The spear that peirced the side of Christ


#21

By the way, the discussion is not off-topic. The title to the thread reads, “The spear that pierced the side of Christ…” The question in Post #1 reads, “How many of the rumors behind this artifact are true, such as it has powerful occult powers and what not…”

Actually you are right about that. With the statement about being off topic I was referring to our discussion of your client’s claims about Hitler’s home which I hope you now realize were not true. He may have been a great guy and very convincing, but Hitler’s home was a burned out skeleton of a building before the first American troops ever got near it. There was nothing left to “break in to”. What few things of value there were that escaped damage were removed by the SS staff and the ruins were set ablaze. The only things found by American troops were in the storage areas of the bunker system. The records of the 3rd Infantry division and the 101st Airborne units that were the first Allied units there confirm the state of the ruins when they arrived. Your client’s story is simply not true. It can not possibly be true.

You contested my discussion by saying, in part (inaccurately) that “Hitler was not an occultist.”

My statement that he was not an occultist in the sense that you believe he was is correct. Yes, I am aware of Stein’s work as well as “The Spear of Destiny” by Trevor Ravencroft and “Adolf Hitler and the Secrets of the Holy Lance” by Buechner & Bernhart. All of these works feed off of each other and they are the source of this belief. As I said, Hitler did have “pagan” (or “occult” if you wish) beliefs but they were centered in ancient Germanic lore and mythology.

Therefore, when I say, “Yes, that spearhead WAS believed by some occultists to be a talisman, including by Adolf Hitler, himself,” I’m wrong – that in effect is your argument, right?

“Some occultists” is a pretty wide expansion of our previous comments. Yes, of course there were many people then and still many today who believe this, in spite of the spear being proven as a fake. It is possible that a young Hitler may have been one of them but other than in the works cited above which rely on heresay with no documentation, there is no reliable evidence of these claims. For something to be considered history, it needs to be reliably documented.


#22

Note well: All of the shots of the inside, before the bombing, were by who? Nazi photographers, or Allied photographers?

The office was used to entertain dignitaries from all over the world, it was seen and photographed by scores of people. In all my years of study, the only claim of the existance of these “murals” is in your post about your client. Nowhere else. Considering that the other elements of his story are undeniably false why do you still believe this part of it?

(2) Notice that in the photos of Hitler’s office, *it’s as big as a cafeteria, isn’t it? *My client got that right, didn’t he?

And this means anything? The size of the room negates the fact the the building was largely destroyed before any American troops got there and that it was never put into any use (much less a cafeteria) after the war as your client claimed? Everything about his story is proven false by documented history.

(3) Notice that my client knew that American soldiers took the dwelling. Is he even one of the soldiers in the photos? In any event, he got that right, too

You are really reaching now. Anyone who has made even a cursory reading of the war knows that.

(4) Next, note that one of the captions says that “German” tourists were prohibited from the site.

The caption implies that non-German tourists could go to the site.

Was a cafeteria built into the ruins for non-German tourists before it was destroyed?

You are assuming that it is nonsense that there was a cafeteria inside the ruins after 1945, before the 1952 destruction.

Well, in Philadelphia, there is a cafeteria inside the ruins of Fort Mifflin.

There are undoubtedly cafeterias inside historic ruins all over the world

.

This is just getting silly. I do not assume that it is nonsense, the documented history proves it as such. And just so you know, Germany was not a huge tourist site immediately after the war. The sign was directed at German civilians because they were the only civilians there and the Allies did not want any memorials to Hitler to spring up there. You can cling to believing your client’s story, but to do so is completely irrational.


#23

Hi, 2shelbys.

The material on-line isn’t clear, but it’s there, and it seems too coincidental.

Go to Office of Strategic Services Hitler Source Book…

66.102.7.104/search?q=cache:QqE7IZsiIfAJ:www.nizkor.org/hweb/people/h/hitler-adolf/oss-papers/text/oss-sb-index-03.html+Berghof++obscene&hl=en

*…*Page xxx, tenth item down, apparently indexing photos connected with Hitler’s “Living Style.”


#24

[font=Arial][font=Arial][font=Comic Sans MS]Hello 2Shelbys and Bible reader-[/font]

[font=Comic Sans MS]I copied the paragraph below from an abortion thread. Is this true?[/font]
[font=Comic Sans MS][/font]
[/font][/font][font=Arial]

[font=Comic Sans MS][font=Arial]A doctor delivered 2 babies the same day. The first was a healthy baby boy. The second was a little girl who was Down’s Syndrome.
He told this story years later to a class of medical students. He asked them which baby they thought had the greater value. They all

said the boy. That the Downs[/font][font=Comic Sans MS] baby was “worthless”.
He told them, the girl’s father died young, & her mother had health problems. The girl cared for her mom every day till the mom died. The little boy? His name was Adolf Hitler.[/font]

Keep up the good work!![/font][/font]


#25

Hi BibleReader,

It would be interesting to see what that is but you really can not connect it to anything. There are references there to things all over Germany and most of them, including that one, are very vague or as you said, not clear. I know it can be hard to let go of long-held beliefs, especially in reference to something that originates with someone we know and respect, but there is absolutely no chance that your client’s story is even partly true. The circumstances of the destruction and capture of the Berghof are just too well documented. Everything he told you shows a complete lack of knowledge of the situation and reeks of fabrication. The claim about the cafeteria is, if you will pardon me, ridiculous. Anyone who has studied Hitler, read his writings and transcriptions of his speeches, and researched the memoirs of those around him would say the same thing about pornography in the Berghof. It just is not possible by any stretch of the imagination. Over the years I have sat in front of decent well-meaning people and listened to them tell me about experiences they supposedly had that I already knew were not true and knew where and how the story originated even before they heard it. I would never challenge them on it unless they were so far-fetched that I could not help myself. That is the case with your client. I guess it is one of the flaws in human nature.


#26

[quote=2shelbys]Hi BibleReader,

It would be interesting to see what that is but you really can not connect it to anything. There are references there to things all over Germany and most of them, including that one, are very vague or as you said, not clear. I know it can be hard to let go of long-held beliefs, especially in reference to something that originates with someone we know and respect, but there is absolutely no chance that your client’s story is even partly true. The circumstances of the destruction and capture of the Berghof are just too well documented. Everything he told you shows a complete lack of knowledge of the situation and reeks of fabrication. The claim about the cafeteria is, if you will pardon me, ridiculous. Anyone who has studied Hitler, read his writings and transcriptions of his speeches, and researched the memoirs of those around him would say the same thing about pornography in the Berghof. It just is not possible by any stretch of the imagination. Over the years I have sat in front of decent well-meaning people and listened to them tell me about experiences they supposedly had that I already knew were not true and knew where and how the story originated even before they heard it. I would never challenge them on it unless they were so far-fetched that I could not help myself. That is the case with your client. I guess it is one of the flaws in human nature.
[/quote]

How the heck could you say that “it is not possible by any stretch of the imagination” that Hitler was an occultist who covered the walls of his office with pornography, when I find in the Index to the government’s Source Book on Hitler a reference to “room with obscene pictures”? And that at least corroborates the claim of my client, who was indeed in the unit which seized the Berghof, that “when I broke into Hitler’s office, I saw that the walls were covered with really dirty pictures of naked girls in all kinds of obscene positions,” or words to that effect. His name was William Riches. He passed away about 10 years ago. He lived on a farm in Evesboro, New Jersey. He would have had no reason to lie to me. He completely lacked the sophistication needed to make up something like this. He was just a good, simple man.

You should have at least been surprised that I was able to find government corroboration of my line so easily.

You were not. Instead, you are more convinced than ever of the perfection of your own views.

Have doubts. Doubts are healthy. They are humility. They lead to greater knowledge and to faith.


#27

How the heck could you say that “it is not possible by any stretch of the imagination” that Hitler was an occultist who covered the walls of his office with pornography, when I find in the Index to the government’s Source Book on Hitler a reference to “room with obscene pictures”?

OK, this will be the LAST time I bother to go over the same information or respond to you since you obviously are going to irrationally believe an impossible story no matter how much stone solid historical proof shows that it is wrong. We both agreed that what you found in the Source Book is proves nothing. You said it was not clear. You were right. There are things there from all over Germany, they are not identified in any way, and are a vague as anything could be.

And that at least corroborates the claim of my client, who was indeed in the unit which seized the Berghof, that “when I broke into Hitler’s office, I saw that the walls were covered with really dirty pictures of naked girls in all kinds of obscene positions,”

It corroborates NOTHING. It does not say anything about being his office (or even an “office” at all) nor does it say anything about being at the Berghof which it almost surely would have if that is what it was. You’ll notice that it is not listed in the section about the Berghof. He DID NOT “break into Hitler’s office”. Even if he was in the unit that arrived there first, the building was almost completely destroyed by bombs, then gutted and set on fire by the departing SS garrison. The building was essentially demolished before any American soldier ever saw it. Everything but the shell of the building had been destroyed or dismantled and there was nothing left to “break in to”. This is undeniably proven not only by MANY photographs but by the records of both the SS Garrison and the 2 American units that arrived there. All of the historical records agree. No one anywhere at any time has ever mentioned dirty murals at the Berghof. Not Germans, not American soldiers, not anyone who visited there, not researchers, NO ONE. An internet search using any combination of “Berghof” and “nude,naked, obscene” etc (which would find any reference to such a story, true or not) produces nothing other than what you found which is two separate references, one to the Berghof and another in a different section, about obscene pictures. And lets not forget his ludicrous claim about the cafeteria which is laughable at best. Your client made it up.

He completely lacked the sophistication needed to make up something like this.

This is silly. How much sophistication would someone need? It’s not as though his story is elaborate. Anyone could have invented such a tale.

…you are more convinced than ever of the perfection of your own views

It is not my view, it is what is proven in the historical record. Period.

Have doubts. Doubts are healthy. They are humility. They lead to greater knowledge and to faith.

This can certainly be true. Unless you are talking about having doubts about undeniably proven fact. That is not healthy, it is irrational. Our debate ends here since you obviously feel that this man was as infallible as the Pope, that he could not possibly have made up this tale and that all of the photographs and historical records that prove he did just that are somehow meaningless or wrong.

Take care and may the Lord bless and keep you.


#28

Hey, God bless you, too, my friend!

:wink:


#29

Hello BibleReader,

I wanted to pass on the info I found in the Enlistment Records for WWII (this is public information so listing it here is not a problem):

ARMY SERIAL NUMBER 31199732

NAME RICHES WILLIAM E

RESIDENCE: STATE 16 VERMONT

RESIDENCE: COUNTY 019 ORLEANS
PLACE OF ENLISTMENT 1665 RUTLAND VERMONT

DATE OF ENLISTMENT DAY 29

DATE OF ENLISTMENT MONTH 10

DATE OF ENLISTMENT YEAR 42

GRADE: ALPHA DESIGNATION PVT#

GRADE: CODE 8 Private

BRANCH: ALPHA DESIGNATION BI# Branch Immaterial - Warrant Officers, USA

BRANCH: CODE 00 Branch Immaterial - Warrant Officers, USA

TERM OF ENLISTMENT 5 Enlistment for the duration of the War or other emergency, plus six months, subject to the discretion of the President or otherwise according to law

SOURCE OF ARMY PERSONNEL 0 Civil Life

NATIVITY 16 VERMONT

YEAR OF BIRTH 21

RACE AND CITIZENSHIP 1 White, citizen

EDUCATION 4 4 years of high school

CIVILIAN OCCUPATION 949 SECTION HAND, RAILWAY

MARITAL STATUS 6 Single, without dependents

COMPONENT OF THE ARMY 7 Selectees (Enlisted Men)

BOX NUMBER 0408

FILM REEL NUMBER 3.130

I thought you might be interested if this is him. It is the only William Riches listed. I tried to cross reference his name and serial number in the records of the 3rd Infantry or 101st Airborne (the two units at the Berghof) but he did not come up in relation to either unit. That may, but does not necessarily mean he didn’t serve in those units. It just means that his assignment to those units can not be verified.

Take Care


#30

[quote=2shelbys]Hello BibleReader,

I wanted to pass on the info I found in the Enlistment Records for WWII (this is public information so listing it here is not a problem):

ARMY SERIAL NUMBER 31199732

NAME RICHES WILLIAM E

RESIDENCE: STATE 16 VERMONT

RESIDENCE: COUNTY 019 ORLEANS
PLACE OF ENLISTMENT 1665 RUTLAND VERMONT

DATE OF ENLISTMENT DAY 29

DATE OF ENLISTMENT MONTH 10

DATE OF ENLISTMENT YEAR 42

GRADE: ALPHA DESIGNATION PVT#

GRADE: CODE 8 Private

BRANCH: ALPHA DESIGNATION BI# Branch Immaterial - Warrant Officers, USA

BRANCH: CODE 00 Branch Immaterial - Warrant Officers, USA

TERM OF ENLISTMENT 5 Enlistment for the duration of the War or other emergency, plus six months, subject to the discretion of the President or otherwise according to law

SOURCE OF ARMY PERSONNEL 0 Civil Life

NATIVITY 16 VERMONT

YEAR OF BIRTH 21

RACE AND CITIZENSHIP 1 White, citizen

EDUCATION 4 4 years of high school

CIVILIAN OCCUPATION 949 SECTION HAND, RAILWAY

MARITAL STATUS 6 Single, without dependents

COMPONENT OF THE ARMY 7 Selectees (Enlisted Men)

BOX NUMBER 0408

FILM REEL NUMBER 3.130

I thought you might be interested if this is him. It is the only William Riches listed. I tried to cross reference his name and serial number in the records of the 3rd Infantry or 101st Airborne (the two units at the Berghof) but he did not come up in relation to either unit. That may, but does not necessarily mean he didn’t serve in those units. It just means that his assignment to those units can not be verified.

Take Care
[/quote]

No, that’s definitely not Billy. The family is one of those almost ancient South Jersey families, with no connection to Vermont. And I’ve seen family photos of Billy in uniform in Europe, with members of his unit. There is simply no doubt at all that he was there during WWII.


#31

That was the only William Riches that showed up in any of the Army records but we’re talking about information from 60 years ago. It is possible that there was a data entry error or oversight somewhere along the way. I never had any reason to doubt his service and I do not doubt it, it is just the story in question that was a problem. I just thought you may be interested in the file if it was the right one.

Take Care


#32

[quote=BibleReader]I spent years studying the occult. It’s real, and it can be accessed by anyone. There are two ways to access it – by studious meditation, which takes a long time and much practice; and by consummate personal corruption, by for instance, mixing drugs and sex. The second way is referred to as “the dark way” by some occultists. I believe that many people are making contact with the occult – essentially, with demons – unintentionally, by engaging in extremely immoral activity such as I mentioned – drugs or sex sin or, better yet, a mix of the two.

I don’t know what role things like “The Spear of Destiny” used as a “talisman” play in accessing the occult. My personal suspicion is that personal moral corruption attracts occultic beings – demons – because normally they can’t see people in a state of grace, but massive personal corruption makes the sinner “glow brightly” in some sense, so that they can see him. I also suspect that sin “dirties” the places in which it occurs – perhaps by making them something like the negative counterpart of relics – so that demons can see such places, and somehow “attach,” generating what we called a “haunted house.”

No matter what, I am told that the Bible, and the Church, advises, “STAY AWAY” from the occult.
[/quote]

Thanks for a great post. I never considered it this way before. I was trying to argue how physical places or things could be corrupted by evil acts done nearby, but I had a hard time explaining why I felt this way. Your simple explanation makes the most sense of any other explanation I have heard.


#33

DISCLAIMER: The views and opinions expressed in these forums do not necessarily reflect those of Catholic Answers. For official apologetics resources please visit www.catholic.com.