From: russ@wpg.com (Russell Lawrence)
Subject: Re: Don't tell the Anti-Hunters
Organization: WP Group
Date: Fri, 16 Oct 1992 23:58:24 GMT



William Christie writes: 
wc> Show me how God disproves of the way humans treat animals.

Russell Lawrence writes:
rl> Show me that your "god" really and truly disapproved of the 
rl> mistreatment of hundreds of thousands of witches, heretics, and 
rl> unbelievers during the late middle ages.  After all, your "god" 
rl> did say: "Thou shalt not suffer a witch to live".  

wc> You have been told the context and definitions of the above 
wc> statement.  It is then irrelavent to the question you pose above.  

rl> No, it's not irrelevant at all.  Your current opinions, after 
rl> all, are only your current opinions and are not necessarily 
rl> reflective of a genuine divine will.  In medieval times, 
rl> literally hundreds of prominent christian theologians read the 
rl> same bible that you've read and concluded that witch-killing was 
rl> not only acceptable in the eyes of "god", but desirable.  

wc> Your current opinions are not necessarily reflective of an open 
wc> mind when you refuse to answer questions I have asked of you (in 
wc> different posts as well as this one) and ignore what you have 
wc> already been informed of.  Yes it is irrelevant.  If you remember 
wc> the statement was used in the Old Testament and is not applicable 
wc> as a commandment for Christians...  

So you say, but your opinions won't mean much unless you can 
demonstrate that "god" has verified them in some way.

If it's so obvious that the old testament commandments don't 
apply, why were witches killed by christians in the name of god 
as recently as three hundred years ago with the full support of 
reputable theologians?  Do you have some special bible-reading 
ability that they did not possess?   Isn't it probable that you
have a different interpretation simply because you've had the
good fortune to grow up in a multi-cultural society that no
longer tolerates such intolerance?  

Overall, you seem to be saying is that your position is truthful 
just because you say it is.  However, most christians that I know 
tell me that they read the Old Testament regularly and strongly 
adhere to such codes as the "ten commandments"...  albeit not the 
one that tells them to kill witches.  The notion that one 
commandment is wrong, but the other commandments are right, 
raises doubts about the authenticity of your claims, given the 
fact that 17 centuries elapsed between the advent of the 
christian era and the demise of witchburning practices.  

wc> I showed you in my previous post what they should have been 
wc> practicing.  I would like to point out that probably (as I can 
wc> see) that statement was used as an excuse to remove people that 
wc> the Church considered political enemies...  

Perhaps.  And it may also be the case that biblical references to
the misuse of animals are used, only as an excuse, for selfish,
uncompassionate individuals who only care about themselves or 
members of their own society.

rl> Actually, there's no need to turn back the clock that far to find 
rl> abundant evidence of the misuse of divine credentials in matters 
rl> involving rights.  Roughly half of the pro-slavery books 
rl> published prior to the american Civil War were written by 
rl> clergymen who claimed to speak for "god".  

wc> Again, just because someone does something in so-and-so's name 
wc> does not mean that so-and-so agrees with them or even condones 
wc> their act.  What did these clergymen use as Biblical proof that 
wc> slavery was condoned by God?  

I can't answer this question right offhand.  Like most christians 
who claim to speak for god, they did cite biblical authority.  Of 
course, it would be an easy matter to root through the bible and 
find all sorts of supporting or conflicting evidence to justify 
support or opposition to such beliefs.

I agree that the invocation of a god's name doesn't excuse human
behavior.  What I don't understand is how we can determine who
is or isn't truly qualified to speak for "god".   On the whole,
it seems obvious to me that you have two standards of proof: a
lax standard for yourself that would permit you to interpret the
bible in a manner of your own choosing, and a rigid standard for
folks who choose to interpret the bible differently.    

As an example, you've asked me for a biblical citation that 
specifically says "Thou shalt not abuse animals".  Yet you 
yourself have been unable to supply a statement that specifically 
says, "Thou shalt not kill witches".  Given the fact that we 
don't really know what a "god" does or doesn't think about a 
specific course of action, it seems to me that the only honest 
solution is to leave gods out of the picture.  

rl> Isn't it possible...  just possible, in another hundred years  
rl> from now, that your great-grandchildren will be wondering how/why  
rl> so many christians in our day and age could turn their backs on 
rl> the suffering of non-human animals, while pretending to have 
rl> God's approval?  

wc> And isn't it possible, just possible, that whatever 
wc> great-grandchildren I have will lament the fact that someone one 
wc> hundred years ago arbitrarily decided for them that hunting was 
wc> bad because that someone didn't like it, and so because of laws 
wc> made since are not able to enjoy hunting?  

I can't speak for everyone, but most of the folks I know who
oppose hunting have done so, not because they don't like to hunt,
but because they're concerned about the thoughts and feelings of
the victims.

wc> To answer your question God does disprove of the abuse of using 
wc> God's name to commit acts God is opposed to.  You are blaming the 
wc> principle (in this case Christian faith) for the acts it's 
wc> adherents have done...  

rl> If your "god" ordered you to kill me, and you complied, would it 
rl> be most appropriate for my relatives and friends to place the
rl> responsibility on you?  or on god?  

wc> Oh boy, hypothetical question time again.  If God told me to 
wc> murder you and I did in fact murder you then they could place the 
wc> responsibility on God and myself...

Should they take your word for the claim that "god" had truly ordered
such a killing?

wc> Would you please answer my question that was left from the last post?

rl> Are you referring to this question:  
rl> Did God say, "Love thy neighbor as thyself?"
rl> My answer is, "I don't know". 

wc> No I'm referring to the one that was left at the top of both 
wc> that post and this one:  Show me how God disproves of the way 
wc> humans treat animals.

Prove to me that god specifically disapproves of witchburning.  

-- 
Russell Lawrence, WP Group, New Orleans (504) 443-5000
russ@wpg.com   uunet!wpg!russ
Newsgroups: talk.politics.animals