I am surprised that someone with such a good an understanding of history is not at least conversant in the importance of the ideas of monotheism, truth and the basis of understanding. I would think you know the importance of Jewish and Greek ideas in shaping Western thought. Having some standard for the basis of truth is the foundation of knowledge. One can’t separate theology from other academic disciplines and is especially important in understanding history. Man’s desire to define what is true, to argue over it and even to fight over it is one important theme of history. I think you know what people defined as true and you know several definitions of truth including some Jewish and Greek definitions. Second, as an educated Westerner, even if you aren’t a Christian, you should know the importance of the Nicene Creed to Christianity and what it implies as far as the truth of the Bible. You should be able to apply the creed to the twenty-five points of National Socialism and see that the Nazis were not Christian. The Nicene council laid down what they thought was true and true for all times. They said their God always was and acted as the dispenser of truth and justice. It was and is the accepted definition of what is Christian and what is not. While the Nazis had some self described Christians among them, it is a central theme of Christianity to define Nazi ideas (and other ideas) as not Christian. No authority is needed to define Nazis as not Christian. A general college education will do. In fact, I’m sure you are more than conversant in these ideas. It’s my guess that you just don’t want to openly admit their importance. This common secular, nihilistic theme in modern historical thinking causes me to look at current historians as unreliable, as unreliable as the mainstream media who are more concerned about the implications of the story they tell than getting their facts straight.
The NAZIs were Christian in that they believed they were Christian. That they fell foul of some ancient definition doesn't stop them in their minds being christian. While it may be comforting to believe "real christians wouldn't do those things, so they weren't christians" in reality it's no different to muslims saying that it's against islam to bomb civilians, so suicide bombers aren't really muslims. But anyway, which of the 25 points (abbreviated for space) prove they weren't christians? 1. We demand the union of all Germans, on the basis of the right of the self-determination of peoples, to form a Great Germany. 2. We demand equality of rights for the German people in its dealings with other nations, and abolition of the peace treaties of Versailles and St. Germain. 3. We demand land and territory [colonies] for the nourishment of our people and for settling our surplus population. 4. None but members of the nation may be citizens of the State. None but those of German blood, whatever their creed, may be members of the nation. 5. Anyone who is not a citizen of the State may live in Germany only as a guest and must be regarded as being subject to the alien laws. 6. The right of voting on leadership and legislation is to be enjoyed by the citizens of the State alone. 7. We demand that the State shall make it its first duty to promote the industry and livelihood of the citizens of the State. 8. All further non-German immigration must be prevented. 9. All citizens of the State shall possess equal rights and duties. 10. It must be the first duty of every citizen of the State to perform mental or physical work. 11. We demand the abolition of incomes not earned by work. 12. In view of the enormous sacrifice of life and property demanded of a nation by every war, personal enrichment through war must be regarded as a crime against the nation. 13. We demand the nationalization of all jointly-owned concerns. 14. We demand that there shall be profit-sharing in the great industries. 15. We demand a generous development of provision for old age. 16. We demand the creation and maintenance of a healthy middle class, 17. We demand a land-reform suitable to our national requirements, the passing of a law for the confiscation without compensation of land for communal purposes, the abolition of interest on mortgages, and prohibition of all speculation in land. 18. We demand ruthless war upon all those whose activities are injurious to the common interest. 19. We demand that the Roman Law, which serves the materialistic world order, shall be replaced by a German common law. 20. With the aim of opening to every capable and industrious German the possibility of higher education and consequent advancement to leading positions, the State must consider a thorough reconstruction of our national system of education. 21. The State must apply itself to raising the standard of health in the nation by protecting mothers and infants, prohibiting child labour and increasing bodily efficiency by legally obligatory gymnastics and sports, and by extensive support of clubs engaged in the physical training of the young. 22. We demand the abolition of mercenary troops and the formation of a national army. 23. We demand legal warfare against conscious political lies and their dissemination in the press. 24. We demand liberty for all religious denominations in the State, so far as they are not a danger to it and do not militate against the morality and moral sense of the German race. The Party, as such, stands for positive Christianity, but does not bind itself in the matter of creed to any particular confession. 25. That all the foregoing requirements may be realized, we demand the creation of a strong central power of the Reich.
I actually think it's important to have some understanding of theology to understand history. I won't pretend to be an expert on it, but I'll look it up if I need to. If you write about a religious group it's important to know if, and why, they were considered heretics. I can say that Jan Hus was considered a heretic by the Roman Catholic Church (or that the (Nazi) German Christians were considered heretics by many other German Christians), but I can't say that Jan Hus was truly a heretic without basing my judgement on subjective believes (which isn't the same as, for example, saying that "according to Catholic dogma the condemntion was or was not justified"). As RichardL already pointed out: it's important to know if people believe they are Christian and justify their actions with Christian believes (e. g. in propaganda leaflets like "Jesus Christ - Mortal enemy of the Jews"). I don't "blame" Christianity for their actions and I'm certainly not going to claim that Christianity justified them. Too take a much less extreme example, as you mentioned the Nicene Creed - I don't want to decide if Unitarians are Christians either. Of course there are some categories you have to make, but generally I think it's important to know what people believe (and what other people think about those believes) and not to decide how rightful those believes are (which doesn't mean I can't completely reject them, of course). Although I lean towards secular philosophies, I don't consider myself to be a Nihilist at all . I can agree to the importance of ideas. I'd say you have every right to say that the Nazis' actions were by no means justifiable by Christianity and that no Christian could ever justify genocide for examples. The fact that I think that any religion (or philosophy/ideology) could be used to justify horrible things if you twist it enough doesn't mean that I think that every religion or philosophy is evil. Just that history shows that even the best believes or intentions don't prevent us from being horribly misguided if we aren't careful, as neither religious people or atheists are immune to fanaticism.
Well, I knew that it was a quote from "The Sound of Music", although I verified it by google first - but neither the movie nor the musical are particulary well known in Germany (to quote Wikipedia "Ironically, the US-made movie is virtually unknown in Germany and Austria"), so I have never seen it or even actually heard the song .
She wrote several books that have some very insightful points about immigrating to America plus the movie about her and her family was extremely popular.
Well, can't comment on that as I haven't been there either - for Germany I'd consider the comment to be pretty accurate, though .
The German movie about her was a huge success here - but West German mainstream movies of the 50s are horrible Kitsch, so I avoid watching those whenever I can .
Yep. "the author ... is estimated to be worth £8 million" "The divorce from his third wife Elizabeth West, to whom he was still married when he met Ms Lakshmi, is believed to have cost him more than £5 million." To quote Eddie Murphy, she wants "hef"! "My impression of her is that she's very photogenic, but in the flesh, she's not sexy. She's incredibly dull." But smart enough to marry a wealthy man!
It is frankly very disturbing that a foreign head of state/spiritual leader can encourage the murder of a British citizen for a piece of literature. Still followers of such an outdated ideology have a world view that is very much divorced from reality and a rational response is obviously beyond them. Only someone extremely insecure in his position would feel so threatened by a book. But then as all his power was derived from a fictional book he well understands how the perception of reality can be shaped from a work of literature. In essence, his argument was my Book is better than your Book. Salman Rushdie is an intellectual and an advocate of reform in Islam. Thus it is no surprise that fundamentalist Islamic demagogues wish to prevent his views and reasonings being heard. It is interesting that those who wish to censor his book are also the same who would be most outraged at attempts to block the Koran from being freely published. Hypocrisy in its purest form. Salman Rushdie was knighted for his contributions to literature. If this upsets anyone in other countries then who cares. The selections for British Honours in is not carried out by opinion poll of foreign nationals and nor should it be. It is an internal matter and other countries are free to honour whomever they deem worthy in whatever field they deem worthy of celebrating.
Perhaps the UK is in the process of finding out. Of course, the London & Glasgow carbombs could also be a welcoming gift to the new Scottish PM. Who knows for sure?
Those notable literary critics Al Quaeda OK yes that's right they will attack Britain if we knight Rushdie. Of course they will attack us if we don't knight Rushdie also! They do not dictate policy to us and never will. F@ck them and their threats.
Notice that it was Ayman al-Zawahiri, NOT bin Laden on the tape. I think bin Laden is dead. If he is just in bad shape physically, I could understand not putting him on a video, but this was only an audio tape.
If Zawahiri was an intelligent man he would have put forward Al-Qaeda's nomination for a literary based knighthood instead of just slating Rushdie. I wonder what Al-Qaeda would have voted for.........