AIG: if the Nazis ask you where Jews are hiding, you must tell them

[Radically Rethinking]

I'm sure some people here have seen this already, since I know I'm not the only one here who reads Pharyngula.

Someone from Answers in Genesis tells us that we must never ever tell a lie, and that includes a situation like, if you knew where a Jewish family was hiding and the Nazis demand you tell them where.

Consider this carefully. In the situation of a Nazi beating on the door, we have assumed a lie would save a life, but really we don't know. So, one would be opting to lie and disobey God without the certainty of saving a life--keeping in mind that all are ultimately condemned to die physically. Besides, whether one lied or not may not have stopped the Nazi solders from searching the house anyway.


Whole article is here (http://www.answersingenesis.org/articles/2009/11/13/feedback-righteous-lie) and I found it here (http://scienceblogs.com/pharyngula/2009/11/a_moral_conundrum_resolved_wit.php).

[Thunder]

lying to save a life is bad?

hmmm..

[shandyjan]

I'm with PZ when he says

snip> The 'crime' of telling a lie pales into insignificance against the crime of enabling the death of fellow human beings.

To not lie is to enable murder.
It is easy to say when you dont believe in christianity. I think this question is more for the religious to answer.
No one in this situation would be lieing to a god, but protecting a fellow man against brutality. I dont think it even counts as a lie but preservation.

[A.A. Alfie]

The actual commandment is
“You shall not bear false witness.."

One comment in the thread I read that was provided touched on this too.

The commandment does not imply that all lying is a sin at all. It says one should not tell lies about other people - eg, don't go blabbing that your neighbour is having an affair with the preachers wife when you know it isn't true. That is "false witness".
Telling the "Nazi's at your door" that you "don't know where the Jews are", is not.

[Roadtoad]

Wow. More moral absolutist drivel. I'm reminded of the pastor who declared that, yes, he'd lie, but he'd feel real guilty about it afterward.

Forgive me. I need to watch some porn to clear the stink of this from my brain. Yeah, kids, it's that bad.

[Thunder]

The Bible says that almost all religious obligations can be broken, in order to save a life.

[A.A. Alfie]

Wow. More moral absolutist drivel. I'm reminded of the pastor who declared that, yes, he'd lie, but he'd feel real guilty about it afterward.

Forgive me. I need to watch some porn to clear the stink of this from my brain. Yeah, kids, it's that bad.

Your argument is compelling and in the light of the facts you have provided I seriously have had to reconsider my viewpoint.
:rolleyes::boggled:

[~enigma~]

Wasn't jeebus a jew? Guess AIG just admitted jebbus is not necessary for christianity (retardation).

[Roadtoad]

Your argument is compelling and in the light of the facts you have provided I seriously have had to reconsider my viewpoint.
:rolleyes::boggled:

Smartass. :p

PZ Myers and others have made it clear: There's something wrong when a lie to save a life is somehow worse than telling the truth and allowing evil people to perpetuate their actions. It's utterly repugnant that saving a life is somehow less important than keeping your imaginary sky-daddy happy because you told the truth.

Oh, yes, innocent people died because of your actions, but, hey, they were only Jews, and we know what kind of people they are. Right?

[Piscivore]

Oh, yes, innocent people died because of your actions, but, hey, they were only Jews, and we know what kind of people they are. Right?

Indeed. One wonders what Our Mister Hodge's opinion would be if it were a Christian hiding from the Romans. :)

[tsig]

Smartass. :p

PZ Myers and others have made it clear: There's something wrong when a lie to save a life is somehow worse than telling the truth and allowing evil people to perpetuate their actions. It's utterly repugnant that saving a life is somehow less important than keeping your imaginary sky-daddy happy because you told the truth.

Oh, yes, innocent people died because of your actions, but, hey, they were only Jews, and we know what kind of people they are. Right?

I see you have not been taught by Jesuits.

The proper answer is that you reserve part of your statement.

There are no Jews here "to you"

You say the first out loud then reserve the words in quotes.

That at least was the answer in my seminary class.

[A.A. Alfie]

Smartass. :p

PZ Myers and others have made it clear: There's something wrong when a lie to save a life is somehow worse than telling the truth and allowing evil people to perpetuate their actions. It's utterly repugnant that saving a life is somehow less important than keeping your imaginary sky-daddy happy because you told the truth.

Oh, yes, innocent people died because of your actions, but, hey, they were only Jews, and we know what kind of people they are. Right?

Once again your argument is compelling.
Did you actually read what I wrote? Clealy not.

I am saying that lying to protect the people in the scenario given is perfectly OK. It is not breaching any commandment as they are not and would not be bearing false witness.

Me, a "Smartass"? Guilty - but only because I suffer fools poorly.

[Roadtoad]

You missed the smiley.

[A.A. Alfie]

You missed the smiley.

Sorry RT. I thought you were responding to my first post. If I've had crossed wires; my sincere apologies.
:cool:

[justcharlie09]

The Bible says that almost all religious obligations can be broken, in order to save a life.

What A.A.Alfie and parky76 said :D

I'll say this, I consider myself Christian (trust me, plenty of Christians I've met are bothered with this...so...I have no idea what I really must be then) and I'll say this: if it's a sin, I'd just make a mental note to apologize to God when I got there and/or consider it, at the very least, a really good reason for getting oneself tossed into hell.

Like the UU minister I ran into a while back said: "If there was such a god running the show and casting such judgements, it would be our moral duty to oppose him..." Pretty much my sentiment in a nutshell.

[roger]

Indeed. One wonders what Our Mister Hodge's opinion would be if it were a Christian hiding from the Romans. :)He says in his article that he hopes that he would do the same thing, but isn't sure he would be strong enough to do so.

[justcharlie09]

He says in his article that he hopes that he would do the same thing, but isn't sure he would be strong enough to do so.

Sorry, but is it fair to say "WTF"?

You know, clearly this man isn't married (or at least not happily). Can you imagine what the answer to the question "Does this make my butt look big to you?" might actually be?

ETA some guess: "Yes, dear. It is massive. You look like you're smuggling two elephants back there. Have you considered reducing your intake of donuts after the 'informal' service on Sunday?"

[fuelair]

lying to save a life is bad?

hmmm..

Sounds like a lot of xtian fundies - not to Godwin or anything. Can't say anything about Bodie to abide by certain of the rules of the forum here:mad::mad:!!

[fuelair]

Though my preference is for shooting/knifing or grenading the nazi's. That way I don't have to sin by lying.

[bluesjnr]

I don't think this is going to be much of a problem these days. If a Nazi turned up at my door demanding to know the whereabouts of "the Jews" I'd have to say.

"This is Scotland mate and it's 2009 - I think you're lost. Oh and I'd keep a low profile whilst travelling if I were you."

[justcharlie09]

People can say all they want about Godwin's Law, but those Nazis are going to be floating around the popular consciousness for quite a while... they're flare for the theatrical and costuming alone:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SO5WoLnOOlU

[Foster Zygote]

Consider this carefully. In the situation of a Nazi beating on the door, we have assumed a lie would save a life, but really we don't know. So, one would be opting to lie and disobey God without the certainty of saving a life--keeping in mind that all are ultimately condemned to die physically. Besides, whether one lied or not may not have stopped the Nazi solders from searching the house anyway.
Not only is this one of the most morally reprehensible things I've ever read, but it ignores the fact that the Bible does speak of people being rewarded for lying to protect others. In the second chapter of Joshua the prostitute Rahab openly lies about the whereabouts of the two Hebrew spies she is hiding. Her reward is that she and her household are spared when Joshua's army comes and murders every other man, woman and child in the city.

[a_unique_person]

As a former xian and now atheist, can I just say they got this part completely wrong.


If we love God, we should obey Him (John 14:15). To love God first means to obey Him first--before looking at our neighbor.


If you love god first, you would also love his creation, and lie to save it. There would be plenty of xians who would not follow the insane scripture storm that follows.

[six7s]

The Bible says that almost all religious obligations can be broken, in order to save a life.So?

As we all know, teh bible is like a person; torture it enough and you can get it to say anything

AiG whackos are (in)famous for cherry picking - and it ain't hard to find a passage that they can take out of context to support their despicable, sordid fantasies

For example:

Romans 13: 1 - 5 (http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Romans%2013:1-5&version=NIV)
Submission to the Authorities
1Everyone must submit himself to the governing authorities, for there is no authority except that which God has established. The authorities that exist have been established by God.

2Consequently, he who rebels against the authority is rebelling against what God has instituted, and those who do so will bring judgment on themselves.

3For rulers hold no terror for those who do right, but for those who do wrong. Do you want to be free from fear of the one in authority? Then do what is right and he will commend you.

4For he is God's servant to do you good. But if you do wrong, be afraid, for he does not bear the sword for nothing. He is God's servant, an agent of wrath to bring punishment on the wrongdoer.

5Therefore, it is necessary to submit to the authorities, not only because of possible punishment but also because of conscience.

[Eyeron]

Render unto Ceasar's that which is Ceasar's.

If we apply that line of reasoning here. then that means we must give up the Jew to the Nazi since the Jews belong to the Nazis even if they are the promised people.

[a_unique_person]

Nazis: Tell us the plans for the invasion!
Xian: I cannot tell a lie, this is exactly what they are.

[themusicteacher]

Which philosopher was it that tried to stake out some sort of reasoning for this exact same thing? Kant? Heidegger? I can't recall exactly but it was his (nonreligious) position that it is never okay to lie.

[NorfolkAtheist]

Disgusting.

However, this is a good illustration of the pitfalls of false dichotomies. Bodie Hodge's poor mind can apparently only conceive of lying to the Nazi's or aiding in their murdering of an entire Jewish family, but are those really his only options? Of course not. He could simply refuse to answer the Nazis. Unfortunately Mr. Hodge appears to be only able to conceive of two responses to any dilemma.

[Hux]

Let's just talk about the real world shall we? A guy sticks an MP40 up your nostril and tells you if you don't come clean, about another family, your entire family will be headshot.

I guess it would be time to discuss the moral implications.

[jadey]

Let's just talk about the real world shall we? A guy sticks an MP40 up your nostril and tells you if you don't come clean, about another family, your entire family will be headshot.

I guess it would be time to discuss the moral implications.

Presuming both families are innocent, that makes for a much more interesting discussion.

I guess you have to decide to either 1) live with remorse (for sacrificing the other family) or 2) die with remorse (for sacrificing your own). Not very good options in my opinion.:(

[bruto]

Which philosopher was it that tried to stake out some sort of reasoning for this exact same thing? Kant? Heidegger? I can't recall exactly but it was his (nonreligious) position that it is never okay to lie.That priggish old wanker Kant.

[blobru]

Which philosopher was it that tried to stake out some sort of reasoning for this exact same thing? Kant? Heidegger? I can't recall exactly but it was his (nonreligious) position that it is never okay to lie.

Kant under his Categorical_imperative#Deception.

I'm sure some people here have seen this already, since I know I'm not the only one here who reads Pharyngula.

Someone from Answers in Genesis tells us that we must never ever tell a lie, and that includes a situation like, if you knew where a Jewish family was hiding and the Nazis demand you tell them where. ---

Whole article is here (http://www.answersingenesis.org/articles/2009/11/13/feedback-righteous-lie) and I found it here (http://scienceblogs.com/pharyngula/2009/11/a_moral_conundrum_resolved_wit.php).

I often wonder if a Nazi soldier asked if someone was there hiding and they told the truth before God, could the Lord have in mind a greater purpose? Could God have used that person to free a great many people who ultimately died in the Holocaust? Or have done something to stop the war earlier? Or cause a great number of Jews and Nazi’s to come to know Christ?


So for Bodie, a greater purpose than protecting the lives of Jews hiding from Nazis is that turning them in might somehow cause many Jews and Nazis to convert to Christ?! :boggled:

{Note to self: if I ever go Jewish and there's a pogrom -- avoid Hodges' family attic!!}

[Fiona]

Let's just talk about the real world shall we? A guy sticks an MP40 up your nostril and tells you if you don't come clean, about another family, your entire family will be headshot.

I guess it would be time to discuss the moral implications.

"Love thy neighbour as thyself" come in here at all?

[Tricky]

Some bickering posts moved to AAH. Talk about the topic, not each other.

[six7s]

Let's just talk about the real world shall we? A guy sticks an MP40 up your nostril and tells you if you don't come clean, about another family, your entire family will be headshot.

I guess it would be time to discuss the moral implications.:confused:

How does this scenario differ from the OP?

en.wikipedia.org Miep Gies (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Miep_Gies)
With her husband, and her colleagues, Victor Kugler, Johannes Kleiman, and Bep Voskuijl, Miep Gies helped hide Edith and Otto Frank, their daughters Margot and Anne Frank, Hermann and Auguste van Pels, their son Peter, and Fritz Pfeffer in the sealed-off back rooms of the company's office building on Amsterdam's Prinsengracht from July 1942 until 4 August 1944.

In theory, Miep and the other helpers could have been shot if they had been caught hiding Jews. In practice, however, those caught hiding Jews were more commonly sentenced to four to six months of hard labor.

[blobru]

"Love thy neighbour as thyself" come in here at all?


It does; however, Bodie is quick to point out that "Love God with all your heart, soul, mind, and strength" precedes it in Scripture; thus:

Jesus tells us that all the commandments can be summed up into these two statements. But of these two, the first is to love the LORD your God with all your heart, with all your soul, with all your mind, and with all your strength. So, this would trump the second. Our actions toward God should trump our actions toward men.


And one should turn the Jew over to the Nazi, ihhcco.

[Ron_Tomkins]

AIG: if the Nazis ask you where Jews are hiding, you must tell them

Yeah...
http://www.ordinary-gentlemen.com/wp-content/uploads/2009/09/landa.jpg

[Robin]

I should have thought the answer obvious - you don't need to lie, but instead you should follow the example of the one man righteous enough to be saved from destruction in Sodom and Gomorrah...

You should offer them your daughters as a bribe to go away.

[six7s]

Although the following quote is somewhat clichéd, it is - I think - apt

First they came for the Communists but I was not a Communist so I did not speak out. Then they came for the Socialists and the Trade Unionists but I was not one of them, so I did not speak out. Then they came for the Jews but I was not Jewish so I did not speak out. And when they came for me, there was no one left to speak out for me.
Martin Niemoeller

[pgwenthold]

Not only is this one of the most morally reprehensible things I've ever read,

I agree with FZ that it is morally disgusting. Basically, the argument is that if you don't know 100% for sure that the person will be killed, then you won't be an accessory.

I can't fathom the thought.

If it's a question of lie or just a 10% chance of murder, that isn't even close.

Then again, I am just an immoral atheist.

[quixotecoyote]

If it's a question of lie or just a 10% chance of murder, that isn't even close.


That's not any chance I'd like to take myself.

[~enigma~]

I am just an immoral atheist.
Funny. I have heard some christians (in this case retards) argue that any action god does is good. Strange thing is if his/hers/its actions are always good they can be neither moral or immoral so god is amoral. In this case I'd much rather be immoral.

[A.A. Alfie]

Funny. I have heard some christians (in this case retards) argue that any action god does is good. Strange thing is if his/hers/its actions are always good they can be neither moral or immoral so god is amoral. In this case I'd much rather be immoral.

Just curious, which branch of Christianity is that? Sounds more like a Moslom-type teaching of "Gods will" than anything else.

[six7s]

Funny. I have heard some christians (in this case retards) argue that any action god does is good.Just curious, which branch of Christianity is that? Sounds more like a Moslom-type teaching of "Gods will" than anything else.The christian god - the exact same entity as the islamic allah - is eternal, omnipotent, omnipresent, omniscient and - depending on the sect - omnibenevolent

Even without the omnibenevolence, it seems absurd to suggest that mainstream (head-in-the-sand) christians think believe acknowledge that their god is anything less than 'good', let alone evil...

Yeah... I know... the whole shebang is absurd... but hey-ho... don't blame me... its not like I made up all that crap about smiting

[~enigma~]

Just curious, which branch of Christianity is that? Sounds more like a Moslom-type teaching of "Gods will" than anything else.
Don't know if it is a branch, it was a fundamentalist.

[RandFan]

We'll, let's be pragmatic. The do have vays of making you talk.

[RandFan]

Just curious, which branch of Christianity is that? Sounds more like a Moslom-type teaching of "Gods will" than anything else.Ask Hamelekim (see my sig). And no, it's not exclusive to Muslims at all. But how could you reconcile the attrocity in the Bible? If god killed children in the flood it must have been ok. Killing the first born of Egypt?

See God Is Not Good.

GnV671S6uG0

I left Christianity because I could not reconcile morality and the Bible. It requires mental gymnastics just to keep the dissonance to a dim roar. Now, there are Christians who gloss over or dismiss the parts they find distasteful. That's fine I suppose. But let's be clear. There are many Christians who do believe that it's moral for god to drown infants as he did in the flood.

[justcharlie09]

Ask Hamelekim (see my sig). And no, it's not exclusive to Muslims at all. But how could you reconcile the attrocity in the Bible? If god killed children in the flood it must have been ok. Killing the first born of Egypt?

See God Is Not Good.

GnV671S6uG0

I left Christianity because I could not reconcile morality and the Bible. It requires mental gymnastics just to keep the dissonance to a dim roar. Now, there are Christians who gloss over or dismiss the parts they find distasteful. That's fine I suppose. But let's be clear. There are many Christians who do believe that it's moral for god to drown infants as he did in the flood.

Oh yeah, there are. Just be glad for the separation of church and state people. There are some wild-eyed nuts that would love to go Old Testament on us (just like there are fanatics who would eagerly accept Sharia law). :boggled:

[Thunder]

There are many Christians who do believe that it's moral for god to drown infants as he did in the flood.

it was for the greater good of mankind.

:)

[RandFan]

it was for the greater good of mankind.

:)I'm not sure how to take this. A winking smilie would have been better if you are just being sardonic.

[sphenisc]

Unfortunately Mr. Hodge appears to be only able to conceive of two responses to any dilemma.

Then he might be better at discussing etymology than moral philosophy.

[Lord Muck oGentry]

Someone from Answers in Genesis tells us that we must never ever tell a lie, and that includes a situation like, if you knew where a Jewish family was hiding and the Nazis demand you tell them where.

Clype.

[Darth Rotor]

Though my preference is for shooting/knifing or grenading the nazi's. That way I don't have to sin by lying.

This ^^^^

The problem with far too many self reinforcing forums is that out of the box thinking dies.

As it does here.

Fuelair, thanks for leaving the box, as ever. The linked discussion is also guilty of in the box hiding behavior.

The point, people, is that you are not obliged to be a victim.

DR

[Dr Adequate]

Indeed. One wonders what Our Mister Hodge's opinion would be if it were a Christian hiding from the Romans. He says in his article that he hopes that he would do the same thing, but isn't sure he would be strong enough to do so. Perhaps they could strengthen his virtuous resolve by offering him thirty pieces of silver.

[bruto]

This ^^^^

The problem with far too many self reinforcing forums is that out of the box thinking dies.

As it does here.

Fuelair, thanks for leaving the box, as ever. The linked discussion is also guilty of in the box hiding behavior.

The point, people, is that you are not obliged to be a victim.

DRTrue enough, and one could easily go along with the idea that lying is to be avoided if at all possible, but the absolutist position is that it must be avoided at all costs, which I think presupposes, like the classic "sophie's choice" style dilemmas often foisted on philosophy 101 students and the like, that if the choice is that you sin or the other person sins, you should put the onus on the other, whatever the outcome.

So let's say we have this hypothetical situation. You're unarmed, powerless, and machine-gun toting Nazis crash into your apartment. You know that there is an ambush awaiting them if you can get them to go there. They ask "Where are the Jews hiding?" If you say where they really are, the Jews die, the Nazis walk. If you say you don't know, resist, or otherwise fail to present a reasonable sounding answer, you die, and the Nazis repeat the process on someone else until they either get ambushed or find the Jews and kill them. Or if you lie convincingly enough to seem to be on the Nazis' side, you steer them to the ambush. You live, the Jews live, the Nazis die. But according to certain priggish wankersKant, it seems, you'll go to hell for that.

[Dr Adequate]

It does; however, Bodie is quick to point out that "Love God with all your heart, soul, mind, and strength" precedes it in Scripture; thus:

Jesus tells us that all the commandments can be summed up into these two statements. But of these two, the first is to love the LORD your God with all your heart, with all your soul, with all your mind, and with all your strength. So, this would trump the second. Hmm ...

If a man say, I love God, and hateth his brother, he is a liar: for he that loveth not his brother whom he hath seen, how can he love God whom he hath not seen?

[Malerin]

Ask Hamelekim (see my sig). And no, it's not exclusive to Muslims at all. But how could you reconcile the attrocity in the Bible? If god killed children in the flood it must have been ok. Killing the first born of Egypt?

See God Is Not Good.

GnV671S6uG0

I left Christianity because I could not reconcile morality and the Bible. It requires mental gymnastics just to keep the dissonance to a dim roar. Now, there are Christians who gloss over or dismiss the parts they find distasteful. That's fine I suppose. But let's be clear. There are many Christians who do believe that it's moral for god to drown infants as he did in the flood.

But if you're Christian, you believe in Heaven, so God drowning kids in a flood takes on a whole new meaning. Maude Flanders said it best when she almost died: "It was terrible, Neddy! I almost experienced eternal bliss!".

According to the Bible, did the kids who drowned in the flood go to Heaven?

[Malerin]

This ^^^^

The problem with far too many self reinforcing forums is that out of the box thinking dies.

As it does here.

Fuelair, thanks for leaving the box, as ever. The linked discussion is also guilty of in the box hiding behavior.

The point, people, is that you are not obliged to be a victim.

DR

Actually, you are:

Mt 5:44 But I say to you, Love your enemies and pray for those who persecute you.

[Roadtoad]

Sorry RT. I thought you were responding to my first post. If I've had crossed wires; my sincere apologies.
:cool:

Never, ever apologize for refusing to suffer fools. We have enough of them, thank you.

[Roadtoad]

Sorry, but is it fair to say "WTF"?

You know, clearly this man isn't married (or at least not happily). Can you imagine what the answer to the question "Does this make my butt look big to you?" might actually be?

ETA some guess: "Yes, dear. It is massive. You look like you're smuggling two elephants back there. Have you considered reducing your intake of donuts after the 'informal' service on Sunday?"

One can only hope. Perhaps after his broken jaw heals, he might wise up.

Then again, not likely.

[Roadtoad]

Perhaps the most offensive thing about this nonsense from AiG is that it becomes a smear of serious Christians I've met over the years.

One of the most interesting among them was none other than Brother Andrew, the man who wrote God's Smuggler. Few people realize that his organization, Open Doors, is every bit as much a human rights group as it is a an evangelical one. Considering that his brother was hauled off by the Nazis because he was "useless," it would stand to reason that Brother Andrew would object to those who would adopt such a cowardly stance, then try to label it "righteous in the eyes of God."

I spent about an hour talking with the man, and gained quite a few insights into his way of thinking, not the least of which was coming to see that good human rights policy is good evangelism. It was his view that you must uphold civil liberties in order to accomplish the greater goal of winning people to Christ. (I suspect we'd be at loggerheads over Gay Rights, but let's take it a step at a time, shall we?)

Considering further the moral deviancy that the AiG article justifies, I can't help but wonder if the author thinks someone like Deitrich Bonhoeffer is now rotting in the Netherworld. After all, his actions were outright treasonous to the Third Reich, so much so that he was slowly hung for his deeds. Were the Nazis justified in doing this, given that Bonhoeffer was out to save the lives of Christians, Jews, Communists, Labor Union members, the Infirm, the Gypsies, in direct violation of the stated Nazi goal of wiping out these "undesirables," since the innocent Christians would have wound up in Heaven and the others would have found themselves in a Hell the author clearly believes they would have deserved? Was God's plan being upheld by the likes of Adolf Eichmann, as he shipped off boxcar loads of Jews to be gassed in Auschwitz and Buchenwald?

Sorry, but this whole business just becomes more and more an exercise in intellectual contortionism, destined only to frustrate, even as it infuriates.

[Malerin]

The actual commandment is
“You shall not bear false witness.."

One comment in the thread I read that was provided touched on this too.

The commandment does not imply that all lying is a sin at all. It says one should not tell lies about other people - eg, don't go blabbing that your neighbour is having an affair with the preachers wife when you know it isn't true. That is "false witness".
Telling the "Nazi's at your door" that you "don't know where the Jews are", is not.

Leviticus 19:11 Ye shall not steal, neither deal falsely, neither lie one to another.

Psalm 120:2 Save me, O LORD, from lying lips and from deceitful tongues.

Proverbs 19:9 A false witness will not go unpunished, And he who tells lies will perish.

[Fiona]

So the only moral disciple was Judas? That seems curious to me, but .....

[six7s]

So the only moral disciple was Judas? I doubt that
lorem ipsum

[A.A. Alfie]

Leviticus 19:11 Ye shall not steal, neither deal falsely, neither lie one to another.
Correct, however God was speaking to Moses about lying to one another. i.e. within their 'tribe'.



Psalm 120:2 Save me, O LORD, from lying lips and from deceitful tongues.

And finishes with:
Psalms 120.7.
"I am for peace:but when I speak, they are for war".

Clearly he is talking about others lying to raise war.



Proverbs 19:9 A false witness will not go unpunished, And he who tells lies will perish.

But opens with..

"Proverbs 19.1
Better is the poor that walketh in his integrity, than he that is perverse in his lips, and is a fool"

[Dr Adequate]

So the only moral disciple was Judas? Whereas Peter will have gone straight to Hell.

Which will be awkward, since as he holds the keys to Heaven no-one will be able to get in.

[pakeha]

Yeah...
http://www.ordinary-gentlemen.com/wp-content/uploads/2009/09/landa.jpg

I WAS going to say it seemed to me mr Hodge had been deeply, deeply affected by the opening scene of Tarantino's latest film, but why bother after Ron_Tomkins expressed the same thing so much better.

[Rasmus]

Anyone who even considers to consult any book on the matter is declaring their moral bankruptcy to begin with.

What does it matter what this or that part of the bible has to say on lying? What about those allegedly good Christian that manage to read their book in a way that so happens to allow them to save the Jews? they need an ****** book to justify what they do? They need any justification for anyone? What would they do or say if there wasn't any justification in the book?

They'd be no better than those who told the truth and betrayed the Jews for saving them. They just accidentially happen to interpret the book slightly differently.

[Brian-M]

Even if lying to the Nazis is a sin... isn't Jesus supposed to have died to forgive you (in advance) for your sins? (Indirectly condoning any sin you might choose to commit. ;) )

Ask Hamelekim (see my sig).

I'm glad to see I'm not the only one to think one of Hamelekim's statements to be sig-worthy. (Although, in my case it was the unintended overwhelming irony of the statement that got my attention.)

[Malerin]

Correct, however God was speaking to Moses about lying to one another. i.e. within their 'tribe'.



So it's OK to lie "outside the tribe"?

And finishes with:
Psalms 120.7.
"I am for peace:but when I speak, they are for war".

In its entirety:

1 I call on the LORD in my distress,
and he answers me.
2 Save me, O LORD, from lying lips
and from deceitful tongues.

3 What will he do to you,
and what more besides, O deceitful tongue?

4 He will punish you with a warrior's sharp arrows,
with burning coals of the broom tree.

5 Woe to me that I dwell in Meshech,
that I live among the tents of Kedar!

6 Too long have I lived
among those who hate peace.

7 I am a man of peace;
but when I speak, they are for war

I don't see that as being specifically about war.


But opens with..

"Proverbs 19.1
Better is the poor that walketh in his integrity, than he that is perverse in his lips, and is a fool"

I don't see your point. How does that negate:

5 A false witness will not go unpunished,
and he who pours out lies will not go free

9 A false witness will not go unpunished,
and he who pours out lies will perish.

22 What a man desires is unfailing love;
better to be poor than a liar.

Which are all from Proverbs 19.

Colossians 3
Rules for Holy Living
1Since, then, you have been raised with Christ, set your hearts on things above, where Christ is seated at the right hand of God. 2Set your minds on things above, not on earthly things. 3For you died, and your life is now hidden with Christ in God. 4When Christ, who is your[a] life, appears, then you also will appear with him in glory.
5Put to death, therefore, whatever belongs to your earthly nature: sexual immorality, impurity, lust, evil desires and greed, which is idolatry. 6Because of these, the wrath of God is coming. 7You used to walk in these ways, in the life you once lived. 8But now you must rid yourselves of all such things as these: anger, rage, malice, slander, and filthy language from your lips. 9Do [B]not lie to each other, since you have taken off your old self with its practices 10and have put on the new self, which is being renewed in knowledge in the image of its Creator. 11Here there is no Greek or Jew, circumcised or uncircumcised, barbarian, Scythian, slave or free, but Christ is all, and is in all.

I don't see much in the way of "situational ethics" here. Can you find any passage that is the equivalent of Do not lie...unless you can prevent XYZ from happening?

[A.A. Alfie]

So it's OK to lie "outside the tribe"?

What's your interpretation? I just wanted to put your citation into context.



In its entirety:
1 I call on the LORD in my distress,
and he answers me.
2 Save me, O LORD, from lying lips
and from deceitful tongues.
3 What will he do to you,
and what more besides, O deceitful tongue?
4 He will punish you with a warrior's sharp arrows,
with burning coals of the broom tree.
5 Woe to me that I dwell in Meshech,
that I live among the tents of Kedar!
6 Too long have I lived
among those who hate peace.
7 I am a man of peace;
but when I speak, they are for war

I don't see that as being specifically about war.

Then I have no understanding of what the words "peace" and "war" are about. Perhaps our interpretations are different.




I don't see your point. How does that negate:

5 A false witness will not go unpunished,
and he who pours out lies will not go free
9 A false witness will not go unpunished,
and he who pours out lies will perish.
22 What a man desires is unfailing love;
better to be poor than a liar.

I don't see much in the way of "situational ethics" here. Can you find any passage that is the equivalent of Do not lie...unless you can prevent XYZ from happening?

And a fair point too. No I can't find anything that says "unless...".
What I am trying to show is that there is 'wriggle room' for the reasonably minded individual.

"Better is the poor that walketh in his integrity, than he that is perverse in his lips, and is a fool"

My take on this one is (simply): it is better to stand by honest and reasonable principles (whilst lying perhaps) than to slander recklessly.

[blobru]

It does; however, Bodie is quick to point out that "Love God with all your heart, soul, mind, and strength" precedes it in Scripture; thus:

Jesus tells us that all the commandments can be summed up into these two statements. But of these two, the first is to love the LORD your God with all your heart, with all your soul, with all your mind, and with all your strength. So, this would trump the second. Hmm ...

If a man say, I love God, and hateth his brother, he is a liar: for he that loveth not his brother whom he hath seen, how can he love God whom he hath not seen?

MAJOR!!!GOSPelWNAGE!!! :halo: John v Mark :melting

So the only moral disciple was Judas? That seems curious to me, but .....

Sounds awful close to the Gospel of Judas there (Bodie a latent gnostic?) :eye-poppi

[uruk]

I'm sure some people here have seen this already, since I know I'm not the only one here who reads Pharyngula.

Someone from Answers in Genesis tells us that we must never ever tell a lie, and that includes a situation like, if you knew where a Jewish family was hiding and the Nazis demand you tell them where.




Whole article is here (http://www.answersingenesis.org/articles/2009/11/13/feedback-righteous-lie) and I found it here (http://scienceblogs.com/pharyngula/2009/11/a_moral_conundrum_resolved_wit.php).

God is supposedly a forgiving god, so I would lie and then ask for forgiveness. Not so much for the lie but If I was interfereing with his plan. His plan may have included the death of the people hiding from the NAZIs.

The Judeo/Christian/Islamic god appears to also be a particularly smitefull god.

[Beerina]

There are many Christians who do believe that it's moral for god to drown infants as he did in the flood.

it was for the greater good of mankind.

:)

That's sort of a moral conceit of modern theology. Part of the point of Job was that god was not bound even by his own rules of ethics. That would be a limit to god, and god is without limits.

In any case, even assuming every mother was evil, and that they were of a level of evil that drowning (and the horror and panic of knowing their child was drowning, too) were an appropriate punishment (:rolleyes:) the only moral way for God to do this would be to replace the babies with unconscious automatons just prior to drowning.

Here's the fun part: Said evil mothers could, in theory, figure that out, which would lessen their terror considerably. But it should scare all of us because then God is some kind of deceiver, who lets us merely think babies are dying horribly, when in fact they are not.


Either way, God "is a ass".

[Soapy Sam]

It's never OK to lie.

But sometimes it's OK not to be OK.

[Skeptic]

Wow. More moral absolutist drivel. I'm reminded of the pastor who declared that, yes, he'd lie, but he'd feel real guilty about it afterward.

Well, while hardly supporting AIG in particular, this view is hardly only theirs. It is precisely Kant's view, as well, just to name one.

[jadey]

It's never OK to lie.

But sometimes it's OK not to be OK.

I view morality as a set of behaviours intended to help ensure fairness in society. I'm not convinced that these behaviours are independent of the situation. Behaviours such as honesty, intend no harm, do not steal, etc seem pretty clear in a moral environment. When faced with an amoral dilemma, do these same behaviours apply to ensure fairness? I would say no. If we're certain that the Nazis intend to kill the Jews, I would say that being honest with the Nazis would be immoral.

[Ocelot]

A German Christian in wartime German is more than likely to be Catholic. Why then do we make the presumption that they would believe that handing Jews over the the authorities is a bad thing? Prior to Vatican II Anti Semitism was officially part of the Catechism of the Catholic Church. It was official that the Jews had been forsaken by God and that all Jews since the 1st century carried the responsibility for murdering Christ.

If this guy had somehow developed the idea that handing the accursed and forsaken folk over to the Nazi's was a bad idea for some reason then it wouldn't have been from the thousands of Priests, Bishops Archbishops and even Pope Pius XII who had the opportunity to speak out against the persecution of the Jews but resisted the international pressure to do so.

The idea that a Christian in wartime Germany should automatically have a problem with the persecution of the Jews suggests that the Nazi's who carried out these unspeakable acts were somehow praying to a different Christ.

[jadey]

A German Christian in wartime German is more than likely to be Catholic. Why then do we make the presumption that they would believe that handing Jews over the the authorities is a bad thing? Prior to Vatican II Anti Semitism was officially part of the Catechism of the Catholic Church. It was official that the Jews had been forsaken by God and that all Jews since the 1st century carried the responsibility for murdering Christ.

If this guy had somehow developed the idea that handing the accursed and forsaken folk over to the Nazi's was a bad idea for some reason then it wouldn't have been from the thousands of Priests, Bishops Archbishops and even Pope Pius XII who had the opportunity to speak out against the persecution of the Jews but resisted the international pressure to do so.

The idea that a Christian in wartime Germany should automatically have a problem with the persecution of the Jews suggests that the Nazi's who carried out these unspeakable acts were somehow praying to a different Christ.

I think morality and religion are separate, though I know many disagree. I think people are capable of determining moral behaviour without religion, though many turn to religion to determine it for them (typically revealed religion). You might say the first group chooses morality first, religion second (or not at all), and the second group chooses religion first, morality second. If you're in the first group, good for the Jews, if in the second, not so good.

[Soapy Sam]

I view morality as a set of behaviours intended to help ensure fairness in society. I'm not convinced that these behaviours are independent of the situation. Behaviours such as honesty, intend no harm, do not steal, etc seem pretty clear in a moral environment. When faced with an amoral dilemma, do these same behaviours apply to ensure fairness? I would say no. If we're certain that the Nazis intend to kill the Jews, I would say that being honest with the Nazis would be immoral.

I'm a moral relativist myself. The weakness in the relativist argument is that if there are no moral absolutes and all morality is contextual, where can we draw lines? If it is moral to obey the law and to take care of our children, am I morally wrong to risk incurring the wrath of the government to protect a bunch of strangers I may not like , know, or share cultural values or genes with?

By lying to the SS, you would be stating that a higher morality existed which made lying to the government OK. But if the government is corrupt, is it also morally correct to lie on your tax return, as otherwise you are supporting the regime? Once you accept that you no longer owe X the truth, do you owe X anything?

Is morality involved here at all? I protect a puppy because it feels good to do so. Maybe lying to the SS felt good too?

ETA- Just heard a (UK) gov. ad on radio advertising the fact that employing an illegal immigrant is punishable by a £10,000 fine. Yet surely giving a job to a man who simply wants to feed his family is a moral act?
How corrupt must government be before it becomes morally acceptable - even mandatory- to tell them to piss off?

[Fiona]

A German Christian in wartime German is more than likely to be Catholic.

How so? Of christian germans before WW2 2/3 were protestant.


Why then do we make the presumption that they would believe that handing Jews over the the authorities is a bad thing? Prior to Vatican II Anti Semitism was officially part of the Catechism of the Catholic Church. It was official that the Jews had been forsaken by God and that all Jews since the 1st century carried the responsibility for murdering Christ.

A view shared by the protestant church's so far as I know. Hitler proposed to unite the protestant church's and make them the state religion: both major branches of christianity focussed on politics and the consolidation of their own power: as usual. This says little about the ordinary christian, however. Nor does it take account of those priests and pastors who preached against the nazis:an example from wiki

Dachau had a special "priest block." Of the 2720 priests (among them 2579 Catholic) held in Dachau, 1034 did not survive the camp. The majority were Polish (1780), of whom 868 died in Dachau.

Catholic clergy also fought against Franco in the spanish civil war though in far fewer numbers then those who fought for him in defence of catholicism, I think

[jadey]

I'm a moral relativist myself. The weakness in the relativist argument is that if there are no moral absolutes and all morality is contextual, where can we draw lines? If it is moral to obey the law and to take care of our children, am I morally wrong to risk incurring the wrath of the government to protect a bunch of strangers I may not like , know, or share cultural values or genes with?

By lying to the SS, you would be stating that a higher morality existed which made lying to the government OK. But if the government is corrupt, is it also morally correct to lie on your tax return, as otherwise you are supporting the regime? Once you accept that you no longer owe X the truth, do you owe X anything?
Morally, you still owe them your cooperation in helping ensure fairness in society. It won't always be black and white, nor will you always be fully informed to the possibilities. Nonetheless, you're faced with a dilemma that requires some action. You probably won't have time to post a thread and get others opinions, so do your best.

Is morality involved here at all? I protect a puppy because it feels good to do so. Maybe lying to the SS felt good too?
And maybe it saves you some remorse. And maybe it gets you killed.

ETA- Just heard a (UK) gov. ad on radio advertising the fact that employing an illegal immigrant is punishable by a £10,000 fine. Yet surely giving a job to a man who simply wants to feed his family is a moral act?
How corrupt must government be before it becomes morally acceptable - even mandatory- to tell them to piss off?

Great example. This one is really difficult, but morally, I'm not sure the fine figures in to the equation. Its fair to offer the immigrant a chance, but it is also fair to ask the immigrant to abide by the same legal standards. For me, it gets more tricky when you say "You can't come here" than when you say "You can come here but you have to do it legally".

[Darth Rotor]

True enough, and one could easily go along with the idea that lying is to be avoided if at all possible, but the absolutist position is that it must be avoided at all costs, which I think presupposes, like the classic "sophie's choice" style dilemmas often foisted on philosophy 101 students and the like, that if the choice is that you sin or the other person sins, you should put the onus on the other, whatever the outcome.
You can't ask me the follow on hyppothetical. I own guns. I know how to use them. Go ask somebody else. I don't play these silly games.

DR

[Darth Rotor]

Actually, you are:

Mt 5:44 But I say to you, Love your enemies and pray for those who persecute you.
Actually, no, I am not, but since you live in books, why don't you go and paly in an Archie comic and pick Veronica's cherries, and let the adults have a conversation here.

DR

[Ocelot]

I think morality and religion are separate, though I know many disagree. I think people are capable of determining moral behaviour without religion, though many turn to religion to determine it for them (typically revealed religion). You might say the first group chooses morality first, religion second (or not at all), and the second group chooses religion first, morality second. If you're in the first group, good for the Jews, if in the second, not so good.

Indeed I have no faith, yet somehow I'm not drawn to baby eating. It appears I have some sort of morality even without religion.

The link appears to be that religion attempts to inform morality. In some cases it encourages greater levels of altruism in others as in the famous Steven Weinberg quote - For good people to do evil things, that takes religion.

I'm sure there were a great many religious people who opposed the persecution of the Jews and being endowed with a vocabulary which discussed morality in religious terms they would likely as not rationalise their decision as being informed by religion. Yet as anti Semitism swept Europe in the first half of the 20th century the Church did nothing to assert that this was fundamentally and objectively evil. It's a tad inconsistent for the church to accuse us godless liberals of moral relativism when their excuse for their behaviour at this time was the tu quoque that it was the cultural norm of the time. That they "weren't to know". Recently some Christians were thrown to the lions. Lions in the name of Christopher Hitchens and Stephen Fry. Stephens retort to this feeble defence was simply

"THEN WHAT ARE YOU FOR!"

[Darth Rotor]

A German Christian in wartime German is more than likely to be Catholic. Why then do we make the presumption that they would believe that handing Jews over the the authorities is a bad thing? Prior to Vatican II Anti Semitism was officially part of the Catechism of the Catholic Church. It was official that the Jews had been forsaken by God and that all Jews since the 1st century carried the responsibility for murdering Christ.

If this guy had somehow developed the idea that handing the accursed and forsaken folk over to the Nazi's was a bad idea for some reason then it wouldn't have been from the thousands of Priests, Bishops Archbishops and even Pope Pius XII who had the opportunity to speak out against the persecution of the Jews but resisted the international pressure to do so.

Hi. You are full of some wrong here. Let me help you.

1. Hitler was raised Catholic, but he did not replace all German Christian practice with Catholic churches when he took over.

2. You may be surprised to learn that a great many Germans are and were not Catholic. Protestantism is and was widespread across/through out Germany. While in Bavaria and Austria you tend to find more Catholics, as you go north that changed, and changes.

3. Martin Luther was a German.

4. I would be interested to see substantiation for the following statement of yours:

Prior to Vatican II Anti Semitism was officially part of the Catechism of the Catholic Church

If you can show me chapter and verse, I'd love to be able to use that with a few acquaintances of mine IRL. Much fun to be had.

Can you cite chapter and verse of that old version of CCC, or are you once again talking out of your backside, as you are regarding German Catholics?

5. Generic anti Semitism certainly had some roots in standard German/European Christianity, you sorta got that right.

DR

[The Fallen Serpent]

I believe Darth Rotor would have been in trouble with the Nazis long before they came door to door looking for the Jews. There is a huge timeline of Nazi actions that would have conflicted with Darth Rotor's views before the big round up of the Jews began.

Creating a hypothetical in which DR has not already run afoul of myriad other issues but is in a position to be a German citizen defending Jewish friends from being taken away is to ask DR to consider a hypothetical situation in which he is not himself or the Nazis are just a simple reduction to their most highlighted crimes we attribute to them. That and while I would quite likely disagree with the method of resistance, violent opposition is a valid option in the presented situation.

[bruto]

A German Christian in wartime German is more than likely to be Catholic. Why then do we make the presumption that they would believe that handing Jews over the the authorities is a bad thing? Prior to Vatican II Anti Semitism was officially part of the Catechism of the Catholic Church. It was official that the Jews had been forsaken by God and that all Jews since the 1st century carried the responsibility for murdering Christ.

If this guy had somehow developed the idea that handing the accursed and forsaken folk over to the Nazi's was a bad idea for some reason then it wouldn't have been from the thousands of Priests, Bishops Archbishops and even Pope Pius XII who had the opportunity to speak out against the persecution of the Jews but resisted the international pressure to do so.

The idea that a Christian in wartime Germany should automatically have a problem with the persecution of the Jews suggests that the Nazi's who carried out these unspeakable acts were somehow praying to a different Christ.

I thought we were arguing morality, not statistics. The question is whether a certain way of addressing the problem is morally acceptable, not whether it would have been automatic or even likely. Undoubtedly, the entrenched anti-semitism of most Christian sects, as well as the society itself, helped enable the policy of the Nazis, but plenty of individuals recognized the difference between discrimination and genocide, and even though we can point to numerous and egregious examples of inaction, denial, abetment and indifference, there are also a fair number of examples of devout and orthodox Christians acting selflessly, generously, and helping the persecuted at the risk of their own lives. Neither right nor wrong was automatic here.

In addition, though it seems silly even to have to mention this, I don't think either the Catholic or Lutheran churches advocated persecution of persons of Jewish heritage who had converted or been born into the Christian faith. The Nazi persecution of "Jews" was based on ethnicity, not religious affiliation.

[Magyar]

The Bible says that almost all religious obligations can be broken, in order to save a life.

While I totally agree with the sentiment in this thread regarding the lie, because I do not believe in a god of anykind and therefor saving someone from a nazi would be my only concern, I have to point out the hypocracy here -

IF you truly believe the bible and you believe that this is NOT the only life one has and in fact the life AFTER this one is far supperior to the present than why such value on this life!?

And in that context (excluding the issue of the proper interpretation lie/false witness) wouldn't it be more important to not lie than save a life in this form!?

[Ocelot]

How so? Of christian germans before WW2 2/3 were protestant.

really?

I sit corrected. I did try some fact checking on my semi remembered belief that the Germans were historically predominantly catholic. After all I knew that protestantism did originate in those lands. I saw on Adherrents that they were sitting pretty about 43% of the population a few years ago but I didn't dig hard enough to find any historical data.

[Ocelot]

Prior to Vatican II Anti Semitism was officially part of the Catechism of the Catholic Church

Sorry, thanks for picking me up on this. Prior to Vatican II Supercessionism and Transfer of sin were Catholic Teachings.

These were removed from Catholic Dogma by the new CCC however it appears that I proably erred in assuming that these prior teaching formed part fo the prior catechism

http://www.religioustolerance.org/vat_hol13.htm
http://www.sullivan-county.com/news/mine/timeline.htm
http://www.jstor.org/pss/1384956

or to put in another way

"THAT WOULD BE AN ECUMENICAL MATTER!"

http://www.bbcprograms.com/pbs/catalog/fatherted/thumbs/t0103fted.jpg

[The Fallen Serpent]

I'm sure you can find the numbers somewhere. I forget when it became policy but German citizens had to register their religion, with Christianity having the choice of Catholic or Protestant. IIRC it had to do with sending money to the right church. It was possible to switch associations. When the rule was relaxed allowing no association it was apparently a big deal. Again IIRC, Hitler remained registered as a Catholic until the rule was relaxed to allow no association. Remaining registered is by no means a promotion by or an alignment of ideals between Hitler and Catholicism. If the choice is two that are disliked it is simpler to stick with the less paperwork. In the most general terms Christian Germans promoted, partly opposed, or fully opposed the Nazi agenda and ideals. Something to keep in mind is that the German nation is somewhat new. When it solidified under Prussian leadership it was a collection of various smaller states that had an in general common culture and language. Further west the difference between French and German people blurred. To the south the blurring was with the Italians. To the east it was various East European groups. Since Germany solidified at a period somewhat later than a number of other European states the mix between Catholics and Protestants was much more a reality for Germans.

Also keep in mind that when the Nazis were rounding up the Jews the German people were under the impression (self-deluded or not is a reasonable debate) that the Jews were being relocated to the east. This is not an excuse but just to provide context. I disagree with absolutism personally, but situations being presented are somewhat absolutists as well. Lie or let Jews be killed is not generally how the situation would be presented to Christians, and lieing is certainly not the only option in combating the situation even if full knowledge was had.

Lastly, the response of "I'd lie but fill guilty about it later" doesn't seem wrong to me. Sometimes the perceived available options are all bad and the lesser of evils must be chosen. Feeling guilty is natural.

[bruto]

You can't ask me the follow on hyppothetical. I own guns. I know how to use them. Go ask somebody else. I don't play these silly games.

DRMy point exactly, but it's a silly game whether or not you have access to your guns.

[A.A. Alfie]

A German Christian in wartime German is more than likely to be Catholic. Why then do we make the presumption that they would believe that handing Jews over the the authorities is a bad thing? Prior to Vatican II Anti Semitism was officially part of the Catechism of the Catholic Church. It was official that the Jews had been forsaken by God and that all Jews since the 1st century carried the responsibility for murdering Christ.

If this guy had somehow developed the idea that handing the accursed and forsaken folk over to the Nazi's was a bad idea for some reason then it wouldn't have been from the thousands of Priests, Bishops Archbishops and even Pope Pius XII who had the opportunity to speak out against the persecution of the Jews but resisted the international pressure to do so.

The idea that a Christian in wartime Germany should automatically have a problem with the persecution of the Jews suggests that the Nazi's who carried out these unspeakable acts were somehow praying to a different Christ.

Hang on a second...
Just to put things into a little context here. The Nazi's liked no religions and killed Christians also. I have read of numbers between half a million to 3 million.
Gods had no place in the Nazi party - Hitler was God - and members swore an oath of allegiance to Hitler (personally) ahead of the constitution or any other movement, person or ideology

Let's not pretend that Hitler had a soft spot for Christians, and let's not pretend that Nazi's were Christian either. It is entirely possible that the vatican's 'silence' may have been more about not wanting to 'poke the tiger with a stick' than anything else.

[A.A. Alfie]

IF you truly believe the bible and you believe that this is NOT the only life one has and in fact the life AFTER this one is far supperior to the present than why such value on this life!?

And in that context (excluding the issue of the proper interpretation lie/false witness) wouldn't it be more important to not lie than save a life in this form!?

No! (my bold)

btw, does "supperior" refer to the last supper, or some other repast?

[six7s]

Let's not pretend that Hitler had a soft spot for Christians, and let's not pretend that Nazi's were Christian either. It is entirely possible that the vatican's 'silence' may have been more about not wanting to 'poke the tiger with a stick' than anything else.In all sincerity, I suggest that you at least acknowledge that its quite possible that many non and ex christians may well consider that ALL christians are pretending...

Anyhoo...

Hitler was (at least pretending to be) a catholic - he said so himself:

www.straightdope.com Was Hitler a Christian? (http://www.straightdope.com/columns/read/1699/was-hitler-a-christian)
An Associated Press article from the Lansing State Journal, February 23, 1933, is headlined, "Hitler Aims Blow at 'Godless' Move," and talks about how Hitler was campaigning against atheist communists and wanted support from Catholic Nazis. One line in the article specifically says, "Hitler, himself, is a Catholic." (You can see the entire article at http://www.infidels.org/library/his torical/unknown/hitler.html .) In addition, in 1941, Hitler told General Gerhart Engel: "I am now as before a Catholic and will always remain so." He never left the church. He was baptized a Roman Catholic as an infant and was a communicant and altar boy in his youth.


http://www.liberalslikechrist.org/Catholic/Hitlersfaith.html
Catholics today all try to repudiate Adolf Hitler and deny that he was a fellow Roman Catholic. But this was definitely not the case so long as he was in power, after he had given Germans jobs and reasons to be proud of their powerful country, following the period of great economic depression and great shame which were the results of the country's disastrous defeat in World War One. Hitler understood how much it would hurt his cause if the 66% of the German population who were Protestants and the 33% who were fellow Catholics were to learn how anti-Christian he and his Nazi ring leaders actually were in their hearts. Although we now know that Adolf Hitler expressed his true thoughts and feelings for his Catholic Church in his private writings and in his candid communications with his inner circle, we also know that he was a shrewd politician who knew how to manipulate the churchmen of both of the major German faiths to his advantage, by convincing them at the time that he was a champion, not an opponent, of Christianity.
<snip>
Image: www.liberalslikechrist.org/hitleratchurch.jpg (http://www.liberalslikechrist.org/hitleratchurch.jpg)
A posed picture which Hitler himself used often
to show what a good "practicing Catholic" he was.
<snip/>
Throughout his career however, Adolf Hitler never ceased trying to project to his Christian countrymen and their clergy the image of a "man of God", chosen to lead a Christian nation into a more perfect state, purified of the demonic influence of Jews and "Bolsheviks".


http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/amex/goebbels/peopleevents/p_himmler.html
Himmler was born in Munich, Germany, to a pious, authoritarian Catholic schoolmaster in 1900

http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/amex/goebbels/peopleevents/p_goebbels.html
Goebbels was born into a strict Catholic, working-class family in Rheydt, Germany, in 1897.

[Malerin]

Actually, no, I am not, but since you live in books, why don't you go and paly in an Archie comic and pick Veronica's cherries, and let the adults have a conversation here.

DR

Books? You mean like the Bible:rolleyes:? Whose the Christian here?

[A.A. Alfie]

In all sincerity, I suggest that you at least acknowledge that its quite possible that many non and ex christians may well consider that ALL christians are pretending...

Anyhoo...

Hitler was (at least pretending to be) a catholic - he said so himself:

All Christians pretending? I don't quite get you - sometimes you're just too cryptic for me it seems.

Anyhow, no real argument with what you've cited. He was a shrewd politician as was pointed out and his 'affiliations' served his political purposes.
I can acknowledge I've not made myself 100% clear. Obviously there were Nazis who were Christian (whether Catholic or Protestant matters not). The point is that Hitler became their virtual 'God' ahead of everything else when members of the party swore their allegiance to him. Additionally, civil servants, the military, Hitler youth etc also had their own oaths of allegiance (before God believe it or not) to Hitler - not Germany, Not the coinstitution and not the Nazi party; only to Hitler.

[Rasmus]

All Christians pretending? I don't quite get you - sometimes you're just too cryptic for me it seems.

For some Atheists it's incredibly hard to fathom that *anyone at all* could seriously belief in Christianity. It may seem much more plausible that they really are all just pretending to belief in it for various reasons. We know that some ex-believers have admitted that they were only pretending and, e.g. covering up their doubts. (Of course, I realize that there's a reason these are ex-believers ...)

Anyhow, no real argument with what you've cited. He was a shrewd politician as was pointed out and his 'affiliations' served his political purposes.
I can acknowledge I've not made myself 100% clear. Obviously there were Nazis who were Christian (whether Catholic or Protestant matters not). The point is that Hitler became their virtual 'God' ahead of everything else when members of the party swore their allegiance to him. Additionally, civil servants, the military, Hitler youth etc also had their own oaths of allegiance (before God believe it or not) to Hitler - not Germany, Not the coinstitution and not the Nazi party; only to Hitler.

That doesn't mae them any less Christian, though, does it?

[A.A. Alfie]

For some Atheists it's incredibly hard to fathom that *anyone at all* could seriously belief in Christianity. It may seem much more plausible that they really are all just pretending to belief in it for various reasons. We know that some ex-believers have admitted that they were only pretending and, e.g. covering up their doubts. (Of course, I realize that there's a reason these are ex-believers ...)



That doesn't mae them any less Christian, though, does it?

I see, thanks that makes some sense to me now. Seriously though, do you think he's saying that all Christians are pretending - not to mention other faiths and religions?
Conversely were 'born agains' only pretending to be atheist.

As for "less Christian", I have no idea. What they certainly did was make their Christianity secondary whilst serving Hitler first.

[Rasmus]

I see, thanks that makes some sense to me now. Seriously though, do you think he's saying that all Christians are pretending - not to mention other faiths and religions?
Conversely were 'born agains' only pretending to be atheist.

I don't know what he meant to say, or if he even included himself in that statement.

Personally, I've spoken with enough believers to think that they are not all pretending. Often they don't even think enough about what they believe to even make pretence possible. I would say they think they believe and find questioning that meta-belief too uncomfortable to even go there.

Even though I find it hard to accept that anyone could believe that kind of thing at all, I have to accept that some people do. (I find it harder to believe that someone would sooner get on board of an air-plane and kill himself by piloting it into a skyscraper than to admit that he's actually not certain at all that this might be a good idea.)

As for "less Christian", I have no idea. What they certainly did was make their Christianity secondary whilst serving Hitler first.

That assumes that their Christianity was not compatible with what Hitler was doing. I think it may well have been. Again, I don't think most people would sit down and work through the oath and even realize the potential for conflict between what they swore to do and their religion.

Whether their religion would condone taking such an oath in the first place seems to be arguing about what makes a true Scotsman. But it seems clear to me that

- the vast majority of Germans at the time considered themselves Christian,
- and still the Holocaust played out as it did.

Brave acts of some individuals notwithstanding, if the majority of Christians had not supported/taken part in the Holocaust it could not have happened. (Well, with a sufficently large majority I guess. 51% wouldn't have been enough.)

http://www.geschichteinchronologie.ch/eu/3R/GERMANENFURZ-d/1933-08-priester-m-hitlergruss-f-Hitler-Berlin-Neukoelln-stadion.jpg

THIS is not just keeping quiet, it is not opposition, it is not having nothing to do with it!

[A.A. Alfie]

That assumes that their Christianity was not compatible with what Hitler was doing. I think it may well have been. Again, I don't think most people would sit down and work through the oath and even realize the potential for conflict between what they swore to do and their religion.

Whether their religion would condone taking such an oath in the first place seems to be arguing about what makes a true Scotsman. But it seems clear to me that

- the vast majority of Germans at the time considered themselves Christian,
- and still the Holocaust played out as it did.

Brave acts of some individuals notwithstanding, if the majority of Christians had not supported/taken part in the Holocaust it could not have happened. (Well, with a sufficently large majority I guess. 51% wouldn't have been enough.)

I agree with you for the most part, however I am talking about members of the Nazi party specifically and not just members of the German public; not every German was a Nazi. The Nazi's had some 8million members in 1945 of a population of 80million plus.

btw standing up to Hitler and Himmler was decidedly fatal. It is a bit simplistic to suggest that if 50% of the population stood up, things may have been different - I honestly think that the overwhelming majority of German people had no idea of any atrocities until after the war.

[Ocelot]

If you can show me chapter and verse, I'd love to be able to use that with a few acquaintances of mine IRL. Much fun to be had.


As I said before it looks like a leapt to a conclusion that there was anti semitism ina previosu catechism after finding out that Vatican II was where the Catholic Church officially abandon anti-semitism

However As far as Chapters and Verses that you can have fun with, I've just stumbled across the Good Friday Liturgy which traditionally contained the phrase "Perfidious Jews (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Good_Friday_Prayer_for_the_Jews)"

[jadey]

http://www.geschichteinchronologie.ch/eu/3R/GERMANENFURZ-d/1933-08-priester-m-hitlergruss-f-Hitler-Berlin-Neukoelln-stadion.jpg

THIS is not just keeping quiet, it is not opposition, it is not having nothing to do with it!

Well stated. Wow, that picture is truly worth 1000 words. I wonder if any pictures like that made it in to the Holocaust museum (Washington, DC. USA).

[six7s]

Well stated. Wow, that picture is truly worth 1000 words. I wonder if any pictures like that made it in to the Holocaust museum (Washington, DC. USA).Yes
http://t3.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:dblXo4OiGNS4bM:http://www.ushmm.org/lcmedia/photo/lc/image/08/08024.jpg
The first of 84 images from a site-specific search on Google Images:
http://images.google.com/ site:www.ushmm.org catholic nazi salute (http://images.google.com/images?hl=en&source=hp&q=site%3Awww.ushmm.org+catholic+nazi+salute&btnG=Search+Images&gbv=2&aq=f&oq=&aqi=)

[jadey]

Yes
http://t3.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:dblXo4OiGNS4bM:http://www.ushmm.org/lcmedia/photo/lc/image/08/08024.jpg
The first of 84 images from a site-specific search on Google Images:
http://images.google.com/ site:www.ushmm.org catholic nazi salute (http://images.google.com/images?hl=en&source=hp&q=site%3Awww.ushmm.org+catholic+nazi+salute&btnG=Search+Images&gbv=2&aq=f&oq=&aqi=)

Cool. Thanks for that. That's just the impetus I needed to learn some more advanced searching techniques.:)

[six7s]

Check out images.google.com/advanced_image_search (http://images.google.com/advanced_image_search?hl=en) - it ROCKS!

[jadey]

Check out images.google.com/advanced_image_search (http://images.google.com/advanced_image_search?hl=en) - it ROCKS!

Yeah, I found that when I followed your last response. I was trying to figure out how you did it and followed the advanced button. Your criteria was still populated, which helped even more. Thanks.

[Darth Rotor]

As I said before it looks like a leapt to a conclusion that there was anti semitism ina previosu catechism after finding out that Vatican II was where the Catholic Church officially abandon anti-semitism

However As far as Chapters and Verses that you can have fun with, I've just stumbled across the Good Friday Liturgy which traditionally contained the phrase "Perfidious Jews (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Good_Friday_Prayer_for_the_Jews)"
Thank you, some fun might be had.

DR

[Darth Rotor]

Books? You mean like the Bible:rolleyes:? Whose the Christian here?
And the sola scriptura silly person is you.

Bye bye, boy. Your low class lounge act as a fundy imitator is not selling any tickets.

DR