Fleisher 0896-4, Fleisher Bud

John Mitchell wrote:
>
> Scott Maxwell wrote:
> >
> > > 1. “Jews are evil”(sic) every Christian Denomination has at its core a
> > > denunciation of Jews as having caused Jesus’ death.
> >
> > Uh huh, and just which chapter of the bible says this? (This is
> > especially untue for Fundimentalists who are very Pro-Isreal/Judeism.

I do not support present-day Isreal nor Judaism. I believe most
Christians today are being deceived into believing the lies of uninformed
teachers, tv preachers and a very biased secular media.

> >
>
> Fundamentalists support Israel, as otherwise they may difficulty going to
> Jerusalem.
>
> > > 2. Order is a virtue (need no explanation there)
> >
> > Right, that is one of the original Ten Virtues. Order, Cleanliness,
> > and Flossing were truncated in the Middle Ages…
> >
> > > 3. Charity is highly desirable (the Nazis had more social programs than
> > > any other government until the 1960s). Hitler promoted Charity as a
> > > means of social coherence, just as all christians do.

Your point, please? Does this mean Christians and Hitler or the same,
etc. I’m rather fed up with that analogy. Marx was a Jew. Are all Jews
Communists? Also, many Jews in Russian revolution are guilty of
murdering millions of Christians and Russian civilians. Does
this then make all Jews murderers and persecutors?
>
> > OK, This is the same logic that says that Hitler is the true founding
> > father of Isreal…
>
> But, if not for Hitler, there would have been no need for the existence
> of Israel!

Huh? They started migrating there after WW 1, not after WW 2. Check out
the Balfour declaration.

>
> >
> > > 4. Killing for your beliefs is justifiable (just lookto history for the proof).
> >
> > I don’t think that this is an exclusive to Catholicism or Chrstianity
> > in general (just look to history for proof).
> >
> > > So, even if the Pope didn’t pull the trigger, he sure held the gun…

The Church of Rome is a chameleon. it changes in accordance with its
locale. Today the Pope decries the so-called Holocaust (much of which is
an exaggeration, but some of which is tragically true) and this Pope
upholds just about whatever the popular opinion will support about the
war, despite any real evidence to the contrary.

> >
> > Yep, a complicated issue of the Second World War as described by a
> > complete idiot.


“The judgement of history depends on who writes it” (Richard Nixon)

Nixon is absolutely right!

From [email protected] Thu Aug 8 10:29:13 PDT 1996
Article: 3413 of alt.bible.prophecy
Path: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca!news.island.net!news.bctel.net!news.mag-net.com!freenet.unbc.edu!news.scn.org!
news.abs.net!News1.mcs.net!nntp04.primenet.com!news.shkoo.com!nntp.primenet.com!news.texas.net!vixen.cso.uiuc.edu!
newsfeed.internetmci.com!in3.uu.net!news.gte.net!usenet
From: bud
Newsgroups: alt.bible.prophecy,alt.christnet,alt.christnet.theology,alt.religion.christian,alt.christnet.bible,
alt.christnet.philosophy,a.bsu.religion,alt.atheism,talk.atheism,talk.origins
Subject: quote your sources please.
Date: Wed, 07 Aug 1996 17:35:34 -0700
Organization: home
Lines: 28
Message-ID: <[email protected]>
References: <[email protected]> <[email protected]> <[email protected]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: tpm97098.gte.net
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: Mozilla 2.01E-GTE (Win16; I)
Xref: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca alt.bible.prophecy:3413 alt.christnet:89516 alt.christnet.theology:20275
alt.religion.christian:110140 alt.christnet.bible:47439 alt.christnet.philosophy:13201 alt.atheism:37084
talk.origins:138337

Christopher A. Lee wrote:
>
> In article <[email protected]> [email protected] (bob puharic) writes:
> >
> >snipped out the crap….
> >
> >what creationists fail to point out is that hoyle is not a
> >creationist. he is a scientist. the 2 are mutually exclusive.
>
> And his associate Chandra Wickramasinghe was actually called as a witness by
> the creationists in one of the equal time lawsuits (Arkansas?). They were
> too stupid to realise that although H&W’s views in certain areas were
> rather unorthodox that they were still mainstream scientists.
>
> I suppose this was due to creationist binary thinking.
>
> So they were taken by surprise when their supposed star witness denounced
> creationism as claptrap!

and baloney–Hoyle is also an Evolutionist. As for defining
Evolutionists as Scientists and excluding Creationists from the
definition you are attempting to define your opposition out of existence,
a logical fallacy that does not hold up. You Want the names of dozens of
fine scientists who are also creationist contact ICR in Santee,
California and they can supply you with dozens or men engage in all areas
of the sciences who are creationists.

“The judgement of history depends on who writes it” (Richard Nixon)

From [email protected] Thu Aug 8 10:29:15 PDT 1996
Article: 3418 of alt.bible.prophecy
Path: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca!news.island.net!news.bctel.net!news.mag-net.com!freenet.unbc.edu!news.scn.org!
news.abs.net!News1.mcs.net!nntp04.primenet.com!news.shkoo.com!nntp.primenet.com!news.texas.net!vixen.cso.uiuc.edu!
newsfeed.internetmci.com!in3.uu.net!news.gte.net!usenet
From: bud
Newsgroups: alt.bible.prophecy,alt.christnet,alt.christnet.theology,alt.religion.christian,
alt.christnet.bible,alt.christnet.philosophy,a.bsu.religion,alt.atheism,talk.atheism,talk.origins
Subject: quote your sources please.
Date: Wed, 07 Aug 1996 17:36:01 -0700
Organization: home
Lines: 28
Message-ID: <[email protected]>
References: <[email protected]> <[email protected]> <[email protected]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: tpm97098.gte.net
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: Mozilla 2.01E-GTE (Win16; I)

Xref: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca alt.bible.prophecy:3418 alt.christnet:89523 alt.christnet.theology:20278
alt.religion.christian:110144 alt.christnet.bible:47442 alt.christnet.philosophy:13203 alt.atheism:37093
talk.origins:138342

Christopher A. Lee wrote:
>
> In article <[email protected]> [email protected] (bob puharic) writes:
> >
> >snipped out the crap….
> >
> >what creationists fail to point out is that hoyle is not a
> >creationist. he is a scientist. the 2 are mutually exclusive.
>
> And his associate Chandra Wickramasinghe was actually called as a witness by
> the creationists in one of the equal time lawsuits (Arkansas?). They were
> too stupid to realise that although H&W’s views in certain areas were
> rather unorthodox that they were still mainstream scientists.
>
> I suppose this was due to creationist binary thinking.
>
> So they were taken by surprise when their supposed star witness denounced
> creationism as claptrap!

and baloney–Hoyle is also an Evolutionist. As for defining
Evolutionists as Scientists and excluding Creationists from the
definition you are attempting to define your opposition out of existence,
a logical fallacy that does not hold up. You Want the names of dozens of
fine scientists who are also creationist contact ICR in Santee,
California and they can supply you with dozens or men engage in all areas
of the sciences who are creationists.

“The judgement of history depends on who writes it” (Richard Nixon)

From [email protected] Thu Aug 8 10:29:16 PDT 1996
Article: 3419 of alt.bible.prophecy
Path: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca!news.island.net!news.bctel.net!news.mag-net.com!freenet.unbc.edu!news.scn.org!
news.abs.net!News1.mcs.net!nntp04.primenet.com!news.shkoo.com!nntp.primenet.com!news.texas.net!
news.sprintlink.net!news-fw-6.sprintlink.net!news.gte.net!usenet
From: bud
Newsgroups: alt.christnet,alt.christnet.bible,alt.bible.prophecy,alt.religion.christian,talk.religion.misc
Subject: for your consideration
Date: Wed, 07 Aug 1996 17:52:03 -0700
Organization: home
Lines: 421
Message-ID: <[email protected]>
References: <[email protected]> <[email protected]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: tpm97098.gte.net
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
X-Mailer: Mozilla 2.01E-GTE (Win16; I)
Xref: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca alt.christnet:89524 alt.christnet.bible:47443 alt.bible.prophecy:3419
alt.religion.christian:110145 talk.religion.misc:140216

Wen-King Su wrote:
> =

> In a previous article bud writes:
> =

> >Check out your history books about the black plague and other outbreaks
> >of victims. Actually millions and millions died in the world during
> >to be burned to avoid further infestation. This explanation has been
> >”war criminals”. According to some, starvation, disease and typhus was
> >It has also been pointe out that the allied bombings and raids on
> >get any food to these camps. Sure it had to be done, but this also can
> >(or 20,000!) bodies burned does not add up to 6 million.
> =

> =

> Why is that? It is bigotry to round up the Jews and have them killed by
> the thousands daily whether it was by the use of gas chamber or by causin=
g
> starvation and disease. How does a stand against it makes one a bigot?
> Why is it anti-Christian? Where in God’s teaching that it is OK to treat=

> any group of people this way? There weren’t thousands of Germans dying
> from starvation and disease any day during the war. What is the
> justification for arranging to have a much smaller population die at such=

> a high rate? That the Nazi planners were too stupid to know this might
> hapen?

Actually, Wen, it’s not. I was just being sarcastic and trying to point =

out that too many people in these newsgroups call anybody who disagrees =

with them about minorities or majorities is called a “bigot’ or a Naze or =

whatever. So, I’m going to do the same to them… As for your analysis, =

there are some stories that are true, and others that are exaggerations =

that become more embellished as the years go by and some groups find =

millions of dollars of profit in the business of this situation. =

Remember, Wen, that it is the victors who write the majority of the =

history books. However, the indisputable fact is that many other find =

historians have presented a lot of good reasons to question lots of the =

“stories” coming out of the war. I suggest you read the material From =

this site as a starter: And Please, don’t just resort to calling these =

people “bigots” like so many of their opponents attempt to do. This is =

an attempt to skirt over the issue, rather than addressing it… here it =

is for your consideration:

Adelaide Institute – The final intellectual adventure
THE FINAL INTELLECTUAL ADVENTURE OF THE 20TH CENTURY
We are a group of individuals who are looking at the Jewish-Nazi =

Holocaust, in particular we are investigating the allegation that Germans =

systematically killed six million Jews, four million alone at the =

Auschwitz concentration camp. In our investigations we refuse to be =

intimidated by anyone because we believe that the first step in any =

murder investigation is to forensically test the alleged murder weapon. =

In the Auschwitz murder case, certain individuals wish to prevent us from =

focusing upon such an investigation.
The latest version of how the Germans gassed millions of Jews at =

Auschwitz is propagated by Professor Deborah Lipstadt of Emory University =

in the U.S.A. who claims that mortuaries were converted into homicidal =

gas chambers. Proof of this is apparently found in so-called “conversion =

plans”. We have requested of Professor Lipstadt and of the Holocaust =

Museum, Washington, to provide us with copies of such conversion plans. =

We are still waiting for them to provide us with these plans.
In the meantime we have noted the original four million Auschwitz death =

figure has been reduced by Jean Claude Pressac to a maximum of 800,000. =

This in itself is good news because it means that around 3.2 million =

people never died at Auschwitz – a cause for celebration.
We are worried about the fact that to date it has been impossible to =

reconstruct a homicidal gas chamber. Even the Holocaust Museum in =

Washington informed us that it could not bring one across from Europe =

because there are none available. This is like a space museum without a =

rocket or the Vatican without a Crucifix. We are justifiably sceptical =

about the homicidal gas chamber claims.
We reject outright that a questioning of the alleged homicidal gas =

chamber story constitutes “hate talk”, is “anti-Semitic”, “racist” or =

even “neo-Nazi” activity.

The director of the Adelaide Institute, Dr Fredrick Töben, puts it =

thus:
“If I offend anybody because I show poor taste in my sometime blunt and =

honest questioning, then I apologise. However, if I offend because I am =

politically incorrect by asking uncomfortable questions, then I claim it =

as my right, under the free speech principle, to say these things.”
We at the Adelaide Institute also focus on the Jewish-Bolshevik
Holocaust, a matter which Australian author Helen Demidenko-Darville has =

raised in her book The Hand That Signed The Paper. The controversy =

generated by this novel still continues.
Adelaide Institute associate, Mr David Brockschmidt, sums up the essence =

of Demidenko-Darville’s ‘crime’ in writing this book:

“The merit of Helen Demidenko-Darville’s novel – and hidden agenda of the =

anti-Demidenko affair – is that she has revealed a basic historical fact, =

viz, that Lenin’s henchman, Trotzky (Bronstein) and Stalin’s henchman, =

Kaganovich, were Jewish mass murderers. This historical fact clearly =

shows that Jews are not always victims in history, but also murderers. =

Australia’s mass media has failed to publicise this important fact. =

Why?”

David Brockschmidt displays his parents’ medal received from the West =

German government for saving Jews during World War II. The Brockschmidt =

family was also honoured by the Israeli Government and a tree in their =

memory has been planted in the Avenue of the Righteous Gentiles, =

Jerusalem, Israel.
David’s father was also instrumental in providing Oskar Schindler with =

the trucks which transported the Schindler Jews from Poland to =

Czechoslovakia. Steven Spielberg, who knew the vital role Brockschmidt =

played in this operation failed to give credit to David’s father. Why?
These two historical issues – the Jewish-Bolshevik Holocaust and the =

Nazi-Jewish Holocaust – are worthy subjects for an intellectual enquiry. =

We are aware of the fact that to venture forth in to such an enquiry can =

be dangerous.
Professor Robert Faurisson (France), Mr David Irving (England), Dr =

Wilhelm Stäglich, Professor Udo Walendy, Messrs Günter Deckert, =

Germar Rudolf, Mr Thies Christopherson, Pastor Manfred Junger (Germany), =

Mr Ditlieb Felderer (Sweden), Mr Hans Schmidt (U.S.A.), and Mr Ernst =

Zündel (Canada) are people who have suffered physically, mentally and =

materially as a result of their search for truth in history. The enemies =

of freedom of speech will use physical and legal violence – persecution =

through prosecution – to stifle debate on these contentious historical =

issues. There is a tremendous pressure placed on people who dare touch =

these taboo subjects. All too often the first thing that snaps is the =

family unit, followed by professional and social ostracism.
So, be warned – this final intellectual journey is not for the =

faint-hearted. If you dare to seek the truth, in particular about the =

alleged homicidal gassings, then you will be smeared, libelled and =

defamed by those who are intellectual midgets but materialistic giants.
If you are mentally strong enough to seek the truth of the matter, then =

force an open debate. Don’t get side tracked by details and always =

refocus on the basics. Too many individuals drown in a sea of =

particulars.
People who claim that during World War II, the Germans gassed millions of =

Jews are levelling three allegations at the Germans:
1. The Germans planned the construction of huge chemical slaughter =

houses;
2. The Germans constructed these huge chemical slaughterhouses =

during the middle of World War II; and
3. The German used these huge slaughterhouses to exterminate =

millions of Jews.

Any normal person familiar with bureaucratic red tape will now ask:
What proof is there to back up these claims? Firstly, where are the plans =

of this enterprise? Secondly, where is the budget needed to finance the =

massive enterprise? Finally, it is inconceivable that such a massive =

undertaking would get past first base without an executive order. To =

date, we have been led to believe that “a wink and a nudge” began the =

alleged extermination project.
We at Adelaide Institute believe that those who level the homicidal =

gassing allegations at the Germans owe it to the world to come up with =

irrefutable evidence that this happened.
Instead, these defamers and libellers of the Germans use legal means to =

stifle debate on the topic. They claim that anyone who asks questions is =

engaging in “hate-talk”, is “anti-Semeitic” is a “racist”, even a =

“neo-Nazi”.
If that doesn’t work,then physical violence is used to silence those who =

want to know the truth.
So, come on board if you have the courage to look for truth. We naturally =

maintain that should – after fifty years- proof of the homicidal gassings =

be forthcoming, we shall gladly publicise this as well. To date, there =

has been no proof offered to the world. Robert Faurisson sums it up well: =

“No holes, no Holocaust!”
We are not “holocaust deniers”. We proudly proclaim that to date there is =

no evidence that millions of people were killed in homicidal gas =

chambers. That is good news all round. Why would anyone find this =

offensive? We are celebrating the living who were thought dead. How can =

this be an offence – unless it offends those who have their snout in the =

trough which Jewish academic, Dr Frank Knopfelmacher called, “the =

Holocaust racket”.
If there is to be a mission statement from Adelaide Institute, then it is =

best summed up in a letter which appeared in The Australian on 22 =

February, 1996. Written by John Buchner of Camden of NSW, nine days =

before the 2nd March federal election:
OPEN SEASON ON GERMANS
Phillip Adams referred in a recent column of Review, 13 – 14 January =

1996, to a number of foreign situations, which are dealt with in a =

jocular fashion, but he refers to the German people in a contemporary =

sense as “Nazi swine”. Many people from a German background have settled =

in Australia and made a significant contribution to it, including serving =

in its armed forces against the Nazi regime. Their memory is vilified by =

Mr Adams’ reference.
During my school years here, I endured continual vilification because of =

my German origins and countless “Hitler Salutes”.
However, my complaint to you is not motivated by a chip on the shoulder =

because of these events. Like most Australians, I can take it and abhor =

the treatment other national groups have received.
My concern is that there seems to be a perpetual open season on all =

Germans, as though all Germans must forever bear the guilt and shame of =

the Nazi regime.
I can bear references to “Nazi Swine”, albeit without amusement. But what =

of my children? Are my children to be forever classed “Nazi Swine” in =

this country?
John Buchner
Camden, NSW

Interestingly, a climate of political correctness pervaded the run-up =

period to the 2nd of March federal elections, with Liberal and National =

candidates coming in for some sharp rebukes from their Labor colleagues =

over publicly-made alleged racist statements. For example, there was Bob =

Katter who lashed out at “enviro-Nazis”, “femi-Nazis” and “slant-eyed =

ideologues”. Only the latter statement created an uproar. The “Nazi” word =

has been used by a number of politicians from all parties because it =

still has a sting to it. After all, everything done by the Germans prior =

to and after World War II is eclipsed by what is alleged to have happened =

at Auschwitz concentration camp. The argument is always “from Mozart, =

Beethoven and Wagner to the homicidal gas chambers at Auschwitz”. That’s =

the card pulled out by anyone who is faced with competition from a =

German-born Australian or Australian of German descent.
It is from this basis that we take it as our right to challenge the taboo =

topic’s veracity – did the Germans operate homicidal gas chambers at =

Auschwitz? It is too cheap for us to decry our work as that of =

“hate-mongers”, “anti-Semites”,”racists” or “neo-Nazis”. Let us repeat: =

we are not deniers of the Jewish-Nazi Holocaust. We affirm that to date =

there is no proof that millions of people were gassed by Germans in =

homicidal gas chambers. Dare you join us in this final intellectual =

adventure of the 20th Century?

Adelaide Institute Newsletters
No. 37 – April 1996 Available soon
No. 36 – March 1996 Available soon
No. 35 – February 1996 Available soon
No. 34 – January 1996 Available soon
No. 33 – December 1995 Available soon

What is available
=95 Fredrick Töben : Political Correctness In Our Schools – Paper =

presented at the National Conference Of The Australian College of =

Education: “Tomorrow’s Teachers”, Adelaide, 2-6 October 1995.
ISBN 0646 26799X.
=95 Fredrick Töben (Compiler): Political Correctness Is No Joke – =

The Leuchter Case, 1995. ISBN 0 646 24194 X.
=95 David Brockschmidt: Schindler’s List, Bridging the Gap between =

Political Correctness and Historical Correctness, 1995, Video.
=95 Fredrick Töben: Adelaide War Crimes Trials, 1995, Video.
=95 David Irving – Fighting Back – Confronting Deborah Lipstadt, 11 =

November 1994. Video.

Interesting Revisionist Sites
Zündelsite (Canada – English/French/German)
Greg Raven – Institute for Historical Review
(USA – English)

Bradley Smith – Committee for Open Debate on the Holocaust (CODOH)
(USA – English/French)
Ahmed Rami – Radio Islam
(Sweden – English, French, German, Norwegian, Swedish)
Interesting Exterminationist Sites
Ken McVay – The Nizkor Project (Canada – English)
Simon Wiesenthal Centre (USA – Multilingual)
UPDATES
The Faurisson Forum
The Irving Interlude
The Zündel Site
A Book Boycott
Historical Flashback – Zyklon B
A discussion on Radio National
A question addressed to some philosophers

Please feel free to contact us at;
Adelaide Institute
PO Box 3300
Norwood
SA 5067

Ph. 61 8 331 0808
Fax. 61 8 332 2908

Or email Fredrick Töben for more information or comments.

 

“The judgement of history depends on who writes it” (Richard Nixon)

From [email protected] Thu Aug 8 10:29:17 PDT 1996
Article: 3473 of alt.bible.prophecy
Path: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca!news.island.net!vertex.tor.hookup.net!hookup!chi-news.cic.net!news.bright.net!
usenet.eel.ufl.edu!news-res.gsl.net!news.gsl.net!hunter.premier.net!newsfeed.internetmci.com!in3.uu.net!
news.gte.net!usenet
From: bud
Newsgroups: alt.bible.prophecy,alt.christnet,alt.religion.christian,alt.christnet.bible,alt.christnet,theology
Subject: Fund of faith pt 3
Date: Thu, 08 Aug 1996 08:05:03 -0700
Organization: home
Lines: 462
Message-ID: <[email protected]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: tpm97027.gte.net
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: Mozilla 2.01E-GTE (Win16; I)
Xref: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca alt.bible.prophecy:3473 alt.christnet:89664 alt.religion.christian:110293
alt.christnet.bible:47491

FUNDAMENTALS OF THE FAITH LESSON #3 “WHAT IS THE BIBLE?” (continued)

In this study it is important to have a better understanding of what we
mean when we say that God has “revealed” Himself to us. “Revelation” is
truth unveiled. Theologians generally agree that God has revealed Himself
in two ways: (1) “General Revelation” and (2) “Specific Revelation.” The
Bible mentions both of these.

GENERAL REVELATION (God “indirectly” revealing Himself to man)

Psalm 19:1-6 1 The heavens declare the glory of God; the skies proclaim
the work of his hands. 2 Day after day they pour forth speech; night
after night they display knowledge. 3 There is no speech or language
where their voice is not heard. 4 Their voice goes out into all the
earth, their words to the ends of the world. In the heavens he has
pitched a tent for the sun, 5 which is like a bridegroom coming forth
>from his pavilion, like a champion rejoicing to run his course. 6 It
rises at one end of the heavens and makes its circuit to the other;
nothing is hidden from its heat. (NIV)

Romans 1:19-23 19 since what may be known about God is plain to them,
because God has made it plain to them. 20 For since the creation of the
world God’s invisible qualities– his eternal power and divine nature–
have been clearly seen, being understood from what has been made, so that
men are without excuse. 21 For although they knew God, they neither
glorified him as God nor gave thanks to him, but their thinking became
futile and their foolish hearts were darkened. 22 Although they claimed
to be wise, they became fools 23 and exchanged the glory of the immortal
God for images made to look like mortal man and birds and animals and
reptiles. (NIV)

After carefully reading the above verses answer this question: “God has
revealed Himself to man in what way?
_____________________________________

(ANSWER: Through His creation).

Romans 2:14-16 14 (Indeed, when Gentiles, who do not have the law, do by
nature things required by the law, they are a law for themselves, even
though they do not have the law, 15 since they show that the requirements
of the law are written on their hearts, their consciences also bearing
witness, and their thoughts now accusing, now even defending them.) 16
This will take place on the day when God will judge men’s secrets through
Jesus Christ, as my gospel declares. (NIV)

The above verses also suggest that God has revealed Himself in another
way. What way is that? _______________________________________________

(ANSWER; through our conscience)

Acts 14:15-17 15 “Men, why are you doing this? We too are only men, human
like you. We are bringing you good news, telling you to turn from these
worthless things to the living God, who made heaven and earth and sea and
everything in them. 16 In the past, he let all nations go their own way.
17 Yet he has not left himself without testimony: He has shown kindness
by giving you rain from heaven and crops in their seasons; he provides
you with plenty of food and fills your hearts with joy.” (NIV)

The above verses say that God left a “witness” of Himself. What is it?
_________________________________________________________________
_________________________________________________________________

(ANSWER: God’s “common grace” such as food, rain, etc. Also in this area
would be God’s providence and His control over historical events)

Acts 17:26-28 26 From one man he made every nation of men, that they
should inhabit the whole earth; and he determined the times set for them
and the exact places where they should live. 27 God did this so that men
would seek him and perhaps reach out for him and find him, though he is
not far from each one of us. 28 `For in him we live and move and have
our being.’ As some of your own poets have said, `We are his offspring.’
(NIV)

According to the above verses how far away is God?
___________________________________________________________

answer: Not far from anyone who seeks Him)

Acts 10:1-5 1 At Caesarea there was a man named Cornelius, a centurion in
what was known as the Italian Regiment. 2 He and all his family were
devout and God-fearing; he gave generously to those in need and prayed to
God regularly. 3 One day at about three in the afternoon he had a vision.
He distinctly saw an angel of God, who came to him and said, “Cornelius!”
4 Cornelius stared at him in fear. “What is it, Lord?” he asked. The
angel answered, “Your prayers and gifts to the poor have come up as a
memorial offering before God. 5 Now send men to Joppa to bring back a
man named Simon who is called Peter. (NIV)

Acts 10:23-34 23 Then Peter invited the men into the house to be his
guests. The next day Peter started out with them, and some of the
brothers from Joppa went along. 24 The following day he arrived in
Caesarea. Cornelius was expecting them and had called together his
relatives and close friends. 25 As Peter entered the house, Cornelius
met him and fell at his feet in reverence. 26 But Peter made him get up.
“Stand up,” he said, “I am only a man myself.” 27 Talking with him, Peter
went inside and found a large gathering of people. 28 He said to them:
“You are well aware that it is against our law for a Jew to associate
with a Gentile or visit him. But God has shown me that I should not call
any man impure or unclean. 29 So when I was sent for, I came without
raising any objection. May I ask why you sent for me?” 30 Cornelius
answered: “Four days ago I was in my house praying at this hour, at three
in the afternoon. Suddenly a man in shining clothes stood before me 31
and said, `Cornelius, God has heard your prayer and remembered your gifts
to the poor. 32 Send to Joppa for Simon who is called Peter. He is a
guest in the home of Simon the tanner, who lives by the sea.’ 33 So I
sent for you immediately, and it was good of you to come. Now we are all
here in the presence of God to listen to everything the Lord has
commanded you to tell us.” 34 Then Peter began to speak: “I now realize
how true it is that God does not show favoritism (NIV)

Read the above verses and answer this question: “What will God do for
anyone who “truly” seeks him? (don’t get too complicated, just give it
some sincere thought).

(ANSWER: God will hear him and “maybe” even answer his prayer).

SPECIFIC REVELATION (God “directly” revealing Himself to mankind)

Exodus 32:16 The tablets were the work of God; the writing was the
writing of God, engraved on the tablets. (NIV)

>From the above verse: How is God revealing Himself? _________________

(ANSWER: In writing)

Exodus 33:11 The LORD would speak to Moses face to face, as a man speaks
with his friend. Then Moses would return to the camp, but his young aide
Joshua son of Nun did not leave the tent. (NIV)

(From the above verse: How is God revealing Himself? __________________

(ANSWER; By speaking)

Ezek 1:1 In the thirtieth year, in the fourth month on the fifth day,
while I was among the exiles by the Kebar River, the heavens were opened
and I saw visions of God. (NIV)

In the above verse How is God revealing Himself? ____________________

(ANSWER: Through men)

Daniel 2:19 During the night the mystery was revealed to Daniel in a
vision. Then Daniel praised the God of heaven (NIV)

In the above verse God reveals Himself by ___________________________

(ANSWER: visions and dreams)

Heb 1:1-2 1 In the past God spoke to our forefathers through the prophets
at many times and in various ways, 2 but in these last days he has spoken
to us by his Son, whom he appointed heir of all things, and through whom
he made the universe. (NIV)

>From the above verses answer this question: “How has God revealed Himself
to mankind in the past?
1._______________________ 2.____________________________

(ANSWER: 1. Through the Prophets. 2. Through the Lord Jesus Christ.)

2 Peter 1:20-21 20 Above all, you must understand that no prophecy of
Scripture came about by the prophet’s own interpretation. 21 For
prophecy never had its origin in the will of man, but men spoke from God
as they were carried along by the Holy Spirit. (NIV)

>From the above verse How did God reveal Himself to us?
________________________________________________________

(ANSWER: Through His Holy Spirit)

2 Timothy 3:16-17 16 All Scripture is God-breathed and is useful for
teaching, rebuking, correcting and training in righteousness, 17 so that
the man of God may be thoroughly equipped for every good work. (NIV)

>From the above verses what other reasons are there for God giving us His
word? 1.______________________ 2.__________________
3._______________________________ 4. ____________________________

(ANSWER: 1. teach us 2. Reprove (correct us) 3. train us in
righteousness 4. equip us for good works.

The Bible also says that the Scriptures are God’s revealed Word and is
“inspired” by Him. It is beneficial to have a better understanding of
what we mean when we say the Bible is “inspired” by God.

INSPIRATION

2 Peter 1:20-21 20 Above all, you must understand that no prophecy of
Scripture came about by the prophet’s own interpretation. 21 For
prophecy never had its origin in the will of man, but men spoke from God
as they were carried along by the Holy Spirit. (NIV)

The above verses describe “how” the Bible was written. According to this
verse, who were the authors of the Bible? 1.__________________ and
2.__________________________________.

(ANSWER: 1. Men and 2. the Holy Spirit of God.)

The Greek word for “moved by” means “being carried along.” Therefore, the
phrase “Men moved by the Holy Spirit could best be understood as follows:
“Human men was used as a vehicle through which God spoke His Word. The
Holy Spirit so supervised human authors, that through their individual
personalities and culture they composed and recorded God’s Word without
error in the original manuscripts.

OBJECTION! OBJECTION! Aha! There you go! You don’t have the “original
manuscripts”, so how then can you rely on the Bible?

This is another objection Christians are often confronted with. Included
in these lessons there is a section entitled “IS THE BIBLE RELIABLE”
regarding this complex matter. It is not within the feasible time and
purpose of this study to examine in detail this extensive matter often
referred to as “textual criticism.” In that area this question has been
more than adequately answered by qualified scholars. You can, if you
wish, pursue this avenue of study independently.

Briefly, let us say this: While it is true we do not have the original
manuscripts; and, no copy or translations should be considered “inspired”
as described before… Still, for all intents and purposes with today’s
vast number of manuscripts available, the science of textual criticism
can render us an extremely accurate (99%+) representation. Therefore, be
assured, when you are reading the Bible you are reading the inspired Word
of God.

THE AUTHORITY OF THE SCRIPTURES — THE OLD TESTAMENT

It is possible to cite many reasons for the Old Testament being God’s
Word, but the strongest argument comes from the Lord Jesus Christ
Himself. As God incarnate, Jesus spoke with final authority. His
testimony about the Old Testament is loud and clear.

(a) John 10:35 If he called them `gods,’ to whom the word of God came–
and the Scripture cannot be broken– (NIV)

Here, Jesus is saying that the Scripture _____________________________

(ANSWER: cannot be broken and it is the Word of God)

(b) Matt 15:3 Jesus replied, “And why do you break the command of God for
the sake of your tradition? (NIV)

Here Jesus refers to the Scriptures as___________________________

(ANSWER: the commands of God)

(c) Matt 15:6 he is not to `honor his father’ with it. Thus you nullify
the word of God for the sake of your tradition. (NIV)

Here Jesus refers to the Scripture as ______________________

(ANSWER: the Word of God)

(d) Matt 5:18 I tell you the truth, until heaven and earth disappear, not
the smallest letter, not the least stroke of a pen, will by any means
disappear from the Law until everything is accomplished. (NIV)

In this verse jesus say what about the Scriptures?
________________________________________________________________________
(ANSWER: not even a jot or tittle shall pass away from the Scriptures)

(e) Luke 17:29 But the day Lot left Sodom, fire and sulfur rained down
>from heaven and destroyed them all. (NIV)

In this verse we see the Lord confirming the historicity of what event?
________________________________________________________________________
(ANSWER: the account of the destruction of Sodom and Gomorrah and also of
the death of Lot’s wife.)

(f) Luke 11:51 from the blood of Abel to the blood of Zechariah, who was
killed between the altar and the sanctuary. Yes, I tell you, this
generation will be held responsible for it all. (NIV)

In this verse Jesus confirms? _______________________________________

(ANSWER: the account of Cain and Abel)

(g) Mark 12:26 Now about the dead rising– have you not read in the book
of Moses, in the account of the bush, how God said to him, `I am the God
of Abraham, the God of Isaac, and the God of Jacob’? (NIV)

Here Jesus confirms _________________________________

(ANSWER: the calling of Moses)

(h) Matt 11:22 But I tell you, it will be more bearable for Tyre and
Sidon on the day of judgment than for you. (NIV)

Jesus confirms ____________________________________________

(ANSWER: the judgement of Tyre and Sidon)

(i) Matt 19:8-9 8 Jesus replied, “Moses permitted you to divorce your
wives because your hearts were hard. But it was not this way from the
beginning. 9 I tell you that anyone who divorces his wife, except for
marital unfaithfulness, and marries another woman commits adultery.”
(NIV)

Jesus confirms
___________________________________________________________

(ANSWER: that Moses wrote the first five books of the Bible)

(j) Matt 19:1-6 1 When Jesus had finished saying these things, he left
Galilee and went into the region of Judea to the other side of the
Jordan. 2 Large crowds followed him, and he healed them there. 3 Some
Pharisees came to him to test him. They asked, “Is it lawful for a man to
divorce his wife for any and every reason?” 4 “Haven’t you read,” he
replied, “that at the beginning the Creator `made them male and female,’
5 and said, `For this reason a man will leave his father and mother and
be united to his wife, and the two will become one flesh’? 6 So they are
no longer two, but one. Therefore what God has joined together, let man
not separate.” (NIV)

Jesus confirms______________________________________________

(ANSWER: the account of Adam and Eve)

(k) Matt 24:37 As it was in the days of Noah, so it will be at the coming
of the Son of Man. (NIV)

Jesus confirms__________________________________________

(ANSWER: Noah and the flood)

OVER AND OVER AGAIN THE LORD JESUS CHRIST CONFIRMED THE HISTORICITY OF
THE OLD TESTAMENT AS WELL AS IT’S BEING THE WORD OF GOD!

THE NEW TESTAMENT

JOHN 16:13 But when he, the Spirit of truth, comes, he will guide you
into all truth. He will not speak on his own; he will speak only what he
hears, and he will tell you what is yet to come. (NIV)

In this verse Jesus is telling His disciples that the Holy Spirit will do
what? 1._______________________________________
2______________________________________________

(ANSWER: 1. guide them into all truth 2. tell them what is to come in
the future.)

Matthew 10:2-4 2 These are the names of the twelve apostles: first, Simon
(who is called Peter) and his brother Andrew; James son of Zebedee, and
his brother John; 3 Philip and Bartholomew; Thomas and Matthew the tax
collector; James son of Alphaeus, and Thaddaeus; 4 Simon the Zealot and
Judas Iscariot, who betrayed him. (NIV)

Romans 1:1 Paul, a servant of Christ Jesus, called to be an apostle and
set apart for the gospel of God– (NIV)

1 Peter 1:1 Peter, an apostle of Jesus Christ, To God’s elect, strangers
in the world, scattered throughout Pontus, Galatia, Cappadocia, Asia and
Bithynia, (NIV)

>From the above verses, what group of men wrote the majority of the New
Testament? ___________________________________

(ANSWER: The Apostles)

The others who wrote Scripture spent time with the Apostles, such as
Luke, Mark, James, Jude.

Before closing out this lesson it is important to point out that there
have been many objections brought against the claims of the Bible. If
there are any that concern you, they you are encouraged to investigate
the fascinating area commonly called “Christian Apologetics.” However,
this is a vast subject and scholars and theologians have addressed these
matters with powerful, convincing evidences.

God’s Word will stand up majestically under an “honest” investigation of
the evidences.

HOW SHOULD WE INTERPRET THE BIBLE?

While some people may chose to view the Bible as an allegory,
fundamentalists feel that a literal interpretation is the only
interpretation that does justice to the facts. There are several reasons
for this:
(a) The Bible claims to be the Word of God. Over and over it has
phrases like ‘The Word of the Lord cam unto Moses” or, Thus saith the
Lord” etc.
(b) When people spoke, it was in real life situations, not some
“never-never” land. The Bible views itself as a non-fiction book.
(c) When the writers cite other persons or events in Scripture,
they cite them as real, not imaginary or allegorical. (Examples can be
found in Matthew 12:39, where Jesus referred to His resurrection. The
writer of Hebrews cites many Old Testament men and women of faith as
examples of believers. Nowhere is the story of Abraham or Samson looked
at in any other way other than factual. Thus, the Bible itself gives
testimony that it should be taken at face value. Scripture interprets
Scripture — literally!
(d) The nature of God, as revealed in the Bible, makes it clear
that He has the ability to communicate with people. Since God created
mankind for the purpose of establishing a relationship, it naturally
follows that God would use understandable methods.
(e) There is no “double-talk or weasel-wording in Scripture. The
message is clear and God expects mankind to act responsibly on what He
has revealed. The excuse that so many people use (which is nearly always
a “smoke screen” to cover up their other problems) that the Bible can be
understood in so many ways and that everyone has his own interpretation
JUST IS NOT TRUE… The Bible itself makes this issue very clear: For
instance, John 3:37: “He who believes in the son has eternal life; but he
who does not obey the son shall not see life, but the wrath of God abides
on him.”

DOES THIS MEAN WE SHOULD INTERPRET EVERYTHING IN THE BIBLE LITERALLY?

No. Saying that we should take the Bible literally does not mean that
figurative language cannot be found in the Bible. However, to interpret
figuratively you must find a good reason in the passage to justify doing
this. For example: “Martin Luther was like a bull in a china shop.”
Martin Luther was a theologian–a man–not ‘literally’ a “bull.” This is
a clear example of a figure of speech used to describe Martin Luther.

THEN HOW DO WE JUDGE WHEN AND WHEN NOT TO INTERPRET SCRIPTURE IN SUCH A
MANNER?

A good rule of interpretation is “If the literal sense makes sense, seek
no other sense lest you come up with nonsense!” The words of a given text
should be interpreted literally if possible. If not possible, one should
move to figurative language.

THAT’S TOUGH! IT REALLY LEAVES THE DOOR OPEN TO LOTS OF ERRORS!
Admittedly, it’s not easy, but there are usually many clues in the
context of the Scripture itself. For example, when the book of Revelation
speaks of the dragon (Rev 12:9), the dragon is defined (Satan). Knowing
the culture will help, and the more you know about the language and times
and thoughts of the historical period, the better chance you have of
determining how to interpret a given passage.

YOU’VE GOT TO BE WILLING TO STUDY AND APPLY YOURSELF…!

HERE ARE A FEW THINGS TO HELP YOU GET STARTED (examples of figurative
language)

METAPHOR: “A comparison by direct statement”
SIMILE: “A comparison by use of the words “like” or “as”
HYPERBOLE: “An exaggeration for emphasis”
ANTHROPOMORPHISM: “A method of attributing to God human characteristics
or experiences.”

John 15:1 is a clear example of_________________________

(answer: a metaphor)

Exo: 24:17 is a clear example of_____________________________

(answer: a simile)

John 21:25 is a clear example of__________________________

(answer: a hyperbole)

Genesis 6:6 is a clear example of_________________________

(answer: an Anthropomorphism)

Remember this again… Figurative language does have a place in
Scripture, but only when certain factors indicate that the passage in
question is not to be interpreted literally.


“The judgement of history depends on who writes it” (Richard Nixon)

From [email protected] Thu Aug 8 10:29:18 PDT 1996
Article: 3479 of alt.bible.prophecy
Path: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca!news.island.net!vertex.tor.hookup.net!hookup!usenet.eel.ufl.edu!spool.mu.edu!
howland.erols.net!vixen.cso.uiuc.edu!newsfeed.internetmci.com!in3.uu.net!news.gte.net!usenet
From: bud
Newsgroups: alt.alien.visitors,alt.angst,alt.anonymous,alt.anonymous.messages,alt.anybody,alt.apocalypse,
alt.atheism,alt.bible.prophecy,alt.blasphemy,alt.captain.sarcastic,alt.censorship,alt.christnet,
alt.christnet.second-coming.real-soon-now,alt.conspiracy.area51,alt.culture.internet,alt.culture.usenet,
alt.current-events.net-abuse,alt.current-events.net-abuse.spam,alt.current-events.usa,alt.drugs.culture,
alt.drugs.pot.cultivation,alt.evil,alt.fashion,alt.hi.are.you.cute,alt.individualism,alt.internet.talk.bizarre,
alt.life.sucks,alt.magick,alt.mindcontrol,alt.misc,alt.nuke.the.USA,alt.pagan,alt.parents-teens,alt.psy,
alt.psychoactives,alt.punk,alt.rave,alt.religion.asatru,alt.religion.wicca,alt.satanism,alt.spam,
alt.stupidity,alt.ufo.reports,alt.zen,fidonet.bible,fidonet.church.state,rec.drugs.cannabis,
soc.culture.african.american,talk.atheism,talk.religion.misc
Subject: definition of “fundamentalist”
Date: Thu, 08 Aug 1996 08:31:01 -0700
Organization: home
Lines: 6
Message-ID: <[email protected]>
References: <[email protected]> <[email protected]> <[email protected]>
<[email protected]> <[email protected]> <[email protected]> <[email protected]>
<[email protected]> <[email protected]om> <[email protected]>
<[email protected]> <[email protected]> <[email protected]>
<[email protected]> <[email protected]> <[email protected]>
<[email protected]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: tpm97027.gte.net
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: Mozilla 2.01E-GTE (Win16; I)
Xref: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca alt.alien.visitors:96009 alt.angst:57174 alt.anonymous:3487 alt.anonymous.messages:2962
alt.atheism:37222 alt.bible.prophecy:3479 alt.captain.sarcastic:2637 alt.censorship:93592 alt.christnet:89674
alt.christnet.second-coming.real-soon-now:16814 alt.conspiracy.area51:5667 alt.culture.internet:19100
alt.culture.usenet:26486 alt.current-events.net-abuse:27920 alt.current-events.usa:21596 alt.drugs.culture:9044
alt.drugs.pot.cultivation:3085 alt.evil:22209 alt.fashion:16494 alt.hi.are.you.cute:3818 alt.individualism:28176
alt.life.sucks:6450 alt.magick:51673 alt.mindcontrol:10315 alt.nuke.the.USA:43966 alt.pagan:108750
alt.parents-teens:11305 alt.psychoactives:12927 alt.punk:40680 alt.rave:49350 alt.religion.asatru:4373
alt.religion.wicca:27397 alt.satanism:30942 alt.spam:4067 alt.stupidity:42019 alt.ufo.reports:5041
alt.zen:17359 rec.drugs.cannabis:7518 soc.culture.african.american:123529 talk.religion.misc:140306

Webster’s definition of “Fundamentalist”, in case there is any dispute at
to it’s meaning. If you can find a dictionary that includes belief in
this so-called “holocaust” within that definition, I’d like a copy or a
place where I can check it out for myself.

“The judgement of history depends on who writes it” (Richard Nixon)

From [email protected] Thu Aug 8 10:29:19 PDT 1996
Article: 3482 of alt.bible.prophecy
Path: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca!news.island.net!vertex.tor.hookup.net!noc.van.hookup.net!news.jumppoint.com!n2van.istar!
van.istar!west.istar!n1van.istar!van-bc!news.mindlink.net!uniserve!news.sol.net!newspump.sol.net!news.inc.net!
news.moneng.mei.com!news.ecn.bgu.edu!vixen.cso.uiuc.edu!howland.reston.ans.net!newsfeed.internetmci.com!in3.uu.net!
news.gte.net!usenet
From: bud
Newsgroups: alt.bible.prophecy,alt.christnet,alt.christnet.theology,alt.religion.christian,alt.christnet.bible,
alt.christnet.philosophy,a.bsu.religion,alt.atheism,talk.atheism,talk.origins
Subject: avoid the accusations, stick to facts
Date: Thu, 08 Aug 1996 08:13:19 -0700
Organization: home
Lines: 86
Message-ID: <[email protected]>
References: <[email protected]> <[email protected]> <[email protected]>
<[email protected]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: tpm97027.gte.net
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: Mozilla 2.01E-GTE (Win16; I)
Xref: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca alt.bible.prophecy:3482 alt.christnet:89679 alt.christnet.theology:20312
alt.religion.christian:110308 alt.christnet.bible:47497 alt.christnet.philosophy:13230 alt.atheism:37227
talk.origins:138447

Dave Humrick wrote:
>
> In article <[email protected]> bud, [email protected]
> writes:
> >
> >and baloney–Hoyle is also an Evolutionist. As for defining
> >Evolutionists as Scientists and excluding Creationists from the
> >definition you are attempting to define your opposition out of
> > existence, a logical fallacy that does not hold up.
>
> Balls. Scientists “Do” science. Creationists, or more accurately
> “scientific creationists” – the proper name for young earth,
> religious fundamentalists – are ideologically constrained from
> “doing” science in any area that conflicts with their dogma.
>
> You Want the names of dozens of
> >fine scientists who are also creationist contact ICR in Santee,
> >California and they can supply you with dozens or men engage in all
>areas of the sciences who are creationists.
>
> Typical. Proof by “go look it up if you don’t believe me.” Well,
> unfortunately for you, I have. Using The Institute of Creation
> Research as a source for names of creation scientists is a little
> like using NAMBLA as a source for the names of baby sitters.
>
> All ICR staff and trustees must annually sign a document promising
> to believe the proscribed religiously correct doctrine. What real
> scientist would do this? Here: the actual document the “scientists”
> of the ICR must obey, a few excerpts from TENETS OF SCIENTIFIC
> CREATIONISM and TENETS OF BIBLICAL CREATIONISM:
>
> 1) The physical universe .. was supernaturally created by a
> transcendent
> personal Creator who alone existed from eternity.
>
> 2) The phenomenon of biological life did not develop by natural
> processes from inanimate systems but was specially and
> supernaturally created by the Creator.
>
> 3) Each of the major kinds of plants and animals was created
> functionally complete for the beginning and did not evolve from
> some other kind of organism.
>
> 4) The first human beings did not evolve from an animal ancestry,
> but were specially created in fully human form from the start.
> —
> 3) All things in the universe were created and made by God in the
> six literal days of creation week described in Genesis 1:1-2:3, and
> confirmed in Exodus 20:8-11. The creation record is factual,
> historical, and perspicuous; thus all theories of origins or
> development which involve evolution in any form are false.
>
> 4) The first human beings, Adam and Eve, were specially created by
> God, and all other men and women are their descendants.
>
> 5) The Biblical record of primeval earth history in Genesis 1-11
> is fully historical and perspicuous, including the creation and
> fall of man, the curse on the creation and its subjection to the
> bondage of decay, the promised Redeemer, the worldwide cataclysmic
> deluge in the days of Noah, the post-diluvian renewal of man’s
> commission to subdue the earth (now augmented by the institution of
> human government) and the origin of nations and languages at the
> tower of Babel.
> —-
>
> So tell me how anyone could pretend to be a scientist after
> promising not to believe ANYTHING that conflicts with this blatant
> religious dogma?
>
> Anyone who wants the entire ICR oath send e-mail.

There are many teachers and scientists who have been made to promise they
will NOT teach Creationism and SWEAR TO TEACH ONLY EVOLUTION in
universities all over the nation. Does this make them less of a
scientist? This has nothing to do with the evidence presented —
Evolutionists themselves admitting to the problems with their
“theories.” You have resorted to attacking the men involved, not the
issue or the evidence. If You REALLY want proof that is also available
>from the very educated and highly qualified people you so easily defame
without cause other than your obvious dislike of the though of their
being a God, etc. Since you attack the people, I will take a liberty
here: Like many such people, I would suspect, but admittedly cannot know
for certain, your problem with Creation is NOT the evidence, but a moral
problem.

“The judgement of history depends on who writes it” (Richard Nixon)

From [email protected] Thu Aug 8 10:29:20 PDT 1996
Article: 3483 of alt.bible.prophecy
Path: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca!news.island.net!vertex.tor.hookup.net!eloi.vir.com!noc.van.hookup.net!
news.jumppoint.com!n2van.istar!van.istar!west.istar!uniserve!news.sol.net!spool.mu.edu!howland.erols.net!
vixen.cso.uiuc.edu!newsfeed.internetmci.com!in3.uu.net!news.gte.net!usenet
From: bud
Newsgroups: alt.alien.visitors,alt.angst,alt.anonymous,alt.anonymous.messages,alt.anybody,alt.apocalypse,
alt.atheism,alt.bible.prophecy,alt.blasphemy,alt.captain.sarcastic,alt.censorship,alt.christnet
,alt.christnet.second-coming.real-soon-now,alt.conspiracy.area51,alt.culture.internet,alt.culture.usenet,
alt.current-events.net-abuse,alt.current-events.net-abuse.spam,alt.current-events.usa,alt.drugs.culture,
alt.drugs.pot.cultivation,alt.evil,alt.fashion,alt.hi.are.you.cute,alt.individualism,alt.internet.talk.bizarre,
alt.life.sucks,alt.magick,alt.mindcontrol,alt.misc,alt.nuke.the.USA,alt.pagan,alt.parents-teens,alt.psy,
alt.psychoactives,alt.punk,alt.rave,alt.religion.asatru,alt.religion.wicca,alt.satanism,alt.spam,alt.stupidity,
alt.ufo.reports,alt.zen,fidonet.bible,fidonet.church.state,rec.drugs.cannabis,soc.culture.african.american,
talk.atheism,talk.religion.misc
Subject: a “fundamentalists” reply
Date: Thu, 08 Aug 1996 08:27:42 -0700
Organization: home
Lines: 66
Message-ID: <[email protected]>
References: <[email protected]> <[email protected]> <[email protected]>
<[email protected]> <[email protected]> <[email protected]> <[email protected]>
<[email protected]> <[email protected]> <[email protected]>
<[email protected]> <[email protected]> <[email protected]>
<[email protected]> <[email protected]> <[email protected]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: tpm97027.gte.net
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: Mozilla 2.01E-GTE (Win16; I)
Xref: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca alt.alien.visitors:96016 alt.angst:57177 alt.anonymous:3490
alt.anonymous.messages:2965 alt.atheism:37228 alt.bible.prophecy:3483 alt.captain.sarcastic:2640
alt.censorship:93600 alt.christnet:89680 alt.christnet.second-coming.real-soon-now:16818
alt.conspiracy.area51:5671 alt.culture.internet:19103 alt.culture.usenet:26490
alt.current-events.net-abuse:27923 alt.current-events.usa:21602 alt.drugs.culture:9047
alt.drugs.pot.cultivation:3088 alt.evil:22213 alt.fashion:16495 alt.hi.are.you.cute:3819
alt.individualism:28179 alt.life.sucks:6453 alt.magick:51676 alt.mindcontrol:10318
alt.nuke.the.USA:43970 alt.pagan:108754 alt.parents-teens:11308 alt.psychoactives:12930
alt.punk:40683 alt.rave:49353 alt.religion.asatru:4376 alt.religion.wicca:27404 alt.satanism:30947
alt.spam:4070 alt.stupidity:42022 alt.ufo.reports:5044 alt.zen:17362 rec.drugs.cannabis:7521
soc.culture.african.american:123533 talk.religion.misc:140313

John Mitchell wrote:
>
> Scott Maxwell wrote:
> >
> > > 1. “Jews are evil”(sic) every Christian Denomination has at its core a
> > > denunciation of Jews as having caused Jesus’ death.
> >
> > Uh huh, and just which chapter of the bible says this? (This is
> > especially untue for Fundimentalists who are very Pro-Isreal/Judeism.

I do not support present-day Isreal nor Judaism. I believe most
Christians today are being deceived into believing the lies of uninformed
teachers, tv preachers and a very biased secular media.

> >
>
> Fundamentalists support Israel, as otherwise they may difficulty going to
> Jerusalem.
>
> > > 2. Order is a virtue (need no explanation there)
> >
> > Right, that is one of the original Ten Virtues. Order, Cleanliness,
> > and Flossing were truncated in the Middle Ages…
> >
> > > 3. Charity is highly desirable (the Nazis had more social programs than
> > > any other government until the 1960s). Hitler promoted Charity as a
> > > means of social coherence, just as all christians do.

Your point, please? Does this mean Christians and Hitler or the same,
etc. I’m rather fed up with that analogy. Marx was a Jew. Are all Jews
Communists? Also, many Jews in Russian revolution are guilty of
murdering millions of Christians and Russian civilians. Does
this then make all Jews murderers and persecutors?
>
> > OK, This is the same logic that says that Hitler is the true founding
> > father of Isreal…
>
> But, if not for Hitler, there would have been no need for the existence
> of Israel!

Huh? They started migrating there after WW 1, not after WW 2. Check out
the Balfour declaration.

>
> >
> > > 4. Killing for your beliefs is justifiable (just lookto history for the proof).
> >
> > I don’t think that this is an exclusive to Catholicism or Chrstianity
> > in general (just look to history for proof).
> >
> > > So, even if the Pope didn’t pull the trigger, he sure held the gun…

The Church of Rome is a chameleon. it changes in accordance with its
locale. Today the Pope decries the so-called Holocaust (much of which is
an exaggeration, but some of which is tragically true) and this Pope
upholds just about whatever the popular opinion will support about the
war, despite any real evidence to the contrary.

> >
> > Yep, a complicated issue of the Second World War as described by a
> > complete idiot.


“The judgement of history depends on who writes it” (Richard Nixon)

Nixon is absolutely right!

From [email protected] Thu Aug 8 10:29:21 PDT 1996
Article: 3504 of alt.bible.prophecy
Path: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca!news.island.net!news.bctel.net!news.mag-net.com!freenet.unbc.edu!news.scn.org!
news.abs.net!News1.mcs.net!news.uoregon.edu!vixen.cso.uiuc.edu!newsfeed.internetmci.com!in2.uu.net!
news.magicnet.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-fw-6.sprintlink.net!news.gte.net!usenet
From: bud
Newsgroups: alt.bible.prophecy,alt.christnet,alt.religion.christian,alt.christnet.bible,alt.christnet.theology
Subject: Apologetic Pt 3
Date: Thu, 08 Aug 1996 08:17:28 -0700
Organization: home
Lines: 228
Message-ID: <[email protected]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: tpm97027.gte.net
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: Mozilla 2.01E-GTE (Win16; I)
Xref: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca alt.bible.prophecy:3504 alt.christnet:89724 alt.religion.christian:110350
alt.christnet.bible:47510 alt.christnet.theology:20320

Number three: IS CHRISTIANITY WORTHY OF OUR FAITH?

It is very important to remember that the Christian Faith is based on a
narrative. Over and over again the writers of the New Testament emphasize
the historicity of the Gospel. Therefore, the Christian faith IS NOT
merely based on some philosophy, but on a narrative. Here’s an example
>from Luke. (Acts 1:3) “After his suffering, he showed himself to these
men and gave many convincing proofs that he was alive. He appeared to
them over a period of forty days and spoke about the kingdom of God”
(NIV).

At this point it is also important for us to remember that Christian
Apologetics involves a systematic, scientific defense of the Christian
faith against the intellectual attacks of its enemies. These are
evidences that give us positive objective reasons for believing the Bible
is a unique, inspired, inerrant revelation from God and that Jesus Christ
is the cosmic God, coming into our world on a wonderful redemptive
mission–God in human form. That’s what John tells us: (John 1:1-3) 1 “In
the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was
God. 2 He was with God in the beginning. 3 Through him all things were
made; without him nothing was made that has been made.”(NIV). (John
1:14)”The Word became flesh and made his dwelling among us. We have seen
his glory, the glory of the One and Only, who came from the Father, full
of grace and truth”(NIV). (John 14:9) Jesus answered: “Don’t you know me,
Philip, even after I have been among you such a long time? Anyone who has
seen me has seen the Father. How can you say, `Show us the
Father?'”(NIV).

Knowing we exist, it is natural to ask, “How did I come to be?” “Where
Did I come from?” “Where Am I going?” Are you merely a machine,
chemically and psychologically determined? Can the universe and man be
explained as a simple product of an equation which adds an impersonal
factor plus time plus chance (such as evolution); or–to put it another
way–nobody X nothing = everything?

These are big questions… Yet, if there is a God who cares, obviously He
could settle the great questions concerning life, death, and man’s
destiny. With His knowledge and control of the future God could tell us
about this…if He chose to do so.

THE BIBLE CLAIMS TO GIVE US SUCH INFORMATION

The Bible claims to be from God, giving us this information which most
people yearn for, and in the form of a written revelation to
mankind. The Bible means “the book” and within that book a further
revelation of God Himself is declared in the person of Jesus Christ.
Jesus is the basic theme of the Bible from the opening verses of Genesis
to the closing Amen of John’s Book of Revelation.

IS THIS THEREFORE A GOOD REASON TO BELIEVE?

No, not just because of some claim! We cannot believe unless belief is
more rational than unbelief. We cannot truly believe at will arbitrarily
or against reason, or against all the evidence that can be marshaled.

REMEMBER THIS! NO FAITH IS WORTHY OF ACCEPTANCE UNLESS IT IS JUSTIFIED BY
THE SEVEREST USE OF REASON, BY THE TEST OF THE EVIDENCE.

DOES THIS THEN RULE OUT ALL FAITH’S, INCLUDING CHRISTIANITY?

No. Christians have powerful objective reasons for their faith. Sure,
ultimate truth is often claimed by other religious systems, but under
reasonable scrutiny they cannot be supported because these systems are
based on subjective or metaphysical evidence. In other words, there is no
objective history or facts to substantiate their doctrines because they
are based on non-verifiable, subjective philosophy. The problem with this
is that this makes one persons opinion as good as any other.

The important thing IS NOT our particular subjective experience or
opinion (every religion or cult has its personal testimonies)… the real
crucial question is TRUTH, and TRUTH requires a THOROUGH KNOWLEDGE OF ALL
THE EVIDENCE!

ARE WE CLAIMING WE CAN “PROVE” GOD?

No. We covered this aspect in the previous lesson.

However, we can say that there is MORE EVIDENCE to substantiate God’s
existence than to deny it. After all, as we previously showed, proof
takes place in the mind where evidence can be accepted or rejected by a
persons will.

WHY DOES THIS QUESTION ABOUT GOD CAUSE SO MUCH CONTROVERSY?

There are many reasons. One of the main ones is that when a person begins
to consider God it is hard not to become baffled, to grope in the dark.
This is not surprising, since God is infinite and we are finite. God is
altogether beyond human comprehension. The human mind, though effective
when dealing with the empirical sciences, cannot quickly help us with
God. There simply is not some ladder up the infinite mind of God, only a
vast gulf. while you could show by a process of reasoning and science
that the earth is a sphere, that three angles of a triangle are equal,
etc., you can not apply this process to God (and some other matters
pointed out in Lesson #2).

Even the Bible itself points this out. (Job 11:7) “Can you fathom the
mysteries of God? Can you probe the limits of the Almighty?”(NIV). (1 Cor
1:21)”For since in the wisdom of God the world through its wisdom did not
know him, God was pleased through the foolishness of what was preached to
save those who believe”(NIV). According to the Bible, God has wisely
arranged the world, adjusted the process of human reasoning in such a way
that if a man seeks to know God, he must do it in some other way than by
pure reason. This also means that the man who insists on reasoned proof
and refuses to believe until he has such proof will never come to the
knowledge of God.

Actually, the amount of knowledge we gain by the provinces of the senses
is very limited. For example, has everyone “seen” an atom, or a molecule,
or electricity? Have you ever “seen” a thought, or a pain?

Actually, all abstract truth is founded on faith. Like it or not,
literally all persons move and have their being by faith. You exercise
faith every time you eat, drink water, drive a car, ride an airplane…
Without hesitation you will not question but take the medicine the doctor
gives you, submit to the surgery he recommends… We live continually by
a strong reliance on things not within the province of the senses.

WHETHER YOU BELIEVE OR NOT, IT’S STILL A FAITH

Belief or unbelief in God are both founded on faith, differing mainly in
leading to opposite conclusions. Still, from the Christian perspective,
unbelief is–as far as we’re concerned–tantamount to almost incredible
faith since the evidence for the existence of God is so overwhelming that
even the Psalmist says:(Ps 14:1 “The fool says in his heart,’There is no
God'”. (Ps 53:1) The fool says in his heart, “There is no God. They are
corrupt, and their ways are vile; there is no one who does good.”(NIV).
It is significant to note here that the Psalmist is not talking about an
atheist, but about a man who know full well there is a God, but lives as
though there were no God and no accountability to God for his actions.

WHY DO CHRISTIANS BELIEVE IN GOD?

There are probably several answers to this, but one of them is (or most
certainly should be!) because they believe the Bible is divinely
inspired, an inerrant revelation of God to man, and that the theme of
that divine revelation is the majestic person of our Lord, Jesus Christ.

Yet this is not all. We have powerful, cogent, sensible, verifiable
reasons for such a positive faith.

THEN THIS EVIDENCE WILL CONVINCE ANYONE?

Again, no. Even though the evidence is overwhelming, it will NEVER
convince someone who does not want to believe. Unbelievers can always
bring up another objection. There is an old adage that is certainly true:
“A man convinced against his will is of the same opinion still.” In
lesson #2 we discussed some of the convincing evidences for the existence
of God. There are many others. Such as:

THE FIRST AND SECOND LAW OF THERMODYNAMICS

The First and Second Law of Thermodynamics are “proven” scientific laws,
not theory (such as evolution). The complete ceasing of creative activity
in the universe has been recognized by modern science. This is commonly
called the LAW OF THERMODYNAMICS. It is also commonly referred to as the
LAW OF ENERGY CONSERVATION. This law is the most universal and certain of
all scientific principles and it says conclusively that so far as
empirical observation has shown, there is nothing now being created
anywhere in the known universe. It is significant that the Bible agrees
completely with this proven law.

(Gen 2:2)”By the seventh day God had finished the work he had been doing;
so on the seventh day he rested from all his work.”

(Eccl 1:9-10) 9 “What has been will be again, what has been done will be
done again; there is nothing new under the sun.” 10 “Is there anything of
which one can say, ‘Look! This is something new’? It was here already,
long ago; it was here before our time.”(NIV).

THE FIRST LAW

The first law also says that not only is nothing being created, but also
that nothing is being destroyed (the principle of conservation). It is
again startling that the Bible states:
(Neh 9:6) “You alone are the LORD. You made the heavens, even the highest
heavens, and all their starry host, the earth and all that is on it, the
seas and all that is in them. You give life to everything, and the
multitudes of heaven worship you.”(NIV).

(Isa 40:26) “Lift your eyes and look to the heavens: Who created all
these? He who brings out the starry host one by one, and calls them each
by name. Because of his great power and mighty strength, not one of them
is missing.”(NIV).

(2 Pet 3:7) “By the same word the present heavens and earth are reserved
for fire, being kept for the day of judgment and destruction of ungodly
men.”(NIV).

(Col 1:17)”He is before all things, and in him all things hold
together”(NIV). (Heb 1:3) “The Son is the radiance of God’s glory and the
exact representation of his being, sustaining all things by his powerful
word. After he had provided purification for sins, he sat down at the
right hand of the Majesty in heaven.”(NIV).

The Bible is confirming this fact of conservation.

THE SECOND LAW

This often is referred to as the LAW OF ENERGY DECAY (ENTROPY). This law
governs all processes. THERE IS NO KNOW EXCEPTION. It says that although
mass-energy is not now being annihilated (destroyed) thus confirming the
first law, it is nonetheless “running down” (dying) and becoming “less
available” for the work of maintaining the processes of nature.

This means that the entire universe is in the process of dying entropy).
The total mass-energy might still be there, but it will be in forms
incapable of performing more work. All processes will cease and the
universe will be “dead.” This second law is sometimes referred to as
“time’s arrow” and this “arrow” always is pointing downwards to an
eventual end.

SO WHAT?!

(A) The Second law, the fact that the universe is dying means THE
UNIVERSE MUST HAVE HAD A BEGINNING. This is extremely significant because
if the universe always was it would already be dead, and this is not the
case.
(B) The First law indicates the universe could not have created itself,
because the current structure of matter/energy can neither be created nor
destroyed. This just naturally leads to the conclusion of creation and
THEN the gradual process of dying that is now going on. This is exactly
what the Bible teaches. As we proceed further in this study it will
become wonderfully evident that the Bible is always in tune with SOUND
proven scientific principles and discoveries, while understandably, it
might not be so with unproven theories…….. end


“The judgement of history depends on who writes it” (Richard Nixon)

From [email protected] Thu Aug 8 10:58:50 PDT 1996
Article: 123529 of soc.culture.african.american
Path: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca!news.island.net!vertex.tor.hookup.net!hookup!usenet.eel.ufl.edu!spool.mu.edu!
howland.erols.net!vixen.cso.uiuc.edu!newsfeed.internetmci.com!in3.uu.net!news.gte.net!usenet
From: bud
Newsgroups: alt.alien.visitors,alt.angst,alt.anonymous,alt.anonymous.messages,alt.anybody,alt.apocalypse,
alt.atheism,alt.bible.prophecy,alt.blasphemy,alt.captain.sarcastic,alt.censorship,alt.christnet,
alt.christnet.second-coming.real-soon-now,alt.conspiracy.area51,alt.culture.internet,alt.culture.usenet,
alt.current-events.net-abuse,alt.current-events.net-abuse.spam,alt.current-events.usa,alt.drugs.culture,
alt.drugs.pot.cultivation,alt.evil,alt.fashion,alt.hi.are.you.cute,alt.individualism,
alt.internet.talk.bizarre,alt.life.sucks,alt.magick,alt.mindcontrol,alt.misc,alt.nuke.the.USA,
alt.pagan,alt.parents-teens,alt.psy,alt.psychoactives,alt.punk,alt.rave,alt.religion.asatru,
alt.religion.wicca,alt.satanism,alt.spam,alt.stupidity,alt.ufo.reports,alt.zen,fidonet.bible,
fidonet.church.state,rec.drugs.cannabis,soc.culture.african.american,talk.atheism,talk.religion.misc
Subject: definition of “fundamentalist”
Date: Thu, 08 Aug 1996 08:31:01 -0700
Organization: home
Lines: 6
Message-ID: <[email protected]>
References: <[email protected]> <[email protected]> <[email protected]>
<[email protected]> <[email protected]> <[email protected]> <[email protected]>
<[email protected]> <[email protected]> <[email protected]>
<[email protected]> <[email protected]> <[email protected]>
<[email protected]> <[email protected]> <[email protected]>
<[email protected]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: tpm97027.gte.net
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: Mozilla 2.01E-GTE (Win16; I)
Xref: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca alt.alien.visitors:96009 alt.angst:57174 alt.anonymous:3487 alt.anonymous.messages:2962
alt.atheism:37222 alt.bible.prophecy:3479 alt.captain.sarcastic:2637 alt.censorship:93592
alt.christnet:89674 alt.christnet.second-coming.real-soon-now:16814 alt.conspiracy.area51:5667
alt.culture.internet:19100 alt.culture.usenet:26486 alt.current-events.net-abuse:27920
alt.current-events.usa:21596 alt.drugs.culture:9044 alt.drugs.pot.cultivation:3085 alt.evil:22209
alt.fashion:16494 alt.hi.are.you.cute:3818 alt.individualism:28176 alt.life.sucks:6450 alt.magick:51673
alt.mindcontrol:10315 alt.nuke.the.USA:43966 alt.pagan:108750 alt.parents-teens:11305 alt.psychoactives:12927
alt.punk:40680 alt.rave:49350 alt.religion.asatru:4373 alt.religion.wicca:27397 alt.satanism:30942 alt.spam:4067
alt.stupidity:42019 alt.ufo.reports:5041 alt.zen:17359 rec.drugs.cannabis:7518
soc.culture.african.american:123529 talk.religion.misc:140306

Webster’s definition of “Fundamentalist”, in case there is any dispute at
to it’s meaning. If you can find a dictionary that includes belief in
this so-called “holocaust” within that definition, I’d like a copy or a
place where I can check it out for myself.

“The judgement of history depends on who writes it” (Richard Nixon)

From [email protected] Thu Aug 8 10:58:51 PDT 1996
Article: 123533 of soc.culture.african.american
Path: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca!news.island.net!vertex.tor.hookup.net!eloi.vir.com!noc.van.hookup.net!
news.jumppoint.com!n2van.istar!van.istar!west.istar!uniserve!news.sol.net!spool.mu.edu!howland.erols.net!
vixen.cso.uiuc.edu!newsfeed.internetmci.com!in3.uu.net!news.gte.net!usenet
From: bud
Newsgroups: alt.alien.visitors,alt.angst,alt.anonymous,alt.anonymous.messages,alt.anybody,alt.apocalypse,
alt.atheism,alt.bible.prophecy,alt.blasphemy,alt.captain.sarcastic,alt.censorship,alt.christnet,
alt.christnet.second-coming.real-soon-now,alt.conspiracy.area51,alt.culture.internet,alt.culture.usenet,
alt.current-events.net-abuse,alt.current-events.net-abuse.spam,alt.current-events.usa,alt.drugs.culture,
alt.drugs.pot.cultivation,alt.evil,alt.fashion,alt.hi.are.you.cute,alt.individualism,alt.internet.talk.bizarre,
alt.life.sucks,alt.magick,alt.mindcontrol,alt.misc,alt.nuke.the.USA,alt.pagan,alt.parents-teens,alt.psy,
alt.psychoactives,alt.punk,alt.rave,alt.religion.asatru,alt.religion.wicca,alt.satanism,alt.spam,alt.stupidity,
alt.ufo.reports,alt.zen,fidonet.bible,fidonet.church.state,rec.drugs.cannabis,soc.culture.african.american,
talk.atheism,talk.religion.misc
Subject: a “fundamentalists” reply
Date: Thu, 08 Aug 1996 08:27:42 -0700
Organization: home
Lines: 66
Message-ID: <[email protected]>
References: <[email protected]> <[email protected]> <[email protected]>
<[email protected]> <[email protected]> <[email protected]> <[email protected]>
<[email protected]> <[email protected]> <[email protected]>
<[email protected]> <[email protected]> <[email protected]>
<[email protected]> <[email protected]> <[email protected]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: tpm97027.gte.net
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: Mozilla 2.01E-GTE (Win16; I)
Xref: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca alt.alien.visitors:96016 alt.angst:57177 alt.anonymous:3490 alt.anonymous.messages:2965
alt.atheism:37228 alt.bible.prophecy:3483 alt.captain.sarcastic:2640 alt.censorship:93600 alt.christnet:89680
alt.christnet.second-coming.real-soon-now:16818 alt.conspiracy.area51:5671 alt.culture.internet:19103
alt.culture.usenet:26490 alt.current-events.net-abuse:27923 alt.current-events.usa:21602 alt.drugs.culture:9047
alt.drugs.pot.cultivation:3088 alt.evil:22213 alt.fashion:16495 alt.hi.are.you.cute:3819 alt.individualism:28179
alt.life.sucks:6453 alt.magick:51676 alt.mindcontrol:10318 alt.nuke.the.USA:43970 alt.pagan:108754
alt.parents-teens:11308 alt.psychoactives:12930 alt.punk:40683 alt.rave:49353 alt.religion.asatru:4376
alt.religion.wicca:27404 alt.satanism:30947 alt.spam:4070 alt.stupidity:42022 alt.ufo.reports:5044
alt.zen:17362 rec.drugs.cannabis:7521 soc.culture.african.american:123533 talk.religion.misc:140313

John Mitchell wrote:
>
> Scott Maxwell wrote:
> >
> > > 1. “Jews are evil”(sic) every Christian Denomination has at its core a
> > > denunciation of Jews as having caused Jesus’ death.
> >
> > Uh huh, and just which chapter of the bible says this? (This is
> > especially untue for Fundimentalists who are very Pro-Isreal/Judeism.

I do not support present-day Isreal nor Judaism. I believe most
Christians today are being deceived into believing the lies of uninformed
teachers, tv preachers and a very biased secular media.

> >
>
> Fundamentalists support Israel, as otherwise they may difficulty going to
> Jerusalem.
>
> > > 2. Order is a virtue (need no explanation there)
> >
> > Right, that is one of the original Ten Virtues. Order, Cleanliness,
> > and Flossing were truncated in the Middle Ages…
> >
> > > 3. Charity is highly desirable (the Nazis had more social programs than
> > > any other government until the 1960s). Hitler promoted Charity as a
> > > means of social coherence, just as all christians do.

Your point, please? Does this mean Christians and Hitler or the same,
etc. I’m rather fed up with that analogy. Marx was a Jew. Are all Jews
Communists? Also, many Jews in Russian revolution are guilty of
murdering millions of Christians and Russian civilians. Does
this then make all Jews murderers and persecutors?
>
> > OK, This is the same logic that says that Hitler is the true founding
> > father of Isreal…
>
> But, if not for Hitler, there would have been no need for the existence
> of Israel!

Huh? They started migrating there after WW 1, not after WW 2. Check out
the Balfour declaration.

>
> >
> > > 4. Killing for your beliefs is justifiable (just lookto history for the proof).
> >
> > I don’t think that this is an exclusive to Catholicism or Chrstianity
> > in general (just look to history for proof).
> >
> > > So, even if the Pope didn’t pull the trigger, he sure held the gun…

The Church of Rome is a chameleon. it changes in accordance with its
locale. Today the Pope decries the so-called Holocaust (much of which is
an exaggeration, but some of which is tragically true) and this Pope
upholds just about whatever the popular opinion will support about the
war, despite any real evidence to the contrary.

> >
> > Yep, a complicated issue of the Second World War as described by a
> > complete idiot.


“The judgement of history depends on who writes it” (Richard Nixon)

Nixon is absolutely right!

From [email protected] Sun Aug 11 02:11:05 PDT 1996
Article: 3697 of alt.bible.prophecy
Path: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca!news.island.net!vertex.tor.hookup.net!hookup!tank.news.pipex.net!pipex!
hole.news.pipex.net!pipex!plug.news.pipex.net!pipex!tube.news.pipex.net!pipex!lade.news.pipex.net!pipex!
dish.news.pipex.net!pipex!bt!btnet-feed1!btnet!news.euro.net!venus.euro.net!uunet!in2.uu.net!news.gte.net!usenet
From: bud
Newsgroups: alt.bible.prophecy,alt.christnet,alt.christnet.theology,alt.religion.christian,alt.christnet.bible
,alt.christnet.philosophy
Subject: what is your reality?
Date: Sat, 10 Aug 1996 00:31:45 -0700
Organization: home
Lines: 134
Message-ID: <[email protected]>
References: <[email protected]> <[email protected]> <[email protected]>
<[email protected]> <[email protected]> <[email protected]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: tpm97063.gte.net
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: Mozilla 2.01E-GTE (Win16; I)
Xref: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca alt.bible.prophecy:3697 alt.christnet:90250 alt.christnet.theology:20417
alt.religion.christian:110964 alt.christnet.bible:47733 alt.christnet.philosophy:13320

Eolai wrote:
>
> bud wrote:
>
> >Dave Humrick wrote:
> >>
> >> In article <[email protected]> bud, [email protected]
> >> writes:
> >> >
> >> >and baloney–Hoyle is also an Evolutionist. As for defining
> >> >Evolutionists as Scientists and excluding Creationists from the
> >> >definition you are attempting to define your opposition out of
> >> > existence, a logical fallacy that does not hold up.
> >>
> >> Balls. Scientists “Do” science. Creationists, or more accurately
> >> “scientific creationists” – the proper name for young earth,
> >> religious fundamentalists – are ideologically constrained from
> >> “doing” science in any area that conflicts with their dogma.
> >>
> >> You Want the names of dozens of
> >> >fine scientists who are also creationist contact ICR in Santee,
> >> >California and they can supply you with dozens or men engage in all
> >>areas of the sciences who are creationists.
> >>
> >> Typical. Proof by “go look it up if you don’t believe me.” Well,
> >> unfortunately for you, I have. Using The Institute of Creation
> >> Research as a source for names of creation scientists is a little
> >> like using NAMBLA as a source for the names of baby sitters.
> >>
> >> All ICR staff and trustees must annually sign a document promising
> >> to believe the proscribed religiously correct doctrine. What real
> >> scientist would do this? Here: the actual document the “scientists”
> >> of the ICR must obey, a few excerpts from TENETS OF SCIENTIFIC
> >> CREATIONISM and TENETS OF BIBLICAL CREATIONISM:
> >>
> >> 1) The physical universe .. was supernaturally created by a
> >> transcendent
> >> personal Creator who alone existed from eternity.
> >>
> >> 2) The phenomenon of biological life did not develop by natural
> >> processes from inanimate systems but was specially and
> >> supernaturally created by the Creator.
> >>
> >> 3) Each of the major kinds of plants and animals was created
> >> functionally complete for the beginning and did not evolve from
> >> some other kind of organism.
> >>
> >> 4) The first human beings did not evolve from an animal ancestry,
> >> but were specially created in fully human form from the start.
> >> —
> >> 3) All things in the universe were created and made by God in the
> >> six literal days of creation week described in Genesis 1:1-2:3, and
> >> confirmed in Exodus 20:8-11. The creation record is factual,
> >> historical, and perspicuous; thus all theories of origins or
> >> development which involve evolution in any form are false.
> >>
> >> 4) The first human beings, Adam and Eve, were specially created by
> >> God, and all other men and women are their descendants.
> >>
> >> 5) The Biblical record of primeval earth history in Genesis 1-11
> >> is fully historical and perspicuous, including the creation and
> >> fall of man, the curse on the creation and its subjection to the
> >> bondage of decay, the promised Redeemer, the worldwide cataclysmic
> >> deluge in the days of Noah, the post-diluvian renewal of man’s
> >> commission to subdue the earth (now augmented by the institution of
> >> human government) and the origin of nations and languages at the
> >> tower of Babel.
> >> —-
> >>
> >> So tell me how anyone could pretend to be a scientist after
> >> promising not to believe ANYTHING that conflicts with this blatant
> >> religious dogma?
> >>
> >> Anyone who wants the entire ICR oath send e-mail.
> >
> >There are many teachers and scientists who have been made to promise they
> >will NOT teach Creationism and SWEAR TO TEACH ONLY EVOLUTION in
> >universities all over the nation. Does this make them less of a
> >scientist? This has nothing to do with the evidence presented —
> >Evolutionists themselves admitting to the problems with their
> >”theories.” You have resorted to attacking the men involved, not the
> >issue or the evidence. If You REALLY want proof that is also available
> >from the very educated and highly qualified people you so easily defame
> >without cause other than your obvious dislike of the though of their
> >being a God, etc. Since you attack the people, I will take a liberty
> >here: Like many such people, I would suspect, but admittedly cannot know
> >for certain, your problem with Creation is NOT the evidence, but a moral
> >problem.
> >–
> >”The judgement of history depends on who writes it” (Richard Nixon)
> I think you misjudge agnostic and atheist evolutionists in
> their lack of belief in God. I for one wishes that there
> were a God and that we all lived forever. I wish you were
> right, believe it or not. But I also wish I looked like Mel
> Gibson and could run like Johnson, but alas I don’t think I
> can do that, look like that, or believe in a being that has
> no substance nor manifestations and I know of no evidence of
> life after death. It is just reality and the real world.
> God is part of a fantasy world as is immortality however
> much I wish it were otherwise. I feel I must stay in the
> world of reality, because it is the only plane of existence
> that I know of.
>
> Eolai

reality, to me, is not believing in a theory that requires “belief” in a
system that requires “faith” that a series of accidents can bring about
the complexity of life, etc. Reality says that when I see a chair in the
middle of a well-organized room I do not BELIEVE that this all came about
by accident, but reality tells me intelligence MADE IT AND PUT IT THERE.
This is reality, and certainly more in keeping with all observable
facts. Your problem IS your choice of believing. There is lots of
evidence for creation, etc., but the CHOICE is to dismiss it. Also, not
all Evolutionists are atheists. Some are agnostic, others believe in a
creator who is impersonal, etc. etc. There are all sorts of “BELIEFS.”
As for some of your postulations, whether accepted or not, the Bible
offers many answers to these questions and objections, but again the
point would be if one will ACCEPT THE ANSWERS. Sometimes the answers are
not very pleasant nor very humanistic and this lots of people have
trouble with. The Bible speaks often about this and other subjects. But
there is in existence a body of powerful evidences to indicate that the
Bible is a revelation from God, and that only God could have accomplished
the completion of it. This is an area of Christian Apologetics and
again, the thing would be can OR WILL a person put aside their
presuppositions and allow the evidence to speak for itself. My
experience has been that most, nearly all, simply are either incapable or
unwilling to do that. Finally, you should know that the Bible clearly
teaches that no man can or will know of spiritual things unless he is
called to this by God Himself. Jesus Himself said that “No man can come
to me unless the Father calls him.” There are many other such passages
in Scripture about the fact that God is entirely in charge of all things,
including salvation.
God Bless, even if you don’t believe in Him.
–Bud–

From [email protected] Sun Aug 11 02:11:09 PDT 1996
Article: 3718 of alt.bible.prophecy
Path: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca!news.island.net!news.bctel.net!news.internetMCI.com!newsfeed.internetmci.com!
zdc!nntp04.primenet.com!news.shkoo.com!nntp.primenet.com!news.fibr.net!news.sprintlink.net!
news-fw-6.sprintlink.net!news.gte.net!usenet
From: bud
Newsgroups: alt.bible.prophecy,alt.christnet,alt.religion.christian
Subject: Re: The faith of an evolutionist
Date: Sat, 10 Aug 1996 00:42:50 -0700
Organization: home
Lines: 45
Message-ID: <[email protected]>
References: <[email protected]> <[email protected]> <[email protected]>
<[email protected]> <[email protected]> <[email protected]>
<[email protected]> <[email protected]> <[email protected]>
<[email protected]> <[email protected]> <[email protected]>
<[email protected]> <[email protected]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: tpm97063.gte.net
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: Mozilla 2.01E-GTE (Win16; I)
Xref: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca alt.bible.prophecy:3718 alt.christnet:90305 alt.religion.christian:111016

Marty G. Price wrote:
>
> On 3 Aug 1996, Kirk Nechamkin wrote:
>
> > What I meant in saying that “things just don’t happen,” is
> > JUST that — they don’t just happen. Evolution something
> > quite unique to life and living processes, along with
> > things that have been designed by people — programs, for
> > example — to evolve. Things don’t self-organize, as the
> > laws of nature disallow such.
> >
>
> [Snipped a fair portion of this silliness]
>
> Son, the planet has evolved, the solar system has evolved, the galaxy has
> evolved, the universe has evolved. Even rocks evolve — ever hear of
> metamorphic rock? I’m not going to get into whether this means the
> universe is alive — I don’t want to give aid and comfort to the ignorant
> by debating that proposition (or metaphor) with the better informed
> persons who disagree with my interpretation.
>
> The laws of nature do *not* disallow self-organization. Folks who thought
> that (a century or more ago) were in error. Even the mathematically
> deficient such as myself are capable of understanding some of the obvious
> implications of chaos/complexity theory — such as self-organization.
> Bill Woody posted an excellent example from meteorology, the formation of
> a raindrop.
>
> The next time you see a snowflake, pick it up, say “Wow,
> self-organization”, and take the time to genuinely wonder at this awesome
> universe instead of fleeing to the refuge of a creator so sloppy that you
> see his patch-work everywhere.
>
> Blessed Be,
> Galeto believe as this man does takes real “faith.” Many of you Christians should be as faithful as he is to
his adherence of intelligent
accidents, chance happenings of millions adding up to intelligence and
order, etc. etc. You Christians have a historical, testable record (the
Bible) on which to base your faith. Get to know it (the Bible) well!
Then you can quote something concrete other than just your feelings and
faith as this person has done.

“The judgement of history depends on who writes it” (Richard Nixon)


“The judgement of history depends on who writes it” (Richard Nixon)

From [email protected] Sun Aug 11 02:11:11 PDT 1996
Article: 3721 of alt.bible.prophecy
Path: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca!news.island.net!news.bctel.net!news.internetMCI.com!newsfeed.internetmci.com!
news.dacom.co.kr!news.kreonet.re.kr!usenet.etri.re.kr!usenet.kornet.nm.kr!agate!howland.erols.net!
vixen.cso.uiuc.edu!cdc2.cdc.net!news.texas.net!nntp04.primenet.com!news.shkoo.com!nntp.primenet.com!
news.fibr.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-fw-6.sprintlink.net!news.gte.net!usenet
From: bud
Newsgroups: alt.bible.prophecy,alt.christnet,alt.religion.christian
Subject: Re: The faith of an evolutionist
Date: Sat, 10 Aug 1996 00:42:39 -0700
Organization: home
Lines: 38
Message-ID: <[email protected]>
References: <[email protected]> <[email protected]> <[email protected]>
<[email protected]> <[email protected]> <[email protected]>
<[email protected]> <[email protected]> <[email protected]>
<[email protected]> <[email protected]> <[email protected]>
<[email protected]> <[email protected]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: tpm97063.gte.net
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: Mozilla 2.01E-GTE (Win16; I)
Xref: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca alt.bible.prophecy:3721 alt.christnet:90311 alt.religion.christian:111021

Marty G. Price wrote:
>
> On 3 Aug 1996, Kirk Nechamkin wrote:
>
> > What I meant in saying that “things just don’t happen,” is
> > JUST that — they don’t just happen. Evolution something
> > quite unique to life and living processes, along with
> > things that have been designed by people — programs, for
> > example — to evolve. Things don’t self-organize, as the
> > laws of nature disallow such.
> >
>
> [Snipped a fair portion of this silliness]
>
> Son, the planet has evolved, the solar system has evolved, the galaxy has
> evolved, the universe has evolved. Even rocks evolve — ever hear of
> metamorphic rock? I’m not going to get into whether this means the
> universe is alive — I don’t want to give aid and comfort to the ignorant
> by debating that proposition (or metaphor) with the better informed
> persons who disagree with my interpretation.
>
> The laws of nature do *not* disallow self-organization. Folks who thought
> that (a century or more ago) were in error. Even the mathematically
> deficient such as myself are capable of understanding some of the obvious
> implications of chaos/complexity theory — such as self-organization.
> Bill Woody posted an excellent example from meteorology, the formation of
> a raindrop.
>
> The next time you see a snowflake, pick it up, say “Wow,
> self-organization”, and take the time to genuinely wonder at this awesome
> universe instead of fleeing to the refuge of a creator so sloppy that you
> see his patch-work everywhere.
>
> Blessed Be,
> Gale


“The judgement of history depends on who writes it” (Richard Nixon)

From [email protected] Mon Aug 12 13:01:29 PDT 1996
Article: 3881 of alt.bible.prophecy
Path: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca!news.island.net!vertex.tor.hookup.net!noc.van.hookup.net!news.jumppoint.com!
n2van.istar!van.istar!west.istar!n1van.istar!van-bc!news.mindlink.net!uniserve!oronet!news.sprintlink.net!
news-stk-11.sprintlink.net!news.sprintlink.net!new-news.sprintlink.net!tezcat.com!netaxs.com!hunter.premier.net!
news-res.gsl.net!news.gsl.net!swrinde!news.sgi.com!news.msfc.nasa.gov!newsfeed.internetmci.com!in2.uu.net!
news.gte.net!usenet
From: bud
Newsgroups: alt.bible.prophecy,alt.christnet,alt.christnet.theology,alt.religion.christian,
alt.christnet.bible,alt.christnet.philosophy,a.bsu.religion,alt.atheism,talk.atheism,talk.origins
Subject: weak arguments result in name-calling, and wrong to boot!
Date: Sun, 11 Aug 1996 20:00:23 -0700
Organization: home
Lines: 109
Message-ID: <[email protected]>
References: <[email protected]> <[email protected]>
<[email protected]> <[email protected]> <[email protected]>
<[email protected]> <[email protected]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: tpm97180.gte.net
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: Mozilla 2.01E-GTE (Win16; I)
Xref: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca alt.bible.prophecy:3881 alt.christnet:90805 alt.christnet.theology:20506
alt.religion.christian:111514 alt.christnet.bible:47969 alt.christnet.philosophy:13420
alt.atheism:38189 talk.origins:139171

Wissenschaftler wrote:
>
> >papering over holes in the big bang theory, to build up an idea that has
> >become ever more complex and cumbersome…I HAVE LITTLE HESITATION IN
> >SAYING THAT A SICKLY PALL NOW HANGS OVER THE BIG BANG THEORY.
>
> Big Bang isn t a theory; its a model.
>
> When a
> >pattern of facts become set against a theory, experience shows that the
> >theory rarely recovers.” (Evolutionist Sir Fred Hoyle, famous British
>
> Hoyle has always, and is still regarded by the establishment as an asshole.
> No working productive scientist today takes him seriously.
>
> >astronomer and cosmologist. “The Big Bang Theory Under Attack” Science
> >Digest, Vol. 92 (May 1984), p. 84 (emphasis added)).
> >
> >”Once we see, however, that the probability of life originating at random
>
> Life did NOT originate at random; it EVOLVED as a self-organizing nonlinear
> process balanced at the knife edge between chaos and equilibrium; these highly
> complex non-linear self organizing processes are now coming under greater
> scrutiny as near-chaotic processes quantifiable via the new mathematics of
> chaos.
>
> >is so utterly minuscule as to make it absurd, it becomes sensible to
>
> Absurd to you, because of your ignorance of mathematics. The REAL probability
> today is more like a certainty that if does arise as an inevitability.
>
> >think that the favorable properties of physics, on which life depends,
> >are in every respect deliberate…It is, therefore, almost inevitable
> >that our own measure of intelligence must reflect higher intelligence —
> >even to the limit of God.” (Evolutionist Fred Hoyle and N. Chandra
>
> You and Hoyle are of the exact same ilk; both asshole morons.
>
> >Wickramasinghe, “Evolution from Space” London: J.M. Dent and Company,
> >1981, pp. 141,144)
> >
> >”The likelihood of the formation of life from inanimate matter of one to
> >the number of 40,000 noughts after it… IT IS BIG ENOUGH TO BURY DARWIN
>
> You are a colossal moron. Go soak your stupid head in a toilet.
>
> >AND THE WHOLE THEORY OF EVOLUTION. There was no primeval soup, neither
> >on this planet nor on any other, and if the beginnings of life were not
> >random, they must therefore have been the product of purposeful
> >intelligence.”
>
> Yes, if the definition of intelligence includes those near-chaotic systems
> which are complex enought to self-organize.
> You, of course are not sufficiently complex to be included in that class.
>
> (“Hoyle On Evolution”, Nature Vol. 294, #5837 November
> >12, 1981, p. 148 emphasis added.
> >
> >”The judgement of history depends on who writes it” (Richard Nixon)
>
> As to the BIG BANG – –
>
> Latest research shows that the mathematical singularity that you morons refer
> to as the BIG BANG is REMOVED from physics if you replace (real) time by
> imaginary time, i.e. t -> it; where i = sqrt(-1). Notion of time is NOT
> invariant with time scale; it changes as you approach an external singularity.
>
> Under this model, singularities dissapear, and there is NO ORIGIN; ie. universe
> has always existed, but NOT in Hoyle sense of steady-state. If you try to
> approach initial singularity or final (big crunch) it RECEDES from you
> indefinitely; ie you never arrive at the singularity. Thus NO CREATOR is
> needed, no initial conditions need be ordained by an external entity. These are
> the latest and most compelling models we have today. There WAS NO BIG BANG; at
> least NOT IN IMAGINARTY, or equivalently, entropic time (entropic time is
> -log(real time) – it is time experienced by sentient beings measured by
> quantum transition rate – or, subjective time).
>
> Now go drown your useless superstitions head in a shitty toilet bowl.
>
> Wissenschaftler.

bad language and bad taste do not an argument make. The Big Bang is a
“theory” Evolution is also a theory.

Websters–ev-o-lu-tion (ev uh lue’shuhn; esp. Brit. ee vuh-) n.
1. any process of formation or growth;
development: the evolution of the drama.
2. a product of development; something
evolved.
3. Biol.
a. change in the gene pool of a
population from generation to
generation by such processes as
mutation, natural selection, and
genetic drift.
b. the development of a species or
other group of organisms; phylogeny.
NOTE——c. the theory that all existing
organisms developed from earlier
forms by natural selection;
Darwinism.

also from Websters…
big’ bang’ the ory n.
NOTE————— 1. a theory that the universe began with an
explosion of a dense mass of matter and
is still expanding from the force of
that explosion.
[1950-55]

From [email protected] Mon Aug 12 13:01:32 PDT 1996
Article: 3899 of alt.bible.prophecy
Path: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca!news.island.net!news.bctel.net!news.mag-net.com!aurora.cs.athabascau.ca!
rover.ucs.ualberta.ca!unixg.ubc.ca!van-bc!n1van.istar!van.istar!west.istar!uniserve!oronet!news.sprintlink.net!
news-stk-11.sprintlink.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-stk-200.sprintlink.net!news.sprintlink.net!
news-chi-13.sprintlink.net!news.gte.net!usenet
From: bud
Newsgroups: alt.bible.prophecy,alt.christnet,alt.christnet.theology,alt.religion.christian,
alt.christnet.bible,alt.christnet.philosophy,a.bsu.religion,
Subject: Re: avoid the accusations, stick to facts
Date: Sun, 11 Aug 1996 19:43:43 -0700
Organization: home
Lines: 42
Message-ID: <[email protected]>
References: <[email protected]> <[email protected]> <[email protected]>
<[email protected]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: tpm97180.gte.net
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: Mozilla 2.01E-GTE (Win16; I)
To: “R. Tang”
Xref: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca alt.bible.prophecy:3899 alt.christnet:90840 alt.christnet.theology:20513
alt.religion.christian:111548 alt.christnet.bible:47991 alt.christnet.philosophy:13427

R. Tang wrote:
>
> In article <[email protected]>, bud wrote:
> >Dave Humrick wrote:
> >> In article <[email protected]> bud, [email protected]
> >> You Want the names of dozens of
> >> >fine scientists who are also creationist contact ICR in Santee,
> >> >California and they can supply you with dozens or men engage in all
> >>areas of the sciences who are creationists.
> >
> >There are many teachers and scientists who have been made to promise they
> >will NOT teach Creationism and SWEAR TO TEACH ONLY EVOLUTION in
> >universities all over the nation. Does this make them less of a
> >scientist? This has nothing to do with the evidence presented —
>
> Yes, because the evidence solidly supports evolution.
>
> >Evolutionists themselves admitting to the problems with their
> >”theories.”
>
> That’s how science is done.
>
> > You have resorted to attacking the men involved, not the
> >issue or the evidence.
>
> You can do all three. Check the talk origins FAQ.
>
> BTW….I would hardly credit people with diploma mill degrees or
> degrees in engineering as being very credible on geologic or biologic
> matters.
>
> —
> Roger Tang, [email protected], Artistic Director PC Theatre
> Editor, Asian American Theatre Revue:
> http://weber.u.washington.edu/~gwangung/TC.html
> Declared 4-F in the War Between the Sexes

Get serious. Every man quoted is an authority within their field and are
accurately quoted. What are your credentials in that field that you
attempt to denegrate them?

“The judgement of history depends on who writes it” (Richard Nixon)

From [email protected] Mon Aug 12 13:01:34 PDT 1996
Article: 3910 of alt.bible.prophecy
Path: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca!news.island.net!news.bctel.net!news.mag-net.com!aurora.cs.athabascau.ca!
rover.ucs.ualberta.ca!unixg.ubc.ca!van-bc!news.mindlink.net!sol.ctr.columbia.edu!spool.mu.edu!
usenet.eel.ufl.edu!news-res.gsl.net!news.gsl.net!uwm.edu!math.ohio-state.edu!howland.erols.net!
vixen.cso.uiuc.edu!newsfeed.internetmci.com!in2.uu.net!news.gte.net!usenet
From: bud
Newsgroups: alt.bible.prophecy,alt.religion.christian,alt.christnet.theology,alt.christnet
Subject: very glad to see!!!
Date: Sun, 11 Aug 1996 20:24:31 -0700
Organization: home
Lines: 18
Message-ID: <[email protected]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: tpm97135.gte.net
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: Mozilla 2.01E-GTE (Win16; I)
Xref: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca alt.bible.prophecy:3910 alt.religion.christian:111570 alt.christnet.theology:20520
alt.christnet:90860

Very glad to see that “evolution” and “Theory in Crisis” has brought so
much posting and reaction. The more I read of them the more the evidence
piles up that Evolutionists are exercising a FAITH in a theory. Many of
them just hate that word, FAITH, almost as much as some of them (I said
SOME) evidently have a deep resentment towards “God” (whom they profess
not to believe in) but at the very mention of His name SOME of them also
resort to name-calling, adhomenim attacks or attempting to denegrate the
work of some of the very men whose theories they are now exercising such
FAITH in!

Romans 1:18 For the wrath of God is revealed from heaven against all
ungodliness and unrighteousness of men, who suppress the truth in
unrighteousness,
19 because that which is known about God is evident within them; for God
made it evident to them.
20 For since the creation of the world His invisible attributes, His
eternal power and divine nature, have been clearly seen, being understood
through what has been made, so that they are without excuse.

From [email protected] Mon Aug 12 13:01:35 PDT 1996
Article: 3946 of alt.bible.prophecy
Path: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca!news.island.net!vertex.tor.hookup.net!hookup!jussieu.fr!univ-lyon1.fr!howland.erols.net!
vixen.cso.uiuc.edu!newsfeed.internetmci.com!in3.uu.net!news.gte.net!usenet
From: bud
Newsgroups: alt.bible.prophecy,alt.christnet,alt.christnet.theology,alt.religion.christian,alt.christnet.bible,
alt.christnet.philosophy,a.bsu.religion,alt.atheism,talk.atheism,talk.origins
Subject: ridiculous claim–it is faith
Date: Mon, 12 Aug 1996 07:26:12 -0700
Organization: home
Lines: 38
Message-ID: <[email protected]>
References: <[email protected]> <[email protected]> <[email protected]>
<[email protected]> <[email protected]> <[email protected]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: tpm97080.gte.net
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: Mozilla 2.01E-GTE (Win16; I)
Xref: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca alt.bible.prophecy:3946 alt.christnet:90938 alt.christnet.theology:20528
alt.religion.christian:111641 alt.christnet.bible:48032 alt.christnet.philosophy:13444 alt.atheism:38320
talk.origins:139266

bob puharic wrote:
>
> bud wrote:
>
> >There are many teachers and scientists who have been made to promise they
> >will NOT teach Creationism and SWEAR TO TEACH ONLY EVOLUTION in
> >universities all over the nation. Does this make them less of a
> >scientist? This has nothing to do with the evidence presented —
> >Evolutionists themselves admitting to the problems with their
> >”theories.”
>
> 1. the first statement is true. since creationism is religion, having
> a teacher teach it would be establishment of religion. this is
> forbidden by the 1st ammendment.
>
> 2. creationists by definition can not be scientists since they are
> biased and believe in transcendental explanation of material events.
> this is religion, not science.
>
> 3. evolutionists admit problems with their theories? so what? this is
> science. the only guys who have no problems are the creationists since
> they can dream up whatever suites them.

You obviously have not read much creationist work. many of them admit to
various problems, especially in regards to scientific evidence, etc. As
a matter of fact, many of them admit (as Evolutionists generally fail to
do) that the Origins are extremely difficult to prove and grant their
proposal is also subjected to faith. You, again, like most
Evolutionists, attempt to classify your opposition out of existence by
giving your own convenient definition of science. It’s a ridiculous
claim, and simply flies in the face of the evidence. You need to read
more of the Creationists literature and view their credentials and avoid
the propaganda being spread about Creationists by the Evolutionary
community. Evolution is a FAITH just in the same sense that Creationism
involves a certain exercise of FAITH. You don’t like that word — Your
problem, but doesn’t alter the truth of it.

“The judgement of history depends on who writes it” (Richard Nixon)

From [email protected] Mon Aug 12 13:01:37 PDT 1996
Article: 3959 of alt.bible.prophecy
Path: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca!news.island.net!news.bctel.net!news.mag-net.com!aurora.cs.athabascau.ca!
rover.ucs.ualberta.ca!news.bc.net!nntp.portal.ca!news.mindlink.net!van-bc!unixg.ubc.ca!info.ucla.edu!agate!
howland.erols.net!vixen.cso.uiuc.edu!newsfeed.internetmci.com!in3.uu.net!news.gte.net!usenet
From: bud
Newsgroups: alt.religion.christian,alt.bible.prophecy,alt.christnet.second-coming.real-soon-now,
alt.christnet.bible,alt.religion.christian,alt.christnet.theology,alt.christnet.evangelical,talk.religion.misc
Subject: EVOLUTIONIST HAVE FAITH
Date: Mon, 12 Aug 1996 07:34:46 -0700
Organization: home
Lines: 6
Message-ID: <[email protected]>
References: <[email protected]> <[email protected]> <[email protected]>
<[email protected]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: tpm97080.gte.net
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: Mozilla 2.01E-GTE (Win16; I)
Xref: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca alt.religion.christian:111675 alt.bible.prophecy:3959
alt.christnet.second-coming.real-soon-now:17097 alt.christnet.bible:48045 alt.christnet.theology:20536
alt.christnet.evangelical:10646 talk.religion.misc:141040

You don’t think so just continue to read most of their postings and it’s
becoming more obvious — only thing is they call it “science” and we call
it “faith.” but there is no difference, except they give “chance” the
credit for their answer to origins and we give “God” the credit.

“The judgement of history depends on who writes it” (Richard Nixon)

From [email protected] Mon Aug 12 13:01:40 PDT 1996
Article: 3960 of alt.bible.prophecy
Path: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca!news.island.net!news.bctel.net!news.internetMCI.com!newsfeed.internetmci.com!
newsxfer2.itd.umich.edu!uunet!in3.uu.net!news.gte.net!usenet
From: bud
Newsgroups: alt.christnet.theology,alt.bible.prophecy,alt.christnet.theology,alt.christnet,
alt.religion.christian
Subject: The God of “Chance Happenings”
Date: Mon, 12 Aug 1996 07:45:37 -0700
Organization: home
Lines: 5
Message-ID: <[email protected]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: tpm97080.gte.net
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: Mozilla 2.01E-GTE (Win16; I)
Xref: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca alt.christnet.theology:20538 alt.bible.prophecy:3960 alt.christnet:90980
alt.religion.christian:111682

If you don’t think that Evolutionists have faith just continue to read
most of their postings and it’s becoming more obvious — only thing is
they call it “science” and we call it “faith.” but there is no
difference, except they give “chance” the credit for their answers to
origins and we give “God” the credit.

From [email protected] Sat Aug 24 13:19:46 PDT 1996
Article: 5044 of alt.bible.prophecy
Path: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca!news.island.net!vertex.tor.hookup.net!icarus.lon.hookup.net!hookup!chi-news.cic.net!
news.cic.net!nntp.coast.net!news-res.gsl.net!news.gsl.net!usenet.eel.ufl.edu!spool.mu.edu!daily-planet.execpc.com!
newspump.sol.net!nntp04.primenet.com!nntp.primenet.com!howland.erols.net!newsfeed.internetmci.com!in3.uu.net!
news1.gte.net!usenet
From: bud
Newsgroups: alt.bible.prophecy,alt.christnet,alt.christnet.theology,alt.religion.christian,
alt.religion.church.calvary-chapel
Subject: apologetic # 5
Date: Sat, 24 Aug 1996 12:54:20 -0700
Organization: home
Lines: 101
Message-ID: <[email protected]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: tpm97028.gte.net
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: Mozilla 2.01E-GTE (Win16; I)
Xref: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca alt.bible.prophecy:5044 alt.christnet:95500 alt.christnet.theology:21268
alt.religion.christian:116906

Previously it was stated that whether admitted to or not everybody
exercises faith in one way or another. Webster’s defines it as a
complete trust or confidence; loyalty. Hebrews 1:11 says “Now faith is
the assurance of things hoped for, the conviction of things unseen.” The
real question is in “what” we place our faith.
Essentially, there are three options where one can place their faith, and
again it’s very important to point out that BELIEVING IN SOMETHING DOES
NOT MAKE IT TRUE OR UNTRUE. WHAT COUNTS IS THE EVIDENCE. One of these
options is science.
Someone once sarcastically stated that the definition of science is
“learning more and more about less and less, till you know everything
about nothing.” Joking aside, science has certainly increased man’s
knowledge of himself and the universe. Science has documented a vast
array of facts about the universe. Yet at the same time it has revealed
how much man DOES NOT KNOW. The more the frontiers of knowledge are
pushed back by science, the more vast becomes the area of the unknown.
Every question science answers in almost all cases seems to raise a
hundred more questions. Everywhere there is the SAME EVIDENCE of law and
order, or a thinking mind behind it all. To the Christian this is the
mind of God. It seems highly unlikely that science has or ever will have
all the answers, especially regarding the origin, nature and purpose of
the universe.
The origin of the universe, for example, is outside the realm of
scientific investigation. The scientist who speaks of “origins” speaks
as a philosopher rather than a scientist. He SAYS WHAT HE THINKS NOT
WHAT HE KNOWS. He is dealing in THEORY, NOT FACTS. Like it or not, this
is true for both the Creationist and the Evolutionist, despite the
attempts by some to label one as “science” and the other as “religion.”
There are many today who put their FAITH in the THEORY of Evolution (that
man evolved from a lower life form). The question to be posed is a
“theory” worth putting ones faith in? Whatever your answer, it’s
important to take a long look at Evolution.
The media has been the most influential in promoting the supposed “fact”
of evolution with much of its programming and magazine sections loyally
devoted to the evolutionary theory. Ever since the Scopes Trial (the
famous “monkey trial”) evolution has been almost universally accepted as
fact, while at the same time Biblical Creationism has been somewhat
arbitrarily discarded as an antiquated belief of a former age.
Unfortunately, even some factions of organized Christianity has spent the
past century or more retreating and trying to compromise with some form
or theistic evolution. Consequently, the faith of many Bible-believing
Christians has been seriously affected and countless numbers of sincere
people have been deceived.
Students all over the world have been taught the historical and
scientific greatness of disproving spontaneous generation (life coming
>from nonliving manner). Scientists like Redi, Pasteur, and Spallanzani
proved that life can only come from pre-existing life. IT IS INCREDIBLE
THAT THE EDUCATORS WHO TEACH THIS TO STUDENTS STILL, NONETHELESS, TEACH
THAT SPONTANEOUS GENERATION WAS THE MEANS BY WHICH LIFE AROSE. It is
even further ironic that the very concept of organic evolution is
completely absurd and impossible. Yet, as astonishing as it might seem,
this idea (which is devoid of any legitimate scientific proof) has
attained a lofty position in the name of science…
The most widespread and influential argument against the Bible’s veracity
is the all too common belief that modern science has proved Evolution,
thereby discrediting the Biblical account or creation.
The fatal flaw in this argument, however, is THE FACT THAT IT IS
IMPOSSIBLE TO PROVE SCIENTIFICALLY ANY THEORY OF ORIGINS. This is
because the very essence of scientific method is based on OBSERVATION AND
EXPERIMENTATION, and it is impossible to make observations or conduct
experiments on the origin of the universe. This point is conceded by
British biologist L. Harrison Matthews in his forward to the 1971 edition
of Darwin’s “Origin of Species.”
“The fact of evolution is the backbone of biology, and biology is
in this peculiar position of being a science founded on an unproved
theory–is it then a science or a faith? Belief in the theory of
evolution is thus exactly parallel to belief in special creation–both
are concepts which believers know to be true, but neither, up to the
present, have been capable of proof.”
Sure, scientists may speculate about the past or future, but they can
only actually observe the present. Obviously then, the widespread
assumption that evolution is an established fact of science is false.
Thus, Evolution can only correctly be labeled a “belief,” a subjective
philosophy of origins.
Another important point… scientists ARE HUMAN. They have PERSONAL
PREFERENCE, PREJUDICES, VIEWPOINTS and even a predisposition to certain
views. This can be applied to both Creationists and Evolutionists.
Simply put, they ARE NOT ALWAYS UNBIASED OR OBJECTIVE. Here is a
statement from Dr. George Wald, winner of the 1967 Nobel Peace Price in
science: “When it comes to the origin of life on earth, there are only
two possibilities” Creation or spontaneous generation (evolution). There
is no third way. Spontaneous generation was disproved 100 years ago, but
that leads us only to one other conclusion: that of supernatural
creation. We cannot accept that on philosophical grounds (personal
reasons); therefore, we choose to believe the impossible: that life arose
spontaneously by chance.”
When you read his statement note the words and phrases like “cannot
accept” or “philosophical grounds” and “choose to believe.” These are
personal reasons, choice, NOT SCIENCE.
Like it or not, Evolutionists BELIEVE in one form or another that some
imagined process living things formed themselves with no intelligence
controlling, then somehow improved themselves… all bacteria, plants,
animals, and humans arose by mere chance from a single ancestor that
somehow came into existence… All of this occurring accidentally. If
you reach back far enough into this theory, the theory of Evolution is
proposing that given enough time Hydrogen gas has turned into people!
This ends number 5. In the next posting evolution and the so-called
Geological columns, etc., will be discussed.


“The judgement of history depends on who writes it” (Richard Nixon)

From [email protected] Thu Aug 8 08:47:00 PDT 1996
Article: 93600 of alt.censorship
Path: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca!news.island.net!vertex.tor.hookup.net!eloi.vir.com!noc.van.hookup.net!
news.jumppoint.com!n2van.istar!van.istar!west.istar!uniserve!news.sol.net!spool.mu.edu!howland.erols.net!
vixen.cso.uiuc.edu!newsfeed.internetmci.com!in3.uu.net!news.gte.net!usenet
From: bud
Newsgroups: alt.alien.visitors,alt.angst,alt.anonymous,alt.anonymous.messages,alt.anybody,alt.apocalypse,
alt.atheism,alt.bible.prophecy,alt.blasphemy,alt.captain.sarcastic,alt.censorship,alt.christnet,
alt.christnet.second-coming.real-soon-now,alt.conspiracy.area51,alt.culture.internet,alt.culture.usenet,
alt.current-events.net-abuse,alt.current-events.net-abuse.spam,alt.current-events.usa,alt.drugs.culture,
alt.drugs.pot.cultivation,alt.evil,alt.fashion,alt.hi.are.you.cute,alt.individualism,alt.internet.talk.bizarre,
alt.life.sucks,alt.magick,alt.mindcontrol,alt.misc,alt.nuke.the.USA,alt.pagan,alt.parents-teens,alt.psy,
alt.psychoactives,alt.punk,alt.rave,alt.religion.asatru,alt.religion.wicca,alt.satanism,alt.spam,alt.stupidity,
alt.ufo.reports,alt.zen,fidonet.bible,fidonet.church.state,rec.drugs.cannabis,soc.culture.african.american,
talk.atheism,talk.religion.misc
Subject: a “fundamentalists” reply
Date: Thu, 08 Aug 1996 08:27:42 -0700
Organization: home
Lines: 66
Message-ID: <[email protected]>
References: <[email protected]> <[email protected]> <[email protected]>
<[email protected]> <[email protected]> <[email protected]> <[email protected]>
<[email protected]> <[email protected]> <[email protected]>
<[email protected]> <[email protected]> <[email protected]>
<[email protected]> <[email protected]> <[email protected]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: tpm97027.gte.net
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: Mozilla 2.01E-GTE (Win16; I)
Xref: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca alt.alien.visitors:96016 alt.angst:57177 alt.anonymous:3490
alt.anonymous.messages:2965 alt.atheism:37228 alt.bible.prophecy:3483 alt.captain.sarcastic:2640
alt.censorship:93600 alt.christnet:89680 alt.christnet.second-coming.real-soon-now:16818
alt.conspiracy.area51:5671 alt.culture.internet:19103 alt.culture.usenet:26490 alt.current-events.net-abuse:27923
alt.current-events.usa:21602 alt.drugs.culture:9047 alt.drugs.pot.cultivation:3088 alt.evil:22213
alt.fashion:16495 alt.hi.are.you.cute:3819 alt.individualism:28179 alt.life.sucks:6453 alt.magick:51676
alt.mindcontrol:10318 alt.nuke.the.USA:43970 alt.pagan:108754 alt.parents-teens:11308 alt.psychoactives:12930
alt.punk:40683 alt.rave:49353 alt.religion.asatru:4376 alt.religion.wicca:27404 alt.satanism:30947
alt.spam:4070 alt.stupidity:42022 alt.ufo.reports:5044 alt.zen:17362 rec.drugs.cannabis:7521
soc.culture.african.american:123533 talk.religion.misc:140313