Uncommon Descent Serving The Intelligent Design Community

The unauthorized history of Hitler as a Darwinist

Share
Facebook
Twitter
LinkedIn
Flipboard
Print
Email

Richard Weikart kindly writes to say,

I’m happy to announce that my article, “The Role of Darwinism in Nazi Racial Thought,” has just appeared in German Studies Review (Oct. 2013 issue), one of the most important journals publishing on German history.

Here’s the Abstract:

Historians disagree about whether Nazis embraced Darwinian evolution. By examining Hitler’s ideology, the official biology curriculum, the writings of Nazi anthropologists, and Nazi periodicals, we find that Nazi racial theorists did indeed embrace human and racial evolution. They not only taught that humans had evolved from primates, but they believed the Aryan or Nordic race had evolved to a higher level than other races because of the harsh climatic conditions that influenced natural selection. They also claimed that Darwinism underpinned specific elements of Nazi racial ideology, including racial inequality, the necessity of the racial struggle for existence, and collectivism.

A bit from the Intro:

Many historians recognize that Hitler was a social Darwinist, and some even portray social Darwinism as a central element of Nazi ideology. Why, then, do some historians claim that Nazis did not believe in human evolution? George Mosse argued that human evolution was incompatible with Nazi ideology, because Nazis stressed the immutability of the German race. More recently Peter Bowler and Michael Ruse have argued that the Nazis rejected human evolution, because they upheld a fixed racial type and racial inequality.4 Nowhere is this irony more pronounced than in the work of Daniel Gasman, who claimed that Hitler built his ideology on the social Darwinist ideas of Ernst Haeckel, but simultaneously argued that Nazis rejected human evolution. How is it possible to embrace social Darwinism, while rejecting Darwinism and human evolution? Anne Harrington suggests that the Nazis liked some elements of Darwinism, especially the struggle for existence, but not human evolution. Robert Richards agrees, claiming that Nazi racial ideas “were rarely connected with specific evolutionary conceptions of the transmutation of species,” even though they bandied about the term “struggle for existence.” In another essay Richards went further, arguing that Hitler and the Nazis completely rejected biological evolution. The notion that the Nazis could embrace racial struggle without believing in evolution seems plausible at first, especially since Houston Stewart Chamberlain, a forerunner of Nazi racial ideology, embraced this position. However, the claim that the Nazis did not believe in the transmutation of species and human evolution runs aground once we examine Nazi racial ideology in detail. In this essay I examine the following evidence to demonstrate overwhelmingly that Nazi racial thinkers embraced human and racial evolution:

1) Hitler believed in human evolution.

2) The official Nazi school curriculum prominently featured biological evolution, including human evolution.

3) Nazi racial anthropologists, including SS anthropologists, uniformly endorsed human evolution and integrated evolution into their racial ideology.

4) Nazi periodicals, including those on racial ideology, embraced human evolution.

5) Nazi materials designed to inculcate the Nazi worldview among SS and military men promoted human evolution as an integral part of the Nazi worldview.

This should pretty much end the discussion but won’t because the issue isn’t about the massive evidence that Nazis were social Darwinists but about defending Darwin’s sacred name from the sacrilegious facts.

Note: Weikart explains how he first got involved with this matter here:

Actually, at first, he wasn’t interested. While living in Germany some years ago to improve his German, he was mainly interested in the nineteenth century. He doubted that he would uncover anything new about the Third Reich. For one thing, in his view, it was an overworked field. But then he discovered one neglected point:

[A]s I investigated the history of evolutionary ethics in pre-World War I Germany, I noticed—to my surprise—remarkable similarities between the ideas of those promoting evolutionary ethics and Hitler’s worldview. This discovery (which happened around 1995) led me to investigate Hitler’s worldview more closely, and this research convinced me that I had found something important to say about Hitler’s ideology.

One wonders if Weikart will ever be forgiven for documenting it all so carefully, in the faces of all those who want to explain it away.

Comments
StephenB, I was not going to respond any more in the thread. The issues have been laid out well enough. But this is completely wrongheaded on your part:
You simply copied and pasted reports in which Jesus or one of the apostles criticized the Pharisees or Chief priests and then tried to pass it off as anti-semitism.
No, that's not what's happening at all. Really, do try and be more critical. Maybe try imagining what it's like to be a Jew and to read the NT. At any rate, you don't need to be so defensive. Besides, the main objective behind everything I've discussed has been to suggest that Nazis and Nazism applied their own versions of both Christianity and ToE in building their ideology. They drew from many wells. You can't responsibly lay the Nazis at Darwin's feet --it's not fair or right in any case -- and not do the same for Christianity.LarTanner
November 4, 2013
November
11
Nov
4
04
2013
12:50 PM
12
12
50
PM
PDT
Lar Tanner
I also notice you all have failed to address the specific quote I included at the end of comment 64. Any thoughts on it?
Oh, you mean this?
Here, for instance, is an excerpt from the 24th principle of the Nazi party, from the Twenty Five Points (1920): We demand freedom of religion for all religious denominations within the state so long as they do not endanger its existence or oppose the moral senses of the Germanic race. The Party as such advocates the standpoint of a positive Christianity without binding itself confessionally to any one denomination. It combats the Jewish-materialistic spirit within and around us, and is convinced that a lasting recovery of our nation can only succeed from within on the framework: common utility precedes individual utility.
Obviously, you do not know what Hitler and the Nazi's meant by "positive Christianity."
In 1937, Hans Kerrl, the Nazi Minister for Church Affairs, explained "Positive Christianity" as not "dependent upon the Apostle's Creed", nor in "faith in Christ as the son of God", upon which Christianity relied, but rather, as being represented by the Nazi Party: "The Fuehrer is the herald of a new revelation", he said. To accord with Nazi antisemitism, Positive Christianity advocates also sought to deny the Semitic origins of Christ and Bible. In such elements Positive Christianity separated itself from Christianity and is considered apostacy by Catholics and Protestants.
Do you have any other passages that you would like to explore?StephenB
November 4, 2013
November
11
Nov
4
04
2013
11:06 AM
11
11
06
AM
PDT
SB: All the passages that have been cited here reflect history. It isn’t anti-semitic to report events as they happened. There is not a single rhetorical flourish in the bunch. LT:
Extreme naivete.
Is that supposed to answer the point. The four gospels are historical accounts of real events. If you want to deny the point, you need to provide some kind of rationale, such as the argument that the apostles made it all up or that someone else wrote those passages. Tell us why you think that the simple act of reporting constitutes anti-semitism.
But back to the matter at hand. You all asked me to back up my claims, and I have done so.
You simply copied and pasted reports in which Jesus or one of the apostles criticized the Pharisees or Chief priests and then tried to pass it off as anti-semitism.StephenB
November 4, 2013
November
11
Nov
4
04
2013
10:49 AM
10
10
49
AM
PDT
LT, Eric and I agree on one thing, but not on something else. I do think the person, or persons, who made the list does know what the NT is about, and even Who wrote it; and that's the real reason for the list. Being full of knowledge and being wise are two different things. Whoever made the list is an idiot (and I'm not talking about Mung, who apparently is ten years old, did you know?).Brent
November 4, 2013
November
11
Nov
4
04
2013
10:19 AM
10
10
19
AM
PDT
Brent and Eric, I guess a doctorate from Princeton Theological Seminary doesn't qualify one of my main sources for the list. I'll tell the old professor that two randoms on the internet think he doesn't know the NT. He'll be crushed, I'm sure.LarTanner
November 4, 2013
November
11
Nov
4
04
2013
09:47 AM
9
09
47
AM
PDT
KF at 95, I am listening. You claim that in its proper context, Mk 3:6, which you offer as an illustrative example, does not constitute defamatory rhetoric against the Jews. Yet look at what you yourself say in comment 80:
I have no doubt that some have distorted that hostility of elites in Mk 3:6 — which seems to be accurate history not defamation — into a general perceived enmity of Jews, but that is hardly John Mark’s fault or that of Peter whose testimony Mark records.
Yes, "ome have distorted that hostility of elites in Mk 3:6" and in other verses too. Regardless of what you or I think about the NT, the historical fact is that it has (in some times and places) been used just as I said it has -- to validate and support anti-Jewish enmity. So I understand that you want to declare again and again that Nazism goes against the grain of Christianity. It may go against the grain of your understanding of Christianity, yet others have found it going with the grain of their Christianity. On the other hand, you want to ensure that Darwin's theory of life's evolution on earth is seen as itself containing an endorsement of Nazism. So, in the case of evolution, the Nazis didn't distort science; but in the case of Christianity, they did. That's Barry's argument, too. What you seem not to want to accept is that the Nazis did use Christianity just as they used the science of the day.LarTanner
November 4, 2013
November
11
Nov
4
04
2013
09:43 AM
9
09
43
AM
PDT
Brent @99: With you on that one. What a joke. The whole list seems to have been prepared by someone without a clue as to what the NT is about or who wrote it.Eric Anderson
November 4, 2013
November
11
Nov
4
04
2013
09:28 AM
9
09
28
AM
PDT
LT @64, If you were going to bother posting this list of "anti-semitic" Bible verses from the NT, you could have helped your cause greatly by at least making the first one pass the ROFL test. I didn't read any further.Brent
November 4, 2013
November
11
Nov
4
04
2013
08:04 AM
8
08
04
AM
PDT
Querius at 87, this may interest you: Who Am I? Bonhoeffer as a Historical Mentor in Prayer: Part 2 http://blog.emergingscholars.org/2013/11/who-am-i-bonhoeffer-as-a-historical-mentor-in-prayer-part-2/bornagain77
November 4, 2013
November
11
Nov
4
04
2013
02:58 AM
2
02
58
AM
PDT
PPS: I should note that, strictly, the whole concept of messiah and the spreading of good news to the nations in the power of the poured out Spirit -- "in the last days says God, will I pour out my Spirit on all flesh . . . " -- is eschatological. I would actually argue that from the days of Daniel in which the prophetic 70 7's clock was set a ticking, the Last Days have been at least in gestation. The time of culmination is the time of birth pangs of increasing frequency, not that of beginnings. And I should stress THE primary sign of the end from Matt 24: "14 And this gospel of the kingdom will be proclaimed throughout the whole world as a testimony to all nations, and then the end will come." Yes, there are waves of accelerating distress, but those are the side effects on which the counsel is to see to it that we be not distracted, deluded, intimidated or paralysed by fear. The main thing is the gospel and sound evangelisation including discipleship and the prophetic call to the nations to repentance, renewal, revival and reformation. Those who refuse to heed such may well turn on us in rage, hate and violence backed up by abuse of state power, but that is their fault. Our main job remains: the truth, in love, to all nations.kairosfocus
November 3, 2013
November
11
Nov
3
03
2013
10:31 PM
10
10
31
PM
PDT
Mung: Pardon, but I think you should take a look here on, with an eye to the principles of prophetic foreshortening, multiple [including partial] fulfillment due to the "history repeats or echoes itself" effect, veiling and ultimate completion of history. I think you also overlook the issue of mounting global hostility, the hunters and the fishers that lead to Israel as centre of refuge and protection in parallel with global eschatological hostility to the Judaeo-Christian tradition manifesting in a globally suicidal tribulation that would threaten to wipe out not only Jews and Christians but humanity "except those days be shortened." That is, with Israel there, and well armed and supported by decent people and nations everywhere, we will not again see the sad spectacle of Jewish refugees with nowhere to go. And of course, decent people everywhere will welcome refugees, Jewish or otherwise; as the Dominican Republic shamed the world over in the days of Hitler. (And do I need to note how Israel took in Vietnamese boat people?) Sadly, the time envisioned in Zechariah is one where such decency will have been globally defeated, manifestly that of the eschatological son of perdition. I note also this direct allusion to Zech 12 (and to Daniel 7:9 - 14 as well as Ac 1:1 - 9 and Mt 24) in Rev 1 (which is discussed in the linked):
Rev 1:4 John to the seven churches that are in Asia: Grace to you and peace from him who is and who was and who is to come, and from the seven spirits who are before his throne, 5 and from Jesus Christ the faithful witness, the firstborn of the dead, and the ruler of kings on earth. To him who loves us and has freed us from our sins by his blood 6 and made us a kingdom, priests to his God and Father, to him be glory and dominion forever and ever. Amen. 7 Behold, he is coming with the clouds, and every eye will see him, even those who pierced him, and all tribes of the earth will wail[c] on account of him. Even so. Amen. 8 “I am the Alpha and the Omega,” says the Lord God, “who is and who was and who is to come, the Almighty.”
Also, cf the very text on which Jesus was accused of blasphemy in that night court of Sanhedrinists:
Dan 7:13 “I saw in the night visions, and behold, with the clouds of heaven there came one like a son of man, and he came to the Ancient of Days and was presented before him. 14 And to him was given dominion and glory and a kingdom, that all peoples, nations, and languages should serve him; his dominion is an everlasting dominion, which shall not pass away, and his kingdom one that shall not be destroyed.
Plainly, this has not been fulfilled in history to date, but we have from Ac 17:29 ff assurance that the resurrection as witnessed by 500+ is a substance of things hoped for and evidence of what we do not yet see. In that context, I clip the referenced notes:
As the example of Israel in C1 shows, one of the main challenges to interpreting Bible Prophecy -- and one that we are warned about time and again in the scriptures -- is that it is deliberately partially veiled and uses the principle of foreshortening. That means that, while we can get a general sense of our times and discover sufficient to discern our duty in our times, we will not be able to satisfy our itch to solve all puzzles. However, it is also clear that prophecy must (a) be relevant to those who first hear it, then (b) it must be applicable to the people of God in successive generations, and then -- especially for prophecies connected to the end of days and the Day of the Lord -- (c) it will have an ultimate fulfillment. From this (and bearing in mind also the veiled nature of prophecy), we may infer a three-fold principle of prophetic fulfillment, interpretation and application: I: Immediate relevance and authentication II: Continued relevance through partial fulfillment(s) III: Eschatological surprise, signs of the times and ultimate fulfillment Prophecy starts with the God who is there and is not silent, who redemptively covenants with men, selects spokesmen from -- or even for -- the covenant people, and speaks through these prophets. But in a world of many voices, we must know how to discern the sound from the deceptive. Thus, we see why there will be authenticating signs, and we can see as well across time how a body of well-tested and reliable prophecy reduced to writing become the scriptures that are a plumb-line to test new voices and views against. Hence, the significance of Luke's commendation of the Jews of Berea, who: "were more noble than those in Thessalonica; they received the word with all eagerness, examining the Scriptures daily to see if these things were so." [Ac 17:11b] . . . . The people of God are strictly forbidden to resort to pagan sacrifices (especially human sacrifices) and mediums or other occult sources of divination. Instead they are to seek the voice of the prophet God raises up. And such a prophet will have as defining characteristics, that he calls people to respond to the God of covenant in light of the terms of covenant, and will thus call to holiness and repentance. In addition, such a prophet speaking from God will be accurate, showing the source of his visions to be God. And, once such a prophet is authenticated, the people are accountable to listen to his words, on pain of divine displeasure . . . . So, we are to heed authentic signs from the authentic tradition, and we are to pay no heed to those who prophesy falsely, or would pull us away from the service of God according to his Word . . . . Basic human nature is the same in all times and places, and the sorts of challenges we face will be similar to what has happened before. Sadly, we tend to forget this and make the same mistakes over and over, which is the root of the common saying as to how history tends to repeat or at least echo itself. So, by studying sacred history and the counsels of the prophets of the past, we may often be able to speak prophetically into our own time, once we discern the signs of our times . . . . as the end of days approach, just like birth pangs, certain painful signs -- notice how the very first one is deception and apostasy from the Faith in service to deception -- will come in waves, with accelerating frequency. As the pangs of a woman in the labours of childbirth build up to the breakthrough point, they will be more and more frequent and more and more intense, but it is never easy to predict the "just when" of the point of breakthrough. So, we can see how the ability to discern the signs of the times and apply prophetic revelation will in the end help the faithful in that generation to know that the end is coming, even as birth pangs presage the arrival of a new baby, through pain to joy . . .
I hope it is sufficiently clear why a pre-mill theological view is not inherently anti-semitic, nor other significant views for that matter, in light of the clear scriptural teachings on neighbour love, harmlessness, the brotherhood of humanity and explicit proscriptions on hate, envy, selfish ambition, theft and murder etc. All of which, of course, Nazism wantonly disregarded. At this stage, it seems that all that can reasonably be done in a blog thread that has drifted far from the proper focus, is to speak for record, trusting to the decency of onlookers to see in light of what can be outlined in a blog thread, that the charges made are ill founded. And of course now that we have sufficiently addressed red herrings and ad hominem laced strawmen, it should be well worth noting that no-one has been able to substantially undermine the evidence above that Darwinism and linked social darwinism were material influences on Hitler and nazism. That needs to be squarely faced, not distracted from through toxic side tracks. KF PS: Following up on a note above, loss of pension etc as controlled by the state is of course a threat of impoverishment in old age in a context where one could literally freeze to death. We should take this as a warning on state control of major benefit funds. Financial control, direct or indirect, is control; and, in the hands of the ruthless can be devastating -- in some ways worse than imprisonment as the effects are subtle. I wonder if we are willing to learn this lesson from history? Or, do we imagine that the lords of the state will always be oh so benevolent and just?kairosfocus
November 3, 2013
November
11
Nov
3
03
2013
10:15 PM
10
10
15
PM
PDT
LT: You are clearly not listening. I now simply summarise for record that the very first example you chose Mk 3:6, shows that you and your sources have indulged the same out of context misinterpretation that 2 Peter 3:15 ff speaks to in solemn warning. That Jesus, like leading members of the Hebraic prophetic tradition, had differences with elites who plotted against him is utterly unsurprising and simply not evidence of antisemitism or fomenting of same. At the same time, from the outset, it is quite clear that the core NT teachings on ethics and on the brotherhood/ neighbourliness of man (I notice, you have never seriously responded to these) -- directly derived from the Hebraic tradition cited as scripture -- cut clean across the racism, aggression, murder and theft involved in Nazi aggression. That's before we get to the clear spirit of false and idolatrous political messianism and blasphemy manifest in Hitler, exposing Nazism as utterly anti-Christ, not Christian. I therefore suggest, with all respect, that you seriously need to review and revise tour views and tone. KFkairosfocus
November 3, 2013
November
11
Nov
3
03
2013
09:22 PM
9
09
22
PM
PDT
Rewriting Jesus - Inspirational Videos http://www.godtube.com/watch/?v=FM2F0JNUbornagain77
November 3, 2013
November
11
Nov
3
03
2013
07:50 PM
7
07
50
PM
PDT
LT, do you personally hold that it is the "Christian" thing to do to be an anti-Semite or a racist in any regards? I personally, as a Christian who was miraculously touched by the grace of God at a low point in my life, find this racist/anti-semite claim of yours to be a very peculiar claim for someone to make against Christianity. Although I'm becoming less surprised by the outrageous claims of atheists nowadays since I've found that many dogmatic atheists will make any and all claims they can possibly imagine, no matter how ludicrous, simply to deny the reality of God and Jesus Christ in particular. For instance, Hitchens's claim that Mother Teresa was a fraudulent fanatic (and those are the nice things he said about her). I've found, over and over, that atheists, though claiming to be 'rational', are the most irrational people that there are. Moreover Jesus's own life testifies to the contrary. For instance,,,
Jesus continually sought out marginalised people to befriend. An immense compassion drew him toward poor people, those with leprosy (who were regarded as outcasts) and tax collectors (who were loathed as traitors). Jesus had friends who would feel at home in a synagogue and others who would feel at home in a brothel. Women and children were treated with absolute respect, which was not expected in that culture. — Christian Enquiry Agency http://curtisnarimatsu.wordpress.com/2013/04/11/jesus-invitation-was-for-the-poor-the-crippled-the-lame-the-blind-to-share-in-the-kingdom-of-god-a-feast-of-equals-of-open-commensality-where-there-is-no-distinctions-at-the-table-jesus-b/
I simply cannot fathom where someone would get that it is OK to hate and kill your neighbors ('if' they are Jews) from Jesus's teachings. If anything Jesus's life, and teaching for us, is a example of self sacrifice to the point of death if need be in the service of love for our fellow man. Verse and Music:
Matthew 5:43-48 “You have heard that it was said, ‘Love your neighbori and hate your enemy.’ But I tell you, love your enemies and pray for those who persecute you, that you may be children of your Father in heaven. He causes his sun to rise on the evil and the good, and sends rain on the righteous and the unrighteous. If you love those who love you, what reward will you get? Are not even the tax collectors doing that? And if you greet only your own people, what are you doing more than others? Do not even pagans do that? Be perfect, therefore, as your heavenly Father is perfect. Love Take Me Over (Official Lyric Video) http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=W8DiZhNVu1I
bornagain77
November 3, 2013
November
11
Nov
3
03
2013
07:27 PM
7
07
27
PM
PDT
Leafing through responses to my comment #64: 72, Mung: Point is? 73, StephenB: Extreme naivete: "All the passages that have been cited here reflect history. It isn’t anti-semitic to report events as they happened. There is not a single rhetorical flourish in the bunch." 74, Mung: This is just ear-plugging to drown out the unpleasant sound. 75, Mung: Did you actually read 10:8? 76, KF: The subtext you ascribe to me is explicitly not a point I am making. Everything before your charge is tangential piffle. 77, KF: Another distraction. 79, KF: A predictable, and predicted, argument. For centuries, people found that the gospels, etc. validated their anti-Jewish sentiment, and this is still the history. I understand that you believe that we now finally have the "common sense" Christianity formulated rightly. Better late than never, I guess. 80, KF: Another predictable, and predicted, argument. KF, tell me in a simple yes or no: have people found in the NT support for anti-Jewish feeling? 84, Mung: That Revelations quote certainly does qualify, thanks much. I have discussed the OT already in this thread. My position on it should be clear: it is the result of a certain approach to the Hebrew Bible; the Hebrew Scriptures are another approach. The Hebrew Bible, incidentally, is also the result of an approach. The Hebrew Bible predates both what I am calling the Christian OT and the Hebrew Scriptures, yet it represents a certain way of looking at ancient Israel's library of texts. But back to the matter at hand. You all asked me to back up my claims, and I have done so. You dislike the back-up, and I certainly understand why, but please let it never be said that I did not include examples to support my position. I imagine Barry and others are preparing their apologies to me now. I also notice you all have failed to address the specific quote I included at the end of comment 64. Any thoughts on it?LarTanner
November 3, 2013
November
11
Nov
3
03
2013
06:18 PM
6
06
18
PM
PDT
kairosfocus:
11 –> Now, in addition, I am aware of schools of thought that would take the prophetic texts and apply them instead to the Church...
Rejecting the characterization of "instead," you mean like the authors of the New Testament? Would you likewise say that they took the prophetic texts and applied them "instead" to the Messiah? Take this text, for example:
10 I took my staff Favor and cut it in pieces, to break my covenant which I had made with all the peoples. 11 So it was broken on that day, and thus the afflicted of the flock who were watching me realized that it was the word of the Lord. 12 I said to them, “If it is good in your sight, give me my wages; but if not, never mind!” So they weighed out thirty shekels of silver as my wages. 13 Then the Lord said to me, “Throw it to the potter, that magnificent price at which I was valued by them.” So I took the thirty shekels of silver and threw them to the potter in the house of the Lord.
Mung
November 3, 2013
November
11
Nov
3
03
2013
06:12 PM
6
06
12
PM
PDT
kairosfocus:
9 –> In that context, there is indeed a known and fairly widespread school of thought with significant and responsible study of the Scriptures behind it, that understands the prophetic scriptures of the Tanakh or Old Testament [substantially the same, just differently organised], to speak of a second exile and to speak of a return in the end of days culminating in the advent of Messiah. Which last is the reading of Zechariah 12 that I have highlighted above.
Yes, I'm well aware of this school of thought, and it is this school of thought that is wrong and anti-christian at it's core. The authors of the New Testament clearly place "the end of days" in their own time. They also clearly interpret Zechariah 12 as being fulfilled in their own time. As for a "second exile" that is highly debatable. I assume the first exile was the Babylonian exile. The first challenge that your assertion presents is to identify the Old Testament passages that refer to a second exile. If they do not describe a second exile, how is it to be believed that they describe a return from a second exile? The second challenge that your assertion presents is how to tease apart those passages in the Old Testament that refer to the "first return from exile" from the "second return from exile." The third challenge your assertion presents is to examine these passages and how they are interpreted in the New Testament.Mung
November 3, 2013
November
11
Nov
3
03
2013
05:52 PM
5
05
52
PM
PDT
It was a decision based purely on race, not creed.
I'm anti-racism. There is no "Jewish race." There is no "white race." There is no "Aryan race."
How did Hitler’s followers decide who was a Jew?
Querius: It was a decision based purely on race. How so? There's a racial test for "Jewishness"?Mung
November 3, 2013
November
11
Nov
3
03
2013
05:27 PM
5
05
27
PM
PDT
Mung,
“Christian Jew” is either redundant or an oxymoron, depending on how you’re using the terms.
Yes, there are different interpretations, but the one that I ascribe to refers to a community of faith beginning with incluing pre-Jewish Abel, Abram, and non-Jewish Ruth, Rahab, and many others. The founding believers in Jerusalem were overwhelmingly Jewish. For years after Jesus rose from the dead, "Christianity" was almost exclusively a Jewish sect. According to the Bible, by faith, I've been grafted into this root of faith.
How did Hitler’s followers decide who was a Jew?
It was a decision based purely on race, not creed.Querius
November 3, 2013
November
11
Nov
3
03
2013
04:28 PM
4
04
28
PM
PDT
Yes, kairosfocus, the Confessing Church movement resisted Nazi control over the German Christianity. The German church was split as a result, with the compromising church willing to embrace Hitler and comform to Nazi doctrines. From our position of historical perspective and relative safety, it's easy to distain the cowardice of the compromising church, but within context, one can see the pressure put on the church leaders. Oddly, the threat of losing ones retirement benefits was a more effective weapon against the German clergy than arrest and incarceration. And be sure to check out this link regarding the temple: http://www3.telus.net/public/kstam/en/temple/details/evidence.htm.Querius
November 3, 2013
November
11
Nov
3
03
2013
03:58 PM
3
03
58
PM
PDT
"Christian Jew" is either redundant or an oxymoron, depending on how you're using the terms. I don't care to get into a discussion about who is or is not a Jew. Even 'Jews' can't agree on it. LarTanner says I'm an IDiot for my post #55 but fails to recognize the allusions in it, so who's the real idiot? kf highlights some of the issues involved Is it a matter of birth? Is it the mother, the father, or both? Is it a matter of religion? Some combination of birth and/or religion? In what sense is modern Israel even a Jewish state? How did Hitler's followers decide who was a Jew? I'm more interested in claims that the modern state of Israel exists as a consequence of the fulfillment of Bible prophecy. This is just pure bunk.Mung
November 3, 2013
November
11
Nov
3
03
2013
03:27 PM
3
03
27
PM
PDT
Zechariah 13: 7 “Awake, O sword, against My Shepherd, Against the Man who is My Companion,” Says the Lord of hosts. “Strike the Shepherd, And the sheep will be scattered; Then I will turn My hand against the little ones. 8 And it shall come to pass in all the land,” Says the Lord, “That two-thirds in it shall be cut off and die, But one–third shall be left in it: 9 I will bring the one–third through the fire, Will refine them as silver is refined, And test them as gold is tested. They will call on My name, And I will answer them. I will say, ‘This is My people’; And each one will say, ‘The Lord is my God.’” Past or future?Mung
November 3, 2013
November
11
Nov
3
03
2013
03:09 PM
3
03
09
PM
PDT
Here's antoher one missed by LT's source(s):
These are the words of him who is the First and the Last, who died and came to life again. I know your afflictions and your poverty—yet you are rich! I know about the slander of those who say they are Jews and are not, but are a synagogue of Satan. - Revelation 2:8-9
By the way, the New Testament is not anti-semitic, it is anti-apostacy. There's a difference. Not that LarTanner would have a clue. how does he justify his decision to cherry-pick from the NT and ignore the Old Testament?Mung
November 3, 2013
November
11
Nov
3
03
2013
02:59 PM
2
02
59
PM
PDT
Q: Pardon, but a few years back, Nuremberg papers documenting intended and partly carried out persecution of Christians remaining faithful, came out. Of course, the Barmen Declaration from the 30's, is also on that, as a counterblast to Nazi subversion of the church deemed a heresy. KF PS: FWIW, so long as countries like Jamaica and the like remain solidly Christian, Jews are more than welcome. Indeed Jews are the longest settled inhabitants of Jamaica save for the Spanish based Maroons, the Arawaks having partly died out and been assimilated. About 10% of Jamaicans reputedly have Jewish ancestry, reflected in names like Lindo, Henriques, DaCosta, DeSouza, DeLisser, Pinto etc. Sadly, so far as I know, I am not one -- I have to settle for African, Indian, Scottish and Irish (and behind, Belgian). My Jewish Mom and bro are honorary.kairosfocus
November 3, 2013
November
11
Nov
3
03
2013
02:53 PM
2
02
53
PM
PDT
Nicely stated, kairosfocus. I'd like to add a few points: - Adolph Hitler did not want to fight against the Lutheran and Catholic traditions in Germany. He wanted to integrate the church into his program. However, Hitler would not tolerate independent leadership as demonstrated by his application of the Führerprinzip (leadership principle) to the church, and by his confrontation with Dietrich Bonhoeffer. For any of you who are interested, this history worth looking at in detail. Ultimately, Hitler was threatened enough to assert that Bonhoeffer was his "personal prisoner." Bonhoeffer was imprisoned without further appeal, and was later hanged in a Nazi concentration camp shortly before the German surrender. - Rabbi David Stern, a Messianic Jew, created the Complete Jewish Bible partly to rectify the antisemitism in some translations, and partly to use Jewish terminology, pronunciations, and context. That the majority of Herodian Jewish religious authorities were vehemently against the teachings, rebukes, and miracles of a certain Yeshua Ha'Nazaret who was widely considered the Mashiach of long-standing prophecy is hardly surprising and certainly not antisemitic. After all, the prophets in the Tanakh were also persecuted and killed. - Even the Talmud, hardly considered antisemitic (lol) provides evidence of the miracles that occurred following the execution of Jesus. See http://www3.telus.net/public/kstam/en/temple/details/evidence.htm for an excellent summary.Querius
November 3, 2013
November
11
Nov
3
03
2013
02:38 PM
2
02
38
PM
PDT
Mung: you forget the part of being hunted and fished, ending up seeking refuge back in Eretz Israel. In short, before we get to what sounds suspiciously like a UN war against Israel, the signs suggest persecution with Israel as refuge, even as other prophecies speak of Christians serious about the gospel being hated of all nations and persecuted. Israel is a land of refuge, and in that context I beg to remind of shiploads of Jewish refugees that no-one was willing to take in in the context of WW II, though I should note the commendable behaviour of the Dominican Republic. as long s Haifa and Tel Aviv exist, and of course the upgraded Lod airport, that will not happen again. Given that history, I frankly support a well armed, alert state of Israel and use of the veto in the UNSC to block hate-driven actions. I also think the blind eye to Iran and its obvious agenda is inexcusable. (While we are at it let us remember why in '56 and '67 Israel had to fight with junkyard tanks and mostly second line French equipment, though the Mirage and the 105 mm tank gun are major exceptions to that. Remember, how they had to cut that 105 mm down to fit junkyard Shermans. I say this to the shame of the USA.) KFkairosfocus
November 3, 2013
November
11
Nov
3
03
2013
02:22 PM
2
02
22
PM
PDT
LT: I will take your very first example of alleged antisemitism and defamation as a case of a slice of cake with all the ingredients in it. First, your assertion:
The Gospel According to Mark contains about 40 verses of defamatory anti-Jewish rhetoric, as follows: 3:6, The Pharisees are said to have begun to plan to destroy Jesus . . .
But by simply reading the context, we can directly see:
Mk 3: 1 Again he entered the synagogue, and a man was there with a withered hand. 2 And they watched Jesus, to see whether he would heal him on the Sabbath, so that they might accuse him. 3 And he said to the man with the withered hand, “Come here.” 4 And he said to them, “Is it lawful on the Sabbath to do good or to do harm, to save life or to kill?” But they were silent. 5 And he looked around at them with anger, grieved at their hardness of heart, and said to the man, “Stretch out your hand.” He stretched it out, and his hand was restored. 6 The Pharisees went out and immediately held counsel with the Herodians against him, how to destroy him. 7 Jesus withdrew with his disciples to the sea, and a great crowd followed, from Galilee and Judea 8 and Jerusalem and Idumea and from beyond the Jordan and from around Tyre and Sidon. When the great crowd heard all that he was doing, they came to him.
In short, Jesus here is held in high regard by many ordinary people, specifically including people from Galilee and Judaea -- presumably largely Jews. But, he was held an enemy and schemed against by members of two power elite groups, Pharisees and Herodians. When for instance Jeremiah the prophet had a falling out with the Jewish kings of Judaea after Josiah, was he viewed as an anti-semite? Was Elijah an anti-semite when he destroyed groups of king's men who came after him on instruction of Northern kings? Likewise, at the birth of the Hasmonean uprising, I read in 1 Macc:
1 Maccabees 2: . . . Mattathias the son of John, son of Simeon, a priest of the sons of Joarib, moved from Jerusalem and settled in Mode'in [in the hill country of Judaea]. He had five sons, John surnamed Gaddi, Simon called Thassi, Judas called Maccabeus [i.e. "the hammer"], Eleazar called Avaran, and Jonathan called Apphus. He saw the blasphemies being committed in Judah and Jerusalem, and said, "Alas! Why was I born to see this, the ruin of my people, the ruin of the holy city, and to dwell there when it was given over to the enemy, the sanctuary given over to aliens? . . . " And Mattathias and his sons rent their clothes, put on sackcloth, and mourned greatly. Then the king's officers [i.e. those of Antiochus Epiphanes, Selucid Greek ruler in Syria] who were enforcing the apostasy came to the city of Mode'in to make them offer sacrifice. Many from Israel came to them; and Mattathias and his sons were assembled. Then the king's officers spoke to Mattathias as follows: "You are a leader, honored and great in this city, and supported by sons and brothers. Now be the first to come and do what the king commands, as all the Gentiles and the men of Judah and those that are left in Jerusalem have done. Then you and your sons will be numbered among the friends of the king, and you and your sons will be honored with silver and gold and many gifts." But Mattathias answered and said in a loud voice: "Even if all the nations that live under the rule of the king obey him, and have chosen to do his commandments, departing each one from the religion of his fathers, yet I and my sons and my brothers will live by the covenant of our fathers. Far be it from us to desert the law and the ordinances. We will not obey the king's words by turning aside from our religion to the right hand or to the left." When he had finished speaking these words, a Jew came forward in the sight of all to offer sacrifice upon the altar in Mode'in, according to the king's command. When Mattathias saw it, be burned with zeal and his heart was stirred. He gave vent to righteous anger; he ran and killed him upon the altar. At the same time he killed the king's officer who was forcing them to sacrifice, and he tore down the altar. Thus he burned with zeal for the law, as Phinehas did against Zimri the son of Salu.[1] Then Mattathias cried out in the city with a loud voice, saying: "Let every one who is zealous for the law and supports the covenant come out with me!" And he and his sons fled to the hills and left all that they had in the city. Then many who were seeking righteousness and justice went down to the wilderness to dwell there, they, their sons, their wives, and their cattle, because evils pressed heavily upon them . . .
Were these worthies who struck down a fellow Jew anti-semitic? (And, what did Jesus say to Peter when at the arrest in the garden, he cut off the High Priest's servant's ear? How does what Jesus said resonate with the fate of 4 of 5 Hasmonean brothers in the above uprising? Does Jesus' teaching provide grounds for Nazis to violently attack Jews, and others, or does it not warn rather against the path of the sword, much less that of aggressive war, murder and theft by those nmeans?) I have no doubt that some have distorted that hostility of elites in Mk 3:6 -- which seems to be accurate history not defamation -- into a general perceived enmity of Jews, but that is hardly John Mark's fault or that of Peter whose testimony Mark records. The utterly strained, out of context nature of your citation does not commend your level of understanding of or familiarity with the NT, or that of the sources you seem to have used. Frankly, this one comes across as a mischievous, ill-informed, out of context, hostile misreading that does not even seem to recognise a commonplace of history: elites often retaliate against those who speak unwelcome truth to them. I think you need to go back and seriously think again about what led you to speak in terms of "Christianity" being responsible for Hitler's behaviour. KF KFkairosfocus
November 3, 2013
November
11
Nov
3
03
2013
02:01 PM
2
02
01
PM
PDT
LT: Pardon, but this does not add up, especially given what was already cited from 2 Peter 3:15 ff above:
I’ll return to provide examples of passages in the Christian NT that were used to validate and justify centuries-long prejudice, policy, persecution, and violence against Jewish people. After you review all the examples, you may want to dispute that they are antisemitic, or that otherwise well-meaning people got Jesus’ message wrong, but in doing so you would deny history and then deny the power of Jesus’ message.
This is nonsense. As was already shown, the NT explicitly teaches the universal brotherhood of man, calls us to neighbour love, holds that per the Good Samaritan, neighbourliness extends across hereditary enmities, and explicitly warns gentile Christians against denigration of Jews. All of this was cited line by line from core ethical teachings. Let me now re-cite from 60 above, Peter's warning against scripture-twisting (which is put in terms that would take in OT and NT):
2 Peter 3:15 And count the patience of our Lord as salvation, just as our beloved brother Paul also wrote to you according to the wisdom given him, 16 as he does in all his letters when he speaks in them of these matters. There are some things in them that are hard to understand, which the ignorant and unstable twist to their own destruction, as they do the other Scriptures. 17 You therefore, beloved, knowing this beforehand, take care that you are not carried away with the error of lawless people and lose your own stability. 18 But grow in the grace and knowledge of our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ. To him be the glory both now and to the day of eternity. Amen.
So, the NT affirms what should be obvious to common sense. People who are ignorant or willful can and do distort texts, and we unfortunately routinely ignore direct teachings to the contrary of our stubborn folly, rage or lust etc. That this happens is not the fault of text or teacher whose words are in the text, but of those who are willful in ignorance or misbehaviour. KFkairosfocus
November 3, 2013
November
11
Nov
3
03
2013
01:31 PM
1
01
31
PM
PDT
PPS: I guess we could expect WP to butcher Heb script.kairosfocus
November 3, 2013
November
11
Nov
3
03
2013
01:19 PM
1
01
19
PM
PDT
PS: The rendering, "the Law" or "the law of Moses" does carry in English the specific meaning the Pentateuch and the specific instructions therein; and it is to be noted of course that in professional work, the readings are going to be directly in Hebrew in any case. and it is simple to get a link back to the Hebrew. For instance, pulling a freebie Bible Study package on Josh 1:7, I see the law of Moses referenced and linked through Strong's numbers: "H8451 ??????? ??????? towrah (to-raw') (or torah {to-raw'}) n-f. 1. a precept or statute, especially the Decalogue or Pentateuch [from H3384] KJV: law. Root(s): H3384 [?]." Precept of course means "1. A rule or principle prescribing a particular course of action or conduct. 2. Law An authorized direction or order; a writ" -- AmHD. That's a reasonable rendering by your own admission, accessible to any serious Bible reader in seconds. (In the old days, I would have had to pull the old hard bound Strong's and go to the Hebrew Dictionary, 3 - 5 mins work.) Where also, the works of the Pentateuch are patently sufficiently shot through with specific laws in the regulatory sense to make that a reasonable metonymy; somewhat as Holland often stands in for Dutch Netherlands in English. Likewise, "the law is a teacher," is proverbial. With all due respect, this seems to be a case of looking for a difference and pushing it beyond reasonable limits. Yes, there are 2,000 year long differences of opinion and views, but there is no good reason to infer or suggest systematic manipulative distortion, as your own prime example shows.kairosfocus
November 3, 2013
November
11
Nov
3
03
2013
01:19 PM
1
01
19
PM
PDT
1 2 3 4 5 6 7

Leave a Reply