Comments (1110)

"Paganplace, on a final note, on reading your comments about Christianity on other discussions I don't get the impression you are positively disposed towards it."

Not blanketly, no. Especially not when Christians are trying to associate me, or atheists, or gays, with Nazis cause they'd rather forget what can happen when Christianity gets too much political power and people stop questioning or thinking rationally.

" You don't seem to think that Christians have the right to practice the tenets of their faith and spreading the Good News of Christ's salvation is part of it."

People of all faiths have to respect each other's humanity. Calling it 'spreading the good news' when you just think you have a special right to defame or harm or rule others, cause you want to believe whatever you want to believe about them, doesn't give you the 'right,' no.

Personally, I observe that if you want to preach 'salvation' just for your group, you have to start by preaching the 'damnation' of others who don't fall into line.

And that presents a danger for people in your practice, one best not swept under the rug and scapegoating a minority, like queers or atheists or Neopagans or intellectuals or leftists, when the real Nazi phenomenon was quite the opposite.

" Maybe you'd like to extend to them the same treatment that you expect from them - respect for their right to practice their faith which commands them to love everyone, including their enemies?"

I'm not your enemy, and I often question the presumptions some Christians have about what they redefine as 'loving behavior.'

It may make a fun fantasy to figure all the non-Christians and 'occultists' are really the same 'enemy,' but actually, sometimes it takes a tree-hugger that knows the difference to deal with the *actual* occult scams and manipulations one sees out there, (When it comes down to it, the motivations for such charlatanry are usually disappointingly-banal, actually,) while you scream about nonexistent Satanic conspiracies and secret Wiccan plots to not-condemn ourselves in children's books we didn't write and which have nothing to do with us. :)

To you it's 'all the same,' but you can't tell a charlatan or a manipulator from honest folk if you refuse to see the difference in the name of loving to have 'enemies.'

To keep pushing the blame for the fact that vocally-professing Christianity as a panacea, and all else as 'enemy,' does not prevent the recurring history of horrors done in the name of Christianity, well, that's false witness by *your* standards, and just plain *lying* by mine.

We see the same dynamics of flag-and-cross-waving and scapegoating of minorities, the anti-intellectualism, the calling of any caring policy that doesn't involve kneeling 'Communist elements' the homophobia, (what the Religious Right here in America says about queer folks may as well be an overdubbed version of 'The Eternal Jew,' for instance.) ..and, yes, the anti-Semitism, whether you believe that supporting 'Pro-Israel' policies in the name of using the Jews to rebuild the temple and in Evangelical belief, bring about the end of the world is done out of any respect for the humanity of Jewish people or not...

It's not running around saying, 'Hey, Jesus says be excellent to each other,' that's the problem.

It's running around saying 'only Christians do this, and any Christian that does otherwise doesn't count. So it was really non-Christians that did all that bad stuff, so people of other religions are bad and need 'converting...' So only Bible-wavers should rule, and without question, cause we believe our belief makes us *better than you, by Gott.* Cause that always works out great.'

Lest we forget.

"Paganplace, it is wise to stick to the word 'manipulation.' Anything else gets the Nazi elite SS worshipers of Wotan into as much hot water as anybody else. It can be argued that a party that got its power based on good ideals were corrupted by the worship of Wotan. So there, don't you see where you are headed?"

Just cause it's 'just as easy' to say that doesn't make it 'just as true.'

I'm not saying Hitler was a true Christian or anything, as Christians reckon it. And, no, I certainly don't think professing Christianity automatically results in goodness.

But the anti-semitism and fascism was pre-existing before people crafted that Nazi 'occult' stuff out of very different sources and worldviews than the Neopagan movement.

There weren't, in Germany, masses of 'Wotan-worshippers' and 'atheists' who put the Nazi party in power, it was masses of Christians who let themselves be led to very bad things by someone *running as a 'Christian Values' candidate.*

The fact that they got something else doesn't change the facts of how they were manipulated into fascism.

Paganplace, on a final note, on reading your comments about Christianity on other discussions I don't get the impression you are positively disposed towards it. You don't seem to think that Christians have the right to practice the tenets of their faith and spreading the Good News of Christ's salvation is part of it. Maybe you'd like to extend to them the same treatment that you expect from them - respect for their right to practice their faith which commands them to love everyone, including their enemies?

NB: To me no other theory makes sense. Every situation in history is far too complex for simplistic explanations. The important thing is Hitler was stopped and the Germans have learned their lesson for good.

Paganplace, the other weakness in the argument that Hitler was a Catholic and acting in accordance with the Catholic Catechism is that the first country he invaded without a war declaration was Poland, 95% Catholic. All the European countries he invaded was Christian. So the Christian card and Nazism holds no water at all. If Hitler was merely after Jews, he would not have wanted to occupy all the European countries and establish the rule of the master race for a thousand years.

Stick to the theory that an evil genius exploited the vulnerabilities and strengths of a people at a convenient time in history.

End of this discussion for me.

Paganplace, if antisemitism was commonplace in Europe then Hitler is the only one who exploited it as he did. He used a German nationalist platform to justify it, not a Christian one. If his politics was Christianity based he would not earmark weak and vulnerable Germans, German homosexuals, non-Jew gypsies... for extinction as well.

Paganplace, it is wise to stick to the word 'manipulation.' Anything else gets the Nazi elite SS worshipers of Wotan into as much hot water as anybody else. It can be argued that a party that got its power based on good ideals were corrupted by the worship of Wotan. So there, don't you see where you are headed?

The "Deutsche Christen" ideology did not call for gassing of the Jews, killing of gypsies, homosexuals, handicapped Germans... and creation of a "pure" master race where even vulnerable and weak Germans would be wiped off the face of the earth. Certainly such ideals didn't exist in the Catholic Catechism and Protestant theology at the time.

Basically, Petite, if the distinction isn't clear, yet, the fact that the SS would, after the Nazi rise to power, craft a little secret society hoobajoo based on Blavatsky and Wagner, and call the Old Gods Atlanteans...

...Does not mean....

...That Nazism took power by a mass uprising of a bunch of Pagans and manipulating some fears of Jews, homosexuals, intellectuals, and left-wingers.

Nazism in fact took power and covered up its atrocities by appealing to nationalism, anti-Communism, anti-intellectualism, anti-Semitism, and... Christianity.

We're talking causation and how people get manipulated.

Not 'guilt by association.'

"he confusion with benign neo-paganism occurs because paganism has no scripture and practitioners are free to make up rituals and teachings as they go."

This, however uncharitably-put, is one major thing the SS practices did not share with Neopaganism.

They had their books and prophecies and literalisms.

Sticking the name Wotan on it doesn't make it Neopaganism.

The propaganda the Nazis used to gain support and power from Christian masses, though, was *marketed, sold, bought, and paid for,* as Christian.

No, it wasn't any Christianity most Christians would want to endorse these days,

But neither is Jesse Helms.

Thank you for the elaboration Paganplace. There are more than a few references to neo-pagan occult practices, worship of the Germanic pagan god Wotan, among a few SS, and some elite Nazis were ardent believers. The confusion with benign neo-paganism occurs because paganism has no scripture and practitioners are free to make up rituals and teachings as they go. Just as some Nazis used the worship of a Germanic pagan god to strengthen their fascist political agenda and introduced anything they wanted to fulfil their ends. With no official scripture and teachings they were free to invent their own version of Wotan.

Catholicism on the other hand has official teachings that are publicly available. aJust because Hitler was baptized Catholic as a child does not mean he was acting in accordance with the Catechism taught by the Catholic church. Unless someone can show that Hitler's ideals can be traced back to Catholic Catechism, it is foolish to call Hitler a Catholic. His German nationalistic ideals were appreciated just as much or even more by some Protestant groups. Resistence developed within Churches only when they began to realize they were being used and manipulated to Hitler's fascistic political agenda.

National Socialists were not a religious party. It is the nature of anyone running for a political office to say whatever people want to hear. Hitler's Mein Kampf is definitely not a book that would have got past the Catholic clergy specialised in discernment of the spirits.

No we should not look for simplistic answers to the rise of Nazism in Germany. One of the main contributing factors was the poverty and humiliation suffered by Germans as a result of being blamed for starting WW I and being asked to pay renumeration which left them stuck in the rut of poverty. The utter humiliation made them look for a national identity. Hitler played to that need for his own evil ends. It cannot be said with certainty how Hitler himself might have evolved with time being corrupted with power because of the trust the Germans put in him. Power corrupts, more power corrupts even more, absolute power corrupts absolutely. Even today we can see, if we look closely enough, how many people are changed overnight as a result of power, money or success they recently attained. Instead of becoming better persons, they become more and more greedy for power and money and success and they resort any to method at their disposal to attain it and keep it.

How Christians might have misused their power politically has to do with the free will of the persons concerned. Even the devil can quote the Bible to justify evil, but that would not be Christianity as Jesus taught it or how He lived it.

The fear of neo-paganism is merely a gut reaction in those who associate it with Nazism. If you as a pagan claim that Hitler ran on a Christian platform, then why do you get upset when others return the favour and call attention to the whole German nationalist ideology and the occult worship of the Germanic pagan god, Wotan by some of the elite SS?

The solution is to develop teachings that are available to the public so that they can see for themselves what it is that you really believe and practice. One pagan panelist is doing just that and she is well accepted. Calm down, and don't get on the defensive. Explain your beliefs with confidence and slowly but surely people will begin to realize they have nothing to fear. The real task for you is to accept yourself without apologies and regret. Let people judge you by what you do. Fight for your rights when they are violated as long your idea of rights don't violate the rights of others. You have a right to practice any religion as long it does not violate anyone's human rights.

That's not how the topic came up, let's say, Petite. I'm afraid the anti-Semitism definitely is part of the history of the region's Christianity, from the Middle Ages and on, not that Christians are proud of it, that's part of how the Nazi antisemitism really found purchase, ...not that it was a monolithic thing, of course, or whatnot. There's just a little too much haste for a lot of people to say, 'See, the Nazis were atheists or Neopagans, (Or for that matter, Catholics, if they're anti-Catholic)

But how Hitler got in power has much to do with him presenting himself as a 'Christian Values' candidate. What the SS got up to with the occult stuff and what people call Odinism actually is profoundly different from the Neopagan movement: they used some of the trappings of Pagan heritage, but it was all to the end of worshipping the *state* and the 'master race,' not the Gods as Gods: in fact they were cast as like Atlantean Ascended Masters, conveniently enough to put Hitler on the same sort of level.

Their 'occult' thing actually has more doctrinal and worldview similarity to like those fluffy crystal-wavers: for all the Nordic triumphalism, the Nazi occult stuff was really more the evil twin of New Age: they took Blavatsky and some other Theosophical writings, and made themselves a 'secret society' sort of thing: not a lot of people even really knew about it, apart from a few public spectacles that came in later and apparently weren't widely understood for what they were supposed to be. I don't doubt there was some intention to turn all religious impulse toward the state, but that's not 'neopaganism,' as someone went and labeled it.

It was something else.

It's actually kind of an issue that bothers me in the here and now, apart from people not learning the lessons of history: if people are so anxious to dissociate Nazism with anything familiar they'll mislabel Neopagans as having something to do with Nazis: if they in effect they're also teaching people "The Old Gods Are All For the Nazis."

Watch out, someone might believe you, and think it's *cool.*

This is actually a problem for the Asatru folks, really: particularly compounded in the prisons, where white supremacist groups are re-creating the same kinds of mistakes and calling it Thor and Odin... while the Christians running the prisons just say to actual Pagan clergy who could go in there and teach better than that, 'You're a Nazi, you can't come teach that.'

I'm pretty concerned what's going to come *out* of those prisons. There's been a rather stunning lot of people finding the Goddess in there, too, and they get labeled 'White Supremacist,' as well. And that can't be helpful.

Now, it's my personal belief that the real deal actually teaches itself, but in isolated contained, stressful, and racially-polarized environments like that, it would be much better to have full clergy access and a lot less of people teaching Paganism actually *is* that kind of bigoted nonsense.

Like I said, someone might believe you. JJ started off in this very thread saying that the Nazis were right to kill gays, and that I should be killed for being Pagan, despite his own ancestors having been killed by Nazis... and the stuff he spews comes from a prison religion, actually.

See what I mean? Conveniently-recasting the Nazis as having something to do with innocent people, who can be scapegoated, not problems in European history and culture and, well, fascism, isn't protecting us from the same kind of thing happening again.

Paganplace, nobody casts Nazis into a simplistic category as you suggested. Many suggest Hitler was a Catholic. He was baptized a Catholic, but his evil master race theories had nothing to with Christianity or paganism. Some Nazis sought to worship pagan gods as part of their identification with their German heritage, after all Christianity was introduced to Germany as a foreign religion.

Paganplace, you misunderstood me. There is no denial in Germany at all. The awareness education is ongoing. There are WW II films and documentaries shown on TV at regular intervals. There were two great films made perhaps three years ago, one "Untergang" (Downfall) a thoroughly researched film depicting Hitler's last days in the bunker, another film which won an award was about a young man who was sent off to be trained for SS and ended up committing suicide. It showed the brutality of the training regimen and the intense mental suffering of a vulnerable poetic young man.

What is "verboten" or taboo in Germany is expressing APPROVAL of the Nazi regime, not about discussing WW II or any aspect of the Nazi regime. Germans who had nothing to do with the Nazi atrocities were filled with horror on discovering how they had been deceived with government propaganda. It is in the nature of evil to keep its activities in the dark. There is no way that the Nazi regime would have announced to Germans about the atrocities that were going on. Only people who were directly involved knew. When Jews were being rounded up, Germans were told that they were merely being resettled...

No war in human history has been so thoroughly studied as WW II. So there is really no need to be concerned that Nazis are being misrepresented in any way. The phenomenon has been studied from every angle possible. It provides material for more and more studies for some. Germans don't cringe about any study done that serves as a lesson not just for themselves but for all mankind.

Well, Petite, that's not really what I was trying to say. I certainly don't hate Germans or anything like that, either, I'm saying that actually the fact it's a taboo subject means that there doesn't seem to be a lot of awareness of what happened or how, which may also help Holocaust deniers or maybe leave people in the dark about how to stop it from happening again.

As lousy as what happened (and in another form is still happening) to Native Americans here, to make an understatement, there's actually quite a number of displays, museums, and awareness of what was done to Native Americans here, not that that solves anything, of itself, especially if people don't want to go look. It's not 'celebrating' it, either.

My point was that if you decide to be unaware of what happened and re-cast the Nazis as 'Gay Pagan Atheist Socialists, full stop,' you're just not understanding what happened, and in fact contributing to some alarmingly-similar dynamics in American society today.

Sorry last post was addressed to Paganplace and written by me.

Petite, and mind you there are still plenty of Native Americans and black American around who feel discriminated in the US today. Not many Jews who currently live in Germany would have a similar tale to tell.

Paganplace, talking of museums, pray tell how many museums in the US "celebrate" the genocide of Native Americans or slavery of the black. If sixty three years of constant de-Nazification and introduction of laws to combat any resurgence of racist ideals does not count as lesson learned, there is no pleasing those who would find a reason somewhere else to hate Germans anyway.

*poking back in on this thread.*

Well, I see things are just ticking along wonderfully.

Pardon if I had to absent myself to cool off a bit. (And get some rest. Some health conditions had been keeping me from adequate sleep.)

Wanted to thank Victoria for a bit of mediation, back there.

In terms of things like fascism and how it's sold, it's convenient for some, ancestors killed or hurt by Nazis or not, to oversimplify, to actually *blind* themselves to how it happens by claiming that as long as it's wrapped in a flag or cross or homophobia, or in fact scapegoating-by-association, that...

That 'It can't happen here.'

It can. And that's the scary truth, one I've had to live with.

People claiming, 'The Nazis were gay and Pagan,' while omitting inconvenient details like who they killed a million of, when, and why, and what people bought into to support it.

The SA were led by *closeted* gays who were the shock-troops against the open and tolerant berlin culture of the 30s, using force to establish their own way while *using* others... (In many ways, they were the Log Cabin Club of the Nazi party) and they were obliterated in the Night Of Long Knives once their usefulness had been outworn, ...accusations of homosexuality in fact were used to *justify* mass murder of *any* queers.

The SS dressed up anti-Semitic notions of Aryans and Blavatsky with a few Nordic Pagan *elements* taken totally out of context, ...enough to appeal to a German sense of lost heritage, but the entire end was to worship Hitler and the Nazi state, and they didn't care if it meant claiming they found the Christian Spear of Destiny or wear Sigel runes on the *heads* (Not exactly an expert runecrafter, here, but can you say, 'Kick me?') ...or what to do it.

I get pretty angry when people find it more comfy to associate all the nasty things that happened there with, 'They were evil Pagans just like you,' when a) That wasn't the rationale, and b) I'm the one who's had to be the skinny Irish chick trying to tell Nazi skins about Freya and how their heritage doesn't *have* to be about such dishonor and lunacy.

Especially in the prisons, where some will figure chanting 'Odin,' wearing swastikas, and trying to *act out* the stereotype is honoring their heritage, while their actual *clergy who could teach them better* are shut out cause someone thinks it easier to say, 'Pagans are Nazis, we can't have anyone teach that in there.'

What *Christians* and the 'Aryan Nation' types teach them being a Nordic Pagan, or any kind is about is far more virulent and dangerous.

It's *convenient* for some, *especially* if they have personal wounds or a desire to believe that claiming to represent a certain God results in 'goodness' and anything else results in 'evil,' but then again, they always express great mystification how the people of Germany could have been caught up in that nastiness.

Even if they like to label their scapegoats 'Occult' or 'Gay Nazis' without looking too hard what actually went down.

But hallmarks of fascism always include 'Chosen People,' scapegoated 'enemies,' a sense of world-spanning destiny, and control and redirection of sexuality and reproduction.

Yes, there's often a bait-and switch in terms of religion. Get people to cross certain turning points, and they become *unable* to see what they're doing, cause it'd be too horrible to admit it happened.

You know how many Holocaust museums there are in Germany?

Just one. And it's basically brand new.

Mr Mark-

Who are you- CCNL in disguise? Reading LIBERAL theologian crapola that fits your limited view of truth?

My research from OTHER theologians indicates that it is logical to assume that the book was written in AD 62.

It's funny- you are like all the other skeptics. You can't see anything but what YOU want to see, and you accuse others of being that way that claim the opposite of you.

You rely on Paul's words in the epistles to talk about certain visits, and how many there were, to one place , yet did you ever think that there were other letters that just got lost, and those indicated where he was and would put the epistles in sync with Acts?

Furthurmore, in your assertion that acts 8 and Gal 1 are not congruous, he was known as Saul in Acts at that time, and converted subsequently , changing his name to Paul.

This also leads to Paul's own words, which AGAIN shoots down your false assertion that he believed Jesus to be a some sort of spirit being. He went to see Peter- (Galatians 1:18) Don't you even fathom at all that he and Peter talked about the physical resurrection of Jesus and that Peter spent actual time with Christ for three years? There goes that assertion that Paul thought Jesus was a spirit being! (Read Romans 8:3) Does this not indicate Paul believed Jesus came in the flesh?

You use Paul's words against him to suit you- picking what words he wrote to cherry pick /backup you asinine assertions), and then in another book , say that is unreliable(same source as the that stupid Jesus seminar?)

What it really comes down to is that you don't want to know the truth. You are like a little kid, who is crying , yelling , covering his ears, and saying "Nah,nah,nah,nah " real loud, cause you really don't want to even get near the possible idea that Jesus Christ was a real person, the man-God, and he is calling YOU.

It's really sad -in the end, your knee will bow to Jesus, the question is, will it be because you want to, or because you HAVE to?

Sometimes the atheist mindset-what it really come down to, its all about YOU......

I guess what Paul said is true....the message of the cross is foolishness to those that are perishing, but us who are being saved it is the power of God.

Again, I don't question your right to believe what you do, but with the assertions you make, you are doing yourself a disservice by not revisiting it and asking yourself- could I be wrong?

Farnez!

Your error is in thinking that by documenting evil you will prevent evil. I confront evil by giving my presence to those in crisis. Often- I can only hold a hand and listen. But there is power in providing witness to suffering. It does not bring justice and will never end evil. It is the beginning of forgiveness and reconciliation- the only way I know to overcome evil.

"Do not let yourself be overcome with evil: But overcome and master evil with good."

"Never avenge yourselves, but leave the way open for G-d's wrath: for it is written- Vengeance is Mine, I will repay."

An irate poster has asked me to "get the hell off this thread". Best wishes in your accumulation of books and lists.

Au revoir.

Ah, You Poor Anon,

This ingrate Jew, Farnaz, one among wo many ingrate Jews. I replied to you on the misspellings, apologizing for them. Here I paste the reply for your convenience:

Anon!:

RE: Martin Niemöller

Sorry for the misspellings. We were all posting hurriedly. The quote widely attributed to him was in fact his wife's.

I'm aware of the rest of what you post,and, Trocme is especially important to me, since in some ways he is unique. There are others in the "unique" category, for example, Sophie and Hans Scholl (see http://www.holocaust-history.org/short-essays/white-rose.shtml and follow the link to the "history place" for Dr. Wittenstien's essays; see also "The Altruistic Personality") but not sure how it goes to this discussion. We are talking about millions of Europeans involved one way or another in killing millions of others.

Farnaz
----------------------

My recommendations for reading go to your post of
July 2, 2008 4:05 PM. Researches who ask the question "What happened?" generally start out, as I did years ago with only a cursory knowledge. In the process of remaining with the field new documents are released, new testimony is admitted.
Some Vatican documents, for instance, have been released since I began this work, as have some documents from the former USSR. Much more from both needs to be offered up to the public.

The obsession among Jews about Raul Wallenberg (not Jewish) has led to hunger strikes, protests at the Russian Embassy, etc. We are aware of the righteous gentiles. On the other hand, we cannot content ourselves with a few heroic figures, not if we're going to make any headway into stopping genocide. See my previous post.

This is a huge subject. My own preoccupation has always been with justice, a world without racism.
I've also taken testimony from a young man from Rwanda, several Haitian refugees. I am biased, yes, against racism, racist speech, bigoted speech, refusal to see, wilfull, even militant ignorance. The first book I listed speaks of ordinary church-going people and what they did. There are many other such books.

What good does it do you to remain blind? Blind.
I worked, at one time, with women who were suffering from conversion reactions--blind. They were refugees whose children were split in two in front of them. This is not my bias. This was reality.

Candide was mistaken. This is not the best of all possible worlds. If it were, I would shoot myself
this evening.

My several posts of today are addressed to:

Farnez! (misspelled with an exclamation point) I posted when I noticed you dismissed a Christian Pastor with not one but two names misspelled.

I have encouraged you to let go of your ardent need to document your skewed viewpoint (at least for a moment) and take time to heal.

You repay me with a sh*tload of books.

Well, I'm mad as hell at all the damn fool 'anonymous' posters.

What the bloody damn hell is wrong with you? How can you ever expect to establish a dialog if no one knows quite who you are? Are you simply too stupidly lazy, or just cowardly?

All the bloody hell you have to do is type in a made-up name, and try real hard to remember it. If you have not the will or the brain cells to do that, then get the hell off this thread. You do a disservice to us all.

Anon!

I'm not regurgitating book lists. Except for a few, most of these I've published here for the first time. I've given you a short list of books I've read and used. I'm trying to keep them to those that are easily read and are accessible since I don't know your background.

Your family's experience is one family's experience. There were millions of families who lost people in the Shoah including my one. You've challenged points I've made, quoting me, so I've given you sources that support what I've said with archival documents and photographs.

I don't know what you mean by bias. I've done extensive research into the field, have taken and published the testimony of surviving victims and perpetrators. What bias?

I have a very rich life, but thanks for your concern. Part of my life has been concerned with the refusal to deny the truth. Had we not denied the English introduction of concentration camps in the Boer War (introduced then), the genocide of the Armenians, had we not failed to deal with the perpetrators of the Holocaust, the Stalin era, Biafra, Uganda, Cambodia, etc., etc., maybe we would not be at the start of the next genocidal century.

I also have a concern with language, bigotry. Speech is action, may serve not only as the prelude to violence, but as violence:

All that is necessary for the triumph of evil is that good men do nothing.

Anon,

Are you the Anon! I've been posting to or a different Anon. REally, as Arminius and others have pointed out these multi-Anonymi are difficult to respond to. Kindly come up with a moniker. It's easy.

At any rate, I'd like to respond to you, once I know which Anon you are/were.

Settle down- Farnez!

My family lost two-thirds of our members to the Holocaust. Stop regurgitating book lists.

We were a large active family of musicians, novelists, doctors and scientists. I feel certain you would recognise several names. There is no need to educate me. My education came in my parent's loss and learning to survive.

You need to quit your urgent need to reiterate your bias and begin to regain your life.

Anon!

Not to far down the road, I'd strongly recommend
George Mosse. Nazi Culture
Nazi ideology

Will post more references when time permits.

Farnaz

Anon!

A little knowledge is a dangerous thing. Less than that is more dangerous.

Read and learn:

Ernst Klee, Willi Dressen, Volker Riess, eds. "The Good Old Days": The Holocaust as Seen by Its Perpetrators and Bystanders****

Christopher Browning. "Ordinary Men"
---------------------------------------------
http://www.ushmm.org/ AN EXCELLENT SITE. There are many more, but here you'll find a wealth of information to start with.

Gita Sereny. "Into That Darkness"

Raul Hilberg, The Destruction of the European Jews. Vols. I-III

Leny Yahil. The Holocaust: The Fate of European Jewry

Lucy Dawidowicz, The War against The Jews

Betrayal: German Churches and the Holocaust. Ed.
Robert P. Ericksen, Susannah Heschel**

The Holy Reich: Nazi Conceptions of Christianity, 1919-1945. Richard Steigmann-Gall**

Mothers in the Fatherland: Women, the Family and Nazi Politics. Claudia Koonz

Catholic Theologians in Nazi Germany, by Robert A. Krieg.

Paul Johnson. "A History of the Jews"

Leon Poliakov:
L'étoile jaune - La situation des Juifs en France sous l'Occupation - Les législations nazie et vichyssoise

Harvest of Hate: The Nazi Program for the Destruction of Jews in Europe 1956

The History of Anti-Semitism: From the Time of Christ to the Court Jews

The History of Anti-Semitism: From Mohammed to the Marranos

The History of Anti-Semitism: From Voltaire to Wagner

The History of Anti-Semitism: Suicidal Europe. 1870-1933

The Aryan Myth: A History of Racist and Nationalistic Ideas In Europe

Jews Under the Italian Occupation

L`envers du Destin»

"De l'antisionisme à l'antisémitisme" (1969)

Dear RNH -

I can't believe that you are citing Acts in this discussion. The unreliability of Acts is well documented. Acts doesn't even agree with Paul's accounts of his own life.

First off, Acts was written somewhere between 80-110CE. IT IS NOT AN EYEWITNESS ACCOUNT! It is a later work that attempts to describe the activities of the first Xians, including the apostles. But the important thing to remember is that it was written AFTER Paul and the apostles were dead. While the claim that Luke was the author of Acts is pure conjecture, the author of Acts - like Luke - was attempting to put a realistic spin on things he hadn't himself witnessed with an agenda to portray an imaginary being as a corporeal being.

Acts - like Luke - attempts to pass itself off as an historical accounting of these days. Acts provides a few factual historic events to add a sheen of truth to its claims while making egregious historical errors elsewhere.

Most notably, Acts is in conflict with what Paul wrote about himself. To whit:

* Acts mentioned five trips to Jerusalem by Paul while the Pauline epistles only presupposed three such trips. (Acts 9, 11, 15, 18:22, 21 versus Galatians 1:18, 2:1 and the (planned) visit to Jerusalem in Romans 15:25)

* In Acts 7:58, 8:3, the yet to be converted Saul was said to be in Jerusalem and took an active part in the murder of Stephen. Yet Paul in Galatians 1:22 said that when he visited Jerusalem for the first time three years after his conversion, he was "still unknown by sight to the Churches of Judea". If Paul did take part in Stephen's murder, than at least some of the early Christians would have already seen Paul in Jerusalem before his conversion. Thus the linking of Paul with the death of Stephen in Acts is definitely unhistorical.

* Acts 10:1 -11:18 stated that the mission to the Gentiles was started by Peter, yet in Galatians 2:1-10 Paul is called to defend his mission to the Gentiles against the "three pillars" (James, John and Peter). Why would he have to defend a mission to the Gentiles when Peter had already started it?

* Paul's escape in a basket: Paul asserts that he governor under King Aretas was trying to arrest him when he made his escape. Acts says it was "the Jews" plotting to kill him necessitated the escape.

Who ya gonna believe? Paul or the guy who wrote Acts decades later?

As far as your assertion: "[Paul] not only probably witnessed that, but had conversations with the original Apostles about Jesus as they were with him in the flesh.You think they did not talk to him about the Lord ?",

Let's allow Paul himself to tell us from whence he received his knowledge of the Lord:

"As we said before, so say I now again, if any man preach any other gospel unto you than that ye have received, let him be accursed ... For I neither received it of man, neither was I taught it, but by the revelation of Jesus Christ." – Galatians 1.9,12.

Finally, there is the eternal question of "the Two Pauls." The first Paul is that of Acts, the Paul who was given his marching orders by the apostles. The second Paul is the maverick Paul who in his letters argues with the apostles and damns them with faint praise. Reconciling the two is a fool's errand...which is perhaps why so many Xians rush in to do so.

Gotta go or I'd write more.

Farnez!

You cling to your mistaken belief that Christians are jew-hating evil-doers. For you- altruism is "unique" and disassociated with Christianity.

You are narrow-minded and bigoted when you repeatedly cherish your myopic views. Its like you enjoy picking the scab so you can relive the wound and keep it festering. You make your own malaise.

Listen to yourself:

"Frequently the native Christian/Catholic church goers started the killing, torturing, raping, baby bashing against walls, long before the nazis arrived. In all of these countries Jews were second-class citizens with limited rights. This is not a matter of hypothesizing, arguing, guessing, opinion. It is a matter of historical fact, of the historical record."

Your rigid desire to document and prove as true a stereotypical "black or white" history of the past sounds like the rantings of any fanatical bigot. Like the misspelling of a Pastor's names- your truth is narrowed to suit your story. The Pastor does not enhance your story- so his life has no meaning to you.

You say-

"We are talking about millions of Europeans involved one way or another in killing millions of others."

I must remind you people kill others in a blood rage of insanity. And it has happened more than once. I worked with other Christians to enlighten the free world when the killing in Rwanda ignited a genocide. We were online and in contact with those living the madness in Rwanda who were pleading for us to intercede for them. We were impotent in all our efforts. Our pleadings were met with blind eyes and closed doors: even "give us time to decide how many must die before it becomes a "true genocide" while the river ran with blood and bodies.

Now the work for all Rwanda is forgiveness and reconciliation. It will take generations. Its an old story. Its been told before.

Mr Mark-

I only have time at work(lunch) to address one point.-

You say....
The reason Paul doesn't do so is because he didn't think of Jesus as having an earthly life. Outside of the words Jesus spoke to Paul on the Road to Damascus, there are no words from Jesus. Paul believed Jesus was a fully spiritual being who lived, died and was resurrected in the spirit world. To Paul, Jesus' battles against evil were similar to Lucifer's battle against god - a spirit world event."

Really- the book of acts reveals that after conversion, Paul(Saul) met the Apostles-

Acts 9-

26 And when Saul had come to Jerusalem, he tried to join the disciples; but they were all afraid of him, and did not believe that he was a disciple. 27 But Barnabas took him and brought him to the apostles. And he declared to them how he had seen the Lord on the road, and that He had spoken to him, and how he had preached boldly at Damascus in the name of Jesus. 28 So he was with them at Jerusalem, coming in and going out. 29 And he spoke boldly in the name of the Lord Jesus and disputed against the Hellenists, but they attempted to kill him. 30 When the brethren found out, they brought him down to Caesarea and sent him out to Tarsus.

So he DID know the Apostles, and DID know that Jesus was alive at one time on earth. Why do you think he was persecuting the Jews who had converted to Christianity? Because they were preaching the risen Christ ! He not only probably witnessed that, but had conversations with the original Apostles about Jesus as they were with him in the flesh.You think they did not talk to him about the Lord ?

Sorry dude, your assertion is just ridiculous .

You are either reading some website that came up with this trash, or you have not read through (lately) the NT and thought this through......

Time for you to re-read through it before you make such assertions....

Like I always say, when you want to critique Communism, you attack Marx or Stalin. Fascism- you critique Mussolini or Hitler. Since Paul wrote what ended up as much of the NT, you attack Paul.
Sorry, Paul, given his life, and his death, is beyond reproach.

Nice rationalization on your part, but it does not wash.

Anon!:

RE: Martin Niemöller

Sorry for the misspellings. We were all posting hurriedly. The quote widely attributed to him was in fact his wife's.

I'm aware of the rest of what you post,and, Trocme is especially important to me, since in some ways he is unique. There are others in the "unique" category, for example, Sophie and Hans Scholl (see http://www.holocaust-history.org/short-essays/white-rose.shtml and follow the link to the "history place" for Dr. Wittenstien's essays; see also "The Altruistic Personality") but not sure how it goes to this discussion. We are talking about millions of Europeans involved one way or another in killing millions of others.

Farnaz

"Enough of whom? WE FIGURE WE CAN DO KNOW WROMG? This is sheer stereotyping. Have you read what you've written? There were nazi queers. This is simply fact. The various pan-Gemanist movements did resurrect and create a kind of paganism. This isn't scapegoating."

Enough of who leapt to 'discredit' a person who explained the differences between what the SS occultey beliefs were about and Neopaganism, ...but I left out a couple capitals at about 3AM and all a sudden that's OK to say about me?

Yeah, I *do* hear that attitude plenty, thanks very much, whenever it happens to be someone Jewish who finds it convenient to try and associate my religion and sexuality with something sinister in order to divert from the fact someone wants to brain me over 'Creation Science' and call it *reason.*

Why do you think I know about it in the first place? I've been subjected to enough in my life without people casually disinforming each other with notions I got something to do with *Nazis,* thanks very much.

i think the problem farnaz is having is that she imagines that her suffering is deeper, more valid, and more substantial- therefore worthy of greater consideration than anyone elses-

take your own advice farnaz-

pagnaplace isnt your enemy because she doesnt captialize some words(although you say you're atheist) your self-identification with your own jewishness seems to overwhelm any sense of your athesim-

hey- i dont captialize ANY words! (except that one) they're ALL equal to me!

personally i had no idea from reading your posts that you're an atheist-

you must have missed her reference to her best friend- she is a lesbian woman- her best friend is jewish-
do you think she is not aware that jewish people are gay?
your "duh" was most ingracious-

and while you jumped on her not knowing that you are atheist- you seemed to completely miss her very real, heartfelt and sincere expression of empathy towards you-

paganplace is discussing things that happened to her personally-
her own suffering experience-

so, she has been raped, you have been raped- 1 in 2 women here have-
welcome to america!

we cannot suffer for other people-
we cna empathize, be distressed- but it is not the same-

what matters is how we process those experiences-
and how we respond to others with either grace and sympathy or project our own angers onto them-

competition in suffering?
come on-

Farnez!

Marin Niemuler ??

In two misspelled words you discredit yourself as a trustworthy poster and mark your words as skewed and bigoted.

Martin Niemöller (German Lutheran Pastor) came to oppose the Nazis and actively speak against them. It was largely his connections to wealthy businessmen that saved him until 1937, when he was imprisoned at Sachsenhausen and Dachau concentration camps.

He survived to be a leading voice of penance and reconciliation for the German people after World War II.

"asked in 1971 about the correct version of the quote, Niemöller said he was not quite sure when he had said the famous words but, if people insist upon citing them, he preferred this version:

"In Germany, they came first for the Communists, And I didn’t speak up because I wasn’t a Communist;

And then they came for the trade unionists, And I didn’t speak up because I wasn’t a trade unionist;

And then they came for the Jews, And I didn’t speak up because I wasn’t a Jew;

And then . . . they came for me . . . And by that time there was no one left to speak up."

Did you think his wife wrote it while she roasted a Jewish baby ??

Start to consider if you are not clinging to the past- repeating one-sided truths that only keep you imprisoned in the past.

Consider Le Chambon-sur-Lignon- a small village in Southern France that became a haven for Jews fleeing from the Nazis during World War II.

Their minister Andre Trocme and his wife Magda foresaw the holocaust and under their leadership the entire citizenship of Chambon-sur-Lignon risked their lives to hide Jews who were being rounded up by the Nazis for shipment to death camps. They were hidden in private homes and on farms in the area- as well as in public institutions. Whenever the Nazi patrols came searching- they were hidden in the countryside. They would walk out into the fields and sing loudly to signal to those hidden- it was safe to come out again.

In addition to providing shelter, the citizens of the town obtained forged identification and ration cards for Jews to use and then helped them cross the border to the safety of neutral Switzerland. Some of the residents were arrested by the Gestapo. Pastor Trocmé's cousin, Daniel Trocmé, who was sent to Maidanek concentration camp where he was killed.

By holding on to your one-sided bigoted views- you deny the truth of these brave Christians. You become a mirror image of the thing you hate. Religious stereotypical hatred is not an exclusive trait of any one religion.

Stop and think..

REASONABLE NOT HATEFUL writes:
"Mr Mark-

"Given that I am not a "young earth" Christian- do you not think that GOd can make all those things happen over the millennia? You don't think God could arrange the earth the way he did over millions of years? Really?"

Sure he could have, in which case I would say, some designer. In your latest special pleading for "godidit," you propose an "intelligent designer" whose design is no more efficient or directed than the random forces that actually constructed the universe. You propose an intelligent designer who designs a planet where 99% of the species go extinct, where it takes billions of years for the planet to cool and evolve to the point where he can place his special creatures (humans) on the planet so they might worship him.

Of course, the next special pleading you'll offer is "a billion years is but a day to a timeless god."

"You don't think he could, and did hide things from our knowledge so that you would have to take this leap of faith to believe in him?"

Sure I could if god hadn't been so busy showing the Hebrews in no uncertain terms what it meant to obey or disobey him. Why hasn't god bothered communicating directly as he did in the OT? Why all the secrecy? Unless I'm mistaken, the last thing God the Father is recorded as saying is. "This is my son in whom I am well pleased." Since then, not a word from the old coot.

The "hidden things" pleading is yet another special pleading from the Xians. An attempt to spin an obvious fact. The god of the OT was a blabbermouth. He offered opinions on anything and everything, from war to more-mundane activities like getting one's rocks off. The post-Jesus god is nowhere to be found...except when his face appears on toasted Wonder Bread and under water-damaged overpasses.

"And so what, what if Paul wrote the letters before the gospels were written?"

The point is that Paul's letters were written closer in time to the years when Jesus supposedly lived, yet he mentions none of the "events" of Jesus' life. Where's the virgin birth? Where are the miracles? Where is the wedding at Cana? Where is the raising of Lazarus? Don't you find it odd that Paul wouldn't reference many of the events of Jesus' life as depicted in the Gospels to make his case for Christ's divinity and humanity?

Why does Paul not quote Jesus' actual words that he said during his lifetime? The Gospel writers had no problem doing so, yet Paul - who lived closer to Jesus' time - seems to be unaware of all those famous bon mots that litter the Gospels. Why?

The reason Paul doesn't do so is because he didn't think of Jesus as having an earthly life. Outside of the words Jesus spoke to Paul on the Road to Damascus, there are no words from Jesus. Paul believed Jesus was a fully spiritual being who lived, died and was resurrected in the spirit world. To Paul, Jesus' battles against evil were similar to Lucifer's battle against god - a spirit world event.

And how did Paul know all this? Why, because god revealed it to him in visions. Paul's visions = god's truth. Amazing. And I have a bridge for sale in Brooklyn.

Fast forward to the Gospel of Mark, and we suddenly have all kinds of words spoken by Jesus while on Earth. Scads of them, even though Mark was written decades after Paul's epistles.

Don't you wonder where Mark heard all those quotes? Does it not seem strange that Paul could travel the whole of the Roman Empire, visit church after church, claim to personally know a couple of disciples, yet not bother quoting Jesus, while Mark - who makes no claims of being widely traveled or connected - seems to know the actual words of Jesus as if he heard them himself?

Why does it matter that Paul was written before the Gospels? Because it's the difference between believing in a purely spiritual Jesus or a corporeal Jesus. It's the difference between realizing that Xianity was the invention of Pauls' deranged "visions" and not a religion based on the corporeal life of a godman who assumed human form, was killed and resurrected in human form and is coming again in human form.

Anonymous (which one?)

I have already written so many posts about the superstitious nature of religions INCLUDING ISLAM. If you would have read my last post, you would have found the sentence

"ALL religion always has been and always will be for the sake of power".

The post was not intended to be "politically correct", but to give an example of how I became a convinced atheist ("atheist" applies to all religions, doesn't it?).

And: I was brought up as a Christian, not as a Muslim, so my path to atheism didn't start from Islam. Zum Kotzen? I am at a loss.

And, Soja, don't call yourself Anonymous, you are better than that. There are already too many of this species...

Paganplace, my humble suggestion. Don't hope to work through emotional issues concerning discrimination because of sexual orientation or religion here. Farnaz is trying in her way to play your therapist. There are no easy solutions to such deep issues. You must accept yourself as you are, without apologies and regrets and fight for your rights in real life in whatever way you can.

Zum kotzen!

Said Gerry July 1, 2008 11:11 AM:

Jihadist,
thanks. My original thoughts were not about any excuses for German atrocities, but about some of the reasons of my atheism: Luther, who first incited the peasants against the nobility in the Peasants' wars, then betrayed them, sided with the princes and wanted the peasants all killed (his former friend Thomas Müntzer, one of the peasants' leaders, was executed in the end). Then his ugly and stupid anti-Jewish rants (formidable hate speech!), then his superstition as to the devil and witches, then the 30 years' war, ending with a treatise in 1648 in Münster and Osnabrück FORCING people to believe this or that depending on the "belief" of their masters (no "conscience" involved here, or "godliness", only power! No personal belief about heaven or hell, just naked force!).

Religion - all religion always has been and always will be for the sake of power, just read some of the helpless "under age" posts on these threads (Spiderman etc.), showing people who have surrendered the last shreds of their "god-given" personally accountable mental power.

A mix to bring even an ardent believer to become an atheist by simply informing himself a little bit about history (other historical research will, of course, come to the same conclusion!). - "Christians should be known by their deeds", ha!

**********************
Here an "under age" atheist writes about the evils of Christianity to a Muslim without a word of criticism about Islam. How is that for political correctness?

WIGLAF - actually, blue whales are to be found in all the world's oceanic waters, including the Indian Ocean - which of course includes the Red Sea....so there you have said whales even in the Middle East (theoretically speaking). More so in Noah's time, since they were nearly hunted to extinction in modern times.

Of course that wasn't my point - nor was my comment intended for our obviously well-educated,
and well-represented non-creationist based realists ..... even the ones bound by their own mythologies.

And may I say, you lend considerable weight to the discussion at hand here.

Paganplace,

For the life of me, I don't have a clue to what you are talking about in your last two posts. I am an atheist. Everyone who blogs here knows that.

PaganPlace; Yeah, but they aren't trying to claim Jews are anti-American just for existing.

Farnaz: Yes, "they" are every day and in every way.

Paganplace: Admittedly, that's no consolation, but having grown up in a neighborhood where it was basically Yids on Paddies for no good reason, I retain a notion I'm sick of being talked down to by conservatives who figure past injustices justify present ones they seek to impose.

Farnaz: If you're saying Jews oppressing Irish Catholics, this I'd love to hear about. In fact, so would my Irish Catholic friends, no doubt, and if you're going to post on this, I'm surely going to get them on this thread. So, too, my Askenazic Jewish friends. I'd get my daughter, whose teeth were knocked out by Irish Catholic girls, but, I think she's had enough.

Paganplace: Maybe, sometime, you can find a revelation in a way that doesn't involve scapegoating others.

Farnaz: It seems to me that the scapegoating and stereotyping have been done by you.

To wit:

You quote me: "2. Many Jews dislike the word Holocaust, the word used by Christians (generically speaking) because of its prophetic, apocalyptic dimensions. Wiglaf is correct. No Jews see the Shoah as "prophecy."

Your reply:

Enough of em figure that they can do no wrong cause of it, especially if they conveniently label queers and Pagans as Nazis, that, they may as well, shall we say.

Enough of whom? WE FIGURE WE CAN DO KNOW WROMG? This is sheer stereotyping. Have you read what you've written? There were nazi queers. This is simply fact. The various pan-Gemanist movements did resurrect and create a kind of paganism. This isn't scapegoating. It's history. See anybody: Dawidowicz, Yahil, Hilber, et al.

"Which rabbis or scholars see the genocide as happening only to Jews?"

Oh, this? I was asserting that they *don't* actually.

" Which Jews see it this way?"

Too many.

Farnaz: TOO MANY SEE IT THIS WAY? NAME FIVE, THEN.

Farnaz: YOur comments on the prophetic nature of the Holocaust, ashes etc. I don't know what you're talking about. It's not viewed as prophetic, sacred. Jews are not Christians. It's viewed as utter devastation, waste.

Gay People, the handicapped
And you left out the million+ queers the Nazis killed in those concentration camps. Cause we wouldn't want anything so 'holy' as the 'shoah' to have anything in common with dirty queers, would we?

The context for the discussion was Christians and Jews. However, I will explain why I see parallels between the Jews and the Roma. They have to do with mission, purpose, strategy.

In both cases, though more so with the Jews who were always the first, the primary target, the desire was to wipe out the whole population. The Jews wee always the focus. In the countries I've already listed and more, e.g., Hungary, Rumania, Croatia, Serbia (yes, sorry), Russia, Ukraine, Poland, Latvia, Lithuania, Greece, France, Italy, Bavaria, Austria, etc., etc., this is how it went. This is how it went in all of them. In most of them, the nationals were busy killing Jews before the nazis arrived. This was the case neither with the disabled nor with gay people.

I posted the titles of several books dealing with Christianity and the Shoah. Later, I'll post the titles of a slew of history books on the subject. There are thousands.

The disabled: Ultimately, the T4 program, which sought to rid Germany of the disabled was ended. The nazis did not systematically go from country to country mass murdering the handicapped. Nor did those countries mass murder the disabled in advance of the nazi occupaions.

Gays were not his prime targets. Nor were they turned in by collaborators (the natives) in occupied countries anywhere near the extent to which Jews were. In some countries, the nazis didn't even bother with them. The number you give for the number killed differs from that which I have, and I cannot find yours anywhere. Have emailed a LGBT Studies colleague to confirm. In the meantime, here is a good link for you and anyone else interested in gays and the Holocaust.

http://www.ushmm.org/museum/exhibit/online/hsx/

When you refer to Jews as "them" and argue that we
use the Shoah in the ways you assert you are making historic community with the worst racists. I don't know why you would want to do that. Further, you forget that there are Jewish gays. (Duh).

Attacking me will not change what you've written.
Stereotyping Jews will not help you as a human being. These rants about God, and ashes on the Holocaust memorials are incomprehensible to me.

What is the matter with you Paganplace? Step back. Reflect a little.

Farnaz