Show Me The Crocoduck!!

[MoonLancer]

Why prompt us to go out and burn or hang some?

history has shown this to have already happened. Christians too the initiative and burned witches.

Or is it, as I suspect, just a cheap shot to try and make

God's Church look bad?

nope just pointing out facts and history. God should not have written down that Christians should burn witches if he didn't want Christians to go out can actually do it.

 

[MoonLancer]

I don't 'set my religious book aside' --- I interpret It in light of dispensation theology.

If that's what you call explaining the paradigm shift of today compared to then. sure i guess? but Christians burning witches happened in THIS dispensation. Show me where god explains his errata.

In dispensation theology, God has a set goal He expects us to achieve (replenish the earth and take proper dominion over it), and gives us a set of standards we are to use to achieve that goal.

If we fail to work toward that goal and get to the point that we have no intention of doing so with the standards He has given us, then God steps in and punishes us with a fitting punishment, and then prescribes a new set of standards that we are to use to accomplish our goal.

Failure, of course, will precipitate another judgment.

Each dispensation, then, starts out with a new set of standards, and ends with divine judgment.

that's a nice theology. Is it like being a Mormon with all the modern profits?

 

[AV1611VET]

history has shown this to have already happened. Christians too the initiative and burned witches.

Why are you prompting us to repeat history?

(You guys aren't going to answer this, are you? I've only asked this question how many times now?)

God should not have written down that Christians should burn witches if he didn't want Christians to go out can actually do it.

Please do tell me where God wrote down that Christians should burn witches.

Why is it you're wondering why we're not being obedient to some non-existent command?

Split Rock even admitted that there are no witches.

Are you saying he's wrong?

 

[AV1611VET]

but Christians burning witches happened in THIS dispensation. Show me where god explains his errata.

I have a better idea: you show me.

In fact, MoonLancer, you bring me a real witch --- a real one --- along with the Scripture admonition for Christians to burn her, along with a judge's order after she got a fair trial, and I'll light the fire myself.

Fair enough?

If you can't --- how about manning up and admit that you and your cronies are wrong?

 

[Split Rock]

Why are you prompting us to repeat history?

(You guys aren't going to answer this, are you? I've only asked this question how many times now?)

We are asking why you are not burning witches today, not telling you to do so. You answered that either the Holy Spirit was keeping them at bay, or that Satan gave up on making witches. I athen asked why did Satan give up on making witches and where was the Holy Spirit all this time before the Ressurection.

Please do tell me where God wrote down that Christians should burn witches.

Exodus 22:18 "Thou shalt not suffer a witch to live."

Why is it you're wondering why we're not being obedient to some non-existent command?

See above. The command seems pretty straight foward.

Split Rock even admitted that there are no witches.

Are you saying he's wrong?

You are the one who needs to "admit" there are no witches. Your Bible says there are (or were) witches, and you claim there used to be "real mccoys."

 

[AV1611VET]

We are asking why you are not burning witches today, not telling you to do so.

You guys insinuate that to be a true Christian and not a hypocrite, we should burn witches; despite the fact that the Bible never tells us to burn witches.

You answered that either the Holy Spirit was keeping them at bay, or that Satan gave up on making witches.

No, I did not. You telephoned that to mean Satan "gave up." I said the Holy Spirit keeps Satan in check.

HOWEVER, for the sake of this discussion, I'll go ahead and agree that Satan "gave up".

I don't know if he did or not, he's certainly persistent.

In any event, they don't exist --- at least, not as potently as they did in the Old Testament.

I athen asked why did Satan give up on making witches and where was the Holy Spirit all this time before the Ressurection.

The Holy Spirit has always existed, but He didn't take the forefront until after the Ascension.

In the Old Testament, God the Father was the primary active Member of the Godhead, with the other Two "in the background".

In the beginning of the New Testament, God the Son moved to the front, with the other Two "in the background".

Ten days after the Ascension, the Holy Spirit moved to the front.

The Son with be back to take the front during the Tribulation and Millennial Kingdom, then will turn it all over to the Father again for all eternity.

You are the one who needs to "admit" there are no witches. Your Bible says there are (or were) witches, and you claim there used to be "real mccoys."

If there are witches today, they are exceptions to the way things worked in the Old Testament. They certainly don't have the power they once had, so they would be rendered harmless enough that we don't have to hunt them down.

 

[corvus_corax]

Please do tell me where God wrote down that Christians should burn witches.

Exodus 22:18 "Thou shalt not suffer a witch to live."

~Ahem~
Excuse my interruption here, but.....


....that was not addressed to Christians.


AV has you here (sorry)

ETA- as a matter of fact the only time that witchcraft is mentioned in the 1611 KJV New Testament is in the book of Galatians, and there is no command (or even suggestion) to burn, hang, shoot, stab, stone or otherwise kill one practicing witchcraft.
Like AV has stated in the past, the "witch burnings" of times past by Christians was done in spite of the teachings of Jesus, not because of them.
As much as I disagree with AV on nearly everything, he is correct here.

 

[AV1611VET]

As much as I disagree with AV on nearly everything, he is correct here.

You realize your brownie points just dropped, don't you?

 

[corvus_corax]

You realize your brownie points just dropped, don't you?

Because I agreed with you?
Or because I disagreed with Split?

 

[sandwiches]

~Ahem~
Excuse my interruption here, but.....


....that was not addressed to Christians.


AV has you here (sorry)

ETA- as a matter of fact the only time that witchcraft is mentioned in the 1611 KJV New Testament is in the book of Galatians, and there is no command (or even suggestion) to burn, hang, shoot, stab, stone or otherwise kill one practicing witchcraft.
Like AV has stated in the past, the "witch burnings" of times past by Christians was done in spite of the teachings of Jesus, not because of them.
As much as I disagree with AV on nearly everything, he is correct here.

I would agree with you, if it weren't for the fact that the same way of taking quotes out of their context is used to validate their views about things such as sexuality, marriage, the origin of the universe, or in extreme cases like AV, anything ranging from the existence of elements and space-time. So, you see? To say a passage is being taken out of context is is not only obvious and redundant but meaningless, at this point.

 

[AV1611VET]

Because I agreed with you?
Or because I disagreed with Split?

This one →

 

[AV1611VET]

So, you see? To say a passage is being taken out of context is is not only obvious and redundant but meaningless, at this point.

That's why you need to learn dispensation theology.

So you can know when to hold 'em, when to fold 'em, when to walk away, and know when to run.

You never count your blessings sitting in the pew.

There'll be time enough for counting, when the preaching's done.

 

[corvus_corax]

I would agree with you, if it weren't for the fact that the same way of taking quotes out of their context is used to validate their views about things such as sexuality, marriage, the origin of the universe, or in extreme cases like AV, anything ranging from the existence of elements and space-time. So, you see? To say a passage is being taken out of context is is not only obvious and redundant but meaningless, at this point.

I see where you are coming from in this case.
However, this discussion regarding burning witches (or killing them via any other method) is clear cut.
This statement was not given to Christians.
And the Christians who did burn/hang/stab/shoot/stone witches were doing it (to use AV's phrase) in spite of the New Testament, not because of it.

In this case, despite how often I disagree with AV (and his often "odd" interpretations IMO), this is clear cut.
Split Rock is incorrect.
AV1611VET is correct.

That's all I was pointing out.
Just that simple, nothing more.

 

[corvus_corax]

This one →

meh
I don't care.
I disagree with you 99% of the time (or more).
I agree with you 1% of the time (if that much )

If that's going to keep people from giving me the CF versions of "brownie points", I don't care.
Not that I'm disagreeing with SR on principle, heck no. I really like SR and generally agree with posts made by SR. Heck, SR is a mutual CF friend of mine.
However, in this specific case (Christians burning witches) you are correct, and Split Rock is not...on two points.

Now, do you know the second point SR is incorrect on, regarding this specific subject?
(brownie points to the first person who understands the second point that SR is incorrect on......ya'll might want to go back and re-read the posts in question)

 

[Norbert L]

Ahhh... an excellent example of a primitive mammal with reptilian characteristics. Further support for the theory that mammals evolved from reptiles. Thanks for that!

Actually it is an example of a modern alive today type of mammal with reptilian characteristis. It also supports the idea that God can create and do as He pleases.

It should be concidered there is still someone today that knows all the genetic sequences and is able to reproduce them at his will. Is it not true that the scientific communtity would look down upon anyone withholding information? Perhaps that is a basis why most of that community looks down upon God?

Exodus 22:18 "Thou shalt not suffer a witch to live."


See above. The command seems pretty straight foward.

If a person wants to look at scripture and who is a sciencetist should also take note of what it doesn't say.

There is a difference between "not suffer a witch to live" and thou shalt judge a witch and then execute and kill the witch.

There is a difference between "to live" and 'to die' and 'to kill'. In more modern thought it is about "excommunication" or politically it is about being "exiled" apart from the community.

 

[corvus_corax]

Actually it is an example of a modern alive today type of mammal with reptilian characteristis. It also supports the idea that God can create and do as He pleases.

Please explain this with objective empirical evidence.

It should be concidered there is still someone today that knows all the genetic sequences and is able to reproduce them at his will.

Why should this be considered?

Is it not true that the scientific communtity would look down upon anyone withholding information? Perhaps that is a basis why most of that community looks down upon God?

The scientific community does not "look down" upon any deity.
The concept of deity just does not fall within objective empirical evidence.
If you think it does, then give me such evidence and I will consider it.

There is a difference between "not suffer a witch to live" and thou shalt judge a witch and then execute and kill the witch.
There is a difference between "to live" and 'to die' and 'to kill'. In more modern thought it is about "excommunication" or politically it is about being "exiled" apart from the community.

(bold emphasis mine)
That explains your "interpretation" of that specific scripture.
'Nuff said.

 

[Norbert L]

Please explain this with objective empirical evidence.


Why should this be considered?


The scientific community does not "look down" upon any deity.
The concept of deity just does not fall within objective empirical evidence.
If you think it does, then give me such evidence and I will consider it.


(bold emphasis mine)
That explains your "interpretation" that specific scripture.
'Nuff said.

Objective is the platipus, here and now. Theory is how it got here. Only someone billions of years old would be able to testify to the facts (fossil record) and affirm how these things developed. In other words they would not be speaking theory, they would be speaking facts.

Would those facts disprove the theory of evolution or prove them? Evolutionists say yes and Creationists say no. It is a deadlock, after all Darwin died, so will you and I and continuing generations go through that one observable fact. You die so will I.

Interpretation... well if you ever visit the Christian specific forums you should begin to understand "evolution" is one of the least controversial areas under discussion. Just click on my name look up posts and you will see a lot of this going on ->

But for sciencetists I believe and hope they are actually more perceptive in the area of what is being said compared to what is not being said within scriptures.

Do you really believe that the scripture, Exodus 22:18 "Thou shalt not suffer a witch to live." means you should kill witches?

Maybe a person who has perfect interpretation of scriptures and a lifestyle that matches should be the first to pick up a stone and kill all the witches today, that is if the same someone interprets "Thou shalt not suffer a witch to live" means kill all the witches.

 

[AV1611VET]

Maybe a person who has perfect interpretation of scriptures and a lifestyle that matches should be the first to pick up a stone and kill all the witches today, that is if the same someone interprets "Thou shalt not suffer a witch to live" means kill all the witches.

That's the point I'm making with these guys.

They prompt us to go out and kill witches, but they themselves wouldn't dare.

In fact, if you pin them down and get an honest answer from them, most (if not all) will probably admit that they don't even believe in witches.

And witch hunting is just scratching the surface --- I'm not even mentioning the crusades.

 

[Norbert L]

In fact, if you pin them down and get an honest answer from them, most (if not all) will probably admit that they don't even believe in witches.

Which speaks to the fact that this thread is misnamed, it should of actually been called, "Show me a witch!".

Of course for those the theory of witches should be just as visible as "Show me a Crocoduck!".

The odd thing is some people even today understand there are witches, in the sense some people state they are witches but show them a Crocoduck.

 

[corvus_corax]

Objective is the platipus, here and now.

It's Platypus

Theory is how it got here.

Yes, Scientific Theory, which is the best current model explaining what we observe.

Only someone billions of years old would be able to testify to the facts (fossil record) and affirm how these things developed. In other words they would not be speaking theory, they would be speaking facts.

Bull
Eyewitnesses are notoriously unreliable.
Often, the evidence at hand (historical, forensic, etc) demonstrates eyewitnesses to be incorrect.

Would those facts disprove the theory of evolution or prove them? Evolutionists say yes and Creationists say no. It is a deadlock, after all Darwin died, so will you and I and continuing generations go through that one observable fact. You die so will I.

Yes we will die
But evolution is a fact, not just a theory.
It is as simple as that

Interpretation... well if you ever visit the Christian specific forums you should begin to understand "evolution" is one of the least controversial areas under discussion. Just click on my name look up posts and you will see a lot of this going on ->

Actually, in the "Origins theology" forum, the ToE is quite contested.
Not that I can actually post there
~sigh~

But for sciencetists I believe and hope they are actually more perceptive in the area of what is being said compared to what is not being said within scriptures.

You keep stating "what is not being said" regarding the bible.
What, exactly, are you talking about?

Do you really believe that the scripture, Exodus 22:18 "Thou shalt not suffer a witch to live." means you should kill witches?

It means you will not allow one to live, or have life.

Maybe a person who has perfect interpretation of scriptures and a lifestyle that matches should be the first to pick up a stone and kill all the witches today, that is if the same someone interprets "Thou shalt not suffer a witch to live" means kill all the witches.

Well in the "dispensation" of the Old Testament, the rules were much different, weren't they?
Kinda like eating shrimp or wearing clothing made up of multiple fibers.

You cannot "interpret" the morality of the book of Exodus through your "modern" sensibilities.
Quit trying.