God is not omnibenevolent. World War I: Why Didn’t It Put an End to Belief in God?

Here is the link to this article.

By David Madison 

10/14/22

A personal, loving, competent god is out of the question

When we study episodes of colossal suffering in human history, we have to wonder: “How did belief in a good, powerful god survive these experiences?” The masses of people affected would have been more than justified in telling their priests to get lost. “The theology you’ve been peddling is all wrong.” The Black Plague of the 14th century, which brought horrible suffering and death to perhaps a third of the population from India to England, should have meant the end of personal theism, i.e., belief that a loving god manages the world, indeed, keeps close tabs on every person on earth. Unfortunately, critical thinking was not a common commodity at that time, so the church got away with preaching that human sin was the cause of the plague; god was getting even. This is stunningly bad theology, the embrace of supernatural evil, as Dan Barker has put it: the loving god had disappeared.

Christian theology fails to make any sense at all in the face of other historical calamities. During the American Civil War, Christians fought other Christians savagely. But they all prayed to the same god, whose inspired holy book included texts that viewed slavery as a normative practice. Indeed, slavery was not condemned even in the Ten Commandments. More than 600,000 men died in combat in that war. In the face of these events, thoughtful people should have seen that Christian theology doesn’t explain much at all. Christianity was not working as it was supposed to.

I would suggest, however, that World War I has truly catastrophic implications for Christian theology. The death toll, military and civilian, came to almost twenty million, and the war accelerated the flu epidemic that claimed as many as fifty million lives worldwide. This war brought brutality to new levels because of advances in weaponry, e.g., the machine gun, airplanes and aerial reconnaissance, tanks, poison gas, flame throwers. Most astounding of all, however, the combatants were traditionally super-Christian nations, England, France, Germany, Italy, and Russia. They all prayed to the same god, and yet generated propaganda to whip up zealous hatred of the enemy: Christian nations bent on destroying other Christian nations. Christianity was not working as it was supposed to.

In an earlier article on this blog, I commented on Erich Maria Remarque’s novel about the war, All Quiet on the Western Front. He was a German teenager when he was sent to the front, and experienced the full horrors of the trench warfare that went on for four years. After that book, I read G. J. Meyer’s 715-page book, A World Undone: The Story of the Great War, 1914-1918, to get an overall perspective of the war, i.e., a detailed description of every year of the war. There were endless disagreements among the politicians and generals about tactics and strategies, so many bad and faulty decisions. So the horrible bloodshed, the stalemate in the trenches went on year after year. There was widespread starvation in Germany because the allies blocked its only sea lanes. 

Yet we can be sure that citizens of all the combatant nations prayed earnestly, offering fervent appeals to god for an end to the slaughter and madness. And why not? The affirmation of the New Testament is that god knows every person on earth intimately, i.e., what each one of us thinks, says, does. This god is always watching—so could not have been unaware of what was happening: 

“We see men living with their skulls blown open; we see soldiers run with their two feet cut off, they stagger on their splintered stumps into the next shell-hole; a lance-corporal crawls a mile and a half on his hands dragging his smashed knee after him; another goes to the dressing station and over his clasped hands bulge his intestines; we see men without mouths, without jaws, without faces; we find one man who has held the artery of his arm in his teeth for two hours in order not to bleed to death.” (p. 101, All Quiet on the Western Front)  

Why didn’t god put an end to this? “Well, he moves in mysterious ways” doesn’t satisfy any serious thinker. Pope Francis once said, after an earthquake in central Italy that killed hundreds of people, that god and his mother were there to comfort the victims (those still alive). That still leaves an enormous theological problem: why didn’t god prevent the earthquake? Even more to the point with respect to World War I, why didn’t god put an immediate stop to it?

We read at the opening of Mark’s gospel that the voice of god boomed from the sky, “You are my beloved son!” Couldn’t god have done the same thing with the leaders of those Christian nations that were massacring each other? Just stop it, this is not how I want you to treat each other.

We also have to wonder: more subtly (if you concede that a voice booming from the sky is part of Mark’s fantasy), why couldn’t god have changed the minds of the leaders and generals? That was beyond his power? Devout Christians claim that the Bible—more than a thousand pages—is god’s inspired word, i.e., god worked through the minds of the Bible authors to get them to write exactly what he wanted them to write. William Lane Craig insists that he knows his faith is the real thing, because the holy spirit is in his heart, guaranteeing that his faith is true. Why didn’t the holy spirit rise to the challenge of getting inside the heads of the politicians and generals to get them to stop the war? 

God works in mysterious ways is sometimes supplemented with the argument that god gave humans free will, so the suffering is our fault. But this doesn’t work either. God allowed horrendous slaughter of young soldiers to go on for four years because protecting free will was more important than rescuing these lives? This god had his priorities screwed up. 

What was true of the Black Plague is also true of World War I. The masses of people affected would have been more than justified in telling their priests to get lost. “The theology you’ve been peddling is all wrong.” Why didn’t that happen? —especially since citizens of the 20th century were supposedly far more enlightened than the citizens of the 14th century. In the comments section of my article about All Quiet on the Western Front, Daniel Wilcox recommended Philip Jenkins’ book, The Great and Holy War: How World War I Became a Religious Crusade. So I read that book too. The G. J. Meyer book is a detailed history of the war, the Jenkins book illustrates how New Testament superstitions still prevailed and controlled the minds of so many people. 

At the opening of chapter one, Philip Jenkins wrote:

“The Great War took place in the world where many educated people thought that religion was destined to fade rapidly before the growing strength of science and technology. Yet the scale of violence in that war was so incomprehensibly vast that only religious language was adequate to the chore of describing it, or justifying it. The full horror of the war was obvious in its opening weeks… On a single day, August 22, the French lost twenty-seven thousand men killed in battles in the Ardennes and at Charleroi… During August and September 1914, four hundred thousand French soldiers perished, and already by year’s end, the war had in all claimed two million lives on both sides.” (pp. 29-30)

How could these frightful events not bring to mind New Testament teachings about the end times? In Jesus-script we find predictions that, at the coming of his kingdom, there will be as such suffering as at the time of Noah. Mark 13 is a description of the awful turmoil preceding the kingdom. There is this chilling Jesus-script, Matthew 10:34-36:

“Do not think that I have come to bring peace to the earth; I have not come to bring peace but a sword. For I have come to set a man against his father, and a daughter against her mother, and a daughter-in-law against her mother-in-law,and one’s foes will be members of one’s own household.”

And Luke 12:49: “I have come to cast fire upon the earth, and how I wish it were already ablaze!”

These examples of dreadful theology are not standard Sunday School texts, but they are there to be cited when the world has descended to madness. 

Jenkins points out that…

“Eschatology had a broad appeal across nations and societies. Images of a forthcoming ultimate battle predominated in the years immediately before the war, partly because of the series of war scares between 1906 and 1912 (Bosnia, Morocco, and the rest). These end-time ideas appealed to progressive avant-garde figures at least as much as to traditionalists….The key innovators not only knew that war was coming soon but that they were liable to be conscripted to fight and die in the coming conflict. However much they espoused radical or anticlerical views, artists and writers ransacked their religious pasts in search of images and symbols that would allow them to come to terms with this fate…The imagery of apocalypse proved so overwhelmingly attractive that distinctions between mainstream faith and radical modernism often seem paper-thin.” (pp. 146-147) 

Fantasy seized many minds, as was the case in the era when the gospels were written. Thus the war provoked visions of angels, perhaps the most famous example being the angels of Mons, who were credited with saving the British army from defeat by the Germans in Belgium. But these angels didn’t manage to save the 1,600 British soldiers who perished in the battle. The visions of the Virgin Mary occurred at Fatima in Portugal, in 1917, after that country had entered the war. 

Jenkins notes that German militarism found its patron saint in Martin Luther, “…who in this era achieved messianic reputation. German churches had long venerated Luther, but adulation reached new heights with the rise of intense nationalism following the creation of the new empire in 1871.” (p. 174) Luther’s writing would also fuel the virulent anti-Semitism that seized Germany in World War II.

“By 1914, Luther had become the centerpiece of a religious-nationalist vision in which his Reformation marked almost a re-founding of Christianity itself…Luther became a wonderful figurehead for aggressive nationalism at its most ruthless.” (p. 174)

But, across the board, clergy commonly embraced enthusiasm for the war, as Jenkins notes:

“…the war was forcing tens of millions of Catholics to try to kill each other. Generally, when religious leaders had a primary identification with a state—as most did—they not only abandoned words of peace and reconciliation but advocated strident doctrines of holy war and crusades, directed against fellow Christians.” (p. 66)

“…while we might expect clergy to support their nations at war, in practice they went far beyond any simple endorsement and became vocal, even fanatical advocates. Often they presented sophisticated arguments for holy warfare, which drew heavily on both biblical tradition and Christian history.” (p. 67)

Is this the way Christianity is supposed to work? Its theology is so incoherent because the New Testament is an ill-thought-out mess. It managed to mix the messianism of the Old Testament (a hero would emerge to restore the chosen people to their rightful place) with apocalypticism that anticipated cataclysmic upheaval for the world at large.  

These ancient superstitions have no place at all in our modern world. But they’ve been advocated ceaselessly by ecclesiastical bureaucracies—what better credentials than the revered New Testament? —which enables bad theology to overrule critical thinking, logic, and a rational approach to the world. As the vast slaughter in the killing fields of 1914 became so obvious, people should have seen through the religious nonsense: there is no wise, powerful, good god watching out for us. Personal theism should have been knocked out cold by World War I. 

But the peace that eventually ended that war was a flawed, brutal peace, which eventually spawned Nazi Germany, whose fanaticism was identical to religious fervor—Gott mit uns was on Nazi belts. The march of religious insanity was not halted. Is that the way Christianity is supposed to work?

David Madison was a pastor in the Methodist Church for nine years, and has a PhD in Biblical Studies from Boston University. He is the author of two books, Ten Tough Problems in Christian Thought and Belief: a Minister-Turned-Atheist Shows Why You Should Ditch the Faith (2016; 2018 Foreword by John Loftus) and Ten Things Christians Wish Jesus Hadn’t Taught: And Other Reasons to Question His Words (2021). His YouTube channel is here. He has written for the Debunking Christianity Blog since 2016.

The Cure-for-Christianity Library©, now with more than 500 titles, is here. A brief video explanation of the Library is here

Drafting novel #12. Day 87 (101522)

Why am I doing this? Find the answer here.

Today’s live, onscreen recording:

Click the following link to view and listen to today’s recording.

https://screencast-o-matic.com/watch/c36orXVtduv


Slow-writing isn’t bad. Watch, starting at 2:15

Other fiction writing resources I’ve found helpful

H.R. D’Costa’s website, Scribe Meets World

My own website, Fiction Writing School

Anne Rainbow’s website, Scrivener Virgin

Scrivener website, Literature and Latte

John Truby’s website, Truby’s Writers Studio

K.M. Weiland’s website, Helping Writers Become Authors

Does Mark’s Gospel Implicitly Deny the Virgin Birth?

The following is interesting and addresses one of two questions that, if the answer is no, virtually destroys the foundation of what Southern Baptist fundamentalists believe. The first question is, ‘was Jesus born to a virgin?’ The second (not addressed here) is simply, ‘did Jesus resurrect to life on the third day?’

Please take note of the following well-established fact: the Gospel of Mark was the first of the four canonical gospels. It was written thirty to fourty years after Jesus’ death.

The following article strongly implies the authors of the gospels of Matthew and Luke (the second and third gospels to be written) created the virgin birth myth.

Here is the link to the titled article.

By Bart Ehrman
December 27, 2014


It is interesting that our first canonical Gospel (which is our first Gospel, whether canonical or noncanonical), Mark, does not have the story of the Virgin birth and in fact shows no clue that it is familiar with the stories of the Virgin birth. On the contrary, there are passages in Mark that appear to work against the idea that Jesus’ mother knew anything about his having had an extraordinary birth.

There is a complicated little passage in Mark 3:20-21 about Jesus’ family coming to take him out of the public eye because they thought he was crazy. It is a difficult passage to translate from the Greek, and a number of translations go out of their way to make it say something that it probably doesn’t say. The context is that Jesus has been doing extraordinary miracles, attracting enormous crowds, and raising controversy among the Jewish leaders. Jesus then chooses his disciples and they go with him into a house. And then come our verses.

In the Greek the passage literally says that “those who were beside him came forth” in order to seize him, because they were saying, EXESTH. The two problems are: who is this group that has come, and what does it meant that he EXESTH? It is widely thought among translators and interpreters – and I think this has to be right – that “those who were beside him” means “his family.” It cannot mean the disciples, because they are already with him in the house. It must be people who were personally attached to Jesus (that’s what the phrase “were beside him” means). And so that appears to leave his family members. No one else is “on his side,” as it were.

Why then did his family members come? Because they thought he was EXESTH. Whatever the word means, it can’t be good. The whole point of this section of Mark is that Jesus is finding opposition everywhere he turns, despite all the miracles he is doing. The Pharisees are against him because they don’t think he has authority to do the things he does (2:24, 3:2). They become so outraged at his activities that they team up with the Herodians to decide to kill him (3:6). The scribes are against him because they think that he has blasphemed against God (2:6) and that he does his mighty works because he is possessed by the Devil, Beelzebub (3:22). Even his family members – those who stand beside him – think that he EXESTH.

The word EXESTH literally means “to stand outside of oneself.” It is a phrase comparable to the English phrase “to be out of your mind.” In other words, it means “he has gone crazy.”

And so 3:21-22 can be translated “Now when his family heard these things they came out in order to seize him, for they were saying “He is out of his mind.”
Some translators don’t like that way of putting it, not because of any grammatical or lexical issues with the Greek, but simply because they can’t get their heads around Jesus’ family members thinking that he has gone crazy. And so, to avoid the problem, they sometimes change the translation – not because of what the Greek says, but because of what they think it ought to say. And so they translate it as saying that his family has come to take him out of the public eye because “people were saying that ‘He is beside himself.’” (Thus the RSV, for example.)

This is really taking liberties with the Greek. In Greek, the subject of a sentence is often not expressed because it can be found in the form of the verb itself. I will try to explain this simply. In English, when we write or speak a sentence that requires a pronoun (“I” “you” He” “she” “they” “Those ones” “These ones”) we actually give the pronoun. In Greek and other “inflected” languages, the pronouns are already built into the verb. So the verb is spelled differently, with a different ending, whether you want the subject to be “I” “you” “she” “we” etc. It was possible for Greek to use pronouns, of course, and it often does when it wants to place special emphasis on the subject. But in normal speech it was not necessary.

Now the rule is that if a sentence containing a verb does not have an explicit pronoun, and the subject within the sentence itself is ambiguous, then the implied subject (found in the ending of the verb) is the immediately preceding noun or pronoun (or other substantive). So that if you have a sentence that says “He jumped over the ditch,” you actually do not know who the “he” is unless you look in the preceding context and see, right before this sentence, something like, “James ran into the field.” Then you know that the “He” that is jumping over the ditch is James.

Apologies for the grammar lesson here, but it matters. In Mark 3:21, when it says “for they were saying” there is no noun or pronoun expressed to indicated who the “they” is. And so, by the rules of grammar, it almost certainly refers to the closest antecedent, which in this case is “those who were on his side,” i.e., his family. In other words, the ones who came to seize him were the ones saying that he is out of his mind.

The RSV translators were not happy with that view though, evidently because of its implications. But its implications are the very point of the passage and of this post. (As I’ll explain in just one second.) Still, not liking what the verse actually said, the RSV translators interpreted it and re-translated it so the English says something different from the Greek. Their English version adds the word “people” – not found in the Greek – to explain who, in the translators’ opinion, were saying that Jesus had gone crazy. And now what the story means is that the family of Jesus wanted to take him from the public eye because there were people out there saying that he was nuts. But that’s not what the Greek says. The Greek says that the family came to seize him because they were saying that he was nuts.

And who would be included in his family? It becomes pretty clear later in the chapter. For once again his family members come, and we’re told that it is “his mother and his brothers” (3:31) – in another interesting passage where Jesus appears to reject them in favor of his followers (3:31-34).

What does all this have to do with the Virgin birth? Mark does not narrate an account of Jesus’ birth. Mark never says a word about Jesus’ mother being a virgin. Mark does not presuppose that Jesus had an unusual birth of any kind. And in Mark (you don’t find this story in Matthew and Luke!!), Jesus’ mother does not seem to know that he is a divinely born son of God. On the contrary, she thinks he has gone out of his mind. Mark not only lacks a virgin birth story; it seems to presuppose that they never could have been a virgin birth. Or Mary would understand who Jesus is. But she does not.

It’s no wonder that when Matthew and Luke took over so many of the stories of Mark, they decided, both of them, not to take over Mark 3:20-21. They had completely different view of Jesus’ mother and his birth.

Hearsay and anecdotal evidence

Watch and listen as one person describes his encounter with God. As Sam Harris says, “prepare to be overwhelmed.”

https://screencast-o-matic.com/watch/c36oImVtJWW

Here’s what the author of Common Sense said about revelation

“Revelation when applied to religion, means something communicated
immediately from God to man. It is revelation to the first person only, and hearsay to every other, and, consequently, they are not obliged
to believe it. It is a contradiction in terms and ideas to call anything a revelation that comes to us at second hand, either verbally or in writing. Revelation is necessarily limited to the first communication.”

Thomas Paine

What is the definition of anecdotal evidence?

evidence in the form of stories that people tell about what has happened to them.

//His conclusions are not supported by data; they are based only on anecdotal evidence.

Merriam-Webster dictionary

Want additional information? Read the following article

Here’s the link.

Research 101: Anecdotal Evidence vs Scientific Evidence

Elizabeth Berger

What is Evidence?

In any research study, the goal is to generate some type of evidence for a particular purpose, namely for the pursuit of knowledge and the desire to prove or disprove an idea or theory. Good research challenges the status quo, advances our understanding, and drives improvement.  Solid research projects lead to good research findings, which build compelling stories that can dramatically inform and improve our approach to our work. However, it’s important to know what a quality research study looks like as well as whether it applies to your specific clients.

Scientific Evidence

When it comes to scientific evidence, there are a lot of numbers, terminology, and esoteric methodological factors that impact the relevance and utility of research findings. This makes it difficult for practitioners to understand the practical implications of the research and how to apply them to their practice. It can be an intimidating process to determine whether the research is valid, whether it pertains to your population, and how to apply it to your clientele.

Misconceptions

Perhaps one of the most common misconceptions is that between anecdotal evidence and scientific evidence. Anecdotal evidence is information collected in an informal manner and often relying heavily on personal testimony, such as a case study approach (or one yoga teacher’s experience with clients). While anecdotal evidence is generally limited in value due to several types of bias, scientific evidence relies on more rigorous methods. Anecdotal evidence includes the first articles published on new topics, comprising most of what we see online, in the news, and on social media. However, we can’t rely on anecdotal evidence exclusively because it is highly susceptible to error attributed to personal biases and preconceived notions.

God is not omnibenevolent. Three Women of Bucha: Their Deaths and Lives

Omnibenevolent = possessing perfect or unlimited goodness.

Southern Baptist fundamentalists (and many others) claim their God is omnibenevolent. Reality is quite the opposite. Read the following 10/15/22 New York Times article and decide for yourself.

Here’s the link to this article.

New reporting illuminates the fortitude of three women — a former public servant, an animal lover, a grandmother — who were victims of Russian brutality.

By Carlotta Gall and Oleksandr Chubko

  • Oct. 15, 2022

BUCHA, Ukraine — One woman was badly beaten and shot through the eye. Another, held captive by Russian soldiers, was found in a cellar, shot in the head. An 81-year-old grandmother was discovered hanging in her garden, perhaps killed, perhaps driven to suicide.

They were three victims among hundreds during the Russian occupation of Bucha in the spring. Bucha, a suburb of Ukraine’s capital, Kyiv, quickly became the main focus of atrocities by Russian soldiers before they withdrew from the area.

The crimes gained worldwide attention. But these women were unknown, their deaths unseen and unexplained.

My New York Times colleagues and I reported at the time on the Russian brutality and came across these cases. So we went back to Bucha, the place of so many deaths, to learn about these three women — to find out about their lives and who they were.

Volunteer cemetery workers loaded a large truck with 65 bodies found in April in Bucha.
Volunteer cemetery workers loaded a large truck with 65 bodies found in April in Bucha.Credit…Daniel Berehulak for The New York Times
Volunteer cemetery workers loaded a large truck with 65 bodies found in April in Bucha.

We found that each woman, in her own way, was a fighter, struggling to survive weeks of hunger, cold, bombardment and shooting, yet tragically vulnerable to the ruthless violence of an occupying army.

Many of the circumstances of their last days remain unclear, but for their families and Ukrainian officials, there is no doubt that they were victims of Russia’s aggression against their country.

BELARUS

30 MILES

UKRAINE

Bucha

Kyiv

Dnipro River

Detail area

UKRAINE

By The New York Times

Oksana Sulyma, 34, was in Bucha only by chance.

A former public servant, she lived in Kyiv with her 5-year-old daughter, but had visited Bucha to stay with friends only 48 hours before the war began in February. Within days, Russian troops had stormed the wooded suburb and roads and transport links had been cut. Oksana was stuck, said Oleksiy, a childhood friend, who asked that only his first name be used for privacy.

She had grown up and lived much of her adult life in Bucha. Her grandmother lived in an apartment near the center of town. Oksana had moved to Kyiv only after divorcing her husband several years ago; she wanted to be closer to her parents, who helped look after her daughter.

Her mother, Larysa Sulyma, agreed to provide a few details of Oksana’s life for her to be remembered by.

“She was a very bright child,” her mother said. She learned French during an exchange visit to France, completed a degree in sociology at the National Aviation University in Kyiv, and later worked at the Ministry of Infrastructure.

“She was very vivacious,” her mother added. She shared photographs of her daughter on a beach in Crimea, where she used to vacation every year before Russia annexed the peninsula in 2014. “She loved life, she loved to travel.”

Oksana Sulyma was last seen by friends on March 10 at Shevchenko Square.
Oksana Sulyma was last seen by friends on March 10 at Shevchenko Square.Credit…Laura Boushnak for The New York Times
Oksana Sulyma was last seen by friends on March 10 at Shevchenko Square.

In early March, Russian troops set up bases and firing positions in Bucha and began to impose greater control on the streets. They searched houses, confiscated cellphones and began detaining people and killing.

Oksana was last seen by friends on March 10 at Shevchenko Square, her mother said. The square, marked by a statue of the Ukrainian poet Taras Shevchenko, is a popular meeting place.

Her mother posted a message on Facebook on March 15 expressing concern. Oksana had experienced mental health issues, and anxiety at the onset of the war may have exacerbated her condition, her mother wrote.

“Her behavior may have manifestations of anger, aggression or incompetence,” her post said. “If anyone knows her whereabouts, please call.”

Anna Noha, 36, had lived most of her life in Bucha and had no intention of leaving.

She had friends and family in the town, and even when her former partner and half sister fled the occupation in early March, she chose to stay. Anna hung out with friends in the basement of her two-story building, sometimes venturing into the streets, visiting her father and rescuing cats.

“She was very independent, very active,” said her stepmother, Tetyana Kopachova, 51. “At the same time, she was very kind, very helpful. She chopped wood all winter for me.”

Anna’s father and stepmother were dog breeders and kept 11 Central Asian sheepdogs in cages on their property in the center of town. Anna would come around to help.

Anna Noha’s sister Olena showing a photograph of Anna, who was detained by Russian soldiers on March 13 when she went to find dog food.
Anna Noha’s sister Olena showing a photograph of Anna, who was detained by Russian soldiers on March 13 when she went to find dog food. Credit…Laura Boushnak for The New York Times
Anna Noha’s sister Olena showing a photograph of Anna, who was detained by Russian soldiers on March 13 when she went to find dog food.

She had always been a tearaway, her stepmother said. She married young, divorced, had a teenage daughter. She had served time in prison for dealing drugs, but had since given that up, her stepmother said.

Anna was also a survivor. Her former partner was abusive and she came over to their house for a couple of nights with a friend, nursing bruises, Ms. Kopachova said.

Her parents pressed her to stay, but she left again on March 13, promising to find dog food because they were running out. She never came back.

Live Updates: Russia-Ukraine War

Updated 

Oct. 15, 2022, 5:34 a.m. ET43 minutes ago43 minutes ago

Lyudmyla Shchehlova, 81, also did not want to leave Bucha. A retired epidemiologist, she had lived for almost 40 years in a cottage styled like a wood cabin, nestled amid pine trees.

The house had belonged to her husband, also a physician, and together they had raised a daughter, Olena, and later their grandson, Yevhen.

His grandfather was the soft one, Yevhen, 22, recalled in an interview. His grandmother was strict, “It was like good cop, bad cop,” he said laughing. “She taught me a lot,” he added.

Yevhen, the grandson of Lyudmyla Shchehlova, in August at her house in Bucha. The last time Yevhen spoke to his grandmother, she was weeping but was happy that he and his mother were out of danger.
Yevhen, the grandson of Lyudmyla Shchehlova, in August at her house in Bucha. The last time Yevhen spoke to his grandmother, she was weeping but was happy that he and his mother were out of danger. Credit…Laura Boushnak for The New York Times
Yevhen, the grandson of Lyudmyla Shchehlova, in August at her house in Bucha. The last time Yevhen spoke to his grandmother, she was weeping but was happy that he and his mother were out of danger.

Ms. Shchehlova was Russian by origin, and her bookshelves were full of Russian classics. Since her husband died a few years ago, she had lived alone, surrounded by her books and family photographs, with Ralph, a German shepherd, and a cat for company.

Her daughter, Olena, lived in a neighboring suburb, Irpin, and wanted her mother to join her there when the war started, but the roads were blocked by the fighting. Within days, the electricity and telephones went down. She tried to call her mother on March 7, her birthday, but could not reach her.

When the bombardment worsened sharply in their neighborhood, Olena and Yevhen fled on foot across a destroyed bridge toward Kyiv.

The last time Yevhen spoke to his grandmother, she was weeping but was happy that they were out of danger. “She said everything was fine,” he said.

By mid-March, the atmosphere in Bucha was growing uglier. New Russian units had taken over control and reprisals against civilians grew.

For several days around March 18, a lot of killing occurred in Bucha.

Russian troops had occupied School No. 3 on Vokzalna Street, and they were firing mortars from empty land behind it. Soldiers smashed their armored vehicles through garden fences and camped in people’s homes.

At some point, Oksana Sulyma was apprehended and taken to a house on Vokzalna Street. The house backed up to School No. 3, which she had attended as a girl. Oksana was found there in April, imprisoned in a potato cellar, shot in the head. She was wearing only a fur coat.

The body of Oksana Sulyma was found in April in a potato cellar. She had been shot in the head and was wearing only a fur coat.
The body of Oksana Sulyma was found in April in a potato cellar. She had been shot in the head and was wearing only a fur coat.Credit…Daniel Berehulak for The New York Times
The body of Oksana Sulyma was found in April in a potato cellar. She had been shot in the head and was wearing only a fur coat.
Oksana’s grave in Kyiv. An official familiar with the case said there was evidence that she had been raped.
Oksana’s grave in Kyiv. An official familiar with the case said there was evidence that she had been raped.Credit…Laura Boushnak for The New York Times
Oksana’s grave in Kyiv. An official familiar with the case said there was evidence that she had been raped.

The police found bullet casings by the trap door of the cellar and determined she was killed on March 17, a week after going missing. Her passport and ID card were later found by the Ukrainian police near the railway tracks.

Russian soldiers had been living in the house, sleeping on mattresses in the living room and heating water for washing. In a bedroom upstairs, women’s clothes and underwear were strewn about and the police found a used condom. An official familiar with the case said there was evidence that Oksana had been raped.

Around the same time, Anna Noha moved to an apartment a few blocks away, just west of Vokzalna Street. Her windows had been blown out by the shelling and it was freezing, so a friend, Vladyslav, took her and a former classmate, Yuriy, to stay with his mother, Lyudmyla.

Anna brought coffee and tea with her and asked Lyudmyla if she could also bring an abandoned cat, a beautiful longhaired Siamese, that she had found.

“She seemed very kind,” said Lyudmyla, who asked that only her first name be used. “That’s why I gave her shelter.”

On the evening of March 18, the three friends cleaned the apartment and took out the trash, Lyudmyla said. They said they would have a smoke while they were outside. They never came back.

Lyudmyla later learned from neighbors that Russian troops had detained them by the trash bins and marched them with bags over their heads into the basement of a nearby 10-story building. Neighbors said Anna had shouted out “Glory to Ukraine.”

The basement where Anna Noha and her two friends were detained.
The basement where Anna Noha and her two friends were detained. Credit…Laura Boushnak for The New York Times
The basement where Anna Noha and her two friends were detained.

A week later, Lyudmyla was gathering firewood with a friend when she found their bodies. First she saw Anna and Yuriy, lying in the garden of an unoccupied house. Later she found her son, Vladyslav, inside a shed. They had been beaten and each was shot through an eye. Anna was so badly bludgeoned that her face was unrecognizable, Lyudmyla said.

“She was cheerful, strong,” Lyudmyla said of Anna. “Maybe she suffered for her outspokenness.”

By March 19, only two residents, Ms. Shchehlova, the 81-year-old retired epidemiologist, and Mariya, 84, a former factory worker, remained on their narrow lane.

Soldiers occupied a house at the end of the lane, Mariya said. “There were 15 of them in that gang and they made such trouble here,” she said. Someone stole bottles of alcohol from her fridge while she dozed in an armchair, she said.

A builder, Bogdan Barkar, 37, was out scouring for food one day and came across Ms. Shchehlova in the alley behind her house. “She had tears in her eyes,” he said. He sensed she was being threatened by someone. “Just come by in two days and see if I am alive or not,” she told him.

Some days later, Mariya said she heard Ms. Shchehlova arguing with someone and saw a strange man in her yard. But weak from hunger and fearful, Mariya did not intervene.

The cherry tree where Lyudmila Shchehlova, a retired epidemiologist, was found hanging in Bucha.
The cherry tree where Lyudmila Shchehlova, a retired epidemiologist, was found hanging in Bucha.Credit…Laura Boushnak for The New York Times
The cherry tree where Lyudmila Shchehlova, a retired epidemiologist, was found hanging in Bucha.
A calendar at Ms. Shchehlova’s house with dates marked in March.
A calendar at Ms. Shchehlova’s house with dates marked in March.Credit…Laura Boushnak for The New York Times
A calendar at Ms. Shchehlova’s house with dates marked in March.

It was only days later when the Russians withdrew from Bucha that Mariya’s son came back and discovered Ms. Shchehlova hanging from a tree, a ladder propped against the trunk.

The police recorded it as a suicide, but few who knew Ms. Shchehlova believed she could have done it herself. She was religious and knew it to be a sin, said her neighbor Valentyn Melnyk.

Her grandson Yevhen cut the ropes down from the tree and said he doubted that she would have been able to tie them on the high branches. But he was resigned to his doubts.

“I am a realist,” he said. “How is it possible to find out what happened if all the neighbors left, and she was alone at that moment?”

The grief and loss remains overwhelming. His mother, a refugee in Sweden, wept at missing her mother’s funeral.

Anna Noha’s father, Volodymyr Kopachov, died on July 7, soon after burying his daughter. He lies beside her in Bucha City Cemetery in the section reserved for victims of the war.

Oksana Sulyma’s parents made separate visits to the cellar where she died. Weeping, her mother distributed sweets to the neighbors.

The grave of Anna Noha next to her father’s in Bucha.
The grave of Anna Noha next to her father’s in Bucha.Credit…Laura Boushnak for The New York Times
The grave of Anna Noha next to her father’s in Bucha.

Bucha’s Month of Terror

In a Kyiv Suburb,‘They Shot Everyone They Saw’

April 3, 2022

‘We Do Not Want Unknown Graves’: The Struggle to Identify Bucha’s Victims

Sept. 3, 2022

Carlotta Gall is the Istanbul bureau chief, covering Turkey. She previously covered the aftershocks of the Arab Spring from Tunisia, reported from the Balkans during the war in Kosovo and Serbia, and covered Afghanistan and Pakistan. @carlottagall • Facebook

Drafting novel #12. Day 86 (101422)

Why am I doing this? Find the answer here.

Today’s live, onscreen recording:

Click the following link to view and listen to today’s recording.

https://screencast-o-matic.com/watch/c3620xVtJ3R


Other fiction writing resources I’ve found helpful

H.R. D’Costa’s website, Scribe Meets World

My own website, Fiction Writing School

Anne Rainbow’s website, Scrivener Virgin

Scrivener website, Literature and Latte

John Truby’s website, Truby’s Writers Studio

K.M. Weiland’s website, Helping Writers Become Authors

Drafting novel #12. Day 85 (101322)

Why am I doing this? Find the answer here.

Today’s live, onscreen recording:

Click the following link to view and listen to today’s recording.

https://screencast-o-matic.com/watch/c36IrDVtEHd


Helpful Scrivener Keywords instruction videos



Other fiction writing resources I’ve found helpful

H.R. D’Costa’s website, Scribe Meets World

My own website, Fiction Writing School

Anne Rainbow’s website, Scrivener Virgin

Scrivener website, Literature and Latte

John Truby’s website, Truby’s Writers Studio

K.M. Weiland’s website, Helping Writers Become Authors