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