The Murder of Michael Servetus

The Murder of Michael Servetus

Joined: October 1st, 2006, 10:04 am

January 6th, 2011, 6:00 am #1

Just came across Servetus for the first time today; 'Sorvetus s writings (burned with author at Geneva and Vienna).
Wanted to find out more and found this.

Just felt I wanted to share.

*******************************************************************************

Michael Servetus was a Christian living in the 1500's who incurred the wrath of John Calvin and was murdered by him and his cronies for illegitimate reasons. He was accused of heresy and railroaded through a mock trial and put to death being burned alive at the stake. Yet such an atrocity was praised by even well-known Calvinists as Bullinger and others for generations.
A couple of quotes from John Calvin himself:

7 years before the incident:
"If he [Servetus] comes [to Geneva], I shall never let him go out alive if my authority has weight."
Written by John Calvin in a letter to Farel Feb. 13, 1546

During the incident
Again Calvin writes Farel in a letter dated Aug 20th 1553 where he has Servetus arrested.

"We have now new business in hand with Servetus. He intended perhaps passing through this city; for it is not yet known with what design he came. But after he had been recognized, I thought that he should be detained. My friend Nicolas summoned him on a capital charge. ... I hope that sentence of death will at least be passed upon him"
After the incident:

"Many people have accused me of such ferocious cruelty that (they allege) I would like to kill again the man I have destroyed. Not only am I indifferent to their comments, but I rejoice in the fact that they spit in my face."

"Whoever shall now contend that it is unjust to put heretics and blasphemers to death will knowingly and willingly incur their very guilt.


The strongest recorded statement from Calvin on the Servetus affair is a 1561 letter from Calvin to the Marquis Paet, high chamberlain to the King of Navarre, in which he says intolerantly:

"Honour, glory, and riches shall be the reward of your pains; but above all, do not fail to rid the country of those scoundrels, who stir up the people to revolt against us. Such monsters should be exterminated, as I have exterminated Michael Servetus the Spaniard."

Servetus' final words while being burned alive tied to a stake:

"Jesu, thou Son of the eternal God, have compassion upon me!"


Yet a heartless modern day Calvinist comments on this saying "This phrase epitomizes the essence of his Trinitarian error" for he said "Son of the eternal God" rather than "eternal Son of God"
Some Official Reasons for being burned alive:

Accused of teaching against infant baptism
Accused of defaming John Calvin
Accused of refraining from marriage for a "long time"
Accused of denying the Trinity
See Comprehensive List of Official Charges
Concerning his position on the Trinity

(See alsohttp://www.godglorified.com/michael_servetus.htm)
There were many subtle nuances of describing the Trinity, especially at the time. In speaking on the Trinity, it was "Tri-Theism" that Servetus was really against. Concerning Servetus' position on the Trinity, consider his own statements and summaries of his teachings::

"I do not separate Christ from God any more than a voice from the speaker or a ray from the sun [writes Servetus]. Christ is in the Father as a voice from the speaker. He and the Father are as the ray and the sun are one light. An amazing mystery it is that God can thus be cojoined with man and man with God. A great wonder that God has taken to himself the body of Christ that it should be his peculiar dwelling place."

By the way this is the same analogy that an early church father Tertullian gives in defending the Trinity saying, "For God sent forth the Word, as the Paraclete also declares, just as the root puts forth the tree, and the fountain the river, and the sun the ray. ... Even when the ray is shot from the sun, it is still part of the parent mass; the sun will still be in the ray, because it is a ray of the sun-there is no division of substance, but merely an extension. Thus Christ is Spirit of Spirit, and God of God, as light of light is kindled." Tertullian

"I shall admit these three things: first, this man is JESUS CHRIST; second, he is the Son of God; third, he is God."http://www.geocities.com/Athens/8937/erroribus.htm

"Christ being one with God the Father, equal in power, came down from heaven and assumed flesh as a man."

CHRIST, the Son of man, who descended from heaven, was the Word by uttering which God created the world. He became flesh as God's firstborn, and was the Son of God. He was both human and divine. God's Spirit, moving all things, operates within us as the Holy Spirit, which is a person of the Godhead. It proceeds from the Son, not as a separate being but as a ministering spirit. It is holy, one of three persons in the Godhead, and sanctifies us by dwelling within us.

Examination of the Old Testament usage of the words for God - Elohim and Jehovah - shows that both refer to Christ, as centre of all, and the essence of all things.

The eternally begotten Son was a spoken word by which God made himself known. The Hebrew shows that the whole nature of God abode in Christ as Elohim, man being blended with God. The Word was a disposition of God, who begot the Son, a visible being. The Holy Spirit also is a real being as Christ was. The Word was an actual being, creating all things, manifesting God in bodily form.

Servetus also acknowledges not writing clearly on this matter and thus his writings were misinterpreted, for which he apologizes here. His attitude shows to be far more Christlike than Calvin's bloodthirsty attitude:
All that I have lately written, in seven Books, against the received view as to the Trinity, honest reader, I now retract; not because it is untrue, but because it is incomplete, and written as though by a child for children. Yet I pray you to keep such of it as might help you to an understanding of what is to be said here. Moreover, that such a barbarous, confused,and incorrect book appear as my former one was, must be ascribed to my own lack of experience, and to the printer's carelessness. Nor would I have any Christian offended thereby, since God is wont sometimes to make his own wisdom known through the foolish instruments of the world. I beg you, therefore, to pay attention to the matter itself; for if you give heed to this, my halting words will not stand in your way. Fare you well.

The actual source of theological confusion may have been because Servetus was not a professional theologian, but a doctor. And thus the theological terms used to describe God may have had different meanings between himself and the reformed theologians. In particular it appears in his writings that he uses word "hypostasis" differently than the theologians did. For in medical terminology a "hypostasis" is the settling of blood in the lower part of an organ or the body as a result of decreased blood flow, or more generally A settling of solid particles in a fluid. But there are other definitions of this term:

1. Philosophy. The substance, essence, or underlying reality.
2. Theology a. Any of the persons of the Trinity. b. The essential person of Jesus in which his human and divine natures are united.

To Servetus, Jesus Christ was the only "hypostatis" of the Godhead in that he was the only outward manifestation - using more of the medical sense - as light is to the sun. Thus to say that each person of the Trinity was a "hypostatis" to Servetus meant more of a three-headed God - tri-theism, which he appropriately rejected. But I think this was a misunderstanding of theological terminology and less a disagreement of concepts.
But Calvin was simply too proud and hostile to try to understand Servetus. And Servetus was too unlearned when it came to theological terminology, of which he seemed to become more aware as his apology above reveals. But it was too late. Calvin was out for blood.

There is little doubt that Servetus was a Christian, but one who was purposely misinterpreted by his accusers so as to railroad him through a mock trial in order to murder him. Servetus was refused an advocate at the trial, being told with grim humor that he could lie well enough without one and was not allowed to answer a number of charges against him.

In fact in his book "CALVIN AND HIS ENEMIES" Rev. Thomas Smyth D.D admits that Servetus was not really condemned because of his doctrine, but because of the manner in which he maintained them. Meaning that he was not a man-pleaser, but spoke his opinion without respect of persons, speaking even in a condescending and common manner (much as Jesus did). In this way he offended the religious elite (much as Jesus had) and was condemned to death not because of his doctrine, but because he humiliated the proud. Yet many Calvinists simply place the blame on Servetus. If ever a poor fanatic thrust himself into the fire, says J. T. Coleridge, it was Michael Servetus. While they strive to hold John Calvin as the victim of circumstance.

This is an example not uncommon of how even popular institutional leaders in the church can end up committing atrocious crimes. Because of their elitist attitude, they cannot handle humiliation and thus react with even bloodthirsty hostility. Christ's death was one example, and Servetus' another.


http://www.bcbsr.com/topics/servetus.html
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Love
Jackie


LOVE is the Answer
Quote
Like
Share

Tim
Tim

January 6th, 2011, 6:54 am #2

Those were very confused people.
Constantine who forced in the beliefs of the Trinity murdered his own son and wife.

We live in a much different world today.
People are wiser today. Today we don't use guillotines or swords and bow and arrow. Today we just push a button and the world is robotically destroyed with ICBM's. We've come a long way, Heavens Gate, Jamestown, Pope Mobile, Global Socialism, Waco Texas, Global Economy, Internet Communications....

What more could we want? Ciber hugs where the screen reaches out and hugs you?

It's a crazy world, but I don't think the Creator is crazy. I think HE is putting a stop to it soon. But in order for that to happen HIS words must be fulfilled. But that will soon be finished. Then you will realize who Jesus is. He will return and be King of earth, based in Jerusalem, in a giant golden cube, with over 3 million cubic miles of space in it. That sounds crazy doesn't it?

Love ya Jackie
Quote
Share

Joined: October 1st, 2006, 10:04 am

January 6th, 2011, 8:08 am #3




Love
Jackie
Quote
Like
Share

Joined: March 8th, 2007, 6:53 am

January 6th, 2011, 8:19 am #4

Just came across Servetus for the first time today; 'Sorvetus s writings (burned with author at Geneva and Vienna).
Wanted to find out more and found this.

Just felt I wanted to share.

*******************************************************************************

Michael Servetus was a Christian living in the 1500's who incurred the wrath of John Calvin and was murdered by him and his cronies for illegitimate reasons. He was accused of heresy and railroaded through a mock trial and put to death being burned alive at the stake. Yet such an atrocity was praised by even well-known Calvinists as Bullinger and others for generations.
A couple of quotes from John Calvin himself:

7 years before the incident:
"If he [Servetus] comes [to Geneva], I shall never let him go out alive if my authority has weight."
Written by John Calvin in a letter to Farel Feb. 13, 1546

During the incident
Again Calvin writes Farel in a letter dated Aug 20th 1553 where he has Servetus arrested.

"We have now new business in hand with Servetus. He intended perhaps passing through this city; for it is not yet known with what design he came. But after he had been recognized, I thought that he should be detained. My friend Nicolas summoned him on a capital charge. ... I hope that sentence of death will at least be passed upon him"
After the incident:

"Many people have accused me of such ferocious cruelty that (they allege) I would like to kill again the man I have destroyed. Not only am I indifferent to their comments, but I rejoice in the fact that they spit in my face."

"Whoever shall now contend that it is unjust to put heretics and blasphemers to death will knowingly and willingly incur their very guilt.


The strongest recorded statement from Calvin on the Servetus affair is a 1561 letter from Calvin to the Marquis Paet, high chamberlain to the King of Navarre, in which he says intolerantly:

"Honour, glory, and riches shall be the reward of your pains; but above all, do not fail to rid the country of those scoundrels, who stir up the people to revolt against us. Such monsters should be exterminated, as I have exterminated Michael Servetus the Spaniard."

Servetus' final words while being burned alive tied to a stake:

"Jesu, thou Son of the eternal God, have compassion upon me!"


Yet a heartless modern day Calvinist comments on this saying "This phrase epitomizes the essence of his Trinitarian error" for he said "Son of the eternal God" rather than "eternal Son of God"
Some Official Reasons for being burned alive:

Accused of teaching against infant baptism
Accused of defaming John Calvin
Accused of refraining from marriage for a "long time"
Accused of denying the Trinity
See Comprehensive List of Official Charges
Concerning his position on the Trinity

(See alsohttp://www.godglorified.com/michael_servetus.htm)
There were many subtle nuances of describing the Trinity, especially at the time. In speaking on the Trinity, it was "Tri-Theism" that Servetus was really against. Concerning Servetus' position on the Trinity, consider his own statements and summaries of his teachings::

"I do not separate Christ from God any more than a voice from the speaker or a ray from the sun [writes Servetus]. Christ is in the Father as a voice from the speaker. He and the Father are as the ray and the sun are one light. An amazing mystery it is that God can thus be cojoined with man and man with God. A great wonder that God has taken to himself the body of Christ that it should be his peculiar dwelling place."

By the way this is the same analogy that an early church father Tertullian gives in defending the Trinity saying, "For God sent forth the Word, as the Paraclete also declares, just as the root puts forth the tree, and the fountain the river, and the sun the ray. ... Even when the ray is shot from the sun, it is still part of the parent mass; the sun will still be in the ray, because it is a ray of the sun-there is no division of substance, but merely an extension. Thus Christ is Spirit of Spirit, and God of God, as light of light is kindled." Tertullian

"I shall admit these three things: first, this man is JESUS CHRIST; second, he is the Son of God; third, he is God."http://www.geocities.com/Athens/8937/erroribus.htm

"Christ being one with God the Father, equal in power, came down from heaven and assumed flesh as a man."

CHRIST, the Son of man, who descended from heaven, was the Word by uttering which God created the world. He became flesh as God's firstborn, and was the Son of God. He was both human and divine. God's Spirit, moving all things, operates within us as the Holy Spirit, which is a person of the Godhead. It proceeds from the Son, not as a separate being but as a ministering spirit. It is holy, one of three persons in the Godhead, and sanctifies us by dwelling within us.

Examination of the Old Testament usage of the words for God - Elohim and Jehovah - shows that both refer to Christ, as centre of all, and the essence of all things.

The eternally begotten Son was a spoken word by which God made himself known. The Hebrew shows that the whole nature of God abode in Christ as Elohim, man being blended with God. The Word was a disposition of God, who begot the Son, a visible being. The Holy Spirit also is a real being as Christ was. The Word was an actual being, creating all things, manifesting God in bodily form.

Servetus also acknowledges not writing clearly on this matter and thus his writings were misinterpreted, for which he apologizes here. His attitude shows to be far more Christlike than Calvin's bloodthirsty attitude:
All that I have lately written, in seven Books, against the received view as to the Trinity, honest reader, I now retract; not because it is untrue, but because it is incomplete, and written as though by a child for children. Yet I pray you to keep such of it as might help you to an understanding of what is to be said here. Moreover, that such a barbarous, confused,and incorrect book appear as my former one was, must be ascribed to my own lack of experience, and to the printer's carelessness. Nor would I have any Christian offended thereby, since God is wont sometimes to make his own wisdom known through the foolish instruments of the world. I beg you, therefore, to pay attention to the matter itself; for if you give heed to this, my halting words will not stand in your way. Fare you well.

The actual source of theological confusion may have been because Servetus was not a professional theologian, but a doctor. And thus the theological terms used to describe God may have had different meanings between himself and the reformed theologians. In particular it appears in his writings that he uses word "hypostasis" differently than the theologians did. For in medical terminology a "hypostasis" is the settling of blood in the lower part of an organ or the body as a result of decreased blood flow, or more generally A settling of solid particles in a fluid. But there are other definitions of this term:

1. Philosophy. The substance, essence, or underlying reality.
2. Theology a. Any of the persons of the Trinity. b. The essential person of Jesus in which his human and divine natures are united.

To Servetus, Jesus Christ was the only "hypostatis" of the Godhead in that he was the only outward manifestation - using more of the medical sense - as light is to the sun. Thus to say that each person of the Trinity was a "hypostatis" to Servetus meant more of a three-headed God - tri-theism, which he appropriately rejected. But I think this was a misunderstanding of theological terminology and less a disagreement of concepts.
But Calvin was simply too proud and hostile to try to understand Servetus. And Servetus was too unlearned when it came to theological terminology, of which he seemed to become more aware as his apology above reveals. But it was too late. Calvin was out for blood.

There is little doubt that Servetus was a Christian, but one who was purposely misinterpreted by his accusers so as to railroad him through a mock trial in order to murder him. Servetus was refused an advocate at the trial, being told with grim humor that he could lie well enough without one and was not allowed to answer a number of charges against him.

In fact in his book "CALVIN AND HIS ENEMIES" Rev. Thomas Smyth D.D admits that Servetus was not really condemned because of his doctrine, but because of the manner in which he maintained them. Meaning that he was not a man-pleaser, but spoke his opinion without respect of persons, speaking even in a condescending and common manner (much as Jesus did). In this way he offended the religious elite (much as Jesus had) and was condemned to death not because of his doctrine, but because he humiliated the proud. Yet many Calvinists simply place the blame on Servetus. If ever a poor fanatic thrust himself into the fire, says J. T. Coleridge, it was Michael Servetus. While they strive to hold John Calvin as the victim of circumstance.

This is an example not uncommon of how even popular institutional leaders in the church can end up committing atrocious crimes. Because of their elitist attitude, they cannot handle humiliation and thus react with even bloodthirsty hostility. Christ's death was one example, and Servetus' another.


http://www.bcbsr.com/topics/servetus.html
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Love
Jackie


LOVE is the Answer
thanks
Quote
Like
Share

Tim
Tim

January 6th, 2011, 8:56 am #5




Love
Jackie
I don't believe mankind can do what GOD can do.

We're still working on the gravity problems....
Try walking on water, good luck.

The simplest of things we simply overcome with POWER and design and imagination.
Or rather imagination and design and power.


Quote
Share

Joined: October 1st, 2006, 10:04 am

January 6th, 2011, 9:09 am #6

Some interesting reading can be found about anti-gravity and the US of A!

If you have the time and the inclination, Tim, this is a neat web site to have a gander in.

http://www.antigravitytechnology.net/


Later....
Love
Jackie
Quote
Like
Share

Tim
Tim

January 6th, 2011, 9:09 am #7

thanks
Why was it Outstanding Bro Gerard?

OK, sorry for asking....
Quote
Share

Joined: October 1st, 2006, 10:04 am

January 6th, 2011, 9:14 am #8

Just came across Servetus for the first time today; 'Sorvetus s writings (burned with author at Geneva and Vienna).
Wanted to find out more and found this.

Just felt I wanted to share.

*******************************************************************************

Michael Servetus was a Christian living in the 1500's who incurred the wrath of John Calvin and was murdered by him and his cronies for illegitimate reasons. He was accused of heresy and railroaded through a mock trial and put to death being burned alive at the stake. Yet such an atrocity was praised by even well-known Calvinists as Bullinger and others for generations.
A couple of quotes from John Calvin himself:

7 years before the incident:
"If he [Servetus] comes [to Geneva], I shall never let him go out alive if my authority has weight."
Written by John Calvin in a letter to Farel Feb. 13, 1546

During the incident
Again Calvin writes Farel in a letter dated Aug 20th 1553 where he has Servetus arrested.

"We have now new business in hand with Servetus. He intended perhaps passing through this city; for it is not yet known with what design he came. But after he had been recognized, I thought that he should be detained. My friend Nicolas summoned him on a capital charge. ... I hope that sentence of death will at least be passed upon him"
After the incident:

"Many people have accused me of such ferocious cruelty that (they allege) I would like to kill again the man I have destroyed. Not only am I indifferent to their comments, but I rejoice in the fact that they spit in my face."

"Whoever shall now contend that it is unjust to put heretics and blasphemers to death will knowingly and willingly incur their very guilt.


The strongest recorded statement from Calvin on the Servetus affair is a 1561 letter from Calvin to the Marquis Paet, high chamberlain to the King of Navarre, in which he says intolerantly:

"Honour, glory, and riches shall be the reward of your pains; but above all, do not fail to rid the country of those scoundrels, who stir up the people to revolt against us. Such monsters should be exterminated, as I have exterminated Michael Servetus the Spaniard."

Servetus' final words while being burned alive tied to a stake:

"Jesu, thou Son of the eternal God, have compassion upon me!"


Yet a heartless modern day Calvinist comments on this saying "This phrase epitomizes the essence of his Trinitarian error" for he said "Son of the eternal God" rather than "eternal Son of God"
Some Official Reasons for being burned alive:

Accused of teaching against infant baptism
Accused of defaming John Calvin
Accused of refraining from marriage for a "long time"
Accused of denying the Trinity
See Comprehensive List of Official Charges
Concerning his position on the Trinity

(See alsohttp://www.godglorified.com/michael_servetus.htm)
There were many subtle nuances of describing the Trinity, especially at the time. In speaking on the Trinity, it was "Tri-Theism" that Servetus was really against. Concerning Servetus' position on the Trinity, consider his own statements and summaries of his teachings::

"I do not separate Christ from God any more than a voice from the speaker or a ray from the sun [writes Servetus]. Christ is in the Father as a voice from the speaker. He and the Father are as the ray and the sun are one light. An amazing mystery it is that God can thus be cojoined with man and man with God. A great wonder that God has taken to himself the body of Christ that it should be his peculiar dwelling place."

By the way this is the same analogy that an early church father Tertullian gives in defending the Trinity saying, "For God sent forth the Word, as the Paraclete also declares, just as the root puts forth the tree, and the fountain the river, and the sun the ray. ... Even when the ray is shot from the sun, it is still part of the parent mass; the sun will still be in the ray, because it is a ray of the sun-there is no division of substance, but merely an extension. Thus Christ is Spirit of Spirit, and God of God, as light of light is kindled." Tertullian

"I shall admit these three things: first, this man is JESUS CHRIST; second, he is the Son of God; third, he is God."http://www.geocities.com/Athens/8937/erroribus.htm

"Christ being one with God the Father, equal in power, came down from heaven and assumed flesh as a man."

CHRIST, the Son of man, who descended from heaven, was the Word by uttering which God created the world. He became flesh as God's firstborn, and was the Son of God. He was both human and divine. God's Spirit, moving all things, operates within us as the Holy Spirit, which is a person of the Godhead. It proceeds from the Son, not as a separate being but as a ministering spirit. It is holy, one of three persons in the Godhead, and sanctifies us by dwelling within us.

Examination of the Old Testament usage of the words for God - Elohim and Jehovah - shows that both refer to Christ, as centre of all, and the essence of all things.

The eternally begotten Son was a spoken word by which God made himself known. The Hebrew shows that the whole nature of God abode in Christ as Elohim, man being blended with God. The Word was a disposition of God, who begot the Son, a visible being. The Holy Spirit also is a real being as Christ was. The Word was an actual being, creating all things, manifesting God in bodily form.

Servetus also acknowledges not writing clearly on this matter and thus his writings were misinterpreted, for which he apologizes here. His attitude shows to be far more Christlike than Calvin's bloodthirsty attitude:
All that I have lately written, in seven Books, against the received view as to the Trinity, honest reader, I now retract; not because it is untrue, but because it is incomplete, and written as though by a child for children. Yet I pray you to keep such of it as might help you to an understanding of what is to be said here. Moreover, that such a barbarous, confused,and incorrect book appear as my former one was, must be ascribed to my own lack of experience, and to the printer's carelessness. Nor would I have any Christian offended thereby, since God is wont sometimes to make his own wisdom known through the foolish instruments of the world. I beg you, therefore, to pay attention to the matter itself; for if you give heed to this, my halting words will not stand in your way. Fare you well.

The actual source of theological confusion may have been because Servetus was not a professional theologian, but a doctor. And thus the theological terms used to describe God may have had different meanings between himself and the reformed theologians. In particular it appears in his writings that he uses word "hypostasis" differently than the theologians did. For in medical terminology a "hypostasis" is the settling of blood in the lower part of an organ or the body as a result of decreased blood flow, or more generally A settling of solid particles in a fluid. But there are other definitions of this term:

1. Philosophy. The substance, essence, or underlying reality.
2. Theology a. Any of the persons of the Trinity. b. The essential person of Jesus in which his human and divine natures are united.

To Servetus, Jesus Christ was the only "hypostatis" of the Godhead in that he was the only outward manifestation - using more of the medical sense - as light is to the sun. Thus to say that each person of the Trinity was a "hypostatis" to Servetus meant more of a three-headed God - tri-theism, which he appropriately rejected. But I think this was a misunderstanding of theological terminology and less a disagreement of concepts.
But Calvin was simply too proud and hostile to try to understand Servetus. And Servetus was too unlearned when it came to theological terminology, of which he seemed to become more aware as his apology above reveals. But it was too late. Calvin was out for blood.

There is little doubt that Servetus was a Christian, but one who was purposely misinterpreted by his accusers so as to railroad him through a mock trial in order to murder him. Servetus was refused an advocate at the trial, being told with grim humor that he could lie well enough without one and was not allowed to answer a number of charges against him.

In fact in his book "CALVIN AND HIS ENEMIES" Rev. Thomas Smyth D.D admits that Servetus was not really condemned because of his doctrine, but because of the manner in which he maintained them. Meaning that he was not a man-pleaser, but spoke his opinion without respect of persons, speaking even in a condescending and common manner (much as Jesus did). In this way he offended the religious elite (much as Jesus had) and was condemned to death not because of his doctrine, but because he humiliated the proud. Yet many Calvinists simply place the blame on Servetus. If ever a poor fanatic thrust himself into the fire, says J. T. Coleridge, it was Michael Servetus. While they strive to hold John Calvin as the victim of circumstance.

This is an example not uncommon of how even popular institutional leaders in the church can end up committing atrocious crimes. Because of their elitist attitude, they cannot handle humiliation and thus react with even bloodthirsty hostility. Christ's death was one example, and Servetus' another.


http://www.bcbsr.com/topics/servetus.html
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Love
Jackie


LOVE is the Answer
Again, just following a lead from elsewhere. This is a must read, I think. Very interesting...

The following extract is really best read at the website:
http://tripatlas.com/Book_burning
**********************************************************************

'Book burning' is the practice of ceremoniously destroying by fire one or more copies of a book or other written material. In modern times, other forms of media, such as phonograph records, video tapes, and CDs have also been ceremoniously burned, torched, or shredded. The practice, usually carried out in public, is generally motivated by moral, religious, or political objections to the material. Books can be also destroyed in secret, like millions of books in the former Communist Eastern Bloc.

Some particular cases of book burning are long and traumatically remembered - because the books destroyed were irreplaceable and their loss constituted a severe damage to cultural heritage, and/or because this instance of book burning has become emblematic of a harsh and oppressive regime.
Such were the destruction of the Library of Alexandria, the Burning of books and burying of scholars under China's Qin Dynasty, the destruction of Mayan codices by Spanish invaders, and in more recent times the book burnings by the Nazis.

Other cases are celebrated, as a triumph of righteousness. Such is the bas-relief by Giovanni Battista Maini of ''The Burning of Heretical Books'' over a side door on the façade of Santa Maria Maggiore, Rome.

Contents
Historical background
Chronology of notable book burning incidents
Chinese Philosophy books (by Emperor Qin Shi Huang)
Sorcery scrolls (by Early converts to Christianity at Ephesus)
Epicurus' book (at Paphlagonia)
Egyptian alchemy texts (by Diocletian)
Christian books (by Diocletian)
Books of Arianism (after Council of Nicaea)
The Sibylline Books (by Flavius Stilicho)
Egyptian non-conforming Christian texts (by Athanasius)
Writings of Priscillian
Repeated destruction of Alexandria libraries
Etrusca Disciplina
Nestorius' books (by Theodosius II)
Qur'anic texts (ordered by the 3rd Caliph, Uthman)
Competing prayer books (at Toledo)
Abelard forced to burn his own book (at Soissons)
Samanid Dynasty Library
Destruction of Cathar texts (Languedoc region of France)
Maimonides' philosophy (at Montpellier)
The Talmud (at Paris)
Wycliffe's books (at Prague)
Non-Catholic books (by Torquemada)
Decameron, Ovid and other "lewd" books (by Savonarola)
Over a million Arabic and Hebrew books (at Andalucia)
Tyndale's New Testament (in England)
Servetus's writings (burned with their author at Geneva)
Maya sacred books (at Yucatan)
Luther's Bible translation (in Germany)
Hobbes books (at Oxford University)
Anti-Wilhelm Tell tract (at Canton of Uri)
Religious libraries (by Robespierre)
Early braille books (at Paris)
Anti-Communist books (by Bolsheviks)
"Valley of the Squinting Windows" (at Delvin, Ireland)
Jewish, anti-Nazi and "degenerate" books (by the Nazis)
Theodore Dreiser's works (at Warsaw, Indiana)
Jorge Amado's novels (by Brazilian dictatorship)
Comic books (at Binghamton, New York)
Judaica collection at Birobidzhan (by Stalin)
Communist and "fellow traveller" books (by Senator McCarthy)
Wilhelm Reich's publications (by U.S. Food and Drug Administration)
Library of writer Pramoedya Ananta Toer (by Suharto Regime)
Burning of Jaffna library
Anti-Pinochet Dictatorship books (at Valparaiso)
The Satanic Verses (in the United Kingdom)
Bible Burning (by artist Mark Pauline)
Oriental Institute Library, Sarajevo (by Serb nationalists)
Books "contrary to the teachings of God" (at Grande Cache, Alberta)
Books of Falun Dafa Teachings
Abu Nuwas homoerotic poetry (by Egyptian Ministry of Culture)
Harry Potter books (at various American cities)
Anti-copyright anthology "Copy Me" (by Piratbyrån)
Inventory of Prospero's Books (by proprietors Tom Wayne and W.E. Leathem)
For a different motive: Guru Granth Sahib
Medieval burning of Jewish Literature



From China's 3rd century BCE Qin Dynasty to the present day, the burning of books has a long history as a tool wielded by authorities both secular and religious, in efforts to suppress dissenting or heretical views that are perceived as posing a threat to the prevailing order.

When books are ordered collected by the authorities and disposed of in private, it may not be ''book burning'', strictly speaking but the destruction of cultural and intellectual heritage is the same.

According to scholar Elaine Pagels, "In AD 367, Athanasius, the zealous bishop of Alexandria... issued an Easter letter in which he demanded that Egyptian monks destroy all such unacceptable writings, except for those he specifically listed as 'acceptable' even 'canonical' a list that constitutes the present 'New Testament'". Although Pagels cites Athanasius's Paschal letter (letter 39) for 367 CE, there is no order for monks to destroy heretical works contained in that letter [1].

Thus, heretical texts do not turn up as palimpsests, washed clean and overwritten, as pagan ones do; many early Christian texts have been as thoroughly "lost" as if they had been publicly burnt.
In his 1821 play, ''Almansor'', the German writer Heinrich Heine referring to the burning of the Muslim holy book, the Koran, during the Spanish Inquisition famously wrote:

'"Where they burn books, they will end in burning human beings."' (''"Dort, wo man Bücher verbrennt, verbrennt man am Ende auch Menschen."'')

One century later, Heine's books were among the thousands of volumes that were torched by the Nazis in Berlin's Opernplatz in an outburst that did, in fact, foreshadow the blazing ovens of the Holocaust.

Anthony Comstock's New York Society for the Suppression of Vice, founded in 1873, inscribed book burning on its seal, as a worthy goal to be achieved (see illustration at right). Comstock's total accomplishment in a long and influential career is estimated to have been the destruction of some 15 tons of books, 284,000 pounds of plates for printing such 'objectionable' books, and nearly 4,000,000 pictures. All of this material was defined as "lewd" by Comstock's very broad definition of the term which he and his associates successfully lobbied the United States Congress to incorporate in the Comstock Law.


The Ray Bradbury novel ''Fahrenheit 451'' is about a fictional future society that has institutionalized book burning. In Orwell's ''Nineteen Eighty-Four'', the euphemistically-called "memory hole" is used to burn any book or written text which is inconvenient to the regime, and there is mention of "the total destruction of all books published before 1960".

The advent of the digital age has resulted in an immense collection of written work being cataloged exclusively or primarily in digital form. The intentional deletion or removal of these works has been often referred to as a new form of book burning.


This reference is more closely related to the relationship between book burning and censorship than the systematic and categorical elimination of a particular body of literary work. This particular application of the term is often misused by embittered content creators who do not understand the rights of a hosting service or community to select and censor content located on its own services or within its community borders.

Book burning does not refer to individual censorship, but rather to an act of mass censorship, and the term is applied appropriately only when these types of digital cases are suspected to be epidemic or widespread and systemic.


**************************************************************************

The article in full at:http://tripatlas.com/Book_burning

Quote
Like
Share

Joined: October 1st, 2006, 10:04 am

January 6th, 2011, 9:17 am #9

thanks
Yes, there was something that just gripped me as I read:

"'Sorvetus s writings (burned with author at Geneva and Vienna)."

I wanted to know what a man had written that lead to his death in such a way.

I wanted more than just knowledge of this rather sad , singular little line.


Last edited by BlueJudah on January 6th, 2011, 9:17 am, edited 1 time in total.
Quote
Like
Share

Tim
Tim

January 6th, 2011, 9:50 am #10

Again, just following a lead from elsewhere. This is a must read, I think. Very interesting...

The following extract is really best read at the website:
http://tripatlas.com/Book_burning
**********************************************************************

'Book burning' is the practice of ceremoniously destroying by fire one or more copies of a book or other written material. In modern times, other forms of media, such as phonograph records, video tapes, and CDs have also been ceremoniously burned, torched, or shredded. The practice, usually carried out in public, is generally motivated by moral, religious, or political objections to the material. Books can be also destroyed in secret, like millions of books in the former Communist Eastern Bloc.

Some particular cases of book burning are long and traumatically remembered - because the books destroyed were irreplaceable and their loss constituted a severe damage to cultural heritage, and/or because this instance of book burning has become emblematic of a harsh and oppressive regime.
Such were the destruction of the Library of Alexandria, the Burning of books and burying of scholars under China's Qin Dynasty, the destruction of Mayan codices by Spanish invaders, and in more recent times the book burnings by the Nazis.

Other cases are celebrated, as a triumph of righteousness. Such is the bas-relief by Giovanni Battista Maini of ''The Burning of Heretical Books'' over a side door on the façade of Santa Maria Maggiore, Rome.

Contents
Historical background
Chronology of notable book burning incidents
Chinese Philosophy books (by Emperor Qin Shi Huang)
Sorcery scrolls (by Early converts to Christianity at Ephesus)
Epicurus' book (at Paphlagonia)
Egyptian alchemy texts (by Diocletian)
Christian books (by Diocletian)
Books of Arianism (after Council of Nicaea)
The Sibylline Books (by Flavius Stilicho)
Egyptian non-conforming Christian texts (by Athanasius)
Writings of Priscillian
Repeated destruction of Alexandria libraries
Etrusca Disciplina
Nestorius' books (by Theodosius II)
Qur'anic texts (ordered by the 3rd Caliph, Uthman)
Competing prayer books (at Toledo)
Abelard forced to burn his own book (at Soissons)
Samanid Dynasty Library
Destruction of Cathar texts (Languedoc region of France)
Maimonides' philosophy (at Montpellier)
The Talmud (at Paris)
Wycliffe's books (at Prague)
Non-Catholic books (by Torquemada)
Decameron, Ovid and other "lewd" books (by Savonarola)
Over a million Arabic and Hebrew books (at Andalucia)
Tyndale's New Testament (in England)
Servetus's writings (burned with their author at Geneva)
Maya sacred books (at Yucatan)
Luther's Bible translation (in Germany)
Hobbes books (at Oxford University)
Anti-Wilhelm Tell tract (at Canton of Uri)
Religious libraries (by Robespierre)
Early braille books (at Paris)
Anti-Communist books (by Bolsheviks)
"Valley of the Squinting Windows" (at Delvin, Ireland)
Jewish, anti-Nazi and "degenerate" books (by the Nazis)
Theodore Dreiser's works (at Warsaw, Indiana)
Jorge Amado's novels (by Brazilian dictatorship)
Comic books (at Binghamton, New York)
Judaica collection at Birobidzhan (by Stalin)
Communist and "fellow traveller" books (by Senator McCarthy)
Wilhelm Reich's publications (by U.S. Food and Drug Administration)
Library of writer Pramoedya Ananta Toer (by Suharto Regime)
Burning of Jaffna library
Anti-Pinochet Dictatorship books (at Valparaiso)
The Satanic Verses (in the United Kingdom)
Bible Burning (by artist Mark Pauline)
Oriental Institute Library, Sarajevo (by Serb nationalists)
Books "contrary to the teachings of God" (at Grande Cache, Alberta)
Books of Falun Dafa Teachings
Abu Nuwas homoerotic poetry (by Egyptian Ministry of Culture)
Harry Potter books (at various American cities)
Anti-copyright anthology "Copy Me" (by Piratbyrån)
Inventory of Prospero's Books (by proprietors Tom Wayne and W.E. Leathem)
For a different motive: Guru Granth Sahib
Medieval burning of Jewish Literature



From China's 3rd century BCE Qin Dynasty to the present day, the burning of books has a long history as a tool wielded by authorities both secular and religious, in efforts to suppress dissenting or heretical views that are perceived as posing a threat to the prevailing order.

When books are ordered collected by the authorities and disposed of in private, it may not be ''book burning'', strictly speaking but the destruction of cultural and intellectual heritage is the same.

According to scholar Elaine Pagels, "In AD 367, Athanasius, the zealous bishop of Alexandria... issued an Easter letter in which he demanded that Egyptian monks destroy all such unacceptable writings, except for those he specifically listed as 'acceptable' even 'canonical' a list that constitutes the present 'New Testament'". Although Pagels cites Athanasius's Paschal letter (letter 39) for 367 CE, there is no order for monks to destroy heretical works contained in that letter [1].

Thus, heretical texts do not turn up as palimpsests, washed clean and overwritten, as pagan ones do; many early Christian texts have been as thoroughly "lost" as if they had been publicly burnt.
In his 1821 play, ''Almansor'', the German writer Heinrich Heine referring to the burning of the Muslim holy book, the Koran, during the Spanish Inquisition famously wrote:

'"Where they burn books, they will end in burning human beings."' (''"Dort, wo man Bücher verbrennt, verbrennt man am Ende auch Menschen."'')

One century later, Heine's books were among the thousands of volumes that were torched by the Nazis in Berlin's Opernplatz in an outburst that did, in fact, foreshadow the blazing ovens of the Holocaust.

Anthony Comstock's New York Society for the Suppression of Vice, founded in 1873, inscribed book burning on its seal, as a worthy goal to be achieved (see illustration at right). Comstock's total accomplishment in a long and influential career is estimated to have been the destruction of some 15 tons of books, 284,000 pounds of plates for printing such 'objectionable' books, and nearly 4,000,000 pictures. All of this material was defined as "lewd" by Comstock's very broad definition of the term which he and his associates successfully lobbied the United States Congress to incorporate in the Comstock Law.


The Ray Bradbury novel ''Fahrenheit 451'' is about a fictional future society that has institutionalized book burning. In Orwell's ''Nineteen Eighty-Four'', the euphemistically-called "memory hole" is used to burn any book or written text which is inconvenient to the regime, and there is mention of "the total destruction of all books published before 1960".

The advent of the digital age has resulted in an immense collection of written work being cataloged exclusively or primarily in digital form. The intentional deletion or removal of these works has been often referred to as a new form of book burning.


This reference is more closely related to the relationship between book burning and censorship than the systematic and categorical elimination of a particular body of literary work. This particular application of the term is often misused by embittered content creators who do not understand the rights of a hosting service or community to select and censor content located on its own services or within its community borders.

Book burning does not refer to individual censorship, but rather to an act of mass censorship, and the term is applied appropriately only when these types of digital cases are suspected to be epidemic or widespread and systemic.


**************************************************************************

The article in full at:http://tripatlas.com/Book_burning

I feel this is dear to you heart Jackie, and also mine.

I have a collection of old books from 1800's and early 1900's that I treasure.
School books and Bibles and Dictionaries.

Book burning is forbidden in my home.
Yet my wife wants me the throw them in the trash!

To see threw the eyes of past people is wonderful to me.


Quote
Share