[topcat54]

Rushdoony wrote:

It is difficult to imagine that anyone can deny the reality of the mass slaughter that characterized the twentieth century, whether it be the Armenian millions murdered by the Turks, the Jewish millions murdered by the Nazis, or the untold millions murdered by the communists in China, Russia, and Cambodia.

In my Institutes of Biblical Law, I noted that the scope of such mass murder had so numbed the modern conscience that the murder of a "mere" thousand, or ten thousand, no longer shocked, tempting some to inflate the scope of lesser atrocities, lest they not seem sufficiently horrific.

It was not my purpose to enter a debate over numbers, whether millions were killed, or tens of millions, an area which must be left to others with expertise in such matters. My point then and now is that in all such matters what the Ninth Commandment requires is the truth, not exaggeration, irrespective of the cause one seeks to serve. (Quoted here )

[1000 silverlings]

Anyone can buy a Jewish Torah and read the commentary that goes along with the scripture. All kinds of insights are given. The number of letters in the Torah have a mystical purpose, as does just about everything else, including the letters themselves.

Whether it was in fact 6 million Jews who died in the Holocaust or not, killing even one Jewish person the sages say, is in effect destroying a universe.

[allmendream]

“Poncins is hostile to lies about the numbers of Jews killed, but is he not repeating the lie of Adam and Eve in blaming the evils of the church on everyone except the church?”

Is this not an endorsement of Poncins view that the reports about the number of Jews killed are “lies” that he is “hostile” to?

It seems that this Rushdoony character's real problem with Poncins was that he was not sufficiently anti-Catholic in his Holocaust denial/revisionism.

*****************************
So when questioned about his denial he doesn't want to argue numbers, but suggests it is most likely exxageration.

Sorry, a little too late to put the toothpaste back into the tube.

“hostile to lies about the numbers of Jews killed” is what he said.

Who told these “lies”? On what basis does he deem them lies?

And his criticism of a Holocaust revisionist is not that he is a nutter, but that he (of course) is hostile to the lies about the number of Jews killed but wasn't critical enough of the Catholic Church.

And now it really isn't important if they were, in fact, “lies”.

No, they might merely be “exxagerations”.

DISGUSTING!

I didn't know Free Republic was so rife with Holocaust Revisionism.