Witch Sues Christians Under Controversial Hate Laws

Then what you are saying is the Bible teaches witchcraft. I can't imagine that many people would agree with that definition.

Whether others agree with me or not is of no concern. The only question of importance to me is whether I am right or not. I'm not much of a Bible scholar so I can't speak to the whole of it but Jesus in Gethsemene is an example of not using prayer to alter things. He wanted out of his circumstances in a big way and he said it straight out. But he closed with "may your will be done". When he gave instructions on "this is how you should pray ..." he also gave an example of that.

Your definition is so broad ... and they obviously have nothing to do with witchcraft.

You are right. My definition is too broad. Perhaps I should have said 'intention alone' as in 'concentration on a mental construction alone.'

They try to use the supernatural to affect and effect things in the physical world, ... The power that they call on is what defines them as witches ...

Essentially I agree with that except that I don't see any true seperation between the 'physical' world and the 'supernatural' world. The word 'supernatural' is a problem. It implies something not natural or unnatural which is not the case. It is only the focused power of mind that is called on which is something that everyone has. The fact that few understand that or have much control of it doesn't change the fact that it is nothing more than a learned control of one's own mind. What could be more natural?

Supernatural refers to that which is not understood by or not under the control of ordinary people. To the mind of a primitive the use of radio waves would be supernatural and appear to be witchcraft which it is not. To the mind of a scientist witchcraft appears to be 'coincidence', 'scam', psychological manipulation or some aspect of physiology effecting physics that hasn't been understood which it isn't. The practitioners of witchcraft themselves may fully believe that they are calling on 'powers' or 'beings' that exist independently of themselves but that is also false.

They try to use the supernatural to affect and effect things in the physical world, oftentimes trying to make a specific person complete their own desires.

Again you have pointed to a problem in my definitions; you are more correct to say 'complete their own desires.' Instead of 'alter' it would have been better if I had said 'alter for personal benefit' although the 'benefit' derived might be indirect, for example; using witchcraft to make the towns crops grow better. The direct benefit is to the townspeople the indirect benefit comes from taking credit for it.

"Essentially I agree with that except that I don't see any true seperation between the 'physical' world and the
'supernatural' world. "

I agree. The separation is perceived, not actual.

"Instead of 'alter' it would have been better if I had said 'alter for personal benefit' "

That's my point. It involves using others for your own benefit, not their benefit. There is a level of control and power over others trying to be achieved through witchcraft which I believe is inappropriate. Granted, this happens outside of witchcraft, too, but it's not right in those circumstances, either.

The basis of this is who witches pray to. The Christian God does not make allowances for praying in order to have control over others -- except in the sense of praying for your safety or that of others, and that does not involve controlling others for your own beneft at their expense.

That's my point. It involves using others for your own benefit, not their benefit. There is a level of control and power over others trying to be achieved through witchcraft which I believe is inappropriate.

I have to go further than that. Witchcraft may not necessarily use others or effect others to be witchcraft but includes that. It might indeed benefit others (in at least some respects) and be done with the noblest of intentions. I would agree that witchcraft is inappropriate even if done with positive ends in mind. To do so assumes, on the part of the practitioner, that they know what is best for themselves or others. That is arrogant. Many might believe they know what is best for themselves by forcing a change in some negative circumstance but this denies the reason their circumstances exist. Cause and effect. To alter a condition without addressing the cause of it only delays and intensifies the condition. It is an attempt to deny or circumvent (same thing) reality.

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.