Discussion:
Jesus never existed?
(too old to reply)
Religion is a Lie
2003-11-26 22:09:09 UTC
Permalink
Jesus never existed. Christianity is based on a work of fiction -
altered, expanded, corrupted, etc. The Paulinian description of the
spread of Christianity in the 1st cent. AD. was written c. 140 AD - it
is complete fiction. There is no evidence that Christianity existed in
the 1st cent AD - because it didn't!

Christianity as we know it today stems primarily from the machinations
of the Roman Emperor Constantine early in the 4th cent AD. It was him
who ordered the bible to be compiled. All the property and sacred texts
of the numerous Christian sects that existed at the time was given to
the Catholic Church. Eusebius, a Catholic scholar, was commissioned to
produce 50 copies of the bible for distribution throughout the churches
of Constantinople, Constantine's capital. Constantine himself was NOT A
CHRISTIAN!

The big question, the question in my mind, is - who was the author who
invented the character Jesus?

I, personally, have no complaints about the moral teachings of those
parts of the gospel story that I think were in the original - but I do
object, most strongly, to much of the later additional material,
insertions, corruptions, etc., that other hands managed to get accepted
as "inspired".

Newton's Cat <***@my-deja.com>
in Message-ID: <8p5vi2$ft$***@nnrp1.deja.com>
georgann
2003-11-26 22:24:48 UTC
Permalink
Post by Religion is a Lie
Jesus never existed. Christianity is based on a work of fiction -
altered, expanded, corrupted, etc.
georgann, Teflon/Bulova apologist wrote:

Oh grow up little boy.

Why does everyone think to be properly introduced to the alt.atheism
newsgroup they have to do this same shtick on Christians and Jesus Christ?

Don't you see how obvious you are? How desperate you look?

--
(`'·.¸(`'·.¸(`'·.¸ ¸.·'´)¸.·'´)¸.·'´)
«´¨`·.¸¸ ¸¸.·´¨ `»

All your prophecy are belong to Christ!

(¸.·'´(¸.·'´(¸.·'´ `'·.¸)`'·.¸)`'·.¸)
Blast Femur
2003-11-27 05:52:15 UTC
Permalink
Post by georgann
Post by Religion is a Lie
Jesus never existed. Christianity is based on a work of fiction -
altered, expanded, corrupted, etc.
Oh grow up little boy.
Why does everyone think to be properly introduced to the alt.atheism
newsgroup they have to do this same shtick on Christians and Jesus Christ?
Because Christianity and Jesus Christ *are* just that. A schtick.
Post by georgann
Don't you see how obvious you are? How desperate you look?
Et tu, Brute.
--
Blast Femur

______________

"We look at the ancient Greeks with their gods on a mountain top throwing
lightning bolts and say, 'Those ancient Greeks. They were so silly. So
primitive and naive. Not like our religions. We have burning bushes
talking to people and guys walking on water. We're ...sophisticated.'"

-Paul Provenza
Jon Davis
2003-11-26 23:31:10 UTC
Permalink
*plonk* wheeee!!
Post by Religion is a Lie
Jesus never existed. Christianity is based on a work of fiction -
altered, expanded, corrupted, etc. The Paulinian description of the
spread of Christianity in the 1st cent. AD. was written c. 140 AD - it
is complete fiction. There is no evidence that Christianity existed in
the 1st cent AD - because it didn't!
Christianity as we know it today stems primarily from the machinations
of the Roman Emperor Constantine early in the 4th cent AD. It was him
who ordered the bible to be compiled. All the property and sacred texts
of the numerous Christian sects that existed at the time was given to
the Catholic Church. Eusebius, a Catholic scholar, was commissioned to
produce 50 copies of the bible for distribution throughout the churches
of Constantinople, Constantine's capital. Constantine himself was NOT A
CHRISTIAN!
The big question, the question in my mind, is - who was the author who
invented the character Jesus?
I, personally, have no complaints about the moral teachings of those
parts of the gospel story that I think were in the original - but I do
object, most strongly, to much of the later additional material,
insertions, corruptions, etc., that other hands managed to get accepted
as "inspired".
Newton Joseph
2003-11-27 00:31:07 UTC
Permalink
Was Jesus a real person? Read;

Ancient Myth and Modern Life by Gerald A. Larue

The Christ Myth by Nicholas Carter

Belief and Make Believe by G.A.Wells

Did Jesus Exist? By G.A. Wells

The Jesus Idea by Arnold M. Rothstein

The Jesus Puzzle by Earl Doherty

Jesus Outside the Bible by. Joseph Hoffman

Jesus in History and Myth by Joseph Hoffman and Gerald A. Larue

What's in a Name by G.A. Wells

Who was Jesus? G.A. Wells

The Myth of the Resurrection by Joseph McCabe

Pagan Christs by J.M. Robertson

The Historical Evidence for Jesus by G.A. Wells

They all generally concur with one another. Now, my point is
that educated and intelligent priests are more or less familiar with these
books and yet they believe. Which proves to me that their life long
conditioning makes them mentally disturbed to believe that these mythical
tales are true.

Newton
JTEM
2003-11-27 01:44:46 UTC
Permalink
Post by Newton Joseph
Was Jesus a real person?
Who cares? Honestly.
Roger Pearse
2003-11-27 16:11:04 UTC
Permalink
Post by Newton Joseph
Was Jesus a real person? Read;
Ancient Myth and Modern Life by Gerald A. Larue
The Christ Myth by Nicholas Carter
Belief and Make Believe by G.A.Wells
Did Jesus Exist? By G.A. Wells
The Jesus Idea by Arnold M. Rothstein
The Jesus Puzzle by Earl Doherty
Jesus Outside the Bible by. Joseph Hoffman
Jesus in History and Myth by Joseph Hoffman and Gerald A. Larue
What's in a Name by G.A. Wells
Who was Jesus? G.A. Wells
The Myth of the Resurrection by Joseph McCabe
Pagan Christs by J.M. Robertson
The Historical Evidence for Jesus by G.A. Wells
They all generally concur with one another.
A certain repetition of names, there! No wonder Mr. Wells agrees with
other books by Mr. Wells. Mind you, I'm not sure why the religious
maunderings of a retired professor of German should be of interest to
anyone.
Post by Newton Joseph
Now, my point isthat educated and intelligent priests are more or less
familiar with these books and yet they believe. Which proves to me that their
life long conditioning makes them mentally disturbed to believe that these
mythical tales are true.
I don't think anyone outside a handful of cranks bothers with these
books, or the other atheist pamphlets like them. The question you
need to ask is not why 'priests' ignore them, but why educated people
of all classes and religions ignore them, and in particular scholars
ignore them.

The answer, btw, is that they are pieces of special pleading, one and
all. No sensible person doubts that some guy with a beard and a towel
on his head was doing the rounds on a soapbox in 30AD. That's how
every ideological movement starts. (The towel is optional; the beard
seems mandatory).

Whether he was the Son of God is another question, which is treated at
length with much more disagreement, or, in some cases, envy. Don't
try feeding the 5000 at home, folks.

All the best,

Roger Pearse
angelicusrex
2003-11-27 03:52:32 UTC
Permalink
Post by Religion is a Lie
Jesus never existed. Christianity is based on a work of fiction -
altered, expanded, corrupted, etc.
Can you prove this? There is a lot of archaelogical evidence that
Christianity was well established in the 1st Century A.D. Writers mention
them, records of Rome mention them, there are artifacts that are Christian.
Post by Religion is a Lie
The Paulinian description of the
spread of Christianity in the 1st cent. AD. was written c. 140 AD -
Pauline doctrine is not the only mention of Jesus.
Post by Religion is a Lie
it
is complete fiction. There is no evidence that Christianity existed in
the 1st cent AD - because it didn't!
But there is evidence. As I said.
Post by Religion is a Lie
Christianity as we know it today stems primarily from the machinations
of the Roman Emperor Constantine early in the 4th cent AD. It was him
who ordered the bible to be compiled.
From gospels and letters extent and written in the 1st Century A.D. The
first Century is the year 1 to 100. Do you really think it was created in a
vacuum out of the whole cloth?
Post by Religion is a Lie
All the property and sacred texts
of the numerous Christian sects that existed at the time was given to
the Catholic Church. Eusebius, a Catholic scholar, was commissioned to
produce 50 copies of the bible for distribution throughout the churches
of Constantinople, Constantine's capital. Constantine himself was NOT A
CHRISTIAN!
Constantine was the Head of the Christian Church. That's why he was making
the Bishops find a common ground. They didn't. Not for some time afterwards.
Some still don't agree.
Post by Religion is a Lie
The big question, the question in my mind, is - who was the author who
invented the character Jesus?
Jesus was a real person.
Post by Religion is a Lie
I, personally, have no complaints about the moral teachings of those
parts of the gospel story that I think were in the original - but I do
object, most strongly, to much of the later additional material,
insertions, corruptions, etc., that other hands managed to get accepted
as "inspired".
You seem to be deriding Catholicism, not Christianity. The Church of Jesus
was headed by his own brother, James and by his disciple Peter. Now, if
Jesus never existed, according to you, how could anything in the Gospels be
true? They would be complete fiction, as you said. Are you drunk or on
drugs?

Saint
Blast Femur
2003-11-27 06:02:23 UTC
Permalink
Post by angelicusrex
Post by Religion is a Lie
Jesus never existed. Christianity is based on a work of fiction -
altered, expanded, corrupted, etc.
Can you prove this? There is a lot of archaelogical evidence that
Christianity was well established in the 1st Century A.D. Writers
mention them, records of Rome mention them, there are artifacts that
are Christian.
Cites please. Prove this.
Post by angelicusrex
Post by Religion is a Lie
The Paulinian description of the
spread of Christianity in the 1st cent. AD. was written c. 140 AD -
Pauline doctrine is not the only mention of Jesus.
Right, he is mentioned throughout the NT. But try to find him in the
real world...
Post by angelicusrex
Post by Religion is a Lie
it
is complete fiction. There is no evidence that Christianity existed
in the 1st cent AD - because it didn't!
But there is evidence. As I said.
Once again, cites please. I cannot accept your assertion as is.

<snip>
--
Blast Femur

______________

"We look at the ancient Greeks with their gods on a mountain top throwing
lightning bolts and say, 'Those ancient Greeks. They were so silly. So
primitive and naive. Not like our religions. We have burning bushes
talking to people and guys walking on water. We're ...sophisticated.'"

-Paul Provenza
Christians Kill
2003-11-28 07:24:58 UTC
Permalink
Post by angelicusrex
Jesus was a real person.
Where is the evidence for your claim?

-
Science can teach us, and I think our own hearts can teach us, no
longer to look around for imaginary supports, no longer to invent
allies in the sky, but rather to look to our own efforts here below to
make this world a fit place to live in, instead of the sort of place
that the churches in all these centuries have made it.
--Bertrand Russell
Dr. Jason Gastrich
2003-11-28 07:26:29 UTC
Permalink
Post by Christians Kill
Post by angelicusrex
Jesus was a real person.
Where is the evidence for your claim?
The gospels. Christmas. Josephus. The miracles I've done in His name.
The Holy Spirit He gave me that lives within me. The inerrant Word of God.

Sincerely,
Jason Gastrich
--
The Awesome, Saving Gospel of God
http://gospel.jcsm.org
Are you saved? Read the gospel and make sure!
Ron Baker
2003-11-28 14:03:55 UTC
Permalink
Post by Dr. Jason Gastrich
Post by Christians Kill
Post by angelicusrex
Jesus was a real person.
Where is the evidence for your claim?
The gospels. Christmas. Josephus. The miracles I've done in His name.
The Holy Spirit He gave me that lives within me. The inerrant Word of God.
Interesting.

What evidence is Flavius Josephus?

What miracles have you done in His name?

Is every word in the bible literally true?
Dr. Jason Gastrich
2003-11-28 22:38:25 UTC
Permalink
Post by Ron Baker
Post by Dr. Jason Gastrich
Post by Christians Kill
Post by angelicusrex
Jesus was a real person.
Where is the evidence for your claim?
The gospels. Christmas. Josephus. The miracles I've done in His
name. The Holy Spirit He gave me that lives within me. The inerrant
Word of God.
Interesting.
What evidence is Flavius Josephus?
Josephus is a historian that recorded the existence of Jesus.
Post by Ron Baker
What miracles have you done in His name?
I healed a man's epilepsy in Jesus' name.
Post by Ron Baker
Is every word in the bible literally true?
Every word is true. Not every passage should be taken literally, though.

God bless,
Jason
Christopher A. Lee
2003-11-28 22:52:14 UTC
Permalink
Post by Dr. Jason Gastrich
Post by Ron Baker
Post by Dr. Jason Gastrich
Post by Christians Kill
Post by angelicusrex
Jesus was a real person.
Where is the evidence for your claim?
The gospels. Christmas. Josephus. The miracles I've done in His
name. The Holy Spirit He gave me that lives within me. The inerrant
Word of God.
Interesting.
What evidence is Flavius Josephus?
Josephus is a historian that recorded the existence of Jesus.
Josephus is a historian into whose writing an out-of-context mention
of Jesus was inserted using Christian description and language which
makes it very doubtful that he wrote it as he was Jewish.
Post by Dr. Jason Gastrich
Post by Ron Baker
What miracles have you done in His name?
I healed a man's epilepsy in Jesus' name.
Objective evidence and medical records?
Post by Dr. Jason Gastrich
Post by Ron Baker
Is every word in the bible literally true?
Every word is true. Not every passage should be taken literally, though.
Only if you ignore all the internal and external contradicytions.
Post by Dr. Jason Gastrich
God bless,
Who farted?
Post by Dr. Jason Gastrich
Jason
Dr. Jason Gastrich
2003-11-29 00:57:02 UTC
Permalink
Post by Christopher A. Lee
Post by Dr. Jason Gastrich
Post by Ron Baker
Post by Dr. Jason Gastrich
Post by Christians Kill
Post by angelicusrex
Jesus was a real person.
Where is the evidence for your claim?
The gospels. Christmas. Josephus. The miracles I've done in His
name. The Holy Spirit He gave me that lives within me. The
inerrant Word of God.
Interesting.
What evidence is Flavius Josephus?
Josephus is a historian that recorded the existence of Jesus.
Josephus is a historian into whose writing an out-of-context mention
of Jesus was inserted using Christian description and language which
makes it very doubtful that he wrote it as he was Jewish.
This is an unsubstantiated theory.
Post by Christopher A. Lee
Post by Dr. Jason Gastrich
Post by Ron Baker
What miracles have you done in His name?
I healed a man's epilepsy in Jesus' name.
Objective evidence and medical records?
This wasn't done inside a hospital. It was done on a street corner. In the
rest of my experience with this man, he never had another seizure. Glory to
God.
Post by Christopher A. Lee
Post by Dr. Jason Gastrich
Post by Ron Baker
Is every word in the bible literally true?
Every word is true. Not every passage should be taken literally, though.
Only if you ignore all the internal and external contradicytions.
Good luck producing one. The people at alt.atheism have been trying for
months, but they haven't had any luck.

Sincerely,
Jason
Jos Flachs
2003-11-29 01:41:50 UTC
Permalink
Post by Dr. Jason Gastrich
Post by Christopher A. Lee
Josephus is a historian into whose writing an out-of-context mention
of Jesus was inserted using Christian description and language which
makes it very doubtful that he wrote it as he was Jewish.
This is an unsubstantiated theory.
Then kindly proof it to be so.
Post by Dr. Jason Gastrich
Post by Christopher A. Lee
Post by Dr. Jason Gastrich
Post by Ron Baker
What miracles have you done in His name?
I healed a man's epilepsy in Jesus' name.
Objective evidence and medical records?
This wasn't done inside a hospital. It was done on a street corner. In the
rest of my experience with this man, he never had another seizure. Glory to
God.
So, you practice medicine without an education or a license. In my
country you'd be doing jail time for that.
Post by Dr. Jason Gastrich
Post by Christopher A. Lee
Post by Dr. Jason Gastrich
Post by Ron Baker
Is every word in the bible literally true?
Every word is true. Not every passage should be taken literally, though.
Only if you ignore all the internal and external contradicytions.
Good luck producing one. The people at alt.atheism have been trying for
months, but they haven't had any luck.
"The Flood! The Flood!"
Christopher A. Lee
2003-11-29 02:39:13 UTC
Permalink
Post by Dr. Jason Gastrich
Post by Christopher A. Lee
Post by Dr. Jason Gastrich
Post by Ron Baker
Post by Dr. Jason Gastrich
Post by Christians Kill
Post by angelicusrex
Jesus was a real person.
Where is the evidence for your claim?
The gospels. Christmas. Josephus. The miracles I've done in His
name. The Holy Spirit He gave me that lives within me. The
inerrant Word of God.
Interesting.
What evidence is Flavius Josephus?
Josephus is a historian that recorded the existence of Jesus.
Josephus is a historian into whose writing an out-of-context mention
of Jesus was inserted using Christian description and language which
makes it very doubtful that he wrote it as he was Jewish.
This is an unsubstantiated theory.
Stop lying.

Read it for yourself and and then tell me.
Post by Dr. Jason Gastrich
Post by Christopher A. Lee
Post by Dr. Jason Gastrich
Post by Ron Baker
What miracles have you done in His name?
I healed a man's epilepsy in Jesus' name.
Objective evidence and medical records?
This wasn't done inside a hospital. It was done on a street corner. In the
rest of my experience with this man, he never had another seizure.
Then all we have is the word of a demonstrated liar. How convenient.
Post by Dr. Jason Gastrich
Glory to
God.
Fuck you and the god you rode in on.
Post by Dr. Jason Gastrich
Post by Christopher A. Lee
Post by Dr. Jason Gastrich
Post by Ron Baker
Is every word in the bible literally true?
Every word is true. Not every passage should be taken literally, though.
Only if you ignore all the internal and external contradicytions.
Good luck producing one. The people at alt.atheism have been trying for
months, but they haven't had any luck.
Stop lying.
Post by Dr. Jason Gastrich
Sincerely,
Hardly.
Post by Dr. Jason Gastrich
Jason
Don Kresch
2003-11-28 23:22:43 UTC
Permalink
In alt.atheism on Fri, 28 Nov 2003 22:38:25 GMT, "Dr. Jason Gastrich"
Post by Dr. Jason Gastrich
Post by Ron Baker
Post by Dr. Jason Gastrich
Post by Christians Kill
Post by angelicusrex
Jesus was a real person.
Where is the evidence for your claim?
The gospels. Christmas. Josephus. The miracles I've done in His
name. The Holy Spirit He gave me that lives within me. The inerrant
Word of God.
Interesting.
What evidence is Flavius Josephus?
Josephus is a historian that recorded the existence of Jesus.
No, he didn't.
Post by Dr. Jason Gastrich
Post by Ron Baker
What miracles have you done in His name?
I healed a man's epilepsy in Jesus' name.
No, you didn't. You don't "heal" epilepsy, you fucking idiot.
Post by Dr. Jason Gastrich
Post by Ron Baker
Is every word in the bible literally true?
Every word is true.
So bats are birds?
Post by Dr. Jason Gastrich
Not every passage should be taken literally, though.
Then not every word is true.

You are such a fucking idiot that you don't even know when you've
contradicted yourself.


Don
---
aa #51, Knight of BAAWA, DNRC o-, Member of the [H]orde
Atheist Minister for St. Dogbert.

"No being is so important that he can usurp the rights of another"
Picard to Data/Graves "The Schizoid Man"
angelicusrex
2003-11-29 00:01:48 UTC
Permalink
Calling people fucking idiots or reducing their faith to a joke is NOT valid
argumentation and simply shows your own inability to actually bring to bear
evidence or proofs of the validity of your own arguments.

Saint
Post by Don Kresch
In alt.atheism on Fri, 28 Nov 2003 22:38:25 GMT, "Dr. Jason Gastrich"
Post by Dr. Jason Gastrich
Post by Ron Baker
Post by Dr. Jason Gastrich
Post by Christians Kill
Post by angelicusrex
Jesus was a real person.
Where is the evidence for your claim?
The gospels. Christmas. Josephus. The miracles I've done in His
name. The Holy Spirit He gave me that lives within me. The inerrant
Word of God.
Interesting.
What evidence is Flavius Josephus?
Josephus is a historian that recorded the existence of Jesus.
No, he didn't.
Post by Dr. Jason Gastrich
Post by Ron Baker
What miracles have you done in His name?
I healed a man's epilepsy in Jesus' name.
No, you didn't. You don't "heal" epilepsy, you fucking idiot.
Post by Dr. Jason Gastrich
Post by Ron Baker
Is every word in the bible literally true?
Every word is true.
So bats are birds?
Post by Dr. Jason Gastrich
Not every passage should be taken literally, though.
Then not every word is true.
You are such a fucking idiot that you don't even know when you've
contradicted yourself.
Don
---
aa #51, Knight of BAAWA, DNRC o-, Member of the [H]orde
Atheist Minister for St. Dogbert.
"No being is so important that he can usurp the rights of another"
Picard to Data/Graves "The Schizoid Man"
Don Kresch
2003-11-29 00:57:28 UTC
Permalink
In alt.atheism on Fri, 28 Nov 2003 17:01:48 -0700, "angelicusrex"
Post by angelicusrex
Calling people fucking idiots or reducing their faith to a joke is NOT valid
argumentation
It is when the person in question:

1. Is a craven coward.
2. Proffers no evidence.
3. Believes something so fucking stupid that only a fucking idiot
would believe it.

That sums up Jason.
Post by angelicusrex
Post by Don Kresch
In alt.atheism on Fri, 28 Nov 2003 22:38:25 GMT, "Dr. Jason Gastrich"
Post by Dr. Jason Gastrich
Post by Ron Baker
Post by Dr. Jason Gastrich
Post by Christians Kill
Post by angelicusrex
Jesus was a real person.
Where is the evidence for your claim?
The gospels. Christmas. Josephus. The miracles I've done in His
name. The Holy Spirit He gave me that lives within me. The inerrant
Word of God.
Interesting.
What evidence is Flavius Josephus?
Josephus is a historian that recorded the existence of Jesus.
No, he didn't.
Post by Dr. Jason Gastrich
Post by Ron Baker
What miracles have you done in His name?
I healed a man's epilepsy in Jesus' name.
No, you didn't. You don't "heal" epilepsy, you fucking idiot.
Post by Dr. Jason Gastrich
Post by Ron Baker
Is every word in the bible literally true?
Every word is true.
So bats are birds?
Post by Dr. Jason Gastrich
Not every passage should be taken literally, though.
Then not every word is true.
You are such a fucking idiot that you don't even know when you've
contradicted yourself.
Don
---
aa #51, Knight of BAAWA, DNRC o-, Member of the [H]orde
Atheist Minister for St. Dogbert.
"No being is so important that he can usurp the rights of another"
Picard to Data/Graves "The Schizoid Man"
---
aa #51, Knight of BAAWA, DNRC o-, Member of the [H]orde
Atheist Minister for St. Dogbert.

"No being is so important that he can usurp the rights of another"
Picard to Data/Graves "The Schizoid Man"
JTEM
2003-11-29 04:19:17 UTC
Permalink
Post by angelicusrex
Calling people fucking idiots or reducing their faith
to a joke is NOT valid argumentation
Christians do this every day and never so much as acknowledge
it.

There are churches that don't see an issue with anybody being
gay, and they want to see their gay members enjoying marriage
as much as their straight members.

But "Christians" devalue thier beliefs. They say that they don't
count, that their beliefs don't matter.

There is a lot of religious persecution in the United States, and
all of it comes from Christians. Christians don't like Jews...
Christians don't like Muslims... Christians don't even like other
Christians, Catholics for example...

There has never been a single religious minority persecuted by
atheists here in the United States, but there's been no shortage of
discrimination & persecution heaped on religious minorities....

by Christians.
Douglas Berry
2003-11-29 08:46:32 UTC
Permalink
In alt.atheism on Fri, 28 Nov 2003 22:38:25 GMT, "Dr. Jason Gastrich"
Post by Dr. Jason Gastrich
I healed a man's epilepsy in Jesus' name.
Oh, really? I'm an epileptic myself. I have a few questions..

1. What type of epilepsy did he suffer from?

2. What type of seizures did he evidence?

3. What was his mean time between events?

4. What medications, and at what dosages?

5. How did he withfraw from the anti-convulsants?

6. What medical follow-up was undertaken?

7. How can we contact this man and his neurologist?
--

Douglas Berry Do the OBVIOUS thing to send e-mail
Atheist #2147, Atheist Vet #5

Ezekiel 13:20 "Wherefore thus saith the
Lord GOD; Behold, I am against your pillows"
Dr. Jason Gastrich
2003-11-29 08:53:20 UTC
Permalink
Post by Don Kresch
In alt.atheism on Fri, 28 Nov 2003 22:38:25 GMT, "Dr. Jason Gastrich"
Post by Dr. Jason Gastrich
I healed a man's epilepsy in Jesus' name.
Oh, really? I'm an epileptic myself. I have a few questions..
1. What type of epilepsy did he suffer from?
2. What type of seizures did he evidence?
3. What was his mean time between events?
4. What medications, and at what dosages?
5. How did he withfraw from the anti-convulsants?
6. What medical follow-up was undertaken?
7. How can we contact this man and his neurologist?
I'm sorry, but I don't have the answers to these questions. If you think
about it, they don't seem like the things a person who bumped into another
person once or twice a week, at the gym, would ask or know. I'm not a
medical doctor. I'm a person who prayed for this man to be healed.

I hope and pray that you can be healed from your epilepsy.

God bless,
Jason
Don Kresch
2003-11-29 14:07:49 UTC
Permalink
In alt.atheism on Sat, 29 Nov 2003 08:53:20 GMT, "Dr. Jason Gastrich"
Post by Dr. Jason Gastrich
Post by Don Kresch
In alt.atheism on Fri, 28 Nov 2003 22:38:25 GMT, "Dr. Jason Gastrich"
Post by Dr. Jason Gastrich
I healed a man's epilepsy in Jesus' name.
Oh, really? I'm an epileptic myself. I have a few questions..
1. What type of epilepsy did he suffer from?
2. What type of seizures did he evidence?
3. What was his mean time between events?
4. What medications, and at what dosages?
5. How did he withfraw from the anti-convulsants?
6. What medical follow-up was undertaken?
7. How can we contact this man and his neurologist?
I'm sorry, but I don't have the answers to these questions.
Translation: Jason just got caught in a lie.


Don
---
aa #51, Knight of BAAWA, DNRC o-, Member of the [H]orde
Atheist Minister for St. Dogbert.

"No being is so important that he can usurp the rights of another"
Picard to Data/Graves "The Schizoid Man"
Douglas Berry
2003-11-29 19:11:41 UTC
Permalink
Lo, many moons past, on Sat, 29 Nov 2003 08:53:20 GMT, a stranger
called by some "Dr. Jason Gastrich" <***@jcsm.org> came forth and
told this tale in alt.atheism
Post by Dr. Jason Gastrich
Post by Don Kresch
In alt.atheism on Fri, 28 Nov 2003 22:38:25 GMT, "Dr. Jason Gastrich"
Post by Dr. Jason Gastrich
I healed a man's epilepsy in Jesus' name.
Oh, really? I'm an epileptic myself. I have a few questions..
1. What type of epilepsy did he suffer from?
2. What type of seizures did he evidence?
3. What was his mean time between events?
4. What medications, and at what dosages?
5. How did he withfraw from the anti-convulsants?
6. What medical follow-up was undertaken?
7. How can we contact this man and his neurologist?
I'm sorry, but I don't have the answers to these questions. If you think
about it, they don't seem like the things a person who bumped into another
person once or twice a week, at the gym, would ask or know. I'm not a
medical doctor. I'm a person who prayed for this man to be healed.
So, you hve no actual proof at all, nothing to support the claim, and
you don't even know what meds he was taking? How then, sir, do you
know that you healed him? Surely you know that some epileptics on
meds can go for *years* without an event, yes? Did you know that? I
haven;'t seized since last May myself. So, how long did you do follow
ups? When did this allegedly happen?

You are a liar, sirt, bearing false witness.
Post by Dr. Jason Gastrich
I hope and pray that you can be healed from your epilepsy.
I put my trust in science, and I'm still alive.
--

Douglas Berry Do the OBVIOUS thing to send e-mail
Atheist #2147, Atheist Vet #5

Ezekiel 13:20 "Wherefore thus saith the
Lord GOD; Behold, I am against your pillows"
Ron Baker
2003-11-29 00:11:27 UTC
Permalink
Post by Dr. Jason Gastrich
Post by Ron Baker
Post by Dr. Jason Gastrich
Post by Christians Kill
Post by angelicusrex
Jesus was a real person.
Where is the evidence for your claim?
The gospels. Christmas. Josephus. The miracles I've done in His
name. The Holy Spirit He gave me that lives within me. The inerrant
Word of God.
Interesting.
What evidence is Flavius Josephus?
Josephus is a historian that recorded the existence of Jesus.
Yes, I knew that. I meant to convey that by mentioning
his first name. I should have been more direct.

As others have no doubt pointed out there is a good
argument that those reference were inserted by later
transcribers who were more faithful to Jesus than Josephus.
Post by Dr. Jason Gastrich
Post by Ron Baker
What miracles have you done in His name?
I healed a man's epilepsy in Jesus' name.
Now that is interesting. I'd like to hear more about that.
Did you stop a particular seizure or did you prevent
all future seizures? Was he on medication? Is he now?
How did you do it? Pray? Lay on hands?
Was it a group effort?
Post by Dr. Jason Gastrich
Post by Ron Baker
Is every word in the bible literally true?
Every word is true. Not every passage should be taken literally, though.
How does one know what to take literally and what not?


Hey, I listened to the audio of the debate you pointed to
in another post. It was pretty good. The audio is not
the best but I think I got 80% of it.
There was some good back and forth and some excitement
but it seemed there were no tempers or animosity.
They applauded you at the end.
You were brave and stood up well.

-Ron
Dr. Jason Gastrich
2003-11-29 01:02:15 UTC
Permalink
Post by Ron Baker
Post by Dr. Jason Gastrich
Post by Ron Baker
Post by Dr. Jason Gastrich
Post by Christians Kill
Post by angelicusrex
Jesus was a real person.
Where is the evidence for your claim?
The gospels. Christmas. Josephus. The miracles I've done in His
name. The Holy Spirit He gave me that lives within me. The
inerrant Word of God.
Interesting.
What evidence is Flavius Josephus?
Josephus is a historian that recorded the existence of Jesus.
Yes, I knew that. I meant to convey that by mentioning
his first name. I should have been more direct.
As others have no doubt pointed out there is a good
argument that those reference were inserted by later
transcribers who were more faithful to Jesus than Josephus.
There is an argument and I read it awhile back. It didn't seem very
convincing, though.
Post by Ron Baker
Post by Dr. Jason Gastrich
Post by Ron Baker
What miracles have you done in His name?
I healed a man's epilepsy in Jesus' name.
Now that is interesting. I'd like to hear more about that.
Did you stop a particular seizure or did you prevent
all future seizures? Was he on medication? Is he now?
How did you do it? Pray? Lay on hands?
Was it a group effort?
There was a man at my old gym and he was the maintenance guy. We became
friends and I shared Christ with him. He had suffered from seizures and I
can't remember if he was on medication or not.

One day, he was on the street and waiting for the bus. I asked him if I
could lay my hands on him and pray that the seizures go away. He said ok
and I did. I prayed in Jesus' name and he didn't have another seizure.
Post by Ron Baker
Post by Dr. Jason Gastrich
Post by Ron Baker
Is every word in the bible literally true?
Every word is true. Not every passage should be taken literally, though.
How does one know what to take literally and what not?
An apologetic method I like to use is taking the obvious, concrete passages
and using them to interpret the rest. For instance, we see a number of
direct passages about God not having a body. When we see a passage about
God's wings, in the Psalms, we can safely conclude that it is a poetic
device and not meant to be literal.
Post by Ron Baker
Hey, I listened to the audio of the debate you pointed to
in another post. It was pretty good. The audio is not
the best but I think I got 80% of it.
There was some good back and forth and some excitement
but it seemed there were no tempers or animosity.
They applauded you at the end.
You were brave and stood up well.
-Ron
Thanks, Ron. It was an exciting debate and I was happy to do it. Maybe
they'll have me back some time. We left on good terms and have communicated
a little since the debate.

I'm hoping to get a better audio file. We'll see, though.

Sincerely,
Jason Gastrich
Ron Baker
2003-11-29 05:06:22 UTC
Permalink
Post by Dr. Jason Gastrich
Post by Ron Baker
Post by Dr. Jason Gastrich
Post by Ron Baker
Post by Dr. Jason Gastrich
Post by Christians Kill
Post by angelicusrex
Jesus was a real person.
Where is the evidence for your claim?
The gospels. Christmas. Josephus. The miracles I've done in His
name. The Holy Spirit He gave me that lives within me. The
inerrant Word of God.
Interesting.
What evidence is Flavius Josephus?
Josephus is a historian that recorded the existence of Jesus.
Yes, I knew that. I meant to convey that by mentioning
his first name. I should have been more direct.
As others have no doubt pointed out there is a good
argument that those reference were inserted by later
transcribers who were more faithful to Jesus than Josephus.
There is an argument and I read it awhile back. It didn't seem very
convincing, though.
I guess it is kind of subjective then.
Post by Dr. Jason Gastrich
Post by Ron Baker
Post by Dr. Jason Gastrich
Post by Ron Baker
What miracles have you done in His name?
I healed a man's epilepsy in Jesus' name.
Now that is interesting. I'd like to hear more about that.
Did you stop a particular seizure or did you prevent
all future seizures? Was he on medication? Is he now?
How did you do it? Pray? Lay on hands?
Was it a group effort?
There was a man at my old gym and he was the maintenance guy. We became
friends and I shared Christ with him. He had suffered from seizures and I
can't remember if he was on medication or not.
One day, he was on the street and waiting for the bus. I asked him if I
could lay my hands on him and pray that the seizures go away. He said ok
and I did. I prayed in Jesus' name and he didn't have another seizure.
I would have another batch of questions but I won't grill
you on the details now.

I will ask you why it worked in this instance and would
it work in another instance.
If you had even a 20% success rate at this I would think
you would have a moral obligation to be treating epileptics
rather than enduring our questions.
Post by Dr. Jason Gastrich
Post by Ron Baker
Post by Dr. Jason Gastrich
Post by Ron Baker
Is every word in the bible literally true?
Every word is true. Not every passage should be taken literally, though.
How does one know what to take literally and what not?
An apologetic method I like to use is taking the obvious, concrete passages
and using them to interpret the rest. For instance, we see a number of
direct passages about God not having a body. When we see a passage about
God's wings, in the Psalms, we can safely conclude that it is a poetic
device and not meant to be literal.
Hmm. That sounds pretty subjective too. I doubt that
you and I (or even most Christians) would agree on what is
concrete and what is the rest.
In Genesis, is a day the same as what you and I call a day now?
Post by Dr. Jason Gastrich
Post by Ron Baker
Hey, I listened to the audio of the debate you pointed to
in another post. It was pretty good. The audio is not
the best but I think I got 80% of it.
There was some good back and forth and some excitement
but it seemed there were no tempers or animosity.
They applauded you at the end.
You were brave and stood up well.
-Ron
Thanks, Ron. It was an exciting debate and I was happy to do it. Maybe
they'll have me back some time. We left on good terms and have communicated
a little since the debate.
I'm hoping to get a better audio file. We'll see, though.
Cool.


You seem to be big on the inerrancy of the bible.
You also seem to imply that some (how much?) of
the bible is poetic or figurative.
What do you consider an error?
What errors have you seen in comparable works?

-Ron
Dr. Jason Gastrich
2003-11-29 08:50:55 UTC
Permalink
Post by Ron Baker
Post by Dr. Jason Gastrich
Post by Ron Baker
Post by Dr. Jason Gastrich
Post by Ron Baker
Post by Dr. Jason Gastrich
Post by Christians Kill
Post by angelicusrex
Jesus was a real person.
Where is the evidence for your claim?
The gospels. Christmas. Josephus. The miracles I've done in
His name. The Holy Spirit He gave me that lives within me. The
inerrant Word of God.
Interesting.
What evidence is Flavius Josephus?
Josephus is a historian that recorded the existence of Jesus.
Yes, I knew that. I meant to convey that by mentioning
his first name. I should have been more direct.
As others have no doubt pointed out there is a good
argument that those reference were inserted by later
transcribers who were more faithful to Jesus than Josephus.
There is an argument and I read it awhile back. It didn't seem very
convincing, though.
I guess it is kind of subjective then.
Post by Dr. Jason Gastrich
Post by Ron Baker
Post by Dr. Jason Gastrich
Post by Ron Baker
What miracles have you done in His name?
I healed a man's epilepsy in Jesus' name.
Now that is interesting. I'd like to hear more about that.
Did you stop a particular seizure or did you prevent
all future seizures? Was he on medication? Is he now?
How did you do it? Pray? Lay on hands?
Was it a group effort?
There was a man at my old gym and he was the maintenance guy. We
became friends and I shared Christ with him. He had suffered from
seizures and I can't remember if he was on medication or not.
One day, he was on the street and waiting for the bus. I asked him
if I could lay my hands on him and pray that the seizures go away.
He said ok and I did. I prayed in Jesus' name and he didn't have
another seizure.
I would have another batch of questions but I won't grill
you on the details now.
I will ask you why it worked in this instance and would
it work in another instance.
If you had even a 20% success rate at this I would think
you would have a moral obligation to be treating epileptics
rather than enduring our questions.
You make a great point. However, different people have different gifts and
missions. I'm using technology to do God's work through the web. It's a
unique ministry, but definitely a needed one.
Post by Ron Baker
Post by Dr. Jason Gastrich
Post by Ron Baker
Post by Dr. Jason Gastrich
Post by Ron Baker
Is every word in the bible literally true?
Every word is true. Not every passage should be taken literally, though.
How does one know what to take literally and what not?
An apologetic method I like to use is taking the obvious, concrete
passages and using them to interpret the rest. For instance, we see
a number of direct passages about God not having a body. When we
see a passage about God's wings, in the Psalms, we can safely
conclude that it is a poetic device and not meant to be literal.
Hmm. That sounds pretty subjective too. I doubt that
you and I (or even most Christians) would agree on what is
concrete and what is the rest.
In Genesis, is a day the same as what you and I call a day now?
We have every reason to understand that one "yom" from Genesis is the same
length as one day, today.
Post by Ron Baker
Post by Dr. Jason Gastrich
Post by Ron Baker
Hey, I listened to the audio of the debate you pointed to
in another post. It was pretty good. The audio is not
the best but I think I got 80% of it.
There was some good back and forth and some excitement
but it seemed there were no tempers or animosity.
They applauded you at the end.
You were brave and stood up well.
-Ron
Thanks, Ron. It was an exciting debate and I was happy to do it.
Maybe they'll have me back some time. We left on good terms and
have communicated a little since the debate.
I'm hoping to get a better audio file. We'll see, though.
Cool.
You seem to be big on the inerrancy of the bible.
You also seem to imply that some (how much?) of
the bible is poetic or figurative.
What do you consider an error?
What errors have you seen in comparable works?
-Ron
I just answered this in another thread. Let me know if I should repost it.

Jason
Ron Baker
2003-11-29 17:43:11 UTC
Permalink
<>
Post by Dr. Jason Gastrich
Post by Ron Baker
Post by Dr. Jason Gastrich
Post by Ron Baker
Now that is interesting. I'd like to hear more about that.
Did you stop a particular seizure or did you prevent
all future seizures? Was he on medication? Is he now?
How did you do it? Pray? Lay on hands?
Was it a group effort?
There was a man at my old gym and he was the maintenance guy. We
became friends and I shared Christ with him. He had suffered from
seizures and I can't remember if he was on medication or not.
One day, he was on the street and waiting for the bus. I asked him
if I could lay my hands on him and pray that the seizures go away.
He said ok and I did. I prayed in Jesus' name and he didn't have
another seizure.
I would have another batch of questions but I won't grill
you on the details now.
I will ask you why it worked in this instance and would
it work in another instance.
If you had even a 20% success rate at this I would think
you would have a moral obligation to be treating epileptics
rather than enduring our questions.
You make a great point. However, different people have different gifts and
missions.
Hmm. Do you not really have the gift to facilitate healing through prayer?
It seems to me that your message would have much greater
affect if it was associated with that healing.

And on a broader view, why do we need healing?
Why are we sometimes afflicted with illness?
Why does God allow that? Is He not benevolent?
Post by Dr. Jason Gastrich
I'm using technology to do God's work through the web. It's a
unique ministry, but definitely a needed one.
Hmm. There must be thousands of online evangelists.

<>
Post by Dr. Jason Gastrich
Post by Ron Baker
You seem to be big on the inerrancy of the bible.
You also seem to imply that some (how much?) of
the bible is poetic or figurative.
What do you consider an error?
What errors have you seen in comparable works?
I just answered this in another thread. Let me know if I should repost it.
I saw it. Thanks.

-Ron
Jos Flachs
2003-11-29 01:41:48 UTC
Permalink
Post by Dr. Jason Gastrich
Post by Ron Baker
Interesting.
What evidence is Flavius Josephus?
Josephus is a historian that recorded the existence of Jesus.
Sorry, doctor. Those lines do not fit into the context, and are a
forgery. Besides, a Jew (Josephus was a Jes) wuld NEVER write that
description down.
Post by Dr. Jason Gastrich
Post by Ron Baker
What miracles have you done in His name?
I healed a man's epilepsy in Jesus' name.
Practising medicine without a licence, isn't that a serious crime in
your country?
Don Kresch
2003-11-28 16:01:37 UTC
Permalink
In alt.atheism on Fri, 28 Nov 2003 07:26:29 GMT, "Dr. Jason Gastrich"
Post by Dr. Jason Gastrich
Post by Christians Kill
Post by angelicusrex
Jesus was a real person.
Where is the evidence for your claim?
The gospels.
Not evidence.
Post by Dr. Jason Gastrich
Christmas.
Not evidence.
Post by Dr. Jason Gastrich
Josephus.
Not evidence.
Post by Dr. Jason Gastrich
The miracles I've done in His name.
No such thing.
Post by Dr. Jason Gastrich
The Holy Spirit He gave me that lives within me.
No such thing.
Post by Dr. Jason Gastrich
The inerrant Word of God.
No such thing.

Well, that about wraps up your supposed evidence.


Don
---
aa #51, Knight of BAAWA, DNRC o-, Member of the [H]orde
Atheist Minister for St. Dogbert.

"No being is so important that he can usurp the rights of another"
Picard to Data/Graves "The Schizoid Man"
angelicusrex
2003-11-28 23:59:48 UTC
Permalink
"Don Kresch" <***@jv.ee.pbz.com> wrote in message > >>> Jesus was
a real person.
Post by Don Kresch
Post by Dr. Jason Gastrich
Post by Christians Kill
Where is the evidence for your claim?
The gospels.
Not evidence.
More evidence than you have provided for your assertion.
Post by Don Kresch
Post by Dr. Jason Gastrich
Christmas.
Not evidence.
True. Christimas is evidence of nothing.
Post by Don Kresch
Post by Dr. Jason Gastrich
Josephus.
Not evidence.
Prove it. It is evidence, it is simply in dispute.
Post by Don Kresch
Post by Dr. Jason Gastrich
The miracles I've done in His name.
No such thing.
Where is the evidence for your claim?
Post by Don Kresch
Post by Dr. Jason Gastrich
The Holy Spirit He gave me that lives within me.
No such thing.
Where is the evidence for your claim?
Post by Don Kresch
Well, that about wraps up your supposed evidence.
It's evidence to him. It is disputed by you. But you brought nothing to the
dispute but opinion. So the debate rages.

Saint
Don Kresch
2003-11-29 00:58:38 UTC
Permalink
In alt.atheism on Fri, 28 Nov 2003 16:59:48 -0700, "angelicusrex"
Post by angelicusrex
a real person.
Post by Don Kresch
Post by Dr. Jason Gastrich
Post by Christians Kill
Where is the evidence for your claim?
The gospels.
Not evidence.
More evidence than you have provided for your assertion.
No, it's not.
Post by angelicusrex
Post by Don Kresch
Post by Dr. Jason Gastrich
Christmas.
Not evidence.
True. Christimas is evidence of nothing.
Post by Don Kresch
Post by Dr. Jason Gastrich
Josephus.
Not evidence.
Prove it. It is evidence,
No, it's not. It's one sentence, not evidence.
Post by angelicusrex
Post by Don Kresch
Post by Dr. Jason Gastrich
The miracles I've done in His name.
No such thing.
Where is the evidence for your claim?
The fact that miracles are impossible. Check out Hume and Kant.
Post by angelicusrex
Post by Don Kresch
Post by Dr. Jason Gastrich
The Holy Spirit He gave me that lives within me.
No such thing.
Where is the evidence for your claim?
The fact that there's no such thing as the holy spirit.
Post by angelicusrex
Post by Don Kresch
Well, that about wraps up your supposed evidence.
It's evidence to him.
So? What are you going to try--epistemic solipsism?


Don
---
aa #51, Knight of BAAWA, DNRC o-, Member of the [H]orde
Atheist Minister for St. Dogbert.

"No being is so important that he can usurp the rights of another"
Picard to Data/Graves "The Schizoid Man"
angelicusrex
2003-11-29 08:30:52 UTC
Permalink
Post by Don Kresch
Post by angelicusrex
Post by Don Kresch
Not evidence.
More evidence than you have provided for your assertion.
No, it's not.
Yes it is. If you want to be a big baby about it. But in fact you offered NO
evidence. So the Gospels at least are SOME evidence. Putz.
Post by Don Kresch
Post by angelicusrex
Prove it. It is evidence,
No, it's not. It's one sentence, not evidence.
That's one sentence more than you brought.
Post by Don Kresch
Post by angelicusrex
Post by Don Kresch
Post by Dr. Jason Gastrich
The miracles I've done in His name.
No such thing.
Where is the evidence for your claim?
The fact that miracles are impossible. Check out Hume and Kant.
What on earth would either Hume or Kant know about miracles??? They weren't
religious or men of faith. Miracles happen every day. I've seen them. And
they are documented. Which again, is more documentation than you bring here.
Hume and Kant! Any philosopher can SAY miracles don't exist. This does not
make their statements scientifically accurate.
Post by Don Kresch
Post by angelicusrex
Post by Don Kresch
Post by Dr. Jason Gastrich
The Holy Spirit He gave me that lives within me.
No such thing.
Where is the evidence for your claim?
The fact that there's no such thing as the holy spirit.
That's not evidence, that is opinion. It is not "fact." If it were a fact,
everyone would have dismissed Holy Spirit. Since millions have not, then
that makes you in the minority. Odd how so few atheists seem to hold ALL the
facts in the world...
Post by Don Kresch
So? What are you going to try--epistemic solipsism?
No, I'll try mine with mustard and mayo, thanks.
I'm not into that hot stuff...

Saint
Don Kresch
2003-11-29 14:11:10 UTC
Permalink
In alt.atheism on Sat, 29 Nov 2003 01:30:52 -0700, "angelicusrex"
Post by angelicusrex
Post by Don Kresch
Post by angelicusrex
Post by Don Kresch
Not evidence.
More evidence than you have provided for your assertion.
No, it's not.
Yes it is.
No, actually it's not.
Post by angelicusrex
If you want to be a big baby about it. But in fact you offered NO
evidence.
In fact, I offered evidence. You can keep being Jason's
sock-puppet alter-ego all you like. It won't matter to me.
Post by angelicusrex
So the Gospels at least are SOME evidence. Putz.
So, the gospels aren't evidence. They are just stories. To use
them as evidence is to commit the fallacy of circularum in
demonstrando.
Post by angelicusrex
Post by Don Kresch
Post by angelicusrex
Prove it. It is evidence,
No, it's not. It's one sentence, not evidence.
That's one sentence more than you brought.
No, it's not.
Post by angelicusrex
Post by Don Kresch
Post by angelicusrex
Post by Don Kresch
Post by Dr. Jason Gastrich
The miracles I've done in His name.
No such thing.
Where is the evidence for your claim?
The fact that miracles are impossible. Check out Hume and Kant.
What on earth would either Hume or Kant know about miracles???
Thus proving that you don't know their works. Read them.
Post by angelicusrex
They weren't
religious or men of faith.
*laughs*

Thus proving that you know nothing of either Hume or Kant, who
were clearly christian.
Post by angelicusrex
Post by Don Kresch
Post by angelicusrex
Post by Don Kresch
Post by Dr. Jason Gastrich
The Holy Spirit He gave me that lives within me.
No such thing.
Where is the evidence for your claim?
The fact that there's no such thing as the holy spirit.
That's not evidence, that is opinion.
That's fact.
Post by angelicusrex
Post by Don Kresch
So? What are you going to try--epistemic solipsism?
No, I'll try mine with mustard and mayo, thanks.
I'm not into that hot stuff...
You don't even know what solipsism is. You know nothing of
philosophy. You're simply being a poseur troll.


Don
---
aa #51, Knight of BAAWA, DNRC o-, Member of the [H]orde
Atheist Minister for St. Dogbert.

"No being is so important that he can usurp the rights of another"
Picard to Data/Graves "The Schizoid Man"
angelicusrex
2003-11-29 20:53:55 UTC
Permalink
Post by Don Kresch
In fact, I offered evidence. You can keep being Jason's
sock-puppet alter-ego all you like. It won't matter to me.
I think both of you are brutish, egotistical babies. But Gastrich at least
tries to put forth some sort of debate. He doesn't have any support from me.
But since you have brought no evidence that the Gospels need to somehow be
denounced as totally without evidentiary materials, I'd have to conclude
that you, for all your calling Gastrich a liar or me a sock-puppet, are just
being a bull-headed moron.
Post by Don Kresch
Post by angelicusrex
So the Gospels at least are SOME evidence. Putz.
So, the gospels aren't evidence. They are just stories. To use
them as evidence is to commit the fallacy of circularum in
demonstrando.
The gospels may or may not be stories. The evidence is not in. I have gone
over much of the pros and cons. I believe the gospels are correct in many
points. A man named Jesus lived, was thought to be the messiah, was
crucified and a cult grew up around him. The title of this post: Jesus never
existed. The argument is whether he did or did not. However the gospels do
not jibe in details, they all specify the same things. There was a man named
Jesus, he lived in the region of Gallillee during what we now term the 1st
Century CE. We know from a document ripped off and stuck here by a guy named
"Religion is a Lie" that at least three to five Jesus' or Yeshuas, lived in
the region and were crucified by the Romans or killed by the Priesthood of
Israel. This confirms that either one or all of them were a model for the
Jesus in the gospels, or the Jesus in the gospels was just another
Jesus/messiah. It is obvious that the argument is now over. Did Jesus exist?
Most certainly. Many did. Pick one.

As for Hume and Kant, they were what they were, which does not make them
experts in either miracles or Christianity. They were philosophers. And I do
not credit them with discrediting miracles. I've read both their works and
they are pointless red herrings in your present argument. You cannot dismiss
Jesus being real by dismissing miracles by using Hume and Kant's works.
Philosophy is not science.

You call me a poseur and a troll. When did I troll you? and exactly what am
I posing as? I am simply doing what you keep accusing Gastrich of, bringing
to bear arguments, assertions and evidences of your own inability to make
your argument stick. Neither you nor Gastrich are right. All you are are two
people butting heads over faith in something neither of you seems to have
researched very well.

Saint

Mike Painter
2003-11-28 18:07:50 UTC
Permalink
Post by Dr. Jason Gastrich
Post by Christians Kill
Post by angelicusrex
Jesus was a real person.
Where is the evidence for your claim?
The gospels. Christmas. Josephus. The miracles I've done in His name.
The Holy Spirit He gave me that lives within me. The inerrant Word of God.
Matthew 21:22 If you believe, you will receive whatever you ask for in
prayer."

Mark 11:24 Therefore I tell you, whatever you ask for in prayer, believe
that you have received it, and it will be yours.

Luke 11:10 For everyone who asks receives; he who seeks finds; and to him
who knocks, the door will be opened.

John 16:24 Until now you have not asked for anything in my name. Ask and you
will receive, and your joy will be complete.

Mark 11:23
For verily I say unto you, That whosoever shall say unto this mountain, Be
thou removed, and be thou cast into the sea; and shall not doubt in his
heart, but shall believe that those things which he saith shall come to
pass; he shall have whatsoever he saith.

If any of the above were valid, that is, *anything* asked for would be given
then there would be little discussion of it and Randi would not have a
million dollars to offer.

Take Randi's challenge, perform an agreed upon miracle, make some converts
and do some good with a million dollars.
Dr. Jason Gastrich
2003-11-28 22:48:06 UTC
Permalink
Post by Mike Painter
Post by Dr. Jason Gastrich
Post by Christians Kill
Post by angelicusrex
Jesus was a real person.
Where is the evidence for your claim?
The gospels. Christmas. Josephus. The miracles I've done in His
name. The Holy Spirit He gave me that lives within me. The inerrant
Word of God.
Matthew 21:22 If you believe, you will receive whatever you ask for in
prayer."
Mark 11:24 Therefore I tell you, whatever you ask for in prayer,
believe that you have received it, and it will be yours.
Luke 11:10 For everyone who asks receives; he who seeks finds; and to
him who knocks, the door will be opened.
John 16:24 Until now you have not asked for anything in my name. Ask
and you will receive, and your joy will be complete.
Mark 11:23
For verily I say unto you, That whosoever shall say unto this
mountain, Be thou removed, and be thou cast into the sea; and shall
not doubt in his heart, but shall believe that those things which he
saith shall come to pass; he shall have whatsoever he saith.
If any of the above were valid, that is, *anything* asked for would
be given then there would be little discussion of it and Randi would
not have a million dollars to offer.
This means *anything* that is according to God's will. Asking for God to
give you something that is against His will would be like asking Him to do
or be something that is against His character. Impossible.
Post by Mike Painter
Take Randi's challenge, perform an agreed upon miracle, make some
converts and do some good with a million dollars.
I've interviewed James Randi. You can hear it here: http://sa.jcsm.org.
Like you, he embraces the Pharisee principle. "Give me a miracle for my
ego, right now, and I'll believe (or win money)." This isn't a biblical
principle and, in fact, it's just what the Pharisees requested. Jesus
refused to give them an ego sign and told them that resurrection would be
their sign.

God bless,
Jason
Mike Painter
2003-11-28 23:41:05 UTC
Permalink
Post by Dr. Jason Gastrich
Post by Mike Painter
Post by Dr. Jason Gastrich
Post by Christians Kill
Post by angelicusrex
Jesus was a real person.
Where is the evidence for your claim?
The gospels. Christmas. Josephus. The miracles I've done in His
name. The Holy Spirit He gave me that lives within me. The inerrant
Word of God.
Matthew 21:22 If you believe, you will receive whatever you ask for in
prayer."
Mark 11:24 Therefore I tell you, whatever you ask for in prayer,
believe that you have received it, and it will be yours.
Luke 11:10 For everyone who asks receives; he who seeks finds; and to
him who knocks, the door will be opened.
John 16:24 Until now you have not asked for anything in my name. Ask
and you will receive, and your joy will be complete.
Mark 11:23
For verily I say unto you, That whosoever shall say unto this
mountain, Be thou removed, and be thou cast into the sea; and shall
not doubt in his heart, but shall believe that those things which he
saith shall come to pass; he shall have whatsoever he saith.
If any of the above were valid, that is, *anything* asked for would
be given then there would be little discussion of it and Randi would
not have a million dollars to offer.
This means *anything* that is according to God's will. Asking for God to
give you something that is against His will would be like asking Him to do
or be something that is against His character. Impossible.
So teh bible is inerrant except where you say it is errant. Where *exactly*
in "If you believe, you will receive whatever you ask for in prayer." does
it say this?
What do you, breaker of the commandment not to lie, mean by the term
"whatever"?
Post by Dr. Jason Gastrich
Post by Mike Painter
Take Randi's challenge, perform an agreed upon miracle, make some
converts and do some good with a million dollars.
I've interviewed James Randi. You can hear it here: http://sa.jcsm.org.
I've not the time to search your web site. If you can't give a reference to
such an interview I'll just assume it's another lie.

I'm not going to send you money or sign up for your email so I will wait
until I hear from Randi before commenting.
I did ask him how he lasted 49 minutes...
Gregory A Greenman
2003-11-29 00:05:37 UTC
Permalink
On Fri, 28 Nov 2003 07:26:29 GMT, Dr. Jason Gastrich
Post by Dr. Jason Gastrich
Post by Christians Kill
Post by angelicusrex
Jesus was a real person.
Where is the evidence for your claim?
The gospels.
To the same extent that The Iliad is evidence of Achilles.
Post by Dr. Jason Gastrich
Christmas.
Huh?
Post by Dr. Jason Gastrich
Josephus.
Only if you count forged quotes as evidence.
Post by Dr. Jason Gastrich
The miracles I've done in His name.
Jason, from your previous posting history, I know you're not
that bright, but I didn't know you're delusional too. Exactly
what miracles have you done? Exorcisms? Bringing the dead
back to life? Faith healing?
Post by Dr. Jason Gastrich
The Holy Spirit He gave me that lives within me.
Your imagination is evidence that jesus was real?
Post by Dr. Jason Gastrich
The inerrant Word of God.
The one that says pi is three, bats are birds and rabbits
chew their cud?




Greg the Reprobate
Missionary of Death
-------------------
greg -at- spencersoft -dot- com
Jos Flachs
2003-11-29 01:22:49 UTC
Permalink
Post by Dr. Jason Gastrich
The gospels.
Are based on two utterly UNrelated versions. Written decades after the
events.
Post by Dr. Jason Gastrich
Christmas.
A pagan festival, to celebrate the shortest day of the year. Taken
over by xtians in the 3rd century.
Post by Dr. Jason Gastrich
Josephus.
Said nothing about jesus, the lines you refer to are a known forgery.
Post by Dr. Jason Gastrich
The miracles I've done in His name.
Ganesh did bigger miracles. So did Kali.
Post by Dr. Jason Gastrich
The Holy Spirit He gave me that lives within me.
Whereabouts?
Post by Dr. Jason Gastrich
The inerrant Word of God.
Is found in which bible exactly?
Nevermore
2003-11-29 16:24:51 UTC
Permalink
Post by Jos Flachs
Post by Dr. Jason Gastrich
The gospels.
Are based on two utterly UNrelated versions. Written decades after the
events.
Post by Dr. Jason Gastrich
Christmas.
A pagan festival, to celebrate the shortest day of the year. Taken
over by xtians in the 3rd century.
Which the Christians barely bothered to celebrate until Charles Dickens
and Queen Victoria decided to popularize it in the 19th Century as a
holiday which celebrated FAMILY not particulary Christ. "A Christmas
Carol" is far more about secular charity and kindness to family members
and living your life with a spirit of generosity than it is about thrall
to Christian worship and celebration of the birth of Jesus. Scrooge
doesn't get down with holy spirit - Ghosts convince him to go to dinner
with his nephew, hardly the key point of the Bible.
Post by Jos Flachs
Post by Dr. Jason Gastrich
Josephus.
Said nothing about jesus, the lines you refer to are a known forgery.
Post by Dr. Jason Gastrich
The miracles I've done in His name.
Ganesh did bigger miracles. So did Kali.
Post by Dr. Jason Gastrich
The Holy Spirit He gave me that lives within me.
Whereabouts?
Post by Dr. Jason Gastrich
The inerrant Word of God.
Is found in which bible exactly?
Roger Pearse
2003-11-28 14:05:26 UTC
Permalink
Post by Christians Kill
Post by angelicusrex
Jesus was a real person.
Where is the evidence for your claim?
Usenet contains little else.
How many times have we killed you?
Post by Christians Kill
Science can teach us, and I think our own hearts can teach us, no
longer to look around for imaginary supports, no longer to invent
allies in the sky, but rather to look to our own efforts here below to
make this world a fit place to live in, instead of the sort of place
that the churches in all these centuries have made it.
--Bertrand Russell
Now known to have been a sleazeball of the first water who tormented
his family for amusement.

All the best,

Roger Pearse
Figinn
2003-11-28 15:15:40 UTC
Permalink
Post by Christians Kill
Post by angelicusrex
Jesus was a real person.
Where is the evidence for your claim?
Such tiresome arguments. How about you give me any evidence that anyone is
a real person? How can you prove to me that you're not a figment of my
imagination ... a mental delusion created by my mind merely to amuse myself?

And at this point, it doesn't really matter if Jesus of Nazareth actually
ever lived. If he did exist, it doesn't really matter what he did or what
he said, whether his mama was a virgin, whether he ever married, whether he
was crucified and whether he was resurrected.

People believe in such things. Perceived reality becomes subjective reality
which many times becomes actual reality. If some Christian believes in
Jesus and that makes them want to be a "better" person then Jesus is real
for them and their reality is manifested in their interactions with others.
If some Christian believes in Jesus and that makes them act like an asshole,
well it has the same effect.

So why do we all insist on nitpicking details? Leave them alone ... you're
clearly not adding anything of substance to anyone's reality ... or is it
you just like to whine and moan about how the big, bad Christians ruin
everything for you? They don't ruin everything for me. I don't have to
agree with someone in order to tolerate their belief systems. Most
Christians I know are actually pretty nice folks ... they just believe in
different things than I do.

Figinn
Uncle Davey
2003-11-28 15:46:01 UTC
Permalink
Post by Figinn
Post by Christians Kill
Post by angelicusrex
Jesus was a real person.
Where is the evidence for your claim?
Such tiresome arguments. How about you give me any evidence that anyone is
a real person? How can you prove to me that you're not a figment of my
imagination ... a mental delusion created by my mind merely to amuse myself?
And at this point, it doesn't really matter if Jesus of Nazareth actually
ever lived. If he did exist, it doesn't really matter what he did or what
he said, whether his mama was a virgin, whether he ever married, whether he
was crucified and whether he was resurrected.
People believe in such things. Perceived reality becomes subjective reality
which many times becomes actual reality. If some Christian believes in
Jesus and that makes them want to be a "better" person then Jesus is real
for them and their reality is manifested in their interactions with others.
If some Christian believes in Jesus and that makes them act like an asshole,
well it has the same effect.
So why do we all insist on nitpicking details? Leave them alone ... you're
clearly not adding anything of substance to anyone's reality ... or is it
you just like to whine and moan about how the big, bad Christians ruin
everything for you? They don't ruin everything for me. I don't have to
agree with someone in order to tolerate their belief systems. Most
Christians I know are actually pretty nice folks ... they just believe in
different things than I do.
Figinn
It's very nice to be tolerated, but it's still my duty to tell you that
Christ is not about making us good people, he is about making us forgiven
people.

I for one will never be good no matter how hard I try, until I follow in my
Lord's resurrection.

Uncle Davey
Blast Femur
2003-11-27 05:49:49 UTC
Permalink
Post by Religion is a Lie
The big question, the question in my mind, is - who was the author who
invented the character Jesus?
http://www.geocities.com/inquisitive79/godmen

Jesus seems to have, like the humanity he mythologically represents,
evolved through time. He is but a combination, stolen and mixed from
previous myths throughout history.

Through the advent of brainwashing, mind manipulation by the
administration of the concept of eternal afterlife vs. eternal horrific
punishment, and despite the advancement of science today, he still
commands a great portion of the minds of the fearful, regardless of their
presentday intellect.

Amazing, isn't it?
--
Blast Femur

______________

"We look at the ancient Greeks with their gods on a mountain top throwing
lightning bolts and say, 'Those ancient Greeks. They were so silly. So
primitive and naive. Not like our religions. We have burning bushes
talking to people and guys walking on water. We're ...sophisticated.'"

-Paul Provenza
duke
2003-11-27 13:07:15 UTC
Permalink
Post by Religion is a Lie
Jesus never existed. Christianity is based on a work of fiction -
altered, expanded, corrupted, etc. The Paulinian description of the
spread of Christianity in the 1st cent. AD. was written c. 140 AD - it
is complete fiction. There is no evidence that Christianity existed in
the 1st cent AD - because it didn't!
Is there any reason that anyone should believe you? It's easy to say, but why
would anyone care about your mistakes?
Post by Religion is a Lie
The big question, the question in my mind, is - who was the author who
invented the character Jesus?
God became man in the person of Jesus Christ.
Post by Religion is a Lie
I, personally, have no complaints about the moral teachings of those
parts of the gospel story that I think were in the original - but I do
object, most strongly, to much of the later additional material,
insertions, corruptions, etc., that other hands managed to get accepted
as "inspired".
Like what?
Dr. Jason Gastrich
2003-11-27 13:29:19 UTC
Permalink
Post by duke
Post by Religion is a Lie
Jesus never existed. Christianity is based on a work of fiction -
altered, expanded, corrupted, etc. The Paulinian description of the
spread of Christianity in the 1st cent. AD. was written c. 140 AD -
it is complete fiction. There is no evidence that Christianity
existed in the 1st cent AD - because it didn't!
Is there any reason that anyone should believe you? It's easy to
say, but why would anyone care about your mistakes?
Post by Religion is a Lie
The big question, the question in my mind, is - who was the author
who invented the character Jesus?
God became man in the person of Jesus Christ.
Amen and welcome to free.christians, duke.

Sincerely,
Jason
--
The Awesome, Saving Gospel of God
http://gospel.jcsm.org
Are you saved? Read the gospel and make sure!
Jos Flachs
2003-11-28 01:36:15 UTC
Permalink
Post by Dr. Jason Gastrich
Amen and welcome to free.christians, duke.
Sincerely,
Jason
Hi Jason. Back again?

That doctor title you now carry, is that something like Doctor Pepper?
Dr. Jason Gastrich
2003-11-28 02:03:58 UTC
Permalink
Post by Jos Flachs
Post by Dr. Jason Gastrich
Amen and welcome to free.christians, duke.
Sincerely,
Jason
Hi Jason. Back again?
That doctor title you now carry, is that something like Doctor Pepper?
Hello Jos,

Nice to see you, again.

I was happy to answer lots of questions proposed by the alt.atheism group in
September/October. I used my AOL account and it was quite easy to leaf
through the multitude of posts and answer your questions.

When I started using Road Runner and OE for my newsreading and posting, for
some reason, NONE of those posts or messages were there. So, I figured our
paths would eventually cross and sure enough, they did.

In mid-September, I started the free.christians newsgroup. It has been
quite an interesting group with a number of subscribers, and yes, our share
of trolls and spammers.

So, welcome to free.christians and feel free to strike up a conversation
with me or any of our subscribers.

God bless,
Jason (aka Dr. Pepper)
Jos Flachs
2003-11-28 04:34:00 UTC
Permalink
Post by Dr. Jason Gastrich
Post by Jos Flachs
That doctor title you now carry, is that something like Doctor Pepper?
Hello Jos,
Nice to see you, again.
I was happy to answer lots of questions proposed by the alt.atheism group in
September/October. I used my AOL account and it was quite easy to leaf
through the multitude of posts and answer your questions.
No, that was what you said you would do. But never did.
Post by Dr. Jason Gastrich
So, welcome to free.christians and feel free to strike up a conversation
with me or any of our subscribers.
So, welcome back to alt.atheism. (Which is were you cross post to.)
Any plans to proof your deities do exist now? You've had quite a few
months time to think of something.
Dr. Jason Gastrich
2003-11-28 04:38:02 UTC
Permalink
Post by Jos Flachs
Post by Dr. Jason Gastrich
Post by Jos Flachs
That doctor title you now carry, is that something like Doctor Pepper?
Hello Jos,
Nice to see you, again.
I was happy to answer lots of questions proposed by the alt.atheism
group in September/October. I used my AOL account and it was quite
easy to leaf through the multitude of posts and answer your
questions.
No, that was what you said you would do. But never did.
You are absolutely incorrect and I don't appreciate your lies. I posted
over 100 messages in alt.atheism as I answered your questions. It's typical
of fools to slam people that don't want an eternal conversation, but nobody
will buy it if they look in the archives. I posted countless messages.
Post by Jos Flachs
Post by Dr. Jason Gastrich
So, welcome to free.christians and feel free to strike up a
conversation with me or any of our subscribers.
So, welcome back to alt.atheism. (Which is were you cross post to.)
Any plans to proof your deities do exist now? You've had quite a few
months time to think of something.
I'm in free.christians and didn't begin this cross-posting. It came to me.

I have a little time earmarked for usenet posting and explaining the
inerrancy of the scriptures. Perhaps you should peruse Google Groups, so
you can see my previous answers. I'd hate to repeat myself and your
questions will likely be the same ones that I've already answered.

<Insert false, misleading statement about me avoiding questions here.
*chuckle*>

Sincerely,
Jason
Jos Flachs
2003-11-29 01:22:43 UTC
Permalink
Post by Dr. Jason Gastrich
Post by Jos Flachs
Post by Dr. Jason Gastrich
I was happy to answer lots of questions proposed by the alt.atheism
group in September/October. I used my AOL account and it was quite
easy to leaf through the multitude of posts and answer your
questions.
No, that was what you said you would do. But never did.
You are absolutely incorrect and I don't appreciate your lies.
Sorry doctor. I DO NOT lie. Maybe I quote something incorrect, or make
a mistake. But I'm happy to apologize if such happens.

I think you owe me an apology.
Post by Dr. Jason Gastrich
I posted
over 100 messages in alt.atheism as I answered your questions.
So you ARE that other Jason Gastrich? Why did you deny that? Let's
stay on the topic of lying, for a wee bit longer. That was -shall we
say- a minor willful infringement of the truth?

That Jason Gastrich walked proudly in this group, announcing he would
proof the existence of his deities. We are still waiting for it.

I got the posting still on my box. Want me to repost your messages?
Post by Dr. Jason Gastrich
It's typical
of fools to slam people that don't want an eternal conversation, but nobody
will buy it if they look in the archives. I posted countless messages.
You did, but none of them of any intellectual level worthy of a
doctorate.
Post by Dr. Jason Gastrich
Post by Jos Flachs
Post by Dr. Jason Gastrich
So, welcome to free.christians and feel free to strike up a
conversation with me or any of our subscribers.
So, welcome back to alt.atheism. (Which is were you cross post to.)
Any plans to proof your deities do exist now? You've had quite a few
months time to think of something.
I'm in free.christians and didn't begin this cross-posting. It came to me.
Well, I am as always in alt.atheism. Still got that cross posting
problem? I recall you had some difficulty with that the last time.
Post by Dr. Jason Gastrich
I have a little time earmarked for usenet posting and explaining the
inerrancy of the scriptures.
Please feel free. We can use a good laugh. Try the Flood story.
Post by Dr. Jason Gastrich
Perhaps you should peruse Google Groups, so
you can see my previous answers.
Still got them here.
Post by Dr. Jason Gastrich
I'd hate to repeat myself and your
questions will likely be the same ones that I've already answered.
So what exactly are you doing here? Trolling for your gods?
Dr. Jason Gastrich
2003-11-29 08:57:34 UTC
Permalink
Post by Jos Flachs
Post by Dr. Jason Gastrich
Post by Jos Flachs
Post by Dr. Jason Gastrich
I was happy to answer lots of questions proposed by the alt.atheism
group in September/October. I used my AOL account and it was quite
easy to leaf through the multitude of posts and answer your
questions.
No, that was what you said you would do. But never did.
You are absolutely incorrect and I don't appreciate your lies.
Sorry doctor. I DO NOT lie. Maybe I quote something incorrect, or make
a mistake. But I'm happy to apologize if such happens.
I think you owe me an apology.
Post by Dr. Jason Gastrich
I posted
over 100 messages in alt.atheism as I answered your questions.
So you ARE that other Jason Gastrich? Why did you deny that? Let's
stay on the topic of lying, for a wee bit longer. That was -shall we
say- a minor willful infringement of the truth?
I never denied it.
Post by Jos Flachs
That Jason Gastrich walked proudly in this group, announcing he would
proof the existence of his deities. We are still waiting for it.
I said I would answer questions about God and the Bible. In fact, the
subject of my post(s) was "Jason Gastrich Answers." It wasn't "Jason
Gastrich Proves God's Existence."

As I said before, I'm happy to answer questions about the Word of God. I
also know someone who would be thrilled to debate you on the existence of
God. Didn't I already mention him to you?
Post by Jos Flachs
I got the posting still on my box. Want me to repost your messages?
There is no need. Anyone can go to Google Groups and read them.
Post by Jos Flachs
Post by Dr. Jason Gastrich
It's typical
of fools to slam people that don't want an eternal conversation, but
nobody will buy it if they look in the archives. I posted countless
messages.
You did, but none of them of any intellectual level worthy of a
doctorate.
Post by Dr. Jason Gastrich
Post by Jos Flachs
Post by Dr. Jason Gastrich
So, welcome to free.christians and feel free to strike up a
conversation with me or any of our subscribers.
So, welcome back to alt.atheism. (Which is were you cross post to.)
Any plans to proof your deities do exist now? You've had quite a few
months time to think of something.
I'm in free.christians and didn't begin this cross-posting. It came to me.
Well, I am as always in alt.atheism. Still got that cross posting
problem? I recall you had some difficulty with that the last time.
Post by Dr. Jason Gastrich
I have a little time earmarked for usenet posting and explaining the
inerrancy of the scriptures.
Please feel free. We can use a good laugh. Try the Flood story.
I'm happy to answer questions (e.g. sentences with question marks that ask
questions). However, I'm not impressed with your attitude or words so far.
I've accused me of not giving answers, you misrepresented my last
appearance, lied about my identity, etc. Maybe you should get over the
introductions and get on with your point.
Post by Jos Flachs
Post by Dr. Jason Gastrich
Perhaps you should peruse Google Groups, so
you can see my previous answers.
Still got them here.
Post by Dr. Jason Gastrich
I'd hate to repeat myself and your
questions will likely be the same ones that I've already answered.
So what exactly are you doing here? Trolling for your gods?
Sincerely,
Jason
turk
2003-11-29 09:54:59 UTC
Permalink
Post by Dr. Jason Gastrich
Post by Jos Flachs
Post by Dr. Jason Gastrich
Post by Jos Flachs
Post by Dr. Jason Gastrich
I was happy to answer lots of questions proposed by the alt.atheism
group in September/October. I used my AOL account and it was quite
easy to leaf through the multitude of posts and answer your
questions.
No, that was what you said you would do. But never did.
You are absolutely incorrect and I don't appreciate your lies.
Sorry doctor. I DO NOT lie. Maybe I quote something incorrect, or make
a mistake. But I'm happy to apologize if such happens.
I think you owe me an apology.
Post by Dr. Jason Gastrich
I posted
over 100 messages in alt.atheism as I answered your questions.
So you ARE that other Jason Gastrich? Why did you deny that? Let's
stay on the topic of lying, for a wee bit longer. That was -shall we
say- a minor willful infringement of the truth?
I never denied it.
Post by Jos Flachs
That Jason Gastrich walked proudly in this group, announcing he would
proof the existence of his deities. We are still waiting for it.
I said I would answer questions about God and the Bible. In fact, the
subject of my post(s) was "Jason Gastrich Answers." It wasn't "Jason
Gastrich Proves God's Existence."
As I said before, I'm happy to answer questions about the Word of God. I
also know someone who would be thrilled to debate you on the existence of
God. Didn't I already mention him to you?
Post by Jos Flachs
I got the posting still on my box. Want me to repost your messages?
There is no need. Anyone can go to Google Groups and read them.
Post by Jos Flachs
Post by Dr. Jason Gastrich
It's typical
of fools to slam people that don't want an eternal conversation, but
nobody will buy it if they look in the archives. I posted countless
messages.
You did, but none of them of any intellectual level worthy of a
doctorate.
Post by Dr. Jason Gastrich
Post by Jos Flachs
Post by Dr. Jason Gastrich
So, welcome to free.christians and feel free to strike up a
conversation with me or any of our subscribers.
So, welcome back to alt.atheism. (Which is were you cross post to.)
Any plans to proof your deities do exist now? You've had quite a few
months time to think of something.
I'm in free.christians and didn't begin this cross-posting. It came to me.
Well, I am as always in alt.atheism. Still got that cross posting
problem? I recall you had some difficulty with that the last time.
Post by Dr. Jason Gastrich
I have a little time earmarked for usenet posting and explaining the
inerrancy of the scriptures.
Please feel free. We can use a good laugh. Try the Flood story.
I'm happy to answer questions (e.g. sentences with question marks that ask
questions). However, I'm not impressed with your attitude or words so far.
I've accused me of not giving answers, you misrepresented my last
appearance, lied about my identity, etc. Maybe you should get over the
introductions and get on with your point.
While I have never met Mr. Flachs, I doubt he would object to me asking the
following: Can you provide any evidence of a global flood as described
according to the Bible?

I put a question mark on there, so you can't miss it.

turk
Dr. Jason Gastrich
2003-11-29 10:29:11 UTC
Permalink
Post by turk
Post by Dr. Jason Gastrich
On Fri, 28 Nov 2003 04:38:02 GMT, "Dr. Jason Gastrich"
Post by Dr. Jason Gastrich
Post by Jos Flachs
Post by Dr. Jason Gastrich
I was happy to answer lots of questions proposed by the
alt.atheism group in September/October. I used my AOL account
and it was quite easy to leaf through the multitude of posts and
answer your questions.
No, that was what you said you would do. But never did.
You are absolutely incorrect and I don't appreciate your lies.
Sorry doctor. I DO NOT lie. Maybe I quote something incorrect, or
make a mistake. But I'm happy to apologize if such happens.
I think you owe me an apology.
Post by Dr. Jason Gastrich
I posted
over 100 messages in alt.atheism as I answered your questions.
So you ARE that other Jason Gastrich? Why did you deny that? Let's
stay on the topic of lying, for a wee bit longer. That was -shall we
say- a minor willful infringement of the truth?
I never denied it.
That Jason Gastrich walked proudly in this group, announcing he
would proof the existence of his deities. We are still waiting for
it.
I said I would answer questions about God and the Bible. In fact,
the subject of my post(s) was "Jason Gastrich Answers." It wasn't
"Jason Gastrich Proves God's Existence."
As I said before, I'm happy to answer questions about the Word of
God. I also know someone who would be thrilled to debate you on the
existence of God. Didn't I already mention him to you?
I got the posting still on my box. Want me to repost your messages?
There is no need. Anyone can go to Google Groups and read them.
Post by Dr. Jason Gastrich
It's typical
of fools to slam people that don't want an eternal conversation,
but nobody will buy it if they look in the archives. I posted
countless messages.
You did, but none of them of any intellectual level worthy of a
doctorate.
Post by Dr. Jason Gastrich
Post by Jos Flachs
Post by Dr. Jason Gastrich
So, welcome to free.christians and feel free to strike up a
conversation with me or any of our subscribers.
So, welcome back to alt.atheism. (Which is were you cross post
to.) Any plans to proof your deities do exist now? You've had
quite a few months time to think of something.
I'm in free.christians and didn't begin this cross-posting. It came to me.
Well, I am as always in alt.atheism. Still got that cross posting
problem? I recall you had some difficulty with that the last time.
Post by Dr. Jason Gastrich
I have a little time earmarked for usenet posting and explaining
the inerrancy of the scriptures.
Please feel free. We can use a good laugh. Try the Flood story.
I'm happy to answer questions (e.g. sentences with question marks
that ask questions). However, I'm not impressed with your attitude
or words so far. I've accused me of not giving answers, you
misrepresented my last appearance, lied about my identity, etc.
Maybe you should get over the introductions and get on with your
point.
While I have never met Mr. Flachs, I doubt he would object to me
asking the following: Can you provide any evidence of a global flood
as described according to the Bible?
I put a question mark on there, so you can't miss it.
turk
Sure, turk. Did you see the web page that I just made? It gives several
evidences for the flood. There are countless web pages that you could
visit. My page is for a different subject, but you still may be interested
in seeing it. http://jcsm.org/BibleLessons/Originality1.htm.

JG
turk
2003-11-27 16:08:38 UTC
Permalink
Post by duke
Post by Religion is a Lie
Jesus never existed. Christianity is based on a work of fiction -
altered, expanded, corrupted, etc. The Paulinian description of the
spread of Christianity in the 1st cent. AD. was written c. 140 AD - it
is complete fiction. There is no evidence that Christianity existed in
the 1st cent AD - because it didn't!
Is there any reason that anyone should believe you? It's easy to say, but why
would anyone care about your mistakes?
Post by Religion is a Lie
The big question, the question in my mind, is - who was the author who
invented the character Jesus?
God became man in the person of Jesus Christ.
This is your evidence? Superman became man in the person of Clark Kent.
Batman became man in the person of Bruce Wayne. Captain Marvel became man
in the person of Billy Batson. I know these things to be real fact since my
holy comic books tell me so.
Post by duke
Post by Religion is a Lie
I, personally, have no complaints about the moral teachings of those
parts of the gospel story that I think were in the original - but I do
object, most strongly, to much of the later additional material,
insertions, corruptions, etc., that other hands managed to get accepted
as "inspired".
Like what?
The Rapture, anti-abortion groups and their "God opposes abortion" claims,
prayer in public (Matthew 6:5 clearly calls this hypocritical), the worship
of false icons (see Judge Roy Moore and Alabama), just off the top of my
head...

turk
duke
2003-11-27 22:42:28 UTC
Permalink
Post by turk
Post by duke
Post by Religion is a Lie
I, personally, have no complaints about the moral teachings of those
parts of the gospel story that I think were in the original - but I do
object, most strongly, to much of the later additional material,
insertions, corruptions, etc., that other hands managed to get accepted
as "inspired".
Like what?
The Rapture, anti-abortion groups and their "God opposes abortion" claims,
Abortion and abortionists are on a quick trip to the hellhole.
Post by turk
prayer in public (Matthew 6:5 clearly calls this hypocritical),
Matthew 6
Prayer
5"And when you pray, do not be like the hypocrites, for they love to pray
standing in the synagogues and on the street corners to be seen by men. I tell
you the truth, they have received their reward in full.

Sorry, praying in public is not at all hypocritical. Praying to impress people
rather than God is hypocritical.
Post by turk
the worship
of false icons (see Judge Roy Moore and Alabama),
Nobody worshipped Roy's rock.

What in the world are you talking about?
Post by turk
just off the top of my head...
turk
I suggest you put it back in your pocket.
Dr. Jason Gastrich
2003-11-28 02:08:10 UTC
Permalink
Post by turk
Post by duke
Post by Religion is a Lie
Jesus never existed. Christianity is based on a work of fiction -
altered, expanded, corrupted, etc. The Paulinian description of the
spread of Christianity in the 1st cent. AD. was written c. 140 AD -
it is complete fiction. There is no evidence that Christianity
existed in the 1st cent AD - because it didn't!
Is there any reason that anyone should believe you? It's easy to
say, but why would anyone care about your mistakes?
Post by Religion is a Lie
The big question, the question in my mind, is - who was the author
who invented the character Jesus?
God became man in the person of Jesus Christ.
This is your evidence? Superman became man in the person of Clark
Kent. Batman became man in the person of Bruce Wayne. Captain Marvel
became man in the person of Billy Batson. I know these things to be
real fact since my holy comic books tell me so.
Too bad none of them claimed to be God. Too bad none of them rose from the
dead.
Post by turk
Post by duke
Post by Religion is a Lie
I, personally, have no complaints about the moral teachings of those
parts of the gospel story that I think were in the original - but I
do object, most strongly, to much of the later additional material,
insertions, corruptions, etc., that other hands managed to get
accepted as "inspired".
Like what?
The Rapture
Please expand on this.
Post by turk
, anti-abortion groups and their "God opposes abortion"
claims,
See http://abortion.jcsm.org. I don't advocate violence from these groups,
but God is clearly against abortion.
Post by turk
prayer in public (Matthew 6:5 clearly calls this
hypocritical),
Jesus prayed in public and in private. He also spoke on issues of the
heart. It's not wrong to pray in public. It is wrong to pray with the
wrong motive; to merely draw attention to oneself.
Post by turk
the worship of false icons (see Judge Roy Moore and
Alabama),
Nobody worshiped this "icon." If you believe they did, please provide some
proof.
Post by turk
just off the top of my head...
Perhaps you should give us something that's not simply off the top of your
head. And expand on the things that are rolling off your scalp.

God bless,
Jason
Don Kresch
2003-11-28 02:32:32 UTC
Permalink
In alt.atheism on Fri, 28 Nov 2003 02:08:10 GMT, "Dr. Jason Gastrich"
Post by Dr. Jason Gastrich
Post by turk
Post by duke
Post by Religion is a Lie
Jesus never existed. Christianity is based on a work of fiction -
altered, expanded, corrupted, etc. The Paulinian description of the
spread of Christianity in the 1st cent. AD. was written c. 140 AD -
it is complete fiction. There is no evidence that Christianity
existed in the 1st cent AD - because it didn't!
Is there any reason that anyone should believe you? It's easy to
say, but why would anyone care about your mistakes?
Post by Religion is a Lie
The big question, the question in my mind, is - who was the author
who invented the character Jesus?
God became man in the person of Jesus Christ.
This is your evidence? Superman became man in the person of Clark
Kent. Batman became man in the person of Bruce Wayne. Captain Marvel
became man in the person of Billy Batson. I know these things to be
real fact since my holy comic books tell me so.
Too bad none of them claimed to be God. Too bad none of them rose from the
dead.
Neither did jesus.
Post by Dr. Jason Gastrich
Post by turk
Post by duke
Post by Religion is a Lie
I, personally, have no complaints about the moral teachings of those
parts of the gospel story that I think were in the original - but I
do object, most strongly, to much of the later additional material,
insertions, corruptions, etc., that other hands managed to get
accepted as "inspired".
Like what?
The Rapture
Please expand on this.
It's non-biblical.
Post by Dr. Jason Gastrich
Post by turk
, anti-abortion groups and their "God opposes abortion"
claims,
See http://abortion.jcsm.org. I don't advocate violence from these groups,
but God is clearly against abortion.
Nah. "Happy are those who dash infants against the rocks".

[snip]
Post by Dr. Jason Gastrich
Post by turk
the worship of false icons (see Judge Roy Moore and
Alabama),
Nobody worshiped this "icon."
Don't you recall the idiot who screamed "Get your hands off my
god" when the monument was being moved?



Don
---
aa #51, Knight of BAAWA, DNRC o-, Member of the [H]orde
Atheist Minister for St. Dogbert.

"No being is so important that he can usurp the rights of another"
Picard to Data/Graves "The Schizoid Man"
georgann
2003-11-28 02:42:49 UTC
Permalink
Post by Don Kresch
Post by Dr. Jason Gastrich
Too bad none of them claimed to be God. Too bad none of them rose from the
dead.
Neither did jesus.
georgann, Teflon/Bulova apologist wrote:

Huh? Claims don't matter here boys. Hundreds, nay thousands, have claimed to
be God or gods or prophets or angels or aliens or reincarnations of someone
who just happens to have been very well known in their day.

All hogwash.

Its who God really is that matters.

And that's Jesus Christ - God in the flesh - the only God you'll ever see
with human eyes.

--
(`'·.¸(`'·.¸(`'·.¸ ¸.·'´)¸.·'´)¸.·'´)
«´¨`·.¸¸ ¸¸.·´¨ `»

All your prophecy are belong to Christ!

(¸.·'´(¸.·'´(¸.·'´ `'·.¸)`'·.¸)`'·.¸)
lizzard woman
2003-11-28 03:49:03 UTC
Permalink
"Dr. Jason Gastrich" <***@jcsm.org> wrote in message news:e6yxb.53275$***@twister.socal.rr.com...
(snip)
Post by Dr. Jason Gastrich
but God is clearly against abortion.
Reason enough for people to be atheists.

In the case where a fetus isn't viable (due either to short gestation or
abnormal medical indication), you cannot tell a woman what she can and
cannot do with her own body. If you were to tell a woman in that case she
must carry a fetus or she cannot have a particular procedure, that elevates
the rights of a non-viable fetus above that of an extant woman.

I have actually had very few conversations with people like you who hold the
view that they can blithely tell women what they can and cannot do with
their own body when carried a non-viable fetus. I simply assume they have a
screw loose and make some excuse to get away.
--
sharon, aa #2153
"(of creationism) ... Only apocryphal tales told by goat herders around the
campfire after it became too dark to continue to molest their charges." --
TvG (Rec.Equestrian, 2003)
Dr. Jason Gastrich
2003-11-28 04:19:09 UTC
Permalink
Post by lizzard woman
(snip)
Post by Dr. Jason Gastrich
but God is clearly against abortion.
Reason enough for people to be atheists.
I suppose this same logic worked for Hitler.
Post by lizzard woman
In the case where a fetus isn't viable (due either to short gestation
or abnormal medical indication), you cannot tell a woman what she can
and cannot do with her own body. If you were to tell a woman in that
case she must carry a fetus or she cannot have a particular
procedure, that elevates the rights of a non-viable fetus above that
of an extant woman.
I have actually had very few conversations with people like you who
hold the view that they can blithely tell women what they can and
cannot do with their own body when carried a non-viable fetus. I
simply assume they have a screw loose and make some excuse to get
away.
Have you seen http://abortion.jcsm.org? The scriptures are clear on the
issue. God is the giver and taker of life; not woman or man.

Sincerely,
Jason
lizzard woman
2003-11-28 04:40:45 UTC
Permalink
Post by Dr. Jason Gastrich
Post by lizzard woman
(snip)
Post by Dr. Jason Gastrich
but God is clearly against abortion.
Reason enough for people to be atheists.
I suppose this same logic worked for Hitler.
As far as I know, Hitler was never pregnant.
Post by Dr. Jason Gastrich
Post by lizzard woman
In the case where a fetus isn't viable (due either to short gestation
or abnormal medical indication), you cannot tell a woman what she can
and cannot do with her own body. If you were to tell a woman in that
case she must carry a fetus or she cannot have a particular
procedure, that elevates the rights of a non-viable fetus above that
of an extant woman.
I have actually had very few conversations with people like you who
hold the view that they can blithely tell women what they can and
cannot do with their own body when carried a non-viable fetus. I
simply assume they have a screw loose and make some excuse to get
away.
Have you seen http://abortion.jcsm.org? The scriptures are clear on the
issue. God is the giver and taker of life; not woman or man.
Okay I skimmed that page.

Please tell me why that isn't a "Look at the wookie" defense. Since I
suspect you do not watch South Park, I'm referring to that fact that those
scriptural quotes don't really address abortion, now do they?

If God is the giver and taker of life then why are some Congressmen,
ostensibly men and women, trying to have a say so in a woman's life and the
life of her fetus? How is it their business when clearly its God's
purview?????

Perhaps we can agree that I won't tell you what to do with your body and you
don't tell me what to do with mine, okey-dokey???

(This has already become the longest discussion I have ever had with an
anti-choice type.)
--
sharon, aa #2153
"(of creationism) ... Only apocryphal tales told by goat herders around the
campfire after it became too dark to continue to molest their charges." --
TvG (Rec.Equestrian, 2003)
Dr. Jason Gastrich
2003-11-28 04:47:37 UTC
Permalink
Post by lizzard woman
Post by Dr. Jason Gastrich
Post by lizzard woman
(snip)
Post by Dr. Jason Gastrich
but God is clearly against abortion.
Reason enough for people to be atheists.
I suppose this same logic worked for Hitler.
As far as I know, Hitler was never pregnant.
Well, Hitler was an atheist and he was for genocide (similar to the mass
deaths in abortions). So, you are missing some obvious parallels between
your comment and Hitler's world view. Survival of the fittest. I suppose
the fetuses aren't fit enough or strong enough. Yes?
Post by lizzard woman
Post by Dr. Jason Gastrich
Post by lizzard woman
In the case where a fetus isn't viable (due either to short
gestation or abnormal medical indication), you cannot tell a woman
what she can and cannot do with her own body. If you were to tell
a woman in that case she must carry a fetus or she cannot have a
particular procedure, that elevates the rights of a non-viable
fetus above that of an extant woman.
I have actually had very few conversations with people like you who
hold the view that they can blithely tell women what they can and
cannot do with their own body when carried a non-viable fetus. I
simply assume they have a screw loose and make some excuse to get
away.
Have you seen http://abortion.jcsm.org? The scriptures are clear on
the issue. God is the giver and taker of life; not woman or man.
Okay I skimmed that page.
Please tell me why that isn't a "Look at the wookie" defense. Since I
suspect you do not watch South Park, I'm referring to that fact that
those scriptural quotes don't really address abortion, now do they?
On that page, there are a long list of scriptures that teach us a variety of
things about life, death, and yes, abortion. They don't have to use the
word "abortion" to be talking about abortion. They address a number of
issues regarding abortion, though.
Post by lizzard woman
If God is the giver and taker of life then why are some Congressmen,
ostensibly men and women, trying to have a say so in a woman's life
and the life of her fetus? How is it their business when clearly its
God's purview?????
God is the giver and taker of life. In other words, He is involved with a
person being born and a person dying. Humans shouldn't be murdering people;
no matter how many months they have been growing in the womb.
Post by lizzard woman
Perhaps we can agree that I won't tell you what to do with your body
and you don't tell me what to do with mine, okey-dokey???
Agreed. I'll only point you and others to what God has said. What I say
matters little. What He says matters a lot.
Post by lizzard woman
(This has already become the longest discussion I have ever had with
an anti-choice type.)
I'm happy to be the first pro-lifer to speak to you in length.

Are you a Christian? Do you have any experience with abortions?

Typically, women that have abortions have some serious, mental trauma
because of the death. I'm sure some blame their pain on society and the
biblical God, but it is surely because of their God-given conscious that is
telling them to repent.

God bless,
Jason
lizzard woman
2003-11-28 05:03:19 UTC
Permalink
Post by Dr. Jason Gastrich
Post by lizzard woman
Post by Dr. Jason Gastrich
Post by lizzard woman
(snip)
Post by Dr. Jason Gastrich
but God is clearly against abortion.
Reason enough for people to be atheists.
I suppose this same logic worked for Hitler.
As far as I know, Hitler was never pregnant.
Well, Hitler was an atheist and he was for genocide (similar to the mass
deaths in abortions). So, you are missing some obvious parallels between
your comment and Hitler's world view. Survival of the fittest. I suppose
the fetuses aren't fit enough or strong enough. Yes?
I'm not referring to genocide, survival of the fittest, etc. depsite your
second attempt at a "look at the wookie" defense. I'm talking about
recognizing that women are neither chattel nor children and have the right
to decide what to do with their own body, not anyone else's body which is
the Hitler example. Deliberately and erroneously conflating the two is not
going to win you any points in the logic department. In the case where the
fetus is not viable, your position is that the fetus' rights trump that of
the mother in teh case where she decides she does not want to be an
incubator. This is where I usually need to break off the discussion... when
someone can sit there and say "Yes the fetus' rights trump the mother's.".
Its just too insane.
Post by Dr. Jason Gastrich
Post by lizzard woman
Post by Dr. Jason Gastrich
Post by lizzard woman
In the case where a fetus isn't viable (due either to short
gestation or abnormal medical indication), you cannot tell a woman
what she can and cannot do with her own body. If you were to tell
a woman in that case she must carry a fetus or she cannot have a
particular procedure, that elevates the rights of a non-viable
fetus above that of an extant woman.
I have actually had very few conversations with people like you who
hold the view that they can blithely tell women what they can and
cannot do with their own body when carried a non-viable fetus. I
simply assume they have a screw loose and make some excuse to get
away.
Have you seen http://abortion.jcsm.org? The scriptures are clear on
the issue. God is the giver and taker of life; not woman or man.
Okay I skimmed that page.
Please tell me why that isn't a "Look at the wookie" defense. Since I
suspect you do not watch South Park, I'm referring to that fact that
those scriptural quotes don't really address abortion, now do they?
On that page, there are a long list of scriptures that teach us a variety of
things about life, death, and yes, abortion. They don't have to use the
word "abortion" to be talking about abortion. They address a number of
issues regarding abortion, though.
I disagree.
Post by Dr. Jason Gastrich
Post by lizzard woman
If God is the giver and taker of life then why are some Congressmen,
ostensibly men and women, trying to have a say so in a woman's life
and the life of her fetus? How is it their business when clearly its
God's purview?????
God is the giver and taker of life. In other words, He is involved with a
person being born and a person dying. Humans shouldn't be murdering people;
no matter how many months they have been growing in the womb.
You didn't answer about whether it is correct or not for US Congressmen to
be insinuating themselves into women's wombs.
Post by Dr. Jason Gastrich
Post by lizzard woman
Perhaps we can agree that I won't tell you what to do with your body
and you don't tell me what to do with mine, okey-dokey???
Agreed. I'll only point you and others to what God has said. What I say
matters little. What He says matters a lot.
Thank you for that.
--
sharon, aa #2153
"(of creationism) ... Only apocryphal tales told by goat herders around the
campfire after it became too dark to continue to molest their charges." --
TvG (Rec.Equestrian, 2003)
Dr. Jason Gastrich
2003-11-28 05:05:30 UTC
Permalink
Post by lizzard woman
Post by Dr. Jason Gastrich
Post by lizzard woman
Post by Dr. Jason Gastrich
Post by lizzard woman
(snip)
Post by Dr. Jason Gastrich
but God is clearly against abortion.
Reason enough for people to be atheists.
I suppose this same logic worked for Hitler.
As far as I know, Hitler was never pregnant.
Well, Hitler was an atheist and he was for genocide (similar to the
mass deaths in abortions). So, you are missing some obvious
parallels between your comment and Hitler's world view. Survival of
the fittest. I suppose the fetuses aren't fit enough or strong
enough. Yes?
I'm not referring to genocide, survival of the fittest, etc. depsite
your second attempt at a "look at the wookie" defense. I'm talking
about recognizing that women are neither chattel nor children and
have the right to decide what to do with their own body, not anyone
else's body which is the Hitler example. Deliberately and
erroneously conflating the two is not going to win you any points in
the logic department. In the case where the fetus is not viable,
your position is that the fetus' rights trump that of the mother in
teh case where she decides she does not want to be an incubator.
This is where I usually need to break off the discussion... when
someone can sit there and say "Yes the fetus' rights trump the
mother's.". Its just too insane.
Post by Dr. Jason Gastrich
Post by lizzard woman
Post by Dr. Jason Gastrich
Post by lizzard woman
In the case where a fetus isn't viable (due either to short
gestation or abnormal medical indication), you cannot tell a woman
what she can and cannot do with her own body. If you were to tell
a woman in that case she must carry a fetus or she cannot have a
particular procedure, that elevates the rights of a non-viable
fetus above that of an extant woman.
I have actually had very few conversations with people like you
who hold the view that they can blithely tell women what they can
and cannot do with their own body when carried a non-viable
fetus. I simply assume they have a screw loose and make some
excuse to get away.
Have you seen http://abortion.jcsm.org? The scriptures are clear
on the issue. God is the giver and taker of life; not woman or
man.
Okay I skimmed that page.
Please tell me why that isn't a "Look at the wookie" defense.
Since I suspect you do not watch South Park, I'm referring to that
fact that those scriptural quotes don't really address abortion,
now do they?
On that page, there are a long list of scriptures that teach us a
variety of things about life, death, and yes, abortion. They don't
have to use the word "abortion" to be talking about abortion. They
address a number of issues regarding abortion, though.
I disagree.
Post by Dr. Jason Gastrich
Post by lizzard woman
If God is the giver and taker of life then why are some Congressmen,
ostensibly men and women, trying to have a say so in a woman's life
and the life of her fetus? How is it their business when clearly
its God's purview?????
God is the giver and taker of life. In other words, He is involved
with a person being born and a person dying. Humans shouldn't be
murdering people; no matter how many months they have been growing
in the womb.
You didn't answer about whether it is correct or not for US
Congressmen to be insinuating themselves into women's wombs.
Post by Dr. Jason Gastrich
Post by lizzard woman
Perhaps we can agree that I won't tell you what to do with your body
and you don't tell me what to do with mine, okey-dokey???
Agreed. I'll only point you and others to what God has said. What
I say matters little. What He says matters a lot.
Thank you for that.
You snipped the last 1/4 of my post and some questions. Was this an
accident?

JG
lizzard woman
2003-11-28 05:25:02 UTC
Permalink
Post by Dr. Jason Gastrich
Post by lizzard woman
Post by Dr. Jason Gastrich
Post by lizzard woman
Post by Dr. Jason Gastrich
Post by lizzard woman
(snip)
Post by Dr. Jason Gastrich
but God is clearly against abortion.
Reason enough for people to be atheists.
I suppose this same logic worked for Hitler.
As far as I know, Hitler was never pregnant.
Well, Hitler was an atheist and he was for genocide (similar to the
mass deaths in abortions). So, you are missing some obvious
parallels between your comment and Hitler's world view. Survival of
the fittest. I suppose the fetuses aren't fit enough or strong
enough. Yes?
I'm not referring to genocide, survival of the fittest, etc. depsite
your second attempt at a "look at the wookie" defense. I'm talking
about recognizing that women are neither chattel nor children and
have the right to decide what to do with their own body, not anyone
else's body which is the Hitler example. Deliberately and
erroneously conflating the two is not going to win you any points in
the logic department. In the case where the fetus is not viable,
your position is that the fetus' rights trump that of the mother in
teh case where she decides she does not want to be an incubator.
This is where I usually need to break off the discussion... when
someone can sit there and say "Yes the fetus' rights trump the
mother's.". Its just too insane.
Post by Dr. Jason Gastrich
Post by lizzard woman
Post by Dr. Jason Gastrich
Post by lizzard woman
In the case where a fetus isn't viable (due either to short
gestation or abnormal medical indication), you cannot tell a woman
what she can and cannot do with her own body. If you were to tell
a woman in that case she must carry a fetus or she cannot have a
particular procedure, that elevates the rights of a non-viable
fetus above that of an extant woman.
I have actually had very few conversations with people like you
who hold the view that they can blithely tell women what they can
and cannot do with their own body when carried a non-viable
fetus. I simply assume they have a screw loose and make some
excuse to get away.
Have you seen http://abortion.jcsm.org? The scriptures are clear
on the issue. God is the giver and taker of life; not woman or
man.
Okay I skimmed that page.
Please tell me why that isn't a "Look at the wookie" defense.
Since I suspect you do not watch South Park, I'm referring to that
fact that those scriptural quotes don't really address abortion,
now do they?
On that page, there are a long list of scriptures that teach us a
variety of things about life, death, and yes, abortion. They don't
have to use the word "abortion" to be talking about abortion. They
address a number of issues regarding abortion, though.
I disagree.
Post by Dr. Jason Gastrich
Post by lizzard woman
If God is the giver and taker of life then why are some Congressmen,
ostensibly men and women, trying to have a say so in a woman's life
and the life of her fetus? How is it their business when clearly
its God's purview?????
God is the giver and taker of life. In other words, He is involved
with a person being born and a person dying. Humans shouldn't be
murdering people; no matter how many months they have been growing
in the womb.
You didn't answer about whether it is correct or not for US
Congressmen to be insinuating themselves into women's wombs.
Post by Dr. Jason Gastrich
Post by lizzard woman
Perhaps we can agree that I won't tell you what to do with your body
and you don't tell me what to do with mine, okey-dokey???
Agreed. I'll only point you and others to what God has said. What
I say matters little. What He says matters a lot.
Thank you for that.
You snipped the last 1/4 of my post and some questions. Was this an
accident?
No. They were irrelevant to the general points we were discussing.

You failed to answer my questions quoted above. Was that an accident?

Do US Congressmen belong in women's wombs or not?
--
sharon, aa #2153
"(of creationism) ... Only apocryphal tales told by goat herders around the
campfire after it became too dark to continue to molest their charges." --
TvG (Rec.Equestrian, 2003)
Dr. Jason Gastrich
2003-11-28 06:40:38 UTC
Permalink
Post by lizzard woman
Post by Dr. Jason Gastrich
Post by lizzard woman
Post by Dr. Jason Gastrich
Post by lizzard woman
Post by Dr. Jason Gastrich
Post by lizzard woman
(snip)
Post by Dr. Jason Gastrich
but God is clearly against abortion.
Reason enough for people to be atheists.
I suppose this same logic worked for Hitler.
As far as I know, Hitler was never pregnant.
Well, Hitler was an atheist and he was for genocide (similar to the
mass deaths in abortions). So, you are missing some obvious
parallels between your comment and Hitler's world view. Survival
of the fittest. I suppose the fetuses aren't fit enough or strong
enough. Yes?
I'm not referring to genocide, survival of the fittest, etc. depsite
your second attempt at a "look at the wookie" defense. I'm talking
about recognizing that women are neither chattel nor children and
have the right to decide what to do with their own body, not anyone
else's body which is the Hitler example. Deliberately and
erroneously conflating the two is not going to win you any points in
the logic department. In the case where the fetus is not viable,
your position is that the fetus' rights trump that of the mother in
teh case where she decides she does not want to be an incubator.
This is where I usually need to break off the discussion... when
someone can sit there and say "Yes the fetus' rights trump the
mother's.". Its just too insane.
Post by Dr. Jason Gastrich
Post by lizzard woman
Post by Dr. Jason Gastrich
Post by lizzard woman
In the case where a fetus isn't viable (due either to short
gestation or abnormal medical indication), you cannot tell a
woman what she can and cannot do with her own body. If you
were to tell a woman in that case she must carry a fetus or she
cannot have a particular procedure, that elevates the rights of
a non-viable fetus above that of an extant woman.
I have actually had very few conversations with people like you
who hold the view that they can blithely tell women what they
can and cannot do with their own body when carried a non-viable
fetus. I simply assume they have a screw loose and make some
excuse to get away.
Have you seen http://abortion.jcsm.org? The scriptures are clear
on the issue. God is the giver and taker of life; not woman or
man.
Okay I skimmed that page.
Please tell me why that isn't a "Look at the wookie" defense.
Since I suspect you do not watch South Park, I'm referring to that
fact that those scriptural quotes don't really address abortion,
now do they?
On that page, there are a long list of scriptures that teach us a
variety of things about life, death, and yes, abortion. They don't
have to use the word "abortion" to be talking about abortion. They
address a number of issues regarding abortion, though.
I disagree.
Post by Dr. Jason Gastrich
Post by lizzard woman
If God is the giver and taker of life then why are some
Congressmen, ostensibly men and women, trying to have a say so in
a woman's life and the life of her fetus? How is it their
business when clearly its God's purview?????
God is the giver and taker of life. In other words, He is involved
with a person being born and a person dying. Humans shouldn't be
murdering people; no matter how many months they have been growing
in the womb.
You didn't answer about whether it is correct or not for US
Congressmen to be insinuating themselves into women's wombs.
Post by Dr. Jason Gastrich
Post by lizzard woman
Perhaps we can agree that I won't tell you what to do with your
body and you don't tell me what to do with mine, okey-dokey???
Agreed. I'll only point you and others to what God has said. What
I say matters little. What He says matters a lot.
Thank you for that.
You snipped the last 1/4 of my post and some questions. Was this an
accident?
No. They were irrelevant to the general points we were discussing.
You failed to answer my questions quoted above. Was that an accident?
Do US Congressmen belong in women's wombs or not?
In America, we have a democracy. The government represents the desires of
the people. If the people decide to legislate against abortion and the
Congressmen help fulfill that wish, then so be it.

Sincerely,
Jason
lizzard woman
2003-11-28 05:55:47 UTC
Permalink
Post by Dr. Jason Gastrich
You snipped the last 1/4 of my post and some questions. Was this an
accident?
I promise to answer all snipped questions truthfully and completely if you
will agree to expound on your novel theory of how the animals on the Ark
were in fact baby animals.
--
sharon, aa #2153
"(of creationism) ... Only apocryphal tales told by goat herders around the
campfire after it became too dark to continue to molest their charges." --
TvG (Rec.Equestrian, 2003)
Dr. Jason Gastrich
2003-11-28 06:42:07 UTC
Permalink
Post by lizzard woman
Post by Dr. Jason Gastrich
You snipped the last 1/4 of my post and some questions. Was this an
accident?
I promise to answer all snipped questions truthfully and completely
if you will agree to expound on your novel theory of how the animals
on the Ark were in fact baby animals.
. . . talk about off-subject. Just kidding.

I haven't posted on this for a little while. Are you reading an old post of
mine?

I don't see why we need to "strike a deal." I'm happy to answer your
questions to the best of my ability, though.

God bless,
Jason
Don Kresch
2003-11-28 05:20:02 UTC
Permalink
In alt.atheism on Fri, 28 Nov 2003 04:47:37 GMT, "Dr. Jason Gastrich"
Post by Dr. Jason Gastrich
Post by lizzard woman
Post by Dr. Jason Gastrich
Post by lizzard woman
(snip)
Post by Dr. Jason Gastrich
but God is clearly against abortion.
Reason enough for people to be atheists.
I suppose this same logic worked for Hitler.
As far as I know, Hitler was never pregnant.
Well, Hitler was an atheist
Well, Hitler was catholic.


Don
---
aa #51, Knight of BAAWA, DNRC o-, Member of the [H]orde
Atheist Minister for St. Dogbert.

"No being is so important that he can usurp the rights of another"
Picard to Data/Graves "The Schizoid Man"
Christopher A. Lee
2003-11-28 12:17:34 UTC
Permalink
Post by Dr. Jason Gastrich
Post by lizzard woman
Post by Dr. Jason Gastrich
Post by lizzard woman
(snip)
Post by Dr. Jason Gastrich
but God is clearly against abortion.
Reason enough for people to be atheists.
I suppose this same logic worked for Hitler.
As far as I know, Hitler was never pregnant.
Well, Hitler was an atheist and he was for genocide (similar to the mass
deaths in abortions). So, you are missing some obvious parallels between
your comment and Hitler's world view. Survival of the fittest. I suppose
the fetuses aren't fit enough or strong enough. Yes?
Stop lying. Hitler was no a theist. He was a Christian. Specifically
Catholic. And he believed that God was going to choose an Aryan
world-leader - him.

What kind of atheist is hoing to treat Jews as Christ-killers?

Use your allegedly god-given brain. The only person you're fooling is
yourself.

Either demonstrate that this Gog thingy actually exists outside your
overworked imagination or shut the fuck up about it.

And do you honestly imagine that lying about us to our faces, is
somehow going to convince us that anything you have to say is going to
be true?
Jos Flachs
2003-11-29 01:22:45 UTC
Permalink
Post by Dr. Jason Gastrich
Post by lizzard woman
As far as I know, Hitler was never pregnant.
Well, Hitler was an atheist
Nope. Sorry to correct you. He was christian, Roman Catholic, to be
exact. He was never excommunicated. Or, if you really like that
position: he was an "atheist" with full support from ALL christian
churches, none excepted.
Post by Dr. Jason Gastrich
and he was for genocide (similar to the mass deaths in abortions).
Not quite: abortion carried a very heavy penalty in the 3rd Reich.
Remember, the Fuhrer needed soldiers. The "Kaninchen Kreuz", does that
ring a bell?
Post by Dr. Jason Gastrich
So, you are missing some obvious parallels between
your comment and Hitler's world view. Survival of the fittest. I suppose
the fetuses aren't fit enough or strong enough. Yes?
Probably not.
Post by Dr. Jason Gastrich
Post by lizzard woman
If God is the giver and taker of life then why are some Congressmen,
ostensibly men and women, trying to have a say so in a woman's life
and the life of her fetus? How is it their business when clearly its
God's purview?????
God is the giver and taker of life. In other words, He is involved with a
person being born and a person dying. Humans shouldn't be murdering people;
no matter how many months they have been growing in the womb.
Now all you have to do is proof these three gods exist...
Post by Dr. Jason Gastrich
Post by lizzard woman
Perhaps we can agree that I won't tell you what to do with your body
and you don't tell me what to do with mine, okey-dokey???
Agreed. I'll only point you and others to what God has said. What I say
matters little. What He says matters a lot.
He (singular, OT version) said a lot about clothes of mixed fibres,
forbidden foods and picking up sticks on Saturdays. You obey that god?
Melleagris Gallopavo
2003-11-29 04:07:32 UTC
Permalink
Post by Dr. Jason Gastrich
Well, Hitler was an atheist
Well, no, Hitler was a Christian. Here is the evidence that you are
lying again, Jason:

Hitler's Christian Beliefs and Fanaticism
Selected quotes from Mein Kampf

"Hence today I believe that I am acting in accordance with the will of
the Almighty Creator: by defending myself against the Jew, I am
fighting for the work of the Lord." 1

- Adolf Hitler, from Mein Kampf

Many pious and dishonest Christians claim that Adolf Hitler was an
atheist. Their assertion however is an outright lie.

Hitler was a Christian. He was raised as a Catholic and attended
Catholic schools. Much of Hitler's philosophy, as detailed in Mein
Kampf, came right out of the Bible, and more importantly, from the
Christian Socialist Movement of early twentieth-century Europe.

Hitler's anti-Semitism grew from his Christian education, which taught
him that Jews were inferior to Christians. Jewish hatred did not
spring from Hitler, it came from the preaching of Catholic priests,
and Protestant ministers throughout Germany for hundreds of years.

Hitler took his Christian beliefs for granted and thus concentrated on
politics and military power. Through political power Hitler wanted to
create a German Reich Church (the Third Reich) to instill dogmatic
beliefs in the German populace.

Future generations should understand that Adolph Hitler could not have
come into power without the support of German Christians, Protestant
(Lutheran) Churches and the Vatican.

Suggested Reading: Hitler's Pope, by John Cornwall

Pope Pius XII (Eugenio Pacelli) and the Vatican greatly assisted
Hitler in his rise to power in Germany. The Reich Concordat, a formal
agreement bewteen Pius XII and Hitler, muzzled German Catholics and
virtually silenced Church criticism of Nazi atrocities. Pius XII
authorized the use of concentration camp labor to maintain church
properties in territory under German control. None of these
irrefutable facts, however, has stopped a movement by the current
pope, John Paul II, to elevate the immoral Pius XII to sainthood.

The following quotes from Mein Kampf prove Hitler held fanatical
religious beliefs. Note the many biblical references.

Volume 1, Chapter 1, In the House of My Parents

Their sword will become our plow, and from the tears of war the daily
bread of future generations will grow.
-Adolf Hitler (Mein Kampf)

Note: "Their sword will become our plow" appears to paraphrase Micah
4:3 about beating swords into ploughshares, but his tears of war more
resembles Joel 3:9-10 "Beat your plowshares into swords."

I had excellent opportunity to intoxicate myself with the solemn
splendor of the brilliant church festivals. As was only natural, the
abbot seemed to me, as the village priest had once seemed to my
father, the highest and most desirable ideal.
-Adolf Hitler (Mein Kampf)

I thank Heaven that a portion of the memories of those days still
remains with me. Woods and meadows were the battlefields on which the
'conflicts' which exist everywhere in life were decided.
-Adolf Hitler (Mein Kampf)

Only a handful of Germans in the Reich had the slightest conception of
the eternal and merciless struggle for the German language, German
schools, and a German way of life. Only today, when the same
deplorable misery is forced on many millions of Germans from the
Reich, who under foreign rule dream of their common fatherland and
strive, amid their longing, at least to preserve their holy right to
their mother tongue, do wider circles understand what it means to be
forced to fight for one's nationality.
-Adolf Hitler (Mein Kampf)

Volume 1, Chapter 2, Years of Study and Suffering in Vienna

...God have mercy!
-Adolf Hitler (Mein Kampf)

Fate must bring retribution, unless men conciliate Fate while there is
still time. How thankful I am today to the Providence which sent me to
that school!
-Adolf Hitler (Mein Kampf)

Thus my faith grew that my beautiful dream for the future would become
reality after all, even though this might require long years.
-Adolf Hitler (Mein Kampf)

The more the linguistic Babel corroded and disorganized parliament,
the closer drew the inevitable hour of the disintegration of this
Babylonian Empire, and with it the hour of freedom for my
German-Austrian people.
-Adolf Hitler (Mein Kampf)

Not until my fourteenth or fifteenth year did I begin to come across
the word 'Jew,' with any frequency, partly in connection with
political discussions.... For the Jew was still characterized for me
by nothing but his religion, and therefore, on grounds of human
tolerance, I maintained my rejection of religious attacks in this case
as in others. Consequently, the tone, particularly that of the
Viennese anti-Semitic press, seemed to me unworthy of the cultural
tradition of a great nation.
-Adolf Hitler (Mein Kampf)

I was not in agreement with the sharp anti-Semitic tone, but from time
to time I read arguments which gave me some food for thought. At all
events, these occasions slowly made me acquainted with the man and the
movement, which in those days guided Vienna's destinies: Dr. Karl
Lueger and the Christian Social Party.
-Adolf Hitler (Mein Kampf)

(Note: Karl Lueger (1844-1910) belonged as a member of the
anti-Semitic Christian Social Party, he became mayor of Vienna and
kept his post until his death.) The man and the movement seemed
'reactionary' in my eyes. My common sense of justice, however, forced
me to change this judgment in proportion as I had occasion to become
acquainted with the man and his work; and slowly my fair judgment
turned to unconcealed admiration. Today, more than ever, I regard this
man as the greatest German mayor of all times.
-Adolf Hitler speaking about Dr. Karl Lueger (Mein Kampf)

How many of my basic principles were upset by this change in my
attitude toward the Christian Social movement! My views with regard to
anti-Semitism thus succumbed to the passage of time, and this was my
greatest transformation of all.
-Adolf Hitler (Mein Kampf)

Hence today I believe that I am acting in accordance with the will of
the Almighty Creator: by defending myself against the Jew, I am
fighting for the work of the Lord.
-Adolf Hitler (Mein Kampf)

Volume 1, Chapter 3 General Political Considerations Based on My
Vienna Period

A man does not die for something which he himself does not believe in.
-Adolf Hitler (Mein Kampf)

The Western democracy of today is the forerunner of Marxism which
without it would not be thinkable. It provides this world plague with
the culture in which its germs can spread.
-Adolf Hitler (Mein Kampf)

Just as a man's denominational orientation is the result of
upbringing, and only the religious need as such slumbers in his soul,
the political opinion of the masses represents nothing but the final
result of an incredibly tenacious and thorough manipulation of their
mind and soul.
-Adolf Hitler (Mein Kampf)

God forbid!
-Adolf Hitler (Mein Kampf)

Sooner will a camel pass through a needle's eye than a great man be
'discovered' by an election.
-Adolf Hitler with his twist on Mark 10:25 (Mein Kampf)

Thank the Lord, Germanic democracy means just this: that any old
climber or moral slacker cannot rise by devious paths to govern his
national comrades, but that, by the very greatness of the
responsibility to be assumed, incompetents and weaklings are
frightened of.
-Adolf Hitler (Mein Kampf)

For by employing religious force in the service of its political
considerations, the crown aroused a spirit which at that outset it had
not considered possible.
-Adolf Hitler on the state of Rome (Mein Kampf)

For when a people is not willing or able to fight for its existence--
Providence in its eternal justice has decreed that people's end.
-Adolf Hitler (Mein Kampf)

the unprecedented rise of the Christian Social Party... was to assume
the deepest significance for me as a classical object of study.
-Adolf Hitler (Mein Kampf)

Even less could I understand how the Christian Social Party at this
same period could achieve such immense power. At that time it had just
reached the apogee of its glory.
-Adolf Hitler (Mein Kampf)

But the power which has always started the greatest religious and
political avalanches in history rolling has from time to immemorial
been the magic of power of the spoken word, and that alone.
Particularly the broad masses of the people can be moved only by the
power of speech.
-Adolf Hitler (Mein Kampf)

The hard struggle which the Pan-Germans fought with the Catholic
Church can be accounted for only by their insufficient understanding
of the spiritual nature of the people.
-Adolf Hitler (Mein Kampf)

The root of the whole evil lay, particularly in Schonerer's opinion,
in the fact that the directing body of the Catholic Church was not in
Germany, and that for this very reason alone it was hostile to the
interests of our nationality.
-Adolf Hitler (Mein Kampf)

Protestantism as such is a better defender of the interests of
Germanism, in so far as this is grounded in its genesis and later
tradition; it fails, however, in the moment when this defense of
national interests must take place in a province which is either
absent from the general line of its ideological world and traditional
development, or is for some reason rejected.
-Adolf Hitler (Mein Kampf)

Thus, Protestantism will always stand up for the advancement of all
Germans as such, as long as matters of inner purity or national
deepening as well as German freedom are involved, since all these
things have a firm foundation in its own being; but it combats with
the greatest hostility any attempt to rescue the nation from the
embrace of its most mortal enemy, since its attitude toward the Jews
just happens to be more or less dogmatically established.
-Adolf Hitler (Mein Kampf)

As long as leadership from above was not lacking, the people fulfilled
their duty and obligation overwhelmingly. Whether Protestant pastor or
Catholic priest, both together and particularly at the first flare,
there really existed in both camps but a single holy German Reich, for
whose existence and future each man turned to his own heaven.
-Adolf Hitler (Mein Kampf)

Verily a man cannot serve two masters. And I consider the foundation
or destruction of a religion far greater than the foundation or
destruction of a state, let alone a party.
-Adolf Hitler speaking like Jesus in Matthew 6:24 (Mein Kampf)

Heaven will smile on us again.
-Adolf Hitler (Mein Kampf)

Political parties has nothing to do with religious problems, as long
as these are not alien to the nation, undermining the morals and
ethics of the race; just as religion cannot be amalgamated with the
scheming of political parties.
-Adolf Hitler (Mein Kampf)

For the political leader the religious doctrines and institutions of
his people must always remain inviolable; or else has no right to be
in politics, but should become a reformer, if he has what it takes!
-Adolf Hitler [the original comes in italics] (Mein Kampf)

In nearly all the matters in which the Pan-German movement was
wanting, the attitude of the Christian Social Party was correct and
well-planned.
-Adolf Hitler (Mein Kampf)

It [Christian Social Party] recognized the value of large-scale
propaganda and was a virtuoso in influencing the psychological
instincts of the broad masses of its adherents.
-Adolf Hitler (Mein Kampf)

The anti-Semitism of the new movement [Christian Social movement] was
based on religious ideas instead of racial knowledge.
-Adolf Hitler (Mein Kampf)

If Dr. Karl Lueger had lived in Germany, he would have been ranked
among the great minds of our people.
-Adolf Hitler speaking about the leader of the Christian Social
movement (Mein Kampf)

Volume 1, Chapter 4, Munich

But the people on top made a cult of the 'ally,' as if it were the
Golden Calf.
-Adolf Hitler (Mein Kampf)

(The Golden calf occurs in Exodus 32:1-4)

Mankind has grown great in eternal struggle, and only in eternal peace
does it perish.
-Adolf Hitler (Mein Kampf)

We must, therefore, coolly and objectively adopt the standpoint that
it can certainly not be the intention of Heaven to give one people
fifty times as much land and soil in this world as another.
-Adolf Hitler (Mein Kampf)

...a man does not die for business, but for ideals.
-Adolf Hitler (Mein Kampf)

Volume 1, Chapter 5, The World War

Even today I am not ashamed to say that, overpowered by stormy
enthusiasm, I fell down on my knees and thanked Heaven from an
overflowing heart for granting me the good fortune of being permitted
to live at this time.
-Adolf Hitler (Mein Kampf)

I had so often sung 'Deutschland u:ber Alles' and shouted 'Heil' at
the top of my lungs, that it seemed to me almost a belated act of
grace to be allowed to stand as a witness in the divine court of the
eternal judge and proclaim the sincerity of this conviction.
-Adolf Hitler (Mein Kampf)

Indeed, nearly all attempts to exterminate a doctrine and its
organizational expression, by force without spiritual foundation, are
doomed to failure, and not seldom end with the exact opposite of the
desired result...
-Adolf Hitler (Mein Kampf)

Only in the steady and constant application of force lies the very
first prerequisite for success. This persistence, however, can always
and only arise from a definite spiritual conviction. Any violence
which does not spring from a firm, spiritual base, will be wavering
and uncertain.
-Adolf Hitler (Mein Kampf)

Volume 1, Chapter 6, War Propaganda

I soon realized that the correct use of propaganda is a true art which
has remained practically unknown to the bourgeois parties. Only the
Christian-Social movement, especially in Lueger's time achieved a
certain virtuosity on this instrument, to which it owed many of its
success.
-Adolf Hitler (Mein Kampf)

Certainly we don't have to discuss these matters with the Jews, the
most modern inventors of this cultural perfume. Their whole existence
is an embodied protest against the aesthetics of the Lord's image.
-Adolf Hitler (Mein Kampf)

Volume 1, Chapter 7, The Revolution

More than once I was tormented by the thought that if Providence had
put me in the place of the incapable of criminal incompetents or
scoundrels in our propaganda service, our battle with Destiny would
have taken a different turn.
-Adolf Hitler (Mein Kampf)

Once again the songs of the fatherland roared to the heavens along the
endless marching columns, and for the last time the Lord's grace
smiled on His ungrateful children.
-Adolf Hitler reflecting on World War I (Mein Kampf)

...we must pray to the Almighty not to refuse His blessing to this
change and not to abandon our people in the times to come.
-Hitler recalling a priest's speech after the defeat of WWI (Mein
Kampf)

Volume 1, Chapter 8, The Beginning of My Political Activity

As soon as the theoretician attempts to take account of so-called
'utility' and 'reality' instead of absolute truth, his work will cease
to be a polar star of seeking humanity and instead will become a
prescription for everyday life.
-Adolf Hitler reflecting on World War I (Mein Kampf)

The thinking of the one, therefore, will be determined by eternal
truth, the actions of the other more by the practical reality of the
moment. The greatness of the one lies in the absolute abstract
soundness of his idea...
-Adolf Hitler reflecting on World War I (Mein Kampf)

The more abstractly correct and hence powerful this idea will be, the
more impossible remains its complete fulfillment as long as it
continues to depend on human beings...
If this were not so, the founders of religion could not be counted
among the greatest men of this earth... In its workings, even the
religion of love is only the weak reflection of the will of its
exalted founder; its significance, however, lies in the direction
which it attempted to give to a universal human development of
culture, ethics, and morality.
-Adolf Hitler (Mein Kampf)

To them belong, not only the truly great statesmen, but all other
great reformers as well. Beside Frederick the Great stands Martin
Luther as well as Richard Wagner.
-Adolf Hitler (Mein Kampf)

What we must fight for is to safeguard the existence and reproduction
of our race and our people, the sustenance of our children and the
purity of our blood, the freedom and independence of the fatherland,
so that our people may mature for the fulfillment of the mission
allotted it by the creator of the universe.
-Adolf Hitler (Mein Kampf)

Volume 1, Chapter 10, Causes of the Collapse

Consequently, the value and importance of the monarchic idea cannot
reside in the person of the monarch himself except if Heaven decides
to lay the crown on the brow of the heroic genius like Frederick the
Great or a wise character like William I.
-Adolf Hitler (Mein Kampf)

Hastily and indifferently, people tried to pass by the unpleasant
truths, as though by such an attitude events could be undone. No, the
fact that our big city population is growing more and more prostituted
in its love life cannot just be denied out of existence; it simply is
so.
...it is said with such terrible justice that the sins of the fathers
are avenged down to the tenth generation. But this applies only to
profanation of the blood and the race.
-Adolf Hitler (Mein Kampf)

(Avenged to the tenth generation appears in Deuteronomy 23:2-3)

Blood sin and desecration of the race are the original sin in this
world and the end of a humanity which surrenders to it.
-Adolf Hitler (Mein Kampf)

The fight against syphilis demands a fight against prostitution,
against prejudices, old habits, against previous conceptions, general
views among them not least the false prudery of certain circles.
The first prerequisite for even the moral right to combat these things
is the facilitation of earlier marriage for the coming generation. In
late marriage alone lies the compulsion to retain an institution
which, twist and turn as you like, is and remains a disgrace to
humanity, an institution which is damned ill-suited to a being who
with his usual modesty likes to regard himself as the 'image' of God.
-Adolf Hitler (Mein Kampf)

Parallel to the training of the body a struggle against the poisoning
of the soul must begin. Our whole public life today is like a hothouse
for sexual ideas and simulations. Just look at the bill of fare served
up in our movies, vaudeville and theaters, and you will hardly be able
to deny that this is not the right kind of food, particularly for the
youth...
Theater, art, literature, cinema, press, posters, and window displays
must be cleansed of all manifestations of our rotting world and placed
in the service of a moral, political, and cultural idea.
-Adolf Hitler sounding like the Moral Majority (Mein Kampf)

But if out of smugness, or even cowardice, this battle is not fought
to its end, then take a look at the peoples five hundred years from
now. I think you will find but few images of God, unless you want to
profane the Almighty.
-Adolf Hitler (Mein Kampf)

The works of Mortiz von Schwind, or of a Bo:cklin, were also an inner
experience, but of artists graced by God and not of clowns.
-Adolf Hitler (Mein Kampf)

How widespread the general disunity was growing is shown by an
examination of religious conditions before the War. Here, too, a
unified and effective philosophical conviction had long since been
lost in large sections of the nation. In this the members officially
breaking away from the churches play a less important role than those
who are completely indifferent.
-Adolf Hitler (Mein Kampf)

While both denominations maintain missions in Asia and Africa in order
to win new followers for their doctrine-- an activity which can boast
but very modest success compared to the advance of the Mohammedan
faith in particular-- right here in Europe they lose millions and
millions of inward adherents who either are alien to all religious
life or simply so their own ways. The consequences, particularly from
a moral point of view, are not favorable.
-Adolf Hitler (Mein Kampf)

Also noteworthy is the increasingly violent struggle against the
dogmatic foundations of the various churches without which in this
human world the practical existence of a religious faith is not
conceivable.
-Adolf Hitler (Mein Kampf)

The great masses of people do not consist of philosophers; precisely
for the masses, faith is often the sole foundation of a moral
attitude. The various substitutes have not proved so successful from
the standpoint of results that they could be regarded as a useful
replacement for previous religious creeds. But if religious doctrine
and faith are really to embrace the broad masses, the unconditional
authority of the content of this faith is the foundation of all
efficacy.
-Adolf Hitler (Mein Kampf)

The attack against dogmas as such, therefore, strongly resembles the
struggle against the general legal foundations of a state, and , as
the latter would end in a total anarchy of the state, the former would
end in a worthless religious nihilism.
-Adolf Hitler (Mein Kampf)

Worst of all, however, is the devastation wrought by the misuse of
religious conviction for political ends. In truth, we cannot sharply
enough attack those wretched crooks who would like to make religion an
implement to perform political or rather business services for them.
-Adolf Hitler (Mein Kampf)

Volume 1, Chapter 11, Nation and Race

The result of all racial crossing is therefore in brief always the
following:
(a) Lowering of the level of the higher race;
(b) Physical and intellectual regression and hence the beginning of a
slowly but surely progressing sickness.
To bring about such a development is, then, nothing else but to sin
against the will of the eternal creator. And as a sin this act is
rewarded.
-Adolf Hitler (Mein Kampf)

Here, of course, we encounter the objection of the modern pacifist, as
truly Jewish in its effrontery as it is stupid! 'Man's role is to
overcome Nature!'
-Adolf Hitler (Mein Kampf)

(Man's dominion over earth appears in Genesis 1:26)

...the fall of man in paradise has always been followed by his
expulsion.
-Adolf Hitler (Mein Kampf)

(See Genesis Chapter 3)

...that is why the prophet seldom has any honor in his own country.
-Adolf Hitler (Mein Kampf)

("For Jesus himself testified, that a prophet hath no honour in his
own country." John 4:44)

The purest idealism is unconsciously equivalent to the deepest
knowledge.
-Adolf Hitler (Mein Kampf)

The Jew has always been a people with definite racial characteristics
and never a religion.
-Adolf Hitler (Mein Kampf)

Due to his own original special nature, the Jew cannot pos ess a
religious institution, if for no other reason because he lacks
idealism in any form, and hence belief in a hereafter is absolutely
foreign to him. And a religion in the Aryan sense cannot be imagined
which lacks the conviction of survival after death in some form.
Indeed, the Talmud is not a book to prepare a man for the hereafter,
but only for a practical and profitable life in this world.
-Adolf Hitler (Mein Kampf)

The best characterization is provided by the product of this religious
education, the Jew himself. His life is only of this world, and his
spirit is inwardly as alien to true Christianity as his nature two
thousand years previous was to the great founder of the new doctrine.
Of course, the latter made no secret of his attitude toward the Jewish
people, and when necessary he even took the whip to drive from the
temple of the Lord this adversary of all humanity, who then as always
saw in religion nothing but an instrument for his business existence.
In return, Christ was nailed to the cross, while our present-day party
Christians debase themselves to begging for Jewish votes at elections
and later try to arrange political swindles with atheistic Jewish
parties-- and this against their own nation.
-Adolf Hitler (Mein Kampf)

At times of the bitterest distress, fury against him finally breaks
out, and the plundered and ruined masses begin to defend themselves
against the scourge of God.
-Adolf Hitler (Mein Kampf)

(See Isaiah 63)

This game is repeated again and again, and in it the role of the
so-called 'German princes' is just as miserable as that of the Jews
themselves. These lords were really God's punishment for their beloved
peoples and find their parallels only in the various ministers of the
present time.
-Adolf Hitler (Mein Kampf)

They [German princes] made a pact with the devil and landed in hell.
-Adolf Hitler (Mein Kampf)

If we consider how greatly he has sinned against the masses in the
course of the centuries, how he has squeezed and sucked the blood
again and again; if furthermore, we consider how the people gradually
learned to hate him for this, and ended up by regarding his existence
as nothing but punishment of Heaven for the other peoples, we can
understand how hard this shift must be for the Jew.
-Adolf Hitler (Mein Kampf)

First, therefore, he goes about making up to the people for his
previous sins against them. He begins his career as the 'benefactor'
of mankind. Since his new benevolence has a practical foundation, that
the left hand should not know what the right hand giveth; no, whether
he likes it or not, he must reconcile himself to letting as many
people as possible know how deeply he feels the sufferings of the
masses and all the sacrifices that he himself is making to combat
them.
-Adolf Hitler (Mein Kampf)

(The left/right hand paraphrase appears to come from Matthew 6:3)

But even more: all at once the Jew also becomes liberal and begins to
rave about the necessary progress of mankind.
-Adolf Hitler (Mein Kampf)

The Jew almost never marries a Christian woman; it is the Christian
who marries a Jewess.
-Adolf Hitler (Mein Kampf)

the personification of the devil as the symbol of all evil assumes the
living shape of the Jew.
-Adolf Hitler (Mein Kampf)

With satanic joy in his face, the black-haired Jewish youth lurks in
wait for the unsuspecting girl whom he defiles with his blood, thus
stealing her from her people.
-Adolf Hitler (Mein Kampf)

Peoples which bastardize themselves, or let themselves be bastardized,
sin against the will of eternal Providence...
-Adolf Hitler (Mein Kampf)

Providence did not bestow her reward on the victorious sword, but
followed the law of eternal retribution.
-Adolf Hitler (Mein Kampf)

Volume 1, Chapter 12 The First Period of Development of the
Nationalist Social German Worker's Party

Faith is harder to shake than knowledge, love succumbs less to change
than respect, hate is more enduring than aversion, and the impetus to
the mightiest upheavals on this earth has at all times consisted less
in a scientific knowledge dominating the masses than in a fanaticism
which inspired them and sometimes in a hysteria which drove them
forward.
-Adolf Hitler (Mein Kampf)

The future of a movement is conditioned by the fanaticism, yes, the
intolerance, with which its adherents uphold it as the sole correct
movement, and push it past other formations of a similar sort.
-Adolf Hitler (Mein Kampf)

...absolute intolerance also provides long growth.
-Adolf Hitler (Mein Kampf)

The greatness of every mighty organization embodying an idea in this
world lies in the religious fanaticism and intolerance with which,
fanatically convinced of its own right, it intolerantly imposes its
will against all others.
-Adolf Hitler (Mein Kampf)

The greatness of Christianity did not lie in attempted negotiations
for compromise with any similar philosophical opinions in the ancient
world, but in its inexorable fanaticism in preaching and fighting for
its own doctrine.
-Adolf Hitler (Mein Kampf)

No more than a famous master can be replaced and another take over the
completion of the half-finished painting he has left behind can the
great poet and thinker, the great statesman and the great soldier, be
replaced. For their activity lies always in the province of art. It is
not mechanically trained but inborn by God's grace.
-Adolf Hitler (Mein Kampf)

All in all, this whole period of winter 1919-20 was a single struggle
to strengthen confidence in the victorious might of the young movement
and raise it to that fanaticism of faith which can move mountains.
-Adolf Hitler (Mein Kampf)

The characteristic thing about these people is that they rave about
old Germanic heroism, about dim prehistory, stone axes, spear and
shield, but in reality are the greatest cowards that can be imagined.
For the same people who brandish scholarly imitations of old German
tin swords, and wear a dressed bearskin with bull's horns over their
heads, preach for the present nothing but struggle with spiritual
weapons, and run away as fast as they can from every Communist
blackjack.
-Adolf Hitler (Mein Kampf)

(The above statement refutes the common impression that Hitler admired
ancient Nordic customs.)

A man who knows a thing, who is aware of a given danger, and sees the
possibility of a remedy with his own eyes, has the duty and
obligation, by God, not to work 'silently,' but to stand up before the
whole public against the evil and for its cure.
-Adolf Hitler (Mein Kampf)

Volume 2, Chapter 1, Philosophy and Party

Thus inwardly armed with confidence in God and the unshakable
stupidity of the voting citizenry, the politicians can begin the fight
for the 'remaking' of the Reich as they call it.
-Adolf Hitler (Mein Kampf)

By helping to raise man above the level of bestial vegetation, faith
contributes in reality to the securing and safeguarding of his
existence. Take away from present-day mankind its education-based,
religious-dogmatic principles-- or, practically speaking,
ethical-moral principles-- by abolishing this religious education, but
without replacing it by an equivalent, and the result will be a grave
shock to the foundations of their existence.
-Adolf Hitler (Mein Kampf)

Of course, even the general designation 'religious' includes various
basic ideas or convictions, for example, the indestructibility of the
soul, the eternity of its existence, the existence of a higher being,
etc. But all these ideas, regardless of how convincing they may be for
the individual, are submitted to the critical examination of this
individual and hence to a fluctuating affirmation or negation until
emotional divination or knowledge assumes the binding force of
apodictic faith. This, above all, is the fighting factor which makes a
breach and opens the way for the recognition of basic religious views.
-Adolf Hitler (Mein Kampf)

Anyone who dares to lay hands on the highest image of the Lord commits
sacrilege against the benevolent creator of this miracle and
contributes to the expulsion from paradise.
-Adolf Hitler (Mein Kampf)

Volume 2, Chapter 2, The State

We, as Aryans, can conceive of the state only as the living organism
of a nationality which not only assures the preservation of its
nationality, but by the development of its spiritual and ideal
abilities leads it to the highest freedom.
-Adolf Hitler (Mein Kampf)

the task of preserving and advancing the highest humanity, given to
this earth by the benevolence of the Almighty, seems a truly high
mission.
-Adolf Hitler (Mein Kampf)

World history is made by minorities when this minority of number
embodies the majority of will and determination.
-Adolf Hitler (Mein Kampf)

A folkish state must therefore begin by raising marriage from the
level of a continuous defilement of the race, and give it the
consecration of an institution which is called upon to produce images
of the Lord and not monstrosities halfway between man and ape.
-Adolf Hitler (Mein Kampf)

It would be more in keeping with the intention of the noblest man in
this world if our two Christian churches, instead of annoying Negroes
with missions which they neither desire nor understand, would kindly,
but in all seriousness, teach our European humanity that where parents
are not healthy it is a deed pleasing to God to take pity on a poor
little healthy orphan child and give him father and mother, than
themselves to give birth to a sick child who will only bring
unhappiness and suffering on himself and the rest of the world.
-Adolf Hitler (Mein Kampf)

That this is possible may not be denied in a world where hundreds and
hundreds of thousands of people voluntarily submit to celibacy,
obligated and bound by nothing except the injunction of the Church.
Should the same renunciation not be possible if this injunction is
replaced by the admonition finally to put an end to the constant and
continuous original sin of racial poisoning, and to give the Almighty
Creator beings such as He Himself created?
-Adolf Hitler (Mein Kampf)

*For the greatest revolutionary changes on this earth would not have
been thinkable if their motive force, instead of fanatical, yes,
hysterical passion, had been merely the bourgeois virtues of law and
order.*
-Adolf Hitler (Mein Kampf)

It doesn't dawn on this depraved bourgeois world that this is
positively a sin against all reason; that it is criminal lunacy to
keep on drilling a born half-ape until people think they have made a
lawyer out of him, while millions of members of the highest
culture-race must remain in entirely unworthy positions; that it is a
sin against the will of the Eternal Creator if His most gifted beings
by the hundreds and hundreds of thousands are allowed to degenerate in
the present proletarian morass, while Hottentots and Zulu Kaffirs are
trained for intellectual professions.
-Adolf Hitler (Mein Kampf)

It may be that today gold has become the exclusive ruler of life, but
the time will come when man will again bow down before a higher god.
-Adolf Hitler (Mein Kampf)

Volume 2, Chapter 5, Philosophy and Organization

Christianity could not content itself with building up its own altar;
it was absolutely forced to undertake the destruction of the heathen
altars. Only from this fanatical intolerance could its apodictic faith
take form; this intolerance is, in fact, its absolute presupposition.
-Adolf Hitler (Mein Kampf)

For how shall we fill people with blind faith in the correctness of a
doctrine, if we ourselves spread uncertainty and doubt by constant
changes in its outward structure? ...Here, too, we can learn by the
example of the Catholic Church. Though its doctrinal edifice, and in
part quite superfluously, comes into collision with exact science and
research, it is none the less unwilling to sacrifice so much as one
little syllable of its dogmas... it is only such dogmas which lend to
the whole body the character of a faith.
-Adolf Hitler (Mein Kampf)

Volume 2, Chapter 7, The Struggle with the Red Front

I must frankly admit that... I should probably lose all interest in
life and would rather not be a German at all. But since, thank the
Lord, this cannot be done, we have no need to be surprised that the
health, unspoiled people avoid 'bourgeois mass meetings' as the devil
holy water.
-Adolf Hitler (Mein Kampf)

This, it may be that centuries, dissatisfied with the form of their
religious life, yearn for a renewal, and that from this psychic urge
dozens and more men arise who on the basis of their insight and their
knowledge believe themselves as prophets of a new doctrine, or at
least as warriors against an existing one.
-Adolf Hitler (Mein Kampf)

The main fighter for the DSP [*Deutsch-Sozialistische Partei* or
German Socialist Party], as I have said, was Julius Streicher, then a
teacher in Nuremberg. At first he, too, had a holy conviction of the
mission and the future of his movement.
-Adolf Hitler (Mein Kampf)

*Great, truly world-shaking revolutions of a spiritual nature are not
even conceivable and realizable except as the titanic struggles of
individual formations, never as enterprises of coalitions.
-Adolf Hitler (Mein Kampf)

Volume 2, Chapter 10, Federalism as a Mask

The folkish-minded man, in particular, has the sacred duty, each in
his own denomination, of making *people stop just talking
superficially of God's will, and actually fulfill God's will, and not
let God's word be desecrated.* For God's will gave men their form,
their essence and their abilities. Anyone who destroys His work is
declaring war on the Lord's creation, the divine will.
-Adolf Hitler (Mein Kampf)

In the ranks of the movement [National Socialist movement], *the most
devout Protestant* could sit beside *the most devout Catholic,*
without coming into the slightest conflict with his religious
convictions. The mighty common struggle which both carried on against
the destroyer of Aryan humanity had, on the contrary, taught them
mutually to respect and esteem one another.
-Adolf Hitler (Mein Kampf)

Volume 2, Chapter 13, German Alliance Policy After the War

... the world has no reason for fighting in our defense, and as a
matter of principle God does not make cowardly nations free...
-Adolf Hitler (Mein Kampf)

If the German nation wants to end a state of affairs that threatens
its extermination in Europe, it must not fall into the error of the
pre-War period and make enemies of God and the world; it must
recognize the most dangerous enemy and strike at him with all its
concentrated power. And if this victory is obtained through sacrifices
elsewhere, the coming generations of our people will not condemn us.
-Adolf Hitler (Mein Kampf)

For this, to be sure, from the child's primer down to the last
newspaper, every theater and every movie house, every advertising
pillar and every billboard, must be pressed into the service of this
one great mission, until the timorous prayer of our present parlor
patriots: 'Lord, make us free!' is transformed in the brain of the
smallest boy into the burning plea: '*Almighty God, bless our arms
when the time comes; be just as thou hast always been; judge now
whether we be deserving of freedom; Lord, bless our battle!'
-Adolf Hitler's prayer (Mein Kampf)

Volume 2, Chapter 14, Eastern Orientation or Eastern Policy

...we National Socialists must hold unflinchingly to our aim in
foreign policy, namely *to secure for the German people the land and
soil to which they are entitles on this earth.* And this action is the
only one which, before God and or German posterity, would make any
sacrifice of blood seem justified: before God, since we have been put
on this earth with the mission of eternal struggle for our daily
bread...
-Adolf Hitler (Mein Kampf)

And so he [the Jew] advances on his fatal road until another force
comes forth to oppose him, and in a mighty struggle hurls the
heaven-stormer back to Lucifer. Germany is today the next great war
aim of Bolshevism. It requires all the force of a young missionary
idea to raise our people up again, to free them from the snares of
this international serpent...
-Adolf Hitler (Mein Kampf)

*The fight against Jewish world Bolshevization requires a clear
attitude toward Soviet Russia. You cannot drive out the Devil with
Beelzebub.*
-Adolf Hitler (Mein Kampf)

(devils through Beelzebub comes from Luke 11:15-19)

Never forget that the most sacred right on this earth is a man's right
to have earth to till with his own hands, and the most sacred
sacrifice the blood that a man sheds for this earth.
-Adolf Hitler (Mein Kampf)

(till the ground: see Genesis 3:23)

Volume 2, Chapter 15, The Right of Emergency Defense

Viewing all this from a higher vantage-point, we can speak of one
single piece of good fortune in all this misery, which is that, though
men can be befuddled, the heavens cannot be bribed.
-Adolf Hitler (Mein Kampf)

But in the great hour Heaven sent the German people a great man, Herr
von Cuno.
-Adolf Hitler (Mein Kampf)

Hitler's Henchmen

God gave the savior to the German people. We have faith, deep and
unshakeable faith, that he [Hitler] was sent to us by God to save
Germany.
-Hermann Goering

I swear before God this holy oath, that I shall give absolute
confidence to the Fuehrer of the German Reich and people.
-Heinrich Himmler (reminding his hearers about the oath taken by all
SS men as well as by the military forces)

(The mass murderer Himmler was brought up as a devout Catholic, like
young Hitler, and he was careful to attend mass regularly.)

You *Einsatztruppen* (task forces) are called upon to fulfill a
repulsive duty. But you are soldiers who have to carry out every order
unconditionally. You have a responsibility before God and Hitler for
everything that is happening. I myself hate this bloody business and I
have been moved to the depths of my soul. But I am obeying the highest
law by doing my duty. Man must defend himself against bedbugs and
rats-- against vermin.
-Heinrich Himmler (in a speech to the SS guards)

Julius Streicher, the ninth child of a Roman Catholic primary school
teacher, also became a school teacher in Nuremberg. When Hitler got
released from prison in December 1924, Streicher hailed Hitler's
return to politics as a "gift of God," a judgement the Fuehrer never
forgot. Streicher held an enthusiam about allegations that the Jews
murdered non-Jews in order to obtain blood for the feast of Passover.
He charged that Jews hated Christianity and mankind in general.
Streicher went to grotesque lengths in his attacks on Jews claiming
the discovery that "Christ was not a Jew but an Aryan."

If the danger of the reproduction of that curse of God in the Jewish
blood is finally to come to an end, then there is only one way-- the
extermination of that people whose father is the devil...
-Julius Streicher (in an article in the newspaper *Der Stu:mer*)

Only the Jews, he shouted, had remained victorious after the dreadful
days of World War I. These were the people, he charged, of whom Christ
said, "Its father is the devil."
-Julius Streicher

(See John 8:44, for Christ's accusation of father the devil)

Germans must fight Jews, that organized body of world criminals
against whom Christ, the greatest anti-Semite of all time, had fought.
-Julius Streicher

Now it goes to God!
-Julius Streicher (as he mounted the gallows platform to his death)

Purim Fest, 1946.
-Julius Streicher (his last words before his hanging)

(Purim describes a Jewish holiday, celebrated in the spring to
commemorate the hanging of Haman, biblical oppressor of the Jews.)

No matter what human beings do I shall some day stand before the
judgement seat of the Eternal. I shall answer to Him, and I know he
will judge me innocent.
-Rudolf Hess (in a statement to the Nuremberg Tribunal)

The pious Catholic parents of Joseph Goebbels raised him and his two
brothers in that faith. He spoke of Hitler as "either Christ or St.
John." "Hitler, I love you!" he wrote in his diary.

A Jew is for me an object of disgust. I feel like vomiting when I see
one. Christ could not possibly have been a Jew. It is not necessary to
prove that scientifically-- it is a fact.
-Joseph Goebbels (in his attempt to win the eternal gratitude of
Hitler)

May God save Germany!
-Joachim Ribbentrop (his last words before his hanging)

In his Nuremberg cell, Rudolf Hoess told psychologist G.M. Gilbert how
he got brought up in a rigorous Catholic tradition:

My father was really a bigot. He was very strict and fanatical. I
learned that my father took a religious oath at the time of the birth
of my younger sister, dedicating me to God and the priesthood, and
after that leading a Joseph married life [celibacy]. He directed my
entire youthful education toward the goal of making me a priest. I had
to pray and go to church endlessly, do penance over the slightest
misdeed-- praying as punishment for any little unkindness to my
sister, or something like that.
When asked if his father ever beat him, Hoess replied that he was only
punished by prayer. "The thing that made me so stubborn and probably
made me later on cut off from people was his way of making me feel
that I had wronged him personally, and that, since I was spiritually a
minor, he was responsible to God for my sins.

NOTES:

Martin Bormann stood as one of the few top Nazis who rejected
Christianity. At Hitler's round table, Bormann noted that the Fuehrer
did not want to pursue a campaign against the churches. Only in secret
did Bormann hold a grudge against the churches. He carefully avoided
the rouse of suspicion of the Fuehrer. If he could not destroy the
churches, he could at least demand that his subordinates pay little
attention to them.

Alfred Rosenberg stands as the major reason why so many American
Christians think Nazism represented Nordic pagan beliefs instead of
Nazi Christianity. Hitler chose Rosenberg to create a 'religion of the
Blood' knowing that any form of propaganda could prove useful.
However, Hitler also attempted to establish a Reich Christian Church
for the future of Germany. Hitler, himself, did not believe in pagan
cults. Rosenberg charged that the true picture of Jesus had been
distorted by fanatics like Matthew, by materialistic rabbis like Paul,
by African jurists like Tertullian, and the mongrel half-breeds like
St. Augustine. The real Christ, wrote Rosenberg, was an Amorite
Nordic, aggressive, courageous, "a man of true Nordic character," a
revolutionary who opposed the Jewish and Roman systems with sword in
hand, bringing not peace but war (see Matthew 10:34-37). Rosenberg
later went on to say that he favored a "positive Christianity," which
would purify the Nordic race, re-establish the old pagan virtues, and
substitute the fiery spirit of the hero for the crucifixion.
angelicusrex
2003-11-29 08:06:01 UTC
Permalink
Actually, we can't take Mein Kampf any more seriously than the Bible. It was
written as a self congratulatory propaganda piece. Though Hitler dealt with
the churches, he hated them. He is documented as saying that if he had his
way they would be swept off the earth. And he was going to make Germany, not
into a godless atheistic state, but rather one based on Norse and other old
pagan gods. He and many of his followers were occultists and followers of
Nietzsche, who of course proclaimed that: God Is Dead. Nietzsche was a
philosopher who believed the next step in the evolution of mankind was to
create a race of Supermen who were their own gods, and gods over a world of
mindless slaves. The Nazis took this to heart. They began to develop a
formal set of rituals and rites that was a travesty of religion. It is also
evident from the quotes you took from Mein Kampf that Hitler was a
megalomaniac who cared more for pomp and power than God, his "paraphrase" of
Micah was typical of his using both the Hebrew Bible and the New Testament
against those he was going to destroy.

Many good and worthy Christian people fought and opposed Hitler on all
fronts. As well as the God-Emperor Hirohito. Many good people took Jews into
their homes and saved as many lives as they could from that terror. Oddly no
one ever hears about how atheists or Muslims saved any Jews or opposed
Hitler. Perhaps they did. I do not know. What I do know is that everything
in this particular group turns anti-Christian very quickly.

Hitler believed in god all right, in HIMSELF as God over all. Don't confuse
this with traditional or even heretical Christianity. It is more like the
Roman ideal.

Saint

"Melleagris Gallopavo" <***@yahoo.com> wrote in
message: Stuff about Hitler...
Michelle Malkin
2003-11-29 08:52:44 UTC
Permalink
On Sat, 29 Nov 2003 01:06:01 -0700, "angelicusrex"
Post by angelicusrex
Actually, we can't take Mein Kampf any more seriously than the Bible. It was
written as a self congratulatory propaganda piece. Though Hitler dealt with
the churches, he hated them. He is documented as saying that if he had his
way they would be swept off the earth. And he was going to make Germany, not
into a godless atheistic state, but rather one based on Norse and other old
pagan gods. He and many of his followers were occultists and followers of
Nietzsche, who of course proclaimed that: God Is Dead. Nietzsche was a
philosopher who believed the next step in the evolution of mankind was to
create a race of Supermen who were their own gods, and gods over a world of
mindless slaves. The Nazis took this to heart. They began to develop a
formal set of rituals and rites that was a travesty of religion. It is also
evident from the quotes you took from Mein Kampf that Hitler was a
megalomaniac who cared more for pomp and power than God, his "paraphrase" of
Micah was typical of his using both the Hebrew Bible and the New Testament
against those he was going to destroy.
Please provide source quotes to back up what you write.Without this,
you are merely making unproven asertions.
Post by angelicusrex
Many good and worthy Christian people fought and opposed Hitler on all
fronts. As well as the God-Emperor Hirohito. Many good people took Jews into
their homes and saved as many lives as they could from that terror. Oddly no
one ever hears about how atheists or Muslims saved any Jews or opposed
Hitler. Perhaps they did. I do not know. What I do know is that everything
in this particular group turns anti-Christian very quickly.
Hitler believed in god all right, in HIMSELF as God over all. Don't confuse
this with traditional or even heretical Christianity. It is more like the
Roman ideal.
Saint
message: Stuff about Hitler...
Michelle Malkin (Mickey)

^^ ^^ ^^ ^^ ^^ ^^ ^^ ^^ ^^ ^^ ^^ ^^ ^^ ^^ ^^ ^^ ^^ ^^
Hands that work are better than mouths that pray -
Robert Ingersoll
****************************************************
turk
2003-11-28 04:59:17 UTC
Permalink
Post by Dr. Jason Gastrich
Post by lizzard woman
(snip)
Post by Dr. Jason Gastrich
but God is clearly against abortion.
Reason enough for people to be atheists.
I suppose this same logic worked for Hitler.
Hitler was a Christian.
Post by Dr. Jason Gastrich
Post by lizzard woman
In the case where a fetus isn't viable (due either to short gestation
or abnormal medical indication), you cannot tell a woman what she can
and cannot do with her own body. If you were to tell a woman in that
case she must carry a fetus or she cannot have a particular
procedure, that elevates the rights of a non-viable fetus above that
of an extant woman.
I have actually had very few conversations with people like you who
hold the view that they can blithely tell women what they can and
cannot do with their own body when carried a non-viable fetus. I
simply assume they have a screw loose and make some excuse to get
away.
Have you seen http://abortion.jcsm.org? The scriptures are clear on the
issue. God is the giver and taker of life; not woman or man.
But, anti-abortionists are free to take the lives of doctors they deem
"immoral"? So much for that old "thou shalt not kill" inconvenience, eh?
Of course, I wonder how a perfect, omnipotent, omniscient God could screw up
enough in the creation of a life that it could later feel the need to take
one? Couldn't it have just foreseen the mistake ahead of time and not made
it? Perhaps it just gets amusement from the act of killing and destruction?

turk
Dr. Jason Gastrich
2003-11-28 05:08:08 UTC
Permalink
Post by turk
Post by Dr. Jason Gastrich
Post by lizzard woman
(snip)
Post by Dr. Jason Gastrich
but God is clearly against abortion.
Reason enough for people to be atheists.
I suppose this same logic worked for Hitler.
Hitler was a Christian.
Post by Dr. Jason Gastrich
Post by lizzard woman
In the case where a fetus isn't viable (due either to short
gestation or abnormal medical indication), you cannot tell a woman
what she can and cannot do with her own body. If you were to tell
a woman in that case she must carry a fetus or she cannot have a
particular procedure, that elevates the rights of a non-viable
fetus above that of an extant woman.
I have actually had very few conversations with people like you who
hold the view that they can blithely tell women what they can and
cannot do with their own body when carried a non-viable fetus. I
simply assume they have a screw loose and make some excuse to get
away.
Have you seen http://abortion.jcsm.org? The scriptures are clear on
the issue. God is the giver and taker of life; not woman or man.
But, anti-abortionists are free to take the lives of doctors they deem
"immoral"? So much for that old "thou shalt not kill" inconvenience, eh?
This is a straw man. I never said it was okay for anti-abortionists to
murder. They should be held accountable for their actions.
Post by turk
Of course, I wonder how a perfect, omnipotent, omniscient God
could screw up enough in the creation of a life that it could later
feel the need to take one? Couldn't it have just foreseen the
mistake ahead of time and not made it? Perhaps it just gets
amusement from the act of killing and destruction?
turk
I suppose those are typical musings from an atheist. Consider sin, though.
God allowed people to have a free will and they chose to sin. Therefore, we
have evil in the world.

Are you one of those atheists that think (if He exists) God should intervene
a lot more in everyday affairs? It's pretty ironic when I hear these things
because these same people would surely be complaining if God intervened more
by saying He intervenes too much.

JG
Gregory A Greenman
2003-11-29 00:08:58 UTC
Permalink
On Fri, 28 Nov 2003 05:08:08 GMT, Dr. Jason Gastrich
Post by Dr. Jason Gastrich
Are you one of those atheists that think (if He exists) God should intervene
a lot more in everyday affairs? It's pretty ironic when I hear these things
because these same people would surely be complaining if God intervened more
by saying He intervenes too much.
It depends on how god intervenes. Go read a Superman comic.
If god intervenes by doing what Superman does, I doubt you'd
hear any complaints from us. OTOH, if god intervened by doing
some of the evil stuff he did in the old testament, we'd be
crazy not to complain about that.




Greg the Reprobate
Missionary of Death
-------------------
greg -at- spencersoft -dot- com
Christopher A. Lee
2003-11-28 12:17:28 UTC
Permalink
Post by Dr. Jason Gastrich
Post by lizzard woman
(snip)
Post by Dr. Jason Gastrich
but God is clearly against abortion.
Reason enough for people to be atheists.
I suppose this same logic worked for Hitler.
The moron is reduced to equating atheists with Hitler, who was a
Volkish-Christian who believed that God would choose an Aryan world
leader: him.

Invoke Godwyn's law.
turk
2003-11-28 04:53:02 UTC
Permalink
Post by Dr. Jason Gastrich
Post by turk
Post by duke
Post by Religion is a Lie
Jesus never existed. Christianity is based on a work of fiction -
altered, expanded, corrupted, etc. The Paulinian description of the
spread of Christianity in the 1st cent. AD. was written c. 140 AD -
it is complete fiction. There is no evidence that Christianity
existed in the 1st cent AD - because it didn't!
Is there any reason that anyone should believe you? It's easy to
say, but why would anyone care about your mistakes?
Post by Religion is a Lie
The big question, the question in my mind, is - who was the author
who invented the character Jesus?
God became man in the person of Jesus Christ.
This is your evidence? Superman became man in the person of Clark
Kent. Batman became man in the person of Bruce Wayne. Captain Marvel
became man in the person of Billy Batson. I know these things to be
real fact since my holy comic books tell me so.
Too bad none of them claimed to be God. Too bad none of them rose from the
dead.
But if they did claim to be God, then you'd have to believe them? And
technically, Superman did rise from the dead. So, I suppose you'll be
building churches in his honor now?
Post by Dr. Jason Gastrich
Post by turk
Post by duke
Post by Religion is a Lie
I, personally, have no complaints about the moral teachings of those
parts of the gospel story that I think were in the original - but I
do object, most strongly, to much of the later additional material,
insertions, corruptions, etc., that other hands managed to get
accepted as "inspired".
Like what?
The Rapture
Please expand on this.
Not one mention of it in the Bible.
Post by Dr. Jason Gastrich
Post by turk
, anti-abortion groups and their "God opposes abortion"
claims,
See http://abortion.jcsm.org. I don't advocate violence from these groups,
but God is clearly against abortion.
God was clearly for killing babies and children. See Ex. 11:7, 12:12,
21:15, 21:17, and the classic Leviticus 26:16-39 amongst hundreds of other
passages. Show me one single passage where God forbids abortion. I can
give you plenty where he commands the death of the unborn.
Post by Dr. Jason Gastrich
Post by turk
prayer in public (Matthew 6:5 clearly calls this
hypocritical),
Jesus prayed in public and in private. He also spoke on issues of the
heart. It's not wrong to pray in public. It is wrong to pray with the
wrong motive; to merely draw attention to oneself.
Perhaps you need the context. See Matt 6:6. "But when you pray, go into
your room, close the door and pray to your Father, who is unseen. Then your
Father, who sees what is done in secret, will reward you."

Now, are you seriously expecting people to believe that "go into your room,
close the door and pray" is supposed to be interpreted as "gather in groups
of hundreds and pray together? Furthermore, the word "closet" actually
means "huge, expensive, ornately designed buildings filled with praying
benches"?
Post by Dr. Jason Gastrich
Post by turk
the worship of false icons (see Judge Roy Moore and
Alabama),
Nobody worshiped this "icon." If you believe they did, please provide some
proof.
Um, the yelling of "Get your hands off my God!!" repeatedly when it was
removed was pretty clear to me. Also, Moore's insistence that removing the
monument was denying God tends to indicate worship of an icon to me.
Post by Dr. Jason Gastrich
Post by turk
just off the top of my head...
Perhaps you should give us something that's not simply off the top of your
head. And expand on the things that are rolling off your scalp.
Perhaps you need to read your scriptures a little more thoroughly and
dispassionately instead of butchering the meanings to suit your convenience.
Post by Dr. Jason Gastrich
God bless,
No thank you. Not even when I sneeze.

turk
Dr. Jason Gastrich
2003-11-28 05:03:43 UTC
Permalink
Post by turk
Post by Dr. Jason Gastrich
Post by turk
Post by duke
Post by Religion is a Lie
Jesus never existed. Christianity is based on a work of fiction -
altered, expanded, corrupted, etc. The Paulinian description of
the spread of Christianity in the 1st cent. AD. was written c.
140 AD - it is complete fiction. There is no evidence that
Christianity existed in the 1st cent AD - because it didn't!
Is there any reason that anyone should believe you? It's easy to
say, but why would anyone care about your mistakes?
Post by Religion is a Lie
The big question, the question in my mind, is - who was the author
who invented the character Jesus?
God became man in the person of Jesus Christ.
This is your evidence? Superman became man in the person of Clark
Kent. Batman became man in the person of Bruce Wayne. Captain
Marvel became man in the person of Billy Batson. I know these
things to be real fact since my holy comic books tell me so.
Too bad none of them claimed to be God. Too bad none of them rose
from the dead.
But if they did claim to be God, then you'd have to believe them? And
technically, Superman did rise from the dead. So, I suppose you'll be
building churches in his honor now?
Jesus fulfilled a great number of Messianic prophecies. This is another
thing that separates Him from Superman. See here:
http://www.jcsm.org/biblelessons/FMP.htm
Post by turk
Post by Dr. Jason Gastrich
Post by turk
Post by duke
Post by Religion is a Lie
I, personally, have no complaints about the moral teachings of
those parts of the gospel story that I think were in the original
- but I do object, most strongly, to much of the later additional
material, insertions, corruptions, etc., that other hands managed
to get accepted as "inspired".
Like what?
The Rapture
Please expand on this.
Not one mention of it in the Bible.
Sure it is. The Greek word "rapturo" is where we get it. See this page of
mine on the rapture and you'll be convinced. Link:
http://www.jcsm.org/BibleLessons/RaptureSecondComing.htm
Post by turk
Post by Dr. Jason Gastrich
Post by turk
, anti-abortion groups and their "God opposes abortion"
claims,
See http://abortion.jcsm.org. I don't advocate violence from these
groups, but God is clearly against abortion.
God was clearly for killing babies and children. See Ex. 11:7, 12:12,
21:15, 21:17, and the classic Leviticus 26:16-39 amongst hundreds of
other passages. Show me one single passage where God forbids
abortion. I can give you plenty where he commands the death of the
unborn.
You'll have to see the page above to see how God is clearly against
abortion.

I understand why you are confused, though. You are lumping together some
passages that have to do with war and God's judgment on pagans. Perhaps you
can quote one if you are still confused. I will explain it to you.
Post by turk
Post by Dr. Jason Gastrich
Post by turk
prayer in public (Matthew 6:5 clearly calls this
hypocritical),
Jesus prayed in public and in private. He also spoke on issues of
the heart. It's not wrong to pray in public. It is wrong to pray
with the wrong motive; to merely draw attention to oneself.
Perhaps you need the context. See Matt 6:6. "But when you pray, go
into your room, close the door and pray to your Father, who is
unseen. Then your Father, who sees what is done in secret, will
reward you."
Now, are you seriously expecting people to believe that "go into your
room, close the door and pray" is supposed to be interpreted as
"gather in groups of hundreds and pray together? Furthermore, the
word "closet" actually means "huge, expensive, ornately designed
buildings filled with praying benches"?
It's nice that you say you care about context. However, pulling one verse
out of the Bible is a surefire way to miss the context. If you really want
to understand the context, then quote the verses before and after it (or the
entire chapter) and we will discover the context.

Sincerely,
Jason
Don Kresch
2003-11-28 05:21:39 UTC
Permalink
In alt.atheism on Fri, 28 Nov 2003 05:03:43 GMT, "Dr. Jason Gastrich"
Post by Dr. Jason Gastrich
Post by turk
Post by Dr. Jason Gastrich
Post by turk
Post by duke
Post by Religion is a Lie
Jesus never existed. Christianity is based on a work of fiction -
altered, expanded, corrupted, etc. The Paulinian description of
the spread of Christianity in the 1st cent. AD. was written c.
140 AD - it is complete fiction. There is no evidence that
Christianity existed in the 1st cent AD - because it didn't!
Is there any reason that anyone should believe you? It's easy to
say, but why would anyone care about your mistakes?
Post by Religion is a Lie
The big question, the question in my mind, is - who was the author
who invented the character Jesus?
God became man in the person of Jesus Christ.
This is your evidence? Superman became man in the person of Clark
Kent. Batman became man in the person of Bruce Wayne. Captain
Marvel became man in the person of Billy Batson. I know these
things to be real fact since my holy comic books tell me so.
Too bad none of them claimed to be God. Too bad none of them rose
from the dead.
But if they did claim to be God, then you'd have to believe them? And
technically, Superman did rise from the dead. So, I suppose you'll be
building churches in his honor now?
Jesus fulfilled a great number of Messianic prophecies.
He filled none. He didn't gather the diaspora. He didn't rebuild
the temple. He didn't usher in the age of peace and knowledge. He
wasn't a great military and political leader. He wasn't of the line of
David.

In short, he's not the Davidic messiah, which is the messiah of
the jews.

But you don't know anything about that, do you, Jason.


Don
---
aa #51, Knight of BAAWA, DNRC o-, Member of the [H]orde
Atheist Minister for St. Dogbert.

"No being is so important that he can usurp the rights of another"
Picard to Data/Graves "The Schizoid Man"
turk
2003-11-28 06:17:03 UTC
Permalink
Post by Dr. Jason Gastrich
Post by turk
Post by Dr. Jason Gastrich
Post by turk
Post by duke
Post by Religion is a Lie
Jesus never existed. Christianity is based on a work of fiction -
altered, expanded, corrupted, etc. The Paulinian description of
the spread of Christianity in the 1st cent. AD. was written c.
140 AD - it is complete fiction. There is no evidence that
Christianity existed in the 1st cent AD - because it didn't!
Is there any reason that anyone should believe you? It's easy to
say, but why would anyone care about your mistakes?
Post by Religion is a Lie
The big question, the question in my mind, is - who was the author
who invented the character Jesus?
God became man in the person of Jesus Christ.
This is your evidence? Superman became man in the person of Clark
Kent. Batman became man in the person of Bruce Wayne. Captain
Marvel became man in the person of Billy Batson. I know these
things to be real fact since my holy comic books tell me so.
Too bad none of them claimed to be God. Too bad none of them rose
from the dead.
But if they did claim to be God, then you'd have to believe them? And
technically, Superman did rise from the dead. So, I suppose you'll be
building churches in his honor now?
Jesus fulfilled a great number of Messianic prophecies. This is another
http://www.jcsm.org/biblelessons/FMP.htm
Actually, I'd say they share one very important similarity: they are both
fictional beings. But, at least when Superman promises something in his
fictional world, he usually delivers. In that, Jesus and Superman are very
different. Jesus promised to return within the lifetimes of those he spoke
to after his supposed "resurrection". If he were going to be that damned
late, he could at least have phoned.
Post by Dr. Jason Gastrich
Post by turk
Post by Dr. Jason Gastrich
Post by turk
Post by duke
Post by Religion is a Lie
I, personally, have no complaints about the moral teachings of
those parts of the gospel story that I think were in the original
- but I do object, most strongly, to much of the later additional
material, insertions, corruptions, etc., that other hands managed
to get accepted as "inspired".
Like what?
The Rapture
Please expand on this.
Not one mention of it in the Bible.
Sure it is. The Greek word "rapturo" is where we get it. See this page of
http://www.jcsm.org/BibleLessons/RaptureSecondComing.htm
Sorry, not convinced at all. And neither are most Biblical scholars who
freely admit that the Rapture was a later creation never mentioned in the
scriptures.
Post by Dr. Jason Gastrich
Post by turk
Post by Dr. Jason Gastrich
Post by turk
, anti-abortion groups and their "God opposes abortion"
claims,
See http://abortion.jcsm.org. I don't advocate violence from these
groups, but God is clearly against abortion.
God was clearly for killing babies and children. See Ex. 11:7, 12:12,
21:15, 21:17, and the classic Leviticus 26:16-39 amongst hundreds of
other passages. Show me one single passage where God forbids
abortion. I can give you plenty where he commands the death of the
unborn.
You'll have to see the page above to see how God is clearly against
abortion.
I've seen enough. It's very wordy, but not one single reference to
abortion. Not one.
Post by Dr. Jason Gastrich
I understand why you are confused, though.
I only seem confused to you because clarity of thought is a confusing notion
to one such as yourself.

You are lumping together some
Post by Dr. Jason Gastrich
passages that have to do with war and God's judgment on pagans.
Oh, see, you should have clarified your views. I thought you meant that
killing fetuses was wrong no matter what. Now you imply that you are okay
with the slaughter of Pagan fetuses. Must be tough getting declarations of
religion from small collections of cells within a woman's womb, but I'm sure
you have some schizophrenic procedure that takes care of this complication.

Perhaps you
Post by Dr. Jason Gastrich
can quote one if you are still confused. I will explain it to you.
Let's start here:
"I will make them eat the flesh of their sons and daughters, and they will
eat one another's flesh during the stress of the siege imposed on them by
the enemies who seek their lives."-Jeremiah 19:9

And how about this?:
"Happy shall be he that taketh and dasheth thy infants against the
rocks."-Psalms 137:9

Yeah, God sure is concerned about infanticide, eh? But then, those were
babies already born. Maybe he just wants them good and alive because it
makes people happy to kill babies? Maybe killing fetuses just plain isn't
as fun as killing or eating infants? Or maybe God was just being practical,
since an infant can feed more people at the dinner table than a fetus?
Post by Dr. Jason Gastrich
Post by turk
Post by Dr. Jason Gastrich
Post by turk
prayer in public (Matthew 6:5 clearly calls this
hypocritical),
Jesus prayed in public and in private. He also spoke on issues of
the heart. It's not wrong to pray in public. It is wrong to pray
with the wrong motive; to merely draw attention to oneself.
Perhaps you need the context. See Matt 6:6. "But when you pray, go
into your room, close the door and pray to your Father, who is
unseen. Then your Father, who sees what is done in secret, will
reward you."
Now, are you seriously expecting people to believe that "go into your
room, close the door and pray" is supposed to be interpreted as
"gather in groups of hundreds and pray together? Furthermore, the
word "closet" actually means "huge, expensive, ornately designed
buildings filled with praying benches"?
It's nice that you say you care about context. However, pulling one verse
out of the Bible is a surefire way to miss the context. If you really want
to understand the context, then quote the verses before and after it (or the
entire chapter) and we will discover the context.
Actually, you used one verse. I corrected you pointing out the verse
immediately following in a contextual manner that contradicted your
ridiculously loose interpretation. I assumed since you seem to claim some
Biblical knowledge, putting Matt. 6:6 after Matt. 6:5 would not throw you
off. Apparently, it did.

And you didn't answer my questions concerning the Bible's clearly stated
condemnation of public prayer.

turk
Dr. Jason Gastrich
2003-11-28 06:52:57 UTC
Permalink
Post by turk
Post by Dr. Jason Gastrich
Post by turk
Post by Dr. Jason Gastrich
Post by turk
Post by duke
Post by Religion is a Lie
Jesus never existed. Christianity is based on a work of fiction
- altered, expanded, corrupted, etc. The Paulinian description
of the spread of Christianity in the 1st cent. AD. was written
c. 140 AD - it is complete fiction. There is no evidence that
Christianity existed in the 1st cent AD - because it didn't!
Is there any reason that anyone should believe you? It's easy to
say, but why would anyone care about your mistakes?
Post by Religion is a Lie
The big question, the question in my mind, is - who was the
author who invented the character Jesus?
God became man in the person of Jesus Christ.
This is your evidence? Superman became man in the person of Clark
Kent. Batman became man in the person of Bruce Wayne. Captain
Marvel became man in the person of Billy Batson. I know these
things to be real fact since my holy comic books tell me so.
Too bad none of them claimed to be God. Too bad none of them rose
from the dead.
But if they did claim to be God, then you'd have to believe them?
And technically, Superman did rise from the dead. So, I suppose
you'll be building churches in his honor now?
Jesus fulfilled a great number of Messianic prophecies. This is
http://www.jcsm.org/biblelessons/FMP.htm
Actually, I'd say they share one very important similarity: they are
both fictional beings. But, at least when Superman promises
something in his fictional world, he usually delivers. In that,
Jesus and Superman are very different. Jesus promised to return
within the lifetimes of those he spoke to after his supposed
"resurrection". If he were going to be that damned late, he could at
least have phoned.
This is untrue. Can you support this belief with scripture?
Post by turk
Post by Dr. Jason Gastrich
Post by turk
Post by Dr. Jason Gastrich
Post by turk
Post by duke
Post by Religion is a Lie
I, personally, have no complaints about the moral teachings of
those parts of the gospel story that I think were in the
original - but I do object, most strongly, to much of the later
additional material, insertions, corruptions, etc., that other
hands managed to get accepted as "inspired".
Like what?
The Rapture
Please expand on this.
Not one mention of it in the Bible.
Sure it is. The Greek word "rapturo" is where we get it. See this
http://www.jcsm.org/BibleLessons/RaptureSecondComing.htm
Sorry, not convinced at all. And neither are most Biblical scholars
who freely admit that the Rapture was a later creation never
mentioned in the scriptures.
Hmmm. I'm not convincing an atheist about a biblical principle. Why am I
not surprised?

Have you studied the Greek? Are you really saying that the word "rapturo"
isn't used and isn't referring to a rapture? You are exposing your
ignorance. See http://study.jcsm.org.

I don't care for your appeal to authority. Any Bible scholar that can read
Greek knows that rapturo is in the Bible and refers to a rapture.

It really doesn't matter when we think the modern rapture doctrine was first
penned. Does it? The Bible is a very large book and requires diligent
study. It isn't surprising that something like the rapture could remain
hidden. It simply fulfills Daniel 12:4. "But you, Daniel, shut up the
words, and seal the book until the time of the end; many shall run to and
fro, and knowledge shall increase."
Post by turk
Post by Dr. Jason Gastrich
Post by turk
Post by Dr. Jason Gastrich
Post by turk
, anti-abortion groups and their "God opposes abortion"
claims,
See http://abortion.jcsm.org. I don't advocate violence from these
groups, but God is clearly against abortion.
God was clearly for killing babies and children. See Ex. 11:7,
12:12, 21:15, 21:17, and the classic Leviticus 26:16-39 amongst
hundreds of other passages. Show me one single passage where God
forbids abortion. I can give you plenty where he commands the
death of the unborn.
You'll have to see the page above to see how God is clearly against
abortion.
I've seen enough. It's very wordy, but not one single reference to
abortion. Not one.
If you can't read that page and understand how abortion is wrong, then it
doesn't surprise me how you can reject the biblical gospel. Both are
obvious, plain and simple, and accepted by humble people that want God's
will.
Post by turk
Post by Dr. Jason Gastrich
I understand why you are confused, though.
I only seem confused to you because clarity of thought is a confusing
notion to one such as yourself.
You are lumping together some
Post by Dr. Jason Gastrich
passages that have to do with war and God's judgment on pagans.
Oh, see, you should have clarified your views. I thought you meant
that killing fetuses was wrong no matter what. Now you imply that
you are okay with the slaughter of Pagan fetuses. Must be tough
getting declarations of religion from small collections of cells
within a woman's womb, but I'm sure you have some schizophrenic
procedure that takes care of this complication.
This is a bizarre statement. The Bible records some wars. You are
confusing a historical record of war and judgment with a present atrocity.
Why would you promote abortion by comparing it to the consequence of sin in
the Old Testament? This is a poor parallel unless you're on God's side.
Post by turk
Perhaps you
Post by Dr. Jason Gastrich
can quote one if you are still confused. I will explain it to you.
"I will make them eat the flesh of their sons and daughters, and they
will eat one another's flesh during the stress of the siege imposed
on them by the enemies who seek their lives."-Jeremiah 19:9
* This verse does not indicate that God literally made these people eat one
another. However, God did promise judgment for their wickedness. He also
told them that they would resolve to eat human flesh because of their
desperate and dire circumstances. As the Romans besieged Jerusalem, this
was fulfilled.
Post by turk
"Happy shall be he that taketh and dasheth thy infants against the
rocks."-Psalms 137:9
* The preceding verses in this chapter explain the context of this
statement. Verse 8 sums it up: "O daughter of Babylon, who are to be
destroyed, happy the one who repays you as you have served us!"
With all due respect, you are reminding us how atheists are such poor
apologists by taking single verses out of context.
Post by turk
Yeah, God sure is concerned about infanticide, eh? But then, those
were babies already born. Maybe he just wants them good and alive
because it makes people happy to kill babies? Maybe killing fetuses
just plain isn't as fun as killing or eating infants? Or maybe God
was just being practical, since an infant can feed more people at the
dinner table than a fetus?
Post by Dr. Jason Gastrich
Post by turk
Post by Dr. Jason Gastrich
Post by turk
prayer in public (Matthew 6:5 clearly calls this
hypocritical),
Jesus prayed in public and in private. He also spoke on issues of
the heart. It's not wrong to pray in public. It is wrong to pray
with the wrong motive; to merely draw attention to oneself.
Perhaps you need the context. See Matt 6:6. "But when you pray, go
into your room, close the door and pray to your Father, who is
unseen. Then your Father, who sees what is done in secret, will
reward you."
Now, are you seriously expecting people to believe that "go into
your room, close the door and pray" is supposed to be interpreted as
"gather in groups of hundreds and pray together? Furthermore, the
word "closet" actually means "huge, expensive, ornately designed
buildings filled with praying benches"?
It's nice that you say you care about context. However, pulling one
verse out of the Bible is a surefire way to miss the context. If
you really want to understand the context, then quote the verses
before and after it (or the entire chapter) and we will discover the
context.
Actually, you used one verse. I corrected you pointing out the verse
immediately following in a contextual manner that contradicted your
ridiculously loose interpretation. I assumed since you seem to claim
some Biblical knowledge, putting Matt. 6:6 after Matt. 6:5 would not
throw you off. Apparently, it did.
And you didn't answer my questions concerning the Bible's clearly
stated condemnation of public prayer.
turk
In the context of all of Jesus' teachings and examples on prayer, we
understand this statement in Matthew 6 as a statement about the heart and
the motive; not a literal statement regarding every prayer. Two verses
won't always give you the proper context. Sometimes a whole chapter won't.
Glad you asked, though.

From the Skeptic's Annotated Bible: Corrected and Explained . . .

* First, Jesus tells His disciples to avoid being like the hypocrites. They
were praying in public because they wanted attention. Jesus added that
their prayers would not be answered.

* Jesus tells His disciples that they should do the opposite and pray
privately. However, Jesus never forbids or condemns public prayer. In
fact, He prayed several prayers in public.

Sincerely,

Jason
Mike Painter
2003-11-28 07:40:01 UTC
Permalink
Post by Dr. Jason Gastrich
Jesus fulfilled a great number of Messianic prophecies. This is
http://www.jcsm.org/biblelessons/FMP.htm
This is a must read for all atheists.
I've never seen so many of these prophesies laid out in one place before.
I can see why so many buy into the bible codes.

Talk about quote mining.
turk
2003-11-28 15:40:03 UTC
Permalink
Post by Dr. Jason Gastrich
Post by turk
Post by Dr. Jason Gastrich
Post by turk
Post by Dr. Jason Gastrich
Post by turk
Post by duke
Post by Religion is a Lie
Jesus never existed. Christianity is based on a work of fiction
- altered, expanded, corrupted, etc. The Paulinian description
of the spread of Christianity in the 1st cent. AD. was written
c. 140 AD - it is complete fiction. There is no evidence that
Christianity existed in the 1st cent AD - because it didn't!
Is there any reason that anyone should believe you? It's easy to
say, but why would anyone care about your mistakes?
Post by Religion is a Lie
The big question, the question in my mind, is - who was the
author who invented the character Jesus?
God became man in the person of Jesus Christ.
This is your evidence? Superman became man in the person of Clark
Kent. Batman became man in the person of Bruce Wayne. Captain
Marvel became man in the person of Billy Batson. I know these
things to be real fact since my holy comic books tell me so.
Too bad none of them claimed to be God. Too bad none of them rose
from the dead.
But if they did claim to be God, then you'd have to believe them?
And technically, Superman did rise from the dead. So, I suppose
you'll be building churches in his honor now?
Jesus fulfilled a great number of Messianic prophecies. This is
http://www.jcsm.org/biblelessons/FMP.htm
Actually, I'd say they share one very important similarity: they are
both fictional beings. But, at least when Superman promises
something in his fictional world, he usually delivers. In that,
Jesus and Superman are very different. Jesus promised to return
within the lifetimes of those he spoke to after his supposed
"resurrection". If he were going to be that damned late, he could at
least have phoned.
This is untrue. Can you support this belief with scripture?
Post by turk
Post by Dr. Jason Gastrich
Post by turk
Post by Dr. Jason Gastrich
Post by turk
Post by duke
Post by Religion is a Lie
I, personally, have no complaints about the moral teachings of
those parts of the gospel story that I think were in the
original - but I do object, most strongly, to much of the later
additional material, insertions, corruptions, etc., that other
hands managed to get accepted as "inspired".
Like what?
The Rapture
Please expand on this.
Not one mention of it in the Bible.
Sure it is. The Greek word "rapturo" is where we get it. See this
http://www.jcsm.org/BibleLessons/RaptureSecondComing.htm
Sorry, not convinced at all. And neither are most Biblical scholars
who freely admit that the Rapture was a later creation never
mentioned in the scriptures.
Hmmm. I'm not convincing an atheist about a biblical principle. Why am I
not surprised?
Have you studied the Greek? Are you really saying that the word "rapturo"
isn't used and isn't referring to a rapture? You are exposing your
ignorance. See http://study.jcsm.org.
I don't care for your appeal to authority. Any Bible scholar that can read
Greek knows that rapturo is in the Bible and refers to a rapture.
It really doesn't matter when we think the modern rapture doctrine was first
penned. Does it? The Bible is a very large book and requires diligent
study. It isn't surprising that something like the rapture could remain
hidden. It simply fulfills Daniel 12:4. "But you, Daniel, shut up the
words, and seal the book until the time of the end; many shall run to and
fro, and knowledge shall increase."
Post by turk
Post by Dr. Jason Gastrich
Post by turk
Post by Dr. Jason Gastrich
Post by turk
, anti-abortion groups and their "God opposes abortion"
claims,
See http://abortion.jcsm.org. I don't advocate violence from these
groups, but God is clearly against abortion.
God was clearly for killing babies and children. See Ex. 11:7,
12:12, 21:15, 21:17, and the classic Leviticus 26:16-39 amongst
hundreds of other passages. Show me one single passage where God
forbids abortion. I can give you plenty where he commands the
death of the unborn.
You'll have to see the page above to see how God is clearly against
abortion.
I've seen enough. It's very wordy, but not one single reference to
abortion. Not one.
If you can't read that page and understand how abortion is wrong, then it
doesn't surprise me how you can reject the biblical gospel. Both are
obvious, plain and simple, and accepted by humble people that want God's
will.
Post by turk
Post by Dr. Jason Gastrich
I understand why you are confused, though.
I only seem confused to you because clarity of thought is a confusing
notion to one such as yourself.
You are lumping together some
Post by Dr. Jason Gastrich
passages that have to do with war and God's judgment on pagans.
Oh, see, you should have clarified your views. I thought you meant
that killing fetuses was wrong no matter what. Now you imply that
you are okay with the slaughter of Pagan fetuses. Must be tough
getting declarations of religion from small collections of cells
within a woman's womb, but I'm sure you have some schizophrenic
procedure that takes care of this complication.
This is a bizarre statement. The Bible records some wars. You are
confusing a historical record of war and judgment with a present atrocity.
Why would you promote abortion by comparing it to the consequence of sin in
the Old Testament? This is a poor parallel unless you're on God's side.
Post by turk
Perhaps you
Post by Dr. Jason Gastrich
can quote one if you are still confused. I will explain it to you.
"I will make them eat the flesh of their sons and daughters, and they
will eat one another's flesh during the stress of the siege imposed
on them by the enemies who seek their lives."-Jeremiah 19:9
* This verse does not indicate that God literally made these people eat one
another. However, God did promise judgment for their wickedness. He also
told them that they would resolve to eat human flesh because of their
desperate and dire circumstances. As the Romans besieged Jerusalem, this
was fulfilled.
Post by turk
"Happy shall be he that taketh and dasheth thy infants against the
rocks."-Psalms 137:9
* The preceding verses in this chapter explain the context of this
statement. Verse 8 sums it up: "O daughter of Babylon, who are to be
destroyed, happy the one who repays you as you have served us!"
With all due respect, you are reminding us how atheists are such poor
apologists by taking single verses out of context.
Post by turk
Yeah, God sure is concerned about infanticide, eh? But then, those
were babies already born. Maybe he just wants them good and alive
because it makes people happy to kill babies? Maybe killing fetuses
just plain isn't as fun as killing or eating infants? Or maybe God
was just being practical, since an infant can feed more people at the
dinner table than a fetus?
Post by Dr. Jason Gastrich
Post by turk
Post by Dr. Jason Gastrich
Post by turk
prayer in public (Matthew 6:5 clearly calls this
hypocritical),
Jesus prayed in public and in private. He also spoke on issues of
the heart. It's not wrong to pray in public. It is wrong to pray
with the wrong motive; to merely draw attention to oneself.
Perhaps you need the context. See Matt 6:6. "But when you pray, go
into your room, close the door and pray to your Father, who is
unseen. Then your Father, who sees what is done in secret, will
reward you."
Now, are you seriously expecting people to believe that "go into
your room, close the door and pray" is supposed to be interpreted as
"gather in groups of hundreds and pray together? Furthermore, the
word "closet" actually means "huge, expensive, ornately designed
buildings filled with praying benches"?
It's nice that you say you care about context. However, pulling one
verse out of the Bible is a surefire way to miss the context. If
you really want to understand the context, then quote the verses
before and after it (or the entire chapter) and we will discover the
context.
Actually, you used one verse. I corrected you pointing out the verse
immediately following in a contextual manner that contradicted your
ridiculously loose interpretation. I assumed since you seem to claim
some Biblical knowledge, putting Matt. 6:6 after Matt. 6:5 would not
throw you off. Apparently, it did.
And you didn't answer my questions concerning the Bible's clearly
stated condemnation of public prayer.
turk
In the context of all of Jesus' teachings and examples on prayer, we
understand this statement in Matthew 6 as a statement about the heart and
the motive; not a literal statement regarding every prayer. Two verses
won't always give you the proper context. Sometimes a whole chapter won't.
Glad you asked, though.
From the Skeptic's Annotated Bible: Corrected and Explained . . .
* First, Jesus tells His disciples to avoid being like the hypocrites.
They
Post by Dr. Jason Gastrich
were praying in public because they wanted attention. Jesus added that
their prayers would not be answered.
* Jesus tells His disciples that they should do the opposite and pray
privately. However, Jesus never forbids or condemns public prayer. In
fact, He prayed several prayers in public.
First, I never said that this Jesus character wasn't a hypocrite. In fact,
that is very much my point. He contradicts his own teachings multiple
times. Second, I now recognize your name. You're the poor fellow that Dan
Barker took behind the woodshed on that broadcast debate. Third, I would
say that the height of hypocrisy is using (and writing) that utterly
ridiculous, desperate, delusional grouping of apologetics that is the
'Skeptic's Annotated Bible: Corrected and Explained' and then accusing
others of stretching the Biblical "truth".

Unfortunately, I am off to work at the moment, but I will be back this
evening to answer your rebuttals. In the meantime, I'd still love to see
some real historical information that Hitler was an atheist, because you
seem very fond of banying that myth around almost as much as the myth of
Christianity.

turk
Dr. Jason Gastrich
2003-11-29 01:09:47 UTC
Permalink
Post by turk
Post by Dr. Jason Gastrich
Post by turk
Post by Dr. Jason Gastrich
Post by turk
Post by Dr. Jason Gastrich
Post by turk
Post by duke
Post by Religion is a Lie
Jesus never existed. Christianity is based on a work of
fiction - altered, expanded, corrupted, etc. The Paulinian
description of the spread of Christianity in the 1st cent.
AD. was written c. 140 AD - it is complete fiction. There is
no evidence that Christianity existed in the 1st cent AD -
because it didn't!
Is there any reason that anyone should believe you? It's easy
to say, but why would anyone care about your mistakes?
Post by Religion is a Lie
The big question, the question in my mind, is - who was the
author who invented the character Jesus?
God became man in the person of Jesus Christ.
This is your evidence? Superman became man in the person of
Clark Kent. Batman became man in the person of Bruce Wayne.
Captain Marvel became man in the person of Billy Batson. I
know these things to be real fact since my holy comic books
tell me so.
Too bad none of them claimed to be God. Too bad none of them
rose from the dead.
But if they did claim to be God, then you'd have to believe them?
And technically, Superman did rise from the dead. So, I suppose
you'll be building churches in his honor now?
Jesus fulfilled a great number of Messianic prophecies. This is
http://www.jcsm.org/biblelessons/FMP.htm
Actually, I'd say they share one very important similarity: they are
both fictional beings. But, at least when Superman promises
something in his fictional world, he usually delivers. In that,
Jesus and Superman are very different. Jesus promised to return
within the lifetimes of those he spoke to after his supposed
"resurrection". If he were going to be that damned late, he could
at least have phoned.
This is untrue. Can you support this belief with scripture?
Post by turk
Post by Dr. Jason Gastrich
Post by turk
Post by Dr. Jason Gastrich
Post by turk
Post by duke
Post by Religion is a Lie
I, personally, have no complaints about the moral teachings of
those parts of the gospel story that I think were in the
original - but I do object, most strongly, to much of the
later additional material, insertions, corruptions, etc.,
that other hands managed to get accepted as "inspired".
Like what?
The Rapture
Please expand on this.
Not one mention of it in the Bible.
Sure it is. The Greek word "rapturo" is where we get it. See this
http://www.jcsm.org/BibleLessons/RaptureSecondComing.htm
Sorry, not convinced at all. And neither are most Biblical scholars
who freely admit that the Rapture was a later creation never
mentioned in the scriptures.
Hmmm. I'm not convincing an atheist about a biblical principle.
Why am I not surprised?
Have you studied the Greek? Are you really saying that the word
"rapturo" isn't used and isn't referring to a rapture? You are
exposing your ignorance. See http://study.jcsm.org.
I don't care for your appeal to authority. Any Bible scholar that
can read Greek knows that rapturo is in the Bible and refers to a
rapture.
It really doesn't matter when we think the modern rapture doctrine
was first penned. Does it? The Bible is a very large book and
requires diligent study. It isn't surprising that something like
the rapture could remain hidden. It simply fulfills Daniel 12:4.
"But you, Daniel, shut up the words, and seal the book until the
time of the end; many shall run to and fro, and knowledge shall
increase."
Post by turk
Post by Dr. Jason Gastrich
Post by turk
Post by Dr. Jason Gastrich
Post by turk
, anti-abortion groups and their "God opposes abortion"
claims,
See http://abortion.jcsm.org. I don't advocate violence from
these groups, but God is clearly against abortion.
God was clearly for killing babies and children. See Ex. 11:7,
12:12, 21:15, 21:17, and the classic Leviticus 26:16-39 amongst
hundreds of other passages. Show me one single passage where God
forbids abortion. I can give you plenty where he commands the
death of the unborn.
You'll have to see the page above to see how God is clearly against
abortion.
I've seen enough. It's very wordy, but not one single reference to
abortion. Not one.
If you can't read that page and understand how abortion is wrong,
then it doesn't surprise me how you can reject the biblical gospel.
Both are obvious, plain and simple, and accepted by humble people
that want God's will.
Post by turk
Post by Dr. Jason Gastrich
I understand why you are confused, though.
I only seem confused to you because clarity of thought is a
confusing notion to one such as yourself.
You are lumping together some
Post by Dr. Jason Gastrich
passages that have to do with war and God's judgment on pagans.
Oh, see, you should have clarified your views. I thought you meant
that killing fetuses was wrong no matter what. Now you imply that
you are okay with the slaughter of Pagan fetuses. Must be tough
getting declarations of religion from small collections of cells
within a woman's womb, but I'm sure you have some schizophrenic
procedure that takes care of this complication.
This is a bizarre statement. The Bible records some wars. You are
confusing a historical record of war and judgment with a present
atrocity. Why would you promote abortion by comparing it to the
consequence of sin in the Old Testament? This is a poor parallel
unless you're on God's side.
Post by turk
Perhaps you
Post by Dr. Jason Gastrich
can quote one if you are still confused. I will explain it to you.
"I will make them eat the flesh of their sons and daughters, and
they will eat one another's flesh during the stress of the siege
imposed on them by the enemies who seek their lives."-Jeremiah 19:9
* This verse does not indicate that God literally made these people
eat one another. However, God did promise judgment for their
wickedness. He also told them that they would resolve to eat human
flesh because of their desperate and dire circumstances. As the
Romans besieged Jerusalem, this was fulfilled.
Post by turk
"Happy shall be he that taketh and dasheth thy infants against the
rocks."-Psalms 137:9
* The preceding verses in this chapter explain the context of this
statement. Verse 8 sums it up: "O daughter of Babylon, who are to be
destroyed, happy the one who repays you as you have served us!"
With all due respect, you are reminding us how atheists are such poor
apologists by taking single verses out of context.
Post by turk
Yeah, God sure is concerned about infanticide, eh? But then, those
were babies already born. Maybe he just wants them good and alive
because it makes people happy to kill babies? Maybe killing fetuses
just plain isn't as fun as killing or eating infants? Or maybe God
was just being practical, since an infant can feed more people at
the dinner table than a fetus?
Post by Dr. Jason Gastrich
Post by turk
Post by Dr. Jason Gastrich
Post by turk
prayer in public (Matthew 6:5 clearly calls this
hypocritical),
Jesus prayed in public and in private. He also spoke on issues
of the heart. It's not wrong to pray in public. It is wrong to
pray with the wrong motive; to merely draw attention to oneself.
Perhaps you need the context. See Matt 6:6. "But when you pray,
go into your room, close the door and pray to your Father, who is
unseen. Then your Father, who sees what is done in secret, will
reward you."
Now, are you seriously expecting people to believe that "go into
your room, close the door and pray" is supposed to be interpreted
as "gather in groups of hundreds and pray together? Furthermore,
the word "closet" actually means "huge, expensive, ornately
designed buildings filled with praying benches"?
It's nice that you say you care about context. However, pulling
one verse out of the Bible is a surefire way to miss the context.
If you really want to understand the context, then quote the verses
before and after it (or the entire chapter) and we will discover
the context.
Actually, you used one verse. I corrected you pointing out the
verse immediately following in a contextual manner that
contradicted your ridiculously loose interpretation. I assumed
since you seem to claim some Biblical knowledge, putting Matt. 6:6
after Matt. 6:5 would not throw you off. Apparently, it did.
And you didn't answer my questions concerning the Bible's clearly
stated condemnation of public prayer.
turk
In the context of all of Jesus' teachings and examples on prayer, we
understand this statement in Matthew 6 as a statement about the
heart and the motive; not a literal statement regarding every
prayer. Two verses won't always give you the proper context.
Sometimes a whole chapter won't. Glad you asked, though.
From the Skeptic's Annotated Bible: Corrected and Explained . . .
* First, Jesus tells His disciples to avoid being like the
hypocrites. They were praying in public because they wanted
attention. Jesus added that their prayers would not be answered.
* Jesus tells His disciples that they should do the opposite and pray
privately. However, Jesus never forbids or condemns public prayer.
In fact, He prayed several prayers in public.
First, I never said that this Jesus character wasn't a hypocrite. In
fact, that is very much my point. He contradicts his own teachings
multiple times. Second, I now recognize your name. You're the poor
fellow that Dan Barker took behind the woodshed on that broadcast
debate. Third, I would say that the height of hypocrisy is using
(and writing) that utterly ridiculous, desperate, delusional grouping
of apologetics that is the 'Skeptic's Annotated Bible: Corrected and
Explained' and then accusing others of stretching the Biblical
"truth".
Unfortunately, I am off to work at the moment, but I will be back this
evening to answer your rebuttals. In the meantime, I'd still love to
see some real historical information that Hitler was an atheist,
because you seem very fond of banying that myth around almost as much
as the myth of Christianity.
turk
Unfortunately, Dan has refused to debate me, again. He did buy a copy of my
book, though. Perhaps he read it and figured he couldn't win. Feel free to
email him and request another debate between us. I'll be ready if he
changes his mind.

Dan Barker: ***@mailbag.com

Sincerely,
Jason Gastrich

P.S. There is plenty of evidence that Hitler was not a Christian. He had a
loose tie with the Catholic church that he broke when it was convenient for
him. That's the only evidence of his so-called Christianity that anyone can
ever produce.

His world view was obviously atheistic: survival of the fittest. Atheists
simply find it so detestable that Hitler was an atheist that they have to go
on the attack and say he was a Christian. Perhaps you can show me some of
his writings that indicate his faith in the biblical God. Perhaps you can
show me some of the ways he obeyed God and had faith in Him. Or perhaps
not.
turk
2003-11-29 08:15:51 UTC
Permalink
Post by Dr. Jason Gastrich
Post by turk
Post by Dr. Jason Gastrich
I don't care for your appeal to authority.
You don't care for my appeal to authority? Fine, then let's make a rule
that any further debate between us cannot involve any appeals to authority.
Now, I hope you will take a split second to realize what this means for your
unenviable postion. Surely, you can't ignore the fact that your position
rests entirely on an appeal to authority? After all, what is Christianity
except an appeal to authority? Christianity is accepting a claim as true
without there being adequate evidence to do so. Therefore, you cannot use
the Bible or God as evidence at all of anything you might claim, since to do
so would be, by definition, an appeal to authority. Fair enough?
Post by Dr. Jason Gastrich
Post by turk
First, I never said that this Jesus character wasn't a hypocrite. In
fact, that is very much my point. He contradicts his own teachings
multiple times. Second, I now recognize your name. You're the poor
fellow that Dan Barker took behind the woodshed on that broadcast
debate. Third, I would say that the height of hypocrisy is using
(and writing) that utterly ridiculous, desperate, delusional grouping
of apologetics that is the 'Skeptic's Annotated Bible: Corrected and
Explained' and then accusing others of stretching the Biblical
"truth".
Unfortunately, I am off to work at the moment, but I will be back this
evening to answer your rebuttals. In the meantime, I'd still love to
see some real historical information that Hitler was an atheist,
because you seem very fond of banying that myth around almost as much
as the myth of Christianity.
turk
Unfortunately, Dan has refused to debate me, again. He did buy a copy of my
book, though. Perhaps he read it and figured he couldn't win. Feel free to
email him and request another debate between us. I'll be ready if he
changes his mind.
It appears I've struck a nerve. Mr. Barker has aready taken his valuable
time to make a fool out of you. Don't you remember your ridiculous answer
to his question "would you kill me if God told you to?" There is a reason
evolutionary scientists do not debate creationists. To do so gives the
latter unfounded position unwarranted credibility by just putting them in
the same forum as a man of science. To those less educated, it gives the
illusionary appearance that evolution and creationism are equally valid. I
assume this is the exact same reason that Mr. Barker won't allow you more of
his time. Just his presence in a debate with you gives you credit that you
do not deserve on your own accord. Mr. Barker was cordial enough to give
someone as unworthy as yourself a chance to debate him. You squandered the
opportunity in spectacular fashion. You owe him a great debt for just
giving you the time of day. I would think a Hallmark would be appropriate
to show your gratitude.
Post by Dr. Jason Gastrich
Sincerely,
Jason Gastrich
P.S. There is plenty of evidence that Hitler was not a Christian. He had a
loose tie with the Catholic church that he broke when it was convenient for
him. That's the only evidence of his so-called Christianity that anyone can
ever produce.
You mean other Christians don't break their ties when it's convenient for
them? Perhaps we live on different planets...
Post by Dr. Jason Gastrich
His world view was obviously atheistic: survival of the fittest.
As opposed to the Bible's view of "survival of the holiest"?

Atheists
Post by Dr. Jason Gastrich
simply find it so detestable that Hitler was an atheist that they have to go
on the attack and say he was a Christian.
I don't care a whole lot about his religion, there were plenty of evil and
good people of all religions, but I do have this pet peeve about people
spreading lies, which is why I had to bring it up.

Perhaps you can show me some of
Post by Dr. Jason Gastrich
his writings that indicate his faith in the biblical God. Perhaps you can
show me some of the ways he obeyed God and had faith in Him. Or perhaps
not.
Maybe you've heard of 'Mein Kampf'? It was only a book authored by Hitler
dealing specifically with his beliefs and ideology.

"I believe today that my conduct is in accordance
with the will of the Almighty Creator.": Adolph Hitler, _Mein Kampf_, pp.
46


"This human world of ours would be inconceivable without the practical
existence of a religious belief.": Adolph Hitler, _Mein Kampf_, pp.152


"What we have to fight for...is the freedom and independenc of the
fatherland, so that our people may be enabled to fulfill the mission
assigned to it by the Creator.": Adolph Hitler, "Mein Kampf" pg 125.

"And the founder of Christianity made no secret indeed of his estimation of
the Jewish people. When He found it necessary, He drove those enemies of the
human race out of the Temple of God.": Adolph Hitler, "Mein Kampf" pp.174

"It may be that today gold has become the exclusive ruler of life, but the
time will come when man will again bow down before a higher god.": Adolph
Hitler, "Mein Kampf" Vol. 2 Chapter 2


"....the personification of the devil as the symbol of all evil assumes the
living shape of the Jew.": Adolph Hitler, "Mein Kampf", Vol. 1, Chapter 11

"Thus inwardly armed with confidence in God and the unshakable stupidity of
the voting citizenry, the politicians can begin the fight for the 'remaking'
of the Reich as they call it.": Adolph Hitler, "Mein Kampf" Vol. 2 Chapter
1


"The greatness of Christianity did not lie in attempted negotiations for
compromise with any similar philosophical opinions in the ancient world, but
in its inexorable fanaticism in preaching and fighting for its own
doctrine.": Adolph Hitler, "Mein Kampf" Vol. 1 Chapter 12

Now, I would love to see your historical evidence of Hitler's
self-proclaimed atheism, please.

turk
Dr. Jason Gastrich
2003-11-29 09:05:15 UTC
Permalink
Post by turk
Post by Dr. Jason Gastrich
Post by turk
Post by Dr. Jason Gastrich
I don't care for your appeal to authority.
You don't care for my appeal to authority? Fine, then let's make a
rule that any further debate between us cannot involve any appeals to
authority. Now, I hope you will take a split second to realize what
this means for your unenviable postion. Surely, you can't ignore the
fact that your position rests entirely on an appeal to authority?
After all, what is Christianity except an appeal to authority?
Christianity is accepting a claim as true without there being
adequate evidence to do so. Therefore, you cannot use the Bible or
God as evidence at all of anything you might claim, since to do so
would be, by definition, an appeal to authority. Fair enough?
Haha. This sounds like an unhappy diatribe from someone caught using an
appeal to authority.
Post by turk
Post by Dr. Jason Gastrich
Post by turk
First, I never said that this Jesus character wasn't a hypocrite.
In fact, that is very much my point. He contradicts his own
teachings multiple times. Second, I now recognize your name.
You're the poor fellow that Dan Barker took behind the woodshed on
that broadcast debate. Third, I would say that the height of
hypocrisy is using (and writing) that utterly ridiculous,
desperate, delusional grouping of apologetics that is the
'Skeptic's Annotated Bible: Corrected and Explained' and then
accusing others of stretching the Biblical "truth".
Unfortunately, I am off to work at the moment, but I will be back
this evening to answer your rebuttals. In the meantime, I'd still
love to see some real historical information that Hitler was an
atheist, because you seem very fond of banying that myth around
almost as much as the myth of Christianity.
turk
Unfortunately, Dan has refused to debate me, again. He did buy a
copy of my book, though. Perhaps he read it and figured he couldn't
win. Feel free to email him and request another debate between us.
I'll be ready if he changes his mind.
It appears I've struck a nerve. Mr. Barker has aready taken his
valuable time to make a fool out of you. Don't you remember your
ridiculous answer to his question "would you kill me if God told you
to?" There is a reason evolutionary scientists do not debate
creationists. To do so gives the latter unfounded position
unwarranted credibility by just putting them in the same forum as a
man of science.
If you think Dan is a man of science or an evolutionary scientist, then you
didn't hear the debate. Dan knows very little about science.
Post by turk
To those less educated, it gives the illusionary
appearance that evolution and creationism are equally valid. I
assume this is the exact same reason that Mr. Barker won't allow you
more of his time. Just his presence in a debate with you gives you
credit that you do not deserve on your own accord. Mr. Barker was
cordial enough to give someone as unworthy as yourself a chance to
debate him. You squandered the opportunity in spectacular fashion.
You owe him a great debt for just giving you the time of day. I
would think a Hallmark would be appropriate to show your gratitude.
Post by Dr. Jason Gastrich
Sincerely,
Jason Gastrich
P.S. There is plenty of evidence that Hitler was not a Christian.
He had a loose tie with the Catholic church that he broke when it
was convenient for him. That's the only evidence of his so-called
Christianity that anyone can ever produce.
You mean other Christians don't break their ties when it's convenient
for them? Perhaps we live on different planets...
Post by Dr. Jason Gastrich
His world view was obviously atheistic: survival of the fittest.
As opposed to the Bible's view of "survival of the holiest"?
Atheists
Post by Dr. Jason Gastrich
simply find it so detestable that Hitler was an atheist that they
have to go on the attack and say he was a Christian.
I don't care a whole lot about his religion, there were plenty of
evil and good people of all religions, but I do have this pet peeve
about people spreading lies, which is why I had to bring it up.
Perhaps you can show me some of
Post by Dr. Jason Gastrich
his writings that indicate his faith in the biblical God. Perhaps
you can show me some of the ways he obeyed God and had faith in Him.
Or perhaps not.
Maybe you've heard of 'Mein Kampf'? It was only a book authored by
Hitler dealing specifically with his beliefs and ideology.
That's right. Not his faith in God, though.
Post by turk
"I believe today that my conduct is in accordance
with the will of the Almighty Creator.": Adolph Hitler, _Mein
Kampf_, pp. 46
This is a good indication that he wasn't a Christian. No Christian would
say that genocide was God's will for them to enact.
Post by turk
"This human world of ours would be inconceivable without the practical
existence of a religious belief.": Adolph Hitler, _Mein Kampf_, pp.152
"What we have to fight for...is the freedom and independenc of the
fatherland, so that our people may be enabled to fulfill the mission
assigned to it by the Creator.": Adolph Hitler, "Mein Kampf" pg 125.
"And the founder of Christianity made no secret indeed of his
estimation of the Jewish people. When He found it necessary, He drove
those enemies of the human race out of the Temple of God.": Adolph
Hitler, "Mein Kampf" pp.174
If he were a Christian, then why didn't he say, "My Lord and Savior . . ."?
Hitler allegedly said, "the founder of Christianity."

Would a devout Jew simply refer to God as "the founder of Judaism"?

Do you know who Haeckel is (e.g. Haeckel's fabricated charts)? Do you know
where he lived? Do you know what he believed? Do you know who he
influenced greatly?

Sincerely,
Jason
turk
2003-11-29 09:46:25 UTC
Permalink
Post by Dr. Jason Gastrich
Post by turk
Post by Dr. Jason Gastrich
Post by turk
Post by Dr. Jason Gastrich
I don't care for your appeal to authority.
You don't care for my appeal to authority? Fine, then let's make a
rule that any further debate between us cannot involve any appeals to
authority. Now, I hope you will take a split second to realize what
this means for your unenviable postion. Surely, you can't ignore the
fact that your position rests entirely on an appeal to authority?
After all, what is Christianity except an appeal to authority?
Christianity is accepting a claim as true without there being
adequate evidence to do so. Therefore, you cannot use the Bible or
God as evidence at all of anything you might claim, since to do so
would be, by definition, an appeal to authority. Fair enough?
Haha. This sounds like an unhappy diatribe from someone caught using an
appeal to authority.
And this sounds like someone who has either no will or ability to address
the claims.
Post by Dr. Jason Gastrich
Post by turk
Post by Dr. Jason Gastrich
Post by turk
First, I never said that this Jesus character wasn't a hypocrite.
In fact, that is very much my point. He contradicts his own
teachings multiple times. Second, I now recognize your name.
You're the poor fellow that Dan Barker took behind the woodshed on
that broadcast debate. Third, I would say that the height of
hypocrisy is using (and writing) that utterly ridiculous,
desperate, delusional grouping of apologetics that is the
'Skeptic's Annotated Bible: Corrected and Explained' and then
accusing others of stretching the Biblical "truth".
Unfortunately, I am off to work at the moment, but I will be back
this evening to answer your rebuttals. In the meantime, I'd still
love to see some real historical information that Hitler was an
atheist, because you seem very fond of banying that myth around
almost as much as the myth of Christianity.
turk
Unfortunately, Dan has refused to debate me, again. He did buy a
copy of my book, though. Perhaps he read it and figured he couldn't
win. Feel free to email him and request another debate between us.
I'll be ready if he changes his mind.
It appears I've struck a nerve. Mr. Barker has aready taken his
valuable time to make a fool out of you. Don't you remember your
ridiculous answer to his question "would you kill me if God told you
to?" There is a reason evolutionary scientists do not debate
creationists. To do so gives the latter unfounded position
unwarranted credibility by just putting them in the same forum as a
man of science.
If you think Dan is a man of science or an evolutionary scientist, then you
didn't hear the debate. Dan knows very little about science.
It was an analogy. I never once said Dan Barker was an evolutionary
scientist or a a scientist of any sort. My point was that his knowledge,
critical readings and understanding of scripture, as well as his debating
skills, was so far above yours that his participation in a debate with you
afforded you credibility that you did not earn or deserve. And I assure you
I heard the debate. Don't make so much background noise when you fumble
around for sources. It sounds unprofessional.
Post by Dr. Jason Gastrich
Post by turk
To those less educated, it gives the illusionary
appearance that evolution and creationism are equally valid. I
assume this is the exact same reason that Mr. Barker won't allow you
more of his time. Just his presence in a debate with you gives you
credit that you do not deserve on your own accord. Mr. Barker was
cordial enough to give someone as unworthy as yourself a chance to
debate him. You squandered the opportunity in spectacular fashion.
You owe him a great debt for just giving you the time of day. I
would think a Hallmark would be appropriate to show your gratitude.
Post by Dr. Jason Gastrich
Sincerely,
Jason Gastrich
P.S. There is plenty of evidence that Hitler was not a Christian.
He had a loose tie with the Catholic church that he broke when it
was convenient for him. That's the only evidence of his so-called
Christianity that anyone can ever produce.
You mean other Christians don't break their ties when it's convenient
for them? Perhaps we live on different planets...
Post by Dr. Jason Gastrich
His world view was obviously atheistic: survival of the fittest.
As opposed to the Bible's view of "survival of the holiest"?
Atheists
Post by Dr. Jason Gastrich
simply find it so detestable that Hitler was an atheist that they
have to go on the attack and say he was a Christian.
I don't care a whole lot about his religion, there were plenty of
evil and good people of all religions, but I do have this pet peeve
about people spreading lies, which is why I had to bring it up.
Perhaps you can show me some of
Post by Dr. Jason Gastrich
his writings that indicate his faith in the biblical God. Perhaps
you can show me some of the ways he obeyed God and had faith in Him.
Or perhaps not.
Maybe you've heard of 'Mein Kampf'? It was only a book authored by
Hitler dealing specifically with his beliefs and ideology.
That's right. Not his faith in God, though.
I mentioned belief. Pay attention. Maybe if you weren't so obssessed with
convincing others that the words of the Bible mean the exact opposite of
what they actually say, your reading comprehension might improve a bit.
Post by Dr. Jason Gastrich
Post by turk
"I believe today that my conduct is in accordance
with the will of the Almighty Creator.": Adolph Hitler, _Mein
Kampf_, pp. 46
This is a good indication that he wasn't a Christian. No Christian would
say that genocide was God's will for them to enact.
So, the Crusades were just a minor annomaly in the Christian teachings? The
Inquisition, too? Might you define genocide as "and utterly destroy all
that they have, and spare them not; but slay both man and woman, infant and
suckling, ox and sheep, camel and ass." 1 Samuel 15:2-3? Sounds pretty
genocidal to me...
Post by Dr. Jason Gastrich
Post by turk
"This human world of ours would be inconceivable without the practical
existence of a religious belief.": Adolph Hitler, _Mein Kampf_, pp.152
"What we have to fight for...is the freedom and independenc of the
fatherland, so that our people may be enabled to fulfill the mission
assigned to it by the Creator.": Adolph Hitler, "Mein Kampf" pg 125.
"And the founder of Christianity made no secret indeed of his
estimation of the Jewish people. When He found it necessary, He drove
those enemies of the human race out of the Temple of God.": Adolph
Hitler, "Mein Kampf" pp.174
If he were a Christian, then why didn't he say, "My Lord and Savior . . ."?
So, you can't refer to "God" at all unless you use the words "My Lord and
Savior"? Is that now a hard and fast rule, because if so, you better get
the word out to the other sheep. They seem to be missing that commandment.
Post by Dr. Jason Gastrich
Hitler allegedly said, "the founder of Christianity."
Would a devout Jew simply refer to God as "the founder of Judaism"?
If he did, would you misunderstand him? Would the meaning not be clear?
Besides, Christians get a bonus there. The founder of Christianity could be
Jesus or God. Either way, the reference is crystal to all but the most
evasive.
Post by Dr. Jason Gastrich
Do you know who Haeckel is (e.g. Haeckel's fabricated charts)? Do you know
where he lived? Do you know what he believed? Do you know who he
influenced greatly?
I know who he is, but am hardly an expert on his work. I do know that
creationists prefer to attack him over Darwin on evolution since he seems a
much easier target to them. Personally, I'm more of a Dawkinsian. Unless
you have some groundbreaking new evidence in the "science" (I use that term
in it's most generous form) of creationism to present to me, please don't
bother to waste my time.

turk
Dr. Jason Gastrich
2003-11-29 10:37:17 UTC
Permalink
Post by turk
Post by Dr. Jason Gastrich
Post by turk
Post by Dr. Jason Gastrich
Post by turk
Post by Dr. Jason Gastrich
I don't care for your appeal to authority.
You don't care for my appeal to authority? Fine, then let's make a
rule that any further debate between us cannot involve any appeals
to authority. Now, I hope you will take a split second to realize
what this means for your unenviable postion. Surely, you can't
ignore the fact that your position rests entirely on an appeal to
authority? After all, what is Christianity except an appeal to
authority? Christianity is accepting a claim as true without there
being adequate evidence to do so. Therefore, you cannot use the
Bible or God as evidence at all of anything you might claim, since
to do so would be, by definition, an appeal to authority. Fair
enough?
Haha. This sounds like an unhappy diatribe from someone caught
using an appeal to authority.
And this sounds like someone who has either no will or ability to
address the claims.
Post by Dr. Jason Gastrich
Post by turk
Post by Dr. Jason Gastrich
Post by turk
First, I never said that this Jesus character wasn't a hypocrite.
In fact, that is very much my point. He contradicts his own
teachings multiple times. Second, I now recognize your name.
You're the poor fellow that Dan Barker took behind the woodshed on
that broadcast debate. Third, I would say that the height of
hypocrisy is using (and writing) that utterly ridiculous,
desperate, delusional grouping of apologetics that is the
'Skeptic's Annotated Bible: Corrected and Explained' and then
accusing others of stretching the Biblical "truth".
Unfortunately, I am off to work at the moment, but I will be back
this evening to answer your rebuttals. In the meantime, I'd still
love to see some real historical information that Hitler was an
atheist, because you seem very fond of banying that myth around
almost as much as the myth of Christianity.
turk
Unfortunately, Dan has refused to debate me, again. He did buy a
copy of my book, though. Perhaps he read it and figured he
couldn't win. Feel free to email him and request another debate
between us. I'll be ready if he changes his mind.
It appears I've struck a nerve. Mr. Barker has aready taken his
valuable time to make a fool out of you. Don't you remember your
ridiculous answer to his question "would you kill me if God told you
to?" There is a reason evolutionary scientists do not debate
creationists. To do so gives the latter unfounded position
unwarranted credibility by just putting them in the same forum as a
man of science.
If you think Dan is a man of science or an evolutionary scientist,
then you didn't hear the debate. Dan knows very little about
science.
It was an analogy. I never once said Dan Barker was an evolutionary
scientist or a a scientist of any sort. My point was that his
knowledge, critical readings and understanding of scripture, as well
as his debating skills, was so far above yours that his participation
in a debate with you afforded you credibility that you did not earn
or deserve. And I assure you I heard the debate. Don't make so much
background noise when you fumble around for sources. It sounds
unprofessional.
Bottom line: Barker appears chicken because he refuses to debate me. He
just debated some pastor from Mesa, Arizona with far less debating
experience than me, so you can't simply say that Dan won't debate people
with little debating experience.

I've gotten all kinds of feedback from people who have heard that debate.
The majority of it has been positive. Therefore, I must take your criticism
with a grain of salt. Furthermore, as I've mentioned, that debate was
before I wrote my book, so I gained a lot of knowledge as I wrote it.
Post by turk
Post by Dr. Jason Gastrich
Post by turk
To those less educated, it gives the illusionary
appearance that evolution and creationism are equally valid. I
assume this is the exact same reason that Mr. Barker won't allow you
more of his time. Just his presence in a debate with you gives you
credit that you do not deserve on your own accord. Mr. Barker was
cordial enough to give someone as unworthy as yourself a chance to
debate him. You squandered the opportunity in spectacular fashion.
You owe him a great debt for just giving you the time of day. I
would think a Hallmark would be appropriate to show your gratitude.
Post by Dr. Jason Gastrich
Sincerely,
Jason Gastrich
P.S. There is plenty of evidence that Hitler was not a Christian.
He had a loose tie with the Catholic church that he broke when it
was convenient for him. That's the only evidence of his so-called
Christianity that anyone can ever produce.
You mean other Christians don't break their ties when it's
convenient for them? Perhaps we live on different planets...
Post by Dr. Jason Gastrich
His world view was obviously atheistic: survival of the fittest.
As opposed to the Bible's view of "survival of the holiest"?
Atheists
Post by Dr. Jason Gastrich
simply find it so detestable that Hitler was an atheist that they
have to go on the attack and say he was a Christian.
I don't care a whole lot about his religion, there were plenty of
evil and good people of all religions, but I do have this pet peeve
about people spreading lies, which is why I had to bring it up.
Perhaps you can show me some of
Post by Dr. Jason Gastrich
his writings that indicate his faith in the biblical God. Perhaps
you can show me some of the ways he obeyed God and had faith in
Him. Or perhaps not.
Maybe you've heard of 'Mein Kampf'? It was only a book authored by
Hitler dealing specifically with his beliefs and ideology.
That's right. Not his faith in God, though.
I mentioned belief. Pay attention. Maybe if you weren't so
obssessed with convincing others that the words of the Bible mean the
exact opposite of what they actually say, your reading comprehension
might improve a bit.
My statement showed you had no point. You confirmed it, now.
Post by turk
Post by Dr. Jason Gastrich
Post by turk
"I believe today that my conduct is in accordance
with the will of the Almighty Creator.": Adolph Hitler, _Mein
Kampf_, pp. 46
This is a good indication that he wasn't a Christian. No Christian
would say that genocide was God's will for them to enact.
So, the Crusades were just a minor annomaly in the Christian
teachings? The Inquisition, too? Might you define genocide as "and
utterly destroy all that they have, and spare them not; but slay both
man and woman, infant and suckling, ox and sheep, camel and ass." 1
Samuel 15:2-3? Sounds pretty genocidal to me...
I'm not Catholic and those, two things were done by Catholics. Furthermore,
you quote 1 Samuel. I clearly said CHRISTIAN. No CHRISTIAN has been told
by God to commit genocide. Christians didn't exist when 1 Samuel was
written.

It's unfortunate that you want to use sloppy apologetics and assume every
word of the Bible was written to 21st century Christians, but things like 1
Samuel were clearly written to a different audience. Haven't you ever
considered this?
Post by turk
Post by Dr. Jason Gastrich
Post by turk
"This human world of ours would be inconceivable without the
practical existence of a religious belief.": Adolph Hitler, _Mein
Kampf_, pp.152
"What we have to fight for...is the freedom and independenc of the
fatherland, so that our people may be enabled to fulfill the mission
assigned to it by the Creator.": Adolph Hitler, "Mein Kampf" pg 125.
"And the founder of Christianity made no secret indeed of his
estimation of the Jewish people. When He found it necessary, He
Adolph Hitler, "Mein Kampf" pp.174
If he were a Christian, then why didn't he say, "My Lord and Savior . . ."?
So, you can't refer to "God" at all unless you use the words "My Lord
and Savior"? Is that now a hard and fast rule, because if so, you
better get the word out to the other sheep. They seem to be missing
that commandment.
Post by Dr. Jason Gastrich
Hitler allegedly said, "the founder of Christianity."
Would a devout Jew simply refer to God as "the founder of Judaism"?
If he did, would you misunderstand him? Would the meaning not be
clear? Besides, Christians get a bonus there. The founder of
Christianity could be Jesus or God. Either way, the reference is
crystal to all but the most evasive.
Post by Dr. Jason Gastrich
Do you know who Haeckel is (e.g. Haeckel's fabricated charts)? Do
you know where he lived? Do you know what he believed? Do you know
who he influenced greatly?
I know who he is, but am hardly an expert on his work. I do know that
creationists prefer to attack him over Darwin on evolution since he
seems a much easier target to them. Personally, I'm more of a
Dawkinsian. Unless you have some groundbreaking new evidence in the
"science" (I use that term in it's most generous form) of creationism
to present to me, please don't bother to waste my time.
turk
You totally missed it. See when and where Haeckel lived and you'll begin to
see the correlation I'm trying to show you.

Jason
Dirk Hartog
2003-11-28 15:38:30 UTC
Permalink
Post by Dr. Jason Gastrich
Jesus fulfilled a great number of Messianic prophecies. This is another
http://www.jcsm.org/biblelessons/FMP.htm
But it doesn't separate Him from Apollo, or Apollonius, or Pythagoras,
or Isis, or Mithras, or dozens of other ancient Pagan Gods, does it?

The power of prophesies made and fulfilled was basic to ancient Pagan
Gods:
"He [the Pagan Celsus] says: "What could be called more divine than
the power of foreknowing and foretelling the future?"
[Origen, Against Celsus, 4.96]

Dirk Hartog
Dr. Jason Gastrich
2003-11-29 01:10:37 UTC
Permalink
Post by Dirk Hartog
Post by Dr. Jason Gastrich
Jesus fulfilled a great number of Messianic prophecies. This is
http://www.jcsm.org/biblelessons/FMP.htm
But it doesn't separate Him from Apollo, or Apollonius, or Pythagoras,
or Isis, or Mithras, or dozens of other ancient Pagan Gods, does it?
The power of prophesies made and fulfilled was basic to ancient Pagan
"He [the Pagan Celsus] says: "What could be called more divine than
the power of foreknowing and foretelling the future?"
[Origen, Against Celsus, 4.96]
Dirk Hartog
Until you can show 60+ Messianic prophecies that your gods fulfilled, Jesus
will be separated from those gods.

Jason
Dirk Hartog
2003-11-29 13:14:44 UTC
Permalink
Post by Dr. Jason Gastrich
Post by Dirk Hartog
Post by Dr. Jason Gastrich
Jesus fulfilled a great number of Messianic prophecies. This is
http://www.jcsm.org/biblelessons/FMP.htm
But it doesn't separate Him from Apollo, or Apollonius, or Pythagoras,
or Isis, or Mithras, or dozens of other ancient Pagan Gods, does it?
The power of prophesies made and fulfilled was basic to ancient Pagan
"He [the Pagan Celsus] says: "What could be called more divine than
the power of foreknowing and foretelling the future?"
[Origen, Against Celsus, 4.96]
Dirk Hartog
Until you can show 60+ Messianic prophecies that your gods fulfilled, Jesus
will be separated from those gods.
Well, they're not MY Gods. They were the Gods the early Christians
used to model Jesus.

--------
You're exactly right, the _messianic_ prophecies do _separate_ Jesus
from the other Pagan Gods. The separation, of course, is simply that
the other Pagan Gods had been around since prehistoric times (Isis,
for eg., dates to the 3d _millennium_ BC), so messianic prophesies
weren't important for them, everybody already knew they were Gods.

Jesus' mom was named Mary, so that separates him from the other Pagan
Gods too. So what?

Are you saying that your theory sees the messianic prophesy separation
as somehow persuasive? How odd. Can I ask, why are you persuaded by
_messianic_ prophecies -- are they somehow more magic than other
prophesies? Are you saying that Jesus' other prophesies are NOT
persuasive?

Dirk Hartog
People's Commissar
2003-11-28 22:43:56 UTC
Permalink
Zeus never existed either :-D. Religion is a lot of things aside from
"actual fact."

See http://www.geocities.com/go_darkness/god-humans-tod.html
Post by Religion is a Lie
Jesus never existed. Christianity is based on a work of fiction -
altered, expanded, corrupted, etc. The Paulinian description of the
spread of Christianity in the 1st cent. AD. was written c. 140 AD - it
is complete fiction. There is no evidence that Christianity existed in
the 1st cent AD - because it didn't!
Christianity as we know it today stems primarily from the machinations
of the Roman Emperor Constantine early in the 4th cent AD. It was him
who ordered the bible to be compiled. All the property and sacred texts
of the numerous Christian sects that existed at the time was given to
the Catholic Church. Eusebius, a Catholic scholar, was commissioned to
produce 50 copies of the bible for distribution throughout the churches
of Constantinople, Constantine's capital. Constantine himself was NOT A
CHRISTIAN!
The big question, the question in my mind, is - who was the author who
invented the character Jesus?
I, personally, have no complaints about the moral teachings of those
parts of the gospel story that I think were in the original - but I do
object, most strongly, to much of the later additional material,
insertions, corruptions, etc., that other hands managed to get accepted
as "inspired".
ATT
2003-11-29 02:37:42 UTC
Permalink
So, OK, then don't practice Christianity. Fine with me...
Baruch
2003-11-29 19:55:25 UTC
Permalink
OK. Let's go with that for a minute - Jesus never existed. The entire
story was made up, and the whole thing we're doing now is the result of a
really successful Public Relations scam.

Does that make Jesus, or the story of Jesus, any less real? It does not.
It makes the story less physical - it makes the physicality of the story
nonexistent. Fine. Many things exist, that are not physical. Emotion is
an example; thought another. The fact that something is not physical, does
not mean that the thing doesn't exist at all.

I think we get so bogged down in the details of the Jesus story, whether he
really was born in Bethlehem in a stable, whether he was God, whether he
performed all the miracles claimed of him, in the correct order, that we
overlook something vital. What was he *doing* here in the first place? You
can bet he didn'g come here to do a few magic tricks for people, and then
get himself hammered to a tree... even in fiction that doesn't make a whole
lot of sense. What is the point of creating a fictitious character who
comes here, does magic, and gets crucified?

Behind the story, whether it ever took place in the physical world, is a
message, and it is that message that has relevance regardless of the
physical facts. As long as you continue to focus on the physical issues,
you will miss the story completely. And it's a pretty nice story, if you
can get past people getting nails driven through their flesh.

True, much of this story is terribly garbled, with all the church people
adding their two cents worth in over time. The Good News somehow went from
"God loves you" to "You're all going to hell", and to me that isn't good
news. But you still can find a story of love and tenderness, forgiveness
and healing, where someone cared enough about the poor and disempowered to
hang out with them and to try to comfort them. He lost his life doing that,
if the story has physical reality. If not, it's still a story about someone
who'd be willing to do exactly that - lose his life - to bring healing and
comfort to hurting people.

How bad is that? It only gets bad when people get all worked up on the
physical details, how Jesus must have done this, or couldn't possibly have
done that, and then it gets to be so important that you wind up killing for
the prince of peace. Come on...

So who cares if Jesus, the physical human being, never existed? Does this
story mean anything without it? Old Yeller never existed, either, and I
still shed a tear when they shot that poor dog... the story meant something
to me - canine heroism, loyalty, love, etc.

Old Yeller didn't exist either. And that's OK.
Continue reading on narkive:
Loading...