More Catholic Churches Closed, Being Sold Off

[Mitchell Holman]

Catholic Church selling many Maine properties
May 18 2013

PORTLAND – St. Patrick Church will host its final
Mass on Sunday afternoon, with its sale to the
owner of the adjacent Westgate Shopping Center set
to close this summer.

It will likely be emotional for parishioners who
have celebrated some of the most significant
occasions of their lives at St. Patrick, including
baptisms, communions and weddings.

But final Masses are happening in communities around
Maine and the U.S., where declining membership is
forcing Catholic parishes to make tough decisions to
close and sell underused churches.

The Catholic Church now has about 30 properties up
for sale in Maine, most of them churches. Even after
it sells them, it will remain a huge property owner
in the state.

There's no way to determine an official value of the
church's holdings, because assessors don't appraise
properties that aren't taxed, but church officials
said the total insured value of their property in
Maine, including land, buildings and the contents
of some of the buildings, is $720 million.


http://www.pressherald.com/news/catholic-church-tries-new-investment-
strategies-with-its-assets__2013-05-18.html

[default]

Dude you left out the best part!!!
They aren't closing churches because they have to, they are doing it
because they are greedy, and can make more money on the land....

There it is folks, the church showing its true colors. The return on
investment for shopping mall rents, exceeds the contributions of
parishioners. God and parishioners be damned - the money is what
counts, emotional bullshit, the love of god, the mission of the church
doesn't count. The church, of course still keeps its tax exempt
status (anyone else see something wrong in that?)

The Catholic church is a business - and all you heard about saving
souls, holy crap and spreading the word is just so much horse pucky.

cite from the same site:

The sale of so many properties has put the diocese in the unusual
position of having significantly more money coming in than going out.
It also has led the church's financial officials to re-evaluate how to
get the best return on that money.

For example, the diocese recently bought a shopping center on Congress
Street in Portland, between the Cathedral of the Immaculate Conception
and other church property nearby.

Although church officials said the location added to their interest in
the property, the purchase was driven largely by their desire for a
greater return on the church's money than investments such as
government bonds would produce.

"It's an alternative way of investing (for the church)," said Dave
Twomey, the diocese's chief financial officer. "With fixed income ...
you're lucky if you can be close to one percent."

[PATRICK]

Mitchell Holman <nomailverizon.net> wrote:
>Catholic Church selling many Maine properties

>PORTLAND � St. Patrick Church will host its final
>Mass on Sunday afternoon, with its sale to the
>owner of the adjacent Westgate Shopping Center set
>to close this summer.

> ... declining membership is

>forcing Catholic parishes to make tough decisions to
>close and sell underused churches.

>... but church officials

>said the total insured value of their property in
>Maine, including land, buildings and the contents
>of some of the buildings, is $720 million.

Yup.
Catholics are moving from the ghettos and they are selling the
underused properties in order to build bigger and better churches in
the burbs.

[linuxgal]

PATRICK wrote:
> Catholics are moving from the ghettos and they are selling the
> underused properties in order to build bigger and better churches in
> the burbs.

Where dropping a Benjamin in the collection basket every Sunday will be
expected.

--
Halftime at Circvs Maximvs, and the Lions lead the Christians 326-0

[default]

On Sat, 18 May 2013 08:18:25 -0800, linuxgal <linu...@cleanposts.com>
wrote:

>PATRICK wrote:
>> Catholics are moving from the ghettos and they are selling the
>> underused properties in order to build bigger and better churches in
>> the burbs.
>
>Where dropping a Benjamin in the collection basket every Sunday will be
>expected.

Patrick's fantasy.

The real church is drying up and blowing away.

The poor emigrants that swell the ranks in the US don't stuff the
collection bags the way the old middle class Catholics did. There are
no churches being built in the burbs - that is pure Patrick fantasy.
Churches are being torn down to sell off the land, and the money
shifted to shopping malls - the new tax free income investment of the
"Holy" Catholic Church

It is time to legislate tax breaks for religions out of existence.
Shopping malls indeed!

What "holy" shopping malls?, where the CVS can't sell condoms, and
sales of liqueur will be forbidden on Sunday?

The Catholic church and Christianity is a blight upon us.

[Mitchell Holman]

PATRICK <pbark...@woh.rr.com> wrote in
news:7i6fp8l1dnulgda0i...@4ax.com:

Even as the population of the state
grows the numbers of Catholics shrinks.

Haven't we been over this before?

[James]

default <no...@noname.net>

Don't throw out the baby with the bath water!

Just because a religion calls itself 'christian' doesn't mean it is
automatically a "blight".

What if there really was a religion that followed all of Jesus' words
and esp: Mt 19:19b,

"...Thou shalt love thy neighbour as thyself." (KJV)

That means that one can't hurt your neighbor physically, or
financially, or any other way. What if ALL people followed Jesus'
words here. Think about how the world would be.

At any rate, there is one religion which does follow all of Jesus'
words to the letter. And for that, they are persecuted and hated by
many. (Lu 21:12)

James
John 4:23,24
www.jw.org

[Mitchell Holman]

James <1ri...@windstream.net> wrote in
news:2ucfp850otmfldh6c...@4ax.com:

Indeed.



"If any man come to me, and hate not his father,
and mother, and wife, and children, and brethren,
and sisters, yea, and his own life also, he cannot
be my disciple."
Luke 14:26

[default]

On Sat, 18 May 2013 13:07:55 -0400, James <1ri...@windstream.net>
wrote:

That would be actual "Christianity," instead of virtual Christianity.

It last happened at Woodstock and before that the Cathar movement.

Nice to think - what if? but do you see it taking over the established
ruling class and economy models we currently pay homage to?

Religions are just organizations that profess to ascribe to certain
tenants - the reality is more like greed, avarice and selfish self
interest on the part of multinational corporations who claim to be
religious in nature.

>
>"...Thou shalt love thy neighbour as thyself." (KJV)
>
>That means that one can't hurt your neighbor physically, or
>financially, or any other way. What if ALL people followed Jesus'
>words here. Think about how the world would be.

I can see it - but it denies human nature. Until human nature changes
the world will never be able to meet the standards of actual
Christianity. The chance of that happening is less than moot.

>
>At any rate, there is one religion which does follow all of Jesus'
>words to the letter. And for that, they are persecuted and hated by
>many. (Lu 21:12)

None follow Christ - only lip service - although any new converts who
get bitten by the bug do, for a short time, live the life of Christ,
or pretty close seeing as how they are saddled by some greedy
organization's real agenda.

[duke]

On Sat, 18 May 2013 08:18:25 -0800, linuxgal <linu...@cleanposts.com> wrote:

>PATRICK wrote:
>> Catholics are moving from the ghettos and they are selling the
>> underused properties in order to build bigger and better churches in
>> the burbs.
>
>Where dropping a Benjamin in the collection basket every Sunday will be
>expected.

Catholics don't tithe.

The dukester, American - American

********************************************
Repeal Obama
You simply can't fix stupid.
********************************************

[duke]

On Sat, 18 May 2013 12:10:20 -0500, Mitchell Holman <nomailverizon.net> wrote:

>> That means that one can't hurt your neighbor physically, or
>> financially, or any other way. What if ALL people followed Jesus'
>> words here. Think about how the world would be.
> Indeed.

>"If any man come to me, and hate not his father,
>and mother, and wife, and children, and brethren,
>and sisters, yea, and his own life also, he cannot
>be my disciple."

John 15:18 (New International Version)
The World Hates the Disciples
18 “If the world hates you, keep in mind that it hated me first.

[duke]

Yes, we have. The US Catholic Chruch has grown 10% in the last 10 years.

[Mitchell Holman]

duke <duckg...@cox.net> wrote in
news:ihlhp8pplar7fc7o7...@4ax.com:

Wrong.



"While nearly one-in-three Americans (31%) were
raised in the Catholic faith, today fewer than one-
in-four (24%) describe themselves as Catholic. These
losses would have been even more pronounced were it
not for the offsetting impact of immigration."
http://religions.pewforum.org/reports





Roman Catholic Church is losing members in droves.
APRIL 30, 2010

How severe is the crisis? It�s "the largest institutional
crisis in centuries, possibly in church history," says
the National Catholic Reporter. Worldwide, the Roman
Catholic Church now has 1.1 billion members, compared
with 1.5 billion Muslims and 593 million Protestants.
In the U.S., all the major denominations have seen their
numbers decline in recent years, but the Catholic Church
has taken the biggest hit. Since the 1960s, four American-
born Catholics have left the church for every one who has
converted, according to a 2009 Pew study. In 2008 alone,
Catholic membership declined by 400,000. More than 1,000
parishes have closed since 1995, and the number of priests
has fallen from about 49,000 to 40,000 during that same
period. Some 3,400 Catholic parishes in the U.S. now lack
a resident priest. "Catholicism is in decline across
America," says sociologist David Carlin.

http://theweek.com/article/index/202388/catholics-in-crisis

[ala...@hotmail.co.uk]

But the ghettos are the very places where the lurv of jesus is most
desperately needed, surely. Oh but Paddy and his ilk care more about
the money than the saving of souls. Let those iggerant mofos go to
hell, right? More money to be had from the rich white folks in the
burbs.

Paddy, you are so transparent, your hypocrisy knows no bounds.

[harry k]

Wanna bet that figure is waaaayyyy understated?

Harry K

[James]

You really do not no JW's. Just attend one of their meetings to see
for yourself if they live by Jesus' commands.

[James]

Mitchell Holman <nomailverizon.net>

To modern man, sounds like he has it out for the whole family. But was
Jesus speaking these words to modern man, or ancient Jews? The key
question is, what did Jesus mean by the word "hate"?

In the Bible, the word "hate" has several shades of meaning; one of
which is to mean loving to a lesser degree. For example see Ge
29:30,31. We can't just ignore the original meanings of the Hebrew and
Greek words used at that time. The meaning of Lu 14:26 becomes
apparent when we look at Jesus' statement at Mt 10:37,

" He that has greater affection for father or mother than for me is
not worthy of me; and he that has greater affection for son or
daughter than for me is not worthy of me."

Yes, Jesus is telling us that if we have more love for a family member
than we have for Jesus, then Jesus would not accept us. Why? Because
the family member could induce us to sin against God. That is what
happened to Adam when he listened to his wife Eve. He apparently had
more love for her than for God. Because he did not love Eve less than
God, he also sinned, and lost for himself everlasting life on a
garden-like earth. What a high price to pay for misdirected love.

[Father Haskell]

On May 18, 11:14 am, PATRICK <pbarker...@woh.rr.com> wrote:
>
> Catholics are moving from the ghettos and they are selling the
> underused properties in order to build bigger and better churches in
> the burbs.

Why is it necessary to build them "bigger" and "better?" Wouldn't
the money be better off going to the needy?

[PATRICK]

On Sat, 18 May 2013 08:18:25 -0800, linuxgal <linu...@cleanposts.com>
wrote:

>PATRICK wrote:
>> Catholics are moving from the ghettos and they are selling the
>> underused properties in order to build bigger and better churches in
>> the burbs.
>
>Where dropping a Benjamin in the collection basket every Sunday will be
>expected.

I have no problem with that.
Why do you?

[Free Lunch]

On Sun, 19 May 2013 11:28:32 -0700 (PDT), Father Haskell
<father...@yahoo.com> wrote in alt.atheism:

How can the Curia support itself in the manner that it has become
accustomed if it spends its money on those in need. There's a reason the
GOP is loved by the American bishops. Both prefer self-indulgence to
care of the needy.

[Father Haskell]

On May 19, 2:29 pm, PATRICK <pbarker...@woh.rr.com> wrote:
> On Sat, 18 May 2013 08:18:25 -0800, linuxgal <linux...@cleanposts.com>

> wrote:
>
> >PATRICK wrote:
> >> Catholics are moving from the ghettos and they are selling the
> >> underused properties in order to build bigger and better churches in
> >> the burbs.
>
> >Where dropping a Benjamin in the collection basket every Sunday will be
> >expected.
>
> I have no problem with that.

Apparently.

[PATRICK]

On Sat, 18 May 2013 11:54:42 -0400, default <no...@noname.net> wrote:

>On Sat, 18 May 2013 08:18:25 -0800, linuxgal <linu...@cleanposts.com>
>wrote:
>
>>PATRICK wrote:
>>> Catholics are moving from the ghettos and they are selling the
>>> underused properties in order to build bigger and better churches in
>>> the burbs.
>>
>>Where dropping a Benjamin in the collection basket every Sunday will be
>>expected.

>Patrick's fantasy.
>>The real church is drying up and blowing away.

>The poor emigrants that swell the ranks in the US don't stuff the
>collection bags the way the old middle class Catholics did. There are
>no churches being built in the burbs - that is pure Patrick fantasy.
>Churches are being torn down to sell off the land, and the money
>shifted to shopping malls - the new tax free income investment of the
>"Holy" Catholic Church

Just one example: St Louis: We are also a parish community that
appreciates its history and roots--and we have four churches to prove
it!! The very first church used by the parish was built in 1855 and is
in the process of being restored; in 1889 a second church was built
and is very much in use today; then in 1980 a new and larger church
was built to accommodate a growing parish. The continued growth of the
parish over the last two decades necessitated the building of an even
larger church which was dedicated in April 2006.

Whatever happened to Robert Schuller and his Crystal Cathedral?
Do you give up?
The Catholic Church purchased it.
We needed a larger church for the "immigrants."

[Father Haskell]

On May 19, 2:31 pm, Free Lunch <lu...@nofreelunch.us> wrote:
> On Sun, 19 May 2013 11:28:32 -0700 (PDT), Father Haskell

> <fatherhask...@yahoo.com> wrote in alt.atheism:

Start with the shoes. A pair of Converse All-Stars "fish heads"
has to be cheaper than those hand-cobbled ruby slippers pope
Frank wears.

[PATRICK]

On Sat, 18 May 2013 11:56:17 -0500, Mitchell Holman
<nomailverizon.net> wrote:

Yup.
We still need more and bigger churches. In the meantime, we'll close
the ones that require too much maintenance and has too few
parishioners.

[PATRICK]

Hey, the churches in the ghettos need maintenance. They are old. When
all the male members of the households are spending more and more time
behind bars, there isn't enough financial aid to the churches. If all
those parolees who found "Jeezus" would just pretend to attend church
once in a while, things wouldn't be so bad. In the meantime, if a
parish cannot stand on its own, it folds.

[linuxgal]

Because then your parish priest might be tempted to "wash" drug money.
The US $100 bill is the International Currency of Bad Shit.

[Free Lunch]

On Sun, 19 May 2013 11:35:08 -0700 (PDT), Father Haskell
<father...@yahoo.com> wrote in alt.atheism:

What's the difference between fish heads and Chucks?

[PATRICK]

On Sun, 19 May 2013 12:48:21 -0700, linuxgal <linu...@cleanposts.com>

Don't worry.
I put a check in the collection basket.

[PATRICK]

On Sun, 19 May 2013 11:28:32 -0700 (PDT), Father Haskell

You know, that is a pretty good question.

The purpose of the church is to worship God (Luke 4:8; John 4:23; Rev.
4:10), study His Word (2 Tim. 2:15; 1 Cor. 4:6), pray (Acts 2:42),
love one another (John 13:35; Phil. 1:1-4), help each other (Gal.
6:2), partake of baptism and the Lord's supper (Luke 22:19-20), to
learn how to live as godly people (Titus 2:11-12), and to be equipped
to evangelize the world (Eph. 4:12; Matt. 28:18-20).

Though there isn't a single verse that defines the purpose of the
church, Acts 2:42 gives a nice synopsis. It says, "And they were
continually devoting themselves to the apostles’ teaching and to
fellowship, to the breaking of bread and to prayer." All churches
should model themselves after this verse.

The Bible reveals additional aspects of the purpose of the church that
are worth viewing:
•To guard the proper teachings of the church, 2 Tim. 2:1-2, "You
therefore, my son, be strong in the grace that is in Christ Jesus. 2
And the things which you have heard from me in the presence of many
witnesses, these entrust to faithful men, who will be able to teach
others also."
•To discipline believers, Matt. 18:15-17, “And if your brother sins,
go and reprove him in private; if he listens to you, you have won your
brother. 16 But if he does not listen to you, take one or two more
with you, so that by the mouth of two or three witnesses every fact
may be confirmed. 17 And if he refuses to listen to them, tell it to
the church; and if he refuses to listen even to the church, let him be
to you as a Gentile and a tax-gatherer."
•To become more like Christ, Eph. 4:15-16, " but speaking the truth in
love, we are to grow up in all aspects into Him, who is the head, even
Christ."
•To be subject to pastoral leadership, 1 Pet. 5:1-3, "Therefore, I
exhort the elders among you, as your fellow elder and witness of the
sufferings of Christ, and a partaker also of the glory that is to be
revealed, 2 shepherd the flock of God among you, exercising oversight
not under compulsion, but voluntarily, according to the will of God;
and not for sordid gain, but with eagerness; 3 nor yet as lording it
over those allotted to your charge, but proving to be examples to the
flock."
•To be unified in Christ, Gal. 3:28, "There is neither Jew nor Greek,
there is neither slave nor free man, there is neither male nor female;
for you are all one in Christ Jesus."

[PATRICK]

On Sun, 19 May 2013 13:31:35 -0500, Free Lunch <lu...@nofreelunch.us>
wrote:

The largest charity in the world is the Roman Catholic Church. They
provide more food and resources to the poor than any other source in
the entire world.

Prove me wrong.

[PATRICK]

Tell the shoe maker to stop making the shoes then.
It is his pride and joy.

[Free Lunch]

On Sun, 19 May 2013 17:23:51 -0400, PATRICK <pbark...@woh.rr.com>
wrote in alt.atheism:

They don't come close to the aid that the US government provides.

>
>Prove me wrong.

[Father Haskell]

There are plenty of drag queens to support his business.

[Father Haskell]

On May 19, 5:23 pm, PATRICK <pbarker...@woh.rr.com> wrote:
> On Sun, 19 May 2013 13:31:35 -0500, Free Lunch <lu...@nofreelunch.us>
> wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> >On Sun, 19 May 2013 11:28:32 -0700 (PDT), Father Haskell

> ><fatherhask...@yahoo.com> wrote in alt.atheism:

>
> >>On May 18, 11:14 am, PATRICK <pbarker...@woh.rr.com> wrote:
>
> >>> Catholics are moving from the ghettos and they are selling the
> >>> underused properties in order to build bigger and better churches in
> >>> the burbs.
>
> >>Why is it necessary to build them "bigger" and "better?"  Wouldn't
> >>the money be better off going to the needy?
>
> >How can the Curia support itself in the manner that it has become
> >accustomed if it spends its money on those in need. There's a reason the
> >GOP is loved by the American bishops. Both prefer self-indulgence to
> >care of the needy.
>
> The largest charity in the world is the Roman Catholic Church.  They
> provide more food and resources to the poor than any other source in
> the entire world.
>
> Prove me wrong.

The Ronald McDonald House Charities has the best track
record of ALL charities, with every penny donated going
to helping families of childhood cancer patients. Not one
cent goes to administrative costs. Looks like the rcc
skims off most of what it takes in under the guise of
helping the poor.

[Christopher A. Lee]

On Sun, 19 May 2013 16:29:34 -0500, Free Lunch <lu...@nofreelunch.us>

wrote:

>On Sun, 19 May 2013 17:23:51 -0400, PATRICK <pbark...@woh.rr.com>
>wrote in alt.atheism:
>
>>On Sun, 19 May 2013 13:31:35 -0500, Free Lunch <lu...@nofreelunch.us>
>>wrote:
>>
>>>On Sun, 19 May 2013 11:28:32 -0700 (PDT), Father Haskell
>>><father...@yahoo.com> wrote in alt.atheism:
>>>
>>>>On May 18, 11:14 am, PATRICK <pbarker...@woh.rr.com> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> Catholics are moving from the ghettos and they are selling the
>>>>> underused properties in order to build bigger and better churches in
>>>>> the burbs.
>>>>
>>>>Why is it necessary to build them "bigger" and "better?" Wouldn't
>>>>the money be better off going to the needy?
>>>
>>>How can the Curia support itself in the manner that it has become
>>>accustomed if it spends its money on those in need. There's a reason the
>>>GOP is loved by the American bishops. Both prefer self-indulgence to
>>>care of the needy.
>>
>>The largest charity in the world is the Roman Catholic Church. They
>>provide more food and resources to the poor than any other source in
>>the entire world.
>
>They don't come close to the aid that the US government provides.

And they do it in order to spread the word.

Genuine charity wouldn't care about that.

>>Prove me wrong.

[Mitchell Holman]

PATRICK <pbark...@woh.rr.com> wrote in
news:6lgip8lmgd3118h9h...@4ax.com:

Prove it.

[ala...@hotmail.co.uk]

On May 20, 4:40 am, PATRICK <pbarker...@woh.rr.com> wrote:

So why can't the better-funded churches assist the poorer ones?

Don't you get it? I'm asking why wealthy christians are not supporting
the type of people who (according to you) most need your god's
message?

> When
> all the male members of the households are spending more and more time
> behind bars, there isn't enough financial aid to the churches.

So it's all about money? Spreading the word is a for-profit
enterprise?

> If all
> those parolees who found "Jeezus" would just pretend to attend church
> once in a while, things wouldn't be so bad.

Well they will be less inclined to attend the church if it's allowed
to become understaffed and run down, will they not? Did jesus only
preach to rich, white people who are more inclined to be addicted to
legal drugs (cigarettes, alcohol, tranquilizers) rather than illegal
drugs (cocaine, heroin, meth)?

> In the meantime, if a
> parish cannot stand on its own, it folds.

What about the children? Doesn't your church care about ghetto
children?

[ala...@hotmail.co.uk]

On May 20, 7:23 am, PATRICK <pbarker...@woh.rr.com> wrote:
> On Sun, 19 May 2013 13:31:35 -0500, Free Lunch <lu...@nofreelunch.us>
> wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> >On Sun, 19 May 2013 11:28:32 -0700 (PDT), Father Haskell

> ><fatherhask...@yahoo.com> wrote in alt.atheism:

>
> >>On May 18, 11:14 am, PATRICK <pbarker...@woh.rr.com> wrote:
>
> >>> Catholics are moving from the ghettos and they are selling the
> >>> underused properties in order to build bigger and better churches in
> >>> the burbs.
>
> >>Why is it necessary to build them "bigger" and "better?"  Wouldn't
> >>the money be better off going to the needy?
>
> >How can the Curia support itself in the manner that it has become
> >accustomed if it spends its money on those in need. There's a reason the
> >GOP is loved by the American bishops. Both prefer self-indulgence to
> >care of the needy.
>
> The largest charity in the world is the Roman Catholic Church.  They
> provide more food and resources to the poor than any other source in
> the entire world.
>
> Prove me wrong.

The Mafia and Hamas and the IRA and Al Quaida are also known to try to
appear to be doing good works for the poor and downtrodden. Not out of
compassion, obviously, but purely for PR purposes.

[default]

On Sun, 19 May 2013 11:03:45 -0400, James <1ri...@windstream.net>
wrote:

>>
>>None follow Christ - only lip service - although any new converts who
>>get bitten by the bug do, for a short time, live the life of Christ,
>>or pretty close seeing as how they are saddled by some greedy
>>organization's real agenda.
>
>You really do not no JW's. Just attend one of their meetings to see
>for yourself if they live by Jesus' commands.
>
>James
>John 4:23,24
>www.jw.org

I admit that any new convert that gets the bug is, for a time, a "good
person." (if hard to live with if they are also imbued with
evangelical zeal)

My next door neighbor bought the whole JW enchilada recently. He was
never a bad person in my opinion and I don't see a real difference
(save one).

What I do see is him spending a great deal of time with his JW
"handler" for lack of a better word. The guy that got him hooked.
From what I see, they are building a clique where members help other
members - like other religions Judaism, Scientology, etc.. An "us
versus them" mentality.

After a year of this, he brings his handler along and goes door to
door looking for converts. I like his handler, but since I told my
neighbor I'm an atheist he acts like I slapped him in the face and
won't speak or look at me. I'm fine with that, of course, but it does
have me wondering how far this us/them clique goes.

His two sons left home and I haven't seen them either - but that isn't
necessarily part of the JW thing, it isn't like he's going to unburden
himself to me these days.

My other experience with JW was a close friend who had a story book
marriage (and interracial to boot). Seven years of marriage lasted
one year after his wife became a JW convert and he didn't. Like all
new converts to an ideology everything they did had to be measured
against her new found "spirituality," and it was just too much for my
friend. And from what he was telling me his inventive soul mate
became a zombie in bed because her religion forbids sexual pleasure.

BTW do JW's believe that Moses wrote the bible? That's the line I was
getting from my neighbor's handler the other day.

[duke]

On Sun, 19 May 2013 08:59:25 -0500, Mitchell Holman <nomailverizon.net> wrote:

>>> Even as the population of the state
>>>grows the numbers of Catholics shrinks.
>>> Haven't we been over this before?

>> Yes, we have. The US Catholic Chruch has grown 10% in the last 10
>> years.
> Wrong.

The bishop's accountability data definitely shows otherwise.


The dukester, American - American

********************************************
Repeal Obama
You simply can't fix stupid.
********************************************

[PATRICK]

Why should they?
Why throw good money after bad?
Each parish needs to stand on its own...... or it will fold.
The RCC cannot keep ALL of the decrepid empty churches open.

>Don't you get it? I'm asking why wealthy christians are not supporting
>the type of people who (according to you) most need your god's
>message?

If they want to listen, tell them to get on a bus.

> > When
>> all the male members of the households are spending more and more time
>> behind bars, there isn't enough financial aid to the churches.
>
>So it's all about money? Spreading the word is a for-profit
>enterprise?

It is when it comes to keeping parishes functioning.

>> If all
>> those parolees who found "Jeezus" would just pretend to attend church
>> once in a while, things wouldn't be so bad.
>
>Well they will be less inclined to attend the church if it's allowed
>to become understaffed and run down, will they not? Did jesus only
>preach to rich, white people who are more inclined to be addicted to
>legal drugs (cigarettes, alcohol, tranquilizers) rather than illegal
>drugs (cocaine, heroin, meth)?

I don't know,
Tell me.

>
>> In the meantime, if a
>> parish cannot stand on its own, it folds.
>
>What about the children? Doesn't your church care about ghetto
>children?

The children either start breeding (females) or they graduate and go
to prison (men)

[PATRICK]

On Sun, 19 May 2013 16:29:34 -0500, Free Lunch <lu...@nofreelunch.us>

wrote:

>On Sun, 19 May 2013 17:23:51 -0400, PATRICK <pbark...@woh.rr.com>
>wrote in alt.atheism:
>
>>On Sun, 19 May 2013 13:31:35 -0500, Free Lunch <lu...@nofreelunch.us>
>>wrote:
>>
>>>On Sun, 19 May 2013 11:28:32 -0700 (PDT), Father Haskell
>>><father...@yahoo.com> wrote in alt.atheism:
>>>
>>>>On May 18, 11:14�am, PATRICK <pbarker...@woh.rr.com> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> Catholics are moving from the ghettos and they are selling the
>>>>> underused properties in order to build bigger and better churches in
>>>>> the burbs.
>>>>
>>>>Why is it necessary to build them "bigger" and "better?" Wouldn't
>>>>the money be better off going to the needy?
>>>
>>>How can the Curia support itself in the manner that it has become
>>>accustomed if it spends its money on those in need. There's a reason the
>>>GOP is loved by the American bishops. Both prefer self-indulgence to
>>>care of the needy.
>>
>>The largest charity in the world is the Roman Catholic Church. They
>>provide more food and resources to the poor than any other source in
>>the entire world.
>
>They don't come close to the aid that the US government provides.

Guess again.

[PATRICK]

You better look again.
You actually can find out by checking out a Charity Navigator site.
Get back to me when you've done your homework.

[PATRICK]

The Economist Estimates the Catholic Church Spent $171,600,000,000 in
2010
August 17, 2012 By Hemant Mehta 91 Comments
The Economist has attempted to paint a picture of what the Catholic
Church�s finances look like, especially in light of the sexual abuse
scandals. I�ll admit it.

The Economist estimates that annual spending by the church and
entities owned by the church was around $170 billion in 2010 (the
church does not release such figures). We think 57% of this goes on
health-care networks, followed by 28% on colleges, with parish and
diocesan day-to-day operations accounting for just 6% and national
charitable activities just 2.7% (see chart). In total, Catholic
institutions employ over 1m people, reckons Fred Gluck, a former
McKinsey managing partner and co-founder of the National Leadership
Roundtable on Church Management, a lay organisation seeking to improve
the way the church is run. For purposes of secular comparison, in 2010
General Electric�s revenue was $150 billion and Walmart employed
roughly 2m people.

[Free Lunch]

On Mon, 20 May 2013 19:54:38 -0400, PATRICK <pbark...@woh.rr.com>
wrote in alt.atheism:

As you make very clear from this, that was not all charity. Hardly any
of it was.

[Mitchell Holman]

PATRICK <pbark...@woh.rr.com> wrote in
news:dldlp8d3fe5jjh6oe...@4ax.com:

Just 2.7% of the Catholic budget goes to charity.

THAT is your "largest charity in the world" proof?

[Father Haskell]

Ronald McDonald doesn't conduct his business from
a gold throne.

[PATRICK]

[PATRICK]

On Mon, 20 May 2013 18:58:23 -0500, Free Lunch <lu...@nofreelunch.us>

For more than 100 years, Catholic Charities USA, formerly the National
Conference of Catholic Charities, has guided and supported the vast
network of Catholic Charities agencies nationwide in a common mission
to serve, advocate, and convene.

�Throughout its 100-year history, Catholic Charities has been
understood as a �movement� committed to social transformation, but a
movement also deeply connected to its roots in the Gospel and its
Catholic identify and tradition. We find there the clear mandate that
we must be of service to our neighbor in need, but in a way that
respects the inherent dignity of every human being.�

� Excerpt from Catholic Charities USA: 100 Years at the Intersection
of Charity and Justice

+ In contrast....

Lets look at one of your Ronald McDonald Houses:

Financial Performance Metrics
Program Expenses 73.1%
Administrative Expenses 10.9%
Fundraising Expenses 15.5%
Fundraising Efficiency $0.19
Primary Revenue Growth -14.2%
Program Expenses Growth 26.0%
Working Capital Ratio (years) 6.63

[PATRICK]

On Mon, 20 May 2013 20:58:24 -0500, Mitchell Holman

What is 2 percent of $ 171 Billion?
Where would the poor be without Catholic Hospitals?
Or colleges? or Catholic grade schools?
Which charities are on the ground first during disasters?

Take one small charity within the RCC:
Charity is the first principle of the Knights of Columbus. Knights are
men who get things done. We volunteer our time to serve our parishes
and our communities. And by working together, we were able to donate
more than $1.4 billion and 664 million volunteer hours to worthy
causes in the past decade.

Another is the CRS.
Catholic Relief Services is the official international humanitarian
agency of the Catholic community in the United States.
Our mission is to assist impoverished and disadvantaged people
overseas, working in the spirit of Catholic social teaching to promote
the sacredness of human life and the dignity of the human person.
Although our mission is rooted in the Catholic faith, our operations
serve people based solely on need, regardless of their race, religion
or ethnicity. Within the United States, CRS engages Catholics to live
their faith in solidarity with the poor and suffering people of the
world.

CRS is motivated by the example of Jesus Christ to ease suffering,
provide development assistance, and foster charity and justice. We are
committed to a set of Guiding Principles and hold ourselves
accountable to each other for them.

CRS maintains strict standards of efficiency, accountability and
transparency: 94 percent of our expenditures go directly to programs.

[duke]

I think lg may be trying to cover her tracks.

In the course of its average 20 months in circulation, U.S. currency gets
whisked into ATMs, clutched, touched and traded perhaps thousands of times at
coffee shops, convenience stores and newsstands. And every touch to every bill
brings specks of dirt, food, germs or even drug residue.

Research presented this weekend reinforced previous findings that 90 percent of
paper money circulating in U.S. cities contains traces of cocaine.

[duke]

On Sun, 19 May 2013 19:13:18 -0700 (PDT), ala...@hotmail.co.uk wrote:

>> Hey, the churches in the ghettos need maintenance.  They are old.
>So why can't the better-funded churches assist the poorer ones?

The parishioners have already moved on.

>Don't you get it? I'm asking why wealthy christians are not supporting
>the type of people who (according to you) most need your god's
>message?

It's not a matter of Catholics helping Catholics. It's a matter of Catholics
helping others.

[duke]

The US government only helps those that help back.

[Paul Duca]

On Sunday, May 19, 2013 9:39:51 AM UTC-4, duke wrote:
> On Sat, 18 May 2013 12:10:20 -0500, Mitchell Holman <nomailverizon.net> wrote:
>
>
>
> >> That means that one can't hurt your neighbor physically, or
>
> >> financially, or any other way. What if ALL people followed Jesus'
>
> >> words here. Think about how the world would be.
>
> > Indeed.
>
>
>
> >"If any man come to me, and hate not his father,
>
> >and mother, and wife, and children, and brethren,
>
> >and sisters, yea, and his own life also, he cannot
>
> >be my disciple."
>
>
>
> John 15:18 (New International Version)
>
> The World Hates the Disciples
>
> 18 “If the world hates you, keep in mind that it hated me first.
>
>
>


Which is why Duke's Jesus doesn't really love ANYONE...



Paul

[Paul Duca]

> It distracts him the way Fox News does me.

[Mitchell Holman]

PATRICK <pbark...@woh.rr.com> wrote in
news:vdkmp8hse3auvc8lb...@4ax.com:

Since all of the above charge fees to users
they are hardly charities.


http://www.sttheresa.cc/school/index.cfm?load=page&page=175

http://enrollmentservices.cua.edu/Student-Financial-
Information/Tuition2012-2013.cfm

http://032ecaa.netsolhost.com/admissions/tuitionfees.html

http://www.stmcs.net/documents/schedule%20of%20fees%202012-2013.pdf

> Which charities are on the ground first during disasters?
>
> Take one small charity within the RCC:
> Charity is the first principle of the Knights of Columbus. Knights are
> men who get things done. We volunteer our time to serve our parishes
> and our communities. And by working together, we were able to donate
> more than $1.4 billion and 664 million volunteer hours to worthy
> causes in the past decade.
>
> Another is the CRS.
> Catholic Relief Services is the official international humanitarian
> agency of the Catholic community in the United States.
> Our mission is to assist impoverished and disadvantaged people
> overseas, working in the spirit of Catholic social teaching to promote
> the sacredness of human life and the dignity of the human person.
> Although our mission is rooted in the Catholic faith, our operations
> serve people based solely on need, regardless of their race, religion
> or ethnicity. Within the United States, CRS engages Catholics to live
> their faith in solidarity with the poor and suffering people of the
> world.
>
> CRS is motivated by the example of Jesus Christ to ease suffering,
> provide development assistance, and foster charity and justice. We are
> committed to a set of Guiding Principles and hold ourselves
> accountable to each other for them.
>
> CRS maintains strict standards of efficiency, accountability and
> transparency: 94 percent of our expenditures go directly to programs.

Just back your claim that the RCC is
"the largest charity in the world".

[thomas p.]

"James" <1ri...@windstream.net> skrev i meddelelsen
news:7gqhp8hk4a54koilv...@4ax.com...
> Mitchell Holman <nomailverizon.net>
>>James <1ri...@windstream.net> wrote in
>>news:2ucfp850otmfldh6c...@4ax.com:
>>
>>> default <no...@noname.net>

>>>>On Sat, 18 May 2013 08:18:25 -0800, linuxgal <linu...@cleanposts.com>
>>>>wrote:
>>>>

>>>>>PATRICK wrote:
>>>>>> Catholics are moving from the ghettos and they are selling the
>>>>>> underused properties in order to build bigger and better churches in
>>>>>> the burbs.
>>>>>

>>>>>Where dropping a Benjamin in the collection basket every Sunday will
>>be
>>>>>expected.

>>>>Patrick's fantasy.
>>>>
>>>>The real church is drying up and blowing away.
>>>>
>>>>The poor emigrants that swell the ranks in the US don't stuff the
>>>>collection bags the way the old middle class Catholics did. There are
>>>>no churches being built in the burbs - that is pure Patrick fantasy.
>>>>Churches are being torn down to sell off the land, and the money
>>>>shifted to shopping malls - the new tax free income investment of the
>>>>"Holy" Catholic Church
>>>>
>>>>It is time to legislate tax breaks for religions out of existence.
>>>>Shopping malls indeed!
>>>>
>>>>What "holy" shopping malls?, where the CVS can't sell condoms, and
>>>>sales of liqueur will be forbidden on Sunday?
>>>>
>>>>The Catholic church and Christianity is a blight upon us.
>>>
>>> Don't throw out the baby with the bath water!
>>>
>>> Just because a religion calls itself 'christian' doesn't mean it is
>>> automatically a "blight".
>>>
>>> What if there really was a religion that followed all of Jesus' words
>>> and esp: Mt 19:19b,
>>>
>>> "...Thou shalt love thy neighbour as thyself." (KJV)

>>>
>>> That means that one can't hurt your neighbor physically, or
>>> financially, or any other way. What if ALL people followed Jesus'
>>> words here. Think about how the world would be.
>>
>>
>> Indeed.
>>
>>
>>
>>"If any man come to me, and hate not his father,
>>and mother, and wife, and children, and brethren,
>>and sisters, yea, and his own life also, he cannot
>>be my disciple."

>>Luke 14:26
>>
>
> To modern man, sounds like he has it out for the whole family. But was
> Jesus speaking these words to modern man, or ancient Jews? The key
> question is, what did Jesus mean by the word "hate"?
>
> In the Bible, the word "hate" has several shades of meaning; one of
> which is to mean loving to a lesser degree. For example see Ge
> 29:30,31. We can't just ignore the original meanings of the Hebrew and
> Greek words used at that time. The meaning of Lu 14:26 becomes
> apparent when we look at Jesus' statement at Mt 10:37,
>
> " He that has greater affection for father or mother than for me is
> not worthy of me; and he that has greater affection for son or
> daughter than for me is not worthy of me."
>
> Yes, Jesus is telling us that if we have more love for a family member
> than we have for Jesus, then Jesus would not accept us. Why? Because
> the family member could induce us to sin against God. That is what
> happened to Adam when he listened to his wife Eve. He apparently had
> more love for her than for God. Because he did not love Eve less than
> God, he also sinned, and lost for himself everlasting life on a
> garden-like earth. What a high price to pay for misdirected love.


What a silly story - not to mention vicious. Fortunately for all of us
there is no rational reason for believing any of it. Isn't that wonderful
news?

--
thomas p

Ignorance is the mother of devotion.

David Hume

[James]

default <no...@noname.net>

>On Sun, 19 May 2013 11:03:45 -0400, James <1ri...@windstream.net>
>wrote:
>
>>>
>>>None follow Christ - only lip service - although any new converts who
>>>get bitten by the bug do, for a short time, live the life of Christ,
>>>or pretty close seeing as how they are saddled by some greedy
>>>organization's real agenda.
>>
>>You really do not no JW's. Just attend one of their meetings to see
>>for yourself if they live by Jesus' commands.
>>
>>James
>>John 4:23,24
>>www.jw.org
>
>I admit that any new convert that gets the bug is, for a time, a "good
>person." (if hard to live with if they are also imbued with
>evangelical zeal)
>
>My next door neighbor bought the whole JW enchilada recently. He was
>never a bad person in my opinion and I don't see a real difference
>(save one).
>
>What I do see is him spending a great deal of time with his JW
>"handler" for lack of a better word.

Handler??

>The guy that got him hooked.
>From what I see, they are building a clique where members help other
>members - like other religions Judaism, Scientology, etc.. An "us
>versus them" mentality.
>
>After a year of this, he brings his handler along and goes door to
>door looking for converts.

You mean like Jesus said to do at Mt 28:19,20?

"19 Therefore go and make disciples of all nations, baptizing them in
the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit, 20 and
teaching them to obey everything I have commanded you. And surely I am
with you always, to the very end of the age." (NIV)

>I like his handler, but since I told my
>neighbor I'm an atheist he acts like I slapped him in the face and
>won't speak or look at me.

Sometimes new zeal can make a person seem 'over righteous'. One learns
over time. Mt 28:19,20 didn't say to not go to atheists or people of
other religions, etc. If that were so, there would be no reason going
door to door. Experienced JW's talk to all people who want to talk.

Sometimes a person wants it made known that they want nothing to do
with the 'devil worshippers', the JW's. I am fine with that, but still
smile when I see the person.

>I'm fine with that, of course, but it does
>have me wondering how far this us/them clique goes.

The only way you are going to find out is to either go and carefully
look through their web pages, or go to one of their meetings at the
local Kingdom Hall. Then you will get it straight from the source.

>
>His two sons left home and I haven't seen them either - but that isn't
>necessarily part of the JW thing, it isn't like he's going to unburden
>himself to me these days.
>
>My other experience with JW was a close friend who had a story book
>marriage (and interracial to boot). Seven years of marriage lasted
>one year after his wife became a JW convert and he didn't. Like all
>new converts to an ideology everything they did had to be measured
>against her new found "spirituality," and it was just too much for my
>friend.

Sorry to hear that because God hates a divorce. Mal 2:16,

""I hate divorce," says the LORD God of Israel,"..." (NIV)

>And from what he was telling me his inventive soul mate
>became a zombie in bed because her religion forbids sexual pleasure.

Boy did he get it wrong!!! God created sexual pleasure for pleasure,
not just the making of babies. But there are some considered unclean
sexual acts that many people in the world do, such as oral sex,
(homosexual sex) anal sex, wife swapping, etc. But nobody judges us in
the bed, so it is up to their conscience what to do.

I am sure you have some limitations in the bedroom also. (such as sex
with children, etc)

>
>BTW do JW's believe that Moses wrote the bible? That's the line I was
>getting from my neighbor's handler the other day.

Yes, Moses wrote SOME of the Bible. He is credited with Genesis,
Exodus, Leviticus, Numbers, Deuteronomy,and Job. The Bible was written
by around 60 writers over a period of 1600 years.

[Dakota]

So hate means "loving to a lesser degree." Gotcha.

The fact that they have to 'correct' the text of their holy book tells
us a lot.

[Free Lunch]

On Tue, 21 May 2013 06:41:43 -0500, duke <duckg...@cox.net> wrote in

alt.atheism:

>On Sun, 19 May 2013 16:29:34 -0500, Free Lunch <lu...@nofreelunch.us> wrote:
>
>>On Sun, 19 May 2013 17:23:51 -0400, PATRICK <pbark...@woh.rr.com>
>>wrote in alt.atheism:
>>
>>>On Sun, 19 May 2013 13:31:35 -0500, Free Lunch <lu...@nofreelunch.us>
>>>wrote:
>>>
>>>>On Sun, 19 May 2013 11:28:32 -0700 (PDT), Father Haskell
>>>><father...@yahoo.com> wrote in alt.atheism:
>>>>
>>>>>On May 18, 11:14�am, PATRICK <pbarker...@woh.rr.com> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Catholics are moving from the ghettos and they are selling the
>>>>>> underused properties in order to build bigger and better churches in
>>>>>> the burbs.
>>>>>
>>>>>Why is it necessary to build them "bigger" and "better?" Wouldn't
>>>>>the money be better off going to the needy?
>>>>
>>>>How can the Curia support itself in the manner that it has become
>>>>accustomed if it spends its money on those in need. There's a reason the
>>>>GOP is loved by the American bishops. Both prefer self-indulgence to
>>>>care of the needy.
>>>
>>>The largest charity in the world is the Roman Catholic Church. They
>>>provide more food and resources to the poor than any other source in
>>>the entire world.
>>
>>They don't come close to the aid that the US government provides.
>
>The US government only helps those that help back.

Texas and Oklahoma elect people who don't want to pay for disasters in
the Northeast, yet we will help Oklahoma, even though you say we should
not because they refuse to help back.

[default]

On Tue, 21 May 2013 15:54:13 -0400, James <1ri...@windstream.net>
wrote:

>default <no...@noname.net>
>>On Sun, 19 May 2013 11:03:45 -0400, James <1ri...@windstream.net>
>>wrote:
>>
>>>>
>>>>None follow Christ - only lip service - although any new converts who
>>>>get bitten by the bug do, for a short time, live the life of Christ,
>>>>or pretty close seeing as how they are saddled by some greedy
>>>>organization's real agenda.
>>>
>>>You really do not no JW's. Just attend one of their meetings to see
>>>for yourself if they live by Jesus' commands.
>>>
>>>James
>>>John 4:23,24
>>>www.jw.org
>>
>>I admit that any new convert that gets the bug is, for a time, a "good
>>person." (if hard to live with if they are also imbued with
>>evangelical zeal)
>>
>>My next door neighbor bought the whole JW enchilada recently. He was
>>never a bad person in my opinion and I don't see a real difference
>>(save one).
>>
>>What I do see is him spending a great deal of time with his JW
>>"handler" for lack of a better word.
>
>Handler??
>

sure looks like it. His guy joined himself at the hip to my neighbor.
They have prayer meetings twice a week at his house while his wife is
out working.

>
>>The guy that got him hooked.
>>From what I see, they are building a clique where members help other
>>members - like other religions Judaism, Scientology, etc.. An "us
>>versus them" mentality.
>>
>>After a year of this, he brings his handler along and goes door to
>>door looking for converts.
>
>You mean like Jesus said to do at Mt 28:19,20?
>
>"19 Therefore go and make disciples of all nations, baptizing them in
>the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit, 20 and
>teaching them to obey everything I have commanded you. And surely I am
>with you always, to the very end of the age." (NIV)
>

If you believe the idea that an account of Christ written by some
people who were already embellishing what they thought they heard and
was passed along accurately some 300 years before being committed to
recorded accounts, then further picked over by a council held at the
behest of a politician trying to solidify his control as emperor, then
passed down through centuries by churches trying to solidify their own
power.

I'm too skeptical to believe any of it. Men use religion for their
own ends.

>
>
>
>>I like his handler, but since I told my
>>neighbor I'm an atheist he acts like I slapped him in the face and
>>won't speak or look at me.
>
>Sometimes new zeal can make a person seem 'over righteous'. One learns
>over time. Mt 28:19,20 didn't say to not go to atheists or people of
>other religions, etc. If that were so, there would be no reason going
>door to door. Experienced JW's talk to all people who want to talk.
>
>Sometimes a person wants it made known that they want nothing to do
>with the 'devil worshippers', the JW's. I am fine with that, but still
>smile when I see the person.
>

Yeah. The guy is personable and easy to like in my opinion. But he
is selling an ideology. Like the Catholic abuse scandal - the
successful child molesters had whole congregations on their side. I
remember my mom - "not that dear Father Eddie! That can't be right,
he is a man of god" - he was also charismatic, personable, oozing
empathy, charm ..... and a sociopath IMO.

They didn't see him walking around the playground with an entourage
of 7-8 year olds following him during lunch time - they just saw the
humble man of the cloth at his most ingratiating as he smiled down on
them from the pulpit Sundays.

>
>
>>I'm fine with that, of course, but it does
>>have me wondering how far this us/them clique goes.
>
>The only way you are going to find out is to either go and carefully
>look through their web pages, or go to one of their meetings at the
>local Kingdom Hall. Then you will get it straight from the source.

No, the only way I myself can find out, would be to do a study of all
the religions of the world, past and present, not assume one was
automatically right.

I think when all is said and done most of the prophets (particularly
the ancient ones) had a common theme that the religions tend to forget
- that awareness and enlightenment are an individual journey, there is
no shortcut and it isn't institutionalized.

Some ten years ago my cousin was into one of the California cults -
except when the prophet was alive it was just one holy man who was a
fount of wisdom but not overly practical - he lived frugally and was
basically just like Christ. The cult came along after the prophet
died. Some disciples found that they liked the attention and could
command respect and power.

>
>>
>>His two sons left home and I haven't seen them either - but that isn't
>>necessarily part of the JW thing, it isn't like he's going to unburden
>>himself to me these days.
>>
>>My other experience with JW was a close friend who had a story book
>>marriage (and interracial to boot). Seven years of marriage lasted
>>one year after his wife became a JW convert and he didn't. Like all
>>new converts to an ideology everything they did had to be measured
>>against her new found "spirituality," and it was just too much for my
>>friend.
>
>Sorry to hear that because God hates a divorce. Mal 2:16,
>
>""I hate divorce," says the LORD God of Israel,"..." (NIV)
>
>
>>And from what he was telling me his inventive soul mate
>>became a zombie in bed because her religion forbids sexual pleasure.
>
>Boy did he get it wrong!!! God created sexual pleasure for pleasure,
>not just the making of babies. But there are some considered unclean
>sexual acts that many people in the world do, such as oral sex,
>(homosexual sex) anal sex, wife swapping, etc. But nobody judges us in
>the bed, so it is up to their conscience what to do.

I'm sure that is true - but the thing is that men create the cult's
rules. If the head honcho has a thing about XXX he will use the power
religion gives him to rail against XXX. And the members of the flock
will believe that god almighty is against XXX.

>
>I am sure you have some limitations in the bedroom also. (such as sex
>with children, etc)

I'm a sucker for smart, self confident, introspective passionate
women. Submissive weak stupid uneducated women turn me off - so yeah
children would be out.

>
>>
>>BTW do JW's believe that Moses wrote the bible? That's the line I was
>>getting from my neighbor's handler the other day.
>
>Yes, Moses wrote SOME of the Bible. He is credited with Genesis,
>Exodus, Leviticus, Numbers, Deuteronomy,and Job. The Bible was written
>by around 60 writers over a period of 1600 years.
>

This guy has it that Moses wrote the entire bible. I doubt a man
named Moses wrote any of the bible - since he'd been dead some 2K-3K
years before any parts of the bible had been written.

That is from "The Bible Unearthed," an archeological examination of
the bible and it's inconsistencies with other recorded history. There
was no evidence for a large exodus - and it is inconceivable that
there wouldn't be if one had occurred. Without an exodus you don't
have a Moses or commandments.

[Father Haskell]

Exactly what does the pope need with this?

http://saintpetersbasilica.org/Altars/PapalAltar/Baldacchino-Nave.jpg

[Christopher A. Lee]

On Tue, 21 May 2013 20:08:37 -0400, default <no...@noname.net> wrote:

>On Tue, 21 May 2013 15:54:13 -0400, James <1ri...@windstream.net>
>wrote:
>
>>default <no...@noname.net>
>>>On Sun, 19 May 2013 11:03:45 -0400, James <1ri...@windstream.net>
>>>wrote:
>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>None follow Christ - only lip service - although any new converts who
>>>>>get bitten by the bug do, for a short time, live the life of Christ,
>>>>>or pretty close seeing as how they are saddled by some greedy
>>>>>organization's real agenda.
>>>>
>>>>You really do not no JW's. Just attend one of their meetings to see
>>>>for yourself if they live by Jesus' commands.

Like every other JW I've come across, he is incapable of thinking
outside the box.

It makes him stupid and he can't understand why people react
negatively.

>>>>James
>>>>John 4:23,24
>>>>www.jw.org
>>>
>>>I admit that any new convert that gets the bug is, for a time, a "good
>>>person." (if hard to live with if they are also imbued with
>>>evangelical zeal)
>>>
>>>My next door neighbor bought the whole JW enchilada recently. He was
>>>never a bad person in my opinion and I don't see a real difference
>>>(save one).
>>>
>>>What I do see is him spending a great deal of time with his JW
>>>"handler" for lack of a better word.
>>
>>Handler??
>>
>sure looks like it. His guy joined himself at the hip to my neighbor.
>They have prayer meetings twice a week at his house while his wife is
>out working.

I gather the wife isn't a JW.

How does that work out?

I know a Hindu/Catholic couple in a similar situation. He doesn't go
to church with her, and while he was away in India she held a Rosary
at their apartment because he won't let her have one if he is at home.

She has that evangelical zeal but has no idea how to talk to people
who don't already believe.

>>>The guy that got him hooked.
>>>From what I see, they are building a clique where members help other
>>>members - like other religions Judaism, Scientology, etc.. An "us
>>>versus them" mentality.
>>>
>>>After a year of this, he brings his handler along and goes door to
>>>door looking for converts.
>>
>>You mean like Jesus said to do at Mt 28:19,20?
>>
>>"19 Therefore go and make disciples of all nations, baptizing them in
>>the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit, 20 and
>>teaching them to obey everything I have commanded you. And surely I am
>>with you always, to the very end of the age." (NIV)

Again the moron rudely and stupidly quotes his Bible at people he
knows it has no authority for.

It is irrelevant to non-Christians what the Bible says, and using it
as an excuse for bothering them and wasting their time about something
relevant just reinforces their already low opinion of them.

>If you believe the idea that an account of Christ written by some
>people who were already embellishing what they thought they heard and
>was passed along accurately some 300 years before being committed to
>recorded accounts, then further picked over by a council held at the
>behest of a politician trying to solidify his control as emperor, then
>passed down through centuries by churches trying to solidify their own
>power.

Citing the Bible as an excuse for bothering others, is a worthless
excuse to those they bother.

>I'm too skeptical to believe any of it. Men use religion for their
>own ends.
>>
>>>I like his handler, but since I told my
>>>neighbor I'm an atheist he acts like I slapped him in the face and
>>>won't speak or look at me.
>>
>>Sometimes new zeal can make a person seem 'over righteous'. One learns
>>over time. Mt 28:19,20 didn't say to not go to atheists or people of
>>other religions, etc. If that were so, there would be no reason going
>>door to door. Experienced JW's talk to all people who want to talk.

Then why do they come round even when they've been told not to?

It is arrogance to assume that they have anything to tell everybody
else.

Even mainstream Christians aren't interested.

>>Sometimes a person wants it made known that they want nothing to do
>>with the 'devil worshippers', the JW's. I am fine with that, but still
>>smile when I see the person.
>>
>Yeah. The guy is personable and easy to like in my opinion. But he
>is selling an ideology. Like the Catholic abuse scandal - the
>successful child molesters had whole congregations on their side. I
>remember my mom - "not that dear Father Eddie! That can't be right,
>he is a man of god" - he was also charismatic, personable, oozing
>empathy, charm ..... and a sociopath IMO.

They can't grasp that people simply aren't interested and have better
things to do.

>They didn't see him walking around the playground with an entourage
>of 7-8 year olds following him during lunch time - they just saw the
>humble man of the cloth at his most ingratiating as he smiled down on
>them from the pulpit Sundays.

That describes a lot of them, not just priests but TV preachers - they
ooze phony sincerely.

>>>I'm fine with that, of course, but it does
>>>have me wondering how far this us/them clique goes.
>>
>>The only way you are going to find out is to either go and carefully
>>look through their web pages, or go to one of their meetings at the
>>local Kingdom Hall. Then you will get it straight from the source.
>
>No, the only way I myself can find out, would be to do a study of all
>the religions of the world, past and present, not assume one was
>automatically right.

Believers always imagine theirs is the right one and that everybody
else should think so too - they don't understand just how much work
they would have to do especially when there is no common ground.

Prosetylisers have no common ground with those they try to convert,
because they are incapable of thinking outside their religion. If they
could they would understand that their often involuntary audience
doesn't grant their doctrinal presumptions - including (for atheists)
their god, their Jesus and their scriptures.

>I think when all is said and done most of the prophets (particularly
>the ancient ones) had a common theme that the religions tend to forget
>- that awareness and enlightenment are an individual journey, there is
>no shortcut and it isn't institutionalized.
>
>Some ten years ago my cousin was into one of the California cults -
>except when the prophet was alive it was just one holy man who was a
>fount of wisdom but not overly practical - he lived frugally and was
>basically just like Christ. The cult came along after the prophet
>died. Some disciples found that they liked the attention and could
>command respect and power.
>
>>
>>>
>>>His two sons left home and I haven't seen them either - but that isn't
>>>necessarily part of the JW thing, it isn't like he's going to unburden
>>>himself to me these days.
>>>
>>>My other experience with JW was a close friend who had a story book
>>>marriage (and interracial to boot). Seven years of marriage lasted
>>>one year after his wife became a JW convert and he didn't. Like all
>>>new converts to an ideology everything they did had to be measured
>>>against her new found "spirituality," and it was just too much for my
>>>friend.

I've seen that both where one partner has got religion and also where
one has lost their religion.

>>Sorry to hear that because God hates a divorce. Mal 2:16,

Once again the moron rudely and stupidly quotes the Bible where he
knows it is just so much bullshit.

>>""I hate divorce," says the LORD God of Israel,"..." (NIV)
>

Why does the moron imagine we give a toss about what the Bible says?

>>>And from what he was telling me his inventive soul mate
>>>became a zombie in bed because her religion forbids sexual pleasure.
>>
>>Boy did he get it wrong!!! God created sexual pleasure for pleasure,

Where did the moron demonstrate this hypothetical God before
attributing anything to it?

>>not just the making of babies. But there are some considered unclean
>>sexual acts that many people in the world do, such as oral sex,
>>(homosexual sex) anal sex, wife swapping, etc. But nobody judges us in
>>the bed, so it is up to their conscience what to do.
>
>I'm sure that is true - but the thing is that men create the cult's
>rules. If the head honcho has a thing about XXX he will use the power
>religion gives him to rail against XXX. And the members of the flock
>will believe that god almighty is against XXX.

Including the JW cult's rules.

Paul was a misogynist who hated sex - and that got enshrined in
Christianity.

>>I am sure you have some limitations in the bedroom also. (such as sex
>>with children, etc)
>
>I'm a sucker for smart, self confident, introspective passionate
>women. Submissive weak stupid uneducated women turn me off - so yeah
>children would be out.
>>
>>>
>>>BTW do JW's believe that Moses wrote the bible? That's the line I was
>>>getting from my neighbor's handler the other day.
>>
>>Yes, Moses wrote SOME of the Bible. He is credited with Genesis,
>>Exodus, Leviticus, Numbers, Deuteronomy,and Job. The Bible was written
>>by around 60 writers over a period of 1600 years.

Yet the Pentateuch describes Moses' death. Was he dead when he wrote
that?

>This guy has it that Moses wrote the entire bible. I doubt a man
>named Moses wrote any of the bible - since he'd been dead some 2K-3K
>years before any parts of the bible had been written.
>
>That is from "The Bible Unearthed," an archeological examination of
>the bible and it's inconsistencies with other recorded history. There
>was no evidence for a large exodus - and it is inconceivable that
>there wouldn't be if one had occurred. Without an exodus you don't
>have a Moses or commandments.

That's the problem.

For centuries the Christian world got their ancient history from the
Bible.

[Jeanne Douglas]

In article <m6unp8t6djskr7ggm...@4ax.com>,

I've already heard one Oklahoma politico saying that even talking about
offsetting disaster relief funds for Oklahoma is a horrible thing.

--

JD

"Osama Bin Laden is dead and GM is alive."--VP Joseph Biden

[Dakota]

It strokes his ego far more than feeding the poor would do.

[PATRICK]

Do you think this picture depicts the Pope conducting business from a
throne?

[PATRICK]

On Tue, 21 May 2013 23:53:12 -0500, Dakota <ma...@NOSPAMmail.com>
wrote:

Since it was your great grandparents who paid for this, you should
scold them.

[duke]

They don't?? Where do you get that stupid idea from?

But you really put your foot in your mouth, because we Christians help those in
need, not just those that give back.

[duke]

On Tue, 21 May 2013 18:04:06 -0700, Jeanne Douglas <hlwd...@NOSPAMgmail.com>
wrote:

I'd say you got your head stuck up your butt as usual.

[default]

On Tue, 21 May 2013 17:40:07 -0700, Christopher A. Lee
<ca...@optonline.net> wrote:

>On Tue, 21 May 2013 20:08:37 -0400, default <no...@noname.net> wrote:
>
>>On Tue, 21 May 2013 15:54:13 -0400, James <1ri...@windstream.net>
>>wrote:
>>
>>>default <no...@noname.net>
>>>>On Sun, 19 May 2013 11:03:45 -0400, James <1ri...@windstream.net>
>>>>wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>None follow Christ - only lip service - although any new converts who
>>>>>>get bitten by the bug do, for a short time, live the life of Christ,
>>>>>>or pretty close seeing as how they are saddled by some greedy
>>>>>>organization's real agenda.
>>>>>
>>>>>You really do not no JW's. Just attend one of their meetings to see
>>>>>for yourself if they live by Jesus' commands.
>
>Like every other JW I've come across, he is incapable of thinking
>outside the box.
>

"The box" is religion, not the sole purview of JW's. Ideological
indoctrination is the box "believers" accept, it greatly simplifies
their thinking.

>It makes him stupid and he can't understand why people react
>negatively.
>
>>>>>James
>>>>>John 4:23,24
>>>>>www.jw.org
>>>>
>>>>I admit that any new convert that gets the bug is, for a time, a "good
>>>>person." (if hard to live with if they are also imbued with
>>>>evangelical zeal)
>>>>
>>>>My next door neighbor bought the whole JW enchilada recently. He was
>>>>never a bad person in my opinion and I don't see a real difference
>>>>(save one).
>>>>
>>>>What I do see is him spending a great deal of time with his JW
>>>>"handler" for lack of a better word.
>>>
>>>Handler??
>>>
>>sure looks like it. His guy joined himself at the hip to my neighbor.
>>They have prayer meetings twice a week at his house while his wife is
>>out working.
>
>I gather the wife isn't a JW.
>
>How does that work out?

I assume I won't be privy to the fallout.... During my wandering days
I worked for a foreman who's wife went JW on him. This otherwise
opinionated fire-breathing curmudgeon decided it kept his wife and
daughter home, chaste, obedient, cowed and he was all for it.

>
>I know a Hindu/Catholic couple in a similar situation. He doesn't go
>to church with her, and while he was away in India she held a Rosary
>at their apartment because he won't let her have one if he is at home.
>
>She has that evangelical zeal but has no idea how to talk to people
>who don't already believe.

Making converts is just a matter of finding people with problems that
they are unable or unwilling to confront - IMO.

>
>>>>The guy that got him hooked.
>>>>From what I see, they are building a clique where members help other
>>>>members - like other religions Judaism, Scientology, etc.. An "us
>>>>versus them" mentality.
>>>>
>>>>After a year of this, he brings his handler along and goes door to
>>>>door looking for converts.
>>>
>>>You mean like Jesus said to do at Mt 28:19,20?
>>>
>>>"19 Therefore go and make disciples of all nations, baptizing them in
>>>the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit, 20 and
>>>teaching them to obey everything I have commanded you. And surely I am
>>>with you always, to the very end of the age." (NIV)
>
>Again the moron rudely and stupidly quotes his Bible at people he
>knows it has no authority for.

When blind faith is attacked the fallback position is the bible.

I think deep down they know their faith is blind and unsubstantiated.

>
>It is irrelevant to non-Christians what the Bible says, and using it
>as an excuse for bothering them and wasting their time about something
>relevant just reinforces their already low opinion of them.
>
>>If you believe the idea that an account of Christ written by some
>>people who were already embellishing what they thought they heard and
>>was passed along accurately some 300 years before being committed to
>>recorded accounts, then further picked over by a council held at the
>>behest of a politician trying to solidify his control as emperor, then
>>passed down through centuries by churches trying to solidify their own
>>power.
>
>Citing the Bible as an excuse for bothering others, is a worthless
>excuse to those they bother.
>
>>I'm too skeptical to believe any of it. Men use religion for their
>>own ends.
>>>
>>>>I like his handler, but since I told my
>>>>neighbor I'm an atheist he acts like I slapped him in the face and
>>>>won't speak or look at me.
>>>
>>>Sometimes new zeal can make a person seem 'over righteous'. One learns
>>>over time. Mt 28:19,20 didn't say to not go to atheists or people of
>>>other religions, etc. If that were so, there would be no reason going
>>>door to door. Experienced JW's talk to all people who want to talk.
>
>Then why do they come round even when they've been told not to?

Many people are concerned with what others think of them so they
listen so as not to appear rude.

Telephone solicitations are a lot more irritating IMO.

>
>It is arrogance to assume that they have anything to tell everybody
>else.
>
>Even mainstream Christians aren't interested.

I don't see a difference. To me it is more arrogant to just assume
that god is on your side and the world must submit to your Christian
rules.

Cults become sects, sects become religions, religions become
untouchable.

Yet they keep on keeping on, so they must get a few. Half the people
have less than average intelligence, things like philosophy,
confronting one's own mortality, and just the man made stresses of
living must seem very daunting to some.

Ever watch Jerry Springer? I rest my case.

The religiously afflicted think their god rules everyone; saints like
themselves, and sinners like us. Haven't you heard? the bible is the
word of god if you are Jew or Christian, and god rules you whether you
acknowledge him or not.

I imagine god loves married people who hate each other's guts, and has
no pity for the children of such people.

Then too, JW seems like another of the "keep the women submissive and
obedient" cults to me.

>
>>>>And from what he was telling me his inventive soul mate
>>>>became a zombie in bed because her religion forbids sexual pleasure.
>>>
>>>Boy did he get it wrong!!! God created sexual pleasure for pleasure,
>
>Where did the moron demonstrate this hypothetical God before
>attributing anything to it?

The beauty of religion is there is a cult to fill all needs. You want
to be wealthy and not feel guilty? There's a cult for that. You want
to feel righteous and punish sinners? There's a cult for that.

>
>>>not just the making of babies. But there are some considered unclean
>>>sexual acts that many people in the world do, such as oral sex,
>>>(homosexual sex) anal sex, wife swapping, etc. But nobody judges us in
>>>the bed, so it is up to their conscience what to do.
>>
>>I'm sure that is true - but the thing is that men create the cult's
>>rules. If the head honcho has a thing about XXX he will use the power
>>religion gives him to rail against XXX. And the members of the flock
>>will believe that god almighty is against XXX.
>
>Including the JW cult's rules.
>
>Paul was a misogynist who hated sex - and that got enshrined in
>Christianity.

There are a good many religious who find sex icky. There's a long
illustrious string of Catholic "theologians" who hated women and sex.

James: "But there are some considered unclean sexual acts that many

people in the world do, such as oral sex, (homosexual sex) anal sex,
wife swapping, etc."

From that statement I infer that James finds oral sex icky. Or is
putting the homosexual sex in brackets after oral intended as a
modifier to oral sex - immediately followed by anal sex? Now I'm
confused.

Then the whole statement seems to contradict his point of "But nobody

judges us in the bed, so it is up to their conscience what to do."

Conscience? as long as you aren't causing harm to another person why
would conscience be part of intimacy? Unless your religion has already
spelled out what is or isn't allowed in the bedroom - and you buy into
the idea that "morality" is the purview of your religion.

>
>>>I am sure you have some limitations in the bedroom also. (such as sex
>>>with children, etc)
>>
>>I'm a sucker for smart, self confident, introspective passionate
>>women. Submissive weak stupid uneducated women turn me off - so yeah
>>children would be out.
>>>
>>>>
>>>>BTW do JW's believe that Moses wrote the bible? That's the line I was
>>>>getting from my neighbor's handler the other day.
>>>
>>>Yes, Moses wrote SOME of the Bible. He is credited with Genesis,
>>>Exodus, Leviticus, Numbers, Deuteronomy,and Job. The Bible was written
>>>by around 60 writers over a period of 1600 years.
>
>Yet the Pentateuch describes Moses' death. Was he dead when he wrote
>that?

Religious mystery? That's what the nuns would fall back on when you
try to apply logic and reason to religious indoctrination - it is a
mystery and smarter people than you have already did your thinking for
you, and it you keep on questioning you will be punished.

>
>>This guy has it that Moses wrote the entire bible. I doubt a man
>>named Moses wrote any of the bible - since he'd been dead some 2K-3K
>>years before any parts of the bible had been written.
>>
>>That is from "The Bible Unearthed," an archeological examination of
>>the bible and it's inconsistencies with other recorded history. There
>>was no evidence for a large exodus - and it is inconceivable that
>>there wouldn't be if one had occurred. Without an exodus you don't
>>have a Moses or commandments.
>
>That's the problem.
>
>For centuries the Christian world got their ancient history from the
>Bible.
>

The problem with the bible is that it is a propaganda piece and not an
honest historical account.

[James]

default <no...@noname.net>

I thought you said he was divorced?

At any rate, each household is different on how they do their
activities.

>>
>>>The guy that got him hooked.
>>>From what I see, they are building a clique where members help other
>>>members - like other religions Judaism, Scientology, etc.. An "us
>>>versus them" mentality.
>>>
>>>After a year of this, he brings his handler along and goes door to
>>>door looking for converts.
>>
>>You mean like Jesus said to do at Mt 28:19,20?
>>
>>"19 Therefore go and make disciples of all nations, baptizing them in
>>the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit, 20 and
>>teaching them to obey everything I have commanded you. And surely I am
>>with you always, to the very end of the age." (NIV)
>>
>If you believe the idea that an account of Christ written by some
>people who were already embellishing what they thought they heard and
>was passed along accurately some 300 years before being committed to
>recorded accounts, then further picked over by a council held at the
>behest of a politician trying to solidify his control as emperor, then
>passed down through centuries by churches trying to solidify their own
>power.

I stand by Jesus' words.

>
>I'm too skeptical to believe any of it. Men use religion for their
>own ends.
>>

I was also a skeptic at one time. But after much research found the
Bible to be a book of doctrinal truths.

>>
>>
>>>I like his handler, but since I told my
>>>neighbor I'm an atheist he acts like I slapped him in the face and
>>>won't speak or look at me.
>>
>>Sometimes new zeal can make a person seem 'over righteous'. One learns
>>over time. Mt 28:19,20 didn't say to not go to atheists or people of
>>other religions, etc. If that were so, there would be no reason going
>>door to door. Experienced JW's talk to all people who want to talk.
>>
>>Sometimes a person wants it made known that they want nothing to do
>>with the 'devil worshippers', the JW's. I am fine with that, but still
>>smile when I see the person.
>>
>Yeah. The guy is personable and easy to like in my opinion. But he
>is selling an ideology. Like the Catholic abuse scandal - the
>successful child molesters had whole congregations on their side. I
>remember my mom - "not that dear Father Eddie! That can't be right,
>he is a man of god" - he was also charismatic, personable, oozing
>empathy, charm ..... and a sociopath IMO.
>
>They didn't see him walking around the playground with an entourage
>of 7-8 year olds following him during lunch time - they just saw the
>humble man of the cloth at his most ingratiating as he smiled down on
>them from the pulpit Sundays.

Don't let the misdeeds of others draw you away from God. My suggestion
is when you feel ready, to make a heart-felt prayer to God to guide
you in the right direction.

>>
>>
>>>I'm fine with that, of course, but it does
>>>have me wondering how far this us/them clique goes.
>>
>>The only way you are going to find out is to either go and carefully
>>look through their web pages, or go to one of their meetings at the
>>local Kingdom Hall. Then you will get it straight from the source.
>
>No, the only way I myself can find out, would be to do a study of all
>the religions of the world, past and present, not assume one was
>automatically right.

That's great if you have the time. Then you would be seeing some of
the falsehoods in those other religions.

I like the Bible because unlike many other old religions, the Bible is
in harmony with true science.

>
>I think when all is said and done most of the prophets (particularly
>the ancient ones) had a common theme that the religions tend to forget
>- that awareness and enlightenment are an individual journey, there is
>no shortcut and it isn't institutionalized.

But checking in the Bible, God usually had an organization to guide
His people. He had it in the OT and in the NT. Thus to be in the true
religion is to be with a group of people.

>
>Some ten years ago my cousin was into one of the California cults -
>except when the prophet was alive it was just one holy man who was a
>fount of wisdom but not overly practical - he lived frugally and was
>basically just like Christ. The cult came along after the prophet
>died. Some disciples found that they liked the attention and could
>command respect and power.

In most of those cults, they all live together and don't want much to
do with the outside world. They also have a charasmatic leader who has
great influence over them, esp their paychecks and their property etc.

Such is not the case of the "one faith" religion of the Bible. (Eph
4:5) Their leader is Jesus, and they go out into the world to spread
the good news of the kingdom. (Mt 24:14) Ac 5:42,

" Day after day, in the temple courts and from house to house, they
never stopped teaching and proclaiming the good news that Jesus is the
Christ." (NIV)

>
>>
>>>
>>>His two sons left home and I haven't seen them either - but that isn't
>>>necessarily part of the JW thing, it isn't like he's going to unburden
>>>himself to me these days.
>>>
>>>My other experience with JW was a close friend who had a story book
>>>marriage (and interracial to boot). Seven years of marriage lasted
>>>one year after his wife became a JW convert and he didn't. Like all
>>>new converts to an ideology everything they did had to be measured
>>>against her new found "spirituality," and it was just too much for my
>>>friend.
>>
>>Sorry to hear that because God hates a divorce. Mal 2:16,
>>
>>""I hate divorce," says the LORD God of Israel,"..." (NIV)
>>
>>
>>>And from what he was telling me his inventive soul mate
>>>became a zombie in bed because her religion forbids sexual pleasure.
>>
>>Boy did he get it wrong!!! God created sexual pleasure for pleasure,
>>not just the making of babies. But there are some considered unclean
>>sexual acts that many people in the world do, such as oral sex,
>>(homosexual sex) anal sex, wife swapping, etc. But nobody judges us in
>>the bed, so it is up to their conscience what to do.
>
>I'm sure that is true - but the thing is that men create the cult's
>rules. If the head honcho has a thing about XXX he will use the power
>religion gives him to rail against XXX. And the members of the flock
>will believe that god almighty is against XXX.

Not in the true religion. They go by the Bible. For example, I'm sure
you know the Bible is against the homosexual lifestyle. Thus any
homosexual type acts in the marriage bed would not be looked upon very
well by the Bible.

>>
>>I am sure you have some limitations in the bedroom also. (such as sex
>>with children, etc)
>
>I'm a sucker for smart, self confident, introspective passionate
>women. Submissive weak stupid uneducated women turn me off - so yeah
>children would be out.
>>
>>>
>>>BTW do JW's believe that Moses wrote the bible? That's the line I was
>>>getting from my neighbor's handler the other day.
>>
>>Yes, Moses wrote SOME of the Bible. He is credited with Genesis,
>>Exodus, Leviticus, Numbers, Deuteronomy,and Job. The Bible was written
>>by around 60 writers over a period of 1600 years.
>>
>This guy has it that Moses wrote the entire bible. I doubt a man
>named Moses wrote any of the bible - since he'd been dead some 2K-3K
>years before any parts of the bible had been written.

Moses is accredited with only those books. There is evidence for each
one on how they arrive at who wrote what books. Sometimes the author
is clear, other times it has to be deduced.

For example, the book of Genesis:

"There is no question as to who wrote Genesis. �The book of the law of
Moses� and similar references to the first five books of the Bible, of
which Genesis is one, are to be found often from the time of Moses�
successor, Joshua, onward. In fact, there are some 200 references to
Moses in 27 of the later Bible books. Moses� writership has never been
questioned by the Jews. The Christian Greek Scriptures make frequent
mention of Moses as the writer of �the law,� the crowning testimony
being that of Jesus Christ. Moses wrote at Jehovah�s direct command
and under His inspiration.�Ex. 17:14; 34:27; Josh. 8:31; Dan. 9:13;
Luke 24:27,�44." (All Scripture book)

>
>That is from "The Bible Unearthed," an archeological examination of
>the bible and it's inconsistencies with other recorded history. There
>was no evidence for a large exodus - and it is inconceivable that
>there wouldn't be if one had occurred. Without an exodus you don't
>have a Moses or commandments.

Did you know that the ancient Egyptians generally did not record their
defeats, only their successes? (sounds like boasting doesn't it. And
that is exactly what they did!). Professor of Egyptology J. A. Wilson
stated,

�Egyptian records were always positive, emphasizing the successes of
the pharaoh or the god, whereas failures and defeats were never
mentioned, except in some context of the distant past.� (The World
History of the Jewish People, 1964, Vol. I, pp. 338, 339)

The Egyptians even lied about their successes, such as one particular
Pharaoh (I can't remember his name) who claimed to have
single-handedly by himself, with his sword killed thousands of his
enemies on the battle field, down to the last one. And he had that
ludicrous information recorded on various monuments etc.

And if the Egyptians didn't like what was recorded on the monuments
and things in the past, they would get stone cutters to go around and
remove all the information they didn't want people to see. Thus even
if the accomplishment of the enslavement of the Hebrews was at one
time recorded for boasting, it could have been removed by later
Pharaoh's who didn't want to be reminded of the degrading experience
their predecessors had with the Hebrews and their God.

Thus we shouldn't be the least bit surprised to not find any mention
of the Egyptians humiliating experience with the Israelites and their
exodus etc, in the ancient Egyptian writings remaining today.

But notice the difference in the writings of the Bible, and how they
recorded their defeats and weaknesses as well as their successes etc.
That would be one earmark of truthful writing.

Also concerning the Bible, false stories intending to deceive, usually
do not gives dates and names and geographical information etc, that
can be verified. True today, we are far removed from those events, but
close to the time they were written, people could easily have verified
them to be true or not. Thus if the writers of the Bible were writing
false stories, they sure took a big chance giving out so much
information. They should have stuck to just generalities etc. But they
usually didn't.

But there is some mention of Moses outside of the Bible. For example
the writings of the 1st century historian Josephus in the work
"Against Apion (I, 38-40 [8])". He wrote:

"We do not possess myriads of inconsistent books, conflicting with
each other. Our books, those which are justly accredited, are but two
and twenty, and contain the record of all time. Of these, five are the
books of Moses, comprising the laws and the traditional history from
the birth of man down to the death of the lawgiver. . . . From the
death of Moses until Artaxerxes, who succeeded Xerxes as king of
Persia, the prophets subsequent to Moses wrote the history of the
events of their own times in thirteen books. The remaining four books
contain hymns to God and precepts for the conduct of human life."

So at least in the first century, there must have been some consensus
around that Moses was a real historical figure.

But if you want to stick just to the historical evidence outside of
the Bible, no there isn't much, just like a lot of ancient secular
historical events recorded.

[Dakota]

Ah, yes. We friendly theists are only here to help you. Sign here and
bend over.

Some kinds of friendships are like fishhooks. - author unknown to me.

[Free Lunch]

On Wed, 22 May 2013 06:21:41 -0500, duke <duckg...@cox.net> wrote in

From the votes they made.

>But you really put your foot in your mouth, because we Christians help those in
>need, not just those that give back.

People are seldom trustworthy when they keep telling us how very, very
Christian they are. They rarely even accept Jesus' teachings.

[•RLMeasures]

In article <08jqp8d45fqcnc86u...@4ax.com>, Free Lunch

• Indeed. When someone announces that he/she is a Christian I check for
the presence of my wallet. The laugher about Christianity is that the
supposed founder said his father does not want sacrifice but after the 4th
Century sacrifice became part of Christian dogma.

[walksalone]

James <1ri...@windstream.net> wrote in
news:v8ipp8d9mhphmb8gq...@4ax.com:

Follow up set to group James is posting from.

> default <no...@noname.net>
>>On Tue, 21 May 2013 15:54:13 -0400, James <1ri...@windstream.net>
>>wrote:
>>
>>>default <no...@noname.net>
>>>>On Sun, 19 May 2013 11:03:45 -0400, James <1ri...@windstream.net>
>>>>wrote:

snip

> At any rate, each household is different on how they do their
> activities.

So, the temple does not set the standards?

snip

>>If you believe the idea that an account of Christ written by some
>>people who were already embellishing what they thought they heard and
>>was passed along accurately some 300 years before being committed to
>>recorded accounts, then further picked over by a council held at the
>>behest of a politician trying to solidify his control as emperor, then
>>passed down through centuries by churches trying to solidify their own
>>power.
>
> I stand by Jesus' words.

Of course you do. What you do is ignore those instructions that are
different. Diferent to what you want to hear that is.

You like the Greek Testament, how about what he was supposed to have said
versus where it came from.

5 Now when Jesus saw the crowds, he went up on a mountainside and sat down.
His disciples came to him, 2 and he began to teach them.
The Beatitudes

He said:

3 �Blessed are the poor in spirit,
for theirs is the kingdom of heaven.
4 Blessed are those who mourn,
for they will be comforted.
5 Blessed are the meek,
for they will inherit the earth.
6 Blessed are those who hunger and thirst for righteousness,
for they will be filled.
7 Blessed are the merciful,
for they will be shown mercy.
8 Blessed are the pure in heart,
for they will see God.
9 Blessed are the peacemakers,
for they will be called children of God.
10 Blessed are those who are persecuted because of righteousness,
for theirs is the kingdom of heaven.

11 �Blessed are you when people insult you, persecute you and falsely say
all kinds of evil against you because of me. 12 Rejoice and be glad,
because great is your reward in heaven, for in the same way they persecuted
the prophets who were before you.
Salt and Light

13 �You are the salt of the earth. But if the salt loses its saltiness, how
can it be made salty again? It is no longer good for anything, except to be
thrown out and trampled underfoot.

14 �You are the light of the world. A town built on a hill cannot be
hidden. 15 Neither do people light a lamp and put it under a bowl. Instead
they put it on its stand, and it gives light to everyone in the house. 16
In the same way, let your light shine before others, that they may see your
good deeds and glorify your Father in heaven.
The Fulfillment of the Law

17 �Do not think that I have come to abolish the Law or the Prophets; I
have not come to abolish them but to fulfill them. 18 For truly I tell you,
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. 19 Therefore anyone who sets aside one of the least of
these commands and teaches others accordingly will be called least in the
kingdom of heaven, but whoever practices and teaches these commands will be
called great in the kingdom of heaven. 20 For I tell you that unless your
righteousness surpasses that of the Pharisees and the teachers of the law,
you will certainly not enter the kingdom of heaven.
Murder

21 �You have heard that it was said to the people long ago, �You shall not
murder,[a] and anyone who murders will be subject to judgment.� 22 But I
tell you that anyone who is angry with a brother or sister[b][c] will be
subject to judgment. Again, anyone who says to a brother or sister,
�Raca,�[d] is answerable to the court. And anyone who says, �You fool!�
will be in danger of the fire of hell.

23 �Therefore, if you are offering your gift at the altar and there
remember that your brother or sister has something against you, 24 leave
your gift there in front of the altar. First go and be reconciled to them;
then come and offer your gift.

25 �Settle matters quickly with your adversary who is taking you to court.
Do it while you are still together on the way, or your adversary may hand
you over to the judge, and the judge may hand you over to the officer, and
you may be thrown into prison. 26 Truly I tell you, you will not get out
until you have paid the last penny.
Adultery

27 �You have heard that it was said, �You shall not commit adultery.�[e] 28
But I tell you that anyone who looks at a woman lustfully has already
committed adultery with her in his heart. 29 If your right eye causes you
to stumble, gouge it out and throw it away. It is better for you to lose
one part of your body than for your whole body to be thrown into hell. 30
And if your right hand causes you to stumble, cut it off and throw it away.
It is better for you to lose one part of your body than for your whole body
to go into hell.
Divorce

31 �It has been said, �Anyone who divorces his wife must give her a
certificate of divorce.�[f] 32 But I tell you that anyone who divorces his
wife, except for sexual immorality, makes her the victim of adultery, and
anyone who marries a divorced woman commits adultery.
Oaths

33 �Again, you have heard that it was said to the people long ago, �Do not
break your oath, but fulfill to the Lord the vows you have made.� 34 But I
tell you, do not swear an oath at all: either by heaven, for it is God�s
throne; 35 or by the earth, for it is his footstool; or by Jerusalem, for
it is the city of the Great King. 36 And do not swear by your head, for you
cannot make even one hair white or black. 37 All you need to say is simply
�Yes� or �No�; anything beyond this comes from the evil one.[g]
Eye for Eye

38 �You have heard that it was said, �Eye for eye, and tooth for tooth.�[h]
39 But I tell you, do not resist an evil person. If anyone slaps you on the
right cheek, turn to them the other cheek also. 40 And if anyone wants to
sue you and take your shirt, hand over your coat as well. 41 If anyone
forces you to go one mile, go with them two miles. 42 Give to the one who
asks you, and do not turn away from the one who wants to borrow from you.
Love for Enemies

43 �You have heard that it was said, �Love your neighbor[i] and hate your
enemy.� 44 But I tell you, love your enemies and pray for those who
persecute you, 45 that you may be children of your Father in heaven. He
causes his sun to rise on the evil and the good, and sends rain on the
righteous and the unrighteous. 46 If you love those who love you, what
reward will you get? Are not even the tax collectors doing that? 47 And if
you greet only your own people, what are you doing more than others? Do not
even pagans do that? 48 Be perfect, therefore, as your heavenly Father is
perfect.
Footnotes:

Matthew 5:21 Exodus 20:13
Matthew 5:22 The Greek word for brother or sister (adelphos) refers
here to a fellow disciple, whether man or woman; also in verse 23.
Matthew 5:22 Some manuscripts brother or sister without cause
Matthew 5:22 An Aramaic term of contempt
Matthew 5:27 Exodus 20:14
Matthew 5:31 Deut. 24:1
Matthew 5:37 Or from evil
Matthew 5:38 Exodus 21:24; Lev. 24:20; Deut. 19:21
Matthew 5:43 Lev. 19:18

The Greek Testament propagandists like to pretend they are with it &
presenting new material.
In context, they never did.

Or how abut the unmodified 10 commandments, Judaic & red headed
stepchildren style.

An all time favorite for xians, only they prefer to say it's
misinterpreted.

Exodus 20:13

King James Version (KJV)

13 Thou shalt not kill.

You do not accept the Hebrew Bible on that, why should anyone accept your
claims to stand by what your missing mesiah said?

>>I'm too skeptical to believe any of it. Men use religion for their
>>own ends.
>>>
>
> I was also a skeptic at one time. But after much research found the
> Bible to be a book of doctrinal truths.

Then you never learned to read in context but found what you wsanted.
Goodx on you, my standards for evidence are much higher than yours appear
to be.

snip

>>They didn't see him walking around the playground with an entourage
>>of 7-8 year olds following him during lunch time - they just saw the
>>humble man of the cloth at his most ingratiating as he smiled down on
>>them from the pulpit Sundays.
>
> Don't let the misdeeds of others draw you away from God. My suggestion
> is when you feel ready, to make a heart-felt prayer to God to guide
> you in the right direction.

You are overlooking a problem of your own making. Mundane but routine
among bleaters.
For you, having a safety net is a good thing. For people that stand on
their own two hind legs & make their own way, not so much. It's based on
the observation thjat trhe revealed gods of the desert have one thing in
common. A hateful & destructive god.
So even if a person of c oncience were to accept your god, they would be
ethically & morally obliged. To hunt it down & kill it.
But yolu can't do that, nor can any other follower of the revealed gods of
the desert.
Odds are, you never wondered why gods that weak were accepted. But then,
you never knew they were that weak. & can not accept the fact that is just
what they were.

snip

>>>The only way you are going to find out is to either go and carefully
>>>look through their web pages, or go to one of their meetings at the
>>>local Kingdom Hall. Then you will get it straight from the source.
>>
>>No, the only way I myself can find out, would be to do a study of all
>>the religions of the world, past and present, not assume one was
>>automatically right.

> That's great if you have the time. Then you would be seeing some of
> the falsehoods in those other religions.

The same ones your group calls gospele truth?
The creation, two different scenarios within the first twso chapters.
Would you carfe to disc uss that obvious fact.
Hint the currfent apologetioc does not work, they are indeed two differen t
versions intended for two different audiences. There is no
misintgerpolation. Though one is claimed.

> I like the Bible because unlike many other old religions, the Bible is
> in harmony with true science.

Oh reallly, then I take it that science was learned from your elders?

>>I think when all is said and done most of the prophets (particularly
>>the ancient ones) had a common theme that the religions tend to forget
>>- that awareness and enlightenment are an individual journey, there is
>>no shortcut and it isn't institutionalized.

> But checking in the Bible, God usually had an organization to guide

That's what the priesthood wrote. & guess what, we don't know the name of
the any biblical authors except ben sidra.
We also know that each book, to include those with multiple authors, were
written for a specific audience or propaganda puroses of the elite.

> His people. He had it in the OT and in the NT. Thus to be in the true
> religion is to be with a group of people.

The priesthood & the elite had it. Joe doaks, the farmer that used to own
his land, not so much.

snip

>>died. Some disciples found that they liked the attention and could
>>command respect and power.

> In most of those cults, they all live together and don't want much to
> do with the outside world. They also have a charasmatic leader who has
> great influence over them, esp their paychecks and their property etc.

But xianity is different, you get to stay at home.
BTW, IIRC, Luke puts your lie to rest. 1st century xianity was communistic
& one fellow & his wife died for they did not give the disciple all the
money from the sale of their home.
Your myth, not so nice if you really study it in historical & societal
context. Which xains avoid doing quicker than volunteering for testing a
new disease that is 100% fatal. Like the galloping mongolian clap.

> Such is not the case of the "one faith" religion of the Bible. (Eph
> 4:5) Their leader is Jesus, and they go out into the world to spread
> the good news of the kingdom. (Mt 24:14) Ac 5:42,

Yet that is a later addition, at first he wanted them to know he only came
for the lost tribes of Israel. Tribes that may well never have existed.
Tribes that couldn't exist after the fall of Israel to the Assyrians.

> " Day after day, in the temple courts and from house to house, they
> never stopped teaching and proclaiming the good news that Jesus is the
> Christ." (NIV)

Accordinhg to unkown authors, but then, I doubt anyone knows who first
cooked pabuluum, or wrote it.
Serious question, when was xainity granted the right to kill & get away
with it?

snip

> Not in the true religion. They go by the Bible. For example, I'm sure
> you know the Bible is against the homosexual lifestyle. Thus any

No, it's not. You see, it's that context thing. What they were against
was jews worshipping other gods. The Hebrew Bible, the suppposed authority
for the Greek Testament one, was written strictly for the jews. The Greek
Testament had the same idea, for the sacred bed was a well known piece of
temple furnitue.

> homosexual type acts in the marriage bed would not be looked upon very
> well by the Bible.

They wouldn't have exsted. Marriage like todays didn't exist. Daddy paid
the dowery & she was your property. No civil ceromony, no priest required.
& homosexuality was not frowned on in Europe until churches needed new
boogymen.
How long was homoexuality acceptable in Europe?

Florence Tamagne
A History of Homosexuality in Europe
Volume I & II

snip

he entire bible. I doubt a man
>>named Moses wrote any of the bible - since he'd been dead some 2K-3K
>>years before any parts of the bible had been written.

> Moses is accredited with only those books. There is evidence for each

No, he did not. Like your missing messiah, evidcence says he never
existed. & the name, it means son of in Egytian. Many a pharoah had that
distintion. Only in their case, it ws know they were a son of a god.

> one on how they arrive at who wrote what books. Sometimes the author
> is clear, other times it has to be deduced.

The claimed author you mean. But that's just another thing your elders
don't mention.
Psuedographia was a common ancient writeing technique.

> For example, the book of Genesis:

It is not knowsn wsho wrote the book, but why is well understood. It was
to give legitimacy to a group of priests & other elites that had no
political power of their own. Nowhere has any writings, diplomatic or
otherwise been found & verified.

From a xian site

Prophets.
Jonah 770 B.C. to Ninevah
Amos 760 to Israel
Hosea 760 - 730 to Israel
Isaiah 740 - 700 to Judah
Micah 737 - 690 to Judah
Habakkah 630 to Judah
Zephaniah 627 to Judah
Jeremiah 627 - 580 to Judah
Daniel 605 - 530 to Judah
Ezekiel 593 - 570 to Judah
Nahum 593 - 570 to Ninevah
Haggai 520 to Judah
Zechariah 520 - 518 to Judah
Joel 500 to Judah
Obadiah 500 to Edom
Malachi 433 B.C. to Judah

> "There is no question as to who wrote Genesis. �The book of the law of

The authors of genesis are distinct, & not the same person or school of
thought. Of course, your elders won't discuss that either.

> Moses� and similar references to the first five books of the Bible, of
> which Genesis is one, are to be found often from the time of Moses�
> successor, Joshua, onward. In fact, there are some 200 references to
> Moses in 27 of the later Bible books. Moses� writership has never been

So what? If you want a lie to be believed, you need to convince people.
It's been known for centurys that repetion is just about the best way.

> questioned by the Jews. The Christian Greek Scriptures make frequent
> mention of Moses as the writer of �the law,� the crowning testimony
> being that of Jesus Christ. Moses wrote at Jehovah�s direct command
> and under His inspiration.�Ex. 17:14; 34:27; Josh. 8:31; Dan. 9:13;
> Luke 24:27,�44." (All Scripture book)

No, he didn't. Your belief, along with biblical propagandist claims, are
evidence for your belief, but not the accuracy of those claims.

>>That is from "The Bible Unearthed," an archeological examination of
>>the bible and it's inconsistencies with other recorded history. There
>>was no evidence for a large exodus - and it is inconceivable that
>>there wouldn't be if one had occurred. Without an exodus you don't
>>have a Moses or commandments.
>
> Did you know that the ancient Egyptians generally did not record their
> defeats, only their successes? (sounds like boasting doesn't it. And
> that is exactly what they did!). Professor of Egyptology J. A. Wilson
> stated,

That's nice, care to provide his crentials?
& then care tol explain why Egypt, one of the, if not the, richest nations
was n ot invaded & overtaken by people that had a grudge. BTW, that would
include alomoist all, if not all of the Canaanite popultion. & there is the
problem of a military presence along the coastal road where they maintained
garrisons.

> �Egyptian records were always positive, emphasizing the successes of
> the pharaoh or the god, whereas failures and defeats were never
> mentioned, except in some context of the distant past.� (The World
> History of the Jewish People, 1964, Vol. I, pp. 338, 339)
>
> The Egyptians even lied about their successes, such as one particular
> Pharaoh (I can't remember his name) who claimed to have
> single-handedly by himself, with his sword killed thousands of his
> enemies on the battle field, down to the last one. And he had that
> ludicrous information recorded on various monuments etc.

You sound surprised? Never heard of political bravado I take it?

> And if the Egyptians didn't like what was recorded on the monuments
> and things in the past, they would get stone cutters to go around and
> remove all the information they didn't want people to see. Thus even
> if the accomplishment of the enslavement of the Hebrews was at one
> time recorded for boasting, it could have been removed by later
> Pharaoh's who didn't want to be reminded of the degrading experience
> their predecessors had with the Hebrews and their God.

According to you, but not according to archaeology & other disciplines that
study the past. But hey, all they have is evidence.

> Thus we shouldn't be the least bit surprised to not find any mention
> of the Egyptians humiliating experience with the Israelites and their
> exodus etc, in the ancient Egyptian writings remaining today.

In Egypt, we would have found physical evidence, 2 million people with
livestock, & only two midwives, create a vacuum when they leave. & no one
complained abiout the theft of Egyptian?
& then, there is the Saini, absen t of any evidence.
Now Moses was unique, if you accept the Hebrew Bible. He reported his own
death. Bit hard to do.

> But notice the difference in the writings of the Bible, and how they
> recorded their defeats and weaknesses as well as their successes etc.
> That would be one earmark of truthful writing.

Not at all, & when did the actually suffer defeat as caimed? I don't find
that when I read in contex.
What I do see is an aggrandizment of Yahweh. Which BTW, tghe priestghood
seemed to have taken a liking to after the missing exoldus. Makes sense,
they had to justify their right to power once they got to Judea.
Which surpise, as done peacefully. Some wager it was the result of the
Ageian Apocolypse.
But your elders won't discuss that either.

> Also concerning the Bible, false stories intending to deceive, usually
> do not gives dates and names and geographical information etc, that
> can be verified. True today, we are far removed from those events, but
> close to the time they were written, people could easily have verified
> them to be true or not. Thus if the writers of the Bible were writing
> false stories, they sure took a big chance giving out so much
> information. They should have stuck to just generalities etc. But they
> usually didn't.

They did in Exodus, & when you are writting after the fact? Which it
appears is the case.
The Hebrew Bible was not written down until ca. -545Gr.. Long after moshie
would have been dead, had he lived.

> But there is some mention of Moses outside of the Bible. For example
> the writings of the 1st century historian Josephus in the work
> "Against Apion (I, 38-40 [8])". He wrote:

<SEAG> Ledts see, a known copiest & a True Jew. How culd he write
otherwise.<SEAG>

> "We do not possess myriads of inconsistent books, conflicting with

Of course you don't, if you exclude the Hebrew Bible & the Greek
Testaments.

> each other. Our books, those which are justly accredited, are but two

I must presume that ou have not read Genesis without "guidence" from an
elder then. Chapter one & two conflict big time.

Genesis 1 (King James Version)
Page Options
Share on facebook Share on twitter Share on email

<<
<
=
=
>
>>

Show resources
Add parallel
Genesis 1

King James Version (KJV)

1 In the beginning God created the heaven and the earth.

2 And the earth was without form, and void; and darkness was upon the face
of the deep. And the Spirit of God moved upon the face of the waters.

3 And God said, Let there be light: and there was light.

4 And God saw the light, that it was good: and God divided the light from
the darkness.

5 And God called the light Day, and the darkness he called Night. And the
evening and the morning were the first day.

6 And God said, Let there be a firmament in the midst of the waters, and
let it divide the waters from the waters.

7 And God made the firmament, and divided the waters which were under the
firmament from the waters which were above the firmament: and it was so.

8 And God called the firmament Heaven. And the evening and the morning were
the second day.

9 And God said, Let the waters under the heaven be gathered together unto
one place, and let the dry land appear: and it was so.

10 And God called the dry land Earth; and the gathering together of the
waters called he Seas: and God saw that it was good.

11 And God said, Let the earth bring forth grass, the herb yielding seed,
and the fruit tree yielding fruit after his kind, whose seed is in itself,
upon the earth: and it was so.

12 And the earth brought forth grass, and herb yielding seed after his
kind, and the tree yielding fruit, whose seed was in itself, after his
kind: and God saw that it was good.

13 And the evening and the morning were the third day.

14 And God said, Let there be lights in the firmament of the heaven to
divide the day from the night; and let them be for signs, and for seasons,
and for days, and years:

15 And let them be for lights in the firmament of the heaven to give light
upon the earth: and it was so.

16 And God made two great lights; the greater light to rule the day, and
the lesser light to rule the night: he made the stars also.

17 And God set them in the firmament of the heaven to give light upon the
earth,

18 And to rule over the day and over the night, and to divide the light
from the darkness: and God saw that it was good.

19 And the evening and the morning were the fourth day.

20 And God said, Let the waters bring forth abundantly the moving creature
that hath life, and fowl that may fly above the earth in the open firmament
of heaven.

21 And God created great whales, and every living creature that moveth,
which the waters brought forth abundantly, after their kind, and every
winged fowl after his kind: and God saw that it was good.

22 And God blessed them, saying, Be fruitful, and multiply, and fill the
waters in the seas, and let fowl multiply in the earth.

23 And the evening and the morning were the fifth day.

24 And God said, Let the earth bring forth the living creature after his
kind, cattle, and creeping thing, and beast of the earth after his kind:
and it was so.

25 And God made the beast of the earth after his kind, and cattle after
their kind, and every thing that creepeth upon the earth after his kind:
and God saw that it was good.

26 And God said, Let us make man in our image, after our likeness: and let
them have dominion over the fish of the sea, and over the fowl of the air,
and over the cattle, and over all the earth, and over every creeping thing
that creepeth upon the earth.

27 So God created man in his own image, in the image of God created he him;
male and female created he them.

28 And God blessed them, and God said unto them, Be fruitful, and multiply,
and replenish the earth, and subdue it: and have dominion over the fish of
the sea, and over the fowl of the air, and over every living thing that
moveth upon the earth.

29 And God said, Behold, I have given you every herb bearing seed, which is
upon the face of all the earth, and every tree, in the which is the fruit
of a tree yielding seed; to you it shall be for meat.

I hope you can name Adams first wife. I can. & I know the legend. BTW,
it should be gods, but I don't do forgein language claases. & your elders
would be very unhappy if you were to bring the question to their attention.
It is but one indicator that the Hebrew Bible is totally of human origin.

> and twenty, and contain the record of all time. Of these, five are the

Ah, you ae following Italian xianity then. Or did you not realise that
other sects had a diifferet setup for holy literature?

> books of Moses, comprising the laws and the traditional history from

There ae no books of moses, & yes, the Hebrew Bible forwards that claim.
Bit like xians pretending they have a messiah which had he existed would
have been JAFM[Just another failed messaih].

> the birth of man down to the death of the lawgiver. . . . From the
> death of Moses until Artaxerxes, who succeeded Xerxes as king of
> Persia, the prophets subsequent to Moses wrote the history of the
> events of their own times in thirteen books. The remaining four books
> contain hymns to God and precepts for the conduct of human life."

You would not benefit from courses in Ancient history,

> So at least in the first century, there must have been some consensus
> around that Moses was a real historical figure.

Which is not evidence for Moses really having been there. We have more
evidence for Paul Bunyan & Babe, the Blue Ox. Using the same standards of
course.

> But if you want to stick just to the historical evidence outside of
> the Bible, no there isn't much, just like a lot of ancient secular
> historical events recorded.

Yet, we have physical evedince for much of the secular history claims.


Biblical morals, fine ones indeed.
2. Behold now, I have two daughters which have not known man; let me, I
pray you, bring them out unto you, an do ye to them as is good in your
eyes. -- Genesis 19:8
3. Come, let us make our father drink wine, and we will lie with him, that
we may preserve seed of our father -- Genesis 19:32
4. And they made their father drink wine that night: and the firstborn went
in, and lay with her father; and he perceived not when she lay down, nor
when she arose -- Genesis 19:33
5. Behold, I lay yesternight with my father: let us make him drink wine
this night also; and go thou in, and lie with him, that we may preserve
seed of our father -- Genesis 19:34
6. And they made their father drink wine that night also: and the younger
arose, and lay with him; and he perceived not when she lay down, nor when
she arose -- Genesis 19:35
7. Thus were both the daughters of Lot with child by their father. --
Genesis 19:36

21:7 And if a man sell his daughter to be a maidservant, she shall not go
out as the menservants do.
21:8 If she please not her master, who hath betrothed her to himself, then
shall he let her be redeemed: to sell her unto a strange nation he shall
have no power, seeing he hath dealt deceitfully with her.
21:9 And if he have betrothed her unto his son, he shall deal with her
after the manner of daughters.
21:10 If he take him another wife; her food, her raiment, and her duty of
marriage, shall he not diminish.
21:11 And if he do not these three unto her, then shall she go out free
without money.


From the SAB Via the KJV. Why the KJV, no copyright. So much for the word
of god being freely availible.

walksalone who no longer anticiptes a serious open discussion with xians.
The locust effect does not diminish quickly.

Religions are conclusions for which the
facts of nature supply no major premises.
Ambrose Bierce, Collected Works(1912)

[Paul Duca]

> in need, not just those that give back--although God loves those that
>
> give back FAR more than the others.

[default]

On Wed, 22 May 2013 10:06:04 -0400, James <1ri...@windstream.net>

No that's a guy I knew some ten years ago - his wife joined not him.
My current neighbor is a new convert.

And another (totally different) JW was a foreman on a power line
construction project I worked on. His wife went JW and he was all for
it since it kept his wife and daughter submissive and chaste.

But those last two were in the same city so there's a chance that they
belonged to the same sexually repressed group of JW'ers.

>
>At any rate, each household is different on how they do their
>activities.

Household? is that how each group views its "congregation?"

>
>>>
>>>>The guy that got him hooked.
>>>>From what I see, they are building a clique where members help other
>>>>members - like other religions Judaism, Scientology, etc.. An "us
>>>>versus them" mentality.
>>>>
>>>>After a year of this, he brings his handler along and goes door to
>>>>door looking for converts.
>>>
>>>You mean like Jesus said to do at Mt 28:19,20?
>>>
>>>"19 Therefore go and make disciples of all nations, baptizing them in
>>>the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit, 20 and
>>>teaching them to obey everything I have commanded you. And surely I am
>>>with you always, to the very end of the age." (NIV)
>>>
>>If you believe the idea that an account of Christ written by some
>>people who were already embellishing what they thought they heard and
>>was passed along accurately some 300 years before being committed to
>>recorded accounts, then further picked over by a council held at the
>>behest of a politician trying to solidify his control as emperor, then
>>passed down through centuries by churches trying to solidify their own
>>power.
>
>I stand by Jesus' words.

Then you do so on blind faith alone. Not to denigrate the so-called
words of Jesus, there's a lot of damn good philosophy there even if it
may have been plagiarized from some Greek and Roman philosophers from
about 500 BCE.

It would have seemed revolutionary at the time because Jesus addressed
the common folk (not the lotus eating wealthy G&Rs) during an age
where slavery flourished and it wasn't much better to be free and
poor.

>
>>
>>I'm too skeptical to believe any of it. Men use religion for their
>>own ends.
>>>
>
>I was also a skeptic at one time. But after much research found the
>Bible to be a book of doctrinal truths.
>

Some folk's need for feeling secure outweigh their desire for truth
(actual truth not religious or doctrinal truth). A weakness in my
opinion and I'd admit some cause for jealousy too.

It would be a lot easier if there was a god (but not like the OT god
since he was a sadistic juvenile hypocritical idiot). But then they
say people with lobotomies are happy as clams, and while I want to be
happy.....

>>>
>>>
>>>>I like his handler, but since I told my
>>>>neighbor I'm an atheist he acts like I slapped him in the face and
>>>>won't speak or look at me.
>>>
>>>Sometimes new zeal can make a person seem 'over righteous'. One learns
>>>over time. Mt 28:19,20 didn't say to not go to atheists or people of
>>>other religions, etc. If that were so, there would be no reason going
>>>door to door. Experienced JW's talk to all people who want to talk.
>>>
>>>Sometimes a person wants it made known that they want nothing to do
>>>with the 'devil worshippers', the JW's. I am fine with that, but still
>>>smile when I see the person.
>>>
>>Yeah. The guy is personable and easy to like in my opinion. But he
>>is selling an ideology. Like the Catholic abuse scandal - the
>>successful child molesters had whole congregations on their side. I
>>remember my mom - "not that dear Father Eddie! That can't be right,
>>he is a man of god" - he was also charismatic, personable, oozing
>>empathy, charm ..... and a sociopath IMO.
>>
>>They didn't see him walking around the playground with an entourage
>>of 7-8 year olds following him during lunch time - they just saw the
>>humble man of the cloth at his most ingratiating as he smiled down on
>>them from the pulpit Sundays.
>
>Don't let the misdeeds of others draw you away from God. My suggestion
>is when you feel ready, to make a heart-felt prayer to God to guide
>you in the right direction.
>

I don't pray to a god to change things, I learn and adapt.

>
>>>
>>>
>>>>I'm fine with that, of course, but it does
>>>>have me wondering how far this us/them clique goes.
>>>
>>>The only way you are going to find out is to either go and carefully
>>>look through their web pages, or go to one of their meetings at the
>>>local Kingdom Hall. Then you will get it straight from the source.
>>
>>No, the only way I myself can find out, would be to do a study of all
>>the religions of the world, past and present, not assume one was
>>automatically right.
>
>That's great if you have the time. Then you would be seeing some of
>the falsehoods in those other religions.

They are all the one true religion - just ask them!

Catholics claim primogeniture among the Christian sects so they may
have the "one true religion," if you ignore the Chosen People and
everyone else that disagreed with the Catholics and who died as a
result....

>
>I like the Bible because unlike many other old religions, the Bible is
>in harmony with true science.

You JW guys have your own bible? Did you study the Koran? How about
the Urantia Book? (now there's a book just looking for a religion to
form around it) Book of Mormon?

Here it is
http://www.urantia.org/urantia-foundation/history
They claim to be a tax exempt "educational" society.

I read the book in the 70's and had no idea whence it came.

>
>
>>
>>I think when all is said and done most of the prophets (particularly
>>the ancient ones) had a common theme that the religions tend to forget
>>- that awareness and enlightenment are an individual journey, there is
>>no shortcut and it isn't institutionalized.
>
>But checking in the Bible, God usually had an organization to guide
>His people. He had it in the OT and in the NT. Thus to be in the true
>religion is to be with a group of people.
>

The bible was a propaganda piece to mold a group of people into a
cohesive political faction. So of course the religious organizations
would use it to prove that they are legitimate routes to nirvana. No
more legit than the Catholic Catechism. (which we learned by rote
even if we got the dumbed down version at age 6)

>
>>
>>Some ten years ago my cousin was into one of the California cults -
>>except when the prophet was alive it was just one holy man who was a
>>fount of wisdom but not overly practical - he lived frugally and was
>>basically just like Christ. The cult came along after the prophet
>>died. Some disciples found that they liked the attention and could
>>command respect and power.
>
>In most of those cults, they all live together and don't want much to
>do with the outside world. They also have a charasmatic leader who has
>great influence over them, esp their paychecks and their property etc.

Oh you are just going with some of the "definition of a cult" ideas
floating around - which try to distinguish their cult from your cult
(oops, I meant religion).

I applied one of the cult definitions to Catholicism and it made all
of the salient criteria for being called a cult...

The bible is the most contradictory book ever written; save perhaps
the Koran and I wouldn't bet money on either.

Religions can and do cherry pick what seems to support their agenda,
and it doesn't matter if you are for or against 9 out of 10 you can
find some verse that seems to support what you want to believe.

You can make a good case for slavery using the bible, or arranged
child bride marriages, or skulduggery of the first order, or whatever
else you may want, save perhaps sexual expression and freedom.

>
>
>>>
>>>I am sure you have some limitations in the bedroom also. (such as sex
>>>with children, etc)
>>
>>I'm a sucker for smart, self confident, introspective passionate
>>women. Submissive weak stupid uneducated women turn me off - so yeah
>>children would be out.
>>>
>>>>
>>>>BTW do JW's believe that Moses wrote the bible? That's the line I was
>>>>getting from my neighbor's handler the other day.
>>>
>>>Yes, Moses wrote SOME of the Bible. He is credited with Genesis,
>>>Exodus, Leviticus, Numbers, Deuteronomy,and Job. The Bible was written
>>>by around 60 writers over a period of 1600 years.
>>>
>>This guy has it that Moses wrote the entire bible. I doubt a man
>>named Moses wrote any of the bible - since he'd been dead some 2K-3K
>>years before any parts of the bible had been written.
>
>Moses is accredited with only those books. There is evidence for each
>one on how they arrive at who wrote what books. Sometimes the author
>is clear, other times it has to be deduced.

Archeology would differ.

>
>For example, the book of Genesis:
>
>"There is no question as to who wrote Genesis. “The book of the law of
>Moses” and similar references to the first five books of the Bible, of
>which Genesis is one, are to be found often from the time of Moses’
>successor, Joshua, onward. In fact, there are some 200 references to
>Moses in 27 of the later Bible books. Moses’ writership has never been
>questioned by the Jews. The Christian Greek Scriptures make frequent
>mention of Moses as the writer of “the law,” the crowning testimony
>being that of Jesus Christ. Moses wrote at Jehovah’s direct command
>and under His inspiration.—Ex. 17:14; 34:27; Josh. 8:31; Dan. 9:13;
>Luke 24:27, 44." (All Scripture book)
>
>>
>>That is from "The Bible Unearthed," an archeological examination of
>>the bible and it's inconsistencies with other recorded history. There
>>was no evidence for a large exodus - and it is inconceivable that
>>there wouldn't be if one had occurred. Without an exodus you don't
>>have a Moses or commandments.
>
>Did you know that the ancient Egyptians generally did not record their
>defeats, only their successes? (sounds like boasting doesn't it. And
>that is exactly what they did!). Professor of Egyptology J. A. Wilson
>stated,

Did you know that the Egyptian civilization depended on the written
word? It is just now coming to light that the overseers, merchants,
organizers etc., all tried to grab bits of the afterlife by preserving
their bodies along with their toys. They needed to record everything
in minute detail to make it work, and they did and those records
survive today. They tell how much grain was required to feed the work
forces, housing, promotions, rewards, punishments, etc.. and no where
does it record 60 slaves walking off the job let alone the 600K the
Jews would have us believe - yet they did record defections and slaves
running off.

and some of the places the exodus people were supposed to have
visited? were actually garrison towns to keep people out of the Nile
valley - but many years after the Exodus was to have occurred.

The bible and Moses are not a factual account - but a gallimaufry
(hodge podge) of bits and pieces of legend intended to make a sect of
the Israelites look better than their neighbors and to unify them.
>
>“Egyptian records were always positive, emphasizing the successes of

>the pharaoh or the god, whereas failures and defeats were never
>mentioned, except in some context of the distant past.” (The World
>History of the Jewish People, 1964, Vol. I, pp. 338, 339)
>
>The Egyptians even lied about their successes, such as one particular
>Pharaoh (I can't remember his name) who claimed to have
>single-handedly by himself, with his sword killed thousands of his
>enemies on the battle field, down to the last one. And he had that
>ludicrous information recorded on various monuments etc.
>
>And if the Egyptians didn't like what was recorded on the monuments
>and things in the past, they would get stone cutters to go around and
>remove all the information they didn't want people to see. Thus even
>if the accomplishment of the enslavement of the Hebrews was at one
>time recorded for boasting, it could have been removed by later
>Pharaoh's who didn't want to be reminded of the degrading experience
>their predecessors had with the Hebrews and their God.

That is true - but the people who actually did the work kept separate
truthful accounts, they had to. They even had an advanced cursive
writing (like hieroglyphs were for those dummy priests and pharaohs,
and too slow and labor intensive for everyday writing)

>
>Thus we shouldn't be the least bit surprised to not find any mention
>of the Egyptians humiliating experience with the Israelites and their
>exodus etc, in the ancient Egyptian writings remaining today.
>
>But notice the difference in the writings of the Bible, and how they
>recorded their defeats and weaknesses as well as their successes etc.
>That would be one earmark of truthful writing.
>
>Also concerning the Bible, false stories intending to deceive, usually
>do not gives dates and names and geographical information etc, that
>can be verified. True today, we are far removed from those events, but
>close to the time they were written, people could easily have verified
>them to be true or not. Thus if the writers of the Bible were writing
>false stories, they sure took a big chance giving out so much
>information. They should have stuck to just generalities etc. But they
>usually didn't.
>
>But there is some mention of Moses outside of the Bible. For example
>the writings of the 1st century historian Josephus in the work
>"Against Apion (I, 38-40 [8])". He wrote:

Historically, "Moses" was a common enough Egyptian name.

>
>"We do not possess myriads of inconsistent books, conflicting with
>each other. Our books, those which are justly accredited, are but two
>and twenty, and contain the record of all time. Of these, five are the
>books of Moses, comprising the laws and the traditional history from
>the birth of man down to the death of the lawgiver. . . . From the
>death of Moses until Artaxerxes, who succeeded Xerxes as king of
>Persia, the prophets subsequent to Moses wrote the history of the
>events of their own times in thirteen books. The remaining four books
>contain hymns to God and precepts for the conduct of human life."
>
>So at least in the first century, there must have been some consensus
>around that Moses was a real historical figure.
>
>But if you want to stick just to the historical evidence outside of
>the Bible, no there isn't much, just like a lot of ancient secular
>historical events recorded.
>

There's far more than the bible, but you won't find it in a neat
little bound volume (complete with papal or other imprimaturs)

[default]

On Wed, 22 May 2013 10:52:19 -0500, Dakota <ma...@NOSPAMmail.com>
wrote:

>> Making converts is just a matter of finding people with problems that
>> they are unable or unwilling to confront - IMO.
>>
>Ah, yes. We friendly theists are only here to help you. Sign here and
>bend over.

Not a bad analogy, if over simplified. I am capable of empathy and
compassion but at the same time see how religions use the things that
test one's courage or perseverance for their own ends.

>
>Some kinds of friendships are like fishhooks. - author unknown to me.

Yeah. I guess what rankles, is my childhood religious indoctrination.
It is all too easy to see how, when confronted with adversity (like
the death of someone dear) it would be all too easy to take solace in
the superstition of religious indoctrination.

Aunt Sophie is with the angels, sounds better than her corpse is in a
cold dank grave while bacteria reduce her to slime.

We are born free - then our parents impose the shackles of religion on
our minds, because their parents did it, and their parents before....
It is so ingrained, that it isn't questioned just accepted as "truth."

[•RLMeasures]

In article <pebsp8d5rtapieel5...@4ax.com>, default

• Excellent Mr. D.

[default]

We pretend to "protect" children with all these laws, yet none to
protect children from their own parents and childhood indoctrination.
It is a parents "right" to enslave their child with millennia old
superstition before they learn to reason for themselves. (if they
do..)

[Father Haskell]

I hate to think what his bathroom must look like.

[Father Haskell]

Well, no, he was probably off taking a dump.

[•RLMeasures]

In article <ughsp81hk2vlmdu7a...@4ax.com>, default

• woe be to those who are unluckily born into Bible-thumper families.

>
> It is a parents "right" to enslave their child with millennia old
> superstition before they learn to reason for themselves. (if they
> do..)

• not all parents are crazy enough to alienate their children by forcing
a religion on them. My own father allowed me to choose to walk away
from "Christianity" at the age of 13. This probably happened because he
was raised in the Bible Belt and he had grown up seeing the scamsters
plying their craft amoung the unwary. When I was older I started reading
secular history and that convinced me that Christianity was not anywheres
even close to any good news after the 4th Century.

[duke]

Catholics definitely do.

[Free Lunch]

On Fri, 24 May 2013 17:46:26 -0500, duke <duckg...@cox.net> wrote in

Not the bishops. They have sided with the GOP against Jesus and those in
need.

[duke]

On Fri, 24 May 2013 17:48:01 -0500, Free Lunch <lu...@nofreelunch.us> wrote:

>>>People are seldom trustworthy when they keep telling us how very, very
>>>Christian they are. They rarely even accept Jesus' teachings.
>>
>>Catholics definitely do.
>
>Not the bishops. They have sided with the GOP against Jesus and those in
>need.

Free, reduced to a wimpering mass that will say anything in a desperate attempt
to gain recognition.

[Paul Duca]

On Saturday, May 25, 2013 7:47:11 AM UTC-4, duke wrote:
> On Fri, 24 May 2013 17:48:01 -0500, Free Lunch <lu...@nofreelunch.us> wrote:
>
>
>
> >>>People are seldom trustworthy when they keep telling us how very, very
>
> >>>Christian they are. They rarely even accept Jesus' teachings.
>
> >>
>
> >>Catholics definitely do.
>
> >
>
> >Not the bishops. They have sided with the GOP against Jesus and those in
>
> >need.
>
>
>

> The bishsops...reduced to a whimpering mass that will say anything to the
>
> Republicans in a desperate attempt to gain recognition--just like me

[ala...@hotmail.co.uk]

On May 21, 9:44 am, PATRICK <pbarker...@woh.rr.com> wrote:
> On Sun, 19 May 2013 19:13:18 -0700 (PDT), alan...@hotmail.co.uk wrote:
> >On May 20, 4:40 am, PATRICK <pbarker...@woh.rr.com> wrote:
> >> On Sun, 19 May 2013 07:24:35 -0700 (PDT), alan...@hotmail.co.uk wrote:
> >> >On May 19, 1:14 am, PATRICK <pbarker...@woh.rr.com> wrote:
> >> >> Mitchell Holman <nomailverizon.net> wrote:
> >> >> >Catholic Church selling many Maine properties
> >> >> >PORTLAND – St. Patrick Church will host its final
> >> >> >Mass on Sunday afternoon, with its sale to the
> >> >> >owner of the adjacent Westgate Shopping Center set
> >> >> >to close this summer.
> >> >> > ... declining membership is
> >> >> >forcing Catholic parishes to make tough decisions to
> >> >> >close and sell underused churches.
> >> >> >...  but church officials
> >> >> >said the total insured value of their property in
> >> >> >Maine, including land, buildings and the contents
> >> >> >of some of the buildings, is $720 million.
>
> >> >> Yup.

> >> >> Catholics are moving from the ghettos and they are selling the
> >> >> underused properties in order to build bigger and better churches in
> >> >> the burbs.
>

> >> >But the ghettos are the very places where the lurv of jesus is most
> >> >desperately needed, surely. Oh but Paddy and his ilk care more about
> >> >the money than the saving of souls. Let those iggerant mofos go to
> >> >hell, right? More money to be had from the rich white folks in the
> >> >burbs.
> >> >Paddy, you are so transparent, your hypocrisy knows no bounds.
>
> >> Hey, the churches in the ghettos need maintenance.  They are old.
>
> >So why can't the better-funded churches assist the poorer ones?
>
> Why should they?
> Why throw good money after bad?
> Each parish needs to stand on its own...... or it will fold.
> The RCC cannot keep ALL of the decrepid empty churches open.
>
> >Don't you get it? I'm asking why wealthy christians are not supporting
> >the type of people who (according to you) most need your god's
> >message?
>
> If they want to listen, tell them to get on a bus.
>
> > > When
> >> all the male members of the households are spending more and more time
> >> behind bars, there isn't enough financial aid to the churches.
>
> >So it's all about money? Spreading the word is a for-profit
> >enterprise?
>
> It is when it comes to keeping parishes functioning.
>
> >> If all
> >> those parolees who found "Jeezus" would just pretend to attend church
> >> once in a while, things wouldn't be so bad.
>
> >Well they will be less inclined to attend the church if it's allowed
> >to become understaffed and run down, will they not? Did jesus only
> >preach to rich, white people who are more inclined to be addicted to
> >legal drugs (cigarettes, alcohol, tranquilizers) rather than illegal
> >drugs (cocaine, heroin, meth)?
>
> I don't know,
> Tell me.

No. You tell me. Did jesus only preach to rich, white people who are
more inclined to be addicted to legal drugs (cigarettes, alcohol,
tranquilizers) rather than illegal drugs (cocaine, heroin, meth)?

> >> In the meantime, if a
> >> parish cannot stand on its own, it folds.
>
> >What about the children? Doesn't your church care about ghetto
> >children?
>
> The children either start breeding (females) or they graduate and go
> to prison (men)

They're not white enough, so you don't give a damn.

[PATRICK]

lan...@hotmail.co.uk wrote:

>> >Well they will be less inclined to attend the church if it's allowed
>> >to become understaffed and run down, will they not? Did jesus only
>> >preach to rich, white people who are more inclined to be addicted to
>> >legal drugs (cigarettes, alcohol, tranquilizers) rather than illegal
>> >drugs (cocaine, heroin, meth)?
>>
>> I don't know,
>> Tell me.
>
>No. You tell me. Did jesus only preach to rich, white people who are
>more inclined to be addicted to legal drugs (cigarettes, alcohol,
>tranquilizers) rather than illegal drugs (cocaine, heroin, meth)?

I'm not sure those drugs were prevalent in Israel 2000 years ago.

Show me a reference where they were, and we'll discuss this more.

>
>> >> In the meantime, if a
>> >> parish cannot stand on its own, it folds.
>>
>> >What about the children? Doesn't your church care about ghetto
>> >children?
>>
>> The children either start breeding (females) or they graduate and go
>> to prison (men)
>
>They're not white enough, so you don't give a damn.

<yawn>
I am personally assisting a "half-breed" right now in "East" Dayton.
Don't tell me that crap.

[Father Haskell]

So when do you expect to have him fully cured of not being white?

[PATRICK]

Do you need a cure?
Talk to me.
I'm discussing a young man who has been accepted to Catholic High
School in Dayton OH. Do you have any idea how much tuition is?

[Paul Duca]

> I hope by the time this young man graduates from Catholic High
>
> School in Dayton OH. Fortunately, nuns do miracles with their rulers.