of the Ultimate Moral Standard and the 'epitome of truth' -- not condemn superstition as <B>false</B> rather than as <B>evil</B>? (He could, still, leave an exception for his own supposedly miraculous acts.)Prup (aka Jim Benton)https://www.blogger.com/profile/08376467128665482055noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21219785.post-1200128344945513722007-05-21T09:06:00.000-04:002007-05-21T09:06:00.000-04:00rich, well then, here we have an additional proble...rich, well then, here we have an additional problem for God. He cannot guarantee that what he said was effectively transcribed in the Bible.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.com