Do people still think Hitler was an atheist?

Dave_G
Dave_G's picture
Posts: 223
Joined: 2007-04-21
User is offlineOffline
Do people still think Hitler was an atheist?

“My feeling as a Christian points me to my Lord and Savior as a fighter. It points me to the man who once in loneliness, surrounded only by a few followers, recognized these Jews for what they were and summoned men to fight against them and who, God's truth! was greatest not as a sufferer but as a fighter. In boundless love as a Christian and as a man I read through the passage which tells us how the Lord at last rose in His might and seized the scourge to drive out of the Temple the brood of vipers and adders. How terrific was his fight against the Jewish poison. Today, after two thousand years, with deepest emotion I recognize more profoundly than ever before the fact that it was for this that He had to shed his blood upon the Cross. As a Christian I have no duty to allow myself to be cheated, but I have the duty to be a fighter for truth and justice. And as a man I have the duty to see to it that human society does not suffer the same catastrophic collapse as did the civilization of the ancient world some two thousand years ago — a civilization which was driven to its ruin through this same Jewish people.

“Then indeed when Rome collapsed there were endless streams of new German bands flowing into the Empire from the North; but, if Germany collapses today, who is there to come after us? German blood upon this earth is on the way to gradual exhaustion unless we pull ourselves together and make ourselves free!

“And if there is anything which could demonstrate that we are acting rightly, it is the distress that daily grows. For as a Christian I have also a duty to my own people. And when I look on my people I see them work and work and toil and labor, and at the end of the week they have only for their wages wretchedness and misery. When I go out in the morning and see these men standing in their queues and look into their pinched faces, then I believe I would be no Christian, but a very devil, if I felt no pity for them, if I did not, as did our Lord two thousand years ago, turn against those by whom today this poor people are plundered and exploited.”

 

Guess who said that.


BGH
BGH's picture
Posts: 2772
Joined: 2006-09-28
User is offlineOffline
Well the ones who do not

Well the ones who do not claim he was an atheist read this and invoke the "no true scotsman" fallacy.

"He wasn't a TRUE christian"

This kind of counter argument shows their delusion and the lengths they will go to in order to rationalize their faith. 


Cpt_pineapple
atheist
Cpt_pineapple's picture
Posts: 5492
Joined: 2007-04-12
User is offlineOffline
BGH wrote: Well the ones

BGH wrote:

Well the ones who do not claim he was an atheist read this and invoke the "no true scotsman" fallacy.

"He wasn't a TRUE christian"

This kind of counter argument shows their delusion and the lengths they will go to in order to rationalize their faith. 

 

Quick question. What if, hypothetically of course, he was atheist? Would you generalize all atheists as Hitler?


pariahjane
pariahjane's picture
Posts: 1595
Joined: 2006-05-06
User is offlineOffline
Cpt_pineapple wrote:BGH

Cpt_pineapple wrote:
BGH wrote:

Well the ones who do not claim he was an atheist read this and invoke the "no true scotsman" fallacy.

"He wasn't a TRUE christian"

This kind of counter argument shows their delusion and the lengths they will go to in order to rationalize their faith. 

Quick question. What if, hypothetically of course, he was atheist? Would you generalize all atheists as Hitler?

That seems a bit silly.  That would be like generalizing that all Christians are just like Fred Phelps.

[Edit - spelling]

If god takes life he's an indian giver


Dave_G
Dave_G's picture
Posts: 223
Joined: 2007-04-21
User is offlineOffline
http://www.nobeliefs.com/mem

http://www.nobeliefs.com/mementoes.htm

 

LOL Well so much for the atheist question....


Cpt_pineapple
atheist
Cpt_pineapple's picture
Posts: 5492
Joined: 2007-04-12
User is offlineOffline
pariahjane wrote:   That

pariahjane wrote:

 

That seems a bit silly.  That would be like generalizing that all Christians are just like Fred Phelps.

 

That was actually my point.

 

BGH wrote:

 

This kind of counter argument shows their delusion and the lengths they will go to in order to rationalize their faith. 

 

I interputed that as implying all Christians are like Hitler.

 


Cpt_pineapple
atheist
Cpt_pineapple's picture
Posts: 5492
Joined: 2007-04-12
User is offlineOffline
Dave_G

Dave_G wrote:

http://www.nobeliefs.com/mementoes.htm

LOL Well so much for the atheist question....

 

LOL the word HYPOTHETICAL!!!


Dave_G
Dave_G's picture
Posts: 223
Joined: 2007-04-21
User is offlineOffline
Cpt_pineapple

Cpt_pineapple wrote:
Dave_G wrote:

http://www.nobeliefs.com/mementoes.htm

LOL Well so much for the atheist question....

LOL the word HYPOTHETICAL!!!

 

What about murderers like Martin Luther, ect. I don't judge all christians but Christians want to say Hitler was an atheists because they don't like history or science.


BGH
BGH's picture
Posts: 2772
Joined: 2006-09-28
User is offlineOffline
Cpt_pineapple

Cpt_pineapple wrote:
 

Quick question. What if, hypothetically of course, he was atheist? Would you generalize all atheists as Hitler?

No, I would not deny he was an atheist. I do not deny Stalin was an atheist.

I would not generalize all atheists as Hitler like, just as I do not generalize all christians the same. It just seems many theists seem rather keen on claiming he was "not a TRUE christian". Why do this? He was christian, he invoked god and jesus often. If you disagree with him say, "he may have been christian but not all christians are that way", instead of resorting to the no true scotsman fallacy.

 


Tilberian
Moderator
Tilberian's picture
Posts: 1118
Joined: 2006-11-27
User is offlineOffline
Let's remember that it is

Let's remember that it is Christians who are required to bow to particular set of received knowledge and accept those thoughts as their own. Atheists are not required to do that. That's why it is Christians who tend to assume that you can visit the sins of the fathers upon the sons. It is Christians who fraudulently hold up the example of Nazi Germany as an example of what happens under an atheist regime.

It was Christians who invented persecuting Jews in Europe, not Hitler. 

Lazy is a word we use when someone isn't doing what we want them to do.
- Dr. Joy Brown


Ophios
Ophios's picture
Posts: 909
Joined: 2006-09-19
User is offlineOffline
I feel this goes to the

I feel this goes to the "Attach ego to god" bit.

I can't have fault because then god would have fault, and that can happen. Therefore Hitler wasn't a christian like me. 

AImboden wrote:
I'm not going to PM my agreement just because one tucan has pms.


Dave_G
Dave_G's picture
Posts: 223
Joined: 2007-04-21
User is offlineOffline
Does anyone here know who

Does anyone here know who one of the most anti-sematic germans were?

 

 Martin Luther


todangst
atheistRational VIP!
todangst's picture
Posts: 2843
Joined: 2006-03-10
User is offlineOffline
Dave_G wrote: Does anyone

Dave_G wrote:

Does anyone here know who one of the most anti-sematic germans were?

 

Martin Luther

 

Hitler and Martin Luther

todangst's picture Submitted by todangst on Tue, 2007-03-27 15:14.

 

Some theists attempt to argue that Hitler was an atheist. While this claim is untrue, focusing on Hitler's religious beliefs is actually irrelevant: what matters is that Hitler called upon pre-existent, christian inspired hatred and persecution of Jews, and for this reason, christianity is one of the culprits for the holocaust:

Luther's Racism

The magazine Christian History, Issue 39, 1993 (published by Christianity Today) devoted a whole issue to Martin Luther's life and legacy. Pages 38-39 quote his work On the Jews and Their Lies which gives us an idea about how moral Luther's views were:

"Set fire to their synagogues and schools. Jewish houses should be razed and destroyed, and Jewish prayer books and Talmudic writings, in which such idolatry, lies, curing, and blasphemy are taught, [should] be taken from them." Their rabbis [should] be forbidden to teach on pain of loss of life and limb."

This is a man held to be a moral authority? Luther also urged that "safe conduct on the highways be abolished completely for the Jews," and that "all cash and treasure of silver and gold be taken from them." What Jews could do was to have "a flail, an ax, a hole, a spade" put into their hands so "young, strong Jews and Jewesses" could "earn their bread in the sweat of their brow." Do you think any Fuhrer you may have heard of might have gleaned an idea or two from that last passage alone? In fact, think of Hitler while reading the next paragraph.

Luther proposed seven measures of "sharp mercy" that German princes could take against Jews: (1) burn their schools and synagogues; (2) transfer Jews to community settlements; (3) confiscate all Jewish literature, which was blasphemous; (4) prohibit rabbis to teach, on pain of death; (5) deny Jews safe conduct, so as to prevent the spread of Judaism; (6) appropriate their wealth and use it to support converts and to prevent the Jews' practice of usury; (7) assign Jews to manual labor as a form of penance.

Is there no clearer blueprint for the Final Solution than the works of one of christianity's greatest reformers and moralists?

Worse yet, Luther was no paper philosopher - he advised clergy, their congregations, and all government officials to help carry out these measures. Since most Jews had been expelled from Germany before 1536, Luther's counsel was implemented by few officials. Yet a harsh anti-Jewish measure in 1543 mentioned Luther's On the Jews and Their Lies.

Both Luther's friends and his foes criticized him for proposing these measures. His best friends begged him to stop his anti-Jewish raving, but Luther continued his attacks in other treatises. He repeated as true the worst anti-Semitic charges from medieval literature: that Jews killed Christian babies; they murdered Christ over and over again by stabbing eucharistic hosts; they poised wells. As usual, he did not allow facts to deter him from his emotionally driven lies.

Luther now thought what he had accused Catholics of thinking in 1523: Jews were dogs. "We are at fault for not slaying them!" he fumed shortly before his death. Yet one more hypocricy for the master of hypocrisy.

While my argument does not rely solely on demonstrating that the writings of Luther inspired the holocaust (Instead, it implicates Hitler's use of christianity's long history of christian persecution of jews), the following passages come from: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Martin_Luther_and_the_Jews help demonstrate Luther's role in the holocaust.

British historian Paul Johnson has called On the Jews and their Lies the "first work of modern anti-Semitism, and a giant step forward on the road to the Holocaust." (Johnson, A History of the Jews, p. 242.)

While some Lutherans deny the charge, the Nazis did cite Luther's treatise to justify the Final Solution (Egil Grislis, "Martin Luther and the Jews," Consensus 27 (2001) No. 1:64.).

The line of "anti-Semitic descent" from Luther to Hitler is "easy to draw," according to American historian Lucy Dawidowicz. ("The War Against the Jews, 1933-1945&quotEye-wink.

Professor Robert Michael, Professor Emeritus of European History at the University of Massachusetts, Dartmouth, argues that there is a "strong parallel" between Luther's ideas and the anti-Semitism of most German Lutherans throughout the Holocaust. Like the Nazis, Luther mythologized the Jews as evil, he writes. They could be saved only if they converted to Christianity, but their hostility to the idea made it inconceivable (Robert Michael, "Luther, Luther Scholars, and the Jews," Encounter 46:4 (Autumn 1985), pp. 339-56.).

Luther's sentiments were widely echoed in the Germany of the 1930s, particularly within the Nazi party. Hitler's Education Minister, Bernhard Rust, was quoted by the Völkischer Beobachter as saying that: "Since Martin Luther closed his eyes, no such son of our people has appeared again. It has been decided that we shall be the first to witness his reappearance ... I think the time is past when one may not say the names of Hitler and Luther in the same breath. They belong together; they are of the same old stamp [Schrot und Korn]" (Volkischer Beobachter, August 25, 1933 cited in Steigmann-Gall, Richard. The Holy Reich: Nazi Conceptions of Christianity, 1991-1945. Cambridge University Press, 2003, pp. 136-7.).

Hans Hinkel, leader of the Luther League's magazine Deutsche Kultur-Wacht, and of the Berlin chapter of the Kampfbund, paid tribute to Luther in his acceptance speech as head of both the Jewish section and the film department of Goebbel's Chamber of Culture and Propaganda Ministry. "Through his acts and his spiritual attitude, he began the fight which we will wage today; with Luther, the revolution of German blood and feeling against alien elements of the Volk was begun. To continue and complete his Protestantism, nationalism must make the picture of Luther, of a German fighter, live as an example above the barriers of confession for all German blood comrades."
(Steigmann-Gall 2003, p. 137.).

According to Daniel Goldhagen, Bishop Martin Sasse, a leading Protestant churchman, published a compendium Luther's writings shortly after Kristallnacht in which Sasse "applauded the burning of the synagogues and the coincidence of the day, writing in the introduction, "On November 10, 1938, on Luther's birthday, the synagogues are burning in Germany." The German people, he urged, ought to heed these words "of the greatest antisemite of his time, the warner of his people against the Jews." (Bernd Nellessen, "Die schweigende Kirche: Katholiken und Judenverfolgung," in Büttner (ed), Die Deutchschen und die Jugendverfolg im Dritten Reich, p. 265, cited in Daniel Goldhagen, Hitler's Willing Executioners (Vintage, 1997)).

William Nichols, Professor of Religious Studies, recounts, "At his trial in Nuremberg after the Second World War, Julius Streicher, the notorious Nazi propagandist, editor of the scurrilous antisemitic weekly, Der Stürmer, argued that if he should be standing there arraigned on such charges, so should Martin Luther. Reading such passages, it is hard not to agree with him. Luther's proposals read like a program for the Nazis." (William Nichols, Christian Antisemitism: A History of Hate (Northvale, NJ: Jason Aronson, 1995), p. 271).

In the course of the Luthertag (Luther Day) festivities, the Nazis emphasized their connection to Luther as being both nationalist revolutionaries and the heirs of the German traditionalist past. An article in the Chemnitzer Tageblatt stated that "[t]he German Volk are united not only in loyalty and love for the Fatherland, but also once more in the old German beliefs of Luther [Lutherglauben]; a new epoch of strong, conscious religious life has dawned in Germany." Richard Steigmann-Gall wrote in his 2003 book The Holy Reich: Nazi Conceptions of Christianity, 1919-1945:

The leadership of the Protestant League espoused a similar view. Fahrenhorst, who was on the planning committee of the Luthertag, called Luther "the first German spiritual Führer" who spoke to all Germans regardless of clan or confession. In a letter to Hitler, Fahrenhorst reminded him that his "Old Fighters" were mostly Protestants and that it was precisely in the Protestant regions of our Fatherland" in which Nazism found its greatest strength. Promising that the celebration of Luther's birthday would not turn into a confessional affair, Fahrenhorst invited Hitler to become the official patron of the Luthertag. In subsequent correspondence, Fahrenhorst again voiced the notion that reverence for Luther could somehow cross confessional boundaries: "Luther is truly not only the founder of a Christian confession; much more, his ideas had a fruitful impact on all Christianity in Germany." Precisely because of Luther's political as well as religious significance, the Luthertag would serve as a confession both "to church and Volk." (Richard Steigmann-Gall, The Holy Reich: Nazi Conceptions of Christianity, 1919-1945, (Cambridge University Press, 2003), p.138.)

 

"Hitler burned people like Anne Frank, for that we call him evil.
"God" burns Anne Frank eternally. For that, theists call him 'good.'


mrjonno
Posts: 726
Joined: 2007-02-26
User is offlineOffline
Regardless of Hitlers

Regardless of Hitlers believes he made the jews burn on earth but christians say that they will burn for ever in hell so how christians can take a moral high ground on the matter is beyond me


todangst
atheistRational VIP!
todangst's picture
Posts: 2843
Joined: 2006-03-10
User is offlineOffline
mrjonno wrote: Regardless

mrjonno wrote:
Regardless of Hitlers believes he made the jews burn on earth but christians say that they will burn for ever in hell so how christians can take a moral high ground on the matter is beyond me

 

Hence my old quote from Infidelguy:


Hitler burned people like Anne Frank for being Jewish. For that, we call him evil.


God burns Anne Frank for being Jewish, forever. For that, christians call him "good"


 

"Hitler burned people like Anne Frank, for that we call him evil.
"God" burns Anne Frank eternally. For that, theists call him 'good.'


Cpt_pineapple
atheist
Cpt_pineapple's picture
Posts: 5492
Joined: 2007-04-12
User is offlineOffline
I do no understand the

I do no understand the logic of Christians persecuting Jews. Christians follow the teachings of Christ. Christ was Jewish. If you hate Jews doesn't that mean you hate Christ? Am I the only one that sees the flaws in this?


todangst
atheistRational VIP!
todangst's picture
Posts: 2843
Joined: 2006-03-10
User is offlineOffline
Cpt_pineapple wrote: I do

Cpt_pineapple wrote:

I do no understand the logic of Christians persecuting Jews. Christians follow the teachings of Christ. Christ was Jewish. If you hate Jews doesn't that mean you hate Christ? Am I the only one that sees the flaws in this?

I don't get it either. Then again, all prejudice is irrational.


    Christians typically hated Jews because the "Jews killed Christ". However, christians also believe that Jesus came specifically to be a sacrifice.  So why they'd hate Jews for this defies reason....

You see lots of antisemitism in christianity (and outside of it too).  

"Hitler burned people like Anne Frank, for that we call him evil.
"God" burns Anne Frank eternally. For that, theists call him 'good.'


caseagainstfaith
Silver Member
caseagainstfaith's picture
Posts: 202
Joined: 2006-09-10
User is offlineOffline
todangst wrote: Hitler and

todangst wrote:

Hitler and Martin Luther

 Thanks, much for the article!  Although of course I knew Martin Luther was antisemetic, and obviously Hitler was.  But, I didn't know the direct connection.

It looks like you pasted that from somewhere else.  Is it on a website anywhere besides here at RRS?  If not, can I post it on my site?  

 


Sir Valiant for...
Theist
Sir Valiant for Truth's picture
Posts: 156
Joined: 2007-04-23
User is offlineOffline
If memory serves, the

If memory serves, the premise wasn't ever that Hitler was individually atheistic (although with a Christian backdrop for Europe and Germanic history, you still have to take what he says with a grain of political salt) but that the concept that the Nazis enforced - the "arian" race being the master race- was derrived and justified from evolution.

Weikert in From Darwin to Hitler explains and proves this thouroughly. 

"Truth is the cry of all, but the game of the few." George Berkeley
"Truth is always strange — stranger than fiction." Lord Byron

Fixing the world, one dumb idea at a time.


todangst
atheistRational VIP!
todangst's picture
Posts: 2843
Joined: 2006-03-10
User is offlineOffline
Sir Valiant for Truth

Sir Valiant for Truth wrote:

If memory serves, the premise wasn't ever that Hitler was individually atheistic (although with a Christian backdrop for Europe and Germanic history, you still have to take what he says with a grain of political salt) but that the concept that the Nazis enforced - the "arian" race being the master race- was derrived and justified from evolution.

Weikert in From Darwin to Hitler explains and proves this thouroughly.

Yes, nazis abused science for their own behalf, just like theists do... no surprise there.

But you'd be hard pressed to deny that christian persecution of jews fueled the holocaust.

 

"Hitler burned people like Anne Frank, for that we call him evil.
"God" burns Anne Frank eternally. For that, theists call him 'good.'


todangst
atheistRational VIP!
todangst's picture
Posts: 2843
Joined: 2006-03-10
User is offlineOffline
caseagainstfaith

caseagainstfaith wrote:
todangst wrote:

Hitler and Martin Luther

Thanks, much for the article! Although of course I knew Martin Luther was antisemetic, and obviously Hitler was. But, I didn't know the direct connection.

It looks like you pasted that from somewhere else. Is it on a website anywhere besides here at RRS? If not, can I post it on my site?

 

It's here:

http://www.rationalresponders.com/hitler_and_martin_luther

 

However, to me the key point isn't so much that Luther inspired the holocaust so much as it is that Hitler was influenced by, and called upon christian persecution of Jews.  Lutherans were a major part of that however, so it's all interconnected. 

"Hitler burned people like Anne Frank, for that we call him evil.
"God" burns Anne Frank eternally. For that, theists call him 'good.'


PillarMyArse
PillarMyArse's picture
Posts: 65
Joined: 2007-03-13
User is offlineOffline
Quote: If memory serves,

Quote:

If memory serves, the premise wasn't ever that Hitler was individually atheistic (although with a Christian backdrop for Europe and Germanic history, you still have to take what he says with a grain of political salt) but that the concept that the Nazis enforced - the "arian" race being the master race- was derrived and justified from evolution.

 

If memory serves, the party line was that 'Arians' were superior and should lead the rest of the world because of that.  Persecution of Jews had nothing to do with that particular superiority complex.  It was the pervading anti-semitic bullshit prevalent throughout European history.

And no, I'm not Jewish. 

Religion is the ultimate con-job. It cons the conned, and it cons the conner.

Mr.T : "I ain't gettin' on no damn plane [sic]" - environmentalism at it's best


Jacob Cordingley
SuperfanBronze Member
Jacob Cordingley's picture
Posts: 1484
Joined: 2007-03-18
User is offlineOffline
It is hard to pinpoint

It is hard to pinpoint Hitler's actual beliefs. He used Christianity to win support and justify his policies to a largely Christian population. He was also behind the German Faith Movement, which was a new religion based upon ancient Germanic and Norse pagan Gods. His beliefs seem muddled in terms of religion but one thing is clear, he had a belief in something spiritual about the Aryan race, that they were proud, noble and strong, and as a skinny, dark haired, vertically impaired (repressed homosexual?) he found that very appealing.

I think it is for historians to study in depth what religion Hitler was, I do not think he was an atheist in the strict scientific/philosophical sense, but he wasn't part of any mainstream religion, even when his party was the mainstream, he saw the uses of religion in propaganda, and used the deep-rooted memetic parasites to his advantage, and it does seem that he was probably theistic in some abstract way.


totus_tuus
Theist
totus_tuus's picture
Posts: 516
Joined: 2007-04-23
User is offlineOffline
Hitler was a ruthless

Hitler was a ruthless opportunist who used any means at his disposal to influence the German people. He hijacked science as well a theology to institute his programs.

Religious resistance to Hitler began before his rise to power (one of the primary political parties opposing the NSDAP was the Catholic Centre Party). Hitler remembered this opposition and repression of religious groups followed immediately his rise to power in 1933 withthe banning of Catholic newspapers in Cologne (Koln) in February of that year.

Domestic resistance to Hitler was primarily by religious groups, and by people motivated by religious belief. Conspicuous among German resisters to the Nazi regime were Lutheran ministers Dietrich Bonhoefer, Martin Niemoller,
Catholic bishops Clemens von Galen and Franz Bornewasser, Catholic priest Bernhard Lichtenberg, Catholic laymen Hans von Dohnany and Joseph Mueller; and the White Rose Organization, a group of religious youth of different faiths in Munich. Colonel Count Claus von Stauffenberg, a devout Catholic, was one of the moving forces behind the July 1944 assassination and coup attempt against the Nazis. All of these people risked their lives in their resistance to the regime and many of them died

Thousands of Jehovah's Witnesses and hundreds of Mormons perished in concentration camps because of their refusal to cooperate with the Nazis.

Nazi repression of the Polish Church was one of the cornerstones of ther government's Polish policy. Closure of seminaries and the summary arrest of numerous clergy (predominantly Catholic, as is Poland herself, but also Othodox and Protestant) was the order of the day. By the end of the German occupation in 1944, nearly a third of Poland's priests had perished.

Denunciations of Nazi atrocities and policies rang out from pulpits from Stockholm to Rome, from Paris to Moscow (yes, Moscow. Stalin actually enlisted the help of the Russian Orthodox Church against Nazism).

Domestic German Lutheran opposition to the Nazis was fuled by Hitler's attempts to Nazify religion. German Catholic resistance was primarily motivated by human rights violations (ie, forced euthanasia, racial murders, censorship). Reistance by foreign religious groups obviously were aimed at the occupation of their homelands by invaders.

If Hitler was such an outstanding Christian, why was there such a Christian opposition to him?

"With its enduring appeal to the search for truth, philosophy has the great responsibility of forming thought and culture; and now it must strive resolutely to recover its original vocation." Pope John Paul II


totus_tuus
Theist
totus_tuus's picture
Posts: 516
Joined: 2007-04-23
User is offlineOffline
Quote: If memory

Quote:

 

If memory serves, the party line was that 'Arians' were superior and should lead the rest of the world because of that.  Persecution of Jews had nothing to do with that particular superiority complex.  It was the pervading anti-semitic bullshit prevalent throughout European history.

And no, I'm not Jewish. 

You're not serious about "persecution of Jews had nothing to do with that particular superiority complex", are you?

"With its enduring appeal to the search for truth, philosophy has the great responsibility of forming thought and culture; and now it must strive resolutely to recover its original vocation." Pope John Paul II


Dave_G
Dave_G's picture
Posts: 223
Joined: 2007-04-21
User is offlineOffline
OK...what was Hitler's

OK...what was Hitler's belief? Here's a clue:

 

“My feeling as a Christian points me to my Lord and Savior as a fighter."

 

- Adolf Hitler


PillarMyArse
PillarMyArse's picture
Posts: 65
Joined: 2007-03-13
User is offlineOffline
(sorry if this is a repeat

(sorry if this is a repeat - it lost my last comment)

Quote:
You're not serious about "persecution of Jews had nothing to do with that particular superiority complex", are you?

Yes I am.   What makes you think otherwise?  And it doesn't matter how many religious people argued against Hitler.  What matters is whether Hitler himself had a religious context.

And while I have your attention, could you explain:

The tortures of the Inquisition

The witch burnings

The Cathar Extermination

The Crusades of conquest

etc 

Religion is the ultimate con-job. It cons the conned, and it cons the conner.

Mr.T : "I ain't gettin' on no damn plane [sic]" - environmentalism at it's best


Jacob Cordingley
SuperfanBronze Member
Jacob Cordingley's picture
Posts: 1484
Joined: 2007-03-18
User is offlineOffline
I think the Aryan

I think the Aryan superiority complex did come into the attacks on Jews, although yes the long running cultural theme of anti-Semitism was also part of it. Hitler regarded the Jews as being one of the weaker races in the social-Darwinist (not to be confused with actual Darwinism) food chain, and so there it fits into the superiority complex. However as has been noted there was a tradition of anti-Semitism in Europe, and to some level there still is today.

I think if you look at the roots of many historical events or memetic shifts it is a combination of environmental factors that cause them. WWI for example has an incredibly complicated back-story including arms races, liberation movements, long chains of alliances all of which came together in a big mess. Hitler's anti-Semitism is perhaps much more straight forward, but I was trying to demonstrate how there can be multiple causes of any one thing.


totus_tuus
Theist
totus_tuus's picture
Posts: 516
Joined: 2007-04-23
User is offlineOffline
PillarMyArse

PillarMyArse wrote:
Quote:
You're not serious about "persecution of Jews had nothing to do with that particular superiority complex", are you?

Yes I am.   What makes you think otherwise?  And it doesn't matter how many religious people argued against Hitler.  What matters is whether Hitler himself had a religious context.

I agree that Hitler had a "religious context". It does matter that serious, dedicated, religious Germans were able to see through that veneer and recognize it for the sham that it was.
It does matter that people of religion and people of conscience organized resistance to the regime and frequently sacrafice their lives for their beliefs.

Furthermore, your post implies that the "Final Solution" was not a question of racial superiority dogna of the NSDAP. Not true.

"But we do not have the right to enrich ourselves with even one fur, with one Mark, with one cigarette, with one watch, with anything. That we do not have. Because at the end of this, we don't want, because we exterminated the bacillus, to become sick and die from the same bacillus.
I will never see it happen, that even one bit of putrefaction comes in contact with us, or takes root in us. On the contrary, where it might try to take root, we will burn it out together. But altogether we can say: We have carried out this most difficult task for the love of our people. And we have taken on no defect within us, in our soul, or in our character."
- Heinrich Himmer, Poznan, Oct 4, 1943

"We see clearly that this war could only end with the extermination of the Germanic peoples, or that Jewry must disappear from Europe. I already said it on September 1, 1939 [sic] in the German Reichstag...that this war will not end the way the Jews have foreseen it, namely that the European Aryan peoples will be exterminated; rather the result of this war will be the annihilation of Jewry. For once all the others will not bleed to death alone; for once the ancient Jewish law will come into play: an eye for an eye; a tooth for a tooth."
- Adolf Hitler, Jan 30, 1942

"I have also left no doubt that, if the nations of Europe are again to be regarded as mere shares to be bought and sold by those international money and finance conspirators, then that race, Jewry, which is the real guilty party in this murderous struggle, will be saddled with the responsibility. I also made it clear that this time, not only would millions of children of European Aryan races starve, not only would millions of grown men meet their death, and not only would millions of women and children be burned or bombed to death in the cities, but that the real culprit would atone for his guilt, even if by more humane means."
- Adolf Hitler, Political Testament, page 3

"The most fearsome example of this kind is Russia where he (Jewry) allowed 39 million humans in truly fanatical wildness to die or starve in inhuman agony, in order to secure the mastery of a great people for a gang of Jewish literati and stock exchange bandits."
"The result is not only the end of freedom for the people oppressed by the Jews, but rather also the end of these parasites of the peoples themselves. After the death of the victim, the vampire dies sooner or later."
-Mein Kampf, 1925, vol I, p 358

"This contamination of our blood, which hundreds of thousands of our people blindly ignore, is used by the Jew today according to plan. These black parasites of the peoples deliberately violate our inexperienced, young blond girls and thereby destroy something that cannot be replaced in this world."
-Mein Kapmf, 1925, vol II, p629

"Was there any excrement, any shamelessness in any form, above all in cultural life, in which at least one Jew would not have been involved? As soon as one even carefully cut into such an abscess, one found, like maggots in a decaying body, often blinded by the sudden light, a kike."
-Mein Kapmf, 1925, vol I, p65

" Jewish question: tremendous calm in G.G. (Generalgouvernement) since solution of Jewish question

Race war

total solution

obviate possibility of creating avengers for our children "
- Heinrich Himler, notes for a speech, Jan 26, 1944

It's all about race.

Quote:
And while I have your attention, could you explain:

The tortures of the Inquisition

The witch burnings

The Cathar Extermination

The Crusades of conquest

etc 

Some, although you may wanna start another post for that.

"With its enduring appeal to the search for truth, philosophy has the great responsibility of forming thought and culture; and now it must strive resolutely to recover its original vocation." Pope John Paul II


Strafio
Strafio's picture
Posts: 1346
Joined: 2006-09-11
User is offlineOffline
Totus, this is more of a

Totus, this is more of a response to the old "Hitler was an atheist and Nazism is what happens when a nation believes in evolution" crap that we get from some corners. I don't think anyone's trying to blame Christianity for Hitler, after all, he punished a lot more people than just Jews, Christians included. But it's also likely that his anti-semetism has Christian roots.


Tilberian
Moderator
Tilberian's picture
Posts: 1118
Joined: 2006-11-27
User is offlineOffline
totus_tuus wrote: If

totus_tuus wrote:
If Hitler was such an outstanding Christian, why was there such a Christian opposition to him?

Christians oppose Christians all the time. Why was there Christian opposition to any ruler in Europe at any time since the founding of the Church? Answer: Christians can get involved in politics just as anyone can.  

I personally agree that Hitler's religious statements were probably more motivated by political expediency than by any genuine faith. However, her certainly never classified himself as a atheist, nor spoke as though he rejected notion of God. And, as Todangst has shown, his Final Solution was torn right from the Christian guide book to anti-semitism.

 

Lazy is a word we use when someone isn't doing what we want them to do.
- Dr. Joy Brown


d_focil
Theist
Posts: 25
Joined: 2007-05-10
User is offlineOffline
A true christian..

There is such a thing as a true christian, or at least an approximation of one. Just as there is such a thing as a true athiest or a true scientist, or a true communist. Every belief system has a set of criteria that are set in one way or another.

I can say that I'm a scientist but if i refuse to follow the proper scientific method then no one will take me seriously as one. You don't simply label someone something without taking into account their actions. North Korea calls itself a "Democratic Republic" yet despite the fact that they obviously are not, we do not assume that there is no real qualities that actually define a democratic republic.

So hitler may have called himself a Christian, but if you look at the entirety of religious works representing christianity his actions and ideas will in no way be justified or consistent with Christian theology. One of the fundemental points of Christianity is an adulation of humility, the very opposite of a egomaniacal and selfish figure like Hitler.

This is all besides the point however, because its not religion that causes that kind of evil, its human beings who think they know what best for everyone else. They then decide to force people into following their ideas. This type of mentality permeates all of human history, from so called christians, to communists, to nazis, to our very government. The use of coercive force, of violence to spread ideas is the problem here.


todangst
atheistRational VIP!
todangst's picture
Posts: 2843
Joined: 2006-03-10
User is offlineOffline
Tilberian wrote: I

Tilberian wrote:

I personally agree that Hitler's religious statements were probably more motivated by political expediency than by any genuine faith.

Would anyone really be surprised to hear that Hitler's main objective was to advance the cause of Adolf Hitler, and that he'd use any means to further his own goals?

 Again, what matters here is this: Hitler was one man. No matter how clever he was, no matter how stirring a speaker he could be, if there wasn't a willing audience, nothing he believed would matter. The simple reality is that Hitler couldn't do a thing unless millions of people were wiling to follow.  And they were willing to buy into Hitler for various self agrandizing reasons... and one of the key motivators was a pre existent hatred of Jews inculcated by christianity.

 

 

 

 

"Hitler burned people like Anne Frank, for that we call him evil.
"God" burns Anne Frank eternally. For that, theists call him 'good.'


Romsca
Posts: 7
Joined: 2007-05-10
User is offlineOffline
Wasn't he the leader of tha

Wasn't he the leader of tha Nazi cult though? Like the one from Hellboy but real? I can't recall the name of it at the moment. But yeah, he enlisted the help of the Lutheran Church to help persecute the German Jews.

"And there's no God in heaven so get off your knees."
-MDC


Tilberian
Moderator
Tilberian's picture
Posts: 1118
Joined: 2006-11-27
User is offlineOffline
todangst wrote: Would

todangst wrote:

Would anyone really be surprised to hear that Hitler's main objective was to advance the cause of Adolf Hitler, and that he'd use any means to further his own goals?

Again, what matters here is this: Hitler was one man. No matter how clever he was, no matter how stirring a speaker he could be, if there wasn't a willing audience, nothing he believed would matter. The simple reality is that Hitler couldn't do a thing unless millions of people were wiling to follow. And they were willing to buy into Hitler for various self agrandizing reasons... and one of the key motivators was a pre existent hatred of Jews inculcated by christianity.

Excellent point. Even if Hitler was an atheist, the country he was leading was very, very Christian. 

Lazy is a word we use when someone isn't doing what we want them to do.
- Dr. Joy Brown


Cpt_pineapple
atheist
Cpt_pineapple's picture
Posts: 5492
Joined: 2007-04-12
User is offlineOffline
Tilberian wrote: todangst

Tilberian wrote:
todangst wrote:

Would anyone really be surprised to hear that Hitler's main objective was to advance the cause of Adolf Hitler, and that he'd use any means to further his own goals?

Again, what matters here is this: Hitler was one man. No matter how clever he was, no matter how stirring a speaker he could be, if there wasn't a willing audience, nothing he believed would matter. The simple reality is that Hitler couldn't do a thing unless millions of people were wiling to follow. And they were willing to buy into Hitler for various self agrandizing reasons... and one of the key motivators was a pre existent hatred of Jews inculcated by christianity.

Excellent point. Even if Hitler was an atheist, the country he was leading was very, very Christian. 

 

Are you saying if Germany was mostly an atheist nation, then Hitler wouldn't have been able to do anything? I doubt that, Hitler was a very good public speaker and he knew how to play to the people to get them to follow him. He used the building (forgot the name) fire to rally up supporters. Wouldn't that have also worked for atheits?


PillarMyArse
PillarMyArse's picture
Posts: 65
Joined: 2007-03-13
User is offlineOffline
Quote: Are you saying if

Quote:
Are you saying if Germany was mostly an atheist nation, then Hitler wouldn't have been able to do anything? I doubt that, Hitler was a very good public speaker and he knew how to play to the people to get them to follow him. He used the building (forgot the name) fire to rally up supporters. Wouldn't that have also worked for atheits?

Hitler could not have made everyone develop a hatred of jews like that.  He was feeding from the ambient anti-semitism around.  This goes back a lot further than hitler, and is definately religiously inspired.

Atheist have no reason to hate jews. 

 

Religion is the ultimate con-job. It cons the conned, and it cons the conner.

Mr.T : "I ain't gettin' on no damn plane [sic]" - environmentalism at it's best


Jacob Cordingley
SuperfanBronze Member
Jacob Cordingley's picture
Posts: 1484
Joined: 2007-03-18
User is offlineOffline
Cpt_pineapple

Cpt_pineapple wrote:
Tilberian wrote:
todangst wrote:

Would anyone really be surprised to hear that Hitler's main objective was to advance the cause of Adolf Hitler, and that he'd use any means to further his own goals?

Again, what matters here is this: Hitler was one man. No matter how clever he was, no matter how stirring a speaker he could be, if there wasn't a willing audience, nothing he believed would matter. The simple reality is that Hitler couldn't do a thing unless millions of people were wiling to follow. And they were willing to buy into Hitler for various self agrandizing reasons... and one of the key motivators was a pre existent hatred of Jews inculcated by christianity.

Excellent point. Even if Hitler was an atheist, the country he was leading was very, very Christian. 

Are you saying if Germany was mostly an atheist nation, then Hitler wouldn't have been able to do anything? I doubt that, Hitler was a very good public speaker and he knew how to play to the people to get them to follow him. He used the building (forgot the name) fire to rally up supporters. Wouldn't that have also worked for atheits?

I don't think Todangst was saying that. He was saying that it was the situation that Hitler was leading a Christian nation, whether or not he was Christian/atheist/pagan etc. He might not have personally liked the church, he was well aware that it was a product of Judaism but he was pragmatic in appeasing all those who might otherwise oppose him - trying to buy their support for his racial cleansing policies. He was originally fairly socialist in his economic viewpoint at least (although you could hardly call him socialist) but he sucked up to big powerful businessmen like Herr Krupp for example. In the same way he sucked up to religious groups, both Catholic, Protestant, German Faith Movement, using their values to justify Nazism.


Cpt_pineapple
atheist
Cpt_pineapple's picture
Posts: 5492
Joined: 2007-04-12
User is offlineOffline
Jacob CordingleyI don't

Jacob Cordingley wrote:

I don't think Todangst was saying that. He was saying that it was the situation that Hitler was leading a Christian nation, whether or not he was Christian/atheist/pagan etc. He might not have personally liked the church, he was well aware that it was a product of Judaism but he was pragmatic in appeasing all those who might otherwise oppose him - trying to buy their support for his racial cleansing policies. He was originally fairly socialist in his economic viewpoint at least (although you could hardly call him socialist) but he sucked up to big powerful businessmen like Herr Krupp for example. In the same way he sucked up to religious groups, both Catholic, Protestant, German Faith Movement, using their values to justify Nazism.

I was replying to Tilberian's post. He just happened to quote Todangst

 

[edit:fixed quote tags]


Tilberian
Moderator
Tilberian's picture
Posts: 1118
Joined: 2006-11-27
User is offlineOffline
Cpt_pineapple wrote: Are

Cpt_pineapple wrote:

Are you saying if Germany was mostly an atheist nation, then Hitler wouldn't have been able to do anything? I doubt that, Hitler was a very good public speaker and he knew how to play to the people to get them to follow him. He used the building (forgot the name) fire to rally up supporters. Wouldn't that have also worked for atheits?

I think PillarMyArse put it best: atheists have no reason to hate Jews. Hitler's plan never would have worked, in fact he probably wouldn't have thought of it himself, if it weren't for the history of persecution against Jews that the Church had already established in Europe. It was easy, too easy, for Christian Germans to swallow the proposition that this peaceful, law-abiding, productive minority was responsible for all their problems.

Lazy is a word we use when someone isn't doing what we want them to do.
- Dr. Joy Brown


Dave_G
Dave_G's picture
Posts: 223
Joined: 2007-04-21
User is offlineOffline
Tilberian

Tilberian wrote:
Cpt_pineapple wrote:

Are you saying if Germany was mostly an atheist nation, then Hitler wouldn't have been able to do anything? I doubt that, Hitler was a very good public speaker and he knew how to play to the people to get them to follow him. He used the building (forgot the name) fire to rally up supporters. Wouldn't that have also worked for atheits?

I think PillarMyArse put it best: atheists have no reason to hate Jews. Hitler's plan never would have worked, in fact he probably wouldn't have thought of it himself, if it weren't for the history of persecution against Jews that the Church had already established in Europe. It was easy, too easy, for Christian Germans to swallow the proposition that this peaceful, law-abiding, productive minority was responsible for all their problems.

Jesus  was a Jew.. The first 300 Christians were jews.

 

The authers of the Bible were Jews. I smell a condtridiction


Tilberian
Moderator
Tilberian's picture
Posts: 1118
Joined: 2006-11-27
User is offlineOffline
Dave_G wrote:

Dave_G wrote:

Jesus was a Jew.. The first 300 Christians were jews.

The authers of the Bible were Jews. I smell a condtridiction

Do you mean that there is a contradiction in the Christian attitude toward Jews? Yes, I totally agree.

[MOD EDIT - fixed quotes] 

 

Lazy is a word we use when someone isn't doing what we want them to do.
- Dr. Joy Brown


FreeThoughtMake...
Superfan
FreeThoughtMakesMeTingle's picture
Posts: 173
Joined: 2006-08-14
User is offlineOffline
So.........to be clear on

So.........to be clear on all this.,,..Hilter was a Christian or at least claimed he was.


Tilberian
Moderator
Tilberian's picture
Posts: 1118
Joined: 2006-11-27
User is offlineOffline
FreeThoughtMakesMeTingle

FreeThoughtMakesMeTingle wrote:
So.........to be clear on all this.,,..Hilter was a Christian or at least claimed he was.

He claimed he was and never claimed he wasn't. It is impossible to say that he wasn't without resorting to the no-true-Scotsman fallacy.

 

Lazy is a word we use when someone isn't doing what we want them to do.
- Dr. Joy Brown


d_focil
Theist
Posts: 25
Joined: 2007-05-10
User is offlineOffline
I still think that lacks a

I still think that lacks a true appreciation of what someone can claim to be and yet not really be.

  In the end our labels are not just a product of what we claim, but what others see in us.

This is especially true concerning members of a group deciding if someone meets their criteria for inclusion.

  This may not be logical or consistent, but as the fallacy points out a subjective term never can be. The truth is Christians are for the most part not going to regard Hitler as a Christian, regardless of what he said.

I would agree though that his athiesm or lack thereof has no real bearing on the fact that he was a meglomaniacal oportunist looking to achieve glory and power at any cost.

Christians should stop using his supposed athiesm as a reason to justify the need for organized religion to prevent atrocity. 


Tilberian
Moderator
Tilberian's picture
Posts: 1118
Joined: 2006-11-27
User is offlineOffline
d_focil wrote: I still

d_focil wrote:

I still think that lacks a true appreciation of what someone can claim to be and yet not really be.

By saying this, you ask us to accept the presupposition that Christians cannot do the kinds of evil things that Hitler did. It is understandable that Christians would like us to think that way, but to do so is not valid in logic.

If we abandon presuppositions and simply look at the evidence, we are presented with a man that claimed to be Christian who did horrible things. The only conclusion from logic is that Christians can do horrible things.

 

Lazy is a word we use when someone isn't doing what we want them to do.
- Dr. Joy Brown


d_focil
Theist
Posts: 25
Joined: 2007-05-10
User is offlineOffline
Not at all, Its obvious

Not at all, Its obvious Christians as well as any type of person can commit horrible deeds. If you deny this you deny the history of humanity.

Im just saying that the scotsman fallacy fails in appreciating the complexities of group identity and self identification with a particular group.

There are criteria which people have for their belief systems, in the end the majority of that group decides who falls within that criteria.


Tilberian
Moderator
Tilberian's picture
Posts: 1118
Joined: 2006-11-27
User is offlineOffline
d_focil wrote: Not at all,

d_focil wrote:

Not at all, Its obvious Christians as well as any type of person can commit horrible deeds. If you deny this you deny the history of humanity.

Im just saying that the scotsman fallacy fails in appreciating the complexities of group identity and self identification with a particular group.

There are criteria which people have for their belief systems, in the end the majority of that group decides who falls within that criteria.

I agree that the opinions of Christians who were CONTEMPORARY with Hitler might have some bearing on whether he was considered a Christian or not. I'm not sure if the guy was a member of any church or not. 

Whatever, as you've said the whole issue is rather moot. Whether Hitler was Christian or atheist tells us nothing important about the real causes of the Holocaust. At the end of the day, Hitler had an entire country on his side: a country that was well primed to persecute Jews by centuries of Christian hatred.

 

Lazy is a word we use when someone isn't doing what we want them to do.
- Dr. Joy Brown


d_focil
Theist
Posts: 25
Joined: 2007-05-10
User is offlineOffline
True, but so did most

True, but so did most european countries and to a lesser degree the U.S. The issue of the Holocoast and the Nazi question in general is something we really need to understand.

Hopefully these debates get us away from the moot points, and bring us to the deeper issues of mass psychology and the desire of human beings to negate their own freedom, subjegating it to a unified vision.

 


todangst
atheistRational VIP!
todangst's picture
Posts: 2843
Joined: 2006-03-10
User is offlineOffline
Cpt_pineapple

Cpt_pineapple wrote:
Tilberian wrote:
todangst wrote:

Would anyone really be surprised to hear that Hitler's main objective was to advance the cause of Adolf Hitler, and that he'd use any means to further his own goals?

Again, what matters here is this: Hitler was one man. No matter how clever he was, no matter how stirring a speaker he could be, if there wasn't a willing audience, nothing he believed would matter. The simple reality is that Hitler couldn't do a thing unless millions of people were wiling to follow. And they were willing to buy into Hitler for various self agrandizing reasons... and one of the key motivators was a pre existent hatred of Jews inculcated by christianity.

Excellent point. Even if Hitler was an atheist, the country he was leading was very, very Christian.

 

Are you saying if Germany was mostly an atheist nation, then Hitler wouldn't have been able to do anything?

Hitler didn't invent antisemitism, and you can't just create a 'hatred' in people wholecloth. There has to be something already there to stir up.

If christian created, Luther inspired antisemitism didn't already exist in germany (and it did, Hitler GREW UP an antisemite in an antisemtic culture) then there wouldn't have been a final solution in the first place.

 

Quote:

I doubt that, Hitler was a very good public speaker and he knew how to play to the people to get them to follow him. He used the building (forgot the name) fire to rally up supporters. Wouldn't that have also worked for atheits?

Without christian created, Lutheran inspired antisemitism, you don't get a Hitler and you don't get a final solution.

But do you get a different tyrant looking to kill other people for different reasons? Sure, that's possible, look at Stalin. Stalin killed in the name of Stalinism. 

"Hitler burned people like Anne Frank, for that we call him evil.
"God" burns Anne Frank eternally. For that, theists call him 'good.'


todangst
atheistRational VIP!
todangst's picture
Posts: 2843
Joined: 2006-03-10
User is offlineOffline
FreeThoughtMakesMeTingle

FreeThoughtMakesMeTingle wrote:
So.........to be clear on all this.,,..Hilter was a Christian or at least claimed he was.

 

Sigh. I know I am sweeping against the tide, but I will again say that this is moot.  What matters is what the people who he led believed. Hitler didn't invent antisemitism. Hitler can't create hatreds in people wholecloth... you can't invent racism, bias, prejudice, long standing historical enmities... you can only call upon them, you can only stir them up, you can use them to achieve your own results, but you can't just INVENT THEM where they do not exist.

Look at Hitler's own life way before the 1930s. He grew up an antisemite. His family was antisemitic. His town, his country were antisemites. Hitler didn't invent christianity and judaism and the hatreds and prejudices. He was born into them, just like many others, and he used them to his own benefit.

Hitler could have been an avowed at atheist the entire time, and still christianity, (Lutheran and Catholic) would have some of the blood on its hands, because  it is these social forces that were used to inculcate antisemitism.

This is not to pin the holocaust on the church. It's merely to point out that christianity, as a social structure, has a long, long, long history of inculcating hatreds and prejudices. Some might say that ultimately, human personality, and not 'christianity' is to blame and that Hitler equally yoked science (social darwiniasm) as a support for his Final Solution.  This is true... he was just as likely as to cite darwin or christianity as a justification for his crimes.... but the difference here is that christianity specifically targeted jews as a focus of hate stemming back centuries.... and the specific institutions of christianity repsonsible: some of the Lutherans, the catholic church, deserve blame, not for the holocaust, but for inculcating the hatreds that made the holocaust a possibility.

 

 

"Hitler burned people like Anne Frank, for that we call him evil.
"God" burns Anne Frank eternally. For that, theists call him 'good.'