Understanding the burning of heretics

  • Thread starter Thread starter angell1
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
Karen107 said:
Jesus said that his armies were from another place. We are the instruments to His peace, the sad souls that we are we have to try harder to bring His peace to the world.
Click to expand...
That was kinda the point I was trying to make 🤷
 
Thinking10 said:
Do not Islamic nations use the same justification for their methods of law enforcement and punishment? That is where we will end up if we follow this line of thinking seriously.
Click to expand...
I am NOT condoning or agreeing or advocating this line of thinking. Folks who are intolerant of other faiths, like some muslims today, and radical Christians in the dark ages probably thought that way. So for the sake of saving some souls that would be led astray, they were willing to torture and kill others.

It’s a little like some folks willing to kill an abortion doctor so they can save the lives of the unborn. In a twisted sort of way, you can see some logic to their way of thinking.
 
wcknight said:
In a twisted sort of way, you can see some logic to their way of thinking.
Click to expand...
The same can be said for anyone who seeks revenge. That is why such actions should be considered immoral. Once you start justifying some offenses as deserving of torture or whatever punishment you feel they deserve, you can justify any punishment that way.

We have evolved as a society to a point that we don’t inflict sadistic vengeful punishment on others because we feel they deserve to suffer. We don’t use torture chambers for criminals, and in very rare cases of execution, the victims are first rendered unconcious through injection and then killed by a second chemical injection without causing extreme pain. I don’t believe in the death penalty myself if it can be avoided, but whether it is necessary to use it in our country today is debatable.

What I specifically object to is torture of people, which is nothing more than an act of vengence and dehumanization of the person being tortured and ending of human life based on subjective “preservation of morality.” If you intentionally resort to harm of another person because of your subjective opinion of intangible harm done to a person’s soul, are you not acting immorally?

What good is your morality if it is the cause, rather than the prevention of unecessary harm to human beings? How do you know it is not you that is acting immorally? There is no objective measure, other than perceptible harm done to another human being to determine whether an action is directly moral or immoral. If you suspect that a person believes something other than what you authorize them to believe, does that give you the right to burn them alive if you feel like doing so?

Homosexual supporters think they have the right to close Christian businesses and take you to court because you believe incorrectly according to them.

Islamists think they can chop off limbs, heads, or dump acid on a person in their country, for people who believe incorrectly in their view.

Whether you are Christian, Atheist, or Muslim, it is immoral to cause harm of any nature to another person because you disagree with them. Even if they pose a legitimate physical threat to you, it does not give you the right to cause more pain than necessary to contain the threat. What a person deserves is a subjective feeling, so that is why a standard has been set in America and other civilized nations for ethical treatment of a person. If a person is found guilty of being a danger ot the rest of society, we don’t take revenge, we maintain our respect of human dignity by containing the threat, nothing more.
 
Thinking10 said:
The same can be said for anyone who seeks revenge. That is why such actions should be considered immoral. Once you start justifying some offenses as deserving of torture or whatever punishment you feel they deserve, you can justify any punishment that way.

We have evolved as a society to a point that we don’t inflict sadistic vengeful punishment on others because we feel they deserve to suffer. We don’t use torture chambers for criminals, and in very rare cases of execution, the victims are first rendered unconcious through injection and then killed by a second chemical injection without causing extreme pain. I don’t believe in the death penalty myself if it can be avoided, but whether it is necessary to use it in our country today is debatable.

What I specifically object to is torture of people, which is nothing more than an act of vengence and dehumanization of the person being tortured and ending of human life based on subjective “preservation of morality.” If you intentionally resort to harm of another person because of your subjective opinion of intangible harm done to a person’s soul, are you not acting immorally?

What good is your morality if it is the cause, rather than the prevention of unecessary harm to human beings? How do you know it is not you that is acting immorally? There is no objective measure, other than perceptible harm done to another human being to determine whether an action is directly moral or immoral. If you suspect that a person believes something other than what you authorize them to believe, does that give you the right to burn them alive if you feel like doing so?

Homosexual supporters think they have the right to close Christian businesses and take you to court because you believe incorrectly according to them.

Islamists think they can chop off limbs, heads, or dump acid on a person in their country, for people who believe incorrectly in their view.

Whether you are Christian, Atheist, or Muslim, it is immoral to cause harm of any nature to another person because you disagree with them. Even if they pose a legitimate physical threat to you, it does not give you the right to cause more pain than necessary to contain the threat. What a person deserves is a subjective feeling, so that is why a standard has been set in America and other civilized nations for ethical treatment of a person. If a person is found guilty of being a danger ot the rest of society, we don’t take revenge, we maintain our respect of human dignity by containing the threat, nothing more.
Click to expand...
Actually, why is it in america that Abortion is legal, capital punishment, and even going towards euthenasia, IVF where there embryos that are frozen forever or disposed of… Is this somehow considered humane? Babies aren’t considered harmful, and why kill a prisoner, they’re not considered harmful, more-so someone want them to get what they feel they justly deserve and it could be said that it is revenge for someone killing. I think there is definitely a battle going on still now, and it’s the Christ in people that are working against the evil in the world just like always. God is the Creator, he does not take away life, he creates it, so why is there still killing? Life is sacred and should be treated as such… That’s the argument that hasn’t gone away.
 
Karen107 said:
Actually, why is it in america that Abortion is legal, capital punishment, and even going towards euthenasia, IVF where there embryos that are frozen forever or disposed of… Is this somehow considered humane?
Click to expand...
No, it is not humane. But if life can be disposed of when there are other options because you believe it is justifiable, I suppose you could justify these things too.
 
wcknight said:
I am NOT condoning or agreeing or advocating this line of thinking. Folks who are intolerant of other faiths, like some muslims today, and radical Christians in the dark ages probably thought that way. So for the sake of saving some souls that would be led astray, they were willing to torture and kill others.
Click to expand...
I agree with that line of thinking. The muslims who do that sort of killing are often young, not well educated, poor and they are convinced wrongly that this is the way to go.To kill in the name of Allah… But I think that the ones who are better educated, have an opportunity to help them see the errors of their ways and often dont’ for whatever reason.
 
Thinking10 said:
No, it is not humane. But if life can be disposed of when there are other options because you believe it is justifiable, I suppose you could justify these things too.
Click to expand...
A person can justify it but it doesn’t make it right in the eyes of God.
 
Karen107 said:
A person can justify it but it doesn’t make it right in the eyes of God.
Click to expand...
Agreed, we shouldn’t think of any type of intentional harm to another person, whether it be done out of ill will toward another person or out of convenience, is right in the eyes of God.
 
Justifying burning heretics is beyond any sense, the real excuse is pure political, to stay in power you have to kill others who might shake your majesty. In order to do that, people need to believe you, the excuse of the divine will would serve the cause and justify the terrible act.
Heretics didn’t lead people away from god, they were enlightened, what leads people away from god is this kind of horrible idea of playing Satan’s role and burning people alive, just in case they don’t lead other people to the uncertain Hell.
 
Heretics enlightened??? I seriously doubt that, maybe in a few cases as with Gallilao but in many cases they were misguided, mistaken, misinformed or just plain wrong. They didn’t deserve a death penalty but they were certainly not enlightened, unless you think perversion of truth is somehow enlightened.
 
Hello again…
This is how I have viewed this topic.

Heretics CAN lead people away from God, and we are seeing that very much throughout the world. The message of Jesus Christ being lost every day based on peoples different interpretations of truth. It started from the very beginnings of Christianity where the Word of God was fiercely attacked with Arianism.

Regarding being politically motivated remember, God put power in the hands of the rulers. Romans 13:1 Let everyone be subject to the governing authorities, for there is no authority except that which God has established. The authorities that exist have been established by God.

But one day, these authorities will no longer exist.

…1 Corinthians 15:23 But each in his own order: Christ the first fruits, after that those who are Christ’s at His coming, 24 then comes the end, when He hands over the kingdom to the God and Father, when He has abolished all rule and all authority and power. 25 For He must reign until He has put all His enemies under His feet.…

Perhaps the thing people might do is shake your fists at God because it is in Gods providence that things happen. I mean we could always go back to the way things used to be before the church existed where all were subject to Kings or the Emporers whims no matter how cruel or unfair their laws were. God changes the hearts of men and therefore God changed nations and frees us from the oppression of sin. Look what God did for the nation of the Isrealites. He made them a much holier people, and what has He done for the world? He’s not done with that but I hope we can see with a bigger lens that the world has become a better place in many places, not despite God but because of Gods goodness and the Holy Spirit weaving through our lives bringing us to righteousness.

Romans 5:18 Therefore just as one man’s trespass led to condemnation for all, so one man’s act of righteousness leads to justification and life for all. 19 For just as by the one man’s disobedience the many were made sinners, so by the one man’s obedience the many will be made righteous. 20 But law came in, with the result that the trespass multiplied; but where sin increased, grace abounded all the more, 21 so that, just as sin exercised dominion in death, so grace might also exercise dominion through justification leading to eternal life through Jesus Christ our Lord.

Do we go back and say they were wrong and point out all their faults? Sure there were wrongs that happened, but the Church as in the nation of the Isrealites and in Gods mercy and divine way God is forever faithful to His people. And we should pray everyday that God not look down at our sins but on the faith of His church because we are all sinners trying to be Saints and are in need of Gods mercy. We could also look at this like we should do as they teach and not as they do.

I try and look back with a bigger lens and think what if the US was governed by God? What would the government look like? People would be guilty all the time wouldn’t they because no one would be able to meet God in His holiness. Well I try to see that in ancient times where punishments against the law was severe and how probably all of us would be guilty of some crime against the government of God. It’s a good thing that Jesus is ruler over our hearts and not ruler of our nations. He’d have a tough time enforcing his rules without having to pardon us all the time:) . But on a more personal level God will always bring us to bigger heights if we allow Him to.

Romans 8:28 We know that all things work together for good for those who love God, who are called according to his purpose.

Peace…
 
Karen107 said:
Just look at what happened in Salem Massachusetts with the witch burning by Protestant Americans?

Please check your history book. There was no “witch burning” in Salem or in any other place that is currently in the United States. In Salem, 19 women were hanged, and one man was pressed to death. Let’s get our facts straight. 🙂

Also, since I am a lawyer, I will point out that there were no lawyers involved in the Salem witch trials. They were all clergymen, who ignored the common law rules of evidence and employed the form of law to manifest perversion of justice. They are a sobering reminder of why we must not allow any particular religious group to gain control of our government, and why we should be grateful for, and ever vigilant to protect, our religious freedom.

I am wondering, though, what could a Protestant have done that would merit the horrific punishment of burning at the stake? Putting people to death is one thing, but burning at the stake?
Click to expand...
 
This is the biggest problem i have with the faith. There is always an excuse, it was a different time, it wasn’t as bad as people say, others were worse…etc…

Never the church was wrong

I was reading the same arguments about Galileo, it was a different time, his confinement was made as pleasant as possible, other astronomers disagreed with his science, it was years later until he was proven right…etc…

Same with the crusades, the death of the crusaders…etc…

Sorry, but that’s the way i read it.
 
Thank you for the links, really opened my eyes to what the church actually says about these things as compared to what i read in the postings.

“Another sad chapter of history to which the sons and daughters of the Church must return with a spirit of repentance is that of the acquiescence given, especially in certain centuries, to intolerance and even the use of force in the service of truth.”(78) This refers to forms of evangelization that employed improper means to announce the revealed truth or did not include an evangelical discernment suited to the cultural values of peoples or did not respect the consciences of the persons to whom the faith was presented, as well as all forms of force used in the repression and correction of errors."

That says it all
 
“An excuse is worse and more terrible than a lie, for an excuse is a lie guarded.”
John Paul 2
 
ru1too said:
This is the biggest problem i have with the faith. There is always an excuse, it was a different time, it wasn’t as bad as people say, others were worse…etc…

Never the church was wrong

I was reading the same arguments about Galileo, it was a different time, his confinement was made as pleasant as possible, other astronomers disagreed with his science, it was years later until he was proven right…etc…

Same with the crusades, the death of the crusaders…etc…

Sorry, but that’s the way i read it.
Click to expand...
Concerning the burning of heretics, the persecution of Galileo, and other things, the church was wrong. I had Jewish physics teacher in high school, and a Baptist history professor in college, and they were able to look at things with an interesting perspective. In their view, the church, after the collapse of the Roman Empire, was the social, political, and education structure of Western Europe, and, especially after the Protestant Reformation started, saw anything that was contrary to the accepted belief as a threat, not only to its existence, but to the social and political order of Europe, and resisted it accordingly. The Pope’s stature and respect in the world did not really begin until after he lost the Papal States in 1870, and was deprived of his last remaining role in politics. It was then that the church became exclusively a spiritual organization, and its reputation has increased greatly from that time. It does not always translate backwards into time though.
 
2 Corinthians
3For though we live in the world, we do not wage war as the world does. 4The weapons we fight with are not the weapons of the world. On the contrary, they have divine power to demolish strongholds. 5We demolish arguments and every pretension that sets itself up against the knowledge of God, and we take captive every thought to make it obedient to Christ
Click to expand...
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top