Sork - you are cheating. You originally said Christianity REQUIRED me not to fight. You are wrong. Admit it.

Cheating? Moi? Why? It all started with light hearted comment about forgiveness being the christian thing to do... throughout this debate I have been at pains to point out the complexity and diversity of such large and long-standing faith as christianity- If did say it REQUIRED and if it makes you feel better I happy to modify that... if it makes easy for some people to sleep at night thought I would mantain what we have are different interpretations of chrisitanity- rather than one correct version and the others incorrect. But I happy to admit- whatever it was that needed admiting.

El Cid after recovering from my shock regarding your views on nuclear proliferation a couple of posts back- I would interested to see what kind US policy way back in 1940/50s do you think would have been better at limiting nuclear proliferation- is there a counter-history that you could suggest which would mean if different decisions had been taken we not be faced with todays' problem of nuclear prolifertion... with your actual expereince in governmental circles you must have an apperciation of where the policy on nuclear proliferation worked and were it did not.

You guys have had some deep and knowledgeable discussions re Christianity and pacifism. I thought the Christian ethos could be summarized best by that FDR homely, ‘talk quietly and carry a big stick’. In other words the first obligation is to not be violent, but when all else fails controlled reasonable force was okay as a last resort. Pragmatic Idealists. There’s probably no one passage or quote that says it but surely that would be the summary of the ‘contradictions’? Not that I think it impacts on the current situation. Although Judeo-Christianity morality is the underpinning of most western democracies laws and morality, it is more the pragmatics of economics etc that determine Western policy towards Islam. The impact of religion on decision making in the west is minimal. By my observations probably greater in America but it still not the 'decider'. But it doesn’t seem to be working the same from the other side.

...The non-violent palestinian movement has not been that successful... Maybe its political circumstances that 'Judeo-Christian' sensiblities find themselves which determines their openess or not to non-violent protest... What non-violent palestinian protest movement? Have I missed Yasser Arafat holding a sit-in at a Tel Aviv delicatessen and singing "We Shall Overcome" ?

...Also, one should not forget the 'Judeo-Christian' roots of both communism and Nazism (e.g see Michael Burliegh's recent histroy of Third Reich)... Karl Marx was the child of German Jews who convetrted to Lutheranism in the 19th century. And that is as close to Judeo-Christian as communism comes. It was, from 1848 onwards, rigorously athiest. Marx did have some kind words to says about the historical effects of protestantism in Das Kapital, but he saw no use for it as part of the future of mankind. Many years ago I forced myself to read through the turgid verbal sewage of Mein Kampf. Adolf Hitler expressly condemned Christianity, labelling it as a Jewish plot foisted on the gentile world to weaken it. Both Communism and National Socialism appropriated imagery and aspirations from Christianity. That does not mean that they were inspired by Christianity. Communism and National Socialism tried to replace Christianity, just as Christianity replaced the pagan culture that preceeded it. As it replaced paganism, Christianity it apropriated imagery, holidays and titles titles from it. One example of this appropriation is that "Pontifix Maximus", the chief priest of Rome, became the title of the Bishop of Rome, and therefore of the Pope. This process does not mean that the paganism inspired the Catholic Church, and it does not mean that Christianity inspired Communism or the Nazi's.

...Like sorkoi, I am not Christian and I believe that allows me to be much more objective on this topic... I don't believe that this is a matter of objectivity. I think it is a matter of a knowledge deficit. I see many people making glib statements about Christianity; things that are both "common knowledge" and utterly false. It does not matter whether the people making the statements are Christian believers or not. The statements are based on a lack of knowledge. I responded to a post by sorkoi in which he made a statement about the problems the Roamn Empire with Christians because their religion was pacifist. This statement was historically incorrect. I used knowldege from a lifetime of reading history to reply. I think I made a pretty good historical case. after all, objectivity without knowledge is still just ignorance. respectfully yours, timon_phocas

Yes you have missed it. I was not talking about Yasser Arafat- he is not be all and end all of the Palestinian movment. The Black Panthers, The Nation of Islam, Malcolm X, Martin Luther King were all involved in different ways and levels in affirmation of rights for African Americans.

I did say 'roots' not inspire- but I guess it depend on on what you mean by inspire. 1. The philophical structure of communism and Nazism can be seen as secularized version of Christian eschatology. 2. Again, the relationship between early Chrisitanity and Paganism is very complex. We see often (not exclusively) a Christian re-occuption of pagan rituals, metaphors, institutions... For example, temple friezes in 3rd Cent. BCE showing Isis and Horous -we see similar illustrations in 6th cent CE but this time they are described as Mary and the baby Jesus. How do we explain this translation? Or why does the Christian church use purple for it high officials? Is because the Romans used purple to signfy high rank? Why did the Romans use purple was because they were obessesed with trying to imitate Alexander and came to see that purple was associated with Hellensitic kingdoms, who used purple because the Achamenids did, who used purple because the Assyrians did... or was that purple was one of the most expensive dyes in the ancient world and its use to denote wealth and privilige?

sork: the relationship between early Chrisitanity and Paganism is very complex. Indeed it is worse than the examples you point out, and Timon Phocas may have studied history, but he apparently missed some important "Pagan" mythological influences on Christianty like the influence of "Mithraism" (the God who descends into the earth for three days, and then rises again), and I believe there is a precedent for the "Virgin Birth" in paganism as well. .