Freethought & Rationalism Archive

Chili · 04-06-2006, 09:03 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Skeptical

First published in 1486, it was a guidebook to the torture and murder of hundreds of thousands of woman and children.

Can children be witches and heretics, or is that an appeal to our emotions?

According to the Church witches are born again Christians that bundled some bible passage together on which they soared through mid-heaven. They are described in Rev. 13:6-12.

Quote:

The history is all there for the reading. Tell your friend to do a search on the site through the text for "torture", he'll be reading all night.

According to the Church they were the wolves in sheep's clothing that would scatter the flock by 'leading them to Jesus' (sounds familiar) in which case they were 'reborn from below' as describes in Rev.13:11-18 where they came from 'the old earth' instead of the water, and, as would follow, they became Jesus worshipers with a vengeance (sounds familiar).

The Church, OTH, wants us to be reborn from above in which case we come from the water as in Rev.13:1-11 and become of followers of Jesus instead of worshipers of Jesus.

The difference here is that the so called witches were in hell if the followers of Jesus end up in heaven. The torture was their best effort to change their mind and bring relief to those suffering souls before they crashed at the foot of the cross and there sing "patient endurance" songs to bring them relief until they died, nonetheless.

Quote:

Allow me to give a few quotes from the site:

"At the time of the writing of The Malleus Maleficarum, there were many voices within the Christian community (scholars and theologians) who doubted the existence of witches and largely regarded such belief as mere superstition. The authors of the Malleus addressed those voices in no uncertain terms, stating: “Whether the Belief that there are such Beings as Witches is so Essential a Part of the Catholic Faith that Obstinacy to maintain the Opposite Opinion manifestly savours of Heresy.” The immediate, and lasting, popularity of the Malleus essentially silenced those voices. It made very real the threat of one being branded a heretic, simply by virtue of one's questioning of the existence of witches and, thus, the validity of the Inquisition."

The eye of the Inquisitor belongs to the Church since heaven is exclusive to them and thus where they are beyond criticism. Let's face it, even today theologians deny heaven on earth and would never accept hell on earth.

Quote:

AND

"It must be noted that during the Inquisition, few, if any, real, verifiable, witches were ever discovered or tried. Often the very accusation was enough to see one branded a witch, tried by the Inquisitors' Court, and burned alive at the stake. Estimates of the death toll during the Inquisition worldwide range from 600,000 to as high as 9,000,000 (over its 250 year long course); either is a chilling number when one realizes that nearly all of the accused were women, and consisted primarily of outcasts and other suspicious persons. Old women. Midwives. Jews. Poets. Gypsies. Anyone who did not fit within the contemporary view of pieous Christians were suspect, and easily branded "Witch".

They were Catholic and not Christian. From this follows that a theologian who does not know the difference is not to be trusted.

Quote:

AND Finally

"The Malleus Maleficarum is one of the most blood-soaked works in human history,in that its very existence reinforced and validated Catholic beliefs which led to the prosecution, torture, and murder, of tens of thousands of innocent people."

You can read the gory details on the site, the text of the book is all there.

Tens of thousands or 600.000 to 900.000?

The aim was to protect the innocent people from the witches. We call them "evangelist" today, or "ministers of the word" that would play a hokus-pokus on them or lead them into being a "new creation" along the lines of some bible passage recipe that they brewed up on their own.

Skeptical · 04-06-2006, 09:41 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Chili

Can children be witches and heretics, or is that an appeal to our emotions?

According to the Malleus, yes, children can be witches (or at least "be-witched") and heretics. You can search through it at the site I listed.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Chili

According to the Church witches are born again Christians that bundled some bible passage together on which they soared through mid-heaven. They are described in Rev. 13:6-12.

Sorry, you lost me, I don't know what "mid-heaven' is. And according to the Malleus witches are in league with Satan. You know, incubi, sucubi and all that.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Chili

According to the Church they were the wolves in sheep's clothing that would scatter the flock by 'leading them to Jesus' (sounds familiar) in which case they were 'reborn from below' as describes in Rev.13:11-18 where they came from 'the old earth' instead of the water, and, as would follow, they became Jesus worshipers with a vengeance (sounds familiar).

Sorry, you lost me again.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Chili

The Church, OTH, wants us to be reborn from above in which case we come from the water as in Rev.13:1-11 and become of followers of Jesus instead of worshipers of Jesus.

I'm really trying, but again, you lost me. What's the difference between a follower of Jesus and a worshipper? And which church are you referring to?

Quote:

Originally Posted by Chili

The difference here is that the so called witches were in hell if the followers of Jesus end up in heaven. The torture was their best effort to change their mind and bring relief to those suffering souls before they crashed at the foot of the cross and there sing "patient endurance" songs to bring them relief until they died, nonetheless.

I read it 3 times, I don't get the in hell/in heaven part. Also don't get how the torture was to help the suffering. Sorry, just don't get it.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Chili

The eye of the Inquisitor belongs to the Church since heaven is exclusive to them and thus where they are beyond criticism. Let's face it, even today theologians deny heaven on earth and would never accept hell on earth.

Are you speaking in some kind of metaphors? I sort of understood the last part, but didn't get the eye part.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Chili

They were Catholic and not Christian. From this follows that a theologian who does not know the difference is not to be trusted.

Aren't Catholics Christians?

Quote:

Originally Posted by Chili

Tens of thousands or 600.000 to 900.000?

After more reserach, I think tens of thousands is probably closer, although its hard to say for sure because certain areas did not keep records. I think a fairly conservative estimate would be between 50,000 and 100,000.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Chili

The aim was to protect the innocent people from the witches. We call them "evangelist" today, or "ministers of the word" that would play a hokus-pokus on them or lead them into being a "new creation" along the lines of some bible passage recipe that they brewed up on their own.

You had me up to "being a new creation", then you lost me. The goal may have been to protect the innocent, but the point is that the innocent is who got tortured and burned. Honest intentions do no excuse murder and torture.

andrewcriddle · 04-07-2006, 10:54 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Skeptical

The bottom line is that whether the inquisitors were responsible for burning a "witch" or some other authority was responsible is quite irrelevant. So-called "secular" courts were torturing, convicting and burning "witches" based on policies and procedures developed from the Christian religious obsession with witches and their destruction. ("thou shalt not suffer a witch to live")

Whether the court was called "secular" because not directly underneath the inquisitorial court system or whether the prosecutors and judges were or were not inquisitors in a technical sense is to my mind a distinction without a difference.

If you wish to define your terms so that anyone executed for witchcraft is a victim of the Inquisition by definition (including those lynched by Stearne and Hopkins in England where the Inquisition in the strict sense had never existed) then so be it.

My point is that over half of those executed for witchcraft were tried and convicted in the same courts and with similar officials and procedures as those that would have been used to try them for sheep stealing.

In these cases the accusation of witchcraft typically came from their neighbours not from the religious authorities.

Andrew Criddle

Roger Pearse · 04-07-2006, 10:59 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Skeptical

The bottom line is that whether the inquisitors were responsible for burning a "witch" or some other authority was responsible is quite irrelevant.

Can we be accurate in our terms, however, please? Particularly if we are seeking to 'knock' other people (a somewhat hateful activity, and surely rather likely to make us narrow-minded and hateful if we do it?)

All the best,

Roger Pearse

Doug Shaver · 04-07-2006, 03:17 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Chili

Can children be witches and heretics, or is that an appeal to our emotions?

Many Christians of the time believed that they could. Many Christians nowadays would disagree, of course.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Chili

They were Catholic and not Christian.

That premise might be accepted by Christians of the evangelical persuasion. That does not make it a fact.

Happy Wonderer · 04-07-2006, 07:31 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Toto

Your friend is relying on the historical fact that the Inquisition at times did not torture people - it just turned them over to the king to have them tortured.

The inqusition did the torturing (in Spain at least) but executions were carried out by the state. Prisoners were "relaxed" to the state with a hypocritical letter recommending mercy.

One example

Quote:

There were also four martyrs. Jorje Núñez, denied until he was tied upon the rack; he then confessed and refused to be converted, but after his sentence of relaxation was read he weakened and was strangled before burning. Francisco Rodrêguez endured torture without confessing; when threatened with repetition he endeavored unsuccessfully to commit suicide; he was voted to relaxation with torture in caput alienum, and under it he accused several persons but revoked at ratification. He was pertinacious to the last and was burnt alive. Juan Fernández was relaxed, although insane; the Suprema expressed doubts whether he had intelligence enough to render him responsible. Pedro de Contreras had been tortured for confession and again in caput alienum; he denied Judaism throughout and was relaxed as a negativo; at the auto he manifested great devotion to a crucifix and presumably was strangled; in all probability he was really a Christian. . . .

hw

sorompio · 04-07-2006, 08:40 PM

As an atheist, I do not share anything with Stalin or Pol Pot.
But a Christian share the same God with Hitler and Torquemada.

04-08-2006, 02:11 AM

If anyone is really interested in the inquisition (as opposed to wanting to engage in a point scoring exercise or feel righteous outrage at how horrible Christians are) I have assembled a FAQ based on current best scholarship here:

http://bede.org.uk/inquisition.htm

It is fully referenced to anyone can go and read the books if they feel so inclined.

The OP asked for 'credible' sources. I should point out the Lea, whom Happy Wonderer, quoted is NOT regarded today as a credible source. His work is rather a historical artifact that tells us about nineteenth century Protestant attitudes to Catholicism.

Best wishes

Bede

Spitfire · 04-08-2006, 02:27 AM

Bede!! I didn't know you ever posted here. I love your site! I've noticed that once people make up their minds that Christians hate science and that the inquisition is proof of how evil they really are, though, this tends to become so central to their world view that all the contrary evidence in the world could not change their minds.

But I've learned a lot.

Spitfire · 04-08-2006, 02:32 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Skeptical

Aren't Catholics Christians?

As you probably already knew anyway, this depends who you ask. Chili has explained to me before (I think) why he makes this distinction himself but it wasn't anything I could relate to.

Thread Tools	Search this Thread
Show Printable Version	Search this Thread: Advanced Search

04-07-2006, 08:40 PM	#17
sorompio Junior Member Join Date: Oct 2004 Location: Spain Posts: 58	As an atheist, I do not share anything with Stalin or Pol Pot. But a Christian share the same God with Hitler and Torquemada.

04-08-2006, 02:11 AM	#18
Bede Guest Posts: n/a	If anyone is really interested in the inquisition (as opposed to wanting to engage in a point scoring exercise or feel righteous outrage at how horrible Christians are) I have assembled a FAQ based on current best scholarship here: http://bede.org.uk/inquisition.htm It is fully referenced to anyone can go and read the books if they feel so inclined. The OP asked for 'credible' sources. I should point out the Lea, whom Happy Wonderer, quoted is NOT regarded today as a credible source. His work is rather a historical artifact that tells us about nineteenth century Protestant attitudes to Catholicism. Best wishes Bede

04-08-2006, 02:27 AM	#19
Spitfire Senior Member Join Date: Feb 2006 Location: The belly of the beast. Posts: 765	Bede!! I didn't know you ever posted here. I love your site! I've noticed that once people make up their minds that Christians hate science and that the inquisition is proof of how evil they really are, though, this tends to become so central to their world view that all the contrary evidence in the world could not change their minds. But I've learned a lot.

Freethought & Rationalism Archive

The archives are read only.