The Uncanny Christianity of the Nazis

[Donkey1499]

I am not saying I liked the Totalitsrianism of the NAZI party.

All I am saying is that their was nothing "uniquely evil" about NAZI Germany.

We are supposed to think that their is....but really, Americans and Russians tortured and exterminated people too.

It is evil when anyone does it....not just German people.

As for conspiracy.....WWI and WWII were created to make money for banks and industrialists.

Especially the Swiss Banks.

I'm still pissed off about White Americans slaughtering the Native Americans. And not just because I'm a quarter Iroquois either. It was wrong.

 

[Lucidthots]

I'm still pissed off about White Americans slaughtering the Native Americans. And not just because I'm a quarter Iroquois either. It was wrong.

I agree...in fact if I had a debate with the Jew "Benyamin" about Genocide by Jews against Canaanites in the Old Testament....he supported it and compared it to the extermination of American Indians. (as if that was fine and dandy)

I told him he was disgusting.

 

[Lucidthots]

Especially the Swiss Banks.

BAnk of England.. Chase Manhattan.

Rolls Royce made millions.

General Electric made millions.

etc etc etc.

What people should ask is why didn't these companies and banks "volunteer" their services.

After all, was it not a "life or death" situation?

Truth is the ones who are called to sacrifice are the poor who go and fight and die.....and the workers whose pay is taxed to pay the banks principle, plus interest.

While the working class and the soldiers sacrifice for the country.....the Bankers and industrialists rake in massive profits.

 

[Donkey1499]

BAnk of England.. Chase Manhattan.

Rolls Royce made millions.

General Electric made millions.

etc etc etc.

What people should ask is why didn't these companies and banks "volunteer" their services.

After all, was it not a "life or death" situation?

Truth is the ones who are called to sacrifice are the poor who go and fight and die.....and the workers whose pay is taxed to pay the banks principle, plus interest.

While the working class and the soldiers sacrifice for the country.....the Bankers and industrialists rake in massive profits.

I think that the Swiss Banks were worse tho. They took all of the Jewish gold the Germans took from the Jews. And the Swiss Banks still won't give it back to the Jews. They say that their accounts don't exist. I saw that on a History Channel Special.

 

[Donkey1499]

I agree...in fact if I had a debate with the Jew "Benyamin" about Genocide by Jews against Canaanites in the Old Testament....he supported it and compared it to the extermination of American Indians. (as if that was fine and dandy)

I told him he was disgusting.

It was done by white ppl who want nothing more in life than wealth and power. If they fought the Indians in self defense, fine. But to drive them from THEIR land for gold is completely babaric. But the Natives are getting back by opening up casinos and buying their land back. I say more power to em'.

 

[Lucidthots]

It was done by white ppl who want nothing more in life than wealth and power. If they fought the Indians in self defense, fine. But to drive them from THEIR land for gold is completely babaric. But the Natives are getting back by opening up casinos and buying their land back. I say more power to em'.

You are right about the brutality of the American Invasion,

However......Casinos in every nighborhood is not my idea of a community.

I mean, even the government is involved in the gambling racket!

Gambling Corporations simply offer the State Gov. a "cut" if they let them run their "Lottery."


These Corporations are making Billions off of the State Lottery.

If you did that you would go to jail....the State lets these big Corporations do it because they get a cut...it is a crooked system.

What ever happened to an honest day of work?

Maybe if the Gov did not tax everyone to death and had usury laws to protect its citizens from going into debt, people would not be so "anxious" about the subject of money...they would simply have enough.

 

[George_Washington]

My point is that Mein Kampf is to be believed, since it is the foundation behind Hitler's pratices in action as well as the entire nazi platform. There is simply no credible reason to disregard it while cherry-picking other parts of it. Mein Kampf is extremely reliable, since most of what he said corresponds to what he planned to do or did.

If you are going to claim propaganda every 5 seconds with everything I say, why the hell should I believe your guy? He was just believing "propaganda."

The reason why Mein Kampf doesn't prove Hitler is a Christian is because it was written by him. You can't take a document that was written by a person and use it to claim that person's true intentions and nature. That's like saying Ted Bundy wasn't a serial killer because he said he wasn't!! Do you not see the stupidity in that? Besides, Hitler said many whack job things in Mein Kampf that weren't true and were near lunacy. If you remember the Son of Sam, Ted Berkowitz, he claimed that he took orders from a dog to kill people, LOL. By your logic it must have been true because he said so. The dog MUST have talked to him !!

Ok. Let me get this straight. You will ignore the wealth of primary source documents of the time, Mein kampft, but you are fully prepared to believe whatshisface's second-hand research? Your whole counter to my primary document[/B} is....he's lying! I don't buy it.

Using that logic, I can claim everyone's lying.

My point is not that he admired it, therefore was a christian. My point was, and is, he used and taught christian principles, he curried christian favour, and he himself STATED he was a christian. YOu, on the other hand, are simply going "he's lying." You have to prove he's lying, and that you cannot do. NOthing hitler did was incompatible with what ANY other christian did in history.

Many were jew hating, murderous, warlike, pagans.

I don't ignore Mein Kampf. I just treat it differently than you do. I treat it as a window into his lunacy just like I would treat a document that was written by any other psycotic (and yes, Hitler was very mentally ill). I do NOT, however, base it as evidence of his true nature. Just like I wouldn't go into a psych ward and take something a patient wrote as "literal." See what I mean? It's just like I don't judge our American politicans on what they say but what they do.

Anyway, Hitler did a lot of things that were incompatible with what other Christians did. You're right in that there have been many racist Christians in the past but the Nazis were unique in their racial science and their fascination for Germanic paganism. No Christian before Hitler ever created a holocaust state like he did. Luther might have hated the Jews but he didn't gas six million of them.

1. First, let's break this up into two separate parts. Foremost, I will deal with the claim that no true christian will burn bibles. This is a no True Scotsman Fallacy. Look it up. "Christians" do lots of things that they shouldn't, but that doesn't make them unchristian. Burning a bible doesn't make you less of a christian than slaughtering and raping the muslim citizens of Jeruselem. You can always repent after. (Which did happen, of course). The Pope is the vicar of God.

Secondly, of course a real christian would want to destroy the Bible. This is like saying no true American would burn the American Flag. It's happened before. You have lots of CHristians that have destroyed and edited the Bible through history. There have also been examples of Christians in history who have burned bibles of various versions they disagreed with. In fact, during the protestant revolution of the 16th and 17th centuries, the Catholic Church [was known for] ignoring, opposing, hiding and even destroying the Bible in order to keep it from the people. Allegedly, copies of the Bible were chained to the walls of churches during the Middle Ages so that people could not take them home to read. Supposedly the Church during the Middle Ages also refused to translate the Bible into the various tongues of the common people, the vernacular languages, in order to further hinder personal Bible reading. Furthermore it is claimed that the Church even went as far as to burn vernacular Bibles.


Those damn Catholics! They aren't TRUE Christians, according to your absurd claim. For sources on this, reference:


[1] Warren H. Carroll, The Building of Christendom (Christendom College Press, 1987) pp. 359,371,385.
[2] The Jerome Biblical Commentary (Prentice-Hall, 1968) Vol. II, pp. 586-588.
[3] Henry G. Graham, Where We Got The Bible (TAN Books, 1977) p. 99.

For a more recent example of Christians burning Bibles, check out this source:

http://jmm.aaa.net.au/articles/481.htm

WASHINGTON, D.C. (BWA) - Bishop Malkhaz Songulashvili, Pastor of the Central Baptist Church, Tbilisi, Georgia, and President of the Evangelical Baptist Church there, told an audience at the Baptist World Alliance on Friday, September 20, that the burning of the Bibles at the Baptist warehouse last February 3 by a group of people led by a dissident Orthodox priest

Sooo, your claim is false, first of all. And don't even tell me they weren't real Christians. If that's true, then neither are you.

You are completely wrong about the Catholic Church. I've studied their history and I know what I'm talking about. Look at this website:

http://www.cathinsight.com/apologetics/adventism/bible.htm

I don't know where you get your misguided information about before the printing press was invented, it was hard for the average person to pick up a copy of the Bible because there weren't many around. The Catholic Church only prohibited poor translations from being read. The Catholic Church has always encouraged scholarship regarding the Bible. When St. Francis De Sales wrote his book, "An Introduction to the Devout Life," he created some interesting and DIFFERENT viewpoints of the Bible and this book was never banned. In the mid 20th century, the Catholic Church commissioned many Torah and Hebrew scholars to create a fresh translation, hence "The New American Bible". Furthermore, the Catholic Church encouraged these scholars to look at contextual views of the Bible and not just traditional, literal interpretations. Much of the research and knowledge we have today on the Bible has come from the Catholic Church. And you say the Church didn't encourage other translations?? That's bull. For one thing before the printing press, not many people could read anyway. The people that couldn't read latin couldn't read AT ALL, so there was no reason to translate it into the vernacular languages at first. But the Church DID print it in the vernacular languages as soon as the grammer and literature of it came out. Also, consider how expensive it was to make a copy of the Bible before the printing press!

Anyway back to the topic at hand...

I'll quote Shirer again since you obviously did not read it well enough the first time:

"Bormann and Himmler, who were backed by Hitler, the Nazi regime intended eventually to destroy Christianity in Germany, if it could, and substitute the old paganism of the early tribal Germanic gods and the new paganism of the Nazi extremists."

-"The Rise and Fall of the Third Reich" p. 240.

Again, going back to Rosenberg's thirty-point program, he not only illustrated the burning of Bibles but also crucifixes and pictures of Saints. They wanted to crush ALL churches and Christian activity and instead, have only ONE National Reich Church, which was planned to be dedicated to Germanic Paganism. The program also SPECIFICALLY states that the "strange and foreign Christian faiths brought to Germany in the year 800" are to be exterminated!

 

[George_Washington]

2. Why would Hitler's Henchmen say they are against Christianity? Do you think that everything EVERY henchman in Hitler's government had the same exact opinion and policy? You would like to think that, but that's simply untrue. In fact, after the 1933 election, people remained faithful to Hitler, yet for some reason, they were quite dissident when it came to various of his "underlings" as newspapers of the time called them. Hitler's popularitying going into 1934 remained fairly high, while they outright complained about the stances of some of his henchmen, according to "The Hitler Myth."

Finally, Nazis are contradictory. Contradiction doesn't mean they aren't what they say they are. It just means they are stupid and pandering to all kinds of groups. For example, I could really be a nazi, yet, in the intersts of political gain, argue against them.

I didn't say that weren't ever ANY Christians in the Third Reich. There were probably some if you consider how many government officials they employed and especially if you take into account the millions of military personnel. My point was that Hitler and the top guys weren't Christian and that there philosphies were fundamentally anti-Christian.

Prove he was lying. If you give me a statement in which he says he hates christianity, I will give you an equal statement by him which claims he loves it. Going by your systemof merely saying "he's lying" is absurd, since I can do that whenever you can do that. That gets nowhere.

LOL, As if Rosenberg's 30-point Program, which was endorsed by Hitler and Himmler, isn't enough to prove that he was anti-Christian?

Just because someone says they are Christian doesn't mean they are.

But fine. You want to look at quotes? Here are some very anti-Christian things he said:

http://answers.org/apologetics/hitquote.html

Also, look at this private letter Hitler sent to Himmler on October 14, 1941:

"It may be asked whether concluding a concordat with the churches wouldn't facilitate our exercise of power.

First, in this way the authority of the state would be vitiated by the fact of the intervention of a third power concerning which it is impossible to say how long it would remain reliable. In the case of the Anglican Church, this objection does not arise, for England knows she can depend upon her church. But what about the Catholic Church? Wouldn't we be running the risk of her one day going into reverse after having put herself at the service of the state solely in order to safeguard her power? If one day the state's policy ceased to suit Rome or the clergy, the priests would turn against the state, as they are doing now. History provides examples that should make us careful.

Secondly there is also a question of principle. Trying to take a long- range view of things, is it conceivable that one could found anything durable based on falsehood? When I think of our people's future, I must look beyond immediate advantages, even if these advantages were to last 300-500 years or more. I'm convinced that any pact with the church can offer only a provisional benefit, for sooner or later the scientific spirit will disclose the harmful character of such a compromise. Thus the state will have based its existence on a foundation that one day will collapse.

An educated man retains the sense of the mysteries of nature, and bows before the unknowable. An uneducated man, on the other hand, runs the risk of going over to atheism (which is a return to the state of the animal) as soon as he perceives that the state, in sheer opportunism, is making use of false ideas in the matter of religion, whilst in other fields it bases everything on pure science.

Being weighed down by a superstitious past, men are afraid of things that can't, or can't yet be explained - that is to say, of the unknown. If anyone has needs of a metaphysical nature, I can't satisfy them with the party's program. Time will pass until the moment when science can answer all the questions.

So it's not opportune to hurl ourselves now into a struggle with the churches. The best thing is to let Christianity die a natural death. A slow death has something comforting about it. The dogma of Christianity gets worn away before the advance of science. Religion will have to make more and more concessions. Gradually the myths crumble. All that's left is to prove that in nature there's no frontier between the organic and the inorganic. When understanding of the universe has become widespread, when the majority of men know that the stars are not sources of light but worlds - perhaps inhabited worlds like ours - then the Christian doctrine will be convicted of absurdity.

But one must continue to pay attention to another aspect of the problem. It's possible to satisfy the needs of the inner life by an intimate communion with nature., or by knowledge of the past. Only a minority, however, at the present stage of the mind's development, can feel the respect inspired by the unknown and thus satisfy the metaphysical needs of the soul. The average human being has the same needs, but can satisfy them only by elementary means. That's particularly true of women, as also of peasants who impotently watch the destruction of their crops. The person whose life tends to simplification is thirsty for belief, and he dimly clings to it with all his strength.

Nobody has the right to deprive simple people of their childish certainties until they've acquired others that are more reasonable. Indeed it's most important that the higher belief should be well established in them before the lower belief has been removed. We must finally achieve this. But it would serve no purpose to replace an old belief by a new one that would merely fill the place left vacant by its predecessor.

It seems to me that nothing would be more foolish than to reestablish the worship of Odin. Our old mythology had ceased to be viable when Christianity implanted itself. Nothing dies unless it is moribund. At that point the ancient world was divided between the systems of philosophy and the worship of idols. It's not desirable that the whole of humanity should be stultified - and the only way of getting rid of Christianity is to allow it to die little by little.

If in the course of 1-2,000 years science arrives at the necessity of renewing its points of view, that will not mean that science is a liar. Science cannot lie, for it's always striving, according to the momentary state of knowledge, to deduce what is true. When it makes a mistake, it does so in good faith. It's Christianity which is the liar; it's in perpetual conflict with itself.

One may ask whether the disappearance of Christianity would entail the disappearance of a belief in God. That's not to be desired. The notion of divinity gives most men the opportunity to concretize the feeling they have of supernatural realities. Why should we destroy this wonderful power they have of incarnating the feeling for the divine that is within them?"

- Adolf Hitler, in _Bormann-Vermerke_ (transcribed by Martin Bormann), reprinted as _Hitler's Secret Conversations 1941-1944_ (H.R. Trevor-Roper, Trans.), New York: Farrar, Straus & Young, 1953, pages #48-51.

Again, I can easily contradict you by appealing to Mein Kampf as well as various personal letters of his in which he (not facing an audience at all), praises Jesus and God. Hitler wasn't an Atheist of any sorts. For example, take a look here from Mein Kampf: (No reason to classify it as propaganda any more than any other autobiography).

1. I thank Heaven that a portion of the memories of those days still remains with me.

He thanks Heaven. Clearly, he's not an Atheist, since he believes in Heaven.

LOL A lot of people use that expression, it doesn't mean anything. I knew a guy who was an atheist in college and sometimes he would say, "Oh my God" but that didn't mean he was a Christian.

 

[George_Washington]

2. I was not in agreement with the sharp anti-Semitic tone, but from time to time I read arguments which gave me some food for thought. [...] these occasions [...] made me acquainted with the man and the movement, which in those days guided Vienna's destinies: Dr. Karl Lueger and the Christian Social Party [...]. I had occasion to become acquainted with the man and his work; and slowly my fair judgment turned to unconcealed admiration. Today, more than ever, I regard this man as the greatest German mayor of all times ... How many of my basic principles were upset by this change in my attitude toward the Christian Social movement! My views with regard to anti-Semitism thus succumbed to the passage of time, and this was my greatest transformation of all.

As you can clearly see, Hitler is in utter love with a major head of the Christian Social Movement in Germany as well as in Austria. This is Christian movement and man from which Hitler OBTAINED the majority of his antisemitic arguments. He didn't wake up one day and go---I hate jews! There is no credible reason to say he's lying. He got his jew-bashing from Christian Socalist groups who were prominent during the time. He was mesmerized by them, and he favoured them in his government. They "transformed" his thought.

His jew hated was mostly not motivated by the fact that he hated them for killing Jesus. It was because he thought they had a history of tearing down countries, feared they were trying to destroy Germany, and thought they were biologically inferior to Aryans. But then again, he also hated Africans and Asians as well. And who cares about his relations with Dr. Karl Lueger?? He kissed up to a lot of people! He kissed Hindenberg's ass over and over again for months and promised that he would uphold the constitution. And then, OOPS, let's suspend the constitution! Don't forget he also said nice things to Stalin while they had an agreement of non-aggression-WHICH HITLER OBVIOUSLY BROKE.

In the words of Mr. Wong, who runs an excellent page on religion:

"4 (Hitler was inspired to become a radical anti-Semite by the Viennese Christian Social movement, whose attitudes are almost identical to the far-right American Christian fundamentalist movement today).

Part of the Nazis inspiration was that and Luther, I already admitted that. But that doesn't mean they were Christians. For example, I could say I hate Jews based on the teachings of some Muslims leader but does that mean I'm a Muslim?? No, of course not.

You may be right that Hitler MAY have not been an atheist, he might have been a pagan. But he certainly wasn't a Christian.

 

[George_Washington]

No, you couldn't claim he's an atheist only by showing him quoting Neitcsche. That's merely guilt by association. THat's hardly the same as him claiming "I am an Atheist." If he said that, and there was no evidence to the contrary saying "I am not an atheist." I would believe him. There is no evidence whatsoever to contradict his statement "I am a Christian."

True but you were saying that Hitler had all of these christian influences yet you failed to mentioned any of his atheist ones.

That's not true. The fact that someone does not believe Jesus was a Jew does not make them non-christian. In fact, dissent does NOT make you unchristian at all. It merely means you aren't dogmatic, but I don't think that will make an impact on ardent Christian thought. During the reformation and revolution, dissenters who strayed away from "Canon" teachings were thought evil, vile and pagans. That was BS then, and it's simply BS now.

Him not believing Christ was a jew didn't solely prove he wasn't a Christian but it was, in fact, an example of how he deviated from Christian.

Yes. He got much of his original ideology from Luther, and it stayed with him long, long into his life. As I mentioned above, even when he was older, he met with and conversed significantly with Christian groups, including the Good Doctor. I think you are trying to imply that, because he melded Christianity with other aspects, and because he altered it, he wasn't a Christian. Well, that's not true. In that case, no Protestant is a "true" Christian either. You aren't a real Christian, since modern Christianity is far, far from what original Christianity was. If Jesus saw what it was today? He would be like Jefferson taking the subway to the Capitol--perplexed.

Just because Luther was an influence on him DOES NOT mean he was a Christian. If you think the idea of a Christian is so subjective, than that's even more proof that Hitler wasn't a Christian.

You have a point---except Hitler, as a youth, was a Christian. This is a fact. It's also a fact that he claimed he was a Christian well later in life. Actually, Nietche was not anti-semetic at all, if that is what you mean by 'racist.' He decried anti-semitism.[/quote[

I thought I admitted that Hitler was a Christian as a youth. But so what? So where millions of other people. Nietszche may not have been anti-semetic in that he hated Jews but he definitely had racist ideas. Look at that quote I gave, he believed in a "higher race". In fact, Shirer says that Nietszche was the inspiration of the Nazi Weltanschauung. Nietszche thought that a master race would soon arise to take command of the world.

Ok. What Race? The Human race? Do you understand Nietche's ethics? It's widely misunderstood as being the Nazi ethics, but it's not. The Uebermensch idea was stolen, but that was not what Nietsche had it mind. Plus, the fact that he took elements from various philosohpies does NOT mean he was still not a Christian.

Nietszche (if you can remember how to spell his name right) had many ideas in common with the Nazis: His dislike of democracy, his idea of a traditional husband and wife role, and his like of war and of "powerful" statesmen.

Hitler was appointed to the Chancellorship, however, elections took place after Hindenberge was already dead. There was more than one election. The Nazis were elected into power by large numbers, including 87.4 per cent of the plebiscite in 33-34. Hitler, however, was not the Nazi Party. THere were elections---you know...where you...elect people? Did you not learn of the elections? It's far from bullcrap that the Nazis came to power via the Christians. YOu don't have to vote for Hitler to vote for Nazi Ideals. I am talking about Reichstag elections.[.quote]

It's true that the Nazis won many seats in the Reichstag but that still doesn't mean the Nazis were Christian.

Hitler's initial victory was with Hindenberg and since he was with him, people thought Hitler would uphold the Weimar Constitution and that he shared the same views as Hindenberg. People had thought that Hitler had abandoned many of the views he had expressed in Mein Kampf. They didn't realize what was going to happen in the upcoming years. So it's inaccurate to say that Christians voted for Hitler BECAUSE they knew he was a racist and all. Which means that although Christians voted for him, they didn't realize what he would do. Neither did it mean that Christians voted for Hitler cause they thought he was a Christian. Most of the Nazi's popularity centered around economics and the fear of communism.

And don't forget that in 1932, the power given to Hitler to make laws that deviated from the Constitution was given to him by a two thirds majority vote of the Reichstag-not the German people.

According to Dr. Renate Wind, Professor of THEOLOGY, writes of Boenhoffer, a priest of lived during the time and DIED trying to convince the masses that the Nazis were evil, but did so unsuccessfully. According to private letters, Boenhoffer revealed this about the "christian churches" in early 32 and 33.

In 1933 the Protestant Church in Germany greeted the brutal exclusion of entire social groups as the “restoration of order.“ Further, Under the slogan “better Brown than Red“, representatives of both catholic and protestant churches welcomed the destruction of the labor movement and also the persecution of all those who had always been a thorn in the flesh especially of nationally minded Protestants: democrats, liberals, pacifists, socialists. They included also the critical Jewish intelligentsia, indeed all of “Jewry. In fact they stated, “If the state exercises its office against those who undermine the foundation of state order, above all against those who with corrosive and mean words destroy marriage, cast scorn on faith and besmirch death for the Fatherland, then may it exercise its office in the name of God.“ Then, Three weeks later Bonhoeffer spoke before a group of Berlin pastors on “The Church and the Jewish Question“. This talk was to be the first and only reaction from within the Protestant church as early as 1933

Amazing...no one but he spoke up, and the nazis weren't even violent against the population! The Population was fanantic about him--in utter adulation! Really integrate the meaning of the above into your mind, and you will find how absurd the claim is that Christians didn't overwhelmingly support the Nazis.

Just because Christians voted for Hitler doesn't mean Hitler was a Christian. I don't know why it's hard for you to graps this concept. Anyway, there was more support for Hitler among Protestants than Catholics, this much is true. BUT, you're not taking into consideration the persecution the Churches faced once the Nazis came to power. AGAIN, look at the 30 point program that detailed the annihilation of ALL Christian Churches and the formulation of a National Reich Church.

Like Hell I haven't. THat's not even a fair comment. I have not given you "off-the-wall" sources. I have given you reliable historians and primary sources, as well as various positions of Theologicans OF the time. I have given you Hitler's own words. YOu have merely given me some second-hand research by some Historian I have never even heard of.

The fact that you haven't heard of two of Germany's most well known, well regarded Third Reich historians is your own fault and simply shows your ignorance about this subject matter. And again, for like the 40th time, Hitler's words don't prove his was a Christian. He said just as many anti-Christian things as he did Christian ones. His words don't prove anything. It's his actions and the policies he implemented that are the true bearers of proof.

You merely choose to ignore it my sources as automatically false and parrot what your favourite historians say. Face it. NOthing I say will ever convince you, notwithstanding the fact that I have contradicted and provided credible evidence for every claim I made, and in doing so, I have refuted every single one of your absurd claims, especially the claim that the Christians didn't support hitler overwhelmingly. That's total balderdash. YOu haven't shown me anything of academic value that says I am wrong, except appealing to the authority of your personal favourute authors, while ignoring every other source, author, and primary document, claiming not to find anything academic. The best you can do is claim "He's lying." If so, I can claim He's lying when he's saying how bad the Christians are. That leaves us at a stand-still. In that case, I can easily say that Christians were STILL bad, since Nazi Ideology was so compatible with it that no one made a fuss LONG LONG before any danger to them was present.

What I meant by academic was that what you gave me didn't contradict my sources-it just didn't. Nor was it very, "Hard evidence." Most of which you gave me were just things Hitler said himself. And it doesn't really matter how many people Christians actually supported Hitler in the early days because that doesn't prove he was a Christian. I have clearly shown you evidence that the Nazi wanted to destroy Christianity. Also, when the Reichstag was burned down, it was the people's fear of communism that made them vote for Hitler, not so much so that they supported the annhilation of the Jews.

 

[Technocratic_Utilitarian]

True but you were saying that Hitler had all of these christian influences yet you failed to mentioned any of his atheist ones.

True, I didn't, but that would be like me trying to prove something I didn't set out to prove. If I were proving that he was a mormon, would I want to go out and find every influence he might have had from catholics? He did have some atheist influences, but most of his actual ideology stemmed from christianity. The most he got from Nietsche was a perverted version of the Uebermensch.

Him not believing Christ was a jew didn't solely prove he wasn't a Christian but it was, in fact, an example of how he deviated from Christian.

See, now I agree with you here. I am not saying he was your average christian, but he was a type of Christian. You could say he took the catholicism of his earlier life, mixed it with protestantism, and then added some "spice" to make it more fun.

Just because Luther was an influence on him DOES NOT mean he was a Christian. If you think the idea of a Christian is so subjective, than that's even more proof that Hitler wasn't a Christian.

Well, him taking ideas from Christians does not directly mean he is a Christian no, but it means he likes and follows their doctrines. When looking at the sheer quanity he takes and references them, and considering that he proclaimed to be a catholic mixing protestantism, it's not unreasonable. Even Christians have influences from "atheists" and other non-christians. Christianity is relatively subjective. The only real qualifier you need is to believe that JEsus is your savior--nothing else.

I thought I admitted that Hitler was a Christian as a youth. But so what? So where millions of other people. Nietszche may not have been anti-semetic in that he hated Jews but he definitely had racist ideas. Look at that quote I gave, he believed in a "higher race". In fact, Shirer says that Nietszche was the inspiration of the Nazi Weltanschauung. Nietszche thought that a master race would soon arise to take command of the world.

Yes, but my point is that he was when he was a Youth, and those ideas he was forced to learn stayed with him, obvious in the sheer christian basis for his entire autobiography and narrative between 22-33. What I am saying is, In his later years, he still claimed to be CHristian, still believed JEsus was the savior, still used Christian ideology in his own ideology, and still had intimate relations with the Church signified by his lack of excommunication and his own statements on how great the protestant churches were.

Nietsche didn't say what race, so it's highly ambiguous. His concept of the master race is taken from the concept of the Uebermensch, but the Uebermench (Superman) is highly misinterpreted. The Uebermensch is not ment to rule over anyone, but break past the herd in achievement and moral thought. Nietsche was anti-christian morality, because he believed it was weak. Master Race does not mean make everyone slaves--that's simply a misunderstanding of him. It's mastery over the self and the force of others.

Nietszche (if you can remember how to spell his name right) had many ideas in common with the Nazis: His dislike of democracy, his idea of a traditional husband and wife role, and his like of war and of "powerful" statesmen.

Lets not be a semantic whore. It's irrelevant to the points made. Next time you make a spelling mistake, I will donate an entire paragraph to that. Disliking Democracy is not a bad thing--Democracy is what got most of the Nazis into power. It's a shitty system.

It's true that the Nazis won many seats in the Reichstag but that still doesn't mean the Nazis were Christian.

True, however, it means that their messages (which were vile, even at the time) appealed to Christians many times over. The fact that they were Christian is signified by their Christian teaches, mottos, and rituals. It's also proven by direct personal----NOT public---writings between individuals that they said they were Christian. For example:

1. Although he himself [Hitler] was a Catholic, he wished the Protestant Church to have a stronger position in Germany, since Germany was two-thirds Protestant.
-Hermann Göring (Trial of The Major War Criminals Before the International Military Tribunal, Nuremberg, 1945, Vol.9)

2. The Führer wanted to achieve the unification of the Protestant Evangelical Churches by appointing a Reich Bishop, so that there would be a high Protestant church dignitary as well as a high Catholic church dignitary.
-Hermann Göring (Trial of The Major War Criminals Before the International Military Tribunal, Nuremberg, 1945, Vol.9)

3. I myself am not what you might call a churchgoer, but I have gone now and then, and have always considered I belonged to the Church and have always had those functions over which the Church presides-- marriage, christening, burial, et cetera-- carried out in my house by the Church.
-Hermann Göring (Trial of The Major War Criminals Before the International Military Tribunal, Nuremberg, 1945, Vol.9)

4. No matter what human beings do I shall some day stand before the judgement seat of the Eternal. I shall answer to Him, and I know he will judge me innocent.
-Rudolf Hess

5.
I swear before God this holy oath, that I shall give absolute confidence to the Fuehrer of the German Reich and people.
-Heinrich Himmler, reminding his hearers about the oath taken by all SS men as well as by the military forces (Hitler's Elite, Shocking Profiles of the Reich's Most Notorious Henchmen," Berkley Books, 1990)


6. You Einsatztruppen (task forces) are called upon to fulfill a repulsive duty. But you are soldiers who have to carry out every order unconditionally. You have a responsibility before God and Hitler for everything that is happening.
-Heinrich Himmler

7. A Jew is for me an object of disgust. I feel like vomiting when I see one. Christ could not possibly have been a Jew. It is not necessary to prove that scientifically-- it is a fact.
-Joseph Goebbels

 

[Technocratic_Utilitarian]

What I meant by academic was that what you gave me didn't contradict my sources-it just didn't. Nor was it very, "Hard evidence." Most of which you gave me were just things Hitler said himself. And it doesn't really matter how many people Christians actually supported Hitler in the early days because that doesn't prove he was a Christian. I have clearly shown you evidence that the Nazi wanted to destroy Christianity. Also, when the Reichstag was burned down, it was the people's fear of communism that made them vote for Hitler, not so much so that they supported the annhilation of the Jews.

Of course it contradicts you. It contradicts you very well, and it comes from FAR more sources than your 2. Haha. Nothing can convince you. Your belief is unfalsifiable regardless of the proof. He could dance around in a pope's outfit, make love to marry, swear he's a Christian, and you would deny it. You're brickwalling, and that's not a debate.

I have clearly shown you evidence that Nazis loved Christianity. And false, it was not the burning of the Reichstag--in fact, everyone loved his ideas so much, according to 4 independent sources. The Reichstag fire merely was the icing on the cake.

Wrong again. Tsk, tsk, tsk.

To quote Shirer:

"As for the German majority of Protestant pastors, they, like almost everyone else in Germany, submitted in the face of Nazi terror. By the end of 1937 the highly respected Bishop Marahrens of Hanover was induced by Dr. Kerrl to make a public declaration that must have seemd especially humiliating to toughter men of God such as Niemoeller..."

--"The Rise and Fall of the Third Reich" p.239

So you see that that Catholic Bishop was forced into signing that document.

This an example of your utter, complete nonsense. Tsk tsk tsk. Every source is wrong except for yours. I will trust my sources over your love affair with one man. Yours is simply "lying" as you say. They didn't sign anything out of fear--the man's bloviating hard. They applauded him WELL before and supported him even DURING the war.

LOL, As if Rosenberg's 30-point Program, which was endorsed by Hitler and Himmler, isn't enough to prove that he was anti-Christian?

No, it's not proof, since everything YOU say, I can directly contract with 3-4 other history texts in primary documents. Primary documents count for more than secondary sources, as well.

You will never accept your contradictions, and I won't accept yours based on your own logic.

 

[Columbusite]

It was a joke, obviously...

Sadly, no, it wasn't obvious. There are too many Christians who actually do believe that. So I hope you can understand why I get touchy about such things. Maybe an emoticon would help. :rofl

 

[Lucidthots]

Mathew 5: 14, 16

"You are the light of the world!"

Let your light so shine before men, that they may see your good deeds and glorify your father which is in heaven.

(Apparently Christ views you as the son of god just as he does himself)

 

[Donkey1499]

Mathew 5: 14, 16

"You are the light of the world!"

Let your light so shine before men, that they may see your good deeds and glorify your father which is in heaven.

(Apparently Christ views you as the son of god just as he does himself)

Because we ARE God's children. But I'm not getting into this discussion.

 

[George_Washington]

Sadly, no, it wasn't obvious. There are too many Christians who actually do believe that. So I hope you can understand why I get touchy about such things. Maybe an emoticon would help. :rofl

Um, I DID put an emoticon icon there. This one: Remember...?

 

[George_Washington]

True, I didn't, but that would be like me trying to prove something I didn't set out to prove. If I were proving that he was a mormon, would I want to go out and find every influence he might have had from catholics? He did have some atheist influences, but most of his actual ideology stemmed from christianity. The most he got from Nietsche was a perverted version of the Uebermensch.

But see, the point you're not grasping is that his ideology of racism, sadism, murder, etc. did NOT stem from Christian teachings. Christianity, the Bible, works of Saints, etc. do NOT teach to kill, steal, conquer, plunder, etc.

Well, him taking ideas from Christians does not directly mean he is a Christian no, but it means he likes and follows their doctrines. When looking at the sheer quanity he takes and references them, and considering that he proclaimed to be a catholic mixing protestantism, it's not unreasonable. Even Christians have influences from "atheists" and other non-christians. Christianity is relatively subjective. The only real qualifier you need is to believe that JEsus is your savior--nothing else.

Which it's obvious that he did not.

Yes, but my point is that he was when he was a Youth, and those ideas he was forced to learn stayed with him, obvious in the sheer christian basis for his entire autobiography and narrative between 22-33. What I am saying is, In his later years, he still claimed to be CHristian, still believed JEsus was the savior, still used Christian ideology in his own ideology, and still had intimate relations with the Church signified by his lack of excommunication and his own statements on how great the protestant churches were.

Nietsche didn't say what race, so it's highly ambiguous. His concept of the master race is taken from the concept of the Uebermensch, but the Uebermench (Superman) is highly misinterpreted. The Uebermensch is not ment to rule over anyone, but break past the herd in achievement and moral thought. Nietsche was anti-christian morality, because he believed it was weak. Master Race does not mean make everyone slaves--that's simply a misunderstanding of him. It's mastery over the self and the force of others.

Nietszche was sick when you think about it. Despite how you try to cover his tracks...he did believe in a master race which made him fundamentally a racist. Hmm, an atheist can be racist, imagine that...

Disliking Democracy is not a bad thing--Democracy is what got most of the Nazis into power. It's a shitty system.

You're a fool. Democracy has proven to work. Like Winston Churchhill said: Democracy may not be the best system but it's the best that we know about. If you would like to see some sort of communism implemented, it's not going to happen. Communism has proven to be a completely worthless form of government that breads totalitarianism, death, and other horrible things. But that's a whole other debate.

True, however, it means that their messages (which were vile, even at the time) appealed to Christians many times over. The fact that they were Christian is signified by their Christian teaches, mottos, and rituals. It's also proven by direct personal----NOT public---writings between individuals that they said they were Christian. For example:

1. Although he himself [Hitler] was a Catholic, he wished the Protestant Church to have a stronger position in Germany, since Germany was two-thirds Protestant.
-Hermann Göring (Trial of The Major War Criminals Before the International Military Tribunal, Nuremberg, 1945, Vol.9)

2. The Führer wanted to achieve the unification of the Protestant Evangelical Churches by appointing a Reich Bishop, so that there would be a high Protestant church dignitary as well as a high Catholic church dignitary.
-Hermann Göring (Trial of The Major War Criminals Before the International Military Tribunal, Nuremberg, 1945, Vol.9)

3. I myself am not what you might call a churchgoer, but I have gone now and then, and have always considered I belonged to the Church and have always had those functions over which the Church presides-- marriage, christening, burial, et cetera-- carried out in my house by the Church.
-Hermann Göring (Trial of The Major War Criminals Before the International Military Tribunal, Nuremberg, 1945, Vol.9)

4. No matter what human beings do I shall some day stand before the judgement seat of the Eternal. I shall answer to Him, and I know he will judge me innocent.
-Rudolf Hess

5.
I swear before God this holy oath, that I shall give absolute confidence to the Fuehrer of the German Reich and people.
-Heinrich Himmler, reminding his hearers about the oath taken by all SS men as well as by the military forces (Hitler's Elite, Shocking Profiles of the Reich's Most Notorious Henchmen," Berkley Books, 1990)


6. You Einsatztruppen (task forces) are called upon to fulfill a repulsive duty. But you are soldiers who have to carry out every order unconditionally. You have a responsibility before God and Hitler for everything that is happening.
-Heinrich Himmler

7. A Jew is for me an object of disgust. I feel like vomiting when I see one. Christ could not possibly have been a Jew. It is not necessary to prove that scientifically-- it is a fact.
-Joseph Goebbels

Those quotes don't prove anything. Goring was talking about how Hitler wanted to unite all of the Protestant Churches so that he could eventually create the National Reich Church like I had already talked about. And Himmler used the concept of God as a propaganda tool in the early days. And that quote by Goebbels in no way proves he was a Christian.

You know, it's amazing how you refuse to acknolwedge Himmler's 30 point program that clearly states he wanted to annhiliate Christianity. I think you just can't handle the fact that you were mistaken and your pride is wounded.

 

[robin]

Technocrat
Do you not think perhaps if you spend too much time trying to understand the workings of the mind of a total madman like Hitler, you will wind up a little confused if not slightly mad yourself.
Just don't go there.

 

[George_Washington]

Of course it contradicts you. It contradicts you very well, and it comes from FAR more sources than your 2. Haha. Nothing can convince you. Your belief is unfalsifiable regardless of the proof. He could dance around in a pope's outfit, make love to marry, swear he's a Christian, and you would deny it. You're brickwalling, and that's not a debate.

I have clearly shown you evidence that Nazis loved Christianity. And false, it was not the burning of the Reichstag--in fact, everyone loved his ideas so much, according to 4 independent sources. The Reichstag fire merely was the icing on the cake.

You've shown me nothing of the sort. What you've shown me is mostly just primary sources from Hitler and the Nazis themselves. If you really believe you can judge a sick, psycotic, criminal organization based on what they themselves say then, well, better give up your dream of being a Criminologist.

No, it's not proof, since everything YOU say, I can directly contract with 3-4 other history texts in primary documents. Primary documents count for more than secondary sources, as well.

You will never accept your contradictions, and I won't accept yours based on your own logic.

Wrong. You CANNOT contradict fundamental actions that the Nazis took such as the implementation of the 30 point program, the betrayal of Protestant and Catholic Church leaders as I've pointed out, and the ideological aspects like the Germanic Paganism and more.

But go ahead and try: Show me something that says Himmler and Rosenberg did not implement a 30 point program. Go ahead. Show me something that directly proves Shirer was a liar.

 

[George_Washington]

Technocrat
Do you not think perhaps if you spend too much time trying to understand the workings of the mind of a total madman like Hitler, you will wind up a little confused if not slightly mad yourself.
Just don't go there.

Exactly. A mad man like Hitler cannot be understood on his words but on his actions.

 

[Aryan Imperium]

Damn, for being the greatest country on earth, Germany did get their asses kicked by the Cowboys, Canucks, Brits, and Ruskies. Who were all at least one step behind.

Germany fought a hard and long war on 2 fronts in Europe and Africa for 6 years with ineffectual allies.How long do you think that they could have continued to do this for?
How many other countries survived alone for 6 years without being overwhelmed by the fresh troops,material and sheer numbers of the Americans and Russians?
It is surely to Germany`s credit that she arose like a phoenix from the ashes in the mid 1950s to become THE European super power outside of the USSR?
As far as National Socialism is concerned it has survived and evolved and is continuing to evolve.We have not been defeated and we are not going away.

 

[Aryan Imperium]

But Germany also had Japan, the Swiss, and Italy. The US was fighting a two front war as well (Against all the Axis Powers).

And I can see that your "conspiracy gears" are cranking up again. We didn't slaughter Germans. You seriously need to quit smoking the pot, dude.

LoL! You are joking,right?:2razz:
The Swiss? That military superpower??
Italy? A nation of "heroes"?
As far as Japan is concerned its theatre of operations was the Pacific not the North Sea!!

 

[Aryan Imperium]

I think that the Swiss Banks were worse tho. They took all of the Jewish gold the Germans took from the Jews. And the Swiss Banks still won't give it back to the Jews. They say that their accounts don't exist. I saw that on a History Channel Special.

Ah,so it must be accurate then?:roll:

 

[Aryan Imperium]

You've shown me nothing of the sort. What you've shown me is mostly just primary sources from Hitler and the Nazis themselves. If you really believe you can judge a sick, psycotic, criminal organization based on what they themselves say then, well, better give up your dream of being a Criminologist.

By what definition and by what law was the NSDAP "criminal"?

 

[George_Washington]

You've shown me nothing of the sort. What you've shown me is mostly just primary sources from Hitler and the Nazis themselves. If you really believe you can judge a sick, psycotic, criminal organization based on what they themselves say then, well, better give up your dream of being a Criminologist.

By what definition and by what law was the NSDAP "criminal"?

National Socialism in itself isn't criminal but I would say the Nazis were certainly criminal in how they created their death camps and killed so many innocent people, namely Jews. I'll admit that Stalin killed more people than Hitler did but Hitler was a murderer as well.

If they weren't criminal than why were they tried and convicted for war crimes at Nuremberg?