Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.1 6/24/83; site duke.UUCP
Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!burl!ulysses!unc!mcnc!duke!nlt
From: nlt@duke.UUCP (N. L. Tinkham)
Newsgroups: net.religion
Subject: In response to Rosen, Bellovin, Maroney, and others
Message-ID: <5633@duke.UUCP>
Date: Wed, 27-Mar-85 21:22:47 EST
Article-I.D.: duke.5633
Posted: Wed Mar 27 21:22:47 1985
Date-Received: Fri, 29-Mar-85 06:03:45 EST
Organization: Duke University
Lines: 31

[*]

   It has taken awhile, but I am finally coming to realize that some
of the assumptions I make about the net.religion readers may be in error.
In particular:  I have been assuming that most net.religion readers
have enough of a working knowledge of Christianity that they are able
to discern whether a given position is representative of one or more
of the major Christian traditions.  And I have been applying this assumption to
Don Black's articles:  It is obvious to me that "Identity Christianity"
holds many views which are contrary to those of orthodox Christianity;
I assumed it was obvious to everyone else -- so obvious that it was not
worth stating.
   Those of you who have complained about silence:  Are you honestly
claiming that "Identity" sounds so much like the teachings of the
major Christian traditions that you cannot distinguish them?
Do you truly believe that it is safe to assume that a Christian is
passionately anti-Semitic until he proves himself otherwise?

   For those who need someone to state the painfully obvious, here
it is:  The torture and execution of millions of Jews and others
under the Nazis was a horror and an abomination which must never,
ever be repeated.  I, too, was stunned to read Byron's article pointing
out that there are groups today which consider this to have been
an acceptable action, and that "Identity" is apparently among them.
Should a group like that ever begin to come to power in this country,
I would use any moral means at my disposal to oppose them.

   Is that a clear enough statement?

                                    N. L. Tinkham
                                    duke!nlt