DP: Jesus and the Holy Spirit and the Dual Characteristics of the Logos
Damian J. Anderson
Rev. Sun Myung Moon
Exposition of the Divine Principle
1996 Translation
Chapter 7
Christology
4.1.2 Jesus and the Holy Spirit and
the Dual Characteristics of the Logos
Logos is Greek for "rational principle" or "the Word." The
Bible indicates that the Logos is an object partner to
God,36(John1:1) engaged in a reciprocal relationship
with Him. Since God, the subject partner of the Logos, exists
with dual characteristics, the Logos as His object partner
should also be composed of dual characteristics. If the Logos
were without dual characteristics, all things made through
it37(John1:3) would not be composed of dual
characteristics. Adam and Eve, the embodied object partners
of God in image, were created separately out of the dual
characteristics of the Logos.38(cf. Creation 1.1)
Had Adam as a man realized the ideal of creation and become
the tree of life, and had Eve as a woman realized the ideal
of creation and fulfilled the tree of the knowledge of good
and evil, they would have stood together as the True Parents
of humankind. They would have fulfilled God's three great
blessings and established the Kingdom of God on earth.
Instead, because they fell, this world became an earthly
hell. Therefore, to give rebirth to fallen people, Jesus came
as the second Adam,39(I Cor. 15:45) the True Father
of humankind, with the mission symbolized by the tree of
life.40(Rev.22:14) This being the case, should not
there also have come the True Mother of
humankind,41(Rev.22:17) the second Eve with the
mission symbolized by the tree of the knowledge of good and
evil? The one who has come as the True Mother to give rebirth
to fallen people is the Holy Spirit.
--
Damian J. Anderson dam...@unification.net http://www.unification.net
HRobin153
Craig;
I don't understand.
Why have there been no snappy comments concerning the DP's view of
Jesus, the Holy Spirit, Logos, Trinity, Rebirth, and/or Salvation?
What's the matter...Tiamat got your tongue?
Hamm
my brothers, father's not naked; he be clothed in the glory of God
Rosa maxim
>Subject: I don't understand....
>From: hrob...@aol.com (HRobin153)
>Date: Wed, Dec 3, 1997 20:57 EST
>Message-id: <19971204015...@ladder02.news.aol.com>
>
>Craig;
>I don't understand.
>
>Why have there been no snappy comments concerning the DP's view of
>Jesus, the Holy Spirit, Logos, Trinity, Rebirth, and/or Salvation?
I was gone 4 days , protesting your daddy !
Moon , Blessing '97- no shows :
Whitney Houston (Singer)
Ralph Reed (Former head of the Christian Coalition)
Lou Dobbs (CNN)
Camila Sadat (Daughter of Anwar Sadat)
Marion Barry (Mayor of DC)
Craig Maxim < rosa...@aol.com >
1 John 5:20 And we are in him who is true-even in his son Christ Jesus.
He is the true God and eternal life .
Free Bible Course : Send Name , Address , Age cva...@juno.com
Tilman Hausherr
In <19971204030...@ladder02.news.aol.com>, rosa...@aol.com
(Rosa maxim) wrote:
>Whitney Houston (Singer)
>Ralph Reed (Former head of the Christian Coalition)
>Lou Dobbs (CNN)
>Camila Sadat (Daughter of Anwar Sadat)
>Marion Barry (Mayor of DC)
Benhasir Bhutto (Pakistan) did also not appear.
--
Tilman Hausherr ** Inventor of the "Driving Principle" **
til...@berlin.snafu.de http://www.snafu.de/~tilman/faq-you/moonies.txt
"What I don't understand is how anyone can take
seriously a newspaper that is controlled (...) by the agents of a
foreign government. No one would take them seriously if it was
Bangladesh. No one would take them seriously if it was France."
(WP's Ben Bradlee about the Washington Times)
HRobin153
In article <3496f8ec....@news.snafu.de>, til...@berlin.snafu.de (Tilman
Hausherr) writes:
><HTML><PRE><FONT COLOR="#0000ff" BACK="#ffffff" SIZE=3>
In
><19971204030...@ladder02.news.aol.com>, rosa...@aol.com
(Rosa
>maxim) wrote:
>Whitney Houston (Singer)
>Ralph Reed (Former head of the
>Christian Coalition)
>Lou Dobbs (CNN)
>Camila Sadat (Daughter of Anwar
>Sadat)
>Marion Barry (Mayor of DC)
Benhasir Bhutto (Pakistan) did also not
>appear.
</PRE></HTML>
Neither did Craig Maxim
HRobin153
In article <19971204030...@ladder02.news.aol.com>, rosa...@aol.com
(Rosa maxim) writes:
><HTML><PRE><FONT COLOR="#0000ff" BACK="#ffffff" SIZE=3>
>Subject: I don't
>understand....
>From: hrob...@aol.com (HRobin153)
>Date: Wed, Dec 3, 1997
>20:57 EST
>Message-id:
><19971204015...@ladder02.news.aol.com>
>
>Craig;
>I don't
>understand.
>
>Why have there been no snappy comments concerning the DP's
>view of
>Jesus, the Holy Spirit, Logos, Trinity, Rebirth, and/or
>Salvation?
I was gone 4 days , protesting your daddy !
Moon , Blessing '97-
>no shows :
Whitney Houston (Singer)
Ralph Reed (Former head of the Christian
>Coalition)
Lou Dobbs (CNN)
Camila Sadat (Daughter of Anwar Sadat)
Marion
>Barry (Mayor of DC)
Craig Maxim
But I did see Ron 'Maxim' at the media conference (via C-SPAN)
Hamm
Rosa maxim
><HTML><PRE>Subject: Re: I don't understand....
>From: hrob...@aol.com (HRobin153)
>Date: Sat, Dec 6, 1997 11:31 EST
>Message-id: <19971206163...@ladder02.news.aol.com>>><FONT COLOR="#0000ff" SIZE=3>
>In
>><19971204030...@ladder02.news.aol.com>, rosa...@aol.com
>(Rosa
>>maxim) wrote:
>
>>Whitney Houston (Singer)
>>Ralph Reed (Former head of the
>>Christian Coalition)
>>Lou Dobbs (CNN)
>>Camila Sadat (Daughter of Anwar
>>Sadat)
>>Marion Barry (Mayor of DC)
>
>>appear.
>
>Neither did Craig Maxim
You've got to be kidding ? Go to Steve Hassan's web page
there is a full report of my activities in DC .
Which included being part of the press conference we held ,
being interviewed by three Japanese television stations
(They even asked me to sing in Korean , like I did for Moon)
I also was on a live televised debate on WJLA 7 in DC , only
my opponent (Tyler Hendricks) was a no show .
I was interviewed by TV and print media at RFK stadium .
My wife was even interviewed by the Spanish CNN and
another spanish journalist .
Not only that , but Camilia Anwar Sadat took a copy of my
Christian Appeal against Moon and faxed it to Billy Graham .
It was my wife who had the sign "Moon esta Loco !"
(Moon is Crazy !") It was written up in the Wash. Post .
The other side of her sign read "Solo Jesus , No Moon"
(Just Jesus , not Moon)
My sign said "Mom Come Home !"
It was shown on the news in DC . While in DC I was invited
to sing at a Christian church , the minister had seen me and my
sign asking for my mother back , and told me he wanted to cry
when he saw me on TV .
I even saw Damian Anderson walking into the stadium and he
yelled to me like he knew me (The sign gave me away I guess)
You'll have to explain what you mean by your comment Hamm .
Rosa maxim
><HTML><PRE>Subject: Re: I don't understand....
>From: hrob...@aol.com (HRobin153)
>Date: Sat, Dec 6, 1997 11:31 EST
>
>In article <19971204030...@ladder02.news.aol.com>, rosa...@aol.com
>(Rosa maxim) writes:
>
>><FONT COLOR="#0000ff" SIZE=3>
>>understand....
>>From: hrob...@aol.com (HRobin153)
>>Date: Wed, Dec 3, 1997
>>20:57 EST
>>Message-id:
>><19971204015...@ladder02.news.aol.com>
>>
>>Craig;
>>I don't
>>understand.
>>
>>Why have there been no snappy comments concerning the DP's
>>view of
>>Jesus, the Holy Spirit, Logos, Trinity, Rebirth, and/or
>>Salvation?
>
>I was gone 4 days , protesting your daddy !
>
>
>But I did see Ron 'Maxim' at the media conference (via C-SPAN)
>Hamm
He wasn't at our press conference ! He apparently was at RFK
though . Moon let him marry my mother , she didn't tell me until
after it was over . Talk about mind control ! She told me that she
would never again have anything to do with him , and now she
let's Moon marry them .
I'm sick !
Usernet566
<<But I did see Ron 'Maxim' at the media conference (via C-SPAN)
Hamm>>
Hamm, you knew Maxim while he was in the church? What's this about his pulling
a knife on someone? Was he kicked out of the church because of this? What's
Maxim been doing since leaving the church? Any ideas why he's suddenly on the
attack? Who's Ron? And Who's Rosa Maxim?
Rosa maxim
>Subject: Re: I don't understand....
>Date: Sat, Dec 6, 1997 14:47 EST
>Message-id: <19971206194...@ladder01.news.aol.com>
>
><<But I did see Ron 'Maxim' at the media conference (via C-SPAN)
>Hamm>>
>
>Hamm, you knew Maxim while he was in the church? What's this about his
>pulling
>a knife on someone?
More moonie lies ! It's amazing what the indoctrinated will resort
to in the name of God . A moonie where I live (He must be the only one here)
said that he knew my mother and had asked someone in the church about me . He
says they told him I was kicked out of the church for stealing money . That's
even funnier than the other one because I was selling flowers all day for Moon
living in a state of self induced poverty . I lived in a room with 3
other guys , where am I going to keep this booty ?
I met John Stacey in the DC protest , he told me that the church told the other
members that he was kicked out because he had a drug problem (this was another
moonie lie) .
Cathryn Mazer , who's story was aired on the Today show , really was kicked out
of the church (That show brought to much heat to the UC and she was asked to
leave) but she says the church told people that it was her who had chosen to
leave (More lies) .
I would say the only thing moonies seem to be better at than selling flowers is
selling lies . Of course as Moon has said "If you lie to make someone better ,
this is not sin"
Was he kicked out of the church because of this?
I left the church gradually . I asked permission to be a home member from my
central figure after my wife (who I joined with)
was "exit counciled" out of the cult . The leader told me he would have to pray
about it . The next day he said that I could be a home member if I lived in my
mother's house and continued my mission (which was singing for Moon , when I
wasn't fundraising) .
I'm telling you , he didn't want me to leave the center , I had to beg him . I
think the only reason he did it was fear of a backlash from my ex-wife being
rescued from the cult . Also since my mother was a member and one of "father's"
favorites , he probably didn't see it as too risky . In fact , I remained loyal
(and celibate) for over a
year even with no one guarding me . I continued my mission for two years on the
outside , but with the freedom to think for myself , finally I just had enough
and walked away .
What's Maxim been doing since leaving the church?
Getting my life together . Learning to be a good husband .
Witnessing about Jesus' love and mercy . Serving my church
and many other churches and ministeries . Helping support
missionaries in Haiti and Venezuela . Trying to reach members
with my knowledge and experiences with Moon personally .
Letting you guys know that there is life outside the UC . That you can have a
fulfilling life , serving God , without Rev. Moon .
That in fact you will find God much more accesible without the
satanic influence of Moon's lies .
Any ideas why he's suddenly on the
>attack?
I've been reading the Bible and seeing how blatantly
Moon lied about it . I want to help my mother out , and all
other victims of mind control .
Who's Ron?
One of Moon's first converts (co-conspirators ?)
In America . He introduced Moon's teachings to my mother and I
when I was 12 years old . And Moon has been screwing with the lives of my
family ever since !
And Who's Rosa Maxim?
My wife - I chose her myself : - )
Actually she is truly a gift from God .
Tilman Hausherr
In <19971206163...@ladder02.news.aol.com>, hrob...@aol.com
(HRobin153) wrote:
>Benhasir Bhutto (Pakistan) did also not
>>appear.
></PRE></HTML>
>
>Neither did Craig Maxim
1. Please configure your AOL newsreader so that it stops using the HTML.
2. Craig did appear. Several articles mentioned him.
Schmid Herwig
> What's Maxim been doing since leaving the church?
>RANTING IN NEWSGROUPS, I SUPPOSE!
>I've been reading the Bible and seeing how blatantly
>Moon lied about it .
WHERE'S YOUR ANSWER, BIGMOUTH! QUITE A FEW PEOPLE ARE WAITING FOR IT!!!
Hey, Craig Maxim, remember this e-mail? Still waiting for your response...
Rosa...@aol.com wrote:
>
> Remember the parallels of history with identical time
> periods that "prove" how God is working through history ?
> Were those dates really history ?
>
> Moon said the"Slavery in Egypt" lasted 400 years .
> In reality it was 515
What is your source? Exodus 12:40 and Genesis 15:13 both puts it's around
400
years.
> Moon said the"Period of the Judges" was 400 years .
> But it was only 200
1 Kings 6:1 supports the 400 year number saying 480 years after Israel came
out
of Egypt, Solomon began the building of the Temple in his fourth year as
king.
Since each of the kings reigned for 40 years, by subtracting 80 years for
Saul
and David, it's clear that the Period of the Judges lasted 400 years.
Furthermore, Baker's Bible Handbook outlines the period as existing 370
years.
Years the judges led Israel:
Othniel: 40 years (Judges 3:9,11)
Ehud: 80 yrs. (Judges 3:15, 30)
Shamgar: 10 yrs. (Judges 3:31)
Deborah/Barak: 40 yrs. (Judges 4:4, 5:31)
Gideon: 40 yrs. (Judges 8:28)
Abimelech: 3 yrs. (Judges 9:22)
Tola: 23 yrs. (Judges 10:1-2)
Jair: 22 yrs. (Judges 10:3)
Jephthah: 6 yrs. (Judges 12:7)
Ibzan: 7 yrs. (Judges 12:8-9)
Elon: 10 yrs. (Judges 12:11-12)
Abdon: 8 yrs. (Judges 12:13-15)
Samson: 20 yrs (Judges16:31)
Eli: 40 yrs. (1 Sam. 4:18)
Samuel: 21 yrs. (1 Sam. 7:15)
Considering these Biblical sources, saying the period lasted 400 years is
more
accurate than your claim of 200 years!
> The "United Kingdom" is in the D.P. as 120 years .
> But it was only 98
The Bible is very clear on the time periods of two of the kings:
1 Chronicles 29:27 shows David reigning for 40 years, 1 Kings 11:42 shows
Solomon reigning for 40 years. Though the Bible is unclear on Saul's reign
(Samuel 13:1), as the HarperCollins' Bible Dictionary states, still, all
other
references I've found support the 40-year reigns of each king. (See Baker's
Bible Handbook.) Also, Genesis 15:13 and 1 Kings 6:1 help to deduce Saul's
reign is 40 years. Therefore, United Kingdom lasted 120 years.
> "Divided Kingdoms of North and South" ? 400 years .
> It was closer to 500
Again, though HarperCollins tries to date the Divided Kingdom as existing
from
924-586 B.C. using an "antedating reckoning system" (using the Bible's
scattered record of rulers and lenghts of rulership and counting backwards
from
the "destruction of Jerusalem" benchmark), they emphasize that all dates for
periods prior to the Babylonian conquest of Jerusalem can only be regarded
as
approximate. APPROXIMATE is the key word! Bakers Bible Handbook even states:
"Ancient systems of reckoning have produced chronological problems for the
divided monarchy." (See footnote.)
Still, the Bible spells out the time period clear enough...
Baker's Bible Handbook outlines the period by kings (page 178):
Rehoboam: 17 years (1 Kings 14:21)
Abijam: 3 yrs. (1 Kings 15:1)
Asa: 41 yrs. (1 Kings 15:9-10)
Jehoshaphat: 25 yrs (2 Chron. 20:31)
Jehoram: 8 yrs (2 Chron. 21:5, 2 Kings 8:16-17)
Ahaziah: 1 yr. (2 Kings 8:26)
Athaliah: 6 yrs. (2 Chron. 22.2)
Jehoash: 40 yrs. (2 Kings 12:1)
Amaziah: 29 yrs. (2 Kings 14:1-2)
Uzziah (Azariah): 52 yrs. (2 Kings 15:1-2, 2 Chron. 26:3)
Jotham: 16 yrs. (2 Chron. 27:1)
Ahaz: 16 yrs. (2 Kings 16:2)
Hezekiah: 29 yrs. (2 Kings 18:1-2)
Manasseh: 55 yrs. (2 Kings 21:1, 2 Chron. 33:1)
Amon: 2 yrs. (2 Kings 21:19)
Josiah: 31 yrs (2 Kings 22:1)
Jehoahaz: 3 mos. (2 Kings 23:31)
Jehoiakim: 11 yrs. (2 Kings 23:36)
Jehoiachin: 3 mos. (2 Kings 24:8)
Zedekiah: 11 yrs. (2 Kings 24:18)
Total: 393.5 years
> "Jewish Captivity and Return" he says 210 .
> It was 160
2 Chronicles 36:17-21, Jeremiah 25:11, 29:10, Daniel 9:2, and Zechariah 1:12
all indicate the captivity period lasted 70 years. Afterwards, the Jews were
allowed to return (Ezra 1:1) and rebuild the Temple (Ezra 6:3-5).
http://www.yfiles.com/express.html places the invasion and captivity of the
first Jews by Nebuchadnezzar at 606 B.C. By that reckoning, the 210 year
time
period would have lasted until around around 400 B.C.
Cyrus the Persian decreed the liberation of the exiles in 538 B.C. Exiles
continued to return during the next 140 years, such as Ezra and Nehemiah.
(Baker's Handbook places them at 440 B.C.) 140 years from that liberation
point
brings us to 398 B.C. and the Preparation period.
> The period called"Preparation for the Coming of the
> Messiah" listed as 400 years
> History shows it to be 450
The Reformation Period begins with Malachi. Some reference works place
Malachi
at 425 B.C. Close enough to a 400-year preparation period for me, especially
considering Malachi could easily have lived beyond 400 B.C.
> "Persecution under Roman Empire" Moon says 400 ,
> was he close ? Hardly ! The correct answer is 261
Christians were treated as "second-class" citizens well beyond 261, even
after
Constantine recognized Christianity in 313 A.D. It wasn't until 392 A.D.
that
Christianity became a state religion by a decree of Theodocius I. That's
when
the Christians were able to enter THEIR "Promised Land."
> If he lied about historical dates , what else is he lying about ?
That's your biased opinion. I don't see any lies about Rev. Moon's Parallels
of
History.
> These dates are easily verified in various reference works .
And your dates can be contradicted by just as many reference books --
including
the Bible. (As proven above.) Does that mean YOU'RE lying?
> Check them out yourself . Nothing to lose , but you may
> gain your life back !
You're right. Nothing to lose for me; alot for you.
Steve
Footnote:
HarperCollins Bible Dictionary, page 181:
Chronology, Old Testament, the historical dating of persons and events in
the
OT: The biblical books Genesis through 2 Kings, our primary source of
information for the history of ancient Israel and Judah, provide a
continuous
chronology of generations, key persons, and events from creation to the
Babylonian exile (see Gen.5; 11:10-26; 21:5; 25:7, 26; 35:28; 47:9, 28;
Exod.
12:40; 1 Kings 6:1; 11:42; 14:21: and so on). Further chronological
information
may be derived from other biblical books, such as 1 and 2 Chronicles, and
occasionally from ancient nonbiblical documents. The Assyrian and Babylonian
records are especially useful in this regard, since they provide absolute
dates
that can be calculated in terms of present-day calendars. It can be
established
from the Babylonian records, for example, that Jerusalem fell to the
Babylonians on March 16, 597 B.C. Theoretically one might begin with this
latter "benchmark" date and, utilizing the chronological information
provided
in Genesis through 2 Kings, figure backward to creation.
Unfortunately, the situation is not that simple. First the chronological
data
provided in Genesis for the beginnings of the universe and human
civilization
(a seven-day creation, people who lived over nine hundred years) do not
square
with the perspectives of modern science. Second, many of the numbers
recorded
throughout Genesis through 2 Kings appear to be symbolic or schematic. Note
the
constant recurrence of twenty, forty, and multiples of forty. Third,
different
manuscripts and versions of the biblical books often provide differing
readings, especially where numbers are involved. Finally, there is no way to
verify the biblical chronology, or even to verify the historicity of the
early
biblical characters and events. Abraham, Isaac, Jacob, Joseph, Moses,
Joshua,
the Isrelite sojourn in Egypt, the Israelite conquest of Canaan, Saul,
David,
Solomon--none of these are mentioned in any of the ancient non-biblical
documents recovered thus far.
Indeed, with one exception, nothing has turned up in either nonbiblical
documents or anscient city ruins that points to a specifically Israelite
presence before the ninth century B.C. This exception is an Egyptian
inscription from the reign of Merneptah that seems to refer to a group known
as
"Israel" on the scene in Palestine during the late thirteenth century B.C.
While the problematic nature of the evidence warns agains assigning specific
dates to any of the individual characters in the book of Judges, a case can
be
made for associating the "period of the judges" in general with the opening
centuries of the Iron Age, that is, from roughly 1200 to 1000 B.C. The
stories
about the judges presuppose village life in the central Palestinian hill
country, for example, a phenomenon characteristic of the Iron Age rather
than
of the preceding Bronze Age. Beginning with chronological information
available
for later kings (see below) and figuring backward, one arrives at 925 B.C.
as
an approximate date for Solomon's death. Both David and Solomon are credited
with forty-year reigns, a number probably not to be taken literally. 1 Sam.
13:1, on the other hand, which reports the length of Saul's reign, is
obscure.
Thus the most we can say with any degree of certainty is that Saul, David,
and
Solomon lived sometime around 1000 B.C...
This abundance of chronological information renders it possible to calculate
dates more closely for the period of the separate kingdoms (ca. 925-597
B.C.)
than for the earlier periods. Nevertheless, problems still preclude exact
dates
before the fall of Jerusalem in 597 B.C. For example, variant readings for
the
synchronisms and regnal periods in differend manuscripts and versions of 1
and
2 Kings warn against overconfident use of this information. And there are
internal discrepancies in all of the manuscripts. In none of them, for
example,
do the regnal periods square completely with the synchronisms. Also, the
biblical figures require more time than certain "benchmark" dates derived
from
Assyrian records allow. Finally, there are several crucial unknowns. Did
both
Israel and Judah use the same calendar--that is, did they both begin the new
year at the same time? What methods were used for reckoning the length of
each
king's reign, to his successor's reign, or to both? Were there co-regencies
other than the one recorded for Uzziah (Azariah) and Jotham in 2 Kings 15:5?
If
so, how are they calculated in the biblical figures?
Page 708 of HarperCollins further explains the enability to use non-biblical
sources to date OT history:
The Historicity of Moses: Our only source of knowledge about an individual
named Moses is the Bible. Archaelogy has not unearthed objects bearing his
name, nor do ancient Near Eastern documents contain references to him.
Therefore, judging his historicity, like the historicity of other early
biblical figures, depends on one's view of the historicity of the Bible,
especially the Pentateuch where the preponderance of Mosaic references are
found. The historicity of the Pentateuch is a vexed question in biblical
scholorship. Based on inconsistencies and doublets, scholars have isolated
separate sources dating from different periods. Because some of the Moses
stories show inconsistencies (e.g., in some of the wilderness narratives) or
occur in doublets (e.g., intercessions in Exodus and Numbers), it is
difficult
to know which material is historically authentic, if any. Most scholars
think
that the most reliable references to Moses come from the J and E sources,
the
two earliest.
Schmid Herwig
Schmid Herwig
Tilman Hausherr
In <19971206213...@ladder02.news.aol.com>, rosa...@aol.com
(Rosa maxim) wrote:
>And Who's Rosa Maxim?
>
>My wife - I chose her myself : - )
I guess this answers another question I just thought about - so although
you were separated after her exit-counseling, you two came back together
after it. Kindof cute... one exit-counseled and one walked-away ex-cult
member together :-)
Rosa maxim
>Subject: Re: I don't understand....
>Date: Sun, Dec 7, 1997 05:55 EST
>Message-id: <34deddda....@news.snafu.de>
>
>In <19971206213...@ladder02.news.aol.com>, rosa...@aol.com
>(Rosa maxim) wrote:
>
>>And Who's Rosa Maxim?
>>
>>My wife - I chose her myself : - )
>
>I guess this answers another question I just thought about - so although
>you were separated after her exit-counseling, you two came back together
>after it.
No , it was my ex-wife who was a member . We joined together
but were forced to live in different states and told that Moon would probably
divorce us (because we didn't have children) so that
he could choose other spouses for us .
Her parents found out that Moon was willing to break apart a marriage for no
better reason than picking the spouses himself and
they had her exit-counciled (which is a voluntary rescue as opposed to
deprogramming which is in-voluntary) .
I was stupid enough to continue in the church for two more
years after she left , so our marriage was broken .
Rosa is my second wife and was never in the cult , but she did
help me recover and had alot of patience through our religious disagreements ,
while I was still working it all out in my heart
about God , the Bible etc..
No , Moon breaks families , I'm just grateful God gave me another
chance with Rosa ! We are very happy together and believe in and work for God
(And make mistakes , as we all do) . And contrary to Moon's threats , no one
has gone insane yet .
ftt...@erols.com
Schmid Herwig wrote:
>
> > What's Maxim been doing since leaving the church?
>
> >RANTING IN NEWSGROUPS, I SUPPOSE!
>
> >I've been reading the Bible and seeing how blatantly
> >Moon lied about it .
>
> WHERE'S YOUR ANSWER, BIGMOUTH! QUITE A FEW PEOPLE ARE WAITING FOR IT!!!
>
> Hey, Craig Maxim, remember this e-mail? Still waiting for your response...
Hey Mr. Schmid,
playing "GOEBELS", aren't you? The world had enough "propagandists"!
Thikaza Brik
In article <19971207185...@ladder01.news.aol.com>,
rosa...@aol.com (Rosa maxim) wrote:
>
> No , it was my ex-wife who was a member . We joined together
> but were forced to live in different states and told that Moon would probably
> divorce us (because we didn't have children) so that
> he could choose other spouses for us .
When was this?
>
> Her parents found out that Moon was willing to break apart a marriage for no
> better reason than picking the spouses himself and
> they had her exit-counciled (which is a voluntary rescue as opposed to
> deprogramming which is in-voluntary) .
Really? What is the difference? Aren't people still secluded and not
allowed to leave until they agree with the deprogrammers?
>
> I was stupid enough to continue in the church for two more
> years after she left , so our marriage was broken .
>
> Rosa is my second wife and was never in the cult , but she did
> help me recover and had alot of patience through our religious disagreements ,
> while I was still working it all out in my heart
> about God , the Bible etc..
>
> No , Moon breaks families , I'm just grateful God gave me another
> chance with Rosa ! We are very happy together and believe in and work for God
> (And make mistakes , as we all do) . And contrary to Moon's threats , no one
> has gone insane yet .
>
>
> Craig Maxim < rosa...@aol.com >
> 1 John 5:20 And we are in him who is true-even in his son Christ Jesus.
> He is the true God and eternal life .
>
> Free Bible Course : Send Name , Address , Age cva...@juno.com
Hey, Craig, what happens to people that do not believe in Christ and die
not believing in Christ, for instance the several billion Jews, Buddhists
and Muslims?
Hey, Craig, what happens to homosexuals, even if they believe in Christ
but continue to have sexual relations with their same sex partner?
Exactly how many people will be raptured, Craig? If it is not 144,000,
exactly, then how many will it be and why not exactly 144,000? Why is your
explanation not twisting the words of the Bible to suit your own purposes?
Did God literally create the world in seven literal days of seven literal
24 hour periods, ie, in 10,080 minutes? Did God literally take a rib from
Adam and create Eve?
Did Noah literally build a boat that could hold exactly one pair of every
living animal, mammal, bird, reptile, amphibian, and insect, and exactly
how was it big enough with enough controlled environments and enough
varied foods to keep all of them alive for over 40 days? How was it that
the whole Earth was covered with water?
Should women wear covers on their head and never speak when they are in church?
Is it really better and more holy to be like Jesus and never marry? Then
why are you married?
Did God really order the killing of every man, woman and child in Canaan?
Did God really send the bear to rend, and kill the children that made fun
of Elijah?
Why did Jesus say John was Elijah, when he clearly was not? Why did John
say he was not Elijah, when he was told that the son of God said that he
was Elijah? If he was Elijah, how could it be possible, when Elijah was
taken to God by a chariot of fire, and John was obviously a different man
born of Elizabeth and Zachariah? If he was not Elijah, then why did Jesus
say he was? Why is your explanation not twisting the words of the Bible to
suit your own purposes?
Tell me, Craig, just how many of the billions of people that have died in
this century alone, not believing in Jesus as their only lord and saviour,
will live and burn in eternal hellfire created by their loving God, the
Father of all?
And what happened to John and James, when they dropped their Father's
fishing nets to join Jesus? Do you think their family was happy they did
that? And what exactly is your Biblical proof of your answer, whatever it
is?
If people were never to believe in the return of Christ on Earth when it
was pointed to, why did he qualify his statement not to believe, with the
statement that you would know him by his work?
Leave Rev. Moon out of it and just answer these questions, ok?
--
Eric
"It is easy to be a holy man when you are living at the top of a mountain." Bill Murray, in the movie _The_Razor's_Edge_
Thikaza Brik
>
> Hey Mr. Schmid,
> playing "GOEBELS", aren't you? The world had enough "propagandists"!
Well, anonymous fttler, calling names is proof of your apparent inability
to refute the evidence that Schmid gave in support of the parallels of
history, which Craig Maxim tried to say had no basis in truth. Apparently
Craig has no ability to refute it either, just spout made up numbers fed
him by someone else without reference or footnote, even one. That is far
more propagandish than the well researched and referenced post made by Mr.
Schmid.
But never let fact stand in the way of your bigotry, fttler.
Tilman Hausherr
In <brick-08129...@detshiva2-124.flash.net>, br...@flash.net
(Thikaza Brik) wrote:
>Really? What is the difference? Aren't people still secluded and not
>allowed to leave until they agree with the deprogrammers?
They can leave... the trick of the deprogrammers is to use arguments
instead. They tell the moonie: "if you are really persuaded, then you
wouldn't have any problem watching a harmless video, don't you?" Of
course, the moonie, to prove that he is not brainwashed, will agree to
watch the video. And that video will e.g. show what methods of mind
control are used.
HRobin153
In article <34d2d18b....@news.snafu.de>, til...@berlin.snafu.de (Tilman
Hausherr) writes:
In
><19971206163...@ladder02.news.aol.com>,
>hrob...@aol.com
(HRobin153) wrote:
>Benhasir Bhutto (Pakistan) did also
>not
>>appear.
>
>
>Neither did Craig Maxim
1. Please configure your AOL
>newsreader so that it stops using the HTML.
2. Craig did appear. Several
>articles mentioned him.
--
Tilman Hausherr ** Inventor of the
>"Driving Principle" **
til...@berlin.snafu.de
>http://www.snafu.de/~tilman/faq-you/moonies.txt
---
Tilman,
1) I haven't got a clue about that HTML-stuff. It just appeared one day.
Maybe
it's part of the 'enhanced e-mail' stuff that's just been introduced. (I'll
look
around and see what I can do about it. It annoys me too.)
2) I was expecting to see Craig on CNN, hogging the camera telling his tale
of woe....but didn't see him at all. I saw the articles.
HRobin153
In article <19971206213...@ladder02.news.aol.com>, rosa...@aol.com
(Rosa maxim) writes:
>Subject: Re: I don't understand....
>From: usern...@aol.com (Usernet566)
>Date: Sat, Dec 6, 1997 14:47 EST
>Message-id: <19971206194...@ladder01.news.aol.com>
>
><<But I did see Ron 'Maxim' at the media conference (via C-SPAN)
>Hamm>>
>
>Hamm, you knew Maxim while he was in the church? What's this about his
>pulling
>a knife on someone?
More moonie lies ! It's amazing what the indoctrinated will resort
to in the name of God .
snip
Craig Maxim <
>rosa...@aol.com >
1 John 5:20 And we are in him who is true-even in his
>son Christ Jesus.
He is the true God and
>eternal life .
Free Bible Course : Send Name , Address , Age
>cva...@juno.com
>>>
no comment
HRobin153
In article <66cmuo$1drs$1...@alijku04.edvz.uni-linz.ac.at>, "Schmid Herwig"
<hsc...@mail.asn-linz.ac.at> writes:
> What's Maxim been
>doing since leaving the church?
>RANTING IN NEWSGROUPS, I SUPPOSE!
>>>
Now that's funny.
>>>
>I've
>been reading the Bible and seeing how blatantly
>Moon lied about it .
>WHERE'S YOUR ANSWER, BIGMOUTH! QUITE A FEW PEOPLE ARE WAITING FOR IT!!!
Hey,
>Craig Maxim, remember this e-mail? Still waiting for your
>response...
Rosa...@aol.com wrote:
>
> Remember the parallels of history
>with identical time
> periods that "prove" how God is working through history
>?
> Were those dates really history ?
>>>
Please be patient with Craig; he's a young snot-nose, and he has been
busy propelling his family into the international spotlight. I'm sure he'll
respond with his usual wit to the really great post about the parallels of
history
as soon as he gets some more Kleenex(tm)....
Tilman Hausherr
In <19971208211...@ladder01.news.aol.com>, hrob...@aol.com
(HRobin153) wrote:
>1) I haven't got a clue about that HTML-stuff. It just appeared one day.
>Maybe
>it's part of the 'enhanced e-mail' stuff that's just been introduced. (I'll
>look
>around and see what I can do about it. It annoys me too.)
Then ask the AOL hotline about it, and/or download the latest version.
Tilman
--
Tilman Hausherr ** Inventor of the "Driving Principle" **
til...@berlin.snafu.de http://www.snafu.de/~tilman/faq-you/moonies.txt
"What I don't understand is how anyone can take
Rosa maxim
>Hey, Craig, what happens to people that do not believe in Christ and die
>not believing in Christ, for instance the several billion Jews, Buddhists
>and Muslims?
>
>
Jn:3:36: He that believeth on the Son hath everlasting life: and he that
believeth not the Son shall not see life; but the wrath of God abideth on him.
>Hey, Craig, what happens to homosexuals, even if they believe in Christ
>but continue to have sexual relations with their same sex partner?
>
>
Jn:3:36: He that believeth on the Son hath everlasting life: and he that
believeth not the Son shall not see life; but the wrath of God abideth on him.
>Exactly how many people will be raptured, Craig? If it is not 144,000,
>exactly, then how many will it be and why not exactly 144,000?
Jn:3:36: He that believeth on the Son hath everlasting life: and he that
believeth not the Son shall not see life; but the wrath of God abideth on him.
>Did God literally create the world in seven literal days of seven literal
>24 hour periods, ie, in 10,080 minutes?
What would that prove to you either way ? The Bible says
God created in 7 days . It also says that a day with the Lord
is as a thousand years . What does time mean to an eternal
being ? Are God's days the same as man's days ? Who knows .
Do I believe that God can create in 7 days ? Yes I do . If you
believe that the " laws " of nature bind the hands of the one who
created those "laws" . Then you are saying that nature is greater
than God . Many environmentalists seem to believe that . Do you ?
>Did God literally take a rib from
>Adam and create Eve?
There is a story that Moon drew a circle in the dirt when he was
in the prison camp during the bombing of the camp . He told the
prisoners that if they stood in the circle they would not be
harmed . Apparently those who did were not harmed .
You believe these stories don't you ? Is the suspension of
natural law or prophecy less a miracle than any other miracle
performed by God in the Bible ?
When Jesus commanded the storm to cease , was that easier
than any other miracle in the Bible . Are you fairly certain then
that you personally know all God is capable of ? If you in fact
knew all God was capable of , you would be a god yourself .
Are you ? Thinking it possible to be a god was satan's first sin
and Adam and Eve's downfall as well . Will it be yours ?
>Did Noah literally build a boat that could hold exactly one pair of every
>living animal, mammal, bird, reptile, amphibian, and insect, and exactly
>how was it big enough with enough controlled environments and enough
>varied foods to keep all of them alive for over 40 days? How was it that
>the whole Earth was covered with water?
>
>Should women wear covers on their head and never speak when they are in
>church?
>
>Is it really better and more holy to be like Jesus and never marry? Then
>why are you married?
>
>Did God really order the killing of every man, woman and child in Canaan?
>
>Did God really send the bear to rend, and kill the children that made fun
>of Elijah?
>
>
Are these your best arguments ?
>Why did John
>say he was not Elijah, when he was told that the son of God said that he
>was Elijah?
John was not told that Jesus said he was Elias . That is the UC
revisionism of the Bible . John had made a name for himself
baptising and the Jewish leaders sent some men to ask him
who he was . Are you Elijah or the Christ etc.. This was before
John ever saw Jesus or had the revelation that he was the Christ .
It was the next day when John first saw Jesus and saw the dove
descending on him . This is another reason why the UC claim
that God's providence was based more on a sinner (John) than
on the sinless Son of God (Jesus) is so ridiculous .
>Tell me, Craig, just how many of the billions of people that have died in
>this century alone, not believing in Jesus as their only lord and saviour,
>will live and burn in eternal hellfire created by their loving God, the
>Father of all?
God is loving , but he is also Holy and Just . All men have rejected
God because of the sin in them . Man chose to sin and leave God
by disobeying him . Man knew the consequence before he
sinned .Man sinned anyway . Are you going to blame God for
that ? Are you going to blame God for keeping his word that
"in the day you eat the fruit you will die ?"
Instead , why not praise the loving God that allowed his only
son to die in your place ? Why not glorify Jesus for becoming
a sacrifice to atone for your sin . God created man and gave him
everything in creation . Man had a paradise to live in . Man rejected God
anyway . He sent Prophets to us and ultimately
sent his own son to offer his life as an atonement for our sin .
All God asks is that we sincerely humble ourselves and accept
his son , accept his gift of life through forgiveness and repentance of our
sins . God is offering you paradise as surely as he had
done with Adam and Eve . Will you reject it too ? And blame God
as they did ? For their own sin ?
>If people were never to believe in the return of Christ on Earth when it
>was pointed to, why did he qualify his statement not to believe, with the
>statement that you would know him by his work?
He doesn't . Jesus said if anyone says he is the Christ not
to believe him . Period . He doesn't change or make any
exceptions to that command at all . Anywhere .
Usernet566
Maxim,
All mixed up with no place to go?
Your understanding of the Bible, from a Christian and Divine Principle
viewpoint, is all mixed up. Do you remember which of your beliefs are solely
Christian and which solely Divine Principle?
Keep posting. Always interesting to see how an
ex-Christian-ex-Unificationist-Born-Again-Christian-follower of the
ex-Jew-ex-Unificationist-atheist explains his worldview. And to think the
Washington Post saw fit to print it. How pathetic.
HRobin153
In article <34ed7641...@news.snafu.de>, til...@berlin.snafu.de (Tilman
Hausherr) writes:
In
><19971208211...@ladder01.news.aol.com>,
>hrob...@aol.com
(HRobin153) wrote:
>1) I haven't got a clue about that
>HTML-stuff. It just appeared one day.
>Maybe
>it's part of the 'enhanced
>e-mail' stuff that's just been introduced. (I'll
>look
>around and see what
>I can do about it. It annoys me too.)
Then ask the AOL hotline about it,
>and/or download the latest version.
Tilman
>>>
I'm running aol3.0 already; but calling the hotline is a good idea.
Please stand by....
SMarti9608
Of course the video is full of "evidence" of mind-control that even the APA
finds unsubstantiated.
What's going to happen when these ex-members finally learn the truth about the
lies of the deprogrammer cartel?
Rejoin I hope.
HRobin153
In article <19971204015...@ladder02.news.aol.com>, on 120497
hrob...@aol.com (HRobin153) writes:
Craig;
I don't
>understand.
Why have there been no snappy comments concerning the DP's view
>of
Jesus, the Holy Spirit, Logos, Trinity, Rebirth, and/or
>Salvation?
What's the matter...Tiamat got your tongue?
Hamm
>>>
Before this was written someone posted a perfect rebuttal of the
Maxim/Williams/Wood demolition of the parallels of history. And they asked
Craig to comment. He responded by posting the Williams/Wood piece and asked
for a month to respond.
I've noticed that no one seems to want to tackle the DP chapters mentioned in
my previous post. I don't expect Craig to do it, although I don't think anyone
else is even up to attempting to debate the points made in those chapters.
(Craig can't successfully do it, but it kind of fun watching him try--sort of
like watching a chihuahua attack a fundraiser.)
But instead of attempting to respond, Craig is spending his time trying to make
folks forget about his promise to respond to the parallels in less than a
month.
This seems to be a pattern--stall long enough for folks to forget; or say
anything in order to change the topic; or ignore the question......
Hey wait a minute....Daniel, or who ever he is, says these are tactics used by
hard core Communists. Is Craig a hard core Communist?
HRobin153
OK, you asked for them and here they are. My sister, in California (wink wink
nudge nudge) sent me these. At the end I've added one that I heard just the
other day in Kansas City.
Hamm
read at your own risk
----------
Subject: FW: Fwd: The grieving period must've lapsed.....
What's the difference between Princess Diana and Tiger Woods?
Tiger has a better driver.
What did the Queen say when she heard Princess Diana died in a car
wreck?
Was Fergie with her?
Prince Charles was out early the other day walking the dog. When a
passer-by said "Morning", Charles said "No, just walking the dog."
What's the Queen giving Fergie for Christmas?
A trip to Paris, dinner at the Ritz, and a chauffeur-driven Mercedes.
What did Princess Di say to Dodi after he gave her the Ring?
Aren't we moving a bit to fast?
Why did Elton John sing at the funeral?
Because he's the only queen who cares.
By the way, Elton John is now set to make a tribute record for Mother
Teresa... 'Sandals in the Bin'
What was the last thing Di said to Dodi?
'These paparazzi are driving me up the wall'
What does Diana's bumper sticker say?
My other car's a decoy.
What is the difference between leeches and the paparazzi?
Leeches fall off after you die.
What did the French mortuary attendant say when he got the body bags?
Zip-a-dee Dodi, Zip-a-dee Di.
Why did Diana want to die?
She wanted to be the first to see Versace's 98 collection.
What were Di's last words?
Leave me alone, I'm a bloody Princess!
Why did Di die?
Because Mercedes bends
When the people at the Ritz asked Princess Di if she wanted a room for
the night she said, "No, I'm gonna crash with my boyfriend"
Why was Lady Di's death a tragedy?
Because the rest of the Royal Family wasn't in the car with her.
Did you hear about the new fairy tale for kids that's replacing the
Cinderella and carriage story? It's about Diana at midnight. She turns
into a pillar.
------------- End Forwarded Message -------------
And last, but not least:
What did Prince Charles say to O.J.?
>That's< the way you do it.
Ta-daaaaaaa.
Thikaza Brik
In article <19971230215...@ladder01.news.aol.com>,
hrob...@aol.com (HRobin153) wrote:
>
> Why was Lady Di's death a tragedy?
> Because the rest of the Royal Family wasn't in the car with her.
>
Is this your favorite one?
--
Eric
"It is easy to be a holy man when you are living at the top of a mountain." Bill Murray, in the movie _The_Razor's_Edge_
"I naively thought that the Moonies would be exposed and the group would crumble...It's incomprehensible to me that it's 21 years since I got out ot the Moonies and in that time, Moon owns the Washington times and the University of Bridgeport and has wined and dined so many politicians and celebrities." Steve Hassan, career faith-breaker, as he stood outside RFK stadium, nearly alone, while 30,000 couples celebrated their marriage at Blessing '97, 11/29/97
HRobin153
I contacted SOL tech-support about the problem that many noticed involving
my posts. (The formatting, not the content!!) They said they couldn't do
anything about either one. And blamed the formatting problem on the
newsgroups.
I'm not completely confident about their ability to assist (or spell). But
I'll
keep an eye out for some button, buzzer, bell, or whistle that I may have
messed with that caused the problem. In the meantime, anybody got any
suggestions? (About the formatting.)
Hamm
---
Dear hrobin153,
I am writing to you on behalf of America Online to answer your recent
question/comments.
Some news groups message boards are being updated, we can't correct it, the
correct has to me made by the news group.
-------------------------
Howdy,
Here's the problem:
When I see a newsgroup post I want to respond to, I highlight it and hit the
reply button. When the reply screen comes up, the quoted part has HTML codes
at the top and at the bottom of the post. (This seems to also affect
a person's ability to easily respond to my response to their post.)
What can be done to eliminate the HTML codes and any hidden codes that come
with them?
Thanks.
Hamm
Field 50 = keyword: Help
Tilman Hausherr
Dump AOL and get a real ISP. As a moonie, you might want to chose
Earthlink (founded by scientologists).
HRobin153
In article <brick-31129...@detshiva8-136.flash.net>, br...@flash.net
(Thikaza Brik) writes:
In article
><19971230215...@ladder01.news.aol.com>,
hrob...@aol.com
>(HRobin153) wrote:
>
> Why was Lady Di's death a tragedy?
> Because the
>rest of the Royal Family wasn't in the car with her.
>
Is this your
>favorite one?
--
Eric
"It is easy to be a holy man when you are living at
>the top of a mountain." Bill Murray, in the movie
>_The_Razor's_Edge_
Well, I did LOL at that one.
Hamm
Thikaza Brik
In article <19971231195...@ladder02.news.aol.com>,
hrob...@aol.com (HRobin153) wrote:
>
> Well, I did LOL at that one.
> Hamm
>
I bet. I did.
--
Eric
"It is easy to be a holy man when you are living at the top of a mountain." Bill Murray, in the movie _The_Razor's_Edge_
"I naively thought that the Moonies would be exposed and the group would crumble...It's incomprehensible to me that it's 21 years since I got out ot the Moonies and in that time, Moon owns the Washington times and the University of Bridgeport and has wined and dined so many politicians and celebrities." Steve Hassan, career faith-breaker, as he stood outside RFK stadium, nearly alone, while 30,000 couples celebrated their marriage at Blessing '97, 11/29/97
HRobin153
Didn't SMM say that the powerful would have to apologize to their victims?
The United States has done so, and recently Canada. Who's next?
Now this may all be coincidence, but I see SMM words coming true. A report
from a recent Wall Street Journal confirms the power of his words...
Hamm
---
Who's Sorry Now?
By JOE QUEENAN
Now that the Canadian government has officially apologized to its aboriginal
peoples for past mistreatment, experts in transnational remorse expect many
other nations to follow suit. In the coming months, the Spanish government
is expected to apologize to the indigenous peoples of Mexico for
imprisoning Montezuma and enslaving the Aztec peoples, while issuing a
simultaneous apology to the indigenous peoples of Peru for virtually
identical abuses in Machu Picchu. A highly placed official in Madrid has
also confirmed that the Spanish government is thinking of apologizing to
the Carib peoples for their brutal mistreatment at the hands of the
conquistadors. Since the Carib peoples were wiped out in a single
generation, the apology will be accepted either by representatives of the
peoples of nearby Venezuela or by Susan Sarandon.
Meanwhile, the French government is expected to apologize officially to the
Spanish people for the horrors inflicted on them during the Napoleonic era;
the
Belgian government has tentative plans to apologize to the people of
Zaire--excuse me, Congo--for its misdeeds in the late 19th century; and the
Italian government intends to apologize to the people of Ethiopia for its
abuses during its brief colonial adventure. The German government,
according to one Bonn official, is preparing an apology to "just about
everybody."
One of the most interesting developments in the burgeoning field of national
remorse is how far into the past some nations are willing to go in verbally
compensating their victims. The government of tiny Macedonia is currently
preparing an official apology to the indigenous peoples of Iran for
Alexander the Great's depredations during his invasion circa 300 B.C. At
the same time, the government of Mongolia is weighing an apology to the
indigenous peoples of Afghanistan for their sufferings at the hands of
Genghis Khan in the 13th century. And an Italian cabinet minister confirms
that Rome is pondering an apology to the peoples of Libya for sacking
Carthage, but only if the descendants of Hannibal apologize for the damage
created by his elephants and "if somebody apologizes for what happened
around here in A.D. 476."
Not to be outdone, the governments of Norway, Sweden and Denmark are
planning to apologize to the indigenous peoples of Ireland for putting the
entire
country to the sword back in the Middle Ages. This unusual group apology
stems from difficulty in assigning blame for past crimes. "We all know it
was the Vikings who put Ireland to the sword," explains Lars Hamm,
president of the Oslo-based Guiltgild. "But 'Vikings' is kind of a general
term--these people could have been Danes, Swedes, Norwegians, even
transplanted Finns. So just to be on the safe side, we're going to
apologize simultaneously."
Difficulty in assigning guilt is the biggest snag in the continuing
negotiations
between the indigenous peoples of assorted victimized Middle Eastern
countries and the descendants of their oppressors. "Nothing would suit me
more than getting an apology from the Hittites, the Chaldeans and the
Amorites for some of the things that went down in the Tigris and Euphrates
Delta in the three millennia before Christ," says Ty Kilmer of the Palo
Alto organization Whales 'n' Blame. "But the truth is: We don't know who
these suckers were or where their descendants live."
"It's the same basic problem you run into with your Jutes, your Huns, your
Druids," laments Mr. Hamm. "We'd just love to drag these people in, have
them issue an apology and maybe write a nice check to the indigenous
peoples their ancestors butchered. But we don't know where to find them."
One sign that the contrition craze is not likely to pass quickly is the
growing
penchant for domestic apologies that are not along purely racial lines, and
do not necessarily involve aboriginal peoples. For example, the French
government recently apologized to "Huguenots everywhere" for the St.
Bartholomew's Day Massacre of 1572, and also apologized to the residents of
southern France for assorted genocidal crimes that took place during the
Albigensian Crusade of the early 13th century.
The very next day, in an official communiqué, the Elysée Palace apologized
to the residents of Loudon for the excesses of the Inquisition that led to
the burning of various innocent people as witches during the reign of Louis
XIV, and also apologized to the indigenous peoples of Corsica for all past
injustices. "The French figured they should just get all the apologies out
of the way in one fell swoop," reasons Mr. Kilmer. "You don't want to
nickel-and-dime the victims of outrageous historical abuses."
Some have criticized the practice of apologizing to victims of historical
abuses on the grounds that in most cases, both victims and perpetrators are
long dead. But national contrition teaches an important lesson to young
people and thus may help prevent future horrors.
And the kids are listening: At the National Board Games Association
convention in Denver last month, 16-year-old Eric Smith apologized to
11-year-old Todd Litwak for wiping out the entire population of South
America in a game of Risk. "Even though it was only a game, I felt that I
was practicing vicarious genocide by massacring Todd's entire army,"
explains Eric. "I didn't care that much about the soldiers, but
annihilating the civilian population was completely unconscionable." White
House officials confirm that President Clinton will soon phone young Eric
to commend him for a gesture that "ennobles us all."
Mr. Queenan is a satirist in Tarrytown, N.Y.
Tilman Hausherr
In <19980112174...@ladder02.news.aol.com>, hrob...@aol.com
(HRobin153) wrote:
>Didn't SMM say that the powerful would have to apologize to their victims?
I did suggest in the past that the Moon organisations apologizes to its
victims, and refund people money who felt defrauded. I don't remember
the exact answers, but no moonie agreed. Instead, one even considered it
OK to ask money for prayer (= defrauding japanese widows).
HRobin153
In article <34c36978...@news.snafu.de>, til...@berlin.snafu.de (Tilman
Hausherr) writes:
In
><19980112174...@ladder02.news.aol.com>,
>hrob...@aol.com
(HRobin153) wrote:
>Didn't SMM say that the powerful would
>have to apologize to their victims?
I did suggest in the past that the Moon
>organisations apologizes to its
victims, and refund people money who felt
>defrauded. I don't remember
the exact answers, but no moonie agreed. Instead,
>one even considered it
OK to ask money for prayer (= defrauding japanese
>widows).
--
Tilman Hausherr ** Inventor of the "Driving Principle"
>**
til...@berlin.snafu.de
>http://www.snafu.de/~tilman/faq-you/moonies.txt
---
I'm shocked!!....shocked!!!
Tilman is admitting that SMM is powerful!!
Amazing!
Hamm
Dennis Smith
HRobin153 wrote:
> I'm shocked!!....shocked!!!
> Tilman is admitting that SMM is powerful!!
> Amazing!
> Hamm
>
> my brothers, father's not naked; he be clothed in the glory of God
I don't think anyone on this NG ever said Moon wasn't powerful.
I for one believe he is very powerful. He is rich and money is
power. He is also a delusional convicted felon who runs a criminal
organization masquerading as a church.
D.Smith
Hatolzin
Im Artikel <69u1us$2...@bgtnsc02.worldnet.att.net>, Dennis Smith
<dsm...@worldnet.att.net> schreibt:
>I don't think anyone on this NG ever said Moon wasn't powerful.
>I for one believe he is very powerful. He is rich and money is
>power. He is also a delusional convicted felon who runs a criminal
>organization masquerading as a church.
>
>D.Smith
>
Hallo, D.Smith,
It seems you are very shure about the "criminal organization".
I was an official member of the UC in Germany for 20 Years.
It's not criminal.
It's like all other religios organizations in the world. (And ALL structures in
the world)
Addicted structures. Addicted People. Addicted to power and controlling others.
The UC is just a mirror of the society as the society is a mirror of the UC.
Not better and not bader.
Just to mention: I am on my own way now to heal from all my addictions and to
find a TRUE spiritual life. I don't need any religious organization for that.
Just friends.
And I am not shure about the personality of Rev. Moon. I think he beliefs in
what he is saying and doing and I respect him for that.
And it's not MY way.
Hans
HRobin153
In article <69u1us$2...@bgtnsc02.worldnet.att.net>, Dennis Smith
<dsm...@worldnet.att.net> writes:
HRobin153 wrote:
>
>I'm shocked!!....shocked!!!
> Tilman is admitting that SMM is powerful!!
>
>Amazing!
> Hamm
>
> my brothers, father's not naked; he be clothed in the
>glory of God
I don't think anyone on this NG ever said Moon wasn't
>powerful.
I for one believe he is very powerful. He is rich and money
>is
power. He is also a delusional convicted felon who runs a
>criminal
organization masquerading as a church.
D.Smith
>>>
It's not the money that makes SMM powerful; it's the ideas.
It was his ideas which generated the money, the UC, and
his influence.
It's also his ideas which make him appear 'delusional' to some
observors. But I've found that by testing the ideas it's possible
to separate the delusions from the reality.
Being convicted of a felony is not a delusion; but that mark against
his name will be erased as soon as the Presidential pardon comes
through.
'Cri-min-al orga-nization mas-que-rading asa chu-rch' ??
What are you talking about? The UC was dissolved last year
and everybody was sent home. (Actually I think he was glad
to disband the UC. In the 70's he said the UC gave him a
headache. Now that the UC is gone he can get on with his
'real mission'--creating families through the Blessing--unemcumbered.)
(Some observors point out that switching from 'church' to 'families'
is 'brilliant marketing strategy'. They point out that the only thing
>everybody< needs more than a personal relationship with God, is
a family.)
Dennis Smith
Hatolzin wrote:
> Im Artikel <69u1us$2...@bgtnsc02.worldnet.att.net>, Dennis Smith
> <dsm...@worldnet.att.net> schreibt:
>
> >I don't think anyone on this NG ever said Moon wasn't powerful.
> >I for one believe he is very powerful. He is rich and money is
> >power. He is also a delusional convicted felon who runs a criminal
> >organization masquerading as a church.
> >
> >D.Smith
> >
>
> Hallo, D.Smith,
> It seems you are very shure about the "criminal organization".
> I was an official member of the UC in Germany for 20 Years.
> It's not criminal.
> It's like all other religios organizations in the world. (And ALL structures in
> the world)
> Addicted structures. Addicted People. Addicted to power and controlling others.
> The UC is just a mirror of the society as the society is a mirror of the UC.
> Not better and not bader.
> Just to mention: I am on my own way now to heal from all my addictions and to
> find a TRUE spiritual life. I don't need any religious organization for that.
> Just friends.
> And I am not shure about the personality of Rev. Moon. I think he beliefs in
> what he is saying and doing and I respect him for that.
> And it's not MY way.
> Hans
Hans:
Since you were in Germany you probably didn't know that the
church pled guilty to violating federal criminal laws here in the
United States.
D.Smith
Dennis Smith
HRobin153 wrote:
> In article <69u1us$2...@bgtnsc02.worldnet.att.net>, Dennis Smith
> <dsm...@worldnet.att.net> writes:
>
> HRobin153 wrote:
>
> >
> >I'm shocked!!....shocked!!!
> > Tilman is admitting that SMM is powerful!!
> >
> >Amazing!
> > Hamm
> >
> > my brothers, father's not naked; he be clothed in the
> >glory of God
>
> I don't think anyone on this NG ever said Moon wasn't
> >powerful.
> I for one believe he is very powerful. He is rich and money
> >is
> power. He is also a delusional convicted felon who runs a
> >criminal
> organization masquerading as a church.
>
> D.Smith
> >>>
>
> It's not the money that makes SMM powerful; it's the ideas.
> It was his ideas which generated the money, the UC, and
> his influence.
>
It is clearly the money that makes Moon powerful. If hedidn't have money do
you think people like George Bush
would speak at his functions?
> It's also his ideas which make him appear 'delusional' to some
> observors. But I've found that by testing the ideas it's possible
> to separate the delusions from the reality.
>
The only people that think he is not delusional are membersof his church
who have been duped by him. Even people who
have taken money from him like Jerry Fawell think he is a nut.
> Being convicted of a felony is not a delusion; but that mark against
> his name will be erased as soon as the Presidential pardon comes
> through.
>
Presidential pardon? How much will that cost?
> 'Cri-min-al orga-nization mas-que-rading asa chu-rch' ??
>
> What are you talking about? The UC was dissolved last year
> and everybody was sent home. (Actually I think he was glad
> to disband the UC. In the 70's he said the UC gave him a
> headache. Now that the UC is gone he can get on with his
> 'real mission'--creating families through the Blessing--unemcumbered.)
>
The only thing that has changed is the name. Moon still calls theshots and
controls all of the assets formerly under the HSA-UWC.
In fact the majority of movement assets are held by corporate
entities other than HSA-UWC.
> (Some observors point out that switching from 'church' to 'families'
> is 'brilliant marketing strategy'. They point out that the only thing
> >everybody< needs more than a personal relationship with God, is
> a family.)
> Hamm
> my brothers, father's not naked; he be clothed in the glory of God
Oh ya its just one brilliant move after another by Convicted Felon
Sun Myung Moon.
D.Smith
Rosa maxim
>Subject: Re: SMM's Words Become Reality, According to Newspaper
>From: hrob...@aol.com (HRobin153)
>Date: Wed, Jan 21, 1998 12:51 EST
>Message-id: <19980121175...@ladder01.news.aol.com>
>
>
>It's not the money that makes SMM powerful;
Of course it is . That and finatical followers . And friends
in the Japanese mafia doesn't hurt either .
When he was runnung around from church to church in
Korea asking Christian ministers to follow him , what power
did he have ? When the stories of his sexual infidelities came
out , he was just a laughing stock . The papers for years had
fun at his expense . As close knit as Korean society is and as
important is respect from the tribal elders , sometimes I wonder
if Moon isn't just getting everybody back .
>it's the ideas.
>It was his ideas which generated the money, the UC, and
>his influence.
BS . Most of his "ideas" are other people's ideas .
Moon is a nut . Like Hitler , he is deluded as to his own
identity , and will make any relationship and do anything
to accomplish his ends . Bo Hi Pak and others in the KCIA
developed very interesting relationships for Moon in
Japan and America . He has been able to hide behind
religious freedom in America and has been valuable to
Foreign Governments because of it .
>It's also his ideas which make him appear 'delusional' to some
>observors. But I've found that by testing the ideas it's possible
>to separate the delusions from the reality.
Lucky for you , you didn't have to test going to the
bathroom on the floor , like the women in the church .
>Being convicted of a felony is not a delusion; but that mark against
>his name will be erased as soon as the Presidential pardon comes
>through.
Don't hold your breath .
-snipped-
>They point out that the only thing
>>everybody< needs more than a personal relationship with God, is
>a family.)
I hope you meant "other than a personal relationship w/ God"
and not "MORE than a personal relationship"
Tilman Hausherr
In <19980121175...@ladder01.news.aol.com>, hrob...@aol.com
(HRobin153) wrote:
>
>What are you talking about? The UC was dissolved last year
>and everybody was sent home.
Not true. The unificiation church is not being dissolved. Their web site
is still at www.unification.org.
--
Tilman Hausherr ** Inventor of the "Driving Principle" **
til...@berlin.snafu.de http://www.snafu.de/~tilman/faq-you/moonies.txt
"What I don't understand is how anyone can take
Hatolzin
Im Artikel <6a5epq$h...@bgtnsc01.worldnet.att.net>, Dennis Smith
<dsm...@worldnet.att.net> schreibt:
>
>Hans:
>
>Since you were in Germany you probably didn't know that the
>church pled guilty to violating federal criminal laws here in the
>United States.
>
>D.Smith
You are just continuing BLAMING, D. Smith.
Just seeing ONE side of at least 2 sides.
Continue and be happy. It's not my way.
Hans
HRobin153
In article <34c974bb....@news.snafu.de>, til...@berlin.snafu.de (Tilman
Hausherr) writes:
In
><19980121175...@ladder01.news.aol.com>,
>hrob...@aol.com
(HRobin153) wrote:
>
>What are you talking about? The UC
>was dissolved last year
>and everybody was sent home.
Not true. The
>unificiation church is not being dissolved. Their web site
is still at
>www.unification.org.
--
Tilman Hausherr ** Inventor of the "Driving
>Principle" **
til...@berlin.snafu.de
>http://www.snafu.de/~tilman/faq-you/moonies.txt
>>>
That's an outdated web site. Someone somewhere else described the
phenomenon as a distant exploding star viewed from Earth. Although the
star is gone it takes a while for the last light to reach us. The UC is gone,
but we still see its light. But soon its light will seem dim compared to
the brightness that is to come.
HRobin153
In article <19980121201...@ladder02.news.aol.com>, rosa...@aol.com
(Rosa maxim) writes:
>It's not the money that
>makes SMM powerful;
Of course it is . That and finatical followers . And
>friends
in the Japanese mafia doesn't hurt either .
>>>
At least you're right about that.
>>>
When he was runnung
>around from church to church in
Korea asking Christian ministers to follow
>him , what power
did he have ? When the stories of his sexual infidelities
>came
out , he was just a laughing stock . The papers for years had
fun at
>his expense . As close knit as Korean society is and as
important is respect
>from the tribal elders , sometimes I wonder
if Moon isn't just getting
>everybody back .
>>>
In some cultures it's customary to give the new leader a rough time
just before he recieves his authority.
>>>
>it's the ideas.
>It was his ideas which generated the
>money, the UC, and
>his influence.
BS . Most of his "ideas" are other
>people's ideas .
Moon is a nut . Like Hitler , he is deluded as to his own
>
identity , and will make any relationship and do anything
to accomplish his
>ends . Bo Hi Pak and others in the KCIA
developed very interesting
>relationships for Moon in
Japan and America . He has been able to hide
>behind
religious freedom in America and has been valuable to
Foreign
>Governments because of it .
>>>
And the Messiah is >supposed< to hide out in a cave with
Benjamin Creme, right? If you're trying to change the world
you have to deal with those who control it.
What were you thinking...that villans would feel conscience-stricken
in his presence and become new people?
Hey!! Sci-fi-boy; wake up!!
>>>
>It's also his ideas which make him appear
>'delusional' to some
>observors. But I've found that by testing the ideas
>it's possible
>to separate the delusions from the reality.
Lucky for you ,
>you didn't have to test going to the
bathroom on the floor , like the women
>in the church .
>>>
Yeah; men are lucky that way....
>>>
>Being convicted of a felony is not a delusion; but that
>mark against
>his name will be erased as soon as the Presidential pardon
>comes
>through.
Don't hold your breath .
>>>
I'm not blue yet.
>>>
-snipped-
>They point out that
>the only thing
>>everybody< needs more than a personal relationship with God,
>is
>a family.)
I hope you meant "other than a personal relationship w/
>God"
and not "MORE than a personal relationship"
Craig Maxim <
>rosa...@aol.com >
1 John 5:20 And we are in him who is true-even in his
>son Christ Jesus.
He is the true God and
>eternal life .
>>>
Nope.
So what if you have a personal relationship with God?
God's substantial influence can't spread without substantial
bodies to express His/Her Heart, and people have this
tendency to get old after about 80years or so.
And so what if you have a personal relationship with God;
you only know half of God's nature unless you have a spouse.
So what if you have a personal relationship with God;
unless you have children then you can't know how
God felt at the creation of mankind or how S/He
feels toward people.
And so what if you have a personal relationship with God;
how personal can it be if you don't have a family?
Oh you can talk with God, but how much can you
empathize when the conversation turns to sharing life with a
wonderful spouse, or the activities of hard-headed children?
Having that personal relationship with God is only the first step
in a joyful eternal life. This is why I say that:
'the only thing >everybody< needs more than a personal relationship
with God, is a family.'
I thought you knew this stuff, Short-years.
HRobin153
In article <6a5f90$h...@bgtnsc01.worldnet.att.net>, Dennis Smith
<dsm...@worldnet.att.net> writes:
snip
> (Some observors
>point out that switching from 'church' to 'families'
> is 'brilliant
>marketing strategy'. They point out that the only thing
> >everybody< needs
>more than a personal relationship with God, is
> a family.)
> Hamm
> my
>brothers, father's not naked; he be clothed in the glory of God
Oh ya its
>just one brilliant move after another by Convicted Felon
Sun Myung
>Moon.
D.Smith
>>>
Oh ya, just one sour grape after another by D. Smith.
Rosa maxim
>Message-id: <19980123042...@ladder02.news.aol.com>
>>the only thing
>>>everybody< needs more than a personal relationship with God,
>>is
>>a family.)
>
>I hope you meant "other than a personal relationship w/
>>God"
>and not "MORE than a personal relationship"
>
>
>Craig Maxim <
>>rosa...@aol.com >
>1 John 5:20 And we are in him who is true-even in his
>>son Christ Jesus.
> He is the true God and
>>eternal life .
>>>>
>
>Nope.
>
>So what if you have a personal relationship with God?....
-snipped-
>So what if you have a personal relationship with God;
-snipped-
>And so what if you have a personal relationship with God;
-snipped-
>Having that personal relationship with God is only the first step
How many cultures in the world do you know that have a
saying like this "A journey of a thousand miles begins with
the first step ." ?
There is no journey without the first step , that makes the first
step more important than any thing else . You yourself recognise
that a personal relationship with God is that first step . Then you
should realise that nothing is more important than that
relationship . Everything that can be called good or valuable
will flow from that .
It is your humanist philosophy that prevents your priorities
from being absolute in regard to that relationship of putting
God always first in your life .
Even the suggestion that there is something that can be needed
more than a relationship to God is devoid of any understanding
of God . Try to understand how far from God Moon has put
your heart and mind . You can allow Moon to deceive you your
whole life , but when you are standing alone in front of God
himself , Moon will not be there to defend you . He will have
to face God alone for his own actions and heart .
>This is why I say that:
>'the only thing >everybody< needs more than a personal relationship
>with God, is a family.'
They don't need it more , but they may want it more , that is
what causes them to create satanic imitations of God's family ,
which replace God as the head . Like the UC .
Craig Maxim < rosa...@aol.com >
1 John 5:20 And we are in him who is true-even in his son Christ Jesus.
He is the true God and eternal life .
Free Bible Course : Send Name , Address , Age cva...@juno.com
Dennis Smith
Hatolzin wrote:
I'm sorry but I don't know what you mean. Did you
or did you not know the church is a criminal
organization?
D.Smith
HRobin153
In article <19980123163...@ladder01.news.aol.com>, rosa...@aol.com
(Rosa maxim) writes:
>So what if you have
>a personal relationship with God?....
-snipped-
>So what if you have a
>personal relationship with God;
-snipped-
>And so what if you have a
>personal relationship with God;
-snipped-
>Having that personal
>relationship with God is only the first step
How many cultures in the world
>do you know that have a
saying like this "A journey of a thousand miles
>begins with
the first step ." ?
>>>
Why do you think that one must always be in the 'evangilizing-the-heathens'
mode? While you seem to believe that no one who reads your posts is 'saved',
I take the opposing view; that most ARU readers are 'saved'. Consequently
they need to know about the next step. (I don't consider it a virture to
confine
folks to the realm-of-the-damned-if-they-don't-think-like-I-do, as you do.)
To answer your question: many cultures do. (My favorite Capricornian motto is:
'One step at a time.')
>>>
There is no journey without the first step
>, that makes the first
step more important than any thing else . You
>yourself recognise
that a personal relationship with God is that first step
>. Then you
should realise that nothing is more important than that
>
relationship . Everything that can be called good or valuable
will flow
>from that .
>>>
And what else is new? (Why do you not want folks to know that once they
are one with God, they need a family to continue doing the will of God?)
>>>
It is your humanist philosophy that prevents your priorities
>
from being absolute in regard to that relationship of putting
God always
>first in your life .
Even the suggestion that there is something that can
>be needed
more than a relationship to God is devoid of any understanding
of
>God . Try to understand how far from God Moon has put
your heart and mind .
>You can allow Moon to deceive you your
whole life , but when you are
>standing alone in front of God
himself , Moon will not be there to defend
>you . He will have
to face God alone for his own actions and heart .
>>>
Dead-fish rhetoric twisted beyond the realm of reality.
>>>
>This
>is why I say that:
>'the only thing >everybody< needs more than a personal
>relationship
>with God, is a family.'
They don't need it more , but they
>may want it more , that is
what causes them to create satanic imitations of
>God's family ,
which replace God as the head . Like the UC .
Craig Maxim
>< rosa...@aol.com >
1 John 5:20 And we are in him who is true-even in
>his son Christ Jesus.
He is the true God
>and eternal life .
>>>
Who is this mysterious 'they' you speak of? Would 'they' be the heathens
you presume yourself to be showing off for? Why do you pretend to be
an elitist when you don't pay attention to the way God works, and don't have
a clue as to who you are, let alone who other people are?
HRobin153
In article <6abk5u$r...@bgtnsc03.worldnet.att.net>, Dennis Smith
<dsm...@worldnet.att.net> writes:
snip
>
> You are just
>continuing BLAMING, D. Smith.
> Just seeing ONE side of at least 2 sides.
>
>Continue and be happy. It's not my way.
> Hans
I'm sorry but I don't know
>what you mean. Did you
or did you not know the church is a
>criminal
organization?
D.Smith
>>>
Hans,
I'd like you to meet Dennis--he looks 'harmless' but has
big teeth.
Dennis, this is Hans--he looks 'harmless' but he's a German.
(Do you think that Tilman has felt the tremor in the net?)