Links Kicking Broadswords: “Question Boldly Even the Very Existence of God”.

Kicking Broadswords

Rants from two Pro-gun, pro-Constitution, anti-liberal, anti-government spouses who also discuss Lutheran doctrine and probably a lot about survival and guns from the other spouse- my husband. If you hate commies, the blue states, and love the Constitution, read this blog.

Monday, February 14, 2005

“Question Boldly Even the Very Existence of God”.

Permit me, please, to digress a bit..
First, I want to thank RNS and others who broadcast our story about our local Republican class president (or something, whatever he is..). And I want to thank RNS very much for all their work over on the upper Left Coast, exposing loony lefties, and helping us citizens do things by ourselves, and for ourselves.

Second, I want to explain something..

“//When my husband would make me question the Holocaust's killing of 6 million//”

“From another post at that particular blog. I'm hoping it's not implying what it appears to be, but it does give me the creeps.”

Posted by: Dan at January 14, 2005 12:53 PM

A month ago, a reader made this comment in another forum, which made me think, and caused this thought to run through my head:


I don’t want to sound like a mean guy. I don’t want to scare anyone. However, in some way, I do like ‘giving the creeps’ to someone else. And not in some scary way, like jumping out from some bushes and yelling ‘Boo!’.

Well, have you ever been walking down the street, maybe a trail, and something ‘gives you the creeps’? It has to me. I’ve gotten ‘the creeps’, or, that ‘creepy feeling’. It makes my hair stand up. It makes me stop whatever I was doing, and pay attention – look, feel…It makes me ask myself, ‘what is going on’? It makes me aware. This ‘creepy’ feeling makes me pay attention to things in a way that I hitherto had not. Sometimes I pause, look around, listen, think…

Does it do the same for you? When you get a ‘creepy feeling’, do you stop, and pay attention, focus on trying to find what gave you that feeling? I know it does to me, and to my wife, and to a couple of people I’ve met in my life. In fact, I’m sure that you’ve experienced ‘the creeps’, and that they made you stop, and look, and listen, even in a frightened or exhilarated way, and smell, and think.

Which comes around to the title, a famous quote from Thomas Jefferson. When I say that it is good that I gave the creeps to Dan, I don’t mean I revel in my scaring of him. What I want is to make him think, to have that feeling you get when your hair stands up on end and makes you look around and attempt to ascertain, or, ask questions, what is going on?

Question Boldly!

The best compliment I ever get is ‘you made me think’. Whenever I show my essays to people, or speak up in class, inside, I hope for that compliment – ‘you made me think’. I hope that Dan is able to read this, and I hope, I truly hope, pray, that Dan acts on that creepy feeling to ask questions. To stop, pause, focus – what is giving me that feeling? Why that feeling? What is that feeling?

And I want to end this note with a question to many – if it is acceptable to question, boldly, even the very existence of God (and it is), why is it not acceptable to ask, ever so politely or demurely, about the extent and nature of the Holocaust?


Blogger Kevin said...

You asked: "(I)f it is acceptable to question, boldly, even the very existence of God (and it is), why is it not acceptable to ask, ever so politely or demurely, about the extent and nature of the Holocaust?"Because one is theology, the other, history. The existence of God is, by definition, dependent on faith. The existence of the Holocaust is documented, by multiple parties, including those who carried it out, those who were its victims, and those who ended it. The evidence is on paper, in photographs, and on film. Some of the original physical evidence is still extant, in the concentration camp at Auschwitz, and in the numbered tattoos on the remaining survivor's arms.

February 14, 2005 at 8:32 PM  
Blogger smle41 said...

Thank you very much for your comment. I want to expand on that, if I may..
Let us suppose that I show you a picture of a dead journalist holding a camera, I then state that this journalist was murdered by American soldiers who deliberately targeted him. But is what I said true? The photo does not show what I said, it only shows a dead person, not how he died, or why, and certainly does not prove that the American military deliberately targeted journalists. It may be part of a larger story, but the picture itself needs the frame around it, a frame which must be supplied, and even spun, by facts outside the picture itself.
Also, let us suppose that one is shown a field. What is there is a field, but we are told that a great and terrible battle occurred there. We do not know this from looking at the field, that information must be supplied by someone else, whom we must believe.
We place faith in the witness who framed the picture, or we don't.
We learn from history because we are always looking into it, questioning previous versions and asking questions about it.
Abernethy's questioning of Turner about the frontier in American history has led to great leaps in understanding of the American past, and all because someone questioned another.
So I see where you're coming from, and I'd like to see us take it further.
PS, I LOVE history... :)

February 15, 2005 at 7:26 AM  
Blogger Kevin said...

What part do you question, then? Whether it happened or not? Or just how many died? There may be valid questions about specifics, but the weight of evidence, from so many sources, eliminates any question as to the existence of the Holocaust.
We have the documentation, written by the Nazis, of their decision to commit genocide. We have further documentation not only of the construction of death factories, but also their "production records" and logistics data. Jews, Gypsies, homosexuals, mental defectives, etc. were all targets of what was justified as a eugenics program.
Any attempt at this point to "ask, ever so politely or demurely, about the extent and nature of the Holocaust?" smacks of an attempt to deny, or at least downplay, a horror that we as human beings need to face, acknowledge, and swear to never allow again.
Have there been state-sanctioned mass-murders before and after? Certainly. Are they comparable to the Holocaust? A valid question. Is a eugenic justification somehow more horrible than a merely pragmatic political one? That's a question for sociologists. But I think there's a difference in kind, not just degree, between allowing millions to starve to death (for example) and setting up government bureaucracies dedicated to building factory complexes to collect them, rob them, strip them, murder them, and dispose of the remains.

February 16, 2005 at 6:54 AM  
Blogger smle41 said...

Is this the Kevin that I think it is? If so, I am honored that such a tall oak of the blogosphere would post on my wee weed. :) Thank you.. :) I admire your writings, and, oft, your conclusions.
I am unsure as to your thought that Stalin's, Mao's, Minh's, Pot's, etc murders were 'merely pragmatic". I think of them as just as terrible, for the intent of the state was the same, only the method differed.
Since you ask what I question, the point I'm at in my own enquiry is as follows (roughly), based on an agreement of all sides.
A. The 'einsatzgruppen' existed, and they went around the countryside shooting large groups of whoever they could as heavy-handed 'reprisals'.
B. There were some 'chambers', or 'rooms' set up as gas chambers, not for 'euthanizing' or for judicial death penalty, set up in one or more camps, with engines set to run exhaust into a room to murder those inside it.

Beyond that, to me, things can get sticky. One group of witnesses will say, for example, that Camp A was a death camp and was permanently covered with the smoke of crematoriums. Another group of witnesses says no such thing. Aerial photos, daily taken by Allied planes show no cloud of smoke, leading me to think that one group of witnesses are more accurate than another. At Camp B, a set of witnesses says they were housed in barracks, another group say in tents if at all, and, again, we have the advantage of aerial pictures showing groups of people in a fenced field with nary a building in sight. A lot of this, even with the parts that both sides agree on seems to boil down to a 'which witness do I trust more and why'. (Always dangerous, as witnesses are a lousy sort of evidence).
And, finally, I owe all an apology - Frederick Jackson Turner was a famous historian who theorized that the defining factor in all of American history, no matter the epoch or event, was the presence of a frontier. Thomas Perkins Abernethy was the historian who recountered that theory, stating that Eastern aristocrats played the dominant role. Sorry for any confusion..
And thank you very much.. :)

February 16, 2005 at 9:05 PM  

Post a Comment

<< Home