Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.2 (Tek) 9/28/84 based on 9/17/84; site shark.UUCP
Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!cbosgd!ihnp4!houxm!vax135!cornell!uw-beaver!tektronix!orca!shark!hutch
From: hutch@shark.UUCP (Stephen Hutchison)
Newsgroups: net.religion,net.religion.christian,net.religion.jewish
Subject: Re: The writings of Don Black (Bravo Rich!)
Message-ID: <1303@shark.UUCP>
Date: Thu, 28-Mar-85 23:05:49 EST
Article-I.D.: shark.1303
Posted: Thu Mar 28 23:05:49 1985
Date-Received: Sun, 31-Mar-85 02:48:11 EST
References: <653@pyuxd.UUCP> <200@ihu1n.UUCP> <1291@shark.UUCP> <745@pyuxd.UUCP>
Reply-To: hutch@shark.UUCP (Stephen Hutchison)
Organization: Tektronix, Wilsonville OR
Lines: 78
Xref: watmath net.religion:6381 net.religion.christian:534 net.religion.jewish:1771
Summary: 

In article <745@pyuxd.UUCP> rlr@pyuxd.UUCP (Professor Wagstaff) writes:
>But not that stupid.  You are using the word "we" but you are only speaking for
>yourself.  Certainly Wingate has seen the articles as he has seen fit to
>comment on them.  All we got was "charley" saying "yes, i agree" to what
>someone else had said.  On the other hand, we got lots of christians actually
>DEFENDING Black and his neo-Nazi philosophy.  So YOU may not have seen it,
>Hutch.  (Though how you managed to see NONE of his articles and NONE of anyone
>else's responses defies comprehension.)  But others certainly have and
>certainly have failed to say anything dissociating themselves from this
>philosophy, certainly a growing "christian" movement.

Actually, I was speaking for myself and others here at tek wilsonville in
ECS.  Most of the folks I have talked with never saw his articles.  However,
my wife Penny tells me she saw them in net.religion, which I do not read.

I recall vaguely seeing a Wingate article which agreed with SOME of the
points in an article which I don't remember seeing, but it seemed to be
against most of them.

In any case, there are lots of non-Christians who also support the neo-Nazi
groups, and a lot of crazed fools and cultists who believe the lies invented
by pseudo-evangelist neo-Nazis.  There is a concentration of those in Idaho
which is entirely too close to where I grew up.  It's probably a good place
for them to be; the majority of the populace are armed and familiar with the
proper use of firearms, and can fight back effectively should the neo-Nazi
leadership decide they want to actually take over.

>I'll make a deal with you:
>
>definition of religion:  anything you want -- include Buddhism, Marxism,
>	embolism, cataclysm, tomatoes, whatever, I'll go along with it!
>
>subjective evidence:  agreed---anything you subjectively experience really
>	does happen and is verifiable and absolutely true!
>
>wishful thinking:  nobody I've ever spoken to engages in that.

What a concession!  Can we hold you to this? :-)

>Now, partially because I'm absolutely swamped here and more importantly because
>I think THIS issue is of paramount concern:
>
>1.  To Christians:  What about this guy Black?  And his philosophy of America's
>	destiny under god and Christian morality and law?  Does he represent
>	your point of view?  A slightly different one?  An antithetical one?
>	Does he have real truth to offer as agreed with by other Christians?
>	Does he represent a growing influence in America?  Do you care?

As far as I can tell, having seen only what you quoted, Black does not
represent Christianity in any way.  He represents a facet of movement which
may be growing (I can't tell, not having access to a Real Good Database from
various law-enforcement agencies about increase or decrease of nazi fringe);
they are certainly becoming more aggressive.

The idea of a "Christian State" is repellent to me.  I don't WANT to have
to accept as Christians people who are NOT Christians.  I don't WANT to make
other people accept the costs of being Christian, without the help of the
Holy Spirit to support them.  I certainly don't want the CHURCH (which is
hard pressed to agree within itself on ANY peripheral issue) to take over
the responsibility for deciding all sorts of trivial matters which are
unrelated to its REAL responsibilities.

Incidentally, Black denies that the Holocaust occurred.  Thus he has, by
throwing away history, thrown away any possibility that his claims to
be Christian are valid.  Christianity is an historical religion, that is,
we follow a Messiah who lived, died, and was raised from the dead, IN
REALITY, no fable, no myth.  By claiming against an event which living
people remember and for which real physical evidence exists, Don makes it
impossible to accept the Christian Gospels, which were written by and
attested to by living people who remembered it happening, and by the
physical evidence of the empty tomb.

Do I care about his beliefs?  If he doesn't act on them, I have less reason
to care about them.  If he acts on them, or attempts to spread them, then
you KNOW I care about them.  I may not STOP him from spreading them, but
I can certainly tell the truth to counter his lies.

Hutch