Re: Scriptural errors (was Hyers' Article - Cods Wallop!)

From: George Murphy <gmurphy@raex.com>
Date: Sat Mar 06 2004 - 15:41:16 EST

John W Burgeson wrote:
>
> >>I know there are specious arguments by damned fools and by other
> classes of fools. Why do their conclusions vitiate the authority of
> scripture?>>
>
> Luther wrote some of the most anti-semitic diatribes on record, but I
> would not call him any kind of a fool.

        I have no wish to defend "Against the Jews and their Lies" but because both the
content & impact of this & anti-Jewish statements in other writings from Luther late in
his life are often misrepresented, a reality check may be helpful. Luther did indeed
write this & it's pretty horrible stuff. However -
        1) Luther's arhguments are not racial but theological. That may or may not be
any better, but his views are quite different from those of later anti-Jewish rhetoric
in Germany.
        2) The idea that Luther's views were largely responsible for creating the
climate for German acceptance of Nazi persecution of the Jews, the so-called "Shirer
myth", is incorrect. (Shirer was a good journalist but not all that great an
historian.) Later German Lutherans, to their credit, did not promote "Against the Jews
and their Lies," to the extent that the Nazis claimed that the Jews & their minions had
suppressed it.
        The writings I've mentioned were from late in Luther's life, which doesn't
excuse them. But it should be remembered that earlier (1522 I think) he had written an
essay, "That Jesus Christ was Born a Jew," that was much more favorable.
        & finally, the correct term is "anti-Judaism," not anti-semitism. "Semitic" was
originally a linguistic term which got turned into a racial one by the same process
through which "Aryan" was changed from a term for what we now call "Indo-European"
languages to its Nazi racial use. If "Semitic" meant anything in racial terms, Arabs,
among whom the most virulent "anti-Semitism" is found today, would be Semites. I know
that this is like trying to get people to call a negative electron a "negaton" - i.e.,
pretty much hopeless - but it's worth the effort.

                                                        Shalom,
                                                        George

George L. Murphy
gmurphy@raex.com
http://web.raex.com/~gmurphy/
Received on Sat Mar 6 15:57:44 2004

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.8 : Sat Mar 06 2004 - 15:57:44 EST