That's WW1 gear, goofy. Hitler was as bigoted as you can get.Also, for any Ku Klux Klan members who are looking to Germany for an example of what the White Race represents, they should do some more investigations as alot of the soldiers of the german empire were black whom served in Hitlers Reich. :lol:
Picture: Emil Doerstling
The Ku Klux Klan and Christianity
- Thread starter abitz
- Start date
For a man who talks long and somewhat loud on the woes of religion, and of Christianity in particular - and claims to having been raised a Roman Catholic - come on SJP - your statement, "Exodus exhorts Christians to kill witches (thou shalt not suffer a witch to live) is just wrong. Yes, I realize that as always, it is just your opinion, but you are quoting a document - and you are wrong. Exodus was written well before the Christian era, and therefore could have in no way exhorted Christians to do anything. Now I realize that possibly you mean that generally, as a part of the Bible it exhorts people to do something , but you were VERY specific.You said that Exodus exhorted Christians - and it didn't. You are indeed entitled to your opinion, but when you state something as fact, then you should at least get it right. It may be a 'niggling' fact, but there are people her who look at what's written and actually believe that the people that write these things take the time to get it right. Are you SURE you were raised a Christian? Your knowledge is - well - kind of sketchy.
I stand partially corrected as this was a genuine officer and was not a picture based on the Russian Pushkin who was a black confidant of the Tsar. Doerstling did make paintings called "Prussian Happy Love" (you know, it's been MANY years since I frequented the museums of NYC, Chicago, and Kansas City and I'm getting rather old so it's easy for me to forget all those historic works). Up to this time, I thought that was a mythic figure:
The person of interest in your photo was of Prussian officer Gutav Sabac el Cher. He did not serve in the Wehrmacht as the Prussian state pre-dates the Weimar Republican and the Nazi state. He died in 1934 which was about the time Hitler was just rising to power.
Benutzer:Suedwester93/Baustelle ? Wikipedia
Old Testament is as much a part of Christianity as the New Testament, DHW. Both OT and NT together form the Christian religion. Indeed, the Book of Genesis, the fable of Adam and Eve is the very cornerstone of Fundamentalist Christianity.
Also, Catholicism relies on OT in a big way. In the Dark Ages, Catholic Church had forbidden doctors to give women any medication to relieve their labour pain during child delivery. Labour pain was supposed to be the punishment of Eve for leading Adam astray. Even today, Catholic opposition to homosexuality is largely based upon Leviticus.
OT is an important, integral part of Christianity. To leave out OT and claim that Christianity is represented by only NT is a fringe belief at best.
Indeed, let us look at Exodus. Exodus does say ‘thou shalt not suffer a witch to live’. The medieval witch burnings in Europe, the Salem witch hunts in Massachusetts were based upon this verse from Exodus. Again, OT is an integral part of Christianity.
Or are you saying that they were not Christians and you are one, that you are the sole authority in deciding who is a Christian and who isn’t? May be your faith is based upon NT only and you totally ignore OT. But that is not the mainstream Christian belief, never was.
Or are you saying that they were not Christians and you are one, that you are the sole authority in deciding who is a Christian and who isn’t? May be your faith is based upon NT only and you totally ignore OT. But that is not the mainstream Christian belief, never was.
It is not quite that simple.
Thou Shalt Not Suffer a Witch to Live: an Enquiry into Biblical Mistranslation
Even today, some Christian Fundamentalist zealots invoke the same passage when denouncing what they see as the Satanically-inspired success of the Neo-Pagan Craft. Not surprisingly, modern Witches throw the verse back at them as proof of the extreme and intransigent hatred that monotheists have had, and will always have, for people like themselves.
The use of the word "witch" in this verse is a translation: it is presented -- rightly or wrongly -- as the English-language equivalent of a term from another language, another culture, and another time. What did the term mean in its original context, and what shifts in meaning through both language evolution and successive translations have led to its being understood (or misunderstood) as it is today? In this article I will attempt a concise overview of the linguistic development of Exodus 22:18 through several Scriptural traditions, from its origins in a specific Near Eastern situation to current attempts at applying it in non-Western settings.
Proteus Library: Thou Shalt Not Suffer a Witch to Live
Thou Shalt Not Suffer a Witch to Live: an Enquiry into Biblical Mistranslation
"THOU SHALT NOT SUFFER A WITCH TO LIVE." This interpretation of Exodus 22:18 provided encouragement to the witchhunters of the Renaissance, and justified their putting to death those they had identified as witches. Tens of thousands of unfortunates who, in some way or other, had earned for themselves the title "witch" had little hope of mercy when faced with the seemingly unambiguous nature of this command.
Even today, some Christian Fundamentalist zealots invoke the same passage when denouncing what they see as the Satanically-inspired success of the Neo-Pagan Craft. Not surprisingly, modern Witches throw the verse back at them as proof of the extreme and intransigent hatred that monotheists have had, and will always have, for people like themselves.
The use of the word "witch" in this verse is a translation: it is presented -- rightly or wrongly -- as the English-language equivalent of a term from another language, another culture, and another time. What did the term mean in its original context, and what shifts in meaning through both language evolution and successive translations have led to its being understood (or misunderstood) as it is today? In this article I will attempt a concise overview of the linguistic development of Exodus 22:18 through several Scriptural traditions, from its origins in a specific Near Eastern situation to current attempts at applying it in non-Western settings.
Proteus Library: Thou Shalt Not Suffer a Witch to Live
That is all very well ironsides, and may even be true for all I know. However, that does not invalidate my point that Old Testament is very much the part of Christianity. What you are arguing is whether people interpret what is written in OT in a proper way. And we could debate that. But that does not invalidate my point, that OT is fully as much a part of Christianity as NT.
Yes, SJP, the OT is indeed an important to Christianity. But you said 'Exodus exhorts Christians to kill witches (thou shalt not suffer a witch to live)' but Exodus NEVER exhorts CHRISTIANS to do anything. It was written for Jews and by Jews. the fact that Christians have taken the texts and translated them and indeed re-written many of them to suit their own particular beliefs, does not alter what I said - Exodus never exhorted Christians to do anything. when Exodus was written Christianity didn't exist. The fact that Christians choose to use it is another matter altogether.
As far as doctors in the Dark Ages being forbidden by the RC Church to relieve women's labour? That would have been a stretch, as in the Dark Ages it would have been a rare doctor that would have anything to do with a pregnant woman - that was the the job of the midwife - - and from what I've read, they pretty much flew beneath the church's radar.
Again, you are skirting the issue. You are arguing as to whether OT should be a part of Christianity (and evidently you are saying that it should not be, since it was not written for Christians).
That is besides the point. It was not written for Muslims as well, still Muslims follow part of Old Testament, they regard Abraham as a Prophet (in fact, I think the first Prophet in a long lines of prophets). The point is that Christianity is made up of OT and NT, OT is an integral part of Christianity. Whether it was written for Christians or not is irrelevant.
Christians think that Exodus tells them to kill the witches, and that is all that matters.
As to child birth in Middle Ages, it was mostly supervised by midwives, but a doctor was occasionally summoned if the delivery was difficult and prolonged. And doctors were under strict instructions by the Church not to give the woman anything to relieve the pain.
In fact, a doctor would be called only when the delivery is very difficult, very painful. I also remember reading that one doctor could not stand the screams of agony, screams of pain in a particularly difficult delivery. Feeling compassion for the woman, he gave her something to relieve her pain. For his efforts, he was burned at the stake by the Church for heresy.
Not trying to invalidate your point, just that is what was quoted a true translation of Exodus? "Thou shalt not suffer a witch to live". It could just be a bastardization of the book of Exodus by modern day progressive (1500+AD) Christians to say what they want to hear.
Probably the same thing Muslims use to promote terrorism. When you get right down to it there is no difference between the two.
I think Cliffy is right . It is little dick syndrome.
Oh, you may be right, we don’t know. I think for a while Bible was transmitted from generation to generation orally. When it was written, it was copied by hand for hundreds of years. It has been translated numerous times. Who knows what the original Bible actually said and what kinds of errors have crept into it?
So I can well believe that the original Bible may not have said that. But as I said, that is besides the point. Christians think that that is what Exodus says, and that is important. That was the basis for witch hunts, witch burning. That is also the basis for Fundamentalists opposing witchcraft today, wanting to ban witchcraft.
Yeah, God was allways a sucker for witches, at least God get's his point across using them. Humurous indeed...
lol Spinning things again? Who said that Christians leave out the OT and rely ONLY on the NT? No-one but you.
Ignorance is bliss apparently: The Old Testament - ReligionFacts
You remebber reading - what? give me a literary reference - otherwise you might just have been reading a novel for all I know - oh that's right - you don't need to give a reference - it's your opinion.