Should Christians be Pacifist?

[Edward]

Hitler also asked the world jewish congress if they wanted to go to Palestine. The Jews said no.

Which didn't start until the war started. Hitler wanted the Jews out of Europe but the Jews said no.

In fact, the Jews were onboard with emigration. The problems were the British (who didn't want them in Palestine), the French (Madagascar) and the Americans (US and Cuba). An objective study of the issues leaves the British looking really bad (although they did eventually take in 10,000 children and perhaps 30,000 valuable immigrants), the Germans less so that modern propaganda depicts as everyone projects backwards from the Final Solution (which was the last choice of the Nazis.) About a quarter of a million Jews made it past the British (and later Russian) gauntlet to Palestine 1933-1941. (Yes, even a couple of years into the war with Germany, the Brits were still devoting resources to keeping the Jews out.)

Read up on the MV Struma (1942) and the SS Patria (1940) to get a very small taste of what was going on. And, of course, the well known case of the St. Louis.

The Austrian Jews and t he Nazis tended to agree that the immigrant to Palestine be the young, healthy folks.

In at least one case, the Germans released an inmate from the Dachau concentration camp so he could attempt to get to Palestine.

Hitler wanted to have all Jews exterminated, as they were the main cause in his sick and perverted mind as to why the German master race had become polluted.

Don't believe everything you learned in school. He wanted the Jews out of Europe. It was the what, not the how, that was important to most of the Nazi leaders.

 

[RamistThomist]

Hitler wanted to have all Jews exterminated

No he didn't. If that were true, then he wouldn't have made offers to the World Jewish Congress on obtaining Palestine.

 

[RamistThomist]

I agree with you on that point, so you would not see them doing what God had desired when they supported each other at that time?

I see the situation as the young community trying to live in a new way. Economically, it proved to be a disaster (as the Jerusalem church rarely had enough food in Acts).

 

[Dachaser]

No he didn't. If that were true, then he wouldn't have made offers to the World Jewish Congress on obtaining Palestine.

Hitler was demon possessed probably, and his final plan was what he interned to have done to not just the jews, but other minorities, as Hitler played nice and put on a false front until he assumed absolute power and authority in Germany.

 

[Dachaser]

I see the situation as the young community trying to live in a new way. Economically, it proved to be a disaster (as the Jerusalem church rarely had enough food in Acts).

I see what you are saying here, as it was more that God allowed them to do that, but it was not really the preferred way for them to handle the needs of the new faith community.

 

[Dachaser]

No he didn't. If that were true, then he wouldn't have made offers to the World Jewish Congress on obtaining Palestine.

That was early on I think, as he ultimate goal always was to implement the Final Solution, and he just wanted until he assumed absolute power and was the right time.

 

[Edward]

That was early on I think, as he ultimate goal always was to implement the Final Solution, and he just wanted until he assumed absolute power and was the right time.

You need to learn to separate your emotions from history. Wannsee didn't even happen until January, 1942, after the US and Germany went to war and it was clear other options were foreclosed.

 

[Dachaser]

You need to learn to separate your emotions from history. Wannsee didn't even happen until January, 1942, after the US and Germany went to war and it was clear other options were foreclosed.

You do not think Hitler wanted to exterminate the Jews then? He was early on demonizing them in Germany, after he was elected into power.

 

[RamistThomist]

That was early on I think, as he ultimate goal always was to implement the Final Solution, and he just wanted until he assumed absolute power and was the right time.

His goal was Lebensraum for the Germans.

 

[RamistThomist]

You do not think Hitler wanted to exterminate the Jews then? He was early on demonizing them in Germany, after he was elected into power.

No, he wanted them out of Europe. Otherwise he wouldn't have offered them Palestine.

 

[RamistThomist]

I see what you are saying here, as it was more that God allowed them to do that, but it was not really the preferred way for them to handle the needs of the new faith community.

Where is your Scripture evidence for any of these claims?

 

[RamistThomist]

Hitler was demon possessed probably, and his final plan was what he interned to have done to not just the jews, but other minorities, as Hitler played nice and put on a false front until he assumed absolute power and authority in Germany.

Given that he was into Thule worship, I can grant the demon possession claim. The other assertions, however, are simply conjectures.

 

[Dachaser]

Where is your Scripture evidence for any of these claims?

Acts records to us historically how the early community of Faith decided to provide fort heir own then. correct?

 

[Dachaser]

Given that he was into Thule worship, I can grant the demon possession claim. The other assertions, however, are simply conjectures.

We know that Hilter lied big time to Chamberlaid though, as in the famous peace in our time, and he also signed a peace treaty with Stalin, and then proceeded to attack Russia, he has been shown to be liar and to have real agendas behind the fake facade.

 

[RamistThomist]

We know that Hilter lied big time to Chamberlaid though, as in the famous peace in our time, and he also signed a peace treaty with Stalin, and then proceeded to attack Russia, he has been shown to be liar and to have real agendas behind the fake facade.

He was right to attack Stalin. He intercepted communiques stating that Stalin was poised to overwhelm the West. All of Stalin's troops were in attack formation, which is why they were susceptible to Hitler's blitzkrieg. In fact, he destroyed so much Soviet materiel that Stalin was unable to enslave the West after the war.

 

[RamistThomist]

Acts records to us historically how the early community of Faith decided to provide fort heir own then. correct?

Acts does record the actions, but it doesn't say all that you read into it. Plus, economically, one doubts the Jerusalem church was able to really provide for their own, given that they were starving as a whole for much of the time.

 

[Edward]

You do not think Hitler wanted to exterminate the Jews then?

The Germans kept great records. Come up with one piece of documentation that Hitler was even aware of the death camps, much less directed their operations. Sure, he was aware of the early labor camps, but there's no documented ties between Hitler and the extermination centers.

As for Barbarossa, as Jacob notes, that was just beating the other guy to the punch.

 

[Dachaser]

He was right to attack Stalin. He intercepted communiques stating that Stalin was poised to overwhelm the West. All of Stalin's troops were in attack formation, which is why they were susceptible to Hitler's blitzkrieg. In fact, he destroyed so much Soviet materiel that Stalin was unable to enslave the West after the war.

Actually, believe the Lord directed him to do that attack, as it caused Germany to be forced to fight on both East/West, and thus contributed to Hitler getting defeated and stopped.

 

[Dachaser]

Acts does record the actions, but it doesn't say all that you read into it. Plus, economically, one doubts the Jerusalem church was able to really provide for their own, given that they were starving as a whole for much of the time.

I am open to different understandings of how to apply what they did to us, as still do see it as being what God wanted them to do at that time, but not for us today.

 

[Dachaser]

The Germans kept great records. Come up with one piece of documentation that Hitler was even aware of the death camps, much less directed their operations. Sure, he was aware of the early labor camps, but there's no documented ties between Hitler and the extermination centers.

As for Barbarossa, as Jacob notes, that was just beating the other guy to the punch.

You really think Hitler was ignorant of the Holocaust? I think that it is pretty clear that Himmler and Him co worked out the Final Solution, and that Dr Mengale and all of those other Nazi animals were following his orders. You and others here seem to be supporting to some degree those who seek to revise history and have it rewritten.

 

[RamistThomist]

as still do see it as being what God wanted them to do at that time, but not for us today.

That's fine, but you have to provide *scriptural evidence* that says God wanted them to do that at that time but doesn't want us to do it today. My contention is that no such evidence exists.

 

[RamistThomist]

Actually, believe the Lord directed him to do that attack, as it caused Germany to be forced to fight on both East/West, and thus contributed to Hitler getting defeated and stopped.

Can you provide evidence that the Lord wanted him to attack? And why is Hitler's defeat a good thing but Stalin's defeat would have been a bad thing?

 

[RamistThomist]

You really think Hitler was ignorant of the Holocaust? I think that it is pretty clear that Himmler and Him co worked out the Final Solution, and that Dr Mengale and all of those other Nazi animals were following his orders. You and others here seem to be supporting to some degree those who seek to revise history and have it rewritten.

No revision on our part. Simply that the Holocaust, defined as death camps, was a late development in WWII. Therefore, it can't be read into Hitler's earlier motives.

 

[Dachaser]

No revision on our part. Simply that the Holocaust, defined as death camps, was a late development in WWII. Therefore, it can't be read into Hitler's earlier motives.

He had those anti Semitic thoughts in Mein Kamf, and so he was just finally able to bring them to pass at that time. He needed to wait until the extermination camps were fully built in order to execute his Final Solution.

 

[Edward]

You really think Hitler was ignorant of the Holocaust?

I didn't say that, did I?

You and others here seem to be supporting to some degree those who seek to revise history and have it rewritten.

You are the one that is arguing from emotion and option, not facts.

I think that it is pretty clear that Himmler and Him co worked out the Final Solution, and that Dr Mengale and all of those other Nazi animals were following his orders.

Mengele was a battalion medical officer until 1943; he was clearly a small fish. As for the rest of your theory, show me some evidence. Particularly since it has been documented that Hitler personally intervened on several occasions to save individual Jews.

 

[RamistThomist]

He had those anti Semitic thoughts in Mein Kamf, and so he was just finally able to bring them to pass at that time. He needed to wait until the extermination camps were fully built in order to execute his Final Solution.

Of course he had anti-semitic thoughts. Every person in Europe at the time did. But that still doesn't mean his ultimate goal was to kill off every Jew. His goal was to have a Greater Germany.

 

[Justified]

Proof of historical revisionism on the part of the establishment can be proven by the simple fact that it's all right to be a Communist but one cannot be a Nazi. Communism killed (is killing) countless more lives than Nazism/Facism ever did. Moreover, the economies and standard of living in communist countries was and is abysmal. Communism is not about common property but party ownership. The economy under the Nazi or national socialist government, on the other hand, thrived and the German people flourished.

 

[Edward]

Every person in Europe at the time did.

Not everyone. Probably most. I learned something interesting the other day. The Nazis apparently swiped the plan to ship Jews to Madagascar from the Poles who had looked into doing that themselves.

 

[ZackF]

Proof of historical revisionism on the part of the establishment can be proven by the simple fact that it's all right to be a Communist but one cannot be a Nazi. Communism killed (is killing) countless more lives than Nazism/Facism ever did.

True believer Nazi-ism was thankfully too exclusive to endure. They ran out of the 'right people' to kill or keep in-line the 'wrong people.'

On the contrary, Communism has a pull with folks that I've only learned to apprehend but not truly comprehend. Marxism has always tried to pass itself off as scientific but it inspires belief. You have to 'buy in.' Gary North recommends a book, 'Dedication and Leadership,' written by Roman Catholic convert from communism, Douglas Hyde. Hyde breaks down the training that the Party systematically did with new 'converts.' Their proto-Alinsky way of rubbing people's emotions raw and then pouncing on them with a purpose became refined over the years. Because have-nots (or have-lesses) will always outnumber haves, fresh meat is too be had at any time and place. A new member is a new member regardless of his hair color.

I was in high school between 88-92 and so I saw all the stuff tumble down from the Berlin Wall to Gorbachev's resignation. In college I remember Leftist professors just being grumbling malcontents. To them Clinton was a Center-Right guy and much too campy for their tastes. However, one conservative prof I knew was just delighted with the changes. He was a second generation American of polish parents. He'd been to Soviet Union several times. He just didn't get folks that were enamored with communism. We joked about bringing the efficiency of the tag office to every place in American life.

 

[Held Fast]

You probably need to study a bit more history on that. There was provocation.
Economic
-embargo on steel and oil
-asset freeze
-pressuring the British and Dutch to join the asset freeze
Military
-supply of weapons and pilots to the Chinese



I've already indicated above that I would take the other side on an argument based upon the neutrality patrols and unilateral weapons supply. The Germans declared war based on loyalty to an ally, not the neutrality patrols.

As for the Jews, Hitler would have been glad for the US to take them. The US didn't want them.

(Semi-related question - who were the first US military casualties of World War II in your mind?)

I'm secure in my read of Japan's right to bomb Pearl Harbor ... it was unprovoked. Yes, there was economic and strategic pressure, but we had made no threat of violence upon them for which they would have a right to preemptively strike, a matter which in and of itself is debatable in a Christian view of justifiable use of violence. Again, partnership and allies brought us into a situation where violence was a natural development.

Your read on the Jews is spot on ... they became an issue as the war developed, but were not our justification for war, nor at any time where they offered as justification for war. It was in the outcome, when the utility of the war was evaluated, that many chose to point backwards and say, see, it was all about Israel and the Jews ... and it was never about them at all. A Christian ought not enter into violence first, hoping for a good cause to develop over time.

First casualties? Germans bombed Norway in 1940, and we had military attache killed at the diplomatic mission we were in the process of evacuating in the face of invasion. We were not targeted, but were collateral damage. We were not at war at the time, nor would that incident qualify as grounds to enter the war.

The essential question at hand is whether or not a Christian, or a nation that claims to uphold Christian values, can justify war, and if so, upon what grounds. That is a distinct conversation from politics, policies, and the relationship of nations. Christians, by nature of our belief, are not limited to secular justifications, and in fact are called to avoid them. We do however stoop to them most frequently when we have made oaths of loyalty to other nations, and in essence abdicate our obligation of moral evaluation to the leadership of the nation to which we've made an oath. We also like to invoke a divine mandate against evil some times, but that too must be tempered with the question of appropriate authority. If we believe that God appoints leaders of the church, empowers them to do things that the laity do not, it should not be hard to except that agency in the prosecution of war is likewise tied to God's appointed leaders, and not to the emotional appeal of interested Christians.