quote:

ORIGINAL: Nosathro

quote:

ORIGINAL: Kirata

quote:

ORIGINAL: Nosathro

Both were done by Christians to save the souls of those they believed needed saving.

The Inquisitions had nothing to do with "saving souls". The sole and exclusive purpose of the Medieval Inquisition was the eradication of heresy. The Spanish Inquisition was established independently, with only the reluctant approval of Sixtus IV, mainly for the purpose of uniting Spain under the Catholic rule of Ferdinand and Isabella.

With that as a hint that you don't know what you're talking about, I'll leave you to redo your homework on the Witch Trials.

K.

HERESY:
a : adherence to a religious opinion contrary to church dogma

b : denial of a revealed truth by a baptized member of the Roman Catholic Church

c : an opinion or doctrine contrary to church dogma

The Inquisition was created through papal bull, Ad Abolendam, issued at the end of the 12th century by Pope Lucius III. However in Spain little attention was paid to heresy by the Catholic ruling class. Jews and Muslims were considered inferior to Catholics and were subject to discriminatory legislation. The Inquisition was originally intended in large part to ensure the orthodoxy of those who converted from Judaism and Islam. This regulation of the faith of the newly converted was intensified after the royal decrees issued in 1492 and 1501 ordering Jews and Muslims to convert or leave. Nevertheless, in some parts of Spain towards the end of the 14th century, there was a wave of violent anti-Judaism, encouraged by the preaching of Ferrand Martinez, Archdeacon of Ecija. The pogroms of June 1391 were especially bloody: in Seville, hundreds of Jews were killed, and the synagogue was completely destroyed. The number of people killed was also high in other cities, such as Córdoba, Valencia and Barcelona. A consequences of these programs was the mass conversion of Jews. Forced baptism was contrary to the law of the Catholic Church, and theoretically anybody who had been forcibly baptized could legally return to Judaism; this however was very narrowly interpreted. Legal definitions of the time theoretically acknowledged that a forced baptism was not a valid sacrament, but confined this to cases where it was literally administered by physical force: a person who had consented to baptism under threat of death or serious injury was still regarded as a voluntary convert, and accordingly forbidden to revert to Judaism.

A can't wait to read what you have to say about Witch Trials, you would make a great writer of fairy tales.
And I am sure you have read "Der Hexenhammer". [sm=wiggleass.gif]

quote:

ORIGINAL: BamaD

When he first started this I told him that while they did it in the name of Christianity it did not make it a Christian act and it did not mean that they were good Christians.

He somehow thought that this discredited people who brought firearms to church and used them to protect the congregation.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Just0Us0Two

quote:

ORIGINAL: Nosathro

quote:

ORIGINAL: Kirata

quote:

ORIGINAL: Nosathro

Both were done by Christians to save the souls of those they believed needed saving.

The Inquisitions had nothing to do with "saving souls". The sole and exclusive purpose of the Medieval Inquisition was the eradication of heresy. The Spanish Inquisition was established independently, with only the reluctant approval of Sixtus IV, mainly for the purpose of uniting Spain under the Catholic rule of Ferdinand and Isabella.

With that as a hint that you don't know what you're talking about, I'll leave you to redo your homework on the Witch Trials.

K.

HERESY:
a : adherence to a religious opinion contrary to church dogma

b : denial of a revealed truth by a baptized member of the Roman Catholic Church

c : an opinion or doctrine contrary to church dogma

The Inquisition was created through papal bull, Ad Abolendam, issued at the end of the 12th century by Pope Lucius III. However in Spain little attention was paid to heresy by the Catholic ruling class. Jews and Muslims were considered inferior to Catholics and were subject to discriminatory legislation. The Inquisition was originally intended in large part to ensure the orthodoxy of those who converted from Judaism and Islam. This regulation of the faith of the newly converted was intensified after the royal decrees issued in 1492 and 1501 ordering Jews and Muslims to convert or leave. Nevertheless, in some parts of Spain towards the end of the 14th century, there was a wave of violent anti-Judaism, encouraged by the preaching of Ferrand Martinez, Archdeacon of Ecija. The pogroms of June 1391 were especially bloody: in Seville, hundreds of Jews were killed, and the synagogue was completely destroyed. The number of people killed was also high in other cities, such as Córdoba, Valencia and Barcelona. A consequences of these programs was the mass conversion of Jews. Forced baptism was contrary to the law of the Catholic Church, and theoretically anybody who had been forcibly baptized could legally return to Judaism; this however was very narrowly interpreted. Legal definitions of the time theoretically acknowledged that a forced baptism was not a valid sacrament, but confined this to cases where it was literally administered by physical force: a person who had consented to baptism under threat of death or serious injury was still regarded as a voluntary convert, and accordingly forbidden to revert to Judaism.

A can't wait to read what you have to say about Witch Trials, you would make a great writer of fairy tales.
And I am sure you have read "Der Hexenhammer". [sm=wiggleass.gif]

This really has NOTHING to do with a gun debate, but I'll humor you anyway because otherwise you're not going to let it drop and will keep attempting to sidetrack the conversation. Der Hexenhammer (Malleus Maleficarum), The Witches Hammer. It was the primary source book for the "legal" prosecution of witches.

The Inquisition had nothing to to with the persecution of Jews living openly. They didn't need to be. Jews had almost no legal protection, and what little they had was often ignored. Massacres and pogroms were a fairly common occurrence. The Inquisition was meant to investigate heretics, which mostly amounted to secret/hidden Jews. As you said, these were Jews who "agreed" to convert to Catholicism, but continued to practice Judaism.

Ok, with that out of the way, what difference does it make to the debate at hand? The Inquisition and Witch Trials were examples of people doing bad things under the auspices of religion. So what? No one is disputing that there are bad people in the world. No one is disputing that some of these bad people try to justify their actions by saying that they're doing God's will. Actually, far from disputing it, I'm sure many would agree with you. There are absolutely bad people in the world, who are more then happy to harm others for their own ends and justifications. However, where you see this as an excuse to disarm people, others see it as a reason why they should be armed in order to protect themselves.

quote:

ORIGINAL: BamaD

quote:

ORIGINAL: Politesub53

Lmfao....Did you miss your post using the word speak....you know, the one I clearly quoted. The one you re-quoted in the post above this.

Start a thread on what being the same ? Do you mean apartheid and segregation ?

Apartheid and Jim Crow yes, in fact I started it for you.

quote:

ORIGINAL: PeonForHer

quote:

ORIGINAL: Zonie63
All I would ask is that if someone does express a grievance against America or criticizes our country, that they at least be fair and open-minded enough to listen to our side and our perspective on things. The trouble is, I just don't see that coming from our European cousins. It seems like they believe like they have us all figured out and don't even want to hear our side.

Just to be crystal clear: I haven't 'criticised the USA' or 'expressed a grievance against the USA' here, Zonie. What I've done is said that I find an *aspect* of American culture disgusting. There are aspects of British culture that I find disgusting, too - but few would consider that to be a sign of my 'anti-Britishness'. Instead, they'd probably think, 'Ah, well, he's a lefty. He's bound to criticise his own country'. And they'd be right.

quote:


When American gun-fans try to turn my views about attitudes to guns in the USA into an attack on American culture as a whole, coupled with some old drivel about Europeans' alleged feelings of superiority towards Americans, most of the time I see that as a implausible, as well as somewhat pathetic, attempt to cry victim and thereby evade the argument.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Nosathro

quote:

ORIGINAL: BamaD

When he first started this I told him that while they did it in the name of Christianity it did not make it a Christian act and it did not mean that they were good Christians.

He somehow thought that this discredited people who brought firearms to church and used them to protect the congregation.

Now that is really out in left field...er I mean right field.

quote:

It is so nice you live in Utopia, but we all know how that book ends.

quote:

ORIGINAL: thishereboi

quote:

ORIGINAL: Nosathro

quote:

ORIGINAL: BamaD

When he first started this I told him that while they did it in the name of Christianity it did not make it a Christian act and it did not mean that they were good Christians.

He somehow thought that this discredited people who brought firearms to church and used them to protect the congregation.

Now that is really out in left field...er I mean right field.

the phrase refers to a baseball field, not politics [8|]

quote:

ORIGINAL: Politesub53

quote:

ORIGINAL: BamaD

quote:

ORIGINAL: Politesub53

Lmfao....Did you miss your post using the word speak....you know, the one I clearly quoted. The one you re-quoted in the post above this.

Start a thread on what being the same ? Do you mean apartheid and segregation ?

Apartheid and Jim Crow yes, in fact I started it for you.

You skipped the point about speak, no matter though, its not a biggie.

No bruv you didnt start it for me, you started it for you, hoping everyone would agree with you... Hows that working out for you ?

quote:

ORIGINAL: Nosathro

quote:

ORIGINAL: Just0Us0Two

quote:

ORIGINAL: Nosathro

quote:

ORIGINAL: Kirata

quote:

ORIGINAL: Nosathro

Both were done by Christians to save the souls of those they believed needed saving.

The Inquisitions had nothing to do with "saving souls". The sole and exclusive purpose of the Medieval Inquisition was the eradication of heresy. The Spanish Inquisition was established independently, with only the reluctant approval of Sixtus IV, mainly for the purpose of uniting Spain under the Catholic rule of Ferdinand and Isabella.

With that as a hint that you don't know what you're talking about, I'll leave you to redo your homework on the Witch Trials.

K.

HERESY:
a : adherence to a religious opinion contrary to church dogma

b : denial of a revealed truth by a baptized member of the Roman Catholic Church

c : an opinion or doctrine contrary to church dogma

The Inquisition was created through papal bull, Ad Abolendam, issued at the end of the 12th century by Pope Lucius III. However in Spain little attention was paid to heresy by the Catholic ruling class. Jews and Muslims were considered inferior to Catholics and were subject to discriminatory legislation. The Inquisition was originally intended in large part to ensure the orthodoxy of those who converted from Judaism and Islam. This regulation of the faith of the newly converted was intensified after the royal decrees issued in 1492 and 1501 ordering Jews and Muslims to convert or leave. Nevertheless, in some parts of Spain towards the end of the 14th century, there was a wave of violent anti-Judaism, encouraged by the preaching of Ferrand Martinez, Archdeacon of Ecija. The pogroms of June 1391 were especially bloody: in Seville, hundreds of Jews were killed, and the synagogue was completely destroyed. The number of people killed was also high in other cities, such as Córdoba, Valencia and Barcelona. A consequences of these programs was the mass conversion of Jews. Forced baptism was contrary to the law of the Catholic Church, and theoretically anybody who had been forcibly baptized could legally return to Judaism; this however was very narrowly interpreted. Legal definitions of the time theoretically acknowledged that a forced baptism was not a valid sacrament, but confined this to cases where it was literally administered by physical force: a person who had consented to baptism under threat of death or serious injury was still regarded as a voluntary convert, and accordingly forbidden to revert to Judaism.

A can't wait to read what you have to say about Witch Trials, you would make a great writer of fairy tales.
And I am sure you have read "Der Hexenhammer". [sm=wiggleass.gif]

This really has NOTHING to do with a gun debate, but I'll humor you anyway because otherwise you're not going to let it drop and will keep attempting to sidetrack the conversation. Der Hexenhammer (Malleus Maleficarum), The Witches Hammer. It was the primary source book for the "legal" prosecution of witches.

The Inquisition had nothing to to with the persecution of Jews living openly. They didn't need to be. Jews had almost no legal protection, and what little they had was often ignored. Massacres and pogroms were a fairly common occurrence. The Inquisition was meant to investigate heretics, which mostly amounted to secret/hidden Jews. As you said, these were Jews who "agreed" to convert to Catholicism, but continued to practice Judaism.

Ok, with that out of the way, what difference does it make to the debate at hand? The Inquisition and Witch Trials were examples of people doing bad things under the auspices of religion. So what? No one is disputing that there are bad people in the world. No one is disputing that some of these bad people try to justify their actions by saying that they're doing God's will. Actually, far from disputing it, I'm sure many would agree with you. There are absolutely bad people in the world, who are more then happy to harm others for their own ends and justifications. However, where you see this as an excuse to disarm people, others see it as a reason why they should be armed in order to protect themselves.

I understand that pro gun claim it their God given right, I just trying to find out when God announced that policy. I know a person in SCA who sings a wonderful song the Jews in Spain sang in Hebrew about what they thought of monarchy. She also sings in in Hebrew, if she sang the song in English, well there are laws. [&:]

quote:

ORIGINAL: Nosathro

quote:

ORIGINAL: BamaD

When he first started this I told him that while they did it in the name of Christianity it did not make it a Christian act and it did not mean that they were good Christians.

He somehow thought that this discredited people who brought firearms to church and used them to protect the congregation.

Now that is really out in left field...er I mean right field.

quote:

ORIGINAL: BamaD

Wrong as usual I started it to halt the derailment of this thread so it is worked as planned.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Politesub53

quote:

ORIGINAL: BamaD

Wrong as usual I started it to halt the derailment of this thread so it is worked as planned.

Odd, because when I pointed out derailments were not allowed in this thread, as per the OP, you assured me I was wrong then.

quote:

ORIGINAL: BamaD

I understand that pro gun claim it their God given right, I just trying to find out when God announced that policy

Book of Ruth
One of her missions was getting the King, not to protect the Jews, but to allow them the weapons to do it themselves.
The modern equivalent would be not swords but ... wait for it.... Firearms.