The Bible Condemns Witchcraft

[boedicca]

"Case Study:
The European Witch-Hunts, c. 1450-1750

"Traditional [tolerant] attitudes towards witchcraft began to change in the 14th century, at the very end of the Middle Ages."

"What we think of as "the Burning Times" -- the crazes, panics, and mass hysteria -- largely occurred in one century, from 1550-1650."

This is NOT the DARK AGES.

And in fact, in the countries where the church was the strongest, the witch hunt didn't get a foothold:

""This helps us understand why only the most rapidly developing countries, where the Catholic church was weakest, experienced a virulent witch craze (i.e., Germany, France, Switzerland). Where the Catholic church was strong (Spain, Italy, Portugal) hardly any witch craze occurred ... "

""The vast majority of witches were condemned by secular courts," with local courts especially noted for their persecutory zeal (Gibbons, Recent Developments). "

Gendercide Watch European Witch-Hunts

I read an interesting book a few years ago, "Poisons of the Past". The author noted that crazed times involving burnings, beheadings, and rioting were associated with ergot poisoning from a fungus on rye. Ergot is a form of natural LSD. The Salem witch trials, the French Revolution, and the Russian Revolution all involved peasant populations who comsumed rye as a food staple and climates that caused ergot. Medical records from the Russian Revolution show high levels of ergot poisoning.

Similar superstitious peasants (for example the Irish), who ate oat based diets did not go "crazy".

I'll also note the the Spanish Inquisition wasn't exactly kind to witches-heretics.

 

[koshergrl]

Strange how fundies wish to re-write history regarding the atrocities of their cults.

Nobody's re-writing anything. You're the one denying the history.

"Although they may themselves be accused of witchcraft, it is also generally the nangas who are called upon to point out "suspicious" persons who can be accused as witches: according to one South African police sergeant, "Generally, if people believe there is a witch in their village, they will consult the [witch-doctor]. He or she will then 'sniff out' the witch."

"In Zimbabwe, as in neighbouring South Africa, the witch-hunts also seem closely related to "the black market demand for human body parts, which are used in making evil potions."

Gendercide Watch European Witch-Hunts

 

[koshergrl]

"Case Study:
The European Witch-Hunts, c. 1450-1750

"Traditional [tolerant] attitudes towards witchcraft began to change in the 14th century, at the very end of the Middle Ages."

"What we think of as "the Burning Times" -- the crazes, panics, and mass hysteria -- largely occurred in one century, from 1550-1650."

This is NOT the DARK AGES.

And in fact, in the countries where the church was the strongest, the witch hunt didn't get a foothold:

""This helps us understand why only the most rapidly developing countries, where the Catholic church was weakest, experienced a virulent witch craze (i.e., Germany, France, Switzerland). Where the Catholic church was strong (Spain, Italy, Portugal) hardly any witch craze occurred ... "

""The vast majority of witches were condemned by secular courts," with local courts especially noted for their persecutory zeal (Gibbons, Recent Developments). "

Gendercide Watch European Witch-Hunts

I read an interesting book a few years ago, "Poisons of the Past". The author noted that crazed times involving burnings, beheadings, and rioting were associated with ergot poisoning from a fungus on rye. Ergot is a form of natural LSD. The Salem witch trials, the French Revolution, and the Russian Revolution all involved peasant populations that had rye as a staple and climates that caused ergot. Medical records from the Russian Revolution show high levels of ergot poisoning.

Similar superstitious peasants (for example the Irish), who ate oat based diets did not go "crazy".

I'll also note the the Spanish Inquisition wasn't exactly kind to witches-heretics.

Actually, in Spain, there were very few witch burnings.

 

[koshergrl]

The highest numbers of victims were in Germany and other countries where the old pagan ways were still very firmly in place.

 

[shart_attack]

The term witchcraft is one of the most frequently misunderstood, misinterpreted words in the entirety of The Bible.

Translated from the Greek word pharmakeia, witchcraft as found in Galatians 5:20 means sorcery via potions.

That's incidentally why so many women were killed by The Church in the Dark Ages, because the little old lady in the woods was thought to have been a witch by virtue of the home brews she made which healed people.

Accordingly with the Greek translation of the word for witchcraft, the equivalent of a witch or warlock today would be a drug dealer or pharmacist.

I guess that means Walter White's in trouble, eh?

Pharmakeia The Abuse of Drugs

There weren't any women "killed by the church" in the Dark Ages. The Dark Ages was the period of time in Britain/Europe BEFORE the church was established, after the Romans withdrew...people were essentially pagans at that time, and the church hadn't arrived to teach people to read and write. The term "dark" refers to the fact that because there was very little church involvement, there's not much known because there's no (or very little) written history.

In fact, the numbers of women "killed by the church" for witchcraft were miniscule. Women (and men) were killed for HERESY by various and assorted government groups, in the NAME of the church, but these (including the Salem incidents) were political, not religious, killings...and the numbers of so-called witches that were killed were minute.

No offense, sis, but you really oughtta think about looking up your old high-school and undergraduate history teachers, and screaming at them for a coupla hours.

They didn't do very good jobs of teaching you. Sorry.

Inquisition - Wikipedia the free encyclopedia

Dark Ages historiography - Wikipedia the free encyclopedia

I can cite volumes more sites online as proof of the timeline should you prefer, but I think you get the idea, hun.

Yes, there were more than a few women killed by the church during the Dark Ages for those women's having been alleged to have been witches.

My information comes from college history courses and subsequent learning... Not from wiki.

And again, that's why you need to go back and scream at your old professors, because they didn't teach you well.

Go ahead and provide the citations of all the witch burnings that took place during the Dark Ages. Include the numbers.

The Church didn't keep records of those it killed for their allegedly having been witches in the Dark Ages.

Imagine that.

But those persecuted by The Church did.

And also unsurprisingly, only a few of those manuscripts survived.

I don't have time right now to name all of them.

But I shouldn't have to do that, because I'm not the one who is making incorrect statements on this thread, see.

I'm not saying it never happened at all, it may have..but the church was not an established power in the Dark Ages. It was just starting to get it's feet.

Charlemagne was crowned the first Holy Roman Emperor in 800 A.D. — i.e. the Dark Ages.

Charlemagne Crowned as Holy Roman Emperor - 601-900 Church History Timeline

Sorry, but yeah, that means The Church was most indeed "an established power".

And when it did get established, the result was the middle ages, and the enlightenment, as people became more educated (by the church) and hospitals and colleges were established....

"1000 Christianity is on the rise

As Christianity spread through the lands, the people began to settle down. The lands settled firmly into their own kingdoms, and the fighting died down for a time.It was considered the end of the "Dark Ages".

The Dark Ages Timeline

"The Myth:

"....Society was barely a thing, and infrastructure was practically nonexistent. Warlords and barbarians roamed the land, every surface was covered by a layer of filth, and the general populace had the life expectancy of a three-legged gazelle in a lion's den. Meanwhile, the church was going around torturing people until they converted, and then probably kept torturing them anyway. Honestly, go find a movie or book about the era and we guarantee it's not going to have a bunch of smiling children on the cover."

"The Reality:
"...The rise of Christianity... saw a dramatic increase in charities. Almost immediately after the church gained a foothold in Europe, they started introducing a widespread system of charity that distributed food, clothing, and money to those in need. Perhaps not by coincidence, the concepts of goodwill hospices, hospitals, and shelters for the poor were also invented during the "dark" ages, paving the way for the public health care system."

Read more: 5 Ridiculous Myths You Probably Believe About the Dark Ages Cracked.com

So your're bitching about my having used Wikipedia as a source, and now you're citing a competitor of Mad magazine as yours???

You're funny, sis.

 

[boedicca]

"Case Study:
The European Witch-Hunts, c. 1450-1750

"Traditional [tolerant] attitudes towards witchcraft began to change in the 14th century, at the very end of the Middle Ages."

"What we think of as "the Burning Times" -- the crazes, panics, and mass hysteria -- largely occurred in one century, from 1550-1650."

This is NOT the DARK AGES.

And in fact, in the countries where the church was the strongest, the witch hunt didn't get a foothold:

""This helps us understand why only the most rapidly developing countries, where the Catholic church was weakest, experienced a virulent witch craze (i.e., Germany, France, Switzerland). Where the Catholic church was strong (Spain, Italy, Portugal) hardly any witch craze occurred ... "

""The vast majority of witches were condemned by secular courts," with local courts especially noted for their persecutory zeal (Gibbons, Recent Developments). "

Gendercide Watch European Witch-Hunts

I read an interesting book a few years ago, "Poisons of the Past". The author noted that crazed times involving burnings, beheadings, and rioting were associated with ergot poisoning from a fungus on rye. Ergot is a form of natural LSD. The Salem witch trials, the French Revolution, and the Russian Revolution all involved peasant populations that had rye as a staple and climates that caused ergot. Medical records from the Russian Revolution show high levels of ergot poisoning.

Similar superstitious peasants (for example the Irish), who ate oat based diets did not go "crazy".

I'll also note the the Spanish Inquisition wasn't exactly kind to witches-heretics.

Actually, in Spain, there were very few witch burnings.

There are more ways to do damage to a witch than burning, although the Inquisition did burn witches.

There is even a how to manual:

The Malleus Maleficarum[2] (commonly rendered into English as "Hammer of [the] Witches";[3] Der Hexenhammer in German) is a treatise on the prosecution of witches, written in 1486 by Heinrich Kramer, a German Catholic clergyman. The book was first published in Speyer, Germany, in 1487.[4] James Sprenger is also often attributed as an author, but some scholars now believe that he became associated with the Malleus Maleficarum largely as a result of Kramer's wish to lend his book as much official authority as possible.[5] In 1490, three years after its publication, the Catholic Church condemned the Malleus Maleficarum, although it was later used by royal courts during the Renaissance, and contributed to the increasingly brutal prosecution of witchcraft during the 16th and 17th centuries....

Malleus Maleficarum - Wikipedia the free encyclopedia


Malleus Maleficarum How to Torture a Witch

 

[koshergrl]

"Case Study:
The European Witch-Hunts, c. 1450-1750

"Traditional [tolerant] attitudes towards witchcraft began to change in the 14th century, at the very end of the Middle Ages."

"What we think of as "the Burning Times" -- the crazes, panics, and mass hysteria -- largely occurred in one century, from 1550-1650."

This is NOT the DARK AGES.

And in fact, in the countries where the church was the strongest, the witch hunt didn't get a foothold:

""This helps us understand why only the most rapidly developing countries, where the Catholic church was weakest, experienced a virulent witch craze (i.e., Germany, France, Switzerland). Where the Catholic church was strong (Spain, Italy, Portugal) hardly any witch craze occurred ... "

""The vast majority of witches were condemned by secular courts," with local courts especially noted for their persecutory zeal (Gibbons, Recent Developments). "

Gendercide Watch European Witch-Hunts

I read an interesting book a few years ago, "Poisons of the Past". The author noted that crazed times involving burnings, beheadings, and rioting were associated with ergot poisoning from a fungus on rye. Ergot is a form of natural LSD. The Salem witch trials, the French Revolution, and the Russian Revolution all involved peasant populations that had rye as a staple and climates that caused ergot. Medical records from the Russian Revolution show high levels of ergot poisoning.

Similar superstitious peasants (for example the Irish), who ate oat based diets did not go "crazy".

I'll also note the the Spanish Inquisition wasn't exactly kind to witches-heretics.

Actually, in Spain, there were very few witch burnings.

There are more ways to do damage to a witch than burning, although the Inquisition did burn witches.

There is even a how to manual:

The Malleus Maleficarum[2] (commonly rendered into English as "Hammer of [the] Witches";[3] Der Hexenhammer in German) is a treatise on the prosecution of witches, written in 1486 by Heinrich Kramer, a German Catholic clergyman. The book was first published in Speyer, Germany, in 1487.[4] James Sprenger is also often attributed as an author, but some scholars now believe that he became associated with the Malleus Maleficarum largely as a result of Kramer's wish to lend his book as much official authority as possible.[5] In 1490, three years after its publication, the Catholic Church condemned the Malleus Maleficarum, although it was later used by royal courts during the Renaissance, and contributed to the increasingly brutal prosecution of witchcraft during the 16th and 17th centuries....

Malleus Maleficarum - Wikipedia the free encyclopedia


Malleus Maleficarum How to Torture a Witch

Which was from the Middle Ages, not the Dark Ages..and did not reflect the church's preferences.


"Kramer failed in his attempt to obtain endorsement for this work from the top theologians of the Inquisition at the Faculty of Cologne, and they condemned the book as recommending unethical and illegal procedures, as well as being inconsistent with Catholic doctrines of demonology."

Heinrich Kramer - Wikipedia the free encyclopedia

"In 1490, three years after its publication, the Catholic Church condemned the Malleus Maleficarum, although it was later used by royal courts during the Renaissance."

"Kramer wrote the Malleus shortly after being expelled from Innsbruck by the local bishop after a failed attempt to conduct his own witchcraft prosecution."

Malleus Maleficarum - Wikipedia the free encyclopedia

 

[boedicca]

Which was from the Middle Ages, not the Dark Ages..and did not reflect the church's preferences.


"Kramer failed in his attempt to obtain endorsement for this work from the top theologians of the Inquisition at the Faculty of Cologne, and they condemned the book as recommending unethical and illegal procedures, as well as being inconsistent with Catholic doctrines of demonology."

Heinrich Kramer - Wikipedia the free encyclopedia

"In 1490, three years after its publication, the Catholic Church condemned the Malleus Maleficarum, although it was later used by royal courts during the Renaissance."

"Kramer wrote the Malleus shortly after being expelled from Innsbruck by the local bishop after a failed attempt to conduct his own witchcraft prosecution."

Malleus Maleficarum - Wikipedia the free encyclopedia

Actually, it was written during the Renaissance, not the Dark Ages, and continued to be used throughout the 16th and 17th Centuries

 

[koshergrl]

The fact is, the whole idea of the church being the momentum behind the Inquisition OR the the witch hunts of the middle ages is a re-configuring of history by people who don't know much.

The church resisted both. That isn't to say there weren't clergy involved..of course there were, for one thing, a LOT of people were *clergy*. It was the best way for non-noble (and even noble) families to see to it that their children had a living. But the church fought long, and hard, against even acknowledging witches, let alone killing them.

 

[koshergrl]

Which was from the Middle Ages, not the Dark Ages..and did not reflect the church's preferences.


"Kramer failed in his attempt to obtain endorsement for this work from the top theologians of the Inquisition at the Faculty of Cologne, and they condemned the book as recommending unethical and illegal procedures, as well as being inconsistent with Catholic doctrines of demonology."

Heinrich Kramer - Wikipedia the free encyclopedia

"In 1490, three years after its publication, the Catholic Church condemned the Malleus Maleficarum, although it was later used by royal courts during the Renaissance."

"Kramer wrote the Malleus shortly after being expelled from Innsbruck by the local bishop after a failed attempt to conduct his own witchcraft prosecution."

Malleus Maleficarum - Wikipedia the free encyclopedia

Actually, it was written during the Renaissance, not the Dark Ages, and continued to be used throughout the 16th and 17th Centuries

At the tail end of the Middle ages, or the beginning of the Rennaissance, meh.

The point is, it wasn't the dark ages, and it wasn't embraced by the church.

 

[boedicca]

My understanding is that the Inquisition was part of the Roman Curia for centuries. It may not have burned people at the stake, but it did persecute non-believers (i.e. Jews) in rather hideous ways.

 

[amrchaos]

Here is a fun fact:

A lot of the miracles performed by Jesus, as according to the Gospel, could be considered Witchcraft sorcery!!

You could even make a game of it with your non-believing friends!! Take a 3x3 card and write the miracle on the front, and then write the type f witchcraft and punishment for it on the back.

For instance, the raising of the dead(the gospel gives several people) could be called Necromancy

The instant changing of water to wine is alchemy, which is sorcery and not science, by the way

The ability to cast out demons and control them by invoking his own name--that is some form of evocation(actual term I have to find)


Even the act of walking on water and defying God's natural law of gravity is some from of sorcery with blasphemous intent and surely it has a matching punishment for it!!

Maybe the christian church should just come out and admit it--Jesus was the greatest Warlock in History.


Hey, does that mean the pharisees crucified Jesus because he was practicing sorcery?

 

[koshergrl]

It's considered witchcraft and sorcery primarily by those who don't believe in God, and this has been historically true through the ages.

 

[amrchaos]

It's considered witchcraft and sorcery primarily by those who don't believe in God, and this has been historically true through the ages.

Sorcery is believed by people who do not believe in supernatural beings.

You do know that is basically what you are saying, right?

 

[koshergrl]

No, that's not what I, or any of the historians who say the same thing (and who are quoted in this thread) have said.

What we said is that the church considered labeling people as witches HERESY for many, many years, and the places with the worst record when it came to witch hunts were places where the church was not as firmly established, and the people tended to hearken back to paganism a lot more immediately than to Christianity.

The places that CONTINUE to conduct witch hunts in Africa are TRIBAL, non-christian societies, where there is no belief in a Christian god, but rather alternate beliefs, and often it is their WITCH DOCTORS who make the accusations.

 

[koshergrl]

I continue to be disgusted by the ignorance of history evinced by people who I have no doubt consider themselves "educated" on this site. I can only hope this isn't a true slice of America, and is weighted heavily by internet idiots who are, hopefully, a minority.

 

[amrchaos]

No, that's not what I, or any of the historians who say the same thing (and who are quoted in this thread) have said.

What we said is that the church considered labeling people as witches HERESY for many, many years, and the places with the worst record when it came to witch hunts were places where the church was not as firmly established, and the people tended to hearken back to paganism a lot more immediately than to Christianity.

The places that CONTINUE to conduct witch hunts in Africa are TRIBAL, non-christian societies, where there is no belief in a Christian god, but rather alternate beliefs, and often it is their WITCH DOCTORS who make the accusations.

Pagans tend to believe in a God or Gods, you do know that, right?

Also, witchcraft was condemned by christians, especially during the dark ages.

 

[koshergrl]

Read the thread, gomer.

 

[amrchaos]

Read the thread, gomer.

Oh, I see.

You think that by introducing a new topic, that people that do not believe in the christian god was the biggest perpetrators of witchhunts. However, the introduction of said topic does not continue the main topic of the thread in which the op, a christian mind you, advises people that witchcraft is condemned by the church.

Understand, the introduction of what other, non-christians, do has no bearing on the subject matter of what the church condemns. your introduction of your topic is therefore a bit illogical and do not absolve any christian group of the practicing witchhunts, although, admittedly, not all christian groups did.

Finally, how you introduced the topic suggested that disbelievers in a god/gods were the main perpetrators of witchhunts. when in fact many of these pagans that you are referencing did believe in a god/gods. The difference is that they did not believe in your god.

Stranger, is the accusation of a witchdoctor--who is also assumed to be a witch by the followers, is charged with leading the accusations againsts witches.

So tell me, how am I doing in understanding what you are trying to say?

 

[koshergrl]

Read the thread, gomer.