rlr@pyuxd.UUCP (Dr. Emmanuel Wu) (04/01/85)
> It has taken awhile, but I am finally coming to realize that some > of the assumptions I make about the net.religion readers may be in error. > In particular: I have been assuming that most net.religion readers > have enough of a working knowledge of Christianity that they are able > to discern whether a given position is representative of one or more of the > major Christian traditions. And I have been applying this assumption to > Don Black's articles: It is obvious to me that "Identity Christianity" > holds many views which are contrary to those of orthodox Christianity; > I assumed it was obvious to everyone else -- so obvious that it was not > worth stating. [NANCY TINKHAM] It's obviously not obvious to Black and his kind. Never assume that such things are "obvious". The man and his fellow travelers use the name "Christian". They believe they are Christian. The rest of the world has no reason to believe otherwise. Though Christians have been known to delete certain groups from their ranks by fiat ("THEY're not Christians!"), such claims don't hold any water for the outside observer. If you don't feel he represents Christianity, say so, as Bill Jefferys did so very well. > Those of you who have complained about silence: Are you honestly > claiming that "Identity" sounds so much like the teachings of the > major Christian traditions that you cannot distinguish them? Yup. When compared to the history of the practice of Christianity throughout the last 2000 odd years (when Christians claim it is Satan who has had control of the earth), I see a very close resemblance to the excesses of the movement. > Do you truly believe that it is safe to assume that a Christian is > passionately anti-Semitic until he proves himself otherwise? I don't think it's "safe" at all. It opens one up to the most vicious sort of attack. Given the way Christian teaching has treated the Jewish people until only recently, and given the continuance of such notions as "the Jews were responsible for Jesus' death" and other great lies told about Jews throughout the ages BY CHRISTIANS (how Jews engage in the blood sacrifice on Passover, how Jews were responsible for the plague, how some STILL believe that Jews have horns), and how Christians treated many other groups of people, given all that, and given the way all these notions still seem well etched in the mindset of many Christians (even though they may have been taught otherwise, there's always the family history...), it may be unfair to ASSUME that all Christians are de facto anti-Semitic, but it's equally poor reasoning for Christians to assume that they are free of the prejudices ingrained in the followers of that religion for 2000 years just because of one generation of sudden turnabout. We are in the Easter season, when numerous productions tell the story of the Jews being responsible for the death of Jesus. Watered down out of ecumenism, of course, but still holding the seeds. > For those who need someone to state the painfully obvious, here > it is: The torture and execution of millions of Jews and others > under the Nazis was a horror and an abomination which must never, > ever be repeated. I, too, was stunned to read Byron's article pointing > out that there are groups today which consider this to have been > an acceptable action, and that "Identity" is apparently among them. > Should a group like that ever begin to come to power in this country, > I would use any moral means at my disposal to oppose them. Will you act only if and when they "ever begin to come to power"? Are you only willing to act when it's too late? Or will you speak up now? Having learned a lesson of history from those who didn't... -- Life is complex. It has real and imaginary parts. Rich Rosen ihnp4!pyuxd!rlr