Phenomenology: Nazi Salute Forerunner of the ‘Mark’
April 18th, 2008 by David DanskerHistorians never tire of studying the phenomenon of Adolph Hitler and the rise and fall of the Third Reich. Everything from the origin of the swastika to the pharmacopeia behind the Nazi madmen has been delved into, and now a new work examining the “The Hitler Salute” by German sociologist Tilman Allert puts together 128 pages of fascinating details on “Hiel.”
What is probably little known to most contemporary teachers is that the Nazi Salute was, among other things, an acknowledgement of Hitler’s divine status. It was made mandatory for civil servants, and used in public to display fervent devotion to the master race, and to mark any who lacked enthusiastic reverence and commitment. It could only be used by pure Germans, and it was illegal for Jews to use it.
The sociological dynamics of grouping an entire country and modifying their behaviors by the salute merit this interesting study. It also makes interesting comparison of the “mark” that will be required by the coming world leader for all to prove, not only their right to commerce and citizenship, but of outright worship of the man the Bible describes as the Antichrist. While the Nazi salute could be discontinued by surviving dissidents after the defeat of Germany in WWII, those who take the mark of the beast will be doomed forever (Rev.14:9-11).
Notes:
Richard J. Evans, “All Hailed: The Meaning of the Hitler Salute,” review of “The Hitler Salute” Tilman Allert, New York Sun, April 16, 2008.
http://www.nysun.com/arts/all-hailed-meaning-hitler-salute
April 28th, 2008 at 10:15 am
I’m sure this is correct. And the really amusing and ironic part will come when the so-called Mark is applied by Christ’s very own fundamentalists. Look at them at work here:
http://www.motherjones.com/mojoblog/archives/2008/04/8056_religious_right.html
April 28th, 2008 at 4:09 pm
Mitchel
Any religious organization may celebrate a National Day of Prayer, and certainly would not be expected to do so in a way that departed from their various traditions and doctrines.
The article you shared, “Holy Wars: Evangelicals Attempt to Exclude Non-Christians From National Day of Prayer” (Mother Jones) supplies some facts on the NDP, but makes an error in surmising that “it was meant to encourage Americans of all faiths to pray with one another in whatever way felt best to them. It would be an ecumenical celebration of faith that would draw people together in common religious and spiritual contemplation.”
It was intended to encourage all Americans to pray in accordance with their various faiths, but not for them to join to together in an ecumenical prayer service. To suggest this is to go beyond the scope to the proclamation, to ignore demographics of the nation in the 1950’s, and fail to see political maneuvers for what they are.