THE PHOENIX FILE is written as a satire focusing on the destructive results of religious atheism as it is imposed in the form of law. If it goes unchallenged every citizen will be required to live within THE BARN of a culturalized atheism. The future of freedom is in the balance. A choice lies before our nations. If we want continued freedom we must re-examine and reassert our founding Judeo-Christian values. Failing this our children will be subjected to a fully intolerant and militant atheism. Pragmatic atheism can never take credit for generating our historic religious freedoms, or such things as our system of law, property rights and the guaranteed right to life. Once these God-given rights and freedoms are lost they are only recovered at great cost. So either we stand and insist that our historic values be defended or become nations of slaves. Few, it appears, have the heart for such a struggle. Our children will live with the choice made. May I suggest therefore that you read carefully?

THE PHOENIX FILE is written as a satire focusing on the destructive results of religious atheism as it is imposed in the form of law. If it goes unchallenged every citizen will be required to live within THE BARN of a culturalized atheism. The future of freedom is in the balance. A choice lies before our nations. If we want continued freedom we must re-examine and reassert our founding Judeo-Christian values. Failing this our children will be subjected to a fully intolerant and militant atheism. Pragmatic atheism can never take credit for generating our historic religious freedoms, or such things as our system of law, property rights and the guaranteed right to life. Once these God-given rights and freedoms are lost they are only recovered at great cost. So either we stand and insist that our historic values be defended or become nations of slaves. Few, it appears, have the heart for such a struggle. Our children will live with the choice made. May I suggest therefore that you read carefully?

No Description Available.

Today’s modern technology and scientific knowledge contradicts all religious dogma created in ancient times by ignorant and superstitious people who had just learned to write. Modern science can test the strength of one’s faith and it can make him a skeptic, causing him to discard the religious beliefs of his family for generations past. Deep religious experiences (or self-induced delusions) can be explained by physical, psychological, biological and medical sciences today. “Evil” or “Sin” is the result of social and mental conditions and can be corrected with education and medication today and without the help of an imaginary “God”. To quote Mark Twain “Faith is to believe in what you know for sure is not true”. The GOD Dilemma is an unscientific investigation to justify believing in religion today and in particular the Christian faith. It argues that scientific and logical discussions about religion and the existence of God are futile; however, we cannot stop thinking about it. Humans are (maybe) born with a faith in God’s existence and with a conscience that tells them which is morally and ethically right and which is not. Author Thomas used to believe in religion, God, and Christianity through his teenage years, but even if he learned to ignore it during his 50 adult years, he never consciously discarded his Christian faith. He now shares his investigations and attempts to believe in Jesus Christ once again, despite today’s knowledge of the universe and evolution and by ignoring the sanctimonious behavior of fundamentalist US Christians. In the international scene, Thomas believes that the US wars since WWII cannot be justified by the life and the teachings of Jesus Christ. There is an underlying moral claim by fundamentalist Christian Americans that its actions are justified by Jesus and Christianity. The new phenomenon called “Christian Zionism” which requires the removal of Palestinians from their homeland to create and expand Israel to enable the second coming of Christ, categorically contradicts the teachings of Jesus in the four Gospels. Zionism is based on the Old Testament Bible (OTB) and Revelations in the New Testament both of which are scientifically ridiculous. The OTB is also historically questionable (about a God interacting with his only chosen people in Middle East) and morally criminal (God sponsored and assisted armed robbery and genocide to create Israel – ancient and modern) by today’s legal and ethical standards. Why has the life and teachings of Jesus Christ not produced universal love and non-violence among Christians? Why are American Christians the most active supporters of (or not speaking out against) the wars, bombing and destruction by the USA since WWII? Are Ashkenazi European Jews really the descendants of Semitic slaves from Egypt? What were the reasons for anti-Semitism and the Holocaust in “Christian” Europe of the past? Why is the European Union and the US punishing the Palestinians for the Holocaust crimes in Europe? Can God’s orders in the Bible be legally used by the United Nations to recreate Israel again in the 20th century after 3000 years by getting rid of Palestinians? The book seeks to inform and provoke critical thinking of the readers through this investigation into religion and God and, in particular, the violent, intolerant and self-righteous behavior of Christians for centuries past and even in today’s enlightened age using the source of the Christian religion – the Bible.

Today’s modern technology and scientific knowledge contradicts all religious dogma created in ancient times by ignorant and superstitious people who had just learned to write. Modern science can test the strength of one’s faith and it can make him a skeptic, causing him to discard the religious beliefs of his family for generations past. Deep religious experiences (or self-induced delusions) can be explained by physical, psychological, biological and medical sciences today. “Evil” or “Sin” is the result of social and mental conditions and can be corrected with education and medication today and without the help of an imaginary “God”. To quote Mark Twain “Faith is to believe in what you know for sure is not true”. The GOD Dilemma is an unscientific investigation to justify believing in religion today and in particular the Christian faith. It argues that scientific and logical discussions about religion and the existence of God are futile; however, we cannot stop thinking about it. Humans are (maybe) born with a faith in God’s existence and with a conscience that tells them which is morally and ethically right and which is not. Author Thomas used to believe in religion, God, and Christianity through his teenage years, but even if he learned to ignore it during his 50 adult years, he never consciously discarded his Christian faith. He now shares his investigations and attempts to believe in Jesus Christ once again, despite today’s knowledge of the universe and evolution and by ignoring the sanctimonious behavior of fundamentalist US Christians. In the international scene, Thomas believes that the US wars since WWII cannot be justified by the life and the teachings of Jesus Christ. There is an underlying moral claim by fundamentalist Christian Americans that its actions are justified by Jesus and Christianity. The new phenomenon called “Christian Zionism” which requires the removal of Palestinians from their homeland to create and expand Israel to enable the second coming of Christ, categorically contradicts the teachings of Jesus in the four Gospels. Zionism is based on the Old Testament Bible (OTB) and Revelations in the New Testament both of which are scientifically ridiculous. The OTB is also historically questionable (about a God interacting with his only chosen people in Middle East) and morally criminal (God sponsored and assisted armed robbery and genocide to create Israel – ancient and modern) by today’s legal and ethical standards. Why has the life and teachings of Jesus Christ not produced universal love and non-violence among Christians? Why are American Christians the most active supporters of (or not speaking out against) the wars, bombing and destruction by the USA since WWII? Are Ashkenazi European Jews really the descendants of Semitic slaves from Egypt? What were the reasons for anti-Semitism and the Holocaust in “Christian” Europe of the past? Why is the European Union and the US punishing the Palestinians for the Holocaust crimes in Europe? Can God’s orders in the Bible be legally used by the United Nations to recreate Israel again in the 20th century after 3000 years by getting rid of Palestinians? The book seeks to inform and provoke critical thinking of the readers through this investigation into religion and God and, in particular, the violent, intolerant and self-righteous behavior of Christians for centuries past and even in today’s enlightened age using the source of the Christian religion – the Bible.

Today’s modern technology and scientific knowledge contradicts all religious dogma created in ancient times by ignorant and superstitious people who had just learned to write. Modern science can test the strength of one’s faith and it can make him a skeptic, causing him to discard the religious beliefs of his family for generations past. Deep religious experiences (or self-induced delusions) can be explained by physical, psychological, biological and medical sciences today. “Evil” or “Sin” is the result of social and mental conditions and can be corrected with education and medication today and without the help of an imaginary “God”. To quote Mark Twain “Faith is to believe in what you know for sure is not true”. The GOD Dilemma is an unscientific investigation to justify believing in religion today and in particular the Christian faith. It argues that scientific and logical discussions about religion and the existence of God are futile; however, we cannot stop thinking about it. Humans are (maybe) born with a faith in God’s existence and with a conscience that tells them which is morally and ethically right and which is not. Author Thomas used to believe in religion, God, and Christianity through his teenage years, but even if he learned to ignore it during his 50 adult years, he never consciously discarded his Christian faith. He now shares his investigations and attempts to believe in Jesus Christ once again, despite today’s knowledge of the universe and evolution and by ignoring the sanctimonious behavior of fundamentalist US Christians. In the international scene, Thomas believes that the US wars since WWII cannot be justified by the life and the teachings of Jesus Christ. There is an underlying moral claim by fundamentalist Christian Americans that its actions are justified by Jesus and Christianity. The new phenomenon called “Christian Zionism” which requires the removal of Palestinians from their homeland to create and expand Israel to enable the second coming of Christ, categorically contradicts the teachings of Jesus in the four Gospels. Zionism is based on the Old Testament Bible (OTB) and Revelations in the New Testament both of which are scientifically ridiculous. The OTB is also historically questionable (about a God interacting with his only chosen people in Middle East) and morally criminal (God sponsored and assisted armed robbery and genocide to create Israel – ancient and modern) by today’s legal and ethical standards. Why has the life and teachings of Jesus Christ not produced universal love and non-violence among Christians? Why are American Christians the most active supporters of (or not speaking out against) the wars, bombing and destruction by the USA since WWII? Are Ashkenazi European Jews really the descendants of Semitic slaves from Egypt? What were the reasons for anti-Semitism and the Holocaust in “Christian” Europe of the past? Why is the European Union and the US punishing the Palestinians for the Holocaust crimes in Europe? Can God’s orders in the Bible be legally used by the United Nations to recreate Israel again in the 20th century after 3000 years by getting rid of Palestinians? The book seeks to inform and provoke critical thinking of the readers through this investigation into religion and God and, in particular, the violent, intolerant and self-righteous behavior of Christians for centuries past and even in today’s enlightened age using the source of the Christian religion – the Bible.

No Description Available.

No Description Available.

No Description Available.

No Description Available.

SET UP: Donald W. Gieschen is the author of this piece and, with the exception of the small talk, all of what Don says in the substantive conversations in An Uncommon Conversation is autobiographically true of the author in the sense that what Don says both accurately relates events in the author’s life and honestly expresses the authors thoughts on the subjects being talked about. The lunches are fictional. Paul is a fictional character created to be part of the conversation. Don is a self-professed atheist. The fictitious friend, Paul, is slightly younger than Don, and is a believer. They were close friends in their youth, almost like brothers, and have continued their friendship at a distance over the past years with letters and occasional visits. Paul, as he is portrayed, is rather easy going. He is married with a family and is here visiting. He is alone, staying with his son and the son’s family who have just recently moved to Phoenix, Arizona. Don lives in near-by Tempe. Paul is curious and is especially interested in other people and their lives, though not in an uncomfortable nosey way, as you will see. He graduated from the University of Michigan. From there he started up and ran a successful consulting business specializing in the field of health-care. Don and Paul both served in the U. S. Navy during World War II. We encounter them conversing over lunch at a local restaurant. Don, who does most of the talking, talks about his life and a great deal about his reasons for rejecting any form of religious faith. The conversation then takes up the question of moral values and morality in what according to Don is a Godless universe. Don’s views on faith and on ethics derive from his study and teaching of philosophy, though the areas of religion and ethics were not the areas of philosophy in which he concentrated his study and research or his teaching. The conversation between these two friends, with daily breaks, spans a five-day period.

SET UP: Donald W. Gieschen is the author of this piece and, with the exception of the small talk, all of what Don says in the substantive conversations in An Uncommon Conversation is autobiographically true of the author in the sense that what Don says both accurately relates events in the author’s life and honestly expresses the authors thoughts on the subjects being talked about. The lunches are fictional. Paul is a fictional character created to be part of the conversation. Don is a self-professed atheist. The fictitious friend, Paul, is slightly younger than Don, and is a believer. They were close friends in their youth, almost like brothers, and have continued their friendship at a distance over the past years with letters and occasional visits. Paul, as he is portrayed, is rather easy going. He is married with a family and is here visiting. He is alone, staying with his son and the son’s family who have just recently moved to Phoenix, Arizona. Don lives in near-by Tempe. Paul is curious and is especially interested in other people and their lives, though not in an uncomfortable nosey way, as you will see. He graduated from the University of Michigan. From there he started up and ran a successful consulting business specializing in the field of health-care. Don and Paul both served in the U. S. Navy during World War II. We encounter them conversing over lunch at a local restaurant. Don, who does most of the talking, talks about his life and a great deal about his reasons for rejecting any form of religious faith. The conversation then takes up the question of moral values and morality in what according to Don is a Godless universe. Don’s views on faith and on ethics derive from his study and teaching of philosophy, though the areas of religion and ethics were not the areas of philosophy in which he concentrated his study and research or his teaching. The conversation between these two friends, with daily breaks, spans a five-day period.

SET UP: Donald W. Gieschen is the author of this piece and, with the exception of the small talk, all of what Don says in the substantive conversations in An Uncommon Conversation is autobiographically true of the author in the sense that what Don says both accurately relates events in the author’s life and honestly expresses the authors thoughts on the subjects being talked about. The lunches are fictional. Paul is a fictional character created to be part of the conversation. Don is a self-professed atheist. The fictitious friend, Paul, is slightly younger than Don, and is a believer. They were close friends in their youth, almost like brothers, and have continued their friendship at a distance over the past years with letters and occasional visits. Paul, as he is portrayed, is rather easy going. He is married with a family and is here visiting. He is alone, staying with his son and the son’s family who have just recently moved to Phoenix, Arizona. Don lives in near-by Tempe. Paul is curious and is especially interested in other people and their lives, though not in an uncomfortable nosey way, as you will see. He graduated from the University of Michigan. From there he started up and ran a successful consulting business specializing in the field of health-care. Don and Paul both served in the U. S. Navy during World War II. We encounter them conversing over lunch at a local restaurant. Don, who does most of the talking, talks about his life and a great deal about his reasons for rejecting any form of religious faith. The conversation then takes up the question of moral values and morality in what according to Don is a Godless universe. Don’s views on faith and on ethics derive from his study and teaching of philosophy, though the areas of religion and ethics were not the areas of philosophy in which he concentrated his study and research or his teaching. The conversation between these two friends, with daily breaks, spans a five-day period.

The failure of the practical application of moral principles givesmoral failure an outward appearance of moral respectability. Onone hand, they are insuffi cient to quell the moral liberal’s unhappyskepticism and, on the other, they are a sanctuary for the rigidabsolutism of moral fundamentalists. In different ways, moralprinciples provide both with a ready made excuse to abdicate theirmoral responsibility – the one pleads the ignorance of the agnostic, theother the infallibility of faith. The tragedy is that others pay the pricefor their moral incompetence.

The failure of the practical application of moral principles givesmoral failure an outward appearance of moral respectability. Onone hand, they are insuffi cient to quell the moral liberal’s unhappyskepticism and, on the other, they are a sanctuary for the rigidabsolutism of moral fundamentalists. In different ways, moralprinciples provide both with a ready made excuse to abdicate theirmoral responsibility – the one pleads the ignorance of the agnostic, theother the infallibility of faith. The tragedy is that others pay the pricefor their moral incompetence.