Throughout history, people have always put prisoners to work using tools.

But not high technology items. Plows, yokes, harrows but not stealth technology or supercomputers. Germans had to deploy prisoners with terrible security risk realized in menial jobs at V-2 factories and U-boats shipyards. in semi-underground bunkers. Thus Polish Underground reported to England thickness of their concrete cover, which Allies (knowing which bombs to use) used to bomb them. 1000-900 BC was the beginning of the Iron age and there was not enough of it for mail and armor, forget about 20 lb sledge hammers for an army of old men women and children

I'm still not seeing any specific reference in any of the translations making reference to old men, women and children.

I am astonished at your blindness!!! Get old unadultered editon of KJB. It says 'he brought forth the people that were therein" After the customary "putting to the sword" of all armbearing men, who was left in Rabath? Old men, women and children. Were there any exceptions mentioned? - NO. This means that David did not do anything merciful or exceptional like saving the lives of six or 60 or 600 or 6,000 defenders. As usual, all armsbearing men were slaughtered.

Moreover "and thus did he unto all the cities of the children of Ammon". Now STOP here and think. Massacring defenders of Rabath (the armsbearing men) was expected, normal and not criminal, actually in the long term preserving thousands of lives of future attackers who died as flies during seiges. HOWEVER killing inabitants of "all the cites of the children of Ammon" was racially motivated. 'Extermination' on an industrial and sadistic scale. Hitler protected selected Jews in Theresienstadt! 11% of barracks in Birkenau were used as Lazarets-infirmaries. In 1964 I was still using the same Xray machines which were used in Birkenau (see photos of them from the nuremberg exhibits) My Jewish friend Treblinka escapee and Bireknau survivor was treated with sulfonamides which were more expensive than gold shortly AFTER the WW II in Poland. Hitler never exterminated "all cities" of his enemies.

Right, but assuming the tools existed (which the text doesn't leave in doubt) it's no more expensive to have POW's using them than it is to have the Israelites themselves using them.

You are childlish, believing the Bible. How come that there is no archeological evidence of David's empire and only flimsy iron arrowheads survive from that era?? Thin arrowheads were the first to corrode into nothing. There are not even iron knives discovered in Israel from that era.

Again, the text doesn't leave any doubt that the tools existed. Since the texts appear to have been written roughly the same time as the events (there's no strong evidence of interpolations) is stands to reason that the tools being described really existed.

You are a biblical cherry picker who disbelieves in the Flood but believes in iron harrows which were not much better that wood/flint or wood-only harrows. In 1940s with my grandpa, we were still manufacturing harrows totally from wood!!! Ironwod at that also called hornbeam because of their resistance to breaking and abrading.

What on Earth are you talking about? Those camps were open for years. Auschwitz was open from 1940 to 1945, IIRC. That's plenty of time to cremate people when it only took about a half hour or so.

You are dead wrong again, and ignorant of the Hx of the big H. I am going to report you to Abe Foxman!!!!! Of course I am writing about the victims of the Einsatzgruppen, shot and burried behind the Eastern Front not in Poland!!! Moreover in order to cremate USHMM and Panstwowe Muzeum w Oswiecimiu state that the speed of cremation had to be ten minutes in order to meet the six figure quota of the total count. However an Israeli who creamted Eichman stupidly and truthfull confessed that it took him 90 minutes to do the job. American cremationists do not do better time despite using natural high temp burning gas and computerized retors, Vide History Channel, Modern Marvels about the funerary industry in these USA.

Yet there are still around six million who disappeared altogether.

Prove it instead of believing

Yeah, same here. I really didn't want to get into one at all. Let's call it off here. If you're interested at some point later on, there is a site responding to the IHR's charges at http://www.nizkor.org/features/qar/qar00.html

Nizkor should be congratulated at picking up stupidities and zeal of about 50% of Holoocaust revisionist who are ardent anti-Semites.   However, elsewhere they use similar reasoning like you about the Bible cherry-picking method and omitting or dismissing inconvenient statements

[Portion edited out per Myron's request]

I don't belittle God, I just refuse to blame Him for things that I don't believe He is responsible for.

But I do think that I am smarter than Pat Robertson, yes.

I AGREE ABOUT THAT. Some atheists and H revisionist are equally stupid like the old Pat.

I don't believe in Purgatory.

Shame on You, biblical cherry picker (smile please, sarcasm)

I definitely think he (Einstein) was on to something. Whether he was truly "correct", I don't know, but he was at least pointing in the right direction.

No doubt about that.

Technically, every single moment, we are seeing into the past. Even if you look at someone who is standing a foot away from you, you are seeing them as they were one-billionth of a second ago (or something like that).

THIS IS BRILIANT AND SO SIMPLE!  I NEVER THOUGHT ABOUT IT. Hats off to you David!!!

I think we're seeing a sun as it was fourteen minutes ago, not as it is right now. So if we could find some way to look at our own planet from a great distance, we'd be seeing into its distant past. Wouldn't it be cool to focus on the Middle East around 32 A.D. and determine once and for all whether Jesus was resurrected?

This would collapse the entire matter of Faith and Religion, I think.  Then Bible study would become true science!

Because it's unlikely that the earliest Christians, the ones who would have known whether it was a myth or not, would have suffered the persecution under Nero had they been able to get out of it by saying "oh, that Jesus thing? Yeah, that's just a myth!" Christianity wouldn't have survived the 1st century had there not been truth to it.

You are dead wrong!! One thousand of Jones' faithful in Guiana selected suicide. A group of 29 computer geeks in California comitted ritualistic suicide about 7 years ago. Human stupidity is boundless.

I think it took a while for the cross to catch on since, prior to the resurrection, crucifixion was considered a shameful way to die.

You got it! Christ would not ask the crowds to pick up the cross (crucifixion)!

But not high technology items. Plows, yokes, harrows but not stealth technology or supercomputers.

Right. Saws and stuff like that weren't high technology.

1000-900 BC was the beginning of the Iron age and there was not enough of it for mail and armor, forget about 20 lb sledge hammers for an army of old men women and children.

I don't see any reason to suppose that the tools described didn't exist at the time, since they described the tools. They weren't writing science fiction here.

After the customary "putting to the sword" of all armbearing men, who was left in Rabath? Old men, women and children. Were there any exceptions mentioned? - NO. This means that David did not do anything merciful or exceptional like saving the lives of six or 60 or 600 or 6,000 defenders. As usual, all armsbearing men were slaughtered.

We have two possibilities here.

If the passage is describing the people being put to death, then this is likely describing what happened to the armbearing men.

If the passage is describing people being put to work, then there is nothing in here saying that the armbearing men were put to death first. Not everyone followed every military tradition, especially if they had a good reason not to. If the Israelites were planning on putting their POW's to work, it makes sense that they would spare those best suited for work, as opposed to killing them and putting those least well-suited, the elderly and kids, to work instead. That wouldn't make any sense for them to do it that way.

How come that there is no archeological evidence of David's empire and only flimsy iron arrowheads survive from that era??

First of all, the historical evidence for David is quite strong. Strong enough that if we're going to doubt that David existed, then we're going to have to be consistent and doubt the existence of many other historical figures that no one doubts existed. When we're talking about archeological evidence from 3000 years ago for a specific individual, the fact that we're not finding much wouldn't be surprising.

But second of all, there is indeed archeological evidence for the existence of David. Avraham Biran, an archeologist at Hebrew Union College, found (in 1993) a 9th century B.C. inscription in Northern Israel that refers to the "Beit David", the House or Dynasty of David. It was found in the Biblical city of Dan.

You are dead wrong again, and ignorant of the Hx of the big H. I am going to report you to Abe Foxman!!!!! Of course I am writting about the victims of the Einsatzgruppen, shot and burried behind the Eastern Front not in Poland!!!

For the record, I am done talking about the Holocaust. Go to that website I gave you earlier if you want answers to your objections.

One thousand of Jones' faithful in Guiana selected suicide. A group of 29 computer geeks in California comitted ritualistic suicide about 7 years ago. Human stupidity is boundless.

Yep, and those faiths died, which is what Christianity would have done if, like with their faiths, there had been nothing to it.

Christ would not ask the crowds to pick up the cross (crucifixion)!

Not unless He knew what was coming next. I don't doubt that when He said it, the crowds had little if any idea what He meant. I think He meant for them to figure it out after He was crucified.

David

They (British bobbies) also live in a much more peaceful society than Jesus lived in.

But Jesus being "The" God, to set an example, could have protected them with His unspoken wish and did not have to resort to swords, and most likely 'concealed' swords. If they had been openly armed, peaceful Gallileans would have consider them as thugs and cultists. You live in a dangerous and violent internally and internationally country. Would you or your minister walk into your church with a holstered Colts?

In our Oryan (Aryan is misspeling, Proto-Ukrainians were called Oryany literally Plowers plow is cognate of Ukrainian pluh) homeland Europe knights always left their swords in nartexes of their churches. And you tell me that the Prince of Peace, Almighty (as a part of Trinity) and Gentle Jesus tolerated His Disciples to be armed?

David, you constantly want to eat you cake and have it too. The Bible is rife with contradiction and violence. Read it. If you do not see it, visit web pages describing genocides and violence ordered by God, especially in OT by the tens of thousands of killed, for nothing by our standards, by kids making fun of a bald prophet.

Would you recommend that policemen in high crime areas like New York City, Detroit, Los Angeles and Chicago go around unarmed?

Yes! But it would take a generation or two of preparation of our society for such a change.

No, most Christian denominations agree that there is a trinity. Only a few don't.

Please do not fool me and yourself. 400 Big Ch denominations exist because EACH of them DISAGREE about this or something else.

A parable isn't an untruth or unholy. When Jesus spoke of the prodigal son and the sower of seeds, He was speaking in parables.  When David spoke of "walking through the valley of the shadow of death", he wasn't speaking of a literal valley. That doesn't mean it's a lie and should be discounted.

You are fooling yourself. When it is written that David "did it (exterminated them) to all cities of children of Amon" this can not be constured as a parable. "Valley of the shadow of death" is not parable, but poetic idiom. Do not fool me. It is not difficult to differentiate parable from alleged facts.

I do not believe KD ever existed. What is important about this story is that post Nuremberg exegetes fail to notify that they made-over King David from Hitler into FDR. Incidentally, Hitler did not want war - Repeat - did not want. He was petrified of war after being himself gassed. He was in a panic when Mussolini betrayed him on Aug 24, 1939.  Read NY times Sept 1, 1939 about the 16 points peacer for Poland. Without the Mussolini betrayal there would not have been a WWII. On the other hand, FDR plan of Hitleand Morghenthau were lying as much as Bush and Wolfowitz and the real warmongers and the real war criminals.  The main and the first charge at Nuremberg in 1945 was Starting Preventing War!!!!!

Hitler was forced to attack Poland by Morghenthau, via FDR via US ambassador Bullit in Paris, Polish ambasador Lewandowski in Paris > Polish government in Warsaw on Feb 17, 1939. Fat and bemedaled Goering and shy uniformed Himmler walked right behind Jewish wife of Pilsudski who walked behind the hearse with her husband on the main Ave of Warsaw!

Since Jesus knew what was coming, and He's the one speaking, there's no reason to suppose it's an anachronism.

We are again at it. Would Christ say today "follow me and be hanged" or "Follow Me and we will die suffocated by leather thongs" (like the 36 yo sadomasochistic son the only child of the Jewish owner of the Time Warner syndicate and CEO Gerald ...I forgot his surname, tragedy happened about five years ago and after that poor Gerald resigned as CEO). Crucifixion was a shameful death then, and Christ would never prophecize about the Cross in order not to lose the crowd and Disciples and followers. He could talk about beheading or some other heroic martyrdom, but not prophecize about crucifixion.

Read galatians. ST Paul wirtes about RESURRECTION but fails to mention far more emblematic (centuries later) CRUCIFIXION. Gov Martin Glyn writes in 1919 about holocaust of 6,000,000 plus 800,000 Jewish children under the title "Crucifixion of Jews Must Stop!" but St Paul is silent about the crucifixion of JC because at his time it was still shameful. Today symbol of Crucifixion beats 100,000 to 1 the symbol of Christ knocking at someones door or teaching from the boat. 80% of christian women, including my daughters, wear crucifix and about 20% of men. How many paintings of JC teaching from the boat have you seen lately? For at least 500 years JC was imagined as good shepard or Apollo or Sol invictus or a Fish but not as a ridiculed cadaver-king hanging on the cross.

Did you ever think why JC's 12 Disciples did not preserve His Cross??? Why it got lost??? (and them 500 years later and 1,000 years later, hundreds of its splinters materialized??) The explanation is given to you above.

The fact that the wood of the Holy Cross (*portion edited per Myron's request*) got lost, for any reasonable person, should be almost a proof that neither crucifixion nor resurrection of JC ever took place.

Don't you think that if the resurrection took place, the Disciples would not protect the Cross for veneration and posterity???

Oh, I know, you will write to me that JC secretly told them for His own Lordly mysterious reason, to downplay the Holy wood or cross or beam.

But then let's take any rationality of the religion away and explain every contradiction (e.g with Tsunami) as "Gods Mysterious Ways" and then there is no need for further discussion.

And I see nothing wrong with it because Faith is faith, including Humphrey's Atheism.

While you seem to be Deist I lean toward Deism but vascilate between Agnosticism, but after reading the Bible I kind of realized that Judeo-Christianity is a Big J (big joke).

Not sure I'm getting your point here. He warned them that many of them would suffer, and they did.

This is you wishful thinking. Sword does not mean suffering. Sword means painful death. Cancer, TB, strokes, inquisitional torturers, but not even leprosy bring suffering. Lepers do not hurt because the bug destroys sensory nerves. The Sword is then meant war fighting not suffering.   Not even being killed by lions (I believe Humphreys and others that Christians were not given to the lions) was very painful.  Ask Roy, this Jewish bestial homosexual who was dragged from the stage by his white tiger, if he was hurt, I forgot his surname. In his interview he did not mention that.

The Holy Ghost gives guidance, but doesn't exert control over what people do. If someone decides to do something God doesn't like, God won't force them to stay in line. If He did, then there would be no point in free will.

And your Judeo-Christian sado-masochistic God: JC, HF or HG, all-in-one Holy Trinity could not enjoy watching sinners being boild in tar for infinity

I don't find it suspicious that Jesus, or the Biblical authors, used fictional stories to make points. It was quite common in those days, and it still is today.

True, especially among Holocaustians, but not Holocaust Revisionists

The historicity of Jesus (the idea that He really existed) has overwhelming evidence to support it. Even among non-Christians, most believe He at least existed.

Most believed that Mithra existed and billions belive that Buddha existed. "All of them can not be wrong" is a non-argument.

I lived just fine without religion until I was 27, at which point I became logically convinced that the resurrection of Jesus is historical fact. If someone could give me any kind of evidence that it isn't, I'll weigh it against the positive evidence, and if I become logically convinced that Jesus wasn't resurrected, I'll do just fine living without it once again.

There are good reasons to assume Resurection as a fact if one drops the idea of Crucifixion, which is not venerated or even mentioned by St Paul. see Galatians 1;1 etc and 500 years of forgetfullness about The Cross.

If historicity is logical, why are you, especially Protestants, willing to send millions of $$$ on proving it and paying it to a rapacious, half-skillful forger, and Israeli dentist who created Just-For-You the James ossuary.

Why do we Catholics pray to Shroud of Turin, a gross homosexual hoax by Leonardo Da Vinci.

Why does the whole world venerate homosexual pornography on the Sistine chapel ceiling (St Barbara there has nice but underdeveloped breasts but at the same time muscles of a 20year old Toy Boy on steroids, elderly Michelangelo and Julius II the Pope both still loved. And look at the stereotypic buttocks of JC (Jesus Christ), a super double-"L" (i.e. Lewd & Luscious)!

They probably were concealed, but if someone approached them planning on attacking, they could reveal the swords and the person would refrain from attacking.

And you tell me that the Prince of Peace, Almighty (as a part of Trinity) and Gentle Jesus tolerated His Disciples to be armed?

Yes. In many situations, visible weapons can prevent violence.

The Bible is rife with contradiction and violence. Read it. If you do not see it, visit web pages describing genocides and violence ordered by God, especially in OT by the tens of thousands of killed, for nothing by our standards,

Been there, done that.

by kids making fun of a bald prophet.

More like grown men threatening the bald prophet with death, and nothing in the text says the men were killed.

David: Would you recommend that policemen in high crime areas like New York City, Detroit, Los Angeles and Chicago go around unarmed?

Myron: Yes! But it would take a generation or two of preparation of our society for such a change.

And how would you prepare society? And what if society wouldn't go along with your plans? Would you still recommend that the officers go out unarmed? Do you think that would prevent criminals from committing violence?

David: No, most Christian denominations agree that there is a trinity. Only a few don't.

Myron: Please do not fool me and yourself. 400 Big Ch denominations exist because EACH of them DISAGREE about this or something else.

I agree, but it's usually not major points like the trinity. I don't believe that there should be denominations, personally, but don't see their existence as anything more than human nature.

When it is written that David "did it (exterminated them) to all cities of children of Amon" this can not be constured as a parable.

I'm not saying it is. But stories like Adam and Eve, Job, the Prodigal Son, the Sower of Seeds are parables, in my opinion.

"Valley of the shadow of death" is not parable, but poetic idiom. Do not fool me. It is not difficult to differentiate parable from alleged facts.

But you agree that some of what is in the Bible are parables, right? And that being parables doesn't make them lies, right?

Crucifixion was a shameful death then, and Christ would never prophecize about the Cross in order not to lose the crowd and Disciples and followers. He could talk about beheading or some other heroic martyrdom, but not prophecize about crucifixion.

But if He talked about beheading, but then was crucified, then His words wouldn't have made sense even in hindsight. But speaking of crucifixion and then being crucified makes His words make sense.

Read galatians. ST Paul wirtes about RESURRECTION but fails to mention far more emblematic (centuries later) CRUCIFIXION.

What are you talking about? Paul wrote about the crucifixion in 1 Corinthians 1:13, 1:23, 2:2 and other passages, and 1 Corinthians is believed to be his earliest writing.

And yes, Paul mentioned it in Galatians, also. See Galatians 3:1, 5:24, and 6:14.

How many paintings of JC teaching from the boat have you seen lately? For at least 500 years JC was imagined as good shepard or Apollo or Sol invictus or a Fish but not as a ridiculed cadaver-king hanging on the cross.

Which is irrelevant. They knew He was crucified in the 1st century, so how they chose to portray Him in art and other symbolic means doesn't negate that. If not being portrayed in art means something didn't happen, then we have to toss out most of ancient history. I wonder what the earliest artistic representation of the assassination of Caesar was?

Did you ever think why JC's 12 Disciples did not preserve His Cross??? Why it got lost???

Because they weren't able to, probably. The cross was Roman property.

The fact that the wood of the Holy Cross *portion edited per Myron's request* got lost, for any reasonable person, should be almost a proof that neither crucifixion nor resurrection of JC ever took place.

I can't imagine any reasonable person, faced with the overwhelming evidence for the crucifixion having happened (even most non-Christians at least agree that Jesus was crucified), finding a single missing 2000-year-old relic any sort of difficulty.

And where's the dagger with which Brutus stabbed Caesar? If no one can find it, does that prove that Caesar wasn't assassinated?

Don't you think that if the resurrection took place, the Disciples would not protect the Cross for veneration and posterity???

If they were able to, perhaps. Do you really think the Romans would hand it over to them?

Oh, I know, you will write to me that JC secretly told them for His own Lordly mysterious reason, to downplay the Holy wood or cross or beam.

No, that didn't even cross my mind, actually.

But then let's take any rationality of the religion away and explain every contradiction (e.g with Tsunami) as "Gods Mysterious Ways" and then there is no need for further discussion.

Since I don't believe God caused the Tsunami, that doesn't reflect my attitude at all.

And I see nothing wrong with it because Faith is faith, including Humphrey's Atheism.

I agree, but I feel that faith must at least make some kind of sense, or it's more like just wishful thinking.

While you seem to be Deist I lean toward Deism but vascilate between Agnosticism, but after reading the Bible I kind of realized that Judeo-Christianity is a Big J (big joke).

Funny, that's what I thought of it before I started reading the Bible.

Sword does not mean suffering. Sword means painful death.

No, it means division. Read the next few verses (Matthew 10:34-36). Jesus says that following Him means having people, even members of your own family, turn against you.

And your Judeo-Christian sado-masochistic God: JC, HF or HG, all-in-one Holy Trinity could not enjoy watching sinners being boild in tar for infinity.

I don't believe people are boiled in tar for infinity, and God wants all people to join Him in Heaven.

Most believed that Mithra existed and billions belive that Buddha existed. "All of them can not be wrong" is a non-argument.

Actually, I'm not sure anyone but Mithraists believe that Mithra existed, but most do believe Buddha existed, which is because the historical evidence suggests he did. Though it's not as strong as the evidence that Jesus existed.

There are good reasons to assume Resurrection as a fact if one drops the idea of Crucifixion, which is not venerated or even mentioned by St Paul. see Galatians 1;1 etc and 500 years of forgetfullness about The Cross.

Besides Paul's many mentions, it's also mentioned in all four Gospels. All of those were written in the 1st century A.D., most of them (all but John's Gospel) likely within 35 years of the time Jesus walked the Earth.

If historicity is logical, why are you, especially Protestants, willing to send millions of $$$ on proving it and paying it to a rapacious, half-skillful forger, and Israeli dentist who created Just-For-You the James ossuary.

The vast majority of Protestants didn't send any money to that forger. Don't judge all by the actions of a few.

Why do we Catholics pray to Shroud of Turin, a gross homosexual hoax by Leonardo Da Vinci.

I agree it's a hoax, since (unlike the resurrection) there is no evidence of it having been around in the 1st century. But since the shroud appears to have been around about 100 years before Da Vinci, he probably couldn't have created it.

David

David,

It is clear to me that, most likely subconsciously, you are a hypocrite as much on the subject of race as on the subject of religion. Actually we both act alike and this is the reason I did not notice it initially.  We both avoid to live or face reality but operate on the level of "P.C." political correctness i.e. pleasing the crowds at the expense of logic and truth.

"The high crime areas" is a phoney for Afro-Spamish high crime area.  But you are afraid to state so. And I agreed with you. Once a year for past two years The Daily News published on front pages the mugshots and two page spreads on pages 6-7 with write-ups about Ten Most Wanted by NYC Police Dept. One year among them was Greek national and the other time all ten were AfroAms.  There were no Oryans (i.e.Northern and Central Europeans) among them nor Orientals.

In the nearby huge State Prison 3,000 or 4,000 'correctioners' (hehehe) at least 80% of them are AfroSpams or AfroLatinos. It is a joke that this is "State Correctional Facility". It is Oyrans and not Aryans.  Aryans is misspeling destroying the etymology of these peoples. But even Oryans although at least 7,500 year old term it is improper. Proto-Ukrainians became out of necessity the first literate and agricultural people 14,000 BP when the megafauna died out due to global warming (start of melting of glacier) and the Ice Age Hunters of Ukraine were forced to turn into Flaz Farmers of Ukraine. Surely they did not call themself Oryany because one does not have to plogh soil to cultivate flax. Flax is the only plant which is harvested by pulling out with roots Because shallow root system it does not require plowing but weeding. Thus Oryans (aryans) probably called themselve Pullers or Flaxers.

Because of very short maturation time (90-100) days and still semi-tundra like climate it was absolutely necessary for Oryans to know astronomy to figure out under cloudy sky the Spring Solstice to know EXACTLY because short summer when to saw flax hence knot writting was indispensible

But this has nothing to do with the fairy tales (parables) of the Bible and stenographic (shorthand) recording of Christ speeches by His illiterate Disciples. Virtually all Jewish males knew how to read or "read" but very few knew how to write (except for numbers). Mark wrote for St Peter! The other possibility is that the octogenarian Evangelists were spared by the Almighty Trinity the ravages of senility i.e. usual memory deficits.

Rejoice and Behold David. I am coming to this age. I keep my wallet tied on the string to my belt loop but nevertheless for the past three months I drive without my licence. I was stopped by the state trooper 7 hours ago for a noisy muffler. Seeing me in my sunday best and the fact that after the first red flash I turned on my blinkers and started to brake slowly and seeing my even older elderly companions inside he knew I was not under the influence of Jack Daniels and was not afraid of me because I 'disarmed' his anxiety of me shooting and escaping by turning off my engine before he approached. Thus he gave us a warning, agreed that the car is on its last leg and not worth of repairing, believed that I have another car about to be registered (which is true but it is untrue that I will junk my old jelopy) and did not even ask this greenor (about 22 years old) for my licence.

Perhaps the God still likes me???

Myron

I don't consider myself a hypocrite on either subject.

Actually we both act alike and this is the reason I did not notice it initially.  We both avoid to live or face reality but operate on the level of "P.C." political correctness i.e. pleasing the crowds at the expense of logic and truth.

No, I favor logic and truth over pleasing the crowds. If something I say ticks off a large number of people, I don't care. If something I say is false, I want to be corrected.

And I'm absolutely NOT a fan of "political correctness". It crushes creativity and free speech and causes fear where none should be.

" The high crime areas" is a phoney for Afro-Spamish high crime area.  But you are afraid to state so.

No, "high crime areas" is a statement about crimes, not skin color.

Once a year for past two years The Daily News published on front pages the mugshots and two page spreads on pages 6-7 with write-ups about Ten Most Wanted by NYC Police Dept. One year among them was Greek national and the other time all ten were AfroAms.  There were no Oryans (i.e.Northern and Central Europeans) among them nor Orientals.

That says something about criminals, for sure. But it doesn't say anything about AfroAms (I call them blacks, so I'll use that word from now on). This is actually a good example of the fallacies racists tend to use. It may well be true that a majority of criminals are blacks, but it's by no means true that a majority of blacks are criminals. Most black people are law-abiding citizens. So, essentially, racists try to turn facts around to make them appear to say something that they actually don't. It's dishonest.

The big question is - if one is going to use a fact that is true only for a small percentage of a certain group, and use that fact to generalize about the group - why do they use a negative trait? Why don't they use a positive trait instead? A minority of blacks are doctors, so why don't they generalize that blacks are doctors?

If someone is bound and determined to hate a certain group, then they're going to take negative traits about that group, even if it's a trait that applies to a small minority of them, and use it to generalize. It's both dishonest and illogical. It's like generalizing that Arabs are terrorists or that Polish people are idiots. It makes no sense.

I believe that people should be judged by their own actions, not by what group they belong to. If someone commits a violent crime, no matter what their skin color or racial heritage, then they should be judged on that action, and go to prison. If 10% of black people in a certain area happen to be violent criminals, then those 10% deserve to go to prison, but I'm not going to judge the other 90% by their actions.

In the nearby huge State Prison 3,000 or 4,000 'correctioners' (hehehe) at least 80% of them are AfroSpams or AfroLatinos.

That's a statement about that prison, but not a statement about AfroSpams or AfroLatinos. If you want to tell me something about those groups, tell me what percentage of members of those groups are in that prison. I'm betting it's a minority. Most people in those groups are also law-abiding citizens.

By the way, did you know that around 90% of American serial killers are white males, even though white males are only about 30% of the population. Watch out for them white dudes! (being sarcastic, of course)

David

Dear David,

The issue is God's Love: You believe in God's Love. Don't you think that this is a strange kind of God's Love to select Indonesians for genocide by drowning in order to teach and "make us [I guess Americans and others] appreciate life more". You and your God are Jesuites who claim that the goal justifies the means. This is a ridiculous explanation: Loving God kills in order increase love among his creation.

I rose the issue of Almightiness of Xian God or Trinity or deities and our Xian semi-deities (i.e. saints). The question is - if He or they do not control natural disasters - The Acts of God - and saints are unable to interfere, this means that the entire Xian pantheon in Unity is NOT almighty.

Theology of Xianity makes no sense. It is full of contradictions. The only way you can "rationalize" it is by saying that every contradiction and nonsense are "the inexplicable Mystery of God" .

Whoever burned John Tyndal on stake knew what they were doing because the Bible is not to be read, but to be believed in.

And again, the minor stuff of the David's myth is not that he was given a post-holocaustian white wash but that this whitewash was concealed from the average bible student, while at the same time thousand of footnotes are provided in every Bible except for 2 Sam 12:31 ,and thousands of exegates of all colors have had to notice it and remain silent about it.

Since that's not what I believe, I can't respond to it. Your question makes false assumptions about what I believe.

1) I don't believe God "selected" Indonesians. He didn't cause the earthquake, and the resulting tsunami, to happen. Those people were simply in the wrong place at the wrong time.

2) Since many, many Indonesians survived the tsunami, there was no genocide going on there.

David