A thought-provoking article. Humanity’s capacity for conscious evil and, perhaps more chilling, the unthinking evil Arendt highlights does not sit easily with modern ideas about human identity and motivation. Religion has been particularly helpful in prompting self-examination, and the awareness of our own capacity for evil, which modern culture with its emphasis on self-esteem and antisocial behaviour as a product of environment and upbringing fails to address. Mythic language and figures such as Satan and demons help to express the ever-present “otherness” and possibility of evil.

I found Gary Baumeister’s book on the "Myth of Pure Evil" particularly insightful in exploring how our most idealistic endeavours (e.g. Communism, and also religion ) so often lead to the most appalling results.

(summary and review here: http://homepages.which.net/~radical.faith/reviews/baumeister1.htm )

I have a small quibble with the article, – all religions deal with the problem of evil, but “original sin” and its link to the Eden story is a uniquely Christian doctrine, and one that I find problematic for modern audiences.

In order to base justice over the entire world on combating evil we would have to develop a universally accepted morality so that we can recognise evil where it occurs. I don't think we can develop an objective system of morality applicable to all because societies define morality, and the definition varies from one society to another.

It is not even reasonable for our own legal system. English Common Law prescribes penalties for illegal acts not for sins. We have progressed to a more humane society by separating sin from crime.

The United States enacted a Constitutional Amendment regarding Prohibition of alcoholic beverages. The attempt to legislate morality was a massive failure promoting governmental corruption, criminal empires and a disregard for law. I feel I am not wise enough to determine other's morals, and I would not be willing to give anybody else the right to determine mine.

My My....what a fascinating article.... err confession?

There are so many juicy quotes from the article I'd love to use here, but if I did so my own post would just be full of cut and paste.

I do note though that by 2 lines of the article we have mention of "Original Sin"...then peppered throughout it, are mentions of religion God etc.

This is the ultimate dilemna. Without the righteousness of God, we cannot define 'evil'. The closest we can come is to define "unpleasant/threatening/unsafe/annoying/life threatening"..but "evil"? nope.. without reference to our Creator the idea is completely meaningless.

This problem is highlighted by the fact that those withIN given societies such as the Nazi regime, or Maos Cultural revolution or Saddaam's Iraq.. the primary focus of 'good' =That which advances the agenda of 'us', and evil is that which threatens it.

Paul contends that ALL have sinned.. Jews and Gentiles, and he goes to considerable lengths to develop this idea in Romans 1-3

Paul offers not a 'legal' solution but a spiritual.

1/ The Failure of LAW in producing righteousness.

Therefore no one will be declared righteous in his sight by observing the law; rather, through the law we become conscious of sin.(Rom3:20)

2/ The Solution in Christ.

21But now a righteousness from God, apart from law, has been made known, to which the Law and the Prophets testify. 22This righteousness from God comes through faith in Jesus Christ to all who believe.(Rom3:21f)

The key here is the 'righteousness APART from law'...... Paul contends that the law alone cannot make people righteous because the law only serves to highlight our sin and evil.

"Customers did not care that the cheap products they bought were made with child labor" (From the article)

Sorry.. we are all sinners and equally in need of Grace.. undeserved kindness from our Creator who has given us a Way..in Christ to be born anew to a living hope that is unfading, incorruptable and undefiled.

Any significance this article might have had is lost in the nature of it.

People who buy cheap clothes are not evil and their ‘crime’, not that I think they have committed one, is not comparable to those of Eichmann and not worthy of being included in the same article. Such hyperbole defeats the point the author is trying to make.

Apart from that, he is just stating the obvious, that bad people exist.

I am not responsible for those bad people, I am responsible for my own conduct and whilst I may buy price-competetive garments, I am a very long way along the “chain of responsibility” to bear any culpability.

Polycarp “The Failure of LAW in producing righteousness.”

I would disagree Pc, I think you have that entirely the wrong way around

The existence of LAW is only necessitated because of the absence of righteousness.

“The solution in Christ”

The solution is to find the morality and goodness within overselves. A belief in God might help but God is the great “non-interventionalist”, the motivation to find any solution has to come from within.

Yum Cha?

Polycarp wrote:

"This problem is highlighted by the fact that those withIN given societies such as the Nazi regime, or Maos Cultural revolution or Saddaam's Iraq.. the primary focus of 'good' =That which advances the agenda of 'us', and evil is that which threatens it.."

I get tired of Christians disowning the Nazis.

Hitler's anti-Semitism grew out of his Christian education. Christian Austria and Germany in his time took for granted the belief that Jews held an inferior status to Aryan Christians. Jewish hatred did not spring from Hitler, it came from the preaching of Catholic priests and Protestant ministers throughout Germany for hundreds of years. The Protestant leader, Martin Luther, himself, held a livid hatred for Jews and their Jewish religion. In his book, "On the Jews and their Lies," Luther set the standard for Jewish hatred in Protestant Germany up until World War II. Hitler expressed a great admiration for Martin Luther.
Although Hitler did not practice religion in a churchly sense, he certainly believed in the Bible's God. … As a young boy, Hitler's most ardent goal was to become a priest. Much of his philosophy came from the Bible, and more influentially, from the Christian Social movement. (The German Christian Social movement, remarkably, resembles the Christian Right movement in America today.) Many have questioned Hitler's stand on Christianity. Although he fought against certain Catholic priests who opposed him for political reasons, his belief in God and country never left him. Many Christians throughout history have opposed Christian priests for various reasons; this does not necessarily make one against one's own Christian beliefs. Nor did the Vatican's Pope & bishops ever disown him; in fact they blessed him! As evidence to his claimed Christianity, he said:
"My feelings as a Christian points me to my Lord and Savior as a fighter.... And if there is anything which could demonstrate that we are acting rightly it is the distress that daily grows. For as a Christian I have also a duty to my own people.”

The Nazi Holocaust was applied Christianity.

Nice article.

It is true that we all have to put our religious identities aside in order to define evil and fight it together under the banner of human brotherhood.

The problem with identity labels whether religious of non-religious is that as soon as someone calls themself a muslim for example they are somehow responsible for all atrocities that every other muslim has done. But as for christians they get to pick and choose which groups are 'really' christians, so I guess the nazi party were not christian.

On original sin you are incorrect to put us muslims in the category that believe in original sin as we do not believe in it at all.
While christians see original sin as inherited from Adam thus making us all born with a sinful nature, Islam teaches we are all born good natured and only sin when we consciously make a decision to rebel against God.

We do need God and religion to define what is evil, the moral teaches of most faiths 'if implemented' will serve to change society in a good way.

Re David's post of October 11th. While Hitler and the overwhelming majority of Nazis were brought up as Christians - in line with most non-Jewish Germans - there was a strong thread of contempt in Nazi thought for Christianity as a weak Jewish-based religion. Rosenberg was the main proponent of a replacement religion based on ancient German paganism and there is evidence that the aim was to turn on the Christian faiths once the war was won and the building of the 'Thousand Year Reich' commenced.

The Nazi leadership realised from the reaction to the Euthanasia programme in the 1930s, that adherence to traditional Christian beliefs was still strong in Germany, and to take on the Churches was unwise at that time. The new generations, schooled in Nazi ideology, would be a different matter. Also, to break the Concordat would be internationally and domestically unwise during the war.

Please don't take this a defence of the Christian Churches during this period or a denial of Christian culpability for antisemitism. Just that Nazi ideology was profoundly and essentially anti-Christian.

As a postscript: Hitler died a suicide and without the last rites. Hardly the action of a Catholic believer.

Orpheus: If Nazi ideology was profoundly and essentially anti-Christian why did the churches support them and provide chaplains for their armies? They could not recognise the nature of the ideology?

Welcome Casalan.

Genesis 3: 17 …cursed is the ground for thy sake..

‘for thy sake’ according to Rabbi Hertz in his commentary in the Soncino edition of the Pentateuch “Only as Adam lived was the earth under a curse.” No curse was passed to his descendents.

Rabbi Hertz interpreted Genesis 3:16 as God saying to Eve “Thee I need not punish. A sufficiency of woe and suffering is thine because of thy physical being.”

The normative Jewish attitude is that we are born neither good nor evil. Our acts determine whether we are good or evil. No one can take on another’s sins.

Imam Ahmed Saad of the “Reading Islam” project (http://www.readingislam.com/servlet/Satellite?pagename=Zone-English-Discover_Islam/DIEZone) states … “Islam teaches that all humans are innocent by birth and they become sinful only when they consciously commit a sin. Islam regards the concept of “Original Sin” and the need for atonement by God Himself - via dying on the Cross - as a pure invention of those who came after Jesus Christ, declaring themselves as Christians.

… the Islamic concept of sin is that one man’s sin cannot be transferred to another; nor can the reward due to a person be transferred either. Every individual is responsible only for his or her actions.”

The Islamic position is the same as the Jewish.

The concept of Original Sin is rooted in paganism not monotheism. Plato’s Theory of Forms has the idea in the beginning. Reality is a degenerate form of the idea. The real world is thus imperfect, and the ideal form is perfect.

In the City of God, Augustine reflected how physicality is the natural basis for mankind's propensity for sin. He took the Platonic idea that physical form in mankind's existence on Earth is imperfect compared to the ideal of human.

Augustine applied this to the story of Adam’s sin and expulsion from Eden and concluded that all carry the stain of that sin.

Col Rouge:
" ... The solution is to find the morality and goodness within overselves. .. the motivation to find any solution has to come from within. ... Yum Cha? "

Reminds me of a metaphysical axiom:
" For as it is above, so it is below, as it is within, so shall it manifest without "

Whether I am this religion or that, this belief system or that, this culture or that, this racial group or that,

Am I not my fellow human's helper? Should I not protest and intervene in some fashion on issues of "Human Rights" for want of a better term and I note that some do not like it, whether it b red china, or otherwise? R those who espouse or aquiesce to policies of non-political interference in the affairs of other states really people of good will?

To sit as I did at a Human Right's conference in Geneva and to listen to the reps of the "Princes" of this world, I found it difficult to discern them one from another. They all make the same beautiful flowery speeches. BUT on the issue of hanging out the dirty washing they are all as thick as thieves in their denial. But then to see the "evidence" from the NGO's of humanity's inhumanity to humanity .. :-(

Did the Australian population not vote to bring the Jews here b4 the holocaust? Was it not a Russian who advocated for this? Did the Australian people vote to effect change to OUR constitution and end appeals to Head of State in council?

Mayhaps if we can reconcile the evil/negativity within our own nature and in our own environment, irrespective of religion, belief or control system, mayhaps concurrently we can also come to reconcile the suffering of all our fellow humans, wherever they be.

Tends to fall down and bcome just one group telling another what to do for power/profit though.

How many good persons have risen to worldly power only to fall from the white horse of grace?
Why is this so?

...Adam...

My view also is that once a so called sovereign power commits crimes against humanity, such as the classification of one group of humans as animals, then they no longer have the right to govern or issue edicts and ought stand down of their own accord.

The crown in my view should, in a frothing at the mouth inspired fit of dynamic good governance, try itself for a host of wickedness post WWII and resign sovereignty that the people may make a new determination.

We also note the words of Chancellor Palpatine:
"All who gain power are afraid to lose it .. "

even the Catholics. Such a terrible history at times and yet they would still have us believe that they provide us with the chosen of El Goddo or some such thing. OF course, they are not the only ones. Common as muck this problem.

Why not get that goat t.blair into the exorcism room and see if we get our *Lord Satan* on-line.

;-)

...Adam...

At the risk of sounding like polycarp, and despite being (essentially) an atheist, I have to say Jesus (and almost all the ancient philosophers) had this question covered.
What is evil? When one does not treat others they way they would like to be treated.
jesus said the Greatest commandment was to love God 'with all thy heart, and with all thy soul and with all thy mind'. Fair enough, define God in any manner you like -nature, world whatever- or disregard altogether.
BUT, Jesus went on to say:"and the second is like it; 'love thy neighbour as thyself'".
When asked:"Who is my neighbour?" Jesus related the parable of the Good Samaritan; For anyone unfamiliar with this story, suffice to say the Samaritans were the traditional enemies of the Jews.
In other words, we must come to the point of overcoming our tribalism, and start treating everyone, everywhere, as our neighbours.
Would you buy cheap clothes if they were made by your next door neighbour's children?
Would you allow your next door neighbour's children to be potbellied stick figures, without offering to help?
Another thing Jesus said. "Before you attempt to remove the splinter from your brother's eye, first remove the plank from your own.
We have to stop blaming others, and start admitting we share the blame.

Arrrgggh.. DAvid.. with all due respect

"The Nazi Holocaust was applied Christianity." is legally actionable.

that is outright religious vilification not because I don't like it, but because it simply is unsupportable from the facts. I know from our correspondence this is a big thing with you, one might call it a bit of an obsession, but seriously, you must watch what you say because that little bit it over the top and I'm recommending the post for deletion.

The words of Hitler you quoted are quite accurate but you fail to identify the CONTEXT. He was desperately seeking the political support of a broader base of the German population so.. like 'Born Again' Bush he selects words which will advance his agenda.

No.. Hitler/Holocaust were NOT 'applied Christianity' they were applied Machievellism.

Dear COL... I disagree with your disagreement :)

"Law"....produces 'compliance' not 'goodness'.

Socially, a sense of right and wrong is certainly enhanced by strong laws and consistent application, but changing the person? hmmmm that's a different issue

Polycarp wrote: “"The Nazi Holocaust was applied Christianity." is legally actionable.”

If it is legally actionable take out an action against me.

It is not religious vilification. It is history. Christianity has a record of hatred, persecution and intolerance of non-Christians.

The Holocaust was not a departure. It was in the tradition of the Crusades, the Inquisition, the conversion of Europe by force, the massacres and expulsion of Jews and Muslims from Christian territories, the wars of the Reformation and the other abuses of humanity by Christianity.

Hitler got his bigotry from Christianity. As a young boy, Hitler's most ardent goal was to become a priest. Much of his philosophy came from the Bible, and more influentially, from the Christian Social movement. Karl Lueger founded the Christian Social Party (CS). Lueger was known for his antisemitism, Adolf Hitler saw him as an inspiration for his own virulent hatred of anything Jewish. The CS was oriented towards the bourgeoisie and clerical-catholic; there were many priests in the party, including Chancellor Ignaz Seipel.
Hitler’s Christian inspired Jew hatred found fertile soil since the Catholic, Lutheran and Orthodox churches had been promoting Jew hatred for centuries.

When you try to make Christian Germany as non-Christian because you didn’t like what they did in WW2 you are playing fast and loose with the facts.

Polycarp wrote: “like 'Born Again' Bush he selects words which will advance his agenda.”

Bush and Hitler were both real Christians pursuing the Christian record of violence, hate and intolerance. You merely follow the Christian pattern of denying the Christian record and denying the Christianity of those Christians whose actions you don’t approve of.

The evangelical community in the United States supports Bush because he is one of them. The anti-Semitic Christian community in Germany supported Hitler because he was one of them.

I certainly wish that Christianity were a religion of compassion, peace and love rather than merely spouting the words.

I repeat: The Nazi Holocaust was applied Christianity. Sue me.

Dream on from your post, I am not sure if you are agreeing, disagreeing or just making noises.

The human life experience is a personal matter and one where people make gestures, good and bad, grand and infamous.

Ultimately we individually decide what sort of life we will live and possibly, what contribution we will make and how we would seek to be remembered.

I accept a strong personal responsibility for the things I do and influence, as I see them as being significant and material. Many people do not.

If I make a decision not to buy a pair of shorts as a protest against slave working conditions in Upper Volta do I show solidarity with the slave workers or does such denial of income to their masters increase their suffering?

I cannot work it out, when you can maybe call back and tell us.

As for me, I will continue to pursue ethics business and personal practices in Australia.

Grandstanding and ranting against the fact that the world has some bad people in it, helps no one.

Regarding Nazi’s… I thought a lot of core Nazi “theology” was founded in paganism / occultism (swastika runes etc) more than Christianity.

Pc you still miss my point, the need for compliance, through law, is only necessary because of the absence of individual righteousness.

I have to agree with Col's posts on this thread so far.

A set of laws whether via government or via religion still presents a choice for individuals. Being of a particular faith or being an atheist is irrelevant. For example a corrupt priest has made an individual choice not to obey the laws of his God.

A set of laws in themselves do not produce righteousness nor adherence. As Col wrote, goodness or righteousness has to come from within and it is because of this that certain safeguards, as the author states, are built-into the system.

For me these safeguards are best established in law than in religion. There are too many religions and perversions of religions to be able to safeguard a legislative framework for the common good.

Col Rouge of all people must understand the capitalist laws of Supply and Demand.
So long as we are all in the market for cheap clothing, countries that do not have strong laws against child labour will continue to supply that market.
How long has it been since Keating famously called for a 'level playing field'? Rather than so called 'free' trade agreements, we need fair trade agreements, with countries that have similar if not identical views on civil rights and obligations.
It can only be grossly hypocritical to have minimum work standards for Australians, but still happily trade with countries who have lower standards.
When we do this, we are saying: 'We don't expect our people to work for these conditions, but it's alright for you coolies, serfs and peasants (I actually used stronger -and sadly, more common- words than these, but they were disallowed) to work for us, and send your product to us'.
This allows us to use the same argument drug dealers use, to whit: 'I don't force them to use my product'.
We don't force them to sell to us at subsistance prices.
They could always just die, if the price isn't good enough.
An interesting editorial debate; the words I originally used were disallowed as profanity, yet 'coolies, serfs and peasants' went through.
As someone from the 'peasant' class, I find that rather profane.

Dear David

please have a peek at the trial transcript for the 2 Dannies.

You would find that they failed to make a distinction between "Moderate" and "Radical" muslims, but they simply made a broad baby out with the bathwater "all" Muslims kind of statement.

In your case, you have failed to link your accusation that the Holocaust was 'applied' Christianity to specific teachings in the New Testament.
For your statement to be:

a) True
b) Acceptable

It would need to be based on a sure foundation of fact and not opinion based on personal bitterness.

I am simply pointing out that what you said IS against the law as I understand it, and based on the trial of 2 Christians.

You are blaming all Christians for the holocaust by saying it was "applied Christianity."

In order for something to be "applied" it must be clearly defined.
You would need to support your assertion from the teaching and example of Jesus of Nazareth.

Knowing that you cannot do this without extreme misinterpretation, (as Hilter did with the cleansing of the temple- which any judge would recognize immediately) means I can confidently say that you should retract that statement ("The holocaust was applied Christianity") as it is tantamount to a non Jewish person saying "All Jews are bloodsucking parasites and that this is simply applied Judaism" when such an assertion can never be supported by the Torah.

This is exactly WHY it is important to link behavior to belief and accepted doctrine.

When evaluating "Christian" behavior it is essential to identify which sect/denomination/cult you are referring to.

Your statement was in every respect as bad (for Christians) as the worst things the Nazi's ever said about Jews.

Porky: << I am simply pointing out that what you said IS against the law as I understand it, and based on the trial of 2 Christians >>

True to form, Porky omits to mention that the two Christian Islamophobes got off on appeal. A bit like the homophobic Swedish pastor he used to rant about when he was BOAZ_David.

It's why I call him "Porky", of course. He's apparently unaware of the biblical dictum about bearing false witness.

Col Rouge wrote:

“Regarding Nazi’s… I thought a lot of core Nazi “theology” was founded in paganism / occultism (swastika runes etc) more than Christianity.”

People often make the claim that Adolph Hitler adhered to Atheism, Humanism or some ancient Nordic pagan mythology. None of these fanciful and wrong ideas hold. Although one of Hitler's henchmen, Alfred Rosenberg, did undertake a campaign of Nordic mythological propaganda, Hitler and most of his henchmen did not believe in it.
Many American books, television documentaries, and Sunday sermons that preach of Hitler's "evil" have eliminated Hitler's god for their Christian audiences, but one only has to read from his own writings to appreciate that Hitler's God is the God of the Christian Bible. Hitler held many hysterical beliefs which not only include, God and Providence but also Fate, Social Darwinism, and ideological politics. He spoke, unashamedly, about God, fanaticism, idealism, dogma, and the power of propaganda. Hitler held strong faith in all his convictions. He justified his fight for the German people and against Jews by using Godly and Biblical reasoning. Indeed, one of his most revealing statements makes this quite clear:
"Hence today I believe that I am acting in accordance with the will of the Almighty Creator: by defending myself against the Jew, I am fighting for the work of the Lord."
Many Christians try to deny the links of Christianity with the Holocaust by emphasising the minor role of the occult in Nazi philosophy. Like Polycarp they get angry when the Holocaust is recognised as a Christian product. Many Christians agreed that Hitler was doing the work of the Lord.

Dear Polycarp,

Christianity became the official Roman religion in 371 CE. 14 years later Christianity committed its first murder. Priscillian, bishop of Ávila (died 385), was the first person in the history of Christianity to be executed for heresy.

Since Priscillian Christianity has persecuted and murdered many more.

In the New Testament it says that ‘ye shall know them by their fruits.’ The fruits are intolerance, persecution and massacre. It’s very bad to say, but that’s the historical record.

PELICAN.. an insightful post there :)

You said:

<<A set of laws in themselves do not produce righteousness nor adherence.>>

They 'might' produce adherence if the penalty is sufficiently strong, but compliance has nothing to do with inner feeling.

This is the whole POINT about the core truth of the Christian faith.

The Law... (Of Moses) simply served to SHOW our sinfulness... because under law we see that deep down, there are certain aspects of it which we would love to go against if we can get away with it.

The law was pointing/leading to ... a Messiah. One who, in the words of Paul would be:

<<But now a righteousness from God, apart from law, has been made known, to which the Law and the Prophets testify.>>

Notice the key words "apart from Law"?

This is a fulfilment of Jeremiah's prophecy

33 "This is the covenant I will make with the house of Israel
after that time," declares the LORD.
"I will put my law in their minds
and write it on their hearts."

Failure to understand this is also the reason David F goes wrong when he condemns 'Christianity' for ugly world events. He simply does not understand "Christ-ianity". (nor his own Torah by the looks of it)

CJ is in one of his 'close but no cigar' moments :) He thinks the appeal was successful on the basis of a rejection of the failure to distinguish between moderate and radical Muslims. No..it was succesful on other grounds.

So the success of the Dannie's appeal has zero relevance to my assertion about the contents of the trial transcript in connection with David F's comment.

David's last post simply shows how 'power corrupts' it says nothing about 'Christianity' as a faith.
It says as much about 'the Faith' as the paedophile priest going directly against His Lords command does. (i.e.. nothing)

But David and I have irreconcilable differences on faith and history so..I don't expect him to agree here either.

Grim “So long as we are all in the market for cheap clothing, countries that do not have strong laws against child labour will continue to supply that market.”

The Nixon “China initiative” demonstrates, the path to fair trade agreements is through basic “agreements”, trade and otherwise. From discussions can come forth greater discussion, from exclusion comes only exclusion.

I feel, to your expectation of ‘fair trade agreements’, the words ‘walk before your run’ could be applied.

Further, I ask again, through a withdraw of trade, do you feel you improve the condition of the serfs or exasperate them?

The reality is, the only way any nation improve the lot for its population is through adoption of democratic processes. Without a political process which is constituted on democratic principles, the lot of the serfs will remain the same.

Address the political system (eg Zimbabwe, which has gone backward, along with a lot of the rest of Africa) first and the ‘trade issues’ will follow.

“Keating famously called for a 'level playing field'? –

he did not, Hawke did.

Hawke also said no Australian child will live in poverty.

He lied about that too.

David F I was observing recorded history, I am not bothered by the exactness as it might apply to Christianity other than to say, every faith and religion has its extremists, including the atheists (Lenin & co as an example) and the Jews, as well as the Christians and Muslims.

My view is the responsibility is to other practitioners of every faith to recognize the extremists and demonstrably distance oneself from them.

What every extremist claims and use to justify their extremism is founded in intolerance

and “Evil”, the topic of the thread, feeds on intolerance.

Dear Polycarp,

What NT texts justified the evils done by Christianity? From Bishop Spong’s site:

http://www.johnshelbyspong.com/bishopspongon_theTerribleTexts.aspx

RELIGIOUS BIGOTRY: "No one comes to the Father but by me" (John 14:6) This text has helped to create a world where adherents of one religion feel compelled to kill adherents of another. A veritable renaissance of religious terror now confronts us and is making against us the claims we have long made against religious traditions different from our own.

ANTI-SEMITISM: And the people answered, 'His blood be on us and on our children'" (Matt. 27:25) No other verse of Holy Scripture has been responsible for so much violence and so much bloodshed. People convinced that these words conferred legitimacy and even holiness on their hostility have killed millions of Jewish people over history. Far more than Christians today seem to understand, to call the Bible "Word of God" in any sense is to legitimize this hatred reflected in its pages.

SEXISM: For man was not made from woman, but woman from man. Neither was man created for woman, but woman for man." (1Cor. 8-9)The message of the Christian church was once that women are evil to their core and it was built on the story of Eve. She was taken out of man and was not his equal, but his helpmeet. Evil entered human history through the weakness of the woman. She was made to bear the blame and the guilt. She was the source of death.

david f,

Regarding the association of Nazis with the Church -

http://nobeliefs.com/mementoes.htm

Hitler, like too many before him and too many since, used religion to feed his desire for power. The religion in this case was unequivocally Christian. Those who deny this truth are not doing Christianity any favours by so doing, nor are they learning from the horrors of the past.

For this reason, religion is still being used to commit further horrors. Denial is a blindfold over acceptance and progress to enlightenment.

Polycarp wrote:

This is a fulfilment of Jeremiah's prophecy

33 "This is the covenant I will make with the house of Israel
after that time," declares the LORD.
"I will put my law in their minds
and write it on their hearts."

Failure to understand this is also the reason David F goes wrong when he condemns 'Christianity' for ugly world events. He simply does not understand "Christ-ianity". (nor his own Torah by the looks of it)

Dear Polycarp,

I have not gone wrong. I just don’t have a Christian viewpoint.

Jeremiah is not in the Torah. The Jewish Bible consists of Torah, Prophets and Writings. The Five Books of Moses are the Torah. Jeremiah is in Prophets.

I condemn Christianity for ugly things that it has done because what you do is important not what you believe. In Judaism if you don’t believe but behave righteously you are a righteous person. If you believe but do not behave righteously you are not righteous.

Even the NT says, “By thy fruits shall thee know them.”

From a Christian viewpoint ugly world events may not be important. From a Jewish viewpoint they are what is important. They affect people, and people are important.

Jews do not believe one is saved or forgiven one’s sins because of what one believes. You must behave rightly. From a Christian viewpoint belief is important. From a Jewish viewpoint what one does is much more important.

As far as any messiah is concerned the messiah heralds a messianic age where ‘the lion shall lie down with the lamb’ and other prophesies are fulfilled. As I wrote before the messiah is a consequence of a myth that grew from Jews looking for a person to reunite the kingdoms of Israel and Judah.

I think the messiah is myth. However, if one does believe in it, it is obvious that the messiah has not come since the prophecies have not been fulfilled. Any messiah worth his salt should have sufficient competence to get it right the first time. A second coming indicates incompetence.

A good article and some intelligent responses. Mine is this - at this point in human history I believe we are ready to embrace the concept of the oneness of mankind; in fact without it, I believe, we cannot move forward. There may be an infinite variety of belief and "non-belief" systems,whether religious or secular, but there is no longer room for excluding any person or group of persons from membership in one common humanity - and all that that implies. This addresses the entire issue of in-group/out-group behaviours.

At the end of the day, legislation can go a long way to directing human behaviour. But at back, legislation itself derives from moral concepts. And these concepts are founded, historically, in revealed religion. Religion has stuffed up in major ways, I agree. At least human beings have stuffed it up. But let's not throw the baby out...

The concept of "progressive revelation" makes a good deal of sense regarding the similarities and differences in religions throughout the ages. It takes away the "I'm right and all the others are wrong" conundrum which has blighted the harmonious co-existence of revealed religions through time. It is a view elaborated in the writings of the Baha'i faith, and I believe, in the bid for one humanity living together harmoniously, is worth investigating.

Polycarp wrote:

You are blaming all Christians for the holocaust by saying it was "applied Christianity."

I don’t blame all Christians. I recognize the pattern of hatred for Jews by various Christian churches for most of the history of Christianity. The Holocaust conformed to a large part of Christian practice.

Not all Christians are guilty of this hatred. Some of my information regarding Christian behaviour comes from Christians who have examined their own history.

Bishop Spong who I mentioned in my last post cited texts in the New Testament that promoted such hatred.

James Carroll, a Catholic, has written CONSTANTINE'S SWORD which is subtitled The Church and the Jews: A History. He thinks the relationship with the Jews is the central issue in the history of the church. Carroll reflected on the meaning of the cross at Auschwitz. It ignored the fact that most of the victims were Jews. He also had a long reflection titled Christianity's Original Sin which seems to be its treatment of the Jews.

Andrew Sullivan, another Catholic, wrote a review of the book that ends "But it is only by excavating that rubble, by disinterring and facing that destruction, that we can regain a faith that still lives -- and repent, as if repentance were sufficient, for the evil done in its name."

Polycarp wrote:

“In order for something to be "applied" it must be clearly defined.
You would need to support your assertion from the teaching and example of Jesus of Nazareth.”
Try to get out of your Christian box. When 9/11 happened did you think, “What in the teaching and example of Mohammed justified this?” I’ll bet you didn’t. What Christians do affects others. What Jesus supposedly said is another matter. What Jesus, Mohammed and Buddha said is important to Christians, Muslims and Buddhists. What Christians, Muslims and Buddhists do is important to those affected by their acts.
I ask you to learn more about the history of your religion and how it has affected others. To the others what Jesus said really doesn’t matter. They are affected by what Christians have done.

Fractelle is quite correct...

<<Hitler, like too many before him and too many since, used religion to feed his desire for power.>>

Bingo! exactly.. and I don't have any argument with that statement at all. It is historically correct. What I DO question, is Hitlers own motivation, and.. his misinterpretation of certain key texts which he used to support his cause.

Anyone can use a 1+1=3 logic and if people want to believe that enough, they will.
1 "Jesus chased 'the Jews' out of the Temple"
+
1 "We must do the same"
=3

Hitler forgot to mention that
a) Jesus was a Jew.
b) He loved, healed and reached out to the vast majority of Jews.

David F refers to "Bishop" Spong :) gooooood grief.. one simply needs to compare the teaching of Spong with the Bible on many issues to see how far astray the man is.
Spong simply looks around and asks "Hmmm what is the current state of humanity? aah.. like this and that and such and such.. lets now re-make Christianity in humanities image"

David further says:

<I condemn Christianity for ugly things that it has done because what you do is important not what you believe.>

I suggest that behavior follows belief. If you believe Jews are sub human why would you worry if a few million 'rodents' are killed?
But on the other hand, if you believe that Jews are created in the image of God just like everyone else.. and toward whom the hand of Grace and divine love is unendingly extended....then you would be very concerned if any of them are murdered.

When David juxtaposes 'behavior/belief' he would be well advised to read the Book of James the brother of Jesus where he will find strong support..

James2:18 But someone will say, "You have faith; I have deeds."
Show me your faith without deeds, and I will show you my faith by what I do"

Polycarp wrote:

“But on the other hand, if you believe that Jews are created in the image of God just like everyone else.. and toward whom the hand of Grace and divine love is unendingly extended....then you would be very concerned if any of them are murdered.”

If that is true why have Christians promoted hate for Jews and murdered so many?

Why did the German Lutheran church and the German Catholic church support Hitler? Why did Christians in the occupied countries notably Ukraine and France support the Nazi extermination? Why did Christian countries outside refuse refuge to most Jews fleeing the Nazis?

Why did the Christian Inquisition burn Jews at the stake?

We can look further back in history. The Christian German Crusaders in 1096 massacred Jews in Speyer, Worms, Metz, Trier, Eller, Neuss, Xanten, Cologne, Wevelingshofen, Prague and Ratisbon.

The Holocaust remains applied Christianity.

Go to http://www.ushmm.org/research/center/church/persecution/ to read about Christian persecution of Jews over the centuries.

From the article:

In the second century and beyond, many of the principal Fathers of the Church began to write of Jews as a "rejected people" who were doomed to a life of marginality and misery. Jews were to wander the world as a "despised people." This image persisted in Christian preaching, art and popular teaching for centuries to come. In certain countries it often led to civil and political discrimination against Jews and in some instances to physical attacks on Jews which resulted in death. While some Popes, bishops and Christian princes stepped up to protect Jews, they were clearly a minority. It was only in the mid-twentieth century that the Catholic Church and many Protestant denominations issued major statements repudiating this anti-Judaic theology and began a process of constructive Christian-Jewish interaction.

….

Scripture scholar and theologian Gerard Sloyan has detailed in chronological fashion the "shadow" on the cross of Christianity. It does not make for pleasant reading. But it is a legacy that must be confronted with honesty and remorse. Knowledge of this history of antisemitism within the Christian churches is indispensable for any full understanding of the Holocaust.

Polycarp wrote:

“… if you believe that Jews are created in the image of God just like everyone else …”

Christian Jew hatred pictured Jews not in the image of God but as the devil. From “The Devil and the Jews: The Medieval Conception of the Jew and Its Relation to Modern Anti-Semitism”

“Talk of the devil and his horns appear, says the proverb. In an age so familiar with Satan’s least feature as the medieval, the portrayer of the horned Jew need not have felt called upon to make his allusion more specific—yet an occasional hyperliteralist, not content with sketching the horned Jew alone, scratches a devil alongside him, for good measure. And in one instance at least, that horned Jew is identified with the legend, in bold face, “This is the Jew Devil.”
Nor were his horns the Jew’s sole physical token of his satanism. The devil’s tail is as characteristic as his horns, and consequently only the least stretch of the imagination was required to perceive the Jew’s diabolic dorsal appendage, even though he managed cunningly to hide it from common view. And in the event we find it difficult to believe that these notions were accepted in all seriousness, it must be pointed out that such beliefs are still prevalent, not only among benighted European peasantries but even in our own enlightened land.
A supposedly characteristic feature of the Jewish physiognomy, which is constantly stressed in the prints and particularly in the folk tales, is the so-called Ziegenbart (goat’s beard, or goatee). This otherwise obscure detail assumes meaning when we consider it in conjunction with the common representation of the Jew in association with the he-goat, either as his favorite domestic animal or as his favorite mount (which he prefers to ride facing backward, to judge from the prints). Or the goat is offered as the symbol of Judaism and the Jewish God.”
Christians traditionally did not think of the Jew in the image of God. This tradition continued in the applied Christianity of the Holocaust.

Davidf: "Christians traditionally did not think of the Jew in the image of God. This tradition continued in the applied Christianity of the Holocaust."

Exactly. Without this inherent hatred of the Jew as a part of fundamental Christianity, Hitler would've had stood alone.

http://www.calvin.edu/academic/cas/gpa/images/sturmer/dsrm34.jpg

>>> This is the cover to the most infamous issue of Der Stürmer, the 1934 issue accusing Jews of practicing ritual murder to secure the blood of Christians to use in Jewish religious rituals. The headline reads: Jewish Murder Plan against Gentile Humanity Revealed. The issue actually got banned by the Nazis after it had been out for a while, not because of anti-Semitic content, but because it compared alleged Jewish ritual murder with the Christian sacrament of communion. A full English translation of the issue was published in the United States in 1976 by a group in the "Christian Identity" tradition.

Special Issue: May 1934 <<<

Polycarp wrote:

“When David juxtaposes 'behavior/belief' he would be well advised to read the Book of James the brother of Jesus where he will find strong support.”

You would be well advised to read James Joyce’s ‘Ulysses’. It’s an accurate portrayal of Dublin on June 16, 1904 as opposed to the New Testament that is a highly unreliable narrative of the Middle East 2,000 years ago.

I really don’t think I would be well advised to read the New Testament. Books of mythology are entertaining. We can read about Zeus impregnating Leda in the form of a swan or Mary being impregnated by the Holy Spirit. We can read about Orpheus visiting the underworld or Jesus raising Lazarus from the dead.

In Greek mythology, there is the legend of the cornucopia. The original depictions were of the goat's horn filled with fruits and flowers: deities, especially Fortuna, would be depicted with the horn of plenty. The cornucopia was also a symbol for a woman's fertility.

The New Testament version of the cornucopia states that Jesus fed 5000 not counting women and children from an original 5 loaves and 2 fish, implying that Jesus miraculously created more food. The Gospels also state that after the meal was over, the disciples collected the scraps, filling 12 baskets.

I have enjoyed reading Greek, Norse, Biblical and other mythology. There are many books of fantasy such as “Lord of the Rings”, “Harry Potter” and the Bible. They are entertaining and may even contain useful insights. However, they should not be confused with reality.

I will be 83 years old. I still read both fiction and non-fiction. However, I no longer enjoy reading mythology, fantasy or science fiction even if it is biblical material.

Polycarp wrote:

“Spong simply looks around and asks "Hmmm what is the current state of humanity? aah.. like this and that and such and such.. lets now re-make Christianity in humanities image"”

That is what is good about Spong. He recognizes the evil in the Bible and Christianity. Christianity needs humanity to throw off the tradition of the Inquisition and anti-Semitism.

Evil is a concept, not a reality. Nothing is of itself evil. It's when man makes a judgement that something becomes good or evil.

Evil is hiding behind a false religion with a fake God. My judgement.

Original sin, give me a break TuTu. Sin is another concept used to scare and punish people with whom one doesn't agree. Not an announcement from above.

Sheesh, when are people going to outgrow their invisible buddy? Most kids do. Why don't adults have the same capacity to learn?

I would hope that such learned persons wld also look out at what is occuring in the world today and not only argue about what has passed, not that that also is not important.

I was enjoying reading some of *DavidF's* comments, though I like to think that the 2nd coming refers to the Spiritual interconnect that exists between us all and the potential to evolve and not stultify.

*Coogee Bear* taught in our history class that 1 of the lessons of WWII was the recognition of the inherent risk in "putting yr black boot on the neck of a people too hard and too long," in that a *Monster* is very often the result.

Is there anything for us to learn in this from Iraq? Other places too come to mind.

I think we need massive "displaced" people way stations, places where we can quickly attend "shattered" folk, be it as a result of conflict, global warming or otherwise. A place where we can show case our latest tech, business strategies, philosophies etc rehabilitate and send back out.

Sooner I would bring all those who are sick of the tired old arguments and warfare here temporarily for a breather.

Re Iran, not that I am an expert, but I doubt seriously that he intends to destroy the Holy sites. And does anyone seriously believe he would risk bombing any of the many Muslims in that place? Rather to me, he is just talking sh!t to give those who are downtrodden and terribly oppressed a spike, for want of a better term, and saying no, we will not relinquish our rights, we will not give away that which is also ours and we will not bow to your way of being simply because u tell us too.

Double standards .. for verily when dealing with those who believe in an eye for an eye, why is it a surprise that some say, "if u point a nuke wocket at me, I'll point a nuke wocket at u."

Why not let that Jewish poppet out of the monkey house? The one who knows about secret nuke bizness in militant israeli central. I would have given him asylum here. It seems some Jews too also are dissatisfied with the present prevailing "conventional wisdom."

What did he name such weapons? .. HOLOCAUST devices .. indeed none of us wld profit much from nuclear winter would we?

Alas, how the abused become the abusers? We need some shrinks from the media to talk about some of the banal behaviour common to us all.

...Adam...

DreamOn wrote:

"*Coogee Bear* taught in our history class that 1 of the lessons of WWII was the recognition of the inherent risk in "putting yr black boot on the neck of a people too hard and too long," in that a *Monster* is very often the result."

That has happened over and over again in history. The roots of apartheid South Africa grew out of the British concentration camps in the Boer War. Resurgent Germany and Italy grew out of the humiliation of their defeats at the hands of Napoleon and the Bourbons. Castro is a reaction to the US trying to make the Caribbean an American Lake. All the current Islamic states with the exception of Turkey were colonies of European powers. They are still angry at that.

I hope the US will start to work with other nations to rebuild the instruments of national cooperation like the International Criminal Court and the Law of the Sea that Dubya has torn down. Previous presidents including his father have helped build up these institutions. We need to break the cycle of revenge. Maybe Obama will do it.

Rudd said 'sorry' to the Aborigines. That helped. One can start by recognising a wrong.

Howard refused to recognise it and called it the black armband view of history. In the same way Polycarp refuses to recognise the wrongs carried out by Christianity and calls it 'vilification' when they are mentioned. Fortunately other Christians such as Bishop Spong are willing to admit what was done and go on from there.

Behind many monsters are many tragedies.