Criticizing Christianity is a lost cause

[john.livingstone@lr]

The best thing about Christianity is that even though it attempts to explain certain events and the beginning of the world, the good book does not attempt to disprove others and their beliefs. The Christian religion is a big group of loving friends, we support God and his message and in the end we are all looking to better our lives through Christ. It makes very little sense to me as to why folks seem to get a kick out of trying to discredit Christianity. The Church is about self improvement, positive self-reflection and love of one another. And with a message this positive, why would an individual attempt to discredit the Bible on the basis of the creation or Noah's Ark or Adam and Eve. These are merely stories with the intent of explaining the progression of man and the Earth. The purpose of Christianity is to improve a person's life through God, not to explain the wonders of the world. And all of the people out there spewing hate about Christianity simply because they heard about why Christianity is unbelievable or how evolution better explains the origins of the world are simply wasting their time because Christians don't care what you have to say if the message isn't positive.

[cnorman18]

It's always annoying when one has to review a debate and correct misstatements of the record. Allow me to civilly and calmly reveal your distortions and falsehoods:

Baloney. I have posted this three times and also told you by PM:

As you knew perfectly well when you first posted this, I do not question your DATA, but your take on its SIGNIFICANCE.

Baloney to your baloney!

First, you didn't write me a PM until a few days ago and this whole thing happened way before then.

Yes, I sent you a PM a few days ago - but only after I had already posted the same statements on the forum two or three times without acknowledgment or response.

In sending you the PM, I wanted to take this pissing match off the forum and possibly settle it in private; but you wouldn't have it, and have continued your public attacks to the point of stalking me - bringing up your claims on at least three threads, including this one, that are unrelated to our original dispute. Fine; we'll settle in in public if that's your preference.

Second, I said that we are the largest exporters of guns to third world countries and you replied quote "that's not true".

That is an outright lie, especially with the quote marks. See below.

You said some bs about AK-47s and didn't shut up about that until I showed you a map of all the places in America where Ak-47s are manufactured. So that you contest my opinion of the data's significance, and not the data itself is a bold lie. You tried to contest the data, and it wasn't until I proved you wrong by presenting raw facts that you mysteriously vanished.

First: That account is totally fabricated and false. Here's where I am forced to review the actual debate:

From this page:

... All that being said, I don't question the notion that the 3rd Reich is worse than the US Government. But if the measurement of how bad an entity is, is the number of civilians it kills, then we're a close 3rd on that list, right after Hitler and Stalin. Especially if you consider all the child soldiers in Africa who kill each other day in day out with guns WE sold them. That blood is on our hands.

And here is my reply:

Just one quibble (not that I agree with the rest of your leftwing extremist rants) - the overwhelming majority of those child soldiers carry AK-47s. American firms don't manufacture those. Those weapons come from Russia, China, or one of the former Soviet-bloc nations.

Note that I did NOT dispute your data, as you have repeatedly and falsely claimed. I disputed that one statement in bold only, and I have proven that I was right. More on that in a moment.

Second: For the record, I don't doubt for a moment that we are the largest arms exporter in the world; but that's ARMS, not just guns, i.e., small arms. I suspect we got to first place by selling fighter planes and the like to foreign governments at a few billion a pop - not by selling rifles to children. When you're selling airplanes and warships, it doesn't take long to register a LOT of money in sales.

The FACT is, the Chinese, the Soviets, and the old Eastern Bloc - Romania, Bulgaria, Poland, Hungary, etc. - shipped out millions upon millions of cheaply-produced SKSs and AKs worldwide for decades, and that's where those guns come from.

See? I'm not disputing your STATISTICAL FACTS. I'm disputing your claims about their MEANING, their SIGNIFICANCE. Your trying to turn this into a matter of my lying and unethical arguments by falsifying the arguments that have actually been made is pretty dishonest itself, and when those false charges are gratuitously repeated as many times as you have repeated them, it rises to the level of a personal attack.

If you want to have a real debate, let's have one; but revising the actual exchanges so they fit what you WISH I had said isn't debate.

Third: One more point - I didn't "vanish." I've been posting more often the last few days than I have in months. I abandoned my debate with YOU, after I answered your objections, because I don't care to debate people who lie about what I say and what I think. I still don't, but I don't care to let your falsehoods stand uncorrected.

To continue the review:

Clinging to your proven-false allegation, you then posted a website that contains the names of a number of firms that manufacture AKs in the US - which claim I corrected again; NONE of those firms manufacture large quantities of AKs (which would be necessary to make your claims true) or even make the parts. They are small firms that assemble AKs from foreign, usually Eastern bloc, parts and kits and sell them to American collectors and enthusiasts. You never responded to that statement; do you see me taunting you for "vanishing"?

No firm in the US exports AKs in bulk to Third World countries. That's a FACT, too.

So the bottom line on this portion of our dispute is this: We, the US, did NOT put those weapons in the hands of the "child soldiers" in Africa, Asia, and Latin America, as you claimed - and I never disputed anything else that you said. All your twisting and revising and misstating my arguments and your own hasn't changed that, and that's where we were about a week ago.

On calling you an "extremist," I have also asked this several times without an answer: Do you or do you not acknowledge that your position is at the extreme left of the American political spectrum? If not, why on Earth not?

Because I don't have a position.

Uh-HUH. Does anyone here take that statement seriously? I don't.

Aren't you just denying that you have a position - which you obviously do - in order to warp my objective description of you as a "leftist extremist" into some sort of insult?

All I am doing is listing data issued by government and UN agencies. That is not a position. That's not an opinion. It's a list of facts. Listing facts cannot be extremist. It's the FACTS that are extreme, not my mere act of writing them down.

Perhaps your choice of the particular facts you want to list is relevant to one who wishes to discern a position?

Nowhere in all your previous posts did I see the list of POSITIVES about America that you posted below, nor anything like it. EVERY fact you have posted till now has been about America as the leading arms exporter, leading killer of civilians, leading incarcerator of prisoners, leading instigator of wars, etc., etc.., etc.

I would say that no reasonable person reading your posts is likely to say, "Oh, I can't see that this fellow has any position at all. He might as easily be a flag-waving rightwing Republican as anything else."

Talk about disingenuous. "I don't have a position..." Please. If you don't have a position, what are you arguing for here?

Let me ask another way, then: Would you admit that your OPINIONS tend toward the extreme left of the spectrum? Or do you not have any opinions, either?

If I were as convinced as you that the USA was the most evil entity on the face of the Earth, which seems to be what you conclude from your statistics, I'd be PROUD to be called an "extremist."

I am not convinced the US is the most evil entity in the world. I think there are some wonderful things going on in America....

Yeah, yeah. Funny you never mentioned these before. Never even hinted at them.

Now watch closely what follows:

All I am saying is that reputable impartial sources claim that the US is the entity that killed the most civilians in the world in the last 50 years, that it's the country that exports the most hand weapons to 3rd world counties, it's the industrial country where citizens kill each other at the fastest rate, and it's the country where most citizens are deprived of their freedom. These are facts. Is your position that if looking at this data I say "wow, clearly something is wrong" then I'm an extremist?

If those are the only data you look at or talk about? Absolutely.

I don't deny all the great things about our country. The number of Nobel Award recipients, the great Universities, the amazing social movements it started, the scientific cutting edge, the cultural and social cutting edge (at least in NYC, Alabama not so much), etc. Those are things that are great about America. In fact if you tried to deny the data about the good things about America, I'd debate you as forcefully as I did when you denied weapon exportation rates and other irrefutable facts.

Which, as I hope we've established by now, I never did.

Now see, if you had bothered to mention those things - and maybe thrown in a few references to POSITIVE things we've done in foreign nations - the Peace Corps, the Marshall Plan, etc. - I'd never have called you an extremist in the first place. As it stands, those positive references appear to be afterthoughts and cover.

More baloney. You were amusing yourself with intentional mocking and baiting, and now you're trying to find a plausible excuse for it. You are here and now admitting, by the way, that your posts WERE sarcastic, and therefore that you lied - to an administrator! - when you denied that they were.

By the way, alleging dishonesty where the only real issue is disagreement with your views is dishonesty, too.

Keep it up. You won't be here long if you continue this intentionally provocative and insulting, not to mention repeatedly dishonest, behavior.

All I did in talking to East of Eden is state something I completely believe (that lying is wrong), using language that I think he would understand. He believes that an invisible man in the sky created the world in 6 days 6000 years ago! You can't expect me to use logic and nuanced concepts when trying to get across to him.

In other words, you were talking down to him in a demeaning and sarcastic manner, pretending to take beliefs seriously that you actually hold in contempt, exaggerating them and stating them in as extreme and shocking terms as you could manage in order to highlight how ridiculous you believe them to be.

That's called "mocking" and "baiting."

Your intent very clearly had nothing to do with "enlightening" EoE at all, but only to provoke and enrage him; and your primary intent was very obviously to exaggerate and ridicule EoE's beliefs for everyone else's benefit and amusement.

I said "hundreds of thousands of women were burned alive by Christians". And he responded "That's not true, only 19 were killed in Salem".

No opinion. I haven't bothered to read that exchange myself, and I've seen how accurately you report debates - even when you're talking to people who were actually in them - so I'll reserve judgment.

That is about as simplistic an attempt to mislead and lie using a non-sequitur as this exchange would be:

Statement "The US is the largest gun exporter in the world"

Response "That's not true, Russia manufactures Ak-47"

Quite right, it would be - if anyone had ever actually said that in response to that question.

It's about as simplistic an attempt to mislead and lie using a non-sequitur as this exchange would be:

Statement: "1+1 is 2"

Response: "That's not true, my favorite color is blue".

Again; right, but nobody here is really interested in arguments that were never offered in conversations that never happened.

I can see why you returned from your exile for the opportunity to defend East of Eden. You clearly think alike.

"Exile"?

On some things, no doubt EoE and I do think alike; on others, no doubt you and I do.

Whatever. Let the record show that you clearly intended that as a parting insult, which of course also proves the malicious intent of your earlier posts.

So, to review:

You mischaracterized and falsified an earlier exchange, repeatedly, lying outright about what was said, and doing it through multiple posts on multiple threads;

You object to being called an "extremist" because you have no position at all;

And, finally, you had no sarcastic and mocking intent in your earlier posts to EoE - you just intended to talk down to him in the primitive, superstitious language that this ignorant Yahoo needed, exaggerating his beliefs and lampooning them, and only coincidentally holding them up to ridicule and derision.

As if all that's not "baiting" and "mocking." In light of your previous remarks on beliefs like EoE's, no other conclusion is reasonably possible.

Thanks for the "debate." I think I'm done now. If you think you can refute any of this, feel free, but don't be surprised if I don't trouble myself to answer, especially if I have to unravel a lot of misstatement and falsehood again in order to do it.

You don't debate cowards? I don't debate people who lecture others on honesty while repeatedly and intentionally lying about what both he and I have said - and while feigning sincerity and concern in order to mock and bait and demean.

If you ever decide you have a position, let us all know.

[East of Eden]

It's an irrefutable fact that thousands of women were burned alive by christians. Therefore saying that only 19 died, while knowing that thousands died, is a lie.

You said:

"Millions of people have been killed or tortured by Christians becuase of their religion or lack thereof (inquisition, crusades, witch burning, etc)"

Where do you get the 'millions' from? In his book 'The Spanish Inquisition', Henry Kamen says the Inquisition trials were fairer and more lenient than their secular counterparts, not only in Spain but across Europe. Frequently the only penalty given was some form of penance, such as fasting or what today would be called "community service". Kamen estimates that around 2,000 people were executed for heresy by the Inquisition, far fewer than the 20,000 figure I gave earlier. Other contemporary historians make estimates of between 1,500 and 4,000. These deaths are tragic, but remember they occurred over a period of 350 years.

As for the Crusades, reasonable people can dispute the worthiness of their objectives, but there is no reason for considering the Crusades a world historical crime of any sort. The Christians fought to defend themselves from foreign conquest, while the Muslims fought to continue conquering Christian lands.

I brought up the Salem witch trials because that came immediately to mind. If you want to discuss European witch burnings, even your fellow atheist Sam Harris cites contemporary historical sources that put the number of witches burned at around 100,000.

So my question is, where are your 'irrefutable' facts to back up your statement that 'millions of people have been killed or tortured by Christians' in the above three events? Until you can produce them, you haven't convinced me that I am the one doing the lying here.

[cnorman18]

It's an irrefutable fact that thousands of women were burned alive by christians. Therefore saying that only 19 died, while knowing that thousands died, is a lie.

You said:

"Millions of people have been killed or tortured by Christians becuase of their religion or lack thereof (inquisition, crusades, witch burning, etc)"

Where do you get the 'millions' from? In his book 'The Spanish Inquisition', Henry Kamen says the Inquisition trials were fairer and more lenient than their secular counterparts, not only in Spain but across Europe. Frequently the only penalty given was some form of penance, such as fasting or what today would be called "community service". Kamen estimates that around 2,000 people were executed for heresy by the Inquisition, far fewer than the 20,000 figure I gave earlier. Other contemporary historians make estimates of between 1,500 and 4,000. These deaths are tragic, but remember they occurred over a period of 350 years.

As for the Crusades, reasonable people can dispute the worthiness of their objectives, but there is no reason for considering the Crusades a world historical crime of any sort. The Christians fought to defend themselves from foreign conquest, while the Muslims fought to continue conquering Christian lands.

I brought up the Salem witch trials because that came immediately to mind. If you want to discuss European witch burnings, even your fellow atheist Sam Harris cites contemporary historical sources that put the number of witches burned at around 100,000.

So my question is, where are your 'irrefutable' facts to back up your statement that 'millions of people have been killed or tortured by Christians' in the above three events? Until you can produce them, you haven't convinced me that I am the one doing the lying here.

Excuse me; I'm pretty clearly no big fan of anotheratheisthere, but in all fairness, I think he was right on this.

The Holocaust alone, though it wasn't done under the direction or the auspices of the Church, accounts for "millions" - and it counts, because institutional Christian antisemitism was the foundation of the casual, taken-for-granted Jew-hatred throughout Europe that made it possible.

It's also true, as few Christians seem to know, that the Crusaders often stopped to massacre Jews and burn their villages to the ground on their way to the Holy Land.

The Inquisition was not particularly easy on Jews, either; I suspect Mr. Kamen's information doesn't rely much on Jewish records - and in any case, though relatively few Jews may have been murdered outright by Torquemada & Co., the Jews were expelled from Spain in 1492, and many died as a result of their forced exile. Christians ordered or encouraged the expulsion of Jews from every nation in Europe at least once, and who knows how many deaths resulted? There were massacres, expulsions, torture, and mass murder of Jews taking place for centuries, and it's not hard to see the reason. The Christian Church taught outright lies about Jews for all of those centuries, including the Blood Libel (still taken seriously by some Christians even today, as has been seen on this forum), and those hateful lies cost the lives of (yes) literally millions of my people.

Jews alone account for millions of victims of Christianity and Christian teachings. Those teachings have largely been corrected and even apologized for today, but history remains history, and those people are still dead. Antisemitism remains the great untreated wound of the Christian Church, and Christian complicity in the murder and torment of my people for almost two thousand years has never even been properly acknowledged, let alone repented of. Watch and see the responses to this post.

Christianity is an honorable and noble religion today, or can be; but history, as I said, remains history.

[East of Eden]

It's an irrefutable fact that thousands of women were burned alive by christians. Therefore saying that only 19 died, while knowing that thousands died, is a lie.

You said:

"Millions of people have been killed or tortured by Christians becuase of their religion or lack thereof (inquisition, crusades, witch burning, etc)"

Where do you get the 'millions' from? In his book 'The Spanish Inquisition', Henry Kamen says the Inquisition trials were fairer and more lenient than their secular counterparts, not only in Spain but across Europe. Frequently the only penalty given was some form of penance, such as fasting or what today would be called "community service". Kamen estimates that around 2,000 people were executed for heresy by the Inquisition, far fewer than the 20,000 figure I gave earlier. Other contemporary historians make estimates of between 1,500 and 4,000. These deaths are tragic, but remember they occurred over a period of 350 years.

As for the Crusades, reasonable people can dispute the worthiness of their objectives, but there is no reason for considering the Crusades a world historical crime of any sort. The Christians fought to defend themselves from foreign conquest, while the Muslims fought to continue conquering Christian lands.

I brought up the Salem witch trials because that came immediately to mind. If you want to discuss European witch burnings, even your fellow atheist Sam Harris cites contemporary historical sources that put the number of witches burned at around 100,000.

So my question is, where are your 'irrefutable' facts to back up your statement that 'millions of people have been killed or tortured by Christians' in the above three events? Until you can produce them, you haven't convinced me that I am the one doing the lying here.

Excuse me; I'm pretty clearly no big fan of anotheratheisthere, but in all fairness, I think he was right on this.

The Holocaust alone, though it wasn't done under the direction or the auspices of the Church, accounts for "millions" - and it counts, because institutional Christian antisemitism was the foundation of the casual, taken-for-granted Jew-hatred throughout Europe that made it possible.

I completely reject that line of thought. As I posted before, Einstein said the church was the German institution that did the most to oppose Hitler. Because Christians believe Jews to be theologically wrong (as Jews do Christians) does not equate to 'institutional Christian antisemitism'. Today evangelical Christians are the strongest supporters of Israel.

It's also true, as few Christians seem to know, that the Crusaders often stopped to massacre Jews and burn their villages to the ground on their way to the Holy Land.

Unfortunately true, but they don't add up to 'millions'.

The Inquisition was not particularly easy on Jews, either; I suspect Mr. Kamen's information doesn't rely much on Jewish records - and in any case, though relatively few Jews may have been murdered outright by Torquemada & Co., the Jews were expelled from Spain in 1492, and many died as a result of their forced exile.

In the Kamen book I quoted earlier, he pointed out that the only Jews who came under the purview of the Inquisition were Jews who had converted to Christianity. Of couse, many Christians suspected that some of these "new Christians' were not Christians at all. Interestingly the main source of allegations against the "new Christians" came from other Jews who were angry about their fellow Jews relinquishing their Judaism. These Jews had no qualms about testifying before the Inquisition courts because as Jews they were exempt from its jurisdiction. Kamen points out the grand inquisitor himself, Tomas de Torquemada, had known Jewish ancestry. The unfortunate harrassment Jews got back them was based on their religion, not their race. Hitler's persecution was racial, as even Jews who converted to Christianity were not spared.

Christians ordered or encouraged the expulsion of Jews from every nation in Europe at least once, and who knows how many deaths resulted? There were massacres, expulsions, torture, and mass murder of Jews taking place for centuries, and it's not hard to see the reason. The Christian Church taught outright lies about Jews for all of those centuries, including the Blood Libel (still taken seriously by some Christians even today, as has been seen on this forum), and those hateful lies cost the lives of (yes) literally millions of my people.

Jews alone account for millions of victims of Christianity and Christian teachings. Those teachings have largely been corrected and even apologized for today, but history remains history, and those people are still dead. Antisemitism remains the great untreated wound of the Christian Church, and Christian complicity in the murder and torment of my people for almost two thousand years has never even been properly acknowledged, let alone repented of. Watch and see the responses to this post.

Christianity is an honorable and noble religion today, or can be; but history, as I said, remains history.

That is what the debate is about. I appreciate your keeping it civil.

[cnorman18]

Excuse me; I'm pretty clearly no big fan of anotheratheisthere, but in all fairness, I think he was right on this.

The Holocaust alone, though it wasn't done under the direction or the auspices of the Church, accounts for "millions" - and it counts, because institutional Christian antisemitism was the foundation of the casual, taken-for-granted Jew-hatred throughout Europe that made it possible.

I completely reject that line of thought. As I posted before, Einstein said the church was the German institution that did the most to oppose Hitler. Because Christians believe Jews to be theologically wrong (as Jews do Christians) does not equate to 'institutional Christian antisemitism'. Today evangelical Christians are the strongest supporters of Israel.

You're not hearing me; I'm not talking about the direct involvement of the Church. There was none, and I am among those Jews who think Pius X got a bad rap. I'm talking about the history behind the Holocaust that set the stage for it; the teaching of the Church for more than a thousand years that Jews are "Christ-killers," that the Jews wander because we are accursed by God, that Jews are doomed to Hell because Christians took our place, that Jews regularly commit ritual murder of Christian children to drink their blood (the Blood Libel), that Jews are dishonest, grasping, greedy, and hate Christians, that we plan to rule the world through corruption and conspiracy, and on and on and on. Material from a Christian website that still teaches these things today has been presented in this forum within the last few weeks. The church no longer teaches them today, but they became part of European Gentile culture for more than a millenium, and absolutely and without question were the indirect and often direct cause of the deaths of millions of Jews. These Christian teachings made the Holocaust possible. Period, full stop.

....

The Inquisition was not particularly easy on Jews, either; I suspect Mr. Kamen's information doesn't rely much on Jewish records - and in any case, though relatively few Jews may have been murdered outright by Torquemada & Co., the Jews were expelled from Spain in 1492, and many died as a result of their forced exile.

In the Kamen book I quoted earlier, he pointed out that the only Jews who came under the purview of the Inquisition were Jews who had converted to Christianity. Of couse, many Christians suspected that some of these "new Christians' were not Christians at all. Interestingly the main source of allegations against the "new Christians" came from other Jews who were angry about their fellow Jews relinquishing their Judaism. These Jews had no qualms about testifying before the Inquisition courts because as Jews they were exempt from its jurisdiction. Kamen points out the grand inquisitor himself, Tomas de Torquemada, had known Jewish ancestry.

The bolded part is contemptible. It's called "blaming the victim." It's common for antisemitic and neo-Nazi sites to point out that there were Jews who assisted the Nazis, too. Neither those nor Kamen's remarks, which are now enormously suspect to me, take into account that these "traitor Jews" had been put in the position of either betraying their own people or being murdered, or forced to emigrate, or lose their livelihood.

The idea that the Church's thugs didn't have jurisdiction over Jews would have been very surprising to the Jews of Spain, who were told where to live, what to wear, what they could do for a living, and what they could say or do in public. Further, the Inquisition wasn't the only Church office or institution that persecuted Jews.

Didn't you know why the Jews were expelled from Spain in 1492? They were told to become Christians, leave the country, or die.

The Church isn't directly responsible for the Holocaust, but they certainly set the stage for it; and the Church IS responsible for being honest and repentant about its history. And minimizing and downplaying the crimes and horrors of the Church, and bringing up Jews who were complicit in them, as has been done here, is not evidence that those lessons have been learned.

The unfortunate harrassment Jews got back them was based on their religion, not their race.

What difference does THAT make? The Jews who were locked inside burning synagogues to be incinerated alive - a common Christian practice throughout the ages - probably didn't much care if their murderers were motivated by racial or religious bigotry.

Do you really think "unfortunate harassment" is quite the phrase you want to use here? It sounds like you think they were having eggs thrown at them. How about "viciously brutal mass murders repeated for hundreds of years with impunity"?

Christians ordered or encouraged the expulsion of Jews from every nation in Europe at least once, and who knows how many deaths resulted? There were massacres, expulsions, torture, and mass murder of Jews taking place for centuries, and it's not hard to see the reason. The Christian Church taught outright lies about Jews for all of those centuries, including the Blood Libel (still taken seriously by some Christians even today, as has been seen on this forum), and those hateful lies cost the lives of (yes) literally millions of my people.

Jews alone account for millions of victims of Christianity and Christian teachings. Those teachings have largely been corrected and even apologized for today, but history remains history, and those people are still dead. Antisemitism remains the great untreated wound of the Christian Church, and Christian complicity in the murder and torment of my people for almost two thousand years has never even been properly acknowledged, let alone repented of. Watch and see the responses to this post.

Christianity is an honorable and noble religion today, or can be; but history, as I said, remains history.

That is what the debate is about. I appreciate your keeping it civil.

No problem. Let me add that I do NOT think you, or your post, is antisemitic; but you prove my point. Antisemitism became such an integral part of Christianity that even today, its traces and shadows are invisible to many Christians.

Do you understand why a Jew might be enraged at someone "pointing out" the things you have? I have actually heard Christians talk about the fact that Jewish converts to Christianity were gassed along with those who remained Jewish as an especially heinous crime - as if that was worse than murdering the rest, and the Nazis should have allowed Christian Jews, but not Jewish Jews, to live. The same goes for talking about Jews who cooperated with the Inquisition and the Nazis; does that make what our persecutors did OK? If you're talking about rape, do people appreciate anyone saying that "some women ask for it"? The same applies here. I fail to see why anyone would even mention either in this context - both are horribly offensive. If you never knew that before, now you do.

This is my point. Very few Christians ever think about these things from a Jewish perspective, to the extent that they don't even understand how these references can be offensive. These lessons will only be learned when Christians actually examine their thinking about Jews and change it.

[East of Eden]

Excuse me; I'm pretty clearly no big fan of anotheratheisthere, but in all fairness, I think he was right on this.

The Holocaust alone, though it wasn't done under the direction or the auspices of the Church, accounts for "millions" - and it counts, because institutional Christian antisemitism was the foundation of the casual, taken-for-granted Jew-hatred throughout Europe that made it possible.

I completely reject that line of thought. As I posted before, Einstein said the church was the German institution that did the most to oppose Hitler. Because Christians believe Jews to be theologically wrong (as Jews do Christians) does not equate to 'institutional Christian antisemitism'. Today evangelical Christians are the strongest supporters of Israel.

You're not hearing me; I'm not talking about the direct involvement of the Church. There was none, and I am among those Jews who think Pius X got a bad rap. I'm talking about the history behind the Holocaust that set the stage for it; the teaching of the Church for more than a thousand years that Jews are "Christ-killers," that the Jews wander because we are accursed by God, that Jews are doomed to Hell because Christians took our place, that Jews regularly commit ritual murder of Christian children to drink their blood (the Blood Libel), that Jews are dishonest, grasping, greedy, and hate Christians, that we plan to rule the world through corruption and conspiracy, and on and on and on. Material from a Christian website that still teaches these things today has been presented in this forum within the last few weeks. The church no longer teaches them today, but they became part of European Gentile culture for more than a millenium, and absolutely and without question were the indirect and often direct cause of the deaths of millions of Jews. These Christian teachings made the Holocaust possible. Period, full stop.

If your theory that Christianity was the cause of the Holocaust were true, there would be rampant anti-Semitism in the US, one of the most Christian nations of the West. The US is in fact, a safe haven for Jews. The causative factor in the Holocaust was Hitler and his ideology, not Christianity. If the Inquisition was the pattern Hitler used for the holocaust, why were there a few thousand victims of all races over centuries in the former and millions of victims over a decade with the latter?

You are ignoring church opposition to the reprehensible ideas about Jews that circulated among Christians of the Middle Ages. Pope Innocent III wrote in 1199:

"No Christian shall do the Jews any personal injury, except in executing the judgments of a judge, or deprive them of their possessions, or change the rights and privileges which they have been accustomed to have. During the celebration of their festivals, no one shall disturb them by beating them with clubs or by throwing stones at them. No one shall compel them to render any services except those which they have been accustomed to render. And to prevent the baseness and avarice of wicked men we forbid anyone to deface or damage their cemeteries or to extort money from them by threatening to exhume the bodies of their dead."

Unfortunately, like those who ignored Papal decrees against involvement in slavery and like those today who ignore issues like abortion and sexual immorality, not all Catholics obeyed.

The bolded part is contemptible. It's called "blaming the victim."

Just making the point that the Inquisition wasn't about race, as Hitler's program was. "These Jews had no qualms about testifying before the Inquisition courts because as Jews they were exempt from its jurisdiction."

Didn't you know why the Jews were expelled from Spain in 1492? They were told to become Christians, leave the country, or die.

Of course I know, I've been to Spain more times than I can count. Being told to convert or leave doesn't equate to the torture and murder of millions. How many Jews were there in Europe in the Middle Ages?

Do you understand why a Jew might be enraged at someone "pointing out" the things you have? I have actually heard Christians talk about the fact that Jewish converts to Christianity were gassed along with those who remained Jewish as an especially heinous crime - as if that was worse than murdering the rest, and the Nazis should have allowed Christian Jews, but not Jewish Jews, to live. The same goes for talking about Jews who cooperated with the Inquisition and the Nazis; does that make what our persecutors did OK? If you're talking about rape, do people appreciate anyone saying that "some women ask for it"? The same applies here. I fail to see why anyone would even mention either in this context - both are horribly offensive. If you never knew that before, now you do.

This is my point. Very few Christians ever think about these things from a Jewish perspective, to the extent that they don't even understand how these references can be offensive. These lessons will only be learned when Christians actually examine their thinking about Jews and change it.

If I can make a general observation, IMHO some of what is called anti-Jewish sentiment is the idea that Jews, like everybody else, are sinners in need of redemption through Jesus Christ. This is what I believe, as well as many Messianic Jews. That we believe Jewish theology to be wrong doesn't make us anti-Jewish any more than the fact Jews believe us to be wrong about Jesus makes them anti-Christian.

[JoeyKnothead]

Didn't you know why the Jews were expelled from Spain in 1492? They were told to become Christians, leave the country, or die.

Of course I know, I've been to Spain more times than I can count. Being told to convert or leave doesn't equate to the torture and murder of millions. How many Jews were there in Europe in the Middle Ages?

You can't tote that much goofy in two trips draggin' two carts.

Notice the absence of any concern for that whole "or die" part cnorman18 referenced.

It is my contention such dismissal of the worst part of that whole "deal" is a product of a religion that must dismiss so much in order to maintain belief.

[East of Eden]

Didn't you know why the Jews were expelled from Spain in 1492? They were told to become Christians, leave the country, or die.

Of course I know, I've been to Spain more times than I can count. Being told to convert or leave doesn't equate to the torture and murder of millions. How many Jews were there in Europe in the Middle Ages?

You can't tote that much goofy in two trips draggin' two carts.

Notice the absence of any concern for that whole "or die" part cnorman18 referenced.

I'm not denying many Jews were killed, my quibble is with the 'millions' (i.e., 2,000,000+) part that is thrown around here without any documentation. In 1391 the entire Jewish population of Seville was estimated at 7,000 families. It's been estimated that in the Jewish expulsion of 1492 about 20,000 died en route.

It is my contention such dismissal of the worst part of that whole "deal" is a product of a religion that must dismiss so much in order to maintain belief.

Not sure what you mean here.

[Sir Rhetor]

Samuel Harris estimated that about 50 thousand witches alone were burned during the middle ages. I'm not surprised: they didn't exactly give each one a separate trial.

[Grumpy]

joeyknuccione

It is my contention such dismissal of the worst part of that whole "deal" is a product of a religion that must dismiss so much in order to maintain belief.

Good point. In this case they must distort and gloss over the history of both the Catholic and Protestant Christians in regards to the pogroms* that flared in Europe, culminating in the Nazi atrocities. Even in Russia(which was very much a Christian nation under the Czars until 1918)pogroms happened regularly. Do you really think the Cossacks stopped to count the dead Jews when they killed everything that moved in a village? These "hidden" deaths(including those perpetrated by Crusaders and other agents of the ruling Christian Kings)are regularly forgotten by Christians today(as East of Eden demonstrates).

*pogrom-(pgrm, pgrm), Russian term, originally meaning "riot," that came to be applied to a series of violent attacks on Jews in Russia in the late 19th and early 20th cent. Pogroms were few before the assassination of Alexander II. Alexander II, 1818"81, czar of Russia (1855"81), son and successor of Nicholas I . He ascended the throne during the Crimean War (1853"56) and immediately set about negotiating a peace (see Paris, Congress of )in 1881; after that, with the connivance of, or at least without hindrance from, the government, there were many pogroms throughout Russia. Soldiers and police often looked on without interfering. These pogroms encouraged the first emigration of Russian Jews to the United States. After 1882 there were few pogroms until 1903, when there was an extremely violent three-day pogrom at Chisinau resulting in the death of 45 Jews. Although it has not been conclusively proved that the czarist government organized pogroms, the government's anti-Semitic policies certainly encouraged them. After the abortive revolution of 1905, pogroms increased in number and violence. With the success of the Bolshevik Revolution, pogroms ceased in the Soviet Union(wow, the atheist STOPPED the pogroms G); they were revived in Germany and Poland after Adolf Hitler attained power.

http://encyclopedia2.thefreedictionary.com/Pogram

And that's before we even consider the rampant anti-semitism in other parts of Europe. Jews faced persecution, theft of their livelihoods and outright state sanctioned murder for CENTURIES before Hitler tried to exterminate them once and for all. Christians try to conviently forget that for the vast majority of those centuries the state WAS the church(or it's puppet "Divine right of Kings").

The reason Jews were singled out for this treatment had EVERTHING to do with religion and religious institutions. Christian bigotry and the lies it generated is directly responsible, even if some churches resisted it's direct implementation(as Albert Einstein experienced), most did not interfere and actually entered into compacts with the worst of the murderers(Hitler and the Pope). Germany was a christian nation, Hitler was a life long Catholic and his hatred of the Jews was church doctrine of the time(and a long time before), this cannot be denied by informed and reasonable people.

It is true that some of our world has learned the lessons of what intolerance can lead to. The christian churches have come a long way. Islamic sects learned nothing from WW2(Islamic countries sided with the Nazis). And some christians just transfered their hatred and intolerance to different groups of "others"(gays, Communists, liberals, Socialists, etc.). Hatred and prejudice is still preached from some pulpits. Uganda is a recent example where the intolerant preaching of Evangelicals has had unexpected and horrible consequences(a possible death sentence for gays), India today is constantly having violent conflicts between religions(Christianity is far from the only religion teaching intolerance of others). Even those of the SAME religion are killing themselves(Sunni and Shiai in Islam, Catholics and protestants since Martin Luther(a raging antisemite as well))because of intolerance.

Rodney King said "Can't we all just get along?" to which all I can add is "Amen!"

Grumpy