Green Room

The Pope’s Jews: Rethinking Pius XII

posted at 12:04 pm on February 16, 2013 by

For much of the post-WWII period, Pope Pius XII came under considerable fire for supposedly appeasing Hitler and the Nazis during the war.  Thirteen years ago, a book titled Hitler’s Pope claimed that Pius XII turned his back on Jews due to anti-semitism.  However, a Protestant researcher granted access to Vatican materials has reached a very different conclusion in a book titled The Pope’s Jews: The Vatican’s Secret Plan to Save Jews from the Nazis.  The Guardian profiles the book, author Gordon Thomas, and the network the Vatican put in place (via The Anchoress):

Gordon Thomas, a Protestant, was given access to previously unpublished Vatican documents and tracked down victims, priests and others who had not told their stories before.

The Pope’s Jews. . . details how Pius gave his blessing to the establishment of safe houses in the Vatican and Europe’s convents and monasteries. He oversaw a secret operation with code names and fake documents for priests who risked their lives to shelter Jews, some of whom were even made Vatican subjects.

Thomas shows, for example, that priests were instructed to issue baptism certificates to hundreds of Jews hidden in Genoa, Rome and elsewhere in Italy. More than 2,000 Jews in Hungary were given fabricated Vatican documents identifying them as Catholics and a network saved German Jews by bringing them to Rome. The pope appointed a priest with extensive funds with which to provide food, clothing and medicine. More than 4,000 Jews were hidden in convents and monasteries across Italy.

During and immediately after the war, the pope was considered a Jewish saviour. Jewish leaders – such as Jerusalem’s chief rabbi in 1944 – said the people of Israel would never forget what he and his delegates “are doing for our unfortunate brothers and sisters at the most tragic hour”. Jewish newspapers in Britain and America echoed that praise, and Hitler branded him “a Jew lover”.

However, his image turned sour in the 1960s, thanks to Soviet antagonism towards the Vatican and a German play by Rolf Hochhuth, The Deputy, which vilified the pope, accusing him of silence and inaction over the Jews. It was a trend that intensified with the publication of Hitler’s Pope, a book by John Cornwell.

However, as the Vatican’s secretary of state before the war, the future pope contributed to the damning 1937 encyclical of Pius XI, With Burning Anxiety, and, as Pius XII he made condemnatory speeches that were widely interpreted at the time – including by Jewish leaders and newspapers – as clear condemnations of Hitler’s racial policies. Due to the Vatican’s traditionally diplomatic language, the accusation that Pius XII did not speak out has festered.

Professor Ronald J Rychlak, the author of Hitler, the War and the Pope, said: “Gordon Thomas has found primary sources … He has tracked down family members, original documentation and established what really was a universal perception prior to the 1960s. He’s shown what the people at the time – victims, rescuers and villains – all knew: that Pius XII was a great supporter of the victims of the Holocaust.”

Asked why the Vatican had not made the new material available until now or, where stories were known, disseminated them more widely,Thomas said: “The church thinks across centuries. If there’s a dispute for 50 years, so what?”

Given all this week’s events, the timing of the new book seems propitious, especially for the author and publisher.  History takes its own time to unfold, and often touches off bouts of revisionism and re-revisionism.  Thomas appears to have done his homework, and without an ideological or denominational dog in the fight.  I’ll add this to the List Of Books I Want If I Ever Get Time To Read Books Again.

Recently in the Green Room:

Blowback

Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.

Trackbacks/Pings

Trackback URL

Comments

Comment pages: 1 2 3

He hasn’t come.

annoyinglittletwerp on February 18, 2013 at 1:14 AM

He has.

unclesmrgol on February 18, 2013 at 1:16 AM

A very good recitation on why most Jews didn’t recognize the Messiah when He came…..

unclesmrgol on February 18, 2013 at 1:10 AM

The christian concept of a “messiah” deity have no foundations in the Torah or in Jewish tradition.

The reasons your Jesus wasn’t recognized as such are multiple. Once again, here are some comprehensive explanations.

Shy Guy on February 18, 2013 at 1:19 AM

He has.

unclesmrgol on February 18, 2013 at 1:16 AM

He’s dead, Jim.

Shy Guy on February 18, 2013 at 1:21 AM

Shy Guy on February 18, 2013 at 1:19 AM

Annointed with oil.

unclesmrgol on February 18, 2013 at 1:23 AM

Shy Guy on February 18, 2013 at 1:21 AM

Yes He is. But then again, He isn’t.

unclesmrgol on February 18, 2013 at 1:23 AM

He has.

unclesmrgol on February 18, 2013 at 1:16 AM

The Apostle Paul’s experience on the road to Damascus verifies this – or would anti-Christians have us believe that Paul was a better person and Jew before he converted to Christianity?

Anti-Control on February 18, 2013 at 1:25 AM

The christian concept of a “messiah” deity have no foundations in the Torah or in Jewish tradition.

The reasons your Jesus wasn’t recognized as such are multiple. Once again, here are some comprehensive explanations.

Shy Guy on February 18, 2013 at 1:19 AM

Is it not true that every cult pontificates about the “correct” way to interpret God/spirituality?

What argument can you make to an outsider that Jews against Jesus are less dogmatic, angry, and an arrogant than Jews for Jesus, which is not dependent on appeals to emotion and authority, nor personal attacks?

Anti-Control on February 18, 2013 at 1:40 AM

and an arrogant

Anti-Control on February 18, 2013 at 1:41 AM

Anti-Control on February 18, 2013 at 1:25 AM

I’m not going into the anti-Christian vs. pro-Christian fight other than to say that anyone who tells me that Jesus is not Lord/Messiah is not going to gain any traction.

They are welcome to their beliefs, and the truth shall become apparent after death one way or the other.

That said, Judaism and Christianity are united in certain works which must be performed (or not performed) under the Law. With Christianity, nearly all of the old Law continues, but is now applicable to non-Jews as well. As Paul points out, the behavioral portions of the Law continue — the Ten Commandments, the Great Commandments — they are to be followed. Merely believing does not save us — we must obtain the grace of God AND behave in a manner which warrants salvation.

Ezekiel says:

If he turns from the wickedness he has committed, and does what is right and just, he shall preserve his life.

Matthew says:

“What is your opinion? A man had two sons. He came to the first and said, ‘Son, go out and work in the vineyard today.’ He said in reply, ‘I will not,’ but afterwards he changed his mind and went. The man came to the other son and gave the same order. He said in reply, ‘Yes, sir,’ but did not go.

Which of the two did his father’s will?” They answered, “The first.” Jesus said to them, “Amen, I say to you, tax collectors and prostitutes are entering the kingdom of God before you.”

So, you can claim to be whatever you want, but the winnowing will occur — afterward. Both the Old Testament and the New Testament are clear on that.

As this post deals with the acts of Pius in preserving Jews from the hands of Nazis (the sum of whose acts by anyone’s estimation ought to be evil), I’m not sure why we are discussing whether or not Jesus is Messiah, but I stand with Him.

unclesmrgol on February 18, 2013 at 1:46 AM

Anti-Control on February 18, 2013 at 1:40 AM

(s)he is defending his/her faith. Unfortunately, by attacking someone else’s faith. But it didn’t start there. It started with the very first post — Karl Magnus’, which implied something quite incorrect about Jews and skirted the concept of blood libel a bit too close for my druthers.

I do have my bones to pick with certain Jewish leaders who’ve led the attempt to rewrite Pius’ history — most notably Rabbi Marvin Hier of “The Museum of Tolerance” — which, in my mind is anything but a museum of tolerance, especially since it broke ground in Jerusalem for another site — built on top of a Muslim cemetery. All of their mechanics to justify building on top of that cemetery put to the lie any concept of tolerance.

Tolerance is not breaking the windows of a synagogue, and it is not putting condoms on the door of a church, and it certainly is not building on top of another faith’s cemetery. You don’t have to like the other guys, but you do have to be sensible about their beliefs (including their sacred grounds) and their rights to practice their beliefs — except when such practice harms others (think clitorotomies here, not words or ideas). When we are not is precisely where conflict happens.

unclesmrgol on February 18, 2013 at 2:05 AM

As this post deals with the acts of Pius in preserving Jews from the hands of Nazis (the sum of whose acts by anyone’s estimation ought to be evil), I’m not sure why we are discussing whether or not Jesus is Messiah but I stand with Him.

unclesmrgol on February 18, 2013 at 1:46 AM

Because someone in the thread decided to act like a leftist debater?

Karl’s comment looked dumb, and annoyinglittletwerp’s response looked even dumber.

(s)he is defending his/her faith. Unfortunately, by attacking someone else’s faith. But it didn’t start there. It started with the very first post — Karl Magnus’, which implied something quite incorrect about Jews and skirted the concept of blood libel a bit too close for my druthers.

unclesmrgol on February 18, 2013 at 2:05 AM

Anti-Control on February 18, 2013 at 2:17 AM

Let’s take this one at a time:

Annointed with oil.

unclesmrgol on February 18, 2013 at 1:23 AM

Thank you for the literal translation. I shall hop over to the kitchen and douse myself with virgin (no, she wasn’t) olive oil.

Here is an article on references to the messiah, as mentioned in the Torah and the Prophets. See if you can figure out what other traits the messiah is supposed to have (other than oily hair), how some of these terms and conditions were not at all fulfilled by the deity you believe in (nowhere in the Tanach – Torah, Prophets, Scriptures – is their a mention of a non-human god-messiah – and I’ll be happy to point out the follies of the standard christian “proof” texts you will hurl back at me) and how some of these verses suit christianity not one little bit.

Shy Guy on February 18, 2013 at 2:20 AM

Yes He is. But then again, He isn’t.

unclesmrgol on February 18, 2013 at 1:23 AM

In the Wizard of Oz, the Cowardly Lion kept his eyes closed and kept on repeating, “I do believe in spooks.”

Once again, here’s the link, which you conveniently ignored:

Did the disciples die for a lie?

Shy Guy on February 18, 2013 at 2:23 AM

Is it not true that every cult pontificates about the “correct” way to interpret God/spirituality?

Anti-Control on February 18, 2013 at 1:40 AM

Pontification in itself neither proves or disproves a belief. Some pontificate. Some stand by what are known to be the original beliefs of this religion or that. This is true between different religions. It is also true between different denominations within one religion, for example Orthodox versus Reform Judaism or Catholicism versus Evangelism.

The bottom line still remains that either everybody’s got it wrong or one of them has it right. What cannot be is that everybody is right. So we need to present arguments for and against this or that belief. I think that’s what we’re doing here.

What argument can you make to an outsider that Jews against Jesus are less dogmatic, angry, and an arrogant than Jews for Jesus, which is not dependent on appeals to emotion and authority, nor personal attacks?

Christianity wound up basing itself on the foundations of the Tanach (old testament), claiming not only to be a continuation but even a replacement of Judaism and the Nation of Israel. Those claims were not unanimous at first. Had christianity gone the way of Marcion, the whole structure of the arguments would be completely different.

I’ll keep it simple. Nowhere throughout Jewish history did anyone believe that the Torah permits, let alone approves of, the concept of a human flesh and blood deity. The concept is completely pagan to the Torah. It always was.

An article summing up why Jews don’t and cannot ever believe in Jesus, based on Tanach, can be found here.

Incidentally, I totally disagree with your presumptions about who is more or less angry and emotional than whom. Christian emotions and anger did enough damage to my nation for the last 1800 or so years, thank you very much.

Shy Guy on February 18, 2013 at 2:45 AM

I do have my bones to pick with certain Jewish leaders who’ve led the attempt to rewrite Pius’ history — most notably Rabbi Marvin Hier of “The Museum of Tolerance” — which, in my mind is anything but a museum of tolerance, especially since it broke ground in Jerusalem for another site — built on top of a Muslim cemetery. All of their mechanics to justify building on top of that cemetery put to the lie any concept of tolerance.

unclesmrgol on February 18, 2013 at 2:05 AM

The truth will set you free – not what you’ve been fed by others who are no less tolerant than what you gripe about:

For almost 50 years the compound has not been apart of the cemetery, both in the normative sense and in the practical sense, and it was used for various public purposes.” It also noted: “During all those years no one raised any claim, on even one occasion, that the planning procedures violated the sanctity of the site, or that they were contrary to the law as a result of the historical and religious uniqueness of the site … . For decades this area was not regarded as a cemetery by the general public or by the Muslim community … . No one denied this position.”

Important Facts:

•The site that was given to the Wiesenthal Center by the government of Israel and the Jerusalem municipality previously served as the City’s municipal parking lot for more than 40 years.

•During that time, Muslim groups never protested that the parking lot was once part of an ancient burial site.

•In 1964, the highest Muslim religious authorities declared that entire area, including adjacent Independence Park, a ‘mundras’ – an abandoned, ancient cemetery where public facilities may be built.

•The Simon Wiesenthal Center initiated a town plan to build a museum on the parcel allocated to it by the Government of Israel and the Municipality of Jerusalem and the City of Jerusalem issued a building permit to construct a museum. For five years during the public planning process, the Center for Human Dignity was the subject of hearings at open City Council meetings, through notices published in both Hebrew and Arabic newspapers, and the architectural model was on public display at City Hall. At no time throughout that entire public process, did a single person or organization come forward to object to the use of the grounds on the premise that the site was a Muslim cemetery.

•All of Jerusalem is layered in memory and history and it is not unusual for construction work in Jerusalem, a 3,000-year-old city, to encounter archeological artifacts and bones. That is why there is a special department called the Israel Antiquities Authority, charged with the special handling of any archaeological artifacts or remains that are found. Since the commencement of excavation, the project has been under their supervision, and every instruction has been followed. Most important, the Antiquities Authority, which is an independent body, supported the technical solutions that the Simon Wiesenthal Center filed with the Supreme Court.

•Given Jerusalem’s history, it is safe to assume that many prestigious academic and civic institutions may, in fact, be built on ancient remains. Human dignity demands that we respect and treat with reverence these remains of ancient civilizations without impeding the right of Jerusalem, or any other city, of building a future. If cities were not allowed to be built on the relics of previous civilizations, there would be no modern-day Rome, Jerusalem, or Cairo.

Source: Simon Wiesenthal Center

It took a half a minute for me to find it on Google. What’s your excuse?

Shy Guy on February 18, 2013 at 2:50 AM

Because someone in the thread decided to act like a leftist debater?

Anti-Control on February 18, 2013 at 2:17 AM

How misleading. The first comment here is by Karl, who is obviously a supporter of the Catholic church and Pius XII. He acted like many a christian I’ve heard. Left or right has nothing to do with it.

Karl’s comment looked dumb, and annoyinglittletwerp’s response looked even dumber.

How cheap a shot can you toss?

Shy Guy on February 18, 2013 at 2:56 AM

unclesmrgol on February 18, 2013 at 2:05 AM

I’m a ‘she’. Karl Magnus started it. I was baptized in an fundamentalist church in ’96, became a Catholic in 2010…and have been fighting to permanently return to Judaism since ’97. My mother’s death solidified my belief that I have a JEWISH soul. As Daniel Pearl was made to say(it’s on Ed Koch’s headstone as well), ‘My mother was a Jew, My father was a Jew, and I am a Jew.’

annoyinglittletwerp on February 18, 2013 at 2:59 AM

Shy Guy on February 18, 2013 at 2:56 AM

Until about 6 weeks ago, I was attending a Catholic Parish. There’s much to like about them. Karl Magnus is not representative. He might be a ‘traditio’ type. They don’t acknowledged Vatican II and still blame the Jews for Jesus death.

annoyinglittletwerp on February 18, 2013 at 3:03 AM

Until about 6 weeks ago, I was attending a Catholic Parish. There’s much to like about them. Karl Magnus is not representative. He might be a ‘traditio’ type. They don’t acknowledged Vatican II and still blame the Jews for Jesus death.

annoyinglittletwerp on February 18, 2013 at 3:03 AM

I’m very familiar with both flavors of Catholics you mention. I have no problem liking people of different faiths (and lack of faiths) who aren’t out to get me one way or another.

Shy Guy on February 18, 2013 at 3:10 AM

As Daniel Pearl was made to say(it’s on Ed Koch’s headstone as well), ‘My mother was a Jew, My father was a Jew, and I am a Jew.’

annoyinglittletwerp on February 18, 2013 at 2:59 AM

Ironically, Koch had himself interred in a burial plot he purchased at Trinity Church Cemetery because Manhattan was more important to him than a Jewish burial.

A lost Jew.

Shy Guy on February 18, 2013 at 3:13 AM

annoyinglittletwerp on February 18, 2013 at 2:59 AM

Unless you’re having breakfast in London or Paris, you need to get some shuteye, no?

Shy Guy on February 18, 2013 at 3:14 AM

Pontification in itself neither proves or disproves a belief. Some pontificate. Some stand by what are known to be the original beliefs of this religion or that. This is true between different religions. It is also true between different denominations within one religion, for example Orthodox versus Reform Judaism or Catholicism versus Evangelism.

The bottom line still remains that either everybody’s got it wrong or one of them has it right. What cannot be is that everybody is right. So we need to present arguments for and against this or that belief. I think that’s what we’re doing here.

Christianity wound up basing itself on the foundations of the Tanach (old testament), claiming not only to be a continuation but even a replacement of Judaism and the Nation of Israel. Those claims were not unanimous at first. Had christianity gone the way of Marcion, the whole structure of the arguments would be completely different.

I’ll keep it simple. Nowhere throughout Jewish history did anyone believe that the Torah permits, let alone approves of, the concept of a human flesh and blood deity. The concept is completely pagan to the Torah. It always was.

An article summing up why Jews don’t and cannot ever believe in Jesus, based on Tanach, can be found here.

Incidentally, I totally disagree with your presumptions about who is more or less angry and emotional than whom. Christian emotions and anger did enough damage to my nation for the last 1800 or so years, thank you very much.

Shy Guy on February 18, 2013 at 2:45 AM

I asked you to make an argument for your position free from appeals to emotion and authority, and from personal attacks – are you unable, or merely unwilling to do that?

How misleading. The first comment here is by Karl, who is obviously a supporter of the Catholic church and Pius XII. He acted like many a christian I’ve heard. Left or right has nothing to do with it.

That’s an opinion, one I don’t agree with – to me, “arguing like a leftist” means to debate based upon feelings whilst placing a lesser emphasis on evidence and reason.

How cheap a shot can you toss?

Shy Guy on February 18, 2013 at 2:56 AM

Saying that a person’s offensive comment “looks dumb” now is a “cheap” shot? lol overpersonalize much? :)

In your opinion, was the Apostle Paul a better Jew before, or after, his conversion? Do you reject his stated understanding of his conversion experience? If so, for any reason other than that it doesn’t fit into your presupposition of the nature of God, and reality?

Anti-Control on February 18, 2013 at 3:22 AM

Ironically, Koch had himself interred in a burial plot he purchased at Trinity Church Cemetery because Manhattan was more important to him than a Jewish burial.

A lost Jew.

Shy Guy on February 18, 2013 at 3:13 AM

lol you crack me up! :)

Anti-Control on February 18, 2013 at 3:28 AM

I asked you to make an argument for your position free from appeals to emotion and authority, and from personal attacks – are you unable, or merely unwilling to do that?

Anti-Control on February 18, 2013 at 3:22 AM

In that whole big quote from my comment, where do you see a personal or emotional attack?

That’s an opinion, one I don’t agree with – to me, “arguing like a leftist” means to debate based upon feelings whilst placing a lesser emphasis on evidence and reason.

Most everything is an “opinion”. Karl’s opinion is based on early church teachings and there are plenty of good arguments for his claims based on the NT and no lack of christian doctrine.

Are you implying that right-wing, conservatives, don’t debate based on feelings? Talk about opinions!

In your opinion, was the Apostle Paul a better Jew before, or after, his conversion?

You mean according to the NT, which I view as fiction? My answer is neither.

Do you reject his stated understanding of his conversion experience? If so, for any reason other than that it doesn’t fit into your presupposition of the nature of God, and reality?

My presuppositions are from Sinai. Yours are from a cut and paste manuscript designed to suit its audience of readers.

All this assumes Paul was actually a Jew to begin with. Google for many who show why this is likely not true to begin with.

Shy Guy on February 18, 2013 at 3:38 AM

lol you crack me up! :)

Anti-Control on February 18, 2013 at 3:28 AM

If you say so.

Shy Guy on February 18, 2013 at 3:39 AM

Hey, I’m looking for a non-liberal group for Jews returinig to Judaism from Christianity, that doesn’t push orthodoxy(like Jews for Judaism does). Is there such a group?

annoyinglittletwerp on February 18, 2013 at 12:43 AM

Where are you located?

Shy Guy on February 18, 2013 at 4:08 AM

In that whole big quote from my comment, where do you see a personal or emotional attack?

Appeals to emotion and authority, which you made in your post, are not always done in a personally denigrating way, correct? However, that’s not to say that you didn’t make any personal attack – you did when you mentioned “Christan emotions and anger…” in the process of sidestepping my challenge.

Are you implying that right-wing, conservatives, don’t debate based on feelings? Talk about opinions!

Um, no, I wasn’t implying that. In fact, I thought I was being very clear that I was saying the opposite!

You mean according to the NT, which I view as fiction? My answer is neither.

My presuppositions are from Sinai. Yours are from a cut and paste manuscript designed to suit its audience of readers.

All this assumes Paul was actually a Jew to begin with. Google for many who show why this is likely not true to begin with.

Shy Guy on February 18, 2013 at 3:38 AM

Paul’s account is “fiction,” and he might not even have been a Jew? Do you believe this might be the case for any reason other than that it doesn’t fit into your own religious presuppositions? :)

That is bad argumentation – it reads to me much like an AGW proponent’s defense does. You are treating your personal beliefs and inferences as authoritative and persuasive, which only undermines your position, and says to me that you are insecure i.e. why would a person who’s secure rely on such cheap devices, anyway?

If you say so.

Shy Guy on February 18, 2013 at 3:39 AM

I do! :D

I am not looking for an unfriendly argument about Christianity vs. Judaism, and I don’t want to be accused of derailing the thread further than it already might have been, so I’ll just state here that I thought Karl’s comment was improper, as I do annoyinglittletwerp’s escalatory one, and leave it at that.

Anti-Control on February 18, 2013 at 4:34 AM

I prematurely sent that.

Since I say that leftism is based in emotion, and rightism in logic, I meant to have phrased it more like this:

Are you implying that right-wing, conservatives, don’t debate based on feelings? Talk about opinions!

Um, no, I wasn’t implying that. In fact, I thought I was being very clear that by saying, “arguing like a leftist”, it means I believe right-wingers can debate based upon emotion.

Anti-Control on February 18, 2013 at 4:45 AM

However, that’s not to say that you didn’t make any personal attack – you did when you mentioned “Christan emotions and anger…” in the process of sidestepping my challenge.

Anti-Control on February 18, 2013 at 4:34 AM

That was not part of my answer to your question. It was about your presumptuous remark at the end of your post.

I’m sure you’ll get over it.

Paul’s account is “fiction,” and he might not even have been a Jew? Do you believe this might be the case for any reason other than that it doesn’t fit into your own religious presuppositions?

I have previously pointed out why the NT is a document of historical disrepute. I have suggested you use Google to answer your own question on this matter.

And I suggest when it comes to presuppositions, you are hardly the one to cast the first stone.

That is bad argumentation

Yada yada. Brilliant rebuttal on your part.

When you have something of substance to say, perhaps I’ll respond again.

Shy Guy on February 18, 2013 at 4:46 AM

Yada yada. Brilliant rebuttal on your part.

When you have something of substance to say, perhaps I’ll respond again.

Shy Guy on February 18, 2013 at 4:46 AM

Oh, you are an appealing converser, aren’t you? – “You can’t fire me, I quit!”

Nah, instead of you, I think I’d do better for myself in every way to go find one of those “lost” Jews you referred to before to talk with!

:lol:

Anti-Control on February 18, 2013 at 4:57 AM

Where are you located?

Shy Guy on February 18, 2013 at 4:08 AM

Lubbock. There nothing here.

annoyinglittletwerp on February 18, 2013 at 9:24 AM

Lubbock. There nothing here.

annoyinglittletwerp on February 18, 2013 at 9:24 AM

Other than Pony Express, how can I contact you?

Shy Guy on February 18, 2013 at 11:05 AM

I wrote

Millions upon millions believe otherwise–and did so in the ancient world as well.

To which Shy Guy responded

That’s true for many a false “messiah”:

Like Mohamed.

Like Marx.

Like Hitler.

Like Obama. :)

Totally missing my point. I wasn’t trying to prove that the numbers prove Jesus was authentic, I was trying to indicate a lot of people would be deeply offended by twerp’s post–not to speak of yours. Anti-Christianity is as offensive as anti-Semitism. It’s just as rooted in malice.

writeblock on February 18, 2013 at 11:23 AM

writeblock on February 18, 2013 at 11:23 AM

I’m happily married to a Christian. My ex-husband is a Christian. My great-grandmother(mother’s paternal grandmother) was born Christian. I’m not anti-Christian…I’m pro-Jewish.

annoyinglittletwerp on February 18, 2013 at 12:06 PM

Totally missing my point. I wasn’t trying to prove that the numbers prove Jesus was authentic, I was trying to indicate a lot of people would be deeply offended by twerp’s post–not to speak of yours. Anti-Christianity is as offensive as anti-Semitism. It’s just as rooted in malice.

writeblock on February 18, 2013 at 11:23 AM

Neither Twerp nor I would have responded here had it not been for the very first comment on this article. When you first commented here, you didn’t even relate to that.

Speaking for myself, I know I have avoided commenting on so many Christian subject topics on HA. It’s simply not my realm. When I have replied, it’s always been because of the jooooooooooooooooozzz commenters who seem to never fail to pop up. And they’re usually long time repeaters – until some of them go overboard and get banned.

Regarding your intent, I read your 12:13AM comment again. You may have intended otherwise but the way it reads is what I responded to.

In any case, I’m more than happy to cease and desist here. This is not what attracts me to HA.

Shy Guy on February 18, 2013 at 12:08 PM

Shyguy: I obviously don’t want to put my e-mail on this site…but I’m FB friend’s with KJ. If you go to his blog and send him a personal message with your e-mail or FB page, I’m sure he’ll pass it on to me. Just make sure you mention your ‘handle’ in the message. KJ’s a real mensch-so he won’t share any of your info.
Here’s his blog.

annoyinglittletwerp on February 18, 2013 at 12:12 PM

annoyinglittletwerp on February 18, 2013 at 12:12 PM

KJ’s email address is nowhere to be found on his blog. I personally don’t do Twitter nor FB.

You can email me at theshyguy@gmx.com with your contact info (email and phone). I will have someone contact you.

Nesi’ah tova!

Shy Guy on February 18, 2013 at 12:42 PM

I’m not anti-Christian…I’m pro-Jewish.

annoyinglittletwerp on February 18, 2013 at 12:06 PM

Likening Jesus to Hitler is not anti-Christian?

writeblock on February 18, 2013 at 1:08 PM

annoyinglittletwerp

Sorry, it was Shy Guy who likened Jesus to Hitler. It was you who called Jesus a false messiah, a political insurgent and one of a dime-a-dozen. Same difference.

writeblock on February 18, 2013 at 1:14 PM

Sorry, it was Shy Guy who likened Jesus to Hitler.

writeblock on February 18, 2013 at 1:14 PM

No, I did not. I equated your logic of Jesus’ mass popularity (which you claimed above you did not intend – so be it) with various historical figures for whom the same logic would apply. If anything, I was trying to show the fallacy of what you wrote.

It was you who called Jesus a false messiah, a political insurgent and one of a dime-a-dozen. Same difference.

Most folks I know would not equate the transgressions of “political insurgent” with Hitler. Perhaps you [again] intended something else.

Shy Guy on February 18, 2013 at 1:23 PM

Neither Twerp nor I would have responded here had it not been for the very first comment on this article. When you first commented here, you didn’t even relate to that.

It’s not your argument that repels, it’s the venom behind it. It’s just another form of bigotry–no different from anti-semitism.

writeblock on February 18, 2013 at 1:26 PM

It’s not your argument that repels, it’s the venom behind it. It’s just another form of bigotry–no different from anti-semitism.

writeblock on February 18, 2013 at 1:26 PM

If it makes you feel better believing that, then good for you.

Shy Guy on February 18, 2013 at 1:41 PM

No, I did not. I equated your logic of Jesus’ mass popularity (which you claimed above you did not intend – so be it) with various historical figures for whom the same logic would apply. If anything, I was trying to show the fallacy of what you wrote.

But that was not “my logic.” The notion I introduced was that many people would be offended by the equation of Jesus of Nazareth to one of a dime-a-dozen false messiahs–which twerp argued was “historical truth.” I was suggesting one person’s “historical truth” was another person’s smear tactic. The real purpose behind the comment was to insult, not shed any kind of historical light on the subject.

Most folks I know would not equate the transgressions of “political insurgent” with Hitler. Perhaps you [again] intended something else.

Nor would most folks put Jesus in the same category as Hitler under any circumstances. Again you hide your malice behind specious rationalizing. Why list Jesus with Hitler or Karl Marx? Why not with Gandhi or Solzhenitsyn?

writeblock on February 18, 2013 at 1:51 PM

Nor would most folks put Jesus in the same category as Hitler under any circumstances. Again you hide your malice behind specious rationalizing. Why list Jesus with Hitler or Karl Marx? Why not with Gandhi or Solzhenitsyn?

writeblock on February 18, 2013 at 1:51 PM

I’ll repeat. What you wrote versus what you intended are easily not one and the same. As such, my point was to show the fallacy of your literal (not intended) argument. Therefore, my response would not have made sense had I compared Jesus with Gandi or Solzhenitsyn.

This is not rocket science. I would also think it should all be mute by now. However, that would require you to realize how your original post could so easily be misunderstood – in spite of your intentions.

Shy Guy on February 18, 2013 at 1:59 PM

If it makes you feel better believing that, then good for you.

Shy Guy on February 18, 2013 at 1:41 PM

It’s not a matter of what I feel, it’s a matter of how you and twerp use language. It’s like calling the Piss Christ a “work of art.” To many it’s art, to many more it’s bigotry pure and simple.

writeblock on February 18, 2013 at 2:06 PM

It’s not a matter of what I feel, it’s a matter of how you and twerp use language. It’s like calling the Piss Christ a “work of art.” To many it’s art, to many more it’s bigotry pure and simple.

writeblock on February 18, 2013 at 2:06 PM

Then why do I feel that the Piss Christ is disgraceful and insulting to christians?

“For a man hears what he wants to hear and disregards the rest”

We are spinning our wheels.

Shy Guy on February 18, 2013 at 2:14 PM

writeblock on February 18, 2013 at 2:06 PM

Bigotry? Really?
Funny, but my UBER-Calvinist husband doesn’t doesn’t see it that way. He thinks I’m wrong-but despite being married for 10+ years(we’ve been together almost 16)-he’d be out the door if I WAS an ‘anti-Christian’ bigot. I also have some very Christian friends. They disagree with my return to Judaism. They probably think that I’m hell-bound for it too-but they’re still friends. Me thinks that you protest too much.

annoyinglittletwerp on February 18, 2013 at 2:16 PM

’ll repeat. What you wrote versus what you intended are easily not one and the same.

I was responding to twerp’s argument that it was “historical truth” that Jesus of Nazareth was a false messiah. But millions differ and differed. When I said that, I was not arguing that great numbers proved the Christian perspective. I was arguing that the Christian perspective was at least as legitimate historically as the Jewish one. It’s a 2 thousand year old dispute after all. Much depends on who’s writing the history.

writeblock on February 18, 2013 at 2:36 PM

Twerp, I can be reached at theshyguy@gmx.com.

Shy Guy on February 18, 2013 at 2:45 PM

Shy Guy on February 18, 2013 at 2:45 PM

I’m added to to my ‘contacts’ so I don’t forget. Right now,I’m fighting a vacuum cleaner. *smiles*

annoyinglittletwerp on February 18, 2013 at 2:49 PM

Comment pages: 1 2 3