From: mprc@troi.cc.rochester.edu (M. Price)
Newsgroups: talk.abortion,talk.religion.misc,alt.atheism
Subject: Re: Is it Christian values or chavinism?
Date: 6 Oct 92 18:42:25 GMT
Organization: University of Rochester - Rochester, New York

In <nyikos.718388155@milo.math.scarolina.edu> nyikos@math.scarolina.edu (Peter Nyikos) writes:

>In <1992Oct1.220046.8952@galileo.cc.rochester.edu> mprc@troi.cc.rochester.edu (M. Price) writes:

>>In <nyikos.717897446@milo.math.scarolina.edu> nyikos@math.scarolina.edu (Peter Nyikos) writes:

>>>In <usglkrx.717686544@gsusgi1.gsu.edu> usglkrx@gsusgi2.gsu.edu (Lori K. Rothman) writes:

>>>>nyikos@math.scarolina.edu (Peter Nyikos) writes:

>>>>>In <1992Sep25.211600.23804@coopsol.com> gordons@coopsol.com (Gordon Storga) writes:

>>>>>><1992Sep18.233054.14674@noao.edu> forgach@noao.edu (Suzanne Forgach) said:
>>>>>>>From article by iad@cogsci.ed.ac.uk (Ivan A Derzhanski):
>>>>>>>> In article mprc@troi.cc.rochester.edu (M. Price) writes:
>>>>>>>> >In nyikos@math.scarolina.edu (Peter Nyikos) writes:
>>>>>>>> >    <...> the fact that Suzanne
>>>>>>>> >used the word "crucified" to refer to the justifiable tongue-lashing
>>>>>>>> >Christ gave those who debased His temple trivializes the agony and
>>>>>>>> >suffering He underwent in His death and spiritual separation from His
>>>>>>>> >Father.

>>>I've already followed up to this post, but since then I realized that
>>>there are many layers of deception that I haven't addressed before.

>>>1. The original statement of M. Price, which Storga cunningly deleted,
>>>had to do with the "white hot flashes" of Jesus, with the comment,
>>>"Think of those poor Scribes and Pharisees, how they must have suffered."
>>>[This I did comment on before, along with the fact that Suzanne's 
>>>rejoinder, directed at M. Price and NOT Jesus, was "Yeah, he really
>>>crucified them," putting the "suffering" of the Scribes and Pharisees 
>>>into perspective.]

>>    Not my statement, Petie. 

>But your conspicuous silence on it, while "castigating" Suzanne for her
>rejoinder.  

     I did not find the statement offensive and blasphemous. I responded
to the statement I did find offensive and blasphemous. You later admit
that Jesus did rage at the scribes and Pharisees--why should I find
Loren's statement of this blasphemous and yours inoffensive?

>> Try to concentrate.

>It was a lapse of memory, not concentration.

    Oooh, you hated that, didn't you?

>>>NEW BUSINESS:

>>>2. M. Price cunningly made it seem that the original quote was about
>>>Jesus driving the money-changers out of the temple.  The scribes and
>>>pharisees did not "debase" the temple in this way, and I cannot 
>>>recall any biblical statement that they did debase the temple.

>>     Well, I'm sorry if I made an assumption about what Lori meant.

>It was Loren, not Lori [fascinating resemblance!].  Loren Petrich, 
>that is, the lead-off speaker in this little excerpt from an exchange
>with Susan Garvin, which you seem to have missed:

    Au contraire.

>>#####From article <1992Aug26.061545.18227@s1.gov#, by lip@s1.gov (Loren I. Petrich):
>>###### 	Well, to be fair, even Jesus Christ was known for white-hot
>>###### rages, or so his biographers depict. Consider what those poor Scribes
>>###### and Pharisees suffered.
>>###
>>#####Oh, yeah, He really crucified them.
>>###
>>####     I am disgusted. I find this lighthearted treatment of the Savior's
>>####agony on the cross appalling and blassphemous. I demand an apology!
>>###
>>###You don't fool me for one second, M. Price.  I wonder if anyone doesn't
>>###see you are being sarcastic.
>>#
>>##Why would you say that, Nyikos?  Do you think that no Christians
>>##support legal abortion?
>>#
>>#Who said anything about abortion above?  Of course lots of Christians
>>#support legal abortion.  What I'm saying is that M. Price's "disgust"
>>#about "blasphemy" is phony.  I've known Christians of all shades and
>>#stripes, and from everything I've ever heard from them, M. Price's
>>#statement sounds as phony as a $3 bill.  

>>#And that's even without taking into account his silence about Loren's
>>#talk about the "white-hot rages."  With that, the statement becomes
>>#as phony as a $3.50 bill.

>> She
>>wrote "Scribes and Pharisees," but, as she discussed Jesus' rage,I
>>assumed that she was referring to the one section of the Bible where he
>>vents it,

>I believe Loren is a masculine name. Anyway, Jesus did "rage" at the
>Scribes and Pharisees, too, only you don't seem to be very conversant
>with the Bible.  I leave it to you to dig up the passages, to be found
>in both Luke and Matthew.  

  1. I have female friends named Loren.
  2. Why do you agree that Jesus "raged" (albeit in quotes) but expect
me to be outraged with Loren for saying so? Consistency, Petie!
  3. The overturning of the tables of the moneychangers in the temple is
the only Biblical example of Jesus physically venting His righteous
anger. Unless, of course, you can "dig up" the other refs.

>> i.e., the confrontation with the money-changers and vendors in
>>the temple (unless you count the cursing of the fig tree, for which I'm
>>sure He had His reasons). 

>Still trying to maintain your charade, eh?  You'll find lots more
>"raging" than this, if you care to look.  That fig tree incident
>is an old standby of village atheists.  Funny how they don't bring
>up the much more embarrassing (to Christians) incident of Jesus
>putting demons into a whole herd of swine, who promptly rushed lemming-
>like to kill themselve.  The swineheards were anything but happy about it.

     If you're trying to assert that the exorcism of demons into the
Gadarene swine was an example of Jesus "raging," you'll have to try
harder than that. And I certainly am not a "village atheist." The
cursing of the fig tree is Biblically authenticated--if you don't like
it, tough. The Bible is not a buffet, with choice items to be selected
at will.

>>>>>>Suzanne seems to ignore the castigation of other Christians who take her
>>>>>>to task for trivializing their god's contributions.  I notice she doesn't
>>>>>>apologize for it.
>>>>>Get with it, Gordon!  Don't you see how Ivan has exposed M. Price's 
>>>>>"castigation" for the hoax that it is?  And I've addressed this
>>>>>"castigation" myself several times.

>>>>Well, just to be fair, I asked my aunt what she thought of Suzanne's
>>>>"joke".  My aunt is 78 years old, goes to church every Sunday, doesn't
>>>>drink, etc.

>>>I recommend that you NOT show this follow-up to your aunt until you have
>>>had a chance to gauge her reaction to my one of yesterday.  Her heart
>>>might not bear up well under the depths of human hypocrisy which it 
>>>reveals.

>>    Ok, I did delete stuff, but certainly not anything which revealed
>>"the depths of human hypocrisy" (or, frankly, anything that was at all
>>interesting).

>I was "castigating" Storga up there.  And you talk about reading
>comprehension!

    No, sweetie--I _write_ about it. Get with the program!

>Storga only deleted all the evidence that would exonerate Suzanne.

>>>Peter Nyikos

>>>QUOTE OF THE DAY:

>>>"Blessed are you when they insult you and persecute you and
>>>utter every kind of evil against you [falsely] because of me.
>>>...Thus they persecuted the prophets who were before you."
>>>		----The words of Jesus, spoken during the Sermon on 
>>>		    the Mount [Matt. 5:11-12]

>>    I'm afraid your own caveat excludes you.
>		^^^^			 ^^^
>I stand by what I have said, except for that lapse of memory.  If you
>were to read the New Testament at all carefully, you would realize
>that "your" and "you" could best be applied to Jesus and his followers,
>by Storga's atheistic standards, and quite possibly your own carefully
>concealed ones.

     Are you saying you are Jesus? And you accuse me of hypocrisy!

                                                      MP

>PS Anybody who deletes "by Storga's atheistic standards..." and smears
>me with smearing Jesus and his followers, can expect the same 
>"castigation" I am now directing at Storga and M. Price.