Hard Onions

[Narnian]

Jam, what you have descibed to me looks like a gospel of works, not grace. Everything depends on what you do and how you act. You never know what sin will push you over the edge. And if the interpretation of the passages you cited are true, then once you fall away you can never come back. You seem to be missing the joy that comes with the assuance that God is sovereign - he calls and he seals. No one can break that seal, including ourselves.

Paul understood this well and explains it in Romans 5 and 6. We cannot be condemned, ever. Grace has totally overpowered the law. Our obedience to the law now comes not from fear since it no longer has power over us, but from love. Paul knew he could not lose his salvation and his letters are filled with assurances to us that is the case.

I found a good lesson that describes everything that has to be undone for someone to lose their salvation: http://www.learnthebible.org/Lose%20Your%20Salvation%201.htm

I used to believe that you could lose you salvation but over time I have become convinced that the sovereignty and grace of God are much greater than we can imagine.

[TMLutas]

At the same time, the world is not black and white (as implied in this comic, and as stated by Ralph on a couple occasions on these forums) My way or the highway. With me or against me. I'd be willing to bet most of you in here weren't with me OR against me (at least until you read this--now I'm sure you're in either one camp or the other, and I can probably guess which *dons armored suit*) For every Muslim extremist shouting til he's blue in the face about how we need to blow up America, there's probably a dozen here in America just like the rest of us--trying to make a living and provide for their families. If every Muslim was a fundamentalist extremist like that WE WOULD ALL BE DEAD. There are enough of them that, if it came down to brass tacks, they could probably wipe this country off the map. (there are at least three times as many Muslims as there are Americans--and there are a lot of people who are both!)

The christian genesis of the black and white world comes from the belief of a final judgment on which the grading is pass/fail. If you believe in it (and both christians and muslims do) and are serious about it, the greys clear up to white/black pretty quick.

As for muslims wiping out America, Hilaire Beloc comes to mind:

Whatever happens, we have got
The Maxim gun, and they have not

The number of muslims who are both malign and capable is absolutely tiny. The danger they pose is one of will, that they will use a superior dose of it to leverage our movement to voluntary surrender rather than use our 'Maxim guns'.

[TMLutas]

With regards to bashing of Christians, in my opinion it's mostly that all Christians are receiving the backlash against the Extremist Christians who give the rest a bad name. Solution I would see is for the more sane Christians to be more vocal about their sanity and the extremists' lack thereof. (Phelps, as an example of the extremist groups.)

Christianity seems to be under attack alot, with court cases about the Ten Commandments in a courthouse, or teachers leading a prayer, or a school putting a Nativity Scene out on the lawn.

I don't think these are attacks on Christianity specifically, but upon government and government sponsored entities activly endorsing a religion.

I'm not quite sure how much more vocal christians can get w/regard to Phelps. We're trying to save his soul too and that puts some limits on the denunciations so long as Phelps stays nonviolent.

I would say that an attack on religion in government/government sponsored entities would attack all faiths. An attack on christianity would be suing to remove the Jesus picture on the wall while leaving the two foot tall buddha statue next to it off the lawsuit. The ACLU is currently doing exactly this in a W. Virginia school case.

[TMLutas]

If you honestly believe god will send me to hell for not believing in him, say it! That's an important facat of your belief, not something you can handwave away with "Oh, but you didn't ask!". By filtering everything unpleasent out of what you believe, you turn what your saying from a statement of belief into propoganda.

I can't help but imagine that there is some Christian Hell joke in there somewhere. Honestly, I would rather neither. If I choose to burn in the burning hells, that's my business, and I don't need anyone telling me. However, saying you believe in something, yet omitting something just because it isn't pearly, I dislike, I can agree there.

In the end, christian salvation is a very hard pass/fail exam. Getting there has always been a collective activity (which is why even radical protestants that try to deny this have meeting houses). As part of that collectivity, we are called to help each other along the way. The best way is through example but if acts fail us, we use words. Sometimes we end up using words badly.

[The JAM]

[...unWARP!!!]

Good evening.


In my early days as a Christian, when I was 11, I heard a sermon about going to Heaven. Basically, the minister said, "God has you SO protected, that if you were to die and still have sinned, you automatically get cleaned of everything the moment you die, except if you have blasphemed against the Holy Spirit."

Heh, the entire school gave a HUGE sigh of relief.

What that minister didn't know he did, was that he gave an entire school of Christian kids and teenagers license to sin. Not ONCE in that sermon did he mention holiness:

"Be ye holy, for I am holy."
"For without holiness, NO ONE will see The LORD."
"Though shall be PERFECT with the LORD thy God."

Or even maintaining our testimony before others:

"For the name of God is blasphemed among the Gentiles through you."

There is a doctrine going around that more or less says "Once saved, always saved." Sorry, Narnian, but that is VERY licencious and not once does it implore the Christian to live a holy life.

That teaching up there managed to convince me to NOT get pastoral OR parental help about a VERY deep problem I had back then, because, after all, I reasoned, it won't make a difference in the end, would it?

And because I let that problem go for the next 20 years, when I finally DID decide to confront it, it had grown to the point that I had already hurt quite a few people around me, and I thank God that I did NOT get in trouble with the law, and it's taken very long and painful councelling sessions to deal with it.

You do NOT get salvation by works. I know that (justification is instantaneous). But you can't let that seed of faith (which will be manifested in fullness when we stand before God) get choked out by this world by either INaction, or by willingly backsliding.

Another minister of God preferred, "Once in Heaven, always in Heaven."

If a Christian is convinced that he can't lose his salvation, I would hope that he is actively maintaining a sanctified life, in every area.


¡Zacatepóngolas!

Until next time, remember:

I

AM

THE

J.A.M. (a.k.a. Numbuh i: "Just because I'm imaginary doesn't mean I don't exist")

Good evening.

[WARP!!!]

[Narnian]

<snip> There is a doctrine going around that more or less says "Once saved, always saved." Sorry, Narnian, but that is VERY licencious and not once does it implore the Christian to live a holy life.
<snip>
Another minister of God preferred, "Once in Heaven, always in Heaven."

You bring up some very good points and I couldn't agee with you more that the later quotation is a much better description. Your concerns are legtimate but I believe the are addressed in the systematic study of the scriptures by looking at the totality of what the bible has to say, not just proof texts.

There are 3 possible approaches to the subject (credit to Greg Johnson[).

1. Classic Arminianism
• One must persevere in faith to be saved.
• True believers can lose their faith.
• Those dying without faith in Christ are condemned.
“The believer who loses his faith is damned.”

2. Antinomianism
• One need not persevere in faith to be saved.
• True believers can lose their faith.
• Those who lose their faith are saved, since they once believed.
“The believer who loses his faith is saved.”

3. Classic Calvinism
• One must persevere in faith to be saved.
• True believers cannot lose their faith, since it’s God’s gift.
• Those dying without faith in Christ are condemned.
• Those who “lose” their faith never had it to begin with.
• God will preserve true believers and they will be saved.
“The ‘believer’ who loses his faith never really had it—or at least it wasn’t in Jesus.”

I believe you are concerened about antinomianism ("cheap grace"), which is what Paul warned about in Romans for those who think they can sin freely since they are covered by grace. This is not the gospel. Any person who believes this is probably not a Christian.

What I believe is not "once saved always saved", but "perseverence of the saints". The work of sanctification by the Holy Spirit will seal those who believe. True believers cannot fall away - they may struggle and stumble but not completely fall. The work of sanctification will bring true believers back and keep them from falling too far.

Again I point out this is clearly covered by Paul in Romans 5 and 6 regarding the dangers of those who view grace as a license to sin.

[Narnian]

If a Christian is convinced that he can't lose his salvation, I would hope that he is actively maintaining a sanctified life, in every area.

I would agree, and hopefully the same for those who believe they can lose their salvation

But we will sin - the perfect life is impossible until glorification:

1John 1:8-10 8 If we say we have no sin, we deceive ourselves, and the truth is not in us. 9 If we confess our sins, he is faithful and just to forgive us our sins and to cleanse us from all unrighteousness. 10 If we say we have not sinned, we make him a liar, and his word is not in us.

This knowledge should drive us to the cross every day. And keep us from thinking ourselves better than others. Sanctification, like regeneration and justification, is primarily the work of the Holy Spirit.

I have described salvation like being in a dark basement all of your life - and God puts in a 5 watt light bulb. To someone who has not seen light at all is is brilliant and overwhelming - but it is only a fraction of the glory of God. We now see our sin, but only the major ones.

As we grow the light gets brighter (sanctification) and we see more of our sin - what didn't bother us before now looms large. But the grace of God grows as well to cover us. And will continue to do so until we die.

I always wondered why someone like Mother Teresa, Saint Francis, John Calvin or Paul, giants in the faith, continued to struggle with sin. Then I realized their proximity to God's truth provided a light into every nook and cranny of their life, their basement.

[Mayihelpyou]

I completely agree with this last Hard Onions. Mr. RH is right on the money here. My daughter can't bring a picture of a stable to color to school at Christmas time, but they can be taught the signifigance of a dradle. Could someone PLEASE explain that to me??

And on a more political note.. did anyone else find Mr. Ellison's insistance on being sworn in with a Koran and not a Bible hilarious? Talk about storms in a teacup.

[Mutant for Hire]

Here's a small hint: not being allowed to color in a nativity scene at school doesn't qualify as persecution. Being beaten up almost every day at school for being homosexual qualifies as persecution. Having laws passed banning you from activities such as getting married qualifies as persecution. Being strung up for having the wrong color skin, having a cross burned on your front lawn, that qualifies as persecution.

It is nice to see that Christians have finally tapped into the "victim" mentality that various groups on the liberal side have embraced. It must be the new 2006 era of bipartisanship truly in action here.

[Mayihelpyou]

Here's a small hint: not being allowed to color in a nativity scene at school doesn't qualify as persecution. Being beaten up almost every day at school for being homosexual qualifies as persecution. Having laws passed banning you from activities such as getting married qualifies as persecution. Being strung up for having the wrong color skin, having a cross burned on your front lawn, that qualifies as persecution.

It is nice to see that Christians have finally tapped into the "victim" mentality that various groups on the liberal side have embraced. It must be the new 2006 era of bipartisanship truly in action here.

Oh.. and getting beaten up for being a Seventh Day Adventist in a small country school every day doesn't qualify? Being called a cracker and having Honky Bitch scrawled across your office door because you had to dock someone's pay because they were missing for two hours doesn't qualify? Having death threats left on your car because you're white. Hrmmm.. I did not have an ISSUE with her being told not to bring the picture to school.. I had an ISSUE with her being told not to bring it to school and yet she can be taught about Jewish and Islamic religions and signifigance. And excuse me if I'm wrong, but didn't Christians START the whole "victim" mentality with the whole being fed to lions?

You are screaming that Christians can't possibly be persecuted because all these other "victims" are being persecuted. Isn't that just another form of belief oriented bigotry?

When was the last time Christianity was taught alongside Islam, Judaism, Hindi, Shinto and Buddhism in schools?

[Sapphire]

Here's a small hint: not being allowed to color in a nativity scene at school doesn't qualify as persecution. Being beaten up almost every day at school for being homosexual qualifies as persecution. Having laws passed banning you from activities such as getting married qualifies as persecution. Being strung up for having the wrong color skin, having a cross burned on your front lawn, that qualifies as persecution.

It is nice to see that Christians have finally tapped into the "victim" mentality that various groups on the liberal side have embraced. It must be the new 2006 era of bipartisanship truly in action here.

Oh.. and getting beaten up for being a Seventh Day Adventist in a small country school every day doesn't qualify? Being called a cracker and having Honky Bitch scrawled across your office door because you had to dock someone's pay because they were missing for two hours doesn't qualify? Having death threats left on your car because you're white. Hrmmm.. I did not have an ISSUE with her being told not to bring the picture to school.. I had an ISSUE with her being told not to bring it to school and yet she can be taught about Jewish and Islamic religions and signifigance. And excuse me if I'm wrong, but didn't Christians START the whole "victim" mentality with the whole being fed to lions?

You are screaming that Christians can't possibly be persecuted because all these other "victims" are being persecuted. Isn't that just another form of belief oriented bigotry?

When was the last time Christianity was taught alongside Islam, Judaism, Hindi, Shinto and Buddhism in schools?

Lee's Summit High School, December, 2003. School assembly. LSHS is a large school, in the heart of Kansas City. The traditions of the Nativity were presented alongside the traditions of Chanukkah, Ramadan (I believe, I could be wrong), Kwanzaa, and the Raven festival. Each was explained.

I reiterate what I said in the TotQ forums: I went to schools throughout Kentucky (aside, of course, for this year at LSHS). I had a completely different experience than that described. People prayed in school, and no militia came to beat them into submission. There was prayer at assemblies, and no one helicoptered in to arrest the lot of the faculty. I was presented with guised ID teachings in a Chem class, and the horrors that every Creationist freak screeches prophetically about didn't happen. There were Bible study clubs or groups in every school. There were religious hymns in every music class (balanced of multiple traditions, usually a Christian/Jewish/Kwanzaa mix), be it chorus or piano. There were Bibles and Crosses and the traditional Islamic head coverings and DNA chains as jewelry (that's Atheism, by the way) and kids with Spellbooks and Wiccan books and Ambrose's Devil's Dictionary. But moreover this weird 'We can't talk about Christ' schools are simply unknown to me.

Once, just to test out this weird and wild theory, I carried my leather-bound, gold-edged Zondervan Bible around school, with my name on the plate on the cover. I made sure that it was the only book outside of my backpack, in my hand. The result? No one cared. No one batted an eye. Nothing. It made sense: When I was reading Mere Christianity, I would do so blatantly, walking down the hallway with my face buried in the thing, the words blazed large across the front.

So schools of every tradition and type, that I have experience with, from big cities to tiny towns, have not openly and horrifyingly decried the Word of the Lord, shrieking like banshees and recoiling like vampires. It was peaceful. Benign.

Unlike what Hayes wants to believe.

[Dabenner]

The current diatribe totally ignores the synagogues, mosques, sikh temples, and other non-'Christian' places of worship burned, tagged, vandalized and otherwise targeted across the country. It also does nothing to be inclusive of Christian faiths that do not maintain the strict (IMO) version of faith espoused by our dear Cartoonist.

Sorry, but if you want me to buy into the 'Christians are being targeted' movement, you had better not ignore the rest of hate being spewed forth by those within the various movements who flock to your banner.

But then, I'm LDS and I know all about how 'Christians' can be bigoted, intolerant, abusive and demeaning towards fellow 'Christians' of whom they disapprove.

Derek

[Kinsfire]

I'm looking at the most recently displaying comic on 12/3/06, which is RJH's most recent part of his witnessing.

I will state now that I have no problems with his witnessing.

What I do insist on is that the truth be given properly, not in half-doses. Those people who started the country, running from religious persecution? Does anyone remember who was persecuting them?

The answer? A different Christian sect. (Do NOT get into a discussion of what sects qualify as Christian, please. I am using the definition "church that has as prime tenet the divinity of Christ".)

And let us also remember that those same people began to persecute others who did not think as they did. The Salem Witch Trials were of the same group that landed in Plymouth in 1620 - Puritans.

So this was Christian versus Christian in the forming of the country. (I will not get into the Founding Fathers in this post.)

As for the church burnings - RJH, can you PLEASE give me the citation that shows that these are all religiously based? I did a little searching on this, and found the following: http://www.firechief.com/mag/firefighti ... es_church/ (The text is as follows)

---
Report indicates church arson decline

Colin A. Campbell

Nov 1, 2000 12:00 PM

The National Church Arson Task Force has issued to the president its fourth report, which highlights statistics indicating that the number of arsons at houses of worship continues to decline. Task force officials are attributing their success, in part, to continued vigilance, well-publicized arrests and ongoing prevention efforts.

In 1996, when the task force was created, there were 297 arsons, bombings or attempted bombings at our nation's houses of worship. In 1997, that number dropped to 209 incidents; in 1998, there were 165 incidents; and in 1999, there were 140. These statistics represent a 53% decrease in the rate of these incidents. According to the report, the downward trend continued this year, with 82 incidents through Aug. 15.

The task force's arrest rate of 36.2% continues to be more than twice the national average for arson cases. To date, 305 defendants have been convicted in connection with 224 arsons or bombings.

---

This report was from 2000. The other researches I've seen show that the arsons are sometimes set by racists (a number of them were black churches), and sometimes by the insane. What are your sources to show that 300 churches are burned BECAUSE the people are Christians? There have been arsons for race, for money, and for any number of other reasons. Or are they religiously motivated BECAUSE it's a church?

I have another question to ask, but that should be in a different posting.

[Jump D'Shark]

Sigh..

I am an atheist, I am an atheist because my parents were atheists just as most all Christians are Christians simply because their parents were. Muslims, Buddhists, Hindus etc etc pretty much are because their parents are. I really want to know where all this christian oppression is because while I was growing up in Texas, Alabama, California, Oklahoma and Louisiana I didn't see any any of this. I was required to take a "christian" bible study class in Alabama, pray and listen to scripture at the the beginning of the school day in every school I went to and I am not that old.

Let me tell you god, guns and football are very much ingrained in most places in America outside large cities. You wanna talk persecution, try being an atheist in bum-phuk Egypt.

Speaking of persecution, let's talk about the Puritans since they were mentioned. They basically left England because they ran out of people to oppress. From Wikipedia;

Many immigrants to New England, who were motivated by a desire for greater religious freedom, actually soon found repression under the Puritan theocracy to be far more repressive than any "oppression" of their faith that they had experienced back in Britain. (For example see: Roger Williams, Stephen Bachiller, Anne Hutchinson, Mary Dyer, etc.)

Puritan oppression, including torture and imprisonment of many leaders non-Puritan Christian sects, led to the (voluntary or involuntary) "banishment" of many Christian leaders and their followers from the Massachusetts Bay Colony. This negative impact of Puritanism on many new colonists had a positive result on American history in that it led to the founding of many new colonies - including: Rhode Island, Pennsylvania, New Jersey, Delaware, New Hampshire, and others - as religious havens that were created for devout Christians who wanted to live outside the oppressive reach of Puritan theocracy.


Andres Serrano's photograph "Piss Christ" was art. It may be repellent but it did its job very well, it is ingrained in most America's consciousness. It was designed to prompt a reaction, make those who look at it think and feel just as art is supposed to and it is remembered 18 years later. Also, because of it and other similarly sensational artwork, the funding for the National Endowment for the Arts has been drastically cut and art censored to the point where "freedom of expression" is reduced to a meaningless phrase. The artist's message wasn't about oppressing Christians or ridiculing his own strong religious beliefs. The point of the piece and many of his other works is the contrast of the beautiful made with the vulgar. If you look at his other work sans cheap religious icons you will find examples of beautiful artwork, some of which is displayed at Episcopal Cathedral of Saint John the Divine in New York City. Me, personally, I don't find the urine to be all that offensive but I do find the depiction of a man being tortured and an instrument of death being used as a religious icon to be extremely vulgar but that's just me.

What amazes me sometimes is that even though I am an atheist, I know more about the bible than many of the Christians I am surrounded by, its unbelievable really. I don't know how many times I hear the story of Daniel and the lions being held up as an example of christian persecution and it was not in any way. It is a story of a government official caught in a political scheme to eliminate him by using a law the king was duped into proclaiming and compelled to enforce when Daniel broke the law by praying. That, and the glaring fact he was Jewish, not Christian. Yeah, you know, Jewish. Old Testament= Jewish, New Testament= Christian.

I tend to think many Christians feel persecuted today because, like the Puritans who left England for the new world, they are running out of people to force their beliefs onto or they fear the idea that not everyone around them is a christian just like them and true diversity scares the crap out of them. If you want to see why I think the way I do, imagine all references to religion, god, Jesus, etc replaced by Star Trek references.
If you aren't a Star Trek fan, having strangers coming up to you and giving you the Vulcan hand sign and saying "Live long and prosper" can make you feel uncomfortable, finding badly printed copies of the Prime Directive stuck on your windshield can be annoying and some wild-eyed zealot standing on a street corner yelling instructions on how to reverse polarity on an antimatter plasma waveguide at the top of his lungs can make the world seem mad.

[Wanderwolf]

Additional point: The work in question, a photograph by Andres Serrano, was not funded by the NEA; it happened to win the Southeastern Center for Contemporary Arts' "Awards in the Visual Arts" competition, which was partially funded by the NEA.

Oh, and Ralph? Ironically for your position, the photograph was actually endorsed by Sister Wendy Beckett, art critic and nun, as a representation of society's treament of Christ and His values. (Oh, and the illustration is misleading: The actual photograph was of a tiny plastic crucifix in a glass of the artist's urine.)

Other notes:

The Christians in the Colosseum were there mostly because they stood on the temple steps and threw rocks and bottles at the people entering and leaving. (I like to call them "The First Fundamentalists".) Religious freedom, as long as it was according to the law, was a cornerstone of Roman society. (Christianity flunked, however; it had no written liturgy, it was much too young, and it preached against Rome. The only way the first Christians wouldn't have been persecuted was to be listed as a faction of Judaism. As you can guess, Jude didn't think much of the idea.)

If you're talking about the Mount Soledad Memorial Cross, you have your facts a wee bit twisted; the cross is a memorial to Korean War vets, and has not been torn down. The land upon which it stands has been deeded to the DoD, and is now a Federal Memorial, exempting it from Mr. Paulsen's vow to "remove the unmistakable symbols of the Christian religion from those public lands".

If you were referring to Mt. Helix, you're still a bit off: It's a memorial to Mary Yawkey White, mother of Cyrus Yawkey, founder of the park. And yes, the cross is still there; the land upon which it stands has been deeded to a nonprofit organization, removing it from John Murphy's "public lands" case.

The Mt. Helix cross, in short, has only been removed from the official stationery of the La Mesa government, police badges, and police cars. That's how much the ACLU can get for Murphy and his laws.

"Baby Jesus persona non grata"? Only in one case at a Chicago festival. The nativity scene was permitted, please note; their issue was with a movie about the Nativity. (I agree with Christine Kounelias, however, that any non-Christian attending something called "Christkindlmarket" likely knows it's about Christmas.)

Expelled? In Nigeria, yes. And they're targets of the local Muslim extremists. But I thought we were dealing with America here.

"Political opponents" aren't the only ones criticizing Bush on religious matters; try an evangelical with similar views to your own. That's this past November, too.

For the rest, I have no clear citations to follow; care to share?

Yours truly,

The fact-checking,

Wanderer

[Wayfarer]

I soooo shouldn't be getting into this; I should be doing homework. So I apologize ahead of time for just picking up a couple of things and then running.

What amazes me sometimes is that even though I am an atheist, I know more about the bible than many of the Christians I am surrounded by, its unbelievable really. I don't know how many times I hear the story of Daniel and the lions being held up as an example of christian persecution and it was not in any way. It is a story of a government official caught in a political scheme to eliminate him by using a law the king was duped into proclaiming and compelled to enforce when Daniel broke the law by praying. That, and the glaring fact he was Jewish, not Christian. Yeah, you know, Jewish. Old Testament= Jewish, New Testament= Christian.

I know it's a small point, but technically there's more ground for the association than that. Daniel was a man who obeyed and honored God despite what he knew it could cost him. No, what he experienced was not really persecution for what he believed - it was really power-play and jealousy. And yes, he was an Old Testament Jew rather than a New Testament Christian. However, his example of following God regardless of the cost is still a perfectly valid one for Christians to look up to and wish to follow. It also has a perfectly valid application to the potential situation of facing persecution, as it does to any other situation where the choice to follow God could end up carrying a price. The situations wouldn't have to be in any other way equivalent; the example of his steadfastness and faith is the only necessary basis for comparison. A lot of times people will skip over the reasoning and just relate the two directly, but the basis for connecting them is there.
I do grant that many Christians don't know the Bible as well as they should. It's just that the example you cited above isn't pure nonsense, though there's always the potential for nonsense in the way people handle it, as there is with just about anything.

The Christians in the Colosseum were there mostly because they stood on the temple steps and threw rocks and bottles at the people entering and leaving.

What is the source for this information?

[Wanderwolf]

The Christians in the Colosseum were there mostly because they stood on the temple steps and threw rocks and bottles at the people entering and leaving.

What is the source for this information?

<checks>

Darn. Can't produce a cite. Please consider that point withdrawn.

[Wanderwolf]

I tend to think many Christians feel persecuted today because, like the Puritans who left England for the new world, they are running out of people to force their beliefs onto or they fear the idea that not everyone around them is a christian just like them and true diversity scares the crap out of them.

A-hem?

Jump, love, that's called "blaming the victim". While true persecution after the mold of Rome doesn't happen in America today, Christianity has come in for a healthy share of ak-ak now and again.

As I occasionally point out to people: Of course Christianity isn't terribly popular with some people. We're talking about a religion that, back in the day, became a political power unto itself, with the Pope as its head of state. It had an army, and could change the course of governments. The old Catholic Church even practiced pogroms on a scale that would make Lenin green with envy, once you consider the Albigensians and the Huguenots (not to mention that long ago man, burned as a werewolf, whose main "sin" was believing the Earth had started out liquid and become solid gradually; keep in mind that werewolves, unlike witches, were burned alive).

On the behalf of the medieval barons, it even promoted an entire war just to "recapture" the city of Jerusalem by killing everyone that tried to hold on to it. Then you have the original "witch hunt", which was promoted not only by the Church hierarchy, but by the account-skimming "witch finders", whose tools included collapsible needles (for producing an "insensate" witch's mark) and chicken blood (for producing "evidence" of ritual sacrifices and sex on the altar). Even preachers came in for it; remember the "possessed" nuns of Loudun? (First tourist attraction in France: "SEE the possessed nuns of Loudun! HEAR their shocking language! WATCH as they contort their bodies into lewd and lascivious positions, their dignity revealed for all to see, controlled by the demons within them! Come one, come all! Modest donations accepted!" End result: The local abbot was burned at the stake, all because the nuns had found a "loophole" in their restrictive vows and started capitalizing on it.)

After all of that, it's going to take a while before Christianity works through the "bad karma" its followers have earned for it.

Yours truly,

The historical,

Wanderer

[Deckard Canine]

(not to mention that long ago man, burned as a werewolf, whose main "sin" was believing the Earth had started out liquid and become solid gradually; keep in mind that werewolves, unlike witches, were burned alive).

...
You might be right, but I heard a couple snaps in my head after reading that.

[NydaLynn]

Technically Jesus's birthday was probably sometime in the fall. Around the time Christianity was indorsed by the Roman governemnt, the ruler at the time changed the dates on many Christian observances to coincide with widespread pagan rituals at the time in order to help with conversion. Many such things occure as religions gain political power.