I have always liked Charlie Chaplin. That is, of course, from The Great Dictator. Chaplin at the time was really affected, to say the least, about Hitler and the Nazis and the treatment of Jews. He had sort of a resemblance to Hitler, and used it to good effect. I don't really at all think, though, that this clip or the film can be used as any sort of attack on religion, especially Christianity per se. Quite the opposite. The, what's in his speech, something like, "machine men with machine hearts and minds" clearly applies to the Nazis. He was appalled with the anti-Semistism of the Nazis. I do agree with the sentiment, though, that vesvehighfolk and stonehart imply with use of the clip. If only we could do as Chaplin says, indeed, I agree completely.
C.S. Lewis, in the last novel of his "space trilogy," talks of how science can be misused.
I don't think at all that Christianity can be singled out as militaristic. I don't think Chaplin, again, can be used in that way. And, speaking of militarism, Hinduism and Buddhism and Islam can be shown to have a very pronounced military emphasis indeed.
I think Chaplin was very prescient. For a hand clenching experience, before Chaplin was, as indeed the world was, fully aware of what the Nazis were up to, see "A Film Unfinished," a documentary about a film the Nazis were making of life in the Warsaw ghetto. A lot of actual film footage from the Nazis' own cameras, as they attempted to document how good life was there!
Stonehart, I appreciate the whole tone of your post, and sense that it was made from the heart, and appreciate that. I agree with you on some things.
However, I do want to point out what I've tried to point out before: that history just has to be consulted on religion, Judaism, and Christianity. You speak of your "stance on organized religion." And, more to my point, you say, "a book written by what amounts to desert sheep herders," and "what it tells you is so delusional and arrogant in the extreme." May I point out, aside from the not so subtle insinuation (that's a euphemism!), the historical inaccuracy of that? First of all, you realize that that statement of "fact" is a condemnation not of Christianity, but of the Jews. The Old Testament has a rich and long history, it was composed at different times by different men, over the course of the ninth to fourth centuries B.C. These men were educated and were telling the history of their people. The Old Testament is very much a testament to the Jews' own shortcomings in living up to their God, and about their struggles, in great detail. You know, of course, about the Babylonian Captivity, the Exile and the Return? "Desert sheep herders" carries a connotation, and I'm just pointing this out, and that is of course my opinion, and am addressing this on this thread because it's become a topic of this thread. For more on the Jews and my perspective on their history and the Old Testament, you can read my posts on the Thomas Fusco thread started by Angelo.
One thing I've noticed about history, and its perception by people, and I think this is pervasive, and I see it because I taught it for so many years, and Heaven knows, I have much to learn still, and I'm just saying this as a general observation that from my experience is true. That is, that history has to be really gotten into, read about, studied as to what scholars on different periods have written, what primary sources say, and so on. First of all, a basic chronology has to be learned. I know I'm sounding lecturing, and I don't mean it that way, because I see evidence of a lot of knowledge on these forums. What I mean is, you've got to know some more than just merely basic, timeline. For instance, if you say "the Greeks" or "the Romans" or Henry VIII to many people, it's not really their fault, but they tend to lump it all together, so centuries are compressed, whole peoples' histories are confused and melded into trite terms, like oh, yeah, there was the emperor Augustus, and gladiators, and Plato, and oh yeah, Alexander the Great, he was Greek, right?, and Henry VIII murdered all eight of his wives (!), and on and on. And so when you say "a book written by what amounts to desert sheepherders," you are drawing on an image you have in your mind of the Jews going into Canaan, Moses leading them, and yes, they DID herd sheep, who doubts that (!), but the point you are trying to make becomes sort of a mockery of history and it as a field that deserves respect, not only as it pertains to the peoples of the world, but to scholarly endeavor. And the point about what the statement says about, not Christians, but Jews, is clear as to what I think you meant. You can't dismiss a whole rich field with such statement. The history of Israel is one of great richness and sophistication.
Anyway, I do believe that religion and this forum about the paranormal cannot be separated. Kim
. I cannot get started on scientology! What's that Goggs? (speaks to Mr Hat) 'But Goggs, you haaaaave to post about scientology, you just haaaaave to'.
