Sudan Massacre

[Emily Lake]

Ignoring the lessons of history makes your argument less convincing. Saying “it’s the others” while whitewashing “us” is the age old tactic of demogogues.

Go ahead, fear Islam and ignore white Christian nationalists today.

I'm getting so tired of this kind of argument. You're acting like I think christianity is fantastic or something, which is just plain dumb.

Here's an idea: I can be concerned by BOTH at the same time, and I even have the cognitive capacity to evaluate what the current and in-progress risks of each are and make an intelligent decision on which currently represents a higher risk to democracy and the developed world!

 

[pood]

It is so fascinating how people online, when confronted with disagreement, fall back on “you are uneducated” or “you lack reading comprehension.” This is the smarmy little dodge of posters who cannot actually defend their BS. Anyone who is familiar with my posts knows neither charge is true of me.

Then read. If you won't read the posts in this thread, consider a book:

Narrative Theology After Auschwitz: From Alienation to Ethics...

Find the best prices on Narrative Theology After Auschwitz: From Alienation to Ethics by Fasching, Darrell J at Biblio | Paperback | 1992 | Augsburg Fortress Publishing | 9780800625313

www.biblio.com

I apologize for being rude, but Holocaust denialism, even the selective variety, is a pretty sore point with me. And with many other people. You're denying history that is:

1. Common knowledge
2. Very important for everyone in the Christian world to understand.

WTAF? You are now accusing me of being a Holocaust denialist?? How is this baseless charge even remotely related to what we are discussing?

You seem to be claiming here that the Holocaust was because of Christians, and not Nazis. You could not be more wrong.

 

[Politesse]

It is so fascinating how people online, when confronted with disagreement, fall back on “you are uneducated” or “you lack reading comprehension.” This is the smarmy little dodge of posters who cannot actually defend their BS. Anyone who is familiar with my posts knows neither charge is true of me.

Then read. If you won't read the posts in this thread, consider a book:

Narrative Theology After Auschwitz: From Alienation to Ethics...

Find the best prices on Narrative Theology After Auschwitz: From Alienation to Ethics by Fasching, Darrell J at Biblio | Paperback | 1992 | Augsburg Fortress Publishing | 9780800625313

www.biblio.com

I apologize for being rude, but Holocaust denialism, even the selective variety, is a pretty sore point with me. And with many other people. You're denying history that is:

1. Common knowledge
2. Very important for everyone in the Christian world to understand.

Nothing pood has written even ventures into the same time zone as holocaust denialism.

Seriously, Poli, have you completely lost the ability to make a rational argument? All you ever seem to do is toss around ad-hom insults and attempt to poison the well via disinformation.

Okay, fine. I retract the phrasing. Pood is denying a lot of very important facts about the Holocaust and the Christian Church's open and intentional complicity in it. He is pretending that Aryanism is solely to blame for the Holocaust, as though neither Aryanism nor the Holocaust were influenced by sixteen centuries of explicitly Christian anti-Semitic propaganda, and pogroms that long predate Nazism. When I said "selective denialism", I should have assumed that no right-leaning poster would know what that meant and phrased things accordingly. Pood is blatantly denying history, but he is not denying the Holocaust as a whole, only Christian culpability in the Holocaust. Nor did I ever mean to claim that he was denying the Holocaust as a whole, and I should have known that my wording would confuse people. I apologize.

 

[Politesse]

It is so fascinating how people online, when confronted with disagreement, fall back on “you are uneducated” or “you lack reading comprehension.” This is the smarmy little dodge of posters who cannot actually defend their BS. Anyone who is familiar with my posts knows neither charge is true of me.

Then read. If you won't read the posts in this thread, consider a book:

Narrative Theology After Auschwitz: From Alienation to Ethics...

Find the best prices on Narrative Theology After Auschwitz: From Alienation to Ethics by Fasching, Darrell J at Biblio | Paperback | 1992 | Augsburg Fortress Publishing | 9780800625313

www.biblio.com

I apologize for being rude, but Holocaust denialism, even the selective variety, is a pretty sore point with me. And with many other people. You're denying history that is:

1. Common knowledge
2. Very important for everyone in the Christian world to understand.

WTAF? You are now accusing me of being a Holocaust denialist?? How is this baseless charge even remotely related to what we are discussing?

You seem to be claiming here that the Holocaust was because of Christians, and not Nazis. You could not be more wrong.

Nazism was an explicitly Christian movement. It makes no sense to say that the Holocaust is "because of" Nazis but not "because of" Christians. Especially since the Holocaust was enacted, supported, and justified by many people around the world who were Christians, but were not Nazis.

 

[pood]

I am of Polish Catholic heritage on both sides. I despise the Nazis and what they did to my people and to the Jews. I am also quite well aware that Nazis are not the same as Christians. Some people are too stupid notice the difference between Nazis and Christians, it appears.

 

[pood]

Nazism was an explicitly Christian movement.

Absolute bullshit, as usual from you.

 

[Politesse]

Nazism was an explicitly Christian movement.

Absolute bullshit, as usual from you.

Do you deny that endorsement of Christianity was an explicit plank of the Nazi Platform?

 

[pood]

As noted, Germany was an overwhelmingly Christian nation but from this fact it does not follow that Christians were responsible for Nazis. And as also noted, Nazis oppressed Christians in Germany and brutally suppressed them in Poland. And as further noted, a great many
Christians in all nations vigorously opposed Hitler and Nazis.

 

[Politesse]

As noted, Germany was an overwhelmingly Christian nation but from this fact it does not follow that Christians were responsible for Nazis. And as also noted, Nazis oppressed Christians in Germany and brutally suppressed them in Poland. And as further noted, a great many
Christians in all nations vigorously opposed Hitler and Nazis.

Germans were almost exclusively Christian. All Nazis were Christian, and the party endorsed Christianity. Its entire political philosphy was based on anti-Semitism, a Christian philosophy. The Vatican endorsed the Nazi Party, as did the German Protestant authorities such as they were. But you want us to believe that Christians do not share in responsibility for what happened.

 

[pood]

Nazism was an explicitly Christian movement.

Absolute bullshit, as usual from you.

Do you deny that endorsement of Christianity was an explicit plank of the Nazi Platform?

I don’t really give a fuck about your link. I have already acknowledged that Hitler tried to co-opt Christianity to his own ends. It does not follow from this fact that most or even many Christians in Germany or anywhere else supported Hitler, or that Christianity and Naziism were the same. And what I have said certainly does not support your slanderous claim that I am a Holocaust denier.

 

[laughing dog]

Ignoring the lessons of history makes your argument less convincing. Saying “it’s the others” while whitewashing “us” is the age old tactic of demogogues.

Go ahead, fear Islam and ignore white Christian nationalists today.

I'm getting so tired of this kind of argument. You're acting like I think christianity is fantastic or something, which is just plain dumb.

No,I’m not at all. Ignoring or playing down a threat does not imply applauding it. At least to someone with sufficient cognitive capacity to make rational evaluations.

Unfortunately, the mindless Islamophobia in your posts is inconsistent with your confidence.

 

[Politesse]

Nazism was an explicitly Christian movement.

Absolute bullshit, as usual from you.

Do you deny that endorsement of Christianity was an explicit plank of the Nazi Platform?

I don’t really give a fuck about your link. I have already acknowledged that Hitler tried to co-opt Christianity to his own ends. It does not follow from this fact that most or even many Christians in Germany or anywhere else supported Hitler, or that Christianity and Naziism were the same. And what I have said certainly does not support your slanderous claim that I am a Holocaust denier.

Again, go fuck yourself.

Where by "my link", you mean the official platform of the Nazi Party?

Are you admitting to being a history denialist?

 

[pood]

“Positive Christianity” was basically a rewriting of Christianity to put Hitler as the head of a new revelation. This has nothing to do with Christianity per se.

 

[Politesse]

“Positive Christianity” was basically a rewriting of Christianity to put Hitler as the head of a new revelation. This has nothing to do with Christianity per se.

So your position is that Positive Christianity has "nothing to do" with Christianity.

 

[Emily Lake]

It is so fascinating how people online, when confronted with disagreement, fall back on “you are uneducated” or “you lack reading comprehension.” This is the smarmy little dodge of posters who cannot actually defend their BS. Anyone who is familiar with my posts knows neither charge is true of me.

Then read. If you won't read the posts in this thread, consider a book:

Narrative Theology After Auschwitz: From Alienation to Ethics...

Find the best prices on Narrative Theology After Auschwitz: From Alienation to Ethics by Fasching, Darrell J at Biblio | Paperback | 1992 | Augsburg Fortress Publishing | 9780800625313

www.biblio.com

I apologize for being rude, but Holocaust denialism, even the selective variety, is a pretty sore point with me. And with many other people. You're denying history that is:

1. Common knowledge
2. Very important for everyone in the Christian world to understand.

Nothing pood has written even ventures into the same time zone as holocaust denialism.

Seriously, Poli, have you completely lost the ability to make a rational argument? All you ever seem to do is toss around ad-hom insults and attempt to poison the well via disinformation.

Okay, fine. I retract the phrasing. Pood is denying a lot of very important facts about the Holocaust and the Christian Church's open and intentional complicity in it. He is pretending that Aryanism is solely to blame for the Holocaust, as though neither Aryanism nor the Holocaust were influenced by sixteen centuries of explicitly Christian anti-Semitic propaganda, and pogroms that long predate Nazism. When I said "selective denialism", I should have assumed that no right-leaning poster would know what that meant and phrased things accordingly. Pood is blatantly denying history, but he is not denying the Holocaust as a whole, only Christian culpability in the Holocaust. Nor did I ever mean to claim that he was denying the Holocaust as a whole, and I should have known that my wording would confuse people. I apologize.

Hey @pood! Welcome to the ranks of Poli's "right wingers" here on IIDB!

In a bit more seriousness... Your argument is fallacious and irrational, Poli. Nobody is denying that christianity is the predominant religion in the western world, nor that it was the predominant religion in Germany during that time period. On the other hand, you're trying really, really, really fucking hard to retroactively change history in order to make Nazi imperialism be something done explicitly in the name of christianity, waged as a religious war. That framing is objectively wrong - you know it, we know it, everybody fucking knows it, so how about you just stop playing this game?

Especially since you apparently can "win" by calling pood a holocaust denier and relegating him to the bucket of people you've decided are "right wing". Because somehow, you're the authority on other people's thoughts and beliefs and motivations, and we're supposed to just completely accept whatever YOU tell us WE are. It's asinine. Be better.

 

[Emily Lake]

Nazism was an explicitly Christian movement.

That's wrong and nuts.

 

[Emily Lake]

Do you deny that endorsement of Christianity was an explicit plank of the Nazi Platform?

Alright, let me see if I'm following your logic. Naziism was 100% an aggressive, imerialistic, genocidal *religion*, framed entirely around christianity as its motivation, and put itself forth as waging a holy war. And because somehow you think this is "true", it means that christianity as a whole in 2025 in western nations is a bigger and more dangerous religion than islam... and we're just supposed to refrain from looking behind the curtain and noting things like Charlie Hebdo, the Twin Towers, Al Qaueda, Isis, Hamas, Hezbollah, and others that literally describe their actions as being done in the name of their prophet and islam.

Is it so important to you to oppose christianity that you're willing to defend something objectively worse?

 

[Emily Lake]

“Positive Christianity” was basically a rewriting of Christianity to put Hitler as the head of a new revelation. This has nothing to do with Christianity per se.

So your position is that Positive Christianity has "nothing to do" with Christianity.

Oh FFS. By your own link, christianity only gets mentioned at the very end, and pretty much in passing. It comes up exactly once:

1. We demand freedom of religion for all religious denominations within the state so long as they do not endanger its existence or oppose the moral senses of the Germanic race. The Party as such advocates the standpoint of a positive Christianity without binding itself confessionally to any one denomination. It combats the Jewish-materialistic spirit within and around us, and is convinced that a lasting recovery of our nation can only succeed from within on the framework: common utility precedes individual utility.

The Nazi platform from your link does not frame itself as a christian endeavor, nor as being motivated by christianity. At best, it gives a passing mention to christianity as a means to demonize jews.

 

[Politesse]

“Positive Christianity” was basically a rewriting of Christianity to put Hitler as the head of a new revelation. This has nothing to do with Christianity per se.

So your position is that Positive Christianity has "nothing to do" with Christianity.

Oh FFS. By your own link, christianity only gets mentioned at the very end, and pretty much in passing. It comes up exactly once:

1. We demand freedom of religion for all religious denominations within the state so long as they do not endanger its existence or oppose the moral senses of the Germanic race. The Party as such advocates the standpoint of a positive Christianity without binding itself confessionally to any one denomination. It combats the Jewish-materialistic spirit within and around us, and is convinced that a lasting recovery of our nation can only succeed from within on the framework: common utility precedes individual utility.

The Nazi platform from your link does not frame itself as a christian endeavor, nor as being motivated by christianity. At best, it gives a passing mention to christianity as a means to demonize jews.

Why did the Nazis "demonize" Jews?

 

[Politesse]

Do you deny that endorsement of Christianity was an explicit plank of the Nazi Platform?

Alright, let me see if I'm following your logic. Naziism was 100% an aggressive, imerialistic, genocidal *religion*, framed entirely around christianity as its motivation, and put itself forth as waging a holy war. And because somehow you think this is "true", it means that christianity as a whole in 2025 in western nations is a bigger and more dangerous religion than islam...

What are you talking about? I said literally none of that.