Topic: Throw down
Quikstepper's photo
Sun 08/10/08 12:29 PM

Those good old Catholics...You Are targeting a whole group of people because of their religious beliefs. That is no better than targeting someone because of the color of their skin or the culture they grew up in.Thats my point.

Also separation of church and state by our founding fathers was put into place to keep the government from persecuting people of different religious beliefs just as much as it was put into place to protect the government from becoming a giant church on to its self. But then again some people make politics their religion and others make Science their religion...just Replacing one belief system for another is all that you are doing.

Most Muslims do not want to fly planes into American buildings so would you accuse them all of being mindless sheep that follow their dogma and infer that that don't mind a good old beheading from time to time????.

One last thing we are the size of a hair on a bugs ass when you look at the size of the universe..You have no more of the truth than I have when it comes down to it all.




LOL...the visual...LOL

...but I got what you are saying. I am amazed when I think of how God put us before all of creation given how frail we are compared to the universe. He is so mindful of us.

Whoever says we are not loved by God has not a clue. :smile:

hinkypoepoe's photo
Sun 08/10/08 12:38 PM
AMEN SISTER!!!

Krimsa's photo
Sun 08/10/08 12:40 PM
Well I guess I will continue on with this list of collective murders perpetrated by Christians/Catholics. But of course the "good far outweighs the bad as someone just said". Hah!

Mission

Emperor Karl (Charlemagne) in 782 had 4500 Saxons, unwilling to convert to Christianity, beheaded. [DO30]

Peasants of Steding (Germany) unwilling to pay suffocating church taxes: between 5,000 and 11,000 men, women and children slain 5/27/1234 near Altenesch/Germany. [WW223]

15th century Poland: 1019 churches and 17987 villages plundered by Knights of the Order. Number of victims unknown. [DO30]

16th and 17th century Ireland. English troops "pacified and civilized" Ireland, where only Gaelic "wild Irish", "unreasonable beasts lived without any knowledge of God or good manners, in common of their goods, cattle, women, children and every other thing." One of the more successful soldiers, a certain Humphrey Gilbert, half-brother of Sir Walter Raleigh, ordered that "the heddes of all those (of what sort soever thei were) which were killed in the daie, should be cutte off from their bodies... and should bee laied on the ground by eche side of the waie", which effort to civilize the Irish indeed caused "greate terrour to the people when thei sawe the heddes of their dedde fathers, brothers, children, kinsfolke, and freinds on the grounde".
Tens of thousands of Gaelic Irish fell victim to the carnage. [SH99, 225]


Crusades (1095-1291)



--------------------------------------------------------------------------------








First Crusade: 1095 on command of pope Urban II. [WW11-41]

Semlin/Hungary 6/24/96 thousands slain. Wieselburg/Hungary 6/12/96 thousands. [WW23]

9/9/96-9/26/96 Nikaia, Xerigordon (then Turkish), thousands respectively. [WW25-27]

Until January 1098 a total of 40 capital cities and 200 castles conquered (number of slain unknown) [WW30]

After 6/3/98 Antiochia (then Turkish) conquered, between 10,000 and 60,000 slain. 6/28/98 100,000 Turks (incl. women and children) killed.
[WW32-35]
Here the Christians "did no other harm to the women found in [the enemy's] tents - save that they ran their lances through their bellies," according to Christian chronicler Fulcher of Chartres. [EC60]

Marra (Maraat an-numan) 12/11/98 thousands killed. Because of the subsequent famine "the already stinking corpses of the enemies were eaten by the Christians" said chronicler Albert Aquensis. [WW36]

Jerusalem conquered 7/15/1099 more than 60,000 victims (Jewish, Muslim, men, women, children). [WW37-40]
In the words of one witness: "there [in front of Solomon's temple] was such a carnage that our people were wading ankle-deep in the blood of our foes", and after that "happily and crying for joy our people marched to our Saviour's tomb, to honour it and to pay off our debt of gratitude."

The Archbishop of Tyre, eye-witness, wrote: "It was impossible to look upon the vast numbers of the slain without horror; everywhere lay fragments of human bodies, and the very ground was covered with the blood of the slain. It was not alone the spectacle of headless bodies and mutilated limbs strewn in all directions that roused the horror of all who looked upon them. Still more dreadful was it to gaze upon the victors themselves, dripping with blood from head to foot, an ominous sight which brought terror to all who met them. It is reported that within the Temple enclosure alone about ten thousand infidels perished." [TG79]

Christian chronicler Eckehard of Aura noted that "even the following summer in all of Palestine the air was polluted by the stench of decomposition". [WW41]

Battle of Askalon, 8/12/1099. Thousands of heathens slaughtered "in the name of Our Lord Jesus Christ". [WW45]

Fourth crusade: 4/12/1204 Constantinople sacked, number of victims unknown, numerous thousands, many of them Christian. [WW141-148]

Crusades (1095-1291)



Estimated totals:



Wertham: 1,000,000

Charles Mackay, Memoirs of Extraordinary Popular Delusions and the
Madness of Crowds (1841): 2,000,000 Europeans killed. [http://www.bootlegbooks.com/NonFiction/Mackay/PopDelusions/chap09.html]

Aletheia, The Rationalist's Manual: 5,000,000


Individual Events:



Davies: Crusaders killed up to 8,000 Jews in Rhineland

Paul Johnson A History of the Jews (1987): 1,000 Jewish women in
Rhineland comm. suicide to avoid the mob, 1096.

Gibbon, Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire, v.5, 6



1st Crusade: 300,000 Eur. k at Battle of Nice [Nicea].

Crusaders vs. Solimon of Roum: 4,000 Christians, 3,000 Moslems


1098, Fall of Antioch: 100,000 Moslems massacred.

50,000 Pilgrims died of disease.

1099, Fall of Jerusalem: 70,000 Moslems massacred.

Siege of Tiberias: 30,000 Christians k.

Siege of Tyre: 1,000 Turks

Richard the Lionhearted executes 3,000 Moslem POWs.

1291: 100,000 Christians k after fall of Acre.

Fall of Christian Antioch: 17,000 massacred.

[TOTAL: 677,000 listed in these episodes here.]


Catholic Encyclopedia (1910) [http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/]



Jaffa: 20,000 Christians massacred, 1197


Sorokin estimates that French, English & Imperial German Crusaders lost
a total of 3,600 in battle.



1st C (1096-99): 400

2nd C (1147-49): 750

3rd C (1189-91): 930

4th C (1202-04): 120

5th C (1228-29): 600

7th C (1248-54): 700


James Trager, The People's Chronology (1992)



1099: Crusaders slaughter 40,000 inhabs of Jerusalem. Dis/starv reduced
Crusaders from 300,000 to 60,000.

1147: 2nd Crusades begins with 500,000. "Most" lost to
starv./disease/battle.

1190: 500 Jews massacred in York.

1192: 3rd Crusade reduced from 100,000 to 5,000 through famine, plagues and
desertions in campaign vs Antioch.

1212: Children's Crusade loses some 50,000.

[TOTAL: Just in these incidents, it appears the Europeans lost around
650,000.]




TOTAL: When I take all the individual death tolls listed here, weed out
the duplicates, fill in the blanks, apply Occam ("Pluralitas non est
ponenda sine necessitate"), etc. I get a very rough total of 1½ M
deaths in the Crusades.







Heretics and Atheists



--------------------------------------------------------------------------------








Already in 385 C.E. the first Christians, the Spanish Priscillianus and six followers, were beheaded for heresy in Trier/Germany [DO26]

Manichaean heresy: a crypto-Christian sect decent enough to practice birth control (and thus not as irresponsible as faithful Catholics) was exterminated in huge campaigns all over the Roman empire between 372 C.E. and 444 C.E. Numerous thousands of victims. [NC]

Albigensians: the first Crusade intended to slay other Christians. [DO29]
The Albigensians (Cathars) viewed themselves as good Christians, but would not accept Roman Catholic rule, and taxes, and prohibition of birth control. [NC]
Begin of violence: on command of pope Innocent III (the greatest single mass murderer prior to the Nazi era) in 1209. Beziérs (today France) 7/22/1209 destroyed, all the inhabitants were slaughtered. Number of victims (including Catholics refusing to turn over their heretic
neighbors and friends) estimated between 20,000-70,000. [WW179-181]
Carcassonne 8/15/1209, thousands slain. Other cities followed. [WW181]

Subsequent 20 years of war until nearly all Cathars (probably half the population of the Languedoc, today southern France) were exterminated. [WW183]


After the war ended (1229) the Inquisition was founded 1232 to search and destroy surviving/hiding heretics. Last Cathars burned at the stake 1324.
[WW183]

Estimated one million victims (Cathar heresy alone), [WW183]

Other heresies: Waldensians, Paulikians, Runcarians, Josephites, and many others. Most of these sects exterminated, (I believe some Waldensians live today, yet they had to endure 600 years of persecution) I estimate at least hundred thousand victims (including the Spanish inquisition but excluding victims in the New World).

Spanish Inquisitor Torquemada, a former Dominican friar, allegedly was responsible for 10,220 burnings. [DO28]

John Huss, a critic of papal infallibility and indulgences, was burned at the stake in 1415. [LI475-522]

Michael Sattler, leader of a baptist community, was burned at the stake in Rottenburg, Germany, May 20, 1527. Several days later his wife and other follwers were also executed. [KM]

University professor B.Hubmaier burned at the stake 1538 in Vienna. [DO59]


Giordano Bruno, Dominican monk, after having been incarcerated for seven years, was burned at the stake for heresy on the Campo dei Fiori (Rome) on 2/17/1600.

Thomas Aikenhead, a twenty-year-old scottish student of Edinburgh University, was hanged for atheism and blasphemy.


Witches



--------------------------------------------------------------------------------








From the beginning of Christianity to 1484 probably more than several thousand.

In the era of witch hunting (1484-1750) according to modern scholars several hundred thousand (about 80% female) burned at the stake or hanged.
[WV]

Incomplete list of documented cases:
The Burning of Witches - A Chronicle of the Burning Times


Religious Wars



--------------------------------------------------------------------------------








15th century: Crusades against Hussites, thousands slain. [DO30]

1538 pope Paul III declared Crusade against apostate England and all English as slaves of Church (fortunately had not power to go into action). [DO31]

1568 Spanish Inquisition Tribunal ordered extermination of 3 million rebels in (then Spanish) Netherlands. [DO31]
Between 5000 and 6000 Protestants were drowned by Spanish Catholic Troops, "a disaster the burghers of Emden first realized when several thousand broad-brimmed Dutch hats floated by." [SH216]

1572 In France about 20,000 Huguenots were killed on command of pope Pius V. Until 17th century 200,000 flee. [DO31]

17th century: Catholics slay Gaspard de Coligny, a Protestant leader. After murdering him, the Catholic mob mutilated his body, "cutting off his head, his hands, and his genitals... and then dumped him into the river [...but] then, deciding that it was not worthy of being food for the fish, they hauled it out again [... and] dragged what was left ... to the gallows of Montfaulcon, 'to be meat and carrion for maggots and crows'." [SH191]

17th century: Catholics sack the city of Magdeburg/Germany: roughly 30,000 Protestants were slain. "In a single church fifty women were found beheaded," reported poet Friedrich Schiller, "and infants still sucking the breasts of their lifeless mothers." [SH191]

17th century 30 years' war (Catholic vs. Protestant): at least 40% of population decimated, mostly in Germany. [DO31-32]


Jews



--------------------------------------------------------------------------------








Already in the 4th and 5th centuries synagogues were burned by Christians.Number of Jews slain unknown.

In the middle of the fourth century the first synagogue was destroyed on command of bishop Innocentius of Dertona in Northern Italy. The first synagogue known to have been burned down was near the river Euphrat, on command of the bishop of Kallinikon in the year 388. [DA450]

694 17. Council of Toledo: Jews were enslaved, their property confiscated, and their children forcibly baptized. [DA454]

1010 The Bishop of Limoges (France) had the cities' Jews, who would not convert to Christianity, expelled or killed. [DA453]

1096 First Crusade: Thousands of Jews slaughtered, maybe 12.000 total. Places: Worms 5/18/1096, Mainz 5/27/1096 (1100 persons), Cologne, Neuss, Altenahr, Wevelinghoven, Xanten, Moers, Dortmund, Kerpen, Trier, Metz, Regensburg, Prag and others (All locations Germany except Metz/France, Prag/Czech) [EJ]

1147 Second Crusade: Several hundred Jews were slain in Ham, Sully, Carentan, and Rameru (all locations in France). [WW57]

1189/90 Third Crusade: English Jewish communities sacked. [DO40]

1235, Fulda/Germany: 34 Jewish men and women slain. [DO41]

1257, 1267: Jewish communities of London, Canterbury, Northampton, Lincoln, Cambridge, and others exterminated. [DO41]

1290 Bohemia (Poland) allegedly 10,000 Jews killed. [DO41]

1337 Starting in Deggendorf/Germany a Jew-killing craze reaches 51 towns in Bavaria, Austria, Poland. [DO41]

1348 All Jews of Basel/Switzerland and Strasbourg/France (two thousand) burned. [DO41]

1349 In more than 350 towns in Germany all Jews murdered, mostly burned alive (in this one year more Jews were killed than Christians in 200 years of ancient Roman persecution of Christians). [DO42]

1389 In Prag 3,000 Jews were slaughtered. [DO42]

1391 Seville's Jews killed (Archbishop Martinez leading). 4,000 were slain, 25,000 sold as slaves. [DA454] Their identification was made easy by the brightly colored "badges of shame" that all Jews above the age of ten had been forced to wear.

1492 In the year Columbus set sail to conquer a New World, more than 150,000 Jews were expelled from Spain, many died on their way: 6/30/1492.
[MM470-476]

1648 Chmielnitzki massacres: In Poland about 200,000 Jews were slain.
[DO43]





(I feel sick ...) this goes on and on, century after century, right into the kilns of Auschwitz.


Native Peoples



--------------------------------------------------------------------------------








Beginning with Columbus (a former slave trader and would-be Holy Crusader) the conquest of the New World began, as usual understood as a means to propagate Christianity.

Within hours of landfall on the first inhabited island he encountered in the Caribbean, Columbus seized and carried off six native people who, he said, "ought to be good servants ... [and] would easily be made Christians, because it seemed to me that they belonged to no religion." [SH200]
While Columbus described the Indians as "idolators" and "slaves, as many as [the Crown] shall order," his pal Michele de Cuneo, Italian nobleman, referred to the natives as "beasts" because "they eat when they are hungry," and made love "openly whenever they feel like it." [SH204-205]

On every island he set foot on, Columbus planted a cross, "making the declarations that are required" - the requerimiento - to claim the ownership for his Catholic patrons in Spain. And "nobody objected." If the Indians refused or delayed their acceptance (or understanding), the requerimiento continued:

"I certify to you that, with the help of God, we shall powerfully enter in your country and shall make war against you ... and shall subject you to the yoke and obedience of the Church ... and shall do you all mischief that we can, as to vassals who do not obey and refuse to receive their lord and resist and contradict him." [SH66]


Likewise in the words of John Winthrop, first governor of Massachusetts Bay Colony: "justifieinge the undertakeres of the intended Plantation in New England ... to carry the Gospell into those parts of the world, ... and to raise a Bulworke against the kingdome of the Ante-Christ." [SH235]

In average two thirds of the native population were killed by colonist-imported smallpox before violence began. This was a great sign of "the marvelous goodness and providence of God" to the Christians of course, e.g. the Governor of the Massachusetts Bay Colony wrote in 1634, as "for the natives, they are near all dead of the smallpox, so as the Lord hath cleared our title to what we possess." [SH109,238]

On Hispaniola alone, on Columbus visits, the native population (Arawak), a rather harmless and happy people living on an island of abundant natural resources, a literal paradise, soon mourned 50,000 dead. [SH204]

The surviving Indians fell victim to rape, murder, enslavement and Spanish raids.
As one of the culprits wrote: "So many Indians died that they could not be counted, all through the land the Indians lay dead everywhere. The stench was very great and pestiferous." [SH69]

The Indian chief Hatuey fled with his people but was captured and burned alive. As "they were tying him to the stake a Franciscan friar urged him to take Jesus to his heart so that his soul might go to heaven, rather than descend into hell. Hatuey replied that if heaven was where the Christians went, he would rather go to hell." [SH70]

What happened to his people was described by an eyewitness:
"The Spaniards found pleasure in inventing all kinds of odd cruelties ... They built a long gibbet, long enough for the toes to touch the ground to prevent strangling, and hanged thirteen [natives] at a time in honor of Christ Our Saviour and the twelve Apostles... then, straw was wrapped around their torn bodies and they were burned alive." [SH72]
Or, on another occasion:
"The Spaniards cut off the arm of one, the leg or hip of another, and from some their heads at one stroke, like butchers cutting up beef and mutton for market. Six hundred, including the cacique, were thus slain like brute beasts...Vasco [de Balboa] ordered forty of them to be torn to pieces by dogs." [SH83]

The "island's population of about eight million people at the time of Columbus's arrival in 1492 already had declined by a third to a half before the year 1496 was out." Eventually all the island's natives were exterminated, so the Spaniards were "forced" to import slaves from other caribbean islands, who soon suffered the same fate. Thus "the Caribbean's millions of native people [were] thereby effectively liquidated in barely a quarter of a century". [SH72-73] "In less than the normal lifetime of a single human being, an entire culture of millions of people, thousands of years resident in their homeland, had been exterminated." [SH75]

"And then the Spanish turned their attention to the mainland of Mexico and Central America. The slaughter had barely begun. The exquisite city of Tenochtitlán [Mexico city] was next." [SH75]

Cortez, Pizarro, De Soto and hundreds of other Spanish conquistadors likewise sacked southern and mesoamerican civilizations in the name of Christ (De Soto also sacked Florida).

"When the 16th century ended, some 200,000 Spaniards had moved to the Americas. By that time probably more than 60,000,000 natives were dead."
[SH95]


Of course no different were the founders of what today is the US of America.







Although none of the settlers would have survived winter without native help, they soon set out to expel and exterminate the Indians. Warfare among (north American) Indians was rather harmless, in comparison to European standards, and was meant to avenge insults rather than conquer land. In the words of some of the pilgrim fathers: "Their Warres are farre less bloudy...", so that there usually was "no great slawter of nether side". Indeed, "they might fight seven yeares and not kill seven men." What is more, the Indians usually spared women and children. [SH111]

In the spring of 1612 some English colonists found life among the (generally friendly and generous) natives attractive enough to leave Jamestown - "being idell ... did runne away unto the Indyans," - to live among them (that probably solved a sex problem).
"Governor Thomas Dale had them hunted down and executed: 'Some he apointed (sic) to be hanged Some burned Some to be broken upon wheles, others to be staked and some shott to deathe'." [SH105] Of course these elegant measures were restricted for fellow Englishmen: "This was the treatment for those who wished to act like Indians. For those who had no
choice in the matter, because they were the native people of Virginia" methods were different: "when an Indian was accused by an Englishman of stealing a cup and failing to return it, the English response was to attack the natives in force, burning the entire community" down. [SH105]

On the territory that is now Massachusetts the founding fathers of the colonies were committing genocide, in what has become known as the "Peqout War." The killers were New England Puritan Christians, refugees from persecution in their own home country England.

When however, a dead colonist was found, apparently killed by Narragansett Indians, the Puritan colonists wanted revenge. Despite the Indian chief's pledge they attacked.
Somehow they seem to have lost the idea of what they were after, because when they were greeted by Pequot Indians (long-time foes of the Narragansetts) the troops nevertheless made war on the Pequots and burned their villages.
The puritan commander-in-charge John Mason after one massacre wrote: "And indeed such a dreadful Terror did the Almighty let fall upon their Spirits, that they would fly from us and run into the very Flames, where many of them perished ... God was above them, who laughed his Enemies and the Enemies of his People to Scorn, making them as a fiery Oven ... Thus did the Lord judge among the Heathen, filling the Place with dead Bodies": men, women, children. [SH113-114]

So "the Lord was pleased to smite our Enemies in the hinder Parts, and to give us their land for an inheritance". [SH111].

Because of his readers' assumed knowledge of Deuteronomy, there was no need for Mason to quote the words that immediately follow:
"Thou shalt save alive nothing that breatheth. But thou shalt utterly destroy them..." (Deut 20)

Mason's comrade Underhill recalled how "great and doleful was the bloody sight to the view of the young soldiers" yet reassured his readers that "sometimes the Scripture declareth women and children must perish with their parents". [SH114]

Other Indians were killed in successful plots of poisoning. The colonists even had dogs especially trained to kill Indians and to devour children from their mothers breasts, in the colonists' own words: "blood Hounds to draw after them, and Mastives to seaze them." (This was inspired by Spanish methods of the time)
In this way they continued until the extermination of the Pequots was near. [SH107-119]

The surviving handful of Indians "were parceled out to live in servitude. John Endicott and his pastor wrote to the governor asking for 'a share' of the captives, specifically 'a young woman or girle and a boy if you thinke good'." [SH115]

Other tribes were to follow the same path.

Comment the Christian exterminators: "God's Will, which will at last give us cause to say: How Great is His Goodness! and How Great is his Beauty!"
"Thus doth the Lord Jesus make them to bow before him, and to lick the Dust!" [TA]

Like today, lying was morally acceptable to Christians then. "Peace treaties were signed with every intention to violate them: when the Indians 'grow secure uppon (sic) the treatie', advised the Council of State in Virginia, 'we shall have the better Advantage both to surprise them, & cutt downe theire Corne'." [SH106]

In 1624 sixty heavily armed Englishmen cut down 800 defenseless Indian men, women and children. [SH107]

In a single massacre in "King Philip's War" of 1675 and 1676 some "600 Indians were destroyed. A delighted Cotton Mather, revered pastor of the Second Church in Boston, later referred to the slaughter as a 'barbeque'." [SH115]

To summarize: Before the arrival of the English, the western Abenaki people in New Hampshire and Vermont had numbered 12,000. Less than half a century later about 250 remained alive - a destruction rate of 98%. The Pocumtuck people had numbered more than 18,000, fifty years later they were down to 920 - 95% destroyed. The Quiripi-Unquachog people had numbered about
30,000, fifty years later they were down to 1500 - 95% destroyed. The Massachusetts people had numbered at least 44,000, fifty years later barely 6000 were alive - 81% destroyed. [SH118] These are only a few examples of the multitude of tribes living before Christian colonists set their foot on the New World. All this was before the smallpox epidemics of 1677 and 1678 had occurred. And the carnage was not over then.

All the above was only the beginning of the European colonization, it was before the frontier age actually had begun.

A total of maybe more than 150 million Indians (of both Americas) were destroyed in the period of 1500 to 1900, as an average two thirds by smallpox and other epidemics, that leaves some 50 million killed directly by violence, bad treatment and slavery.

In many countries, such as Brazil, and Guatemala, this continues even today.


More Glorious Events in U.S. History







Reverend Solomon Stoddard, one of New England's most esteemed religious leaders, in "1703 formally proposed to the Massachusetts Governor that the colonists be given the financial wherewithal to purchase and train large packs of dogs 'to hunt Indians as they do bears'." [SH241]




Massacre of Sand Creek, Colorado 11/29/1864. Colonel John Chivington, a former Methodist minister and still elder in the church ("I long to be wading in gore") had a Cheyenne village of about 600, mostly women and children, gunned down despite the chiefs' waving with a white flag: 400-500 killed.
From an eye-witness account: "There were some thirty or forty squaws collected in a hole for protection; they sent out a little girl about six years old with a white flag on a stick; she had not proceeded but a few steps when she was shot and killed. All the squaws in that hole were afterwards killed ..." [SH131]






By the 1860s, "in Hawai'i the Reverend Rufus Anderson surveyed the carnage that by then had reduced those islands' native population by 90 percent or more, and he declined to see it as tragedy; the expected total die-off of the Hawaiian population was only natural, this missionary said, somewhat equivalent to 'the amputation of diseased members of the body'."
[SH244]


20th Century Church Atrocities



--------------------------------------------------------------------------------








Catholic extermination camps
Surprisingly few know that Nazi extermination camps in World War II were by no means the only ones in Europe at the time. In the years 1942-1943 also in Croatia existed numerous extermination camps, run by Catholic Ustasha under their dictator Ante Paveliç, a practicing Catholic and regular visitor to the then pope. There were even concentration camps exclusively for children!
In these camps - the most notorious was Jasenovac, headed by a Franciscan friar -
orthodox-Christian Serbians (and a substantial number of Jews) were murdered. Like the Nazis the Catholic Ustasha burned their victims in kilns, alive (the Nazis were decent enough to have their victims gassed first). But most of the victims were simply stabbed, slain or shot to death, the number of them being estimated between 300,000 and 600,000, in a rather tiny country. Many of the killers were Franciscan friars. The atrocities were appalling enough to induce bystanders of the Nazi "Sicherheitsdienst der SS", watching, to complain about them to Hitler (who did not listen). The pope knew about these events and did
nothing to prevent them. [MV]




Catholic terror in Vietnam
In 1954 Vietnamese freedom fighters; the Viet Minh; - had finally defeated the French colonial government in North Vietnam, which by then had been supported by U.S. funds amounting to more than $2 billion. Although the victorious assured religious freedom to all (most non-Buddhist Vietnamese were Catholics), due to huge anticommunist propaganda campaigns many Catholics fled to the South. With the help of Catholic lobbies in Washington and Cardinal Spellman, the Vatican's spokesman in U.S. politics, who later on would call the U.S. forces in Vietnam "Soldiers of Christ", a scheme was concocted to prevent democratic elections which could have brought the communist Viet Minh to power in the South as well, and the fanatic Catholic Ngo Dinh Diem was made president of South Vietnam. [MW16ff]
Diem saw to it that U.S. aid, food, technical and general assistance was given to Catholics alone, Buddhist individuals and villages were ignored or had to pay for the food aids which were given to Catholics for free. The only religious denomination to be supported was Roman Catholicism.
The Vietnamese McCarthyism turned even more vicious than its American counterpart. By 1956 Diem promulgated a presidential order which read:



"Individuals considered dangerous to the national defense and common security may be confined by executive order, to a concentration camp."



Supposedly to fight communism, thousands of Buddhist protesters and monks were imprisoned in "detention camps." Out of protest dozens of Buddhist teachers - male and female - and monks poured gasoline over themselves and burned themselves. (Note that Buddhists burned themselves: in comparison Christians tend to burn others). Meanwhile some of the prison camps, which in the meantime were filled with Protestant and even Catholic protesters as well, had turned into no-nonsense death camps. It is estimated that during this period of terror (1955-1960) at least 24,000 were wounded - ; mostly in street riots ; - 80,000 people were executed, 275,000 had been detained or tortured, and about 500,000 were sent to concentration or detention camps. [MW76-89].
To support this kind of government in the next decade thousands of American GI's lost their life.





Christianity kills the cat
On July 1, 1976, Anneliese Michel, a 23-year-old student of a teachers college in Germany, died: she starved herself to death. For months she had been haunted by demonic visions and apparitions, and for months two Catholic priests - with explicit approval of the Catholic bishop of Würzburg - additionally pestered and tormented the wretched girl with their exorcist rituals. After her death in Klingenberg hospital - her body was littered with wounds - her parents, both of them
fanatical Catholics, were sentenced to six months for not having called for medical help. None of the priests was punished: on the contrary, Miss Michel's grave today is a place of pilgrimage and worship for a number of similarly faithful Catholics (in the seventeenth century Würzburg was notorious for it's extensive witch burnings).
This case is only the tip of an iceberg of such evil superstition and has become known only because of its lethal outcome. [SP80]




Rwanda Massacres
In 1994 in the small African country of Rwanda in just a few months several hundred thousand civilians were butchered, apparently a conflict of the Hutu and Tutsi ethnic groups.
For quite some time I heard only rumors about Catholic clergy actively involved in the 1994 Rwanda massacres. Odd denials of involvement were printed in Catholic church journals, before even anybody had openly accused members of the church.
Then, 10/10/96, in the newscast of S2 Aktuell, Germany - a station not at all critical to Christianity - the following was stated:



"Anglican as well as Catholic priests and nuns are suspect of having actively participated in murders. Especially the conduct of a certain Catholic priest has been occupying the public mind in Rwanda's capital Kigali for months. He was minister of the church of the Holy Family and allegedly murdered Tutsis in the most brutal manner. He is reported to have accompanied marauding Hutu militia with a gun in his cowl. In fact there has been a bloody slaughter of Tutsis seeking shelter in his parish. Even two years after the massacres many Catholics refuse to set foot on the threshold of their church, because to them the participation of a certain part of the clergy in the slaughter is well established. There is almost no church in Rwanda that has not seen refugees - women, children, old - being brutally butchered facing the crucifix.
According to eyewitnesses clergymen gave away hiding Tutsis and turned them over to the machetes of the Hutu militia.
In connection with these events again and again two Benedictine nuns are mentioned, both of whom have fled into a Belgian monastery in the meantime to avoid prosecution. According to survivors one of them called the
Hutu killers and led them to several thousand people who had sought shelter in her monastery. By force the doomed were driven out of the churchyard and were murdered in the presence of the nun right in front of the gate. The other one is also reported to have directly cooperated with the murderers of the Hutu militia. In her case again witnesses report that she watched the slaughtering of people in cold blood and without showing response. She is even accused of having procured some petrol used by the killers to set on
fire and burn their victims alive..." [S2]



More recently the BBC aired:




Priests get death sentence for Rwandan genocide
BBC NEWS April 19, 1998


A court in Rwanda has sentenced two Roman Catholic priests to death for their role in the genocide of 1994, in which up to a million Tutsis and moderate Hutus were killed. Pope John Paul said the priests must be made to account for their actions. Different sections of the Rwandan church have been widely accused of playing an active role in the genocide of 1994...






As can be seen from these events, to Christianity the Dark Ages never come to an end.







--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

If today Christians talk to me about morality, this is why they make me sick.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------




References




[DA]

K.Deschner, Abermals krähte der Hahn, Stuttgart 1962.

[DO]

K.Deschner, Opus Diaboli, Reinbek 1987.

[EC]

P.W.Edbury, Crusade and Settlement, Cardiff Univ. Press 1985.

[EJ]

S.Eidelberg, The Jews and the Crusaders, Madison 1977.

[HA]

Hunter, M., Wootton, D., Atheism from the Reformation to the
Enlightenment, Oxford 1992.

[KM]

Schröder-Kappus, E., Wagner, W., Michael Sattler. Ein Märtyrer in
Rottenburg, Tübingen, TVT Media 1992.

[LI]

H.C.Lea, The Inquisition of the Middle Ages, New York 1961.

[MM]

M.Margolis, A.Marx, A History of the Jewish People.

[MV]

A.Manhattan, The Vatican's Holocaust, Springfield 1986.
See also
V.Dedijer, The Yugoslav Auschwitz and the Vatican, Buffalo NY, 1992.

[NC]

J.T.Noonan, Contraception: A History of its Treatment by the Catholic
Theologians and Canonists, Cambridge/Mass., 1992.

[S2]

Newscast of S2 Aktuell, Germany, 10/10/96, 12:00.

[SH]

D.Stannard, American Holocaust, Oxford University Press 1992.

[SP]

German news magazine Der Spiegel, no.49, 12/2/1996.

[TA]

A True Account of the Most Considerable Occurrences that have Hapned in
the Warre Between the English and the Indians in New England, London 1676.


[TG]

F.Turner, Beyond Geography, New York 1980.

[WW]

H.Wollschläger: Die bewaffneten Wallfahrten gen Jerusalem, Zürich
1973.
(This is in german and what is worse, it is out of print. But it is
the best I ever read about crusades and includes a full list of original
medieval Christian chroniclers' writings).

[WV]

Estimates on the number of executed witches:




N.Cohn, Europe's Inner Demons: An Enquiry Inspired by the Great Witch
Hunt, Frogmore 1976, 253.

R.H.Robbins, The Encyclopedia of Witchcraft and Demonology, New
York 1959, 180.

J.B.Russell, Witchcraft in the Middle Ages, Ithaca/NY 1972, 39.

H.Zwetsloot, Friedrich Spee und die Hexenprozesse, Trier 1954,
56.








wouldee's photo
Sun 08/10/08 12:42 PM
This week, John Edwards was found out to have been lying about an affair he had in the past.

The DNC wanted him to speak at the coming convention.

The news channels and the talking heads have taken it upon themselves to frame the gossip as news and nationally, iut is the current titilation and brief respite known as one of many tender morsels of juicy and salient gossip, so lusted after by the fans of the media and their sponsors.

So, many deplorable things occur in this life and in our communities.

Which is worse? the media pandering to the baser emotions of those lustfully insatible for gossip and intrusion into the foolishness and weaknesses of hypocrits and self centered fallable heroes of our time?

Or the baser nature of the intellectual dishonesty and orgyistic nature of our avaricial and greedy panderers of the worst of humanity to their deluded benefactors?







whatever one stays one mind on fills said vessel with treasure.


stay my heart on thee, O magnificent depravity.

praise be the momentum of lust and pride and deception.

glorify the justifications of such applause and berievement upon our souls, O mighty delusion.



























what kind of prayer is that?


heaps and heaps of garbage overflow in the streets and few there be that see it.

such a garden paradise.

hail secular humanism.
















:laughing: :laughing: :laughing: :laughing: :laughing:

Abracadabra's photo
Sun 08/10/08 12:43 PM
Wouldee wrote:

That not being the case in reality, I must say, that nothing is further from the truth that remains so exemplified in the elusive protestations of self centered, egotistical and arrogant demogogues that speak from nothing more than their abundance of lack in experience, knowledge, understanding and wisdom found only in the selflessness of denying oneself for the good of those dear and tenderly entered into their hearts and held in higher esteem than their very own lives, which is foreign to any that through fear or enlightened self interest have determined for themselves to be the purview of the foolish and ignorant and basest of men.


So in other words, no one believes in the Bible verbatim, nor follows it as such.

I'm in total agreement with that, Wouldee. drinker

Krimsa's photo
Sun 08/10/08 12:49 PM

Wouldee wrote:

That not being the case in reality, I must say, that nothing is further from the truth that remains so exemplified in the elusive protestations of self centered, egotistical and arrogant demogogues that speak from nothing more than their abundance of lack in experience, knowledge, understanding and wisdom found only in the selflessness of denying oneself for the good of those dear and tenderly entered into their hearts and held in higher esteem than their very own lives, which is foreign to any that through fear or enlightened self interest have determined for themselves to be the purview of the foolish and ignorant and basest of men.


So in other words, no one believes in the Bible verbatim, nor follows it as such.

I'm in total agreement with that, Wouldee. drinker


Of course not, they simply manipulate and conform it to whatever suits their own belief structure.

wouldee's photo
Sun 08/10/08 12:58 PM
Edited by wouldee on Sun 08/10/08 12:59 PM

Wouldee wrote:

That not being the case in reality, I must say, that nothing is further from the truth that remains so exemplified in the elusive protestations of self centered, egotistical and arrogant demogogues that speak from nothing more than their abundance of lack in experience, knowledge, understanding and wisdom found only in the selflessness of denying oneself for the good of those dear and tenderly entered into their hearts and held in higher esteem than their very own lives, which is foreign to any that through fear or enlightened self interest have determined for themselves to be the purview of the foolish and ignorant and basest of men.


So in other words, no one believes in the Bible verbatim, nor follows it as such.

I'm in total agreement with that, Wouldee. drinker




Of course you are, abra.:banana: :laughing: :laughing: :laughing:


and this from one who has found nothing more than torment within it, at the end of the day.
No doubt, you can only see that which you choose to see from the sidelines that sequester your participation in the abundant joys called life.


This from a man that equates definitions given the abundance of lack of the delusional protestations of male chauvinism in transference as the metaphorical and allegorical interpretation of the full import of the Holy Bible as the sum total of that which is gleaned from my previous observations.

It is no surprise to me that you have missed the point, abra.

But your sense of humor does not escape me, even if in the bereft catacomb that you call your own esteemed heart, it seems appropriate for you to so opine.

:banana: flowers :banana: flowers :banana:


:laughing: :laughing: :laughing: :laughing:

rofl rofl rofl rofl rofl rofl rofl



what a treat, that which a day may bring.


:wink:


hinkypoepoe's photo
Sun 08/10/08 01:10 PM
How many people have died under communism and fascism?????? Mankind perverts the law and we will it to greed, lust and power.

Gods commandments would bring peace to this earth if man would follow them. Again God is pure and righteous and man is flawed.

You like science ?...well Scientifically put a community together and have them follow Gods commandments and I will bet that community will prosper.That does not mean they will not have hardship...but They will prosper.

Krimsa's photo
Sun 08/10/08 01:13 PM


Wouldee wrote:

That not being the case in reality, I must say, that nothing is further from the truth that remains so exemplified in the elusive protestations of self centered, egotistical and arrogant demogogues that speak from nothing more than their abundance of lack in experience, knowledge, understanding and wisdom found only in the selflessness of denying oneself for the good of those dear and tenderly entered into their hearts and held in higher esteem than their very own lives, which is foreign to any that through fear or enlightened self interest have determined for themselves to be the purview of the foolish and ignorant and basest of men.


So in other words, no one believes in the Bible verbatim, nor follows it as such.

I'm in total agreement with that, Wouldee. drinker




Of course you are, abra.:banana: :laughing: :laughing: :laughing:


and this from one who has found nothing more than torment within it, at the end of the day.
No doubt, you can only see that which you choose to see from the sidelines that sequester your participation in the abundant joys called life.


This from a man that equates definitions given the abundance of lack of the delusional protestations of male chauvinism in transference as the metaphorical and allegorical interpretation of the full import of the Holy Bible as the sum total of that which is gleaned from my previous observations.

It is no surprise to me that you have missed the point, abra.

But your sense of humor does not escape me, even if in the bereft catacomb that you call your own esteemed heart, it seems appropriate for you to so opine.

:banana: flowers :banana: flowers :banana:


:laughing: :laughing: :laughing: :laughing:

rofl rofl rofl rofl rofl rofl rofl



what a treat, that which a day may bring.


:wink:




So basically you are saying the bible is old, there was simply a lot of chauvinism and a misogynistic viewpoint was the norm, get over it already.

I’m sorry but I am asking you WHY there was such an agenda set forth? Why were these men so oppressive and fearful? Don’t tell me about your god today, and he's made up for this and its all fine and good now. There is bound to be a little mistrust and resentment there.

hinkypoepoe's photo
Sun 08/10/08 01:14 PM
sudo intellectuallism

Quikstepper's photo
Sun 08/10/08 01:17 PM

How many people have died under communism and fascism?????? Mankind perverts the law and we will it to greed, lust and power.

Gods commandments would bring peace to this earth if man would follow them. Again God is pure and righteous and man is flawed.

You like science ?...well Scientifically put a community together and have them follow Gods commandments and I will bet that community will prosper.That does not mean they will not have hardship...but They will prosper.


We all know that too. :smile:

It's too easy to not look at the good...for some if you do 9 out of 10 things right they will always choose to complain about the 1 thing that wasn't done & conveniently choose to ignore the accomplishments.

frustrated frustrated frustrated


Quikstepper's photo
Sun 08/10/08 01:20 PM

This week, John Edwards was found out to have been lying about an affair he had in the past.

The DNC wanted him to speak at the coming convention.

The news channels and the talking heads have taken it upon themselves to frame the gossip as news and nationally, iut is the current titilation and brief respite known as one of many tender morsels of juicy and salient gossip, so lusted after by the fans of the media and their sponsors.

So, many deplorable things occur in this life and in our communities.

Which is worse? the media pandering to the baser emotions of those lustfully insatible for gossip and intrusion into the foolishness and weaknesses of hypocrits and self centered fallable heroes of our time?

Or the baser nature of the intellectual dishonesty and orgyistic nature of our avaricial and greedy panderers of the worst of humanity to their deluded benefactors?


whatever one stays one mind on fills said vessel with treasure.


stay my heart on thee, O magnificent depravity.

praise be the momentum of lust and pride and deception.

glorify the justifications of such applause and berievement upon our souls, O mighty delusion.


what kind of prayer is that?


heaps and heaps of garbage overflow in the streets and few there be that see it.

such a garden paradise.

hail secular humanism.


:laughing: :laughing: :laughing: :laughing: :laughing:



LOL.. of course!!! why didn't "THEY" think of that????? frustrated frustrated

no photo
Sun 08/10/08 01:22 PM

Those good old Catholics...You Are targeting a whole group of people because of their religious beliefs. That is no better than targeting someone because of the color of their skin or the culture they grew up in. Thats my point.


Hinkypoepoe:

I don't target people. I target the religion created by alien overlords or corrupt statesmen who plagiarize myths of old to create the great lie. If they were here before me, those liars, I indeed to call them such.

But to those who choose to believe, well, they have my deepest sympathy.



Also separation of church and state by our founding fathers was put into place to keep the government from persecuting people of different religious beliefs just as much as it was put into place to protect the government from becoming a giant church on to its self. But then again some people make politics their religion and others make Science their religion...just Replacing one belief system for another is all that you are doing.


You are generalizing here.. not speaking to me directly, so I will pass on a response to this statement.

Most Muslims do not want to fly planes into American buildings so would you accuse them all of being mindless sheep that follow their dogma and infer that they don't mind a good old beheading from time to time????.


Does not apply to me, so I pass...


One last thing we are a hair on a bugs ass when you look at the size of the universe..You have no more of the truth than I have when it comes down to it all.


It is hard to look at the size of the universe from the position of a hair on a bugs ass.

I don't know how much of the truth you claim to have, so I will pass on that last statement.

JB

Abracadabra's photo
Sun 08/10/08 01:23 PM
and this from one who has found nothing more than torment within it, at the end of the day.


You only feel this way because you misunderstand the realistic pragmatic conclusions that I post for the sake of intellectuals who are interested in truth.

I could easily embrace the bible from a positive view just like Christians do and twist it and bend it into my own fantasy world. I fully understand how and why people do that Wouldee. Truly I do.

I'm not out to burst personal bubbles. Those burst bubbles are "collateral damage" for the sake of revealing truth.

People who want to keep their bubbles in tact should go out and pick daisies. They shouldn't be on religious forums arguing religion in the first place. laugh

On a personal level I see absolutely no problem with the "Fairy Designer Religion" aspect of it. If it makes people happy on a personal level more power to them. But on a global scale real people are dying because of it. Real babies are being physically harmed by the 'collateral damage' of real wars and violence that is actually taking place in the real world due to religious tensions.

Everyone is worried about "Abra saving his own soul".

I can tell you this Wouldee; Abra's soul is the least important thing in this universe.

I post my observations for the sake of humanity. For the sake of future generations. Young minds will read my posts and realize the truth of my words. They will then go on to further argue against the absurdities of superstition-driven hostilities, prejudices, and wars.

I'm just not the least bit interested in the personal bubble world that you are into. I have my own personal bubble world for that purpose Wouldee, and my personal bubble world works just fine for me and it doesn’t require that I accuse other people of rejecting God or being on the side of evil. flowerforyou


no photo
Sun 08/10/08 01:26 PM
I'm just not the least bit interested in the personal bubble world that you are into. I have my own personal bubble world for that purpose Wouldee, and my personal bubble world works just fine for me and it doesn’t require that I accuse other people of rejecting God or being on the side of evil.


A drink to personal bubble worlds! drinker

JB


Eljay's photo
Sun 08/10/08 01:27 PM



Redy, she used the same tactic with one of my arguments about the word "unclean". Instead of just looking at how the word is used in Leviticus (verbatum) she insists that I would need to show EVERY single time in the bible the word "unclean" is used and do a comparison of them and their contexual meaning.

A. That would not be practical on an open forum but it would allow her to feel like she had "won" an argument for once.

B. The point is that in Leviticus, the word "unclean" would seem to indicate that it means UNCLEAN in a spiritual sense based on the entire verse. I just dont know what else to do here. She has done that more than once just so you know. With a few people.


Actually - It was I who stated this, although Deb may have also. The point that "unclean" in Leviticus being used in a spiritual sense is false exegesis - as it is unsupported by the other uses of "unclean" within the same book - as used by the same author, and indicates that interpreting it in this manner is in direct conflict with the command "increase and multiply".
This indicates a misinterpretation of the word "unclean" in THIS context (as spiritual) rather than a contradiction textually. Further examiniation of the word "unclean" is warrented.

That is what you should do - if you don't know how else to interpret it. The word is used for the first time in Lev 5:2 and is referencing an animal. To better understand what is being referenced by "unclean" - the term "clean" needs to be understood - and just what it means as it is discussed in Leviticus. There is no doubt that Levituicus is written with the underlining theme that these "rules" are given to the Isrealites for their purpose of conducting allegorical rituals, and for the ceremonial worship of God. Though not stated clearly in black and white - the idea of "clean" is associated with "purity" - and were given to the people to perform as a constant reminder that they were to seek rightiousness and purity in their lives, in thought, word and action. In doing so - things would go well for them. In not - there were consequences - some that would extend beyond the actions of the individual to the group as a whole.

This is not necessarily a way of life that was considered worthy by only the Isrealies - but this type of lifestyle has been adopted by just about every generation in one way or another - all through time. We exhibit it today in the way that we establish laws to govern society - and incarcerate criminals so that their actions do not extend beyond themselves to society at large.

The beginnings of this thought - can be traced back to Leviticus, and the very passage you wish to understand. That is the bigger picture that needs to be examined when questioning one word in a specific reference - or a single concept within a group of passages that is discussed in the entire book.

So - to respond to the idea that "unclean" here means spiritual - having not considered all that I've discussed before, is analogious to trying to explain why a single toe is not the best way to describe why an elephant is not small and round, and couldn't possibly have a trunk.

I hope this is helpful.

lj



What would really help is if you show me. Find the actual text in the bible where the word unclean is used and how we might possibly me misinterpreting its point of reference in Leviticus 12. Put your money where you mouth is so to speak Eljay.happy You claim I have not read the bible. I have done the leg work otherwise I would not have found this passage. It’s your turn to show me where I might have misunderstood the intended reference to the word. That’s only fair.

Also you still have not addressed these issues. Unless your ONLY argument at this point is this proposed "misinterpretation" on our part? That would require proof. Do you think a scientist or an actual professor of mathematics could just rely on "what he or she thinks"? Our community disapproves of that. You can have a hypothesis that you either prove or disprove through logic and reasoning or experimentation. We don’t have the luxury of just basing "facts" on the conformation of our own belief structure.

Why was the atonement or "cleansing period" twice as long if a woman should give birth to a female infant as opposed to a male child?

Why were women advised to not touch "holy" objects until this ritual cleansing had been completed?

Why did this process just happen to take place immediately after childbirth? Women go for a span of time where they do not have periods following birth. Breast feeding lengthens this time period and the bottle for feeding babies was not invented yet. All of these women would have been breast feeding Eljay. So that is further physical evidence to discredit your argument that this was only for her medical state and well being. These priests would have had zero in the way of concern for her reproductive health.

Why would she need to pay the priests for her sin of childbirth? It is referred to as sin twice in Leviticus.

Tell me the answers to these questions BASED on the actual verse, not what you think it might mean. Or what they possibly could have meant to minimize the damage here. You also just contradicted yourself. You mention that Leviticus and its use of the word "unclean" are in direct contrast with Genesis and "be fruitful and multiply." Yes it is! That was the contradiction that I initially brought forth on this thread. You just now admitted it. It is a contradiction in terms and god can’t seem to decide what he wants. Presumably, he wants more children to be raised as "good Christian folk" but at the same time, he's not really sure he wants to share the limelight with human females who actually create life from their own bodies. Because, you see, he (god) wants to be the ONLY one who creates life. So since there is no way for a mythological male figurehead to create life in reality, human females will have to do BUT, they better pay atonement, ritually cleanse themselves, and do something about this ability to create babies that they posses. They are being made to feel it’s wrong and shameful whereas for thousands of years before the advent of Christianity, birth was held in the minds of both men and women as a wonderful power to be honored as all birth and life was in the Pagan tradition.

While you are at it, do you believe that the bible does not have a VERY anti-female tone in many passages?




Here's the thing Krimsa - all of the responses to your questions are in the text. I've read the text. It is obvious by your post you have not. I'm not going to do the research for you - because it is obvious what your intent is. The burdon is not on my to prove that your misunderstanding and conclusions thereof are not correct due to your lack of information. If you were in a class of mine - I'd flunk you.

I told you where to look - now you want me to provide you with actual verses? Your too old for me to have to explain to you how to do a study.

Come back to me with questions when you've prepared.

hinkypoepoe's photo
Sun 08/10/08 01:27 PM
I like the happy face and brick wall.To the point and funny...nice LoL.

Division, Division, and more divison aint it a shame Stepper!!!!

Krimsa's photo
Sun 08/10/08 01:27 PM

How many people have died under communism and fascism?????? Mankind perverts the law and we will it to greed, lust and power.

Gods commandments would bring peace to this earth if man would follow them. Again God is pure and righteous and man is flawed.

You like science ?...well Scientifically put a community together and have them follow Gods commandments and I will bet that community will prosper.That does not mean they will not have hardship...but They will prosper.


So now in light of all of this murder, torture, mayhem and destructive behavior caused by your religion and its inspiration (Catholism) you are going to sit back there and tell me well, there have been some secular bad guys also ya know. The difference is Hitler was not mass murdering people in the NAME of his invented god. These Christian serial killers had a clear cut agenda from day one. That’s quite obvious.

How about we shave the corners and just allow people to believe in whatever they darn well please without being murdered, raped, tortured and imprisoned by a bunch of lunatics guided by invisible men up in the clouds. That would not even require a new society. We could go ahead with that plan now. That might work also. It’s just as plausible as your idea.

Eljay's photo
Sun 08/10/08 01:29 PM







A man must not divorce a woman he married after having raped her. (Deuteronomy 22:29)
359.


I feel very sorry for that woman. He rapes her, then marries her and... now he can't divorce her.

These laws are written for men, not for women. Another example of the poor way women were treated as property not human beings.


It is what it is....and don't think that other women haven't said the same thing...It was a man's world...and no matter how much you complain about it now...it won't change it.


Thank God he sent Jesus huh....


You wanna bet it won't change? Women are already ignoring the law about keep their mouths shut. LOL

Thank God he sent Jesus? If Jesus is God, then he is responsible for these laws. Like Abra said, what makes you believe that it will be any different in Heaven? Will you still be a woman in heaven or will you be both man and woman? Or will you be neither? What do you think Deb?

JB




I think your insane......gigglesnort......and totally joking.....cmon there was a lot of amazing women of the Bible to.....You guys are harping on something that just was....It is not like that now.....Cmon JB I don't shut my mouth for no one....and God knows and uses me because of it.

Remember Jesus would not of been able to do his ministry had it not been for women......



The Three Wise Women

You do know what would have happened if it had been three wise WOMEN instead of men, don't you?


They would have asked for directions,
arrived on time,
helped deliver the baby,
cleaned the stable,
made a casserole,
and brought disposable diapers as gifts!



Not to put a damper on your cute little joke, but the truth of the matter is many of the wise outspoken women were killed. This is no joke.

JB


Yes - and in Pagan society they were passed around first - then killed for sport. I don't see any of you woman complaining about what was going on in scripture with woman - to what was happening to them ouside of the Irealite world?

Or do you think it was a world of Ozzie and Harriet?

This is not an endorsement on my part of what it is you are compaining about - but a demonstration of your lack of examining the larger issue at hand. Unless you were a queen in the days of Leviticus - as a woman you'd have traded your live for any of the woman who were Isrealites.



Whoa whoa whoa, wait up here a minute. You really should not be espousing a bunch of assumptions on your part nor repeating what you have been told by supporters of Christianity about Pagans. This was the dominant religious belief that has existed well before Christianity. There is archeological evidence (yes physical) that supports Earth/Goddess based beliefs extending as far back as the Neolithic.

You have yourself admitted to knowing very little about Wicca, Witchcraft, Goddess or earth based spirituality or paganism. So now you know enough to start accusing the pagans of the actual tortures that the Christians were responsible for?



Christians did not exist at the time of Leviticus - what are you talking about.

Krimsa's photo
Sun 08/10/08 01:31 PM




Redy, she used the same tactic with one of my arguments about the word "unclean". Instead of just looking at how the word is used in Leviticus (verbatum) she insists that I would need to show EVERY single time in the bible the word "unclean" is used and do a comparison of them and their contexual meaning.

A. That would not be practical on an open forum but it would allow her to feel like she had "won" an argument for once.

B. The point is that in Leviticus, the word "unclean" would seem to indicate that it means UNCLEAN in a spiritual sense based on the entire verse. I just dont know what else to do here. She has done that more than once just so you know. With a few people.


Actually - It was I who stated this, although Deb may have also. The point that "unclean" in Leviticus being used in a spiritual sense is false exegesis - as it is unsupported by the other uses of "unclean" within the same book - as used by the same author, and indicates that interpreting it in this manner is in direct conflict with the command "increase and multiply".
This indicates a misinterpretation of the word "unclean" in THIS context (as spiritual) rather than a contradiction textually. Further examiniation of the word "unclean" is warrented.

That is what you should do - if you don't know how else to interpret it. The word is used for the first time in Lev 5:2 and is referencing an animal. To better understand what is being referenced by "unclean" - the term "clean" needs to be understood - and just what it means as it is discussed in Leviticus. There is no doubt that Levituicus is written with the underlining theme that these "rules" are given to the Isrealites for their purpose of conducting allegorical rituals, and for the ceremonial worship of God. Though not stated clearly in black and white - the idea of "clean" is associated with "purity" - and were given to the people to perform as a constant reminder that they were to seek rightiousness and purity in their lives, in thought, word and action. In doing so - things would go well for them. In not - there were consequences - some that would extend beyond the actions of the individual to the group as a whole.

This is not necessarily a way of life that was considered worthy by only the Isrealies - but this type of lifestyle has been adopted by just about every generation in one way or another - all through time. We exhibit it today in the way that we establish laws to govern society - and incarcerate criminals so that their actions do not extend beyond themselves to society at large.

The beginnings of this thought - can be traced back to Leviticus, and the very passage you wish to understand. That is the bigger picture that needs to be examined when questioning one word in a specific reference - or a single concept within a group of passages that is discussed in the entire book.

So - to respond to the idea that "unclean" here means spiritual - having not considered all that I've discussed before, is analogious to trying to explain why a single toe is not the best way to describe why an elephant is not small and round, and couldn't possibly have a trunk.

I hope this is helpful.

lj



What would really help is if you show me. Find the actual text in the bible where the word unclean is used and how we might possibly me misinterpreting its point of reference in Leviticus 12. Put your money where you mouth is so to speak Eljay.happy You claim I have not read the bible. I have done the leg work otherwise I would not have found this passage. It’s your turn to show me where I might have misunderstood the intended reference to the word. That’s only fair.

Also you still have not addressed these issues. Unless your ONLY argument at this point is this proposed "misinterpretation" on our part? That would require proof. Do you think a scientist or an actual professor of mathematics could just rely on "what he or she thinks"? Our community disapproves of that. You can have a hypothesis that you either prove or disprove through logic and reasoning or experimentation. We don’t have the luxury of just basing "facts" on the conformation of our own belief structure.

Why was the atonement or "cleansing period" twice as long if a woman should give birth to a female infant as opposed to a male child?

Why were women advised to not touch "holy" objects until this ritual cleansing had been completed?

Why did this process just happen to take place immediately after childbirth? Women go for a span of time where they do not have periods following birth. Breast feeding lengthens this time period and the bottle for feeding babies was not invented yet. All of these women would have been breast feeding Eljay. So that is further physical evidence to discredit your argument that this was only for her medical state and well being. These priests would have had zero in the way of concern for her reproductive health.

Why would she need to pay the priests for her sin of childbirth? It is referred to as sin twice in Leviticus.

Tell me the answers to these questions BASED on the actual verse, not what you think it might mean. Or what they possibly could have meant to minimize the damage here. You also just contradicted yourself. You mention that Leviticus and its use of the word "unclean" are in direct contrast with Genesis and "be fruitful and multiply." Yes it is! That was the contradiction that I initially brought forth on this thread. You just now admitted it. It is a contradiction in terms and god can’t seem to decide what he wants. Presumably, he wants more children to be raised as "good Christian folk" but at the same time, he's not really sure he wants to share the limelight with human females who actually create life from their own bodies. Because, you see, he (god) wants to be the ONLY one who creates life. So since there is no way for a mythological male figurehead to create life in reality, human females will have to do BUT, they better pay atonement, ritually cleanse themselves, and do something about this ability to create babies that they posses. They are being made to feel it’s wrong and shameful whereas for thousands of years before the advent of Christianity, birth was held in the minds of both men and women as a wonderful power to be honored as all birth and life was in the Pagan tradition.

While you are at it, do you believe that the bible does not have a VERY anti-female tone in many passages?




Here's the thing Krimsa - all of the responses to your questions are in the text. I've read the text. It is obvious by your post you have not. I'm not going to do the research for you - because it is obvious what your intent is. The burdon is not on my to prove that your misunderstanding and conclusions thereof are not correct due to your lack of information. If you were in a class of mine - I'd flunk you.

I told you where to look - now you want me to provide you with actual verses? Your too old for me to have to explain to you how to do a study.

Come back to me with questions when you've prepared.


I would not take a class from you because I’m having a hard time believing you are a professor honestly. Debate me if you can, I’m waiting. Getting upset and defensive will not score points here. If you have an argument, make it. The kid gloves are coming off. I have been respectful in the clear cut lack of your own.