1 2 3
Like in Salem when they tied weights to peoples legs and threw them in the river. If they were a witch they would be able to escape, if they drowned, they were obviously innocent. Or when they threw them off a cliff: A witch would just fly away and the innocent would smash into the rocks below. Such a great system when the innocent die horribly and the guilty escape.
2/28/2008 4:47:00 AM
He is in severe trouble if God judges him guilty of superbia...
2/28/2008 4:53:16 AM
Innocence in this case is determined by how much you suck up to God.
2/28/2008 5:12:54 AM
Wow. Yeah, someone this deluded shouldn't be able to live. Someone should ask him to set himself on fire and see what happens...
2/28/2008 5:27:52 AM
Wow. YOU FAIL AT HISTORY.
2/28/2008 5:29:44 AM
Has there ever been a verdict that was proven correct?
2/28/2008 5:33:47 AM
All right, I accuse you of breaking the Celestial Teapot by shooting it with a laser.
Now, if you're innocent, these rusty spikes....
2/28/2008 5:35:32 AM
Iiiiiiiii... don't think trial by ordeal is well-represented in the legal casebooks. Something about them being ineffective and needlessly brutal.
2/28/2008 5:46:03 AM
"What evidence do you have that trial by ordeal wouldn't work? There's not a single case where someone was judged innocent or guilty in a trial by ordeal and then the verdict was proven wrong. If there is please bring it up."
Well, for an obvious start, ALL trials by ordeal to test people accused of witchcraft have since been "judged" as being tragically wrong, since witchcraft (in terms of spellcasting to bring about actual physical effects) is totally bogus. It is no more efficacious than prayer (in other words, worthless), and, in fact, though many people feared it going on all around them, it was almost never proved to be attempted in reality. It was just assumed to be happening.
Also, equally to the point, nobody ever confessed to being a witch without being forced into doing so; no evidence was ever produced that proved that the phenomenon of witchcraft was even real, let alone that the people accused of it were applying it themselves. In a couple of cases, up to a third of the population of a town wound up being accused of witchcraft as the torturers demanded the names of others from their victims (that's the real word here -- not witches, but victims). That left a lot of real estate up for grabs. You know who got it? The church and the professional witch hunters. Funny, that.
Do you REALLY think that women (and men) accused of being witches actually were casting spells that caused epidemics, blighted crops, caused livestock to go lame or have mutated offspring, and so on and so forth? You think this stuff is all real, that magical powers and spells exist and work?
If so, THAT is the problem. You choose to reside in the same dark fantasy world as those poor simpletons of a benighted age. However, they had no choice; they actually lived then. You, however, live in the 21st century -- so what is your excuse?
2/28/2008 5:48:45 AM
It gets worse....I call Poe.
In Salem they stood up to the vile practice of witchcraft only to be fooled by the Devil that witchcraft wasn't real.
There are still witches today, not the 'Wiccans' that's a silly fad heathen religion. Real witches are secretive. They usually pretend to be good, pious Christians so no one would suspect.
2/28/2008 5:58:59 AM
(let's go down this god road for a moment)
God could change the minds of the judge/jury or unearth some evidence of the sinner's deeds just as easily as he could make the innocent survive a fire.
However, it seems that he won't do that and prefers trial by ordeal. Sir, not only is your god promoting ignorance, but he is also, apparently, a masochist.
2/28/2008 6:03:11 AM
"If that actually happened I know God would spare me, because I am innocent."
Is this guy volunteering for a trial by ordeal!?!?!?!?!? QUICK, GET SOME KINDLING! I'll get the gasoline (consecrated, naturally).
2/28/2008 6:07:35 AM
Real witches pretend to be good pious christians so no one will suspect?
This guy is acting like a pious christian and what he thinks of as 'good'. I wonder?
2/28/2008 6:12:58 AM
christians - set others on fire to see how fucked up they [the burning people] are
some bhuddist monks - set themselves on fire to TELL people how fucked up they [the people not being burned] are
2/28/2008 6:18:23 AM
This test typically required that the accused walk a certain distance, usually nine feet, over red-hot ploughshares or holding a red-hot iron. Innocence was sometimes established by a complete lack of injury, but it was more common for the wound to be bandaged and reexamined three days later by a priest, who would pronounce that God had intervened to heal it, or that it was merely festering - in which case the suspect would be exiled or executed.
the ordeal of hot water requires the accused to dip his hand in a kettle of boiling water.
witches floated because they had renounced baptism when entering the Devil's service. Jacob Rickius claimed that they were supernaturally light, and recommended weighing them as an alternative to dunking them. King James I (and VI of Scotland) claimed in his Daemonologie that water was so pure an element that it repelled the guilty.
The ordeal of the cross was apparently introduced in the Early Middle Ages by the church in an attempt to discourage judicial duels among the Germanic peoples. As in the case of such duels, and unlike the case of most other ordeals, the accuser has to undergo the ordeal together with the accused. They stand on either side of a cross and stretch out their hands horizontally. The one to first lower his arms loses.
Franconian law prescribed that an accused was to be given dry bread and cheese blessed by a priest. If he choked on the food, he was considered guilty.
Sounds like fun to you does it?
2/28/2008 6:19:49 AM
Here's another question, when has trial by ordeal ever judged someone guilty ? They all died, didn't they...yeah, that's because the trial of ordeal, kills people. You burn 'em, they burn, you drown 'em, they drown.
2/28/2008 6:30:13 AM
I also say he's a POE!
Mi ankaux diras al vi ke li estas "POE!"
Ich sage er ist ein "POE!"
Anata hito wa POE desu.
Could it get much clearer?
2/28/2008 6:31:09 AM
2/28/2008 6:42:46 AM
I'm not Phoenix Wright, but I can see the Psyche-locks in this guy's post. The instant someone actually tried to enact trial by ordeal on him, he'd run for the hills.
2/28/2008 9:28:25 AM
If it's true, why did St Joan of Arc die?. Why were many medieval Martyrs falsely accused of heresy martyred?. Of course there was not a single case. 99% of the cases were declared guilty(guess why)and there was never a revision of the case.
2/28/2008 10:30:11 AM
Of course, there is no evidence that trial ordeal didn't work. As everybody died in the process, they couldn't appeal. And besides, if you accuse them of evident crimes such as heresy or witchcraft...........go figure.
2/28/2008 10:32:07 AM
There's not a single case where someone was judged innocent or guilty in a trial by ordeal and then the verdict was proven right. If there is please bring it up.
2/28/2008 11:54:00 AM
Didn't we decide in a previous quote that this was a Poe?
2/28/2008 12:59:25 PM
2/28/2008 2:42:45 PM
2/28/2008 2:58:42 PM
1 2 3