Conference yukon::christian_v7

    
    I do not think there is enough reliable information about the
    situation to comment on this guy and his group.  I would be very
    skeptical of anyone who preached with a Bible in one hand and an
    automatic weapon in the other.
    
    I will also watch what commentary this stirs here.
     

I agree with Mike Parise on this.  I too would be wary.  We have swords
not rifles.  ;-)  And we do not fight flesh and blood.

If you get comments about Christians based on these people in Waco,
I would suggest that the commentators are looking for reasons to 
denigrate Christianity.  There are so many other [legitimate] black-eyes
to Christianity (Bakker, Swaggart, etc) that this one just isn't worth
the effort of holding up as an example of "kooky kristians."

Mark

'swords in one hand a Bibles in the other'

 - reminds me of Nehemiah 4:17-18
	- though there any similarity stops!

I agree with Mark that these are too obviously off beam - and yet even they
have followers!  And people who are trying to ignore conviction of guilt
will use even them as an excuse to hide ....

						sadly...
								'rew

    
    
    OK I'll go out on a limb here.  What was the affect that caused the ATF
    to storm the compound??? I have been listening quite closely and have
    found no reason put forth as to WHY the compound was stormed.  You see
    it is not a crime YET to own firearms if you have obtained the proper
    licenses etc..  And even if it was then it should have been a local
    problem to solve not a federal.  I am not advocating the means this
    cult has used, but questioning the validity of why the feds are
    involved in the first place.

 Funny, Dan, I've been wondering the same thing.  






 Jim

    
    Hi Jim...
    
    Has there been any indication that they have automatic weapons??
    
    
    Andy
    

    re : automatic weapons.
       Not meaning to be nit picky - really, but automatic weapons can be
       privately owned. There is a license that can be acquired for these
       types of weapons too. Automatic weapon licenses are very few and
       far between, but I know someone who had one. (not the weapon, but
       the license, he sold the weapon.) - I do not know if the act
       of selling the (last) automatic weapon, (to another authorized
       license holder), constitutes the invalidation of the license,though.
        PDM
    

    A Fort Worth writer wrote that for months and years people have been
    telling local, state and federal officials about not only firearms but
    sexual misconducts by Koresh inside his compounds.  Like having sex
    with girls as young as 12 or so.  (I admit that this may not be a
    federal offense and most likely not under the ATF's jurisdiction.)  
    Today there are also reports of him possibly involved in money 
    laundering.  In 1987 there was a fierce gunfight that actually led to 
    Koresh's rise to the top of the sect.  With all those, some locals 
    are said to be surprised no action was taken sooner.  And they are 
    also surprised and dismayed that the authorities did not nab Koresh 
    when he ran errands or jogged.  Now that is a legitimate complaint.  
    Police searched black neighborhoods and the slums for weapons all 
    the time (maybe not enough).  No one complains about violating 
    whoever's constitutional rights there, let's remember.
    
    Charles
    

    
    Hi Jim...
    
    Was in Armor during my stint in the Army, and heard the 50 cal many a
    time.... It's very distinct sounding. I never heard the sounds during
    the tapes I saw... 
    
      Also, I talked with a few National Guardsmen who were involved in the
    Newark, N.J. riots in 1967. Not condoning the way they did it, BTW, but
    there was a sniper firing at them from a 6 story tenament.... they
    brought up a 50 cal mounted on a jeep and the guy took off the whole
    sixth floor with it... I mean literally took the whole floor down... 
    it looked like a wrecking ball systematically demolished the whole top
    floor. 
    
      I would think if they had a 50 cal, it would have done a lot more
    damage than is being shown...
    
      Just my 2 cents...
    
      Andy
    

    >like having sex with girls as young as 12 or so.  (I admit that this 
    >may not be a federal offense and most likely not under the ATF's 
    >jurisdiction.)
    
    EXCUSE ME!!!!   It SHOULD BE!!!!!!!!!
    
    Sorry, this line just really set my button off.  No offense at you
    Charles, but that qualification sounded like you were minimizing his
    immoral abuse with children!!
    
    Nancy
    

    No Nancy, I thought the ATF is only in charge of alcohol, tabacco and
    firearms and that sort of stuff.  While they're at it of course they
    should nab crooks of all kind at the same time.  But like if there's a
    rapist in town the ATF won't march into town for him, it would be the
    FBI or whoever.
    
    Charles
    

    :-}
    
    Yah, I understood that, but the qualifier *to me* was, well, it hurt!
    sorry.
    
    I guess this is my spot of sensitivity.  

    Some things I read in the paper today that surprise/confuse me..
    
    1.  There was an ATF undercover in the compound just before the "raid"
    and supposedly he heard Koresh get a warning that the raid was
    coming... something fishy here.
    
    aw chucks... can't remember the second thing that caught my
    attention... getting old..
    
    Nancy

    
    Cults and false Christs will be common as we move into the 'Endtimes'
    It is an effective ploy to mislead people from the truth by using partial
    truth approach. It is also effective in preventing non-believers to go for
    Christianity verses other religions lest one may end up joining a cult
    without knowing it. It is common to come across friends and relatives
    asking us "how do you know yours is not a Christian cult", especially
    if you happened to be in a charismatic denomination.
    
    Mike, you are right, by making this Cult incident sensational, it does
    serve the above mentioned purpose.
    
    Jeff
    

    
    
      From what I could tell, in spite of claims to the contrary, there was
    *no* .50 cal. gunfire during the "raid". In fact, if there was one
    mounted to a guard tower the media would have zero'd their cameras in
    on it from their helicopter.
      If they (ATF) wanted Koresh on weapons charges they could have easily
    served the warrant while he was out jogging. They didn't need to stage
    a SWAT team attack. I was incredulous when the ATF spokeswoman said 
    right after the attack that they had been "outgunned". Although it's 
    politically correct for agencies such as ATF to make that claim, it 
    doesn't stand up under scrutiny. ATF, FBI, etc. have M16's, UZI's 
    SIG and Beretta 9mm's and the like. The M16 and UZI's are machine guns,
    not the semi auto rifles available to the general population. The SIG's
    and Beretta's are high capacity, very reliable handguns. These guys 
    have state of the art weaponry and gear and yet they made the claim
    that they were outgunned......I don't think so. Later they had to
    retract that statement and then they claimed that they lost the
    element of surprise.......why......it seems that a call was placed 
    to the BD compound a few minutes before the attack.......the question
    is who placed the call.
      I'm not saying that these guys (the BD) are ok and that the Feds had
    no reason to serve a warrant, I just don't believe all of the info (or
    misinfo) that has been circlulated so far by the Feds who are in turn
    feeding the media.
      As for the claims that Koresh thinks he's the Christ and all that I'd
    like to hear him say it....in fact there's a lot more info I'd like to 
    obtain before I make any determinations on this situation. 
    
      Just my 2 cents worth.
    
      RG 

    First, I would like to offer a prayer of thanks to God for 
    getting some measure of sanity into the BD situation.  
    
    It seems that every day the ATF is offering another reason/excuse
    for why the initial raid was 'necessary'.  Child abuse couldn't
    have been it.  Not only does the ATF not have any jurisdiction,
    but I understand that various organizations have *peacefully*
    gained access to the compound to review this particular complaint.
    The ATF had claimed that the BD planned an attack on the neighboring
    community of Waco - completely unsupported and no longer mentioned.
    
    Basically every 'reason' for the raid and its failure just haven't
    held up.  As far as why it failed, I can see no way it would have
    done anything else.  Attacking a cult with 'us vs them' mindset
    would seem to be a way of confirming their beliefs and stiffening
    their resolve.
    
    The worst indictment (to me) is that the press was invited to watch
    the show.  It smells like some yahoo saw a chance for flashy glory.
    Add this to the fact that *no* attempt was made to nab cult members
    when they went to town for errands, went to work, or basically anything
    that would not have made a flashy news story.
    
    Otto

    My reaction to this is "If they had left them alone, nobody would have
    been killed. So why the raid? It seemed like such a large price to pay,
    was nabbing them really worth it?"

    Definitely strange. 

    Maybe there are forces at work here that we won't ever understand.

    ???

    Glenn

    G'day...
    
    Most of the Australian media end the report of the Waco story with some
    comment like, "well, it is America you know...", or "Aren't they
    strange over there?".
    
    James

According to the internal news article (wasn't one posted
in this file?), Koresh hasn't left the compound in months.

According to Koresh, they have enough weapons in there
to wipe out those doing the seige.  So tanks have been
brought in.

It seems to me that walking up, knocking on the door with
a warrant and asking to go on a search would not have been
effective.  Perhaps I'm wrong.  The events of the past
days, however, seem to indicate that I'm right.  In this
case, a surprise search seems to be indicated with the
power to avoid a confrontation.  That's what was tried.
Unfortunately, the search wasn't a surprise and the power
was lacking as well.

All this is saying is that what happened doesn't sound
so unreasonable to me.  I'm not claiming that it was the
best decision.

Collis

    There were government officials allowed in the compound as has been
    said before.  The DSS was in to investigate allegations of child abuse.
    I'm not saying this guy (Korresh) has any validity at all, but
    something about this whole operation isn't right.
    
    
    Mike

    
    
    Both TIME and PEOPLE magazines have cover articles on him.
    
    Well, TIME's cover says something about "WHAT PEOPLE DO IN THE NAME OF
    GOD".
    
    I heard on the radio that they are requesting that the media give him
    no attention for a while to see if it stops him.  The attention may 
    be sustaining to him.
    
    #24

    You've asked why the raid was held in the first place.  My
    understanding is that the BATF has a hard time justifying its
    existance.  There are other depts. than can do the same work more
    effectively and efficiently.  With the budget cuts looming, the saw a
    chance for a major media event.  That's why the news folks were invited
    to be there.  In spite of the months they admit to training for this
    episode, they were unable to pull it off and are now looking for was to
    blame others for their ineptitude.  Perhaps knocking at the front door
    with a warrant might not have worked, but breaking in through a 2nd
    story window didn't either, and at a much higher cost.
    
    Karen
    

    re .25
    
    It pains me beyond measure that you may be right.
    I continue to offer up prayers that false prophets
    will be revealed and that the situation in Waco
    will be peacably concluded.
    
    In Christ,
    
    Otto

 In keeping with the Christian goals of most members of this conference, may
 I make a couple of observations about this discussion?

 1) Several times, the BD has been referred to as a cult.  Cult has become
 a rather dangerous word, as its respectable denotation has been totally
 debased by the media's suggestive connotations of the word.  A Christian is
 a Christion is a Christion.  If a sect has beliefs somewhat different
 than one's own, they are right or wrong, let God decide.  If we, as responsible
 Christions, support the media's subversion religion by continuing to
 use the word cult to describe the BDs, it would seem to me that we are not
 supporting God's best intersts in this matter.

 2) The BATF is a branch of the treasury, the tax collection organization of
 the government.  Presumably if BATF is interested in the BDs, it would be
 for the non-payment of the $200 tax stamps required for machine gun transfers.
 Since all Christians are taught to `render unto Ceaser...', and ` to judge
 not...', let us accept that those Christians's known as the Branch Davidians
 have also followed those teachings.

 3) Christians are a minority, especially those who are willing to admit their
 convictions of the teachings of Christ.  Our prayers should be that the
 truth and teaching of God prevail in this matter.  We live under a government
 and media that are often hostil to Christianity and firearms.  The BD have
 openly engaged in both activities.  Is it not then reasonable that the 
 media and the government would now both side against those Christions?

 In this particular matter I find that I must pray `thy will be done'.

 Bruce

    Bruce,

    With respect, I must take issue with your assertion that "A Christian
    is a Christian is a Christian" (assuming your spelling differences
    were unintentional).  The Bible very clearly defines what it means to
    be a Christian, and this definitions differs from the conceptions of
    the majority of the populace, including many of those who would
    consider themselves Christians.

    While I *strongly* agree that we are not to condemn anyone but rather
    to love everyone (we will be known by our love), as Rob expressed so
    well in another topic, we are also told to test all things and to be
    on the lookout for false prophets and apostles, as well as the spirit
    of the antichrist which is at work in the world today even at this
    moment.

    We are also told that in the end times there will be those who say,
    "Here is the Messiah," or, "there He is..." Very simply put, anyone who
    claims to be the Messiah has the spirit of the antichrist and is most
    definitely *not* a Christian in any sense of the word whatsoever.  Such
    a person is a (witting or unwitting) tool of Satan.  We must recognize
    this spirit for what it is so that we may know how to pray in these
    situations.

    I find that I almost never pray for God's will to be done, simply
    because I've come to realize that His will is *always* done, and
    there is nothing that anyone or anything can do that is not in
    accordance with His will.  My prayers have taken on the form of
    asking that He open my eyes more and more to His Spirit so that I
    will be more attuned to His will and His plan, partly so that I may
    share that knowledge as He sees fit.

    In Christ's love,

				*** Daryl ***

    My first reaction to the situation was amusement, before I heard of the
    fatalities.
    Amusement because the "leader"'s claim to be Christ automatically
    invalidated his claim.  "JESUS" is the Greek translation of the actual
    name of the Savior "JOSHUA".  I expect his full name was "Joshua son
    of the Carpenter Joseph of Nazareth, of the House of David".
    The savior would NEVER refer to himself as JESUS, it would be an awful
    insult to the family who named him.
    
    The Federal Gun Act of 1934 did NOT outlaw machineguns, it simply taxed
    and regulated them severely.  I yearly go to Las Vegas and fire
    automatic firearms.  We shoot derelict cars on a range, just in case
    you were worried.  Even the peoples republic of Massachusetts allows
    (but discourages) machinegun ownership and use.
    
    I am afraid that the ATF attack is just another suppression of anyone
    who is "different".  This happened in 1934 Germany, and you know the
    results.  It continues in Ireland, RSA (Inkata against ANC - NOT white
    against blzck), Burma, etc, etc.  Can we allow it to happen here?  I
    had thought our tolerance of non-conformity was one of our strengths.
    Sadly, Phil

    re: .29
    
    >>The savior would NEVER refer to himself as JESUS, it would be an awful
    >>insult to the family who named him.
    
    ..." I am Jesus, whom you are persecuting" ...
    
    Acts 9:5 (NIV)
    
    Please explain why it would be an insult to the family??
    
    Confused
    
    Regards
    
    
    
    Graeme

    Graeme,
    
    I think the author of .29 might be referring to the fact that the word
    "Jesus" is the English form of the Greek word used for the Hebrew name
    "Yeshua".  He was known as Yeshua ben Yoseff (Yeshua son of Joseph).
    
    It's like my junior high French teacher who told me that if I were born
    in France, my first name would have been Etienne, however, in France,
    they would still call me Steve since it would be impolite to impose
    their culture on me (being born an American and given the name Steve).
    
    I think that's what was meant....but then again, I'm butting in ;-)
    
    Steve (a.k.a. Etienne ;-)

    That's okay Steve, in the Spanish culture, my name is Nancy only
    pronounced Nahncy! :-)
    
    Nancy no matter where I go! :-)

    The fact that loonies like this never claim to be Mohammed, Buddha,
    Hare Krishna, etc., (insert favorite false god) is a telling conviction
    of who the Truth is.

    .33 :-) :-)
    
    Thanks Mike.
    

Good point.  hadn't thought of that before.

    re: .33
    
    I'm somewhat ignorant of some of the non-Christian religions, but from
    what I understand it only makes sense for a "loony" to pick a
    person/deity that followers anticipate.  Kind of kills the ol' rhythm
    if you claim to be someone that your followers expect to stay dead.
    So, the Lord is a favorite.  I understand that Buda (or "a" Buda) is
    another.  In Islam, a favorite seems to be that of fulfilling the
    prophesies having to do with restoring the glory of Babylon.
    
    Steve

    Back in early 1500's they were translating the "King James" version
    of the Bible.  Most of the source material was in Greek.  Some of
    the Greek may have been translated in turn from the Aramaic which
    was the language in common use in the Bible area at the time of the
    Biblical events.
    
    If you wonder why there seem inconsistancies in the Bible, imagine
    at least two major translations, plus dozens of scribes (Xerox was
    not available) making copies and changing words that they found
    they did not like.  I expect much of the writings existed as oral
    tradition long before it was recorded on clay or paper.  Certainly
    MANY of the "biblical times" stories bear amazing resemblance to
    stories like Gilgamesh from 2000 years earlier.  Much or the Bible is
    history, and history is normally written by the winners of battles.
    The story of Joshua and Jerico might sound different written by a
    resident of Jerico, for example.

>    Back in early 1500's they were translating the "King James" version
>    of the Bible.

100 years later -- KJV appeared in 1611.  Work began in 1604.

/john

re.37


>   The story of Joshua and Jerico might sound different written by a
>    resident of Jerico, for example.

The Bible is God's view, and that is what matters.

ace

 I heard that something was happening in Waco (FBI moving in or something)
 but don't have any details.





 Jim

    Authorities brought tanks up to the building to knock small holes in
    the sides.  They threw tear gas in the building, the building caught
    fire, and 4-5 people may have survived.  All the people are dead!
    
    
    Donna

 From what I've heard around here, ABC news is saying ~20 have surrendered
and the justice dept is saying two fires were set inside the compound by 
members of the cult (witnessed by FBI people who were on the roof).






Jim

    We probably won't find out how many really came out for a day or so. 
    Its just sad that it happened.
    
    dh

    The Branch Dividian Compound has been burnt to the ground
    95 people were in the compound, at this time no survivors have been
    found.  An ambulance was dispatched to the scene, but newscasters have
    not seen anyone brought out of the fire.  They do have an underground
    bunker at the compound, and no further information is available at this
    time.
    
    This ain't over yet, folks!
    
    
    

We will probably not know the whole story, either.

    The latest is that 2 of the people taken to the burn center confessed
    that they used torches on the compound to set it on fire.
    
    
    
    
    dh

	The Lord will always vindicate His name. Mr.Koresh's end has 
demonstrated that.

	"and the populace cried out, The voice of a god and not of a man! And
instantly an angel of the Lord struck him because he did not give glory to
God; and he was eaten by worms and expired" Acts 12:22-23


	The authorities have bungled this caper from the beginning. The new
attorney general was not mature enough to handle this responsibility. Bad
decision. The FBI spokesman in charge was sounding very shrill. Almost like he
was taking it personally. Backed the madman into a corner, they only gave him 
one choice. FBI ran over tricycles, killed the family pets, rammed the house 
with tanks. Even people in their right mind could have responded the way Koresh
did.  You don't corner stray dogs, much less one foaming at the mouth. 

	All those dear little children.

ace

p.s. I heard  Ms.Reno describing the need to purge the U.S. of "armed camps" 
like the one in Waco. 

    I was wondering... do we know for sure that Koresh is dead?

 Don't think they know yet, though they say all the tunnels and hideouts they've
 checked turned up nothing.





 Jim

RE:47

>p.s. I heard  Ms.Reno describing the need to purge the U.S. of "armed camps" 
>like the one in Waco. 

    I heard her say this too. Makes me a little nervous knowing how she
    feels about pro-life people.

     Jim

    I'm embarassed but is Ms. Reno the newly appointed judge to the
    supreme court?

No, there has not been a judge appointed to the Supreme Court yet.

Reno is the new attorney general.

/john

    THANK YOU.

There was an interesting article in the paper today that indicated
that the government went about this all wrong.  It said that they
should have been responding to Koresh as a cult leader rather than
as a criminal.  In this scenario, they would have attempted to
loosen his hold on his followers by doing things such as playing
messages from relatives of his followers, playing soothing music,
having a pizza party :-) and whatever to show them how good the
world outside the compound was.

They actually chose the opposite tact of loud music, blinding
lights, etc. which would only increase their sense of isolation,
etc.

On the other hand, former cult members and experts were almost
unanimous in their belief that Koresh would not commit suicide
and the government's actions were based on this belief.  Koresh
exits as a mass murderer who controlled others and was controlled
by his ego.  Instead of submitting, he controlled.  Instead of
loving, he manipulated.  And, despite well-intentioned (although
very unsucessful) efforts by the government, he killed rather than
be captured.

A rather remarkable contrast to Jesus' last day.

Collis

Because of the government's ineptitude, a mad man won.  His apocalyptic
vision was realized and therefore proved right (because of the government).
Yet the spin in politics is to say that if you criticize the government,
then you must be rooting for this mad man.

The events in Waco are not a matter of right and wrong, black and white,
but more a matter of wrong and wrong, and black and black.

Yeah, Koresh is responsible, but so is the government.  Both.
One person characterized the fiasco like this:  
  You never corner a stray dog, let alone corner a stray dog that's
  foaming at the mouth.

So who's the stupid one for cornering a mad dog, rather than luring it into 
cage?

Mad dogs have a fate, but this one took out some other people, children 
included because "no progress was in sight" and it was getting "expensive"
for the taxpayers.  Conditions were worsening for the children (duh, they
shut off the water, etc) so they moved in for their sakes.  "We didn't know
he was going to do this.  We were surprized!"  (Perhaps by the method used,
but not surprized that the suicides would be attempted - see footage from
press conference a few weeks ago.)  Speak to anyone outside of the political
arena and you get the same answer from the person on the street.  "I saw it 
coming."  And now the propaganda machines are working overtime to shift as
much blame as possible to "that madman" when both are responsible for the
deaths of those children and some others, because they did not listen to
those who know how to better handle dogs that foam at the mouth.

MM

    
    Without exception, every 'cult expert' has said that the 
    negotiations were mishandled.  Basically as was mentioned
    in the previous reply.  I would expect the ATF to have no
    clue as to running a standoff just as the ATF had no clue
    as to serving a warrant or running a small scale war.  The
    FBI, however, is supposed to be experienced in these matters.
    Is the FBI's (mis)handling of the past 50 days a measure of ineptitude
    and bad leadership, or was the final outcome among those solutions
    held to be acceptable by the FBI?
    
    As something of a disclaimer, all I've seen about the standoff 
    is what has been presented in the media.  I would feel more
    comfortable of my observations if I felt more comfortable with
    the reliability of the media.
    
    I missed Reno's comment about 'removing armed camps'.  When did
    she say this?
    
    Otto

I offer prayer for all of those whose families who had loved ones 
mezmorized by David Koresh.  I was watching television last evening and
one of those being interviewed lost his wife and children in the fire.  He
said that he also came very close to becoming a follower of Koresh.  He
stated that "David Koresh had a way of making you believe everything
about him.  He casts spells on people".  I don't remember this man's name.
He tried to get his family out but was not successful.

I also offer prayer that our government learn an important lesson from all of 
this.  Especially, on how thwy might handle events such as this in the future.

In trying to understand what happened, I found several pieces of Scripture
that I wish to share.  May God add His Blessing to these words and to 
those who lost family and friends.


Julian


Matthew 24:5  For many shall come in my name, saying, I am Christ; and shall 
deceive many.

Matthew 24:23  Then if any man shall say unto you, Lo, here is Christ, or 
there; believe it not.

Matthew 24:24  For there shall arise false Christs, and false prophets, and 
shall shew great signs and wonders; insomuch that, if it were possible, they 
shall deceive the very elect.

Matthew 24:26  Wherefore if they shall say unto you, Behold, he is in the 
desert; go not forth: behold, he is in the secret chambers; believe it not.

Mark 13:6  For many shall come in my name, saying, I am Christ; and shall 
deceive many.

Mark 13:21  And then if any man shall say to you, Lo, here is Christ; or, lo, 
he is there; believe him not:

Mark 13:22  For false Christs and false prophets shall rise, and shall shew 
signs and wonders, to seduce, if it were possible, even the elect.

Luke 21:8  And he said, Take heed that ye be not deceived: for many shall 
come in my name, saying, I am Christ; and the time draweth near: go ye not 
therefore after them.

2 Thessalonians 2:3  Let no man deceive you by any means: for that day shall 
not come, except there come a falling away first, and that man of sin be 
revealed, the son of perdition;

2 Thessalonians 2:4  Who opposeth and exalteth himself above all that is 
called God, or that is worshipped; so that he as God sitteth in the temple of 
God, shewing himself that he is God.

2 Thessalonians 2:5  Remember ye not, that, when I was yet with you, I told 
you these things?

1 John 2:18  Little children, it is the last time: and as ye have heard that 
antichrist shall come, even now are there many antichrists; whereby we know 
that it is the last time.

Revelation 19:20  And the beast was taken, and with him the false prophet 
that wrought miracles before him, with which he deceived them that had 
received the mark of the beast, and them that worshipped his image.
These both were cast alive into a lake of fire burning with brimstone.

Revelation 20:10  And the devil that deceived them was cast into the lake 
of fire and brimstone, where the beast and the false prophet are, and 
shall be tormented day and night for ever and ever.

Revelation 20:15  And whosoever was not found written in the book of 
life was cast into the lake of fire.

    
    It was a sad ending to an event which will (in my opinion) be replayed
    again and again in the coming days.  
    
    The first problem was... we expected the secular government to address
    a clearly spiritual problem.  David Koresh was a false prophet.  That
    whole situation was a spiritual problem.  Even though the media and the
    government 'sources' told us all about how Koresh claimed to be Jesus
    Christ, how he may have fathered childern by several women and how he
    taught an unusual doctrine...NONE OF THESE IS AGAINST SECULAR LAW! 
    Tanks and high powered weapons won't make it in a spiritual battle.
    
    Next problem...  The media has had a field day with this, using clever
    words to characterize Koresh as a 'charismatic' leader.  OK, I know
    what the  might mean, but the average guy on the street might just
    connect that reference with any Spirit filled Christian church.  This
    could come back to haunt ALL small Christian churches at a later date.
    
    Next problem...   I don't know what the weekend media did with the cult
    issue in other parts of the country but here in Phoenix, AZ, the
    reporting wasn't to objective.  In section C, page 1 of the Arizona
    Republic dated April 25, 1993 there was an editorial style expose' on
    cults.  The writter named several by name and indicated that Phoenix
    was a popular place for cult recruitment.  Mixed in with the cults was
    mention of "The Door" aka "Potters House", aka other names which I
    forgot.  The reference the writter made sounded like all Pentecostal
    churches would fall into the Koresh style description.  BTW..curiously
    missing was any reference to our local favorite cult.  The one which
    advertises 'another testament of Jesus Christ' in slick TV ad's and
    sends their 'missionaries' around on bicycles to recruit the youth and
    elderly in the valley! I don't want to mention the name.
    
    Problems...yes.  The American opinion generator is working overtime to
    portray Spirit filled Christians in less than favorible light.  Did
    they define a cult CLEARLY?  Not that I have seem.
    
    	CULT:	1. Considers a source other than or in addition to the Holy
    		   Bible as inspired writ.
    
    		2. Considers another person other than Jesus Christ, the
    		   virgin born Son of God, as savior.
    
    		3. Offers another way to salvation other than the shed
    		   blood of Jesus Christ.
    
    Fasten your seatbelts folks, we might be in for a ride!  We have one
    thing going for us though.  We have all peeked ahead and read the
    ending....WE WIN!
    
    		In Jesus name,
    
    	Rich
    <sorry if I exceeded the MAX_LINE_COUNT :^) >

    I didn't mean to appear anaonomus...ENDTMS::CZARNECKI is the author for
    entry 44.59.
    
    Rich

    >we have all peeked ahead and read the ending....WE WIN!
    
    I heard that song last night, sung by some visiting missionaries from
    Australia [Mom and Dad come to our church].. :-) :-)
    
    Wish I knew all the words, yowza it had me almost lifted off my seat!!!
    
    Nancy

    I never heard the song, but I bet it's great.
    
    If we just back up a little....just before we win, there are some
    exciting and intense times!  I believe that we are just rounding that
    corner and will start to see things happen like never before!
    
    	MARANATHA!!
    
    		Rich

    re: .59
    
    Gee.  Didn't know I was a cultist.  Guess I'd better stock up on arms
    and petro ...  BTW, when I was a missionary for the unnamed cult in
    Denmark, I found that they have an even stricter definition of what a
    "cult" is.  Among the folks I spoke with, "cult" basically referred to
    any religion that was NOT the Danish Folk Church.  So, how many more
    "cultists" do we have here?  ;^)
    
    Steve

I don't know how to receive the comments in 44.63.  I would like to define
the perspective from which I was looking at 'cults'.  From a Bible based
point of view, you are heading for trouble IF:

	1. You add to or subtract from the Word of God.

	2. You deny in any way the Deity of Jesus Christ, including
	   placing any other man alongside Jesus Christ as deity or
	   denying His virgin birth.

	3. You follow other methods to salvation aside from the
	   only method given by God's Word..Jesus paid it all on
	   the cross of Calvary.  Grace of God not works of man.

Contrary to what is becoming the contemporary view, there is only ONE way 
God and that is through His Son Jesus Christ.  Besides, when you line
up all of the modern 'religious figures', the only one who has left
us an empty tomb is Jesus Christ.

	BTW...I didn't mean that bicycles are cult related!

	Rich

    re: .64
    
    Here's how to receive my comments.  I use the Bible.  You use the
    Bible.  The Danes use the Bible.  We all have conflicting definitions
    of what a cult is.  Each of us (if we choose to play the game) can
    point fingers at each other and shout "CULT!"  Where will it get us?
    Nowhere.  At best, we can each walk away having verbally abused each
    other and somehow vindicated ourselves for having been "valiant" in 
    serving the Lord.  And, we could all be wrong.  At least, according to
    some fourth party who has yet another definition for "cult."  (Like, as
    an example, TAHD.)  So, the way to receive my comments is to recognize
    that I am not going to get into a finger-pointing match because I grant
    that we can all point fingers and go nowhere.
    
    Let's not play that game.  Nobody wins.  It's okay with me if you want 
    to think I belong to a cult.  But, you won't "convert" me (if such be your 
    desire).  It seems atypical to me of many examples of missionary work as 
    described in the Scriptures.  There, the Lord exemplified love, caring 
    and understanding as He preached (the woman at the well comes to mind).  
    Even Paul made efforts to be near to and understand cultures when he 
    preached (the "unknown god" segment comes to mind).  
    
    Do I accept your definition of "cult?"  Of course not.  For similar
    reasons as mine you would likely reject a definition I might come up
    with.  Similarly, we'd probably both reject the definition coming from 
    an average Dane (until we came to a better understanding of their culture, 
    as I feel I did -- "cult" for them tends not to really be derogatory).
    The one thing that you and I probably WOULD agree upon about "cult" is 
    that it tends to be used here in a derogatory sense.  As such, it is
    inflammatory and not in harmony with what I understand to be the
    helpful, fellowshipping and friendly Christian nature of this conference.
    
    And, no, I do not regard my religion as a cult.  Nor do I regard most
    Christian religions as cults.  I *do* think that the Branch Davidians
    were a cult, per definition 2 of TAHD.
    
    Steve

Re .65;  Hi Steve,

No finger pointing intended - I believe (though some methods, maybe, were
picked out somewhere back there)!  The basis for this conference is the
Bible, and the principles Rich laid down in .59 and .64 are those which are
very basic essentials of the faith, as understood from the Word of God,
according to evangelical Christianity.  For instance, for some quick
pointers: 

	1. You add to or subtract from the Word of God.

Revelation 22:18 :
 "I warn everyone who hears the words of the prophecy of this book: If 
  anyone adds to anything to them, God will add to him the plagues described 
  in this book.  And if anyone takes words away from this book of prophecy, 
  God will take away from him his share in the tree of life, and in the holy 
  city, which are described in this book.

	2. You deny in any way the Deity of Jesus Christ, including
	   placing any other man alongside Jesus Christ as deity or
	   denying His virgin birth.

1 John 4:2-3 :
 "This is how you can recognise the Spirit of God: Every spirit that 
  acknowledges that Jesus Christ has comein the flesh is from God, but
  every spirit that does not acknowledge Jesus is not from God.  This is the 
  spirit of the antichrist, which you have heard is coming and even now is 
  already in the world."

	3. You follow other methods to salvation aside from the
	   only method given by God's Word..Jesus paid it all on
	   the cross of Calvary.  Grace of God not works of man.

Galatians 1:8 :
 "But even if we or an angel from heaven should preach a gospel other than 
  the one we preached to you, let him be eternally condemned!  As we have 
  already said  so now I say unto you again: If anybody is preaching to you a 
  gospel other than what you accepted, let him be eternally condemned! 


I might add as another, any private interpretation of Scripture...  but 
it's late here. 

As far as the  subject of this note is concerned, this is a 'rathole', so
if you wish to discuss the basis and validity of these principles further,
they will be moved (probably from about .63, with an intro...) to a new
note to be started for that purpose.  I'm happy to do that if you wish to.
pursue it, but bear in mind the basis of the conference as stated in 2.*

In particular - no abuse, eg in terms of finger pointing, or labelling one
another; merely examination of the Scripture to define the bounds of
Christianity.

Steve, if you are not happy to discuss the definition of 'cult' here, we
can drop it.  Certainly there is no profit in merely bandying words.  You
seem to presume that we cannot find a concensus, but will end up in
conflict.  If this is what you feel, do you believe that other participants
here are Christians, saved by grace, bound for heaven?  If the answer is
'yes', then possibly we can define Biblical boundaries.  If the answer is 
'no', then you can hardly expect us to elect that our belief is cultish... 


							Andrew

    <sigh>
    
    Steve

    I was thunkin'!
    
    It's very difficult in our Faiths to get across that non-judgemental
    tone.  But I, for one, believe most folks participate in here in that
    state of mind.  Some don't, but hey, we is human.
    
    With that in mind, please understand, most folks in here share the
    common bond of our Lord Jesus Christ, as sole Savior, as Creator, and
    as the Word made flesh...  You know, while if you were to see me in
    person, you'd see no hatred, and I'd greet you as often as I saw you, I
    will always give you the plan of Salvation as pure from God's Holy Book
    if you believe salvation comes through any other venue.
    
    And please note, if you are taking it personal, that I'd continue to
    witness the Gospel to you in spite of your attempt to tell me you don't
    want it, then please rethink the motivation behind the action. 
    
    When other faiths come to my door a knocking, I treat them with respect
    as I refuse their doctrine.  When that happens to me from others
    towards my faith, it hurts my heart, not my feelings.  
    
    This notesfile premise is well stated in 2.*, if you do not know the
    premise of this conference, I'd suggest you read it.  If you do not
    believe in the premise of this conference, I'm not asking you to go
    elsewhere, but I am asking that you not be antagonistic to our faith in
    here.
    
    There are other notesconferences for other doctrines, if you look, you
    may find a better suited environment for your beliefs.  If so, then you
    may want to consider participation there.
    
    In Him,
    Nancy

    re: .68
    
    Perhaps I misunderstand.  I believe the Bible to contain the Word of God.  
    I believe in Christ.  I have participated in thought and prayer here in what 
    I thought and hoped to be Christian fellowship.  I choose not to "Bible bash" 
    about whether or not my religion is a "cult."  I would rather not enter
    into such a contest as there would be no winner.  But, am I now being asked 
    to no longer participate in CHRISTIAN notes because I do not share the belief 
    that my religion is a "cult?"  
    
    Steve

Can an ex-mod butt in?

Sequence of events:

(1) someone alluded to Steve's religious organization (not by name, but by
    inferrence) as one of a cult based on some criteria provided.

(2) Steve objects and disputes the criteria

(3) Andrew describes the criteria the other person (forgive my laziness, I 
    can't recall the name) gives with scriptural support and asks Steve to 
    describe his criteria with his scriptural support.

(4) Steve declines the invitation with a sigh, showing he'd rather not
    get into an argument.

(5) Nancy enters a note about "people of like precious faith" which can
    apply to this situation but also applies to all situations.  She is 
    describing what she sees as incompatible relgious expressions:
    [mainline] Christianity, and Mormonism (there I said the words).

(6) Steve states that he believes in the Bible and Christ.  Asks if he's
    being invited to leave.

Steve, 
  You are not being invited to leave.  On the contrary, you are invited to stay.
The differences between our religions are substantial enough to have lots of
debates.  The person who called Mormonism (not by name) a cult can do so by
the definition he's provided, though you and I know that there is not a 
favorable connotation to that word.  And it can result in emotional debate
with countercharges of "cultism" for just about any other religious organization.
As such, some imprudent indiscretion may have been committed, because even
if our churches define each other as cults, we can be a bit more careful of
inflammatory language in a public notes conference.
  I have noticed that your entries have been carefully limited to the Bible
and have not included the Book of Mormon, and I thank you for adhering to
the conference premise.  (The BoM can be discussed here, by the way, but
by the very scriptures that Andrew listed, it will likely be viewed as 
something outside of the realm of Christianity.  I see the moderators as
only reiterating the standard by which all discussions, concepts, and ideas
will be measured in this conference.)
  I did not see you as "pushing Mormon doctrine" anywhere; only objecting 
to being called a cultist (by inferrence), which I can understand.

Mark Metcalfe
(ex-moderator, though I sound like one, eh?)

    Steve,
    
    Please read this paragraph again:
    
    >This notesfile premise is well stated in 2.*, if you do not know the
    >premise of this conference, I'd suggest you read it.  If you do not
    >believe in the premise of this conference,****I'm not asking you to go
    >elsewhere*******, but I am asking that you not be antagonistic to our
    >faith in here.
    
    Obviously you fall into the latter part of that sentence of not being
    antagonistic... GREATLY APPRECIATED!!!  However, if at any time this
    changes, then we must abide the premise of the conference.
    
    >There are other notesconferences for other doctrines, if you look,
    >you may find a better suited environment for your beliefs.  If so, then
    >you may want to consider participation there.
    
    This was stated generically to *all* reading not directed at you, BTW,
    all of this note was for the GENERAL PUBLIC, but fitting for the
    previous banter being set in this note.
    
    However, knowing that there is conference dedicated to your particular
    faith, why do you choose participation here?  Not asking for an online
    response, just thunkin' aloud.
    
    On Christ the Solid Rock I stand,
    all other ground is sinking sand.
    
    [one of my favorite songs]
    
    In Him,
    Nancy
    

    Yes, there is s conference devoted to Mormonism and I do participate
    there.  The question is, why do I participate here?  And, yes, Mark is
    absolutely right about how I've been participating here; I tend to 
    avoid referencing BoM and other non-Biblical scriptures in discussions 
    here.
    
    So, what does this conference offer that the Mormonism conference does
    not?  For one, the conference tends to be more generic in Christian
    themes, perspectives and discussions.  There are current news articles
    posted and discussed from a Christian point of view.  I learn from
    many of these discussions. (I tend to "next unseen" the more heated 
    Biblical debates here.)  
    
    LDS folk (Mormons) believe they have truth, but do not hold to any dogma 
    about the Church containing *all* truth about *all* things.  Quite the 
    contrary, we are encouraged to seek out of the best books and other sources 
    to learn, grow in wisdom and decide issues for ourselves using prayer
    and study.  One of my Scripture study companions is, for example, Smith's 
    Bible Dictionary.  So, this conference assists me in learning.
    
    But, the main reason that I like this conference is that I've learned
    the value of fellowship across faiths.  I've participated with others
    in worthy efforts and have not limited my activities to people of my own 
    faith.  Though I feel I belong to the "one true church" I accept that others 
    feel the same way about their own faiths and tend to look for areas where 
    we share in beliefs and commitments.  There is so much more that we
    have in common and it is so wasteful for us to continually focus on the
    motes in each others' eyes.  Why do this when there is so MUCH good
    that we can do together.
    
    The church I belong to is today actively working together with many
    denominations for the common good and to strengthen the family in
    addition to proselyting.  I have and continue to maintain hope that 
    CHRISTIAN notes can be a place for fellowship across Christian faiths.
    
    If challenged about belief in the "inerrant" quality of the Bible I
    would maintain that the Bible is not "inerrant."  However, out of
    respect for 2.* I have not pushed that issue.  I have read much
    in the way of discussion among other noters over the many and various
    different understandings had concerning the Bible.  I tend not to 
    interfere.  Long ago I learned that "Bible bashing" is fruitless; that 
    debate seldom results in clear winners and losers.  But, some discussions
    here have been enlightening, particularly with respect to issues that
    have not confronted Christians in the past as much as now.  They cause
    me to think and help me form my own opinions about current issues.
    Who wouldn't want that?  
    
    Certainly there are viewpoints expressed that I wouldn't have read in 
    Mormonism notes.  For example, I previously had less understanding about what 
    others meant by "rapture" or other terms used by non-LDS with respect to
    events surrounding the return of the Lord.  If I want to learn about
    the beliefs of those in other faiths, I would rather read the words of
    people in those faiths rather than trust that someone of my faith will
    represent them fairly.
    
    I understand that these ideas are not necessarily part of the charter that 
    was formed for this note file, but it was the impression that I have had in
    reading these notes thus far.  I didn't add CHRISTIAN to my notebook
    because of the charter.  I added it because it looked and felt like a
    gathering place for Christians.  It may well be, however, that the
    majority of members of CHRISTIAN do not share my feelings.  Intrusion 
    was never my intent and if my presence constitutes intrusion I shall 
    delete the conference from my notebook out of respect for your wishes.
    
    Steve

Steve,

Although I strongly disagree with much of the teaching of the LDS 
church, I very much appreciate your presence here.  The church is, after 
all, one of DEC's largest and most loyal commercial customers west of 
the Mississippi. :^)

Living in Utah , I have many Mormon friends.  We learned years ago not 
to discuss our differences but to rejoice in our similiarities.  Once 
such friend is Rich Kotter, a former DEC sales rep and ex-moderator of 
the Mormonism notes conference.  We differ greatly in our beliefs but 
respect each other enough not to let it get in the way of our 
friendship.  I see no reason why we can't do that here.

Sandy

    Steve,
    
    No-one is asking you to leave, on the contrary, stay and fellowship as
    you have been... and honestly, your contributions in here have been
    good ones...
    
    I will respond to some of the content of your note in another one, as I
    want to separate clearly the differences between the two.
    
    And once again let me state, NO, you are not being asked to leave.
    Besides personally, I like you! :-)
    
    With love,
    Nancy
    

    Thanks.  :)
    
    Steve

    I must put on my Corporate Security hat for a friendly comment.
    
    The rules governing what may be in a notes file are fairly clear,
    The author of the definition of CULT, which included all non-Christian
    faiths (much more than 1/2 the world population), could be resented
    by members of those faiths, and taken as religious bigotry.
    
    It  is unlikely that people who would be offended would be looking in
    this file, but please exercise your faith without bringing this file
    in danger by insulting people.   Phil

    Dear Noters,
    
    I have contacted Phil from .77 offline to better determine and
    understand as a moderator the implications of his note.
    
    FYI,
    Nancy
    co-mod CHRISTIAN
    

The implications of Phil's note are up to the moderators, the participants,
and whatever personnel or security people get involved if someone gets bent
out of shape and requests outside redress.

In general, company policy forbids any negative comments about anyone or
any organization.  Truth, where it disparages someone or some community,
is not permitted.

In practice, it is up to the moderators.  For example, in one particular
conference, it is legitimate to ridicule one particular large, worldwide
Christian organization to which tens of thousands of DEC employees belong
to the point of spreading bogus stories about rituals involving looking up
at the leader's testicles from below an open chair and declaring that they
hang well before he may be installed into his leadership position.

Yet a note in this same conference which uses the word "abortuary" or
"abortion mill" is not permitted.

/john

    I must admit to some naivety in moderating this conference, as I do not
    have experience in other conferences.. to some degree this is good,
    because I am not influenced or sensitized by the wrongs in other
    conferences.  However, to my detriment, is when someone sporting a
    Security Title voices a warning as though it is official that we are
    possibly in the position of being shut down and using further
    intimidation by stating it would be a *cost effective* measure.
    
    Whilst I don't know how many of you are aware that notes conferences
    are being looked at for shutting down as part of *downsizing*, I wanted
    to understand where Phil was coming from.. was he an authority or
    watchdog as part of this measure or just another person voicing his
    view of cultism by stating it shouldn't be addressed.
    
    The response I got from Phil was that just as any of us can, he can
    file a complaint against this conference and most likely get us shut
    down since that may well be the future intention.  However, Phil's
    motivation to write was to warn us as to possible repercussions
    in the current Digital climate, not to file a complaint.
    
    I'd say that we have stated well the premise of this conference, and
    from what I can tell much more diverse subjects are being sported
    elsewhere.  
    
    My moderator recommendation is to take this discussion to note 125, and
    discuss freely what cult means and how that meaning has evolved to mean
    something negative today.
    
    Nancy
    co-mod CHRISTIAN
    

Nancy, I believe that Phil's note was based on two misunderstandings, or at 
least, on two points which I would understand differently from what he has 
expressed.

I believe he assumed that:

1) 'Cult' is an offensive word, and can only be used in that way of those 
   said to belong to one.

2) The definitions of 'Cult' applied to anything and everyone non-Christian.

I attempt to address this area in my reply to topic 125 (I think it's .13), 

i)  That a 'cult' can be explicitly identified by clear characteristics
    which it's members would agree applied.  This is distinct from the more
    general use of the word. 

ii) That a 'cult' is only so in respect to a specifi religion, of which it 
    purports to be the real, true and only version. - ie it is not relevant 
    of other religions.

 - unless *I've* got my usage the wrong way round... ;-}

Incidentally, I believe that Phil was only flagging a danger area; not 
voicing an objection.  The specific we must beware of is of identifying any 
'accepted' group, and applying an offensive epithet.

However, the discussion of what is and what is not a cult is now active in 
note 125, opened for that purpose, and it is strictly a rat-hole here.

We can continue, if there is anything anyone has further to add pertininet 
to the Branch Davidians..

								Andrew
							     co-moderator

 Koresh never said he was the messiah, the clipped quote was `I am god', the
 unclipped quote from the interview (just watched the tape last night) was
 that if I raped a 75 year old women, and she got pregnant, then I am God.

 The comment was made in response to an allegation that Koresh had raped
 an opponent's (to the church leadership) 75 year old mother.

 The same tape, `Waco, the Big Lie', suggests that the source of the 
 adultery claims against Koresh was from a self professed profit who had
 challenged Koresh for the leadership of the Mormon sect and was subsequently
 asked to leave.  He spent a couple of years after this making accusations
 about the integrity/christianity of the sects minister Koresh.

 Bruce

 Mormon sect?  I believe Mr. Koresh was leader of a 7th Day Adventist sect.






Jim

    Just goes to show you that you can't trust the media...or the
    government. 
    
    Wait til they start bulldozing the ashes of more mainstream churches
    that get labelled cults by the media.
    
    -steve

    .85
    
    Scarey... but true.

 I agree.....

	Speaking of "Waco: The Big Lie" -- This video raises some
disturbing questions, some of which have already been mentioned here.
The producer claims to have provided a copy of this video to all TV
networks.  The video is also claimed to be taken directly from the
same satellite feed that all of the networks used.

	In the initial BATF raid, the agents are shown just after
their arrival, all firing their weapons into the compound, not bothering
to take cover and apparently not receiving any return fire from the
compound.

	The agents are shown climbing ladders to the roof.  One of them
shoots himself in the foot, but eventually continues up the ladder.
Three agents are shown entering the second-floor window.  A fourth stays
behind, prone, on the roof.  There is then a jump edit in the tape, which
the video claims was made by the originator of the feed.  Then the fourth
agent appears to throw something into the window.  The video claims he then
sprays automatic fire into the window (this was not obvious to me).  Then
bullet exit holes appear in the wall, including three that appear
simultaneously in the same video frame.  The fourth agent is hit in the
back of his helmet by one bullet, but is only temporarily stunned by the
blow, and eventually goes back down the ladder.

	The video asserts (and this has apparently been independently
corroborated) that the three men who entered that window were killed,
and that they were Bill Clinton's bodyguards during his Presidential
campaign.

	The video's account of the FBI assault was also very disturbing.
It provided some footage supporting the assertion that the underground
bunker was deliberately set ablaze by agents, and that the people trapped
inside were prevented from fleeing.  It shows a tank with the "tear gas"
appendage backing away from the hole it had just made in a building,
with what was apparently A FLAME being emitted from the appendage.
It also shows an agent calmly jumping down from the roof of a building
as the fire begins to engulf it, and walking away.  The final scene is
that of the tanks pushing the ashes of the Mt. Carmel compound into neat
little piles, burying and destroying the evidence of what actually happened
there.  It fades to black, and we are left wondering why, if true, none of
the major media have reported any of this.

	It was also pointed out that federal agents received authorization
from the Texas Governor to use military equipment (National Guard tanks,
etc.) against the compound, based on their "suspicion" that the Branch
Davidians had a drug lab.  She was notified prior to the raid that no
evidence was found of a drug lab, yet she let her authorization stand,
and did not order the withdrawal of the military equipment.

	This whole situation stinks to high heaven.  Our local answer
to Rush Limbaugh has begun to call the US Attourney General "Janet Nero".

...and do you know how much support one gets when they mention these
inconsistencies?  Accusations of supporting dangerous lunatics.
The government is always right, right?  Wrong.

    This sounds like the same video that is now available to the general
    public through Jeremiah Films.  It shows a Federal agent shooting other
    Federal agents.  I'll have to look up that address and post it here so
    the curious can grab a copy.

    Yes, please do...
    
    -curious

    I saw the Video and it does not show agents shooting each other or even
    the agent shooting himself. Most is what the narrator suggest to the 
    viewer of what's happening, but it is not clear. There are some parts
    where the narrator says that you can't see certain things on a
    residential T.V. but need  professional studio equipment to see it.
    
    I believe the ATF screwed up and something was covered up, but I don't 
    totally believe "The Big Lie" video either.

     Jim

	Apparently it was Randall Terry who first called her "Janet Nero".
Most of the events narrated on the video were quite easy to see for
oneself.  The major exception for me was the claim that the fourth agent
sprayed automatic fire into the window.  That was not obvious to me.  The
narration was generally conservative in its interpretations.  That is, it
did not make "wild claims", it simply stated the events as the narrator saw
them.  I think the woman's name is Linda Thompson, and the video can be
ordered directly from her organization.  She will be appearing on local
TV, and I will try to supply the address and some info on her further work.

    The film of the Waco incident is on Jeremiah Films, but is available
    from Chuck Missler's ministry.   Ask for the "Linda Thompson" video.
    
    Koinonia House
    PO Box D
    Coeur d'Alene, ID 83816-0347
    (208) 773-8524
    (208) 773-8324  FAX

    For anyone in Denver or Colorado Springs who would like to attend an
    evening seminar by Linda Thompson: This Saturday, 6PM, at the Sheraton,
    I-25 and Bellevue, Englewood CO.  Tickets are $20.  No, I'm not posting
    this for any personal gain.  I'm not even currently planning to attend.
    However, if I had more wealth and leisure time, I probably would go.

    A friend of mine just got his copy of the Linda Thompson video and was
    telling me about it.  They report that the 3 ATBF agents that were
    murdered by another ATBF agent were Clinton's ex-bodyguards.

    RE:97

    Its true that three body guards were killed at WACO, but whether they
    were murdered by another agent is not conclusive on the tape.


    Jim

    I'll do it, but not say it...
    
    :-)
    
    the 3 bodyguards... hmm....
    worse than the plot to a book...

    The video also shows that there was *ZERO* return gunfire at the ATBF
    agents.  If the 3 agents were killed by their own, who was the 4th one
    firing at after he followed the 3 into the window?
    
    I'm not convinced either way yet, but it is VERY interesting
    speculation.
    
    Mike

    re:101

    The video doesn't show the forth agent firing into the room. It merely
    show's him pointing his weapon into the room, then the black curtain
    covers the rifle and the narrator tells you that he is firing into
    the room. There is no view of muzzle flash or shells being ejected
    from the rifle.

    Also it is logical that you would not see return fire at the BATF
    agents in the beginning of the tape, because the agents were
    behind trucks that were facing towards the compound. Any rounds coming at
    them would either hit the front of the vehicles or go over the top
    which would put the impact zone in both cases out of the video camera's 
    view. Again, the narrator suggest to the viewer that there is no return
    fire.

    Jim

    I finally got to see the Linda Thompson video.  If anyone is interested
    in ordering a copy, you can get it straight from her at:
    
    American Justice Federation
    3850 S. Emerson Ave., Suite E
    Indianapolis, Indiana  46203
        (317) 780-5204
    FAX (317) 780-5209
    
    All I can say is that, whether you believe the evidence presented or
    not, it certainly causes you to question our government and our
    national media.
    
    Mike

    .103
    
    Who is linda thompson?  Sorry.. but haven't had the TV turned on for
    months. :-)

    Linda Thompson appears to be the head of the American Justice
    Federation.  The government sure looks bad on this tape and it doesn't
    take much imagination to think that Reno (or is that Nero?) and Clinton
    were in on it.  Here are some video highlights that show:
    
    - that the ATF responsibility is in firearms only, not in controlling
      religious fanatics.  Their foot-in-the-door was a $200 machine gun
      tax for a machine gun that didn't exist.
    - ATF agents calmly walking around the compound because there was no
      threat to their lives.  How do we know?  The ATF inserted high-tech 
      cameras into the walls all over the compound so that they could monitor 
      the Branch Davidians every move.  When they siezed them, all of the BD's 
      were in the underground bunker in back of the compound.
    - the ATF agent on the roof killing 3 other ATF agents which also
      happened to be Clinton's ex-bodyguards.  That same ATF agent on the
      roof that the national media shows being shot, was only hit in the 
      helmet and is shown getting up and walking down the ladder afterwards.
    - zero return fire coming from the Branch Davidians toward the Federal 
      agents.
    - the government using military equipment against civilians which is
      against Federal law.
    - the government starting the fire that burned the place to the ground. 
      They initiated it in the tunnel that went from the undergound bunker to
      the compound.  The ATF burned alive 100 BD's in the underground bunker;
      they knew they were all in there.
    - the government keeping all media a minimum of 5 miles away, yet they
      allow them on the frontlines during Desert Storm.
    - The news reported that 1 man tried escaping and the BD's shot him. 
      What actually happened is that he was trying to get back in the compound
      after returning from work and was shot by the ATF.  They left him hanging
      on the fence for 7 days.

    .105
    
    These are facts????? Really?  Eeps its worse then I thought.. very sick
    to my stomach right now...

    RE:105

    Those are not the facts. What you are stating as fact, is 
    mere suggestion  by Linda Thompson on her tape.

    Much of what she states as happening on the tape is either not visible
    or can be refuted. It also shows her lack of knowledge when it comes to
    know what being shot at looks like.

     Jim

    The only one that could be called into question is the ATF agent
    killing the other 3 agents (Clinton's bodyguards) because it's not cut
    and dry on the film.  When the 3 enter the 2nd story window, you
    already know the house is empty because all the BD's are in the
    underground bunker.  After all 3 are inside, the 4th one outside on the
    roof throws a grenade into the window and starts shooting.  Suddenly
    there is return fire (like they all of a sudden figured out that they
    were setup) with rounds coming through the wall, one hitting the guy
    outside on the helmet.  At one point, you see *3* rounds
    *simultaneously* coming through the wall from inside the house.
    
    Deductive reasoning tells me it was a planned hit to keep Clinton's
    campaign bodyguards from talking, ever.

re:108

>    The only one that could be called into question is the ATF agent
>    killing the other 3 agents (Clinton's bodyguards) because it's not cut
>    and dry on the film.  When the 3 enter the 2nd story window, you
>    already know the house is empty because all the BD's are in the
>    underground bunker.  
     
    How do you know this ? The only evidence that all Davidians are in the 
    underground bunker comes from Linda Thompson.


    >After all 3 are inside, the 4th one outside on the
>    roof throws a grenade into the window and starts shooting.  

    I didn't see a grenade thrown inside. All I saw was the agent tossing
    something into the room. From what I could tell, it was probably a 
    piece of broken glass from the window that he pulled out of the frame
    and tossed on the floor inside the room.


    >Suddenly
>    there is return fire (like they all of a sudden figured out that they
>    were setup) with rounds coming through the wall, one hitting the guy
>    outside on the helmet.  At one point, you see *3* rounds
>    *simultaneously* coming through the wall from inside the house.

      Yeah so what ? What keeps you from believing that there
      Davidians firing inside the room ?
        
>    Deductive reasoning tells me it was a planned hit to keep Clinton's
>    campaign bodyguards from talking, ever.

     This part I suspect is true, but not from the evidence on the video.

    My suspicion goes with the fact that the agents were transferred just
    prior to the raid.

     Jim

Whatever the story, we know that it is obfuscated by someone to deliberately
cover up the truth.  We will never know.  The upshot of it is that I 
trust less and less in government-run a_n_y_t_h_i_n_g.

MM

    RE:110

    Agreed ! However, we must be honest and objective when looking for the
    truth so that we aren't deceived again.

    Jim

>    How do you know this ? The only evidence that all Davidians are in the 
>    underground bunker comes from Linda Thompson.
    
    if they were in there, they would've been returning rounds of fire.

>      Yeah so what ? What keeps you from believing that there
>      Davidians firing inside the room ?
    
    see above as one.  In addition, the ATF agents were walking around the
    compound pretty casually.  They didn't look like people running for
    cover or fearing for their lives from return gun fire.
        
>     This part I suspect is true, but not from the evidence on the video.
>    My suspicion goes with the fact that the agents were transferred just
>    prior to the raid.
    
    That's interesting as well, and something I didn't know!
    
    Mike

re:112
>>    How do you know this ? The only evidence that all Davidians are in the 
>>    underground bunker comes from Linda Thompson.
    
>    if they were in there, they would've been returning rounds of fire.

     I don't understand what your saying here. Are you saying that the
     Davidians  were not in the bunker ? I thought you said they were.

    >>      Yeah so what ? What keeps you from believing that there
>>      Davidians firing inside the room ?
    
>    see above as one.  In addition, the ATF agents were walking around the
>    compound pretty casually.  They didn't look like people running for
>    cover or fearing for their lives from return gun fire.

        Nor was it clear that the video was showing agents at the
        WACO compound or at a training exercise somewhere else.
             
        My father told me that the guy who worked on making the video, 
        was on the news and admitted to editing the tape and adding 
        the flames to the flame-thrower. I have not heard this from 
        anyone other than from my father and don't know if its true or not.
        
        Jim    
     

>    I don't understand what your saying here. Are you saying that the
>    Davidians  were not in the bunker ? I thought you said they were.
    
    I did say they were in the bunker.  What I'm saying is nobody was
    shooting back at the Feds.
    
>       Nor was it clear that the video was showing agents at the
>       WACO compound or at a training exercise somewhere else.
    
    well it looked a lot like the Waco compound if it was filmed somewhere
    else.  I'm not saying this isn't possible, but I tend to doubt it.
             
>       My father told me that the guy who worked on making the video, 
>       was on the news and admitted to editing the tape and adding 
>       the flames to the flame-thrower. I have not heard this from 
>       anyone other than from my father and don't know if its true or not.
    
    I haven't heard this either, but it wouldn't surprise me.  What I
    question is why would he do this and portray the government in a
    negative light?  He could've also put armed BD's in the windows, and
    maybe make the tanks look like bulldozers to prevent the government
    from breaking their own law (using military gear against civilians).
    
    Mike

 This was not an edit/intentional distortion as near as I can tell.  If the
 news media had been allowed closer by the feds, none of these questions
 would exist.  The `flame thrower' appears to be an artifact of the long
 range lens and lighting angles, another set of pictures show this as
 a section of wall that fell across the tank that smashed the Davidian's
 house, when the tank turns in this other film, the wall looks like wall
 not like a jet of flame as it did in the earlier frames.

 In typing this, I was suggesting that there was nothing wrong, the 
 government didn't use a flame thrower against the family in their house...
 this is absurd, a military tank against civilians in their home!  Reads
 like something out of Revelations.

 Bruce

	Christian Research International (CRI) has been discussing the
Branch Davidians and Linda Thompson on their Bible Answer Man show.

	Their emphasis is on stating the problems of the theology and
practice of both Koresh and Thompson.  They said repeatedly that they
"never claimed that the government did everything exactly right", but
generally took a low-key approach in criticizing the government.

	They claim that many "patriot networks" are racist in nature,
and therefore have an agenda that makes them unreliable as sources of
information.  Yet they failed to provide solid documentation of their
claims, telling the audience to buy their book instead.

	I found their approach, which was basically to attack the
theology and morality of Koresh and Thompson, with very little
consideration of the material evidence in the Waco tragedy, both
disturbing and thought-provoking.

	The issue of what really happened at Waco is having a very
unfortunate divisive effect on the Body of Christ.  Most of us find
ourselves in one of two "camps" of thought on this.

	To me, the deaths at Waco provide two warnings: (1) Don't
get suckered into a cult by placing your faith in some mere human being.
(2) Don't stay complacent about living in America, the "land of freedom".
The foundations of this society are crumbling away.

There was a fairly extensive article in an Oz magazine recently on Jonestown 
- the article featured interviews with Jim Jones sons. Some of them said that 
  Waco had stirred up a lot of old memories, both good and bad.

Chele

    Jim Jone's sons were not killed in Jonestown?  I didn't know that.

>>  							His apocalyptic
>>vision was realized and therefore proved right (because of the government).
>>----------------------------------------------------------------------------
>	Hmm...  I did not think that D.K.'s vision was right.  I thought
>	it was wrong...! 

David Koresh's apocalyptic vision was indeed MADE correct by the government.
His prophesy may not have been from God but of course, who would think that
this is what I was saying?

Mark

>>						  A statue can be a memorial,
>>like one of George Washington in a park, or it can be a representation of
>>something that we worship, such as a golden calf, Bhuddah, or a BMW.
>>------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>	I don't worship golden calves, Buddah's, or BMW's.  ;-)

I'm glad to hear it, Greg.  I hope that you worship the One True God and
not any one of the many other things (even "gifts") that one might be 
tempted to elevate above its proper position.  The statement here is an
acknowledgement that we, as humans, often mess up our priorities, and that
includes YOU *and* ME.  It is not meant to be present tense.  Did you take
it that way?  If so, allow me to correct you.  

(Perhaps the smiley face is intended to obscure something?)

Mark

    Facts: based on news reports, videos, laws, and two Christian
    investigative reporters that I know personally who went down to Waco
    for some time.  Throw in some common sense in that list.
    
    A cult by definition is a group who share a common belief(approx. I
    don't have the dict. in front of me at the moment.)
    
    Local police investigated the claims about automatic weapons and found
    them baseless.  Local authorities also investigated the claims of child 
    abuse and found them baseless.  Local is where it should stop!
    
    The local people found the BD's to be harworking conscientious people.
    
    Even if the two hundred dollar gun tax had not been paid there were
    many laws broken by the government and the whole case smells strongly
    of anti-Christian prejudice.
    
    Koresh DID leave the compound several times right up to the end as is
    testified by a number of witnesses.  A warrant could have been served
    then or even by the undercover agents at anytime. (They had people inside 
    who had a chance to see all the weapons, and also knew that Koresh knew 
    they were coming that morning.)  
    
    The government repeatedly lied to the media and the media happily
    passed it along and avoided investigative journalism, and even
    deliberately covered up a great deal of info.
    
    The gov't deliberately lied to the governor in order to get military
    equipment there.  
    
    More of Clintons pre-presidency bodyguards and close associates have
    died mysterious deaths than those three. (I think the number is 14?)
    
    COMMON SENSE AND FACT:
    
    There is a full scale war going on. 
    
    Side 1:  Christians who wish to establish God's kingdom(=righteous
    judgement according to God's laws) on earth as it is in heaven.
    
    Side: Those who also believe that earth should have a heavenly kingdom
    according to the changing dictates of an evolving man.  To bring the
    people into judgement this side has been lifted high to the "head"
    while HIS unrepentent people have been made "the tail".
    
    To say the "other side" would not deliberately "torch" its enemies not
    only shows ignorance of their track record, and hatred, but also seems
    to indicate a lack of understanding of the total situation.
    
    A legal group which has investigated a number of gov't-citizen
    conflicts said long before the conclusion of Waco that the situation
    needed to be resolved(they offered help) because SO MANY OF THESE
    SITUATIONS END UP IN FIRE.  Fire is convenient in that it destroys much
    evidence.  What was not destroyed by fire was conveniently bull dozed
    by tanks etc.  I have yet to hear a critic give a decent explanantion
    as to why the government needed to bulldoze evidence.  Usually they
    rope off a crime scene and take meticulous care to preserve evidence. 
    Also, why did they keep the media MILES away.
    
    I could fill over one hundred lines with more, and already did in some
    old newsletters, but if that can't make you see the government
    prejudice against Christians(esp. armed) then it would be useless.
    
    
    Know that the groups like the Cult Awareness Network(whom the govt turn
    to for advice in these situations) have now labeled mainstream
    Christianity as a cult.  Don't think that this administration, who has
    been appointing antiChrists to gov't positions left and right, will
    rest until you either accept their kingdom or are eliminated as a
    threat.  There only problem is they have to wage war in such a way as
    not to turn so many people so totally against them that they lose their
    power base.  So they use the media to dupe the masses. 
    Programs like America's Most Wanted and many others - well don't be
    surprised if some people on there become Christian political fugitives. 
    Oh they'll be labeled as armed and dangerous and every other thing you
    can imagine, but DON'T TRUST THE ANTICHRISTIAN MEDIA.  There are many
    alternative media sources - in the form of newsletter, on shortwave,
    and some fair ones on AM radio. 
    
    PS.  Linda Thompson declared an armed march to be held by the true
    state militias - on Washington, D.C.  Thank the Lord, the militia units
    wouldn't have any part of it and called it off.  I enter this info so
    that you can make a better decision in judging her character. 
    The video however was edited from a great deal more footage which was
    seen by many top notch Christian Patriots.
    
    Rich

    After some reflection and review, I must agree with what the Christian
    patriots have long been saying about Linda Thompson.  Apparently she
    has been using the Waco holocaust to further her own personal agenda.
    This is unfortunate.
    
    I've also noticed that some people (even some Christians) have tried
    to lump Christian patriots together with racists and extremists.
    My own experience tells me that this view is, at best, a gross
    oversimplification, based upon media lies and distortions.
    
    The trouble is that, once publicly tarred with that brush, it is difficult
    to make any effective defense, disavowing the few racists and extremists
    who call themselves Christians.  Often only these few are allowed to speak
    in the major media, and yet they claim to speak for us!

    I have to agree with the previous entry.  It is unfortunate that many
    "patriots"(loosely defined) have observed God's blessings on a country
    who's foundation were predominantly white and protestant, and have
    confused those blessing as something achieved by themselves a "superior
    race."  This country WAS blessed by God for obedience and now it is
    being brought low due to disobedience.
    
    Rich

    It's the 2nd anniversary of Waco and the ATF division that destroyed
    Waco were from this OKC office.  Pure speculation so far.  It wouldn't
    surprise me though given how the government broke several laws that
    day, including using military equipment on civilians.  Unfortunately,
    small children have suffered and died in both situations.  Maybe
    Clinton still had some bodyguards working there.
    
    There are reports now of a 2nd bomb on the east side of the building
    and the area is being evacuated.  Problem is there are still many
    trapped inside and ATF is trying to diffuse the bomb.
    
    Islamic extremists (surprise surprise) are jumping at the chance
    for credit.
    
    I thought these Federal court buildings had tank-like security?!

The blast was felt in a 60 mile radius.  My folks live there and they felt
the explosion.  It went off 9am CDT.  It was a car bomb that left a huge
crater in the street.  The federal building which the car was next to, housed 
the Social Security Administration, ATF, DEA, Armed Forces recruiting, 
plus a nursery in the basement for the employees.  

One lady they are rescuing from the basement was originally on the 9th floor.

At this time (I'm on the phone with my mom), 84 are reported dead.  17 babies.


The President should be speaking on this shortly.

Jeff

It probably didn't have anything to do with the Branch Davidians.

The FBI is treating it as a Middle Eastern incident.

It was probably done by people who disapprove of American support
of the Jewish state of Israel.

/john

	Let's hope so.  You don't suppose "someone" could be purchasing one
or more staged terrorist acts, in order to ensure that emergency powers are
invoked, and that the US Constitution gets fully and finally suspended and
superseded by UN rule?  Naaaahhh....

	Clinton noted that the perpetrators of this bombing are killers,
and deserve to be treated as such.  I do wish that Clinton, as a promoter
of abortion, could see how his own words may one day judge him.

	Janet Reno talked tough about seeking the death penalty for the
bombers.  I wonder why she doesn't think the same punishment should apply
to the blood on her own hands.  What an amazing "coincidence" that this
bombing has occurred on the second anniversary of the Mt. Carmel massacre.

    re: .129
    
    The same thoughts (as in your first paragraph) crossed my mind, too.
    
    -steve